CCC humiliated again on Smith’s Beach

CCC's Phony Brabazon Charge - Exposed as Grubby Politicking

The grovelling but unreserved apology by Major General Len Roberts-Smith to senior public servant Mark Brabazon underscores the abject failure of the Corruption and Crime Commission and its inability to objectively investigate the Smith’s Beach matter.

It was a case of verdict now and gather the evidence later, even fabricate it if necessary and destroy and “prosecute them through the media. A conviction is just “icing on the cake” to these modern day Beagle Boys.

Parliamentary Inspector Christopher Steytler QC found the reasoning and the “material” (Steytler doesn’t give it the dignity of evidence) in the report did not support the opinion expressed about Mark Brabazon.

Len Robert-Smith’s apology was immediate and he withdrew the CCC’s opinion that Mr Brabazon “acted with a lack of integrity” in his dealings with Mr Brian Burke.

That makes six people against whom the CCC has launched cases, where the CCC charges have been unceremoniously tossed out of Court.

Mike Allen. Was acquitted on two count of giving false evidence in testimony. The CCC lied and omitted facts that didn’t suite them in their report.

David McKenzie. Two charges of giving false evidence dismissed.

Paul Frewer. A concocted misconduct finding was rejected by Parliamentary Inspector Malcom McCusker QC.

Julian Grill. He was acquitted on two charges of giving false testimony in evidence. The Magistrate said he was a witness of truth.

Wally Cox. A misconduct finding was rejected by a Public Service inquiry. The CCC's only win was when Cox (probably on poor legal advice) challenged the CCC right to make a finding. Cox lost. The Judges said the CCC did have the right but stressed the judgment did not reflect on whether the finding was right or wrong. These was no vindication there for the CCC decision - only that they could express it i.e could tell lies.

The prosecutions following the Smith’s Beach inquiry were based on a dishonest investigation involving gross misconduct, of which the Desert Rat is now aware of evidence.

The Brabazon inquiry and report was a Stalinist sham to damage Brian Burke and Julian Grill. Trail by media – hoping the courts would follow suite.

The House of Cards Inquiry into Smiths Beach has already collapsed. The CCC case is in its dying throws – a death tryst of a morally bankrupt organisation that is a weeping ulcer on the justice system of Western Australia.

The Desert Rat’s opinion is that Premier Colin Barnett and the Parliament should give it the last rites.

Meanwhile back at the ranch, Julian Grill's phone is still being tapped six years later, by the Robert -Smith and Silverstone entourage. They are still being spied on and photographed. Their mail is being tampered with; email and faxes are examined back at the CCC's own headquarters reminiscent of the Smolny Institute (after it was a school for noble maidens - see picture and statue of Lenin in foreground).

All in the hope that they can find some minor breach that will help justify the $50 million spent on the political witch hunt, curiously targeted at the enemies of McGinty.

Parallels between Mallard Investigation and the Smith Beach Investigation.. Part 3.

The CCC's dirty war on Burke and Grill - the Smiths Beach Investigation. Part 3. The Paul Frewer Report.

Compare the Corruption and Crime Commission's investigation of widely-respected senior public servant Paul Frewer that was part of the Smiths Beach investigation with the police investigation of Andrew Mallard which was denounced by Justice Dunford QC. Neither investigation was honest or impartial. The CCC report has proved to be a shameful embarrassment to Mike Silverstone and Mark Ingham.

The Parliamentary Inspector Malcolm McCusker QC's review of the CCC's report is scathing and damning. Read the Executive Summary (pages 1 to 4) to see the deceit and dishonesty of the CCC modus operandi, exposed by McCusker.

Crucial evidence was ignored by the CCC and their principle finding had absolutely no basis in fact. The CCC disgraceful report was of the type the Desert Rat would expect to be tendered to a Star Chamber show trial. Shades of the Mallard case?

In the Desert Rat's opinion the CCC Report reveals incompetence aggravated by self-deception.

McCusker exposes it as a sham:

• The CCC claimed Mr Frewer did not disclose he had been lobbied, when they knew he did make the disclosure. They were forced to admit, that although it was not recorded in the minutes, his disclosure was on the tapes and the CCC had the tapes and were aware of it. Deceit? Questions in the public hearings were framed on this deceit; questions which Paul Frewer had to assume were correct and his memory faulty! Unnerving! The tapes show Frewer had made full and proper disclosure.
• The CCC incorrectly blamed Frewer for an amendment (No 92) being deferred. Inconsistencies between the Busselton Shire Council resolution and Amendment 92 were raised by the reporting officer, a Mr Scribilia and the motion was adjourned unanimously by the (whole) Committee. That amendment is now the subject of a State Administrative Appeals Tribunal appeal and will be the subject of a future article by the Desert Rat.
  
• McCusker found the opinion of "misconduct" expressed in the CCC Report was unsound, because the Commission had failed to properly consider some basic facts and had mistaken views about a number of matters. McCusker was too kind to the CCC in the Desert Rat's opinion.
  
• The CCC failed to give Mr Frewer reasonable opportunity to respond to their adverse findings, a requirement under s 86 of the CCC Act, forcing Mr Frewer to incur expensive personal legal costs to successfully challenge the CCC report.

