REPRESENTATION:

Counsel Assisting: Ms Julie Wilson

Introduction...................................................................................................1

The Coroner’s jurisdiction.............................................................................1

The background and basis of the jurisdiction............................................1

The scope of the Coroner’s inquiry and findings.......................................1

The admissibility of evidence and the standard of proof...........................2

The investigation..........................................................................................3

The search................................................................................................3

Further Investigations...............................................................................5

The first inquest........................................................................................5

Since the Inquest......................................................................................6

The reopening of the inquest........................................................................6

The evidence................................................................................................6

Accounts of Mrs Schmidt by friends and family........................................6

Possible Sightings....................................................................................8

Mr and Mrs Schmidt’s relationship............................................................9

Persons of interest..................................................................................10

Medical evidence....................................................................................10

Findings required by s43(2)........................................................................10

Cause and circumstances of the disappearance....................................11

Whether Mrs Schmidt is alive or dead....................................................11

The Coroners Act 1958 provides in s43(1) that after considering all of the evidence given before a coroner at an inquest the coroner shall give his or her findings in open court. What follows are my findings in the inquest held into the disappearance of Shirley Schmidt. Copies will be provided to her family and posted on the web-site of the Office of the State Coroner.

On 15 December 1985 Shirley Schmidt set off on her usual morning walk from a holiday house she shared with her husband Raymond. Mrs Schmidt did not return from her walk and, despite an extensive search and subsequent investigations, has never been found.

Before turning to the evidence, I will say something about the nature of the coronial jurisdiction.

In this case an inquest was held into Mrs Schmidt’s disappearance on various dates between 1 December 1987 and 17 August 1989 when Coroner I. A. Fisher delivered findings. Essentially those findings were that there was no evidence available to the Coroner that would allow a finding that Mrs Schmidt was deceased.

In 2004 the Missing Person Unit of the Queensland Police Service (QPS) conducted a review of Mrs Schmidt’s file. As a result of that review, which included further unfruitful investigations, the matter was referred to the Office of the State Coroner. I requested that the Attorney-General direct that the inquest be reopened pursuant to s47 of the Act and such direction was issued.

Pursuant to s10 of the Act, a coroner has jurisdiction to inquire into the cause and the circumstances of a missing person’s disappearance and into all such matters that will be likely to reveal whether the missing person is alive or dead.

The Act, in s24(4), provides that where an inquiry concerns a missing person the finding shall set forth –

1. the cause and circumstances of the disappearance of the missing person; and
2. whether such missing person is alive or dead; and
3. if such missing person is alive or likely to be alive – the whereabouts of the missing person at the time of the inquiry.

Proceedings in a coroner’s court are not bound by the rules of evidence because s34 of the Act provides that "the coroner may admit any evidence the coroner thinks fit" provided the coroner considers it necessary to establish any of the matters within the scope of the inquest.

In the case of a missing person a coroner must find if possible, whether, on the balance of probabilities the person is alive or dead. The question therefore is whether it is more probable than not that Mrs Schmidt is deceased.

clear that includes being given an opportunity to make submissions against findings that might be damaging to the reputation of any individual or organisation. The possibility of adverse findings being made in this case does not arise on the evidence.

I turn now to a description of the investigation into the disappearance.

Senior Constable Cole of the Paluma Police, as he then was, initiated an extensive search of the local area on the morning of Mrs Schmidt’s disappearance. He was alerted to the disappearance by Mrs Schmidt’s husband Raymond, who had become concerned when his wife did not return from her morning walk. Mr Schmidt reported the disappearance to police at about 10.40am on 15 December 1985.

The search commenced with the officer and Mr Schmidt driving what was thought to be Mrs Schmidt’s usual walking route, checking at the couple’s holiday residence and questioning local residents. Following that Acting Inspector Angus of the Townsville Police Station was called to assist arranging a more comprehensive search of the area.

By the afternoon a group of 6 police officers and about 20 volunteers combed the local area. That search was called off at 6.00pm.

On 16 December 1985 a full scale search of the Paluma region was commenced employing the services of police, SES personnel, the National Safety Council helicopter, Salvation Army and Townsville Catering staff, as well as volunteers. Members of the defence force on exercise in the local area also assisted in the search.

That search covered the Paluma township and an area surrounding the walking route on Mt Spec-Ewan Road from Windy Corner to the bitumen end of that road and an area off the road extending for approximately 20 metres.

Information regarding a possible sighting of Mrs Schmidt was received at lunch time on Monday, 16 December. Two holiday-makers, Mr Carl Barlow and Ms Tanya Cooper reported that they saw a woman they thought fitted the description of Mrs Schmidt at the Paluma Dam Picnic area at about 12.30pm on Sunday, 15 December. They said she was with a man and their manner led them to assume they were a couple. Mr Barlow and Ms Cooper were shown a photograph of Mrs Schmidt and they confirmed their opinion that she was the woman they saw. It is unclear if the couple were ever shown a photograph of Mr Schmidt and it is unfortunate they were not shown a photoboard rather than a single photograph of Mrs Schmidt.

On the basis of that possible sighting, the search was reoriented towards the Paluma Dam, including the dam, surrounding bushland and tracks. Extensive searching on foot, by four wheel drive vehicle, by boat on the damn and helicopter over the area was fruitless.

The further significance of that possible sighting was that Mr Schmidt told police that his marriage to Mrs Schmidt was not without problems. They had been seeing a counsellor, Mr Bradley Levingstone, who last saw the couple on 12 December 1985. He was interviewed during the course of the investigation as was another counsellor, Mrs Bell Addison who was a close friend of Mrs Schmidt’s.

The search of that route revealed the road to be bound on both sides by dense rainforest with numerous cuttings and embankments on either side of the road. There are a number of places along the road where the forest drops steeply off the road. The shoulder is narrow and covered with thick grass. The road was frequented by tourists on account of it being the only access to the Hidden Valley/Ewan area and to the dirt road leading to the dam. Clifford Firth, a Paluma local resident observed in his statement to police that in certain cloud/mist condition vehicles can approach without one being able to hear them, or know the direction of travel. There was evidence from a local resident Cameron McKenzie that there was mist on the morning of the disappearance.

A full line search of the area surrounding the walking route was undertaken to the point of impenetrable dense forest and difficult creek crossings. It also covered a smaller dam nearby, the town’s water supply, various trails, old mine sites and caves.

On Wednesday 18 December the search was scaled down but included a re-check of the Paluma dam by boat.

The investigating officer describes the search as particularly difficult given the humidity, difficult terrain and presence of ticks, snakes and leeches. Senior Constable Cole quite appropriately praises the efforts of all those involved.

A number of people reported foul smells at the rubbish dump and other locations in the area. Those reports were followed up and were ultimately fruitless.

In addition, a number of witnesses were interviewed during the course of the investigation and information gathered by the police was appropriately pursued. A summary of the investigative steps taken is found in the police ‘running sheet’ which is contributed to by various officers. It details a thorough investigation.

As already mentioned an inquiry was held into the cause and circumstances of Mrs Schmidt’s disappearance commencing on 1 December 1987. On that day Coroner M. K. Davies heard evidence from a number of witnesses, namely –

1) Senior Constable Cole (investigating officer)

2) Carl Keith Barlow

3) Cameron McKenzie

4) Linda May Venn

5) William James Venn

During the course of the inquest information came to hand regarding a timber cutters ‘break-up’ party that had been held at Ingham the night before Mrs Schmidt’s disappearance. A follow-up party was held the following day at Hidden Valley and the party-goers would have driven the route Mrs Schmidt is thought to have walked. A theory developed that Mrs Schmidt may have been hit by a car while walking. Further investigations were undertaken regarding that information. There is some controversy in the records regarding missing material relating to those inquiries. It seems that a Detective Gray attended to the inquiries as part of the initial investigation but was later suspended from duty. In the event, original interview notes were not available to investigating police. Despite that, no evidence of involvement of the timber cutters was revealed.

Proceedings were adjourned a number of times in an effort to have Ms Cooper give evidence. As mentioned she was the woman who reported seeing some near the dam. Unfortunately she could not be located. Detective Gray gave evidence before Mr Nolan at the Coroners Court at Southport on 19 May 1989. At that time he was suspended from duty. He played a part in the investigation and the running sheet previously mentioned was tendered through him.

The inquest closed with finding being delivered by Mr Fisher at the Townsville Coroner’s Court on 17 August 1989.

I have previously mentioned that the Missing Persons Unit conducted a review of Mrs Schmidt’s files in late 2004. Officers conducted electronic checks of the following databases which one would expect to reveal evidence that Mrs Schmidt was alive if in fact she was –

1. QPS indices
2. Centrelink
3. Health Insurance Commission
4. Pharmaceutical Benefit Scheme

No such evidence was revealed by those investigations.

Finally, staff of this office obtained a statutory declaration from Judith Malpas (one of Mrs Schmidt’s daughters) to the effect that neither she, nor any other family member, have had any contact with their mother since prior to the disappearance.

I am satisfied that the investigation was thorough and competently carried out.

The inquest was re-opened on 5 December 2007. Ms Julie Wilson was appointed Counsel Assisting and another of Mrs Schmidt’s daughters, Leah James, was present in court. Submissions were made by Ms Wilson based on the investigation materials already gathered. Those materials did not disclose any lines of inquiry that could be usefully pursued at this stage. Accordingly no witnesses were called to give evidence. Ms James indicated to the court that the family accepted that no further productive investigation could now be undertaken.

Some of the evidence revealed during the course of the search has been mentioned above. I turn now to the evidence in some more detail. I can not, of course, even summarise all of the information contained in the exhibits but I consider it appropriate to record in these reasons the findings of fact on which I have based my decisions concerning the particulars of the disappearance.

Shirley Schmidt was born on 4 November 1929. She was married to Raymond Schmidt who is now deceased. She had four children – Leah, Judith, Rosemary and Frederick who is now deceased.

The witnesses interviewed gave some insight into Mrs Schmidt’s life and character immediately prior to her disappearance. That evidence is inconsistent with a person who might stage a disappearance and create a false identity.

Mrs Linda Venn was a friend of Mrs Schmidt’s and had known her since 1982. Mrs Venn and Mrs Schmidt shared an interest in local history and were

Mr William Venn knew Mr and Mrs Schmidt through his wife. He and Mrs Venn had visited the Schmidt couple at their homes in Townsville and Paluma. He had observed the family dynamics to be happy and normal. He had seen Mr and Mrs Schmidt disagree but observed them to be respectful of their differences. Mrs Schmidt expressed great interest for her children and grandchildren.

Two of Mrs Schmidt’s daughters, Judith Malpas and Leah James were interviewed by police on 17 January 1986. Mrs Malpas last saw her parents on Saturday 14 December 1985 and did not notice anything unusual. Likewise, Mrs James did not notice anything out of the ordinary when she saw them on 11 December 1985.

Raymond Schmidt was interviewed by police on the day of his wife’s disappearance and several times thereafter. He gave the following account of the 24 hour period leading up to Mrs Schmidt’s disappearance –

1. Mr Schmidt went shopping while Mrs Schmidt stayed at home. The house cleaner was also at the house.
2. Mr and Mrs Schmidt went to visit Ruth Bradshaw
3. At 2pm the couple attended the Good Shepherd Hospice where Mrs Schmidt sang with the Townsville Chamber choir

1. Mr Schmidt heard his wife shower and leave the house
2. He rose at about 7am and went to mow the lawn
3. By 8.30am Mr Schmidt was concerned about his wife’s whereabouts – since she had been late from her walk on a previous occasion he decided to wait for a while
4. Mr Schmidt prepared breakfast for his grandson and his friend and following that initiated his own search for Mrs Schmidt
5. He attended the police station at 10.40am to report his wife missing

Mrs Schmidt was, by all accounts a loving mother and grandmother (to 13 grandchildren at the time). At the time of her disappearance her daughter Leah was expecting a child.

She was a piano teacher with over 50 students. She had a passion for music which was well known. She had recently completed a degree in social sciences and had applied for a counselling position at the university. Apparently she had been short-listed and was very much looking forward to her new career.

The evidence describes a woman who was positive about life and who was making plans for the future at the time of her disappearance.

As already indicated police obtained information from Mr Barlow and Ms Cooper to the effect that they had seen a woman fitting Mrs Schmidt description at about 12.30 pm on the day of the disappearance at the Paluma Dam.

Ms Cooper described the woman she saw as being in her 50’s and in company with a male person. Ms Cooper said that the woman did not appear to be distressed or concerned and the pair appeared to be a couple. Mr Barlow, unlike Ms Cooper, did not see the woman with a man and neither could say if the woman was wearing spectacles (which Mrs Schmidt wore).

Mr Barlow thought the woman was wearing a purple dress (possibly purple and white), and Ms Cooper recalled the woman wearing a purple frock. At the

inquest in 1987, Mr Barlow gave evidence that the dress the woman was wearing was a light orange or light brown.

Police interviewed Mr Barlow and Ms Cooper a number of times and as mentioned and Mr Barlow gave evidence at the inquest. The sightings were discounted on account of the unlikelihood of Mrs Schmidt walking the distance to the dam and the further unlikelihood of her taking up with another man (on the basis of statements from friends). There were also inconsistencies in the descriptions given.

