The ACL bombing still doesn’t add up

THERE a too many unanswered questions surrounding last year’s ACL bombing to accept suicide was the only motivation, writes Miranda Devine.

Jaden Duong — who took his life last month — told police he disliked the Australian Christian Lobby for their stance on marriage equality after driving a burning van into their headquarters. (Pic: Ray Strange)

IT’S been almost a year since the bombing of the Australian Christian Lobby headquarters in Canberra by gay activist Jaden Duong, yet the police still claim that suicide was the only motivation.

Tragically, Duong, 36, did take his own life last month, while on bail on charges of arson and property damage in the ACT Supreme Court.

Clearly he was a troubled soul, and you wonder if he had enough support when he was released on bail.

But the actions of the Australian Federal Police, and its local arm, ACT Policing, continue to raise questions.

A few hours after the explosion, which blew out windows, gutted the ground floor of the ACL building and caused $100,000 damage, ACT Deputy Chief Police Commander Mark Walters told reporters: “As a result of our conversations with this man, we’ve been able to establish that his actions were not politically, religiously or ideologically motivated.”

Yesterday, under questioning from Liberal Senator Eric Abetz in Senate estimates, AFP commissioner Andrew Colvin and ACT Chief Police Officer Justine Saunders continued to insist that Duong’s only motivation was suicide, and that the choice of the ACL HQ was incidental.

“I believe the… conclusions we made with regards to his motivation have been consistent throughout the investigation... I have no reason to question or doubt the investigators who came to those conclusions,” Colvin said.

The van was driven into the car park at Eternity House, the Australian Christian Lobby Headquarters in Canberra. (Pic: Kym Smith)

Abetz persisted, despite theatrical sighs and points of order from Labor Senators (and same-sex marriage activists) Penny Wong and Louise Pratt, and a gratuitous interruption by Attorney-General George Brandis.

Abetz simply asked what the ACL has been asking for 10 months: why did police downplay the seriousness of this attack by telling the media it was just a “car fire” and declaring it was not “politically, religiously or ideologically motivated”? This despite the fact the ACL had been on heightened alert due to threats over its advocacy on contentious social issues including opposing same-sex marriage.

And why have police stuck to their story, in the face of evidence to the contrary? Were they pressured to downplay the bombing by anyone in the ACT government or elsewhere?

It doesn’t add up, and the conspiracy of silence around the matter is disconcerting.

After all, as documents tendered to the court revealed, Duong told police why he chose to attempt suicide by detonating a Toyota HiAce one-tonne van packed with four 8.5kg LPG bottles on the doorstep of the ACL headquarters in Canberra at about 9.30pm on December 21.

Asked why he chose the location he replied: “Because I dislike the Australian Christian Lobby” over its “position on sexuality” and because “religions are failed”.

Australian Christian Lobby’s Lyle Shelton at the headquarters after the explosion. (Pic: Kym Smith)

Before the attack, Duong ran internet searches on “Australian Christian Lobby”, “countries with same sex marriage”, “Israel gay marriage”, “same sex marriage Germany”, “China lgbt”, “how to make ammonium nitrate”, “pressure-cooker bomb”, and “how much gas leak to cause explosion”.

So it is difficult to argue that it was a random suicide attempt, with the ACL an incidental target.

Yet Saunders told Senate estimates yesterday: “Yes he did… indicate he did not like the Australian Christian Lobby.

“But that was not his motivation for taking the action that he did and… establishing the fact that a person has certain views is not the same as establishing that any given action they undertake are necessarily motivated by those same views.”

Colvin concluded by saying he felt “uncomfortable” talking about the case because it was before the coroner.

The final attempt to close down Abetz’s line of questioning came from Pratt, who declared that talking about the circumstances of the bombing breached mental health guidelines which recommend “minimising” details of suicides.

What rich hypocrisy from the party whose leader, Bill Shorten, used the threat of suicide of LGBTI people as a weapon to block the same-sex marriage plebiscite