Aussie Judges Issues Secret Order Protecting Muslims Who Threatened to Kill Jews

Aussie Judges Issues Secret Order Protecting Muslims Who Threatened to Kill Jews. By Daniel Greenfield at Front Page.

You may remember this story of Muslims working in Australian hospitals threatening to kill Jews. …

Asked what would happen if an Israeli patient came into the hospital, [female nurse] Abu Lebdeh says: “I won’t treat them, I will kill them.”

 

 

This happened at Bankstown hospital. After the Muslim terrorist attack aimed at a Chanukah party at Bondi Beach, a Jewish victim was checked in under a fake name so she wouldn’t be harmed by the Muslim employees.

She was struck in the head by shrapnel and began bleeding heavily before she was admitted to Liverpool Hospital under her real name, with her surname and Jewish religion recorded.

“Next day, just before the operation, some administration staff came and she said, ‘We have to change your name’,” she said.

“They cut my (wristband) and put my new band on with ‘Karen Jones’ without any religions,” Ms Shikhverg told Sky News.

“In my opinion, they were afraid of staff (confronting me). They can’t trust their own staff,” she said.

“Now do Jewish people have to be afraid to go to (a) public hospital?”

So what happened to the nurses who made those threats on camera?

But if you assumed the system would give the Muslims a pass, you guessed correctly. It’s happened by way of a secret order which falsely classified the public social media interaction as an illicitly obtained ‘private conversation’ and blocked the video, and therefore the evidence, for holding them accountable. …

Why? Well, as the Australian op-ed correctly notes (and as much of the media misreported) the answer is secret. …

Why can’t it be published? This isn’t a judgement involving some classified information, but a widely published social media interaction. And yet it must be kept secret from us while ensuring that the case against them collapses. …

Consequences? Not for the Muslim nurses:

Patients will continue hiding out and hoping not to be murdered by Muslim hospital workers.

Bimini Plesser in The Australian:

Sarah Abu Lebdeh and Ahmad Rashad Nadir made global headlines last year after Israeli influencer Max Ilinski recorded their conversation in an online chatroom, in which Mr Nadir suggested he had sent Israeli patients to “hell” while Ms Abu Lebdeh allegedly told Mr Ilinski he was going to “die the most disgusting death”.

In an extraordinary ruling, NSW District Court judge Michael McHugh on Tuesday declared the viral video was inadmissible and could not form part of the evidence against the former nurses, as it was unlawful for Mr Ilinski to have recorded and shared the private conversation.

The lawyer who successfully argued a video of two Sydney nurses allegedly threatening to kill Israeli patients should be thrown out of evidence has warned prosecutors that any bid to have the evidence reintroduced would be “doomed to fail”.

Chris Merritt in The Australian on the secrecy

Normally, when judges make important decisions, they hand down judgments outlining their reasoning so everyone can see, hopefully, that justice has been done. But not so in this case. ….

Section 138 also says illegally obtained evidence can be still be used if “the desirability of admitting the evidence outweighs undesirability of admitting the evidence”.

Rule of law? Our ruling class override it with their prejudices and self-interest.

hat-tip Matthew T.