Kidnapped Page 16

  Sergeant Bateman then quizzed Bradley on some of the details of this account:

  Bateman: Do you say that you did not go to the boy from the time when you say you first pushed him into the boot before the furniture men came until it was dark?

  Bradley: Yes.

  Bateman: The boy had a fractured skull. Did you hit him with something?

  Bradley: No, but I think he hurt his head on the spare tyre.

  Bateman: Did you pull the boy into the car at Bondi?

  Bradley: No, I have told him the lady is sick, and he got in the front with me.

  Bateman: Did the boy complain or protest when you did not take him to the school?

  Bradley: No, I keep telling him that I am to pick up some other boys too.

  Bateman: What about the scarf and the twine?

  Bradley: I put the scarf around his mouth to stop his call out noise before I push him into the boot. The string came later.

  Bateman: The rug was your own?

  Bradley: Really Weinberg’s and my wife’s, but call it ours.

  Bateman: Was your wife associated with you in this matter?

  Bradley (emphatically): No, she and the children had gone.

  Bateman: Were you associated with any other person in this matter?

  Bradley: No, I was on my own.

  When Bradley was informed that there were witnesses who claimed they could identify him in a line-up, he told the police that he did not want to participate in such a procedure, saying: ‘Please don’t line me up. I am the man who has done this thing, so don’t bring the people to see me. There is no need.’ He was, however, prepared to assist the police by showing them the route he had taken with Graeme in the Customline, and where he had disposed of the boy’s body and belongings.

  Sergeant Bateman then asked Bradley whether he was prepared to make a written statement about the matter. This was a standard request after an oral police interview that was generally answered in the negative, because most interviewees felt that they had done quite enough in answering questions orally. Bradley, however, as an educated man, readily agreed to create a written account in his own words. He was given a pen and paper and he wrote out in his own handwriting a two-page confession as follows (using Bradley’s spelling):

  I red in the newspaper that Mr. Thorne won the first prise in The Operahouse Lottery. So I desided that I would kidnap his son. I knew ther adress from the newspaper, and I have got their phone number from the telephone exchange. I went to the house to see them. I have asked for someone but cannot remember what name. Mrs. Thorne said she did not know that name and she told me to enquire in the flat upstairs.

  I went upstairs and I seen the woman there. I have done this because I though that the Thornes will check up. I went out and watched the Thorne boy leaving the house and seen him for about three mornings and I have seen where he went. And one morning I have followed him to the school at Bellevue Hill. One or two mornings I have seen a womman pick him up, and take him to the school. On the day we moved from Clontarf I went out to Edward Street. I parked the car in a street I don’t know the name of the street it is off Wellington Street. I have got out from the car, and I waited on the cornor, untill the boy walked down to the car.

  I have told the boy that I am to take him to the shool. He sed why, where is the lady. I sed she is sick and can not come today. Then the boy got in the car, and I drove him around for a while, and over the harbour bridge. I went to a public phone box near the spit bridge and I rang the Thornes. I talked to Mrs. Thorne and then to a man who sed he was the boys father. I have asked for £25,000 from the boys mother and father. I told them that if I don’t get the moneys I feed him to the sharks, and I have told them I ring later.

  I took the boy in the car home to Clontarf and I put the car in my garage. I told the boy to get out of the car to come and see another boy. When he got out of the car I have put a scarf over his mowth, and put him in the boot of the car, and slamed the boot. I went into my house and the Furniture Removalist came, a few minutes after. When it was nearly dark, I went to the car and found the boy was dead.

  That night I tied the boy up with string and put him in my rug. I put the boy in the boot of the ford car again, and them I throw his case and toys out near Bantry Bay, and I put the boy on a vacant lotmount near the house I went to see with a Estate Agent, to buy it some time before.

  Bradley duly signed this statement and his signature was witnessed by Detective Sergeant Bateman. Following this, Detective Inspector Windsor, an independent officer, was called into the room to ask some formal questions to verify with Bradley that his written confession had been made voluntarily.

