The Bathurst riots were a series of violent incidents that occurred at Bathurst Gaol, a prison in Bathurst, New South Wales, Australia, in October 1970 and February 1974. On both occasions, a sit-in protest by inmates escalated into a prison riot. Each riot was followed by violent reprisals from prison officers, the so-called Bathurst Batterings. The second outbreak of violence at Bathurst led to the partial destruction and temporary closure of the prison, and ultimately to a Royal Commission into the entire State prison system.
Background
Long before the 1970 riot, Bathurst had acquired a reputation within the NSW state prison system for violent disturbances. Of the 25 major incidents that had occurred in NSW prisons between 1889 and 1975, 15 had taken place at Bathurst. The main section of the prison, where both riots took place, was completed in 1888. There was no glass in the cells' external windows, leading to freezing overnight temperatures in winter. The archaic plumbing system struggled to cope: toilets overflowed, pipes froze, and there was seldom enough hot water even for thrice-weekly showers. As the then Commissioner the Department of Corrective Services, Walter McGeechan, later conceded, Bathurst was "by its design the antithesis of what was required in a modern institution."
But the problems were not just architectural. Led by Superintendent John Winter Pallot, senior officers imposed an extremely strict regimen on the inmate population. Officers rarely talked with prisoners or addressed complaints, for fear of being accused of being "involved" with inmates. Examples of this rigidity included a uniform style of haircut for inmates, a ban on sitting down in the yard, and a requirement that inmates wear jackets during muster (roll call), even in summer. Enforcement of rules was inconsistent and arbitrary. Inmates also complained of rancid food, limits on the number of incoming letters they could keep, and the odours and flies from the prison's piggery.
1970 riot
The Royal Commission later found that the cancellation of mid-week sport in September 1970 may have brought discontent over conditions to a head.
16 October
Around 150 prisoners staged a peaceful "sit-in" protest in the yards at 4pm on Friday 16 October. The leaders of the protest submitted a list of 17 demands to Deputy Superintendent John Medway. Though Medway characterised the demands as "silly", McGeechan immediately granted five: no reprisals against protesters, permission to sit in the yards during exercise time, extended time with the radio and lights on in the evenings, and permission for "modern" styles of haircuts.
A representative of the protestors was allowed to telephone a senior officer at the head office in Sydney, probably Assistant Commissioner Noel Day. The inmates formed the belief that the Commissioner would travel to Bathurst on the Monday to hear their grievances directly, and voted to return to their cells at 1am. Tensions continued to rise over the weekend, and McGeechan formed the view that an "insurrection" was being planned for Monday 19 October. He ordered five armed officers from the Establishments (i.e., security) Division to Bathurst on Sunday night; they were in position in the chapel at the centre of the complex on Monday morning.
19 October
As prisoners filed out of the cell blocks in the morning, they could see armed men in the chapel. Many recognised at once that the administration had no intention of discussing their grievances or improving conditions. The mood among the inmates deteriorated further. While the exact trigger is not known, at the midday muster a group of younger inmates began to riot. This group rushed into C Wing and barricaded themselves inside. They began to destroy fittings, furniture and records. At around 1pm a guard in a tower fired a shot at an inmate climbing over an internal fence. This triggered a broader riot.
Inmates from outside C Wing surged into the central yard (known as the Circle), smashing doors and locks and entering the prison kitchen. Officers withdrew to a safe distance as the destruction unfolded. William Morrow, the Director of Establishments and the most senior officer present, began negotiations with the inmates and the violence began to abate. At around 2pm, the inmates barricaded inside C Wing came out into the yard and mixed with the other prisoners.
Morrow promised that there would be no physical reprisals ("biff", in prison slang) against rioters and, to safeguard against this, agreed to a demand that prisoners would be allowed to associate in their cells that evening.
The inmates were counted and fed without incident, but already resentment was building among the prison officers. They were angry that they had not been allowed to physically suppress the riot and now demanded that they be allowed to conduct reprisals. At 6pm the officers met with Morrow, and one asked "How about we give them a touch of the liquorice stick [rubber baton] in the morning?" Morrow was reportedly non-committal, saying something to the effect of "we'll work that out later on".
Morrow reported the desire of some officers to attack the prisoners in the morning to the Commissioner. McGeechan then made the extraordinary decision to recall Morrow – the most experienced correctional officer on site at the time – to Sydney. Morrow departed Bathurst at 8pm, leaving Pallot in command.
20 October
On the morning of Tuesday 20 October, the officers needed to return prisoners to their normal cells and ensure that all weapons seized or manufactured by inmates during the riot or overnight were confiscated. Despite the dangerous situation, Pallot did not consult the more experienced Establishments officers or head office on the best course of action. He issued his men with batons and told them to strike any prisoner who refused to come out of his cell. This was in direct violation of prison rules, which tightly circumscribed the use of force against inmates.
