Julia Gillard

Prima facie case to charge Julia Gillard with concealing a serious indictable offence in the AWU Scandal

There is enough evidence to charge Julia Gillard for concealing a serious indictable offence which carries a jail term of 2 years. Julia Gillard has dared anyone to make allegations against her, I have before and will again, in this post I make out the prima facie case against Julia Gillard.

There are two key elements

1. Does Julia Gillard know about the fraud. and

2. Did she conceal the fraud.

If you are new to this story please go to the Julia Gillard / Bruce Wilson – AWU Fraud Page at the top in the menu bar for previous posts with all the history. (Click here to go to the page)

Evidence that Julia Gillard knew that there was a fraud.

Everyone knows that her former boyfriend ripped off the AWU and Julia Gillard knows this as well. Gillard helped him but says she did not do it knowingly. The evidence that Julia Gillard knew about the fraud is a mile long but let’s have a look at just some of it.

1. Her excuses that she was “young and naive” and “I was in a relationship, which I ended, and obviously it was all very distressing. I am by no means the first person to find out that someone close turns out to be different to what you had believed them to be. It’s an ordinary human error.” (Click here to read the article)

2. She said in her press conference the on Thursday that as soon as she found out what Bruce Wilson had been up to she ended the relationship.

3. She was left Slater and Gordon not long after as a direct result of the AWU fraud. Although in the press conference on Thursday she seemed to be claiming there were other reasons as well.

4. Slater and Gordon interviewed her and taped the interview which clearly suggests wrong doing or knowledge of it. In the press conference on Thursday Gillard tried to make out this was not unusual.

I could keep going but if Julia Gillard wants to deny knowing about the fraud it would be a bad joke.

Did Julia Gillard conceal the fraud.

All of the media attention on Julia Gillard in relation to this matter could have been cleared up by her by simply releasing the statements and/or affidavits she gave to the police in 1995/96. There does not seem to be any. Why not?

She could also have released the statements she  gave to the AWU in this matter in 1995/96. As we will see she did not give them any and must have refused to. Why?

In the Ian Cambridge affidavit dated 19th September 1996 on page 19 he says in relation to the purchase of the house by Bruce Wilson in Melbourne  “I am unable to understand how Slater & Gordon, who were then acting for the Victorian branch of the union, could have permitted the use of funds which where obviously taken from the union, in the purchase of private property of this nature, without seeking and obtaining proper authority from the union for such use of its funds” (Click here to read the affidavit)

That is a statement that Ian Cambridge should not have needed to make. Julia Gillard and/or Slater and Gordon should have told Ian Cambridge how it happened. At the time Ian Cambridge wrote the affidavit the AWU account had been transferred to Maurice and Blackburn lawyers because of the AWU fraud. But this alone should not have stopped Julia Gillard and Slater and Gordon from helping the AWU investigate.

Did she refuse to help because of the police investigations that were afoot at the time? If this is the case it is not a good look to say the least.

At the press conference on Thursday Julia Gillard was asked:

JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, do you have any information which you are prevented from giving by lawyer-client privilege that could assist the authorities in relation to the funds, you know, that Mr Wilson-

PM: No

Then why did she not give a statement to the police.

The reason there is no lawyer-client privilege stopping her is because of what is called the fraud exception or also known as the crime exception. Lawyer-client privilege means that a lawyer does not have to disclose any communication with the client and they are protected by the law. But if a lawyer helps a client commit a crime then they can and have to disclose the communication which is covered by the fraud exception

I believe that her admission that there is no “information which you are prevented from giving by lawyer-client privilege” says she knew there was a crime and her communication with Bruce Wilson and Ralph Blewitt was not covered by the lawyer-client privilege. It also asks the question why Julia Gillard did not give any statements to the police or if she did why she has not released them.

At the time of th fraud back in 1995/96 the Western Australia police, Victorian Police and Federal police where all investigating. Bob Kernohan gave a statement to the Federal police in relation to $6,500 he had received from Bruce Wilson which shows up on the Victorian Parliament Hansard website. Kernohan was cleared of any wrong doing. (Click here to read)

If Bob Kernohan gave a statement, why did Julia Gillard also not give a statement to the police? She now says that she believed the accounts where to be used for a re-election slush fund which turned out to be a lie. So who lied to her? Was it Bruce Wilson or Ralph Blewitt or both. What did they say exactly? This at the very least would clearly be relevent information that would have helped the police in their investigations and most likely would have helped in a prosecution of Bruce Wilson and/or Ralph Blewitt.

CRIMES ACT 1900 – SECT 316

Concealing serious indictable offence

316 Concealing serious indictable offence

(1) If a person has committed a serious indictable offence and another person who knows or believes that the offence has been committed and that he or she has information which might be of material assistance in securing the apprehension of the offender or the prosecution or conviction of the offender for it fails without reasonable excuse to bring that information to the attention of a member of the Police Force or other appropriate authority, that other person is liable to imprisonment for 2 years.

(2) A person who solicits, accepts or agrees to accept any benefit for himself or herself or any other person in consideration for doing anything that would be an offence under subsection (1) is liable to imprisonment for 5 years.

(3) It is not an offence against subsection (2) merely to solicit, accept or agree to accept the making good of loss or injury caused by an offence or the making of reasonable compensation for that loss or injury.

(4) A prosecution for an offence against subsection (1) is not to be commenced against a person without the approval of the Attorney General if the knowledge or belief that an offence has been committed was formed or the information referred to in the subsection was obtained by the person in the course of practising or following a profession, calling or vocation prescribed by the regulations for the purposes of this subsection.

(5) The regulations may prescribe a profession, calling or vocation as referred to in subsection (4).

Some of the questions that Julia Gillard has to answer are:

1. Why did you not give a statement / affidavit to the police? If you did why have you not released it as it would clear the air on the whole matter.

2. If you did give a police statement is the story in the statement different to the one the one you have made publicly?

3. Why did you not assist the AWU in their investigations given they were the client?

4. If you did not give a police statement did you refuse on the grounds that you might incriminate yourself?

5. Did you also refuse to help the AWU on the grounds that you might incriminate yourself?

6. Did you claim legal privilege in refusing to help the police? If you did, why did you say on Thursday that legal privilege was not a factor that covered your information in this matter.

7. In 2007 Glenn Milne reported “she has strenuously denied ever knowing what the association’s bank accounts were used for.” (Click here to read more) But you now say they were meant to be used for a slush fund. Have you told this to the police?

That will do for starters and I will have follow-up questions once you have answered them.

If you appeal a judgment in court on the grounds of bias by the judge you do not have to show actual bias, you only have to show perceived bias and you will win the appeal. The point is in this matter the media are totally focused on showing Julia Gillard was party to the crime which should be applauded, but they also need to question her role in the concealment of the crime.

Showing Gillard was a party to the crime will be hard to prove unless at least two people spill the beans on Julia Gillard and that is unlikely to happen anytime soon. But what can be proved now is his her involvement in the concealment of the crime unless she has some brilliant answers to the issues and questions that I have raised above.

It would be greatly appreciated if you spend a minute using Twitter, Facebook and email etc and promote this post. Just click on the icons below.

And make sure you follow this site by email which is on the top right of this page and about once a week you will get an email when there is a new post/story on this site.

This site is fully funded by myself, both time wise and monetary wise. If you would like to support the continuance and growth of this site it would be greatly appreciated if you make a donation, buy a t-shirt, coffee mug  or a copy of my book. The links are below.

If you would like to buy a t-shirt or coffee mug visit my online shop (Click here to visit the shop)

Thank you for your support.

373 replies »

  1. Julia Gillard has a lot to answer for , but is anyone going to make her or is she going to get away with it again ?

    • She got away with it before, now would be a good time to bring it all to the fore. craig thompson is also a benefactor to what she does, how many more, we don’t know, they all seem to have sticky fingers.

    • Yes, she will get away with it ‘again’. There are powerful forces within the legal profession and the Labor Party who will see it in their own interests to protect her.
      That she has much to hide is obvious, but less so is the cooperation of the left wing press. Why have the so called ‘investigative press’ not done their duty and revealed this?
      Even a elementary knowledge of the criminal law statutes is enough to realise that there is a ‘prima facie’ case against her. One that requires an explanation, which so far she has failed to provide.
      Even for an uneducated person, ignorance of the law is not an excuse for criminal behaviour. She was, and is, a trained lawyer, so for her this excuse is even more unavailable.
      When can we expect the Police to do their duty? After all the Police take an oath to persue criminals without fear or favour, amongst other things. They do not, and should not, excuse non action because nobody has complained. They can not expect a corpse to complain of murder before investigation, nor can they refuse to act because a number of compromised lawyers and Unionists want to bury the truth.

    • I think maybe B.Hansford and I are asking the same question . . Is there any point in continuing this expose if nobody has access to the evidence to force a court appearance for the PM. Who has the deep pockets to commence legal action to force the PM to make a statement to Parliament, or to appear in Court ?
      The PM’s manouvre last week to ‘present’ a press conference was brilliant cause it sucked in the media who should have told the PM to schedule a time, so they could prepare for it
      The media are letting us all down again in their grab for any headlines and PM’s ear.
      Now the media is having a go at Tony Abbott when they should be showing the public the business electricity accounts which Tony Abbott tried to table in Parliament last Wednesday, but Albanese refused to allow it ! ! !
      That should be the headlines
      And, I have to say it . . if the Labor party are so interested in climate change, why don’t they provide tax incentives to companies who use environmentally safe processes, instead of taxing the ‘pollutants’ ?. . . because they are interested in redistributing wealth! and their tax receipts !

      • “$300,000 pa, SA Rann Govt Water Commissioner, Robyn Mcleod” this is Gillard friend and flat mate. Rann is sent to london as :”some big deal australian official” covering up her tracks:
        Gillard also said that the file is now closed at the press conferece: How can it be closed when she did not even open a file.

        As a group can all of us collectively file in the high court to have this matter heard>

  2. >> Slater and Gordon interviewed her and taped the interview which clearly suggests wrong doing or knowledge of it. In the press conference on Thursday Gillard tried to make out this was not unusual. <<

    At this point I stopped reading this post. Taping a conversation is just that, taping a conversation. To infer anything from it is just plain ridiculous.

  3. Shane, maybe the Tim Murphys of this world are used to having their conversations taped and transcribed – it’s just another ‘day at the office’ for them.

    There are a lot of people who are also accustomed to having their mug-shots taken along with their fingerprints. Horses for courses eh??

  4. of course she should be charged, its blatantly obvious from what ive seen that she acted fraudulently , she knew about it all or it would have been done aboveboard , even if it was unknowingly, she still was involved in fraud , she has lied and shafted her way to a position no one wants her in or voted her in and arrogantly thought she could just walk over anyone she chose and not get held accountable for her actions !!!!!!!!!!!!

    • exactly – we all feel sick she is PM – we all feel so embarrassed world wide – what is the world (western that is) thinking of us – possibly the “others” are having a good laugh at us

  5. what i cannot understand is why were there so much emphasis on the renovation of the PMs house. it took slater and gordon a lot of time to go deep into this renovation: was julia a builder or lawyer. the renovation must have a bearing on the PM because it was part of her dismissal. no company will fire you becuase you did renovations to your home unless the payments of the renovations came from “sources that were not to be used” Deception is Glaring for all to see: SLUSH FUND/ reform association account. The payment for the kerr street home is proof that monies were moved from the association/slush fund. that is something gillard must have known, including slater gordon. Gillard also must know that she gave advice and wrote out the application form for something which was later used for something else. as soon as she was made aware of this , she had a duty of care to report this matter immediatley. teachers and doctors who do not report matters face seriouis consequences. Julia Gillard demonstrated to the nation how to close a case: just hold a press conference and say “file closed” after faffing and dodgy the real truth.

    • Tongaat – if you go back and read Shane’s post again, the reason there was an emphasis on Gillard’s house renno was that …..

      a) If she had knowingly concealed a crime, the penalty could be two years in prison.

      b) If she had received any benefit from a crime (ie, having expensive house rennovations paid on her behalf with stolen money), then the possible prison sentence is FIVE years in jail.

      There were tens of thousands of dollars worth of reasons why the house rennos made a difference, and any one of them could have seen her and/or her law firm charged with criminal conduct.












  7. If my reading of the Income Tax Assessment Act is correct then the funds stolen from the AWU by Wilson and friends form part of the assessable income of those who benefited. Does anyone know if the ATO has pursued this?

    • is anyone asking the question indeed? and what about Capital Gains Tax ??? has the ATO pursued this also? good question from you – lots of unanswered questions from us Australians over this whole grubby mess –

    • on your point, have Slater & Gordon advised anyone which account they drew funds from to finalise the purchase transaction as they I believe from reading media accounts they said they did

  8. More strength to your arm Mr Dowling but I think your cause is hopeless. The fix is in because there is simply too much at stake. There are federal judicial members, senior journalists, the entire corrupt union movement from the ACTU down and Federal Ministers that stand to lose everything if this matter is fully tested in court or a Royal Commission. If she goes down so goes the rest of them. She is going to get away with it and she knows it. That is why she treats the whole thing as a nuisance. After the next election she will slip into retirement and enjoy the fruit and laurels the ALP lavish on their ex-leaders.

    If she was a suburban solicitor and her accomplice was a business man this would all have been sorted long ago. In fact she and the business man would be out on parole long ago.

    • Sadly I agree – she has placed too many mates in high places, including Judges to the Federal Court Bench – arrogant, unapologising, but that’s her history and background – walk all over everyone including the Media people who have folded (not all thankfully) and yep, like Hawke, self professed drunk womaniser, Keating who eventually came out of the closet not before the women’s Weekly “family” photos, and just had to give Australia the recession we had to have, these Labour PMs are all the same – come in, riding on the pig’s back of CREDIT in our bank acount, no idea how to do business books, lie to the public and we will end up in a jolly mess again and Liberals will have to once again get us out of their incredability and put us back in the BLACK – do Australians ever learn?



    • HWAB, I believe that it’s important to understand that the fraud committed by Wilson & Co against the AWU, was not actually money that belonged to the AWU. As I understand it, the money that was deposited into the account(s) set up by Julia, was money that Wilson & Co.extorted from companies such as Theiss. Last time I checked, ‘blackmail’ at this level is quite a serious crime.

      The truth Harry is that the Australian people (Julia’s ‘misogynist nut jobs’) should never feel that the cause Shane Dowling has persued with valour and vigour, is hopeless. Yes a lot of people in Government, the unions, and what’s worse, the main stream media, certainly stand to loose a lot. If you look at the reality of the situation, they have already lost a lot. You only have to look at the resignation of Peter van Onselen, Graham Richardson, Barry Cassidy and a myriad of others to realise that reputations have been severely impacted. You can hear the dread and desperation in their message.

      In their last ditch effort, all and sundry are furiously and aimlessly slinging mud at Tony Abbott. I think we ‘misogynist nut jobs’ can work out that the credibility of the Labor/Union movement has suffered the most serious terminal damage. Just look at the NT election yesterday – just another very powerful rejection of something that was once good, now turned terribly rotten. And what is even worse for Labor, is the thorough rejection of their condecending attitude toward, and treatment of matters Aboriginal. As from last evening, Aboriginal electorates in the Territory cut themselves loose and voted with the Country Liberal Party. No longer do they wish to suffer by sucking on the socialist teet.

      So HWAB, I believe that our glass is half full. We should be doing everything we can to support Shane, and all those gifted warriors who contribute tirelessly to this blog in a quest for justice for all Australians.

      • Unfortunately, the money was “laundered” through a court and is clean.
        Bill Ludwig and co got a court to rule it was AWU cash ,even though the union officially never collected it, the “invoices” having been manufactured allegedly by Wilson and co–
        So the companies had to repay it after there had been some restitution made when the bank accounts were frozen by Maurice Blackburn–not that Ms Gillard helped anyone find out they were fraudulent–she did not!–yes, allegedly they got “rorted’ twice, once by a supposed union worker and the second time by the union heavy weights or the union,getting to grips with the cash that was NOT taken out in time for the con man to flee with it!!
        I find it utterly despicable!

  9. Shane

    There are many questions floating about and for mine these two from a Lecturer in Law go to the heart of the matter. They relate to the “slush fund” allegedly set up to facilitate “worker safety and training”

    1. Did you counsel the proponents that it would be fraudulent to solicit donations on the assertion that donations would be intended to be devoted to worker safety and training.

    2. If you knew the entity was not a worker safety and training agency, and knew that the proponents would be withdrawing money from it to pay for their election campaigns, did you recognise that such a utilisation of association money would be:

    · contrary to the constitution of the association, and/or

    · a breach of the trust on which the money was donated ?

    • The point I am trying to make in the post is that the answer to your questions and others should be in the statements she gave to the police which it looks like she did not make a police statement. If not, why not? And we know, as outlined in the post, Gillard and Slater & Gordon would not assist the AWU in their investigation. Why not? They were clearly concealing a crime which is a criminal offence.



  10. “Gillard could not categorically rule out that she had personally benefited from union funds in the renovation of her Melbourne home. Her partners “took a very serious view” of her conduct, ” the australian. So is this proof that she may have used union money. Julia categorically stated that she paid for the renovations: nobody can doubt that but how did you pay for it, was it your money or was it from favours or was it from friends or was it from Bruce or was it from the slush fund (i am not suggesting that julia took out the money herself) but could it be that Bruce arranged the payments. if i was the PM and if these questions were raised I will publish the receipts in the press, and show a money trail for transparency but the manner in which the PM dodged and ducked and dived showed something else. Today Bruce wants immunity from prosecution if he tells all. so is that a smoking gun.

  11. I have read in full all the documents oavailable online in this tawdry affair and I ask:
    1. Who handled the conveyancing file – Julia Gillard or someone else at Slater & Gordon. I have not seen this mentioned anywhere. Do any of the readers know?
    2. At the time Blewitt provided the cheque for $67,000.00 odd drawn on the Account of the Association whoever was handling the conveyancing should have had big concerns and a signed Authority should have been obtained from AWU authorising the property to be purchased in the name of Blewitt. Was a signed Authority ever obtained?
    Wilson and Blewitt must gave felt very comfortable with their dealings with Gillard and Slater & Gordon as they made no attempt to conceal the fact that the cheque for $67,000.00 was drawn on the Account set up for the Association. One would have thought, if they were worried about needing to conceal the misuse of thus money, they would have transferred it in to another Account in a totally unrelated name and drawn the cheque off the new Account. Instead they made no attempt whatsoever to conceal the origin of such money. Why not? Is this why this matter appears not to have been reported to any relevant Authority? This leads me to believe Gillard and Slater & Gordon actually needed each other in some twisted way to save each other from possible criminal charges.

    • All very good points Sandra but you forgot to add that S&G provided a $150K mortgage for the balance of the purchase price on the house.

      It beggars belief that they would not have conducted proper due diligence before lending the money to Blewitt, a man who Gillard described in her taped interview with them as someone who had some excess cash, looking to buy an investment property to gain negative gearing tax benefits.

      Hello ATO, are you listening???????

      • Ralph Blewitt apparanty did not know he had a loan. It is reported in the SMH today: “The self-confessed union bagman Ralph Blewitt – the legal owner of a terrace house in Fitzroy allegedly purchased using misappropriated Australian Workers Union funds – has claimed that he never knew he had a housing loan for the property.”
        Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/union-bagman-i-didnt-know-i-had-home-loan-20120825-24t6o.html#ixzz24dvU8sEo

        So who did the loan go to?

      • Hi Shane, interesting link you have provided. I stopped reading the SMH earlier this week due to their blatant bias.

        I note Mr Blewitt has engaged lawyers to inspect the loan and conveyancing files to see who was behind it.

        Ian Cambridge’s affadavit names Jonathan Malcolm Rothfield, a partner or consultant to S&G during this period as the only mortgagee registered on the title of the property.

        Join the dots for me she said…..

      • I agree, Andrew.
        Speaking as a Conveyancer, there are two areas where, if it is to be believed Julia Gillard or Slater & Gordon were unaware of the misuse of AWU monies, proper conveyancing procedures should have led to questions being asked.
        Firstly, when the cheque for $67,000.00 odd was received drawn on the Account in the name of the Association, the first thing any Lawyer or Conveyancer doing their job properly would have done is ring their client, AWU, to obtain a written Authority for the house to be purchased in the name of Blewitt.
        Secondly, at the time of arranging the in house Mortgage proper checks should have been made to see where the client’s (Blewitt’s) contribution was coming from.
        Both these checks would have alerted not only Slater & Gordon but also AWU that something was not right. So what happened? What went wrong or was allowed to happen within Slater & Gordon that allowed the purchase of the house in the name of Blewitt?

      • Sandra as a conveyancer…perhaps you can help answer some questions..
        I posted @EJ August 26, 2012 at 12:05 am # under

        -Julia Gillard caught lying on the public record in 2007 about the Bruce Wilson AWU fraud scandal.-

        Just a thought… but does anyone have a current registered user/login to https://www.landata.vic.gov.au/tpc/ …perhaps… to obtain various certificates of titles, property details etc. I thought that the person or persons that handle the conveyancing of a property usually have their details recorded on the documents like signatures, relating to the transaction somewhere amongst them? Would this be true? Maybe further info is on them like dates too? Any legal eagles out there…and NO…not you Ms Gillard- pun intended!

        Sandra is it possible that further information could be seen on the documents like relating to the section 32, titles, land data etc? I remember Gillard mentioned she had nothing to do with the conveyancing…so we wonder who did?

      • Anyone can set up an Account with Landata and order a copy of a Title or Instruments (Transfers of Land, Mortgages, Caveats etcetera). The question would be is it possible to obtain copies of same after the purchase of the house was settled considering the property has since been sold (possibly several times)? Slater & Gordon would be noted on the Mortgage as acting for the Mortgagee and there may possibly also be an internal Slater & Gordon file reference noted thereon. Slater & Gordon should also be noted on the Transfer of Land as the lodging Solicitors and a file reference may also be noted. It would be most interesting to see who witnessed Wilson’s signature on the Transfer of Land and Mortgage (assuming that Wilson signed all documents in his capacity as Power of Attorney). Should Gillard have witnessed his signatre, this still would not indicate she knew about the cheque drawn on the Association to appropriate towards the purchase of the house. This is why it is imperative to know who at Slater & Gordon handled the conveyancing file. Because whoever did handle the conveyancing file I believe was negligent in their duties once the cheque was provided drawn on the Association’s Account if that person did not contact AWU to obtain a signed Authority that the house be purchased in the name of Blewitt. I believe the failure to do so left it open for AWU to sue Slater & Gordon. I also believe a file for the conveyancing would have to have been opened to enable the cheque to be deposited in the Trust Account of Slater & Gordon. A Bank cheque would then have to have been obtained for the $67,000.00 to be handed over at settlement of the purchase of the house. So someone has either knowingly or mistakenly not followed proper procedure where the Authority from AWU is concerned. Either way, that left Slater & Gordon open to being sued I believe for negligence. That then leads to the question of why Maurice Blackburn did not sue Slater & Gordon on behalf of AWU when they took over the files?

      • A Power of Attorney was organised for Wilson to act for Blewitt. This would have been another freebie organised by Gillard. With that in hand Wilson could do almost whatever he liked in Blewitt’s name. Apparently the property was sold without Blewitt seeing a cent of the proceeds.

        The conveyancing file and the loan file will be very revealing I’m sure if they still exist. Maybe she didn’t open files for these matters as well. This is becoming more damning as the days go by.

      • Andrew and Sandra
        I have read that Wilson has POA for Blewitt who was in WA still, and Wilson carried a stamp of Blewitt’s signature. I cannot vouch for its authenticity but to me although it would explain how Wilson could carry out his alleged rorts in Blewitt’s name, it also should have sent alarm bells ringing at a decent and competent solicitor’s office!
        Hm, need I say more?

  12. The Gillard filibuster did nothing to convince me. Just because she claims to have paid for renovations does not prove that it was her money. The Greek builder that confirmed she paid also said he had no paperwork covering the transaction. So nothing is proven. For those who will say this was all 17 years ago I say does passing time make a crime any less of a crime? The reason this has to be pursued in such detail is because Gillard is the Prime Minister of this country not a commoner.
    As Prime Minister she has to held in the highest degree of integrity. Her answers to date have been less than convincing and just add weight to the impression that she has given of being liberal with the truth and willing to say anything to retain power.
    Lets have it all Ms Gillard, convince me!

    • Sorry Saxon, but as far as I’m concerned, they don’t come any “commoner” than Julia Eileen Gillard.

      As a lawyer she screwed her client, as a Shadow Minister she screwed a Cabinet colleague and as PM she has lied, usurped, bullied and threatened, costing several journalists of integrity their careers. In the process she has screwed the nation.

      If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck, it isn’t a bloody skylark.

      She and her Cabal of Labor thugs have brought the Office of Prime Minister into disrepute and must be accountable for their greed and treachery.

      • is it possible to get together a group of lawyers from around the country to start legal proceedings. send a letter of “please explain in detail to the following issues… ..”failure to do so will result in court proceedings….

  13. Well, when the government ministers are starting to fortify their homes , it can only mean nasty times ahead.
    So, if that’s how they want to play , so be it .
    But not answering , or by answering with dirty tactics , and pathetic excuses, will only lead to them requiring even higher fences.
    And as history has always shown , it doesn’t matter how high they build them , one day , the people will pour over the top.
    If the law is no longer the law, they will suffer the consequences eventually.

    Sad days for a wonderful country in 2012, when man was just starting to get some brains .
    One thought !!!!!

  14. this will go the same way the incompents dealt with craig thompsom years and no result sadly this doesnt apply to us mere mortals ,bring on the next federal election ,note the northern territory ,how can swan saw no federal implications can be read into the result.

  15. So truer words, they are all in bed together…all in corruption with the unions and all in for the benefits of the hard working people for wankers like Thompson to got to the brothels, and believe me they are all the same…sleazes…12 months I hope the corrupt are soles are gone….Julia Gillard…how come a Naive young solicitors gets sack for something so small ??? answer that.

  16. I am not able to donate money at this time (I’m a pensioner) however you need all the support you can get. You ARE the most informed and the perfect person to attend. Anyway, I put my trust in you, Shane and please let us know when you go.

    Is there any value in having a mass walk on parliament? Maybe that can be saved for later – what do you think? Anyway, I cannot wait for your emails. It is a sad indictment on the media that only a handful of journos have the wherewithall to face this issue head-on. I am very, very disappointed in the rest of them. Kudos Shane

    • Hi. It is fine if you cannot donate. Just coming on here and letting others know about it helps greatly. I believe the online mass walk has greater effect because it happens all day every day and that is why I set up this site.

  17. Me reckons Tony Abbott should call for a full inquiry in to the concealment of an indictable offense. Labor, of course, will band together to oppose it. This will CONFIRM in the eyes of the public that the entire Labor movement is corrupt. Perhaps the Independents, who are supposedly independent and acting in the best interests of their electorates and Australia will support the investigation.

  18. Shane – well done in your coverage –

    There is another issue – S&G were appointed Lawyers for AWU Victoria, by association Gillard as a S&G Partner had a duty of care to AWU Victoria ahead of any other Law advice – she had a duty of care to ensure the business she was doing for Wilson had AWU sanction …

    The ‘conflict of interest; arises in that she was in a relationship with Wilson and did not do theh due diligence on Wilsons business to ensure it was sanctioned by AWU Victoria.

    That ‘conflict of interest’ is a serious breach of Law and AWU Victoiria had a case against S&G over this breach of conflict … did S&G settle with AWU … is Gillard still able to practise Law – or is she under threat of a report to the Law Society if she does …

    Your outline requires an admission from Gillard which she will not give – but the conflict of interest is there in black and white …

    Keep up the good work ….

    • The conflict part you raise has been covered many times on this site but she says she was young and naive. My outline does not require an admission, just answers, which I suppose will be the same thing at the end of the day.

  19. Shane – great work – you’re an inspiration to us all…

    The concealment angle is a good one, but it I’m not sure how easy it would be to prove…

    For me there was an even more basic trangression than concealment. I’m not sure how to phrase it legal terms (failure to report a crime?) but looking at her own description of events there was a definite date on which she claims she became aware that Wilson was involved in criminal activity. That being the case, surely there was an obligation on her on that date to immediately inform the police, get the accounts frozen, etc. so that further losses would not be inccured. That would surely apply to any member of the public, even moreso for someone who was directly involved through her legal work. In layman’s terms, if you don’t report the crime then that makes you party to the crime…

    I could be barking up the wrong tree here (or going over old ground?) but I thought I’d throw it out there anyway…

    • What you say is not a different angle. It adds further evidence to the case that I have made out that Gillard concealed a serious indictable offence.

      That’s what we want in the comments on this one. Start thinking people, of the evidence that Gillard concealed the crime.

  20. Another avenue worthy of investigation/formal questions in writing to Slater & Gordon. Bag man Blewett said he didn’t apply for loan for home bought with funds, didn’t know he was listed as owner of home until recently.

    Union bagman: I didn’t know I had home loan

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/union-bagman-i-didnt-know-i-had-home-loan-20120825-24t6o.html#ixzz24e8RVEBP

    WA ROYAL COMMISSION was happening at this time. Both dodgey stuff in WA involving ALP, business, and union. ALP Hawke and Keating were ruling the roost. Tell me again Gillard was young and naive.

    …Personal associations and the manner in which electoral contributions were obtained could only create the public perception that favour could be bought, that favour would be done … We have observed that the size of the donations was quite extraordinary…


    They’d deposit that kind of cash for that kind of purpose into a slush fund er?

    • Yes, Michelle, I was starting to think along similar lines…

      She hasn’t denied being present with Wilson at the auction. At some point during the auction in the discussions with the Real Estate Agent or the Sellers it would have had to come up that the house was being purchased by Wilson on behalf of Blewitt, therefore she would have to have at least been aware of the Power of Attorney was in place and thtat there was a legal obligation to provide Blewitt with copies of documents, etc.

  21. If Blewit did not know he was the owner and mortgagee of the Fitzroy property he must not recall signing any documents connected with the purchase, conveyancing and mortgage. Someone must have signed them. The last time I went through that process the signatures required witnesses. Even if Wilson had a power of attorney (who prepared the Power of Attorney?) his signature on the documents must have been witnessed. And witnesses to a signature in a deed must write their name and address on the document. Who were the witnesses to the signatures? This would establish for a fact who was present when the documents were prepared. If the person who witnessed the signatures later became aware of the fraud then they must have then been aware the house was purchased with stolen money. I am not a lawyer but surely this is the point at which the duty to report the offence arose.

