top of page

I am intentionally not mentioning people I am forbidden to mention in respect of recent court orders.

violent attack.jpeg
violent attack.jpeg

Barran Dodger: On Identity Politics, Character Assassination, Conspiracy, Potential incarceration, Abuse & Neglect of a Disabled Scapegoat, Being a Targeted Individual, Protection, Transparency, Justice and now Seeking Refuge in a  PID

If I can substantiate a government conspiracy, it implies that I can also emphasise that my court sentencing, which is a component of and influenced by the same government intentionally causing harm to me, would potentially be complicit in aligning with the government's treatment of me to achieve its objectives.

Therefore to avoid a possible or even likely jail sentence I need to avert the impending sentencing in April 2024 by submitting this Public Interest Disclosure (PID) for protection. Federal court document asserts I was an employee of DSS contracted to NDIS for which my disclosure relates. I will do that before 20th Feb and legislative measures require a response within 14 days.
 
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram

In the corridors of justice, a resilient voice emerges, seeking refuge in the sanctum of truth and transparency. As I embark on the journey to unveil a narrative veiled in systemic wrongs, corruption, and a labyrinth of ethical transgressions, I extend an earnest plea for your attention and understanding. I, as an individual with a multifaceted history entwined with public service, advocacy, and artistry, find myself compelled to make a resounding Public Interest Disclosure (PID). The motivations that propel me toward this pivotal disclosure resonate with the core tenets of democracy, justice, and the relentless pursuit of a better world. My plea transcends the boundaries of personal strife; it echoes as a call to arms for those who champion human rights, transparency, and fairness. With evidence firmly in hand, I invite you to explore the mosaic of my experiences, marked by merits, advocacy, and resilience, each piece a testament to the urgency and significance of the disclosure I am about to unfold. Join me in this quest for justice, a quest that not only seeks redress for personal wrongs but aspires to uphold the very pillars upon which the edifice of a just society stands.

It's true I am crazy...

That doesn't negate an actual conspiracy happening.
Law

How could a person who's achieved this- become that?

How could I, the once-celebrated success story with a Ph.D. in mental health, find myself now portrayed as the antagonist? I was revered for my courageous narratives and a life dedicated to community service, both in person and in the media. Yet, I've fallen victim to financial abuse, with documented human rights abuses left uninvestigated. I endure a reality where access to legal rights is nonexistent, compelled to face a deceitful conspiracy that nearly cost me my life. After surviving a suicide attempt, I spent three long years squatting or living in my car, unable to work due to an added brain impairment. Retraumatized seven times in ineffective hospital treatments, I continue to lack essential support, including a GP, psychologist, psychiatrist, or the necessary medication. The non-acknowledgment of past child sexual abuse, coupled with unpaid work cover, denied income assistance from HCF, neglected superannuation, and a lack of settlement with the hospital, adds to my plight. Banned from AFCA and rejected in multiple PIDs without legal representation, my FOIs were even denied by the Prime Minister's office. How did I, once celebrated, become the perceived antagonist in my own story?

 

Easy - you piss off the wrong people such as his protected former fiancé and criminal tax cheat former drug mule and sexual predator Steve Iasonidis of ASIO, an individual no public official including every police officer or health care worker or politician will acknowledge or legitimise the proven facts of the relationship which would lead to a $500000 settlement.

I am eligible to make a PID under PID legations because of the following attributes I have:

Endowed with a diverse array of qualifications and contributions, I possess a compelling foundation for making a Public Interest Disclosure (PID) as per attributes required in the PID act. My eligibility is underscored by a noteworthy professional journey as the former spouse of a public official, substantiated by a rich relationship history and legal documentation. Additionally, my extensive experience, employed via a government contract, is supported by meticulously maintained employment records and government contract details. The Federal Court's official recognition of my employment at DSS, as outlined in a formal statement, further enhances my eligibility. As a former nurse paid in a public hospital, my eligibility is fortified by verifiable evidence encompassing nursing credentials and a comprehensive work history.

 

Furthermore, my eligibility is bolstered by a multitude of merits, including educational accomplishments, such as degrees in BFA, Med, and PhD, corroborated by academic certificates. Recognition for my unwavering commitment to human rights advocacy is documented through awards and acknowledgment from reputable entities like SANE Australia. A thirty-year history as an independent advocate is not only evidenced by a robust track record but also by heartfelt testimonials. As an artist and former illustrator, my eligibility is affirmed through an artistic portfolio and a history of contributions to esteemed publications like The Herald Sun and The Age. Finally, my role as a business owner dedicated to marginalised care is supported by tangible evidence found in business records and testimonials.

 

This compelling confluence of attributes renders me eligible and empowers my pursuit of justice through a PID as a 'public official'.

public official has the meaning given by Subdivision A of Division 3 of Part 4.

Subdivision A—Immunity from liability

10  Protection of disclosers

 (1) If an individual makes a public interest disclosure:

 (a) the individual is not subject to any civil, criminal or administrative liability (including disciplinary action) for making the public interest disclosure; and

6  Objects

  The objects of this Act are:

 (a) to promote the integrity and accountability of the Commonwealth public sector; and

 (b) to encourage and facilitate the making of public interest disclosures by public officials and former public officials; and

 (c) to ensure that public officials, and former public officials, who make public interest disclosures are supported and are protected from adverse consequences relating to the disclosures; and

 (d) to ensure that disclosures by public officials, and former public officials, are properly investigated and dealt with.

What is a public interest disclosure?

A public interest disclosure is a disclosure of information relating to disclosable conduct alleged to have occurred within a Commonwealth agency (for relevant agencies, see sections 71 and 72).

There are 5 kinds of public interest disclosure (see section 26), which are as follows:

 (a) an internal disclosure (disclosed within an agency);

 (b) an external disclosure (disclosed outside Government);

 (c) an emergency disclosure;

 (d) a legal practitioner disclosure;

 (e) a NACC disclosure.

What is disclosable conduct?

Disclosable conduct, broadly speaking, includes conduct that:

 (a) is illegal or corrupt; or

 (b) results in a wastage of money or property; or

 (c) results in unreasonable danger or risk to health and safety; or

 (d) results in danger, or an increased risk of danger, to the environment.

Protection of disclosers and witnesses

The protection provisions in Division 1 of Part 2 relate to all forms of public interest disclosure (whether internal, external, emergency, legal practitioner or NACC disclosure). They deal with the protection of disclosers, and witnesses (that is, persons providing assistance in disclosure investigations and reviews), from reprisals by providing for the following:

 (a) immunity from liability that is related to disclosures and such assistance;

 (b) criminal offences for such reprisals, and for disclosing the identity of disclosers;

 (c) civil remedies for reprisals related to disclosures.

I need to avert the impending sentencing by submitting this Public Interest Disclosure (PID).

If I can substantiate a government conspiracy, it implies that I can also emphasize that my court sentencing, which is a component of and influenced by the same government intentionally causing harm to me, would potentially be complicit in aligning with the government's treatment of me to achieve its objectives.

Race Against Injustice: Urgent Public Interest Disclosure (PID) Submission Amidst Looming Threat of Unjust Incarceration"

I am urgently racing against time to submit a Public Interest Disclosure (PID) before facing court, where I could potentially be jailed after being criminalized with an indictable offense. I believe the justice system may act as another component of a federal government conspiracy and has identified me as a targeted individual, subjected to persecution, financial abuse, and family violence from a former spouse who was an ASIO employee.

 

This subtle form of torture existed years before it elicited a suicide attempt. This conspiracy not only absolves corrupt decisions by public officials that have caused me harm but has already driven me to a suicide attempt, deemed fatal yet I was revived. My tragedy was whitewashed by the same system that facilitated the circumstances.

 

Three years after this tragedy, which left a brain impairment, my victimization, abuse, and neglect have exponentially amplified and intensified under the government's watchful eye, leaving me in December 2023 with no possessions, living in my car—an egregious violation of the UN Human Rights Charter and moral and ethical principles for disabled persons' care.

 

The government, aware of my documented human rights abuses detailed by an NDIS worker, now perceives me as a liability due to my moral and ethical obligations to expose corruption for the sake of democracy and humanity.

 

I foresaw the possibility of being framed for a crime, either admitted to or innocent of, to silence my critiques of the current tyrannical power structure. Despite being conscious of my imminent risk of harm to welfare, safety, and life, the government, as described in a federal court document, is prepared to potentially jail me for an innocuous crime impossible to commit born out of frustration—a response sought when I was pointedly neglected.

 

Such an action would epitomize conspiracy and the pinnacle of hypocrisy and destroy every avenue I have to express my remorse and demonstrate there is a better way forward, and I mean no harm to anyone in line with my non-violent Buddhist principles.

