The Urgent Need to

Improve Australian Justice

An internet search under Australian Miscarriages of Justice reveals everyday people trying to help innocent, everyday people — in jail. Miscarriages Justice Fund Inc. put the figure at 7-10% mis-convicted, Civil Liberties Australia — 7% not guilty as charged. What proportion of the 7% are not guilty of anything?


What Went Wrong?

Could we become Sherlock Holmes for a moment? Northern Territory’s Eyre’s Rock campgrounds, 1980, a young mother raised an alarm – a dingo (her word) was carrying her baby away from inside their tent.

Thus began one of the more ignorant, destructive attacks by government and judicial bodies, on any young family in the history of Australia. The original coroner and one or two of the involved police did their job professionally and did not contribute to the loathsome crime against this family.

Why This Site?

The reason for this site originated earlier in the new millennium with trying to assist someone in a ruinous legal tangle, Queensland, Australia. See: King Neptune and the Mermaids….

It continued with low key research aimed at discovering how and why our justice system goes wrong.

It was brought up to date, as of 2021, with the author himself being processed through the legal machine! He put trust in Queensland Justice. To his consternation, every step he experienced in the legal process was effectively a crime scene!

The good news? Many of those responsible for justice gone wrong are good people who under proper leadership and conditions could shine on the world stage. There are ways to meet the challenges? Suggestions are respectfully proffered on this site.

What Can Be Done?

Failure at Law equals injustice against a fellow man.  Australia has a major crime source – its legal systems. Well programmed computers would perform much better in courtroom settings than do some legal operatives. 

Parliamentarians, through passing unjust or simply stupid laws, or by turning a blind eye to the failures, are accessory to the fact.  What to do?  At least we can employ free speech and publicize the crimes against fellow citizens?  …..

With miscarriages continuing to proliferate …. we believe the time has come to introduce more radical procedures …[or]… innocent people will continue to languish in jail because the appeal courts failed to acknowledge the serious errors ……


No advance in error identification …

DR. ROBERT MOLES LLB (Hons) Queens University, Belfast; top student of the year in 1978. PhD, University of Edinburgh, author and Law lecturer, Australian National University, Canberra and Flinders University, South Australia.

Australia and Miscarriages of Justice. Posted on-line 04/12/2013. Downloaded 5/05/2021,  “…….  all states and territories have demonstrated egregious error in dealing with criminal prosecutions and appeals. If such an error had occurred in the construction of a bridge or the assembly of an aeroplane or car, there would be an immediate recall or cessation of activities until the problem had been identified and resolved. In the case of criminal convictions and appeals, there appears to have been no advance in error identification and error correction systems over the last 30 years.” END MOLES’ QUOTE.

Posted on August 10, 2021

Cardinal Pell: evidence does prove his innocence – leading jurist

“… the evidence against Cardinal George Pell simply falls apart on inspection. … casts doubt on the judgement of the judges who didn’t see it. Like the jury, the two Appeal judges who voted to uphold the conviction also failed to act rationally, by implication.”

John Finnis AC QC
John Finnis AC QC

John Finnis AC QC is professor emeritus at Oxford University, having been Professor of Law and Legal Philosophy from 1989 to 2010.  He is a Fellow of the British Academy (Law and Philosophy sections). A barrister of Gray’s Inn, he practised from 1979 to 1995 and was appointed Queen’s Counsel [QC] (honoris causa) in 2017.  Originally from South Australia, he was made a Companion in the Order of Australia in 2019 ‘for eminent service to the law, and to education, to legal theory and philosophical enquiry, and as a leading jurist, academic and author’. END INTERNET EXTRACT.

Not quite 30 years ago, Queensland Labour parliamentarian Bill D’Arcy, was tried and found guilty of raping a schoolgirl at the school where he was teaching 34-odd years previously. D’Arcy, as innocent as Pell, unlike Pell, did not have the benefit of the public support of two Australian Prime Ministers.  D’Arcy himself had been ill at the time of his legal battles.  Friends of D’Arcy belatedly undertook research.  They found that D’Arcy had been transferred for roughly a year from the school where the offence was supposed to have occurred.  He was not at the school where the Prosecution said he was teaching.  As with Pell, the supposed evidence was provided by news media, elements of the taxpayer funded Australian Broadcasting Commission included(?)  The police and prosecution acted with all the rationality of dogs indiscriminately dragging down a sheep. No interest was shown, no alarm sounded, by any parliamentarian, police spokesman, or member of the judiciary. D’Arcy if he is yet with us stands legally guilty to this day.  All the guilt lies elsewhere.  Read more here.

The taxpayer funded Australian Broadcasting Commission Four Corner’s team was heavily implicated roughly a decade previous to the D’Arcy set-up in another witch-hunt.  The Queensland Fitzgerald Inquiry was a creation of the Conservatives who in trust handed their affairs to a member of the judiciary. They were to learn too late of prosecutors and judges with the rationality of dogs dragging down sheep. Geoff Muntz was an instance of the lawlessness.   In a situation where Labour parliamentarians without controversy and without going through proper channels had helped themselves to half a million dollars of taxpayer’s money — worth more then than now – he as a conservative was jailed and possibly financially ruined through nit-picking legalese involving five thousand dollars, all of which (to Muntz’s recollection) had been cleared through the relevant ethics procedures of his department! A lawyer in court requested the judge clarify travel expenses guidelines.  These were then of some interest because the Labour parliamentarians had been going on free family holidays without so much as signing off on anything – and without being prosecuted! — the judge more or less shrugged and suddenly decided the mystified jury was to make up its own mind.  Like Pell and D’Arcy – whatever is on the idiot box, whatever way you got out of bed this morning – that is how we do law here. Read more here.

