'High-profile man': Suppression challenged in QLD extortion case

A Queensland man is accused extorting his former partner by threatening to expose her alleged past affair with a high-profile public figure. The identity of the high-profile man has been suppressed even though he's not accused of any wrongdoing. Cairns reporter Conor Byrne and investigative reporter Grace Tobin join the pod to explain what we can and can't report and why. If you have any questions you'd like Grace, Conor and Stocky to answer in future episodes, please email [email protected] mailto:[email protected]. The Case Of is the follow-up to the hit podcast Mushroom Case Daily, and all episodes of that show will remain available in the back catalogue of The Case Of.

• 0:00Speaker 00

  Deeply insightful.

• 0:01Speaker 01

  An hour.

• 0:01Speaker 00

  One hour. Deeply personal.

• 0:04Speaker 01

  Two mics.

• 0:04Speaker 00

  Two microphones.

• 0:05Speaker 02

  Four watts, going at the same time, one for each hand. Um, can you murder him, please?

• 0:10Speaker 03

  Hey, what?

• 0:10Speaker 00

  Unforgettable stories.

• 0:12Speaker 04

  We got hit by a wave and I was just in this sort of penumbra of bubbles, this world of fizz. And it was very beautiful. I didn't notice that I was drowning.

• 0:22Speaker 00

  Hear the latest from conversations. Find it on the ABC Listen app. ABC Listen, podcasts, radio, news, music and more.

• 0:43Speaker 05

  The courts in the Sunshine State have cast a shadow over open justice with the suppression of a high-profile man implicated in, but not a part of, an extortion case. I'm Stephen Stockwell, this is The Case Of.

• 0:57Speaker 06

  The highly unusual and secretive court case.

• 1:00Speaker 07

  Alleged repeated breaches of a strict secrecy order.

• 1:03Speaker 05

  The man appeared in Cairns Magistrates Court. Charged with extortion, allegedly threatened to reveal evidence of his former partner having had a relationship with a high-profile Queensland man.

• 1:16Speaker 05

  There is a man who you have probably heard of implicated in a Queensland extortion case. It is a story that is all over message boards and social media, but we can't tell you his name. And while that seems extraordinary, and in my opinion it is, the story of how we got here is even stranger. It involves the Cairns Magistrates Court, Instagram stories and late-night phone calls from police. To help tell it, we've enlisted the help of a couple of people. The man there for the start of it, ABC reporter Conor Byrne, based in Cairns. Connor, welcome to The Case Of. Ahoy. And we've also got Grace Tobin from ABC Investigations, who has been drawn into this story. That's how you know it is a big deal. Welcome, Grace.

• 1:58Speaker 06

  Hello.

• 1:59Speaker 05

  Grace, this story starts in the Cairns Court but it's broken through to your beat now. This name was suppressed to stop people talking about it, but by trying to hide such a big secret, so the court's just made this a bigger story?

• 2:11Speaker 06

  Well, yes, potentially. I think that the way that this has unfolded, that has got the attention of people like me who want to investigate further and make sure that nothing has happened behind the scenes, that powerful people are not influencing public institutions, that there is nothing untoward going on there and we do not know the answers to that at this stage. But yeah, I think that if not for the way that this had unfolded, maybe none of us would be talking about this case, maybe none of us would know the name of this high-profile man. So that in itself is an interesting

• 2:55Speaker 06

  result of what's taken place in this regional magistrate's court.

• 3:00Speaker 05

  And is that the crux of your interest in this story? And I guess this points to the level of the person whose name is being kept quiet, that there is the potential for some kind of misuse of power or profile in keeping this under wraps?

• 3:13Speaker 06

  We don't know if it's this high-profile person himself, we don't know if it's people around him, we don't know if people have acted in a way because they're worried about how this controversy might play out. Those are all the questions that now swirl around this case because there is no transparency and it's why journalists start digging.

• 3:34Speaker 05

  Totally. No better way to motivate a journalist than by telling them they can't have something. Connor, this is a story that starts in the Cairns magistrate's court. It's actually where we met when I was in town for the case of Toye's murder where Raj Winder Singh was found guilty. And basically, on these days, your bread and butter is sitting in court and waiting to see what pops up. On this day, what were you actually there for?

• 3:59Speaker 07

  Want to be there that day. I was protesting to my editor, the very need. It was the first mention of the final alleged fender after a gang of five people allegedly stole cars rampaged around Cairns one Wednesday. But still, I had my orders, so I had to go down to court. And in the arrest court, court number one in most towns, down on the ground floor, it's where all court cases start, where they're triaged to other courts. So it could be from people contesting a parking ticket. It could be for drunk drivers, misdemeanors, drug possession. Very occasionally, you'll get something in the court which pops up which you're not expecting, a diamond in the rough.

