The conviction
was obtained using fabricated evidence

The accuser started the fight by attacking me with a piece of wood and after loosing the contest he was presenting himself as a ' victim ' . To dramatize the effect of the incident he claimed to be hit ' unexpectedly ' on the head several times with a piece of wood capable of breaking the hand .

The accuser claims before the trial :

From police notebook ( and police charge sheet ) –' I was hit on the head from behind . Then I heard a bang and I was hit again on the back of my head . I fell against the generator panel . ' –
( indicating severe blow )

· statements to police -16.07.07 - point 8 - hit twice with a large wooden club at the back
of the head hard enough to cause his head to hit the switchboard ( indicating severe blow )

· statements to police -16.07.07 - point 12 - as the result of being hit on the head he
could not see through his left eye at all ( indicating severe blow )

During the trial those claims were repeated .

1-54-23 - back of the head

1-54-42 - ' … my weight went forward – with the force of the thump , went forward .
I immediately thought that the shed fell on me because of the power that hit me . ' (re:Exh 6)

1-54-49 - again on the head

1-56-44 - side of the face

1-60-8 - ' leg , lower side of my body … swing to the head '

1-61-28 -' …a couple of blows to the body… and he would go for my head '

1-62-18 - '.. on the body , on the leg , top of the head '

1-68-44 - ' I got a blow to the side of the head …and I got a blow to the eye'(!? )

Other statement made by the accuser in court

1-75-4 - ( still ) ' got the lumps to prove it …' ( on the head , 15 months later )
'… Do you want me to shave ? Get a shaver , I`ll shave my head and show you . '

1-75-9 - '…There were no cuts just lumps and slightly …slightly bleeding '
( ??? there cannot be bleeding without a cut !!! )

1-75-40 - ' I have recollection of the police photographer asking me , where I was hurt
and I start showing him where I was hurt , where I was bruising and where I was bleeding
( no such photograph )( after 3-4 hours of bleeding it would be quite a pool of blood !? )
( see also 1-75-9 !?)

1-75-46 - Q.- Did you show any staff at the resort those head injuries ?

A.- That`s correct sir , Peter Gannon came to see me at my bedside (he does not confirm that)

1-84-40-… he tried to kill me '

1-90-58 -… he tried to kill me '

There was no photographic evidence of the accuser being hit on the head as well .

1-68-37 to 55 - Exhibit 6 - photograph of the face

… ' I got a blow to the side of the head and this is swollen and I got the blow to the eye'...

' it became quite blue and swollen …' ( no such thing visible )

Even , if only a half of what he claimed was true , it would be expected to be quite severe head damage !? However hospital examination and tests did not find any evidence of that and this created a problem for the prosecution trying to maintain the credibility of the accuser.( He was released from the hospital , after the customary checks did not reveal any serious problem , after few hours on the same day . )

Since this is happening in the ' smart state ' they overcome it in a crude and a perfidious way making unique contribution to Queensland legal system .

1. Before the trial Queensland Department of Public Prosecutions provided me with 4 photographs of the accuser face .

I looked at them and since they did not show any damage I ignored them . During the trial one of the available photographs of the accuser face was presented as the only ' evidence ' of the alleged hits to the face or the head. ( 'with a large wooden club' )( Exhibit 6 - MO 454993 QPS AA0019.jpg -18 409 )
On the top of the LHS cheek bone ( under the eye ) it was showing very small lump , no other visible sign of swollen face or head . No blue , no discoloration.

Surprised with that ' evidence ', knowing that I did not hit him and with the pressure of the trial going on , I thought that it could be an old lump ( no discoloration ) or it was caused by the accuser hand hitting himself when I was blocking his blows .
I questioned doctor McLeay about it : 2-28-10 to 2-29-10 , who did not or could not say what could be the cause of that - so the issue was left hanging in .

Only after the trial I had the chance to compare closely those 4 photographs .Others being ; MO 454993 QPS AA0018.jpg -17 409 ; MO 454993 QPS AA0020.jpg - 19 409 ; MO 454993 QPS AA0021.jpg - 20 409 .

There is almost exactly the same size ' lump' under the right eye as well which was not claimed as being caused during the incident .
Such ' lumpy ' appearance under the eyes are just the accuser normal , natural facial features and not the result of the incident .

2. Even more arrogant is the fact of presenting the photograph taken few hours after the incident showing a clearly old scab ( wound crust ) on the right knee as the result of the incident . Exhibit 9 - MO 454993 QPS AA0011.jpg - 10 409 .

Comparing this photograph with the marks on left leg resulting from the incident , clearly shows that the age , the cause of their existence and the nature of them cannot be the same
( MO 454993 QPS AA0010.jpg - 06 409 ) .

Such conscious , deliberate act shows hypocrisy of Queensland Department of Public Prosecutions as the institution supposedly created to protect the society from criminals , when in fact it is itself involved intentionally in hideous criminal act of the most serious nature , by using clearly unlawful and morally repugnant methods to achieve a ' successful prosecution ' by any means available .

Previously , obscured photographs showing only the relevant part of the face of the person who attacked me , -' the victim ' were shown . They could not ' publically ' identify that person
BUT they had to be removed due to the specific order I received from the Queensland Parole Board

Without those photographs Queensland Police and Queensland Department of Public Prosecutions can claim that there is no evidence of them doing anything wrong and unfortunately as a person on parole and subjected to lots of restrictions I had to ask my friends to remove them .

Only now , when my parole ended ( October 2012 ) , I can display them without the threat of going immediately to the prison .

- By using such objectionable methods by the prosecution I was deprived my right to fair trial

- The jury was mislead as to the value of the accuser claims .

- Such conduct indicates travesty of justice and contempt for laws within DPP apparatus