PDA

View Full Version : How police committed DOCUMENTATION FRAUD to bring false conviction



1victim
26-07-2012, 10:00 PM
This is documented proof of how police officers IAN PETER COLLIN and RICK (Richard) VEACOCK with assistance from their corrupt lawyer, CHRISTNE SCOTT, Fraudulently altered documents to bring a false conviction against their victim, Paul Currie.

Assisted, naturally, by the corrupt judges and appeal courts and two lawyers working against their client. ( RICHARD EARWAKER pronounced "Erica" and CHLOE WILLIAMS.)

The judges gave the police "complainant" name and occupation suppression, so he is referred to here as "Z".

This story has been touched on by Vince Siemer via his site, Kiwisfirst.com, Supreme Court Insights - 15 June 2012 - Fraud Unrecognised by Supreme Court.

Having been misrepresented in his affairs by "Z" Paul Currie notified "Z" in writing of his dissatisfaction.

A professional negotiator ( John Pippos of PJM & Associates Ltd. ) was employed to negotiate a settlement. "Z" conceded he was wrong and a settlement sum of $351,886.00 was agreed on.

"Z" requested the claim be put in writing.

On the 16th of OCTOBER 2006, Paul met with John Pippos in a cafe opposite "Z's" office in Customs Street, Auckland, to sign off on the claim. He initialed all 4 pages of the document, and dated and signed the final page.

Coincidently, "Z" happened to walk past the cafe and so Pippos went out to him and handed him the claim in an envelope.

On the 15th of November 2006, "Z" sent a fax to Pippos confirming he was giving the claim to his professional indemnifiers. He said it would take 90 to 120 days and that Paul and Pippos should be available for an interview with them.

However, "Z" was subsequently informed by his insurers that due to his non - payment of his premiums his policy had expired and he had no cover. This of course made "Z" himself liable to pay the settlement.

Rather than pay, he then went to the police and complained that he was being blackmailed !!!

Paul was charged with "blackmail" and DENIED A STATEMENT by IAN PETER COLLIN ....

IAN PETER COLLIN and RICK VEACOCK sought legal opinion from their police lawyer, CHRISTINE SCOTT, and on her advice, they used Paul's written claim as their "exhibit 2" against him.

In their police disclosure, they stated in paragraph 8 of their document : "POL 262" Page 2 03/06, that : " THE INITIAL CLAIM WAS DATED 16th OCTOBER 2006 ".

"Z" reiterated this date in a letter he sent to his "society" dated 31.01.2007 : " On receipt of the demand in OCTOBER 2006 ...."

The case was heard in court on the 24.07.2008.

The claim against "Z" was deemed to be a valid one and the case was duly DISCHARGED !!

Reeling at this defeat, "Z", IAN PETER COLLIN and RICK VEACOCK conspired to defeat justice and two months later they re-charged Paul.

** NO FRESH EVIDENCE WAS PRODUCED **

Paul was again DENIED A STATEMENT !!!

At depositions the question was put to IAN PETER COLLIN : " Is there any new evidence in this latest charge Mr COLLIN ? "

Reply : " It's the same evidence as before. It's exactly the same evidence as before ".

Once again, COLLIN and VEACOCK stated they received legal opinion from CHRISTINE SCOTT.

This time, however, they produced as their " exhibit 2 ", not a letter dated the 16th OCTOBER 2006, but a different document, UNDATED in NOVEMBER 2006 !!!!!!

This document did not have Paul's initials on all 4 pages as did the original, and it featured a FORGERY of Paul's signature on it.

And to cover their Documentation Fraud, IAN PETER COLLIN and RICK VEACOCK falsified their police document " POL 262 " Page 2 03/06, by removing paragraph 8 stating the INITIAL CLAIM WAS DATED 16th OCTOBER 2006 ....

A sentence was emblazoned on this document just above the forged signature stating " ...forward the matter to others for consideration ".

The very sentence used to "convict" Paul !!!

Having witnessed this police Documentation Fraud, lawyer CHRISTINE SCOTT was a willing participant in their Fraud.

We repeatedly requested from police,court of appeal, supreme court, crown law, official information, ombudsman and others, that this document be given up for expert examination.

Without giving a reason, ALL have refused !!!

Further proof of the Documentation Fraud is by way of the conflicting sworn evidence of "Z".

Asked when he received the claim, "Z" now stated to the court : " It was the beginning of NOVEMBER ".

But in contradicting that statement he further stated to the court : " I was away from the first week in NOVEMBER for about 10 days " ... !!!!

We have made exhaustive requests to "Z" , police, meredith connell, crown law, judges, court of appeal, supreme court, ombudsman, minister of courts, police commissioner and others, to produce "Z's" Passport / immigration records as proof of when he was out of the country in NOVEMBER 2006.

Whilst again giving no reason, ALL REQUESTS HAVE BEEN DENIED !!!! Is it possible they are hiding something ? ...

This begs the question - WHO wrote this undated letter ? - WHO signed it ?

Justice ?

And what terrific Defence counsel from RICHARD EARWAKER and CHLOE WILLIAMS !!!!

** 24.07.2008 DISCHARGED ** 03.08.2010 CONVICTED

" Exactly the same evidence as before "

I now attach for your enlightenment some of the documents mentioned here. They have been modified to comply with the suppression order and exerpts done to keep documents to a minimum.

** 1. Evidence of "Z" confirming receiving letter in Customs St./confirming OCTOBER 2006.
** 2. Original police doc. " POL 262 " Page 2 03/06. ( Highlighting paragraph 8 )
** 3. Fraudulently altered " POL 262 " Page 2 03/06.
** 4. Fax from "Z" to John Pippos dated 15.11.2006 confirming claim to indemnifiers.
** 5. Sworn evidence of IAN PETER COLLIN " It's exactly the same evidence as before " / Identifying corrupt police personnel.
** 6. Undated letter November 2006 - Forged signature, sentence /" forward matter to others ".
** 7. Supreme court doc. highlighting sentence bringing false conviction.
** 8. Conflicting sworn evidence of "Z". " I was away for the first 10 days of November ".
** 9. Supreme court doc. confirming refusal to allow examination of "exhibits".

