HOW TO SACK ALL TOWNSVILLE CITY COUNCILLORS- QLD AUSTRALIA –PAT COLEMAN
HOW TO SACK ALL TOWNSVILLE CITY COUNCILLORS- QLD
AUSTRALIA –PAT COLEMAN
“Any
Person can bring an action in the Supreme Court Under the Qld Local Government
Act 2009 ,for judicial review of qualifications (s157) of the council and whether they are therefore
acting without authority (s158) cos they
are taken to be disqualified for committing electoral and other offences (s153)
https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2009-017#ch.6-pt.2-div.1”
(NOTE: 23/10/19 The Electoral Commission of Qld has fucked over all my
links to donations returns in my articles. They have changed all links. To make
it easier to view these broken links go to my page with the new links in a new
browser and scroll down to the relevant return in the article. Page link here: https://cynicismcentraltownsvilleaustralia.blogspot.com/2019/10/changed-ecq-donor-returns-links-page.html
)
Read my previous article at https://cynicismcentraltownsvilleaustralia.blogspot.com/2018/07/scoop-crimes-of-townsville-mayor-jenny.html
On 22/11/2016 , in the
Townsville Council Minutes Item 11,
the Matter of Townsville devlopers -Maidment Group's
Sanctum development came up . The entire council declared an interest
because they had said they received donations from Maidment and McConaghy
Properties (McConaghy is Castletown and This was hidden behind the “Lentenyard” donation . This is at p 8 of the pdf file and
p9146 . They Voted anyway at p
11pdf /p9149 , and p16 pdf/ p9154 . At p 20 pdf/ p9158 to p 23pdf / 9161 ,
and at p53 pdf / 9191 to p56 pdf 9194 It was recommended by Councils
Planning officer that the
preliminary approval be rejected on 23 grounds and it was passed because
of the donation https://www.townsville.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/26106/OC-mins-22.11.16.pdf
Like other donors since uncovered , The Jenny Hill Gang hid donors.
Any Person can bring an action in the Supreme Court Under the Qld Local Government Act 2009 ,for judicial review of qualifications (s157) of the council and whether they are therefore acting without authority (s158) cos they are taken to be disqualified for committing electoral and other offences (s153) https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2009-017#ch.6-pt.2-div.1
- The Council approved an extension of Maidments “Sanctum” development at “North Shore” on 13/12/2016 . No interests were declared in relation to Miadment in that meeting https://www.townsville.qld.gov.au/about-council/news-and-publications/media-releases/2016/december/council-approves-sanctum-extension Minutes 13/12/16 : https://www.townsville.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/26107/Confirmed-Minutes-Ordinary-Council-13-December-2016.pdf
- Since the minutes of the 22/11/2016 Council meeting, it can be an unarguable proposition that THE JENNY HILL GANG – knew of the Maidment donation . In fact no effort was made to amend that return to make it clear and unambiguous on what day, how much and who paid the donation as agent for the third party. Complaints have been laid and still the minutes are up UNAMENDED . This is because changing them brings up the charge of destroying evidence and perverting the course of justice . See extracted law for that below :
Like other donors since uncovered , The Jenny Hill Gang hid donors.
Any Person can bring an action in the Supreme Court Under the Qld Local Government Act 2009 ,for judicial review of qualifications (s157) of the council and whether they are therefore acting without authority (s158) cos they are taken to be disqualified for committing electoral and other offences (s153) https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2009-017#ch.6-pt.2-div.1
Anyone doing so must subpoena the bank records of
The Jenny Hill Gang , and her Election PR mob- Dee Madigan’s “Campaign Edge”, a Labor front company
In that proceeding , you can use that to try the
issues that will cause them to be disqualified .
You can try to privately prosecute , but if under Chapter
70 of the The Qld Criminal Code they force you to provide security for costs go
with the perjury charge only as this is enough to disqualifiy them for
intergrity offences under s153 of The Local Government Act https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1899-009#sch.1-pt.8-ch.70
You need to get them to lie about the donation by
Maidment for the last election . Once you do that you can get the beak to
charge them with either perverting the course of justice or for perjury under
ss697 of The Code https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1899-009#sch.1-sec.697.
