A lawyer representing Alan Jones has alleged that one of his accusers fabricated claims against the former broadcaster to seek financial compensation. The individual, referred to as Complainant J, refuted this assertion, stating, “I don’t want anything from this.” On Thursday, a non-publication order that had been in place during the cross-examination was lifted, allowing for public reporting of the proceedings.
During the fourth day of Mr. Jones’s trial, where he faces 22 charges related to indecent assault and sexual touching, Complainant J testified about encounters with Mr. Jones that began when he was 17 years old. The Local Court in Sydney heard that Complainant J met Mr. Jones during high school and alleged that he was kissed and touched multiple times by the broadcaster. The court also learned that Mr. Jones provided Complainant J with a mobile phone, a car, and weekly payments ranging from $400 to $600, which ceased in 2012 as their contact diminished.
In her cross-examination, barrister Gabrielle Bashir SC revealed that Complainant J had a long tenure as a police officer but resigned amid allegations of serious misconduct. Ms. Bashir suggested that Complainant J’s financial struggles following his unemployment motivated him to file a complaint against Mr. Jones to obtain compensation. She inquired if he viewed the allegation as a chance for a transformative financial outcome. Complainant J firmly denied this, asserting that he did not expect any financial gain from his allegations. “I think I’ve been very clear,” he stated. “I don’t want anything from this.”
A non-publication order had temporarily restricted the reporting of the cross-examination to prevent media from disseminating evidence that might later be deemed inadmissible. However, the judge lifted this order after the prosecution withdrew their objections.
Further testimony revealed that Complainant J had previously stated he received a mobile phone from Mr. Jones at age 14 or 15 and a car when he was 17. Under questioning, he acknowledged that records indicated he was 18 when he received the phone and that the car was registered in his name after he turned 18 and graduated from high school. Complainant J explained that discrepancies in dates were due to his recollection, emphasizing that he was clear about the alleged offenses against him.
During cross-examination, Complainant J rejected claims by Ms. Bashir that he was attempting to portray Mr. Jones’s gifts as sinister, asserting that he understood the payments from Mr. Jones were intended to support his athletic career, not as part of any inappropriate context. Ms. Bashir contended that the timing of increased payments suggested ulterior motives, but Complainant J maintained that he was not trying to imply anything beyond the support he received.
On Thursday, Complainant J was also questioned about messages sent to a former girlfriend, whom he confided in before coming forward with the allegations. The court learned that the ex-girlfriend provided a statement to police regarding what Complainant J had disclosed about Mr. Jones. In a message sent after they gave their statements, he referred to her as a “shooting star” and promised to care for her once the situation concluded. Complainant J denied the defense’s implication that his message suggested he intended to provide her with financial support. “I don’t want to sue him [Mr. Jones], I don’t want any of his money,” he reiterated.
Complainant J acknowledged that during the incidents he did not attempt to stop Mr. Jones through physical or verbal means, except for one instance in a car when he claimed he told Mr. Jones he was “trying to drive” as he allegedly engaged in inappropriate behavior. Throughout the proceedings, Ms. Bashir accused Complainant J of fabricating his allegations.
