Mr.Sunol yet again guilty of vilification of homosexuals

NSW Crest Civil and Administrative TribunalNSW Crest
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation:
Burns v Sunol [2015] NSWCATAD 131
Hearing dates:
7 October 2014
Decision date:
25 June 2015

Jurisdiction:
Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before:
J Wakefield, Senior Member
J Schneeweiss, General Member
M O’Halloran, General Member
Decision:
In this order, “the material” means:

(a) Garry ** ** is after me. Little faggot stalker who contacted me first, harnessed me and claimed connection to corrupt police. He is evil.

I have work to do to help you, protest signs and letters. I am not the case. Your enemy is my enemy and he is evil gay stalker.

I will not be raped to death in jail while he watches as he says in his threats to me.

(b) Rape little boys, this is same sex marriage.

If you want this sit back in your armchair and let the homosexual lobby push for same sex marriage.

This is the end results of same sex marriage.

Sit back and enjoy yourself whilst this goes on.

(c) Older homosexuals call their underage love interests or targets ‘chickens’ or ‘chicks’. The baby chicks featured in this video was likely an advertisement for the pedorists ring.

(d) Gay marriage equality makes it even more easier for pedophiles to gain access to their child victims.

(e) Everybody with common sense knows gay people have issues and are inclined to be pedophiles, but they call sane people ‘homophobic’ and don’t give a damn if children are being hurt.

(f) Gay marriage is child abuse.

(2) Mr Sunol is to refrain from publishing the material including statements to the same or similar effect on any website whether or not controlled by him.

Catchwords:
ANTI-DISCRIMINATION – Homosexual vilification- Public Act- Incitement – Remedies – Restraining Order
Legislation Cited:
Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 NSW ss 49ZS, 49ZT, 88, 104, 108
Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 ss 3(d), 45
Cases Cited:
Burns v Corbett [2013] NSWADT 227
Burns v Dye [2002] NSWADT 32
Burns v Sunol [2012] NSWADT 246
Collier v Sunol [2005] NSWADT 261
Collier v Sunol [2008] NSWADT 339
Sunol v Collier (EOD) [2006] NSWADTAP 51
Sunol v Collier (No 2) [2012] NSWCA 44
Category:
Principal judgment
Parties:
Garry Burns (Applicant)
John Christopher Sunol (Respondent)
Representation:
G Burns (Applicant in person)
J C Sunol (Respondent in person)
File Number(s):1410384
REASONS FOR DECISION

Introduction

By these proceedings, Mr Burns makes three complaints that the publication of certain material on his website by Mr Sunol constitutes homosexual vilification in breach of s 49ZT of the Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 NSW. For the reasons which follow the Tribunal finds that Mr Burns’ first two complaints are substantiated and that the third complaint is partly substantiated.

Procedural History

On 24 March 2014, Mr Burns lodged his three complaints with the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board. The President’s delegate accepted the complaints for investigation under s 89B of the Anti-Discrimination Act. The President received further information from Mr Burns on 24 March 2014.

The complaints accepted for investigation by the President and identified in the complaint summary in the President’s Bundle are as follows:

“1. The complaint of homosexual vilification in the publishing of comments on the respondent’s blog on 23 March 2014 and endorsing comments by Luke McKee (C2014/0238). …

  1. The complaint of homosexual vilification for comments published on the respondent’s blog on 21 March titled ‘Rape little boys taken off ABC shows – this is same sex marriage’ and following comments (C2014/0371) …
  2. The complaint of homosexual vilification in relation to comments made by the respondent on his blog published on 21 March 2014 headed

‘Some very interesting videos on corruption from Luke McKee’ (C2014/01372) …”

On 14 May 2014 the President wrote to Mr Sunol and sought a response to the allegations. No response was received from Mr Sunol.

The President referred the complaints to the Tribunal pursuant to s 93C of the Anti-Discrimination Act on 21 July 2014. The President has identified each of the complaints as homosexual vilification in breach of ss 49ZS and 49ZT of the Anti-Discrimination Act. The period of the complaints is from 21 to 24 March 2014.

The hearing

The matter was heard on 7 October 2014. The parties were self- represented. At the commencement of the hearing Mr Sunol sought leave for Mr Geoff McKee to appear as his representative at the hearing. Mr Sunol said that Mr McKee was the father of Mr Luke McKee of whom Mr Burns had also made complaint but that he was independent. No real basis for the application was advanced. Mr Sunol gave no reason why he could not represent himself at the hearing and indeed said that he was able to represent himself.

Mr Burns objected to Mr McKee representing Mr Sunol. He said that Mr McKee was the subject of a separate complaint before the Tribunal which was to be set down for a case conference.

Section 45 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 provides:

“45 Representation of parties

(1) A party to proceeding in the Tribunal:

(a) has the carriage of the party’s own case and is not entitled to be represented by any person, and

(b) may be represented by another person only if the Tribunal grants leave for the person to represent the party

(3) The Tribunal may at its discretion:

(a) grant or refuse leave under subsection (1)(b) and

(b) revoke any leave that it has granted.”

On the basis of the parties’ submissions and the Tribunal file it was apparent that:

Mr Sunol had served no witness statement and did not seek to give oral evidence at the hearing the facilitation of which would require separate representation,

Mr Sunol anticipated making an application to call Mr McKee as a witness in his case,

Mr McKee’s son was the subject of complaint in other proceedings before the Tribunal in which Mr Burns is the applicant in which event questions could arise as to Mr McKee’s independence and interest,

There was no evidence of any medical or other reason why Mr Sunol could not represent himself, and

Mr Sunol has previously represented himself before the Tribunal and informed the Tribunal that he could represent himself at the hearing.

In those circumstances we considered it appropriate to refuse Mr Sunol’s application for leave for Mr McKee to appear as his representative.

Later in the course of the hearing Mr Sunol sought to call Mr McKee to give evidence. He had not served a witness statement from Mr McKee or given advance notice to Mr Burns of the nature of the proposed evidence. When asked about the nature of that evidence, Mr Sunol said that Mr McKee knew of relevant matters and could give evidence about them. In particular, Mr Sunol said that he (Mr Sunol) did agree with some of the issues which had been published on his website about which complaint was made but that he did not believe that publication was going to harm anybody and that he did not post things which were totally inappropriate in his view. He said that evidence about this could also be given by Mr McKee. When questioned by the Tribunal about whether the evidence would be relevant including whether it went to the question of whether or not any publication, if a public act, had the effect of inciting hatred, serious contempt or severe ridicule of homosexuals, Mr Sunol said that he thought his publications would not incite hatred, that he was “not out to incite hatred” and that Mr McKee could give evidence of this.

We could not be satisfied on the basis of Mr Sunol’s submissions as to the real nature of the proposed evidence or how it would be relevant. Mr Sunol’s submissions appeared to concern evidence of his intention regarding publication. This is not a necessary element of a contravention of s 49ZT; see Sunol v Collier (No 2) [2012] NSWCA 44 per Bathurst CJ at [41] and Basten JA at [79]. Additionally, it would have been unfair to Mr Burns to allow late evidence of which he had not had notice or the opportunity to prepare for or respond to. Mr Sunol gave no reason for the lateness of the proposed evidence.

Lastly, in light of the opportunity already afforded to the parties by the pre hearing process to serve any evidence, and having regard to the object set out in s 3(d) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 NSW to promote resolution of the real issues in the proceedings justly, quickly, cheaply and with as little formality as possible, it would not have been appropriate in our view to adjourn the hearing to allow for the service of further evidence, the real nature and relevance of which could not be identified. For these reasons, we refused Mr Sunol’s application to call Mr McKee as a witness.

Full Decision can be viewed here

Residents call for Dubbo City Council to change social policy

By ORLANDER RUMING

Dubbo marriage equality advocate Nicholas Steepe has shared his story of self-harm and isolation to Dubbo City Council in an effort to create a more inclusive Social Plan for the city.

Mr Steepe spoke at council’s June Finance and Policy Committee meeting on behalf of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex, Questioning and Asexual (LGBTIQA) community.

