KeenSleuth17
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2022
- Messages
- 181
- Reaction score
- 1,204
wwwhoooaaaaa ! That page is woeful! " Barrister Adam Casseldon framing & bullying a 83 year-old Belgian for the entertainment of the public is disgusting. Assisting offenders is a serious crime"
WT* !
Yeah that person appears quite unwell. And bizarrely attached/passionate about many different types of issues. Largely just anti-authority.
Re protective order:
I guess if this is being served in Australia by an Australian court, then it doesn't count internationally ?
My first thoughts were the real Ramakels, bearing in mind they are elderly and have felt harassed, however would they not be 'out of jurisdiction'?
Possibly it is for Dianne and WW themselves as now they have testified they must be left alone and as we see they are also elderly and ahem... 'unwell'... they may well be framing themselves as innocent victims in the strange disappearance of a woman he once briefly knew.
If the concept is that WW himself or anyone acting on his behalf is a threat to those he has already menaced, then the list is long. Is WW a threat to anyone? Maybe if he has firearms and wants vengeance.
Usually a PO has to be against someone particular. It's a protective order either domestic or personal for one person and those that live with them against someone else. I don't think you can take one out against faceless/nameless potential harassment, endangerment etc
Edit to say thats strictly not true. I guess RB could take one out against Channel 7 for example.
Yeah I don’t think the protective orders are orders on a specific person or entity. I took from it that they are in relation to information privacy and withholding records and evidence from publication. I don’t think they are to protect certain people or to restrict certain others. Those types of orders I don’t think would be made by a Coroner.