Two sovereign citizens who used oily handprints to damage sacred Aboriginal cave art at Uluru discover their fate

Two men have been convicted and fined after showing ‘gross contempt’ by vandalizing an important Indigenous heritage site.

Shawn Bartley and Richard Jarrett from New South Wales, who claim to be “sovereign citizens”, skipped their court date in Alice Springs Local Court on Thursday for a series of offences.

The court heard the pair had driven into Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park after 10am on August 11, 2022, and entered Warayuki, a sacred cave site of the Aṉangu people.

They climbed over a fence and into the cave with their two dogs before pressing two oil handprints on the walls, one of which was covered in sacred rock art.

Fees included damaging and defacing a Commonwealth reserve, entering a restricted area and starting a fire and taking animals onto a Commonwealth reserve.

Shawn Bartley and Richard Jarrett from New South Wales, who claim to be ‘sovereign citizens’, faced multiple charges in Alice Springs Local Court on Thursday – although they did not appear in person.

Men had entered Warayuki, a sacred cave site of the Aṉangu people in Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park on August 11, 2022 and destroyed sacred rock art (stock image)

Prosecutor Ryan Bocock told the court the cave was placed ‘in the highest order of significant sites’ at Uluru and was marked by a number of signs prohibiting entry.

A tour guide, who spotted the pair entering the site and reported hearing sticks being used, was under the impression that a traditional ceremony was taking place.

The guide alerted the park rangers, who were waiting for the Aṉangu traditional owners to arrive before they caught the intruders on the way out.

“A conversation ensued between Jarrett and Bartley and the traditional owners, where Jarrett stated that he came to make a treaty … with ‘my people,'” Mr Bocock said. as ABC reports.

“In response, (a traditional owner) said: “No, I know this place. What’s wrong with you? You are not ashamed to come to our house, you have no culture, no language.”

Mr Bocock described Bartley as Caucasian, while Jarrett was ‘Aboriginal in appearance’.

Bartley was seen carrying a jar of an unidentified liquid, believed to be the oily substance used to create the handprints.

The two men left the park while the ranger and landowners entered to inspect the cave.

The court heard the men had also created a drawing on the ground using sand they had dragged and lit a fire inside the cave.

The pair had no connection to the traditional owners of the land and entered the cave without their permission, the court was told.

The accused were offered interviews but declined, with Bartley sending an email instead, which said he “personally accepted responsibility” but had been “coerced and misled” by Jarrett.

They also failed to admit their statements, and since they did not appear at their trial, this case continued in their absence.

The court heard that both men had shown “gross contempt” for the heritage site and a “deliberate disregard and disrespect for Indigenous culture and heritage”.

Signs adorn the exterior of much of the site, and the idea that the men did not know they were not allowed to enter the site has been debunked.

Mr Bocock told the court that the same cave had been inspected again in July and damage from oily handprints had remained.

The prosecutor argued there was ‘little doubt’ the two were aware of the importance of the site when they started ‘trampling’ on it.

“There was no apparent remorse at the time or afterwards, and it is still unclear whether any damage can be repaired,” he said.

“This reveals a willful disregard and disrespect for Indigenous culture and heritage.”

He said Jarett’s claim that he was there to make the treaty ‘lacked credibility’.

The court heard that both men had existing criminal records, with Bartley described as ‘old and juvenile’ while Jarret was said to be ‘substantial’.

Judge David Bamber admitted it was the first time either of them had been charged with offenses of this nature, but acknowledged the damage to the rock art was serious.

“This is a case where we have two people who have these mistaken notions of sovereign citizenship, whatever that means,” he said.

“Clearly this was quite an overt attempt to point out the general law and really show a disdain for the culture of the traditional owners.”

The co-defendants were convicted and fined $8,600 each.