Highest Court in Oz has LIAR judge.
Australian Government Remains Silent on Judicial Fraud
Thursday, April 15, 2010
By Ash Patil
The 7th of April 2010 marked the fourth anniversary of the Magill v Magill paternity fraud case in Australia, effectively creating two remarkable precedents in terms of the perpetuation of fraud in this country.
According to Anti Paternity Fraud Advocate Cheryl King, “Paternity fraud was effectively endorsed by Australia’s highest court, the High Court, denying the plaintiff Mr Liam Magill any legal recourse against the woman who fraudulently deceived both Mr Magill and two of his three children into believing that he was their father.” King further stated that “this deception continued even after separation, involving financial fraud which the Court deemed need not be re-paid”.
King alleges that in the second, another type of fraud was exercised by one of the presiding judges, Justice Crennan. King states that “in this case, Justice Crennan, who had previously herself misled her own de facto husband into believing that their two children were fathered by him, refused to step down from the High Court hearing of the Magill case, in response to the undeniable Conflict of Interest given her own personal history.”
King continued; “This bizarre act of judicial mis-representation by Justice Crennan raises serious questions about the administration of justice in Australia, from its highest Court and on a matter of significant public and community interest.”
Ash Patil, President of Shared Parenting group Fathers4Equality adds that “What is even more remarkable is that the Australian government has been complicit with this judicial fraud, refusing to investigate this most serious of allegations against this judge. Patil adds that “The silence from the Rudd government, and especially from the Attorney General, Robert McClelland, on the issue of judicial misconduct in the Magill case has been deafening.”
Patil states that “Given the recent Chisholm review of Family Law practices, of which many people believe was nothing more than a political stunt by the Attorney General and a waste of public funds, the question has to be asked as to why there is such resistance by Robert McClelland to simply investigate a matter which could otherwise seriously undermine the foundation of credibility that the High Court of Australia bases its decisions on. ”
King has stated that she has “officially written to the Rudd government repeatedly over the last few years, requesting an investigation into this judges behaviour.”
King adds that “I challenge Kevin Rudd, given that it is an election year and the importance that he claims to attach to proper checks and balances within our schools and hospitals, to explain why there has been no investigation into this most serious case of judicial misconduct. ”
Anti Paternity Fraud Advocate
Box 685 Deepdene 3103
Ph-0416 031 145
Int 61 -416031 145