Friday, July 1, 2022
Google search engine
HomeEditors PickThe Australian People demand to know what was uncovered during the Wood...

The Australian People demand to know what was uncovered during the Wood Royal Commission NOW


We are 100% independently owned, free from corporate ownership and control. Help support a free press by donating to us.

The Wood Royal Commission – Paedophilia of Politicians, Judges and Police exposed in the 1990s, but details kept from the Public for 90 years.

As hundreds of thousands of concerned Australian’s rally across the country and protest the 2020-2022 government covid overreach and vaccine mandates, amidst many questions, another common question being asked and not answered is, why are the findings of the Wood Royal Commission not being released to the public? Protesters with banners, public speakers and crowds have demanded to know what the government is trying to hide about this other vexatious issue and why. Speculation about who is named in the documents resulting from investigations is rife, and distrust in the government is growing on this issue too. Many of the protesters are ordinary hard-working Australian parents and grandparents who object to the withholding of the findings or don’t understand why this has happened. These people are rightly concerned about the safety of their children and want to know what is being done to prosecute the guilty. The fact that these findings have been suppressed for so long has done nothing to reduce the clamour for their release; in fact, the noise is only getting louder and louder every day.

The Wood Royal Commission took place between 1995-1997, cost an estimated $64 million and heard from 902 public witnesses in the NSW Supreme Court. It began as an inquiry into police corruption in NSW and then moved into the investigation of the collusion between organised paedophile networks within senior ranks of the NSW Police Service and the judiciary, and members of the political establishment, legal profession, and the media. Some of the details are available online for everyone to access on Wikipedia. This source, however, fails to mention the suppression order that was placed on the findings.

A Sydney Morning Herald article from 2015 reported that a former Prime Minister of Australia was a suspected paedophile and was on a ‘secret list’ containing the names of high-profile alleged paedophiles. In 2015, Senator Bill Heffernan used a Senate Estimates Committee hearing to discuss the list of 28 people which he said formed part of police documents that had been ‘signed off’ by Gary Crooke, QC. Mr Crooke was the former senior counsel assisting the Wood Royal Commission in the 1990s. This was also reported on by SBS News ‘A former PM: in paedophile list’ where it says that Senator Heffernan had disturbing police documents and made the comment that “No one seems to want to deal with them”. He also said “it’s not so much the secrets that’s the problem. It’s when a group such as the 28 people on this page keep each other’s secrets”. Senator Heffernan didn’t name any names but called on the then Attorney-General George Brandis to expand the child abuse royal commission so that it included the legal fraternity.

In November 2020, independent member for Clark, Tasmanian MP Andrew Wilkie tabled a petition to Federal Parliament that had been signed by thousands of Australians. It called for the lifting of the suppression orders on documents presented during the Wood Royal Commission during the 1990s, which contains the names of 28 political, judicial, and other high-profile figures allegedly connected with paedophilia. The petition read as follows –

On 20th October 2015, Senator Heffernan brought to Parliament and Australia’s attention, official documents presented during the Wood Royal Commission and again during Royal Commission into Ritual and Sexual Abuse within Institutions. These documents include police documents, naming 28 high profile paedophiles, including one former Prime Minister. Investigation into these documents were stopped. The government and Judiciary have been noted suppressing these documents with orders for 90 years, choosing not to investigate as the public would ‘lose faith in the judiciary’. The public have already lost faith in the Government and Judiciary. This is compounded by these suppression orders. We the Australians with integrity and honour stand against these suppression orders and wish to protect our children. We insist these people and institutions be fully investigated, and held to account, including those whom have chosen to cover and suppress any investigations.

We therefore ask the House to 1: Lift the 90 year Suppression Orders on these documents. 2: Create and support permanently, Independent Corruption and Integrity Commission to investigate any and all corruption exposed within Government, Judiciary, and other formal Institutions. 3: Investigate these particular documents suppressed and bring those guilty to account. 4: Bring justice to the victims and survivors, by exposing those people and systems in place that are corrupt and currently hidden. 5: Clean the institutions of all corruption, to start bringing the public’s faith back, showing that our government and judiciary will be honest and work for the people of Australia, while protecting our children’s future.

