Page 1

Associate Sarah Gall to His Honour Carmody J

judgecarmody.chambers@countycourt.vic.gov.au
Cc:

8-6-2016

Mr Peter Kidd CJ County Court of Victoria, feedback@countycourt.vic.gov.au

Buloke Shire Council buloke@buloke.vic.gov.au
Daniel Andrews Premier Victoria daniel.andrews@parliament.vic.gov.au
Mr Martin Pakula, martin.pakula@parliament.vic.gov.au, attorney-general@justice.vic.gov.au
Elliott Stafford and Associated
lawyers@elliottstafford.com.au
County Court of Victoria crim.reg@countycourt.vic.gov.au

Re: 20160608-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to Associate Sarah Gall to His Honour Carmody J CCV-Re APPEAL-15-2502-Re void orders of
His Honour Carmody, etc-Supplement 1

Madam,

I can assure you that I am working on a further supplement which also includes the following:
QUOTE 20160519-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to County Court of Victoria-Re Written submission ADDRESS TO
THE COURT-APPEAL-15-2502
However, because of the NO CASE TO ANSWER claim the Defendant made before opening his own case,
the judicial officer must now find that the failure of the prosecutor to present evidence and to rely now upon
the Defendant to give some kind of evidence that he may not actually have filled in any ballot paper is
irrelevant as the claim of NO CASE TO ANSWER relies upon what evidence was before the Court PRIOR
TO what evidence was before the Court when this claim was made and must disregard any evidence that was
given afterwards. A Court of Appeal, if the matter is appealed, re-assess the claim of NO CASE TO
ANSWER, upon the basis if the Prosecutor in fact had proved BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT the
charge and by this must disregard any evidence that was given after the claim of NO CASE TO ANSWER
was made. The Prosecutor having the CRIMINAL STANDARD OF PROOF there by had the onus to
disprove each and every excuse the Defendant may proffer on the CIVIL STANDARD OF PROOF and
therefore where the Prosecutor takes the gamble of relying upon the averment rule that he takes a
CALCULATED RISK that it might be fatal to his case. The judicial officer, who becomes aware , once the
Defendant opened his case, that the Defendant in fact on CIVIL STANDARDS OF PROOF had a excuse,
then is duty bound to discontinue the trial and make a ruling that the NO CASE TO ANSWER claim by
hindsight now is validated. This, as the Prosecutor already had closed his case. To allow for the prosecutor to
use cross-examination as a way to try to re-open his case and to try to thereby get away from the averment
rule and now seek to rely upon evidence elicited from the Defendant would a be gross abuse of the legal
processes and would defeat the entire purpose of what the averment rule is about and interfere with the DUE
PROCESSES OF LAW.
END QUOTE 20160519-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to County Court of Victoria-Re Written submission ADDRESS
TO THE COURT-APPEAL-15-2502

The above quotation was of 2 successful appeals of 19 July 2006 in the County Court of Victoria.
What this means is that the Prosecutor had to overcome each and every element of the charge as
well as having to overcome each and every excuse/issue I placed before the court.
It is clear that the Prosecutor himself filed material that supported my submissions such as the
trees and bushes in the centre of the property, His Honour Carmody J never attended to
numerous issues I raised and as such at no time had the Prosecutor defeated each and every issue.
.

His Honour Carmody J did deal with the Mens Rea issue in his own manner but in my view
overlooked this was a criminal and not a civil trial and as such the legal principles of a criminal
trial MUST BE ADHERED TO and seemed to me to deal with the matter as if it was a civil
trial about a debt that as I explained never as such existed because an Infringement Notice is not
p1
8-6-2016
G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 2
a debt ordered by a court, regardless that the Legal Service Commission didnt understand this,
as referred to by the Prosecutor that it had written about it being a debt.
In my view the failure to have the correspondence of the Legal Service Commission included in
the brief itself also must be considered being an issue. As Prosecutors are bound so to say
reveal their hand and not at a trail come up with all kind of material it concealed from the brief,
this even so at the time already in its possession.
QUOTE
Elliott Stafford and Associated
lawyers@elliottstafford.com.au
Cc:

29-5-2016

Mr Peter Kidd CJ County Court of Victoria, feedback@countycourt.vic.gov.au

Buloke Shire Council buloke@buloke.vic.gov.au
Daniel Andrews Premier Victoria daniel.andrews@parliament.vic.gov.au
Mr Martin Pakula, martin.pakula@parliament.vic.gov.au, attorney-general@justice.vic.gov.au
County Court of Victoria crim.reg@countycourt.vic.gov.au
Associate to Her Honour Hannan J. judgehannan.chambers@countycourt.vic.gov.au
Associate Sarah Gall to His Honour Carmody J judgecarmody.chambers@countycourt.vic.gov.au
Ref; 20160529-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to ES&a Your ref LA-05-06- -Re APPEAL-15-2502 Re Evidence-etc

Sir/Madam,
On 17 May 2016 Counsel for Buloke Shire Council claimed (FROM THE BAR TABLE) that ES&a
Associates (for Buloke Shire Council) had served the appropriate brief via email, etc.
Obviously this was a mere statement from the Bar table and cannot be accepted as evidence by the Court.
It will my intention to pursue that unless Buloke Shire Council provide a witness to give evidence to the effect that
the appropriate brief was provided, etc, I will pursue that the court due to lack of proper evidence will not accept
this.
In the past I challenged the service of documents and at that time the Court made clear that it was not for the trail
judge to accept service had eventuated unless this was so stated under oath from the witness box, and I was entitled
to cross-examine the witness. As I then was able to do.
Because the trial judge must and must be seen to be impartial and independent the trial judge then cannot
assume/accept that service of a brief was properly executed where there is no evidence whatsoever before the
court (as evidence cannot be given from the Bar table) the onus is upon Buloke Shire Council to prove an
appropriate brief was served upon me, this I deny ever eventuated.
This document is not intended and neither must be perceived to refer to all details/issues.
Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O. W. B. (Friends call me Gerrit)

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL (Our name is our motto!)

END QUOTE

Again
QUOTE
Because the trial judge must and must be seen to be impartial and independent the trial judge then cannot
assume/accept that service of a brief was properly executed where there is no evidence whatsoever before
the court (as evidence cannot be given from the Bar table) the onus is upon Buloke Shire Council to prove
an appropriate brief was served upon me, this I deny ever eventuated.
END QUOTE

The real problem is that both members of the legal profession as well as judicial officers have
this kind of modus operandi to blatantly disregard to follow and comply with required legal
procedures and as such are no longer even aware of doing so. It takes a person like myself to
expose this rot. In particular where I even warned about it before hand I was well aware that
likely His Honour Carmody J and the Prosecutor would ignore this.
Still this cannot justify their conduct as it must be considered reprehensible for those engaged in
the legal profession and so also judicial officers to have climatised themselves to persistent
breaches and other violations of legal procedures, court orders, rules and regulations as well as
other legal requirements because it might be a so called convention even so it denied any
person a FAIR and PROPER hearing and NATURAL JUSTICE. This is also why so many
p2
8-6-2016
G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 3
unsuccessful parties in litigation are upset to the extend as I understand it to even desiring to kill
the judicial officer who they perceive violated their rights, because the system is such that to
complain to anyone generally ends up nowhere or is railroaded to protect the legal profession
rather than the integrity of the courts.

As I made clear:
QUOTE 20160517-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to County Court of Victoria-Re Written submission ADDRESS TO
THE COURT-APPEAL-15-2502
Hansard 8-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates (Official Record of the Debates of the National Australasian
Convention)
QUOTE Mr. ISAACS.We want a people's Constitution, not a lawyers' Constitution.
END QUOTE
Hansard 19-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates
QUOTE
Mr. CARRUTHERS:
This is a Constitution which the unlettered people of the community ought to be able to understand.
END QUOTE
.
As the States are created within s106 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 (UK) then clearly
all legal principles embedded in the constitution applies also to any state legislation and court rules and regulations.
On Friday 13 May 2016 I attempted to find the latest version of a Notice of Appearance in criminal matters and went
to search it on the internet. After many hours of searching and reading articles it became clear to me that judges at
times make errors not being able to adhere to the numerous rules and regulations and other legislative provisions
(hence successful appeals) which is further expanded by court staff making errors and likewise legal practitioners.
In fact on 25 May 2016 the County Court of Victoria is as I understand it a session for legal practitioners to learn
about eFiling.
If the court holds it necessarily to hold special sessions for legal practitioners then surely it cannot expect unlettered
persons to do better, albeit they are not provided for this.
Where the courts must place both parties on equal footing then this obviously doesnt exist where legal
practitioners have special ways to be provided for, even immediate contact with associates of judges whereas I
am as a party not provided with the same.
The fast amount of material in my view is beyond the scope of an unlettered person to read and
understand/comprehend when faced with a charge, and as such the complexity of the legal provisions are too
cumbersome to enable an accused a reasonable opportunity to defend his/her case. It should be understood that
legal practitioners do no more but give legal advice as to their opinion about legal provisions and often are
found to be totally in the wrong, when a court hands down a decision against their clients. As such engaging a legal
practitioner doesnt at all mean a better position before the court rather likely a more expensive litigation. In my
view the complexity of the rules/regulations/legislation is beyond reasonable and must be drastically reduces so
ordinary persons have a reasonable opportunity to understand and comprehend it all as much as they are entitled to
do with the constitution. After all rules/regulations/legislation are subject to the constitution and must conform to the
principle that it must be able to be understood by unlettered persons. Hence the current mountains of details to be
digested for any unlettered person in itself is a gross injustice and a denial of a fair and proper hearing. After all as I
will set out below even legal practitioners have problems to act within the confines of rules/regulations/legislative
provisions and flaunt court orders.
END QUOTE 20160517-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to County Court of Victoria-Re Written submission ADDRESS
TO THE COURT-APPEAL-15-2502

Here we had His Honour Carmody J referring about b ranches that it was in the Fire prevention
Notice whereas I had during cross-examination clearly indicated that there was a stack of
branches as fire wood and as such the witness during cross-examination not refusing this to have
been so it was not for His Honour Carmody J then to so to say argue about some branches and
not others. Either branches are or are not to be included.
It was not the task of His Honour Carmody J to assume that code A description of the 3 page
exhibit used by Mr Wayne Wall in the Fire prevention Notice was relevant, as it was for the
Prosecutor to prove why other codes were not applicable and so to bring out the opinion for
this that was sufficient as required by Section 41 of the Country Fire Authority Act 1958 (d)
must contain any prescribed information and Section 41(1) (a) on that land, other than a
p3
8-6-2016
G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 4
building or in a building; (b) on the adjacent half width of any private street that abuts that
land (other than a prescribed thing or class of things) clearly the Fire Prevention Notice failed
to be doing so, and for this was invalid and so any legal proceedings based on it.
It would be absurd for an ordinary person to second guess what b ranches might or might not be
included. The same with all combustible material it is not for an ordinary person to so to say
try to go into the mind of the Municipal Fire Prevention Officer as what he might or might not
consider what the all combustible material relates to. All and any legislation and so any issue
of a Fire Prevention Notice must be able to be understood by an unlettered person. And in this
case I view that even lettered person wouldnt even have a clue what might be referred to where
clearly the Fire Prevention Notice was vague and aloof. By the very exhibit the Prosecutor
filed as an exhibit of 3 pages designed/created by Mr Wayne Wall the witness and Municipal
Fire Protection Officer, he could have used other descriptions as to pursue any alleged fire
danger to be cleared. However, despite being aware that there was a stack of (old railways)
sleepers stacked up between the shed as well as a stack of branches for fire wood he elected not
to differentiate and use the term all combustible material which clearly refer to all and any
fire wood as if they are not combustible they would be useless for any open fire.
I commenced to prepare my case way back in October 2013 then already making photos of how
there was a considerable fire danger along Calder Highway well aware that Mr Wayne Wall as
Municipal Fire Protection Officer was using and likely seeking to use and misuse the provisions
of the Country Fire Authority Act 1958 for ulterior purposes and not as to avoid fire fighters and
the community to be safeguarded, and rather to try to use it to micro manage private land holders
properties. As the litigation was not instituted until about August 2015 it is clear I was preparing
for a likely case well beforehand.

