PUBLICLY AVAILABLE 3rd PARTY VERIFICATION INFORMATION

regarding litigants in Supreme Court of Queensland cases

Peterson v. Hottes and Swettenham v. Wild and Field v. Loh

PRESENTED IN REVERSE DATE ORDER.
Links go to PDF pages. Use your back button to return here.

BACK TO HOME PAGE

DISCLAIMER

THREAT/ TROLL ALERT

NOTE: Publicly and freely available online sources have been used to compile the information on this page, in order to distinguish the litigants from other people with the same names. This also protects the defendant in one case (Peterson v Hottes) in that a simple mis-spelling of the defendant's name in online searches goes to multiple links to online adult material unrelated to the defendant, and australiansense.com seeks to ensure that there is absolutely no inadvertant or by-extension confusion of that defendant with those links. Online searches for information about both the Plaintiff and the Defendant in each case were conducted. The right to privacy of individuals who may have knowledge of the particular case but who were not themselves litigants or testifying witnesses, requires that their identitities and locations remain undisclosed.

PETERSON v HOTTES

PLAINTIFF: D. L. Peterson: No current location-specific verification information is publicly available online. Formerly of Townsville and Brisbane, Queensland. If any legitimate publicly available information emerges, it will be provided here. Any confusion of identity with that of other persons with the same names is purely co-incidental. In particular, the identity of a person with the same name as the Plaintiff and currently living in Townsville, Queensland, and the identity of a person currently living in the Blue Mountains, NSW, Australia, is not to be confused with that of the Plaintiff.

DEFENDANT: Location-specific verification information of Ms Heidi Hottes/ Ms Julianne Heidi Hottes is publicly available online. Any confusion of identity with that of other persons with the same names is purely co-incidental. In particular, the following is provided to avert any confusion with a very famous "Heidi"; or with a private individual with exactly the same name living elsewhere; or with links to online material unrelated to the defendant.

2012 - Teaching at a Catholic high school college in Burnie, Tasmania, Australia. The specific reference is a hotlink email address for "Dr Hottes". Online information found through Google search 9 August, 2012. (Derived from verifiable time-stamped hard copy documentation of online information, held on file in support of this page.)

2010 - Teaching at a Catholic high school college in Burnie, Tasmania, Australia. See high School newsletter 2010 - half way down second column (Dr H Hottes, Room 59). (Derived from verifiable time-stamped hard copy documentation of online information, held on file in support of this page.)

2009 - Teaching through Adult Education in Devonport, Tasmania, Australia. Online information found through Google search 9 August, 2012. (Derived from verifiable time-stamped hard copy documentation of online information, held on file in support of this page.)

2007(?) - Extensive online business listings ("Black Cockatoo") for Julianne Hottes (a.k.a Heidi Hottes) at the disputed property 46 DiCaprio Circuit, Bridgeman Downs, Brisbane, Queensland. Online information found through Google search 9 August, 2012. (Derived from verifiable time-stamped hard copy documentation of online information, held on file in support of this page.)

ADDITIONALLY:
(1) The Supreme Court listing appears in Google search results: Peterson v. Hottes Supreme Court of Qld. (Online information found through Google search 9 August, 2012.)
(2) Specific Tasmanian residential address for the defendant was identified in February 2011. Full details remain unpublished here for privacy reasons. (Derived from verifiable time-stamped hard copy documentation, received unsolicited through legitimate attorney-to-attorney pathways in February 2011 and held confidentially on file by the site owner in support of this page.)

 

FIELD v LOH & ANOR

PLAINTIFF: Mrs M Field. Deceased.

DEFENDANT: Ngiap Siong Loh and Suray Binte Isnin. Previously at Lot 150 on registered plan 142337 and having title reference 50363926 (in Queensland). No current location-specific verification information is publicly available online. Any confusion of identity with that of other persons with the same names is purely co-incidental.

 

SWETTENHAM v WILD

PLAINTIFF: Leonard Swettenham - formerly at Nerang, Queensland, Australia. No current location-specific verification information is publicly available online. Any confusion of identity with that of other persons with the same names is purely co-incidental.

DEFENDANT: Rose-Marie Wild - formerly at Nerang, Queensland, Australia. No current location-specific verification information is publicly available online. Any confusion of identity with that of other persons with the same names is purely co-incidental.

 

Information current and accurate at 13 August 2012.

DISCLAIMER: This web page is created in the United States of America by a U.S. limited liability company (registered in the State of Delaware) under U.S. rights to free speech and educative reporting in the public interest. One sphere of relevant public interest is that of growing community awareness of troublesome issues affecting the elderly and their assets. This page has no affiliation with the Supreme Court of Queensland (Australia), the Court of Appeal (Queensland, Australia), the Plaintiffs, or the Defendants. The information above is from verifiable public domain sources only. The facts posted here are believed to be accurate and current at the time of posting. Online searches will reveal numerous individuals with the same names. In providing the above facts to distinguish the litigants from others with the same names, no other purpose is intended or implied, and no other purpose is to be inferred. No other use may be made of this information by third parties. No other information regarding the cases or the litigants themselves can be provided by this site. Email requests for more information about the litigants cannot be filled.

THREAT/ TROLL/ CYBERSTALKER/ STALKER ALERT

******

PRIVACY MATTERS: Due to constant harassment and cyber-stalking directed towards the Plaintiff in Peterson v Hottes, and towards the Plaintiff's other daughter, decrying the public domain availability of Public Record information reported on this site, the following additional clarification is provided. The right to privacy of non-litigants and non-witnesses in that particular case extends to the defendant's son - including his written communication to the plaintiff, the defendant's boyfriends (at least two had direct knowledge of the case), the plaintiff's care co-ordinator and care workers, the plaintiff's other daughter and other family members. All had knowledge of the case, but since they were not the litigants and were not testifying witnesses, the details of their knowledge of the case remain off the public record and they accordingly retain the right to privacy.

Substantiating documentation has been retained by australiansense.com in support of the Threat/ Troll Alert and these additional comments.

WA Management.

wa@wamanagement.com