I have learned that the term private prosecution applies to criminal proceedings and is usually initiated, or brought before a court, by an individual or private organization instead of a public prosecutor who represents the state. This an acceptable procedure in Australia.
Steven Unthank lodged charges with the Magistrates Court many months ago in the form of a 664-page "Submission" which he now calls a "Religious Manifesto" that I understand was perfectly legal and understandable by the powers that be in what I call a "God-ruled legal system" in Victoria, Australia, although my trying to understand that "Submission" was difficult when I first read it as this type of "legal" document is very strange to us in the US.
Steven had to have approval to file the charges and I was told that The Department of Justice spent almost 2 months reviewing the entire 664- page document he produced. They did a thorough review of the evidence and application of the legislation and law as it applied to the religion of JWs. Following the review of charges, Steven was formally given the green light to file the charges by Victoria’s Chief Magistrate which he did on the 26th of July. Then as we read from the Press Release above, "court fees for the filing of the charges were donated by a number of children, through their parents, for and on behalf of all children within the religion of Jehovah’s Witnesses."
Following the filing of the charges, instead of Steven Unthank prosecuting the case, which can be done by a private citizen but who then bears all the expense, the "Registrar of the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria, acting under direct instruction from the Chief Magistrate, formally referred the case to the Office of Public Prosecutions which is the statutory authority responsible for preparing and conducting criminal prosecutions in Victoria."
From this it appears that this particular office has taken the case over. If there is need for a correction to any of this information, I'll get back to you. If I hear of any further information of interest, I'll post it immediately, especially concerning the following when:
"A total of 5 separate court hearings have been scheduled for 13 September 2011 in the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria at Latrobe Valley with the accused to be served by summons to appear."
Here's some miscellaneous information that might interest you that I have located:
Page 2 of "The Submission" contains the phrase "Brief of Evidence for the Charging, Indictment, and Prosecution of "The Faithful and Discreet Slave".
Page 12 of "The Submission" contains the "Charge-Sheet and Summons (Corporate Accused)" and identifies the corporate accused as "The Committee of Management for the Religion of Jehovah's Witnesses in the State of Victoria".
"The Faithful and Discreet Slave" (FDS) is a "person" as defined under Australian State law which includes "an unincorporated body or association". The Organized book on page 16, par. 1, identifies the FDS as a "body".
The FDS can be charged and documents can be served at the local Kingdom Hall.
The WTS claims that members of the FDS are now ruling in Heaven over every congregation. This is irrelevant. However, it can be argued that the FDS, in relation to Section 35 (1)(a)(b)(c) of the Working with Children Act 2005, are aware that Elders, Ministerial Servants, and others are working with children, on their behalf, without an "assessment notice" in breach of the Act. Under the Victorian State Charter of Human Rights, "religious belief" the WTS and JW teach that there is at least one resurrected member of the FDS in Heaven per every congregation worldwide. By having the FDS charged, this allows the State Government to seize every single Kingdom Hall in the world. How? By hiding behind the religion the WTS has created a sanctimonious front and attributed everything to the FDS. Therefore the FDS are at fault.
The Governing Body operates in Victoria as they sign their "person" name on the inside of many books which are distributed in Victoria, Australia.
Also, the NY Corporation does not operate in Australia. The Pennsylvania Corp. does, unlike in the U.K. when the Pennsylvania Corporation was dissolved back in 1999. And I have been given to understand that indicting the Pennsylvania Corporation for criminal activity gives the Victorian government the right to reach across borders to the United States to get at that corporation. In addition, certain agencies in the US government are watching this case carefully because it involves a US corporation. It has come to my attention too that the District Attorney in Brooklyn, NY, is also keeping up with events as they unfold in Australia. More information will probably be available in the future.
Please see www.jwnews.net for frequent updates by Steven Unthank. Hopefully, maybe very soon there will be Australian newspaper coverage of the most recent events to do with this case.
Barbara
