TREASON REPLACES DEMOCRACY IN A SHAMEFUL & DISMAL DAY FOR FREEDOM IN VICTORIAN MAGISTRATES COURT

Yesterday, the Mikiverse witnessed the Victorian Attorney General, Rob Hulls send a private letter, not for public consumption, through its solicitors, who are defending The Director of Public Prosecutors, Jeremy Rapke on Treason charges to the Deputy-Chief Magistrate.

This private letter advised the Deputy Chief Magistrate, that the Attorney General's solicitors were taking charge of the defence of Director of Public Prosecutions, Jeremy Rapke, from the DPP (at their request), and, that secondly, the Attorney General was taking over the charges of treason laid against Jeremy Rapke from the six private prosecutors and dropping them without seeking advice about whether this action was warranted, or indeed wanted.

This meant that the Attorney General's solicitor was acting for BOTH parties, with the informants not being given the option of refusal.

Yes, you read that correctly. The Attorney General's solicitor took over the prosecutions case against their client and dropped it.

WOULD YOU LIKE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO TAKE OVER AND DISCONTINUE THE SPEEDING/PARKING/LICENCE CLAIMS AGAINST YOU? ADD YOUR COMMENT TO THE COMMUNITY DISCUSSION.

The Mikiverse has been advised in confidence that the private letter was personally signed by Robert Hulls.

SHOULD THE ATTORNEY GENERAL INTERVENE IN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM TO PREVENT HIS MATE FROM FACING JUDICIAL SCRUTINY? ADD YOUR COMMENT BELOW.

It gets better.

The Deputy-Chief Magistrate was only sitting in this matter because the Chief Magistrate had to excuse himself from sitting because he is facing the same charges of treason as Jeremy Rapke.

The Victorian Attorney General, Rob Hulls is also charged with treason and should not be holding office, much less perverting the course of justice to 'help out a mate'.

Then again, Jeremy Rapke, shouldn't be holding office whilst facing charges of treason, and neither should Australian Prime-Minister Julia Gillard who is also facing charges of treason.

GAVIN SILBERT'S LETTER TO JEREMY RAPKE

SUNDAY HERALD SUN OCTOBER 24 2010

Gavin Silbert wrote a confidential letter to Jeremy Rapke in July. Source: Herald Sun

THIS is the confidential letter Gavin Silbert sent his boss, Jeremy Rapke, on July 19.

Dear Jeremy

Your letter of 29 June has caused me great concern, as it fails to deal with any of the history of the matters which you have raised in that correspondence.

I have no choice but to respond and make clear both the background and the circumstances that have led to this most unfortunate exchange of correspondence.

You have reproached me in your letter for being grossly disloyal and attempting to undermine your standing. I emphatically deny any disloyalty and deny that it was my intention then or at any time in the past to undermine your standing.

As you will undoubtedly recall, I have previously approached you on a private and personal level and indicated to you the concerns that were being expressed by various solicitors in the office of Public Prosecutions, members of the Victorian Bar and the judiciary about your relationship with Ms. Diana Karamicov, particularly considering your then relative positions, you as Director of Public Prosecutions, and she as a junior solicitor. At the time I first spoke to you I was unaware of her name.

I did not enquire of you then the nature of your relationship, but cautioned you as to the general perceptions of that relationship. You continued to associate and spend time with Ms Karamicov in a manner that was markedly different from every other solicitor in the Office of Public Prosecutions. The concerns of the groups of people to whom I previously referred continued unabated and increased, with the passing of time, as stories were then circulated about you attempting to interfere in her career by seeking to have her promoted within the Office of Public Prosecutions, and interfering in an area in which you had no statutory role, attempting consistently to advance her career well beyond that of a solicitor of her experience.

The position of Associate Crown Prosecutor is a public position funded by public monies, and I am, pursuant to s14 of the Public Prosecutions Act charged with managing the Crown Prosecutors and Associate Crown Prosecutors to ensure they function in an effective and efficient manner. I became aware that there was a possibility that you were considering appointing a number of Associate Crown Prosecutors and accordingly I enquired of you on two occasions who you were considering recommending for the position. You refused to tell me. Prior to these three appointments we had always discussed persons you were considering recommending for appointment in Prosecutor's Chambers.

I was concerned that the persons being recommended may have been persons who were unsuitable for the positions, which is what has in fact transpired.

