Home Australia A Female Police Officer Was the Catalyst in the State’s Abduction of...

A Female Police Officer Was the Catalyst in the State’s Abduction of a Child

67

By Dee McLachlan

There is the expectation of fairness in Australia… “Australians all let us rejoice…” But there is no rejoicing for many thousands of children and their protective parents.

This story I’m about to tell you is antithetical to fair. It’s about deep corruption and criminality against a child. It is about how certain police officers felt it their business to destroy a child’s life.

In desperation, I began a series of videos recently to explain the modus operandi and the many tricks used against children and protective parents. Then as more people contacted me, I was to hear more truly distressing accounts of child stealing and judicial misconduct on every level. It seems the very system has festered beyond redemption.

Something must be done. I have – again — contacted the prime minister’s office; the South Australian premier, attorney-general, and child protection minister for phone meetings. They need to be briefed, and I will no longer be brushed off.

Now please hear about this specific case.

State Abduction of a Child

There is no other way to describe what happened in this case, but “abduction”. I wrote about the offending police officer in June 2019, in an article entitled, “Removal of Child from Good Mum Traceable to Corrupt Female Police Officer”. I referred to her as ‘Officer Demeter’ (not her real name).

There is a law in South Australia: s80 of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 SA, with regard to the Abduction of a Child, that states (1) “Any person who (a) unlawfully, either by force or fraud …(c) deprives any parent …having the lawful care of the child … shall be guilty of an offence and liable to be imprisoned for a term not exceeding seven years.”

For this law to be valid there needs to be clear “fraud”; fraud being defined as “false representation of a matter of fact … or by concealment of what should have been disclosed … and is intended to deceive…,” and “used to gain a legal advantage or accomplish a specific crime.”

Various persons cooperated to remove this young girl and damage her future; potentially robbing years of the childhood she deserves and wishes; and by doing so also robbing years of motherhood from the mother. (I hear these accounts all the time.)

And for Officer Demeter and her cohort to be prosecuted for the abduction of a child, they must, according to s80, have “deprived” the parent of “having the lawful care of the child.” Well, the child was in the LAWFUL CARE of her mother, per a 2018 order of the Family Court, and the means in which the child was removed was unequivocally orchestrated by means of deception.

The Federal Court Order

After a long and very expensive Family Court trial the mother was awarded sole custody of the child.

Then, just over one month after the Family Court Orders were delivered in 2018, the child was deliberately injured during a weekend visitation to the father. I have heard the child’s account as she bravely described to a medical practitioner what terrible things were done to her – and I absolutely believe her. She described how she had been threatened — with her and her mother’s life — to not speak out.

The injury was reported, but sadly, this corrupt female police officer, and whoever she enlisted into this conspiracy, HALTED all investigations and thereafter focused on taking the child from her mum. You see, a child injury report means the Department for Child Protection (DCP) can step in, which they did — turning a federal custody order into a state matter via a trick in Family Law (s69ZK). Maybe someone didn’t like the orders?

As soon as the child’s wounds had healed, and less than three months after these orders were delivered, she was removed — taken from school while the mother was putting her case to Youth Court. To note: as the child had feared being separated from her mum, the Family Court Judge had also ordered that the child was in no danger of being removed from her mother’s care.

I declare that various people plotted against the mother from the get-go. For two years they have been trying to SWITCH CUSTODY – against the child’s wishes – to reunify the child with her father, the very person she claimed abused her. And the switch of custody is taking place in the informal and so-called ‘Reunification Court’, with the exclusion of the mother. This stands in contempt of the Federal Court Orders.

Mother and daughter have now been APART for two and a half years, and egregious restrictions have been placed on them to keep them apart. They see each other for only 2 hours a month in a room watched on by others. I cannot imagine how degrading, and brutal this must be for them both. And what must the child think, as the actions of authorities indoctrinate her into believing that her mother is ‘dangerous’ and must have done something terribly wrong?

Fortunately, I believe that this child is particularly intelligent and knows exactly what is going on, but is powerless without the one person that she trusted to protect her.

Officer Demeter and the Deception

When I wrote the article about Officer Demeter back in 2019, I did not know some critical information that would surface later, which reveals how the game that was viciously played against this child.

Officer Demeter came into the picture when two items of clothing that were to be tested (for DNA etc.) by CIB in Adelaide were mysteriously removed. Demeter declared nothing could be tested now until she had interviewed the child. She dilly-dallied for weeks, and after the Family Court trial was in progress, she conducted an interview. [In my original article, I said the interview was “only days before the start of trial,” but that is incorrect. It was conducted mid-trial.]

After the interview, Demeter said to the mother that the child passed the truth test and was very brave, but there was “nothing to go by.” The mother never knew what her daughter had disclosed, (she did not talk about it with the girl, in deference to the rule of “No coaching”). So Mum assumed that her daughter’s disclosures must have been inconsequential.