• 4:40Speaker 07

  And out of nowhere, a local barrister in Cairns named Bridie Billock, she appears in the arrest court. She stands out, not least because she's a high-profile legal identity, but she also has this impeccable fashion sense. She was wearing this blue suit. She had this shiny matching red lipstick with these shiny high heels. And she stood out among the usual company of alleged great unwashed drunk drivers in thongs, singlets and tattoos. And barristers usually have bigger fish to fry upstairs. So seeing Bridie Billock down here meant she'd obviously reeled in a big one. And in Northern Queensland, unless you throw in some fishing analogies, you lose people. So she was with another local lawyer, Michael Finch. And the pair have worked together to defend, as you mentioned earlier,

• 5:25Speaker 07

  Rajwinder Singh in his first trial for the murder of Toy Accordinly. But they also had another man with them who I'd never seen before, didn't recognise, and this was the defendant. He looked a bit out of place in the arrest court, uncomfortable. But he also appeared very interested in what was going on in the proceedings. So what unfolded next, I couldn't believe my ears. A local man had been charged with extorting a local woman, who was the complainant, who wasn't there, because he allegedly had proof that she allegedly had had a romantic affair with a prominent, high-profile Queensland man who we cannot name. And that high-profile, prominent Queensland man's name was read out in open court.

• 6:05Speaker 05

  When you heard that name, what was your first thought?

• 6:10Speaker 07

  When I heard the name, I had it written down in my notebook and you can see that I'm rapidly trying to get every word of it down, but my first initial thoughts were this is serious, this is not a name you would hear in an arrest court. I don't want to say it was like an out of body experience, but my head had to kind of rewind back and play back in my head. What did I just hear? Did I just hear that correctly? And I wasn't expecting an extortion charge up this morning. So initially didn't believe it. And then, of course, the next thing I said was to myself, sit up and pay attention. This is big. Don't daydream. Get every second of this.

• 6:44Speaker 05

  You talked about this being an extortion case, basically. The reason that this name has popped up is that it's implicated somehow in an extortion case. What can you tell me about what was really being discussed in that courtroom?

• 6:56Speaker 07

  Now, at this point, we weren't sure because it was just a bail variation. And this may have been this defendant's second time in that courtroom. And we weren't aware of the first time because obviously it wasn't flagged with us as something that we needed to attend. So they were just back to change the bail variations. And Ms. Billick said that the existing bail terms were overreaching. She said there are concerns that they are designed to protect, and there are some matters that go so far as to potentially constitute a gag order. So this is a flag that there was some serious bail terms set by either the judge or the police to say this person cannot talk about what is happening with this extortion case and this high profile man.

• 7:39Speaker 05

  Kind of, we should flag it. Like, at this point, you're in court, you've got this name written down in front of you. At this point, this name is not suppressed. You know, you could have talked about that name, you could have gone on the radio, you could have mentioned what you'd heard at that point. Is that right?

• 7:52Speaker 07

  At this point, I could potentially have thrown down my typewriter, ran outside to the public payphone, rang my editor and said, have I got a story for you? But the important thing is... You've got to sit in and you've got to wait and see how it all plays out. Now, speaking of gag orders, Bridie Billick stood up and asked for the bail variation. And before she even got an answer to the bail variation, she then asked for the names to be suppressed of the defendant, her defendant, her client and the complainant.

• 8:23Speaker 05

  Right.

• 8:24Speaker 07

  So that to me is, okay, something is about to happen here. There could be a suppression order laid down on this matter, on these names. So I may or may not be able to report all of this. That's when I kind of, it's flagged with me that there's more to travel here and I may not be able to cover all of it, but pay attention and see what happens next.

• 8:45Speaker 05

  So Connor, who is in the room at this moment?

• 8:48Speaker 07

  Well, it's the arrest court. So this is where you've got people sitting in the gallery who are awaiting their own hearings. There was a local online content maker who had been in court dealing with his own charges that day. Also in the courtroom is the police prosecutor. Now, she by admission was quite new and was unaware, she was a bit out of her depth in what was going on at this point. And she had been with senior sergeant Philip Stevens, who was a more senior police prosecutor. He'd been in and out of the courtroom at this point. I'd seen him earlier. And when this name was read out in court, he wasn't there, although he did return later on.

