🧵🧵🧵 1. This is a thread about the always winning suspended doctor William Bay and his various legal “victories”!
2.Billy was a late arrival to the Freedom Movement. He burst onto the scene in July 2022, when he infamously gatecrashed an Australian Medical Association conference. The confrontation, which was live-streamed, Billy accused the AMA of gaslighting doctors about the COVD vaccine
3. As a result, AHPRA proposed to suspend Billy on grounds he posed a “serious risk to persons” requiring AHPRA to take “immediate action” to protect public health.
4. In UNBELIEVABLE scenes, Billy organized a protest outside AHPRA’s offices where he attempted to live stream his Show Cause hearing before the Medical Board. He challenged the Board to kick him out!
5. No guesses as to what the Board did next. They granted Billy’s wish and suspended him!
6. But after being kicked out, Billy decided he wanted back in! So he launched proceedings in the QLD Supreme Court to challenge his suspension.
7. The crux of Billy’s case was that the Medical Board & AHPRA lacked jurisdiction which meant his suspension was “invalid at law”.
Billy was self represented.
8. Billy did not let his status as a self represented litigant deter him. In fact, Billy announced he was confident of a “strong victory”.
9. The day of the Supreme Court hearing, Billy decided he didn’t want to fight AHPRA in the Supreme Court anymore. He wanted to take his fight to the High Court! He filed an application to essentially “transfer” his case from the Supreme Court to the High Court
10. We all know how this ended. The High Court dismissed Billy’s application with costs.
11. The day the judgment was due to be delivered, poor Billy went live on FB so he could announce his victory to his followers. Unfortunately, a follower found out the outcome before Billy did, spoiling the surprise.
Billy couldn’t (cont)
12. believe he wasn’t the first to know. After 30 mins of searching the High Court website, Billy finally found proof that his follower was correct – his application was indeed dismissed.
With costs.
13. So what does Billy do? Well, he launches an appeal of course!
14. Billy’s appeal application forms were accepted for filing. In typical Billy style, he claimed this as a victory. As we all know, having one’s documents accepted for filing is NOT a win.
15. The High Court dismissed Billy’s application for leave to appeal his AHPRA case.
16. Not content w/ fighting AHPRA in the High Court, Billy decides to take on the AEC & challenge the Constitutional validity of the Voice Referendum.
17. Billy claimed victory, declaring the Referendum invalid!
18. The OPPOSITE happened. The Registrar REFUSED to accept his application for filing b/c it appeared on its face to be an abuse of process, frivolous or vexatious. If Billy wanted to progress the application, he would need to submit a Form 31 and get permission from the Court.
19. Even the AEC confirmed that Billy Bay had NOT had a victory in the High Court 😁
20. After copping a lot of heat from the Freedom Movement for claiming he’d had a victory when he hadn’t, Billy eventually caved & decided to submit his Form 31 & apply for permission to file his application.
21. A few weeks later, the inevitable result was delivered: Billy’s application to file his challenge to the Voice Referendum was REFUSED on grounds it was an ABUSE OF PROCESS.
22. THIS was the EXACT moment Billy found out his High Court application had been refused.
23. So what does Billy do?
He tries AGAIN!
24. And loses. Again.
25. In between all these proceedings against AHPRA and the AEC, Billy was busy getting himself arrested.
26. His first court appearance he claimed VICTORY!
What was the victory?
27. Billy exercised his legal right to plead NOT GUILTY to the charges against him.
Presumption of innocence = victory.
28. Billy then decided that AHPRA were fraudulently representing themselves as a state entity to avoid their GST responsibilities so he reported AHPRA to the ATO for Organised Crime.
The ATO are yet to take action against AHPRA.
29. With a taste for the law, Billy decided he’d try & intervene in the Australian Vaccination-risks Network’s “Australian Babies Case” (their High Court challenge to the TGA’s approval of the COVID vax for infants).
30. The AVN’s case was ultimately dismissed but guess what, Billy claimed it was because of him! In reality, the AVN’s loss had NOTHING to do with Billy. The HCA dismissed the AVN’s case w/o even considering Billy’s submissions
31. So what is Billy up to these days? Well, he’s trying to challenge the constitutional validity of the Referendum yet again.
32. Court victories? None.
33. @SOS149 and @sunnysandeel have both done a podcast episode about the suspended doctor Bay! You can listen to it here: redcircle.com/shows/tinfoil-…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🧵 1. Psuedolaw guru Spiros Kalotihos is at it again!
He claims that "through his background in 42 yrs litigation experience", he can help ppl "access the millions of dollars that are credited in each & every one of our incorporated straw man trusts".
2. But Spiros' 42 yrs of litigation experience is just nonsense.
In a recent Federal Court case, the Court said of Spiros (who is NOT legally qualified):
"There is nothing to suggest that Mr Kalotihos is sufficiently competent & familiar w/ the practices & procedures (cont)
3. of the Federal Court. In fact, the content of his affidavit suggests the opposite is true...."
"He has not acted as a paralegal for about 20 yrs"
🧵 1. This is a thread about anti lockdown activist Monica Smit's new law firm, Reignite Legal!
2. Yes, it is a REAL law firm.
3. Reignite Legal Pty Ltd was incorporated in October 2022.
The firm was established by Clinton Rogers & Nicole Kuth. Both are lawyers w/ current practising certificates. They used to work for Monica, representing RDA followers challenge employer vax mandates in Fair Work.
🧵 1. Haha! You don’t see this every day! Canadian pseudolaw adherent commences proceedings against HIMSELF!
James Kenneth vs Knutson, James Kenneth
2. James filed a 16 page package w/ the Court, which included various documents. These documents were in the name of “James Kenneth”. “James Kenneth” sought to appoint a “trustee” by the name of “Knutson, James Kenneth” over “James Kenneth”.
3. Here’s a copy of one of the documents filed by “James Kenneth” (or was it “Knutson, James Kenneth”)? (Note: I adore that James has signed the document “with love” 😀)
2. The workers appointed Spiros as their “ensuring power of attorney”.
Despite not being legally qualified, Spiros argued he was sufficiently experienced to represent the workers in these complex proceedings
3. The court said “nuh uh”. An enduring power of attorney doesn’t work like that. You can’t use a POA to authorise a non-lawyer to represent you in a court proceeding because there are two statutory prohibitions or restrictions upon such representation
🧵 1. “I’m a living man, I was travelling not driving!”
A pseudolaw adherent w/ an affinity for Latin maxims & United States case law, has failed to convince the Victorian Supreme Court that he was not a “driver” of a “vehicle”
2. Alex Stefan was found guilty in the Magistrates Court of speeding & driving a vehicle w/o a numberplate, contrary to the Road Safety Rules & Road Safety Regulations. Alex appealed to the Supreme Court, representing himself
3. His notice of appeal raised 71 “questions of law”, such as he wasn’t subject to the Magistrates’ Court’s jurisdiction, & the Road Safety rules didn’t apply to him.
“The number of questions was a product of the appellant’s want of legal training”.
🧵 1. A couple who claimed they were unlawfully discriminated against b/c they were directed to wear a FACE MASK at the airport have had their case THROWN OUT by the Federal Court!
In a scathing judgment, the Court described the case as “manifestly deficient” and (cont)
2. suggested to the respondents that they may want to pursue the applicants’ lawyer personally for costs!
3. The applicants said they were discriminated against when they arrived at the airport.
At the arrival gate, police directed them to wear a face mask.
The applicants said “no, we are medically exempt”.