March 26, 2021

Perfidious Hopium: Nightcap's Negligent Folly


Gi Linda Responds to Nightcap's Note to Emerging Community Members:


Nightcap promotors complain that potential new investors back out when they discover the losses and harm suffered by disenfranchised investors, and the ongoing lawsuits that we have now been tenaciously pursuing for four yearsNightcap Nightmare Blog documents our quest for truth and justice.

In retaliation, Adrian Brennock, (AB) and cohorts, imposed on me, as publisher of the blogs, an aggressive SLAPP action - "Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation" in a failed attempt to impose a total gag on free speech that would enable them to continue selling interests in land, without anyone revealing the long trail of harm and loss caused to earlier investors.

Foundational to the SLAPP litigation is a perjured false narrative that, for the last six years has been published in Nightcap Newsletters, posted online and recited with big-puppy-eyes before judges and prospective investors.


I am cast as a "serial pest" in this noxious narrative by which anonymous weasels have maligned me since 2016, warning that I can expect to be "wiped off the windscreen of their lives like a bug..."


Potential new investors are falsely informed that the original investors lost their battle for justice in court 17 times and have all been repaid. 


Posted on the marketing website of Nightcap on Minjungbal, the malicious false narrative was also copied on Samantha Bachman's site as a "Note to Emerging Community Members".


Below I quote excerpts (in italic) and comment on the mendacity of the narrative. The full text of the "Note to Emerging Community Members" is attached after my response. 


Extract:


"Dear Emerging Community Members

The purpose of this note is to address repeated enquiries being received by Nightcap surrounding online publications concerning Nightcap Village Community. The principal author of those publications is a person by the name of Gillian Norman, aka Gi Linda, aka Free Radical. For a time Gi Linda, was a prospective member of the intentional community known as Bhula Bhula."


Gi Linda Response: 
It is entirely misleading to say I was "for a time a prospective member of the intentional community known as Bhula Bhula."

In 2015, in response to marketing by Mark Darwin (MD), I submitted an application to join the BB "Community". MD promised shared ownership of land and a 3-acre "Dwelling Site" in exchange for purchase money to buy two proposed properties. My application was approved and I paid $120,000 to the trust account of lawyer Wroth Wall in acceptance of the offer.
 
On July 30, 2015, Adrian Brennock (AB) used investors' trust funds to purchase property at 3222 Kyogle Rd, Mt Burrell, NSW, but he did not fulfil marketing promises by transferring co-ownership of the land to investors. Instead, by holding a $1 share and sole directorship of the company he used to buy the land, he usurped rightful ownership from purchase money investors and disenfranchised us.


"For many reasons, including where the community felt her values lay and her having undertaken unauthorised and unapproved building work on land, Gi Linda’s prospective membership was withdrawn."


GN: Investors were encouraged to camp on the land and were falsely told that multiple occupancy was a permissible use of the land. Several investors build homes. I did not undertake "unauthorised building work" as falsely claimed. Temporary dwelling on the property is permissible by Tweed Shire Council for seasonal agricultural work, and so I built a beautiful garden while sometimes staying in my mobile home until harassment and malicious attacks became too severe.

One year later, the aggrieved investors who requested honourable conduct and who objected to being ousted without fulfilment of agreements, and with no restitution, were informed that our previously approved "applications" to join "BB Community" had been revoked and marketing representations offering co-ownership of land and residential lots, would not be fulfilled. Neither were the funds returned to us that AB used to purchase the property.

It remains extremely clear to those of us who invested our life savings in this development that we were providing funds in exchange for a share in the property that we paid for, a tangible asset. Certainly we did not pay a non-refundable fee to become members of some supposed "Community" that would capriciously take our funds then "withdraw prospective membership" and provide nothing in exchange.


"Not being happy with this, Gi Linda took steps to commence a winding up against the entity controlling Bhula Bhula, Woolumbin Horizons. "


GN: This is false. Not being happy with receiving nothing in exchange for $120,000, in 2017 I filed a statutory demand in Qld Federal Court as a creditor of Wollumbin Horizons Pty, the company AB used to purchase the property with investors' funds.
 
As part of my claim, an attempt at mediation requested Adrian Brennock to fulfill marketing representations by transferring his $1 shareholding to co-ownership of investors. He refused.

My statutory demand was upheld by Registrar Belcher and Wollumbin Horizons was given seven days to repay the debt.

Instead of paying the debt to me, AB put his company in administration. It was Adrian Brennock, not me, who commenced winding up of Wollumbin Horizons, the "entity controlling Bhula Bhula". In the company RATA claiming a presumption of insolvency, he omitted to include the company's judgement debt to me.

One month earlier he executed an unregistered mortgage over the property attached to an internal contract of sale with Nightcap Village.


"What followed then was a barrage of consistent and continuous false, damaging, misleading and defamatory publications concerning a number of people, including Adrian Brennock and Phillip Dixon."


GN: This is a reference to the newspaper articles and blogs that provided a true account of how I and others lost our life savings in this venture, which we called a scam. 

In publishing these allegations, I wrongly assumed that in Australia defamation law only applied to false statements. I discovered later that Australia is a global exception in that statements may be considered defamatory if they harm a person's reputation or cause financial loss, even if they are true.

"Proceedings were commenced in the Supreme Court of New South Wales by, amongst others, Messrs Dixon and Brennock seeking relief under the Defamation Act on account of the false and damaging publications made by Gi Linda online. That proceeding went to trial before Justice Fagan in August 2019, and was adjourned, after being part heard, to be completed in October 20189. In April 2020, his Honour handed down judgment in the proceeding.

By his judgment, his Honour having (patiently) considered Ms Norman’s evidence (and that of the witnesses she called) utterlyrejected her defence. For example, his Honour observed:

The defendant has shown no justification for her assertion that the conduct of Mr Darwin, still less that of the plaintiffs [Messrs Brennock and Dixon], went beyond folly to fraud. Nor does she recognise the degree to which her own lack of care and judgment contributed to her loss…"

GN: In response to an article published by Nimbin GoodTimes and the blogs, defamation charges were brought against me in 2017 by Mark Darwin, Adrian Brennock and others. Mark Darwin discontinued the claim, but in 2019 Adrian Brennock and Phillip Dixon prosecuted the defamation charges against me. They affirmed a perjured false narrative, blaming me for failure of the BB venture. 

I was represented in the second part of the 7-day trial by barrister Jeremy Harrison who presented extensive evidence that the published claims of fraud and misleading, deceptive representations were true and justified.

Brennock and Dixon won. Fagan J ruled that AB's failure to fulfil marketing representations after taking our money should be attributed to mere folly. Not fraud, as I claimed, just foolish incompetence.


Following is the full text of the statement published on the website of Nightcap on Minjungbal, in which anonymous attackers accuse me of defamation while they defame the alleged defamer:

Note to Emerging Community Members


Dear Emerging Community Members


The purpose of this note is to address repeated enquiries being received by Nightcap surrounding online publications concerning Nightcap Village Community.


The principal author of those publications is a person by the name of Gillian Norman, aka Gi Linda, aka Free Radical.

For a time Gi Linda, was a prospective member of the intentional community known as Bhula Bhula. For many reasons, including where the community felt her values lay and her having undertaken unauthorised and unapproved building work on land, Gi Linda’s prospective membership was withdrawn. Not being happy with this, Gi Linda took steps to commence a winding up against the entity controlling Bhula Bhula, Woolumbin Horizons. What followed then was a barrage of consistent and continuous false, damaging, misleading and defamatory publications concerning a number of people, including Adrian Brennock and Phillip Dixon.


Proceedings were commenced in the Supreme Court of New South Wales by, amongst others, Messrs Dixon and Brennock seeking relief under the Defamation Act on account of the false and damaging publications made by Gi Linda online. That proceeding went to trial before Justice Fagan in August 2019, and was adjourned, after being part heard, to be completed in October 20189. In April 2020, his Honour handed down judgment in the proceeding.

By his judgment, his Honour having (patiently) considered Ms Norman’s evidence (and that of the witnesses she called) utterlyrejected her defence. For example, his Honour observed:

The defendant has shown no justification for her assertion that the conduct of Mr Darwin, still less that of the plaintiffs [Messrs Brennock and Dixon], went beyond folly to fraud. Nor does she recognise the degree to which her own lack of care and judgment contributed to her loss… Also, the defendant does not acknowledge the extent to which her own conduct contributed to failure of the project. When Mr Anderson’s report came to hand and Council forbade construction on the land, the defendant responded to the difficulties faced by the community with a barrage of vitriolic emails, making accusations for which she had no evidence against those who were trying to organise the unit holders’ affairs. She also defied the Council and remained in occupation of the land in knowing breach of planning laws… The internecine warfare initiated by the defendant and her defiance of existing land use restrictions cut off that possibility. Since then the defendant has been consumed by hostility toward Mr Darwin and his associates

Gi Linda was ordered to pay $200,000 in damages to each of Messrs Brennock and Dixon. She is further required to pay their legal costs associated with the proceeding.


Thereafter, in May 2020, his Honour imposed a permanent junction against Ms Norman making further defamatory publications against Messrs Brennock and Dixon, including publications that carry defamatory imputations.

Ultimately, Ms Norman failed to comply with the terms of the Injunction and, to this day, continues to publish scandalous and defamatory material online with the intention of causing maximum reputation damage to each of Messrs Brennock and Dixon as well as to the Nightcap Village. In light of these breaches, in August 2020 contempt proceedings were commenced against Ms Norman in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. Ms Norman has recently engaged Counsel on a pro-bono basis. One possible penalty for contempt is a term of imprisonment.


At present, everything has been done to bring Ms Norman to cease continually publishing defamatory content in breach of the permanent injunction. Messrs Brennock and Dixon Went to the cost of running a 7 day trial against Ms Norman, for which they were entirely successful. Thereafter, notice was provided to Google to remove the content of the offending website. Those requests have been, largely, accepted by Google and the majority of the defamatory content uploaded by Ms Norman since May 2020 has been removed. Messrs Brennock and Dixon will continue to press ahead with the removal of the Nightcap Nightmare website.


Ultimately, Messrs Brennock and Dixon have been vindicated by the judgment of Justice Fagan. Each of the individual matters complained of were accepted by his Honour to be defamatory. Ms Norman failed in each attempt to lead a defence. 

Featured Posts