Scroll Down

Surviving a Systemic Conspiracy: A Tale of Neglect, Suicide, and Conscious Indifference

A successful conspiracy infiltrates the victim's inner circle, and this has been demonstrated to be true.
 
Make no mistake: the same neglect, deceit, and subtle decisions that led to my detriment in all ways have caused me to attempt suicide. It was fatal, but I was revived from certain death.
 
That subtle torture, which has victimized me personally, maliciously redacted my prosperity, abused my human rights, and destroyed any access to litigation, is the same oppression that is occurring three years after I was revived and menacingly placed my life at existential risk.
 
The system is very conscious that I am at imminent risk of suicide due to financial constriction, yet I have been forced to either squat or be homeless in my car without enough to survive, with normally available support structures absent from my care.
 
In this way, under the watchful eye of the government, it demonstrates their consciousness in aiding and abetting my death by sustained prolonged violence of neglect.
 
The apex of my second potential death occurred in December 2023, living in my car in the Preston Woolworths car park. In this suicide note, I decided, after I sent my final note of disgust to family, friends, and carers, that I would stick it out.
 
That act demonstrates I was conscious of perceived neglect from people in my life. The fact I turned off my phone after I sent it for a day, then turned it on and received zero responses, illustrates the absence of care and hence the intention of harm.
16_edited.jpg

I find myself compelled to make a Public Interest Disclosure (PID) due to several pressing reasons other than avoiding jail and literally surviving with my basic needs met and oppose the redaction of my prosperity as an allegory of destroying me in a conscious way that weigh heavily on my conscience and sense of responsibility:

 

1. Exposing Systemic Wrongdoing: I have firsthand knowledge of systemic wrongdoing, corruption, or unethical practices within the organization or government agency, and I believe it is crucial to expose these issues in the public interest.

 

2. Whistleblower Protection: Recognizing the potential risks associated with being a whistleblower, I am making a PID to seek legal protection and safeguard myself against potential retaliation for disclosing information about illegal or unethical activities.

 

3. Concern for Public Interest: My primary motivation lies in my genuine concern for the public interest. The information I possess has the potential to impact the well-being, safety, or rights of the broader community, and I feel a duty to share it for the greater good.

 

4. Injustice and Victimisation: Whether personally experiencing or witnessing injustices, victimization, or mistreatment within my workplace or community, I am making a PID to address and rectify these issues, seeking intervention and justice.

 

5. Anticipating Retaliation: I am aware of potential retaliation or adverse consequences due to my knowledge of certain actions. By making a PID, I aim to protect myself from any reprisals and ensure that justice prevails.

 

6. Legal or Ethical Violations: My knowledge extends to activities that violate legal or ethical standards, prompting me to make a PID to uphold accountability and adherence to established norms within the organization or government.

 

7. Preventing Harm: I firmly believe that the information I possess has the potential to prevent harm, whether to individuals, the organization, or the public at large. Making a PID is an ethical imperative to avert any foreseeable negative consequences.

 

8. Preserving Democracy and Human Rights: Concerned about potential threats to democracy, human rights violations, or abuse of power, I am driven to make a PID to safeguard these principles and ensure that justice and fairness prevail.

 

9. Personal Integrity: As an individual who values personal integrity and ethical conduct, making a PID aligns with my commitment to doing what is morally right, even in the face of challenges or adversity.

 

10. Seeking Redress for Previous Disclosures: Previous attempts to disclose information may not have been appropriately addressed. Making a PID is a proactive step to seek redress, resolution, and acknowledgment of the issues I have raised in the past.

 

In making this PID, I hope to contribute to transparency, accountability, and the well-being of individuals and society at large. It is my sincere belief that exposing the truth is a necessary step toward positive change and justice.

Compelled to my Public Interest Disclosure: A Commitment to Truth, Accountability, and Justice

Statement from Barran Dodger

I never wished or intended to become this scapegoat. It is my moral and ethical obligation to democracy and humanity to attempt to make this PID. If this level of destruction to an individual can exist in society, in plain view, and happen to me – a kind, creative, intelligent, and ethical person guided by principles of kindness, advocacy, and fairness – then it can happen to any human being. Every person should support my cause; just because you are safe inside your prosperity or comfort does not negate the possibility of my fate occurring to you as well. Your neglect to act in my defense is a potential breach of your own happiness.

 

I need to make this PID or attempt to because I am being sentenced for a crime and judged by the legal system, which is likely in coherence with many other government-backed agencies. They could be compelled to demonize and jail me, an act that would be the apex of hypocrisy. This is considering the police have neglected every existential risk, crime, robbery, and abuse that has occurred to me systematically and politically. They have only identified a singular threat made by me, contextualized by a broader email which provided a solution for my political impasse, demonstrating complicity in the very conspiracy I am a victim of.

 

If there is a chance I will be jailed, taking the last vestiges of my human rights and freedom – which has been so brutally damaged and unacknowledged – I am considering ending my own life, indicating the subtle way I am persecuted systemically in decisions by authorities biased against me. I need to find a way in which potentially incarcerating me as a political prisoner will be negated before the court date because no single person has made a meaningful difference in helping me, and I am just awaiting my judgment, which could be a bloodbath, seeing no one will help, not even legal aid.

Title: The Systematic Conspiracy Against Rich McLean: A Call for Justice

Introduction:

 

In recent years, my life has become a battleground, where a pervasive and damaging conspiracy has systematically dismantled it through a web of deceit, manipulation, and orchestrated injustice. My compelling narrative reveals a concerted effort by various government entities, officials, and powerful figures to silence me, deprive me of justice, and perpetuate my vulnerability. This essay aims to explore the evidence I've presented, illustrating the presence of a carefully orchestrated conspiracy that has infringed upon my rights, denied me access to justice, and perpetuated my suffering.:

 

1. Rejected Whistleblower Status:

   I claim to be a rejected whistleblower, with my Public Interest Disclosures (PIDs) dismissed due to a technicality. Despite possessing the eligibility criteria, including being a former public official and the former spouse of a public official, the rejection raises questions about the system's reluctance to address legitimate concerns.

 

2. Government Entities' Complicity:

   The involvement of various government entities and officials, such as Victoria and federal police, the healthcare system, AFCA, AHRC, NACC, and The Ombudsman, suggests a collaborative effort to protect my former partner, Stefan Iasonidis, at the expense of my well-being. The refusal to investigate documented human rights abuses and the delegitimization of corruption reports underscore a systemic failure to address serious allegations.

 

3. Abuse of Legal Proceedings:

   The influence of powerful figures, like Russell Ball, in manipulating legal proceedings and suppressing crucial evidence across multiple institutions further strengthens the argument for a conspiracy. The intricate plan seems aimed at silencing me, perpetuating my vulnerability, and denying me the justice I rightfully deserve.

 

4. **Mental Health Stigmatization:**

   My claim of being dismissed as delusional by hospitals and police, force-medicated, and subjected to false narratives highlights the insidious nature of the conspiracy. The mental health system appears to be weaponized against me, further exacerbating my plight and portraying me as an extortionist, deflecting attention from the real issues at hand.

 

5. **Suicide Attempt and Whitewashing:**

   The attempt on my life within a hospital setting, followed by the whitewashing of the incident, raises serious concerns about the lengths to which this conspiracy is willing to go. The subsequent memory impairment and isolation vilification showcase a deliberate strategy to erase evidence and maintain control over the narrative.

 

6. Criminalization and Delegitimization:

   My arrest and criminalization, coupled with the delegitimization of my statement by the Victims of Crime Commissioner, point to a pattern of character assassination. The conspiracy not only seeks to silence me but also aims to criminalize me, making it increasingly difficult for me to seek justice.

 

Conclusion:

 

My harrowing account paints a picture of a complex and insidious conspiracy orchestrated by powerful entities to deny me justice, silence my voice, and perpetuate my vulnerability. This case underscores the urgent need for a thorough and impartial investigation into the allegations I've presented, ensuring that justice prevails and those responsible for the conspiracy are held accountable. The government's obligation under UN charters to provide reasonable accommodation and access to justice for disabled persons must be upheld, and legal avenues must be made available to rectify the documented human rights abuses. The subtle and malicious conspiracy that has robbed me of my prosperity, human rights, and access to the law must be exposed and dismantled to safeguard the principles of justice and equality.

