Seriously disabled vet with chronic mental & physical war-caused injuries, exposes horrific Commonwealth government abuses and EMAIL FRAUD - leading to suicide attempts

A long list of government failures spanning some 60 years through archaic engagement banned by government in 1901 and as a result being held captive against my will from 1951 - with protections and cover-up


“The willingness of future generations to serve in our military will be directly dependent upon how we have treated those who have served in the past.”

George Washington.


Update 25 January 2016 with letter on DVA proven corruption as contained in 25 October 2015 letter to Prime Minister Turnbull and to Minister DVA:


11 Willow Glen Close

Green Point NSW 2251 AUSTRALIA        

Mobile: (02) 4367 3780,  0439 197 846(M)



25 October 2015


The Prime Minister, the Hon. Malcolm Turnbull

Minister for Veterans' Affairs  (DVA) the Hon Stuart Robert MP


Re: Veteran's 20 year fight with DVA's concocted fraud & independently proven corruption - complaint


Dear Sirs

Veteran of 19 operational war zones battles proven DVA corruption and a legal quagmire involving DVA's concocted fraud and forging of documents to be branded a criminal fraudster trashing his good name after many times putting his life on the line for Australia.

  • DVA corruption was proven by 2011 external review, which DVA controlled;


v  20 April 2012 DVA was forced to apologise, but only for corruption aired in independent external review which DVA controlled; many complaints remain un-investigated.


  • DVA corruption also verified by independent Dr Kristy Muir(2001), CDPP (2003/4), OAIC (2012), and other independent findings.
  • At a January 2014 AAT hearing of a Veterans' Entitlements Claim I was three times advised that Australian Law, Administration Law and Precedent did not apply and that all evidence was irrelevant and unacceptable as put by the AGS for DVA and confirmed by the AAT.
  • A Statement of Claim initiating legal action against DVA was to be heard at this AAT hearing    It was lodged on advice of Commissioner Australian Public Service - it was deemed irrelevant, not heard and is blocked.
  • Appeal extension lodged to Federal Magistrates Court - delayed due poor health and cancers
  • Dealing with DVA has always been difficult and poisonous.


  • Veterans' Affairs' serious failures are exposed in 2014 Australian Public Service Commission Capability Review, just as ANAO was very critical of DVA complaint process several years ago. Read more:


In almost twenty-years DVA failed to heed independent corruption findings and warnings and has illegally urged senior politicians, including two Prime Ministers and other agencies to ignore me and cease enquiries (Crimes Act & Criminal Code issues).    DVA deliberately trashed my name and defamed me in hundreds of widely spread lengthy, up to 23 page dossiers.     DVA also intentionally concocted and illegally used false fraud.    Furthermore, DVA's failed process led to institutional bias and deliberate widespread trashing of my name, wrongly branding me a fraudster.   


New corruption enquiry

As in unheeded 2003 warnings to DVA about my case and harm caused, just a few weeks ago another of DVA's officers was so appalled by DVA’s actions they lodged formal notification under the Public Interest Disclosure Scheme of what both she and an independent advocate considered corrupt DVA behaviour.  Senior DVA officers whom I have unsuccessfully dealt with in the past now stage manage the enquiry.

  • Thus DVA corruption has again been aired by senior DVA staff, just as it was in September/October 2003, including warning/s to the then DVA Minister.

v  October 2003 unheeded warning by a senior DVA staffer on harm in false fraud:

"This case is going to blow sky high"

  • Despite calls for a Royal Commission into DVA, the Department remains unbridled, yet censored by admonitions in my case and in a 2013/14 Australian Public Service report.


DVA corruption Confirmed (Attachment 1)

  • Much was exposed in the 2011 external review admonishing DVA for causing harm; similarly CDPP (2003 & 2004) chastised DVA.   
  • After DVA was forced to apologise 20 April 2012, OAIC also separately chastised DVA, changed DVA process and initiated code of conduct enquiry.


  • External review found it was impossible impossible to prove my innocence in onslaught and harm caused by DVA, particularly where there are also countless "errors of law" as independently exposed and where DVA concocts and illegally uses false fraud from 2001, including in evidence; also where repeated admonition and warnings go unheeded.
  • Similarly, fair consideration of entitlement claim, FOI & reason for decision requests and complaints proved impossible during more than a decade.


New mischief - interference with Disability Pension for serious war injuries

(See also 20 October 2015 press article on overpayment and government error - reference:


The most recent major problem is DVA questionable deduction from 100% war-caused Disability Pension; also DVA cutting my wife's income to zero and removing her Health Card - for government error causing overpayment, which I reported.   

v  Deductions are being made without consideration or reply to $$$millions outstanding issues (for up to 5 years) linked to alleged overpayment - my unanswered 20 August 2015 letter.


I voluntarily pay a nominal sum to reduce alleged debt - pending:

v  Fair resolution and reply to 2010 Letters of Demand, 2012 Commercial Invoice for a large $$$millions sum relating to DVA caused harm; as well as blocking of Statement of Claim lodged on advice of Public Service Commissioner in 2013; also 20 August 2015 letter. 

  • I have reasonably linked and required DVA resolve all issues before any adjustment is made.
  • I complained to DVA about wrongful deduction with large compensation issues outstanding for up to 5 years


Background to apparent pension and wider corruption

In 2013, after a fight lasting nearly five decades, I was awarded compensation for injuries suffered as a member of the Royal Australian Navy.  It was backdated to the 5 December 1968.  During my service I was also sexually and physically abused at the Royal Australian Naval College when a "child soldier" from age 13 years


Later, I was summarily, wrongly and illegally jailed without enquiry - for serious sabotage to a ship by my most  senior sailor who harboured hatred for the CO.   In Navy service I was also wrongly summarily dismissed without enquiry several times.    Other untoward events, include denial of compassionate leave when my daughter was seriously assaulted.   


This Navy abuse was investigated by DLA Piper, accepted by DART; ex-gratia reparations payment made.   


Explanation of new DVA pension heist

I had much concern that this back-dated compensation may lead to an overpayment by DVA.  I contacted DVA several times since 2013 and raised this issue.  They never responded.  Then, just a few months ago, they wrote and demanded immediate repayment of an alleged debt of $43,772.50 caused by government error


I have been making a nominal payment, but DVA refused to consider it, or other major issues I have fought in very large unaddressed corruption compensation - $$millions outstanding up to five years. 


Instead, DVA has completely stopped my wife’s partner pension and my disability pension.  This is an extra-ordinary abuse of administrative power for government error and, with DVA history of abuses, is more corruption.


Outline 20 year toxicity and corruption & independent findings against DVA since 2000 (Attachment 1)


I am a very old man and strongly object to the DVA corruption I have fought for nearly 20 years.


My life was destroyed by sexual and physical abuse when I entered the Royal Australian Navy at the age of thirteen.  The system set up by the good old boys failed me and many others like me.  DART proved that.  To this day DVA treats me like garbage, even though every independent review of DVA’s behaviour towards me finds them at fault.  Its head, Simon Lewis, its senior lawyer, Carolyn Spiers, will do or say anything to protect their own.  The Senior Executive Service in DVA is rotten to the core; Senator Jacqui Lambie and a group of veterans are each separately seeking Royal Commission into DVA where like application by my team in January 2012 led to no response from government.


Now, in my twilight years, when I am suffering from multiple chronic diseases and I am about to start chemo for bladder and prostate cancers, DVA hits my wife and I with this obscene behaviour.  They know I have some money left from my compensation payment after buying our house because I have told them as I am required.  My wife is just as elderly with severe mobility problems.  We don’t know what our future medical expenses are, nor what modifications the house and other costs may be, nor even how long we can stay here. 


Yet, DVA appears to want every single cent we have and refuses to address specific long outstanding financial compensation issues and wide-ranging complaints as listed in 2012.


Incidentally, I had an appeal over finally getting the T&PI.  It was the determination by DVA to refuse the T&PI that led to one of its officers lodging a corruption complaint under PID.  That’s getting white-washed as well.  I offered to sit down and discuss the issues with the delegate.  Just have them treat me like a person for once.  He didn’t even bother to reply.



Yours sincerely


John Atkins

LCDR RAN ret'd


Attachment 1:

Outline 20 year toxicity and corruption & independent findings against DVA since 2000

  1. I should make you aware my relationship with DVA is toxic at best where, as found by external review, it has been impossible to prove my innocence in a number of DVA concocted frauds DVA illegally used in evidence and in trashing my name.   
  2. In 2001, DVA fraudulently manipulated an entitlement claim, leading to DVA's threat to sue me for fraud 30 May 2005 and to Minister DVA's public vilification and threat to sue me for fraud c. August 2010.    Independent Professor Kristy Muir identifies this fraud as a tactic used by DVA.
  3. Independent former public servant and former DVA "insider", Mr Paul Evans, discovered DVA trashed my name in hundreds of lengthy dossiers (up to 23 pages long) branding me a fraudster and vexatious litigant.     Also in these dossiers DVA successfully and illegally urged senior politicians including two prime ministers to ignore me and cease enquiries (Crimes Act & Criminal Code).    This prevented any enquiry and me proving my innocence.
  4. 2002, DVA commenced, without justification (external review & CDPP), first of three almost three year fraud investigations.  Finally, DVA was criticised by an external reviewer controlled by DVA; also by CDPP for not even establishing a crime was committed.   I should add that was because I committed no crime. 
  • An independent review by a former DVA staffer, Mr Paul Evans, found that the investigators recommendations to not investigate was over-ruled by members of DVA’s senior executive. 
  • A hand-picked consultant by DVA also concluded that the investigation/s was botched and should not have taken place, but placed the blame purely on the investigators.
  • External reviewer reported CDPP chastised DVA for harm caused September 2004
  • It took six months of hard fighting for DVA to accept the independent review findings and to even apologise over my treatment and harm caused.
  1. 6 & 21 October 2003 senior DVA staff warned DVA management about using corruption against me stating "This case is going to blow sky high".    DVA cover-up and corruption continues today.
  2. Both Mr Evans and DVA’s consultant found my privacy was breached.  DVA has never apologised.
  3. Similarly, DVA failed to apologise for admitted lies to the Privacy Commissioner (FPC) - DVA letter 23 June 2004 apologised to FPC for misrepresenting facts, but damage was already done.    DVA never apologised to me or corrected matters involving serious fraud allegations and their illegal use by DVA, whilst FPC refused to reopen the case.    DVA even used threats on false fraud and other criminal allegations DVA invented to prevent me proving my innocence.
  4. I had a T&PI claim going before the AAT at the time of fraud investigation/s from2002. 
  5. Even though CDPP questioned and warned DVA about the propriety of fraud investigations and specifically stated that investigation could be seen as placing pressure on me to stop pursuing this claim - the investigation/s continued. 

10.  When leaving a very stressful interview by the director and the head of the Special Investigation Unit (SIU) 6 November 2003 I was threatened with long-term jail by a senior DVA Fraud Officer.

