This victim-survivor is fighting for her safety after her perpetrator's release from jail
WARNING: This story contains descriptions of violence and injuries that readers may find distressing.
If you need help immediately call emergency services on triple-0
Now she is fighting to extend the ADVO after being told authorities could no longer help protect her from the man who put her in hospital.
She feels NSW Police and the courts have only let her down.
"It's disgusting … it's just not good enough," Ms Purcell said.
She was with her ex-husband for 15 years and the pair have four children together.
Ms Purcell claims the abuse began just one year into their relationship.
"It started with little things, like controlling what I could wear, where I could go, things like that … and then it progressed to the verbal abuse and then physical abuse, financial abuse," she said.
Ms Purcell said she finally decided to leave "when my children became the targets of his abuse".
Even after leaving, she said her ex-husband continued to control and abuse her.
One evening in March 2023, Ms Purcell drove to her ex-husband's family's home to pick up their youngest children.
"He turned all of the outside lights off as he came out of the house … he jumped in the car with me," she said.
According to court documents, he grabbed her phone off her before attacking her.
"I got out of the car and I started running down the street.
"He chased me and pushed me to the ground and was kicking me while I was on the ground."
Family members who witnessed the attack managed to pull him off her and Ms Purcell was able to escape.
"I didn't know the extent of my injuries until I was driving home and I could just feel warm blood just dripping from my head," she said.
"My kids were so distraught and terrified. I had to get my scalp stapled back together."
Hospital staff called police, who convinced her to make a statement.
"They told me that I would be protected," she said.
Her ex-husband was convicted over the assault and sentenced to nine months in jail with a non-parole period of just four months.
Ms Purcell claims police discouraged her from reporting any previous abuse against her and the children during their marriage because there was not enough evidence.
According to court documents, the man has "an extensive history of violent offending including domestic violence offences and personal violence offences".
He was released from jail in late 2023 and a two-year ADVO was in place to protect Ms Purcell, which prohibited him contacting or going near her.
But in mid-2024, Ms Purcell's ex-husband turned up at their son's football game, approaching their young children and standing just 1 metre away from her.
"So after the game I drove straight to the police station, let them know there had been a breach.
"They told me that it wasn't a breach because he had approached my [children] … but he hadn't spoken to me."
Outraged by the lack of support from police, Ms Purcell posted on social media about her case.
The post gained some traction after it was shared by her sister, media identity and writer Rosie Waterland.
Ms Purcell believes this is the only reason police changed their minds about charging her ex-husband for breaching the ADVO.
"I felt like it was only because of the social media post … they didn't care that I was unsafe and I was fearful, it was just that they looked bad," she said.
The man pleaded guilty to the breach but was spared more jail time and instead handed a community corrections order.
Now the ADVO is set to expire in July and Ms Purcell has been fighting to have it extended.
She was told police will not apply to the court on her behalf for an extension and she would instead have to make the application herself or hire a private lawyer.
"Now it's left me feeling really, really unsafe, my kids are scared," she said.
"I just think if I can't get an extension to an AVO with a person that has put me in hospital, was convicted and did jail time … breached the AVO, has numerous violent offences in the past, then who can get their AVO extended?"
After being contacted by ABC News, NSW Police have since contacted Ms Purcell and agreed to "support a new application" to extend the ADVO.
"Where appropriate, police will seek to extend a current AVO or make a new application if there has been a continuation of offending and/or behaviour or new incidents have occurred," a NSW Police spokesperson said in a statement.
"Given the circumstances of this matter, police would support a new application and the Bankstown Domestic and Family Violence Liaison Officer have contacted the person in need of protection to discuss the options," the statement said.
Ms Purcell said she fears for other victims who feel let down by police and the courts in their fight to stay safe.
Attorney-General Michael Daley said "the duration of an ADVO is determined by the court for as long as is necessary to ensure the safety and protection of the victim-survivor".
"The NSW Government is always looking at ways the law can be improved to better protect victim-survivors of domestic and family violence," the statement said.
According to domestic and family violence advocates, Ms Purcell's is not an isolated case.
