Address to the Supreme Court – 14 December 2015


14 December 2015

Most Honourable Justice Ian Harrison and Members of the Court,

This court is to decide beyond reasonable doubt as to whether I am a risk to society.

Please bear with me as I make my public statement as to why I am not a risk to society.

Only the facts will do – So help me God.

“’That it is better 100 guilty persons should escape than that one innocent person should suffer’ is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved” (Benjamin Franklin).

“It is better five guilty persons escape than one innocent person suffer” (Chancellor Lord Chief Justice Hale).

Dear Honourable Members of this Court,

The court is supposed to be a Court of Law – one of Truth and Justice. Over the years of my long incarceration and my time on parole I have been interrogated by Corrective Services, by parole and by psychologists and psychiatrists to ascertain why I continue to maintain my “Not Guilty” stand.

I have been asked to be open and transparent, but each time I have given my account my words have been misused and reported in such a way so that I was made to look like a person who was deluded and one who was hiding the truth.

I can identify many such reports, even the ones recently written by parole and the psychologists and psychiatrists placing a wrong slant and interpretation on my words and intentions.

Therefore, I categorically state one more time before this court and before my God and yours that I maintain my stand NOT GUILTY.

It is easy to overlook the facts and truth, as it has been in my case since my arrest in 2002 to this day. Therefore, I now make my open statement which I have wanted to do since my trials but I have never been given the opportunity.

As both my trials were trials by media, not the jury, as the facts stand out for themselves beyond reasonable doubt.

I would not have fought twelve years to have my name cleared at the cost of over 1 million dollars with the loss of my family, property, mission and reputation if I was not innocent.

So, the question needs to be asked, “am I a risk to the community?” For this hearing is based upon this. We must look upon the facts, not hearsay or third hand information as the media have used all these years.

Well let us look at the facts:

After having a barrage of media frenzy from the time I was arrested to the time of my last sentencing August 2007, some 400 negative newspaper articles were written on me with over some 40 TV news reports and three currant affairs programmes. All negative. Some of these programmes were aired shortly before the jury made its decision. These records came from the Media Statistics available to the public. This does not include the internet and social media coverage.

Before I was arrested, I was a well known religious leader known as a Catholic Seer, visionary and prophet. It was only after the arrest that the media began to label me as a cult leader, to align me with the more sensational aspect of cults like WACO of Texas USA.

This in itself placed a great influence upon judge and jury. It is like placing the same Ad on TV. The more it is advertised, the more likely a man is influenced.

So let me explain in short detail as to why I insist that I am NOT GUILTY:

In every report given by parole and the psychiatrists and the psychologists (who were chosen for me by Corrective Services, either directly or via a short list), their reports say “Kamm refuses to acknowledge his guilt and has no empathy for the victims”. Please tell me Honourable Members of this court, how is it possible for me to feel empathy for my victims as I maintain that I am NOT GUILTY.

So let us see, I would ask Most Honourable Justice Ian Harrison, to please read the No-Bill that was handed to the DPP in March 2007, that will explain it in detail. But without exhausting and labouring the issue, the onus of the court says “beyond reasonable doubt”.

So I wish to place the matter to you – At the Committal Hearing in 2003, Magistrate O’Connor heard that the victims had lied on oath, had admitted to lying on oath, had gone to “60 Minutes” and Channel 7 “Current Affairs” before I was charged. They made a programme with money exchanged. More money was promised on conviction. One of the victims gave me a letter of demand for money and if I did not comply with her demand for money, she would go to the police.

The evidence in chief showed there was concoction, collusion and extortion for money with threat. There were two victims who came forward — joined together as one case.

At the conclusion, Magistrate O’Connor said “in spite of the dates not matching up and the victim having lied, I find her to be a credible witness and the jury could find Kamm guilty”.

The Prosecutor, Lindy Rogers stated to my legal team and others that the girls had lied and recent findings of the victims diary shows matters in favour of Kamm. You have the No-Bill as an avenue.

I will not labour the fact that the Media had a field day before the first trial. It was a foregone conclusion that me being labelled a religious “cult leader”, with sexual assault allegations would lead to me being convicted by a jury.

Now, for my background of which you would be well informed. During various trials and subsequent interviews by the authorities, and psychologists etc, variations of the visions and messages have been read and are in question, but the real facts are overlooked. Namely, I have had visions since I was a young teenager in 1967. These visions continued throughout my life.

As a Catholic, having visions is not as uncommon as people may perceive. Currently, around the world there are many hundreds of people who have these visions. Most of what is given to these visionaries are revelations about the world as it stands, its pending troubles to come, whether it be war, disasters, sickness etc.

This month’s National Geographic magazine has an extensive article on the world wide Apparitions of Mary and also aired a documentary on the 13 December 2015 [actually planned to air on the 17th December].

This is no different to the old prophets of the Old Testament and the saints of the New Testament like Saint Peter, Paul and John, but it is in the 20th and 21st century – as man has not changed much. Here, I will give you a few examples as to what prophets are called to:

Noah – was called Gods Prophet, who was asked to build an Ark in the middle of “nowhere” (Genesis 6:13).

Abraham – as God’s Prophet, he was asked to leave his homeland . He was promised by God that he would be given somewhere else – and would become the Father of Nations; yet he was asked to sacrifice his only son Isaac. (Genesis 12:1-3; 22:2-10) Jacob – God’s Prophet wrestled with an Angel – God and man struggled, and he won. (Genesis 32:24-28).

Elisha – God’s Prophet laid his body on a young boy who was dead in order to resurrect him. He placed his mouth, eyes and hands on the boy’s mouth, eyes and hands (2 Kings 4:34)

Isaiah – God’s Prophet was asked by God to walk naked for 3 years (20:2)

Jeremiah – God’s Prophet was beaten and placed in prison (37:15-17). He complained to God – saying that God deceived him(20:7). He asked God to take revenge upon those who did those evil things to him. He was asked to wear a yoke (27:1-12) and was put in prison two more times . God said to him “I chose you before I gave you life, I selected you to be a prophet” (1:5) God took revenge on behalf of Jeremiah, defending him, and God punished all those who persecuted him and placed him in prison – including those who lied against him. He was also betrayed by family who had him charged and placed in prison.

Daniel – God’s Prophet was placed in prison (6:16-22)

Hosea – God’s Prophet was told by God to marry a woman who would betray him and commit adultery and her three children would do the same (1:2-3). God then told him to marry a prostitute and ordered him to love her (3:1-3)

Jonah – God’s Prophet who did not want to be Gods Prophet (1:1-3). The reason: he said that God does not keep His Word when He prophesies a Chastisement – Jonah did not want to be a fool (4:1-3)

Micah – God’s Prophet was asked to walk around naked and howl like a jackal and wail like an ostrich. (1:8)

Ezechiel – God’s Prophet was told by God to go home and shut himself up (3:24) – to be tied with ropes and that God would paralyse his tongue (3:26). God said that he was to lie down on his left side for 390 days (4:9), in order to suffer for the sins of God’s people – one day for each year. God told him that He would take the life of his wife, the one he loved the most (24:18) but he was not to cry or shed any tears – no signs of mourning.

Habakkuk – God’s Prophet complained to God because of the injustice of evil people, who get the better of the righteous and justice is perverted – but he asks why: why is God silent (1:1-4). God answered him “it may seem slow in coming but it will come” (2:3). “Those who are evil will not survive.”

Saint Joan of Arc – God’s Prophet as a 12 year old girl, she was asked to crown the King and lead an army. She was condemned by the foreign leaders and by the Church – accused of being a witch, she was burned to death.

Saint Bernadette – God’s Prophet was asked by Our Lady to wash her face in muddy waters and to eat the grass growing in the Grotto.

The psychologists and other authorities constantly refer to the “visions”. They say I am not suffering from delusions or hallucinations. They do not say what my visions are. They have no expertise in this field. It is likened to a person who is sent to a mechanic to assess spiritual matters. It is not his field. Neither was the progress during my time — in prison and out — commented on. The idea of “grandiosity” which is a constant theme by them, seems to miss the real facts.

I was a public figure – they wanted transparency – this I gave them. But when I explained — I was a well known figure — it translated to them that I was blowing my own trumpet. I simply explained that in the role that I had as a public figure I was privileged to meet some very high profile people, eg, Pope John Paul II. I simply stated the facts.

All the revelations given to me have been public material – nothing was hidden or in secret.

If our learned friends would take the time to study people who are claiming the same as I do, they will learn that the Church is well entrenched in such matters. There is no such things as “grandiosity” about them. We are simply “voice-boxes” transmitting what we believe are messages from Heaven. I could give many examples …

Many things written by the psych’s and parole and others — are totally inaccurate and misleading. Yet, we who are convicted cannot challenge it.

Jesus asked me to form an Order called the Saint Charbel Order. It has rules and regulations, and a constitution which was presented to the Sacred Congregation for Religious in Rome in 1996. The Order has recognition in the state of NSW, nationally and internationally. It is not a “cult”.

In Dr. Christopher Lenning’s recent report he cites Dr. Bernard Doherty (who claims we are not a cult) but Dr. Lenning purposely does not elaborate on it as it may give us some credibility. Dr. Bernard Doherty is an Adjunct lecturer in History and New Religions at St Marks National Theological Centre School of Theology at Charles Stuart University in Canberra. He has written in the Australian Catholic Historical Society Journal on this subject.

We ask ourselves “are people of notable talent like sports figures or academic men and women grandiose simply because they have the gift of the gab or use their talents publicly?”

A part of the Mission God gave me was not only to form an Order but to give public revelation to the Church. Thus, I was much involved in Church affairs.

The psychologist quote me as claiming I will be the “last Pope” but skim over the fact that I saw Pope John Paul II, who believed in it. Pope John Paul II and John XXIII were both mystics and were told by other mystics that one day they would be Pope. In my case, God revealed it to other visionaries before He revealed it to me. These visionaries are very well known by the Church.

However, this is reserved for when Jesus returns. Many Saints have spoken about it. This does not make me “grandiose”. It was simply revealed. It does not fill my mind with “grandiose” visions. It is simply a revelation. It is the psychologists who make it sound so. Do I look like I am going to be sitting on the Throne of Peter!

But then comes the part of the Mission God gave me and the other revelations which are mostly in contention in these proceedings; the revelations about “queens” and “princesses”. Here, I will quote from the Church’s Teaching — the Role of a Prophet:

In the writings of Pope Innocent III who reigned from 1198-1216, we have a clear teaching of the ordinary Magisterium of the Church about the subject of marriage with several women. The Pope’s teaching is based upon Divine Precedent in Sacred Scripture. In a Papal letter called “Gaudemus in Domino” in the year 1201, writing to the Bishop of Tiberias, he commented, expressly, on the subject of marriage with several women. This important text follows:

“And no body ever was allowed to have at the same time several wives – if it was not granted to him by Divine Revelation which, at times, was considered custom, sometimes law and by which they were excused; just like James (Jacob), from deceit (when he tricked his father, Israel, in pretending he was his brother Esau; the Israelites from theft (when they took Canaan); Samson from murder, as well as the Patriarchs, and other just men, who, as can be read, had several wives at the same time, (were excused) from adultery.” (Bannwart, Clement, Heinrich, Denzinger, and Johann Umberg. Henr. Denzinger et Clem. Bannwart … Enchiridion symbolorum, definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei st morum, editio XIVa et XVa, quorum preparavit joannes Bapt. Umberg … Friburgi Brisgoviae: Herder, 1922)

I was asked to form a “new dynasty” – a Command from God very challenging, but no more challenging than the prophets of old. The only difference was that I was a Catholic Christian who is normally forbidden to have more than one wife. But multiple spouses is an old age tradition of thousands of years in the Old Testament and even now amongst other faiths.

The New Dynasty was to be formed, but as the Command troubled me, I checked with the Teachings of the Church and the Teachings of Saint Thomas Aquinas and Pope Innocent III which confirmed that it is possible for a prophet of God to follow such an instruction.

This did not mean having a sexual relationship with an under age person as claimed by the authorities and the Crown.