But the interview is central to the deception, as I shall reveal.

With the mother having sole custody, life moved on. As I said, just a month after the orders were delivered the child was intentionally injured. And guess what? The same female policewoman that interviewed the child was back. Officer Demeter then worked with DCP staff to immediately HALT the investigation into the assault (against all regulations and admitted to in documents later). DCP staff also ignored medical professionals and went against the child’s version.

However, it was after the child unexpectedly told her teacher at school about the abuses and injury that Demeter went into high gear. She began actively colluding with the father to get the child, and then entered fabricated accusations against the mother into the system, making her out to be the problem — provided the fraudulent grounds for the DCP to remove the child.

Enter Detective Lemon

The mum had been separated from her daughter for close to eight months when she asked the South Australian Police to please investigate Officer Demeter, and whether her daughter had disclosed any abuse in her police interview.

That is when Detective Lemon (not his real name) came onto the scene, assigned by SAPOL’s Internal Investigation Section to investigate. He visited the mum around New Year’s Eve to tell her so, but seemed completely uninterested in being provided with additional evidence and information. A month later he called on the phone to say that he had completed his investigation and that her daughter had NOT DISCLOSED ANY ABUSE. He admitted to not having viewed the video but had discussed it with Demeter and allegedly read her notes.

There was nothing to be done, and the file was closed – no matter how many times we wrote to Lemon’s superiors to question the malfeasance.

Let me make it clear, the DCP’s removing and keeping the child is based on their assertion that the child has NEVER been abused. And because the mother had supporting her daughter’s view (that she was abused), then she must be a danger to her daughter – and therefore they must be kept apart until the child is 18, even if the child desperately wants to go back home to her mum. Please re-read these two sentences several times to fully understand the true nature of what has unfolded. I have learned that it is a well-honed procedure, perhaps worldwide.

Finally Exposed – The Police Interview

In the back of the mother’s mind was: What if her daughter had disclosed something in the police interview? Every attempt to get the police interview through an FOI had been blocked and so it was around July 2019 that a judge finally granted the mother’s request to subpoena the video.

The mother was not prepared for what she was about to witness on viewing the 73-minute police interview of her daughter. It took her several hours to call me, as she was so distressed and unable to watch more than about 15 minutes. It took her several days to view the full video and comprehend what her daughter had gone through and had described.

At this point, the state was asking for guardianship, yet no one in authority was willing to watch the video, with the DCP insisting that abuse had NEVER occurred. Mind-boggling.

But the facts are the facts, and can no longer be disputed.

I will not outline what abuse the child described but can say she chronicled what happened to her in the most innocent way, including various versions of extreme abuses and versions of rape. It appears she described these as a child would, not knowing exactly what to call things, nor fully understanding what was really happening to her – taking very long moments to pluck up the courage to speak out and explain. (Don’t forget, she spoke of death threats if she told anyone.)

In this interview, the fraud and deception of Officer Demeter were truly exposed. She lured the child into a false sense of security, telling her over and over again:

“You can use any words… This is a safe place, you can tell me anything… What don’t you want to say? …use your big voice, your big brave voice …It’s safe for you to tell me the truth …tell me the truth …what happened then? …tell me everything you remember.”

And the child told her the truth; told the officer everything.

And what did Demeter do? She never entered the abuses into the system (it is mandatory to do so); never reported the abuses to the Department for Child Protection (DCP), and did not inform the Family Court.

Then months later, after the new injury was reported, Officer Demeter was back. She not only halted the investigation into that assault by the father, but she colluded with him. Demeter was the one person who had known the truth all along. The child had told her of terrible things in the interview in late-2017 — THREE YEARS AGO. But Demeter concealed those crimes and began writing reports into the system that the mother was delusional — signifying that the abuses could have never happened.

Her actions of fraud enabled the unlawful removal – the abduction — of the child.

One can only hope that Officer Demeter will be prosecuted for s241— Impeding investigation of offenses and assisting offenders; s243—Fabricating, altering or concealing evidence; s14—Criminal neglect (where a child suffers harm as a result of an act), and s80 — all serious offenses with long-term imprisonment if convicted.

But there’s another chapter to this sorry saga.

Detective Lemon’s Moment in the Sun

The truth is always grounded, but a lie has to be remembered.

You see, Detective Lemon, the person investigating Officer Demeter, had confirmed to the Mum in early 2019 that no abuse had ever happened. He had informed all his superiors, including the Police Commissioner and presumably the minister that all was in order. He had told the mother in a phone conversation (which she recorded to protect her legal rights) that he had investigated, and that no abuse was ever disclosed. Of course, we now know that is a blatant lie and cover-up. (Note: cover-up is a crime.)

Recently in September 2020, the mother finally got through to him (using a private number). She again recorded the conversation and asked Detective Lemon about the investigation. Now he declared that he had not done the investigation, and told her it was up to the police ombudsman. However, he must have told his superiors that he had.

