Chief Justice Tom Bathurst

Journalist charged by police for asking questions about judicial corruption

On Wednesday, the 21st June I was charged by the NSW police for breaching telecommunications laws for an email that I sent in September 2016 to all the judges of the NSW Supreme Court asking questions and giving them an opportunity to respond to allegations which is nothing more than journalists do around the world every day of the week.

The police executed a search warrant on my unit while I was at work and took my computer and the spare one I have which the police said they will give back in about 10 days which has forced me to buy a new one. I went to the police station after work and was charged.

If I am found guilty the repercussions are potently huge for every journalist in the country who emails questions to criminals or alleged criminals before they publish articles. The police officer who charged me even said that the area of law that I am being charged with is unsettled. In other words, he was not sure that there was a legal basis for charging me.

At this point, there is only one complainant and that is the NSW Supreme Court registrar Rebel Kenna although it was the Crown Solicitor Ms Lea Armstrong who made the complaint on Rebel Kenna’s behalf. They are also the 2 people who are overseeing a current contempt of court case against me in the NSW Supreme Court.

The charges are some 9 and 1/2 months after I sent the email and the police said no one else has complained at this point but it is only 6 weeks since I raised allegations of criminal conduct against Rebel Kenna and Lea Armstrong in the NSW Supreme Court on the 4th May 2017. It makes it very obvious that Rebel Kenna’s complaint is a retaliatory action against me raising her and Ms Armstrong’s criminal conduct in court.

The email in question shows up in an article I published last year titledPaedophile priest gets 3 months jail for raping 3 boys by NSW Supreme Court’s Justice Hoebenand the article was also filed in court on the 4th of May as part of my defence.

The court matter that was in court in the 4th of May is the contempt proceeding by the NSW Supreme Court called “Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of NSW v Shane Dowling“.  The Prothonotary is the head registrar for the court and it is my understanding that is Rebel Kenna so she would have known what I said about her in court on the 4th of May. Lea Armstrong was in court that day instructing the barrister so was also aware of the allegations I made against her and Rebel Kenna.


On the 3rd of February 2017, the registrar of the NSW Supreme Court sought leave to have me charged for contempt for comments I made in court that day and I wrote an article about it titled: “Chief Justice Bathurst has journalist charged with contempt for accusing him of corruption” and said:

NSW Chief Justice Tom Bathurst instituted contempt of court proceedings against me for accusing him of corruption in court on Friday the 3rd of February 2017. The corruption is being a bribe taker and paedophile which I have previously written on my website. Chief Justice Bathurst has used taxpayer funds and taken out a suppression order to conceal who has charged me with contempt and to conceal the fact that they are trying to hide the very serious allegations. (Click here to read more)

When I was finally charged in April they dropped the claims against me for saying anything about Chief Justice Bathurst and: “I was charged for contempt for allegedly calling a Justice Clifton Hoeben a paedophile and Registrar Christopher Bradford a paedophile and a bribe taker in court on the 3rd of February 2017. I have pleaded not guilty and deny the allegations against me. (Click here to read more)

Hearing on the 4th May 2017 – Justice Helen Wilson – Supreme Court of NSW

At the hearing, I pleaded not guilty and denied the allegations and also ran a defence that I was also protected by the implied freedom of political communication in the Australian constitution.

I wrote on the 11th of June in an article titled: “Blogger charged with contempt ordered to serve Attorney-Generals with Notice of a Constitutional Matter

The pursuit of me by the Supreme Court of NSW for contempt has stepped up a notch with the court ordering me to serve all Australian Attorney-Generals with a Notice of a Constitutional Matter pursuant to section 78B of the Judiciary Act 1903.

Neither Clifton Hoeben or Registrar Christopher Bradford have filed an affidavit in the case nor have they denied the allegations that they say I made. They have also not charged me or complained about the allegations I made against them in an article last year titled Paedophile priest gets 3 months jail for raping 3 boys by NSW Supreme Court’s Justice Hoeben” even though I wrote to them and let them know I would be publishing the allegations. So I take it they confirm that the allegations in the article is true and correct. (Click here to read more)

It is possibly the 11th of June article that was the trigger for Rebel Kenna and Lea Armstrong to make the retaliatory complaint to the police given I had pointed out no one had denied the allegations I had made against them in the article and email.

Rebel Kenna

The email complained about was sent to every judge of the NSW Supreme court on the 6th of September 2016 and the article with the email in it was published on the 8th September 2016. The article was about a paedophile priest receiving 6 months jail after abusing 3 boys and when it was appealed by the prosecutor because the sentence was scandalously inadequate instead of getting a longer sentence the judges reduced it to a minimum 3 months. In the email, I made allegations against various judges and registrars for being paedophiles, suspected paedophiles and gave them the opportunity to respond before I published the article and let them know I would be publishing the email. Not one responded or denied the allegations but they obviously received the email given Rebel Kenna’s complaint.

The article and email also raised the issue of NSW judges receiving bribes of $2.2 million as reported by Fairfax Media and the ABC’s Four Corners in 2015. (Click here to read more)

At no stage did anyone sent the email respond or deny the allegations. No one has ever contacted me to complain about the email or article. There are never been any defamation threats or action. There has never been any contempt of court action.

Rebel Kenna’s complaint to the police which was done via Lea Armstrong said the email made her physically sick. So why didn’t she complain or take any action before?

I had previously made a compliant to the court of assault against Rebel Kenna and a court sheriff in 2015 and on the 4th of May 2017 I made a number of allegations against Rebel Kenna including:

  1. Rebel Kenna colluded with a court sheriff to threaten and assault me while I was in court at the bar table representing myself on the 24th of August 2015 and I made a formal complaint to senior management of the court. (Click her to read more)
  2. Every decision Rebel Kenna made at various directions hearings was in the favour of Kerry Stokes’ barrister Sandy Dawson and Rebel Kenna was clearly acting corruptly.
  3. I raised the article and email from last year in court on the 4th of May and while I did not expressly mention Rebel Kenna in relation to the article and email she would have known she was named on them and would have been very annoyed that I had raised the email and article in court.
  4. In court on May 4th I raised the fact that previously in court when I was in front of Rebel Kenna for a directions hearing I asked her not to list a hearing beforepaedophile judge Garry Neilson. I said this a number of times and Rebel Kenna did not complain.

NSW Crown Solicitor – Lea Armstrong

NSW Crown Solicitors Office make compliant for Rebel Kenna

Why the NSW Crown Solicitor is making a complaint to the police on behalf of a public servant is very disturbing. Rebel Kenna should have been made to make the complaint herself. Why is the taxpayer paying for it?

One positive is that there is no suppression order on the charges against me or the article I published last year so it can be spoken about freely and it also shows how futile the suppression orders are in the contempt matter against me.

Telecommunications laws – CRIMINAL CODE ACT 1995 (Commonwealth)

The exact part of the Telecommunications laws that I have been alleged to have breached is section 474.17 of the CRIMINAL CODE ACT 1995. Using a carriage service to menace, harass or cause offence

             (1)  A person commits an offence if:

                     (a)  the person uses a carriage service; and

                     (b)  the person does so in a way (whether by the method of use or the content of a communication, or both) that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, menacing, harassing or offensive.

If Rebel Kenna was so offended why didn’t she make a complaint when I emailed her and the Supreme Court judges in September 2016. Why did Rebel Kenna start to be involved and continued to be involved in the prosecution of my contempt case? Why hasn’t she sued for defamation? etc.

Threat to all journalists – Fairfax Media and Eddie Obeid

If I am found guilty of breaching section 474.17 of the telecommunications act for emailing questions, allegations and putting the parties on notice that I plan of publishing them that leaves the door open in the future for other journalists to be charged with the same crime.

In 2006 Fairfax Media and its journalists Kate McClymont and Anne Davies were found have to have defamed former Labor Party MP Eddie Obeid by claiming he was corrupt and he tried to get a $1 million bribe. I am sure that Kate McClymont and Anne Davies would have emailed Eddie Obeid questions before they published and in a case like this there would have been nothing stopping Eddie Obeid from making a complaint to the police for breaching section 474.17 of the telecommunications act given the court found the allegations were defamatory. Any journalist could face charges just for asking questions. (Click here to read more)

As we all know Eddie Obeid is now in jail because he was corrupt when he was a politician.

