HAIG    REPORT:    GoTo [on this page] HaigReport's Menu Of Themes of Menus for our thousands of pages
TIPS for
Navigating HaigReport:  If you arrived at this page, referred from a Search Engine such as Google et al, your URL link will NOT have an #Anchor/Marker to take you to the relevant spot on this page.  In that case, we do recommend that you view our "Latest HaigReport Promotions" of recent additions to our websites, by Clicking Here.  It will open in a new Browser window. 

If
you Click Here, you will be taken, usually, to the specific Unique Content on this page, for which you were most likely seeking.  However, if you Click Here, you will be taken to the Top of the HaigReport Header, below on this page. 

However, if you have arrived at this page from another of our Website pages, your link will usually have an #Anchor, also called a marker, which will take you to the intended specific spot on the page where that marker is positioned.  In fact, it will probably take you there prior to your reading this.  Moving to that Anchor is the final step in the loading of this page.

 HAIG     REPORT:   Is now on  twitter  [from 2nd June, 2013]  link to us HERE on twitter     See our Twitter Strategy    

 HAIG    REPORT:  SEE: Russell Mathews' COMMENTARY:    Russell Mathews' [BCom BSc LLB & BA] current TOPICAL commentary on GOVERNMENT, politics & business     Press to READ       Press for MENU   

 HAIG    REPORT:    WANTED:
Healthy female "dog" to breed with Parson Russell Terrier, to produce ASSISTANCE DOGS.   Rochedale South QLD 4123
I wish to breed from my Parson Russell Terrier. He is a trained assistance dog. He has a wonderful nature. The breed of his mate could be varied or a cross; eg Parson Russell Terrier, Jack Russell Terrier, Beagle, Bull Terrier, Bull mastiff, Staffy, and/or Fox Terrier plus many others. She does not need to be "pedigreed". I am very protective of my dogs. She will become very valuable to me and become one of my assistance "dogs". If we can assist each other, please contact me on my contact form, including your email address and your landline phone number so I can phone you to discuss. 

Because I am disabled and have an LLB [so therefore understand the Law surrounding disabilities and assistance dogs] I am now branching out to providing Assistance dogs to disabled persons [even if disabled in only a minor way and so not even realizing it]. This is not a business proposition but rather just a very necessary service I can offer to the community.
Many people have a disability and do not realize their ailment or "problem" is by law, the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) [DDA], classified as a "disability". This is especially so for people getting on in years, and who have a dog, and are maybe moving to accommodation where they are told they cannot take their dog. In a majority of cases, those people cannot be legally forced to surrender their animal/dog.
I will be assisting those person who already have dogs, but are being forced, unlawfully, to dispose of them because maybe they are moving accommodation. I can train your existing dogs to be assistance dogs and provide the documentation as required by the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) [DDA]. I do not intend to charge for this, but just maybe cover some marginal costs.

    View the Latest    HAIG     REPORT Promotions:  in this Scrolling Window, or OPEN in new browser:     

 Click here  to Learn how your Personalized Alert Notice [IMMEDIATELY ABOVE] is prepared by our HAIG Unique Visitor Algorithm: [HUVA] or  Click here  to see your UNIQUE Personalized Alert Notice in a new Browser Window.


 Hearing 16th May, 2011 Mathews-v-TheCommissioner of Police [2011] QDC_Brisbane #3095_2010 coram KJ O'Brien DCJA::


My logo, my TRADEMARK, is the MRI of my skull, showing gross assymetry,aka DEFORMITY = ugliness and target of bullies. The HAIG REPORT: the EVIDENCE My logo, my TRADEMARK, is the MRI of my skull, showing gross assymetry,aka DEFORMITY = ugliness and target of bullies.

   It is Our legal, social and moral DUTY to EXPOSE CRIME, FRAUD & CORRUPTION plus Lying and Hypocrisy in Public Life, Including Judges & magistrates 
 

Fraud, Corruption & attempted  MURDER 
covered-up by Queensland police, EXPOSED 

header: Qld District Court coram Kerry O'Brien:

Qld District Court coram Kerry O'Brien: 
Australian Government Steals Disabled Old Man's home for The University of Queensland to punish Disabled Old Man for being DISABLED & wants Court's sanction.

commonheader.php

Reg. Office: 254 Hawken Drive, St Lucia, Qld. 4067, Australia.  
Editor-in-Chief:  Russell G H Mathews BCom BSc LLB BA      EMAIL us anytime:  Please Please make a donation using BPay.  using  Please make a donation using BPay. 

considerevidence.php

Consider the evidence! Please Please make a donation using BPay.  using  Please make a donation using BPay.  

/CodingPHP/includedSeeContentPageFileNameURL.php

  Click here to GoTo Detail:=> Hearing 16th May, 2011 Mathews-v-TheCommissioner of Police [2011] QDC_Brisbane #3095_2010 coram KJ O'Brien DCJA:

../Corrupt Police& Magistrates Menu.php An example of a CASCADING Drop Down Menu.

MENU: Rantala-Gate: Corrupt Police & Magistrates Mafia.

CDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.php

See: the Menu: for  Latest Update: So why is   District Court Judge Administrator Kerry John O'Brien,   who is Second Only To Corrupt Patsy Mary Wolfe,   So Determined To Control My Appearances in the District Court 

Follow @HaigReport
??   ??   ???? Tweet  
Share on Facebook Share on Facebook  
http://HaigReport.com/includedSeeTodaysHotTopics.php

See: Today's HAIG HOT_TOPICS  => Click HERE <= 

/CodingPHP/includedSeeContentPageFileNameURL.php

  Click here to GoTo Detail:=> Hearing 16th May, 2011 Mathews-v-TheCommissioner of Police [2011] QDC_Brisbane #3095_2010 coram KJ O'Brien DCJA:

See: the Menu: for  Latest Update: So why is   District Court Judge Administrator Kerry John O'Brien,   who is Second Only To Corrupt Patsy Mary Wolfe,   So Determined To Control My Appearances in the District Court 

Follow @HaigReport
??   ??   ???? Tweet  
Share on Facebook Share on Facebook  
http://HaigReport.com/includedSeeTodaysHotTopics.php

See: Today's HAIG HOT_TOPICS  => Click HERE <= 

 Content: Hearing 16th May, 2011 Mathews-v-TheCommissioner of Police [2011] QDC_Brisbane #3095_2010 coram KJ O'Brien DCJA:

../Corrupt Police& Magistrates Menu.php An example of a CASCADING Drop Down Menu.

MENU: Rantala-Gate: Corrupt Police & Magistrates Mafia.

CDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.php

See: the Menu: for  Latest Update: So why is   District Court Judge Administrator Kerry John O'Brien,   who is Second Only To Corrupt Patsy Mary Wolfe,   So Determined To Control My Appearances in the District Court 

Follow @HaigReport
??   ??   ???? Tweet  
Share on Facebook Share on Facebook  
included20110516HearingMathews-v-TheCommissionerofPolice2011QDC_Brisbane3095_2010KJOBrienDCJAHeard20110516.php.html

Transcript of Proceedings

DISTRICT COURT
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
JUDGE O'BRIEN
No 3095 of 2010
RUSSELL GORDON HAIGH MATHEWS Appellant       [Note the incompetence: the public sector individual who transcribed the audio recording to text, would have also had the correct spelling of my name, and this has stil not been corrected.  More comment from the public sector.]
and
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE Respondent
BRISBANE
..DATE 16/05/2011
..DAY 1

THE COURT RESUMED AT 9.38 A.M.
HIS HONOUR: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Number 3095 of 2010, Russell Gordon
Haigh Mathews and Queensland Commissioner of Police.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, Mr Hunter?
MR HUNTER: If it please your Honour, my name's Hunter,
initials SR. I appear for the respondent in this matter on
behalf of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions.
HIS HONOUR: Thank you. And, Mr Mathews, I understand that
you're on the - on the line, is that so?
APPELLANT: I am on the phone, yes, your Honour. And, you
are?
HIS HONOUR: I beg your pardon?
APPELLANT: I - I don't - I'm - I'm just wondering who - which
Court - who is the Judge I'm before this morning?
HIS HONOUR: You're before me, Judge O'Brien.
APPELLANT: Judge O'Brien. Thank you, Judge. Thank you, your
Honour.
HIS HONOUR: And you're appearing on your own behalf this
morning, Mr Mathews?
APPELLANT: I - I am, yes, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: All right. All right. Well, now I have
received, of course, your outline of argument.
APPELLANT: Yes, and submission too, I hope, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, indeed. And they're the ones dated this
morning, is that right?
APPELLANT: Through on the weekend.
HIS HONOUR: I'm sorry. That may not be so. You sent-----
APPELLANT: Sunday. Sunday.
HIS HONOUR: -----them Sunday at 2.34 p.m?
APPELLANT: Yes, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: All right.
APPELLANT: Yes, your Honour, about that. Yes.

HIS HONOUR: Yes, well, I have those. Thank you. And-----
APPELLANT: Mr Hunter should have a copy also.
HIS HONOUR: I beg your pardon?
APPELLANT: Mr Hunter should have a copy also.
HIS HONOUR: Do you have a copy, Mr Hunter?
MR HUNTER: That's correct, your Honour. It was delivered to
me this morning.
HIS HONOUR: All right. All right. And now you obviously
rely upon those. Is there anything you wish to add to them
or-----
APPELLANT: Yes, your Honour. I - I seek leave to adduce more
evidence from the witness who's been subpoenaed.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: And I've indicated on my submission there there's
the evidence which they should be able to give.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: They will be hostile witnesses, of course, your
Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Yes. I'm just a little troubled as to how
they're - any evidence they can give is relevant to the orders
that are the subject of this appeal. Can you explain that to
me?
APPELLANT: Well, the orders are - well, your Honour, in fact,
as you can see from my submission, I'm - I'm of the belief
that the hearing before Magistrate Kluck had become void long
before I could no longer appear.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: Well, for the start, denying a fair hearing -
denying due process and as a result of that, my - I've -I've -
I think I've explained that in my submission that - I may not
be able to explain it as well verbally as I've tried to do in
the submission.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: But the Court will then have to decide what to do
with these charges given that the decisions made by Magistrate
Kluck from way back in June have been void.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: Your Honour, the whole hearing has been a nullity
due to the denial of natural justice that occurred due to the
613
denial of a fair hearing because I've not had my special needs
accommodated-----
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: -----which I had indicated to the Magistrate quite
clearly and I have a difficulty explaining myself too, your
Honour, and - and I think-----
HIS HONOUR: You're not doing too badly. You're doing quite
well.
APPELLANT: Well, I - I've - I've had to write all this out,
your Honour, so I'm trying to remember what I've written.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: Yes. Now, so - and so then the Court has to
decide what to do with these charges and, your Honour, my view
is that these charges are - have been taken against me as
disability discrimination because I am disabled and puts a
terrible strain on me-----
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: -----to have to try and defend myself and to take
all my time doing this and the reason is that my property was
stolen. Could I ask your Honour, have you - have you read my
submissions?
HIS HONOUR: Yes, I've read them. Yes, most certainly.
APPELLANT: Okay. And - and-----
HIS HONOUR: You can be assured of that. I've read all of the
submissions you've ever provided to the Court, Mr Mathews.
APPELLANT: Thank you, your Honour. I just - I remember on
one occasion there, you were asking Mr Hunter to - to say if
there's anything else in the submission that you should -
yeah, anyway, no worries.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, that's right. And I should explain to you
so you're not under any misapprehension about that. That was
purely on the occasion of a mention of another matter.
APPELLANT: Yes, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: And I - it was not necessary on that occasion for
me to descend into all the detail you see. It was purely a
mention of the matter.
APPELLANT: Okay. Thank you, your Honour. Okay. Now, so -
okay - and as what to do with these charges, well there is a
related matter that has been already before the Court of
Appeal and that was a matter regarding Magistrate Ehrich on
the 1st of June. And then whether the Court of Appeal
referenced a topsy-turvy verdict first - sentence first,
614
verdict afterwards - and of course that was the occasion that
the police officer, Rantala , happened to arrest me and after
he had done the armed robbery. Could I ask, your Honour, who
is in Court this morning in regard to this matter?
HIS HONOUR: Mr Hunter's here for the - for the respondent to
this appeal and he's instructed by someone presumably from the
Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecution's Office.
APPELLANT: Yes, your Honour, I had served a subpoena on
Joanne Whiting. I served that on Tuesday.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: From the Brisbane City Legal Practice. Is there -
has anything happened regarding that? Is there any - been any
word on that? Are they in Court?
HIS HONOUR: Well, there doesn't appear to be anyone else here
in response to any subpoena.
APPELLANT: Oh.
HIS HONOUR: But I - the - I'm just wrestling with the -
coming - trying to come to grips with how you say - see these
- this is an appeal against the decision of the Magistrate to
make an order under section 20B-----
APPELLANT: Well, it's not just that, your Honour. It's
against-----
HIS HONOUR: -----of the Crimes Act. Yes. That's - that's
all that's before me.
APPELLANT: No, well, the point is, your Honour, the hearing
is long been ultra vires. It's long been void and so - not
only those decisions but many, many decisions he'd made prior
to that.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: Including, you know, bail and facts like this. So
the whole thing has been a void ab initio.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: I mean there's the occasion where Magistrate Kluck
ridiculed me and my disability.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: "So you - it's all back together again, have you,
Mr Mathews?" I - I was really brain-damaged and I - I mean,
you know, that can be - that's what I was also wanting to
know, your Honour, what - what's happening regarding my
application I made last Tuesday for a preliminary hearing to
determine my special needs and what accommodations should be
made for them?
615

HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: Because the uncertainly causes me to have to think
more about - about all the options or the alternatives.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: And with my brain damage, there's a limit to how
much I can do. I - I fatigue very quickly and so, you know,
so I just need to have as much certainty in my life as
possible.
HIS HONOUR: Yes. Yes.
APPELLANT: -----which I try to - try to achieve.
HIS HONOUR: I can understand that. Have you ever thought
about getting legal - getting legal advice?
APPELLANT: I wouldn't have that, your Honour, and I don't
have to either.
HIS HONOUR: No, I know you don't have to but I just thought
it might help you.
APPELLANT: No, I don't think so, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm. Someone who's - you don't think that would
be of benefit to you?
APPELLANT: No, your Honour, I do not.
HIS HONOUR: No. All right. Well, you understand-----
APPELLANT: As long as my - as long as my special needs are
accommodated, your Honour, I can go ahead and - I can work
quite well provided I'm, you know, my special needs are
accommodated. Now, I do that in my own life. I - I, you
know, it's an ordeal for me to go out anywhere so I mean I
stay here at my computer most of the time.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: And, you know, I've - I've adjusted to my - my
circumstances.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: And so - I forget what I'm saying now too and this
happens quite often. That's why it's better if I'm writing
something because I can then see what I've just written to
remind me where I'm at.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: That's why verbally I'm at a great loss. That's
why I put most of my submission there in writing.
616

HIS HONOUR: Mmm. Well, you're doing - you're doing quite
well this morning.
APPELLANT: Well, I don't think so, your Honour, and because I
know I - I'm, yeah. So - but that's why I need to know how my
special needs are accommodated.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: And I - I put that in last Tuesday.
HIS HONOUR: You understand the issue before this morning is
the decision of the Magistrate to make an order under section
20B of the Crimes Act. That's the specific issue that's
before me-----
APPELLANT: Well, my - my-----
HIS HONOUR: -----and you've appealed against that decision.
APPELLANT: Well, I've - I've appealed against the whole
hearing, your Honour, and against the whole matter that
Magistrate Kluck was hearing.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: Probably from before he ridiculed me, in fact, on
the first day of the hearing which was on the 24th of June.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: And - I mean, that - that - that was totally
uncalled for. It didn't add anything to the proceedings.
HIS HONOUR: No.
APPELLANT: And we have got the record there - the transcript
where he actually did say - say "you've got your thinking back
together again." Also, your Honour, there is many occasions
that you see - check through the transcript - where both Mr
Hunter and Magistrate Kluck agree, you know, that I - I had
great difficulty during those three days and that, you know,
apparently I'd stand at a bar - I didn't even realise this
your Honour - I would stand at the Bar table apparently for
minutes at a time mute.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: Because see I can do that when I'm at my computer
here-----
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: -----and I don't realise.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
617

APPELLANT: And I don't realise time's passing. And - but,
you know, I-----
HIS HONOUR: Could you sit at your computer in a courtroom?
APPELLANT: No, I can't, your Honour. It's a desktop
computer. It's an ordeal, you know - it would be an extra
ordeal for me to get it there and get me there.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm. One of the main issues - or really the main
issue for me today, I think, is do I have power to even hear
this appeal? Is this appeal legally competent?
APPELLANT: Well, it's - the matter's no longer before the
Magistrates Court, although it can be re-activated there. And
once the evidence is brought to the attention of the Court
that the matter in the Magistrates Court was void - it's
actually a no - it was a nullity. Nothing was actually
happening in law but just a farce basically because it was a
nullity. Then when that's brought to the attention of the
Court, the Court has to decide on the basis of the evidence
before it - what it has before it.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: And if the Court decides [indistinct] there - it
was void at that time - there'd been a denial of natural
justice way back then, then, you know, you have to decide what
to do with these charges.
HIS HONOUR: Well, this - yes. The real issue is whether this
is an appeal that is permissible under section 222 of the
Justices Act.
APPELLANT: Well that would may be make a determination of
whether it's a final decision in the Magistrates Court.
HIS HONOUR: You're getting close to the mark, now, yes.
APPELLANT: And of course it's long - long ago been final this
but ultra vires if - if it's void.
HIS HONOUR: But there's - the proceedings were still afoot.
There was a committal proceeding going on before the
Magistrate.
APPELLANT: Yeah, but it was - it's void. It's a nullity.
Denial of natural justice. It's a nullity. It's not
happening. It's not happening. It's - as soon as it becomes
a nullity, it then gets just effectively wiped so it doesn't
matter if people are still there and talking and whatever but
it's a nullity in law.
HIS HONOUR: Yes. All right.
APPELLANT: And so a nullity's happening and it can't be
reactivated. Once it's been - become a nullity, it cannot at
some time later become reactivated. It's - it's a nullity.
618

It's gone. It's - it's finished. So, now you're left with
these charges before you and you have to decide what to do
with them and that is the purpose of bringing in new evidence
so you can decide what to do with them. You can see then for
the same reason that Magistrate Ehrich decision was bound to
be topsy-turvy from, you know, this challenge Alice in
Wonderland - sentence first, verdict afterwards. And you have
to then - the reason that Magistrate Ehrich was so desirous of
getting rid of it, in his words. He wanted to get rid of it.
He wanted to get rid of it. He came to Court half an hour
late, you know, as to his reasons we may never know but I
think there's that - the point was that I had witnesses there
to show, as I could show now, that it was armed robbery of my
property by the police and Brisbane City Council because they
didn't have the Court - records of Court order to enter.
And-----
HIS HONOUR: And what's that case got to do with this one?
APPELLANT: Well, it's the same police officer. It's the same
matter. Apparently, they're saying that I put on - on the web
that the police officer's an armed robber. And that's causing
him to be concerned and menacing the poor man. And, in fact,
well I can say now, he was an armed robber. All the elements
of armed robbery are - are in place. The - the - he - he had
entered; he was armed, potentially. He - they had no
authority to enter. They needed a Court order to enter. And
in my submission, I've shown you the letter from the Brisbane
City Council sent to me; said that they're going to enter
under this regulation 200 of the Health Regulations 1996.
And, in fact, you know, the regulation cannot overrule a
section of the Act or a Common Law right and - which is what
they've reported  [this shows the pathetic calibre of the public sector parasites the "Justice department of Queensland" can find to do transcription;  I would have spoked the unaccented form of "have" that sounds like the unaccented form of "of"  ie  " uv"; on the earlier occasion, I said "purported" with the accent on the "port" syllable, so this incompetent transcriber, had probably not ever understood "purported" so transcribed the word as "reported"] to do. And, of course, they had no authority
to enter, therefore, the entry was illegal. The officer was
armed; he doesn't have to be waving his armament around. It
was in his holster. And that's sufficient of me - if I - I
picked up a piece of timber to protect my property, I have no
doubt, Rantala would have shot me. So, he was armed - he was
armed. It was an armed robbery. I suffered my loss - loss of
property and, of course, it wasn't - they didn't want that to
be known because the point of that armed robbery was to get
the house-----
HIS HONOUR: Sorry, are you saying that, therefore, you're
entitled to put these things on the web? Is that what you're
saying?
APPELLANT: Whether I'm putting them on the web or they're on
the web, well, it's a different matter, your Honour. What I'm
saying is that they're saying that - well, you're saying how -
how does that matter relate to - to this matter. Well, why
did Magistrate Ehrich want to get rid of it? It would have
been shown that the police had - that the police had no
authority to enter, the Council had no authority to enter on
that occasion, and, of course, the arrest of me would have
been shown to be wrong. But, it also would of [this shows the pathetic calibre of the public sector parasites the "Justice department of Queensland" can find to do transcription;  I would have spoked the unaccented form of "have" that sounds like the unaccented form of "of"  ie  " uv"; on the earlier occasion, I said "purported" with the accent on the "port" syllable, so this incompetent transcriber, had probably not ever understood "purported" so transcribed the word as "reported"]
Magistrate would have also had to decide what to do, given
that it was now shown the police had committed armed robbery.
619

HIS HONOUR: Hasn't that matter been determined in the Court
of Appeal?
APPELLANT: No - no; the arrest has. The arrest has.
And-----
HIS HONOUR: I'm still - I'm-----
APPELLANT: -----and the charges - I was charged at that time
- the Court of Appeal - was being a public nuisance. That's
all that's been determined in the Court of Appeal.
HIS HONOUR: Well, what's it got to do with this case, that's
what I'm trying to find out.
APPELLANT: Well, on the same occasion, when he did the - when
he - he arrested me just after he'd done the armed robbery he
charged me with public nuisance. Well, I mean, I can't be
causing a public nuisance if I'm trying to defend myself
against an armed robbery-----
HIS HONOUR: But these are the charges-----
APPELLANT: -----as best I can.
HIS HONOUR: Pardon me, but the charges here are not ones of
creating a public nuisance, are they?
APPELLANT: No - no, they're - it's - it's in - in relation to
the same incident. He - he made out that I was - well, that
was the second charge, he decided to change it to - but on
that occasion - it's all related to the same event. The armed
robbery was to get the house from me and they didn't have a
right of entry. They didn't have a right of entry which had a
- had an effect on the - the - of public nuisance. And the
fact they didn't have an entry - right of entry had an effect
on the - this matter before the Court that he's an armed
robber.
HIS HONOUR: What's that got to do with the charges here?
APPELLANT: Well, the charges that are - I have - causing
offence to this - for Police Officer Rantala, because it's
alleged that I've put on the web that he's an armed robber.
Well, it's on the web that he's an armed robber. And I - I
will say now that he is an armed robber. I have no doubt - I
have no qualms in saying he's an armed robber.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: And because he committed armed robbery - he had no
right of entry. And there is a whole - the Council has
created a ruse - an art of this, to try and give them scheming
authority to enter. And that involved the use of - of
[indistinct] which they thought they would have had footage to
not produce. But obviously the girl who was instructed to
proceed with it didn't understand the concept of client
620
privilege and that the legal opinion that they would rely on
was - wasn't to become public. And they would have been able
to rely on later and say, "Oh, well, look, we have - we have a
barrister's opinion, but we have client privilege on that,
your Honour, so, we don't have to produce it, so you don't
have to see how we could misinterpret that to believe that we
had authority to enter."
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: But, anyway, though - so, can you see now how
these matters are related?
HIS HONOUR: Well, not really. I can see what - I think I see
what you're saying that you've got some issue with the police
officer, Rantala, who you say, because of his conduct,
committed an offence of robbery.
APPELLANT: Armed robbery.
HIS HONOUR: Armed robbery, yes. And, the charges against you
now, allege that - you say that some of the - one of the
charges here relates to something published on the web about
Rantala; is that right?
APPELLANT: The four of them do. The four charges do.
HIS HONOUR: The four charges do. Well-----
APPELLANT: Yes.
HIS HONOUR: But I'm - the only common feature seems to be
Rantala.
APPELLANT: And his armed robbery.
HIS HONOUR: And his armed robbery.
APPELLANT: That's right.
HIS HONOUR: But how does that help me with this appeal today?
APPELLANT: Well, that's only once you've decided that the -
there's been denial of - of due process.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: And then you have to decide what to do. I mean,
it's brought to your attention that there's been a denial of
due process which I think you can - you should be able to
clearly see, and - I forget what I'm saying half the-----
HIS HONOUR: That's all right.
APPELLANT: The - yeah, once you can see there's a denial of
due process, the whole thing's a nullity and, I mean, you
know, what are you to do with - you're going to - back to some
common point of which it was no longer a nullity. And so,
621

okay, when they - well, the charges before the Court
proceedings began maybe-----
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: So, okay, you have four charges before you and
now, you know, what do you do with them.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm. So, can I try and encapsulate what you're
saying in this way: you're saying that there's been a denial
of natural justice. Therefore, in your words, "The whole
proceedings in the Magistrates Court are a nullity", and,
accordingly, I should strike them out and that I have the
power to do that. Is that what you say?
APPELLANT: What I mean, you have to do something with the
fact. Yeah, you can't - you can't ignore the fact that
there's been a denial of due process in the Magistrates Court.
You know, maybe on the first day, maybe prior to the first day
of hearings. Maybe, you know, on the 24th of June or maybe
even prior to that-----
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: -----or at some time on the 24th of June, and, as
such, at which time that there was a denial of due process or
that it fell apart - the due process, then the whole thing's a
nullity. It can't be pulled back on the rail.
HIS HONOUR: It's only a committal proceeding, wasn't it,
before the Magistrate?
APPELLANT: It still has to give you a fair hearing.
HIS HONOUR: Well, yes, but I mean you - you're defence -----
APPELLANT: Still has to give me due process.
HIS HONOUR: Your defence that you may have to the charges,
would emerge at the hearing, wouldn't it?
APPELLANT: If there was a hearing, yes - yes-----
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: -----that's right. But that doesn't mean that we
can throw due process out the door and do what we like-----
HIS HONOUR: No.
APPELLANT: -----in a committal hearing. He has to give me a
fair hearing.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: Magistrate Kluck has actually said that on the
record.
622

HIS HONOUR: And how were you denied-----
APPELLANT: So - yeah.
HIS HONOUR: -----how do you say you missed a fair hearing
again-----
APPELLANT: I have special needs, your Honour. I'm - and they
were denied to me.
HIS HONOUR: All right.
APPELLANT: I mean I - I am disabled. I can't do a full time
job.
HIS HONOUR: No.
APPELLANT: And here am I trying to be - being forced to try
and - and think through the things for a whole day.
HIS HONOUR: Yeah.
APPELLANT: You know?
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: I can't do that.
HIS HONOUR: All right.
APPELLANT: And they can't do that. And they've admit that if
you, you know - I - I have actually summarised the - those
three days where evidence was given-----
HIS HONOUR: Yes, I see that.
APPELLANT: And, you know, there's, like, 200-odd points per
day, roughly, where I've put anchors into the transcript.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
APPELLANT: And the people can read through those 200
summaries, that summary of 200 sentences, basically, and they
click on one; it will take it right to the point in the
transcript. And now they - those - those anchors should be
in sequence. I hope they are. I intended them to be.
HIS HONOUR: They seem to be.
APPELLANT: And, so, one can follow through the transcript in
that way without having to read it all.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
623

APPELLANT: And people have told me that they - they have
found that that does help them find something in the
transcript.
HIS HONOUR: Yes. Yes, it does.
APPELLANT: So-----
HIS HONOUR: You've got the days 1, 2, 3 and so on.
APPELLANT: And the mentions afterwards and the five mentions
prior to that.
HIS HONOUR: That's right.
APPELLANT: Yeah, I think I - it was the 9th of June I called
00 - day 00, I think. And, yeah, so-----
HIS HONOUR: That's right, 00, 9 June, yes.
APPELLANT: Yeah, see, I can do that work by doing a bit at a
time. You know, when I - you know, when it doesn't - when
it's not happening, then I know it's not happening.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: So I can come back to it at a later time.
HIS HONOUR: I see.
APPELLANT: You know, trying to recover from my injury as
well, you know, trying to - I don't know whether it works -
having to keep on training myself, pushing myself.
HIS HONOUR: You know it would help you a lot if you had legal
representation with these problems.
APPELLANT: Well, I don't - I don't need it.
HIS HONOUR: I thought you said you had a problem though.
APPELLANT: No, well, I have special needs but as long as you
accommodate them - that has to do with my concentration. I
cannot do long stints.
HIS HONOUR: If you had a lawyer, they could do the
concentrating for you in relevant respects.
APPELLANT: No, I don't trust that.
HIS HONOUR: I beg your pardon?
APPELLANT: I don't trust that to be the case. I'd rather do
my own thinking where I can do it.
HIS HONOUR: I see. All right.
APPELLANT: And I'm entitled to that.
624

HIS HONOUR: Yes. All right.
APPELLANT: And I'm entitled to the dignity of being able to
represent myself.
HIS HONOUR: Look, no-one's disputing that.
APPELLANT: Yeah, and-----
HIS HONOUR: You're entitled to do it. I'm just suggesting to
you that sometimes there is a lot of benefit to be had in
having someone represent you.
APPELLANT: Mmm. Well, you know I do have a law degree?
HIS HONOUR: Oh, yes, I see you have a law degree.
APPELLANT: Mmm. Well, I might have a little knowledge of
law.
HIS HONOUR: Yes. All right. All right, well, is there
anything else you want to add to your submissions, Mr Mathews?
APPELLANT: Well, I want to know if I can adduce some
evidence.
HIS HONOUR: Yes, of course. All right, well, look, I'll hear
from Mr Hunter now and then I'll come back to you, all right?
APPELLANT: Well, I also - on my memory and being able to
remember things-----
HIS HONOUR: Yes?
APPELLANT: That's why I need - I put my submissions in
writing.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: So I have it in writing.
HIS HONOUR: Oh, yes.
APPELLANT: And I'm just wondering when Mr Hunter makes his
submissions if I can have that in writing. That means the
transcript, basically, unless he does his submissions in
writing also.
HIS HONOUR: Well, you would have received Mr Hunter's outline
of argument some time ago.
APPELLANT: Some time ago.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: Done by another barrister, apparently.
625

HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: Yes, but that's not his submission. So I'm
wondering if I can have a transcript - a contemporary
transcript. I know that - I have been in the-----
HIS HONOUR: It's not possible to give you a contemporary
transcript because none of us have that.
APPELLANT: Well, I have been in the District Court previously
and the transcripts came in regularly-----
HIS HONOUR: We don't have a-----
APPELLANT: -----of what had been-----
HIS HONOUR: We don't have a contemporary transcript.
APPELLANT: Well, I have been - as I said, been in the
District Court and, you know, it had been a few-day trial and
the transcripts of what had been said in the morning would
come in in the afternoon and such like that so it was within
our-----
HIS HONOUR: It depends on the - it depends on the load that's
placed upon the State Reporting Bureau at the relevant time,
Mr Mathews.
APPELLANT: Yeah, well-----
HIS HONOUR: But, I mean, you'll get a transcript of what's
said today. You're entitled to-----
APPELLANT: When?
HIS HONOUR: You're entitled to ask for that.
APPELLANT: When will I have that? Can-----
HIS HONOUR: Well, I can't answer-----
APPELLANT: Can the Court-----
HIS HONOUR: I can't answer that because-----
APPELLANT: Could the - can - will-----
HIS HONOUR: -----I don't even know when I'll get one.
APPELLANT: Can the Court order that I receive one now so that
I don't have-----
HIS HONOUR: No, you have to make an application to the State
Reporting Bureau.
APPELLANT: Well, the - it's the Court orders that it'll be -
it'll happen anyway. I won't need to make that because that's
an extra job that I have to do because I'm disabled because,
626

you know, if I wasn't disabled, I probably wouldn't worry
about it.
HIS HONOUR: All right. All right, look, can you just-----
APPELLANT: So that's why I'm wanting the Court to make that
order for me.
HIS HONOUR: All right. All right, well, I'll consider that.
Would you like to just wait on line for the moment?
APPELLANT: Will do, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: And we'll hear from Mr Hunter.
Mr Hunter, I have, of course, read your outline of argument as
I had read Mr Mathews'.
MR HUNTER: Yes, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: And is there anything specifically that you wish
to add to it? And I would like to hear from you also in
relation to Mr Mathews' application to call additional
evidence.
MR HUNTER: With respect to the outline of submissions, your
Honour, the Crown or the respondent has nothing further to
add, and, indeed, the committal proceedings are effectively
still on foot although they've been referred to this Court.
As such, the law with respect to the interpretation of the
words in subsection 1 of section 222 of the Justices Act
clearly say that an appeal is only competent when there's been
effectively a final order of the Court. There is no
final-----
APPELLANT: Excuse me, your Honour, I cannot hear very well.
HIS HONOUR: All right. Can we move the - Mr Bailiff, is it
possible to move the - try that. We've moved things around a
little bit, Mr Mathews.
APPELLANT: Thank you, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: I think what you were saying was that - you're
referring to section 222 and saying that an appeal can
only-----
MR HUNTER: Lie-----
HIS HONOUR: -----lie-----
MR HUNTER: -----in respect of a final determination on a
complaint. There has been no final determination of any
description on that complaint. The practical effect, although
not in the words of the legislation, is that the committal has
effectively been adjourned sine die until the determination of
the interlocutory issue of fitness to be tried. That's the
practical effect. So, in essence, the committal proceeding
627

has not been finalised within the meaning of the case law with
respect to the interpretation of section 222(1). So in that
respect the Crown's submission or the respondent's submission
is that the appeal is incompetent. There's nothing further
I'd seek to add in respect of the outline of submissions so
tendered, your Honour.
Your Honour, with respect to the other issue concerning
additional evidence, in the circumstance - if your Honour were
to accept my first submission, then your Honour need not even
determine it - the issue of the additional evidence, but,
under section 223 of the Justices Act, your Honour would be
well familiar with the fact that an appeal of this nature is
by way of a rehearing on the evidence, but that any further
evidence that might be sought to be called must first be the
subject of an application for leave.
In order for your Honour to properly adjudicate on that, your
Honour would have to be satisfied that the subpoenas have been
properly served and that there should be a return of service
or an affidavit of service of those subpoenas before the Court
with information, for example, that the proposed witnesses had
been provided with conduct money. I'm unaware of what the
nature of the Court file is so if your associate could check
perhaps that there is an affidavit of service or there is an
affidavit of service, then those subpoenas-----
HIS HONOUR: Well there's not one presently on file but
whether it's been served, I don't know. On the file as I have
it, that is. But what about - even if that is so, where does
it take this appeal?
MR HUNTER: Well, in my submission, it doesn't take us any
further. The witnesses, as I understand it, are from the
Brisbane City Council and their evidence can only go to
whether or not the events of that day - I think it's back in
2004 where Sergeant Rantala and Constable Antony attended the
address at Hawken Drive - was illegal entry or otherwise.
With respect to the particulars of the offences, your Honour,
the reference to Sergeant Rantala is merely one particular of
many particulars. The particulars were supplied to Mr Mathews
in advance of the committal. A list of - there were two CDs.
There were two discs provided which contain downloads of
various websites, the images and the text that was on those
websites. Mr Mathews was provided with a list of documents,
that is, the file names of the documents and text which the
Crown said offended section 474.17 of the code. The reference
to Sergeant Rantala does appear on a number of occasions in
those documents but there are further other unrelated texts,
for example, the text involving the allegations against her
Honour Judge Dick. There is also text involving Brisbane City
Council employees. There is some extremely derogatory
language used to describe Ms Whiting who's one of the
subpoenaed witnesses, as I understand it, and, to be brutally
blunt, she's described as a "filthy, stinking, sloven slut" in
some of the - in one particular webpage.
628

So the issue involving Sergeant Rantala, as I said, is only
one small part or one part of the particulars. So the
evidence of the Brisbane City Council lawyer and Ms Whiting
and Mr Tolton - I'm not sure what position, if any, he holds
in the council - would not advance your Honour's consideration
of any issue before you today, in my submission.
APPELLANT: [Indistinct]-----
HIS HONOUR: Sorry, just a minute, Mr - just a minute,
Mr Mathews. I'll come back to you shortly.
APPELLANT: Okay.
HIS HONOUR: You'll get a chance again shortly.
Yes, Mr Hunter?
MR HUNTER: I have nothing further, your Honour, on that
point.
HIS HONOUR: All right. Mr Hunter, just one thing. I accept
this might be getting a bit off it, away from the real - what
you say is the real issue here, but how is the prosecution
going to prove the matters in section 20(b)(1)? You haven't
got any psychiatric assessment.
MR HUNTER: There is some material from a Dr Moyle who has
been Mr Mathews' treating doctor for some years and I have
been in contact with Mr Moyle with a view to having a
recommendation for another psychiatrist to see Mr Mathews in
the short term to have him assessed.
HIS HONOUR: All right.
MR HUNTER: And the plan was, or the strategy was, to call
both Dr Moyle and the second doctor-----
HIS HONOUR: All right. So the Crown would say, if it came to
it, they do have evidence?
MR HUNTER: Yes.
HIS HONOUR: All right. All right, well, thank you,
Mr Hunter.
MR HUNTER: Thank you, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: All right, well, can I come back to you now,
Mr Mathews, and give you the opportunity to reply to
anything-----
APPELLANT: Yes.
HIS HONOUR: -----you've just heard?
APPELLANT: Yes, your Honour. Well, on the matter of fitness
to be tried, in fact Mr Hunter and the DPP are in agreement
629

that I'm not unfit to be tried. They're trying to say that I
am fit to be tried. Whether that's the truth or not-----
HIS HONOUR: Sorry-----
APPELLANT: -----is a different matter.
HIS HONOUR: Sorry. Sorry, I - presumably-----
APPELLANT: I'm sorry. Yes?
HIS HONOUR: The Magistrate's referred it up here because
there's a question of your fitness to be tried that's arisen,
in his view.
APPELLANT: Well, there hasn't. There hasn't. But that was
his view. He had to get rid of it because he'd long - long -
long before this, he realised he'd made the thing a nullity, a
denial of due process. So he had to do something with it when
- what was he going to do? What was he going to do? It was
denial of due process and he wanted to get rid of it.
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: So, you know, I mean, there's no other question
now. What was Mr Hunter saying? Oh, yes, he's
misrepresenting the situation by saying there was a whole host
of material and all that. It boils down to two matters. One
is the matter regarding the armed robbery by Rantala and the
other matter is regarding apparently an address for Julie
Maree Dick who has the same name as the name that - as the
maiden name of Judge Julie Maree Mellifont. She was Julie
Maree Dick prior to her marriage to that notorious Terry
Mellifont. So - yes, so - and she goes by the name of Julie
Maree Dick in - as a Judge in the District Court, but in fact
there is another woman whose married name is Julie Maree Dick
who lives in an adjoining suburb to the suburb where Terry
Mellifont and Julie Maree Mellifont live. So - and that is -
that's basically the other two scenarios and my submission
will be if I'm ever put to the point that that scenario
regarding the Dicks was just - that was just [indistinct] so
they could bring it up to be a red herring in another - if
they ever wanted to bring-----
HIS HONOUR: Sorry, it was just what?
APPELLANT: It will be a red herring if ever they wanted to,
you know, give - say it was - well, they could then say, "Oh,
there were a whole lot of matters", you see, not just the
Rantala matter, but yeah, that - it can be shown that the
police did not ever try to effect any real change for the
lady, Julie Maree Dick, the childcare lady, but anyway that is
a total furphy.
HIS HONOUR: If the two people you subpoenaed were here today,
what would you say to them? What would you ask them?
APPELLANT: It would be a matter of raising the - well, it
630