The victims knew well their calling from God not only through me but through many other prophets and visionaries in the Catholic World. It had nothing to do with a sexual encounter – but always left to the freedom of those adults concerned. There was no “grooming” or under age sexual contact. However, this Mission of the Dynasty was mostly reserved for the New Era to come when Jesus would return — as royalty will be restored — as all other forms of government would be removed.

The victims had asked many questions to the Virgin Mary regarding these matters and other matters through me and other visionaries around the world. They were never encouraged towards a sexual relationship – but were free as the relationship simply remained on a platonic level. I viewed them as my future spiritual spouses and I strongly contest their claims. For age of consent is the issue.

Some of my letters were somewhat sexualised but these were in response to their letters to me which had the same connotations and I reciprocated in the same way. At the time I did not think it was out of order but now I do see that it was.

But what has been missed about all this is when I was charged in 2002, some ten years after the event – the two victims with their drug broker, were after money, therefore threatening me and went to the Media before I was arrested. Only after 10 years down the track — I was arrested and charged.

These victims had moved on with life – not “traumatised” as stated, because when one sees the uncut version of “Today Tonight Current Affairs”, the reporter David Richardson says to the victims “you can show emotion to show that you are visibly affected”.

Money was the prime purpose of this whole affair and even years later more and more programs have been made to gain more money.

In 2006 as my visions continued in prison — I asked Jesus to remove the planned dynasty until He, Jesus Returns, which was granted. Abraham asked God not to punish certain cities, He agreed.

Yet, the psychologists and psychiatrists claim, “even if God agreed, Kamm could change his plans and ask God to change it again”. This is ridiculous considering the consequences of the charges. Why would I risk losing my family, my friends, my health, my work and possessions, my reputation, my liberty and freedom all over again to have extramarital sex with underage girls. I did not do this to start with. How can I repeat something that was not committed in the first place. That would be ludicrous.

And it must be said that I looked upon my so called “victims” as my future spouses – not “prey” as it is portrayed.

Then it was implied by those who were assessing me that my friends — who were connected with the Order — were supporting criminal activity. They are discouraging contact with my lifelong friends as they see them as “condoning” this and adding to my “risk factor”.

Also, as some of my friends live on my property — they see returning to my home as a “risk factor”. This is ludicrous. Simply because a person believes that I am God’s seer does not constitute a threat.

Because of all the injustice that has happened in the past they would be more prone to protect me and God’s Work rather than support any criminal activity that would cause great harm to others and to me and also the place of residence. Further, for the psychologists to claim that if I were to go to a farm I would be in a “risk” situation of building a new community, this is pathetic as under State legislation you cannot build multiple housing. I was only able to do this as, a caravan park licence already existed on the property.

So their arguments have no foundation because if I wanted to continue the dynasty I could do it in my own home.

So, now let me look at the “risk factors”: While I was in Custody, I was advised before my parole came into play, that I was eligible for a “Deniers course” and I was placed on a list, then later I was advised I was now to do a “Cubit course”. So I was placed on that list. A few months before my parole I was told I could do the Cubit course which was 10 months. So now I was going into my parole period, doing a course — where I was supposed to retract my “Not guilty” Plea.

During the Cubit Course, Corrective Services tried to blacken my name by setting me up with two jail charges which I can prove to be false. This was done by Intel and those in charge. I took the matter to lawyers and the Ombudsman. I was also intimidated by two squad raids. I can prove beyond doubt these were fabricated charges so that my parole would become difficult as I had a clean record.

My Cubit Report was fair – but biased and influenced, but I could not take it on legally as I wanted my parole. At the end of Cubit we had to get a rented place so I could get parole. This was achieved by February 2014, yet parole rejected my parole 9 times wasting 9 months worth of rent at $600 per week. This is another reason I need to return to my home as I only now receive a part pension of $270 a fortnight and my funds provided by the good-will of my friends are now completely drained, due to having to defend myself now. I was not able to utilise Legal Aid due to my assets which are non-liquid. I cannot sustain renting privately at all.

I was under SPAR not SORK as the Crown claim. I was under a sub-committee of the Serious Sex Offenders — as, I was High Profile and a person of Interest, not due to the charges — due to Media.