At 7.15am, Pallot led a group of officers to the first cell on the top floor of C Wing, where six inmates had spent the night. The first inmate to emerge, Michael Bowen, did so peacefully. Pallot said to Bowen, "You were pretty tough yesterday. Let's see how tough you are today. Cop this!" and struck him in the face with his hand. According to the prison officers' union, the Public Service Association of New South Wales (PSA), Pallot's example set the tone for the events that followed:Some prison officers participated in a systematic flogging of a large number, if not all, of the prisoners in the jail. Such flogging was carried out under the leadership and control of the Superintendent, Mr Pallot, and was regarded as representing official policy.
Investigations Warwick Cornwell was the first of the inmates involved to be released; he described his experiences to a Sydney radio station. The next inmate to make allegations was Keith Clark, who was released a month after the violence. He provided a statutory declaration to an Opposition MP, George Petersen. Petersen in turn provided this to Justice Minister John Maddison, and – with the names of officers redacted – the press. Clark not only detailed his own assault, but that of others. Among these was Pallot's initial assault of Bowen.
The next report regarding the reprisal violence came from four of the Department's psychologists, led by Len Evers, who wrote to the Commissioner saying that they had received information from multiple sources that "a systematic and calculated brutality has been perpetrated against prisoners by some officers".
Maddison directed the department to investigate. This internal investigation, which lasted almost two years, was initially led by a legal officer named Eris Quin. Quin's methods were later to be criticised by the Royal Commission. All interviews – with both inmates and staff – were conducted in the presence of senior prison officers. Inmates were aware of the Department's practice, common at that time, of charging any inmate who made a complaint with making a false statement. Staff were threatened with disciplinary action or worse. According to one Bathurst officer, before his interview with Quin he was warned by a senior colleague:
Be careful what you say. Be careful you don't get some bugger's throat cut, especially your own.
Quin's conclusions exonerated the department and its officers. In 1971, McGeechan wrote to Maddison to provide a progress report on the investigation. This report was, as the Commissioner was later forced to concede, wholly misleading, including its torturous conclusions that there was no "uniformity of story" and that, although Quin had discovered "isolated" assaults by officers, "This is in no way incriminatory" because of the prevailing "combat conditions". In a bid to discredit the complainants, McGeechan provided the Minister with summaries of each inmate's criminal or psychiatric histories. Nagle concluded that "Mr McGeechan had attempted, successfully, to deceive the Minister about the true situation which had obtained in Bathurst."
Further allegations emerged in early 1971. Petersen produced a statutory declaration from inmate Thomas Smedley; Evers related the account of inmate Alan Morrison. Again, Quin interviewed witnesses in the presence of senior correctional officers. Yet the weight of evidence had begun to accumulate. Quin now concluded that "a prima facie case exists against Prison Officers generally at Bathurst Gaol." McGeechan removed him from any further work on the internal inquiries; Quin's conclusion was never communicated to the Minister. Indeed, it only came to light after photostat copies of Quin's papers was anonymously supplied to lawyers appearing before the Royal Commission several years later.
Subsequent media coverage
In June 1971, an anonymous document was published with the title "Bathurst Batterings – October 1970. The case for a Royal Commission into the Department of Corrective Services of New South Wales." It included the statutory declarations, the psychologists' letter, and the statements from inmates made to the Quin, as well as other material. The document began:
The record of events given here, if true, suggests that the administration of the Department of Corrective Services of New South Wales is founded on parsimony, incompetence, treachery, violence, intimidation and deceit.
The document generated considerable media interest and encouraged still more inmates to come forward. Quin's replacement as investigator, Boyd Cleary, reported that he believed elements of a complaint from inmate L.W. Boyle. The following month, Evers went public, speaking to The Sunday Australian. The Australian later discovered that an inmate had reported the reprisals to the local Bishop, Albert Thomas. When the inmate's letter was discovered, the department was more interested in punishing him than investigating the allegations.
1974 riot
Pallot remained as superintendent and little changed at Bathurst in the years following the violence of 1970. Poor plumbing, inedible food, cancelled sport and unreasonable rules continued to rankle inmates. Further sit-ins occurred on 29 October 1973 and 15 January 1974. Each time the administration promised protesting inmates would not be punished; and each time at least some of them were.
The inmates riot
On the afternoon of 3 February 1974, up to 90 inmates were gathered in the chapel to watch the film Women in Love. As the second reel began, an unidentified prisoner threw a petrol bomb. After a brief period of confusion the people present were evacuated and the fire extinguished. Officers escorted one inmate, Billy Kennedy, back to his cell. Kennedy was later accused of throwing the petrol bomb, or may have thrown a chair at an officer. The other inmates heard screams coming from Kennedy's cell.