User talk:193.115.105.203

If you look at the two South Australian Criminal Court of Appeal results for R v Angel from 2014 and 2015 you will see that there is a finding that it is fine to raise information pertaining to a psychiatric illness against the defendant's will. This in conflict with the Supreme Court of Canada decision in R v Swain. I am Mr Angel and if you don't create the article I will consider suing you personally rather than simply as part of a media conglomerate. You will note that in the second SAust appeal there is reference to a defence exhibit being a bowel movement chart of the complainant. This chart shows no incontinent bowel movement on the part of the complainant on the afternoon of July 28th 2011 and thereby exonerates the defendant yet the jury still find the offence proven to have been committed (after the judge advised effectively of the chart being filled out in error). My e-mail address is angel.stephenp@hotmail.com. Obviously I can field any inquiries you might have pertaining to the two judgements and further to the two High Court Appeal attempts (responses - HCASL). Particularly the High Court's response that my argument of double jeopardy was misconceived in the first round of appeals. Further, I can provide a copy of my argument to prove that I raised the fact that the bowel movement chart should exonerate. Note: I think Justice Peek concedes that I succeed on my grounds of appeal - yet still refuses to allow it. Obviously it goes without saying that this was raised in the argument to the High Court in the first round of appeal. Certainly also R v Swain was raised in a constitutional argument in the second round of appeal when Justice Millsteed's court refused to separate the objective elements and mental competence investigation. Again my e-mail address is angel.stephenp@hotmail.com.au.