Hello 2025!
INTRODUCTION‘2024 equals approximately 5 months of travel and five months of prison.
This book detailing what it was to do more time than some pedos, the setbacks endured, the becoming of a cover up.’
Most of this autobiography was drafted as a handwritten manuscript during my time at Adelaide Women’s Prison. Thank you to everyone who gave me pens, I love you all.
Outwardly I smiled; -happy, funny and mischievous. But all it took was a word, a moment, a statement to reveal the deep look of a tormented soul.
Almost half of 2024 I spent travelling the East coast of Australia – free as a bird. The other half of 2024 was mostly spent in the confinement of the Adelaide Women’s Prison (AWP), with as little freedom as life can offer. The torts a result of two separate incarcerations during start of June (2024) – start of December 2024. Locked up for what should have been ‘No Case to Answer’ defence, ten days separated this devastating level of harassment that SAPOL repeated. Almost six weeks of this time I was locked in the old parts of AWP, like a dungeon compared to other units. A small concrete and wire cage was all you had to exercise in over the five odd hours of out of cell time that was allocated as ‘unlock’ for the day. Enough room for a row of six to eight people wide to stand side by side and step approximately ten steps to the other end of the cage. I was given less privileges than convicted paedophiles while held on remand at AWP pleading “Not Guilty”.
Both the best of my strengths and the worst of my death wishing misery shone.
Through hope and hardship, torts and collective trauma, the altruist elements of the moment kept me going. A determination to not allow a cover up of criminal negligence to succeed. A vision of A Better World, Barbwire Noose – BN Couture gracing the New York Fashion Week runways – Milan, London, Paris, all a vision and a blur during solidarity. I dreamed of and at times dreaded freedom. I felt like I felt nothing and had a lack of freedom for a decade since 2014. Prison at times seemed easier than reality. Regimented, roof, three meals, warm bed, the worst features were unruly screws. Prison guards who would pin inmate against inmate and antagonise drama. Causing fights that resulted in inmate and guard injuries alike.
Emotionally exhausted is the only way to explain feeling such peace in chaos, drained and revived so many times over these years. Jail sucks and was a Really Bad holiday, yet I grew there, unfortunately for the men driving my incarceration – I did not languish.
Oppressed, dehumanised, and degraded. A true account of how: ‘It is better to take refuge in the Lord, than to trust in man.’ PSLAM 118:8
The bible, hope – faith, for the most part got me through.
I have always been able to live in confined space, occupying my time with reading and writing, drawing and music since I was a child. Spending much time in my room under parental care, in my late teens and upon buying a single bedroom home. Moving out of home at sixteen years of age, I am capable of being up or down financially and keeping independent - looking after me from my own resources. In small spaces – incarcerated, I suffered not from loneliness. Nor from the overall experience, just many lost opportunities over five months. Fate always bringing jealousy – envy of the inspiration I aroused with my persistence pushing against power, corrupt power. The’bullshit’ of the environment was uncomfortable. My cousin giving some good advice, a seasoned jailbird, she said “Keep out of the politics” which was a solid tip for me as nothing really more than a prison system newbie.
Bullying isn’t my style to dish or to take. So, you can imagine how ‘in’ jail was for me. It wasn’t crazy, but it wasn’t me either. If I am around a bully I leave or I say something to that twat. There is no real middle ground, space to tolerate bullshit hate. “Go Fuck Yourself I say to a bully. Don’t like it, don’t dish your ugly behaviour then.” - Autobiographical Series; ANYTHING BUT ORDINARY Judgement and Perception have NO Value Here, Book 6.
Before delving into the nitty gritty, I am sharing my perspective on bullying as prison is filled with large personalities, friends/foes and power tripping petty bullies. The following was written in 2018, when I was involved in International Beauty Pageant’s:
“I have stood up for Disabled Rights in 2004, Empowerment against oppression since 2005 - 2017, Against Bullying Gang Behaviour in 2012, For a deceased Victims Justice in 2014 and Community Safety 2015 - Ongoing. It is important to remember in our discussions about bullying that words are not the Real issue. The tone, the delivery, the gossip, the constant badgering of another’s soul is the behaviour we should condemn.
“Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will Never hurt me.” An old saying of Strength not Weakness. Teaching you yourself - your children to know thyself, believe in the person you are and Never be defined by another. The greatest power you have against a bully is your reaction. Self-defence is kindness to yourself and others – a deterrent to ego and fear driven activity. Use Your Voice. Knowing when to stand up or
walk away are some of the most empowering decisions we can make. To stop bullying we cannot just simply say no, we need to encourage cultural change and independent thinking to ensure the bad influence of one is not passed on and encouraged as behaviour in another.
Empower the Courage to be Kind to one another and Stand up – Speak Out!” Stop bullying campaign 2018.
Prison felt like a plot to push the refuge of suicide. Bullying. I refuse to be bullied like that. Any right- thinking person agreed that the victim was me and power; government/police (religion) were abusing a legal opportunity to cease the day, change their ways and move forward from eras of criminal negligence, conflate and confuse (operations at the taxpayers’ expense) cover ups.
It was nearly two decades of building brand Barbwire Noose and public scrutiny. The truth out there in black and white yet still being hidden by perceptive operational tactics, efforts to confuse the truth in a cover up as mental health, frivolous, untrue, unreliable – anything but Defamation as the truth is defence regarding defamation claims. I reported the truth of criminal negligence cases surrounding SAPOL. Exposed to my own experiences with malfeasance and the fall out of corruption and knowledge of reckless endangerment during operations which included deaths due to SAPOL’ failure to act lawfully.
While incarcerated in AWP I read Autobiographies. The literature reading a personal interest and hoping to broaden my writing style as I further establish as a global author. I do quite like sharing views, philosophy, knowledge, progressions of time. The Anything But Ordinary Autobiographical Series – Judgement and Perception have NO Value Here; is my book series full of candid facts, experiences, quotes and open to interpretation depending on where the readers head is at in judgement of education, my life and thoughts. The books definitely share my views, knowledge, time spent in action (life) and theory. My life and life choice being open to media interpretation for years – poor investigative journalism. The Autobiography – Nelson Mandela sums it up best I think in book ‘Conversations with Myself’; he states “The trouble, of course, is that most successful men are prone to some form of vanity. There comes a stage in their lives when they consider it permissible to be egotistic and to brag to the public at large about their unique achievements. What a sweet euphemism for self-praise the English language has evolved! Autobiography they choose to call it, where the shortcomings of others are frequently exploited to highlight the praiseworthy accomplishments of the author.”
LOVE of SELF.
What love of self means to me: Regard for one’s own happiness. Compassion for others and self.
Practice of self-care actions and activities.
Connection with your inner energy – meditation, etc.
Respecting your own uniqueness and allowing your personal authenticity to manifest.
Living in the moment, just for at least a moment every day.
Decide that you are enough and watch what happens.
A beautiful façade of a dangerous underbelly covers the complex life/environment that is my thirties until now. Rob Lowe book: ‘Stories I Only tell My Friends’ sums up the life of these years well, acting a façade, he says “I’m deeply suspicious and rarely entertained by conventionally accepted turning points in a plot, of events that are meant to seem earth-shatteringly dramatic when in fact, to me, they are merely predictable.” My strong intuition leaves life with little surprises. Stumbling through gold mines and mine fields, after a decade of the unusual becoming more usual, my quiet life disrupted by dickheads and sex deviates. I learnt to trust no one and live in the moment. I’ve lived through much illegal privacy breach techniques, technology and the disruptive, corrupt tactics taught me a lot about deception and perception. The depths of articulation, the skills of real life acting. Living in the moment, real moments are consuming, overwhelming, deceiving and dangerous.
Subject to many persons with long histories of incarceration and heavy drug use, I did not really fit in so to speak in this environment, yet with an open mind listened to everyone (as best as possible) as an equal while I kept to myself. Adapting my own routine of TV favourites with daily life incarcerated, and clearly spending a lot of my time engrossed in literature and writing. Despite some gossip from the AWP school yard that I heard about myself, witnessed by the AWP employees (screws) was my excessive coffee consumption, regular time in cell over lunch, exercise, love of my pen and regular request for envelopes. Indulging arts in some of this time and posting an outstanding amount of out-going mail to productively pursue litigation for personal injury, defamation, and my release.
There are some great stories out of oppression and detainment. Myself, a Human Rights activist, not a man nor a martyr. This incarceration nearly broke my poor little spirit and its hopes for resolution and fair trial regarding police and government criminal negligence. I had to remind myself that great things, people have achieved much out of adversities.
To watch free speech eroding at any avenue with oppression allowed to flourish in covert and obscure ways while Julian Assange was finally free from incarceration himself, surreal.
Those who police opinion and our rights to freely speak the truth guilty of vile and heinous atrocities. The “Why was I here?” question and answer pounded at the forefront of my mind. Why?? because no one wanted to be responsible for failing to address sexual violence against disabled persons, sexual violence by police (government ministers) against minors and decades of criminal negligence in governance in general.
The legal reasons and legislative Acts which say I should not have been incarcerated finish this chapter.
HUMAN RIGHTS MATTER.
WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION
This concerns protecting people who act in the public interest when disclosing serious wrongdoing to the authorities. This wrongdoing usually relates to environmental and health issues or information relating to corruption, misconduct and maladministration in public administration. Laws protecting whistleblowers exist at both State and Commonwealth levels.
Specifically my own, my public disclosures and my immunity when it comes to doing so; Public interest information may be disclosed in certain circumstances to a journalist or a member of Parliament (other than a Minister of the Crown). Where a person has previously made an appropriate disclosure to a relevant authority, and has not within the specified time frame received notification that their disclosure has been assessed, they may then disclose that information to a journalist or MP.
The objects of the PID Act are— (a) to encourage and facilitate the disclosure, in the public interest, of information about substantial risks to public health or safety, or to the environment, and about corruption, misconduct and maladministration in public administration— [(i) (ii)]
(b) to ensure that there is appropriate oversight of public interest disclosures about corruption, misconduct and maladministration in public administration.
As a whistleblower, reporter of governance associated crimes, I have been subject to institutional torts - harassment acknowledged by Magistrate Teresa Anderson in 2018 at the Mount Gambier Magistrates Courts and reprisal regarding report criminal negligence in the Disability sector. I should be protected under whistleblower laws of state and federal litigation.
It should be noted as 'on my mind' that a person who causes detriment to another on the ground, or substantially on the ground, that the other person or a third person has made or intends to make an appropriate disclosure of public interest information commits an act of victimisation.
(2) An act of victimisation under this Act may be dealt with— (a) as a tort; or (b) as if it were an act of victimisation under the Equal Opportunity Act 1984, but, if the victim commences proceedings in a court seeking a remedy in tort, the victim cannot subsequently lodge a complaint under the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 and, conversely, if the victim lodges a complaint under that Act, the victim cannot subsequently commence proceedings in a court seeking a remedy in tort.
(3) If a complaint alleging an act of victimisation under this Act has been lodged with the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity and the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity is of the opinion that the subject matter of the complaint has already been adequately dealt with by a competent authority, the Commissioner for Equal Opportunity may decline to act on the complaint or to proceed further with action on the complaint.
(4) In proceedings against a person seeking a remedy in tort for an act of victimisation committed by an employee or agent of the person, it is a defence to prove that the person exercised all reasonable diligence to ensure that the employee or agent would not commit an act of victimisation.
(5) A person who personally commits an act of victimisation under this Act is guilty of an offence. Maximum penalty: $20 000 or imprisonment for 2 years.
(6) Proceedings for an offence against subsection (5) may only be commenced by a police officer or a person approved by either the Commissioner of Police or the Director of Public Prosecutions.
(7) In this section— detriment includes— (a) loss or damage (including damage to reputation); or (b) injury or harm (including psychological harm); or (c) intimidation or harassment; or (d) discrimination, disadvantage or adverse treatment in relation to a person's employment; or (e) threats of reprisal. (f) For the purposes of this section, a threat of reprisal may be— (a) express or implied; or (b) conditional or unconditional, and in any proceedings dealing with an act of victimisation (including proceedings for an offence against subsection (5)) it is not necessary to prove that the person threatened actually feared that the threat would be carried out.
