THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION
WEDNESDAY 17 MARCH 2004
12884103 ? JOHN WILSON v STATE ELECTORAL OFFICE & ANOR
Plaintiff/respondent self?represented Miss L Tucker with Miss 0 Guillen for the applicants/defendants
HIS HONOUR: Yes Mr Wilson you appear for yourself?
PLAINTIFF: And who are you appearing for Mr Adams? By what right do you sit as a judge of this Court?
HIS HONOUR: I don't answer questions like that. Please sit down.
PLAINTIFF: I am challenging thejurisdiction of this Court. You have no authority to be a judge anywhere in Australia. I am challenging the jurisdiction
of thisCourt. It must be decided by a special jury.
HIS HONOUR: Miss Guillen, you appear for the defendant in this Court?
TUCKER: My name is Tucker, I am instructed by Miss Guillen for the Crown Solicitor and I
appear for the applicant in this matter.
PLAINTIFF: What are you doing Mr Adams? You have no right to be in this Court. Mr Adams what are you doing?
HIS HONOUR: I am looking at the papers.
Mr Adams you are not a judge. You are a fraud. I do not give my consent to be without a jury. There must be a jury in this Court otherwise this is not a Court.
HIS HONOUR: This matter has been listed before me for hearing and I propose to hear it. If you do not wish –
PLAINTIFF: You have no authority to hear anything anywhere in Australia. In fact you have been featured
in my submission to the United Nations for violation of my civil and democratic rights. It is accepted before the United Nations in New York city at this moment.
Their session goes from 16 March to 2 April. You are featured in that as a criminal denying me the right to trial by jury.
HIS HONOUR: Yes. Now the matter for hearing is your notice of motion, is it?
TUCKER: It is ours.
PLAINTIFF: What do you think you are doing Mr Adams? You have no authority in this Court whatsoever.
HIS HONOUR: Mr Wilson if you do not permit me to proceed with this case I will have you removed.
PLAINTIFF: You cannot proceed.
HIS HONOUR: I will have you removed.
PLAINTIFF: I will have you removed. You are the criminal and the fraud.
HIS HONOUR: Are you going to sit down and let me proceed?
HIS HONOUR: I propose to adjourn and remove Mr Wilson and I will proceed with the application.
(His Honour left the Bench.)
PLAINTIFF: You are not to proceed with any such thing. You are a fraud, a traitor and a criminal.
Tell Mr Adams my submission to the United Nations is on my website, he can read it, and he is featured as one of the
criminals who have denied me my right to trial by jury. This is not the end, not by a long chalk.
(His Honour returned to the Bench in the absence of the plaintiff.)
HIS HONOUR: Miss Tucker, I have your notice of motion.
TUCKER: Yes, your Honour.
HIS HONOUR: And I have the summons. It seeks to set aside a judgment of Magistrate Garbett.
TUCKER: Yes, your Honour, you have the notice of motion and affidavit.
HIS HONOUR: Do you seek to read your affidavit?
TUCKER: I do seek.Do you require me to read the affidavit on to the record?
HIS HONOUR: That's not necessary.
TUCKER: I rely on the affidavit and annexures thereto affirmed 11 December 2003. As your Honour may be aware Justice Kirby made orders that the defendant file such an affidavit
seeking to have the summons struck out.
HIS HONOUR: I haven't seen the file. This has already been the subject of an order for directions?
TUCKER: That is correct, it was heard on the 8 December.
AFFIDAVIT OF OLGA GUILLEN AFFIRMED 11 DECEMBER 2003 READ.
TUCKER: There are two annexures to that affidavit, your Honour, two letters.
HIS HONOUR: I take it that the ground is that neither the State Electoral
Office nor the State of New South Wales was a party to the proceedings in the Local Court?
TUCKER: There are two matters that we are addressing with regard to the summons. One was the matter of a wrong defendant which we
accept is possible to be cured but there is a fatal defect in that the pleadings disclose no cause of action and they should be struck out.
HIS HONOUR: As is usual the summons merely seeks to have the judgment set aside.
There is nothing wrong formally with that is there?
TUCKER: No, your Honour, but the supporting affidavit sets out the grounds on which Mr Wilson appeals. It appears to be on two bases; one is the request for the trial
by jury and the second is the invalid appointment of the Judiciary in Australia and, obviously, as your Honour would be aware, the matter of which he was convicted was a summary offence and that pursuant to the Criminal
Procedure Act section 6, that the matter must be heard and that it's clearly a fatal defect. There is no grounds that have been disclosed on which Mr Wilson could possibly succeed in this appeal.
Does your Honour require to hear further from me on this?
HIS HONOUR: No.
FOR HIS HONOUR'S JUDGMENT SEE SEPARATE TRANSCRIPT
HIS HONOUR: Which procedural act?
TUCKER: The Criminal Procedure Act 1986, section 6(1)(c).
FOR THE CONTINUATION OF HIS HONOUR'S JUDGMENT SEE SEPARATE TRANSCRIPT
HIS HONOUR: Are there any other matters?
TUCKER: No further matters.