30 years of selfless advocacy for marginalised people across Australia in person and in the media only to be betrayed by everyone I helped and cast as the antagonistic villain when it was I who suffered the crime

It is with a profound sense of disbelief that I grapple with the inconceivable notion that an individual, boasting a commendable history of academic prowess, artistic contributions, and unwavering advocacy for human rights, particularly in the realm of schizophrenia awareness, could find themselves cast as the antagonist in a tale of systemic injustice. Through the tumultuous chapters of enduring multiple incarcerations spurred by mental health battles and emerging resilient from the abyss of a suicide attempt, the prospect of incarceration for a perceived threat that remained unrealized stands as a glaring miscarriage of justice. The subsequent failure of authorities to address the pervasive issues of family violence and the prejudicial vilification based on the individual's mental health history unveils a distressing narrative of government tyranny and societal bias. It becomes imperative to acknowledge the intricate layers of this individual's circumstances and to confront the structural injustices they have confronted, steering away from perpetuating an unjust vilification narrative.

We have the know-how you need.

Scroll Down

From Scapegoat to Defender: The Urgent Call for Support in the Face of Systemic Injustice

I never wished or intended to become this scapegoat. It is my moral and ethical obligation to democracy and humanity to attempt to make this PID. If this level of destruction to an individual can exist in society, in plain view, and happen to me – a kind, creative, intelligent, and ethical person guided by principles of kindness, advocacy, and fairness – then it can happen to any human being. Every person should support my cause; just because you are safe inside your prosperity or comfort does not negate the possibility of my fate occurring to you as well. Your neglect to act in my defense is a potential breach of your own happiness.

 

I need to make this PID or attempt to because I am being sentenced for a crime and judged by the legal system, which is likely in coherence with many other government-backed agencies. They could be compelled to demonize and jail me, an act that would be the apex of hypocrisy. This is considering the police have neglected every existential risk, crime, robbery, and abuse that has occurred to me systematically and politically. They have only identified a singular threat made by me, contextualized by a broader email which provided a solution for my political impasse, demonstrating complicity in the very conspiracy I am a victim of.

 

If there is a chance I will be jailed, taking the last vestiges of my human rights and freedom – which has been so brutally damaged and unacknowledged – I am considering ending my own life, indicating the subtle way I am persecuted systemically in decisions by authorities biased against me. I need to find a way in which potentially incarcerating me as a political prisoner will be negated before the court date because no single person has made a meaningful difference in helping me, and I am just awaiting my judgment, which could be a bloodbath, seeing no one will help, not even legal aid.

Reasons I am making this PID supported with evidence publicly because:

About the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol (A/RES/61/106) was adopted on 13 December 2006 at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, and was opened for signature on 30 March 2007. There were 82 signatories to the Convention, 44 signatories to the Optional Protocol, and 1 ratification of the Convention. This is the highest number of signatories in history to a UN Convention on its opening day. It is the first comprehensive human rights treaty of the 21st century and is the first human rights convention to be open for signature by regional integration organizations. The Convention entered into force on 3 May 2008. The Convention follows decades of work by the United Nations to change attitudes and approaches to persons with disabilities. It takes to a new height the movement from viewing persons with disabilities as “objects” of charity, medical treatment and social protection towards viewing persons with disabilities as “subjects” with rights, who are capable of claiming those rights and making decisions for their lives based on their free and informed consent as well as being active members of society. The Convention is intended as a human rights instrument with an explicit, social development dimension. It adopts a broad categorization of persons with disabilities and reaffirms that all persons with all types of disabilities must enjoy all human rights and fundamental freedoms. It clarifies and qualifies how all categories of rights apply to persons with disabilities and identifies areas where adaptations have to be made for persons with disabilities to effectively exercise their rights and areas where their rights have been violated, and where protection of rights must be reinforced. The Convention was negotiated during eight sessions of an Ad Hoc Committee of the General Assembly from 2002 to 2006, making it the fastest negotiated human rights treaty.

These articles have been violated regarding The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities : Article 10 – Right to life I have been tortured to the point of killing myself \ Article 11 – Situations of risk and humanitarian emergencies 
Article 12 – Equal recognition before the law 1. States Parties reaffirm that persons with disabilities have the right to recognition everywhere as persons before the law. 2. States Parties shall recognize that persons with disabilities enjoy legal capacity on an equal basis with others in all aspects of life. 3. States Parties shall take appropriate measures to provide access by persons with disabilities to the support they may require in exercising their legal capacity. 4. States Parties shall ensure that all measures that relate to the exercise of legal capacity provide for appropriate and effective safeguards to prevent abuse in accordance with international human rights law. Such safeguards shall ensure that measures relating to the exercise of legal capacity respect the rights, will and preferences of the person, are free of conflict of interest and undue influence, are proportional and tailored to the person’s circumstances, apply for the shortest time possible and are subject to regular review by a competent, independent and impartial authority or judicial body. The safeguards shall be proportional to the degree to which such measures affect the person’s rights and interests. 5. Subject to the provisions of this article, States Parties shall take all appropriate and effective measures to ensure the equal right of persons with disabilities to own or inherit property, to control their own financial affairs and to have equal access to bank loans, mortgages and other forms of financial credit, and shall ensure that persons with disabilities are not arbitrarily deprived of their property. 
Article 13 – Access to justice 1. States Parties shall ensure effective access to justice for persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others, including through the provision of procedural and age-appropriate accommodations, in order to facilitate their effective role as direct and indirect participants, including as witnesses, in all legal proceedings, including at investigative and other preliminary stages. 2. In order to help to ensure effective access to justice for persons with disabilities, States Parties shall promote appropriate training for those working in the field of administration of justice, including police and prison staff. 
Article 14 – Liberty and security of person 1. States Parties shall ensure that persons with disabilities, on an equal basis with others: a) Enjoy the right to liberty and security of person; b) Are not deprived of their liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily, and that any deprivation of liberty is in conformity with the law, and that the existence of a disability shall in no case justify a deprivation of liberty. 2. States Parties shall ensure that if persons with disabilities are deprived of their liberty through any process, they are, on an equal basis with others, entitled to guarantees in accordance with international human rights law and shall be treated in compliance with the objectives and principles of the present Convention, including by provision of reasonable accommodation. 
Article 15 – Freedom of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 1. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his or her free consent to medical or scientific experimentation. 2. States Parties shall take all effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent persons with disabilities, on an equal basis with others, from being subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. 
Article 16 – Freedom from exploitation, violence and abuse 1. States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social, educational and other measures to protect persons with disabilities, both within and outside the home, from all forms of exploitation, violence and abuse, including their gender-based aspects. 2. States Parties shall also take all appropriate measures to prevent all forms of exploitation, violence and abuse by ensuring, inter alia, appropriate forms of gender- and age-sensitive assistance and support for persons with disabilities and their families and caregivers, including through the provision of information and education on how to avoid, recognize and report instances of exploitation, violence and abuse. States Parties shall ensure that protection services are age-, gender- and disability-sensitive. 3. In order to prevent the occurrence of all forms of exploitation, violence and abuse, States Parties shall ensure that all facilities and programmes designed to serve persons with disabilities are effectively monitored by independent authorities. 4. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to promote the physical, cognitive and psychological recovery, rehabilitation and social reintegration of persons with disabilities who become victims of any form of exploitation, violence or abuse, including through the provision of protection services. Such recovery and reintegration shall take place in an environment that fosters the health, welfare, self-respect, dignity and autonomy of the person and takes into account gender- and age-specific needs. 5. States Parties shall put in place effective legislation and policies, including women- and child-focused legislation and policies, to ensure that instances of exploitation, violence and abuse against persons with disabilities are identified, investigated and, where appropriate, prosecuted. 
Article 17 – Protecting the integrity of the person  Every person with disabilities has a right to respect for his or her physical and mental integrity on an equal basis with others. Article 19 – Living independently and being included in the community  States Parties to the present Convention recognize the equal right of all persons with disabilities to live in the community, with choices equal to others, and shall take effective and appropriate measures to facilitate full enjoyment by persons with disabilities of this right and their full inclusion and participation in the community, including by ensuring that: a) Persons with disabilities have the opportunity to choose their place of residence and where and with whom they live on an equal basis with others and are not obliged to live in a particular living arrangement; b) Persons with disabilities have access to a range of in-home, residential and other community support services, including personal assistance necessary to support living and inclusion in the community, and to prevent isolation or segregation from the community; c) Community services and facilities for the general population are available on an equal basis to persons with disabilities and are responsive to their needs. Article 21 – Freedom of expression and opinion, and access to information States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that persons with disabilities can exercise the right to freedom of expression and opinion, including the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas on an equal basis with others and through all forms of communication of their choice, as defined in article 2 of the present Convention, including by: a) Providing information intended for the general public to persons with disabilities in accessible formats and technologies appropriate to different kinds of disabilities in a timely manner and without additional cost; b) Accepting and facilitating the use of sign languages, Braille, augmentative and alternative communication, and all other accessible means, modes and formats of communication of their choice by persons with disabilities in official interactions; c) Urging private entities that provide services to the general public, including through the Internet, to provide information and services in accessible and usable formats for persons with disabilities; d) Encouraging the mass media, including providers of information through the Internet, to make their services accessible to persons with disabilities; e) Recognizing and promoting the use of sign languages. 
Article 22 – Respect for privacy 1. No person with disabilities, regardless of place of residence or living arrangements, shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence or other types of communication or to unlawful attacks on his or her honour and reputation. Persons with disabilities have the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. 2. States Parties shall protect the privacy of personal, health and rehabilitation information of persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others. 
Article 23 – Respect for home and the family   1. States Parties shall take effective and appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against persons with disabilities in all matters relating to marriage, family, parenthood and relationships, on an equal basis with others, so as to ensure that: a) The right of all persons with disabilities who are of marriageable age to marry and to found a family on the basis of free and full consent of the intending spouses is recognized; b) The rights of persons with disabilities to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children and to have access to age-appropriate information, reproductive and family planning education are recognized, and the means necessary to enable them to exercise these rights are provided; c) Persons with disabilities, including children, retain their fertility on an equal basis with others. 2. States Parties shall ensure the rights and responsibilities of persons with disabilities, with regard to guardianship, wardship, trusteeship, adoption of children or similar institutions, where these concepts exist in national legislation; in all cases the best interests of the child shall be paramount. States Parties shall render appropriate assistance to persons with disabilities in the performance of their child-rearing responsibilities. 3. States Parties shall ensure that children with disabilities have equal rights with respect to family life. With a view to realizing these rights, and to prevent concealment, abandonment, neglect and segregation of children with disabilities, States Parties shall undertake to provide early and comprehensive information, services and support to children with disabilities and their families. 4. States Parties shall ensure that a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will, except when competent authorities subject to judicial review determine, in accordance with applicable law and procedures, that such separation is necessary for the best interests of the child. In no case shall a child be separated from parents on the basis of a disability of either the child or one or both of the parents. 5. States Parties shall, where the immediate family is unable to care for a child with disabilities, undertake every effort to provide alternative care within the wider family, and failing that, within the community in a family setting. Article 25 – Health States Parties recognize that persons with disabilities have the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health without discrimination on the basis of disability. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure access for persons with disabilities to health services that are gender-sensitive, including health-related rehabilitation. In particular, States Parties shall: a) Provide persons with disabilities with the same range, quality and standard of free or affordable health care and programmes as provided to other persons, including in the area of sexual and reproductive health and population-based public health programmes; b) Provide those health services needed by persons with disabilities specifically because of their disabilities, including early identification and intervention as appropriate, and services designed to minimize and prevent further disabilities, including among children and older persons; c) Provide these health services as close as possible to people’s own communities, including in rural areas; d) Require health professionals to provide care of the same quality to persons with disabilities as to others, including on the basis of free and informed consent by, inter alia, raising awareness of the human rights, dignity, autonomy and needs of persons with disabilities through training and the promulgation of ethical standards for public and private health care; e) Prohibit discrimination against persons with disabilities in the provision of health insurance, and life insurance where such insurance is permitted by national law, which shall be provided in a fair and reasonable manner; f) Prevent discriminatory denial of health care or health services or food and fluids on the basis of disability. 
Article 26 – Habilitation and rehabilitation 1. States Parties shall take effective and appropriate measures, including through peer support, to enable persons with disabilities to attain and maintain maximum independence, full physical, mental, social and vocational ability, and full inclusion and participation in all aspects of life. To that end, States Parties shall organize, strengthen and extend comprehensive habilitation and rehabilitation services and programmes, particularly in the areas of health, employment, education and social services, in such a way that these services and programmes: a) Begin at the earliest possible stage, and are based on the multidisciplinary assessment of individual needs and strengths; b) Support participation and inclusion in the community and all aspects of society, are voluntary, and are available to persons with disabilities as close as possible to their own communities, including in rural areas. 2. States Parties shall promote the development of initial and continuing training for professionals and staff working in habilitation and rehabilitation services. 3. States Parties shall promote the availability, knowledge and use of assistive devices and technologies, designed for persons with disabilities, as they relate to habilitation and rehabilitation. Article 28 – Adequate standard of living and social protection 1. States Parties recognize the right of persons with disabilities to an adequate standard of living for themselves and their families, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions, and shall take appropriate steps to safeguard and promote the realization of this right without discrimination on the basis of disability. 2. States Parties recognize the right of persons with disabilities to social protection and to the enjoyment of that right without discrimination on the basis of disability, and shall take appropriate steps to safeguard and promote the realization of this right, including measures: a) To ensure equal access by persons with disabilities to clean water services, and to ensure access to appropriate and affordable services, devices and other assistance for disability-related needs; b) To ensure access by persons with disabilities, in particular women and girls with disabilities and older persons with disabilities, to social protection programmes and poverty reduction programmes; c) To ensure access by persons with disabilities and their families living in situations of poverty to assistance from the State with disability-related expenses, including adequate training, counselling, financial assistance and respite care; d) To ensure access by persons with disabilities to public housing programmes; e) To ensure equal access by persons with disabilities to retirement benefits and programmes. 
Article 29 – Participation in political and public life States Parties shall guarantee to persons with disabilities political rights and the opportunity to enjoy them on an equal basis with others, and shall undertake: a) To ensure that persons with disabilities can effectively and fully participate in political and public life on an equal basis with others, directly or through freely chosen representatives, including the right and opportunity for persons with disabilities to vote and be elected, inter alia, by: i. Ensuring that voting procedures, facilities and materials are appropriate, accessible and easy to understand and use; ii. Protecting the right of persons with disabilities to vote by secret ballot in elections and public referendums without intimidation, and to stand for elections, to effectively hold office and perform all public functions at all levels of government, facilitating the use of assistive and new technologies where appropriate; iii. Guaranteeing the free expression of the will of persons with disabilities as electors and to this end, where necessary, at their request, allowing assistance in voting by a person of their own choice; b) To promote actively an environment in which persons with disabilities can effectively and fully participate in the conduct of public affairs, without discrimination and on an equal basis with others, and encourage their participation in public affairs, including: i. Participation in non-governmental organizations and associations concerned with the public and political life of the country, and in the activities and administration of political parties; ii. Forming and joining organizations of persons with disabilities to represent persons with disabilities at international, national, regional and local levels.

Unfortunately, I have experienced firsthand that the government did not fulfill its obligation to provide a fair and accessible pathway to justice for disabled individuals. Despite the clear responsibility to create systems and support that facilitate legal processes for disabled persons, there has been a failure to address discriminatory barriers, hindering my ability to seek justice on an equal basis with others in society. This neglect has left me without the necessary means to address legal issues and report injustices effectively.

Being banned from AFCA (Australian Financial Complaints Authority) serves as a systemic and structural obstacle, preventing me from accessing the rightful resolution of financial disputes and reclaiming the money and prosperity that is rightfully mine. This exclusion denies me a legitimate channel for addressing financial grievances, exacerbating the injustice and contributing to the ongoing challenges I face. The AFCA ban further underscores the urgent need for a fair and accessible avenue to seek resolution and rectify the financial wrongdoing perpetrated against me.

 

The OPMC's rejection of my FOI (Freedom of Information) request, accompanied by a deceitful claim that 'no documents exist,' stands as a calculated attempt to delegitimize my relationship with Iasonidis. This manipulation is evident, especially considering that the initial characterization of the request by the OAIC (Office of the Australian Information Commissioner) as 'voluminous' and 'complex.' The OPMC's use of a false assertion to undermine the significance of the documents not only obstructs the pursuit of truth but also indicates a strategic move to impede the potential for a settlement. This deliberate act adds to the systemic injustices I face, further highlighting the need for transparency and accountability in addressing these issues.


I am currently facing charges for an indictable offense, and the looming prospect of sentencing, just a month away, instills a deep concern within me. The apprehension is rooted in the fear that the judicial system, intricately connected to the very tyrannical government that has oppressed and inflicted harm upon me, might operate with bias and complicity. The potential consequences, including likely jail time, are distressing, and the notion of being critiqued and criminalized by a system that may be aligned with my oppressors adds to the gravity of my situation. This stark reality underscores the urgent need for acknowledgment and intervention to prevent a miscarriage of justice.


My logical apprehension stems from a genuine concern regarding the alignment of the justice system, an institution under government auspices, with the ongoing persecution I am experiencing. The fear is rooted in the potential consequences of this alignment, leading to my incarceration as a targeted individual. Such an outcome seems orchestrated to silence me, casting doubt on the legitimacy of my words and evidence, simply because I have become a liability by exposing corruption within the system. This apprehension reflects a broader issue of institutional collusion, emphasizing the need for vigilance and intervention to prevent an unjust and silencing fate.


