My first port of call (or where I was directed to from the switchboard), was a very nice young woman called Kelly, working for the AFP Complaints Co-ordination Team. She was pleasant and professional, and took her time figuring out where to direct me. I think she may have been a bit overwhelmed when I bluntly said I was reporting Mick Keelty for potential corruption, but she remained very helpful and polite.
Anyway, I was then put through to an officer Scott (badge number 19859), who was a complete delight to talk to. He was respectful, listened well, and took my issues seriously. I directed him to these questions, and told him that my complaints against Mick Keelty related to both Section 2, and Section 11. Section 2 details the complete lack of police investigation re Schapelle's "Crime" in Australia, and section 11 details Mick Keelty's apparent lies to the Australian media, about Schapelle (apparent for the time being, until there is any other official explanation).
Scott agreed with me that if Schapelle had committed the crime she's accused of, then of course, she would also have committed a crime in Australia, as the drugs would have been supplied to her here. Scott also agreed when I said it would have been an organised crime connection, as you don't get 4.2 kg of marijuana randomly hanging around on street corners. Therefore, the complete failure of the Australian police to commence ANY kind of investigation into this aspect is, in my view, a corrupt act which is crying out for investigation. That was point 1 of my formal complaint against Mick Keelty.
Now to point 2, re Mick Keelty's apparent lies to the Australian media. I pointed out to Scott that my facts (in relation to the questions in section 11), were gleaned from Schapelle's book, which has since sold over 100,000 copies, and has been around for about 4 years. To my knowledge, Mick Keelty hasn't sued for libel yet - and I also said Kathryn Bonella (a professional journalist and author), wasn't likely to pepper her work with falsehood and leave herself open to legal action. Therefore, I could only assume the facts were correct. So Mick Keelty's apparent lies (in section 11), were point 2 of my complaint against him.
Scott did ask if I had all the details and dates of Keelty's statements to the media, and he was quite satisfied when I said that if he looked at the relevant questions (sec 11), he'd find everything he needed to know.
Anyway, that done with, I asked Scott what the next step was. He said the matter would be allocated a file/case number, and that he'd ring me back with it. Probably an hour later, Scott did just that. It's complaint number 4077 - and I'll be ringing the AFP everyday from here on in, to find out just how 4077 is progressing. Further, I'll also be blogging the results from here on in, until justice is done.