Why Julian Grill should not apologise

Greens Giz Watson thinks Julian Grill is innocent

What caught the Desert Rat’s eye recently was Greens MLC Giz Watson’s speech in Hansard, where she concedes in the debate (4 December 2007) of the Privileges Committee, that she thinks the argument put forward by Julian Grill’s lawyers, is correct.

Giz Watson then says she won’t oppose the recommendation (No 20) before the House; that Julian Grill should apologise to the House. Presumably Giz Watson would have abstained if there was a division - which there was not, because it was decided on the voices.

It has taken some time for the Desert Rat to get his pointy snout and whiskers into the entrails of this issue and make some sense of the Legislative Council Committee's Report and findings against Julian Grill.

The quote in the report that gives rise to the finding that Grill leaked information, is clearly wrong and dangerously damaging to Julian Grill. The Desert Rat wonders why the Committee took the quite unprecedented step of bringing in Philip Urquhart as the Counsel Assisting the Committee (previously he was Counsel Assisting the Corruption and Crime Commission) to run the second half of this inquiry. There have been questions asked by Senior Counsel as to whether such a step was legal.

The Desert Rat can clearly see, as can Hon Giz Watson, that what is quoted in the Finding of the Committee Report (Rec. 20) is not the same as the evidence given by Brian Burke. Mr Burke never said “that Mr Grill had advised him of the fact that those documents had been requested by the Committee”

The Desert Rat is not suggesting anything nefarious, but just an honest misinterpretation made by the Committee. This type of situation is why those witnesses like Mr Grill, should have the right to know when they are being accused and have the matter tried before a competent court or tribunal. Such mistakes can then be corrected by an impartial body.

The Desert Rat would hope that Philip Urquhart was not involved in writing that part of the report given the shoddy reports recently written by the CCC officers - such as the phoney and incompetent findings against Paul Frewer, Dr Wally Cox and now Dr Mike Allen in the Smith Beach Inquiry.

Whatever the case, it is disappointing that Giz Watson did not take her belief in Julian Grill’s innocence further than she did and call a division. Then the issue would have been out in the open and other members of the Legislative Council would have to properly debate the issue.

It is not surprising that Julian Grill’s lawyers advised him not to apologise to the Legislative Council Committee.

Lame Duck and Public Joke - the CCC Cabal

CCC lightweight Len Roberts-Smith takes on Malcolm McCusker QC

When reading of the tiff between Parliamentary Inspector Malcolm McCusker QC and Corruption and Crime Commission Commissioner Len Robert-Smith in today’s The West Australian, the Desert Rat is reminded of the old saying:

“When you can’t argue the facts, argue the law!”

This is precisely what doddering Dad’s Army Chief Major-General Roberts - Smith has done.

Roberts - Smith accuses McCusker QC, not of being wrong, but acting outside his powers, given to him by the CCC Act. Roberts-Smith should have the courage and character to apologie on behalf of the CCC to all involved in the Smith's Beach Star Chamber hearings - even though it underlines how stupid they have been.

Roberts-Smith conveniently thinks that McCusker should or does not have the power to review CCC evidence. So he argues the law because he can’t argue facts which show the CCC incompetence. Roberts-Smith does not want to be checked by the Parliamentary Commissioner - it's too embarrassing!

The CCC does not deny or argue that it got the Frewer case unbelievably, badly wrong. They arrogantly have their collective heads in the sand.

The CCC, Major General Lenny Roberts-Smith, Brigadier Mike “Children Overboard” Silverstone and Comrade McGinty have refused to apologise (McGinty never admits any mistakes – on “principle”?) to any of the public servants Paul Frewer, Dr Wally Cox or Mike Allen who the CCC has defamed.

Paul Murray points out in his excellent column in today’s The West Australian, that the CCC investigators listened to the Planning Committee meeting tapes and knew, but did not disclose to Stephen Hall SC, the Special Council doing the CCC interrogating of witnesses during the Smith’s Beach Inquiry; that the tape of the Planning Committee meeting revealed Paul Frewer had made proper disclosures.

Stephen Hall SC must be feeling very soiled and used by the CCC, particularly the CCC investigators. The Desert Rat wonders how many of the others supposedly smart SC’s have been deliberately lied to, or have had material evidence withheld from them by what seems to be corrupt or incredibly incompetent officers. The latter should be investigated by the CCC. Someone needs to pull the full-flush button and sack them or send them back to the sewers.

Why would any lawyer continue to work for the CCC – the money can’t be that good?

How long will the perpetrators of this amateurish, incompetent and destructive witch hunt remain in "a state of denial"?

The "Silence of the Lambs"

Where is the ALP Backbench?

The Desert Rat compliments ALP backbencher Ben Wyatt MLA for his public statement backing The West Australian, the Law Society and the Bar Association's call for contempt of parliament charges to be heard in the Supreme Court.

This follows his recent call for the Carpenter Government to immediately stop using the death traps (commonly known as prisoner transport vehicles) to transport (mainly Aboriginal) prisoners from remote areas over long distances in extremely hot conditions without water and adequate stops.

Wyatt's public comment on the death of Aboriginal Elder Ian Ward earned him a rebuke from lightweight government enforcer Kieran Murphy who the Desert Rat thinks should have been charged under Section 55 of the Criminal Code for threatening a Member of Parliament. The Corruption and Crime Commission will demonstrate its ethical bankruptcy and grovelling fealty to their masters by not taking any action.

Where are the other backbench members of the Australian Labor Party? The public has not heard a peep out of them although Grumpy Jack would suggest a few sexual squeals have been heard in the corridors of power. Forget the speak easy good life of the spiritually bankrupt, the Desert Rat would like to hear them speak-up and speak-out occasionally.

The truth is that they are all shit-scared of their pre-selections and those who control the numbers – particularly the self-appointed Emperor of Western Australia. Hence the eerie silence of these apologies for Labor politicians.

The silence of the lambs is eerie as even those who will get the mutton chop such a Sheila Mills MLC still think they will get a reprieve as they are being led away like lambs to the slaughter - if they keep quiet.

The Labor Party is now a shadow of itself. The internal tensions which were often the strength, are smothered. There is no oxygen in the Australian Labor Party. It is led by a cut-lunch politician Alan Carpenter who has no history or understanding of the ethos of the party and the Socialist Left have complete hegemony and Jim McGinty controls the Socialist Left.

The ALP backbenchers (Wyatt excepted) hear no evil, see no evil and speak no evil. Are they all on Prozac?

Why did Commissioner Kevin Hammond resign from the CCC early?

Was Hamond disillusioned by the CCC Process?

Corruption and Crime Commission Commissioner, Kevin Hammond announced his resignation in November 2006 and finished-up almost a year ago at the end of March 2007.

He said his decision was based solely on the fact that he would turn 71 a month after his resignation became effective.

The Desert Rat and many others think it very unusual that Judge Hammond resigned after only three years of a five year term, at the end of a public hearing; but before the report was written. On the face of that, it needs a better explanation than turning 71.

Judge Hammond resigned at the end of the hearing into the Smith’s Beach Development, but strangely, before the report on Smith’s Beach was written. Judge Hammond was the only person who heard all the evidence, he was the person who observed the body language, the verbal intonation and nuance of the evidence given by those who were interrogated. These observations are extremely important when judging if a witness is truthful.

This vital part of the evidence is not available in a transcript of the interrogation. This information is extremely important in making sensitive judgments, as the “victims” have no right to cross examine the witnesses, hostile or otherwise, no rules of evidence apply and there is no forewarning of the matters to be examined. In the case of Burke and Grill, they as witnesses did not have access to their files, records and computers for reference as they had been seized by the CCC.

Strangely, Judge Hammond left the writing of the Smith’s Beach Report to his Deputy Commissioners, neither of whom the Desert Rat understands, had heard all the evidence of the interrogation in the Commission hearings. This fatal inadequacy was dismissed by one Special Council as unimportant, as they had access to the transcripts.

It is highly probable that one or both of Christopher Shanahan SC and Neil McKerracher SC were involved and responsible for writing the report - which has now been shown to be grossly inaccurate, reflecting poorly on the competence of the CCC. Neither of these two supposedly distinguished lawyers / barristers have defended the report, or apologised or belatedly admitted having involvement in the report, let alone put up their hand for writing it.

Back to the resignation of Judge Hammond whom the Desert Rat once held in high regard. The Desert Rat is not aware of any judge who has heard a case and not written the report or judgment. The Desert Rat also knows good lawyers and judges fiercely defend the right of natural justice being afforded to all people.

It is highly unusual for Judge Hammond not to have written the report with his army of 150 staff, including special councils, lawyers, barristers, journalists, ex-police officers, etc. All he had to do was oversee the report and edit it.

The Desert Rat thinks that Judge Hammond may have jumped ship early because he:

• could see no criminal or corrupt behaviour or misconduct by Burke and Grill (a later finding in the Smith's Beach Report)

• could see the reckless damage that had been done to peoples’ reputations, businesses, careers, livelihoods and health for no public interest benefit

• could see the inquiry was heading nowhere, drowned in salacious publicity by a heady media circus

• could see there was no prospect of Grill and Burke getting a fair hearing or even a semblance of natural justice

• may have been aware of some “inappropriate behaviour” by CCC staff in the conduct of the investigation. Hammond may have hinted at this in a farewell speech when he said the greatest threat to the CCC was for the Commission “to breach those public sector standards that it holds others to account for.

The Desert Rat asks “Was there more to Judge Hammond’s resignation than just turning 71 - was he disillusioned by the CCC process?”

Carpenter Government involvement in new "Dirt File"

Carpenter Government’s “Dirt File” on “The West” Editor Paul Armstrong - Exposed

As if politics could get any lower and dirtier, the Desert Rat is surprised by the new depths being plumbed by the sanctimonious but spiritually bankrupt cabal known as the Carpenter Government.

The target of a "Dirt File" is Paul Armstrong the independent minded editor of The West Australian. Jim McGinty has black-banned The West’s journalists from prior knowledge of media conferences and is unimpressed by Armstrong’s inability to be sycophantic to the self-appointed Emperor of Western Australia.

What is gallingly grubby is that the "Dirt File" was sent to Armstrong's competitor The Australian. John Lyons a senior journalist was the recipient. The Australian had taken a very strong anti-Grill and Burke stance in its copy and editorials and the Sydney based John Lyons recently visited Perth to interview Julian Grill. This resulted in well written but not-so flattering article in The Australian.

It is interesting that John Lyons was sent across as Amanda O’Brien the Oz’s Perth based journalist who was Jim McGinty’s Chief Media Officer was really getting stuck into Burke and Grill in her articles, giving generally McGinty a good press and playing down anything critical of McGinty and the Corruption (of Truth) and Crime Commission shenanigans.

The Carpenter Government thought it had a captive admirer in The Australian but to John Lyons credit he has blown the whistle on the “Dirt File”.

It is reminiscent of the email received by the Editor of Perth based WA Business News, claiming and warning him that Joe Poprzeczny was a friend of Burke and Grill - presumably because he wrote an article drawing the paralel between the CCC witch hunt of Burke and Grill to the McCarthyism in the USA. Poprzeczny, in his column in WA Business News, blew the whistle three weeks ago on this crude bit of surreptitious subversion, an attempt to silence him.

The Desert Rat has a very good idea who is the author. He has a clear conflict of interest, he is a failed journalist, and is of the Socialist Left and has attacked Burke and Grill before . He is probably one of the 643 media hacks on the Carpenter Government’s spin payroll. The Desert Rat is checking this out.

The Desert Rat can only conclude that this “Dirt File” is part of the Carpenter Government’s arsenal to control the media and also “get Burke and Grill at any cost” campaign?

Alan Carpenter and Jim McGinty were very quick to duck for cover when asked by the media about their involvement.

Year of the Rat

McGinty misses out

The Desert Rat is celebrating the start of the Year of the Rat. Unfortunately for Jim McGinty he was born just after the year of the Rat in 1949 so has missed out on those wonderful qualities possessed by those born in the Year of the Rat. With the start of the Year of the (Desert) Rat, Chinese have been forming queues across the country to buy the solid gold rodents pictured.

A Rat Year is a time of hard work, activity, and renewal. People born in an Earth Rat Year are said to be logical realists, shrewd, charming, ambitious, and inventive.

In Chinese, the Rat is respected and considered a courageous, enterprising person. People born in the Year of Rat are clever and bright, sociable and family-minded. They have broad interests and strong ability in adapting to the environment and able to react adequately to any changes.

They are gifted in many ways and have an easy going manner. They are active and pleasant, tactful and fantastic, and are able to grasp opportunities. They seem to have interests in everything and hope to participate in doing it and usually do it very well. Well Jim blame your normal parent, you just missed out - by a rat's whisker!

McGinty, Carpenter and the Corruption (of truth) and Crime Commission should remember the old desert saying:

"Fate is not an eagle, it creeps like a rat."

Grylls Nationals Prostitute Themselves for Preferences?

McGinty's Prostitution Act - modelled on the NZ Act?

News today from the bush that new National MLC Wendy Duncan will support McGinty's Prostitution Bill. Nationals had previous opposed the legislation.

The Desert Rat smells a vote preference deal in the wind. The Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC) should investigate. It is a lay down misere that this is a bribe for ALP preference. All this political horsetrading is how politics functions unless you want to work through lugubrious and incompetent institutions such as the CCC. If Burke and Grill were involved in this just as they were in the previously unresolved settlement of the Finance Brokers scandal, the CCC would be deliriously swarming like wasps.

Most legislation of this type exacerbates the problem, as behaviour shifts or changes to accommodate and exploit new laws.

New Zealand's new prostitution laws are an example.

Mamatere the founder of a sex-worker support group says that older girls in Auckland are going home hungry and forced to live off Salvation Army food parcels.

She says in an article in a New Zealand newspaper that the number of underage prostitutes is rising because of the Prostitution Reform Act. "The act has taken police resources off the street and has therefore sent the message to pimps and gangs that there are opportunities to get away with things," she says.

Underage prostitutes don’t dress up in high-heels, fishnet stockings and miniskirts, she says. The girls wear their normal clothing but punters know they are working because they frequent red-light areas after midnight.

The Desert Rat highlighted here that McGinty's had an obsession with legislation - as well as Burke.

Can CCC CEO Silverstone be believed?

Cable issued by HMAS Adelaide : October 10

It's difficult to believe CCC CEO Brigadier Silverstone's story of events in the "Children Overboard" scandal.

Brigadier Silverstone is central to the disputed evidence which changed the course of history in Australia that essentially gave John Howard an extra term in Government.

Excluding exculpatory evidence, selective quoting of evidence and not having the right to cross-examine your accusers puts the accused at a great disadvantage - all techniques (and powers) exploited by the CCC. Here is an excerpt from the Senate Report - to make the point!

Initial report

3.52 It is uncontroversial that the original report that a child had been thrown overboard was conveyed by Brigadier Silverstone to Air Vice Marshal Alan Titheridge, Head, Strategic Command Division and to Rear Admiral Geoffrey Smith, Maritime Commander, on the morning of 7 October 2001.[198] Brigadier Silverstone made this report, believing himself to be passing on information that he had just been told in a telephone conversation with Commander Banks.
3.53 There is, however, disagreement between Commander Banks and Brigadier Silverstone about a number of aspects of their telephone conversation, including whether Commander Banks ever said that a child had been thrown overboard.
3.54 According to Brigadier Silverstone, he spoke with Commander Banks at 7.20am Darwin (‘India-Kilo’) time on 7 October 2001. The time difference between Darwin and the Adelaide was then two and half hours, meaning that, on Brigadier Silverstone’s account, the time on the Adelaide (‘Golf’ time) would have been 4.50am. The conversation lasted for less than five minutes[199] and conveyed to him the following information:
the vessel had disabled its steering, and was dead in the water 7-8 nautical miles south;
there was a threat of mass exodus;
there were men in the water and a child thrown over the side, 5,6 or 7 years of age;
some had discarded their life jackets, but to the best of CO Adelaide’s knowledge everyone had been recovered.[200]
3.55 Brigadier Silverstone told the Committee that both his contemporaneous notes and his recollection of the conversation confirm this account.
3.56 The contention between Brigadier Silverstone and Commander Banks with regard to their recollections of this conversation is focused on two matters. They are, first, the time at which the conversation took place and, second, whether Commander Banks said that a child had been thrown over the side.

Time of telephone conversation

3.57 In relation to the first issue, the time of 0720 (7.20am) is noted at the top of Brigadier Silverstone’s diary notes of the conversation. However, the Brigadier informed the Committee that he had only inserted that notation of the time three to four days after the conversation, ‘when it became apparent that this was the subject of some interest’.

[201] Questioned as to how he could be confident that that was the correct time, Brigadier Silverstone said:
I had a requirement to pass the latest information to Air Vice Marshal Titheridge by 0730 Darwin time that morning and I had previously arranged with CO Adelaide to talk to him at 0720 in order to get a report on what was happening.

Senator Brandis - And you met that deadline to speak to Air Vice Marshal Titheridge by 0730am?

Brigadier Silverstone - Indeed. My recollection is of sitting there at about 0728. I called him at that time and then called Rear Admiral Smith directly after that.

[202]

3.58 To set against this confidence, however, is the problem that if the phone call took place at that time, then the events which formed its content do not seem, according to the Adelaide’s boarding logs, to have yet taken place.
3.59 Commander Banks testified that, to the best of his recollection, the conversation occurred at about 6.00am his time, and thus at 8.30am in Darwin time.[203]
3.60 The discrepancies between the two sets of recollections and reconstructions of the time of the phone call were extensively canvassed by the Committee in its hearings.[204] The main features of the evidence which support each version of events are outlined below.
3.61 The following considerations speak in favour of Commander Banks’s account of the time:
the Adelaide’s boarding log contains no entries at around 4.50am which refer to persons in the water or recovery of SUNCs from the water, whereas the entries at around 6.00am refer to both those things;[205] at around 6.00am, according to a boarding log entry and subsequent witness statements from the crew, a child was being held over the side of SIEV 4 and being threatened with being thrown overboard;[206]
Commander Banks testified that he only recalled one telephone call with Brigadier Silverstone which involved reference to a child, and that this call occurred at the time that the child was being held over the side;[207] a statement made on 10 October 2001 by the Adelaide’s Principal Warfare Officer, Lieutenant Commander Daniel Hynes, reports on the incident of a child held over the side a few minutes prior to 6.00am. It continues: ‘The adult then brought the child inboard after a few minutes when it was evident that the SUNCs that were jumping in the water were being returned. At this time I moved into the bridge where the Commanding Officer was on the phone to the Brigadier, where I heard him state quite clearly that the SUNCs were throwing themselves overboard and threatening to throw a child in the water in an attempt to cause a SOLAS [safety of life at sea] situation’.[208]
Commander Banks’s statement made on 11 October 2001 concerning his telephone conversation with Brigadier Silverstone uses the present tense in relation to his report of a child being held over the side. This gives support to Commander Banks’s recollection that the phone call happened as he was witnessing the incident. The statement reads, in part, ‘I believe I told him [Silverstone] that they were threatening to throw children overboard and I had witnessed such an event. I believe the CJTF asked me to confirm that children were involved and I believe I advised him that I could see a young child being held over the side. I believe he asked me some questions about this and could I definitely confirm this. I am positive I stated that quote I had seen it myself unquote’. At the end of the statement, Commander Banks summarised: ‘I advised CJTF 639 ... that I could see a man threatening to put a child over the side’ [emphasis added].[209]
3.62 Finally, the Committee notes that at 4.50am, the sun had not yet risen at the Adelaide’s position. Commander Banks told the Committee that the boarding party was inserted in darkness (between 4.39am and 4.42am),[210] and Brigadier Silverstone noted that, at 4.50am, first light would have been ‘10 or 15 minutes away’.[211] Sunrise did not take place until 5.39am.[212] This fact seems difficult to reconcile with the claim that Commander Banks or his crew would have been able to see sufficiently well to specify the age of any child, at 4.50am, as 5, 6 or 7 years old.

The relevant chapter of the Senate Report can be downloaded here.

Lazy Carpenter demands others work

Cut lunch politician Carpenter shoots himself in the foot.

The Desert Rat was gob-smacked to hear Alan Carpenter getting stuck into the Legislative Council telling them they were lazy and should work harder and pass the Government legislation.

Carpenter must be by far the laziest Premier this State ever had. He was so exhausted when he won his safe seat of Willagee the first time, he took a month off for a holiday. Carpenter regularly takes holidays. Eric Ripper seems always to be the Acting Premier.

Most country members work every weekend driving long distances attending functions and seeing constituents.

The Desert Rat has heard from a number of sources that Carpenter does not work weekend and refuses to take phone calls. Carpenter took little interest in Committee work when in Opposition.

And he has the gall to tell the Legislative Councillors to work harder.

Only last week he blamed the Legislative Council for failing to pass a Bill to increase penalties for serious assaults on police. The Legislative Council spent weeks last year debating a motion to expel Shelley Archer, because Carpenter stupidly ordered Archer to resign, then suddenly realised he had lost the ALP majority in the Legislative Council. So he changed tack and tried to get her expelled so he could replace her with a vote he could count on. Very few Bills were debated because of Carpenter’s blunder!

