Letter to the New King about an Australian Pedophile Case

by Mary W Maxwell, PhD, LLB

(L) Their Majesties in Belfast. Photo: YouTube (R) The Court in Brisbane, Photo: newswire

Dear King Charles,

You and I are the same vintage, born '48 and '47 respectively. You seem to have lived up to the role that was thrust upon you. During the last seven decades, I have had more freedom than you. Not that anyone has complete freedom; it's relative. I empathize with your lack of freedom, but you are still able to cast off your bonds. You could strive for something other than conformity.

Today I am writing to you as King of Australia. I have recently been reading up about the 2004 case of an Aboriginal man, Mulrunji Doomadgee, age 36, in Palm Island, Queensland. I was sleuthing for information about Judge Leanne Clare. For the moment let me say that I think the judiciary would be better honored without her. Three reasons recommend themselves right away.

1. Ms Clare's behavior in the Palm Island case, when she was not a judge but a DPP -- Director of Public Prosecutions -- was abominable. I s'pose that's why she was awarded a judgeship. It looked as though Leanne, as DPP, was absolutely forbidden by her masters to say that a cop, Chris Hurley, had caused the death of Mulrunji (even though the coroner, Christine Clements, said it).

2. Judge Clare's behavior is also abominable in the current case of Cling Peaches. (That's an American joke from the show "All in the Family," where Archie Bunker told his wife Edith to stop talking about cling peaches. He put a gag order on her). Leanne the judge has put a gag order on every journo, via a suppression of the defendants' names. And I'm guessing that her masters have forbidden her to suggest that the sexual abuse of children is wrong.

3. My third reason hasn't got specifically to do with Judge Clare. It has to do with you, Sir. I note that in my country of origin, the US, the legislature -- Congress -- can remove a judge by a vote to impeach. But in Australia it can only be done if the Governor-General approves, which is to say it can only be done by you. I find that horrific -- that Australian judges work for the monarch.

In their oath of office, the judges plainly say that they serve the king. It's hard for me to get my head around all that that entails. Certainly it means that Royalty can protect any person in a black robe, no matter their behavior.

Note: On one occasion, an Australian High Court Justice was threatened with removal, but he died of cancer first. That was Lionel Murphy in 1985. In the 1800s a few judges got "removed." Since Federation, a few more have been threatened with it, but resigned. The drill is for the Judicial Commission to determine if such-and-such behavior warrants removal, and if so, send it to Parliament and then seek the royal assent. It never gets that far, of course.

The Cling Peaches Case Today

Two women are on trial in Brizzie for protecting, respectively, twin daughters and one grandson. The Family Law Act (federal) says it's nice for a kid to have a relationship with both its parents -- an idea that would hardly win a prize for originality. So, Your Majesty, do you think this means that if a father rapes a child, the mother shouldn't restrict his access to the kids? That is what every Family Law court judge says.

I refer to the Cling Peaches women, which is to say, persons upon whose names Judge Leanne Clare has ordered a suppression, allegedly to protect the privacy of children. Quelle joke, it is being done to keep a lid on the case. Some members of the Australian Federal Police and state police, whose loyalty is to the king, are out-and-out child traffickers.

That is proven in Dr Russell Pridgeon's new book, "Everybody Knows" ($12.50 at Amazon). The book is a legal masterpiece, but it is tragic.

The trial in Brisbane now (May 2023) is possibly a first in history -- folks being tried as criminals for having saved their darling progeny. Hard to see how it will end! Will the "criminals" be given a prison sentence? They have already endured years of suffering at the hands of the law (or the thugs, or whatever the true picture is). We've got to fix this. I trust you agree.

Balance-of Power-Type Thing

The real reason I am addressing Your Majesty is not the Cling Peaches case, though that weighs heavily on me. My concern is with the on-the-face-of-it problem of "crown prosecutions." I hail from the US, another of your former colonies, and some teacher of mine, perhaps in the 10th grade, must have really drummed the US Constitution into me. She (it would have been a she; I had nuns all the way 1-12) taught us well.

It's not the words of the that document that count but the spirit. We call it "the spirit of the parchment." Some folks say its most important bit is the Bill of Rights, but I say it's the separation of powers. In Australia there isn't such a demarcation of the roles of powerful officials.

Hence there is no effective oversight, is there? No checks and balances. It's all kissy-huggy at the top. That's really frightening. What if there are bad prosecutors? The public can't even get at them -- they'd be asking the prosecutor to prosecute himself. A nemo judex situation turned on its head.

The concept of a DPP prosecuting crime, instead of the parliamentary portfolio of A-G doing it, was invented only in 1984. Per its website, the DPP mission is "to contribute to the safety and well-being of the people of Australia and to help protect the resources of the Commonwealth through the maintenance of law and order and by combating crime."

I wonder if only a Murkin can see through that hoax. An Office of DPP is pure and simple a protection scheme.

King Charles, and Queen Camilla, why don't you set the world on fire! Make some radical changes. People would go nuts with joy. Look what Henry VIII did -- he seized the lands of the Church. I'm not saying that was a good thing. But he saw the prospect of it, and saw that he could pull it off. Put his Biro to paper and that was that.

And you, five hundred years later, became the Defender of the Faith, into the bargain. Wow.

You are also the commander in chief of the British armed forces. Think what scope there is to use that role in innovative ways!

I confess that I have previously urged that the monarchy of Australia be ended. That His Maj (as we call you) should bow out. That the 26 million Aussies should get on their own 52 million feet.

That said, good wishes on your anointment. We're glad you lived to see it happen.

P.S. If the name of Judge Leanne Clare comes before Your Majesty, please be critical of her outrageous gag-order. I'm putting here, for your amusement, the "Cling Peaches" comedy sketch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltNBZx7t3XY

-- Mary W Maxwell is author of "Reunion: Judging the Family Court". A pdf of that book is linked below.