Translate

Saturday, January 29, 2011

Open the flood gates, the shit storm is about to begin.



Folks this is not over, not by a long shot.

A Perth man who posted a video online showing him arguing with a Jewish man and calling him a "racist, homicidal maniac'' has been found guilty of racial hatred.

Brendan Lee O'Connell, 38, represented himself before a jury in the Perth District Court after firing the lawyer who had been defending him against an accusation that he posted an anti-semitic video online.


O'Connell faced seven charges related to the posting of a verbal altercation he had with Stanley Keyser and Timothy Peach, who are Jewish, and was found guilty on six.


An argument broke out between the three men at an IGA supermarket in South Perth on May 2, 2009, where a Friends of Palestine group was holding a protest against Israeli oranges.


Mr Peach, 19, told the court during the trial that he was a member of the Australasian Union of Jewish Students at the time and had attended the rally to "observe" and hand out flyers to educate the protesters about Israel.


He said he was "angry", "confused" and "offended" by O'Connell when he started to film the two Jewish men and argue with them about their religion.


During the trial, O'Connell refused to acknowledge Judge Henry Wisbey when he entered the court and, instead, rose to bow to the jury.


About a dozen supporters in the court cheered when O'Connell labelled the proceedings "a kangaroo court" and gave a long, repetitive rant about the King James Bible and the Constitution.


The video that O'Connell posted online was shown on the first day of the trial.


"You have a religion of racism, hate, homicide and ethnic cleansing," O'Connell says to the men on the video.


"You are a racist, homicidal maniac."


When the jury found O'Connell guilty on Friday, he shouted: "Free Palestine! Free Iraq!" before being taken away.


Outside court, Mr Keyser's mother Shelley said it was "a big relief" for the "terrible" ordeal to be over.


O'Connell was remanded in custody and is due to reappear in court on Monday.


Source: Herald Sun















5 comments:

FugaziQuo said...

"Folks this is not over, not by a long shot."

On the contrary, it's only just begun. Let the battle commence.

Whitelaw Towers said...

I do believe they just made the biggest mistake yet. They cant put us all in Jail yet. Now I wonder if a deal is in the wind? Another gag order maybe. Lets see what happens Monday.

Pariah McLairy said...

The quintessense of Judaism is that non-Jews are little more than animals in human form who may only have a place in the world to come as "Noachides"....

The number of the beast, the six million, must be seared into the belief system of each Noachide to remind each one of them that they are savages deserving of their status.

That the courts refuse to acknowledge the responsibility to dissent demonstrates its compromised nature and provide an insight into the murderous totalitarianism waiting for all.

FugaziQuo said...

I spoke with Brendon the other night and he is preparing himself for jail-time. He was shocked that the judge refused to allow him to present all his evidence and closed the trial just as Brendon was about to present details of the "Shulkan Aruch" to the jury. We can't have Jewish hatred of Gentiles exposed in a court of a law, can we?

Brendon now fears for his life and is expecting to meet with "an accident" in prison. He stressed that he is NOT suicidal.

Brendon also asked me to convey a message that those of us still at liberty focus our attention and research on exposing the activities of Israeli intelligence in Australia as he believes this to be the real reason behind his arrest, trial and likely imprisonment.

I believe that Brendon will receive a prison sentence on Monday. I hope I'm wrong. I think that him calling the judge an old fool, accusing him of being corrupt, and trying to have him arrested for treason will count against him when Brendon's sentence is passed.

Anonymous said...

Can a judge end a trial arbitrarily ? There must be some legal ground to do so. If not, then this alone sets the stage for an appeal relating to an apparent judicial attempt to pervert the course of justice by failing to allow both parties an opportunity to present all evidence.

This particularly so in that it was the accused defendant who has been denied natural justice.

The allusion is that he was guilty by default and all superficial formalities designed to make a verdict appear valid had been met.