    • And the auction would have been advertised, so who was the real estate agent?
      Was there really an auction?
      Maybe it is all smoke and mirrors.

      • Not one person who attended this auction, or any person who knew a person that attended the auction has put their hand up, and said ” yes, I was there” or maybe “I know someone who was there”.

        When the property was sold, on behalf of the mortgagee in1996, was it advertised, or was it a mutual sale agreement between Slater & Gordon and Maurice Blackburn Co ?

    • You have it all wrong – Dick. And so does almost everyone else who is peddling misinformation about these funds.

      None of the money laundered through these phoney accounts belonged to the AWU – it was the PROCEEDS OF CRIME.

      Wilson, an ORGANISER for the AWU, decided he’d ‘organise’ a little action for himself. As a union strong-arm man he approached construction site bosses (Theiss being the biggest and with the most to lose) and ‘persuaded’ them that they should ‘buy’ a whole lot of extra union tickets (memberships) for workers who never existed – they were falsely created.

      Under threat of having worksites disrupted if the bosses refused to comply, they obliged, to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars. To keep these funds a secret from the AWU, Wilson needed to create and incorporate a phoney association and to this end he made a clumsy application which was rejected by the Commissioner in WA.

      Enter the ‘girlfriend’ Gillard. She, with advice from her boss Murphy at Slater & Gordon, wrote out amended application forms (full of untruths and misinformation) and the ‘association’ was duly incorporated, but it wore the tag ‘AWU’ because that would appear to legitimise the payments on their books when these construction companies handed over the cash.

      When the entire scheme came to light, the Union movement decided to go after the money but the police investigating the fraud determined that it was Theiss who needed to lodge a formal complaint as they were the largest victim of this theft. Theiss declined (for obvious reasons – they have billions of dollars tied up in construction all around the country), the police investigation lapsed (who knows why) and the union bosses baying for blood, cash and royal commissions all changed their minds.

      Wilson walked away – from his ever-so-obliging girlfriend, from his “mate” Blewitt, clearing out the thirteen bank accounts involved and pocketing all the proceeds of the house sale.

      How he did it and how he got away with it is the subject of these inquiries, but NONE of that money EVER belonged to the AWU or its members.

      • it may be true that the money did not belong to the members. But the at the very heart of all this MESS is the PMs involvement in this sordid saga. Julia Gillard does not deny helping this boyfriend of hers. it is on record. Being an attorney and aspiring for the high office , one would axpect to be atleast squeaky clean. The PM knew about this fradulent activity when all the monies were gone and she did not perform her duty of care, ie tell the authorities and pursue it vigourously and she had almost all the information to provide to the authorities. I cannot believe, that there are some people who will just support Gillard no matter what she does and say. the PM must tell the TRUTH, something she has not done yet on this matter.

      • Great post Blackswan. Yep, Julia at the very least, had knowledge of her boyfriends and Blewitts extortion – the crime of obtaining money or some other thing of value by the abuse of one’s office or authority – otherwise ‘blackmail’.

        Even in the unlikely event that she had no knowledge of the extortion during her relationship with Wilson, as Shane has pointed out, as soon as she had knowledge of the crime she should have immediately reported the matter to the Police. All solicitors, and most non solicitors know that, why not Julia?

        If I found out my partner had been extorting money on the scale of the Wilson extortion, I would end the relationship for the same reasons that Julia gave. And then, I have no doub,t that the first thing I would do is report the extortion to the police. I can’t imagine this not being the first thing one would do! Wouldn’t you do everything possible to protect your own integrity? Not reporting the extortion would more than likely leed to the suspicion that you were involved, as it has with Julia.

        Julia and (large parts of) the MSM think they can tough it out, like they did with Thompson. But consider the damage that has already been done to the office of Prime Minister, and the damage to a party that many eons ago truely represented the worker. Their cancer, and the cancer that pervaids the MSM is terminal. And when you consider the enormity of what has occured in the Northern Territory over the weekend, you start to reaslise the extent of decay in what was once a great political party.

        The PC stunt of last week, where Julia defied Australians of a reasonable explanation for her actions, or lack thereof, was akin to rubbing our noses in dog excreetment. It is this behaviour that causes me to have little doubt that good quality sites like Shane’s, will flourish and grow at the expense of a media that has abandoned its character of journalistic principals.

      • Hi Black Swan (says B/H in a sleepy voice). Check the Cambridge Affidavit to confirm that most if not all the Thiess cheques were made out to either the AWU or The AWU Workplace Reform Association Inc. I think I mentioned this to you yesterday, but I believe itI’s the original scam that Wilson and Blewitt had going in 1991 in W.A is what you’re referring to. There are different versions of how it was done but the most popular one seems to be that in order to have industrial peace on various relevant sites the contractor was required to “buy” hundreds of AWU membership tickets. It was apparently very successful for Wilson & Blewitt and it appears they tried to form an association and get it incorporated so they could set up Bank a/c’s to launder the money but the W.A Corporate Affairs Commissioner knocked them back. That’s apparently when Wilson decided to get his solicitor girlfriend Julia Gillard in victoria to lend a hand and events unfolded as now on record.


      • Forgot to add that you are correct that Thiess would have had to lay the complaint but in addition to the obvious reasons you state for them not doing so, it is reported that there is a rather closer in-law connection with Wilson and the person at Thiess who would have had to lay such a charge!

  22. An angle that few commentators are following seems to me to be likely to be productive. Apparently it is clear that the AWU Workplace Reform Association was set up specifically to be a suitable recipient of funds from Thiess in WA that initially came to them from the WA Government for the purpose of Workplace Reform. In effect, that was taxpayer’s money. It is instructive that Thiess declined to make a comment. One wonders what Thiess thought it was getting by advancing those funds to the AWU Workplace Reform Association. What did Wilson say to them that encouraged them to pass those funds on? What did they expect tor receive in return for advancing those funds?

    • i make no allegations but simply note it is reported that the main person at Thiess at the time is, or was, Bruce Wilson’s brother-in-law.

    • Abby, you’ve answered your own question. None of those involved in this whole sorry mess, Unions, Solicitors, Law Firms, legal “watchdogs” and especially politicians etc., were prepared to do what was right because had everything come out most of them would have been in very deep and messy”doo-doo”!

  23. She lied about the press conference being held to speak about asylum seekers therefore some of the best journalists who ask the curly questions were not there, Watched the whole thing and not convinced of her “I did nothing wrong”. Keep up the good work Shane and Mike Smith. Don’t let this die a slow death.

  24. This article in The West Australian demonstrates that she was much more actively involved in the dodgy bank accounts than she would have us believe:

    Newspaper archives show Ms Gillard travelled with Mr Wilson to Boulder in 1992 to allay members’ concerns about a decision to transfer the management of a Goldfields death fund to the union’s head office in Perth.

    Ms Gillard addressed members in Boulder Town Hall to explain why it should happen.


    • Thanks for the link Colin – I wasn’t aware that the Goldfields death funds had also been stolen for the purpose of buying those holiday units.

      And Gillard put the case for the funds being moved?

      Begs the question; whatever happened to those properties? Who were the principals in those purchases and why didn’t the union movement demand charges be brought in that case?

      These people make the Sopranos look like amateurs.


  25. Makes one wonder what Julia’s ardent supporter Stephen Conroy might have organised in terms of slush funds during his stint as Superannuation officer for the TWU

    • Superannuation?? That’s the very reason none of these reptiles will readily relinquish any control of those Industry Super Funds – it’s a veritable mountain of cash and they are gorging on it.

      Super is no can of worms – it’s a can of rattlesnakes.

      • While touching on the issue of Superannuation earlier (and the corruption in its control that makes the theft of Union dues pale in comparison), as compulsory contributions rise from 9% to 12% today, Peter Costello says this;

        ”After passing laws that require the money to go off into superannuation, [the government] appears to be blissfully unconcerned what happens to it after that,” Mr Costello said.

        ”I think this is where the current government and the current Treasurer are blissfully ignorant that they are requiring people to give up more and more of their income and lose it.”


        This industry is worth $1.4 Trillion and where Industry Super Funds are being invested needs far greater scrutiny. A great deal of it goes into ‘Green’ investments which also attract a lot of taxpayer Grants. Gillard didn’t introduce the Carbon Dioxide Tax simply at the behest of the Greens.

        There is another agenda at play here and it appears to be tied up with the corrupt Union Movement and its control of those many billions of Industry Super dollars which are also overseen by the same Union heavies who play fast and loose with other money belonging to the workers of this country.

        Wake up Australia!

  26. Shane, am I incorrect in stating that MANY more Questions should be asked of Gillards employer? Everything I have read to date, seems to avoid any implication that Slater and Gordon, as her employers, are in any way responsible or duty bound to offer the Police, MEDIA, Justice system and the AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE an explanation re 2 different stories…was she asked to resign over this matter or did she “take leave of absence” in order to pursue political ambitions? WHY IS NO-ONE CHECKING SLATER AND GORDON for any other discrepancies? The fact that Gillard claims to have receipts for work done is not good enough, where did the money come from as it could have been a gift of cash from WILSON or it could have been from her regular salary….why is there no proof of her statements that she believes that she paid it all herself? Is there collusion with AWU and Slater and Gordon, and are they a REPUTABLE LEGAL PARTNERSHIP? It will have a domino effect if Gillard is found guilty and I would hope that ALL INVOLVED would be made to tell the truth! Slater and Gordon are just a business , they are not GOD!

  27. It seems to me that thetre are several points at which Ms Gillard is on shaky ground: The setting up of the fund; the cashing of the cheque for the house; and when the fraud was discovered.

    The Setting Up of The Fund.
    Ms Gillard has stated that she thought the purpose of the fund was to provide money for re-election of Union Officials. Not only was that not one of the stated purposes of the fund, but the fund articles specifically forbid any member of the association from benefitting either directly or indirectly from the funds. So at the time the fund was set up Ms Gillard must have realised that it could not LEGALLY be used for the purpose she has said she knew it was for.

    The Cheque for the House.
    Slater and Gordon accepted a cheque from the AWU Workplace Reform Association as settlement on the house, which was in Blewitt’s name. Ms Gillard has said that no other lawyer within S&G was dealing with this matter. At that time therefore, the highly unusual transaction was OK’d within S&G, and if it was Ms Gillard, that was knowingly abbetting a fraud.

    When the S*** hit the Whirly Thingo.
    As others have pointed out, what did she do? Did she make statements to the Rozzers? To the AWU? Did she freeze accounts? Did she assist in recovery of funds?

  28. Going back to Gillard’s original reasons for helping Wilson- she stuffed up because she was wearing love goggles.
    This excuse goes to the very heart of why Gillard was guilty of gross malpractice as an officer of the Supreme Court of Victoria (as a solicitor).
    One of the fundamental rules of a professional is your duty to deal dispassionately with clients- which is why you don’t act on behalf of self, family, close friends and, most of all, lovers. I have had a solicitor refuse to take a case for myself because he was a schoolmate of my son. If and when you do, tish happens and there are consequences.

    Her excuses are that she was “young and naive” and “I was in a relationship, which I ended, and obviously it was all very distressing. I am by no means the first person to find out that someone close turns out to be different to what you had believed them to be. It’s an ordinary human error.”
    Lets disambiguate what she said.
    “I was young”

    young 1.having lived or existed for only a short time:

    She was in her mid-thirties and had been old and mature enough in the eyes of the Supreme Court of Victoria to be issued with a practice certificate as a solicitor.

    ‘naive’ (of a person or action) showing a lack of experience, wisdom, or judgement:

    Again, she was considered experienced enough in the eyes of the Supreme Court of Victoria to be issued with a practice certificate as a solicitor. You have to spend time as an articled clerk to gain such experience. She certainly showed a lack of wisdom and judgement so that bit is true, but, again, if she’d followed due diligence and correct QA procedure, she wouldn’t have acted on behalf of her lover.

    The jails are full of offenders who, in hindsight, would say that, if they had used more wisdom and judgement, wouldn’t have offended in the first place.
    Being young and naive, especially as a solicitor is no defence-, an excuse, but not a defence.

    “I am by no means the first person to find out that someone close
    turns out to be different to what you had believed them to be.”

    Again, as a professional, don’t deal with lovers- your mistake Gillard- suffer the consequences.

    “It’s an ordinary human error”

    Maybe so, but as an officer of the Supreme Court, your duty of care to your client (AWU) is not equal to that of an ordinary human being, it is much higher.

    So in the end, the consequences of being “young and naive” aren’t anywhere near as serious as conspiring to defraud and extort money for personal gain.

    Gillard paid the price by being “asked to resign” and not having her practice certificate renewed.
    But there are those (and not just bloggers) who feel that the “young and naive” excuse is too simplistic and there’s something more sinister behind it all.
    Gillard held mock court last Thursday where she put herself in the witness box and asked to be cross-examined by a bunch of un-prepared amateur “counsels for the prosecution”. It was a court where the accused was running the show, and to the ignorant and biased judges in the left-wing media, she was found “not guilty”.
    Only an appeal to the “higher court” of a royal commission, where rules of evidence and cross-examination are more onerous, will the real truth come out.
    But this won’t happen when 50 of the 70 + caucus members of the government benches are union supported, because, in the words of trade union heavies on discovering Ian Cambridge’s call for a royal commission in the WIlson/Blewitt affair-
    “if this happens, we’re all history.”


      • As a female, I think I can safely say, without being accused of being misogynistic – there is a word for this person, and I’m sure we all know it!

    • Good comment Two Bob – It’s only when the Fabian/Marxist/Socialists have been thrown out of office will a fresh government call a Royal Commission with sweeping powers and terms of reference to clear out the Organised Crime that has permeated every level of our government and bureaucracy.

      This country needs RICO laws modelled on those in the USA, whereby not only are the crooks prosecuted, but their associates and anyone else who could reasonably have been found to be complicit in Organised Crime.

  29. I thank you for your blog Shane. What an ugly mess this Labor Party has made of Government of the people, for the people of Australia.

  30. Moderator: Comment deleted as off topic. If I allow one person to go off topic then I need to allow everyone to go off topic. Then the comment section is undermined.

  31. OK Folks. Been burning the midnight oil to sift through all the comments and tips from yesterdays great joint brainstorming session and previous comments from that thread. Thank you all for your wonderul incisive help and I hope I’ve done your efforts justice!
    All matters are freely available on the public record and I do wish to publicly thank Julia for the wonderful leads and inspiration invoked by her fanciful evasive responses liberally sprinkled with legalese the doting journalist elite lapped up and left her conference completely satisfied, ready to defend her to the bitter end! I trust this will also help enhance Shane’s latest great article!

    Gillard stated this as the reason she had called the snap Press Conference.

    “I’ve taken the view over time that I will not dignify this campaign with a response either. However, this morning something changed on that. The Australian newspaper republished a false and highly defamatory claim about my conduct in relation to these matters 17 years ago. It is a claim about me setting up a trust fund.”
    (“The Australian” wrote that she had set up a “trust” fund instead of the “slush” fund that she had admitted it was, despite that the stated aims of the Association for which she had drawn up the Rules and set up for her then boyfriend, when incorporated (in which she also “advised”) was stated to be about worker’s safety etc.’.

    However, back in the real world, something else “changed” that morning.
    Phil Coorey wrote that “Ms.Gillard did the conveyancing”. It is common knowledge her massive staff of spin doctors and other stooges keep a close watch on the blogs and any search of the early blogs on that day indicates that what Phil Coorey wrote was clearly recognised by many astute bloggers as being “new” information and many comments were made about it’s damaging impact to Gillard, given her continuing and oft repeated claims she’d done”nothing wrong” and had no knowledge of anything untoward.about subsequent events.

    Gillard actually made this claim at her Press Conference:”I did not know anything further about the workings of the association until these matters commenced to be dealt with publicly in 1995. That is, I provided advice to assist with the incorporation of the association and then knew nothing further about its workings until allegations about these matters were raised in 1995.”.(She later admitted when interviewed by her partners it was more than just advice saying ” this was a more substantial job than that and (the file) really ought to have been opened on the firm’s system).

    If Phil Coorey’s claim about her doing the conveyancing is correct, how could she possibly not have known about the cheque clearly marked as being from one of the A/c’s subsequently opened as a result of incorporation of the association, for which she had drawn up the Rules and set up for her boyfriend, then helped him have it incorporated in the name of The AWU Workplace Reform Association ?

    The cheque was clearly from the AWU Workplace Reform Association Inc. Cheque A/c (C’wealth Bank A/c No.6005 1000 2582) for $67,722-30 drawn in favour of Slater & Gordon, co-signed by her two clients, boyfriend Bruce Wilson and Ralph Blewitt,and paid into the Slater & Gordon Trust A/c as revealed by Ian Cambridge in his sworn affidavit, and verified from his copy of the S & G Trust A/c Ledger, showing it was properly recorded in accordance with the firm’s rules for such transactions. Read for yourselves what Cambridge said about his amazement at the astounding fact that the transaction went through unchallenged at Slater & Gordon for whom the AWU was a client !

    Many other questions then arise such as who drew up the Power of Attorney for Wilson under which he acted for Blewitt in purchase of the 85 Kerr St., Fitzroy property.and may well have signed whatever was necessary on Blewitt’s behalf to obtain the substantial Mortgage loan Slater & Gordon provided to complete the purchase, given that personal knowledge of such mortgage loan in his name Blewitt now denies! Gillard admits she attended the auction and it is believed another partner or consultant to S & G also attended. His name is known.

    Rather curiously one question (a Dorothy Dixer as it turned out) asked by a journalist the P.M called Phil, did mention the article written by Phil Coorey.

    JOURNALIST: The story today about Ralph Blewitt leaving Indonesia in 2009 with the police after him and left owing a lot of money. When you dealt with him, did you find him a shonky character then?
    PM: Phil, that’s a question really that no-one could answer. Did I have any reason to believe that Mr Blewitt was involved in the kind of conduct that has subsequently come to light? No, I did not.

    One might have thought that as a member of the goup in that august assembly of what Gillard described as “the journalist elite of this country” Phil might have asked: :”Prime
    Minister. Is it true that you did the conveyancing work for the purchase of the 85 Kerr.St., property” bought by your then boyfriend Bruce Wilson as stated in the article referred to?

    If what Phil Coorey wrote is not true, isn’t that clearly defamatory?

    If so, why hasn’t Gillard demanded a retraction from Fairfax and the sacking of Coorey as happened to Glenn Milne for his minor error and the later sacking of Michael Smith for merely seeking to ask her questions to clarify matters arising from the Statutory Declaration of former AWU official Bob Kernohan, who had a substantial knowledge of the circumstances of the Wilson/Blewitt/AWU frauds? Could it be because she didn’t wish to draw attention to that part of the article and If so, why?

    (Note that persons swearing Affidavits and/or making Stat Decs.face heavy penalties for perjury if proved they lied in such documents. Incidentally, no such document sworn or declared by Gillard about any of these matters and the investigations into them has ever surfaced or been produced, and she has flatly declined to make any explanatory statement in Parliament (which would carry serious consequences if it was found she had misled Members) to the dozens of serious so far unanswered questions still circulating surrounding her involvement..

    Which do you think is the most defamatory, calling a “slush” fund a “trust” fund,or;
    opening up a huge can of worms that could bring down a Prime minister and possibly her Government as well, by publicly writing that “Ms.Gillard did the conveyancing.”

    Which item would you consider more likely to be the cause for calling a snap conference, allegedly to take “every question that the journalist elite of this country have got for me.”?

    Some additional thoughts. Many here will recognise there must be a huge paper trail that would still be available.. Mortgages and other documents dealing with the property purchase and later sale: registering and/or recording a Power of Attorney; Caveat documents if indeed there was one: Slater & Gordon’s File on the transaction which must have been created as the cheque went into their Trust a/c and they lent money as well. On and on the trail goes and it was the many such references from all you good people that helped me to “join the dots” .

    Of course this is just the tip of the iceberg. as we haven’t yet scratched the surface of Union corruption and failure to chase members lost funds or proceed with charges against the known perpetrators. Neither has this angle from what Ian Cambridge investigated, recorded and swore to, that the money for the purchase of 85 Kerr St… came via a circuitous route some might see as “laundering”, from the taxpayers of Western Australia The W.A Government gave the money to Thiess Contractors Ltd who then gave the money to Wilson & Blewitt ostensibly for the AWU, and Thiess cheques were clearly made out to either the AWU or the AWU Workplace Reform Association Inc., they put in the A/cs by way of the association Gillard had kindly helped them set up, incorporate and open Bank A/c’s in strict contravention of all AWU Rules prohibiting such unauthorised entities and also in strict contravention for handling AWU moneys, in force at the time. $67,722-30 of it finished up in Julia’s firms Trust a/c!, and another $25,000 is traceable as having been used in that transaction!

    I could go on and on but I think by now everyone “gets” the idea. I hope i’ve done you all proud and once again thank you to all my fellow “misogenyst nut jobs” and especially to the courageous defender of free speech Shane Dowling! A small cheque in the mail to you soon and could I also hint that having this man is worth far more than the cost of your daily paper and he will keep you far better informed! than they do.

    Cheers to all from the very tired but happy hillbilly 33!

    • Good find Michelle! i remember posting somewhere a few short weeks ago about Paul Howes of the AWU, pontificating on TV and Radio about the HSU scandal saying words to the effect “I’ve been in the Union movement for twenty years and have neve seen anything like this”! Shane may even have a link to him saying it.
      My comment was something like : Hmm.Twenty years covers the period 1992 to 2012. Did he have his head in the sand from 92 to ’96 when the huge frauds and subsequent ongoing coverup took place in his own Union?I

  32. It’s Michael Smith News.com and he’ll be releasing the documents over a number of days. Methinks the end is nigh! Well done Shane and all the other brave people who pursued this disgraceful coverup regardless of personal cost!

  33. You are absolutely right shane, that there should be a prima facie case against Julia Gillard. She definetly knew there was a fraud going on, but also I believe she also helped conceal the crime because she was living with Bruce Wilson and was Bruce Wilsons lawyer willing to help Wilson steal the money because they wanted more than what they had. She didn’t help the police and the awu in their investigations over the fraud because she knew if she had said anything she would have been arrested and charged. She knew too much on the fraud, and obviously was helping her client (Wilson) make as much (illegal) money as he can. She had obviously knew that the association was not what it was and it was a fraudulent personal bank account right from the start. I’m shocked and appalled that no criminal charges were ever laid. In my view the clients (Wilson & blewitt) and the lawyer (Gillard) did the crime. There are too many holes in Gillards side of the story.

  34. The Australian and Telegraph have been nobbled. Has she got something on John Howard and the AWB scandal and corrupt payments to IRAQ – I think that is still being sorted.

  35. Shane, I keep coming back to the Bob Kernohan signed statutory declaration (witnessed by M. Crane at Castlemaine Police Station):

    “I was informed by Bob Smith, with Bill Shorten present, that some thousands of dollars were paid illegally from union funds, by Wilson, for house renovations to Julia Gillard’s property.”


    This is corroborated by her statement during the Slater & Gordon taped interview that she could not categorically rule out having benefited financially from the Association, but appears to be contradicted by her statement at her recent the press conference:

    “I paid for the renovations on my home in St Phillip Street in Abbotsford.”


    I don’t understand how she can continue to duck and weave around obvious discrepancies like these.

    I also don’t understand why Bob Kernohan and all of the other witnesses (Bob Smith, Bill Shorten and M Crane) haven’t been asked to confirm the validity of this statutory declaration.

    • Hi Colin. Bob Kernohan has put his neck on the line simply by making the Stat. Dec. and in doing that, he therefore stands by the validity of what he has declared. I haven’t had a chance to have a close look at it but even if there were to be any errors or misconceptions in it, from what Michael Smith writes about him, Bob genuinely believes everything he declared.

      It is open to any of the persons you name or anyone else to lodge their own Stat Decs or affidavits if they wish to dispute any of the matters that are in such records. At this stage, such legal documents are pretty thin on the ground from Union officers or anyone else involved on “the other side” and I don’t see much change in that situation in the near future! But keep digging and bouncing ideas off each other!

    • Colin & fellow Kangas, as stated in several places, stat decs don’t need to be verified. If they are false it is perjury, that is why people are very careful when making them. Same as why hasn’t JG sued KCOA for defamation, she can’t, as facts could be proved. Some other things to ponder.
      1. If she was innocent of any wrongdoing as a lawyer, why didn’t she renew her practicing certificate after her failed bid to enter the Senate. Any normal person in a normal situation would keep that up to date as a “back-up” if political ambitions did not go as planned. Joan Kirner & the Vic ALP to the rescue. I suspect she didn’t want the Law Society asking pointy questions of S & G regarding the circumstances of their parting of the ways. She probably would have been disbarred which would not be a good springboard into politics.
      2. Can anyone actually believe that after an intimate relationship that lasted several years, during which they appeared to be very close, closer than most couples as they worked closely together on these legal & Union matters, she did not know this man’s character or what he was up to? Huh? If she was that young, dumb and naiive she would never have graduated from Uni.

      • MNJ, and nor should her backers, such as Paul Howes (knowing what they already knew about her) have been so keen to elevate her to the top job. They sacraficed a PM in his first term. Why would you do this when the women was carrying so much baggage? Doesn’t make sense to me?

  36. Like HB I’ve gone over lots of recent links too and have re-read many items I read before but their significance escaped me at the time. It’s like a jigsaw puzzle – the colour and shape of single pieces don’t make sense until the bits start fitting together to display ‘the big picture’. And what a picture it is.

    For instance, it was no accident that the new Association’s title included the words “Workplace Reform”. It created the perfect vehicle for the Theiss boss (Wilson’s brother-in-law) to divert tens of thousands of dollars of WA taxpayer dollars into it – a WA government grant of hundreds of thousands of dollars paid to Theiss to promote workplace safety. Coincidence is stretching the bounds of probability.

    Looking at all of it beggars belief that no action was ever taken against ANY of the players and Gillard (and her acolytes) just keep saying “it was so long ago”.

    NOT SO LONG AGO the Federal Budget was handed down by Treasurer Wayne Swan under the smug gaze of his boss the Prime Minister.

    One item was a $10 million taxpayer grant to the ACTU to promote ‘better communication with the union membership’. (Other commenters may have a better recollection of exactly what the wording of that grant entailed).

    I remembered it because I had only recently been reading that the Union Movement had recently donated $10 million to the Labor Party.

    Ten million dollars worth of Union Dues are paid to the Labor Party and ten million dollars worth of taxpayer funds are paid back into Union coffers by the Labor Government.

    What a juicy, convenient little money-go-round that turned out to be. Can ANY rank and file union member please nominate a single instance of “better communication” with their leadership that those taxpayer funds facilitated?

    It certainly hasn’t benefited the poor buggers who are members of the HSU – they are still in the dark about what their leaders have been up to. And these crooks are bleating that Wilson’s old scams are “so long ago” ???

    THEY ARE ALL STILL AT IT !!! Except that now it’s all under the auspices of Government – it’s in the Budget – it’s “on the books” – it’s all in plain sight and nobody turns a hair.

    “A rose by any other name ….” – Ten million bucks have gone back into the Union treasure chest earmarked for “communication”. It’s STILL money laundering, and makes the Wilson/Blewitt/Gillard haul look like pocket-change.

    • it’s absolutely staggering what the gullible rusted on sheeple will swallow Black Swan! i’ll tell you what though, Harry Nowicki or the first person to get a book out will make a fortune (Moderator: rest going off topic)


      • not a chance: but i do hope the book launches soon and i hope it gets widespread publicity. and a movie of it too.and ask ABC to screen it and see what their reponse is:

    • Hi again Black Swan. Now the WA Taxpayers via W>A Government via Thiess via Wilson/Blewitt and their Bank Accounts enabled by the Julia Gillard set up Workplace Welfare Reform Association Inc., looks to be a straightout money laundering scheme, your $10,000,000 Taxpayer via Gillard/Swan Government Budget via ACTU money-go-round tip must be pursued!

      • Hillbilly – they have been doing this kind of thing for decades – amazing what can be hidden ‘in plain sight’ – and the more they get away with, the more blatant their money-go-round becomes.

        These parasitic grubs are now so bloated, and their arrogance in getting away with it so obvious, that surely even their rusted-on devotees are starting to see the truth of the matter.

      • I clicked on your google search link and found this which is of interest:

        WA cash given to union ‘slush fund’
        WA taxpayers were victims of the alleged $1 million union fraud that is continuing to haunt Julia Gillard.

        As the Prime Minister again denied any wrongdoing over the 17-year-old financial scandal, The West Australian can reveal that more than $380,000 of State Government money was given to a union “association” that Ms Gillard helped establish on behalf of her then boyfriend Bruce Wilson.


      • So could it be said that the East Coast branches of the AWU treated the West Coast branches, like fools, and raided the West Coast finances. Cause, it would seem that much of the West Coast( Union) finances ( including WA government inputs) ended up on the East Coast.

      • Gezz, I feel like i’m becoming annoying, but Wilson’s brother in law, being one of the bosses of Thiess in WA, would have been well aware of the WA’s government’s willingness to provide funds for health and safety.
        So now we have business and union officials walking hand in hand.
        The facilitation of the association, was the perfect carriage, to perpetrate the movement of funds. But until those who feel blighted, and stand up, for those, that they know, have been blighted, nothing will happen.

      • You aren’t being annoying Terry, unless I am too, because I’ve suggested elsewhere that I believe it is no coincidence that the bogus ‘association’ bore a ‘work reform’ title.

        The brother-in-law, as a recipient of taxpayer cash earmarked for workplace reform, would have known that any payment to such an entity would not have alerted any auditor of his own books.

        The entire charade was a highly lucrative money-go-round for all concerned, except that in this case it was no brass ring – this time it was solid gold.

        I believe it was a template for practices that continue today – ie. the Swan Budget grant of $10 million to the union movement to “facilitate communication with the union membership”. What kind of rubbish is that? And yet not a single one of the Canberra “elite” Press Gallery turned a hair.

        The fact that the Unions had given $10 million to the Labor Party is a mere coincidence of course. Otherwise we could be forgiven for concluding that the Labor Party had helped themselves to 10 mill in taxpayer cash, albeit by laundering it through the union books.

        We really ARE a most annoying lot aren’t we?

      • Her excuses that she was “young and naive” and “I was in a relationship, which I ended, and obviously it was all very distressing. I am by no means the first person to find out that someone close turns out to be different to what you had believed them to be. It’s an ordinary human error.”
        There are a lot of people (journalists included) who seem to accept Gillard’s excuse that she was “young and naive” and this was a good enough reason for her to act in the way she did, and, from a lay-person’s perspective, its a reasonable assumption. However, there’s one small point, which, I contend, make this excuse untenable, and quiet frankly and insult to the more learned of our bloggers. I am a professional (in the classic sense of the term) and gained my position through 5 years of full-time university study and 2 years internship before sitting regulatory exams set by government authorities to gain a practicing certificate in my chosen profession. When I commenced full-time employment I was in my mid-20’s, young, yes, but in my chosen field of expertise- certainly not naive. As a consultant, I set myself up to advise on projects worth millions of dollars before I was Gillard’s age when she did work for Wilson. If I gave advice, which caused my clients or any person to suffer physical, or economic loss, I certainly couldn’t have used the excuse “I was young and naive” as a defence- I would have been laughed out of court. And it’s all about duty of care to the client (under contract) and to anyone else who would likely to be affected by my actions (the law of tortuous liability). The standard of care expected from a competent professional (such as a solicitor) is higher than a layperson’s.(or Gillard’s “ordinary human”)From this perspective, Gillard’s work for Wilson was, I contend, totally unprofessional and fell well below that standard of care expected from a competent practising solicitor. It would appear that the partners of Slater and Gordon formed this opinion also by “asking” for her resignation. As a 30 something solicitor and a partner of a law firm, I suggest she was totally aware that what she was doing was not in accordance with the professional standard of care demanded of a competent practising solicitor. The question remains unanswered- why the lack of procedure, even if there was no formal file raised on the commission?
        The answer “I was young and naïve” might satisfy the hoi polloi and the less dispassionate journalist, but not the thinkers with some knowledge and experience in professional consultancy and advice.
        Still, I will give Gillard a pat for having stage managed her own “moot court” Thursday before last, where the accused was in charge of proceedings and the “counsels for the prosecution” were cleverly and deliberately caught under or un-prepared.
        Of course this allowed for a unanimous verdict of “not guilty” from the judges in the sympathetic media, who are wishing this will all just go away. But it won’t not until there is a full judicial enquiry where rules of procedure, evidence and cross-examination are just a tad more onerous than the “Judge Judy” pantomime of Thursday before last.

      • Fair suck of the sauce bottle Patrick. Some posters here call “me” Billy!!

        Seriously, great work! Does anyone here know whether it’s possible to impeach a Prime Minister and if so what steps are necessary to institute such proceedings ? I’ll ask the same question at Michael Smith News.com.

        We must also look out for a rash of judicial appointments from Gillard, because if Shane’s contention that under Section 316, ‘Concealing an Indictable Offence ‘ she may face charges, along with many Labor MP’s, lawyers and others plus at least 1600 spin doctors possibly falling into the same category, the courts will be busy for the next century and it would be wise for her to have a few more hand-picked sympathetic judges on hand!

      • Hillbilly my dear chap, I do not mean to implicate you at all mate. If you have a funny name then those things might happen. However, apart from all that:- I cannot take all of the cudos for that article. I came across it from a very close friend with whom I would trust my life. I stand by everything in it but I am still worried that she will finally walk away from all of this as will our nasty little friend Thomson. They seem to have too many so called ‘heavy weights’ on their suspect team.

      • hello guys: we really do have a major issue here. firstly we have S&G who is deep in the mud with gillard and a tinge of Maurice B . There are very many people who are intertwined in this nasty scandalous mess. A roayal commission is the only answer but it must not be commissioned by Gillard or the unions or the ALP because they will set the terms of reference. There seems to be much more information regarding this scandal to come and i suspect that we are only half way through.: the quickest way to get julia out will be from within. ie a few ALP MPs miust just resign and force and election or change of government or get the three GREAT GUNS who took 17 days to form this ridiculous government to pull out. the other option will be for the coalition to call for a press conferece, whille Julia is busy spruiking another of her jolly dreams, and annouce that due to the scandals which involves the highest office we(the entire coalition will not be participating in any more parliamentary sittings unless Julia gillard steps down or calls for an immediate election. and the the entire coalition must pack up and leave. this will send a strong message to the nation and the world and the we will see real action.. Julia is , in the meantime very busy shutting up the media and to me this sound very much like blackmail and that initself is a crime.

      • Hi 2BW. Pop over to Michael Smith News. com Great things are happening and a considerable amount of that brown stuff is hitting the proverbial fan, scattering and landing on quite a few worthy recipients !! Well, she did ask what she did wrong and if she didn’t know before she’ll sure know now! Spread the cheer far and wide!!

  37. Shane.This might be a worthwhile lead to follow and apologies for the long posts but please bear with me.

    From the Cambridge Affidavit it is clear big changes were made on 17th February 1995 when, amongst other things the Victoria and Western Australia Branches were dissolved. The background is that Cambridge took up his duties as Joint National Secretary on16th May 1994 and by agreement with the other joint Sec.,became solely responsible for overseeing the financial side of Union affairs.

    He states that “as a result of certain events in 1995”,( which he unfortunately does not specify) “I have had cause to conduct extensive investigations……..”.

    The point you may like to follow is; with the dramatic changes that were made especially the change to the handling of AWU moneys and other financial arrangements on that date, it is reasonable to assume considerable legal advice would have been required from their industrial lawyers at Slater & Gordon, Bernard Murphy and Julia Gillard.

    It is also almost inconceivable that those lawyers would not have known about his investigations, if no earlier, then certainly by 17th February 1995. it is my reasonable belief that in the latter part of his first nine months Cambridge had discovered many discrepancies and these actions were his first attempts to try and internally institute some system of monetary control and rein in the obvious excesses of several Union officers.

    By August 1995 the muck had really hit the fan, all hell broke loose and the big attempts to coverup were started. The other joint sec., went back on his agreement and Cambridge was compelled to share dutes with him. Cambridge eventually became so frustrated he wrote to the Workplace Relations Minister seeking a Royal commission into his own Union!

    The infamous “you know as well as I do that if Cambridge isn’t stopped we’re all history” letter followed and the ACTU Executive did manage to “stop”” him!

    Any perusal of his Affidavit would show that in addition to his other duties as scretary, he must have spent months trying to unravel the tangled web of deception apparent in the myriad accounts he uncovered . At any time during that investigation Gillard could have and should have disclosed what she knew about the unauthorised Bank a/c’s her actions had allowed to be set up!

    it is inconceivable that she would not have subsequently been asked to at least provide a statement nor in the absence of evidence to the contrary, does it appear she even offered to do so!

    It would seem to me there are some rich grounds in that lot to dig for evidence of concealment of many crimes!

    Hope that helps but will keep looking!

  38. Shane. A quick thought before I go. In his affidavit, Ian Cambridge took great pains to clearly and concisely set out the Rules of the Union applying to the matters in which Gillard was involved and as a solicitor acting for the AWU she would have been fully aware of them.
    Therefore, when she set up the sham association as she admits, “at the behest of Bruce Wilson”, she knew it was not properly authorised and she did not seek such authorisation from the AWU and therefore clearly breached those Rules.
    She did it in such a manner that it was concealed from her principal clients, the AWU and also her other partners
    She did not list any file on the firm’s system as she admits she should have done.
    She also knew Bank A/’s were being opened clearly in breach of AWU Rules.
    She knew moneys were being deposited in those A/c’s clearly in breach of the Union Rules as to how and where such moneys were to be banked.

    There are many other things I could list but the main point is that from the time she made the decision to set up the sham associaton she was in breach of ,at the very least, her duty of care to the AWU.
    At any time she could have, and should have made them aware of the existence of the assocation and the a/c’s, particularly when she became aware Ian Cambridge was investigating such matters..
    At the time of the house purchase she must have known funds from the Bank A/c’s she had facilitated being opened were being improperly used and therefore a criminal offence had been comitted.
    Certainly from that time, if not earlier, she was concealing a crime.

    A line well worh pursuing I would think. Sorry I don’t have more time today. Cheers.

  39. “At any time she could have, and should have made them aware of the existence of the assocation and the a/c’s, particularly when she became aware Ian Cambridge was investigating such matters..
    At the time of the house purchase she must have known funds from the Bank A/c’s she had facilitated being opened were being improperly used and therefore a criminal offence had been comitted.”

    Let me think now- “conspiring to pervert the course of justice” come to mind.
    And that involves all those who were involved in the ring-around as a result of
    “working the phones” to get the numbers to silence Cambridge.
    It would be interesting to know who was aparty to the “ring-around” and see how many of these are in parliament or in positions of “influence” in this present government.
    My thesis is this (just an idea)
    The Gillard/Wison/Blewitt affair was discovered by the Cambridge audit, and as you said SAG had to be involved. When the partners of SAG discovered that one (or two) of their own partners were involved, this would have caused a lot of “tension” in the office. A tension which wold also been aggravated by the loss of the AWU account.The very “tension” Gillard refers to in her 23/8/12 – moot court she set up to profess her innocence.
    It was obviously to the mutual benefit SAG and the AWU that this whole affair was “hushed-up”. For SAG, their professional reputation was on the line seeing as one (or two) of their partners had been complicate in creating a vehicle to “launder” extortion money through a bogus “AWU” affiliated association.
    The AWU didn’t want to proceed with any legal investigations which is why police investigations were shut down and judicial inquiries weren’t proceeded with.
    GIllard was SAG’s fall guy (resign or be sacked)- every one, including Gillard et al remained silent and the whole thing was quietly swept under the carpet.
    Over these years, the official line was the one Gillard continues to trot out- I was “young
    and naive” and set-up by an adulterous lover who misled me.

    Well Gillard, the left-luvvies may have accepted your invitation to your pity-party, but the rest of us who have a few more years on most of you can see right through the scam. Those of us who have had first-hand experience of the stand-over tactics in the construction industry of the (previously) BLF and its latest re-incarnations, know better,
    We’ve experienced unnecessary delays on building sites through bogus “OH and S” complaints- like not having the right grade dunny paper in the crib room.

    Update: This is the sort of ‘agent provocateur” tatics being used this morning by the CFMEU to give Gillard, Shorten and the rest of the Labor front bench the big stick to beat Abbott over the head with this afternoon in question time. See how conservative governments deal with important issues like OH and S- they bring in police on horse back-boogerbooger to the Coalition and see how important the setting up of slush funds to re-elect union officials whose sole aim it is to improve workplace health and safety.
    These guys are unbelievable-when their backs are against the wall, they really fight dirty.

  40. As I understand it our ‘fearless leader’ issued an invitation to the MSM to attend a Press Conference in regard to ‘boat people’ or words to that effect. It seems to me that the ‘trigger’ for questions to be asked about the ‘fraud affair’ during that Press Conference was a set up as many of the questions are during Question Time in Parliament. So, the invitation was a ‘lie/fraud’ and the answers given were also in the area of ‘handling the truth very carelessly’.

    Please ‘keep on keeping on’ Shane and others and hopefully the ‘truth’ will eventually prevail in the long run (and a long run it will be)!

    She is lying now. She allway has and she allways will because that is the culture in which she has been brought up and has been surrounded with most of her life. Perhaps she does not know when she is lying and truly believes her own lies. That is a BIG problem. (There is a name for that condition I believe…..Oh yes….’Politition’). I do hope the truth gets in the way of this dreadful story. See ya! Pat

  41. Shane. Analysing Gillard’s Pr/ Con & referring back to the Cambridge Affidavit, this may help. Given Ian C.’s affidavit could have decided Gillard’s whole future, it’s a given that she would have studied every word and gone through every detail with a fine-tooth comb, particularly everything in relation to the A/c’s her actions had allowed her boyfriend to set up against all Union Rules in force at the time.

    There were two significant mentions of the affidavit at her snap P.C. sprung on the most hopeless excuses for journalists, none of whom knew anything about the case!

    Q. “………..the FWA Commissioner, Ian Cambridge, has called for a royal commission…… Do you think there needs to be some sort of formal investigation so the process, we can move on from this and you can be cleared?”

    PM: “Well you are conflating a number of things that is prejudicial to me. Mr Cambridge has never called for an inquiry into my conduct…………………”

    (Aside from the fact I.C did everything but do so, by laying out in clear detail the Union Rules she had breached which led to the fraud, and which should and almost certainly would have led to charges against her and others had the AWU done the right thing and pursued the matter, it does establish beyond doubt the fact she had seen the affidavit.)

    Q. “Do you believe workplace reform associations are legitimate bodies these days or should they be outlawed?”
    PM: ( Her reply, like many she gave, was meaningless waffle)!

    Q. “But the experience of companies like Thiess which, I mean, they put $380,000 of taxpayers’ money into this association or the funds. Its experience was that the coffers..” (cut off by Gillard).

    PM: I’m not sure I understand your contention: taxpayers’ money.***************

    “Well, the money they put in was actually from taxpayers, from the State Government***. But with regards to the work of this association, Thiess refused to be a complainant because it thought it had got its service. Now, that service presumably was industrial peace. If these are still instruments that can maintain industrial peace,then it’s a waste of money, isn’t it?”

    PM: Well, first and foremost, I think you’re putting a set of assertions to me I’m not in a position to deal with. I had no knowledge of the workings of this association from the time of assisting with legal advice when it was being incorporated to the time that
    allegations about it were being raised in 1995; no knowledge of the operation……….”( (more meaning less waffle)

    para 12 of the affidavit sets out details of the two main AWU Worplace Reform Assoc. Inc. Bank A/c’s set up by Wilson and details the Union Rules flouted in so doing.

    para 13 Details the operators, Wilson and Blewitt

    para 17, 17.1 and 17.2 Detail Source of funds and deal with the Thiess cheques made out to the AWU or AWU Worplace Reform Association

    17.3 Cambridge writes:”I understand almost all the funds deposited were paid, or intended to be paid to the Union by a construction company, Thiess Contractors Ltd for the purpse of assisting the Union in providing paid staff for training purposes and for other specific purposes.

    I understand these funds had been paid to Thiess by the Western Australia Government out of a fund kept by the State for the financing of training schemes and were intended to be used for that purpose by the Union.” “************************

    PM: “I’m not sure I understand your contention: taxpayers’ money.*************????

    The AWU Workplace Reform Association Inc cheque for $67,722-30 came into her firm , recorded and deposited in their Trust A/c. W.A Taxpayers paid for her boyfriend’s house

    “I had no knowledge “blah, blah, blah and it was 17 yars ago. Yeah, right Julia!!!

    How she had the gall to stand there and utter such barefaced lies is almost beyond my comprehension! She is still, at the very least, concealing crimes, the robbing of Western Australian taxpayers and ordinary Union members who may have derived benefit from either instructing or training.. Aiding and abetting are two other words that spring to mind!!

  42. Shane, not sure if you will let this opinion pass through, but could it be that,Julia”s INTENTIONS, were not unto herself, It Is indicative that in the society that we live in that, there is a point of self-righteous dignity, and that dignity is PERSONAL.

  43. Shane, an idea for your site, how about a list of questions that the media should have asked at the PM’s recent press conference?

    The questions would need to be pointed and succinct so they would not lend themselves tot the now standard response of evasion and obfuscation…

    Keep up the good work – we’re all endebted to you and we’re all right behind you!

  44. Shane. Referring to my 27Aug post @ 2-52pm. I’m just having a very detailed look at the transcript of J.G’s Press conference and coming up with many worthwhile leads to follow. However , what suddenly struck me was the context in which the Phil Coorey article was so ineffectively raised by a journalist the P.M called “Phil”. Have a look and see what I mean and also, any chance of identifying who “Phil” was?? I may have slightly edited some of what I’m posting but have not altered the context in any way

    JNLIST: Given your difference with Sid over the correction, could you just precisely tell us where it was wrong, your version of where it was wrong?
    PM: I can certainly tell you where it was wrong. The Australian newspaper today asserted that I created a trust fund.That is wholly untrue and seriously defamatory.
    The Australian, in the past, has asserted that I created bank accounts. News Limited has known that that allegation is wholly untrue and defamatory since the Sunday before the 2007 election campaign.Indeed, so concerned about it were they, that they changed the second edition of the Sunday newspapers and put a retraction and apology on News Limited websites. The Australian has certainly known that that allegation is defamatory and untrue since Mr Milne reproduced it, and the determination was made that the appropriate course of action was to terminate Mr Milne’s employment. That is why I am so amazed, I think is the right word, to see it reproduced today.

    JNLIST: That’s the only contention with the last week’s reporting, isn’t it?
    PM: I’ve got other contentions with last week’s reporting, but ****I want to be clear with you, Sid, about what’s motivated me today.***** I did not want to dignify what is, I believe, a very sexist smear campaign on the Internet.The Australian newspaper commenced to report on a number of matters that I thought had been dealt with publicly before and which no wrongdoing by me was alleged.Today, a move has been made from those matters to a specific contention which is highly wrong and defamatory, and I believe it is appropriate for me to deal with it. I am taking the opportunity to deal with related matters. I am answering all of your questions and today is an end of it.

    (Methinks she doth protest too much, especially as a retraction and apology had already happened, because right on cue after that very suspect tirade on what motivated her snap ambush Press conference came the inconsequential ,no point to it other than diversionay Dorothy Dix question, on the “Ms.Gillard did the conveyancing” article!

    JNLIST: The story today about Ralph Blewitt leaving Indonesia in 2009 with the police after him and left owing a lot of money. When you dealt with him, did you find him a shonky character then?
    PM: Phil, that’s a question really no-one could answer. Did I have any reason to believe Blewitt was involved in the kind of conduct that’s subsequently come to light? No, I did not..

    (Again, I ask the question:- Which do you think is the most defamatory, calling a “slush” fund a “trust” fund,or;
    opening up a huge can of worms that could bring down a Prime minister and possibly her Government as well, by publicly writing that “Ms.Gillard did the conveyancing.”)

    BTW Shane, Do you think have I driven everyone away by appearing to dominate the blog? If I thought that was true, I would stop posting and just keep working in the background and letting you know when I thought I had somethong to help! Cheers. H/B

      • Thanks so much Fidopuss. You have just made it all worthwhile and a tired old man very happy! Laurie Oakes says it’s all “driven by Gillard-haters!” Like the government, the ABC, etc., etc., he is living in a parallel universe and hasn’t got a clue about what most Australians think and the kind of Australia they want to leave for their children and future generations! PS. I love cats and all animals!

  45. Any chance of a class action against Slater and Gordon and/or AWU for negligence and/or misappropriation of members funds – a civil action by disaffected Union members?

    • S & G do that type of work!
      First hour for an interview might be free and they may offer a ‘no win no fee’ basis! (:-

      • are they any good at telling the truth. will they open a file: will they have an affair with me; will they tape and transcribe. will the do the wang and the wang.

  46. Shane. As I predicted a week or so ago, the next bi move would be from Michael Smith ‘
    With his entry into the bloggers world, the tsunami of truth is underway that is going to see the end of Gillard and her crime -covering- up Union cronies and solicitors!

    your archived site history will show the world the valuable and courageous part you have played, and also the power of all freedom-loving blogs such as yours which give decent people a voice.

    I’ll now take a background seat and leave you with this thought. I believe you may well be able to claim that one of your bloggers, if not the first, was certainly one of the first to spot , put it all together and post on the final nail in the coffin!

    hillbilly33August 23, 2012 at 3:46 pm#

    “The final piece of the puzzle fell into place today ironically due to a Fairfax journalist at the Sydney Morning Herald, who has been one of Gillard’s most staunch defenders. Thanks to an alert blogger at Andrew Bolt’s Blog in the Tips section who provided a link to Coorey’s article which I then viewed myself to verify. I don’t know where or how he got his information but in an article titled ‘Union offical fled to Indonesia’ he stated Julia Gillard had done the conveyancing for purchase of the house at 85 Kerr by her boyfriend
    Bruce Wilson allegedly for Ralph Blewitt. Gillard has admitted attending the auction with Wilson.”

    and later:

    hillbilly33August 25, 2012 at 1:59 am#

    “Hi Shane. Re the P.M’s.snap Press Conference. My B.S meter has just about gone off the scale. Remember Phil Coorey’s article in the SMH where he wrote “Julia Gillard did the conveyancing” in relation to purchase of 85 Kerr St.

    To me and many others that was completely new information and many bloggers picked it up early in the morning. I’ve never seen it anywhere else in my research, have you?

    IMHO,it is not too far fetched to say that was the sole reason the hasty P.C was arranged as no doubt her stooges would have picked up the early blog interest in it. I therefore believe it was a last desperate throw by the P.M to try and put an end to questioning and speculation and in particular divert attention away from the part of the article that was obviously a grave error or slip of the tongue or pen on Phil Coorey’s part.”

    Now, in the next couple of days to get your Book and put a little something in your Donations Jar.

    I’ve enjoyed it all immensely, got the old neurons working again, and “met” some lovely fellow bloggers. Cheers and thanks to all from the hillbilly!

    • Come on Billy, you stirred me up, got me interested. Enjoy reading your thoughts and analysis. This matter is not at a dead end. Sharpen your pencil.
      Regards from us all.

    • It needs to be kept bubbling along till the next election,and then Brandis I do not doubt will push TA for a Royal Commission
      BUT–if this matter gets “looked at” under Labor and Greens and useless idiots it would be a shameful whitewash and the chance would be forever lost for justice.
      That’s my opinion for what it’s worth as I cannot see how without a huge scandal there would be anything done under this mob of pseudo marxists!

      • Sorry to disagree with you, Jazza! Nothing “pseudo” about them, they’re the real thing, but there are few people out there who would know or acknowledge them for what they are!

  47. 10 Yes or No Questions for the Prime Minister

    1. Were you in any way involved in the conveyancing on the house at 85 Kerr St (Yes or No)?

    2. Was any money from the AMU slush funds at any time used to fund renovations on your home (Yes or No)?

    3. When you found out what Bruce Wilson was up to did you report it to the police right away (Yes or No)?

    4. Did you provide the police with copies of all of your documentation on the AMU slush funds (Yes or No)?

    5. After the taped interview, did you provide Slater and Gordon with copies of all of your documentation on the AMU slush funds (Yes or No)?

    6. Can any of the blame for Slater and Gordon’s loss of the AMU account be attributed to you personally (Yes or No)?

    7. Would Slater and Gordon have had possible grounds for your dismissal (Yes or No)?

    8. Are you concerned about corruption within the trade union movement (Yes or No)?

    9. Do you see any similarities between things that happened in the AMU and things that have happened more recently in the HSU (Yes or No)?

    10. Is there a need for a Royal Commission into union finances and accountability (Yes or No)?

    • Good luck with the questions.Under Julia’s Law,( quite different from the law thatr apply to the citizens of the country) , you will most likely be treated to a another load of crap, or just be brushed aside like the dirt she treats everybody else as .

      They don’t come much lower than this.

      • Thanks for your reply Barry.

        Perhaps the real issue here is how and when did Australia become a country where the Prime Minister can’t answer basic questions like these and an ordinary member of the public like me asks better questions than our media elite, the Canberra Press Gallery…

    • I am happy to be corrected, but if JG has no practising certifiate, what jurisdiction does the LC commissioner of VIC have?
      I sense a bs artist?

      • It was her conduct at the time of the AWU issue which needs to be investigated by the Legal Services Commissioner; it will be interesting to see their response, if any. Slater and Gordon must be in damage control over the publicity which doesn’t paint them in a good light.

      • Don’t worry about the feelings of Slater and Gordon remember they happily took over Keddies last year despite its thoroughly tarnished reputation as a result of stealing clients money.
        I reckon they showed Julia the door not because of what she was doing to the AWU but because she had not “opened a file” which I think is probably code for not charging her client for work done in Slater and Gordon time. That is the unforgivable sin in their eyes I imagine.
        Compensation lawyers like Slater and Gordon don’t worry about what is right or wrong only what is or isn’t legal and what they can get away with .

      • I can’t recall a time when it has ever been possible to paint Slater & Gordon in a good light. Among Doctors I worked with in Melbourne back in the 90s S&G were seen as nothing but ambulance chasing predators.

  48. wow. this is dynamite what has been uncovered and slowly pieced together. although it is still possible that these criminals may get away with it, the fuse has been lit and there is no doubt there will be a big bang coming soon.

  49. Hi Black Swan. Urgently need your help. Have you got links to verify the $10,000,000 -Gillard/Swan Government – Union -Labor Party grant & donation money-go-round?
    Also on the same theme, Could you kindly delve deeper into the BCITF where the money for the 85 Kerr.St. property came from? It was supposedly to be funded by “small levy’ from companies but quickly became very flush. What I’d like to know is whether any part of the money paid to Thiess was taxpayer funded? I believe the fund was wound up in 1994 because very little training benefit was found. However, the organisation has morphed into another name. Construction Training Fund.’ but still on the BCITF website. Thanks.
    Apologies if I’m O/T for this next one Shane or B.S, but do you know the actual date of the ‘ if Cambridge isn’t stopped we’re all history’ letter from Robert F.Smith letter to Steve Harrison?
    Thanks. Greatly appreciated if you can help..

    • Hello Hillbilly – Sorry but I have no links re the $10 mill from the Swan Budget, but I clearly recall seeing his announcement on a TV news grab on Budget night with the PM also in the frame, smiling benignly. My jaw hit the floor.

      It rang alarm bells because shortly before that, I had seen news reports that the Unions had handed over $10 mill to the Labor Party. I wondered at the time what union members who were NOT Labor devotees thought of their ‘dues’ going to such a pathetic excuse for a government.

      Sorry that I don’t have the time or resources to assist further as I’m currently ‘on the road’ and grabbing a bit of time here and there to catch up with emails/news/blogs etc.

      You’ve been doing a stirling job in ferreting out a lot of info – sorry I can’t be of more help.

  50. Hi Shane. I think Mike Smith has just provided you with your “Smoking gun” today! Check his article 03/09/12 and link to Address by Joint National Secretary Mr.Ian Cambridge to the Queensland Branch Meeting – January 311996. The AWU Workplace Reform Association Bank A/c’s had still not been discovered at that date. Bruce Wilson had gone by 18th August 1995. Gillard had hung on to the file she had not registered until the Monday before her final formal interview on 11/09/95.

    That means Julia Gillard for sure knowingly sat on evidence concealing a crime, and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary , it appears the partners who’d remained at the firm after she was given the resign or else option, may have been complicit in such concealment!

    The plot thickens and the net on the guilty ones keeps tightening!

  51. “Julia Gillard employs no fewer than 1,600 media advisers. (Spin doctors).”
    Which is why I have dubbed her “the Spinster Prime Minister”
    Spinster by status and spinster by action.
    Cute, don’t you think?

  52. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/hansons-right-hand-man-played-key-role-in-airing-union-dirt/story-fn59niix-1226139337119:-

    “PAULINE Hanson’s former senior adviser John Pasquarelli helped produce and distribute a former union official’s statutory declaration about the allegedly fraudulent conduct of Julia Gillard’s former boyfriend 16 years ago.

    Mr Pasquarelli confirmed to The Weekend Australian that he had typed and helped draft the document for his friend, former Australian Workers Union Victoria president Bob Kernohan, shortly before last year’s federal election.”


    How does this sit with all that is now out there?

    • Not a huge issue. That was well known last year. Pasquarelli only draft one before the 2010 election. Bob Kernohan signed a stat dec back in 1995/96 so the new one only reinforces what he had written on a stat dec previously. It was raised in the Victorian Parliament in 2001. But even if you take out Bob Kernohan’s stat dec there is still a truck load of evidence.

      • Shane I agree wholeheartedly. However I have been actively spreading this story & particularly the implications of the cover-up to the entire ALP & Union movement & this Pasquarelli involvement was thrown back at me.

        I do realise that his activities are after the fact, but the PM’s spin doctors will inflate it into “an orchestrated conspiracy”.

        The cover-ups, the pay-offs with jobs for the boys & the apparent code of “Omerta” which exists in the senior levels of the factions of the party are staggering.

        If it proves substantially to be as it appears & was all laid bare the ramifications for one half of our essentially two party system are enormous & frightening.

        However I do not doubt the other side of politics has its own dark history.

        I saddens me to discover this is not the country or society I thought I grew up in.

      • I know what you mean . I am old enough to remember when we could afford to sneer at the moral turpitude of the leaders of other countries .

      • Pattoh. Shane is correct as Michael Smith would confirm. It doesn’t matter who is involved in preparation of documents or anything else. The main evidentiary documents speak for themselves!

        Here’s an actual quote you can use to your friends. It’s from a judgment with which I’m familiar and is a response from the judge to the defence who had questioned the testimony and reliability of a witness for the plaintiff:-
        “I have weighed the evidence xxxxxxx gave most carefully and found nothing that was said at any time could alter the objective facts or operate to prejudice the plaintiff”!

  53. Shane. I think you are on the right track with Section 316. i believe a firm case could be made out for multiple breaches by Gillard at least since she did the conveyancing work on 85 Kerr St. I’m going to link his post on as many sites as I can and would ask every other poster here to do the same. The “sleeping giant “of the silent majority is awakening and becoming “filled with a terrible resolve”. Let’s focus, people!

  54. Shane . This a cross post of one I submitted @ Michael mith News.com this morning.

    To the many enquiring minds posting here, please help flesh out these bones, which with the good grace of Mike (and Shane?) I’ll split into several posts.
    I’ll repeat: treat every investigation as though you are dealing with criminals. If such investigation proves them to be innocent, all well and good.
    ut think Justice Marcus Einfeld, and the elaborate deceptions he tried and everything he sacrificed trying to avoid a miserable fine and/or conviction for speeding !

    Based on my own extensive investigations and evidence presented so far by Mike and other sources such as Shane Dowling at Kangaroo Court, Stephen Mayne at the Mayne Report (definitely no friend of conservatives but willing to look at and analyse the facts), investigative reporter Hedley Thomas at The Australian (yes they are a very rare and endangered species but still clinging on to existence and should be protected at all costs), and many others.

    Julia Gillard’s only excuse offered so far for all her actions is that at the time, she was “young and naive” and “I did nothing wrong”.

    On the other side, we have the sworn affidavit of Ian Cambridge, Stat Dec of Bob Kernohan, testimony of Gillard’s partners. All three sources had occasion to investigate all related matters available to them and did so.

    This is the background we know from presumably an impeccable source, Peter Gordon, a senior equity partner at Slater & Gordon.

    (a) Julia Gillard worked in the industrial department of of S & G 1990 through to 1995.
    (b) She was accountable to Bernard Murphy.
    (c) They acted for the Victorian State Branch of the AWU from 1991-92 until 1995
    (d) They also acted for two of its officials Bruce Wilson and Ralph Blewitt. That had been well known since the early 1990’s.
    (e) Murphy and Gillard left the firm in late 1995 in circumstances where:
    (ea) their relationship with the equity partners had fractured:
    (eb) trust and confidence had evaporated:
    (ec) the partnership had concerns about various aspects of the way in which Murphy and Gillard had acted with regard to Mr.Wilson and the AWU.
    (ed) the partnership felt that a number of **matters required explanation: (** unspecified.)
    (ee) the partnership was concerned as to whether they had acted consistently with their obligations of utmost good faith with regard to their partners:

    My assessment (so far) and summary of at least some of the things she did wrong.

    1. As an officer of the court, by entering into an intimate relationship with a client, she wilfully and knowingly breached the Rules of her profession as set down by the Law Society and/or Law Council.
    2. In doing so she knowingly and deliberately breached her obligations of duty of care to her partners and one of her principal clients the AWU ,
    3. By concealing and not reporting her relationship with AWU officer Bruce Wilson (which put her in a grave conflict of interest situation) to either the AWU or her partners at S & G she knowingly and deliberately committed further breaches of her obligations of duty of care to all parties.

    In her hastily arranged 23/8/12 “ambush” Press Conference Gillard was asked :

    Journalist: Prime minister, are you satisfied your conduct as a lawyer throughout this matter was ethical ?
    PM: Yes.

    Just matters 1.,2. and 3.above show that her twisted self-serving view of ethics is clearly and demonstrably erroneous. She showed she was willing to deliberately flout those basic rules, so in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, people are entitled to then have a reasonable belief that she may have committed several serious crimes which I’ll elaborate on in further posts.

    Let’s work methodically through all this, check, double-check and document till we have the full story. Cheers H/B

    Posted by: hillbilly33 |

  55. Hi Shane; you mentioned that you will be visiting Canberra shortly. Is it your intention to serve a summons on Ms Gillard? There has to be a circuit breaker here , otherwise we are all going around in circles. You have established that there is a prima facie case to answer, so lets get on with it!

    • Many have tried, none have succeeded.

      The Labor Party as a whole , should be up for treason.

      The only problem being , there isn’t a judge in the country that would find them guilty.

      It will take an uprising to clean this lot up .

      But , their day will come .

  56. PLEASE STOP AND THINK!! Everyone is thrashing around trying to absorb, analyse and understand all the complexities..Not necessary!

    I speak from experience. Even the most complex cases come back to just one or two events, where if they’d been recognised and nipped in the bud nothing more would have ensued. When one can identify that point the whole case opens up.

    LET’S START with what we KNOW Gillard did wrong, what she KNEW she did wrong. and WHEN she did it, remembering as a lawyer/solicitor she was an officer of the court and in a law firm partnership as a SALARIED partner, bound by all relevant Rules of Practice.and duty-bound to operate within them.

    1. She admits that in 1991, she commenced an intimate relationship with Bruce Wilson, an officer of her principal client the AWU, in breach of those guidelines, also constituting a conflict of interest. If she was then acting for him legitimately through the firm that breach was compounded. Had a complaint been made to the Law Society she may have been subject to at least disciplinary action or struck off the Roll. It would or should have been END of story!

    2. She admits that in 1992 she commenced acting for her boyfriend Wilson in what was obviously a private capacity outside all guidelines. She was in a clear breach of trust and duty of care to her partners, firm and principal client the AWU.

    By not putting the file she opened on the firm’s system she made a DELIBERATE CHOICE to keep it secret from most of her partners and by not notifying either them or the officers of the Victorian Branch Executive or National Executive of the AWU, she was in clear breach of her obligations as to duty of care, trust and acting consistently with utmost good faith particularly as to timely discloure, (Amongst others, these were some of the allegations put to her after investigations by the partnership in the formal interview 11/9/95 before she left the firm)!

    The sworn affidavit of AWU joint national secretary Ian Cambridge records that every action she carried out from at least the day she commenced acting separately for him, was in clear breach of all applicable Rules of the AWU, a fact of which Gillard was well aware!!

    THEY ARE THE FACTS. Everything stems from there and in the absence of ANY EVIDENCE to the contrary, it is more than reasonable to believe she should face charges over many matters.IGNORANCE OF THE LAW is no excuse, nor is saying she was “young and naive”, having a “memory lapse” or constantly repeating “I did nothing wrong” That carries no weight. Gillard has never defended her actions by producing either a sworn affidavit, a Statutory Declaration, or making a statement in a place where she would be accountable if proved to have lied. On the contrary she has seemingly sought to actively avoid doing so!

    It’s now only a matter of someone with more knowledge than I have, putting names to the various Laws Gillard may have flouted and/or broken.
    ‘m not a lawyer but these are JUST a few which spring to mind that could be applicable

    (a) Aiding and betting in the committing of a crime;
    (b) Committing or Participating in a crime;
    (c) Accessory before and after the fact;
    (d)Countless breaches of the Crimes ACT 1900 – Section 316 Concealing Serious Indictable Offence (certainly needing investigation from the time she acted for Wilson in the purchase of 85 kerr St.,Fitzroy if not before)
    (e) Perverting the course of justice.

    Is there not one lawyer/solicitor of integrity and principle left in Australia willing to now stand up and defend their profession?
    Is there not one politician of integrity and principle left who will not stand up in Parliament and pursue these grave matters to the end?
    Is there not one Union member or official willing to defend their right to be properly represented without all the fraud and corruption so rife?
    Is there not one print, radio, or TV media executive willing to stand up and call this Prime Minister’s bluff and help restore this country back to a place with some semblance of fairness, honesty and integrity?
    Is there not one journalist in the MSM or ABC with the integrity to forget politics and report the facts accurately devoid of “spin”?

    Do we the general public of Australia have the will and good sense to forget politics and have the guts to stand together and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH?.

    Even though I’m near the end of my life and have seen and experienced enough to be cynical about many things, I do believe there is a groundswell that I’ve never seen before of people who are sick of the blatant corruption of power, unpunished crimes, lies, deceit, lack of moral compass etc. so evident in the last few years. Who yearn for positive change and a return to values of yesteryear once held dear and WILL see that it happens. I hope so, as the future of Australia and all generations to come is at present in the balance as are many of the freedoms our forebears fought and died for and many of our fine young people are still doing so today.

    I hope today’s post may help in that endeavour. Cheers to all from the hillbilly!!

    • Billy, I’m also near the end of mine, and I would love to see this woman get her just reward before I go! What you say about the want of integrity of those in the law and in politics is spot on, but, in reality, aren’t we completely bereft of honour in this age? If untrue, particularly with the airing this matter has had, surely someone with the wherewithal would have acted by now! I feel more and more that anyone who attempts to take it in hand will be labelled “treasonous” by those with vested interests who have the power to reject it!

      • Liz. Hopefully the whole sorry mess will now start to unravel. I haven’t stopped working on it , neither has Shane, Michael Smith and many others and I won’t while there’s breath in my body. I love Australia and its people!

      • Fidopuss, thank you again. It’s beyond politics for me, I just want to see the whole mess cleaned up. Politicians of whatever leaning, crooked law firms, the unions, the media including the ABC, companies involved in money laundering; the list goes on and on. To get some idea of what’s involved, I urge everyone to access the speech of Ian Cambridge to QLD delegates in January 1996. If my link doesn’t work you can access it from Michael Smith News on his “The AWU Scandal – Ian Cambridge Speech to QLD Delegates ” post. Ian left us a wonderful legacy of leads and information before being overwhelmed. Thanks to Shane, Michael and others like them, the general public is stirring, becoming informed.and the “bushfire” has well and truly started . I dont think anyone can now stop it. Watch for lots of rats jumping ship and troubled souls gradually refinding some of their lost honour and integrity!


    • You’re doing a great job Hillbilly. You’ve distilled these complex issues down to the fundamental basics and it’s well to remember that without these most basic elements of Gillard’s culpability, all else could not have followed.

      She functioned as a ‘facilitator’ – without her intervention and her sly and secretive activities, the welter of theft and fraud that followed could never have happened.

      I have no sympathy for her in any shape or form. She has proven to be devoid of morals or scruples or ethics of any kind and it pandered to her massive ego to be the linchpin in her boyfriend’s plans.

      As she boasted on the ABC’s Australian Story; she operates according to “Gillard’s Doctrine”. In that frame of mind there is no room for humility, for compromise, for regret or apology. For her such sentimental attributes are a sign of weakness and she could never accommodate that.

      The only people involved who are even more deserving of my contempt are the ‘useful idiots’ who, to preserve their own scrawny backsides, have covered up for her – and continue to do so.

  57. Shane, I have been away from News etc. since 24th August and have just read everything on your website, am absolutely flabbergasted. I have lived a long time and never thought to have to live through this episode with a PM surrounded by scandal in office. Who would have thought this possible. It is obvious, she is guilty,I have known this for months, she is evil. The only thought I can contribute is that I read the transcript of the interview between Peter Gordon and Julia and the first question PG asked her was: Can you tell me about this file, now on the table, or something close to this. I then thought ‘She has kept this file away from her partners’.
    She did all this without them knowing, therefore she had to leave.
    S & G covered up the whole affair and are also guilty.

    They of course lost the AWU business to Maurice blackburn, when Gillard and Murphy left S & G and went to Blackburn.
    Shane you and all the bloggers, have done a wonderful job. I’ll send you some help as soon as i can, Keep it up, but be careful, we are dealing with very dangerous people. Take care

      • tongaat – while I’m holding my thoughts as you suggest, I’ll include the grief suffered by the families of the four young men who died in the ‘pink batts’ bungle, the suffering of the families of the young soldiers who were murdered in Afghanistan, the loss suffered by the loved ones of all the young workers who die each year in preventable industrial ‘accidents’ and those rural families who are crushed by the suicide of farmers destroyed by inane Green carbon-sink and water policies.

        We certainly have a lot to think about.

      • hello,Blackswan I also feel for all of them too. But sometimes we need to step back pause for a moment and reflect on life. I am not at all impressed with the policies the PM is unleashing with such fury.I just hoped that if all of us just stopped, just for a while, and in doing so allow the universe to take over from where we left. Remember we are working against an athiest. we, collectively as bloggers have already sent a very strong and serious message and we continue to do that.The universe has been listening to all of us and because we still continue to show our anger, the universe cannot act on our demands.Now this may sound a bit strange but great leaders such as Mahathma Gandhi . Nelson Mandela, the great BUDDHA etc. reveal to us in their words of wisdom that when we do something with a lot of passion we inevitably recieve that thing we are so passionate about. (it could be anger, hatred , or love) Julia Gillard no doubt has recieved her share from the universe because if you read her speech to the FABIAN SOCIETY (31/8.2007) you will see very clearly how she attracted all of her HATRED AND ANGER …EVERY SINGLE BIT> i will just quote a few lines from her speech (Julia with exreme anger said:Much can happen between now and the election later this year. And it will, for many reasons.Just one reason is because we are confronting the most successful and cunning conservative politician of his generation – John Howard) but who really became the cunning one. and she goes on to say”.They will continue to roll out myth after falsehood, and fib after bluster every day between now and the election. Their election machine and most significantly their election funds/slush funds will bombard our airwaves and our newsprint and cyberspace with an unprecedented onslaught of negative advertising and campaigning.No untruth will be too big for them to tell. No piece of mud too muddy to fling. No gutter too low for them to climb down into” , Now you see Julia recieved her EXACT dues from the UNIVERSE because she was very passionate in her ANGER. she has the slush funds, she is lying etc. but the best one is this “John Howard sent our troops there, intends to keep them there, and won’t apologise for making Australia a bigger terrorist target as a result.Labor opposed the commitment of Australian troops from the beginning.We regard it as one of the biggest blunders in Australian foreign policy since the Vietnam War.And we will bring the troops home.” she just could not follow through with her policies. so now with the passing away of her dad , she will have some time to reflect, and the message we sent will hit hard and she may have a rethink or the ALP will do that for her. I really am sorry to have upset any one, and for that i sincerely appologise.

      • No need to apologise Tongaat, I’m sure many in Australia will be feeling the same .

        Sympathy to anyone who loose a family member.

        But when that someone has been spiting in your face for a couple of years, the sympathy lies pretty shallow.

      • In response to Blackswan’s 3.39 pm comment. Exactly, Blackswan! My thoughts on this day have been that we all lose our parents, but not all of us suffer the torment of unnecessary accidental death and suicide!

      • I could be seen as wrong in saying this but to me I’m not and I have No sympathy for the corrupt in our society. I can see the death of her father been used by the media and polticians as a sympathy card. I know this as this is what the corrupt do – go looking for the sympathy vote. Call me hard but I aint corrupt!

      • Good point Curious, glad you brought it up .

        Many minds will be clouded, as most respectful are. But the truth doesn’t alter the facts, and all must remember this lot will stop at nothing to achieve their aim.

        Even using the death of a parent , as in this case.

        No surprise with this lot.

      • Thanks for your reply tongaat – nothing you said could cause offense to anyone, so no apology is necessary.

        “We reap what we sow” sums it up, and there are many of us sufficiently outraged by the lies and duplicity of this Prime Minister to pick up our scythes and deliver her hard-won harvest to Ms Gillard at the next election.

        If your concern lies in the possibilty that our anger will reflect negatively upon ourselves – perhaps it will. But demanding accountabilty for criminal behaviour is to seek justice, and that can only be positive for our nation.

  58. My thoughts about Gillard’s rise to power.

    Gillard is now our Prime Minister (Prime Monster). She got there with the full support of certain factions in the ALP. We know that the union movement itself is full of deals, deal makers, ambitious, power hungry people and incestuous relationships. Gillard had to have been pushed forward and aided and abetted in her political career. It doesn’t just “happen” in Union/Labor World. And so, when one reads about Gillard’s past, many well-known names come up. Bill Shorten, Steven Conroy, Nicola Roxon, Bill Ludwig, to name a few. It seems to me that many many people knew all about this scandal and many actually involved one way or another.

    And yet in spite of this, she was still thrust forward and helped into high office. (Picture the AWU that holds enormous power and voting rights and remember Paul Howes basically announcing to the Australian people that we had a new PM. As is the common expression today WTF?) The AWU was ripping off or were ripped off of so much money, their honesty, credibility and reputation was trashed – and so cover ups were ordered. All because of a certain solicitor in S and G, and yet she was still installed into the highest office of the land. It really beggars belief that Labor actually engineered this. Having a compromised Prime Minister can lead to a Government which can be seriously open to pressure be it implied or real. Favours are owed, debts need to be repaid.

    The facts must speak for themselves. They tell me that at the very least Gillard was not suitable to be given the job as the highest politician in the land, (and she has certainly shown that she is not even up to the job). She is completely out of her depth and one can only wonder at what happened within party circles, for her past to be so blatantly ignored. Surely many people knew of the skeletons in Gillard’s closet and didn’t speak out. What on earth were they thinking?

    One day all will be be revealed and the AWU will have to be held accountable as it is them who are basically “running the (Labor) show”

    Too much power – leads to corruption. Too much arrogance will lead to eventual exposure I hope.

    • But at the very heart of all these scandals lies a solution.the Backbench guys. They are sh&t scared to even squeak or their pension and massive handouts will be gone.Thus is the power of our government. We have spent a lot of our energies on the PM. we need to start applying the BLOW torch onto the rest of the mob. How can they be so quiet.. A few have mentioned that they will retire but not now. If there are just two labour MPs who really cares about the reason they entered politics, could resign in disgust today, we will have a quick solution to this debaclle because the PM will be forced to announce the elections.then on the other hand if this does not happen we must hold the entire ALP/Greens and Independs and UNIONS to account.

    • The reason why she is put their? The answer is right in our face, whether that be here on this site or elsewhere on the net and even in our daily lives. People need to look at how things were once and how things are now and work out the difference?

  59. Reply to Hill Billy- should also add- is there not one union official in Australia prepared to stand up right now and attempt to recoup the millions of dollars allegedly embezzled from the membership of the union, given in good faith to the union so as their rights at work can be protected. Just because your union fatcats and mandarins refuse to “prefer charges” against these embezzlers, doesn’t mean the money was not illegally (against the articles of the union) taken, when it could have been put to the use it was originally intended, Buying beach houses, investment properties and whoremongering is
    NOT a proper use of union funds?
    And here’s a warning to the honest union leaders out there (if there are any left), stand up now or you’ll be caught up in the inevitable conflagration which will result from an Abbott government instigated Royal Commission into the union movement (with broad terms of reference). As old Joh used to say- “If you fly with the crows, expect to get shot with the crows”. Mark my words, time is running out for the honest brokers in the unions, act now and avoid the rush later- you will be held in high esteem by the general public if you do – or you can scurry under the dung-heap with the rest of the cockroaches and be exterminated with the rest of the pests- its your choice.

    • Well Spoken , but I bet they choose to scurry under the dung -heap for fear of losing their jobs and income.
      Seems the rot is pretty deep , and Australia needs a huge clean up .

      Just wonder if the Australian people will support whoever it is that decides to do the clean up .
      From past experience, my guess is it will be left to a few.
      Pretty sad for a country that had such a brilliant history of fighting for it’s values.

      80,000 at a football match , 1000 at a carbon tax rally…..where do you think the priorities lie?

      • Barraabus, the average Aussie has their focus on paying their rent/mortgage, keeping their jobs, getting their kids to school and putting food on the table…. and of course which footy team will win the premiership.

        Most get their news from the TV networks and the MSM have become so adept at keeping such corruption under wraps that they can only be regarded as the Propaganda Arm of Government.

        Nobody grieves more for the loss of our national integrity than we whose fathers and grandfathers fought for our values, but the 5th Estate – the Internet – is the only place our voices will be heard, thanks to the testicular fortitude of the few blog hosts with the courage to raise their heads out of the trenches.

        The Internet is our new front-line.

      • Thanks Blackswan , point taken .and totally agree.

        I’m just saying , as others far more prominent than me , are too, it will be up to the Australian people to move this mob .

        Hopefully by an election.

        Just concerned as to the way we are heading , and the prospect of even “getting” an election.

        And like all other average aussie’s , I’m just a worker making his way through life.


  60. Maybe a touch off topic,but because we have a PM whose position is secure because of the block vote of the AWU, and with an ex-union heavy as Industrial Affair Minister (Shorten), we have a nonsensical situation here in Brisbane with the CFMEU picketing the Children’s Hospital site, effectively closing it for 5 weeks, costing the contractor “who knows what/”, each week in on-site costs ( the cranes alone would cost close to $200Gs for five weeks)- not counting the 5 weeks lost wages for the 600 workers not allowed on site by the picket. There is a Federal Magistrates Court order preventing the CFMEU form coming within 100ms of the site, but then, if your PM and Industrial Affairs Minister have form in flouting the law, monkey see , monkey do.
    And so much for the bleating of the public service unions whinging about the budget cuts in the Health sector by Newman and the Borg- who’s going to pay for the cost blow-out resulting from the delays in the opening of the new Children’s Hospital. I only hope the extra costs result in the loss of futher jobs in the Qld Public Service.
    And where the horse-mounted Police picket busters here in Qld. Come-on Can-do, buck up mate- you have the mandate.

  61. A further distillation of events. I’m as sure as I can be it’s legally OK but please give it close scrutiny.

    In his response to the Jon Faine/Julia Gillard interview, Harry Nowicki made this interesting and profound observation: “As Hugh Trevor Roper stated, History is not merely what happened; it is what happened in the context of what might have happened”.

    1. Although frauds have been rife throughout the union movement for many years(and other institutions and sections of society), the genesis of the Gillard/Wilson/AWU/Fraud affair was the moment Julia Gillard DELIBERATELY CHOSE to agree to her boyfriend Bruce Wilson’s request to advise and assist him to set up a sham association, have it incorporated and enable him to open Bank Accounts.

    2. Gillard should have told Wilson that she was already in a grave conflict of interest situation but even if not, without the proper authority and/or resolution from either the Branch or National Executive of the AWU, her principal client, it would be legally, ethically and morally WRONG and she could not assist.

    3. All the ensuing abuses, frauds, coverups, bribes, dubious appointments to high office and concealment of a serious indictable offence etc., etc., stemmed from that pivotal moment of choice for Gillard, which has so altered the course of history for Australia and that of many lives!

    4. Every person who knew of Gillard’s decision and subsequent actions and didn’t report it from that day forward, may have cause to show why they should
    not be charged under Section 316 of the Crimes Act 1900.

    5. Every partner at Slater & Gordon involved in the investigation of Gillard and subsequently allowing her to resign instead of be dismissed and others who have since attempted to cover up that decision by making false claims, may have to show similar cause.

    6. Those S & G partners may also need to show cause as to why they should not at least face further disciplinary charges for their failure to bring the actions of Gillard to the attention of The Law Society of Victoria.

    7. Those who subsequently had carriage of the AWU file at law firm Maurice Blackburn, to where Bernard Murphy, Gillard’s mentor and former boss of the industrial section at S & G had gone, may need to show similar cause under Section 316.

    8. From the time the Affidavit of Ian Cambridge became public, many persons involved may need to show cause as to why they should not face charges under several Laws.

    9. Every member of the ACTU and other union officers involved who prevented the call of Ian Cambridge for a Royal Commission or Judicial Inquiry into his own union, from going ahead may need to show cause as to why they should not face charges under various laws.

    10. From 1995-1996 at least, everyone in the Labor Party with any influence on its future direction may need to show cause why they should not face various charges. There are mitigating circumstances for some who actually predicted what could and has happened and tried everything in their power to keep Julia Gillard out of politics.

    If our children and all who come after us are to have any chance of a decent future governed by decent honourable people of honour and integrity working for the common good, then we must see Australia returned to a place where people accept full responsibility for their own actions. All else will flow from there!

    Cambridge Speech to QLD Delegates


  62. It looks as though Phil Coorey of the SMH is trying to make amends for ‘stupidly’ dumping Gillard in it by revealing she did the conveyancing on Wilson’s rented house – you know the one – the one where she had LOTS of sleepovers but didn’t live in.


    “The allegations about Gillard’s conduct as a lawyer, which were never substantiated, were fuelled by those eager to further her reputation today as being untrustworthy.

    The story’s of Abbott’s past at university will be propagated by those keen to underscore the theory he still has a problem with women.”

    Really? Phil is having two bob each way.

    The story of Abbott’s alleged extreme abuse of walls had no ‘legs’ because nobody believed it or particularly cared, so Phil, under duress to make a Lazarus out of that dead pony, succumbed to this…….

    ” … at noon today, the manager of government business, Anthony Albanese, demanded Abbott answer questions about the incident…”

    What is it with this Albanese character? I know that ‘access’ is a journalist’s stock in trade, but that just makes journalists publishers of media releases, useful ‘tools’ in the propaganda machine.

    • I did Google some time back, Rudd, Strauss Khan, what ever, Craig, etc,
      not a good look, and these people are hiding behind Gillard, waiting to move up, as a pack operates. I am happy, that I know for sure, that the next election, will sort the chaff from the straw

  63. “The allegations about Gillard’s conduct as a lawyer, which were never substantiated, were fuelled by those eager to further her reputation today as being untrustworthy”
    Well Coorey, you’re wrong, yet again. The release of excerpts of Gillard’s exit interview with Slats and Gordy is evidence that she professionally “stuffed-up” big-time with cler conflicts of interest with dealing with two conflicting client at once and keeping such information secret form her partners and the other client/s. The only reason that no criminal investigation was allowed to proceed is because it was not pursued by the AWU on instructions from those “higher-up” the food chain, because, as we know, if the matters were subject to judicial inquiry, “they were all history”.
    If the ,atters were insignificant, why were the union leadership so shit-scared of an inquiry, as demanded by Ian Cambridge?
    And Coorey is trying to suggest “punching a wall” in frustration is somehow worse than being part of a $1 mill. conspiracy to defraud.
    Pull the other one Phil.

  64. Hi BW 2BW. I’ve just been working on this again today and my B.S meter has gone through the roof1 Something stinks to high heaven here!!. First watch this utter crap hosted by Tim Lester of three of SMH”s best journalists, Coorey, Michelle Grattan and some bird-brain called Jaqueline Maley who was so over the moon with her beloved Juiia , she “couldn’t think of another question she’d want to ask”,. They were analysing Gillard’s ambush Press Conference!!. Hope you’ve got strong stomachs!


    Fairfax SMH Editorial.Date August 23, 2012 The PM, her ex-lover, the cartoonist, the union and the media (social and otherwise)

    Hope the way I’ve split the comments doesn’t bug peole too much!

    All matters below are for the most part the exact words of either the Fairfax Editor or Philip Coorey, Fairfax chief political correspondent out of the SMH 23/8/12!.

    Misjudgments of character;
    FAILURE to pay attention at a critical moment;
    understandable that Julia Gillard has been reluctant to open up about a crisis in her FIRST JOB as a YOUNG lawyer;
    especially when A LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP was entangled.
    The reluctance is even more forgiveable when the old issue is dragged out:
    by a vitriolic blogger unabashed about employing personal invective and obscene cartoons;
    then picked up by a news organisation that makes no bones about having the objective of bringing her government down.
    Nonetheless, she must recognise that as Prime Minister and leader of a major political party her entire life is regarded by the public as open to scrutiny;
    at least in respect of how her actions and statements REFLECT ON HER SUITABILITY FOR HIGH OFFICE.
    Her Labor colleagues have not hesitated to bring up the indecent assault charge brought against Tony Abbott decades ago in his student days even though it was dismissed by the court.
    What is sauce for the gander is sauce for the goose.
    In her case, the controversy was kicked into life again by SOMEONE ON HER OWN SIDE, the MP Robert McClelland;
    just after Gillard dumped him as attorney-general;
    as well as by those she would regard as the political opposition. (factions in the Labor Party and the Unions)?
    However, the narrative of events shows two errors of judgment on the YOUNG Gillard’s part
    She DID NOT OPEN A FILE AT THE FIRM on her work for her then lover Bruce Wilson and his colleague Ralph Blewitt;
    who were state branch secretaries of the Australian Workers Union.
    While she might have thought this a personal, unpaid service;
    The second and MORE SERIOUS ERROR was not to see;
    that the work she did setting up an entity called the Australian Workers Union Workplace Reform Association;
    was IN CONFLICT WITH Slater & Gordon’s REPRESENTATION of the AWU itself,
    It was used by Wilson and Blewitt to channeL FUNDS EXTRACTED from construction companies OSTENSIBLY TO FURTHER INDUSTRIAL SAFETY;
    Some of the FUNDS WERE USED TO BUY A HOUSE in Blewitt’s name;
    in which WILSON LIVED,
    for which she ASSUMED she was paying in full.
    According to a former Slater & Gordon partner who interviewed Gillard about the affair in 1995:
    Gillard admitted the ERROR OF NOT OPENING A FILE due to a *memory lapse(?)
    and said she believed the purpose of the association she helped set up was to “hold re-election funds for union officials”.
    She has later admitted she was “young and naive” and over-trusting of Wilson.
    She CLAIMS that her later resignation from Slater & Gordon was NOT FORCED BY THE CASE.
    Coming at the same time that a KPMG audit of FAIR WORK AUSTRALIA’S INVESTIGATION into the HSU found INADEQUACIES in the process;

    Phillip Coorey SMH.August 23, 2012: Union official in PM row fled Indonesia

    As a partner at Slater & Gordon in the early 1990s,
    Ms Gillard did legal work for the Australian Workers Union branch run by her then boyfriend, Bruce Wilson.
    He and Mr Blewitt were accused by the union of siphoning off hundreds of thousands of dollars DESTINED FOR THE UNION
    and placing it into ACCOUNTS SET UP BY Ms GILLARD.
    It was a further alleged some of this MONEY was USED TO BUY THE FITZROY HOUSE.
    The Fitzroy house was bought in Mr Blewitt’s name, even though he DID NOT HAVE THE ASSETS TO FINANCE THE PURCHASE.
    and it was Mr WILSON WHO LIVED IN IT..
    Ms Gillard has always denied any knowledge of, or role in, illegal behaviour and none has been shown
    Her former partners say an internal inquiry uncovered no legal wrongdoing.

    IGNORING the affidavit of Ian Cambridge that had been on public record for years;
    IGNORING the Statutory Declaration of Bob Kernohan on record for years;
    IGNORING information made available by former S & G partner Nick Styant-Browne;
    IGNORING the intensive extensive investigations by journalists at The Australian
    IGNORING the released transcript of the partners of S & G when they put allegations revealed by their investigations to Gillard in a formal interview;
    IGNORING all the information raised by investigative persons on the internet;
    IGNORING what had been written by SMH chief political correspondent and
    IGNORING what he himself had written in the Editorial

    the Fairfax SMH Editor concludes:

    The facts that have emerged do not suggest Gillard committed any breach of law
    or that she knowingly derived any personal benefit from improper or deceitful activities
    as the principals of the law firm where she worked, Slater & Gordon, attested at the time
    when the case was aired under privilege in the Victorian Parliament.
    The new airing has not brought out anything to change that opinion.

    Who writes this absolute SHITE!! And they wonder why people come to Kangaroo Court instead of buying their useless rag!! ‘ll have more later!

    • It’s no wonder they are going broke. Between their protection of Gillard and hate towards Abbott they must have turned away so many readers. Not to mention the “terrible” Gina Reinhart! Go Get “em Gina. It is a disgrace that this government, backed by Fauxfacts and Their ABC can get away with anything. Albanese is having a go at Abbott for misleading Parliament, yet Craig Thomson stood there for an hour and basically lied! Now I would like Abbott to ask Gillard to repeat her claims of “doing nothing wrong” in Parliament. Abbott has tried to leave the subject to the media but as they all seem to be in her pocket, it might now be the time for Abbott to bring up the subject in Question Time, where she will have to be very carefull with her responses.

    • hi, i just watched the video and i must admit that the four people in the video must be the ELITE group of journalist Australia has>( they have no idea what they were babbling on about. perhaps they were talking about a barbie doll or about some snake in the tasmania wilderness, or perhaps the were playing political “pig in a poke” .

      My only suggestion would be that julia needs to extend her education reform to the journalists asap.

      on another note i believe that the case against julia is only half way through and that more information is coming to light. this was mentioned at a meeting with michael smith last week. the lawyer (the one who is writing the book on the mischief caused by the ALP gang mentioned this to a cowd about 200 people in melbourne) this meeting was arranged by the ATA)

      • Yes tongaat. Coorey said there “3 or 4″questions she had to answer and “she did that”. That Maley person is unbelievable. Gillard “did so absolutely brilliantly and I for one came away, well I couldn’t think of another question I’d want to ask her” !! Between other posts, I’m working on questions Fairfax should have asked based ENTIRELY on what they’d published that morning – up to 40 so far and plenty more to go!!

    • They write it Hillbilly, and they get away with it because the average Joe says “So what? – It was so long ago.”

      Joe’s eyes glaze over in utter boredom and besides, he has the attention span of a gnat. Anyway, if it wasn’t on ‘Today Tonight’ or ACA then it couldn’t possibly have happened.

      Labor and the PM’s 1600 ‘advisers’ know this – the journos and their publishers do too – and they all understand how the game is played.

      The rest of us are left to scratch our heads.

      Sorry, my stomach wasn’t strong enough to watch your link, so I really appreciate your work in the rest of your comment.

  65. HI I was at the meeting with Michael Smith in Brisbane last week. Was very interesting indeed. He thinks everyone should be complaining to Leighton Holdings (who own Thiess), as they are a Public Company and as such as responsible to their shareholders.They should have been aggressively suing Wilson and his mates, instead they said they didn’t want to pursue the case. One can assume it is because they didn’t want any more trouble with the union at that stage, but it might also have something to do with Wilson’s brother in law who was the boss at Thiess in WA at the time.

    The second thing is that he mentioned the Power of Attourney which was used to buy the Kerr Street house. This, of course, gave Wilson Power of attorney over Ralph Blewitt’s affairs and was used to buy the house, finance it, and settle on it. Wilson then lived there (with his floosy, who dropped in from time to time), and of course Ralph now claims he knew nothing about it.

    Michael dropped a large hint about this document. He was talking about not being able to be in “two places at the same time” when the Power of Attourney was signed and witnessed. This could be very important. Ralph would have had to “give” wilson his Power, and that document would have to have been drafted by a (young and naive?) lawyer. So that could be very interesting!

    I was telling my son the story tonight (he has been overseas) and he said “How much evidence do they need?” He is right…at what stage will the evidence be accepted as having serious weight as opposed to Gillard just saying she did nothing wrong?

    • Winnedge – there are a great many loose ends flapping in the breeze aren’t there?

      I’ve always wondered how ‘thick’ Blewitt would have to be to give his full Power of Attorney to known-to-be-dodgy Wilson. It’s ridiculous. A bloke “with some money to invest”, gives a prospective tenant his full PoA to go with his ‘girlfriend’ to choose and buy a house, raising a substantial mortgage on it, receive no rental income, applies to council for rennovation permits, then the property is sold and he receives none of the proceeds. It’s beyond ridiculous and highly improbable.

      And Slater & Gordon’s involvement is bizarre. They extend a mortgage of $150,000 on a property without any information on Blewitt’s financial status or income, based entirely on a signature on a piece of paper purporting to be Blewitt’s PoA, and all on the say-so of one of their salaried Partners who personally handles the conveyancing on the purchase.

      Just imagine … a highly ambitious industrial lawyer whose major client is the biggest union in the country has become a salaried partner in a major law firm. Someone in the firm suggests that Partner do all the conveyancing on a small, privately-owned residential property. Such a lawyer would have booted them out of the door so fast their feet wouldn’t have touched the ground.

      Of course, that is IF the said lawyer isn’t part of a convoluted conspiracy to defraud. In that case, legal work and advice would have been kept secret, files are never kept, and those that do exist are kept from the firm AND the union client.

      Where is that Power of Attorney? Who drafted it, signed it, witnessed it and registered it? What was its duration? When the house was sold several years later, was that PoA used to divert proceeds of the sale from Blewitt the registered owner? If the AWU did, in fact, apply for a caveat on that title how was such a registered interest in the property ignored? Who did the conveyancing on the sale?

      All of it beggars belief and the ‘useful idiots’ of the MSM are culpable in their negligence.

  66. Urgently need your help re Shane’s prima facie quest. Though I believe Gillard knew from day 1 what Wilson was about and certainly from when she did the conveyancing for 85 Kerr St. and the receipt of the AWU WRA Inc., cheque into the S & G Trust A/c , but she may be able to weasel her way out with so many culpable people protecting her.

    However, in his 31/1/96 speech to AWU Delegates in QLD, Ian Cambridge gives a wonderful timeline for when she could not help but be subject to Section 316 as Wilson would have gone scutlng to her for advice.

    17/2/95 when the Victorian Branch Structure changed. Also prior to that Cambridge had sought unsuccessfully to get financial matters in place ready for the transition.

    30/6/95 Change over and all AWU A/c’s frozen because it was believed Wilson had been taking money from A/c’s he was no longer entitled to operate.

    2/8/95 Finance Commitee met and investigations started

    4/8/95 when Bob Smith said he was going to charge Wilson under Union Rules
    Several times through August until 17th-18th when Wilson (along with five others) was given a “redundancy” which Cambridge had to go to court to get ipaid back to the AWU.

    When Cambridge made his 31/1/96 speech in QLD he was still UNAWARE of the Gillard enabled AWU WRA A/c’s in W.A !!

    Gillard was clearly in breach of Section 316 of the Crimes Act 1900 at all timessince.

    I’m sure it would help Shane immensely if we can set out those timelines when Gillard could and should have informed authorities.

    I’ll be away most of today and won’t get a chance so what about it fellas and ladies?

    Ian Cambridge Speech to QLD Delegates

  67. Cant help but think that Gillard was half right in her “young and naive” statement.
    I believe it was her “greeness” and naivete’ which was targeted by Wilson and Blewett because in Gillard, they had found a “willing idiot” to legitimize their scam. They needed the status of a lawyer to give their scam (and the transfer of the Kalgoorlie death funds) the legitimacy it needed to get past the WA regulatory authorities. All it then needed was a pair of “love goggles” on the part of the then married Wilson to “seal the deal” with a naive, but legitimate legal officer. And,poor Julia, by the time she discovered what was happening, she was into it up to her snout. Too late to get out, but luckily, the AWU wanted to bury the scandal too. And, (just a theory of mine) I wouldn’t mind betting that Gillard, being the cunning little fox she is, milked her knowledge of the AWU cover-up for all its worth, right the way up to the PM-ship. Why else would a right-wing union like the AWU want to support a left-wing Fabian socialist like Gillard? Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer.

    • I agree, I’ve long thought that the young and naive bit referred to her being totally besotted with this Wilson character. There’s not much more I can add to your comment, I think you have nailed it.

      • I am not sure. Michael Smith, at his speech the other night, said that the four year relationship they had was quite serious and that they both thought there was a future in it. He talks to Bruce Wilson regularly and this is from Wilson himself. The point he makes is that after 4 years together Gillard would have had to have known what he was like. He had a bit of a reputation when they first met and was known as a bit of a union heavy. The other thing is that Wilson threw money around like it was no ones business. There were thousands of dollars going through his hands every week, they were living it up in high style. Where did she think all the money came from? He also had a wife and kids at this time and should have been paying a lot in family payments and not had so much left over.

        In answer to HillBilly I think it was the following May that the real AWU accidentally found out about the accounts in Perth and the house in Fitzroy. Something like 6 months after Gillard left Slapper and Gordon. This is one of the most telling things to me – why on earth didn’t she tell anyone at the time – after all she said when she found out about her boyfriend she immediately broke off their relationship. Surely she should have been trying to redeem herself.

        I think this is right HB…..the timeline is tricky, but is the key.

    • Sorry 2 BW. I never bought the young and naive bit. As her departed Dad used to say – What Julia wants Julia gets! Thank goodness he won’t have to be put through the trauma of what’s coming.

      Stephen Mayne deals with this quite well in a piece in his Aug 2011 Bumper Edition.
      titled “There are some genuine issues in the Bruce Wilson saga”.


      “The other obvious conflict of interest would have come from Gillard’s repeated attempts to win preselection and Wilson’s control over ALP votes and his presence, alongside Gillard, on the ALP’s powerful Victorian administrative committee.

      If Wilson did support Gillard’s 1995 senate preselection, he would have been open to charges of trying to sponsor his girlfriend into parliament.”.


      Thank you all for your input ,Winnedge and Jordan

      • Hi Hillbilly – it looks like we were thinking along the same lines re Gillard’s known propensity for getting her own way.

        Sorry, your link went nowhere for me. The excerpt looks interesting though.

    • Two Bob, I don’t buy the ‘young & naive’ willing idiot image. She knowingly took up with a renowned union ‘bad boy’ who had a wife and family and, while undoubtedly besotted with him, went to a great deal of trouble to accommodate him and his schemes.

      She turned up in WA and persuasively addressed a hostile group of miners to transfer their accident/death funds to a private PO Box with only Wilson/Blewitt as signatories to the account. As Wilson’s legal adviser she would have HAD to have discussed the ultimate destination of those funds or the miners would never have agreed if she hadn’t come up with a reasoned argument.

      When did she discover those two holiday homes at Kalbarri had been bought with those funds?
      How often were those properties used by Gillard and Wilson?
      When the AWU got wind of them they were sold and the money disappeared.
      How did THAT happen?
      Whose names were those properties in?
      Who sold them?
      Who did the legals and conveyancing on THAT?
      Did Gillard ever have a Practising Certificate to operate as a lawyer in WA?
      Was there another Wilson-friendly WA law firm that facilitated that sale?
      Did Slater & Gordon have a WA branch at the time?
      Why did the AWU or the gold miners NEVER pursue the proceeds of those sales?
      Did the Power of Attorney Blewitt gave to Wilson ever acted upon in WA?
      Her partners at S&G Victoria must have wondered what she was doing on union business in WA so it must have been billed against the AWU account.

      And that’s before we even get to Melbourne.

      Until some answers are forthcoming on any of these questions, I’ll NEVER give her the benefit of any doubt as to her motives. Didn’t one of her own family members say “What Julia wants, Julia gets”?

      I’ll take their word for it. They know her better than anybody.

  68. THi Shane. Think I’ve found your smoking gun! Got it straight from the horse’s mouth so to speak at Gillard’s Comedy Half-Hour Ambush P/C.

    JOURNALIST: Can you be specific about exactly when and how you were informed that it might have been put to questionable use?
    PM: These matters started to come to attention in 1995 when they became the subject of controversy within the AWU itself. That is the first time that they came to my attention.

    And this:

    J’LIST. At any point were you aware that this workplace reform association was to receive lumps of money from companies like THEISS and John Holland?
    PM: I was not aware……knew absolutely nothing about its workings until allegations about its workings until it became the subject of discussion within the AWU …then more broadly.

    When looking for that info I gleaned another very interesting fact. From the early 1990’s there was an authentic file open at S & G for Blewitt and Wilson. with Murphy and Gillard acting for them.

    This makes the Cambridge dates very relevant because immediately the AWU smelt fraud about Wilson’s dealings, Murphy would be the first contacted and he’d immediately alert Gillard..This means no later than 17th February1995 and probably earlier!

    I’ve done a post on the authentic file and its significance earlier this evening at Michael Smith News.com on a thread about Julia doing freebies. Of course it places Gillard in very deep doo-doo in relation to her secret file!!

    Hedley Thomas at the Australian says April 1996 was when the AWU heirarchy and Cambridge found the Gillard enabled AWU WRA Inc A/c’s. Hope she likes jail food!

    I’ve got more back-up if needed Shane, but this should give you plenty.’

    • Great work Hillbilly – Gillard’s and S&G’s time-line on the fraud revelations certainly dumps them ALL in it, including Murphy, if Cambridge didn’t know until the following year.

  69. Having observed Gillard carefully, I feel, that she was never young and naive, I also think that she may have been besotted with Wilson, but not after four years anymore, it was more serious by then, however, Gillard is a Liar by nature and she is a competent liar, you only have to listen to her ranting in parliament, she does not flinch as the lies glide out of her mouth.
    I do think, there was a file, that is in the transcript of the interview with peter gordon, the first question he asked was, What do you know of the file, now on the table, but S & G did not know. she had kept that secret.

    I do agree that the time is of the utmost importance.

    It is most important to know when she broke up with Wilson, which I believe was 17/08/95.

    • H nty. Pop across to Michael Smith News and look for my 5-46 post on the “AWU Scandal- Do you believe it’s a coincidence Miss Gillard set up the AWU WRA for free- with no bill. It wil explain the significance of the firm’s file and the one they found she had kept secret. I don’t want to load Shane’s page with too much ‘hillbilly’!

      I too think she has a severe psychotic or sociopathic condition and needs urgent treatment. She is obviously self-deluded to an alarming extent!

      • From Greg Sehridan’s account of the “Abbott wall-punching” incident in todays OZ came the comment
        “The stench of marijuana lay heavy in the air, and every communist and Trotskyist sub-group had assembled, it seemed, its entire national membership…”
        Now, given that Gillard was once an ASU president representing the socialist left factions,maybe too much bong is a reason for her erratic and sometime psychotic-like and self-delusional behaviour.

      • The pressure on the PM at this time must be immense:
        Loss of her Dad.
        Compromised by the information above.
        Obligated to those who are/will protect her from the above.
        Fearful of those wishing to expose her.
        ‘guilt’ to some extent having to face soldier’s family’s losses cow wars based on lies.
        Obligations to repay past favors.
        Nothing will happen out of all this, the picture is to big and she is a sock puppet with no control. Poor Julia, poor Australia they have her by the ‘what-evers’ and therefore, US as well.

  70. As we have watched this Government in the last few years, I am sure that all of us here are completely dismayed at what has taken place. When Gillard bought in the Carbon Tax, and would not let any objections be heard and then celebrated in the face of massive public outcry, we were so angry at her brazen arrogance. When the “Thomson Affair” started to unravel and we had to watch with horror at the complete farce perpetrated on Australians with the 3 year “investigation” etc etc…You all know what I mean. My point is that unfortunately it looks like they will all “get away with it”, that they have managed to stay in power for this long through a “whatever it takes” philosophy.

    I have no doubt that history will show that Gillard was unfit to be PM, that Thomson was unfit to be an MP and that Peter Slipper was unfit to be the Speaker.

    Unfortunately, it probably won’t happen in the next few months and the election will take its course despite all that we know about corruption, lies, spin, theft and complete lack of integrity. I think that is the worst part of this. The frustrating fact that they behave like this and not be called to account whilst still in Government. Basically they are just stalling and rubbing it in our faces that they are still in power. They have no shame and ultimately I expect it will be shown that they HAVE lied and manipulated to stay in power, but, unfortunately, not proven in the time frame that would have seen them humiliated, shamed and with a legacy of losing power because of corruption.

    If only the wheels of justice could have moved quicker…….

  71. Hi Shane. I’ve just cracked this case wide open. It’s as I’ve said on two previous posts.

    When Julia Eileen Gillard chose to accede to Bruce Wilson’s request she knew that what she was doing broke every rule in the AWU book and was illegal in the eyes of the law. She still chose to do so and kept what she called the AWU Association file secret!

    In the Ian Cambridge affidavit dated 19th September 1996 on page 19 he says in relation to the purchase of the house by Bruce Wilson in Melbourne.
    “I am unable to understand how Slater & Gordon, who were then acting for the Victorian branch of the union, could have permitted the use of funds which were obviously taken from the union, in the purchase of private property of this nature, without seeking and obtaining proper authority from the union for such use of its funds.

    The 1/85 Kerr St., property purchase went through the genuine firm file of Ralph Blewitt referred to by Peter Gordon and was recorded on Blewitt’s page in the S & G Trust Ledger. Nick Styant-Browne (NSB) appears to be recorded as the responsible partner and Client Manager. The Solicitor for Ralph Blewitt in WA had initials of NOS, 138 Warwick Road Duncraig W.A 6023.

    How Murphy and/or Gillard as solicitors acting for Blewitt and Wilson worked it is unknown at this stage.

    Slater and Gordon’s partners have many questions to answer which explains many of the things they’ve said over the last few weeks. However, it appears many charges can now be levelled at the PM Gillard!

    On Aug 20, 2012 Nick Styant-Browne said:
    ‘When I made public certain of the matters surrounding Julia Gillard’s departure from Slater & Gordon,I was meticulous to ensure a balanced account of the facts was given. I did not ever contemplate that the world’s only publicly listed law firm, Slater & Gordon would spin the facts of her departure to the market in the way that it did yesterday so as to protect the Prime Minister’s position’

    If the cabal of Labor/ Unions/ lawyers/ politicians/ compliant companies and others house of cards doesn’t tumble now, Australia is lost!!

    Good Hunting!

    • Hillbilly – Australia IS lost, and we have been ever since Organised Crime seized control of our Government and Judiciary.

      Elsewhere on these pages I have said I don’t believe that any prosecution against any of these criminals in high public office will EVER take place – the System will simply not allow it.

      Keeping the example of Richard Nixon in mind, he never faced criminal prosecution simply because it could not be seen that the Office of President could be corrupted and an individual proven to be a criminal had ever held the reins of government.

      It is one thing to jail a judge for lying to avoid a traffic infringement, or a state Premier for rorting his allowances, but it is another thing entirely for the intricate web of theft and corruption to be exposed which will implicate every bearer of high office in our nation and leave them open to be prosecuted.

      It just won’t happen.

      Consider past Members of Parliament or Premiers who have been implicated in the worst kinds of corruption, being allowed to simply ‘retire’ from office and end up being the go-to guy for political commentary. There are past office-bearers who wrote the manual on union/party corruption and today enjoy their perks of office and will for the rest of their lives.

      Their appointments to the Judiciary and as Prosecutors have established an infrastructure that renders the miscreants accountable to nobody. It has been that way for decades and will continue to be so.

      Unless, and until, the Australian People wake from our slumbers and demand a change for the better, the status quo will remain.

      It can start with a Royal Commission into the Union Movement and legislation to make their accounts open and transparent to their membership with rules of governance that will end the nepotism and theft of workers’ hard-earned money.

      If the Opposition, when elected to government, fail to make that Royal Commission a priority, then I will deem them to be equally culpable and complicit in the cover-up.

      We simply have to DEMAND it. As a people, we have been too complacent, too apathetic, too willing to abrogate our responsibilities as citizens to others with an eye for the main-chance. This cycle of corruption must end and WE have to demand it.

      Will that mean changes to the Constitution? A good starting point would be changes to our Electoral System wherein a voter has to have photo-ID to register to vote and similar ID to cast a vote. Citizens-initiated Referenda and powers of Recall of incompetent governments must be considered.

      There are many issues that must be addressed before we ever see an end to the corruption and lack of accountability that is endemic in Australia today.

      • …….then I will deem them to be equally culpable and complicit in the cover-up……

        Me too Blackswan, I agree 100 % , and with this too
        ………good starting point would be changes to our Electoral System wherein a voter has to have photo-ID to register to vote and similar ID to cast a vote. Citizens-initiated Referenda and powers of Recall of incompetent governments must be considered.

        I’m SO SO tired of

        the crap,
        the corruption,
        the waste,
        the lies,
        the spin,
        the cover-ups,
        the back-flips,
        the slimey double deals,
        the stupid airy-fairy let’s-all-save-Gaia-schemes that cause more environmental damage than they prevent,
        the blatant disregard for the Australian people’s mandate and wishes,
        the MSM feeding us rubbish that would make Geobbels proud
        the protection of out-right slime-ball crooks like Gillard, Thomson and Slipper
        the ‘black is white and white is black’ crap – I’M NOT STUPID

        I’d go on but it’s all just too depressing. I honestly feel this government has dragged us down to banana republic status, right there with the other tin-pot dictatorships we used to smuggly snigger at and shake our heads.

        We are just as bad.

        I only hope we get an election soon and that the Libs can turn this mess around and give us DECENCY, HONOUR, INTEGRITY and COMMON SENSE in our government.

      • Black swan, hit the corruption in the right place and the corruption will fall like dominoes. Some are already falling but NOT the keystone! Shanes right and instead of targeting everything he’s going hard at the judicial system (the keystone).

  72. I understand completely what you’re all saying but don’t be despondent.. Read the posts here and at Michael Smith News. The large majority are not even political but simply decent Australian people like yourselves expressing the same views and yearning for a return to some moral compass, honour and integrity. Have you ever known such a huge groundswell of citizens realising they at last have a voice and, to go back to football days, a few people with the guts and determination to help ensure they keep it and are able to work for positive change.

    When we finish this first phase and see the end of Gillard we can start on other politicians, the Unions, lawyes, law firms and the political, current affairs, and other commentary departments of the ABC and get some fairness and balance back into communication and debate. There are plenty to target and they have delivered some wonderful ammunition of ridiculous statements and blatant politically biased opinions.recorded for posterity. i’ve got work done on some of them already so as a people employing and paying them their inflated salaries we either demand they resign or be shamed out of it!

    Some pollies, culpable union hacks, whatever will crack under pressure and desert the sinking ship because when push comes to shove, self-preservation takes over. There are signs already and also some in all walks of life still have shreds of decency left just waiting to be awakened when they think it is safe to speak out and try to return dignity and decorum to their professions. Think positive!!

    Remember Churchill’s tribute to the fighter pilots of the Battle of Britain,” Never have so many owed so much to so few”!!

    • Just want to thank you for your post, trying to keep our spirits up, it is great to know, that you, Shane and many others think along the way we all do.
      It is an exasperating situation, never thought to have come to a country that has become so rotten during the time I have lived here, I came here in 1954, it was not happening then,although the unions were already standover merchants, I suppose that is where it all started.
      I do appreciate your kind thoughts for all of us on this blog.

    • G’day HB – I’m not despondent. Angry, yes. Disgusted, yes. But not feeling hopeless at all.

      In fact I think we’re in the best position we’ve been in for decades to restore some integrity to our system of government.

      Our Constitution was written in the 19th century – it doesn’t even recognise political parties – it talks of the Executive which is supposedly elected by all the members of the House.

      Our Elections are based on a ‘honour system’ which has proven to be utterly useless. Even illiterate peasants in the Third World have their fingers dipped in indelible ink to ensure they don’t make multiple votes.

      We have no say in who our Prime Minister is, and that person is solely responsible for the appointment of the Governor General. There is no selection of candidates from which the Queen may choose her representatives – the PM or the Premiers give an individual the ‘nod’ and HRH, following ‘convention’ affirms the appointment.

      Similarly with Judicial appointments to the High Court etc. These systems have to change. Our current circumstances have seen the most egregious appointments that are such blatant political manipulations that it’s simply breathtaking – and that goes for statutory bodies and quangos of all kinds.

      My fear is that if we hinge our measure of success or failure on whether actual criminal prosecutions of wrongdoers eventuates, then we will be disappointed and nothing will change. We’ll stagger on from one odious set of useless Party hacks to another, and achieve no lasting change.

      But if the groundswell of outrage that Australians are currently demonstrating can be encouraged to grow into an unrelenting demand for real and lasting change of our system of government, to restore a measure of integrity and probity to our elected representatives, then the word ‘Honorable’ when applied to members of our Parliament may actually mean something.

      • Hi BS, I’ve been through this sort of thing before and I totally agree.
        Gillard could escape prosecution simply because of being Prime Minister.e.g., the Office not the person. I’ve always recognised that resignation would probably be the escape route for her just as it was at S & G. , but I’d be happy wih that.

        Keep punching old (or young) mate! I think you’ll like my latest post!

  73. Sorry. Forgot to click paste. It’s been a long night!!

    I believe Stage 1 is over. Gillard condemned herself in front of the nation on 23/8/12 when she said:

    “I was a solicitor at Slater & Gordon. I assisted with provision of advice re the setting up of the workplace reform association. I had no involvement in the working of the association. I provided advice in relation to its establishment and that was it.”

    The only possible lawful legal advice she could have given was “Bruce, I represent the AWU and unless you have written authorisation from the Branch Executive or a resolution of the National Executive under Rules 51 & 54 of the AWU, you simply cannot set up an association and I cannot assist you!”

    That she chose to ignore those Rules and assisted him to set up and incorporate a sham association enabling him to unlawfully open Bank A/c’s to deposit AWU moneys and put them to his own use, makes her an accomplice and/or accessory both before and after the fact from day one!
    he sworn affidavit of Ian Cambridge spells out in unambiguous detail Gillard’s breaches of AWU Rules.

    Now we enter Stage 2. (And I need your help)!
    The 1/85 Kerr St., property purchase through S & G.T

    The documents show that Gillard clearly and deliberately misled her employers, most of the equity partners of S & G. Their Trust Ledger A/c shows they thought it was a genuine property deal and had no idea of the real source of the funds.

    In his statement published in The Australian, Nick Styant-Browne, whose name appears on the S & G Trust ledger A/c as Partner Responsible and Client Manager, was at pains to make this clear saying:
    The Kerr St.,conveyance and mortgage were both unexceptional transactions for the firm’s conveyancing and mortgage practice”.

    Now see the Ian Cambridge comment ” I am unable to understand how ……S & G acting for the AWU could have permitted funds obviously taken from the Union in the purchase of private property etc., etc.etc.

    Ian you brave man, thanks to you, I understand exactly how!

    Julia Gillard, their salaried partner whom they would then have had no reason to doubt, had spun them a cock and bull story about Ralph Blewitt owning a couple of hairdressing saloons, cafe’s or some such, and that he had spare money he wanted to invest.

    They perhaps should have checked more closely as to why he needed a $150,000 mortgage, but why would they question a trusted salaried partner?

    The key of course is the 18/3/93 AWUWRA Inc. cheque from AWU Workplace Reform Association Inc. Commonwealth Bank Cheque A/c No. 6005 1000 2582 for the amount of $67,722-30 made out to Slater & Gordon.. Just how did it get into the S & G Trust a/c apparently without being noticed or questioned by S & G partners, and actually marked Direct Debit on Blewitt’s page in the Trust Ledger?

    I unreservedly thank Mr. Philip Coorey of the Fairfax SMH and his article on the same day of Gillard’s press conference for providing the answer when he very kindly informed me and the nation, “Ms.Gillard did the conveyancing”!

    Now you can all have fun chasing down the various bits and pieces and sources hows, whys and wherefores pertaining to all this.
    Thank you in advance. H/B

    • H/B – Great job.

      However, the purchase of the property is only half of the story. Who did the conveyancing on the sale?

      As I understand it, S&G won’t release their file on the property citing client confidentiality. As Blewitt is their client, surely he is entitled to files on all matters on which S&G represented him. Maybe those files are Ralph’s ace-in-the-hole and S&G are keeping them nice and safe for him. Yeah, right.

      You (courtesy of a very-obliging Phil Coorey) have established that JEG did the conveyancing on the purchase, but we have Paul Howes (who is appearing to be as genuine and reliable as a $3 Rolex) claiming that upon discovery of the property bought with AWU-WRA funds, a caveat was lodged registering an interest in the title.

      The question remains; who processed the sale? If a caveat WAS lodged, who ignored it? As Blewitt was the registered owner of the property (courtesy of a Power of Attorney), why did he allegedly see NO funds from the purchase? Who did THAT conveyancing and was responsible for the disbursement of sale proceeds, first to pay out the S&G mortgage, and then the remainder to who-knows-where if it wasn’t the legal vendor of the property, one Ralph Blewitt who disclaims any knowledge of the mortgage or the sale proceeds?

      If Nick Styant-Browne was right and “The Kerr St.,conveyance and mortgage were both unexceptional transactions for the firm’s conveyancing and mortgage practice”, then we can only conclude that it’s S&G’s standard modus operandi to ignore a registered caveat on a title, repay itself mortgage finance without the property owner’s knowledge or signature, and disburse proceeds to some other individual than the legal vendor of the property.

      Having recently sold a property myself, I’m REALLY glad I didn’t engage the services of Slater & Gordon.

      On the other hand, maybe Phil Coorey’s candid revelations actually were all-encompassing. Good grief! Don’t tell me ….. Gillard actually did the processing for BOTH the purchase AND sale of the hapless Kerr Street house.

      Wow! “I did nothing wrong” sure is using broad brush strokes to absolve oneself of any unethical, illegal behaviour as a salaried partner in a major law firm….. a publicly listed law firm on the Australian Stock Exchange no less.

      • All very good points BS, but I think you may find the Sale of Kerr St., was not handled by S & G. Peter Gordon says certain information was made available to Bernard Murphy, then to Gillard in July 1995 and after a “small delay” to the partners. who then immediately ceased acting for the AWU, Wilson & Blewitt .
        Ian Cambridge got a letter from Maurice Blackburn on 14/7/95 stating that they were now acting for the AWU.

        The Sale documents certainly will be interesting, because Murphy went there.
        Cambridge included with his affidavit a copy of the T1 for the sale (whatever that is )dated 23/2/96 I also have a feeling Harry Nowicki may have a surprise or two up his sleeve regarding Ralph Blewitt.

        One other matter.I don’t think the file that Gillard was forced to produce to the partners in September 1995 contained anything about AWU WRA. She’d had plenty of time to falsify and/or remove a few of the more damaging documents! She’s capable of anything, any subterfuge or deception. Peter Gordon noted : “While other matters I was not aware of in 1995 have come to my attention since……….”! The AWU WRA matter was not discovered or disclosed to Ian Cambridge and allegedly the AWU till April 1996 so how the hell did Paul Howes know anything about it to put on a caveat? The stench of corruption and coverup gets stronger while Fairfax and a lot of Australia argues over whether Tony Abbott punched a wall 35 years ago or they’ve changed the recipe for Banana Icy Poles. Sheeesh! Give me strength!!

      • Thanks Hillbilly – it didn’t occur to me that Murphy would have had anything to do with the sale of the house.

        Why would he? That wasn’t an AWU transaction – the house belonged to Blewitt. If Maurice Blackburn actually did the conveyancing on the sale, then all of the questions I raised above applied to them.

        Was the Power of Attorney still in force at that time? Blewitt still claims he got no proceeds of the sale and knew nothing of the mortgage.

        In fact whoever processed the sale, whether it be S&G, M/B or a little suburban solicitor picked out of the phone book, they STILL have to answer those questions.

        As for our MSM, don’t start me. Have you EVER seen or heard anything so banal in your life? I am of a vintage to remember Woodward and Bernstein of the Washington Post, the saga of Deep Throat and the whole world in a state of suspense as more revelations were exposed each day.

        Would POTUS be sent to prison?

        My profound disappointment that he wasn’t (and ended up being regarded as some kind of benign statesman) probably explains my opinion that we’ll never see a criminal conviction of ANY of the parade of outright crooks that have held high office in this country.

        Journalism?? Our lot just don’t get it.

  74. Looks as though you have worked out the puzzle, This is why nobody wants to touch it as S & G are into it up to their necks to have covered this up.
    Anyway, slowly but surely it is all coming together. Great work!

    • From the article that Michelle supplied about Gillard……….

      She was notable for her “formidable intellect and her razor-like attention to detail”,

      Hillbilly, as you posted earlier …..

      ‘When Julia Eileen Gillard chose to accede to Bruce Wilson’s request she knew that what she was doing broke every rule in the AWU book and was illegal in the eyes of the law. She still chose to do so and kept what she called the AWU Association file secret !!’

      And from Gillard herself …..

      “I was a solicitor at Slater & Gordon. I assisted with provision of advice re the setting up of the workplace reform association. I had no involvement in the working of the association. I provided advice in relation to its establishment and that was it.”

      Young and naive – pah, what a load of crap.

      • Chookums – the same thought occurred to me. Plus this …..

        “… she did not secure articles, the equivalent of a legal apprenticeship after graduation from the University of Melbourne, but instead did a Leo Cussen’s study course  often seen as the second-best option at the launch of a practical legal career.”

        That’s Gillard – short cuts are her specialty. And this …..

        “Gillard, who secured a coveted partnership aged just 29, was a formidable presence at the firm.”

        I’ve read that she was recruited to S&G by Murphy. The word ‘coveted’ and the mention of her age indicate to me that her appointment was somewhat resented in the politics of the Firm by some who felt they themselves were in line for a partnership, not Murphy’s non-articled ingenue. Just how ‘grateful’ was she? Her track record speaks for itself.

        I believe that when the “exultant” text message: “Julia, you bloody beauty.” did the rounds of her past colleagues (as described in Michelle’s link), it was from past associates who now saw the golden goose about to lay a few eggs. After all, she is described as “intensely loyal” – she’d send a few judicial appointments their way, not to mention lucrative seats on various Boards and Quangos. Yippee!!

        However, “… those who worked with her as an industrial lawyer recall her pragmatism. It is that pragmatism that has seen some of the most bruising criticism of her from former friends in the union movement who feel betrayed by her as she climbed the political ladder.”

        ‘Pragmatism’ is a polite euphemism for ‘ruthless’.

        It isn’t just her union buddies who feel betrayed – the entire Nation has been betrayed.

  75. Black Swan, you bloody beauty! Your analysis is spot on! Do you realise that we two are becoming a very formidable tag team, assisted by many thinking, enquiring people like Michelle, Chookums, Winnedge, Terry and others too numerous to mention?

    With Shane’s permission, I’d like to keep brainstorming here with anyone interested. Mike Smith is doing a good job but hasn’t yet been able to get to grips with his ‘typepad’ format , so too much info, too many threads etc..( I’m afraid I vented my frustration a bit there last night but Val Majkus cooled me down a bit!)!!

    After our exchange last night, I realise that S & G as the mortgagee must have held Blewitt’s property file and likely the Title Docs. Apparently Gillard could have still been on the Roll, (even though she should have been struck off), and could have done the conveyancing, or any little suburban solicitor as you said

    The next phase I’m pursing is the massive ongoing conspiracy to pervert the course of justice which Cambridge alluded to, the latest manifestation being the Gillard designed and implemented FWA and Gillard controlled judicial appointments, and that’s NOT 17 years ago!!.

    Anybody else like to “rassle” with us??

    BTW. If you have the transcript of the Gordon/Shaw – Gillard interview read on from:
    (this is about “the secret file”).

    PG: How, what are the circumstances in which we only got that last week? Can you talk about that?

    JG: When Geoff and Nick came down and saw me about the conveyancing file,………..

    • Hello HB33, I would certainly like to help in some way, I have not kept any of the documents, which have been appearing in the various Blogs i.e. the transcript of the interview S&G – Gillard, however, I have a good memory and am so disgusted with this whole situation that I am happy to spend time, as I agree with you, that the current goings-on in the Courts need to be addressed.. Just the current investigations in Craig Thomson, as far as i know no investigation into Williamson, the case against Slipper, none of them going anywhere.
      Whatever i can do, am only too pleased to assist. In the meantime good luck!!!

    • I think it very telling that the Pm at her ambush question time for absent journos, did NOT take Fairfax to task for that day’s story where she was outed as the person who did the conveyancing of “Blewitt’s house” purchas It is unbelievable that those in the PM’s i office hadn’t read it, so that goes to guilt does it not, other wise they would have got a huge servetoo, not just the OZ, for using the (shock horror) term trust fund when it was as Juliar says a slush fund( all good in Laborland)

  76. Short version of transcript for those who don’t have it.

    From Equity partners interview of their salaried partner! 11/9/95

    Peter Gordon: file you gave Paul last Monday,- describe circumstances you came across it,- How we only got that last week?

    JG: Geoff, Nick, saw me about conveyancing file- the incorporation file- hadn’t opened on system – had some papers – given papers to (name redacted).
    don’t recall – remember saying to Geoff – don’t think I opened it on system – Geoff said easy enough to check – didn’t do anything to check – went on period of leave – focused on issues surrounding – wasn’t particularly focused about file.
    Before going said to Leesha — did she remember file? She did – I came back from leave -she said it was – had been in the cabinet,-she’d found it, did I want it?
    PG: Why wasn’t it opened on the system?
    JG: didn’t have intention to charge -.this was more substantial job – ought to have been opened on system,.

    PG: Response redacted.!!!!!!! (Says it all)!

  77. hanks Liz. I need two dates.and Shane may have them in previous posts so good place to start.

    1. Date Jennie George stood down from No.3 spot she’d won on Labor Senate ticket in April 1995 pre-selection, to allow Gillard to take her place.

    2. Date of “if Cambridge isn’t stopped we’re all history” letter from AWU joint Sec., to Bob Smith.

    • Will try HB33, my name also comes up as nottwistedyet, is same as Liz of Vic, so you won’t be confused, do not know why this is happening, never mind, I’ll start searching for what you want.
      I had picked up the fact when I read the transcript of the interview PG and JG about the file!

    • HB33, report on 4 hours solid reading of Blogs, Googled articles, found that an amazing number of articles refer back to this (Kangaroo Court) website or the michael Smith News one, There seems to be a cloud over dates between
      17/08/l995 ( the date Bruce Wilson disappeared from Gillard’s life and the beginning of June l996. Have not been able to find the dates you want, will try again to-morrow after lunch, have to go out now, by the way, nowhere has it been mentioned that this Wilson was married with 2 children,, just always ‘Wilson”
      Neither has it been mentioned often that Emerson was married with two kids.
      Must be Gillard’s specialty!!!

      After all this more convinced than ever, that she is as guilty as hell.

  78. Jazza @ 11-57. I’ve got over 50 questions so far these Fairfax luvvies could have asked from their own paper, and I’m only half-way through.. Uh-Oh. I FEEL SICK!!!!

    Fairfax SMH Editorial.Date August 23, 2012 The PM, her ex-lover, the cartoonist, the union and the media (social and otherwise)
    All matters raised below are for the most part the exact words of either the Fairfax Editor or Philip Coorey.Fairfax correspondent.

    Misjudgments of character;
    FAILURE to pay attention at a critical moment;
    A LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP was entangled.
    must recognise that as Prime Minister and leader (Labor) entire life regarded by public as open to scrutiny,
    in respect of how her actions and statements REFLECT ON HER SUITABILITY FOR HIGH OFFICE.
    controversy kicked into life again by SOMEONE ON HER OWN SIDE, MP Robert McClelland,
    events shows two errors of judgment on the YOUNG Gillard’s part
    She DID NOT OPEN A FILE AT THE FIRM on work then lover Bruce Wilson/ colleague Ralph Blewitt
    While she might have thought this a personal, unpaid service
    The second and MORE SERIOUS ERROR was not to see;
    that the work she did setting up an entity called the Australian Workers Union Workplace Reform Association
    was IN CONFLICT WITH Slater & Gordon’s REPRESENTATION of the AWU itself,
    used by Wilson and Blewitt to channeL FUNDS EXTRACTED from construction companies OSTENSIBLY TO FURTHER INDUSTRIAL SAFETY;
    Some of the FUNDS WERE USED TO BUY A HOUSE in Blewitt’s name
    in which WILSON LIVED,
    Gillard admitted ERROR OF NOT OPENING A FILE due to *memory lapse(?)
    said she believed purpose of association she helped set up was to “hold re-election funds for union officials”.
    She has later admitted she was “young and naive” and over-trusting of Wilson.
    CLAIMS her later resignation from S & G was NOT FORCED BY THE CASE.
    Coming at tame time KPMG audit FAIR WORK AUSTRALIA’S INVESTIGATION into HSU found INADEQUACIES in the process

    Article: Union official in PM row fled Indonesia Date August 23, 2012 Phillip Coorey Sydney Morning Herald chief political correspondent

    Ms Gillard did legal work for Australian Workers Union branch run by her then boyfriend, Bruce Wilson.
    He & Mr Blewitt accused by union siphoning off hundreds of thousands of dollars DESTINED FOR THE UNION
    placing it into ACCOUNTS SET UP BY Ms GILLARD.
    further alleged some this MONEY was USED TO BUY THE FITZROY HOUSE.
    Fitzroy house bought in Blewitt’s name, though he DID NOT HAVE THE ASSETS TO FINANCE THE PURCHASE.
    it was Mr WILSON WHO LIVED IN IT..

    IGNORING affidavit of Ian Cambridge that had been on public record for years;
    IGNORING Statutory Declaration of Bob Kernohan on record for years;
    IGNORING information made available by former S & G partner Nick Styant-Browne;
    IGNORING intensive extensive investigations by journaists at The Australian
    IGNORING released transcript of the partners of S & G when they put allegations revealed by their investigations to Gillard in a formal interview;
    IGNORING draft statement of Peter Gordon equity partner at S & G
    IGNORING all information/ questions raised by investigative persons on the internet;
    IGNORING what had been written by SMH chief political correspondent Phil Coorey
    IGNORING what he himself had written in the Editorial

    The Fairfax SMH Editor concludes: (After analysin the the two errors)!!

    “The facts that have emerged do not suggest Gillard committed any breach of law
    or that she knowingly derived any personal benefit from improper or deceitful activities
    as the principals of the law firm where she worked, Slater & Gordon, attested at the time when the case was aired under privilege in the Victorian Parliament.
    The new airing has not brought out anything to change that opinion.:


    Of course his opininion is backed up by such reputable all-knowing people like lawyer and former Law Report host & Investigators team member John Faine,who has been feeding off public money for many years at “our” ABC., Peter van Onselon who’s been teaching our chidren at UWA etc. etc. Have some fun compiling a list of the notables who have said move on, nothing to see here, the PM did nothing wrong, we believe she’s honest and ethical and was just young , naive and in. love.

    I mean,what hope has a geriatric old misogynist nut job got after only invesigating six months, against the opinions of such powerful, knowledgable literate lawyers , academics, ABC and fairfax commmentators, Investigative journalists, doyens of the Canberra Press Gallery etc., etc.,.

    Gee I’m feeling thoroughly underwhelmed!!

    • Sorry you’re feeling sick H/B – it’s because you don’t have a strong enough stomach for this indigestable load of utter rubbish from the MSM.

      Take an Alkaseltzer – a good belch and you’ll be good as new.

      Shane Dowling and Michael Smith are like Town Criers asking us all to gather in the marketplace and listen.

      The Mainstream Media are like the Sheriff’s Deputies with the latest government edicts on notices being hammered into our front doors.

      • You’re dead right BW. Should have put LOL or sarc/on.
        Can we pick a quiet nignt (everyone ) occasionally for 2-3 hrs briaristorming? It’s too nice to sit inside. I’m off to walk the dog, watch the Roulettes mark Battle of Britain Day – how appropriate to celebrate “The Few” ! We can make a big difference!

  79. HB 33.
    Just did another hour, read the Mayne report, which you refer to in one of your posts (1st September, 2012, Have read it a few times to-day, please let everyone have a read of it, I feel that I am missing something there, but cannot put my finger on it!

    Will conitnue to-morrow!

    • NTY. Any particular aspect troubling you?

      Check this Ian Cambridge speech. If you haven’t read it it will quickly bring you up to speed on the AWU corruption and coverup. H/B

    • Hello NTY – I followed your advice and read the Mayne Report again ….


      The excerpts, out of her own mouth, prove her to be a liar and a fraud of astounding proportions.

      And later, as the IR Minister and architect of Fair Work Australia, I have little doubt that ALL that the Unions demanded of her came with an implied threat to expose her if she failed to do as she was told.

      She is a thoroughly compromised individual, and as such, is a particularly dangerous person to be at the helm of Government.

      As for dates, the chronology between Gude’s revelations, her exposure at S&G, her demanded resignation, Wilson’s disappearance (with the cash), and Union action to recover some of it are, in my opinion, irrelevant.

      For me, the documents that will prove her culpability in aiding, abetting and PARTICIPATING in criminal acts, are the Power of Attorney (which Pickering claims she drew up) and the conveyancing in both the purchase AND sale of the Melbourne property. Those documents, and the monies that changed hands, will prove she knowingly engineered the AWU-WRA as a means to divert cash for Wilson’s personal use.

      Slater & Gordon hold all those documents and continue to hide her criminal activity by citing “clent confidentiality”.

      Blewitt is not the sharpest tool in the shed, but it isn’t a crime to be stupid.

      One more thing ……..

      We are told that Gordon originally sent her to WA as an S&G rep to “take care of” a Union heavyweight named Wilson.

      To legally represent him in WA she MUST have had a WA legal Practising Certificate.

      She was presented to the goldminers in Boulder as an S&G rep and persuaded them to transfer funds to the accounts of Wilson/Blewitt.

      Those miners’ accident/death funds ultimately purchased two holiday houses in Kalbarri. Why two? One for Wilson (who was still married with children at the time and needed a getaway pad for trysts with his new ‘squeeze’) and one for Blewitt.

      Who did the conveyancing on the purchase AND sale of those two properties?

      Who owned them, who lived-in/used them? Was a Power of Attorney involved?

      Whatever the case, the funds stolen from the goldminers was never recovered. Why not? These WA transactions have been shrouded in secrecy from the beginning. Why?

      There is no doubt now that Organised Crime has seized control of our Government – the tentacles of which are like a giant parasitic squid wrapped around the face of our nation.

      • Once again Black Swan you’re spot on and they’re all very valid points. I’ve moved on a bit now because I think I’ve almost done all I can in that area and sleuths such as you are now running hard with it. Whilst still keeping a very interested eye on progress, I’m trying to help complete what Ian Cambridge started and get that Royal Commission or Judicial Inquiry going to look into the ongoing corruption and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.

        The Jennie George matter and the “we’re all history” letter are important dates in what I’m putting together, Judicial and FWA appointments by Gillard or through her ever-ready pre-selected “independent panel of experts” will also come into it and I’ll be first delving into work done by Shane in that area.

    • Thanks so much Sean. Wiil definitely check that out as I think a citizen’s action of some sort may be the only way to bring this to a head!

  80. Reply to hillbilly33.ear HB I have spent most of the day looking up web-sites and articles and have not been able to find the dates you want, But I have found some disturbing things.
    Yesterday I visited Jenny George’s site twice and Steve Harrisons and Cambridge’s once, and to-day when I
    just wanted to check I had not missed anything I found that a lot of information had disappeared from these sites. No, I am not crazy, in one of the articles I read
    it said that Julia’s office is keeping an eye on all blogs and comments on articles from us nutjobs and mysogonists. I took that with a grain of salt, well IT WAS RIGHT, AS ESPECIALLY ON JENNY GEORGE’S PAGE, MOST OF THE STUFF HAS DISAPPEARED! It has been replaced by the Michael Smith News sites, most of the stuff is his, one was from Kangaroo Court.

    Other than Jenny George’s name being mentioned, nothing at all, so we are being watched.
    Not that this worries me, but it is criminal, that these pages are being altered in front of our eyes just about.
    It seems that we won’t find anything anymore.

    I am finishing forGood night all.

    • Thanks NTY. Not unexpected, but does show we’re on the right track. Welcome to the future under Green/Labor totalitarian rule. Do check the matter I mentioned Sept 15 @ 8-oopm. It is important but seems there’s a problem with me providing you the link. Your efforts much appreciated.

  81. hillbilly33. Saw an article to-day, which I did not see yesterday on Electionnow.com.au under ‘the latest new julia Gillard: Rule by Fear’. Did you see that before?

    • No but will check. I’ll be laying low doing my own thing for a while as I seem to be upsetting the equilibrium even on friendly sites, but don’t worry – I’ll be lurking!.

  82. Two tips for all. 1. Capture a screen shot of anything interesting you find.
    2. Search newspaper archives particularly for the George/Gillard switcheroo between April 1995 and 17/8/95. Most likely between 14/7/95 to 18/8/95.

    They can’t plug every leak!!

  83. I’ve been searching for dates and things as well but to no avail but there is a bio of Jennie George that was written and a heap on Union goings on maybe there are copies in the big library archives I will post anything of interest I come across, and the “letter to stop Cambridge” or it’s dates are hard to track down.

    • Thanks Michelle. Library is a good place and many papers have on-line archives. Suggest :AGE, Melb.Herald Sun, The Australian. Though I believe Murphy, Gillard, and certainly Wilson knew earlier that big trouble was on the way , the crap really hit the fan at S & G on or around 14/2/95 when they lost the AWU A/c to Maurice Blackburn. Be very interesting to find the exact date Murphy left S & G!

    • michelle . Shane has a link to old newspaper reports on his Gillard/Wilson/Fraud page.. It’s the last one.and this is from it:

      “Gillard’s initial push to win Senate preselection was foiled in April 1995 when the factions backed Senator Barney Cooney to stay at number two on the ticket, with Jenny George at number 3 and the PM missing out. George then pulled out and Gillard secured the number 3 spot at around the same time Wilson was booted from the AWU,”

      Shane may also have the Hansard link for the letter, check there first. If not, I’ll find mine later. Cheers H/B

  84. Okay thanks Hillbilly I will go back and read through Shane’s pages and links but what I’ve been reading online is Martin Ferguson got the No. 3 spot from Jenny George in 1995 for the seat of Batman and there was a big scandal at the time within the unions about branch stacking.

    • Michelle, On one of the pages, which have now disappeared from her site, it said: Jenny George did so graciously stand down of the no. 3 spot in favour of julia Gillard.
      It also mentioned that there was a lot of opposition within the labor-party to Gillard wanting to leave the left and stand on this ticket.

    • Thanks Michelle. Could tie-up another couple of loose ends. Shane Maloney wrote a great article describing the factional in-fighting, branch stacking and other Labor carry-on. On the face of it, the reward for standing down in favour of Gillard, which gave her an excuse to cover her sacking from S & G,, may have got Jenny George the ACTU presidency in Sept 1996. The No.3 spot on the Labor Senate tcket was virtually unwinnable anyway, so it was convenient all round.

    • No Michelle. Martin Ferguson was standing for the Federal House of Reps seat in Batman. There’s a heavy Greek presence (also many kooris) there and his main rival was Theo Theophanous who was apparently trying to move from State to Federal politics. In the end the powerful NSW Right stepped in and backed Ferguson. Some said that Bill Kelty and others chose this way to get rid of Ferguson from the ACTU presidency which it did but it strengthened the Vic Left in relation to the NSW Right

      What all this does do is reinforce my belief that it all ties in with the long-term strategy of Gillard and her driving ambition to get to the top whatever it took. The Left-wing ambitious lawyer and the Right-wing rising star Wilson, who through the efforts of Gillard was given access to huge amounts of money – a power-seeking marriage made in heaven which was temporarily derailed by a diligent honest joint Secretaryof the AWU, Ian Cambridge.

      It was a stutter for Gillard but the powerful Right-wing Unions wanted a puppet in the Prime Ministership,,deals were done with Arbib and other Right powerbrokers, Rudd was “knifed” in the back and the rest as they say, is history and Australia slips deeper into the mire of criminal Union, legal, judicial and political corruption and we are all the poorer for it,. Except the crooks to whom we and our children are ,and will be, keeping in luxury on fat Parliamentary pensions and other perks for the rest of their lives. Who said crime doesn’t pay!!

  85. okay I will go over all again but when you google Jennie George 1995 pre-selection see what you come up with I might just be confusing myself. I did come up with this article from 1996 about Fergusons pre-selection in 1995 August – Sept (the article was published April 96) if it isn’t off topic. Gillard isn’t even mentioned unless this is what happened after she missed out.
    its a pdf file
    (scroll down to Stand by your man article)

    • Michelle follow this,http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/regional/goldfields/a/-/news/14642031/awu-ex-haunts-gillard/
      If she was representing Slater & Gordon, as obviously she was, according to this article, Gillard presented as a representative of Slater and Gordon.
      But the fact is, Gillard, as a partner, of Slater & Gordon, she was being paid for her conduct in Boulder, being paid by her employer to encourage people to transfer their monies into a account, that she helped set up for her boyfreind!
      Slater and Gordon are in this up to their ears.

      • Terry. Thanks so much for that link. I’m off on a new track and that was a link I needed. It’s a number of connections coming together that I haven’t seen anyone else coming up with yet and it’s starting to gel very nicely. May need some more help soon so hold your faith!

  86. Can anyone please explain why, with these obvious frauds happening left right and centre with union member’s money being spent on private investments and these fact are known to the police and now, all and sundry, where there no charges laid?

    • The police cannot do much until a complaint is lodged that a crime has been committed,
      Has anyone lodged a complaint?
      Which state is appropriate to lodge a complaint?
      What are the grounds for the complaint?
      Those matters have to be considered.
      Additionaly: people who knowingly interfere with ‘evidence’ run a risk of being charged with a conspiracy to defeat the course of justice.
      Finally; keep in mind the clergy who recently (in Newcastle?) was charged with not reporting a crime ….. s’pose; one law for some and another for others!?
      Perhaps the msm is rather selctive as to who to chase up for criminal acts; probably something to do with advertising revenue, favours on stories and the usual horse ttrading, bullying, bit of blackmail and the usual corruption.
      Ho hum! We should all really understand our place in the chookyard.

  87. Thanks to the great investigators who’ve collated all the facts on this web site, but, supporting you with every ounce of my being, yet not in a position where I’m able to add anything of substance, I ask this question. Who will take the necessary steps to introduce this information to “whoever” can put it into action, and when? Seems Gillard’s popularity with the sheeple is increasing, and if something isn’t done in the near future, she’ll wheedle or claw her way back to a winning position!

    • “Wheedle? ‘ …entice…flatter…cajole with soft words…getting something by coaxing or flattery..’
      Quiet apt; when she is heard on TV. Bloody dangerous!!
      I prefer “weasel’.

      • ‘Quite’ Sorry.
        May I be practical? On a review, about five people have put in the work and the result deserves a commendation for all involved.
        But the msm and political anusholes will ignore all the work.
        How many Aussies visit this site? Shane probably can determine that.
        Whatever! Perhaps we should endeavor to send this link to all, msm contacts, local members,friends, etc. Otherwise the research is not known by the general populace. It is democracy at work; ‘If you do not use it you lose it’. (Rugby people will understand.)
        Sorry if this is trite, but it is possible that many are
        shy, do not be, you are entitled to an opinion and to broadcast it. Better to be wrong than submissive.
        So stuff the msm!!!

  88. Hi to all. I share your frustrations especially when I’m as sure as I can be that Gillard has committed a list of crimes as long as my arm!! We are fighting a culture of corruption . nepotism, bribery you name it that has been entrenched for many years, but good people are chipping away at the foundations and it will crumble. Something you could all do if you wish and Shane has already done a lot of work on it. Track backwards from the appointments Gillard has made to the:”baby” she conceived, delivered and is fattening up with union hacks who’ve helped her get where she is and using it to silence others who could bring her down with what they know.
    I’m referring to her FWA – Full Whitewash Association, that few, if any decent qualified industrial lawyers can get near. Believe me, there are many out there who’ve put in for and don’t even get a reply, but are too frightened to speak out publicly!

    Keep yor individual chins up!!

    • Billy, your a good man, but your reference to conception, is a wee bit unfair.
      What Julia did privately, is really none of our business.
      Can I comment on the young and naive defence.
      At 17, our youth can gain a drivers licence, enter the armed services.
      At 18, they can vote, in local, state and federal elections.
      At 21, it was considered, once upon a time, that you are now smart enough to buy grog.
      At a time in her 40’s, our Prime Minister, has reflected, back to her 30’s, suggesting she was young and naive, in her 30’s.

      I just seen a bird flying over, looked like a black swan, but anyway, geday

      • G’day Terry.

        I agree with you on all counts. A lawyer, an Officer of the Court, granted a License to Practise law and represent a client in our jucidicial system can’t simply say “I didn’t know what I was doing” when their own criminal culpability is exposed.

        Or maybe they can. Our entire corrupted System has closed ranks to protect them all.

        My children were taught to respect our Rule of Law and the authority figures in their lives. It is so confronting to realise that this level of politcial and judicial corruption happened on my watch – that my generation has allowed this to happen by virtue of our ‘blind faith’, ignorance and apathy.

        Our children have been betrayed, and we need to make it right.

      • Hi Terry. You remind me how careful one has to be in these days of of uber-political correctness where ,as Andrew Bolt found, you can be sued not for what you say, but for what some biased judge interprets as to what he thinks you meant and that you may thereby have offended someone .

        Do you know, I honestly did not even think of the slant you’ve put on it? I was simp;y saying she had sole control of what went into it, how it was to be staffed and how it would operate..My loved and loving daughters would happily confirm that. However, no offence taken by me. Bigger fish to fry yet! Cheers H/B

  89. Hi fellow Kangas. My latest effort. Please pull it apart, ask questions, add comments where you see it could be improved, pass it by your legal man etc.
    I think it has the makings of a full-page ad, a massive C & P mailout, email, flyer distribution whatever. I’ll post it in two parts.

    When Julia Gillard chose to assist in unlawfully setting up and incorporating a sham association for her boyfriend Bruce Wilson and his partner in crime Ralph Blewitt, it was for ONE purpose only, to enable Wilson to open Bank A/c’s. That was the genesis of the whole Gillard/Wilson/AWU Fraud Scandal!!

    Two extensive meticulously detailed recorded investigations have been done by professional people with first-hand knowledge and access to most of the relevant documents, into matters in which Julia Gillard was intimately and undeniably involved from day one!

    The first investigation, by AWU joint national secretary Ian Cambridge, resulted in his sworn affifavit outlining chapter and verse from the AWU side everything Gillard did wrong in unlawfully advising and assisting her boyfriend Bruce Wilson to set up and incorporate a sham association which had only ONE purpose. To enable him to open Bank A/c’s. Cambridge knew it, Gillard knew it, Wilson knew it, Blewitt knew it, I know it and everyone else since who has studied the evidence and the facts cannot help but know it!!

    After only 16 months investigation and at a time he was not even aware of the sham AWU WRA Gillard had unlawfully helped her boyfriend set up and get incorporated nor of the Bank A/c’s Gillard had enabled Bruce Wilson and his partner in crime Ralph Blewitt to open and proceed to launder AWU moneys and defraud AWU members on a massive scale, on 10/8/95 Ian Cambridge consulted QC Richard Kenzie who gave him five pages of advice on how he might be able to fix it all up within the Union and account for every cent.

    When further investigations not only revealed more frauds and other abuses but also a huge coverup amounting to a massive conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, he sought further legal advice and was advised the only way to get to the bottom of it was for Cambridge to call for a Royal Commission or Judicial Inquiry into his own Union, with wide-ranging powers to subpoena documents being with-held from him.

    What has Gillard offered as evidence in her defence? “I did nothing wrong, was young and naive and taken in by a conman”!

  90. Preamble: In 1995 Ian Smith was a Minister in the Kennett Victorian State Government. Slater & Gordon were acting for Smith’s embittered former chief of staff Cheryl Harris and Bernard Murphy was calling the shots.
    There were serious breaches of the legal process constituting disgraceful and unethical conduct by S & G who were successfully sued by Ian Smith resulting in a substanial damages payout to him by the S & G partners in 1997.

    None of this is hearsay as Stephen Mayne helped Ian Smith prepare the June 2nd 1995 statement he made to the Victorian Parliament. Full details and links
    to Hansard @ What were Gillard and her then boss-turned-Judge doing in mid-1995?


    The second, (investigation): by the equity partners at Slater & Gordon, who “were extremely unhappy with both Murphy and Gillard”, resulted in these very serious allegations against both of them. The partnership considered:-

    that proper vigilance had not been observed:
    that their duties of utmost good faith to their partners, especially as to timely disclosure had not been met:
    that the partnerships “had concerns about various aspects of the way in which Murphy and Gillard had acted with regard to Mr.Wilson and the AWU and felt “that a number of matters required explanation:”
    that “the nature of the wrongdoings alleged required us, if we were to take an adverse view of Ms.Gillard in relation to these events, to believe that she had knowingly participated in a fraud and deceived her partners for a year or more about it”!
    As a result of their investigations “the partnership considered terminating both Bernard Murphy and Julia Gillard.” but “Ms.Gillard elected to resign and we accepted her resignation without discussion”. Bernard Murphy also left the firm!

    Coming straight on top of the foreshadowed substantial damages suit caused by Murphy’s unethical actions in the Harris/Smith case and, as the editor of the Fairfax SMH wrote on 23/8/12 (Gillard’s actions) “created a risk for the firm in terms of professional indemnity and conflict of interest.,” which had laid the partnership wide-open to another substantial damages suit. This would have ruined them and likely been the finish of S & G. The partnership could not risk another public scandal and made the face-saving excuse that they “gave her the benefit of the doubt” by accepting the same incredibly unbelievable weak “I was young and naive” “taken in by a conman” excuse a legion of willing and shameless ABC, MSM, rusted on Labor supporters, Greens, Independents, academic and other sycophants have also lapped up!

    In the face of all the wrongdoings revealed by those two extensive investigations, Gillard has never offered one shred of evidence to support her repetetive bleating plea “I did nothing wrong”.

    No Affidavit, No Stat Dec nor even any statement she surely MUST have made to the police. Rather than be like Ian Smith who fronted Parliament and made a statement, she has actively dodged making any statement anywhere she could be accountable.

    Her “ambush” Press conference before possibly the worst bunch of woefully unprepared, ill-informed, inadequate and plainly inept gaggle of self-styled “journalists” ever assembled in one place, was a tissue of lies, half-truths, evasions and straightout deception! If you wish, I’ll prove it!

    Rather than the role model she could have been for so many as Australia’s first woman P.M., she has brought more shame on the legal profession and would never be allowed to practise Law again.

    She has brought nothing but shame, derision and disrespect for the office of Prime Minister, set back the feminist cause and that of all women for many years and provided the worst possible role model for young ambitious women to enter politics!

    Every sitting Labor member, especially those with a Union or legal background were aware of Gillard’s baggage and many had actively fought to try and keep her out of politics for that reason. All their worst nightmares have now come true and some of them are just as culpable as Gillard who sacrificed any principles she may have had in her driving self-delusional lust for power.

    There has never been a more shameful period in Australia’s history and we are all collectively the poorer for it in so many ways!

    • You’ve done a good job Billy, distilling the sequence of events into a particularly hard-to-swallow and bitter brew. It certainly has been a shameful period in our history.

      For a really arrogant and delusional woman, she just needs a fresh perspective.

      Poaching other women’s husbands could equally be seen as ‘settling’ for other women’s left-overs.

      Poaching other people’s jobs is just as bad. Not gained by merit, but simply because her criminal behaviour has made her a thoroughly compromised ‘puppet’ of the faceless men who power the Labor Machine. Doesn’t she see that the same Machine will grind her up and spit her out if she is seen to be a liability to them?

      For a smart woman she’s pretty stoopid. They will all rue the day they patronisingly dismissed “ordinary Australians” as “nutjobs”.

      By the way, what kind of language is that for a Prime Minister to use? Is her vocabularly so limited? It goes down in the annals of Australian politics as on a par with Keating’s “scumbags”. Now THERE’s a statesman for you.

  91. Thanks Swannie. I’ll be away today but have been at it since 5.00am distilling it down further . More very interesting “stuff” emerging as I work my way through.and have enough now even if references do continue to keep disappearing off the internet at a rate of knots. I can see a lot of Gillard’s 1600 spin doctorsand blog-scouring spies putting in for stress leave soon!

    • HB,
      You mention many spin doctors.
      If they exist, they should take care. If their purpose
      may be demonstrated as, even an attempt to defeat the course of
      justice, they are at risk of a conspiracy to defeat the course of justice charge.
      Matter for them! No doubt they will dog on their controllers
      if TSHTF..

      • The s will h the fan, but they will go out on a no comment clause, and the enticement will be too good to refuse.

    • Billy, thanks for your reply, I was not having a dig, but, what yourself said is so correct, that what a Magistrate comprehends, is regarded as a truth.
      As has been shown, on this site, backed by facts, that our judiciary is not squeaky clean.
      I think if we abide by the facts, and not allow assumptions to intrude upon the facts, the weight of the facts will prevail.
      Keep looking Billy. All the best, keep looking.
      Cheers, terry

  92. hi all,

    i read something a bit further up about web pages “disappearing”.

    i think there are a number of sites which effectively store snapshots of web pages, so you might be able to find them again. one such site i remember was called waybackmachine.com. another one is called screenshots.com. i’m sure there are others.

    hope this helps.

  93. The basic facts of the Gillard/Wilson/AWU Fraud Scandal show the matter is not complex in any way.
    The complexity is in the massive money extraction and laundering process involved once Gillard unlawfuly enabled Wilson to open bank accounts and the wide-spread coverup and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice by so many people and organisations, which is still ongoing!!

    The intensive investigation and probe by the equity partners of S & G partners centred on TWO Files:

    (1) the conveyancing file re the 85 Kerr St., Fitzroy property transaction held at all times by S & G,because it had been deliberately and deceitfully been misrepresented to the firm by Julia Gillard as a normal investment by individuals not in any way connected with their positions as employees of the AWU!
    Although the partners may have known Wilson and Blewitt were AWU officers or employees, Gillard must have talked long and hard to convince them that it had nothing to do with the AWU and that there was no “conflict of interest”!

    In his recently released statement Nick Styant-Browne said “the Kerr St.,conveyance and mortgage were both unexceptional transactions for the firm’s conveyancing and mortgage practice”.

    He would have been particularly angry at being so misled and deceived, as he was inveigled to put his name to the matter.
    Imagine his fury and frustration when he realised Gillard had totally misrepresented the facts and he was now on the Trust Ledger A/c of Blewitt as the Partner Responsibleand Client Manager, who unwittingly oversaw the fraudulent use of AWU funds embezzled by Gillard’s lover from unlawful Bank A/c’s she’d illegally enabled him to open!
    Imagine his further amazement when Gillard became PM and had her mentor Murphy, who had wreaked such financial and embarrassing havoc on the firm and it’s partners by his outrageous and unethicalabuse of legal process in the Harris/Smith case and “failure to show proper vigilance” of Gillard in the Wilson/AWU Fraud matter, elevated to a judicial appointment!

    (2) the sham AWU Workers Reform Association incorporation file:- held at all times until early September 1995 by Julia Gillard and deliberately kept secret from most of her equity partners, as well as the Victorian Branch and National Executive heirarchy of her principal client the AWU.
    This file could NEVER have been opened on the firm’s system and Gillard NEVER considered doing so as it would have immediately exposed her unlawful, unethical criminal actions. She herself said in the interview:- “I’ve just done relatively small jobs for unions that I wasn’t intending to charge for. Ordinarily they would be kept on THE UNION’S FILE!

    Just one question of Gillard at her farce “ambush” Press Conference on 23/8/12 would have blown her excuses completely out of the water!

    Prime Minister: As a solicitor in the industrial section of S & G, accountable to Bernard Murphy and acting for the Victorian Branch of the AWU, you would have been fully aware of all the applicable Rules of the AWU re the handling, the receipt and banking of AWU moneys and any subsequent disbursement. If you were not aware, it would have been the first thing you checked when your then lover Bruce Wilson, having already tried and failed to do so himself in WA, approached you for advice and assistance on setting up and incorporating an association to enable him to open and operate bank accounts.

    Prime Minister, can you explain to us, on what possible basis as a salaried partner of S & G, did you ignore not only the breach of ethics and obvious conflict of interest involved which could have had disastrous financial and other deleterious effects on your firm and it’s equity partners, but also in total breach of all the relevant Rules of your principal client, the AWU, did you proceed to advise and assist your lover to do what he asked enabling him to subsequently defraud Union members and others of hundreds of thousands of still unrecovered dollars and also escape justice for so doing?

    Gillard, like all the “best” and most outrageous liars in history, has become the master (or to be properly PC, the mistress) of the art of hiding the truth in plain view!!

    It is a sad commentary on the state of affairs in Australia on many levels, that not only did Gillard make complete fools of the supposed journalist elite and many of the general public of Australia, but was actually lauded by some of those same idiots for doing so and appears to have even had a lift in some polls!!!

  94. Well, that post went down like a lead balloon !! I cannot believe that it did not draw ONE
    comment from any of the erudite posters here nor did it do so on another investigative blog

    To me, in my apparently very lonely “land of hillbilly”, all that is needed is a friendly lawyer proud of his profession to put names to the laws and Rules of Practice of which Julia Gillard is clearly in breach and then for us to decide how to bring it to mass public attention!

    I don’t want kudos, fame, recognition or anything like that. In fact I shun those things. I just want an Australia back on track for all our descendants to enjoy!

    What do those who post here want, because I don’t know anymore!!

    • Billy, no erudition here, but you don’t stand alone! I agree with everything you say, plus I want to give the collective Australia a boot up the k…r! However, are we assuming that there’s this “friendly lawyer proud of his profession” out there? Find me one and I’ll contribute to his legal fees – honestly, I think my pockets will be no lighter, I don’t think that species exists, AND one of my family is a lawyer!

      • Thank you fidopuss. No offence or “elitism” intended because there’s no erudition here either. You’re a “salt of the earth” person as I like to think I am!
        It was a bit of a wake-up dig at posters on another website, as they seem to be unwittingly running round in circles oblivious to what’s staring them in the face!

        I know some good lawyers, but they are all so scared of “the system” and their future prospects, they’re afraid to speak out publicly!

        Can I remind everyone the internal investigations by S & G were summed up by Peter Gordon in this way :-

        “the nature of the wrongdoings alleged required us, if we were to take an adverse view of Ms.Gillard in relation to these events, to believe that she had knowingly participated in a fraud and deceived her partners for a year or more about it”!

        It can be very reasonably inferred that because they couldn’t afford to have another public scandal so soon after the Murphy/ Harris/Smith fiasco, which was to eventually cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars damages in 1997, they would not do their duty and report Gillard to the Law Society.I

        Instead, they settled for her “resignation” from the firm and hoped it would all go away!

      • Then, Billy, “that” lawyer needs to go after both S & G and JG knowing that he has the support of the greater section of the community! Surely “that” lawyer would cause enough of a stir to be ultimately in receipt of a great deal of respect and gratitude from the general public, and would indeed be the winner once it was all laid out in a Court of Law!

  95. Dear Hillbilly 33. Noticed the same. Michael Smith put something to-day about things happening during the Kenneth Government and the NBN. Do not know where that is going.
    But agree with you that we will not get a lawyer, who knows what he is doing in the Gillard case. She must have frightened the life out of somebody, bullied people, so that we are in this position.
    I am still trying to get those dates for you. I have an appointment with someone next week who should be able to help us. Sorry it is taking so long.
    I really believe that Gillard is guilty as hell and it should not take much more to prove it. But who is going to take her on I find it becomes harder and harder to find something. Between freezing pages and scrolling down 290 comments, I am trying hard not to throw the computer on the scrap-heap. Trying hard to keep the faith, Please do the same, Good luck,

    • Thanks nty. I do very much appreciate your efforts but a friendly warning though.; don’t be too obsessed and stress about it. That’s my problem and it has been exacerbated by the fact I’m on borrowed time age-wise.

      The dates are not that critical now . The “we’re all history” letter was not till 1996 I think and the Jennie George “gracious” stepdown is but one link in the cover-up in the 1995 chain. Quite amusing really to see all the bits of “history” being frantically removed from the internet. Another point is that many other good people are still working on this including Shane. Some have the advice of at least one QC so when the time comes to unleash I think they will be well prepared.

      • G’day Hillbilly,

        I’ve been ‘otherwise engaged’ for a little while and haven’t caught up with your latest posts.

        Your good advice to MS News has not been heeded and comments just gurgle down the plughole, with no Reply facility for feedback and interaction with like-minded commenters. Instead of total focus on one issue at a time, we are seeing efforts dissipated and readers’ best efforts swirling round the bowl.

        This KCA thread is getting too long now and so many of your best efforts are missed by readers who can’t be bothered scrolling down the page to read what they presume to be more of the same.

        My recent visit to Canberra convinced me of one thing – we are all looking at this issue with rose-coloured glasses. We know what’s right and wrong, our bullcrap antennae are twitching with alarm, but the fact remains – this corruption has become endemic. 2012 is the 40th anniversary of Whitlam’s rise to power and every single Labor Administration since then has covered the butts of their predecessors and refined their own nefarious activities.

        I have no reason to believe that Abbott will remain as Leader and if Turnbull rolls him, the circle is complete. There will be no Royal Commission into the Union Movement. Don’t forget that Bryce holds her current job simply because she refused to convene a Commission into the Heiner Affair and paved the way for Rudd to gain the PM’s chair.

        I sat in that Public Gallery in Question Time and the sheer arrogance of the useful idiots of the Labor Party was palpable – so smug, such self-satisfied smirks – Shorten bellowing into the microphone like a demented man – you never see that side of him on TV news grabs. He always comes across as a bloke who is well-considered in his responses. Not in the House. His entire demeanour was that of an utter thug, roaring at the Opposition and intent on intimidation.

        I came away seriously unimpressed with ALL of them.

        Under Standing orders the word “lie” is forbidden and we’ve seen Abbott, Bishop et al banished from the House by an incredibly biased Deputy Speaker for using it. If the Opposition’s questions are a little too awkward she just switches off their microphones and orders them to sit down.

        However, the Labor Party can accuse the Opposition of “mendaciousness” and that’s allowed. It brought guffaws from Labor and sniggers around the public and press galleries.

        This game is rigged, and has been for years. The ONLY way it will change is for Labor to be annihilated at the next election and I hold concerns that there are enough votes in Labor’s “captive constituency” to get them across the line.

        Many thousands in a bloated Public Service who would vote for the devil if it meant they hold onto their cushy jobs and the benefits that ensue.

        “Ever-so-grateful” migrants who know that Labor is the only way they’ll stay here. Don’t forget, they only have to be here 12 months and if they are on Benefits (which most are), citizenship only costs them $20. We hand out citizenship like pretzels at a party.

        All the Contractors and Consultants, the NGOs and all the businesses who have invested heavily in Green Scams – they need Labor to stay in power to keep the Gravy Train chugging along.

        I really hope I’m wrong and that integrity will prevail, but I wouldn’t make a major bet on it. Too much money at stake, too many favours owed.

        If ‘ignorance is bliss’ too many Aussies are in a state of euphoria – they simply don’t care. They won’t care until the Carbon Tax puts their cost of living through the roof.

        By then our Sovereign Debt levels will be so astronomical the Libs won’t be able to afford to pluck that Golden Goose. I take nothing for granted in this political climate.

  96. This battle won’t be easy! The tide will turn though. Turn their Fabian crap back on them and keep chippin away at them. Never give up!

  97. Billy, Black Swan, All Others,
    I reckon if you read the new doc’s on Michael Smith’s site, (enlarge, and have a good read ) You’ll probably find the conflict in dates. Would seem Wilson used a window of opportunity, and that those who assisted with the fraud, colluded with him to create the fraud. So not only Gillard and Blewitt, but probably Slater & Gordon, plus Trio, were all aware, that a manipulation was at hand. And I believe they all participated in the eventual fraud.

    • You may ask what did each gain out of this fraud?
      Wilson, large amounts of money, disposable.
      Blewitt, he is yet to tell.
      Slater and Gordon, hugh legal fees, which they are still milking, to this day, plus their illegal gains.
      Gillard, protectionism. ( The code of silence, a Political Ploy )
      Trio, cash kick backs, from Gillard’s boyfriend, Wilson.

      Time the MSM chased this Trio and asked questions, but they won,t.
      Mr Trio is still involved in gaining government grants, to kick more money into, the fraud pot.

      If I’m wrong blame me. Looking back through the posts, keeps becoming obvious that there are,
      some people and organisations,that really do have some questions, to answer.

  98. The worse crime to me is the conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. As an officer of the Supreme Court of Victoria and as the Supreme Lawmaker of the land, if Gillard is guilty of this charge (and the evidence would seem to point this way), it is the most serious offense and worthy of 20 years imprisonment and a stripping of all entitlements as an ex PM. As chief law officer of the land, such behaviour by her strikes at the very heart of our justice system.

  99. Read all your posts to-day. Agree with all of it.I do not know how all this is going ot fall apart, but I feel it should and it will.
    It is obvious that the opposition is not doing anything, perhaps i can understand that a Royal Commision is only going to come about under a next Coalition Government.
    Dis anyone see Gillard leave? Did she have Tim with her or has she appointed him ambassador to a country, where she can flee to, shen thing become too hot here?

  100. Was not finished with last post. Wanted to say that we have to carry on. Gillard went overseas as she cannot be asked questions there, so that is another week she has gained. I do think things are getting difficult for her, so don’t let up. Please find out where Tim is!

  101. I haven’t posted for a while but I’m totally in awe of this site and it’s strong supporters. I have been a bit slack but will get back to telling everyone and spreading the word. I was actually shocked by her blatant lying and the calm acceptance of it. I bumped into George Negus on the bus and he didn’t want to know about it – I was so disillusioned. Shane, I will keep doing my bit. I think I might start putting posters on telegraph poles as well as community boards.
    People without computers have no idea what is happening.

    Also I cringe when I think of Gillard representing us over there – it’s like a cruel joke or a nightmare that I can’t wake up from Where is the dignity? We should be the ones demonstrating in Hyde Park ……

    • yve1111 – seems Negus and his ilk (most media people) are so wrapped up in our PM’s “glamour” that they don’t want to know! Their glasses all have this strange pink-coloured tint to them! Another thing, I don’t only cringe when I see Gillard acting as our representative overseas, I cringe every time I see her face or hear her voice! How sorry I was to hear today that she’s copped a dose of the US variety of “Delhi belly”!

  102. Negus is more left than Julia herself! My theory is that Julia is not sick at all, but threw a sickie, as not not to be seen with Obama, When he was in Australia she could not keep her talons of him, But if he loses the election, not good for her is it, she could be next!
    Sorry Shane, but I loath the woman, it is upsetting me greatly, just wish we could think of something to be rid of her. At least she has Timmy, he must be on stand-by!

  103. its called “playing the sympathetic card”.people with devilish values will do this in the hope that the entire delgation will come over to her room and wish her well and when they do come she is automatically better and immediately begins to spruik her reason for wanting a seat in the UN. the Idea is to get the worlds attentions to her. she is a big showboat. she is about to start this sympathetic crap very soon in australia. she will use her father and talk about how grand he was and how he told her to work for the people and she is going to use this line. she is also going to fake a lot of croc tears and she is going dig at the audience and plead to their sympathetic side. i just hope the audience are not going to be sucked in. at the moment she is already talking about how grand the future is goin to be. there will be more jobs in health education etc. and all of this after messing with the budget. the scale of the budget deficit is so big it will make you vommit when you see it interactively : heres the link :http://www.debtclock.com.au/

    • Debt !
      Banker’s delight!
      So, ‘hooray’ for Gillard and Labor chaps, they are the Banker’s delight.
      Let the taxpaying suckers stay out of the light.

    • When the LNP won in QLD the QLD debt on this clock, was over 4.5 billion,
      now it is less than 1 billion. That’s what happens when the unions are booted from power. The unions decide who runs as Labor candidates and federally it’s such a sham, with many of the front and back bench having been connected to serious fraud.
      But all is not lost, thanks to our small population compared to our GDP.
      http://www.usdebtclock.org/world-debt-clock.html .
      All we need is a change of government to get things back on track, but maybe, we will just have to wait.

  104. Shane. This is well worth checking out as a means to an end and I’m currently working on specific complaints against Gillard. The penalties are pitiful but IMHO section 149 subsection 1 (b) could open up more charges against her.

    Legal Practice Act( 1996) Victoria
    Act 35/1996

    Part 3 The Manner of Legal Practice.
    Division 1 Principles of legal practice.
    Section 64. General Principles of professional conduct
    (Gillard is in clear breach of many of the subsections listed).

    Part 5 Disputes with clients and Discipline.
    Division 2 Complaints about practitioner’s and firm’s conduct.
    137. What are misconduct and unsatisfactory conduct?

    138. Who may complain?
    (1) Any person may make a complaint about the conduct of a legal practitioner or firm –
    (a) to the Legal Ombudsman; or
    (b) tothe RPA of which the legal practitioner or firm was a regulated practitioner at the time of the conduct allegedly occurred; or
    (c) to the Board

    139. When may a complaint be made?
    (1) Subject to subsection (2), a complaint may not be made more than six years after the conduct complained of is alleged to have occurred.
    (2) The Legal Ombudsman, an RPA or the Board may accept a complaint made more than 6 years after the conduct is alleged to have occurred if satisfied-
    (a) that there was reasonable cause for the delay in making the complaint; or
    (b) that is otherwise in the public interest to do so.

    145. Investigation by a Legal Ombudsman

    149. Practitioner or firm must provide information and documents.
    (1) The Legal Ombudsman may require a legal practitioner or firm to provide –
    (a) a full written explanation of the practitioner’s or firm’s conduct; and
    (b) any other information or documents- and to verify the explanation, information or documents by statutory declaration or another manner specified by the Legal Ombudsman, RPA or Board.

    • Billy, hold your horse’s, corruption is a signature of this government.
      We will be through 1, 2, 3, elections, before an outcome on corruption is resolved.
      Our next election is getting closer and closer, save your powder.

  105. Dear Prime Minister
    I refer to (a)the matters of the AWU/Workplace Reform Association
    (b)your press conference addressing (a)
    (c)your role at Slater and Gordon as an industrial lawyer
    (d) your statements you “did nothing wrong”
    It is noted that you condemned the “Australian” newspaper for a one word slip–“trust” instead of “slush”(fund)-when, on the same day, Fairfax published a statement that you did the conveyancing on the private house bought at an auction you attended with Bruce Wilson, who bough t the house in the name of Ralph Blewitt.
    The deposit cheque paid into Slater and Gordon was drawn against the AWU/Workplace Reform Association bank account,set up by Wilson subsequent to this Association becoming registered in WA, on your admitted advice.

    It is noted Slater and Gordon provided/arranged the house mortgage,and that Slater and Gordon were solicitors for the AWU, for whom you yourself acted on occasions
    Subsequent documents such as affidavits,eg, one from William Ludwig who leads the Qld AWU group, state that the union is not in the habit of purchasing private property for an individual unionist,and/or using a union bank account,ie it’s “outside the rules”

    My questions_(1)Why-as apparently is the case–did you not either query with the union a cheque drawn on an account bearing its name,for a private house purchase deposit,or contact the union to seek clarification that such a trade had union approval and met union rules?
    it is noted that when the AWU/WRAss was “discovered” within the AWU’s investigations into Mr Wilson, in 1996, the AWU removed its business from Slater and Gordon.

    (2)How can you say you “did nothing wrong”,when clearly, in a conflict of interest of clients–first the AWU then Bruce Wilson, a member–you acted for Mr Wilson and disadvantaged the AWU?
    That seems not to meet expected ethical behaviours for a lawyer.

    it is noted that no statement you made to the union or police/investigators about your prior knowledge in this mater in 1996 has surfaced,only your 1995 “exit interview” at Slater and Gordon,published in the “Australian” newspaper–where you advise the AWU/WRAss was intended to be a slush fund, but you don’t seem to mention union rules or any union participation in the house purchase.

    (3) Have you ever signed an affidavit or statement explaining the above questions,as I would like to be referred to such a statement if contained therein is proof you didn’t act unethically, with disadvantage both to your company of which you were a partner,and the AWU?


    • Great letter, Jazza! Now, who’s going to sign/send it? I would, if everybody else joins me, but how do we organise that? I’m quite old, and disposable, so it doesn’t worry me too much if they want to lock me up for treason! I’d simply consider it my life’s work well done!

      • I will also sign it. Can we organise a mass signing? I think we should have a mass walk on Canberra. I would like to deliver it in person (with anyone else willing to join? If everyone knew about the letter, it could be electronically signed, couldn’t it? It would be like a micro election – all these signatures, voting for her explanation, removal and/ or arrest. Everyone on this site can put a notice in their busiest local shops eg Coles/Woollies, petrol stations, libraries etc – any notice board they can see. Maybe one of the braver media people could direct some traffic to the site/letter. We could print t-shirts, have stick=on labels to paste on shopping bags, cars, tied to dog leads, etc When it is en masse she can’t control it. What do other people think? Groups of people wherever she goes asking her to read/address the letter. Prolonged advertising of her criminal activity and unsuitability for the role of PM. Who is she to say when it’s over? We have every right to keep asking until the matter is addressed. Personally, I don’t want to wait till the next election. How dare she trot off to the UN with this hanging over her head! I am prepared to meet and discuss this further but only with Shane’s approval.

        Yes, it was a great letter, Jazza. Let’s do something ……..

    • Jazza – here is a possible (and the most likely) answer to your first question…

      On 18 March 1993, Slater & Gordon wrote Ralph Blewitt (the legal owner of the Kerr Street property) a letter signed by employee Olive Brosnahan less than a week before the 22 March settlement date.

      The letter requested that Blewitt send a bank cheque payable to Slater & Gordon for the amount of $67,722.30 in order for settlement to take place. The letter contained an explicit statement on the meaning of “bank cheque”.

      However, the letter ALSO gave Blewitt a further alternative to sending a bank cheque to Melbourne. Blewitt could, if he wished, arrange a telegraphic bank transfer of funds to Melbourne instead of sending an actual cheque. And this is exactly what he did.

      Blewitt wrote a cheque for $67,722.30 drawn on the AWU-RA slush fund, personally took the cheque to the bank branch in Perth, and deposited the funds. The bank then immediately sent a $67,722.30 telegraphic transfer deposited directly to the Slater & Gordon Trust Account.

      Slater & Gordon had no way of knowing the original source of the funds transferred. They never saw the AWU-RA cheque as it was still in Perth. All Slater & Gordon knew was that funds had now been deposited in their Trust Account, and they were therefore now quite free to draw their own bank cheques for settlement purposes. Hence, your question (1) has been answered.

      Of course, this is not to say that other legitimate questions cannot be asked of Slater & Gordon, and also Gillard, about the Kerr Street purchase. I happen to believe that Gillard does have important questions to answer about this transaction. But I don’t think your question (1) is one of these since a plausible (likely) explanation exists.

    • Unfortunately, I don’t think something like this can be signed online! I know that Petitions aren’t regarded as legal documents if electronically signed! Posting the letter all over the place – stickers, etc as suggested by yve111 would draw some attention from the media, especially if someone was to mention it to “A Current Affair” or “Today Tonight”! They know how to dig up the dirt, as we all know! ABC would be calling us “nut jobs”, and have the authorities chasing us!! We haven’t heard from Shane for a while, so wonder where he stands on this kind of action!

  106. Thank you all, but it is what I posted to the woman today–not that I expect she will answer it factually, but– I am as teed off as anybody that we have such a person for our PM and one feels like doing SOMETHING!.
    Feel free to use any sections and send your own letter–addie:
    Hon Julia Gillard,MP
    Prime Minister
    Parliament House
    I posted it as i found out her MP email was deactivated after I’d emailed it and copied to Tony Abbott and Julie Bishop and Andrew Bolt and Michael Smith and my usual private emailers.,amongst whom I hope will now be a lot of disgust making them come read facts here and at wwwmichaelsmithnews.com

  107. I understand everyone’s frustration and the real anger that’s building in the community and we each must do what we feel is right. Personally, I’ve got a bit more refining to do before all the pieces fit but I’m getting there and when I do, I’ll post it for all to see. It’s then my intention to print and mail it to as many people as possible and/or distribute by any means available. Anyone else will be welcome to do the same if they feel so inclined.

    Just a couple of things Jazza. Although the AWUWRA Inc. cheque as part payment for 85 Kerr St.,was drawn in favour of Slater & Gordon, t seems the money actually went into their Trust A/c by Direct Deposit. Giilard had totally deceived her partners by representing to them that the purchase was a private investment by Ralph Blewitt and had also drawn up a Power of Attorney under which her boyfriend was able to act on Blewitt’s behalf. She must have done some fancy talking because although the firm would have been aware the two were AWU employees and would have been a bit wary, Gillard convinced them, but of course also concealed the fact she was in an intimate relationship with Wilson.
    As the conveyancer Gillard was on hand to deal with any problems arisng

    The matter went through S & G as a normal property trnsaction and they even provided a $150,000 motgage loan. Nick Styant-Browne actually was inveigled into putting his name to it as Partner Responsible and Client Manager for Blewitt. This explains why he was so furious when he found out he’d been duped by Gillard. Salaried partner Gillard and Wilson/Blewitt had almost pulled off the perfect money-laundering scam under the noses of the equity partnership of S & G who were paying her salary!
    One thing more, Ian Cambride was actually notified by Maurice Blackburn & Co on 14th July 1995 that they now acted for the Vic Barnch of the AWU.. Good luck H/B

  108. HillyBilly

    I sincerely hope the “Omerta” will crack. Hopefully when one or more of the players in the cover-up realise what they are potentially facing, the cracks could open.
    With respect to the 85 Kerr St property, I have not heard much pertaining to the disposal.
    Clearly when the AWU-WRA & other instruments were exposed the, ownership of the house would have been questioned. Further as Slater & Gordon were also financially exposed through the mortgage facility, there must have been some very interesting discussions prior to & at the settling of the disposal sale. There must be a paper trail which may indicate some of the decision makers in any “cover-up”. NSB’s belated enlightenment & reaction may lead to some fruit.

    • Pattoh. The documents re that sale will be very interesting especially as to who did the conveyancing. Para.18-2 of the Cambridge affidavit tells us the property was sold before the AWUWRA A/c’s were known to him. He did a search when he found out and attached a FormT! dated 14/2/96 to his affidavit in relation to the sale. He believes the balance after costs and mortgage were paid must have gone to Wilson and/or Blewitt.

      Though WE now know how Gillard did it, the laundering of the AWUWRA Inc. cheque through the S & G Trust A/c without the AWUnion being advised nor their interest noted on the mortgage, remained a mystery to Ian Cambridge.

      • HB

        I got the impression that Blewett did not get a red cent hence his reported approach to Gillard & subsequent flight to Asia in front of threats of “Federal Authorities” ( if you can believe everything you read on the webb)

        Either way, how the property was sold, who condoned the legal process allowing the sale & most importantly who was party to the decision process preceeding the action are all are all people of interest.

  109. A question which has been on my mind a lot since Gillard ascended (or descended whichever world view you subscribe to) to the high office of Prime Minister is, why would the right-wing AWU faction of MP’s (under instruction from Bill and Paul no doubt) swing their weight behind a self-confessed Left-wing faction contender in Gillard? Was non-aligned Rudd so bad that sworn enemies in the ALP factional make-up had to get into bed together and support each other?
    Or is there something more sinister happening here. I used to think that Gillard, on her power-at-any-cost crusade was prepared to sacrifice her true beliefs to get the #1 spot, but I’m not so sure now. Could it be that Gillard has got something over the power brokers of the AWU, which forces them to back Gillard? Keep your friends close and enemies even closer is an old Labor principal. So here’s the scenario.
    The types of misuse of union funds and personal gains, which have surfaced in the Thomson affair and the Wilson AWU/WRA affair, can’t be isolated incidents.
    Over many years hints of such behaviour have been brought forward but no charges laid, simply because no complaints have been put to the authorities or, when the have, the cone of silence descends and there’s no evidence to prosecute. And it is suggested that lawyers brokered such “confidentiality agreements”. As a partner to, at the time, the AWU’s solicitors, Gillard must have been privy to all sorts of “agreements” between the mandarins of the AWU and those who had “lined their pockets” at the union’s expense. Such “agreements” seemed to be made on the basis of a return of part or all of the “misappropriated” funds. It appeared to be the case with the Thomson/call girl issue. So Gillard, having access to confidential knowledge of probable corruption in the union movement, keeps this information in her own “secret place” for future reference. On top of that (poor choice of a phrase) Gillard, no doubt, would have gleaned all sorts of additional “off the record” salacious information from her beau, Wilson. You can picture the scene- a glass of chards or two, basking in the afterglow- who knows what information Gillard may have garnered by way of post-coital pillow talk?
    My thesis is that our PM has any number of Labor and union (especially AWU) identities over a barrel by virtue of what she knows about them both on and off the record.
    And the use of union money to curry favours with factional members seems to be the driving force behind the misuse of Thomson’s credit card for escort services- all in the name of achieving power in the union and/or government.
    Similarly, the Wilson slush fund was a war chest for him to gain a position of power in the union and the broader Labor movement.
    Information is knowledge, and knowledge is power.
    “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. (Acton)
    And in Gillard’s case, her maxim is, (from one bogan to another);
    “The thing women have yet to learn is nobody gives you power. You just take it.” (Rosanne Barr)

    • You could be right,though I hadn’t thought about that, being a simple soul who simply thought that what Gillard had on her mob was the threat that if they tried to dethrone her she would bring down the government.
      While i still think that, it is entirely possible she also has loads of dirt on multiple ALPs both in an out of unions and parliament.
      If so then that alone proves she was no innocent but a player in all that transpired.
      I know a union rep who hates this government and Gillard but still believes that Thomson and Williamson are aberrations to “most good and honest unions”
      Ha ha! Wonder is she knows the latest purchase of a mansion etc, for one of the “family” (old Mafia term)
      BTW wouldn’t it be good to know what Piggy has on everybody, he has gone into hibernation for the winter or something…..
      Keep up the good work Boys,you are doing Australia a service when it’s got cowards galore in Cowards’ Castle.

  110. Here it is in 4 parts Shane and others. Do with it what you will and many thanks to all who contributed. Cheers H/B

    Julia Gillard’s Ambush Press Conference on 23rd August 2012 arguably provided one of the most extraordinarily transparent (albeit unwitting) confession of guilt in completely unambiguous terms, ever made by a Public figure. Incredibly, she did not offer one shred of tangible evidence in her defence, nor has she ever done so!

    In answers to:-
    Q5. I was a solicitor at Slater & Gordon. I assisted with the provision of advice regarding the’ setting up of an association,’ the ‘workplace reform association’ that you refer to..
    Q.15 I took the same approach in relation to this file for the ‘ Australian Workers Union association.’
    Q 18. Let’s just be clear, so it’s clear for everyone. I assisted with the provision of legal advice to’ incorporate’ this association.
    Q.22 Can you be specific about exactly when and how you were informed that it might have been put to questionable use?
    PM: These matters started to come to attention in 1995 when they became the subject of controversy within the AWU itself. That is the first time that they came to my attention.

    PART 1.
    I.was a solicitor (who was in an intimate relationship with Bruce Wilson, an officer employed by my principal client, the Victorian Branch of the AWU).and therefore in breach of many of my obligationsunder the following Act, or the one it replaced.

    Legal Practice Act (1996) Victoria. Breaches:- Sec. 64, (a)(i)(ii)(iii);(b);(d)(i) and (ii); (f);(h);(i)

  111. PART 2.
    Julia Gillard:- I assisted with the provision of advice regarding the setting up of an association, the workplace reform association that you refer to……the Australian Workers Union association.

    Joint National Secretary of AWU Ian Cambridge: Affidavit.sworn 19/9/96
    Paragraph 11 (excerpts).

    Principal Rules 51 and 54.

    At all times between 1991 and 1996 the Rules of the Union and the resolutions of the National Executive have required that all money payable to the Union

    be paid into known bank accounts operated by or on behalf of the National Office or the Branches of the Union in the respective States.
    To my knowledge there has never been an occasion during that period on which the National Executive or a Branch Executive has authorised any individual

    officer of the Union to open and operate a bank account in their own right, for the purposes of receiving and disbursing funds which were paid to the or to the use of the Union.
    If such an acount were to be operated by any person connected with the Union it would be extremely difficult if not impossible to audit such accounts and to maintain track of the Branch and Union finances.
    I know of no reason why the National Executive or a Branch Executive would authorise such accounts to be conducted by persons connected with the Union outside the official Union financial structures or would authorise a Union official or employee to deal with Union funds without proper records or accurate accounts being kept..
    As Joint National Secretary I would never countenance such an irregular financial practice, and prior to the matters discovered in 1995 and 1996, I have never been made aware of any such practice occurring with respect to Union funds in the past.

  112. PART 3
    Julia Gillard:-Let’s just be clear, so it’s clear for everyone. I assisted with the provision of legal advice to incorporate this association. the Australian Workers Union association.

    WA Associations Incorporation Act.
    The Western Australian parliament envisaged it would be useful for groups of people to come together, to associate and to inform the government of their association so that they could incorporate, or become a single body corporate. Amongst other things that would let them open bank accounts.
    The parliament in the West saw that as a community good for sports, arts, cultural groups and the like.
    There are less burdensome reporting requirements on associations than there are for companies, trusts or other forms of corporate entities (or bodies).
    The law is Western Australian law. It’s not industrial relations law, it’s a local state law designed for small community groups.

    What we know for sure is that Bruce Wilson and Ralph Blewitt wanted an Association incorporated under that legislation

    You will note several significant points in the Act.

    1 An association must have 5 members to incorporate under this law. Bruce and Ralph only had themselves. There were no other members.
    2 An association cannot incorporate under this law if it proposes to trade for pecuniary profit. Bruce and Ralph started issuing invoices as soon as their Association paperwork went in, in fact before it was even incorporated.
    3 An association cannot incorporate under this law if it is a trade union.
    4 An association cannot incorporate under this law if its name is misleading as to its purpose.
    Note J Gillard’s statement that it was a re-election slush fund. Compare and contrast with the name.
    5 An association cannot incorporate under this law if it sounds like another corporate body.
    That is at the heart of this association. The invoices Bruce and Ralph sent out,:the scam wouldn’t have worked if it didn’t sound like it was part of the AWU.
    So Bruce Wilson’s choice of lawyer is significant. He started going out with Julia Gillard in late 1991 (source, J Gillard departure interview with S & G).
    Rather than go to a suburban solicitor in Perth who would be conversant with the local law, Bruce flew with Ralph to Melbourne to meet with Ms Gillard. Ms Gillard acknowledges having given legal advice in the establishment of this association (source, transcript of interview 23 August, 2012).
    The Australian Workers’ Union Workplace Reform Association was (wrongly) incorporated under Western Australian law. enabling Gillard’s lover Bruce Wilson and accomplice Ralph Blewitt to open Bank A/c’s.

    In his Affidavit Ian Cambridge, starting at Para.12 ‘Bank Accounts Discovered’ ,sets out the incredible chain of events of misappropriation and fraud across almost every State by so many people that one action of Julia Gillard set in motion when she deliberately chose to break every applicable Rule, obligation and law in the book to unlawfully assist her lover.
    These were described by QC Richard Kenzie as “the tip of the iceberg” as many documents from the Union and other information from banks and elsewhere were denied to him in a vast conspiracy to pervert the course of justice . That was why he was advised the only way to have a hope of getting to the bottom of it was to call for either a Royal Commission or a Judicial Inquiry with wide-ranging powers to subpoena.

  113. PART 4
    PM: These matters started to come to attention in 1995 when they became the subject of controversy within the AWU itself. That is the first time that they came to my attention.

    CRIMES ACT 1900 SECT 316
    Concealing serious indictable offence

    (1) If a person has committed a serious indictable offence and another person who knows or believes that the offence has been committed and that he or she has information which might be of material assistance in securing the apprehension of the offender or the prosecution or conviction of the offender for it fails without reasonable excuse to bring that information to the attention of a member of the Police Force or other appropriate authority, that other person is liable to imprisonment for 2 years.

    As an officer of the court, there was even more of an obligation on Julia Gillard to report the offence. It is apparent she did not do so because the first two unlawful Bank A/c’s she’d enabled Bruce Wilson to open did not become known to Ian Cambridge until April 1996. In the absence of any evidence whatsoever to the contrary, she is still in breach of that Act!

    • You have put it together beautifully. Congratulations! What then? She appointed Ian Cambridge as a Judge? for fair Work Australia, so obviously that shut him up.
      That is the problem, there is such an enormous web woven from Union-Boss right up to the Judiciary, right up to the PM. It is a web of deceit, lies, corruption unbelievable.
      However, if it is like a brick wall and you take out some of the bricks the wall will collapse, if only someone knows which bricks to attack!

      Whenever evidence i.e. in regard to Craig Thomson, Williamson, Peter Slipper goes to the police, we never hear anything after that.

      But then the PM has 1500 members in her media department, look how everything Michael does,gets stopped.

      I wish i knew the answer to that

      • NTY – I think it’s time Michael learned that conducting his private activities over the phone is no longer a good idea.

        Remember the UK case of Murdoch Media hacking into private phones – it was the excuse for the Finkelstein Report.

        Considering who is now running communications in this country and the resources available to him, I’d have second thoughts about ringing for a taxi if I were Michael.

      • May be, but at the same time I think these blogs are under the ‘loupe’, I have been searching for a few things for two weeks and more than half of the websites I have visited, disappeared within 24 hours, never to be seen again!
        So what are we going to do? Visit each other?

        It does not bother me, I was young once too, but naive??????

      • Hi nty. Ian Cambridge recently observed that he couuld not comment but did say this:- “I stand by every word I wrote”.
        See my Sept.25 @ 11-28 pm post above. Sections 138,139,145,148 offer a possible way to advance this.

      • You are probably right there, still wonder how we would get to him?
        In regard to the Libs I have been given the position they are taking is to wait untill after the election, once they are in office, they will call a Royal Commission. They then set the references, if Gillard would offer to call a Royal Commission and sets the references we would not get to the bottom at all and still be stuck with the corruption through the whole system.
        I do not think that Tony Abbott is going to tell anybody this.

        BTW I will ring this Johnson to-morrow in regard to the investigation Allison mentioned in her post.

        I will report to-morrow. Keep your spirits up, things are moving!

    • H/B – great job.

      As to the Crimes Act to which you refer in Item #1, how about Shane’s Item #2 which really gives a case to answer….

      (2) A person who solicits, accepts or agrees to accept any benefit for himself or herself or any other person in consideration for doing anything that would be an offence under subsection (1) is liable to imprisonment for 5 years.

      That’s a difference of three years in the slammer.

      I have been ‘on leave’ from my home on a number of occasions in my lifetime and have NEVER returned home to find thousands of dollars worth of rennovations carried out in my absence, without my knowledge, by a friend, lover, business associate or anyone else.

      We can safely assume this wasn’t a Bourke’s Backyard surprise TV make-over.

      In her exit interview with Peter Gordon she waffles interminably about her front fence, saying she wasn’t satisfied with the quality of the work so had refused to pay for it.

      Then she describes the builder who had carried out the work without her knowledge or approval as a “Greek bullshit artist”.

      Then she says that she hadn’t paid a $3,700 builder’s invoice because she had only been able to raise $2,000 of it and was “trying” to get together the remainder of the amount.

      Good ole Con the “bullshit artist” can now, after all these years and all the jobs he has done in his working life, remember clearly that she paid him with “two bank cheques”.

      Unless she can produce records showing unequivocally that those cheques were paid for from her own personal account (when she had declared she had problems “raising the balance” of $1700), then it is not unreasonable to infer that those bank cheques were bought and paid for by a third party. The fact that she handed over the cheques says NOTHING about where the money came from.

      If I rob a bank or drove the getaway car and subsequently received monies stolen from that bank, and then pay it back again, I still end up in gaol.

      It isn’t going to wash if I plead that I didn’t threaten a teller or commit the actual crime. It remains a crime to facilitate such an act and to receive benefit from it, and there is no way that “young and naive” is going to establish my innocence.

      And it certainly does NOT establish hers.

      • Thanks Swannie. I think that could be added to the list and it’s just what I was hoping: that further “crimes” can be added by those with better brains and legal knowledge than mine.

      • Blackswan, that whole thing about the demolition and the front fence has REALLY REALLY niggled at me too. It just doesn’t make sense, and I think this is why………..

        Wilson was presumably living in the house bought by Blewitt, but obviously had the keys to Gillard house, (which is common enough) or he couldn’t have gotten in to do the demolition work, but to then take the EXTREEMLY presumptuous step of demolishing her bathroom says a great deal about the closeness of their relationship. Most people would be concerned that the other person could go ballistic and end the reelaionship

        From the S&G interview……….” I went away to, for a holiday, in late August early September last year and I had been talking for a long time about getting this bathroom and laundry work done.

        And, Bruce whilst I was away decided that I should just get it done so he commenced with a group of friends demolishing the bathroom.

        By the time I came back the bathroom had been demolished so I had no option but to get the rest of the renovations done”

        So, he destroyed her bathroom (and presumably laundry too), without her permission, without discussion, while she was away. And don’t forget, this was out of the blue, after she had been talking about it “for a long time”.

        To me this implies that he either ASSUMED that she would now have the money to re-do the bathroom – which is never a cheap proposition BTW, or more probably, that he KNEW that there would now be money available for the work – of course, from the slush fund. Even dumping of the demolition rubble costs money !

        Similarly…………” Bill the Greek, whilst I was at work one day, built for me a low level brick fence. I didn’t ask him to do that. The result was truly hideous……”

        What would the ordinary person do when faced with (ugly) work on their house that they didn’t arrange or authorise? The first question would be “Who the hell gave you permission to do this !!??”

        Builders aren’t stupid – they just don’t do work which hasn’t been approved or authorised, as they risk not getting paid. Don’t you think a few questions would have been naturally, automatically, asked by any ordinary average person, let alone by an educated qualified lawyer/law-firm partner and those questions would clearly have led to some interesting revelations? She didn’t need to ask because she already knew who would be willing to pay for the work and that was Wilson and his slush fund !

        And wouldn’t Bill the Greek be especially careful when dealing with a lawyer, knowing she could sue the pants off him ! Even I, with no law degree, can see trespassing as the first possible charge.

        Another thing, Gillard tells S&G that she borrowed $20,000 to do the renovations but that ………
        I don’t feel confident saying I can categorically rule it out, but I can’t see how it’s happened because that really is the only bit of work that I would identify that I hadn’t paid for. And it seems, just looking at the receipts and how much I borrowed and all the rest of it that I basically paid full value for everything else, so it doesn’t seem to me looking at the house and working through it mentally that there is sort of thousands of dollars of free unexplained work lying around in the house.

        It seems to me that I’ve paid, you know, relatively ordinary funds for work to get done and you know I don’t see where there could be big money coming from any other source into the renovations. So I think that that’s the site of the problem, it’s this recent invoice with Con. I will know if there is anything else having spoken to Bob Smith.

        We only have her word that she BELIEVES she paid for everything – but that $20K seems to have gone an awfully long way, even back then when things were cheaper, and even though it was a small house – new bathroom, new kitchen, new appliances, new laundry, new windows, external painting, verandah posts, floorboards. And much of it arranged by her boyfriend/client, who she knows she set up the slush-fund for, and who arranged much of the work, and who presumably hadn’t totally financially abandoned his wife and kids back home, and who was funding his separate accommodation at Blewett’s house.

        So why did Gillard not question what was going on with Wilson financially, how he could finance his lifestyle?

        Because she knew exactly what was going on.

      • On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Kangaroo Court of Australia wrote:

        > ** > Chookums commented: “Blackswan, that whole thing about the demolition > and the front fence has REALLY REALLY niggled at me too. It just doesn’t > make sense, and I think this is why……….. Wilson was presumably living > in the house bought by Blewitt, but obviously had the” >

      • Chookums – She said she borrowed $20K to do the renno. Borrowed? From whom? Was it a bank, a finance company or her boyfriend? She never says and Gordon didn’t ask.

        Having done a number of kitchen/bathroom rennos over many years, one has to do a costing of every facet of the process in order to determine exactly what one can afford and/or would need to borrow.

        Was that money borrowed before the house refurb or ONLY after she had been ‘rumbled’ and needed to cough up some quick cash to placate the AWU?

        That entire interview transcript which you reproduced for us, becomes even more ludicrous with every fresh reading.

        It was astonishing to me that a salaried partner in a major law firm was having trouble scraping up less than $2,000 to pay an invoice.

        And after the dust had settled and she was unemployed, she had to sell half of her house to another “chum” – someone who was also up to her neck with Wilson, Trio and their dodgy contracts and who seemed to be the only “friend” in the ABC’s Australian Story in the run-up to election.

        Her history clearly demonstrates that her financial acumen is seriously in question and she is at the helm of our Economic ship of fortune. Until she began suckling full-time at the taxpayer teat, as so many of her predecessors who have gone on to become multi-millionaires, her financial background seems to indicate a person who has come from a family of modest means and who will do ‘whatever it takes’ to better themselves …. with no regard as to how she achieves it or at what cost to others.

        While Mike Smith today thinks we are making too much of her financial benefit from the fraud, I don’t agree.

        When determining a suspect’s likely guilt, surely an initial appraisal would have to be ‘motive’. Wilson couldn’t have been such a hot lover that all other considerations were disregarded. No – what she stood to gain was a never-ending cash spigot and for four years she lived high on the hog, enjoying all the perks that the ‘proceeds of crime’ will buy.

        Even the seemingly innocuous little details all contribute to an overall picture of the life and times of the person who heads our government.

        So far it’s looking very much like Edvard Munch’s “The Scream”.

      • Totally agree with you. Apparently the money was flowing and she could afford the high life, it was exactly what she wanted. But let’s not forget that if she lived with this Wilson for four years, what happened to the wife and children in Perth?
        One must have a certain personality, to be able to live with the knowledge, there is another woman and especially the children, I think it shows what type of character she is,
        She is ruthless!

    • H/B 33. Just read previous posts and saw a post from Allison that there is an investigation current by a James Johnson Lawyer/Journalist into the legal activities of Julia Gillard. Investigation started 27th August 2012.\
      There is a link on Allisons Post on 31 August 2012 at 7.50am
      There is a phone-number of this James: 0401-865-914.

      Will you give him a ring Monday or will I?

      Also there is someone else working on the dates you require other than me!

  114. With no person in a a position to lay a charge against Gillard or any of the others, involved union, Thiess or in parliament,or unwilling if they are, and the MSM silent on the gravity of this rort and all union rorts until they are forced to provide us with some truncated “report” there remains only the hope I can see of people dunning Tony Abbott’s office with a demand for a promise of a full Royal Commission into union activities over the past 50 yrs, to see if they should be regulated more appropriately
    I have asked this of him in my cover letter, copied to Julie Bishop and Warren Truss. and my local member –a Liberal–whom I hope to pigeonhole Tueday night as I’m attending a dinner in his honour.
    To date I have received the standard reply from Abbott’s office with referral to his facebook page etc. so i cannot say he has read it, but I won’t stop trying!

    • Hi Jazza. See my Sept.25 @ 11-28 pm post above. Sections 138,139,145,148 offer a possible way to advance this. I’ll be refining and adding a bit more, then intend to print and distribute it to various strategic bodies and people.

    • Jazza – I too have emailed Abbott and various Libs and got Zip in response to my specific questions.

      Simply got ‘the usual’ rubbish till I unsubscribed myself from his mailing list.

      KRudd and the Goss Cabinet got away with perverting the course of Justice because Bryce refused to convene a Royal Commission – that’s the only reason she now spends her days in Yarralumla arranging flowers.

      How long is her tenure as GG? Unless she is replaced by a person whose integrity is unquestioned and we have a Prime Minister committed to seeing this Labor/Union cesspit cleaned out, we have little reason to believe such a Commission will ever take place.

      Labor have an even greater urgency about seeing Abbott rolled and replaced by Turdbull. Having come to grief himself at the hands of a Royal Commission, Turdbull will never call his Labor mates to account.

      In our Government it isn’t simply a case of black hats versus white hats. There are many players wearing hard-hats who carry baseball bats, others who wear horse-hair wigs and others with no hats at all.

  115. It is so obvious,that corruption is accepted in the Labor party, as being part of the norm.
    Power, is a doctrine, that Labor clings to. Truth is secondary to the unions, power is absolute.
    Power within the modern day Unions is financial. As seen by the Wilson/Blewitt/ Gillard, is to control the funds provided by the worker.
    The power to live beyond their needs, the power to manipulate and corrupt.
    I did use to vote Labour, but Labor, is so distant, from it’s parent, that the difference,
    is so obvious.

    • And further more, if I’m allowed, a wonderful attribute of power, is the ability to tell the truth, to not deny, when, truth is at your door step.

      • Paul Howes sits on his hands, and waits for likes of Gillard, to fall, so that the likes of himself, can move forward.
        Yet, Howes, sits on documents, that can clear, Gillard, Blewitt and Wilson, of any implication of fraudulent behaviour.
        But then, again, Mr Howes, was a pre teenager, when the alleged fraud took place.
        Could be that maybe, there are people, within the Union Movement, have perverted the course of Justice. But that is only subjection as in a maybe.

      • I think on the contrary. I suggest that Gillard herself is sitting on documents, from her times with S and G as AWU chief brief and information (gleaned from pillow talk during her Wilson affair) that would probably incriminate the AWU mandarins in impropriety going way back. Why else would a right wing union support and out and out socialist as leader? Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer is the Labor way.

  116. Terry if you think Paul Howes is sitting on documents that can clear Gillard, you must be dreaming. The only papers he is sittring on (if he has them) will prove what Shane and Michael and many people on this blog have put together.
    Please think again, Bill Shorten was also too young when this went on, however, he has succefully closed down the investigation into Fair Works Australia, so he is probably the one, who knows all about it, and he aims to be the next Prime minister!!!!!!

    • God help us if Shorten ever achieves his goal! He’s the one who didn’t know what Gillard said, but agreed with whatever it was she said! He’s like a two week old lettuce leaf!

    • notwiseyet,

      My comments were tongue in cheek, Howes does sit on information, which could clear Gillard, or maybe, implicate her to a point of criminal activity.
      And that information, some of it, is held by Slater and Gordon, as you are well aware that Slater and Gordon have stated that they are writing to the AWU, requesting that they be able to publicly release files pertaining to their alleged involvement in matters involving AWU/Gillard/Wilson and Blewitt.

      Howes has indicated that he has not been contacted by Slater and Gordon.
      So that it would seem that one, or maybe both, are lying.

      Slater and Gordon want to clear their name about the matter, but Howes continues
      to sit on the truth.

      Howes has ambitions, political ambitions, he is a young man, a foolish young man,
      he is operating for his own ambitions. He seeks power, and is willing to ignore the power of honesty.
      His own willingness to be a willing partner in corruption, will be his Achilles Heel.

      I don’t mean to offend.

      • Terry, I certainly was not offended, do not worry, just got the wrong impression. Yes I know about the ambitions of Paul Howes, actually it was in The Womens Weekly, he wants to be PM, , I think it was a month or so after that the wife of Craig Thomson had
        pages in the same magazine telling everybody that her husband was innocent!!!!
        I was furious and cancelled the subscription, which I have had for so long, that I hate to remember. Like so many other things the magazine has become a propaganda-tool for the ALP.
        Anyway stay with us please, we need everyone to help. Take care!

  117. Looks like Alan Jones is another victim for pursueing Gillard! No wonder people are afraid to go after her considering people are having their careers destroyed. The Zombies who’s lives depend on this parasitic corrupt system are’nt going to give it up easily. Maybe we should divide Australia and put the honest citizens on one side and the Zombies on the other!

  118. Just heard Michael Williamson has been arrested. What does this mean in the scheme of things? Shane, is this what you meant by ‘be patient’?

  119. Hello Shane. For this topic, you place at the heart of your argument Section 316 of the Crimes Act 1900. I have also quoted this source in another place, only to be told by a lawyer that the Crimes Act 1900 is a New South Wales act and therefore applicable only to NSW. Given that the events pertaining to the AWU scandal took place in Victoria and Western Australia, it would seem that the Crimes Act you rely on here has no bearing. Thought you might like to know this.

    • Good point. But there are numerous federeal laws such as section 44 of the 1914 Crimes Act that could be used to bring charges:

      44 Compounding offences
      Any person who asks receives or obtains, or agrees to receive or obtain, any property or benefit of any kind for himself or any other person, upon any agreement or understanding that he will compound or conceal any indictable offence against the law of the Commonwealth or a Territory, or will abstain from, discontinue, or delay any prosecution for any such offence, or will withhold any evidence thereof, shall be guilty of an offence.
      Penalty: Imprisonment for 3 years.

      And there would be Victorian and WA laws that are the simular.

      • I take your point, Shane, but I still think the argument is not strong. In my view, there is a big difference between failing to report one’s suspicions to the police (the NSW Crimes Act 1900 section 316) and seeking an inducement to keep quiet (the section 44 you cite above).

      • Her inducement was that they both shut up and both stay out of Jail.

        What about below from the Victorian Crimes Act

        Crimes Act 1958 – SECT 325

        325. Accessories

        (1) Where a person (in this section called the principal offender) has
        committed a serious indictable offence (in this section called the principal
        offence), any other person who, knowing or believing the principal offender to
        be guilty of the principal offence or some other serious indictable offence,
        without lawful authority or reasonable excuse does any act with the purpose of
        impeding the apprehension, prosecution, conviction or punishment of the
        principal offender shall be guilty of an indictable offence.

        Julia Gillard knew the fraud had taken place and had documents but failed to go to the police.

  120. How about the recent claim on the Michael Smith site the Gillard falsely declared she’d witnessed Blewitt signing a power of attorney document for Wilson in Perth when she was in Melbourne at the time. This document allowed Wilson to buy the house in Melbourne on Blewitt’s behalf. Any crime committed there?

    • 2 Bobs Worth – in my opinion, it’s even worse than you say! Consider the following chronology of events….

      4 February 1993 – absolutely NOTHING of relevance happened on this date.

      13 February 1993 – the Kerr Street property was purchased at auction by Bruce Wilson with Julia Gillard in attendance. The contract of sale provided for a 37-day settlement period, with settlement scheduled for 22 March 1993. Wilson paid a ten percent cash deposit and signed the contract of sale. Wilson endorsed his signature with the words “as per Power of Attorney″.
      Sometime after 13 February (but before the 22 March settlement date) – Blewitt signed his donated Power of Attorney document in Perth. The document had been hand delivered to him by Bruce Wilson and indicated a creation date of 4 February 1993. Blewitt’s signature was not legally witnessed by anyone, and only Wilson was present in the room at the time of signing. The document was subsequently brought back to Melbourne by Wilson. At some point, Gillard signed the document and affixed the imprint of her “witness” stamp after Blewitt had signed the document. There were no other witness signatures noted on the document even though it is probable two such signatures were legally required under relevant legislation at the time.

      22 March 1993 – settlement on the Kerr Street property took place. Prior to settlement, Bruce Wilson signed the Transfer of Land document and endorsed his signature with the words “pursuant to a Specific Power of Attorney dated 4th day of February, 1993″. Prior to settlement, Wilson also signed the Mortgage document and again endorsed his signature with the words “pursuant to a Specific Power of Attorney dated 4th day of February, 1993″.

      There are other relevant details I could have posted here, but did not for the sake of brevity. But I leave it to those with legal training to draw out the implications of the above chronology of events. Keep in mind that no power of attorney existed at the time the Kerr Street property was purchased at auction. Keep in mind also that the power of attorney document was not properly witnessed and indicated a false date of creation. Keep in mind that the power of attorney document might have been additionally defective due to less than the required number of witness signatures.

      • According to Bolta’s blog there may be questions in the House next week.
        Gillard had questions reviving the matter today from Julie Bishop- but the usual non-answer. Gillard said that she had exhausted all the questions at her media performance recently and the police investigation concluded there was no case to answer. That was because there was no official complaint made by the AWU
        but that was before this new evidence has come to light. Surely there has been a breach of the Instruments (Power of Attorney Act 1980)?

  121. Julie Bishop attempted to get a response from Gillard on this matter during Question Time on Thursday 11th, and got the usual response from Gillard – nothing, i.e. “that’s already been answered – all dealt with!! Bishop’s supplementary question was blocked by Albanese!

    • If she has nothing to hide , her emphatic, and persistent excuses, and her panic whenever someone gets close to exposing something , suggest there is a fear there.

      Now , curiosity about her actions should be enough to sense something is wrong.

      After all, if there has been no wrongdoing, why the refusal to reply to questions?And why the emphasis on shutting down , and restricting free speech?

      And as everybody knows, the truth comes out eventually.

      Those who seek to avoid it , usually end up running around like a flock of panic stricken geese.Something similar to what the government looks like at the moment.

      Julia must almost be counting…….and waiting …… surely …..

      After all, Lawyers are such perceptive people , she must know the writing is on the wall.

      Long shall she be remembered as Australia’s first female Prime Minister.

      If only one could read the history books of the future.

  122. I do not know much about the rules set for the parliament, however i have been watching Question-time for at least 12 months and have noticed that Gillard does not ever answer a question, other than with a rant on the terrific performance of her government, followed by the incompetence of the opposition, I have never heard a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’.
    I do not know whether it was legal for Albanese to stop the supplementary question, but it happens regularly, or she just announces that Question-time will be resumed the next day and she and her troops leave the chamber.
    It does not seem right to me, but as I say I do not know the

    • I missed the very last few minutes of QT, but Christopher Pyne was attempting to put forward the second supplementary when Albanese had it put to the vote that Pyne should “no longer be heard”! I’m pretty sure Albanese’s attempt was rejected but I wouldn’t swear to it, so we should hear more on that when Parliament sits next!

      • Yes, I did not see that either. I just noticed that parliament is not sitting next week. Someone rang me to-day who thought that she might call an election, he also reckoned that she is desperate. Anyway, we’ll see, it is just a shocking situation we are placed in.
        I saw her in bali talking with one of the victims, i felt it was sacrilege that she was there.

Leave a Reply