Howdy dear availees right across the Third Rock...in the time-honoured traditions of 'The Best Laid Plans of Mice and Men' meets 'Three Steps Forward, Two Steps Back' we here at TMGI genuinely and enthusiastically launched back into doin' this 'ere blog, only to have our purest intentions and desires abruptly cruelled by the uncaring fates of circumstance, technology, and geography...(whaaa?-Ed)...I was unexpectedly away from this 'ere keyboard for several days and couldn't get my frickin' laptop to work where I was...(well why not just say that in the first instance?-Ed)...goin' for a bit of dramatic effect/poetic license...(well don't, it's just silly-Ed)...so anyhoos, here we are back again, exhausted from nights sleeping on the floor, mucho mucho hours behind the wheel, etc, etc, so we're just gunna' pump-out a cut-'n'-paste post to keep things rolling along...(well that's another fine tradition-Ed)...what is?...(for us to promise a particular topic "Tomorrow", then lob-back days even weeks later with something completely different-Ed)...fair call, but if that's how it has to be, well, so be it...
And it's not really a pure cut-'n'-paste post 'cos it's part of what I've continued to try to do re the rank corruption embodied by South Australia's farcical Independent Commission(er) Against Corruption...(not 'resolved by', "embodied by"?-Ed)...yeah, it's fundamentally set-up to protect crooked politicians, their corrupt public servant mates, etc, and simultaneously try to justify itself by attacking mid-level nobodies...(no offense to those nobodies involved, not least of all 'cos we're included in that number-Ed)...indeed, and what we've been deliberately subjected to is nothing other than Retributional Political Persecution for speaking out about SA's Institutionalised and often Pro-Paedophile Corruption...(which is why POLICE vs Fletcher MTGMC-15-72 can and indeed should be described as the Pro-Paedophile Political Persecution of a Whistleblower-Ed)...exactly...and I don't think I have, but apologies if I've posted this 'submission' before, I've somewhat lost track of my many various 'Draft' posts and what's actually been posted...
Here is the first of several posts to come about my attempts to re-engage with the Institutionalised Corruption that is the South Australian Parliament...early in 2021 I managed to politely insist/force my way onto the witness list for the Legislative Assembly (Upper House) Select Committee (Special Inquiry) into the Damage, Harm or Adverse Outcomes Resulting from ICAC Investigations...(and how'd that work out for ya'?-Ed)...well, I didn't get arrested for appearing or anything, if that's what you're asking...(well not arrested yet-Ed)...fair point, and indeed a topic we covered during my personal testimony/appearance...
However, dear availees will not be shocked to learn that not one single word of my submission/testimony/evidence/documentation made it into the Final Report...anyhoos, so here's my original submission from February 2021...***
Select Committee
Damage, Harm, or Adverse Outcomes Resulting from ICAC Investigations
GPO Box 572Adelaide SA 5001
Email: SCICAC@parliament.sa.gov.au
Dear Committee Members,
On 28th February 2018 I was 'Convicted' in the Mt Gambier Court of eighteen (18) alleged breaches of the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption Act 2012, Section 56 (a) and/or (b), and fined a maximum of $30,000 per count, totalling $540,000. Because I have no money, this was commuted to a Community Service Order of 260hrs, plus a $3,500 fine for Victims of Crime, Court costs, etc. This leaves the precedent penalty at $30,000 per count.
For the record, here is that piece of legislation;
56—Publication of information and evidence
A person must not, except as authorised by the Commissioner or a court hearing proceedings for an offence against this Act, publish, or cause to be published—
(a) information tending to suggest that a particular person is, has been, may be, or may have been, the subject of a complaint, report, assessment, investigation or referral under this Act; or
(b) information that might enable a person who has made a complaint or report under this Act to be identified or located.
Two of the 18 'counts' were talking to local media The Border Watch and ABC Radio, even though no articles were published/aired, and a third was identifying myself as the complainant/reporter.
Please note that I am a private citizen, and am not now nor have ever been a public servant, elected official, government contractor, or any other person who officially falls within the auspices of the ICAC Act 2012. As I understand it, there is no specific reference to 'private citizens' anywhere in the original ICAC Act 2012, or recent 'Amendments', to indicate that the ICAC Act has any jurisdiction governing the actions of private citizens.
As proven later in Court, ICAC Bruce Lander was the complainant against me, personally referring me directly to SAPol Anti-Corruption Branch in early February 2014, allegedly without any relevant pre-investigation by either the Ombudsman or the Office of Public Integrity.
Also proven in Court, this led to the establishment of the ICAC/SAPol 'Operation Baritone' in mid-February 2014, an 'Operation' with multiple 'teams' of officers involved, etc, that is solely about me and my blog, The Mount Gambier Independent. In Court, SAPol witnesses alleged that they did not know who specifically instigated 'Operation Baritone' or on what date it was established/ratified, etc, it just happened.