The petition also called for a federal integrity body to assure the community that there will be a proper investigation into these very serious allegations. MP Wilkie went on to say that it needed to be “a fair dinkum integrity agency, not the half-baked proposal that the Federal Government announced last week, because the Australian public doesn’t want to see the implementation of the weakest watchdog in the country with investigations held behind closed doors and decisions kept secret”. He also said that public trust in politicians and our institutions was at an all-time low, and suppression orders and allegations of paedophilia not investigated help explain why. He implored the parliament to get serious about this and do exactly what the petitioners were calling for. MP Wilkie said that while the allegations from the 1990s may ultimately not be sustained, they still needed to be properly investigated by a strong and independent integrity commission and that anything less was a betrayal of the community.

The Australian Federal Integrity Commission Bill 2020 calls for the establishment of the Australian Federal Integrity Commission as an independent public sector anti-corruption commission for the Commonwealth. An article in The Guardian highlights how Scott Morrison digs in over federal ICAC – tries to shift blame to Labour for slow progress. Whoever is to blame, Australians are still waiting for some sort of federal Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), which would have the power to expose any crimes committed by those in power.

This was over a year ago and the people of Australia are still waiting for answers.

In the meantime, we have learned of many other sexual misconduct scandals involving Australian politicians. These are summarised in an article from March 2021,  Timeline: Rape, sex scandals rocking Australian Parliament. Prime Minister Scott Morrison addressed some of the claims which he appeared to take seriously by speaking to his wife about them and considering how he would feel if the abuse allegations involved his own daughters. He claimed to be shocked and disgusted at the long list of offences by Coalition members, but also pointed out that there had been similar claims about misconduct by members of other political parties. This was apparent in the press conference with Scott Morrison on verge of tears addressing culture within parliament, where he said, ‘we must get this house in order. We must put the politics aside on these things and we must recognise this problem, acknowledge it and we must fix it.’

However, the public is still waiting for this problem to be solved. And it is still waiting for the problems uncovered by the Wood Royal Commission to be made public and to be informed about the behaviour and integrity of politicians, judiciary, senior ranks of the police, the legal profession, and the media. While governments and citizens have been distracted by Covid-19 for almost two years, many serious questions remain unanswered about the functioning of these key, influential and high-level individuals, and organisations.

It all began in 1994, when Independent MP John Hatton and other independent MPs who held the balance of power in the NSW Parliament called for a Royal Commission into the NSW Police Service. It was also stipulated that an inquiry into police protection of paedophiles, previously in the hands of the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), become part of the Royal Commission.

Two years later, the 154 page Royal Commission of Police Services Interim Report February 1996 was prepared by Justice James Roland Wood, who stated that there was a serious corruption problem in the police service and that an unhealthy police culture had developed. The Report also included a comment from the former NSW Ombudsman who claimed that bodies such as the Ombudsman, ICAC, and the NSW Crimes Commission were oversight bodies with scattered resources and skills and no match for endemically corrupt individuals and organisations. He believed they were at best capable of only addressing surface issues and that NSW needed a different approach.

A subsequent article written in 2014, The Wood Royal Commission 10-years on, now available on the Australian Police website, commented that there was no doubt the Wood Royal Commission purged the NSW Police Service of a ‘rollcall of rotters’. A total of 284 police officers were adversely named, with 46 briefs of evidence supplied to the Director of Public Prosecutions. Seven police officers received jail sentences and a total of twelve people enmeshed in crimes uncovered by the Commission took their own lives before, during and shortly after the proceedings. Charges against fourteen officers were dismissed due to irregularities in search warrants and their execution. The article also went on to discuss what the police force did with police, ‘who were on the nose but could not be brought to account by normal means’. The Police Commissioner was given powers to serve these officers with a notice that indicated he did not have confidence in their suitability to continue in their role. A total of 380 officers were targeted in this manner, which resulted in a further 21 police officers being dismissed from the force, 14 resigning, and four being medically discharged.

