File into toddler’s death given to lawyer but with strict rules
A coroner has determined that the review of a police investigation into the death of three-year-old Lachie Jones, who was found in the Gore District Council’s oxidation ponds, can be released, but with strict controls to prevent distribution.
But his dad, Paul Jones, says while his lawyer can now access the file it could be late January before he is able to see it.
‘‘It’s a step in the right direction I guess that my lawyer will have it, but he’s not keen to let me see it, and he wants me to wait until after the trial,’’ Jones said.
‘‘He said it could send me right off, so I guess I’ll have to wait until the court case. It’s going to be very difficult to deal with any surprises I hear in court, but I can’t risk the case not going ahead.’’
Jones’ lawyer, Grant Fletcher, requested a copy of the review into the investigation to prepare for a court hearing in January.
WorkSafe charged the council, which owns the ponds where Lachie’s body was found, under the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015. It has pleaded not guilty, and the case is expected to be heard in Gore District Court in January 2023.
Jones has always maintained he believed Lachie did not walk the 1.2km from his home, down a gravel road, over a fence and through scrubby land to where he was found. He had bare feet, but said his body had no marks or scratches on it when he was found.
In October 2020 police said they would review the case and in November 2021 said the review was concluded and all matters would be referred to the coroner.
Jones had requested the file into the review but was told by police and the Coroner that it would not be released until after the court case was heard.
A minute released by Coroner Ho says an urgent telephone conference was held between Fletcher, WorkSafe and police on November 17.
The minute, which was released on the same day, says Fletcher indicated his client [Jones] was distraught by the delay in releasing the documents.
Jones intends to instruct various experts to review the documents, the results of which will inform his approach to the WorkSafe prosecution and the coronial inquiry.
WorkSafe did not want the documents released until after the court case was concluded because of the risk of prejudice arising as a result, for example because of the information entering the public domain or witnesses being approached.
Coroner Ho determined that the documents could be released to Jones and his experts subject to strict controls to prevent further distribution.
Fletcher would file a memorandum listing the expert witness individuals the documents would be released to, and get undertakings from each of them that they would not disseminate the information contained in the documents, or distribute any reproduction, to any other person.
Jones also had to give an assurance that he would not distribute the document to anyone else.