Thank You   Curtis Gregorash

This morning when I woke up  I had never heard your name, I read my Herald and you have  restored my  faith in humanity.

In my experience we are   riddled with corruption  .It is concealed by those who work  for it,  intentionally, through  ignorance and  others for self preservation.

At last there is some one   who  not only has the   values to resign  but also the guts to speak out .We need more like you Curtis , there is actually strength in numbers   and  wouldn’t that   just make such a difference on the integrity of New Zealand.

Corruption is like cancer.  You can deny   you have it   but in the end  the symptoms will be too bad and it will either become obvious  or   you simply pop your clogs.

I Stood as an Independent Candidate for  Epsom  to  highlight the corruption issue.  I think I have contributed to the exposure of it  but  only in a minor way  as   what I have had to say has as usual been   well concealed,  yes the media play their part in the concealment too .

I happen to think that if the   improper swearing in of police officers is a significant issue then a fraudulent application  for Law enforcement powers  and as a result   having this granted to a fictitious organization  would also be of significance. The Animal welfare Institute of New Zealand  (AWINZ )enforced the animal welfare act  for some 10 years  despite having  any  identifiable  legal persons  revealed behind this trading name.  Ultimately   four people, who together have no evidence of having run the  ” organisation ” and who  MPI have no record of  being  the  applicant , sought to have the law enforcement  status revoked 

Both National and Labour   are involved  in this   corruption,  and  it is not as if  it has not been raised with Government departments   the office of the auditor general, Ombudsmen , SFO, MPI , Solicitor General , office of the prime minister etc   did not know,  they all knew   and all played their part.

We have  preciously highlighted the reason  for that , it  is because they  all support Transparency International New Zealand  . And  What does Transparency International – New Zealand Know about corruption ? apparently not much ,  they know how to deny  that corruption exists   just look   who supports them in their quest to   portray  that  New Zealand is the least corrupt country . In the end  Transparency New Zealand is a business  and  needs to be paid . Rule 1. never bite the hand that feeds.

Come to think of it Transparency International New Zealand has been surprisingly  quite   during the election campaign .

Then  the other  item   which was of news this week was that  There are reports that Chinese communist party anti-corruption officials are looking to investigate suspects in New Zealand.

Mr  Peter Goodfellow   got involved in the matter as mentioned in the  article  but   we have found connections with him and Oravida see Nationals multiple connections with Oravida – is it all about scampi ?

Then  there is the issue of the Crarfar farms and he manner in which  New Zealand farm land is being bought up in a most non transparent  way  and  here again we have a connection with Oravida  through their former director  who resigned from  Orvida one day  and  set up  with   those involved in making an application for the farms  the next  day and then doing so  deceptively  in my opinion through a  British Virgin Islands Company  Is there an obligation to comply with directions of the Overseas investment office ?

New Zealand is all about big business  we are happy to facilitate anything  from International money laundering   to  selling off our land  to unknown persons  all the while  we have this pretense of being squeaky clean

In 2011 commerce Minister Simon Power wants the taxman to help crack down on NZ registered companies implicated overseas in smuggling, money laundering and tax fraud.

Three  years later and  another election later  nothing much has changed in the mean time  brand NZ has been damaged   by having  our companies  registered here  through our slack company registration processes  being used in international money  laundering  and fraud.

We dont learn from our mistakes , we allow  the real criminals to use our justice system to conceal corruption  and  beat up   whistle blowers.

The Government  and  its employees   all stand on the side line and are complicit.   I takes a very special person to   make a stand . I have  heard far too may  say, “I am just a few years off retirement  I dont want to rock the boat.  ‘   Those who remember the   old TV program Gliding On.. Well  Its alive and well  .

I am preparing my submissions for  the commission against corruption petition  which was presented in June , let us hope that people vote  wisely   and that  we will see the C word  ( corruption )  Used a lot more  and  also see actions to combat it.

 

stack of paperI had intended to post on this  site everyday during the pre election period and I notice to my horror that it has been a week since my last post.  I have been busy  but    not he way I intended to be  and I will make certain that my time was not wasted.

Not long after I  announced my intention to stand I was sued by my former lawyer  Evgeny Orlov.  Evgene  or Eugene  as many know him   like to  live in the grey area of law. confusion  and   burying people  under mountains of paper are his best  skills .

I am a former client of  Orlov’s  firm Equity law, I used to work in the office and saw how it operated. Orlov was so scared that I would talk that he took me to court to get a restraining order  when I had not done anything except breathe . That order  expired  last November .

Now I am under siege again the tactics he uses  is to throw so much at you that   you will either go broke  engaging a lawyer  or if you do it yourself that you will  miss something vial and he will   squeeze in and  annihilate  you in court.

Orlov   is no longer  a lawyer but is practicing through a proxy ,Julia Leenoh,giving her heaps of experience at my expense,  guess its his way of getting money for her. Last week he filed yet another set of proceedings this time   his lawyer  Greg Stewart is trying to to get a protection order through his client Orlov  to prevent me from  publishing anything about Greg   Stewart. Julia  Leenoh and  George Bogiatto      this is the application here application restraining order. The  bits they complain of are here http://www.transparency.net.nz/legal-bullying/  and at the links at their name.. seems like  transparency and truth dont serve them well .They prefer to work invisibly .

