As things stand, politicians burdened with the responsibilities of Attorney-General often face the impossible choice of advising the relevant Governor on petitions from innocents convicted of sexual abuse. It should not be their choice; legal matters should stay within the realm of the administration of the law, not politics, argues ANDREW L. URBAN.
A middle aged man, without a single other legal blemish, convicted of historical sexual abuse of a young girl in his family, 22 years before, believes he could prove his innocence if the NSW Attorney General advised the Governor to act on his petition and referred his case for a judicial review – as it was the case of Kathleen Folbigg, convicted of murdering her children. But he has been refused and given no reason. He has served his prison sentence, his wife continues to support him and his 76 page petition was prepared pro bono by a lawyer outraged at the many flaws that led to the conviction and failed appeal.
When Paul followed up on his petition with his local member three years after it was lodged, the Attorney General replied to the local member: “I confirm that the Governor, on the advice of the Executive Council, has declined to take action in relation to the petition.” No reason was forthcoming.
In 2019, the man (let’s call him Paul) wrote to NSW Attorney General then the Hon Mark Speakman as follows:
“You will understand that I feel strongly that I, too, deserve justice. I note that although Ms Folbigg’s petition was submitted three years ago, it wasn’t until just nine days after an investigation into Ms Folbigg’s case was broadcast by the ABC’s Australian Story, (10 August, 2018), that you announced as follows:
“I have formed the view that an inquiry into Ms Folbigg’s convictions is necessary to ensure public confidence in the administration of justice. Today’s decision is not based on any assessment of Ms Folbigg’s guilt.
“The petition appears to raise a doubt or question …
Paul wrote: “I ask for equal access to a review. My petition also raises very serious doubts – on several issues. The very same sentiments would apply in my case…
“I do not ask you to form a view as to my innocence, only to permit a proper review of my conviction…
“My life has been decimated, my family has been hurt and my confidence in our justice system has been badly damaged …”
This one duty (advising the Governor on petitions) is exempted from the concept of separation of powers, intended to safeguard politicians interfering in legal matters. But refusing to process a petition for mercy (a last resort) is effectively interfering in a legal matter.
If judges are obliged to detail their reasons for decisions, Attorneys-General should also be so obliged. A conviction of sexual abuse of a minor is “a life destroying crime,” as one of his friends puts it, and “the State must be vigilant to the opportunity for Paul to clear his name.”
Paul says “I want real victims protected, real offenders prosecuted and no more political outcomes to satisfy a public which are conditioned to believe all claims of this nature.” In prison, Paul met other men in similar situations. So has Noel Greenaway, 85, convicted of 18 instances of sexual abuse against five youngsters, now middle aged women. They all stated that they had never spoken of their abuse to anyone – until the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse started in 2013. Greenaway is serving a 20 year prison sentence.
As this blog has often argued, a national network of Criminal Cases Review Commission would not only absolve Attorneys-General of tough choices about politically sensitive petitions concerning sexual abuse convictions, it would also serve the interests of justice. Claimants whose appeal has failed, such as Paul (and Noel) would access the CCRC in their respective states, which would assess these claims for a review and if found to have merit, refer their cases to the Appeals Court (in the relevant state jurisdiction).
Readers may ask, why are State Attorneys-General not urging for this reform?
ANDREW – Here is a great chance to watch “Justice Australian Style” in Action (unfolding live) .The Mushroom Lady has NOT followed her good given Legal Advice – she has already broken – disregarded RULE ONE- The Victorian Police are notoriously famous for underhand information twisting / gathering and manipulating- (Tasmaniac style DNA-Spanners and screw drivers) She hasn’t listened to good advice! Just as Sue SNF spoke to Tasmaniac Policeymens in a friendly helpful manner – This Naive Lady has Spoken to Cunning Victorian Police Interrogators – Disingenuous Bastards- Some Media Swine are already writing a one sided Screenplay – “She has lied”≈ – one claim already ! Can point the reader to some tricky slanted Media Stories – The DPP Staff are in a Frenzy of Exciting Screenplay “Crafting” ! The Policeymens know she
should NOT have spoken to them – they know they have a mug pansy -they are setting her up for a carefully selected (even stacked jury- Queensland Type) A Jury for the DPP and Judge to read a Cunning Screenplay – Amazing Fungus Knowledge – Tasmaniac Style “Biggest Liar Wins” (quote from much Internationally Respected Barrister). Apparently she MAY NOT be the mushroom identification expert the policeymens and their media mates are claiming – We shall see ? PS. Not for one minute claiming guilt or innocents – Am claiming a scenario’s being created – A SUE /LINDY Style doing over Screenplay- Nothing to do with JUSTICE – To do with Political Police Power and Glory – Promotion (Commissioner even) Courtesy of the Death Sentence for Innocent Darryl Beamish – another great Screenplay – Don’t turn your brain off ! Too late – She already has – She’s in the Police Spider – DPP and JUDGE rat trap ! In 20 years time -when Andrews is in a Nursing Home and I’m in Hell – Students will Read of Southern Style Justice – Make Ya PROUD !
Folks, I would like to bring it your attention, a United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Article 1
1 For the purpose of this Declaration, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted by or at the instigation of a public official on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or confession, punishing him for an act he has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating him or other persons. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to, lawful sanctions to the extent consistent with the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners.
Robert Greenshieds writings inspired me to write this. To me it is not new, I found this years ago, hence another reason my refusal to go away, climb under a rock and shiver in fear.
Robert says amongst other things re SNF case; deceit, brutality, and psychological terrorism of the Tasmanian colonial era, and there are obviously many who desire to inherit, misuse, and maintain those disgraced factors as the continued comfortable status quo.
Right on Robert, you have nailed it from observation and interpretation.
The key words to me, from the Declaration are; severe pain or suffering; mental; by or at the Instigation of a public official, (at Kempton Tasmania it took years for govt to enforce their laws to protect us. We were outsiders. And there must be hundreds of Tasmania outsider abuse stories. We were Outlaws, like Robin Hood and the deer have been protected in Tasmania until recently.
Locals were endorsed by Govt Officials to harass and intimidate us for years.
Police were told to leave it alone by Senior Tasmania Police.
And later my Case Study 2 where Article 1 came into play again and I suffered more and gained more evidence.
We were victims and have the evidence; and years later we have to witness Sue Neill-Fraser and her family suffer and no justice for her murdered husband and cronies walk the streets.
Owen.
Love your work Garry, thanks a million, your comments have made me feel alive; I am a person and I am interacting in society with someone, who thinks he is smart, and I hope he is. Bring it on. I am ready to face it.
The facts will speak for themselves, Tasmania 1990/91 to 2004.
Owen
Amendment to Owen Allen August 20 10.49pm,
Reply to Gary Stannus,
Line 11, states 10,000;
Amended to 1000.
Slip of the finger.
Owen.
I again call on Michael Phelan, CE of ACIC to investigate Tasmania Police as a criminal organisation with links to politicians and judiciary.
A totalitarian corrupt society. But I just investigated the ACIC and a board member of ACIC is Tasmanian Commissioner of Police. Research and relatively new Commissioner, whom has inherited the Force and was way corrupt before she joined the force. The old school corrupt bullies still run the show behind the scenes and still get protection from the politicians and corrupt judges, as has been witnessed in recent times. Therefore I say again, I ask for an enquiry by ACIC into criminality in Tasmania Police, Govt, and Judiciary and the Tasmanian Police Commissioner might be smart enough to give the ok to face it sooner than later.
Owen.
A pub test- Megan Vass and Friends known to Tasmaniac Policeymens were on the Yacht – more than just the Vass vomit DNA was tested – but the friends DNA also – Protected Police Snouts – A Cooke type confession is always possible -(unlikely) – The pub might help arrange that – one never knows in that Cesspool – Tasmaniac Justice .
The matter of ‘vomit’ was introduced – in my opinion – by a confusion/conflation of mention of: vomit rags below deck and a blue rag above deck.
