Yeh !!! we have news papers speaking out and supporting whistle blowing see the dominion article here
I have posted the following on the site and hold my breath if the new paper will do anything with it or if it too will demonstrate that they were but empty words .
my comments which are awaiting moderation are as follows .
“I am a licensed private Investigator. Some years ago a dog control officer came to me with concerns that she was required to volunteer her council paid time to carry out animal welfare duties.
Animal welfare is the responsibility of central government it is performed through the RNZSPCA. At that time there was a second private law enforcement authority the Animal welfare institute of New Zealand (AWINZ )
AWINZ operated from the Waitakere city council dog control premises, used the council staff, vehicles plant and resources. I was asked to find out who or what AWINZ was and discovered that it did not exist beyond the dog control manager who was a barrister and had both advised on and written the bill for the legislation which had facilitated a fraudulent application by him for law enforcements.
He had made false claims to the minister bout AWINZ existence when in reality it was nothing more than a pseudonym for himself. He later went on to effectively contract to himself as manager of dog control contracting to the pseudonym.
As a whistle-blower I have been done ” like a dogs dinner ” pardon the pun.
It has been covered up at every level of government.
It is proof that Councillors have no influence or say as to what goes on in council divisions and these divisions are able to take on a life of their own including the use of public resources for private pecuniary gain. That is more than likely why our rate are so high.
Fines under the animal welfare act are up to $350,000 and section 171 of the act allows the money to be returned to the approved organization ( the law enforcement authority section 121 AW act ) .
MAF had not checked the existence of AWINZ and neither did the minister therefore it is much easier to shoot the messenger
The neglect of MAF and council has cost me well over $300,000 and 7 1/2 years of my life. They continue to cover up , if they cover this up what else are they hiding ? and how responsible are they really ?”
I am keeping my fingers crossed that the dominion may do some whistle-blowing on the whistle blowers issue . I do note that they have an other item ” Justice hacker sparks police probe“ so who knows perhaps times are a changing.
It is a proven fact that most corruption is revealed through whistle blowers. yet when some one blows the whistle the whole world turns and attacks the whistle blower.
Invariable the matter which was raised is resolved through the back door but the whistle blower is left standing on their own and neglected left to fight for justice through our antiquated court system which does not rely on evidence or truth.
. In my case the matter has gone on for 7 1/2 years , I am certain that if people hear my story they would make certain that they would be persuaded that whistle blowing certainly is not worth it.
A current example is Peter Dunne.. stop to think about it hasn’t he just exposed the fact that the government is secretly spying on New Zealanders the following Leaks have been attributed to him source
• An internal GCSB survey showing staff morale at the spy agency had “declined dramatically” (October 16, 2012).
• Novopay payroll system undermining Inland Revenue’s payment of teachers’ child support and KiwiSaver contributions (February 5, 2013).
• Details of the Prime Minister’s involvement in the appointment of his old schoolmate Ian Fletcher as head of the GCSB (April 2013).
• The resignation of National MP Jackie Blue to take up the position of Equal Opportunities Commissioner (April 16, 2013).
All are matters touching corruption all are matters which the government is being less than transparent about.
I can safely say this because I know that it is impossible to report corruption in New Zealand , our civil court system is dangerous and the entire system appears to favour corruption.
It is still unbelievable to me that the Government can condone people writing legislation for their own use, advising on it and then applying under a false name. then allow the private law enforcement authority to continue to exist knowing that its structure would not be sufficiently robust to qualify for a $5 bank loan .
This ” organization ( AWINZ ) was then allowed to operate from council premises so that it appeared that the organization was a crown entity from one angle , a council entity from another angle but in reality was one man playing local and central government off against each other while making a private pecuniary gain courtesy of the rate payers.
I made the fatal mistake of believing that being the least corrupt meant that we had a identify and annihilate approach to corruption. Instead i found that our approach is ignore ,keep stum and cover up.
We should be encouraging more ministers like Peter Dunne not disposing of them. He may have breached some ethical rules but he certainly cannot be accused of concealing corruption.
to see what effect our attitude to whistelblowershave on people I invite you to look at this video of a fire chief in Canada, he spoke out about a conflict of interest in council and paid the ultimate price see story
No matter who we are , no matter where we are not one of us is served will by a government which conceals corruption and bribery .
Perhaps we should unite for our future and have a zero tolerance to bribery and corruption not by ignoring it and pretending it is not there but by actively exposing it and cleaning up our our act so that we can hold our heads high and know that we are the least corrupt because we deal with the issue and not because we ignore it.
It is a sad indictment on society when we care more about animals than we do about fellow human beings. Don’t get me wrong I do not support cruelty to animals but it appears to me that those who campaign against cruelty for animals are not averse to treating humans in a cruel manner.
Much research has been done to show that people who treat animals unfavourably will also treat people unfavourable. I submit that the reverse also applies.
You cannot pretend to care about animals when you treat people in a most horrendous way.
The New Zealand Animal welfare strategy published in the animal welfare matters New Zealand Animal Welfare Strategy lists two outcomes
1. Care of animals-We meet the needs of our animals and avoid causing unreasonable or unnecessary harm to animals through our activities.
2. Reputation for integrity- New Zealand’s animal welfare practices add value to our exports and contribute to our reputation as a responsible agricultural producer
Let us focus on the second item Reputation for integrity
Reputation- A specific characteristic or trait ascribed to a person or thing
Warren Buffett stated “ It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you’ll do things differently.”
While Abraham Lincoln said “ Character is like a tree and reputation like a shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; the tree is the real thing.”
The word “integrity” stems from the Latin adjective integer (whole, complete). In this context, integrity is the inner sense of “wholeness” deriving from qualities such as honesty and consistency of character.
H. Jackson Brown, Jr. said “Live so that when your children think of fairness, caring, and integrity, they think of you. “
And W. Clement Stone said “Have the courage to say no. Have the courage to face the truth. Do the right thing because it is right. These are the magic keys to living your life with integrity.”
Reputation for integrity can therefore be taken to mean that the Ministry of primary industries wants to be seen as consistently acting in an ethical, legal and honest way.
The document animal welfare matters at point 2 talks of compassionate treatment of animals as already discussed we cannot have compassion for animals if we do not have compassion for fellow humans.
The article considers the fact that animals feel pain and distress and have other experiences; this in many respects is the same for humans.
The duty of care for animals physical, health, and behavioural needs cannot exceed the duty of care for human physical, health, and behavioural needs and must at the very least be equal .
The word humane is used a number of times and the requirement for Humane action is stressed.
Humane is defined characterized by tenderness, compassion, and sympathy for people and animals, especially for the suffering or distressed:
We can conclude from this statement that action which is unsympathetic and which causes distress and suffering would not be considered “humane “
Last year I was hounded through the court by a charitable trust which used its trust funds to pursue a judgement debt which had been awarded to one of the trustees in his private capacity as reward for deceiving the court and misleading the court.
$94,860.48 of charitable funds were used to collect a cost award in favour of Mr Neil Wells that author of the animal welfare no 1 bill and the “ independent “ advisor to the select committee who had an undeclared vested interest in seeing the legislation passed into law so that he could set up a fictional organisation under a false name to acquire coercive law enforcement powers.
What is even more spectacular is that he later set up a trust to cover up the fact that the animal welfare Institute of New Zealand (AWINZ) had no existence in any manner or form other than as a trading name for himself.
It was only when a Waitakere council officer asked who she was volunteering her council paid time to that it emerged that AWINZ had no legal existence and was not defined as being any particular legal person.
Wells set up a meeting and started to cover up, this included taking court action so that things which could not be proved otherwise were proved through misleading the court. Being a barrister made this a simple task as his status allowed him to be trusted over and above any mere plebe appearing in the court.
Once he had the 57,500 awarded in his favour, he set about taking contemporaneous liquidation and bankruptcy action without first sending any demand .
This was not the only sums he was after he wanted the $41,000 costs plus the interest, and then when that was taken care of other demands came out of the woodwork totalling nearly $200,000.
This was all done using the charitable dollar proof of this can be found on the charities web site in the annual accounts of a further trust caked AWINZ which did not even exist when litigation commenced.
The chronology of events is found in this document misappropriation of funds
What is incredible is that one of the purposes of this trust is stated as being
To encourage and develop by humane education individual responsibility for the welfare of animals and the promotion of humane attitudes in society to animals and people;
Makes a mockery of charities and donations don’t you think?
The following is my complaint to the charities commission what’s the bet that this type of action is going to be condoned ?
This Teflon trust appears to be able to get away with so much it makes you wonder what influence they have in the various government departments.
Neil Wells barrister..former council manager . well connected to the labour party , associate of bob Harvey , wrote the animal welfare bill closely associated with MAf now the ministry of primary industries
Wyn Hoadley former mayor, Councillor Thames Coromandel district council closely associated to the ministry of primary industries , labour party connections husband is professor of Human rights at Auckland university
Graeme Coutts JP , recruiter
Tom Didovich former council manager life coach .. that has to be a joke doesn’t hesitate funding the assault on a family.
Your complaint to the Charities Commission
Here is a copy of the complaint you submitted to the Charities Commission using the online complaint form on this page:
What charity is your complaint related to?
Animal welfare institute of New Zealand CC11235
Is the charity registered with the Charities Commission?
How do you know the charity?
Through court proceedings , I am not affiliated with them.
What is your complaint?
Charitable funds have been used to pay for bankruptcy and liquidation proceedings for judgement debt payable to one of the trustees in his private capacity for court action commenced prior to the charity being established . The charitable funds have also been used by three of the trustees to pay for court proceedings in which they each as individuals and not as trustees were taken to court. This is misappropriation of charitable funds.
Evidence of this is found in the invoices produced by Brookfields made out to AWINZ as attached
a full chronology is here with the hyperlinks open into the required evidential documents
The ministry of Primary industries formerly MAF has this week been taught a lesson in the significance of names. this is probably best summed up in the herald Editorial: Name change hardly makes business sense .
It would appear therefore that MAF aka the ministry of Primary Industries knows nothing about legal names, trading names and legal persons. Until they do they will be a continued target of identity fraud. Perhaps its time they learned a lesson from the Chinese.. It would appear that the Chines do due diligence and do everything they can to stamp out identity fraud.
Where as MAF and the MPI in the least corrupt country in the world can be so complacent as to be negligent. but the when in doubt ” deny everything ” approach appears to work in their favour.. except when you deal with the Chinese.
The ministry has had its head in the sand far too long and is oblivious to the fact that a name change could have an impact on exports — fraud does not just happen in bribery or in accounts it also happens through Identity fraud – the Chinese know this but apparently the MPI does not.
I have two first hand experiences of this with the former MAF and both show how ignoring a name can perpetrate fraud and corruption. If I have had two incidents how many more are out there ??????
The first matter is Animal welfare institute of New Zealand ( AWINZ ) – The MPI formerly MAF gave this law enforcement powers under the animal welfare act , this enabled AWINZ to become a law enforcement authority but the issue was that AWINZ did not exist in any guise or form other than an undefined trading name.
MAF never received any evidence that AWINZ existed and acted on unfounded trust when it advised the minister of agriculture at the time and caused AWINZ to be gazetted and the issuing of this press release by the minister.
Note that on the gazette item the letters Inc appear after the name , if you refer to the Incorporated societies Act you will note that only incorporated societies are refereed to as inc.
the news item states that ” AWINZ is a charitable trust Based in Auckland” yet MAF had never seen a trust deed and despite the application made only by Mr wells through an unsigned application for approved status MAF did not query any of the following.
- That the application was unsigned
- the application was supported by an executed trust deed
- that none of the persons who were purportedly the AWINZ trustees had shown their consent in any manner or form to becoming a law enforcement authority with coercive statutory powers.
- That Mr Wells misled the MAF and the minister as to the the existence of AWINZ and it structure both verbally and in correspondence. see page 6 of this document “A signed copy of the Deed of Trust will follow. The original is being submitted to the Ministry of Commerce for registration as a charitable trust in accordance with clause 20 (a) of the Deed.” – it appears that MAF was so ignorant that it didn’t matter that they never received a copy of the deed, that originals are never sent off , only certified copies are sent and that in the unsigned deed that they were given a copy of no section 20 ( a) exists.
- MAF did absolutely no due diligence and did not check with the registrar of charitable trusts to see if a trust was registered. The effect of registration under the charitable trust act makes a trust by group of people into a legal person through incorporation .- Basically no contract to anything that is not a legal person will not be valid and as such the agreement between MAF and AWINZ was not worth the paper it was written on as no trust deed had been sighted and no legal body named AWINZ existed.
Even when MAF became aware that AWINZ had no legal existence it continued to all it to be a law enforcement authority , this period was from March 2006 until December 2010 when Auckland council was formed .
But it gets better than that MAF is not even alerted to the fraud when the see the logos of AWINZ matching those of Waitakere city council dog control division.
and their own people writing up an audit report which states ” it was at times difficult during the audit to distinguish where the structure of AWINZ finished and where WCC began hence it was at times difficult to separate the AWINZ organisation from that of WCC. For example AWINZ inspectors are not employed by AWINZ but are all employees of WC ”
The second matter involves a company called Fresh prepared Limited , the background to this company has been well reported in the press Boss invents accountant to escape $60k debt and Charges over alleged fake liquidator and the latest news item .
Mr Terry Hay who is the subject of all of thise items saw to it to harass me by placing three advertisements in the mandarin times
He also made use of my visit to t e company premises which I had undertaken to locate the fictional director Sanjay Patel. While I was there I was told that the company was no longer fresh prepared Limited but was Salad foods. I was told that the company had changed its name. I pointed out that it was not a name change but that apparently another company had taken over the business seamlessly .
I noted that there were MAF certificates for import licensing on the wall in the name of Fresh prepared limited . I mentioned that if this was Salad foods Limited then MAF would be interested in these certificates for one company being used for another.– I was wrong Names are of no relevance to MAF and a certificate on the wall apparently is enough no matter what name it is in.
I reported this to MAF and found myself under investigation by MAF for passing myself off as a MAF officer . I was eventually warned when all MAF had to rely on was the statement of one employee who claimed ” I don’t remember who she said she was but she said she was from MAF ”
Fortunately the NEW of the MED were a lot more competent and did charge Mr Hay with 22 offenses of fraud Only to see these charges dropped by Crown law office after being approached by a QC.
Significantly I was to find out just how closely Mr Wells and Mr Hay were associated , they played it beautifully both having a desire to keep themselves out of Jail by discrediting me and obfuscating the facts.
I was to find out that the very same people who were behind granting the AWINZ approval were also involved in the investigation of the fresh prepared allegations into me. I had to be silenced was pointing out something potentially career limiting to these people.. the fact that they had trusted Mr Wells on his word and had simply mot checked It was therefore easier to crucify me than face the music.. this shows that I would have been better off as a whistle blower in China than In New Zealand. hence NZ is the least corrupt county .. we hide it so well. Look no corruption !
A mother of 5 in Northland who is the subject of having one of her children abducted through use of the court has written to Chester burrows in response to his letter.
It brings up an important issue .. privacy
16 May 2013
Minister for Courts
By Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
I am writing in relation to the letter you sent to Ms Haden dated 15 May 2013. I comment as
I agree there are a number of statutes which require personal service. Applications within the District Court are contained in this number. Applications in the District Court are legal documents and should be required to be served by someone with “standing”. These documents often contain very personal information. The fact that currently “anybody” can serve these often very important and personal documents, is appalling! Why should New Zealander’s be expected to trust ”just anybody”? We should not have to, we need protection from “untrustworthy people” who are allowed to serve legal documentation. Surely, it does not take a rocket scientist to figure this out!
In January, (as you are probably aware) an unsavoury document server (of no standing) swore an “affidavit of service”that he served me, when he did not. In fact, he swore two separate “affidavits of service” with different dates and times as to the service. The nature of the documents that he swore he served on me was very personal indeed. These documents were never served on me, therefore I am left wondering what he did do with those documents. He could have hung them up on a public notice board for all I know. Do you really consider the appropriate legislation in place to safeguard me, in this regard?
The fact that there is punishment of up to 7 years for committing perjury is beside the point. It is in fact, very difficult to uphold charges of perjury, aside from anything else, special permission is required because of the difficult nature of pressing charges.
This, is not in my opinion, acceptable. Accountability is almost zero. If you think the legislation
you have in place is adequate, I think you are sadly, living in a fantasy Aotearoa “land”.
Of the many members of the public I have spoken to, I have ascertained that it is assumed by them,that people of standing are required to serve legal documentation. I consider absolutely, that adequate protection of New Zealanders in this regard is not in place.
