YOU walk up the stone steps onto an ageing red carpet, past a gallery of former speakers and into the house of disgrace.
Welcome to the most corrupt parliament in Australian history — the NSW Legislature.
In nine months, 11 Liberal politicians have resigned, stepped down or moved to the crossbenches amid corruption investigations. Labor’s ship has been equally rat-infested, with names like Obeid, Macdonald, Kelly and Tripodi now bywords for the stink in Macquarie St.
“You’d probably find maggots if you dug the foundations,” one former state MP said.
NSW’s corruption shame can be traced back to 2007, when Morris Iemma won Labor’s fourth successive term in government. The sense of entitlement that came with 16 years in power was irresistible to some MPs, who treated parliament as a personal fiefdom and rorted the system to benefit themselves.
The Australian Federal Police state that "Human trafficking is the physical movement of people across and within borders through deceptive means, force or coercion."
Australian child protection authorities do this, and they use the services of lawyers to ensure that this happens. Lawyers then have the protection of the state legal services commission, ie the NSW Office of Legal Services Commission - whereby they pretend that they are an oversight authority to ensure the professionalism of their lawyers.
There is a way to address the common issues within the system including judicial, child protection and public guardianship corruption, and all those scheming and rorting MP's.
It is not a quick fix but a long-term permanent solution.
Therefore, here goes ...
The reason we cannot get anybody to effectively act on extremely serious corruption is because no oversight authority is doing anything about it - and this problem is at the top of the ladder.
We cannot get oversight and accountability when the ministers for the departments are placed there by the parties and not the people.
Paedophile Contact with Victim-Children in the Family Court of Australia is a very real and serious issue, and there’s a few case references to get you started at the bottom of this message.
Paedophiles access and custody to victim- children IS NOT A MYTH concocted by “Jilted Mothers” to “get even” with the fathers.
YES. Paedophile rights trump children’s rights.
The recent arrests by the Australian Federal Police surrounding the “Criminal Syndicate of Child Abductors” known as Operation Neoctic, as reported by mainstream media is nothing more than a state sanctioned witch-hunt to protect the paedophile-sympathiser judges in the Family Court of Australia.
Written by Judge Peter Johnstone - NSW Children’s Court
Children’s Court of New South Wales Community Services Division Legal Conference Darling Harbour:
Introduction
1. This paper has been prepared for the 2013 Department of Family and Community Services (FaCS) Legal Services Care and Protection Conference on Thursday 1 August 2013. 2. Attendees at the conference will include both public and private legal practitioners representing FaCS in care proceedings in the Children's Court of New South Wales. 3. The paper is presented in four parts: the first part will address model litigant requirements, the code of conduct obligations, and case management in care proceedings. The second part will deal with alternative dispute resolution. The third part will deal with the Children's Court Clinic, and the fourth part will address the way forward for care proceedings. I have added an Appendix dealing with some recent cases of importance.
In 2012, Australian Deputy Prime Minister Truss asked High Court Chief Justice French to file a case against corrupt judges, some of them in the High Court. Three High Court judges have denied the public access to justice at the highest level, defying a Constitutional right. For at least 15 years the legal and judicial fraternity has covered up injustices and corruption in the secretive Family Court. Only the High Court has power to review the Family Court.
Hume Legal - Joanna Jarasevic - picked up another easy score, that over a few months makes ten thousand dollars cash, and cashed right in. Unfortunately this lawyer was not working for the department at the time, and had no right to deliberately tank her clients case which ultimately ended up with the kids sent to foster care till they're eighteen. The case was simple, clear cut and the biggest point on her side, was the Emergency Order for removal of the kids was not only unlawful - it was maladministration at best and corruption at worst.
The cow should have had this case dismissed. Instead she did nothing in almost a month. Not one affidavit. All she did was collude with the department, and used her scare tactics saying "there's heaps of evidence". Our auditors concluded the complete opposite, and to tell her clients to "consent to establishment", was giving up the battle before it started. She had a fantastic opportunity to put some overreaching lazy caseworkers in place and on the spot, and to save other families the same fate she sentenced this family to. But that would have meant doing more work, and getting paid less money in the long run. As most legal aid lawyers state "they don't get paid enough money to do affidavits". For christ sake, how can parents defend themselves when their own solicitors roll over because it's more financially viable.
Regarding the allegations - there wasn't a thing that couldn't be explained and most of their [FACS] dribble was lies. So much, it would make your toes curl, believe me. Fucking dirty child trafficking mutts. NB: This mutt was given enough notice that her clients were now informed of what happens when u CONSENT TO ESTABLISHMENT. They told her No. And she lied in court and said they said yes, making docs not have to even prove one of their single reprehensible lies. They make me sick. The whole lot of them.
Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 No 157 - S51 Duty of Secretary to give information to certain persons
(1) If a child or young person is in the care responsibility of the Secretary under this Part or a warrant issued under section 233, the Secretary:
(a) must, as soon as practicable, cause notice of the fact that the child or young person is in the care responsibility of the Secretary, and the fact that an application may be made to the Secretary for the discharge of the child or young person from the care responsibility of the Secretary and the procedures for making such an application, to be given to:
(i) in the case of a child who is of or above the age of 10 years or a young person—the child or young person, and
Written by Nick McKenzie & Richard Baker - The Age
Izey Semovic remembers reeling with disbelief when he was told the Melbourne neurologist who he accused of sexually assaulting him would escape serious punishment.
It was 2007 and the now 53-year-old former truck driver had no idea that the doctor he had reported to the medical board would years later be exposed as one of the worst sexual predators in Australian medical history. All Semovic knew was that the handling of his own case stunk.
The Medical Practice Board had somehow concluded that Dr Andrew Churchyard had the laconic truckie’s "best interests at heart" when he fondled the 42-year-old’s genitals. Semovic had sought the neurologist's help to deal with upper body muscle pain and weakness.
A NOTORIOUS paedophile who allegedly planned to set up a "snuff camp" on his release from jail was freed on a legal technicality that left him unsupervised in the community for almost six months.
The notorious sex offender, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was released from jail after his sentence expired in its entirety on April 23 last year.
He only reappeared on the prison radar after being re-arrested in October for a raft of fraud offences in the Wollongong area of NSW.
Six months before his release, prison intelligence uncovered a set of letters being sent by the inmate to another paedophile, a former scoutmaster, located in a separate wing of Goulburn jail.
The pair had planned to set up a "snuff camp" in country NSW upon their release.
The letters outlined the names, ages and addresses of the child victims they intended to abduct - all were living around the Mudgee and Rylestone areas of NSW.
The two men had secured funding to buy a secluded, rural property to film the videos, and vehicles to assist with transport.
They discussed procedures they would undertake if police ever cottoned on to their plans.
Prior to his release, prison authorities flagged the inmate as being a danger to the public, and applied to keep him behind bars under a Continuing Detention Order (CDO).
Congratulations on the Australian Federal Police for sending three innocent men and one courageous lady (Big brave police they are!), to be tried by the paedophile protecting family court judges.
By the way, great news press with the AFP’s Debbie Platz saying ‘how many issues the “stolen” children have’ - though we at Alecomm highly doubt it’s anything, compared to being raped by ur daddy - which is what these men were protecting these children from.
Unfortunately Townsville Detective Miles, heading the child sex abuse crimes unit already gave evidence about how he concealed sex crimes against children when sequestered in the current royal commission - read the transcripts.
Now he’s the state cop feeding the federal cops the lies that the children were never sexually abused by their father.
Written by An extract taken from the book "Child Protection" written by Professor Freda Briggs. AO
For her PhD, Dr Wendy Foote (2006) researched into what happens when mothers report child sexual abuse to Family Courts. She found that normal maternal anxiety is pathologised and mothers, not fathers, are labelled as mentally ill. Ironically, mothers who are mentally ill do not automatically lose residence of their chidren outside the Family Court.
In only 6% of litigated cases, accused fathers were banned from spending time with their children. In 38% of these cases, the ban related to child abuse/family violence and only 2% of these fathers were labelled as mentally ill. The notion that mothers concoct allegations of child sexual abuse has persisted despite (a) Australian and International research showing that children`s evidence is reliable and (b) research conducted with the cooperation of the Australian Family Court showed that false allegations are rare and, when they occur, the mothers usually had good reason to suspect that their children were being abused or were at high risk.
A California judge has caused outrage after slashing 15 years off the prison sentence of a pedophile convicted of raping a 3-year-old child.
Orange County Superior Court Judge M. Marc Kelly cut the child rapist’s prison term down to ten years from 25 years claiming that “he didn’t mean to harm” the 3-year-old girl that he raped.
He also backed the claim from child rapist Kevin Rojano that the young girl initiated the act of sodomy. Rojano said in his own defense that “she asked me to do it.“
YOU walk up the stone steps onto an ageing red carpet, past a gallery of former speakers and into the house of disgrace.
Paedophile Contact with Victim-Children in the Family Court of Australia is a very real and serious issue, and there’s a few case references to get you started at the bottom of this message.
