No-ethics Case, Part 1:  The Regime That Condones Child Sexual Abuse

Definition of ‘Regime’:

Mode of rule; a government, especially an oppressive or undemocratic one; heavy-handed administration or group in charge; a way of organizing or managing a system; a regulated period of rule…

by Dee McLachlan

We need to understand the world we live in.

This article is the first part of several regarding my observations of a day in the public gallery of a courtroom. In this article, I will lay out an overview — the landscape in which we live here in Australia, and how the court is ‘programmed’ to operate.

I grew up in the ‘Apartheid regime’ and so became familiar with how a regime operates in order to facilitate and apply its beliefs throughout society — even if it is against those society’s values. The above photo is of one German who is defying the Nazi program and it reminds me of a time when I was about 7 or 8 years old when my father was the only one in a crowd of thousands who refused to stand and sing the then South African National Anthem.

Now, to the court case at hand.

In the past, I have been allowed to listen in on the Operation No-ethics (Noetic) court hearings, but after I emailed the Brisbane court on 7 February 2023 for a phone link to the hearing on the 8th, I got this reply “I have been advised by the Judges Associate that no journalist will be granted access to dial into the courtroom for tomorrow’s pre-trial hearing. You … may attend the court in person.”  So when the next important committal hearing in the matter of THE KING v PATRICK FINBAR MCGARRY O’DEA, WILLIAM RUSSELL MASSINGHAM PRIDGEON and ANN KATHLEEN GREER was scheduled on 15 March 2023, I was able, with generous support, to fly to Brisbane to attend.

I consider myself a ‘reasonable person’, but as a witness to the proceedings from the gallery at the Brisbane District Court, I became extremely troubled at what unfolded across the day.

Some Background

This is what the government wants you to believe. ABC headline:

“Members of alleged child-stealing syndicate committed to stand trial”

The alleged crime boss of this stealing syndicate racket was none other than a humble and caring doctor in Grafton, NSW. It was a massive AFP operation (Operation Noetic) resulting in the AFP alleging this is the most voluminous or “largest criminal brief in Australian history”.

But What Really Happened?

It’s actually about a number of people trying to PROTECT three children that disclosed sexual abuse by their fathers. There are two incidents.

The one case is about Ann Greer, a grandmother, who had lawful custody of her grandson. After abuse disclosures from the young lad to the police, she withheld him from the father for some of his holiday visitations. She was heading back to Townsville with her grandson to attend a Family Court challenge when she was arrested at the train station. The police detained her in a cell for 8 days and denied her any access to the court hearing — even a phone link. As a result, the young lad was sent back to live with the very person he disclosed had abused him. A tracker was attached to Ann’s ankle and remained on for two and a half years until it was removed for medical reasons.

The other case had to do with two young girls. They had made horrific disclosures that their father (and others) had abused them. There were 40 mandatory reports by a dozen experts and advocates supporting the children — but the Family Court and the children’s lawyer managed to disregard the evidence so the children were sent back to their abuser. Out of desperation and to evade further abuses, the mother and the willing children decided to ‘flee’. They were off-grid for 4 years and this violated the Family Court order.

(Note: 70NAE of the Family Law provides for an order to be set aside when there is a belief that the children were in danger.)

Asked To Help

The late Professor Freda Briggs, AO, the eminent authority in Australia (and globally) on child sexual abuse, had extensive files — with evidence — of the abuses of the two girls. She approached Dr Russell Pridgeon and Patrick O’Dea and asked them to assist this mother and her two children. When Professor Briggs asked him, as a doctor, to help, he found he could not ETHICALLY refuse.

After four years the children were tracked down and returned to their abuser. Russell pleaded with ministers and the Attorney-general to assist the children, but after doing so he and these other child protectors were arrested.  Trackers were put on their ankles and they were advertised through the mainstream media as abhorrent criminals with the good doctor – for example — being accused in the media (AFP propaganda) of being the mastermind child smuggler; that he was dealing in proceeds of crime; stalking; and conspiring to defeat the course justice.

The stealing and harbouring charges were dropped (thanks to Sir Graeme and Pastor Paul), as were the bogus lies of ‘using proceeds of crime’ and stalking charges. In fact, all charges against them were dropped by Magistrate Gett, who then immediately recharged them with new charges from the bench —  counts of “Conspiracy to defeat the Course of Justice” — but this time, it seems, without the appropriate legal consent and signatures.

But, everybody’s actions in this matter were initiated by the misfeasance of persons in authority. Certain officers, along with child lawyers, suppressed or distorted the considerable evidence of sexual abuse resulting in the Family Court going along with the ‘program’ and making decisions against the best interests of the children — i.e., returning the children to their abusers.

And the media refuses to deal with this issue.

I know this to be true as I have tracked – firsthand –similar cases where police officers deliberately concealed horrific abuse disclosures deliberately placing children in harm’s way. In this case Detective MD, the Case Officer for Operation Noetic, denied that the children had made disclosures even though his unit had collected all the mandatory reports disclosing horrific sexual abuse. This narrative is repeated daily across the country.

My Day in Court

Let me give you the picture that was before me: At the bar table was the prosecution, Mr Whippy and his team, and the crown barrister Mr Bean (I have tactfully not used their real names). Further along the bench were the three defendants – the alleged criminals — with the only remaining charges of conspiring to defeat the course of justice.

Really? They were the few people attempting to seek justice for the children.

I don’t want to be disrespectful to the defendants, but the three elderly unrepresented souls, grandmother Ann Greer, the good doctor Russell Pridgeon, and anti-pedophile advocate Patrick O’Dea, were sitting alongside the highly paid wigs. They looked submissive, somewhat broken and weary after 4 years of court — and obviously out of their depth and unprepared for the programmed slaughter predetermined for them. It was a sad sight seeing these truly caring people in their late 60s being subjected to this punishing journey. The doctor’s medical practice had been destroyed and O’Dea’s import business and marriage destroyed. Having survived several land mines in Africa, Patrick has hearing difficulties and now suffers severe PTSD. They hobbled around with criminal tracking devices; their lives have been ruined, and essentially have been left essentially destitute.

Note: I have personally witnessed this emotional, physical, and financial destruction to some mothers (and fathers) and I don’t believe many people can make their way back to some semblance of normality and functionality after the government uses ALL of its resources to punish these child protectors.

Repeat: this is callous punishment of those persons who TRULY protect children.

As I listened to Mr Bean give an overview of the defendants and their case I felt I was in some kind of a court sketch. Do you remember the Fawlty Towers comedy episode about the Germans? Basil Fawlty says that when the German guests arrive “don’t mention the war”. Well in this court it was “don’t mention child abuse.”

The three defendants had acted on the facts given to them and were morally compelled to protect these children from further sexual abuse — but now the court wants to exclude the child abuse from being heard. Judge Clare said she had already ruled in a previous hearing that “whether the children were abused or not is not relevant.”

While sitting in the gallery, I was reminded of the Berlin museum honouring Germans who helped save the lives of Jews from the Nazi regime. There is a list of 3,000 ‘silent heroes’ who put their lives on the line. They must have risked everything. It is estimated about 20,000 people across the country did the right thing. Others may have been good people, but the regime’s program prevail by keeping silent.

Understand Our World, Understand the Court

I have been working with child protectors and learning about the system for about 5 years now. 5 torturous years.

I, and others, can now confirm we are under a Regime, a government, that condones child sexual abuse. A regime where child abuse disclosures are routinely suppressed; where children are deliberately and knowing sent back, by enablers in authority, to the very people that abused them.

The laws, on the surface, appear to legislate for the protection of children (e.g., closed courts for the privacy of the child; or ‘rules of evidence’ don’t apply, etc.) — but in fact, these laws are used to protect perpetrators, as in the Noetic case. The ‘system’ is a well-oiled machine in facilitating the removal of children from protective parents and punishing any person that challenges the system — or the regime.

How can I be so confident to make that claim?

Firstly, the Wood Commission and many other Commissions and Enquiries disclose this pattern. That the content for some of these inquiries is locked away in secret for 75 years, or the names of 28 politicians suppressed is a red flag. It is shocking, but we appear to live in a country where secret pedophile cults prevail in high places.

As for the Royal Commission into Institutional Response to Child Sexual Abuse, which ran from 2014 to 2017, it refused to hear current pleas, only historical cases!

These people have extraordinary powers and reach.

Secondly, in a well-researched paper, by Collin-Vézina, De La Sablonnière-Griffin, Palmer & Milne, 2015 p.123, a paper initiated by the NSW Office of the Children’s Guardian (OCG), the authors presented one significant study noting Australia as having the highest reported rate for child sexual abuse of girls internationally at 21.5% (Stoltengorgh, van Ijzendoorn, Euser, & Bakersman- Kranenburg, 2011).

Thirdly, after five years of speaking to and writing hundreds of letters to every official in power; ministers, commissioners, corruption or investigative bodies, and every possible person of influence, not one person could or would do anything to assist a young child that had disclosed (over three years) the most horrific abuses (rape). The facts were presented to these people, including how a police officer had concealed these facts. It seems unbelievable, but not a single person seemed to want to break their “program” — depart from the regime — to assist. (I make a correction: Just before Christmas in 2018, a deputy Ombudsman did listen, she did take it all in, and said she would put her best investigators on it. That didn’t happen and she was moved, or ‘promoted’ sideways to another department.)

There is only one explanation for not one person even attempting to assist this child — a child in a similar position as the three children in the No-ethics case.

Namely, the system is designed by powers within and behind Government to condone — or even assist — child sexual abuse. This is the regime presently operating. And seems like government and court officials are on a specific band frequency, and cannot access what is morally the right thing to do.

Australian society is essentially unaware — because of secret laws and intimidation — that this ‘program’ is the norm. But society does not accept or condone child abuse as will be discussed in a follow-up article (e.g., outcome of the Sid Morgan jury)

Judge Clare is in a tough spot – I don’t envy her position. She is operating under a regime — a bandwidth — that condones the suppression of child abuses and is dealing with a prosecution programmed to facilitate an outcome to punish child protectors. Blind Freddy can see that these defendants put their lives on the line to save and PROTECT these three children; as those 3,000 tried to protect Jews in Nazi Germany.

Confirmation of The Regime

On March 15th, in Brisbane, it seemed like there were attempts to discount or ‘distance’ the child abuse, and impede the defendants from presenting the facts that formed their belief that these children desperately needed protection. But the prosecution has a problem; the AFP has a problem.

You see, the AFP provided the brief and so-called damning evidence to the prosecution, YET, the AFP, when arresting Russell, took all the computers and hard drives. These hard drives have all of the late Professor Freda Brigg’s detailed and damning reports, and files of evidence.

Why is there even a court case? The AFP (and prosecution) have all the evidence of horrific child sexual abuses; yet instead of following up on investigating what happened to the children, they are cherry-picking details to incriminate those attempting to protect children.

This simple fact proves — 100% — that we exist under a Regime that condones child sexual abuse and the removal of children from their protective parents and grandparents. And that the system must find ways to punish those protectors.

As I said, Judge Clare is in a tough spot.

If this trial goes ahead, knowing these facts; knowing that the AFP has all the facts of crimes against children and yet does nothing. These actions will confirm, sadly, that the prosecution and courts have been captured by the regime’s program. It will mean that the judicial process has been compromised.

Considering the above, can these defendants ever receive a fair trial?

The next hearing is 10am, 23 March 2023 at The District Court, George Str, Brisbane.