118 Comments

Bettina, I hope this is alright I post this here, but for people in England it could be good to have:

https://starchamber.co.uk

COPPER STOPPER

Paperback Edition 2025

Copper Stopper is a comprehensive and essential guide for non-lawyers on how to protect yourself from law enforcement. 347 pages of effective legal self-defence strategies to keep you safe from arrest, prosecution, misuse of force, and abuse of power on the street, at your door, on the road, and at the station.

Expand full comment

I do not agree that Jones is a decent, principled man. He was a media professional with far too much influence than is healthy, who used his position to monster hundreds of his rivals. The fact that the media is feeding on him now is, in my view, poetic.

Your wider point is whether media should report on criminal cases at all. There are obviously pros and cons, and courts can place an injunction if they deem appropriate. Perhaps they should do so more often, when the accused is a public figure. I agree that his public demonisation while facing charges is inimical to justice.

Expand full comment

When I watch an episode of Crime Scene investigation (American CSI), there is always a Branch of the Police force in every city, whose job it is to investigate every crime before reporting their findings to the relevant Court. i.e. In America it is not the Courts job to do a crime scene investigation.

Compiling evidence can take time because people lie. Only the evidence doesn't lie. That

takes careful work in laboratories with the right equipment to examine the evidence.

Therefore in the U.S.A. CSI are given the opportunity to do their job responsibly.

Political interference in Australia, as in the Brittany Higgins case, by a senior politician is outrageous. Proper protocol was not followed to allow the Police to do their job.

Expand full comment

In the spirit of "where there is smoke, there is fire" Alan Jones is not my favourite person. His ranting allegations about the blame for the Grantham flood, for which he was successfully sued, is one example.

But I deeply respect your steadfast adherence to the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Thank you, Tina.

Expand full comment

Great read Bettina. Thanks for putting in the time it's appreciated.

Expand full comment

feminist tinkering with our laws! NO Bettina, feminist are DESTROYING our laws ;-(

Expand full comment

Some of you will know Josh Szeps… used to be a presenter on ABC radio… He has just published this very good podcast. He used to work for Alan Jones at 2GB when he was a young producer. His description of their complex relationship is most intriguing.

It is a remarkable podcast, extremely honest and nuanced. He's rightly very critical of the malicious glee of the journalists celebrating Alan’s downfall.

https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/just-josh-me-and-mr-jones/id1002920114?i=1000677839306

Expand full comment

I can attest to refusal of police (including a Regional Police Commander) declining my requests to be interviewed, so that I might explain why AVDOs (plural) should be withdrawn. The furthest I got, was in person meeting, when I requested meeting for purpose of communicating, my concerns as to "process" (ie made it clear was not expecting to discuss merits of the ADVO.

The Regional Police Commander's (sympathetic maybe) advice being:

"You will have your opportunity to put your case to the Magistrate when the matter is heard."

I later sued the police for range of personal torts, but gave up as the Crown simply was not going to be reasonable (and stress in self representation).

Cheers

Expand full comment

Magistrates often work with police to “pre- arrange” the outcome of a hearing. We are naive to think magistrates are independent , fair , upholders of natural justice. They should be and some might be ,but many are compromised by the corrupted nepotistic relationship between police and magistrates . This goes back centuries and its about time it was taken apart and reworked for a better system.

Expand full comment

Yes Ken, look at the disgusting, pre-trial "instructions" given to the 95 year old tazering case...he practically told the jury to acquit the young copper as it was all the fault of the demented old lady! How low can these "upholders of the truth and justice" go?...

Expand full comment

Yes , the fact that the cop was even charged was a positive , thanks to the public outcry . But the system fights back , trying to blame the victim, in this case a frail old lady , disgusting . Has this cop actually been acquitted ? Is the case still going I haven’t heard.

A similar case happened in WA. A 36 year old man was shot dead by police in his own home , he was unarmed, had committed NO crime and was not threatening anyone ,least of all the two cops. This looks like a murder , and the family demanded he be charged. The WA police refused , blaming the man , the Coroner sided with the police , no surprise . But there was no public outcry in this case , men don’t matter.

Expand full comment

I might assume you read this guys work: https://iaingould.co.uk

he is a good man..

Expand full comment

This works in Supreme Court too. Cases can be ‘tagged’. A lot goes on behind the closed doors of the ‘open court’. Defendants can be put through a lot behind those closed doors, even with their own lawyers acting contrary to best interests due expediency or court wants and other vested interests.

Expand full comment

That’s right the Supreme Court is also the Appeal Court ,feminist controlled , any man appealing an unfair DV order will probably find that it fails even when there are very good grounds.

Judges like Magistrates were once lawyers , the system is archaic ,corrupt and secretive , no place for it in the 21st century , hopefully Bettina’s campaign will start the changes needed.

Expand full comment

Nadine Taylor makes a good point about solicitors, their loyalty is to the court not their client. The justice system is a protected monopoly , jealously guarded against outside interference .

Expand full comment

and the Monopoly only happens because our leaders let it happen...

Expand full comment

shared

Expand full comment

For prosecutions where it's unclear if any crime has even occurred (as opposed to when a crime has occurred but the guilty party is not established) there should be 3 verdicts.

"Guilty", "unproven", never happened".

If it's the latter the accuser(s) get mandatory 10 years in jail and the prosecutors are fined $10 million paid to the accused.

Expand full comment

If he was a lefty luvvy homosexual, the feminist harridans would have left him alone.

Expand full comment

I had a laugh when the media story I read about Alan Jones described one alleged victim was a 17 year old male child. In Queensland the premier is calling for adult time for juvenile offenders some as young as 13 or 14. Obviously juvenile offenders are viewed as adults in QLD. Yet a play on words by media have a 17 year old as a child. Our laws now can have males of any age can have a relationship with 16 year old males as they are viewed as adults. Yet here we have a sensational statement describing the complaint as as a child. But of hyperbole by the journalist, it doesn’t work though.

Expand full comment

Yesss.. this wording is just newspapers catching our eyes...

I thought the age of consent was 16??

The hypocrisy of the laws is outstanding...

Expand full comment

I have experienced all this in family court, Federal court, SSAT, and Canberra and Queanbeyan courts over the last 30 years https://humanistman.com/ It is getting worse - anywhere where women and weak minded tribal virtue signaling men are involved. Every court , every public service, the "Office of women" all of politics and media - rampant corruption and disintegration of society at every level and too many are too afraid to call it out in case the screaming banshee women and FM witches come for them.

Expand full comment

Alan Jones another George Pell trial by media

Expand full comment

I am aware of how police are pressured by their superiors to get more DV charges against men. Police officers need to remind themselves that they are there to police the laws on evidence not for feminists. If they can’t be unbiased they should look for another job. Do what’s right for society.

Expand full comment

In principle police should not allow themselves to be influenced by politics , but it does happen. Have senior police been pressured to “ go hard” on men in DV cases ? There can be little doubt about it . Men are an easy target no one cares, but can you imagine the outrage if police unfairly targeted some other section of society , Aboriginals , ethnic minorities , Muslim women , homosexuals etc.

Thats the trouble ,a police force must not be seen to have double standards , every person is entitled to equal treatment .

Political interference into a nations police force should be prohibited by law .

Expand full comment