Sunday, May 30, 2010

Schapelle Corby - Courier Mail makes malicious & false accusations

This is David Fagan, current editor of The Courier Mail. Here is a vicious article in that newspaper of Monday 31st May 2010, which calls Schapelle a "Drug Smuggler," and mocks both Schapelle's pain, and the pain of her Mother.

So here's the missive I've just sent David . . .


I'm referring to your article here about Schapelle Corby. You refer to her as a "Drug smuggler." When referring to any person, there are many ways you could choose to describe them, such as "Australian," "Former Gold Coast resident," or "Former beauty student." These are just random examples off the top of my head. You could also choose to use no adjectives re Schapelle at all. However, when you deliberately choose to use "Drug Smuggler," you are also deliberately choosing to hi-lite certain facets and alleged "Facts."

You are (in effect), telling your readers about Schapelle's "Conviction" in a way that informs them (by omission of key points), that she was found "Guilty" through the due process of law, as understood by most Australians. It's a natural assumption to make. This is not correct. Schapelle's conviction was not lawful under either Australian or Indonesian law. Both jurisdictions require the presumption of innocence, and "Proof" of the charges laid. You will find many of those key facts thoroughly explained in this Sydney Morning Herald article (March 5th 2005).

Therefore, I am asking your publication to either formally (and publicly), retract it's use of the term "Drug smuggler" in relation to Schapelle, or to run an extensive article which fully describes and outlines the illegal nature of her conviction.

You may also wish to mention that the very senior policeman who was running a major "Drugs operation" at Sydney Airport (exact same time and terminal pertinent to Schapelle), is now in prison, awaiting trial on conspiring to import $120 million worth of drugs into this country, AND that the NSW Crime Commission (who employed that very senior policeman in the role of "Assistant Commissioner"), sold huge amounts of cocaine to the Australian public, at a very large profit. You could also report on the serious allegations of Ray Cooper, former Head of Operations, AFP Internal investigations, plus report the current complaints, re AFP/Queensland Police corruption (concerning Schapelle), that are now formally lodged with ACLEI (more info on that here too), The Commonwealth Ombudsman and The Queensland Parliamentary Crime & Misconduct Committee.

I look forward to your response on this matter, and I'll call your office tomorrow to confirm receipt of this correspondence.

If there is no satisfactory outcome (which corrects the public record), I will be lodging a formal complaint with The Media Alliance, in regard to the journalist who wrote the article. It is quite clear (in the very first point of their Code of Ethics), that the points I've outlined above are legitimate. More about that here.

So in summary, please be in no doubt that if there is no satisfactory outcome on this formal complaint to you by the end of this week, further complaints will be lodged with The Media Alliance ASAP, and formally followed up here, for the World to view (1st Google page, 2nd link down).

And you may also wish to take into account that this blog is a great deal more than one individual's words on a screen. It is a building body of formal evidence than can (and will), be taken to appropriate international bodies, re gross and continuing breaches of Schapelle's human rights. Australian media complicity in the corruption cover-up will be part of that far reaching report, and will also put other Australian outlets in the dock of Global opinion too.

And one more point David, Schapelle WILL have babies, but it won't be in that filthy, corrupt hell-hole - it will be back home here, in Australia, where she belongs.

Regards, Kim

Addit to the above, Monday 31st May 2010

Rang David Fagan's office around 3pm, and spoke to his secretary, a very pleasant and helpful woman (thank you). She confirmed that David had received the communication above. She was wasn't sure who wrote the article of to-day that I'm complaining about, but thought it was either Jasmine Lill, or Josh Robertson. I rang both journalists around 3.15pm, to find out one way or another, but both phones went straight through to voicemail. I left my name, phone number and details of the specific info I'm chasing, and asked them to call me back.

Anyway here are the further questions I wanted to put to David, and I look forward to his formal response (I told his secretary I had further questions, and I thought it would be more straight forward to put them in writing - she agreed):

1. Will The Courier Mail be publishing a formal apology for referring to Schapelle as a "Drug smuggler"?

2. Will The Courier Mail be publishing information re the illegal nature of her conviction?

3. Will The Courier Mail be publishing information about the current complaints (re the lack of a formal Australian police investigation, into the Australian crimes closely connected to the allegations against Schapelle), that are currently before The Commonwealth Ombudsman, plus The Federal Integrity Commissioner Philip Moss and The Queensland Parliamentary Crime & Misconduct Committee?