  • My health collapsed and I withdrew my claim.  DVA has never explained why it then continued the fraud investigation in these circumstances, nor apologised.

11.  The only recommendations from this interrogation were made by the director, and none were about me, but only to investigate serious concerns about the person who made that particular criminal fraud allegation illegally used against me by DVA.   

  • Yet there are other DVA concocted fraud allegations, one of which exploded into threat to sue me 30 May 2005, as already mentioned.
  • Also, in August 2010 the Minister DVA made additional threat to sue me for fraud.

v  It is apparent that DVA had obsession to find me guilty of fraud, trash my name to all and sundry, cause me harm and prevent me proving my innocence as found in external review controlled by DVA, supported by CDPP and OAIC findings.

  1. In 2003 the initial DVA investigator had recommended no further action in false fraud DVA used against me.   This was accepted by his director and DVA, yet DVA continued to pursue me. 
  2. The heart of DVA corruption
  • It is noteworthy that the only action taken against me was by the SIU, which was formed to handle high value crimes.    The SIU interrogated me about fake documents forged by a disenfranchised accuser trained, paid and elevated by DVA and to whom I was referred by DVA

v  He seems to be involved in much of DVA's corrupt conduct toward me and possibly the unrecorded threat by one SIU officer as I departed hearing.     

  • He was protected by DVA at my expense, including through a "round-robin" of funds to cover-up his sizeable frauds.    Ultimately in 2012 he appeared in the Manly Court on some 30 counts of defrauding DVA.     Interestingly, he is known to have had wide-ranging associations - within DVA to Ministerial levels.
  • I should point out that I was falsely accused of preparing a fake medical report.  At no stage was the report lodged with any claim or appeal, so it had no monetary value.  Why was the SIU involved, at all? 
  • The doctor whose name was on the report told DVA’s investigators I was incapable of writing it. 
  • Despite all this, the SIU kept on going after me.  The head of the SIU reported directly to the Deputy President, who was then Ian Campbell (another possible reason for the SIU threat as I departed hearing 6 November 2003). 
    • At the time DVA engaged a consultant to write the report, Mr Campbell was President and Secretary of DVA.  He met with the consultant and discussed the report prior to its conclusion.


  1. Involvement of the AAT:
  • I reported duress after AAT threat in 2004, but was finally, in July 2005, forced to agree to a minor claim settlement with DVA
  • Some 9 months earlier the AAT had altered terms of settlement negotiated by my lawyers

v  THEN three times in January 2014 the AAT advised Australian Law and Precedent did not apply and my evidence was irrelevant, which shows how this case has developed.

  1. For nearly three years of the much questioned investigation for which DVA was condemned, DVA told all and sundry in lengthy dossiers of up to 23 pages, that I was being investigated for fraud and that they should not respond to my letters (breaches of The Criminal Code & Crimes Act). 
  • Even after the CDPP’s advice DVA continued to tell every parliamentarian or agency that showed any interest that the only reason I was not in gaol was because the CDPP had declined to prosecute and that they should ignore me. 
  • What they neglected to say was that the CDPP had not declined to prosecute. 
  • Instead, they were highly critical of DVA for not lodging a brief of evidence, but seeking advice for what they should do next.  They also stated that DVA had not even established a crime had been committed, let alone by me.  DVA’s ‘advice’ was clearly designed to stop further inquiries and for ten years its legal team kept this CDPP criticism hidden from everyone, including me. 
  • After it became public in 2012, DVA bluntly refused a recommendation from an outraged Mr Evans that they should write to all agencies and parliamentarians advising them that there was no basis for making these statements, at all, and apologise for providing misinformation.
  1. The Australian Government Solicitor (AGS) formally advised DVA in 2012 as to whether I was entitled to compensation over my treatment.  DVA has refused to reveal that advice.
  2. The AGS reviewed a complaint I made against a senior member of DVA’s legal team.  This was the officer who breached my privacy and managed my Freedom of Information requests for over a decade.  DVA flatly refused to reveal the AGS conclusions regarding my complaint, despite the clear guidelines by the Australian Public Service Commission. 
  • DVA has simply not responded when challenged by myself and others as to why they have ignored the guidelines. 
  • Incidentally, this officer has since left DVA with a sizeable redundancy package.
  1. I could go on.  DVA failed to fulfil its obligations under legislation and policy with regards to FOI and complaints for over a decade.  Their compliant consultant didn’t even bother to look at these issues.
  2. Separately, the OAIC was severely critical of DVA.  As a result Mr Evans lodged a complaint over straight out lies by DVA and by DVA’s senior lawyer, Ms Carolyn Spiers.  DVA took nearly three years to resolve the latter complaint.  Even then, Mr Lewis personally and repeatedly narrowed the scope of the complaint until a consultant was engaged to consider just one single letter. 
  • Despite this attempt at obvious and new manipulation, DVA’s trained consultant still had to find Ms Spiers’ letter did contain two ‘false statements’, but as there was no evidence she had written them deliberately no further action would be taken.


Attachment 2:

Excerpt from unanswered 20 August 2015 letter on government error and overpayment:

(See also 20 October 2015 press article on overpayment and government error - reference:


Response to advice of alleged huge overpayment

  1. In response to DVA's alleged overpayment and recovery letter, we  confirm there was apparently a government Comsuper error in payments to my wife and I.   
  2. Accordingly, we make a Payment of $20 each/fortnight in consideration of any overpayment, pending proper resolution of many long outstanding issues with DVA, involving some $$million; also considering:
    1. Our very significant costs  and out of pocket expenses in managing on-going acute serious medical conditions and major life threatening health issues we both battle
    2. Our out of pocket expenses due to most confining and debilitating accepted medical conditions, include PTSD where no manner of help from DVA can make amends for the harm caused, or consequential harm by DVA over the last almost twenty years
  • Initial harm in Navy service included in around 19 periods of operational war service, particularly where DVA has denied me Special Rate/TPI pension from 1996, largely through use of innumerable "errors of law"; furthermore
  1. Expenses in relation to horrific abuses suffered in ADF service 1951-1968, many of which were accepted by DART, where government assistance appears to be outside legislation.
  2. I was held captive by the Navy from February 1951 and this has not been dealt with as acknowledged by the Royal Commission into Child Abuse.    Dealing with this extraordinary abuse is a costly exercise.


Update - May 2015

The main outcome from the Royal Commission into Child Abuse hearing 5 May 2015 was that I was held captive against my will from 1951, trapped in an extraordinary form of engagement in long bonded indenture with payment by way of pocket-money.    This was for 22 years in my case after Navy extended without discussion.
Such work contracts were devised long ago when slavery went out of fashion, but they gave little protection and none of the rights to workers as enacted in the international workplace from the early 1800's when worker representation and unions came into being.   This form of engagement had been banned by the Australian government under 1901 legislation, yet it continued in the Navy.

Worker rights of fairness and "balance", without fear of retribution for complaint, as now required under legislation are fundamental in today's workplace, but apparently not so under the contract signed by John's father in January 1951.    Hence the reason for this story of dark shadows and evasion following unbelievable abuses of rape, repeated torture and bashings, followed by denial of what we know today as basic human rights.

However, as in quotations on this website, international leaders have long recognised the need for a fair and safe workplace, which can only be brought about by significant change in process and culture apparently still deficient in the Australian military as shown in recent reports from 2012.    Thus, as with revelations made in the Gray and Rapke (HMAS Leeuwin) reports, so too in the recent DLA Piper and DART reports, we see amazing ADF cover-up, turning of the blind eye and failed process where there continues to be much fear in our military service.   

Accordingly, on 5 May 2015, the Royal Commission was presented with a scenario not only of widespread abuse of process within Navy, but also in all of John's dealings with government and particularly DVA embracing horrific abuses of power and visible unconscionable government conduct.     

In John's dealings with government in seeking to obtain his rightful and legislated entitlements, government interfered with his case and set him up to be branded a criminal fraudster, liar and cheat, including in "arranging" medico-legal reports confirming government assessments.    Government also referred him to a wrongly accredited fraudster jailed c. 1980 whom DVA trained and paid, then protected at John's expense.    This individual was later charged on more than 30 counts of defrauding DVA but, as in other instances, he used mental illness to escape sanction.

This individual, demanded John pay a bribe to ensure DVA accepted his claims and paid entitlements, but John refused leading to John's medical documents being forged by this man and to John being blamed, so setting alight the whole case and to John eventually fighting 6 x separate false DVA concocted and used fraud scenarios and three wrongly constituted national fraud enquiries (see 2011 External Review condemning DVA) !

The 2011 External Review also found John had been harmed and eventually DVA was forced into writing a mean apology, but still John is denied his rightful entitlements, including TPI, or Special Rate pension and other compensation, but his hundreds of complaints and requests as outlined in his letter 12 April 2012 remain unaddressed from May 2002.

In 2012 both the Minister and Secretary DVA closed the case and in 2014 Assistant Commissioner DVA blocked John from communicating with DVA directly.

THEN January 2014 and despite John remonstrating against the order from the AAT, John was advised not only was his evidence of some more than 200 "errors of law" in his VEA claims irrelevant, but also that Precedents (foundation of Australian Law - Justice Kirby) were irrelevant !!

In the supposedly independent AAT, John was advised in January 2014, that Australian Law does not apply in his case !

This was and remains unbelievable and John's protests only caused the AAT hearing to be closed.   

An extension of time was requested of the Federal Magistrate's Court, but it is considered that presence of John's Statement of Claim commencing Court action against DVA and lodged on advice of the Public Service Commissioner may have caused this highly questionable action.    However, it is not the first of a number of apparently hostile AAT actions with which John was forced to contend; these have been recorded to the Attorney General for either no response or no action.

Government intentional Defamation
Worse is how government deliberately trashed John's name, defaming him in lengthy (up to 25 page) dossiers widely spread to "pollies", including prime ministers Howard and Gillard.    Some were actually published in the 2011 External Review Report.

These long defamations; were sent to "pollies" and to all agencies to which John sought help for fair consideration.    In these lengthy documents, DVA obsequiously and illegally successfully urged recipients to cease enquiries on John's behalf and to ignore him (serious breaches of Crimes Act, Criminal code, Public Service Act and Privacy Act).   

In short, these defamatory documents containing all manner of information about John's case, without his permission, were each criminally illegal by any fair assessment !    They caused John and his reputation and personal integrity most serious harm.

What chance does anyone have against government's entrenched position and protections for its bureaucrats in such circumstances ?   

For example, how can one persevere in the face of Minister DVA c. August 2010 publicly comparing john with a jailed criminal and threatening to sue him for FRAUD !    The Minister was accompanied by a DVA Deputy Commissioner who in April 2010 cleared DVA of any wrongdoing in one of three known Internal Reviews, immediately prior to extreme exposé's by very brave former DVA "insider", Mr Paul Evans, which led to DVA condemnation for harm caused and DVA's forced apology 20 April 2012 !

