Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 61

Thread: How police committed DOCUMENTATION FRAUD to bring false conviction

  1. #1

    Wink How police committed DOCUMENTATION FRAUD to bring false conviction

    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.
    Last edited by 1victim; 24-10-2012 at 06:12 PM.

  2. #2
    Administrator admin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Dargaville
    Posts
    448
    Blog Entries
    8
    Contact the admin if you need help posting docs.

  3. #3
    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 .....

  4. #4

    9 pages of Police Documentation Fraud

    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 ?????
    Attached Images Attached Images

  5. #5

    PIG Complaint document exposes further Police Filth .....

    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.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  6. #6
    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

  7. #7
    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

  8. #8

    Graphic proof of PERJURY by police witness endorsed by COA & Supreme court ......

    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
    Attached Images Attached Images

  9. #9

    PERJURY is further proof of police "Exhibit 2" being a FORGERY ....

    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
















    Quote Originally Posted by 1victim View Post
    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 ?????
    Attached Images Attached Images

  10. #10

    IAN PETER COLLIN and RIC VEACOCK commit further Documentation Fraud ......

    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
    Attached Images Attached Images

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •