Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Landeryou and Co's photostream

The mother load Patriots.

Discuss away.

65 Truth On Comments:

Anonymous said...

Adam Shand would have a great scoop by checking Flickr. Wow!

Telescope said...

More dodgy, dirty deeds done dirt cheap by the artful dodger! One dollar companies and layers of addresses protecting the fat fraud!

Colonel Sanders said...

Imagine my shock on seeing this headline on the Age site:

Chicken mogul strangled lover in penthouse, court told

...... had been having an affair with a man more than 20 years his junior.

At first I thought it must have Halal Poultry CEO Landeryou.

Halal Chook said...

Mr Landeryou has asked me to be Managing Director of Australian Halal Poulty P/L.

It won't be the first company in Australia to be run by a complete chook.

Anonymous said...

No comments from the fat cunt.


Anonymous said...

He's too busy mopping up his involuntary bowel movements after reading Flickr.

Anonymous said...

Poor Fat Andy! He used to make up false names on company documents. Now he just has to make up false names for the bizarre and banal comments he posts here.

Inspector Clousseau said...

More forged signatures in a long history of fraud and forgery.

Arrowhead would have been better named Dunderhead!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but do any of the docs fall within the period of Landeryou's bankruptcy? The closest was April & December 2006.

ATO Sticky Beak said...

Clousseau, Landeryou was declared bankrupt on May 23, 2006 owing two Mill! The document dated December 2006 might be worth another look.

Andy B said...

I wrote a poem!

Andrew Landeryou,
I speak for all of us when I say,
Fuck you.

Andrew Landeryou said...

It is not correct to say my postal and other addresses are secret. They are in fact a matter of public record... My neighbours probably wouldn’t appreciate me listing the location of my humble crib here but should anyone wish to send me greeting cards, cheques, writs and such they should call my mobile 0415 99 33 26 and I’ll let you know where to send them.

Anonymous said...

That is definitely Landeryou's child-like scrawl on those documents.

Cudgel said...

In other words your personal address is not on the public record. I have to ring you so that I can find out where you live so I can come around and beat your brains out.

Ha Ha Ha - you idiot!

Graphologist to the Stars said...

May 19, 2009 3:06:00 AM - Congrats!

It all goes to show that company law is vulnerable to dedicated, determined criminals. Forgery is perhaps an even more insidious crime than fraud. Those whose signatures have been forged are compromised. It's a whole new level of evil.

Jordanlane Crimwatch said...

Very interesting documentation.

Some people on this blog suggest that Landeryou is not as insolvent as he claims.

We'd love to hear from you at Crimwatch!

Anonymous said...

ABC-TV's Media Watch did a splendid job tonight of demolishing Matty Johns media apologists (like Vexnews).

Poor old Landeryou keeps on getting on the wrong tram. I was going to say he should stick to crime, but after reading this blog he is obviously incompetent as a criminal also.

Anonymous said...

May 19, 2009 2:54:00 AM

That was GREAT Haiku, Man. Thanks!

Humble start of the Blog of Hate said...

Tonight's new documents are a shocking new insight into the demi-monde of forgery and fraud'

Landeryou as the link above shows made plenty of empty promises even when he began his repulsive blogs.

Anonymous said...

Lew has demonstrated exemplary justice to the Landeryous - but not to Andrew. Kick in a few thou, Sol, for a good QC, and you could get his scalp and a lot of the dollars he is hiding.

Health reporter said...

AN ACE investigative journalist has joined the search for the man dubbed “the Typhoid Mary of the chicken flu pandemic”.

Channel 9 reporter Andrew Shand said he was excited about tracking down Andrew Landeryou.

“Going by the ramblings Landeryou leaves on the internet he is a very sick man,” Mr Shand said.

“Chicken flu has destroyed his reason. We can’t let his infection spread to others. He must be stopped.”

Health authorities believe Mr Landeryou contracted the infection which normally only affects poultry by eating vast quantities of KFC, leading to a fluke amassing of chicken flu microbes in his system.

He fled and went into hiding as soon as he was diagnosed and has evaded quarantine officials searching for him nation wide.

Mr Shand believes there may be more to the Landeryou case.

“Here’s someone who should be easy to find. First, he is immensely fat; somewhere between 350 and 420 kilograms.

“He is balding and walks with a limp thanks to painful gout.

“He won’t go anywhere without a jerry can full of cheap fortified wine, at least six KFC Family Feast tubs, and looks over his shoulder every 15 seconds or so in case he’s being followed.

“To top it off, he wears jumbo sized women’s clothes and likes to be called Cait or Rita or Jenny.

“He’s vanished. Why? Yes, he’s infected with a noxious virus, but that’s only the start of the story.”

Mr Shand believes Mr Landeryou is hiding something.

“Landeryou is an undischarged bankrupt with no job and no visible means of support but lives the life of Riley.

“Until he was diagnosed with chicken flu and fled he occupied a luxury apartment in the heart of Melbourne.

“There are intriguing reports he is paid a secret salary by top figures in the Victorian Labor Party.

“I contacted Victorian ALP State Secretary Stephen Newnham about his persistent claims he had given $50,000 to Landeryou’s former business partner and fellow online spiv to pay for his upkeep.

“Newnham replied ‘We no spik the English we love the peace we Azerbaijani peoples here my wives, my childrens why you worry them’ and immediately slammed down the phone”

Anonymous said...

I've lost track with all those documents, patriots. How many signatures did Landeryou forge?

Anonymous said...

What sort of scumbag forges their brother-in-laws signature?

What sort of moronic scumbag forges their brother-in-laws signature but spells their name wrong?

kevin of southbank said...

Where is Andy? Gone on one of his now infamous disappearing acts!

I expect he read this, and has scarpered.

Fat Andy's going down said...

Click on the above link for the online ASIC complaint form.

It is time that justice was done on Andrew Landeryou.

Spider Pig said...

Still no Andy?!?!?!??!

Anonymous said...

Landershonk is too busy forging signatures and putting fake details on documents to comment today.

Anonymous said...

No Poxnews updates either today.

Anyone phoned immigration in Costa Rica and asked if they've seen a very fat drunk man in a dress?

A patriot said...

Andy can't flee the country that quickly. He has to charter a Super Guppy air freighter if he wants to travel anywhere by air as he is too fat to fly in anything else.

Rita Randles said...

Channeling Richard M. Nixon:
"I am not a chook."

Anonymous said...

Today the bent coppers, tomorrow the bent businessmen!

Mullett committed to stand trial on perjury
May 19

Victoria's ex-police union chief Paul Mullett has been committed to stand trial on two counts of perjury.

Rita Randles said...

Slanderyou has been feeding filth and lies to Adam Shand. For a full exposure of Shand and his evil deeds we must read Vexnews, Australia's leading news source, and for the benefit of those patriotic readers of this blog the story is reproduced below. Read on:

THE NIMMER: The journalist who got too close to organised crime defends Ombudsman’s investigator
By VEXNEWS ⋅ May 19, 2009

adamshanfinal Long-time Channel Nine employee Adam Shand yesterday bravely ventured forth on behalf of his chum, controversial Ombudsman investigator Lachlan McCulloch, slamming his critics. McCulloch’s controversial memoirs were exposed in the Sunday Herald Sun this past weekend and are closely examined here.

The Nine Network employee and journalist Shand claimed that the article was a:

vicious, inaccurate self-serving rant. Clearly, he has hit the mark again, hence the thin miserable whine. I hope he sues the promoters of this disgraceful site. I am proud to say Lachlan was a fine upstanding courageous officer who sincerely tried to make Victoria a better place. And still does. He was not always right and of course made mistakes but at least he always put his name to his mistakes unlike you Mr VexNews. I would back Lachlan Mc over a truckload of you.

We were keen to understand why he was so unhappy about a story we’d thoroughly researched and is very hard to refute. We’ll perhaps never know the full answer to that - we certainly tried asking him - but we can review the public record to see what motivated Shand’s unlikely excursion into the badlands of the VEXNEWS comments section in defence of a law enforcement official who has written three volumes of memoirs so scandalous that he now disavows them as fiction.

As we will see, Shand has also written a book - to which McCulloch contributed - that contains some damning admissions of his own including that Shand:

■ Grew too his closely associated with gangsters, including cultivating a very close friendship with convicted murderer Carl Williams (see below);

■ Told Mick Gatto he was a “leader in your community and a man of honour whom everyone respects” (page 65);

■ Refers to someone as a “bumptious little Leb” and “drug-dealing Lebanese camel-herder (page 101);

■ Admits his journalism was frequently of a poor standard(page 139 and 140); and

■ At one stage while living in Zimbabwe with his then wife and family that he was only happy drunk with an African girl under his arm (page 246).


And that’s really just a quick summary. There’s so much more. But because we’re news fair and balanced, we’ll also note that Adam Shand is not the stereotypical inner-city leftist journo either. While most in his profession are coy about ever disclosing their political views, our research reveals that he is essentially a divorced Catholic right-wing film buff, a slightly balding climate change sceptic with a nervous tic he describes as “nimming” and who seemed genuinely touched by a gangster who became a born again Christian. So he can’t be all bad.

But his attacks on our credibility as a news source are to be taken seriously. He worked for ACA after all. And this is our response. Probably a bit more than he expected, poor sod.

Shand opened the batting with remarks we incorrectly presumed to be someone pretending to be the gangland reporter that attacked our story on the Ombudsman investigator whose memoirs are replete with damning admissions of a toe-curdling kind including illegal behaviour, sexism and racism.

Upon further investigation, we discovered he had actually entered in a Channel Nine email address so we sent him an email which we posted up as a comment as well. Partly this was to flush out whether it was an impersonator and if it wasn’t to seek from him a defence of his assertions that the very strongly sourced article was in some unspecified way inaccurate.

Turns out it was the Adam Shand. We sent him an email that asked a number of questions he has so far refused to answer:

1) How is the article inaccurate? It’s sourced almost entirely from an article written by a business partner and friend of McCulloch’s and from his own book.

2) Do you normally encourage people to sue other journalists? Do you think the laws of defamation should be used to shut down discussion of what people have admitted to in their own books? Do you admit to these views at cocktail parties with brother/sister journalists?

3) We don’t disagree that McCulloch was courageous, as our article noted. Any undercover police officer who obeys the law deserves our great respect. Our issue is whether he’s an appropriate person to be investigating cardigans in the public service and reasonably sedate folk on local councils. You obviously had dealings with him that lead you to think otherwise, could you detail your association with McCulloch?

