Uploaded March 2026 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
This is Julian Ingram, also known as Julian Pierpoint. He allegedly shot and killed three people—including a 25-year-old pregnant woman and her unborn child—and seriously injured a 19-year-old man in the central New South Wales town of Lake Cargelligo. He’s been on the run for nearly seven weeks now.
But now there’s a bounty on his head. As the New South Wales Police announced today: “$250,000 reward offered as police appeal for information to locate Julian Ingram.”
So, Mr. Ingram is wanted dead or alive—well, alive. I mean, if you found his body, then of course he’d be dead, and you’d inform the police; but you wouldn’t be the one who made him dead—unless, of course, it was some kind of self-defence scenario.
The point is, Julian Ingram is a wanted man. If you have any information that can help investigators locate him, report it to the police immediately and you might just make yourself 250 grand richer.
Just to be clear, according to the official wording: “The $250,000 reward is available for information leading to the arrest of Julian Ingram.”
I repeat: please don’t kill anybody.
But the point of this video is the media framing of Mr Ingram’s racial identity. In the official police press release, they write: “Ingram is described as being of Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander appearance, about 165cm-170cm tall, of a medium build with short dark hair and brown eyes.”
I’m not here to judge that description, but that’s the official police position.
In The Australian from today, they correctly include the official description: “Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander appearance.” 7News also reported on the $250,000 reward and stated that Mr. Ingram is described as being of “Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander appearance.”
However, the ABC—funded by you, the taxpayer—includes his photograph, yet refuses to include Ingram’s official description. Interestingly, they warn that the article contains “images of Indigenous people who have died,” but refuse to label Mr. Ingram as Aboriginal himself.
Can the national broadcaster just pick and choose which official police information to include?
The Guardian took the same tack. It’s hard to prove a negative, of course, but you can check their coverage for yourself.
Surprisingly, the National Indigenous Times does include a description—even mentioning Ingram’s “demonic” tattoos—but they also refuse to state that he is Aboriginal. This is despite their own warning about “Indigenous people who have died” and their decision to explicitly refer to one of the victims as an “Aboriginal woman.”
Clearly, depending on the political leanings of the media outlet, one’s identity depends entirely on whether they are the victim or the perpetrator.
The ABC happily refers to victims as Indigenous—they do it all the time. For example: “Family of Indigenous man who died in custody,” accompanied by a picture of the man, or “Inquest into Aboriginal woman’s death in custody,” again showing a picture of the victim’s family alongside the victim herself.
I’m not here to debate the definition of Aboriginality, but clearly, if somebody self-identifies, then the ABC is happy to go along with that. When Aboriginal people are the victims, the media finds it perfectly acceptable to state their identity.
However, for whatever political reason, the ABC refuses to state that Julian Ingram is of Aboriginal appearance, despite the police explicitly declaring his identity in their official appeal. The visual contrast is stark: the ABC is happy to label victims who don’t fit a “stereotypical” appearance, yet they suddenly become silent when it comes to the alleged perpetrator.
What game is our national broadcaster playing?
MUSIC
Allégro by Emmit Fenn
This is Julian Ingram, also known as Julian Pierpoint. He allegedly shot and killed three people—including a 25-year-old pregnant woman and her unborn child—and seriously injured a 19-year-old man in the central New South Wales town of Lake Cargelligo. He’s been on the run for nearly seven weeks now.
But now there’s a bounty on his head. As the New South Wales Police announced today: “$250,000 reward offered as police appeal for information to locate Julian Ingram.”
So, Mr. Ingram is wanted dead or alive—well, alive. I mean, if you found his body, then of course he’d be dead, and you’d inform the police; but you wouldn’t be the one who made him dead—unless, of course, it was some kind of self-defence scenario.
The point is, Julian Ingram is a wanted man. If you have any information that can help investigators locate him, report it to the police immediately and you might just make yourself 250 grand richer.
Just to be clear, according to the official wording: “The $250,000 reward is available for information leading to the arrest of Julian Ingram.”
I repeat: please don’t kill anybody.
But the point of this video is the media framing of Mr Ingram’s racial identity. In the official police press release, they write: “Ingram is described as being of Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander appearance, about 165cm-170cm tall, of a medium build with short dark hair and brown eyes.”
I’m not here to judge that description, but that’s the official police position.
In The Australian from today, they correctly include the official description: “Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander appearance.” 7News also reported on the $250,000 reward and stated that Mr. Ingram is described as being of “Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander appearance.”
However, the ABC—funded by you, the taxpayer—includes his photograph, yet refuses to include Ingram’s official description. Interestingly, they warn that the article contains “images of Indigenous people who have died,” but refuse to label Mr. Ingram as Aboriginal himself.
Can the national broadcaster just pick and choose which official police information to include?
The Guardian took the same tack. It’s hard to prove a negative, of course, but you can check their coverage for yourself.
Surprisingly, the National Indigenous Times does include a description—even mentioning Ingram’s “demonic” tattoos—but they also refuse to state that he is Aboriginal. This is despite their own warning about “Indigenous people who have died” and their decision to explicitly refer to one of the victims as an “Aboriginal woman.”
Clearly, depending on the political leanings of the media outlet, one’s identity depends entirely on whether they are the victim or the perpetrator.
The ABC happily refers to victims as Indigenous—they do it all the time. For example: “Family of Indigenous man who died in custody,” accompanied by a picture of the man, or “Inquest into Aboriginal woman’s death in custody,” again showing a picture of the victim’s family alongside the victim herself.
I’m not here to debate the definition of Aboriginality, but clearly, if somebody self-identifies, then the ABC is happy to go along with that. When Aboriginal people are the victims, the media finds it perfectly acceptable to state their identity.
However, for whatever political reason, the ABC refuses to state that Julian Ingram is of Aboriginal appearance, despite the police explicitly declaring his identity in their official appeal. The visual contrast is stark: the ABC is happy to label victims who don’t fit a “stereotypical” appearance, yet they suddenly become silent when it comes to the alleged perpetrator.
What game is our national broadcaster playing?
MUSIC
Allégro by Emmit Fenn