would be a matter then of your having to decide - well, it
would - I would ask them the questions regarding the - well,
for a start, to produce a legal opinion, the barristers being
in which - where client privilege has been waived. You see
that letter I've produced in the affidavit - in the
submission-----
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
APPELLANT: -----from the council dated 25th of June. You can
see clearly that - well, I'd want her to produce that, for a
start, because that letter is also before you in evidence and
the - apparently downloaded from a website. Mr Hunter can
probably tell you if that is the case if that's on the CDs or
something. Anyway - yes, that letter's there. And that
letter, Jenny - rather - what's her name? Joanne Whiting had
actually signed that letter and we could get a copy from her
and we would prove the veracity of that letter and that in
fact she had waived client privilege on that report. And, in
fact, the information - I have obtained some of that legal
opinion because - under FOI because the Information
Commissioner had determined that they had waived client
privilege.
HIS HONOUR: Well, if I had that - even if I had that, how
would that help me today?
APPELLANT: Well, it would show you that the - that the ruse
or artifice that has been created by the council was, in fact,
an artifice and how they had no real justification in saying
they had authority to enter and the-----
HIS HONOUR: So you say that might show that it was an
unlawful entry, but how would that help me with this appeal?
APPELLANT: Well, the thing is you don't need that to show
it's an unlawful entry. I mean, you can - well, the thing is
you need for them to show that they don't have a Court order,
but that's already before you in evidence because Rantala has
stated, under oath, on the 28th of June and - Magistrate Kluck
- that there was no Court order-----
HIS HONOUR: So you've got this evidence anyway?
APPELLANT: Well, no, that's only some of the evidence. The
evidence is not that - the lengths to which the council has
gone to create the artifice-----
HIS HONOUR: Oh, I see.
APPELLANT: -----and that once you had seen that, then you
would see that there was obviously fraud afoot.
HIS HONOUR: I see. All right.
APPELLANT: And so you'd be very wary of allowing these
charges to go forward.
631

HIS HONOUR: All right. So is that it? You'd say that their
evidence would show that - to use your words - the length to
which the council went to create the artifice; is that right?
APPELLANT: That's right, your Honour, and that - yes, well,
and that the - and that in fact it cannot be disputed that if
they did not have entry, there is sufficient evidence from
themselves that they took property from my - they took my
possessions from my yard and premises at my property and that
therefore the elements are there for armed robbery-----
HIS HONOUR: I see. So-----
APPELLANT: -----by the common purpose, by the number of
persons involved.
HIS HONOUR: I see.
APPELLANT: And, I mean, it's a matter of-----
HIS HONOUR: So are you saying that somehow or other that
justifies what you said about Rantala on the web or what
you're alleged to have said about Rantala on the web? Is that
right?
APPELLANT: Well, if he is an armed robber, I mean, would it
be wrong to say - well, yeah, if he is an armed robber, would
it be wrong to say that he is an armed robber on the web?
HIS HONOUR: I see. So - all right.
APPELLANT: Well, would it be?
HIS HONOUR: No, I'm just - I'm just trying to come to grips
with your argument; that's all. And I think I have it now.
APPELLANT: Yes.
HIS HONOUR: I think I understand what you're saying.
APPELLANT: Well, that would be what you have to do with the
charges-----
HIS HONOUR: All right.
APPELLANT: -----once you see that there has been - that I've
been denied due process and hence void-----
HIS HONOUR: All right.
632

APPELLANT: So, I mean, Magistrate Kluck was sitting on, you
know, hearings which were a nullity on many, many occasions
and nothing can be - nothing can bring them back from being a
nullity and that, you know, so if that is, it cannot be
reactivated. That - that - that hearing is on hold at the
moment and cannot be reactivated by the Magistrates Court and
if it is purportedly reactivated by the District Court when,
in fact, it was a nullity, well, it can't be reactivated by
the District Court under the referral - the 20 - [indistinct]
of the referral because they've been - I'll - I'll be stating
that the referral is void anyway - void ab initio. But what I
am saying is that the decision to void long before that - the
decisions of Magistrate Kluck were a nullity long before that.
So, yeah, so I - I don't think you can, you know, yes, we have
to - regarding those subpoenas too, I mean, depends - okay,
depends on legal finding. I be asking for a certain
assistance from the Court in getting those - making sure we
have those properly served and that would be for a time for an
adjournment in this matter. I'd be asking for an adjournment
to assist and for that to be done. But, yeah, but on - on the
point now we have to decide on the fact that it was a nullity
long - long before and that once that's brought to your - your
attention as it has been and the - the decisions are final,
you cannot say they're not final, there is a denial of due
process long ago. And of course the matter is finalized in
the District Court and in the Magistrates Court - the
committal is finalized in - in law. Thank you, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: All right. Well, thank you, Mr Mathews. Pardon
me. It seems to me you've presented your argument very
carefully this morning and I have your outline of submissions
as well as your arguments that I've received - the arguments
that you've sent yesterday - your written submissions. So you
may be assured that I will give those very careful
consideration.
APPELLANT: Mmm-hmm.
HIS HONOUR: I intend to reserve my decision in this matter.
APPELLANT: Yes.
HIS HONOUR: Save only for this that in relation to the
application to call further evidence, the power to - to -
section 223 of the Justices Act provides that an appeal under
section 222 is by way of re-hearing on the evidence - that is,
on the original evidence given in the proceedings before the
Justices.
APPELLANT: Yes.
HIS HONOUR: The Court may, however, give leave to adduce
fresh additional or substituted - that is, new evidence - if
the Court is satisfied that there are special grounds for
giving such leave.
APPELLANT: Yes, your Honour.
633

HIS HONOUR: In the circumstances here, given the nature of
the appeal and the issue that is before me, I am not satisfied
that such special grounds exist and I cannot see that any
injustice would follow to the appellant if the application to
adduce that further evidence were denied. So in the
circumstances, the application to adduce the evidence is
denied and although there's no evidence that the subpoenas
have been properly served I will be prepared to order that
they be set aside. And I will reserve my decision in this
matter, Mr Mathews, and I'll have the sheriff contact you when
I'm in a position to deliver it.
APPELLANT: Thank you, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: Thank you, Mr Mathews. And again-----
APPELLANT: Do you have any - do you have any idea when that
may be?
HIS HONOUR: Look, no, I don't but I'll-----
APPELLANT: Okay.
HIS HONOUR: -----I'll try to do it as soon as I can. Can I
just say again you've - you've presented your argument very
carefully and I will take it all into - into account.
APPELLANT: So maybe I didn’t need a legal representation.
HIS HONOUR: Maybe but I still suggest that might be welladvised,
Mr Mathews.
MR HUNTER: Your Honour, can I just clarify one matter that Mr
Mathews seem to take issue with?
APPELLANT: I can't hear, your Honour. I can't hear. Thank
you.
HIS HONOUR: Can't hear Mr Hunter. All right. Well, I'll
just move it around again.
MR HUNTER: I'll just speak up. Can I just clarify one matter
that Mr Mathews did take issue with or appeared to?
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
MR HUNTER: It is true that at the committal the Crown did
oppose the order under section 20B - the making of it. His
Honour, the learned Magistrate disagreed with that as was his
right.
HIS HONOUR: Was his right. Yes. I - I must admit I wondered
why he shouldn't have proceeded to exercise his powers to hear
the matter.
MR HUNTER: Nonetheless, he did make the order.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
634

MR HUNTER: And it is true that the Crown opposed it.
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
MR HUNTER: Your Honour asked me earlier how the Crown would
go about proving-----
HIS HONOUR: Yes.
MR HUNTER: -----the matters in section 20. The Crown does
have the contact details of these doctors who can give
evidence that is relevant-----
HIS HONOUR: Mmm.
MR HUNTER: -----but what the final outcome might be is
entirely a matter for the jury.
HIS HONOUR: Yes. No question about that.
MR HUNTER: The Crown would simply call those witnesses and
let the jury decide.
HIS HONOUR: Yes. Yes.
MR HUNTER: That's - that's the point I was trying to clarify.
HIS HONOUR: All right. All right. All right. Well, would
you adjourn the Court please, Mr Bailiff?
THE COURT ADJOURNED AT 10.30 A.M.
635



 Menu:  Latest Update: So why is   District Court Judge Administrator Kerry John O'Brien,   who is Second Only To Corrupt Patsy Mary Wolfe,   So Determined To Control My Appearances in the District Court 