4) When you say he made mistakes, are you referring to the serious issues raised in the article or to other issues? If the latter, what?


He responded by not answering any questions at all. Just firing off abuse in a way that really did suggest he’d spent a bit too much time watching gangster movies.

from: Shand, Adam
to: Andrew Landeryou
date: Mon, May 18, 2009 at 12:53 PM
subject: RE: Introductions and a few questions

Follow up messageThanks for that
Reasonably freely…is not the same as free. I stand by every word of what I wrote. Put a by-line if you want to have any cred whatsoever. This is not journalism, but a vendetta for party political purposes. Hence the cloaked identity of the writer. [VEXNEWS: LOL, our identity is a state secret] Like I said disgraceful, unprofessional and certainly worthy of suing.

As it happens, Adam Shand knows quite a bit about defamation, having paid out a large financial settlement and making a grovelling apology for some pretty exotic claims he made about a lawyer in that same book on criminals we referred to last year where Shand appeared to form a friendship with Carl Williams and other organised crime identities.

Anyway, as we both clearly didn’t have enough to do yesterday afternoon, I responded.

from: Andrew Landeryou
to: “Shand, Adam”
date: Mon, May 18, 2009 at 1:18 PM
subject RE: Introductions and a few questions

Follow up messageDear Adam
We also stand by every word of what we have written. I have explained why there isn’t a single by-line on it and have now made that clear in the comments section of the blog. Frankly, that’s a bit of a furphy, and if you really want to have a long debate about the history of by-lines we’ll indulge you, perhaps another time.

What would be helpful I think is for you to explain how - specifically - the article is in any respect inaccurate.

We’d also appreciate a response to our other questions.

It seems to us you actually don’t have any specific criticism of the article in mind, you just don’t like it because he’s [Lachlan McCulloch] your friend. Well that’s OK, but unfortunately your friend occupies a serious position of public trust in the community and should - and will - be held to account for what he does and says. I can’t imagine the kind of journalism that would lead you to conclude otherwise, unless you’ve been trained in North Korea.

And to be very clear, I am not a member of a political party and I can assure you my interest in Mr McCulloch has nothing to do with party politics and everything to do with the very strange situation of a senior officer in the Victorian Ombudsman’s office making damning admissions in three volumes of memoirs and now claiming it to be fiction.

If we’re wrong about any of it, we’d be happy to concede that. Instead, you just offer insults, which is your right, but I am particularly interested in your (arguably defamatory) suggestion that the story is inaccurate.

How so?


PS Our research suggests you once worked with [deleted - a respected senior Channel 9 person], if you really don’t know who I am, I suggest you ask him.

Shand wasn’t keen on answering any questions that might have substantiated his attack. Because he couldn’t.

But he did seem very keen on finding out who’d written the article as he seemed to think that we hadn’t. Perhaps he thought it had been supplied by one of the PR firms that pre-package stories for broadcast on some of Channel Nine’s current affairs shows.

VEXNEWS is of course a wholly owned enterprise of Andrew Landeryou. One of the reasons we shifted from the OC blog to these broad, sunlit uplands at VEXNEWS was to acknowledge the extent of the teamwork involved in producing stories that bear our name.

But somehow or other Mr Shand had been determined to think our usual absence of a by-line to be part of a sinister plot or something. Journalists love a conspiracy. Sadly there isn’t one.

Unless you count Adam Shand attempting to dig up information on the article to pass on to his chum at the Ombudsman’s office, Lachlan McCulloch.

VEXNEWS understands that Shand and McCulloch spoke during the day, yesterday. Sources have also told us that Shand and McCulloch have had extensive previous interactions, as one would expect of Shand, given his research into cops and robbers and McCulloch’s high-profile exit from Victoria Police. Indeed, McCulloch is quoted on page 94 of Shand’s book and appears to have been more generally a source of Shand’s. Perhaps he still is.

A wag might suggest they’d bump into each at book launches as well, as the rather nauseating industry in organised crime publishing rolls out to clog up our bookshelves and screens with gangster porn. Having read four books relating to it now, we really do wonder what the fuss was about.

Can there be any doubt that the reporting on these hideous matters glamourised and glorified drug traffickers and murderers far beyond what they should have ever been?

And all to make a buck. As we noted on Sunday, the only people who seem to have made a serious, long-term quid out of organised crime in Victoria are authors like The Age’s John Silvester and newbie Adam Shand.

So it seems, Shand was wanting to present a morsel of information to his mate, much like a spaniel bearing a captured bird, he seemed most intent on a specific admission of authorship. Shand scratches his back, McCulloch is a source later on. How very cosy.