Attack on Freedom of Political Communication and journalist’s rights

This is a case of government officials using a police force trying to stop an Australian citizen’s right to free speech and political communication. I make no apologies for criticizing the courts and judges given their scandalous conduct. Former Chief Justice of High Court of Australia Sir Anthony Mason said:

In Nationwide News Pty Ltd v. Wills, Mason CJ described scandalising as a ‘well recognised form of criminal contempt’ (at para 21) but suggested there was no contempt at common law ‘if all that the defendant does is to exercise his or her ordinary right to criticise, in good faith, the conduct of the court or the judge’ (at para 21).

He stated the judiciary should be open to criticism and cited US Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black stating in Bridges v. California in 1941:

The assumption that respect for the judiciary can be won by shielding judges from published criticism wrongly appraises the character of American public opinion. … an enforced silence, however limited, solely in the name of preserving the dignity of the bench, would probably engender resentment, suspicion, and contempt much more than it would enhance respect (pp. 270-271). NATIONWIDE NEWS PTY. LIMITED v. WILLS [1992] HCA 46; 

I’ve been issued with a court attendance notice for August which I assume is like a directions hearing and what the process is after that I am unsure. I had to buy another computer to see me through until I get my other one back from the police and I don’t know if I would be keen on using the old one now.

This matter has a distance to go but it is a battle well worth fighting. Just for the record the police were fine with me writing this article. But in saying that when the police are raiding the homes of journalists and taking their computer it should be disturbing for all Australians. Even more so when there was no need to as I had already told the court on May 4th that I had published the article and email and tendered it as evidence.

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

Kangaroo Court of Australia is an independent website and is 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)

If you would like to follow this website, you can by email notification at the top right of this page and about twice a week you will be notified when there is a new article.

Thank you for your support.

38 replies »

  1. Absolute disgraceful act by NSW Police.

    These Police Warrants are a complete and utter joke. Your old PC’s should be thrown, who knows what malicious software they could install..

    You might want to read up on the NSW Surveillance Devices Act, it might provide you with a strong defence. It has helped me before 🤓

    I am at a complete loss as to how this conduct is actually lawfull, aside from stating that as a “reasonable person”, the system is so BROKE it is becoming embarrissing. Notwithstanding, I am not sure when the next “care taker” period starts to kick in, but these ministers might not be around to respond to your questions. Have experienced that before too.

    Hard to fight a battle when you hands are cuffed. They know that they cannot WIN against people like you, so they will do whatever they need to do to stop you fighting…

    Gutless puppeteers, with lots and lots of money !!!

    • “Your old PC’s should be thrown, who knows what malicious software they could install..”

      It does not matter. Reformat the drive anyway, but they have deliberately created soooooo many back doors into computers, both hardware and software, that you will never prevent them from installing malicious content on there. Type “3G in Intel processors” into a search engine and see for yourself the microprocessor within a microprocessor with hidden 3G comms so they can access your entire PC even while it is turned off. Very nasty stuff. For this reason I will NEVER again believe when someone is accused of having malicious or illegal content on their computers.

      SHANE, THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO KNOW BECAUSE THEY MAY DO OR HAVE ALREADY DONE JUST THAT TO GET YOU. If you want to be 100% secure (????) set up a steel box big enough to fit in, or line an entire room in steel plate (a Faraday cage), get inside with a PC that is never connected to the internet and never leaves that steel box. Maybe that will work. Maybe. (????).

      As for the situation now: corruption on top of corruption on top of corruption to hide all the corruption.

    • Pig’s at the trough don’t like their filthy pens cleaned out, it would appear there is similar sediments within in our judicial system

    • “… who knows what malicious software they could install…”

      I know for a fact that NSW Police have malicous software available to install covertly on civs computers and smart phones. It is called FinFisher specifically, and they purchased it with tax payer funds.

      If you check out the Wikileaks page, you can see a list of clients (GOVERNMENTS) that have purchased this software for nefarious purposes.

  2. Gosh they are getting crazier and crazier. Stay strong, and keep on posting the truth, and continuing to expose them.

    I had taken to cc’ing emails to the Crown Solicitor, advising that I would be taking NSW Justice to court, if they didn’t stop bringing false charges against me, and handing down false convictions for same, to protect an employee of the NSW Attorney General’s Department. Things got worse for me, once I’d added the Crown Solicitor into the loop. Then I read your article, looked at her photo, and realized why things had gone downhill so fast. You can almost feel the evil that emanates from her, just from looking at her photo.

    I was considering taking things to the NSW Supreme Court next, but after reading this article, I might have to rethink that.

    Did you see the article months ago, where the high court and some politicians want ‘offence’ to be removed from being considered to be a criminal act. Maybe once upon a time when people where more polite, being offensive was out of order. But in this world, offence is the least of what we have to deal with.

    Corrupt courts and a corrupt judicial system, is much more dangerous than offence.

    Pedophiles working within government buildings and the police force, is offensive to me.

    Do you think I could have them charged for being there, for that reason?

  3. Nothing is going to change until we have a Royal Commission into the justice system in this country. Look at this recent debacle with the three Ministers being hauled over the coals, it seems a matter of do as I say and not as I do when it comes to the dedicatory.

    • Sorry Sue, I have had dealings with the system and I can tell you that a Royal Commission into the justice system implies immediately that there is justice. I can assure you there is not. The system should be called merely the Legal System. I have memories of Obama saying “… will be brought to justice”. No, no, no, they will be brought before the law and have their ass kicked. Like I say, there is no such thing as justice, there or here. And thanks to this website we are seeing it happen in real time. Keep it up. Your work is important.

  4. I and I am sure many many others think what you are doing and how you are doing it is very very brave. The reality is you will not always be exactly correct in your assertions or what you deduce ( because I don’t actively refute something you say of me does not make it true) but none the less that the authorities at all its levels should take the actions they have against you, suggests that at the very least there are a whole range of decisions being made that give cause to question whether officers of the system are acting as they are required “without fear or favour”.
    It is just so unfortunate the MSM are not picking up and helping you, especially considering much of the inconsequential dribble some of them produce.
    I can’t believe the Telecommunications Act you have quoted I offend and am offended every day mostly through the telecommunications carriages! WTF.

    • I was charged with the same offence in October 2016. I offended an employee of the CJC who used her position at a court house to pervert the course of justice against me. I forwarded two emails to her, which were copies of complaints I lodged with her employer, the Attorney General of NSW, about three police officers she had used her position to instruct to act unlawfully against me, and bring false allegations against me. I am on bail for causing that ‘offence’ to her, and police say in their bail paperwork that I will be doing jail time for those two forwarded emails.

      Yet it is against the law for her to have again used her position to have bought a charge against me, for lodging complaints about her. It is called a crime against justice.

      However, I’m the one who has to go to jail, for her crimes, according to the Magistrate, the AG and even the Premier of NSW.

  5. Politicians and judges are corrupt. Not only that, they are cowards.

    The three politicians who criticized the bail and parole system in Victoria were on target.

    But to protect their position in parliament they made an abject apology.

    Contemptible does not sum it up!

  6. I would suggest that the Judiciary are coming under a lot of pressure and are looking for a victim so as to warn others. We are hurtling towards the totalitarian state where corrupt decision makers can utilise subjective laws to hide themselves from criticism.
    If you are a member of the Judiciary and you receive correspondence that questions your position of power you may well consider that communication as menacing, harassing or offensive and try to use the Telecommunications act section 474.17 as a form of attack. Now if you had sent a letter would that change the situation.

  7. I believe you have been charged under The Schedule of the CRIMINAL CODE ACT 1995 (Commonwealth), not the Telecommunications Act.

    474.17 Using a carriage service to menace, harass or cause offence

    (1) A person commits an offence if:

    (a) the person uses a carriage service; and

    (b) the person does so in a way (whether by the method of use or the content of a communication, or both) that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, menacing, harassing or offensive.

    It appears, that this section is extremely wide but like defamation legislation can be successfully defended if the allegations are proven to be true.

  8. Dear Shane,
    Why do you never demand Trial by Jury? To quote Lysander Spooner, “For more than six hundred years — that is, since Magna Carta, in 1215 — there has been no clearer principle of English or American constitutional law, than that, in criminal cases, it is not only the right and duty of juries to judge what are the facts, what is the law, and what was the moral intent of the accused; but that it is also their right, and their primary and paramount duty, to judge of the justice of the law, and to hold all laws invalid, that are, in their opinion, unjust or oppressive, and all persons guiltless in violating, or resisting the execution of, such laws.” Democracy means that “Common Law doth control Acts of Parliament and adjudges them when against common right to be void” (Lord Edward Coke). On Saturday, 1st July, I’ll be doing a Common Law Workshop at Club Redfern, Sydney, 2 – 5 pm.
    Yours sincerely,
    John Wilson

    • Nice post.

      However, if you have ever been on a jury I think you will be horrified.

      People want it done in a hurry, they want to go back to work.

      Others think the accused was non compos mentis but want revenge anyway so they vote ‘guilty’.

      The original idea of a jury was a jury of my peers, my family, friends, neighbours who know me and can really judge me.

      The whole judiciary system is a farce.

      • Plus it costs, there is an upfront fee and you have to pay the jury upfront for each day they are there, that’s how it is in Qld anyhow.

        But weigh that up against having a capricious or worse judge.

        It’s a difficult choice.

  9. I wish you luck. If democracy was measured by equal access under the law we would be a failed state. 99 percent of us cannot afford a court case and without representation we are less than plebs. Everyone charged in this courts is the only one there everyday with his/her hand in their pocket. The true time wasters are the government self employed.
    If the self employed had their way they would be the new patricians. A very near step towards the bunyip aristocracy. Money and mirrors do love each other.

  10. Lawyers are leaches on society ably assisted by magistrates, judges, senior bureaucrats and politicians. What hope has the country and its citizens got in receiving a fair go in anything ???
    I cannot but despair for the future of my kids and grandkids.

  11. I’m sorry such abuse by Judicial positions in going after you, because you are trying to expose many years of dishonesty that no Govt seems to want to stand up against; or media for that matter. I hope you have a full backup of your computer in case something suddenly appears that you never put their. Also maybe up your security thoroughly when you get it back; in case something extra has been installed to keep track. Seems suspicious that your computer is confiscated, when they get can get email evidence from your provider.

  12. Shane, considering my recent writings to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Victoria setting out why I view she fails to act properly I might now expect that she may get me charged for CONTEMPT OF COURT? I did however in my writings published at my blog at set out how the amendments to the US constitution of FREEDOM OF SPEECH was relied upon by the Framers of the constitution for the Commonwealth of Australia and so we have the same FREEDOM OF SPEECH rights. I understand from
    Bolt breached discrimination act: court
    that a journalist should contact the person(s) they desire to write about to give them an opportunity to give their side of the facts so a journalist can consider them and if deemed appropriate include some or all of the responses.
    During the trial it came out that Bolt did not contact any of the nine people before the articles were published.
    He did not speak to any of them, nor did he try to. He relied a lot on Google for his information, and much of what was in the search engine was found to be wrong.
    Mr Disney says fundamental principles of the press still apply to the online medium.
    “Without tying it particularly to this particular case, certainly it’s a matter of concern to the Press Council, and we’ve expressed this view on other matters in recent weeks, that there can be a view in some circles that columns or blogs online or comment streams to websites are somehow exempt from the normal principles of accuracy and fairness and balance,” he said.
    it appears to me you did precisely what the judge then stated a journalist should do,.

  13. I’m with the trial by Jury proposals. Every indication suggests they won’t take it before a Jury. But be careful of Jury stacking and partake in jury selection yourself.

    • The bad guys know they have to nobble the jury to keep their rackets going. We’ve got to convince the Sheriffs of their true role as protectors of our courts. The barriers against us are enormous but we will win.
      Yours sincerely,
      John Wilson.

  14. Whistleblowers are cut down and spat out.. go under the whistleblowers act… stay safe Shane, and you are helping many, you and Julian should become good friends. you are in line with him, a great hero. Good luck. PS, nearly everyone that represents themselves in court goes down, it’s a JOKE.. The so called protectors eg,police that are there to serve and protect the public, well not anymore, the policeforce/courts it appears, is just another public funded gov business, money making and so corrupt, it’s a JOKE.

  15. Some of the fines and prison sentences dirty scum get from magistrates are worthless. I guarantee you if the crimes were committed against the judge or their family the sentences would be 1,000 x harsher !!

    • No way. Longer sentences cost the Corporation much more. In that regard, I suppose the only hope is those private prisons who take governments to court to complain that the private prison has been losing money because the judiciary haven’t been sending them enough prisoners.

  16. This is why if you are critical of the government they come down on you to shut you down permanently !

Leave a Reply