includedMenuDistrictCourtKerryOBrien.php

Menu: Qld District Court coram DCJ Kerry John OBrien

G'day, This menu will collect the various mentions on our websites of our process of exposing the fraud and corruption in the Public Sector of Queensland and the Commonwealth of Australia.  So much of this corruption is in the court, but we believe we have found a 'headland' of Truth and Honesty in the Queensland Courts.  Regardless, we can take these legal matters to higher courts including UN Committees in Geneva Switzerland.  We believe we have been able to make these inroads into the corruption in Queensland and Austalia because of our websites.
  1. Submission to District Court re DCJ Griffin Recuse SCQ Application HUMAN RIGHTS Injunction Nicola Roxon 19th November, 2012:
  2. Submission to District Court re SCQ Application HUMAN RIGHTS Injunction Nicola Roxon & My Flu; 12th November, 2012:
  3. 2nd November, 2012 Unrepresented Disabled Defendant Teaches Human Rights Law To District Court Judge Kerry John O'Brien:
  4. Submission To District Court DCJA Kerry O'Brien 19th October, 2012 Re Disability Arrangements Unlawful Order Is Disability Discrimination:
  5. 4th Oct 2012 Transcript DCJ Michael Shanahan Prejudges Appeal Without Jurisdiction Or Evidence Eager Misrepresent My Application To Recuse:
  6. Submission to & Appearance in District Court 4th October, 2012 Motion DCJ Michael Shanahan Disqualify Himself As catholic Due Repeated catholic Fraud, Corruption, Attempted Murder; Patsy Wolfe, Quentin Bryce, Jeff Spender; Apprehended Bias a la Ustashi, IRA, nazi:
  7. See the Outcome of my Submission [above] to mention 4th October, 2012:
  8. Magistrate Marshall Davies, Eager To Convict Innocent Disabled Man Targeted By Corrupt Police To Please Corrupt Police:
  9. CDPP Email Advice & District Court Transcript: re My Motions, 24th August, 2012, DCJA Kerry John O'Brien Rejects Immunity from Prosecution Due Qualified Privilege Confirms SetUp by Government including Courts:
  10. CDPP Email Advice & District Court Transcript: re My Motions, 31st July, 2012, Russell Mathews: DCJA Kerry O'Brien's back, admits ignorance, seems determined to not ensure Fair Hearing; Due Process. :
  11. Submission & Appearance to District Court 24th August, 2012 Motion Permanent Stay Qualified Privilege Social Moral Duty Expose Australian Corruption in Continued Attack upon Disabled Old Man by Queensland & Australian Government to conceal his EXPLOITATION by Douglas Porter of University of Qld & Chief Justice Paul deJersey's Brisbane Diocese Anglican Church; & Disqualification of Judges for BIAS & WORSE:
  12. Why Chief District Court Judge Patsy Mary Wolfe Should Disqualify From Dealing with RussellMathews,in Any Matter:
  13. Why District Court Judge Kerry John O'Brien Should Disqualify From Dealing with Russell Mathews in Any Matter:
  14. Submission & Appearance to District Court "Interim Review" 31st July, 2012 in Continued Attack upon Disabled Old Man by Queensland & Australian Government to conceal his EXPLOITATION by Douglas Porter of University of Qld & Chief Justice Paul deJersey's Brisbane Diocese Anglican Church; Re DUTY of Court to Determine & Provide Accommodation of my Special Needs for Due Process & Disqualification of Judges for BIAS & WORSE:
  15. Judge Julie Maree Mellifont nee Dick Has Less Risk of Violent Attack As REAL Julie Maree Dick Is BAIT:
  16. Perjury, Fraud & Corruption Connection to "Her Honour" Judge Julie Maree Mellifont nee Dick aka Judge Julie Marie Dick:
  17. DCJ Leanne Clare nee HURLEY: Murder Pig Snr Sgt Chris HURLEY Palm Island killer Mulrunji Doomadgee, Why as DPP would she not charge her NAMESAKE?:
  18. District Court Transcript: Mention, 15th June, 2012, Russell Mathews: DUMB Chief Judge Patsy Mary Wolfe's prior professional misconduct returning to haunt her. :
  19. District Court Transcript: Mention, 20th April, 2012, Russell Mathews coram Judge Milton Griffin SC DCJ Asks CDPP's Shane Hunter If Referral Order Proper & Question Properly Raised:
  20. Submission to District Court Mention 15th June, 2012 in Continued Attack upon Disabled Old Man by Queensland & Australian Government to conceal his EXPLOITATION by University of Qld & Chief Justice Paul deJersey's Brisbane Diocese Anglican Church:
  21. Hearing 16th May, 2011 Mathews-v-TheCommissioner of Police [2011] QDC_Brisbane #3095_2010 coram KJ O'Brien DCJA::
  22. Hearing 21st July, 2011 Mathews-v-TheCommissioner of Police [2011] QDC_Brisbane #3095_2010 coram KJ O'Brien DCJA::
  23. Decision 21st July, 2011 Mathews-v-TheCommissioner of Police [2011] QDC_Brisbane #3095_2010 coram KJ O'Brien DCJA::
  24. The August, 2011 [20110814] Update: on Court Case Alleging Russell Mathews' Use of a Carriage Service [Broadband] to harass but actually Exposing Even More police & political Corruption in Australia:
  25. Anthony Gett of International Society for the Reform of Criminal Law does CRIMINAL FAVOUR for OTHER ISRCL 'members'
  26. Anthony Gett of International Society for the Reform of Criminal Law {ISRCL} uses ISRCL EVIL contact to TARGET DISABLED PERSON
  27. Listing of Members & Directors of the International Society for the Reform of Criminal Law
  28. International Society for the Reform of Criminal Law Director's CRIME to DEFRAUD DISABLED PERSON
  29. What is the future for the International Society for the Reform of Criminal Law After CRIME Exposure?
  30. Who are the International Society for the Reform of Criminal Law?
  31. Anthony Gett sycophant to International Society for the Reform of Criminal Law Evil judges:
  32. Index: District Court coram DCJ Kerry John OBrien [We may move this file later, out of the Emails Menu: Now we have.]
  33. Submission #0001:  Purported  referral to the District Court  per Sec 20B Crimes Act 1914 by Magistrate Paul M Kluck on 24th September, 2010
  34. Submission #0002:  Purported  referral to the District Court  per Sec 20B Crimes Act 1914 by Magistrate Paul M Kluck on 24th September, 2010
  35. Initial General Submission to District Court coram DCJ Kerry John O'Brien AO for mention 28th January, 2011
  36. Submission #0003 in Registrar's Reference; District Court Appeal, # D3095/10: 10AM 4th March, 2011: Mathews _v_ Read & another:
  37. Submission #0004 in Sec222, Justices Act 1886; District Court Appeal, # D3095/10: 9:30AM 16th May, 2011: Mathews _v_ Read & another/Commissioner of Police:
  38. State Crime Operations Command Pigs Steven Geoffrey Bignell & Brendan Scott Read [Now of KPMG] Con the Dicks To Help Police Crime
  39. Queensland Police Keep Clever Dick John Edward Dick & the REAL Julie Maree Dick On Ice To Further Police Fraud
  40. Medical Report of 20100806 ex Dr Rob Moyle re Special Needs Accommodated by Keyboard and Computer = Disability AIDS
  41. Dr Bennett's report 31st March, 1998, listing FOUR separate episodes of head injuries sustained by me

Menu: of Emails: Registry, District Court coram DCJ Kerry John OBrien

  1. District Court emails of 20101104 re District Court coram Kerry O'Brien: Jo Stonebridge Emails Ending with Smart Arse Email Ex Smart Arse Deputy Regisrar Kerri
  2. More 20101104_District Court coram Kerry O'Brien Emails Ex District Court Jo Stonebridge & Deputy Registrar Kerri
  3. Jo StoneBridge, Sherrif & Marshal Qld District Court Bogus Email Advice to Purchase Transcripts
  4. Smart Arse Email From Smart Arse Deputy Registrar Kerri
  5. Email 20101122 Jo Stonebridge District Court Sheriff & Marshal
  6. Commonwealth DPP_Handed Up Copy Of My Submission For Attention Judge Kerry John Obrien
  7. Jo Stonebridge Advises That I_Am Required To Attend Next Mention
  8. Jo StoneBridge Sherrif & Marshal Qld District Court gives Bogus Advice to Purchase Transcripts
  9. District Court Registry Parasites Impede Disabled Old Man's Communication With the Court
  10. Qld Public Sector Parasite Jo Stonebridge Deems My Commuication With Court 'Not Appropriate'
  11. Jo Stonebridge Now Advises There Is No Charge for Transcripts in Criminal Matters
  12. My Direct Reproach to Jo Stonebridge for Impeding My Communication with the Court
  13. 20101206 Ken Wells Executive Officer to the Director of Courts [WOW - Big Deal] Bogus information Pittance
  14. My Advice to District Court That I_will Publish on the Web due to Her Stuffing Me Around
  15. My Advice to District Court That District Court Lacks Jurisdiction
  16. My Advice to District Court That I_Will Communicate As A_Courtesy
  17. District Court Ken Wells Response To My Reproach of Jo Stonebridge Re Courteous
includedCDDMenuAvengerRevengeRetribution.php http://HaigReport.com/aaaaMenu/Menus/includedMenuDefraudingMeMyHome.php

LinkToAspinallInMorganPanel This Profile Panel re the dumb parasitic anglican priest John Leslie Morgan, links most appropriately to the site exposing the fraud by archbishop Phillip Aspinall of a vulnerable disabled guy where anglican archbishop Phillip Aspinall headed up the scheme to steal the home of this vulnerable disabled guy.

http://HaigReport.com/Photos/100_0663_20070120CanonRevProfDrJohnLeslieMorganWardenStJohnsCollegeUniversityQueenslandHidingBehindToiletRolls_cr30pc.jpg
About this despicable life form , Canon Rev. (sic) Prof. Dr John Leslie Morgan [he just loves his "titles", as worthless as they are; his PhD is in "divinity"], Anglican "Priest" & CRIMINAL, now Warden, St Johns College, St Lucia Campus, of The CORRUPT University of Queensland.

This photo was taken in a supermarket, on the 20th January, 2007 at 4:54PM Brisbane, Australia time, when Morgan was attemting to not be photographed by hiding behind some toilet rolls.

This individual is evil and he escapes scrutiny as he is a "priest".  Over time I have collected much evidence about his evil and criminal actions and published it.  I have assembled that into a menu.  I now include that menu here.
/PHPincludesCorruptBrisbaneDiocese/includedMenuJohnMorgan.php Menu: CORRUPT Rev Canon Prof Dr John Leslie Morgan, @ St Johns College, UQ:
*  PROOF of the 2001 FRAUD  by CORRUPT Rev Canon Prof Dr John Morgan
*  Directory of links about Criminal parasite priest Rev Canon John Leslie Morgan:
*  Directory of Anglican CORRUPTION matters:
*  Anglicans conspire to steal the home of disabled with aid of political & judicial corruption
*  PROOF of another instance that Rev Canon Professor Dr John Leslie Morgan is yet again a LIAR
*  PROOF that Rev Canon Professor Dr John Leslie Morgan is Incompetent
*  PROOF that Rev Canon Professor Dr John Leslie Morgan is a BULLY
*  Email from Morgan showing he is a silly malicious ratbag 
*  Is this Primate Aspinall's BUSINESS ACUMEN?
*  Anglican priest bullies DISABLED Neighbour to STEAL his HOME.
*  Yet another Morgan LIE that neither he nor St John's College had any documents about me..  I had to push it all the way to the Privacy Commission, who Morgan was repeatedly ignoring.  He really thinks he is god.
*  Anglican CORRUPTION EXPOSED
*  Another Morgan LIE
*  One of the many examples of MONEY & FRAUD being motivator of 'Rev' John Morgan
*  $1Mill+ FRAUD- St Johns College & University of Queensland
*  Australian CRIMINAL LAW Journal ISSN: 1321-6562 26 February, 2007. Issue #: 200702
*  FRAUD on Uni Students: $1,500 RENT PER WEEK, for an ASBESTOS RIDDEN dump.
*  Is FRAUD the answer for Anglican return on investment?