** This has only scratched the surface of this corrupt case ....


1victim.

admin
26-07-2012, 10:08 PM
Contact the admin if you need help posting docs.

1victim
23-10-2012, 08:33 PM
police minister ANNE TOLLEY and corrupt police lawyer, CHRISTINE SCOTT, were sent this post via email and invited to comment on their actions. SCOTT for her part in falsifying evidence and ANNE (The Law is The Law) TOLLEY to explain why she refuses to answer any of our emails.

Both were sent 354 pages of literature, comprising 30 individual sections, of indisputable proof of the Crimes committed by the police and their "witness" to bring about this False Conviction.

Neither have responded .....

In light of the recent post by Yoda in the Forum section "In the News" (Public Trust in the police is low) 16-10-2012, I once more invite these two people to respond via this Forum and explain their corrupt actions ......

PERJURY - FORGERY - FRAUD. THE LAW IS THE LAW .....

1victim
24-10-2012, 06:39 PM
The two versions of Police document " POL 262 Page 2 03/06 ".

Original in paragraph 8 stating "The original document was dated 16th October 2006."

Police witness letter confirming the same ....

And the Fraudulent Police "exhibit 2", the "undated letter of November 2006", featuring a Forgery of Paul's signature and added sentence. (And minus initials on all 4 pages)

Police witness sworn evidence he was out of the country when he received this letter ......

Supreme court denies request to have police exhibits examined. (Despite professional handwriting expert declaring signature is a Forgery)

They're all about transparency !!!

DOCUMENTATION FRAUD "IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME EVIDENCE AS BEFORE"

Public Trust in the Police is Low ?????

1victim
07-11-2012, 02:08 PM
The extreme Documentation Fraud (including the tape recording of lawyer John Holmes and the 4 conflicting Police disclosures) from this case was sent to the Prime Minister, John Key, who in turn sent it to Police minister Anne Tolley, who in turn sent it to Police commissioner, Peter Brendon Marshall ..... (See attached Image 680)

Here now is one further example of how the police falsified the evidence in this entire case.

(Footnote : Paul had no criminal history at all prior to this corrupt case)

The date of the "arrest" was the 19th of February 2007. This is the date when the Police (Ian Peter Collin) gathered all of their "exhibits" from Paul's home.

Listed as "exhibit 14" in their disclosure was a hand written letter. I dictated this letter to Paul approximately 2 weeks AFTER his "arrest". This document HAD NOT BEEN WRITTEN at the time of their raid !!! (Attached Image 681)

The content of this document is absolute proof of this. Line one reads :" Withdraw formally PIG Complaints. " How could we withdraw a complaint which had not been made ?? !!

Lines 6,7,8 read : " 1-3- PJM is going to pigs with lawyer that will totally extinguish T.B. extortion charge. " How could PJM possibly go to the pigs with his lawyer about a charge which had not been laid yet ?? !!!

Line 11 reads : " NZ Police corruption. Peter. " Peter (Boylan) was the name of the lawyer we contacted AFTER the "arrest" !!!
Again - HOW could this document be in the police disclosure ??? (Read attached affidavit Image 682)

(Image 198) A letter from Ian Peter Collin to lawyer Richard Earwaker dated 01.04.2010 stating :" .. this is a DUPLICATION of previously provided items ..."

(Image 199) Sworn evidence of Ian Peter Collin 21.09.2009 :" It's EXACTLY THE SAME EVIDENCE AS BEFORE ".....

(Image 683) Excerpts from the 4 CONFLICTING POLICE DISCLOSURES.
Exhibit 14 : 19.02.2007 - (1 Page)
25.09.2008 - (1 Page)-Seized from CURRIE'S HOME ADDRESS
14.09.2009 - (7 Pages)- Seized " " " "
01.04.2010 - Property Record !!!!!! (Completely Removed from disclosure !!!)

Does anyone see a DUPLICATE DISCLOSURE here ????

(Section by section,we will post all other fraudulent documents from this case)

Recently, of course, Police minister Anne Tolley stated on national TV she was happy for the Police to falsify documents. (Nelson gang case) She still won't answer us about this case though ......

And what do you think Police commissioner, Peter Brendon Marshall will say ?? (Watch this space !!)

They're all about transparency .....

1victim.

1victim
09-11-2012, 05:26 AM
NZ's largest patch membered gang is about to face a civil charge. The family of Halatau Naitoko, the innocent courier driver slain by the Police, are to seek one million dollars for this murder. Of course, against "the crown", it will be almost impossible to succeed, as any show of justice against the Police Gang will send a bad message to the NZ public that they are accountable for their actions.
There was also another innocent bystander injured by a wayward Police bullet in this case, another driver who was shot in the arm and has permanent damage, which affects his work, as to the now limited use of that arm. He also has had no acknowledgement or apology from the Police .....
Watch as "the crown" vehemently defend their "right" to Slaughter innocent New Zealanders at random ....

The same would be for us should we take civil action. The Corruption Machine which IS NZ's "justice system", will simply bury any attempt to expose the truth. We will, however, continue to post all falsified evidence from our corrupt case, showing the Fraud, Perjury and Forgeries committed by the Police and their "witness" , since the initial hearing on the 24.07.2008, in which the case was Discharged.

1victim

1victim
23-11-2012, 10:09 AM
Minister of police, Anne (The police CAN falsify Documents) Tolley has finally responded (Not Answered) our request to reply to this post which was forwarded to her.
She said these matters of PERJURY, FRAUD and FORGERY are a matter for the police commissioner, Peter Brendon Marshall, and said she has forwarded it to him.
(police to investigate the police !!!)
As the police minister has proven herself untrustworthy, we have sent this post to Peter Brendon Marshall ourselves for his response. Marshall was sent the entire 30 sections comprising 354 pages on the 12th February 2012 as a formal complaint against the proven Crimes committed by his police officers and witness in this case.
We still await his corrupt reply .....

He was also sent 2 CD copies of the John Robin Holmes interview, and also sent it 3 further times electronically. He has not acknowledged receiving any of this information !!!!!
We offered to travel to Wellington to discuss this with him - no reply .....

Question to John Holmes regarding the PERJURY committed by the police witness : "HE'S BLATANTLY LIED UNDER OATH YOU WOULD AGREE?"

Holmes : " YES, OH CLEARLY HE HAS YES ."

They're all about transparency. Transparency - spelt : C-O-R-R-U-P-T-I-O-N ........

1 victim

1victim
22-01-2013, 11:41 PM
On the 24th of July 2007, the case against Paul was Discharged. Paul's lawyer, Jonathon Wiles, told him , "The reason why it was discharged is because he could not represent you, as he did not have an instructing solicitor. He's guilty of documentation fraud and accounting fraud. He'll be pissed off having to go back to the *** society with this". (See attached Image 746)

On the 03.08.2010, in the High Court at Auckland, the police witness, "Z", completely falsified his evidence by now telling the court that he DID have an instructing solicitor.

Quote "Z" : "Mr Holmes was the instructing solicitor".
"I discussed it with Mr Currie and he agreed Mr Holmes would be suitable as an instructing
solicitor".
"Yes I spoke to Mr Holmes and,um,he was".
"Yes, I'm sure that Mr Holmes was the instructing solicitor. His details would appear on the
court documents". (See full page of court evidence attached, Image 744)

And, of course, the secretly tape recorded interview with John Holmes 01.03.2011. (See attached excerpt Image 745)

Quote John Holmes : "I was not the instructing solicitor for "Z" and there's no way I could have been".

Were you aware he was using your name like this in court ?
J.H. "NO".

He's Blatantly Lied you would agree ?
J.H. "YES,OH CLEARLY YES".

Despite a formal request being lodged with the COA and Supreme court, we were denied by them to play the Holmes tape recording ..... to this day they are in denial of it.

Justice New Zealand style !!!

1victim

1victim
04-02-2013, 04:20 PM
In conspiring with their "witness" to conceal their Forged Document,"exhibit 2"- their undated letter of November 2006, the police and "Z" told the court 6 CONFLICTING STORIES as to where and when it was delivered !!

Their 4 "exhibits" were : 1. Letter dated 16.10.2006
2. Undated letter November 2006
3. Fax dated 22.11.2006
4. Statement of accounts ("Lost" by the courts !!!!)

These "exhibits" were confirmed by "Z" in both his police statement and his hand written statement. (Attached image 766)

"Z's" sworn evidence was he received the letter on a Friday, matching his police statement, as the 10th November 2006 was indeed a Friday.
He then swore that he did not read the letter and that he went away overseas for 10 days, stating he would return to his office on the 22.11.2006. (Attached image 764)

However, a fax dated the 15.11.2006 signed and sent by "Z" to John Pippos proves this to be a lie.

So while he was overseas from the 10th to the 22nd of November, "Z" managed to come back to his office in Auckland and on the 15th of November send a fax to John Pippos confirming he is referring the claim to his professional indemnifiers !!!
And further to this, he wrote : " I am leaving for Sydney tomorrow 16.11.06 !!!! " (Attached image 767)

Do the police and "Z" really think that any normal human being would believe this Perjury ?

Well, Paul remains convicted by this perjury and Fraudulent Document, so they must be right .....

Or is it just that the high court, COA and supreme court judges are not normal human beings, but corrupt ????

1victim

















The two versions of Police document " POL 262 Page 2 03/06 ".

Original in paragraph 8 stating "The original document was dated 16th October 2006."

Police witness letter confirming the same ....

And the Fraudulent Police "exhibit 2", the "undated letter of November 2006", featuring a Forgery of Paul's signature and added sentence. (And minus initials on all 4 pages)

Police witness sworn evidence he was out of the country when he received this letter ......

Supreme court denies request to have police exhibits examined. (Despite professional handwriting expert declaring signature is a Forgery)

They're all about transparency !!!

DOCUMENTATION FRAUD "IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME EVIDENCE AS BEFORE"

Public Trust in the Police is Low ?????

1victim
26-02-2013, 11:09 PM
Having proven Ian Peter Collin and Ric Veacock's "exhibit 2" - the "undated letter of November 2006" to be Fraudulent, have a look at their "exhibit 3".....

4 "exhibits" were produced by these two Fraudsters in this entirely manufactured case.

Their complainant - "Z" - allegedly made his complaint on the 21.11.2006 at Auckland central police station. He produced 3 documents as his "exhibits." (See attached Image 798)

His "exhibit 3" was a fax dated the 22.11.2006 !!!

So he gave them a document which he HAD NOT RECEIVED YET !!!

And to compound matters, the officer who took his "complaint", constable Maree Stevenson, recorded this "exhibit" of that date on her jobsheet !!! Note the date on this document in her own handwriting - 21.11.2006 !!!
(See Item 05 on attached Image 799)

Realising their collective Documentation Fraud, they conspired to conceal this Fraud by introducing at the corrupt trial, yet another Fraudulent Document.

Their "exhibit 3" now became a letter dated the 14th of November 2006 !!!

Astonishingly (or not !!) this fictitious and Fraudulent Document cannot be found in ANY of their 4 Conflicting Disclosures !!!

And yet there it is, recorded on the court register of "exhibits" on the 03.08.2010. (See attached Image 800)

Quote Ian Peter Collin : "It's the same evidence as before - it's exactly the same evidence as before."

We phoned constable Maree Stevenson on three occassions to discuss her "exhibits". She hung up on us three times ......

Readers will be shocked and in disbelief to hear that all requests to the police, courts, crown law, official information, ombudsman etc. to view the "exhibits" to our case have been denied !!!!

Wait till you see what they did to "exhibit 4" .....

