Cape York Fraud Trial Collapses as Juror Spots Redacted Evidence

For six days, a Cairns courtroom had been the stage for a fraud trial that pitted the word of a Cape York traditional owner against the machinery of the Queensland justice system. Then, two hours into jury deliberations, a single observant juror noticed something off in the evidence folder—redacted material that should never have been there. That discovery unraveled the entire proceeding, leaving Judge Joshua Treviño KC with no choice but to discharge the jury and declare a mistrial.

The defendant is Larry Joe Woosup, an Ankumuthi traditional owner from Cape York Peninsula, who has pleaded not guilty to two aggravated fraud charges over the alleged misuse of mining royalties in 2014. The prosecution claimed Woosup, as sole trustee of two trust accounts set up for the Ankumuthi community, used overdraft capacity to transfer and withdraw $110,000, and deposited a $95,000 cheque from a mining company into another account, which was also withdrawn. The trusts were meant to hold all money for the community's benefit, but the court heard that Woosup and another community member had brokered a separate deal with a mining company over bauxite rights after earlier negotiations stalled.

The mistrial, however, was not about the merits of the case but the integrity of the process. Judge Treviño told the court that a juror had flagged redacted information in an exhibit, and upon examination, another juror's working copy was also irregular. The judge noted that this material might have been before the jury since the start of the trial, creating a risk of unfair prejudice to the defendant. "It was the crown's responsibility to prepare those documents and ensure that the documents that you were provided were the same as those that were tendered," he said. "You have been deliberating on, potentially, documents and material that is not evidence. That's a significant irregularity that I cannot cure."

As if that weren't enough, the court also discovered that the jury's mobile phones had not been confiscated when they retired to deliberate at 1:43 pm—a breach of standard procedure that was only caught an hour later. Judge Treviño described the events as "most unfortunate" and thanked the jurors for their service. The Crown prosecutor, Christian Peters, took responsibility for the irregular copies, though the damage was done. The case will return to Cairns District Court on September 28 for a trial review.

For those who follow capital and wealth in Oceania, this is more than a legal procedural hiccup. It underscores the delicate relationship between resource extraction and Indigenous land rights in Australia's north. Bauxite mining on traditional lands is a multi-million-dollar industry, and deals like the one Woosup allegedly struck are not uncommon. But they are fraught with complexity—who represents the community, how benefits are distributed, and whether trustees are held accountable. The mistrial doesn't answer those questions; it only postpones them.

What this case signals is that the courts are willing to hold the Crown to a high standard, even in cases involving Indigenous defendants. The judge's decision to declare a mistrial rather than proceed with a flawed evidence base is a reminder that justice in Oceania is not just about outcomes but about process. For the Ankumuthi community, the wait continues. For the wider region, it's a cautionary tale about the perils of rushing resource deals and the importance of transparency—both in boardrooms and in courtrooms.

As the September review date approaches, all eyes will be on Cairns. Will the Crown retry the case with cleaner evidence? Will Woosup seek a permanent stay? And what does this mean for other traditional owners navigating the murky waters of mining royalties? For now, the only certainty is that the jury's sharp-eyed observation has bought time—and perhaps a lesson—for all involved.