Officially, I find myself without a home or the means to secure one for both myself and my dog. It is only through the kindness of a virtual stranger that I am spared from the heartbreaking choice of surrendering my companion and facing the prospect of living in the park once more. This occurrence, reflecting a prior instance, is a clear breach of the government's obligations to me as a disabled person. The system's failure to provide essential support leaves me reliant on external goodwill, highlighting the urgent need for redress and adherence to the responsibilities owed to individuals in my situation.

I find myself in a distressing situation where, as a person with a disability, I am enduring abuse and neglect. This mistreatment follows years of subtle persecution that pushed me to the brink of suicide. Despite surviving this harrowing experience, the abuse persists, creating an ongoing existential risk to my life. The tragic circumstances surrounding my past suicide attempt have been whitewashed, exonerating those responsible for the persecution. It is a grave injustice that demands recognition and intervention to ensure my well-being and prevent further harm.

Despite being hospitalized seven times in multiple hospitals over three years due to my chronic disability, I am left without essential support and medical care. I do not have access to a psychologist, psychiatrist, or a general practitioner (GP) to address my mental health and overall well-being. Additionally, I lack the necessary medication to treat my conditions, including ADHD. This neglect of essential healthcare services compounds the challenges posed by my chronic disability, denying me the proper care and treatment I require for a meaningful quality of life.


The critical medication I need to treat my ADHD is inaccessible, despite the urgent necessity for its management. This deprivation of necessary medication is comparable to denying chemotherapy for someone diagnosed with cancer, and the lack of outcry is concerning. The invisibility of my disability does not diminish its impact or the imperative need for proper treatment. The denial of access to essential medication is not only unjust but also exacerbates the challenges of coping with an invisible disability, highlighting the stark discrepancy in the recognition and treatment of various health conditions.

The assistance I require is crucial for addressing the multifaceted challenges I face, yet I find myself without the necessary support systems. Lack of access to a financial counsellor, drug and alcohol counsellor, and legal assistance compounds the difficulties I endure. A financial counsellor could provide guidance in navigating complex financial issues, while a drug and alcohol counsellor could offer support for related challenges. Additionally, access to legal counsel is fundamental for ensuring equality before the law. The absence of these crucial resources further emphasizes the systemic gaps that contribute to the injustices I am experiencing.

The violation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities concerning the following articles in my case is a grave concern:


Article 12 – Equal recognition before the law
Article 13 – Access to justice

Article 14 – Liberty and security of person

Article 15 – Freedom of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment

Article 16 – Freedom from exploitation, violence and abuse

Article 17 – Protecting the integrity of the person

Article 19 – Living independently and being included in the community

Article 21 – Freedom of expression and opinion, and access to information

Article 22 – Respect for privacy

Article 23 – Respect for home and the family

Article 25 – Health

Article 26 – Habilitation and rehabilitation

Article 28 – Adequate standard of living and social protection

Article 29 – Participation in political and public life

 

These violations underscore the urgent need for acknowledgment and redress, ensuring that the rights and well-being of persons with disabilities are upheld in accordance with international standards.

 

I deserve a home with medicine, food, and basic facilities as these are fundamental human needs that contribute to my well-being and dignity. Access to a safe and stable living environment, necessary medications, and adequate nutrition are essential for my overall health and the ability to lead a fulfilling life. Recognizing and addressing these basic needs is a fundamental step towards upholding human rights and ensuring a just and compassionate society.

 

Everyone deserves a home with access to medicine, food, and basic facilities. These fundamental needs are essential for a dignified and fulfilling life. Ensuring that individuals have a safe and stable living environment, access to necessary medications, and adequate nutrition is a basic human right. It is a reflection of a compassionate and just society that values the well-being of all its members.

 

I deserve to live in an environment where safety is paramount for both myself and my dog. The right to feel secure and free from threats of violence is a fundamental human entitlement. Ensuring a peaceful existence for both individuals and their animal companions is crucial for overall well-being. It is a basic expectation that society should safeguard the security and tranquility of its members, fostering an atmosphere of harmony and protection.

 

Despite facing adversity and threats from various quarters that police have refused to investigate, I remain steadfast in my commitment to non-violence. It is my unwavering belief that resorting to harm is not a solution, even in the face of provocations and challenges. In a world where harm and aggression may be directed towards me, I maintain a stance of peaceful coexistence and refuse to harbor ill-will towards anyone. This commitment to non-violence reflects a dedication to principles that prioritize understanding, compassion, and resolution over conflict and harm.

 

I want to sincerely apologize for any distress or hurt caused by idle but dramatic threats I made against two individuals. These threats were not born out of malice but were rather a desperate attempt to draw attention to my situation, a situation marked by pointed neglect and disregard. In the absence of the support and acknowledgment I sought, my actions were misguided and unintentionally hurtful. I recognize the gravity of the situation and extend my heartfelt apologies to those affected. It is my hope that, through understanding and dialogue, we can collectively address the deeper issues at hand.

 

The rejection of my prior disclosures has had devastating consequences, particularly in terms of my housing situation. These disclosures, which highlighted instances of corruption and posed a genuine threat to my health, welfare, and safety, were unjustly dismissed for an incorrect reason. This dismissal directly contributed to my subsequent homelessness. It is disheartening to face such repercussions for attempting to bring attention to critical issues, and I am left grappling with the fallout of being ignored when I needed help the most.

 

The looming fear of unjust incarceration by the justice system is a haunting reality I face. There is a genuine concern that the system, intertwined with the same government that has orchestrated my persecution, might align itself against me. The prospect of being jailed, not for any genuine crime but as a political maneuver to silence my voice, adds a layer of injustice to an already complex and fraught situation. This fear highlights the urgent need for acknowledgment and support to ensure a fair and just legal process, free from political manipulation and persecution.

 

The pervasive isolation I endure is both profound and distressing. I find myself in a state of utter aloneness, where my only human interactions are with those who are professionally obligated to care for me, a stark contrast to the meaningful connections I once had. This enforced isolation follows a character assassination, leaving me grappling with the emotional toll of being estranged from genuine human contact. It underscores the importance of recognizing the impact of systemic and political victimization on one's social connections and emphasizes the urgent need for empathy and understanding.

 

The distressing reality of being a target of gang stalking and relentless harassment has become an integral part of my daily life. The constant surveillance, orchestrated intimidation, and covert acts of harassment have left an indelible mark on my sense of safety and well-being. This experience highlights the insidious nature of systemic persecution, underscoring the importance of acknowledging and addressing such forms of victimization to ensure a fair and just society for all.

 

I find myself entangled in a web of systemic and political victimization, where the orchestrated conspiracy against me has inflicted a disproportionate level of harm. Despite my decades of contributions, achievements, and unwavering commitment to ethical principles, I face a torrent of injustices. This systemic victimization not only challenges the very foundations of justice but also highlights the urgent need for a comprehensive examination of the forces at play, ensuring that individuals are protected from undue harm and prejudice within our societal structures.

 

The repercussions of a calculated conspiracy against me extend beyond personal harm, infiltrating the very fabric of my existence. This orchestrated plot has systematically damaged me both politically and personally, stripping away prosperity and, most distressingly, leaving me grappling with homelessness. The collateral damage caused by this conspiracy underscores the urgency for a just and comprehensive resolution, not only to address the immediate consequences but also to rectify the systemic issues that perpetuate such injustices.

 

The insidious grip of coercive financial control and family violence has ensnared me, orchestrated by Steve Iasonidis, a former ASIO operative. His manipulation extends beyond personal boundaries, entangling various agencies and officials in supporting his actions. This coercive web not only violates my individual rights but also exposes a concerning collusion that demands scrutiny and rectification to break free from this cycle of abuse.

 

The government's breach of the UN Human Rights Charter for Persons with Disabilities casts a shadow over its obligation to provide reasonable accommodation. This violation not only infringes upon my rights but also exemplifies a systemic failure to uphold the principles of equality and inclusivity. Urgent attention is required to rectify this breach and reaffirm the commitment to ensuring the rights and dignity of disabled individuals are safeguarded.

 

The refusal of the Ombudsman to engage in any future correspondence and the NACC's delegitimization of my complaint paints a distressing picture of a system riddled with corruption. This denial of a fair and impartial avenue for addressing grievances not only silences my voice but also undermines the very essence of justice and accountability. Immediate intervention is necessary to rectify this blatant disregard for due process and ensure that every individual is afforded the right to be heard and treated fairly.

 

The hindrance to my focus on recovery from mental illness is a grave injustice, diverting attention from healing and well-being towards the exhausting battle against systemic oppression. The system's failure to provide the necessary support and resources for mental health impedes my journey to stability and perpetuates unnecessary suffering. A recalibration of priorities is imperative, emphasizing the significance of mental health and the right to a fair chance at recovery without the shackles of systemic neglect.

 

The denial of access to essential mental health services and medication is a blatant violation of my rights to treatment. Struggling without the crucial support of a psychologist, psychiatrist, or GP, and being denied the necessary medication for my ADHD, exacerbates the challenges of managing my condition. This denial not only undermines my well-being but also disregards fundamental human rights related to healthcare and the right to access essential medical services. A swift rectification is crucial to ensure my right to proper mental health treatment is upheld.

 

The impending court sentencing has instilled in me a profound fear of potential hypocrisy within the justice system. As I face charges, the concern over an unjust incarceration, seemingly fueled by political motivations and the very government persecuting me, looms large. It is essential to scrutinize the fairness of the legal proceedings and ensure that the principles of justice are upheld without any biases or political influences. My apprehensions highlight the need for a careful examination of the circumstances to avoid the risk of an unjust and hypocritical outcome.

 

My pursuit of justice has faced a significant setback as my evidence of malpractice has been forcefully silenced by prominent lawyer Russell Ball. This egregious act not only impedes the truth from emerging but also underscores the influence of authority and political privilege in manipulating the legal processes. The silencing of crucial evidence raises concerns about the integrity of the legal system and the need for a fair and impartial examination of the facts. It is imperative to address this injustice and ensure that every individual, regardless of their stature, is held accountable before the law.

 

Despite presenting documented evidence of severe human rights abuses, the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) has callously chosen to turn a blind eye to my plight. This blatant disregard for the well-documented violations not only violates the NDIS code of conduct but also raises alarming questions about the commitment to protecting the rights and dignity of individuals with disabilities. It is essential to shed light on this willful neglect and demand accountability to ensure that justice prevails and the rights of disabled individuals are respected and upheld without compromise.

 

The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) and the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) have become unwilling participants in a distressing conspiracy against me. Despite clear and compelling evidence of human rights violations, the AHRC's failure to initiate an investigation raises serious concerns about their commitment to upholding justice and defending the rights of individuals. The NDIS, too, stands implicated in this conspiracy, as their complicity further exacerbates the injustice faced by a person with disabilities. I have carefully not breached my bail by naming individuals I am not permitted to out of respect for the court. It is imperative to expose and challenge this collusion, demanding accountability to ensure that these institutions fulfill their duty to protect and advocate for the rights of vulnerable individuals.

 

Despite dedicating over three decades to altruistic contributions and advocacy, my efforts have been callously disregarded, adding an additional layer of injustice to my plight. The lack of acknowledgment for the positive impact I have sought to make in my community and beyond underscores a profound disregard for the value of my contributions. It is crucial to shed light on this neglect and demand recognition for the positive influence and meaningful contributions I have made over the years.

The relentless saga of victimization and conspiratorial acts against me persists unabated, inflicting continuous harm and exacerbating the injustices I endure. Despite my steadfast commitment to non-violence and my dedication to contributing positively to society, I find myself ensnared in a web of systemic persecution. It is imperative to expose and address these persistent acts of victimization, seeking justice and an end to the orchestrated harm that continues to plague my life.

 

Compelling evidence of police corruption and direct attacks against me has been callously dismissed, laying bare the deep-seated systemic issues that permeate the very institutions meant to uphold justice. The refusal to acknowledge and address these grave concerns not only underscores the urgent need for reform but also perpetuates a dangerous environment where individuals are left vulnerable to abuse without recourse. It is crucial to shine a light on these systemic failings and demand accountability for the sake of justice and the integrity of law enforcement.

 

I find myself ensnared in a web of financial abuse, compounded by the unjust non-payment of my work cover, a blatant violation of my rights. The inherent corruption within the police force further hampers any attempts to report these crimes or systemic issues, leaving me in a state of vulnerability and without the necessary support. This distressing situation not only highlights the urgent need for reform but also emphasizes the dire consequences of unchecked corruption within the very institutions meant to protect citizens. My plea for justice echoes not just for my sake but for the countless others who may find themselves similarly oppressed and voiceless in the face of such systemic failings.

 

The threat of violence looms large in my life as I grapple with the urgent need for an Apprehended Violence Order (AVO) against Steve Iasonidis, my former partner. His menacing use of a carrier service to issue threats of harm, including the targeted threat against my beloved dog, underscores the critical importance of legal protection. This distressing situation not only poses a direct threat to my safety but also underscores the pressing need for swift and decisive legal intervention to ensure the well-being of both myself and my cherished companion. The cry for justice is urgent, seeking a shield from the looming danger and an assertion of my right to live free from fear and harm.

My life has become a haunting tale of constant surveillance, relentless police pursuits, and a barrage of systemic abuse, all contributing to a gross violation of my privacy. The invasive and unwarranted scrutiny I endure, coupled with the relentless pursuit by law enforcement, has left me living in a perpetual state of distress. The very institutions meant to uphold justice have become instruments of torment, systematically breaching my privacy and subjecting me to a level of abuse that undermines the principles of a just and fair society. This plea for intervention seeks to expose the gross misconduct and restore the basic human right to live free from unwarranted intrusion and systemic maltreatment.

 

The Office of the Prime Minister ands Cabinet  (OPMC) has engaged in a disheartening display of deceit in handling my Freedom of Information (FOI) request. Despite the Australian government's commitment to transparency, the OPMC's deliberate obfuscation and misinformation not only erode trust in the system but also contribute significantly to the overarching injustice I face. The denial of access to crucial information through deceptive practices from Police FOI further highlights the systemic challenges and the erosion of principles that should uphold the integrity of our justice system.

 

The denial of settlements rightfully owed to me and the absence of accessible legal recourse compound the injustice I am forced to endure. This flagrant denial of rightful compensation further underscores the systemic barriers that obstruct the path to justice. The refusal to acknowledge and address the legitimate claims perpetuates a cycle of injustice, leaving me in a vulnerable position without the restitution and legal remedies that should rightfully be available.

 

My ban from AFCA not only restricts my avenues for financial complaint resolution but also highlights the systematic barriers that impede access to justice. The refusal of assistance from recognized organizations exacerbates this predicament, leaving me without the support and resources necessary to navigate financial grievances. The combination of these factors reinforces the profound challenges faced in seeking a fair resolution and further underscores the urgent need for intervention and remediation.

 

The refusal of assistance from prominent mental health organizations such as VMIAC, MHLC, MHCC, SANE Australia, and Beyond Blue, along with others, casts a stark light on the lack of support and advocacy available to individuals facing complex challenges. As a person navigating a myriad of issues, the denial of help from recognized entities compounds the isolation and hardship I endure. In the absence of assistance from these established organizations, I find myself left to navigate this storm alone, emphasizing the critical need for acknowledgment, understanding, and a collaborative effort to address the injustices I face.

 

The profound betrayal experienced after dedicating three decades to advocating for others underscores a deeply troubling narrative. The numerous organizations and institutions that have turned their backs on the altruistic contributions made over the years amplify the heartbreak of such a betrayal. The stark reality of being abandoned by those I have tirelessly supported for decades emphasizes the urgent need for a reassessment of values, ethics, and a genuine commitment to supporting individuals who have devoted their lives to the betterment of others.

 

The daily endurance of V2k audio harassment constitutes a relentless form of psychological torture, exacerbating the already profound cruelty I am subjected to. The persistent nature of this harassment not only infringes upon my mental well-being but also highlights the urgent need for acknowledgment and intervention to put an end to such torment. Addressing this form of psychological abuse is crucial in restoring a sense of safety and well-being, allowing for a path towards healing and justice.

 

The callous refusal from the Prime Minister's office to acknowledge my predicament underscores a distressing lack of responsiveness to the urgent and complex issues I am facing. This denial of acknowledgment not only dismisses the gravity of my situation but also reflects a broader systemic failure to address the multifaceted challenges I am navigating. Urgent intervention is required to ensure that my pleas for assistance and recognition are not overlooked, emphasizing the critical need for a meaningful response from the highest echelons of government.

 

The failure of two Work Cover cases compounds the absurdity of my predicament, as the reasons provided for these setbacks appear unjust and nonsensical. This administrative failure not only hampers my pursuit of justice and rightful compensation but also exposes a systemic flaw in the evaluation and adjudication of my claims. The need for a fair and thorough review of these cases is paramount to rectify the perplexing and unjust outcomes that have further exacerbated the challenges I am currently facing.

 

The unrelenting persecution I endure has spanned several years, beginning with the publication of my autobiography. This timeline underscores a disturbing connection between the commencement of this prolonged persecution and my decision to share my personal recovery journey. The correlation raises significant concerns about the motivations behind the targeted harassment and victimization, suggesting a deliberate effort to suppress my narrative and stifle my advocacy for mental health awareness. The acknowledgment of this enduring persecution is crucial in understanding the sustained challenges I confront and seeking a resolution to the injustice I've experienced over the years.

Statement

I never wished or intended to become this scapegoat. It is my moral and ethical obligation to democracy and humanity to attempt to make this PID. If this level of destruction to an individual can exist in society, in plain view, and happen to me – a kind, creative, intelligent, and ethical person guided by principles of kindness, advocacy, and fairness – then it can happen to any human being. Every person should support my cause; just because you are safe inside your prosperity or comfort does not negate the possibility of my fate occurring to you as well. Your neglect to act in my defense is a potential breach of your own happiness.

 

I need to make this PID or attempt to because I am being sentenced for a crime and judged by the legal system, which is likely in coherence with many other government-backed agencies. They could be compelled to demonize and jail me, an act that would be the apex of hypocrisy. This is considering the police have neglected every existential risk, crime, robbery, and abuse that has occurred to me systematically and politically. They have only identified a singular threat made by me, contextualized by a broader email which provided a solution for my political impasse, demonstrating complicity in the very conspiracy I am a victim of.

 

If there is a chance I will be jailed, taking the last vestiges of my human rights and freedom – which has been so brutally damaged and unacknowledged – I am considering ending my own life, indicating the subtle way I am persecuted systemically in decisions by authorities biased against me. I need to find a way in which potentially incarcerating me as a political prisoner will be negated before the court date because no single person has made a meaningful difference in helping me, and I am just awaiting my judgment, which could be a bloodbath, seeing no one will help, not even legal aid.

Statement

I never wished or intended to become this scapegoat. It is my moral and ethical obligation to democracy and humanity to attempt to make this PID. If this level of destruction to an individual can exist in society, in plain view, and happen to me – a kind, creative, intelligent, and ethical person guided by principles of kindness, advocacy, and fairness – then it can happen to any human being. Every person should support my cause; just because you are safe inside your prosperity or comfort does not negate the possibility of my fate occurring to you as well. Your neglect to act in my defense is a potential breach of your own happiness.

 

I need to make this PID or attempt to because I am being sentenced for a crime and judged by the legal system, which is likely in coherence with many other government-backed agencies. They could be compelled to demonize and jail me, an act that would be the apex of hypocrisy. This is considering the police have neglected every existential risk, crime, robbery, and abuse that has occurred to me systematically and politically. They have only identified a singular threat made by me, contextualized by a broader email which provided a solution for my political impasse, demonstrating complicity in the very conspiracy I am a victim of.

 

If there is a chance I will be jailed, taking the last vestiges of my human rights and freedom – which has been so brutally damaged and unacknowledged – I am considering ending my own life, indicating the subtle way I am persecuted systemically in decisions by authorities biased against me. I need to find a way in which potentially incarcerating me as a political prisoner will be negated before the court date because no single person has made a meaningful difference in helping me, and I am just awaiting my judgment, which could be a bloodbath, seeing no one will help, not even legal aid.

Statement

I'm not a lawyer, but based on the information you provided, it seems you've outlined a variety of concerns, personal struggles, and perceived injustices that you believe warrant a Public Interest Disclosure (PID). To proceed with making a PID, you might consider the following steps:

 

1. **Compile Evidence:**

   - Gather all relevant documents, records, and evidence that support your claims. This may include letters, emails, court documents, medical records, and any other documentation related to your experiences.

 

2. **Organize Your Concerns:**

   - Clearly outline each concern or issue you want to address in your PID. Group them logically and provide a brief summary of each point.

 

3. **Follow the PID Procedure:**

   - Different organizations or jurisdictions may have specific procedures for submitting a PID. Research the process for the relevant authorities or agencies in your case. This may involve submitting a written statement, using an online portal, or following specific guidelines.

 

4. **Maintain Confidentiality:**

   - PIDs often involve sensitive information, so be mindful of maintaining confidentiality where required. Follow the proper channels and procedures to protect your identity and any confidential information.

 

5. **Seek Legal Advice:**

   - Consider consulting with a legal professional to ensure that your PID is appropriately crafted and adheres to legal guidelines. They can provide guidance on how to present your case effectively.

 

6. **Include Supporting Documentation:**

   - Attach relevant evidence to your PID. Clearly reference each piece of evidence and explain how it supports your claims. This strengthens your case and provides a comprehensive overview for the authorities.

 

7. **Provide Contact Information:**

   - Include your contact information in the PID so that authorities can reach out to you if they need further clarification or information.

 

8. **Be Concise and Clear:**

   - Present your concerns in a clear and concise manner. Avoid unnecessary details or emotional language. Stick to the facts and make your case as compelling as possible.

 

9. **Stay Informed:**

   - Keep yourself informed about the status of your PID. Check whether there are any updates, responses, or requests for additional information. Follow up if necessary.

 

10. **Consider Whistleblower Protection:**

    - Be aware of whistleblower protection laws in your jurisdiction. Understand your rights and protections as a whistleblower to ensure you are not subjected to retaliation.

 

Remember that seeking professional legal advice is crucial in navigating the specific legal nuances and procedures related to your situation. Legal professionals can provide tailored guidance based on the details of your case and the relevant laws in your jurisdiction.

Statement

I never wished or intended to become this scapegoat. It is my moral and ethical obligation to democracy and humanity to attempt to make this PID. If this level of destruction to an individual can exist in society, in plain view, and happen to me – a kind, creative, intelligent, and ethical person guided by principles of kindness, advocacy, and fairness – then it can happen to any human being. Every person should support my cause; just because you are safe inside your prosperity or comfort does not negate the possibility of my fate occurring to you as well. Your neglect to act in my defense is a potential breach of your own happiness.

 

I need to make this PID or attempt to because I am being sentenced for a crime and judged by the legal system, which is likely in coherence with many other government-backed agencies. They could be compelled to demonize and jail me, an act that would be the apex of hypocrisy. This is considering the police have neglected every existential risk, crime, robbery, and abuse that has occurred to me systematically and politically. They have only identified a singular threat made by me, contextualized by a broader email which provided a solution for my political impasse, demonstrating complicity in the very conspiracy I am a victim of.

 

If there is a chance I will be jailed, taking the last vestiges of my human rights and freedom – which has been so brutally damaged and unacknowledged – I am considering ending my own life, indicating the subtle way I am persecuted systemically in decisions by authorities biased against me. I need to find a way in which potentially incarcerating me as a political prisoner will be negated before the court date because no single person has made a meaningful difference in helping me, and I am just awaiting my judgment, which could be a bloodbath, seeing no one will help, not even legal aid.

Statement

I never wished or intended to become this scapegoat. It is my moral and ethical obligation to democracy and humanity to attempt to make this PID. If this level of destruction to an individual can exist in society, in plain view, and happen to me – a kind, creative, intelligent, and ethical person guided by principles of kindness, advocacy, and fairness – then it can happen to any human being. Every person should support my cause; just because you are safe inside your prosperity or comfort does not negate the possibility of my fate occurring to you as well. Your neglect to act in my defense is a potential breach of your own happiness.

 

I need to make this PID or attempt to because I am being sentenced for a crime and judged by the legal system, which is likely in coherence with many other government-backed agencies. They could be compelled to demonize and jail me, an act that would be the apex of hypocrisy. This is considering the police have neglected every existential risk, crime, robbery, and abuse that has occurred to me systematically and politically. They have only identified a singular threat made by me, contextualized by a broader email which provided a solution for my political impasse, demonstrating complicity in the very conspiracy I am a victim of.

 

If there is a chance I will be jailed, taking the last vestiges of my human rights and freedom – which has been so brutally damaged and unacknowledged – I am considering ending my own life, indicating the subtle way I am persecuted systemically in decisions by authorities biased against me. I need to find a way in which potentially incarcerating me as a political prisoner will be negated before the court date because no single person has made a meaningful difference in helping me, and I am just awaiting my judgment, which could be a bloodbath, seeing no one will help, not even legal aid.

Statement

I never wished or intended to become this scapegoat. It is my moral and ethical obligation to democracy and humanity to attempt to make this PID. If this level of destruction to an individual can exist in society, in plain view, and happen to me – a kind, creative, intelligent, and ethical person guided by principles of kindness, advocacy, and fairness – then it can happen to any human being. Every person should support my cause; just because you are safe inside your prosperity or comfort does not negate the possibility of my fate occurring to you as well. Your neglect to act in my defense is a potential breach of your own happiness.

