Chasing Justice – Exposing Child Trafficking

As a parody to the movie poster of A FEW GOOD MEN, I have recreated the poster with Pastor Paul Robert Burton and Dr Andrew Katelaris in their own court drama. The picture is on the background of the statue holding the scales outside the (Brisbane) Supreme Court. So we ask the readers, judicial officers and public servants today: “Can YOU handle the truth?“

by Dee McLachlan

I believe Australia was tipped into a new era the other day. In an open criminal District Court in Newcastle two self-represented defendants laid out in detail, in their evidence, that the Australian government participates in child trafficking. In his opening address Pastor Paul Robert Burton informed the jury that he would show how the government removed a child on false grounds, and that department staff lied and acted deceptively. He said, “I will show you that I believed and still believe that the Department was and is trafficking children for profit,” and described how he discovered the day after the child’s unlawful removal, that the then Secretary of FACS, the person had the power to remove the child, was and is “a convicted heroin trafficker.” Pastor Paul felt compelled to try save that child. 

Confirmed – Child Trafficking by Government

Over about 14 days of the trial (R v Paul Robert Burton and R v Andrew Katelaris) starting from 14 October ending 13 November, the jury, the court and the gallery were provided detailed evidence of how and why the state government departments are abducting children from families and trafficking them for profit — in a ‘cash for kids’ program (as described in this ARTICLE).

I, and many others, were fortunate enough to be able to watch the trial over a video link. As part of the evidence, a long video was played to the court where Graeme Bell also provided context and detail of how the trafficking works, how children are assets (called financial units) and how, once a child is taken, is rarely, if ever, returned to their parents. The evidence presented was shocking and stunning in its disclosure. I doubt a barrister could have ever said what was put to the court.

The Crown never once attempted to rebut the claims of trafficking. But more on this later.

Necessity?

When does it become a “necessity” to save or protect a child from the possibility of life-long adverse consequences of him or her being removed from their loving parents … on known FALSE grounds? How do you “defend” the rights and liberty of that “kidnapped” child when there appears to be no ministerial or judicial remedy? The irony is, the law requires you to assist children in an abusive or dire situation. But if you do, beware — you are going to be punished and persecuted.

I’ll take you back seven and a half years.

In May 2017, Dr Andrew Katelaris was treating a 4-year-old highly compromised indigenous child (with intractable epilepsy) and Pastor Paul Robert Burton was providing pastoral care for the child and family. (The parents had left QLD with their children to seek special medical care for their young boy in Newcastle, NSW.) But FACS (NSW) removed the child claiming medical neglect based on alleged critically low levels of potassium in blood tests. But that was all a LIE. They knew the levels of potassium were OK, but removed the child (on FALSE grounds) anyway.

Dr Andrew and Pastor Paul did everything to negotiate a care plan for the child and for his loving parents, but FACS workers and the police force they had brought along continued with a shocking and violent, warrant-less and forced removal of this child. The supporters were capsicum sprayed and the mother was handcuffed and shoved in a wagon. Pastor Paul broadcast this live on Facebook.

Concerned citizens all across Australia were made aware of the violent removal — in effect, kidnapping — and the story was extensively broadcast. Thousands of people were posting the story that published the name of the child and his parents across the internet, and people did this to pressure the government to do the right thing. The Brisbane Times, the Daily Telegraph, published the story too and Channel 7 covered the story (plus, doing a hit-piece on Dr Katelaris), but governments rarely correct their wrongful actions.

However, only Pastor Paul and Dr Andrew were targeted and charged for naming the child even though they (reluctantly) removed the posts and videos. Pastor Paul was charged for 4 posts, Dr Andrew for one. Not one other person was ever charged, including a person who was called a “prolific poster” in the closed Children’s Court proceedings, and another who was actually acting as a solicitor in those proceedings.

Only a Few Good Men

It’s a very long convoluted story of endless court cases and court challenges by these two good men. (And it’s not me saying “good men” — their character witnesses testified they are much more than good, they are exemplary and extraordinary caring and courageous individuals.)

It’s a tale twisting through every court (even three attempts in the High Court) to challenge the validity of the case and s105 of the (misnamed) Children and Young Persons Care and Protection Act (that prohibits mentioning the name of any child), and they even took out a malicious prosecution against Michael Coutts-Trotter (The Secretary of FACS), and three attempts at private prosecutions against the caseworkers (for a range of crimes). These were all shut down by the DPP.

Put simply, these two men stuck their necks out to help save this child. 18 months was the time the child spent in a motel, and it took two years for the matter to be resolved in the courts. The department eventually moved the family into the motel with him. Madness.

In a desperate attempt to convict these two men, the government and the courts ignored their own crimes which were detailed in the trial by the two defendants. Let me continue (referencing my notes):

During the trial, Pastor Paul presented evidence that the child was removed unlawfully (kidnapped by FACS); that the closed Children’s Courts did not honour their statutory obligations, and he gave evidence of how these courts condoned the unlawful removal of this child (and others) describing how FACS consistently participates in warrant-less removals in New South Wales.

He presented evidence that for seven years, the resources of the state, using millions of taxpayer dollars, was used to stifle any criticism of this department — and that this abuse of process has nothing to do with the purpose of section 105, which is to protect the privacy and identity of a child, or specifically, to protect that child from stigma. He demonstrated that this law was and is being used “to hide the criminality of the state, and that this is not a valid use of the law — and he went on to explain how abducting children is not a function of a representative democratic system.“

Dr Andrew also spoke frankly in the witness box and in his final summation. He described to the jury how “Cognitive dissonance is a state of confusion arising in your mind when you hear information that is very hard to accept.” He described how the person who in control of child protection (FACS) only served three of a seven-year sentence for trafficking commercial heroin. He described how through seven grueling years in courts he had learned a number of “alarming and disturbing things.” Having appeared on this matter before seven judges “including this one”, he said turning to Judge Harris, and “…those seven judges had one thing in common. They all said to me, it doesn’t matter if a child was seized illegally, their suppression laws still apply.” And those judges were from the Supreme Court, the District Court, and the Court of Appeal. I think he said “mongrel” suppression laws.

He continued: “I consider, as Pastor Paul considers, the Children’s Court (he’d seen enough evidence), is a criminal organisation. … They should be in the dock here, not Pastor Paul and me.“

Yes — why are the government not prosecuted for much more egregious crimes acting against children? Everybody ignores the kidnapping of children and the courts, by remaining silent, condone these actions. Those that remain silent are part of the problem — and it’s the fox investigating the missing chickens in the hen house.

Also, it seems, when public servants could be exposed for their lies or misfeasant actions (when subpoenaed to appear in court) there’s a simple way to abuse the administration of justice. Two public servants, a detective (who originally charged the defendants) and a FACS employee (the person who signed the papers to falsely remove the child) did not — or could not — appear as witnesses to be cross examined. How come? They both conveniently obtained medical certificates for the trial period.

It’s a challenge chasing justice.

I reflect back to the court persecution of Dr Pridgeon, O’Dea and the grandmother. They had clearly tried to protect children that had spoken of egregious sexual abuse. The court completely ignored this as if this is the status quo in Australian society. In both of these cases, it was truly shocking for me to see judge after judge, and agency after agency IGNORING the REAL CRIMINALS by trying to judicially punish those few brave persons trying to assist the children.

Who will be left to help protect the children in the future when they are deprived of their rights and liberty? I think that’s the idea. The government does not want courageous activists interfering in the business of children.

Court v Chamber

Pastor Paul put to the court, asking what was this all about?  “What have I done?  I’ve allegedly said the name of a child on Facebook seven and a half years ago, along with millions and millions of other people… I complied with all court orders when they were properly brought to my attention…” And Dr Andrew emphasized, “What’s missing from this trial is a victim.”

To quote Pastor Paul’s recent update post:

[After the first jury was discharged and a second jury impaneled on the 30th of October] “…the trial finally started proper and continued through 31st Oct, 1st Nov, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 11th, 12th and concluded on the 13th of November with a jury deliberating for around 20 to 30 minutes before finding us guilty. And as I mentioned, they had absolutely no choice other than to find us guilty. … During the proceedings just before the last day of the trial the Judge removed ALL of our defences from the jury, including self defence, necessity and honest and reasonable mistake of fact and so [the judge] became the sole arbiter of fact bypassing the jury completely. The exact same thing I already raised to the CCA before the trial in Burton v The King [2024] NSWCCA 213 because “Blind Freddy” could see it coming.”

To explain the indictments, Pastor Paul writes, “…I bought to Her Honour and the Crowns attention that both indictments were not known to the law and were both missing an essential element. That is the indictments were both invalid. … we never had a chance because we were not being tried for what we pleaded to. I hope you are still following what could best be described as the death of democracy…“

There is an appeal on foot. (Link to UPDATES)

Failing the Law and Mental Illness

I come to my final conclusion in this saga. We have an understanding of the PURPOSE of the LAW, as quoted in lawnotes.co

“The judicial process plays a crucial role in maintaining social order within a society. It serves as a mechanism for resolving disputes, administering justice, and upholding the rule of law. By establishing and enforcing legal norms, the judicial system contributes significantly to the overall stability and harmony of a community…”

That is not what I have witnessed in Pastor paul and Dr Andrew’s case — and neither with the Dr Pridgeon et al cases. It’s the opposite. The judicial process, the judges, the law and protection agencies were silent about the egregious abuses of government for years and yet vocal about those trying to protect children and correct government.

They failed to deliver justice. Why were the kidnappers provided protection but the protectors persecuted in this case? The courts were not upholding the law. Why did the DPP shut down the private prosecutions that would have exposed the malfesance of public servants? Is this not administrating justice for overall societal stability? And in Dr Pridgeon’s case, the DPP and the courts gave a pass to concealing child sexual abuse — to rather prosecute those trying to save and protect children.

Instead of “establishing legal norms …that contribute to harmony in the community,” these actions contribute to societal dysfunction and breakdown, and mistrust of the system. If you can’t protect a sexually abused child because the courts disregarded or hid the evidence, or if you can’t save a child that has essentially been kidnapped by rogue public servants, then society is in crisis.

I refer in the heading to “mental illness”. When you are charged with these duties of judicial oversight, one should have an understanding of how society functions, the importance of family, love and human bonding. Judges and magistrates should have an understanding that the judicial process is the “vital instrument of social ordering“. So when a judge is able to “overlook” or “condone” the most criminal of actions of government servants but participate in the process to punish and convict those exposing that criminality, then you know society has a serious problem. The order is broken.

Having listened in to several trials in the last year, I can only conclude that some of these judges suffer from some mental incapacity or mental misalignment (with society). That’s what it seems like. Are they under instruction? Maybe a form of Stockholm syndrome? Judges adjudicating over any child-related matters should be put through a series of mental health assessments to also discount a form of any signs of cognitive dissonance.

The positive message in all of this is: these good men have explained and proved that the government is party to the criminality of trafficking Australian children.

It’s a challenge chasing justice in the Land Down Under. To quote Pastor Paul’s recent post: “We indeed had two prosecutors, the Crown and The Judge…. What I appeared to be witnessing was a Judge doing everything in her power to protect (aid and abet) a government department that kidnapped a child,” and… “To be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society is no measure of health.”