The Assistant Commissioner Kevin Cochoran and the Commissioner Peter Severin were in contradiction because it was Cochoran alone who pushed for the Extended Supervision Order (ESO) in spite of the fact (which was available to him before parole and during parole) that I was “low risk” in “static-99” and moderate to high in the “dynamics” through the reports from parole and the psychologists. Parole even suggested, and it is recorded in their case notes — that I was not considered for an Extended Supervision Order (ESO) as I did not meet the criteria for that. It was also recorded that my bracelet should be considered to be removed. This was back in February.

So, I ask myself “how do I qualify to be a serious sex offender when I continue to maintain my Not Guilty Stand?”

I looked at the list of the Serious Sex Offenders. There are 37 such persons. They were crimes against children under 10 years of age, rape, serial rape, violence, repeat offences, long term offences and even murder. Now, look at what I am charged with: “Touching” a fifteen year old girl, “kissing” and the second victim, a fifteen year old girl having consensual intercourse.

So, the situation is like this, neither a bracelet nor an extended order would stop a crime, nor even change a personality disorder as a crime can be committed anywhere at any time. Monitoring does not change that, but costs the tax-payer millions of dollars. Just like the psychologists and psychiatrists assessments — will not rehabilitate a criminal they will only give key elements of background situations — they cannot predict future behaviour. The psychs have said this themselves in their reports.

Assistant commissioner of Corrective Services Rosemary Caruana said the bracelets are “tracking devices, not steel cages, they cannot stop people from being violent or acting out. What we can’t control is him re-offending”

Considering my charges were not based on “opportunistic or impulsive behaviour”. I did not attack random children or hang around Bus Stops or Schools or Parks waiting for a victim. I was neither violent nor a stalker, my charges are quite simply a question of the “the age of consent” What would a bracelet achieve. It has nothing to do with what I have been charged with.

What I have placed before you is this: I have not committed the crime and I will not rest until a judge finally studies my case fully. The victims charged me with the help of the Media to gain money. I am not a risk to society as I know what prison has done to me, therefore, me returning to my home where I do not pay rent and as I am a public figure, the risk factor would be very low.

I would ask the court to grant a “stay of execution” to live my final years, considering I am 65. To live in hope to restore my family unity.

And finally, when considering the claim that the internet website is a way to “recruit” female members for my pleasure, considering this is a public website, this claim has no foundation. The website has been running since the year 2000. All reading matter is available for the public. The authorities have had access to it for years. If I wanted to use the internet, would I not be more discreet to take a further risk? To continue to use my Website provides the authorities with an open window into my world.

I find it very unusual that the justice system allows psychiatrists and psychologists to write a report assessing my “risk factor” for the Judges after reading the previous reports of other psychologists and psychiatrists. This would be bias, unethical and prejudiced. You could not tell me they would not be influenced by other reports therefore it could not be fair or just and the Judge would then make his decision on those findings.

It is also to be noted that the parole reports were assessed by enquiring from persons — like my ex-wife who I am currently in contention with regarding my children and as this information given by her was inaccurate, unreliable and untrue, this matter is also being pursued legally, where possible defamation and even criminal intent is being applied.

Yet, the report from parole which is based on false information is being used by psychiatrists and psychologists as being true — as a fair appraisal of my life. This is being used as the basis of their reports to add to the risk factor.

I could call Officers on the stand to show charges I received in jail were false and manipulated to bring more discredit to myself at a critical time during my pending parole. Yet, the Crown is using all of this to prove I am a “risk to society”.

Therefore, most Honourable Members of this court and especially Justice Ian Harrison, I would please ask you before you hand down any decision, to please read the Basher Inquiry of Judge Solomon on my case of February 2007 where he threw the case out — due to perjury, concoction and collusion and told the crown to go back and rethink.

And please read the No-Bill of March 2007 as this matter would have gone to the Court of Criminal Appeal for a permanent stay as mentioned at the hearing on May 8th 2007 under Judge Berman. But due to the negligence of my legal team not having the paperwork ready in time, it did not proceed.

This is my Testament in all Truth. I thank you for listening and wish God’s Blessing on you,

William Costellia (Kamm)