Court hears that the ex-wife of a union boss claimed she “had to kill him to survive.”

A court has been informed that the estranged wife of union boss John Setka told a private investigator, “I have to kill my children’s father to survive, you’re going to help me work out how I do it.”

The remarks were made in a covert video that was shown in court on Tuesday, the day Emma Walters’s firearms charge was dropped.

The 47-year-old, who is the mother of two children with the Victorian secretary of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, appeared before Melbourne Magistrates Court to refute claims that she made death threats against Setka.

She has entered a not guilty plea to the charge against Walters, which states that she threatened to kill Setka with the intention of making private investigator Adrian Peeters “fear such a threat would be carried out or being reckless as to whether or not” he would fear the threat would be carried out.

A private investigator secretly recorded Emma Walters. Due to police allegations that she attempted to obtain a handgun, she was also charged with attempting to commit an indictable offense.

However, that charge was dropped by Magistrate Leon Fluxman when Walters’s attorney claimed there was insufficient proof to support the gun’s description.

Defense attorney Emily Clark stated, “There is no evidence at all regarding the nature of the firearm, and no evidence capable that it could meet the definition of a handgun.”

On March 21, 2023, Walters was surreptitiously videotaped by Peeters at her West Footscray residence in response to a request to “debug” the property.

He said that instead of talking about debugging, the topic “shifted quite quickly” to her alleged threats to kill Setka. “Ms Walters initiated the shift, she stated that she needed a ‘piece’ and she had to kill the father of her children,” the judge was told. After she allegedly told him she wanted to “lure” Setka to the house, he claimed he started recording on his phone for his own protection after about ten minutes.

In the video, Walters can be heard telling Peeters, “I know how to use a gun alright, and I’m willing to deal with the consequences of having to go through the court process of self-defence.” “I have to kill my children’s father to survive, and that is not a very good position to be in.”In any case, you will assist me in refining my method.”

Then, she is heard stating to Peeters that she was a “lawyer by trade” and that “you cannot say that you have any knowledge of it once it’s in court.” This conversation never took place, she said. Emma Walters told police that she had to defend herself even though she didn’t want to kill John Setka.

Peeters claimed that after departing the property, he spoke with Setka via the union to issue a warning. He then gave the police report on the incident.
After being taken into custody on March 29, Walters’ police interview, during which the video recording was shown to her, was also shown in court.

She claimed to have “had a responsibility” to defend herself and her kids from Setka, which is why she was angry, upset, and had used “florid language,” according to detectives.
During the interview, she said, “The police have failed to protect me and the children.”

“Am I inclined to murder John Setka? Not at all, no. Do I need to keep myself safe? Sure. Will I be doing this with a gun? Not at all.I was attempting to convey that there is a woman in distress and that the system has consistently failed her and her children.”

Prosecutor Philip Teo claimed that the covert recording demonstrated her “distinct threat to kill” and that her remarks to Peeters regarding “once it’s in the court” demonstrated the premeditation of the crime. According to Clark, Walters wasn’t careless in posing the threat, nor did she mean for Peeters to be afraid of it. She wanted him to be afraid of it? No, she said, she wanted his assistance.

The maximum penalty for the charge of threatening to kill is ten years in prison. Walters, who is still free on bond, is scheduled to appear in court again on December 8, when the magistrate will render a decision.