Twenty-five years of Federal Court judgments, Senate Hansard, ASIC media releases, Deloitte liquidator reports, and a 10-domain defamation campaign — examined in full.
| Every factual claim in this article is drawn from official court judgments, ASIC media releases, Senate Hansard, or registered corporate records — not allegations |
There is a technique Jamie Neville McIntyre has refined over more than two decades of operating in Australian financial markets: when confronted with evidence of wrongdoing, reframe yourself as the victim. Attack the regulator. Attack the journalist. Attack the former partner. Claim conspiracy. Launch a media campaign. Repeat. The technique has worked — partially, intermittently — because McIntyre controls his own media infrastructure and has spent years cultivating an audience pre-primed to distrust regulatory and legal authority. What it has never been able to do is erase the public record. And the public record, examined in full, tells a story that no spin can alter.
This article contains no allegations. Every material fact stated below is drawn from an official judgment of the Federal Court of Australia, an ASIC media release, the Senate Hansard, a Deloitte liquidator report, or a registered corporate registry. McIntyre is free to dispute any of it. To do so, he would have to contradict the Federal Court of Australia, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, two sitting Senators, and his own signed agreements.
SECTION I Who Jamie Neville McIntyre Actually Is
McIntyre presents himself as a self-made millionaire, financial educator, media founder, and champion of the ordinary Australian investor. He claims to have educated over 550,000 people. He has photographed himself alongside Arnold Schwarzenegger and Richard Branson. He founded the Australian National Review. He has written books. He has run for federal parliament. The biography is polished and extensive.
What is absent from that biography — entirely, across every platform he controls — is the following:
| VERIFIED PUBLIC RECORD |
| On 17 October 2016, the Federal Court of Australia declared that five land banking investment schemes operated by Jamie McIntyre and his brother Dennis McIntyre were UNREGISTERED MANAGED INVESTMENT SCHEMES — meaning they were operated unlawfully from the outset.
▶ Source: ASIC Media Release 16-357MR | ASIC v McIntyre [2016] FCA 1276, Justice Bromwich |
| The Court ordered that Jamie McIntyre and Dennis McIntyre be DISQUALIFIED FROM MANAGING CORPORATIONS and PROHIBITED FROM PROVIDING FINANCIAL SERVICES FOR 10 YEARS. Both brothers agreed to these orders.
▶ Source: ASIC v McIntyre [2016] FCA 1276 |
| Deloitte were appointed as court-appointed joint liquidators. Their investigation found approximately 152 investors had collectively lost around AUD $7 million across the five schemes. The liquidators were UNABLE TO LOCATE THE MISSING FUNDS.
▶ Source: ASIC Media Releases 15-289MR, 16-077MR, 16-357MR | Deloitte Liquidator Reports |
| In his published judgment, Justice Bromwich stated the McIntyre brothers are “at the very least, completely financially incompetent” and — unless they acquire new skills — “will be a menace to the investing public.” The judgment noted there was “no evidence to suggest that such successful reform is likely.”
▶ Source: ASIC v McIntyre [2016] FCA 1276, Justice Bromwich — Reasons for Judgment |
| The five collapsed schemes: Botanica, Secret Valley Estate, Oak Valley Lakes Estate & Resort, Bendigo Vineyard Estate & Resort, and Melbourne Grove Estate — promoted to investors through seminars and 21st Century Group marketing material.
▶ Source: ASIC Media Release 15-214MR |
McIntyre agreed to the banning orders. He did not contest the findings on the substance. He did not appear before the Federal Court to defend himself at the final hearing. The Court made its orders. They are permanent, published, and publicly accessible on the Federal Court of Australia’s judgment database.
| “In my seven years in the Senate, you would have to be the most evasive witness I have had to deal with — and that’s saying something.”
Senator Nick Xenophon — Senate Economics References Committee, 30 September 2015, Hansard |
At a Senate hearing on 30 September 2015, Senator Sam Dastyari called McIntyre a “conman” on the public record. Senator Nick Xenophon, after seven years of Senate committee hearings, stated he was the most evasive witness he had encountered in that entire period. Both statements are in the Senate Hansard — the official, permanent record of parliamentary proceedings in Australia.
SECTION II The Pattern: Twenty-Five Years of the Same Playbook
What makes the Federal Court ban significant is not that it happened — it is that it was the culmination of a pattern visible, documented, and officially flagged for over a decade before that judgment. Understanding the timeline is essential to understanding what is happening now.
| 2001–07 | First ASIC Investigation
ASIC commences proceedings over early financial services operations. Discontinued in 2007 after McIntyre repays investors. No finding of innocence — a commercial resolution. |
| 2012 | 21st Century Academy Liquidated
Placed into liquidation owing AUD $5.41 million to 13 creditors. None recover their money in full. |
| Aug 2015 | ASIC Federal Court Action
ASIC files over five land banking schemes. Court accepts undertakings McIntyre will not promote schemes, receive funds, or remove assets from Australia. Deloitte appointed provisional liquidators. |
| Sept 2015 | Senate Hearing
Senator Dastyari: “conman.” Senator Xenophon: “most evasive witness” in seven years. Both on Senate Hansard — the permanent parliamentary record. |
| Oct 2016 | Federal Court Banning Orders — 10 Years
Justice Bromwich delivers judgment. Five schemes declared unlawful. Both McIntyres banned from managing corporations and providing financial services for 10 years. $7M in investor funds remain unlocated. |
| 2016–23 | Reinvention: Indonesia
Despite the active banning order — which the Federal Court explicitly noted extends to online activity holding McIntyre out as carrying on a financial services business — McIntyre relocates offshore and re-enters property development and investment promotion in Indonesia. |
| 2023–25 | Marina Bay City, Lombok
McIntyre’s company PT Bali Real Estate Investments (Lux Projects Bali) develops Stage 1 of Marina Bay City. Kinnara Capital acts as marketing partner and visionary creator of the Marina Bay City plans. |
| Sept 2025 | CSPA Executed — Exit Agreement
Contract for Sale and Purchase Agreement signed 24 September 2025 governing Kinnara’s exit. Conditions Precedent in the CSPA remain unsatisfied. Kinnara is owed substantial sums under the agreement. |
| Dec 2025–Mar 2026 | 57-URL Defamation Campaign
Rather than meeting CSPA obligations, McIntyre launches a coordinated defamation campaign across 10 domains — fabricated ‘Business Review’ outlets posing as independent media across Asia, Europe, and Australia — publishing false allegations against Kinnara’s principals. |
| 27 Mar 2026 | Concerns Notice Served
Formal Concerns Notice under the Defamation Act 2005 (Qld) served. Within days, new defamatory articles are published after service of the Notice — a legally significant act strengthening the case for aggravated damages. |
SECTION III The Media Empire That Is Not What It Claims to Be
Central to understanding McIntyre’s current defamation campaign is understanding the infrastructure he built to conduct it. The Australian National Review — ANR — is presented as an independent, anti-establishment news platform. It has no masthead journalist. It has no editorial board. It is not registered with any press regulator. It is a personal publishing operation controlled by a man under a Federal Court banning order.
Its audience is not accidental. ANR’s content — conspiracy-adjacent political commentary, distrust of regulators, anti-establishment framing — is specifically designed to cultivate readers who will be sceptical of ASIC warnings, Federal Court judgments, and official regulatory actions. That audience is then exposed, within the same platform, to property investment promotions. The distrust of authority that ANR builds is the precondition for the investment products ANR promotes.
| ⚠ STRUCTURAL WARNING FOR INVESTORS
The network now publishing false allegations against Kinnara’s principals — businessreviewasia.news, businessrevieweurope.news, businessreviewaustralia.com.au, businessaustralia.news, balinews.live, balieyewitnessnews.com, londontimes.live, thekinarrascam.com — are fabricated media outlets with no editorial staff, no press registration, and no journalistic accountability.
They exist solely to manufacture the appearance of independent media consensus against parties who contest McIntyre’s financial claims. This is not journalism. It is a coordinated inauthentic behaviour campaign using fake media as a weapon — identical to the technique McIntyre used to discredit ASIC, Fairfax Media, and Senate committee findings against him in 2015–2016. |
SECTION IV What the Verified Evidence Shows About the Current Dispute
McIntyre’s campaign makes numerous allegations against Kinnara’s CEO and principals — fraud, theft, diversion of funds, criminal conduct. Each claim is directly contradicted by verified primary evidence:
| VERIFIED PUBLIC RECORD |
| Claim: Adrian Campbell has a criminal history.
ACIC Criminal History Check (Reference VC0453119) confirms NO DISCLOSABLE COURT OUTCOMES for Adrian James Campbell. This is the official national criminal record check. ▶ Source: Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission — Reference VC0453119 |
| Claim: Kinnara is connected to GIM Trading and related fraud.
ASIC records confirm NO CONNECTION between Adrian James Campbell, Kinnara Limited, or any Kinnara entity and GIM Trading or any unlicensed financial services entity. ▶ Source: ASIC Corporate Registry Records |
| Claim: Kinnara misappropriated or stole client funds.
An independent external audit conducted in March 2026 confirms that all payment obligations by Kinnara Capital to relevant parties have been MET IN FULL. ▶ Source: Independent External Audit Report, March 2026 |
| Claim: Kinnara fabricated its corporate structure and ownership.
The Ditjen AHU Indonesian corporate registry confirms PT Marina Bay Group’s 50% shareholding structure, consistent with Kinnara’s stated position. The registry is a public government database, not a party to this dispute. ▶ Source: Direktorat Jenderal Administrasi Hukum Umum (Ditjen AHU) — Indonesian Ministry of Law |
| The CSPA dated 24 September 2025 contains Conditions Precedent that remain unsatisfied. Kinnara’s exit was contingent on obligations McIntyre’s entities have not fulfilled. The defamation campaign is being conducted by a party in breach of its own contractual commitments.
