{"id": "DISC-0038", "item_id": "ITEM-0022", "source_id": "SRC-0038", "year": "1998", "date_precision": "year", "disclosure_method": "academic_research", "extent": "reference", "coverage": "", "review_status": "unreviewed", "notes": "", "item": {"id": "ITEM-0022", "tradition_id": "TRAD-0019", "name": "Women's restricted knowledge concerning Kumarangk (Hindmarsh Island)", "secrecy_type": "restricted_oral_knowledge", "restricted_to": "Ngarrindjeri women with the relevant authority", "restriction_mechanism": "oral_only;social_sanction", "stated_reason": "Restricted women's knowledge that may not be disclosed to men or outsiders", "current_status": "unknown", "status_as_of": "", "status_claim_ids": "", "description": "Knowledge asserted in 1994 by a group of Ngarrindjeri women opposing a bridge to Hindmarsh Island, given to the federal minister's reporter in sealed envelopes marked for women only.", "notes": "Its authenticity was the subject of a Royal Commission and later litigation. The content has not been published."}, "tradition": {"id": "TRAD-0019", "name": "Ngarrindjeri religion", "tradition_type": "indigenous_tradition", "founded": "ancient", "region": "Lower Murray and Coorong, South Australia", "status": "active", "wikidata": "", "notes": "Wikidata has an item for the Ngarrindjeri people (Q370543) but not for the religion."}, "source": {"id": "SRC-0038", "title": "Ngarrindjeri Wurruwarrin: A World That Is, Was, and Will Be", "author": "Diane Bell", "original_year": "1998", "edition_year": "", "source_type": "academic", "url": "", "identifiers": "ol:OL2266943W", "provenance": "academic_fieldwork", "source_authenticity": "unassessed", "verification_notes": "", "rights": "copyrighted", "content_hash": "", "notes": "Written with Ngarrindjeri women; does not publish the restricted content.", "artifacts": []}, "dataset": {"name": "open-arcana", "version": "0.3.0", "metadata_license": "CC0-1.0", "snapshot_sha256": "fd755a0cc0c78cf43dac965d39908085b13b246532d888525645150e391f8e45"}, "quality_issues": [{"table": "sources", "record_id": "SRC-0038", "code": "source_authenticity_unassessed", "message": "Source authenticity is unassessed; this is separate from the truth of its assertions."}, {"table": "sources", "record_id": "SRC-0038", "code": "source_without_content_hash", "message": "No source-level content_hash is recorded; linked artifact hashes may identify excerpts, derivatives or metadata instead."}, {"table": "disclosures", "record_id": "DISC-0038", "code": "record_unreviewed", "message": "Record review status is unreviewed; review is not proof of truth."}, {"table": "disclosures", "record_id": "DISC-0038", "code": "disclosure_without_coverage", "message": "The parts, version or edition covered by this disclosure have not been specified."}], "claims": [{"id": "CLM-0007", "item_id": "ITEM-0022", "claim_type": "other", "suppression_method": "", "statement": "The restricted women's knowledge about Hindmarsh Island was fabricated.", "period": "1994–1995", "claim_support": "contradicted", "supporting_source_ids": "SRC-0036", "independent_source_ids": "", "contradicting_source_ids": "SRC-0037", "locators": "SRC-0036: report of 19 December 1995; SRC-0037: paras 133, 199, 330", "review_status": "reviewed", "verification_notes": "The Royal Commission (1995) concluded the whole of the women's business was a fabrication. The judgment records that Dr Kartinyeri did not give evidence to the Commission and that the contents of the sealed envelopes were not before it (para 133). In 2001 von Doussa J heard evidence from several Ngarrindjeri women supporting its genuineness (para 330) and was not satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that it was fabricated or was not part of Aboriginal tradition (para 199). The two bodies are independent and heard different evidence. Checked against the judgment text on 2026-11-04.", "item": {"id": "ITEM-0022", "tradition_id": "TRAD-0019", "name": "Women's restricted knowledge concerning Kumarangk (Hindmarsh Island)", "secrecy_type": "restricted_oral_knowledge", "restricted_to": "Ngarrindjeri women with the relevant authority", "restriction_mechanism": "oral_only;social_sanction", "stated_reason": "Restricted women's knowledge that may not be disclosed to men or outsiders", "current_status": "unknown", "status_as_of": "", "status_claim_ids": "", "description": "Knowledge asserted in 1994 by a group of Ngarrindjeri women opposing a bridge to Hindmarsh Island, given to the federal minister's reporter in sealed envelopes marked for women only.", "notes": "Its authenticity was the subject of a Royal Commission and later litigation. The content has not been published."}, "tradition": {"id": "TRAD-0019", "name": "Ngarrindjeri religion", "tradition_type": "indigenous_tradition", "founded": "ancient", "region": "Lower Murray and Coorong, South Australia", "status": "active", "wikidata": "", "notes": "Wikidata has an item for the Ngarrindjeri people (Q370543) but not for the religion."}, "supporting_sources": [{"id": "SRC-0036", "title": "Report of the Hindmarsh Island Bridge Royal Commission", "author": "Iris Stevens (Commissioner)", "original_year": "1995", "edition_year": "", "source_type": "court_record", "url": "", "identifiers": "wikidata:Q5766130", "provenance": "court_filing", "source_authenticity": "unassessed", "verification_notes": "", "rights": "unknown", "content_hash": "", "notes": "Wikidata item is for the Royal Commission. Reported 19 December 1995. Dr Kartinyeri did not give evidence, and the sealed envelopes were not before the Commission (SRC-0037, para 133).", "artifacts": []}], "contradicting_sources": [{"id": "SRC-0037", "title": "Chapman v Luminis Pty Ltd (No 5) [2001] FCA 1106", "author": "Federal Court of Australia (von Doussa J)", "original_year": "2001", "edition_year": "", "source_type": "court_record", "url": "https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2001/2001fca1106", "identifiers": "", "provenance": "court_filing", "source_authenticity": "verified", "verification_notes": "Read on the Federal Court of Australia's own judgments site on 2026-11-04: von Doussa J, Adelaide, 21 August 2001; application dismissed.", "rights": "court_record", "content_hash": "", "notes": "Reported as (2001) 123 FCR 62.", "artifacts": []}], "dataset": {"name": "open-arcana", "version": "0.3.0", "metadata_license": "CC0-1.0", "snapshot_sha256": "fd755a0cc0c78cf43dac965d39908085b13b246532d888525645150e391f8e45"}, "quality_issues": [{"table": "sources", "record_id": "SRC-0036", "code": "source_authenticity_unassessed", "message": "Source authenticity is unassessed; this is separate from the truth of its assertions."}, {"table": "sources", "record_id": "SRC-0036", "code": "source_without_content_hash", "message": "No source-level content_hash is recorded; linked artifact hashes may identify excerpts, derivatives or metadata instead."}, {"table": "sources", "record_id": "SRC-0036", "code": "source_rights_unknown", "message": "The source text's rights have not been established."}, {"table": "sources", "record_id": "SRC-0037", "code": "source_without_content_hash", "message": "No source-level content_hash is recorded; linked artifact hashes may identify excerpts, derivatives or metadata instead."}, {"table": "claims", "record_id": "CLM-0007", "code": "claim_contradicted", "message": "Claim support is contradicted; retain that qualification when quoting or training."}]}]}