source : the age
Warning: Graphic content
Hello and welcome to our live coverage of day seven of Alan Jones’ lengthy criminal trial on charges of indecent assault and sexual touching. Court reporter Clare Sibthorpe and I will be bringing you the latest from the hearing today.
If day seven looks familiar, you’re right. Yesterday was to be the seventh day of the trial, but the Crown foreshadowed that it wanted to amend seven of the charges in the case. This triggered an adjournment for the parties to make legal arguments.
After hearing those arguments, Judge Glenn Walsh said the Crown did not require the court’s permission to make the changes, which do not relate to the alleged physical acts in the case. He concluded that it did not result in prejudice to Jones and his right to a fair trial.
Jones’ lawyers did not object to an amendment to one of the charges but had opposed the amendments to the remaining six.
The trial is expected to resume in earnest today in the NSW Local Court in Sydney’s historic Downing Centre building with more evidence relating to complainant “J”, the first witness to give evidence in the trial.
In the first week of the trial, the court heard allegations that Jones indecently assaulted “J”, a young athlete, starting with unwanted kissing when the man was a teenager in year 12. Jones denies the claims.
On Tuesday, the older brother of “J” and the complainant’s ex-girlfriend gave evidence about what they say he told them about the alleged assaults.
His brother said he had not witnessed Jones acting inappropriately towards “J”, but that the complainant told him in 2024, after Jones’ arrest, that he was one the men who had come forward.
The ex-girlfriend of “J” said he confided in her 20 years ago that Jones had touched him inappropriately. She said he looked like he had “seen a ghost” before he made the disclosure and swore her to secrecy.
Her evidence continues today. The mother of “J” and his former sporting coach are also slated to give evidence.
While we don’t expect to hear from him today, a man known as “C” will be the next complainant to give evidence. He may start his evidence as early as Friday.
The Crown alleges that Jones indecently assaulted or sexually touched six men without their consent between 2003 and 2020, and is seeking to prove 22 charges against him.
The former broadcaster has emphatically denied wrongdoing and his barrister Gabrielle Bashir, SC, said during her opening address to the court that the credibility and reliability of the complainants’ evidence would be tested.
Support is available from the National Sexual Assault, Domestic Family Violence Counselling Service at 1800RESPECT (1800 737 732) or the Men’s Referral Service on 1300 766 491.
The mother of “J” has told the court that she told her son she was sorry and she should have protected him after he said that Alan Jones had touched him inappropriately.
She said that she had asked him after allegations about Jones were published in the media: “Did you Alan Jones ever touch you or do anything to you?”
She said “J” had said no, but the following year he had said he lied.
“J”’s mother recalled that she told him: “I’m sorry that happened, I should have protected you.”
The mother of “J” said her son told her Alan Jones was going to buy her a dishwasher, and one was delivered to her home. She also recalled receiving a hamper.
She said Jones had visited the family home on one occasion and she made sandwiches.
“The driver dropped him,” she said.
She recalled going to visit Jones with her family at his Fitzroy Falls farm, and said they got lost on the drive. She said she tried playing tennis “but I wasn’t very co-ordinated”.
Jones had staff in the kitchen, she said.
The mother of complainant “J” has told the court her young son used to climb trees and was good at “every sport”, as well as maths.
Prosecutor Emma Curran asks her if anyone ever told her about Alan Jones talking about her son on the radio. She agrees that she did. Asked when this was, she said: “I think when ‘J’ was 12.”
She believes that was the first time Jones spoke about “J”.
The mother of complainant “J” is in the witness box. The court hears her evidence may be completed by the end of today’s hearing.
The cross-examination of the ex-coach of “J” concludes with questions about whether the complainant had ever raised concerns with him about Alan Jones.
This did not occur, the court heard, and the witness believed at the time that Jones had been “nothing but supportive” of the young athlete’s career.
The witness said he enjoyed giving evidence because “it brought back some memories”.
The ex-coach of “J” agrees that he was a confidant of the young athlete, and he had his back.
“He confided in you about [his concerns about] some of his competitors?” Jones’ barrister, Michael Burke, asked.
“Yes,” the witness replied. He agreed the coach-athlete relationship was special and built on trust.
The ex-coach of “J” agrees with Alan Jones’ barrister, Michael Burke, that “J” was “confident and forthright” as a young athlete.
He would speak to his coach if he had a complaint about officials, the court heard, but he was respectful.
Burke asked the witness if, in his experience, “J” “knew he could look after himself” if he was “in any physical danger”.
“Yes,” his former coach said.
The ex-coach of “J” agrees with a suggestion by Jones’ barrister, Michael Burke, that the then-broadcaster’s support for the young athlete went beyond financial.
He agreed with Burke that he had heard Jones say words like, “I love you mate, but I’d love you more if you hit the board”. This was a reference to performing well in sporting endeavours.
The ex-coach of “J” is asked again about Jones’ financial support for the complainant.
“It would be a tragedy if the lack of funds got in the way of his career?” Jones’ barrister, Michael Burke asked.
“Yes,” his former coach replied. He agreed it was “a good thing” that “J” was being funded by Jones at the time because it meant he didn’t have to undertake other work and could focus on training.
Lack of transport was a significant obstacle to complainant “J” attending regular training, his ex-coach has agreed during cross-examination.
He accepted that “J” got his provisional licence the February after he finished high school, and that he received a car from Jones the following year, around his 19th birthday.
This is based on documents in evidence in the trial rather than his own memory or knowledge.
“When Alan purchased ‘J’ [the car] … that obviously helped remove that obstacle?” Jones’ barrister, Michael Burke, asked.
“Yes,” his former coach replied. He agreed that “J” had significant potential.
