Home Australia Operation Noetic — AFP Arrests Patrick O’Dea and Dr Pridgeon for “Child-stealing.”...

Operation Noetic — AFP Arrests Patrick O’Dea and Dr Pridgeon for “Child-stealing.” Really?

57
AFP arrests, Pat O’Dea is in the red shirt

by Dee McLachlan

My introduction to the Family Court was in Adelaide in mid-September. I met “Darlene” (a protective parent) and was horrified by her story.

After we published a few articles detailing some of the failings in the Family Court system — I was inundated with calls from desperate parents, grandparents and a few legal people. The accounts only got worse.

One of these calls was from a South African/Australian, Patrick O’Dea. [Update: Correction. Patrick is originally Rhodesian/Zimbabwean.] He seems to have dedicated his life to helping keep children safe, so we chatted for some 30 minutes — and I offered to write, in the future, about any miscarriages of justice (understanding the restrictions of section 121).  That’s what we do at Gumshoe: write about the wrongs being done to the people of Australia — or anywhere else for that matter.

Then yesterday, in Grafton, NSW, the Australian Federal Police (AFP) officers arrested Patrick O’Dea, and William Russell Massingham Pridgeon, a physician.

As far as I can tell, these arrests are timed to stop the growing support of the many organisations exposing improper conduct in the Family Court system.

Operation Noetic

I’m sure my conversation with the activist Patrick O’Dea was listened to by the investigators of Operation Noetic. (Well I’ve considered that all my conversations are being monitored. I just hope I’m educating the listeners in the process.) But back to Operation Noetic. It is, or was, a complex, two-year investigation into people that were allegedly “stealing” children.

Before I go on, the word noetic relates to mental activity or the intellect, and is defined as:

“the noetic quality of a mystical experience refers to the sense of revelation.”

South Africa

Interestingly, Patrick O’Dea, Dr Pridgeon, and I are all originally from South Africa. In fact the doctor was at the University of Cape Town doing his medical degree when I was at the same university studying Ecology. At that time, if I remember correctly, a “gathering” of more than four people on campus could be labelled by police as a protest group, and they could thus be arrested.

One thing many people learned when growing up in South Africa — in the Apartheid Regime — was that even if something is lawful, is not necessarily moral or right.  It was lawful to jail a black person for climbing onto a white bus.

So I find some “sense of revelation” that these two South African / Australians have been arrested. I am sure as they sit in their cells today, they must be reflecting on how they were brought up in one police state, only to immigrate to another, that, to them, has become like the regime they so despised.

And as Saint Augustine allegedly said, “Right is right even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it.”

So what is right, and wrong in this instance?

The Charges

The AFP put out a media release this morning:

“The AFP has arrested three men… plus they served a Court Attendance Notice on a 78-year-old Perth woman… also executed 10 search warrants…

“AFP Assistant Commissioner Debbie Platz, Assistant Commissioner Crime Operations, said investigators had disrupted an organised and well-resourced group of people demonstrating a complete disregard for the rule of law and decisions of the courts. ‘The actions of this group do not protect children. What it does is potentially endanger the safety and wellbeing of them,‘ she said.”

Were they endangering or protecting? To continue:

“We believe this group has sought assistance from other people – some who may be unaware of their involvement in criminal activity – so we are urging anyone with any knowledge about these activities to come forward to the AFP.”

Who are these two South African / Australians? The founders of the Australian Antipaedophile Party. And they are now being charged with a range of offences, including:

Conspiracy to defeat justice (punishable by imprisonment for 10 years).

Dealing in the proceeds of crime (15 years).

Using a carriage service to menace, harass or cause offence, and publishing an account of proceedings, contrary to section 121 of the Family Law Act 1975.

Section 121 (FAMILY LAW ACT 1975 No. 53 of 1975) essentially gags any parent disclosing details of their case — and says that a person shall not print or publish any statement or report that proceedings have been instituted in the Family Court or in another court…  or any account of evidence in proceedings.

Is this contrary to the implied freedoms granted in the Constitution? Who speaks for the child?

The Publicity Over the Arrests

What I find most disturbing is the publicity over these arrests. Let’s see how the media has framed this story.