We will build into this caption here, the detail that is relevant to this despicable life form .  Whereever this photo appears on new pages on our websites, this caption will accompany the image of Canon Rev. (sic) Prof. Dr John Leslie Morgan [he just loves his "titles", as worthless as they are; his PhD is in "divinity"], Anglican "Priest" & CRIMINAL, Warden, St Johns College, St Lucia Campus, of The CORRUPT University of Queensland.   This caption will be progressively added to all previous representations of the photo of Canon Rev. (sic) Prof. Dr John Leslie Morgan [he just loves his "titles", as worthless as they are; his PhD is in "divinity"], Anglican "Priest" & CRIMINAL, Warden, St Johns College, St Lucia Campus, of The CORRUPT University of Queensland. 

../Corrupt Police& Magistrates Menu.php An example of a CASCADING Drop Down Menu.

MENU: Rantala-Gate: Corrupt Police & Magistrates Mafia.

CDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.php aaaaLinks/LinkToRantalaGateIndexPage.php

If you wish to view and USE the Full    Rantala-Gate:   Corrupt Police & Magistrates Mafia  cascading drop down menu [CDDM], click to GoTo the   Rantala-Gate:    website.



New Document includedCDDMenuCourtTranscripts.php

See **** The EVIDENCE **** that ex-police cop parasite Peter Dutton, Liberal Party Federal MP for Dickson, tried, but failed, to close down our website disclosing labor ELECTORAL FRAUD, using corrupt Qld cops.

  Australian Federal Court Judge Jeffrey Spender is criminal scum. See the EVIDENCE

BREAKTHROUGH in Daniel Morcombe case.
We
SCOOPED Channel 7, TV & EXPOSED POLICE CORRUPTION.

See the photo PROOF
 E-Contact us to tell us what you think:

This website is part of the web-presence of

Russell G H Mathews BCom BSc LLB BA

View list of SOME of my WEBSITES and Bulletin Boards

Email: http://HaigReport.com/eml.html

SEE WHAT I PLAN TO DO ABOUT IT!

Image

CLICK on image => My Election HOMEPAGE


Russell G H Mathews BCom BSc LLB BA

View list of my WEBSITES and Bulletin Boards

Email: http://HaigReport.com/eml.html

See our LATEST TOPICS:

HOT NEWS: HARD EVIDENCE:  Joe Hockey & FASCIST CRIMINAL congress

I have been bullied my whole life.  See the reason.  That means that I have had fights my whole life.  You can realize the I detest bullies; that is, bullies that are personal to me, politically domestically which includes corrupt polticians, judges and ,MAGISTRATES  & MAGISTRATESmagistrates, more magistrates, lawyers, lawyers, and police, police, and other public sector parasites, plus, politically INTERNATIONALLY.

20041129 more reduced and cropped photo police Rantala.jpgDCP_0517_Big_Big_Big_A_Constable_Antony.jpg

















 CORRUPT ARMED ROBBER [with violence] Henri Elias Rantala. 

[see NEW Website on Henri Rantala]  

"PPheeeeew , that is HUUUUGE", he whispered.

Monica Antony [BigA for Antony]

Corrupt Cops  [talk about being the BUTT of humour]   'Does Swine flu [flew] have anything to do with the POLICE AIR WING? '  and who said, 'PIGS WILL FLY'.

SEE WHAT I PLAN TO DO ABOUT IT!

My Qualifications

       Bachelor of Commerce [BCom] [The University of Queensland] - 1978
       Bachelor of Science [BSc] [The University of Queensland]
- 1997
       Bachelor of Laws [LLB]
[The University of Queensland] - 2003
       Bachelor of Arts [BA]
[The University of Queensland] - 2003


   Police Constable Henri Elias Rantala aka 'Minge'  aka 'Dummy'  
20041129 more reduced and
            cropped photo police Rantala.jpg About this parasite , Corrupt cop Henri Elias Rantala aka Minge, aka dummy [he dumped his superior Superintendent Dale Pointon right into the CORRUPTION QUAGMIRE], Qld police prosecutor now prosecuting exclusively traffic charges, [I hear],, now groomed to perpetuate corruption in the Queensland police and Queensland government.
Rantala is a rare case within the Queensland Police Service [QPS] in that he he was "groomed" and "fast tracked" to continue the fraud, corruption and bribery that is the QPS within the wholesale corruption that is the Queensland labor Government.  [One major way to reduce this is the restoration of the Upper House  to the Queensland Parliament, the Legislative Council, as a democratically elected house.  It was abolished by the Queensland labor government in 1922.]  Rantala was groomed to be a police prosecutor, which is one position where police can be particularly corrupt.  As Prosecutors, they had Advocates Immunity.  I have been able to have this parasite under oath in the witness box subject to my cross examination.   In his evidence in chief at "Call Henri Elias Rantala" he produced a litany of lies.   My cross examination of him, and his replies thereto, at My Cross-Examination Of Corrupt Police Parasite Henri Elias Rantala,  are most instructive.  Considering all the subsequent events in the attempted corrupt cover-up of this gross crime of Armed Robbery by the Queensland Government, the extended period of planning activity that went into the perpetration of this Armed Robbery, and the fact that Rantala Left Indooroopilly Station from which he launched this Armed Robbery, targeting me, soon after in January2005, it appears Rantala was in integral part of this armed Robbery targeting me.  Just a few days prior, Douglas Porter, the then Registrar of The University of Queensland, for whom, as its Rep, Porter was orchestrating this Armed Robbery as a step towards stealing my beneficial ownership of my home, house and land, caused an attack on me and then called the police to me, and Rantala appeared..

 I will build in this caption here, the detail that is relevant to this despicable life form.  This caption will accompany the image of Henri Elias Rantala where ever it appears on our websites.  It will be progressively added to all previous representations of his photo.
We will build into this caption here, the detail that is relevant to this parasite .  Whereever this photo appears on new pages on our websites, this caption will accompany the image of Corrupt cop Henri Elias Rantala aka Minge, aka dummy [he dumped his superior Superintendent Dale Pointon right into the CORRUPTION QUAGMIRE], Qld police prosecutor now prosecuting exclusively traffic charges, [I hear],, groomed to perpetuate corruption in the Queensland police and Queensland government.   This caption will be progressively added to all previous representations of the photo of Corrupt cop Henri Elias Rantala aka Minge, aka dummy [he dumped his superior Superintendent Dale Pointon right into the CORRUPTION QUAGMIRE], Qld police prosecutor now prosecuting exclusively traffic charges, [I hear],, groomed to perpetuate corruption in the Queensland police and Queensland government. 



   Police Constable Monica Louise Antony aka 'Big A for Antony' 

DCP_0517-Big_Big Big A
            Constable Antony.jpg
We will build into this caption here, the detail that is relevant to this twit brainwashed with a bidet .  Whereever this photo appears on new pages on our websites, this caption will accompany the image of Corrupt cop Monica Louise Antony aka BigA for Antony, SUPER DUMB FEMALE Just consider her answers in my cross-examination of her, now that the police hierarchy has shuffled her out of the way, so she can do no harm to police corruption by her inability to lie convincingly.   This caption will be progressively added to all previous representations of the photo of Corrupt cop Monica Louise Antony aka BigA for Antony, SUPER DUMB FEMALE Just consider her answers in my cross-examination of her, now that the police hierarchy has shuffled her out of the way, so she can do no harm to police corruption by her inability to lie convincingly. 


../CorruptMagistratesMenu.php ../Corrupt Police& Magistrates Menu.php An example of a CASCADING Drop Down Menu.

MENU: Rantala-Gate: Corrupt Police & Magistrates Mafia.

CDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.php

Dumb Cop Henri Rantala UPDATE:


SEE:    Rantala-Gate:  => Qld Police CORRUPTION COVER-UP
& FACE of    Rantala-Gate:

UPDATE:

More PROOF of SENIOR LEVEL POLICE Corruption in Qld

[and not just in Queensland:]
Dumb cop Henri Elias Rantala dumps Superintendent Pointon and Senior cops right into the CORRUPTION MIRE that is Queensland.



"The offensive material has been subsequently been maintained on the internet since that time until the present day.  I have been contacted by Superintendent Pointon, Officers from Ethical Standards Command, Security Intelligence Branch, State Crime Operations Command, relatives all asking question about the material from 2006 until the present day."

"The offensive material has been subsequently been maintained on the internet since that time until the present day.  I have been contacted by Superintendent Pointon, Officers from Ethical Standards Command, Security Intelligence Branch, State Crime Operations Command, relatives all asking questions about the material from 2006 until the present day."

../CorruptMagistratesMenu.php ../Corrupt Police& Magistrates Menu.php An example of a CASCADING Drop Down Menu.

MENU: Rantala-Gate: Corrupt Police & Magistrates Mafia.

CDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.php
This, above, has been stated in writing in a signed statement by the
Corrupt Police Prosecutor Henri Elias Rantala, dated 21st October, 2009; [20091021].   What he calls "offensive material" is the irrefutable PROOF that Police Officer Henri Elias Rantala, committed an ARMED ROBBERY.  This "offensive material" also includes MY REPORT TO POLICE OF ARMED ROBBERY, which they have ignored.  This statement by Rantala, is now PROOF that the police are AWARE OF THE ARMED ROBBERY and are ignoring my complaint of ARMED ROBBERY, AND BREAKING, ENTERING AND STEALING by Queensland Police and Government officials.   I am trained in law with an LLB apart from my other qualifications.  I know more law that these mug police officers.  The evidence, the  irrefutable PROOF,  is shown on these websites.  It shows that Rantala, while armed, ensured that thieves could ransack my home.  The fact that the thieves pretended they were from Brisbane City  Council is irrelevant, as they did not have a legal right to enter.  The Queensland Parliament sets the process for Council to enter private property.  This involved obtaining a COURT ORDER.  The armed robbers and thieves did not have a court order.  Australia is becoming a REAL POLICE STATE, when police believe they can over-ride STATUTE LAW passed by the legislature.  

That police ignore instances of ARMED ROBBERY, is not unique in Queensland.   Andrew Phillip Scipione the Commissioner of the New South Wales Police Force is GUILTY OF SIMILAR CRIME [cover-up] IN NSW as relates to the case below.



Thieves using ARMED POLICE to detain the owner of the property, and keep the owner of the property separated from his property while the thieves steal the property, happens regularly with Queensland Corrupt Police.   One case occurred on 15th September, 2005 in Cairns when the thieves from St Vincent de Paul Society, with whom Jim Tierney previously of JT's Gym in NSW, were operating a Joint Venture for Charitable Purposes, called "Vinnie's Gym", where Jim Tierney supplied his own labour and his own Gym equipment, valued many years previous, at over $1 million dollars worth.  The thieves from St Vincent de Paul Society had corrupt ARMED police attend and 'escort' Jim Tierney, AT GUN POINT, from his equipment and keep him from it, while they stripped the Gym of Jim Tierney's valuable gym equipment.

On 15th September, 2005,the ARMED police and sparmy callous hypocritical Brisbane based paid staff of St Vincent dePaul Society, arrived unannounced to steal Jim Tierney's one million dollars plus worth of gym equipment, by ostensibly 'closing' the gym. When one of the instructors asked what they should tell the group of very disabled people who were due in that afternoon, the answer from the sparmy hypocritical CEO of the thieving St Vincent dePaul Society was 'life is tough'. In an effort to calm the situation, "Enough," said Judith Tierney.


Police Armed Robbery Elsewhere

This has been a case of POLICE THUGGERY.  This, my case, is not a unique case of armed police using their position, to detain property owners, to enable thieves to rob them. Another documented case occurred in 2002 at Queanbeyan, with ARMED ROBBER scum pig Leslie Charles Gilroy  employed by Andrew Phillip Scipione the Commissioner of the New South Wales Police Force



../CorruptMagistratesMenu.php ../Corrupt Police& Magistrates Menu.php An example of a CASCADING Drop Down Menu.

MENU: Rantala-Gate: Corrupt Police & Magistrates Mafia.

CDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.phpCDDM_StartMenu160.php


  Directory re


 Tax & Investment Planning Services - 1982 to 1989
 [TIPS] [Townsville]


TIPS for TAX logo
 
T
ax & Investment Planning Services


About our first TIPS office in Townsville at 62-66 Railway Avenue, Townsville.
 
About our second TIPS office at 56 - 58 Thuringowa Drive, KIRWAN, Townsville.

    UPDATES:
 These updates will be dated, [what else, but], and be in order with the latest at the top.

[20081231]
Favicon.ico links to Website Index pages:
  [Just click on any logo/favicon to be taken to that particular Web-site.]

  Image             FISH        us  uk  nz Au  Ca   In                       



Our LATEST TOPICS:

    Listed here  20090804_0947GMT
       http://CorruptJudgeBrendanButlerChiefMagistrateCaucusingPoliceFraudAim.info

         http://CorruptJudgeMarshallIrwinChiefMagistrateCaucusingPoliceFraudAim.info

        
http://IndiaStudentAustraliaVisaPRScamShonkRipOffRaceFraudPrisonDeport.info
     

    Listed here  20090724_1103GMT

          http://DangerousLiaisonCapriCorruptQueenslandPoliceArmedHoldUpFraudCMC.info

          http://FlowerHartMichaelMeadowsFraudWCOWhiteIndustriesCaboolturePark.info

      
   http://CrimeMafiaPoliceProsecutorHenriRantalaMagistrateEhrichStrofield.info

    Listed here  20090712
       http://WalterHarveyEhrichCorruptMagistratePoliceFraudArmedRobberyTheft.info

         http://ColinJStrofieldCorruptMagistratePoliceFraudArmedRobberyTheftQld.info

       http://StVincentDePaulFraudBullyingPeterMaherJerryMcAuliffeMareeFell.info

    Listed here  20090601

Australian Public Sector CLICK HERE  Anti-Corruption Conference 2009

 CLICK HERE - Home of Fraud, Rort & Sin
 & sponsored by the corrupt partnership of the corrupt partners of Qld's CMC,  NSW's ICAC & WA's CCC.

 Allstralian Parliament
Member for TARDIS CLICK HERE
CLICK HERE  Russell Mathews BCom BSc LLB BA



    Listed here  20090525

Daniel Morcombe  Photo Evidence Update:

Police GAG Witness &
Police threaten Witness 

http://DanielMorcombePhotoEvidenceUpdatePoliceGagThreatenWitness.info

Beware of
CRIME STOPPERS

 
It Assists Corrupt Police, Political Crime & Criminal Fraud

  http://BewareCrimeStoppersAssistCorruptPolicePoliticCrimeCriminalFraud.info

  It Assists Corrupt Police, Political Crime & Criminal Fraud

    Listed here  20090520

    HOT NEWS: HARD EVIDENCE:  Joe Hockey & FASCIST CRIMINAL congress

    Joe Hockey & NSW Liberals Supports Lisa Chikarovski's

        Sewer Language Internet Bullying & INCITING MURDER

       This sewer mouth espousing slut language Lisa Chikarovski  espousing the slut language does great harm to Joe Hockey.

    Listed here 20090509:

TIPS for TAX logo
Tax & Investment Planning Services

  1.   *     Analysis of the 21st Century World Recession-Global Financial Economic Crisis
  2.   *   Free Advice How to SURVIVE 21st Century World Recession & PROSPER
  3.   *     Free Advice How to FIND a JOB & MAKE MONEY finding It
  4.   *     Free Small Business Advisory Service
  5.  *      Free T.I.P.S. for Tax & Investment Planning Service
  6.  *      FREE study Learn How To Do Own Personal Financial Planning Advice

   
    Listed here 20090503:




linksforumworldrecession
Links to our FORUMS regarding the 21st Century World Recession, SURVIVING IT & PROSPERING.
  1. 21st Century World Recession
  2. Analysis of the 21st Century World Recession
  3. FULL detail of the Analysis of 21st Century World Recession
  4. How to SURVIVE the 21st Century World Recession, & PROSPER
  5. In detail: How to SURVIVE the 21st Century World Recession, & PROSPER.
  6. Looking for Work: Looking for a Job:
  7. How to FIND A JOB, & MAKE MONEY doing it!!
  8. FULL detail: How to FIND A JOB, & MAKE MONEY doing it!!
  9. FULL detail: How to FIND A JOB, & MAKE MONEY FINDING it, and REAL MONEY doing it!!
  10. FULL DETAIL: Looking for Work: Looking for a Job:
  11. Small Business Advisory FORUM
  12. Full Description, Small Business Advisory Forum.
I have addressed this way forward, depending upon one's predilection, based on one's past actions or inclinations: Income from working for an 'employer' or working in one's own business.

  1. Looking for Work: Looking for a Job: How to FIND A JOB, & MAKE MONEY doing it!!
  2. Small Business Advisory FORUM
HaigReport Themes

Themes of  Websites
for the
HAIG   REPORT: Group of Websites:
[We expect, in time, to have all of the thousands of pages on the
HAIG   REPORT: group of websites accessible from this Menu of THEMES. Eventually, there will be 20 themes, each with an average of 15 to 20 websites/domains/directories, with each website/domain having an average of 20 pages. This would equate to 20 x (15 to 20) x 20 = 6,000 to 8,000 pages. This menu of Themes will be included near the bottom of each page, in time. With one line of code, strategically placed, this Menu of Themes is now on thousands of pages. We are continually and progressively adding pages to this Menu of Themes of website Menus.]

commonheader.php

Reg. Office: 254 Hawken Drive, St Lucia, Qld. 4067, Australia.  
Editor-in-Chief:  Russell G H Mathews BCom BSc LLB BA      EMAIL us anytime:  Please Please make a donation using BPay.  using  Please make a donation using BPay. 

Menu: HaigReport'sThemes or Categories of the the Topics of the HaigReport Group of Websites: 
© COPYRIGHT: Russell Gordon Haig Mathews 2002 - 2018

The LATEST ADDITIONS are added to the top:


See  All 67 Domain Names in the HaigReport Group 

© COPYRIGHT: Russell Gordon Haig Mathews 2002 - 2018

Now here are the THEMES:



  1. Commonwealth of Australia Knowingly Employs LIARS, CHEATS and CRIMINALS:


  2. Government Corruption Infecting Corporates; ASX:


  3. New ADDITIONAL platform; Printed Distributed HaigReport NEWSPAPER:


  4. Self Help Law: Do your own Legals/Law:


  5. International: Corrupt Politics & Corrupt religion:


  6. About HaigReport Group of Websites including
    Vote One Russell Mathews:


  7. Russell Mathews [BCom BSc LLB & BA] Commentary additional to the rest of these Websites:


  8. Legal Rights, & BLACKLISTS of parasite residents & tenants in rental accommodation:


  9. RAMPANT POLICE CORRUPTION Exposed by HaigReport Websites; Publicize Your Complaint Here:


  10. Other public sector corruption Exposed by HaigReport Websites:


  11. RELIGION Corruption CRIME & PAEDOPHILIA Exposed by HaigReport Websites:


  12. Qld Govt Translink wankers & pony spankers Exposed by HaigReport Websites:


  13. Corrupt JUDGES, COURTS, & TRIBUNALS Exposed by HaigReport Websites:


  14. Corrupt LAWYERS Exposed by HaigReport Websites:


  15. Corrupt POLITICANS Exposed by HaigReport Websites:


  16. University of Qld Fraud & Corruption Exposed by HaigReport Websites:


  17. Corruption at other universities; Exposed by HaigReport Websites:


  18. Expose' of Other CORRUPTION, including TELSTRA, under influence of public sector parasites, as exposed by the HaigReport Group of Websites:


  19. Business Promoted by HaigReport Websites:


  20. Finance by HaigReport Websites:

This page is part of the Internet presence of

Russell G H Mathews BCom BSc LLB BA
View list of SOME of my WEBSITES and Bulletin Boards

Email: http://HaigReport.com/eml.html


SEE WHAT I PLAN TO DO ABOUT IT!


Image
CLICK on image => My Election HOMEPAGE