John Barilaro

John Barilaro, who gave $100,000’s from taxpayers to a company associated with Angus Taylor and faces possible perjury charges at the NSW ICAC, gets a $715,000 payout

Google was ordered (6/6/22) to pay $715,000 for defamation to former NSW Deputy Premier John Barilaro who is under investigation by the NSW ICAC for a number of corruption allegations including perjury. The payment is in relation to 2 videos uploaded to YouTube which is owned by Google. So, it was Google that defended the complaint and it was Jordan Shanks who posted the videos using his online name FriendlyJordies.

A huge lie from Justice Steven Rares’ judgment is this paragraph 294: 

“The matters complained of resulted in Mr Barilaro being driven prematurely from office, so that the judgment sum, necessarily, will have to reflect the very substantial damage done to his feelings, his reputation, the need to nail the lie and to vindicate him to the public.” (Click here for the full judgment)

When Justice Rares says “The matters complained of resulted in Mr Barilaro being driven prematurely from office” he is talking about the 2 FriendlyJordies videos but that is a blatant lie and John Barilaro and Justice Rares know it.

I published an article on the 5th of October 2021 titled “The real reasons NSW Deputy Premier John Barilaro resigned: Fraud, theft, abuse of power and numerous alleged affairs” (Click here to read the article) And that article is looking more spot-on by the day.

While John Barilaro might have had a victory, he will likely lose the war that is raging behind him and the $715,000 might have to be used to defend criminal charges against himself in the near future.

A quick overview of issues facing John Barilaro:

  1. NSW ICAC will hand down a judgment soon regarding their investigation into former NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian and John Barilaro was a witness. (Click here and here to read more)
  2. A formal complaint was made to ICAC in October 2021 that Mr Barilaro perjured himself giving evidence in the matter. (Click here to read more)
  3. What I said in the article on the 5th of October 2021 about John Barilaro resigning because of “Fraud, theft, abuse of power” has been reinforced with revelations in March 2022 that the NSW ICAC is investigating dodgy payments made by John Barilaro as a Minister to a company associated with federal MP Angus Taylor. (Click here to read more)
  4. FriendlyJordies has previously hinted at suing the NSW for malicious prosecution regarding a false complaint made to the police by John Barilaro which resulted in FriendlyJordies employee Kristo Langker being falsely charged. If they do sue the NSW police then John Barilaro will be a witness and likely have to refuse to answer questions on the basis of not wanting to incriminate himself.

In the below video that I published on YouTube on Monday (6/6/22) expands on the matter.

(For other articles on John Barilaro on this website click here)

John Barilaro also sued Jordon Shanks (FriendlyJordies) but discontinued the proceedings in November 2021 after a $100,000 payment for costs by Shanks who had at that stage raised $1million to fight the defamation matter. Friendlyjordies published the below statement on Twitter on Monday the 6th of June after the judgment:

Google said they were going to continue to fight the matter and call Jordan Shanks as a witness but then a few months ago they folded and said they would admit the videos were defamatory and pay damages. Why did Google change their mind? Were they leaned on by someone in government? Who knows, but other battles for John Barilaro and Jordan Shanks await in the near future so maybe some questions will be answered then. 

Please use Twitter, Facebook, email and the other buttons below and help promote this article.

Kangaroo Court of Australia is an independent website and is reliant on donations to keep publishing so please click on the Patreon button below and support independent journalism.

If you would like to support via PayPal use the button below or for other donation options click here to go to the Donations page.

Thank you for your support.

For the KCA t-shirt shop click here.

Follow Kangaroo Court of Australia via email for free

And be notified immediately when there is a new article published. Enter your email address below and click on the follow button. You will be sent an email to confirm you want to follow this website.

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

21 replies »

  1. Justice Rares has shown great sympathy for John Barilaro. Great sympathy. Yes, a great deal of sympathy. The very thought that such a great and sensitive man as spaghetti-eating champion John Barilaro had been offended fills me with incandescent rage.

  2. Well, there`s a new one. A judge caring about a citizen`s ‘hurt feelings”. I thought the whole court process was designed to crush one`s feelings?