The Desert Rat was amused to hear that when Malcom McCusker QC was undertaking his inquiry, the CCC's senior investigator involved, Mark Ingham, refused to talk to the Parliamentary Inspector (Malcolm McCusker QC) without his barrister being present!!

Why would a senior CCC investigator need to have a senior lawyer present?

The $50 to $60 million Smiths Beach investigation by the Corruption and Crime Commission shows the same lack of honesty and impartiality, which in Judge Dunford's opinion was lacking in the Mallard investigation by police.

The investigation into Paul Frewer, like the investigation into Mike Allen, was also a disgrace, again there has been no apology from the CCC, just the usual dissembling comment from the nameless faceless spokespersons.

Why does Mike Children Overboard Silverstone tolerate similar unethical behaviour by his investigators which has resulted in the now completely discredited Smiths Beach investigation and Report?

What does this say about Executive Director Mike Silverstone's professionalism and character, that these activities are allowed and such reports are produced; are tabled in Parliament sullying reputations without any apology or withdrawal?

They stand for all time unchallenged and uncorrected and are a pox on our justice system, the WA Parliament and the people who wrote the report.

Secretive Silverstone peeps over the parapet

Rare public comment from Silverstone on Andrew Mallard case inquiry reveals CCC's apprehension.

The Desert Rat was surprised to find a public comment from Mr Invisible Mike 'Children Overboard' Silverstone, albeit from the safety of a letter to the obscure Western Suburbs Weekly (3/2/2009) probably written with the help of his brigade of propaganda and public relations militia.

This valorous outburst from the timorous mouse was the first since the defamatory press release (subsequently amended without any apology) that he handed out when he jumped in front of the TV cameras, to announce the 'findings' of the Smiths Beach Inquiry many long years ago. After this disaster and humiliation, he has had no public profile and has hardly been sighted.

Silverstone's recent tentative effort was a response to a letter by civil liberties campaigner Brian Tennant asking why no criminal prosecutions had been made in the $8 million inquiry into the wrongful conviction of Andrew Mallard, by Judge John Dunford QC. The inquiry was commissioned by the Corruption and Crime Commission presumably because the job was too difficult for the Dad's Army duds.

Silverstone's defence in the letter, is that John Dunford did not recommend criminal charges, but that did not stop Mike Silverstone and the CCC from proceeding with criminal charges against Brian Burke, Julian Grill and Norm Marlborough even though the Director of Public Prosecutions recommended against charges. Judge Dunford QC didn't say criminal charges should not be laid against police.

The real reason the Desert Rat suspects, is, that if charges were laid against the police officers and the prosecutor involved, then the CCC investigators and Silverstone himself would be placed right in the firing line, because the CCC has been guilty of the same lack of honesty and impartiality in its Smiths Beach investigation.

The Desert Rat is currently researching the striking similarities between the police investigation into the Mallard and his wrongful conviction, and the CCC's officers in the Smiths Beach investigation.

Mike 'Children Overboard' Silverstone and his inept outfit have every reason to fear the police officers being charged and successfully prosecuted, because they would soon find themselves in the same perilous situation.

Smiths Beach: What's in it for me? Part 2. Adele Farina

Adele Farina. What were the motives in her dealings with the Smiths Beach development?

The Desert Rat has applied his limited forensic psychology skills to plumb the depths of the working of Adele Farina's mind, to elucidate her schizophrenic position on the Smiths Beach development and what explains her friendship with Bill Mitchell and her strange behaviour towards Brian Burke.

Publicly she was seen to oppose Smiths Beach but she privately attended at least 2 meetings with the developers, that the Desert Rat is aware of, to further the project.

Why her unusual interest in the Smiths Beach development, when she has shown only minimal interest in environmental causes, let alone actively prosecuted them?

An opposition to the Smiths Beach development is all Adele Farina and multi-millionaire developer friend Bill Mitchell seem to have in common. This article examines the possible motives behind Adele Farina's public opposition.

Like Mitchell, neither could reasonably claim they were driven by environmental concerns as neither had any history of environmental activism before Smiths Beach. Mitchell appears to have been more interested in pursuing his own extensive development projects, rather than community benefit and has had several green groups up-in-arms and critical of his various development activities.

Farina has no record of interest in environmental matters, except lamenting the plight of 'misunderstood' timber workers in her maiden speech.

2001 Elections - Burke to the rescue

In Parliament during the Committee debates on Planning and Infrastructure and the WA Planning Commission in October 2001, when Hon Barry House MLC raised the matter of Smiths Beach, Adele Farina, despite being present, made no comment. If she had deep seated environmental concerns about the project, why didn't she voice them?

In fact, a search of Hansard shows she has never raised the Smiths Beach development in Parliament since she was elected in May 2001. Strange?

Environmental concerns therefore would appear to have little to do with Farina's motives in respect of the Smith's Beach development.

The Desert Rat thinks her pre-selection tribulations are the real key to her behaviour and actions.

It seemed strange to the Desert Rat that Farina, who is a member from the Centre Faction of the ALP, got a winnable position on the South West ticket in 2001 when the Centre could not muster the numbers for a seat. A deal had to be made or a favour granted or conceded; so this is where the investigation starts.

The clue is in her maiden speech, when she thanked her supporters. She gratefully said:

"I have been fortunate to have the support of a number of those unions, and I take this opportunity to thank the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Workers Union of Australia, the Transport Workers Union, the Australian Workers Union and the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association of WA."

That, for the uninitiated, is a Centre and Right Faction union grouping. There is no Left Faction support there. The success has the fingerprints of Julian Grill and Brian Burke written all over it. Grill often did the negotiations for the Centre Faction and Brian Burke would have had to agree to bring Right Faction support behind Farina. In fact, that is what people in the know, tell the me what happened.

Effectively Brian Burke had secured her a winnable position and seat in 2001, so Farina can thank Burke.

The reason why she did not thank Burke in her speech, is that would have alienated her from Jim McGinty and Geoff Gallop whose support she may need to advance her in the parliamentary ranks. Burke was treated like a pariah by the Left who took every public opportunity to put the boot into Burke to limit his effectiveness within the ALP, which threatened the Left's power base.

Adele Farina, the Desert Rat is told, originally wanted the lower house seat of Perth, vacated by the retiring Centre Faction's Diana Warnock. But Farina was foiled when Centre Faction member John Hyde defected to the Left and got the numbers for the pre-selection. Cold war politics and no loyalty - but all quite legal.

Julian Grill tried to find Adele Farina a seat in the 2001 election - I presume to keep the fragile Centre group together or there would be more defections. He must have somehow secured Burke's support - why he would have bothered, is beyond the Desert Rat - Burke must be a soft touch.

There is no doubt that Farina owed her pre-selection to a safe seat in 2001, to Brian Burke's help and support.

After the 2001 election Farina realised she would have to impress the Left Faction if her political career was not to wither on the vine. The Desert Rat suspects she saw that, by supporting the Smiths Beach Action Group and opposing the Smiths Beach development she would have the potential to endear herself to the Left. This she did not do publicly or in Parliament but, behind the scenes. Farina, the Desert Rat thinks, was cultivating the Left with her opposition to the Smiths Beach development to prop up her future prospect for pre-selection.

By demonstrating her Green credentials she sought to garner enough Left support to guarantee a winnable, even safe, position. Hence the marriage of convenience with Bill Mitchell and the developers who controlled the Smiths Beach Action Group. The environment may not have been a priority at all.

Secretly, however, at the request of Brian Burke, she was also meeting with the developer of Smiths Beach and their consultants. Farina was playing two ends against the middle.

2005 Election - Burke again to the rescue

In the run up to the 2005 election, Farina was again in a difficult situation. There were only two safe Labor seats - one Left and one for the Right and one marginal. The ALP's National Executive intervened into WA and with Burke's Right Faction support, Adele Farina was given a winnable position on the ticket. Matt Benson-Lidholm was elected for the Right and the Left Faction's Sally Talbot scraped in to the marginal position.

Again Farina had fortuitously survived with the help of Burke but needed to shore up her position with the Left for the future.

2008 Election

The looming 2008 election presented a different problem for Farina, as one-vote, one-value meant there were now only two possible ALP positions on the South West ticket for the Legislative Council. Notionally one for the Right and one for the Left. Farina, from the Centre Faction appeared to be stranded on the third unwinnable position on the ALP ticket.

This is where the Desert Rat thinks she devised a strategy to ingratiate herself once again with the Left and make it impossible for the Party (ALP) not to preselect her.

The strategy involved publicly dumping on Burke when giving evidence at the Corruption and Crime Commission's Smiths Beach public hearings. That was done after Burke had got an orchestrated public pillorying by the CCC, which played selected phone conversations, many of which were out of context. Adele Farina was the last witness to give evidence.

Farina seized the day. She gave headline grabbing evidence in the Smiths Beach public hearing of the CCC, condemning Brian Burke and accusing Burke of bullying, blackmail and intimidation. Her 'testimony' would have really impressed the Left leadership!

The Desert Rat has been told, that in the weeks following her evidence to the CCC ,of the alleged offensive behaviour by Brian Burke, Farina wrote to Burke thanking him for his help, support and guidance and invited him to a function in her office.

The strategy was successful. Giving evidence against Burke ingratiated her with the left and also made it impossible for the ALP not to select her in a winning position on the South West Region ticket -because if it did it would be seen as disciplining her for giving evidence against Burke.

The Premier Alan Carpenter said publicly that she had to be put in a winnable position. Even though the Left adopted her, they refused to give up their safe position now held by Sally Talbot who was placed in the No 1 position. Poor Matt Benson-Lidholm was shunted out of his home area of Albany in the South West Region and forced to run in the Agricultural Region

Interestingly, Farina's testament indicting Burke never resulted in any charges. Nor was it even mentioned in the CCC report on Smiths Beach. It appears to have been dropped from the CCC's Smiths Beach report, like a hot potato!

Farina, having created the anti Burke headline that the CCC thrived on - saw Mike Silverstone and the CCC subsequently decide her evidence was not relevant and jettisoned it from further consideration.

The Desert Rat has come to the view that most of Farina's actions can be attributed to her own self-interest in advancement in the ALP, rather than to any higher 'noble' motives.

Coming soon: How Farina used the Iron Ore Industry Committee proposal and the CCC to destroy Brian Burke.

Smiths Beach: What's in it for me. Part 1 - Bill Mitchell

Mitchell & Farina. What were the motives of these strange 'bedfellows' in opposing the Smiths Beach development?

