Why hasn’t the Abbott/Pell painter been charged?

Last week an offensive, pornographic, putrid and reprehensible image of Tony Abbott and Cardinal George Pell appeared on the wall of a Newtown pub.

Abbott Pell pornographic image

The offensive image after it was ‘defaced’.

It depicted the two men engaged in an indecent homosexual act.

The mural was supposed to show support for homosexual marriage and homosexuality, while at the same time denigrating two key figures from Australia’s Catholic community.

And then the media took up arms after it was ‘defaced’. When I say defaced, I mean that the offensive image was covered in paint, so that it was no longer so offensive.

Let’s unpack this a little.

There are two points to make.

Firstly, this image is a reflection on the depravity of the ‘Yes’ crowd.

These people hate themselves.

On the one hand, they claim that homosexual behaviour is something to be esteemed, applauded and respected.

And on the other, they insult those they hate by hitting them with the greatest slur they can: depicting them engaged in homosexual acts.

Anyone who was involved in the marriage campaign knows what I mean: I have never been a called a ‘faggot’ so often in my life as in the past two months.

It is bizarre and twisted. It is akin to ‘No’ campaigners putting out flyers to ‘insult’ the leaders of Australian Marriage Equality by depicting them as happily married men tending the front gardens of their white-picket fenced homes.

True. That would not be much of an insult. That’s because the idea of heterosexual family life has an inherent ‘goodness’ about it.

So it is interesting to unwrap why pro-homosexual activists seek to hurl abuse that is based on nothing more than the very nature of homosexuality itself at defenders of traditional marriage.

And there is only reason why it is insulting: the very nature of homosexual behaviour is degrading. The insult is the attempt to infer that people like Tony Abbott and George Pell are somehow tainted with this same degrading behaviour.

It is an admission that there is something off about homosexuality. Yet those making this admission are the very same people cheering it on.

It is twisted and it reflects twisted logic and morality that expresses itself so profoundly in the sneering rejection of the idea of ‘straight’.

That’s point number one. It’s philosophical.

Point number two is straight out of the New South Wales criminal code.

It is against the law in New South Wales and most other places in Australia to publish images without consent that depict personal sexual activity, or that are altered or doctored to do so.



(1) A person who intentionally distributes an intimate image of another person:

(a) without the consent of the person, and

(b) knowing the person did not consent to the distribution or being reckless as to whether the person consented to the distribution,

is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty: 100 penalty units or imprisonment for 3 years, or both.


(1) In this Division:

“distribute” includes:

(a) send, supply, exhibit, transmit or communicate to another person, or

(b) make available for viewing or access by another person,

whether in person or by electronic, digital or any other means.

“engaged in a private act” means:

(a) in a state of undress, or

(b) using the toilet, showering or bathing, or

(c) engaged in a sexual act of a kind not ordinarily done in public, or

(d) engaged in any other like activity.

“intimate image” means:

(a) an image of a person’s private parts, or of a person engaged in a private act, in circumstances in which a reasonable person would reasonably expect to be afforded privacy, or

(b) an image that has been altered to appear to show a person’s private parts, or a person engaged in a private act, in circumstances in which a reasonable person would reasonably expect to be afforded privacy.

Yet that is exactly what happened to Tony Abbott and George Pell. ‘Artist’ Scott Marsh distributed an intimate image in a public place of them engaged in a private act.

It would seem on every count that this image violates section 91Q of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) – a section that carries a penalty of imprisonment of up to three years.

New South Wales police, over to you. Do your duty and enforce the law.

Or are we to add a perpetual state of lawlessness to the consequences of ‘marriage equality’ as well…

Author: Bernard Gaynor

Bernard Gaynor is a married father of nine children. He has a background in military intelligence, Arabic language and culture and is an outspoken advocate of conservative and family values.

Share This Post On


  1. A failed Prime Minister and a person now known as “the accused” have endured worse.

    Post a Reply
  2. There is as much logic in this action as there is in people decrying the Church’s attitude towards marriage and opposing it, then fighting for the right to be married in a church, particularly when after abusing God and His Word, they then want His blessing on a union that He regards as Sin.
    All this graffiti and the response of the Newtown and Sydney councils shows is that Sydney is fast becoming the capital of the gay world. The same councils and NSW government spend millions fighting against graffiti vandals defacing public property and have instituted laws against it, but support this pornographic display, supposedly on the grounds that it is art. Compare this to the action of Darwin council who instructed that a wall painting of the West Papuan flag be destroyed because of the demands of the Indonesians.
    As it states in the Bible, “we wrestle not against flesh and blood but against spiritual wickedness in high places.”

    Post a Reply
  3. The Abbott/Pell painter will not be prosecuted because he/she/who cares belongs to an aggrieved victim group that is entitled (and funded) to run its schtick on those deemed by The Party to be class enemies or reactionary elements or whatever.

    A gravy train has been created to give him/her/’we don’t care’ special status.

    No offendees will be permitted to denounce he/she/’we don’t care’ to the Committee of Public Safety in NSW . Australian laws which he/she/it/whatever broke in its exercise of freedom of expression will not be enforced against him/her/it/whatever.

    Let’s just see what kind of civil ‘rights’ Tony Abbott and Cardinal Pell have in this loathsome episode. My confidence prediction – about as much as the Australian Christian Lobby in the van explosion. Zip.

    http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/van-drove-into-australian-christian-lobbys-canberra-headquarters-and-exploded-20161221-gtg6et.html The actual title of this piece printed in a FakeNN bubgie paper put ‘exploded’ in italics. I confidently predict this will become the trend with crimes against Christians treated as italicized crimes.

    Post a Reply
  4. NSW Police….The best money can buy. Bought off by the LBGTQI movement no action on this = corruption.

    Post a Reply
  5. One of my sons told me about this unbelievable excuse for a cartoon mural yesterday. One may be forgiven for thinking that certain people believe that the words “private” and “public” are synonyms, and that lewdness is the new public decency… The abolition of all definitions of any worth would appear to be a goal of the Post-Modern phase of the Sexual Revolution.

    Post a Reply
  6. An excellent article. I also wondered why they would depict these prominent Catholic men engaging in homosexual acts as a means to defile them. That suggests that they regard this behaviour as deviant and disgusting. Despite being in the hospitality industry this pub seems comfortable offending millions of Catholics who work, visit and spend money in Sydney. No courage needed as they know the Church will not seek retribution. I wonder would they be so brave as to depict Muslim leaders (who we know want them eradicated) in a similar manner. Now that would be brave.

    Post a Reply
  7. Along a similar line, a year or so ago the national, publicly-funded broadcaster (i.e. the ABC) transmitted across the nation a photo-shopped picture showing a non-left-wing journalist having intercourse with a dog. Was anyone charged? NO, to this country’s great shame.
    When it comes to morals and ethics, Australia is on the downward slide as it rejects the Judae-Christian priciples that were once the foundation of this country. And the Left have the hide to call this “progress”.

    Post a Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Pin It on Pinterest