For a nation that used to pride itself on hosting festivals of ‘dangerous ideas’, there has certainly been a ridiculous amount of protest and outrage regarding the innocuous-sounding Restoring the Presumption of Innocence conference.

It seems no one is allowed to talk publicly about how a vital legal principle – the presumption of innocence – has been undermined by the sisterhood’s long and successful ideological effort to tilt the justice system in favour of alleged victims.

Bruce Lehrmann and his ‘trial by media’ was originally intended as the headline act, but this promoted a petition calling on the local council to prevent the discussion going forward ‘before it causes any further harm or damage to the victim survivor community’. A recent judgment against Lehrmann meant he had to withdraw from the event to continue his legal battle.

The conference lives on, having been moved to August 31.

If you believe in the presumption of innocence and would like to hear law professors, criminal lawyers, political commentators, and other experts speak to the issue, you can book your tickets here.

It will be held in Rushcutters Bay, but it says a great deal about the childish nature of progressive culture that the exact details of the location and the identities of some of the well-known speakers are being kept secret until closer to the event.

Welcome to Australia, where silence is guaranteed by the incessant harassment of cancel culture.

Considering Restoring the Presumption of Innocence will present evidence from eminently qualified academics, experts, statisticians, criminal lawyers, and doctors – it is absurd that activists would attempt to close it down.

Mind you, it’s easy to see why activists are nervous.

The truth about our justice system is a can of worms and there is plenty of evidence that something is going very wrong.

In the last year, six NSW District Court judges have spoken out about rape cases being pushed through to trial supported by insufficient evidence – leading to the Crown Prosecution office conducting an audit of all current sexual assault cases. In addition, there are plenty of outrageous stories that have made it to the press in recent years that do not pass ‘the pub test’ when it comes to public expectations of innocence, guilt, and evidence.

With the presumption of innocence under siege, it is the right time for a proper public discussion about what is going on here. Luckily there are many in the community concerned about the silencing of debate about these pivotal issues.

Restoring the Presumption of Innocence is being hosted by Australians for Science and Freedom, an organisation founded by concerned doctors, lawyers, and academics who objected to the government’s response to the pandemic. Readers may have been to other events hosted by them that centre around liberty and medical freedom. Now, they focus on broader goals, including encouraging ‘better institutions that embed respect for freedom and scientific approaches for society’s problems’.

The event is sponsored by Mothers of Sons, which is an organisation I helped to establish some years ago in which I brought together mothers wishing to expose the injustice suffered by their sons within the criminal and family courts. A number of the Mothers of Sons family members will be speaking at the conference, revealing the devastating impact that false allegations of sexual assault can have on the entire family – including a lasting financial and emotional cost.

There will also be some exciting mystery speakers – including a celebrity who has had his life destroyed by a #MeToo accusation.

False allegations are a key theme of this forum. A recent YouGov survey found that Australia has one of the highest rates of false allegations in the world, mostly related to family law disputes. Across the country, our police and our courts are drowning in unproven domestic violence accusations which, in NSW alone, take up 50-70 per cent of police time and 60 per cent of local court time.

Lawyers are now bracing for a tsunami of fresh allegations with the introduction of ‘coercive control’ into law for NSW (and Queensland to follow). Many lawyers believe this will open the floodgate for women to allege a partner has been emotionally controlling. Such an accusation may be enough to see him put in prison. Coercive control, as a criminal offence, is difficult to define, impossible to prove, and many believe it was designed as a weapon to be used against men.

The NSW government has launched a massive campaign on the topic, including publishing a list of those ‘most at risk’ from coercive control:

• Women
• People with disability
• Aboriginal people
• People from multicultural, migrant or refugee background
• LGBTQI people
• Older people
• Children and young people

Funny that. This list cautions almost everyone, except ordinary, heterosexual blokes – ‘cisgender’ men, as the government literature calls them. Instead, these men are typecast as being overwhelmingly likely to be the perpetrators. Which is odd, considering the Australian Bureau of Statistics has acknowledged that men are just as likely as women to be victims of emotional abuse – defined using many of the same behaviours now listed as coercive control.

The government has released a flood of video material explaining coercive control where men are invariably featured as perpetrators. Yet the Restoring the Presumption of Innocence conference will hear from Australian men who have already fallen victim to coercive control within domestic relationships. These men were selected from nearly 1,000 local men who took part in the large international survey on male victims of coercive control run by the University of Central Lancashire. Their experiences represent the truth that our governments are so determined to bury.

There’ll be other truth-tellers at the conference, presenting evidence about all sorts of politically incorrect subjects – like research that shows false rape allegations are far more common than often claimed. And the international literature clearly demonstrating that most family violence involves both male and female perpetrators. And the data showing children are more at risk when dad is removed from the home.

Plenty to inform anyone with an interest in how social engineering is now unfairly targeting men and denying them fair treatment under the law. Yet conference organisers are keen to also attract parents of young men who are particularly vulnerable to false allegations. Many parents assume that they can keep their sons out of trouble by raising a good young man who treats women with respect and follows the rules on consent. It never occurs to them that he is still vulnerable if he is unlucky enough to get involved with a woman who becomes angry if he doesn’t want to become her boyfriend or has sex she later regrets.

This vital one-day conference will tell it as it is. Forewarned is forearmed.

Tickets are available at the conference website –www.presumptionofinnocence.au