Corrective services / S 474.17/ Magistrate Lisa Stapleton
So I have just returned from the second visit to Burwood Correctional Services where a Ken Stevens is doing a report for the shonky Magistrate Lisa Stapelton who is trying to protect systemic corrupt conduct in Government departments.
Stevens commenced reading me a statement he prepared for Stapleton.
I stopped him on one sentence he had written and told him this was incorrect.
He became aggressive and told me I could not tell him what to put in his report.
I replied that I did not wish for him to put anything false in the report to Stapleton and that the in fact the sentence did not make sense.
I asked for a copy of the report . Again he was aggressive and told me it was the property of the court.
I tried to get him to clarify other matters to which he also become aggressive.
The
offending sentence that I first questioned him about was a statement
that he had made ......................" Fiona Brown said she is not
guilty of offensive language but only guilty of breaching the Act" Clearly this sentence does not make sense.
I
tried to bring up that I relied on Brett David Starkey V the Queen that
clearly states everything must be read in correct context and also Monis V the Queen. He said he was disinterested any legal terms as he did not understand them.
He appeared to be winding himself up into some frenzy. He said I was guilty.
I told him Stapleton had denied due process and it was a requirement to read my blogs in correct context. I told him if I said somebody had been " fucked over" by ITSA or AfSA it did not actually mean that ITSA or AfSA were having sex with each other or random people .
It appeared that Stevens thought he had the right to put what he liked in a report S
474.17 is objective according to the reasonable persons test and not
according to a magistrate who considers herself a reasonable person and
must coverup
and protect corrupt conduct in Government departments . According to
Brett David Starkey V the Queen the Fault Element must also be
objective.
Everything must be read in correct context ( Brett David Starkey V the Queen)
474.17 cannot be compared with the Summary Offenses Act as it is subjective and not objective.
George Alex ‘settles 6 million defamation claim in his favour but creditors won’t get a cent’
BUSINESS identity George Alex agreed to settle a $6 million defamation claim in his favour, a court has been told — but his creditors aren't entitled to a cent of it.
A witness told Mr Alex’s bankruptcy examination in the Federal Court the agreement followed a series of disputes between Mr Alex, murdered construction identity Joe Antoun and colourful businessman Jim Byrnes, Queensland hire firms boss Kevin McHugh and other business identities.
The tax office is trying to recover $1 million it claims it is owed in tax from Mr Alex. But bankruptcy trustees are barred from seizing money from defamation payments.
The extent and location of Mr Alex’s assets and business interests are being examined in the Federal Court.
Ned Cavric, who works at NSW Compensation Lawyers, told the court on Thursday the “defamation issue” came up as part of a “$12 million resolution” between the parties.
“To the best of my recollection there was (sic) several disputes between Antoun and McHugh interests, and there was disputes between Mr George Alex and Mr Byrnes and that was subject to a $12 million resolution,” he said.
Of that, $6.35 million was to go to Mr Alex and Mr Antoun was to receive $150,000, Mr Cavric told the court.
The parties drew up several draft deeds outlining the payments, the court heard.
Mr Cavric denied a question by the bankruptcy trustee’s barrister Peter Fary that there was “no mention of defamation” in the original draft of the agreement.
It is not known whether Mr Alex was paid the money.
A sum of $1.5 million was paid in to a trust account of law firm Colin Biggers & Paisley, Mr Fary told the court.
But the firm’s senior partner Chris Rumore told the court: “I never considered (Mr Alex) our client”. Mr Alex was bankrupted in 2011, after owing the tax office $64,100. The ATO then varied the amount to more than $1 million. A sequestration order was made and trustees were appointed to put Mr Alex’s affairs under the microscope. The examination has also sat in Victoria where evidence has been suppressed.
Antoun was shot dead as he answered the front door of his Strathfield home in December.
Two men unrelated to these proceedings have been charged over the shooting.
A settlement has been made over a Penshurst unit project in which Mr Alex’s sister Athina Alex held an interest, the court heard.
Ms Alex was one of a number of witnesses who were unable to appear in court because of illness or injury.
The court was told Ms Alex fell over outside court on “Monday or Tuesday”, aggravating an injury to her right knee and that her leg had “swollen up drastically”.
Registrar David Pringle then insisted Ms Alex give evidence to the court over the telephone from her home in Earlwood. Ms Alex told the court she met Mr Alex for coffee at a city cafe on Wednesday where they discussed a newspaper story about him.
Ms Alex denied Mr Fary’s question she was allowing her brother to control businesses by registering her as a director.
Another witness unable to attend was CAP Accounting accountant David Cassaniti.
On Thursday, Mr Pringle said he would issue an arrest warrant before the court was told Mr Cassaniti had undergone a “stomach operation” for gastric banding. He was experiencing “vomiting convulsions” and was “dry retching every so often”.
On Friday, Mr Alex’s wife, Nectaria Alex, was also struck down with ill-health and provided a medical certificate explaining she could not attend court for six weeks because of an ongoing medical condition.
Mr Pringle asked why the condition was brought up on the morning she was due to give evidence if it was ongoing.
A witness told the court Mr Alex was earning $80,000 a week from a Queensland business. He was also planning to buy a Burwood home for $3.6 million, he told the court.
.jpg)
