top of page

Appeal to the Criminal Court of Appeal

Updated: Dec 1

The latest update on the trials of The King v Burton and The King v Katelaris.


Please follow as best you can.........


After nearly 7 years in the courts and the spending of millions of dollars of tax payer funds, on the 13th of November 2024 Dr Andrew Katelaris and I were found guilty by a jury of 12, a jury who were given no choice other than to find us guilty.


The trial originally began on the 14th of October 2024 with two to three days allocated to discuss the matter of defences before empaneling a jury, and on the 17th of October I raised a permanent stay application as Her Honour made decisions that either foreshadowed the removal, or severely limited the scope of our defences. The matter then went to the Court of Criminal Appeal (CCA) seeking leave for an urgent interlocutory hearing. On the 23rd of Oct three Judges from the CCA heard my application (for around one hour) then refused that application for leave. "Legalease" can be very difficult to follow for us common folk, so putting this as simply as I can for you all, the three judges of the CCA argued that Her Honour's decisions to remove and limit defences from the jury were not really decisions that could be appealed because they were not really decisions, they were just decisions that were not decisions, YET !!! My apologies if that appears a little confusing, that's because it is a little confusing, it's called law and it's very difficult for people like us to understand, to me it just appears like "shifting goal posts", anyway the Judgment is here if you would like to read it yourselves and make up your own minds. Burton v The King [2024] NSWCCA 213


The matter then returned to finally begin with a jury in the Newcastle District Court on the 28th of October, "woohoo". On the 29th of October the jury was discharged because one went down sick, at this point it was beginning to feel like snakes and ladders, you get a jury empaneled, 12 are chosen by the court from about 40, you go through all that process, the opening addresses start to begin the trial and then "whammo", one juror gets sick the next day, you hit a snake and you go right back to the beginning again. Unlike in QLD, in NSW the courts don't appoint any spare jurors for trials, unless they are really long trials, hence why there has been a significant increase in mistrials with more people getting sick these days, anyway lets not go down that rabbit hole. On the 30th of October another jury was empaneled and the trial finally started proper on the 30th Oct, and continued through 31st Oct, 1st Nov, 4th Nov, 5th Nov, 6th Nov, 7th Nov, 8th Nov, 11th Nov, 12th Nov and concluded on the 13th of Nov with a jury deliberating for around 20 to 30 minutes before finding us guilty.


And as I mentioned, they had absolutely no choice other than to find us guilty.


Let me explain in a highly abridged version..........


During the proceedings just before the last day of the trial The Judge removed ALL of our defences from the jury, including self defence, necessity and honest and reasonable mistake of fact and so became the sole arbiter of fact bypassing the jury completely. The exact same thing I already raised to the CCA before the trial in

Burton v The King [2024] NSWCCA 213 because "Blind Freddy" could see it coming.


Also on the second to last day of the trial the Indictments against both Dr Andrew and I were changed after being the same for nearly 7 years. Yes it appears they can do this at anytime, I'm beginning to wonder if they can even do it after a conviction?


This website https://trialdirections.com.au/ I find is very helpful if you want to understand the trial process in NSW, and this below explains about indictments.



The reason for this change to the indictment (notwithstanding in this instance she could not amend it) is that I bought to Her Honour and the Crowns attention that both indictments were not known to the law and were both missing an essential element.


That is the indictments were both invalid.


Further to this I had pleaded to a number of elements that the crown argued it did not even need to prove, so even without the changes to the invalid indictment (which you cannot do as you can't amend a nullity) we never had a chance because we were not being tried for what we pleaded to.


Anyway, I hope you are still following what could best be described as the death of democracy....................


Notwithstanding the indictments being invalid for 7 years, our alleged crimes (albeit their was neither a crime nor a victim) were saying the name of a highly compromised indigenous child 7 1/2 years ago on Facebook on a few posts between a 3 to 10 day period (posts despite our objections, that we removed when they were properly brought to our attention), because this child was kidnapped by the then dept of FACS. Thats right, it appears we are being criminalised to hide criminals. Let us also not forget that we were targeted out of millions of other people who were all doing the exact same thing (saying the childs name) including multi national media corporations, and that even today if you google the childs name you will find thousands are still in breach of section 105, and also notwithstanding that nothing we did impacted the child’s privacy or identity or caused him any stigma (the purpose of section 105) as defined by the courts themselves in the following caselaw.


[40] (Smith SC) per Brereton J

206 (Smith CA) at [46]-[49] per Gleeson JA, for the Court.


Ok, if you are still following lets continue.............


According to the crown they had to prove only three things

  1. That we said the name of a child

  2. That that child was, or is, or was reasonably likely to be, in care

  3. That it could be seen in NSW


So if you have a child that was, or is, or is reasonably likely to be in state care in NSW Australia, if for example you wish that child happy birthday on Facebook it appears you are now committing a 2 year indictable offence, thats of course, if like us, the government decides to target you and charge you.


At one point Her Honour did go on to explain that it "must be in connection with children's court proceedings" something that was rattled off a few times during the trial but at the same time that was never an essential element that needed to be proved, nor was it in the indictment, so I don't see how that could be correct. So I hope you are following this, and if you are, you are doing better than me because as far as I could tell it appears to me the courts just make up whatever they want to fit an outcome they had already decided.


What I appeared to be witnessing was a Judge doing everything in her power to protect (aid and abet) a government department that kidnaps children for profit.


We indeed had two prosecutors, the Crown and The Judge.


Interestingly the entire court process although somewhat heated at times was quite respectable and I couldn't help but feel deep down that it was like the Leonard Cohen song "Everybody Knows" in that there is this kind of spiritual inner knowing and albeit we were found guilty we were both very content to be in the team fighting for parents and children.


Clearly Dr Andrew and I being charged has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that this child was kidnapped and that the NSW State Government removes thousands of children unlawfully, and still continues this practise today.


Clearly it has nothing to do with the fact that our own government abducts children every week with no judicial oversight, without any delegated authority, based on nothing more than hearsay innuendo and accusations, and they do it for profit.


Clearly also the multiple reports of the shocking outcomes of children in "alleged" care are all just nonsense !!!


Anyway, to continue, we were sentenced in Newcastle District Court on the 22nd of Nov with the judge appearing by AVL and this now multi million dollar seven year enormous tax spend culminated in a $1000 fine for myself and a $500 fine for Dr Katelaris with convictions recorded despite there being no crime and no victim.


I guess I will just add it to the pile of around $200,000 worth of court fees fighting to defend myself !!!


Throughout the entire trial proceedings and all those that witnessed them, we presented undeniable evidence showing how the state government (dept of DOCS/FACS/DCJ) the politicians, the police, the media and sadly even the courts themselves are condoning child trafficking and child abuse. None of this evidence was challenged or rebutted in any way.


on Monday the 25th of November I filed an Appeal of the trial decision that I envisage will be listed for a hearing in late January early February next year. For those whom are interested I have attached a copy of my submission for that Appeal below. I would highly recommend the public to attend on this date (when it is known) if like us, you value the protection of our children and grandchildren.


Until we as a society stop removing children from parents who love them (no matter what colour their skin) we will never be able to repair the inter generational impacts of these kinds of highly invasive and psychologically damaging activities.


To be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society is no measure of health.

Amen, Pastor Paul




My good friend and legal mentor Graeme Bell recently stated the following in regards to Lady Justice.


"That is why I once said that Lady Justice has a blindfold and unequal scales.The scales are unequal to represent the fact that the State controls the Courts so that the courts do the bidding of the State and the blindfold symbolises that Justice is blind to the suffering of the people."


Lady Justice has a blindfold and unequal scales.The scales are unequal to represent the fact that the State controls the Courts so that the courts do the bidding of the State and the blindfold symbolises that Justice is blind to the suffering of the people.




Comments

Rated 0 out of 5 stars.
No ratings yet

Add a rating
bottom of page