"We have maintained a silence closely resembling stupidity" - Neil Roberts

Until we have legislation adopted into law to ensure fiduciary accountability and transparency in public affairs we will continue to have human rights breached because the existing crown immunity and lack of any independent oversight invites corruption to flourish.


"Question authority, and think for yourself" - Timothy Leary


"We have maintained a silence closely resembling stupidity" - Neil Roberts


"Information is the currency of democracy" - Thomas Jefferson


‎"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever does." - Margaret Mead

"The truth is like a lion, you don't have to defend it. Let it loose, it will defend itself."

"I = m c 2 [squared] where "I" am information" - Timothy Leary

"Ring the bells that still can ring, forget your perfect offering, there's a crack in everything, that's how the light gets in." Leonard Cohen

"The internet is a TV that watches you"

Monday, December 20, 2010

Lawyer Michael Appleby's 'friend' Julian Tyerman responds to Law Society complaint:


I recently wrote to the Wellington District Law Society about the actions of lawyer Michael Appleby, who agreed to act for me regarding the politically motivated attack on me by Police at a public meeting in October 2007 after an outburst from Georgina Beyer. The response from the Law Society is unbelievable! In it, Mr Appleby denies sending me any accounts - and blatantly denies the existence of the Bills of Costs, the Submissions for Costs, the Submissions in response to the police submissions, etc, etc, etc, - all listed at the bottom of his complaint to the IPCA! He never even bothered providing a response, so the Law Society made one up for him and this is the fob off! Unbelievable! This is blatant corruption and dishonesty! Mr Appleby had a fiduciary duty to my, to the Court, to the Law Society - and this is the ease with which complaints are dismissed in the face of indisputable evidence!

Mr Appleby originally offered to act pro bono on these matters, because, as other lawyers have noted, they involve serious fundamental issues of constitutional law. He agreed to sue the Police over their actions at the public meeting in 2007 and afterward, pursue the matter of the refusal of Police to take complaints from me or investigate them, regarding this matter and several other corruptly laid charges, and to act for me regarding three well founded appeals.

I was prevented from getting to the Wellington Court on the day of the three appeals, by Colin Allomes, a man who was paying Mr Appleby money, at Mr Appleby's request, as part of the six accounts Mr Appleby sent me, totalling nearly $45,000, as one of them involved the Mr Allomes' daughter, who sent me messages saying "you need a bullet" and "watch your back".

The NZ Police still refuse to charge Rachel Betteridge and her husband for this, despite going ahead to the bitter end with the corrupt prosecution against me, and in spite of the fact that there was no evidence against me and there is overwhelming and indisputable evidence against Betteridge and her husband!

After Mr Appleby apparently deliberately lost the three appeals, I discovered that he had also deleted a paragraph from the original complaint to the PCA, and mislead me regarding the deletion. The correspondence is below, and at a previous post, although a little disorganised.

Three days after the hearing of the three appeals Mr Appleby somehow managed to lose, I was seriously assaulted in Dannevirke, by Colin Allomes, the man who was paying Mr Appleby. A letter from Constable Cunningham to lawyer Jock Blathwayt describes Mr Allomes previous history of attempting to pervert the course of justice and his habit of intimidating and threatening witnesses, behaviour which Constable Cunningham himself describes as bordering on perverting the course of justice, in the letter at the link.

When I expressed my concern about this, and my reluctance to sign over all the money from suing the police to him if he was going to do things like that, he set about undermining my complaints to both the PCA and the Ombudsmen, and breaching my confidence by discussing my affairs with his friends, etc

His six accounts also failed to mention the money he was extorting from Mr Allomes, or the considerable amount of work I had done typing up work he was doing for other clients, submissions, etc, other considerable amounts of typing submissions to IRD who Mr Appleby was engaged in a dispute with, major section clearing and rubbish removal at another property of Mr Appleby's in Palmerston North. He has also neglected to mention the several hundred dollars I gave him or the various items of jewellery, furniture, etc.

Shortly after making the complaint to the Law Society it was drawn to my attention that Mr Appleby's 'friend' Julian Tyerman had created a Facebook page and various websites using my name, and purporting to be written by me.

The posts have become increasingly nasty and vicious, culminating in the latest two offerings, including sick urgings for me to commit suicide - copied here, the one published on December 14 being in response to the one I published the previous day challenging him regarding his identity. There is no evidence of the allegations that I defamed or spoke badly of Mr Appleby whatsoever. This disturbing rubbish is in direct response to my letter to the Law Society - but wait till you see the Law Society's response:

Katherine Raue, Court Jester and Taxation Waster:
DECEMBER 14 2010
Well done Katherine ... yes one and the same !
Good friend of lawyer Michael Appleby indeed and proud of it .
The same Michael Appleby who generously assisted you for some time till he also came to the conclusion that you had a serious personality disorder, and refused you any further legal assistance.
And we both know what you did then.
You decided that Michael was now the enemy, and as is your modus operandi set your sights on defaming him, but it didnt work did it !.
By this stage you had amassed a whopping, and as yet unpaid bill to Michael totalling in excess of $30,000.
You left your signature ranting messages on his answer phone... in fact completely filling the available message space day in day out, simply confirming to Michael his thoughts of you.
Did you really expect him to return your calls Kate... how sad.
What worries me Kate is that despite the fact you so obviously desperately need help, it is not being afforded to you, and I find this to be a shameful reflection on the social system.
But in truth, you are your own worst enemy.
Are you aware Kate that you are simply becoming an amusing interlude, allowing the public and the Police an escape from the day to day drudgery of life, by being our one and only court jester.
If this has perhaps escaped your attention, then it may be wise to put some consideration into it.
Or simply join the comedy roadshow and make it your new vocation.

DECEMBER 9TH 2010, 2:29 AM
Im perturbed, hence the reason Im posting again.

This week Katherine Raue stood in court and instead of addressing the issue at hand, that being assault.
Cleverly admitted that perhaps she was mentally impaired, and as such could not defend herself as planned.
The presiding Judge had no option but to once again adjourn the case.
This is in fact the same raving lunatic that purports to expose corruption in our taxation system, while costing each and every New Zealander an unknown amount to deal with her.
She cried suicidal tendancies in order that she may weasel out of appearing.
And yet requested a police escort to leave the premise, as she feared retaliation from those that she has savagely defamed, who rightfully so are baying for her blood.
Its appalling that Katherine Raue continues to manipulate the system at enormous expense to us all.
Carterton has recently experienced an upsurge in burglarly, and yet the local plod have to spend valuable time dealing with what can only be described as a maggot on the face of the planet.
That maggot being Katherine Raue.
If it were not for the fact I feel intensely sad whenever a suicide happens,
I would urge Katherine Raue to hurry up and get it over with.
Why on earth can she not be afforded the help she so desperatly requires, before the owners of the backpackers on High street Carterton have to deal with what for me seems like an inevitable end .

Come on the powers that be. can we please gratiously, discretely and quickly give Katherine the help that even a layman can obviously see she needs.
This has gone on so long that it is becoming a farce... and the egg on the face may well end up on our social system, and the police ... perhaps that is Katherines ultimate agenda.

This taunting, mocking, spiteful outpouring of hatred from Michael Appleby's "friend" is a damning indictment on both of them and says far more about them than me. Firstly, my involvement with lawyer Michael Appleby was subject to confidentiality and absolutely none of Tyerman's business whatsoever, Appleby clearly breached that confidence in bleating to Tyerman about these matters, Tyerman should get a life and stop poking his nose in mine. The mere fact that Mr Appleby is discussing my confidential affairs with a hate filled maniac like Julian Tyerman, who is publishing damning and untrue rubbish like this is a very serious breach of fiduciary duty indeed. Tyerman is clearly the one with the personality disorder - nobody in their right mind publishes this sort of spite: "If it were not for the fact I feel intensely sad whenever a suicide happens, I would urge Katherine Raue to hurry up and get it over with."

This is indicative of a sick and nasty mind, with a serious personality disorder alright - Tyerman's! This is who should be locked in the lunatic asylum - Tyerman!

Wairarapa has some of the highest suicide rates in the world, as a direct result of corrupt police and Court staff, who conspire with other people of low character (liek Tyerman, and the group of unemployed louts and mental patients who accompany him, and disgraced ex Mayor Gary McPhee, to Court where they sit in the front row all day calling out abuse, then they follow me from the courthouse calling out more abuse and threats, as witnessed by passers by, such as the local church minister who gave me his card and said he'd be happy to make a statement about this behaviour of Tyerman and his nasty lunatic mates.