Vass’s subsequent references to vomit might be true, but I think that there is an equal possibility that they are ‘recalled’ memories… such as ‘I must have thrown up’ … after it perhaps being put to her by people such as Colin McLaren et al., that she had done so.
Everything I’ve read variously of her actual evidence – and I must say that I was present when she gave evidence at one of the many hearings in the application for Sue’s second Appeal process and at Sue’s second Appeal itself.
Meaghan’s evidence – suggested to me that she possibly was pressured (threatened with being put into a car boot) if she didn’t come out and support Sue and didn’t have a clue at all about having been on the Four Winds, but confronted with the the fact of her DNA being on the deck walkway of the boat, and being contacted by those who (such as McLaren) she came to believe that she might have been on the boat, that there might have been a fight, that there…
…and so forth and so on.
I witnessed McLaren giving his evidence. He was highly prepared and cagey. Nearly every question that Coates/Shapiro put to him (it must have been Coates) he responded to by ‘Your Honour, …’ He directed his responses away from Coates and made it sound as if it was Brett J’s questions to which he was responding. It sounded a little artificial to me. Actually, [personally], I didn’t buy his explanation ‘just research for a book I want to write’ … when Coates suggested he was doing private investigation work … without an investigator’s licence.
I’m sure that there are (Tasmanian) police who break the law and/or are corrupt. It’s possible that police involved with the SNF case are corrupt.
1. Gleeson claimed that Detectives owned brothels in Sandy Bay. (I can take you to those premises).
2. Sinnitt claimed that the Sam’s sleepover address did not exist … or that he could not find it: I found it and I can take you there.
3. Peter Powell – who did not give evidence at Sue’s trial – later told Eve Ash that he knew that Meaghan had been associating with youngsters who had been breaking into boats on the Derwent. I know the name of such a person (known to police, convicted of such offences, then with access to a [weathered grey, commercial type?] dinghy) who may have [‘hypothetically’] taken Meaghan round to the Four Winds by water.
4. In my view the time of Meaghan’s departure from Mara House is not necessarily that which was given to Sinnitt. It might be the time that the staff member on duty at the time recorded the fact of her having left the refuge, rather than the actual time she left. (Was the staff member completing the day’s record just prior to knocking off and handing over to the next afternoon shift worker? Had Meaghan gone some time earlier?)
These, and many more questions can only be answered by a Commission of Inquiry. Where is the truth … ‘In Whom do we Trust?’
GARRY MATE -Surely you are not implying that Sue got a fair trial ? That the detailed criticisms are ALL RUBBISH . That any Policeymens Outfit in Australia has a reputation for honest dealing ? Do we have to go thru the Vomit List just for you ?
Love your work Garry – THAT Owen – he deserves criticism – how dare HE imply that Vass DNA was NOT on one legged Policeymans boot – that the spanners and screw drivers are a figment of a creative DPPs Virtuous mind – as his mate – the fountain of wisdom – He with his library of proven ScreenPlays – We shot him 6 times in the face koz he didn’t have a ticket !
Love your work Whalensky, read and reread, smoke and mirrors, Garry has called for an enquiry,
reread his comments on corrupt police.
Owen.
OWEN- Re – Garry may not be all that silly – seems to contradict himself- eg. “MIGHT- be Vass Vomit ” – Policeyman might have picked it up (the Vass Vomit) in one of the Policeymens Operated Sandy Bay Hobart Brothels – The Tasmaniac Policeymens disappeared the Blue Cloth – because it would be difficult to fool even a Jury of the halfwitted that the Blue Vomit Cloth also came from a Policeymans boot – Wonder why most Countries have done away with the Jury System – However – Just like the Idea that a CCRC is the Answer ( read what’s happening to The Dear Old Pommy Land CCRC !) The Jury System in Australia
could be more tamper proof – fewer implants courtesy of the Prosecution – (as in Queensland) – Less of the selected Juries – delivering the required Halfwitted Verdicts ! Jury should have to explain their Verdicts – OMG – that would frighten the pants of any AG ! The Verdicts in many trials and tribulations could be overturned in a few days – eg. In SUE’S Debacle- the blood in the Dinghy – The Absolute Codswallop Screenplay- Vomit on the Dear Policeymans Boot – Spanners and screwdrivers !
