The HAIG
REPORT: the EVIDENCE
The HAIG
REPORT: the EVIDENCE
Australian CORRUPTION EXPOSED
* Webletter dated 8th January, 2007 re FIRST Woolworths ATTACK and unlawful Disability discrimination.[At this stage, {in January, 2007}
there is/was no link on
this website to this page.*{as of 20071125 this has changed and so WE
NOW HAVE more UNCOMPLIMENTARY EVIDENCE TO PUBLICIZE}. The
only incidence of the hyperlink to this page was the php form I
submitted on your, WOOLWORTHS website. Please signify you
receipt of this communique,{they didn't and haven't more thatn TEN
MONTHS LATER} so I do/would not need to more widely distribute
this link, to say, Commonwealth parliamentarians, MHRs and
Senators.]
[The URL for this letter: http://haigreport.com/webletter20070108woolworthshaigreport.html/
/.]
Woolworths
IGNORED this
web-letter of
8th January, 2007.
Link
to later attack
on
27th October, 2007.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
8th January, 2007.
Mr Michael Gerard Luscombe,
Managing Director, CEO,
Woolworths Limited.
Dear Sir,
I am a shareholder of 700 shares in WOW since 18 November, 2005 through
my company **** Holdings Pty Ltd.
I bring to you attention a serious
legal matter. I am disabled. I have two
small assistance dogs. I am presently undertaking my
PhD. One of my four undergraduate degrees is an LLB.
I have had substantial experience in many courts, my best performance
being a unanimous win in the Queensland Court of Appeal.
Having an LLB and being disabled, I am well versed on the
DDA. Accordingly, I refer you to my
legal interpretation.
I attended at your/[our] Buranda
store yesterday [Sunday, 20070107]. I was monstered by your store
manager there. I captured some photos of the incident. One is
shown here.
The previous photo
of him, shows his turning away so he could not be identified.
That is a reduced pixel density photo. The original shows his
name is clearly "MATTHEW". I am not so much concerned about
this man. My major concern is that he is MISADVISED and
MISGUIDED. He spoke of only guide dogs being
permitted. There is an older Queensland Statute that make
provisions for "Guide dogs" for the visually and hearing
impaired. By Sec 109 of our Commonwealth of Australia
Constitution Act, the Cth DDA takes precedence over the Queensland
Guide Dogs Act 1972.
As a shareholder of WOW I have the
interests of WOW in mind. A person who is not a WOW shareholder
could make this most embarrassing and punishing of the WOW
shareprice.
I live near a Coles
Supermarket. As I shopped there, I requested from the then
Coles Myer Limited, a letter from them recognising my right per the
DDA, to take my Assistance Dogs into their store. I referred them
to the pages of my legal interpretation including the matter of
"Unjustifiable Hardship". Specifically, I did not request
their "permission" as I did not need it, as I already had the right per
the DDA. I specificaly stated this to them. Needless, they
framed their letter, [here beside] as a "permission".
In light of this incident,
I request a letter from WOW in much the same terms.
I reiterate, I do not need "permission".
I reiterate: At this stage, there is no link on this website to this page. The only incidence of the link to this page is the php form I submitted on you website. Please signify you receipt of this communique, so I do not need to more widely distribute this link, to say, Commonwealth parliamentarians; MHRs and Senators.
Kind regards,
********************************************************************
Russell G H Mathews BCom BSc LLB BA ex-Member of the Standing Committee of Convocation of