Readers of this site will know full well that I have never "defamed" Michael Appleby in any way. Mr Appleby wrote the letter dated 30 May 2007 to the Police Complaints Authority, which can be viewed at the link. In paragraph 12 of the formal complaint attached to this letter is the following statement (12): "I very reluctantly agreed to act for her, based on my normal legal costs of $200 per hour, knowing full well that she was impecunious and on a benefit." And "13. Mrs Raue has, therefore, been faced with a legal bill of $15,639 (see Bill of Costs attached as “B”) as a result of the opposition of the Police, thereby breaching her right under Section 24(f) of the NZ Bill of Rights Act , which states that she “shall have the right to receive legal assistance without cost if the interests of justice so require and the person does not have sufficient means to provide for that assistance.”
14. The District Court Judge, Behrens J., Q.C. dismissed the five charges at the close of the case for the Prosecution, following submissions from myself (and having six witnesses ready to refute the complainant’s ‘evidence’), with the Prosecution agreeing at the end of Counsel’s submissions that the evidence for the Prosecution was, indeed, “tenuous”.
15. The District Court took the most unusual step of granting costs against the Police following Submissions by myself as to the question of costs. Behrens J. granted costs of $3781 instead of Mrs Raue’s actual costs of $15,639, leaving a shortfall of $11,858 to be paid by Mrs Raue as a result of the actions of the Police in opposing the application for an adjournment, and based on their knowledge that they had only “tenuous” evidence against Mrs Raue.
16. An appeal against the refusal to grant actual costs on a lawyer-client basis was lodged with the High Court but this was unsuccessful.
17. Mrs Raue seeks not just damages for the various breaches of the NZ Bill of Rights Act, but also the shortfall between her actual legal expenses of $15,639, and the costs awarded to her of $3781, namely $11,858.
18. A copy is attached of the Judgment by Behrens J. dismissing the three charges of Trespass, Disorderly Behaviour and Resisting Arrest at the close of the second day of the trial on the Wednesday. Judge Behrens adjourned the two further charges of assault, and assaulting Police, until a subsequent date, and on that date he dismissed these two further charges, again at the close of the case for the Prosecution, following submissions from myself, without the Defence needing to call any evidence.
19. A copy of his further judgment is attached, and it can be seen that he took a very dim view of the whole sorry saga.
20. Apart from the three breaches of her human rights outlined above, a perusal of the various attached documents will reveal to you that a number of Mrs Raue’s other human rights have also been breached, namely:"


This statement makes it indisputably obvious that Appleby is now lying to the Wellington District Law Society, from whom I received a letter recently to confirm that Appleby has told them that he acted pro bono in the matters. He did not, he sent six accounts and sabotaged the complaints, and the appeals.


The Police and the PCA responded to the complaint, completely ignoring paragraphs 3-5 (below) inclusive:
  1. Further to Judge Borrin’s letter of 9 December 2005 (a copy of which is attached for your convenience and ease of reference), I write to confirm that all of the five charges have been thrown out by the District Court, and partial costs awarded against the New Zealand Police.
  2. I attach some relevant documents in connection with Mrs Raue’s complaint.
  3. Further background to the history of the treatment of Mrs Raue by the Masterton Police is the letter of 26August 2004 from Mrs Raue’s previous counsel, Mr Ken Daniels, to the Police calling their attention to what Mr Daniels himself believed to be fraud at the Carterton Community Centre.
  4. The only response to this letter seems to have been the brief e-mail dated 26 April 2006, from Police officer Murray Johnston, admitting that he couldn’t remember Mr Daniels letter, that he couldn’t locate the file, and scoffing at any allegations which might have been made in the letter from Mr Daniels, even though he couldn’t even remember receiving the letter. The e-mail states: “Any such allegation by Kate against the Community Centre management would take a very low priority from a Police perspective. Her allegations about the Community Centre have mostly proved unfounded, emotive and simply not credible”, even though Mr Daniels is a Lawyer, and had expressed his concern at what he himself believed to be fraud.
  5. The Masterton Police have, apparently, made no further investigations into Mr Daniels’ concerns about the fraud, nor do they intend to do so from the tenor of the email. This obviously requires further investigation by the Authority and constitutes a separate complaint.
______________________________________________________________________
This was the response from the Police, with Mr Appleby's annotations on the covering letter, below, showing that he didn't see anything wrong with this response, which clearly there was:



Firstly, P O Box 5025 is the address of the Police Complaints Authority, which is why it took another three months for Mr Appleby and I to receive it.


The responses clearly ignore the main part of the complaint, and the refusal of the police to investigate the allegations supported by the letters from other lawyers about the fraud and misfeasance at the former Carterton Community Centre.


When I pointed this out to Mr Appleby, I discovered that he had apparently deleted the fifth paragraph of the original letter of complaint before sending it, the paragraph which said "The Masterton Police have, apparently, made no further investigations into Mr Daniels’ concerns about the fraud, nor do they intend to do so from the tenor of the email. This obviously requires further investigation by the Authority and constitutes a separate complaint."

When I asked him why he had deleted it, and confronted him with the draft copies of the letter he had written and I had typed, he claimed that the paragraph had been 'accidentally' deleted. Apparently it still contained paragraphs 3 & 4, copied below, along with the deleted paragraph 5, and these aspects of the complaint are completely and utterly ignored by the Police and the PCA:

"3. Further background to the history of the treatment of Mrs Raue by the Masterton Police is the letter of 26 August 2004 from Mrs Raue’s previous counsel, Mr Ken Daniels, to the Police calling their attention to what Mr Daniels himself believed to be fraud at the Carterton Community Centre.
4. The only response to this letter seems to have been the brief e-mail dated 26 April 2006, from Police officer Murray Johnston, admitting that he couldn’t remember Mr Daniels letter, that he couldn’t locate the file, and scoffing at any allegations which might have been made in the letter from Mr Daniels, even though he couldn’t even remember receiving the letter. The e-mail states: “Any such allegation by Kate against the Community Centre management would take a very low priority from a Police perspective. Her allegations about the Community Centre have mostly proved unfounded, emotive and simply not credible”, even though Mr Daniels is a Lawyer, and had expressed his concern at what he himself believed to be fraud.
5. The Masterton Police have, apparently, made no further investigations into Mr Daniels’ concerns about the fraud, nor do they intend to do so from the tenor of the email. This obviously requires further investigation by the Authority and constitutes a separate complaint."

___________________________________________________________________
I wrote to Mr Appleby (the letter is below) he then reluctantly wrote the following letter, dated 16 February 2008:

Michael Appleby B.A. LL.B. LL.M. (Hons)
Barrister of the High Court of New Zealand


15 Fairview Crescent
Kelburn
Wellington
Phone: (04) 9349 389
Mobile: (0274) 40 33 63
Email: m.g.appleby@gmail.com

Police Complaints Authority
Level 5
342 Lambton Quay
P O Box 525
Wellington


16 February 2008


Your Honour,
Re: Kate Raue – your ref 05-0761/ghe:bpd
  1. Thank you for your letter of 1 February 2008, enclosing the documents sought.
  2. The letter of complaint dated 8 June 2007 contained a further paragraph 5 that appears to have been inadvertently deleted from the actual letter which you received.
  3. I attach a copy of the letter as it should have been, and you will note that Mrs Raue wished a further separate investigation into the reluctance of the Masterton Police to actually investigate the frauds and illegal takeover of the Carterton Community Centre, frauds which her previous lawyer, Mr Ken Daniels, himself believed to have been committed.
  4. This protest at the refusal by the Masterton Police to investigate these matters was explicit in the paragraph 5 that was inadvertently omitted from the letter actually sent to you.
  5. In spite of the implicit complaint against Police Officer Murray Johnston in paragraph 4, the response ignores this.
  6. A copy of the response from the Masterton Police to me dated 22 November 2007 was sent to me at the address of the Police Complaints Authority, PO Box 5025 Wellington, and it was finally resent to me on 10 December 2007, but not received by me until 5th February.
  7. It seems from that response by Inspector Johnston that he has not addressed the refusal to investigate the fraud by Sgt Murray Johnston. Are the two men related?
  8. The protest in the complaint at the refusal by the Police to investigate these allegations was certainly made explicit in the missing paragraph 5, but it is clear from paragraph 4 that this refusal by Sgt Murray Johnston should have been investigated by Inspector Johnston. It was not.
  9. His response dated 22 November 2007 makes no reference to it at all, and in view of the inability of the Authority to complete its investigation for several more weeks (as advised to me by your office on 5 February 2008), there appears to be time for the Authority to ask the Masterton Police as to why they treated the original complaint into fraud in such a cavalier way, when Mr Daniels had clearly indicated that he himself had serious concerns.
  10. A further example of their cavalier attitude is contained in their letter of 28 July 2003, attached “A”, to Mrs Raue, as if the Mayor and MP, Georgina Beyer, were sacrosanct, and immune from investigation.
  11. Please investigate Officer Murray Johnston’s behaviour, as well as the other breaches of Mrs Raue’s human rights as set out in the actual letter sent to you by me on the 8th June 2007.
  12. I look forward to your advice as to this further explicit complaint, as well as the other complaints regarding the breaches of Mrs Raue’s rights.
  13. Moreover the response dated 22 November 2007 by Inspector Johnston, at page 3, comments that it is standard policy and practice at the Masterton police station not to have accepted Mrs Raue’s handbag from her friend Mr Allomes even though her medicine was in it, yet another admission by the Police that their particular branch appears to ignore the fundamental right set out more particularly by me in the “Twenty Third Breach” that “everyone deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the person.”
  14. The Police could have quite easily searched the handbag, and confiscated any items that they thought were inappropriate, before giving the handbag containing her personal items and medicine to Mrs Raue.
  15. Moreover, Inspector Johnston’s comment in his penultimate paragraph, that “from the Doctors observations of her, he was able to give an opinion, which was that she did not require medication at the time” is simply quite untrue.
  16. A copy of the relevant Trial transcript containing the Doctor’s evidence is attached “B” from which it can be seen that the Police Doctor, Dr McGrath actually stated under oath that he did not even recall seeing Mrs Raue at the police station, at all, and that he had no record of seeing her.
  17. Although Inspector Johnston has conceded in his response that a number of Mrs Raue’s rights were breached, I believe it was appropriate, really, that he address each and every breach of Mrs Raue’s rights as set out in my letter: i.e: all twenty seven breaches individually, rather than the selective approach he has taken, merely responding to four of the criticisms by Judge Behrens, or the five matters he chooses to deal with as set out on page 2 of his letter.
  18. It would have been of more assistance, surely, if Inspector Johnston had dealt on a thorough and professional basis with the twenty seven breaches complained of.
  19. It should also be noted that Inspector Johnston was actually rung up personally the day after the political meeting by Mr Kennedy, a concerned citizen who was aghast at the treatment meted out to Mrs Raue.
  20. Inspector Johnston however refused to either interfere in the prosecution of Mrs Raue, or to order his officers to at least question, and take statements from, other more neutral witnesses.
  21. Inspector Johnston’s own behaviour in this sorry saga seems to not be beyond reproach, and it appears inappropriate that he has conducted the investigation. A neutral Investigator would be more appropriate to investigate the background of the behaviour of the local police, rather than the local Inspector, who seems part of the problem.
  22. I would be grateful if you would advise the Authority’s next step, and the time frame within which you expect the complaint to be finalised.