The Desert Rat in this article, intended to explore the relationship between multi-millionaire developer Bill Mitchell and Labor MLC Adele Farina and how they came to work together in their opposition to David McKenzie's Smiths Beach development. Did these strange Liberal - Labor 'bedfellows' have common motives?

Part 1 looks at the more simple picture that emerged of Bill Mitchell's motives for opposing the Smiths Beach development.

Bill Mitchell has condemned the relationship between Brian Burke and Noel Creighton-Browne who were working for David McKenzie on the Smiths Beach development - on the basis that their politics were different.

Bill Mitchell told gullible ideologue Liz Jackson of ABC TV's Four Corners:

"I was very surprised because I thought with the Liberal-Labor poles apart.."

That shallow bit of public hypocrisy was no impediment for Bill Mitchell to work closely with Labor MLC Adele Farina in lobbying against the Smiths Beach development.

Mitchell can hardly claim opposition on environmental grounds given his own carnage along the Cape. Nor would it interfere with his surfing - more likely floating these days.

The Smiths Beach development will certainly interfere with the view from his Smiths Beach property, so that is a strong reason for his opposition.

There is certainly some jealously that David McKenzie secured the property back in 1986. Who was the other determined potential buyer who David McKenzie outbid in 1986? The Desert Rat does not know and has, as yet, been unable to find out.

The Desert Rat thinks Mitchell and many others would love to pick over Smiths Beach if the proponents become financially stressed and sell because of inordinate delays. Long delays in the project and costly Corruption and Crime Commission generated legal costs have increased the financial risk of the project for David McKenzie.

Bill Mitchell also told Liz Jackson on ABC TV Four Corners

"I couldn't imagine a property development that would be more profitable than this one anywhere in the State, so what's at stake - massive profits, the bigger the development, the bigger the profits."

That in itself is a powerful motive - but the Desert Rat wonders if there may be more honourable motives.

Mitchell greatly appreciated the help of Labor MLC Adele Farina in his opposition to Smiths Beach. In an emotional outburst before the 2006 election Mitchell felt compelled to issue this rather unctuous media release:

Farina to be congratulated

BILL MITCHELL, SMITHS BEACH

13/12/2006 12:00:19 PM

ADELE Farina is to be acknowledged and congratulated as a woman of high integrity who demonstrated enormous courage under fire.

This endorsement is from a Liberal voter.

I know the intense pressure and intimidation she was under from Burke. As a consultant I was appointed by him to restructure the West Australian football industry, the Public Works Department. and greyhound industry in the 1980s.

He was and is a huge political figure who always got his way.

Adele by not being prepared to trade-off the community values she endorses and represents is prepared to put her career on the line in a stand for principles and ethics.

A rare performance in today's political arena. I and the community commend you.

Whatever the motive may be, Mitchell has successfully garnered the support of the CCC and all their resources in his Smiths Beach Action Group campaign.

Who is the meat in all this self interest and politicking? It is a decent guy named David McKenzie who has a dream of establishing a development that fits in with Smiths Beach in a sensitive way, thatis consistent with planning requirements and allows many more people to enjoy this beautiful place.

There are no Bill Mitchell style 10 metre high sand pads planned for houses in the Smiths Beach development and no views will be interrupted from the ridges. Bill Mitchell's vista from his Smiths Beach property will overlook the McKenzie's development and be affected.

The Desert Rat's not sure if the view from the sand pad perched, grandiose $2 million Cowaramup mansion, is compromised.

Postscript: The truth of the matter about the reports Mitchell brags about in his self-aggrandising media release above (his nickname in some quarters is FIG JAM), is they they were poor and had to be rewritten by John Horgan.

Smiths Beach: How the CCC and Silverstone were manipulated. Part 3

The Players: Bob McKay - a Damascene Conversion? The Links between Smiths Beach Action Group and competing developers.

The third spokesperson and founding member of the Smiths Beach Action Group, along with multi-millionaire developers Bill Mitchell and Kevin Merrifield, is Bob McKay, a former Busselton Shire Councillor.

The Desert Rat doesn't know a lot about his business activities but is aware that Bob McKay is a significant commercial property owner in Dunsborough and has subdivided coastal land south of Smiths Beach.

The track record of former Councillor Bob McKay is erratic indeed. In respect of the Smiths Beach development - he must have had a Damescene conversion when he co-founded the Smiths Beach Action Group with Bill Mitchell and Kevin Merrifield!

Bob McKay spearheaded a motion in the Busselton Shire Council rejecting the draft Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge Statement of Policy Planning. The Busselton Shire Council submission was moved by Bob McKay. It read, under the heading:

11. Table 5 Hierarchy

• It is considered that Table 5 needs to be reviewed in a number of areas to provide for an increased and a more realistic target population for the coastal nodes given the existing resident population numbers to match the servicing requirements, in a number of cases.

• The notes in respect of tourist nodes also need to be modified to reflect that the agreed position at Smiths Beach is that 1/3 of the accommodation maybe (sic) developed for permanent residential purposes.

Here Bob McKay argued for more permanent residential development on the Smith Beach node, when 230 dwellings had already been recommended for permanent residents!

Bob McKay also supported the extension of the Development Investigation Areas at Smiths Beach at the Steering Committee meeting of the Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge Planning Review on 10 December 1997.