In respect of the possible sightings of Mrs Schmidt with a man in the vicinity of the damn, the evidence of Mr John and Mrs Frances Morland is significant. They owned a weekender in Paluma and particularly remembered driving to and from the Paluma Dam on 15 December. Between 7.15 and 8.30 am, the Morlands drove the route Mrs Schmidt is thought to have walked and they did not see Mrs Schmidt whom they knew. That evidence, together with the evidence of Mr Barlow indicates that the dam was populated by a number of people on the morning of Mrs Schmidt’s disappearance and is unlikely to be a place where Mrs Schmidt would go with a secret companion.

On 19 December 1985, Leone Dewis told police she saw a woman walking towards Paluma at about 9.50 am on 15 December. The woman was wearing a floral dress and was medium build (Mrs Schmidt was a large build). Ms Dewis later saw the woman walking past Ivy Cottage (the home of her friends, Mr and Mrs Venn) which is past Mrs Schmidt’s home.

The marriage logically came under scrutiny on account of the evidence suggesting Mrs Schmidt might have been seen with another man at the dam, in addition to evidence that the marriage was strained. Two marriage counsellors were interviewed by police.

Mrs Addison was interviewed by police on 16 December 1985. She was a close friend of Mr Schmidt and although she was aware that there were problems in the relationship she noted that Mrs Schmidt doted on her grandchildren and was not interested in other men. Mrs Addison’s evidence was that said she had spoken deeply with Mrs Schmidt in the past and in her opinion Mrs Schmidt was not suicidal nor the type of person to run away with another man.

Leah James told Counsel Assisting that while her parents had issues at the time of the disappearance, those were no more serious than those which face all married couples from time to time. Mrs James was 30 years old at the time and therefore, in my view, able to make that observation reliably.

I am satisfied that there is no evidence that the marriage was in such a state that would provoke Mrs Schmidt to leave it in the manner of her disappearance.

A person named Rodney Jones came under suspicion by police on account of his apparently unusual involvement in the search for Mrs Schmidt. He was interviewed by police and gave an account of his whereabouts at the time of Mrs Schmidt’s disappearance. That account was verified by Mr Jones’ parents who were also interviewed by police.

Further, Mrs Schmidt’s relatives suggested that police interview Laurie Colwell who was a boarder with the Schmidt’s while he was at university. There was an argument between him and the Schmidt’s prior to the boarding arrangement being terminated. They also asked that Duggan Dugai be investigated. He was a resident at Mount-Spec near Paluma and had made a nuisance of himself causing an argument with the Schmidt’s. Police attempts to locate those two people failed. There is no evidence to suggest that either of those men had a hand in the disappearance.

Evidence regarding Mrs Schmidt’s mental and physical health is largely anecdotal and was provided by some friends and family.

I accept that evidence. It is noteworthy, however, that the MPU checks of the Health Insurance Commission and Pharmaceutical Benefit Scheme databases did not reveal any record of Mrs Schmidt having sought medical attention or medication since her disappearance.

I am required to find, so far as has been proved, the cause and circumstances of Mrs Schmidt’s disappearance, whether she is alive or dead and if alive or likely to be alive – the whereabouts of Mrs Schmidt at the time of the inquiry.

On account of my findings in respect of the second question, it is not necessary to address Mrs Schmidt’s whereabouts now.

As a result of considering all of the material contained in the exhibits and the evidence given by the witnesses, I am able to make the following findings.

The evidence set out above in these findings describes the circumstances surrounding Mrs Schmidt’s disappearance. Sadly, the cause of her disappearance remains a mystery. Theories developed during the course of the investigation relating to the involvement of others, or a marriage breakdown that led to desertion, but there is no reliable evidence to support any of them. Accordingly, I find that Mrs Schmidt disappeared while taking her regular morning walk at Paluma on 15 December 1985, I regret that I am unable to make any findings as to the cause of her disappearance.

I find that she has made no contact with persons whom she would reasonably be expected to contact were she alive. Nor is there any other evidence indicating that since 15 December 1985 Mrs Schmidt is alive. I am therefore of the view that the evidence is sufficient to prove that Shirley Schmidt is deceased.

I find she died on or about 15 December 1985 in the vicinity of Paluma in North Queensland. I am unable to ascertain the cause of her death.

I close the inquest.

Michael Barnes

State Coroner

Brisbane

17 January 2008