4. Is The Courier Mail formally aware of any . . .

a. CCTV evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag?

b. Direct physical & forensic evidence from the Australian premises of Schapelle, that connects her to the drugs found in her bag?

c. Luggage weight evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag?

d. Phone and banking record evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag?

e. Finger print and human DNA evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag?

And further to the above, I also rang the Media Alliance, to speak to someone there re the process for formal complaints, relating to Point 1 of their Code of Ethics. No-one was available to speak to me (even informally), because all complaints are examined by an elected panel of 12 people, and have to be in writing. So asked who was on this panel, and the woman I was speaking to wasn't sure if she could tell me, because of "Privacy issues." She said she would investigate that further, and she would call me back, if I didn't call her back first. I said that was fine.

Addit to the above - Tuesday 1st June 2010

Rang David's office again to-day (around 12.30pm), to confirm that he has received the above questions. Got that confirmation very efficiently. Thank you. I then added that three formal complaints have gone into firstly, The Commonwealth Ombudsman, The Queensland Parliamentary Crime and Misconduct Committee and Philip Moss Federal Integrity Commissioner, re Australian police corruption surrounding the non-investigation of the export, production/cultivation and supply of $40,000 worth of marijuana - and did David wish to report on that breaking story? Because I reckon it's newsworthy. Anyway, I asked if those important details could be passed on to him, and I'd ring back this afternoon to confirm David's interest in doing that story, or otherwise. And if it's "Otherwise," then I think that "Otherwise" should be laid naked for the whole World to see.

Addit to the above - Tuesday 1st June 2010 (around 4pm)

Just had a phone call directly from David Fagan (asking me not to "Bother" his secretary again), no mention at all of any journalistic interest in correcting the public record re the blatant illegality of Schapelle's conviction - and when I asked David if he intended to report on the current complaints (documented above), re possible Australian police corruption related to their non-investigation of three Australian crimes (export, cultivation & supply of $40,000 worth of marijuana), he bluntly told me "No," he wouldn't be reporting on it, because it wasn't "Newsworthy."

So I could be rude and suggest, in the light of that, David obviously got his qualifications off the back of a cornflake packet, but I won't. Instead, I'll just plod along, and put in those formal complaints to The Media Alliance . . . and now, there's no need for me to "Bother" David's delightful secretary again (no worries), because I've got all the info I need. Thanks for taking the time David, very much appreciated, but when this hits the World stage, don't you think your public performance will look very, very grubby? Though come to think of it, that's never been a problem for Murdoch, has it?

Schapelle Corby & Useless, Toothless Dogs of Shame?

This is Professor John McMillan, the current Commonwealth Ombudsman. His organisation is empowered to take complaints about the Australian Federal Police, and to make appropriate recommendations as a result. However, Al Wilson, who's been dealing with John's organisation for some time re Schapelle's problems, is not very happy with the service, and he's expressed his problems in a song that's equal to the best of Bob Dylan.

So shall we try again John, and see how we go this time? I want to make a formal complaint to you about the Australian Federal Police, and their failure to act on a legitimate crime report (related to the allegations against Schapelle), or even reply to it. I also wish to formally complain about their neglect of basic procedures in relation to three Australian crimes associated with the allegations against Schapelle, e.g., export of $40,000 worth of marijuana though an Australian airport, cultivation/production of $40,000 worth of marijuana and supply of $40,000 worth of marijuana. Personally, I'm not sure if the latter two matters are strictly "Federal," but the Queensland Police Minister assures me that they are, and has yet to respond to my written request for further clarification.

This is the formal crime report that no-one in the Australian Federal Police would take from me (read the sorry saga, it's a disgrace). Currently (as per my very last phone call to the AFP), Tony Negus is formally refusing to respond to that document, and says it's Brendan O'Connor's responsibility - and Brendan O'Connor is hiding.

Now, the Queensland Crime & Misconduct Commission has already formally refused to investigate these matters, and this refusal is currently the subject of my formal complaint to The Queensland Parliamentary Crime & Misconduct Committee. I'm also hoping those formal actions will clarify (once and for all), which police force has jurisdiction of which crimes.