In particular the judiciary should welcome how I expose the misuse and abuses within the legal
system, as for example I did in the Colosimo case, where Mr Colosimos previous barrister was
ending up having orders issued adverse to Mr Colosimo, but I was able to reverse this all on
appeal, etc. The Country Court of Victoria and the Magistrates Court of Victoria proved to me so
to say the cancerous growth within the legal processes and again I view no member of the legal
profession is likely to understand and comprehend the extend of this because it is so ingrained
that so to say only an outsider can expose and address the relevant issues. The mere fact that I
comprehensively defeated the Commonwealth and all other Attorney-Generals on FAILING TO
VOTE (in both appeals on 19 July 2006 in the County Court of Victoria) may underline that I
succeeded where others despite of an army of lawyers failed.
His Honour Carmody J asked me grounds as to my submission NO CASE TO ANSWER and
ruled upon 2 grounds, reality is that no grounds are required, because it is for the trail judge to
consider if the Prosecutor made out a case, and must do so without taking in consideration any
material I may have filed that may be adverse to my own case. As my written submissions and
other correspondences extensively referred to this it cannot be held the Prosecutor was unaware
of this. Even if, unlikely because of having even raised the issue of sleeping, then the court
nevertheless was bound to consider this where it was also provided to the court by way of
written submissions in the ADDRESS TO THE COURT and its supplements.
QUOTE 20160214-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to ES&a Your ref LA-05-06- -Re APPEAL-15-2502 Re NO CASE TO
ANSWER
Elliott Stafford and Associated
14-2-2016
lawyers@elliottstafford.com.au
Cc:

Mr Garry McIntosh, Associate to His Honour Mullaly J. judgemullaly.chambers@countycourt.vic.gov.au

Mr Wayne Wall & Buloke Shire Council buloke@buloke.vic.gov.au
Daniel Andrews Premier Victoria daniel.andrews@parliament.vic.gov.au
Mr Martin Pakula, martin.pakula@parliament.vic.gov.au & attorney-general@justice.vic.gov.au

p4
8-6-2016
G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 5
Ref; 20160214-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to ES&a Your ref LA-05-06- -Re APPEAL-15-2502 Re NO CASE TO ANSWER

Sir/Madam,
Without seeking to imply that my OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION will be dismissed, I am
well aware that judges at times may act in a manner not expected and/or not legally justified but that
may be the issue of a judicial review, etc. As such, were the court to proceed with any De Novo hearing
then I pursue the NO CASE TO ANSWER claim
See also eg Glass, McHugh and Douglas, The Liability of Employers, 2nd ed (1979) at 204-217; Glass, "The
Insufficiency of Evidence to Raise a Case to Answer" (1981) 55 Australian Law Journal 842.

Some of the issues but not in any of priority

OBJECTION TO JURISDICTION
Fire Prevention Notice in violation to the provisions of the Country Fire Authority Act 1958
Fire Prevention Notice contains demands exceeding delegated powers.
Fire prevention Notice in valid in law
Infringement Notice invalid in law based on invalid Fire prevention Notice.
Summons invalid in law based on Invalid Infringement Notice.
Summons invalidly issues as Infringement Noticed failed to have been withdrawn.
Summons hearing in the wrong court venue
Failure to serve full brief
No evidence to prove jurisdiction.
No evidence whatsoever to justify 20 August 2015 orders at St Arnaud venue
No evidence to legally justify 17 September 2015 orders at St Arnaud venue
Failing to file and serve Notice of Appearance regarding appeal
Failing to file and serve for Leave to file and serve out of time Notice of Appearance
Failure to provide 27 October 2015 requested brief
Failing to comply with 30/10/2015 order to serve via Australia Post by 9/11/2015 full brief
Failing to request leave to serve out of time full brief.
Providing misleading Form 11 statement dated 25/11/2015 re 18/3/2013 alleged hearing
Provide different Form 11 for 22/2/2016 hearing without full brief
Failure by State Government to provide relevant FOI material requested 9/12/2015
Not to overlook purported evidence obtained by tress passing! As such no evidence exist to support any
charge!