Based on 2003 CDPP chastisement, External Review 2011 admonition, 2012 change of process by OAIC and admonition by OAIC December 2012 for continuing abuses in John's case, even after apology, nothing short of Royal Commission will apparently bring to the surface the extremes used by DVA and correction.   

In another example, a number of years ago Dr Kristy Muir's published works exposed tactics used by DVA, similar to the manner in which DVA concocted the first fraud John was forced to fight.    DVA's other tactic of starting and stopping serious medical condition have also correctly fallen into disrepute.   

Many have called for Royal Commission into DVA, including independent reviewer, Mr Terry Fogarty in January 2012.    HIs demand and recording of criminal practices received no response. 

For the record:
It is clear that, from John's time of discharge as proposed and arranged c. 22 August 1968 by Deputy Navy Chief Stevenson, DVA was the only agency through which John could realistically obtain consideration and remedy for firstly his most serious abuses and secondly his chronic serious disabilities caused during his service and in around 19 periods of separate war operational service.

So began john's long and toxic fight, some of which is outlined on this website, which sets out to present some of the story.   

Separately, a book is being printed on one of many stories in this case.    It is written with co-author and very brave former DVA "insider", Mr Paul Evans who lost everything through helping John, much as did former NSW Attorney General, the late Mr Jeff Shaw QC, who helped John 2007-2010, but asked to be relieved shortly before his death; he recommended Supreme Court action.

Court action against DVA
On advice of the Public Service Commissioner, Statement of  Claim initiating Court action against DVA was lodged but was blocked and unheard by the AAT in January 2015.    Like other evidence and precedent presented at that hearing, it was BLOCKED and deemed to be irrelevant, whilst John was told he and his case were not subject to Australian Law.

Thus, government has not only prevented enquiry into a long list of complaints as contained in John's complaint to DVA dated 12 April 2012, but government process has now prevented, for more than 12 months, hearing of Statement of Claim fairly and properly lodged for hearing in the AAT.

So, John's complaints remain unaddressed from 1951 where he apparently rightly claims that he was held against his will by government from 1951, whilst repeatedly being denied fair hearing of complaints apparently embracing most serious criminal acts where abuse has been heaped upon abuse.   

He remains without remedy from when aged 13 years and he is now in his 79 year !

On 17 November 2014 this website was updated as follows:

Defence Abuse Response Taskforce (DART) yesterday recommended royal commission info ADF abuses.    This is a major step after the DLA Piper legal investigation which identified me as the oldest valid claimant.

The following was today posted on my Facebook page:

I am wondering on how to now best proceed.

Check this story written by acclaimed defence columnist Ian McPhedran.

Then perhaps suggest and consider how my manuscript and book on the well documented and publicly recorded stories of my abuses in the public domain can help in the proposed royal commission.


This could help bring some closure to perhaps the tens of thousands of ADF abuse sufferers, including through abuses by DVA and obsequious government administration, Thank you.

The following was just received from a fellow abuse sufferer thanking me for that which I have done to help this cause:

Abuse victim John Atkins, who was raped and tortured at the Navy recruit school HMAS Cerberus in Victoria as a 13-year-old in the early 1950s, said the only way to rid Defence of abuse was through a Royal Commission.…/a-ne…/story-fncynjr2-1227136099775=

SENIOR officers are among almost 800 alleged abusers still serving in the Australian Defence Force and a royal commission is needed, the final report of the Defence Abuse Response Taskforce (DART) has found the following - see website:

My story:
However, my story is encapsulated in this website and summarised in a manuscript now with the publishers.    The book contains summary of stories only in the public domain and proven through acceptance in a number of forums which have proven me right all along and awarded aappropriate compensations.

At the outset it should be known that forgiveness, re-invention and persistence have been the cornerstone to surviving events in this website.   

To help me along the way and from when a lad of 16 years, I carried with me a story of hardship from the Readers Digest and Matthew 7 paraphrased "with what measure ye mete, ye will in turn be measured".

Not any of the events should have occurred:

1.    Navy accepted liability some sixty years after first complaints 19 February 2013.
2.    DVA made "hidden" apology 20 April 2012, but also
3.    DART accepted wide-ranging rape, torture, illegal jailing, horrific repeated physical bashings and abuse; also mental abuses in specific listings from 1951 to 1968.

Case for Royal Commission:
1.    January 2012 independent reviewer, Mr Terry Fogarty, presented the case for Royal Commission into DVA

2.    Following the 2012 DLA Piper and subsequent DART work on ADF abuses; with detailed media coverage, Royal Commission is again on the lips of most of the ADF and veteran communities.

I was commended on the draft of the following in support of a NEW Royal Commission, in addition to the current Royal Commission into child abuse (prevalent in ADF abuses), while contrasting the need where there are some 200 veteran suicides during the last decade, with Royal Commission into alleged Union corruption where there has been no loss of life.

This NEW Royal Commission is fundamentally about protecting the workplace of those who defend Australia's Freedom and Liberty, thus it involves National Security.

My submission follows:



11 Willow Glen Close

Green Point NSW 2251 AUSTRALIA        

Mobile: (02) 4367 3780, 0439 197 84(M)




Also independent:


12 June 2014


Government avoidance in extreme child and other abuses, including failed process and protections for the abusers in and out of government administrations, consistent over at least six decades in personal experience through "turning a blind eye" and/or "it's not my problem and it didn't occur on my watch" - this is NOT GOOD ENOUGH - time has come for Elected Representatives (as challenged by Senator John Faulkner in 5 December 2012 Melbourne University speech); ALSO for all Australian bureaucrats to shape up or ship out - check your Public Service Code; bring about Royal Commission into extraordinary abuses exposed by DLA Piper, DART, Grey & Rapke, PLUS CPM's Lamond external review into DVA, supported by Gary McColley self-immolation and others suicide enquiries

Dear  Addressees; particularly Dr Kristy Muir, Maryann, Rob, Marc, Paul, Terry, Greg and Jacqui; also Flinders Year 1951 Entry

Despite Navy, Comsuper, DART and DVA all accepting liability for abuses and injuries I suffered in ADF service, including war-caused injuries, there is no remedy or closure and pension and compensation is minor for events that have ruined my life and that of my family and others, including a couple who staunchly supported my battle; others have lost very long associations and friendships through helping me over the years and speaking out !


However, many thanks to each who have been involved and for the words of encouragement in these difficult times while seeking in-depth Royal Commission enquiry into the many abuses suffered by ADF personnel.    This enquiry to include consequential cover-up and white-wash during some sixty years as in my own case.    We are pressing for transparency, remedy and closure dating back to, in my own case, 1951.    Issues involve rape and torture, then other ritualistic hazing, bastardisation and torture abuses dating from the early 1950's through to 1968 and continuing thereafter as DLA Piper and DART show.    In my case alone, these were topped off with extreme DVA abuses as recorded by seven independent reviewers at the time of external review by CPM's Mr Lamond in August 2011.   

But, even after forced DVA apology, the department continued its failed process and abuse for more condemnation in 2012 and new external review ordered 2014, so there is no apparent change.

My loss to date:

I was forced from my chosen career just three weeks after I was commended for notable contribution and recommended for very early promotion.

Eventually, after a forty five year battle the Pension I was then awarded has helped, but was around one-third of indexed value - for example, can you imagine payment of pension in 2013 being made in 1968 dollars ???

For what it is worth, I am also still waiting for remedy in abuses ALSO for award of Special Rate Pension or TPI (worth some $400,000 PLUS around $400/week tax free PLUS benefits for my wife) and other compensation for which I qualify and have qualified since discharge in December 1968.   

These losses make a marked difference to lifestyle for my wife and family and for the family alienated from me through ADF and war-caused injuries I suffer - most remain unrecognised.   

But, I am not alone !

Widespread knowledge by Australians:

All Australians know and/or are aware of family, friends or associates with involvement in the ADF and in defence of our National Freedom during the period from commencement of WW1 through to the present Afghanistan involvement.

It is about our National Security.

This properly affects all Australians and should some think not, each should contemplate who it is that provides them with the Freedom they now have and the education they have received............even their ability to is our military who have done this and in so doing put their lives on the line for Australia's Freedom and remarkable standard of living.    The ADF personnel protected our National Security in the widest terms, yet they are not recognised and are forced to fight tooth and nail for legislated entitlements.

As in the USA (see attached Time Magazine article) ADF and veterans' administration is in crisis.

Unconscionable conduct:

Unfortunately, visible abuses, followed by totally unconscionable conduct and abuse of power in administrative and government cover-up is the resulting topic on most Australian's lips at the present time.    Morale and reputation have suffered.    People just do not understand the paradox of their Freedom and abuse of and by those protecting that freedom; it just does not fit !

Exposé's and continuation of abuses:

Significant steps exposing bad conduct have been made by DLA Piper, DART and other investigations including the Rapke & Gray reviews; also, in my own case, the external review by CPM's Mr Lamond; as well as by former government "insider" and "whistleblower", Mr Paul Evans.    For example, Mr Lamond found I had been harmed and he exposed unheeded CDPP 2003 warning and 2004 chastisement of DVA administration.    He included examples of illegal, lengthy, up to 25 page, defamatory denunciations by DVA trashing my name to people from the Prime Minister to many senior bureaucrats; also hundreds of instructions to ignore me.  

DVA was forced to apologise, but THEN, DVA continued its abuse and OAIC changed process - after chastising DVA in December 2012, leading also to initiation of Code of Conduct enquiry and finally new external review into another part of my case in January 2014. 


HOWEVER, RIGHT NOW, there is fortunately a significant groundswell for Royal Commission, just as Terry Fogarty made an unanswered case for Royal Commission into DVA January 2012, but this time on an even wider base of abuses, including sexual and gross physical and mental abuses and cover-up spanning six decades and involving large numbers of children from age thirteen years.

Adding to the groundswell are the Royal Commission into Child Abuse and the expensive Royal Commission into apparent corrupt Union activities where there has been no loss of life.    By comparison, to May 2013 there were around nineteen suicides attributed to failed process within DVA and some 200 veteran suicides during the last decade.

This is a very large penalty and cross the Nation must bear.

Royal Commission:

Supporting need for Royal Commission are examples of bungled government administration and numerous protections from wrongdoing, including even round-robin of funds to cover-up frauds; with extraordinary unaddressed privacy breaches.    Some examples are contained in the websites listed in the address for all to see, should there be any doubt.


The facts can no longer be ignored.   

Be they in sexual, physical or mental abuses, some dating back up to some sixty years, OR repeated "turning the blind eye" throughout all ADF and government echelons during the same period.    Sometimes, as in my case, including with the deliberate trashing of a veteran's name through false fraud and other criminal allegations, OR through illegal use of untested harmful allegations denying Natural Justice, breaching Duty of Care and all rules by which we veterans must abide.     

