Senate Secrets #12: Take heart, Inspector Morse is sniffing around, finally.

Anyone who read my last blog post may be interested to know that:

(A) On Thursday (7-11-12) I found an email from the New South Police that was classified as “secret”. Consequently, I cannot either post it here or even tell you the topics raised but the average 10-year-old should only take about half a nano-second to work that out.

(B) On Friday (8-11-12) an Inspector from the SA Police major crime section phoned me following my request to an SA prosecutor for the contact details of Giuseppe Corbo’s lawyer. The inspector came on like Inspector Morse until he was sure that I was no danger to his case against Mr Corbo and had no information that he could use. For some reason, he let down his guard and I asked him a crucial question, “Did he know what Breaching was?” His one word response was “No.”

That response raises a critical legal issue; if all of the SAPOL officers that I have raised the issue of breaching triggered fatalities with do not know what breaching is, how on earth can they then claim that these fatalities do not represent “Unlawful killings”? Go figure that one!

[NOTE:  the short URL for this posting is      ]

As ever, I remind you that Centrelink’s official position on these fatalities is:

“Centrelink does not collect ‘Post Breaching Terminal Outcome Statistics’ and is therefore unable to assist with your request for this information”?

My ‘concerned citizen’ position still is that these deaths are like the Patel fatalities in 2003, unreported, ignored and swept under the carpet by those who wish to avoid responsibility and accountability.


  1. Readers should also be aware that the Centrelink and Dept Of Employment officials who have yet to get around to reporting these fatalities recently put in a joint submission to the parliamentary inquiry looking at the adequacy of the NewStart Allowance.
  2. Their viewpoint is that job seekers get too much money!
  3. They want welfare recipients to actually get less because they think that living on $34 a day AND doing job search is too big a payment!
  4. Given that these people get paid over $200,00 a year, and have successfully hidden breaching fatalities for decades, I find that ‘Ebeneezer Scrooge attitude to be utterly disgraceful
  5. I believe that it is further empirical evidence that these bureaucrats need to be dumped ASAP for the sake of those who struggle to survive on the dole. Valuing money more than the lives and the welfare of the people that they are supposed to serve is totally and utterly the wrong mindset for the job that they do.
  6. If they want to be bean-counting money grubbers instead of compassionate life-savers, then they should work in a bank, not welfare.

Ronald Medlicott (Christian advocate of welfare justice.)

P.S. The real name of  “Inspector Morse”  is Inspector Stuart MacIntyre of the South Australian Police Major Crime Section.

When I asked Inspector McIntyre if he knew what breaching was, he said “No” and the called ended. As a result, Inspector McIntyre may have missed out on learning about “Quotagate”. This possibly the worst case of systemic fraud and mass murder in Australia’s history with an estimated 2,631 possible fatalities in just 3 years that John Howard  & Co ‘forgot’ to report to the Federal Parliament.

If Inspector McIntyre conducts investigations in the same way his boss, Superintendent Grant Moyle, did in 2011, then mass murderers and fraudsters should all feel safe. After all, what sort of mass investigation AVOIDS interviewing the plaintiff, witnesses and the families of victims? How much reliability would you place in any official “Record of Investigation” in which the plaintiff is not interviewed at any time during  the so-called investigation?

This entry was posted in News and politics, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Senate Secrets #12: Take heart, Inspector Morse is sniffing around, finally.

  1. yadnarie48 says:

    UPDATE: On May 8th 2013, the High Court turfed out retrospective legislation set in place by Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott citing it as “statutory fiction.” When the CES and the DSS were shut down by the Howard Government and Centrelink and the Job Network were set, legislation requiring welfare recipients to report changes in their income to Centrelink was not introduced. Instead, the employment minister (Senator Amanda Vanstone) and the minister responsible for the wel;fare portfolio (Senator Jocelyn Newman) and their parliamentary secretaries (on of whom was none other than Tony Abbott) simply left in place the obligation to report income to the non-existent DSS.

    I kid you not.

    In 2011, a welfare recipient pointed this out to the High Court and in a desperate, human rights violating attempt to validate the prosecution and conviction of some 15,000 people for a non-existent crime, Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott came up with the ‘retro’ legislation that the High Court turfed out as “statutory fiction.”

    This decision begs the question, “What other legislation or actions by federal government agencies are also statutory fiction”?

    How about these for starters?

    The constitution requires that the parliament make legislation to provide people with a welfare allowance – it does not empower the parliament to deprive impoverished people of a welfare allowance. So whether you call it Breaching or Compliance Failure, the welfare penalties, like bank late payment penalties, are statutory fiction.

    The constitution also states that “the law is binding on the people.” The federal police therefore cannot refuse to investigate the Howard government’s fraudulent use of breaching quotas just because of the (political) “gravity/sensitivity” of the crime.

    Under NSW and SA laws, breaching quota triggered fatalities are FELONY MURDERS and the refusal of the AFP, the NSW police and the SA police to investigate these murders is unconstitutional.

    Mr Corbo’s legal team knew about these murders in January 2013 and yet they chose to ignore all of the empirical evidence provided. Why is unknown but with legal fees of up to $10,000 for each day in court, it is not hard to find a motive for ignoring the compelling evidence that would have seen the charges against Mr Corbo dropped by the SA Police or the SA DPP which also had turned a blind eye to these murders.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s