Home > Current Affairs, Politics - Domestic, The EYE-BALL Herman O'HERMITAGE > EYE-BALL’s Herman on: White Collar Crime – Craig Thomson and Peter Slipper … or just Federal Parliament?

EYE-BALL’s Herman on: White Collar Crime – Craig Thomson and Peter Slipper … or just Federal Parliament?

May 26, 2012
Herman O'Hermitage
White Collar Crime – Craig Thomson and Peter Slipper …    or just Federal Parliament?
By: Herman O’Hermitage

Herman O'HermitageT

his past week in politics has truly made me angry. Where the minority government continues to stutter and stumble, constantly unpopular in opinion polls, they cling to power with the support of Peter Slipper and Craig Thomson. For the PM or government manager of business to cite the number of censure motions or suspensions of standing order motions, only won through this imbroglio is simply high farce. Wake up and grow up!

When hearing of Craig Thomson’s speech to parliament last Monday, I felt sympathy for him. Within hours Marco Bolano in the presence of Kathy Jackson called him delusional. Since then we have a chorus of labor sympathisers including Thomson say lay off, enough is enough. We are told he might be mentally unstable.

Expense rorting is a white-collar crime. When it occurs in Federal parliament, an enclave of trust and entitlement it is 3 times worse. If the money was defecated surreptitiously in the commercial workplace gaol time would follow. We would use words of fraud. In the case of the Health Services Union East Branch we are told there is no fraud involved because there wasn’t defined entitlements or systems in place. To the contrary there is common law. Fair Work Australia intends to pursue the matter through the Civil courts (Federal Magistrate’s Court) rather than criminal court. Utter nonsense.

Now Fair Work Australia is implicated as being biased by Mr Craig Thomson’s speech to parliament, a speech made under parliamentary privilege. As a member of parliament Craig Thomson is entitled to the salutation “the honourable”. I won’t use that salutation. The same holds for many other government posts where by virtue of position we are required to use; your honour, or your worship, or Emiterius. How often does the encumbent live up to that title and its full intonation?

During the week one of the comments on this blog site said we live in a plutocracy. An oligarchy of the rich and powerful. I needed to go and search this concept of a plutocracy. While not knowing exactly the full context of where plutocracy started as a concept, the failure of this parliament to root out this obvious crime, gives society the message that expense rorting is condoned, possibly even widespread. Generally accepted.

That is a double standard.

In Sept 2007 an acquaintence was arrested at an inner western football club, in front of many patrons, associates or friends, and charged with grievous bodily harm. He was held without bail in holding cells to face court where bail was established. Within weeks he was arrested and again held in custody for allegedly breaching an AVO. By Oct 2009 we had buried that man. He never saw the inside of a prison cell again, but lived in a personal prison and was 54 when he died. All allegations stemmed from a matrimonial dispute. The woman involved is to this day contesting the deceased’s will. There was no crime ever established, indeed the police dropped the charges. There was never a causal link established between this man defending those charges of grievous bodily harm and his onset of cancer, he was merely a heavy smoker and drinker and that caused his premature death.

Time non specific, at least 20 years ago, I was told how a childhood friend had hung himself in a Darlinghurst cell, after being arrested for possession of heroin. He had been through detox more than once, and this time when caught, he could not face friends or family and simply topped himself.

Gaol is not a pretty place. We all now that, even though few of us can give first hand account. But it exists, and by common law, if we can prove beyond reason doubt that Michael Williamson or Craig Thomson, or Marco Bolano or Kathy Jackson have taken what they were not entitled to, then that is where they deserve to be. That is common law. That is what we term natural justice. It occurs without fear or favour. If that money was used to win a Federal Government seat of Parliament, there are further charges possible under electoral law.

The following is a comment posted by Warwick on May 28, 2011 regarding post on Harbour Bridge held to ransom posted on the 15th May 2011. [See link]

Regarding Jennifer Betts Stipendary Magistrate being asked to show cause why she should not be removed from office, I have circulated to each and every MLA and MLC in NSW details that the Judicial Commission would not investigate. I have asked the Attorney General if I could make a victims statement to the joint houses sitting after Ms Betts has presented to show cause.

This bi polar bull really sickens me. I wrote into the The Daily Telegraph, bi polar is becoming the diagnosis of convenience. When anyone makes an absolute fool of themselves, Marcus Einfield, John Brogden or Jennifer Betts they simply plead bi polar but I am back on my medicine.

How many people suffering from a any type of depressive illness has Jenny Betts sent to gaol. About 25% per cent of the prison population are there for some type of alcohol related crime. Alcohol is the most widely self prescribed medicine for depression. After that it would be non prescription chemist products like pain killers.
In Jenny Betts case her depression is contagious, because she spreads it every time she gives another outrageous ruling from the bench, thereby denying justice. To what extent do those types of injustice contribute to the recent siege on the harbour bridge or the Robina/Northern NSW triple murder suicide. It is time we hold an enquiry with full and frank admissions.

I know Warwick, and tend to know much of his circumstance. He was denied natural justice and he has been tormented for far too long with some version of post traumatic stress syndrome. What is the difference between him and Craig Thomson? Warwick was arraigned to stand trial where he was found not guilty. Since then his life has collapsed. Craig Thomson has not been charged despite volumes of evidence that are sufficient to lay charges, and at this point in time his career is intact, he continues to sit in parliament, with all his privileges intact, and our justice system fails to resolve the issues.

Our system of incarcerating people is draconian, most think of it as punishment, in reality we attempt to stop people from self harm or further harm to society. If Craig Thomson is borderline, then that is simply more reason to gaol him. Gaol will prevent him from self harm. It did not help my childhood friend. MMMMM!


Click here to read more of Herman’s previous posts …

Herman …

  1. May 26, 2012 at 5:07 pm

    If this wasn’t such a serious matter – you would want to have the oversight on every Member checked and double checked. The system these days have Members staff fill out all claim forms and in that scenario, the staff member is responsible if mistakes are made.

    The Member gets a slap on the hand – only if caught and the allegation of rorting expenses is never provable becaus eof plausible deniability. In a yeat every member claims somewhere around 200-300% of their renumeration – why should there not be vigerous oversight –

    With 150 Members and 80 Senators – the rough cost of running the Governemnt stands around $750 million a year – when security, Parliament House, and overseas Ambassodors are factored in –

    There is ample room for rorting and every Member has their turn at the troff – the tempetation is just too easy to refuse …

  2. May 26, 2012 at 5:22 pm

    There is no evidence that supports the comment that ‘justice’ is fair’ – if you cannot affort an expensive ‘siut’ to fight the court stsyem it just chews you up and soits you out and never giving what it prides itself upon – ‘fair justice for all’ – yea …. the wealthy get a crack at fighting the system but the poor – they’re thrown to the loins.

    If Craig Thompson was not a member of Parliament the following is true – he would have been charged 3 years ago – the media would never have picked up the story – and the HSU would be better off today …

    Why is a MP treated any different – why do the same rules not apply – why is he allowed to carry on as if the Courts have to wait until he is done with political requirements before the courts have a crack at him?

    Anyone who holds the courts to such contempt is also guilty – but who amoung our sherriffs will arreat the PM and her band of theives. Some 15 years ago Gillard was caught up in a Union ripoff of $1 million – her then partner wore the crime and teh PM mad eno restitution given she received proceeds from the theft – unknowingky though she claimed …

    As for the goal deal – there is nothing so cold as the feel of that hollow walk to the jail cell and hearing that cell door close behing you – it is a great equaliser for most – and whether Crail Thompson and any othe rHSU executive are exposed to that ‘walk of shame’ – is why we are all so interested in this matter.

  3. the parable
    May 27, 2012 at 5:07 am

    Family law will always be unjust.

    Kathy Jackson appears to be a woman scorned. Julia Gillard’s time is coming. The whole lot of them are beneath contempt. One day full facts might emerge.

  4. オンラインカジノ 2ch
    November 8, 2012 at 8:55 pm

    I love this blog and every thing about it. I have been reading it for a while but have yet to say hello.


  5. November 9, 2012 at 11:07 am

    Hello Back at you …and welcome … please enjoy the site at your leisure …

  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: