May 25 is also my poor suffering wife’s birthday.

Each Towel Day, we reveal the latest builds of our Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy Lifetime LEGO Builds. These are built throughout the year.

When the date arrives, I spend the whole day going up and down our basement stairs to set up the latest scene.

And here it is.

It always looks less impressive in photos. Perhaps it’s my photographic skills.

Here’s a dodgy video shit at the end of Towel Day…

New Additions

Bowerick Wowbagger - The Infinitely Prolonged

Bored with immortality, Bowerick decides on the honourable purpose of insulting the entire universe in alphabetical order. He stands above in our LEGO scene, giving it the finger!

Bowerick was my favourite character in the books. He had me in hysterics!

The build isn’t quite complete, but it’s mostly there.

Agrajag - The Cathedral of Hate

Agrajag is a creature (or a consciousness) that continuously reincarnates into different forms throughout the timeline and is killed by Arthur Dent in each one.

‘Look, it’s just fate playing silly buggers with you. With me. It’s a complete coincidence.’

Arthur Dent, Throwing The Nutrimatic Cup

There are now three known statues of Arthur Dent in the universe.

There’s the rather unflattering Cathedral of Hate statue...more on that later...

There’s Arthur Dent, Throwing The Nutrimatic Cup - a fifteen-mile-high statue on the planet of Brontitall.

And, a strange LEGO Arthur Dent Throwing The Nutrimatic Cup, located in a basement garage in Kalamunda, Western Australia.

The people of Brontitall made the original statue after seeing a wormhole appear in the sky, showing Arthur Dent aboard the Heart of Gold, throwing a styrofoam coffee cup because the Nutrimatic Drink Dispenser didn’t know how to make the traditional tea Arthur Dent had drunk on Earth.

Just like the original statue, the LEGO statue also has the tea cup held in mid-air by the Power of Art. Since it is artistically correct that it stays where it is, there it remains. It’s miraculous!

A Reinvention…

We reinvented the main scene…integrating the universe with our DON’T PANIC in LEGO.

I think it worked quite well and am, in fact, considering making the Universe four times as big to integrate the whole scene! Although building that may kill me…the kids, who are teenagers now, have no interest in assisting in this madcap project these days!

We’re now posting each day on the Bowerick Wowbagger Facebook page…

and considering a LEGO Ideas submission…although I’m not sure we’ve got the scene together well enough yet…maybe next year.

https://www.facebook.com/Bowerick42

The amount of work that goes into this is extraordinary. Marvin never hesitates to remind me…

My favourite builds are the Heart of Gold and Vogons…

Ideas:

• Zaphod Beeblebox - while we have him as a mini-figure, not having his large mugs feature is the most obvious omission so far

• Bowerick needs a spaceship.

• I’d like to do a large representation of the Babek fish.

We’d love your suggestions for next year’s builds…just comment below.

I’m loving watching the Don’t Panic Festival 2026 Stalbridge…highly recommended.

As it has been compiled from a series of posts, it's quite lengthy.

Occasionally, I’ve needed a mental break from the safety posts. Usu…

Read more

The 'mushroom murder' trial in the Supreme Court in regional Victoria is coming to a close.

Erin Patterson, a wealthy East Gippsland mother of two, is charged with three murders and one attempted murder.

On 29 July 2023, Patterson cooked a beef Wellington for lunch with her estranged husband's parents, Don and Gail Patterson, her mother-in-law's sister, Heather Wilkinson, and Wilkinson's husband, Ian.

She served beef Wellington to her guests. Three of them died. Ian, though he suffered extreme illness, survived.

Erin Patterson is accused of intentionally poisoning her estranged husband, Simon Patterson's parents, Don and Gail Patterson, 70, and Gail's sister and Simon's aunt, Heather Wilkinson, 66, by serving them a toxic beef Wellington.

While giving evidence, Erin Patterson accepted that death cap mushrooms were in the meal.

Patterson pleaded not guilty and claimed she did not intend to poison her guests.

As well as being hooked on the awful Karen Read trial, I've been listening to the great Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) podcast, 'The Mushroom Trial Daily.

The contrast with the US media coverage of the Karen Read Trial is extreme. I’ve posted extensively about that trial on LinkedIn

My take - a Karen and media-fuelled injustice!

'The Mushroom Trial Daily is precise, objective and thorough...the podcasters never speculate on the outcome.

The podcast’s logo inspired the LEGO build. A relatively quick build for us, considering our Judge Dredd build is still ongoing at 5 years plus, taking about 3 hours. My kids thought it was ‘fully sick’.

The Jury will be out in this trial later this week. They plan to release some podcasts while the jury is in session and will also provide time for those who may have missed it to catch up.

Lesser podcasts, documentaries and mini-series will follow.

It inspired the latest LEGO creation based on the podcast logo...Not a bad likeness?

#deathcapmushrooms #trial #law #courts #podcast #mushroomtrial

The crash resulted in the loss of all 109 people on board and four on the ground.

As a child in Sheffield, England, I was obsessed with the Concorde. That interest faded when I moved to Perth, Australia, at the age of 10 - a long way from any Concorde action.

The interest was rekindled when I visited the Concorde on display at the North Berwick Aviation Museum a few years ago.

In researching the disaster, I’ve watched many documentaries and read Samme Chittum’s The Last Days of the Concorde. All were fascinating!

The LEGO is a modified and enhanced version of the Concorde from the Blockzone. It took a long time, mainly because it was involved in its own crash when I dropped it! 😣

Here’s the first version that included the trail of smoke. We modified the original build and added fire and smoke (all in LEGO)!

The Crash

On 25 July 2000, Air France Flight 4590, a Concorde, crashed in Gonesse, France, after departing from Charles de Gaulle Airport en route to John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City.

The Air Traffic Controller (ACT) was closely observing the plane's takeoff when he saw bright yellow-and-red flames streaming from the underside of the Concorde's port wing. As the plane lifted off the runway, a fiery 61-meter tail trailed it.

He immediately alerted the flight crew via radio, “Concorde zero, four-five-nine-zero, you have flames behind you.”

The ACT listened and observed intently for the next one minute and eighteen seconds when all sounds abruptly ended.

The crash killed all one hundred passengers and nine crew members on board, as well as four people on the ground.

These last were four women: Ewa Lipinska, 18; Paulina Cypko, 19; Kenza Rachid, 19; and Devranee Chundunsing, 41. Later called the 'forgotten victims', they were cleaners at the crash site, the Hotelissimo - a two-story wooden hotel and restaurant.

Immediately after the crash, Air France voluntarily grounded all five Concordes in its fleet.

The investigation into the disaster revealed that a metal strip on the runway had fallen from the number 3 engine of a Continental Airlines DC-10. The strip fell because of substandard repair work carried out earlier that month at the Continental maintenance facility in Houston, Texas.

At take-off, the main landing gear of the speeding Concorde ran over the bent titanium strip that lay on its side with its razor-sharp edge pointed upward. The impact led to the violent blowout of a tire, hurling tire fragments that led to a disastrous series of events:

- The tearing of insulation off a live electrical cable in the wheel well.
A deformation in the tank caused a build-up of pressure inside the fuel tank, which eventually ruptured, resulting in a massive leak of liquid kerosene.
- An electrical arc from the damaged cable ignited the fuel vapour.
- Hot gases from the blaze were sucked into the portside engines, with pieces of the blown tire, causing a dramatic drop in power in the number 2 engine and surging in the number 1 engine.
- The remnants of the tire dragged along the runway pulled the plane off-centre.

After taking off, the aflame plane lurched for 9.5 km in just over a minute before plummeting into the hotel.

Recommendations implemented from the investigation included:
- The certification of tires to reduce the risk of inferior or damaged tires causing blow-outs.
- Better surveillance of runways, including using radar to detect all foreign objects on the runways.
- Adding Kevlar liners to the fuel tanks to prevent static ruptures.
- Armouring of electrical wiring in the undercarriage bay to prevent damage, causing a short circuit.

On November 7, 2001, Air France’s Concorde fleet returned to the air.

The legal ramifications of the crash took much longer to resolve.

The Investigation

The investigation into the crash of the Air France 4590 Concorde on 25 July 2000 identified the main cause as a metal strip on the runway that punctured a tire, leading to debris rupturing a fuel tank and causing a catastrophic fire.

Relatives of the victims sought compensation and lobbied for those responsible to face criminal charges.

In 2001, Air France reached a $150 million civil settlement with the families of the victims.

In July 2008, a French prosecutor announced criminal charges of involuntary homicide and manslaughter against:

Taylor, a Continental Airlines mechanic, was alleged to have made the repair error on the DC-10 that caused the metal strip to be dropped on the runway.
- Ford, Taylor’s supervisor;
- Continental Airlines on account of their workers' negligence.
- Perrier, the director of the first Concorde program at Aérospatiale, was accused of failing to respond to evidence of weakness in the aircraft's tyres and fuel tank designs.
- Frantzen, former director of technical services for Concorde, was accused of underestimating previous tyre and fuel tank incidents and failing to demand design changes.
- Hérubel, Concorde’s former chief engineer, was accused of not taking action to strengthen the fuel tanks.

The trial began in May 2010 and concluded at the end of that year. Continental Airlines and its mechanic, Taylor, were found guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

Continental Airlines was fined $266k and held liable for damages of €1 million to Air France.

The French court sentenced Taylor to a 15-month suspended sentence for involuntary manslaughter.

Frantzen was found not guilty, as were Perrier and Hérubel. Perrier and Hérubel’s employer, Aérospatiale, was ordered to pay a portion of the damages.

In 2012, an appeals court judge overturned the guilty verdicts, holding that any mistakes made by Continental and Taylor didn’t make them criminally responsible for the deaths.

In mid-2001, the families of five members of the crew of the Concorde plane filed a lawsuit in the US against Continental Airlines and the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company. The lawsuits promptly settled for an undisclosed sum.

A further twist in the legal saga occurred in late 2013 when Taylor filed a lawsuit in the US against United Airlines and United Continental Holdings, which had acquired Continental Airlines, as well as Air France–KLM.

Taylor’s suit claimed:

- His former employer had used Taylor as a scapegoat and prevented him from testifying in the criminal trial stemming from the crash.
- He did not perform the work on the DC-10.
- The criminal trial contributed to his divorce, alcoholism and depression.

The lawsuit did not proceed. It was dismissed on the basis that it should be filed in France. However, a French attorney advised him that no French court would be receptive to his claim, and he should not waste further time and money pursuing it.

References:

Chittum, Samme. Last Days of the Concorde: The Crash of Flight 4590 and the End of Supersonic Passenger Travel (Air Disasters Book 3) Kindle Edition.

Concorde Trial: Criminal Prosecution of Chief Engineer Not in Best Interests of Safety https://www.aviationlawmonitor.com/2010/05/airlines/concorde-trial-criminal-prosecution-of-chief-engineer-not-in-best-interests-of-safety/

The Concorde Accident Criminal Trial in France. Maud Marian https://kluwerlawonline.com/journalarticle/Air+and+Space+Law/36.2/AILA2011017

Families of Concorde crew file lawsuit //https:dictionaryedition.cnn.com/2001/LAW/07/25/concorde.lawsuit/index.html

#disasters #safety #concorde #burn #airsafety #airfrance

Here is the key:

The favourite: the Heart of Gold!!!

The back is a large cup of tea and the penguin! 🤣🤣🤣

Next for us are both Vogons

What’s your favourite? And for next year’s Towel Day what are we missing?

#towelday #sciencefiction #lego #comedy

It started with a crude building of a unique Marvin - now it’s huge!

First up this year, we built our favourite Marvin - from the original BBC TV series!

Inspired by the Official Towel Day graphic (see here: https://www.towelday.org/), next up was a blocky Ford Prefect complete with the most useful thing in the universe, a satchel, the Guide and thumb up for a passing Vogon spacecraft.

One of my favourite builds from this year - our take on the Milky Way.

The answer is 42, but what is the question?

We already have some big plans for next year! How many? Well, think of a number, any number?

Don’t forget to carry a towel!

#towelday

Read more

Carey-Schofield v Hays & Civeo [2024] QSC 60 (11 June 2024) (Link)

C-S worked for Hays (H) and, in February 2019, was labour hired to work Facilities/Grounds at Civeo Dysart (CD), a holiday village complex in Dysart, Queensland.

On 15 February around 1030 am, C-S was emptying wheely bins at the back of the Hub into his utility when he was stung by a wasp and fell over a bin bag; he had removed, suffering a serious elbow injury requiring hospitalisation and multiple surgeries. C had tipped the wheelie bins on their side to get the bin bags out as they were ‘too heavy and full’ to lift out. He slid the bag out of the first bin, but it was too heavy to lift into the utility. He called out for assistance to a female worker who was driving past fifteen metres away in a golf buggy. However, she did not respond, and he “went back to start emptying the rest of them” when he was stung by the wasp and fell over one of the bags he had emptied. He planned to remove all the bags from the wheelie bins and obtain assistance to lift the bags.

C-S sued both H and CD for damages in negligence, alleging H and CD breached their duty of care to him in:

• failing to instruct him to ensure the floor of The Hub was free of potential trip hazards before removing bags filled with rubbish from wheelie bins; and 

• ‘causing, permitting or allowing’ him to remove bags filled with rubbish from the wheelie bin, creating potential trip hazards.

H and CD argued that the risk of C-S tripping on a bag that he had just temporarily placed on the ground was not significant.

