Is Anti 5G Australian Barrister the real deal or a stooge for the Telcos?

To date in Australia there is much confusion regarding the status of 5G installations across the nation and where people now stand with regard to reported 5G success stories. A reader is concerned about the Sunshine Coast case of David Evans, EMF sensitive person versus NBN and the recent developments of the case. While there has been a lot of noise regarding impending class action cases to wipe 5G off the map in Australia, the lack of details and the recent magistrates court outcome poses more questions for the concerned public.

On the face of it, the efforts of the Tasmanian Barrister appear gallant and heroic and in the spirit of protecting the general public from trespass and harm, and this should be applauded. However, many people are reporting that they are not receiving replies from Michael Kirby Chambers re issues of 5G which adds to peoples concerns regarding the integrity of the single barrister fighting the just cause.

This story may clarify the issues as the appeal of the case is imminent, and if there is no appeal than really we all must question the news report as well as the people involved in this particular 5G case.

Questions arise from this case, indeed several questions..

1/ Why is there no statement or interview at least with Barrister Broomhall who specializes internationally in this field of law relating to EMF harm?

2/ How can NBN counsel state there never was a case when Barrister Broomhall has already had successes to stop installations based on the same argument? Courts act on precedent cases so were there not precedent cases presented before the trial or at least during to counter the claim of NBN?

3/ Is Andrew O’brien, lead counsel for NBN correct in his statement that due process was not followed under the planning Act? And if so, why would a barrister present a case if this action was not taken?

4/ It would seem unprecedented for such costs to be awarded against a plaintiff who’s case was not heard, and questionable if a plaintiffs house could be claimed under the circumstances.

5/ Without details and without answers there is a reasonable argument that this is indeed a fake news story and may account for why it’s not covered by ABC or any other mainstream news agency.

6/ On the Go Fund Me page, why is there again no supporting statements from Broomhall and why is the beneficiary the wife of the plaintiff, Lisa Evans?

7/ With a world class barrister on the case, why would David Evans assume the loss of his house prior to an appeal, which is the obvious outcome?

Readers are always advised to follow the money when it comes to fake news…NEWS CORP owns Sunshine Coast Daily, it aint a cute independent newspaper like we once had.

The Sunshine Coast Daily is the only daily newspaper specifically serving the Sunshine Coast region of Queensland, Australia. The newspaper is owned by News Corp Australia.[1]

In 2008, the circulation of the Sunshine Coast Daily was 21,604 Monday to Friday and 34,716 on Saturday.[2] In 2015, those figures are down to 12,200 Monday to Friday and just under 18,000 on Saturday.[citation needed]

There are also a number of community publications attached to the newspaper, the Caloundra Weekly, Maroochy Weekly, Nambour Weekly, and Buderim Chronicle. The Sunshine Coast Daily is also responsible for producing the Caboolture News, Noosa News, and Bribie Weekly.

And you guessed it already, News Corp, is a big promoter of 5G technologies and therefore the motive for honest journalism seems to have vanished!

5G a ‘gamechanger’ for businesses

Well readers, place a note in your diary for February 24th and lets all hope that the news is of an appeal, based on common law rights under trespass and the precedent successful actions of the esteemed Tasmanian Barrister Ray Broomhall.

Mr Broomhall has just two counts of reporting by the national broadcaster, the ABC, the most recent dealing with his wig fetish, great coverage but surely 5G coverage is more pivotal? Why would not such a passionate activist say to the ABC, forget the wig story, the battle against 5G is far more important?

Barrister collects judges’ and lawyers’ wigs to preserve the stories of legal history

The only other coverage is an unsolved Tasmanian mystery legal who dunnit case:

Judah Mattathyahu inquest: Man missing for more than 30 years victim of homicide, coroner finds

If one cares to search on google ‘Ray Broomhall Barrister’ under ‘News’ there is just one record in relation to EMF 5G and in this case there was no 5G planned?

Telstra regional general manager Mike Marom said, after reviewing feedback on the Lilli Pilli site, it had been determined this was the best location for the facility.

“The proposed installation of the small cell utilises 4G infrastructure, not 5G,” he said. “There is no 5G infrastructure currently being installed in the Lilli Pilli area”.

All other reports are cited on social media and the common theme regarding all of them is lack of facts or case summaries, creating an illusion that action is happening, however when one searches for facts they are not present.

What would be useful is a comprehensive summary of the successful cases to date and an explanation of why this particular case failed. This would be highly useful and encouraging to people who may otherwise live in fear of losing the roof over their head if they stand up for their basic rights, a ludicrous proposition and one that must be seriously questioned.

Image sourced from: