🚀 go-pugleaf

Gregory Toomey wrote:
> 
> There was a recent followup on Channel Nine's Sunday Program that raised
> serious concerns about the authenticity of the "smoking gun" document.
> 
> gtoomey
> --------
> "Geoff T" <gold@end.of.rainbow> wrote in message
> news:3AEA7096.4994173A@whistleblowersx.org.au...
> > Whistleblowers Australia says the outcome of the current inquiry into
> > the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) by the ICAC is a foregone
> > conclusion.

That doubt about the authenticity is exactly what's referred to in the
press release, and it's one of the *three* terms of reference of the
inquiry.

However - the original allegations about the NPWS still stand and are
still valid, regardless of who wrote the "smoking gun" memo. Why is the
inquiry not investigating the NPWS conduct as it should be doing?

The terms of reference are: the conduct of the NPWS staff in allegedly
perverting the course of justice, the authenticity of the "smoking gun"
memo, and the existence and/or identity of the "ICAC contact" who would
allegedly abort any adverse investigations into the NPWS.

As the release states, "NPWS staff conduct is the crux of Kite's
allegations. The authenticity issue may or may not substantiate, but
would not necessarily negate, Kite's allegations. However, Kite's
allegations are apparently not the focus of the present Inquiry - Kite
is!" In other words, the ICAC appears to be putting a lot of effort into
discrediting Kite over the memo, and ignoring its responsibilities in
respect to the actual problems that were reported!

Anyhow, even if Kite wrote the "smoking gun" memo, it would be virtually
impossible to prove it. The existence of the text on his PC probably
proves nothing. Someone else could have written the memo, too. We know
his phone was bugged and he was under observation - some people
presumably knew his movements and when he was not at home.

Why was the whistleblower under such close observation, anyway? The
original allegations involved the NPWS!

Why were the NPWS phones (apparently) not bugged, and the staff
investigated?

If it is indeed important to determine who wrote the "smoking gun" memo,
then why have the NPWS computers apparently not been checked at all??!!
Why weren't their hard drives and NPWS floppy disks examined? This
smells very strongly of fish.

Why is Justice Slattery working in such poor conditions to investigate
the "ICAC contact" allegation? He has no staff. Those in the environment
in which he is conducting the investigation apparently have not been
informed of his power to compel people to cooperate.

Why is Justice Cripps not being presented with *all* the relevant
evidence??

Ryan's job is now in jeopardy. Why? I understand that Ryan is one of
only 3 people who have given evidence in public. Is this witness in
trouble for giving evidence apparently supportive of Kite's testimony?

The inquiry is supposed to be a public one, isn't it? Why have NPWS
staff given evidence in camera?

There is clearly a lot that needs to be done to get at the truth in this
whole affair, and it currently isn't being done.

-- 
Geoff Turner     gat AT suburbia DOT com DOT au  (NO SPAM)