Liberal Senator Bill Heffernan

In Australia, Justice James Roland Wood Presided Over The Wood Royal Commission Overseeing His Own Paedophile Network

Reporter Credit:  David Shurter

https://www.australianpeacemakers.com

Former Royal Commissioner James Wood, who denied the existence of a VIP pedophile network in Australia – named as a VIP pedophile to current Royal Commission

In Sydney Australia in the mid 1990s, politician Diedre Grusovin complained about reports of a VIP Sydney pedophile ring which implicated politicians, Catholic churches, Child Protection Services (DOCS), the Education Department, media moguls, and entertainers. This sparked a Royal Commission in the state of New South Wales. The commission was to examine allegations of systemic and entrenched corruption within the NSW Police, namely that police were protecting pedophiles, and that some police were actually involved in pedophile activities and ritual abuse.

This Royal Commission was conducted by Justice James Wood. The Wood Royal Commission was to specifically examine allegations of satanic ritual abuse at Seabeach Kindergarten, otherwise known as the ‘Mr Bubbles’ case. The subsequent Royal Commission into the NSW Police Service Final Report was published on 1st May, 1997. Three volumes of this report were devoted to pedophilia inquiries. Volume Four, Chapter 5 (pages 99 -116) was solely devoted to the subject of RA. At the end of this chapter, Commissioner Wood concluded:

5.13 From a common sense perspective, while it must be recognised that apparently respectable and successful members of the community do commit child sexual abuse, a quantum leap in credibility is required to suppose that they would do so in the bizarre, ritualistic way described, which includes the infliction of serious, even fatal, injury and mutilation upon their own children.

Wood’s examination of RA amounted to a blatantly biased whitewashing. The entire contents of Chapter 5 were devoted to discrediting RA victims, parroting critics’ unscientific reasons for why RA does not exist in Australia, excluding the evidence for RA’s existence, and listing alternative possible reasons – none scientifically evidenced – for the epidemic reporting of RA in Australia.

Wood’s given explanations for the multitude of witness testimonies included mental illness, substance abuse history, urban legend, a ‘metaphor’ for incest, lying to get compensation, and exposure to ritual themes in books, film or television.

Commissioner Wood detailed the arguments against the possibility of dissociation and memory loss, and the arguments for the existence of something called ‘false memory syndrome.’ Wood failed to mention where the notion of ‘false memory syndrome’ stemmed from. False Memory Syndrome is not a recognised psychiatric condition, it does not appear in the DSM. The term was coined by pedophiles and their supporters.

Commissioner Wood’s report referenced Loftus’ 1994 book, The Myth of Repressed Memory: False Memories and Allegations of Sexual Abuse, to support the views that (a) false memories of RA can be artificially created as a result of third person suggestion and (b) a victim of RA cannot experience dissociation and repression of traumatic memories. Loftus’ 1994 book was not a scientifically conducted, peer reviewed research publication. It was just a book.

In his Final Report, Commissioner Wood indicated that RA does not exist from a law enforcement perspective because:

1.)rarely, if ever, are bodies of the ‘victims’ or their graves found, nor do neighbours, friends or relatives report children missing in the numbers required to account for the allegations;

2.)there is rarely, if ever, any evidence of the kind which can be confirmed by modern forensic technology;

3.)signs of physical injury in the form of scarring, burns and the like, are not found upon medical examination of ‘victims’ who report torture of the most extreme and prolonged kind; more often than not the medical examination fails to confirm the abuse as alleged;

4.)in cases of criminal conspiracy, inter-group jealousies or disputes inevitably develop and throw up an informant. In cases of RA, this rarely if ever occurs. Similarly a co-conspirator who is otherwise in trouble, and prepared to supply information in return for an immunity or assistance in sentencing, rarely emerges;

5.)again, contrary to experience with child sexual abuse generally, most of the offenders are reported to be females;

6.)although many ‘victims’ claim that photographs are taken and videotapes made of the activity, visual records of the kind are rarely found, nor does the large amount of child pornography in circulation portray the bizarre and ritualistic activities described;

7.)and so many people tell the same story, and allege the involvement of so many others in the events that it is difficult to see how there could not be independent evidence, or knowledge of it on the part of persons outside the alleged rings.

Now, the true reason behind Commissioner Wood’s dismissal of the evidence for the existence of Ritual Abuse and a VIP pedophile ring in Australia has come to light.

One victim of the Sydney based VIP pedophile ring who was prostituted by government owned boys homes, has named Commissioner James Wood as one of his VIP pedophile ring clientele who paid to rape him as a child in a Kings Cross boy brothel.

The following is a transcript of the witness statement that Dean Henry provided to the current Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Abuse, while in prison. Do not be deterred by Dean’s criminal history, as ALL of the Wood Royal Commission victims were routinely incarcerated in adult prisons following their incarceration and abuse in child institutions.

About Justice James Roland Woods

Reporter Credit: Wikipedia 

The Honourable James Roland Tomson Wood AO, KC (born 1941) is the chairman of Law Reform Commission of New South Wales, the chairman of the New South Wales Sentencing Council, the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission and a former judge in Australia. He is currently a judge of the Fiji Court of Appeal.

Wood was born in Sydney in 1941.

He attended Knox Grammar School and the University of Sydney, graduating with the University Medal in Law in 1964.

Wood was admitted as a solicitor of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in 1964. He was called to the bar in 1970 and subsequently became a Queen's Counsel.

He was appointed a judge of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in 1984 and became the Chief Judge at Common Law in 1984 before retiring in 2005. He served as chairman of the Law Reform Commission of New South Wales between 1982 and 1984. During his time as a judge, he served as a royal commissioner in the New South Wales police royal commission.

He is widely recognized as a conservative judge, who is mostly known for his involvement in the case of the murder of Leigh Leigh. In this case a 14 year old female victim was gang raped, mutilated, tortured and her body discarded on a beach in New South Wales. Woods was widely criticized for his judgement as he shifted the blame of the rape and murder partly on the underaged victim. After being the presiding judge in this case, he went to dismiss the appeal of this case as head of the Crime Commission.

He is currently the chairman of both the New South Wales Law Reform Commission and the New South Wales Sentencing Council. In November 2008 he released the Report of the Special Commission of Inquiry into Child Protection Services in NSW. The inquiry reported on what changes were required within the child protection system to improve the safety of children and families in NSW.

Wood is also Patron of Pathfinders, an Armidale-based not for profit organisation that supports vulnerable and disadvantaged children and communities.[1]

He received an AO in 2000 for "service to the community as Royal Commissioner into the New South Wales Police Service, and to the judiciary as a Judge of the Supreme Court of New South Wales".[2]

Disclaimer
‍The information provided on this website is for educational purposes only. We cannot confirm the completeness or accuracy of this information. We do not accept liability for the actions of anyone who chooses to apply the information on this site.