Dispute over seized devices may delay Alan Jones trial

Alan Jones’ sexual touching and indecent assault trial faces potential delays amid a dispute over material seized from the former broadcaster’s home during his arrest in Sydney.

Local Court Judge Glenn Walsh said on Friday that Jones’ lawyer, Bryan Wrench, had filed a motion seeking either a temporary halt in the proceedings, known as a stay, or an order that certain evidence seized from Jones’ apartment was inadmissible in the trial, slated to start on August 3.

Jones, 85, has pleaded not guilty to 22 charges of indecent assault and sexual touching relating to six complainants spanning from 2003 to 2020.

The former broadcaster is accused of committing the crimes at his harbourside apartment, his farm at Fitzroy Falls in the Southern Highlands, and a lower north shore restaurant, among other venues in Sydney.

In the motion, Wrench sought a stay of the criminal proceedings “until the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions identifies by reference to items, dates and times the data from devices seized on 18 November 2024 from the accused’s home that is relied upon” in the trial, the judge said on Friday.

As an alternative to a stay, Wrench sought an order that “the data from the devices … is inadmissible pursuant to section 138 of the Evidence Act.”

That section relates to evidence obtained improperly or illegally, but no determination has been made by the court about the legality of the search. The law does not impose a blanket prohibition on such evidence being used in proceedings, and the court will weigh a range of factors in determining whether it will be admitted.

Walsh said he would deal with the stay application on Monday if Jones’ lawyers proceeded with it. However, the court also heard it was possible the parties might be able to resolve the issue.

The judge said “the issue concerning a potential stay … [involves], it seems, a combined issue about seized material and also witnesses not proposed to be called by the Crown”.

“If there’s going to be a stay application, one of the parties is going to be disappointed,” Walsh said.

“One of the parties may seek to appeal against that … determination [in another court].”

The judge said he had been raising the issue since October last year and “we’re running out of time”.

“We now have in a week’s time a hearing to start,” he said. “If there’s going to be a stay application, it needs to be ventilated.”

In a pretrial decision on Monday, the judge ruled in favour of the Crown and will allow prosecutors to rely on types of circumstantial evidence known as tendency and coincidence in the trial.

Prosecutors will seek to prove Jones engaged in a pattern of behaviour when acting on his alleged sexual interest in “significantly younger” men.

But the judge made clear Jones “has the presumption of innocence” and “it is the prosecution that bear the onus of proof throughout, beyond reasonable doubt, for each element of each offence as charged”.

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.