24 June 2016

Victoria Police Commissioner concerned with increase in crime.

Last night the corporate media stated that the current Victoria Police Chief Commissioner Graham Ashton is concerned with the increase in car theft crime which is linked to gangs.

Has this come about as a result of the Australian government's deliberately slack screening process for migrants, and the policy to keep them in Australia once they are convicted of criminal activities?

The Australian government has imported gutter trash from various countries into Australia, where one can even be a criminal in one's birth country, burn their documentation including personal identification, claim 'refugee' status come into the country only to continue with intentions and actions where one leads a life of crime.

Most of this garbage comes to the state of Victoria, at approximately 1000 per week.

A Failure of Governance or just BIG BUSINESS for the courts, prisons etc, all at the expense of the general populous.

"Australia the Lucky Country"!!! !!! !!!

Descendant of first contact says Australia was invaded 'by gunfire'

Rodney Kelly is the eighth generation descendant of the Gweagal aboriginal warrior, Cooman, who was shot by Captain Cook's landing party at Botany Bay in April 1770. Kelly says Australia was invaded 'by gunfire'.

He says the shield belonging to Cooman still has white ochre on it from that day, and a musket hole from when his ancestor was fired upon.

The shield has been preserved in the British Museum for more than 240 years.

Now, Rodney Kelly is crowdfunding so he can travel to the UK to meet with the British Museum and continue his campaign for the shield's return to Australia.

'We feel [the shield] takes us back to a time before the British come here, it connects us back a long time ago. It's just significant, we have lost a lot of history, we've lost a lot of things,' says Kelly.

'For this shield to be connected to us is very significant and makes us very proud. We we just want it to come back home to Australia.'

abc.net.au 23 Jun 2016

What the masses are not taught about is that from 1788 for 40 years (officially) Martial Law was installed on this continent.

So is that a 'we come in peace' action? 

No treaty unlike with the natives of a place called New Zealand. 

Melbourne driver victorious in year-long fight against EastLink speeding camera fine

Paul Daniel speed camera court battle
A YEAR-LONG court battle over a $185 speeding fine from one of Melbourne’s most controversial cameras has ended in victory for a driver. 

Paul Daniel, an earthmoving firm’s health and safety manager, spent 15 months fighting the EastLink fine — because “I was accused of a crime I did not commit”.

Mr Daniel and his father-in-law were at the start of their annual fishing trip to Eden in NSW on February 26 last year.

On the way they laughed at media reports and a radio campaign claiming drivers had been wrongly fined at the Wellington Rd bridge.

“I jokingly said, ‘Here comes the Wellington Rd bridge, have a look at my speed’,” Mr Daniel recalled.

“He leaned over and had a look at my speed and said, ‘Yep no worries’, and we laughed … I was going between 95km/h and 97km/h. Two weeks later I get the fine in the mail.”

The penalty notice alleged Mr Daniel was speeding at 110km/h in a 100km/h zone.

He couldn’t pay a solicitor, but armed with advice from a barrister friend he decided to fight the charges himself.

He spent weeks researching state and federal law, the ­National Measurement Act and previous court cases, in his lunch breaks and after work.

“I was willing to fight tooth and nail all the way to the High Court,” he said.

“That’s how passionate I was about fighting something I was accused of that I didn’t do.”

Late last year, a magistrate upheld the prosecution case, but Mr Daniel appealed and this week Judge Geoffrey Chettle dismissed the charges in the County Court.

Mr Daniel claimed the judge had believed the testimony of himself and of his ­father-in-law.

He said he believed the judge had expressed the view that he preferred their evidence over that of a machine.

“I was so happy that I forgot to ask for costs,” Mr Daniel said.

The southbound camera in lane two, which Mr Daniel has now beaten, fined 5798 drivers in the 2014-15 financial year, raking in $1.2 million, making it Victoria’s 41st highest-earning speed camera.

“The cameras are flawed,” Mr Daniel said.

“People should not blindly pay up when they know they weren’t speeding.”

Traffic and criminal defence lawyer Michael Kuzilny said Mr Daniel’s success could set a precedent.
“Victorians are losing their licences on demerit points and losing thousands of dollars for offences they didn’t commit,” he said.

“It would be refreshing that some drivers could win cases on corroborated evidence.”

The camera commissioner conducted a year-long probe into EastLink cameras in 2013 after complaints, but found they were accurate.

In 2011, a policewoman nabbed by an EastLink camera beat a speeding fine after evidence from a 16-year-old work experience student who was in her patrol car and had looked at its speedo just before the officer drove under the camera.

heraldsun.com.au 19 May 2016

Make no mistake about it EVERY SINGLE 'fine' is unlawful, irrespective of the technicalities of inaccurate speed cameras, as in this case.

When you are dealing with Australia's judicature you are dealing with experts in:
  • corruption,
  • fraud,
  • deception,
  • theft,
  • extortion and 
  • unlawful incarceration
just to name a few.

21 June 2016

Corporate media cannot name paedophile ex-cop Robert William Gommeson

The is is the sort of scum that can be found in the Victorian police force.

He should have never been released.

From the article of 21 June 2016 by The Age of the Headline:

Predator policeman handed one of Victoria's longest sentences for sex crimes

The County Court. Photo: Scott Barbour
One of Victoria's worst sexual predators – a former policeman who raped children for more than a decade – has been handed one of the state's longest sentences for sexual offences.

The man, 66, was on Tuesday sentenced to serve 19 years in jail (with a 15-year non-parole period) for abhorrent crimes against children aged 10 and younger.

This, combined with a previous sentence imposed for similar crimes committed in New South Wales, means he will be at least 85 before he is released.

The man's youngest victim was just five years old when he first raped her.

Three of the man's victims on Tuesday said they wanted his name made public, saying they believed more victims could come forward if they knew he was behind bars. But Fairfax Media is unable to name the paedophile due to a request from the County Court.

The man was a police officer between 1967 and 1979, when he resigned from the force after the mother of one of his victims reported the abuse to his colleagues.

On Tuesday, County Court Judge John Carmody said the day after the woman reported the abuse, "a number of police" came to the family home and questioned the boy about what had happened.

While the woman said she didn't want to take the matter any further, the officers told her that the man"wouldn't be in the police force any more and would be moved away".

The court was told on Friday that after Victoria Police failed to act on the complaint, the man went on to sexually assault and rape children for at least another four years.

He formally pleaded guilty on Friday to 18 offences against nine victims.

"The offending in this case is of the most serious nature," Judge Carmody said.

"You were in breach of trust in relation to all the complainants."

This, he said, was aggravated by the fact the man was a local policeman when he brutalised the children, who were all aged between five and 10 when he first began to abuse them.

On Friday, Crown Prosecutor Nanette Rogers told the court that the police officer had asked one boy, who was between six and 10 when he was raped, whether he wanted to see the police station.

When the boy said yes, the officer took the boy to a room in the station where there was a bed, and raped him.

Dr Rogers said in another episode, a girl went to the police station for help after losing her mother at a nearby festival.

After telling the child, "I'll look after you", the officer took her into the back of a police divisional van and forced her to perform oral sex on him.

In harrowing testimony one of the victims, now 45, told the man she hoped he rotted in hell for what he had done to her, including holding a police-issue revolver to her head as he raped her.

She wept as she described how she had hoped he would pull the trigger and put her out of her misery.
Instead, he forced her to suffer through years of "hell and his sick games".

Judge Carmody said that by pleading guilty to the offences, the man had "demonstrated some limited remorse" for his actions.

But, Judge Carmody said, he was concerned by a pre-sentence report that described the man as being at high risk of re-offending.

He was also concerned that the man had a "simplistic and under-developed" understanding of the impact of his offending on his victims; one of whom had tried to take his own life three times after suffering a lifetime of trauma from his childhood abuse.

"Your prospects of rehabilitation are, in my opinion, low," Judge Carmody said.

This, he said, was aggravated by the fact that the former officer  did not use any protection when he raped the children, exposing them to the risk of sexually-transmitted disease.

The man was arrested in 2012, and jailed in NSW in 2014 for separate offences of a "similar" nature, committed between 2005 and 2012.

For those offences he was sentenced to 17 years, with a non-parole period of 12 years.

When the two sentences are combined, and taking into account time served, he will serve a total 26 years, with a non-parole period of 19 years, for all the offences.

The man did not react as he was led away.

Outside court, one of his victims told Fairfax that "justice is served".

"I'm glad to see that justice is served, but I'm just relieved that it's all done," she said. "It's been a long time coming."

19 June 2016

Television ads despite Medibank defrauding its customers

Sometimes one might wonder who is the bigger corporate whore, the corporate media, or the corprate criminals on the safe continent of Australia.

Australia is touted as the 'Lucky Country', but most people are oblivious who the people in the Australian government really support fraud committed against the tax slave population.

Here is just one minuscule example from the accc website of the headline:

ACCC takes action against Medibank for alleged misleading and unconscionable conduct

16 June 2016
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has instituted proceedings in the Federal Court against Medibank Private Limited (Medibank) alleging it contravened the Australian Consumer Law by engaging in misleading conduct, making false or misleading representations and engaging in unconscionable conduct.

The allegations are in relation to Medibank’s failure to notify Medibank members and members of its subsidiary brand, ahm, regarding its decision to limit benefits paid to members for in-hospital pathology and radiology services.

The ACCC alleges that Medibank did not provide members with any advance notice of the change despite previously representing that it would do so. Medibank also adopted a strategy of keeping communications about this change contained and reactive. The ACCC alleges that Medibank’s conduct was misleading and, in all the circumstances, unconscionable.

“Consumers are entitled to expect that they will be informed in advance of important changes to their private health insurance cover, as these changes can have significant financial consequences at a time when consumers may be vulnerable,” ACCC Chairman Rod Sims said.

“Private health insurers must ensure their disclosure practices comply with the Australian Consumer Law. Competition and consumer issues in the health and medical sectors are a current enforcement priority for the ACCC.”

The ACCC alleges that additional circumstances in support of unconscionable conduct include that:
  • Medibank knew or expected that many members incorrectly thought all of their in-hospital medical expenses were covered, and that most members didn’t make enquiries about out-of-pocket expenses before being admitted to hospital;
  • Medibank calculated there was a risk that, if the benefit change was disclosed, members might leave Medibank;
  • Medibank calculated there was a risk that the publicity around the benefit change would damage Medibank’s brand and reputation, and have a negative impact on its planned initial public offering of securities; and
  • Medibank estimated the change would lead to it making substantial financial gains, including from not paying the gaps, and from not paying the medical claims of members who left Medibank after becoming aware of the change. The members most likely to become aware of the change were members who claimed more frequently, some of whom were suffering from chronic conditions.  Most of these members were then confronted with out-of-pocket expenses when in hospital receiving treatment.
The ACCC also alleges that Medibank represented to members and potential members that a number of its policies covered in-hospital pathology and radiology services, such that members would not pay any out-of-pocket expenses for these services, unless Medibank provided them with prior notice otherwise. These representations were false or misleading from 1 September 2014, since from that time members incurred out-of-pocket expenses for such services and were not notified by Medibank. The relevant policies include:
  • Medibank’s Basic Hospital, Mid Hospital, Standard Hospital, Top Hospital and Ultra Health Cover policies; and
  • ahm’s Budget Hospital, Basic Hospital, Classic Hospital, Top Hospital (No Obstetrics), Top Hospital and Top Hospital 500 policies.
The ACCC is seeking declarations, injunctions, compensation orders, pecuniary penalties, findings of fact, implementation of a trade practices compliance program, corrective notices and costs.


Medibank is Australia’s largest private health insurer and has approximately 3.9 million members through its Medibank and ahm brands. The conduct affected most Medibank and ahm hospital policies in place since 1 January 2012.

Since at least 1 January 2012, Medibank had agreements with many pathology and radiology providers who supplied services to hospital patients (such as blood tests, x-rays, CT scans and MRI scans). Under these agreements, in situations where these providers charged above the Medicare Benefit Schedule (MBS) fee, Medibank paid charges above the MBS fee (the gap) on behalf of Medibank and ahm members.

From 1 September 2014, Medibank terminated or phased out these agreements. As a result of the agreements no longer being in force, since 1 September 2014, Medibank and ahm members have no longer been completely covered for in-hospital pathology or radiology services, and have had to pay the gap as an out-of-pocket expense.

Release number: 
MR 104/16

VCAT deception regarding presiding members

When it comes to corruption, fraud, extortion and theft it is difficult to match the masters of deception in Australia's judicature.

Many a legal 'person' has been harmed by a judicial registrar presiding over a matter where it is stated by law (a term referred to very loosely) that a magistrate must be present.

This is unfortunately very common in Australia, in a place of business, trading  and commerce called the 'court'.

Don't expect the corporate media to devote resources (read reporters) to matters of significance like this, but rather chasing pictures of how wide Kim Kardashian's arse is this week are a priority to distract the herd populace.

We've been given the heads up that in an inquisitorial place of mutual consent called VCAT ( Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal) people who have not the required qualifications have been sitting behind the bench hearing matters and issuing 'orders'.

In one instance of a 'miscarriage of justice' a town planner heard a matter, instead of a legally qualified member.

If your 'person' ends up in court, you 'person'  may want to aquire:

  • the name of the person presiding over the matter ( for damages in relation (but not limited) to: 
  •  treason/fraud/deception/miscarriage of justice),
  •  their qualification,
  •  the court's indemnity insurance company, for claims of harm/injury.

You may wish to proceed after all those details have been disclosed.

If your matter is a 'civil' matter and a court chooses not to provide the answers you seek, you may wish to serve a 'Notice For Discovery' (for Victorian litigants), referred to as a 'Form 29A' contained within the post:

If you have been harmed by VCAT in any manner, you may want to exercise your right to sue.