Maintain the faith Owen and FTW, been following your input and in general agree with your thoughts.
Sue Neill Frasers case in particular is an unadulterated debacle, and fits quite adequately into recognised records of the deceit, brutality, and psychological terrorism of the Tasmanian colonial era, and there are obviously many who desire to inherit, misuse, and maintain those disgraced factors as the continued comfortable status quo.
Extracting some delusional types from that mindset is an exercise in futility, so be reassured that by continuing your rage and protest on this site, your concerns are received and recognised, and you are not alone.
Keep safe and strong. All the best.
Robert, acknowledged, with thanks,
Owen.
I am in too deep, I know too much to let it go. I would be complicit and branded a coward.
Can I add some more, it has been 3 days.
I am a simple man, a working class pleb, I know right from wrong; I realise “laws” create grey areas of understanding, possibly creating confusion.
I need help to understand a real scenario, as real as The Alamo, and Gunfight at the OK Corral. The scenario is this. State Politicians know and admit the State Police Force is Too Corrupt to do anything about. What does this mean?
Are they too afraid to be the front man or woman to address the situation, knowing they will have no or limited support from fellow politicians.
Or are they complicent with the Corrupt Police Force, and that gets my nod; because at a political function I pointed out a uniform police officer to a staffer and said he is a thug. She replied, ‘thats how we like them’.😂.
Now this was before I was threatened by Detectives in Tasmania at my place of business; and I had to make a decision on the spot. Do I allow these punks, Nazi Scum stand over and threaten me in Australia. Not on your life buddy, I did what any real ozzie would do, and told them to fuck off; and face the consequences later. And I did, I assure you, they ruined my life; or did they, my life certainly changed and I am still out there spruiking to help the down trodden, like good people and the ADF do. UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE BEG.
Everyone who can, should contribute with knowledge, experience and support
here at WC. Thanks,
Owen.
Owen, over some years now, you’ve variously blamed your situation: on Tassie, on its cops and on its detectives.
You’ve written how you were arrested and imprisoned for playing a guitar … while never informing the reading public that your arrest was (according to court records) for breaking one of those ‘restraining orders’ … how you had set up busking with your guitar in proximity to the premises in which the woman (who you were – for want of a better word – ‘stalking’), worked.
You have earlier on WCR characterised that arrest as ‘arrested for playing a guitar’. Then, if memory serves me correctly, you were also present in a street in which that woman lived. It might all be just a big mistake and yet I accept your enjoinder:
“Everyone who can, should contribute with knowledge, experience and support
here at WC” and have replied accordingly.
[Owens comment, ”
Andrew this for you or anyone. Get your head around this. Justice Tasmania style. Bearing in mind the Chief Justice sent a university student to prison for stealing library books. And I was in Maximum security for playing guitar in a public place. Something is going on. Very wrong. Fear, corruption??? or am I missing something.” (https://wrongfulconvictionsreport.org/2020/06/13/a-cancerous-phenomenon/)]
If any readers care to check out what I have written, they might find further [quite riveting…] background information at http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/tas/TASSC/2004/30.html?context=1;query=owen%20allen;mask_path=au/cases/tas/TASSC.
In my opinion, Owen, its about time you publicly responded to your ‘stalking’ conviction before you continue on again with your apparent rejection of Tasmanian justice.
AGREED.
On yer Gary,
as Father Ted Whalensky stated, I was set up, I stalked nobody, I was earning money, contributing to my income as a professional musician, albeit a busker learning on the spot by a master Ernie Ball. I had crashed from Commercial Agricutural Pilot down to taxi driver, back to Owner Operator of a tourist business riding a Harley Davidson with a sidecar in the precinct of my charges and arrests. I had been working in that very area, driving and riding those very streets for 10 years. I had taken thousands of people for rides in that locality and took over 10000 rides up Mt Wellington.
