Page:R v McBride (No 4).pdf/36

 So I was glad that I kept them in some ways, even though I could see that it was - I was possibly facing prison, because I felt - as I said, I felt that they, um, that they would vindicate me.

176․ At page 107, when asked about the obligations of a person who holds a Positive Vetting top secret clearance, he said:

177․ Counsel submitted that the crimes to which Mr McBride referred in his interview with police were those which were recorded in the Agreed Statement of Facts as having been disclosed to the AFP in May 2014, namely:


 * (a) conspiracy to pervert the course of justice;


 * (b) misuse of Commonwealth resources;


 * (c) interference with a legal officer performing their duties;


 * (d) failure to comply with a general order; and


 * (e) improperly prejudicing ADF members' careers.

178․ No particulars were provided of any such offences. The AFP reached the conclusion that, based upon the information that Mr McBride had provided, no criminal offence was disclosed. That conclusion on the part of the AFP has not been shown to be wrong.

179․ I do not accept that the passages in the interviews with police demonstrate, on the balance of probabilities, that Mr McBride genuinely believed that he was not committing a crime. The statements do not reflect any coherent argument as to how his conduct may have been rendered lawful. They involve vague and unparticularised claims of criminal activity. They involve complaints of lies and "window dressing" by the senior leadership of the ADF. His statements also involve vague and unparticularised claims of a legal entitlement to breach the law in order to expose such (vague and unparticularised) criminal activity. This may be seen from other passages in his interview with police.

180․ At page 66 of the Crown Tender Bundle, he said: