Anticorruption New Zealand

It appears to me that what happens overseas eventually comes here

I can certainly relate to much of what  this lady has to   say.  I am fortunate  that in reporting corruption that it has only cost me  my  marriage and family and an obscene sum of  money .

I can relate to what has happened at her house to what happened to Kim dot  com  and you have to wonder why we are making  fast  changes to our spying legislation  .. is this what  we  have ahead of us ?

already we cannot question corruption  that part is already being covered up

do watch this  it is certainly worth  looking at.

DHS Whistleblower Labeled Domestic Terrorist (Censored from 60 Minutes)

When the government acts beyond the law, like in the recent Fast and Furious scandal, don’t “we the people” have a right to ask questions of our government? Is asking questions of your government a crime?

Why is the government now labeling people anti-government just because they ask legitimate questions, on specific issues to hold the government responsible?

Now in Florida they are asking citizens to turn people into Law Enforcement if a person appears to be anti-government, why? What is the definition anti-government?

To answer some of those questions, you will want to watch this.

The movie trailer is   viewable at http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1852949/

Twice in the past week I have seen references to  suicide in the news   the first on the 7th April in this headline Deadly toll claimed in Kaipara rates war    and again on the 9th  in the Call for rural suicide awareness at quad bike inquest.

Co incidentally I had made submissions at the   select committee on the Judith Collins amendment to the  family court  bill on this exact subject.

We are diligent  about keeping statistics  as to when  and where  vehicle  fatalities occur  and   drownings occur.  we go all out to make any one with anything bigger than a puddle fence it   but what do we do about suicide?  Nothing – in fact if we were  concerned about human deaths  we would be  doing a whole lot more than we are.

Currently the sum of the road toll and the drownings  are still significantly less than than   the suicides.  You also have to consider that  some of  the drownings and   road deaths are also  suicides .

Many year  ago  the editor of the herald picked up a letter I had written   and  expanded on it   Editorial: Get humbug out of pool fencing rules While I support  safety and common sense  around pool areas I also support supervision of children.  I raised three children on a yacht with   sides which were only a few inches high.

The extremes that I have to go to  for some one  else child wandering into my house  unsupervised and without my knowledge then  jumping out of  bedroom window to drown in the pool  are over the top  but  we have lots of measures in place  probably because the very persons who  manufacture window and doer locks sit on these  pool committees. No one has ever   thought  about the fact that bodies are found by these very doors and windows in the case of  fire, the escape roots having been successful  locked.

But if we implement  the same   concern and care with every potential death and did as much to prevent the  suicide rate  what would New Zealand look like..   well lets dream.

Local councils  would   be  responsible  to the rate payers and residents.  they would  operate to the  retirement of transparency  and provide information as requested.

even more radical they would correct anything which   was non compliant   and   council employees  would be as accountable to the law as we are to the  parking restrictions and the consequences for  them would be as severe  as it is for us to  find that your  car has  a ticket or been towed because you are a  few minutes late.

You would be able to question  corruption without fear of losing your  family   and your home  councils and government  departments alike would  ensure that the same laws applicable to you and me   apply to them.

Truth would be a required standard in our courts  and perjury   has real and serious consequences.

The society  we  would have   wold be the one which we now pretend to have . Those  who are desperate for help  would not have to go on banging their  heads agaisnt the  political  walls.

New Zealand has been abducted  by a few , it is driven by greed .  until many of us  decide that we  stand together and  that  we  want our country to be about us  and not about the  financial benefit to  unseen persons,  nothing is going to change.

Each and every one of us has to wake up and stop being  complacent not one of us can do this on our own , lets reduce  suicide through  seeking accountability   of public servants .

Fairness  and Justice is what it is all about .. lets hope we get it

Dumped teacher will fight charges

An early childhood teacher who forged her qualifications is in prison awaiting sentence and has had her name removed from the New Zealand Teachers Council Register. More

Why is  it that one person is sent to jail for an offence ,when another, who in my honest opinion, has committed exactly the same offence  but in a more serious manner, can’t even be reported or investigated?

Is it because one is  teacher and the other a lawyer?

Or is it that the lawyer used a tactic which would also have worked for the teacher if she had thought of it.

In the end both should be accountable to the law in exactly the same manner!

The  teacher

1. never passed the final paper of her diploma,
2. got provisional registration as a teacher and a job( basically the  teachers registration did not check )
3. provided  forged documents but later said in her defence a Clevedon Kidz manager had forged the documents

The lawyer

1. Had not set up a trust
2. made an application in the name of the alleged trust for law enforcement authority and was granted it ( basically the  minister  did not check )
3. provided forged documents to the law society to cover up the lack of existence of a trust.

I could not even get the matter with regards the lawyer investigated. Ye the school teacher was charged and was found guilty by a Jury .

The law society and the LCRO have both condoned the action of the lawyer , police, SFO have refused to act on the matter of the lawyer and MAF and the council involved have spent their time covering the matter up.

Quite frankly I think that if the teacher is in jail the lawyer should be too.

What the lawyer did that the teacher did not.

There is a secret to how you can conceal crime in New Zealand .. Attack is the best form of defence here is what Tracy Hibberd should have done she could have saved herself her career and a stint in jail.

Her first and major mistake was that she does not have friends in High places. It is far more important to have good connections than anything else.

Once she had roped in a few “ well respected “ persons her outer shield of protection would have been in place.

Secondly along with this respected person she should have taken defamation legal action against whoever alleged that her teachers qualifications were dubious.
The right Lawyer would have commenced proceedings without any evidence at all see How Brookfields secures victory
For good measure the documents could be served on the other party by Brookfields using the Approved and acceptable standards for document service in New Zealand a service provided by Translegal services NZ ltd.
Once the other party is before the court no one will dare investigate or fear of undermining the court.
It is a lot easier to secure a win in the civil court , ther is a low threshold of proof .. in my case no proof at all was needed just the uncorroborated evidence of the person who would otherwise have found himself in Tracy Hibberds position.
As my case has proved you don’t need to produce one single document which alleges the defamation if you use the following formula .
1. Make up claims using the well-known and well respected persons you have brought into the mess.
2. Use interlocutory applications on these false claims to push up costs against the party who was alleging that you were dishonest.
3. Insist that the costs are paid or their defence struck out, in my case I had to find somewhere about $20,000 in a week.
4. Ignore the courts directions to file new claims but enforce the striking out of the defence against the other party.
5. Proceed with the other party not knowing that it has proceeded, just tell the court that the other party won’t show and then don’t serve them.
6. Inform the court that there is no requirement for a formal proof hearing and go straight to a Quantum hearing akin to sentencing.
7. Ensure that you bad mouth the alleging party so that the sentencing report is highly critical of the person who made factual allegations against you . As a result of this they will be discredited and while this judgement stands so will the notion that your credentials are valid.
8. Don’t worry about perjury the police wont prosecute for this.
9. No one will dare to investigate you again because to do so would undermine the court.

By Following the above recipe you can use the court to pervert the course of justice. You wont go to jail and the other party gets to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars some of which end up back in your pocket.
It is such a great system it is such a win win for criminals that I can’t understand why every criminal doesn’t use it.
What is crucial is that you get the right lawyer whatever you do don’t go to an honest lawyer it won’t work.
So there you have it that is why teachers go to jail and lawyers don’t

On 8 March Judith Collins addressed the Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration.

This organisation claims “The principal objectives of the Institute include research into judicial administration and the development and conduct of educational programmes for judicial officers, court administrators and members of the legal profession in relation to court administration and judicial systems.”

While I agree with the later part of Ms Collins speech about the need for change to our antiquated legal system there is much at the start of her speech which in my experience is spin .

It may be clever to use spin doctors to give a Positive angle to everything but it belies reality and paints a totally false picture of what real people experience in our courts.

For this reason I am de spinning the earlier part of Ms Collins presentation and will be forwarding this to the institute so that they can have a truer perspective of reality.

Firstly it must be noted that not only is Judith Collins a minister of the crown , she is the Minister of Justice and one of only four practicing lawyers in our parliament the ministers who hold current practicing certificates are Judith Collins, Chris Finlayson, Murray McCully and Charles Chauvel . (There are 19 current politicians who hold law degrees of which many been practicing lawyers in the past.)

The fact that our justice minister and our solicitor general are members of the law society is an interesting concept as they are as ministers effectively responsible to the organisation which supposedly sits independently from our parliament, it therefore follows that the Law society in effect sits higher than our key judicial ministers.

The following are Quotes from Judith Collins speech and the reality addressed for each quote

“This morning I will talk briefly about what we’re doing in New Zealand to drive excellence and innovation in the courts.”

At this time the New Zealand courts run on an antiquated system based on medieval law, there is no accountability to the truth.
Our justice and courts system is one of our greatest assets.

We do not have a justice system; it is called a Legal system which does not necessarily supply justice. In my own case I am a whistle blower I asked of MAF why there was a law enforcement authority which did not exist and of a council why their manager was contracting to himself. I was sued for defamation by the manager for pointing out that the trust he purportedly ran did not exist. I was denied a defence, no evidence was ever produced other than the uncorroborated oral evidence of the manager which has since been proved to be false and has so far been condoned by the courts.

I was not ever found guilty of defamation we simply went straight to sentencing $57,000 plus $41,000 court costs, the judge even went online to look for evidence, I still don’t know what he saw and what influenced him all I know is that I should have been a criminal; I would have had my rights protected, I didn’t even have the right to a fair trial.

“By international accounts, we have one of the best performing justice systems in the world – we have a strong judiciary, high public confidence in our justice sector institutions, and consistently rank as one of the most transparent governments in the world.”

I think this has to be her biased and unsupported opinion and again she refers to the Justice system which according to Google is represented in New Zealand only by the Justice system publications the remainder according to our own ministry of justice is the legal system.

We may have a strong Judiciary but there is no enforceable code of conduct and a complaint to the judicial review officer will ensure that justice will never be within your grasp, the strong judiciary ensures that no one criticises the court.

As to the confidence which is held in the justice sector you need only refer to these news items Law system a ‘laughing stock‘‎ , Justice in the firing line and Civil justice in tatters.

“For the seventh year in a row, New Zealand was placed first by Transparency International as the least corrupt country.”

First of all the statistics were for the least perceived corruption, there is a vast difference , I know from experience that New Zealand goes to great lengths to deny that there is corruption and prevents any one from speaking out about it .

Secondly Transparency International NZ who send the statistics in have only 70 members , they do not want to hear from anyone who has had first-hand experience with corruption .

Perhaps more reliable is a survey conducted recently and published in many of our major newspapers , New Zealand a nation of cheats and thieves – survey 81% of adult respondents admitted to cheating of some kind, including 36% cheating in a relationship and 22% at work. 92% of young people are self-confessed cheats. 40 Canterbury students caught cheating

New Zealand is extremely corrupt but we keep quite about it as it suits those at the top end of the food chain and encourages business growth. Our life style of back handers , jobs for the boys and friendly favours makes actions which are considered corrupt internationally OK here.

“This reflects the integrity of our system and the people who work in it.”

There is little or no accountability for the people who work in the legal system, Law societies, of which Ms Collins is a member, have oversight over their own members.

Our country is run by Lawyers, they write the Bills, advise the select committees on the legislation , in some cases on the bill which they wrote . I have documentary evidence that is actually possible for a Lawyer to write legislation for their own business and to be involved in every step of the process. This type of corruption Known as state capture is unheard of in New Zealand and therefore it is condoned. See How to write legislation for your own business plan.

The law society, ministers and the courts have condoned this behaviour which makes me believe that there is a great deal more of this going on.

It appears that the law society only holds Members accountable if they want to get rid of them. The old boys are safe no matter what they do even if they are blatantly in breach of the rules of conduct.

There is no enforceable code of conduct for Judges, while some are excellent others miss the mark by long shot and although it’s not PC to say so, I have my suspicion that some are politically influenced.

I use the equation Corruption = Monopoly + discretion – accountability. Where ever this equation exists there is scope for corruption, by simply introducing accountability into the equation corruption can be avoided or minimised.

New Zealand appears to lack accountability in just about every sector and there is virtually no ethics training that could be because the protection new Zealand relies on is emblazoned in their national anthem “From dissension, envy, hate, And corruption guard our State. Make our country good and great, God defend New Zealand.” Sorry to tell you this but God needs help on the corruption front.

“It also means the people who live, do business and invest in New Zealand know that they can trust our laws to protect their rights and freedoms.”

I have proved that lawyers can just make it up , the proceedings against me were commenced with meritless claims for which the lawyer had no evidence and the plaintiffs had no standing. Lawyers regularly make claims which result in people having to choose the “ economic path “ and hand over assets in circumstances which if the weapon used was anything other than a lawyer would be extortion or theft.

I refer to an article I published last year where my company was liquidated when I was not served documents at the commencement of proceedings, see Approved and acceptable standards for document service in New Zealand and Translegal services NZ Limited another lesson in document service

Company structure in New Zealand is more than dodgy to say the least and for this I refer to an incident I was involved in where a fake liquidator and director ran a company, the court did not even twig when the liquidator who moved to Mumbai had his affidavits sworn by a solicitor in Shanghai .( guess they sound the same but they are not exactly next door to each other

The man who was charged with creating these fictional characters , Terry William Hay , Skipped the country , he has now returned after doing a deal with Government to have the charges dropped. It’s what friends in high places in New Zealand can do – no such luck for the guy on the street.

“Overall the crime rate is down and the number of people in our courts is falling.”

I was a police officer for 15 years, during that I time I was also a police prosecutor; I have seen the change in policing. In those years the police went to people’s homes to take complaints, police stations were open 24/7. To make a complaint now days you have to go into police stations many are open only between 8 and 4.30. For a large section of the population this poses an issue and stop reporting crime after having been through the process and having to take time off from work for a matter which takes 40 minutes to report only to be told the matter is Civil or to see it filed .

We increase clearances by giving diversion. Pay up and no one gets to know about it or face years of court and lawyers bills to match. On pure economic terms even if you are not guilty this is the most affordable way out. Even serious matters are dealt with in this way, as in this example , no such luxury for New Zealand tourists overseas.

Lawyers’ fees are so outrageous that it is cheaper to give and extortionist $15,000 than it is to go to court to fight for your rights. The average person does not have $350 per week to spare yet lawyers’ fees start at that as an hourly rate. Justice is not affordable and in my experience it is not attainable. Money buys your win in this adversarial system.

“This means we have an unique opportunity to rethink our justice and court system to ensure it’s accessible, modern and sustainable and works better for those people who use it.”

There is nothing “modern” about our legal system it is based on the adversarial system and the religious principles of the 12^th century. Evidence not reputation and money should be the basis of court decision and until we introduce the inquisitorial system and acknowledge that science has made progress and can support decision making, nothing is going to change.

I believe that our court is persuaded by spin, it should be persuade by provable factual evidence and have this occur in an environment where those who seek to deceive the court will be held accountable to perjury charges, thereby providing the accountability which fives a real incentive to promote truth. Without truth there is no justice.

Currently perjury is not enforced no matter how much evidence is produced, the police wont deal I have heard that this is because taking perjury action undermines the court decision.

“We have an opportunity to work differently – to focus more on the underlying causes of crime and crime prevention, to modernise and improve our operating model, and to build a more customer focussed lower cost and more accessible justice system.”

When a disaster occurs , we do a post mortem and analyse the events so as to put processes in place to minimise the fallout from similar future events. But we do not wish to look at matters which have been before the court and gone drastically off the rails to see why it happened and how we can prevent this from happening again.

I have been through 7 years of the most unbelievable court action, where the plaintiffs had no standing, meritless claims were used to manipulate the court the court to strike out my defence of truth and honest opinion on defamation claims. Not one statement which was alleged to have been made by me was produced to court in our out of contexts. There was no formal proof hearing and we went straight to sentencing. I have experience in the court as a former police prosecutor and know that no criminal could ever have been subjected to what I have had to endure.

It is such that an astute criminal will use the civil jurisdiction to get in first by commencing proceedings against the complainant or party seeking to expose them. Once it is before the court the police will not act and neither will any other government department.

From my experience I would like to see the following changes
1. Do away with the legal system and introduce a justice system based on the inquisitorial system
2. One law for all make every one equally accountable to the rule of law including lawyers and judges. (Accountability)
3. Enforce perjury though court appointed investigators who armed with a warrant can seek out the truth.
4. Penalties, for those who file meritless claims or use the court in an attempt to defeat justice.
5. Court needs to be affordable for all parties and no one should not have to sell their home because a large corporate can throw millions in tax deductible funds at lawyers. Middle income New Zealanders are most at risk
6. Document service the first and most fundamental step in the proceedings needs to be done in a regulated and verifiable manner.
7. Embrace technology, do more on line filing for paperless courts (except original exhibits)
8. Prompt decisions where the quality of a decision is when the judge has to decide 11 months after the court appearance, can he really remember what was said in court?

“The best starting point is the rule of law – everyone is subject to the law, and the law must serve everyone.”

I cannot agree more but currently lawyers and Judge are not being held accountable to the rule of law. A lawyer in my matter has continued to take liquidation and bankruptcy action against me and my company despite action being before the court and being reviewed by a judge to set aside the original proceeding based on the fact that the judgment was obtained by fraud. The lawyer has continued to act despite section 13.5.3 of the rules which says he should stand down.

The Law society has confirmed that they are not doing anything about this as they believe it is up to the judge. In other words the rules are not enforced against lawyers.