ABC TV's Four Corners gullible ideologue Liz Jackson displayed her ignorance of Bob McKay's duplicity in this excerpt from her unrestrained dump on the lobbying work of Brian Burke and Julian Grill. In the excerpt that follows, McKay complains about the size of a development - of which he earlier had unsuccessfully tried to increase! Jackson's grubby juxtaposition of these two excerpts makes Bob McKay look real good, when she should have exposed his hypocrisy - not to mention the comments of multimillionaire developer Bill Mitchell's she slotted in between.

BOB MCKAY, SMITHS BEACH ACTION GROUP: The first glimpse the public got a look at it was in the year 2000 and everybody was horrified. There was spontaneous public meetings. When it was put out for advertising, over 3,000 people wrote in written submissions against it, the State record.

BILL MITCHELL, SMITHS BEACH ACTION GROUP: I couldn't imagine a property development that would be more profitable than this one anywhere in the State, so what's at stake - massive profits, the bigger the development, the bigger the profits.

LIZ JACKSON: The Canal Rocks proposal was for 230 houses, 360 tourist units and over 100 hotel rooms, clustered here on the southern headland of the beach. The then Opposition leader, Geoff Gallop, pledged that if the Labor won the upcoming election, they would amend the regional planning scheme to restrict the development's size.

The Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge Statement Policy Planning Report (LNRSPP) stipulated the Smith Beach Tourist node development and it remained as before.

It is an irony that the LNRSPP decided there was to be less development than that proposed by the Busselton Shire Council and moved by Bob McKay who also attended the Steering Committee meeting on behalf of the Busselton Shire Council.

It was Bob McKay who moved the Busselton Shire Council submission that was unsuccessful in locking in more area for permanent residents.

What or who influenced Bob McKay and made him change his mind? Why the change of opinion to total opposition of the Smiths Beach development, which is much less than originally proposed and less than McKay wanted to expand the development?

Mike Children Overboard Silverstone and the CCC must have walked into the Smiths Beach development with closed eyes or maybe they only wanted to know half the story. Then again the CCC have been very selective and impartial in most of what they have done while investigating the Smiths Beach development.

It's Cape rape by Silverstone's star CCC complainant

More about Bill Mitchell - Silverstone's CCC complainant and Labor MLC Adele Farina's good mate

Bill Mitchell the environmentalist, ageing surfie, Corruption and Crime Commission 'complainant' and ABC 4 Corners 'star' informant had his own exposé by Sunday Times writer Janet Wainwright a while back.

This is what seasoned hack Janet Wainwright said about Bill Mitchell and his partner:

"Developers who encroached into the Leeuwin Naturaliste National Park and damaged vegetation have been given the go-ahead to build four houses.

This is despite Conservation and Land Management (CALM) condemning the siting of the houses as 'most unsuitable'.

The Gracetown Progress Association, Cape to Cape Alliance and Leeuwin Conservation Group are irate that despite the developers putting in earthworks without council permission and damaging the park, they have been allowed to proceed.

Bill Mitchell admitted that sand pads up to 10m high had been put on the ridge without building permission and there had been some damage to adjoining park vegetation by the contractor.

'We had planning permission. I did not realise building permission was needed. It was a mistake.' he said. [To which the Desert Rat would respond: "What dissembling bullshit - a seasoned developer not knowing the difference?!"]

Mr Mitchell is building the houses in Juniper Road for his family and his partner because of the potential loss of ocean views from Mr Mitchell's property at nearby Smiths Beach.

He bought 104ha adjoining the Leeuwin Naturaliste National Park for $1.2 million in 1994 after getting council assurance that he could site the houses on the ridge.

[The Desert Rat may take readers on a virtual tour of this gross grandiose mansion - at a later date. The 490 square metre house took around two years of construction worth more than $2 million. Its render is a special feature, inappropriately described as (feral) camel-coloured but looks more like baby-shit yellow to the Desert Rat - who sees camels and dodges camel dung daily.]

While admitting damaging the vegetation was a breach of the National Park regulations, he said the damage was minor and was being rehabilitated.

'An area of National Park was damaged - not cleared - by a rubber tyred scraper,' Mitchell said.

CALM's Regional Manager for Bunbury, Bob Chandler, said CALM stood by its original advice that the building sites were the worst possible on the block for the protection of landscape values on the ridge, but but the council had planning powers.

In a detailed submission on December 14 1998 following the unauthorised (10m high) sand pads, Mr Chandler drew attention to the Cape to Cape Walk within the National Park, which is 500 metres from one (10m high) sand pad.

The spokesperson for the the Cape to Cape Alliance and the Leeuwin Conservation Group, Bill Meiklejohn, said that council's own planning policy was that 'no development should be permitted that would affect the landscape'.

As late as February the council's planning committee recommended the sand pads should be removed and plans rejected. [Now there's a job for the CCC which they won't want to know about.]

Gracetown Progress Association Wayne Baddock said the council had not paid enough attention to the area.

'There should never have been approval for buildings directly adjoining CALM land on a sensitive area of the ridge.'

Council chief executive Max Eastcott said in hindsight the zoning was inappropriate and there should have been some landscape protection."

The Desert Rat wonders just how much homework Mike Silverstone did before he rushed into the Smiths Beach inquiry fiasco. It was too good to be true Mike! Don't ever let the facts or background get in the way for a sensational public "investigation" or "story" - to lift the profile of the CCC.

Let's hope that some day, CCC chief clown Mike Silverstone has to come out of hiding and publicly explain his incompetence.

Smiths Beach: How the CCC and Silverstone were manipulated. Part 2

The Players: Bill Mitchell. The Links between Smiths Beach Action Group and competing developers.

This article is the second in a series that shows how the Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC) was manipulated by greedy developers that wanted to maintain their control of development in the Busselton Shire area.

Bill Mitchell, the second and pivotal player is also a spokesperson for the Smiths Beach Action Group (SBAG). Like Merrifield, Bill Mitchell is also a significant property developer and landholder in the Busselton Shire area and has played a much more public role than Kevin Merrifield in his opposition to the Smiths Beach development.

Bill Mitchell was one of the SBAG spokespersons depicted as an ageing surfie and environmentalist when interviewed at the beach side by ABC TV's Four Corners program. There was no mention of Bill Mitchell being a significant property developer and landowner in the area. During that interview, Mitchell claimed credit for making the Smiths Beach complaint to the CCC?

Bill Mitchell lives in a grandiose house on a prominent ridge above the Smiths Beach overlooking the the bay and David McKenzie's proposed development. Mitchell was involved in the development of four properties on the top of the ridge and has retained at least one for himself.

Bill Mitchell will look down on the Smiths Beach development area and it will affect Mitchell's beautiful panoramic view of the bay, the natural surrounds and the now undeveloped private land on which David McKenzie wishes to develop for a range of accommodation.

The Smiths Beach development is not allowed to obscure the view from any of the five or six ridges below Mitchell's much higher ridge. How did Bill Mitchell get approval to build on a ridge which breaks the skyline? Different rules for different people?

Interestingly, Bill Mitchell's property on top of the ridge has a restrictive covenant which prevents the clearing of natural vegetation. It now has rows of planted olive trees and pines. The Busselton Shire Council advised Mitchell was in breach of the covenant but he has done nothing about it and strangely, the Shire have not pursued to breach with any vigour.

Mitchell also built a house at Cowaramup for himself in 2004 and during construction rock from the excavation spilled over into the adjacent CALM reserve. He was prosecuted but came to an arrangement with CALM.

Bill Mitchell was the developer behind Regency Park on the site of the old Greenacres Caravan Park located 1 to 2km west of Dunsborough. Mitchell tried to get the beach privatised! The development was to be prestige apartments and homes and the reason he sought a private beach was that "schoolies" were detrimental to an up-market estate. About a dozen beautiful trees in the development mysteriously died overnight.

Mitchell was responsible for the development, some would say environmental vandalism of the beautiful Gunyulgup Valley some 5 to 6kms from Smiths Beach. This pristine area was sub-divided into 80 to 100 large individual lots.

It was Bill Mitchell pictured on Smiths Beach with the opportunistic Geoff Gallop 3 weeks prior to the 2000 election with Allanah McTiernan and Adele Farina, the latter at least seems to have a very close working relationship with Mitchell. More of than anon.

Mitchell and Merrifield had two meeting with Allanah McTiernan and Adele Farina and there was at least one private dinner held in Mitchell house on the ridge overlooking Smiths Beach. McTiernan refused to meet with David McKenzie to allow him to put his case.

Brian Burke and Norm Marlborough played a role in getting the reluctant Allanah McTiernan, later as the Minister for Planning, to meet with the frustrated David McKenzie the proponent of Smith Beach development who had been 'locked out' of all discussions with the Minister.

Bill Mitchell claimed in the ABC TV Four Corners interview that he was the person who initiated the Smiths Beach CCC investigation. The Desert Rat has been told that he openly bragged about being the "whistle blower".

If so, what then did Bill Mitchell tell Senior Investigator Mark Raymond Ingham and Executive Director Mike Silverstone of the CCC, that was of such gravity for the required affidavits to successfully apply to have phone tapped, bugs placed in the houses and camera surveillance of Brian Burke, Julian Grill and David McKenzie for three years? The Desert Rat has been told by a highly placed source, which is difficult to verify, that Kevin Merrifield and Bill Mitchell met with Jim McGinty about the Smiths Beach lobbyists and McGinty is alleged to have advised them to take the matter to the CCC.

A simple denial that none of these three met or discussed Smiths Beach lobbyists would put that allegation to rest.

The thickening plot lends itself to a remake of 'How Green was my Valley'.

Smiths Beach: How the CCC and Silverstone were manipulated. Part 1

Links between Smiths Beach Action Group and competing developers. The Players - Kevin Merrifield

Research by the Desert Rat shows how the Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC) was manipulated by greedy developers that wanted to maintain their control of development in the Busselton Shire area.

Who are the players behind the Smiths Beach Action Group (SBAG)? What do we know about these prominent spokespersons for the SBAG, one of whom was Kevin Merrifield; another was Bill Mitchell, who has claimed credit for making the complaint to the CCC?

The Smiths Beach Action Group's inaugural chairperson was Kevin Merrifield and was one of three spokespersons for the SBAG. Kevin Merrifield was probably the biggest developer in the Busselton area and the surrounding 25 km.

Merryfield developed the Busselton shopping centre as well as many other tacky shopping centres in regional WA including the the eyesore Newman, Carnarvon and Esperance shopping centres - the latter a big disappointment that didn't live up to expectations for parking, landscaping and visual amenity.

His partner in many earlier developments was Kerry Stokes, until they fell out.

Kevin Merrifield lives at Millbrook a beautiful property about 5 km from Smiths Beach which is the site of an old mill. It he subdivided the picturesque property into 25 lots in about 2002.

Merrifield describes himself in the CCC hearings and transcripts as a retired property developer but makes regular presentations to the Busselton Shire Council. Merrifield is still one of the most significant landholders and property developers in the area.

The Smiths Beach Action Group seems to have a close relationship with the Busselton Shire Council and they seem to be able to obtain information from the Busselton Shire Council that is not normally available to other members of the public.

The ABC TV program Four Corners depicted these ageing SBAG spokespersons as surfies and environmentalists when interviewed near the beach in the surfies gear. There was no mention of any being significant property developers and landowners.

Are many of these protagonists wolves in sheep clothing?

In following posts the Desert Rat will examine the background and role of other competing developer from the Smiths Beach Action Group.

Remorse, restitution and rehabilitation not enough - so in with the Silverstone slipper

Silverstone wreaks savage retribution as well, on world renowned piano tuner.

The Desert Rat was appalled that the Corruption and Crime Commission used all its resources to drag a penitent Walter Haass before the courts.

Walter Haass stole a $20 000 Steinway piano some 12 years ago from the University of WA music school, after succumbing to a gambling addiction.

Months later Walter Haas told the school about his misdeed and came to an informal arrangement to cover the loss. Haass completed his part of the bargain and his unpaid work more than covered the cost of the loss to the university.

Haas overcame his gambling addiction, was remorseful (as he reported the offence himself) and had made restoration. All the ingredients of restorative justice, the Desert Rat would have thought.

Ten years later Brigadier Mike Silverstone and the crew down at Dad's Army saw this as a great opportunity to stamp out corruption and unorganised crime.

Haass defence lawyer Mark Andrews told the court that "an unknown party with an axe to grind" had brought the matter to the CCC's attention some 10 years after the offence was committed.

Haass was fined afurther $4500. He had not offended before or since the solitary offence.

Well done Mike Silverstone! We owe you our heartfelt gratitude for saving us from these vicious criminal types who must be up to other "no good" business - perhaps even organised crime. Just what did he really do with that piano?

The Desert Rat thinks a Military Medal should be awarded to Mike Silverstone for this CCC triumph.

CCC (taxpayers) to pay $19149 Legal Fees and Court Cost to Julian Grill

Court Costs - a win for truth and integrity over malice.

The Desert Rat suspects that Julian Grill and his wife Lesley are not about to travel to the south of France to spend the $19 149 costs that were awarded to them for legal fees and court costs in yesterday's acquittal.

The Desert Rat has the sad duty to inform punters that all this gratefully received money will disappear into the black hole of legal fees. Even though this was Silverstone's and Roberts-Smith first group of charges against Julian Grill - and their first embarrassing failure, Grill's legal fees are known to be well over $300 000 already and mounting.

This legal bill has accumulated over the three year that Silverstone has been desperately trying to justify the estimated $50 million his outfit the CCC has wasted trying to find some evidence of corruption against Julian Grill.

There is a formula that magistrates use to calculate costs and it not meant to cover all costs by the successful defendant. In this case it will cover about 5% of Grill's costs to date.

The Desert Rat thinks that Mike Silverstone would be less reckless if he was spending or wasting his own money on these nasty actions - instead of frivolously spending taxpayers funds.

If Silverstone was to be sued by his victims, Silverstone's costs would unfortunately be paid for by the State and taxpayers. We all lose.

All Brigadier Silverstone of the Children Overboard infamy can only lose, is he remaining credibility. Some would argue that is little for him to lose.

Magistrate: Grill "a witness of truth".

Third group of CCC charges thrown out in CCC Smith's Beach "House of Cards" Inquiry and Report

Julian Grill was yesterday cleared of two charges of giving false testimony at the Corruption and Crime Commission's Smith's Beach hearings about 3 years ago.

Magistrate Wheeler said Grill was a witness of truth and any erroneous answers are understandable given the circumstances. He said Mr Grill had little input into the proposed Smith's Beach development and was in the USA for most of the 4 weeks of the deferral of the town planning amendment .

Magistrate Wheeler said he had watched a video of Mr Grill's evidence and declared him to be studious, respectful and trying to answer correctly.

Julian Grill was awarded cost of $19 149.

Smug Brigadier Mike Children Overboard Silverstone, Senior "Investigator" Mark Ingham and the antique, sphinx-like Major General Roberts-Smith have suffered another humiliating defeat.

Every finding of the phoney Smith Beach Inquiry has already been discredited and their dodgy practices exposed. Also the vindictive and malicious false testimony charges belatedly made against Mike Allen, David McKenzie and Julian Grill, by the CCC incompetents to save face - have been thrown out of Court.

Read the latest Eastern States comment on VexNews.

Organised crime out of control in Perth

Cage fighter fears for safety after Molotov attack

The West Australian 2nd March 2009, 12:00 WST

"The manager of a Northbridge gym fire-bombed overnight, star cage fighter Brian Ebersole, says he believes organised crime is out of control in Perth and he fears for his safety."

This story in today's The West Australian makes the Desert Rat wonders why the Corruption and Crime Commission and Police can't get their act together and tackle organised crime.

The CCC it seems would rather be in hot pursuit of a miscreant middle aged piano tuner. The CCC believed the piano tuner presented a serious challenge for them because he was armed with a tuning fork and therefore must have had a concealed knife.

The CCC requested the assistance police tactical response group because of the danger involved.

The police refused to help saying the CCC were operationally inept and a security risk.

Brigadier Mike Silverstone the Executive Director of the CCC said he will be forced to subdue the piano tuner with our own CCC militia. The resources involved he said will make it impossible for the CCC to interview Mr Brian Ebersole and risk tackling organised crime at any time in the near future.

CCC prosecution of David McKenzie thrown out of court

Administrative incompetence. Could Silverstone organise a root in a brothel?

After almost three years of preparation, the Corruption and Crime Commission incompetents have had their prosecution of David McKenzie, thrown out of court. McKenzie was charged for allegedly giving false evidence at the Smiths Beach public hearing.

There seems no limit to the stress these sadists will put ordinary people under because of their incompetence. If Brigadier Mike Children Overboard Silverstone and Major General Roberts-Smith down at Dad's Army decide to appeal the decision, a result of their own incompetence, it will mean ten of thousand of dollars of extra legal and court costs to David McKenzie and his family and to the us taxpayers who already fork out $170 000 for Silverstone's farcical performance and are charge $30 million a year to fund the CCC.

This malicious prosecution of David McKenzie for giving "false" evidence, proceeded some two years after that evidence was given in the public hearings, and after the failure of the substantive cases of corruption and misconduct against Mike Allen, Paul Frewer and Wally Cox.

The charges were laid after every major allegation ('finding' in the CCC view!) in the CCC's Smiths Beach Report had been discredited.

The CCC's House of Cards cases collapsed when their investigation practices and sham reports were exposed. It was shown by Malcolm McCusker QC that the CCC ignored evidence they were aware of and did not disclose, because it contradicted their case. Petrice Judge the independent investigator for the Public Sector Management Commission revealed that exculpatory evidence was concealed and left out of the Frewer report.

Excluding exculpatory evidence corrupts justice in the Desert Rat's simple view.

Again this latest bungle reflects dismally on hapless Executive Director Mike Children Overboard Silverstone who has overseen more dodgy investigations, more stuffed up investigations and more clumsy prosecutions than is believable.

Who would now believe his account of the conversation with Commander Banks in the Children Overboard Scandal?

Silverstone's strategy over the last year seems to have been to pursue prosecutions that will improve his and the CCC dismal win-loss record. He is now becoming a national laughing stock.

The pitiful prosecution of a piano tuner has plumbed new depths in useless and pointless prosecutions. More on that in a later post.

When CCC opinions become findings - truth is the victim

CCC conditions the public mind with half truths.

The Desert Rat's examination of the media statement of Mike Silverstone referred to in the previous post and the Letter to the Editor by Major General Roberts-Smith, highlights both mens' shortcomings.

Do either of these men really understand the role of the agency they head as Commissioner and Executive Director of the Corruption and Crime Commission?

It is about time they understood more about the CCC Act under which they operate.

They appears to be either amateurish and incompetent or off on some political vendetta redolent of the intoxicating effect of having too much power. Read on and decide for yourself.

In Silverstone's opening paragraph in his media statement of 9 October 2007 he says the CCC has found evidence of misconduct against a former minister and others. Silverstone goes on to highlight four findings; against Norm Marlborough, Dr Wally Cox, Mr Paul Frewer and Mr Mike Allen.

No wonder the public regards the CCC opinions (which should be nothing more and nothing less) as findings. Like the police they cannot find any guilty of any offence - it is for the courts to decide.

God only knows what the Desert Rat would find if he had the time to examine all of Silverstone and Roberts-Smiths public comments or if he was allowed to listen to all their private conversations and read their corrospondence. A camera and bug in their respective bedrooms may relieve the humdrum of this tedious research.

Commissioner Major General Roberts-Smith in his letter to the editor of The West Australian 24 February 2009 uses the words opinion and finding interchangeabily. He says:

"It [the CCC] has not formed any opinion (finding) about Mr Grill..."

One would expect a lot more intellectual rigour from a former supreme court judge - maybe he has spent too much time on military tribunals as Judge Advocate.

The CCC can only express an opinion - it cannot make findings. It should never use the word 'found' or 'finding', as they imply a much higher level of authority - that of a tribunal or even court in the minds of most of the public. Any CCC views should properly be expressed as an opinion and sent with any evidence to the Director of Public Prosecutions or the Public Sector Commissioner or the relevant authority to inquire into and if there is a case to answer, recommend a course of action such as discipline or prosectution.

Malcolm McCusker QC in his recent John Curtin Institute of Public Policy address lamented the lack of success both he and the CCC have had in educating the public that the CCC can only express opinions - and that it was up to others bodies to make findings of guilt or otherwise.

When material such as the above are fed into the media by Silverstone and Roberts-Smith it is not surprising that the public think of their opinions as findings.

All of the Smiths Beach inquiry opinions above, which are in their public report, have been wrong in fact or law and discredited and all resulting charges to date have been discredited or thrown out of court.