This getting a restraining order for yourself through your client while working  in a conflicted position by acting agaisnt a former client  must be a first in New Zealand  and  it  will be  testing the   conflict of interest  rules to the  absolute hilt .

As can be seen in his application filed through  lawyers  Stewart & Associates Equity Law,( whose address  and phone numbers are  those of  Equity law) , Mr Orlov requests

Restrain the Respondent from publishing any material that may
directly or by inference lead to his identification or any other details
about his previous practice and all associated members of the practice
that has now merged with Stewart & Associates, explicit or implied,
on the Respondent’s blog Transparency New Zealand or any other
online forum accessible by the public which she can moderate”

So what has he got to hide ?    the strange thing is that he has already taken defamation proceedings   and  I have an open offer on the table to him that all he has to do is  ask me to amend what has posted and  It will be done.

But basically he  does not like the idea that I provide transparency   e.g  Look at this document  from the companies office .  the  document is an application to remove  the  company SWEDLINK TRADE LTD from the register .

The director is Inta Bilder  the form was   completed by Equity trust International  which uses the same address and pone number as  Equity law barristers Limited

This application is supported by the alleged minutes of the company. Now to grasp the complexity of this meeting you have to note that the director Inta Bilder is Latvian , lives in Latvia, the  director of the shareholder  is in  Cyprus and he company is registered  to  level 4 44 Khyber pass road Grafton Auckland

I believe that there is very good reason that the minutes don’t  state where the meeting was held  or  who was present  as is usual for minutes.  the share holder is Interhold  directed by  Manti EFFROSYNI.

Now look at the   last page   Equity  trust   uses the   email address  equitylaw.co.nz  which is registered to equity law barristers limited

Now lets look at the players

Inta Bilder is widely  reported in the international and local  press

NZ shell company linked to alleged $150m fraud | Stuff.co.nz

The Latvian Proxies

Massive Ukrainian government money-laundering system

Latvian pair behind firm named over Quinn payments

New Zealand, Fresh From Its Service to Mexican Drug Lords, Helps Out the Russian Mafia

Erik Vanagels™ – the extent of a money laundering

a search of  the companies he has been involved in  records that he once held    834  companies  in  New Zealand  .A recent search reveals that the following are still  showing Inta Bilder as the director

Shareholder  Interhold

BREND DEVELOPMENT LIMITED (2514944) – Shareholder
COMMERCIAL EXPORT LIMITED (2410887) – Shareholder
CROSSIMPEX LIMITED (2259084) – Shareholder
EXMONT IMPEX LIMITED (2196237) – Shareholder
LCK MERCHANTS LIMITED (2200979) – Shareholder
TRIOGROUP ALLIANCE LIMITED (2386331) – Shareholder

Shareholder Maxhold

BENTLEX LIMITED (1964808) – Shareholder
CARGOTEX LIMITED (2084625) – Shareholder
EXPORTEX LIMITED (1964816) – Shareholder
INFINITY INTERTRADE LIMITED (2067354) – Shareholder
TRANSLINE CORPORATION LIMITED (2135243) – Shareholder

Shareholder Unihold

BALLEX UNIVERSAL LIMITED (1907994) – Shareholder

As well as being registered to the premises  of  Equity law limited   these companies  are all ultimately owned by Liliya Soboleva  eh wife of  Evgeny Orlov  as per this diagram company structure

Many of the companies have  now been struck off through a major cull carried out by the companies office  but those named above remain.

Moving on to the next name on the list  Equity trust International  

company records show 2 directors

Steven James GREEN

138 Weymouth Road, Manurewa, Auckland, 2102 , New Zealand

Greg Roderick STEWART
Unit 5, 27 Fache Street, Clyde, Clyde, 9330 , New Zealand
Steven Green is  the same Steven Green who gave a  testimonial for  Equity law .  and Greg Roderick STEWART is the  lawyer who is ” independently ” through the merged  law firm  suing my butt off .
The company is owned by Liliya Soboleva  Orlovs wife . The  web site  http://trust-nz.com/ is owned By
Registrant Organization: Equity Trust ltd
Registrant Street: 3033004
Registrant City: Auckland
Registrant Email: email@equitylaw.co.nz
Admin Name: Evgeny Orlov
Admin Organization: Equity Trust ltd
Articles by by Evgeny Orlov, Barrister, Equity Trust International (New Zealand)

Why Trust a New Zealand Trust

Is New Zealand the Switzerland of the South Pacific?

Avoiding Death and Taxes When Investing in Property – The Benefits of a New Zealand Foreign Trust for Property Investors  Contributed by Evgeny Orlov, Barrister, Equity Trust International (New Zealand) [www.Trust-NZ.com]

Avoiding Death and Taxes When Investing in Property. the benefits of a New Zealand Foreign Trust for property investors by Evgeny Orlov, Barrister, Equity Trust International (New Zealand) International property investors have realised that property is one of the best forms of investment. Of course, provided that you are not stuck in a particular location: [...]

http://www.chirbit.com/realestatedownunder

http://www.trust-nz.com/en-investment.html

See his very convincing  spiel  here he is a Human rights lawyer but does not   respect the human rights of freedom of expression when it comes to him .In my experience  He doe not  practice what he preaches. Love the bit about looking after  clients.. he   gave me false invoices   and over charged me and agave me  grossly sub standard work

director    Manti EFFROSYNI    11 Stavrou Stylianidi Street, Nicosia, CY-2023 , Cyprus
shareholder :GENHOLD LIMITED  Level 4, 44 Khyber Pass Road, Grafton
GENHOLD LIMITED director:  Fernando Enrique MONTERO DE GRACIA  Calle Primera, Panama Viejo, House 496, Panama City, Republic Of Panama  Shareholder :TRUST (NZ) HOLDINGS LIMITEDLevel 4, 44 Khyber Pass Road, Grafton
It has to be noted that Interhold was  also the   shareholder of  Falcona systems  which was involved in 150 Million dollars  money laundering

Manti EFFROSYNI.

Manti EFFROSYNI NZ company involvement

news items relating to Manti  Effrosyni as below

Forgery and corruption ties – gun Latvian Raiders

New Zealand, Fresh From Its Service to Mexican Drug Lords, Helps Out the Russian Mafia

Power embezzlement

Day October 22: The son of the former president and international mafia

What is this firm Interhold Ltd, which manages $ 45 million asset M.Bakieva?
Try to find out. The company is registered at the Khyber 44, Auckland, New Zealand. Her owner is registered in Cyprus Genhold Limited, whose director Cypriot Manti Effrosini (Manti Effrosyni) concurrently is director 88 New Zealand companies. ”  (Copied From Google translate)

So that is it in a nut shell folks  the reason why a human rights lawyer  doe snot  wish me to have freedom of expression  .  By stating  the facts above he thinks I am defaming him.
 I am however quite flattered  with the statement  he made  in the application for restraining order ..
Not only are the allegations and articles Ms Haden posts, ve1y offensive
and distressing, they cause further concern to the safety of my family,
myself and my legal acquaintances because of Ms Haden’s capabilities as
an ex police woman and private investigator. I fear that if Ms. Haden is
not stopped in this way, she will stop at nothing to destroy myself and all
the people around me all because of the fact I brought a legal proceeding
against her.
As a private Investigator I  find   evidence , if it does not exist  I can only say that I cannot find it  and it appears not to exist , I cannot find something which is not there   and I do not ” create”  evidence , I collate  it
If I was  not  being hauled through the courts I don’t waste my time looking   but when  I have to  defend myself I go for the best evidence. That is my right.
 I deal in evidence truth , verified truth  and facts  .
I find it amusing that I am accused of  “destroying ”  Mr Orlov.  he also made that   claim agaisnt Judge Harrison  and another lawyer  who  he took to court.
I suspect that mr Orlov  has a phobia abut  being “destroyed ”    Evgeny, if you dont attack  people  they wont  fight   back .  When you attack me  I fight back and scream at the top of my voice.   I consider the three concurrent court actions against me because I complained  about your false invoices as an attack , an assault using he court as a weapon .
 I am  NOT going to stop screaming until you stop assaulting me.
 I  Will have more coming on the trail of debts  of Mr Orlon and he people who have been left out of pocket.
 Should have this for you tomorrow.

When I was a cop  I always had a supervisor , even after the 2 year probation period was   up there was always some one  who you reported to and were accountable to.

Compare that to lawyers   and  it appears that   a law degree makes them honest and responsible . They can also go right out on a limb and cover up for   their mate  who  have lost their  practising certificate.

In fact what is happening  is so good   It seems i

I have just received a response  from the  law society with regards to Evgeny  Orlov practicing by proxy  it appears  that  it is quite Ok  for him  to   be acting  as a lawyer   even though he  is no longer one.

He still has  copious articles on the net   portraying him as a lawyerer

Not too long ago  we  posted an article with regards to Milk New Zealand Holding , this is the company which  is purportedly  owned  by  Shangai Pengxin

The  office of overseas investment OIO Assessment at page  four stated

The Applicant is Milk New Zealand Holding Limited (“the Applicant”), a Hong Kong incorporated company which is an
overseas person under the Act.

The Applicant will register as an overseas company under the New Zealand Companies Act 1993 prior to acquiring the Investment.

It transpired that the  applicant  did not   comply with this direction   instead  another company named  Milk New Zealand Holding was registered as a New Zealand company   with a share holder initially unidentified but later revealed to   be Milk New Zealand  Investment  a  company registered in the British Virgin islands .

I requested information from the companies office   through FYI  and a response has  been received  .

MILK NEW ZEALAND INVESTMENT LIMITED  is indeed registered in the British Virgin islands , but the  companies register  there does not  disclose who the share holders  are .

The British Virgin Islands company was   registered on  24 May 2012  , the company which registers off shore   incorporation has provided a certificate of incumbency    which presumably is only accurate as  at the date it was issued.

Additionally   the  final paragraph it  states that the register may be kept elsewhere and their records may not be up to date .. so fat lot of use that certificate is  .

But  going back   to the instructions   of   the OIO   it states   The Applicant will register as an overseas company under the New Zealand Companies Act 1993 prior to acquiring the Investment.