Further backing Dr. Moles’ no improvement assessment: during 2018 – 2021, I was able as a convict to follow Australian legal process from police raid to High Court.  I was tried, magistrate only, no jury, found guilty on a technicality, magistrate on record owned I am safety conscious, appeal judge implied the same, no conviction (publicly) recorded, $500 fine. With government records as proof, I encountered illiteracy,  perversion of the course of justice, defiance of government, defiance of human rights, defiance of their own legal bodies.   Three Supreme Justices, presumably covering for the lawless behaviour of the Prosecution, on record, questioned an official, coded police file on their own  desks.  Quote “If the document is a true copy – there is no evidence it is ….”  I removed myself fast and went across to Police Headquarters.  These so-called justices were mafia. I obtained F.O.I. certification of the file – the file the justices had on their desks for a month prior to my appeal. These justices had in legal terms effectively tampered with a police document to cover for their mates.”   The Prosecution had committed a criminal offence by not presenting the file at my trial.  The file states there was no round in the chamber of a bolt action rifle, the  magistrate having found me guilty of a loaded rifle. Locked in a safe.  Worse for the Prosecution, the concealed file repetitively states in straight English that my manner, words and behaviour are those of a mentally troubled and deteriorating person. This solely on the word of the Officer in Charge of the case, uncorroborated, as the document itself states. If the audio of the Officers raid had been played in court, with the secret file meanwhile being in the magistrate’s hand to enable evaluation of the mental derangement claims, he would have figuratively thrown the officer out of the courtroom.

High Court justices Gordon and Steward, in 2021, found nothing legally improper in a police sergeant deciding to class a man whom he had never met nor investigated as mentally disturbed; who then travelled onto his farm, without recorded attempt at gaining permission to enter private property; positioned himself near the man’s house where he was accidentally discovered by the man’s dog; excused himself  by saying he would like to have a look at the (two, licensed, correctly stored) farm guns; and being greeted with innocent and open country hospitality, made off with same, later claiming in court he had undertaken a storage audit with the full approval of the owner. The sergeant then transcribed a message to head office somewhere, to the effect the man is dangerous and mentally disturbed. In large print, in his Brief of Evidence, wrote, “NIL legislated requirement for pre-arrangement”, spliced words into the man’s written Statement (which then mysteriously disappeared, all bar the supposed additional wording which was not in the original) and proceeded to splice a half-minute home-made radio play into the courtroom copy of the audio of his supposed audit. No attempt was made to pre-arrange an audit as all regulatory bodies stipulate, and if in fact he did make an attempt at telephoning, it was presumably to give him a better opportunity to inspect the premises in the absence of the owners. His written and spoken testimony proves he had been inside the house previous to the day of his raid.  His mental diagnosis of the property owner was translated to head office at or soon after the time of the raid, but was kept as a Police secret for something of the order of 15 months. (The lawyer for the Qld Department of Prosecutions then claimed he could not clearly see how the withheld document was secret!)  This documented proof of trespass, defamation and blatant forgery/evidence planting was on the desks not only of three justices of the Qld Supreme Court, but also of the two High Court justices. 

Here is the respect these legal operatives show our own High Court – the one before the illiterats invaded—and chewed up the existing paper: High Court of Australia   PLENTY v. DILLON 171 CLR 6357 March 1991(available on-line). MASON C.J., BRENNAN AND TOOHEY JJ.

The starting point is the judgment of Lord Camden L.C.J. in Entick v. Carrington (1765) 19 St Tr 1029, at p 1066:
“By the laws of England, every invasion of private property, be it ever so minute, is a trespass. No man can set his foot upon my ground without my licence, but he is liable to an action, though the damage be nothing … If he admits the fact, he is bound to shew by way of justification, that some positive law has empowered or excused him.” …… “‘The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail – its roof may shake – the wind may blow through it – the storm may enter – the rain may enter – but the King of England cannot enter – all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement.’ So be it – unless he has justification by law.” And in Halliday v. Nevill (1984) 155 CLR 1, Brennan J. said (at p 10): “The principle applies alike to officers of government and to private persons. A police officer who enters or remains on private property without the leave and licence of the person in possession or entitled to possession commits a trespass and acts outside the course of his duty unless his entering or remaining on the premises is authorized or excused by law.” END HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA 1991 EXTRACT.

So why not sue the crooks? Firstly, possibly no lawyer in Australia would have the intestine to do it, unless payed handsomely up front. We are talking half a million: Secondly, I suspect such procedures would require working through the Supreme Court of Queensland. Like asking police forces to take themselves to court, the legal operatives involved might dislike taking legal action against themselves. Since it is all on government record, however, it is safe to name the crooks …… .

We cannot trust Australian Law.   If we wish it done properly – as ever – do it ourselves.  And don’t try to pay for it. That’s where they know they’ve got you. But perhaps, unlike the site provider, you qualify for legal aid?  Guess who pays the legal aid personnel. The government that is prosecuting you.  And the Qld Government, for one, is so heavily in debt, it would qualify for legal aid twice over.

Upon sending the proof of incompetence to the Qld Chief Magistrate – like most legal operators, a gentleman and a scholar – he advised, ‘there is nothing I can do.’   Magistrates and judges of necessity to some extent must be given a free hand.  The only control, it would seem, is, a) their conscience, and, b) public opinion?  We hope they don’t watch the same idiot box as some jurors?

More documentation.