The Judge found that H and CD breached their duty of care to C-S as the method ‘he was trained to perform the task of rubbish removal was contrary to the proper and safe system of work’. The /judge identified a safe system as involving:

-               garbage bags being immediately placed in the back of the utility to avoid any chance of a tripping hazard being created; and

- the person performing that task should always be assigned with a co-worker because it ought reasonably to be anticipated in the normal course of emptying wheelie bins that some wheelie bin liners may be extremely heavy and be beyond the capability of a one-person lift, particularly when including food waste.

“Emptying garbage bags was a frequent task, which is performed in the manner in which the plaintiff was trained, that is by leaving garbage bags all about the place, would create hundreds of potential tripping risks and as Mr Lawson correctly identified, the risk being to the person moving the garbage bag or to another person.”

The Judge held in C-S’s favour, awarding damages of 1.3 million: $500k against H and $873k against CD.

Credibility

H and CD raised issues with C-S’s credibility, including his consumption of cannabis - C-S pleaded that he had ceased using it in March 2018, but this conflicted with his admission to the staff at the Mackay Base Hospital after the incident that he smoked cannabis occasionally.

The Judge was convinced by C-S’s version of events:

“Although, as discussed above, there are several aspects of the plaintiff’s evidence which were not satisfactory, I do accept the plaintiff’s evidence as to how the incident occurred, and that includes his request to a female co-worker for assistance.”

“They [the matters of credibility affect C-S’s claim]… in my view, to a relatively minor extent. I consider that [C-S] ought to be accepted as a generally honest witness and mostly reliable witness, however, as discussed below, where there is objective or earlier evidence as to what had occurred, I do prefer the objective or earlier evidence. I do, however, consider it appropriate to be cautious of the plaintiffs evidence more so on the basis of reliability rather than honesty.”

Accurate Testimony as to How an Incident Occurred - Tripped v Slipped

H and CD pointed to inconsistencies in C-S’s description of what occurred. The Judge considered these re-telling differences to be minor. His Honour referred to Cains v Mathers Shoes Pty Ltd [1993] QCA 193 as supporting “absolute precision in the description of how an incident occurred provided in a consistent manner over a period of time is not a pre-requisite for acceptance of how an incident occurred.”

Cains appealed a finding against her by describing an incident in which she fell as her “slipping over” in a cross-examination where she had described it in evidence as an instance where she had “tripped”.

Appeal?

A fascinating case! Given the high damages award and contested factual circumstances, an appeal of this judgment will no doubt be lodged!

Disaster Area is a plutonium rock band from the Gagrakacka Mind Zones. It is generally regarded as not only the loudest rock band in the Galaxy but also as the loudest noise of any kind.

So loud audience members listen from within large concrete bunkers thirty-seven miles away from the stage.

The musicians themselves play their instruments by remote control from within a heavily insulated spaceship.

In our scene, they appear as holograms at a concert shortly before singer Hotblack Desiato spent a year dead for tax reasons. He is protected by an incredibly aggressive bodyguard.

At this concert, Disaster Area was joined by Cal Kramer, who also managed to hitchhike onto a passing Vogon spaceship before the Earth's demolition after getting into a fight with the cup of tea and the Lakers Tavern jukebox. Cal is reunited at this concert with Galatea, the perfect robot and protector of space-sailor men (LEGO inspired by Chiara Mazzoni's rear sleeve of the Darkness Motorheart album cover)!

If you’re in the UK/Europe check out the Southern River Band. They’re awesome and come from where I live - Thornlie!

There's also a huge (!!!) 18-inch Stonehenge - Spinal Tap's enormous stunt made it all the way to the end of the universe!

Biro Utopia

The biroless office…
 
Digital transformation is real...or perhaps it's just the biros slipping away!

At least that's the theory of Veet Voojajig, anyway:

“Somewhere in the cosmos, he said, along with all the planets inhabited by humanoids, reptiloids, fishoids, walking treeoids and superintelligent shades of the color blue, there was also a planet entirely given over to ballpoint life forms. And it was to this planet that unattended ballpoints would make their way, slipping away quietly through wormholes in space to a world where they knew they could enjoy a uniquely ballpointoid lifestyle, responding to highly ballpoint-oriented stimuli, and generally leading the ballpoint equivalent of the good life.

And as theories go this was all very fine and pleasant until Veet Voojagig suddenly claimed to have found this planet, and to have worked there for a while driving a limousine for a family of cheap green retractables, whereupon he was taken away, locked up, wrote a book and was finally sent into tax exile, which is the usual fate reserved for those who are determined to make fools of themselves in public.”
 
Unfortunately, all the paper has stuck around!

The Vogon Spaceship

The Vogons are a race that will not save their grandmothers from certain death “without orders signed in triplicate, sent in, sent back, queried, lost, found, subject to public inquiry, lost again, and finally buried in soft peat for three months and recycled as firelighters”!!! (Douglas Adams, the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy).

Saved by a Cup of Tea - The Heart of Gold (HOG).

It was the first spacecraft to use the galaxy's most dangerous and valuable device - the Infinite Improbability Drive (IID).

Impressed by its sleekness, Zaphod Beeblebox, the then-President of the Galaxy, stole the ship during its launch ceremony.
 
Zaphod’s & Trillian’s use of the IID picked up Arthur Dent & Ford Prefect while they floated in deep space, having just been ejected from the Vogon Spaceship they hitchhiked onto to avoid the destruction of the Earth.

The IID was created by a student at the University of Maximegalon who “left to sweep up after a particularly unsuccessful party found himself reasoning in this way: 'If such a machine is a virtual impossibility, it must have finite improbability. So all I have to do, to make one, is to work out how exactly improbable it is, feed that figure into the finite improbability generator, give it a fresh cup of really hot tea... and turn it on!' He did this and created the long sought after golden Infinite Improbability generator out of thin air. Unfortunately, shortly after he was awarded the Galactic Institute's Prize for Extreme Cleverness, he was lynched by a rampaging mob of respectable physicists on the ground that he had become the one thing they couldn't stand most of all: ‘a smart arse’.”

Somebody Mention Tea

Marvin the Paranoid Android

This year, we also had to rebuild Marvin the Paranoid Android. Unfortunately, the original Marvin was dropped from a great height during our house move!

Marvin was an incredibly intelligent but overwhelmingly depressed robot manufactured by the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation. However, despite being so smart, Marvin is typically made to perform menial tasks and labour such as escorting people, opening doors, picking up pieces of paper, and other tasks well beneath his skills.

His workplace wasn't psychologically safe from Marvin's point of view! We've all been there!

If I can fit them all in, I will try to take a photo of all the builds so far and post it to subscribers. There are so many now! Every LEGO build is here, but not in one shot!