They're all about transparency - spelt C-O-R-R-U-P-T-I-O-N

1victim

screwedbythelaw
02-03-2013, 09:42 AM
Hi there, i am new to this forum, and glad to have found it, very interesting! its great to see other people taking action against corupt police. we too are dealing with a situation caused by an officer who went out of his way to take my partner down after our home burned down, my partner is a good man with no criminal history, who has only ever told the truth. but was made a mockery of. 6 months before the fire we had a run in with a nosey cop, he was told where to go by my partner, of course when house burned down the same cop was on the scene who immediatly calls it suspicious. and goes after my partner full force. i stupidly provided a statement, which i later find to be duplicated and forged further by the same officer, i found this in the police evidence file, all went to trial, long story cut short...we had a lawyer who didnt give a shit, legal aid, during triall we find out our lawyer is mates with cop, and has a good laugh together in our presence. our lawyer recommends we call no witnesses or gather any info that may be helpful, oh after my partners arrest cop turns up on my door step and summonds me to trial on their behalf, therefore my partners lawyer will not speak to me. bizzzare! i was dropped from police witness list day before trial...strategic???...my partner was found guilty by jury who heard nothing but a load of shit which was unbearable to hear!..and by all means not factual. he has just served nine months, we have been appealing for the last year, and have a date for this month, but lawyer has advised us to fire him as hes not confident and our fire expert has dissapeared with a 20 page report recalling a shit load of mistakes made by the fire department and police....

sorry didnt mean to rant lol

screwedbythelaw
02-03-2013, 04:01 PM
i think there needs to be a series of storys on Cambell Live on this subject to open the public to what really goes on. The public have no idea what goes on unless its happened to them...we thought it would never happen to us but it has, only now have we learned how the whole system works, its degrading, unjust, and cruel, and completly money driven, it has changed our whole view of the justice system here in nz and we are discusted by it. This is nz not a 3rd world country, or are we slowly becomming one, economicly and law wise. Innocent people have no leg to stand on if u are trying to fight for ur innocence against a game playing police man who has honed his skills in defat for his whole career. it becomes a game of who spins the best story wins. regardless of actual evidence. I also think police should be monitered more on what they are doing with documents, some way of making sure they cannot duplicate or edit,

Newspapers too! after the article about us...i will never beleive another news article, news articles come from a journalist who listens to the prosercution, and reports on that story. Whats the prosercutions job??...to challenge the defendants lawyer and create doubt...what happens if the prosercution plays a much better game than the defendants lawyer who hasnt spent enough time studying the defendants case because they are being paid by legal aid? prosecution wins!

i wish this never happend to us :(

screwedbythelaw
02-03-2013, 04:16 PM
people in nz have no leg to stand on if its happend to them, unless they have thousands tucked away to fill the lawyers pockets to fight it.. Society is under the impression that police allways do the right thing as they are here to serve and protect. at the end of the day in many cases its their word over the accussed, who wins? the uniform. i dont think its a question of why does the nation let it happen, its a case of the nation never hears enough of it to warrent any concern. In our case and in many, u are swept under the carpet in from all law agencies, angain money, and it seems these things are so hard to prove over the uniform.

screwedbythelaw
02-03-2013, 04:19 PM
police have the power, also the power to abuse their power. there seems to be some holes for them slip into when it suits them, things can be easily covered up. these are the holes we need to identify.

1victim
26-04-2013, 12:54 AM
Arthur Allan Thomas is the victim of one of the worst cases of police/government coverups in the history of this shamefully corrupt nation.
Arthur and his family held a press conference on Wednesday the 10th April at the Pukekawa Hall, to express their displeasure at the failure of the NZ Government/police to investigate the case and find the actual murderer.

We took the opportunity to attend the meeting, and subsequently met and spoke with Arthur.

He, and brothers Des and Ray, explained with photographs how the police had manufactured and planted evidence in order to wrongfully convict him.
They expressed their disgust at how successive NZ governments and police commissioners continue to coverup the truth in the case.

The media asked the Thomas's how many senior police officers they believed should face charges due to the coverup. They replied : "At least ten".

The media further questioned as to how many judges convicted Arthur on the false evidence. The prompt answer was -"Eighteen".....
Arthur and Des stated they had sent a letter of request to police commissioner, Peter Marshall, last year. They have not had a reply .......

The Thomas anger was fuelled by the glowing tributes given to the corrupt police officer, Bruce Hutton, upon his recent death, by Deputy police commissioner, Mike Bush, at the funeral.

At the conclusion of the conference I introduced myself and had a conversation with Arthur about the atrocities committed against him.
I explained how the police had manufactured evidence in our case, and produced the document "POL 262 Page 2" and the Forged "exhibit 2", used to convict Paul.
Also on hand were the John Holmes tape recordings.
And I showed him the the police charge in which they threatened Paul with 14 years imprisonment.
We agreed that nothing has changed with police "proceedure" over all of these years .....

Arthur commended us for perservering for 7 years in our quest for justice, and urged us to continue. He said it was the intention of he and his family to educate all New Zealanders to the ongoing corruption and coverups within the NZ police/ Government.
Fact File :

Arthur Thomas was framed and convicted by two corrupt police officers. (Bruce Hutton and Les Johnson)
Paul Currie was framed and convicted by two corrupt police officers. (Ian Peter Collin and Richard (Ric) Veacock)

Arthur Thomas had police manufacture evidence against him.
Paul Currie had police manufacture evidence against him.

Perjury was committed against Arthur Thomas.
Perjury was committed against Paul Currie.

Police commissioner Peter Marshall will not answer Arthur Thomas.
Police commissioner Peter Marshall will not answer Paul Currie.

Whilst the two cases are poles apart, the police "proceedure" is identical ......

If I may use your phrase, Patrick - : LIE - DENY - IGNORE ......

They're all about transparency - spelt C-O-R-R-U-P-T-I-O-N

1victim

1victim
14-05-2013, 10:45 PM
In a letter of today's date, John Key and Michael Heron have confirmed they both endorse the Crimes of Perjury, Fraud and Forgery committed by the Crown Solicitor, NICK FLANAGAN, against his Victim, Paul Currie.

Crimes Act 1961 Section 108 Perjury.
" " " Section 66 Parties to offences
" " " Section 71 Accessory after the fact

Having been sent substantive literature as proof in a Formal complaint against Nick Flanagan, (much of which has been posted on this Justice Forum) both the Prime Minister and Solicitor General state they :- "decline to engage with you in respect of your false conviction" !!!!!!

Documents posted earlier on this thread prove indisputably the Crown Law's "exhibit 2" is fraudulent. A document not written by Paul, and featuring a Forgery of his signature on it. This signature was confirmed a Forgery by a professional handwriting expert.

The certified report from the handwriting expert was presented to Crown Law prior to being presented to the COA. A lying "sl@*pa" by the name of Madeline Laracy disputed this report, and also the John Holmes tape recordings (4) in her "submissions" on behalf of the "crown" ...... (subsequently, the corrupt COA and supreme court refused our formal request to play the tapes or acknowledge the handwriting certificate !!!)

Laracy also endorsed the multiple counts of Perjury by her's and Flanagan's "witness" during the Corrupt "trial" on the 03.08.2010. (Remembering the case was initially discharged on the 24.07.2008)

Having participated in the public protest outside the Solicitor General's private residence on the 7th April this year, we can confirm that Michael Heron voiced his "concern" at corruption in our courts.
His actions by way of today's letter proves him to be nothing more than a corrupt liar himself ....

And where does this leave the PM ?
He has been sent all 4 of the John Holmes tape recordings and much literature from the two completely conflicting court transcripts (confirmed in writing from him) and asked to "right this wrong" by his "crown solicitors" ..... but today states in his letter he :- "declines to engage with you in respect of your false conviction" .....

When our Prime Minister flagrantly disregards our Human Rights, by way of our Bill of Rights, then where do we go to seek Justice ???

RIGHT TO NATURAL JUSTICE ??? .... TRANSPARENCY ??? .....

NO .... it is OPPRESSION !!!!

1victim

1victim
11-06-2013, 01:17 AM
Conscience - we all have one (Moral sense of right & wrong / Ensuring respect for those affected)

Here is the answer to the questions in my opening post of this thread.

The police materially altering documents against Paul is well proven, but look at this damning evidence ...

We received anonymously what is understood to be the ORIGINAL FORGERY of the police 4 page "Exhibit 2".

Image 874 attached below shows the 4 page Forgery ("Stacked" to save space here) with numbers 1/2/3/4 handwritten at the top left corners. On page 1 notice the sentence ; Page 1 of 18. This handwriting IS IN INK.

The Forged signature of Paul's and the handwriting here was identified by a professional handwriting expert as being that of CAROL ANN BYROM. A police witness in this case !!!!!
(See her photo - Image 00047 below)

Note the date above the numbers ...... 20.01.2007 ...

Most importantly, notice page 4 of this document IS UNSIGNED !!!!!!

3 months AFTER the police claimed Paul signed it !!!!!!

Further investigation reveals this police "Exhibit 2" was faxed as part of a total of 20 pages (Top right of pages)
from an internet café called SAI SOFT SYSTEMS at 602 Dominion Rd. Balmoral, Auckland.

The recipient's number to this fax was 64 9 3770762. The fax number of the police "complainant" in this case - Mr "Z" !!!!!!

Despite our numerous Formal Requests, the police REFUSED to put their witness, CAROL ANN BYROM, forward for cross examination at the "trial" ......

But all of this proof was no match for "justice" JUDITH POTTER.

In her COA "judgement" she said : Quote : "IT IS FANCIFUL THAT YOU CLAIM THIS DOCUMENT IS A FORGERY" ....

So who out there sent us these documents ????

Who out there has a Conscience ????

Certainly not our Prime Minister. He remains true to his letter and will not speak to us .......

Transparency ???? No - it is OPPRESSION !!!!!!

1victim

1victim
12-06-2013, 11:36 PM
....the NEW ZEALAND POLICE - CODE of CONDUCT

Breaches of the Code of Conduct

* Serious Misconduct

The following are some specific examples of unsatisfactory behaviour that may be considered serious misconduct and which COULD JUSTIFY DISMISSAL WITHOUT NOTICE following due process :

* KNOWINGLY FALSIFYING A DOCUMENT or POLICE RECORD/S or KNOWINGLY MAKING A FALSE DECLARATION or STATEMENT.


The police commissioner has had ALL of the preceeding proof of Forgeries since the 24th February 2012 as part of our Formal Complaint against COLLIN, VEACOCK, and SCOTT ......

Why won't he honour this Code ???????

(Image 875)

"Code of Conduct" = O-P-P-R-E-S-S-I-O-N

1victim

1victim
18-06-2013, 07:17 PM
In reply to Yoda's question: ..."why no lawyer is taking up this matter to the judiciary?"
"This is beyond my belief" .....

The word BETRAY is defined as: Give up treacherously to the enemy ....

The word TRAITOR is defined as: One who violates his allegiance or acts disloyally ....

The word SABOTAGE is defined as: Malicious Destruction ....

As our case was so strong against the "brotherhood", a total of 9 lawyers withdrew from this case.
NONE of them gave a reason for their withdrawal !!!! (See list of lawyers names in Image 877)

Paul was eventually assigned a legal aid lawyer named RICHARD J EARWAKER.

Unbeknown to us at the time, EARWAKER was a "plant", sent by the "brotherhood" to sabotage all evidence of the police Forgeries and Perjury.

A GOOGLE search reveals his self written appraisal and allegiance to the police in his profile ....

Quote: " In 1995 I began representing members of the New Zealand Police Association and in that capacity I have SUCCESSFULLY ACTED for a LARGE NUMBER of police officers facing various CRIMINAL and disciplinary charges." - R J Earwaker (See Image 878)

Earwaker was given instruction to present our evidence at a "pre-trial" hearing under the provision of Section 347, on the 29th March 2010.

Prior to this hearing, Paul - not Earwaker - sent a letter of request to Inspector MARK BENEFIELD to produce ALL EVIDENCE the police were alleging against him.

Earwaker was instructed to put forward all evidence from the Discharged case of the 24.07.2008, and further instructed to expose the conflicting police disclosures and Forgeries.

He did none of this.

The Trojan Horse Traitor had begun his Betrayal ....

One day AFTER THIS HEARING,(30th March 2010) we received an email from Benefield stating, " I have discussed this email with your counsel, Mr Richard Earwaker. Mr Earwaker IS ADVANCING the DISCLOSURE MATTERS and ALL THE OTHER MATTERS will be addressed by Mr Earwaker AT A LATER DATE !!!!!!
(See Image 879)

So AFTER the hearing, Paul's lawyer is "advancing these issues" ??!!?