Subsequently, the Police Integrity Commission was formed and became a type of permanent watchdog. Former policeman, Dr Michael Kennedy, claimed the commission was a political response and that the attorney-general, parliamentary ministry and judiciary took little responsibility for the state of the police force. Michael McGann, another former policeman, commented that direct links to corruption went back 50 or 60 years in Parliament. He believed political hypocrisy and the Wood Royal Commission had left a demoralised police force tarnished and rudderless, with limited operational effectiveness and the problem of corruption unsolved.

It has now been a total of 26 years since the Wood Royal Commission began in 1995 and the Australian public do not want to wait another 64 years to hear the findings. They want to know NOW. And they want to know WHY the suppression order was ever allowed in the first place as they do not want it to happen again. The Australian people want to feel safe with respect to their government and law enforcement agencies.

In January 2013, the then Prime Minister, Julia Gillard initiated another Royal Commission, this one specifically to inquire into the institutional responses to child abuse. The report of this investigation took almost 5 years to complete and was presented in December 2017 as the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse Final Report Recommendations. It revealed an obvious focus on trying to prevent the sexual abuse of children but contained some mixed messages of significant concern. One recommendation stated that the national strategy to prevent child sexual abuse should encompass complementary initiates such as the provision of, ‘information and help-seeking services to support people who are concerned they may be at risk of sexually abusing children’. In Recommendation 6.2 g, the design of these services was meant to be informed by the Stop It Now! Model implemented in Ireland and the United Kingdom. Finally, Recommendation 6.3 c. that, ‘the design and implementation of these initiatives should consider involving children and young people in the strategic development, design, implementation, and evaluation of initiatives’ could be interpreted as suggesting that children be involved in supporting the people who could potentially abuse them.

Still, according to a February 2020 article, child sexual abuse and trafficking are prevalent in Australia. So, 26 years after the Wood Royal Commission millions of dollars have been spent ‘fixing’ the problem using countless child protection programs, but there remains a huge problem in Australia. Due to the suppression orders and the silence of our government, the people of Australia still do not know who was named and who should have been punished for these crimes against children. We do not know who was investigated and we do not know whether they are still committing the crimes that they were accused of during the enquiry.

In the US, the recent Ghislaine Maxwell verdict is yet another example of the protection of powerful people being investigated for sexual crimes against children. Ghislaine Maxwell was found guilty of recruiting and grooming teenage girls for sexual encounters with the disgraced late financier Jeffery Epstein between 1994 and 2004. She was also found guilty of sex trafficking a minor. Unfortunately, there is no guarantee that  Ghislaine Maxwell’s guilty verdict is just the start in achieving justice for victims, with rumours of missing evidence, an unwillingness to investigate and the suppression of findings.

Ghislaine Maxwell is guilty, but the toxic fallout from Jeffrey Epstein’s life is far from over and the point has been made that, ‘what (the verdict) says is that people have become intolerant, not just of the Epstein’s of the world, but for the people who enable them’. So, any sort of help in the commission or covering up of these crimes must be recognised as enabling those found guilty. Ghislaine Maxwell has been found guilty of helping and enabling Jeffrey Epstein and we will hopefully see the other guilty parties exposed and facing prosecution sooner rather than later. Any suppression orders placed on the findings from Ghislaine Maxwell’s sex trafficking trial could hamper the exposing of other guilty parties, so those who do so could also be accused of enabling these crimes to continue. It could then be argued that this also applies to the suppression orders on the findings from the Wood Royal Commission and the way numerous consecutive Australian governments have kept the information from the public.

