Tuesday 22 January 2019

" The Law/judiciary Aussie style regarding " Honey ".

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX





The Aussie major climate zones over the 2nd ( to the Antarctic ) most dry country/continent in the
world and although 5.4% of the total worlds landmass has a centre of some 25% unpopulated desert.





( Me at my place )
My bog: www.beautkoot.blogspot.com.au.
URL: https://beautkoot.blogspot.com.au
www.wordpress.com.

I am coming out and proudly declaring the following:

1. I am an Aussie white bloke of European descent,although these days stating that your proud to be
"White" is something branding you " Racists "??.
2. I am heterosexual," TUT TUT " that makes the non-hetro's,and the list of the various kinds grows
by the day,feel discriminated against.
3. I am a staunch self-rule,non-forelock touching or kneeling,bowing Republican.
4. Although not religious I tend to believe in the so-called Christian values and beliefs,however stating
anything else would be far more acceptable to the " Political Correct " mob.

G/day readers wherever you are in Aussie and around the world where I hope you are well and
enjoying life to the best you can considering your circumstances and that 2019 brings you health,
happiness and prosperity.

Subject " The Law/judiciary Aussie style regarding " Honey ".- SUPREME COURT FINDS
              CAPILANO HONEY'S LAWYERS LIED AND DECEIVED ABOUT POISONOUS
              AND TOXIC HONEY " see below.

I wonder dear readers just how many people around the world enjoy the probably 100's if not
1000's of various types of honey's being produced and where I am confident here in Aussie that
very few households would not have some type of honey in their kitchen cupboards,you could
quite easily state that honey like Vegemite is part of the Aussie populations staple diet.



Vegemite - Wikipedia

Therefore ? how would you feel if you suddenly found that there is every possibility that the honey
that you,your family and loved one's have consumed is quite possibly not " Pure Honey " and in
actual fact had various other substances added which could have very serious deleterious effects
on across the board human health ??and where a journalist like Shane Dowling questions the
authenticity of so-called " Pure Australian Honey " is attacked by the likes of Capilano and Allowrie
Honey and one of their major shareholders the billionaire and media mogul Kerry Stokes and where
it would appear,reading the Kangaroo publication below,with the help,intentional or otherwise,of certain
of the judiciary get sent to jail for ( 3 months ) for the " Contempt of court " and where now The
NSW Supreme Court of Appeal has found that this was quote " an unjustifiable chilling effect on
freedom of speech " unquote. 

I have followed Shane Dowling Kangaroo publications for years and even re-published some of
Shane's publications on this blog.

Shane takes on subjects that the so-called " Major media " avoids whether for fear of being sued
or I believe like the Aussie ABC because of their political,ideological bias.



Teflon Billy Shorten the Federal Labor Party Opposition Leader and possibly the next Aussie
Prime Minister,Union Stooge,adulterer and alleged " Rapist " of Kathy a then member of the
Victorian Youth League and where in recent years the Victorian Police charged Teflon Billy of
the heinous crime of rape of Kathy a then 16 year old however the Victorian Prosecutor would
not proceed with the case due to his belief there was little chance of a conviction and 'NOT '
that Teflon Billy was deemed innocent as stated by Teflon Billy.





This photo has nothing to do with Kangaroo Publications I received this very telling photo over the
net from supporters of Kathy a now registered nurse in NSW.

Although the Australian Newspaper mentioned at the time of Teflon Billy's questioning in regard to
the heinous rape of Kathy a then (16) year old it did not name Teflon Billy specifically but instead
mentioned all the other Labor Leaders at the time that it was " NOT " leaving only one conclusion
that it had to be Teflon Billy Shorten the Opposition Labor Leader leaving all other major media
to totally very conveniently,for whatever purpose to ignore it ? I wonder if it had been an LNP
leader Abbott,Turnbull now Morrison if the like's of the ABC would have been so generous??.
 
