His Defence Council said – “Yes.
And this particular man, your Honour, has seen
operational conduct in a variety of countries. He’s
bound – he’s not allowed to talk about it, and he had
fought for his country and it is quite apparent, your
Honour that he has had to do some horrific things. But
your Honour he comes before this court who has
suffered the scars of that”..
A
Psychology report was tendered to the court as
evidence, the Psychological report was not read to the
court.
Having
heard the defence barrister and read the Psychologists
report the Judge said:
“Normally offences of this nature involve a gaol term,
however I am not going to send you to gaol because of
the unique circumstances.
I
accept the background information that has been
provided by Mr Goldenberg (The Psychologist)
concerning you”.
Judge
White continued: “The rest of us owe gratitude to
people like you as we owe to police officers who work
for our protection. I suspect that police officers
feel they are not wholly appreciated and probably
soldiers feel the same way, but I can tell you as far
as I am concerned the work you do and the work police
officers do is appreciated.
But
that experience in the service of your country has led
you to suffer severe and ongoing emotional
disturbances, which you understand you have, and which
before this incident you had taken steps to alleviate.
You must
realise of course, that given your military training
and experience the potential for you to inflict lethal
harm on others was great”.
Judge
White ordered that no conviction be recorded and
Redfern be put on a two year good behavior bond of
$1,000.
A court
reporter, for the Cairns Post was present at the
trial, this was Simone Knox.
After sentencing, the
reporter phoned the Office of the Director of Public
Prosecutions to confirm some information about the
case. She was informed by the Crown Prosecutor's clerk
that Redfern had been in the SAS. Cairns Post editors
created the heading "Ordeal of SAS soldier."
“Ordeal of SAS Soldier”
“Hero’s breakdown blamed on Post-traumatic stress”
The
full article is shown below


Redfern
said about his day in court that he had never
mentioned any “Special Service” activity to anybody
and the reporter was at fault for sensationalising and
further traumatizing a sick soldier of good character.
Redfern thought he was safe about his lies because
they were contained in a confidential Psychologists
report that was privileged information and only read
by his legal team and the Judge. For a short time
Redfern successfully shifted the blame for his dilemma
on
to the reporter.
Experienced veterans could see through the innuendo of
exceptional service given as an excuse for his crime.
Investigations then revealed he never served outside
of Australia and had experienced
an ordinary career as
a soldier.
It took
little effort to convince the Crown Prosecutor to
appeal the sentence and request a review on the basis
that the Judges sentence was based on incorrect
evidence given to him. The Crown Prosecutor lodged a
subpoena and acquired Redfern’s real
Military record.
On the 9th
March 2005 Redfern again fronted the Cairns District
Court to answer for the lies about his military career
he put forward as mitigating circumstance at his first
trial.
The
Judge read details of Redfern’s real Military Record
to the Court saying that he was initially a Storeman
and then a Medic (Nurse) and had never set foot
outside of Australia. The Judge then read excerpts
from the Psychologists report submitted to him as
evidence at the first trial;
The Judge said Mr Goldenberg reported
about Redfern as follows:
Report
by Sheldon Goldenberg, Psychologist
“He
enrolled in the Australian Army in 1983 and remained
in the service until he was retrenched 14 years later.
Mr Redfern reported that although he does not like to
talk about his
achievements, he was a decorated sergeant and corporal
in the military and at times was responsible for
hundreds of soldiers during conflicts overseas.
He was
trained in special forces and was involved in
intelligence and reconnaissance activities. He
achieved high ranks and promotions on a steady basis
and was a highly skilled and trained special service
soldier, which Mr Redfern explains taught him to react
instantly and effectively in certain circumstances
including sieges.
Mr
Redfern provided numerous examples of his
accomplishments and achievements in the military, but
was aware that he was also exposed to extreme levels
of violence and terror during his career, though at
the time he was unable to manage the memories,
visions, flashbacks and feelings that would flood into
his mind as he attempted to continue his career.
He left
the military and attempted to reintegrate into a
civilian lifestyle but found this extremely difficult
and frustrating as he continued to be plagued with his
demons from the military experiences.
Mr
Redfern was trained to commence a lethal response to
danger and this is what he was programmed to achieve
on a daily basis without exception in the most extreme
and nightmarish conditions”
The
Judge further stated that Redfern’s Barrister said at
the first trial:
“And
this particular man, your Honour, has – he has seen
operational conduct in a variety of countries. He’s
bound, he’s not allowed to talk about it, and he had
fought for his country and it is quite apparent, your
Honour, that he has had to do some horrific things.”
Redfern’s Barrister told the Judge “Your honour no one
likes being duped. I don’t, nor does your honour
obviously” In reference to the Psychologists report
Redfern’s Barrister further said
“Your Honour what
was put in front of you was done in good faith”
Judge
White further commented as follows;
“The
prisoner did all the right things following the
commission of the offence but one. He was very
remorseful when spoken to by police. He pleaded guilty
at an early stage. His expression of remorse were
repeated on the sentence hearing. It is accepted that
he had been suffering from significant emotional
disturbance. He sought counselling for his problems.
The one thing he did wrong was to fabricate a military
history to Mr Goldenberg, the psychologist who
prepared a report for the sentencing proceeding. He
similarly fabricated a military history to Mr McCreanor, his counsel, who spoke of that military
history to me in good faith, and I believed it”.
The
Judge set aside the previous penalty and re-sentenced
Redfern to 120 hours community service and ordered
that a conviction be recorded.
Redfern
lied to his Barrister, to his Psychologist to the Judge
to his friends and he almost succeeded in blaming a
reporter for his situation. After exposure of all the
facts it is obvious that Redfern is a devious fraud
and a liar.
Redfern
was caught out by the fact that a Cairns reporter –
Simone Knox was in court when his case was heard.
Although she was
incorrectly informed Redfern was in the SAS, the
substance to her story was accurate.
Had she not reported the story it would have slipped
by as Redfern had planned.
Below is the follow-up news report from
the Cairns Weekend Post of 12 March 2005.

Redfern would most likely have received reasonable
treatment from the court had he disclosed his real
military record, as it shows he was an exemplary
soldier. He chose to go way over the top and claim
international heroic deeds of a clandestine nature. He
had no idea that he would be caught out. The question
is, if he is prepared to lie to a District Court Judge
about his military career how many times and where
else has he lied about it?
Below is a similar case from the US.
The difference between this case and Redferns???
Well look at the last paragraph below and see just how
well genuine Veterans are supported in the US. We cant
get our government or law enforcers to even arrest our
frauds let alone fine or gaol them. Just what is
wrong with our judicial system when it comes to
protecting the Honour and Service of Australian
Veterans. There are literally hundreds of bogus
veterans across Australia, our fines have been
slightly increased but obviously the maximum amount
they can be fined still isn't enough to cover the
morning tea for the magistrate and lawyers and while
the DPP continues to consider that charging these
people "Is not in the public interest" we are never
going to see these people charged and removed from our
ranks.
American
man charged for lying about service record
 |
Rockport resident Andrew Isbell has been arrested
and charged with aggravated perjury in connection
with the presentation of testimony during his drug
possession trial in August.
Isbell was found not guilty of those charges after
a two-day trial during which an
Aransas
County
deputy testified on his behalf.
Assistant District Attorney Michael Hess
explained during that trial, someone in the
courtroom contacted an army recruiter about Isbell
and the Army uniform he was wearing in the
courtroom. Army recruiters attended the trial and
the information was brought to the attention of
prosecutors who then checked into Isbell's record. |
Hess explained anyone who presents false testimony
under oath is charged with perjury. Aggravated perjury
is when anyone who is testifying in an official
proceeding provides false information which is
material to that proceeding. Under oath in his trial,
Isbell reportedly testified regarding his military
record and about his duties on patrol in
Baghdad. He also
said he earned two Bronze Stars, as well as a Purple
Heart when he sustained a gunshot wound in the
shoulder. He claimed to be on leave from the service
because of the injury.
A check into his military records, however, revealed
Isbell worked in the food service department as a cook
and never served in combat. There is no record of
awards or medals or verification he was injured.
According to information from the Aransas County
Sheriff's Office, Isbell reportedly made a statement
to Texas Ranger Oscar Rivera admitting his false
testimony.
An arrest warrant for Isbell on the charge of
aggravated perjury was subsequently issued Oct. 15 and
he was arrested last week. He posted
a $50,000 bond
and was released from the Aransas County Jail.
Aggravated perjury
charge penalties include a prison sentence of two to
10 years and up to a $10,000 fine.