Transcripts Prove That I Received No Fair Hearings, Just Convicted of False Allegations

RSB:SND 99/16
23/11/15
IN THE LOCAL COURT ALBURY

MAGISTRATE MURRAY
MONDAY 23 NOVEMBER 2015

SUSAN GAY WARD AND JANICE EVELYN O’BRYAN v TRACEY GWENDOLINE BURT
Complaint Apprehended Domestic Violence Order

Complainants appeared in person No appearance of defendant

SPEAKER: The applicants in that matter, Janice O’Bryan and Susan Ward are before the Court. I’ll just call Ms Burt again, she was here before. (not true, I had no idea this hearing was even happening, until I was served with the Interim Order he issues))

HIS HONOUR: Sergeant, in respect of Tracey Burt and the application for Ms O’Bryan, I do not have a statement of service. In respect of Susan Ward I do not have a statement of service regarding Ms Burt either.

Can I firstly deal with Janice O’Bryan, who’s that? Ma’am is that you? Ma’am, you’re Janice? Ma’am, unfortunately the application has not been served on the other party and the Court can’t make any order as a matter of fairness – just stand in front of the microphone for me.

Your application has not been served on Ms Burt, so the Court can’t make a final order without that taking place. Do you seek a temporary order for your protection between now and when the order is served?

COMPLAINANT O’BRYAN: Yes.

HIS HONOUR: Has anybody spoken to you about that?

COMPLAINANT O’BRYAN: No.
HIS HONOUR: Can your officer just speak to the lady? And is Susan Ward present?

COMPLAINANT WARD: Yes.
HIS HONOUR: That’s you ma’am? Can the officer just speak to the two ladies about what happens when matters are not served and they’ll be asked to come back into Court, give some short evidence. I expect I’ll be making interim orders but if the officer wouldn’t mind explaining that to them?

HIS HONOUR: Just take a seat just for a couple of minutes and somebody will speak to you.
SPEAKER: Okay.

HIS HONOUR: Ms O’Bryan come forward and I’ll explain it to you, just come up to the witness box and just remain standing ma’am when you get up there please.

HIS HONOUR: Take a seat please ma’am, make yourself comfortable.

<EXAMINATION BY HIS HONOUR

Q. Ma’am, your full name please?
A. Janice Evelyn O’Bryan.

Q. Just have a look at this document for me. Ma’am, just have a look at that document, that’s an application you made. Hopefully you read the document before you signed it?

A. Yes.

Q. What’s contained in the document is true and correct?
A. Yes.

Q. And you hold fears based upon that information?
A. (No verbal reply)

Q. Just hand that back to the lady for me. Just give me a minute to read it myself. Ma’am in simple terms, the police have not been able to serve Ms Burt with a copy of the application, all right? Because she has not been served I cannot make a final order until she’s been given a copy of it, and that’s – if the Court’s satisfied she’s been given a copy. Once that happens if the lady does not attend Court, the Court can make a final order in her absence, but I can’t do it until she’s given a copy of it, all right? The other thing is ma’am, that do you know of any reason ma’am that the lady would have to go within 100 metres of 858 Union Road? Any other friends, relative within that distance? A. Her son lives with us.

Q. How old’s the son?
A. Twenty-three.

Q. You’re not working at the moment?
A. Me?

Q. You are not working?
A. No.

Q. Ma’am did somebody assist you insofar as the orders that you sought? Did you draft these yourself?
A. No, no, someone at the courthouse.

Q. Ma’am, is a little bit difficult to enforce in those terms. I’ll take a short adjournment, I’ll be adding a different clause which will prohibit the lady from using basically the internet to publish the material.

HIS HONOUR: So I’ll just take a short adjournment, the Court will resume very shortly.

HIS HONOUR: IN RESPECT TO THE MATTER NOW BEFORE THE COURT I AM SATISFIED THERE ARE REASONABLE GROUNDS FOR THE MAKING OF AN INTERIM ORDER. 5

THE INTERIM ORDER MA’AM IS NOW MADE IN THE FOLLOWING TERMS:

THE PERSON IS NOT TO ASSAULT, MOLEST, HARASS, THREATEN, OR OTHERWISE INTERFERE WITH YOU, OR ANY OTHER PERSON WITH WHOM YOU HAVE A DOMESTIC RELATIONSHIP. ANYBODY LIVING WITH YOU, HUSBAND, PARTNER, CHILDREN, THAT TYPE OF THING.

NOT TO ENGAGE IN CONDUCT THAT INTIMIDATES YOU, OR STALK YOU, OR ANY OTHER PERSON WITH WHOM YOU HAVE A DOMESTIC RELATIONSHIP.

FURTHER, NOT TO GO WITHIN 100 METRES OF THE PREMISES IN WHICH YOU MAY FROM TIME TO TIME RESIDE, THE NOMINATED PREMISES BEING XXXX UNION ROAD GLENROY.

NOT TO APPROACH WITH 50 METRES. SO THERE IS A TOTAL PROHIBITION, SO THERE IS 50 METRES SO THAT YOU KNOW THE DISTANCE, AND THE LADY DOES AS WELL.
NOT TO DESTROY OR DELIBERATELY DAMAGE OR INTERFERE WITH YOUR PROPERTY.

THE OTHER CONDITION IS MA’AM, THE DEFENDANT IS NOT TO USE EQUIPMENT CONNECTED TO A TELECOMMUNICATIONS NETWORK IN THE COMMISSION OF, OR TO FACILITATE THE COMMISSION OF A BREACH OF THESE ORDERS BY HIMSELF OR ANOTHER PERSON.

FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS ORDER TELECOMMUNICATIONS NETWORK HAS THE SAME MEANING AS IN THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1997, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE ONGOING PUBLICATION OF A BLOG “GARY BURT RIPS OFF HIS YOUNGER SISTER TO BUY HEROIN”.

Ma’am, unfortunately those orders have no effect until the order is served on Ms Burt. The order is then in place until 14 December. Before you leave speak to the officer, give her your contact details and they’ll ring you when the order’s been served.

You’ll get a copy of the order in the next three or four days in the mail, but it doesn’t start until it’s served on the other person, all right? Make sure you come back on 14 December. If you’re not here and the other lady is the Court would normally dismiss your application. So it’s really important you come back. Just leave your contact details with the senior constable before you go.

That completes your matter today.

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW

Ms Ward, just come up to the witness box please and remain standing.

COMPLAINANT WARD, AFFIRMED(10.49AM)

HIS HONOUR: Thank you ma’am, take a seat and make yourself comfortable.

EXAMINATION BY HIS HONOUR

Q. Ma’am, your full name please?
A. Susan Gay Ward.

Q. And again ma’am, you’ve read the application no doubt before you signed it–
A. Yes.

Q. –satisfied yourself that what’s contained in the application is true and correct?
A. (No verbal reply)

Q. Ma’am listen carefully You satisfied yourself that what was contained in your application is true and correct and you hold fears based upon that information?
A. Yes.

HIS HONOUR: Again I’m satisfied there is reasonable grounds for making the order.
Q. Ma’am, BDS Huon, Griffith Road Lavington, is that a part of a large shopping complex or something? A. No it’s out of the shopping complex.

Q. Do you know of any other lawful reason why the lady would have to go within 100 metres of that address? A. Well she may go to the shopping complex, yes.

Q. How far is the shopping complex from where you work? A. Across the road.

Q. And the 2/6 Brent Court is your home address? A. Yes.

Q. Know of any reason why she’d have to go within 100 metres of that?
A. No.

Q. Ma’am if I indicate she’s not to enter or loiter within 20 metres of your work address, that would allow the lady to go shopping in the other complex? A. Yeah.

HIS HONOUR: I AM SATISFIED THEY ARE REASONABLE GROUNDS FOR MAKING THE ORDER. ORDER MADE IN THE FOLLOWING TERMS:

MANDATORY ORDERS, (3) NOT TO ENTER OR LOITER WITHIN 20 METRES OF THE PREMISES IN WHICH THE PROTECTED PERSON MAY FROM TIME TO TIME WORK, NOMINATED PREMISES BEING BDS HUON, 338 GRIFFITH ROAD LAVINGTON; NOT TO GO WITHIN 100 METRES OF THE PREMISES IN WHICH THE PROTECTED PERSON MAY FROM TIME TO TIME RESIDE, NOMINATED PREMISES BEING XXXX BRENT STREET LAVINGTON; FURTHER, NOT TO APPROACH WITHIN 50 METRES OR CONTACT HER BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER; NOT TO DESTROY OR DELIBERATELY DAMAGE HER PROPERTY.

AND AGAIN THE SAME TERMS THE ADDITIONAL ORDER REGARDING THE INTERNET.

Q. Again ma’am, what I said to the other lady, equally applicable to you. The order has no effect until it’s served. Most people like to know when that happens. Just give your contact details to the officer at the bar table. Make sure you also come back on the 14/12 as well.

A. Thank you.

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW 20
MATTER ADJOURNED TO 14 DECEMBER
.14/12/15
IN THE LOCAL COURT ALBURY

MAGISTRATE MURRAY 5
MONDAY 14 DECEMBER 2015

SUSAN GAY WARD AND JANICE EVELYN O’BRYAN v TRACEY GWENDOLINE BURT
COMPLAINT
Apprehended domestic violence order

Ms F Garwell for the Complainants/Defendants
Defendant appeared in person
TRACEY GWENDOLINE BURT v SUSAN GAY WARD

COMPLAINT Apprehended domestic violence order

Complainant/Defendant appeared in person 20
Ms F Garwell for the Defendants/Complainants

GARWELL: There’s two lots of matters your Honour. If I could deal with the matter involving Sue (as said) Ward as the applicant and cross-AVO where she’s the defendant?

HIS HONOUR: Yes.
GARWELL: I have service your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: Firstly, can I deal with the matter in which Tracey Burt is the applicant, and Susan Ward is the defendant?
GARWELL: Yes your Honour. Ms Ward is before the Court.

HIS HONOUR: Who’s appearing for Ms Burt?

GARWELL: I appear as duty solicitor for Ms Ward.

HIS HONOUR: Who’s appearing for Ms Tracey Burt? That’s you ma’am? Stand up please. Just come forward to the microphone. Ma’am you’re still seeking to continue with your application?
DEFENDANT: Yes sir.

HIS HONOUR: And you appear for Ms Ward?

GARWELL: Yes, as duty solicitor your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: Since when have Legal Aid started doing these matters?

GARWELL: There’s a domestic violence duty solicitor who’s appointed by Legal Aid for Mondays your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: That’s fine. Your client’s position regarding the matter please?

GARWELL: She agrees to an interim order without admissions and opposes a final order your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: MATTER ADJOURNED TO 18 JANUARY 2016 AT 9.30AM

(7) NOT TO APPROACH WITHIN 50 METRES, RATHER THAN JUST NOT TO APPROACH. 15
And would the lady have any reason to go within 50 metres of her as well?

SPEAKER: No.

HIS HONOUR: Ms Ward, stand up please, just move to the microphone on your right hand side.

Hand down service orders in respect to that matter.

Ma’am, you understand the application is granted, or an interim order is granted between now and 18 January in terms identical to the application. The only thing that has changed is (7) not to approach, not to approach within 50 metres. So you know the distance and the lady does as well. Apart from that ma’am, everything else, and that is by consent without admissions, interim order made.

SPEAKER: Yes.

HIS HONOUR: In terms sought. ADD NOT TO APPROACH WITHIN 50 METRES TO CONDITION NUMBER 7. 35

Now Ms Burt, in respect of that matter it’s really important that you understand you are the private applicant, which is number 1. You must file your material in accordance with the orders made by the Court and then Ms Ward has to do the same thing.

In simple terms, if either of you fail to comply with the orders then quite clearly if you fail to comply with it ma’am, the order would normally be dismissed, and ma’am, if you fail to comply the order would normally not be made to finality.
That completes that matter.

The next matter is Susan Ward and Ms Burt as the defendant. Now you’re appearing for Ms Ward?

HIS HONOUR: Ma’am, you can take a seat please.

SPEAKER: Thank you.

DEFENDANT: Your Honour could I ask a question?

HIS HONOUR: Just give me one minute. Yes.
DEFENDANT: Why does she have Legal Aid when she has a full time job?

HIS HONOUR: Check that with Legal Aid. You may have the same option to you as well ma’am, so – certainly Legal Aid did not normally cover these types of matters. Ms Garwell’s indicated Legal Aid now does, so.

Now ma’am, do you oppose the making of the order as well?

DEFENDANT: Yes, I plead innocent, I reject it.
HIS HONOUR: That’s fine. Ma’am you agree to the temporary order that was in place when you walked into Court being continued until 18 January?

DEFENDANT: I don’t think it’s relevant, but if the Court chooses to do so. I have not made any threats to Susan Ward, I have not contacted her. I’ve been in Albury for a year and she’s been making threats towards me. I was told I can’t go to my parent’s house because she wants to beat me up. These threats have continued for a year and then she sent me a menacing email–

HIS HONOUR: Stop, stop. I’m not concerned with it at this stage.

DEFENDANT: Yes.

HIS HONOUR: You’ll be given the opportunity of placing all this material before the Court, but again in respect of this matter, because it’s a separate application, I hand down orders in respect of this matter to you both and the INTERIM ORDER MA’AM WHICH WAS IN PLACE WHEN YOU WALKED INTO COURT IS TO CONTINUE.

DEFENDANT: Okay.

HIS HONOUR: Make sure that when you’re dealing with the matters, this applies to you both, that they’re separate applications, so you must file the material in respect of each of the matters you have before the Court today.
The last matter is Janice O’Bryan and Tracey Burt. Now who is Janice – that’s you? Now – no, just stay there ma’am, please. Is that Janice O’Bryan, you’re appearing for her?

GARWELL: I appear for Ms O’Bryan your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: Now Ms Burt, this is a separate application. Do you oppose this application as well?

DEFENDANT: Yes I do.
HIS HONOUR: Again ma’am, YOUR MATTER IS ADJOURNED TO 18/01 – THIS ONE AS WELL AT 9.30 FOR COMPLIANCE CHECK.

And I hand down orders in respect of that as well.
INTERIM ORDER IS TO CONTINUE

SO THE ORDER FOR MS O’BRYAN CONTINUES, THE ORDER FOR THE OTHER LADY.
Make sure ma’am if you don’t understand what you have to do that you have that explained to you by the registry staff, because if you don’t comply with the orders made by the Court, in simple terms your applications will be dismissed or you’ll have orders made against you.
So apart from that, that completes your matters today. Same with the other matters as well, thank you.

DEFENDANT: Thank you

 

 

IN THE LOCAL COURT – ALBURY
MAGISTRATE MURRAY
MONDAY 18 JANUARY 2016

SUSAN WARD AND JANICE O’BRYAN  v  TRACEY BURT

PART HEARD

Complaint Apprehended Domestic Violence Order
Complainant appeared in person
Defendant appeared in person

HIS HONOUR:  Can I firstly deal with the matter of Burt and Ward.  Who is Tracey Burt – is that you ma’am?

SPEAKER:  Tracey Burt’s at the microphone there your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:  Ma’am I’m dealing with the matter in which you are the applicant, or protected person – Ms Ward is the defendant.  Where’s Ms Ward? Ma’am, you’re not legally represented?

COMPLAINANT WARD:  No.

HIS HONOUR:  Ms Burt, you filed the material, and Ms Ward, you’ve picked up Ms Burt’s material and also filed your own in respect of the matter in which you are the defendant?

COMPLAINANT WARD:  Correct.

HIS HONOUR:  Ma’am, that’s correct as well?

DEFENDANT:  Yes.

HIS HONOUR:  I’m now dealing with the matter in which Ms Ward is the applicant and you are the defendant?

DEFENDANT:  Yes.

HIS HONOUR:  And again in respect of that you’ve both filed your material and obtained a copy of the other person’s material as well?

DEFENDANT:  Yes.

COMPLAINANT WARD:  Correct.

HIS HONOUR:  I haven’t read this material but whoever the magistrate is obviously will do that.  How many witness statements in respect of firstly Ms Ward do you intend to call in which you’re the applicant and defendant, because I expect some of them are going to be the same?

COMPLAINANT WARD:  How many witnesses am I going to call?

HIS HONOUR:  How many witness statements.  Because you’ll be restricted only to the people whose statements you’ve provided.

I’d indicate to you both if people other than yourself have provided statements, if they are not here for cross-examination the Court normally would not admit that evidence.

COMPLAINANT WARD:  I’m not calling anyone other than my mother that I provided a witness statement for.

HIS HONOUR:  All right.  Well if that’s the case ma’am, do you have anybody else apart–

DEFENDANT:  I have one witness statement in there from XXXX XXXXX, he’ll be there on the day to testify.

HIS HONOUR:  That’s fine, as long as they’re both there, because if they’re not here for cross-examination the statements basically just don’t come in.

Now is 5 February a suitable date for you both?

COMPLAINANT WARD:  I have to check with work but–

DEFENDANT:  Yes.

HIS HONOUR:  You better go and check now, do it quickly, unless there’s a very, very good reason ma’am.

COMPLAINANT WARD:  What day does it fall on?  Monday?

HIS HONOUR:  5 February is a Friday.

COMPLAINANT WARD:  Yeah.

HIS HONOUR:  So that date is suitable?

COMPLAINANT WARD:  Yeah.

HIS HONOUR:  Ma’am suitable?

DEFENDANT:  Yes, fine.

HIS HONOUR:  Both matters are to be heard at the one time, 5/2/2016 at 9.30.

Both the interim orders are to continue in identical terms between now and the 5/2 and you both understand the matters in which you are the respective defendants.

DEFENDANT:  Yes.

COMPLAINANT WARD:  Yes.

HIS HONOUR:  And you agree that both matters be heard at the one time?

DEFENDANT:  Yes.

COMPLAINANT WARD:  Yes.

HIS HONOUR:  Can I just say that if you haven’t got legal representation that’s fine, you don’t have to be legally represented, but you’re still going to be bound by the rules of evidence in respect of the matters now before the Court and you really should get some assistance regarding basic rules of evidence, how to ask questions, et cetera.  Because it’s a big call to ask people to abide by the rules of evidence but that’s what the law says.

BOTH MATTERS ADJOURNED TO 5 FEBRUARY 2016 AT 9.30AM TO BE HEARD TOGETHER.  BOTH THE INTERIM ORDERS TO CONTINUE IN IDENTICAL TERMS.

HIS HONOUR:  And that completes the matters today.

COMPLAINANT WARD:  Thank you.

HIS HONOUR:  Ms O’Bryan.  Now ma’am you filed your material?

COMPLAINANT O’BRYAN:  Yes.

HIS HONOUR:  And again you’ve both obtained copies of the statements that you both filed?

DEFENDANT:  Yes.

HIS HONOUR:  Now in respect of the other matter, do you wish to have this matter ma’am where you are the applicant dealt with at the same time as the other matter as well?

COMPLAINANT O’BRYAN:  Might as well yes.

HIS HONOUR:  Ma’am you agree with that as well?

DEFENDANT:  It doesn’t–

HIS HONOUR:  Well there’s going to be commonality between the statements, it’s just a matter of common sense—

DEFENDANT:  Yes.

HIS HONOUR:  –it’s going to be – ma’am, the comments that I passed to the other two ladies equally applies to you.  The rules of evidence apply to this application as people find it a very frustrating experience.  So I suggest that you basically both go and get some fundamental advice as to how these matters are dealt with.

ALL MATTERS TO BE HEARD TOGETHER.  INTERIM ORDER IS TO CONTINUE.

In simple terms, if either of the parties don’t turn up, if you are the applicant in the matter and the defendant does not turn up the applicant would normally have the orders made.  If the defendant does not turn up, sorry – the defendant turns up and the applicant does not, the matters would normally be dismissed.

So the matters where you are applying for the order if that person does not turn up the matter would normally be dismissed, and equally importantly if the defendant does not turn up the orders would normally be made.

Other than that, that completes the matters today.

DEFENDANT:  Thank you.

COMPLAINANT O’BRYAN:  Thank you.

 

 

IN THE LOCAL COURT
ALBURY
MAGISTRATE CROMPTON

FRIDAY 5 FEBRUARY 2016

R  v  Tracey BURT
OFFENCE         Contravene apprehended violence order

COMPLAINT     Apprehended violence order(2)

Sergeant S Lewis for the Informant
Accused appeared in person

HIS HONOUR:  Just come forward to the bar table.

WARD:  Both of us?

HIS HONOUR:  Yes.  I’ll start with you, ma’am, what’s your name?

O’BRYAN:  Janice O’Brien.

HIS HONOUR:  Janice O’Bryan, and you are?

O’BRYAN:  The mother of Tracey Burt.

HIS HONOUR:  Who are you?

WARD:  I’m Susan Ward.

HIS HONOUR:  You’re Susan Ward.  Tracey is not here, is that right?

WARD:  Apparently not, no.

HIS HONOUR:  She’s been called.  I’ve had a look at all of the paperwork in this matter and I’m going to refer this matter to the Community Justice Centre for mediation.

WARD:  No.  We can’t do mediation, it won’t work, sir.

HIS HONOUR:  I am going to make that order, I am going to refer you to mediation and if it doesn’t resolve at mediation then you can come back to court.

WARD:  It won’t work she’s not here.

HIS HONOUR:  What I can do is I can wait a little bit longer to see if she turns up or I can just make the order now.  What do you want me to do?

WARD:  We’d like to resolve it if we can somehow.

HIS HONOUR:  I understand that.  The legislation provides that the Court is to refer these matters to mediation unless there’s a very good reason not to do so.  I’ve looked at the paperwork.  If it happens to be the case that it can’t be resolved at mediation then you will have an opportunity to come back to court, do you understand that?

O’BRYAN:  Yeah.

WARD:  Sir, just the longer it takes the more she has the opportunity to keep breaching and ringing my work and emailing and coming in and it’s getting embarrassing. (This statement is purjery, completely untrue)

COURT OFFICER:  Your Honour, Tracey Burt is here.

HIS HONOUR:  Just come forward, ma’am, just stand right there beside the sergeant.  I’ve had a look at the paperwork in these matters and I am going to refer them to the Community Justice Centre for an attempt at mediation.  If the mediation is not successful then the matters will come to back to court for a hearing.

ACCUSED:  Okay.

HIS HONOUR:  I am going to refer these matters to the Community Justice Centre for mediation and they will be listed back before this Court on 18 March.  Someone from the centre will contact you and make a time.

WARD:  Sir, excuse me.  We have a friend that works in the mediation and we’d like to make sure she’s totally exempt from it and not involved in the mediation.

HIS HONOUR:  I’m sure that can be arranged.

WARD:  Tracey has abused her in the street just recently so we need to keep that lady totally out of it

ACCUSED: And I had to lodge a complaint about her to the ICAC. (This sentence was left out of the official transcript, but was clearly heard by the court and my witness who was in attendance)

HIS HONOUR:  When the people from the centre contact you you can make sure that you tell them that piece of information and I’m sure they’ll make arrangements.

WARD:  Sure, yes.

HIS HONOUR:  You can go now, just speak with the Court Officer who will get your details.  Thank you.

ADJOURNED TO FRIDAY 18 MARCH 2016

 

Defence lodged in relation to the criminal charge of contravene ADVO, prior to the hearing, and which the Magistrate had already read, with the rest of the ADVO applications lack supporting evidence, and strong defence evidence and case evidence in my application against Ward.

 

Defence Statements To Address New Charges Bought Against Tracey Burt by Susan Ward via Police

I have lodged a complaint with the ICAC about Gwen Bradley of the Community Justice Centre’s unofficial involvement in all of these proceedings, and in particular of myself having been charged with this new offence. I have lodged a complaint about her with her employer as well.

I have lodged a complaint with the Police Commissioner’s Office about the Constable who ‘arrested’ me. I have lodged two complaints with this court house, about these proceedings Susan Ward has taken against me, this being the second of those.

I attended Albury Police yesterday morning to ask for an event number for being informally charged in my own home, for a crime I did not commit. The desk policeperson gave me a copy of Constable Weekley advice to this court that I had been officially charged with breaching the Interim AVO Susan Ward has against me. I was not aware that I had been charged with anything officially, until I read the ‘arrest’ documentation, already forwarded to the court.

Upon arriving home after having read the document on the bus, I phoned Albury Police station to advise them that what Constable Weekely has written in his Fact Sheets, and in particular in the ‘Full Facts’ section, is not true, nor correct. That he has tried to frame me.

The policeperson who claimed to be the supervisor of the Albury Police station at the time, hung up the phone on me twice. He gave his name as Sergeant Tim Whimpleman and refused to listen to my advice that he copy and preserve Constable Weekley’s recording of my voice, because his version of its contents was being now disputed by myself. This was after I advised him of the deceptive way Weekley had gone about getting the confession. I then had to phone again to be able to continue my advice that the statement of the account of the interview by Weekely, was full of falsities and lies.

  1. Constable Weekley has written that I made a statement that I wanted to have my sister fired, when not only did I not say that, he did not even ask that question. This makes it very apparent that he was sent specifically to gain that answer, and even though he did not, is now claiming that he did. He never asked me why I wrote the letter to Susan Ward’s boss, in a way that allowed an answer from myself from my own recollection of events.
  2. Constable Weekley did not inform me that I was being formally questioned and about to be charged. He implied he was at my house to discuss what appeared to be a breach, bought to their attention by Susan Ward.
  3. Constable Weekley did not inform me of my rights, nor that any recording of my voice could be used as evidence against me. He claimed that allowing him to tape certain parts of the conversation would make it uneccessary for me to attend the station to discuss the matter. He implied the matter was trivial, his visit informal, and did not advise me that I was about to make any kind of statement in relation to a crime with which I was being charged.
  4. Constable Weekely then produced a faint photo copy of the letter to Susan Ward’s employer, dated 4 Dec 15. He asked me if I had written it, and I stated into the phone/microphone that I had.
  5. He then produced the original copy of documents I had lodged with the court on 11 Jan 16 for Susan Ward to collect, before our court appearance on 18 Jan 16. He showed me one statement in particular, written within the 9 page statement to the court, and asked me if I had written it. The statement said that I wrote and delivered the letter because we were playing a game of tit for tat, and it was now my turn again. I stated that I had written that sentence, and that yes, that’s all the situation has ever been.
  6. He asked me if I had lodged the document with the Albury Court House a week prior, again nominating the date of lodgement as being 11 January 2016. I replied that I had lodged the paperwork he was holding in his hand with the court, on that date.
  7. I am aware that he was holding the original print out that was lodged with the court for Susan Ward to receive. I had printed one set in coloured ink, after running out of black, and then the court copy in black once I had replaced the ink cartridge. He had the green copy which belongs to Susan, not a photocopy of her paperwork. He must have been required to hand the paperwork back to whoever gave it to him, as Susan needed it to prepare her defence.

That was the end of the interview. He and the other officer who had waited outside left the premises and had gone out of sight. Constable Weekley returned several minutes later and handed me an infringement notice of some kind. I thought I had just been fined, not charged with a criminal offence.

Constable Weekley was already very aware of the date of the next hearing, for the AVO matters. He suggested at the end of the ‘interview’ he would ensure that it was heard on that same date as the AVO matters, for my own convenience. He was very certain that he could arrange that, and the matter would be deal with on that date, alongside the AVO application itself.

The following day I attended the Albury Police station to get an event number, and the names of the officers involved in that ‘interview’. It all seemed a bit strange to me, and I suspected that it was actually an act of harassment against myself organized by Susan Ward and her neighbor Gwen Bradley, carried out by officers of the Albury Police force.

I discovered that not only did it appear to be just that, but that the officer had gone on to deliberately frame me for a breach of the AVO being falsely sought against me.

  1. I believe I was not meant to receive a copy of that statement of arrest, and did so quite by chance. I was never advised to pick one up from the police station, nor told he would be writing one. The desk clerk at the police station assumed I had been told to pick it up, and printed it out and handed it to me.
  2. Constable Weekley wrote in his “Full Facts” document that I had to him that I had written and delivered the letter to Susan’s boss specifically to have Susan fired from her job. That is a complete lie. I did not say that. In fact my reason for doing it, was in the hope that he would force her to drop her complaint against me.
  3. Constable Weekley claims that I made a full admission to knowingly and willingly breaching the AV. That is also not true. I advised that I believed that I had not done so, when I had deliberately not approached Susan Ward, nor her workplace, had done so to comply with the AVO. I stated that I truly believed I was innocent of any wrong doing, or breach at all.
  4. I was not given the chance to offer a real reason why, except for when he wanted me to confirm the written statement that it was all merely a game of tit for tat. I did confirm that I wrote that. He never posed the question again, in any other form, and I never gave any other answer.
  5. Constable Weekley writes that Susan Ward advised that she became aware of the letter I had written to her boss on Monday 11 Jan 16. The same day I had lodged it with the court evidence.
  6. He states that the letter was ‘then’ located by the victim’s employer at his former residence at 26 Sarson Road, Lavington. Jon Williams, Susan Ward’s boos is then nominated as being a witness as to the fact that I had slipped it under his garage roller door, just as I had described in my statement to the court, and that’s exactly where he found it.
  7. Susan had advised him that it was there by phone or while still at work, and either he was sent by her to collect it, or they arranged to meet there that night and collect it together.
  8. I request that Mr Jon Williams be summoned to appear in court on 5 Feb 2016, to confirm which of the above is the case. Also, whether he read the letter addressed to his company, BDS Group, or gave it to Susan Ward unopened. I was unaware of his name until I read the policeman’s report about it, so it was not addressed to him personally, but to the company itself.
  9. I request that Mr Jon Williams testify under oath about how long he has known about the allegations I have been trying to make to him about Susan Ward, and how long he has been assisting her to have this AVO against me, to silence me about same.
  10. I request that Mr Jon Williams explain to the court why he allowed Susan Ward to steal mail to his company, then gave her time off work to go ahead with claims that I might approach her boss to warn him about her, when they both knew that I already had done so, and failed.
  11. Susan was aware that he had not read the letter, but then had me charged by police for writing it to him a week after she received it. I want Susan Ward charged with theft of mail and personal documents. My own copy of her AVO application was included in the envelope.
  12. The above is a very serious matter as far I as I can see. Her boss and Susan working together to have an AVO preventing me from speaking to him about her. That’s very questionable dealings on his part, not only with myself, but with Albury Court House.
  13. Constable Weekley states that my intentions for leaving a letter for his company were unknown to Jon Williams at the time. If this is true, then Susan Ward intercepted and stole the letter by way of deceiving him of its true content.
  14. Susan had already received a copy of it herself, in the same evidence and statements she had picked up from the Albury Court House that day, 11 Jan 16. She did not need to read Jon Williams’ copy to know what it said. She was fully aware of what it said, when she set about obtaining it.
  15. Constable Weekely claims that Susan attended Albury Court House again on 12 Jan 2016 to pick up more documents regarding our cases. However, all of her documents had been lodged the day before, both for her case against me and mine against her. She had nothing left to pick up on 12 Jan 16.
  16. She has made this untrue statement to pretend that she had not read the letter, until after Jon Williams provided her with a copy of it.
  17. On 12 January I lodged my defence and evidence against Janice O’Bryan. That is all that was available to be picked up that day. That evidence and statement did not include the line quoted by Constable Weekley in his Facts Sheet. It comes from the documents lodged the day before, and which Susan acknowledges she picked up on that same day.
  18. Susan admits that she saw those statements on 11 January 2015. She admits that her employer Jon Williams retrieved the letter she saw had been written to him around that same time. Yet she appeared in court on 18 Jan 16, and said nothing to the magistrate about it being a breach, or that she wanted to stop proceedings, as they were no longer valid.
  19. Instead, Susan Ward went straight to the police station after the hearing, or the very next morning. She knew for a fact that her boss had never read the letter and never would be able to. She had prevented my contact herself, without an AVO, yet still went ahead asking for one, and then had me charged for breaching it the very next day.

 

And the Albury Police are supporting her in all of this? Why is that? Therefore, I am not only refuting this charge and ‘arrest’ by Constable Rowan Weekley, I ask the court to take note of the fact that he has done this, as a deliberate act of harassment and intimidation, possibly designed to drive me out of town, and to fail to appear. I have lodged a complaint about him with the Office of the Commissioner, and I will be asking that he be charged with falsifying evidence, and false arrest.

I refute this new charge, and state that it was an elaborate attempt to not only frame me, but to intimidate me from continuing to defend myself against untrue and unsupported accusations. Because I have maintained my innocence, and dismissed and disproved most of their evidence by way of the real evidence, they are now desperate to intimidate me and to save themselves from being exposed as false and vexatious litigants.

I have made a complaint to the ICAC about Gwen Bradley, as I don’t believe that Susan Ward has any influence over the Albury Police force, but that Gwen Bradley certainly does.

Albury police person Senior Constable Richardson then refused to take a statement from me, about sexual assaults by Wayne Burt against myself when I was a child and pre-teenager.

At first she refused to see me in private, but made me start outlining the offences while standing at the front counter of the police station, with two other members of the public present.

She made notes on a scrap of paper only, an evidence tag. She refused to let me make a statement, claiming that detectives would do that at a later time. When I asked if that was standard procedure, she claimed that it was.

I provided Senior Constable Richardson with the pages of evidence from the AVO proceedings between myself, Susan Ward and Janice O’Bryan, stating that since they have been lodged with a court house, I want them followed up on. Especially since police chose to act on one sentence in all that evidence, and chose to arrest me for it. I still have not heard anything from any detectives, or other police about that matter, but intend to follow it through to its conclusion.

Constable Richardson stood outside my premises on the day that Constable Weekley questioned me alone inside the premises. I believe that Senior Constable Richardson was trying to make it appear to my landlady, and her visitor who had also arrived, that she was on guard in case I tried to escape. More police harassment, to protect Susan Ward and her job at BDS Group, Lavington.

I have made reports to the Police Commissioner about these matters also.

 

Signed on this day, 21 January 2016.

 

 

IN THE LOCAL COURT
ALBURY
MAGISTRATE MURRA

MONDAY 15 FEBRUARY 2016

R  v  Tracey BURT
EX PART

OFFENCE             Contravene AVO
COMPLAINT        Apprehended violence order (2)

Sergeant Harris for the Informant

No appearance of or for Accused       

 

HIS HONOUR:  Sergeant the matters of Burt have been restored to the list but only the applications

PROSECUTOR:  The matter of-

HIS HONOUR:  Burt–

PROSECUTOR:  –Burt?

HIS HONOUR:  –B-U-R-T.  Quite clearly in respect of those I was advised that one of the people – I can’t remember who – has been charged with a criminal offence of a breach;  I just want to find out what’s happening in respect of those matters because quite clearly the criminal charge should be dealt with before the other DVOs that’s all.

PROSECUTOR:  Oh right, yes your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:  It’s not in the list today but I had requested the – well not I had requested, directed that the charge be restored to the list as well.  So we’re just having an inquiry made.  Who was the defendant in the matter of Burt?  There’s Tracey Burt, Janice O’Bryan, Susan Gaye Ward and Tracey Burt.

SPEAKER ONE:  Ward and O’Bryan are here sir.

HIS HONOUR:  Is Ms Tracey Burt here?

SPEAKER ONE:  Outside I think.

HIS HONOUR:  And just both of you stand up please.  Just come up to the microphone for me.

COURT OFFICER:  There’s no appearance of a Tracey Burt, your Honour.

SPEAKER TWO:  She was here.

SPEAKER ONE:  She came in before sir.

HIS HONOUR:  Just wait one minute.  Madam Sheriff just take one of the ladies outside;  they don’t have to speak to the lady but if they can point out the lady to you.

SPEAKER TWO:  I’ll go mum, you stay there.

HIS HONOUR:  As I understand it one of the parties sergeant has been charged with a criminal offence and quite clearly the criminal offence should be dealt with before the AVO is dealt with, that’s all.

PROSECUTOR:  Yes your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:  Ma’am do you know if yourself or one of your – either of your daughters have been charged with a criminal breach of the order?

SPEAKER ONE:  Yes, Tracey Burt.

HIS HONOUR:  Tracey has?  Thank you.  Just give me one minute. 

SHERIFFS OFFICER:  Tracey Burt can’t be located your Honour.

HIS HONOUR:  If that’s the case the papers for 18 March need to be restored to the list today.  I just wish to explain to Tracey Burt, who’s one of the people involved in the matters now before the court, that quite clearly if the lady’s been charged with a criminal offence regarding a breach of the order the court would deal with that matter before dealing with the private applications.  That’s the reason the matter’s been referred(as said) to the list and if there’s breaches, or alleged breaches of orders it’s not appropriate if they’re acts of violence for the matters to be referred to mediation.  So they will not be referred to mediation.

I just want to see – hopefully if the lady has been here and she’s left of her own accord so be it, but I just want to have the court papers brought in and I’ll formally vacate 18 March.  So don’t go too far away, thank you.  As soon as those papers are located I’ll deal with it straightaway

Just sit down ma’am, it should be about five or ten minutes before the papers come in

MATTER STOOD IN LIST

HIS HONOUR:  Next matter please?  Sergeant in respect of the matter of Burt there was related charge matters in respect of an alleged breach by  Ms Tracey Burt, and I’m not certain who the protected person was, but quite clearly the matters – that matter should be dealt with before the other related domestic violence applications are dealt with.  And unfortunately the notice that was sent out to the lady only indicated the domestic violence matters, it did not refer to the charge.  Now even if the lady was here – if she’s not here I’m going to adjourn it for a period of two weeks, and, if the lady is not here on the next occasion, the court may even deal with all these matters in her absence

SO IN RESPECT OF THE CHARGE MATTERS THEY ARE RESTORED TO THE LIST TODAY’S DATE

NO APPEARANCE AND THE MATTER IS ADJOURNED TO THE 29/2/2016 AT 9.30.  REGISTRAR OF LOCAL COURT NOTIFY DEFENDANT IF SHE FAILS TO ATTEND MAYBE DEALT WITH TO FINALITY

She’s not on bail so that – AND VACATE FORMALLY THE 18/3

In respect of the AVOs;  now is Janice O’Bryan present firstly?  Ma’am that’s you

O’BRYAN:  It is

HIS HONOUR:  That matter is also – I VACATE THE 18/3 AND REFERRAL TO CJC IS REVOKED.  MATTER ADJOURNED TO THIS COURT ON 29/2/2016 AT 9.30.  Just excuse me for one minute

Ms O’Bryan and Ms Susan Ward stand up please?  Just come forward to the microphone.  Because Tracey Burt was charged with a criminal offence the determination of the criminal offence should take place before your matters are dealt with, all right

WARD:  Yes

HIS HONOUR:  Quite clearly the criminal charge could not be referred to mediation, it has to be dealt with by the court,-

WARD:  Mm-hmm

HIS HONOUR:  –that’s why the matter was brought back before me at my direction today because I was going to formally vacate the date of 18 March

In respect of the matters now before the court the charge against Tracey is now going to be adjourned for a period of two weeks with an indication in a letter that’s to be forwarded to her, if she fails to attend the court may deal with the matter in her absence on the next occasion, in which case she’d normally be convicted and, depending upon the nature of the conviction, orders would be made for a domestic violence order if she is found guilty of the criminal offence.  So you don’t go through the process of the civil proceedings, there’s no need to.  The law is if you’re found that you’ve breached an AVO, which we haven’t found that as yet, but if the lady is found guilty of it there’s no need for the court to consider the other matters

All the matters have gone over to the 29th with a notification that the lady attend in respect of the matters which she is the applicant, and the criminal charges in which she is the defendant, and the two related personal violence orders, or AVOs, in which you are the complainants and she is the defendant, all right

So all matters to the 29th.  Make sure you’re both back here on that date.  If you’re not here and the lady is you would normally have your applications dismissed.  Similarly if the lady is not here, one, I’d normally deal with the criminal matter and then upon the criminal matter being determined the court may also independently of that deal with the other matters as well.  So if there’s no satisfactory reason why she’s not here basically the court can deal with it in her absence, all right

O’BRYAN:  ..(not transcribable)..

HIS HONOUR:  So you understand that

O’BRYAN:  Yes

WARD:  Yes

HIS HONOUR:  That completes your matters today, thank you

O’BRYAN:  Thank you

WARD:  Thank you.

 

IN THE LOCAL COURT – ALBURY
MAGISTRATE MURRAY
MONDAY 29 FEBRUARY 2016

R  v  Tracey BURT

OFFENCE         Contravene apprehended violence order
COMPLAINT    Apprehended violence order(2)

Sergeant A Coombs for the Informant
No appearance of or for the Accused

HIS HONOUR:  I firstly deal with the matter in respect of Susan Ward and Tracey Burt.  Who is Susan Ward ‑ that’s you, ma’am.  The matter was relisted by the Court and I do note the Court vacated the orders for the referral of a CJC, bearing in mind there was incidence of violence.  In respect to that matter the matter then came before the Court on the last occasion when the matter was adjourned.  The lady was present but left without further explanation, she is not here at 10.30.  Ms Ward, you’re seeking to continue with your application?

WARD:  Yes, your Honour.

EXHIBIT #1 COURT RECORD AND STATEMENT OF SERVICE TENDERED, ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION

HIS HONOUR:  I AM SATISFIED THE COMPLAINANT HOLDS FEARS IN THE INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT, THERE IS NO APPEARANCE OF THE DEFENDANT NOR ANY REASON WHY SHE IS NOT HERE.  IN LIGHT OF THAT, THE FINAL ORDER MADE.

PROSECUTOR:  Your Honour, is there any way we could tighten them up because of the continued breaching, that she not be allowed phone, email.

HIS HONOUR:  THE FINAL ORDER MADE FOR A PERIOD OF 12 MONTHS FROM TODAY.

Ma’am, if there is an application for variation of the conditions you’re going to have to make that but the order itself is in place in respect of you and that lady now.  In respect of the matter of which Ms Burt was the complainant and Ms Ward was the respondent, again there is no appearance of the complainant at 10.30 or any reason placed before the Court for a non‑attendance.  The defendant is present and again I note the same orders were made and indicated that the matter may be dismissed if she fails to attend.  There is no reason for her non‑attendance today.

THAT MATTER IS MARK DISMISSED.

 

 

IN THE LOCAL COURT – ALBUR
MAGISTRATE MURRAY
MONDAY 29 FEBRUARY 201

R  v  Tracey Gwendoline BURT
EX PART

OFFENCE             Contravene AVO
COMPLAINT        Apprehended violence order

 

Sergeant Coombs for the Complainant O’Bryan

No appearance of or for Defendant

HIS HONOUR:  The next matter is Miss Janice Evelyn O’Bryan, and again that lady – ma’am is that you

COMPLAINANT:  Yes

HIS HONOUR:  I note she is present, and again there’s no appearance of Tracey Burt at 10.30.  Again there’s no reason placed before the court for the lady’s non-attendance, and, again, that matter is dealt with ex parte.

 I note the evidence relied upon by the applicant and the lady is, as I said, not here.   That matter is dealt with ex parte.

 I AM SATISFIED THE COMPLAINANT HOLDS FEARS AND THOSE FEARS ARE REASONABLY HELD.  SO A FINAL ORDER MADE FOR 12 MONTHS IN TERMS OF INTERIM ORDER.

 HIS HONOUR:  That completes the three domestic violence matters, and in respect of the charge matter I note there’s no appearance of the defendant today as well.  And I do note that some private DVOs were referred by another magistrate for mediation.  These are charge matters and I had requested that the matters be – or directed rather the matters be returned to court on the 15/2 because quite clearly these are not suitable matters for referral to the CJC as quite clearly they are police prosecutions, they are not private matters.

 In respect of that I also requested the court to notify the lady if she failed to attend the matter may be dealt with in her absence  So far as that there’s no appearance of that defendant again at 10.30. 

Matter dealt with pursuant to s 196.  Statement of facts please?

 PROSECUTOR:  Your Honour I hand up the facts and record.

HIS HONOUR:  Yes in respect of the matter now before the court I do note the breach has been established and the antecedents.  There’s no other prior matters of a similar type.

THE LADY IS CONVICTED AND FINED THE SUM OF FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS.

That completes the matter.  Thank you, you’re both free to go

COMPLAINANT O’BRYAN:  Thank you.

 

Murray claims ‘there is no reason for her non‑attendance today’, yet I had sent the following email or letter to the court house on 15 February 2016, the day I walked out of their trap, and pretence at mediation.

However, I had changed my mind after issuing this letter (can’t find it atm) and had planned to attend the above hearing. I got fluid on me knee, and was unable to go. Murray was furious at appeal, when I could produce medical evidence to show why I hadn’t been able to walk into the next attempt to spring their trap, on 29 February 2016.

Also, notice that he was dealing with O’Bryan’s matter and the police prosecutor was representing her in her civil application, when they both deal with the allegation of breach of Ward’s Interim ADVO.

 

 

IN THE LOCAL COURT
ALBURY
MAGISTRATE CROMPTON

MONDAY 11 APRIL 2016

R  v  Tracey Gwendoline BURT

OFFENCE Contravene apprehended violence order

APPLICATION TO REVOKE APPREHENDED VIOLENCE ORDER

(It was supposed to be an appeal of the conviction of breach on 29 February 2016, but was listed as an application to revoke. I did later make application to revoke, in August 2016)

 

Sergeant Harris for the Informant
Accused/Applicant appeared in person
Accused/Applicant off bail

HIS HONOUR:  All right.  The application for annulment I’ve got before me and I’ve read the paperwork you’ve attached to it.  So the matters came before the Court on 29 February and there was no appearance by you.  Why do you say you were unable to be at court on that date?

ACCUSED/APPLICANT:  I’d had to go to the doctor on the Friday before.  I had fluid on the knee, my knee had swollen up and it was difficult to walk, so the doctor had sent me for a scan and she’d put me on a high dose of  anti-inflammatories, so all weekend I was off the planet on this painkillers.  On the Monday I did get out bed to come but my mind was unable to focus and I was not supposed to be walking around, I’d been ordered to bed rest.  So I didn’t appear.

But on the other hand I had appeared before yourself on 5 February on what was supposed to be the trial for these matters and you sent it to mediation and advised me to leave the courthouse, which I did, and the applicant stayed around badgering your clerk that they weren’t satisfied with your decision and then they had mediation revoked and myself found guilty without being able to defend myself.  All the evidence showed that the AVOs were false and that they were lying.  They provided no evidence for their cases at all and on that very same day that they overturned your ruling as I encountered them in the street when they left the courthouse, Terry O’Brien then called myself and my witness a fuckwit, so they breached their own AVO on that day, and then on 19 February, Janice O’Bryan’s son, who started this whole fight, wrote a blog and put it on the internet–

PROSECUTOR:  I object to all this your Honour–

ACCUSED/APPLICANT:  –about me.

PROSECUTOR:  I object to all this your Honour.  The matter before the Court today is whether or not she could attend court.

HIS HONOUR:  Today we’re focused only on the question of whether or not I should annul the conviction that was recorded in your absence.  So the question before me today is solely one as to why it was that you say you were unable to attend court on 29 February.

ACCUSED/APPLICANT:  Mm-hmm.

HIS HONOUR:  Do you have any material from the doctor about this condition that you say you were suffering at the time?

ACCUSED/APPLICANT:  I didn’t get a medical certificate cause I have needed to go back and see her one more time which I didn’t have.  I did have – it might be in my other papers that I didn’t bring – I did have a copy of a blood test she ordered me for on the same day, so it shows I was at the doctor on the 26th, she gave me a referral for a blood test and a scan.  I went and had the scan on my knee because she was worried it was a blood clot behind my knee, so once they ascertained it was fluid on the knees I went back and got that result and then she gave me another thing for another blood test and I didn’t go and have that because at first I was on the anti-inflammatories and I was so rundown I started taking iron and protein, so–

HIS HONOUR:  Well just wait one moment.  This is what’s going to happen.

I’m going to give you an opportunity to get material from the doctor–

ACCUSED/APPLICANT:  Okay.

HIS HONOUR:  –which supports what you say was your situation.  You say you went to the doctor on the 26th.  This matter was listed on the Monday the 29th.

ACCUSED/APPLICANT:  Yes.

HIS HONOUR:  You say you were on medication and you weren’t able to attend court on that date.

ACCUSED/APPLICANT:  That’s right.

HIS HONOUR:  I’m going to give you an opportunity to get something from the doctor.  I’m going to put this matter over for one week.

ACCUSED/APPLICANT:  Okay.

HIS HONOUR:  All right.  The matter goes over to–

ACCUSED/APPLICANT:  However, in what I was saying before your Honour, the conviction only stands if the AVOs stand and as I was about to say–

HIS HONOUR:  Yes, I understand—

ACCUSED/APPLICANT:  –the people breached their own AVOs before they were even awarded so they shouldn’t have been awarded.

HIS HONOUR:  Today is not the day for that argument. Today is simply about whether or not the conviction should be annulled and I’m giving you an opportunity to get some medical material in support of your application.

ACCUSED/APPLICANT:  Yes, that’s not hard.

HIS HONOUR:  Now just give me one moment.  Right, this matter goes over on the application for one week, that is the 18th, back before this Court and you can supply that material to the Court on that occasion, all right?

ACCUSED/APPLICANT:  Yes.

HIS HONOUR:  Thank you.

ADJOURNED TO MONDAY 18 APRIL 2016

 

This document is the first transcript I received from the court. I was deliberately not supplied with the above transcripts, which show why I was convicted, by deceit, before the appeal hearing. It was the first transcript which I had noticed had been severely doctored by staff at Albury court house.

I spoke in the same clear voice all the way through. They pretend not to hear key points of my defence. They won’t even enter the name of my illness into the transcript, being degenerative disc disease, amongst other associated conditions.

They edit out some of Murray’s more outrageous behaviour, and the mocking of myself that occurred when I asked the prosecutor and Magistrate to be allowed to see the police brief, and merely pretend that I wanted the letter from Superintendent Quarmby denying me access, tendered into evidence.

 

IN THE LOCAL COURT
ALBURY
MAGISTRATE MURRAY

MONDAY 18 APRIL 2016

R  v  Tracey BURT

OFFENCE         Contravene apprehended violence order

Sergeant S Lewis for the Informant

Accused appeared in person

HIS HONOUR:  Ma’am, the matter was adjourned to enable you to get outstanding medical certificate and other documents.  Are you ready to proceed with your application today?

ACCUSED:  Yes.

<ACCUSED, SWORN(3.23PM)

<EXAMINATION BY HIS HONOUR

HIS HONOUR: Ma’am there’s a large amount of material that’s been tendered to the Court.  I’ll just hand this to you, can you identify what material, if any, that you wish to rely upon in support of your application?

ACCUSED: There’s a statement about the events of my arrest that I’ve written specifically for this hearing but then I’ve also put in the defence that should have been heard when the case was listed for 5 February and we were all dismissed from the courtroom that day.  They both are basically the same thing, I just added the other one because it was more detailed and written when it was all fresh in my mind.

HIS HONOUR: The orders were made on 29 February.  What I need, ma’am, is for you to identify what material you wish to rely upon in support of your application.  Stand up to the lady and just show it to her.

ACCUSED: That’s taken from ..(not transcribable).. I rely on the personal reference from a friend and there’s a supporting statement for the application ..(not transcribable).. I’m not worried about the other ones they’re ..(not transcribable)..

HIS HONOUR: The material that you don’t rely upon, just take that out of the material that you’re just leafing through at the moment.

ACCUSED: Okay.  The other reason ‑ I didn’t appear in court on the Monday.

HIS HONOUR: Ma’am, we’ll come to that shortly.  The material that you don’t intend to rely upon just remove that please.  Hand the other documentation back to the Court officer, take a seat.

ACCUSED: Yes.

HIS HONOUR: The application it relates to is a charge that you breached a domestic violence order, is that correct?  The material in support of the application, the first document is just page 1 of 1, as you describe it, that’s 54, 55.

ACCUSED: That’s the statement from the initial cases that Susan Ward took her information from that had been lodged with the Court, that page had been lodged as part of a nine page statement.

HIS HONOUR: Ma’am, just wait for a minute.  I’m only concerned with the breach of domestic violence order which relates to this.

ACCUSED: That’s what I’m saying, that’s where I described it to the Court and then when Susan Ward saw that description advising the Court that I had written a letter to her boss and delivered it to his home address.  She then used that information to have me arrested for writing to his work but she also, she was aware he didn’t live at that address any more and that the letter had actually been sitting there for six weeks unread at that stage, and she phoned her boss at home after hours and got him to drive and meet her at his property that he owns that he doesn’t live at, and then he opened up the garage door for her so she could get the letter.

HIS HONOUR: On the 5/2 you were before the Court self represented and the matter was adjourned to 18 March.

ACCUSED: No.  It was sent to mediation, your Honour, and then I was told I could leave the courthouse, and after it was sent to mediation these people reversed the magistrate’s decision.

HIS HONOUR: That’s an order made by the Court because quite clearly the power in the Court to refer that matter to arbitration, in my view, does not exist.  The matter was then adjourned to be restored to the list on 29 February 2016.

ACCUSED: The next hearing that you mentioned on the 15th or the 18th, I did come to the Court that day and I thought it was for mediation, and when I got here and found that I was on trial again I left.  Then it was adjourned to the 29th and that was the one I couldn’t attend.

HIS HONOUR: On the 15/2 you were aware that the matter was before the Court and you left before the Court dealt with the matter.

ACCUSED: Last I’d heard I was to go mediation so I thought the letter was for mediation.

HIS HONOUR: Listen carefully to the question.  You came to the Court on the 15th.

ACCUSED: Yes, to attend mediation.

HIS HONOUR: You knew‑‑

ACCUSED: No, I did not know I had been summoned here for some sort of hearing and conviction, and that’s all it was, it was supposed to be a little hearing for me to be convicted and fined and that’s that other document that I’d just taken back.  I’d already lodged this to be read on the 5th.

HIS HONOUR: Just wait one minute.  Have a look at that document for me, did you receive that document and for the purpose of the record there it’s a notice of listing addressed to Ms Burt at ..(not transcribable).. Street, Albury.  Just have a look at that document for me, did you receive that document?

ACCUSED: Not put like that, no.  I thought it was for meditation.

HIS HONOUR: Just wait one minute.  Did you receive that document?

ACCUSED: No, no.  What I received was something else and ..(not transcribable).. 3.29.50 but it didn’t say anything like that because like I say, when I came here I thought it was for mediation.  When I found out that it wasn’t for mediation I left that day, and then I was going to attend the next hearing.  I was advised that it was adjourned to the 29th and then that was the one I couldn’t come to because I was sick, I’ve got the medical for that.

HIS HONOUR: You accept that you were supposed to be before the Court on 29 February, that’s correct?

ACCUSED: Yes.

HIS HONOUR: How did you know that you had to come back to court on the 29 February if you didn’t receive any notification?

ACCUSED: I got that in the mail.

HIS HONOUR: The document you were just shown that is the document you’re talking about.  What document are you referring that you received.  Sit down, ma’am.

ACCUSED: It was advice the matters were adjourned on the 15th until the 29th.

HIS HONOUR: Do you have a copy of the document that indicated that to you please?

ACCUSED: No, I don’t.

HIS HONOUR: Did you keep all your court material in one bundle?

ACCUSED: I’ve got a big bundle at home but I didn’t bring it today. I did have all my papers on the day I came for mediation.

HIS HONOUR: But you were aware that you had to come back to court and received an advice from the Court for you to be here on 29 February?

ACCUSED: Yes.

HIS HONOUR: Why didn’t you come to court on that day?

ACCUSED: I was at the doctor’s, I’d been to the emergency room the Thursday night,

HIS HONOUR: Do you have any evidence ma’am of the fact that you were unwell and unable to attend court on that day?

ACCUSED: I beg your pardon?

HIS HONOUR: Do you have any evidence of the fact that you one, either told the Court that you were unable to come to court or the fact that you had a medical condition which allowed you not to attend court because you basically just couldn’t do it?

ACCUSED: I told the magistrate that last week, that that’s why I couldn’t come.  I had to go to the doctor on Friday, I had fluid on the knees, I was ordered to bed rest, I got up on the Monday morning to come to court and I was‑‑

HIS HONOUR: Ms Burt, stop.  Do you have any medical evidence, ma’am, which supports the fact that as at 29 February you were unwell and so unwell that you could not attend court?

ACCUSED: Yes.

HIS HONOUR: Please produce that to the Court.  Show that to the Sergeant.

ACCUSED: May I speak for a moment though?

EXHIBIT #1  LETTER FROM DR THAVAKUMARAN TENDERED, ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION

HIS HONOUR: This is a document under the hand of Dr Thavakumaran which says this:

“This letter is written on the request of Ms Tracey Burt, that she attended our clinic with tender distal medial thigh, close to left knee joint, on 26/02/2016.  Then was investigated and treated, probable diagnosis was soft tissue injury and a natural history.  Her pain was expected to last a few days.”

HIS HONOUR: Ma’am, even accepting that, there’s no indication why you did not attend court on the 29th.

ACCUSED: I explained to the magistrate last time, I was on high doses of anti‑inflammatory and I could barely think, and I got up for court that day and my leg was still swollen, she’d ordered me bed rest and I thought I can’t defend myself when I can’t think clearly of being on high doses of medication all weekend and I was for the next few days after that.

HIS HONOUR: Have you spoken to the doctor about your inability to attend court on 29 February?

ACCUSED: When she printed out that letter she said to me, is that enough, and I could have said to her, “No, write more”, but I didn’t I just said, “No, that’ll do”, because that was all the magistrate asked me for, a letter to show that I had been there on the Friday, and ordered to bed rest and swollen knee and was on high doses of medication.  I’d also wanted to lodge documents on that Friday and going to the emergency room the night before meant that I didn’t have them finished, prepared, and so then I wanted them lodged on the Friday so that the magistrate would have seen them before the hearing on the Monday, so again I would have had to come here without being able to lodge some of the things I wanted to lodge, and I’ve got those with me today, and one of them is an email to this very court advising that Janice O’Brien and Susan Ward had breached their own AVOs when Janice O’Brien’s son wrote a blog about me and put it on the internet.

Now the original AVO applications were because I’d written a blog about my family which contained true stories of life with them and then on 19 February Janice O’Brien’s son wrote a really foul and abusive blog about me and put it on the internet and their orders weren’t issued until the 29th, so they’d breached it on the 19th and then they were granted on the 29th, ten days later.  So I have here a copy of the email to this courthouse advising them of that.  They tell me approach police, I’ve got that email here.  I put in two on line requests to Albury police about the breach, two notifications, so I’ve got an email here that they sent me on 27 February to advise me that they hadn’t recorded it and wouldn’t investigate it.  I’ve got an email from Western Australian police showing where I’d lodged the complaint with them, and they actually took some action and tried to phone my brother and he wouldn’t answer the phone, and they advised me to take a restraining out on him.

So on 23 February I have Western Australian police telling me to take out an AVO on the same person that these people claim they took an AVO out on me to protect.  So I have that letter from the police, there was also another breach by that party on 5 February where Terry O’Brien called myself and witness a fuckwit as we were walking away from this very courthouse, and so again.  They shouldn’t have been awarded their AVOs when firstly all ‑ they were unproven, and then they were only granted to them because of this so‑called breach that the police have put forward in a charge and then they go and write a blog about me before they even get that ruling.  Now the other reason I’ve applied to have it annulled is because I have put in a whole pile of complaints about the arrest.  It was done in a way that was unlawful and then he wrote in his arrest document that I’d confessed to it and I’d confessed that I’d done it deliberately, and none of that is true and I have been contacting police ever since that day asking them to listen to the recording and then I asked them to provide me with the documents that I needed to be able to challenge it in court and they’ve withheld them at all times.

So I’ve got a copy here of the blog that Janice O’Brien’s son ‑ well actually it was written by the daughter‑in‑law and she pretends to be my brother, pretending that she has knowledge about me.  She writes at the end, “This was all written by Gary Burt with no help or influence”, but it’s written by his wife, and all of the AVO applications say that I was attacking them, my sister‑in‑law for no reason when this was the sort of thing she was saying about me that made me attack her.  So I was retaliating then.  They put AVOs out on me for retaliating and then straight away she goes and retaliates, posted on 19 February, “Hi, world, I’m the unfortunate brother of the mentally sick, drug addict, Tracey Burt, 35 years of constant drug taking has fried her brain”‑‑

HIS HONOUR: Ma’am, you can stop.  In respect to the matter now before the Court, the matter is adjourned to this Court on How long before you can see this Dr Thavakumaran, is he or she your regular doctor?

ACCUSED: Yes, she is, but she was going away next week she told.

HIS HONOUR:  Ma’am, your matter is adjourned to this Court on 9 May.  The defendants are to obtain a further medical document regarding the defendant’s inability to attend court on 29 February 2016, it should be supported by the medical includes the following because at the moment, this medical certificate is totally devoid of merit.

You must indicate that you were not able to attend court rather than being merely unwell, must specifically address the nature of the illness or injuries suffered by you and the reasons why you could not attend court on that day.  When you will be able to attend court the further medical certificate must specifically address why you are not able to come to court even for a very short period of time, and if you are not able to travel to court why it cannot be dealt with by way of audio visual.  I also remind the medical practitioner of the public guidelines issued by the AMA regarding the issuing of such certificates.  Make sure, ma’am, in the Registrar of the Local Court to notify to notify you of that.  I mark this as being part heard as well.

ACCUSED:  Your Honour, my visibility is degenerative‑‑

HIS HONOUR:  Ma’am, just stop.  Your matter is going to be adjourned to 9/5.  I particularly draw to your attention the form of your medical certificate.  If the medical certificate does not include the material that I have requested I expect it would have a very substantial and detrimental effect on your application so if in fact the material which I have requested is not before the Court on the next occasion that document which is a medical certificate, with respect, is just a nonsense.  It does not indicate why you are not able to attend court in any way, shape or form.

You are unrepresented, if you were represented your solicitor or barrister would have requested a more detailed medical certificate, I am directing that that take place.  If the latter is not obtained and the medical certificate is only the matter before now before the Court then quite clearly on the evidence before the Court at the moment there is no medical reason why you could not attend court.

Just go out to the Registry, you will be given a copy of the document, make sure that you abide by it.  This will be handed to you in a written document so make sure you get it before you go.  Attached to it will be some comments that were made by Barrett J on 15 December 2009, that should also be included in the order, and just make sure that the lady signs for it.  If you don’t understand it, speak to the registry staff because quite clearly if the medical certificate is not before the Court in that form on the next occasion, just repeating what I said earlier, it’s very detrimental to your application.

ACCUSED: With respect I had told the magistrate‑‑

HIS HONOUR:  That is all, ma’am, stop.

ACCUSED: That was what he asked me for to confirm my‑‑

HIS HONOUR:  Ma’am, listen carefully.  If you wish me to proceed on the basis of the application and the medical certificate now before the Court I will.  I indicate to you that it’s basically nonsensical, it doesn’t say why you cannot come to court on the date.  If you wish me to proceed on that basis I’m happy to do it.  That would be to your detriment.  If you wish to include the additional material then I will afford you the opportunity of having this letter, showing it to your doctor.  Hopefully he or she may say, “Look, you’re well enough to attend court”.

If they say that then quite clearly that will have an effect.  If they say you are not well enough to attend court, that obviously will impact as well but absent that, if you wish me to continue with your application today I will but that’s going to, on that information, not provide any medical evidence as to why you could not come to court.  If you wish me to proceed with it I put you on notice of that very issue.  If you don’t wish me to proceed with it and you wish the updated medical certificate I’m happy to grant you the adjournment.

ACCUSED: No, I’ll proceed now.

HIS HONOUR:  That’s fine, I’ll withdraw those orders.  I will leave these orders on the Court file insofar as that’s concerned because quite clearly the evidence before the Court insofar as medical certificate is concerned is woefully inadequate.  I also note that I have afforded Ms Burt the opportunity of seeking an adjournment to enable those issues to be identified, the lady has elected not to do that, so I vacate the application to 9 May 2016.

HIS HONOUR: What additional Ma’am, would you like to give?

ACCUSED: As I said I’ve got emails to the Courthouse to the police.

HIS HONOUR: I need to know why you did not attend court on that particular day.

ACCUSED: I consulted the doctor on the Friday, she didn’t know whether I had a blood clot behind my knee or fluid on the knee, she suspected it was fluid on the knee.  She sent me to get a scan, she said if I could get in there by lunchtime she’d have the results by that afternoon and if it was a blood clot then she would let me know and call me back in for treatment.  She advised me to keep off my feet for a couple of days and she prescribed me anti inflammatories.  The chemist told me to take an extra one for the first couple of days until the swelling went down.

I didn’t ask her for a certificate on that day because I still intended to come to court on the Monday but on the Monday when I got up, as I told the other magistrate, I couldn’t think clearly, I’d been on these anti‑inflammatory all weekend, my leg was still swollen so it was going to aggravate it again to come, and I hadn’t been able to lodge the documents that I’d wanted to beforehand, which I would like to lodge now, which as I say is advice to the Court and the police about a major breach of Janice O’Brien’s AVO by her son by writing this nasty blog about me.  I’ve also got a six page letter here‑‑

HIS HONOUR: Just wait one minute.  None of that is relevant to the application before the Court.  I wanted you to concentrate on why you did not attend court on the 29th knowing that you had to attend court.  Anything else you wish to say?

ACCUSED: Yes.  I would also like to say that the constable makes out in his arrest document that I’ve admitted to the crime freely and did it willingly whereas I always have said it was unintentional breach, I did not approach my sister, I did not approach her workplace, I wrote a letter to her boss and delivered it to his home address on a Saturday morning advising him of the AVO, hoping that he would make her drop the charges.  That was the main reason I did it, hoping he would make her drop the charges, and instead she called him up, met him at the property and she took the letter, the letter that was addressed to her workplace because I didn’t know her boss’s name, it was addressed to BDS Group, Lavington, and she convinced him to give her the letter.

HIS HONOUR: Just be very careful about what you are saying to the Court about requesting a person not to attend court or not to give evidence in respect to the matter the commission of a very serious criminal offence so bearing in mind the application really is only as to the merits of the annulment of your conviction recorded in your absence‑‑

ACCUSED: Well I’m talking about the conviction now, I’m giving my defence.

HIS HONOUR: Anything else?

ACCUSED: I don’t believe I was guilty and that’s why I’ve asked for it to be annulled, not just because I wasn’t here but because I was tried on a statement that I’ve been trying to talk to the police about for months about it being false, and the way he conducted the arrest when he came to the door and he said, “I’m here to talk to you about what might have been a breach”.  I said, “What, are you going to fine me a thousand dollars and lock me in goal for a year”, and he laughed and he said, “No, nothing like this, this is an informal interview” ‑ an informal interview.

HIS HONOUR: Anything else?

ACCUSED: Then at the end of it he stood up and said, “All right, I’m satisfied a breach has been committed, you’re under arrest, appear in court”, and also, like I said, I never admitted it to him.  He claims that I did and he recorded it onto his phone and he never did.  I admitted writing the letter, I admitted where I delivered it to, that was all I admitted to, and he claims he has a full confession from me on his phone.

Now the other thing I tried to bring up a few minutes ago when you wouldn’t listen, here’s a letter from Superintendant Quarmby of Albury Police Station saying I will not be provided with a copy of the audio recording, “unless you proceed to hearing in your matter at which time a copy of the brief will be served on you”.  So the matter was heard in my absence and then I made this annulment and the prosecutor objected to something last week but never offered me the brief.  So that’s why I’ve brought this today to lodge as evidence too.  The police are saying I can have a copy of the brief when it goes to hearing, well we’re at hearing, where is my copy of the brief?

HIS HONOUR: Do you wish to tender that letter, do you wish to place that document before the Court?

ACCUSED: Yes.  I’ve got a list here of all the evidence that I want.

HIS HONOUR: Just the letter, take the letter out, show that to the Sergeant, and I’d like to hear you, sergeant, so far as relevance is concerned.  Why do you say, ma’am, that’s relevant as to why you were not here on 29 February?

PROSECUTOR: I object to this on the grounds of relevance.

EXHIBIT #2 LETTER FROM SUPERINTENDANT QUARMBY OF ALBURY POLICE STATION, ADMITTED FOLLOWING OBJECTION

HIS HONOUR: Anything else, ma’am, you wish to say?  Just give me a minute to look at it.  Anything else?

ACCUSED: Email to this courthouse advising of Janice O’Brien’s daughter in law’s‑‑

HIS HONOUR: What date please?

ACCUSED: 19th of the 2nd.

HIS HONOUR: The relevance of that material, to ask why you did not attend court on the 29th?

ACCUSED: The relevance of it is that the AVOs had not been granted at that stage they were still at ..(not transcribable).. and I’ve been charged with breaching one so if they’d breached them before they were approved how can I be charged with breaching it on the same day that they were approved if they’ve breached it themselves 10 days before?

HIS HONOUR: I’m just not understanding what you’re saying to me.  Repeat that to me.

ACCUSED: They breached it on 19 February when I walked out of the courthouse‑‑

HIS HONOUR: Forget about any breach that you’re alleging against you.  Just concentrate on your alleged breach which occurred on 13 January.

ACCUSED: No, it didn’t, your Honour.  I was at home on 13 January, I committed no crime on 13 January, and I have witnesses to prove that.  Susan Ward took her boss to get the letter, intercept the letter, on the 11th or 12 January but I was at home on the 11th and 12 January.  I had visitors up from Melbourne on 12 January, we went out photographing ancestral places and then that evening there was three of them at one place and me at another and we were sending photos to each other via the internet, so I have proof that I was out with them all the day and home all that evening.  So the arrest, the charge, is wrong saying that I did anything on that day other than go out with friends.

HIS HONOUR: Anything else, ma’am?

ACCUSED: Another thing I’d like to tender to the Court.  Like I say, these advices of breaches.  I advised the Court that they’d breached their AVO before it was awarded.  The Court told me to tell Albury Police, I advised them on line.  I advised Western Australian police, Western Australian police acted.  On 27 February, Albury police advised me that they’d done nothing about it and then two days later their AVOs are granted, two days after Albury police have advised me that they won’t have done it, and ten days after this courthouse has said that it’s got to go via police.

Well Albury police did nothing but Western Australian police did and I’ve got this email from them advising me to take a restraining out on my brother so if he got my mother to take a restraining order out on me then police over there tell me to take a restraining out on him, you know, what’s the point, it would just be better for none of us to have any but if you want to I’ll go ahead and take a restraining order out on him.  I also have here a six page letter outlining harassment by Albury Local Police of myself including a phone call at five minutes to midnight on the evening before I was due to appear in court on 5 February, and that has been confirmed, it was investigated, and the officer said that he rang to talk to me about one of my complaints at five minutes to midnight, and then tried to tell the investigator that that was a quite reasonable time to ring.  I’ve also tried to lodge a complaint with police about my older brother sexually molesting myself when I was younger and none of that is mentioned in the evidence.

HIS HONOUR: No, ma’am.

ACCUSED: Police have refused to investigate that‑‑

HIS HONOUR: None of it is relevant.

ACCUSED: Yes it is‑‑

HIS HONOUR: Ma’am.

ACCUSED: ‑‑ because the three people who have applied for the AVOs have now lied

HIS HONOUR: Ma’am, Ms Burt, if you continue to talk over me I’ll just finish your application.  None of that is relevant to why you did not attend court.

ACCUSED: What I was going to say is all three of them have now lied to a police investigation and said that my brother didn’t molest myself and my sister, and all three of them know that he did.  So what I mean is that they’re people of no character, they’ve made false complaints against me in a court of law, they’ve then been able to enlist police to harass me, they’ve gone around and done the same thing that I’ve done to them.  They’ve lied to a police investigation and covered up sexual assault by her son‑‑

HIS HONOUR: Ms Burt, Ms Burt, stop, stop.  Do you have mental health problems?

ACCUSED: No, I don’t actually, no, I don’t.

HIS HONOUR: Ma’am, listen carefully to what I’m saying to you.  If I ask you to stop, stop.  There is no point in rambling on like this, it has to be relevant evidence.  Any other relevant evidence that you wish to place before the Court?

ACCUSED: No, but it’s been four months of appearing here in trials and never being allowed to say a word in my own defence, and all of the defence evidence that I submitted‑‑

HIS HONOUR: Thank you, stop.

ACCUSED: ‑‑was ignored.

HIS HONOUR:  Thank you, stop or you will charged, you will be charged if you continue to disregard what I have to say to you.

NO CROSS-EXAMINATION
THE WITNESS WITHDREW

HIS HONOUR:  , I’ll hear your submissions as to why you should have the application granted.  Yes, what would you like to say?

ACCUSED:  I was always innocent, it was an unintentional breach, your Honour, and so therefore I feel that the fine of $560 in total is a bit excessive for a breach that was unintentional.  I was arrested in an unlawful manner and then not given the chance to defend myself in court.

HIS HONOUR:  Ma’am, just so I understand it.  You say that you accept that it was a breach, what occurred was a breach.

ACCUSED:  No, I don’t accept that it is.  A breach would have been to approach my sister at her workplace.  I approached her boss at his home address on a Saturday morning and he didn’t even live there, and he didn’t get the letter till six weeks later when she rang him up and told him it was sitting there, and took him around to it.

HIS HONOUR:  Anything else you wish to say?

ACCUSED:  No.

HIS HONOUR:  There is an application been brought by the defendant that pursuant to s 4 of the Act.  So far as that is concerned I do note that it is a very broad interpretation of the remedial provisions that are contained in that part of the legislation.  Insofar as that is concerned I do note that it is the same test that applies in domestic violence matters as it does for criminal proceedings but this is in fact a criminal proceeding brought quite properly pursuant to s 4 of the relevant Act.

Quite clearly the evidence which is undisputed before the Court is that the lady was aware of 29 February as being the date upon which she had to come to court.  Certainly insofar as that is concerned the lady was found guilty in her absence, there was no appearance of her at 10.30.  Importantly, the application indicates in simple terms that she was on medication, had an order to rest up and diagnosed with fluid on the knee three days prior, and the arrest was questionable, lodge a claim for compensation.

So far as that is concerned there is ample evidence to indicate that the lady had received and was aware that she was supposed on 29 February 2016.  It is clearly clear as at 10.30 on that particular date the lady had not attended court.  I also note insofar as that is concerned that the lady was aware that if she failed to attend court, in my view, on that date she had received notification from the Court that final orders may be made in her absence.

Quite clearly the evidence before the Court, exhibit 2, the letter from Dr Thavakumaran is woefully inadequate.  I do note that the Court indicated to the applicant, Ms Burt, that it would afford her the opportunity of addressing the deficiencies in the medical evidence before it.  The Court had indicated that, and I quote the orders that I had intended to make the defendant’s inability to attend court due to medical reasons should be supported by a medical certificate which includes the following the information:

(1) The medical certificate must specifically indicate that the person was not fit to attend court rather than she was merely unwell

(2) The medical certificate must specifically address the nature of the illness and injury suffered by the person the reason why she could not attend court on 29 February 2016.

(3) The medical certificate must specifically address when the person will be able to attend court in future including the reasons or rationale for this opinion.

(4) The medical certificate must address the issue, if applicable, as to why she was not able to come to court on 29 February s 16 even for a very short period of time.

(5) Whether or not she was fit enough to travel to some other location for evidence to be given by some other means, via audio visual.

(6) I also note the Court would have reminded the medical practitioner of the public guidelines regarding the issuing of such certificates.

I specially note insofar as that is concerned the observations made by Barrak J in the decision of Alija Magjarraj v Asteron Life Ltd [2009], a decision of the Supreme Court.  His Honour said this at para 22 and 23:

“All too frequently judges see cryptic written statements from medical practitioners referring to some undisclosed and undiagnosed medical condition culminating in the assertion that a person is unfit to attend court or unfit to attend a court hearing.  To the extent that such statements are put forward as evidence about the state of the person’s health and the extent to which impaired health may incapacitate a person from participating in court proceedings the statements fail the most fundamental test for the reception of expert evidence.  All unexplained and unfathomable statements of that kind must be simply rejected out of hand as evidence of anything.”

He continued on para 23:

“Doctors probably do not realise they are engaged in an exercise in futility when they issue such certificates and expect courts to treat them as evidence, if indeed that is what the doctors do expect.  These are matters about which professional organisations within the medical profession really ought to consider informing their members.”

As I indicated, the shortcomings in the report under the hand of the doctor which is exhibit 2, I have highlighted to the defendant the evidentiary insufficiencies of the medical certificate was explained to the applicant, also the fact of the absence of that material which I had requested would substantially, and to her detriment, operate against the defendant because there was, on that material, insufficient evidence to ascertain any proper reason why she was unable to attend court.

The defendant elected not to seek the adjournment that she was going to be granted and quite clearly insofar as that is concerned wished the matter dealt with today.

I AM NOT SATISFIED THAT THE APPLICATION SHOULD BE GRANTED.

I AM SATISFIED THAT SHE WAS AWARE OF THE DATE OF THE HEARING, AND CERTAINLY ON THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE AS IT PRESENTLY EXISTS, THERE IS NO PROPER REASON PLACED BEFORE THE COURT AS TO WHY THE LADY WAS NOT ABLE TO ATTEND COURT.

THE S 4 IS REFUSED FOR THOSE REASONS.

Advertisements

Protection Posts Published by Default

 

For all of last evening, I left the posts which were scheduled to post themselves if I didn’t make it out of the court room unshackled yesterday, to do just that, in case I was arrested and taken to jail for the night.

A law student would have been able to organize my release the next morning, but I would not have put it past police to try to harass and assault me in custody, again.

As the earlier deadlines loomed, I moved them all back to publish at 11pm, again, if I was not here to stop them. I needed to get to bed, and had to stay up late to try to prevent them going ahead. I was already tired from little sleep the night before court, but again, did not trust that police would not knock at my door not matter how late it was getting.

Not long short of that time, I reset them to start publishing themselves this morning, starting at 10am. I was up early today, and still not in a jail cell, and so should have been able to rest the schedule, and which I have only just done.

But I’d just got caught up talking to a neighbour outside for the past hour, forgot about the posts, for which I could have been charged, under the old gag orders, for naming the real guilty people in these matters, online, in a blog.

So I see that they have already appeared. I have removed them, again, for now.

One was my defence summation speech, that I didn’t get a chance to give yesterday in court. I had thought to hand a copy to the prosecutor and the Magistrate at the outset, and state that since I doubt they will let me get through it all, I’d like to get it onto the record in its written form. I didn’t get the chance to do that anyway.

However, here it is, with the names of the real guilty people removed, to comply with the original illegal gag orders the Albury Local Court pretended were in some way valid.

 

Summation – Charge H60077075 – 14 September 2017

This court had no legal right to commence hearing this charge.

This court house was advised I would seek compensation by way of civil action against Local Courts NSW, if this court went ahead with these proceedings.

Be formally advised that will happen, unless I am awarded compensation against NSW police at the end of this hearing.

This court had no right to be hearing this charge, when I was legally entitled to motion, when I made application for same on 12 December 2016, due to acts of gross misconduct, by court staff, and Albury police.

This Magistrate had no right to be hearing this charge, when I deliberate made a statement in that application for motion designed to exclude him personally, if matters had to proceed here.

This Magistrate had no legal right to be hearing this charge, when he is the same Magistrate who declined to hear the same charge when it was first listed for hearing on 5 February 2016.

I attended court, had lodged a defence prior to the hearing, and the police prosecutor was in attendance at what were civil matters, to hear that one charge.

I have always believed that Magistrate Cromptom did not hear the charge on that day, because he knew that he would not be granting the ADVO application the charge of breach had been made against, due to perjuy on behalf the complainant, in the statements she had lodged with the court, prior to that hearing.

When read in conjunction with the applications made against me, and my counter application against (BDS Huon Employee), the defence evidence, coupled with the lack of any real evidence by the complainants and many proven instances of perjury on their parts, the other being (BDS Huon Employee)’s mother XXXXXX, it was obvious that the letter to Jon Williams was justified and written in self defence.

It was also obviously an unintentional breach if anything, since I believed I was free to approach the owners of BDS Huon, if I did so without approaching their office while (BDS Huon Employee) was at work.

It was an allegation of breach of an Interim ADVO, for an application which had not yet been proven in court.

The ADVO application was never heard in court, partly due to the actions of officer Weekley, therefore is it not valid, and this court has no legal right to be pretending that it is.

(BDS Huon Employee) would not have been granted an Interim ADVO had I been summoned to attend the first hearing of her application. I believe my omission from those proceedings was deliberate. My plea of innocent would have denied her the Interim ADVO, unless she could prove in front of me, that she was in any immediate danger of attack, or any attack.

I believe that (court mediator) arranged for the hearing to be listed on a day that would not provide police with enough time to serve a summons on myself.

I had not appeared in court at all, when I wrote and delivered the letter to Jon Williams on 4 December 2015. My first appearance, and chance to tell my side of the story, was on 14 December 2015.

I advised BDS Huon they might soon be embarrassed by all of this. Yet months later when it was starting to become known around town, they wanted me charged for the fact that they allowed it all to continue, in what acts of professional misconduct by Mr Williams and Ross Griffin, and breaches of the Federal Regulations which govern their industry.

The court had no right to hear this charge when lack of service by police had been established by the defendant at hearing in August 2016.

NSW Police have continually been unable to produce any document which proves service, except a general form which is unsigned, undated, and therefore questionable. For most of the charges of breach bought against me, they don’t even bother to try to even use that.

My letter to Superintendent Quarmby of 24 March 2016 shows that I mentioned the issue of non-service of the final order, without realizing the ramifications of that at the time.

I had to email the court house to ask what I had been charged with in court on 15 and 29 February 2016.

Since only ADVO had been served, I could only assume that I had been fined for breaching (BDS Huon employee’s mother)’s ADVO in some manner.

Since the court has chosen to hear this matter, the only finding it can come to, is that Con Rowan Weekley, of the Albury police station, fabricated evidence by way of making an illegal recording, and then tampered with it both before and afterwards.

He also tampered with evidence, when he deliberately neglected to tender the following documents to the court; a witness statement by (BDS Huon Employee) dated 13 January 2016, a copy of the letter to Jon Williams and a transcript of his so-called ‘formal confession’. He also neglected to provide a copy of that interview on disc, so the court was unable to listen to it.

He failed to write a witness statement himself, or obtain one from his partner, Snr Con Bonnie Richardson, and one from Jon Williams.

He did not prepare anything he was required to present to the court as evidence, until long after the charge had been heard, appealed, and then finally overturned in the District court.

However, he was required to present all of those things at hearing on 5, 15 and 29 February 2016, and failed to do so on all three of those occassions.

Now he has committed perjury in his short testimony to the court on 20 June 2017. As did Jon Williams.

(BDS Huon Employee), the complainant, has attempted to do the same today. All of her statements given to officer Weekely on 13 January and 25 October 2016, have been shown to be lies, manipulations of the truth, and amount to false allegations.

(BDS Huon Employee) is guilty of gossiping about her client’s financial affairs, with her only witness in these same matters before the court, (BDS Huon employee’s mother).

(BDS Huon employee’s mother). wrote a witness stating refuting my need for an ADVO against (BDS Huon Employee), even though it was (BDS Huon employee’s mother) who had been passing on (BDS Huon Employee)’s threats to me, for the period from March 2014 right up until they applied for their orders against me.

The initial summons to court is illegal because the signature on the back of (BDS Huon Employee)’s application does not match the name on the front. Court office staff later changed her name in the computer, for the issuing of the Interim ADVO and further documents.

(BDS Huon Employee) was breaking the law. She had her car registered in a different state to the one she was living in. She had no legal right to start action in a NSW court house, according to her official address registered on her Victorian driver’s licence.

She deceived the Registrar so that she could use the same court house where her friend (court mediator) was employed, so that Bradley could ‘assist’ her with these matters. That was illegal.

Also, so that her mother could make a false complaint along with her, because without some other evidence, (BDS Huon Employee) didn’t have a leg to stand on. Again, illegal actions on both of their parts.

(BDS Huon Employee) approached me, with more threats of violence, after committing continuing acts slander against myself, and started these hostilities herself. That was proven in the evidence.

Then when she didn’t get to beat me into submission and scare me into leaving town, her mother continued to threaten me on her behalf, until both realized I might finally go ahead with the threat to contact BDS Huon.

(BDS Huon Employee) jumped into two arguments between myself and other members of my family, landing blows, then declared that she was in possession of an Interim ADVO, therefore it was illegal for me to hit her back.

She continued to assault me by way of acts of slander, libel, intimidation of witnesses, a false report to Centrelink, trying to turn my children against me, etc, etc, all while playing the victim on days that she had to attend this court house.

Albury police were happy to charge me anytime I took my frustration out on BDS Huon, because I could not fight back against the people who wanted to have this family fight and new drama. I was forced into being the victim of these dramas, against my will, but forced to participate with my hands handcuffed behind my back.

The only finding that this court can make today is that Snr Con Rowan Weekley is guilty of making an illegal recording, tampering with its content, and conspiring with (BDS Huon Employee), and (court  mediator) of the CJC, to bring a false charge against me, to affect the outcome of the hearing of (BDS Huon Employee)’s ADVO application.

In making false allegations to the police on 13 and 19 January 2016, (BDS Huon Employee) is also in breach of the Interim ADVO protecting myself from harassment by her, which was in affect during that same time.

I’d like her to be charged for that breach, along with the other matters of making false allegation against me to and in a court of law, and then to police on several more occasions.

 

The following issues would have also been pointed out to the court, when I forced them to play the ‘formal confession and formal interview’. I had my laptop in the car, just in case they didn’t have the disc. I also had misplaced my copy on disc, but I’m sure they still would have tried to claim their equipment was not working.

The arresting officer never tendered a copy of the transcript to the court, until many many months later in his new brief.

However, when you hear the illegal recording it as it happens, its much more obvious that he lied, and then ignored all of my statements about the night the complainant had tried to assault me, in front of two independent witnesses.

Yet the court only every believes the complainant’s mother, and ignored all other statements by outside and non-concerned parties.

Key Points Relating to the Illegal Recording/Formal Intervie

  1. Snr Con Weekley’s introduction is recorded in the police car, out the front of my house, approximately 7 minutes before they appeared at my door.
  2. There is a sound which nothing in my flat makes audible in the recording.
  3. It might be a car’s reversing sound. That might be my landlady’s sister arriving with her child, and both of who were already out of the car, when police arrived on foot at the top of my driveway.
  4. Weekley initially has me agreeing to his statements, without giving me any chance to reply, except to affirm that I wrote them.
  5. When he states my answers can be used in court against me, there is no audible reply agreeing to that, because I was taken aback by the question and did not give consent.
  6. When he asks me to identify the admission that I wrote the letter, and I affirm that I wrote it, I know that I added, ‘and lodged it at the court house last week’. That part of my answer has been deliberately edited out.
  7. How many more instances of that occur, I cannot say. Obviously I could not remember the conversation word for word by the time I had read his account of it, was taking issue with it, and being denied access to it. However, many instances were glaringly apparent to me.
  8. Then he claims that the letter and the page from the defence statements relating to it, were submitted to the court by Ward, pretending that was done as evidence against me.
  9. He puts words in my mouth when he finally asks me if I wrote the letter to have (BDS Huon employee) fired, there is room for one word only, that of yes.
  10. I realize then that he had tricked me into making that admission, and so began to speak about the night (BDS Huon employee) had come to the same premises, making of threats of violence against me. He’s not so interested in listening to my side of the story.
  11. However, he should have been aware, since he claims to have checked the ADVO records twice, that I also had an Interim order against (BDS Huon employee) herself.
  12. He changes the word in the transcript, where I stated I wanted her charged with attempted assault, to read that I wanted her charged with disrespecting me.
  13. Is there a charge for disrespecting someone? He would know there is not.
  14. But there is for attempted assault, and for inciting another person to inflict an act of violence on another person. (BDS Huon employee) is guilty of those things.
  15. When I did attend the police station the next morning, wanting to make a complaint, Snr Con Bonnie Richardson was sent to take that complaint. She bought with her an evidence ticket to write her notes on, and nothing else.
  16. Instead of making a complaint about (BDS Huon employee) attempt to assault me on the evening of 6 November 2015, I instead made one about (BDS Huon employee’s brother) and sexual assault. Since this is the truthful allegations at the heart of this matter.
  17. Richardson refused to take my complaint. Was that pre-arranged in anticipation of the complaint being made about (BDS Huon employee)?

 

 

As stated elsewhere, I was only allowed to ask her two questions. Both the Magistrate and police prosecutor protected her from answering either of them, and I was told I would only be allowed to ask her one more question. I walked out at that point.

The second question, which they refused to let her answer, was in relation to her main allegations against me, abuse of other family members via email and text message.

Why would they not let her comment on that issue, when according to my convictions, I was convicted of that very allegation, and two ADVO’s awarded based on it.

The questions asked by the police prosecutor of the BDS Huon employee were short and to a point. They were to prove that she lodged a copy of the letter to Jon Williams, at the court house, on the same day that she picked up my defence documents.

That was done to imply that BDS Huon’s reaction to receiving the letter, and on advice from their solicitor, was to give her a copy of the letter and try to have her ADVO awarded, based on BDS Huon’s receipt of same.

While they think that fixes one issue with their dodgey dealings, it opens up another can of worms for the owners of BDS Huon. Who then had to enlist the Tax Practitioner’s Board to cover up for the fact, that they had to admit that they had done that, and yes, I had been arrested for it.

 

It seems to me that I might finally be in the clear, in these court matters anyway. I suspect that Albury police have arranged a hit on me, by way of an ex drug dealing police officer they still have an association with, to deflect attention away from themselves as being behind it.

However, the court suddenly doesn’t seem to want to list any of the charges against me, which are still technically pending hearings.

I’d suspected they’d tried to drop the mediators charge off the list a few months ago, but then forgot that since they refused to also drop my bail, they had to continue to list the charge, up until yesterday that is.

The Act of Parliament AVO’s weren’t allocated any time for hearing, when the Magistrate was sorting his list and allocated times for each matter,  yesterday morning. If he had the hearing after I left and awarded those applications, I’d have to cry foul play. I’d advised him I had applications for motion which needed to be heard before that hearing could ‘continue’.

I hope that I was exonerated yesterday of the charge of breach. He doesn’t need to overturn the illegally gained ADVO, because it expired on 28 February 2017.

However, I have been bound by the interim order associated with that new application, and gagged from naming the perpetrators of all of this criminal activity, since February by default, and then by court order since April 2017. Which means the defamation created by the false convictions handed down in February 2016, continued for another nine months.

I believe the court was caught out yesterday, trying to hear an illegal charge. I believe the court couldn’t afford to convict me of a charge which involved so much misconduct by police during the arrest, and for all of the time after it.

I believe the court did not want me to prove in court, and in the transcript, that the complainant was a liar, and that is why they protected her from answering any questions. Again, because that would show that they should have let me cross examine her on 5 February 2016, and they would have realized that right back then.

However, I believe the court still had it in mind to somehow dismiss the charge. Maybe they agreed I was guilty of writing and delivering the letter, but since she didn’t get fired from BDS Huon, it doesn’t matter. Especially not 18 months later.

I’d love to just walk away, at this point, if I am free to do so now.

However, there’s still the little matter of compensation, and that I have just been robbed of two years of my life, and forced to suffer through a nightmare for all of that time.

Also worth taking into consideration, is the amount of emails I sent to the various departments who should have nipped it in the bud. Then there was two NSW Attorney General’s who were covering up for it all, condoned the assault police enacted on me, and continued to allowed these false proceedings to continue, right up until yesterday.

Was that because the information was now being supplied to members of the opposition?

Was it because two of the most relevant briefs have also been sent to the Justice Project, which looks into how innocent people end up in jail?

Was it the affidavit to the Supreme Court, swearing on oath that all of my allegations of misconduct by staff at the Albury court house are true, and are proveable?

Or was it an email to the investigator at the Office of the General Counsel two days before the hearing, in which I did use the c word quite freely, but had attached to it, the false application the BDS Huon’s mother had made to the court, originally, and the two pages which showed it was all a not very clever deception?

Also contained in that email, were that woman’s statement in court, at the first hearing, that she didn’t write those allegations. That a woman at the court house did. She then swears that it is all true though.

The investigator had exonerated the Registrar from colluding with that same person, in her second application, by claiming that the Registrar merely types their words into the computer, and does not compose it for them.

That is contrary to the experience I had there, when I applied for counter ones against the complainants. The Registrar refused to even listen to one of those, or to type it into the computer.

And then we had the person in question swearing in court that the investigator is wrong, that the Registrar really does write them for her, or ‘a woman at the court house’ wrote it, were her actual words.

When the investigator realized that the Act of Parliament AVO’s revolved around those original false statements, recorded in that original complaint which was being asked to be extended, she must have nearly died.

I wonder if that is why the new AVO applications were delisted?

 

What is also interesting is that Murray was trying to play the same game he did last year. When he dismissed all of my defence evidence, he claimed the ADVO applications that evidence related to had been cancelled, and replaced with new ones being made by police.

When I bought that up to him at appeal, that I never got to address those new police applications, he stated that never happened. That we were still dealing with the original applications, and have been all the way through.

These new applications for extensions started off as civil matters, with the complainants having to represent themselves. Then I noticed on the court list that one had been elevated to police status.

I emailed the court house and asked why. The Registrar replied that it was not a police matter. I emailed her a link to the court list. Later that status was removed.

However, Murray had bumped them up into police matters, when he part heard them in May 2017. I was annoyed, knowing that they then got to use the police prosecutor, and didn’t have to commit more acts of perjury themselves, when attempting to present them to the court.

I made an FOI request, to the department of justice, asking for access to the records of conversations their ADVO officer, not the mediator, had been having with one of the complainants, based on the grounds that I have never been allowed to address them, but they appear to have elevated me into being classed as a high range abuser of the complainants.

The Registrar replied that they don’t have a domestic violence worker there. I replied that they did, her name is Robyn, she is there every Monday assisting women applying for court orders, and that she is either employed by the court house itself, or Albury City Council.

The registrar tried to link me to a state wide website, and a toll free number, and directed me to look there for her.

So the court had admitted, via email, that they had no records to back up Murray’s decision to elevate these matters to being police matters. Just like he didn’t have any evidence, or reason, to believe that an incidence of violence had occurred last year, when he revoked matters from mediation, and convicted me of criminal actions, that were not even that.

I’m not going to email the court yet, and ask what the result was. If they can’t send me a copy of the fine, then I shouldn’t have to pay it. They have my email address. However, if one has been issued, and I don’t start paying it off, within 30 days, warrants will be issued for my arrest. So I guess I should try to find out sometime between then.

 

In the meantime, I will continue to blank out the names of the real guilty people in these matters, in accordance with any court orders which might remain in place, until advised otherwise.

I think the court and police might tell them to take civil action against me, if they have any more beefs about me exposing them online, and to keep them all out of their shitty dramas.

I am not afraid to leave the supreme court affidavits on display, which name and shame the complainants, and their mediator buddy. The police can charge me for it. I’ll be happy to appear in court, and provide the Magistrate with a copy of the offending post.

Its time NSW Justice agreed to opening communications with myself, to talk about compensation, especially if they want that same document, off the internet.

 

Original defence statements submitted to the court prior to the first listed hearing of this charge, being 5 February 2016, before Magistrate Cromptom, who refused to mention it at all on the day, and refused to conduct the listed trial into the complainants allegations against me. Caught one of them lying as I walked into the court room.

 

Defence Statements To Address New Charges Bought Against Tracey Burt by Susan Ward via Police

 

I have lodged a complaint with the ICAC about Gwen Bradley of the Community Justice Centre’s unofficial involvement in all of these proceedings, and in particular of myself having been charged with this new offence. I have lodged a complaint about her with her employer as well.

 

I have lodged a complaint with the Police Commissioner’s Office about the Constable who ‘arrested’ me. I have lodged two complaints with this court house, about these proceedings Susan Ward has taken against me, this being the second of those.

 

I attended Albury Police yesterday morning to ask for an event number for being informally charged in my own home, for a crime I did not commit. The desk policeperson gave me a copy of Constable Weekley advice to this court that I had been officially charged with breaching the Interim AVO Susan Ward has against me. I was not aware that I had been charged with anything officially, until I read the ‘arrest’ documentation, already forwarded to the court.

 

Upon arriving home after having read the document on the bus, I phoned Albury Police station to advise them that what Constable Weekely has written in his Fact Sheets, and in particular in the ‘Full Facts’ section, is not true, nor correct. That he has tried to frame me.

 

The policeperson who claimed to be the supervisor of the Albury Police station at the time, hung up the phone on me twice. He gave his name as Sergeant Tim Whimpleman and refused to listen to my advice that he copy and preserve Constable Weekley’s recording of my voice, because his version of its contents was being now disputed by myself. This was after I advised him of the deceptive way Weekley had gone about getting the confession. I then had to phone again to be able to continue my advice that the statement of the account of the interview by Weekely, was full of falsities and lies.

  1. Constable Weekley has written that I made a statement that I wanted to have my sister fired, when not only did I not say that, he did not even ask that question. This makes it very apparent that he was sent specifically to gain that answer, and even though he did not, is now claiming that he did. He never asked me why I wrote the letter to Susan Ward’s boss, in a way that allowed an answer from myself from my own recollection of events.
  2. Constable Weekley did not inform me that I was being formally questioned and about to be charged. He implied he was at my house to discuss what appeared to be a breach, bought to their attention by Susan Ward.
  3. Constable Weekley did not inform me of my rights, nor that any recording of my voice could be used as evidence against me. He claimed that allowing him to tape certain parts of the conversation would make it uneccessary for me to attend the station to discuss the matter. He implied the matter was trivial, his visit informal, and did not advise me that I was about to make any kind of statement in relation to a crime with which I was being charged.
  4. Constable Weekely then produced a faint photo copy of the letter to Susan Ward’s employer, dated 4 Dec 15. He asked me if I had written it, and I stated into the phone/microphone that I had.
  5. He then produced the original copy of documents I had lodged with the court on 11 Jan 16 for Susan Ward to collect, before our court appearance on 18 Jan 16. He showed me one statement in particular, written within the 9 page statement to the court, and asked me if I had written it. The statement said that I wrote and delivered the letter because we were playing a game of tit for tat, and it was now my turn again. I stated that I had written that sentence, and that yes, that’s all the situation has ever been.
  6. He asked me if I had lodged the document with the Albury Court House a week prior, again nominating the date of lodgement as being 11 January 2016. I replied that I had lodged the paperwork he was holding in his hand with the court, on that date.
  7. I am aware that he was holding the original print out that was lodged with the court for Susan Ward to receive. I had printed one set in coloured ink, after running out of black, and then the court copy in black once I had replaced the ink cartridge. He had the green copy which belongs to Susan, not a photocopy of her paperwork. He must have been required to hand the paperwork back to whoever gave it to him, as Susan needed it to prepare her defence.

That was the end of the interview. He and the other officer who had waited outside left the premises and had gone out of sight. Constable Weekley returned several minutes later and handed me an infringement notice of some kind. I thought I had just been fined, not charged with a criminal offence.
Constable Weekley was already very aware of the date of the next hearing, for the AVO matters. He suggested at the end of the ‘interview’ he would ensure that it was heard on that same date as the AVO matters, for my own convenience. He was very certain that he could arrange that, and the matter would be deal with on that date, alongside the AVO application itself.
The following day I attended the Albury Police station to get an event number, and the names of the officers involved in that ‘interview’. It all seemed a bit strange to me, and I suspected that it was actually an act of harassment against myself organized by Susan Ward and her neighbor Gwen Bradley, carried out by officers of the Albury Police force.

 

I discovered that not only did it appear to be just that, but that the officer had gone on to deliberately frame me for a breach of the AVO being falsely sought against me.

 

  1. I believe I was not meant to receive a copy of that statement of arrest, and did so quite by chance. I was never advised to pick one up from the police station, nor told he would be writing one. The desk clerk at the police station assumed I had been told to pick it up, and printed it out and handed it to me.

 

  1. Constable Weekley wrote in his “Full Facts” document that I had to him that I had written and delivered the letter to Susan’s boss specifically to have Susan fired from her job. That is a complete lie. I did not say that. In fact my reason for doing it, was in the hope that he would force her to drop her complaint against me.
  2. Constable Weekley claims that I made a full admission to knowingly and willingly breaching the AV. That is also not true. I advised that I believed that I had not done so, when I had deliberately not approached Susan Ward, nor her workplace, had done so to comply with the AVO. I stated that I truly believed I was innocent of any wrong doing, or breach at all.
  3. I was not given the chance to offer a real reason why, except for when he wanted me to confirm the written statement that it was all merely a game of tit for tat. I did confirm that I wrote that. He never posed the question again, in any other form, and I never gave any other answer.
  4. Constable Weekley writes that Susan Ward advised that she became aware of the letter I had written to her boss on Monday 11 Jan 16. The same day I had lodged it with the court evidence.
  5. He states that the letter was ‘then’ located by the victim’s employer at his former residence at 26 Sarson Road, Lavington. Jon Williams, Susan Ward’s boos is then nominated as being a witness as to the fact that I had slipped it under his garage roller door, just as I had described in my statement to the court, and that’s exactly where he found it.
  6. Susan had advised him that it was there by phone or while still at work, and either he was sent by her to collect it, or they arranged to meet there that night and collect it together.

 

  1. I request that Mr Jon Williams be summoned to appear in court on 5 Feb 2016, to confirm which of the above is the case. Also, whether he read the letter addressed to his company, BDS Group, or gave it to Susan Ward unopened. I was unaware of his name until I read the policeman’s report about it, so it was not addressed to him personally, but to the company itself.
  2. I request that Mr Jon Williams testify under oath about how long he has known about the allegations I have been trying to make to him about Susan Ward, and how long he has been assisting her to have this AVO against me, to silence me about same.
  3. I request that Mr Jon Williams explain to the court why he allowed Susan Ward to steal mail to his company, then gave her time off work to go ahead with claims that I might approach her boss to warn him about her, when they both knew that I already had done so, and failed.
  4. Susan was aware that he had not read the letter, but then had me charged by police for writing it to him a week after she received it. I want Susan Ward charged with theft of mail and personal documents. My own copy of her AVO application was included in the envelope.

 

  1. The above is a very serious matter as far I as I can see. Her boss and Susan working together to have an AVO preventing me from speaking to him about her. That’s very questionable dealings on his part, not only with myself, but with Albury Court House.
  2. Constable Weekley states that my intentions for leaving a letter for his company were unknown to Jon Williams at the time. If this is true, then Susan Ward intercepted and stole the letter by way of deceiving him of its true content.
  3. Susan had already received a copy of it herself, in the same evidence and statements she had picked up from the Albury Court House that day, 11 Jan 16. She did not need to read Jon Williams’ copy to know what it said. She was fully aware of what it said, when she set about obtaining it.
  4. Constable Weekely claims that Susan attended Albury Court House again on 12 Jan 2016 to pick up more documents regarding our cases. However, all of her documents had been lodged the day before, both for her case against me and mine against her. She had nothing left to pick up on 12 Jan 16.
  5. She has made this untrue statement to pretend that she had not read the letter, until after Jon Williams provided her with a copy of it.
  6. On 12 January I lodged my defence and evidence against Janice O’Bryan. That is all that was available to be picked up that day. That evidence and statement did not include the line quoted by Constable Weekley in his Facts Sheet. It comes from the documents lodged the day before, and which Susan acknowledges she picked up on that same day.
  7. Susan admits that she saw those statements on 11 January 2015. She admits that her employer Jon Williams retrieved the letter she saw had been written to him around that same time. Yet she appeared in court on 18 Jan 16, and said nothing to the magistrate about it being a breach, or that she wanted to stop proceedings, as they were no longer valid.

 

  1. Instead, Susan Ward went straight to the police station after the hearing, or the very next morning. She knew for a fact that her boss had never read the letter and never would be able to. She had prevented my contact herself, without an AVO, yet still went ahead asking for one, and then had me charged for breaching it the very next day.

 

And the Albury Police are supporting her in all of this? Why is that? Therefore, I am not only refuting this charge and ‘arrest’ by Constable Rowan Weekley, I ask the court to take note of the fact that he has done this, as a deliberate act of harassment and intimidation, possibly designed to drive me out of town, and to fail to appear. I have lodged a complaint about him with the Office of the Commissioner, and I will be asking that he be charged with falsifying evidence, and false arrest.

 

I refute this new charge, and state that it was an elaborate attempt to not only frame me, but to intimidate me from continuing to defend myself against untrue and unsupported accusations. Because I have maintained my innocence, and dismissed and disproved most of their evidence by way of the real evidence, they are now desperate to intimidate me and to save themselves from being exposed as false and vexatious litigants.

 

I have made a complaint to the ICAC about Gwen Bradley, as I don’t believe that Susan Ward has any influence over the Albury Police force, but that Gwen Bradley certainly does.

 

Albury police person Senior Constable Richardson then refused to take a statement from me, about sexual assaults by Wayne Burt against myself when I was a child and pre-teenager.

 

At first she refused to see me in private, but made me start outlining the offences while standing at the front counter of the police station, with two other members of the public present.

 

She made notes on a scrap of paper only, an evidence tag. She refused to let me make a statement, claiming that detectives would do that at a later time. When I asked if that was standard procedure, she claimed that it was.

 

I provided Senior Constable Richardson with the pages of evidence from the AVO proceedings between myself, Susan Ward and Janice O’Bryan, stating that since they have been lodged with a court house, I want them followed up on. Especially since police chose to act on one sentence in all that evidence, and chose to arrest me for it. I still have not heard anything from any detectives, or other police about that matter, but intend to follow it through to its conclusion.

 

Constable Richardson stood outside my premises on the day that Constable Weekley questioned me alone inside the premises. I believe that Senior Constable Richardson was trying to make it appear to my landlady, and her visitor who had also arrived, that she was on guard in case I tried to escape. More police harassment, to protect Susan Ward and her job at BDS Group, Lavington.

I have made reports to the Police Commissioner about these matters also.

 

Ignored by Magistrate Murray, when he convicted me of the charge on 29 February 2016, after revoking matters from the order of mediation made that day, because there had been an ‘incidence of violence’. Incidence of bullshit, and which is still dribbling out of their rear ends!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Magistrate Anthony Murray – An Act of Perjury While on His Bench

In court on 6 April, I described the following document as a fabrication, which didn’t reflect the true proceedings of that day. I’d only read it once, after returning home from the corrupted dealings on 13 February 2017, and only thought about the biggest errors in it.

In looking again though, it does actually still show Magistrate Murray committing perjury, from his bench, to protect his co-conspirator, the court house mediator.

He asserts he doesn’t know her, on the first page, but by page 5, has to admit that he works with her at the Albury Court House on a regular basis. On the day in question, he even smiled broadly as he spoke of her. However, at least one person was unable to stop himself from laughing out loud, when he did so.

Then he tries his usual game of belittling me, and pretending that I’m not following, and unable to follow, the proceedings.

Yet it was all simple to me. I’d lodged one application for motion the moth before, which was listed for hearing by Magistrate Cromptom on 11 November 2016, for 12 December 2016.

On 12 December, I arrived with a second Notice of Motion, and tried to lodge it at hearing, but then did as he said, and lodged it at the office. He then made me wait until the end of the day to deal with that one.

The office had changed that one notice of motion, into five, because it related to all matters before the court relating to one ADVO. They had to create a pile of paperwork, by insisting they make a different application relating to each charge. Each was a reproduction of my original. Only Murray pretends that there is just too many matters, and too much paperwork before the court, from him to be able to understand it all.

He most certainly did, and so did I.

On 6 April 2017, Magistrate Cromptom listed the first of the illegal breach charges for hearing again, with the others to be listed one by one after that, at the Albury Local Court, with himself as the presiding Magistrate, or an assortment of others who would be flown down at the tax payer’s expense, to cover for Murray. Meaning, Murray has agreed to be allowed to be disqualified from matters relating to the second set of applications, but still wants Albury Court House and a Magistrate he can control, to convict me of all five false charges, and against the evidence that would exonerate me.

scan0034scan0035scan0036scan0037scan0038scan0039scan0040

scan0041

scan0042

scan0043scan0045

scan0046scan0047scan0048scan0049

scan0050scan0051scan0052scan0053


From: Karma
Sent: Monday, 23 January 2017 11:43 PM
To: complaints@judcom.nsw.gov.au
Subject: The Never Ending Acts of Corruption by Magistrate Tony Murray, Albury Local Court

Dear Mr Schmatt

Please find attached, as promised, complaint number 5 about Tony Murray.

Maybe its time you did something about him. Finally. As previously advised, I will be seeking a review of all of your decisions in the Federal Circuit Court next month, in yet another attempt to end the miscarriages of justice being committed against me, by your corrupt employees at the Albury Court House.

I will also be complaining to Mr Brandis about it all. He will really appreciate having me filling up his email inbox each day, until something is done about XXXXXX AND TONY MURRAY WORKING TOGETHER TO CONVICT INNOCENT PEOPLE OF CRIMES WHICH DID NOT OCCUR.

See you in the federal court, you condoner of injustice and unlawful court dealings.

Karma

I don’t seem to have a scan of the signed copy of this, posted to the Judicial Commision in January 2017.

Complaint Against a Judicial Officer

To — The Judicial Commission of NSW

I, Karma, of XXXXXX, West Albury NSW 2640, wish to complain against ­­­­­­­­­­­­ Magistrate Murray of the Albury Local Court.

My complaint is as follows:

At hearing in November 2016, Magistrate Cromptom listed an application for motion for decision on 12 December 2016. Magistrate stated at that hearing, on 12 December 2016, that he would disqualify himself from being able to hear it, but did not rule on whether or not he would agree to a change of venue. I planned to appeal any denial of the application for a change of venue, to the District Court.

At same hearing on 12 December 2016, I lodged a second application for motion, regarding five illegal breach charges, stemming from an unserved ADVO. Magistrate Murray stated that he would hand down a decision on that Application for Motion on 9 February 2017.

Against my wishes, he asked to be allowed to list one of the breach charges for mention on that same date, being 9 February 2017. I stated that none of those five allegations of breach should be listed for hearing until police have provided a signed statement of service.

In checking the court listings online, I found on 20 January 2017, that he has instead listed one breach charge for hearing, and the other four for mention on 9 February 2017. He has not listed the Application for Motion for decision, at all.

Office staff from the court house advised via email dated 23 January 2017, that Magistrate Murray has recorded that he dismissed that application for motion on 12 December 2017. That opposes my recollections of the events and decisions made at that same hearing. I believe this is yet another instance of corruption by Magistrate Murray, to protect his colleague XXXXXX.

I also do not consent to the first application for motion, having been settled without myself having the chance to argue that I had changed my mind about allowing a different Magistrate to hear it at Albury Court House, due to involvement of all staff there, in these conspiracies to bring false allegations against myself. Magistrate Murray will be seeking to cover up once again for his own illegal involvement in XXXXXX’s conspiracy to bring false allegations against myself, and will instruct the replacement Magistrate to rule in a way that brings that about.

When listening to the verbal transcript of the two separate hearings held on 12 December 2016, one in the morning and the other very late in the afternoon, you will hear Magistrate Murray denying knowing XXXXXX at all, and deny that she works at the Albury Court House. A few minutes later, he had to change his own words, and confirm that he does work with her nearly every day, and that she does in fact contract to Albury Court House through the CJC.

Magistrate Murray is now guilty himself of perjury, in his continued attempts to protect XXXXXX from being held accountable for perverting the course of justice in relation to matters involving her personal friends and intimidation of a witness for the defence in those same matters.

Albury Police, who illegally searched my possessions, put me on very questionable bail and once again lie in all of their statement of facts, will be seeking to have me convicted of all of these false charges to conceal their own unlawful actions. Therefore, there will no impartiality in the mind of the prosecutor, who will be seeking to cover up for these unlawful police actions, and to protect the person who instructed them to all act in that manner, being XXXXXX.

I will be once again seeking to take the NSW Judicial Commission to the Federal Circuit Court next month, by way of appeal against the last decision letter sent to me, exonerating Tony Murray of misconduct on 29 February 2016, when he granted two false ADVO applications, which had both been disproven by evidence, and by way of using a false allegation of breach, created by a police officer who was sent to deliberately frame me for same, and then by way of denying the accused access to the evidence police fabricated and then to used in court against me.

I have since become aware of evidence that Con Weekly did not submit to the court on that same date, which would have exonerated me, and therefore is again guilty of tampering with evidence, along with creating a false and tampered with recording of an unlawful interview with myself. I will submit that new evidence to the Federal Circuit Court, in an attempt to have all decisions made by Tony Murray on 29 February 2016, overturned due to corruption of processes.

I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believe the same to be true and by virtue of the provisions of the Oaths Act 1900.

Declared at: Albury on 24 January 2017                      

       

From: Karma
Sent: Thursday, 2 February 2017 12:16 PM
To: complaints@judcom.nsw.gov.au
Subject: Re: The Never Ending Acts of Corruption by Magistrate Tony Murray, Albury Local Court

Dear Mr Schmatt

I have been forgetting to post the signed copy of this complaint to you. Rest assured though that it will be posted before the end of this week. And this time, I will be seeking true justice, if not from you, but through the Federal Court.

Might I also remind you of the following statements taken from your own website.

Judicial officers

In a case of attempting to pervert the course of justice, a custodial sentence will be imposed where the offender is a judicial officer: R v Farquhar (unrep, 29/5/85, NSWCCA). The court stated at pp 30–31:

Where, as here, the offence is committed by a person holding judicial office in the judicial hierarchy of the State the attempt to commit the offence strikes at the very core of the integrity of the administration of justice. Such a person is in a commanding position to attempt to pervert the course of justice and when he seeks to abuse his position to achieve that end, public confidence in the judicial system will be lost unless it is made clear that such conduct will bring a prison sentence.

The court made clear that since the public is entitled to expect a judicial officer will be of good character and integrity, previous good character or reputation of a judge convicted of attempting to pervert the course of justice will be of far less weight than in a different type of offence: R v Farquhar at p 31. In Einfeld v R (2010) 200 A Crim R 1 at [81], Basten JA said:

… it is beyond question that for a senior legal practitioner and former judge of a superior court to commit offences against the administration of justice is apt to give rise to public disquiet about the integrity of the judicial system. These were offences to which the present status of, and the offices formerly held by, the applicant were of great significance.

There is “a risk that judges will deal more harshly than some would think appropriate with those from within their own ranks”: Einfeld v R at [82]. Notwithstanding that danger, it is accepted that an offender’s status as a senior legal practitioner and former judge rendered perjury and perverting the course of justice more serious than they would otherwise have been: Einfeld v R at [82]. Basten JA also stated at [83] (Latham J agreeing at [196]; RS Hulme J agreeing at [195]) that the applicant’s former positions removed:

… an element of ignorance which might otherwise have diminished the degree of culpability. It was not merely a matter of knowing that it is a crime to lie on oath or seek to pervert the course of justice: it was a matter of understanding the significance accorded to such conduct by the law and the heightened seriousness of offences when committed by a person with the applicant’s background and experience.

Sincerely
Karma

From: Karma
Sent: Wednesday, 22 February 2017 2:00 PM
To: complaints@judcom.nsw.gov.au
Subject: Complaint against Tony Murray of the Albury Local Court No. 6

Dear Mr Schmatt

Please find attached complaint number six, against Tony Murray of the Albury Court House. I refuse to address him using the term Magistrate, because he does not conduct himself with honour, or with any respect to the laws of Australia.

I will be seeking a permanent stay in all proceedings against me, at the Albury Local court, due to his misconduct, that of XXXXXX of the CJC and Constable Rowan Weekley, who arrested me in an unlawful manner and fabricated evidence, which was denied to the defendant in a deliberate ruse to have ADVO applications made by XXXXXX’s personal friends, awarded, without the defence evidence which had disproven both of those, being considered.

Yours in disgust of NSW Justice

Karma

From: Karma
Sent: Wednesday, 22 February 2017 3:49 PM
To: complaints@judcom.nsw.gov.au
Subject: Re: Complaint against Tony Murray of the Albury Local Court No. 6

Dear Mr Schmatt

I realized after sending this that I had not attached any supporting evidence. I will scan the 14 pages of lies which have been written up, purporting to be a transcript of the hearings on 12 December 2016, and email those later tonight, along with the new applications from the ADVO holders. You will have it all by morning, along with a scan of the signed complaints, which I will post on Friday.

Karma

Murray 6 p 1 editMurray 6

 

I don’t have anything to hide, yet I am the one who has been found ‘guilty’.

I’m quite happy to have myself and my actions exposed on the internet. But only the truthful version of same, not the one others have been seeking to impose onto me.

 

You wonder why the other people involved in all this, seem desperate to seek some in appropriate gag orders, to cover it all up?

 

Justice in the Albury Court House?
– proven to be contrary to what they work towards there –

Complaints to Federal Police, Re: Albury Court House & NSW Police Officers

Lodged online 15 February 2017

Thank you for your submission to the Australian Federal Police (AFP). Your submission has been received and will be assessed by the AFP. The AFP endeavours to provide a response to complainants, when considered appropriate, within 28 days of receiving a submission. Please be aware that, at times, due to operational priorities this may not be possible.

Further information can be located on the AFP’s website.

Please do not reply to this message. This e-mail is an automated notification, which is unable to receive replies.

The following details were submitted via the AFP website:

Form Information

Site Name AFP
Site Id 71
Folder Name Online forms
Folder Id 93
Page Asset Listing Name Report a Commonwealth crime
Page Asset Listing Id 2478
Page Standard Name Report details
Page Standard Id 2655
Url https://forms.afp.gov.au/online_forms/report_a_crime/report_details
Submission Id 31334
Submission Time 15 Feb 2017 1:24 pm
Submission IP Address

Yes, I am reporting a Commonwealth crime

Staff at Albury Court House are doctoring typed versions of transcripts of court proceedings and hearings. I have been able to see this quite easily for myself, in the transcripts I have been supplied. It is also quite easy to prove this, by simply comparing the two copies, being the recordings made in the court room of proceedings, and what appears in the typed versions created afterwards. This is being done to cover up for illegal actions by Magistrate Tony Murray, the Registrar and a court employed mediator, contracting to that court house, through the Community Justice Centre. The mediator has been perverting the course of justice, in relation to matters her personal friends’ bought before the court. It was illegal to do that, and the proof of the corruption and perversion of justice, is still recorded and proven by the transcripts, despite them being heavily edited. In particular, statements made by the Magistrate are being changed to make it appear he has acted in accordance with the law. My own defence statements are being edited, to hide crucial points of my defence statements. I have lodged complaints about this to the Office of Public Prosecutions, in Wagga Wagga. Transcripts for Albury Court are prepared there, and then changed by staff at the Albury Court house upon receipt of same. The OPP refused to contact me in relation to this complaint. I have lodged two complaints about this issue to the ICAC. They also have ignored those complaints. I have lodged complaints with the Chief Excutive of the NSW Judicial Commission about same, who has also refused to act. The OPP, Judical Commission and ICAC are refusing to act on my complaints, due to how many of their own staff members who will be affected by being exposed for same. I need a higher authority to act on these complaints, and one which operates on a commonwealth level, due to the NSW Attorney General also being implicated in covering up for illegal and unlawful actions committed against me, by staff of the Albury Court House, and NSW Justice Department.

Your contact details

Surname: Karma
Given names: Karma
Date of birth:
Email address: Karma
Phone number:
Postal address: I do not wish to provide my address. I am about to go into hiding from corrupt Albury police who have assisted the court to do this to me. I have already been assaulted by Albury Police once, and am in danger of being jailed by them, due to being on bail.
State/Territory: NSW

Acceptance of AFP’s Privacy Statement

Yes, I understand and accept the AFP’s Privacy Statement

Second Complaint Lodged Just Now

Thank you for your submission to the Australian Federal Police (AFP). Your submission has been received and will be assessed by the AFP. The AFP endeavours to provide a response to complainants, when considered appropriate, within 28 days of receiving a submission. Please be aware that, at times, due to operational priorities this may not be possible.

Further information can be located on the AFP’s website.

Please do not reply to this message. This e-mail is an automated notification, which is unable to receive replies.

The following details were submitted via the AFP website:

Form Information

Site Name AFP
Site Id 71
Folder Name Online forms
Folder Id 93
Page Asset Listing Name Report a Commonwealth crime
Page Asset Listing Id 2478
Page Standard Name Report details
Page Standard Id 2655
Url https://forms.afp.gov.au/online_forms/report_a_crime/report_details
Submission Id 31336
Submission Time 15 Feb 2017 1:51 pm
Submission IP Address

Yes, I am reporting a Commonwealth crime

On 19 January 2016, Con Rowan Weekely, from Albury Police Station came to my rented property and asked to have an information conversation with me of an allegation of breach on an ADVO which had not yet been decided at hearing. He asked to be allowed to record a few of my answers as his notes. He then stood up and informed me I was under arrest, and issued me with an infringement notice. I attended the police station the to get his name and lodge a complaint. Instead I was accidentally handed his CAN and full statement of facts. In that, he claims that he conducted of formal interview and had a full confession from myself, recorded onto his personal mobile phone. Upon returning home, I phoned the police station and asked them to listen to his recording and compare it to his statement of facts. They hung up on me, twice. I lodged a complaint with the police commissioner’s office. They refuse to look into it. They directed his superiors to do so, who Instead threatened to charge me for lodging a complaints about their officers. Police continued to harrass and bring more false charges against me, to deter me from seeking justice. I was convicted in court on 29 February 2016 of that allegation, in my absence due to illness, which was confirmed by my GP in a letter to the court. The court refused to overturn the conviction on appeal. I had lodged defence statements prior to the hearing, outlining all of the illegal and unlawful actions committed by Con Weekley on that day. On appeal in the District court, the conviction was set aside. The Judge stated that he was not able to overturn it, because it had never been properly heard in the local court. He could only set it aside, and send it back to the local court for rehearing. Before that could happen, police assaulted me, put another false charge on me for which they attached bail, and instructed me to leave town. The NSW Police Commissioners office is fully aware that I have valid and proveable complaints about officers at Albury Police Station, and which they are refusing to investigate. In preparing for the re-hearing of the charge, Albury Police have now edited and added content of that same recording. Including a formal introduction stating he is about to conduct the formal recorded interview, which is not made in my presence, nor even in my home. Again, this is easily proveable. Albury Police and/or NSW Police are guilty of making an illegal recording and tampering with it afterwards. The NSW Ombudsman refuses to act, and is covering up for the actions of police corruption in Albury. The NSW Judicial Commission is covering up for the court convicting me on evidence which should have been under investigation at that stage, by both police and ombudsman. I have nowhere else to turn now to have this investigated.

Your contact details

Surname: Karma
Given names: Karma
Date of birth:
Email address: Karma.com
Phone number:
Postal address: Again, I will not provide my address, I should be in witness protection, but have to go into hiding without that support.
State/Territory: NSW

Acceptance of AFP’s Privacy Statement

Yes, I understand and accept the AFP’s Privacy Statement

 

Both of the above complaints have been forwarded to the Judicial Commission and the Crown Solicitor General of NSW, also to the Mediator Standards Board, and some other assorted people involved with all of this corruption.

 

Oh, and to the two local accountancy firms named in the two new applications for extensions of the original ADVO’s. Along with this one below, and to the ABC, for investigation by their journalists. 

Thank you for your submission to the Australian Federal Police (AFP). Your submission has been received and will be assessed by the AFP. The AFP endeavours to provide a response to complainants, when considered appropriate, within 28 days of receiving a submission. Please be aware that, at times, due to operational priorities this may not be possible.

Further information can be located on the AFP’s website.

Please do not reply to this message. This e-mail is an automated notification, which is unable to receive replies.

The following details were submitted via the AFP website:

Form Information

Site Name AFP
Site Id 71
Folder Name Online forms
Folder Id 93
Page Asset Listing Name Report a Commonwealth crime
Page Asset Listing Id 2478
Page Standard Name Report details
Page Standard Id 2655
Url https://forms.afp.gov.au/online_forms/report_a_crime/report_details
Submission Id 31339
Submission Time 15 Feb 2017 2:37 pm
Submission IP Address

Yes, I am reporting a Commonwealth crime

Belinda Brady, Registrar at the Albury Court house is allowing orders made by visiting Magistrates to be changed after hearing, at the Albury Court House. There have been three instances of this now, however, she was not working there for the first occurrence of same. Hearings into the outcomes of applications made to the court, are being removed from the court list, and replaced with criminal charges against myself. This has occured twice, and during the third instance, while they did not remove the application from the list, they added new charges against my name all around it, to cloud the issue. The applications listed for hearing that day, were not dealt with, due to the confusion being caused by all the new charges. At the hearing prior to that, where Magistrate Tony Murray had already had to disqualify himself, a new Magistrate from Sydney was flown down for the hearing of two applications for motion, a change in venue, to a less corrupt court house, and which is not already seeking to protect members of their own staff from being found guilty of corrupt and illegal actions. That Magistrate stated quite clearly, that no new charges would be listed against me, or the existing ones, until after the Applications for motion had been decided. The Registrar has defied that order, and not only listed new charges, but has allowed them to be bought against me knowing full well that they are not true, and she has supplied information for the complainants to use in those. Belinda Brady is also covering up for the fact that she is aware that the complainants (2) had made false allegations against me, which were defeated by defence evidence, and the evidence submitted by the complainants. Belinda Brady is aware that those two ADVO’s were granted due to perversions of the course of justice, by a court employed mediator, XXXXXX, acting on behalf of her personal friends, and with the assistance of Magistrate Tony Murray. She is aware that one of those never came into affect, due to having never been served on the accused. Yet she continues to allow false charges of breach to be listed in relation to that, and has even allowed the protected person now apply for an extension of that illegally gained ADVO, and which was designed to protect the applicant to continue to break federal regulations which apply to staff of taxation accountancy firms. The NSW Department of Justice is covering up for her actions, and those of the Magistrate, the mediator, and her personal friends. As is the NSW Ombudsman, the NSW Attorney General and the ICAC. I cannot report any of these people to the Commonwealth Ombudsman, due to their own rules on who they will accept complaints about. Yours is the only agency I can now complain to and ask for an investigation into corruption at the Albury Court House, and Albury Police Station, and which Belinda Brady has been enabling since June 2016, and continues to do so.

Your contact details

Surname: Karma
Given names: Karma
Date of birth: 22/11/1962
Email address: Karma@outlook
Phone number:
Postal address: I do not wish to divulge my address. Please contact me via email, to arrange an interview, or phone for more information.
State/Territory: NSW

Acceptance of AFP’s Privacy Statement

Yes, I understand and accept the AFP’s Privacy Statement

Thank you for your submission to the Australian Federal Police (AFP). Your submission has been received and will be assessed by the AFP. The AFP endeavours to provide a response to complainants, when considered appropriate, within 28 days of receiving a submission. Please be aware that, at times, due to operational priorities this may not be possible.

Further information can be located on the AFP’s website.

Please do not reply to this message. This e-mail is an automated notification, which is unable to receive replies.

The following details were submitted via the AFP website:

Form Information

Site Name AFP
Site Id 71
Folder Name Online forms
Folder Id 93
Page Asset Listing Name Report a Commonwealth crime
Page Asset Listing Id 2478
Page Standard Name Report details
Page Standard Id 2655
Url https://forms.afp.gov.au/online_forms/report_a_crime/report_details
Submission Id 31340
Submission Time 15 Feb 2017 2:47 pm
Submission IP Address

Yes, I am reporting a Commonwealth crime

In relation to my complaint about Albury Police, lodged earlier today, below is confirmation that what I saw is true, provided to me by a journalist at the local newspaper, the Border Mail.

Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 09:37:08
From: tahlia.mcpherson@fairfaxmedia.com.au
To: Karma@outlook.com
Subject: Border Mail Comment

Hi Karma,

Tahlia from The Border Mail Here, how are you? I saw your comment which came through saying:

Local police have been acting unlawfully themselves recently, all with the blessing of Superintendent Quarmby. Seems he’s been wasting resources himself, on harassing members of the public, and protecting a policeman who falsified evidence to be able to arrest an innocent person, as a favour to a ‘mate’.

I was wondering if we may be able to chat further about it, as we have been getting this feedback quite often in relation to Albury Police. It is something I take seriously and have been looking into for some time. Let me know if you would like to discuss.
Regards, — Tahlia McPherson Journalist –
The Border Mail Australian Community Media t 02 6024 0530 m 0475 951 384 tahlia.mcpherson@fairfaxmedia.com.au 1 McKoy Street, Wodonga, 3690 http://www.bordermail.com.au Twitter: @TahliaMcPherson

Your contact details

Surname: Karma
Given names: Karma
Date of birth:
Email address: Karma@outlook.com
Phone number:
Postal address: Not willing to disclose, for my own safety. I have too much evidence of corruption against too many NSW public officials to feel safe now.
State/Territory: NSW

Acceptance of AFP’s Privacy Statement

Yes, I understand and accept the AFP’s Privacy Statement

NSW Judicial Commission Decision

This is the decision, posted to me in December 2016, that I could have appealed to the Federal Circuit Court last month. I would have had until about 11 January to do so, 28 days from date of issue.

I’d packed up all my court papers and put them away in a cupboard over Christmas, and took time out from having to look at them, and think about them. So I didn’t think to jump at this chance, to have this obviously flawed decision, examined in much higher court, and one which would also take federal regulations surrounding taxation accountants into consideration.

However, I’d lodged the two applications for motion in November and December, and was awaiting hearing on those. Rather than risk being stuck with court costs in the Federal Court at a minimum of $1,600, I’d chosen to continue to fight the original false criminal charges, in an impartial arena instead. The cheaters just won’t allow that, because them and their complaints would promptly be thrown out of the court room and court house.

By the time I’d found out that Murray was playing games again, and now with the applications for motion, on about 20 January, I was already just outside my time period to appeal it to the Federal Court.

Notice that Mr Schmatt exonerates Murray of any wrong doing on 5 February, 29 February and 18 April 2016, but does not mention the 15th, which was the main date of my allegations of corruption and perversion of justice.

Murray wasn’t on the bench on 5 February, so of course he didn’t do anything corrupt on that date. He soon undid the judgements made by the impartial Magistrate who in charge of proceedings that day, and who had dismissed matters to mediation, unworthy of even a hearing in court, and from a position outside of the court room.

15 February was the day that Murray admits in the transcript that he revoked matters from mediation, due to an allegation of an incidence of violence, that not only did the prosecutor not know what he is talking about, the potential victims also do not deny or confirm that one of them had been assaulted, and their is no record of any official advice to the court house of same. He couldn’t convict me on that day, because I’d already walked out of the court house, once I saw mediation had instead been turned into a criminal hearing against myself, and a deliberate trap was waiting to be sprung on me in the court room.

At the continuation of that hearing, on 29 February, he then doesn’t mention the incidence of violence, used to revoke, but instead convicts me of writing a letter to the complainants’ employers, about her legal actions against me. The court had been advised the arrest was unlawful and that police were refusing to give me access to their ‘recorded full confession’. Murray convicted me in my absence, without even hearing the charge. And then grant’s his buddy’s friends’ ADVO applications.

At the appeal, on 18 April, he and the prosecutor both verbally denied me the right to see the evidence they claim to have used against me on 29 February, to gain a conviction, and which I was by then appealing in April. They both even mocked me outloud for even asking to be provided with that, based on a letter from the Superintendent that I would be given a copy at hearing. Murray then stole the letter off me, by keeping it after demanding to be allowed to see it. The transcript was later changed to read that they politely asked me if I wanted that letter tendered into evidence. No, I was asking to see some evidence of the criminal action I had been convicted of.

I had a copy scanned to my computer though, which they hadn’t counted on. I guess they will be wanting to seize my computer soon, to remove all trace of their own corruptions. I guess they will cite ‘my internet crimes against the court mediator’, of blogging about corruption at the Albury Court House, as their reason to do so.

judcom

 

At the start of proceedings on 13 February, into the notice of motions, Magistrate Cromptom tried to get it onto the record that my complaints to the Judicial Commission were not found to be proven, therefore Murray is innocent of any wrong doing, and therefore there is no need for the court to grant me motion.

When I stated in court that the Commission is actually fully aware that my complaints were proven, but covered up for Murray, he then tried to make issue of the fact that my application for stay in proceedings requested time to be able to take the matter to the Federal Circuit Court. He asked the prosecutor if that was even possible.

She, of course, did not know either. But then she also unaware that police must provide the defence with a copy of their brief and evidence, either.

I assured the Magistrate that the Federal Court had accepted my last application, for a judicial review into EJ Schmatt’s decsion, and that I had it half lodged at the Federal Court’s site when the police found out about that, and therefore as did the court mediator, and so they conspired to assault me, put me up on a new false charge, and instructed me to plead guilty to everything, or leave town.

I could appeal it all to the NSW Supreme Court, I saw last week. But then the site gives the public no links or information on how to do that. Albury Court House then went out of the way to print me out a that same piece of information, so that I could take the matter there, if I insist on doing so.

However, since I’m calling the Chief Executive of the NSW Judicial Commission a corrupt liar who has handed down a decision which he is fully aware is incorrect, I don’t want to do that in a NSW court house. Even if it is its highest one in the state.

I assume he won’t have quite so much influence, over a Federal Court.

I am still waiting for another letter from Mr Schmatt, stemming from my 5th complaint about Murray, and which is probably the most serious of them all. That Magistrate Murray committed perjury, while perched on his bench, to cover up for his association with the court mediator I accuse of organizing Murray’s acts of misconduct against me.

Once received, I will have 28 days to appeal that decision. It usually takes him a couple of months, to type up a two page letter. I hope I receive it before the next hearing listed for April, in the Albury Local Corrupt Court.