There is a highly secretive and unusual court case playing out behind closed doors in Far North Queensland involving a prominent married man and his alleged affair, a non-publication order we are not allowed to see and an allegation of extortion we cannot tell you much about.
The case is the talk of legal, political, media and business circles around the state. But if anyone publicly names this high-profile Queenslander, they risk being charged with contempt of court.
This is a story of how a regional magistrates court became the centre of a mysterious high-stakes legal drama that raises questions over the fundamental principle of open justice, the media’s right to fairly report what happens in court, and whether powerful people are using their influence over public institutions to protect this high profile man from embarrassment.
The ‘gag order’ that set the tone
It was quite by accident that this case came to the media’s attention at all.
Two weeks ago on a busy Friday morning at the Cairns Magistrates Court, ABC News reporter Conor Byrne was sitting in the arrests court as bail applications for drug matters and dangerous driving offences were being heard.
About 11am, he noticed something strange.
A highly regarded local defence barrister, Brydie Bilic, and experienced criminal defence solicitor Michael Finch had unexpectedly appeared in the courtroom.
The pair was representing a man in an unlisted matter that seemed to have popped up out of nowhere.
Brydie Bilic and Michael Finch leave the Cairns Courthouse. (ABC News: Conor Byrne)
Ms Bilic told the court that her client had been charged with extorting his ex-partner after she allegedly had a romantic affair with a Queensland public figure.
She explicitly named the high-profile man in open court — a name that took everyone in the room by surprise.
Ms Bilic was there to urgently address some strange and “overreaching” bail conditions that essentially stopped her client from speaking freely, even to his own lawyers, about the facts of the case and, she feared, were potentially only there to protect this powerful person.
She described it to the court as constituting a “gag order”.
Acting Magistrate Gelma Meoli ordered new bail conditions.
But the restrictions on this case were just getting started.
Noting the presence of media and members of the public in court, Ms Bilic raised the issue of a non-publication order to help protect the identities of the defendant and the complainant.
“I’ve done some careful research into extortion charges,” she said.
“The complainant’s name will not be published in the media, although the other facts, of course, can.”
This would mean the high-profile man’s name could be reported.
A junior prosecutor appearing for the police agreed, but the acting magistrate was not so sure.
“Actually, I might just stand down with respect to this, just for a moment,” she said, leaving the courtroom.
While she was gone, a member of the public who had been listening to the proceedings took out his phone and started posting online about the high-profile man.
Word was already out, but that did not stop the courts from trying to put it back in.
‘I’m not telling you what to do but …’
What transpired from here is why some top legal minds are scratching their heads over the case.
A senior barrister with some knowledge of the events told ABC Investigations he thought the court proceedings were “very unusual”.
When Acting Magistrate Meoli returned to the bench after an absence of about 40 minutes, she acted swiftly.
She immediately adjourned the matter to a less crowded courtroom, put an interim blanket suppression order over the entire case, and told the junior prosecutor standing before her to ask a more senior prosecutor to take over.
The ABC’s reporter continued to track the case.
As the afternoon rolled on, Ms Bilic and a new senior prosecutor continued to agree with each other that it was only necessary to de-identify the defendant and female complainant, and not the prominent married man.
He was not an alleged victim himself, nor a witness, and therefore was not a party to the court proceedings. His name, however, was relevant in the factual context of the alleged affair with the complainant.
Acting Magistrate Meoli disagreed.
“He’s part of the allegations,” she argued, before adjourning the matter until the following Monday and making an interim suppression order that included the high-profile man and any allegations that involved him as part of the extortion charge.
She urged the prosecutor to obtain some further instructions.
“I’m not telling you what to do,” she said, before highlighting specific cases that she recommended he might read up on over the weekend.
“I just want to out of an abundance of caution give you that opportunity.”
‘This is coming from the chief magistrate’
That night, the courtroom drama spilled outside.
The man who had posted on social media was sitting at home when he received a phone call from a senior police detective in Cairns.
He was told in no uncertain terms to immediately take down his posts about the high-profile man. They had already attracted thousands of views from across the country.
He did what he was told, updating his followers that he was “all for free speech and transparency” but he had removed the posts because he did not want to get “SWAT teamed” that night.
In a recording heard by the ABC, the police detective later thanked him over the phone, saying “hand on heart [we are] not kicking your door in” over the issue.