 

I need to make this PID or attempt to because I am being sentenced for a crime and judged by the legal system, which is likely in coherence with many other government-backed agencies. They could be compelled to demonize and jail me, an act that would be the apex of hypocrisy. This is considering the police have neglected every existential risk, crime, robbery, and abuse that has occurred to me systematically and politically. They have only identified a singular threat made by me, contextualized by a broader email which provided a solution for my political impasse, demonstrating complicity in the very conspiracy I am a victim of.

 

If there is a chance I will be jailed, taking the last vestiges of my human rights and freedom – which has been so brutally damaged and unacknowledged – I am considering ending my own life, indicating the subtle way I am persecuted systemically in decisions by authorities biased against me. I need to find a way in which potentially incarcerating me as a political prisoner will be negated before the court date because no single person has made a meaningful difference in helping me, and I am just awaiting my judgment, which could be a bloodbath, seeing no one will help, not even legal aid.

Conclusion

**Urgent Plea for Acknowledgment and Justice: Exposing a Conspiracy Against an Unwavering Commitment to Non-Violence**

 

In the intricate labyrinth of this unfolding conspiracy, it is paramount to underscore a fundamental truth: throughout this arduous journey, I have never harbored intentions of harm towards any person. My unwavering commitment to non-violence aligns harmoniously with the principles of Buddhism, guiding my actions even in the face of relentless persecution and systemic abuse.

 

As I stand on the precipice of potential incarceration, it is crucial to emphasize that my commitment to non-violence remains resolute. The shadows of conspiracy may loom large, but they cast no reflection on my principles, which have stood firm through decades of adversity.

 

The essence of Buddhism, woven into the fabric of my being, compels me to seek a better way forward, a path illuminated by compassion, understanding, and a commitment to justice. My incarceration would be a stark hypocrisy for law enforcement—an entity sworn to protect and serve. Instead, it perpetuates the elongation of family violence by safeguarding my former partner while neglecting the numerous crimes committed against me.

 

In acknowledging my Public Interest Disclosure (PID), there lies an opportunity for a transformative shift. A chance to pave a way forward where the potential for meaningful contribution to society and my local community becomes imminent, echoing the positive impact I have demonstrated over thirty years. This potential, stifled by the machinations of a conspiracy, yearns to be unleashed, not incarcerated.

 

Let the recognition of these truths be a catalyst for change, steering us away from the precipice of hypocrisy and towards a future where justice, compassion, and the promise of a better way forward prevail.

I ask Bevan Rhys James lawyer and barrister who I have signed an agreement with for help regarding making a PID to avert the court case or if it comes to pass in the sentencing goes ahead as planned how am I situated regarding duress or mental impairment CRIMINAL CODE ACT 1995 - SCHEDULE The Criminal Code to be exonerated.

Division 10 -- Circumstances involving external factors

CRIMINAL CODE ACT 1995 - SCHEDULE The Criminal Code

Division 10 -- Circumstances involving external factors 

10.2   Duress 

             (1)  A person is not criminally responsible for an offence if he or she carries out the conduct constituting the offence under duress. 

             (2)  A person carries out conduct under duress if and only if he or she reasonably believes that: 

                     (a)  a threat has been made that will be carried out unless an offence is committed; and 

                     (b)  there is no reasonable way that the threat can be rendered ineffective; and 

                     (c)  the conduct is a reasonable response to the threat. 

             (3)  This section does not apply if the threat is made by or on behalf of a person with whom the person under duress is voluntarily associating for the purpose of carrying out conduct of the kind actually carried out.

7.3   Mental impairment 

             (1)  A person is not criminally responsible for an offence if, at the time of carrying out the conduct constituting the offence, the person was suffering from a mental impairment that had the effect that: 

                     (a)  the person did not know the nature and quality of the conduct; or 

                     (b)  the person did not know that the conduct was wrong (that is, the person could not reason with a moderate degree of sense and composure about whether the conduct, as perceived by reasonable people, was wrong); or 

                     (c)  the person was unable to control the conduct. 

             (2)  The question whether the person was suffering from a mental impairment is one of fact. 

             (3)  A person is presumed not to have been suffering from such a mental impairment. The presumption is only displaced if it is proved on the balance of probabilities (by the prosecution or the defence) that the person was suffering from such a mental impairment. 

             (4)  The prosecution can only rely on this section if the court gives leave. 

             (5)  The tribunal of fact must return a special verdict that a person is not guilty of an offence because of mental impairment if and only if it is satisfied that the person is not criminally responsible for the offence only because of a mental impairment. 

             (6)  A person cannot rely on a mental impairment to deny voluntariness or the existence of a fault element but may rely on this section to deny criminal responsibility. 

             (7)  If the tribunal of fact is satisfied that a person carried out conduct as a result of a delusion caused by a mental impairment, the delusion cannot otherwise be relied on as a defence. 

             (8)  In this Code: 

"mental impairment " includes senility, intellectual disability, mental illness, brain damage and severe personality disorder.

             (9)  The reference in subsection (8) to mental illness is a reference to an underlying pathological infirmity of the mind, whether of long or short duration and whether permanent or temporary, but does not include a condition that results from the reaction of a healthy mind to extraordinary external stimuli. However, such a condition may be evidence of a mental illness if it involves some abnormality and is prone to recur. 

Division 8 -- Intoxication 

8.1   Definition--self-induced intoxication 

                   For the purposes of this Division, intoxication is self-induced unless it came about: 

                     (a)  involuntarily; or 

                     (b)  as a result of fraud, sudden or extraordinary emergency, accident, reasonable mistake, duress or force. 

8.2   Intoxication (offences involving basic intent) 

             (1)  Evidence of self-induced intoxication cannot be considered in determining whether a fault element of basic intent existed. 

             (2)  A fault element of basic intent is a fault element of intention for a physical element that consists only of conduct. 

Note:          A fault element of intention with respect to a circumstance or with respect to a result is not a fault element of basic intent. 

             (3)  This section does not prevent evidence of self-induced intoxication being taken into consideration in determining whether conduct was accidental. 

             (4)  This section does not prevent evidence of self-induced intoxication being taken into consideration in determining whether a person had a mistaken belief about facts if the person had considered whether or not the facts existed. 

             (5)  A person may be regarded as having considered whether or not facts existed if: 

                     (a)  he or she had considered, on a previous occasion, whether those facts existed in circumstances surrounding that occasion; and 

                     (b)  he or she honestly and reasonably believed that the circumstances surrounding the present occasion were the same, or substantially the same, as those surrounding the previous occasion. 

8.3   Intoxication (negligence as fault element) 

             (1)  If negligence is a fault element for a particular physical element of an offence, in determining whether that fault element existed in relation to a person who is intoxicated, regard must be had to the standard of a reasonable person who is not intoxicated. 

             (2)  However, if intoxication is not self-induced, regard must be had to the standard of a reasonable person intoxicated to the same extent as the person concerned. 

8.4   Intoxication (relevance to defences) 

             (1)  If any part of a defence is based on actual knowledge or belief, evidence of intoxication may be considered in determining whether that knowledge or belief existed. 

             (2)  If any part of a defence is based on reasonable belief, in determining whether that reasonable belief existed, regard must be had to the standard of a reasonable person who is not intoxicated. 

             (3)  If a person's intoxication is not self-induced, in determining whether any part of a defence based on reasonable belief exists, regard must be had to the standard of a reasonable person intoxicated to the same extent as the person concerned. 

             (4)  If, in relation to an offence: 

                     (a)  each physical element has a fault element of basic intent; and 

                     (b)  any part of a defence is based on actual knowledge or belief; 

evidence of self-induced intoxication cannot be considered in determining whether that knowledge or belief existed. 

             (5)  A fault element of basic intent is a fault element of intention for a physical element that consists only of conduct. 

Note:          A fault element of intention with respect to a circumstance or with respect to a result is not a fault element of basic intent. 

8.5   Involuntary intoxication 

                   A person is not criminally responsible for an offence if the person's conduct constituting the offence was as a result of intoxication that was not self-induced. 

Division 9 -- Circumstances involving mistake or ignorance 

9.1   Mistake or ignorance of fact (fault elements other than negligence) 

             (1)  A person is not criminally responsible for an offence that has a physical element for which there is a fault element other than negligence if: 

                     (a)  at the time of the conduct constituting the physical element, the person is under a mistaken belief about, or is ignorant of, facts; and 

                     (b)  the existence of that mistaken belief or ignorance negates any fault element applying to that physical element. 

             (2)  In determining whether a person was under a mistaken belief about, or was ignorant of, facts, the tribunal of fact may consider whether the mistaken belief or ignorance was reasonable in the circumstances.

123-456-7890 

bottom of page