To continue, these 29 core questions go to the heart of the police competency (and integrity), re the original investigation (or non-investigation), of those three Australian crimes - so will you please seek out the answers on my behalf, and report/recommend as appropriate. Tony Negus and Brendan O'Connor are currently in receipt of those questions too, but they've completely failed to answer to them, or give me any indication of when (0r if), they will.

Further still, I have already reported these matters to ACLEI, but as I'm very unhappy with the current attitude of the officer I'm dealing with there, I've taken all the issues directly to ACLEI Chief Philip Moss (including the bluntly unhelpful stance of his employee). I've yet to hear back from Philip.

I assume there's nothing that formally precludes you from running an investigation along side ACLEI? That is (of course), if ACLEI agree to an investigation. If they don't, my current complaints to you will broaden to include them as well.

And to sum up, it's beyond dispute that Schapelle's human rights were (and continue to be), severely breached - and all of this official correspondence is an increasingly thick dossier that can (and will be), presented to appropriate international bodies. It may be advisable to bear that in mind when replying.

I'll phone you ASAP, to get some initial feedback and information on this complaint.

Regards, Kim

Addit to the above, Monday 31st May 2010

Rang the Ombudsman around 1.47pm, and spoke to "Luke." He was extremely polite, professional and conscientious - and formally confirmed that the communication above was received. He then spent some considerable time with me, while I explained and confirmed the details (at his request). Luke also conferred with his supervisor during our call. He also gave me a reference number for my complaint, 2010 - 108 419. He said that I would receive follow-up from the Ombudsman within 7 to 10 working days, via email (as I told him, when he asked, that it would be the best method). Therefore, if I've heard nothing back by close of business on Tuesday 15th June 2010, I'll get in touch again (the next morning).

Addit to the above, Thursday 17th June 2010

Rang the Ombudsman around 3.55 pm, and spoke to Margot. She said a letter had been sent to me on the 15th June 2010, which I haven't received as yet. I'll post it here as soon as I get it.

Saturday, May 29, 2010

Schapelle Corby - Of White Elephants Riding the Gravy Train . . .

Melissa Parke MP is Chair of The Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity. Only problem is, this quango is as toothless (and as useless), as a geriatric poodle. These guys are laughing all the way to the bank . . . Have you ever interviewed Ray Cooper, former Head of Operations for the AFP's Internal Investigations Melissa? No? I guess you wouldn't want to upset the apple cart and do that, would you? Too close to the bone. You might die of natural causes, or less dramatically, block your career path.

Why an earth bother with an "Integrity" committee that's explicitly forbidden from investigating corruption? Quote . . .
  1. Subsection (1) does not authorise the Committee:
    1. to investigate a corruption issue or an ACLEI corruption issue; or
    2. to reconsider the Integrity Commissioner’s decisions or recommendations in relation to a particular corruption issue or ACLEI corruption issue; or
    3. to reconsider a special investigator’s decisions or recommendations in relation to an ACLEI corruption issue.
Who drafted that? Who explicitly forbade our elected representatives from doing the job every normal and reasonable person would assume they do? It must have been these guys . . . and the strident words ("Organised Crime," near the bottom of p 161), of Tony Fitzgerald, re infiltration of the establishment, now come back to haunt us.

Dear Kim,

Thank you for your email. I am the Chair of the Parliamentary Joint Standing Committee on ACLEI. The Committee has a relatively narrowly prescribed role as a parliamentary body that looks to review and support the structures, resources, jurisdiction, and outcomes of ACLEI.

The ACLEI Committee itself does not have investigative powers, and it is neither possible nor appropriate for me to address the questions you pose.

As you would be aware, there are clear avenues (through ACLEI and other agencies) for raising issues of corruption, and I encourage you to bring your concerns to the appropriate agencies on that basis.

I have met with and assisted WA supporters of Shapelle Corby on more than one occasion, and I understand their distress. I continue to support the effort to reach a prisoner exchange program with Indonesia which might in time allow Australian prisoners in Indonesia to serve their time here in Australia, and vice versa.

Kind regards,

Melissa Parke

And Yep, I guess Melissa's "Narrowly prescribed role" suits her quite nicely, lots of kudos and cash, with zero responsibility for fighting corruption. Tony, your scorching words of less than three months ago are right on the mark.

And Melissa, while we're here, can you please tell me why you think Schapelle should be a "Prisoner" in this country? And that's not a rhetorical question, I'm looking for a formal response. I'll phone your office to confirm receipt of this missive, and get an estimate of how long it will take you to reply. I'm looking for . . .

1. CCTV evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag.

2. Direct physical & forensic evidence from the Australian premises of Schapelle, that connects her to the drugs found in her bag.

3. Luggage weight evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag.

4. Phone and banking record evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag.

5. Finger print and human DNA evidence that connects Schapelle to the drugs found in her bag.

Because, Melissa, these very reasonable standards of evidence, especially in the light of these very high level and public accusations, and this very well known corrupt activity at Sydney Airport, would be absolutely basic to any safe conviction in an Australian court.

So Melissa, I very much look forward to receipt of that evidence from you, and/or an explanation if it's "Missing."

And again, please take note that Schapelle's human rights were severely breached, and this issues will be taken directly into the International arena if necessary. Please frame your requested reply with that in mind.

Addit to the above Monday 31st May 2010

I rang Melissa's office (around 1.06pm), and spoke to a gentleman who refused to tell me his name, or his formal position. However, he did formally confirm that the above communication/questions had been received by Melissa. But when I asked for an estimate re an approximate time frame for a reply he said (direct verbatim quote), "You're not in a position to require a further response from anyone." So when I said did that mean I could formally say I was unable to get a reply from Melissa, he responded "That's fine. Goodbye."

However, due to the extreme seriousness of the above issues, I am still expecting a reply from Melissa - and as a tax payer who helps fund her wages, I'm sorry sweetheart, but yes, I am "In a position" to require a reasonable response to reasonable questions. Therefore, if I hear nothing back within the next 4 weeks, I'll call Melissa's office again, and they can either confirm that arrogant silence (once more), or decide to carry out their public responsibilities.

Friday, May 28, 2010

Schapelle Corby - "Corruption at the highest level" Australian news report, Saturday 29th May 2010

Article HERE

Was Robert McJannett set up, and did he plead "Guilty" to avoid Schapelle's fate?

Schapelle Corby - Handing The-Powers-That-Be more than enough rope . . .

This is their role . . . the Committee . . .
  • receives and considers complaints against the CMC;
  • reviews CMC guidelines and makes suggestions for improvement of CMC practices;
  • reviews CMC reports including its annual report and research reports;
  • requests reports from the CMC on matters which have come to the committee’s attention, through the media or by other means; and
  • deals with ad hoc issues concerning the CMC as they arise.
In addition, the committee holds regular meetings with the CMC.

Addit Tuesday 1st June 2010 - Now I've recently put in formal complaint to all these people - but I just had a phone call from this Government department, telling me that if I publish details of this complaint (even my own words), I could be prosecuted by the Queensland Government, for "Contempt of the Queensland Parliament."

Maybe they should make that clear on their site, because other than psychic ability, or a deeply held desire (and the time), to read volumes of law, there's no way any ordinary member of the public would know that. So I'll formally ask them to make it prominent, clear and unmistakeable, that's if they're not too embarrassed to be completely up front about their legislated ability to hide things from us.

So now, I can't tell you, the public, what I wrote. I wonder when we will ever be able to prosecute them for Contempt of the People? Tony Fitzgerald, you were sooooo right.

But luckily, should the Committee agree, they can give me "Permission" to publish correspondence. So I'm writing to them to-day, to formally "Ask" for permission. I let you know if I get it . . .

Schapelle Corby - Federal Corruption Chief, A Movie Hero, or Movie Villain?


Dear Philip,

Very recently I sent "John," in your "Operations Area," this letter, about the Schapelle Corby issues. He's always refused to tell me his surname. I followed that missive up with a phone call the next day.

I wanted the name of "John's" supervisor, plus some immediate (and basic), information re the assessing officer in this case, such as their background, experience and any potential conflict of interest - plus copies of your formal policies and procedures, re the assessment process.

