I find it puzzling and mighty suspicious that there is no recent mention of the POI Spedding in the media at all. Not a single peep has been heard. I have no idea why.
I mentioned suppression orders and super injunctions (an injunction to keep a suppression order being publicised that it exists at all) previously and if they were used in Australia - and find out they are. Below is a link about such an order in 2014 - one that Australians would have been kept in the dark if not for WikiLeaks. I understand why they would be issued but I cannot help feel the need for a "we cannot comment at this stage" from the media if this is the case.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/30/wikileaks-gag-order-open-justice-is-threatened-by-super-injuctions
"Last month, an Australian judge issued a super-duper injunction preventing the reporting of bribery allegations which involved south east Asian political figures, and in some cases their family members. The allegations have arisen in a criminal case before the supreme court of Victoria. The super-injunction, which not only prevents publication of the allegations, but the detailed terms of the injunction itself, only came to light because WikiLeaks published the intimate details on July 29."
"In Australia, the courts have issued internet take down orders in relation to pending criminal trials. The mainstream media tends to comply, while the rest of the internet, including Google, studiously ignores these attempts to quarantine the jury system."