Latest / Real Crime with Adam Shand / Deported Without Trial: Inside Australia’s Character Test | Gary Lewer

Transcript

Deported Without Trial: Inside Australia’s Character Test | Gary Lewer · Real Crime with Adam Shand

0:05
Speaker 1: Approche Production.
0:14
Speaker 2: Welcome to Real Crime with Adam Shanned. I'm your host,
0:16
Speaker 2: Adam shann. If you like the content of this podcast,
0:19
Speaker 2: please like and subscribe it. I've always believed in the
0:22
Speaker 2: credo that if you do the crime, you do the time,
0:25
Speaker 2: but if there's reasonable doubt, then you're entitled to the
0:27
Speaker 2: benefit of that doubt. This is frustrating to some police
0:31
Speaker 2: officers who take it personally when a crook gets away
0:35
Speaker 2: with their crimes doesn't mean they can load up a
0:37
Speaker 2: suspect and find a way to punish them when they
0:39
Speaker 2: haven't done their job well enough to lock them up
0:41
Speaker 2: fair and square. Out of the reign of former Home
0:44
Speaker 2: Affairs Minister Peter Dutton, a new form of punishment was
0:47
Speaker 2: inactive was called the Character Test, where non citizens living
0:52
Speaker 2: in this country were deported solely for more than twelve
0:56
Speaker 2: months in prison and being a so called bad character.
1:00
Speaker 3: We've got Australian citizens who are falling victim where people
1:04
Speaker 3: are sexual affect against children. Have had a big push
1:06
Speaker 3: to try and to port those pedophiles, and I believe
1:09
Speaker 3: strongly that these Traine people would support that stance.
1:12
Speaker 2: I think there's really appeal to Dutton himself a former
1:15
Speaker 2: police officer, he could play judge and jury and eject
1:18
Speaker 2: people who paid their debt to society or hadn't offended.
1:21
Speaker 2: In decades, I've had two close contacts and friends deported
1:25
Speaker 2: from Australia on this basis without the benefit of natural
1:28
Speaker 2: justice or indeed basic fairness. In both cases, dossier is
1:33
Speaker 2: prepared by police, represented as fact, even though the information
1:37
Speaker 2: was hearsay and perhaps motivated by malice, a square up
1:42
Speaker 2: by police who couldn't do their job well enough.
1:45
Speaker 4: The Opposition leader Peter Dutton has the view that if
1:48
Speaker 4: somebody has committed a terrorism fence, they have broken the
1:52
Speaker 4: oath to Australia and should therefore be deported.
1:56
Speaker 2: Another man recently who's facing deportation based on this character test,
2:01
Speaker 2: Gary John Lewer, is a former champion bodybuilder, Mister Australia
2:05
Speaker 2: winner who represented this country internationally, winning Mister World and
2:10
Speaker 2: Mister Universe titles. However, he was born in England and
2:18
Speaker 2: failed to get his citizenship to one suburban police officer,
2:22
Speaker 2: Lewer was a clever, calculating master criminal who'd gotten away
2:26
Speaker 2: with a string of crimes and was a danger to
2:29
Speaker 2: this nation. He compiled the dossier of hearsay and unproven
2:33
Speaker 2: allegations that have never been tested in court. But on
2:37
Speaker 2: that basis, in twenty twenty, Peter Dutton invoked the character
2:40
Speaker 2: test and ordered his deportation. He's been fighting this order
2:44
Speaker 2: ever since and contacted me to tell his story from
2:47
Speaker 2: inside the broad Meadows Immigration Detention Center in Melbourne.
2:51
Speaker 5: Welcome to Real Crime, Gary.
2:53
Speaker 1: Thank you so much, Evamo to be here.
2:56
Speaker 5: You're in on the podcast Real Crime. Are you a
2:58
Speaker 5: real criminal?
3:00
Speaker 6: Purportedly or allegedly particular by one police officer's got this
3:05
Speaker 6: story and there own particular stories for me. The dossier
3:10
Speaker 6: of terror that this police officer compiled was basically replete
3:16
Speaker 6: with not even allegations but suppositions. And there were sixteen
3:22
Speaker 6: points that he put in there. Out of the sixteen
3:25
Speaker 6: points of not even allegations, actually just beliefs, his beliefs.
3:31
Speaker 6: Out of those sixteen, I was never spoken to on
3:34
Speaker 6: fifteen of those, So one would think how strong are
3:38
Speaker 6: the beliefs if you kind of interview me, let alone, charge.
3:41
Speaker 1: Me or comfit me. So yeah, it's a very convon story,
3:45
Speaker 1: actually it is.
3:46
Speaker 2: And you know, I've been knocking around the underworld and
3:48
Speaker 2: police and things for about twenty five years in Melbourne,
3:51
Speaker 2: and I must confess I've never heard your name before,
3:55
Speaker 2: which tells me that you're a very good, low key
3:57
Speaker 2: criminal or you haven't got much form.
4:00
Speaker 5: What is your form in the criminal sense, my.
4:04
Speaker 6: Forming the criminal scene, it's I've been convicted for eleven
4:08
Speaker 6: times in sixty years, and the majority of those offenses
4:13
Speaker 6: were for possess or restricted substance.
4:16
Speaker 1: I e.
4:17
Speaker 6: Steroids for my bodyhood e avctually before the right up
4:21
Speaker 6: until the eighth Possession of steroids wasn't an offense. They
4:25
Speaker 6: made it so. And because I was so outspoken in
4:30
Speaker 6: relation to using them, I was very honest I always
4:33
Speaker 6: have been in relation to that.
4:35
Speaker 2: I mean, you couldn't be in that game without taking them, right,
4:37
Speaker 2: really in those days.
4:39
Speaker 6: Never all professional sportsmen take performance enhancing things, but in
4:44
Speaker 6: one form or another. So police targue with me and
4:48
Speaker 6: charge me with possess a restricted substance, and restricted in
4:52
Speaker 6: the sense of one needed a prescription to have it.
4:56
Speaker 1: That was it.
4:58
Speaker 6: And I do note though, that in a newspaper article
5:03
Speaker 6: one of your colleagues that was mentioned that I was
5:08
Speaker 6: convicted of selling steroids to other bodybuilders, animal steroids. Even
5:14
Speaker 6: that's correct, and well, there isn't. Actually, this is the
5:17
Speaker 6: way they're laid and packaged. I have never been charged
5:21
Speaker 6: with selling anything to anybody, let alone.
5:25
Speaker 2: I do know them the same story that he talks about.
5:28
Speaker 2: And I haven't had the benefit of reading this dossier
5:31
Speaker 2: that there's a prior conviction for firearms, which is a
5:33
Speaker 2: serious offense.
