R v. Philip Bruce Heywood, Qld grazier, provider, amongst other publications, of these case studies.

Judges McMurdo, Mullins, J.A Fraser, J.A Fraser presiding, Qld Supreme Court of Appeal, 16th October 2020.

Appeal dismissed.

Succinct Grounds of appeal:

  1. The evidence was changed to the near diametric opposite without warning in magistrate’s court, allowing no time to prepare a defence. (The trial was magistrate only, no jury).
  2. The Prosecution failed to present in court an official police document boasting, amongst other assertions: “Heywood’s demeanour, behaviour and comments are such that cause concern that he is suffering from a mental health condition.” The document proves the implicated police sergeant delusional. Note, the police officer taking the sergeant’s message qualifies the script – viz, “Heywood is not the subject of other intelligence relating to his reported declining mental health condition”. No other reports of Heywood’s mental deterioration exist. Anywhere. Moreover, the document contains telling evidence of misconduct by the sergeant – nothing less than trespass, audio forgery, and evidence planting. It concurrently renders fictional the (supposedly criminal!) neglect of which the defendant was found guilty – leaving a round in the firing chamber of a bolt action rifle. Quote: “There was no round in the chamber.” Had the document been presented by the Prosecution in court, the repeated assertions of something which is best categorized as imaginary lunacy, would presumably have terminated proceedings. The sergeant was the chief witness. This official police file was kept secret whilst being utilized by some police. It happened to surface in the defendant’s inbox months after the magistrate’s trial and subsequent failed District Court Appeal. Its coding: QI1800372376 Author, 4021703 Hilton, S., Task Code, T1800891973 – entry times attached, an obvious QPS “Occurrence” file.

J.A. Fraser’s response:

Totally ignore anything to do with Law and lawful process i.e., ignore the first grounds entirely.

Attack the credibility of the supposed secret file. In sceptical yet scholarly manner give the verdict of the highest legal body in Queensland – embodied in himself and the two sidekicks – the file might not be genuine – not admissible evidence. Oh, he did not employ those exact words. Exactly, : “If the document is a true copy – there is no evidence it is …”

As though a Queensland grazier would be faking such items. Describing himself as near lunatic.

If he did not intend that which he implied – it is not evidence – then why dismiss the file’s contents in deciding the verdict? Motive? Either psychologic antipathy against innocent people, or he is covering for the law breaking D.P.P. and/or the magistrate. Concealing files such as these from trials is a prosecutable offence. Are we awake? He removed, by pulling rank, not law, a pivotal item from the trial. The very trial he was conducting. It was in front of him – literally. He had months to verify the obvious. After the rejected appeal, I did so myself. QPS Right to Information, RTI32638, 1/02/021, Acting Sergeant A. Pugh: “The document you emailed to our office as an attachment on 22 December 2020 is an accurate copy of the supplementary report dated 02/03/2018 and the supplementary report dated 02/03/2018 at 16:11 contained under QI1800372376 does exist in the QPS.”

J.A.Fraser has perjured himself, the Supreme Court, and the Police. He has trashed Qld Justice from top to bottom. If he stands, everything of legal veracity around him falls. Technically – of much less significance than the high handed destruction of the methods of policing and prosecution – technically, he has destroyed evidence by refusing its admission to a court proceedings. He has perverted the course of justice. Not through error, but after deliberation. If J.A. Fraser, McMurdo, and Mullins claim they can not recognize a standard police occurrence file, they are either perjurors or should be obliged to undertake professional development – refresher courses. Then be placed on probation. Or give them all enough intelligent researchers and backup to see if headstrain and stress is the problem? END E-MAIL to parliamentarians, etc..