The first I knew of any of this was when two SAPol Anti-Corruption detectives came to my home on 7th May 2014 to try and interview me, and returned the next day 8th May 2014, using a generic Search Warrant to officially 'raid' me, and seize my laptop as 'evidence'.
When I contacted the South East Community Legal Service they were so confused by the wording of Section 56 and the lack of relevant definitions, etc, that they felt compelled to write to Comm Lander seeking guidance, explanation, and/or advice. Copy attached.
SECLS questions included 'what does “tending to suggest” mean?', 'what does “to publish” mean?', and 'are we allowed to speak to our client, because Sec 56 seems to forbid Mr Fletcher even speaking to a lawyer'.
Nonsensical wording and lack of definitions aside, the SECLS's confusion was exacerbated because it was/is the precedent application/prosecution of Section 56, so therefore there was no Case Law to refer to for information.
Comm Lander responded but denied responsibility and refused to advise, and the SECLS wrote a second time, asking the same questions about the vague wording and lack of definitions. This time Comm Lander responded with an official ICAC 'Authorisation'. Copies attached.
As SAPol documents prove, I had not yet been 'charged' when this 'Authorisation' was issued on 28th July 2014 meaning that I, a private citizen who had not yet been charged with any offence, needed official ICAC approval to speak with my lawyer, family, friends, or medical practitioner.
As proven in Court and by ICAC documents and the Parliament's Hansard, Comm Lander went to (then) Attorney-General John Rau in September/October 2014, and had the ICAC Act 2012 amended, via the ICAC Miscellaneous Amendment Act November 2014, to include a definition of “To Publish”, the direct specific issue raised in writing by SECLS.
My trial commenced on 3rd February 2015, but I had not been Summonsed or even 'Charged', and I found out when a friend rang to tell me about an article in The Border Watch reporting that I had missed my Court appearance the day before.
As Magistrate Ian White ultimately conceded, this meant that I was prosecuted 'retrospectively', and convicted under the wrong definition of 'To Publish', but that 'conviction' remains.
The 'trial' ran for 3 years, through dozens of Pre-Trial Conferences and adjournments, three different Magistrates, and three different actual 'trial' periods in November 2016, March 2017, and then November/December 2017, and the 3 'Verdict hearings, February-April 2018.
Please find attached copies of my September 2013 complaint letter to the Ombudsman's Office and my second letter to local Member Don Pegler (also sent to the Ombudsman). Under legislative requirements these matters were then sent by them both to the Office of Public Integrity and ICAC.
I deliberately chose to report to my local Member and the Ombudsman and try to avoid ICAC because I already had concerns about the 'secrecy' apparent in ICAC legislation.
In early October 2013 I was informed that the ICAC had received and was investigating my report. I call it a report not a complaint because it was a strictly factual account of events I had personally witnessed and was also recorded on MGCC's Minutes from their Full Meeting 17th September 2013, as provided with my letter to Don Pegler.
I was given vague directions about not being allowed to talk about my complaint, and immediately and repeatedly sought clarification from the ICAC and Office of Public Integrity. Three times I was sent the same one-page information sheet, where-in the only actual explanation is just a verbatim copy of the actual Section 56.
This alleged ICAC investigation ran from early October 2013 until early January 2014, and I received a two paragraph letter dated 13th January 2014 informing me that the investigation had been concluded and no action was going to be taken, which I started blogging about.
There had been no public hearings or any hearings that I was aware of, and I proved that in Court, where the ICAC officers confirmed that their entire 'investigation' was a 30 minute, un-recorded chat with me in a Mt Gambier cafe, and another un-recorded chat with (then) CEO Mark McShane in a corridor of the Adelaide Convention Centre.
There were no hearings, public or private, and apart from CEO McShane, the perpetrators of the Corruption, ie, the individual Councillors and senior Council staff, were not asked a single question. ICAC's alleged investigation of multiple issues of Corruption within an entire Council was less than an hour of unrecorded 'chats' with the CEO and the 'complainant'. This is not my opinion or a version of events, this is fact as I have proven in Court, and is recorded in the Court transcript.
Have Members of the Committee ever heard of either 1) the 'official' 2013/14 ICAC investigation of the entire Mt Gambier City Council, or 2) the 3-year prosecution and conviction of a citizen under the ICAC Act 2012, Section 56?
Despite my 3-year 'trial' being the precedent prosecution of the extraordinarily powerful and all encompassing Section 56, neither I nor the proceedings are mentioned anywhere on the ICAC website, not even where other trials and outcomes are listed. Despite my trial being repeatedly reported in The Border Watch and on ABC South East Radio, and me notifying Adelaide media, it has never been reported in the Adelaide media or elsewhere.
This reportage and open trial process does mean that everything involved is not further subject to Section 56 restrictions, and I request that the Committee publish my submission and any further correspondence, evidence, documents and testimony that I provide.