The police assault legislation was not on the Carpenter list of 19 priority Bills. The Bill has had bipartisan support since it was dealt with by a Committee in August last year.

Carpenter in an act of barefaced dissimulation, was caught out trying to blame others for his own incompetence for failing to get the police assault laws passed. The West Australian ran a front page story on 7 February 2007 exposing his duplicity. The truth was very different.

Meanwhile cops are in induced comas and are being seriously assaulted daily an Carpenter plays politics. He has done nothing to protect police officers and provide them with compensation for horrific injuries .

The Desert Rat remember about 15 years ago when the then Speaker Harry Jenkins fell off his bike at Parliament House in Canberra a got $66 000 compensation.

The serious injured police officer that shot the Victorian who murdered and raped the twin sisters in Melbourne got $34 000. Why should police care when they get no support from these ingrates who can’t tell the truth about why the legislation was delayed?

CCC: "Clutches at Straws" - but scourges itself

CCC admit it got the Dr Wally Cox case wrong - but qualify how they got it wrong!

The Corruption and Crime Commission has issued a media release today attacking a media release put out presumably by a Carpenter Government Minister. The CCC don’t mention the Minister name or portfolio so the Desert Rat looked up the governments media statements website – but it is off air so the CCC leaves the Desert Rat guessing.

Are the CCC too spooked to name the Minister they are attacking? They bully the public and the opponents of McGinty, but cower before this hapless profligate State Labor Government run (in)effectively by McGinty – too insipid and scared to name the Minister.

The grubby back-peddling media release is one of the very few put out by the CCC. Usually they have a gloating tone. The media release contact is Owen Cole Phone: 9215 4802, 0439 910 161 presumably some media hack at the CCC or hired hand.

The media release criticises the Longson Report on Dr Wally Cox, which they say they have not read (danger – when will these incompetents learn!). At least they are consistently incompetent in that they didn’t bother to listen to the tapes of the Planning Committee meeting in the Paul Frewer case and were shown to be incompetent fools.

Well the CCC media release states what we already know, that:

• The Corruption and Crime Commission has not seen the report on Dr Cox by the Director General of the Department for Agriculture and Food, Mr Ian Longson, but notes the following points from the Minister’s Media Statement


• The CCC inquiry found no evidence that the actions of the former chairman of the Environmental Protection Authority (Dr Wally Cox) constituted misconduct under the Corruption and Crime Commission Act.


• Mr Longson’s report states that the evidence indicates that the draft Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for the Smiths Beach development proposal was not before Dr Cox or the EPA Board at the time of the invitation for the lunch or when the lunch was held. The report states that the SEA was with the EPA Service Unit, whose officers were working with the proponent’s consultants to finalise them, and that the chairman and the board had no involvement at that stage.


• Mr Longson found there was no evidence that Dr Cox attempted to interfere with the SEA process and there was no evidence that Dr Cox was influenced in his role as chairman of the EPA by Mr Grill or Mr Burke. The Commission did not say that Dr Cox attempted to interfere with the SEA process nor that he was influenced in his role as Chairman of the EPA by Mr Grill and Mr Burke. The Commission did not say that Dr Cox attempted to interfere with the SEA process nor that he was influenced in his role as Chairman of the EPA by Mr Grill and Mr Burke.

Are these clowns trying to flagalate themselves?

Read Grumpy Jack's scathing analysis here.

The Desert Rat is in a remote part of the State working in 40 degree heat helping create wealth for the State and so is miffed that McGinty’s CCC has been wasting our wealth ($75 million) faster than we can create it.

Oh for an air-conditioned office on the Terrace where the Desert Rat can polish his hairy arse on a patent leather chair without any personal accountability and to be protected from incompetence by an Act of Parliament.

Sounds better than winning Lotto or getting a lifetime supply of the finest cheeses.

Profligate McGinty: Hard on Spin, Soft on Crime

Why should people obey the law where there are no sanctions or penalties?

Today's "The West Australian" headline screams "60 000 drivers suspended as unpaid fines hit $191 million". It is no wonder the cycle of offending continues when there are no sanctions for many offences. If there are no sanctions or consequences, why worry about offending?

Under McGinty's phoney and debased justice system, if a person commits an offence and is fined and doesn't pay, they lose their driver's licence. So what, because more often than not you don't know you have lost your licence.

If you're Aboriginal you will eventually get a work order for an offence you committed years before. Some may not even remember the offence because of a string of intervening offences. Chances are that someone within the community will sign off your work order, just to acquit it (get rid of it). No penalty! McGinty has ensured that agreements are signed only with Aboriginal Corporations (ot individuals) for supervision of work orders. No one person is ever responsible. Anyone working for the corporation can ingratiate themselves with the community individual by signing off the work order.

When you debase the justice system, the police are wasting their time.

The Desert Rat knows the justice system is a sham and McGinty is doing nothing to fix it? McGinty possibly thinks it is working wonderfully - so deluded has the self-appointed Emperor become.

The Desert Rat know that McGinty has been given some innovative solutions to this problem but has ignored them.

McGinty's idea of justice is reflected in the fatal treatment of Aboriginal Elder Ian Ward (personally known by the Desert Rat). Ian Ward the former Chairman of the Warburton Community was trucked from Laverton to Kalgoorlie (without water) for some stupid reason to face a drink driving offence. Under animal crue;lty law, even cattle have to be removed from truck and given water - but not Aboriginal people it seems.

