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!










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 –