Surprisingly, there's no towel, though, yet!!! Definitely next year! 🤔

‘Shandee’s Legacy’ was a podcast that followed failures at a Queensland government DNA laboratory & the public inquiry into these.

The series was preceded by a podcast, Shandee’s Story, concerning the murder of Shandee Blackburn. This podcast outlined and investigated the trial of John Peros, Shandee’s ex-boyfriend, who was surprisingly acquitted by a Jury in 2017 of Shandee’s murder & who a Queensland Coroner subsequently considered was responsible for the murder & was also considered in Shandee's Story.

Link to the podcast here.

Both podcast series are published by the Australian and produced by Hedley Thomas and his fantastic team. Riveting and disturbing, they make for essential listening.

In the initial coronial inquiry in 2020 into Shandee’s death, Coroner David O’Connell found the “only rational conclusion” was that John Peros stabbed Ms Blackburn as she walked home from work in Mackay in the early hours of February 9, 2013.

The coroner did not refer the case to the police as they were already in possession of all relevant information, and there was no new or fresh and compelling evidence available for use in a criminal court and/or in respect of fresh charges against Mr Peros.

A summary of the Coroner’s findings is here.

The coroner recommended that the Queensland Police Service and the Mackay Regional Council undertake steps to identify areas of high risk and look at upgrading existing street lighting or adding additional street lighting, where required and installing additional CCTV facilities to capture people’s movements. We posted about these recommendations in one of our first (Slide 2).

Shandee’s Legacy investigated failures at a Queensland government DNA laboratory and the public inquiry into these. As reported in Shandee’s legacy Shandee’s criminal investigation included samples from Peros’s car where no DNA was detected – an extraordinary finding as Peros’s own DNA should have (at least) been detected.

After failings in the methodology of DNA testing at the state-run lab were exposed, A Commission of Inquiry into Forensic DNA Testing in Queensland was completed by Walter Sofronoff in December 2022. Following this report, the laboratory committed to reviewing more than 40,000 cases were set to be reviewed. The final report is here.

Shandee’s coronial inquiry was reopened in February 2022 to consider “recent issues raised regarding the forensic evidence and testing of evidence in this case”.

A couple of weeks ago, the ABC posted an update on the progress of reviewing cases at Queensland's forensics lab. The story is here. The update reports that less than two per cent of reviews have been completed.

I’m disappointed there isn't more of a continued high-pressure public outcry!!!

I hope for a further podcast episode with the latest updates.

Another Aussie man going back into the lion's den for their hat!

“Having escaped the lions’ den, Mr Lehrmann made the mistake of going back for his hat.” Justice Lee, Lehrmann v Network Ten Pty Limited (Trial Judgment) [2024] FCA 369

A classic that I considered may discourage those who 'did it' from pursuing defamation claims. Apparently not!

The Australian reported this week that a Supreme Court judge will hold a hearing to decide if John Peros suffered serious harm to his reputation from the podcasts.

I’m hoping the court deals with this application swiftly and there’s justice for Shandee one day soon.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-09/shandee-blackburn-murder-10-year-anniversary-mother-vicki-shares/101927372

#legoandlegal #podcast #injustice #wtf #australia

Read more

Late in the evening of 15 April, 1989 I was 14565 km from where I wanted to be – the Hillsborough Football Stadium.

I lay in my bedroom in Thornlie, Australia, listening to the BBC World Service's pre-match coverage of the FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool & Nottingham Forest. I was nervous - Nottingham Forest was my team.

As a kid living in Sheffield, I'd watch Forest's success to win the League, the European Cup twice & three league cups. My Dad loved of forthright manager Brian Clough & we'd followed their success closely.

Ten years on, they now had another chance at glory & in the FA Cup semi-final against Liverpool. The FA Cup was English Football's most significant prize back then. The trophy that had always eluded Forest.

As the game started, I was clinging to my childhood teddy. He was adorned with my old Forest top, beanie & scarf.

I remember listening to the commentary suddenly shift gears. Slowly & inconceivably, the UK's worst stadium disaster unfolded over the airwaves.

It was utterly horrifying!!!

The Hillsborough Disaster is a compulsory study for anyone interested in crowd safety, health & safety or disaster management.

I've just read Hillsborough the Truth by Phil Scraton - I've never read a more harrowing first four chapters.

…appalling crowd management led to 96 deaths
…Liverpool fans unjustly blamed in the aftermath
…too many inquests, investigations and inquiries
…in late 2020 a jury found David Duckenfield not guilty of gross negligence manslaughter 
 
I became a Liverpool fan for the rest of the tournament (who didn’t?).… In the re-scheduled game – Liverpool won 3-1 & went on to lift the trophy beating derby rivals Everton 3-2 in the final. Gerry Marsden (RIP Gerry) sang 'You'll never walk alone' before the final… as he did many times. What a song!!!
 
The LEGO Scene Explained

That's me in the hat listening to the game live and my old bedroom!

My old Forest shirt that I & my son also wore as a kid playing soccer! It’s a family heirloom!

Gerry (RIP) of Gerry & the Pacemakers is in front of the Beatles (who else!!!)

Liverpool once the enemy team, was from then my second favourite team. Home of the Beatles - I hope to visit their one day soon.

We made the Forest symbol too - see the main picture!

There's Mr Dave Rowland on top of the Anfield stand, from that most famous photo. It's a powerful photo.Sadly, Dave died in the early part of the pandemic due to COVID-19.

Then there’s the Police.

Watch These if You Haven’t

I found this interview with Christopher Eccleston about the 1996 television drama film Hillsborough interesting. Amazing that he was the best man in real life, for Trevor Hicks the victim he portrayed.

Actor Interview .

The movie, though quite old and a little dated now, is worth a watch and can be viewed here:

Hillsborough 1996 Telemovie

The best version of You’ll Never Walk Alone sung at Anfield according to You Tube:

Here's another legal case from history & another LEGO build request - R v Dudley and Stephens (1884) 14 QBD 273, DC.

Survival cannibalism has occurred throughout history. Seamen whose adventures led them to the deadliest of survival predicaments have

long been known to resort to the necessity of cannibalism. The practice of drawing lots to select a sacrificial victim who the crew-mates could consume was even termed 'the custom of the sea'. It was a custom that carried no shame amongst seafarers as it was born from survival. This legal case was the first to try to establish a legal precedent to outlaw the 'custom of the sea'. 

On 19 May 1884, four men set sail from Southampton in a small yacht called the Mignonette: 

• Tom Dudley - 31-year-old captain & an experienced yachtsman.  

• Edwin Stephens - experience seafarer

• Ned Brooks - experience seafarer

• Richard Parker - 17 years old, made his first voyage on the open sea. 

Their destination was Australia, where the Mignonette was to be provided to its new owner, Mr Want, a prominent lawyer & politician in Sydney.

For days in late June/early July between Madeira to Cape Town, the Mignonette was hit by severe storms. Tragically, on 5 July, after being struck by a huge wave, the Mignonette sank. The crew managed to escape to a dinghy but with only meagre provisions.

The storm raged on & the crew worked frantically to keep the dinghy afloat. 

Their situation was dire. Survival was unlikely. The nearest land was fifteen hundred miles away. The dinghy had no sail. They had no water & only two one-pound tins of turnips. 

Over the next 12 days, the turnips were rationed out. They caught a turtle & drank what blood & rationed the meat left. Eventually, they resorted to drinking their urine. 

Eventually, Parker succumbed to his thirst & drank seawater. He was soon violently unwell & collapsing with diarrhoea & vomiting. 

After 17 days & with Parker getting sicker, Dudley raised the 'custom of the sea'. They prepared to draw lots. However, Dudley queried the necessity to complete the deadly ritual, given Parker was near dying. Though initially reluctant, the others accepted Dudley's proposition. While they agreed about the need to carry out the dreadful act, they would not do it. Therefore, it fell to Dudley. He slit Parker's throat & performed the necessary butchery. 

After drying, the crew ate the meat twice that day. A storm passed the next day, allowing each of them to collect & drink a pint of water. However, the rain did not last & four days later, they were back to drinking their urine. 

Just as they began to lose all hope, on 29 July, they were rescued by a passing German ship, the Moctezuma. 

However, shortly after the Moctezuma dropped at Falmouth in England en route to Hamburg, the three provided truthful & frank depositions to a Customs Officer & a Sergeant of the Falmouth Harbour Police concerning the ship's sinking & the death of Parker. Later that evening, the Sergeant with three Special Constables arrested & charged the three survivors for the murder of Richard Parker.  

They duly appeared before Falmouth Magistrates Court & were refused bail. 

A week later, they entered a plea to 'reserve my defence' & the matter was remanded for a week with bail set at £200. 

On 18 September 1884, the three returned to the Magistrates Court to surrender their bail. The prosecution withdrew the charge against Brooks – stating he was 'in no way an actor or participant in the crime of his two companions.' While no longer facing criminal sanction, Brooks was to be a witness for the prosecution. Dudley & Stephens' solicitor sought 

the depositions given to the Customs Officer, the only direct evidence linking them to the murder, to be withdrawn because they were presented for a shipwreck investigation, not criminal proceedings. Brooks gave evidence that he witnessed the vile act of the others. The Magistrates declined & the statement of Dudley & Stephens, but not that of Brooks, was read. 

The trial concluded with the Magistrates deciding that the matter was too grave for their jurisdiction & they committed the two accused to be tried by a Jury. 

The trial of Dudley & Stephens commenced on 11 November 1884 at Exeter Castle. Dudley & Stephens were represented at the trial by Arthur Collins, a Queen's Counsel. It was presided over by Baron Huddleston, who was notorious for two proclivities:

- Wearing gloves to match the case before him – white for petty thefts & black for murder, in this case; &

- Browbeating juries with his opinion on how they should decide the case before them.

In this trial, he implored the jury to return a 'special verdict' whereby the jury confirmed the facts of the case, leaving it to the Court to determine the offence that has been committed & the innocence or guilt of the accused. The evidence was heard with Brooks again as the main

prosecution witness. Collins called no witnesses for the defence but closed the case with a plea that "the circumstances of the case excuse the act these men did…they did it to save their lives." The prosecutor closed with a simple restatement of the facts. 

However, Huddleston was intent, "It was no more essential... to kill Parker than any of the other three men'. "Your verdict, when returned, will conclude that you return these facts & whether upon the whole matter the prisoners were & are guilty of murder, the jury are ignorant & refer to the Court….is this murder or is it not… Gentlemen, that is the Special Verdict which will be taken in this case." 

The jury gave the special verdict & the matter was adjourned to be heard in London on 4 December 1884. However, a jurisdictional problem first necessitated the attention of the Attorney General – the Court of

Crown Cases Reserved could only hear cases after a conviction & the Court of Queen's Bench, where Special Verdicts were reserved, was abolished in 1873. Uniquely in English law, Dudley & Stephen's conviction was decided & death sentence was handed down by five of the most senior judges in England convened, improperly & arguably illegally, as the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice.

In his judgment, Lord Coleridge rejected the defence of necessity. However, the Chief Justice acknowledged that the prisoners were subject to "sufferings which might break down the bodily powers of the strongest man, & try the conscience of the best" Lord Coleridge intimated that the Crown might exercise the prerogative power of mercy. Following significant petitioning to the Home Secretary, the Crown later acted to commute the death sentence to six months in prison.

The case of Dudley & Stephen v R changed the "custom of the sea" from a tragic but accepted necessity to a legal crime. Following it fewer mariners admitted to cannibalism, but it still occurred. Since there have only been two cases involving the 'custom of the sea':

• On 4 January 1893 three survivors of the Thelka killed the fourth leaving his headless body hanging from the riggings in full sight upon their rescue. Norwegian authorities investigated but took no further action. 

• The Drot came to grief in a hurricane off the coast of Mississippi. Six of the crew constructed a raft from the wreckage. One of the survivors threw himself overboard. Another who was ailing was killed. A second suffered a similar fate. A third drew the shortest lot. Despite the German counsel seeking to have the men extradited for murder, US authorities refused, considering the men had suffered enough.  

Courts in Australia frequently cite Dudley & Stephens to support the proposition that there are significant legal difficulties in succeeding with a defence of necessity. In R - Katelaris v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2018] NSWCCA 193, the Court compared the challenges faced by an accused Doctor in using the defence of "medical necessity" to argue his innocence of serious charges relating to the supply & manufacture of cannabis medicines to those of Dudley & Stephens. Ultimately, despite these challenges, a jury found Dr Katelaris not guilty on all charges. 

A 👻 Coincidence

A coincidence I uncovered in my research for this post. Yann Martel's bestselling novel Life of Pi (2001) includes a 450-pound Bengal tiger named Richard Parker. The novel was inspired by the Dudley & Stephens case & Edgar Allen Poe's only complete novel, The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket. The story was published in 1838, 46 years before the Mignonette. Four men, including Richard Parker, control a ship, the Grampus, that runs into a storm & the four are left on the boat without provisions. The men face a similar fate to those on the Mignonette. Parker suggests that one should be killed as food for the others. They draw straws, following the custom of the sea, & guess who gets the short straw & killed - Richard Parker. 

References & Recommended reading:

Hanson, Neil. The Custom of the Sea: The shocking true story of cannibalism and survival (p. 136). Lume Books. Kindle Edition

McDougall, I & Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury (2010) Cases That Changed Our Lives. Chapter 12 Death on the High Seas. LNUK.

"If it doesn't fit, you must acquit."

