Framed by former NSW assistant police commissioner Clive Small & Co, A Malicious Court Trial, The Appeal/Review Judiciary Protect Their System 20th June 2019
I have seen TV commercials - Channel 7 Sunday Night - for 23rd June about me. The media certainly has me at death's door, Clive Small exhorting on TV that this is my last chance to confess for the Belanglo State forest crimes and refer to many other murders as well. The TV producer of course will say any lie and use Small as some sort of corroborative source of what is said. I can just imagine it all.
Small is desperate to convince everyone of my guilt, as then no-one looks at his evilness in his frame-up of me, to get rid of the original Paul Onions and Joanne Berry police statements of 25th January 1990, and upon that act, Small proceeded to implicate me as the person who attacked Onions. This enabled Small to enter my home with his frame-up and arrest me, then plant evidence, gun parts and property, alleged to belong to some of the murdered victims. A close examination of all this would reveal the absolute lack of integrity of the evidence.
But Small, desperate to keep me in the spotlight so no-one looks at the true facts, will lie his soul away to cover up any possibility that some true investigator would actually consider to examine the circumstances. Small so zealous to convince Australia of my guilt he seemly forgets his own mortality. I believe he has some heart issues...but Our Lord can see what he did and continues to perpetrate his lies. Small may not realize that he may be on very thin ice- so to speak.
I, from the outset of my arrest, profess my innocence and many appeals later, the Appellate, High Court and numerous applications to the Supreme Court for a judicial inquiry into the circumstances of my conviction for seven murders and for the Paul Onions offense, all unsuccessful. The Supreme Courts each rely upon the Court of Criminal Appeal judgment and refuse to consider my arguments of a miscarriage of justice in my conviction for the murders and of the Onions offense.
The trial judge told the jury as a direction of law of the case against me, "That I either alone or with some other person or persons did murder each of the victims." The twist in this judicial direction was then saying that: "The Crown is unable to prove one or the other of those murder allegations." That it is unable to prove I acted alone, unable to prove I personally inflicted any injury to cause death of any of the seven victims and unable to prove whether I participated with some other person or persons in the seven murders.
The trial evidence, and seen in the judge's summing up transcript, is that the Crown never attempted, never undertook to prove a Crown case that I either alone or in company (another person/persons) committed acts of murder.
The Crown (Mark Tedeschi) raised this case after close of evidence. Tedeschi argued that he was unable to prove I acted alone or in company but the jury can draw a conclusion from some other circumstances/evidence that I must be guilty of the murders.
The trial judge for some unknown reason agreed to the Crown's case, but it was not a proven case and not subject to any trial, examination, no evidence of it was submitted to the jury by the Crown in its case in chief. (Clive Small often says in media interviews since the trial, there was no police evidence to suggest I acted with another/others or even if I acted alone).
It was made up after the trial finished. I had DNA evidence and an alibi that establishes conclusively I was not responsible for three of the deaths, enough to create reasonable doubt. The Crown Prosecutor Tedeschi as you know, relies on lies, innuendo to get a conviction and went all out in his closing final address to persuade the jury that I either alone or in company murdered the victims and they only had to draw a inference of my guilt of murder from the other evidence found in my home and conclude that I must be guilty of the murders.
Unfortunately for me, the trial judge expanded on this alone and in company non-existent facts, and made up facts to implicate me in the murders, to explain away the DNA evidence which excluded me as the person and explain away the alibi for two other deaths, he said obviously the unknown other person/persons did those murders but I was part of this unknown gang and as such I was guilty as they are.
There was no evidence of their identity or numbers, they were completely non-existent, yet the trial judge turned them into evidence for the jury to accept. The twist also, the jury was not required to deliberate as to whether the Crown proved those elements of the murder offenses alleged against me. The judge said the Crown was unable to prove it, does not know (and this is in the transcript). And as such the jury were told to just draw an inference of guilt of me from some other evidence and on that conclude I must be guilty of murder.
I argued in many appeals, the Crown's failure to prove the elements of the murder offenses alleged against me. The Crown in any trial supposedly must prove the facts in its allegations. The Courts refuse to accept my argument and of course, they cannot back down, considering the enormity of what they have covered up.
Can it be a legitimate criminal charge to put to a jury that I either alone or in company committed acts of murder, but the Crown can't prove one or the other and never undertook to do so? What I state is in the trial judge's summing up.
I was judicially framed by the trial judge in directions of law on a non-existent criminal offense. It cannot be a legitimate criminal case to put to a jury when the Crown is unable to prove one fact in its allegations of murder.
For sure I have wellness issues; sometimes I am quite OK; others times it lays me quite low and difficult to engage in any activity; nevertheless I try to keep positive. Please forgive my penmanship; I recognize that it is not how it should be.
You have been a true friend....Our Lord bless you and give you strength. Much regards and respect, Ivan 20.6.19