Chief Magistrate Ron Cahill

Confessed corrupt judge Justice Adams is suing Fairfax Media for defamation

Justice Michael Adams of the Supreme Court of NSW has made me take down the post that was here. In court today (Wednesday 11/6/14) Justice Adams said to me that he will read my submissions later, handed some submissions straight back to me without reading them and then immediately issued orders (Click here to read) giving Kerry Stokes and his barrister Sandy Dawson what they wanted. A clear pre-determined judgement by Justice Adams. He has no shame. He reserved his written reasons which I suspect that will be a long time coming.

And yes I can call Justice Adams corrupt because he is and I am protected by the precedent Coleman v Power and the truth defence.

I will a write a new post soon. In the meantime read below. Yes Michael Adams heard his own case.

Michael Adams is suing Fairfax Media (Canberra Times) for defamation (Proceedings are currently afoot and set down again before Justice Rares (usually a Federal Court judge) in his capacity as an ACT Supreme Court judge on the 13th June 2014) (Click here to see the latest orders by Rares)

How does Justice Adams justify making me take down a post and video regarding allegations of judicial corruption (it’s really a statement of facts) yet the allegation by Jack Waterford and Fairfax are still on the internet. That seems to be an admission of guilt by Justice Adams or maybe Justice Adams is saying that he has incompetent lawyers.

Mr Waterford says in his defence what he wrote was “a recitation” of the allegations put in 2011 to the ACT Supreme Court. I understand Justice Adams never challenged the evidence (or at least not successfully) in the court so once again I take it as an admission of guilt by Justice Adams.

Some of the things Mr Waterford wrote in relation to the conduct of Michael Adams are absolutely scandalous if true which they clearly are as far as I am concerned.

Some of what Waterford wrote:

“There are modern criticisms of the conviction going to issues of propriety by prosecutors and police. For example, the court was not told the major forensic witness had been dismissed for professional failings from the Victorian Police forensic unit, nor that he had significantly altered critical testimony between inquest and trial. Counsel for the DPP misled the High Court on whether Carruthers had seen material raising the question of fitness to plead. There are complaints of police misbehaviour, not least in efforts, admitted by police, to harass Eastman so he would explode, and, they hoped, make damning admissions.” (Click here to read the May 2012 article)

When Waterford talks about the prosecutors and DPP above he is in effect talking about Michael Adams as he was in charge of the prosecution and that is why Adams is suing for defamation. 

Coleman v Power – High Court of Australia (See paragraphs 76 to 106) (Click here to read the judgement)

A precedent that I will use to defend my actions is Coleman v Power as Justice Adams orders are an unconstitutional restriction on freedom of speech. It relates to a man in Queensland handing out pamphlets “which contained charges of corruption against several police officers.” This is almost identical to the poster that I used during the week except I named 2 judges and it also relates to the post that I published last week. The High Court found that the man was protected by the Constitution because the words used concerned matters within the freedom of communication about government or political matters that the Constitution protects. I will be pushing that myself in relation to my allegations of judicial favours. I am sure Justice Adams new this but did not care less.

Justice Adams denied David Eastman his human rights for 19 years now Adams is denying me my constitutional rights.

I will be writing further about Justice Adams in the near future. He was also involved in the Lindy Chamberlain matter.

12 replies »

  1. Shane was this “Adams” prawn in the supreme court in 2008/2009? I attended a directions hearing – Adams was the Judge – who as it turned out sent me flying into so much corruption it was so not funny and illegal incarceration… this Adams was being controlled like a Gucci puppet by hatsizgorous and Ian knight and David Campbell etc etc at the time..

  2. Adams was also heavily involved with the Lindy Chamberlain case, first at the Morling Inquiry and later to oppose her application for compensation. He made a fair bit of money being a ‘player’ for the Northern Territory.

  3. I was in court a few months ago for a simple speeding fine that came about as a result of entrapment. I could feel the bias while there with little to no regard given to my evidence. We the people need to stand up to this crap. Well done Shane as always enjoy reading your articles.

  4. On what grounds did Justice Adams order the removal of this post? Was it based on sound and fair legal reasoning, or was it because he didn’t like it or was playing puppet for Stokes? The “clear pre-determined judgement” gives me a good hint about what the answer is.

    Will it ever end? When they have to go after a self represented defendant so hard and with so much “dirty” business going on, clearly they are all very scared of the truth being exposed. This site is doing its job well.


  5. I had to return here to say something else.

    For the benefit of those who have come here after everything was deleted, I saw the video of Shane at Addisons and also read an affidavit of Richard Keegan. To the best of my ability this is my recollection and opinions of them:

    In the affidavit he described how two of the staff there (secretary/receptionists?) were “visibly traumatized” after Shane had filmed there. Well, from memory I recall those so called “visibly traumatized” employees chasing after Shane and holding the elevator door open until Richard followed him in there. To me those employees did not look “traumatized”. Is this perhaps a devious ploy to get sympathy from a sympathetic judge? Or from others who may never see the video because of its suppression? From what I saw in my opinion the claim of anyone there being traumatized is not believable. That is the kind of argument/tactic I would expect from a 4 year old child. Geez, and these people are actually taken seriously in a court room! No wonder there’s no justice.

    By the way… that order was made to take down articles at http://www.kangaroocourtofaustralia.COM.AU (non-existent), not http://www.kangaroocourtofaustralia.COM. Is that a technicality that can be exploited here?

    • Yes I agree as I too saw the videos….chasing someone into a lift is not exactly being traumatised….I wonder if Sandy Dawson was feeling a little teary after his video as well. In court it appears it’s all about painting a picture I suppose.

  6. I would have thought that public servants,Judges Politicians and the like as representatives of the people are open to public debate.???????????????

Leave a Reply