Victorian cops using and trafficking drugs according to anti-corruption investigations

Victorian police have been caught using, possessing and trafficking illicit drugs amid systemic deficiencies within the force, an anti-corruption report says. Picture: File, 7 News

Cops partying on ice, cocaine, LSD and ecstasy would meet up with known traffickers, peddle drugs themselves and return positive tests, three Victorian anti-corruption investigations have uncovered.

Victoria’s anti-corruption commission on Tuesday tabled a special report concerning serious misconduct including illicit drug use by Victoria Police officers.

The report exposed evidence of illicit drug and identified serious deficiencies in the handling of drug issues by the force, according to the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC).
The Commission conducted three operations into the possession, trafficking and use of illicit drugs by police officers since 2014, as part of investigations Operation Apsley, Hotham and Yarrowitch.

The IBAC report exposed illicit drug and identified serious deficiencies in the handling of drug issues by the force. Picture: IBAC

"Police officers cannot be selective in choosing which criminal laws they will obey," IBAC Commissioner Stephen O'Bryan QC said in a statement.

"Our investigations found that while most of the police officers investigated were aware they were engaging in illegal conduct, they rationalised their off-duty criminality as being separate to their obligations as police officers.”

The commissioner called illicit drug use by police officers “unacceptable” and said it adversely impacted public safety and undermined the community’s level of trust and respect for police and the law.

“Illicit drug use, possession and trafficking are criminal offences which contravene the oath or affirmation sworn by all police officers, as well as contravening the professional and ethical standards and values Victoria Police are required to uphold," he said.

IBAC said illicit drug use by police officers was “unacceptable” and adversely impacted public safety. Picture: File, 7 News.


Victoria Police's alcohol and drugs policy stated illicit drugs use was not tolerated but there was some "ambiguity" around the consequences of illegal drug use, IBAC said.

In saying illicit drug use by police was a “serious problem with significant ramifications”, the anti-corruption commission added that the activity exposed officers to compromise and corruption, which left them vulnerable to blackmail or coercion.

“Victoria Police’s authority to uphold the law, and maintain the community’s respect for the law, are eroded by police using illicit drugs. An individual officer using illicit drugs lessens their authority to enforce the law, and diminishes the collective authority of Victoria Police in the community,” the report stated.

The special report on illicit drugs is the fourth this year relating to IBAC's oversight of Victoria Police.

Police have accepted the recommendations and committed to reviewing policies and practices, with a progress report due on June 30 next year, IBAC said.

Victoria Police must provide IBAC with a final report by June 30, 2018.

au.news.yahoo.com 13 Dec 2016

Owning cash in Australia to be a criminal offence soon?

Australia is one hell of a unique continent / country.

The people in government are not in office lawfully in line with a document called the Australian Constitution.

A bit like, you know, some stereotypical dodgy military organisation of a South American country taken over office, using a private militia, ruling with force, intimidation, extortion violence including  threats of incarceration.

The 'authorities' advertise this country as a democracy / monarchy whereas in reality it is a fascist state / corporatocracy / police state, depending one's point of view and which reality one is looking at that being political or legal.

Australia as a 'monarchy' has two queens, one of the U.K. a true flesh and blood woman, and another an unlawful paper entity called the Queen of Australia.

Danger, Rhetorical questions ahead:

• So, as a 'monarchy' who are the Australian people subjects of the U.K. Monarch or the Queen of Australia?

• So, who does our judicature answer to the U.K. monarch or a piece of paper in the annals of some government department?

Do you know the difference between the invading British Empire's settlement of Australia and New Zealand?

In short when they came to 'New Zealand' they were met with fierce opposition and British monarchy made a treaty with the native peoples, called the Waitangi Treaty.

Queen Victoria even stated that there is a special relationship with the indigenous people.

On the Australian side, any opposition was quickly extinguished with gunfire and the land of the indigenous people was taken from them under arms by the 'Crown'.

Is the 'Crown' what you really think it is?

So many more questions for the Aussie bogan not to ponder over.

Australia's currency is even a huge scam.

Many a law 'researcher' has commented or documented on the validity of the current currency we have.

Why cannot one say that:

in short, Australia's 'cash' is a corporate promissory note by a hostile company in power over the people of Australia in breach of the Australian Constitution?

Is the push for cashless society is to monitor then control the movements of the slave population of this continent?

