Peter Wicks records a day in the Federal Court yesterday, which included meeting the beleaguered HSU “whistleblower” Kathy Jackson.

Peter Wicks meets Kathy Jackson outside the Federal Court in Sydney yesterday, with the moment being captured for posterity by Frances Jones.
SOMETIMES, it is only when you see a person in real life that you have a full appreciation of them.
I had often wondered why Kathy Jackson seemed to be able to charm so many seemingly intelligent men. When I say intelligent, I am not referring to Tony Abbott, of course.
What is it about her?
I am in Sydney’s Federal Court to see the final showdown between Jackson and Justice Flick.
Standing outside the courtroom, I see Jackson for the first time, she is talking to some men. She looks absolutely radiant, I have to say. She has an air about her that is hard to define. Her eyes radiate warmth, her skin has a flawless quality and every move seems to be done with such grace. I instantly understand the attraction.
Just then, a lady walks past and drops her purse, Kathy gracefully stoops down, picks it up and hands it to the lady with a smile that would make your heart melt.
That’s when I realised — that person wasn’t actually Kathy at all. When I finally do see Kathy for the first time, she has a look on her face that would curdle milk.
Still, it is no wonder she is looking decidedly less than confident. Deep lines on her forehead seem to suggest there has been a lot of frowning over the last few weeks — and I don’t blame her. Things are not traveling well for her. Not well at all.
Independent Australia and Wixxyleaks have produced leaked documents that raise questions over her integrity and her financial practices within the HSU Number 3 Branch. On top of that, she has the Federal Court case — which has been rapidly descending into a farce.
Today, we are all in Sydney’s Federal Court for the finale — and its standing room only for latecomers.
Today is the day that Justice Flick hands down his judgement. There is a sense of anticipation in the air.
Many are surprised to see that Kathy is still being represented by QC Rofe after his hasty departure at the previous court appearance. Rofe is the QC associated with Michael Lawler, Vice President of FWA and Jackson’s partner.
The handing down of judgement is delayed by Rofe once again attempting to request that Justice Flick read Jackson’s affidavit prior to handing down judgement. Rofe explains that the affidavit has vitally important information — however when asked repeatedly about this information by Flick, it becomes painfully clear that Rofe hasn’t even read it himself. There are sniggers and chuckles throughout the court from the press and spectators.
In the end, nothing can stop the judgement — and Justice Flick rules that the union be broken up.
[For anyone interested in getting a more complete run-down of yesterday’s activities, Frances Jones has published a detailed account of the court proceedings.]
Outside court, HSU National Secretary Chris Brown faced the waiting press. Brown said he was happy with the court’s decision and agreed with Justice Flick that it was the best thing for union members and would give members the opportunity to decide for themselves who runs the union. Asked about the questions being raised regarding Jackson’s integrity, Brown said he was of the opinion that Kathy should welcome any investigation if she was confident it would clear her name.
Kathy Jackson’s press appearance raised a couple of interesting points. When asked if she was doing anything about her pay dropping to $150,000 from $270,000 as a result of being stood down as the secretary of HSU East, she stated that she was looking into that and planned to address it. It seems that since her appearance on 7.30 a couple of weeks ago – where she stated that she wanted to have her pay cut by $100K – she has had a drastic change of heart. Quite drastic.
Kathy then told the press that she was “quite surprised by the judge’s decision”. She then went on to say that
“…the membership should decide whether there should be a demerger of the union or whether we should stay together as one big union”.
I can only assume from that statement that she feels a Federal Court Judge did not have the authority to make this ruling. She also forgets the overwhelming vote by Union members at the 2011 convention was for a demerger — and for Jackson to stand down. If she was serious about saying the members should decide she would have resigned back in 2011.
[See the 7.30 report into the break-up of HSU East.]
After the crowd dispersed, I was approached by Andrew Lillicrap — who wanted to discuss my previous post.
Andrew wanted to give his version of the events I described in Part 13.
Andrew told me that he is certainly not a supporter of Jackson — and insisted he was just being polite when he greeted her earlier this week. Andrew explained there was no smooch or kiss — just a polite handshake.
Andrew did, however, confirm that he and Jackson had a sit-down meeting – something Kathy had Federal court orders not to do – at the Sydney HSU office. Lillicrap, however, denied that the meeting was held behind closed doors.
I explained to him that I reported the event not for the greeting, or for the door — but for the fact the meeting took place.
I have to say, Lillicrap came across to me, in the few minutes we were together, as quite genuine. He gave me his contact details and said he was happy to talk to me at any time.
After speaking to Lillicrap, I noticed Jackson sitting on a park bench with her sole supporter. Prodded along by my wife Felicity – and Frances Jones – I decided to introduce myself and see if she wanted to answer some of the questions I had raised.
Walking over, I said “Hi Kathy”, shook her hand and introduced myself.
“You seem to be under the false impression that I am part of a Williamson conspiracy against you,” I stated to her.
“Well you are,” she replied. “You are part of the Right Williamson Faction”
“I can assure you that I am not and I do not even know Mr Williamson,” I responded.
“You just are,” she stated.
As I tried to let her know that I am happy to listen to any explanation or publish any evidence regarding Williamson — but she walked off. As she walked past, Felicity tried to explain she was wrong about her theories concerning my allegiances.
As Kathy walked off by herself, she looked a strangely lonely figure. I actually felt a little sorry for her, knowing her world was starting to crumble around her. Only for a minute though.
My day in town finished with a coffee with my wife and Chris Brown. As we sat in front of Parliament House, sipping tea and coffee and chatting, NSW Firefighters were protesting next to us after O’Farrell and the Coalition had butchered their Workers Compensation scheme.
In a way, it was kind of fitting — sitting there with Brown, a man trying to hold a union together for its members while another union was running a rally right next to us. I couldn’t help but think how much Chris must long for the day when he can fight for his members rights — rather than be stuck in a courtroom or meeting lawyers.
I hope Chris hasn’t lost sight of the fact that, what he is doing, is fighting for his members. He is just fighting a different enemy.
Upon arriving home, I read the Financial Review — not something I would normally do. I went through the articles that delved into the Jackson affidavit that was leaked in defiance of Federal Court orders.
Kathy Jackson’s signed affidavit contains an admission that she “secretly tape-recorded executive meetings of the HSU”. This is highly illegal; even police have to ask before recording a conversation.
Call it a hunch, but I don’t think this is the last time Kathy will see the inside of a courtroom.
(Walk on down to IA’s dedicated Jacksonville page and read our detailed investigation into this rather tawdry affair. You can also read more by Peter Wicks at his blog Wixxyleaks or by following him on Twitter @madwixxy.)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia License










45 Comments
My day in court in #jacksonville with Kathy and the HSU http://t.co/X7xBB5tO #auspol #HSU #Thomson
@Madwixxy met Kathy Jackson in the #Jacksonville Federal Court yesterday. Read all about it – here on IA http://t.co/XombIw5i
Peter Wicks reports from the #Jacksonville Federal Court – including meeting Kathy J. http://t.co/wKIDFuaa
I wonder where those tapes are.
Gem of a piece Wixxy. Reminds me of that wonderful Hannah Arendt phrase – ‘the banality of evil’.
Peter, for a moment I thought you were describing the Greek mythological enchantress, Circe.
I dont think you are right about Kathy going to court, something tells me she will have an overwhelming desire to rediscover her Greek heritage all of a sudden. Who knows,you may well spy her as a tour guide, she likes meeting people
Higs – some resonance in the Circe tale. She enchanted Odysseus’ men then turned them into pigs.
Jacksonville Federal Court – http://t.co/Uwo7IxOj
Jacksonville Federal Court – http://t.co/Uwo7IxOj
Those tapes as many are aware are inadmissible in a Court of Law and categorized as “illegal phone tapping”. So what exactly was Kathy trying to accomplish my admitting in the affidavit to Judge Flick that she had made them.
However I am sure these tapes kept Kathy, with her teaching qualifications, in her lucrative position at Health Service Union, behind her meteoric rise to the cushy $270K salary. As long as she had them she was untouchable.
One must be fearful that the MSM will never ever report on the evidence that has been discovered by Peter Wicks.
If they ever did it would be put in a way that Kathy jackson was no better than Thomsom or Williamson so they “were all at it”.
Secondly any evidence that in any way casts doubt on Craig Thomsons innocence would either be ignored or explained away such as ” whilst some questions can be asked about the credit card slip with a rejected code it still doesnt explain the etc etc etc”
So what is Craig Thomsons only hope of proving that he was set up? I would suggest a court case and is this going to happen? I doubt it. Even if it did occur it will most likely be after the next Federal election.
I have this nagging thought that their are elements (factions) within the ALP that would like to see Craig Thomson out of the party but not until after the next election or maybe after Slipper is returned to the Parliament after all they will have the numbers without Thomson when Slipper returns.
Jeez Wixxy…i thought you were about to link up a Paul Kelly clip or something after your intro describing Jackson….
Thumbs up for the reporting so far and your tenacity in keeping after the story. I still think there is a LOT more to be found out about the Jacksons, Lawlor, the HSU, Tony rAbboot and the LNP and I hope you stick to your guns and keep digging…becuase christ knows no MSM journalist is touching it with a bargepole!
Kimward – I am inclined to agree.
I actually feel like I am in some bizarre version of The Truman Show.
There is no way in the world mainstream media outlets will not be aware of Peter Wicks articles.
I don’t know that everything that Wixxy has presented is 100% kosher. I choose to believe that it is, but I have/can not verify all details.
What I do know is that these articles should be brought to the publics attention. Media outlets are failing greatly in this regard. So are politicians.
It is easy to get comfy in blog/twitter world where birds of a feather tend to flock together. So I would suggest that if you sufficiently feel cranky enough about the fact these articles are not in the public eye – start doing something about it.
I have personally contacted several media outlets (and will continue to do so) – I would urge others to do the same. I am hoping to do a letterbox drop this weekend (I know most will end in the dustbin) but if one more person knows – then all the better. Will MSM be all over this come Monday as a result of me – probably not. It wont be for the lack of trying though.
WAKE UP AUSTRALIA !!!!
I guess you have to ask a question “whats in it for the MSM to pick up this story?”
It will not assist their campaign to get rid of the Gillard Govt. There may be (hopefully) strong links to Abott tho’ it will be difficult to link unless there is a “smoking gun” somewhere, like a photograph of Pyne with Lawler or Jackson have a coffee.
With the hatchet job already done on Thomson by News Ltd are they going to run with a story headline “We Got It Wrong” ? doubt it
Will Fairfax run with a story “Credit card we showed was a forgery” hmmm doubt it
Will the ABC run with it Kerry O’Brian, Barrie Cassidy where are you guys? Give Paul Barry a ring maybe, but who will buy the story and put it air?
Maybe the ABC would run with it if the rebutle of the “evidence” against Craig Thomson could be spelt out more clearly, more forensically and more of it. Or maybe just maybe his legal team wants to sit on it a bit longer, tho Govt hasnt helld back with the Slipper case
So its not looking good I agree with “Father of Three” we can circulate it contact our local ALP member maybe,yeah right, methinks you would need to check which faction they belong to first.
I have directed numerous friends to the IA web and Wixxyleaks but that is not much really.
Sorry to sound so miserable but alas I fear that the truth will not come out to the general public there seem to be to many fences to climb and surprisingly some of them belongs to the ALP
“Standing outside the courtroom, I see Jackson for the first time, she is talking to some men. She looks absolutely radiant, I have to say. She has an air about her that is hard to define. Her eyes radiate warmth, her skin has a flawless quality and every move seems to be done with such grace. I instantly understand the attraction.
Just then, a lady walks past and drops her purse, Kathy gracefully stoops down, picks it up and hands it to the lady with a smile that would make your heart melt. That’s when I realised — that person wasn’t actually Kathy at all.”
Please don’t gush over Sophie Mirabella so shamelessly.
