Aussie Rules

By M.K. Styllinski

“… the victims who were abused as part of this network as children can testify to the fact that police officers we’re actually being paid off so that this criminal network remained untouchable.”

– Dr. Reina Michaelson

---

Australia surfaces consistently on many paedophile ring investigations with a familiar denial of Establishment involvement. This is made easier by the fact that Australia already has the most concentrated media ownership in the western world care of billionaire Rupert Murdoch, a Pathocrat-friendly media mogul.

In March 2005, after alleged police involvement and protection of the State wide paedophile and child pornography network, a former Young Australian of the year, Dr Reina Michaelson held a press conference in Melbourne, Victoria, on new revelations regarding the controversy. She alleged the paedophile networks involved media personalities, politicians and corporate executives. Nothing new you might say. However, what Michaelson did bring to the proceedings was evidence that should have created a storm of publicity.

She produced a police tape recording from an Ombudsmen meeting in November 2004, where the high level investigator from the Office of Police Integrity (OPI) which was formed precisely for the purpose of addressing the continuing allegations of abuse, told her:  “What I would hope that we can achieve is possibly nothing in relation to that past [paedophile] ring, even if it is still operating”. ^[1] This, in itself, is a damning statement offering a hefty can of worms to be opened by the media. True to form, almost all of the Australian press ignored the conference as well as this very revealing statement.

The formation of the Office of Police Integrity was the Victoria Government’s response to fend off calls last year from Dr Michaelson and others for a Royal Commission into links between police corruption, paedophile rings and Melbourne’s gangland killings. The Office dismissed their complaints without having interviewed the copious witnesses or having recalled any Victoria files. The Office continues to be viewed by many as a cover for damage limitation rather than a genuine investigative body.

In Michaelson’s words from her press release:

“… the victims who were abused as part of this network as children can testify to the fact that police officers we’re actually being paid off so that this criminal network remained untouchable. So that’s why we want it to be investigated thoroughly, and for there to be a report of the kind of quality that came out as a result of the last complaint. There is clearly something really bad happening in this State, and it needs to be sorted out. […] It’s organized crime, and it’s being allowed to continue because… There are a couple of bad eggs in the right places.” ^[2]

A separate report followed from Edward Picton Mullighan QC appointed by the government’s Commission of Inquiry into Children in State Care ^[3] which was itself, pressured into action from Dr. Michaelson’s efforts. Characteristic of so many “official” reports and inquiries, the author of the report seemed to slip into extremely selective and simplistic bias regarding the overview of one witness testimony of systematic and severe sexual abuse. The testimony of the professionals involved was deemed more important than witness testimonies and where all adult explanations were taken at face value without taking into account hundreds of other reported cases within the South Australian care system.

Dr. Reina Michaelson

As a signpost for further allegations which the government has steadfastly ignored, it was seen as appropriate to sink the report without further discussions. The nature of the evidence was so disturbing that this automatically engendered disbelief, or as a more likely possibility, the recommendations to cease further investigations.

The only Member of the Australian Parliament, speaker of the House, Peter Lewis MP raised the issue of murder, corruption and organised child abuse thereby taking it straight to the Aussie Establishment door.

The politician gave a statement to police that two gay men murdered in Adelaide in late 2004 told him that a serving elected politician was involved in paedophile activities in Adelaide’s South Parklands. Robert Woodland, who was found beaten to death in the Parklands last December and Shaine Moore, whose body was found in his home in suspicious circumstances in February 2005, separately contacted Lewis and told him of the person’s paedophilic actions. Police initially said the paedophile MP allegations were examined in 2003 and found to be unsubstantiated, but reopened their investigation.

Unfortunately, the key witness, one Lewis Craig Ratcliffe, was also a convicted sex offender which didn’t help the evidence. Yet eight other witness’ testimonies were summarily ignored. All possessed evidence about the paedophile MP’s extra-curricular activities.

Bringing attention to the subject of organised child abuse resulted in the MP resigning to avoid being ousted by a “no confidence” vote. This was said to be based upon his lack of evidence, despite Lewis’ call for a proper investigation and the obvious glut of provable background cases connected to a high-level paedophile ring operating above the law. The latter however, was deemed inadmissible.

If the MP’s allegations were without foundation and evidence, it begs the question why the Rann Government took the unprecedented step of temporarily suspending parliamentary privilege in order to stop the MP at the centre of the claims being named. One political scientist commented on the move describing the removal of the privilege of Parliament as a “major step” and that “The argument that Premier [Mike] Rann is using [that the paedophile allegations take precedent over anything else] is an emotive argument but put against 100 years of convention is a difficult one to push…” ^[4]  Other pleas for investigations into separate paedophile rings began to surface during the same year and by August 2005, someone in the OPI obviously wanted to send a message showing just how ineffective the Office was. ^[5]

Mike Rann

The Privacy Commissioner was called in to investigate how over 500 pages of police files on more than 400 people were sent to a woman who had lodged a serious complaint against the police, after the Office had dismissed her original complaint. The documents that the woman anonymously received showed that: “… the OPI agreed with police to cut the scope of the investigation from two years to five months – without telling the woman.” and also revealed that “her husband’s files were accessed in April last year – although the OPI told the woman that its investigation had found no such access.” One MP told parliament that OPI had ‘misled’ the woman over the accessing of her husband’s file, and had ‘deliberately deceived’ her over the scope of the investigation.

As always, the networks appear to be a tightly woven affair where evidence is highly difficult to come by. This is no surprise if it is sourced from those whose job it is to set the laws and to then give the appearance of investigating it.

On 4th April 2005, Peter Lewis MP, gave a 20 minute resignation speech responding to the highly unusual moves by the Rann government to remove him as Speaker of the House.

An edited extract follows:

---

The Premier and the Deputy Premier have recently publicly insulted and defamed me and, through the efforts of their spin doctors and media minders, in particular Melvin Mansell of the Adelaide Advertiser, to criminally defame me in a series of editorials and articles, which were reckless in that they were not well researched, unfounded, unprofessional, malicious and, for that reason criminal, they provided through the orchestrated campaign the means by which it has become possible for the Premier and Deputy Premier to now attack and tear down the straw man they constructed.

The central issue in all this is the grossly misleading assertion that I publicly raised the problem of allegations that a Member of Parliament is a paedophile. I made no such claim. That was made by Melvin Mansell’s Advertiser itself. It began on 2 March, when Nigel Hunt contacted me to ask me about claims made by Craig Ratcliffe on web sites late last year and repeated by him to The Advertiser early this year that there is a paedophile in state parliament and that he (Craig Ratcliffe) was very concerned that his life had been threatened following the death in suspicious circumstances of someone else, namely Shaine Moore, whom he knew and whom he believed had been murdered.

I responded honestly to Nigel Hunt’s unsolicited inquiries to my office on 1 March. That information coming into my office from a few of the very many people claiming knowledge about the activities of paedophiles in general was of concern to me because, of the few people who spoke about parliament’s problem, more than half had been killed. Since then, Shaine Moore’s death has been declared a murder. […]

… they [witnesses] were being ‘bumped off ’— that is, murdered and viciously assaulted — quicker than I or the people who were helping me could get them to write down their allegations and then swear that what they were saying was true. Of course, I told Nigel Hunt that they should be protected from murderous acts. At no time have I ever said that they were being murdered or violently bashed into serious long-term mental dysfunction at the hands or the instigation of any MP. That was an improper speculation made by government ministers and their specialist spin doctors to the press across the length and breadth of the state to try to show me in a bad light. In retrospect, I believe it was another deliberate red herring contrived by them, just like the one about homosexuals and their haunts, to discredit me. […]

The most outrageous thing of all, which disturbs me most about the information which has come in to my office is not the matter of paedophiles in South Australia’s parliament but what appears to be the related and organised activities of those paedophiles in high public office—that is, the judiciary, the senior ranks of human services portfolios, some police, and MPs, across the nation, especially within the ranks of the Labor Party. Yet you only have to recall in recent years the investigations, charges and successful convictions against such people as Darcy, Liddy, Wright, Wells, a former senator, and other current and past MPs in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria to understand my concern. They have not acted alone or in isolation, it seems to me. Equally, it seems to me, they cleverly recruit their victims not from amongst the churches’ young groups and surf life saving clubs and boy scouts these days. There is a new group of youngsters they prey on—those involved in other action-type sports requiring body contact in coaching and skills development, if not in the action of the sport itself.

---

Lewis reiterated the standard protocol of initiatives, inquiries, commissions and investigations of this nature are carried under intense pressure, ridicule, and denials, while the individual or individuals in question who have sought to have proper investigations into organized child molestation are defamed, slandered and marginalised. The door always remains closed to Establishment complicity. Meantime, another Australian police officer shoots himself in an apparent suicide while investigating cases of child abuse.^[6]

On the subject of child pornography we have explored the multi-faceted nature of endless prosecutions. Placing tax payers’ money into a short-term cure is designed to obfuscate and distract from the root cause of the problem. As Dr. Michaelson mentioned in her in Press statement following the resistance and refusal of Office of Police Integrity to do their job: “This is NOT the opportunistic abuse of children by men scouring playgrounds or scout groups. What  organized means is that groups of men – and we are largely talking about men, though women have been involved too – that groups of men can meet regularly at particular places at particular times and have children provided for them to abuse. I was told by the OPI’s investigators that what they, quote, “hope to achieve is possibly nothing in relation to that past [paedophile] ring, even if it’s still operating.” ^[7]

They are nothing if not honest in their intentions. What is more, their trust in the Pathocracy ensures that such honesty is always rewarded. Peter Lewis wasn’t the first to be jettisoned from Parliament over the issue and he won’t be the last.

From a speech by New South Wales Senator Bill Heffernan in Australian Federal Parliament on 29 May 1998: “Recently I made a speech in which I highlighted the code of silence which protects worldwide child sex networks including people in the judiciary, parliament, clergy and the public service. Many of these people live in an abhorrent culture in which is included, as spoils of office, the right to have sex with children …”

Twelve years later, the Australian Parliament is still hanging on to these rights.

 

---

Notes

[1] Dr. Michaelson Taped Meeting Transcript with the Victorian Ombudsman’s Office, Wednesday, 17th November, March 2005. http://www.csapp.net.

[2] Dr. Michaelson Taped Meeting Transcript With The Victorian Ombudsman’s Office, http://www.csapp.net. Wednesday, 17th November, 2004.

[3]  Children in State Care Commission of Inquiry Report as to a Particular Matter – 28 October 2005.

[4] Flinders University political scientist Dean Jaensch, quoted in The Australian: ‘Parliament gagged as speaker quits.’ By Michelle Wiese Bockmann and Tom Richardson, April 05, 2005.

[5] ‘Call for ‘paedophile ring’ inquiry’ The Herald Sun, May 3, 2005. “A Tasmanian lobby group for child sex abuse survivors has called for a state inquiry into claims a paedophile ring operated in Tasmania during the 1970s and 1980s.”[6] ‘Again a policeman clocks on, kills himself’ By Les Kennedy, Sydney Morning Herald, November 25, 2005.

[7] op.cit; Michaelson, Press Statement, 2005.