Forensic red flags, systemic failures, and the evidence that was never tested

In Part Two of our examination into the fatal police shooting of Luke Gilbert, we move beyond headlines and into the forensic and procedural foundations of the case and what happens when those foundations are missing.

Despite a coronial finding being handed down, critical evidence in Luke’s death was never independently tested, never fully disclosed, and in some instances, appears to have been altered or withheld entirely. From missing and edited CCTV footage, unresolved ballistic inconsistencies, and misclassified weapons, to allegations of conflicts of interest, unlawful autopsy consent, and failures by oversight bodies, this episode methodically examines the red flags that undermine confidence in the official findings.

This is not an episode driven by outrage or speculation. It is driven by evidence, forensic standards, and the legal obligations that apply when police use lethal force. Drawing directly from the coronial record, the concerns raised by Luke’s family, and accepted forensic and investigative principles, this episode asks one central question: can justice exist where transparency does not?

Luke’s case is not just about one man or one night; it is about the systems meant to protect truth and what happens when they fail.

Correction & Clarification

I want to acknowledge and correct an error made at the end of the most recent episode.

When responding to a listener question about Constable Bryce Collins, I incorrectly stated that he was present at the shooting. That was an error.

Constable Collins was not present at the shooting. As mentioned earlier in the episode, his involvement relates to looking Luke up and passing information on to a member of the public.

Accuracy matters deeply to me, especially when discussing cases that carry so much weight for families and the public. Thank you to those who respectfully flagged this, and I appreciate the continued care and accountability from this community.