David Nilson's approval to build new town at Clairview

Australia the 7th September 1995  David Nilsson Company had approval from the Broadsound Shire Council to build a new town at Clairview this was now a very valuable piece of real-estate. Source: Clairview Town Plan Approval

The same year, a disgruntled and misinformed politician in opposition, Jim Pearce the member for Gracemere, told the Queensland Parliament, under parliamentary privilege, that David Nilsson had sold land to people in Nauru that did not exist. Pearce would not repeat this statement in general public without the protection of parliamentary privilege. Australian law states that Members of Parliament can defame anyone without legal recourse within the walls of parliament. The Federal Police and the Australian Securities Investment Commission (ASIC) investigated this statement. This took two years and seven months. During the ASIC investigations, ASIC would not allow Nilsson to trade, which halted his income. Biased media reporting focused purely on the negative, without balance to the issues at hand (Media code of ethics). ASIC took David Nilsson to court Mr. Leo Keke the Lawyer Barrister from Nauru letters were used as evidence to the court. On October 29, 1999 The Honorable Justice Dowsett ordered that all chargers against David Nilsson and his companies be dismissed. Court file number QG3002 of 1997 (Source: Australian Federal Court Decision).

By this time, the media had already caused irreparable damage to Mr. David Nilsson’s reputation. The single parent, father of three teenage sons, was ruined mentally and financially. Because of the trial by media over the past two years, no one wanted anything to do with David Nilsson. They had ruined an innocent man. Jim Pearce’s statement misleading the parliament remains on the Queensland Government website. No mention is made of Mr. David Nilsson’s innocence. Fifteen years later Liam Bartlett interviewed Mr. Leo Keke “Lawyer Barrister” in 2012 in Nauru and neither of them told the viewers that in 1999 the Federal Court dismissed the case against David Nilsson and his companies. Why didn't Liam Bartlett mention this fact which he knew? Bartlett had the opportunity and should have checked the Court records.  Also, Dan Pantone, Simon Tegal, and Partick Bodenham all knew about David Nilsson Court clearance, as David Nilsson had previously given each a copy of the Court Decision.  Furthermore, Simon Tegal and Partick Bodenham both knew about Dan Pantones alledged criminal activities, including the alledged rape of the Indigenous girl Flora, but choose to ignore it, just as Liam Bartlett did . One would have to ask why?

Share with others