Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 61

Thread: How police committed DOCUMENTATION FRAUD to bring false conviction

  1. #21

    Police witness's Diary reveals Lawyer's Betrayal of Paul Desmond Currie .............

    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
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #22
    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.

  3. #23
    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".
    Last edited by John "Brockovich"; 28-07-2013 at 03:01 PM.

  4. #24

    Corrupt police officer IAN PETER COLLIN attempts to pervert the course of justice ...

    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
    Attached Images Attached Images

  5. #25
    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

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by teeny View Post
    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.

  7. #27
    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.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Yoda View Post
    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.

  9. #29

    .... "i smell and sense a huge level of malpractice" .....

    ... 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
    Attached Images Attached Images

  10. #30

    Misrepresentation of his client by Richard Earwaker brings $30,000 legal aid bill...

    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
    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
  •