This document is not intended and neither must be perceived to refer to all details/issues.
Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O. W. B. (Friends call me Gerrit)

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL (Our name is our motto!)

QUOTE 20160214-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to ES&a Your ref LA-05-06- -Re APPEAL-15-2502 Re NO CASE TO
ANSWER

The following was provided to the Court prior to the hearing:

QUOTE 20160530-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to County Court of Victoria-Re Witness statement-APPEAL-15-2502

Witness statement
(pre-written on 28-5-2016)
County Court of Victoria at Melbourne
This witness Statement is subject to if the court may order the hearing to proceed upon
material disputes and the Court overruling my submission that there is NO CASE TO
ANSWER.
END QUOTE 20160530-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to County Court of Victoria-Re Witness statement-APPEAL-15-2502

Unlike any member of the legal profession may do as to warning a potential witness beforehand,
I nevertheless did so.
QUOTE 20160221-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to ES&a Your ref LA-05-06- -Re APPEAL-15-2502 Re selfincrimination
p5
8-6-2016
G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 6
Elliott Stafford and Associated
lawyers@elliottstafford.com.au
Cc:

21-2-2016

Mr Garry McIntosh, Associate to His Honour Mullaly J. judgemullaly.chambers@countycourt.vic.gov.au

Mr Wayne Wall & Buloke Shire Council buloke@buloke.vic.gov.au
Daniel Andrews Premier Victoria daniel.andrews@parliament.vic.gov.au
Mr Martin Pakula, martin.pakula@parliament.vic.gov.au & attorney-general@justice.vic.gov.au
Basil Stafford <basil.Stafford@elliottstafford.com.au>
Alison May <alison.may@elliottstafford.com.au>
Ref; 20160221-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to ES&a Your ref LA-05-06- -Re APPEAL-15-2502 Re self-incrimination

Sir/Madam,
I view it is essential that Mr Wayne Wall is appropriately warned by lawyers involved that
where he is to take the witness stand he can be cross examined also and he could self-incriminate by his
answers either during examination, cross-examination or any re-examination.
Infringement Act 2006
QUOTE
167Offence to give false information
A person must not intentionally provide false or misleading information in any written statement
required by or under this Act.
Penalty:

10 penalty units.

END QUOTE

In my view this also applies to Mr Wayne Wall!

As Mr Wayne Wall issued defective Fire Prevention Notices (in violation of the legal provisions of the
Country Fire Authority Act 1958) and nevertheless issued an Infringement Notice alleging failure to
comply and this resulted to the Magistrates Court of Victoria (albeit without any evidence to support this
charge) issuing orders adverse to me, then it is my view he could self-incriminate if under oath making
statements. As your correspondence of 10 June 2015 refer to him as Law Officer then clearly it is implied
he is aware of legal provisions and to issue defective notices and base an Infringement Notice upon this to
have it used to achieve a miscarriage of justice I view is a very serious matter. While the Premier still has
not responded to my long overdue FOI Act request as to the extent of Infringement Notices having been
issued in such manner defective, I do anticipate that in the end I will obtain the relevant details.
Mr Wayne Wall employed as a Legal Officer and as such being paid for the job surely can expected to
have a duty of care in his conduct dealing with legal issues. My 20160217-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to
County Court of Victoria-Re Buloke Shire Council -APPEAL-15-2502-ADDRESS TO THE
COURT-Supplement 2 sets out certain issues and I view that if you have not already done so you ought
to give Mr Wayne Wall appropriate legal advice including that if he were to take the witness stand he
could self-incriminate as the transcript could be used in any charges that may be placed against him.
The High Court of Australia in various judgments on record also sets out what may constitute trespassing,
and as I indicated previously I pursue that Mr Wayne Wall committed trespassing upon my property.
Again, if he takes the witness stand than I can assure you I will pursue this issue also. Where the courts
did strike down police conduct to trespass then surely Mr Wayne Wall cannot be allowed to do so!

This document is not intended and neither must be perceived to refer to all details/issues.
Awaiting your response,
G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O. W. B. (Friends call me Gerrit)

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL (Our name is our motto!)

END QUOTE 20160221-Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. to ES&a Your ref LA-05-06- -Re APPEAL-15-2502 Re selfincrimination

I had no doubt that Mr Wayne Wall would tailor his evidence as such and likely would omit or
fabricate his evidence for this. Hence, the issue of the photos of the first inspection not to exist
and somehow the GPS records no longer available was what was anticipated by me as after all if
there was never any inspection in the first place then this had to be explained away in some way.
While His Honour Carmody J may fall for this kind of rot, it was clear that the Prosecutor being
able to produce the alleged GPS positions of 17 November 2014 and this not somehow having
p6
8-6-2016
G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati

Page 7
been wiped out by subsequent inspections in 2015 than it didnt make sense why then it would
have somehow wiped out the October 2014 alleged inspection recordings.
It has for decades been my modus operandi to advise the opponent of their weaknesses so that
more than likely they will tailor their evidence to seek to overcome this by deceptive evidence,
and this then will work adverse to their own cases.

A GPS records without a single photo showing any correlation to the GPS positions claimed in
the exhibit filed by the prosecutor as an aerial view surely must underline how absurd the
Prosecutors case was. On the one hand the GPS wasnt working and on the other hand the GPS
was used to claim it proved that neither witnesses entered my property. What however was not
born out by the evidence was if the GPS in the exhibit was relating to where the vehicle was
stopped and not necessarily an indication where photos allegedly were taken from.
As was born out during the hearing Jeff had advised Mr Wayne Wall that he had twice
mowed/slashed the property in 2014. But what I didnt do was to call Jeff as a witness, as simply
I prefer to do cases without calling other witnesses. And issue is also that I would have to incur
expenses which I could ill afford, nor did I view that in the end it would make one iota of
difference where the witness could give evidence that he had located Mr Wayne Wall inside my
property (as such Mr Wayne Wall was I view perjuring himself under oath claiming he never
entered my property) in 2014) as in the end I had no doubt that the court could never come to any
guilty finding. If however the authorities were to investigate and establish that contrary to his
evidence under cross-examination Mr Wayne Wall did in fact enter my property then clearly he
must be considered to have committed perjury! While His Honour Carmody J may have no issue
about this, I for one do have as I view that His Honour Carmody J making known to have
accepted the witnesses evidence, His Honour by this also accepted what I view the conspiracy
of the witnesses to back each other up as to the evidence given by Mr Wayne Wall, even so I
proved during cross-examination that one photo of a house never was. The mere fact that Mr
Groves without knowing what exactly Mr Wayne Wall had stated during examination and crossexamination nevertheless announced during evidence in chief he agreed with the evidence Mr
Wayne Wall had given (and so including the incorrect photo being part of my property)
underlines in my view that they conspired to pervert the course of justice, just never anticipated I
would expose this. In my view it is extra ordinary incompetence for a Prosecutor not to verify
with the witness if the photos that were in the purported brief actually were of my property. The
evidence by Mr Groves that the time imprint indicated the lapse of time itself couldnt alter the
fact that both had given evidence that the photos were of my property. And the fact that His
Honours note on the photo was attached when shown to the witness also underlines that proper
procedures were not followed. It also proved by hindsight that my request to first have Mr
Groves giving evidence before I cross examined Mr Wayne Wall was justified, as clearly had Mr
Groves first been allowed to give evidence then the prosecutor would never have been alerted to
the one photo not being of the property, but now was able to direct his question by way of a
leading question I objected to but too late as the witness already had now been alerted to it, that
the particular phot was not of my property.
I understand that students in legal studies do read my material, and as I indicated in my material
before the court I am intending to include the material of the case into a forthcoming book
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0

As such, I try/tried to be very diligent in how to prepare and conduct myself in regard of this
case! After all it may avoid others to suffer the same problems, and may end up saving lives!
This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to state all issues/details.

Awaiting your response,

G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL (Our name is our motto!)

p7
8-6-2016
G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
PLEASE NOTE: You may order books in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI series by making a reservation, ERnmail:
admin@inspector-rikati.com Blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati