Hi,

I hope this finds you well. 

I couldn’t get back to you last week because of recent developments, like sadly, the Watergate-eque burglary of my home in Breizh, France (see below correspondence sent to me on Wednesday 21st May 2025 ) that was presumably intended to try and put further obstacles in the way of my ongoing right to go directly to the ECHR to ensure my right to my jury lawsuits, politicians have ‘no recognised defence in law’ to.

(I do think it is probably true that the Australian bully boy PM is legally obliged to resign -because he has illegally misled… the public about… legal proceedings- and that there also needs to be a new election for the federal Melbourne electoral seat too)

**** I now think it is unlikely that I need to provide an attestation -or- pay money to the Australian High Court of Disputed Returns for a hearing, including about jurisdiction, because the:

a) Australian bully boy PM, the

b) former Australian Commonwealth Solicitor General, who is now Chief Justice of the Australian High Court and

c) the latest federal MP for Melbourne cannot deny they…. cannot go before or be cross examined by any jury in any court and claim they reasonably believed the… political language of ‘forced adoption’ is a… legal term they can use in very serious legal proceedings in any court, including when an adoption court order constitutes a… false imprisonment which is a recognised legal term. ****

_________________________________
__________________________________

**** The fact they cannot deny they know they have illegally been using political language that is not recognised by courts means they knew they have no… jurisdiction to stop me ditching an adoption court order made while I was a minor, without my needing to go to or have the permission of a court

I am correct in saying any court registrar could officially acknowledge an adult adoptee has notified of having ditched an adoption court order without needing to refer anything to a judge ****
________________________________
________________________________

Of course a Chief Justice of the Australian High Court can’t swerve legal proceedings relating to his time as the Australian Commonwealth Solicitor General, simply because he has been appointed as a judge or indeed the most senior judge

I always thought it was legally improper that politicians could fake a phoney ‘national apology’ using their political language of ‘forced adoption’ that is not a recognised legal term. It is as though politicians thought a few crocodile tears somehow gave them the right to legal of oversight of any legal redress there might be, while in fact they carried on as before over adoption court orders that constitute false imprisonment (which is a recognised legal term) of… adoptees.

The Judiciary (ie: The NSW adoption judge Brereton who wrote about principles of jurisdiction before he is now at NACC that is run by the Australian Commonwealth Attorney General’s Department) obviously do not investigate their own judiciary:

It is very true that adoptees are being forced or tricked into having to indefinitely return to an originating court, particularly when you consider the judiciary have been willing political accomplices in rubber stamping unlawful adoption court orders they knew adoptees could not and did not agree to as minors tat cannot be used against us as adults without our agreement:

There is no real explanation for the inexplicable continuation of the longstanding and widespread political and judicial abuse of power towards people made adoptees as minors..

I did while sending some documents, with regard to the burglary, come across by pure happenstance some further documents (added below) about the jurisdiction case about me in the UK (in CO/5019/2007) that prove it is commonplace to have some often extensive discussions about what… jurisdiction a case would be heard in. Of course, in that case (CO 5019/2007) we now know politicians were only trying to illegally stop a binding High Court jury ruling that British Magistrates Courts must make audio recordings of court proceedings, particularly because we -also- had the legal right to leapfrog from the British Magistrates Courts directly to the ECHR.

It would probably be sensible to speak next week, including about passing along my witness statement/attestation to the Australian Ambassador to France (who I will presume until it is proven otherwise, given what happened in the UK, has a conflict of interest in the sense of putting Australian politicians interests before mine)

A Chief Inspector Lyazell above (who emigrated to the Bahamas with his brown envelope) or an Asst Commissioner Allison or a Sir Ken Jones, the fmr Head of ACPO in the UK and DAC in Victoria Police in Australia never mentioned “both houses and black rod” because they knew !!!! that gave me the (ongoing) right to go… directly to the ECHR without needing to first, go through any British court.

The politicians and judges cannot… mislead the public about legal proceedings in courts.

This is a very serious example of politicians illegally… misleading the public (while knowing about my for example High Court jury lawsuits in the UK where I was facing endless… intimidation etc in the UK around that time):

**** I understand (after everything I went through from politicians trying to hide my legal right to go…. directly go to the ECHR to enforce my legal right to High Court jury lawsuits in the UK) the Australian bully boy PM and Murdoch spy and crime family apparatchik, cannot, as neither can the fmr Solicitor General he then appointed as the Chief Justice of the Australian High Court (and Court of Disputed Returns) because they are compromised over my British High Court jury lawsuits, along with the latest federal MP for the Melbourne electorate who is a govt propagandist for adoption, spin their political language of ‘forced adoption’ in any court… before a jury in a jury lawsuit, because they know it is not a recognised… legal term, but was instead intended to illegally… mislead the public about legal proceedings in jury lawsuits like my own over my adoption court order that clearly constitutes a false imprisonment which is a known legal term.

When I complained about being illegally stopped from ditching the adoption court order while in my own home in Breizh France and that I was illegally being stopped from standing in federal politics in Australia, by the adoption court order etc my home in Breizh, France was burgled.

I have… repeatedly complained that I should have been able to ditch the adoption court order while still in my own home in Breizh, France. I mentioned that in my response to the email/s sent to me.

The Watergate-esque burglary of my home in Breizh, France that has more than a whiff of politics about it, does not however provide political cover over legally privileged information and my ongoing right to go directly to the ECHR.

I have… repeatedly !!!! complained that I should have been able to ditch the adoption court order while still in my own home in Breizh, France, so however anyone looks at it, and whatever the ins and outs of the Watergate-esque burglary of my home in Breizh, France, may be, Australian politicians have put in place a sequence of events that has facilitated what has happened. I have mentioned that in my initial response to the information sent to me.

I am personally slightly sceptical a…. burglar, can try and also claim to be a squatter which does however align with the efforts of British and Australian politicians and the Murdoch spy and crime family to illegally stop me living in my own home in Breizh, France:

The monetary value of my multiple High Court jury lawsuits in the UK is the reason for the Watergate-esque burglary of my home in Breizh, France, whatever other… excuses may be used.

There is of course… once again the issue of legally privileged information.

{A hospital here spoke to me earlier this week, to update me and let me know my medical situation is in their words “difficult” because although I am, following medical treatment, in partial remission (which I think is a plus) from what the hospital says is a “very rare illness where it is even rarer for someone to also have (my) history of malignancy” (with regard to cancer) that means oncologists will not agree to my having at this time, drugs specialists would otherwise normally give me to try and achieve full remission and deal with relapses, because the illness has no cure. So now I have to have further medical treatment in the months ahead, to still try and achieve full remission by other means]

The medical situation, could also possibly complicate my ability to respond as I would like, to the situation in my home in Breizh, France.

The legally unworkable Victorian Adoption Act 1984 has consistently left me open to being exploited and worse by all sorts of…. unscrupulous and unlawful acts by others who do not have to go to or return to an originating court… in Australia which it is falsely claimed I had to do, to ditch an adoption court order, so I can move on with my own life, without so much unlawful political and judicial etc interference.

_____________

As previously mentioned, my British High Court jury lawsuits stood in the way of the Murdoch spy and crime family BSkyB deal, which remains true in the sense that while I still have the right to go… directly to the ECHR, to enforce my legal right to High Court jury lawsuits (the Victorian Adoption Act 1984 was also about illegally trying to stop jury lawsuits and standing in federal politics) the Murdoch spy and crime family want to extend their business in the EU.

They… profited from this propaganda they published to illegally mislead the public:

The Murdoch spy and crime family illegally misled the public -above- about how the staged propaganda meant they…. profited from illegally stopping CCTV of them… literally stalking me going on the court record on 19th July 2007 at Lavender Hill Magistrates Court, because there are no audio recordings of proceedings in British Magistrates Courts.

I could not have been kidnapped from inside a court… during live proceedings to stop me going on the witness stand at Lavender Hill Magistrates Court- if- there had been audio recordings of British Magistrates Court proceedings)

My personal view having seen all sorts, is that -all- Judges should have to be elected by the public because otherwise there is no actual scrutiny of any kind of what they do.

The latest Chief Justice of the Australian High Court has previously made some hypocritical comments about how the judiciary are appointed, because his own appointment is very much a political appointment, so he could try and ‘sidestep’ he was… compromised by my High Court jury lawsuits in the UK when he was a Commonwealth Solicitor General for Rudd et al when I was illegally denied… access to legal assistance in the UK etc etc

A Chief Justice Gageler who was as the Commonwealth Solicitor General an obedient apparatchik for the Rudd et al Labour Party, including when Gillard tried to jump on the Liberal Party Howard bandwagon with her ‘Malaysian Solution’ following on from Howard’s ‘Pacific Solution’ when the High Court had curiously just dispensed with… Habeas Corpus) is a purely… political appointment.

The same Chief Justice previously said in referring to the Unites States that: “”It can too easily be dismissed by us here as bad things that happened there”” said Justice Gageler. “We can look at them from afar in horror, fairly confident that the same things will never happen here. “The similarity of our legal traditions combined with the constant and ever- increasing impact of extreme ideologies on our own political culture means
that we fool ourselves if we think that something of the kind could not happen here.”

Political and judicial fawning over the inequality of the institution of monarchy that emboldens people to make a republic to be whatever they want to mean, is “extremist ideology” that does not primarily promote the peace and harmony of the rule of law and a genuine democracy that should consistently put legislative options to a public vote.

The archaic not so Australian Constitution is particularly problematic because it is cynically designed to keep the inequality of the institution of monarchy firmly entrenched in Australia.

Of course Chief Justice Gageler did not look on aghast at the behaviour of the British Judiciary towards an Australian citizen, when he was Australia’s Commonwealth Solicitor General compromised by the political scandal of “both houses and black rod” in the UK.

1. the political scandal about the “both houses and black rod” document dated 19th May 2006 about the unlawful interference of the British… Parliament, and the entire state apparatus, including those working for the Murdoch 
   
   spy and crime family who paid for their Private Members Bill in 2011 to also maliciously target me, in the British House of Lords, after they 
   
2. profited from illegally stopping me having CCTV of the Murdoch spy and crime family literally stalking me entered on the court record on 19th July 2007 at Lavender Hill Magistrates Court, before 
   
3. they were publicly calling on Sky News Live, on 19th July 2009, for me to be illegally ‘removed’ which led to the attempt on my life (because I was speaking out about the fact the “both houses and black rod” document dated 19th May 2006 had been illegally withheld until after 3rd March 2009 in CO/113/93/2007 etc etc)

(The British Parliament actually illegally withheld evidence of their illegality from so many legal proceedings because they knew we should have been able to go directly to the ECHR on 19th May 2006. The former British PM did illegally… mislead the public about legal proceedings in the UK)

4. before they were grandstanding at a parliamentary culture and select Committee on 19th July 2011 (which is not anywhere near the same as a High Court jury etc)
   
   are still essentially pursuing extending their ‘media’ operations in EU market.
   
   Meanwhile my priority is to have my having ditched the adoption court order officially recognised without my needing to go to court, because of course there were never any legal reasons to force me to indefinitely leave my own home in Breizh, France to return to the originating court in Victoria, Australia. The politicians spin put in place a sequence of events that has and is only continuing to cause very serious harm me, including with the most recent political development.  
   
   

There was quite a lot of discussion about jurisdiction… ( I don’t think the judges had any jurisdiction because it wasn’t my fault they refused to make audio recordings of court proceedings in the British Magistrates Courts)

The District Judge Evans who alleged the Contempt of Court, makes no comment about it anywhere, that anyone mentions, because in fact we were never cited for any Contempt of Court. The allegation was only dreamed up after the Judge had left the court, and I asked for a copy of the unlawful summons against me (so that I could file them as evidence elsewhere) The summons were placed ‘sine die’ immediately after we were falsely accused of contempt when the… court was not sitting, to hide the fact the summons were illegally issued on Friday 23rd March 2007 for a hearing on Monday 26th March 2007 (a year after my adopted identity was illegally leaked on Mothers Day 26th March 2006 when Blair was grandstanding with politicians in Melbourne, Australia) after Brian had (after the barrister’s letter from 12th March 2007) also asked me to go to the court with him to ask for summons against the two Blairs (that eventually became CO/11393/2007)

They were ducking and diving all over the place to try and stop a legally binding ruling from a High Court jury that they British Magistrates Courts are legally obliged to make audio recordings of court proceedings:

There was quite a large amount of victim blaming of Brian and I going on:

The Treasury Solicitor was writing her legally irrelevant propaganda to distract from our legal right to go directly to the ECHR the day before a hearing on 25th October 2007 that was not included in the published official records (below) because politicians et al wanted to hide they arranged a court hearing on the same day the meddling monarch/y with their now King was opening a statue in Parliament Square, Central London, so they didn’t want us there:

The meddling monarch/y do interfere in politics all the time (as their latest malicious prosecution of Brian and I, in 2010, proved when we were legally entitled to go directly to the ECHR)

Members of the public would reasonably expect the commonsense of the peace and harmony of the rule of law to prevail with an… admission that the British Magistrates are legally obliged to make audio recordings of court proceedings.

It is unclear to me why the barrister while criticising the District Judge did not mention that it was essentially a private prosecution maliciously brought by a serving Tory MP who posed as the prosecutor:

This correspondence dated 12th March 2007 is what led to me being maliciously targeted by the same judge as above, on 26th March 200…7 too, in what became the jurisdiction case about me in CO/5019/2007:

The District Judge would have to have been sacked if the public heard what he actually said to me, which was seriously sexist etc because he relied on no audio recordings of court proceedings.

It was CO11393/2007 no-one could legally go around or overtake that led to my High Court jury lawsuits like HQ12X03564 etc:

_______________

I have also considered how it is problematic that there is no designated Australian department an Australian citizen can simply go along to, to complain about being illegally stopped from having the freedom to stand for democratic election to federal politics in Australia, so it can be sorted out without being further punished by having to go through onerous and what should be legally unnecessary legal proceedings in a court.

The abiding memory that remains with me about the omni-shambles  of my being unlawfully arrested and maliciously prosecuted etc, under ss 132-138 SOCPA 2005 in the UK simply -because- I properly notified in writing that the politically motivated legislation had no legitimate aim that was convincingly established in criminal law, is of politicians illegally misleading the public about wholly unnecessary and adversarial legal proceedings involving the entire state apparatus over legislation I helped force the repeal of.

A kinder evolution is possible.

This statement is true.

Donna

(formerly known as Babs Tucker)