Re: Colosimo case

Saturday, 6 February, 2010 8:46 AM

From: "Jim" <jim.sovereign@optusnet.com.au>

To; "Mr Gerrit H. Schorel-Hlavka" <inspector_rikati@yahoo.com.au>

Hi Gerrit,

Your logic escapes me. I note you have written many hundreds of papes of
correspondence regarding this matter and invested counless hours of your time and
energy. What I would like to know is why do you bother continuing debating with
VCAT if you do not recognise and consent to their jurisdiction? If VCAT is not a
valid Chapter III constitutional court but merely an administrative tribunal, would it
not be wiser and easier for you to simply appeal this disputed case into the County or
Supreme courts for a proper judicial hearing?

Jim

------------------------------------

Jim,
To take it to the Supreme Court of Victoria would play into the hands of VCAT,
because they seek to change the system that instead of the prosecutor proving
jurisdiction the defendant had to disprove jurisdiction and that could have severe
implications from then on.
.
When you place the onus upon the Defendant then having to disprove jurisdiction
means the Court then “assumes” jurisdiction to exist! You see the danger?
.
What we now have, see the attachment, is that they seek to prohibit publication even
so they themselves already publish details. All kinds of government are lately
pursuing to deny Internet publication and the South Australian government already
did so and the Commonwealth of Australia also pursues this to some degree. Hence,
being “registered” publisher I have to stand up for my rights and that of others.
.
We never should accept that our CIVIL, POLITICAL and RELIGIOUS rights are
unduly interfered with.
.
As you may be aware I published Chapter 0003 about this on 3 February 2010 and
then 2 days later the Victorian State government Office seeks to interfere with Fran’s
and also my right to publish.
.
Do understand that VCAT uses this modus operandi against many and what i am
doing is to take a stand whereas most other people would lack the knowledge and so
the ability to do so.
.
What we all should do is to spread the word to everyone as if VCAT can succeed
against Frank and myself to keep it all secret then soon the rot they get involved with
such as secret imprisonment, etc, will escalate.
.
I view it is a very serious issue that a judge of a Court was willing to continue some 6
CONTEMPT hearings and even make clear to Frank he could be imprisoned even so
she had never formally charged him.
.
How many others are routinely dealt with as such?
.
Whereas ordinary the Authorities and the courts argue that they must apply the RULE
OF LAW in this case Frank and so myself are using this against them.
.
We must ensure that we do not just try to get rid of this matter and leave perhaps
thousands of others suffer the same but unable to stand up for their rights.
.
Frank requested my assistance to pursue his CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS and as
recent as yesterday made known he was very pleased how I assist him in that regard.
Do understand he had the litigation going on for about 2 years before I was requested
to assist and the lawyers (including VCAT members) being caught out having done it
all wrong obviously will seek to persist to succeed in their quest against Frank and so
to try to vindicate their wrong doings, where as I seek to avoid them using possible
legal loopholes.
.
For myself, I could have tried different ways but the legal risk to Frank is too great as
I do not want to shift the burden of prove onto Frank.
.
As such, while to you it might appear the easier way is to go to the Supreme Court of
Victoria, in reality it is not the way to go and don’t forget that the president of VCAT
is Justice Bell who is a judge of the Supreme Court of Victoria and so trying so to say
get his mates to go against him is another issue one has to consider.
.
Gerrit
.
Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka
.
6-2-2006