There is a saying about people who live in glass houses and what they shouldn’t do with stones. Some however choose to ignore that wise old saying, Kathy Jackson is one of those.
In fact some would say that Jackson has grown eight strong throwing arms like an octopus and stands with a pile of stones in the centre of her castle of glass.
As most would know Kathy Jackson went after Craig Thomson like some sort of rabid Rottweiler given the taste of blood over what she alleged to be improper use of union members funds.
Now as Kathy finds herself having to explain $1.4 Million worth of her own spending of members funds, suddenly what is and what isn’t a union related expense has taken a turn for the surreal.
This of course is forcing me once again to dredge up the old pot and kettle image.
Kathy Jackson explains “authorised” expenditure to Craig Thomson
In Kathy’s mind it seems spending money on a “Your Rights At Work” anti-workchoices campaign as many other unions did was not union authorised.
In fact the Australian Electoral Commission found in Thomson’s favour on Jackson’s claims of improper spending. Below is a link to the report on their findings
However her own union-related expenses she can’t seem to understand being questioned on, despite them totalling approximately $1.4 Million.
While anti-workchoices campaigns are not authorised in Jacksons mind, apparently her spending was.
I’m sure the members have gained great benefit from her 18 holidays to the US, Europe and Asia. I’m equally sure that the members enjoyed the approximately $660,000 spent on designer clothes in their name.
Equally I’m sure the members were thrilled to know that they were making mortgage payments on Jackson’s former mansion, after all I bet Jackson invited all of those hospital cleaners around for a swim in the pool.
The fine wine and fine dining, the electronics from JB Hi Fi, the ski trips, all above-board in Jacksons mind, all part of her salary package is her defence.
When I started using the word Jacksonville it was to try to portray the particular type of arrogance mixed with delusional thinking that the above is a fine example of.
We’ll tell them its a union-related expense…
The Fair Work Commission Federal Court case against Craig Thomson commenced last week and as reported here Thomson presented an affidavit to the court in an attempt to have the matter dismissed, a copy of Thomson’s affidavit is linked below.
Craig Thomson Affidavit March 2015
As reported previously the attempts to have the case dismissed on mental health grounds were thrown out and disregarded despite the evidence of medical practitioners.
There were however some other parts to the affidavit which produced an interesting reaction from Justice Jessup.
When Thomson sought to bring into evidence the utter incompetence of the Fair Work Australia investigation, and the name Michael Lawler came up Justice Jessup was quick to dismiss the evidence labelling it “scandalous”.
However it was not Thomson that was accusing FWA of incompetence and bodging their investigation, he was merely pointing out that it had a negative impact on his mental health.
It was the independent report by KPMG into the train wreck that Fair Work Australia referred to as an “investigation” that highlighted in organisations incompetence in this matter. It was also the KPMG that singled out Michael Lawler as not co-operating with an investigation his own organisation had commissioned. Fair Work clearly had many workers however only one was singled out, and that was the partner of Thomson’s accuser.
Scandalous indeed.
One area that I found interesting is that of the prostitute that police had lined up to testify against Thomson, something that would have had the media salivating like a starving mutt.
However when it came to the crunch this prostitute went AWOL.
Just like a fart in a stiff breeze she up and vanished into thin air. No name, no address, no-show, no nothing, only the word of a couple of coppers that she even existed.
The last prostitute lined up was pretty reliable too…
However when Thomson pointed out that these were the same cops that had falsified an arrest warrant to publicly arrest Thomson in front of the media that were waiting outside his office for the cops to show up, that was once again “scandalous”. These same police claimed not to have tipped off the media about the arrest under false circumstances, and if these police are to be believed then we have a vast number of psychics in the press who would be far more financially secure picking lottery numbers.
What was scandalous is the behaviour of police regarding this arrest. Even a blind man with his eyes closed and facing the other way can clearly see this arrest was performed for political purposes and was seemingly timed to coincide with a Tony Abbott speech, given ironically at the National Press Club during his election campaign.
These are not conspiracy theories, these are a matter of public record with evidence presented to support the case, and for a judge to brush them off so easily in my opinion is scandalous.
The other star witness appearing against Thomson was also unable to make it to court. This witness was a brothel owner. In any other case a brothel owner would be seen as a highly untrustworthy witness, however when testifying against Thomson, they may as well be the Pope.
Anyhow, the witness was unable to make it to court from his current residence, a prison cell. A reliable witness indeed.
Scandalous even?
Despite the ridiculous fiascos with disappearing prostitutes, jailed brothel owners and dodgy arrest warrants the scandalous court case continues on despite there not being a defendant.
Craig Thomson, following his doctor’s orders, left the Court at the lunch break as he advised the court he would be doing numerous times. Having no legal representation Thomson now finds himself being in the strange position of finding out what is happening in his own court case via media reports. Given there is nobody attending court to argue in Thomson’s defence, those representing Fair Work Commission will have free rein to say whatever they like unopposed.
Great system we have here…
Authors Note
After writing this article Craig Thomson contacted me regarding comments made by readers on the previous article relating to his mental health and legal costs. Thomson has asked me to pass on his gratitude for all the support and offers of help, and has asked that I also pass on that if anyone would like to donate funds that they should donate them to Beyond Blue.
Save Wixxy from his own budget crisis by donating here
Like Wixxyleaks on Facebook here
Oh dear, is there no lawyer who can appear pro bono on Craig’s behalf? This is terrible.
You offer an interesting analogy, Wixxy, namely the pot calling the kettle black. When a black pot calls a black kettle “black”, the hypocrisy is certainly breath-taking. Be that as it may, both utensils are nevertheless black. Someone who genuinely believes in Craig Thomson’s innocence perhaps should not use the pot-kettle analogy. The real issue regarding Craig Thomson should be whether the allegations made against him are true or false. Who makes the allegations against Thomson is not really relevant. It is, in fact, a distraction. It might well be that Thomson, Jackson and Williamson all diverted HSU money for their own improper purpose albeit to different degrees. But I would argue a tumbler of water containing a pinch of powdered chicken manure mixed in makes the liquid just as unpalatable and as undrinkable as if three heaped table-spoons of powdered chicken manure had been added. I therefore doubt that ordinary HSU members would approve of $20,000 being taken from them any more than they would approve of $20 million being taken from them.
I wonder when these Liberal National Party assistants like Ashby, Jackson, Smith, Lawler will realise that they have been played for fools. Peter, the item in the Australian that you referred to in another article really paints a grim picture of some of these people. http://t.co/95kPmFyiCA And that article was published by the LNP friendly Limited News. It is appalling that processes can be corrupted to attack people like Thomson and Slipper from so many different angles and equally corrupted to protect the people that were at the centre of the AWB bribes in the oil for food scandal.
@JB April 8, You say who makes the allegations against Thomson is not really relevant but I think it is because the original allegations and evidence came from the HSU “whistleblower” Kathy Jackson and the players in the games against Thomson had some powerful reasons to go after him as a weak point in the minority Labor Government and a former union official.
Thanks for the reminder of that most fortuitous coincidence, Thomson’s arrest during Abbott’s speech.
You can’t remember everything & there’s so much bastardry perpetrated by this lot.
Notwithstanding Craig’s generous suggestion that people wanting to support him financially should donate to Beyond Blue, there may be well people who would be prepared to do both. And I seem to remember his lawyer at one stage warning people against repeating allegations about prostitutes and fraud etc., suggesting they would find themselves up for libel with big damages to be paid. Was that just bluster?
I have lost all faith in our justice system, the police and the parliamentary process. Can this be restored? I can only hope a political party has the cojones to investigate, publish and prosecute those responsible for damaging our important institutions.
puffytmd, I don’t think either of the major parties has the cojones, their interests lie with the corporations not the people. As I heard said about the two major parties in the UK, you can choose between Red Tories and Blue Tories – that about sums up the Australian position for me.
I seem to be at a loss here, is it now becoming apparent that Craig Thomson was either 1.) Set up , and is innocent, or 2.) Guilty of defrauding the HSU, regardless of the criminality of his accuser, or lack thereof.
I think you have provided a pretty fair summary of the situation, Sydney Dude. Craig Thomson has his share of “one-eyed” supporters, in the same way that Kathy Jackson has her share of “one-eyed” supporters. But both Thomson and Jackson each have implacable critics as well. It is true to say that many of those who are convinced of Craig Thomson’s innocence are just as convinced of Kathy Jackson’s guilt. And the converse is also true – there are those who think Kathy Jackson is a whistle-blowing heroine and that Craig Thomson is an out and out scoundrel. However, there is a third group of people who do not take sides, and who think both Craig Thomson and Kathy Jackson are despicable crooks albeit to differing degrees. I place myself in this latter category. When one then adds Michael Williamson to the list, it just seems that for nigh on 20 years, successive thieving HSU leaderships have been intent on stealing millions of dollars rather than looking after the interests of ordinary HSU members. Supporters of these HSU leaders become inexplicably wrapped up in how hard done by “poor” Craig Thomson is, or how hard done by “poor” Kathy Jackson is, but no-one appears to give a tinker’s cuss about the ordinary HSU member who has been robbed blind over nearly two decades.
I do not think that is so with the ALP or at least less so than the Libs/Nats.