The Continuing Adventures Of Your Own Personal Jesus

EASLING v RANKINE [2014] SADC 40     This is a defamation action by which the plaintiff alleges that he was defamed by the defendant.  At the time of the publications relied on by the plaintiff the defendant was a Member of the House of Assembly of the South Australian Parliament.  She was also the Minister for Families and Communities; for Housing; for Ageing; and for Disability.   The publications relied on by the plaintiff occurred in October and November 2008.   The first occurred in the South Australian Parliament on 30 October 2008.  On that day the defendant answered a question put to her by another member of the Parliament.  Obviously, that publication was made inside Parliament.   The other two publications are said to have occurred on 12 and 14 November 2008.  Those two publications were made outside of Parliament.   All three publications are referred to in the plaintiff’s Second Statement of Claim.    The ...

I dunno about you, but I love reading about people who are given all the chances in life, live richly and successfully and yet want more, all without lifting a finger.  Entitlement is a grand thing indeed, and this guy takes the cake.  Not only does he want it all, he wants to ensure he gets it all solely by taking his mother to court and contesting the will of her father, his grandfather. From the first case. "Robert, the plaintiff, made clear in his evidence that the plaintiffs not only claimed everything from the testor's estate, but had given virtually no consideration to what should happen to their mother. Q: Your case as pleaded is that you and your brother should inherit your grandfather's entire estate, is that correct? A: Yes. Q: And your mother should get what? A: Whatever she likes. Pension. Trust." Lovely kids those. You can almost see the judge sitting there and holding back from calling this guy some choice names.  Perhaps he should have, but, alas, he h...

Sometimes reality is far funnier than fiction... IN THE DISTRICT COURT   CRIMINAL JURISDICTION ADELAIDE THURSDAY, 13 FEBRUARY 2014 AT 2.10 P.M. BEFORE HIS HONOUR JUDGE STRETTON NOS.DCCRM-13-2431 & 13-2432 R  v   DONALD ROY LONSDALE HIS HONOUR IN SENTENCING SAID: Donald Roy Lonsdale, you have pleaded guilty to a bizarre but dangerous crime. To understand your actions it is necessary to go back some years as it seems your actions were the culmination of years of building anger and frustration which had their genesis over a decade ago. None of that is an excuse for what you did but it explains why you did what you did. Some time around early 2002 you suffered an injury at work and made a WorkCover claim. As is usually the case you were referred to various medical practitioners for assessment. As the year progressed you were referred to a psychiatrist Dr Jules Begg who interviewed you on three occasions in the latter part of that year. In recent times when I have bee...