These are stand alone examples of abuse, which include innumerable "errors of law" to evade liability in legislated entitlements AND through, as Paul Evans (independent former government "insider" and "whistleblower") shows examples like the following to evade legislated liability and Public Service Code of Ethics:

  1. Failed process leading to institutional bias
  2. Widely spread false and lengthy, up to 25 page, denunciations deliberately trashing a veteran's name to destroy him and any chance of fairness; with
  3. Successful urgings of Elected Representatives and review agencies to cease enquiries in widespread denunciations and instructions, each deliberately and soundly deliberately perverting the course of justice
  4. More examples are shown in the attached draft 11 June 2014 complaint, but in addition there can be shown wide-ranging
  5. Illegal use of false and concocted fraud in evidence to destroy a veteran; with
  6. Blatant and repeated reversals of onus of proof in government false invented fraud and other criminal allegations; as well as threats to destroy a veteran; furthermore
  7. Innumerable reversals of onus of proof in legislated entitlement claims made to DVA; with

8.    Ministerial vilification at the same time as highly questioned fraud investigations (two commenced after May 2003 clearance), in conjunction with even Ministerial threat to sue for fraud in unclaimed entitlement condition, but maybe there was something more sinister in that to which the Minister was referring..........?


9.    False fraud illegally used in evidence; concocted by government to trash reputation and evade legislated liability;

10. This while using top-echelon bureaucrats arranged "round-robin" of funds to cover-up government fraud and to protect "hired-gun" known fraudster with mental illness from c. 1980, who was wrongly accredited, then trained and paid by government who also worked with linkages to ministerial levels - to destroy a veteran and his entitlements

11. Protections of this "hired-gun" at a veterans' expense but in addition

12. Similarly, protections of departmental legal heads who caused and/or managed the above abuse examples and those in the attached draft complaint.

Only solution - Royal Commission:

As I say, the groundswell is growing and as in the recent new revelations of bad and unacceptable behaviours in the HMAS Ballarat scenario, it is clear that nothing has changed in the ADF and it will not change until Australians know the full extent of cover-up, white-wash and harm caused to so many.    Only Royal Commission can expose these abuses and failures to investigate genuine complaints, including against government bureaucrats and ADF personnel.

It is not on and government and the bureaucracy cannot continue to "turn a blind eye" and "cover-up" extreme and unconscionable conduct contrary to Public Service Code and Good Decision-making for Government.

Pass to others for support:

Please pass this to as many associates and ADF current and ex-service groups as possible...............our FREEDOM is dependent upon our service-people being prepared to put their lives on the line for Australia wherever that may be, either at home or as now needed, in overseas theatres - on the basis that it is far better to fight the bastards offshore rather than at home !   

We need to be able to do this with pride and knowledge that we are safe in our workplace and that is no longer the case.

Quote from George Washington on the military:

In passing this to others, please recall that which George Washington said long ago:

“The willingness of future generations to serve in our military will be directly dependent upon how we have treated those who have served in the past.”

Support and media equals Royal Commission, some remedy and closure for perhaps hundreds of thousands currently denied justice & closure, including through DVA:
With your support and that of those whom you know to have been harmed; also the families and associates of those harmed through ADF and consequential government abuses; as well as those who have correctly sought to assist and represent this large group of Australians, I trust that we may be able, with media support - to initiate Royal Commission or similar Judicial Enquiry to bring about change.


God Bless and thanks for your long term support and empathy.


John Atkins



Repeated warning & condemnation for breach of rules:
Had rules of society been obeyed and had fairness, Australian law and rules prevailed, not any of the extraordinary exposé's of the DLA Piper Report would have occurred and similarly:

Then, with respect to Department of Veterans' Affairs abuses:

1.    Not any of the exposé's of former DVA "insider", Mr Paul Evans, would have surfaced, also
2.    CDPP April 2003 warning would not have been necessary, then
3.    October 2003 senior DVA management unheeded warnings to DVA and Minister DVA that 

                                    "This case is going to blow sky high"

4.    In addition, November 2003 unheeded warning by DVA & National Fraud closing the case
5.    CDPP amazing chastisement of DVA 23 September 2004 would not have been necessary, or
6.    Condemnation of DVA by external reviewer Lamond in his August 2011 report; furthermore
7.    Chastisement of DVA and Code of Ethics enquiry 12 December 2012 involving OAIC
8.    OAIC wrought FOI changes in DVA's FOI process as advised 4 January 2013, but also
9.    Continuing problems leading to a new 2014 external review of DVA into matters involving OAIC.
10.   Revelations and condemnations by seven external reviewers would not have occurred.

Check Mr Terry Fogarty's website for more information on DVA criminal breaches, "errors of law", the call for Royal Commission into DVA and much more spanning decades of unaddressed complaint:   



Harm caused by Administration Law & Precedent being irrelevant: 

1.    Australian Administration law and precedent not relevant in the AAT in 2014:
One of the worst aspects of my case is perhaps, as my small team was advised in the AAT on 22 January 2014, that Australian laws do not apply in veterans' entitlement matters, including very specific administration law rules and precedent.   

Twice I remonstrated against being told my administration law and precedent submissions were irrelevant.    My evidence involved hundreds of "errors of law" or "jurisdictional errors" where only one single error is sufficient to overturn a decision, but no, not in the AAT.

Also shown were repeat errors of law and innumerable reasons for review as contained in Administration Law, but no again, this is irrelevant in the AAT.    So, as presented in my case, evidence was shown of abuses of power by Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA), that is many abuses of power, as proven through external review and other exposé's, but once again - NO, not relevant in the AAT.

These errors and other illegal actions by DVA in considering my entitlement claim applications from 1996 represent serious intentional fraud through their repeat use, but this is not applicable or relevant in the AAT or in consideration of veteran entitlements, or in APSC review.

Strange as it may seem, neither are the hundreds of lengthy widely spread denunciations wrongly and illegally branding me a criminal fraudster and as frivolous and vexatious (despite external review proving me right all along).    In addition, not relevant in the AAT are reasonable hypotheses proving my case; neither is a Statement of Claim initiating legal action, with precedent for action and consideration.  

However, these widely spread denunciations also urged senior officials and review agencies cease enquiries so successfully perverting the course of justice, including with  "highly sensitive material" as recognised by DVA; along with many pages of private information not germane to the issue at hand.    The denunciations were deliberately designed to trash my reputation and wreck all fairness in up to 25 pages of hostile wordsmith crafted legal spin doctoring by some of the best lawyers in the land.     I had no chance................

AND 22 January 2014, the presiding AAT Senior Member emphatically advised that all my evidence and submissions were irrelevant !   

This contradicts Australian law, administration law and precedents.

YET, this is not the first time my evidence has been discarded in the AAT  


2.    Other Australian Administration law and precedents not relevant in the AAT:

    a.    In AAT 2010 hearing senior member presiding handed back evidence submitted by the late eminent lawyer Mr Jeff Shaw QC; he then closed the hearing because we referred to DVA and not the Repatriation Commission, which are one and the same body !

OMGoodness what is this all about, but already in this matter, in the AAT, DVA refused to accept Directions of the AAT, however the AAT supported DVA, despite transcript and eventual report from AAT gained under FOI proving Directions were given !

Nevertheless, the AAT refused to hear the full case and constricted eventual hearing for above result, but also for eventual decision, negotiated under duress following two coercive and threatening December 2009 letters requiring me WITHDRAW all complaints about a long list of individuals and agencies, including DVA !!

I refused government demands but eventually, under duress, obtained May 2010 decision where my PTSD was accepted by DVA, in order to most importantly advance my claim for TPI.    

    b.    My 2007 application, on wide issues (where external reviewer on same issues found me right all along in August 2012), I was found "frivolous & vexatious", without attending hearing when again unrepresented. 

    c.    Mid - 2004, through manipulations, I was prevented from appearing at hearing which went against me when I was unrepresented.

    d.    July 2005 decision in the AAT was forced decision, under duress, following August 2004 agreement signed under duress.    In this case senior member's staff advised I either agree to altered decision, or it would be entered in any case !    I was unrepresented.

    e.    The AAT has still not responded to applications for review of decisions lodged from December 2007, despite numerous follow-up, including through the Ombudsman which has not replied !

    f.    The AAT has also still not responded to my 18 October 2009 GRIEVANCE letter on the above and other issues, including coercion, including through the Ombudsman which has not replied ! 


Toxicity and harm in this case

Perhaps toxicity and harm in my case is best shown through the 2004 advice of Mr Thomas Jordon, former Advisor to Attorney General Ruddock; also former XO to Joint House Committees, whom I hired to review my case when I still had some money.    He spent some three months reviewing and advising on the case.                                   

a.    Mr Jordon advised me to leave Australia as my life was at risk in pursuing my case

b.    In addition he advised me to take my case to the International Courts; also

c.    To withdraw my entitlement claims and "lie-low". 

This was after three attacks on my life and two major physical assault bashings caused by my Navy disabilities for which Navy finally accepted liability in 2013 after a more than 60 year battle.  

At the same time, D'Arcy's Lawyers (now  part of Slater & Gordon), LAC Lawyers, City Law and Legal Aid all advised me to succumb and "get on with life", but the harm was too extensive to stop as there are too many of my family who are also seriously damaged, leading to loss of my first family and three children; also my siblings.

I could not believe the advices and continued to fight as best I could when unrepresented.    I made errors.    Eventually in 2005 I booked overseas passage after arranging International lawyers to take my case, but this was cancelled due serious family accident taking remaining funds.

This then led to me WITHDRAWING entitlement claims under VEA Act.
I also RESIGNED citizenship in absolute disgust, including through my Local Member, The Hon John Howard, he then Prime Minister.    John Howard, from September 2002. had been DEFLECTED by DVA, leading to extreme DVA denunciations.
In late 2010, former DVA "insider", Mr Paul Evans discovered hundreds of widely spread DVA denunciations of me wrongly branding me a criminal fraudster and more as shown herein.    The denunciations of up to 25 pages breached privacy, Crimes Act and the Criminal Code.   

The denunciations contained, as DVA acknowledged  in one denunciation, personal "very sensitive information" and successfully urged senior officials and agencies to cease enquiries.    Other denunciations instructed that I be IGNORED !

These abuses of power, the law and rules, were all given the OK by review agencies in obsequious support for DVA when complaints were lodged.

The stage was set and my case was closed by all agencies, without almost all complaints from 2002 being investigated, or most FOI requests from 2003 being rejected, but see Mr Paul Evans', former DVA "insider" battle on my behalf below on FOI matters where DVA was chastised 12 December 2012 and now in 2014 there is to be yet another external review which Mr Evans obtained.

BUT, where is the Royal Commission into DVA for which independent volunteer, veteran and researcher, Mr Terry Fogarty, presented the unanswered case 14 January 2012 ?    Check Mr Fogarty's website:

Toxicity and harm, failed process and Institutional bias; with discrimination and abuse of power against a veteran who many times put his life on the line for Australia's liberty, is clearly shown in matters and abuses surrounding the external review by Mr Lamond, its results and all subsequent events, some of which are outlined in this website.


Horrific defamatory and biased actions and stand by DVA Minister

Late 2010, the then DVA Minister, Mr Griffin, vilified me in public when he compared me with a known criminal and jailed fraudster and threatened to sue me for fraud !

b)     Mr Griffin, the DVA Minister, also steadfastly asserted that any and all entitlements 
for veterans, under any Act of parliament was BENEFICIAL, that is, any benefit granted 
by government was an act of grace payment or pension.   

It seems that this position is one which successive veterans and their lawyers have battled during some four decades.    Thus false fraud devised by DVA (six separate scenarios in my case); hundreds of false denunciations of me as discovered and exposed by former DVA "insider" Mr Paul Evans and other narcissistic breaching of Australian law, the Crimes Act, the Criminal Code and other rules, including Good decision-making for government and Privacy; as well as FOI rules, by DVA is all A-OK.    You see, complaints about these issues are just "snuffed-out" and top legal and other officers are protected by the bureaucracy.


Breaches by DVA:

Breaches are often visibly shrouded in spin and through being whittled down by regulators they get confirmed as OK through obsequious support of DVA in regulatory agencies, including as Mr Paul Evans shows below.   

It makes me wonder how any government can send young men to fight wars for Australia's freedom, without establishing a fair system for when things inevitably go wrong - changing the system which is visibly flawed, seems essential to meet the George Washington credo and advice.

It is not possible to fight the present government stance and, as a result, obsequious regulatory support for DVA.    In this battle with government administration, I am quite often placed on "suicide watch" as members of my team of supporters well know.    My wife intervened in two suicide attempts.

My wife and I were and still are very frightened by Thomas Jordon's advice; also the Minister DVA's vilification and threat in 2010 and continuing DVA abusive and narcissistic failed process, discrimination and bias; with protections for the most senior officers (check Mr Paul Evans work).   

This protection has include protection to the very highest levels and continues today through regulatory and review agencies, as Mr Evans shows below, despite warnings and condemnations by external reviewers, including CDPP, from 2003 and OAIC 2012.

What is this all about, after many times fighting for Australia's liberty and freedom and accordingly risking my life and my family's wellbeing ?



The seriousness of the problem
It is all about trust, duty of care, natural justice and simple rules for all Australians - to protect and guide us - which the Navy and government administration, in my case, visibly deny with protections, failed process and cover-up, as shown through the DLA Piper and Lamond external review report in 2012 and 2011 respectively.

Navy breached my parents trust within one month of me entering the Naval College in 1951 when, as a child of 13 years I was in Navy care under a long term indenture, not unlike that banned by the Australian government under the Pacific Islander Act 1901.

At this time in 1951, I was seriously raped, tortured twice and many times bashed in physical assaults during the first month of service in an indenture, where complaints to medical staff, teachers and the residing psychologist (recorded in my medical documents), were not acted upon.    A "blind eye" was turned as shown in the DLA Piper Report of 2012 and the abuses mounted, including brain-washing in a horse-breaking style regime to obtain obedience and subservience !

The long abuses began from 29 January 1951 entry to the Royal Australian Naval College as a Cadet Midshipman, following selection from around 600 applicants.    It was a supposed privilege and highly respected and fought for military career program which I entered, along with 27 other young children.

My Dad signed indenture January 1951 for me to enter the Navy and serve until age 30 years but where, in 1961, the Navy extended this period by around five years to 1972 when I was selected to attend specialist training for the Navy in the UK.     

Instead of completing indenture, I was forced out of the Navy and my life career in 1968.

In view of problems I had in Navy service, early release from the Navy was proposed and arranged by my then boss in Navy Office, Deputy Navy Chief, Rear Admiral HD Stevenson.   

Interestingly, he was also a central figure in wrongly implicating the commanding officer of HMAS Melbourne (Captain JP Stevenson) in wrong-doing to appease the US authorities after the collision with USS Frank E Evans in 1969.   

At the time I was betrayed in 1968, by Rear Admiral Stevenson, I was Director Tactics and Weapon Policy (G) in Naval Headquarters in Canberra.    This was a very senior position dealing with fleet operational performance and the future of gunnery, missiles, control systems and air weapons.

My early release was proposed and arranged by Admiral Stevenson just three weeks after I was commended for notable contribution and recommended for early promotion to the rank of Commander RAN.  

Given my prestigious appointment at the time, I should had good, like others in similar roles, good chance of reaching high rank.    Normally, with such acclamation when in an already key position, one could expect to achieve
 high rank, even flag rank and expectation of becoming Navy, or ADF Chief (as did one of my then colleagues), was not out of the question

There was no apparent explanation for my discharge, other than that my career had come to an end due to medical reasons.  

This forced discharge was caused by my chronic, serious disabilities, only some of which are now accepted by government, while others have been rejected out of hand, despite government being required to prove without any doubt that the disabilities were war-caused.    This government failure to consider disabilities fairly is despite Navy acceptance of liability and DFRB acknowledging I was forced to leave the Navy.

Following Navy acceptance of liability:
a.    I have perhaps wrongly anticipated an automatic flow-on in considerations.

b.    I also expected end to DVA abuses, which Mr Evans continues to fight on my behalf.

In bizarre events after early release was proposed and arranged by Deputy Navy Chief, Rear Admiral Stevenson, I was betrayed and abandoned (when full pension failed to materialise), in much the same way as the commanding officers of HMAS Melbourne.
        I did not receive full pension on 1968 discharge and not until 45 years later in 2013 !    

In the big picture, in Navy service I suffered many beatings, rape, torture; also brain-washing and mental and physical bullying.    I had been wrongly jailed and dismissed on several occasions, all without any investigation and handed out summarily, which was totally illegal !    

A blind eye was turned to complaints and resignations, but that has been going on since Nelson's day in the Navy, much as shown in the DLA Piper Report into ADF abuses.

Then, in Industry, the full extent of Navy caused disabilities came home to roost when I was unable to hold any job and became unemployable; I also survived three attacks on my life and was wrongly jailed; in addition, I suffered several bashings through these Navy disabilities and injuries.    
Yet, in Industry, as  in Navy life, I sometimes achieved great change and left my mark in short bursts, but my career was a shambles, ending in ignominy and bankruptcy through being unable to cope.

The bottom line is that through Navy caused disabilities and injuries, my life was ruined and these disabilities have not been properly addressed under entitlements legislation by DVA.   

The abuses and illegal dismissals and jailing have not been addressed, yet the Defence Abuse Taskforce (DART) is looking into reparations only for lack of action on behalf of the Department of Defence (Navy in my case).

31 January 2014, after being identified as the oldest valid claimant in the DLA Piper report, the Judge and Chairman had a member of his team apologise for delay and problems in my case, where in July 2013, I was advised my case was given priority listing.


Purpose of this website
his website is about initial abuses from 1951 and continuing abuses even into late 2013, in me seeking resolution from 1970, mainly through Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA).  

I has been a long hard and very lonely row as a result of what former DVA "insider" and independent volunteer, Mr Paul Evans (who asked if I was well enough for him to reopen my case), exposed in his first exposé's November 2010 "failed process, leading to institutional bias"; with protection, cover-up and much more in continuation.    

Exposé's of DVA abuses, even include illegal protections, FOI manipulations, hundreds of illegal and widely spread DVA denunciations of me trashing my name to destroy me and my entitlement claims and complaints.     

BUT, already back in 2001 DVA has stooped to concoction of fraudulent claim for an unclaimed condition; also use of other false fraud, including in 6 separate scenarios and in three costly fraud investigations - without DVA giving me the legislated "hearing" or "testing" on EMAIL fraud allegations by a convicted felon with serious mental illness.

Worse was that DVA failed to heed many warnings, including from senior DVA officers, BUT the department also failed to heed warning April 2003 from CDPP to test fraud allegations - a fundamental legislated step when someone could be HARMED and to be done BEFORE using the information - OMGoodness, what a mess DVA has caused and covers-up !!

Anyway, the probable perpetrator, the disaffected individual and Commonwealth fraudster from c. 1980, was later subject of 38 fraud charges in Manly Court in 2012 - for fraud of DVA after numerous protections and even DVA arranged "round-robin" of money in cover-up.   

In my case, he had illegally hidden the email and allegations (if evidence ever existed) for some two years.    BUT worse, he was wrongly accredited and trained and paid by DVA AND when DVA was angry with me and my persistence DVA referred me to him in 2000.

He remains free, despite his horrendous many frauds, including where he was protected in DVA arranged cover-up through "round-robin" of funds !!

WORSE, on his written, unsigned and undated "evidence" and allegations, DVA initiated the first of three costly and highly questioned fraud investigations, before receipt of his ex-service organisation's 31 October 2002 false denunciation of me.    Subsequently and until his fall from extraordinary influence within DVA to Ministerial levels he, with his top-level DVA cohorts really "did a number on me" to electrify my case, trash my name and ensure, as he threatened I would not be awarded TPI or any other compensation, despite clear proof under VEA & SRCA Acts and reasonable hypotheses.

These trumped up Felon and DVA concocted fraud allegations against me formed the central theme in my case.    They were discovered and exposed by former DVA "insider", Mr Paul Evans, in hundreds of false up to 25 page DVA denunciations and instructions to ignore me, which were widely spread throughout Canberra, following my abuses and injuries in Navy service.   

Now, how can any citizen fight such government allegations and power and the deliberate trashing of one's name ?    Simply, one cannot win in these circumstances.

AND - the Lamond external review agreed that I had no chance, through DVA's repeated use of reversed onus of proof in both entitlement claims and in fraud matters where DVA failed to give "hearing" or heed warning by CDPP on "testing", leading to CDPP chastising DVA for its actions 23 September 2004, as only the external review revealed - in 2011 !

I was proven right all along, but still the cover-up and protections continue as Paul Evans shows, yet there is to be another external review, however it is by the same outfit which was so highly criticised in the last external review of my case, yet that review did seriously condemn DVA.

The fundamental issue is that I have been seriously harmed by government and no compensation has been awarded for Defence (Navy) abuses, or DVA trashing my name and abuse AND more importantly, through the convicted felon and his "linkages" to top DVA officials, I have been denied TPI.    

This alone represents around $400,000 in back pay to 1996 AND approximately $400/week tax free continuing; WITH major ongoing benefits to my wife who has also travelled this difficult path and helped me through my suicidal times.      

Fairness has not prevailed, despite me being unable to retain work in or out of Navy in Industry; also after discharge, I am more often placed on suicide watch, because of government bureaucratic abuse through failed process, institutional bias and protections.    At the hands of DVA I suffered serious abuse of the FOI system and much more , as exposed by independent volunteer and former DVA "insider", Mr Paul Evans, who asked to reopen my case 30 August 2010.    Some of his exposé's are contained in this website.

Thus, I seek to truthfully portray the journey as best I can.    Much of this challenge is extremely distressing to me and involves abuses by Department of Veterans' Affairs which are proven.  


DVA Apology

20 April 2012 DVA made a forced minor and "hidden" apology for duress caused in fraud issues arising from a disenfranchised ex-service organisation advocate.   

Ministerial Apology

The Minister for defence made public apology to victims of ADF abuse in December 2012.

However, DVA did not apologise for DVA wrongly concocted fraud, or the intentional frauds of DVA through repeated "errors of law" in entitlement claims and in innumerable uses of "reverse onus of proof" in claims and also in fraud issues.

Former DVA "insider", Mr Evans and I have, with the help of others, only achieved hatred and isolation with persistent cover-up and protection of and by the government bureaucracy.   

This is despite three known internal reviews, prior to Mr Evans' November 2010
exposé's and more thereafter.    Furthermore DVA abuse visibly continues, including in entitlement claim considerations.   

This is despite an 2010 external review (controlled by DVA) condemning DVA; also chastisement of DVA by
CDPP (2004) and OAIC (2012).    However, in early 2014 of a second external review was announced .

But, it is interesting that a newly announced (January 2014) review is to be conducted by the same agency as in the highly questioned review commencing in 2010.    This was highly criticised and deliberately constricted by DVA, in spite of my pleas for fairness to the reviewer, DVA, Ombudsman, PM & C and to the AAT where it was learned the review had been completed.    There is strongest evidence that this review was established on lies as adequately exposed.   

I wonder can we forecast the result of this new external review - by the same agency ?


After more than sixty years, in 2013, Navy accepted liability and the Defence Forces Retirement Benefits Fund (DFRB) acknowledged my forced discharge.    Also and following many years of fighting from 1970, DVA made a "hidden" apology in 22012.    Furthermore, DVA eventually accepted back and hearing injuries (VEA) and awarded 100% disability pension in 2010.   DVA also accepted PTSD and Bipolar Affective Disorder (SRCA), but another 14 serious disabilities were rejected out of hand without required investigation, or consideration under s120 of the VEA.   

This VEA Act provides for very special "onus of proof" in war-caused injuries and the ruling was repeatedly breached by DVA as presented to the AAT 22 January 2014, but found irrelevant.    It can be shown that in these repeat "errors of law". where one single error will overturn a decision, DVA likely breached the rule more than 250 times in considering my VEA entitlement claims. 

Similarly, innumerable reasons for review under Administration Law have not been considered and were found to be irrelevant in the AAT 22 January 2014.

DVA has failed to recognise or accept that the accepted and other acute disabilities ruined my life from well prior to 1968 discharge, but please read on for an outline on the extent of the problems I suffer.  

Anger, personality, balance & immobility problems cause big difficulties in relating to people, performing household & other tasks in life.     My second wife is the only person to understand and cope with my acute mental, personality and physical problems; also my outbursts and suicidal tendencies.    I have found that I need to visit the Australian Outback often, where I find relief, non-judgmental people & peace.

Because of personality, mental & physical disabilities my first wife, all children and siblings; also extended family, all alienated themselves from me, which was worsened by my physical immobility, outbursts, balance problems, irritable bowel and other conditions; as well as my  deafness and sleep apnoea, which led to me being dismissed duties as a watch-keeping officer.    My second wife & our children are seriously distressed and stressed by these problems and others I overcame.

Many war "stressors" & diagnosed "onset" 1965/6 caused disputation in risky war operations, leading to summary illegal dismissals from duty, removal from one ship, two bad reports and forced discharge. Then I was unable to hold any job in Industry and was dismissed all work after discharge.    I just could not cope and also, after buying a job as it were, I lost a large family company and family homes.    My suicidal feelings worsened from 1965/6 diagnosed onset of my chronic serious mental and personality conditions.

My medication had bad side effects for many years from 1970 and made me like a zombie. I was hospitalised for my mental illnesses in 2000 & 2002; while other hospitalisation was sought and not available.    My psychiatrist ceased medications in approximately 2006, but suicidal tendencies, extreme anger about events from 1951, then particularly from war 1965/6 to the present, still cause major problems.

I have suffered three attacks on my life, I was repeatedly bashed and mentally and physically abused as a child; I also had to contend with a series of other illegal actions, including summary dismissals and jailing, without any investigation.    Then, I was bashed on a number of occasions and have been wrongly jailed several times due to my chronic disabilities after leaving the Navy.    I was bankrupted through being unable to cope, yet in "civvy-street", as in the Navy, on occasions I was a very high flyer and left my mark.

My life has been a journey of forgiveness, re-invention, persistence and looking outside the nine dots to quickly bring major change in a number of fields, including Navy and in Industry.



Affects of abuse

Unfortunately and as already outlined, I was greatly affected and wanted to leave the Navy - actually from after events in the first weeks in 1951, but my parents could not afford to pay out my long indenture, which was a hang-over from Nelson's Day.   

Actually, this form of indenture was outlawed by the Australian government under the Pacific Islander Act in 1901, putting an end to harsh circumstances for Islanders, known as Kanakas, who worked on Queensland's cane-fields; also for pearl divers.    However this indenture arrangement, which followed slavery when it was outlawed, continued in the Navy into late 1950's.

Initial abuses and likely gross injuries, led to my complete separation from management and likely society in general and were rich fruit for events causing, or blossoming injuries into much more serious conditions in Navy service.    These were then exacerbated by innumerable recorded serious war incidents, leading to PTSD, Bipolar, physical immobility and Personality Disorders I suffer, from war, peacekeeping and secret deployments.

Navy career and thereafter

My Navy career embraced almost eighteen years and began on 29 January 1951 when, with 27 other 13 year old children, I joined the Naval College as a Cadet Midshipman.    We proudly became the "1951 Flinders Year" at the RAN College, HMAS Cerberus, Crib Point Victoria, in a harsh "horse-breaking" style culture with extreme physical, mental and other abuses.   

Sadly, I believe that it is only the US Marine Corps which warns potential entrants of harsh bonding training to mould a skilled "fighting machine", such as we experienced at the Royal Australian Naval College (RANC).

In the event, as in Navy service, which included numerous summary and illegal dismissals from duty and an illegal jailing, I survived and re-invented myself to make my mark.   

Similarly, I was unable to hold any appointment in Industry, through war-caused acute serious mental, physical and personality disabilities, yet I was a very high achiever in short spurts, just as in the Navy.                                

Defence (Navy):

After more than sixty years, on 26 November 2012, following the lengthy DLA Piper external review into serious abuses in the Australian Defence Force (ADF), the Defence Minister was forced to apologise for Defence Department shameful abuses and cover-up.    I was identified as the oldest valid claimant from 1951 - when a child of thirteen years in Navy care.

I was raped and tortured twice within weeks of joining the Navy on long-term indenture in 1951 when a child entrusted to Navy care aged 13 years, but bullying, bastardisation and abuses continued during my almost eighteen year Navy career, including in forced discharge in 1968.    Other abuses included illegal summary jailing where another vessel was almost sunk when weapons were sabotaged by my most senior sailor.    I was dismissed my duties on several occasions and four resignations remain unanswered.   

On 19 February 2013 Navy eventually admitted liability and in August 2013 I received a negotiated compensation payment for pension first advised by Navy on 22 August 1968 !

Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA):

After some 42 years of problems and abuse; with failed process, wrongful and illegal denunciations; also DVA fraud and protections, on 20 April 2012, an apology was hidden in a section of a paragraph of a letter DVA was forced to send.   

However, now exposed government abuses by DVA have continued and are being fought by former DVA "insider", Mr Paul Evans.    But, all of this tooth and nail battle with DVA, is after I had many times put my life on the line for Australia's liberty.    It is also after I was forced from the Navy into Industry; with no skills other than my wits, to begin as a salesman by day and by night.    At night I sold investments door to door, in order that I experienced the true world; later, I also worked on the shop floor working metal presses and assembling products.   

Without the pension Navy advised, I was desperate to provide for my family and to work to rise above my shame from Navy experiences, but I failed and ended up bankrupt and broken.

DVA's 2012 part and "hidden" apology followed lengthy external review into only part of my case and was controlled by DVA, which prevented inclusion of innumerable complaints as shown in my April 2012 complaint and FOI request to DVA - even this was rejected.   

However, the review condemned DVA for its hostile actions and reversals of onus of proof and more, while revealing that DVA failed to heed warnings and had been chastised by CDPP 23 September 2004.    But, it didn't end there as, 12 December 2012, OAIC rebuked DVA for its continuing abuses in my case, while setting in place a Code of Conduct investigation into DVA's Legal Head.

Previously DVA, MRC and the Repatriation Commission had protected another Legal Head against my complaints and also similarly protected a Deputy Legal Head.    At this time, Commissioner APSC protected the Secretary and DVA Commissioner in visible fraud and other extreme abuses from at least 2003.

Worse has been overcoming damage through deliberate DVA harm in my forty-five year battle with Defence.    This was mainly through DVA trashing my name, honour and finances to all and sundry and only slowed through exposé's by a very brave former DVA "insider", Mr Paul Evans, from late 2010, after he asked if I was well enough to reopen my case 30 August 2010.   

While working as a volunteer on my case, the very brave Paul Evans was twice threatened by DVA, yet his extreme exposé's led to external review, established on lies into which Shadow Minister The Hon. Senator Michael Ronaldson  became involved.   

Review by Mr Lamond of Centre for Public Management found:

1.    I had been harmed in my dealings with DVA and agreed that
2.    DVA had prevented me from proving my innocence in false fraud and fraudulent claim allegations concocted and used by DVA against me 2001-2011 - for an unclaimed condition !   
3.    April 2003 Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (CDPP) first warnings on "hearing" and "testing" of extraordinary fraud allegations went unheeded by DVA
4.    DVA then also failed to heed CDPP second warning and chastisement of DVA's hostile actions against me 23 September 2004.
5.    Continuing DVA harm and refusal to consider complaints from 2002 through to the present time.
6.    Costly much questioned fraud investigations were initiated by DVA on the basis of unsigned and undated allegations from alleged email fraud my accuser has illegally concealed for two years !
7.    As Mr Evans exposed, my privacy had been seriously breached and my accuser, a convicted Commonwealth fraudster, was believed by DVA at my expense and without required "hearing".

Harm caused as seen by former DVA "insider" on only more recent FOI matters only:

FOI has been a major problem from 2002 and is basically the only means to delve into the truth, BUT the DVA has repeatedly manipulated FOI and denied access to key documents, including documents on false fraud which DVA used against me in my entitlement claims and to threaten to sue me, but including for false fraud concocted by DVA for an unclaimed condition !!