This submission is literally the tip of the iceberg, eg, I have not included the multiple appearances of ICAC personnel as SAPol Prosecution witnesses during my 'trial'. Also, issues of the ICAC Act compromising Constitutional Law were repeatedly raised in Court but never resolved.
All I have done is try to get appropriate action about multiple obvious issues of Maladministration within Mt Gambier City Council, and I am the one who has been prosecuted and punished.
This process has dominated my life since 2014, and the many aspects of the still ongoing perpetual legal proceedings have caused huge trauma for me and my family, particularly for my elderly Mum who has lived with the constant concern that I was/am going to be gaoled.
Given that my prosecution and 'conviction' is of enormous importance to every person in South Australia, and the extremely convoluted and extensive nature of my interaction with ICAC, and the vast amounts of relevant documentation involved, etc, I request that I be called to appear before the Committee because this would really be the only way to negotiate through this issue in a thorough but specific manner.
Yours,
Nick Fletcher
PS: I apologise that I cannot get the identified documents to attach to the email, so I have sent them via Australia Post, but please accept my submission in the interim.
***...(I've said it before and I'm sayin' it again, but strewth, what a saga, what a ludicrous saga-Ed)...indeed, imagine what it cost for all of those ICAC peeps/cops/Magistrates/Court personnel/etc just to appear in Court multiple times across 3 years...(totalling was it 11 full Court days across 3 main sittings/hearings?-Ed)...yep, as described above, my very own personal SAPol (police) 'Operation Baritone' with several 'teams' involved, Police Prosecutions, Courts, and vasts amounts of related office time and documentation, years in Court, etc, etc, etc...(and all to get you for telling the truth about a fake ICAC investigation-Ed)...exactly, but more specifically to get me and to get this 'ere blog for speaking-out for years about corruption, especially the SA-State sanctioned St Martins Lutheran School Child Abuse Cover-up...
I particularly draw dear availees attention to the bizarrely undefinable nonsense language of the actual Section 56...I challenge y'all, nay I dare ye to try and define that jibberish...(mate! no fair! what the living shreck does "tending to suggest" even mean?-Ed)...exactly, and try "is, has been, may be, or may have been" on for size...combine those 2 loads of bollocks, and literally/actually anything anyone says and/or does on virtually any topic is, can and/or will potentially be in breach of the ICAC Act 2012 Sec 56, not least of all 'cos that issue/incident/person "may be" investigated by ICAC at some undetermined point in the future...it's a deliberately vague nonsense designed to be used in particular against Whistleblowers, with a clear desire/motivation to hide SA's Institutionalised Corruption and protect the Corrupt...
And if that's wet ya' appetite for what is arguably concurrently one of SA's biggest and yet most ludicrous trials, upcoming posts we'll cover my actual testimony...as covered/proven in that testimony, the various documents I refer to...(you mean like SAPol and ICAC emails/letters proving you needed written ICAC permission to speak with your lawyer/family/friends/doctor even before you were 'Charged' with anything?-Ed)...yeah, exactly like those documents...well, via this 'ere Inquiry, many of them have been officially lodged with the Parliament and duly acknowledged...but before we even get to that...
Tomorrow: Is Mt Gambier City Council Going/Already Bankrupt? The Amalgamation Scam
And we're not talking morally and/or credibility-wise and/or competence-wise, whatevs...('cos they're all a' that and then some-Ed)...indeed, but in this context we're referring to the basic 'Financial' application of the term 'Bankrupt' and how it directly relates to MGCC's, and therefore Mt Gambier Ratepayer's precarious position teetering on the precipice of the fiscal abyss that is the $50million+ that MGCC has borrowed to pay for the massive FARC (Farcical Aquatic Recreation Centre)...(and you're suggesting that this teeteringness is what's prompted this sudden announcement of a proposed MGCC/District Council of Grant 'Amalgamation'?-Ed)...I ain't suggestin' nuthin', I'm calling it outright...MGCC have driven the city and it's ever-suffering Ratepayers into a quagmire-pit of decades of spiralling debt, and I reckon that the Labor state government know that...(and they, Labor, are trying to delay the inevitable plummet/collapse/drowning by 'spreading the load' onto the Ratepayers in DCofG?-Ed)...exactly, spread the debt load and hopefully MGCC won't go under...(mate, we are screwed-Ed)...yes, yes we are, and it remains our responsibility to stop the financial cancer spreading to DCofG...(so if I was a MGCC Ratepayer I'd be voting 'Yes' to amalgamation?-Ed)...well, in a very selfish sense, I'd exactly agree...(but if I was in DCofG I'd be demanding we stayed an independent Council?-Ed)...spot on...
Well there's tomorrow's post in a nutshell, but there's heaps of nuance and political machination to account for so tomorrow's post will be a biggie...(see y'all then, ciao-Ed)...
I am Nick Fletcher and this is my blog...cheers and laters...
No comments:
Post a Comment