The Courier-Mail (Renee Viellaris), October 18, 2018 has the title:

“GP, friends allegedly helped women steal children and hide from police”

With the copy:

“An alleged criminal syndicate with links to the 2016 federal election was swooped on in raids across the country yesterday…

“The Australian Federal Police charged three people in Queensland and NSW, while a West Australian woman is expected to be charged under Operation Noetic, a complex, two-year investigation that included raiding a yacht allegedly being refitted to spirit children and mothers overseas.

“The children were stolen by their mothers after marriage breakdowns or custody disputes with fathers.”

Now why would mothers risk all and decide to escape overseas? To continue:

“Some of the children and mothers – who had made unfounded allegations that their partners sexually abused their children – had been off the grid and missing for years.”

Were they unfounded? If they were unfounded would they bother with abandoning their country, their friends, and risk jail over a custody dispute? Possibly. But is there another possibility?

What if the sexual injury accusations were true?

I repeat. What if the sexual injury accusations were true, and the authorities failed to listen to, and protect those children? What if there was emotional and sexual injury to the child and the accusations and evidence was ignored by those authorities charged with protecting these children?

I apply simple logic. People react to danger in different ways, and typically it is “fight or flight”. But if there is no danger, what are the odds of flight? Low, I’d say.

But back to my hypothetical examples (I don’t know any details of any of the alleged cases related to Operation Noetic,). But what if the child has reported one or more of these?

·  graphic sex acts being done to them,

·  being filmed, or talking of camera flashes,

·  reports of pain, rashes in the wrong place,

·  blood in the toilet (“from my bum”), or bloody panties,

·  running away from the police and the (alleged) abusive parent

·  sexually transmitted diseases in very young children,

·  talking about “doodle in my mouth and doodle vomit”, and

·  a fear of being killed.

What IF these were part of the equation, part of the evidence — but that these accounts of the child had BEEN IGNORED by the police and the FAMILY COURT. What then?

Has Operation Noetic investigated thoroughly WHY the alleged “criminals” did what they did?

Are they investigating the claims of the children caught up in this debacle?

Several people face serious criminal charges, but have the authorities — the original investigating officers, those social workers, and the legal professionals in the Family Court — possibly ALSO broken the law in the first instance?

Having listened to “Darlene’s” story, and now heard many other accounts in detail, I have to ask: who is actually stealing and abducting children?

All the publicity is about the alleged “criminal syndicate”. An ABC report has the headline:

“AFP bust alleged child-stealing ring in NSW, Queensland and WA”

I can only weep at that headline coming from the so-called people’s media.

The media are allowed to report the alleged criminal activities of O’Dea, Dr Pridgeon and the 83-year-old gent with abandon. But are these three men allowed to defend themselves? Their defence is gagged under Section 121, and I therefore cannot report the details of why they did what they did.

It feels like we are living in an upside down world.

Update (19/10/2018)

SHARE

57 COMMENTS

  1. There is another lesson learned from South Africa: The more people you unjustly arrest, the more you will advance their cause. The only way to morally resolve societal conflict, is to do so honestly.

    • Thanks Dee, and very well said.

      My opinion and supporting legislation for defending the proactive and protective parties:

      Wake the hell up Australia!! Media is only reporting as per the puppet masters demands!!

      We have a heavily protected network in our country and it’s not the ones who were arrested!!

      It’s the ones who did the arresting, the people they are protecting and agenda thay are pushing at the expense of children’s safety and well-being!!

      Time to take a stand!!

      Queensland Consolidated Acts

      CRIMINAL CODE 1899 – SECT 286
      Duty of person who has care of child
      286 Duty of person who has care of child
      (1) It is the duty of every person who has care of a child under 16 years to—
      (a) provide the necessaries of life for the child; and
      (b) take the precautions that are reasonable in all the circumstances to avoid danger to the child’s life, health or safety; and
      (c) take the action that is reasonable in all the circumstances to remove the child from any such danger;
      and he or she is held to have caused any consequences that result to the life and health of the child because of any omission to perform that duty, whether the child is helpless or not.
      (2) In this section—

      “person who has care of a child” includes a parent, foster parent, step parent, guardian or other adult in charge of the child, WHETHER OR NOT THE PERSON HAS LAWFUL custody OF THE CHILD.

