‘Poor taste’: ABC’s 7.30 slammed over ‘intrusive’ interview with bus crash heroes

An ABC interview with bystanders who helped injured kids in this week’s horrific Melbourne bus crash has been slammed as “insensitive” and “ghoulish”.

An ABC interview with two heroic bystanders who rushed to help injured children trapped in this week’s horrific Melbourne bus crash has been slammed by viewers as “insensitive” and “ghoulish”.

On Tuesday afternoon, a school bus full of 45 children was hit from behind by a truck, causing it to overturn, trapping a number of children inside at an Eynesbury intersection in Melbourne’s west.

Victorian tradies Cameron Chalmers and Dean Eastway were returning from work when they witnessed the accident unfold, and they shared their traumatic experience with veteran reporter Sarah Ferguson on Wednesday night’s episode of 7.30.

Crash scene investigators work at the scene while emergency services pick up school bags after the bus is pulled back onto its wheels. Picture: Jake Nowakowski

The interview came after Royal Children’s Hospital chief executive Bernadette McDonald gave a grim update to the media on Wednesday morning, revealing a number of children had “partial” amputations of arms and one had a “complete amputation” as a result of their injuries.

Mr Chalmers and Mr Eastway were both driving behind the truck when the smash occurred, and immediately did all they could to help.

“We ripped the sunroofs off and found all these kids in the bus. That was horrible,” Mr Chalmers told 7.30.

“The kids were screaming and there was smoke and dust. And we just started pulling out as many kids as we could out of those sunroofs.”

Mr Eastway said the children were: “obviously terrified, they were trapped and yelling out, ‘I don’t want to be in a bus again. Where’s Mum?’ All sorts of stuff, and there were all sorts of injuries. It was just terrible.”

Sarah Ferguson's 7.30 interview with Cameron Chalmers and Dean Eastway has been slammed as 'insensitive'. Picture: ABC/7.30

Mr Chalmers estimated the pair removed around 30 children from the wreckage, and then began assisting those who remained trapped inside the overturned vehicle.

“We just kept talking to them and held their hands and just looked after them,” he said.

“We sat there and we asked them their names … and just tried to keep them calm, just talking to them and reassuring them,” Mr Eastway added.

Both men stayed at the site until all children had been freed, and said the reality of the traumatic incident was still sinking in.

Had to walk away from that interview. Those poor blokes need a professional counselor, not to be hostages to whatever predatory journalism this is. Nauseating. #abc730

— Sly Fellows (@SlyFellows) May 17, 2023

However, it didn’t take long for the interview to spark backlash online, with social media users accusing the ABC of acting insensitively by airing the interview and Ferguson for her rapid-fire questioning and “seeming lack of empathy”, including for asking for details about individual children, such as their names and their condition.

“The bus crash looked horrific and I’m sad for all involved. I’m also disturbed by this interview with Sarah Ferguson and the men who assisted … How is this OK?” one person posted on Twitter.

Another said: “The two rescuers from the Victorian bus crash are so dignified and respectful in responding to the insensitive and highly intrusive questioning by Sarah Ferguson … even asking them to describe the individual children they rescued. It’s unethical and wrong.”

The interview aired on the ABC on Wednesday night. Picture: ABC/7.30

“The men who helped at the bus crash scene are heroes. They deserve more respect than to be asked ongoing inconsiderate, unfeeling questions about the kids, only to relive their trauma for Sarah Ferguson,” one posted.

Another wrote: “I have great respect for Sarah Ferguson – and also, given the gravity of the bus crash incident, it was in poor taste to seek details so intrusive and sensitive of the children’s trauma.

“The rescuers, indeed heroes, are likely traumatised themselves. Dismayed, ABC.”

One more commented, “The two men did a great job. Your interview of them was belaboured and insensitive to the point of ghoulish.”

Yet another commented, “#abc730 trying to get victims names in the bus crash is unforgivable Sarah Ferguson!”, with others branding the segment “atrocious” and “appalling”.

News.com.au contacted ABC for comment.

Truck driver in court

Melbourne truck driver Jamie Gleeson, 49, appeared in the Melbourne Magistrates Court on Wednesday afternoon accused of dangerous driving charges after the horrific collision with the school bus.

The prosecutor told the court police would need a significant amount of time to prepare the case, requesting 16 weeks to account for the “large number of children involved” and size of the collision.

He said Mr Gleeson had been charged with four counts of dangerous driving causing serious injury and may face “additional charges” after investigations into the incident continue.

The court heard the man, from Melbourne’s outer west, had been a truck driver for 18 years and had just finished work driving clay from Bulla to Kensington when the crash occurred.

Reading the police summary, the prosecutor said Mr Gleeson told police he was on his “usual route home” at the time and driving about 70km per hour.

Melbourne truck driver Jamie Gleeson, 49, appeared in the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday afternoon. Picture: Facebook

“Next thing I know the bus in front slowed,” he allegedly told police. “I tried to take evasive action but I couldn’t.”

He said Mr Gleeson recounted seeing “sun flickers” from through trees which he knew could distort his vision. He allegedly told police he would usually react by slowing down, but on this occasion he didn’t.

According to the summary, Mr Gleeson stopped at the scene, called triple-0 and began helping pull children from the records.

There was no allegation Mr Gleeson was affected by drugs or alcohol.

His lawyer successfully applied for his bail saying there was “no allegation he tried to abscond or minimise his involvement”.