"Some [police] officers do it fantastically well and have a really nuanced and innate understanding of domestic and family violence and the complexity that sits around that, but unfortunately that's not every officer," Domestic Violence NSW senior policy and advocacy officer Angie Gehle said.
Women's Legal Service NSW principal solicitor Pip Davis agreed cases like Ms Purcell's were "fairly common" and caused a "big access to justice issue".
"I can only imagine given those hurdles, there are people that just drop off because it's too hard and the consequence is that they continue with an AVO that isn't as protective as it should be or one that has ceased, and they're unprotected," she said.
Ms Gehle said there needed to be a "whole of systems" change to move away from "reactive policing" and focus on preventing domestic violence incidents.
"DV NSW has been advocating for several years for at least a 50 per cent increase to baseline funding for domestic and family violence specialist services across NSW and we're still waiting," she said.
Ms Gehle identified a pilot program being run in 10 NSW Police area commands placing a Women's Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Service (WDVCAS) worker inside the station.
She said the program was "working really well", but the government was yet to commit to extending its funding or expanding the program.
In a statement, Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Prevention Minister Jodie Harrison said she would not "pre-empt the NSW budget" due to be handed down next month.
"The NSW Government's $245.6 million budget for 2024/25 provided $24 million over four years to allow WDVCAS to deliver more intensive support to victim-survivors and help keep up with increasing demand for their services," the statement said.
"Preliminary feedback of the pilots was positive."
For Ms Purcell, she will continue to advocate for victim-survivors.
"I want things to change for women. I don't want this to just keep happening over and over again and more women just dying every week."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Daily Telegraph
Campaigners say tanker carrying Russian oil to dock in WA
Don't miss out on the headlines from Breaking News. Followed categories will be added to My News. A tanker purportedly full of Russian oil is set to dock in Western Australia within days, despite sanctions being in place against Moscow, Ukrainian and anti-Russian oil campaigners According to DFAT, the 'import, purchase or transport' of several goods is prohibited 'if they were exported from, or originated in, Russia'. That includes oil and petroleum products. The ship Seferis left Sika in India two weeks ago full of oil from the Jamnagar refinery, and it is due to arrive in the outer-Perth suburb of Kwinana by 4am Sunday. The Jamnagar refinery is notoriously fed by Russian crude oil, with as much as 55 per cent of their 2025 stock coming from the European pariah. This means the imported oil, which originated in Russia, could end up fuelling Australian vehicles on the road. Anti-Russian oil campaigners allege this ship is full of covertly imported Russian oil The alarm has been raised about a 'loophole' that allows Russian oil to be bought and sold in Australia, with local campaigners and parliamentarians calling for immediate action. Independent federal MP Andrew Wilkie raised the issue in Question Time on Thursday, asking the Defence Minister Richard Marles 'Why are the loopholes in our sanctions so big you can drive a tanker through them?' 'In July, two vessels reportedly docked in Botany Bay, with some 175,000 tonnes of petrol from the Jamnagar refinery in India, which uses up to 55 per cent Russian oil,' Mr Wilkie said. 'So these vessels effectively carry some 90,000 tonnes of Russian-sourced petrol, paid for by Australians, which will help fund Putin's war in Ukraine.' Independent MP Andrew Wilkie questioned the government about the 'loophole'. Picture: NewsWire / Martin Ollman Mr Marles largely avoided the question instead focusing on the sanctions that had been put in place. 'Sanctions, which is the topic of the question the member has asked, is an important part of what we are putting in place to stand with Ukraine,' Mr Marles said. 'And our government will stand with Ukraine. 'I know the Australian people will stand with the people of Ukraine for as long as it takes for Ukraine to resolve this conflict on its terms.' The loophole has recently been closed in the European Union, which has banned the importation of petroleum products refined form Russian crude oil in its 18th sanctions package against Russia. Defence Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles defended Australia's sanctions. NewsWire / Simon Bullard. The Australian Federation of Ukrainian Organisations has urged Australia to take similar action. 'This decisive action closes a glaring and deeply exploited loophole that has allowed Russian crude to enter global markets through refineries in third-party countries – undermining sanctions and fuelling the Kremlin's war machine. 'We urge the Australian government to take similar action and close this loophole in Australia's own sanctions regime. 'Since February 2023, Australia has imported an estimated $3.7bn worth of Russian crude, as a component in refined petroleum products from Indian refineries – sending around $1.8bn in tax revenue to the Kremlin. 'This flow of profits directly helps fund Russia's brutal war against Ukraine.' Originally published as Tanker carrying Russian oil set to dock in WA despite sanctions, campaigners say