He called for council to change the term ‘non-heterosexual’ in the 2015-16 Draft Dubbo Social Plan and introduce a motion supporting marriage equality.

“I implore you all… for all of the LGBTIQA constituents of Dubbo, past, present and future, to take a stand against discrimination, exclusion and prejudice,” Mr Steepe said.

“Update the Social Plan to be fully inclusive and promote social inclusion, and support a motion declaring your support for marriage equality, and convey this to Mark Coulton our Federal MP, as well as the federal government.”

The public gallery was overflowing with people supporting Mr Steepe and Libby McMahon, who also spoke at the meeting telling council about her experience as a mother of a gay daughter.

“Coming out made no difference to Savannah’s friends and while family asked many questions they still accepted and loved her,” she said.

“We were the lucky ones. So many other LGBTIQA living in our community are not so fortunate as us.

“Savannah is in a loving relationship. We want her to have the opportunities to someday marry her partner but this will not happen if everyone does not get behind these social changes, including the elected representatives of the Dubbo community, by supporting a motion to support marriage equality.”

Ms McMahon said council had the opportunity to promote inclusivity.

“We have this wonderful opportunity to create a community that promotes and accepts understanding, a community that the LGBTIQA feel included in and want to stay in,’ she said.

“They have so many skills to enrich our lives, let’s not lose them to other communities where their attitudes are more open minded.

“Let’s change our opinions and open our minds and encourage LGBTIQA people to stay in Dubbo and to be safe.”

Mr Steepe said he struggled to come to terms with his sexuality and have others accept it.

“I have lost track of the amount of time I was ridiculed for my flamboyancy and made to feel like I was different, that this was something I should somehow change,” he said.

“This resulted in a severe decline in my mental health, to the point where I self-harmed for a significant period of time. I felt like I was alone and the majority of people in my life did not understand, and I even contemplated whether my life was worth living on a number of occasions.”

He said he now understood he was no different to his friends and family, nor was any member of the LGBTIQA community.

 

Latrobe city councillor Christine Sindt not backing down as lawyers for MP Darren Chester seek apology over same-sex marriage Facebook posts

Posted yesterday at 10:45am

The controversial south-east Victorian based councillor criticised federal MP Darren Chester after he announced his support of same-sex marriage.

Lawyers for Mr Chester have asked Cr Sindt to apologise and retract what they describe as divisive, offensive and defamatory comments.

A vilification complaint has also been lodged against Cr Sindt by a New South Wales anti-discrimination campaigner.

A panel will decide if Cr Sindt has breached the councillor code of conduct by posting anti-Islamic material on Facebook.

She said threats from lawyers would not force her to censor her public comments.

“Same-sex marriage has a lot of, there’s a lot of robust debate around same-sex marriage and this morning I received some private and confidential correspondence from a lawyer,” she said.

“Will I think about what I say and do to be sure that the thought police are happy with it?

“I do not comply with the thought police. I am a free-thinking person.”

“ Ms.Sindt you can’t fatten a pig on market day love”

Sindt agrees to be more ‘inclusive’

Latrobe City Councillor Christine Sindt says discussions with members of the community have made her aware her Facebook posts opposing same sex marriage “may have triggered intense emotion” for people.

“In relation to same sex marriage, I have met with members of the community, and have become aware that my Facebook posts opposing same sex marriage may have triggered intense emotion, based on their own personal experiences,” Cr Sindt told The Express in a statement on Friday.

“Discussions are continuing, for which there are clearly no immediate short-term solutions.

“We have agreed that same sex marriage is not the solution to far deeper social problems.”

Cr Sindt said she had “agreed to disagree” with people on the issue of same sex marriage, and “agreed that we need to be an inclusive, supportive Latrobe City community”.

Her controversial Facebook comments drew interstate ire last week, with an outspoken, Sydney-based gay rights activist lodging a formal complaint with the Anti-Discrimination Board of New South Wales.

Garry Burns has alleged an 11 June statement on Cr Sindt’s offcial councillor Facebook page incited hatred against homosexual men.

The contents of the Facebook post cannot be reported for legal reasons.

Mr Burns said he believed Cr Sindt’s statement was unlawful because it “has a capacity or effect of inciting hatred towards, or serious contempt or serious ridicule of homosexual men on the grounds of their homosexuality”.

“People in high office have responsibility, they’re people in powerful positions and they should understand the impact of their statement particularly on gay and lesbian teenagers, because these kinds of statements do cause harm,” he said.

Cr Sindt’s Facebook post included a personal attack on Member for Gippsland Darren Chester after he declared he would support legislation to legalise same-sex marriage.

A lawyer for Mr Chester sent a letter to Cr Sindt requesting she retract the statement and unreservedly apologise.

From Thursday morning, Cr Sindt’s councillor Facebook page appeared to have been taken down.

Cr Sindt said she had not yet received any legal correspondence about her councillor Facebook page and she had voluntarily deactivated it.

She said she did not know Garry Burns.

“I have met with members of the local community and those whom I have met do not appear to be as concerned as possibly Mr Burns may be and I look forward to receiving his correspondence,” Cr Sindt said.

LGBTI campaigner speaks out in support of Dubbo gay community

By KIM BARTLEY June 20, 2015,  – thedailyliberal.com.augaryburns6

Prominent anti-discrimination campaigner Garry Burns hit the phone after reading about Nicholas Steepe’s struggle to speak to Dubbo city Councillors.

Prominent anti-discrimination campaigner Garry Burns hit the phone after reading about Nicholas Steepe’s struggle to speak to Dubbo city Councillors. Photo: CONTRIBUTED

A HIGH-PROFILE anti-discrimination campaigner has told Dubbo politicians to show the city’s young gay and lesbian residents that they are “welcome” in their home town.

Sydney-based Garry Burns hit the phone on Friday morning after reading of student Nicholas Steepe’s battle to speak with each and every Dubbo city Councillor about marriage equality, a linchpin of “social inclusion”.

Mr Burns rang the offices of Dubbo City Council and Parkes MP Mark Coulton before sending an email to his own representative in the Federal Parliament, Malcolm Turnbull, asking him to nudge Mr Coulton who is currently against same-sex marriage.

The openly homosexual man, who makes “no apologies for going after people in the public eye who promote homophobia”, is reminding Dubbo’s political leaders of their responsibility to promote “diversity, inclusivity, tolerance and understanding”.

“I was touched by this story and I felt really sad that in 2015 we have still got young gay and lesbian people being denied inclusivity,” Mr Burns said.

“They just want to be treated like they are part of the Australian family.

“They look to Councillors, they look to politicians, to give them that support.

“It is important that these councillors…sit down with this young man and the gay and lesbian youth of Dubbo and say ‘you are welcome here’.”

Mr Steepe sought talks with individual Councillors on behalf of Dubbo’s Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex (LGBTI) community.

See your ad here
When five of 11 councillors ignored his invitation, Mr Steepe applied to speak to the council as a whole at one of its June meetings.

On Wednesday he was notified that he could address the council at its monthly meeting on June 29, an arrangement changed by the council a day later.

Mr Steepe and Dubbo mother Libby McMahon will now address the council in an open forum at committee meetings on Monday, June 22, which suits them better.

“I believe that’s quite a positive step because it will allow for debate,” he said.

The LGBTI community and its “straight allies” have been asking the council to join a national and community-driven campaign aimed at influencing federal politicians to reform the 1961 Marriage Act to include same-sex marriage.

About 40 councils in Australia, including Coonamble and Lachlan shire councils, have joined big business, entertainment royalty, politicians and families in trying to bring about change.

Mr Burns, famous for rows with John Laws and Jeff Kennett, applauds Mr Steepe’s effort to engage the council on the issue, even though it will come down to the votes of federal politicians.

“Every Australian should be involved in the promotion of inclusivity, especially those elected to high office,” said the Moree-raised activist.

“If all people are talking openly about a need for legislative change, the Commonwealth government will go ‘I got it’.”