Michael Caine

There's a pattern that a lot of the charges have the same women being witnesses to the other.

That's one hell of a coincidence.

Yeah, look, I'm not a mathematics genius, but what are the odds of that?

So let's go to the magistrate's comments.

First of all, surprise, surprise.

Brave and honest.

She ruled you were innocent.

She touched on the aspects of unreliability of C2.

She spoke of C2 being confused and prone to exaggeration.

But what I find incredible, listening to the podcast, the fact that she said...

I had no reason to doubt C2's truthfulness, but there was issues of reliability.

Her memories of what she observed and was told about of offending against others was confused and sometimes prone to exaggeration.

It is clear that on May 9th, she could not have made the observations she described.

Possibly she was in the wings, but this is not the evidence she gave.

It's almost like she wanted to get on the stand and answer it herself.

And as Vanessa points out in the podcast, Not Guilty EP, since when has it become practice for a ruling officer of the court to offer up some excuses for a complainant who has so obviously misled police and the court?

And the same goes for C1.

They were so protected.

So the one question that Vanessa asked at the end, how could such a close friendship be explained?

How is it that now all of the evidence of friendly text messages, et cetera, doesn't account for much these times?