How could Earwaker possibly represent his client without having any disclosure ???????

And why was Paul's lawyer discussing his case behind his back with the enemy ?????

One word - TRAITOR !!!!!

Further damning proof of this Betrayal came by way of another letter, 11 days AFTER the Corrupt "trial".

A letter dated the 19th August 2010, to Richard Earwaker from Inspector Anthony Edwards, confirmed in paragraph three the correspondence between Benefield and Earwaker regarding the police Forgeries and Disclosure, and they had agreed that -

Quote : "I also understand that Inspector Benefield has spoken with you about your client's concerns and ADVISED THAT THE MATTER WOULD BE HELD IN ABEYANCE UNTIL THE JUDICIAL PROCESS WAS COMPLETE" !!!!!!!!!! (See Image 880)

Again - EVIDENCE OF FORGERIES HELD IN ABEYANCE until AFTER THE TRIAL ????

Great work Richard J Earwaker.

Just a shame the work was AGAINST your client .....

......TRAITOR !!!

There are the answers to your questions Yoda, and yes, you are right. This is beyond belief.

All part of the RACKETEERING ......

1victim




`

teeny
22-06-2013, 04:49 PM
Wasn't Earwaker the lawyer who managed to get a police officer off six charges of assault despite the evidence of nine of his fellow officers giving evidence against him ?

Goes to show how closely judges,lawyers,and police all stick together when "one of their own" is in trouble.



teeny.

1victim
25-07-2013, 01:13 AM
Richard J Earwaker was not the only lawyer to assist the police and betray his client in protecting a "favoured son", Mr "Z".

The police refused to put their witness, Carol Ann Byrom, forward for questioning in our case ...... could this be the reason why ???

We obtained Byrom's 2007 personal Diary, and on the opening page, in her handwriting, discovered the UNLISTED, HOME PHONE NUMBER of Paul's then lawyer, SHANE DONALD CASSIDY !!!!! (See attached Image 888)

Why would Paul's own lawyer, a married man, give his unlisted home phone number to the opposition police witness ???

Was Cassidy conspiring with this police witness behind his client's back - ??? - or was he simply "having it off" with her ????

Well, we never did find out - when we asked him to explain, Shane Cassidy withdrew from the case without giving a reason .....

Traitor - Coward - LAWYER .......

1victim

teeny
25-07-2013, 06:50 PM
This case highlights the lack of confidentiality between Lawyers and their clients. We all know how difficult it is to have a Lawyer take instruction from their client, but Shane Cassidy sleeping with the enemy ?
What else can you shock us with 1victim ?

teeny.

John "Brockovich"
28-07-2013, 02:57 PM
Advice on corruption. DO NOT BOTHER DOING A PRIVATE CRIMINAL PROSECUTION.
I successfully charged Crown Prosecutors with tampering with evidence and later committing perjury in the Court of Appeal via affidavits. A District Court Judge considered there was sufficient evidence that a jury could convict and authorised summons. Those charges were Stayed by a Deputy Solicitor-General. I charged the Deputy Solicitor-General with perverting the course of justice by Staying a prosecution which he knew should not be stayed. A separate District Court Judge again thought a jury could convict and authorised a summons to appear. That prosecution was Stayed by a second Deputy Solicitor-General. I charged him. Same result - a third Deputy Solicitor-General stayed that prosecution. I charged him for the same alleged crime and charged all with participating in a criminal group for their joint objective of perverting the course of justice. Same result, however this time the Deputy Solicitor-Generals Stayed each others criminal charges in which they were each named co-defendants.

Rather than continue filing criminal charges, and have District Court Judges authorise the alleged criminals to appear to face the charges and then have the charges Stayed by those same alleged criminal, I file Judicial Reviews of all the Deputy Solicitor-Generals decisions to Stay. Justice Andrews of the High Court by her ruling of 14 July 2011 struck out those Judicial Reviews as being "abuse of process". Court of Appeal Judges Glazebrook, Wild and While by their decision of 22 February 2012 agreed it was "abuse of process", in that I had no right to question why Deputy Solicitor-Generals could Stay each other's criminal prosecutions in which each Deputy Solicitor-General who issued the Stay order was a named co-defendants under that charge.

I was not allowed to appeal to the Supreme Court. The Judicial Conduct Commissioner saw nothing wrong with those Judges breaching their Judicial Oaths by writing judicial decisions that were not transparent (that is, judgments that did not record the real evidence provided to them of the crimes alleged to have been committed or the issue). The Commissioner thought my complaint was 'abuse of process".

1victim
10-08-2013, 03:12 PM
Having his witness's handwriting on his Forged "Exhibit 2" obviously created some real concern for IAN PETER COLLIN.
He, of course, could be imprisoned as an accessory to the Crime of Forgery should she slip up under cross examination and admit to Forging Paul's signature on his "Exhibit".

And so he went to extraordinary lengths to prevent her from being put forward at trial. (He needn't have been so concerned, as Richard Earwaker was doing a sterling job of assisting the police in covering up all of their fraud)

The standard police line of "We do not know the whereabouts of our witness, CAROL ANN BYROM" was fed to us ....

After much arguing with Earwacker, he was forced to issue a summons for Byrom to appear.
An address in Invercargill was supplied as being her address. (See Image 900)

This address was visited by the process server. She was not there ...
She was subsequently served with her summons two days later, hiding out at her sister's house in Brightside Road - WHANGAPAROA !!! - on Auckland's North Shore !!!

We received correspondence from Earwacker regarding a conversation the process server (Advanced Investigations) had had with Byrom in attempting to track her down. (See Image 901)

Note the highlighted paragraphs at the bottom. Quote : "She said that she had been in touch with the police involved in this case and said that THEY KNEW HER PRESENT WHEREABOUTS".

And : "She said she had had some conversation with the police WHO TOLD HER THAT SOMEONE HAD SOME PAPERS WHICH WERE TO BE SERVED ON HER, but she did not expand on that".

And : "I asked her if she was in the Auckland or greater Auckland area and she said she was not".

Further investigations revealed it was indeed, IAN PETER COLLIN who had contacted her to warn her of this summons.

Perverting the course of justice.
Crimes act 1961 Section 66 Parties to offence
Crimes act 1961 Section 71 Accessory after the fact

IAN PETER COLLIN - GUILTY.

Paul Desmond Currie - 1VICTIM

teeny
11-08-2013, 01:34 PM
Falsifying evidence is, simply, the standard practice of the New Zealand Police. The only way that criminals such as Ian Peter Collin get away with this is by having the unbridled support of our corrupt New Zealand Judiciary. And, as is evidenced in your case, the Police have the backing of our Government to continue these foul practices, not to mention your back stabbing Lawyers !
What can we, as a Nation, do to eradicate these continued breaches of our Human Rights ?

teeny

John "Brockovich"
11-08-2013, 02:58 PM
Falsifying evidence is, simply, the standard practice of...
What can we, as a Nation, do to eradicate these continued breaches of our Human Rights ?

teeny

As I have suggested, please wait for a week or so. Then you and the public can get involved.

John "Brockovich"
11-08-2013, 03:20 PM
Not necessary for the questions in Parliament of the Attorney-General on corruption. The questions and answers will reveal the "dirty secrets".

In regards to the prosecution of the Judge for alleged falsification of judgment - a brief will be provided to journalist's and this forum, should they, or members of this forum, wish to attend the initial procedural hearing.

Ugly Truth
11-08-2013, 06:36 PM
If the police do not investigate the case, then, I suppose the question is whether a civil case can be brought.
My question is: what approach could be taken to enable the case to be heard without prejudice?
A common law hearing would imply full liability for the fraud if proven, as no statutory protection would be in effect.
One possible approach to this would be for the contesting parties to agree to common law jurisdiction with a known third party acting in a judicial capacity. If the Crown were to oppose common law jurisdiction on principle, then it could be argued that they were acting unlawfully by failing to pursue a possible remedy.

1victim
22-08-2013, 01:40 AM
... these were the words of Ian Peter Collin's police "witness" John Kenneth Pippos used against his Mr "Z", in yet another tape recorded interview, which was not put to the jury by Richard Earwaker, in his ongoing protection of Ian Collin's mangy arse - and further betraying his client, Paul Desmond Currie ....

On the 1st September 2006, police "witnesses", Carol Byrom and John Pippos, agreed to meet to discuss the negligence of Mr "Z" in Paul's case. The 30 minute interview was tape recorded with mutual consent.

Byrom stated that : "I think "Z" has not represented Paul properly". "I think Paul should be compensated for the mis-representation - the truth should be told".

Pippos's reply was : ..."my interest in this now is solely because I smell and sense a HUGE LEVEL OF MALPRACTICE" ... (See Image 906)

Pippos used this evidence in assisting his compiling of the original claim, dated the 16th October 2006. (More of this interview will be posted)

Evidence at depositions by Pippos, confirmed he had in fact run the entire claim past his lawyer, PRIOR to arranging to meet with Paul to sign it. (See court excerpt, Image 905)

And proving further the manufacturing of this entire corrupt case, in an email from Paul's then lawyer, MATTHEW DIXON, he relayed a conversation with the then police prosecutor, THERESA PAUL, saying : ... the prosecutor RIGHTLY ADVISED that if the complaint was solely to the (suppressed) Society, then THE CHARGES SHOULD BE DROPPED". (See Image 905)

The charges were not dropped - but Theresa Paul was !!!!!!

We sent a lot more of our evidence to Theresa Paul and invited her opinion to it - she never replied, but eventually we were threatened by Inspector Mark Benefield to stop sending her literature ...

Nothing to fear, nothing to hide !!!

1victim

1victim
21-02-2014, 01:11 PM
After assisting the corrupt police officers, IAN PETER COLLIN and RICHARD VEACOCK to falsify an entire case against Paul, RICHARD J EARWAKER then charged, through legal services, over $30,000 for this privilege !

The corrupt "trial" against Paul Desmond Currie - CRI-2008-004-021895 - took place on the 3rd August 2010.

On the 27th July 2010, Paul successfully had his "debt" written off. (See Image 91)

So in just seven days, his corrupt back-stabbing lawyer, EARWAKER, billed him for $29,904.31 (See Image 92) plus a further 325.61.

Legal Services are now threatening exorbitant interest on what they perceive to be his "outstanding debt" to them.

On the 27th August 2013, a further application to confirm this write off has been met with no response ....

And yet the public perception of "legal aid" is that it is provided for free !!!

1victim

1victim
06-05-2014, 10:17 PM
Google Lauda finem NZ for a good article on this case. Type Paul Currie into the search box. Read also the comments. I gave them no information about our case prior to this story being written - they have some now though ....

Paul and Robb Currie are now being primed to be deemed vexatious litigants by our non-corrupt judicial system. Having been screwed by our COA and Supreme court, we have filed 4 Private Prosecutions against the suppressed man, Mr 'Z' since August 2013. Each one has been refused.

We found out on Thursday 1 May, that our emails to the justice system have been blocked since 18 December 2013, meaning, in the name of justice, that all of our submissions to the courts have not been given to the judge. We contacted the deputy head of National Security - Michael Hubbard - who refused to reveal who gave him the order to do this (probably illegal) act and when questioned why we were not notified he replied "I didn't think it mattered". Smooth.
And so we have been denied the right to justice once again for six months. Hubbard has told us he is checking with his legal advisers as to the legality of his actions. (After the fact!)

And although they have not received our emails, we are told we have been blocked due to the "tone" of them !!!

Now I have kept all emails sent to them and they have not been able to produce any such "toned" emails.

Further, we have been banned from emailing the Pukekohe, Manukau and Auckland district courts, and also banned from phoning them !!!
We are allowed only to send literature to them by post - of which we have done but have been told they did not receive anything !

Anyone getting this same non-corrupt treatment from the government can contact National Security on ph.04 918 8075 Fax. 04 918 8825 or email michael.hubbard@justice.govt.nz - assuming you are not blocked !

1victim
02-12-2014, 02:22 PM
# HELP REQUIRED PLEASE # Bent Pig .. err policeman, AARON PASCOE, was asked at a meeting on the 19th November to supply a complete copy of our case disclosure.

He refused, stating that it was "in Christchurch with the arresting officer, IAN PETER COLLIN".

Ours must be the only case that has never been entered onto the police "Central System".

Prior to this PASCOE Pigshit, we have been told that Oinker COLLIN, upon transfer, has taken this case file with him to Dunedin and Queenstown !

Now PASCOE may believe his own Porkies, (pardon the pun) but we do not.

And so, to all of you good people on the NZ Justice Forum - can anyone post the procedure as to who/how we request this disclosure from "Official Information" please ?

Thankyou in advance, 1victim.

1victim
17-01-2015, 12:00 PM
On the 19 November 2014, a tape recorded meeting was held with the Bent Pig, AARON PASCOE, at Auckland Central Sty.

PASCOE had been asked to prosecute the Convicted Fraudster and Barrister, Anthony David BANBROOK, for swearing a False Affidavit, dated 29 May 2006, in the case CIV-2005-404-7124.

This is the affidavit which has been retracted by Barrister John Holmes on the 15 July 2014 - Holmes having been falsely named by BANBROOK as his instructing solicitor in the said case.

Crimes Act 1961 s.110 False Oaths : EVERY ONE is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years who, being required or authorised by law to make a statement on oath or affirmation, thereupon makes a statement that would amount to perjury if made in a judicial proceeding. (Image 239)

PASCOE, caught on tape, stated : "This is not a false affidavit because it is only about a law society matter".

He further stated he had "case law" to support his lie. He quoted the case : R v Goodyear-Smith (T 332/92, 26/7/93 Anderson j)

Needless to say, this is pure Fiction .....

On the 9 December 2014, a two hour meeting was held with former police officer and MP Ross Meurant, who was shown the exact same evidence, and more, to evaluate.

In knocking PASCOE off his Trotters, Mr Meurant said : "Rob Currie called me out of the blue so to speak; he ran past me a situation which seems to me at the least to amount to a prima facie against a lawyer - for telling fibs in an affidavit - where the number one witness is another lawyer!"

"...as you require more detail, work through the "other stuff" he has which is regrettably typically shoddy performance by the police" (Image 240)

On the 5 January 2015, Bent Pig PASCOE sent me an email : "I WILL NOT BE READING ANY FURTHER EMAILS FROM YOU REGARDING THIS MATTER" !!

Quote Patrick O'Brien re-police procedure : "LIE, DENY, IGNORE".

1victim

teeny
19-01-2015, 11:04 AM
Surely with this evidence the police must charge this crook ? What is wrong with the NZ justice system ?

John "Brockovich"
20-01-2015, 11:24 AM
On the 19 November 2014, a tape recorded meeting was held with the Bent Pig, AARON PASCOE, at Auckland Central Sty...

1victim: I am not surprised by Pasco's conduct. He refused to even consider charging the A-G with corruption, and gave no rational reason for that refusal.

But that is not uncommon with a corrupt system of justice. The Auckland High Court Registrar refused to refer a perjury (in a Crown Prosecutor's affidavit filed into his Registrar) to prosecuting authorities. Even though he had the prerequisite knowledge of the perjury by the Crown Prosecutor in that affidavit. He also gave no reasons for his refusal.

By letter of 15 September 2014 the Minister of Courts was asked to intervene to investigate the conduct of the Registrar, including the Registrar's refusal to also protect the Courts from further perjury by that same Crown Prosecutor.

Not surprisingly the Minister has not yet responded, other than acknowledging the letter of 15 September 2014 and 5 follow-up emails.

We wait.

1victim
20-01-2015, 01:26 PM
John "Brockovich" - the attached email (Image 233) was received two days after my meeting with this Porky-telling Pig.

They apparently received some "anonymous correspondence" from someone !

"Aaron Pascoe is a bent cop, he appears to be assigned investigations that the police want buried, we have a number of cases involving Pascoe, all of which have gone nowhere".

Little wonder that Banbrook and the A-G can rest easy .....

1victim

1victim
24-04-2015, 05:27 PM
Due to the unparalleled corruption in NZ courts, on the 16th April 2015, 85 year old blind pensioner, Joyce Currie, was forced to confront "justice" Graham Laurie LANG in courtroom 5 at the Auckland High Court in search of an answer to her Memorandum to him on the 11th November 2014 (and many prior) of which Lang has refused to answer.

Having sat in Lang's court for 45 minutes, until the adjournment was called, the blind lady, with the assistance of her caregiver, approached "justice" Lang as he headed for the side door.

As his conscience pricked him, and smitten with guilt, Lang did a marvellous impression of a fire engine, turning bright red as he took a copy of the Memorandum from the elderly woman's caregiver.

Lang was, of course, a willing and integral part of the unbridled perjury in his court on the 03.08.2010, which brought the false conviction of her son, Paul, after the case had been thrown out at depositions.

Upon her return into the High Court after the adjournment, Mrs Currie was blocked by police, who threatened to arrest and charge her with "contempt of court".

This, after "justice" Graham Laurie LANG has continuously abused process, been a willing participant in perjury, and failed to uphold his judicial oath !

These cowardly acts of Judicial Corruption by "justice" Graham Laurie LANG and his cohorts are committed on a daily basis in ALL NZ courts.

NZ Law states : "Perjury prosecution can only be directed by the sitting judge", meaning LANG should prosecute "Mr Z" under s.108 and s.110 of the Crimes Act.

Should this gutless coward issue a minute, as he is abliged to, I will post it with the evidence he was submitted with.

We all know that "justice" LANG will attempt to obfuscate in any of his writings.

1victim

teeny
25-04-2015, 02:03 PM
Do you have confirmation in writing from the registrar that your memorandum has been forwarded to justice Lang ?

1victim
01-07-2015, 06:17 PM
We all know that John Key and his corrupt cohorts put an enormous effort into targeting "speeding" drivers. (All in the name of safety and nothing at all to do with Revenue)

The Bent Pig in this case, Ian Peter COLLIN, was recently caught doing 149km/h ....... fined $650, and allegedly faced an "internal investigation".

It appears to have been suppressed ! GO OINKER !!!

What would happen to you if you did this ???

1victim