LEGISLATION ETRACT: 5—Immunity for appropriate disclosure of public interest information
(5) A disclosure of public interest information is made to a relevant authority if it is made to— (a) where the information relates to a public officer— (i) a person who is, in accordance with any guidelines prepared under section 14, designated as a person who is taken to be responsible for the management or supervision of the public officer or to the relevant responsible officer; or (ii) a person who is, in fact, responsible for the management or supervision of the public officer or to the relevant responsible officer; or (b) where the information relates to a public sector agency or public sector employee— [(i) (ii) (c)] the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment; or the responsible officer for the relevant public sector agency; or where the information relates to an agency to which the Ombudsman Act 1972 applies—the Ombudsman; or (e) where the information relates to a risk to the environment—the Environment Protection Authority; or (f) where the information relates to a risk to the environment—the Environment Protection Authority; or where the information relates to an irregular and unauthorised use of public money or substantial mismanagement of public resources—the Auditor-General; or where the information relates to a risk to the environment—the Environment Protection Authority; or (g) where the information relates to the commission, or suspected commission, of any offence—a member of the police force; or (h) where the information relates to a judicial officer—the Judicial Conduct Commissioner; or (j) where the information relates to a person or a matter of a prescribed class—an authority declared by the regulations to be a relevant authority in relation to such information; or (k) a Minister of the Crown; or (l) OPI; or (m) any other prescribed person or person of a prescribed class.
The Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) also protects officers and employees of a company who disclose information of illegal practices, fraud or misappropriation of funds to company auditors. It is an offence under the Act for a person to be penalized (victimised) for such disclosures.
The Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 (Cth) protects public officials (wider then public servants, includes defence force and others) who make prescribed disclosures. The disclosure ust be made to an authorised officer or to the person's supervisor. The person disclosing the information is protected from civil and criminal liability as well as disciplinary action.
Public interest information affects the wellbeing of the community. The Act applies differently to the following two types of public interest information: 1. Environmental and health information – where there is a substantial risk to the environment or to public health and safety. 2. Public administration information – where there is potential corruption, misconduct or maladministration in public administration. Protections are provided for public officers who make an appropriate disclosure of public administration information and for all persons who make an appropriate disclosure of environmental and health information.
Preventing or hindering disclosure A person must not— (a) prevent another person from making an appropriate disclosure of public interest information under this Act; or (b) hinder or obstruct another person in making such a disclosure.
The PID Act is Non-derogation This Act is in addition to, and does not derogate from, any privilege, protection or immunity existing apart from this Act under which information may be disclosed without civil or criminal liability.
5—Immunity for appropriate disclosure of public interest information
(1) If— (a) a person makes an appropriate disclosure of environmental and health information; or b) a public officer makes an appropriate disclosure of public administration information, the person is not subject to any liability as a result of that disclosure. (2) This section has effect despite any duty of secrecy or confidentiality or any other restriction on disclosure (whether or not imposed by an Act) applicable to the person. (3) A person makes an appropriate disclosure of environmental and health information for the purposes of this Act if the disclosure is made to a relevant authority and the person— (a) believes on reasonable grounds that the information is true; or (b) is not in a position to form a belief on reasonable grounds about the truth of the information but believes on reasonable grounds that the information may be true and is of sufficient significance to justify its disclosure so that its truth may be investigated. (4) A public officer makes an appropriate disclosure of public administration information for the purposes of this Act if the disclosure is made to a relevant authority and the public officer reasonably suspects that the information raises a potential issue of corruption, misconduct or maladministration in public administration. (5) A disclosure of public interest information is made to a relevant authority if it is made to— (a) where the information relates to a public officer— (i) a person who is, in accordance with any guidelines prepared under section 14, designated as a person who is taken to be responsible for the management or supervision of the public officer or to the relevant responsible officer; or (ii) a person who is, in fact, responsible for the management or supervision of the public officer or to the relevant responsible officer; or (b) where the information relates to a public sector agency or public sector employee— (i) (ii) (c) the Commissioner for Public Sector Employment; or the responsible officer for the relevant public sector agency; or where the information relates to an agency to which the Ombudsman Act 1972 applies—the Ombudsman; or (d) where the information relates to a location within the area of a particular council established under the Local Government Act 1999—a member, officer or employee of that council; or (e) where the information relates to a risk to the environment—the Environment Protection Authority; or (f) where the information relates to a risk to the environment—the Environment Protection Authority; or where the information relates to an irregular and unauthorised use of public money or substantial mismanagement of public resources—the Auditor-General; or (g) where the information relates to the commission, or suspected commission, of any offence—a member of the police force; or (h) where the information relates to a judicial officer—the Judicial Conduct Commissioner; or (i) (j) where the information relates to a member of Parliament—the Presiding Officer of the House of Parliament to which the member belongs; or where the information relates to a person or a matter of a prescribed class—an authority declared by the regulations to be a relevant authority in relation to such information; or (k) a Minister of the Crown; or (l) OPI; or (m) any other prescribed person or person of a prescribed class.
What is an ‘ex-gratia’ payment?
An ex-gratia payment is a one-off payment which a state or territory government may choose to provide to someone affected by a wrongful conviction, on its own accord or due to a request by a party.
States and territories are able to make these discretionary payments, with their authority flowing from the ‘Executive Power’ provided to the government under the Constitution.
Payments are made at the discretion of the territory or state Attorney General, and a decision to refuse to make a payment is not reviewable in any way, with no guidelines imposed.
“the provision of compensation for miscarriage of justice in the circumstances… may be by administrative procedures rather than pursuant to specific legal provision.”
What are other schemes of compensation?
In New Zealand, a formal scale has been developed for ex gratia payments, including $NZ150,000 for each year in custody, in addition to up to $NZ100,000 for loss of livelihood during that period, and up to $NZ50,000 to help re-adjust to living in the community.
Without such a scale, it is hard to determine what compensation may be provided, with determination thus branded as arbitrary and inconsistent.
“While any payment is better than none, when seeking compensation, a wrongfully convicted person shouldn’t be left to the discretion of an administrative decision-maker whose determination about whether to provide compensation, and how much if so, cannot be appealed and is not determined by reference to any objective scale.” commented Pettit.
The United Nations developed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Under Article 14 of the ICCPR, everyone has the right to liberty and freedom from arbitrary detention. Where this right has been violated, victims should be compensated “according to the laws of their country”. In 1980, the Fraser Government agreed to ratify the ICCPR, validating it as international law.
The United Nations’ own Human Rights Commission has consistently stated that these options are unsatisfactory, recommending on multiple occasions that Australia withdraw the reservation.
“In some cases, even when [exonerees] are awarded, they make sure to say that this does not set a precedent,” Dioso–Villa (Dioso-Villa; Senior Lecturer in the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Griffith University and a member of the Griffith Criminology Institute).
Recourse can include ex gratia payments (payments made despite there being no legal obligation to do so), which are offered in a range of situations involving income loss or damage costs. In Australia, ex gratia payments for wrongful conviction are made at the sole discretion of a state’s Attorney–General—a government-appointed position.
Payments are often politically motivated, only granted after extensive public outrage or a Royal Commission (like in the case of Lindy Chamberlain). Decisions regarding compensation awards are rarely published and there is little transparency in the decision-making process or in the way that compensation is calculated. “We don’t know what happens behind the scenes, how they reach their decisions before the awards are given or denied,” explained Rachel Dioso–Villa, a senior lecturer at Griffith University in Queensland, who published the most extensive list of Australia’s wrongful convictions. – Human Rights opinion Article: When Justice Fails – Wrongful Convictions in Australia by Phoebe Meeton (2020).
A repeat of a quote which briefly and distinctly describes some of the emotions which overwhelmed me during wrongful conviction: “It is difficult to imagine, for a person who is otherwise generally a law-abiding citizen, a more humiliating experience or a greater shock to one’s equilibrium than being forcefully deprived of one’s liberty for even a relatively short period of time in circumstances which are entirely unjustified. This is all the more so where that curtailment of liberty is accompanied, as in the present case, by the detained person being handcuffed and marched through a crowd of onlookers and then incarcerated in a police paddy wagon, locked in a cell at the police station and fingerprinted and photographed as a criminal. Not surprisingly, the whole experience must have been both humiliating and highly embarrassing.”
Compensation for wrongful conviction is not only a right – a human right but it is a necessity to deter, stop and repent an action which sometimes has no compensable measure upon the suffering inflicted by tis demoralising, dehumanising, destabilising and humiliatingly damaging ordeal.Lara Zarowsky, a law instructor at the University of Washington, worked with her students to advocate for legislation aimed at compensating the wrongfully convicted, successfully introducing a state-wide law in 2013. Zarowsky said: “[It is] a vehicle, really, for people in this position to be able to get some sort of nominal amount for their immeasurable pain and suffering… it also represents official recognition that these cases can and do happen.”.
‘Courage, strength, determination, and human dignity can survive even the most extreme and brutal conditions.’ – Malika Oufkir (Author Michele Fitoussi); a quote from book about General Mohammad Oufkir eldest daughter. ‘As I result of having come so close to death, she has a detachment from life’; a statement to which I personally closely relate. Feeling very detached from life at times. Surviving moments that tempt death in numbers. The incarceration tort at the AWP was going to make or break me.
Comments