Why wasn't Ward's alleged offence heard by a magistrate in Warburton on the normal magistrates round (they now have two magistrates!) or dealt with by video conference from Laverton. If there is an expensive way to do it and waste money, McGinty will find it! If Ward was guilty and sentenced he could have been picked up at at later date at much less expense. Read what Grump Jack has to say about this scandal here.

Labor Government's "toxic" and "poisonous" smear campaign

"Toxic", "poison" and "poisonous" - staying on message

The Carpenter Government has been running a consistant line of spin to discredit and smear Brian Burke and Julian Grill. They involve repeating the words "toxic", "poisonous " and "poison", as often as possible when referring to Burke or Grill. They realised some time ago that Burke and Grill had not acted illegally in the Smith's Beach lobbying - so they started this smear campaign. It's called staying on message and eventually it becomes embedded in the public mind.

It is the sort of approach adopted by totalitarian government and their propagandists such as Hitler's Joseph Goebbels. Second rate journalsits inadvertently pick it up this "message" and repeat it. Others partisan journalists use it deliberately.

"The Australian" has run some grubby articles and editorials againt Burke and Grill.

Their WA political reporter is Amanda O'Brien, who was Jim McGinty's Chief Media Officer in recent times. She has been particularly partisan when it comes to Burke and Grill and given McGinty kid-gloves treatment and generally a cushy ride. The headline in a recent Amanda O'Brien's article in The Australian (29 January) screamed " Premier tackles 'poison of Burke' " and went on with her "toxic and poisonous" lambaste of Burke - cheap, grubby reinforcement that would make admirers of Goebbels smile.

Among others Agriculture Minister Kim Chance has been another offender who repeated these words in a recent TV interview. The Desert Rat thinks these two must be collecting brownie points.

The Desert Rat can now understand the wisdom of the policy of Paul Murray the previous editor of "The West Australian". Murray refused to employ journalists that work for politicians or the Government - he believe they were often tainted, compromised and captured by the political process. Amanda O'Brien would not have been employed by Paul Murray at "The West Australian". Ther Desert Rat can think of some fitting employment for O'Brien.

Watch the media for these derogatory 'key' words of this message and look cafefully at who is using them. They are designed to condition the publics' thinking. The Corruption and Crime Commission's campaign is being exposed as biased and incompetent, so the government has to rely on this nasty campaign - keeping on the message which is aimed at tainting Burke and Grill.

Weak Carpenter won't confront McGinty?

Don’t upset Jim McGinty.

Carpenter's failure to apologise and right the CCC’s wrongs shows the Desert Rat who is really in charge.

Carpenter won’t ask the Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC) to apologise to Paul Frewer. Why? It may upset McGinty, because it also clears Burke of any suggestion of manipulation of Paul Frewer. [Burke had earlier been cleared of any wrongdoing by the CCC but the adverse finding against Frewer and other public servants was designed to reflect on Burke; i.e., he got them into trouble].

Carpenter says the CCC got it wrong, but Carpenter never publically stood behind his senior Department of Premier and Cabinet bureaucrat Petrice Judge who got it right. Her report earlier cleared Paul Frewer of any misconduct. Standing up for Petrice Judge would have reflected badly on the CCC, so Petrice Judge wasn't supported. Why? It may have upset McGinty – so she was left to hang-out and dry.

Carpenter talks about looking at the CCC Act to see if it should be changed to make them apologise. More Carpenter spin and empty talk-talk rubbish. Apologies are about the truth, honour and remorse. They are worthless if forced on people. You don’t write apologies into legislation Alan!

Carpenter says nothing about revisiting the Smith’s Beach Report when it is demonstrably incorrect – now nothing more than a grubby political document. Why? It may upset McGinty. Carpenter will not seek to have the Report which is tabled in Parliament corrected. Why? It may upset McGinty. So it will continue to lie on the public record as a poison bait waiting for any unthinking dog to swallow.

What was all about Paul Frewer’s integrity (and tainting Burke) is now about the integrity of McGinty, Carpenter and the CCC.

The Desert Rat thinks it is high-time the CCC, Carpenter and McGinty apologise and correct the public record.

How to Whistleblow on the CCC

Who will "spill the beans" on Dad's Army's spooks?

The Desert Rat advises potential whistleblowers on any dodgy activities of Corruption and Crime Commission officers, that they can do so under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 2003 (PID) which can be downloaded here.

Given the sloppiness of CCC investigations and reports to date, it is possible, if not probable that they have breached their own standards, or the CCC Act or other Acts under which they operate.

If you think an offence under written law has been committed, the main avenue of complaint is to make it to the Corruption and Crime Commission. I would strongly advise against this approach. On a close reading of the PID Act a person who had such evidence cannot take it directly to the Parliamentary Investigator Malcolm McCusker which the Desert Rat thought would be the sensible path but McGinty chose not to offer that obvious potent remedy. Instead the CCC is obliged (under its Act) to advise the Parliamentary Inspector. More of McGinty’s crappy roundabout legislation which leaves the punters confused.

Under Section 5 of the PID Act a person who suspect or thinks CCC officers have been misbehaving villains can report the offence to a police officer.

The Desert Rat suggests you seek an audience with Police Commissioner Karl O’Callaghan to "spill the beans" or outline your concerns and ask him to refer it to the Parliamentary Inspector. There seem to be an antipathy between the cops and Dad’s Army down at the CCC.

The cops have never request the CCC help to tackle organised crime (which it can) using all the coercive and invasive powers available to the Secret Police. Given the CCC's woeful performance, it can only be said that PC Karl O’Callaghan is much smarter that the Desert Rat gave him credit.

Now is the time to blow the whistle!

McCusker Report confirms CCC's gross incompetence

The Desert Rat is not surprised that Parliamentary Investigator Malcolm McCusker QC has found that the “explosive findings” of the Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC) relating to senior public servant Paul Frewer, in their report on Smiths Beach Inquiry were without any basis.

Although McCusker uses very measured language in his report, his comment in the Desert Rat’s view not surprisingly show the CCC officers defamed both Paul Frewer and Brian Burke. The CCC has shown a flippant disregard for the facts in the case and maliciousness towards Frewer and Burke. The facts were plain to see, but the CCC seems to have ignored the facts.

McCusker’s findings reinforce the findings of Petrice Judge the senior bureaucrat whose reports cleared Frewer and Allen. McCusker is arguably one of the best two or three legal minds in the State. Wayne Martin CJ is another. Major General Roberts-Smith QC from Dad’s Army (the CCC) and ”The Performing Flea” McGinty are at the other end of the scale in the Desert Rat’s view.

What were McCusker’s findings?

• That Burke did not ask Frewer to seek a deferral of a South West Planning Committee meeting

• That Frewer did not receive emails from Burke outlining his views on the matter

• That it was questionable if Burke’s phone call could be considered lobbying

• That Mr Frewer did not argue for a deferral of the meeting - other members unanimously called for it.

• That Mr Frewer had no conflict of interest, pecuniary or otherwise in the issue.

• That the CCC failed to check the voice recordings of the Planning Committee meeting, which it had during the investigation (unbelievable!)

• That the CCC failed to abide by its own Act to ensure those under investigation can respond to adverse findings

• That the CCC wrongly accused Frewer of misconduct in his dealings with Brian Burke

• That there was no justification for the CCC directing that disciplinary action be taken against Frewer.

McCusker has called on the CCC to publically admit it made a “mistake” in its investigation of Mr Frewer.

Why can one woman, Petrice Judge, without a law degree get it right and yet the CCC with QC’s (now called Special Counsels) Christopher Shanahan SC & Neil McKerracher SC, an army of investigators and lawyers, a QC Chairman Len Roberts-Smith, and CEO Brigadier “Children Overboard” Mike Silverstone, get it so badly wrong? Says a lot for the law profession these days!

The CCC has rejected calls to make a public admission that it was (maliciously?) wrong. Len Roberts-Smith says he is considering the document (McCusker’s Report).

Who is going to put there hand up for this disgraceful performance? Why should we continue to feed them?

Will McGinty or any of the Goon Platoon from Dad’s Army at the CCC, publically apologise to Frewer and to Brian Burke at whom the discrediting process was and is still aimed. Frewer (and Allen)were collateral damage because they could find Burke had done anything wrong – so they blamed the public servants.

Why do they call it the Corruption Commission? See a coming post for further illumination.

Roberts_Smith: " the Commission takes great care in forming its opinions".

Innocent victims of another CCC hit and run?

The Desert Rat recently read CCC Chairman Major General Len Roberts-Smith’s speech to Edith Cowan University titled “Misconduct – is that all there is?”.

In the speech last October, he outlines all the findings in the Smith’s Beach Inquiry – more being discredited each day as they unravel. Talk about believing your own bullshit.

To quote Major General Len Roberts-Smith:

“Forming and publishing these opinions in a report may affect individuals personally and professionally. It may affect relations between those adversely mentioned and their families, friends and acquaintances. Recommendations may lead to the laying of criminal or disciplinary charges. For these reasons the Commission takes great care in forming opinions as to the occurrence of misconduct.”

Perhaps his next speech should be titled:

“Taking Great Care- what care?”

A military man like CEO Brigadier Silverstone (ret.), Major General Len Roberts-Smith is the Judge Advocate General of the Australian Defence Force.

As a former Judge of the Supreme Court of Western Australia and the WA Court of Appeal the Desert Rat would have hoped a more rigorous and thorough approach would have been taken to investigations and reports of the CCC.

Rarely does McGinty get value for money. Please give him an Order of Australia and put him out to pasture.

CCC: Protection money can’t buy - unless you’re in a Bikies' Gang

How did Wally Cox do it? That wasn't in the CCC's script!

Jessica Strutt a gifted journalist in the Desert Rat’s opinion, reports in The West Australian that Justice Anthony Templemen of the WA Supreme Court has ruled that Dr Wally Cox former Chairman of the Environmental Protection Authority should be allowed to argue in the Court of Appeal that the Corruption and Crime Commission made serious errors in its findings and acted outside its powers.

What again?

Dr Cox has been cleared of any wrongdoing in respect of the Smith’s Beach affair by an independent government inquiry head by Agriculture supremo Ian Longson.

What again?

Jim McGinty will be wiping the tears from his eyes with his lavender-scented handkerchief.

Given the CCC officers have all the armour-plated protection of a Triassic dinosaur, it is no wonder the faceless, nameless Corruption and Crime Commission officers are so sloppy, amateurish and undisciplined in their investigations and reporting. They are almost untouchable, being heavily protected from their incompetence. There is precious little relief or come-back for those aggrieved.

