According to separate reports, the time the documents could be created are 11:08 pm or 11:32pm. Considering the document was sent at 9:17 am the next day, if the clocks were 10 hours out, that would mean the document was created, typed up, and converted to PDF, 9 minutes before being sent out, or it was created AFTER being sent. Something doesn’t match up here, and I’m sure email, server, and support ticket logs will show that the documents were indeed created prior to The Australian publishing the story the press release was in relation to.

So what does this mean? Well, it means Abbott is both lying and embroiled in the Ashby affair. We know that Brough, Pyne & Bishop have all played their part in this, so how could Abbott not be involved? He has already shown contempt for democratically elected politicians with his Australians for Honest Politics slush fund, the Ashby case fits the same modus operandi.

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2012/politics/abbott-implicated-in-ashby-conspiracy-by-10-hours-of-bullshit/

 

The irrepressible reporter Steve Lewis has been bounding around the Canberra press gallery for couple of decades. He’s been with the The Australian Financial Review, The Australian and, these days, is still in the News Ltd stable writing on national politics for a spread of Murdoch’s local papers.

Lewis is no hard-drinking, hell-raising, out-all-night hack. He’s a family guy, an industrious, diligent reporter, a founding member of the Press Gallery’s singing group, the House Howlers. It was Lewis who mostly conceived the Press Gallery’s now fabled Midwinter Ball, which has raised thousands for charities. He’s an enthusiast for the old rule bashed into newspaper cadets (remember them?): get it first and get it right.

Print journalists achieve longevity in Canberra either because their commentary and analysis is good enough to attract a decent following, they’re standout writers, or because they get scoops. Lewis is a scoops man, in the business of getting exclusives where others can’t or won’t look. They may not be all memorable but they’re frequent.

It’s the hardest of all career platforms to maintain within the press gallery; scoops take more shoe leather, cold calling and shoulder-rubbing time than does an incisive piece of commentary or a gilded piece of writing. Fine writers and insightful commentators have the protective bulwark of reputation and following. For scoop-getters, they’re as good as their last; when the scoops stop, so does the career. Lewis was a journalist in need of the next scoop.

And that’s how Steve Lewis came to be the journalist who broke the whole reeking Peter Slipper saga, abetted by the political insiders who wanted Slipper out of the Speaker’s Office and out of Parliament.

Justice Steven Rares showed touching empathy — for a man of the bench — for the lot of a parliamentary scoop-seeker such as Lewis, when he handed down his 200-paragraph judgment on Wednesday that tossed out the sexual harassment allegations against Slipper. They were sensationally reported by Lewis in News Ltd papers.

While His Honour excoriated Slipper’s former staffer James Ashby for conspiring for his own ends to ruin Slipper’s career by getting his allegations that Slipper had sexually harassed him into the media — under the protection of a Court action — the judge looked more favourably upon Lewis’s role in the affair.

Justice Rares finds Lewis enthusiastically followed up the information Ashby gave him but adds that the reporter could not be said to have shared Ashby’s interests to further his own career prospects with Mr. Slipper’s enemies, the Queensland Liberal-National Coalition. Nor could it be said that Lewis was trying to aid the return to national politics of the former Howard government minister Mal Brough, who was eyeing off Slipper’s seat.

Rather, Justice Rares hit the nail squarely, if rather too bluntly for some squeamish Canberra journos, writing: “It is more likely Mr Lewis was focused on obtaining good copy for stories to sell newspapers.”

The judge goes on to acknowledge that the reporter was probably not blind to the motivations of Ashby or Mal Brough (a confidant of Ashby’s) and doubtless wanted to keep encouraging Ashby and Brough to provide new material for more stories.

The judge even ventures that any hack worth his salt would have done what Steve Lewis did: “Once presented with sources such as Mr Ashby and Ms Doane (Ashby’s colleague in Slipper’s office) together with the prospect of a story such as in the originating application, it is difficult to think that any journalist would have acted differently to Mr Lewis in pursuing and publishing that story.”

Indeed, Lewis was able to write a cracker exclusive when he broke the story back in April, opening in the Daily Telegraph with the choice paragraphs:

“SPEAKER Peter Slipper is facing explosive allegations he sexually harassed a young male adviser and misused taxpayer-funded Cabcharge dockets in a major new crisis for the Gillard Government.

“The man who holds the highest parliamentary office in Australia is accused in court documents by James Ashby of making ‘unwelcome sexual advances’ and ‘unwelcome sexual comments’,” Lewis wrote.

So is the judge right? Do Steve Lewis and his employer, News Ltd, emerge with clean hands from this sordid business? Certainly the judge did not believe all that Lewis said about his own gathering of material for his articles. Specifically he rejected Lewis’s explanation for a now well-publicised text message exchange between Lewis and Ashby after the pair met in a Sunshine Coast café to discuss Ashby’s allegations against Slipper.

This was two weeks before Lewis published. Lewis had travelled from Canberra for the meeting:

Lewis: “Ta Abt to hop on plane Will call later We will get him!!”

Mr Ashby: “Great Thanks for coming up”.

Mr Lewis: “I am here to help!!!”

The judge rejected Lewis’s claim that he had been referring to a hire-car driver who had information about Slipper in his ‘we will get him’ text to Ashby. Further, Lewis’s second text implied the reporter was collaborating with Ashby to damage Slipper.

The judge wrote: “I am not satisfied that Mr Lewis was texting Mr Ashby, while he was boarding a plane, about “getting” a driver. It is difficult to see why Mr Lewis would use the words “get him” rather than “find him” if he was talking of locating a driver. Moreover, Mr Lewis’s next comment: “I am here to help!!!”, in response to Mr Ashby’s thanks for his visit, again suggests collaboration with Mr Ashby and Ms Doane in damaging Mr Slipper. I find that on 4 April 2012, Mr Lewis referred to Mr Slipper when he wrote: “We will get him!!”.

If, as the judge finds, the whole of the Slipper affair was a calculated effort by James Ashby to politically damage Peter Slipper by abusing the court process, then some might say that Steve Lewis and News Ltd were remiss for going along with it by relying on the protection of court filings for their stories; that indeed Lewis should have seen through Ashby’s motivations from the outset.

But that would be naïve. More likely was that Lewis was well aware of Ashby’s motivations and those of other players, such as Mal Brough. Sources have all sorts of motivations for giving up information. What matters to the reporter is whether the material offered is newsworthy, factually correct and can be defended once published. The facts of the various sexually charged exchanges between Slipper and Ashby aren’t in question (what can be drawn from this most certainly is). And Lewis had waited to publish with the legal cover that came once Ashby had commenced his court action.

News Ltd paid Ashby’s hotel accommodation in Sydney while Lewis was researching his story. Again, that’s defensible. Any prudent news organisation might well have done the same.

What we didn’t get from News Ltd and Steve Lewis was anything like the full story. All Lewis reported was that the Speaker was being accused of sexually harassing a staffer.

The bigger story is tightly told in one paragraph — number 138 — in Justice Steven Rares’ judgment: “I am also satisfied that Mr Ashby and Ms Doane by about 29 March 2012 were in a combination with Mr Brough to cause Mr Slipper as much political and public damage as they could inflict on him. They believed and hoped that Mr Lewis would publish unfavourable stories about Mr Slipper concerning whatever they could help Mr Lewis find in relation to Mr Slipper’s use of his travel entitlements in the areas of Mr Lewis’s curiosity. That is why each of Mr Ashby, Ms Doane and Mr Brough were anxious to provide Mr Lewis with the diary entries he sought. It is not clear whether Mr Brough had passed on to Mr Lewis Mr Ashby’s foreshadowed complaint of sexual harassment in late March 2012. They also believed that Mr Lewis, and the media generally, would report on any legal proceeding against Mr Slipper in which Mr Ashby alleged sexual harassment. At this time, Mr Ashby and Ms Doane saw Mr Brough as their means of obtaining favour from the LNP in seeking new employment. It was obvious that once what Mr Ashby was then planning became public, he and Ms Doane could no longer work as members of Mr Slipper’s personal staff. The relationship of trust and confidence (if it still subsisted) between Mr Slipper and the two staff members would have been destroyed by their acts of calculated disloyalty.”

We can thank Justice Rares for a judgment that took us inside the shrouded political backrooms of in Canberra and Queensland, exposing the real grubby self-interest of those who made the allegations against Peter Slipper.

And we thank Steve Lewis. He didn’t get the real story. But without Lewis it would never have been told.

http://www.theglobalmail.org/blog/judge-theres-a-grub-in-my-scoop/521/

 

Parliament House officials have blamed a "technical problem" for an incorrect time stamp being on a media release issued by Opposition Leader Tony Abbott.

Mr Abbott released a lengthy statement about the sexual harassment case against Peter Slipper in April, demanding the Prime Minister remove him from the Speaker's position.

Federal Court judge Steven Rares last week dismissed the case, declaring it to be an abuse of process and politically motivated to advance the interests of the Liberal National Party and former Howard government minister Mal Brough.

Mr Abbott has consistently said he had "no specific knowledge" about the court case until it was revealed in the media, but Labor ministers have questioned that claim.

A time stamp attached to Mr Abbott's press statement appears to show the document was created at 11:08pm the day before the story was published, something his office strenuously denies.

A spokeswoman for the Department of Parliamentary Services (DPS) has told the ABC that technical staff have examined the document and believe the time stamp is incorrect.

"The time on the date stamp is 10 hours behind AEST due to a technical problem," the spokeswoman said in a statement.

"The Parliamentary Computing Network uses Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) on its computers.

"Normally, the time stamp format for this is 'UTC time + offset for local time zone'.

"In this case, the local time information was replaced by a 'z'.

"As a result, the offset for the local time zone wasn't factored in.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-17/technical-problem-caused-abbotts-release-confusion/4432380

-----------------------

I don't believe a word of it...

 

But in case I am wrong my sicerest apologies... Mind you that would not mean that Tony did not lie about not knowing anything or kept himself deliberately out of the official loop, but had secret meeting about the therefore of the matter... Who knows...

 

From Mungo Wentworth MacCallum

Ashby undoubtedly has friends with money: two of the most prominent are the Liberal Party of Australia and News Ltd. But for either of those to produce a cheque book would be an admission that Rares was quite right - the whole thing is indeed a political conspiracy, a stitch up to hurt Slipper, advantage Brough and boost Tony Abbott's quest for an election. And any third party who suddenly bobbed up would be subject to minute scrutiny to see if there was even the faintest suggestion of a hidden connection or an ulterior motive.

And that's the other problem with ignoring the separation of powers: while political plotting can often be done on the cheap, those involving lawyers can't. Whatever advice Ashby is getting from Harmer, he may find it a lot less costly to listen to his fellow Liberals, the smartest of whom will be telling him to cop it sweet, take a long holiday and hope, as they do, that the whole thing will fade away during the silly season.

It's already been a huge unearned bonus for Julia Gillard and her embattled government. Tony Abbott will fervently want it dead, buried and cremated before the election year proper gets under way. The whole sorry business has already produced quite enough unintended consequences. And interestingly, the politician who showed the most perspicacity throughout the whole sorry saga was another Queenslander, Barnaby Joyce, who opined early in the piece that Ashby looked "only slightly less dodgy than Slipper". If only his commonsense was applied more widely, we could have avoided not only Ashbygate but perhaps even Watergate as well.

Mungo Wentworth MacCallum is a political journalist and commentator. View his full profile here.

 

So, how could the time be set wrong if all these boxes are ticked?

Well, there are two ways: when the server was initially set up the person doing so may have just clicked through, rather than reading the prompts; this, however, would give the system a -8:00GMT (US Pacific) time zone, not GMT (10 hours out).

The other way is for a domain admin (like myself) to set the Active Directory (AD) server to 10 hours out and attempt to propagate it across the network. This will mostly not work as AD updates in 15 minute increments & the time is synchronised during this phase. If the servers connected to the AD server are out by 10hrs, they will not synchronise as the Kerberos Server (Windows Server’s authentication protocol) will reject their authentication requests.

The last ditch effort for Abbott would be the files being created locally on a computer that’s 10 hours out, then moved to the files to the server. This, however, would still show the actual time of creation according to the server time zone, not the client. Add to this, Abbott would not have been able to connect to the network if his laptop was 10 hours out.

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2012/politics/abbott-implicated-in-ashby-conspiracy-by-10-hours-of-bullshit/

The explanation from the department of whatever parliamentary services sounds crap.