Again, the question needs to be asked; Why are the findings from the Wood Royal Commission not being released to the public? The people of Australia want answers about the safety of their children now. All previous Australian Governments have avoided informing the public about what was uncovered. The increased calls for a Federal ICAC are a product of this, with many demanding to know who is guilty of what crimes. What began as an inquiry into police corruption in NSW. moved onto the investigation of the collusion between organised paedophile networks within senior ranks of the NSW Police Service and the judiciary, and members of the political establishment, legal profession, and the media. The abhorrent crime of paedophilia committed by the guilty is also said to involve the satanic ritual abuse of children in some cases, making these the most deplorable crimes that anyone can imagine. And just like the saying, “when people don’t know what’s going on, it’s human nature for them to imagine a version that’s ten times worse than the truth”. The people of Australia are speculating and worried about what has been uncovered and hidden from them since the 1990’s. They demand to know the facts now.



  1. Any politician who has the power to lift the suppression order and fails to do so brands him or herself an enabler and unworthy to hold any public office.

  2. Powerful enquires with real teeth need to be initiated and the guilty parties put on notice that they will be exposed immediately and certainly not have their identities hidden for years and protected by parties that are most likely themselves involved at some level. The legal and medical professions, politicians and the police force need to make those starting their careers that they will be under continuing scrutiny throughout their service and will be immediately exposed if found guilty.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

- Advertisment -
Google search engine

Most Popular

Recent Comments

Ivan M. Paton on Approval Of Remdesivir
Beth on Free and Fair?
Novus Ordo Seclorum on Victorian Change to Mandates
Novus Ordo Seclorum on Health care in crisis
Novus Ordo Seclorum on Health care in crisis
Burnthehousedown on Postal vote outrage
Shanthini Balasuriyar on Queensland CHO – a law unto himself
Billie Hutton on Convoy to Canberra Two
Lynn a freedom warrior on Convoy to Canberra Two
Elizabeth on Ruble on the rise
Yvonne Ford on Pfizer drug recall
Gene Trevor Wyngaard on NZ Scrap vaccine mandates
Frances Mahy on Russia Sanctions The U.S.A
Peter Coxhead on My Story, So Far
Theodora Zajaz on Novak Out Of U.S. Open.
Leonie Young on Probuild Buy-Out
Shelley Madden on Pfizer, Stranger than Fiction
Debra Mullins on AVN vs Brendan Murphy
Malcolm on The End Game
Sabina on What’s Next?
Drew Duncan on Belarus Under Threat
Robyn on What’s Next?
Sofia Rutteman on Here We Go Again, Part 2
Robert Burns on Ricardo Bosi Public Address
Kim Henry on Pfizer Whistleblower
Lee Y on Give Me Five
Linda Nemeth on Ricardo Bosi Public Address
Warwick Hibble on Ricardo Bosi Public Address
Lesley on The Data Is Ours
Patricia Poppeliers on Here We Go Again, Part 2
Dani Stevens on Trouble in Paradise
Dianedraytonbuckland on Facebook: Judge, Jury and Executioner
Michael Chere on Before You Inject Your Child
Kerry Taylor on Which one of us is blind?
Kathy Hirsch on First Nations Locked Down
Gloria Feather on Undermining The Indigenous.
Marie Millikin on Let us talk about intuition.
Lucienne Helm on Let us talk about intuition.
Susan Wilson on The real revolution
Jennifer Leonard on 2020 a year to forget
F J on Strange Times
Tracey Parsons on IBAC DAY 9
stacie rose on Which one of us is blind?
Uncertainty on My Story, So Far
Tracey on A Veteran’s Plea
Zaidee Lens Van Rijn on My Story, So Far
Alissandra Moon on The Rise of Medical Apartheid
Peggy Gothe on Mum, I don’t feel well
Keith Cashman on Mum, I don’t feel well
Melinda c Taylor on Mum, I don’t feel well
Vaughan Oke on Which one of us is blind?
Jane Ramsay on Choice vs Ultimatum
Brian K Wilson on Which one of us is blind?
Scott Dawson on Which one of us is blind?