• 9:29Speaker 07

  But also there was the, from the Cairns Post, one of their court reporters who was in the gallery. I hadn't actually seen her yet as I'd walked in and went straight through into the media room. Now, at this point, no suppression order had been made. Acting magistrate Meoli asked to stand down for a few minutes. Now, the gallery is full of all the people waiting to be called for misdemeanors, as this is playing out. Acting magistrate Meoli returns. She says she wants to take this to another courtroom to discuss. So Bridie Billick then offers to withdraw her application for the suppression, if it makes things easier for the court, because it is such a busy day. And then Acting magistrate Meoli says it's probably more appropriate for the prosecutor to apply for a suppression order and asks the inexperienced prosecutor to weigh in. And she says she's

• 10:12Speaker 07

  In unfamiliar territory, will need to take advice for her office. At this point, Magistrate Meoli utters the fatal words. By this time, she makes her application, it's going to be too late. Magistrate Meoli now puts in place an interim suppression order and adjourns until 12.30 in another quieter courtroom upstairs.

• 10:29Speaker 05

  And so this to me seems to suggest that the magistrate can seal the people in the room. She knows, you've heard this name. And basically, she's saying, look, you need to act on this very quickly because if you don't, someone's going to start talking about it.

• 10:44Speaker 07

  Precisely. Acting Magistrate Meoli, she knew that the media was here and I'm riding furiously and I'm paying attention. So she knows the press is here. And at this point, the horse may have bolted already.

• 10:56Speaker 05

  Yeah, absolutely. You go up to this other courtroom, 12.30. What unfolds in that room?

• 11:03Speaker 07

  So upstairs, in that courtroom, Senior Sergeant Philip Stevens has returned to the courthouse. And when the court opens, he says in open court to the magistrate that he's discussed the issues with the defence and they've agreed to make this a domestic violence aggravating charge of extortion. So in my mind, immediately, under Queensland law, that means the names are suppressed. Under a domestic violence charge, the media cannot report names which can identify or tend to identify the parties involved. So that's, that's clear with me. So after some discussion about this, Acting Magistrate Meoli, she stands down again while she gets her head around this. On return, she makes an order not to identify the parties or the high-profile Queensland man.

• 11:46Speaker 07

  And Ms Billick then asks for reasons why the high-profile Queensland man is included in that suppression order, to which Magistrate Meoli says the factual allegations made involve him because they, meaning he, are part and parcel of the extortion charge. So she adjourns the court to a Monday, when the suppression order application can be heard again back downstairs in the arrest court.

• 12:08Speaker 05

  This is why the magistrate moved this quickly, why it was moved to another court, all of that. Did that work?

• 12:14Speaker 07

  No, by this point, the horse had already bolted. So the online local content maker who I'd mentioned earlier, we can't name him. He had told me that he had posted to social media about what he and we had all heard in the court and that his phone had died at that point. He had also followed us up to the second courtroom and Magistrate Moli even asked him why he was there and he said, I have matters all over the courthouse today. She allowed him to stay, even though he had, all due respect to him, he didn't have any business in that courtroom at that time. So after the court rose, I went to the registry office to ask for the charge sheet for this defendant for a written copy of the suppression order made in court and was denied both.

• 12:59Speaker 07

  They said I was in court, I'd heard everything and they were unable to provide what I'd asked for because it was suppressed. And this is another flag. The suppression order is suppressed, so we can't give you the suppression order. So I managed to file a very careful, bare bones online story and some radio copy about the extortion case and this high profile Queensland man following discussions with ABC lawyers. But as I said, this local online content maker had already published to social media what he'd heard in court that day.

• 13:28Speaker 05

  Grace, you've become really interested in this story. I heard about this story because of some of your reporting that you had been doing. Did you see Connor's story that afternoon and think, hang on a second, this is a bit weird, I need to pay more attention to this?

• 13:41Speaker 06

  Well, all respect to Connor because his reporting that day was incredible, but I actually came across this story on Instagram of all places. So Connor got scooped that day in a big way by this man sitting in court, the local content maker that Connor's referred to. And I randomly followed this person myself on social media, I think from a previous story, he's just kind of remained on there. And I couldn't quite believe my eyes when I saw this post go up that day naming this very high profile man online. And so naturally I leaned in, I just assumed this is going to be a massive

• 14:23Speaker 06

  News story and then as the hours ticked by, nothing, nothing, nothing was coming out. And so I just started following this from the sidelines to see what happened next.

• 14:33Speaker 05

  Yeah, I mean, what about it was something that stuck in your mind? Was it just the the scale of this person's name? Or was it a combination of the scale of this person's name? And then the fact that nothing else has emerged afterwards?

