Kev says

Take Back Australia … Reject Socialism

Fraud, the decision: was it reckless?

NSW Fraud Squad claim insufficient evidence to prove deception, however, deception is not that simple, according to NSW Crimes Act 1900 Section 192B

192B Deception

(1) In this Part, “deception” means any deception, by words or other conduct, as to fact or as to law, including:

(a) a deception as to the intentions of the person using the deception or any other person, or

(b) conduct by a person that causes a computer, a machine or any electronic device to make a response that the person is not authorised to cause it to make.

(2) A person does not commit an offence under this Part by a deception unless the deception was intentional or reckless.


Now where I challenge the NSW Fraud Squad is there was obviously deception involved in the card’s usage, and the Fraud Squad claims they cannot prove Mr Thomson had intentionally deceived in the use of the credit card, however, they have either failed to look at whether deception was reckless.

It has the appearance that as the Act was committed in Victoria, they had passed the buck rather than risk fallout over this affair.

We know the Credit Card was used for payment of prostitutes on more than one occasion.
We know the signature was compared by a handwriting expert claiming in his opinion the signatures were made by the same person that signed Mr Thomson’s Driver’s license.
We know up to $100,000 was made in cash advances.
We know Mr Thomson’s association named Coastal voice, is accused of having money transferred to it from Mr Thomson’s HSU Credit Card Account, and used the funds to produce Electoral paraphernalia for Mr Thomson and has never provided Fair Trading with sets of Accounts for the Association since it was formed in 2006/7.
We know Mr Thomson claimed he did not make these payments, or had no knowledge of them, however, he would be required to sign off on these payments  as authorising them with the HSU and therefore at a minimum ‘Reckless’ would be provable.


I am sorry NSW Fraud Squad, but you have not done this case justice, or have not provided a full report to be available to the public.

This does not mean Mr. Thomson is innocent, purely the NSW Squad decided they could not find sufficient evidence to charge him.

My own qualification for these comments is I have worked as a Fraud Investigator  for over 15 years and dealt with both the Criminal Code and Crimes Acts. in NT, WA, SA, and NSW.


07/09/2011 - Posted by | Uncategorized

1 Comment »

  1. […] Craig Thomson …. the NSW Police Decision : Was it Reckless? Posted on September 7, 2011 […]

    Pingback by Craig Thomson …. the NSW Police Decision : Was it Reckless? | Australian TEA Party | 08/09/2011 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: