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.

 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.


 I Win Again. CDPP's Shane Hunter Advises They Will Not Pursue The Four Charges Against Me:


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 

DirectoryWebsite/header.php

Victory, Success & Triumph Over Systemic Government Corruption:
The victory is never complete and the war is never over. It is a matter of winning, not of having won.

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.  

Follow @HaigReport
??   ??   ???? Tweet  
Share on Facebook Share on Facebook  

See: HaigReport's Menu of Menus of Sites of Related Fraud & Corruption Topics:

/CodingPHP/includedSeeContentPageFileNameURL.php

  Click here to GoTo Detail:=> I Win Again. CDPP's Shane Hunter Advises They Will Not Pursue The Four Charges Against Me

../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 Victory, Success & Triumph Over Systemic Government Corruption

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:=> I Win Again. CDPP's Shane Hunter Advises They Will Not Pursue The Four Charges Against Me

Follow @HaigReport
??   ??   ???? Tweet  
Share on Facebook Share on Facebook  

See: HaigReport's Menu of Menus of Sites of Related Fraud & Corruption Topics:

 Content: I Win Again. CDPP's Shane Hunter Advises They Will Not Pursue The Four Charges Against Me

../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 Victory, Success & Triumph Over Systemic Government Corruption

Follow @HaigReport
??   ??   ???? Tweet  
Share on Facebook Share on Facebook  

I Win Again. CDPP's Shane Hunter Advises They Will Not Pursue The Four Charges Against Me:

includedShaneHunterEmailAdviceThatNotPursuing This below is the advice sent to me by the prosecutor for the CDPP advising that they will not pursue the action against me in ANY court.   His mention of Rule 20(6) of the Criminal Practice Rules 1999, is his emphasising that even if the magistrate was to commit me to stand trial, they would not present an indictment against me in the upper court.

Of course he is speaking clap trap to state that  he thinks the crown  case is a strong one when he states, "...
the Crown has decided, despite the fact that it considers the Crown case to be a strong one, ... ".   The reality is that they all knew that the website was telling the truth that the police and the Brisbane City Council, had, in a manner of Common Purpose, conducted an armed robbery against me.  The corrupt Qld police and the corrupt Shane  Hunter of the corrupt CDPP. [What else would you call people who would try to send someone to jail for telling the truth about police and government corruption.]  They all certainly thought they were well protected in committing crime in Qld.

Consider the case law that caused CDPP to drop the case.  [Shane Hunter had to send it to CDPP in Canberra for them to tell him to drop it immediately.  Lowlife parasite ShaneHunter is just trying to save face.

HayneJ_Paras100_209_213MonisHCA_AlwaysBeenInvalidImproper The  cases of Monis in  the HCA, and Starkey in the Qld District Court coram Dorney disclose that that section 474.17 Criminal Code (Cth), could never have been viewed as proper or valid.

Monis v The Queen [2013] HCA 4 AHRC abstract;

Monis v The Queen [2013] HCA 4  HCA full case;

 &

Starkey v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions [2013] QDC 124  with PDF online}


 See Hayne J. paras. 100, 209 & 213 Monis.

100 If a law is narrowly tailored to a legitimate object or end, the conclusion that the law is reasonably appropriate and adapted to that object or end readily follows. But these reasons conclude that, by making all seriously offensive uses of a postal or similar service an offence, including those uses where the user would have a defence of truth or of qualified privilege to a claim for defamation founded on that use, the relevant part of s 471.12 [ &  so S.474.17] goes too far and is invalid.

209 Some forms of political communication are deliberately designed to offend. They may be designed and intended to offend because their content is shocking [ such as MAJOR CRIMINAL FRAUD by the Queensland government, the parasites' paymaster] and the maker, having made reasonable inquiries to verify their content, wishes to disseminate the information widely. Yet if the statement communicated is such as reasonable persons, in all the circumstances, would regard as evoking the reaction described, s 471.12 [ & s474.17] would forbid its communication by post, [ &, or carriage service - let alone PUBLICATION] on pain of up to two [THREE for s474.17] years' imprisonment, regardless of whether it is true or false and regardless of whether its maker took all reasonable steps to verify the truth of what is communicated.


213        To hold that a person publishing defamatory matter could be guilty of an offence under s 471.12 [ & s474.17] but have a defence to an action for defamation is not and cannot be right.  The resulting incoherence in the law demonstrates either that the object or end pursued by s 471.12 [ & s474.17] is not legitimate, or that the section is not reasonably appropriate and adapted to serve a legitimate end in a manner compatible with the maintenance of the constitutionally prescribed system of government and the freedom of communication that is its indispensable incident.  The incoherence is not removed, and its consequences cannot be avoided, by leaving a jury to decide whether reasonable persons would regard the use, in all the circumstances, as offensive.  In the case postulated, the user of the service both knows that the communication is, and intends that the communication be, offensive.  And there is no basis for the proposition (advanced by the second respondent and Queensland) that a jury would not find an accused guilty of an offence against s 471.12 [ & s474.17] in circumstances of the kind now under consideration because of the section's reference to "reasonable persons ... in all the circumstances".  Statements that are political in nature and reasonable for a defendant to make can and often will still bite in the sense relevant to s 471.12 [ & s474.17] .
 A statement can still be offensive even if it is true.


Section 474.17 Criminal Code (Cth) has not become invalid and improper only since Monis and Starkey.  IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN.  Monis and Starkey just means that the parasites can no longer ignore that reality.    How could any of the public sector parasites, or any justice, ignore the reality of Section 474.17, especially in regard to the truth about crime in politics and government.
        

