Multiple government agencies failed to intervene in the neglect of two teenagers with autism found locked in their bedroom, even after child safety officers saw one of the brothers gnawing on a raw dog bone.
This story contains content that readers may find distressing.
Brothers Kaleb and Jonathan*, then 19 and 17, were found in May 2020, naked and in soiled nappies, after their father was discovered dead from a terminal illness at their home in Brisbane's northern suburbs.
In Brisbane, the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation of People with Disability heard government agencies had extensive involvement with the family, in one case of up to 20 years.
In February 2019, Kaleb*, then 18, was seen by child safety officers eating a dog's bone shortly after the dog was chewing it.
The inquiry heard their school often bathed the boys and gave them fresh clothes, that they were observed smelling of faeces, and several times had needed haircuts because their hair smelled so strongly of urine it could not be washed out.
Jonathan was also observed by teachers to be "smelling of a strong dog odour", and "passing rocks and pebbles" in bowel movements.
Yet in their years at the school, only one student protection report was ever made.
Child safety failings
On Wednesday, the inquiry heard child safety officers had made multiple visits to the home.
Meegan Crawford, a witness for the Department of Children, Youth Justice and Multicultural Affairs who reviewed the files, told the inquiry the officers had not attempted to remove the boys after the 2019 visit where they had seen Kaleb eating a bone.
The department had, Senior Council Assisting Kate Eastman said, "decided it was not legally mandated to intervene and that there needed to be ongoing discussions with the NDIS".
Asked if the department had followed up to see if Kaleb had an NDIS provider, Dr Crawford said she would need to take the question on notice.
Asked what would need to have happened for the boys to be taken from the house, she said officers would have needed to go before a magistrate, but in this case she believed the magistrate would have told them to work with the father rather than remove them.
Dr Crawford accepted she was "speculating" as the case had never been brought to a magistrate.
She also said there had been "rigorous assessments" of the father.
"I could see that there were periods of time where we intervened actively with him, where we referred to other services and where we did see improvements for the family over time," she said.
Dr Crawford said the department had intervened "through a number of different mechanisms" including a Child Protection Order, and an Intervention with parental agreement, which allows child safety officers to work with the family while the children stay at home.
According to the Queensland government website, these agreements are only used when "parents are able and willing to work with our department to meet [the child's] needs".
She said told the inquiry there were "a couple of those".
Father 'doing his absolute best'
The inquiry also heard a child safety officer had written the boys' father loved his children and was "doing his absolute best".
Ms Eastman asked Dr Crawford if she agreed that the safety officer's report about the father's love "encapsulated in this one sentence is really the essence of why ... Child Safety let both Kaleb and Jonathan down".
She went on: "That is because throughout the engagement with this family, excuses continued to be made because [the father] was dealing with kids with a disability, doing his absolute best and this misconceived view that he loved his children."
Dr Crawford replied: "We opened intervention and we made referrals ... what I see is the active intervention that occurred with this family".
She said there were "attempts to prevent the abuse by supporting the father", but disagreed with their being a pattern of violence.
The inquiry had also heard the father had been seen kicking and slapping the boys at a campground, and police had intervened but found "there was no harm to the children".
When asked if the department "could have done more" to protect the boys, Dr Crawford agreed.
'Excuse after excuse'
Commissioner John Ryan said Dr Crawford's statement showed "no evidence" of reflection, and she appeared "very defensive".
"There seems to be excuse after excuse, 'the kids were non-verbal', 'we didn't see that', 'there was no one critical incident'," he said.
"Other observations made by your staff was that there was one room with an inflatable mattress and several piles of faeces, one mattress outside the home with brown wet stains.
"And yet, later on, people go back to the office, and they make a conclusion that there's no evidence of harm."
Minister for Children, Youth Justice and Multicultural Affairs Leanne Linard said she found this week's evidence disturbing.
"The Commission is doing its job to identify areas where our response can improve and we will examine any recommendations made," she said.
"Child safety is an area where we can never rest.
"We are continually looking at ways to improve our efforts to protect young people."
'Passing rocks'
The boys were bathed and provided clean clothes every day they came to school, according to a statement from Assistant Director General of the Department of Education Hayley Stevenson, who also gave evidence.
Teachers had requested haircuts for the boys because of a smell of urine in their hair which washing could not remove, but this had not been reported to the then-Department of Child Services, the inquiry heard.
Asked by counsel assisting Gillian Mahoney if she accepted the school knew about the boys' neglect, Ms Stevenson said "yes".
The inquiry heard an audit of the case found a child protection order should have been made by the school about a lump on Kaleb's head, and another should have been made about concerns of neglect in 2018.
She confirmed in all their years at the school, only one student protection report had been lodged, in 2010 — a decade before the boys were found.
Ms Mahoney asked: "Almost their entire educational life at that school for both Kaleb and Jonathan, one report. That's a failing, isn't it?"
Ms Stevenson replied: "In looking at where this situation ended, and looking back, yes."
Ms Mahoney asked Ms Stevenson if she accepted the support offered by the school in washing and clothing the boys had "the effect of enabling [the father] in his sub-standard level of care for the children.
She replied "yes".
Police visits
The commission also heard there were several occasions where police could have intervened.
In 2010, officers visited the boys' home after a report from the school that they often arrived hungry, and their bowel movements regularly contained foam rubber from a lounge or mattress.
The boys were removed from their father's care, but returned a week later.
In 2015, the police were again at the home, where they noted doorhandles had been removed from the boys' bedroom so they were unable to get out of it.
"The father stated that the doorhandle had fallen off, but police believe it had been removed intentionally to prevent the children from getting out," Ms Eastman read from the police report.
"The kitchen was filthy, with open tins of food and dirty dishes, but it appears that the basics are being provided by the children."
But police decided there was insufficient evidence a crime had been committed.
A week later police were called out to a campsite where the father had been assaulting the boys.
A Crimestoppers report said the boys were left unsupervised and washed once a day without soap.
"The father fed the boys in the dark at night, and on two occasions the youngest boy hid behind someone at the campground, but the father grabbed him and on one occasion kicked him very hard up the backside," Ms Eastman read from the report.
"On the last night the informant there said they could hear the father laying into one of them.
"One of the boys was making a noise in a tent, so the father went into the tent and started smacking him loudly."
Police came to the campground three days after the complaint was made, but only spoke to the father, before deciding there was no evidence of criminal offence.
QPS Detective Superintendent Denzil Clark told the commission officers may have decided it was parental discipline.
"You are not for one second suggesting this is domestic discipline, are you, Detective Superintendent?" Ms Eastman asked.
"What I said was you have to consider it, but I concede it could be an assault," Det Supt. Clark said.
*Not their real names