We responded:

From Andrew Landeryou
to “Shand, Adam”
date Mon, May 18, 2009 at 2:04 PM
subject Introductions and a few questions

Follow up messageLOL, I have actually already answered that. Why do you ask? (VEXNEWS: Like it wasn’t obvious)

To humour you, while we receive contributions from many people, and in this case that was true, I am the Editor-in-Chief and am responsible for every article. As you can see, the article is largely a drawing together of quotes from McCulloch and his publisher’s writings, with some editorialising along the way, which is largely my work and that of confidential sources/contributors. You’ll understand why we don’t disclose the latter. My way of acknowledging that fact on stories where I think lots of people have contributed - done research and made suggestions etc - is to indicate that by a use of the collective by-line. (VEXNEWS: Sometimes individual by-lines appear where it’s one person’s opinion or from an outside source or if specifically requested by the contributor. Mostly our default is a collective one, as is the tradition of newspapers prior to journalists seeking to become rock-stars and insisting on putting themselves in stories like Adam Shand’s most recent work on ACA where he’d deliver good news from insurance companies and such to make himself a hero.)

I think your focus on that is quite remarkable given the seriousness of the admissions made by the Ombudsman’s investigator. It is also my practice to collaborate with other journalists, particularly but not limited to News Ltd. Perhaps you’ll have the front to tell them that their stories aren’t journalism either. That’d be fun.

Now we’d like a response to the questions we asked you. How is the article inaccurate? Do you believe McCulloch when he says his memoirs are ‘fiction’? How do you see that fitting with the State Library classifying the works as Police-Victoria-Biography? We’ll soon be delving into the smutty details of the first two volumes of his work which contain many more admissions that will concern Victorians. I’d be happy to incorporate your views and outlook on all of this in the story as we’d like it to be balanced, but if you can’t be specific about your concerns it will make it difficult for your arguments to stand much scrutiny. And scrutiny is what we do.



We didn’t get a response to that, so trying to egg the tough guy on, we had another go, this time setting the pompous ass a deadline with our line - which I think we copied from Leonie Wood at The Age - “failure to respond will be noted in the usual way” :

Hi Adam

Will be doing a follow-up story on your commentary and views about the story for tomorrow, your response would be appreciated no longer than 10AM tomorrow. Failure to respond to the questions we’ve put will be noted in the usual way. Also, we’d be right in describing you as a producer at Nine?

Andrew Landeryou
PS If you prefer to phone through your responses that’s OK, my number is 0415 99 33 26.

Journalistic ethics prevent us disclosing what happened next but it wasn’t pretty. Total dummy spitter, is a fair description.

To be fair to Shand, we should again note that he has done some very impressive and sceptical reporting at Sunday on climate change which can be found on Youtube and was one of very first reports in the Australian mainstream media that was clearly questioning blind faith in global warming. Good for him. That shows a certain courage in our book.

It is sometimes surprising to discover that not every journalist is necessarily a leftist. But that pleasing fact doesn’t necessarily mean he’s not a fool. And he is clearly rather foolish as his half-assed vigorous defence of McCulloch made evident. Willing to denounce the work of others as inaccurate but stubbornly refusing to say how. Not one quote or conclusion was questioned. It was just a dummy spit by someone who obviously thought he could throw his weight around with good effect. Sad really.

But it doesn’t take much courage to be a bully. And those familiar with Shand can reveal to VEXNEWS there is a darker side to Shand, that he is capable of great rudeness and arrogance, talks over those he’ s unhappy with and has a massive chip on his shoulder grossly out of proportion to his talent. Harsh but from our limited interaction it sounds about right.


It’s hard to be certain about the suit behind or in front of the camera - although we think he’s no longer an on-air Nine reporter - but much like his friend Lachlan McCulloch, Shand has written a book.

Given that Shand would not meaningfully respond to his false claims about the article, we thought it worthwhile to find out what we could about a journalist who publicly attacks another journalist’s work yet won’t substantiate the attacks with anything specific, just provides abuse.

We popped in to read Shand’s tome in the splendid confines of the State Library last night. It didn’t take long to pick up a few gems that really should be shared with the wider community not willing to buy the book from the Chopper Read section of their nearest neighbourhood NewsXpress.

The book - the subject of defamation proceedings that resulted in a financial settlement - drew together probably the best-known of Shand’s work, his reporting on organised crime.

After finding his life at a professional and personal crossroads, he’d bravely tried his hand at reporting on Melbourne’s gangland. A gutsy and - in perhaps the highest praise we can offer - an entrepreneurial undertaking for someone who didn’t know much about it.

But as we’ll see, the moth grew far too close to the flickering flame.

We have read Shand’s book in detail. On the basis of its contents and his own admissions, it is clear Adam Shand grew far too close in his association with convicted murderer and gangster Carl Williams. He says on page 27 that he had quite early begun to question his own objectivity on the story. He reveals that he flattered Carl Williams, saying the Police were unfairly trying to discredit him (page 37) and trying to curry favour by telling him:

“WIth such publicity coups to influence potential jurors, the DPP has a better-than-ever chance of securing a conviction. And the odds are shortening every day as police feed more disinformation to sympathetic media. All they can charge you with is making some ill-advised comments on the telephone after you’d had a dozen beers. If that’s a crime, then I will be giving myself up tomorrow, along with every other drunk in Melbourne.” (page 38)

Oh dear. He was saying Carl Williams was just misunderstood. He then explains that he offered to assist Carl Williams manage the PR predicament that usually comes from making illegal drugs and killing people. You’d like to think that the journalist was just trying to butter him up to use him for a story. But by Shand’s own admission, it grew into much more than that.

From the start, Shand felt like he was being “welcomed into a conspiracy” (page 41) and that “Carl and Roberta (Williams) began a long, tortuous dialogue that would take me deep into the ganglands, much deeper in reality, than I wanted to go. Nearly four years later, I would still be living the drama day and night.”

It is clear to us that Shand crossed the line in his dealings with Carl Williams, even seeking his “patronage” and “a partnership”.

“To feel completely safe, I needed Carl’s patronage. I needed him to understand that I meant him no harm, that speaking to a reporter might actually help him in his various legal manoeuvres.” (page 249)

The next part is clearly very disturbing, where he seems to be offering to assist in the derailing of a criminal trial of Williams by arranging some bad publicity that could have the effect of assisting WIlliams arguing that he couldn’t get a fair trial.

“You are trying to get off your drugs trial on the basis of pre-trial publicity, that the media won’t leave you alone. Correct?” He nodded. “So it occurs to me that you and I are in something of a partnership, as unusual as it might seem. Everytime I write something nasty about you, it actually helps you. And the worse the publicity, the better for you.”


Shand thought “Rightly or wrongly, I began to see Carl as a man caught up in circumstances.” (page 243)

He empathised with Williams making mistakes in a climate of violence after having a gun aimed at him while reporting in Africa that had caused him to go off the rails. (Page 246)

The empathy grew into a very close association, perhaps the closest ever relationship in Australia between a working journalist and a crime boss:

“Though we began speaking by telephone most evenings, and sharing more and more of the personal details of our lives, Carl and I still observed an unspoken protocol…”

The relationship was enough to worry then Assistant Commissioner of Victoria Police Simon Overland who warned Shand to be careful:

“Be careful, Overland warned me, not for the first time. ‘You may say you are merely an observer, but that’s that theory - even in the act of observation, one may change the nature of the thing one is observing.’”

Sound advice.

Sounds like it wasn’t really heeded. Adam Shand reveals that he was speaking with “Carl almost every night through this period.” (page 296) Even Williams thought he was pushing the envelope, protesting in jest “I know - you just want me to do your work for you again, don’t ya buddy?…Yeah, good as gold, I’ll get back to you.”

They’d formed quite the coalition. More than just a coalition of convenience, it was much more: a real friendship. He admits - at least once - to eating and drinking on Carl’s tab (page 294) and was a regular guest of his in the foyer bar of the Marriott hotel. Like Al Capone in the Lexington, Carl Williams had moved into a plush hotel. Adam Shand was there to pick up the crumbs from the mobster’s feasting table. What’s more, he liked it.

“As bad as he was, I was getting to like him, I had put on a mask in order to get close to him and Robert so they would tell me their stories, but I couldn’t be sure I was still wearing it.” (page 267)

The seemingly lonely gangster Carl Williams then invited his mate the journalist over for a sleep-over. As mates, because that’s clearly what they had become. Astoundingly enough, Shand had to check with his editor before deciding that might not be the most brilliant idea.


It’s impossible to recount the extent of the association, it even extended to Shand ushering in Roberta Williams and other gangland figures into Channel Nine studios so they could participate in the filming of the Price is Right. Shand even accompanied them.(page 321) He attempted to escape a thrashing for showing up at a mob funeral uninvited by dropping Carl Williams’ name, insisting they were friends. (Page 329)


Shand concedes he had a problem, scandalously, he had chosen sides in a war between organised crime gangs:

“If my objectivity in this story had been in doubt before, entertaining the idea of a sleepover at Carl Williams’ house settled the issue. To have any kind of relationship with the players in this story required a person to choose sides and I had done so, quite against my better judgement.” (page 267-268)

Prior he’d insisted he was on the Police side but his views on this had changed:

“Now with allegations of shadowy police involvement in the murders and talk of historic links between the coppers and the Carlton Crew, it was getting harder to pick black from white.”


This contemptible drivel barely deserves rebuttal save to say to most people there can be no ambiguity on this point. Drugs dealers are no good. If any journalist reporting on crime begins to think otherwise, they are clearly in need for a “time-out” or a fast-track to retirement. To equate the Police with organised crime is outrageous, and is a proposition unsupported with any evidence in Shand’s book. That’s bad enough, but to actually take the crooks’ side is a rather chilling leap into immorality that we suspect Shand now deeply regrets.

He certainly has plenty to regret in our view. The magnitude of this next admission is self-evident.

On page 361 he explains that Williams had asked him lots of questions about Mario Condello, a gangster who was subsequently murdered by Carl Williams:


“All that week (during Williams’ trial) flashes of past conversations with Carl came back to me. He had asked me what I knew about Condello, where he went and with whom, the places I had met him and when I would meet him again. He had asked my personal opinion of Condello: did he have dash, or was he afraid? Even at the time, I had been concerned that these were not casual inquiries.”

Perhaps fessing it up in book form made him feel better. Reading it makes us feel worse, feeling much worse about the integrity of journalism we get. How could have permitted this situation to develop? Providing intelligence to a gangster intent on murder? That’s a lot more than crossing the line, that’s one of the most outrageous things we’ve ever heard about any journalist. And we’ve heard a lot.

Shand has - or at least had - a good name as an impartial journalist but his musings yesterday and these shocking admissions do make us wonder.

There’s a lot more unpleasantness in the book, but on this site of freedom, all roads lead back to politics. So let’s see what Shand thinks about modern politics.

Like every good journalist dreaming of an easy life of copy that writes itself, Shand makes it clear that he wants an ICAC style anti-corruption commission to bug the phones of politicians and other notables and put the recordings on their official website.

Clearly a good idea for journalists, not so good for those picking up the bill for these monster agencies and certainly not good for the targets. Invariably these bodies leave organised crime alone and end up destroying good careers for no good reason. There are so many examples, the most notable being former Liberal Premier Nick Greiner, deemed to be “corrupt” by ICAC but found not to be in a court. Meanwhile he’d had to resign.

No doubt this is the sort of thing that Adam Shand and his mate Lachlan McCulloch at the Ombudsman’s office discuss. Nothing wrong with them having a view, perhaps they should run for public office and mount the argument.

Shand has strong views about the Victorian ALP being involved in an elaborate and of course completely unexplained conspiracy with organised crime, his views are stronger perhaps than we’ve read anywhere, except on the white nationalist infiltrated Sunshine Ratepayers website.


Some pretty big claims and it would be great if Shand could substantiate them. But he doesn’t. We quickly searched the AEC records and found no suggestion that Mick Gatto had ever donated to the ALP, perhaps Shand could produce them as “electoral records” are public documents. The other claims seem so fanciful as to be beyond words but again we challenge Shand to bring forth the evidence, it’d make a great story, if any part was true. Especially the Fatima part. If she’s out there, and not one of Adam Shand’s “African girls” or a figment of his imagination, please call us on 0415 99 33 26, we think you might have an interesting story to tell. And we’d be delighted to tell it.

Back to loopy conspiracy theories dreamed up by Shand and crooks sitting around in cafes, the Liberals of course are in on it too. Shand reckons the previous Kennett Liberal government did nothing about organised crime except sacking 1000 Police. (page 36) A blatant absurdity given the Police resources invested in tackling organised crime under Kennett and since.

Although Shand notes there was one beacon light of freedom on the hill, an unlikely crime crusader. Yes it’s Lord Mayor Robert Doyle. Shand brings out some of his purple prose (an occasionally irritating feature of the book usually describing the author’s many moments of poignancy looking out to horizons, across lakes and such) to condemn those who robbed Doyle of his place in Victorian politics and suggesting that it bizarrely might have had something to do with his support for a Royal Commission into crime.

“Meanwhile, the Opposition leader, Robert Doyle, who had campaigned hard for a royal commission, had been hounded out of office, knifed by his colleagues in a vicious political execution before the election.”

Low poll numbers gave the Baillieu faction an excuse to move Doyle on from an election he couldn’t win is probably a more sensible characterisation. There’s no-one so certain a writer about politics as one who knows nothing at all.

And in this case, we can only question the judgment of a journalist who attacks our work without being willing to be specific and who resorts to trash-talking best left to the shady and dangerous underworld figures he was once so keen to flatter and exploit that it leaves us wondering who used whom.

Spider Pig said...

I see you've woken up Andy!

You are just a cesspit gutter snipe.

Adam Shand however is, and please take note: is a journalist with 20 years experience in Australian television and print media. As a cadet on The Australian newspaper in the 1980s, he covered the rise and fall of the entrepreneurs.

Joining the Nine Network in 1991, Adam reported for the Business Sunday program in Sydney and Melbourne. In 1994, he left Australia to become a freelance reporter in Africa for the Nine Network and international media organisations. He covered the rise to power of Nelson Mandela in South Africa, the aftermath of the genocide in Rwanda and the corruption of Zimbabwe’s democracy.

Returning home in 1997, Adam joined the Today Show as Melbourne correspondent for three years, before joining The Australian Financial Review newspaper as an investigative reporter in Melbourne and Sydney. He rejoined the Packer empire last year and currently works on The Bulletin magazine and the Nine Network’s Sunday and Business Sunday programs.

He has spent the past nine months hanging out in cafes and bars researching the Melbourne ganglands murders in a joint investigation for The Bulletin and Sunday.

Cait Catt said...

Spider Pig aint very credible. The Bulletin magazine is no longer published. Old man Frank liked it, but not young James, who didn't want a loss making publication in his stable.

Anonymous said...

There is a technical term for what Landeryou is doing when he attacks Adam Shand: grasping at straws.

Anonymous said...

Just LOVING the Landeryou/Shand stoush! How thick is Buddha Boy? Does he know what a dream target for tabloid TV he is?

Dig the scene: a podgy shonk, son of a dodgy MP, someone who forges his brother in law's signature on company documents, someone who ran off overseas to escape the law and left his poor wife behind to be bankrupted. He is bankrupt too and unemployed, but lives in a luxury CBD apartment and seems free to spend his days spreading lies and bile on the internet without any financial worries.

ACA tracks him down, sticks their foot in his door and starts asking him the hard questions.

Must-see TV will ensue!

Go Adam! Go Adam! Go Adam! Go Adam!

Deep fat fryer said...

Andy would plead insanity if he ever went before a court. Remember, he has various health problems, such as cranial gigantism, antisocial personality disorder (abbreviated APD or ASPD), delusions, and narcissism.

400 Mogadons said...

Landeryou is becoming the Matty Johns of literature.

He stirs other people's porridge - in this case, their autobiographies.

The Adam Shand marathon was like taking 400 mogadon sleeping tablets. It went on, and on, and on, with me nodding off from time to time. So many non-sequiturs, rambles, rants...

Stacked Up said...

Andy wrote the Shand rant - and a few others - just after he bought some cheap lube that made his anus burn.

Claptrap said...

Adam Shand has shown great sangfroid by ignoring the taunts of stalker Landeryou.

After all, who would knowing get involved in dialogue with a notorious fraud.

Stalking someone by using what they have written about themselves seems a very weird and unproductive thing to do.

Blunderbelly Landeryou is a waste of time and space.

Joseph Pulitzer said...

Absurd, ludicrous, deluded - mad!

Landeryou thinks he is a journalist. But he is not an AJA member and doesn't have a AJA Press card. He thinks that writing a poisonous blog makes him a journo. It confers no such thing.

Landeryou proclaims he is Editor -in-Chief of Vexnews. What laughable nonsense. He is the Grand Poobah of waffle and guff.

The gutless wonder even had the nerve to get the cadaverous dead woman Rita Randles to deliver a copy of his Adam Shand stalk-blog to the long suffering visitors to this site.

For a Journalist and Editor -in-Chief to constantly use fake commenters is, of course, remarkably strange.

Polonius said...


Brevity is the soul of wit.

Walter Cronkite said...

Joe Pulitzer has persuaded me and Dan Rather to offer some basics of good journalism to Andrew Landeryou, who is said to be a layabout and untalented scribbler.

Andrew, I don't intend to spend a lot of time instructing you in the basics. Tafes and Community organisations offer basic courses in writing.

Once you have grasped the basics, you must learn to summarise sometimes complex issues briefly. Lengthy articles that are disjointed, contain too many 'plots', and are repetitive, will confuse your readers and, worse still, bore them to tears.

Dan Rather said...

I'm following up on Walter's advice. Joe Pulitzer sent me an example of Landeryou's writing. It concerned an individual named Adam Shand.

I can see why Joe was concerned about this article. I have never seen such a shoddy report compiled by a person claiming to be a journalist and editor in chief.

The most unprofessional thing about the article was the taunting emails Landeryou sent to his quarry.

My advice to Mr Landeryou, after deep thought, is that he obtains a cleaning job at The Age. If he hangs around long enough, he will learn a lot about real journalists and what they actually do.

Fatt Catt said...

A man claiming to be Slanderyou applied for a job here at the Daily Planet. He's the wrong sex to work at our establishment in a professional capacity, but he wanted to work as a cleaner. We gave him a job but sacked him after a few days. He was meant to make our dunnies spotless, for the Toorak gentlemen who are clients of our ladies insist they be pristine. The dunnies Slanderyou cleaned were still dirty, for he didn't scrub them enough. I told Adam Shand this but he would not print it. He told me I was making it up and I should be a Landeryou alternate personality on Slanderyou. He's confusing me with my sister Cait.

AAP accountant said...

I wonder if Landeryou and Vexnews are paying for all the photos 'borrowed' from the likes of AAP and other news organisations.

So let's get this stright! Andrew is a journalist and editor in chief who plagiarises articles and 'borrows' photos from real news organisations which he uses on Poxnews to libel, defame and belittle ordinary Australians.

He enjoys stalking his victims by going through their rubbish, publishing their private addresses, photographing their homes, etc.

His life as a lawbreaker continues unabated!

Obvious said...

Landeryou demands that Shand explains "how - specifically - the article is in any respect inaccurate".

It's not so much inaccurate as tedious, boring and irrelevant.

Going through someone's book to get the dirt on them, in their own words, is stalking pure and simple.

Researchers do backgrounds.

Real journos get interviews that tell us something N E W !

Square Eyes said...

10:41 PM is right. Landeryou would be a great subject for an A Current Affair investigation, a nasty spolit fat kid who thinks he is above the law just cos his daddy was an MP.

Dung Beetle said...

Landeryou isn't even journalists' dunny paper.

Anonymous said...

Landeryou he has picked a fight with Adam Shand he can only lose because he has had a vendetta against Channel 9 ever since they rejected his proposal for a reality show based on his eating habits called "Ten Kilos Fatter in Ten Minutes".

SUE said...

The Matty Johns story continues to unravel. "Clare", according to ABC Lateline, says she has never met the people who said she boasted about the incident afterwards.

Clare, Adam Shand, Lachlan McCulloch and hundreds of others libelled on Vexnews need a class action law firm to sue the pants off the despicable serial libeller Landerou.

Bubba at Barwon Gaol said...

We hope that Landeryou's endorsement of gangbangs extends to himself. We don't want any Four Corners followups or other media coverage.

When he has signed the forms, he will be mercilessly bonked.

Anonymous said...

Does Landy have a clue just how stupid he looks?

Newnham said...

Private and ConfidentialMr Premier,

Landeryou has been a dumb fool! He bankrupted Melbourne University Students Union; himself; his wife; and his father. That's all on the public record.

There have been, I'm afraid, other issues like the fraud at IQ Corporation, and forged signatures on lots of other company documents. He has been a very active criminal.

Despite all this, Premier, Landeryou is a faithful ALP man who does not deserve the unwelcome attentions of the Barwon Gaol Hot Rodders.

I urge you to extend the Landeryou Protection Program for another three years.

Newnham also said said...

PS I have given Landeryou's fellow online spiv, former business partner and landlord Ed Dale another $50,000 in cash to pay for his upkeep. This money will be written up as "campaign expenses" and claimed back from public funding.

Anonymous said...

Not to mention 'Progressive Business' - the ALP fundraising organisation throwing a bit of coin his way by advertising on his site.

Wonder how much he's raking in through that.

Adam Shand said...

I am researching a report on Andrew Landeryou. If readers of this blog (or any others) have anything of interest to share please call me on 0417 513 135 or email ashand@nine.com.au

he's a fake fat journalist criminal said...

Not Handy Andy's financial involvement in the Melbourne Aquarium should be carefully considered too by Adam Shand.

Peter O'Brien has told too many people for the truth not to come out.

The missing money that went overseas from the 2006 sale must be exposed.

Anonymous said...

Landeryou has been deleting any comments naming the suleman's solicitor all day, why is this? it has widely been reported in the press who it is. He claims he is doing it for legal reasons ie doesnt want to be sued, what a joke, so much for his rubbish site being a blog of freedom

AAP accountant said...

I wonder if Landeryou and Vexnews are paying for all the photos 'borrowed' from the likes of AAP and other news organisations.

So let's get this stright! Andrew is a journalist and editor in chief who plagiarises articles and 'borrows' photos from real news organisations which he uses on Poxnews to libel, defame and belittle ordinary Australians.

He enjoys stalking his victims by going through their rubbish, publishing their private addresses, photographing their homes, etc.

His life as a lawbreaker continues unabated!

Anonymous said...

He's too busy mopping up his involuntary bowel movements after reading Flickr.

Anonymous said...

http://www.dolabuy.com/celine-bags.htm celine handbags 2012 peacefully frostbite cheap louis vuitton shoes free shipping club replica louis vuitton handbags usa black sunglasses for men hide bang fake cheap louis vuitton purses drawback consolidate celine handbags

oakleyses said...

oakley sunglasses, louis vuitton outlet, gucci outlet, michael kors outlet, louis vuitton outlet stores, burberry outlet, coach factory outlet, air max, oakley sunglasses cheap, michael kors outlet, tiffany and co, michael kors outlet, coach outlet, polo ralph lauren outlet, louis vuitton outlet, ray ban sunglasses, louboutin, prada handbags, true religion jeans, polo ralph lauren outlet, christian louboutin shoes, ray ban sunglasses, nike free, air max, longchamp outlet, louis vuitton handbags, michael kors outlet, michael kors outlet, prada outlet, michael kors outlet, louboutin, longchamp handbags, burberry outlet, jordan shoes, kate spade outlet, coach outlet store online, coach purses, nike shoes, oakley sunglasses, louis vuitton, louboutin outlet, true religion jeans, chanel handbags, kate spade handbags, tory burch outlet, longchamp handbags, tiffany and co

oakleyses said...

converse pas cher, ralph lauren, true religion outlet, michael kors pas cher, nike air max, nike blazer, north face, nike free pas cher, nike trainers, hollister, sac louis vuitton, polo lacoste, mulberry, polo ralph lauren, abercrombie and fitch, louis vuitton, barbour, nike roshe run, air force, sac burberry, sac hermes, sac guess, north face, air jordan, louis vuitton uk, nike tn, timberland, air max, ray ban sunglasses, hogan outlet, nike free, lululemon, louboutin, oakley pas cher, vans pas cher, air max, ray ban pas cher, sac louis vuitton, nike huarache, michael kors, vanessa bruno, nike roshe, true religion outlet, longchamp, hollister, michael kors, new balance pas cher, sac longchamp, air max pas cher

oakleyses said...

ghd, canada goose, beats by dre, uggs outlet, herve leger, mac cosmetics, ferragamo shoes, ugg pas cher, longchamp, canada goose outlet, bottega veneta, insanity workout, ugg, celine handbags, mcm handbags, valentino shoes, wedding dresses, canada goose jackets, reebok outlet, soccer jerseys, marc jacobs, mont blanc, ugg boots, hollister, uggs outlet, canada goose, instyler, canada goose, nfl jerseys, jimmy choo outlet, new balance shoes, p90x, north face jackets, north face outlet, chi flat iron, abercrombie and fitch, birkin bag, ugg boots, babyliss pro, nike roshe run, ugg boots, soccer shoes, rolex watches, lululemon outlet, asics running shoes, giuseppe zanotti, ugg australia, vans shoes

oakleyses said...

canada goose, thomas sabo, canada goose uk, hollister clothing store, pandora charms, parajumpers, juicy couture outlet, canada goose, pandora charms, juicy couture outlet, iphone 6 cases, hollister, toms shoes, moncler, timberland boots, rolex watches, moncler, karen millen, moncler, hollister, vans, louis vuitton, moncler, coach outlet store online, wedding dresses, supra shoes, moncler, converse, links of london, ugg, moncler, montre homme, gucci, converse shoes, swarovski crystal, air max, oakley, air max, ralph lauren, louboutin, swarovski, ugg, moncler outlet, ray ban, lancel, pandora jewelry, baseball bats