More Dodgy Dealings in the Albury Local Court

From: Karma
Sent: Monday, 26 June 2017 3:40 PM
To: Local Court Albury;; Premier;;

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.



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.







From: Karma
Sent: Monday, 23 January 2017 11:43 PM
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.


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
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.


From: Karma
Sent: Wednesday, 22 February 2017 2:00 PM
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


From: Karma
Sent: Wednesday, 22 February 2017 3:49 PM
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.


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 –

In Defence of Corrupt Albury Police

Defence Statements Charge H62294944

  1. Constable Minehan held me in custody while he prepared his CAN and arrest documentation. I was given a copy to take with me when released.
  2. The date it is created is 22 October 2016, at 9.01 pm. It confirms I was apprehended at my property at 7.45 pm that same evening.
  3. In the details of Offences, Number 3, he states I resisted arrest on 19 October 2016, at 12.25pm. I had no contact with police on that day, and was not arrested.
  4. The same details allege I again resisted arrest on 21 October 2016, at 8.20 pm. I had no contact with police on that day either, and was not arrested.
  5. CJC MEDIATOR made her complaint to police on 21 October 2016. Did she and Minehan conspire to take me into custody that night, and charge me with resist arrest regardless of what really happened?
  6. I am charged with sending two emails to CJC MEDIATOR on 20 October 2016, one after the other at 12.23 and 12.24 pm, as per the sequence 1 and 2 of the statement of facts, pages 2 and 3.
  7. The CAN cites the dates of two alleged criminal offences, in Numbers 1 and 2, as having been committed between 19 October 2016, at 12.25 pm and on 21 October 2016, at 8.20 pm.
  8. I had no contact with CJC MEDIATOR on either of those dates.
  9. My internet usage for 21 October 2016 shows I sent two emails in the morning only.
  10. I took my cousin shopping that day and stayed at his house until around 11pm.
  11. Therefore, I was not accessing or using the internet, and was not at home when Minehan came to arrest me on the evening of 21 October 2016 and charges for for an offence on that same date.
  12. This charge must be dismissed, based on the inaccuracies contained in the CAN.
  13. In all instances, Minehan fails to record the correct date of either allegation of criminal conduct, and pretends there were another two instances of the same crimes, on separate dates where none occured.
  14. I believe that to charge me with a telecommunications offence the police must prove the IP address from which the offences occurred, and prove an account with the carriage provider in my name, which matches that IP.
  15. Can the police provide a record of the telecommunications account name, and details of the carriage provider?
  16. In the bail documentation, Sargent Stephen Bosch claims that I have a criminal history. Attached print out of the police records of my criminal history disprove that statement, being two incidents over thirty years ago.
  17. He claims I have been put on bail due to the serious nature of the offences. Sending two emails, containing two words each only, is considered serious enough for jail?
  18. He claims they have a strong case against me, particularly due to the victim’s account of the offence she experienced upon reading those two emails. I have yet to see the victim’s witness statement, and cannot continue to defend the matter until it is provided to me, along with the police brief.
  19. He acknowledges ongoing allegations of breach of COMPLAINANT’s ADVO are just that, allegations, and not one has been proven in court.
  20. He claims I show no remorse, but continue to believe that I have been framed by CJC MEDIATOR, using Albury Police, to assist her personal friends to win what was initially a family argument, and involved no criminal allegations, in court, despite her friends’ applications disproven by evidence. Court transcripts from hearings in February 2016 confirm my claims.
  21. CJC MEDIATOR was not officially involved in the ADVO matters, as no mediation was involved at the outset. When the chance did come up, by way of a court order, CJC MEDIATOR ensured that did not happen, and resorted to using police and false allegations of breach to protect her own credibility after that.
  22. CJC MEDIATOR’s friends ADVO applications had both been disproven by evidence and dismissed to mediation between the parties involved.
  23. CJC MEDIATOR should have left it at that, instead she inflamed the situation and it continues today, and is a demonstration of why there are laws forbidding involvement in matters of personal friends before a court.
  24. The fact that COMPLAINANT provides the print out of the ‘evidence’ on behalf of Bradley to police, again shows and proves this collusion.
  25. Bradley forwarded both of the emails at 9am on 20 October 2016 to COMPLAINANT. would have been at work that day, so they would not have been able to discuss them until that evening. Together they decided on CJC MEDIATOR’s response, to pretend offence, so they can claim the emails to have been a criminal act. Yet it is against the law for CJC MEDIATOR to use her influence and working relationship with local police, to bring a charge against me for lodging complaints about both her and themselves.
  26. COMPLAINANT’s interest in these matters is that the contents of the emails refer to the questionable charges bought against me, and in unlawful manners, by Albury police on behalf of COMPLAINANT. CJC MEDIATOR and police should have been angry at COMPLAINANT, since she was the person who created those complaints by her own behavior.
  27. Sgt Bosch claims I had to be put on bail to protect the victim from my conduct. Yet two and a half weeks later, CJC MEDIATOR used her own carriage service to menace/harass and offend myself.
  28. She instructs me to plead guilty to the allegations of breach bought against me by her friend and neighbor COMPLAINANT, listed for hearing on the same day as this charge.
  29. I have prepared an application for a private prosecution in relation to charging CJC MEDIATOR with the same offence she seeks to have me convicted of, along with intimidation of a witness and other offences.
  30. I have made application to the Albury Local Court to have all of the hearings of all of the allegations of breach of an illegally gained and unserved ADVO moved to another venue, where CJC MEDIATOR can no longer affect the outcome of same.
  31. I had to have those same hearings postponed due to injuries received by way of CJC MEDIATOR instructing Minehan to create a situation where they could rough me up, and then claim resist arrest. My GP can confirm that he documented those injuries.
  32. I believe that bail should be lifted, since CJC MEDIATOR has violated the conditions of same, by way of approaching me herself and trying to generate more conflict.
  33. I believe bail was never required anyway, and was a ploy for police to be able to take me into custody prior to the hearing of the breach charges, to deny me the ability to prepare a defence.
  34. The following weekend this arrest, Constable Paul Evans and Sheridan Mifsud came to my property to serve a brief. Evans appeared very agitated and Mifsud tried to start an argument with me. I lodged complaints with the Police Commissioner’s Office about that.
  35. Constable Minehan deliberately listed the hearing of this charge for the same date as allegations of breach relating to an ADVO held by COMPLAINANT in what I believe was yet another attempt to affect the outcome of same, by CJC MEDIATOR.
  36. Again, this shows that Minehan was aware of the matters between myself and COMPLAINANT going through the court. Police were not able to bring any more charges against me on behalf of COMPLAINANT, to punish me for lodging complaints about them, due to lack of service of the ADVO being questioned by then.
  37. I have been lodging complaints about CJC MEDIATOR for all of 2016, within the justice department and other agencies, about her involvement in COMPLAINANT’s matters before the court. This charge is in retaliation for all of those complaints, and she has no right to charge me for using an online complaints process, to complain about her. In fact, it is illegal for her to have done so, while I have continued to lodge complaints about her, and will continue to do so until all of these false convictions, are overturned.
  38. Constable Minehan stated that I was under arrest, and had to come with him, upon arriving at my property. I asked why I couldn’t drive to the station in my own car, so that I had it to drive home in. He refused, stating that he would call the Sargent to kick down my front door, if I didn’t agree to go with them immediately.
  39. I replied that the Police would have to pay for the damage. Minehan replied that he would claim I was resisting arrest, and would be responsible for the cost of any damage they caused.
  40. While waiting for the Sargent to arrive at my home, Minehan stated I could bring any documents with me that I might want to discuss during questioning. I packed a brief case with all of the defence briefs for the five allegations of breach made by CJC MEDIATOR’s neighbor and friends COMPLAINANT, and other associated documents.
  41. The Sargent arrived at my home so quickly I had only just finished gathering up the documents, and things I would take in my handbag, put on a jumper and shut down my computer. I believe I should have been entitled to reasonable time to do those things, and that I did not hinder or delay arrest in doing so.
  42. Once on the footpath, I took my phone out of my bag to take a photo of this waste of police resources, two cars on a Saturday night, over two emails sent two days prior.
  43. Minehan grabbed my hand with the phone in it, and refused to let go. I asked to be allowed to put the phone back into my hand bag. He then grabbed my bag as well, and Constable Mifsud grabbed the brief case I had in my other hand. Both officers started pulling my arms in different directions, jarring my spine repeatedly.
  44. The Sargent, who had been walking behind us, grabbed the end of my scarf, and pulled it tight around my neck. It broke my necklace, then both came off.
  45. I instinctively gripped my bags when the officers tried to take them. I felt like I was being bag snatched, and it didn’t occur to me that it was police who were doing it, and not to try to keep hold of my belongings.
  46. I relaxed when the necklace had come off, and asked if they would to let go of me so I could pick it up off the ground. Minehan refused, and the Sargent did that, putting both into my handbag. The list of my possessions confirms that both the necklace and scarf were in the handbag, before I arrived at the police station.
  47. Minehan then explained that I would not be allowed to have the bags on my person in the police car, nor in the cell. I let go of them, once that had been explained to me.
  48. They started to lead me to the police van, and I was walking calmly with them. Minehan and Mifsud both still had hold of me by each arm at shoulder level.
  49. They had given my bags to the Sargent, who took them in the police car.
  50. Minehan then started applying undue pressure to my left wrist, bending it hard, and appeared to be trying to break it.
  51. I told him a number of times that he was ‘hurting my wrists’, and asked him to ‘stop hurting my wrists’ several times. Finally I stared him in the eyes and said it in a deep and menacing voice. He finally let go of the pressure then.
  52. Once in the police van, Minehan went around the block first, and then the long way to the police station. We arrived at 7.40 as noted by both police and myself.
  53. The document given to me to sign upon release, acknowledging the contents of my bags, was created 7.38 pm. Proving that the Sargent had taken my bags and searched them before I arrived at the station. I was not informed that they would be searched, nor was that done within my sight.
  54. I was charged by Minehan at the station at 9.01 pm. He did not finger print me, or photograph me, but states that he did.
  55. I was released on bail at 10.55 pm, and forced to walk home.
  56. Sargent Stephen Bosch was the supervisor on duty during my time at the police station.
  57. Constable Minehan now reveals in his brief, that the ‘Sargent’ who attended my premises on the evening of 22 October 2016, was not a Sargent at all, and claims that it was an Senior Constable Quiring. Therefore, they had no authority to force me into custody that night.
  58. I will make application for a private prosecution against CJC MEDIATOR for this charge, and the other five false allegations of breach of an unlawfully gained and unserved ADVO. COMPLAINANT and Con Minehan will be named in that, as co-conspirators.
  59. The fact that COMPLAINANT provides the evidence for this charge, finally proves my allegations of collusion between her and CJC MEDIATOR. The fact that COMPLAINANT has tampered with that evidence, by printing it out in a way that it only shows the addresses of the sender and the receivers, without showing any of the complaint about police, again shows that COMPLAINANT has to deceive the court, to make any of her allegations appear to be valid.
  60. I will be lodging a new application for motion, asking for a change in venue, after making the above discovery just recently.
  61. Also, Magistrate Murray has committed perjury on the bench, on 12 December 2016, in an attempt to cover up for that same collusion between Bradley, COMPLAINANT and her XXXXXX COMPLAINANT 2. I was given the evidence of that while the applications for motion regarding CJC MEDIATOR and COMPLAINANT were still I progress. I believe it is ground to insist once again, that there is no chance of myself receiving a fair hearing at the Albury local court, due to CJC MEDIATOR being a regular employee, and enjoys a close working relationship with the Magistrates.