However, a very brave Mr Paul Evans persevered, despite serious health issues, to obtain extreme exposé's of hundreds of denunciations spread widely by DVA.    These were to top officials and to other agencies branding me a fraudster criminal to protect a disaffected wrongly accredited convicted felon with mental illness.   

When angry with me, DVA referred me to this advocate who was trained, paid, elevated and protected by DVA to, in conjunction with top DVA officers, cause me HARM as found by external reviewer Lamond !                                    


Former DVA "insider" documents

After prolonged battle to obtain documents, even Mr Evans was forced to give-up and 14 January 2014 wrote to Information Commissioner's Office as follows:

"Mr Azevedo
As discussed in yesterday's telephone call, I am no longer willing to continue putting the time and effort into fighting DVA over these matters.  They win.  It is a great victory for bureaucracy and a sad day for open and accountable government in Australia.  Mr Lewis, have a scotch on the tax-payers to toast your great achievement.
The simple fact is that DVA's response to the S55E notice was totally unacceptable.  It said nothing.  It took two years to get to the point that a junior staff member of the very person whom I sought information on was able to refuse all relevant documents.  The only information that these documents provide is the very same information that DVA has refused to release in defiance of its own complaints policy.  How much longer am I suppose to continue the charade that this fight actually means anything?
The events of last week have destroyed my hope that there is any person or organisation able to confront the misapplication of Commonwealth power by senior bureaucrats.  I believe, absolutely, that a great wrong was done to Mr Atkins and that DVA has deliberately fought to prevent as much information relating to this matter from becoming public.  It is incredible that DVA has, as its senior legal officer, a person who has been censured and faces an investigation into her handling of FOI matters, admittedly with a pre-ordained outcome of innocence.  How can any agency allow a person to retain control of FOI, especially when it includes FOI requests regarding her?
I know no-one gives a toss, but remember that after three years:

  1. DVA has refused to confirm or deny whether the AGS had recommended compensation for Mr Atkins' treatment as outlined in the Lamond review.
  2. DVA has refused to advise the outcome of the AGS investigation into Mr Harrison.  They have even refused to advise whether they believed his behaviour was acceptable.
  3. After a year long investigation by the AGS into the behaviour of Carolyn Spiers, DVA refuses to release any information and starts another review that excludes most of the matters already considered by the AGS.  The cost to the tax-payer of all three investigations must have been enormous, yet no-one outside of DVA is any the wiser.
  4. DVA has refused to release any document on topics that were excluded from the Lamond review.
  5. In particular, DVA has refused to release any documents relating to how many other veterans were subjected to malicious denunciations by Mr Billing and, in a period when Mr Billing had a very close relationship with the highest officers in DVA, how many were acted upon in breach of DVA's own policies on investigative practices.

I doubt any of you have bothered to read this far, you certainly will not respond.  It's all too hard when the biggest issue over the next few months is a nice cosy trip to Gallipoli at tax-payers expense.
Yours, in absolute sincerity
Paul Evans"


UNBELIEVABLY, 11 January 2014, DVA announced appointment of Mr Jeff Lamond's CPM reviews to conduct ANOTHER external review into aspects of my case presented by Mr Paul Evans - after the first highly questionable and failed review commencing back in December 2010 !

                        Can this really be other than another "white-wash" for DVA ?

ALSO, as Mr Evans stated to the Secretary DVA and others 11 January 2014:

"Nothing to add.  No sarcasm, no pithy lines.  You win Lewis, you piece of c**p.
Your department ignores the OAIC for as long as it can, then responds with this garbage.  Today you deliberately appointed CPM to investigate my complaint knowing that it was about the most offensive appointment you could make because of CPM's history with both Mr Atkins and myself.
You even announced an investigation that has a narrower terms of reference then the one you had Winzenberg start last January.  So, I am supposed to trust you guys for another year, then get shafted again and have to fight to get anything from you under FOI.
Get your investigators to go after me.  Use the full resources of a government agency to make sure none of your precious SES are ever held accountable.  Get your staff to lie to the OAIC, then make applications to them to have me dealt with as a vexatious applicant (must have really pissed you off to lose that one).  Make sure the Minister never gets involved."


This is serious business and I am not the only one to suffer:

  • To May 2012 there were 18 suicides in Queensland all said to be from problems with DVA; there are many other suicides and serious problems with DVA are well documented.    Ultimately it affects Australian Security and Freedom, just as George Washington warned in his quote at the beginning of this website:

“The willingness of future generations to serve in our military will be
directly dependent upon how we have treated those who have served in the past.”

  • The bottom line is likely that systemic problems exist within DVA as shown in cases known to me or linked to my case.
  • Even external reviewer Lamond, in meeting 28 June 2011 compared DVA problems with systemic problems he had found in Department of Immigration.


  • The following excerpt from 30 January 2013 complaint to Public Service Commissioner (APSC) who referred me to the VRB for resolution is very relevant:

"It is clear Mr Lamond did not fully investigate Mr Evans’ allegations and that he betrayed and abandoned his assurances to me 28 June 2011 that, in words to the effect, “no matter the cost I will pursue the truth and will re-write my report after this meeting with you.”  

He spoke at length about the similarity between DVA systemic problems he had unearthed and those he found in Department of Immigration after the Claudia Rau & Virginia Salon saga.  Mr Lamond betrayed assurances, yet condemned DVA in his August 2011 report."

  • Something is seriously wrong as shown in the website of independent Mr Terry Fogarty who took over from the four decades of work by Mr Graham Macleod.    Melbourne lawyer, Mr Greg Isolani writes of such problems, as does Dr Kristy Muir.   

Where there is smoke there is fire - check:

My continuing recorded DVA abuses 1996-2013:

From 1996, DVA embarked on repeated "errors of law" and/or "jurisdictional errors", which led to allegations of intentional fraud in light of the large number of identified breaches - more than 250 breaches in my Veterans' Entitlements Act compensation claims alone.

It is clear, from unheeded warnings and chastisement of DVA hostile actions in my case from 2003, that DVA has and continues abuses for which DVA was indicted in December 2012.    Abuses include "failed process, leading to institutional bias", as exposed by independent former "insider", Mr Paul Evans - one of whose expose' reports forms the "Bizarre events" section of this website.   

Despite these exposé's and condemnation by Mr Lamond in 2011, DVA's abuses continued until 13 December 2012 when Office of the Information Commissioner (OAIC) made serious indictment of DVA for continuing hostile actions and misrepresentations in my case.    A Code of Ethics investigation is also incomplete.

This was even after DVA was forced to make limited apology 20 April 2012, which followed my ten year struggle against extreme defamations and illegality through repeated breaches of legislation by DVA where it can be shown that:

1.    In my entitlement claims alone, DVA breached legislation rules more than 250 times.   
2.    DVA wrongly many times reversed "onus of proof" in entitlement claim considerations and also
3.    DVA illegally concocted scenario in 2001 leading to fraudulent claim allegations, where

4.    DVA then threatened to sue me for actions in a condition I had not claimed, yet DVA also used this in widely spread denunciations exposed by Mr Evans to deliberately cause me serious harm
5.    At the same time, DVA illegally and without "hearing" or "testing", as required and as advised to DVA by CDPP April 2003, the Department deliberately carried-forward and used horrific false fraud allegations against me for more than a decade; furthermore

        The allegations DVA used illegally were unsigned and undated (CDPP April 2003 letter)

6.    DVA also initiated three costly fraud investigations I had to fight (two initiated after 19 May 2003 clearance), as well as
7.    Six separate false fraud scenarios and two other criminal allegation scenarios, each devised by DVA, in apparent obsession to prove me guilty of fraud; also

8.    To further evade fair consideration in entitlement claims where DVA used hundreds of "errors of law" and reversals of "onus of proof".

Main causes of my DVA problems
I was subject to three costly fraud investigations 2002-2013, two of which were initiated by DVA after my clearance of fraud 19 May 2003 by DVA and National Fraud; after April 2003 CDPP warning to DVA, but then CDPP chastised DVA 23 September 2004.   

These facts are revealed in the Lamond external review report, yet there are more disturbing facts:

1.    From 1996 there were biased and unfair repeated entitlement claims  "errors of law", or well documented "jurisdictional errors", which prevented award of Special Rate (TPI) pension and other advised compensation.
2.    DVA's repetitive reversals of "onus of proof" and other problems led to un-addressed allegation of DVA intentional frauds on which APSC referred me to the VRB for resolution.    This did not occur, despite precedent and evidence of:

  • Hundreds of DVA breaches of legislation, including VEA s120 "standard of proof", which
  • In conjunction with hundreds of "errors of law": also
  • Hundreds of widely spread false and illegal DVA denunciations involving fraud, led to
  • Allegations of intentional DVA fraud, but there is more

3.    DVA concocted and DVA illegally used false fraud allegations adding to the intentional DVA fraud in entitlement claims from 1996.    This DVA fraud remains unaddressed.

4.    However on top of that were the intentional frauds and fraud allegations by a wrongly accredited criminal to whom DVA referred me in 2000.    This advocate, whom DVA trained, paid and elevated;  also refused to argue my case and provided false advice; he THEN demanded a bribe, BUT was then protected by DVA at my expense (former DVA "insider" he exposé's).

5.    I also had to battle hundreds of DVA's false up to 25 page, widely spread denunciations and instructions to ignore me, each perverting course of justice in bias, discrimination and in serious breach of s70 ; also s42 & 43 of the Crimes Act and the Criminal Code s11.5 & s142.2.

6.    DVA and regulatory agencies refusals to investigate innumerable complaints in "failed process leading to institutional bias" ("insider" Mr Paul Evans); as well as serious governance failures and obsequious protection of senior bureaucrats.

                                                    What chance did I have ?


Amazing influence of wrongly accredited and known convicted felon with mental illness

Questions must be asked as to how a known fraudster with serious mental illness could be accredited as an advocate and then referred to veterans like me ?   

This advocate electrified my case through his continuing fraud - until he eventually in 2011 he fell-out with DVA after numerous protections at my expense.    Even then, he escaped censure and despite DVA cover-up along the way.

Much of the abuse in this case was likely initiated by this disaffected convicted fraudster and fellow veteran who was wrongly accredited by his ex-service organisation, then trained, paid, elevated to a position of extraordinary influence within DVA (to Ministerial levels).     He was jailed for Commonwealth fraud c. 1980 and used his mental illness to evade jailing on at least three known occasions.    

Yet in 2000, despite his well recorded criminal past, DVA referred me to him after DVA interfered in my claims and when angry with my persistence and discovery of innumerable repeated "errors of law" in entitlement claims considerations.

But, what checks and balances were there and why was he accredited, then believed in preference to me, in most extraordinary bias and discrimination, particularly when it was he who was a criminal convicted of defrauding the Commonwealth on more than ne occasion from c. 1980 ?  

