You are on page 1of 15

Page 1 of 15

Statutory Declaration
OATHS ACT 1900, NSW, EIGHTH SCHEDULE

I, Charles Henry Norville of 21 Crosby Crescent, Killarney Vale in the State of New South
Wales, date of birth 21 February 1952, do solemnly and sincerely declare:
1. I am compelled to report a crime that occurred subsequently after the 1st May
1995 when attending a Workers Compensation [WC] legal consultation with four
legally trained Workers Compensation advocates, at least three being lawyers, at
Garfield Barwick Chambers. On this date the lawyers failed to report an alleged
criminal assault which occurred in 1981, whilst I was a probationary fireman for the
NSW Fire Brigades, later officially recognised as a criminal assault by NSW
Victims Services (VS) 11 August 2014, a branch of the NSW Justice Department
(JD), NB a crime on the ‘balance of probabilities’ REF 170483 VSRP;
a. NSW Police Task Force SIME 2010 was the driver of the investigation into many
depraved assaults against Fire Brigades members including mine;
2. Consideration to the lapses of these lawyers is considerable and ongoing. I deal
with a rationale REF @1-5; CHRONOLOGY REF @6-36; CONCLUSIONS REF @37-
42; EVIDENCE REF @43;
a. 6 Dec 2017 Ombudsman in response to my complaint(s) 2 Nov 2017 about
Justice Department (JD) reticence C/2017/9605 pge 14-15 (contact Caroline
Turner) - state that they have emailed the JD of my complaint and that the JD
would resolve the complaint in 30 days. However I have since sent my 2nd
contentions 28 Nov 2017 provided under DJ legislative imprimatur of economic
losses due to 1981 crime established 11 Aug 2014 – the DJ/VS have not
acknowledged the 2nd contentions report;
b. I submit this Statutory Declaration as evidence after notifying the NSW Police
Customer Assistance Unit Ref CAS-793933-K0N9 29 Jan 2018 - REF pge 12-13;
3. I have also attempted without success to obtain legal assistance from Central
Coast Community Legal Centre, Justice Connect as well as other private law firms
and the NSW Law Society referral system in order to deal with this complaint. The
reason for this reluctance by the legal fraternity, I am told, is policy, that lawyers
do not scrutinise other lawyers;
4. I defend my assertions against the legal fraternities and their abstaining:
a. I have no interest in dictating any litigation against the 1995 WC lawyers
However their alleged lapses criminal or otherwise should be lawfully dealt with;
b. The focus of alleged illegal consequences I consider should be my illegal
retirement motivated by alleged criminal conspiracy that effected not only myself
Page 2 of 15

but also the lives of other firefighters and their families between 1995 and 2010
when a Police Task Force SIME was eventually assigned REF @23;
5. I have also the following internet referenced reports in evidence that can be
available as a printable PDF copy off line;
a. https://www.scribd.com/document/336801798/Reports-by-Charles-H-Norville-to-
Australian-Training-Ministers-Attorney-Generals-26-Sept-2016 Reports by
Charles H Norville to Australian Training Ministers & Attorney Generals 26 Sept
2016;
b. https://www.scribd.com/document/365735319/updated-NSW-Justice-
Department-Review-of-Economic-Losses-28112017 NSW Justice Department
review of economic losses – 28112017 [re these second contentions containing
first contentions re VICTIMS SERVICES REVIEW OF DECISION REFERENCE:
170483D];
c. NB some documentary evidence was able to be obtained under FOI;
d. I am inspired by Rule Of Law reference by The Hon JJ Spigelman AC Chief
Justice of NSW: The Rule of Law Institute of Australia – Judicial Reflections on
the Rule of Law 13 May 2011,– interview by Malcolm Stewart Vice Chair RLIA:
“The Rule of Law to me serves two principle purposes. Firstly it requires a society which
places a high value on individual autonomy and it also requires a society which has a
high level of social order to which it in turn contributes both in terms of preserving
autonomy and contributing (to) the social order”;
THE CHRONOLOGY OF THE CRIMINAL EVENT NOT LIMITING, IS AS FOLLOWS:
6. On 26 Aug 1994 I declared a Workers Compensation injury of work related stress
against the NSW Fire Brigades;
7. This was the 2nd claim for work related stress declared. The 1st was in Feb –Mar
1992;
8. This claim was unrecognised by the Fire Brigades and I had to seek Federal Govt
welfare. Small amounts of leave entitlements were also paid when due;
9. I engaged Workers Comp lawyers P.K. Simpson & Co who were given my list of
complaints against the Fire Brigades for stress I submitted that they had caused;
10. One significant claim was an assault against me by other work colleagues that
occurred on a date between Apr – Sept 1981;
11. NB My assault was one of many that were reported in 2010 which was only
declared as a criminal assault by the Justice Department’s Victims Services 11
Aug 2014, on the ‘balance of probabilities’ I believe to obviate prosecution;
a. I submit these criminal contentions were known to NSW Judicial and watchdog
bodies REF @5a;5b, but no one honest enough stepped forward;
Page 3 of 15

