Advertisment

General News

21 November, 2022

Crowd rallies outside Maryborough court as Magistrate hears local miner’s case

A Magistrate will hand down their decision on the high profile gold mining case of local Neville Perry next month, after a three-day hearing last week. The contested hearing took place in the Maryborough Magistrates’ Court over Wednesday, Thursday...

By Riley Upton

A crowd of supports rallied outside the Maryborough Magistrates Court last week in support of local miner Neville Perry.
A crowd of supports rallied outside the Maryborough Magistrates Court last week in support of local miner Neville Perry.

A Magistrate will hand down their decision on the high profile gold mining case of local Neville Perry next month, after a three-day hearing last week.

The contested hearing took place in the Maryborough Magistrates’ Court over Wednesday, Thursday and Friday in front of a court room filled with Mr Perry’s supporters, friends and family.

Mr Perry represented himself in court against a single charge alleging he knowingly, and without consent, damaged a heritage site between December 2017 and September 2019.

The charge relates to part of a 500-acre property comprising 37 allotments near Dunolly owned by Mr Perry, that contains evidence of mining activity dating back to the 19th-century gold rush.

Mr Perry purchased the property in 2016 and obtained the relevant prospecting licenses, permits, land and cultural heritage assessments and began mining at the site, however in 2019 was instructed to cease mining by Heritage Victoria, who later commenced prosecutions.

Heritage Victoria allege that Mr Perry undertook mining excavation works on parts of his property covered by the Heritage Inventory, a listing of all known historical archaeological sites in the state, without the required approval.

The area of particular interest to Heritage Victoria was a tributary to Charlie’s Gully, a former stream where there is evidence of digging holes and where in 2018, Mr Perry uncovered a 2.5 kilogram gold nugget.

However, Mr Perry pleaded not guilty based on the grounds that he had already received the required licences and approvals from the relevant authorities in 2016, before the Heritage Inventory was expanded to cover parts of his property in 2017, which he was not clearly notified of, the court heard.

Twelve witnesses were called to give evidence in the hearing, with the prosecution calling Heritage Victoria’s principal archaeologist Jeremy Smith to the stand first.

Mr Smith told the court that Heritage Victoria’s Heritage Inventory mapping was updated regularly in line with technological mapping advancements and new information becoming available.

He said the site was of considerable historical and archaeological value.

“I think the whole lead in its entirety is a highly significant landscape, perhaps a unique landscape in the Victorian gold mining sphere,” he said.

“In 1858 there was a rush to Dunolly and the area saw estimates range between 30,000 and 50,000 gold miners coming to this area.

“The great value of the old lead today is that remnant mining landscape can still be interpreted very clearly.”

Mr Smith was one of several investigators, archaeologists and compliance officers to conduct site visits in September 2019, the court heard, which is when Heritage Victoria became aware of the excavations within the Heritage Inventory.

This was corroborated by witness Andrew Wilson, Heritage Victoria’s lead investigator in the matter, who told the court Mr Perry was issued with a letter asking he cease mining activity on September 10, 2019, noting Mr Perry was fully cooperative.

During cross examination by the defence, Mr Smith told the court the approval process for obtaining a prospecting licence in light of an area being covered by the Heritage Inventory could be “complex” and confusing to an ordinary member of the public.

In order to undertake mining works in an area covered by the Heritage Inventory, the court heard, consent provided by the executive director of Heritage Victoria or a delegated officer is required — something Mr Perry told the court he believed he had.

The court heard witness David Bannear, a Heritage Victoria heritage officer at the time, had given advice to Mr Perry prior to works commencing at the site, which Mr Perry had taken to be consent on behalf of Heritage Victoria.

It was revealed that in an email to Mr Perry prior to the Heritage Inventory’s expansion, Mr Bannear stated Heritage Victoria would have no issues with the proposal and acknowledged this may have been misinterpreted by the defence.

Mr Perry’s agent, Noel Laidlaw, a mining engineer and former state mining warden gave evidence to the court that he also perceived Mr Bannear’s email correspondence as consent from Heritage Victoria’s executive director.

He told the court he was applying for licenses and approvals on behalf of Mr Perry and was under the impression they had all been received to undertake the works in question.

Mr Laidlaw said he submitted around 1000 licence applications on behalf of others before selling his business recently and said Mr Bannear’s email correspondence was widely accepted as a means of Heritage Victoria providing consent.

He was not aware Heritage Victoria had updated mapping of the site in 2017, it was revealed.

Mr Laidlaw also told the court the site Mr Perry had been mining was one of around 12 tributaries leading into the main gully which he argued, was more historically relevant than the tributary.

“I can’t see any logic in it,” he told the court.

The belief that Mr Perry possessed all the relevant approvals was supported by Earth Resources mine inspector Dr Benny Asirvatham and assessment officer Collin Dell, who told the court Earth Resources had no objection to granting approvals for Mr Perry’s licensing, but acknowledging their work was not governed by the Heritage Act and was separate from Heritage Victoria.

Mr Perry questioned in open court whether his licence was being targeted, as a neighbouring licence less than 40 metres away that also fell within the Heritage Inventory and was active during site inspections at Mr Perry’s had not been visited, nor prosecutions initiated.

Witness Bruce Beetham, who holds the neighbouring licence, confirmed to the court that in September 2018, during Mr Perry’s site visits he was actively mining, despite investigators giving evidence in court that they saw no evidence of neighbouring mining activity.

Executive director of Heritage Victoria, Steven Avery was called to give evidence on Thursday and Friday last week and told the court he had complete trust in the investigators who initiated proceedings.

He also confirmed Mr Bannear did not have the power to provide consent, but was authorised for site visits and to provide advice.

Speaking on Friday afternoon, Magistrate Ross Maxted adjourned the matter until December 16, when he said he would hand down his verdict.

“I’ve reached a point in my mind where I’ve made a decision, however I’m not going to publish my decision — it will be announced orally, in open court on December 16 at Maryborough,” he said.

“I need time to get my thoughts together as to how I announce this decision in open court.”

The verdict will be handed down at the Maryborough Magistrates’ Court on Friday, December 16.

Advertisment

Most Popular