Colt clan incest case

"June", born in 1948, and "Tim Colt", born in 1943, lived in New Zealand.

June, who was the product of brother-sister incest, married Tim in 1966. The couple had seven children together: Martha, Frank, Paula, Cherry, Rhonda, Betty, and Charlie, before moving to Victoria in the 1970s.[1] Tim Colt began to rape Betty when she was 12. Tim formed a musical band with his family.[3]

In 1997, Betty, wanting to know if June could donate a kidney to a granddaughter, found out that her mother June was inbred.[3]

The family grew to nearly 40 members ranging from grandparents to mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, aunts, uncles, nephews, brothers and sisters all engaging in various forms of incest. Many of the children suffered from deformities and medical problems. School attendance was transient and happened only when welfare officers came, and children needed remedial teaching once there. Some children tortured animals, mutilating their genitals, as a pastime.[1]

Children and adults had regularly engaged in sexual activities, resulting in children, some with genetic deformities. There were incidents of the girls being tied to trees and raped by the boys. They had no access to running water, showers, toilets or hygiene products. Most of the children had fungal infections. In order to hide the pregnancies, the girls would sometimes miscarry on the farm, or fatherhood was attributed to outsiders from outside Australia coming to the country for work or tourism.[1][3]

The case has been described by lead investigator Peter Yeomans as "like nothing I've ever seen," and was considered by many to be so shocking that in a rare move the New South Wales Children's Court allowed full details to be made public, albeit with all names changed to pseudonyms for the children's protection, including the family name of "Colt."[4]

After the death of June in 2001 and Tim in 2009, the family was led by Betty Colt. Betty and her younger brother, Charlie, had 12 children together. The family received multiple social security payments, including disability and family support.[5][6][7]

Starting from the 1990s, the family was known to frequently relocate between South Australia, Western Australia, and Victoria before locals became suspicious. They relocated to New South Wales, 30 kilometers outside of the small town of Boorowa, three and a half hours southwest of Sydney.[3][8] The police ultimately discovered nearly 40 members of the family living under squalid conditions in tents and shacks.[7] They sometimes performed as a musical band.[3]

Knowledge of the family came to authorities in June 2010, which led to seven "risk of significant harm" reports. However, an official investigation was not opened until July 2012 when a child reported overhearing another child at a local primary school speaking of an unkempt girl, living in the bush, who was pregnant with a child fathered by a brother. The child overheard the girl state that one of her sisters was pregnant and they did not know which of her brothers was the father.[9]

Over the next year, police tracked the family down and, after obtaining an understanding of the living conditions on the camp, put several children in foster care including Bobby (Betty's son with her younger brother) and Billy (Betty's son with her older son). Police discovered the living area of 38 members of the family in the bush located on the outskirts of Boorowa, New South Wales. The Colts were charged with incest and child neglect.[2]

Betty Colt legally disputed the charges and attempted to regain custody. After tracking the cell phone activities of Betty, police discovered text messages of a sexual nature sent to her son, Bobby. She and Bobby had made plans to abduct Billy from foster care. Genetic testing showed that Bobby was the product of incest between Betty and a father or full brother.

The case has been described as unique because of the reluctance of the victims to come forward.[8] It has been said that there are difficulties in determining the guilt of particular offenders, due to their behaviour existing on a moral continuum and the law being dichotomous in nature, being an 'absolute concept'. Therefore, even though the victims may have actually consented to the relationships, the law still deems it as criminal.[10]

The Children's Court of New South Wales took the unusual step of publishing its decision permanently removing the children.[2] In the court's findings, the neglect of the children and genetic evidence were viewed as dispositive in the matter. The court held that "there is no realistic possibility of restoration of any of the children [to their biological family]."[11]