Fortunately for Magistrate Murray, number 61 went over onto one page on its own. So I simply deleted it, from what has been submitted to the court. I might leave it in place for the re-lodging of the document, after I have made a couple of changes to the brief.

Should be allowable, since the court can change decisions, and police can change all the facts, after hearings.


I had a thought today about the two emails they showed me at the station. I identified one as being to the Ombudsman and one the NSW Attorney General. But in putting in the emails for the evidence for defence, I see that they were both to the AG. Which means they have showed me a different one on the night, to what they actually charged me with. That should discount another of their false charges against me. However, I have all three to show as exhibits, in court, so the one to the Ombudsman will still be mentioned, and its contents.


Minehan p2 editMinehan p3 editMinehan p4

Turns out the evidence submitted to police for this charge, was not supplied to them by the complainant, but by someone else. Very questionable that. Especially since it had been tampered with, and deliberately omits information which is incriminating for Albury Police.

Another interesting point is, that in failing to submit the text of the complaint contained in the emails about Albury police, the arresting officer then fails to prove his allegations that I refer to court staff as ‘fucking wankers’, or even police as being cunstables.

He only proves that I forwarded two emails to the home email address of the court employee, who then forwarded them to her next door neighbour.


The police evidence against me, three email addresses. I won’t bother to post the second page of their evidence, it is identical to this one, apart from the time stamp of when it was sent. The diferences are on the second page, the one they don’t submit into evidence. Why? Because they outline unlawful actions by police, in relation to three of the charges bought against me, by CJC mediator’s co-conspirator.


Lying cunt po evidence 2 edit

Conspiracy to bring false allegations. I don’t know why the Department of Justice can’t see that is illegal, and criminal charges need to be bought against the complainants, not me.