|Introduction to the Pedophile Police. There is a specialised police unit in Victoria that, since the early 1990’s, is responsible for investigating all child sex offences involving multiple-victims, offences committed by teachers, as well as child pornography offences. I had a meeting with the head of this unit, Detective Senior Sergeant Nick Flanagan, and was very surprised when the first thing he said to me was “Does Greg Neckett know about your program? Greg Neckett should know about your program”.I found this a very odd thing for him to say as an opening statement, and especially so, given the information known about Greg Neckett’s alleged sexual abuse of boys. I thought it impossible for this police officer not to know of these things, given his specialist role. Relationship between Nick Flanagan and Bob Sisterly I subsequently became aware of the “unusual” relationship between Nick Flanagan (police) and Bob Sisterly (Network X). I invited Nick Flanagan to do a presentation for the board members.
Ron Snide was “so impressed” by Nick Flanagan that he wanted to invite him onto the Board of Management (along with all the other pedophile members). I later discovered that Nick Flanagan and Bob Sisterly, although pretending not to know each other at the Board meeting, have a very cosy relationship indeed. Specifically, a couple of years ago, a senior staff member at Network X was charged with procuring children for prostitution.
At the time, the wife of a detective working in Nick Flanagan’s unit (Jan Pummell) received a very sudden and significant promotion to become Bob Sisterly’s Personal Assistant. It was a clear conflict of interest and deeply comprising to the investigation. Jan Pummell’s husband should not have been involved in investigating Network X staff for their involvement in procuring children for prostitution or any other child sex offences connected to Network X.
However, with the appointment of the detective’s wife to Personal Assistant of the General Manager of Network X, it was guaranteed that no other information pertaining to Network X’s illegal activities involving sex offences against children would be pursued by Nick Flanagan or his unit. And Jan Pummell enjoyed her unexpected and incredibly well-paid, new position at Network X. Pedophile Police Called in to Investigate Pedophile Teacher and Other Offences In 1999 fresh allegations were made against Pedophile Teacher, Dick Newman.
This time, teenage girls reported that Dick Newman approaches students and asks them to meet him after school to meet ‘Winston the Baseball Bat’. They indicated that ‘Winston’ was Dick Newman’s penis. They reported that other students were very affected by this behaviour, and some had taken to writing warnings to each-other on the desks, such as “If Newman asks you to meet Winston, don’t do it – its his dick!!”. At last, Newman had been named and the victims were prepared to come forward.
Newman admitted to these offences and received 5 sessions of counselling. I then discovered that Newman had conveniently taken up a temporary position in a country school (like a priest being moved from parish to parish when things get too hot). The principal at the original school had not told the new school the circumstances surrounding his transfer and had instead said “Poor Dick, he’s had a difficult time lately”. I later discovered that this Principal was an expert liar and had gone over and above the call of duty in protecting this pedophile teacher.
At this new country school it was not long before further allegations of child abuse by Newman came out. Incidents of verbal abuse, such as calling students “f–king stupid” were revealed, as well as physical assaults, such as dragging students out of the classroom and throwing them on the floor. In another physical assault, Newman grabbed the 12-year-old boy by the neck and held him by his neck against a wall. Newman admitted to the latter assault, wrote a letter of apology and provided financial compensation for the loss of the necklace.
With Newman being named and various offences being admitted to, I reported his behaviour for criminal investigation to Nick Flanagan’s unit. It also provided the opportunity for the 1995 offences to be re-investigated. However, Nick Flanagan interviewed only 2 of the 12 boys on the list from 1995, and reported to me that as the first two boys did not disclose anything, the others would not be interviewed. In relation to the offences against the teenage girls, Flanagan said that, at 15 years of age, the girls were “too young”, and he did not want to distress the girls’ families by bringing up the topic of child sexual abuse.
Therefore, these offences by Newman would not be investigated either. I could not believe what I was hearing! Child sex offences are offences because they happen against children! And at 15, the victims were hardly at the young end of the age-spectrum! It was a completely nonsensical reason for not investigating Dick Newman. As for the physical assaults, Flanagan said that he was not responsible for such investigations, so those cases would not be pursued either.. (Interestingly, Bob Sisterly also frequently said to me “Greg Neckett (very powerful politician) really likes me since I started helping you.
He has me sit next to him at all of the formal functions we attend now”.) He said “You do understand, don’t you!” (it was not a question) and I replied that I did not. However, Nick Flanagan was not prepared to discuss the situation amicably and Dick Newman evaded investigation, by both the police in the unit established to investigate such offences, and by the Department of Education.
Further Dealings with the Pedophile Police Whilst at the country school (Goldtown) disclosures of child sexual abuse by other offenders were made by many children. The disclosures centred on two offenders in the town. The specialised unit arrived to “investigate”. However, the main victim of the sexual abuse, Sammy, a 12-year-old girl, did not attend school that day. She arrived after school on her bike and her face was visibly disfigured.
I was told by her best friend that she had been bashed but her friend would not tell me who did this to Sammy. Her smashed-in face was warning enough for all of the children. The police later went to her house, where she fainted upon seeing them. She did not disclose any abuse at all. Despite the fact that her face was visibly disfigured and swollen from a recent assault, the police did not pursue the matter further. The specialised police unit totally destroyed any chance of the truth being revealed and the victims receiving the justice they deserved.
For example, they left children waiting all day to be interviewed and did not end up interviewing them, including witnesses to attempted child-rapes. They interviewed one 12-year-old victim (Lucy) and totally intimidated her. When the girl indicated that the police didn’t believe her the first time she told them what had happened to her, one officer lent right over the top of her, pointed his finger directly in her face and hissed “Don’t say that! You don’t know that!”.
I was shaking, and I was an adult sitting next to the girl! As she walked out of the interview room, the officer said in voice loud enough for the girl to hear “We have serious concerns about the truth of what this girl is saying”. It had the desired effect, Lucy burst into tears and said “The police don’t believe me. I don’t want to keep going”. The Welfare Co-ordinator, who was also in the room during the interview, and who is also an experienced sexual assault counsellor and child protection officer, said to me “That wasn’t an interview. That was designed to stop a child from talking”.
The police did not pursue the case any further on the following grounds: No-one would believe Sammy if she disclosed the abuse in the future, as she hadn’t disclosed the first time. (The fact that she had been bashed would not be seen as relevant to her hesitancy to disclose?!) Lucy had led all the children on (to make up “stories” of sexual abuse for fun, even though the children were visibly traumatised). In relation to the sexual abuse of a boy, “men try to touch other men’s penises after football matches all the time” (!) so it was not worthy of pursuing. And finally, that there was not enough evidence – this is despite the fact that there were WITNESSES to the attempted rapes of the children, and the testimonies of many victims provided significant corroboration. Also, many adults reported having been sexually abused by the same offenders when they were children, but the police refused to interview these adults.