12. On about Fri 21 April 1995 P.K. Simpson, arranged for me to attend a meeting on
1 May 1995 at Garfield Barwick Chambers in Martin Place Sydney;
13. On 1 May 1995 I attend the meeting as requested by P.K. Simpson to meet the
barrister Vaughn Jurisich and leading solicitor Jeffery Elia was also in attendance
along with a female solicitor Gabrielle and one other male who was legally trained;
14. At the meeting Mr Jurisich wanted to know the details of the assault which I was
not entirely prepared for. I recall sitting in front Mr Jurisich’s desk and the other
solicitors I recall were behind me;
15. I began to explain the details of the assault but in doing so I broke down in what I
felt was a post traumatic event;
16. I remember that I heard the solicitors starting to leave and at the end of the
interview Mr Jurisich expressed some concern stating simply “I will get them”.
a. NB I think that this assembly of four legal personnel were summoned to witness
my responses. I don’t recall being told prior of the size of this assembly;
17. I remember somehow leaving the presence of Mr Jurisich and Mr Elia and I was
alone in Martin Place and then I went home but remembered having I believe just
two light beers. I know I felt better just concealing the emotion of the trauma;
18. Mr Elia asked me at conclusion of the interview to submit a chronology and on 12
May 1995 I addressed a ’26 page Chronology’ to Jeffery J Elia of P.K. Simpson &
Co, the reference is JE:DLB:5481, at pages 19 & 22 therein refers to the assault;
19. It was this 26 page Chronology that was also given to, NB not limiting, the DJ/VS,
HealthQuest retirement organisation as well as treating health practitioners and
NSW watchdog bodies, and certain NSW Judiciary including possibly the Crown
Solicitors Office [REF @5a 2nd report para 36 – NB legal privilege], Fire Brigades,
HCCC, State Super notating the assault on REF @ pages 19 and 22 therein;
20. 2 May 1995 psychology report from Dr Nicholas Marlowe who was my long term
treating psychologist, was submitted addressed to PK Simpson submitting details,
inter alia, the bastardisation (vis criminal assault);
21.1 June 1995 PK Simpson send a letter to law firm Messrs Hiskson Lakeman and
Holcombe dated noting that the “applicant was assaulted by other employees”;
This clearly makes all WC lawyers aware of the 1981 assault. NB This document
was not attached to 28 Nov 2017 report to the Justice Department but is attached
below – REF pages 10-11;
22.1 June 1995 PK Simpson sends a letter to State Super inquiring on my
superannuation entitlements and a response was sent 7 June 1995 from State
Super providing superannuation payouts under various employment terminations;
23. 5 July 1995 my retirement was instituted in lieu of dismissal directly or indirectly
Page 4 of 15

involving the NSW Fire Brigades, WC lawyers, HealthQuest, and State Super.
The retirement, I have always maintained to all judiciary and watchdog bodies was
fraudulent based on unsubstantiated medical diagnosis. However being sacked
under doubtful a HCCC contemporaneous appeal with a family to support did not
seem a viable option to me at the time as I was still in a state of severe stress;
24. In March 1996 I attended along with all legal practitioners involved, the Workers
Compensation Court with sole jurisdiction on work related injuries. This juncture I
consider occurred under a fraudulent medical retirement on 5 July 1995 in lieu of
dismissal in what appears as an alleged illegal ‘contracting out’ of the Workers
Compensation Jurisdiction, for what is now seen as retirement for the term of my
natural life, for crimes committed by others, endorsed by NSW Judicial functions;
a. Workers Comp lawyers made no attempt to reveal the criminal assault to Police
and then did not reveal the alleged assault to the Workers Comp Court in March
1996;
b. I waited for barrister Vaughn Jurisich to ask the question of me whilst I was in the
Workers Comp Court witness box about the assault, but he didn’t and instead of
getting them (REF @16) as he promised, all parties, got me instead;
25. With my own arduous efforts the medical retirement certification was unwound on
9 July 2003 but I was forced to remain retired despite all litigation attempts, I was
in unemployment stasis being prevented equal access to welfare employment
programs, but really under retiring legislative mechanism, as given to me by State
Super, of the Superannuation Act 1916 …..S48 – S51, the NSW Government was
clearly in charge of placing me into reemployment ie legislative post-employment;
26.Vocational training in a range of disciplines has not lead to long term employment
opportunities and where family commitments had also prevented me for instance
going interstate and isolating some of the NSW employment vetting processes;
REF @5a Reports by Charles H Norville to Australian Training Ministers &
Attorney Generals 26 Sept 2016; [1st report on Training]
27. Personal legal litigation has failed to give me any respite either by way of removal
of the illicit retirement or the pursuit of equal employment avenues. Vetting of my
employment applications for viable long term employment has been a
considerable problem, I also consider at the hands of various crass NSW
judiciaries. The following example not limiting: REF @5a 1st and 2nd reports;
a. The remonstrations from the NSW Industrial Relations proceedings is revealed in
Justice Sams decision as well as in the IR Court transcript REF @5a 1st report
para 25; 2nd report para 52;
b. It is also noteworthy to mention that Justice Sams of the NSW IRC by Fire
Page 5 of 15

Brigades request removed medical evidence from my reemployment submission


in 2007 that denotes the assault REF @20; REF @5a 1st report para 25;
28.In 2010 the NSW Police Force under Task Force SIME were required to
investigate numerous assaults over a period of decades against firemen by NSW
Fire Brigades members. Police Force Officers DSC Anthony Macklin and DSC
Saul Wiseman took my statements and those of the accused concerning the 1981
assault;
a. In 2010 – on a date that can be specified – I reported the offence to the nearest
Police Station, Belmont Police Station where my complaint of assault was
summarily rebutted. I reported this rebuttal immediately to the Ombudsman and
investigative journalist Brenden Hills of the Telegraph who queried the Fire
Brigades who were entrusted in collating complaints by members REF @43c;
b. I conclude that there was never going to be an investigation by Police under my
own volition as I felt that it would be treated as a civil tort, and the concern that I
would be fobbed off as was the case at Belmont Police Station 2010;
c. Consequently to the above I was interviewed at Belmont Police Station by DSC
Anthony Macklin and later DSC Saul Wiseman who apologised on behalf of the
those Police Officers for lack of, I suppose, understanding;
29. Under Task Force SIME, Officers Macklin and Wiseman took my statements only
concerning the 1981 assault and also statements from the 7 remaining offenders;
30. NB It is logical to assume that a similar 2010 Task Force would have taken place
in 1995 with the Police receiving four statements from legally qualified witnesses
seeing what I believed was my post traumatic event of the 1981 assault [REF @1];
a. The media, I have little doubt, would have also got wind of this debacle as they
had in 2010, under similar if not the same circumstances;
31. On 10 Sept 2010 I engaged a Victims Compensation lawyers Napier Keen
Solicitors and Attorneys stating Dec 2012 “We are pursuing a victims
compensation claim for you only” they later state they had difficulty in obtaining an
‘event number’ from the Police which I now find curious;
32. Napier Keen forwarded advice dated 27 Aug 2014 to me the Victims Services (VS)
decision of 11 August 2014 which determined a crime of a serious type had
occurred in 1981. This now establishes the offence of the practitioner/lawyers at
Garfield Barwick Chambers on 1 May 1995 [REF @1;42], failing to report what
must have been seen as an obvious crime, be it alleged REF @15;16;
33. NB I submitted contentious concerns of 1995 to VS twice on 18 Sept 2014 and 28
Nov 2017. Only the 1981 crime alleged was investigated by Police in 2010;
34. Also 27 Aug 2015 Napier Keen also state that Victims Compensation (VC) was
Page 6 of 15

refused. The VC lawyers decide not pursuing a victims compensation claim REF
@31; Napier Keen dropped any further assistance stating that the review would be
unsuccessful. I was forced to raise contentions in the review myself in a Victims
Services review. Thence the 1st submission of contentions under the legislative
imprimatur to a VC review of their wrongful consideration submitted on 18 Sept
2014 [Ref 170483D]; [re VICTIMS SERVICES REVIEW OF DECISION
REFERENCE: 170483D]; NB this 1st contentions is enclosed within the 2nd
contentions 28 Nov 2017 REF @5b;
a. I contended to the VC review that the 1996 WC Commutation $30,000 was for
lost wages and my illegally implemented menial pension over the 19 month
period and thereafter for the term of my natural life – I stipulated in the review
that the VC consideration was ultra vires as a criminal tort payment, which I
consider would have been obvious to Napier Keen VC lawyers – my 1st
submission of contentions in review (18 Sept 2014) was two pages plus
attachments;
35. Some time passes my (1st) contentions are upheld for my right to VC ($10,000).
However I return, by cheque, the amount awarded, back to the Justice
Department stating that they have not given adequate reasons in upholding my
review of contentions of criminal breach(s) by lawyers at Garfield Barwick
Chambers and others on and after the 1 May 1995. I have since reported to the
Ombudsman 2 Nov 2017 for the Justice Department to present the cheque to my
bank NB REF Ombudsman 6 Dec 2017 @4d;
36. On 28 November 2017 I submit a second report of contentions to the VS (1st prev.
18 Sept 2014) with far more concise evidence and under a further legal imprimatur
of the legislative instrument for economic losses vis NSW Justice Department
review of economic losses – 28112017;
a. Regardless of my severe criticism of the way I have been treated by VS as a
victim I have not received an acknowledgement from VS REF @2a;
IN CONCLUSION I SUBMIT
37. On 1 May 1995 an unusual assembly of four legally trained individuals witnessed
an event that should not have been arbitrarily dispensed with. It is reasonable to
assume specific motivation for such an assembly was to observe my responses to
the specific inquiry of the 1981 assault REF @16;
38. Under the proper lawful response to report an alleged crime in 1995, it is clear that
my life would have been totally different and those of other firefighters with regard
to the investigative proximity of criminal assaults prior to 1995 that would have
been far more manifest if revealed at the time;
Page 7 of 15

a. To paraphrase Spigelman – It seems unlikely that a high level of social order is


being neither contributed to nor preserved by Govt in the value of individual
autonomy for victims of crime;
39. To continue on an illicit pension for the term of may natural life, would be seen by
most as an opportunity to recreate or start afresh. I consider that such an
illegitimate retirement having no medical authenticity in order to dispense with the
criminality committed by others was a serious wrong as well as the consequent
harm to firefighters and their families between 1995 and 2010;
40. As another perspective I am a person that has always upheld employment by
merit and the objective of this is to have equal employment opportunity access
and not be punitively denied employment by arbitrary judicial decisions;
41. I believe it is logical that if the WC lawyers had reported the crime to Police soon
after 1 May 1995, under four sworn statements the following not limiting would
have resulted:
a. An investigation of similar response under 2010 Task Force SIME would have
likely taken place;
b. Numerous firefighters and their families would have been saved the criminal
torment which occurred between 1995 and 2010;
c. The proximity of previous criminal activities prior to 1995 would have been more
easily investigated by Police;
d. I conclude that under such discovery I would have certainly been paid rightful
Workers Compensation and moves initiated to remove me from adverse bullying
from Fire Brigades operational senior officers;
e. On this point Workers Comp litigation would have been unnecessary and halted
on the 1 May 1995;
f. Logically then my retirement in lieu of dismissal would not have been
orchestrated;
42. Features of the criminal conspiracy are as follows not limiting:
a. On the evening 1 May 1995 at Garfield Barwick Chambers four legally trained
individuals assembled in a room where I was summoned. At least three of these
were legal officers that had given an oath under the NSW Supreme Court to
uphold the law with integrity. Instead they witnessed a good man torturing
himself under a post traumatic event and then promptly turned their backs on
their legal responsibilities and not report as an alleged crime REF @15 – a crime
on the balance of probabilities, as the NSW Department of Justice puts it, does
not justify the non-reporting of an alleged crime;
b. This should not have been an arbitrary consideration this was an alleged
Page 8 of 15

observable crime that needed to be reported to the NSW Police Force;