“I know you will wholeheartedly agree that everyone should be bound by the same publicly made laws, properly administered by our courts. This is what protects our freedom and underpins a productive and efficient economy.”

We are made to believe that this is so but this statement could not be further from the truth and I cannot see anything being done which will bring our current system in line with this statement. The law society and LCRO are not doing their work. I as a private investigator ended up before the tribunal last year because I told a lawyer that he was committing a crime. I was exonerated but such is the level of accountability for a PI without any statutory duty while lawyers who have vast powers and influence on the court and public records are not controlled by these same strict levels of accountability.

“It’s also critical, I believe, that the law must be accessible, intelligible, clear and transparent.”

Again how can I dispute this statement but when a person can go through the court on a defamation claim without the evidence being heard and a single statement being produced I have to wonder what degree of transparency we are looking at as 1% transparency is equivalent to the transparency of the oil in my cars sump.
As the saying goes – ‘Justice must be seen to be done’. We – government, Parliament and the courts – must have the confidence of the general population if society is to function well.

As a former police prosecutor I believed in the “ justice system” I now realised I should have backed away from it when I had a chance it has cost me over $300,000 in actual funds, my marriage my family and untold lost working hours. Our system is unsafe, very unsafe and unaffordable.

The people who can give you a real insight to how the system is failing are those who are subjected to it but no one wants to know our point of view, we seem to prefer the view point of lawyers whose next holiday depends on the system remaining the gravy train which it is.

“We must ensure the justice system responds and adapts to the demands and expectations of those it serves – and nowadays public demands are many, and expectations are high.”

Again it is not a Justice system it is a “Legal system “, this is well acknowledged by many even the department of justice and reinforced by a Google search .
Having the right to a fair trial and having rights in the civil jurisdiction which equate to the criminal jurisdiction would be a reasonable expectation; the current disparity is grossly disproportionate and does not give a civil defendant any legal rights.

Injustice drives many to suicide and so do the financial pressures which re associated with it. Every dirty trick in the book is used to win in civil litigation and I wonder just how many opt out permanently.

We totally ignore the suicide rates which are higher than the road toll and drowning combined. How many of these deaths are “Justice” related?

“It’s critical that the law and the courts are accessible, easy to understand and transparent. And New Zealanders want government services – including justice – to be as user-friendly as any other service they use.”

There is nothing easy about our courts, winning depends on strategy – playing and bending the rules, those who are honest and stick to the rules don’t stand a chance. Those who win think that they are clever. We would not be as proud of our wins in our national sport if victory was secured by the same tactics.

“That’s why this Government is focused and committed to ensuring we have modern, accessible justice services.”

Minister if you have that commitment I would love to help just ask for my input.

“We’re creating a system that is easier for the public to use and understand; works faster; and allows the judiciary, lawyers, court staff, and other justice-sector staff to do their jobs more effectively and efficiently.”

If the standard of proof in the courts was a great as it is at the registrars counter then we could well be on the way to an improved system. Currently some deputy registrars require more evidence for a fee waiver than the court requires to substantiate the allegations in the claim.

Lawyers who file claims which are not supported by evidence should be held accountable, if there are no grounds for a claim it should not be filed. If you were to use a baseball bat to obtain something which is not yours then you are arrested and charged. if you use a lawyer and inflict injury by way of stress and financial hardship to obtain something to which in reality you have no legal right then it is considered legal.

You should not have to give up assets because you can’t afford to defend your rights to them.

“A key part of this involves bringing court processes, services and ways of working into the 21st century.”

Definitely

“We shouldn’t make people come to courthouses to access services unless it’s really necessary.”

Much more can be done “on the papers”.

“Courthouses should be used for hearings and people should be able to do far more online and in more convenient ways. At the same time, court processes should be clear, consistent and geared towards supporting justice and delivering outcomes.”

Accountability to truth is a key factor which should not be overlooked, consequences should be real, as real as the consequences staying in your car park outside the court for 5 minutes over time, you know you will be fined.

“This transformation is already underway. We’ve put significant legislation in place, and the Ministry of Justice is looking to improve the way courts are administered. You’ll hear from its Chief Executive later.”

The new civil court filing system is an improvement, but there are still holes in it which need to be addressed. E.g. The manner in which documents are served by being “left “at the address this is open to interpretation and also to the possibility of papers being lest so that the served party will not notice them.

If our laws operated as written and the assurances in case law were applied there would be no issue, the real issue is that there is no accountability to the truth.

“Our court system is one of the last areas of our public sector that still operates with a paper-based model. We now have opportunity to use technology to substantially improve the way courts are administered, support the judiciary and serve the public.”

The unfortunate part is that many of the much older lawyers are not IT literate , I have seen 2 finger “typists” charging out at $450 per hour.
They cannot research on line, they are good at speaking to the court but new technology leaves them out of the loop. This would also apply to some judges.

“And I’m pleased to say the Government has already started laying the foundations for an impressive array of initiatives to modernise and improve the justice system.”
We’re amending criminal procedure to bring it up to date with 21st century and to speed up proceedings.

Please also deal with the CIVIL jurisdiction .

“Within the District Courts, around 60 per cent of criminal procedures will be new or changed. Where old law required paper records, the Act allows use of technology to exchange information and communicate.
As a result, an Electronic Operating Model will be introduced into criminal summary courts later this year, replacing the current paper-based court record.
Judicial Officers will be able to view and manage cases on screen, digitally sign their decisions and electronically record related decisions. Proposed bail and pre-sentencing conditions will be provided electronically to Judges so they can review these before court hearings.
It’s estimated charges will be processed up to 70 per cent faster and save the Ministry of Justice and Police around 93,000 hours a year.”

“The Government is also laying the foundations for major change of the Family Court.”

I made submission on this a few weeks ago I suggested
1. Relationship property.. The marriage act is a 1955 act much has changed, marriage ( and de facto relationships ) need to be like forming a company . Only the assets accumulated during the course of the relationship, which has to have a start date and will have an end date, are joint property. This will free up the court from claims for relationship property and false claims by casual relationships seeking to extort assets.
2. Protection orders should be granted to all parties in the family court automatically on filing an application by either party.
3. Every participant is accountable to the truth and perjury enforced
4. Lawyers held accountable to the code of conduct with consequences being real and significant so as to be a deterrent.
5. Judges held accountable to an enforceable code of conduct
6. Court appointed investigators backed by a warrant issued from the bench to , ensure that evidence is brought before the court when withheld by a party
7. The judge should have an inquisitorial role. The adversarial stage finishes with mediation which is a pre requisite before going to court.
8. The court is funded by taking a percentage of the settlement sum on settlement. The court can stipulate the sum payable by each party to the process. – Currently bank accounts are frozen and the party disadvantaged financially loses their rights early on.

“The cost to the taxpayer of running the Family Court grew 70 per cent in the past six years, from $84 million to $142 million per year, despite the overall number of applications to the Court remaining steady.”

Adopting the above measures will go a long way to reducing this cost.

“The Family Court Proceedings Reform Bill, currently before Parliament, aims to reform the family justice system by putting the needs of children and vulnerable people first.
The Bill aims to help parents resolve their simple parenting and relationship issues outside court through a new Family Dispute Resolution (FDR) service.
We’re empowering people to take responsibility for their own disputes by offering them the information, service and support they need to resolve their issues independently of the courts.”

There will still need to be a requirement for truth, accountability and protection.

“The Bill also streamlines court processes, for example, Care of Children applications will follow one of three new court ‘tracks,’ depending on the complexity and urgency of the case.
Although these reforms mark the most significant changes to our family justice system since the Court was established in 1981, the core features of the current system will not change – people still have entitlement to legal aid, and immediate access to the Court in emergency situations.
The Government is also looking at new types of court. At the end of last year I opened New Zealand’s first Adult Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment Court in Auckland. This five-year pilot Court will sit for one day a week in both the Auckland and Waitakere District Courts.
The Court aims to prevent future crime by treating the underlying addiction issues contributing to offending. It was the set up thanks to the hard work and dedication of the judiciary and the Ministry of Justice, as well as other government agencies such as the Ministry of Health. The Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment Court is a perfect example the different parts of the justice system are working together in innovative, new ways to deliver justice.
And then of course the judiciary and the legal profession have a role to play. Bringing our justice system into the 21st century requires cooperation and discussion across all parties– the executive government, Parliament, the judiciary and individual players – to both design change and make it work.”

“While the Government’s focus is very much on improving the delivery of justice, our founding courts legislation also requires a little ‘innovation’.”

There is no Justice in the civil jurisdiction; crime is being committed through the civil courts undermining the entire system.

“The Judicature Act, along with the District Courts Act 1947; and the Supreme Court Act 2003 provides much of the legislative framework for our Courts system.
But the Judicature Act was put in place in 1908 and in the last 100 years it has been amended often and other Acts addressing the Courts have been enacted alongside it.
As a result, the overall picture of our courts system is unnecessarily complex and difficult to understand.
In November last year I tabled in Parliament the Law Commission’s Review of the Judicature Act.
The final report made 89 recommendations for reform including combining relevant legislation into a single courts Act; unifying the District Courts as a single national entity (sitting in the same regions); and providing clearer lines of judicial leadership and accountability.
Modernising our courts legislation is a priority and I expect that a comprehensive Bill will be developed for Parliament’s consideration this year.
As well as modernising the court system, this Bill will have the potential to provide clearer lines of judicial leadership and accountability, and greater transparency and effectiveness to court and judicial processes and enhance public trust and confidence.
This is an exciting time leading the justice sector.
As I’ve outlined this morning, there’s a lot of positive work taking place to ensure our world-class justice system is even more accessible, modern and sustainable for those who use it.
Thank you again for the opportunity to speak with you this morning.
I wish you all the best for a successful conference”

Open letter to minister  of internal affairs , minister of local Government for the information of John banks my local MP And minister of justice   ( PS the  little  lines are hyperlinks  they open up to  evidence  click on them and all will be revealed )

This is being  copied to  Private investigators and persons who are involved in document service and to selected news media

 I realize that writing to you is a waste of time because none of you  ever do anything about it  so I am taking  the approach of  distributing the methods   which are condoned   to the people who  would  be interested in adapting  them, many of those   will be  also be somewhat surprised  others will be relieved  that  they now have a precedent  to support  their dirty tactics. . I will also be sending this to the  law society and publishing this on  www. Anticorruption.co.nz

I won’t bother asking the MPS to do anything  because  they never act , if you are appalled by what I  am putting  forward and see, like  you should  do,  that what is  being condoned undermines justice  ,then I hope  you  will have initiative to act.  I have tried to raise it with the DIA  but as usual   I was ignored.

Seven years ago I questioned Corruption in New Zealand, I  was of the mistaken belief that  writing legislation for your own business plan and then advising on it at select committee level was corrupt .This  is  apparently condoned by every government department and by ministers.

I also thought that running a private enterprise off council infrastructure for private pecuniary gain was  corrupt but again I was wrong it is condoned by Waitakere council and now Auckland council and the various ministers  for local Government it was The perfect fraud – Public money for private gain
And as it transpires we make a big thing of individuals having false CV’s but apparently it is quite OK to  apply for and get law enforcement powers under a fictitious name..  I guess it is too embarrassing for MAF to admit that they didn’t know how to check that an organisation existed or not so its best just to ignore it and hope that it will go away.

Then I found that it is  OK to use  Charitable funds to  conceal corruption  and  use these proceedings and Brookfields lawyers  to  put my company  into liquidation on a false affidavit signed by an un locatable person employed by a Private investigator company Translegal ( Gary SWAN )  I again thought this  was  corrupt  and made a complaint.  Again I was wrong.

I must add that all this happened at a time when I had filed evidence in the court to show that the judgement which they had obtained against me was obtained by fraud and deceit.. But no one cares I am a whistle-blower and we don’t support whistle-blowers in NZ we simply grind them into the dirt. (It encourages the next person to keep their mouths shut about corruption)

On one of the many appearances in court to prevent bankruptcy and liquidation for questioning what I believed to be corruption, I said to the court “I promise never to question corruption again”.   I am going to keep to my word. I have learnt my lesson it simply isn’t worth it.

It would appear that what I call corruption is totally acceptable in New Zealand and it would appear that  I have some warped  sense of ethics, for which I have been severely punished  and therefore it is time that I accept  that I have   got the whole definition of corruption wrong.

Transparency International cleverly measure only the perception index of corruption   not the reality    and the perception is important because it drives business confidence and allows us to rip off the unwary.   I must learn that I must not rock the boat.

I have often said that   I would rather know   that I am dealing with corruption and be wary of it   then to be told that something is not corrupt and feel deceived.  It is therefore fair to inform the public   of the   acceptable standards.

For this reason I am including all Licenced private investigators in this email/Post  and advising them of the approved and acceptable standards for document service in New Zealand .

Many like myself who  serve documents  ethically and honestly are risking complaints against their licence by persons who  take umbrage at being served , ( some of them are quite nasty pieces of work  others are  very nice people )

I have served many documents and was of the mistaken belief that my licence and my accountability to the PSPLA gave the citizens who were being served some level of protection.   I also knew that  affidavits  of service have to  be accurate  and that  the content reflects the events   surrounding the   first and foremost  step  in any legal proceeding, the service of  documents on the other party .

For some   lawyers this step is a thorn in the side as matters are so much easier to win if the party is not served and left out of the loop, it cuts to the chase and prevents all those nasty defendant hearings.

That is why the liquidation of my company, was so smooth, I didn’t know a thing until I received a call from the official assignee.  Gary Swan said to me that Tony was not particularly bright , guess what he meant  was  that Tony should have said to me “ Grace you senile old bag   of course I served  you   why are you trying to deny it ? Instead he came to my home  and gave me the papers      while being recorded  and in the presence of a witness,  four days after the court had made a decision on these very papers.  It was every lawyer’s nightmare and they could not wiggle out of this one.

Fortunately the  court resurrected  my company   , it now has a permanent blot against the name on the companies register ….   But there were no  repercussions for Gary Swan or Translegal services NZ Limited    on the complaint I lodged with the  Pspla

But I can take it to district court. for appeal but I am not going to, I am sick of hitting my head against a brick wall,   I am instead going to circulate the blue print condoned by the PSPLA and the DIA.

Gary Swan  said he is not responsible and   both he and Translegal have been exonerated by the investigators for the PSPLA   see the decision here  and the  DIA report here.

So folks   if you want to know how you can bend the rules here is the formula which has been approved by the PSPLA.

1. Never ever serve a document if you are the licensee, take a leaf out of Gary Swans book and hire an unlicensed person  with a non-descript name  such as Tony Parker   and   do  not have an address for this person… total anonymity is the  key to success.
2. Do not get involved   in the activities and  even though your company   which is licenced under the PSPL Act, contracts  direct to the lawyers,   stay out of the   arrangement and  let your contractor deal directly with the  clients  ( ref statement of Tony Parker )Except for  invoicing of course  .
3. The  document  server  swears an affidavit   You collect your  fees   from the lawyers ( could charge extra or get a bonus for this ) the  other party gets a  surprise when the court action is brought to their attention when the decision has been made against them.
   1. Don’t go back to the person  and serve the papers afterwards, not a good look  just make them out to be a liar  after  all every one knows that  defendants  tell lies about being served  affidavits trump all and  the police never take action for perjury.
   2. 4.       If the affidavit is proved  false  it has nothing to do with you, you simply dismiss the document server   and it looks as if you have done the right thing.
      1. As point of interest on Translegal web site it says “Translegal Services NZ Limited is a licensed and registered private investigation and security company operating in Auckland, New Zealand “-(I would have thought that this would have brought my complaint   in  under section 5 (3) Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Act 2010 “For the purposes of this section but without limiting the meaning of the term carries on any business, a person is carrying on a business if he or she holds himself or herself out to the public as being ready to carry on that business”  But it was far to convenient for the DIA gambling man  to  ignore that part of the act.
      2. I wonder what qualifications Geoff Lawry has he has been with   Gaming for a long time.  What does he know about other laws?
      3. When someone complains about not being served by your  document server, be sympathetic, spin them BS   but distance yourself from it and point out that document service in New Zealand is not regulated   and that they can make a complaint  to the police.
      4. When the police come calling you won’t have an up to date address for the person who uses a name which is so non-descript that he cannot be found.
      5. For those who wish to make heaps of money and have no moral values you can use this   template as a  business model  it is tried and  successful and  now  thanks to  the PSPLA and the DIA  condoned.  BY the way the NZIPI has done nothing at all  it appears this also fits their ethical values as gary swan is still a member.

For the  unscrupulous   this  business model should reap  $$$$$$$  , sorry it is not a service I offer   but I am certain that there are many out there  who already do  offer this service.

If you sign up  to my newsletter I will  also show you how you  do other things which  would be   corrupt   anywhere else in the world  but  condoned in New Zealand by our government   departments  and ministers.   I  can provide  an entire How to  commit crime legally.

Anonymity and denial   are the key to success.. And a few friends in high places are a bonus.

No guarantees are offered all I can say is   all information I have offer is  based on  events which have occurred  and have been tried and tested and if it is condoned it must be legal.

Questioning corruption has cost me dearly  I hope that this my new business venture will  help me recover the   money I have lost .. won’t hold my breath  but it’s worth a try.

.

Brookfields Lawyers -   embraces corruption 

The  manner in which Lawyers conduct themselves is set down in law.