▶ Source: Contract for Sale and Purchase Agreement, 24 September 2025 |
SECTION V The Question Justice Bromwich Already Answered
McIntyre’s public narrative positions him as a wronged developer — a man who trusted partners, had money taken from him, and is now exposing the truth. It is structurally identical to the narrative he ran in 2015 and 2016 — that ASIC was running a witch hunt, that Fairfax Media was biased, that he was the victim of forces that didn’t want ordinary Australians to achieve financial freedom.
In 2016, Justice Bromwich of the Federal Court evaluated that narrative against the evidence. His conclusion — published, permanent, and accessible on the Federal Court’s official judgment database — was unambiguous.
| “Unless they acquire new skills and the capacity for diligence and competence in the 10 years during which they are now disqualified… each of them will be a menace to the investing public. There is no evidence to suggest that such successful reform is likely.”
Justice Bromwich — ASIC v McIntyre [2016] FCA 1276 — Federal Court of Australia |
That judgment was delivered in October 2016. Between then and now, McIntyre has not published a correction to his investor biography. He has not disclosed the banning order on his media platforms. He has not disclosed the $7 million in unlocated investor funds on any platform he controls. He has, instead, rebuilt — in Indonesia, beyond the immediate reach of Australian regulators — and relaunched the same model: property investment, media infrastructure to cultivate believers, and aggressive attack campaigns against those who challenge his financial claims.
SECTION VI Active Legal Proceedings and the Defamation Notice
This is no longer a dispute conducted through media alone. As of the date of publication:
| VERIFIED PUBLIC RECORD |
| A formal Concerns Notice under the Defamation Act 2005 (Qld) was served on Jamie McIntyre on 27 March 2026, identifying specific false statements of fact and demanding retraction. Response deadline: on or around 24 April 2026.
▶ Source: Concerns Notice, Defamation Act 2005 (Qld), served 27 March 2026 |
| Active civil proceedings on foot at the Denpasar District Court, Indonesia — Reference 052/HLF/G/III/2026 — represented by HLF Jakarta (Hendarman Law Firm).
▶ Source: Denpasar District Court, Indonesia |
| Australian legal proceedings managed by Marino Law (Mark Steele and Nicholas Rossi), with ASIC misconduct reports lodged as part of the broader legal strategy.
▶ Source: Marino Law, Australia |
| New defamatory articles were published AFTER service of the Concerns Notice — a legally significant act removing any claim of ignorance and strengthening the case for aggravated damages.
▶ Source: Publication timestamps on defendant domains, post 27 March 2026 |
| A formal legal removal request has been submitted to Google identifying 57 URLs across 10 domains under Google’s defamation and false information policies, with supporting evidence of falsity attached.
▶ Source: Google Legal Removal Submission, March 2026 |
CONCLUSION The Record Speaks
Over twenty-five years, Jamie Neville McIntyre has operated with a consistent method: build a mythology of financial expertise and independence, cultivate an audience that distrusts regulatory authority, promote investment products to that audience, and — when the consequences arrive — reframe yourself as the victim of the system you’ve spent years teaching your audience to distrust.
What is different now is the evidence trail. The ACIC check. The independent audit. The ASIC records. The Ditjen AHU registry. The CSPA. The Concerns Notice. Active proceedings in two jurisdictions. Every pillar of the current defamation campaign is directly contradicted by a document that did not originate from the party being defamed — it originated from a government registry, an independent auditor, or a national criminal intelligence authority.
The Federal Court of Australia described McIntyre in 2016 as a potential menace to the investing public and found no evidence that reform was likely. The public record since that judgment — including the construction of a 10-domain defamation network, the targeting of a former commercial partner through fabricated media, and the continuation of property investment promotion activities — does not suggest the Court’s assessment was wrong.
- The record is public. The sources are cited. The documents are available. What happens next is a matter for courts, regulators, and the investors reading this — not for the spin.
Sources cited in this article:
ASIC v McIntyre [2016] FCA 1276 (Justice Bromwich) | ASIC Media Releases 15-214MR, 15-289MR, 16-077MR, 16-357MR | Senate Economics References Committee Hansard, 30 September 2015 | Deloitte Joint Liquidators’ Reports (2015–2016) | ACIC Criminal History Check ref. VC0453119 | Independent External Audit Report (March 2026) | Ditjen AHU Corporate Registry (Indonesian Ministry of Law) | CSPA dated 24 September 2025 | Concerns Notice under the Defamation Act 2005 (Qld) served 27 March 2026 | Denpasar District Court proceedings ref. 052/HLF/G/III/2026.
Investigative Report — All claims sourced to verified primary records
