Peter Foster snubs court, judge says he's making them look ridiculous Peter Foster pictured supposedly in Fiji in October. He has failed to appear in court again. FUGITIVE conman Peter Foster had "thumbed his nose" at the Federal Court by failing to appear and he needed to be found and brought to justice, a judge said today. Foster did not front the Federal Court today, as ordered, to show cause why his appeal against his October jail sentence for contempt should not be dismissed. However late today Justice Dowsett put a stay on the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission's dismissal application, reserving his judgment until early next year. Foster failed to appear in the court in September and on October 24, when he was sentenced to three years' jail, suspended after 18 months, for contempt. He had been earlier found guilty of defying a court-ordered ban on him working in the weight-loss industry and there is now a warrant for his arrest. "The only way we are going to be able to bring him to justice is if somebody finds him, " Justice Dowsett said today. If people just stop looking, we'll never find him. Provided he keeps his head down he will never end up in jail. Foster's appeal against his sentence was filed on November 5 by his solicitor, Terry Fisher of Fisher Dore Lawyers, and last month he was ordered to personally appear today. "This man is seriously in contempt," Justice Dowsett said today. He has really just thumbed his nose at the court. He says, 'If I hadn't been given such a long sentence I would have served it happily.' What sort of behaviour is that? Justice Dowsett is considering if Foster's appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution or an abuse of process. He said until Foster's sentence had been set aside or he served it the process of the court would not have been vindicated. "I think we all have to keep in mind most people who read about these proceedings will think them absurd and the court is being mocked by your client," Justice Dowsett today told Foster's senior counsel. That by itself indicates the importance of proceeding in a way that cannot be impugned. I am concerned that we not try so hard to be fair that we make ourselves look more ridiculous than we are likely to look anyway in view of this man's conduct. Dan O'Gorman SC, for Foster, said there had been no findings of contempt in relation to Foster's non-appearances in court in September and October before another judge. Mr O'Gorman said under the law Foster did not need to attend court for the appeal and could be represented by lawyers. David Kent, for the ACCC, said Foster had displayed no inclination whatsoever to take part in the appeal proceedings, "other than by remote control." He said correspondence from Foster showed he knew of his obligation to appear in court.