5:34
Speaker 5: What's that all about?
5:35
Speaker 1: Well, the firearms offenses?
5:37
Speaker 6: Why I was relegated to the position of five oho
5:41
Speaker 6: one that character. In nineteen ninety five, I was convicted
5:46
Speaker 6: of possess and illegal firearm, And the possession part of it,
5:50
Speaker 6: some people might think that you're walking around. It was
5:53
Speaker 6: wrapped up under the house, put away, no ammunition, no nothing,
5:57
Speaker 6: And the police did come. They rate again because of steroids,
6:01
Speaker 6: and they found the firearm. And twelve months after this raid,
6:06
Speaker 6: I was summons and went to court and I received
6:09
Speaker 6: two six months sentences to be served concurrently.
6:13
Speaker 1: So I served six months, but.
6:15
Speaker 6: The aggregated sentence brought it up to twelve months. So
6:20
Speaker 6: therefore you were automatically bad character.
6:23
Speaker 2: The magic number? Tell me what sort of gun? And
6:26
Speaker 2: why what sort of gun?
6:28
Speaker 1: Why?
6:28
Speaker 6: Well, I'm just an average boy, I guess, and look
6:33
Speaker 6: I don't think I've ever come across a boy who
6:36
Speaker 6: wasn't some somewhat fascinated firearms, cowboys and all that sort
6:40
Speaker 6: of bit. My son and I used to go target shooting.
6:42
Speaker 6: I mean, there's no way on God's green Earth I
6:44
Speaker 6: could shoot anything like that.
6:46
Speaker 1: So we used to go up the bush and we
6:48
Speaker 1: chewed targets.
6:49
Speaker 5: That's it, Okay, what sort of gun was it?
6:52
Speaker 1: Was it twenty two?
6:54
Speaker 2: Right, Just a little twenty two basically bounce off a
6:57
Speaker 2: thick jumper. Not really a very serious weapon at all,
7:00
Speaker 2: you'd say, no, not a serious weapon, right, because this
7:05
Speaker 2: was the basis of the dossier, or the beginning of
7:08
Speaker 2: the dossier.
7:08
Speaker 5: But there was a lot more.
7:09
Speaker 2: When I look at this story that was written about you,
7:13
Speaker 2: Sylvester talks about you as being an intimidator, a drug importer,
7:16
Speaker 2: a person behind a threat to nail your dogs to
7:18
Speaker 2: the door, and the quote what is beyond dispute? Is
7:21
Speaker 2: it by accident or design? If you get on the
7:23
Speaker 2: wrong side of it? Was massive bodybuilders frame bad things happen.
7:27
Speaker 2: What's he talking about?
7:29
Speaker 6: He really made a license to create a fiction there.
7:33
Speaker 6: I mean, that's just actually, when I read the dossier,
7:36
Speaker 6: I was absolutely horrified. And I actually said to the
7:39
Speaker 6: Immigration that I said, if I had read that, if
7:43
Speaker 6: I thought this was true of someone, I'd want orton too.
7:46
Speaker 6: But there's absolutely no substance to that whatsoever. And like
7:50
Speaker 6: I say, these are the things that were in the dossier,
7:54
Speaker 6: But how strong is their belief that I'm responsible for
7:59
Speaker 6: any of those things?
8:00
Speaker 1: I wasn't even spoken to in relation to that.
8:04
Speaker 2: Right thoroughly bricked in by all this. You've got a
8:07
Speaker 2: dossier which has taken as fact from police officer. You've
8:11
Speaker 2: got a journalist who's writing corroborating material. More trouble than
8:16
Speaker 2: the early settlers here, really, And the bottom line is
8:19
Speaker 2: when it was tested by a court and so forth,
8:21
Speaker 2: there seemed to have taken as fact that this came
8:23
Speaker 2: from police intelligence holdings, which gives it a very authoritative ring,
8:28
Speaker 2: as if you were such a master criminal that they
8:32
Speaker 2: had always intelligence on you, but they couldn't pin you
8:35
Speaker 2: with anything. What's the reality here, I mean, what was
8:38
Speaker 2: the basis of what you call a vendetta against you?
8:43
Speaker 6: Well, let me just begin by correcting you that you
8:46
Speaker 6: said this was tested by a court. These allegations were
8:49
Speaker 6: tested by court. The allegations were never tested by a court.
8:52
Speaker 6: As I say, the allegations, ninety percent of these allegations
8:57
Speaker 6: were never put to me. I was never questioned by
9:01
Speaker 6: anyone in relation to ninety percent of those allegations, let
9:05
Speaker 6: alone charged or convicted.
9:07
Speaker 1: Nothing, and that ever went to court.
9:09
Speaker 2: I should direct myself there when I say tested by
9:13
Speaker 2: a court. It was in the Federal Court judgment of
9:15
Speaker 2: the Judiciary Review that you sought. Justice Murphy found the
9:18
Speaker 2: document to be reliable as it emanated from the quote
9:23
Speaker 2: police intelligence unit.
9:25
Speaker 6: Yes, what he actually said, because we disputed the document
9:29
Speaker 6: as aubrication fiction. What he said in sexual judgment was
9:34
Speaker 6: the Minister was entitled to rely upon the document as
9:38
Speaker 6: having been properly constructed and in good faith, So regardless
9:45
Speaker 6: of what that document contained, as outrageous as it is,
9:50
Speaker 6: it was, the Minister is entitled to rely upon its
9:54
Speaker 6: credibility or validity.
9:58
Speaker 5: Okay.
9:58
Speaker 2: And then of course the Minister for Home Affairs, then
10:00
Speaker 2: Peter Dutton relies on this document referencing quote Police Intelligent
10:06
Speaker 2: Holdings twenty seven times. So it does give us all
10:09
Speaker 2: a pretty authoritative ring. But you say this all came
10:15
Speaker 2: from some years earlier twenty thirteen when this police officer
10:19
Speaker 2: began a vendetta we can call it that against a
10:22
Speaker 2: friend of yours, Andrew Hutton, his wife Lisa, and their
10:26
Speaker 2: four little girls, all under the age of ten.
10:29
Speaker 5: What on earth was going on?
10:31
Speaker 6: Okay, A long story, short as look as short as
10:36
Speaker 6: it can be. Andrew was running a chemical business. He
10:39
Speaker 6: was taking excess leftover chemicals from companies and then reselling them.
10:45
Speaker 6: And what sort of chemicals time, all sorts of chemicals whatever. Basically, companies,
10:50
Speaker 6: when they have excess chemicals, they pay somewhere to come
10:53
Speaker 6: and take them and dispose of them.
10:56
Speaker 1: So he thought, well, hang on a second, these things
10:58
Speaker 1: are worth money.
10:59
Speaker 6: So I'll take them free and then I'll resell them
11:04
Speaker 6: instead of the company's paying for someone to take it
11:06
Speaker 6: and dispose it. I mean, it was costing them thousands
11:09
Speaker 6: of thousands of dollars to pay for disposal of these chemicals.
11:13
Speaker 6: So he just lashed onto something a bit like recycling,
11:16
Speaker 6: I guess. And at this time, probably a few years
11:20
Speaker 6: after the met Andrew was widely advertising the company, bettered
11:26
Speaker 6: by Seculda Road drug Squad ticked all the boxes. Anyway,
11:30
Speaker 6: As time went on, Andrew became embroiled in a custody
11:35
Speaker 6: battle for his children with his then wife Lisa, and
11:40
Speaker 6: as time went on they separated. They moved home, and
11:45
Speaker 6: then they split up. Lisa took some chemicals and she
11:49
Speaker 6: took it back to the house that they ran crime
11:52
Speaker 6: stoppers and said, look, there's some chemicals at this place
11:55
Speaker 6: he had. So they went there and turned into a
11:59
Speaker 6: whole circus, rove off all the area and so forth. Anyway,
12:03
Speaker 6: so then the police did the police who they investigated,
12:06
Speaker 6: who lived here, where the chemicals come from.
12:10
Speaker 1: It came back to Andrew.
12:12
Speaker 6: So they charged Andrew with having precursor chemicals, chemicals that
12:17
Speaker 6: can be used in the manufacture of aphetamines.
12:20
Speaker 2: Well, I was going to say, sorry to stop you there,
12:22
Speaker 2: but I mean, my suspicious and skeptical mind gets a
12:25
Speaker 2: bit excited when I hear people talking about buying and
12:27
Speaker 2: selling excess chemicals. And this is not chlorine for the
12:30
Speaker 2: backyard pool. These are precursor chemicals for the production of methamphetamine.
12:35
Speaker 5: That's pretty serious to me.
12:37
Speaker 6: No, no, no, some of them can be It's like acetone.
12:41
Speaker 6: Now everyone uses acetone. Yeah, you know what acetone is?
12:44
Speaker 5: I do and to make methamphetamine as.
12:46
Speaker 6: Well, well, it can be used in the process. It's
12:50
Speaker 6: a basically a solvent.
12:51
Speaker 2: I mean, I make no allegations against mister Hutton. I
12:55
Speaker 2: don't even know it. But it is suspicious.
12:59
Speaker 6: Well, it became suspicious because it suited the police as
13:04
Speaker 6: a gender. They liked things to be probably more than
13:07
Speaker 6: they actually are, because it's good for their position. As
13:11
Speaker 6: things went along, they charged Andrew having these briefs and
13:17
Speaker 6: chemicals with the intent to do whatever with them in
13:20
Speaker 6: this process. Andrew had one child. She was under the
13:24
Speaker 6: age of five years. She was very ill in hospital.
13:28
Speaker 6: She was basically dying serious aggressive cancer, and he had
13:33
Speaker 6: his other three children removed from his custody and put
13:36
Speaker 6: into foster care. This police officer informed his landlord that
13:42
Speaker 6: he was manufacturing drugs in the house. He lost his home,
13:47
Speaker 6: he lost the business. His wife, Lisa, through all the
13:51
Speaker 6: stress that was put on her by the police, committed suicide.
13:58
Speaker 1: Charlotte.
13:58
Speaker 6: Charlotte, who was in hospital at the time. The police
14:01
Speaker 6: officer questioned entered Andrew visiting her company.
14:09
Speaker 1: Sorry it's.
14:13
Speaker 6: Me, and he prevented him visiting her when she was dying,
14:18
Speaker 6: and poor little thing ends up dying by herself because
14:24
Speaker 6: of this police officer, and as I say, Lisa committed suicide.
14:29
Speaker 1: And this piece of bil this police officer.
14:33
Speaker 6: Even prevented Andrew from going to a funeral by advising
14:38
Speaker 6: that the funeral home his presence there would bring a
14:42
Speaker 6: lot of trouble with it, et cetera, cetera. So he
14:45
Speaker 6: was basically barred from his wife's funeral. So at the
14:49
Speaker 6: end of the day, he's lost his he's lost his business,
14:52
Speaker 6: lost his home, lost his three children, the other one
14:55
Speaker 6: dies in hospital by herself, and Lisa commits suicide. Now
15:01
Speaker 6: a few months later, this all goes to court. Business Well,
15:06
Speaker 6: first of all the children did the court turned around
15:09
Speaker 6: and said give him all his children back. There is
15:13
Speaker 6: no substance to the police allegations. So he gets his
15:17
Speaker 6: children back. Then he goes to court in relation to
15:21
Speaker 6: the chemicals and inso much with this, the police were
15:27
Speaker 6: telling everyone that Andrew was going to get twenty five
15:29
Speaker 6: years in jail for these offenses.
15:33
Speaker 5: What do you get?
15:34
Speaker 6: He got a twelve month good behavior b four dangerous
15:39
Speaker 6: stories of the chemicals. He had some chemicals sitting next
15:41
Speaker 6: to otherlands that it shouldn't have been. It was basically
15:44
Speaker 6: the improper stories of chemics. He got a twelve month good.
15:47
Speaker 5: Behavior So there was no evidence.
15:50
Speaker 2: There was no evidence that these chemicals were being used
15:52
Speaker 2: to produce less of drugs.
15:55
Speaker 1: None whatsoever, not even the sniff of it.
15:59
Speaker 2: So you at this point feel a sense of outrage
16:02
Speaker 2: about all this, and you decide to pursue this police
16:05
Speaker 2: officer through every legal channel available to bring some justice
16:09
Speaker 2: to Andrew.
16:09
Speaker 5: You've sent me a list of the things that you did.
16:12
Speaker 2: You compiled a brief of evidence that the police officers
16:14
Speaker 2: had committed gross misconduct. You made official complaints to the
16:18
Speaker 2: Police Professional Standards Command twice. I back the Independent. I
16:21
Speaker 2: don't even know what it stands for. It's so useless.
16:23
Speaker 5: Highback anyway, the Corruption Commission here in Victoria, yes, Victorian Inspectorate,
16:28
Speaker 5: the Chief Commissioner of Police, the Attorney General, the Shadow
16:31
Speaker 5: Attorney General, the Minister for Police, the Shadow Minister of Police,
16:33
Speaker 5: Premier Victoria, and the obbudsman. And what happened from all.
16:38
Speaker 1: That Absolutely nothing.
16:40
Speaker 6: As you would know, probably better than most police investigating polices.
16:44
Speaker 6: It's just a non starter. So nothing of substance actually happened.
16:49
Speaker 6: I mean, the guy should have been criminally charged the
16:52
Speaker 6: damage he caused from his outrageous fictions is in calculable. However,
16:58
Speaker 6: it was obviously caused through the police force and to him.
17:03
Speaker 6: He was demoted out of the Frankston drug squad and
17:09
Speaker 6: basically placed on desk duties. So he wasn't happy. He
17:13
Speaker 6: wasn't happy at all. Then he started his pursuit of me.
17:19
Speaker 2: How do you feel about what's happened to you in
17:20
Speaker 2: light of your advocacy on behalf of your friend? Because
17:24
Speaker 2: I guess the casual observer might say, well, why is
17:27
Speaker 2: Gary getting involved in this? Look at the stakes of
17:30
Speaker 2: all this, and maybe he had something to do with
17:33
Speaker 2: the alleged wrongdoing that the police officer was trying to
17:36
Speaker 2: bring against your friend.
17:37
Speaker 5: Mister Hutton.
17:38
Speaker 6: No, look, that's it. I was going to say, it's
17:41
Speaker 6: a bolt of mine. I can't stand injustice. It was injustice.
17:47
Speaker 6: If it happened to a stranger, I'd want to help them,
17:50
Speaker 6: let alone a friend of mine. I mean, what happened.
17:54
Speaker 6: I'm surprised Andrew was able to live through this. I
17:57
Speaker 6: honestly had stress. The turmoil of the emotional told this
18:02
Speaker 6: had on this man and his children, all these.
18:05
Speaker 1: Little girls around under the ten for God.
18:07
Speaker 6: So they put in foster care, the assistant eyes, their
18:10
Speaker 6: mum dies, they lose their home. The damage this guy
18:14
Speaker 6: did was incalculable. So I mean I was incensed. And
18:18
Speaker 6: Andrew just wasn't in any state to do anything. I mean,
18:23
Speaker 6: he was lucky. Like I say, I think it's very
18:26
Speaker 6: very lucky to be able to live through that. I
18:28
Speaker 6: think the reality is that Pau wasn't for his little girls.
18:33
Speaker 2: You would have thought the good sense and fair play
18:35
Speaker 2: would have dictated that there should have an end to
18:37
Speaker 2: all this, that you both inflicted damage on each other,
18:41
Speaker 2: all three of you. But it didn't end there because
18:44
Speaker 2: the police officer continued. You say, he furnished the ATO
18:48
Speaker 2: with a DOSSI aliging all amount of criminal activity that
18:52
Speaker 2: you had tens of millions of dollars buried and millions
18:55
Speaker 2: of dollars worth of hidden assets. How much did you
18:59
Speaker 2: actually have buried in the back garden? And you know,
19:02
Speaker 2: do you know where it is today? If it's still there?
19:05
Speaker 1: Issue?
19:05
Speaker 6: I wish I took shovels straight out and started looking
19:08
Speaker 6: for it. Again, outrageous allegations and again, I mean it
19:14
Speaker 6: was first of all, he went to the ATO, they
19:17
Speaker 6: found nothing of substance actually.
19:20
Speaker 1: What they did.
19:20
Speaker 6: Because I hadn't put in tax returns for about five
19:24
Speaker 6: or six years, I was fined six thousand dollars. Oh no,
19:27
Speaker 6: I wasn't fined six thousand dollars. Sorry, I was ordered
19:30
Speaker 6: to pay six thousand dollars. Yeah, I did back taxes.
19:33
Speaker 5: But no penalties. How the hell did your no penalties?
19:36
Speaker 5: Six years of no tax and I didn't penalize you,
19:39
Speaker 5: no penalty? Rageous? So we did that.
19:42
Speaker 2: It's going to fail for your nemesis. Police officer, So
19:45
Speaker 2: he goes again. He gives the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission
19:48
Speaker 2: the same document as the ATO, and you were examined
19:52
Speaker 2: for four hours. You advise you'd be needed for a
19:56
Speaker 2: further examination a couple of months.
19:58
Speaker 6: What happened, Well, just prior to the second examination, I
20:03
Speaker 6: was informed by them that I will not be required
20:06
Speaker 6: for further examination as there was basically no substance to
20:10
Speaker 6: the allegations.
20:12
Speaker 2: Right, but still he's not finished. Twenty seventeen, twenty nineteen,
20:16
Speaker 2: which you call the kill shot.
20:17
Speaker 6: What happened then the kill shot was well, because of
20:21
Speaker 6: their only allegations, he wasn't getting so he compiled a
20:25
Speaker 6: dossier and sent it to the entryp C, which is
20:29
Speaker 6: a National Character Consideration Center. Now that existed, No, neither
20:34
Speaker 6: did I. And they came back to him, and I
20:38
Speaker 6: have internal documents from their relations to this and basically
20:42
Speaker 6: said lewis criminal history. They're only minor offenses, so we
20:48
Speaker 6: need much more than that. So this was in twenty seventeen,
20:52
Speaker 6: so two years later he was informed, but there was
20:56
Speaker 6: nothing there.
20:57
Speaker 1: They do. He furnishes them with.
21:00
Speaker 6: The dossier of terror and that's where all these outrageous
21:04
Speaker 6: allegations and beliefs coming to play, and they send it
21:09
Speaker 6: to mister mister dud with the stroke of a pen,
21:13
Speaker 6: reduces me from a sixty year permanent resident to an
21:17
Speaker 6: illegal non citizen.
21:20
Speaker 5: Why didn't you get citizenship? I've got to ask people
21:22
Speaker 5: this question, because surely that's a way to ensure yourself
21:26
Speaker 5: against this outcome.
21:28
Speaker 1: And I couldn't count times I've asked that question to me.
21:33
Speaker 1: I'm sure it's a nonsense. Now.
21:35
Speaker 6: I came here at the age of four in nineteen
21:38
Speaker 6: sixty and I was a permanent resident, and I thought permanent,
21:43
Speaker 6: it's permanent, but.
21:45
Speaker 1: Clearly it's not.
21:47
Speaker 6: And I never ever once thought to take out citizenship.
21:51
Speaker 1: I mean, why would I.
21:52
Speaker 6: I mean, I represented the country fourteen times in World championships,
21:57
Speaker 6: winning goal for the country five times was basically, I guess,
22:02
Speaker 6: a sporting icon back in the eighties to my sport
22:05
Speaker 6: in particular, and I was the first Australian to ever
22:09
Speaker 6: win a World championship or Australia in body building, and
22:13
Speaker 6: then all of a sudden, I'm not Australian anymore, stroke
22:16
Speaker 6: of a ped Look, honestly, if it was widely known
22:20
Speaker 6: that one is in a position such a violent position,
22:24
Speaker 6: obviously yes I would, and I guess everyone else that's
22:28
Speaker 6: a similar position absolutely would takeouts. But I guess at
22:33
Speaker 6: the time, Look, honestly, it just never entered my head,
22:38
Speaker 6: and I guess it was like, well, what's the advantage.
