ISSUE: 20190724- Re: Euthanasia or Unlawful Killing(s)

As a CONSTITUTIONALIST my concern is the true meaning and application of the constitution.

* Gerrit, If Euthanasia is lawful in the State of Victoria then how can it be unlawful?
**#** INSPECTOR-RIKATI®, it all depends on how it is done. I below will quote my 24July
2019 letter to Premier Daniel Andrews.

Despite all alleged safeguards we now can kill a person using euthanasia regardless the
person to die doesn’t contemplate this then.

The document can be downloaded from:

https://www.scribd.com/document/419548539/20190724-G-H-Schorel-Hlavka-O-W-B-to-Mr-
Daniel-Andrews-Premier-of-Victoria-COMPLAINT-Euthanasia-or-Unlawful-Killing-s

QUOTE
Mr Daniel Andrews Premier 24-7-2019
daniel.andrews@parliament.vic.gov.au

Cc; Mr Martin Pakula, martin.pakula@parliament.vic.gov.au, attorney-general@justice.vic.gov.au

COMPLAINT - Re Euthanasia or Unlawful killing(s)?

Sir,
I will place it beyond doubt that my view about you is that you are grossly incompetent
Premier for Victoria.
When I warned with my 15 July 2016 correspondence that there should be blockage to Bourke
Street Mall to prevent ma killing you ignored this. I repeated the same in my 21 December 2016
warning and again you ignored this and subsequently on 20 January 2017 6 people were
murdered which I view could have been prevented had you taken appropriate action to prevent
unauthorised motor vehicle to enter Bourke Street Mall.
Today, at about7.33am, I understood from a news report on 91.5 FM Smooth that several weeks
ago the first medical certificate was issued for euthanasia but had not a yet been used.
What a BULL.
As I understand it some weeks ago there was person “A” who reportedly was dying of a terminal
issue. This person “A” desired to die at home and so a person “B” (untrained and no medical
qualification) was to apply the euthanasia process. As I understand it a hospital provided the
euthanasia kit for“A” to have this used at his home. Allegedly, after the first injection (to which I
understand “B” never had previously injected any other person (and so untrained in how to
administer it properly) “A” allegedly asked if he still could go on Saturday …., upon allegedly
“B” responded he could, but within minutes continued to proceed with the euthanasia process
(perhaps unaware of the legal implications) and finalized this.
In my view “A” appear to me not to have understood that he would die within minute. In my
view “B” did not understand that to have stopped the euthanasia process, and could do so when
“A” asked about the coming Saturday to attend to something, as clearly “A” didn’t contemplated
to die within minutes. What we have is that despite alleged safeguards a person “A” allegedly
p1 23-8-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
Email: admin@inspector-rikati.com. For further details see also my blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
died not aware that this euthanasia process would result in an about immediate death. How many
others likewise have already died as result of such misconceptions? In my view gross in
competence y failing to ensure that any system is appropriately worked out before usage
I view that there must be an immediate moratorium as to any euthanasia being allowed to
proceed, regardless if medical certificate were already issues and the system must be improved to
ensure that all person involved in any euthanasia process are understanding what the system
involved.
Nothing in those correspondence must be perceived and is neither intended to indicate I agree
with the euthanasia being performed as I oppose the killing of a human being.
Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O. W. B. (Friends call me Gerrit)

MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL®

(Our name is our motto!)
END QUOTE

* You are requesting for “an immediate moratorium as to any euthanasia”?

**#** Well, consider that the news bulletin this morning at about 7.33 provided for it to be the
first case of euthanasia and when the news bulletin at 6 pm came reportedly Premier Daniel
Andrews commented that he could not go into specifics. It might be because of my writings to
which I received the automatic response:
QUOTE
Automatic reply: see attachment
20190724-G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
to Mr Daniel Andrews Premier of
Victoria-COMPLAINT-Euthanasia or
Unlawful killing(s)
From Daniel Andrews (VICMIN)
To Mr G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
Date Today 10:47

Message Body
Thank you for taking the time to contact the Premier, Daniel Andrews MP.

