3 months ago
17
Shock jocks Kyle Sandilands and Jackie O have escaped contempt charges for comments they made on their radio program during the trial of convicted mushroom killer Erin Patterson.
The Victorian Office of Public Prosecutions on Wednesday confirmed the outspoken duo would not be prosecuted over the segment, in which they gave their opinions on Patterson’s case and guilt.
The radio hosts also engaged in discussions that could have been considered off-limits while the trial was still ongoing under sub judice rules, which restrict reporting on a case to only the information that has been heard by a jury.
Kyle Sandilands and Jackie O.
“It is considered that the required elements of contempt could not be proved beyond reasonable doubt, and there are no reasonable prospects of conviction for the referred incidents,” a Victorian Office of Public Prosecutions spokesperson said.
It was a day of mixed news for the nationally syndicated program, with the Australian Communications and Media Authority serving Kyle and Jackie O with a notice of intention to impose conditions on their radio licence.
Loading
ACMA found the program had made seven breaches of decency rules involving vulgar and sexually explicit content, separate to the mushroom trial discussion.
During the mushroom trial segment on June 16, Sandilands asked live on air: “Did she do it or what?” before his co-host rushed to chime in: “Yeah, like, what does the evidence point to? My question is, how strong is her case?”
Sandilands responded: “Not strong.”
The KIIS breakfast radio presenters then discussed evidence from the prosecution about mobile phone tower records potentially placing Patterson in Loch and Outtrim in South Gippsland, two sites where death cap mushrooms had been spotted.
That afternoon, before the jury returned to the courtroom after the lunch break, Supreme Court Justice Christopher Beale issued a stern warning to the media and said he would refer the matter to the OPP for possible contempt proceedings.
Loading
“I encourage all commentators to engage their brains before they open their mouths, as they may otherwise land themselves and their organisations in hot water,” Beale said.
The incident was among three instances referred to the OPP for prosecution during Patterson’s trial, which attracted an unprecedented level of attention from Australian and international media outlets, podcasters, influencers, academics and radio hosts.
The other two included commentary during an episode of the Mamamia Out Loud podcast titled “Grab a Plate: The Twist in The Mushroom Trial” and discussion about the case during a presentation by forensic psychologist Dr Rachel Toles about the psychology of serial killers at Melbourne’s Hamer Hall on May 31
Described as an “unmissable event”, the talk promised to delve into the minds of the world’s most notorious murderers.
The potential breach by Toles prompted Beale to get the court staff to ask the jurors whether they had attended any events or shows in Melbourne that weekend. None had.
The OPP spokesperson said the circumstances of each incident had been carefully considered and assessed against the principles of sub judice contempt, and it had been decided that none of the incidents were likely to prejudice Patterson’s right to a fair trial.
The penalty for contempt can range from fines to jail time.
Most Viewed in National
Loading