ABC News
3 hours ago
- ABC News
Geraldine Doogue takes on the future of journalism in 2025 Andrew Olle lecture
This is an edited version of the 28th annual televised Andrew Olle Media Lecture delivered by ABC journalist Geraldine Doogue in Sydney on Friday, July 25. What a year to be delivering the lecture on the media of the future — or on any subject that requires some certainties or good prophecy — because nothing seems certain in our lives. For quite a while after the invitation to present the 2025 Andrew Olle Media Lecture arrived, I'd settled on those immortal WB Yeats lines as my title: "The centre cannot hold … The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity." Yes, those words certainly describe our times. But it just felt too defensive and grim, and I didn't want to leave you all like that. So I settled on "Not Drowning, Waving" as my title, which somehow seemed more apt, with a touch of irony. It is all a bit grim: no doubt about it for those of us who love the media, love working inside it, consuming it, believing it's vital to our way of life. Roy Greenslade, the UK media analyst, was pretty blunt back in 2016 when he said: "It is time to recognise that the whole UK newspaper industry is heading for a cliff fall, that tipping point when there is no hope of a reversal of fortune." The Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at the University of Oxford has been forensically examining this. Prospect magazine headlined their coverage of the institute's latest report with: "Journalism is in freefall — and the public doesn't care". That rider has stayed with me. "The public doesn't miss yesterday's news, but journalists miss the public," writes the article's author, Rasmus Kleis Nielsen. As he explains, current trends suggest at best a continued retreat, as the press serves fewer people. It may ultimately end up with a role akin to contemporary art or classical music: highly valued by a privileged few, regarded with indifference by the many. That's our existential crisis, though the fine print of the Reuters research does indicate that the public, in theory, is still with us. It's just that other options loom as better. An article by 360 Info, an outlet that bills itself as "Research Reuters", argues that media players are involved in a war of attention, competing against outlets whose stock-in-trade is harnessing rage and anger. Of course, it is also true that media consumers have become our competitors by creating their own bespoke news outlets — a great irony. "Scare stories about the problems associated with digital media will not bring people back to news," Nielsen writes. "A wiser course of action might be to impress people, rather than try to depress them. "The people best positioned to forge a different path are those journalists and publishers who accept that the next step is to meet people where they are. The aim should not be to take journalism backwards, but to create something new." But what would that look and sound like? Christopher Clark, a professor of modern history at Cambridge University, recently wrote an essay called "The End of Modernity". "A crisis is unfolding before our eyes — and also in our heads," its subtitle read. Before the modern age, people obtained information "from individuals, by word of mouth". With the advent of the modern media industry, "rumour-mongers gave way to trained journalists". The media of the modern era, he writes, "created its own mythology, a story we could tell ourselves, a means of situating ourselves in time, of understanding where we came from and where we were heading". But this modern system, Professor Clark says, is disintegrating before our eyes. "The multi-faceted nature of contemporary politics, the present of turmoil and change without a clear sense of direction, is causing enormous uncertainty," he writes. "It helps explain why we are so easily unsettled by the agitations of the present and why we find it so difficult to plot our course." Maybe, he wonders, there's a general reversal taking place. The gossip-mongers of the internet have once again seized the initiative, leading to the fragmentation of knowledge and opinions. "It has never been so difficult to think calmly," Professor Clark writes. And yet, how necessary it is. Perhaps our journalistic egos have become wrapped up in hitting the headlines ourselves. Who among us can honestly say we were impervious to the Woodward-Bernstein achievements around Watergate? Two young bloods, nobly jousting with the deeply flawed Richard Nixon and his establishment and bringing him down. Journalistic nobility, then super-stardom! We media workers will always have a duty to warn citizens of danger and incompetence, alert them to what's not solved, why today might be different from yesterday: the classic role of the fourth estate. However, I do wonder whether the breadth of the community and its range of tastes and interests are sufficiently canvassed, and whether we're more energised by displaying incompetence rather than searching for competence. The latter could be a real service, though it may not yield that fabulous rush of revelation and schadenfreude. I have long believed that reporting achievements makes for a very good first paragraph. It might in fact persuade doubters that we really are interested in the wider community, not just overturning governments or winning a scalp. Mathias Döpfner, head of German media group Alex Springer, believes one of the reasons people are losing trust in the media is because many confuse "journalism for activism". "More and more young people want to become journalists because they want to improve the world," he told The Sunday Times. "I think that's a dangerous misunderstanding of journalism." In this communitarian model I'm reflecting on, I see a renewal of the covenant between the public and the journalist, of clearly making the effort to be fair and accurate. We're not there to tell people about the comfortable status quo. To some extent, we are there to bother them, to introduce some alert and alarm. And no, we can't guarantee we'll be fully objective, but we can observably try, and be seen to be doing so or judged for not. The public can draw its own conclusions. Intellectual openness is, for me, the glittering prize. That's what I look for in colleagues. And I suspect the public does too. This all dovetails with other, bigger needs within the culture. I would argue that we might well have reached peak-individualism, a sociological urge that manifests in all those solitary searches on the net for some bliss — maybe sometimes found. And yet so many of them are seeking ways to avoid loneliness, separateness or alienation. I don't think we thrive on individualism. We're all looking for green shoots: that's the truth of it. After all, the BBC had to invent all those looks and props and sounds around news presentation, which we simply take for granted now. Moving past individual gossip to something more formal involved massive creativity. We clearly need it again. And to my mind, we need to lionise creativity and service beyond individual achievement to routinely engage lots more people, more regularly. Otherwise, we simply won't have an industry at scale. It won't be prosperous enough to offer careers or cadetships to young people. All sorts of people will end up as artists working in garrets, rationing their time and money, occasionally striking it rich, mostly doing something else. That's no answer. I haven't talked about AI, or the innards of dis- or misinformation. I can't even give you specific new models of this communitarian emphasis I'm discussing. I wish I could. But if we're passive, we might lose this gem of ours, this buoy of modernity. We might lose this industry that I adored from day one, back in 1972, when I wandered up the corridor of Newspaper House at 125 St Georges Terrace, Perth, on a hot January day and said, "Is there a way in, I wonder?" Thank goodness they said yes.
West Australian
5 hours ago
- West Australian
Australia, UK solidify AUKUS deal as Pentagon review raised at high-level Australia-UK talks in Sydney
Despite fears the Trump administration could abandon AUKUS, Australia and the UK have pressed ahead, preparing to sign a 50-year agreement they hope will cement the submarine pact. Defence Minister Richard Marles, Foreign Minister Penny Wong, and their UK counterparts John Healey and David Lammy unveiled the new treaty during the annual AUSMIN meeting in Sydney. The Pentagon's review of the trilateral submarine plan had been raised during the high-level talks on Friday, Mr Marles said. Both defence ministers sought to ease concerns, welcoming the still-ongoing review, with Mr Marles cushioning it as 'the most natural thing in the world' for a new government to reassess such a major deal. 'We've welcomed the review, which is being undertaken by the Trump administration. We spoke today about how both of us — both countries — can contribute to the review,' he said. 'When we came to Government back in 2022, we undertook the Defence Strategic Review. When the UK Government came to power, they, in turn, undertook a review. This is a very, very natural step.' Australia had spearheaded the AUKUS pact in 2021 under then-Prime Minister Scott Morrison, after recognising the country needed to rapidly upgrade its defence capabilities. Labor then agreed to continue it. But Mr Trump's return to the White House in January has sparked new doubts over the pricey pact, as Washington slaps controversial tariffs on multiple countries, including close allies UK and Australia. Australia has also been pressured to increase defence spending in line with the NATO agreement for governments to raise their expenditure to 5 per cent of their country's GDP by 2034. While Australia currently spends about two per cent of its GDP on defence — on track to rise slightly above 2.3 per cent by the end of the decade — Washington has signalled that may not be enough. The UK's increase to 2.5 per cent of GDP by the end of the decade, equivalent to an extra £75 billion, was announced at last month's NATO summit and welcomed by US officials. The Coalition welcomed the UK-Australia treaty but called for defence spending to be increased, urging the Albanese Government to show greater commitment to the US. 'The Albanese Government must urgently demonstrate the same clarity and commitment with the United States,' a joint statement by shadow ministers Michaelia Cash and Angus Taylor said: 'Particularly in light of the Pentagon review, to reassure our partners that Australia can deliver on its contributions and, in turn, secure continued US backing for the agreement. 'Australia must do what we can to ensure AUKUS' longevity and success.' 'At a time of rising global instability, sustained underfunding risks weakening Australia's deterrence and damaging trust in our alliances,' they said. 'The Government must match its rhetoric with investment, and we stand ready to support a bipartisan pathway to deliver the capabilities our nation needs.' Australian Strategic Policy Institute senior analyst Euan Graham said it could be contributing to current alliance tensions. The pressure comes ahead of summit season, where the Prime Minister Anthony Albanese hopes to land his first meeting with Donald Trump. The Prime Minister has dodged questions on when he'll meet the US President after their planned G7 meeting fell through, with Opposition Leader Sussan Ley attacking the lack of progress during the first sitting of the new Parliament this week. Dr Graham said while the UK could support long-term ambitions, Australia still faced a near-term capability gap it would need the US to fill. He said Australia still had an interim reliance on US-made Virginia-class submarines — set to be acquired in the early 2030s, while waiting for the AUKUS subs to be delivered in the 2040s. 'It doesn't solve the issue of the gap between now and when those submarines start being delivered,' he said. 'That's where the American Virginia class gap-filling really comes into play.' But he reiterated that the AUKUS arrangement was a three-nation pact and can be reinforced by each side, saying if confidence dips in one party, strengthening ties with the others can help balance it out. 'This is a clear commitment from the UK to honour its side of the bargain, and I think hopefully that should steady some of the nervousness around Washington's commitment levels,' he said. Greens Senator David Shoebridge blasted the new treaty, calling it a backward step that enriches foreign arms companies and damages regional ties. 'Australia needs to look to our region, not tie our future to a dying empire a world away. All this will do is line the pockets of foreign arms companies and alienate our neighbours,' Senator Shoebridge said. But Dr Graham said Australia must pay to play, and it was necessary to offshore work because Australia lacks the technology to produce the subs on its own. 'If Australia wants capability, it has to buy it. It can't produce it itself,' he said. 'As part of that, Australia is committed to directly investing in the defence industrial base of both countries. 'That's money that's going to leave Australia and go into other countries, but those other countries are providing a service. It's like anything else.' Mr Marles expressed the importance of Australia's 'oldest relationship' with Britain amid global uncertainty and a 'great power contest' in the region. UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy labelled the AUSMIN talks as ' focused and constructive' and the pact a 'landmark treaty' which was necessary in a 'turbulent world'. 'It's clear that the UK-Australia relationship is an anchor in what is a very volatile world, providing stability in troubled waters and a relationship that holds steady,' he said. 'Whichever way the geopolitical winds are blowing . . . I think we're sending a clear signal, a signal of the UK's commitment to this region of the world.' He said the UK was determined to keep the Indo-Pacific 'free and open'. Senator Wong said the relationship was rooted in shared values and interests, but it was important to 'modernise' the partnership to meet current global challenges. 'We all know we face the most challenging, strategic circumstances since World War II. More conflict, more contest, a multilateral system under strain,' Senator Wong said. 'And against that backdrop, the partnership between our nations matters even more. And we are determined to work together to modernise our partnership, to take the world as it is, but to work together to shape it for the better. 'We've had an excellent set of discussions today.' Both parties will travel to Mr Marles' Geelong electorate tomorrow, where the agreement is expected to be officially signed. Mr Marles and Ms Wong will also join their UK counterparts in Darwin on Sunday for the visit of the UK Carrier Strike Group, the first such deployment to Australia since 1997, taking place during Exercise Talisman Sabre 2025.