By the following week, these same social media posts helped elicit some intriguing comments from the acting magistrate in court.
In working out the chronology of what had taken place on Friday — including the fact that the social media posts were made prior to her non-publication order — Acting Magistrate Meoli told the court she had first adjourned the matter that day to “take some advice from my superiors” when she realised what “all this was about”.
The drama unfolded inside the Cairns Courthouse. (ABC News: Mark Rigby)
A Queensland silk, speaking strictly on the basis of anonymity, told the ABC that in his view this would be inconsistent with the principle of open justice.
“It’s essential to our system that nothing happens in private,”
he said.
“The process must remain open and it’s rigorous because nothing can happen without interested parties being present and represented.”
It turns out one of those superiors was Queensland’s Chief Magistrate, Judge Janelle Brassington.
Her input was revealed as Acting Magistrate Meoli heard the arguments of Ms Bilic that a blanket suppression order in extortion cases was extreme and went against cases previously noted by the Chief Magistrate.
“I’m getting this information from her,” Acting Magistrate Meoli countered.
“This is coming from the chief magistrate in Brisbane.”
The exchange followed a new application by the police prosecutor for a non-publication order that did not cover the name of the prominent married man.
For a second time, the magistrate extended her blanket suppression order and adjourned the case for another week to allow more time for police to consider their position.
A slip of the tongue
By the following Monday morning, the mounting media interest in this unusual case was becoming clear as an experienced barrister from Brisbane strolled through the doors of the Cairns court building.
The appearance of Andrew O’Brien, King’s Counsel, seemed to take prosecutors by surprise. As did the additional number of journalists suddenly filing into the courtroom, including six reporters who had travelled from Brisbane or Sydney.
Mr O’Brien was there to put forward arguments on behalf of media organisations that it was not the job of the court to shield the prominent man from embarrassment, distress or reputational harm and that the blanket suppression order should be lifted.
But first, Acting Magistrate Meoli ordered the court be closed except to accredited media.
Members of the public were told to leave, including the man who had posted on social media. Over the past week, he had continued to upload multiple videos and memes that even he admitted may result in him being taken into custody.
“They’re obviously referring to my publications. They’re upset about it,” he immediately recorded in yet another video outside.
“They’ve kicked me out of court.”
Back inside, the media heard previously unreported details of the case but those too were suppressed.
Mr O’Brien argued that naming the prominent man would not expose the complainant’s identity through some kind of “jigsaw effect” because there was no known link between the two.
Additionally, the married man had not taken any action to keep his identity secret by applying for an injunction in the Supreme Court.
“It is unfathomable that he doesn’t know that these proceedings are afoot,” Mr O’Brien told the court.
But his arguments failed to persuade Acting Magistrate Meoli.
She ruled in favour of a new application made by Queensland Police Commissioner Brett Pointing that day to keep the married man’s name suppressed and under the pseudonym “MM”.
She explicitly stated that her order was about protecting the principles of justice, and was not based on the fact the man was high-profile or to protect him from embarrassment, but rather to stop the defendant from achieving “publicly the very nature of the charge of extortion”.
“The threat of exposing the married man goes to the very heart of the threat, in my view,”
she said.
Before leaving the bench that day, Acting Magistrate Meoli had one final matter she wanted to address.
“I just wish to clarify that the chief magistrate has not assisted me with this other than to provide particular authorities,” she stated.
“I want to make it very clear that perhaps that was a slip of the tongue on Monday, but I want to make it very clear that this is my decision and my decision alone.”
Appeal is launched
Far from over, this is a case that promises twists and turns in months to come.
The defendant’s legal team, along with media organisations including the ABC, have now launched a judicial review into the acting magistrate’s decision, arguing her blanket suppression order went beyond the scope of her powers.
Police prosecutors and the magistrates court have doubled down, hiring their own top silk to fight the appeal.
A directions hearing before Judge James Henry in Cairns Supreme Court on Wednesday morning was conducted entirely behind closed doors, with journalists locked outside.
We had raced there from a press conference around the corner with Deputy Premier Jarrod Bleijie.
As a former attorney-general, he was asked about the case but refused to comment on it specifically, agreeing only that the fundamental concept of open court in the justice system was important to uphold.
“I couldn’t possibly comment based on the suppression order that’s in place by a court,” he said.
The judicial review is expected to take place in Cairns on July 31.
Loading…