• 14:44Speaker 06

  Look, I think it was definitely the person's name to begin with. The fact that there was this allegation of an affair having taken place. But again, I just sort of thought that was going to be a big news story. It wasn't necessarily something that I would cover in ABC Investigations. We don't really make a point of covering those sorts of stories. We leave that to other publications. So I was really just interested in it as a news story at first, as something that I would read about. But then, as Connor's reporting came out that day and over the coming days, in those first few court hearings, I think there were definitely a few red flags that he pointed out earlier.

• 15:28Speaker 06

  Things like the barrister of the defendant raising her client's bail conditions. You know, her saying that it constituted a gag order, which then I learnt actually meant essentially that this defendant couldn't even speak openly to his own lawyers. I mean, that seemed quite extreme to me. And then I think despite this barrister's arguments about the non-publication order not covering the high profile person, the magistrate put this order on anyway. There seemed to be quite reasonable arguments against it, but the decision to suppress. And because I knew who it was, I I probably wondered about what were the circumstances that this suppression order was put on?

• 16:11Speaker 06

  And I do not have the answers to that at this stage, I will point out. But certainly, I've done a lot of court reporting in my time. And I think that generally matters are held in open court, even when the details involved are excruciating for those who find themselves before the court. So, you know, fundamentally, that is how courts are meant to operate. So any time there's a suppression order or a court departs from that, it is reason to take note.

• 16:39Speaker 05

  Yeah, and is the way that this has been suppressed, or the fact that this man's been suppressed, also something that sticks out to you as well? I mean, when I think about the suppressions that I have kind of looked at and that I have had to abide by as well. Usually they're people who are, you know, they're relating directly to people that are either a complainant or a defendant or, you know, a kind of party to an offence that's being managed in court, not someone who is a third-hand person sort of off to the side of something.

• 17:05Speaker 06

  Yes, and I think that has been a really compelling argument put forward in this case. But having spoken to other legal experts, there are others who have different opinions to that, of course, including the prosecutors in this case. But I have spoken to other legal experts who point out that extortion in Queensland is treated as blackmail. And so, you know, probably the strongest argument there is that even though this high-profile man is not a party to the case, by naming him, the court almost carries out the blackmail allegation themselves that they then carry through on what is alleged initially. So there is that argument to take into consideration too.

• 17:49Speaker 05

  Yep, okay. What about how this decision was made? Usually these things, these decisions are made kind of at the behest of a party. So you have either the defence team or the prosecution saying, oh, hey, by the way, could you suppress this? Were you surprised to see the magistrate kind of taking the initiative in this instance?

• 18:07Speaker 06

  Yes, I do think that that certainly stuck out to me because as things unfolded in court, it wasn't the prosecutor who seemed to be agitating for the suppression order. The prosecutor and the defence seemed on the same page, that they were quite satisfied with the defendant and the complainant being protected, that that really was all that they were asking for. And from the perspective of someone watching this, you know, in a third-party way, it did seem to be the acting magistrate who was pushing for more thought around this. Process and asking the police prosecutor to come back to the courtroom on the following Monday

• 18:49Speaker 06

  and have a think about it again and read up on some of the literature and think carefully around what this suppression order was going to do.

• 18:56Speaker 05

  You know, in this one, we have an individual who has breached this suppression order. You know, we've got this Instagram story, uh, which, you know, is how Grace found out, uh, about this. And, you know, there are penalties for breaching suppression orders. You can get hauled in front of the judge and, you know, kind of shat at, had a talking to in one instance. But also you can be fined, you can be arrested, there's, you know, there's, there's consequences to these actions. What happened to this guy, Grace? I mean, keeping in mind, of course, that he'd actually posted about this before the suppression order was in place.

• 19:28Speaker 06

  Yeah, so that night on the Friday after Connor had packed up his notebook and gone home, uh, this online, uh, content maker, uh, was sitting at home and the drama sort of spilled outside the courtroom. So he got a phone call from a police detective in Cairns and he was told in no uncertain terms to get rid of his posts immediately. I don't know if the police knew it or not at the time, but, um, his social media stats were pretty good. This post and the post afterwards had been shared thousands of times, is what he's told me. And already all of these people around Queensland and maybe around Australia knew the name of this high profile person and some of the key allegations that were made inside that courtroom.

• 20:13Speaker 06

  So I was sitting at home myself, watching this all play out that night. And, um, you know, I, I saw one of his latest posts, which was him updating his followers that he was actually going to delete the post after this phone call from the detective. And he told us that he was all for free speech and transparency, but he didn't fancy getting SWAT teamed that night. So he did what he was told. Now, in return, he said that this detective told him hand on heart, we won't be kicking your door in now. Uh, but the issue didn't actually end there. His posts were brought up in court the following week and really haven't stopped being brought up ever since.

