Alan Jones v Ian Temby – Jones returns fire

Teeth were bared as Alan Jones returned fire on Ian Temby for his comments at the enquiry into the Penrith Panthers’ financial dealings (see our earlier story).

Last week, Temby used the protection of the courts to suggest that Alan Jones may be guilty of cash for comment on the issue.

Alan Jones yesterday hit back at Temby saying:

Well at the inquiry into the Penrith Panthers Rugby League Club on Friday, Mr Temby, QC, must have felt no one was paying enough attention of his deliberations.

He got a headline by asking because I interviewed Roger Cowan, the boss of the Penrith Panthers earlier this year, Mr Temby was asked whether I was on the Panthers’ payroll.

He got the headline with all the associated damage.

It goes without saying that it ill becomes an inquiry, supposed to be founded on the basis of objectivity and factual analysis, to allow itself instead to take an utterly improper position engaging in headline grabbing speculation about me in an abusive, unproven, untrue, damaging and hurtful way.

How can you get the truth from an inquiry that starts without any regard to fair play?

And how can you take any of its deliberations seriously?

What happened, Mr Temby, to the 40 cent phone call?

What happened to your so called balanced analysis?

If, Mr Temby, you or your seat warmers had rung me, I would have set them straight.

I have no relationship with these people.

And, Mr Temby, I would have thought you would have learnt by now the dangers of smearing people and getting it wrong after your shockingly flawed finding of corruption against Nicholas Greiner, our former State Premier.

Didn’t Mr Temby grab the headlines then by finding that Mr Greiner acted corruptly?

Didn’t this force Mr Greiner from office in New South Wales?

And didn’t the Court of Appeal subsequently find that Mr Temby had “erred in making the declaration of corruption in relation to Mr Greiner, in particular, because there must be objective standards that represent a prerequisite for that finding”?

Mr Temby is not much good at objective standards.

Didn’t Chief Justice Gleeson, our greatest lawyer, now Chief Justice of the High Court, hold that there was “no suggestion of a criminal offence and that what was done was believed to be lawful in all respects”?

But, of course, Mr Greiner had resigned from office, driven out by the error of Mr Temby’s judgement.

And he was at it again on Friday.

I have a point of view in relation to the Panthers’ inquiry and I expressed it.

I don’t need to be paid to be committed to a point of view.

My point of view is my own.

And who needs this cynical, smearing approach in a Quasi pseudo judicial government appointment like Temby?

Mr Temby’s performance on Friday was an utter misuse of power.

One would have thought after the Greiner disgrace that Mr Temby would have been careful about what he said and how his power is used.

Mr Temby has been on the record in the past of believing in absolute truth.

He should try living by that in the exercise of this inquiry which is nothing more than a waste of taxpayers’ money.