More Bill DeGaris Alleged Lawyering

Dear Availees,
                   Apologies if I've used this stuff before, but I'm trying to clear-out my 'Draft Section', and by my own admission, have somewhat lost track of what I have posted recently...(well I'm assuming the fact that it's still in 'Drafts' means that we haven't used it-Ed)...fair point, but I still feel that maybe we have possibly referred availees to it in other posts or something like that...anyhoos, if I have done this stuff already, y'all can just skip past this post and I've got several more to come in the days ahead, eg, the litany of lies from Mt Gambier City Council about this farcical 'New Pool Project', and some more positive stuff about 'Ideas To Improve Mt Gambier', etc...(but I thought you said you were positive about MGCC's raft of deceits re the pool thingy?-Ed)...I am, I've used 'positive' there in one of it's other definitions, ie, as stated, 'up-beat', the opposite to negative, and 'to improve', you with me now?...(English can be such a confusing language-Ed)...indeed...

Of course it helps if you're not a moron, enter Bill DeGaris...(Billy! mate! how's it going with your latest round of vacuous threats to this 'ere blog? sorry Billy, can't hear you, mate-Ed)...come on Ed, calm down, I think that availees can discern for themselves just exactly what sort of low, lying Paedophile Protecting Betrayer our mate Billy is, gourd knows we've dealt with his corruptly inept threats often enough, and covered them regularly here on TMGI...new availees might want to just scan back through posts from February-April this year (2018) to get an idea of just exactly what a cowardly incompetent betrayer Bill DeGaris is...(and if they haven't already been exposed to his vacuously pathetic pseudo-lawyering disguised as bilious threats, well just read this dross below-Ed)...spot on Ed, spot on...

I apologise further that I didn't also save the District Court 'Order' referred to by Billy, it was briefly on the New Matilda website before being withdrawn/removed...(and one assumes in response to yet further threats from the Court and/or Billy, mate-Ed)...indeed, but I did read it and have no hesitation in identifying that 'Order' as yet another terrifically corrupt product of the rancidly Pro-Paedophile corrupt South Australian Courts, that concluded with a farcical paragraph entirely in capitals, stating that if anyone discusses that 'Secret Report', then Matilda Duncan will be gaoled...just another rancidly corrupt SA Courts attempt to attack and silence the victim and protect the paedophile who raped her...(South Australia, what a great place to raise kids-Ed)...and there's our li'l mate Billy...

Tell you what Billy mate, why don't you come threaten me again you gutless, corrupt sack-a'-incompetence, and next time I see you in the street, don't cower behind your associate like last time, try verballing me in the same way you try to threaten me with your moronic letters...(he ain't got what it takes-Ed)...no Ed, no he doesn't, because he's a corrupt and cowardly liar and betrayer and he knows that I'll verbally dismantle him the way that I have done others...and some people in this town apparently still wonder why I refer to Mt Gambier's Political and Social Elite as a 'Pro-Paedophile Ring'...(whilst many others quietly understand and support that position-Ed)...indeed they do Ed, indeed they do...

And I'll say it again, for the benefit of any new availees, as offered/requested last time you threatened me, anytime you wanna' get it on Billy, mate...(maaate-Ed)...I'm more than happy to attend your office and participate in a fully recorded formal 'discussion' about your rancidly corrupt betrayal of me, my child, and all the other kids and families involved in the St Martins Lutheran School Child Abuse Cover-up, a Cover-up that you are intimately and complicitly involved in...(never gunna' happen, because he is exactly as you have described, a cowardly and corrupt incompetent who is intimately complicit in the St Martins Cover-up-Ed)...indeed, and I'm quietly confident that several other fathers are more than willing to attend that recorded meeting to discuss with you you're betrayal of them and their kids and their families...see ya' round Billy, mate...

And again, to support my position/statements re the 'facts' of the assault related to this Billy Threat-Letter, apart from this stuff that is publicly available at New Matilda, I have also read in, and refer availees to, the Sydney Morning Herald, July 29th 2017, where-in the student involved is quoted as saying on a sign at a rally, "Here's what the University of Adelaide's response to my rape cost me."...but I don't need to defend New Matilda from Billy's billiousness, because, as evidenced below, they are more than capable of defending themselves...enjoy...

FROM: Bill DeGaris, De Garis Lawyers
SENT: Sunday, 17 December 2017 at 11:23 am
TO: Chris Graham, New Matilda
CC: Mr Graeme William Lyall (Plaintiff)

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL:
Dear Mr Graham,
Given that you only contacted Mr Lyall for “comment” on Friday, and given your threat to publish an article based on the Catholic Church Confidential Report (“Report”) involving Mr Lyall tomorrow, Monday 18^th December, we corresponded with you by email twice on Friday 15^thDecember. I served you with the Copy of the SA Distract Court Order against Ms Matilda Duncan, of which you claimed you were unaware.
I also had a short telephone conversation with you, bringing the existence of the Order to your attention.
I wish to confirm with you that we are instructed to bring proceedings for contempt of the Court Order should you in any way attempt to refer to, or rely on the Confidential Report, or publish in defiance of the Court Order. Our reasons have been set out previously to you and include:

1. The only credible source of the Confidential Report, which you confirm you have read, is Ms Matilda Duncan. If not directly, then indirectly she has furnished you with the Report. Any credible journalist would rapidly reach the conclusion that the only source of the Report was Ms Duncan. I have canvassed that previously, when you claimed your journalists right to protection of sources. Ms Duncan is the only possible source, directly, or indirectly.
2. Ms Duncan is restrained from publishing or circulating the Report, directly or indirectly.
3. You now have a copy of the Court Order, and are fully aware of its contents.
4. The questions  you posed to Mr Lyall are based on matters referred to in the Report. However, the questions also relate to other matters clearly aired by Ms Duncan which are not referred to in the Report, such as the allegation relating to the UniSA, and James Morrison Academy. Those matters have only been raised by Ms Duncan (who, by the way, never attended the JMA at UniSA.) It is an inescapable conclusion you have spoken with Ms Duncan.
5. In your conversation with me on the phone, you referred to having read Ms Duncan’s diary. Clearly that has come directly from Ms Duncan, and is not something in the public domain. This strengthens my belief that Ms Duncan has clearly been the source of the Report to you, directly or indirectly.

By you publishing any part of the Report, or relying on any allegations, investigations, “facts” or other material set out in the Confidential report, you will clearly compromise the Court Order and the Confidentiality of the Report.
Just to be clear, you stated to me that the Court Order does not bind you, and that you had taken “legal advice” to that effect.
That is not the case at all. I suggest that you, and your advisors, read the annexed extract from a Westlaw AU publication, “Injunctions Law and Practice,” where it is clearly stated that;
“where it is asserted that a stranger to the litigation is guilty of contempt, it must be shown that there was a wilful interference with the administration of justice, ie an intention on his part to interfere with, or impede the administration of justice., That intention can be inferred.”
I have provided you with a copy of the Court Order, of which you electronically acknowledged receipt. I have provided you with strong reasons, at least on the balance of probability, but closer I suggest to beyond reasonable doubt, that the source material you have alleged you rely on has come directly, or at least indirectly from Ms Duncan.
In the circumstances if you proceed to publish on the basis of the Report, we will bring contempt proceedings against both Ms Duncan, you and your publisher. This ought to be communicated to your publisher immediately.
THIS LETTER AND EMAIL CONTENTS WILL BE TENDERED TO THE COURT ON THE ISSUE OF PUNISHMENT OF THOSE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF THE DISRICT COURT ORDERS SERVED ON YOU, AND WILL BE TENDERED ON THE ISSUE OF COSTS.

---

Tomorrow: The Orange Roughy - A Week In USofA Politics

Or, Why Nick Fletcher Loathes Donald Trump...(because it's just too easy?-Ed)...well indeed...

I am Nick Fletcher and this is my blog and if you think that's the last time I'm comin' for you Billy mate, then you don't know me at all...(oh I think he knows who you are, and exactly how you roll-Ed)...indeed, and to all other availees, cheers and laters...