The Night Driver podcast: ‘Fantasist’ hijacked police murder probe

Pressure was mounting on the homicide detectives hunting for Janine’s Vaughan’s killer.

Janine Vaughan.

Pressure was mounting on the homicide detectives hunting for Janine’s Vaughan’s killer.

More than four years had passed since the young clothing store manager was abducted and almost certainly murdered after a night out with friends in Bathurst and NSW’s Police Integrity Commission was about to hold public hearings into the handling of the official investigation.

The anti-corruption watchdog was tasked with exposing serious misconduct within the state’s police force and given its wide-reaching powers and annual budget of almost $20m, it was highly motivated to achieve those goals.

■ Subscribers of The Australian will be able to hear The Night Driver podcast before the rest of the nation, exclusively in The Australian app. Episode seven is available now. Subscribe to The Australian here, and download the app via: Apple App Store | Google Play Store

As detectives working Janine’s case prepared as best they could for the inevitable scrutiny a public PIC probe was sure to attract, they had no idea the inquiry was about to throw up a surprise witness that would take their investigation off on a bizarre tangent.

Even today, the witness, a woman from Bathurst, can be known only as RA-1.

She would give evidence that she had seen a frantic Janine tied up in a passing car in the days after she vanished on Friday, December 7, 2001 — and the driver was Brad Hosemans.

Her testimony would further fuel baseless accusations the former detective was responsible for Janine’s death.

Her story soon unraveled and by the time she finished giving evidence, she was regarded as an unreliable fantasist.

It raised serious questions about the PIC’s decision to call RA-1 as a witness and give her a platform from which to publicly vilify Hosemans in the middle of an ongoing murder investigation.

Peter Moss QC, the head Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission, a watchdog responsible for ensuring the PIC handled its investigations appro­pri­ately, was staggered by the PIC’s lack of judgement.

After reviewing all material, Moss believed the PIC had engaged in a witch hunt, using a witness he regarded as deranged.

Hosemans had already been investigated and ruled out as a person of interest in Janine’s disappearance by a police strike force led by Detective Inspector Paul Jacob.

The 31-year-old had vanished after a night out in the rural university town, three hours’ drive west of Sydney, after leaving the Metro Tavern and unexpectedly getting in a small red car shortly before 4am.

Successive investigations had concluded she had been abducted and murdered, but the identity of the car’s driver has remained a mystery and her body has never been found.

Hosemans had always denied any involvement in the missing woman’s disappearance and repeatedly pointed out he had never met Janine.

Still, rumour and innuendo about him continued to circulate through Bathurst and many residents remained fixated with the idea he had murdered Janine, with his crime covered up by his mates on the force.

■ READ MORE: The Night Driver — the new podcast from the investigative journalist who brought you The Teacher’s Pet

As a result of the persistent speculation, the PIC launched an inquiry in late 2005.

By the time it held its opening hearing, RA-1 had come forward with evidence that appeared to prove the very worse accusations against Hosemans.

Her allegations about seeing Janine trussed up in the detective’s car triggered a barrage of highly damaging criticism that would leave both his reputation and that of the official police investigation into Janine’s death in tatters. “I saw a very distressed woman sitting in the front passenger seat trying to get my attention and appearing to wave when I realised that her hands were tied together with what appeared to be bailing twine,” she said.

“The person that I recognised driving the vehicle … looked shocked. His mouth dropped open when the vehicles passed.

“At this time, I was slowing down as I was approaching the street … and I was able to see Brad Hosemans and Janine Vaughan quite clearly.

“I wondered what would happen but as I knew Brad Hosemans as a policeman who should be trustworthy, should be a pillar of society, I thought nothing of it and got on with my day as I had a busy life.”

She said she had initially noticed the small red car because she thought it belonged to one of her son’s friends, but it was later revealed the friend had bought a small red car only in the months after the encounter took place.

During questioning, lawyers for the PIC asked her about her diagnosis for depression and whether she was “on anything or taking anything that might have provided you with some sort of hallucination?”

She replied: “Not that I’m aware of.”

She struggled to explain why she had not mentioned the strange encounter to anyone — not even her husband — for more than four years. In her mind, she said, there was no connection between seeing Janine tied up in Hosemans’s car and Janine’s reported abduction and murder.

She said she had not followed stories on Janine’s disappearance.

By the time the PIC inquiry concluded, “substantial” issues had been found in its star witness’s testimony and the commission concluded her story was far from credible.

After spending two years and millions of dollars on investigations and hearings, the PIC confirmed what homicide detectives had known all along: Hosemans should not be prosecuted for any criminal offence.