This article was written by Susie Jones on 4 November 2017 and published on 8 November on the Truth Library.
Tens of thousands of people have been outraged and shocked to the core by the treatment
of Chase Walker-Steven and his family. Over four million views are recorded on one of the
Facebook live videos about Chase’s brutal removal by New South Wales Family And
Community Services (FACS) on 19th May 2017. Chase is a now-5-year-old non-verbal boy
who has severe spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy with epilepsy. Chase has been
separated from his loving family for over five months as at the date of writing this; 2 nd
November 2017. This is a very long time of trauma and deprivation for an innocent boy
who depended utterly on his family and whose quality of life has already been
Cini (Jacinda) Walker, Chase’s mother, has stated that last year (2016) while in the care of
Lady Cilento Hospital in Queensland medical staff told Chase’s parents to “take him home
and plan for his funeral”. Despite this low point, Chase made amazing progress during the
early months of 2017 after his parents took his health care in hand themselves and turned
his health around (1) with a natural organic plant-based diet. Lady Cilento Hospital
reported the family to Queensland Department of Communities, Child Safety, and Disability
Services when Chase’s parents began to make informed, independent health choices for
their son. The family has been persecuted ever since, both in Queensland and New South
Wales, even after a court assessment order in which Queensland Judge Pam Dowse twice
deemed the family competent and capable and that Chase should remain in their care.
FACS’ alleged reason on the piece of paper they used that night to authorize removing
the child was “critically low potassium level” implying malnutrition and claiming “immediate
risk of harm”. Dr. Andrew Katelaris, an independent consultant who has been helping
Chase’s family, informed the police at the hospital at the time of the removal that a blood
test taken the previous day had, in fact, revealed a healthy potassium level. (2) Chase was
forcibly taken that night anyway. For five months it has been left to speculation as to the
real motivation at play because no other reason -factual or otherwise -has been given.
The Facebook Live video showing Chase laughing with his family.
Chase’s parents have been subject to the usual suppression order (section 105 of the
NSW Child Protection Act) while involved in fighting for the return of their son in the New
South Wales Children’s Court, so the public does not know if another justification for his
removal and its continuance have been put forward in those proceedings. This is the point
in the process of child removal where the surrounding community are left to blindly
presume FACS’ innocence and the parent’s guilt: “there must have been some (valid)
reason for them to take the child….”
Medicinal cannabis oil was being successfully used to almost eliminate the huge number
of seizures the child was enduring, there has been much conjecture that this is the reason
behind the removal. The matter of Chase’s vaccine injury and withdrawal from the vaccine
schedule last year was a point of disagreement between Chase’s parents and some
doctors treating Chase but has not been openly stated as an issue by the department so
far in this case. Perhaps they have been unable to decide which legal debate has a better
chance in court? When the astonishing amount of money and potential money at stake is considered it becomes clear that this has been a very weighty decision for the
According to the FACS NSW website, just one child with the level of disability of Chase generates $325,527.28 per year if made a ward of the state.(3) This is called the ‘unit price’ for ‘intensive residential care’. Over 20 years that is over 6.5 million dollars. This provides employment for a range of service providers some of which are now for-profit organizations. This does not include all medical care. Children in foster care are usually much higher consumers of the medical and pharmaceutical industry who benefit from Medicare funding per visit, per treatment.
Is the public satisfied with FACS using enormous amounts of public money to persecute this loving devoted family and their supporters, to defend themselves legally, and to accommodate Chase away from his family under a health regime that has been shown to tragically deteriorate his health?
As this is probably a landmark case, the millions of dollars potentially involved in appropriating other children with similar health needs is a significant factor in the situation that must be considered. As the prime minister with a wife invested in the vaccine industry pushes mandatory vaccinations, as the grassroots push for freedom to grow and use decriminalized medicinal cannabis bubbles up, the potential financial hit to pharmaceutical companies and associated businesses are incalculable.
A petition created in May for the immediate return of Chase to his family quickly attained
over 104,000 signatures before it was presented to Pru Goward, the Minister for Family
and Community Services. To date, there has been no response from the minister to this
message from the people.
All of this is published copiously on Facebook, with video evidence going back to Chase’s
first day of life, making it much harder for the government to suppress the brutal facts and
put this can of worms back into the can. Nevertheless, FACS NSW applied to the Supreme
Court of NSW for a suppression order on July 18th to prevent Paul Robert Burton, secretary
of the Church of Ubuntu, and Dr. Andrew Katelaris from sharing information with the public
about the situation surrounding the case. (4) Both Paul and Andrew had been supporting
the family with advocacy and health consultancy respectively and were with them the night
of the removal, along with several Church of Ubuntu community members. They both
made appeals to the public on Facebook to support the family, including a request for
writing letters to Minister Pru Goward and sharing the petition and rally details. Many
people were initiating and supporting various efforts to support the family.
The suppression order, which currently stands as an interim order, prohibits the two men
from publishing the name or images of the child or his parents, or of any medical or other
professionals providing services to the child, and details of the children’s court
proceedings. The order is to remove, conceal or destroy this information where it is within
their possession or control on Facebook, Vimeo, websites, bumper stickers, and t-shirts. It
allowed two weeks for Paul and Dr. Katelaris to apply to contest the order, which they did.
The purpose of contesting the suppression order has been to continue to seek justice for
Chase in light of the fact that the justice system itself does not appear to be acting in the
best interests of the child. He and many other children were taken in similar ways need a
voice. The wider community, especially those with children, need to see justice done in this
case and to know it will occur in all cases. The lack of transparency over many years of
closed Children’s Court proceedings and suppression orders has led us to this point of
many thousands of children sentenced to separation throughout childhood from loving
families and the sector becoming increasingly For Profit. Three years ago the number of
children (0-17years of age) in ‘state care’ was 18,192 in NSW and 43,009 in Australia
overall.(5) This number has been accelerating since then and the data does not include
adoptions which are also set to accelerate due to faster adoption processes that Pru
Goward has announced last month. (6.) In the current structure, the children have almost
no defense against a mass of adults whose careers and incomes depend on plenty of child
Paul Robert Burton and Dr. Andrew Katelaris attended a witness hearing in the Supreme
Court in Sydney on 26th October to discuss all the witnesses they wish to subpoena to their
hearing which will be held at the end of November.(7) A few staunch supporters attended
in the court gallery on the 26th while many tens of thousands, both nationally and
internationally remain passionately in support of these two men’s courageous and
enduring demand for justice.
Presumably the truly just original intent and purpose of section 105 of the NSW Child
Protection Act is to protect a child by protecting their reputation as they go through life
after situations of severe abuse, such as sexual abuse, which could be a source of
ongoing shame and trauma for the child. However, many people believe that this power to
silence people is being widely abused and in the majority of cases is being misused to
hamper the families attempts to find support to defend their children and their families, and
to hide the rampant outrageous corruption of FACS and associated organizations who
monetize the removal, fostering and adoption of vulnerable children.
Given Chase’s short life expectancy according to the mainstream medical model and the
results they were getting, it is hard conceived of how suppressing the details of this case is
in his best interests. It is clear to the vast majority of people who are aware of the facts of
this story (8.)(not just consumers of the mainstream media), that Chase’s best interests
are served when in the loving care of his family. Chase’s family are desperately worried for
his health now that he is back in the mainstream health system. His life is in danger as the
seizures, toxic medicines (such as benzodiazepines) and powdered food (dairy based
Nutrini) are harmful to him.
A common sense of justice knows that for FACS to have the power to gag their opponents,
they must be actually fulfilling their very serious responsibilities with complete integrity and
adherence to human rights. If their activities are corrupt and criminal, as appears to be the
case, then no just law can legitimately uphold their power to suppress those who seek
justice against them and for the child.
An order to prevent a child’s family and friends from strongly seeking support to protect
their child and their family, whether it be moral, legal or financial support, must clearly be in
the best interests of that specific child. Chase’s needs are for health care that works now
and quality of life with those he knows and loves and by whom he is loved.
The reason this situation is of such profound significance is the fact that this case is but
one example of a vast problem of abuse-of-office that threatens all families who are, or
ever may be, vulnerable. The wrongful taking (stealing) of children is, in fact, a global
problem with a history far older than our constitution and ‘medical kidnap’ is on the rise.
Colonisation has hit Aboriginal Peoples the hardest with this practice that has eaten away
at the very fabric of their proven sustainable cultures and hence their wellbeing over
generations. Many personal stories are told in the Bringing Them Home Report (9.) Most
people today expect the Law to act in the best interests of the child (10.), to prevent rather
then participate in child trafficking.
