Malice in Wonderland - CCC occupies the moral low ground

Silverstone snubs DPP to prosecute Burke and Marlborough

The revelation on the website CCCexposed that Mike Children Overboard Silverstone and Major General Roberts-Smith ignored the advice from the DPP that the CCC should not charge Burke and Marlborough should dispel any doubts about the malicious nature of the decision by the Corruption and Crime Commission to pursue these prosecutions.

CCCexposed alleges the CCC kept this advice from the DPP, secret - and who would doubt it?

The Desert Rat thinks it must have been for fear of embarrassment and to hide their rancorous and spiteful tactics. Let's hope substantial costs are awarded against the CCC when the case is eventually thrown out of court.

These charges were laid over 2 years after the evidence was given relating to the Smith's Beach development. In pursuing these charges the CCC's design is to place Burke and Marlborough in unnecessary jeopardy and bankrupt them if possible, particularly if an appealed is required.

The Smith's Beach Inquiry has been a embarrassment and financial fiasco for the CCC and WA taxpayers.

In some coming articles the Desert Rat will demonstrate how naive and stupid Silverstone and company were by allowing the CCC to get sucked into local Busselton - Dunsborough development politics and take the side of developers who opposition to Smith's Beach is not on environmental matters.

Blessed Brian Burke: Canonise or crucify?

Some are more equal than others

The website CCCexposed carries an interesting post on former Judge Kevin Hammond's role in the gaoling of Brian Burke on the "travel rorts" charge back in the 1990's. Graeme Campbell former Federal Member for Kalgoorlie claims in the article that Judge Hammond the first CCC Commissioner allowed as admissible evidence, photocopies of travel claims when the originals should have been used.

Judge Hammond strangely departed the Corruption and Crime Commission after hearing all the evidence in the Smith Beach Inquiry fiasco, but before the report was finalised! We now know Judge Hammond's report was extensively rewritten after Hammond left the CCC, presumably with the full knowledge of CCC Executive Director Mike Children Overboard Silverstone.

The cavalier acceptance of photocopies, instead of originals, as evidence at Burke's trial, by Judge Kevin Hammond, reminded the Desert Rat of a few other dodgy aspect of Burke's treatment and gaoling for two years on the unwarranted conviction.

In respect of Burke's travel claim and it should be noted that public servants filled out Burke's travel claim, not Burke or his political staff. If Burke was deliberately trying to rort the system, one of his loyal political (on contract) staff would have done the job.

Burke was charged and convicted in the feeding frenzy that followed the "WA Inc" hysteria. It is interesting, that Carmen Lawrence after she opportunistically usurped the Premiership also claimed a $5000 travel allowance for travel which she never took. It was over a year before what could also be called a "travel rort", was "discovered".

Although the story was around parliament house for a few days before, news flashed around caucus members on 5 November 1992 that the "travel rort" story was to be front page on tomorrow's The West Australian (6 November 1992).

That afternoon, in time for the evening TV news bulletins, John Halden MLC rose to his feet in the Legislative Council and tabled the infamous "Easton Petition" which reflected unfairly and misleadingly on Opposition Leader Richard Court.

This sensational "news" was designed to, and had the effect of displacing the Carmen Lawrence's "travel rort" story off the front page of The West Australian.

Why Carmen Lawrence was never prosecuted and Burke was prosecuted, is still beyond the Desert Rat understanding, if everyone is equal before the law?

The Desert Rat knows of about 15 to 20 federal politicians who have made mistakes or perhaps "rorted" their travel allowance but were never maliciously prosecuted and gaoled at all, let alone gaoled for two years as meted out to Burke by Judge Hammond.

That subtle differentiation of who gets charged, allows some unaware perhaps unthinking journalists to refer to Burke as "the disgraced former premier". But that same epithet could have easily been applied to Carmen Lawrence, (and a similar epithet to about 20 federal members) had someone just as malicious and prejudiced decided to charge her (and the Federal MP's) with stealing!

Given that it is very easy to make mistakes with travel claims, particularly by country members and ministers who travel frequently and rely on their staff to complete claims, both Burke and Lawrence should never have been charged.

There is a fine line sometimes between being cherished and canonised and being castigated and crucified by malicious enemies, then the media and public opinion.