 

The former parliamentary speaker, Peter Slipper, has taken the extraordinary step of making a costs application against the solicitors of the man who brought a sexual harassment lawsuit against him.
Mr Slipper applied to the Federal Court on Wednesday for Harmers Workplace Lawyers and James Ashby, the staffer who accused him of sexual harassment, to pay for the costs of his legal proceedings on an indemnity basis.
The costs awarded by the Federal Court usually amount to between 50 and 70 per cent of the actual proceedings, but costs awarded on an indemnity basis cover the whole cost, and are considered a punitive measure.
It would be rare for the Federal Court to award costs on an indemnity basis, but some lawyers read the judgment handed down by Justice Steve Rares last week as a coded suggestion for Mr Slipper to seek unusual orders.

Justice Rares pointed out that the Federal Court was given the discretion to make costs orders if the action was brought "vexatiously or without reasonable cause".
"Mr Ashby instituted the proceedings without reasonable cause because they were and are an abuse of the process of the court," Justice Rares said.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/slipper-seeks-costs-from-ashbys-lawyers-20121219-2bmpa.html#ixzz2FTV8Rqnd

 

Statement on Peter Slipper MP

Posted on Saturday, 21 April 2012

 

 

 The Speaker is the presiding officer of the House of Representatives and is responsible for the orderly conduct of the House and the maintenance of standards of behaviour and integrity.
 
It is a very senior position within our Parliament and an office that should command respect.
 
It is important for our Parliament that the Speaker have the respect of colleagues and the trust of the community.
 
There are now very serious allegations against the current speaker, Mr Peter Slipper.
 
These allegations concern the sexual harassment of a staff member in Mr Slipper's office.
 
In court documents lodged yesterday, there are further serious allegations regarding potentially criminal misuse of taxpayer funds and breaches of entitlements.
 
For any parliamentarian, let alone the Speaker, these would be very serious allegations.
 
Against the Speaker, such allegations go to the integrity of the highest parliamentary office in the House of Representatives.
 
While Mr Slipper is entitled to the presumption of innocence, these allegations unquestionably have the potential to damage the reputation of the office of Speaker and the standing of the Parliament.
 
It is therefore incumbent on the Prime Minister, who used her numbers to install Mr Slipper as Speaker late last year, to require him to stand aside until these matters are concluded before the courts.
 
The Australian Federal Police must immediately investigate these new allegations relating to criminal misuse of taxpayer funded entitlements.
 
It is untenable that a Member of Parliament facing serious allegations of sexual harassment and criminal misuse of entitlements should hold one of the most senior positions in the Australian Parliament.
 
In the same way that ministers in the past have been stood down from the ministry while matters were being investigated, the Prime Minister must ensure that the Speaker stand aside until this matter is resolved.
 We now have a Government in Canberra that is dependent for its survival on two Members of Parliament, Craig Thomson and now Peter Slipper, who both face investigation over very serious allegations.
 
This is a tawdry state of affairs, to say the least. 
 
We are a good country presently let down by a bad government with poor leadership.
 
 The Opposition cannot support Mr Slipper continuing to hold the office of Speaker while these matters are being investigated.
 
To maintain integrity in our public life, the Prime Minister must act today. 
 
It was the Prime Minister who effectively made Peter Slipper the Speaker less than six months ago. And while she has failed to show leadership over the ongoing Craig Thomson saga, the Speaker is no mere backbencher. 
 
As the person who commands a parliamentary majority, Peter Slipper is her Speaker.
 
The Prime Minister must ensure that no further damage is done to the reputation of one of the most senior offices in the Parliament and she must act today to ensure that Mr Slipper stands down while this matter is dealt with in the courts.
http://www.tonyabbott.com.au/LatestNews/PressReleases

From a computer expert:

(Remember: the top image is Abbott’s press release, the bottom from a PDF I just output from MS Word.)

Notice the difference and the times Abbott’s PDF was edited.

To clarify, the top dates are from Abbott’s PDF and clearly show that:

1. it was created in MS Word, which only supports LOCAL time zone dates; and
2. that the “Created On” date has been edited to have a “Z” (UTC) instead of “+10’00′” as the “Modified Date” shows.

This is a glaring discrepancy and shows that the documents were edited before being submitted to APH. Even if this is the case, the second document sent in the press release would have to have been created AFTER it was sent, if the time zone was indeed UTC.

I have tested to see if a document created within UTC time zone would output with a “Z” as the time zone code and found that it will not when exported from MS Word ― the time zone code defaults to “+00’00′”. The only time you will get a Z time zone denotation is if you export via Adobe Acrobat itself (that is not with the Microsoft Word PDF export). We can clearly see this is not the case from the “PDF Creator” and “PDF Producer” line.

Furthermore, looking at the PDF created by the same user (mcdulingg) submitted from the day before clearly shows “+10’00′” (AEST) time zone. So that’s that ― the date has been modified on the 23/04/12 to attempt to show the time zone as UTC.

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2012/politics/abbott-

implicated-in-ashby-conspiracy-by-10-hours-of-bullshit/

 

Fiddles faddles by Tony's office, the timing is still an issue despite claims to the contrary...

But knowing good writers of press releases, books, TV scripts and commercials — and writing (poorly), myself — I know it would take a good three hours to write such press release to good enough standard. Furthermore, having a court case pending on some issues such as those mentioned in the press release are not enough to demand the resignation of the said person accused — unless proven guilty. Including the Craig Thomson affair in this press release stinks of conspiracy as well — and of misunderstanding the law. 

Furthermore the fact that Ashby was also suing the employer of Slipper — The Commonwealth Government — on the same date, was also a complication in the proceedings. 

It is my humble view that in order to maximise the value in suing Slipper, Ashby made also a few extra claims which unfortunately DID NOT COME FROM HIM, but from a secret third party. The inclusion of the possibility that Slipper had sex with an under-aged person was included in the case but was not relevant to the case. Other implication such as cabcharge abuse and such were soon dismissed as mostly untrue. 

The duty of care of an employer is important and I know many employers who could not care less about some of their employees. With this case being so prominent, the Commonwealth had two choices, wait for the case against Slipper be sorted out, the resolution of which was made complicated by the fact that the Commonwealth was also sued... Thus the juxtaposition of the two cases seems to be deliberate as to extend the time it would take to sort out the issues of guilt or innocence... This would have taken the cases well into mid next year, dragging the process and in the long run would have dragged the government through the mud with the opposition adding to the sauce...

In cases such as this, the financial "justice" is between 30 to 40,000 dollars once the party has been found "injured" or in this case "sexually abused"... The Commonwealth made an offer to settle the case for $50,000 but accepted no liability for what happened... Of course the opposition said it was a waste of money and an admission the government knew Slipper was guilty...

In fact the government was very clever. Had Ashby refused the offer, this would mean he was not about settling the case but after shit-stirring the government. He had no choice but to take the more than generous offer. 

Beyond this the release of some "selected" salacious messages in the press in the correspondence from Slipper to Ashby —released by the Ashby camp — was designed to damage the reputation of Slipper but had nothing to do with the case either. This is where the MISOGYNY lecture from the Prime Minister, to a Tony Abbott who was sinking more and more into the creases of his chair, came in... Of course Peter Slipper resigned the office of Speaker of his own accord (some Labor people may have suggested it would be in the best interest of all for him to quit the speaker chair)... But the Commonwealth payment allowed the court case of Ashby versus Slipper to go ahead much sooner than the opposition would have liked...

Independent Australia did a thorough analysis of the correspondence between Ashby and Slipper and at no stage — as the judge found as well — there was no suggestion of wrong doing from Peter Slipper except having used a few saucy words to describe parts of the female anatomy. That's all... But the damage was done to the "reputation" of Peter Slipper by these few words alone — NOTHING ELSE. As some people have said, who has not used so strong sexist words in our life?... 

Meanwhile, Pyne, Abbott, Bishop, Brandis have all gone pissweak... Abbott claiming he has been too busy to read the judge's statement...

After having written a scathing press release like the one on top, one would want to know WHAT HAPPENED as soon as possible...

Tony Abbott bullshits at hundred miles an hour... whether in writing or when speaking...

He is a danger to this nation.

 

 

On the same day as Peter Slipper filed a demand of costs:

Former parliamentary speaker Peter Slipper has lodged an application in the Federal Court, taking the unusual move of targeting the legal firm involved in the failed sexual harassment claim against him.

Harmers Workplace Lawyers filed the case on behalf of Mr Slipper's former staff member, James Ashby.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-19/slipper-seeks-costs-

 

Craig Thomson case got zip evidence:

The lawyer representing federal MP Craig Thomson is claiming vindication for his client, saying subpoenas issued to several brothels failed to produce any evidence.

Fair Work Australia served the subpoenas earlier this month, demanding any records of services provided to Mr Thomson while he was the head of the Health Services Union.

They specifically requested "copies of invoices, receipts, notes, communications, phone logs, audio recordings and/or other records".

The subpoena issued to Keywed Pty Ltd, which is a Sydney-based escort service allegedly used by Mr Thomson, specifically asked for CCTV footage dating back to 2003.

The results of the subpoenas were returned to the Federal Court today.

Five brothels or escort agencies did not respond to the request.

Mr Thomson's lawyer, Chris McArdle, says the remaining four told the Federal Court that "nothing is produced".

"The subpoenas came back with exactly what we said the subpoenas would come back with - nothing," he told ABC News Online.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-19/thomson-lawyer-claims-vindication-

 

From Michelle Grattan

Mr Abbott's many engagements included a speech, participation in the Britain-Australia-Israel dialogue, and quite a few meetings. But his description was hyperbolic.

The judgment, concluding that Mr Brough joined with James Ashby to politically damage then Speaker Peter Slipper, came out last week. It was long but not complicated - in fact, quite a racy read. There was plenty of time for Mr Abbott to go through it.

Mr Abbott was always going to stand by Mr Brough, who is the Liberal National party candidate in Mr Slipper's seat of Fisher. But to declare on Wednesday that, ''I am confident that he has acted rightly at all times'' (to say nothing of earlier comments about Brough's transparency), without scrutinising what Justice Steven Rares said, smacks of contempt for the public.
In his latest comments, Mr Abbott continued to use his formula that he had no ''specific'' knowledge of the Ashby case until he read it in the newspaper, referring to ''rumours'' around Mr Slipper.
...

Mining magnate Clive Palmer said on Wednesday he could not recall if the Ashby case was discussed when he met Mr Brough and shadow treasurer Joe Hockey in July. ''Joe Hockey was just a guest at our resort and … Mal Brough came to see me because he was seeking endorsement for the seat of Fisher.''
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/abbotts-casual-approach-to-ashby-issue-indicative-20121219-2bn8r.html#ixzz2FWoSGxTD
------------------------

Well, it does not smak of contempt... It IS pure and simple CONTEMPT.

And what was Joe Hockey doing with Mal Brough, then... Or did they just meet by accident in the elevators while on holidays?... It takes Mr Palmer to instruct us that they were there to discuss Mal Brough's candidacy to the seat held by Slipper... Joe Hockey? in APRIL?... (Ashby case was lodged on APRIL 20)... Coincidences?... Is the world still flat?

-------------------------

But let's analyse what the merde-och press has to say about the LATEST on this affair....
From the onset, Tony Abbott being a little shit for not paying attention to the judgement comes as a second tiny fiddle, after Palmer is shown to DENY the earth is round... Straight away the DENIAL perception takes precedence over Abbott being a little shit, and hopefully (for the merde-och press) the word DENIAL will trickle down to exonerate their favourite son, Tony Abbott, in the mind of the plebs...




From the murdoch media:

MINING magnate and coalition donor Clive Palmer has denied any prior knowledge of a politically damaging court case brought against former federal speaker Peter Slipper.

But Mr Palmer does admit that two weeks before the sexual harassment claims were taken to the Federal Court in April, he discussed Mal Brough's candidacy for Mr Slipper's Queensland seat of Fisher with former Howard government minister and shadow treasurer, Joe Hockey.

His comments came after Opposition Leader Tony Abbott said he had not read the judgment of the case, which says Mr Brough helped Slipper staffer James Asbhy with his court action.

http://www.news.com.au/national/clive-palmer-denies

 

subtle manipulations of priorities, of the greatest order...

 

Peter Slipper's former staff member James Ashby has announced plans to file his sexual harassment case against his former boss with Fair Work Australia, despite it being thrown out of the Federal Court as an "abuse of process".

The court ordered Mr Ashby pay Mr Slipper's legal fees, declaring the case had been politically motivated to damage the former parliamentary speaker and advance the interests of the Liberal National Party (LNP).

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-21/ashby-to-take-case-to-fair-work-australia/4439832

 from Kieran Cummings

....

It seems this problem has existed for some time, yet no one in Parliament House thought to correct it. Seeing as time stamps are vital for accountability, I am concerned that known bugs/problems are being exploited to cover up the time of creation of official documents. As I have noted in my last blog post, the same user was using Adobe Distiller with correct time zone flags for some press releases and transcripts, but not for others.

While I am satisfied with DPS’s response, I do question the speed with which Abbott’s Office drafted and sent the statement on Peter Slipper. Between the press release being PDFed/saved and Abbott’s press conference in Brisbane, there was a matter of nine minutes for this document to be edited, clear legal, be read, understood, and recited by Abbott. This does seem to be cutting it fine – at best – and after Warren Entsch’s statements regarding his knowledge of the Ashby/Slipper case and News Ltd story, I can’t believe that someone in Abbott’s office had no knowledge.

For now, I will have to say that there is a lot of suspicious activity regarding IT in Abbott’s office. There is no smoking gun – as I did claim in my last post – but more of a whiff of bullshit. The fact Abbott’s office blamed servers – which was incorrect – rather than Microsoft Word, claimed it was ongoing through April, then claimed they were unaware of the problem does make me believe there is some furious track covering happening.

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2012/politics/tony-abbotts-bag-of-mixed-nuts/

So, we should still believe in Santa Claus?... If Rudolph has a bright red nose, Abbott the Reindeer has a long long long nose.

From Margot Kingston

IN THE ABSENCE of any major mainstream news features on, or serious analysis of, the Ashby judgement – and via unchallenged misinformation about what it decided by Opposition frontbenchers – several misconceptions have arisen among people.

One is that Peter Slipper did sexually harass James Ashby, but that Justice Rares threw it out because the purpose of suing was to destroy Slipper and bring down the government.

In fact, Justice Rares made it crystal clear that he did not believe that Slipper sexually harassed Ashby.

Sexual harassment is where someone engages in unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature towards someone at work if a reasonable person would expect that the other person would be offended, humiliated or intimidated.

The major evidence of sexual harassment was text messages on February 1, 2012, where it was alleged that Slipper propositioned Ashby and Ashby rejected his advances. Even if true, an unsuccessful advance is not harassment.

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/politics/peter-slipper-did-not-sexually-harass-james-ashby/

 

From Bob Ellis

SO, THE PILLORYING of Peter Slipper and the humiliation of his family and the ruin of his career and the trashing of his posterity comes down, in the end, it seems, to the wrongful use in evidence of three words – ‘cunts in brine’ – in a private letter to a false friend, and three trips beyond the borders of the ACT in cabs in breach of a law about which, it seems, he was ignorant, and his drivers were too, and for which he may be fined nine hundred dollars — a sum I am sure he will gladly pay.

That’s right, it does not relate to the James Ashby cabcharge allegations, which he later withdrew from his claims, in any way whatsoever — despite widespread misreporting.

Wow.

This looks very much to me like a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and seize government by unfair means, and reason for Ashby, Brough and Pyne to go to gaol — not Slipper.

I ask any lawyer to pronounce on this.

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/politics/the-pillorying-of-peter-slipper/

 

Rares outlined evidence that Ashby had confided to friends about his plans to singlehandedly make more perilous the government's fingernail hold on power. Brough was in on it; a frontbench figure in the LNP, Mark McArdle, was in on it; other prominent LNP people in Queensland knew what was being hatched; News Ltd was footing hotel bills, yet Pyne and Tony Abbott were comatose and had no inkling that the nation was about to be ''saved'' by Ashby.
It seems all the more extraordinary because there was never going to be anything in this case for Ashby.
The action was designed to maximise and inflame media coverage; to help Brough and the Coalition in their continuing campaign to discredit the Gillard government.
The investigative plods in the media have been eerily shy about exploring the involvement of Abbott in this grubby legal set-up.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/surely-the-coalition-smell-hasnt-evaporated-20130117-2cw5l.html#ixzz2IGfvPxJ2
---------------------

One of the best article by Richard Ackland pointing out the sad fact about the media plods whom I call "dung beetles" since they only push shit uphill...