More Dodgy Dealings in the Albury Local Court


From: Karma
Sent: Monday, 26 June 2017 3:40 PM
To: Local Court Albury; local_court_albury@agd.nsw.gov.au; Premier; investigations@abc.net.au; icac@icac.nsw.gov.au

Subject: Illegal Bail Hearing

Dear Mr Howard

At hearing on 20 June 2017, the charge bought against me by your employee, XXXX XXXXXXX of the CJC, was not mentioned in court. It was listed to be mentioned, for a new date for hearing to be set. You might recall that I lodged my defence brief with the office that morning, and with the police prosecutor in between hearings. However, the charge was not mentioned at all, and no date was set.

In fact, the Magistrate was quite clear that we would only be dealing with one charge on that day, being one of breach of ADVO bought against me by your pal, xxxxxx xxxx.

I believe we have not only had police change the date of the offence on their paperwork, but submit evidence that is not admissible, since this is the re-hearing of the charge, and not the first hearing of the charge, where all of that information should have been submitted. Since it wasn’t, I fail to see how it is admissible now.

However, I have allowed it all to be introduced, because it convicts both of the arresting officers of lying, but also because I intend to address XXXX’s witness statements during my cross examination of her, at the hearing’s continuation in mid September. However, I believe that changing the charge from contravene ADVO to Common Assault is simply not acceptable.

After that hearing had ended and the Magistrate had left the court room for the day, the prosecutor sent a clerk to instruct him to come back to his bench, to hear my bail application. I had mentioned earlier that I did want that addressed at hearing, along with XXXX’s false allegation of XXXXXX her.

Magistrate Cromptom returned to the bench and made an order that bail would continue until a date in mid September 2017. I can’t find my paperwork at the moment, due to have to relocate in my living arrangements late last week. However, that hearing in mid September relates to XXXX’s charge, and to Magistrate Murray’s ADVO applications were are being bought against me as an Act of Parliament.

I hardly think that it would be legal for the Magistrate to bail me until the next hearing of someone else’s complaint to police about me. Especially when it is the same party who’s previous collusions with xxxxxxx were the basis of my applications for motion.

Therefore, he has continued this bail indefinitely, due to not setting a new date for the hearing of the charge I am actually on bail for. I believe it is not legal to put someone on bail indefinitely.

I will be defending Murray’s new false allegations, due to the fact that Magistrate Cromptom assured me at hearing on 6 April 2017, that Magistrate Murray would no longer be involved in any matters involving myself at your court house, before dismissing my three applications for motion, as a compromise. I would have appealed his decision in the district court, but took him for his word that Murray would be kept out of proceedings from here on in. My time period to appeal that decision, has now expired.

Therefore, I will defend those new applications for ADVO’s, and which are an Act of Parliament, by submitting the transcript which shows that Magistrate Murray committed perjury on his bench on 12 December 2016, to cover up for the same collusions between XXXXXXX, XXXX and XXXXXX, when he was originally refusing to grant motion. Something I am long past being legally due, due to the amounts of corruptions in these proceedings, and which began at the outset.

Therefore, you better change the transcript when you prepare it this week. Make sure you add in remarks pretending to be from the mouth of the Magistrate, that a date was set for the hearing of (your employee)’s charge, or all of the above becomes very questionable.

I’m sure you will be able to fix that error, before it comes back to haunt you all, and to cover up for unlawful and illegal actions by both of your Magistrates.

Regards

Karma

Advertisements

Registrar Issues Subpoena to Self

I have received an email this morning from the current Registrar of the Albury Court House, being Elizabeth Leathbridge, confirming that she has processed a subpoena I emailed to the court house a couple of days ago.

The subpoena is addressed to the Registrar of the Albury court house. It requests that they provide the defence with a copy of the advice to Magistrate Murray that an incidence of violence had occurred, upon which advice he revoked matters from mediation, and went on to convict myself of false allegations without considering any of the defence evidence, or even the cases presented to support the applications made by two people against me.

So the Registrar of the Albury Court House, has had to process a subpoena directing herself to provide a record, which the court previously claimed to myself that they had not kept.

Going to be interesting this point, when it comes up in the court.

Murray could argue that he assumed that the allegation and charge of breach, involved an incidence of violence, since they related to an order which prevented violence from occurring. However, no threat of violence had ever been made, apart from by the complainants, in the lead up to lodging their applications to the court.

Which is the whole problem here. An AVO or ADVO is an order to prevent any acts of violence, or contact designed to instill fear, towards the protected person. The protected person, was never under any threat of that. So the ADVO was a misuse of process.

Then when the Magistrate claims to have seen that a charge of breach had been bought against the accused, he jumps to the conclusion that it involved an incidence of violence.

When it reality, all it involved was a typed letter to one of the owners of BDS Huon, and which had been left at an empty house, and was not found until more than a month later.

However, Murray makes those claims about an incidence of violence, and the charge of breach, at hearing for that charge on 15 February 2016. He had me summoned to court to hear that charge, and it was the only matter listed that day for hearing against me, on the list outside the court room.

However, he didn’t hear it. He didn’t read the letter either, because it was never tendered into evidence by the arresting office, Constable Rowan Weekley. If he read the charge sheet and statement of facts created by that same officer, then he would have seen that no incidence of violence had occurred at all.

The matter was adjourned, until 29 February 2016. You’d think that by then he would have read the charge sheet, and even asked the police to submit a copy of the letter, for his determination as to whether or not it constituted an illegal act.

Yet, he is still pretending that the charge of breach involved an act of violence, when he convicted me of it two weeks later.

How did the result of the hearing on 5 February 2016 come to his attention in the first place? He was not the presiding Magistrate, and the matters had been dealt with on that date. The applications for ADVO’s had been ordered to be sent to mediation, and the charge of breach ignored by the Magistrate, until it had been determined whether or not the ADVO’s were appropriate, and/or proven by the applicants.

Why did Murray revoke matters from mediation when he was not aware of the circumstances of the allegation of breach, nor what it really involved?

Why did he make a judgement on it, when the Magistrate who had read the defence statements which related to it, had ignored it completely based on those?

Why did Murray not read those same defence statements, and which had been lodged with the court prior to the hearing of the charge on 5 February 2016, before convicting me of it?

In fact, I never even got the chance to enter a plea. The charge was never mentioned in court in my presence. However, I had attended court on the day it was listed for hearing, and the Magistrate chose to ignore it, to be dealt with after 18 March 2016, when we were all to appear in court again, after mediation.

Is that legal, for me to have been denied the right to enter a plea, before being convicted, and despite having been in attendance on the day the charge was supposed to have been heard?

Why did Magistrate Murray award the ADVO’s just so that he could convict me of the allegation of breach, without considering any of the evidence surrounding them?

Because his colleague from the CJC had asked him to do so.

I have also emailed a new subpoena to the Albury court house this morning. This one is for NSW Police, asking them to produce a valid record of service of one of the ADVO’s, prior to seeking prosecution in court for alleged breaches of that same ADVO.

I have read that a signed record is no longer required in court, just an ‘electronic’ copy of it. Therefore the subpoena asks that if police plan to continue with these prosecutions, without providing a signed record of service, then the serving officers will be required to appear in court, on 20 June 2016, to swear in the witness box that they served two ADVO final orders, and not just the one on the day in question.

I wonder if the cops will commit perjury in court? All of the arresting officers so far have, so I guess I can’t rely on these two officers not to do the same.

 

 

While I was typing up this post, I received an email from the Albury Court house confirming that my second Subpoena has now been made official, and is ready to be served on NSW police.

I also stated in my advice to the Registrar about the first one, that I would expect her not to claim any witness costs, when she gives evidence on 20 June 2017, since she will be on paid duty at the court house anyway.

Lets see if the court tries to add it to my bill though, or your tax bill.

 

scan0001scan0002