Justice Stephen Campbell

Former ICAC investigator Justice Stephen Campbell caught acting corruptly

I was in court before Justice Stephen Campbell a few weeks ago and received the standard treatment in my ongoing battle with Kerry Stokes. The good news is that Justice Campbell is a former investigator for the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) so we get first-hand experience of what an ICAC investigator is like. This takes us into the heart of ICAC to some degree although it must be pointed out he is no longer an investigator there.

The bad news is Justice Stephen Campbell is an extremely dishonest compulsive liar and blatantly corrupt. In this post I won’t focus on his judgment but on Campbell, his operation at ICAC and the importance of always keeping an open mind when it comes to corruption.

At ICAC Stephen Campbell was counsel assisting Operation JAREK which dealt with massive fraud and theft from local governments and organisations. (Click here to read more). But firstly a quick backgrounding to his handiwork in court a couple of weeks ago.

Stephen Campbell ICAC

Stephen Campbell when he worked at ICAC as Counsel Assisting – Did he act corruptly at ICAC? He has acted corruptly as a judge of the Supreme Court of NSW.


Kerry Stokes and Channel 7’s Lawyer Justine Munsie from Addisons Lawyer started suing me for defamation in April last year. (Click her to read more)

Stokes and Munsie have never had any intention of going to hearing as they would lose badly. This is supported by their delaying tactics and refusal to supply me with documents requested (discovery) and answer questions that I sent them in writing (interrogatories). The court has also refused numerous requests by me to issue orders for discovery and interrogatories even though it is standard practice and I am entitled to them to make out my defence. The reason is very clear. Once orders are issued for interrogatories and discovery Kerry Stokes will withdraw the proceedings against me as he does not want to sign an affidavit or hand over the documents.

Their plan is just to get interlocutory orders (temporary orders) to make me take down articles then delay the hearings as long as possible. We have already been going since April last year and the case gone nowhere. All the judges are aware of this including Justice Campbell.

A couple of weeks ago on the 5th June 2015 Justice David Davies and Kerry Stokes lawyers had an ex parte hearing (a secret hearing they never told me about until afterwards) and issued various orders making me take down 2 articles. (Click here to read the ordersI ignored the orders as they were corruptly issued. On the 11th June 2015 Justice Peter Garling continued the orders (Click here to read) Once again I ignored the orders.

On the 17th of June 2015 the matter was before Justice Stephen Campbell. He firstly added Kerry Stokes son Ryan Stokes as an applicant. (Click here to read the judgment) And then in a second judgment Campbell made me take down 4 articles and 3 Tweets from twitter. (Click here to read the judgment) (Click here to read the orders) I took down the posts this time as we change tactics.

Justice Stephen Campbell’s lies and corruption in court

I asked Justice Campbell to transfer the case to the Federal Court because it deals with allegations of corruption against Supreme Court judges and there instantly perceived bias. It is standard practice if a matter deals with a judge of he court it is transferred to another court of or a judge is brought in from interstate. An example is Justice Michael Adams sued Fairfax Media for defamation and it was dealt with by the Federal Court. Justice Campbell refused.

I asked Justice Campbell if I could have a copy of the transcript from the hearings of Justice Davies and Justice Garling. He said no because of copyright laws. This is a lie as often judges will give parties transcript. Justice Adams gave me transcript for example.

I asked Justice Campbell if he could issue orders for discovery and interrogatories and he said he couldn’t as he does not have the power. That is a another lie as he does have the power.

I could dissect all the lies in Justice Campbell’s judgment but I will save that for another time.

ICAC – Operation JAREK – 2008 to 2012

It says on ICAC’s website:

“Corruption allegations that staff from a number of local councils and other authorities accepted secret benefits from suppliers and that staff from two local councils facilitated payment of false invoices from suppliers (Operation Jarek)” (Click here to read more)

ICAC found 110 organisations (88 councils) had been involved in the corruption but only had public hearings into 15 of them. In total there were millions of dollars of bribes.

The SMH reported:

“Mr Campbell said the public hearings, which are due to last three weeks, could not possibly cover the 110 organisations listed so ICAC had chosen organisations whose officials had received gifts of the highest cash value.” (Click here to read more)

Mr Campbell chose 14 councils and the Roads & Traffic Authority for public hearings.

Anywhere Mr Campbell has gone and anything he has done needs to be checked. Was there some corruption in the way he decided who to have and not to have at the ICAC public hearings? Was he involved in other corruption when he worked at ICAC?

Thomas Kelly Murder – Justice Stephen Campbell

Justice Campbell sentenced Kieran Loveridge to 7 years jail with a non-parole period of 5 years and 2 months for the murder of Thomas Kelly. Loveridge committed other assaults on the night he killed Thomas Kelly but was not given much more time in jail.

The SMH published an article titled “Judge with no sense of the real world” which said:

“Stephen Campbell is a judge of the NSW Supreme Court. I will dispense with the usual honorific ”Justice” for reasons that will become obvious. Campbell might want to know what happened outside his court last Friday, in the real world, the day he brought the Supreme Court into controversy, earned the ire of the Premier, shattered an innocent family, mobilised the media and generally enraged the community.”

and: “Campbell paid lip service to the grief of the victims and the standards of society, then imposed a sentence that made a mockery of both.” (Click her to read more)

On appeal Loveridge was given a sentence of 14 years with a non-parole period of 10 years and two months. The new sentence was double what Justice Campbell had given him.

Most media were just as critical and I wrote story at the time titled Justice Campbell the joke of the NSW Supreme Court. Thomas Kelly was always a case of murder. (Click her to readIt’s another reason why Campbell should not have heard my matter although I did not raise it in court as I had forgotten. I am sure Justice Campbell remembered though as it comes up on the first page if you google Justice Stephen Campbell.

Now that I have seen Justice Campbell in court and know how he operates it makes me wonder if he gave Loveridge a light sentence because of corruption and not incompetence as everyone seems to think.


ICAC have done some great work in the last couple of years but they are not above scrutiny. And they are certainly not above having corrupt people working there which Justice Stephen Campbell proves although it has been at least three years since he has been there.

I am sure I will be writing about Campbell again the future. I will also be making a compliant to ICAC about him. Will they investigate one of their own? We’re about to find out.

Please use the Twitter, Facebook and email etc. buttons below and help promote this post.

To receive notifications of new posts on this website go to the top right where it says “Follow this site by email” and about twice a week you will be notified when there is a new article published.

This website is independent and reliant on donations to keep publishing. If you would like to support the continuance of this site please click on the button below to donate via PayPal or go to the donations page for other donation options (Click here to go to the Donations page)

You can also support this site by buying a t-shirt or coffee mug at my online shop (Click here to visit the shop)

Thank you for your support.

13 replies »

  1. I’m fairly au fait with the dastardly behaviour of members of the legal industry, the theatrics, the appointments based on nepotism/gravel rash and the the self-evident corruption, but Shane, if you’re told to take down posts, are they not archived in a “higher jurisdiction”?

  2. I despair at our revolting and corrupt legal system and the many judges that have found to be corrupt, out of touch with reality and downright rude and ignorant.

  3. I think operation Jarek has a lot more that should be exposed. I thought it was odd at the time that some corruption was exposed and some not. Why not? I noticed the Office of Environment got mentioned with some deep research but only once it was mentioned with no details. What was going on there? ICAC in the past and probably still now have been very protective of the NSW Npws and why?

  4. As a CONSTITUTIONALIST I am well aware that the Framers of the constitution concerned about inappropriate trails embedded legal principles in the constitution, and to which the states creagted within s106 “subject to this constitution” are bound by.
    Hansard 8-2-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian Convention)
    Mr. OCONNOR.-No, it would not; and, as an honorable member reminds me, there is a decision on the point. All that is intended is that there shall be some process of law by which the parties accused must be heard.
    Mr. HIGGINS.-Both sides heard.
    Mr. OCONNOR.-Yes; and the process of law within that principle may be [start page 689] anything the state thinks fit. This provision simply assures that there shall be some form by which a person accused will have an opportunity of stating his case before being deprived of his liberty. Is not that a first principle in criminal law now? I cannot understand any one objecting to this proposal.
    Regretfully states and even the commonwealth courts are going crazy issuing ex parte orders which have become the norm of the day. While I stand against those kinds of ex parte orders regretfully few if any has ever done so on the same basis.
    The moment you (Shane) refer to your constitutional rights it becomes a federal matter and the court then can only deal with it invoking federal jurisdiction whereas now it may hold it is a State matter and as such refuse to transfer it to a federal court.

    Held that a State Court exercising federal jurisdiction when it erroneously applies Commonwealth Act to subject matter before the Court. Commonwealth v Cole, (1923) 32 C.L.R. 602 and Commonwealth v Dalton, (1924) 33 C.L.R.. 452; 30 A.L.R. 85

    Similarly in Commissioner of Police v. Tanos (1958) 98 CLR 383, at p 395, Dixon C.J. and Webb J. said that
    it is a deep-rooted principle of the law that before anyone can be punished or prejudiced in his person or property by any judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding he must be afforded an adequate opportunity of being heard.

    The moment as party refers to the provisions of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution act 12900 (UK) then the court must invoke federal jurisdiction to be able to continue with the matter. While a state court can exercise federal jurisdiction is so granted by the Commonwealth one at least remove the misconception by a judicial officer that he/she cannot transfer the matter to a federal court as to that it is only a state matter.

  5. Why are our politicians standing by and allowing this insidious corrupt behaviour – and what is the way forward to get it on the political agenda – surely the Opposition at least, if not the Govt would benefit from exposing this entrenched corruption – Union organisations are being investigated – but yet the judiciary seems bulletproof from investigation (even though the collateral damage is severe) – it feels like Animal Farm all over again – those that are meant to stand for justice – misuse justice and get paid taxpayers dollars for operating corruptly and are beyond the Law because they administer the Law, apparently in whichever way they fancy – the Judicial System needs gutting out – and the wider Media has the power to relentlessly bring that message home to the public – but again will they? Not likely from the Stokes or Murdoch camps, nor the Govt. Seems Judges have an exemption when it comes to ICAC investigations! Or is ICAC going to do the job and launch a judicial investigation – I’m sure there’s other Judges that would come forward and acknowledge the corruption of peers if they were given a secure opportunity.

  6. This is why the Unions are so powerful. Labor are not stupid, they appoint the corrupt sods but have the unions as back up for when it’s better to ‘look after’ justice yourself.

Leave a Reply