An email was long on threats and short on facts
Ashley Geelan has now tried a new line with Geelan Lies: dress up a threatening email as if it came with the weight of Victoria Police and Corrections behind it.
The message opens with the claim that Geelan Lies is “under investigation”, supposedly at the request of his Corrections Officer, by Victoria Police. It then says Victoria Police will provide the site’s name to that Corrections Officer, that the email has been blind-copied to both the officer and Victoria Police, and that the website itself is “also under investigation”.
That sounds dramatic. It is meant to sound dramatic. But a dramatic paragraph is not evidence.
What the email does not provide is more important than what it says. No event number. No police station. No named police contact. No Corrections reference. No formal direction. No notice. No court order. No document telling Geelan Lies that publication is prohibited. No explanation of what law is supposedly being breached. Just a pile of legal-sounding claims, wrapped around a demand that the website stop publishing about him.
The “criminal offence” claim is doing a lot of work
Geelan says his Corrections Officer told him that “interfering with, or publishing about, someone on a Corrections Order could be considered a criminal offence.” That is a very convenient sentence, because it tries to turn ordinary scrutiny into something that sounds arrestable.
But the email gives readers no basis for the leap. Publishing fact checks about public statements is not the same thing as interfering with a Corrections Order. Criticising claims, asking for evidence, and preserving a record of what someone has said are not magically transformed into crimes because the subject of the reporting is unhappy about it.
If Geelan has a real legal basis for saying Geelan Lies cannot publish about him, he can produce it. If police have issued a warning, produce the warning. If a court has made an order, produce the order. If Corrections has approved a formal notice, produce the notice. Instead, the email asks everyone to accept his version of invisible authority.
Trying to manufacture a law-enforcement narrative
The email reads less like a genuine legal update and more like an attempt to manufacture a law-enforcement narrative around Geelan Lies: police are involved, Corrections is involved, your name will be supplied, your devices may be seized, you may be arrested, every article may be a separate criminal offence, and an intervention order may follow.
That is not a careful statement of fact. It is a pressure campaign.
The most revealing part is the confidence. Geelan does not simply say he has made a complaint or that someone has told him to avoid contact. He writes as if the outcome is already known: publication “will be considered” a breach, a court appearance is “likely”, a five-year PSIO application “will” be made, and continued publication “could lead” to arrest, seizure of devices and charges in court.
Those are serious claims. Serious claims require evidence. Without it, the email is just Geelan trying to strongarm a website by borrowing the language of police, Corrections and courts.
“Any publication of this correspondence is a criminal offence”
One of the more audacious lines in the email is the claim that any publication of the correspondence is itself a criminal offence. Again, no statute. No order. No notice. No quoted legal power. Just a sentence dropped into an email as if typing it makes it true.
That matters because the email is not merely private correspondence. It is being used as a threat. It tries to stop publication by claiming criminal consequences, then tries to stop scrutiny of the threat by claiming that publishing the threat would also be criminal. That is a neat little loop, but it still needs a legal basis.
Geelan Lies is not going to treat unsupported threats as facts just because Ashley Geelan writes them in a stern voice.
A document claim does not fix the email
Geelan also refers to an attached image and says it can be requested from Heidelberg Magistrates’ Court under FOI. That may be his attempt to give the email some documentary weight. It still does not prove that Geelan Lies is under investigation, that publication is criminal, that Victoria Police is acting as described, or that a Corrections Officer has the view he attributes to her.
A court document about Geelan’s own Corrections Order, if genuine, is not the same thing as a legal prohibition on other people publishing fact checks about him. He cannot bridge that gap by assertion.
The simple question
The simple question is this: what exactly is Geelan asking readers to believe?
That Victoria Police are investigating a website because it publishes fact checks about him? That a Corrections Officer approved an email warning of arrests, device seizures and criminal charges? That every article about him could be a separate offence? That he can declare publication of his threat email criminal by saying so?
If any of that is real, evidence should be easy. A reference number. A formal notice. A named public contact. A court order. Something.
Instead, the email gives us Ashley Geelan’s familiar routine: big claims, legal theatre, no receipts, and a demand that everyone else be frightened into silence.
Geelan Lies will keep treating unsupported claims as unsupported claims. If Geelan wants to correct the record, he can provide verifiable documents. Until then, this looks like exactly what it is: an attempt to strongarm geelanlies.com with an email that lacks facts and tries to create a false impression of law-enforcement backing.
Source
- Email from Ashley Geelan to Geelan Lies claiming Victoria Police, Corrections and possible criminal consequences for continued publication; supplied to Geelan Lies for review.