Donna Bugat -v- State of Victoria Case 352: Neil Kerslake & UR12138XX (01.10.2020)
... neil built the most beautiful kitchen in the cottage in the woods, and he has always encouraged me with my photography...
I have been informed the hospital in the Netherlands, say there is nothing more they can do for my formerly British, boyfriend, who is stateless.
It's very sad politicians made zero effort to peacefully settle very serious outstanding lawsuits, let alone in a timely manner.
It really does beggar belief Neil was moved from one hospital during a global pandemic !! to Ter Apel refugee centre who could not look after him (which I guess in our unusual inextricably linked case in 'Western Europe' regarding 'no refoulement' was pretty much a distant ‘offshore centre’ for the very Unaustralian ‘government') which resulted in a medical emergency that necessitated him being moved to another hospital.
I will therefore have to reschedule my own two appointments with different specialists at St. Vincent’s hospital in Melbourne (I haven’t got the blood tests done anyway, since I was distressingly illegally detained in 'hotel quarantine' myself by the DHHS in Melbourne, which was a very serious and... entirely deliberate breach of the public trust placed in them, which was also when my back started giving me problems… again. The politicians only… continue trying to stop me being in my own home… anywhere !! so nothing has really changed, since I was isolated from my entire family with the ‘forced adoption’ when I was a small child)
... because he knows it is my real passion and would have been my career, if only I had been able to be free of the 'forced adoption' and all that has gone with that...
(The Premier et al would reasonably know it would be a legal impossibility/‘not a recognised defence in law’ to try and claim to a civil jury in a court, politicians failed in their legal duty to keep minutes of their meetings and decisions, they are also legally obliged to disclose, which was something I legally blew the whistle about in the High Court in the UK on 21st June 2010 regarding... the monarchy.
The best that can be said, is the democratically unaccountable British monarchy who obviously never had insurance cover for their ‘forced adoptions’ which is why we have never had legal representation, before it was dishonestly purported they could reverse civil procedure in 1984, are incompatible with the rule of law and human rights. It is self evident there were never any health reasons to change children’s identities and so with legal representation we would have been able to go home etc etc, so the monarchy don’t exactly set a good example for the equally selfish and unscrupulous political and news media classes who run interference for them. There's so much affordable social housing that could go on 'Crown Lands' that's for sure)