Monday , September 27 2021
Home / National News / John Barilaro reported Friendlyjordies to police six months before producer’s arrest

John Barilaro reported Friendlyjordies to police six months before producer’s arrest

Mr Barilaro’s statements, given in April and June, are listed as being part of a potential case against Mr Shanks, who has not been charged.

Kristo Langker (right) was arrested by the Fixated Persons Unit.

Kristo Langker (right) was arrested by the Fixated Persons Unit.Credit:James Brickwood

In the June statement, Mr Barilaro says his chief of staff was previously in contact with the Fixated Persons Unit to report “incidences of harassment by Jordan Shanks and his followers”, and the staff member contacted them again after Mr Langker spoke to Mr Barilaro on a Sydney street.

Last month, during an interview on Sky News, Mr Barilaro was asked if he requested the Fixated Persons Investigation Unit to be involved in the arrest of Mr Langker. He responded “absolutely not” and “rubbish”.

Host Tom Connell clarified: “So you had no role in that particular unit being involved?”

In a heated exchange, Mr Barilaro responded: “I’ve actually made it clear Tom, I’ve said ‘absolutely not’. For you to be asking that question is an indictment on your level of journalism.”

Mr Barilaro continued that it was unfair for him to be repeatedly asked questions about a matter that was now with police. “I think I’ve answered more than I should have, and I’ve been very, very forthcoming to you,” he said.

Earlier this year, Mr Barilaro sued Mr Shanks and Google – which owns YouTube – in the Federal Court. In a statement of claim, Mr Barilaro argues he was defamed by the videos bruz and Secret Dictatorship, which he alleges were published as part of a “smear campaign”.

In a fresh defence document filed this week, Mr Shanks conceded one of the videos carried the defamatory imputations that Mr Barilaro is a corrupt conman, committed perjury nine times, and so conducted himself by committing perjury that he should be jailed.

Mr Shanks has argued the defences of truth, contextual truth and honest opinion.


In its defence, also filed this week, Google denied Mr Barilaro was defamed in the way he claims. Lawyers for the internet giant will argue the defences of qualified privilege, honest opinion, and public interest.

“The matters complained of constitute and refer to information, opinions and arguments concerning government and political matters affecting the people of Australia, and in particular the people of New South Wales, in which all members of the Australian community have an interest,” Google argues in court documents.

“The second respondent had a duty or interest, legal, social or moral, to publish the information in the matters complained of, and the recipients had a reciprocal duty or interest to receive such information.”

The defamation case will return to court next week. Mr Barilaro has been contacted for comment.

About admin

Check Also

New COVID-19 case detected in Brisbane, exposure sites listed

A number of exposure sites have been listed in Brisbane after a new, confirmed case …