I heard this phrase recently. It popped up out of context on the Grade Cricketer podcast.

Of course, it conjures up the infamous trial of OJ Simpson - race relations, marital violence, wealth, celebrity & the law. I was frantically busy working & gave the trial little to no attention. I studied it much later - reading books & watching all the documentaries.

Charismatic lawyer Johnny Cochran used it in his closing argument at OJ Simpson's murder trial for the deaths of Ron Goldman & Linda Brown, his wife. The prosecutor asked Simpson to try on leather gloves the killer was believed to have worn in slashing to death Simpson's former wife, Nicole, & her friend, Ronald Goldman. As we all know, this turned out to be a wrong move...

Cochran used the phrase just five times in his closing:  

• "…the defining moment in this trial, the day Mr. Darden asked Mr. Simpson to try on those gloves & the gloves didn't fit, remember these words; if it doesn't fit, you must acquit."

• Referring to a lack of blood at O.J.'s place etc, "We this afternoon are talking about the facts. And so it doesn't make any sense. It just doesn't fit. If it doesn't fit, you must acquit."

• Putting a knit cap on (Indicating). "…if you looked at O.J. Simpson over there– and he has a rather large head–O.J. Simpson in a knit cap from two blocks away is still O.J. Simpson. It's no disguise. ... It makes no sense. It doesn't fit. If it doesn't fit, you must acquit".

• On the blood/DNA evidence (which he also described as "compromised, contaminated, corrupted") "This double banded b is more like a b than anything they can ever justify. And it doesn't fit. It doesn't fit in their case, so they can't explain it. Like the number 4 allele on the steering column... It doesn't fit. If it doesn't fit, you must acquit."

• Finally…”By your decision you control his very life your hands. Treat it carefully. Treat it fairly. Be fair. Don't be part of this continuing cover-up. Do the right thing remembering that if it doesn't fit, you must acquit…"

Cochran was a powerful communicator. He outperformed the prosecution during the trial & was instrumental in securing the not-guilty verdict for Simpson. He told a story charismatically, & the jury believed him! 

Jurors in the United States of America are allowed to speak publicly about their deliberations! Many of the jurors in OJ Simpson's trial admitted that they got it wrong.t's fascinating for us Australians as there are laws prohibiting jurors from talking about the trial & the deliberations. 

You see interviews with the jurors in the excellent Netflix documentary -' O.J. Made in America'! The documentary also covered the civil trial & the later criminal trial of O.J. for armed robbery.

The Civil Trial

In the civil trial, a jury held Simpson "committed these homicides willfully & wrongfully, with oppression & malice." The court ordered O.J. pay $33.5 million in compensatory & punitive damages to the families of Ron Goldman & Nicole Brown.

Simpson appealed, claiming the trial court erred in:

• admitting evidence that Simpson previously abused his wife;

• admitting evidence of statements made by his wife as they were hearsay or irrelevant;

• excluding defence evidence of prior testimony of a Police Officer who had been a prosecution witness in the murder trial, & of DNA validation studies performed at the Los Angeles police crime laboratory; 

• denying a mistrial after:

  -the plaintiffs' counsel referred to Simpson's failure to pass a polygraph test, or 

- after a juror's misconduct was discovered; &

• awarding excessive damages, including punitive damages, based upon expert opinion on the value of Simpson's name & likeness as a determinant of his net worth.

Simpson was wholly unsuccessful in the appeal.

The fascinating appeal judgment can be read here: link

Unfortunately, the families report receiving only 1% of the amount owed. Simpson filed for bankruptcy & moved to Florida where there are laws to protect pensions. 

The Robbery Trial

Simpson was charged after he led a group of men to enter a room in a Las Vegas hotel & stole memorabilia at gunpoint. Thirteen years after he was acquitted of the murders, he was found guilty of all twelve robbery-related charges. He was sentenced to 33 years in prison. 

O.J. was released on parole some 9 years laters.

O.J. had a good lawyer for the murder trial, but perhaps he could not afford one for the later trials.

These days O.J. lives in a gated community & he's very active on Twitter doing regular face-to-camera posts. From a brief look at his feed, the comments mainly referring to his troubles with the law are more entertaining than his posts. Still, I have to discourage you from following him!

Whenever I hear "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit." it conjures a time when authenticity seemed to fade from public view. The start of the descent would lead us to Donald Trump's election victory in 2016.

Are things slowly getting better? BLM, ME TOO, & the rise of a new generation of idealistic political leaders ... are my main reasons for being hopeful. Still, there's room for the old....

My daughter did the job on the LEGO gloves... !!!

Its been eight years since the tragic death of Australian cricketer Phillip Hughes!

Hughes was a talented cricketer. In 2009 he was selected for the Australian test team for a series against South Africa. He became the youngest batsman to make two centuries.

The LEGO build commemorates how cricket fans in a touching worldwide tribute 'Put your bat out for Hughesie'! 😢 The post considers the Coroner's report & Cricket Australia's (CA) response.

On 25 November 2014, Hughes, 25, opened for South Australia at the Sydney Cricket Ground. Two days later, he died due to traumatic bleeding caused by the cricket ball striking the left side base of his skull.

Hughes was wearing a Masuri brand original series "Test Cricket" helmet, a model. However, where he was hit was an area of his neck not protected by the helmet. 

The worn helmet complied with the Australian Standard (ASNZS 4499:1997 'Protective headgear for cricket') but not with the later British Standard (BS 7928:2013 'Specification for head protectors for cricketers'). However, the BS helmet would not have offered any additional protection at the location of his injury. 

The 2013 British Standard is now new de facto international standard for cricket helmets. The Australian Standard has been obsolete since 18 June 2015.

In its Clothing & Equipment Regulations, CA requires players to wear helmets complying with the British Standard.

In its Concussion & Head Trauma Policy, CA also recommends using protective attachments that provide additional protection for "the vulnerable neck/occipital area of the batsman". It has not gone further and made the wearing of the devices mandatory & will not do so until it is scientifically proven they will protect players.  

The Coroner considered sledging but found that they did not affect Hughes' composure even if they did occur. 

Coroners Recommendations:
1. Review dangerous & unfair bowling laws to eliminate inconsistencies & provide umpires with guidance on their application.

2. Neck protectors - CA research & develop neck protectors to mandate wearing in 1st class matches.

3. Medical Emergency Response -
Sydney Cricket & Sports Ground Trust & Cricket NSW review the daily Medical Briefing Policy - distributing a 1-page record outlining emergency responsibilities & contact nos.

4 Review Umpire training to ensure they can call for medical assistance in an emergency.

"compelling evidence.. the rules were complied with; [he] was excelling at the crease.. his death was a tragic accident."

Questions that I Still Struggle to Answer:
Did the Hughes tragedy improve safety in cricket? Does CA's & the cricket communities response demonstrate they considered it a 'freak accident'? If so, is this justified? Is helmet & neck protector use widespread when facing pace?

What about umpires? I was concerned when Umpire Aleem Dar ducked twice to save himself from getting hit by the cricket ball in the T20 World Cup.

Reference: Inquest into the death of Phillip Joel Hughes [4 November 2016] State Coroner's Court of New South Wales (Magistrate Barnes State Coroner)

Link to the Coroner's Report

I'm looking forward to attending the Perth Teat Match next week with my Dad!! 🍺

My family's winning entry in the Beaufort Street Books Annual Lego competition a few years ago was based on The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. We created this design with Marvin the Paranoid Android being the main feature!

In what has perhaps been my proudest moment, the children chose the book! We listened to the old radio show that's available on Audible as we travelled around Australia on an eight-week holiday.

We were fortunate to win the competition!!

Afterwards, we thought, "why stop let us build some more "…

We've now decided to make it a lifelong project. Each year we had another build based on the book. Why, may you ask? Well, we discovered this wonderful commemorative day – Towel Day! It happens on 25 May every year!!

On Towel Day, fans openly carry a towel with them, as described in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, to demonstrate their appreciation for the books and the author, Douglas Adams (RIP).

Unbeknown to us, this day has been happening since 2001. 🤷‍♂️

So, each year on Towel Day, we reveal the additions to our Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy LEGO Build.

The first year, we added…..the alien invader eating dog…

..the Vogon captain….with some bad poetry, of course….

and the cops!!

Last year, the planet eating goat….

and Deep Thought!

This year we added Wowbagger…

and the dolphins….

Next year….perhaps….

or may be the most intelligent species on the planet Earth!!

We can't wait either.

What’s this all have to do with safety & law?

Every safety professional needs to study the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. It includes information on the most dangerous and valuable device in the galaxy - the Infinite Improbability Drive.

"Created by a student at University of Maximegalon The drive was created by a lab assistant when he fed the exact probability of creating the drive into a finite probability generator.

He was later lynched by a group of rampaging respectable physicists who couldn't stand a smart arse."

A study on risk and bullying! It's hard not to see the value proposition in the guide for safety professionals!

An important High Court of Australia judgment with implications for employers in emotionally challenging work areas!!

Before reading this case summary I would recommend listening to this podcast, which includes an interview with Ms Kozarov (K).

It’s quite unusual for there to be an interview with the successful litigator in these cases. As explained in the interview Ms Kozarov was motivated to participate to contribute to preventing a similar injury to others.

ABC Article and Law Report Podcast Episode

Here’s a link to the High Court of Australia judgment:

Link

Judgement Summary - Kozarov v Victoria [2022] HCA 12
The case hinged on two issues - notice, whether the OPP were on notice of the risk of psychiatric injury from K's evident signs & if there was notice, was the Victorian Office of Public Prosecutions (OPP) obligated to rotate her out of the Specialist Sex Offences Unit (SSOU)!

The High Court of Australia answered this question affirmatively. K succeeded.

Presented here with the initial trial & appeal history - so it's a bit of a long one!

Background & First Trial
A solicitor & former employee of the Victorian OPP, Kozarov (K), worked for close to three years in the OPP's SSOU. She suffered a psychiatric injury - chronic post-traumatic stress disorder & a major depressive disorder during this time. She claimed her injuries were caused by ongoing, repeated exposure to a high volume of sexual offence cases, including offences against children. Her causes of action were negligence, breach of contract & breach of statutory duty.
  
The OPP denied liability for any K's injury in her employment & alleged contributory negligence. 
 
K argued that the OPP had a duty to take reasonable care due to the risk of psychiatric injury from the exposure to graphic, vivid & disturbing material related to sexual offences. The OPP argued 'it had no relevant duty, before 9 February 2012, to reduce or eliminate the risk of the plaintiff sustaining recognisable psychiatric illness'. On this date, K emailed the Legal Practice Managers advising that she was anxious & distressed about returning to work in the SSOU. She informed the Managers that she could no longer continue to work in the unit because it would have severe repercussions for her mental health, in the months before the email K was on leave. 
  
In mid-2019, the Trial Judge found in favour of K Her Honour rejected the OPP's defence of contributory negligence, assessed damages at $435k. 
  
Her Honour held that" the OPP was on notice as to risks to [her] mental health' the OPP knew or ought to have known 'that [she] was at risk of workplace-related psychiatric harm', & a reasonable person in OPP's position 'would have adverted to the evident signs…& observed that she was failing to cope with her allocated work & that her mental health was at risk'.
  
The Judge concluded that a safe system of work should have included:

• an active 'OH&S framework';

• training for management & staff regarding the risks from vicarious trauma & PTSD';

• welfare checks & occupational screening; &

• work allocation flexibility in response to screening, such as rotation from the SSOU.

The First Appeal

The OPP appealed on two grounds: 

• Her Honour erred in finding a sentinel event occurred when K came into serious conflict with the Directorate Manager. Her Honour cited K's hyper-vigilance about herself, her children, increased emotions & changes in her demeanour at work were signs of her inability to cope. Her Honour also noted K’s signing of a joint staff memorandum raising health concerns as notice of the risks to SSOU staff from burnout, work stress &/or exposure to vicarious trauma]

• Her Honour erred in holding that K would have avoided the injury had the OPP taken reasonable action not to breach their duty of care.
   

The Court of Appeal (COA) found in favour of the OPP, granting leave to appeal & allowing the OPP's appeal. 
  
 The Court held that it could not conclude that had the OPP exercised reasonable care, this would have avoided or reduced the exacerbation of K's PTSD. However, the COA was not satisfied that K proved that she would have accepted a rotation out of the SSOU because:

• she had reacted strongly against the suggestion that she was not coping with the workload at SSOU

• she sought & was granted a promotion within the SSOU.

The High Court of Australia Appeal
In her appeal by special leave to the HCA Court, K sought to overturn the COA's rejection of the rotation finding & argued that it erred in not rejecting the notice finding. K’ argued that the OPP’s liability stemmed from its failure to take reasonable measures in response to "evident signs" of her work-related PTSD.

The HCA allowed K’s appeal with costs, set aside the orders of the COA & ordered that the appeal to the COA be dismissed with costs.

GAGELER & GLEESON JJ.

• Noted the ‘OPP’s Vicarious Trauma Policy’ acknowledged the risk of serious psychiatric injury for workers in the SSOU. This Policy confirmed that such injury was reasonably foreseeable & that the OPP had a Duty of Care to prevent it.

• Identified that no protective measures from the VT Policy, or other preventive measures, were implemented by K’s managers within the SSOU.

Notice finding:
Evident signs of K’s psychiatric condition included:

(1) the staff memorandum, signed by K indicated she might be suffering one or more of the adverse symptoms of vicarious trauma

(2) K’s statements were reports of her adverse symptoms of vicarious trauma

(3) K was at heightened risk of adverse consequences of vicarious trauma from an excessive work load, and by a propensity to overwork; (

(4) K’s unhealthy emotional involvement in some of her cases;

(5) K was having difficulty managing her existing case load, & rather tahn being resolved her workload was increased;

(6) K took two weeks sick leave during a trial and following an episode of dizziness;

(7) Before she took sick leave K experienced a traumatic event in the form of the attempted suicide of a child complainant in the trial ; and

(8) Her supervisor (and others) had formed the view that K was "not coping"

Found that the Notice finding was the preferred conclusion & the 'evident signs' signified more than a shared experience of vicarious trauma in the SSOU.

Rotation finding:

• Held that the Trial Judge's rotation finding was the preferable one.
  Disagreed with the COA’s conclusion that an appropriate exercise of the OPP’s care would have resulted in K being rotated out of the SSOU.

• Noted the COA failed to acknowledge expert evidence indicating the likelihood that a “reasonable person advised of the risks of serious psychiatric injury might be expected, on the balance of probabilities, to accept advice to avoid those risks”.

EDELMAN J

• Agreed with the reasons in both judgments & the orders proposed by Gageler & Gleeson JJ.

• Made some useful observations about the conceptual framework in “ascertaining that [an employer's liability] for negligently failing to take reasonable steps to avoid allocating work, or creating a workplace, that causes or exacerbates psychiatric injury to an employee.”

These included:
*An employer's duty of care to prevent psychiatric injury to an employee can arise in two categories

(i) those that arise by "a voluntary undertaking independent of contract" based upon "an assumption of responsibility"; &/or

(ii) those that are imposed, independently of any undertaking, by a statutory or common law rule.

*The employment contract was not relevant in this case. It was not even tendered in evidence.
*The employer's duty to ensure protection n from mental harm is “imposed by law & is not dependent upon any undertaking by the employer” - it is “no different from the employer's duty to protect an employee's physical integrity from the unreasonable infliction of harm”. *The duty to take reasonable steps to avoid causing or exacerbating mental injury to an employee is dependent upon the reasonable foreseeability of the risk of psychiatric injury to the employee. Whether a risk of psychiatric injury is reasonably foreseeable depends upon (i) "the nature & extent of the work being done by the particular employee" & (ii) any "signs given by the employee concerned.”
*Determining the question of breach & causation will usually entail asking whether the failure by the employer to take reasonable steps was a necessary condition for the psychiatric injury.
*Highlighted the importance of the OHS & more intensive training for managers & staff about the risk posed by vicarious trauma & post-traumatic stress disorder to identify & respond to signs of concern of workers in the SSOU.
*The "evident signs" of psychiatric injury displayed by K as a minimum warranted a welfare enquiry & offer of a referral for occupational screening.

* “An employer will not comply with the common law duty to ensure a safe place of work by acquiescing in the refusal of an employee to be rotated from a position that, [because of] some physical characteristic of the employee, involves a high risk of serious physical injury to that employee. Psychiatric injury is no different.”

KIEFEL CJ & KEANE J.

• Agreed with Gageler & Gleeson that the appeal should be allowed.

• In their judgment highlighted:
  -      The unique case of K.
  -      Questioned it’s applicability to other cases of psychiatric injury.
  -      The officers of OPP were duty-bound to exercise reasonable care to protect K against risks to her mental health that they knew of. A duty clearly stated in terms the Vicarious Trauma Policy.
  -      The OPP had the duty upon K’s employment.
  -      No further warning signs were necessary to establish the content of the duty of care owed to K including active steps for the care of her & her fellow employee’s psychiatric health within the SSOU.

GORDON AND STEWARD JJ

• Identified the question of the appeal and answered it in the affirmative as whether the OPP’s failure to provide K with a safe system of work caused the exacerbation and prolongation of her PTSD, and subsequent development of major depressive disorder (mdd).

• Noted that the appeal challenged the finding of the COA that causation failed because K would not have co‑operated with steps to reduce her exposure to trauma in the SSOU.

• Agreed with the Trial Judge & COA that the OPP was on notice Victoria was on notice of the risk of psychiatric injury to K no later than 29 August 2011, the date of the sentinel event, and that A reasonable person in OPP's position would have foreseen the risk of injury to K then.. This view was correctly reached by the trial judge and by the Court of Appeal, and no sufficient reason was shown for reaching a different conclusion.

• Found the OPP was was in breach of its duty from the commencement of K's employment.

• Agreed with the orders of Gageler and Gleeson JJ

In 2018 Ms Wilby worked for five years in her dream job as the 'Principal In House Solicitor' (PIHS) with the Coroners Court of Victoria.

The Court promoted her to Senior Legal Counsel (SLC) temporarily. After the promotion, she continued to carry out her PIHS duties. She became highly stressed and withdrawn. She began suffering from insomnia.

Tragically, she took her own life in September 2018.

Before Ms Wilby's death, the Court had alarming dissatisfaction rates with poor workplace culture.

After changes to management and Ms Wilby's death, the Court introduced:

• a Wellbeing Committee to introduce a Health and Wellbeing Plan;

• staff access to the Employee Assistance Scheme,

• a functional review of the structure of the Court;

• programs directed to staff mental health and vicarious trauma;

• supervisors and management training on health and safety obligations;

• an improved induction program;

• and a health and wellbeing intranet page with links to supports.
  

The Coroner's report is essential reading. LINK

"What was a dream job ... turned within a matter of weeks to an unimaginable nightmare. With no prior mental health issues and with the responsibilities of a new work role [she] changed from a high achieving, vibrant, vivacious individual to one suffering from an acute mental illness."

"...a Principal Risk Officer ... began reviewing compliance by the Court with legislative requirements to address Risk Management in the workplace. ... a workshop was held with a number of the Executives of the Court. They expressed “review fatigue” and that his work would not result in any changes as previous reviews had been ignored."

"Ultimately, .. engaged .. [a consultant].. to carry out Executive development work with the Court. ... Regrettably, that review ended after ..[the consultant].. tendered his resignation from the project. He observed ... to the Court that it was the first time he had taken this course with a client...".

After reading the Coroner’s report I went to this song for some solace - Teenage Fanclub - Broken.

Tomorrow’s post concerns a High Court of Australia judgment for a stress-related claim from a lawyer working with Victoria’s Department of Public Prosecutions.

Lifeline 13 11 14 lifeline.org.au
Suicide Callback Service 1300 659 467

Also known as dust devils and whirly birds, willy-willies are dust filled vortices that can spiral upwards from the ground, varying in height from a few feet to over 1000 feet. The name Willy-Willy is a distinctive Australian Aboriginal name for the winds, coming from western Australian or south-east Australian nation dialects.

Read more