  It was only after this written confession had been completed that Bradley’s Sydney solicitor, Mr Richard Holt from the law firm of Gilbert M Johnstone and Co,8 arrived at the CIB and came into the interview room. In Bradley’s presence, Sergeant Doyle said:

  Mr Holt, as you probably are aware, we have brought Bradley back from Colombo this morning, and later on he will be formally charged before a Magistrate with the murder of Graeme Thorne. He has written out in his own handwriting quite voluntarily and freely a full statement in connection with the Thorne matter.

  Looking at Bradley, Sergeant Doyle then asked him: ‘Is that correct?’ to which Bradley replied: ‘Yes.’ The statement was then provided to Mr Holt to read, and the police left the room to allow the solicitor to confer privately with his client. About ten minutes later, Mr Holt invited the police back into the room. Sergeant Doyle then said:

  He has told us that he is prepared to go with us and point out where he put the boy’s body, where he picked him up from, and so on, and he has told us to that he does not wish to be lined up for identification.

  Mr Holt was then given access to a telephone in order to consult with a barrister. On returning to the interview room, arrangements were made for Mr Holt to communicate with the police later that day about his client’s further assistance to the police.

  * * *

  During the oral interview, when Stephen Bradley advanced the explanation that Graeme Thorne might have hit his head on the spare tyre, he couldn’t help but notice the looks of incredulity on the faces of the two detectives, and he realised just how lame the excuse really was – and that he could do better. By the time he came to make the handwritten statement, he had had time to think of another possible explanation: that he had accidentally hit the boy’s head when he slammed the boot lid shut; and so he added that detail about closing the boot in his written version. The police clearly had no evidence to prove exactly how the boy had sustained the head injury, and so they were entirely reliant on his account. How could they prove that he had deliberately hit the boy, as opposed to his version of an accidental injury?

  Bradley did not hesitate to make a written statement when asked by the police, because as far as he was concerned it was a way of ensuring that the police did not corruptly add anything to their account of their conversation with him in order to strengthen their case for court. He had no reluctance to acknowledge the voluntariness of his confessions when Inspector Windsor came in, or to confirm it when Mr Holt arrived. After all, this was his exculpatory version that he would rely on at court to demonstrate that he was not responsible for Graeme Thorne’s death.

  * * *

  Later that day, Saturday 19 November, Stephen Bradley appeared in the Central Magistrates Court and was formally remanded in custody to appear at the Coroner’s Court for an Inquest into the death of Graeme Thorne. One of the journalists present during this brief first appearance in court described him as follows:

  He was short and pudgy. As a young man he probably had a good physique. Now he looked soft, well fed, as though he indulged himself in all the good things of life. Olive skinned, with dark hair thinning out, a round face with a slightly porcine look, but with no hint of malice. He moved well, despite the bulk he had gained.9

  Although Bradley had expressed a reluctance to participate in a line-up, the f
ollowing Monday, 21 November, he consented to the police conducting an identification parade in which Freda and Bazil Thorne were given the opportunity to identify the man who had come to their home some weeks before their son had been taken. This procedure was a rather hollow and facile exercise, in view of the fact that both of them had identified a photograph of Bradley more than a month earlier and that the Daily Mirror had already published a photograph of both him and Magda.10

  * * *

  The Thornes avidly followed the progress of Stephen Bradley’s extradition, and were gratified when he finally arrived back in Australia. They were confidentially informed that he had confessed to the police and that he might well plead guilty to the murder, which would save them from the ordeal of a trial. When the day came for Bazil and Freda to attend the CIB to identify him, they were conflicted in their emotions. On the one hand, they both relished the opportunity to contribute to the prosecution case against him, however they also felt revulsion at acknowledging the very existence of the vile creature who had deprived their son of his life and ripped away all joy from their lives. When the time came for them to enter the small room at the CIB where the identification parade was to occur, they felt nauseous at the idea of being in the same space as him. When they laid eyes on the man responsible for so much misery and loss, they were shocked at his ‘ordinariness’ and deeply offended at his seemingly arrogant attitude. They could not fathom how a man in his predicament, who was so obviously guilty, could be so coldly confident, rather than cringing in shame at what he had done.

  As expected, Freda immediately identified Bradley in the parade. When instructed by the police that she had to go up and touch the man she was identifying, she vehemently refused to have any physical contact with the person responsible for the death of her son, indignantly pointing at him several times and saying emphatically, ‘That is the man who came to my place.’ Bazil also immediately recognised Bradley, and he also would not touch the man who had been responsible for causing so much anguish to his family, saying, ‘No. I will not touch him, but that is him there.’ After leaving the CIB, Bazil and Freda were overcome by intense hatred and anger towards the man they had just identified. Never before in their lives had these inherently benevolent people held such powerfully negative sentiments about anyone or anything. How were they to cope with such feelings that threatened to overwhelm their intrinsic personalities?

  * * *

  Bradley’s reasons for permitting the identification parade were twofold; first, he thought that if he refused, it could be taken as a sign of guilt by the jury at his trial. Second, he thought that it was worth taking a gamble that the Thornes would fail to positively identify him. He had lost such a lot of weight in the remand prison in Colombo that it was possible that they just might not be sure. In that event, his counsel could surely make headway at the trial on the issue of identification. When the police lined him up with some hapless volunteers from the street, he deliberately adopted a haughty attitude, thinking that Bazil and Freda would be looking for someone cowering after a lengthy period in police custody. When first Freda and then Bazil nominated him as the man who had come to their home, he was unperturbed because they refused to touch him as the police regulations specified, so the whole process would probably be ruled invalid by the trial judge. Surely, their reluctance to touch him would be seen as uncertainty on their part.

  * * *

  Later that day, three other witnesses were given an opportunity to identify Bradley in a line-up: Mrs Lord, Mr Denmeade and Mrs Denmeade. Mrs Lord identified Bradley, while Mr and Mrs Denmeade, who had also previously been shown photographs of him, said that he looked like the man they had seen at Bondi on the morning of the kidnapping.

  Also that day, Stephen Bradley accompanied two police officers, Detective Sergeants Don Fergusson and Roy Coleman, in a police car to retrace his movements with Graeme Thorne on 7 July. He identified where he had parked his car on the corner of Francis Street. He pointed out the place in the park opposite the Thornes’ home from where he had conducted surveillance of their household. He took the police on the route that he claimed to have taken with Graeme: from Bondi they drove along Old South Head Road towards Centennial Park, where Bradley became disoriented and claimed not to be sure which streets he had taken in the area. He stated to the police: ‘I cannot remember the streets now, but we drove around here and we came out into Anzac Parade near Moore Park.’ He directed them through suburban streets to Anzac Parade by a route that was considerably longer than the most direct one – avoiding Centennial Park. He then indicated the streets to the city and over the Harbour Bridge, then through Neutral Bay and Mosman Junction to the Spit Bridge area, where he pointed out the public phone box from which he had first telephoned Mrs Thorne. He again insisted that Graeme had remained quietly seated in the car while he made this call. Throughout this journey, Bradley remained calm, matter-of-fact and unemotional. Once again, he gave the impression that he was re-enacting a scene from a book he had read or a film he had watched, rather than a disturbing, real-life drama that had resulted in the tragic death of a young boy.

  The police then drove Bradley at his direction to his former home in Moore Street, Clontarf. Here, for the first time, he became quite agitated, saying that he did not want to go into the garage because ‘That is where I done it.’ The police accompanying him were convinced that this sudden display of emotion was prompted by self-pity and a realisation of how far he had fallen from grace, rather than any acknowledgement of the offence that he had wrought on Graeme Thorne.