However it was Shane Dowling that exposed Teflon Billy Shorten in his Kangaroo Publication not
only for his adultery,extra marital affairs,alleged heinous rape of Kathy,and Teflon Billy's many
questionable Labor Party/Union activities and highlighted Teflon Billy's ruthless untrustworthy
selfish attitude all of which appears to be of little interest to the like's of the Aussie ABC and SBS
the so-called champions of equality and the rights of the individual across the full spectrum,and
where the like's of Shane Dowling journalist/publisher/blogger highlights in every way what a
pathetic ideological agenda and bias they have and that said I believe neutralises them and they
become ineffective and untrustworthy " Fake News if you will " because it becomes difficult to
decide " Truth from fiction ".

I like Shane have a limited legal background and have attended NSW Local Magistrates,District
and Industrial Courts and therefore have had first hand experience of just how much " the law is
an ass " where I believe from that experience the Aussie Justice System cannot do what the prime
object should be,as Shane has found out to Shane's cost financially and physically being incarcerated
for (3) months, and that is to protect the weak,innocent and vulnerable because it has become far
to complicated,unreliable,costly and lacks being sensible and fair,where the rich and powerful
including the ( 3) tiers of Aussie government instrumentality use it to their advantage.

However dear readers I cannot praise the peoples defender Shane Dowling journalist/publisher 
enough because I can only " try ",I emphasise " try ", to understand the unimaginable stress Shane
Dowling must be under coming up against a billionaire like WA's Kerry Stokes,Capilano and Allowrie
Honey and their very deep financial pockets and an army of high profile legal teams who's sole
purpose is to destroy in whatever way,hopefully legally,Shane Dowling's reputation as a journalist
and as a source of reliable facts and at the same time financially ruin him.

It would appear from what I read below that just to " Add insult to injury " Shane is up against
various biased judiciary as well to say little of the various government departments where their
silence is deafening.

Readers I realise some will look at the following and just give up saying that it is all to hard and let
someone else take it up however that is the problem because as I type this " So-called Aussie
Honey " is on various retail shelves,being consumed by people probably children and as the saying
goes " We are what we eat " and if these various honey distributors are aloud to get away with
substituting honey with anything else and not declaring it ? what possible long term effect on our
health and ? where does this end,what next to be possibly adulterated,contaminated,polluted.


Sir Mike Howe - but you can call me Mike. scroll down.

          


Shane Dowling- Proprietor/Journalist of Kangaroo Court of Australia Publications/Website.

 

SUPREME COURT FINDS CAPILANO HONEY’S LAWYERS LIED AND DECEIVED ABOUT POISONOUS AND TOXIC HONEY

The NSW Supreme Court of Appeal has found that Capilano Honey’s lawyers lied and deceived the court about their poisonous and toxic honey defamation and injurious falsehood claim against journalist Shane Dowling. The court also found that Capilano Honey’s lies and deception in gaining a super-injunction and wide-ranging suppression orders has had “an unjustifiable chilling effect on freedom of speech“.
The Court of Appeal handed down its judgment on the 3rd of October 2018 in the middle of the media storm over Capilano Honey selling fake honey but the Court of Appeal judgment went unreported by the old media even though it was a key issue. Not only has Capilano Honey been selling dodgy honey for years but they lied and deceived the Supreme Court of NSW to try to conceal it from the public in the long running battle between myself and Capilano. Capilano Honey have also lied and deceived the court in their almost identical claim against Beekeeper Simon Mulvany which is now before the Supreme Court of Victoria.

