Wellington, New Zealand-A decade after the influencer of the beautiful Gibson well-being admitted that she had no cancer of the terminal brain, which, according to her, was healed by the healthy lifestyle that Made its famous, its history has inspired a new Netflix series – and a new outrage in Australia in Australia on the lack of resolution of the case.
The authorities said this week that they are still pursuing the Instagram star disgrace for unpaid fines, fueling the current anger among the Australians on one of the country’s most cheeky online scams – an episode that attracted the ‘Watch out for the destructive damage to allegations of false health on social networks.
Apple cider vinegarNetflix’s dramatic account of Gibson’s story published this month, does not tell what happened after it was revealed in 2015 that it was not sick. In real life, she has never faced criminal charges.
But in 2017, the Federal Court of Australia inflicted a fine on its 410,000 Australian dollars ($ 261,000), which it had collected for charitable works and did not donate. The consumer watchdog in the state of Victoria is still trying to recover the funds, a spokesperson told the Associated Press.
What was beautiful Gibson was loaded with?
The health recipe application from Gibson, The Whole Pantry, had 200,000 downloads in a month from the Apple Store in 2013. She claimed the product of the application and her kitchen book – published by a PEGGUINE – would be given to charities and family of a child with cancer.
Only 2% of the total was given and Gibson turned out to have violated consumer law. A court ordered him to produce the remaining funds and prevented him from making health complaints.
In a letter to the court, Gibson said she was indebted, had no work and could not pay the costs.
“Victoria consumption continued to undertake actions to enforce the debt due by Annabelle Natalie Gibson (Belle Gibson) under the order of the court,” said a statement from the agency which was provided on Wednesday.
The press release did not say if one of the money had been recovered. The authorities have made a descent twice at Gibson’s house in attempts to seize assets, but they did not publicly disclose a result.
What does she say now?
The AP tried to reach Gibson to comment but did not receive an answer. It has not spoken publicly for years and has not been involved or paid by the creators of the Netflix Show.
Jacinta Allan, the first first of Victoria, said this month that she was “disappointed” that the case was not resolved. But the authorities “will not let go,” Allan told journalists.
Journalist Richard Guilliatt, who in 2015 was the first to point out that Gibson was lying, said that the lack of legal consequences still feeds “vitriol” towards the ancient influencer.
“The thing remains a bit like an open injury,” he said. “What she suffered is simply an incredible public humiliation. There is a part of me who thinks that people will just have to let him go at some point. »»
Has the case invited to change?
Gibson’s books publisher paid a fine of $ 30,000 ($ 19,000 in the United States) in the civil affair for not having checked his complaints.
Although Gibson did not face more accusations, his case had other repercussions. The Australian code governing therapeutic health claims has been considerably revised in 2022 and violations can now be punished with millions of fines – modifies certain analysts who partially attribute to Gibson’s driving.
The testimonies paid for these goods are now prohibited, and anyone claiming health expertise cannot approve them.
“It would have applied to the therapeutic claims that Belle has made,” said Suzy Madar, a Sydney -based partner at the King & Wood Mallesons law firm.
How did the Australians responded to the series?
Apple cider vinegar praised his asymmetry of the culture of online well -being – and criticism of the Australians involved in the real events he tells. The series is presented as a “true story, based on a lie”, and Gibson is the only real person that the show claims to represent.
But the man of Queensland, Col Ainscough, whose woman and girl – also an influencer of well -being – both died of cancer decided production in a statement this month, because his characters included a Family with a different name whose story seemed parallel to its own.
The show was “insensitive and clearly focused on profit,” said Ainscough.
“Behind the television stories, behind dramatization, are real people who have had their lives devastated by the actions of this individual,” Allan, the Prime Minister of the State, told journalists.
But the case still holds fascination as one of Australian’s most “bizarre and flagrant” online scams, said journalist Guilliatt.
“I like to think that it was really a awakening for many people,” he said. “I hope it had an impact in terms of people’s credulity to accept advice on very serious health problems online.”