Is it a sign that not only was Craig Thomson not mentioned in Parliament this week, but Mr Abbott didn’t take the opportunity of Mary-Jo Fisher’s departure to compare and contrast (at least as far as I am aware)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-22/abbott-praises-gutsy-mary-jo-fisher/4086368
Charitable persons might suggest that Tony Abbott didn’t want to mar the moment as he tried to give some dignity to her unfortunate political exit. But come on, this is Tony Abbott we are talking about
Chris Brown can fight for his members any time he likes. Following the much-lauded pay increase for disability support workers, my employer, Anglicare Tasmania, is busy downgrading its staff to lower pay levels.
I am waiting for any sort of action on this from our union, HACSU. But I suspect they’ll probably be just as energetic as they were in defending Craig Thomson.
So far, Tony Abbott looks like being the only winner from all of this.
“With the hatchet job already done on Thomson by News Ltd are they going to run with a story headline “We Got It Wrong” ? doubt it”
They will if provided with a reliable basis for doing so. In fairness to the media everyone has fallen silent because they are probably genuinely puzzled as to what is going on. And Craig Thomson is not lending them a helping hand – he has never once publicly commented on the mystery of the credit card slip, although I have seen indirect attributions to his claim that the police investigated the signature and determined it was a forgery (I certainly believe it was a forgery, but whether or not the police have made that determination I am unsure).
The only explanation Craig Thomson has provided is the rather unlikely claim that someone in 2007 spoofed a phone call in Bateau Bay, despite the fact he didn’t move there until 2009. If Craig Thomson doesn’t wish to step on Labour toes by vigorously defending himself, there is no reason for the media to go out of their way to construct realistic scenarios off their own bat.
Passing forged documents is a criminal offence, if he draws attention to the fact that some or many of them are falsified, then the inevitable question is why has he not laid a complaint with the police.
There far too many people behaving irrationally in this story for the media to want to go out in a limb.
I learnt a lesson many years ago.
As a member of the ALP back in the early 70′s I beleived ” in the cause”
I was courted by govt ministers to become their secretaries I could have had a career but I once voted against a branch resolution. The president of the local or whatever his title was a minister in the Whitlam Govt. that was it all over to this day I still beleive the resolution was not democratic silly me
So again I make the point that Craig Thomson is not in the right ( correct) faction and all the excellent work by Peter Wicks will go unoticed
Neither the media nor the Govt will take any action on the IA or Wixxyleaks exposures because it does not either of their agendas
Does not suit their agendas sorry writing this on my Iphone
What do you mean he has never explained it? He has publically stated for years that it is not true.
Thomson has always claimed innocence despite no requirement to. He will never face a court as even if there was some reason to, it’s all out of date.
Kathy Jackson again showed an awful legal ignorance about the HSU being in Administration with her door stop presser. How on earth did she rise to such prominence?.
How on earth did she rise to such prominence?
‘I have deceived people, behaved ruthlessly.’
From the horse’s mouth. Always a substitute for talent.
I wonder why someone could say with a straight face that Craig Thomson could make a call from Bateman bay when he hadn’t been anywhere near the place at the time?
@Grey: if Thomson had a CDMA phone they are really easy to clone as there is a known vulnerability in the encryption used by the sim. So is any sim made before 2002.
But that’s probably not what happened. Thomson doesn’t understand that the easiest way to hack computers or other technical devices is not to exploit vulnerabilities in the hardware or software but instead simply to engage in social engineering.
For instance, all it would have taken for Thomson’s phone to have been used to call the brothel while he was in Perth is quite simply for someone to ask to borrow his phone claiming they had no reception or their battery was dead. Then instead of calling whoever they claimed they would call they could simply call the brothel.
Of course that would mean someone who already knew the number of the brothel and who had motive to frame Craig Thomson would have had to have been with Craig Thomson at the time of the call. Someone who despite their mutual dislike Craig would still lend his phone to as they would have to work together in future.
Sounds a little far fetched. I doubt we could find anyone matching those criteria at the Perth conference…..
No wait a minute, the FWA report clearly states Jeff Jackson was there too. OMG! What a coincidence, one of the people with motive means and opportunity to frame him was right there with him the entire conference.
So all Jeff had to do was ask Thomson to borrow his phone, then make the call. Then they just needed someone to get the fake credit card slip from the brothel (and then probably pay with a valid card or cash) and mission accomplished. Not so far fetched after all.
“So all Jeff had to do was ask Thomson to borrow his phone, then make the call. ”
So let me get this straight. From 2002 to 2007 Jeff Jackson sneakily used Craig Thomson’s phone to ring brothels by asking to borrow it in order to order pizza. Not content with that he had a copy of Craig Thomson’s credit card made up with a misspelt name and an invalid 3 digit verification code – which mysteriously the bank continued to honour. He did this over a five year period in order to torpedo Craig Thomson’s political career since he had travelled forward in time in his own personal TARDIS and knew that Craig Thomson would obtain pre-selection in Dobell in 2007. He then travelled even further in time in his TARDIS to 2009 and saw Craig Thomson was going to buy a house in Bateau Bay. He then returned to 2007 and asked to borrow Craig Thomson’s phone again and drove down to Bateau Bay and made another phone call (all this despite the fact that you should never, ever cross your own personal timeline). And you wonder why the media have gone very very quiet? If Craig Thomson wishes to bring anything to the public’s attention they will report it, just as they faithfully reported his claims of phone cloning.
Don’t get me wrong, I expect Jeff Jackson did make a phone call to an escort agency while in Perth, but not using Craig Thomson’s phone.
One word: Photoshop.
Well who even said anyone of the phone calls were actually made.
Right, then Craig Thomson takes advantage of privacy legislation and contacts the telco involved and asks for all private information they hold on him so that he can correct any inaccurate information
“How do the National Privacy Principles help me?
The National Privacy Principles give you more control over what happens to your personal information. You can:
know why your personal information is being collected and how it will be used
ask for access to your records, including your health information
take up opportunities to stop receiving direct marketing material
correct inaccurate information about you
know which organisations will be given your personal information
ensure organisations only use your information for purposes they have told you about
find out what information an organisation holds on you and how they manage it.”
http://www.privacy.gov.au/individuals/business
And then he lays a complaint with police about people creating falsified records.
Until Craig Thomson takes the basic steps to protect his reputation and provide a coherent narrative for the media to use they are quite within their rights to ignore what is presented here.
Craig Thomson has said that there was a deliberate plot over a number of years involving phone cloning and payments made with his credit card and that is what the media has reported. Anything he says is reported. The media doesn’t have obligations beyond that.
The media doesn’t have rights to demand from the Telco or the Commonwealth Bank his personal data, only Craig Thomson has that right. If he wishes to waive that right in the hope that the Labour factions will throw him some crumbs down the track, that is also his right.
Sorry, maybe I was a little unclear.
I’m unsure whether or not Thomson actually rang the brothel or not.
I’m just pointing out that if he didn’t there is a much simpler explanation than people “hacking” his phone as I seriously doubt Kathy Jackson, Jeff Jackson or the rest of them have the technical know-how to actually clone a sim.
It’s far simpler to simply either borrow his phone or swap the sims of two phones (also fairly easy and only involves borrowing the phone once and wouldn’t really be easy to look up if you consider it would have been swapped with another FWA phone so both sims would have records showing they called people in the FWA) than it is to clone the sim.
Just because Thomson doesn’t have the technical know-how to understand how easy this is to do so hasn’t put it forward as an idea doesn’t mean it isn’t a fairly simple explanation for what happened if his story checks out.
Of course another simple explanation is that he actually made the calls. I don’t think any of us have the evidence to say either way, but having someone else ring from his number on multiple occasions isn’t really all that far fetched.
Grey I’m not sure if Thomson can actually authorise anyone to look into his phone account records for his time at the HSU. The phone account never belonged to him, it belonged to the HSU and as he is no longer employed by them I don’t think he actually has the authority to look into the records without a court order authorising him to do so.
The media doesn’t have the authority to look it up either so really without a judicial enquiry or royal commission I don’t think there is a legal method of the public reading those without someone leaking them (and breaking the Privacy Act).
i’m not sure that this business about Thomson’s failure to defend himself has much relevance as a reason for the MSM to ignore Peter Wicks’s quite dramatic material. One story doesn’t necessarily negate the other and such subtleties have never stopped journos in the past from following up on a good story.
What is clear is that the LOTO has backed off the issue as he has the Slipper story. I guess, given the way the supposedly ‘moderate’ opinion-makers – Grattan, Hartcher, Benson, Coorey et al are presently conducting themselves, that is about as big a win as we can expect.
From Labor’s point of view, I don’t think its necessary to invoke factional strife – real as this may be in NSW – to explain their lack of interest in KJ’s doings until the evidence becomes settled by the actions of the present administrator or in court. They’d be on a hiding to nothing if they pushed the issue with anything less to go by.
Of course the LOTO may have just decided that enough was enough and to concentrate on matters of policy, but as a previous correspondent wisely pointed out; this is Tony Abbot we’re talking about.
SG Warren: cloned sim cards are easy to get.
Another flaw in sim cards..all one needs to do is sign on to a on-line sms service (with a false name) and you can send text messages that appear to come from any phone number.
Of cours everyone knows the poster Grey killed his grandmother and it’s up to him to takes the basic step to protect his reputation and provide a coherent narrative for the media to use they are quite within their rights to ignore what is presented here.
If clearing my name was writing to a telco company to determine where my mobile was when the murder took place, you would have to wonder why I wouldn’t try and clear myself.
You are guilty Grey and we await the proof of your claimed innocence.
Until then you should step down from whatever it si you do and not vote in any election.
Now I’ve exposed you as a homicidal maniac I expect all political parties to refuse to accept your vote. That includes the local council elections.
Well the question was why the media is not rushing to proclaim CT’s innocence.
I am just pointing out that for whatever reason CT is not taking the steps that might clear his name – as is his right. However, its not the role of the media to think of convoluted scenarios which might explain the evidence stacked against him if he can’t be bothered.
As for my grandmother – my phone records demonstrate that I was being entertained in The Boardroom at the time of good lady’s demise.
Not guilty, m’Lud.
Grey, you have such a touching fasith in the media.
As an ex-journalist I can assure you that the reason the media aren’t touching this is that exposing Kathy Jackson won’t help bring down the government and, well, gosh and darn, governments falling is the sort of Shakespearean epic that media loves. If CT had become roadkill we may very weoll have had a change of government. ‘Right Wing Union Hack Lords It Up On Members Coin’ is not going to win Kate McClymot a Walkley.
Alsao, when someone else hgets a story journalists get very cold feet on it. They live for ‘exclusives’. Which leads to many a beat up, such as David Pemberthy’s inciteful piece of investigative journalism into refugee camps being configured as luxury resorts.
In the last 30 years or so journalists have begun to thiunk of themselves as ‘players’ in public life. They like the acclaim, the attention but hate any form of accountability for this public role.
I got out because I was increasingly sickened by the use of ordinary people to advance the careers of insecure little girls and boys that needed public acclaim to get over their daddy issues. If what Wixxy says about KJ is true then using CT as an excuse to topple the government would be just another notch on the bedpost for many of them.
Lachlan, I don’t disagree with much of what you say – except that I don’t think the media as a whole wish to bring down the government, even if some senior News Ltd figures clearly have the knives out.
I also agree that when journalists have skin in the game (like Kate Mcclymot), they will tend to lose their impartiality. But the basic fact remains that findings of a public body and anything that Craig Thomson’s says will be reported.
Craig Thomson said Marc Bolano and others followed him around the country from 2003-2007 with a cloned mobile phone and made calls to brothels and the media dutifully reported his claims in detail.
Craig Thomson has NOT claimed there is any problems with the credit card voucher and so, aside from the Daily Telegraph, there is no reason for the media to leap conclusions on his behalf. If Craig Thomson won’t point these anomalies and provide them with a coherent narrative, the media aren’t in a position to do so.
And what is the narrative claimed by Mr Wicks?
As I understand it, it is that Jeff Jackson and others followed Craig Thomson around with a stolen sim card and made telephone calls to brothels – including from a suburb he was not to move to until 2009. They also had two versions of his credit card made up, one with a false 3 digit verification number that was never charged against and presumably another with a genuine verification number that was charged against from 2003 to 2007.
Do correct me if I have got it is wrong – but that IS what you expect the media to be reporting?
In the end, Craig Thomson is not a victim of the media but a victim simply and solely of the Labor party figures that set him up.
Grey, you obviously have not read any of the relevant articles by Wixxy, as your understanding of his “Narrative” is wrong!
Unlike many others, Peter Wicks does not offer up theories on what may have happened with sim cards or how many bogus credit cards were made, he only points out that the credit card slip that was used as evidence, was of concern as the evidence clearly showed that the banks copy was still attached to the customers copy and the traders copy, and it was the slip, not the card that had a three digit rejection code written on it instead of the required six digit authorisation code.
The other problem with the card was that the imprint clearly showed that the name on the card was Thompson with a “P” not Thomson, and also the rejection code was for an invalid card!
Peter Wicks has done the hard yards of investigative journalism, sadly lacking in the MSM.
Steve,
Just for the record the issues of the multiple slips was first raised on this website on 6 June, 2012 at 1:22 pm in the comments section of Chapter 8 by me.
In regards to this “and it was the slip, not the card that had a three digit rejection code written on it” you are confused over the difference between a cancellation code and a verification code. Mr Wicks has not made this issue clear. The cancellation code 211 is the code for an invalid verification number – that is the 3 digit number written but not embossed on the card. This might mean the card had expired or just as probably that the card was a fake. Without a valid verification number on the card, it could never swipe for electronic payments and would be rejected for all but minor purchases.
Mr Wicks is not always very clear on what he is alleging it is true. I point to his comment on Chapter 7
“Signatures can alter somewhat each time and I am not a signature expert. I can assure you my signature differs most times I scrawl it on something. Therefore, I don’t think we should try to claim that there were forged signatures used, as it is too hard to prove either way.
Sorry to all those conspiracy theorists out there…”
Seems at least clumsily worded. What I think he was trying to say is the signature might be forged or it might not, I can not tell from signatures alone. Which is fair enough, but I think we all agree the signature must almost certainly be forged?
I have tried to work out what the underlying hypothesis Mr Wicks is putting forward and I agree it is not always clear. I assume his comment on his blog here
http://wixxy.wordpress.com/2012/06/12/putting-shame-in-your-game/
“wixxy says:
June 13, 2012 at 10:14 am
That’s right, it is awfully hard to complain about something you do not know about, especially when it hasn’t happenned yet… Only afterwards did he realise what had been going on behind the scenes”
reveals what he thinks is going on.
The fact that even Peter Wicks does not offer a coherent narrative only emphasises the reason why the MSM can’t touch this story at the moment.
What is the story?
Any realistic scenario that could be constructed inevitably runs up against “well, why doesn’t Craig Thomson take the steps to clear himself”. If you say the credit card slip is false, then the question is “why doesn’t he lay a complaint with police”?
I am not judging Mr Thomson here. The Labor Party is a very powerful patronage machine. Arbib and Bitar show that there are very lucrative careers to be made in the Packer empire if you play along. Mr Thomson has to act in what he sees in his own best interests.
But the media can not be expected to do what he refuses to do. He states people cloned his phone over several years, the media reported it.
Anything he says, the media reports.
There is a god after all…………..
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-26/simon-cullen-hsu/4093190
Congratulations Peter Wicks !!!
An indication of why Craig Thomson might think it is a good idea to take one for the team comes from Andrew Bolt
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/the-skeletons-are-rattling/story-e6frfifx-1226407042965
The link to Julia Gillard may or may not be tenuous.
Well, finally the MSM in the form of ABC online has taken notice
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-26/simon-cullen-hsu/4093190
Now we shall see what follows.
I note some interesting details about the slipper case have also come out today:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-26/journalist-text-to-slipper-staffer/4093570
Along with Abbott’s mad intransigence (even the Australian is cirticising him) and Morrison’s nutty statements about refugee policy perhaps a few wheels may be wobbling on the coalition cart.
Amazing co-incidence Grey that the Gillard non-story should surface (yet again) as the wheels come off the Thomson debacle.
Sadly for Abbott and crew there’s nothing there but good on ‘em if they can cause a distraction from the HSU / Slipper time bombs about to blow up in their faces.
It’s all been handled so badly (according to my Coalition Bennelong chums) that Tony is going to be roasted slowly.
The credit card slip is blasted out of the water and quite apart from rejection numbers etc etc, the mis-spelling of the name is the biggest hoot of all.
I defy anyone to pretend they would use a card with their name mis-spelt. The hassles are endless. Buying a airline ticket with ID that showed incorrect spell send alarms bells ringing. It would be rejected as it would be every time you handed over your card and license.
The credit card is a forgery and it’s purpose was exactly as it has been used for- a fraud.
I confidently predict I will be proved right.
No-one but no-one would
Grey I was not confused as you suggest, the code on the slip was,211 Invalid card verification number. and as OscarJones points out the name on the card was wrong indicating that the 211 Invalid card verification number was for exactly that an invalid card.
Nope, still hopelessly confused. (Or probably just too stubborn to admit you were wrong)
The verification number, for the umpteenth time, is the 3 digit code that is printed but not embossed on a credit card.
There is a theoretical, although I agree remote, chance that a misspelt name could be linked to a misspelt account. But at least with online purchases I don’t think there is an absolute check on spelling integrity of the name on the card.
There is an absolute check with the 3 digit verification number. That is what the 211 code refers too.
I hope that clears it up for you.
Grey, if you read my comment, you would see that I said that the three digit number 211 was on the slip, not on the card. It was written not embossed as you cannot emboss a slip.
It was hand written on the slip in three of the six squares supplied ON THE SLIP and was as I said an invalid card verification number.
There was no mention of any number printed on the card as you seem to suggest, and I repeat for the umpteenth time that the number I referred and the number that Peter also referred to was in his article was 211 rejection code written on the slip.
I hope that clears up[ your confusion!
This is good, I think we are beginning to make some process.
You are absolutely correct, 211 is the number written on the slip, but – and let me take this very slowly – 211 is not the verification number.
A verification number is the 3 digit number printed (better word in this context than written), but not embossed, on a credit card – if you have one have a look and you will see it. Because it is not embossed we don’t know what it is, because it does not appear on the slip.
We do know, however, that the verification number printed on the card is invalid.
Why do we know this?
Because the cancellation code – 211 – is a cancellation that stands for a particular error.
And what is the error that the code 211 represents? It is “Invalid Verification Number”
Do let me know if I took this too fast.
Grey, if you look at my original comment you will clearly see that I was questioning your assessment about wixxy’s NARRATIVE, which only mentions the rejection code on the slip, which prompted him to look into it, and subsequently post the link, my point was that wixxy provides the proof and lets others make up their own minds.
His narrative only points the way, it does not make assumptions as to how many cards were made or who used them etc etc.
wixxy gave the narrative, you speculated on that narrative.
hope this clarifies.
.
“hope this clarifies.”
Indeed it does, indeed it does.
I personally think Mr Wick’s absence of narrative is a weakness.
I think that is someone was going around with a fake credit card with a misspelt name and an invalid verification code then that is far likely to have been taking place in 2009, rather than 2007.
This is a rather important point because it suggests that a set-up of Craig Thomson could quite easily collapse on greater scrutiny.
This is obviously far preferable for Mr Thomson than the thought that someone was cloning phones and using his credit card from 2003 -2007 – and this appears to be the scenario that Mr Wicks endorses on his blog.
Did any of you consider that the credit card transactions for prostitutes may have started out as a way to injure CT in a personal sense rather than political? Some nasty person would try to damage another man’s marriage/relationship/family out of spite? And suddenly it is seen as a way to damage both CT and the Labor Party. I haven’t followed the time line closely but it seems opportunistic that here was a way to bring down a minority government. After all, the fact that the rumours about the credit card had been around for a number of years, and no-one thought to do anything about them until now. Misspelt names and false Verification codes seem to me the sort of oversight that occurs when someone is making mischief.