By Gi Linda
truth about Truthology was first told in October 2016 when the Nimbin
GoodTimes published an exposé of a local land-share fraud that had
defrauded investors of over $1.5 million.
The trial about the
truth of “The Truth about Truthology” began on June 9, 2017, with a
directions hearing at Sydney Supreme Court. The initiating claim was
lodged by Mark Darwin and collaborators on March 16, 2017, against
myself and the Nimbin GoodTimes newspaper regarding publication of the
article I wrote exposing Mark Darwin’s use of the fronts “Truthology”
and “Freedom Summits” to deceive investors who were “selected” to become
victims in his “Bhula Bhula Community Village” land-share fraud.
Darwin’s ever-escalating requests for damages estimated to soar over
$4million, giving a proposed cool one-million-dollars for each of four
plaintiffs, this is by far the biggest defamation case in Australian
As a self-representing co-defendant I am cross-claiming
against Mark Darwin and collaborators for malicious prosecution, since
their defamation claim against me takes the form of a “SLAPP”, a legal
trick designed according to the “Law of the Brute” to prioritise a
litigant’s lust for gain over legitimate public concerns.
put profits before people by setting up an unfair Goliath v David
battle between private and public interests, in which an overwhelming
threat of litigation is used to silence critics and prevent free speech
on issues of public concern. Everyone has the right to provide true
information and discuss honest opinions that expose such scams in the
public interest. Facing-off against Goliath in the unequal slugfest are
David's stone-slinging shepherd boys who have been fleeced and stand on
their right to call such scurrilous profiteering just what it is: a
SLAPPs, “Strategic Lawsuits Against Public
Participation” are an abuse of legal process in which power and profit
almost always win against truth and justice, without ever going to
trial. Litigants often drag out their costly cases for many years, not
with the aim of winning and claiming damages, but as a means of
“slapping” their opponents with punishment until they capitulate.
Political and environmental activists are often “slapped” in malicious
retaliation when the threaten corporate interests, and local public
interest groups have been “slapped” to prevent them effectively exposing
private economic interests that trample pubic concerns.
by plaintiffs who assume their private profits are more important than
public interests are common in America, but they’re used infrequently in
Australia, mostly by property developers to target and silence
outspoken individuals who oppose them on public interest environmental
matters. One Judge described SLAPPs as, “suits without substantial
merit, brought by private interests to stop citizens exercising
political rights or punish them for having done so.”
charges are used by a plaintiff in a SLAPP as a powerful and effective
bludgeon to traumatise and silence opponents who are literally “slapped
down” with a massive weight of obfuscating evidence intended to cause an
intimidating fear of crippling costs, damages and loss of reputation.
The fear alone is usually enough to force the victim’s acquiescence to
the litigant’s agenda of injustice before the matter goes to trial.
a flourish of characteristic malice, Darwin’s statement of claim
prominently featured gruesome photos of strangled goats along with a
defamatory caption to effect that I am a “serial pest, crazy torturer
and murderer of small animals.” Darwin then posted this fabricated
narrative on his website that is dedicated to defamation of me, where he
linked further gloating ad hominem attacks to a copy of private
correspondence by Nimbin GoodTimes’ lawyer who had accepted Darwin’s
offer to discontinue litigation against the publisher in exchange for
throwing me under the bus by removing the article, issuing a retraction
and publishing full-page promotions of their land-share venture for the
My article, copied at
http://thetruthabouttruthology.blogspot.com.au/ with additional visual
commentary, was based on a draft chapter of a book I am writing about my
experience as one of the victims of Mark Darwin’s fraud. The exposé was
written as “The Truth about Truthology”, and retitled by Bob Dooley,
editor and publisher of Nimbin’s colourful monthly newspaper, as
“TheTruth About Bhula Bhula”.
In his statement of claim against
me, Darwin linked the Nimbin GoodTimes article with emails I had sent to
other defrauded investors as we discovered we were trapped in a fraud.
These private emails were intercepted and used out of context without
permission of myself or the intended recipients. Darwin has charged that
the publication of these truths and honest opinions about the
falseology of “Truthology”, had damaged the plaintiffs' reputations and
caused them financial loss.
At Friday’s directions hearing the
plaintiffs’ barrister sought leave to submit an additional claim
regarding two blogs that I publish for the “Association of Investors
Defrauded by Darwin” (AIDD). Leave was granted to file an application
for an interlocutory hearing to press for an injunction to have the
blogs removed by court order.
trial of the SLAPP case will determine the truth of “The Truth about
Truthology”. In this analogy, the right of “Goliath” assumed by Mark
Darwin and his mates is their right to profit from the sale of
home-sites located on land where no habitation is permitted, and then
misuse the power of the courts to disenfranchise betrayed investors
The protection of free speech in Australia
is embodied in the Commonwealth Constitution, which, for the legitimate
functioning of representative government, presumes that citizens do have
the ability to freely communicate their views.