The protections include Section 222 prohibits any defamation actions against the CCC:

“No action or proceeding, civil or criminal, lies against the State, against a Minister, or against a person employed or engaged by the State, in respect of the printing or publishing of a transcript of an examination or inquiry or a report of, or a recommendation made by, the Commission ...”

Section 219, protects officers (broadly defined) of the CCC against personal liability:

“An action in tort does not lie against the State, a Minister, the Commission, the Parliamentary Inspector or an official for anything done, in good faith, in the performance or purported performance of a function under this Act or any other written law.”

The Desert Rat is no lawyer (thank God) but thinks that, because the Commission has similar powers as the Supreme Court, there could be an opportunity under Section 147 to get redress if granted by the Supreme Court or his lawyers may have used a prerogative writ seeking relief.

Well done anyhow Dr Wally Cox – the CCC’s bluff appears to have been called!

Of course CEO Silverstone and Chairman Len Roberts-Smith will hide behind sub judice until the case is heard later this year. If they CCC thinks they will lose the appeal we can expect an appeal against Justice Templemen’s ruling.

CCC’s CEO Brigadier Silverstone AWOL?

Why has Corruption and Crime Commission CEO Mike “Children Overboard” Silverstone not been asked to explain his role in the secret McGinty - Fong hearings and the incredibly sloppy Smith’s Beach investigation and Report?

Why do we only read about a “comment from a CCC spokesperson”. Isn’t Brigadier Silveristone paid handsomely to explain CCC actions and show his mug on TV and in the newspapers? Silverstone was quick to jump in front of TV cameras when announcing the public hearing of Burke and Grill. Since then he has crawled into a hole. Strange?

Is it an offence to publish a picture of the Le Messenger in the “Children Overboard” scandal – our former chief refugee catcher?

Why is Silverstone, the head of such a bungling organisation too timid to communicate a few simple messages to the public to explain the extraordinary incompetence at the Corruption and Crime Commission that seems to pass for rigour and thorough investigation?

The CCC's Smith Beach Report has gratuitously destroyed many people reputations and businesses and is being shown as each day passes, to be grossly incompetent. So bad that the Desert Rat wonders if the authors were negligence or it is part of a grubby smear propaganda campaign against Burke and Grill.

How will they compensate the victims of this inquiry? So damning were the findings of the phoney report and the media frenzy that followed, it will be difficult to repair the damage to the reputations of people such as Burke and Grill; the public servants, business people and others who appear to have done no wrong?

Read about Silverstone's evidence in the Senate "Children Overboard" inquiry here.

Corruption watchdog chief refuses to justify secret McGinty - Fong hearings.

Corruption and Crime Commission Chairman Len Roberts-Smith’s refusal to reveal the factors taken in to account in making the decision not to hear in public the evidence from Jim McGinty and Neil Fong, is unacceptable.

The Desert Rat thinks he should front-up to his responsibilities and the media and immediately justify why the hearing were held in private. The public is waiting and becoming impatient.

It is now becoming clearer to the Desert Rat why former Chairman Judge Hammond jumped ship early.

How long will Roberts-Smith last as he find out more about the hopelessness and incompetence of this $70 million white elephant, known in some circles as “McGinty’s Baby”?

Who do we believe, Petrice Judge or the Corruption and Crime Commission?

Are McGinty and Carpenter interested in the truth?

The Chairman Len Roberts-Smith and Brigadier Mike “Children Overboard” Silverstone should publically respond to each finding in Petrice Judge’s Reports on Paul Frewer and Mike Allen. We need to know the truth. Something smells.

Someone will be very embarrassed. Either Petrice Judge should go or Brigadier Silverstone’s and those of his CCC Goon Platoon involved in the initial inquiry should be named, charged and shown the door.

Alan Carpenter’s announcement (instructed by McGinty?) to review the Public Service Act is less about responding to Buswell’s odd criticism of who undertook the Inquiry and more about distracting the media and public from the actual findings of the Inquiry. Neither Carpenter nor McGinty have defended the integrity of Petrice Judge – she has been left out to dry.

Ms Petrice Judge is indeed a very courageous woman. The Desert Rat, and I suspect most other observers, would have expected her to reinforce the criticisms of the Corruption and Crime Commission. She has certainly put herself off-side with Carpenter and McGinty as she has taken Frewer and Allen of the CCC’s butcher’s hook. Why would she do that unless the evidence was undisputable?

Petrice Judge is the very experienced public servant who undertook the investigation suggested by the CCC that found that Brian Burke had not requested a specific environmental officer. It found Mr Allen did not have the power to appoint the officer to undertake any tasks in relation to the development, and the alleged report did not even exist.

Grumpy Jack the well-connected forensic blogger claims that the CCC had tape recordings of the meetings. They should throw light on the truth. Was the exculpatory evidence ignored? Both Petrice Judge and the CCC cannot be right in their diametrically opposed findings. McGinty and Carpenter have made no suggestion that Petrice Judge’s report will be reviewed by a (Court) Judge! Do Carpenter and McGinty suspect they are on shakey ground?

Let's hear what Chairman Len Roberts-Smith and Brigadier Mike “Children Overboard” Silverstone have to say about each of the findings in Petrice Judge’s Report. Someone will be very embarrassed and either Petrice Judge should go or Brigadier Silverstone’s and those of his CCC Goon Platoon involved should be shown the door.

Let not fall for Carpenter and McGinty’s diversion about reviewing the Public Service Act!

The Desert Rat asks "What is the truth?" The tumbril awaits the incompetent frauds!