A key factor that has allowed this broader chronic problem to fester and grow is largely the
extreme lack of transparency of the Children’s Court as explained by George Potkonyak
(11.), which has systematically left the majority of community members to helplessly
assume that if a child is ever removed from his/her family “it must have been for a valid
and justifiable reason”. As a torrent of stories now comes forth from far and wide on
social media it becomes clear that there are many unanswered questions, many
experiences of vulnerable people without the knowledge, support or money to navigate the
Therefore it is in the public interest -at least nationally- that this real case be dealt with
properly, justly, and transparently.
We the people need to know that this boy will not be further used to generate income for
employees of FACS, personnel of an inadequate medical program, lawyers and judiciary
personnel, or motel owners. We all need to know that this boy and this family are rightfully
restored. We need to know that our Law will not continue to allow Chase or any other to be
held hostage as a political prisoner for corporate/bureaucratic purposes over humanity and
There have been public rallies, intense social media activity, letters and phone calls to
many politicians, petitions, newspaper articles and television news. NSW Families and
Community Services Minister Pru Goward, Federal Health Minister Greg Hunt and Prime
Minister Malcolm Turnbull cannot honestly plead ignorance about the facts of this case.
With all the light that has been shone upon the situation, there is no possible plausible
excuse for our justice system to fail to achieve justice.
That is unless our government and justice systems are truly a farce and are finally willing
to be seen and known publicly as such.
Are the people of Australia ready for fascism? Are the people really dumbed down and
submissive enough now to tolerate this travesty and thousands more to occur while
running obediently in their rat wheels?
This is the roll of the dice the government and judiciary are faced with. Is it worth a punt?
Perhaps the people are sufficiently passive, self-oriented and pre-occupied, they won’t
actually, take action unless it involves their own child, they’ll just keep working and
watching TV …..?
As well as the public interest there are other reasons why the suppression order should be
rejected including the legal point of Utility:
- Channel 7 still has its inaccurate and defamatory episode of their current affairs
show Sunday Night Part 1 of 3 called ‘Saving Chase’ available online.
- Hundreds of thousands of people already know the story, it is known globally.
- Facebook or other social media are not necessarily within government jurisdiction,
for example, Facebook is based in America.
- The newspapers The Australian and The Daily Mail printed and sold hundreds of thousands of papers defaming Paul and Dr. Katelaris and harming many others as a result (which has attracted FACS persecution and more wrongful child removals from the Church of Ubuntu community). All those newspapers cannot be retrieved from wherever they have gone.
Therefore what is the point, the utility of gagging these two men?
Is this really about Chase’s wellbeing?
Fortunately there is a private prosecution and other cases pending that Paul Robert Burton
is pursuing because the judgement today was another demonstration of our current reality;
that the Law is corruptly defending the Lawlessness of our government. Before he left the
courtroom Dr. Katelaris forthrightly expressed his opinion of this corrupt system and the
determination of judges based on uncontested fabricated evidence. Paul expects that
three or four cases will be heard in the Supreme Court regarding this matter including the
private prosecution of one of the caseworkers who removed Chase.
Paul shared; “In short both this Judge and the previous Judge have stated quite clearly
that whether the child was taken lawfully or unlawfully has no relevance in regards to
this situation with our suppression orders section 105 of the Child Protection Act.”
This is nonsensical to anyone who does not believe that might is right.
(1.) Chase laughing
(2.) Dr. Katelaris’ letter to Pru Goward
(3.) Screenshot of foster care ‘unit prices’, this document seems to have since
disappeared from FACS website.
(9.) Bringing Them Home Report
(10.) Parens Patriae from the Australian Law Reform Commission website:
“4.56 The Supreme Court of each state and territory has a very wide power to make orders to protect the welfare of children, known as the parens patriae (‘parent of the country’) jurisdiction, the underlying premise of which is that the children in question have no other, or no other suitable, guardian.”
“Purpose of child protection orders 4.69 –
The central dynamic in both child protection under state and territory law, and parenting orders under the Family Law Act is that the best interests of the child are paramount. However state and territory child protection legislation also provides that, subject to this principle, the legislation is to be administered so that where intervention is ordered it must be the least intrusive possible, including keeping the child with his or her family whenever possible. The overall purpose of child protection intervention is therefore, through the action of the state, to provide measures to assist and support children and young people who are in need of protection.”
(11.) George Potkonyak Submission to the Senate Inquiry Children in Out Of Home Care