The apparent new law(?) / policy(?) to remove the current plastic $100 was to allegedly stamp out crime.

Apparently now it's to recoup billions in unpaid tax.

From who?

From the masses,

or the corporations that do not pay hundreds of millions each in tax per year, all year, every year?

With every law passed the people are being put further into slavery and subservience to corporate rule.

The criminal elite telling the slaves that they are the criminals.

Looks like the people have had the wool pulled over their eyes yet again by the 'authorities'.

See article from 14 December 2016 by news.com.au of the headline:

Government floats $100 note removal

SAY goodbye to the $100 note.

Australia looks set to follow in the footsteps of Venezuela and India by abolishing the country’s highest-denomination banknote in a bid to crack down on the “black economy”.

Speaking to ABC radio on Wednesday, Revenue and Financial Services Minister Kelly O’Dwyer flagged a review of the $100 note and cash payments over certain limits as the government looks to recoup billions in unpaid tax.

Monday’s midyear budget update will include the appointment of former KPMG global chairman Michael Andrew to oversee a black economy taskforce. The black economy accounts for 1.5 per cent of GDP, given many cash payments are untaxed.

Ms O’Dwyer told the ABC not only is the lost revenue owed to the Australian people for schools and hospitals, but it’s also critical for those who do the right thing and pay tax.

“The whole point of this crackdown on the black economy is to make sure we close down any potential loopholes,” she said. Despite the broad use of electronic forms of payment, Ms O’Dwyer warned there are three times as many $100 notes in circulation than $5 notes.

“It does beg the question, ‘Why?’” she said.

There are currently 300 million $100 notes in circulation, and 92 per cent of all currency by value is in $50 and $100 notes.

The minister would not rule out the removal of the $100 note, saying it was up to the expert panel to provide recommendations. “There’s nothing wrong with cash per se, the issue is when people don’t declare it and when they don’t pay tax on it,” she said.

David Leyonhjelm. Picture: Mick Tsikas/AAPSource:AAP

Kelly O'Dwyer. Picture: Lukas Coch/AAPSource:AAP

The taskforce will draw on the experience of countries like France, where the government banned cash payments of more than 1000 euros. “I’m not going to put a limit on what the taskforce will look at,” Ms O’Dwyer said.

Liberal Democratic Senator David Leyonhjelm hit out at the proposal, saying “the only people who are distressed by the cash economy are the government and the public servants who want to spend taxes”.

“The incentives for a cash economy would be a lot reduced if taxes were a lot lower,” he told news.com.au. “It’s a reaction to the level of taxes we pay.”

Mr Leyonhjelm said Australia was joining a global push to make it harder to engage in the cash economy. “Whether it will succeed or not is a moot point. Carrying two $50 notes instead of a $100 note doesn’t seem to be much of a disincentive,” he said.

“But with my libertarian hat on, I think the solution is to lower taxes so the incentives to avoid paying taxes are lower.”

It comes after a report by UBS recommended Australia scrap the $100 note. According to UBS, benefits may include “reduced crime (difficult to monetise), increased tax revenue (fewer cash transactions) and reduced welfare fraud (claiming welfare while earning or hoarding cash)”.

“From the banks’ perspective there would likely be a spike in deposits — if all the $100 notes were deposited into banks (ignoring hoarded $50 notes), household deposits would rise around four per cent,” the report said.

“This would likely fill the banks’ Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR) gap and reduce reliance on offshore funding.”

India last month demonetised the country’s two highest-denomination banknotes in a bid to crack down on “black money”, sparking chaotic scenes.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi sent shockwaves through the country by announcing on November 8 all 500 rupee ($10) and 1000 rupee ($20) notes — some 85 per cent of all bills in circulation — would cease to be legal tender within hours.

In a scathing editorial in The Hindu newspaper, former Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said the decision had “shattered the faith and confidence that hundreds of millions of Indians” had placed in their government.

“The vast majority of Indians earn in cash, transact in cash and save in cash, all legitimately,” he wrote. “Their daily subsistence depends on their cash being accepted as a medium of valid currency.

“They save their money in cash which, as it grows, is stored in denominations of 500 rupee and 1000 rupee notes. To tarnish these as ‘black money’ and throw the lives of these hundreds of millions of poor people in disarray is a mammoth tragedy.

“It is the fundamental duty of a democratically elected government in any sovereign nation to protect the rights and livelihood of its citizens. The recent decision by the Prime Minister is a travesty of this fundamental duty.”

This week, Venezuela joined suit, with Venezuelans rushing to trade in their 100-bolivar bills after President Nicolas Maduro said he was eliminating the nation’s highest currency denomination in an attempt to fight speculation and currency hoarding.

VicRoads driver licence deliberate false information?

Can you really trust the corporation conglomerate in Australia called the  'authorities'?

Can you really trust what they put in writing to you, as 'lawful'?

Let's take a closer look at what a legal (but unlawful) licensing business called VicRoads writes to its customers.

This is an excerpt of what they write to their clients:

Carry your driver licence and/or learner permit while driving

You should carry your driver licence and/or learner permit while driving and produce it upon request to a police officer or a VicRoads Transport Safety Services Officer, see scan below:

If you are above 26 years of age you are under no legal obligation to produce your 'driver licence' to a police officer.

A 'VicRoads' Transport Safety Officer has no lawful power to instruct you to produce your 'driver licence'.

Road Safety Act 1986 Section 19 states:

(8)     A person under the age of 26 years who holds a driver licence must have the licence in his or her possession at all times while driving or in charge of a motor vehicle.
Penalty applying to this subsection: 5 penalty units.

Ref:  http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/rsa1986125/s19.html


Putting aside the validity of the Road Safety Act 1986.


Another bit of false / business enticing information produced by "VICTORIA State Government"?

Doctor and wife sue police for $1 million after unlawful arrest and tasering

It can take 20 years to see 'justice' against police personnel who commit criminal activities, as in the example of Corinna Horvath where she was beaten senseless to a point where she did not even remember her name.

This is the extent of thuggery, extortion and violence Australia's police 'force' commit against the general populous.

It's as if the masses where the enemy of police and not where the police where 'public servants', you know where the tax paying public being technically their employers.

Many people are not aware that the police within Australia do no act lawfully, but as always in any criminal matter, the crime must be alleged then followed up with accordance to the 'law'.

This is just one example of many that rarely get reported on by the mainstream media of abuse by Australia's police.

Twenty years to obtain justice against police, where a member of the slave population can be imprisoned for a parking fine.

They are the laws of a penal colony, and not a 'free' society / democracy.

Note: We recommend that any and all interaction with police be recorded either discreetly or openly.

See article from 10 Dec 2016 by yahoo.com of the headline:

Doctor and his wife win $1m after being tasered

A law professor and his wife who were yesterday awarded more than $1 million in damages after an unlawful arrest have told how they risked going bankrupt to expose how they were treated by police officers.

Robert Cunningham and Catherine Atoms wept in the District Court yesterday as their eight-year battle resulted in a judge announcing the massive payout.

Judge Felicity Davis found they were assaulted, tasered, unlawfully detained and maliciously prosecuted by police after stopping to help a stranger on a night out in Fremantle in 2008.

But it was a hollow victory, with Ms Atoms’ career as a community engagement consultant in tatters.

She was put into “performance management” in her relatively new job after being charged by police and by the time a magistrate threw the case out 18 months later, she was on her way “out the door”.

The bulk of damages — $1.024 million — were awarded to Ms Atoms for loss of earnings and the distress and back injury she suffered, with $110,000 awarded to Dr Cunningham.

Judge Davis told the court that she calculated percentages of liability for individual officers and the State and made an order for “aggravated damages” against one officer, Simon Traynor.

The police were represented by government lawyers and supported by the Police Union, which declined to comment yesterday. It is considering an appeal.

Outside court, the couple toldThe Weekend West that they would have been financially devastated by legal costs of the other parties if they had lost the case.

“We would have had to file for bankruptcy, that’s what was on the line for us,” Dr Cunningham said.

“We had to sue both the State and the individual who had separate legal counsel, so we would have been subject to two sets of legal costs of an 18-day trial.”

Dr Cunningham and Ms Atoms took the action after all of their efforts to hold the officers to account failed — a police internal investigation cleared them of wrongdoing and the Corruption and Crime Commission agreed with the outcome, refusing to instigate its own inquiry despite criticism by its then parliamentary inspector.

“I have a great sadness that the legal system pushes you into dollars and cents when that’s not always what it’s about,” Dr Cunningham said.

“This was our last resort, so it’s not as though we signed up for a civil action on day one.

“We were concerned about the systemic issues and how less privileged people in society may be subject to this type of behaviour by the police on a regular basis and all of the consequences that flow from that.

“People lose faith in the justice system. They lose faith in the good police officers serving our State and that has social consequences.”

Ms Atoms said she would take no satisfaction from the decision unless it sparked change. “I think it’s important to recognise that a lot of people experience far worse,” she said.

“If justice is so out of reach for us, how far out of reach is justice for the broader public?”

Dr Cunningham called for the CCC to finally hold its own investigation of the case.

“From our personal experience, we’ve learnt that unfortunately the CCC does not appear to be fulfilling its mandate of successfully overseeing the activities of the WA Police service,” he said.

“Until we have some confidence that this kind of thing is less likely to happen as a result of this, through some sort of systemic review, then we haven’t been fully successful in this action.”

“The society has spent all of this money on an 18-day court trial. Imagine what the CCC could have done in relation to this issue in 2009 and 2010.”

Australia the new Paedophile's Paradise?

It seems that the Australian 'justice' system is in support of paedophilia.

Is it letting out criminals, so that they can re-offend, create more victims from the slave populous, and keep the 'justice' business afloat?

From Queensland, Gary Brabham raped a 6 year old girl and only gets 6 months jail...

From Victoria a CONVICTED pervert gets 'unlimited' (?) access to fresh meat, i.e. children of the slave population.

Would the sentences be different if children of the judiciary were raped?

Just showing the peasant victim's their true standing at law, i.e. that of a slave.

Note:

IF you do not pay unlawful fines from a toll company you can and will end up in prison for over a year, depending on the amount, i.e. more than for raping a 6 year old girl.

Still not caring about taking 'action' ??? !!! ???

Too much footy and beer in the house ???

Centrelink involved in unlawful extortion racket

It's bad enough that Centrelink is scamming it's clients millions of dollars annually by falsely declaring that the recipients have 'breached' Centrelink guidelines, as a result their payments being stopped, but now we have obtained information that Centrelink is unlawfully using debt collectors over falsified debts (a criminal act).

Is there no boundaries that the corporation conglomerate will stop at to extort cash from the 'weak'?

On a side note the true colour of Australian law is that of "Guilty until proven innocent", where absolute and strict liability is (unlawfully) applied. This falls under Roman Law.

See article from 6 December 2016 of the headline:

Guilty until proven innocent – Centrelink gone rogue

The Independent Member for Denison, Andrew Wilkie, urged the Federal Government to call to heel Centrelink which is generating numerous incorrect debt notices and frightening the community with heavy-handed tactics and debt collectors.

Centrelink has begun using a new automated system that matches government payments to tax records to identify fraud or overpayments worth up to $4 billion.

However based on complaints to his office, Mr Wilkie said the new IT system was spitting out numerous incorrect debt notices among the $4.5 million compliance notices produced daily.

“I have no problem with the Government retrieving genuine overpayments or cracking down on fraud,” Mr Wilkie said. “But I do have grave concerns with Centrelink acting like loan sharks and treating people as guilty until proven innocent and sending in the debt collectors.”

Mr Wilkie said his office has heard from distraught and terrified people wrongly receiving debt notices of up to $6500 that date back as far as 2010. They are given three weeks to provide documentation to Centrelink to prove they were not overpaid. If they have changed address, they may not even receive the debt notice.

“These people can explain why they were not overpaid, but are struggling to lay their hands on the documents to prove it as the so-called debt dates back years and in some cases their employers have gone out of business,’’ Mr Wilkie said. “How many of us could lay our hands on a pay slip from six years ago?”

Mr Wilkie said if people could not prove the debt was incorrect, they have to pay up or risk a visit from the debt collector.

“Clearly this new IT system is badly designed and must be sorted out,” Mr Wilkie said. “The Human Services Minister, Alan Tudge, should drop his Grinch act and suspend the program until Centrelink is confident of its system integrity. We don’t treat people as guilty until proven innocent in Australia, unless you’re Centrelink it seems.

“If Minister Tudge does not act, the program will be exposed as another cruel and ideological attack from the Liberal Government on the nation’s vulnerable and disadvantaged.”

Queensland's dodgy government passes law at 2:30am when the sheep are sleeping

This bad enough that literally every single law in Queensland is invalid from the moment the upper house was removed from the law making process, but passing laws at 2:30am seriously??? !!! ???

Just another dodgy 'money for mates' law passed while the slave population are sleeping.

See article from 1 Dec 2016 by brisbanetimes.com.au of the headline:

Public servant super laws passed overnight

The LNP opposition has accused the government of rushing through laws to get its hands on public servants' superannuation.

About 2.30am on Thursday, the government passed its Revenue and Other Legislation Amendment Bill.

 
The Queensland government has passed laws that will change how some public servants' superannuation is calculated.

Shadow Treasurer Scott Emerson said the changes could leave a public servant with more than 30 years' service $210,000 worse off.

"These changes will leave core public servants like teachers, police and nurses tens of thousands of dollars out of pocket," Mr Emerson said.
"In some cases this will cost public servants hundreds of thousands of dollars."

He accused the government of rushing through the laws late at night.

"(Treasurer Curtis Pitt) was caught trying to sneak through a change that could leave some public servants hundreds of thousands of dollars worse off," Mr Emerson said during the debate.

"We are seeing this Treasurer raiding public servants' superannuation."

The largely procedural bill includes a change to the State Public Sector (Superannuation) Act, which gives a government superannuation officer the power to change the multiple that dictates how much money an eligible worker receives from the fund when they go to cash out upon retirement.

The bill previously would have given the treasurer of the day the powers - but Mr Pitt introduced an amendment to that aspect overnight.

Currently, the formula is roughly the final salary of the worker multiplied by the multiple, which increases depending on the number of years of service - an increase in salary has an "immediate" increase in the accrued benefit for scheme members.

Workers eligible for the scheme could negotiate to use allowances to increase their overall salary; for example, a public servant with a base wage of $90,000 could negotiate to include $30,000 in allowances in their take home pay, bumping their salary to $120,000.

Under the changes, workers can no longer have their negotiated allowance payments count towards their overall pay, which lowers the multiple used.

Mr Pitt said the bill formalised the "existing administrative process to manage unfunded windfall benefit gains resulting from artificial salary increases".

"This amendment applies only to employees with defined benefit accounts," Mr Pitt said.

"There is no effect on the benefits accrued before the artificial increase in salary and there is no change to the treatment of normal salary growth, promotions or existing allowances."

Mr Pitt said if an employee believed a decision to adjust their multiple was an inappropriate application of the law, they could appeal under the Judicial Review Act.

He said the bill was no secret and accused the LNP of scaremongering.

"Sometimes an employee's permanent salary is increased artificially - for instance, because irregularly paid amounts such as loading are included," Mr Pitt said.

"This creates an immediate increase in the employee's defined benefits entitlement.

"While there is an immediate increase for those employees with a defined benefit account, those other employees with an accumulation account receive no such increase.

"That is not fair ... It is about making sure that co-workers who sit next to each other are treated in the same and equitable way."

The LNP did not oppose the bill, but opposed clause 68, which addressed the ability to change multiples.

The bill also allows state government and council workers to choose their own superannuation fund.

Justice for the serfs for superannuation theft may take 20 years

So let's have a look at a practical example of how law works in a colony of the United Kingdom called Australia.

So, you've gained access to a computer in the institution you lay your head at night to sleep in and you've gone on a legal crusade to find 'justice'. In your crusade you have been convinced that you're a 'free man' and that only one (universal?) law applies, that being "cause no harm".

Now armed with this knowledge you comprehend that 'theft' is also part of this universal law called 'cause no harm'.

Lucky for you that Australia's judicature has also caught on to this, as it's also defined in 'Common Law', where theft is considered a 'criminal' offence.

So, let's take for example a member of the masses / general populous / serfs / tax slaves / 'mums and dads investors' walks into a mobile phone retail giant and steals a 'dummy' mobile phone, who has the unfortunate luck of being caught by Australia's finest policy enforcers, will end up with a criminal record / conviction for 'theft', you know from the 'cause no harm' law.

If the same member of the above mentioned pleb populous would venture into a office stationary franchise to steal a box of 100 pack of 28mm paper clips of the retail value of  $0.94, and were to be unfortunately caught, one should be charged for the theft of the 'profit' on that item. None the less it is still theft irrespective of amount ($0.23?).

So let's do a flip to the situation where the victim is a member of the tax slave populous, you know the beer and footy bogan crowd.

Let's put aside the fact that that ATO (Australian Taxation Office) is not a lawful (it is a 'legal'?) entity.

Let's put aside that superannuation is a fraud on the unsuspecting masses.

We'll stop here as if we keep mentioning of what we should put to the 'side' we may not finish this post.

An article in the mainstream media stated that there are 2.4 million workers ( read tax slaves / serfs / bogans, etc etc - geez the mainstream media gloss things over) defrauded of their superannuation to the value of $3.6 billion for the financial year of 2013-2014.

Now this is the BEST part (NOT!):

IF you want 'justice' for your person with regards to your stolen superannuation it may take up to 20 years, see attached illustration:

How law works against criminals within the 'system' 101:

• If policy enforcers / employees of a law enforcing monopoly, break into your house (unlawfully) and beat you senseless (until you cannot remember your name), as in the example of Corinna Horvath, you have to seek remedy outside of Australia, namely the UN (Human Right Commission), and it takes 20 years for an employee of  Victoria Police to get charged.

• As an example in Victoria when you obtain an unlawful 'fine' originating from Victoria Police, where it comes from a person (NOT a police officer) sitting in a car parked illegally on a nature strip taking photos (with equipment not certified by the NMI - National Measurements Institute) of a vehicle traveling above the speed limit and do not pay it, the registered person of that vehicle is automatically classified as guilty (in breach of the law), the unlawful fine progresses to a warrant from an unlawful sheriff, where if you do not pay, they clamp the vehicle or STEAL that person's possessions.

Their 'remedy' can be reached in as little as one year, the slave populous 20 years...

STILL not hurting enough and want to keep watching the telly?

Australia's 'laws' made by corporations for corporations.

Corporate Criminals: 1, Slave population:0

The 'Australian Government' forcing law on people

Warning to:
sensitive people, people who get hurt by words, facebook wannabe lawyers who are just online legal studies students, 'free man' theory promoters, lawful rebellion protagonists, and many others who we do not care about...

'Conspiracy theory' content contained within
(i.e. NO case law for facebook legal studies patrons to hijack as their own)

So, we (the people) are apparently told that we live in a democracy, which according to Black's law dictionary 2nd edition (1910) conflicts with living in a monarchy (as we have a Queen), but that's another post or dozen which could be entertained at a later point.

Damn you Sue v Hill damn you!

Anyway, we are also told that we have laws (yes silly, more than one - 'cause no harm') that MUST be in accordance to the supreme document called the 'Australian Constitution', so much so that a court, aptly named the High Court of Australia, has been set up to make sure that ALL laws abide by this Constitution.

The herd populace can even challenge the law that is used against them, from e.g. an unlawful parking fine, in this place called the High Court of Australia.

BUT the plot thickens....

ALL Australian courts must be enacted lawfully, meaning their empowering document, their respective 'Act' must have the correct process to be in circulation.

An example of an alleged 'court' in Victoria, where the slaves get fined unlawfully from, is one that's called the 'Infringements Court'. This is not a legal nor lawful court, as it does not have an empowering document creating its existence, namely the "Infringements Court Act (of whatever year it comes into existence)".

Conversely the High Court of Australia, has its empowering document called the High Court of Australia Act 1979.

Remember that all 'laws' (read Acts) must be in line with this document called the Australian Constitution.

Chapter III of the Australian Constitution  also defines how the judicature is to function, including the High Court.

Now, as an example we move along to this law (Act) defining the existence of the current High Court called the High Court of Australia Act of 1979.

We will also note that laws (once again Acts) are to be passed once they obtain royal assent, that being by the current UK monarch, in this case Her most excellent majesty Queen Elizabeth II.

We are also told, via a piece of legislation, that laws submitted can be given royal assent by the Governor-General.

The Australian Government tells the people that Sir Zelman Cowen was put in office as Governor-General from 1977 - 1982, i.e. the time when the High Court of Australia Act 1979 was put into 'force', see illustration below:

Why was this Act put into 'force'?

Why was it not in 'circulation', or 'enacted' or  to a much lesser extent in 'operation'?

This Act was put in by the 'Australian Government', not the de jure (based on law) government as described in the document called the Australian Constitution.

Is this why this 'Act' is in 'force'. Has it been forced upon the people?

Do YOU know where the High Court of Australia Act of 1979 fails to be enacted 'lawfully'?

Mainstream media concealing ex 'top cop' speeding away crime?

So the corporation conglomerate commonly referred to as the 'government' tells it's slave population that "speed kills" via graphic television ads and also that (speed / red light)cameras save lives.

When the government resorts of TV commercials you'd think something dodgy would be up, right?

Of course not you tin foil hatter slash 'conspiracy theorist'!!!

Well the government DID advertise to people that they must fill out the 2016 census forms, where many people on social media posted that there was no such lawful direction to do so, which also fell under the #censusfail hashtag for a botched up IT infrastructure concerning the census.

Can you even trust the mainstream media with reporting accurate or factual events?

Well, not from where we stand with the reports of fairly 'important' news articles that we were made aware of.

Lets take a look at recent one with regards to a former 'top cop' with regards to his road behaviour and an alleged attempted car jacking.

The newspaper publication the Herald Sun published this article on Saturday the 3rd of December 2016 sans comments in red:

What we find 'concerning' is that an ex 'top cop' was astute enough to notice that the Land Cruiser was 15 years old, but failed to note the number plates of the vehicle with the youths inside where the African youths had a weapon, allegedly a tomahawk.

Brand new Merc with no dash cam?

It was stated by the media in an online version of the article that the ex 'top cop' sped away, therefore he admitted that he was 'speeding', a criminal offence at law.

It is unacceptable that an ex 'top cop' speed given the fact that police beat the populous into submission on road crimes, and that 'speed kills'.


Noel Ashby therefore should be charged for a number of offences including reckless driving since he sped away, IF the police are really serious about the road toll.

Does it seem like the police can do whatever they want, where even road laws do not apply to them because they did a 'defensive driving' course?

See article from adelaidenow.com.au of the headline:

Former Victoria Police Assistant Commissioner Noel Ashby caught up in attempted carjacking on the Princess Freeway

A FORMER high ranking police officer has had a terrifying encounter with a gang armed with a tomahawk in an attempted carjacking.

Victoria Police Former Assistant Commissioner for Traffic and Detective Noel Ashby has told how four “aggressive” men tried to force him to pull over as he drove on the Princes Fwy between Melbourne and Geelong.

“I looked over and there was a car very close to me and it was a four-wheel drive, probably a 15-year-old Land Cruiser,” Mr Ashby told 3AW’s Neil Mitchell.

“There were four African males in it and the passenger was just articulating to me to pull over.

“So I popped into the near side lane and then they moved across so I then pulled the speed back from 100 off cruise control to 80 and they did the same.”

It soon became clear the teens had sinister intentions.

“When they didn’t pass, at that point I saw the passenger had, what looked like to me a small tomahawk in his hand,” Mr Ashby said.

Mr Ashby had been driving to Geelong in his Mercedes when his car’s lane encroachment alarm went off.

He believes the youths targeted his car.

“They picked my car out. I was near the end. It’s a Mercedes and they clearly picked it out. Its clean, I look after it. I like cars, always have but they clearly targeted it,” Mr Ashby said.

Mr Ashby, who had been trained in defensive driving, sped away and the men continued to follow before later disappearing into traffic.

The former top cop said “anything could have happened” had he pulled over.

“I think I could have been in some trouble and I think people would normally act in good faith and potentially stop and that’s where the danger starts,” Mr Ashby said.

“I was wary straight away, the car was behaving OK, there’s nothing wrong with it, it’s less than a year old so there was no real reason for them to be indicating any problem with the car.”

Though under law drivers are required to pull over if there is a crash, Mr Ashby said that if anyone had fears they should instead drive to their nearest police station.

“The message is, traditionally if we get bumped we stop and the law says if there’s a crash of any description, that’s what we have to do and that has to be respected,” he said.

“But if there’s doubts, if you saw what I saw yesterday, how I felt yesterday, there is no way known I was going to stop. The next thing was Triple 000 and head to the nearest police station.”

The offenders were described as in their late teens and of African appearance.

They were driving a Land Cruiser which carried a red P plate that had white writing on it.

I didn’t get a chance to look at the numberplate ... that’s how quick it happens,” Mr Ashby said.

Anyone with information should call Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000.

Originally published as Ex top cop caught up in carjack drama