The  agreement therefore  between the applicant and the government   has not been complied with    and the  Purchaser  has no   obligations to fulfill the    conditions  as the purchaser is not the applicant , it is a grand son   who has the same name .

It is the   company  in between the applicant  and   purchaser which is of concern  as     this is the  weakest  and   a very non transparent link in the chain .

I wonder  if any one will do anything about it ? I have sent the  open letter below to the ministers  .

Sent: Wednesday, 10 September 2014 10:01 a.m.
To: ‘m.woodhouse@ministers.govt.nz'; ‘b.english@ministers.govt.nz'; ‘s.joyce@ministers.govt.nz’

Open letter to the Ministers  of finance,   land information  and  economic development  and OIA request

I wish to draw your attention to the fact that  the purchaser of the Crafar  farms   was not the company which applied to and was approved by the OIO

The directions of  the OIO  appear to have  been ignored , these  were  that “The Applicant will register as an overseas company under the New Zealand Companies Act 1993 prior to acquiring the Investment.”

The resulting group of companies went on to purchase more farms  and a deception/error occurred which caused the OIO   to state at point  16  of the application for the purchase of the  Synlait farms

“In 2012, Milk NZ was granted consent to acquire 16 dairy farms known as the Crafar Farms (“Crafar Farms”). Consent was granted subject to extensive conditions, including annual reporting. The Overseas Investment Office has recently received Milk NZ’s first annual report and is satisfied that Milk NZ is not in breach of any conditions of consent.”

But the report which  was produced was not from the applicant  in the Crafar application  but   from  a company   which  has the same name and purports  to descend from the applicant.

The statement  on the OIO web site  states “Milk New Zealand Holding Limited (Milk NZ), the company that purchased the 16 former Crafar Farms last year, has submitted its first annual report to the Overseas Investment Office (OIO).” This statement is  true however it was not the company which was approved to purchase the farms , it was in effect a name sake  with   questionable genealogy.

The annual report  furnished    further complicates  matter s by referring to the purchaser of the  farms as being Pengxin New Zealand Farm Group, which is a subsidiary of  Milk new Zealand Holding  (NZ)    as opposed to  a direct subsidiary of Milk  New Zealand Holding,  (HK)  the applicant  .   As a fraud investigator I am aware that  through the use of names  assumptions  can be made which  divert     those    who accept the assumption away from the truth.

In between  the company ,which was the applicant  Milk NZ holding ( HK)   and milk New Zealand Holding ( NZ)   is  a non-transparent  and unscreened ,unapproved   entity called Milk New Zealand investments  .This  has a certificate of incumbency dated  5 december 2013, which by its own  disclaimer may or may not be accurate.

Milk  New Zealand holding the applicant    is not the   purchaser or the  direct   owner of the purchaser  and   this may bring about   issues    of its own as the purchaser is not  a party to  any of the conditions agreed to   with the OIO .

There appears to be a disconnect between the OIO  and the  MED .   No one has   verified that the   applicant  has been properly  registered as directed as an overseas company under the New Zealand Companies Act 1993.

 It would appear that the provisions of  the act specified under  the heading  Overseas companies has not been complied with .

As per section 15 of the companies act,  each  company is a separate legal entity , therefore   the applicant considered by the OIO  and the purchaser are two separate legal persons.

By way of OIA   please provide   copies of any documents in which   any of the ministers or ministries have considered the fact that  the applicant in the  Crafar farms  deal was  not the   purchaser . And   please provide copies of  any consents   which  have allowed the  purchaser to be different from the  applicant .

I ask this  under urgency due to the Lochinvar station being negotiated  and if falsehoods exist   then this should be  addressed  prior to the sale  going through.

 

Regards

Grace Haden

 

What would happen   if the  silent majority was not  silent ?

Imagine if  every one who is  eligible to vote  voted .

The undecided would become the deciders  and we may all  be better off because of them .

Instead of not voting  if all non voters voted  for nothing but ” other minority parties ”  which received .48%  of the vote in the last elections  their  vote take woudl be increased  to  34.63%   which would be  3.47%  more than National  got in the  last elections .

Now wouldn’t that be a  left field game changer  ?

These minority parties  would be in a position  to form a government with any one   . They could   actually form a Government  with every one except national and Labour .

They could throw out    consultants, advisers  and  just runt eh country on good  old common sense  .

It would be any ones guess  who would be prime minister  but I certainly do hope that   the first thing this parliament  would address is corruption  .

I have no doubts  that those in  the Grey are those  who can help us beat the  1% .. are you in  ????

 

  Petition for an independent lawyers authority

What is the point of having laws if there  is no accountability to it?

We have screeds of legislation  which applies to lawyers  but just about every time  a complaint  made to the law society  comes back with the words that the lawyer concerned does not meet the threshold   for that rule or offence  or it is written off  in some other lame manner  without real consideration of the rule has been breached or not .

We appear to have allowed a  Grey area creep into law a decision which says technically they have  broken the rules or ignored them  but we dont think that it has done serious damage.  Should we  perhaps  re write our laws  so that  the  law can be broken  by 5%  , 10%   or even totally ignored or sat theft is not a theft is  the sum is less than , or   too bad he stole your TV  but because it was old it doesn’t matter.   Or simply apply  the law  selectively  to people  who you think   has  good reputation which will be tarnished by  a conviction  regardless of the facts.

I think I may have  hit the problem on   the head there as our legal system is built  on the 12 the century  legal concept  in  Britain.There were four inns of court  Grays InnLincoln’s Inn,   Inner Temple,    Middle temple , the links will take you  on a fascinating    voyage of discovery .

It  is perhaps not  very surprising that the words   Bar, standing  and  Inns   are all associated with the   law  .That is why only those standing  can  be at the bar, I can only guess that the others  were under the  table  or  dead in a corner  .

Through the   involvement of the Knights Templar and the  inns,  religion was a tool used  control  those both in the  Inns  and those   on whom the law was practiced. The Fear that  some harm would befall them  would  get any  one  to confess except those  who secretly knew that  you could tell lies and get away with it.

But fast forward to  2014, knights in shining amour are out, religion has been  shown not to  deliver the thunder bolts and lighting  to those who  do not speak the truth  or act honourably  . So what do we do  we   say to the lawyers   go and form an organization and control yourselves. New Zealand Law Society

As a safe guard we   set up  the LCRO    to which you can appeal  if you dont like what the law society does  but  we make certain that the people on the LCRO are appointed in consultation with  the law society  and also funded by them.

Because of the lack of funds the LCRO is desperately under resourced  and there appears to be a wait of some 2 years  before the matter is determined by the LCRO , evidence of this is  shown  in the dates of  the determinations .

To expedite matters and  to make it appear that most of the lawyers are good  guys   the law society ” writes the complaint off ” in their  early resolution process, this has the effect that people   just done bother making complaints   as it is simply a waste of  their time.  Their actions with lawyers are more akin to that of a mother of a very spoiled  only child  , rather than a mother of 10  who  in years gone by would have given   the culprit a good reason to remember why he has to stick to the rules.

I   have   only ever had one successful   complaint to the law society  and  that took 3 years to complete .  I was to get $30,000   after  false invoices had been issued .

As a former police officer I find it appalling that a person with  the full weight and responsibility of upholding the law and being an officer of the court    can  commit  acts which  when I was a police officer  were crimes .I have seen people locked up for  stealing  a packet of tobacco  yet here  I have been deprived of a massive sum   through false accounting and the  offender   is now suing me for bankruptcy.

Bankruptcy and liquidation are two processes used to  ” take some one   out ”   which liquidation of a company is the equivalent of killing off an opponent, bankruptcy is as close as you can  legally get to  bopping off a person  who gets in your way and if  they resit  they will son find that another $3,000 is added  to the bill.

This week a  Lawyer was  jailed for stealing from clients  this brings about the question, what is the threshold for theft? In my day a theft was a theft  but it appears that now thefts are acceptable up to a certain limit.

I have also become aware that  the law society  has a process which takes time  and  does not allow for intervention . Since  filing my  complaint with regards to  my former lawyer in  February 2011,   he has  taken me to court no less than five times  and my matter  has still not been resolved.

He is currently trying  to bankrupt me over $3,000  and  sue me for $500,000 .   All these court processes have   strict time frames  and   is  taking my time.  It has occurred to me that if he  bankrupts me for $3,000 all  my  issues will go away    and when your broke there is no point in coming after you for more dosh  cause your bankrupt.. It must be the  best  place to be. Perhaps my former lawyer is  trying to make me an example after all he   is in the business of setting up trusts  so that people  can hide their  money overseas . I know I wont get a cent from him  as  he  , despite  his business connections does not hold assets in his own name.

A  very good example  of how the  process is abused  is  that  my former lawyer   who was struck off as a  lawyer but  has had a reprieve and can practice   again if the was to get  a practicing certificate , is apparently  running his practice through a Proxy, a   very junior junior   who is working under the supervision of a lawyer in Alexandra and claiming to be a branch of that law firm   and having incorporated   both  law firms names into  the   trading name for the branch.

The very junior lawyer  operates from the premises of the former law firm  and    any one not knowing would think that it is business as usual at the former law firm .   I rather suspect that she is being given Practice   experience  by suing me,  all it can do is  cost me money  because if I  hired a lawyer and was   going to get a cost  payment in favour of me,   my former lawyer would  simply skip the country .

Now I consider  taking court action without   any evidence  as an abuse of process , it is akin to beating some one up  with a piece of 4 x2  and saying  sorry  wrong person  , didn’t mean to  hurt you .

But the law society will no doubt look at this and say no harm  done  and leave the door wide open to the next lawyer to make the same mistake.

In the mean time the person who has had  the court action filed agaisnt them has  how many sleepless nights?

This ” mistake  ‘ is actually a breach of the rules   and   the law society   has a duty to keep lawyers accountable to the rules , but the reality is that it works well for  lawyers not to be hard on   this  kind of thing  as it gives them something to put pressure on people with  .

This is not the only mistake   there have been many  .

It is for such  incidents ,  that I believe that the law society  should not be the both  the  body which disciplines  lawyers and holds them accountable .   I have drawn up a petition to segregate the functions of the law society  being 65 Regulatory functions  and 66 Representative functions. And to ask the government to set up one organization which    is dependent of Lawyers and only has the regulatory functions   so as to  hold lawyers truly accountable to the law.

A matter  follows   from complaint to law society , to LCRO to  tribunal   and  even after that there is  appeal

I am 4 years in on my matter and we have not hit the LCRO yet  , the LCRO will need at least 6 months to make a decision  then    there can be an appeal to the tribunal . Bankruptcy is just a  few   months  so it is a lot easier  for the lawyer to beat up his complainant  than it is for the complainant  to get  justice .

We need a process which work as  fast as a bankruptcy application does, a  process    during which administrators can intervene  and assess  all  court action  between the parties  and ensure that  only matters  are filed which    have followed the rules, proper negotiation and for which  there is evidence.

No more soft touch for lawyers.  They need to be held accountable to the law  to a Higher degree than the people who they proceed against . You can help by singing the petition

The petition is down loadable here   Petition for an independent lawyers authority

Several days  ago the press reported that  Rawshark  the alleged hacker is retiring . at the time his  Twitter account @Whaledump was suspended and he tweeted through an alternative account  that

The account posted that “every device used in this operation will have been destroyed and disposed of along with all the decryption keys” by the time the tweet was read.

Who ever Rawshark is  must be aware of stories like  mine,  what happens to a whistle blower in New Zealand.

Heaven forbid that ordinary people should  listen to a whistle blower, that would shatter the illusion, the perception that new Zealand is the least corrupt country.    so   this is how we deal with whistle blowers in New Zealand

1. Discredit them.  take the focus from the actual incident and   place it on  another event  which  will   be  contorted to make the whistle blower  appear as though they are driven by revenge. This is part of the concept of DARVO

DENY

ATTACK

REVERSE

VICTIM

AND OFFENDER

In my case I had worked on a trust with Mr Wells, The Auckland air cadet trust.  I  had been the  treasurer for 19 Squadron and  knew how hard the kids worked for their money , most of it was to keep the   motor glider  GOD   in the air.

When I took over the accounts for the AACT  , they were a mess  , the trust was losing  $1500 per month , I   straightened up the books asked hard questions  and for my efforts was kicked off the trust by Neil Wells who  was chair man and without warning    stood before the other trustees  and  read from  some notes telling them that I   was bringing the trust into disrepute and needed to be removed.  . I  could not understand what was going  on  I felt totally Bullied  and demanded  evidence .  The evidence never came and the notes which  Wells had read from   disappeared.   The rules of the trust were   re negotiated  so that Wells had the numbers  to remove me as trustee .  As a result of this I sent aFax to him at his work   telling him that I believed him to be the  greatest bully I had ever encountered.    ( for the record  the kids no longer  fly, the building they got had a massive cost and a 10 year lease.. how stupid is that  ? I suspect the trust was supposed to  go under   that is why he had to get rid of me   I  ruined that  plan )

As a result of this Fax I received a phone call  From Lyn Macdonald the bird lady, she was at the time a council dog control oficer and was concered that she was required to  volunteer her council paid time to  an organisation which Mr Wells appeared to run called  the Animal welfare Institute Of New Zealand AWINZ

She put me in touch with Robert Frittmann whose cat had been unlawfully euthanized on the authority of AWINZ. Robert, a security officer at the time, had tried but failed find the “organisation” and failed to get accountability.see the news item  Couple demand compensation for dead cat.

It was a council officer who  came under the auspices of AWINZ  who had used the animal welfare act to  illegally remove the cat.  Tom Didovich the council Manager at the time  wrote to Mr Frittmann

Like Robert ,I  could not  find who or  What AWINZ was so together with Robert and one other person we set up a trust called the Animal welfare Institute of New Zealand  so as to confirm that  an organisation existed as a legal person or not.

We were successful  in registering our name proving that   no organization by the name Of teh Animal welfare institute of New Zealand existed in New Zealand

Had AWINZ existed the matter would have finished there. I would have told the parties who and what the organisation was, instead I found that it did not exist in any legal or identifiable form. In stead we asked Questions  of Both the council and  MAF as to why an unidentifiable  non existent  organization was enforcing animal welfare law and why they were contacting to   an apparently  fictional Organization .

MAF had believed that AWINZ had   existed as a legal person and  had infact been assured of its existence, nut no one had checked.  So Six years after this unknown  and legally non existent   person took on law enforcement   authority  Told Mr Wells   was told to  register  AWINZ  . But of course he couldn’t do this  because we had the name . So he recruited some support   and  tried to pressure us into submission , just like he had removed me off the trust.

And so   I came under 8 years  of attack , the aim was to do as much financial damage as possible  and in so doing they  also destroyed my marriage and my family.  We are just collateral damage to keep this  secret under cover.

I find it interesting that   twice now  there has been intervention because police officers were not correctly sworn  but  one of two private Law enforcement authorities  was a total fiction  and we address that by throwing up   walls and blinkers  and pretending that it never happened.   So much so that I cannot get the press to   publish  anything.