I ain’t telling you everything in case it gets back in court, but there was an arrest warrant out for me for 10 years for attending a seminar in a public place, and when my lawyer from interstate asked for the file, it was lost.
And my charges against me were after I was assaulted, strangled in the taxi, by a local stockbroker, protected by corrupt police. Just as well I am a tough bastard, mental and physical, I am waiting now for hip replacement, it is stuffed and only xrayed 2 weeks ago; and mental pain is restraining oneself to abide by the law, but don’t back down to corruption. It all started in Kempton Gary, are you local Tasmanian? I was on the record and fighting for justice from that point on, because there was always some Tasmanian trying to screw me, I was the outsider and they have their networks. And that goes up to political level where a self funded retiree went to Hobart, sucked in with a local business partner who screwed him, who ended up Premier. That is how they roll.
Owen.
[REJECTED]
Andrew – Can I ask a simple question ?
How many readers of these here pages – believe Megan Vass was NOT on the Yacht in company with Yacht Thieves – her vomit 🤮 🤮 🤮on deck – irrelevant ?
Vote – Was NOT on the Yacht. YOU can then join the Paragons of Virtue / Justice and wisdom – The Justice Delivering Granny Slayers – The High Court of Australia- you effing beauties !
Could it be that some Attorneys General simply love to have that sort of power over people and processes and refuse to give it up?
If NSW had introduced the right to a second or further appeal as they have done in South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria, Western Australia and now proceeding with it in the ACT, an application could be made directly to the Court of Appeal to have the matter determined judicially and not administratively. The current appeal procedures in NSW do not comply with the international covenant on civil and political rights as stated by the Australian Human Rights Commission in their 2011 report to the South Australian parliament. Clearly the time has come for NSW to get its act together on these issues.
Yes TASMANIA does have the right to a second appeal however given the restriction that all must be “new and compelling” evidence there is little opportunity in the appeal process to challenge aspects of the original trial etc.
OH – So all is goot in South Australia ? South Australia has got its act together – All’s good with Derek Bromley – 40 years in prison -The State Muder of Ray Bailey has Been admitted . Maniackle Manock – the Persecuting Prosecutors Wet Dream has been condemned and his evidence thrown out- The Policeymens who murdered Doctor George Duncan in theTorrens – the AG and SA Police Commissioner have placed flowers on Georges grave – Pigs are flying over the Goyder’s Line –
Give (pay)me 10 times the Average Australian Dollar in my Purse – Guvment Leather German Auto – The Power to “do over” the Citizens (ignore their stupid whimpers) – Virtually tell them to stuff off – no reason given ! I’ll somehow manage the Justice burden ! Especially since JUSTICE is not mentioned in my job description .Oh -Poor feller ME- the burden ! We’ll nobble any CCRC- don’t you worry bout that !
It’s time for the relevant people, whomever they may be (Michael Kirby?, Tom Bathurst? others?), to convince the people in power to create a CCRC in Australia.
It’s overdue.
Canada is ahead of us, not by much, ref earlier this year https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl/mjrca-lcees/index.html
UK is about 25 years ahead of us, ref
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_Cases_Review_Commission
New Zealand is at least three years ahead of us, ref
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Te_K%C4%81hui_T%C4%81tari_Ture_Criminal_Cases_Review_Commission.
Politically, how should it be pushed to actually happen? Via our Federal Government? Via the teal independents? I don’t know. I hope someone else does know. Good luck.
As Andrew points out above, an Australian Story show by Quentin McDermott can be a trigger to get politicians to actually do something about a serious problem.
Good work Peter. Perhaps a pub test type survey across the nation, of how people feel about the justice, or injustice system in Australia.
I know there is a large feeling of discontent, carried on from the Eureka Stockade; I know, I am part of it; I put my hand up, democracy means no fear of retribution by the opposition.
Ha, I know thats a lie when the opposition is corrupt police.
Hahaha,
Owen.