There but for the grace of god go many of us mere mortals.

Children Overboard Fiasco: Silverstone's version of events doesn't make sense.

Serious flaws in Silverstone's (on left) secret submission to "Children Overboard" Inquiry.

The Desert Rat knows from the Senate inquiry into the infamous "Children Overboard" fiasco that Brigadier Mike Silverstone made a written submision to the inquiry or tabled written notes of his activities.

We can presume that Silverstone made a request to the Senate Committee to keep the submission or notes secret, because the submission or tabled papers does not appear on the list of public submissions to the Inquiry or tabled papers. Under Senate practice, all submissions and tabled documents are public and listed, except where the person making the submission has asked, and the Committee agreed, to keep it secret.

What we know from material tabled to the inquiry revealed, is that Brigadier Silverstone claimed he had scribbled the word "child" into the notes after the call from Commander Banks. The word "child" replaced "men thrown over side". Silverstone never rang back to Commodore Banks to check that crucial change in the notes of his conversation with Commodore Banks. "Child" we known later blossomed into "children".

We also know that some three or four days later, Silverstone added to his record of the phone conversation to Commodore Banks, a notation of the supposed time of the call (7.20am Darwin time).
The time of this call is in dispute, and importantly, Silverstone's evidence was not challenged on this issue.

This alleged time added days later is important, because the time zone of the HMAS Adeliade was 2 hour and 30 minutes behind Darwin time, that is at 4.50 am.

The HMAS Adelaide logs record the first man overboard after first light at 5.06am followed by further man overboards between 5.43am and 5.56 am - an hour later. This latter time interval was when the fictitious "child overboard" incident supposedly occurred - a whole hour after the time of 7.20am that Silverstone added to his notes.

According to the Senate report transcript page 41:

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.

It doesn't add-up in the Desert Rat's calculations and it's strange it wasn't challenged by the Labor Senators on the Committee.

In fact, it was dark at 4.50am where the Adelaide was positioned 100 nautical miles north of Christmas Island; due south of Djakarta - some 2800km west of Darwin.

No-one jumps overboard in the dark!

The ALP Senators on the Committee seemed to be preoccupied with nailing the Howard Government and its Ministers - nailing military or naval small fry was a distraction and not politically in their interests - blame needed to be pinned on the Howard Government.

The time of the call was not confirmed by Brigadier Silverstone with Commodore Banks and it was some four week after the incident before Banks was even contacted!

The Desert Rat can not find any record of Silverstone contacting Banks within the following month to clear up the confusion. The rabbit was off and running.

How much did this one phone call fiasco cost Australia and its taxpayers? It all revolved around a disputed conversation between Silverstone and Banks - a conversation that Silverstone version has been proved didn't happen. Did Commander Banks tell a lie or did he get it bizarrely wrong or did Silverstone tell a lie or get it bizarrely wrong?

The political benefit and destruction was all at Silverstone's end of the conversation and should have been confirmed by him in writing immediately - which it wasn't.

Brigadier Mike Silverstone has now retired to the invisible job as the Executive Director of the Corruption and Crime Commission in Western Australia.

How good is Mike Silverstone's memory?

Why did Silverstone have false testimony charges laid where the exact detail of a lawful conversation could not be recalled accurately?

Michael Greenberg of the New York Review of Books in a very enlightening review of Sue Halpern's Can't Remember What I Forgot: The Good News from the Front Lines of Memory Research - shows just how dangerous the Corruption and Crime Commission charges of false testimony can be.

When the Desert Rat read the various media accounts of Julian Grill's false testimony charge and trial before a Magistrate, it sounded like Grill denied or thought he never spoke to Mike Allen at the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, which was not the case. In fact Julian Grill admitted under oath that he had a number of conversations with Mike Allen about a variety of planning matters - which were all intercepted and taped by the CCC, but did not recall a conversation which apparently touched briefly on Smith's Beach which was a matter being dealt with by Brian Burke.

What is both strange and malicious is that it was subsequently determined (when some crucial evidence, known to, but deliberately left out by the CCC), that Julian Grill had not done anything unlawful nor had Mike Allen a senior public servant. Yet the CCC supremos Silverstone and Roberts-Smith still pursued an expensive prosecution of alleged false testimony against Grill. A case where they have to prove intent to give false testimony - even though the whole process was lawful. Mind boggling?

The point of all this vindictive prosecution escapes the Desert Rat. Halpin's account of recent memory research shows how dangerous charges like this can be, even where very serious matters that involve unlawful conduct are dealt with.

Giving evidence on matters at the CCC public hearings circus would be incredibly stressful, because the CCC does not advise the victim about what matters, on which they intend to publicly interrogate them. The CCC have usually seized all the victims files and records so that they cannot refresh your memory on issues they may anticipate could arise. Witnesses can be maliciously set up by this evil and poisonous practice used by the CCC.

Greenberg writes in his review (which can be read here):

In her fascinating book about memory loss and the efforts of scientists to understand it, Sue Halpern reports an experiment in which members of the Cambridge Psychological Society were asked to reconstruct a meeting of the society that had taken place two weeks before. The average person was barely able to recall 8 percent of what had happened, and almost half of this was incorrect, peppered with the recollection of events that had never occurred or that had occurred elsewhere.

Such paltry power of retrieval in an educated, and supposedly attentive, group is not surprising. Memory, Halpern reminds us, "is not an archive," nor does it record in real time. It lives in the brain "in chemical traces. The traces can fade...and they can be augmented," depending on one's experience and observation. The intensity of an experience may sharpen the memory of it, while making it even less accurate. During situations of extreme stress, for example, the body is flooded with damaging amounts of the hormone cortisol, causing communication relayed by neurotransmitters and other chemicals in the brain to break down.

Why is Silverstone's Dad's Army swarming with ex-military?

Is oxymoronic taskmaster Mike Silverstone recruiting foot-soldiers for Dad's Army?

A few oxymoron came to mind when the Desert Rat discovered that Donald Barrett the Liberal candidate for the seat of Cockburn in the recent state election, was, prior to the election, an intelligence analyst (oxymoron) with the Crime and Corruption Commission.

Did Donald Barrett ever work for Brigadier Children Overboard Mike Silverstone in the army? Why is the CCC swarming with retired military - army to boot?

Is there real corruption involved in the appointment of staff to the CCC? Does it help to be a retired army serviceman? Does it help to have worked previously for or under Brigadier Mike Silverstone?

Our erstwhile CCC intelligence analyst Barrett must have been a little slow off the mark as he failed to make any headway against Left Faction super-dill Fran "How about a threesome?" Logan. Logan is the Left Faction slug and ALP Member for Cockburn who presided over Western Power board members, public servants and consultants who ripped off Western Power and taxpayers during his oversight of the botched break-up of the utility. He also presided over regular power shortages each summer, the Varanus Island fiasco and couldn't string two coherent sentences together and left us with a dysfunctional government power system. Just as well AlintaGas was privatised because Logan would have stuffed that up as well.

Donald Barrett tells us in the election blurb that he was in the army for 18 years, but says nothing about experience in military intelligence work. His rank isn't given so he was presumably an under achiever or wasn't into self promotion - not something you would expect from a political hopeful.

But then again they are really slow down at the CCC.

It is an open secret that these retired soldiers are having a working holiday at the CCC. Perhaps they are well suited to "intelligence" work in such massive vacuum or empty space such as the CCC, undertaking government intelligence or military intelligence, whatever it may be. Was Barrett the person who "discovered" the false evidence about Brian Burke and Julian Grill? Or was it the wee beastie who wishes to appear invisible, Mike Silverstone who dreams up the false evidence? The CCC clowns seem to equate military justice with civilian justice - as dispensed by our courts. That's not surprising as CCC supremo Roberts-Smith is a former military Judge Advocate.

We can be thankful that this potpourri of chablis sipping cut-lunch soldiers and amateurs is not running military operations in Afghanistan. Given their performance at the CCC and in the Timor Sea (Children Overboard), they should have remained military retirees.

Sentence first - verdict afterwards. Silverstone's incompetence or maliciously deliberate delays?

The "House of Cards" Smith's Beach Inquiry now becomes Alice in Wonderland trials.

Unbelievably, Mike "Children Overboard" Silverstone and his minions at the Corruption and Crime Commission have taken over two years to lay new charges of giving false evidence against Julian Grill, Brian Burke, Norm Marlborough and two public servants. The charges relate to giving false evidence at public hearings in 2006, into the Smith Beach Development.

Is this undue delay, just plain incompetence on Siverstone's part or is the CCC deliberately delaying the process to bankrupt both Burke and Grill, damage their reputations and stave-off any embarrassing acquittals?

Incompetent outfits like the CCC should be made to bring charges within a reasonable time - perhaps 6 months, unless new evidence emerges.

Effectively, these people have already served more than a two year sentence and the charges have not yet gone to trial, let alone a verdict.

Like Alice's experience, is it all just a bad dream? Can such unreasonable delays be real?

"Sentence first-verdict afterwards" said the Queen.

These Western Australian citizens have lost their jobs, their livelihoods, their businesses and many of their friends in the ALP and those who are employed in government; as they are damned if they associate with them while under investigation and suspicion.

Friends won't speak freely to them because they know Mike Silverstone and his cabal may have a record of everything that is said, and photographs of them.

They may, in the future, hear selective parts of a conversation salaciously played out-of-context in some court. Some, possibly all, have had to live with the intrusion of phone bugs, secret cameras, listening devices and eyes prying over personal emails, mail and faxes - for over three years now.

Not to mention legal costs of $250 000 to $350 000 for some of them and thousands of hours of work going over details, court transcripts, records (that haven't been seized) to respond to the various charges relating to the very same matter - charges that never seem to end.

Like the current abuse of process by the CCC, justice was not exactly done in this Wonderland trial:

Alice's Evidence
`Let the jury consider their verdict,’ the King said, for about the twentieth time that day.
`No, no!’ said the Queen. `Sentence first–verdict afterwards.’
`Stuff and nonsense!’ said Alice loudly. `The idea of having the sentence first!’
`Hold your tongue!’ said the Queen, turning purple.
`I won’t!’ said Alice.
`Off with her head!’ the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. Nobody moved.
`Who cares for you?’ said Alice, (she had grown to her full size by this time.) `You’re nothing but a pack of cards!’
At this the whole pack rose up into the air, and came flying down upon her: she gave a little scream, half of fright and half of anger, and tried to beat them off, and found herself lying on the bank, with her head in the lap of her sister, who was gently brushing away some dead leaves that had fluttered down from the trees upon her face.
`Wake up, Alice dear!’ said her sister; `Why, what a long sleep you’ve had!’
`Oh, I’ve had such a curious dream!’ said Alice, she told her sister.

Truth is sometimes stranger than fiction.

Silverstone dodges Senate questioning

Was the Major-General protecting the timorous Brigadier?

The Desert Rat was looking at transcripts of the Senate Committee of Inquiry into the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity and noticed Corruption and Crime Commission were listed to give evidence.

The Committee seemed to the Desert Rat, to be going through the motions. The transcript of evidence revealed most was rehashed material already in their 2008 Annual Report. CCC supremo Major General Robert-Smith fielded all the questions and his responses were about as dry and interesting as camel dung.

Just towards the end of Roberts-Smith's comments, the Desert Rat realised that the Executive Director Brigadier Mike Children Overboard Silverstone was at the Major General's side but hadn't uttered as word during the long and boring session. The Desert Rat only knew because Roberts-Smith asked the Chair for Silverstone to be excused!

Mr Roberts-Smith— Madam Chair, I wonder if Mr Silverstone could be excused at this stage.

He has an urgent commitment elsewhere.

CHAIR— Of course. Thank you very much.

Mr Silverstone— Thank you.

CHAIR— We will shortly be winding this up, but I do have a couple of quick questions. I note that the parliament committee has a formal role in promoting integrity in the public sector. What does it actually do?

There are a number of explanations for Roberts-Smith talkativeness and Mr Invisible Mike Silverstone's silence.

One is that Roberts-Smith has no confidence in Silverstone answering questions from Senators; that Silverstone is a timorous and shy beastie who now lacks any confidence; or that he was just there to waste taxpayers money and was possibly asleep.

For someone that has been paid about $1 million dollars in salary since being at the CCC, it must be retirement after military retirement for Brigadier Mike Silverstone.

The Desert Rat wonders if Mike Silverstone is double dipping by collecting an army pension as well as an inflated CCC salary.