Police have not contacted the complainant in GILLARD forgery 120 days after complaint
Thursday, 23 February 2017
Today I sent the Commonwealth DPP and Attorney General this letter.
|
8:05 AM (0 minutes ago)
 |
|
||
|
||||
FOR MS McNaughton SC
CC The Attorney General
Dear Ms McNaughton,
On 25 October 2016 I made a report to you regarding serious indictable offences arising from the Trade Union Royal Commission concluding with this paragraph:
For the avoidance of doubt, I am reporting this matter to you as a report of serious indictable offences. Given the use of the apparently false instruments at the TURC in the process of it hearing false and misleading evidence and the Commissioner's acceptance (in the absence of any enquiries having been made about their provenance) of the Exhibits as good and valid copies of the documents they purport to be, the use of the false instruments is an ongoing offence (particularly to the purported author) and the record should be corrected.
Yesterday I received a note from the former Commissioner for Corporate Affairs in West Australia Ray Neal, the man who says he did not write nor sign nor authorise any person to create or use the letter purporting to be from him.
Mr Neal said there has been, "...no contact to date" from police or any authority.
I needn't remind you Madam these are very serious offences. The former Commissioner for Corporate Affairs held a high and responsible office. He alleges a letter in an important and now notorious matter purporting to have been written and signed by him is not the document it purports to be.
Mr Neal is a central complainant in this matter. I would expect police to be disciplined for misconduct if a burgled homeowner had not been interviewed 120 days after a complaint had been lodged.
REQUEST
Perhaps you might be so kind as to advise me whether or not you believe the investigative response to the now 120 day old report of serious indictable offences has been appropriate.
May I again thank you Madam and your office for its prompt and complete response to my report in the first instance and your advice as to your referral to police for further action.
Or inaction as the case may be.
Yours sincerely,
Michael Smith