NSW Police harass journalist Shane Dowling after another malicious complaint from Australian judges

I received a harassing visit from the NSW police last Wednesday (15/5/19) and the complaint seems to have been made by staff at the NSW Supreme Court. Although the complaint could have come from the High Court of Australia given I had visited there a few days before to film a video and then I published an article titled “High Court of Australia’s Justice Keane and Justice Edelman caught protecting their bribe-taking and paedophile judicial mates.” (Click here to read the article)

The court staff would have told lies to the police and the court staff know it. They knew what they were doing when they made the complaint as they had done it before which led to a malicious police charge which was withdrawn by the CDPP.

I sent the below email complaining to the CDPP and NSW police senior management on Monday 20/5/19 at 3.30pm and asked for a response from both the CDPP and NSW police by 5pm today, Wednesday 22/5/19. At the bottom is the response I received from the CDPP but I have not had a response from the NSW police at the time of publishing this article. If I receive one I will update this post.

Sent: 20 May 2019 15:30
Subject: Harassment by the CDPP and NSW Police- Contempt of the High Court of Australia by the CDPP and NSW Police – Formal complaint

Dear Ms Sarah McNaughton – Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions and Mick Fuller – NSW Police Commissioner

Just after 12pm on Wednesday the 15th of May 4 NSW police officers visited my residence and tried to harass, bully and intimidate me into stop reporting on my website and social media why I was in jail last year for contempt of court and also to stop complaining about Justice Clifton Hoeben. (See attached business card from Detective James Gatward)

From the conversation I had that day I take it that Detective James Gatward had been in contact with the CDPP before the police visited me and he was there representing the CDPP to some degree as well.

I was jailed last year for 4 months as I was found guilty of calling Justice Clifton Hoeben a paedophile and Registrar Christopher Bradford a suspected paedophile and known bribe-taker when I was in court on the 3rd of February 2017. I was also jailed for breaching suppression orders twice by writing articles reporting on why I had been charged with contempt of court.

Some of the things that were said to me by Detective James Gatward on the 15/5/19 were:

  1. I needed to stop writing emails to the court calling Justice Clifton Hoeben a paedophile and bribe-taker and if I don’t stop I could be charged with using a carriage service to menace, harass or cause offence (s 474.17 – Criminal Code Act 1995). Detective Gatward referred to an email I sent to the court in April 2019. That email in fact was in March and went to the Premier, Attorney-General, Chief Justice Bathurst and Justice Hoeben complaining that Justice Hoeben would not stand down from hearing numerous defamation matters involving me even though I did 4 months jail for calling Justice Hoeben a paedophile. (See attached email to Premier Gladys Berejiklian, Attorney-General Mark Speakman, Chief Justice Tom Bathurst and Justice Clifton Hoeben)
  2. Detective Gatward made it clear he had spoken to people at the NSW Supreme Court recently who had complained about me. I assume it was the same people (Chief Justice Tom Bathurst, Chris D’Aeth and Rebel Kenna) who were behind the malicious complaint that led to the police charge in 2017 that was withdrawn by the CDPP. From the conversation it also sounds like Detective Gatward might have spoken to Justice Hoeben.
  3. Detective Gatward said a complaint had been made by the court at a higher level and it had filtered down to them.
  4. I needed to stop calling people paedophiles and bribe-takers on my website and that I could be charged with criminal defamation. Is Detective Gatward also a defamation lawyer?
  5. I could be charged again for the email that I sent to the court in September 2016 even though I was previously charged by the NSW police and the CDPP withdrew the charge in March 2018. (See attached letter from the CDPP) I assume Detective Gatward had recently spoken to the CDPP about me possibly being charged again even though no crime had been committed.
  6. Detective Gatward said words to the effect that he didn’t want to have to come back and take my computer etc. It was a blatant attempt to intimidate me.
  7. I said the police charge in 2017 was a malicious charge as it was political communication protected by the 1997 High Court judgment Lange v ABC and Detective Gatward said it wasn’t. How would he know?
  8. Detective Gatward confirmed he knew I still had matters before the court that Justice Hoeben was dealing with. On that basis alone Detective Gatward should not have been telling me what I can and can’t say about Justice Hoeben as it could and would be construed as an attempt to interfere in the administration of justice by attempting to intimidate me as a party to the matters that are still in court and as a witness in the matters.
  9. Defective Gatward confirmed he knew I had been to Canberra to film a video and written an article about 2 High Court of Australia judges only a few days before. On that basis Detective Gatward had to of known that on Tuesday the 14th of May 2019, the day before his visit, I had filed an application in the High Court asking for the Seven v Dowling matter be removed to the High Court. That matter also deals with the allegations of Justice Hoeben being a paedophile and the police charge and evidence from 2017. Once again the police visit could be construed as an attempt to interfere in the administration of justice in the High Court of Australia as I published links to the application and supporting affidavit on Twitter the night before the police visit.
  10. I believe the complaint and police visit is likely linked to my visit to Canberra on the 10th of May 2019, the video I filmed outside the High Court and the article I published on the 11th of May titled “High Court of Australia’s Justice Keane and Justice Edelman caught protecting their bribe-taking and paedophile judicial mates”. (Click here to read the article)

What is very disturbing is that accusing government employees of crimes such as bribe-taking is expressly dealt with by the High Court of Australia in the 1997 judgment Lange v ABC and the 2004 judgment Coleman v Power where the High Court ruled it is protected under the Australian constitution as political communication even if it is untrue as long as the person saying it believes it is true. Justice Helen Wilson wrote in her judgment when she sentenced me to jail for contempt words to the effect that she has no doubt that I believe what I say.

Detective Gatward was factually wrong on many points. I said I had not written to the court accusing Justice Clifton Hoeben of being a paedophile since I was released from jail and Detective Gatward said I had.

I later rang Detective Gatward at 3.33pm the same day and spoke to him for 38 minutes. I phoned him to ask for another meeting to correct his false allegations and he could only refer to an email I sent to the court where I wrote about why I was in jail to back up his claims against me. He then said that I had written that Justice Hoeben had not denied the allegation that he is a paedophile and that was evidence of me harassing just Hoeben. So what? That is a fact and part of the story that I was writing about so it’s not harassment.

During the phone call Detective Gatward also said:

  1. I should see a doctor and get therapy even though he knew I had 4 mental health exams and all cleared me of any mental health issues. Why would Detective Gatward say that?
  2. I should stop the numerous court cases and litigation. I pointed out that I had not instituted the matters and he said words to the effect that if I close my website the matters would go away. Once again this could be construed as an attempt to interfere in the administration of justice.
  3. I said I was going to file a malicious charge claim against the NSW Police for the 2017 police charge and he said words to the effect that I shouldn’t. What right does he have to give that advice?

What makes the above worse is there was no legal basis for the police to even come and see me. It was a blatant attempt to interfere in the administration of justice. On the 3rd of May 2019 at a hearing Justice Hoeben had 5 Court Sheriffs in court to try and intimidate me and Justice Hoeben threatened me with jail over 10 times for what I said in court as I tried to represent myself. I wrote at article about it titled “Five Sheriff’s Officers used to intimidate journalist Shane Dowling by the Supreme Court’s Justice Clifton Hoeben” and wrote:

Five Court Sheriffs were used to try to intimidate me on Friday (3/5/19) in the NSW Supreme Court by Justice Clifton Hoeben while he aided and abetted Kerry Stokes and Capilano Honey in their SLAPP lawsuits against me.

I was in court for directions for the 2 criminal contempt applications I had made in the Capilano Honey matter and also in the Kerry Stokes, Ryan Stokes and Justine Munsie matter. I was also in court for the hearing of Capilano Honey’s application to strike out my defence.

Justice Hoeben had obviously pre-planned his intimidation game as he was looking after the defamation list and there were other lawyers and barristers in court for other defamation matters and he didn’t want them to see what he was up to. My 2 matters were listed near the top, but he said he would hold both over until the end knowing all the other lawyers and barrister would be gone.

I noticed one Court Sheriff at the beginning but the full 5 didn’t show up until just before Justice Hoeben started to deal with my matters and they sat in the back of the court room for my full hearing. I asked Justice Hoeben about the 5 Court Sheriffs and how it was disgraceful and a waste of taxpayers money but he would’t answer. At the start of the hearing Justice Hoeben started lecturing me on the court’s code of conduct about when I could talk, when I had to sit down and not to interrupt anyone etc.

Then all of a sudden Justice Hoeben said that I was also not to call him a paedophile or any other judges of the court a paedophile and that I knew what would happen if I did. He was implying that I would be jailed, and the 5 court Sheriffs were obviously to reinforce the threat.

I thought that’s a first for any judge to say that but not surprising given I spent 4 months in jail last year for calling Hoeben a paedophile and registrar Christopher Bradford a suspected paedophile and known bribe taker in court in February 2017.

I said to Justice Hoeben what if I called him a “bribe-taker”. He said I couldn’t call him that either. (Click here to read the full article)

What happened in court on the 3rd of May 2019 is almost identical to what happened when Detective Gatward and 3 other police officers visited me on the 15th of May. I was in court again on Friday the 17th of May for directions in the frivolous and vexatious Jane Doe v Dowling matter and once again Justice Hoeben refused to stand down from hearing the matter, warned me not to call any judges of the court or him a paedophile or call them corrupt. There were also 4 court sheriffs in the court to try and intimidate me again. My matter was the first to be heard in the defamation list and all 4 court sheriffs left the court as I did which proves they were only there to intimidate me.

Once again we have powerful evidence that the NSW Police and the CDPP are working with the courts to interfere with court cases and to intimidate litigants including up to the High Court of Australia.

As you both know I am a journalist and I will be publishing a story on this matter so could you please respond by 5pm on Wednesday the 22nd of May 2019. I would like a  separate response from both of you. I will also be filing this email and any response with the High Court of Australia as evidence why all matters involving me need to be removed to the High Court of Australia as it is obvious I will be denied natural justice from the NSW Supreme Court.


Shane Dowling
Kangaroo Court of Australia

Below is the reply from the CDPP that I was emailed at 4.16pm today (22-5-19)

The issue of judicial corruption is legally protected because it is political communication and for the police to harass me at any time in an attempt to silence me is scandalous, but they did it a few days before a federal election which needs a public investigation.

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.

20 replies »

    • “The plot thickens.”

      The plot insidiously inspissates when the paper-thin evidence is thinner than a .001″ feeler gauge that Shane Dowling is guilty of any_thin’ at all, and the plot thoroughly thickens itself miserably more whenever these gaping authorities like Hardcase Hoeben & Co. feel the nonsensical need to stoop so low as to sool crummy cops like this gate-crashing Gatsby Gatward onto Shane which but proves that they are just putting the peelers..err.. feelers out!
      They are off their ‘rockers’.

      • Inspissates. What a great word … (I had to look it up).

        I’d mistakenly assumed it had something to do with being inside or outside of the tent, and whose boots were being splashed.

        Either way, it suits this situation perfectly.

  1. Good point and I should have as I alaways video lawyers after court. They were plain clothes so I didn’t realise at first but if it happenes again the first thing I’ll do is start recording video on the phone.

  2. Hi, much respect!

    My post just now in our FB Group, FWIW to you and in your battles.


    It is an interesting E Mail reply (from the CDPP to journalist, Shane Dowling) and it invites the following for consideration:

    *Clearly, the CDPP is what’s termed as being an “agent”, of Australia a legal person and body-politic. (Commonwealth is another ‘name’, for Australia.)

    * The CDPP are part of the body-politic of Australia.

    * The CDPP advise that they prosecute crimes against the Commonwealth.

    Does/should this mean crimes against Australia? Against the body-politic?

    (The Commonwealth is not a legal person, at law. Can’t sue or be sued.)

    *We are told that the CDPP rely on investigative agencies (of Australia?), to refer briefs of evidence to support a prosecution.

    Does this only include sworn Police OFFICERS to and of ‘the Crown’, like the AFP? Plus Officers in other states? As only sworn Officers can have jurisdiction over a person. (It’s hard to imagine that it wouldn’t.)


    So (at this stage) it appears that Australia gathers it’s own evidence and must then use external (and, no less than QC’s – as Officers of the Court) Barristers to prosecute matters that it decides need to be prosecuted?

    And before independent courts and always, under the Crown. (REGINA)

    And only then at common law, of course. (Criminal matters against a person or another legal person.)

    Our group:

  3. It is a sad state of affairs in Australia when the LNP can literally launder $80m Australian taxpayer’s money to a Cayman’s Island account to pay for water that does not exist while our towns are about to run out. And instead of the police prosecuting the criminals masquerading as politicians, they come after whistle-blowers. And this is only one of dozens of examples.

    Australia. Proving it really does pay to be corrupt.

  4. “Why would Detective Gatward say that?” Gatward, the police, most probably many members of the judiciary as well, and many another sleazy slimebag to boot, are just trying to grind you down. Don’t rise to the bait. You can bet that if you continue carefully doing whatever they tell you NOT to do, it will stand you in very good stead in the long run. They are just trying to grind you down. If Gatward or any other police officer do or say something to you that is illegal, the police and judiciary couldn’t care less because they will just throw him and any other lackey like him to the wolves if he steps over the line (Gatward and his lowly-ranked ilk are easily dispensible, they are a dime a dopey dozen, but he/they don’t know it!), and then start on you again with feckless fresh police officers like Gatward who will do whatever they have been told (if they want to keep their jobs!) to do in continually trying to grind you down in whatever way they think fit at the time that they confront you unexpectedly, which will far more likely than not, be highly unethical, if not highly illegal as well! You need to keep focusing your avid attention on only those at the very top — who are all now very worried where your determination will result in leading to their deserved detriment — and not waste your valuable time, and more importantly, your mental health and general wellbeing, fretting about losers like Gatward and company. Just tell them your name, date of birth and address. Get your lawyer to tell the police that you have nothing whatsoever to say to them because of Gatward’s reprehensible behaviour towards you. Don’t let goons like Gatward intimidate you. Intimidation is what gormless goons like Gatward and his thick-headed thug mates thrive on. Don’t feed ’em. You won’t ever be able to keep the bastards honest, so just let ’em starve, and you stay well.

  5. Here we have alleged pedophile judges and pedophile judges in the courts and the Police are coming after you. Why don’t the Police do there job and nail these pedophiles. We have 7 intelligence agencies in Australia including the AFP, surely they can bust them, but No they are protecting them. Keep fighting these scum.

  6. Methinks someone is getting worried. Keep the pressure on. We are all behind you. These scumbags must be exposed!

  7. Intimidation is unfortunately standard practice when you blow the whistle, “judges” of all kinds do not like being exposed, “how dare mere plebs question me” syndrome is still alive in this country!

  8. In any other sphere, this sort of behaviour would be recognised as nothing short of Organised Crime.

    When the Mafia Consigliere send their thugs to harass and intimidate witnesses to their crimes, when those who are sworn Officers of the Court fail to do their duty to uphold and enforce the Law but actively conspire to conceal such crimes, those people are dealt with in the US by the RICO Act of 1970.

    Small wonder that in Australia in the past 50 years when several courageous MPs have tried to introduce similar laws here, they have been sent packing, back to where they came from with Parties withdrawing their endorsement and cutting any Legal Reform platform out from under them.

    Good grief!! They can’t have any mavericks shining bright lights on their nefarious activities. What’s the world coming to when wigged and gowned cockroaches have no place to hide? Sheesh! Judicial crooks and their henchmen might actually go to jail!

    We can’t have that now, can we?

    Under our current free-range criminal regime, they are ALL Kangaroo Courts!

  9. I reiterate the suggestion by Brad, to have a camera or recorder on hand to record interactions by the systems police. A camera at home, and a pocket recorder for elsewhere perhaps, although video film of same would be excellent tactics for utube exposure.

    The recorders cost under $75 and are legal under various state listening devices acts, passed when the parliaments were bonefide within our Australian Constitution. Such acts are legal, pre dating the ultravires politicians acts of recent decades.

    I believe one just has to inform parties “that I am recording for legal purposes” to be in order.

    In this now closing epoch of the “Vision Splendid” ideal of our Oz, all fairdinkums could take on board –
    “whatever the system wants – we oppose – whatever the system opposes – we want” Mao 1939.

    Keep up your good work.

  10. It’s actually a very fine attribute and a feather in their cap that a person or organization is known to have and unswervingly maintain a fixation, like that of a firm fixation on seeing to it that pedophiles (think Peter Liddy here), murderers (Roger Rogerson, Glen McNamara etc.), and of course very dangerous members of the judiciary who lie (Marcus Einfeld) or who drive on public roads whilst under the influence of alcohol (Anne Bampton) and cause serious injury to other road-users, are brought to justice. Without ‘fixations’ foxy felons would remain on the ‘loose’ and not get themselves in a ‘fine fix’.

    Without savvy citizens being fixated forensically (remembering that courts of law belong to the people!) on catching those persons with criminal intent who were foolishly placed in positions of authority (like Mark Standen) by their ilk, and many others who have been, and will continue to be, foolishly placed in positions of authority, then justice will go benignly begging cap in hand.

Leave a Reply