I often get calls from Would be whistle blowers  this week from a person  who was concerned with the council again contracting to  unidentifiable persons    this time  Dialect Communications who received $8,000 in rate payers money . I have also raised the issue of 3/4 Million  Len Brown received from the New Auckland council trust.  No doubt his term of office   will be over before the police finish their investigations .

The court also likes  to back up  lawyers on   claims of fictional organisations   and  in my latest judgment from the court  the Judge . Patricia Cunningham ,  goes out of her  way  to attack me  instead of addressing  the issue .  Needles to say since I was not a party to those proceedings   the party involved, Our now renamed Animal owner support trust has filed an appeal.

So folks  that is how  we keep our least corrupt  status  by destroying  any one  who has the audacity   to say.. “but surely that wrong”    that is how  we   are the least corrupt.. we simply bully people into silence   speak up and lose your  home and Family…  Pretty good  for the least corrupt country  isn’t it ?  So lets all dash out  and vote for the parties which   support corruption , National and Act  .  ( I have a silent hope for  LabourAndrew little presented my petition for a commission against corruption .)

 

orlov opposes free speechI may have got this wrong but I some how believed that the Bill of rights  applied to every one in New Zealand .I also find it strange that those who claim the right of freedom of speech for themselves , are at the front of the queue to deny others  that  very same right .

14 Freedom of expression
  • Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form.

Such is the case  with two persons  this week  One being Cameron Slater  the other  Evgeny Orlov.

I also  notice that some  one has attacked Vinny Eastwood and taken down his  videos on You tube .

Cameron Slater’s matter has been well covered in the press.    But then there is Evgeny Orlov.

  Orlov is complaining that   I showed that companies that his  wife is the ultimate shareholder of , are associated with  international money laundering. this is not something I made up, it was widely reported in the press that UNIHOLD  was involved in international money laundering . Type in the words Orlov and MAFIA  into google and the  story which comes up is this one  New Zealand, Fresh From Its Service to Mexican Drug Lords, Helps Out the Russian Mafia

I obtained the  information with regards to Unihold from this and other   reliable sources  and traced the companies genealogy back through the companies office.    It is perhaps an inconvenient truth  but  it is a fact which I had no control over.

The companies have their Genesis  with  the GT group and SP trading companies which were reported on   in many articles in the press including this one on Stuff the article commences

Mexico’s brutal Sinaloa cartel, responsible for killing 28,000 people, is using a New Zealand connection to launder drug money.

In Romania, Laszlo Gyorgy Kiss, arrested in a $14.5 million extortion case, is tied to a New Zealand address – the same one that provides cover for North Korean arms smuggling.

My research  through linking companies  on the companies register  suggests that the activities which are reported in that article have been taken over and continued  By   a company again owned By a  former lawyers wife  .

It could  just be extreme coincidence ,that in a world full of proxy directors,   that this trust company uses  the same  Proxy directors  as  were used by GT Group and SP Trading and have acquired a raft of companies which were previously administered by them.

Many of the companies administered by this group  which operates from the premises of   the former law firm show  through their  archived  documents that they were once companies  under the control of either THE COMPANY NET TRUST or Geofrey Taylor and   sons Ian and Michael .

For   connecting the dots   I have been  has attacked me   and tis former lawyer is  seeking $500,000 in defamation claims  for stating  fact .

It occurs to me  that  he has a problem  comprehending   facts as in a most unprofessional affidavit    accuses the  author  of    New Zealand, Fresh From Its Service to Mexican Drug Lords, Helps Out the Russian Mafia    as being as uneducated as I am.   Richard Smith  mentions the lawyer and his wife by name  in a well researched article .

The former lawyer  claims that my lack of education is because I attended Papakura High school .  I have always  believed that he is  is Dyslexic, this is  from my observation in working with him, I believe that  claiming that  I  went to Papakura High school is a mistake only   a dyslexic could make as the only reference to my education is on my linked in profile  and that school is  Pakuranga College .

 Lack of comprehension  can be a serous matter  as  Richard Smith  is not the only  respected journalist to  have written about the proxy  directors and the companies involved ..

There cannot be any dispute that the companies associated with Unihold  are  ultimately owned  By the lawyers wife   , It is apparently  very defamatory  to make the connection   between a number of news items and the ownership of a company. I have to wonder if she actually knows what these companies are involved in . The cant have done  any due diligence when they took them over  or  have preferred to remain ignorant of the  associated  proxy directors involvement  in international crime.

Other news items   referencing Unihold  and van angels are set out in detail   at this link  and also in this news item   NZ shell company linked to alleged $150m fraud, the company in that article  was  Falcona systems  which  was    100% owned by Unihold.

as a result of the activity of these companies new Zealand was removed  from the EU White list

I find it rather  Ironic that I am attacked for  drawing attention to the activities of these companies  while the lawyer  has attacked the judiciary for not allowing him freedom of Speech.

In the same affidavit my former lawyer   states ”  Ms. Haden does not appear to have any boundaries for she also attacks  perfectly valid intemational organisations in her affidavit. For example, at paragraph 65(f) she states the completely perjurious statement that the  office of Breder Suasso is unattended without providing any proof of this.”

It would appear that he  cant even   compute pictures.  this is what was published

breder suasso in realityis  this not a picture of an unattended office  ” perhaps he did not recognize it  was not what was portrayed on the web site .

Perhaps my lack of education  fails to recognize the  invisible   lady behind the counter.

see also the news item  by Rob Stock

 

Long live freedom of expression for every one  and I certainly hope that Vinny gets his you tube channel back up  .

Last Week  Penny Bright and I did a joint presentation  on corruption to the good people of Helensville .

Vinnie  arranged for  it to be recorded through Barak Ford, I didn’t even know that it was going to be posted   but  am pleased it was   hope you find time to    watch it .

UPDATE

the video was  Hugely popular   look what happened  the account has been blocked . So I have posted this instead  it should  serve as a warning to us all

Where has freedom of speech and right to share information gone?

 

Thank you

The following is an open letter which I have written to the law society , I believe that this is a unique matter which has resulted in a gross miscarriage of justice .

It is a matter in which justice has been perverted by using the court to conceal a public corruption where by a fictional organisation was given coercive law enforcement powers.

I have overwhelming evidence that The Animal Welfare Institute of New Zealand(AWINZ ) , which had equivalent status under the Animal welfare act as the RNZSPCA , did not have any legal existence and its application to the minister was fraudulent as to the structure nature and existence of the alleged trust.

AWINZ operated from council premises in circumstances where by the council facilities were re branded to look like AWINZ. The council resources and staff were being used for private pecuniary gain by a council manager, the man who had also written and advised on the bill to facilitate his personal business plan of amalgamating dog and stock control.

When I questioned the lack of existence of AWINZ and lack of identifiable legal persons I was sued . I had the misfortune to compound matters by taking on the wrong lawyers . I engaged Evgeny Orlov.

The following is my letter to the law Society. I bring this to your notice as I believe that this instance seriously undermines the confidence that we need to have in the law.

I refer to the decision of the high court 21 August 2014 CIV 2013-404-5088 [2014] NZHC 1987

I note that in paragraph 3 c “Harrison J wrote to the Auckland District Law Society requesting it to inquire into Mr Orlov’s competency and qualifications. ‘

My research shows that these concerns stem back to 2009 .

Mr Orlov was my solicitor in 2009 he took a judicial review and an appeal on a matter of serious public corruption where I had been taken to court on a defamation claim by a man who had written and advised on legislation to facilitate his own business plan to amalgamate dog and stock control with animal welfare.

A fraudulent application was made to the minister , it alleged that a trust existed when in reality it did not. It was later claimed that a trust which had formed some three months later was the applicant however due to the unincorporated nature of that trust there was no evidence that the application had been discussed by the individual members or consented to.

My defence of truth and honest opinion were struck out and the matter progressed straight to Quantum.( there was no formal proof other than the person who had everything to gain by deceiving the court, swearing the statement of claim as true. Later evidence has proved that it was not true.

Orlov caused irreparable damage in his appeal and judicial report which has successfully closed all doors on me despite obtaining overwhelming and convincing evidence in 2011 that I have been right all along.

Orlov also allowed items to be written into my matrimonial property settlement after I had signed it a matter which the law society forgave due to the fact that I later consented to the settlement ( I consented because I was penniless and could not survive a week longer )

But that aside with respect to the matter of the animal welfare Institute of New Zealand which has now cost me so very much
1. I did not have competent representation
2. I paid Mr Orlov via Equity law limited fees based on competent representation
3. I had costs awarded against me
4. I also had massive interest charges which Orlov never warned me about

In short the repercussions from his incompetent representation was huge ,it is now such that a recent decision by Judge Cunningham, for the charitable trust involved in the litigation with me ,that her honour focused on me and not on the issues. She was concerned at the number of times associated issues had been before the court , much of this stem from trying to repair the damage done by Orlov.

I now have overwhelming evidence that there has been a miscarriage of justice but I cannot place this evidence before the court, I am exhausted and financially compromised

It has cost me an obscene sum and I too now have the prejudice of the court against me because I chose the wrong lawyer.

Given the fact that there was nothing in the public arena , that I was aware of at the time, with regards to Mr Orlovs competency I made my choice based on the assurance of the law society that their practitioners are qualified.

I did my own investigations into his law degree when I became suspicious of his capabilities and found that mr Orlov does not have a law degree .
For his qualifications he relies upon the LLb and LLM of Eugine Narodetsky.

I know that verification is badly done by many organisations and that the connection often relies on an assumption .
I have seen things manipulated and implied that mr Orlovs father is a Mr Ernest Narodetsky but I have never seen any real evidence that Narodetsky and Orlov are one and the same person.
Basically I have never seen any real evidence that Mr Orlov is Mr Narodetsky and I do not believe that any one else has either.
I am therefore seeking assistance and direction from the law society , I have exhausted my finances, Orlov is now taking me to court for the fourth time and the charitable trust needs to appeal the decision .

It is simply wrong when a client of an incompetent lawyer is left out on their own fighting the battles which he has made complicated and also while he is waging war on her for having made a justified complaint.

This is probably a unique situation and I am seeking a solution I am the victim of incompetent representation .

I ask for this to be treated with urgency
Regards
Grace Haden