There may be malicious attempts to discredit the child now – but I believe that will be impossible.

Who Will End Their ‘Life Sentence’

Sir James Munby in Re J (A Child) [2013] EWHC 2694 (Fam) paragraph 28, in a child care proceedings case, describes the separation by a court of a loving mother-daughter relationship being equivalent to a life sentence to both. It changes both lives forever, and leads to drastic life-long consequences. (I thank Pastor Paul and Graeme for sending me this UK case.)

I call the case I have been discussing a criminal abduction of a child. It is nothing less. (Actually, it is much more, as I have omitted dozens of deceitful things that took place.)

In sum, the mother had lawful care of her daughter, and by fraud, her child was taken from her care. Had Officer Demeter done the right thing, the mother would have not even gone through a family court trial, and her daughter would NEVER have been removed from her care.

How many people are involved now in this abduction? Is there a greater conspiracy to defeat the course of justice? No one can continue to claim this child was never abused. Sexual exploitation by the father had been substantiated years before by Families SA investigators. And in 2019, a doctor who had specialized in trauma wrote, about her…

“…flying in the face of 3 years of consistent reporting by a child …This is professional misconduct of the highest order …and would easily reach the threshold …requiring urgent Ministerial investigation.”

This caring and protective mother has been the only honest person here, diligently following the law, and she is still being denied the lawful custody of her child. Last week she was prevented from attending a public function at the girl’s school – as though she were some kind of ‘undesirable’. Like vermin of society.  

The Family Court Orders Need To stand

We cannot, as a society, tolerate such pernicious disregard to our most vulnerable. Tay-payer funds have been used to destroy these families. There has been a cloak of secrecy over children’s court matters for decades — mandated by s121 of the Family Law Act to ostensibly protect the child’s privacy, but it conceals malfeasance. But South Australian officials know to whom I refer. So, I urge you to share this article widely and contact your local member and the relevant government officials, asking them to please fulfill their duty of care to this child and to the many other children in similar predicaments.

Abusing a child is a heinous act; separating and isolating a child unwarrantedly or unlawfully from a protective parent is a torturous and psychologically abusive act; forcing reunification between a child with his or her abuser is criminal and unconscionable.

This has to stop. This life sentence can end with the stroke of a pen. The young girl must go home and Officer Demeter and others need to be indicted by the DPP.

SHARE

67 COMMENTS

  1. I wish this was an isolated case. Child Protective Services In many jurisdictions, in many supposedly first world countries with the rule of law is anything but.

    • And don’t forget the Minister for Child Protection, but sadly all of Rachel Sanderson’s guardianship powers were removed in 2018 and given to the Chief Executive who earns 600,000+ and I guess wields her power over all the ministers.
      Rachel Sanderson, Minister for the Department for Child Protection minister.sanderson@sa.gov.au

  3. “I will no longer be brushed off “

    “And he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men ought always to pray, and not to faint;
    Saying, There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man:
    And there was a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, ‘Avenge me of mine adversary.’
    And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, ‘Though I fear not God, nor regard man;
    Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.’”
    LUKE 18 1 – 5

    • No dispute on my part re the respective decisions makers being under Satan’s thumb, however, there doesn’t appear to be much understanding that:
      1) All it takes to wind up in such a position is to set ones-self to doing a minimum amount of work for a maximum amount of pay
      and
      2) The very nature of such a focus rules out any conscious awareness of it’s propensity to enslave

      As thinking is hard work, anyone who’s bound up like so is hardly going to see reason, in fact such an approach is more likely to acerbate the problem than not.
      But as everyone who’s ever trained a dog or broken in a horse knows, most domestic beasts will eventually respond to simplistic repetition

  4. What you are highlighting is the infiltration of our previously-trusted institutions by some form of satanic force. As to how far it extends, one can only speculate, but from what I am witnessing over recent years, it is a systemic corruption form top to bottom. Senator Heffernan’s list highlighted this to be a fact. 90 year suppression orders of pedophiles in parliament confirmed it further. One can only hope that action is happening behind the scenes to expose this evil and put an end to it once and for all.

    • Phil, Phil, there’s hope. Today I received my copy of Shane Dowling’s book “Australa’s Paedophile Protection Racket.” Buy it immediately, Phil. It was made for you.

      Berry’s quote from Luke 18 apples here — Dowling, like Dee, would not be brushed off. He even went to the watchhouse twice. Maybe Dee will “serve time” also. Onya, Dee.

      • Hey Mary–is it your mission to have Dee incarcerated.
        The facts are there-here- everywhere-
        Lets stay focused–Mary Dee Fiona Karen Me Rachel -plus plus-Gumshoe researchers–Australia–great south land–arrgghh
        Dee really pleased you are back on track–with the series–re child abduction-am always happy to be interviewed–all we can do –is be true to ourselves–and our story

        aarrgghh

    • “infiltration of our previously-trusted institutions by some form of satanic force.” – I don’t know what it is, but I got tired of endless lies by virtually everyone involved in the ‘system’. Lying politicians, lying judges, lying police, lying bureaucracies, lying doctors, lying media, lying…

      If Satan is the Father of lies, then perhaps a satanic force has taken over ALL the institutions of Australia.

      I decided I had the quit the legal profession when after a case I realized that my continued participation only served to give the system some credibility.

      • This last sentence of yours I can identify with very strongly. I do occasionally go to court but only self-representing. The last few cases I have usually got the order I sought and always close to the outcome I expected. The judgement is by someone you will probably never see again, that is, unless you are connected. I don’t take it too seriously.

        • Towards the end of my career I almost had to force myself to say “Your Honour”. I had a much more descriptive and accurate term on my mind.

        • Live People seal documents with an autograph; Corporations use signatures

          Posted on October 12, 2014 by arnierosner

          Live People seal documents with autograph; Corporations use signatures

          On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Anna von Reitz avannavon@gmail.com wrote:
          Strictly speaking, they aren’t allowed to address you—- you are a foreign state operating in a foreign jurisdiction, utterly immune and separate from them. If they speak to you they also have a hard time keeping up the pretension that you are “dead”.

          The proper way to close all correspondence is with the word “Sincerely” and with your sealed autograph.

          Living people have autographs, not signatures. Signatures are made by corporate officers when they are acting in corporate office.

          So you would autograph your full given “official” name first middle last and add the following disclaimer: “non-negotiable autograph, all rights reserved”.

          To be completely proper, you would write this is RED ink (red is for blood and land jurisdiction, blue is for water and maritime jurisdictions—which they have been using exclusively) and you would seal the document near your autograph with your right thumbprint also in red ink.

          Last but not least, you would affix a small stamp-sized color copy of your family crest at the bottom right hand corner of the last page of the document.

          This completely seals a document—- the thumbprint stands for you the individual, the crest for your family name.

          I am glad you are doing this, Nancy. If enough other Americans do the same, it will help bring pressure to bear on him and his Office and upon the current regime. Simply knowing that there are lots of people “out here” who know the truth will speed the needed reforms.

          https://scannedretina.com/2014/10/12/live-people-seal-documents-with-an-autograph-corporations-use-signatures/

      • Here’s some sentences from the petition – “The government and Judiciary have been noted suppressing these documents with orders for 90 years, choosing not to investigate as the public would ‘lose faith in the judiciary’. The public have already lost faith in the Government and Judiciary. This is compounded by these suppression orders.” – Yeah, like no shit it does.

        Does anybody feel like we are living a repeat of the people of the Soviet Union?

  5. Dee, here’s your best line: “In the back of the mother’s mind was: What if her daughter had disclosed something in the police interview?”

    Maye some readers thought, “Why doesn’t Mum quiz the kid?”

    Answer — she has no access to the kid. Those famous meetings, held in a government “lab.” are so closely watched that some Mums are not even allowed to say “I love you.”

    I can almost guarantee that if Mum said “Darling, do you remember the day you were interviewed by that lady cop?” the curtain would come crashing down to end the visit. Mum might even be told she is now forbidden to meet again, as she “emotionally abuses the kid” with that kind of talk.

    UNFORTUNATELY I AM NOT JOKING OR EXAGGERATING.

    • I know Mary–it is very very serious-it is called MKUltra programming we in Australia are the laboratory- the experiment- Fiona-Sarah- Reina–Karen-plus plus–facts/evidence are there-no disputing-mind control–Illuminati OWG OWR another arrgghhh–round and round in circles
      Your MKultra girls bless them validate our mass mind control–Elisa E Cathy Fox Cathy Morgan explain the evil intent and the reality

  6. Plenty from “the wrong side of the tracks” know this is how it works. Family Law is the apex of injustice by deception, having secrecy and unbridled power(no chance of peer oversight) within that “place”.
    Well done Dee, maybe only a little heat, but they will boil at some point.
    I try to look for the good Cops(i content many, but are known and therefore unassigned) , and be they bad or good they can be sort out on the radar. The higher the cop the more dubious of character.

    Well done Dee is not enough praise of course, words are insufficient on one’s that tower above. Your work humbles me and I gladly look up, my gut at the same time sickened by not being able to help the article’s individuals.

    • Probably, but I think I know what you mean (herself and himself). I only focus on the cop in this article. The offender had to lie and perjure to escape prosecution. But the point here is, even in the federal court, the mum was awarded custody (most unusual) and then the trick of 69zk was used. But perjury is the least of the offender’s problems. Assault and torture carry much longer sentences.

      To answer your question more clearly. I’d say in a custody case — where there is perjury; this abduction law rule (with is SA state law) may be difficult to prosecute. Because it is he said/she said and one lied. But when a serious crime has been committed this reflects on the harm and danger that is implicated in the definition of “abduction”. In this instance, and I know many other cases where crimes are being concealed by the court/police/dept.

      But what makes this different is it is NOT between the parents. I am not arguing custody really; even if that is the outcome. This is between a child and the offender. I think that why I can claim it is abduction. The policewoman went against the CHILD. The child spoke out. She asked for protection countless times. All on record. The major crime is silencing the child’s voice — by fraud. She was removed by “force”. A young girl can’t just leave. All the mother is doing in this case is supporting her daughter, nothing else.

      Thank you for the question: I has made me further clarify the situation. THIS CASE IS BETWEEN A CHILD AND OFFENDER. The crime of deception (which I outline) is SILENCING THE CHILD; GOING AGAINST THE CHILD; IT’S A DECEPTION FIRSTLY AGAINST THE CHILD; then secondarily against her protector which happens to be her mum.

  8. The Orchestrated Plan to Deceive and Enslave the American People

    On Jul 18, 2014, at 1:51 PM, Archbishop of Chicago wrote:

    I stand with the universal Catholic Church, founded by Christ. All the people whom you accuse of defrauding American citizens were elected by American citizens. That doesn’t mean that what they do is morally right, but the responsibility, finally, rests with the electorate.

    God bless you
    .
    Francis Cardinal George, O.M.I. Archbishop of Chicago

    Read on –

    https://anticorruptionsociety.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/the-orchestrated-plan-to-deceive-and-enslave-the-american-people-pdf.pdf

    • “but the responsibility, finally, rests with the electorate.” – Scary isn’t it?! – If the system is totally corrupt and the electorate is totally stupid, what the Hell can a person do?

      Is there some place a person can go to get away from all this insanity? – Perhaps a Brazilian rain forest, a deserted island?

      • No need to run away from it. Just rub THEIR noses in it, as Dee is doing. By the way I had reason to go back and re-read the article on “Burning n the Camps” and I found this zinger by our commenter 56:

        Expose the lies for the wellbeing of all youth. We’re all getting on, we’ve had good lives, our children don’t need this dystopian hell approaching.

  9. Birthed, docked and docketed under Maritime (Bank) law.

    Edward Mandell House (1858-1938).

    He made secret missions to Europe and helped Woodrow Wilson get elected: Shortly thereafter the Federal Reserve was initiated. House was a close confidant of J.P.Morgan and Rothchild.

    Colonel Edward Mandell House Predicts the Creation of the STRAWMAN in the United States.This is the first real evidence found that our current Social, Financial, and Legal system was deliberately designed to enslave humanity:

    In a private meeting with Woodrow Wilson (US President 1913- 1921) Colonel Edward Mandell House predicted the banksters’ plans to enslave the American people. He stated:”Very soon, every American will be required to register their biological property (that’s you and your children) in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging.

    By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda,which will affect our security as a charge back for our fiat paper currency.

    “Every American will be forced to register or suffer being unable to work and earn a living. They will be our chattels (property) and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading (Birth Certificate) to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, secured by their pledges.

    “They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debts to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges.

    “This will inevitably reap us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud, which we will call “Social Insurance.” Without realizing it, every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and we will employ the high office (presidency) of our dummy corporation (USA) to foment this plot against America.”- Colonel Edward Mandell House.

    [Law – Enslavement by Deceit]

    Contract/Equity Law

    In order to understand the legal system we operate under, it is critical to understand that the current system operates under maritime admiralty law and as such is based solely upon contract/equity law. The power of contract is your road to freedom or your road to enslavement.

    Ancient System of Pledging / Birth Certificates

    Our parents/grandparents were misled into registering us at birth and in doing so, under the ancient system of pledging, made us slaves/collateral to the government/bankers. For example, on the back of most Canadian’s birth certificate it says “Revenue Receipt No. A1234556 For Treasury Use Only”. What this means is that you are property/chattel of the government and that a bond was created with your name or number on it that was pledged by the government to the bankers based in your future taxes as collateral on the debt. Thus, you are legally enslaved and property of a banker somewhere.

    Social Insurance Number /Taxes

    What you haven’t been told is that at 18 years old you had an opportunity to legally opt out of the system. However, by applying for or continuing to use the Social Insurance Number, applied for on your behalf by your parents or relatives, you agreed to become a taxpayer and have duties and responsibilities as such. Had you chosen not to have a Social Insurance Number and use your lawful right to contract you would would never had to pay taxes and been free to operate outside the jurisdiction of most statutes.

    Common Law vs. Commercial/Admiralty Law (and Freeman-On-The-Land)

    As demonstrated by numerous alternative lawful scholarly groups, we and our parents have been tricked/deceived into a system in which we have given up our god given natural rights as human beings. This has been done by the creation of artificial persons/corporations that were created by the government and have similar names to our true selves but which are in fact separate corporate entities. We were deceived into accepting these artificial persons as being one and the same as us, the human being, and in the process voluntarily, but out of ignorance, had our rights reduced to that of slaves. By accepting this corporate identity we have given up our common law rights and accepted commercial (i.e. admiralty) law……………………

    https://snippits-and-slappits.blogspot.com/

    .

    • These megalo-types are always coming up with schemes but it’s interesting how “social insurance” fits into the design of breaking up the family unit. The family is very strong in Asia and there isn’t much dole. Here we have the masses voting for dole in a landslide, large numbers succumbing to bat-flu derangement syndrome. So many people want to regress, back to a nanny state, where they loaf around and get looked after, like little pigs in stalls.

    • “In order to understand the legal system we operate under, it is critical to understand that the current system operates under maritime admiralty law and as such is based solely upon contract/equity law.”

      That is simply not true. Please do not post it at Gumshoe unless you personally have an argument to support it. Or just tell the readers where they can read about it if they be interested.

      Gumshoe’s Comments column is primarily for people to weigh in on the issue in the day’s article but we are lucky to get, also, some unexpected insights.

      • MM It’s been true since 1890.

        [THE] COLONIAL COURTS OF ADMIRALTY ACT, 1890 (53 AND 54 VICT., C.27) [25th July, 1890]. [The text of the Act printed here is as on 31-12-1990]

        This Act may be cited as the Colonial Courts of Admiralty Act 1890.

        2Colonial Courts of Admiralty.

        (1)Every court of law in a British possession, which is for the time being declared in pursuance of this Act to be a court of Admiralty, or which, if no such declaration is in force in the possession, has therein original unlimited civil jurisdiction, shall be a court of Admiralty, with the jurisdiction in this Act mentioned, and may for the purpose of that jurisdiction exercise all the powers which it possesses for the purpose of its other civil jurisdiction, and such court in reference to the jurisdiction conferred by this Act is in this Act referred to as a Colonial Court of Admiralty. Where in a British possession the Governor is the sole judicial authority, the expression “court of law” for the purposes of this section includes such Governor.

        http://legislation.data.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/53-54/27/data.htm?wrap=true

        https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/12/pdfs/ukpga_19860012_en.pdf

        I would be happy to be shown that I am in error.

        • Further to my claim, why in ‘The Acts Interpretation Act’ is there reference to the sea “on the landward side of the territorial sea”?

          Section 15B

          (3A) A reference in an Act to all or any of the external Territories (whether or not one or more particular Territories are referred to) is taken to include a reference to the coastal sea of any Territory to which the reference relates.

          Definition

          (4) In this section, coastal sea:
          (a) in relation to Australia, means:
          (i) the territorial sea of Australia; and
          (ii) the sea on the landward side of the territorial sea of Australia and not within the limits of a State or internal Territory;
          and includes the airspace over, and the sea‑bed and subsoil beneath, any such sea; and
          (b) in relation to an external Territory, means:
          (i) the territorial sea adjacent to the Territory; and
          (ii) the sea on the landward side of the territorial sea adjacent to the Territory and not within the limits of the Territory;
          and includes the airspace over, and the sea‑bed and subsoil beneath, any such sea.

  10. BORN IN EQUITY

    Men do not reject the Bible because it contradicts itself; Men reject the Bible because it contradicts them.

    Colonel Edward Mandel House revealed that the American people would be, “…required to register their biological property in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging.”

    Now, if this Ancient System of Pledging could be used against the people after one was, “Born of a Woman, born UNDER the law,” (meaning a new born offspring of slaves is still a slave), for pledging their, “Life, liberty and (property) pursuit of happiness,” (See John Locke) to government through REGISTRATION, which is another way of saying ABANDONED, or to abandoned property (in other words, electing another man as their King in place of their Creator, 1 Sam 8).

    Could that very same Ancient System of Pledging be used to proclaim by Deed to whom one has pledged their, “Life, liberty and (property) pursuit of happiness,” too overturn and effectively rebut all presumptions correcting the mistake that caused presumption to be used in place of expressing such a Will (TRUST) at the time one reached the age of majority, and thereby correcting the mistake that the parents made wherein they should have expressed a trust upon one’s day of nativity?

    Could such a deed be used as proof to show that one is now and forever, “Born from above,” born of fire for pledging their Life and Liberty and Happiness to their Creator through the One that redeemed them without money?

    What religious organization has ever explained how to effectively present how one needs to respond for that gift… honorable… and in the manner that has just been presented to honorably please the Giver of that bestowed gift?

    More importantly, who would ever dare have the audacity to counter such a deed and do so without trespass and trespassing the prohibition against involuntary servitude?

    The doorway (gate) to self-governance can ONLY be found through the ministry of reconciliation, upon a firm and unwavering foundation that the Word of the Promise has been completely fulfilled, and there is nothing more to do, other than for each one to respond to it in reply.

    “Equity will not complete an imperfect gift.” The gift itself is not, nor shall it ever be, in a state of imperfection. However, by the lack of reply, by the lack of acceptance, by the lack of a deed by the receiver of that gift leaves the gift for that one awaiting it being made perfect through acceptance. Does one get what I am saying?

    In all boldness and even dogmatism, there is NO other way for one to be found to be ready for self-governance.

    https://onlashuk.wordpress.com/2018/05/06/the-ancient-system-of-pledging/

  11. CrissCross gives us lengthy quotes, but not always the source. (I mean the original source.)

    The one about Col House is — maybe — very valuable. But would either House or Wilson have told it to the world?

    Crisscross, I google for one of the phrases you quoted. It does appear on Umpteen websites but never with a source. I also went to Google’s Scholar page and found it there, by someone who refers to the quote as being “attributed” to Col House.

    The question is: when did it first get ink? If very recent, it almost looks like someone is reading the IMF (or similar) into the 1920s.

    I am not opposing the possibility that it is genuine. But to me it’s worthless if it is not traceable, and again I ask, would House or Wilson have spilled it? Surely not.

  12. DEE, As I was reading your article, the following thought came to me:

    If I were Demeter, I would grab a suitcase, toss into it a few changes of clothing, some toiletries, pyjamas, laptop and cord (don’t forget the cord), passport, credit cards, Quick-ease, and maybe a book to read on the plane, then phone for a taxi to the airport, and get the hell out of Dodge.

    Still, as I got to the bottom of the article, I thought, maybe it’s Lemon who should be calling his travel agent, and Demeter can stay here.

    She will be useful, if she feels inspired to help society, by providing info about who flung dung type thing.

    We do know that dung was geflungen. But by whom? And why?

      • Oh shite, I did not mean I want that to happen, Simon.  No way.  Gumshoe wants to:

        #1. get the missing kids home
        #2. Make it possible for a Demeter (and maybe even a Lemon) to not get roped into behavior that is really sadistic (from the point of view of how trauma affects the kids later).
        #3. Generally rattle Parliament’s cage.

  13. Have any msm press or television producers been approached by the mum with all the material, including this article.
    I would like to see a list of all msms approached and the responses recorded and listed on GS.
    By considering the msm responses, we shall be able to identify them by their deeds AND OMISSIONS for further knowledge of the msm.

    • Surely the msm would consider this matter more seriously then all the reports on Pell’s matter!
      Here we have allegations of a abusive parent, physical child abuse, ( on going?) a little girl, apparent lying authorities, official suggestions of a conspiracy to defeat the course of justice……. BY AUTHORITIES, NONE THE LESS including the judicial system and a moribund cabal of SA politicians.
      As for the 4th lying phoney and false estate, we shall see whether it is as suspected….. a cruel cabal protectors of the abuse of children.
      What say; you hypocritical sanctimonious lot at the Australian Broadcasting Commission financed by us at a billion per year and still whining.

  14. This case is horrific.

    I also lived as a child under the threat of death if I spoke out against my abusing father. My mother’s life was threatened as well.

    I worried more about my mother’s safety than my own. That was the hardest part.

    I agree with Simon.

    I hope and pray that those who are party to this cruelty – not just the police officers involved, but the parliamentarians who refuse to help – are fully cognisant of the red wave currently gaining traction against people in power who harm children or knowingly allow them to continue to be harmed.

  15. I once asked a Lawyer how the Law works , his reply was , the law is decided by the Rich and or the knowledgeable.
    Reading about this case, and without be privy to the full details and circumstances, it would appear that money played a part in producing the cooperation of those involved to facilitate the deception.
    I agree with Dee’s comment , that it is unusal for full custody to be granted to just one parent .
    What could have been the reason why the father was made exempt in that decision ?
    There would have been no reason for the police to, navigate this case in the direction that they did, without financial benifit on offer and the knowledge of how to facilitate it.

    • Peter, I believe you have explained this well. I have asked myself for 2 years, who would so many people risk their careers to break the law so?

      • Dee. You say Why would so many people risk their careers to break the law so?

        I think the opposite is true. I think the two cops you mentioned have broken the law in order NOT to risk their careers. They are all under pressure to support the child trafficking thing, or face getting sacked (if not “disappeared”).

        And one day soon, all of us may be asked to “break the law” in order to avoid some huge punishment. I am sure I will give in when the time comes.

        Threats are threats. There aren’t a whole lot of Rachel Vaughans who can stand up to such pressure.

        Which is not to say that Peter Way has got it wrong. Money talks.

      • Re.
        Dee. You say Why would so many people risk their careers to break the law so?

        Yes I agree Mary it is “the all powerful machine” that dictates and demands total obedience. Resisters are made public examples of what happens to those who stand up against the machine Dr Prigdon Assange Fiona Reina Sarah Moore come to mind.
        There is a case I was warned of -called the Groote Island Affair–think most records are destroyed but I have a copy–it demonstrates how unions are bankrupted if they represent victims who also are represented by unions –a hierarchy of unions a conflict of interest.

        I agree with Rachel’s concern for the mother’s safety and reprisals for whistleblowers advocates. At times my determination to speak out has resulted in reprisals–a bit like if someone escaped –ten would be publicly executed–a bit like events in Melb right now

        In my observation and experience- many welfare officers have no idea that they are in fact part of such wrong doing–they really think they are heroes doing a great community service –case management is deliberately fragmented and many people are responsible for different tasks—with “Confidentiality” making vital information inaccessible to most particularly the clients. “Volunteers” are used to do certain tasks that are then handed over and used as and when needed–this applies to lost records evidence -failure to test for dna. Also this “confidential data” is used scientifically, and like the 1960 twin studies/experiments–Yale university-Melb Uni- Cathy Morgan research UK—individuals are never to see their files or the studies-or who did the experiments –all coded — Dr Green Dr Black White

        suppression orders

        In the Northern Territory the ministers of departments are all rotated around different portfolios for years –eg 40 years–same as contract principals– new departments are set up–new NGO’s Not for profits -charities-Cunningham Dax-Tavistock used the Country Womens Association to assist in matters of welfare—
        Trying to expose the truth–mocked by “the truth will set you free”

        sorry for fragmented thoughts—

        In education in Vic -early retired principals–55–were brought back to do government bidding by stealth and fraud -close programs/schools –set up cults/ divert money–launder money –blackmail people–close bilingual programs-cover up child abuse enable child abuse-threaten people.

  17. Recall the Fitzgerald Inquiry in Qld re police corruption? At the Inquiry, Assistant Commissioner Graeme Parker turned state’s witness and testified: “I would also receive hundreds of call every week from police who said Lewis was corrupt but were too scared to be named or provide a statement for fear of losing their jobs.”

    The man in charge of the Inquiry gave little speeches before some of the hearings such as this one:

    “It is impossible to concede how an honest policeman could rationally believe the acceptance of a situation, that involves corruption by any of his colleagues, benefits either himself or his force or is justified by his shared interest and burdens with any who are corrupt – merely because like him they are policemen.”

    So, the qq for today’s article is: If other cops nearby Demeter and Lemon see what they do (not necessary for this child but any child), and don’t speak up, is it because of fear, or because they receive little brown bags with a bunch of fifty-notes?

    Maybe they are given the brown bag in order to make them feel they are now part of the system and may, in future, be charged with that crime of corruption. Clever, clever, clever.

  18. Ah money in brown paper bags–a plan I intercepted in the desert late 90’s–resulted in a threat -“Remember Karen Silkwood” and a month or so later –sudden death–no brakes -on a recently serviced vehicle. mmm.small time stuff. An apology and the “mechanic responsible” fired.
    My “rellies” used suit cases.

    • Diane, sit down you’ve got to hear this.

      Yes it’s impressive about your relies using suitcases. It made me think of a quote I heard that the US bribes some Middle East people with palettes of hundred dollar bills. PALETTES.

      I worried that it would be rude of me to upstage you, but anyway I trotted over to google, as is my wont and entered “palettes of dollar bills. The first item to come up was:

      “U.S. Bureau of Engraving and Printing – U.S. Currency …

      “Total Number of Bills: 4 bricks (from COPE) equal 1 cash-pack: 16,000 bills: 40 cash-packs equal 1 skid: 640,000 bills* *The value of the skid is 640,000 multiplied by the denomination contained, (e.g. 640,000 bills x $100 = $64,000,000).”

      THE SIXTY FOUR MILLION DOLLAR QUESTION HAS BEEN ANSWERED!

  19. In a fair world our ‘defence’ would not be protecting the poppy fields in Afghanistan. Secret societies, masquerading as government, would not be controlling our children’s future with the ‘mark of the beast’ (5G ultra and injections) as the final solution.
    Artificial intelligence is the cause of all misery these days. We have been initiated into a satanic cult -masked.
    Unless crown kabal slavemasonry, enforcing cyber surveillance communism globally, is somehow stopped all hope is lost. Here, our time is limited, our activity or non activity (imposed by the freaks in power) is shaping destiny for future generations.
    We don’t need robots to do our work, they are the lies of in just ice.

    Only the Almighty can save from this mess we’re in.
    We need to accept His love within, there is no other way.

      • Jeremiah 2:19
        .
        “Your own wickedness will correct you, And your apostasies will reprove you; Know therefore and see that it is evil and bitter For you to forsake the LORD your God, And the dread of Me is not in you,” declares the Lord GOD of hosts.

  20. LADY MACBETH STRIKES AGAIN

    Just got back from voting. Fairly uneventful. I have found a new use for my face mask. Today was freezing cold, so I put on the mask to keep warm and it worked.

    As I exited the little red, white, and blue polling booth, I was startled to see a large official sign:
    SANITIZE YOUR HANDS AFTER VOTING.

C'mon Leave a Reply, Debate and Add to the Discussion

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.