Teenager accused of planning terror attack targeted LNP over nuclear policy

Lead

A teenager has been acquitted by a Brisbane Supreme Court jury of planning a terrorist attack against the Liberal Party and a Labour Day march. The verdict came after more than a day of deliberation, with family members in the public gallery breaking down in tears.

The teenager, who cannot be legally identified due to his age, had pleaded not guilty to one count of acts done in preparation for or in planning a terrorist act. The trial heard allegations that, when he was 16, he researched bomb-making, purchased chemicals and tested explosives, with the intention of attacking members of the Liberal Party over its policy on nuclear power.

Coverage comparison

Reporting from ABC Australia and The Guardian – World followed the case from the opening of the trial through to the verdict. Both outlets described the prosecution's allegations that the teenager had been influenced by the American terrorist Ted Kaczynski, known as the Unabomber, and had communicated with friends about his plans. They also reported the defence's argument that the teenager was a 'troubled kid' who was experimenting with ideas and beliefs rather than planning a real attack.

The ABC's coverage of the trial's opening noted that the teenager allegedly changed his target from a Labour Day event to the Liberal National Party after researching its nuclear power policy. The Guardian's reporting highlighted that the teenager had allegedly plotted nailbomb attacks against then opposition leader Peter Dutton and the Labour Day march, and that the central issue at trial was the teenager's state of mind.

Key claims

Prosecutors alleged that in 2024, when the teenager was 15 or 16, he planned to set off a homemade bomb at a Labour Day march in Brisbane, and later shifted his target to members of the Liberal Party. The court heard that the teenager drew inspiration from Ted Kaczynski, the anti-technology terrorist known as the Unabomber, and from other infamous figures such as Timothy McVeigh. Diary entries and text messages were presented to the jury, in which the teenager wrote of having an 'unhealthy obsession' with bombs and discussed his plans with a school friend. That friend eventually alerted police in July 2024.

The prosecution, led by Crown prosecutor Sally Flynn KC, argued that the teenager had 'very deliberately' researched explosives and experimented with materials he bought, with the intention of using them in a terrorist act. Flynn told the jury that the teenager's web searches, messages and downloaded documents provided a 'very powerful body of evidence' of his intentions. The defence, led by barrister Laura Reece, argued that the teenager was a 'troubled kid' who was 'experimenting not only with explosives but with ideas and beliefs', and that his actions did not amount to a genuine plan to carry out an attack.

Perspectives

Prosecution: The Crown argued that the teenager was a determined terrorist in waiting, motivated by anti-technology and anti-capitalist ideology. Prosecutor Sally Flynn KC told the jury that 'this was no joke' and that the teenager's actions were deliberate and intended to advance an ideological cause.

Defence: Defence barrister Laura Reece argued that the teenager was a troubled teenager who made edgy jokes and engaged in dangerous experimentation with household chemicals, but did not intend to carry out an actual attack. She described him as 'a troubled kid' who was seeking out extremist material from 'wildly contradictory sources' on the internet.