  2. Great job, Dee!

    I have a message for protective parents – calm down.

    This is obviously a deterrent exercise – and a clever one in the way that “they” always do clever things. Behold the beaut Orwellian twisting of the language. The “child stealers” are parents who don’t want to have their kid stolen from them.

    The biggies want everybody to be scared. That’s fine. I want THEM to be scared, and you see, they ARE scared. Poor wittle gubmint.

    • We already have our Royal Commission into ‘institutions’.
      It has obtained results, be satisfied, nothing more to see here.
      Be distracted, be happy and enjoy the created part of the façade.

    • Hey we have our RC.
      We have caught out the perverted ‘INSTITUTIONS and cover-ups”, so be happy, nothing more to see here.
      Pauline, poor Pauline, but what of devious Deryn, the public morality mouth.

      (3rd attempt at a comment ………… connections went out!!)

      • The difference between ‘poor’ Pauline and Fair Weather Hinch is Pauline’s loyalty to Australian values and people.

        I think you would agree Ned that the RC into child abuse was too limited in its scope – for instance why was Islam excluded?

        And a closed system that is the ‘Family Court’ should be fair game for any investigation into its practises – what possibly could they be hiding?

        • “why was Islam excluded?”
          Good question.
          I’d say it goes to the Church-State alliance I mentioned re the 15 Oct. Gumshoe Post.
          Islam has simply never been part of said magic circle

          • berry; Islam has much to hide, hence the exclusion – can’t wake the masses up as to why Islam is held in such high esteem by our Globalist/Deep State controllers, who also control our politicians, and whose actions against our.vulnerable kids have now been busted wide open for all to see.

  6. Here you go

    Can information about me and my case be used for research?
    Yes. Information about you and your case may be used to help evaluate and improve court services or for research purposes. This research may be conducted by people outside the Court, such as academic researchers. Where the research would amount to a disclosure of your personal information that is not allowed unless you consent, court staff may contact you and ask if you wish to take part. If this happens, it is not compulsory to take part in research or an evaluation and your decision will not affect your case in any way.

    http://www.familycourt.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/fcoaweb/reports-and-publications/publications/getting-ready-for-court/the-courts-and-your-privacy

    • Your very lucky, Doctor John W Gittinger is very interest in your case and is an expert with child education. Your children could really grow with his help. You look exhausted, and he has a great rest room you can get some sleep while the Children are interviewed. Of course it will not affect your case, but it would be seen as odd to pass up such an opportunity.

  7. Pauline Hanson would like a royal commission into the Family Court – Does she really ??????

    Let her get up in the parliament and go into bat for these people, big time not just a whimper here and a whimper there. Let her name names, let her publicity support Fiona Barnett claims in the House. Let her very strongly demand a full inquiry into Fiona’s claims the claims of the people who apparently know what happened to be Beaumont children.

    I don’t think Pauline can be trusted with anything, just look at how she shafted Senator Culleton by siding with George Brandis to kick Senator Culleton out of Parliament just because he wanted to resurrect the commonwealth of Australia Constitution.

  8. This man is a god send for these mothers and children who are failed by the family courts here in Australia.
    Now how do we get them out? How do we help?

    • Danielle, I lived in the emirate of Abu Dhabi for 5 years (1988-1993). They had really good laws. (Please never mind that I had to get a letter of permission from my husband to sign up for a driver’s license).

      One day a doctor reported that a houseboy had stolen his radio (or some other item, I think it was a radio). The lad went to prison. This included whippings on Fridays in prison.

      Weeks later at a social gathering the doctor said he had found his radio.

      An irate member of our ex-pat community, a Swiss lady whom I will forever adore, went stomping down to the prison and demanded his release. She got it.

      That, by the way, inspired my first attempt at a Martin Bryant sketch in the Fringe in 2015. We pretended Martin got freed. Unfortunately the stage at Burnside and Risdon Prison are not quite the same thing. We have not worked hard enough re Bryant.

      Danielle, did I answer your question?

  10. Thanks Dee for getting the truth out there.
    Wish there were more like you.
    This is so incredibly wrong and to think the police we rely on to keep us safe…..scary
    Attacking good honest protective men and protecting paedophiles the current agenda wow what has the world become?

  11. This report doesn’t quite make sense:
    “William Russel Massingham Pridgeon, 64, and Patrick Finbar McGrarry O’Dea, 63, had charges against them in NSW dropped in Grafton Local Court on Thursday………Bail was denied for both men, who will be extradited to Queensland where they will face Brisbane Magistrate’s court on Friday.”
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-18/afp-arrest-three-after-busting-alleged-child-stealing-ring/10389872

    So if the charges were “dropped” what was the basis for denying bail?

    And why the need for an inter-State extradition re a Federal matter?

    And why the need to block the identity of the 3 men pictured ? The one who appears to be under arrest has got his back to the camera in any case

    • And what, exactly were they charged with?

      At a wild guess the location of the alleged(and undisclosed) offence was somewhere in Queensland but the Feds, in standard blundering fashion, proceeded to launch some sort of prosecution in an NSW Court; which was thrown out on a jurisdictional basis; which meant that there was no LEGAL choice but to release the two guys,the only LEGAL means of pursuing the alleged offence being via an application for Queensland extradition papers.

      Please correct me if I’m wrong.

  12. I think Gumshoe is more important than Her Bossification realizes.

    Do you recall Peekay saying that he was in a paddy wagon feeling nervous? A Melbourne Hospital was “threatening to sue him for nuisance calls asking the condition of a patient hurt in the Bourke St Rampage.” Well, you don’t get picked up by police in connection with a lawsuit. I think the intended message was “Hey Gumshoe Dee, stop talking about the 3 silvery cars, OK?” (Dee was the only media yelping about the 3 silvery cars.)

    If they want to shut us up about child-stealing, they could conspicuously arrest Patrick and Pridgeon to scare us. The scene in the pixelated picture may even be unrelated. Could be a generic shot.

    Funny, isn’t it, how Gumshoe is yelping about Sec 121 of the Family Law Act and then somebody gets arrested for that crime. Why don’t they just arrest Big Mouth Me? I buttressed my 121 talk with earlier articles on the legal duty to disobey illegal orders. (See Jules Zanetti above for the illegality of not reporting child-harm.)

    Note: I didn’t say “Disobey the rule” I said “read it up close” — it DOES NOT prevent a person from revealing the child-harm. But frankly, if the law HAD said “You can’t take your kid to the doctor” I would gladly have incited civil disobedience. I mean, come on.

    • Notwithstanding the surreal nature of the coverage I don’t think it’s entirely fake.

      I think the pixelation probably goes to the fact that it’s an offence to publish anything that might lead to the identification of a juvenile re any sort of court process: so far as I’m concerned it just testifies the depths to which the MSM is prepared to stoop re appeasing the so-called “Authorities”

  13. Great article Dee – thanks! It should be called Operation No Ethics. Here’s a thing (unpublishable) I wrote yesterday to the SMH: Your story Parental abduction ring smashed (online today ) does not attempt to give the other side of the story of how children have no voice and no choice in the adversarial Family Law system.
    For years, Family Law provisions have led the way in silencing and suppression of children, protective parents and anyone who wants to see decisions about children’s future made on the basis of their welfare, wellbeing and happiness. Not the bias of judicial officers or the treacherous ‘best interests’ of the child.
    Individuals, organisations and media outlets are too scared to speak out about the children who being damaged and abused every day by decisions made by Judges in the Family and Federal Circuit Courts.
    If you want to know what’s really happening to these children don’t swallow this propaganda about clandestine parental abduction rings. Ask the AFP about some of the pedophile rings who use and abuse children. Check out Abby’s Project at http://www.bravehearts.org.au
    Or have a look at our website http://www.justiceforchildren.org.au
    and now add gumshoenews.com

  14. The South African child trafficking business is linked to the Australian governments child trafficking business.

    All run by our government.

    The family court is an excellent way to collect children with pedo dads, who will share their children for MKULTRA and child trafficking.

    Happened to me and mine.

    FACS and police are an essential part of child trafficking.

    • To:

      Rachel king.

      REMOVAL OF COMMENTS

      Rachel, I have REMOVED your three (part) comments regarding the alleged operation called Operation Bethlehem — a child trafficking operation — and the many names you NAMED.

      I have removed the comments for several reasons, which are:

      1. You sourced the article on FACEBOOK. Anyone can post anything up there — and name anyone without much consequence.

      2. At Gumshoe News we report without fear or favour, but we will attempt to confirm — via several sources — the facts presented in articles here.

      3. Gumshoe is constantly being targeted in various ways to “POISON the well” (the site). Various elements in Australian society or in authority would love to find a reason to TAKE DOWN the site.

      • I never use face book, have an account from the late 90’s. Hate scrabble so never (twice)been back. Sure it’s tried to track me since.
        You know I’m a underdog supporter and I do not have the removed comments.On the face of what Racheal has written given my experience is not beyond the bounds of possibility.I’m sure 90 percent is true.
        You don’t poison a well, you alert for that possibility that the well could be not kosher is all, in this place.
        Dee I know this is your place, but even if it was mine,I would take your advice on these matters.
        Rachel, welcome if your for real, if not, sorry for the roasting your boss will give you.

  15. I found this post on facebook.
    It was sent to a woman who was worried something would happen to her.

    I’ll have to post it in three parts because that’s how it’s saved on my phone.

    Part 1.

    Project Bethlehem is a child kidnapping and trafficking operation.

    It is managed by the Australian Governor General Peter Cosgrove.

    It’s Australia wide but is based in the Australian Capital Territory (Canberra) and South Australia.

    Children are kidnapped and abused by pedophiles within the states and territories of Australia, then smuggles interstate and provided to government departments specialising in child protection services.

    The children are then sold to foster care agencies.

    Peter Cosgrove manages this project under Her Royal Highness and the project also occurs in the UK, South Africa and New Zealand.

    People serving under Peter Cosgrove are:

    Charles Thompson
    Mathew Inkleson
    Andrew Butler

    Under this is Lady Burley Griffin.

    Each Premier (state leader) in Australia is involved except for NSW.

    Politicians are paid off each month and paid a cut by the Department of Child Protection Services and the Department of Child and Social Inclusion.

  16. Part 2

    Evidence:

    Politicians are receiving cheques directly from the Departments, which are cashed overseas.

    Politicians receiving money are:

    Jay Wetherill
    Tom Koutsatonis
    Peter Malinalskis
    Stephen Conroy
    Julia Gillard
    John Howard
    Peter Costello
    Malcolm Turnbull
    Tony Abbott
    Malcolm Fraser
    Ian Hunter MLC

    They all receive cheques each month paying them substantial amounts, based on each child sold.

    Members of “The Family ” Child trafficking ring are:

    Stephen Evans
    Melissa Evans
    Russell Evans
    Sandra Evans

    Gabrielle Schiem….
    Stephen Humphries
    Andrew Worthington
    Melissa Giardi
    Charles Franklin
    Ian Fetridge
    Michael Hurley Senior
    Ian Hunter

    Bevan Spencer Vom Einem
    Paul Kitchener
    Mike Rann
    Julia Preist
    Natalie Simons

    Ian Weatherall
    Ian Goodings
    John Goodings
    Will Goodings
    Graeme Goodings

  17. Part 3

    People who have been killed are:

    Rob Kelvin
    Tamara Heading
    John Lomack
    Rhianna Bateau

    Apprehended by the Australian Federal Police are Ricardo Rodriguez and Felix, wich were involved in the disappearance of Maddy McCann

  18. Rachell,
    I do not know how to reply.
    To get anywhere, one needs evidence.
    Where is it, who has it been passed on to and what was/are the results?
    If Joe Blow was named as above and he is innocentt, what of poor Joe Blow?
    Ms. Blazey Ford had to fall on her sword, take care.

    • Well there is hard evidence, the kind that you and I had to deal with, to convince someone outside of what you or I had learned was worthy of being classed as criminal within a court room, and then there is anecdotal evidence – the kind that cannot be ignored but is very difficult to prove in any court of law due to the restrictions as placed by the justice system for proof beyond reasonable doubt. A classic fit for such anecdotal evidence would be the Beaumont Children who went to the beach one day but were never seen again – does anyone familiar with that case believe that they are still alive? Unproven,but anecdotal evidence of their disappearance from various ‘untested’ sources would tend to confirm, given a fair hearing, what most have suspected for decades, that they were kidnapped and murdered..

      And then there is personal evidence of wrongdoing against oneself or a loved one, that for whatever reason cannot be proven to those outside the sphere of familial influence and that is generally dismissed out of hand due to lack of hard evidence,but that the astute investigator cannot with certainty, simply ‘right off’ due to lack of hard evidence, and so, to have a clear conscience must put on the COPS system at least an ‘occurrence only’ event..

      I don’t know about you, but I found myself in such situations.

      • Nemesis, i never ask because of my upbringing and because the question itself is kinda accusation.
        My curiousity with you is what “level” you achieved(your self id ex Police).
        I of course will answer any similar questions from you.
        Why is there so much lack of evidence, then or now. Its almost always there(available through supena law ), why does it not get a listen in.
        What happens at this law “coalface” in your experience

        • I am a butcher by trade – left school in after year nine to become an apprentice butcher. I spent three years in an infantry battalion before getting back into the trade in the late 1970s. Since that time I have been a taxi driver, bus driver, worked at an aluminium smelter, and was an electronic store manager prior to joining the then NSW Police Service. I was discharged medically unfit from the police force as a constable first class in 2005.

          I am largely self-educated as I found school very boring!

          Hope that short history gives you a heads up.

          As to your question concerning the process of evidence gathering to a point where it becomes irrefutable fact for anyone looking at it – and expected to act on it. Politics and gate keepers keep much of what I would be only too willing to expose from ever becoming public.

          And I experienced the displeasure of those in whom I had no trust of. Can be very intimidating at times.

          Folks need to take on board that this world is not run by honest people but by some very evil souls indeed. When one is at the bottom of the heap in any position, as I was in the cops, sometimes it is more revealing to see how the top echelons of that employment actually work.

          I saw things, heard and became aware of things that would make the average person shudder as to the inhumanity that often drives those at the very top of the heap and the current system we are all under the control of.

          It takes very special people to maintain their personal equilibrium in such circumstances.

          • Thanks Nemesis,
            When getting a scuba licence, my trainee group was me, friend and 4 NSW constables. We all ended up drunk after every class. It was very choir practice. Interesting to glimpse that view, without that two way distrust. I could not work out if the alcohol was for coping with the stories told or a team requirement.

  20. “Dr Pridgeon is charged with conspiracy to defeat justice and dealing in proceeds of crime.”
    “Investigators claim several of the mothers approached the network because they feared the children were being sexually abused by their fathers.”
    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-19/child-stealing-network-accused-granted-bail-in-brisbane-court/10396726

    Due to the nature of the case and the fact that lawyers are in the mix I‘d say the prospect of a trial is remote.

  21. I’m a friend of Russell Pridgeon’s and would like to thank you sincerely for this objective article. I firmly believe he is a courageous and very honourable man.

  22. Just a few thoughts…

    The Australian Constitution neither provides civil rights, nor implies rights (except to be tried where you committed your crime, and to trial by jury)… MHR and constitutional expert Arthur Chresby. Politicians can do as they wish to you and your only recourse is to complain to the Queen.

    It is my own personal interpretation that the Family Law Court was one of the anti-family constructs created following the first New World Order installation of the Lima Agreement.

    Having worked to this court as a welfare officer, from the outset, I quickly concluded that it was hopelessly corrupt and said so to my supervisors, who did not disagree but said I was not tough enough to deal with this reality.

  25. The articles below explain my view far better than I can! Pls wake up Australia

    http://freedom-articles.toolsforfreedom.com/satanic-pedophilia-network-exposed-australia/

    https://m.northernstar.com.au/news/late-british-pm-satanic-sex-abuse-suspect/3231661

    https://m.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/rodney-howard-browne-hollywood-devil-worship_us_59e96616e4b0f9d35bc9a27b

    https://www.nationalgeographic.com.au/history/exclusive-ancient-mass-child-sacrifice-may-be-worlds-largest.aspx

  27. Would love someone brassy enough for one to print stories on children’s court corruption and in particular the child stealers DCJ and NSW Police who with courts Lawyers ICL DRL commit more crimes against children then parents.
    Expose stories of parents who wrongfully have their children stolen with NO QUESTIONABLE history

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.