The 1949 Inquest Documents Questioned & The Next Inquest Update...

 

A lesser-known but interesting fact came to my notice some months ago. It relates to the 1949 Inquest and the records thereof.

Everyone, myself included thought that the entire 1949 Inquest documents were made available in PDF format some years ago, having said that I did wonder why among the records, there were no stenographer notes. Those are the notes taken by the court reporter, a very detailed account of every word spoken at court proceedings. (the image at the head of this post is of Stenograph machine of a little earlier vintage an as used by Court reporters globally.) I asked the question of the relevant authorities in SA but they simply referred me to the widely circualted PDF documents.

Suppose I was to tell you that there were notes taken and that those notes were still in existence? Further, what if I were to tell you that not only were they still in existence but some of those notes had actually been published? Here's one account of the inquest which appears to include the stenographers notes:

What follows is quite probably an example of information being given to a postgraduate researcher, it's from an Adelaide University Wiki regarding the 1949 Inquest, and in it you will see something that is not included in the officially distributed account of that same inquest. Specifically, you will see questions that were asked by the Coroner and to whom he addressed those questions:

Page 1. FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE WIKI (2009?)

South Australia, Deposition of Witness, Under the Coroners Act No. 2248, 1935.

South Australia (To Wit) The examination of the undermentioned witnesses taken and acknowledged on behalf of our sovereign Lord the King, touching the death of the body of an unknown man located at Somerton on 1-12-48, at the house of the Coroner;s Court at Adelaide on the Seventeenth day at Adelaide o the seventeenth day of June one thousand nine hundred and forty nine before me, Thomas Erskine Cleland one of His Majesty's Coroners for the said State, on an inquisition then and there taken.

Coroner calls: John Bain Lyons of 52 Whyte St., Somerton, Jewellery store proprietor. Sworn.

1. Question by coroner Thomas Erskine Cleland: Please describe what you observed the night of the 30th November and the following morning.

John Bain Lyons: I live at Somerton. 2, It is my practice in summer to out on to the seafront every evening. My wife and I every evening took a walk along the seafront, and on the evening of the 30th November we did so. I remember that day. During my walk I saw a man lying on the shore, on our return. We had been to the Broadway, and on our return my wife pointed out the man saying “Look at the way the man is slumped”. He was lying adjacent to the steps in front of the crippled children’s home, within a yard of the steps. It was in quite an open position. I should say the closest I was to the man was 15 to 20 yards, on the beach. We had walked along the beach. I could not see his face from that distance. I did not see his face until the following day. There is a seawall up there, and he was leaning up against that, supporting his shoulders and head. While looking at him, he moved. I had a watch on my wrist, I said “I will report this to the police” in a jocular way, and as I said that his right arm moved, his right arm, moved upwards and fell down.

Page 2

John Bain Lyons: I assumed he was drunk and was sleeping it off, and took no further notice of it that night. My remark about informing the police was quite jocular. I had no intention of doing so then. I did not suspect anything unusual at the time. He was lying on his back, with his feet crossed, and towards me. I was on the sea side of the man. I do not think he was wearing a hat. As he moved his arm, I should say it extended fully upwards, and then dropped. I passed on without taking any further notice. We just stopped momentarily to make the observation and remarks. In the summer time I indulge in an early morning swim. On the 1st December I went down the sea early, at approx. 6.35 a.m. I had my swim first, and then went along to meet a friend, (3 of us swim together). He was further along towards Glenelg. I met him and we were speaking together, then I saw some men on horses looking at the body. I had not noticed it before that. I then became suspicious, and then went over and told them that I had seen the body the previous night. After that I went back and communicated with Constable Moss of Brighton Police. I just casually examined the body without touching it. I made sure he was dead as I did not see the face the previous evening, I could not identify the man, nor could I recognise the clothes, as I was not close enough the previous evening. I would however (say) that it was definitely the same person.

There was one man on a horse, and another leading a horse, 2 jockeys. When Constable Moss came down, he looked to see if there was any disturbance of the sand and the body, and he was sure there had not been. When the hand went up, there was no cigarette in it. I feel sure I could have seen a cigarette if there had been one, as it was fairly light. The following morning, when Constable Moss was there we found a cigarette just above his ear, which he may have been trying to get. That cigarette had not been lit.

I should say his head and top portion of the shoulders were against the wall, using the wall as a support. The body was in the same position the next morning, with the legs crossed.

And so there we see what to many of us is new evidence

1. Question by coroner Thomas Erskine Cleland: Please describe what you observed the night of the 30th November and the following morning. 

2,  ( John Bain Lyons) It is my practice in summer to out on to the seafront every evening. My wife and I every evening took a walk along the seafront, and on the evening of the 30th November we did so. I remember that day. During my walk I saw a man lying on the shore, on our return. We had been to the Broadway, and on our return my wife pointed out the man saying “Look at the way the man is slumped”.

He walked along the seafront, not the road, the seafront, and yet he did not see the man when outbound on his walk, he was seen only on his return walk.( This point was raised here some time ago, 2 years possibly)

(Another question to John Bain Lyons:)
3. Question by Prof John Burton Cleland: Was there anyone else on the beach at the time? Was there any disturbance in the sand around the decease? Did you see the deceased do anything such as smoking? Did the position of the body change from one day to the next?

John Bain Lyons replies:
There was one man on a horse, and another leading a horse, 2 jockeys. When Constable Moss came down, he looked to see if there was any disturbance of the sand and the body, and he was sure there had not been. When the hand went up, there was no cigarette in it. I feel sure I could have seen a cigarette if there had been one, as it was fairly light. The following morning, when Constable Moss was there we found a cigarette just above his ear, which he may have been trying to get. That cigarette had not been lit.

(But Constable Moss in his evidence said it was on his lapel and the cigarette was partly smoked?)

 I quoted the above two pages from the Adelaide University Wiki which you will find here:

https://www.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au/personal/dabbott/wiki/index.php/The_Taman_Shud_Case_Coronial_Inquest

The issue I want to address is why was it that the Coroners questions were not included in the inquest document? The statement in reply is in the document but the wording is attributed to the Coroner there but it loses an essential element of context when the actual question that was put by the Coroner is missing. You can check the wording out against the PDF of the inquest documents which you can download here:

CONCLUSION
 You could argue that the information described in this post is a detail but, in my view, it's an important one because it suggests that the University of Adelaide had more information than has been disclosed, which would include files and photographs that are not publicly available.

It turns out that there are two broad categories of people who can gain access to documents held by SAPOL.  If you are undertaking postgraduate studies for example you can be granted access to Police files and there is a set procedure for doing which you can find in a SAPOL Researcher Information pack.

I would suggest that at this time, SAPOL may not be inclined to respond positively to a request for Research information or indeed an FOI request due, I would think, to the workloads currently being experienced.

On the issue of workloads and Inquests, the latest information sent to me today by a colleague is that it could be May 2025 before the inquest is held. These things do change according to circumstances of course so its best to keep an eye out here for any changes.