• 20:49Speaker 05

  Yeah, and I think the thing I find really interesting about these details as well is that, you know, we are playing by the rules, we understand the rules, we know the rules quite well, and I, you know, I think we'll acknowledge that the rules can be kind of complicated. I don't think there's any expectation that I would have of an ordinary person to kind of really understand how suppression orders work, how you're supposed to abide by them, how to read them in a lot of senses. But Grace, I guess, you know, with everyone else not necessarily understanding that, even though we can't name this person, is this conversation continuing online? Are people kind of willingly breaching this or just accidentally breaching this, talking about this kind of with impunity?

• 21:24Speaker 06

  Look, at Last Check, and I check it fairly regularly, yes, this order continues to be breached by members of the public, and I think there's a lot of people posting about this online under their own names. It's not like anyone's trying to hide it. It's pretty prolific. And, you know, this is part of the problem. It's very difficult to police that once the cat is out of the bag. That detective in Kansas can hardly call up every single one of those people online, like he did with this local content maker, and tell them to take down their posts. So, you know, suppression orders are only meant to be used where strictly necessary. And I guess if it gets to the point if that this

• 22:07Speaker 06

  high-profile man's identity is so widely known, then the order really wouldn't have any real effect in itself. And potentially, there's a good argument there that it's no longer necessary.

• 22:19Speaker 05

  Yeah, I'm interested to talk more in our next episode on Thursday about kind of how the ABC is challenging this and what kind of conversations are being had in court, because this will be back in court later this week as well, conversations around, you know, the different people kind of implicated in this whole process. So it's a, there's a lot to unpack, and we'll have many more details in our episode on Thursday. Connor, is it frustrating that you can't talk about this, that you were there, you have this information, and everyone else is spreading this news while you are, you know, effectively suppressed?

• 22:50Speaker 07

  Yeah, it is frustrating and even my neighbours in the evening when they might have read the story and say, who is this person? And I have to say, I can't tell you. The judge says I'm not allowed to say who it is and I have to abide by that law. And I'm not much of, I don't think I even have an Instagram account. So I missed most of, I missed 99% of the story, it seems. I'm hearing all about it from Grace. I have to ring her and tell

• 23:13Speaker 06

  me. You've got to get on Instagram, Connor.

• 23:15Speaker 07

  I don't think I do, to be honest. So it is hard, but I have to be able to sleep at night, I suppose. I have to know that I've done the right thing by the law, by the ABC lawyers and by our own editorial policies, that I have published the story in good faith. Look, in a modern era when everything is about clicks and performance online and how posts and how many eyeballs are on your story, I don't know how many eyeballs were on my story, but I can tell you a lot more eyeballs were on this person's Instagram post. And such is life. It doesn't upset me too much, but yes, to answer your question, it can be a little bit frustrating. And I don't also want this to get to a point

• 23:55Speaker 07

  where things like that kind of impede our reporting. And to a point, I feel that may already have happened by this post happening at the time that it did. And then that makes it harder for the media to actually report on the case and even enter the courtroom going forward.

• 24:16Speaker 05

  Yeah, very wide ranging impacts that we're seeing here, Connor. Lessons not just for the courts in Queensland, but nationally as well. There is still a lot unfolding too. There's hearings over the next couple of weeks relating to these various proceedings. And there's a lot more of this story to discuss. So we'll be diving into that on Thursday this week. There's the robust police response that we can start with and the challenges that the ABC is making to try and unveil this name of the high profile Queensland man. Grace, Conor, thank you so much for joining us for this episode.

• 24:48Speaker 06

  Pleasure. Thanks for having us.

• 24:50Speaker 07

  Thank you.

• 24:51Speaker 05

  We'll be back in your feed on Thursday. If you want to keep up to date with this and all other episodes of The Case Of, grab ABC Listen, best place to listen to The Case Of. If you want to tell your friends and families, drop it in the group chat. If you're interested in the process and why we can't talk about this, share this story so they can be up to date with the man who cannot be named.

• 25:11Speaker 05

  The Case Of is produced by ABC Audio Studios and ABC News. This episode was reported by Conor Byrne and Grace Tobin and presented by me, Stephen Stockwell. Our supervising producer is Greg Muller and our executive producer is Claire Rollinson. This episode was produced on land of the Gimoi, Yagura, Turable and We're On Tree People.