This apparent "hired-gun" had amazing "linkages" within DVA and was protected at my expense as reported by former DVA "insider", Mr Evans.    DVA also covered up his serious fraud of DVA as reported in 2005 - through a "round-robin" of money arranged by top DVA officials.

This is one of a number of visible successful DVA perversions of the course of justice linked to my case where Mr Evans exposes DVA "failed process, leading to institutional bias" against me.

This advocate and criminal refused to argue my case (see ex-service organisation letter) AND provided false advice.   

He THEN demanded a bribe to obtain Special Rate (Total & Permanent Invalidity pension [TPI]), pension which I vehemently refused.    I lodged complaint about this and his false advice.
THEN, in October 2002 retribution, this wrongly accredited, DVA paid and trained advocate forged my medical documents and claimed to DVA and a wide audience, including NSW Police, that I forged the medical report to defraud DVA.    

                                                He cunningly used "email fraud" at a time 
                 when DVA refused to accept email as a valid communication means !

My case was electrified immediately and for the next decade, but eventually this advocate whom DVA protected at my expense, fell-out with DVA and in 2012 he was charged in the Manly Court on 38 counts of defrauding DVA.   

He used mental illness to escape censure (apparently including in impersonating a policeman) and his professional indemnity insurer VITA, strongly supported by DVA, refuses to accept claim, or claim against his ex-service organisation's errors and refusals to investigate !   

However, he eventually fell-out with DVA masters and was charged in Manly Court on 38 fraud counts of defrauding the Commonwealth in 2012, yet he is still being protected at my expense !!


Government blocks fair consideration

This case is blocked at every turn by government administration from 2002.

Thus, my case remains unresolved with the most serious criminal abuse complaints involving top-level DVA officers remaining un-investigated in more than a decade.    Top bureaucrats and "master craftsmen" legal officers are involved and even protected by DVA, MRC and the Repatriation Commission.    All avenues to fair consideration are now blocked through ministerial and regulatory department closure of the case, mainly through the hundreds of false and widely-spread lengthy - up to 25 page - false DVA denunciations branding me a criminal and more.   

12 April 2012 un-acknowledged and unconsidered complaint about non-investigation and bias was lodged; with outline of un-investigated complaints from 2002.    5 December 2013 FOI request was made in attempt to unearth considerations in blocking the formal complaint on abuses and discrimination where not even a complaint number has been allocated to this time, let alone advice on progress where the statutory 28 day to resolution is more than 12 months overdue.

Worst outcome of events

There is obdurate government blockage in all aspects of this case - from 2002.

Perhaps worst in pursuing fairness is DVA apparent frauds, perversion of justice; with coercion and misrepresentations is the manipulation of FOI, the  only avenue to discovering many events and for which DVA was indicted by OAIC 13 December 2012.

Ombudsman and other agencies fail to respond to requests and complaints, including complaints about coercion; others use the highly questionable Lamond external review to "sideline" complaints by refusing to investigate. 

Not any of these events should have occurred had there been fairness and none of the cover-up as exposed by former DVA "insider", CDPP, external reviewers Lamond, Fogarty and others.   

However, the DLA Piper 2012 Report presents a clear picture of government cover-up and abuse of process in ADF matters in its report to Minister for Defence, leading to his 2012 apology for wide-ranging ADF abuses and establishment of a Taskforce to review complaints.

  • 19 February 2013 Navy accepted liability for my disabilities on the same evidence which Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) denies me Special Rate (TPI) pension from 1996
  • 10 June 2013 Commonwealth Superannuation advised Navy had made errors in my discharge and was specific about war service and 87 serious recorded incidents which DVA has failed to investigate, or discover through Fact Finding as required by legislation, while breaching standard of proof in Veterans' Entitlements Act s120.

Excerpt and commentary from Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) 20 April 2012 acceptance of external review findings and part only apology:

  • The Lamond review found I had been harmed in dealings with DVA
  • Review agreed that I could not prove my innocence in frauds manufactured and used be DVA in light of DVA's reversals of "onus of proof"
  • Review found my privacy had been breached
  • Eventually DVA apologised "for any unnecessary duress that may have been caused"
    • DVA accepted the findings of the external review, initiated by a very brave independent former DVA "insider", Mr Paul Evans, who asked to reopen my case 30 August 2010, leading to exposé's on:    
      • Hundreds of illegal DVA denunciations and instructions to ignore me, of up to 25 pages in length, including successful illegal DVA urgings of senior officials and other agencies to cease enquiries, so perverting the course of justice in criminal breaches; while
      • Illegally providing "highly sensitive" material, as DVA acknowledged
      • Widely spreading the denunciations to deliberately adversely affect me, including
      • In falsely branding me a criminal, in serious breach of PSA Code of Ethics, Crimes Act s70 and The Criminal Code.
    • Protections by DVA at my expense, including of top level DVA officers in the Legal Services Group
    • Cover-up of fraud through senior DVA officers arranging illegal "round-robin" of funds to protect a convicted criminal central to my case.
    • Most serious and continuing FOI breaches, leading to
      • Serious indictment by Office of the Information Commissioner (OAIC) 13 December 2012; also
      • OAIC 4 January 2013 advice of changes to DVA's FOI process; in addition
      • Incomplete Code of Ethics investigation. 

    The "Case for Royal Commission into DVA" prepared by independent volunteer, Mr Terry Fogarty, after reading seven external reviewers remarks remains unanswered.
    Ministerial closure of case
    No doubt the call for Royal Commission will remain unaddressed through Departmental, Public Service Commissioner, Attorney General, Ombudsman refusal to respond to complaints for many years and finally Ministerial closure of the case 10 November 2013 where the new DVA Minister, Senator The Hon. Michael Ronaldson, states:

    • "I am advised that your allegations have been addressed extensively", which is FALSE, yet


    • Innumerable complaints were lodged with numerous regulatory agencies for conspicuous government administration obsequious support for DVA abuses using exposed illegal lengthy denunciations by DVA designed to cause harm as identified by Mr Lamond.
    • Had new evidence and resulting complaints been fairly addressed, many senior DVA officers would now be in jail for ....
      • Serious breaches of The Crimes Act and Criminal Code; also for serious defamations and privacy breaches in hundreds of denunciations and instructions to ignore me as exposed by Mr Paul Evans
      • Harm caused me - as external reviewer Mr Lamond found in August 2011 report; also


      • Most serious intentional frauds arising from some 250 intentional and repeated "errors of law" or "jurisdictional errors" in entitlement claims from 1996
      • Interfering in my claim/s and altering, or forging one claim in 2001 where


      • DVA concocted fraudulent claim allegations (for an unclaimed condition), which
      • DVA used in hundreds of denunciations exposed by former "insider", Mr Evans; also
      • Leading to Minister DVA's August 2010 public vilification of me in comparing me with a convicted fraudster and threatening to sue me for fraud
      • DVA consistent failure to address illegal and criminal behaviour within the bureaucracy, including in
        • most serious and criminal privacy breaches
        • hundreds of repetitive "errors of law" and repeated reversals of "onus of proof" and standards of proof in my case; also
        • widely spread false denunciations -  to seriously harm me as Mr Lamond found; also to
        • wrongly evade liability in breach of many rules, including Crimes Act, Criminal Code, Privacy Act, the Public Service Act and Code of Ethics.


    • Senator Ronaldson also incorrectly states that I am not eligible for Special Rate (TPI) pension, despite reasonable hypothesis and other unconsidered "relevant factors"; in addition
    • He wrongly states that he has no power to influence decisions.
    • In conclusion, Senator Ronaldson states that in future he will only be able to address new issues, despite innumerable complaints still not being investigated from 2002 and after


    • Independent "Case for Royal Commission into DVA" remains unaddressed, following seven independent reviews of DVA actions along with:
      • repeated unheeded warnings from 2003 and
      • condemnations of DVA hostile actions in my case, including by
      • Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (CDPP) from April 2003, then again
      • CDPP chastisement in September 2004 for no change, through to
      • 2010 exposé's by former DVA "insider" and more recently
      • external review condemnations 2011, then
      • Office of Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) indictment December 2012. 

    The Case


    A Royal Commission



    Department of Veterans' Affairs

    Alternatives to Royal Commission


    The catalyst for a Royal Commission into Australia's Department of Veterans' Affairs is quite clearly the 2005 letter delivered by respected advocate Harry Kirkman and confirmed by Paul Evans' FOI search. Copies of both of these documents are available from the hyperlinks below relating to John Atkins.

    Both of these gentlemen have shown outstanding personal courage to bring these matters into the public arena. Paul at great risk to his own career.

    Bureaucracies at all levels of government have developed cultures of dishonesty.

    Veterans have been rebuffed in their endeavours to achieve justice for themselves. Over the years about a million and a half Australians have been required to put their lives on the line in the course of preserving democracy, an essential element of which is the rule of law. Approximately 105,000 of our comrades have made the Supreme Sacrifice in this regard.

    A Royal Commission is analogous to General Eisenhower's need to land troops in France before he could liberate Europe. It's a step that should precede a lot of the very commendable efforts made by veterans over many years.

    The opportunity is here, now, for veterans to make this work for them.

    Terry Fogarty
    7th January, 2012.




    This case involves serious abuses of power, apparent bias, protection and conspiracies to pervert the course of justice in veterans' affairs, leading to one of two stimuli in call for a Royal Commission, or similar independent ADR.   

    Presently five separate and independent parties provide damning evidence and CDPP has chastised DVA where external review damns the Department - for no apology or compensation !

    See Mr Terry Fogarty's website:  


    This contains depreciatory evidence from three independent people, including former DVA "insider" Mr Paul Evans former employee of Department of Veterans' Affairs.


    References - contained in the "follow-up" documents section of this website:

    As in the case of Wing Commander Russell Vance, that of Air Commodore Bates, Air Vice Marshal Peter Criss and others, should the Federal Attorney General initiate top-level investigation ?

    Should the Attorney General and/or Prime Minister & Cabinet Department's, each deeply involved, as separately shown in this website, now immediately set in place Royal Commission or similar top-level ADR ?    Remember, back in mid-2009 the office of Minister Defence Personnel set in place MEDIATION which was hijacked !!

     In any case, I really prefer to recall overcoming the odds of my chronic serious Navy caused disabilities, which began this saga, thru unholy rape, torture, repeated bashing, assaults; also summary dismissals and jailing and more - with good memories.
    These include while at Royal Naval College Greenwich pictured at the beginning of this website and below; also while on specialist weapons training course at Whale Island at Portsmouth near to where HMS Victory is preserved.

    Also the wonderful Painted Hall in which we dined while at Greenwich Naval College right on the Thames in London, at the gates of which the clipper ship "Cutty Sark" is preserved.

    In addition, as young Midshipmen, my colleagues and I will always remember the maiden voyage of HMAS Melbourne and her first deployment to the Far East Strategic Reserve; also the thrill we experienced in exercises like this above with flying operations in progress during refuelling of escorts at sea in the war operations zone in 1956.

    Website Builder