THE JENNY HILL GANG , of whom
SHE was AGENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE ELECTORAL LAWS At the time under s43 of
The Local government Electoral Act https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2011-027#sec.43
And after amendment in May and June 2018 See s174, s178, s197, s207 , s210(3) , s212,
s213, s261-275, QLD Electoral Act -s109
, s117 , 124 and s130 of The Local Government Act 2011 QLD ;
(i)
-put in an intentionally misleading return which was unlawful;
(ii) And
did so, so that if they lost, Maidment
could say they were loyal to the LNP aligned Jayne Arlett Team.
(iii)
Maidment also failed to put in a third party return as required by law under
s124 of the Local Government Electoral Act
https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2011-027#sec.124
(iv) She
Jenny Hill , is/was the legal group
agent for them and has enforceable reporting and disclosure obligations under
law; if she was removed then liability falls on all members of her gang under
s43 of the Local Government Electoral Act. https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2011-027#sec.43
The Jenny
Hill Gang is jointly liable for acts and omissions in relation to disclosure
under div 5 Of that Act . https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2011-027#pt.9-div.5
.
Nowhere in the returns is it recorded that Maidment donated , thats
because they hid it.
2016 TSV Donations
And they were prosecuted previously for failure to disclose and amend https://cynicismcentraltownsvilleaustralia.blogspot.com/2018/09/townsville-mayor-and-councillors-243.html
The Council has approved or varied developments by Maidment to the tune
of Hundreds of millions of dollars since 2016:
Carters Criminal Law of Qld 16th Ed on Perverting the course
of justice and fabricating evidence.
Page 231, Par [123.30].....The prosecution merely
has to show that in the judicial proceeding in which the accused was a witness
he or she wilfully (deliberately and not
inadvertently or by mistake) made on oath a statement which he or she knew to be false or did not
believe to be true .....R v Milward [1985] 1 QB 519; 1985 1 All ER 859 ; (1985)
80 Cr App R 280....
Page 235 Par [s126.20] Meaning of section The word
“fabricates” is not necessarily used in the pejorative sense. The word may only
mean “make up” or “get together” without any dishonest connotation. See R v
Love (1983) 9 ACRIMR 1. The offence is complete even though the tribunal never
sits; R v Vreones [1891] 1 QB 360 .
Page 241, Par [s132.25] ....The course of justice
is perverted or obstructed by impairing the capacity of a court to do justice.
An act which has the tendency to effect this impairment is the actus reus of
attempting to pervert the course of justice......
Par [s132.30].... “It is well established at common
law and under cognate statutory provisions that the offence of attempting or
conspiring to pervert the course of justice can be committed when there are no
curial proceedings on foot, see R v Murphy (1985) 158 CLR 596; 61 ALR 139;
59ALJR 682 ; 16 ACRIMR 2003 . It is enough that an act has a tendency to
frustrate or deflect a prosecution which the accused contemplates may possibly
be instituted even though the possibility has not been considered by police.
See R v Rogerson (1992) 174 CLR 268 ; 107 ALR 225 ; 66 ALJR 500 , 60 ACRIMR 429 .......An
act which has a tendency to deflect the
police from prosecuting a criminal offence or instituting disciplinary
proceedings before a judicial tribunal , or from adducing evidence of the true
facts , is an act tending to pervert the course of justice , and if done with
the intent to achieve that result ,
constitutes an attempt to pervert the course of justice ......
Page 247 , Par [s140.20] ......... “To prove this
charge there has to be evidence that the accused has done enough for there to
be a risk without further action by him that an injustice would occur, see R v
Murray [1982] WLR 475 ; [1982] All ER 225; (1982) 75 Cr App R 58 .....It is
sufficient if the evidence discloses a risk or possibility that injustice might
result. See Foord v Whiddett (1985) 60 ALR 269; 16 ACRIMR 464.
“Perjury offences are serious offences which
strike at the heart of the criminal justice system and are difficult to detect
. Considerations of deterrence are important and offenders normally deserve
custodial sentences “. (R v Morgan (1995) 82 ACRIMR 518”
Extracted from
Carters Criminal Law of Qld, 16th Edition , Authors ; MJ
Shanahan Qld District Court Judge , P E Smith Barrister Qld ,S Ryan Barrister
Qld ,
Reed International Book Trading
as LexisNexis Butterworths Australia,
2007 , Printed Malaysia , p233 par
[s124.15].
Here
are the very recent cases that involved the former NT Police Commissioner being
convicted for perverting the course of justice , and what it involved in
law.
R
v McRoberts no 1.
R
v McRoberts no 2.
Comments
Post a Comment