  3. Not sure which jurisdiction this judge presides, some media say NSW, other media say federal court, but never heard of a judgement described as a citizen having had their ‘feelings hurt’ and awarded such a large amount, meanwhile workers seriously injured on the work front get awarded small amounts by same judiciary. The Federal Court Judge who presided over Opposition Leader Duttons defamation case basically told Dutton to toughen up and awarded $37,000 and then Dutton lost big time with costs, same as former Treasurer Hockey, won $100,000 in damages but lost with costs against him of about $800,000.
    Have costs been apportioned in Barilaro matter? This may show leanings of presiding judge compared to Dutton/Hockey matters.

    • This is what Justice Rares had to say about costs –

      2. On or before 14 June 2022 the applicant and respondent file and serve any evidence and written submissions limited to three pages if he or it seeks an order in respect of costs other than that the respondent pay the applicant’s costs, and, in default of any such application, it be ordered that:

      2. The respondent pay the applicant’s costs.

      3. If either party makes an application pursuant to order 2:

      (a) on or before 21 June 2022 the opposing party file and serve any evidence and written submissions limited to three pages in response.

      (b) on or before 28 June 2022 the applying party file and serve any evidence and written submissions limited to one page in reply…..”

      “406 Having regard to my findings on aggravated damages, my preliminary view is that Mr Barilaro may wish to seek a special order for costs. I will make orders that allow the parties to address on costs.”

  4. YouTube has been going backwards since it was acquired by Google, which has a reputation for being quite invasive. I was trying to watch an age-restricted video which required me to sign in to verify your age. As if that was not enough, you then have to present some sort of ID or hand over your credit card details. You didn’t use to do this, and the original owners of YouTube now regret allowing Google to let their grubby little hands on it. As for friendlyjordies, I would be looking into other YouTube alternatives.

  5. Seems to be an attempt by JB and the judiciary to de-platform critics of the government and those who expose corruption. Thanks for the story KCA.

  6. It seems to me that if I published my view that Hitler was a war criminal, in Australia, I could lose any resulting defamation case. Absolutely nuts.
    Australia needs to have a long hard look at defamation laws. And the Judiciary. And our police system. And the MSM.
    A Federal, tough, retrospective ICAC is a start. Australia is very corrupt, and pressure must be continually applied to the ALP, the Independents, the Teals and the cross bench to sort it out. No small task.

  7. I forgot to add organise crime, money laundering, etc,etc. Australia has become a criminal candy store.

  8. Seems to be an attempt by JB and the judiciary to de-platform government critics. Fiscal penalties like this could (and are likely to) lead to corporate policies that increase censorship of political opinions and satire on their platforms, allowing the MSM to control the ‘narrative’ (propaganda) once more. What made me sick is the way in which John claims public vindication as a result of this outcome. There is no true justice in Australia.

  9. Judge Rares (at paragraph 407) wrote:

    “I propose to refer the conduct of Mr Shanks and Google to the Principal Registrar of the Court to consider whether to institute proceedings against each for what appear to be serious contempts of court by bringing improper pressure on Mr Barilaro and his lawyers not to pursue this proceeding.”

    The judge is speculating as to Jordan Shanks’ motive. There is no proper foundation for his finding.

    Jordan’s comedic political modus operandi is to ridicule people in high places. If he stops them from behaving like fools, he would have no more content for his youtubes. The judge’s fantasy that John Barilaro’s lawyers could be bullied into submission by Jordan Shanks is itself worthy of ridicule.

  10. Judges should discard their wigs and their anachronistic airs. Princess Margaret tolled the bell on the age of deference 60 years ago.

  11. Rares again. An appeal to the Full Bench would probably introduce sanity. Whenever I hear of a wrongheaded decision from the Federal Court, I expect Rares’ involvement.

  12. I’ll support KCA’s work time and time again even though what he writes makes me sick like no other uncensored debasement on the Web can.
    Hopelessness, anger, loss and dread are what I feel when I read about the machinations of the self-proclaimed elite and their minions as they grind just dissenters down while rewarding their puppets.
    This is “our” Australia now. Disaffected, disappointed, disenfranchised and distracted from undoing the rot.

  13. Mark Dreyfus is going after pork barreling in Labor’s federal ICAC.
    Judge Steven Rares thought it was kosher for Pork Barilaro.

  14. Shane, will we be able to read about Rares in your book called “Love Letters from the Bar Table”?

  15. This is wrong on so many levels. It sets a precedent that all published independent media can be challenged in court and injustices issued with fines or imprisonment.
    2/3rds of media is opinion. That leaves a lot if people open for attack by dodgey folk in high places

Leave a Reply to Robert Barnier Cancel reply