However, "John" sniggered when I formally requested these things, and refused to give me the name of his senior officer, or when I could expect to get that initial info.

Could you please look into this for me. I need the name of "John's" senior officer, so I can liaise with them, plus that simple info, ASAP.

Further, could you please personally confirm you've received these 29 core questions. I've also forwarded them to Tony Negus and Brendan O'Connor (amongst others), and asked for direct answers.

If Tony and Brendan fail to give direct answers, could you please follow this up, and ensure the veil is lifted on this ongoing mystery, e.g. the fate of the investigation into the Australian source of the drugs which were (allegedly), smuggled by Schapelle. Three crimes were committed within Australia, export of $40,000 worth of marijuana, plus cultivation/production and supply of $40,000 worth of marijuana. Who committed those crimes?

Obviously, I don't have the formal power to demand answers (if they fail to respond). That ability rests with you.

I'm sure you (like most other reasonable people), can see the centrality of those questions. If you can't, I guess that would seriously call your abilities into doubt.

I'll phone your office soon, to verbally confirm you've received this formal correspondence, and get an indication/estimate of when you will get back to me.

As you probably know by now, this ongoing dialogue with Government can (and will), be taken into the International arena if necessary. These are more than mere words, it's a building dossier of evidence.

And of course, it's also an invaluable resource for a screenplay of this epic story. Personally, I've already nominated Bernard Hill for Mick Keelty's role. So Philip, while we're on the subject, who do you reckon should play you on the silver screen? Any opinion?

Regards, Kim

Addit to the above, Monday 31st May 2010

Just rang ACLEI, and asked to speak to Philip Moss (re the above). I was told he was "In a meeting," and not available. I asked what time he would be free, but they were uncertain. I gave ACLEI my home phone number, and asked if Philip could return my call. I said that if I hadn't heard back by close of business, I'd ring again by about 4pm to-day.

Addit (same day, Monday 31st May 2010), at 5.05 pm

Well, I've been on the phone quite a bit to-day, so I'm not sure if ACLEI tried to call me back (they may have), but I managed to get back to them myself around 4.30pm. I was treated with the utmost courtesy, and put straight through to Steve, who said he was the Executive Director there. We chatted for a while, and he was very pleasant and professional (thank you). He said that I would be getting a formal response from ACLEI, probably by tomorrow, acknowledging my concerns.

After that, he said it was difficult to estimate the length of the assessment process, which includes formally deciding if these matters are within their jurisdiction. I chipped in at that point and said I felt the crime of "Exporting" $40,000 worth of marijuana through an Australian airport was (and is), a "Federal" crime, but the crimes of "Cultivation/production" and "Supply" could be a Queensland Police matter. I assumed that Steve, with his expert knowledge and background, would be able to sort that one out.

I also acknowledged Steve's difficulties when he said that obviously, internal investigators are not the most popular of people, and have to keep their methods and plans under wraps (for obvious reasons).

I pointed out that the core of my concerns was not any special "Inside information" that I have, because I don't have any. The core of my concerns was getting answers to these 29 core questions, which I'm not empowered to ask (and get answers), but which he is empowered to ask, and demand answers.

The biggest example I gave was the complete, simultaneous disappearance of all frames of CCTV (that could possibly relate to Schapelle and/or her luggage), from three Australian airports. Every airport was a formal crime scene, relating to the export of $40,000 worth of marijuana, and as such, every frame of relevant CCTV should have been expertly preserved by the AFP immediately. Why didn't they do it? And why did NO frame ever come to light?

I also suggested that Steve should interview Ray Cooper.

Anyway, we parted on a friendly note. I said that if I hadn't heard anything within 4 weeks, I'd get back to him. He said that would be fine.

Addit (same day, Monday 31st May 2010), at 9pm

Whilst Steve, Executive Director at ACLEI, is perfectly correct to say that the very nature of their investigations means they have to be highly confidential, it's imperative for this confidentiality to be balanced with transparency and accountability. A practical way to achieve this would be to maintain appropriate (and needed), confidentiality during the investigations, but once they're finalised, produce a public availably report based the answers to these 29 core questions.

Obviously, the high profile nature of these matters puts the outcome of this inquiry very firmly in the "Public interest" basket.