Malcolm Joel Murdoch found not guilty after boating offence accusations

A Bundaberg commercial fisherman has been cleared of a charge alleging he rammed a smaller recreational boat on the Burnett River.

A Bundaberg commercial fisherman accused of a ramming attack on a smaller recreational vessel carrying two men has been found not guilty after a trial in Bundaberg Magistrates Court.

Malcolm Joel Murdoch appeared in court on Thursday for judgment, following the hearing of his trial earlier this month.

Mr Murdoch had faced one charge of “master negligently risks safety of a person or a domestic commercial vessel”, to which he had entered a plea of not guilty.

The charge stemmed from an alleged dispute around Mr Murdoch’s fishing nets in the Burnett River at Bundaberg at about 11pm on February 25, 2020.

The two men in the smaller boat, who gave evidence in the trial, claimed Mr Murdoch had become angry after they inadvertently went over his fishing nets in their vessel, and that he had rammed their boat three times in retaliation, with one of the men claiming he had to jump out of the way to not be knocked out of the boat.

However, during the trial, Mr Murdoch’s defence team stated there were inconsistencies including a lack of data showing both boats in the same place for the amount of time it would have taken the alleged attack to unfold.

In reading out the findings, Magistrate Trinity McGarvie told the court there had been inconsistencies in the accounts of the two witnesses which she said fundamentally affected the reliability of their accounts.

Malcolm Joel Murdoch was found not guilty.

Ms McGarvie referred to two videos taken by one of the men in the boat, which she said undermined their evidence.

She cited “significant confusion” regarding when the videos were taken and said that while they showed Mr Murdoch was trying to talk to the men, was using profanities and had likely been drunk and therefore should not have been in charge of vessel, their content was inconsistent with two men who claimed to be fearing for their lives.

“The demeanour of both (men) in those videos was inconsistent with what they say occurred …,” Ms McGarvie told the court.

She further stated that the men had been laughing from time to time in the videos and had “held their own” with no significant disturbance obvious.

“I have no doubt that they were annoyed and frustrated by Mr Murdoch, no doubt he was aggressive, but I’m not satisfied that their behaviour was consistent with the lead-up or aftermath of what they say occurred,” Ms McGarvie said.

While the men had some damage on their boat, it was not possible to prove the damage had been caused by the alleged event.

Ms McGarvie said it was for the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Murdoch’s actions were intended to put the health and safety of another at risk, with intention being an important element.

She said that having regard to the evidence before her, and her doubts about the reliability of the only witnesses to the alleged event, she could not be satisfied that the prosecution had “discharged their onus”.

Mr Murdoch was found not guilty of the offence particularised, and discharged.