Jolanda & Peter Challita

42 Carramar Crescent
MIRANDA NSW 2228

PH: 9501 1072

9 January 2007

The Committee of the Office of the Ombudsman

& Police Integrity Commission
Parliament of New South Wales
Macquarie Street
SYDNEY NSW 2000

Dear Ms D’Amore

I refer to your letter to me dated 18 December 2007 and to my telephone conversation

with Pru Sheaves on 7 January 2007 and confirm my advice to Pru that I am very
disturbed about the Committee’s decision to not act on this matter.

As explained to Pru, the fact that there was a review undertaken doesn’t equate to
procedural fairness as in both instances the Ombudsman did not inform us of the review
outcome but responded with the following:

1. 17 April 2003. We have a wide discretion in deciding which of the many matters
submitted for my attention are acted upon. You have requested a review of the decisions
made by Ms Ovenden and Mr Morse. After receiving Ms Annakin's advice and
reviewing the matters myself, I have decided to confirm the original decision made on
your complaint. It is my view that further examination of your complaint is not
warranted.

2. 3 May 2007 - Your letter has been treated as a request for a review of Mr Conaty's
decision. My officers have a wide discretion in deciding which of the many matters
submitted for my attention are acted upon. After receiving Ms Silver's advice and
reviewing the file myself, I have decided to confirm the original decision for the same
reasons set out in Mr Conaty's letter to you dated 16 March 2007 even after
considering the further comments you have made.

As previously advised, we made a complaint to the Committee of the Office of the

Ombudsman and Police Integrity Commission in 2003 with regard to the handling and
the closing of the complaint by the Ombudsman. At that time Mr. Barbour not only
decided not to investigate the matter, despite clear evidence supporting our case and
despite the allegations involving children, but also decided not to not provide us with the
explanations that we sought in our review request. The response from your office was
that under the Ombudsman’s Act questions were prohibited from being asked in relation
to ‘particular conduct’ and that your office couldn’t help my family.

We allege a conspiracy to cover up.

That Mr. Barbour has been permitted to deal with and close fresh allegations and the
matter again, despite fresh evidence supporting our allegations, denies my family an
impartial and unbiased decision, procedural fairness and breaches the Ombudsman’s Act.

That you inform me that your office does not have the jurisdiction to deal with issues of
procedural fairness is of serious concern, especially when the allegations involve
children.

I formally request that there be an urgent independent investigation of this matter be

undertaken. Procedural fairness is a policy issue and child protection is of paramount
concern.

I await hearing from you in this regard.

Yours sincerely

Jolanda Challita
Peter Challita

c.c. Mr. Kevin Rudd

Mr. Morris Iemma
Mr. Brendon Nelson
Mr. Barry O’Farrell
Mr. Malcolm Kerr