From: "VCAT" <email@example.com>
Subject: Auto Reply
Date: Friday, 22 July 2005 4:57 PM
Your e-mail has been received at the Victorian Civil and Administrative
Tribunal and will be forwarded to the appropriate area for attention.
Please note this is an automated response.
Internet Site Administrator
From: "gaiaguysnet" <firstname.lastname@example.org >
To: <email@example.com >
Subject: Tribunal Reference Numbers: A132/2005, A133/2005 , A134/2005, A137/2005 & A139/2005
Date: Friday, 22 July 2005 11:23 AM
A signed .jpg copy of the below letter is attached hereto.
Dyson Devine and Vivienne Legg
775 Upper Coldstream Rd
New South Wales
Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Tribunal Reference Numbers: A132/2005, A133/2005 , A134/2005, A137/2005 & A139/2005,
Dear Senior Registrar,
We are writing to you now to again explain why, for the first of several ostensibly independent reasons, we are not in attendance at your hearing. In short, it is evident that you lack legal jurisdiction, as you have not directed us otherwise, as we repeatedly respectfully demanded of you and the EOCV over the last six months.
It has come to our attention that you still require further reiteration regarding the simple statements made to you by us in the correspondence that we had with you on last March 10th, 2005, of which you acknowledged receipt but did not further address during our exchange of five emails. Senior Registrar, please refer to the aforementioned correspondence in full at www.gaiaguys.net/vic.vcat.htm
Among several other places, our unanswered correspondence is very prominently referred to near the top of the opening page on our popular whistleblowers website on a hypertext link entitled, "Please read our (unanswered) letters to VCAT (who are pretending they have not heard from us repeatedly) and much more."
For your convenience, we direct you to its location immediately below our large headline, "The OTO proceeds with separate religious vilification and victimization action against us in the Victorian Civil and Administrative Appeals Tribunal, with whom we will NOT co-operate!"
Again, for your convenience, I excerpt and quote the gist of our abovementioned evidently ignored March 10th correspondence to you (and the EOCV):
12:18 PM Kate, could you please inform us how many religious vilification cases against non-Victorian residents the VCAT has prosecuted?
3:02PM: Would you please be so kind as to answer the question we just asked you about Victorian legal jurisdiction too?
..We are very puzzled why this has come to us here in NSW, regarding material published overseas, as common sense dictates that Victorian state law that do not apply outside of the state of Victoria, in spite of the strange statement in the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act Victoria 2001 that it also applies out of Victoria.
Until we get a straight answer to the question of jurisdiction, which we've been asking the EOCV since February 19th, with no replies, we see no reason to continue to waste everybody's time with this nonsense. Did anyone even read the email correspondence we've sent you that has been acknowledged as being received by you?
I quote from yesterday's email to (EOCV Complaints and Conciliation Investigation Officer) Rory (Jolley), "Setting aside for now the issue of David Bottrill's obvious bad faith in focusing his complaints solely on New South Wales while ignoring all the many other sources of the published material to which he objects outside of Victoria, until we can get some plausible information to the contrary, common sense demands that once this Act gets north of the Murray River, it's not worth the paper its written on. Please correct us if we're wrong. In spite of the indications that this is just one of several independent reasons why David Bottrill will be disappointed, it seems prudent to resolve this one before we start downloading and filling out forms for the Victorian Civil and Administrative Appeals tribunal. Would you agree?"
We were then informed by you that this correspondence had to be conducted by telephone, to which we politely declined, insisting on having it in print. There was neither reply, nor subsequent replies from either the VCAT, or the EOCV.
We trust this is sufficient to finally resolve this important matter.
(signed, 22 July, 2005)
Dyson Devine and Vivienne Legg
We were surprised to hear the telephone ring
at 10:15 AM on August 28th, and even more surprised to hear that it was Ms. Catheryn Prowse (of PHILLPS FOX) from Melbourne.
Why the weird letterhead and rubber stamp designs?
Back to homepage