22:42
Speaker 5: Yeah, that's right, Well, you know, fair cool.
22:44
Speaker 2: And while you're doing all this, the police officer alleges
22:48
Speaker 2: to Dutton that you were forging a powerful reputation in
22:51
Speaker 2: criminal circles as being a violent individual who has the
22:55
Speaker 2: proven behavior and financial means to inflict harm on any
22:58
Speaker 2: person that provides the police information about his criminal activities.
23:03
Speaker 5: Pretty heavy, So let's call in you a gangster.
23:06
Speaker 6: Basically absolutely outrageous, But you'll see with that on. My
23:11
Speaker 6: take on that reading those allegations or statements is why
23:16
Speaker 6: aren't you listening?
23:17
Speaker 1: Who is it?
23:18
Speaker 6: I mean, he said I was the boss of the game,
23:21
Speaker 6: and my first question is who's the gang? Who's in
23:24
Speaker 6: the gang? Who are you talking about? What's this in
23:27
Speaker 6: relation to?
23:28
Speaker 2: I feel like I missed your story you would do
23:29
Speaker 2: with this gangster figure on the fringes? Who was this
23:33
Speaker 2: threat to national security? I didn't even know about you.
23:35
Speaker 2: I feel like I've done my job.
23:37
Speaker 6: Well, it's like this police officer said, he said, we
23:41
Speaker 6: couldn't atch you because he was just too smart. Really,
23:44
Speaker 6: maybe you couldn't. You didn't catch him because he wasn't
23:46
Speaker 6: doing it.
23:47
Speaker 2: Yeah, there's also this interesting stuff that's the sort of
23:49
Speaker 2: neighborhood dispute stuff really, i'd call it in the dossier,
23:53
Speaker 2: which is a series of alleged crimes in three fifteen
23:55
Speaker 2: twenty sixteen, as you launched a wave of terror quote
23:59
Speaker 2: against a family building a retirement complex next to his
24:02
Speaker 2: former wife's Frankston home that would have affected you view
24:05
Speaker 2: according this to the article that Sylvester wrote John sevest
24:08
Speaker 2: in the Ages. First, the excavator caught fire, causing one
24:11
Speaker 2: hundred thousand dollars worth of damage, and then a massive
24:13
Speaker 2: hole filled with water on the Lure property caused a
24:16
Speaker 2: landslip that wrecked concrete work on the development next door.
24:19
Speaker 2: There were the further fires on the construction site and
24:21
Speaker 2: two cars owned by the developers were firebombed. Their windows
24:24
Speaker 2: were smashed, and police led to the owner's daughter was
24:27
Speaker 2: followed by Lure. The girlfriend of a family member told
24:30
Speaker 2: police she received a phone call from a man she
24:32
Speaker 2: believed to be Lea who threatened to blow up her house,
24:36
Speaker 2: burn her cars, and quote nail her.
24:38
Speaker 5: Pet dogs to the front door. What do you say
24:41
Speaker 5: to all that?
24:43
Speaker 1: Absolutely outrageous.
24:45
Speaker 6: And that's part of when I said to you earlier
24:48
Speaker 6: that I was never spoken to in relation to allegations.
24:54
Speaker 1: They're part of the allegations.
24:57
Speaker 5: Outrageous, yes, but true or.
24:59
Speaker 6: Not true except except actually I will correct that the
25:03
Speaker 6: water part was correct. Now, at the back of the house,
25:07
Speaker 6: I was going to fence off an area so the
25:09
Speaker 6: dog could have a run, and to put the fence
25:12
Speaker 6: posts in. Obviously, I got to dig down, so I
25:15
Speaker 6: signed myself. We started digging down. There was coming down
25:19
Speaker 6: to clay, so I said, listen, just we'll run.
25:22
Speaker 1: Some water in there.
25:23
Speaker 6: Soft come back to it, I said, I don't forget
25:26
Speaker 6: to turn the tap off. So we put the hose
25:28
Speaker 6: in a And what does my son do if you've
25:31
Speaker 6: got to turn the tap off. So the water ran over,
25:34
Speaker 6: ran over into the nagger's property and washed away some
25:38
Speaker 6: dirt retaining wall.
25:40
Speaker 1: There was no concrete works there.
25:42
Speaker 5: I see, So that partially partially correct. What about the
25:46
Speaker 5: nail pet dogs on the front door. That's alarming for
25:49
Speaker 5: an animal lover.
25:51
Speaker 6: Yes, I mean one only has to look at my
25:54
Speaker 6: Facebook page to see what that's about. And I mean
25:57
Speaker 6: I couldn't kill an ant let alone.
26:00
Speaker 5: I've heard that you befriended the rats in the immigration
26:03
Speaker 5: detension center.
26:04
Speaker 1: By this way.
26:05
Speaker 6: Literally, they're one of the things about place. They had
26:07
Speaker 6: some sort of warmth. Put it that way. There ads
26:11
Speaker 6: on the visions.
26:13
Speaker 5: Speaking of warmth.
26:15
Speaker 2: There was another allegation in two thousand and nine of
26:17
Speaker 2: the gym owner was intimidated into allowing you to work
26:20
Speaker 2: out for free in his gym. He canceled the arrangement
26:22
Speaker 2: when he found that you were selling steroids in the
26:24
Speaker 2: car park and sleeping with his girlfriend. That's very cheeky.
26:28
Speaker 2: And then the gym was burnt down. Any truth to that?
26:32
Speaker 6: Oh my god, this guy now at number one, that
26:36
Speaker 6: I intimidated into allowing me to train there for nothing,
26:41
Speaker 6: what absolute nonsense. Now, most gyms would bend over backwards
26:46
Speaker 6: and pay me to train there.
26:48
Speaker 1: That alone, me having to pay us.
26:50
Speaker 5: Did you bring a following with you?
26:52
Speaker 6: Yes, I bring credibility to the establishment. And this selling
26:56
Speaker 6: steroids in the car park, Oh my god. Actually, and
27:00
Speaker 6: what he even said to supposedly he said that this
27:04
Speaker 6: gym owner said that he saw a quarter of a
27:07
Speaker 6: million dollars in my car.
27:10
Speaker 1: Unbelievable, unbelievable.
27:12
Speaker 6: Anyway, the way things started to fall apart with this guy.
27:16
Speaker 6: He would talk out of school about me. He was
27:19
Speaker 6: one of these guys and I'm sure you wouldn't who's
27:22
Speaker 6: a want to be try hard? And he was upping
27:26
Speaker 6: his own status by putting others down. And he would
27:31
Speaker 6: talk about me out of hand. And half a dozen
27:35
Speaker 6: times I fronted him on it and said, listen, you've
27:38
Speaker 6: got to stop talking about me, because I'm going to
27:41
Speaker 6: jump over the counter. Anyway, this went on on and
27:43
Speaker 6: on and on, and it just got to a point
27:46
Speaker 6: I was I was actually going to give him a
27:49
Speaker 6: belt and at the time he had a falling out
27:53
Speaker 6: with a number of people and the place did burned out.
27:57
Speaker 1: And as I say, I wasn't even spoken to it
27:59
Speaker 1: in relation to that.
28:01
Speaker 6: You know, the way police investigate, they would see where
28:04
Speaker 6: my phone was, was, where my car was, where everything
28:06
Speaker 6: was on the night in particular happens. And I wasn't
28:11
Speaker 6: even spoken to information. I had so much credibility can
28:15
Speaker 6: they be to it?
28:17
Speaker 2: Okay, you've knocked out the intimidation and the steroid sales
28:20
Speaker 2: and said, but what about sleeping with his girlfriend?
28:23
Speaker 5: It's not a crime, by.
28:24
Speaker 1: The way, No, Well that could have been true.
28:27
Speaker 5: Okay, let's that's actually credibility that you'll accept that one.
28:31
Speaker 5: That's good.
28:32
Speaker 2: The report also alleged that you own two multimillion dollar
28:36
Speaker 2: properties obtained through criminal activities and registered to fake companies.
28:40
Speaker 5: What do you say to.
28:41
Speaker 6: That, Well, I mean common sense must dictate if that
28:45
Speaker 6: was correct, the tax office would have gone through and
28:48
Speaker 6: me like those of Salts and or the Australian Criminal
28:51
Speaker 6: Intelligence Commission also absolutely rubbish. And again these are assumptions
28:58
Speaker 6: by this police officer. There were two homes and I
29:03
Speaker 6: think renting one from one person and the other ones
29:07
Speaker 6: in the company same and nothing to do with me.
29:09
Speaker 6: Nothing to do with me whatsoever. So, I mean it's
29:12
Speaker 6: outrageous that he says these were false. If they were
29:15
Speaker 6: false or basically a fiction, there would be ramifications to that,
29:21
Speaker 6: as you would know.
29:22
Speaker 2: Yeah, but suffice to say that you weren't charged. The
29:26
Speaker 2: ATO did not go through your like a dose assaults.
29:29
Speaker 2: So that is a non starter as well. So we
29:32
Speaker 2: come to the end of the scoreboard. We look at
29:34
Speaker 2: what they actually got you for was two six month
29:37
Speaker 2: offenses in jail, which equal the aggregate twelve months. That's
29:41
Speaker 2: enough for the bad character. The rest is all piled
29:43
Speaker 2: on top. That's what's put you in this position. Do
29:46
Speaker 2: you think you could have done anything differently to have
29:48
Speaker 2: avoided this?
29:49
Speaker 1: Gary, Yes, taken out of citizenship.
29:53
Speaker 5: True. So what's your situation now?
29:56
Speaker 6: Well, for the last Bible years, I've been absolutely terrified
30:01
Speaker 6: every single day come and drag me off to the airport,
30:05
Speaker 6: my position having been canceled personally.
30:08
Speaker 1: By the minister.
30:10
Speaker 6: As you would know, you're not afforded any sort of
30:12
Speaker 6: natural justice whatsoever. I like most people are able to
30:17
Speaker 6: appeal the decision a bad character decision or vis a
30:21
Speaker 6: cancelation by going to the Aart Tribunal. And my lawyers
30:26
Speaker 6: said to me, you were able to if I was
30:29
Speaker 6: before the AART. They basically passed the hat around, send
30:33
Speaker 6: me home immediately. But I wasn't important that privilege or
30:38
Speaker 6: that right, and all I could do was appealed to
30:42
Speaker 6: the Federal Court that the Minister had a jurisdictional error.
30:47
Speaker 6: And as you've seen by the first proceeding I had
30:51
Speaker 6: in front of Justice Murphy, he basically said, well, tough shit,
30:56
Speaker 6: that the document was false, but the Minister was entitled
31:00
Speaker 6: to rely on it being created in good faith.
31:04
Speaker 2: Yeah, And that's the problem with the Soule system. It
31:07
Speaker 2: is it gives the minister too much discretion in the situation.
31:12
Speaker 2: And it's been used against you and you're not doing
31:16
Speaker 2: it that well. And there are you. You've got a
31:17
Speaker 2: back injury, you're in a wheelchair. What's what are your
31:20
Speaker 2: conditions like there?
31:22
Speaker 6: Well, four months after being locked up, I slipped on
31:26
Speaker 6: the floor as I was stepping out of the cell
31:29
Speaker 6: and they just washed it lots of circuit water. Slipped
31:32
Speaker 6: ended up on the floor for forty five it's waiting
31:34
Speaker 6: for the ambulance to come, ended up four nights in
31:38
Speaker 6: the office hospital. I now sustained a permanent back injury
31:42
Speaker 6: from this, and actually I was in twenty twenty and
31:46
Speaker 6: I've been waiting from twenty twenty. I'm on the list
31:50
Speaker 6: for a procedure for a consultation neurosurgeon to look at
31:55
Speaker 6: my back. So to say the care in here is
31:59
Speaker 6: substandard via an understatement, how.
32:03
Speaker 2: Do you keep your morale up in there? I wonder
32:04
Speaker 2: big because it's a weird place. It's not really a jail,
32:08
Speaker 2: and you do have access to phones, you're doing the
32:10
Speaker 2: TDV from inside the center.
32:12
Speaker 5: You don't get a minimum term.
32:15
Speaker 2: You're there until they come and drag you out or
32:19
Speaker 2: you win some sort of release.
32:22
Speaker 5: And the longer you there doesn't matter. How long can
32:24
Speaker 5: you hang out there before you just say enough's enough
32:28
Speaker 5: and leave your family behind here in Australia and go
32:30
Speaker 5: back to a country you barely know.
32:33
Speaker 1: Yeah, good question.
32:35
Speaker 6: I think that's That's the worst thing about this is
32:37
Speaker 6: the you're basically put here indefinitely. And I served six
32:43
Speaker 6: months in jail and I've been here five and a
32:45
Speaker 6: half years now, and this is equivalent to I think
32:49
Speaker 6: it's more than a meeting security jail. The only I
32:53
Speaker 6: diess the difference here, which is a fantastic positive. We
32:56
Speaker 6: do have our phones. But other than that, this is jail.
33:02
Speaker 6: This is jail and keeping up again very very difficult.
33:08
Speaker 6: How long can one hold out in these places?
33:10
Speaker 1: I don't know.
33:10
Speaker 6: I guess it's different for different for everybody. But there's
33:14
Speaker 6: been people here. There's people here that are going on
33:16
Speaker 6: eleven now.
33:18
Speaker 2: Unbelievable, and people have the center then go back to
33:22
Speaker 2: freedom in the country that they're unfamiliar with.
33:24
Speaker 6: Absolutely, there's people here they were staying forever rather than
33:29
Speaker 6: go to a country that they have no ties to whatsoever.
33:32
Speaker 6: I mean, there's a poor guy, he's into his eleventh year.
33:36
Speaker 6: I think he did eighteen months jail for holding up
33:38
Speaker 6: the service station with a manana literally and then he
33:41
Speaker 6: handed himself in. Anyway, he's got a permanent care his mother,
33:47
Speaker 6: and for eighteen months jail, he's done.
33:50
Speaker 1: He's onto his elect here and insanity.
33:54
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's kind of ironic.
33:55
Speaker 2: You get this five and a half years for nothing
33:57
Speaker 2: in particular other than a dossier of hearsay and allegations.
34:01
Speaker 2: It'd have been better off being a better crooked and
34:03
Speaker 2: doing these things and stashing some cash away least so
34:05
Speaker 2: your family would be looked after, because I mean, what's
34:08
Speaker 2: the state of your family now that you've been in there,
34:11
Speaker 2: And if the legal fees mount up, that's the only
34:14
Speaker 2: hope is to keep fighting on the legal front.
34:16
Speaker 5: I mean, how are they doing?
34:18
Speaker 6: Look, that's I think that's one of the things that
34:19
Speaker 6: upsets me most is the is the collateral damage from this,
34:24
Speaker 6: from this sort of thing. Honestly, it's incalculable the emotional
34:29
Speaker 6: toll this takes. The emotional damage because it's a never
34:33
Speaker 6: ending thing, and it's very hard for people to understand.
34:38
Speaker 1: They say, well, what did he do? Nothing?
34:41
Speaker 6: No, he must have done something. They don't lock you
34:44
Speaker 6: up for nothing, Yes they do. They lock you up
34:47
Speaker 6: for a character test for something that's not even proven.
34:49
Speaker 6: It's it's just that it's a very subjective thing at
34:52
Speaker 6: the will of a politician that's basically doing what he's
34:57
Speaker 6: doing for his own personal political gain and nothing else.
35:02
Speaker 1: So we're basically pawns. We're all collateral.
35:04
Speaker 6: Damage for these politicians' political aspirations.
35:09
Speaker 5: Well, that's right.
35:10
Speaker 2: And my other contacting friend, Tom Mackie, former president of
35:13
Speaker 2: the Descendant's Motorcycle clubin.
35:14
Speaker 5: Adelaide has been deported to New Zealand.
35:17
Speaker 2: He was there for a similar time to you, and
35:19
Speaker 2: that's how I met you through Tom. He recommended talking
35:21
Speaker 2: to you and gave you a glowing character reference by
35:24
Speaker 2: the way, which I took seriously. He fought and fought
35:28
Speaker 2: and fought, and finally had to accept deportation and has
35:33
Speaker 2: left the country. And at no stage was there a
35:36
Speaker 2: real test of fairness in all this. And this is
35:39
Speaker 2: what bothers me about this. I mean, you may or
35:42
Speaker 2: may not be a serious crook. I don't even know.
35:45
Speaker 2: And we'll let the listeners judge on this. But the
35:47
Speaker 2: point to me is that these allegations, if they're going
35:50
Speaker 2: to be used at such a high level, they need
35:53
Speaker 2: to be tested. They need to be corroborated, the motivations assessed,
35:58
Speaker 2: and they're simply.
35:58
Speaker 6: Not absolutely no way shape or are they tested, as
36:05
Speaker 6: you would probably know too for one to be have there,
36:09
Speaker 6: these are canceled, be locked up here for an indefinite
36:13
Speaker 6: amount of time five six, seven, ten years and supported
36:17
Speaker 6: to a country that you have no ties with whatsoever,
36:21
Speaker 6: you have a family, no friends. There's some people who
36:24
Speaker 6: have been sent to countries they don't speak the language.
36:26
Speaker 1: You don't have to.
36:27
Speaker 6: Even have committed a crime, even if you associate with
36:31
Speaker 6: persons of bad character. Will say, like a motorcycle group,
36:35
Speaker 6: you only have to associate with someone there and that's.
36:38
Speaker 1: Enough to put you in here.
36:40
Speaker 6: And again you don't even have to go to jail
36:44
Speaker 6: Yet's say twelve month good behavior bond, if someone gets
36:47
Speaker 6: twelve months community based order, if someone gets a twelve
36:51
Speaker 6: month of course in drug and alcohol rehabilitation, that is
36:56
Speaker 6: enough to put you in here, sent to the other
36:58
Speaker 6: side of the world, away from your home, away from
37:01
Speaker 6: everything done.
37:02
Speaker 1: It's insanity.
37:04
Speaker 6: The costs associated with the cost of the taxpayer is
37:08
Speaker 6: eye watering.
37:10
Speaker 5: It really is. And how's the food, by the way.
37:13
Speaker 1: It's disgusting. It's disgusting.
37:19
Speaker 5: You're a vegetarian, aren't you.
37:21
Speaker 6: Well, I'm vegan, so vegetarian in here. So yeah, it's
37:28
Speaker 6: our choices here.
37:31
Speaker 5: Listen.
37:31
Speaker 2: I do wish you well on a personal level, and
37:33
Speaker 2: it's not just because I believe that you are innocent
37:36
Speaker 2: or guilty.
37:36
Speaker 5: I think just think that.
37:37
Speaker 2: As I said before, the transparency of the situation is very,
37:40
Speaker 2: very lacking, and we've seen a lot of commentary in
37:42
Speaker 2: the Australian media about the iniquities of the system in
37:45
Speaker 2: America going on, where so called illegal aliens are being
37:48
Speaker 2: ripped out of their homes and deported to countries and
37:51
Speaker 2: so forth, And there's the commentary there is about the
37:53
Speaker 2: lack of natural justice. But we've got it going on
37:55
Speaker 2: in our own country here, yet we've sort of accepted this,
37:58
Speaker 2: that this is the standard practice. So there's a fair
38:00
Speaker 2: amount of hypocrisy in this situation that your case demonstrates.
38:04
Speaker 2: And I do hope that you get to clean your
38:07
Speaker 2: name one way or the other. If they can bring
38:09
Speaker 2: evidence against you to charge you with something, well, well
38:11
Speaker 2: and good in my opinion.
38:12
Speaker 5: You know, I don't want.
38:13
Speaker 2: Drug manufacturers or gangsters or any other people running around
38:16
Speaker 2: our streets. But let's get people for what they've actually done,
38:19
Speaker 2: not what people suspect them of. So Gary and John Lewell,
38:22
Speaker 2: I wish you well and keep me in touch with
38:24
Speaker 2: what goes And you've still got a few appeals of
38:27
Speaker 2: options up your sleeve.
38:28
Speaker 1: I believe we've got a few things in the works.
38:31
Speaker 6: But if I could adam you, I think even to
38:34
Speaker 6: Tom mentioned this is the inequities of what's happening in
38:39
Speaker 6: Australia with immigration and so forth all the other five
38:42
Speaker 6: eyes countries on countries in the USA, Canada, New Zealand,
38:47
Speaker 6: the UK if you'd lived there for ten years, you
38:50
Speaker 6: can't be sported in Australia up until the nineties, if
38:55
Speaker 6: you've lived here for ten years, it could be apported
38:58
Speaker 6: the five oh one criteria came in in relation to terrorism,
39:03
Speaker 6: really really seriously like that. Then they've expanded in twenty fourteen,
39:08
Speaker 6: they changed the legislation, and they changed the legislation right
39:12
Speaker 6: at the end when they were to stop the boats
39:15
Speaker 6: coming in.
39:15
Speaker 1: So the boats stopped coming.
39:17
Speaker 6: And so, I mean all of us here have spent
39:21
Speaker 6: time trying to work out what the hell is going
39:25
Speaker 6: on and what is the rationale behind these places. And
39:29
Speaker 6: as we all would have thought, immigration detentions for illegal
39:33
Speaker 6: people coming illegally by boats, et cetera fair enough.
39:38
Speaker 1: So they stopped the votes coming.
39:40
Speaker 6: And therefore there's no one coming into these places. But
39:43
Speaker 6: then they changed the legislation and they make it retrospective.
39:47
Speaker 6: In other words, from that day on in twenty fourteen,
39:50
Speaker 6: this legislation was applicable to if you committed a crime
39:54
Speaker 6: fifty years ago, you come under the heading of that.
39:58
Speaker 1: So it's not that anyone in here. I'll take myself.
40:03
Speaker 6: Tom committed these and an offense became a five zero
40:06
Speaker 6: one from an defence in.
40:08
Speaker 1: Iteen ninety five. Twenty five years later.
40:11
Speaker 6: They scoop you up off the street and lock you
40:13
Speaker 6: up and saying, well, because you committed this defense back then,
40:17
Speaker 6: now we're going to punish you here as well. And
40:21
Speaker 6: the way for people to understand this it would be like,
40:24
Speaker 6: now we've all committed a defense. Let's say a driving offense,
40:27
Speaker 6: speeding whatever going up, don't wear your seatbelt, and we've
40:31
Speaker 6: all coppied fine and demerit points loss. So let's say you, Adam,
40:37
Speaker 6: committed a driving offense twenty five thirty years ago, and
40:41
Speaker 6: you lost your points and you paid fines, yes, as
40:44
Speaker 6: we all have. And then you get a knock on
40:46
Speaker 6: the door twenty five thirty years later, I say, Adam,
40:49
Speaker 6: we've come to take a car. You excuse me, and
40:52
Speaker 6: we come to take your car. Car is going to
40:54
Speaker 6: be taken to be seized, and it's going to be
40:56
Speaker 6: crushed and you go hang on a seton Once they thought, well,
40:59
Speaker 6: you give it an efense thirty years ago and you
41:02
Speaker 6: paid the fine, you lost your points, but they've changed
41:06
Speaker 6: the legislation which makes it retrospective. So anyone that's committed
41:10
Speaker 6: PA's thirty years ago, we now come and take their
41:13
Speaker 6: cars and we quesh them.
41:16
Speaker 2: Yeah, listen, the other getting punished twice is questionable. Gary,
41:20
Speaker 2: thanks for your time today, mate. I appreciate you telling
41:22
Speaker 2: the story and I do wish you well and you
41:25
Speaker 2: received some form of justice, whether it's positive or negative,
41:29
Speaker 2: but some transparent process I think is due.
41:32
Speaker 5: Thanks for your time today.
41:33
Speaker 1: Thank you so much. Eric.
41:38
Speaker 2: That's Gary Lewe on his present situation. Multiple mister Australia
41:41
Speaker 2: winner who's apparently not Ozzy enough and he's facing deportation
41:47
Speaker 2: back to his native England place that he hasn't lived
41:50
Speaker 2: for many, many years.
41:51
Speaker 5: Does this pass the smell test? You've heard the allegations
41:54
Speaker 5: against Goar, and I stress their allegations, they're not charges,
41:57
Speaker 5: are not proven. What do you think?
42:00
Speaker 2: I certainly think these things, as I've said before in
42:02
Speaker 2: this interview, should be tested in a court, and I
42:05
Speaker 2: think that's just fair. And we did expect that the
42:09
Speaker 2: new Labor government, once Dutton's mob were kicked out, would
42:13
Speaker 2: address this, but they haven't. Maybe it's just politically convenient
42:16
Speaker 2: to retain this and there are some people in our
42:19
Speaker 2: society who should be deported, and maybe you can make
42:22
Speaker 2: an argument that they're too clever and should be deported
42:26
Speaker 2: on this character test. But I'd like to see a
42:28
Speaker 2: lot more natural justice supply to the situation. If you've
42:31
Speaker 2: got a story you want to share with me, please
42:32
Speaker 2: get in touch. You could call crime stoppers if it's
42:35
Speaker 2: conventional information one one hundred, triple three, triple zero, or
42:39
Speaker 2: maybe call me first or send me an email. Adam Shanner,
42:42
Speaker 2: writer at gmail dot com. This has been real crumbert
42:45
Speaker 2: Adam shann Thank you for listening.
42:57
Speaker 5: Thanks for listening to this episode and supporting this story.
43:00
Speaker 5: Independent storytelling that shapes the world is what pod shape
43:03
Speaker 5: really cares about. Right now, There's thousands of people listening
43:06
Speaker 5: to this show and our other true Crimes, and they're
43:09
Speaker 5: completely engaged. More than ten million Australians listen to podcasts
43:12
Speaker 5: each week. If you've ever thought about advertising your business
43:16
Speaker 5: in a podcast, there's a link to reach out in
43:18
Speaker 5: the show notes, or head to podshape dot com to
43:21
Speaker 5: book a free call.