In terms of the position of Associate Crown Prosecutor, the concept is generally speaking that they will be capable lawyers who have demonstrated some skill in the running of criminal trials at a more minor level and who will be given exposure and experience in more complex trials. Neither Ms. Karamicov nor Ms (aifthe Sunday Herald Sun has removed the name of the second lawyer for legal reasons) aifhave ever conducted a criminal trial in the role of counsel or advocate, and there has been nothing demonstrated by either to indicate that they are capable of so doing. The appointment of Mr (aifaifthe Sunday Herald Sun has removed the name of the third lawyer and the rest of this sentence for legal reasons).

There are many talented solicitors within the Office of Public Prosecutions who would make excellent Associate Crown Prosecutors, but they were not afforded the opportunity to apply for these positions.

I was concerned that at some stage your relationship with Ms. Karamicov would become a matter of public knowledge and cause the appointment to be regarded with significant disquiet. The office of Crown Prosecutor is an important office, in which the integrity of the office holders is of the utmost importance, as is the manner of their appointment. Because of my concerns that the appointment of Ms. Karamicov, and indeed the other two appointees, may have damaged that position, I tried to raise the matter with you but you would not speak to me and I had no alternative but to seek information about who was being recommended by your from other sources.

At no stage in my dealing with the Government, the Victorian Government Solicitor, the Solicitor for Public Prosecutions or any of his staff have I commented adversely on your standing, authority or reputation. Your standing and reputation with the solicitors of the Office of Public Prosecutions, Crown Prosecutors, members of the criminal bar and the Judiciary have been undermined by your own persistent actions and behaviour, which have continued and increased over the last two years, despite my warnings.

I was concerned as to whether you had disclosed to the Attorney-General the fact of your relationship and the nature of that relationship with Ms. Karamicov, but did not consider it my role to bring that relationship to his attention.

I reject unequivocally your assertion that there was anything improper in my approaches to John Cain and to the Attorney General. As a statutory appointee charged with specified duties, I maintain my right to approach the Attorney at any time and without reference to you. In each case I expressed my concerns at the proposed appointments based on the lack of qualifications and experience of the appointees. The need for me to make these approaches arose as a direct result of your conduct and your refusal to tell me the names of the three persons you had submitted to the Attorney-General.

Yours sincerely

Gavin Silbert.

DPP JEREMY RAPKE LASHES LEAKERS

HERALD SUN OCTOBER 24 2010

Jeremy Rapke has called for unity in the Office of Public Prosecutions. Source: Herald Sun

THIS is the full text of an internal memo DPP Jeremy Rapke sent to staff on Friday afternoon.

Mr Rapke has declined several requests from the Sunday Herald Sun to be interviewed over this controversy

I HAVE today become aware that the Sunday Herald Sun intends to publish on Sunday a letter written to me in July 2010 by Gavin Silbert SC, Chief Crown Prosecutor.

It was a personal letter in which Mr Silbert expressed his personal views about my recommendation of three solicitor-advocates as Associate Crown Prosecutors.

There has been a lot of discussion in the media recently about these appointments and I now wish to deal with the reasons that motivated me to make my recommendations to the Attorney-General.

In April 2010 I wrote to the Attorney-General, the Honourable Rob Hulls MP, recommending the appointment of seven persons as Senior Crown Prosecutors, Crown Prosecutors and Associate Crown Prosecutors.

In that letter I provided reasons to the Attorney for my recommendations.

I advised the Attorney that my recommendation that the three solicitors be appointed Associate Crown Prosecutors was part of my commitment to enhance and develop in-house advocacy in the OPP and to provide a recognised career path for solicitors who chose advocacy as a specialisation and excelled in it.

I informed the Attorney that the appointment of the three Associate Crown Prosecutors would significantly augment the ability of Crown Prosecutors Chambers to service my briefing needs, particularly in the Court of Appeal and in the area of specialist sexual offence prosecution.

It was in those two areas that I had experienced briefing pressures.

I was concerned to ensure that I was represented in higher court appeals and sex offence prosecutions by the most skilled and experienced specialist advocates.

I observed that the demands made by the Court of Appeal for ever more detailed and complex data and submissions had stretched my resources to the point that I was then having great difficulty in servicing the Court.

I advised the Attorney that I intended to use two of the three Associate Crown Prosecutors as specialist Court of Appeal advocates whilst also giving them appropriate opportunities to develop their general advocacy skills.

It was my stated intention that, initially, the Associate Crown Prosecutors would work in those areas of specialisation which I identified for the Attorney before developing the skills necessary to conduct trials and more complex criminal litigation.

Suggestions that any or all of the three solicitors lacked the necessary qualifications, skill or expertise to carry out the functions I designated for them are completely without foundation and are malicious.

A panel appointed by the Attorney-General to assess independently my recommendations confirmed the suitability of those three solicitors for appointment as Associate Crown Prosecutors.

The continued public denigration of these three prosecutors is a disgrace and reflects poorly on all who have been involved in the public campaign to undermine their standing and careers.

Further, the personal cost to these three people of their public vilification cannot be underestimated and is so frequently ignored.

One needs little imagination to appreciate how hurtful it must be to them to read in the newspapers of their supposed incompetence and lack of suitability for the positions to which they have been appointed.

The three Associate Crown Prosecutors have my full confidence and support.

Each of them is a fine criminal lawyer and advocate and deserved their appointments.

I call upon all prosecutors and staff of the OPP to rally behind these three prosecutors and to stop immediately the despicable and unwarranted campaign which is calculated to cause so much personal hurt and embarrassment as well as significant damage to the prosecution service of this state.

OPP LAWYERS SAY THEY WILL TESTIFY AGAINST JEREMY RAPKE

JAMES CAMPBELL SUNDAY HERALD SUN OCTOBER 24th 2010

Jeremy Rapke meets the press to refute claims about his relationship with a junior lawyer. Source: Herald Sun

FOUR Office of Public Prosecutions lawyers have said they will testify about the relationship between their boss, Jeremy Rapke, and a junior lawyer - if an inquiry is ordered.

The staff, furious over the decision by the Director of Public Prosecutions to promote solicitor Diana Karamicov, have independently confirmed their intentions to the Sunday Herald Sun.

The OPP has been in turmoil since July over Mr Rapke's appointment of three solicitors as associate crown prosecutors - a job that pays $140,000 a year.

"People would be lining up to give evidence," one of the lawyers said.

On Friday, Mr Rapke, QC, issued an internal memo to hundreds of staff accusing some lawyers of running a "despicable" campaign against Ms Karamicov and two other solicitors appointed alongside her.

Mr Rapke took the dramatic step after the Sunday Herald Sun told his office the newspaper had obtained a confidential letter from Gavin Silbert, SC, to Mr Rapke written in July.

It appeared yesterday that Mr Rapke's plea to staff and prosecutors to rally behind, instead of calming the situation, had inflamed matters.

"How dare he blame us for what he has done," one OPP lawyer said.

"We're the ones who are suffering because of this," one source said.

"He's the one who has embarrassed the office, not us."

In his letter, dated July 19, Mr Silbert, the Chief Crown Prosecutor, repeatedly accuses his boss of having a relationship with Ms Karamicov.

Mr Silbert also writes that Mr Rapke is interfering in Ms Karamicov's career by seeking to advance her beyond her experience and skills.

He also makes clear his belief that nothing in the three solicitors' previous careers had indicated they were capable of running criminal trials.

Today's publication of Mr Silbert's letter is set to reignite the fight within the OPP, which Attorney-General Rob Hulls is desperately claiming has been defused.

The four OPP lawyers have told the Sunday Herald Sun they believe Mr Silbert's assertion that Mr Rapke spent time with Ms Karamicov in a manner "markedly different from every other solicitor in the Office of Public Prosecutions" is correct.

They have said that, if called on, they could testify:

THAT Mr Rapke and Ms Karamicov were frequently alone together in his office late at night.

SOLICITORS who briefed Ms Karamicov complained they were afraid to criticise her because they feared she would complain about them to Mr Rapke.

THE relationship between Mr Rapke and Ms Karamicov was one of the reasons why the previous solicitor for public prosecutions left her job in May 2008.

The Brumby Government has ruled out an inquiry.

This month, Mr Rapke told broadcaster Jon Faine that he did not have a sexual relationship with Ms Karamicov, but refused to answer on Friday when asked if he had had a sexual relationship with her in the past.

The conflict inside the OPP has been the subject of rumour and innuendo in the legal district for months.

"He (Mr Rapke) is acting as though this is just something inside the office - it's not, it's the talk of Lonsdale St," one source said.

Victorian Government Solicitor John Cain, who interviewed the solicitors after concerns about their appointments as associate crown prosecutors were raised with Attorney-General Hulls, declined to answer questions about Mr Silbert's letter.

Mr Hulls also declined to answer questions.

Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu called on Mr Hulls to order an inquiry.

"There must now be an investigation extending not only to what has gone on in the DPP's office, but also to what Rob Hulls knew and when, and what his role has been in attempting to cover up this crisis," he said.

campbelljam@heraldsun.com.au