The fact that it would cost applicants significantly more money to apply for applications, may prove to be a deterrent to those applicants who use the Court to try and sort personal matters, which perhaps, could be resolved outside the Court. Currently, as is certainly the case in my case, the applicants could have resolved the issue by playing “nice”. They are in fact, unable to, hence the Court proceedings. Perhaps you could consider my letter as “one with experience”. I am telling you, I feel completely unprotected by the government and the laws which are not in place _ surrounding document service and I believe it is essential that people of “standing” should be required, with the very important/personal details of the public.
Would you trust Michael Downey with your personal information? If you would trust him, my hat goes off to you. I certainly do not, and I still do not know what he did with the documentation that he was supposed to have served on me, and didn’t.
This matter is very serious, are the government taking it seriously? I think not. Place yourself in my shoes. My life has been turned upside down because of the peijury of Michael Downey and the fact, that the likes of people, like me, are not protected. We the people, are very vulnerable to people of the likes of Downey. You may think it will not happen to you, but maybe one day it will because from what I can gather this happens all too often and this is not good enough! I beg you not to be ignorant, and to get with the play. It is insolent, to pretend it does not happen. Non service happens, all too often, because there are people out there who are not honest, and the government are giving them every reason not to be, given that enforcement of peijury is so extremely difficult.
I can honestly say, that two days ago I was pushed along the road by a logging truck, who failed to stop at an accident, and my treatment within the Court system because of the perjury, is worse than that! When I wake during the night- my thoughts are with the Court matter and my “unfair” treatment, not the logging truck that very nearly took my life (and the life of my five children’s mother). My Court ordeal (because of the false affidavits) could all have been prevented if the document server, had served the documents. He didn’t. How would you feel if you had, not one, but two, false affidavits served on you by lawyers who condoned them? The Judge ruled I had evaded service because those same lawyers convinced the Judge of it!
“Anybody who swears a false affidavit can be held accountable under the laws of peijury” I don’t think so, it took me three months for anybody even to listen to me. On the plus side, many people are now aware of the laws or lack of them and are shocked! What will it take for the government to listen to the people, who elected them into parliament, in the hope of betterment of our country?!
I am going to send a copy of this letter to Ms Haden to use on her website if she wishes, as we are two of those people who have been drastically effected as a result of non service. Countless
numbers, were unable to prove they were not served!
I refer to my earlier posts Approved and acceptable standards for document service in New Zealand and Translegal services NZ Limited another lesson in document service
The gentle man to the left is a document server.
He was employed By Translegal services NZ Limited
The documents which he was given to severe were to remove a child from his mothers custody so that the estranged grand parents could access the 5 year old without his ability to have the support or comfort of any of of siblings or mother.
I wrote to to the minister of courts and have received the response today see the letter here chester borrows document service
I have responded to the minister as follows
Reply to Chester Borrows
Thank you for your letter .
I wish to point out that the persons being used for the service of documents are hardly professional in any sense of the word they appear to be persons who could quite easily be classified as of no fixed abode.
Process servers are not registered in any manner or form and John Smith of Auckland can become a process server.
I have laid a complaint for perjury. The person who signed the affidavit is identifiable only by a partial name of Tony Parker and Of Auckland , he is not locatable or able to be charged in the criminal jurisdiction due to the fact that they cannot be identified or located.
Mr Downey on the other hand came from a small enough community to be identified , his picture on face book assisted , I note the page has since been removed
These fine pillars of society are taken on their word that they have served documents and the party who legitimately claims that they were not served is left to fight that point and is often determined by the court as a person who “ evades “ service , this tarnishes their copy book and the court looks at them unfavorably from then on.
It simply does not serve justice .
There perhaps needs to be a vicarious liability provision in this case to ensure that the party who serves is held accountable for perjury and non-service.
In the interest of transparency I will post this reply on my blog site www.anticorruption.co.nz
for the consequences of this lack of service see the blog here http://justnz.wordpress.com/
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.
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/
Open letter to the Solicitor General
I remember doing criminology in my younger days and the age old question was what makes a person become a criminal.
Well I have finally worked it out.. you become a criminal because of your status in society, who you know and what strings you can pull can make the difference to being charged or not. If you are not charged then you wont become a criminal . If you destroy evidence then you will also get away with your crimes as will the simple trick of getting in first and taking the whistle blower to court on fake claims.
There are many would be criminals out there who are fortunate enough to have the right connections or know the right methodology to keep themselves out of the spot light, they live on to rip others off while the unsuspecting appease the statistics to show that they system is working.
She obviously does not know people in influence as she has ended up in jail for having been placed in possession of a forged document which is not even a degree.
YET there are two far worse cases running free they are as follows.
Neil Wells the former head of the RNZSPCA is not even in the firing line for having written legislation for his own business plan then advising on this very legislation as independent adviser to the select committee without declaring his conflict of interest and then making an application under the legislation which he had written for approved status using a pseudonym and making false claims to MAF and the minister that and organisation existed when in reality it was just himself.
HE OBTAINED LAW COERCIVE ENFORCEMENT POWERS FOR A FICTIONAL ORGANISATION WHICH WAS NOTHING MORE THAN HIMSELF
Wells ran this law enforcement authority which lacked any formal structure and was just a pseudonym for himself , from Waitakere city council premises ,where he was dog control manager had had set the staff up to volunteer their time to himself and they were required to prioritize their council paid time to his fictitious organization while using the councils resources and infrastructure . Wells personally ran a bank account in the name of the fictitious organization AWINZ ( animal welfare institute of new Zealand) so when a doc control officer found an animal suffering they would report it to their boss Neil wells , He would hand the complaint on to the head of the fictional AWINZ.. Neil wells .. He would pass it on the the Barrister..Neil wells and by virtue of the legislation which Neil Wells had heavily contributed to , the proceeds of prosecution would be returned to the fictional AWINZ by virtue of section 171 for which Neil Wells was the only account signatory . – effectively he single handedly ran a private RNZSPCA which was all income and no outgoings.
HE USED PUBLIC ASSETS FOR PRIVATE PECUNIARY GAIN
HE MISLED MAF AS TO THE NATURE AND EXISTENCE OF AWINZ
The united nations convention agaisnt corruption calls this action public office for private pecuniary gain. It is frowned upon and is even illegal in 99% of the world but in Good old corruption free NZ it is condoned. I know it is condoned because I have spent 7 years banging my head agaisnt every government department, there is not a Councillor , a minister or head of department who has not hears about this from me. not one has acted proactively
Another person who is not a criminal is Terry Hay, BECAUSE I BELIEVE ON WHAT I HAVE HEARD THAT HE MANAGED TO BUY HIS WAY OUT OF THE CHARGES WHICH WERE BEFORE THE COURT.
Terry Hay is a partner of David Nathan of Auckland chamber of commerce fame.
Terry Hay was charged with a number of charges of fraud by the ministry of economic developments national enforcement unit the charges are here
He had created a fictional liquidator and director to avoid paying lawyers bill . His associate Lyn Pryor was convicted and received a slap across the and with a wet dish rag the news items are Charges over alleged fake liquidator and Boss invents accountant to escape $60k debt
Hay absconded and lived in Honolulu he then attempted to bribe his way back in to the country the NEU refused and told him to front the judge , the NEU was wound up the charges were dropped and Hay is back in the country .
so in summary
It is not a criminal act to make an application for law enforcement powers using a non existent organization . therefore telling lies to the minister and to MAF is OK and to tell lies to the court to cover this up is OK ( I have prepared a perjury file but no one is willing to prosecute .. I am a former police prosecutor I know that the claims were supported )
It is apparently not a criminal act to create a fictional liquidator or director or to use a false address for a shareholder , therefore telling lies to the ministry of economic developments is OK .. having plenty of money and good connections allows you to get away with the crime without having to face court.
BUT it is apparently a crime for an early child hood teacher to have a false degree which was issued from a private teaching establishment.
Why is there such disparity in prosecutions isn’t a crime a crime.. shouldn’t all three be free or all three be in jail ?
And if any one is concerned about a a Kindy teacher not having a qualification perhaps some one should ask Judge Wade to show his law degree. ( I have it on good authority that he has not sat one.)
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
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!
- never passed the final paper of her diploma,
- got provisional registration as a teacher and a job( basically the teachers registration did not check )
- provided forged documents but later said in her defence a Clevedon Kidz manager had forged the documents
- Had not set up a trust
- made an application in the name of the alleged trust for law enforcement authority and was granted it ( basically the minister did not check )
- 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