Former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has lawyered up after he was named in the Jeffrey Epstein files last week. But his lawyers went missing in action when I sent them some questions on Thursday (20/11/25) as per below.
While Rudd’s lawyers, Giles George, have gone missing in action, they did have time to make a frivolous and vexatious defamation complaint to YouTube about my latest video on Rudd being named in the Epstein files, but more on that in a minute.
The problem for Kevin Rudd and his legal threat, as you will see below, is that it has all the characteristics of someone crying wolf, which points to guilt, not innocence.
What would have Kevin Rudd worried is that the UK Ambassador to the US, Peter Mandelson, lost his job in September “after newly revealed emails showed a closer relationship with Jeffrey Epstein than was previously known”.
Kevin Rudd is a liability as Ambassador, especially when he is at the centre of negotiations for the $368 billion AUKUS fraud. Would others use his links to Epstein to blackmail Rudd? I think that is why the UK acted fast in sacking their Ambassador to the US.
Given Rudd chaired an organisation that accepted $US650,000 in donations between 2011 and 2019 from Jeffrey Epstein, there are almost certainly more emails linking Rudd to Epstein in some way.
But with Rudd denying any contact with Epstein, there only needs to be one or two emails linking Rudd and Epstein, and Rudd is in trouble and could end up being sacked just like UK Ambassador Peter Mandelson. (Click here to read more)
Background to Kevin Rudd’s legal threat
I published an article on Sunday (16/11/2025) titled “Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd visited Jeffrey Epstein’s home for a “cocktail party” documents released by the US government show.” (Click here to read the article)
True News Weekly published an article on the same subject on the morning of Tuesday the 18th of November 2025. (Click here to read the article)
Kevin Rudd’s legal threat shows up in an article published by the Daily Mail in the afternoon on Tuesday the 18th of November 2025 titled “Kevin Rudd calls in the lawyers over mention in email to Jeffrey Epstein released by the US Congress – opening up his diary to prove ‘cocktail party’ never happened”, which says:
Australia’s US ambassador, Kevin Rudd, has tapped a defamation lawyer to defend himself from any suggestion he met notorious paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, rejecting as false a document that suggested they once attended the same cocktail party.
and:
Rudd’s spokesperson warned that his lawyer, Patrick George from defamation firm Giles George, would ‘take immediate action in relation to any defamatory coverage of this unsubstantiated report’. (Click here to read more)
Kevin Rudd’s spokesperson naming the lawyer and law firm is unusual, as they normally just say they will take legal action.
I suspect naming the lawyer and law firm is designed to further intimidate other media not to publish a story on the matter by, in effect, saying Rudd already has a lawyer ready and waiting to act.
The problem for Rudd and his lawyers is that by naming them, it left the door open for an independent journalist like me, who isn’t intimidated by nickel-and-dime lawyers, to call their bluff by emailing them questions, which is what I did as per the below email.
I sent questions directly to Kevin Rudd’s office in September, but he never answered, so I didn’t bother sending the questions directly to his office this time. (Click here to read more)
From: SHANE DOWLING
Sent: Thursday, 20 November 2025 1:30 PM
To: patrick.george@gilesgeorge.com.au; rebekah.giles@gilesgeorge.com.au
Cc: enquiries@gilesgeorge.com.au
Subject: Media questions regarding Kevin Rudd
Dear Mr Patrick George and Ms Rebekah Giles
The Daily Mail published an article titled “Kevin Rudd calls in the lawyers over mention in email to Jeffrey Epstein released by the US Congress – opening up his diary to prove ‘cocktail party’ never happened” on the 18th of November 2025 which says:
“Rudd’s spokesperson warned that his lawyer, Patrick George from defamation firm Giles George, would ‘take immediate action in relation to any defamatory coverage of this unsubstantiated report’.”
I have a few questions:
- Have you read my article titled “Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd visited Jeffrey Epstein’s home for a “cocktail party” documents released by the US government show” (Click here to read the article) published on the 16th of November 2025 or watched the associated video titled “Kevin Rudd named in Epstein files recently released by the US government” which was published on the 16th of November 2025. (Click here to watch the video)
- Can you confirm the article and video in question 1 are not defamatory and are fine?
- Can you confirm that you or Kevin Rudd made a defamation complaint to YouTube in relation to a video I published on the 21st of September 2025 titled “Jeffrey Epstein’s connection to US Ambassador Kevin Rudd and his boy Friendlyjordies”? (Click here to read the article version of the video) If so, why hasn’t Kevin Rudd or you complained to me or sent me a concerns notice?
- Can you confirm that you or Kevin Rudd made a defamation complaint to YouTube in relation to a video I published on the 25th of September 2025 titled “Former PM Kevin Rudd lodges defamation complaint over links to Jeffrey Epstein YouTube video”. (Click here to read the article version) If so, why hasn’t Kevin Rudd or you complained to me or sent me a concerns notice?
- Kevin Rudd says he “attended another event Epstein was invited to in 2013”. Can you advise what that event was and where it was? Can you advise how Kevin Rudd knew Jeffrey Epstein had been invited to the event given Rudd says, “that he has no recollection whatsoever of ever meeting Epstein.”?
- In October 2020 in a Channel 7 news report Kevin Rudd blamed News Corp and Rupert Murdoch for the reporting on Kevin Rudd’s links to Jeffrey Epstein. Why did Kevin Rudd try to deflect and lie given News Corp and Rupert Murdoch had nothing to do with the reporting? (Click here to watch the video)
Please respond by 4pm (AEST) Friday the 21st of November 2025 so I can publish and in case I have further questions.
Regards
Shane Dowling
Neither Patrick George nor Rebekah Giles from Giles George Lawyers responded to my above email.
Although, on Saturday the 22nd of November, YouTube sent me an email saying that they had “received a defamation complaint regarding your content” and had blocked the video “Kevin Rudd named in Epstein files recently released by the US government” for Australia.
It normally only takes a couple of days for YouTube to block videos when a lawyer makes a complaint.
So, given my video was published on Sunday the 16th and it wasn’t blocked until Saturday the 21st, it points to Rudd’s lawyers making a complaint when I sent the above email on Thursday the 18th of November, which was 3 days before it was blocked.
Back in September YouTube also blocked my videos “Jeffrey Epstein’s connection to US Ambassador Kevin Rudd and his boy Friendlyjordies” and the follow-up video titled “Former PM Kevin Rudd lodges defamation complaint over links to Jeffrey Epstein YouTube video” after complaints from Kevin Rudd.
As you can see from the links above, the videos are now also published on “X” (formerly Twitter), and the written versions of the videos are still published on this website, and I haven’t received any complaints.
What are Giles George Lawyers doing for Kevin Rudd?
It says on the Giles George website, “We are a boutique law firm devoted solely to the management of reputational risk.”
Their strategy to defend Kevin Rudd is quite simple. But let’s first look at how it worked before the new defamation laws came into effect.
Kerry Stokes and his companies ran SLAPP lawsuits against me from 2014 until 2022, where they would go to court without my knowledge and get suppression orders and non-publication orders, forcing me to take down articles before any hearing or judgement. As regular readers know, I ignored some of those orders, and Stokes charged me with contempt of court.
But defamation laws changed a couple of years ago in all states, except WA, and Stokes’ abuse of defamation law doesn’t work anymore.
Nowadays it is mandatory to send the other party a Concerns Notice that outlines details of the alleged defamation 30 days before you file a defamation claim.
Rudd has serious questions to answer, as I outlined in the email to his lawyers above, which he doesn’t want to answer.
So, Rudd can’t afford to send me a Concerns Notice, as all I would do is publish it, and he has no intentions of instituting a defamation claim against anyone over his Epstein connection.
What happens in a lot of cases now is a law firm like Giles George will write to YouTube and Google and have videos or articles blocked just by claiming they breach Australian defamation law.
YouTube and Google give lawyers preferential treatment they don’t give the average person.
The only thing Kevin Rudd has to defend himself is to pay a dodgy law firm such as Giles George to make frivolous complaints to YouTube and Google. If they make their frivolous complaints to “X” or WordPress, which hosts this website, or many other media sites, they will be told to get lost, as they should be.
Kevin Rudd has likely already spent between $10,000 and $20,000 with Giles George lawyers trying to silence me and intimidate other media.
The irony is that the first video that YouTube blocked in September has over 17,000 views, but it has over 55,000 views on “X”, and I only posted it on “X” because YouTube blocked it.
The Streisand effect has kicked in, and the latest video YouTube blocked is also powering along on “X”. Maybe Rudd should ask Giles George lawyers for a refund.
If Rudd had a real claim for defamation, I would have received a Concerns Notice from his lawyers long ago, or at the very least a complaint.
I’ll keep following up, as more of the Epstein files should be released in the next 30 days, and if Rudd’s in there a few more times, he could be in big trouble.
Admin: Seven new monthly supporters joined during the week after I posted the below message last week, which is great. If you are not a monthly supporter and would like to consider being one, please read what I wrote last week below:
I am an independent journalist and 100% crowdfunded by readers like you and need about another 200 monthly supporters to be financially viable. Most independent journalists are small business owners / sole traders and are struggling at the moment just like many small businesses. If you could afford an amount from $3 to $100 a month, or whatever suits your budget, it would be greatly appreciated. You are not locked in and can cancel at any time. The donation page has all the donation options. (Click here)
Please use Twitter, Facebook, email and the other buttons below and help promote this article.
Kangaroo Court of Australia is independent media and is 100% crowdfunded by readers like yourself so please support on the links below. Click on the PayPal button below to donate 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.
For the Fugitive Clothing t-shirt shop click here
Join the free email subscription below and you will be notified immediately I publish new articles which is normally twice a week.
Discover more from Kangaroo Court of Australia
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Kevin Rudd
Lawyers LOVE sending gutless threatening letters as anyone undergoing divorce can attest. It works for a while until naught happens and you realise it`s only psychological warfare. The gullible continue to be brow-beaten by these pie-in-the-sky shonks who make up claims but never back them with evidence. There used to be a law against threatening by carriage service but it seems to have disappeared. Meanwhile, lawyers go on their way making up outrageous rubbish without punishment.
You offer a lot of insight into what is happening, thank you. Care to share with us any ways to actually end all this corruption?
The number one thing is to share articles like this one. What they fear most is being exposed and that is why they spend a lot of time and effort trying to silence the media and the public.
Given the Labor Government still haven’t sacked Paul Brereton for his SECOND conflict of interest infraction at NACC (both which he lied about) and haven’t sacked the so-called anti-semitism envoy for donating a large amount of money to a White Nationalist lobbyist group and pretending she didn’t know about it (she thinks we’ll believe that rich couples never have discussions about their quite substantial tax breaks er I mean ‘charity’ donations in their down time) I really doubt they will care about Kevin Rudd unfortch. They don’t care that their actions over the last few weeks are bordering on fascist.
The whole world needs a reset on the way it’s been run by the current corrupt Politicians who cover up their tracks with the party within.