Pardon Me:

The Anatomy Of An Australian Political Trial.



James Saleam
January 27 1999


Edited and updated February 2 2002





Introduction



This is the first time an Australian has argued on the Internet that criminal convictions won against him, were the fruits of corruption.

It is, at the time this document was placed upon the Internet, exactly 10 years since the original crime was committed.

The author has served four years prison (May 14 1991 - May 4 1995).

I have no doubt that this case would make an excellent book. It has everything:

Spies, the kidnapping of a defence witness by secret operatives done to the movie script of Mississippi Burning, the mis-use of an informant whose code-name and purpose were analgous to the script of Betrayed, secret Australian Security Intelligence Organisation tape-recordings of the Defence's trial preparations, the murder of my co-accused recorded as it actually took place courtesy of the same surveillance operation, a drunken, corrupt police officer discredited at the Royal Commission Into The New South Wales Police Service (1994-97) whose obsession to convict the accused created the parameters of the case, fabricated notebooks, wildly contradictory prosecution witnesses, some prosecution evidence which seemed to be re-run of the script in the Ananda Marga and the Hilton Bomb frame-ups, political pressure to win a conviction, a prosecution witness with an effective-indemnity for perjury, a Court Of Criminal Appeal ruling which said that I convicted myself at the Trial by leading certain evidence, facts which just don't fit - and the crime victim, the Representative to Australia of the African National Congress.

I hope I have your attention.

The style of this document however, is not really meant for the general reader who enjoys the sauce. Rather, I have two inter-related convictions to overturn, and I must appeal to a different audience. I am writing for those opinion makers, lawyers, policemen, analysts and victims of the organized system of perjury which flows through the Courts. Hence, this document has a "legal" quality. However, I have little doubt, that Internet readers of all types will find something to interest them.

I can tell you that I am now engaged in a political campaign to over-turn these political convictions. This campaign will take many courses. However, I truly hope that the officer who framed the case (pardon me for such a bad pun) might consider libel action. He has his chance. In the final analysis, a political trial is one recourse of State authorities which perceive as a threat any sort of political challenge to State power. It would seem I was involved with people who were perceived as enemies of the Australian State and we had the temerity to question particular policies.

"Pardon Me" for my presumption.

The text which follows is essentially the same (minus certain corroborative documents and with some necessary alterations) as that which will be lodged as an Application to the Supreme Court of New South Wales for the exercise of its independent authority to order an Inquiry under those provisions of the New South Wales Crimes Act (Sections 474D/E) - into two convictions recorded against James Saleam in the District Court (Downing Centre) on May 14 1991.

The convictions referred to followed my (unsuccessful) defence of two charges heard before His Honour, Judge Ducker, and a Jury of twelve.

The charges stated:

(1) For that he on the 27th day of January in the year 1989 at Tempe in the state of New South Wales did have in his possession a firearm, to wit a 12 gauge shotgun, with intent to commit an indictable offence, to wit malicious damage to the property belonging to another.

(2) Further for that Michael George White and Jason Roderick Frost on the 27th day of January in the year 1989 at Croydon in the state of New South Wales did maliciously damage the door and wall of premises at 40 Tahlee St., the property of Margaret Galik and that he, the said James Saleam before the said felony was committed in the manner aforesaid, to wit on the 27th day of January 1989 in the year 1989 did incite, move, procure, aid, counsel, hire, command the said Michael George White and Jason Roderick Frost to commit the said felony in the manner aforesaid.

An Appeal against Conviction and Sentence to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal was heard on June 11 1993 and dismissed on February 11 1994. An Application For Special Leave To Appeal To The High Court Of Australia was made, but subsequently withdrawn following advice from the Legal Aid Commission.

An Application will be made in order to establish (Crimes Act, Section 474E(2)):

"that there is a doubt or question as to the convicted person's guilt, as to any mitigating circumstances in the case or as to any part of the evidence."

Each Section of the Application will be constructed in such a manner as discharges this obligation.

This Internet text is generally prepared in the first person; occasionally, for clarity, the third person is employed.

NOTE:
After the proper identification of each person, witness, court process or transcript:

(a) Saleam Committal Transcript - CT
(b) Saleam Trial Transcript - TT
(c) Saleam Appeal Transcript (Nov. 23 1992; Dec. 8 1992; June 11 1993) - CCAT (with date)
(d) Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment (CCAJ)
(e) Surnames for each person after identification.





Links to the Sections of "Pardon Me":

Main Page
Introduction

Section One
Prosecution Case/Defence Case: An Abstract. (The Cases As Presented At The Trial)

Section Two
A Political Case: A Conspiracy To Affect An Extra-Legal Result

Section Three
The "Doubt" on The Evidence At Trial: A Special Review Of The Evidence Of Prosecution/Defence.

Section Four
Michael White: The Threat In The Police Cells; The Explosion Of Credibility.

Section Five
Catherine: Gross Irregularities In The Investigation. New Material Raises Questions.

Section Six
The Role Of Neville Ireland: Questions Concerning Ireland's Evidence
And His Relationship To The Prosecution Witnesses And Their Evidence.

Section Seven
The Inadequate Appeal Process:
Doubts And Questions Raised By New Evidence And Argument At The Court Of Criminal Appeal.

Section Eight
The ASIO Operation, Special Branch And The Trial And Appeal Processes.
New Evidence And The Need For An Inquiry Into Conviction.

Section Nine
A Table Of New Evidence In Support Of A Judicial Inquiry. Explanation Of The New Material. Its Relevance.


Section Ten

Special Branch Files Opened: How They Impact On This False Process. Revelations Shatter The Guilty Verdict.



Homepage