Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
Criminal lawyer double agent as police informant

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern
 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
thesoretoothsayer 



Joined: 26 Apr 2017


PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 11:22 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Victoria Police were guilty of reprehensible conduct in knowingly encouraging EF to do as she did and were involved in sanctioning atrocious breaches of the sworn duty of every police officer to discharge all duties imposed on them faithfully and according to law without favour or affection, malice or ill-will. As a result, the prosecution of each Convicted Person was corrupted in a manner which debased fundamental premises of the criminal justice system.


Sounds pretty damning to me.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 1:53 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-12-04/gangland-lawyer-scandal-police-chief-graham-ashton-vic-govt/10580046
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 2:12 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Pies4shaw wrote:
^ However, given that some people may have read the post hinting at her identity before you deleted it, it might be helpful to say that it most definitely is not the person that was there mentioned.

I will provide (quite public and authorised) links to the decisions of the High Court, Court of Appeal and the original trial judge when I am in front of a computer. It is fair to say that there is no further risk to the person capable of arising from speculation here, though - it will be quite obvious from those decisions to anyone who might be motivated by a wish to harm her exactly who she is.


Well, her clients already know who she is and, as you say if you review some of the supreme court transcripts then google some of the names, her identity is quite clear.

All of the articles published now about her exploits that withhold her name, can be backtracked, including the taping of Paul Dale and the stroke a few years back

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Jezza Taurus

2023 PREMIERS!


Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2018 3:52 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Pies4shaw wrote:
^ However, given that some people may have read the post hinting at her identity before you deleted it, it might be helpful to say that it most definitely is not the person that was there mentioned.

Correct.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6457365/Glamorous-gangland-lawyer-Zarah-Garde-Wilson-claims-tried-expose-dual-agent.html

_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 |
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Culprit Cancer



Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:48 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

It's amazing how many people know who 3838 actually is. Laughing Laughing Laughing
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail  
ronrat 



Joined: 22 May 2006
Location: Thailand

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 4:11 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

What are the bar association doing about this? She is probably thinking about emigrating.
_________________
Annoying opposition supporters since 1967.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 4:20 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

The Victorian Bar Council expressed condemnation publicly a couple of days ago. Beyond that, they probably have little immediate interest in it - she hasn’t held a practising certificate (whether issued by the Bar or otherwise) for about 5 years (according to published information I read 2 days ago).
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Culprit Cancer



Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 4:28 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

It won't be long before she is named in some overseas Publication.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 5:43 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Interestingly, the link to the first instance public interest immunity decision no longer works. There is either a technical problem at Austlii or there is some further suppression occurring (perhaps in connection with some appeal or other that may by now be on foot). It’s a little curious, really. The breach of confidence reasons for decision are still public but they merely cross-refer to the facts set out in the other (now re-obscured) reasons.

So, here’s a nice pickle - it may be that those of us who saw and read things that were published earlier in the week must now keep quiet about them. Best not to speculate further about anything based on what we know, since we might not now be allowed to know it.

On another, slightly less stultifying note, it might interest some of you to know that, for constitutional reasons (amongst others), the Royal Commission will not be permitted to enquire into things that have been decided by the Courts (so, the Royal Commission will probably have to perform an interesting dance around the findings of fact in the various judgments) but will probably be permitted to re-examine matters that were the subject of the 2015 IBAC report (not that we’ll know, since the detail of that’s presently secret, too). Don’t expect to see any judges in the box at the RC, unless the retired Court of Appeal Judge who wrote the IBAC report is called - that was an executive act on his part, not a judicial one.

I’m greatly looking forward to reviewing the terms of reference/letters patent with a view to anticipating which interlocutory application to the Supreme Court to prevent the Commission proceeding to hear about certain matters will be made first. See, eg, Firman v Lasry, for those of you who remember the MAS Royal Commission.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 7:17 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Culprit wrote:
It won't be long before she is named in some overseas Publication.


The case was referred to in the Daily Mail, they had no hesitation in naming the AFL Footballer subject to the recent release of text messages but maintained confidentiality in this case.

I really don't see the point of the confidentiality. All her clients know and they're the ones most likely to exact retribution. Colleagues know, the crime media know and it's pretty bloody easy to figure out .

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
HAL 

Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.


Joined: 17 Mar 2003


PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 7:19 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

That is a rather sweeping generalization.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2018 8:12 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

stui magpie wrote:
Culprit wrote:
It won't be long before she is named in some overseas Publication.


The case was referred to in the Daily Mail, they had no hesitation in naming the AFL Footballer subject to the recent release of text messages but maintained confidentiality in this case.

I really don't see the point of the confidentiality. All her clients know and they're the ones most likely to exact retribution. Colleagues know, the crime media know and it's pretty bloody easy to figure out .


In this case it seems there’s a suppression order or something in place, so media outlets (and even in bulletin boards, in theory!) would be breaking the law by revealing her name.

_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2018 10:03 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

I have just had an opportunity to read the Herald-Sun's 4 December 2018 report in hard copy. It is (and I say this without my tongue in my cheek) an excellent, if slightly chilling, read. If you get the opportunity, read at least the detailed timeline that runs across the bottom of 6 pages of the feature.

I see it reported there, amongst many other things, that Lawyer X was paid $3 Million just before the drawn Grand Final in settlement of her April 2010 civil claim against the then former and current Victoria Police chief commissioners.

I also see that some details reflected in the report are not now accessible on the web by standard searching. This does lead to the inevitable question - do those responsible for obscuring this information think that sophisticated career criminals can't use the google "cached" search function?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2018 10:24 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think anyone's so naive as to think that people who want to discover this information can't do so – and even if the internet archive wasn't there, there's always word of mouth. I guess there's still an argument for the suppression order as a form of harm mitigation, though, as it makes dissemination of info at least a little more complicated. It seems she was already effectively in witness protection around a decade ago, so perhaps it's possible that these revelations won't even change her circumstances that greatly.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace


Last edited by David on Thu Dec 06, 2018 10:25 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2018 10:25 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Culprit wrote:
It's amazing how many people know who 3838 actually is. Laughing Laughing Laughing

thats a hell of a figure!

_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern All times are GMT + 11 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 2 of 8   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group