c. The complicity of all parties denied me and other fire fighters the lawful
investigations of depraved assaults which occurred against firefighters tormenting
their families between 1995 and 2010 and would have been prevented under a
similar NSW Police task force SIME assembled in 2010;
d. My retirement certainly appears to be a conspiracy to ‘contract out’ of the
Workers Comp Jurisdiction being a fraudulent retirement that had no medical
authenticity;
e. The retirement inspired what was tantamount to a punishment of a victim of
crimes committed by others;
f. I conclude that the Justice Department is acting in conjunct with the 1995
debacle which manifested into a rampaging assembly of NSW administrative,
judicial and legal malice against an innocent victim, punished for the crimes
committed by others and who stood by his Crown Charter to protect life and
property;
Hon JJ Spigelman – REF @5d; 38a; To my understanding per Spigelman, the Rule Of
Law must serve the individual’s rights to contribute lawfully to promote the highest level
of social order expected of a civilised society, a closed loop of integrity but always open
to lawful challenge, not arbitrary motivational self-interests REF @42a; - It is unlawful to
punish a Crown employee in the performance of his duty functions; REF @5a 2nd report
pge 33-34;
THE EVIDENCE IS AS FOLLOWS, THIS DECLARATION AND NOT LIMITING:
43.Google cloud - NSW Justice Department review of economic losses – 28112017:
28112017 [re 2nd contentions containing 1st contentions re VICTIMS SERVICES
REVIEW OF DECISION REFERENCE: 170483D]
https://www.scribd.com/document/365735319/updated-NSW-Justice-Department-
Review-of-Economic-Losses-28112017 Reports by Charles H Norville to
Australian Training Ministers & Attorney Generals 26 Sept 2016;
https://www.scribd.com/document/336801798/Reports-by-Charles-H-Norville-to-
Australian-Training-Ministers-Attorney-Generals-26-Sept-2016;
and in particular the following:
a. My personal contemporaneous diary entries including 1 May 1995 at Garfield
Barwick Chambers were scanned in NSW Justice Department review of
economic losses – 28112017;
b. The psychology report from long term treating clinical psychologist Dr Nicholas
Marlowe report to PK Simpson, 2 May 1995 detailing the assault REF @20;
c. The 26 page Chronology given to PK Simpson 12 May 1995 noting both the 1981
Page 9 of 15

incident @ page 19 and previous divulging of the incident 1 Oct 1987 @ page 22
to Chief Officer Bill Reay, Union Secretary John Slade and FB Personnel Officer
Allan Grunsell; [REF @28a - entrustment]; REF @5b pge 19-44;
d. There are various others organisations that were given 26 page Chronology,
which includes HealthQuest (FOI inclusions REF @5b pge 18) also my treating
psychiatrist Mark Howard 16 Feb 1996 REF @5b pge 85-88; REF @19;
e. PK Simpson letter to law firm Messrs Hiskson Lakeman and Holcombe dated 1
June 1995 noting that the “applicant was assaulted by other employees”; NB
attached below & REF @21;
f. PK Simpson letter to State Super inquiring about superannuation payouts REF
@22;
g. The ‘Short Minutes of Order’ noting the deception of neglecting to mention the
assault to the Workers Comp Judge, by barrister Vaughn Jurisich – REF @5a,b;
h. The statements by the seven accused firefighters of the assault taken by DSC
Anthony Macklin and DSC Saul Wiseman and the relevant ‘event number’;
ATTACHMENTS: PK Simpson letter to law firm Messrs Hiskson Lakeman and
Holcombe date 1 June 1995 REF @21 [pge 10-11]; Contact to NSW Police
Customer Assistance email 29 January 2018 REF@2(b) [pge 12-13; Ombudsman 6
Dec 2017 REF @2a [pge 14-15]
and I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by
virtue of the provisions of the Oaths Act 1900.

Declared at: on
[place] [date]

[signature of declarant]
in the presence of an authorised witness, who states:
I, ,a ,
[name of authorised witness] [qualification of authorised witness]
certify the following matters concerning the making of this statutory declaration by the person who made it: [* please cross
out any text that does not apply]
1. *I saw the face of the person OR *I did not see the face of the person because the person was wearing a face
covering, but I am satisfied that the person had a special justification for not removing the covering, and
2. *I have known the person for at least 12 months OR *I have confirmed the person’s identity using an identification document and
the document I relied on was …………...………………………………….
Charles, your event reference number is E67840074. Matt. Matthew ATTENBOROUGH Detective
Senior Constable Ph 43566104 [describe identification document relied on]

[signature of authorised witness] [date]

PK Simpson letter to law firm Messrs Hiskson Lakeman and Holcombe dated 1 June 1995 @ 21-
NB all other evidence is attached to report NSW Justice Department review of economic losses
– 28112017 google cloud link above.
Page 10 of 15
Page 11 of 15
Page 12 of 15
Page 13 of 15
Page 14 of 15

The Ombudsman states (this page) last paragraph to contact VS after 30 days ref 2nd last para that JD
would resolve complaint or I re-contact VS/JD, I do this under VS legislative imprimatur 28 Nov 2017.
Page 15 of 15