We’ve been reading your blog. Ian, it’s very interesting. – Senior Constable THREFALL, rogue police officer.
The bombay doors for the F-35 fighter planes that are used in the bombing of Gaza are made here in Brisbane in Tingalpa. So on May Day, I stood in silent protest with my back turned to the premier objecting to his government giving license to Ferra Engineering in Tingalpa to make weapons parts for use in the genocide in Gaza.
Police issued a warrant for my arrest, and I was brought before the court. Here is my submission as to why the charges should be dropped.
I first heard about this matter on the 19th of May 2024, I received a text from a police officer THRELFALL who had assaulted me on Labour Day, and he told me that he wanted to talk to me about my ‘offence.’
THRELFALL came around to my house with two other police officers. I wasn’t at home, but I asked my lawyer, Terry Fisher, to ring him up. THREFALL didn’t respond. THRELFALL then assisted police officer MANNING to get an arrest warrant, and the local Carina police, came to my home to arrest me.
My lawyer, Terry Fisher, had contacted THRELFALL in response to that text on my phone, and also responded to the visit to my house by THREFALL from tactical crime squad and police officer BONE from Carina police. Got nothing back.
Police issued the warrant. So I went to Carina police station, and only to be arrested by an officer there. Police refused to give me the arrest warrant. That was on the 7th of November 2024, then on the 28th of November, I went before the Roma Street Magistrates Court, and I asked for particulars of the offence. The magistrate said he can’t deal with that, but the senior officer whom I visited said he would provide me with particulars in the following week, but he didn’t.
Under threat of arrest, I was forced back to court on the 29th of January 2025, where Magistrate MALONEY made an order for police to provide particulars. They didn’t provide them. Nor did they provide crucial body worn camera footage, nor did they provide the statement of their key witness, Sgt SCHMIDT, who authorised the assembly on May Day at the exhibition grounds. I received the statement of their key witness last Thursday. She knocked up a statement on the 29th of April 2025 about a matter arising from the 6th of May 2024.
I was ordered to come here last week. I asked Magistrate MACK for particulars, plus I asked for the relevant body cam footage and the relevant statement.
I finally get particulars from prosecutor Tri PHAM, and those particulars are completely different to what was in the original charges (QP9)., and what is in the bulk of those statements, he’s honed it down, claiming that I attacked police with my back, but there’s no case really to answer, because while police assaulted me I fell backwards.
I was part of a peaceful assembly. That will be a matter for the trial magistrate to determine on the evidence. The police commissioner approved the assembly that I was in. The prosecution has got the material there in their hands. Even though the Commissioner approved the rally, and then they they charge in, and they pushed me and my friend. They don’t get me on the ground, but they did get my friend on the ground. There was no indication in any of their statements that I was doing anything other than turning my back on the Premier in silent protest for his failure to address the issue of the genocide that his government provided licenses to weapons manufacturers at Tingalpa, only a few kilometers from where I live.
Police haven’t brought the matter to trial. They’ve disobeyed the court. The court has been so lax, to allow this to happen. Why would the court accept a refusal to provide me with a key witness, the body cam footage, and police statements. Why would the court want to be party to that? The waste, there are people sitting out there now, waiting. I will not agree to any date that you put down for trial. It is a travesty. It’s an absolute travesty. And I come back here, time and time again, I hear the same thing every time.
Courts cover for weapons dealers
The court proceedings involved Mr. Curr, charged with two counts of assaulting police officers under section 791A of the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act. The case was delayed due to non-compliance with court orders, including the late disclosure of evidence and statements. Despite the delays, the magistrate refused to stay the proceedings, citing that the circumstances did not meet the exceptional or rare criteria for staying criminal proceedings. The trial was scheduled for July 31 and August 1, 2025, in court 18. The magistrate advised that any pre-trial applications should be raised on the trial dates, and any dissatisfaction with the ruling could be addressed through an appeal.
Detailed reasons given by Magistrate
These offenses are alleged to occur on the sixth of May 2024 at the exhibition grounds in Bowen Hills.
The matter didn’t come before the court on its first return date, on the 28th of November 2024 in circumstances where Mr. Curr said that he became aware that police wished to speak to him and made inquiries of them to bring the matter to a head, but that there was a delay of about, or in excess of six months for the matter to have its first return date.
At the first return date on the 28th of November, the matter was adjourned to the summary COVID on the 18th of December. The matter was dealt with on the 13th of December by way of an online application, and it was adjourned to the 29th of January.
On the 29th of January, the matter came before magistrate Moloney, who ordered that a brief of evidence be prepared by the 12th of March, with the matter to be mentioned again on the 26th of March.
On the 26th of March, it was noted by Magistrate Nolan that a brief had been disclosed, but the statement of Sergeant SCHMIDT and body worn camera footage of Sergeant Schmidt had not been disclosed, and Magistrate Nolan directed disclosure of that by the 11th of April, there was an application by the prosecutor to join the two charges that wasn’t opposed by Mr. Curr, and that order was made.
The matter was subsequently listed for a review on the 29th of April and listed for trial for a full day today, the matter came before magistrate Mack at the review on the 29th of April, where his honor noted that the direction the 26th of March had not been complied With. That there was no statement from Senior Sergeant Schmidt, nor any body worn camera footage, though those items were now available for collection of the police, prosecution, court particulars hadn’t been given.
His honor, noted his dissatisfaction of the delay and the non-compliance. He then listed the matter for further review on the seventh of May, when it came before deputy chief magistrate Courtenay, where it was noted that as of the seventh of May, the final part of the brief was ready for collection. His honor directed that particulars be emailed by 2pm on the act of May notifying the name of the prosecutor, his honor was concerned about the matter proceeding to hearing today with a full brief not being disclosed.
Mr. Curr said, says today that the Mr. Curr says today that the direction was not complied with either, because he wasn’t provided with the details until Friday afternoon, which was the ninth of May. Mr. Curr makes application this morning that I should stay the proceedings to prevent an abuse process.
In Neil and the County Court of Victoria, Justice Redlich said that the magistrate finally determining rights and obligations in the exercise of the court summary jurisdiction has the power to stay criminal proceedings euphoric which are an abuse of process. Such power being an essential, essential attribute to the exercise of jurisdiction.
One of the main authorities on this area is Jago and the district court of New South Wales. 189 168 CLR and. 23 where justice galdran said the circumstances which will lead a court to exercise this jurisdiction that can stay, have variously been described as exceptional or rare. It is a power which should be used sparingly and with the utmost caution.
It is a jurisdiction which will only be exercised where it is readily apparent that it should be exercised to prevent prosecutorial oppression. It is a power which is not concerned with the manner of a person’s trial, but is concerned with the question whether a person should be tried at all. There are no set categories of cases whilst instances of this exercise or the power will be rare, it will certainly be invoked where the evidence indicates that it would be unacceptably oppressive or unfair to an accused or an affront to the public conscience to admit the prosecution to proceed. I
don’t find the facts in this case to reach that high level described as exceptional or rare, there has been delay, both in charging Mr. Curr and providing him with the material that he has requested and which the Court has directed satisfied Mr. Curr, seems to indicate the case that now Sergeant Pham has been allocated the case. Particulars have been provided. Whether or not there’s some argument in due course about sufficiency of those, I don’t know, but that will be a matter for Mr. Curr.
There’s criticism about the time in which it’s taken to provide statements and when statements have been taken, but that may be very relevant to Mr. Curr cross examination of those witnesses as to their recall and their credibility and or reliability. So the application to say the proceedings has refused. So I’ll allocate you the what is it? The 31st and first? The 31st of July, 1 of August. If there’s any other pre trial application, will you run them on that day as to sufficiency of particulars, etc. That’s why I think that I’ll note that there might be other arguments that you want to raise. Is that right?
What I’m saying in the trial proper, there’s some other things you may wish to raise that you haven’t raised, yeah, as preliminary issues or not giving you advice, but maybe the case that you litigate your trial, if you are subsequently acquitted, then you’re acquitted then you’re acquitted of everything. If you’re subsequently convicted, then your grants of appeal can include that order I’ve made today, as well as any or other orders you’re dissatisfied with.
So I suspect the High Court might say to you, well, you can hold your it’s a pre trial refusal. The usual courses. You wait until your trials finalized, and then there might be no need for an appeal anyway, because you’re acquitted, if that makes sense to your decision. Or I’ll list the case for a two day hearing court 18, nine o’clock on the 31st of July and first of August. Do you want any further review dates? Or we’ll just leave the trial alone.
Summary
The 19th July 2024 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice establishes that all UN Member States are under an obligation not to recognize Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian territory and not to render aid or assistance to Israel in maintaining the illegal occupation.
BDS movement activities are justified in their pursuit of compliance by Israel with international law.
The Australian government has, in the past, defunded and threatened to defund organizations which have a supportive association with BDS. Any such detriment or threat of detriment is to render aid or assistance to Israel and is unlawful.
Union Aid Abroad should demand assurances from the Australian government that BDS associations will no longer negatively impact organizations which provide lawful support for Justice for Palestine.
In this trial arising from police attack on unionists protesting the genocide on May Day 2024, a hearing was meant to be held today 13 May 2025, but is now postponed 2.5 months because the police and prosecutors can’t do the most basic aspects of their jobs. I wanted to get this done today and now has it hanging over my head again, so I’m very unhappy with this outcome. It would be good to get more support in court when the hearing eventually does go ahead on 31 July 2025.
The magistrate refused an application for a permanent stay of the proceedings because they are an abuse of process. After the hearing today one of the police witnesses Jake Threlfall told supporters that he had been reading the Workers BushTelegraph. It took police six months to execute the warrant for my arrest. One supporter speculated that police had targeted me because of Workers BushTelegraph reports of the Ferra and Boeing genocide trials that have been going on in the Brisbane magistrates courts this year. Readers know how the saying goes just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean you’re wrong.
Ian Curr
15 May 2025
Good luck Ian.
Hopefully the magistrate will throw this case out.