Background to the Super-Injunction suppression orders:
I wrote an article in September 2016 titled “Australia’s Capilano Honey admit selling toxic and poisonous honey to consumers” about Capilano Honey suing Beekeeper Simon Mulvany who runs the Save the Bees Australia Facebook page. The article started going viral here and in Asia. I wrote another article a few weeks later about their CEO Ben McKee and Capilano Honey and Mr McKee took legal action.
Capilano shareholder Kerry Stokes has been suing me since April 2014 using the same lawyers and same tactics in frivolous and vexatious defamation proceedings. Stokes is also the major shareholder of Capilano Honey although that seems to have changed as of a few weeks ago but he is still a substantial shareholder at least.
The Court of Appeal judgment raises numerous issues some of which are:
  1. How did Capilano Honey manage to get the super-injunction, non-publication orders and suppression orders in the first place and how did they keep the dodgy court orders for over 2 years?
  2. Why did the old media not report the judgment especially given it was clearly relevant to the media storm in September / October 2018?
  3. Why have Capilano Honey never filed in court their evidence to prove their honey is safe for humans to support the injurious falsehood claim given there is a reverse onus of proof? For over 2 years why has the court not made Capilano Honey file their evidence?
  4. Why has the ACCC stopped its investigation into Capilano Honey’s fake honey when Capilano are refusing to provide the court with the required evidence they claim shows their honey is not poisonous?
  5. It a blatant SLAPP lawsuit (strategic lawsuit against public participation) so what are the Federal and State governments doing?
  6. The judgment by the 3 judges of the Court of Appeal shows evidence of judicial corruption, given their was no legal basis for the super-injunction and suppression orders, by Justice David Davies and former Supreme Court judge Peter Hall who is now the Commissioner of the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption. So why no action?
Key parts of the unanimous judgment by Justice Margaret Beazley, Justice John Basten and Justice Ruth McColl: (Click here to read the full judgment: Capilano Honey Ltd v Dowling (No 2) [2018] NSWCA 217 (3 October 2018))
The super-injunction and suppression orders against me were issued by the Supreme Court on behalf of Capilano Honey in October 2016 and were lifted in June 2018. Capilano Honey appealed and it was heard by the Court of Appeal on the 19th July 2018 with the judgment given on the 3rd of October 2018. It starts off with the background.
Background as per judgment
On 17 September 2016, Shane Dowling (the respondent) posted an article on his website accusing Capilano Honey Ltd (the corporate applicant) of “selling toxic and poisonous honey”. On 6 October 2016, the respondent posted a further article on the website making allegations about the corporate applicant’s Chief Executive Officer, Ben McKee (the individual applicant).
On 7 October 2016, the applicants commenced proceedings against the respondent for injurious falsehood and defamation. Prior to commencing proceedings, they sought and were granted ex parte interim orders including take-down orders, interlocutory injunctive relief restraining republication, and orders prohibiting publication of any aspect of the proceedings. On 10 October 2016, similar ex parte interim orders were made regarding a further article published by the respondent on his website on 9 October 2016.
On 15 May 2017, three days after directions were given with respect to a foreshadowed application by the respondent to strike out the proceedings for want of prosecution, the applicants filed and served a statement of claim.
On 8 June 2018, on the respondent’s application, and following a contested hearing in April 2018, the primary judge (McCallum J) made orders revoking the interim and interlocutory orders.
At paragraph 56 of the judgment it says:
“The second difficulty arises from the phrase “false statements”. In pursuing a claim in injurious falsehood, the burden will be upon Capilano to prove that the allegations were false, were made maliciously and caused damage to the company.”
Capilano Honey failed dismally to make out their case. They used hearsay evidence, second-hand hearsay evidence in affidavits by their lawyer Richard Keegan and in many instances no evidence at all. Why were there no affidavits from any Capilano Honey employees? And where is all the evidence showing their honey is not poisonous, toxic and polluted?
Keeping in mind that Capilano have to also prove damage to their company as part of proving their injurious falsehood claim the judgment says at paragraph 75: “the applicants made no attempt to assess any financial loss, or likely loss, in Australia.“. That in itself says Capilano Honey could not make out their claim for injurious falsehood and have deliberately and knowingly misled the court.
A prime example of the scandalous attempt to use evidence that can only be described as total dribble can be found at paragraph 73 of the judgment where it quotes so-called evidence by Capilano Honey’s lawyer Richard Keegan:
  1. In his 13 April 2018 affidavit Mr Keegan stated:[43]
“I am informed by Mr McKee and believe that he has received communications from a manager at one of Australia’s largest supermarket chains who has read the toxic honey article and has told Mr McKee that the article is posing ‘a very serious risk to our brand.’
And at paragraph 77 it says:
  1. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the judge either misconceived or disregarded the evidence before her. It is true that she did not refer to the second-hand hearsay evidence of a conversation with a manager at a supermarket chain, but there is little that can be said about it. The content was vague, there was no indication of when the statement was made or in what context and the statement contained no particular reference to the source of the concern.
Using hearsay evidence is a joke but for a qualified lawyer using second-hand hearsay evidence is scandalous. As the judges said: “there is little that can be said about it“.  Richard Keegan should be stuck off as a solicitor. This is a lawyer who is lying and perjuring himself in court to help Capilano sell poisonous, polluted and fake honey to the public.
Capilano Honey would also have to prove malice by me to make out their injurious falsehood claim but provided bugger all evidence of it. But its worth noting that at paragraph 82 of the judgment they said “An ulterior motive was alleged, namely that the respondent was “fixated on attacking Mr Kerry Stokes”, a part owner of Capilano.” How paranoid is Kerry Stokes?
The lawyers representing Capilano Honey are also Kerry Stokes’ and Channel 7’s lawyers (Stokes controls Seven) and they would have had to get Kerry Stokes’ approval to put the reference to him in their submissions. It shows a powerful prima facie case that Kerry Stokes is running Capilano Honey’s legal case against me. Given that, any likely future class action against Capilano Honey for poisoning the Australian public could also go after Kerry Stokes’ $Billions as well.
Another reference to the judgment to reinforce what I previously quoted is at paragraph 122 which points out that the super-injunction and suppression orders had “an unjustifiable chilling effect on freedom of speech“. It was always blatantly a SLAPP lawsuit and the government should investigate. From what I have read INTERPOL are investigating the international food fraud element which one would think would include investigating Capilano Honey and Kerry Stokes role.
Capilano Honey have 2 Barristers and numerous lawyers who specialise in this area of law representing them and they knew they had no justification for the super-injunction and non-publication orders. That is why they went to court ex-parte (by themselves and without my knowledge) on the 7th of October 2016 to get the suppression orders and a super-injunction so I could not tell anyone. They knew they could not defend the court orders in a contested hearing and it should not have been allowed by the judge Peter Hall and Justice David Davies and the appeal judgment says so. At paragraph 114 of the judgment it says: “On the evidence before the Court, there was no reason why the matter had to be dealt with on the spot and a number of reasons why it should not have been.“
I didn’t report the Court of Appeal decision in October 2018 because I was in jail for 3 counts of contempt of court of which 2 were for breaching suppression orders. Those suppression orders no longer exist because they were invalid in the first place the same as Capilano Honey’s suppression orders which adds further weight to my allegations that NSW judges are corruptly issuing invalid suppression orders and selling suppression orders to companies and individuals to help hide crimes they want hidden from the public and law enforcement agencies.
The Capilano Honey matter against me is a prime example of the judicial corruption issuing invalid suppression orders. It is so corrupt even the 3 appeals court judges wouldn’t defend it. But even though Justice Lucy McCallum found in my favour as the initial judge overturning the suppression orders she needs to explain why she helped keep the suppression orders going for over 2 years and why she has never issued orders for Capilano Honey to file their evidence.
Justice McCallum has also deliberately ignored for over 12 months and failed ordering the interrogatory questions and discovery I have requested from Capilano Honey be complied with. I have written articles about it before accusing Justice McCallum of taking bribes from Capilano which she is well aware as the articles are before the court as evidence and she has never refuted the allegations.
I thought I would start the year of with a positive post. The judgment is well worth a read and a big win for this website, its supporter and freedom of speech. The battle isn’t over yet as the defamation and injurious falsehood case continues but we’re in a strong legal position to win it and we’ve managed to do that with me as a self-represented litigant up against a multi-million-dollar company with shareholders with deep pockets. The support of the followers of this website has been crucial in the battle, so thank you.
Please use the Twitter, Facebook and email etc. buttons below and help promote this post.
Posted by at