We appreciate your patience as we work through the large amount of correspondence the Premier
receives.

Comments, suggestions and ideas will be carefully considered, and we will make every effort to
provide a response where required. Your email may be referred to the relevant Minister for their
consideration and response.

Correspondence containing offensive or inappropriate content will not receive a response.

Thank you again for writing. To stay up to date with the Andrews Labor Government plan for
Victoria visit https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/.

Office of the Hon Daniel Andrews MP

Premier of Victoria
Level 1, 1 Treasury Place, East Melbourne VIC 3002
p: (03) 9651 5000 | w: premier.vic.gov.au
e: daniel.andrews@parliament.vic.gov.au
END QUOTE
p2 23-8-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
Email: admin@inspector-rikati.com. For further details see also my blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
That was at 10.47am earlier today.
* Do you know the identity of person “A and/or person “B”?
**#** I have no intention to elaborate at this moment about that because the issue is for the
Government to investigate this matter very urgently as to possibly prevent any deaths in such
manner as I understood to have eventuated. Clearly if the report is that doctors certified that a
person could be Euthanized but had not been proceeded with then one has to ask what about
person “A some weeks ago? Or is it that they referred to this person but because the hospital
didn’t itself do it then for ever in the day it will remain to be as if the person never was
Euthanized, I wonder.
* What are some of the issues of concern?
**#** It appears to me that person “A” may not have understood what the Euthanasia process
was about and how death could be within minutes, not some days later. It also appears to me that
person “B” didn’t understand the ramifications where person “A” allegedly asked if he still could
do something a few days later (after the Euthanasia procedure had already eventuated) that
essentially this could be deemed to mean that the Euthanasia process could not be completed and
medical staff should have been consulted what to do to abort this, if this was possible.
As I understand it after the first injection was given and the person to be Euthanised was still able
to ask a question then there was an ability to abort the Euthanasia process. However, the question
was if person “B” was aware of this and had it been explained to him? Even if the second
injection I understood later was given there still would have been an ability to stop the
Euthanasia process. Again, why was there not a medical qualified person present to be able to
explain that? As I gather it the first injection is, so to say, to make the person to go to sleep. The
second injection is to make the person not to feel any pain and the third is to stop the hearth. As
such, after the first injection there would have been no harm done to stop the Euthanasia process.
* After the first injection could person “A” have been hallucinating or something like that?
**#** As I was not there I wouldn’t have a clue, but person “B” might very honestly have
assumed that regardless if medically this would not be so. My concern obviously is that to my
understanding person “A” simply never understood that death would be within a very short time
after the Euthanasia process was completed and not somehow days later. Also, to have a person
who may never have injected any person to then perform the Euthanasia process unsupervised I
view is grossly irresponsible. Moreover, this kind of Euthanasia process means that anyone who
can access the Euthanasia kit could use this with murderous intent. Say a spouse desires to get rid
of the other spouse and simply inject the sleeping spouse with the first injection. While that
spouse might wake up it be likely too late as the person may become sleepy and then nothing to
stop the sleepy person being injected further to complete the Euthanasia process.
*. Surely no one would desire to do so?

**#** I since 1982 have conducted a special lifeline service under the motto MAY JUSTICE
ALWAYS PREVAIL® and can assure you that my understanding is many would not just like
to Euthanize their partners but also politicians and judges/lawyers.
*. Would that not be murder?
**#** Not in their view as they are relieving the politicians, judges/lawyers of this awful
responsibility to face their rorting/crimes, etc, and so some people may hold that one has to be
kind to them and Euthanized them to relieve them of this mental suffering.

p3 23-8-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
Email: admin@inspector-rikati.com. For further details see also my blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
*. You certainly know how to explain it.
**#** Well, we have all sorts of terrorism legislation but the real terrorist in my view at least are
the politicians who were invading unconstitutionally another country to commit mass murder,
crimes against humanity, war crimes and treason.
*. Surely you are more careful to state this as someone might ask a court to deal with that?
**#** Actually I did on 19 July 2006 and so in 2 appeals and none of the Attorney-Generals
bothered to challenge anything on this and the court upheld both appeals. The Attorney-Generals
had their opportunity to challenge on every aspect of my submissions but none took up the
opportunity to challenge me.
*. Are you still operating this special lifeline service?
**#** Actually, I decided this year to end it. After all when you got reportedly senior police
claiming to the Royal commission that they may have to act contrary to ethics and morals to get
criminals and as I wrote about some 2 years ago it appeared to me the Victorian Police was
involved in the murder of Carl Williams, then I am wasting my time to try to save lives. No
doubt I saved hundreds of not thousands of people being killed in contemplated mass murder
attacks and I do not regret doing so but the time has come to retire from this. This in particular
where Lawyer X (Nicola Gobbo) also a former lawyer of Carl Williams conducted herself in a
manner that violates to me every legal principle of the administration of justice and yet I am not
aware that she was ever held legally liable for that.
*.Surely there is a royal commission going on that you are aware off?
**#** The royal commission is set up to investigate the police handling of informants not really
to investigate the conduct of those lawyers who are betraying not only their profession but also
their clients and undermining the administration of justice. Hence, many of those crooked
lawyers may never be held legally liable for undermining the administration of justice and so
likely the police involved.
*. How on earth could anyone kill hundreds?
**#** Well, as I understood it there was a person contemplating to drive a fully loaded gas
tanker into Bourke Street Mall and use dynamite to blow it up. One should have no doubt that
this would not just bring buildings down but people around and in the buildings likely would be
killed. It are those type of persons I was dealing with to avoid them to commit suicide, murder
and/or mass murder.
I oppose the taking of a human life, even with an abortion, but I can UNDERSTAND why there
are people willing to kill. At times it might be that their former partner prevents access to any
child or children and the person lacking any finances then left desperate not having any ability to
have access to the child/children regardless of court orders providing for this.
*. Surely all the person needs to do is to go to court?
**#** As a person made known to me only days ago, he didn’t have the monies to engage a
lawyer and doesn’t understand the legalities himself and so the court is out. Also do understand
that regardless of the truth in the case if you lose you can face huge legal cost of the other party.
As I proved to the High Court of Australia a judge issued FINAL orders 2 days before the case
was completed 2 and then reissuing the final orders again. However the High Court of Australia
claimed it was a mere error of the judge. To me it was a predetermined order and invalidated
both those earlier and the later FINAL orders. What we need is a Family Court Ombudsman
where if a person is denied access despite having access orders then the Ombudsman can provide
relevant details to a court lawyer if the Ombudsman holds that the party denied access should
p4 23-8-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.
INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
Email: admin@inspector-rikati.com. For further details see also my blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
have Legal Aid representation granted. And if child support should be stayed to be paid to the
custodian parents where there is a violation of court orders. As such, the non-custodian parent
can still continue to pay child support but the Child Support Agency is to hold it pending any
court judgment. Currently there is an unrestrained ability for a custodian parent to defy court
orders without ever being held accountable for doing so. In particular where the non-custodian
parent is crippled with Child Support payments and so left no monies to pay for a lawyer.
*.One hear at times non-custodian parents killing their children and former partner do you think
that might be an issue why they did so?
**#** I do not intent and neither seek to indicate that this is justified, however I can
UNDERSTAND that where a non-custodian parent is denied access despite having had the
elaborate court struggle, and cost, to obtain access orders then lacking any financial means to
engage a lawyer they might, regretfully, hold that to take the law into their own hands might be
for them the best outcome.
*. Did you ever come across people in that frame of mind?
**#** Ample of people and some reasoning that if they commit suicide then no one would care
less and so committing mass murder might attract peoples attention. It is here where our
parliamentarians ARE FAILING BADLY. Too often the custodian parent gets a new partner and
wants the children to recognize the new partner and so preventing the biological parent access.
*.How do you know that?
**#** One of my sons, now 50, wrote to me that I had left his mother financial destitute. I made
clear that the court had split the property 60% for his mother and 40% for me and my tools and
equipment. However shortly after that I decided to hand her the 40% also as to avoid her having
to sell the property. I didn’t ask for anything in return, and the judge asked me if I really wanted
to give away my share, I made clear I did. Well, she had a live in boyfriend she wanted to be the
children’s new father and having the entire property and stealing my tools of trade somehow she
still was in financial problems. I made clear to my son it was not for me to financial support her
live in boyfriend. I saw this some one after about 5 years and then not for another 25 years. I hold
a grudge against me not supporting his mother financially after the support, regardless she had
everything. I made clear it was her own financial problem making conduct and I could not be
blamed for that. I was then a single parent caring for up to 5 children (without child support) and
paying of a house and so had no guilt. I never regretted to give her my share of 40% and the fact
she reportedly sold the property years later for about half of the value had absolutely nothing to
do with me.
* So you think that having this alternative for grieving non-custodian parents to seek assistance
to enforce existing court orders may avoid possible killings?
**#** Absolutely. A person who is at no fault but say the partner fell in love with some other
person and now wants to get rid of the redundant partner then simply is too much geared up to
protect the guilty party and not the innocent person. Take this Rosie Batty who seems to me to
suck the killing of her son Luke to every extend. Well one of my sons was nearly strangled to
death and medical evidence was presented to the Children Court about this. Here we have all
about NO VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND CHILDREN implying women are not violent
while my former wife used a butcher knife on me to force me to stay the night. This is why the
message isn’t driving home about violence, because it pretends women are not violent. We
should have NO VIOLENCE AGAINST ANY PERSON. There is a lot more to all this but I
have no doubt that a lot less killings would eventuate if non-custodian parents had an avenue to
have access orders enforced regardless that they do not have the finances to engage a lawyer.

p5 23-8-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
Email: admin@inspector-rikati.com. For further details see also my blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati
* Getting back to Euthanasia you view is that appropriate safeguards must be in place that are
now lacking to exist?
**#** I oppose Euthanasia in principle but if there is a lawful manner to have this applied,
regardless I oppose it, then at least make sure the system is appropriately applied and not
someone is subjected to a Euthanasia procedure not even understanding that this means death
within a few minutes and not that you can continue for some days to live on afterwards, as if you
are given a switch to determine when to switch off. And considering that reportedly there was
only one case certified and not as yet acted upon then how come person “A” died weeks ago
using Euthanasia? Is it that any Euthanasia applied outside the hospital environment is not
considered for reporting? How many then have died in the meantime by the Euthanasia
procedure not accounted for.

* If you have other details about this person “A” would you be willing to disclose it?
**#** At the moment if I were to have any other details that is I would not release it yet this is
because then it would narrow the investigation to one person and many others might also have
died in the mean time but so to say off the books. As such, I await the result of any investigation
and then if I am aware of some other details that is I might disclose them. Essentially if the
Government were to report that no one had died as result of Euthanasia then well it could face a
horrible shock to reality. It would also mean that there would be a cover-up on how many
persons really died using the Euthanasia procedure. Once thing you can be assured off that this is
not a matter that I will go away from. I am determine to pursue this issue as long as I possibly
can, to ensure that Euthanasia, against my principles, is used in an appropriate manner and not
allow people getting killed who didn’t realize this would as such eventuate. What is needed is not
to tell a person something and ask: Do you understand this? What needs to be done is to carefully
explain matters and then ask each person involved to repeat what was explained. This could
bring out that a person claims to understand but never understood anything.
This correspondence is not intended and neither must be perceived to state all issues/details.
Awaiting your response, G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B. (Gerrit)
MAY JUSTICE ALWAYS PREVAIL® (Our name is our motto!)

p6 23-8-2019 © G. H. Schorel-Hlavka O.W.B.

INSPECTOR-RIKATI® about the BLACK HOLE in the CONSTITUTION-DVD
A 1st edition limited special numbered book on Data DVD ISBN 978-0-9803712-6-0
Email: admin@inspector-rikati.com. For further details see also my blog at Http://www.scrib.com/InspectorRikati