The Gap Between " Privacy " and " Justice " !

Gary Jubelin held the rank of  Detective Chief Inspector in the New South Wales police force and served the people of this state for thirty-two years.  He headed the task force investigating the disappearance of William Tyrrell from his grandmothers home in Kendall until he was dismissed from the force and charged with illegally recording a conversation during that investigation.

There is no doubt the disappearance of William Tyrrell, dubbed the " boy in the spiderman suit " has gripped public attention. It has been investigated under the scrutiny of the media pack and one nearby resident in Kendall has received intense police scrutiny.   It is the recording of conversations between Jubelin and that  " person of interest " which have been found illegal by a magistrate in a local court this week.

In the interest of personal privacy we have laws that require the presence of a court order before conversations may be recorded and the home of the man being investigated was bugged by just such a legal sanction.  Gary Jubelin claimed he recorded the conversation because he thought it necessary to protect his legalrights.  He feared the witness may harm himself or make claims against Jublelin in the future.

The court heard that there were no fingerprints, DNA or witness statements linking this person to William's disappearance and yet Jubelin seemed obsessed with pursuing that line of enquiry and this was approved by his superiors.He recorded two conversations, one in which he put his phone on loudspeaker so that another phone would fully catch the conversation.

Because of the years he investigated crime Gary Jubelin would be fully conversant with the laws that applied to listening devices.  His career has been terminated because he chose to break that law when the investigation reached a stage of great urgency.  Public pressure to find William was reaching an unbearable level.

That recorded conversation could never have been used in court because of its illegality.  The public must wonder how many conversations between them and the police are on tape in some lawman's possession to serve as a reminder of what was said in an interview.  The law does seem to value privacy above the expectation that justice should prevail.

In this instance, we are no closer to finding William and a gifted detective with thirty-two years experience has stepped down from crime investigation.  Perhaps a good time for a reexamination of those privacy laws in this Smartphone age !