  Still in the police car, which was parked outside 28 Moore Street, Bradley told the police that when he drove into the garage Graeme was still sitting next to him, and that it was only when they were inside the garage that he had forced him into the boot. He confirmed that he had then supervised the removalists. When asked what he had done with Graeme after the removalists had finished, he replied:

  I went back to the garage about dark, and the boy was dead. That is when I put him under the house.

  Bradley then accompanied the police to the Wakehurst Parkway, and pointed out the two locations where he had thrown Graeme’s school case and other objects into the bush. Later he directed them to the vacant allotment in Grandview Grove where he identified the large rock under which he had dumped Graeme’s body. He also identified a phone box at the corner of Seaview Street and Upper Beach Street, Balgowlah, where he had made the second phone call to the Thornes’ home.

  When they returned to the CIB, Sergeant Fergusson showed Bradley the picnic rug that had been found wrapped around Graeme’s body, which Bradley identified as belonging to his wife. He also identified the scarf that had been found around Graeme’s neck as one of his own.

  * * *

  Bradley had no qualms about accompanying the police when they requested he show them the route he had taken with Graeme Thorne. All he had to do was to keep to his story that the boy had remained calm for the duration of the journey to Clontarf. He was never going to tell them about the period in Centennial Park, because he could not think of a satisfactory reason for having driven there – at least, not one he was prepared to disclose. After going past the park, he became slightly disoriented when he realised that he was not directing them by the shortest route from Bondi to the Harbour Bridge, but he quickly corrected himself, taking them to Anzac Parade near Moore Park, which was a slightly longer route, but still perfectly acceptable. He had no hesitation showing them the phone box he had used to make the first call, because it would be futile to deny this aspect of his involvement in the kidnapping. When they arrived at his old home, however, Bradley surprised himself when he became quite emotional and nostalgic, remembering all the good times he, Magda and the children had had in the short period they had owned that house. Out of embarrassment, he feigned an unwillingness to go inside the garage because of what had happened to the boy, but in reality he felt no guilt at all for his death, because it had, after all, been an unfortunate, unforesee
n and unpredictable accident. He still believed that Bazil and Freda were partly to blame, because they had recklessly involved the police at such an early stage, and then the police had unwisely kept the media thoroughly informed. He still was firmly of the view that if everyone had behaved sensibly and predictably, Graeme Thorne would have been home safe and sound on the night of his abduction.

  * * *

  After the re-enactment of the events of 7 July, Stephen Bradley was transferred to the remand section of the Long Bay Gaol. Due to the nature of the crime with which he had been charged, and to the fact that most people in Australia had already made up their minds about his guilt, Bradley was at risk of serious harm from other prisoners. A great deal of hostility and belittlement was directed towards him in the gaol from prisoners and gaolers alike. Because of the high level of antagonism, he was kept in segregation away from most other prisoners and constantly accompanied by prison warders when out of his single cell. In fact, he ate his meals with the warders. Within a few weeks, however, he had used his amiable nature to make himself quite popular with his gaolers. Compared to his incarceration in Colombo, this was the Long Bay Hilton.

  13

  REMAND, REVERSAL AND REUNION

  In the few weeks between his confessions to the police in mid-November 1960 and the Coronial Inquest that began in earnest on 5 December 1960, Stephen Bradley’s position on his responsibility for the kidnapping of Graeme Thorne completely reversed. Because of this change of tack, his solicitor, Mr Richard Holt, was forced to withdraw from representing him because he was now a potential witness for the Crown, having heard his client admit in front of the police that his confession had been made freely and voluntarily.

  Stephen Bradley qualified for legal aid, and he was assigned Frederick Vizzard, the Public Defender of New South Wales to defend him, instructed by a solicitor from the Public Solicitor’s office. Fred Vizzard, then in his late fifties, had been the State’s only Public Defender since 1946,1 and there was not another barrister in Sydney who knew more about criminal law than he did. According to Chester Porter QC, who practised alongside him in many cases: