H J AMES J OHNSON

HUMAN RIGHTS § CIVIL RIGHTS § CORRUPTION § MEDIA

D EFA M AT I O N § P R O F E S S I O N A L N E G L I G E N C E L AW
1 S T F L O O R 1 4 1 O S B O R N E S T R E E T S O U T H YA R R A V I C T O R I A 3 1 4 1
TELEPHONE: +613 9279 3932 FA C S I M I L E : + 6 1 3 9 2 7 9 3 9 5 5

Wednesday 19 August 2009 *** IMPORTANT COMMUNICATION

Mr Michael Brett Young

Chief Executive
Law Institute of Victoria
By Facsimile: 9607 9569 (... pages)

Dear Michael

AUSSIES IN WONDERLAND: WITCH HUNT, WATERGATE, WATERLOO - VICTORIAN SUPREME COURT

PROCEEDINGS 9665 OF 2007, 9263 AND 10222 OF 2008 AND 3731 AND 3366 OF 2009
MELBOURNE'S PRETTY WOMAN FRAUD AND SUPREME COURT BROTHEL-GATE SCANDAL

1. I refer to our lengthy telephone conference yesterday morning of approx. 1 hour and 20 minutes duration.

Thank you for your support

2. I am relieved that the Law Institute has, finally, realised its obligations to support me in my pursuit of justice:
 firstly to rectify the injustices done to me personally, and
 secondly on public interest grounds, advocating proper standards and accountabilities, laws and
procedures for the legal profession, the courts, and for executive government agencies.
3. I am hopeful that the latter, sensible law reforms might reduce th erisk of these sorts of injustices happening
to others.
4. I am also relieved that we have cleared up some misconceptions:
 I have never at any time been begging money off of the Law Institute so that I can afford to pay for a
lawyers.
 I am seeking non-monetary support from the Institute – I have never at any time been seeking financial
support.
 I am seeking Law Institute support regarding on account of being defrauded of my wealth, my reputation
and my livelihood (even my physical health and mental health have been viciously threatened, as you
know) by the misconduct of Ms Cressy's champeteering and maintaining solicitors and barristers. With
incredible lack of intelligence, lack of ethics and excessive greed they have pushed her false claims

Page 1
 against me for their (not even her!) unjust enrichment, scandalously abusing Court processes in the
process.
 I need no assistance from the Law Institute in relation to the preliminary fraud by Ms Cressy against me.
The grounds appeal are so overwhelming, I am confident this preliminary fraud will be promptly rectified
by the appellate Courts. It is the secondary fraud, malicious defamations etc by Ms Cressy's lawyers
against me, this where I have been asking the Law Institute for support.

Confirmation of Support
5. I confirm that you have agreed that the Law Institute will, to begin with, support me at a direct, micro level, in
the following three ways:
 By writing a letter to Mr Michael Bevan, the State Director of the Victorian Legal Aid Office supporting
my application for legal aid funding on public interest grounds.
 By writing a letter to the Legal Services Commissioner demanding that she investigate the malicious
slanders of me by Graeme Devries of the Victorian Bar, and his other unprofessional misconduct,
including multiple attempts to pervert the course of justice in these proceedings;
 By writing a letter to the Attorney-General expressing concern over the failure of the Legal Services
Commissioner to police misconduct disputes against members of the Victorian Bar despite having clear
statutory duties, powers and responsibllities to do so.
6. I did request the Law Institute to provide a letter to Victoria Legal Aid along these lines, in my facsimile to
you of 5 August 2009 (see copy attached). To expedite things, I will prepare drafts of each of these letters.
And I have drafted and a attach preliminary draft of the first of these letters.
7. I will send you drafts of the other two letters separately over the next few days.
8. May I suggest the following timeframe, and ask that you please confirm that this is a sensible course (timing)
of actions:
 Law Institute letter to Victorian Legal Aid Office – to be sent by 21 August 2009 (this week);
 Law Institute letter to the Legal Services Commissioner – by 28 August (next week);
 Law Institute letter to the Attorney-General – by 4 September (following week).

Other methods of support (more general level)

9. I am grateful that you recognise the general problems with the legal profession associated with lack of
ethics, and lack of adequate regulation. Certainly they are written about often enough, even in the daily
newspapers and even in the pages of the Law Institute Journal.
10. I confirm that the Law Institute is already behind the scenes working on these concernns at the macro,
public interest level in the following ways:

Page 2
  Submissions to Government for a national bill of rights, including reforms to attitudes and conduct within
the legal profession and within Government (including the judiciary) so that the 'game keepers' of our
human rights laws do keep and protect and implement them – and do not give way to greed and
temptation to turn 'game poachers' and predators.
 Submissions for Victorian and Federal Corruption and Misconduct Commissions (the latter to examine
human rights attrocities occuring in the family law courts every day);

Closing comments regarding Law Institute support offered

11. As an active member of the Law Institute for 20 years, I am disapppointed that it had to get to the point of
me 'reading the riot act' [clauses 1 and 2 of the Law Institute's Constitution) to the Councillors for the Law
Institute. Hopefully I can now put the 'riot act' away and the Law Institute can work with me in the proper
pursuit of the Law Institute's constitutional interests and professional responsibilities, as they overlap with
my own.
12. It is now a long time that the Law Institute has been refusing to step up to its constitutional and legal
responsiblities to support me in the face of 2 years of extremely malicious (even criminally so) misconduct
and abuse from Ms Cressy's barristers and solicitors. It is a year since I first approached then LIV President
Tony Burke for assistance. And it is close to 2 years since I first approached the Law Institute's Professional
Standards (at a time when my wealth, my income and my families and well-being were all relatively intact)
asking the Law Institute to intervene and mediate this Harwood Andrews invoked madness against me.
13. So you will understand that I need to see some positive and decisive action from the Law Institute now, in
the form of quick attendance to sending these submission letters as agreed on my behalf, before I will be
satisfied as to the genuineness of the Law Institute's change of heart.

Kind regards

JAMES JOHNSON

Page 3