Porky Pies on the AustralianProLifeConference Blog?

After I quipped in my abortion story (a comment on this post) that I was relieved not to be physically assaulted I was immediately accused of slander and asked to proved evidence of ProLife violence (because Peter Knight, who shot someone, was not a ProLifer, apparently). So I checked the newspapers and came up with:

In July 2006 Johnathon Stack, 70 was charged with making threats to kill, using threatening language in public and threatening to cause serious injury. This was at the abortion clinic where the security guard was shot.

I was roundly ticked off by Ron for not providing evidence that he had been proven guilty.

*sigh* Personally, I didn't think the police were called for hymn singing, but never mind.

Also, a certain Gabriel mercy, who has at least managed to be mostly civil, wrote:

"I happen to know all the details of that incident and the charges, which were dropped, were a complete and utter fabrication."

and

"Of course, the papers didn't report on the assault of poor old John Stack by a thug of a guard who knocked him to the ground three times. John was trying to hang on to a banner which had been snatched by a female. The case went to court as a civil action (the police refused to take action, even though the victim was bruised and bleeding) and the assault by the guard was found proved. Did the newspapers report it? Don't make me laugh!"

Ok, I thought, lets see if we can find out if ol' John Stack was convicted, and whether he instigated civil proceedings.

So I wrote to the Magistrates Court, who wrote back the very next day.

The charges were not dropped as she said, and the Herald Sun did not lie.

There was, however, no recorded conviction as both the prosecution and the defense agreed to a Diversion Program. To quote them: "Mr Stack was placed on, and successfully completed, a
Diversion Plan for a charge of 'use threatening words in a public place'. The matter was discharged (Diversion completed) on 20 August 2007."

The letter did not mention a civil proceeding at all, though I asked. I am thinking of writing again to ask them specifically but strongly feel that it might be a waste of time :-(

The fact that John Stack was dealt with under the Diversion Program does speak in his favour as it meant that he was either a first offender or considered likely to benefit from participation.

However, Gabriel Mercy's statements on the matter do not speak in her favour. At least as far as her credibility is concerned. Let's be generous and say the grandmother's memory is a little hazy shall we? So sad, she was one of the polite ones too.