This is not the end of the matter as far as I am concerned.   The pig Henri Elias Rantala is an Armed Robber, and he shows no remorse and  the police and  the CDPP are attempting to protect him, and all the crime that went along with, and following, the armed robbery


   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. 


In fact, because he thought he was so well  protected, he made all the necessary admissions under oath, in response to my cross-examination  of him, that he has admitted he has committed armed robbery along with the Brisbane City Council & Counsel [David Askern aka Minge Askern].

 

In his email below, Shane Hunter of the CDPP refers to Rule 20(6) of the
Criminal Practice Rules 1999:

It reads:
(6) If the director of public prosecutions decides not to present an
indictment against an accused person who has been
committed for an offence, the director of public prosecutions
must, as soon as possible after making the decision, give
written notice of it to the following—
(a) the accused person or the accused person’s lawyer;
(b) if the accused person is in the custody of the chief
executive (corrective services), the chief executive
(corrective services);
(c) the proper officer of the court that committed the
accused person;
(d) the proper officer of the court to which the accused was
committed.


RE: CDPP v Russell Gordon Haig MATTHEWS (sic) [DLM=Sensitive:Legal]

Hunter Shane <shane.hunter@cdpp.gov.au> Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 1:52 PM
To: Russell Mathews <http://HaigReport.com/eml.html>

Sensitive: Legal

Dear Mr Mathews,

 

In response to your request, I can advise you that the Crown has decided, despite the fact that it considers the Crown case to be a strong one, that it is no longer in the public interest to pursue the four charges against you that are presently before the Magistrates Court in Brisbane.  This decision relates only to the charges now before the Court and would not necessarily apply to any future potential charges which may be commenced by police in respect of current or future content of the Haigreport.com, even if such content may have also existed in 2009.

 

In any event, the Crown does not intend to call any further evidence.  However, in the Crown’s view, that decision may not necessarily entitle you to have the charges dismissed immediately.

 

The Crown will submit, in the circumstance that it no longer intends to further pursue the current charges in any Court, that:

 

1.       The Magistrate can exercise his “overall supervisory responsibility” conferred by s.103B(1) of the Justices Act to declare the cross-examination of witnesses Rantala and Read, at an end.

2.       Section 104 of the Justices Act contains a  mandatory requirement which compels the Magistrate to commit for trial, if the circumstances are such that, in the Magistrate’s opinion, evidence sufficient to commit has been lead.

3.       It is open to conclude, taking into account the oral evidence already given and the content, as particularised, of the tendered exhibits, namely exhibit nos. 2 & 3 (disks dated 12/3/09 and 17/7/09), that evidence sufficient to prove, to the committal standard, all save one of the physical elements of each offence has already been lead.

4.       The only physical element of each offence in respect of which evidence has not been lead concerns the element that a “carriage service” was used in the commission of the offences.

5.       Though it did not exist at the time of the commission of the offences in this case, Commonwealth Criminal Code s.475.1B(1), enacted in April 2010, was in existence at the time of the commencement of the committal hearing.  This sub-section creates a “deeming provision” which, if it applies in this case, would, when taken in conjunction with the evidence already before the Court,  provide a presumption that a carriage service was used in the commission of each offence.

6.       Though the rule against retrospectivity falls for consideration in respect of such a  matter, the High Court decision in R v. Rodway (1990) 169 CLR 515 tends to support a conclusion that s.475.1B would operate ‘prospectively’ and therefore apply to all proceedings conducted after April 2010.  Since there are no decided cases in respect of the operation of s.475.1B – it will be a matter for the Magistrate to decide in the first instance.

 

In the event that the Magistrate considers himself bound, by virtue of Justices Act s.104, to commit you for trial, the Crown shall, consistently with the decision referred to above, follow the procedure in r.20(6) of the Criminal Practice Rules.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Shane Hunter

Senior Assistant Director

Commonwealth DPP

Brisbane

Ph:  07 3224 9444

Fx:  07 3229 4124


From: Russell Mathews [mailto:http://HaigReport.com/eml.html]
Sent: Sunday, 24 November 2013 9:25 PM
To: Hunter Shane
Subject: Fwd: CDPP v Russell Gordon Haig MATTHEWS (sic)

 

G'day Mr Hunter,
I attach the communique I have received from the Brisbane Magistrates Court.

As I am disabled with brain damage, I have special needs.  That includes that  information should be in written form.  I trust you will accommodate my Special Needs.

Accordingly, please provide me in ample time, the submission you intend to make, and please advise by immediate return email,  when  you expect that you will provide that to me.


**************************************************
Russell G H Mathews BCom BSc LLB BA     

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

 

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Courthouse Brisbane <Courthouse.Brisbane@justice.qld.gov.au>
Date: Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 2:54 PM
Subject: Re: CDPP v Russell Gordon Haig MATTHEWS
To: http://HaigReport.com/eml.html



Mr Matthews,

Your committal hearing has been adjourned to 9:00 am on Thursday 5
December, 2013 in Court 20 and your bail has been enlarged accordingly.


Please advise urgently if you can appear via telephone on that date.  If
you cannot appear, please advise a date on which you can, having regard
to your medical appointment schedule.

Mr Hunter of the CDPP has advised the court today that he will be
calling no further evidence and will be making submissions on 5 December
2013.

In that event you may submit that the evidence that is before the court
is insufficient to commit you for trial and you may submit that the
court should discharge you.  That is a matter entirely for you to
consider.  You of course can make any other submissions you consider
relevant.  Please advise urgently of the matters raised above concerning
the adjourned date.


For and on behalf of
Magistrate Kluck
Brisbane Magistrates Court
Ph:  3247 9419
Fax:  3247 9033


Menu: Victory, Success & Triumph Over Systemic Government Corruption: