On the 25th October 2023, i.e., yesterday, a Federal Court decision may have opened the door to almost all people who have been infected with COVID-19 being able to sue both the Federal Government AND their State Government.
The details are below, but keep in mind the fact that the “summary” of the Federal Court’s decision decision is a staggering 290 pages long. A crucial ‘summary’ point is the following “ought to have known” statement, which applies not only to COVID-GATE, but also to VACCINE-GATE and the WELFARE-GATE massacres.
Justice Stewart stated:
I have found that before the embarkation of passengers on the Ruby Princess for the cruise in question, the respondents knew or ought to have known about the heightened risk of coronavirus infection on the vessel, and its potentially lethal consequences, and that their procedures for screening passengers and crew members for the virus were unlikely to screen-out all infectious individuals. That knowledge arises from the respondents’ experience in February 2020 of coronavirus outbreaks on other vessels owned and operated by them, namely the Diamond Princess off Japan and the Grand Princess off California, their knowledge of the characteristics of the virus and in particular that asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic people could be infectious, and the respiratory illness outbreak on the Ruby Princess’s immediate past voyage. To the respondents’ knowledge, to proceed with the cruise carried a significant risk of a coronavirus outbreak with possible disastrous consequences, yet they proceeded regardless.
The following COVID-19 documentary video opens the door for 935.000 people South Australians to sue the South Australian Parliament for criminal neglect.
The fact of the matter, which is clearly evident in the video, is that the South Australian Government predicted that removing quarantine restrictions could result in many thousands of people being infected and could result in an estimated death toll over an arbitrary 300-day period of as many as 424 deaths.
Viewers of the video should note that the Marshall Government, the ALP under the leadership of Peter Malanauskas, and independent members of the South Australian Parliament knew that lifting the border quarantine restrictions “carried a significant risk of a coronavirus outbreak with possible disastrous consequences, yet they proceeded regardless.”
Expert Insights into the COVID-19 murders
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTGDJYA-qos
Details of the Federal Court case:
A. FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
B. KARPIK V CARNIVAL PLC (THE RUBY PRINCESS) (INITIAL TRIAL)
C. [2023] FCA 1280
D. SUMMARY
https://austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FCA/2023/1280.html
File Number: NSD1033/2012
https://www.comcourts.gov.au/public/esearch/federal/query?last_name=karpik&given_name=susan&filed_after=&filed_before=&court=fca&file_status=Closed®istry_select=any&action_type_select=any&search_by=party_name
File name: CARNIVAL PLC ARBN 107 998 443 & ANOR v SUSAN KARPIK
APPLICATIONS FOR FILE: https://www.comcourts.gov.au/file/Federal/P/NSD1033/2021/actions
LIST OF ORDERS: https://www.comcourts.gov.au/file/FEDERAL/P/NSD1033/2021/order_list
[NOTE: the list of orders can be printed from this page]
Readers take note – the statement below does not state that the “summary” is 290 pages long.
“In accordance with the practice of the Federal Court in some cases of public interest, importance or complexity, the following summary has been prepared to accompany the reasons for judgment and orders made today. This summary is intended to assist in understanding the outcome of this proceeding and is not a complete statement of the conclusions reached by the Court. The only authoritative statement of the Court’s reasons is that contained in the published reasons for judgment which will be available on the internet at http://www.fedcourt.gov.au together with this summary.”
BOUGHEY v R. [HCA 29, 6th June 1986)
SOMEONE SHOULD HAVE ASKED A JUDGE IF THE ROADMAP OF DEATHS WAS LEGAL
Ronald's space 