Yours sincerely,


Michael Appleby
_______________________________________________________________________________

There has apparently been no response to this letter whatsoever, and when I rang Michael Appleby to enquire about the lack of a response, he abused me and said he was only interested in the charges I was acquitted of and the money from suing Police, which he had laid sole claim to. I also advised him that I had been assaulted by Police at the Dannevirke Police station when I went there to report a serious assault by Colin Allomes that left me with three broken teeth, only days after Allomes prevented me getting to the Wellington Court for the hearing of the 3 appeals. Mr Appleby said "Shut up you stupid bitch" and other insulting comments, and told me that if I made a complaint about the assault at the Dannevirke police station it would "detract from the impact of the original complaint" he had made about the matters in Carterton. I was incredulous! The assault by Police at Dannevirke, and their refusal to investigate my complaint was outrageously corrupt, and certainly warranted a formal complaint being made.

I wrote to the Authority myself and asked for copies of the correspondence between the Authority and Appleby, and a response to the original complaint, and received the following letter, which also completely ignores the complaints about the Carterton Community Centre, and arrogantly refuses to provide copies of the correspondence to me - "It is not realistic for this office to generate copies of correspondence to you and to others." - What utter arrogance! We pay the wages of the staff at the Police Complaints Authority and photocopies cost less than 5 cents per page! The attachments referred to in the second page were all provided many times to Police and to the Authority, both my me and other lawyers.
_______________________________________________________________________________




__________________________________________________________________________________________
The following letter was received by lawyer Frank Minehan in response to a letter to the Authority from him, requesting information from the file which was relevant to corrupt and malicious charges against me laid by local police, which Mr Minehan was representing me on.

I received an almost identical letter to my request for constructive communication on the matter of the original complaint being ignored, saying that the investigating officer was away.


Following receipt of the letter dated 10 March 2008 above I rang the Police Complaints Authority, and Michael Appleby, regarding the fact that the three paragraphs of the original complaint dated 30 May 2007 had been completely ignored and also the entirety of his letter of 16 February 2008 (copied above). Michael Appleby swore at me and abused me, saying "shut up you stupid bitch" and other similar comments. He made it quite clear that all he was interested in was getting his hands on all the money to be gained from suing the Police over the assault and illegal imprisonment, etc, following the community meeting. He made it perfectly clear that he couldn't care less that the Police Complaints Authority had totally ignored the matter of the Community Centre fraud and misfeasance. I requested him to write to the Ombudsmen regarding the relevant issues regarding the involvement of the Carterton District Council and several government departments including CYPS and WINZ, who had been funding the Community Centre, and whose investigations into the frauds, and the illegal signing of contracts, were nothing but incompetent and corrupt cover ups.


Mr Appleby then apparently went to the Office of the Ombudsmen and got Ombudsmen Leo Donnelly to write a letter to say that the matters Appleby spoke to him about were under the jurisdiction of the PCA and NOT the Ombudsmen's Office, which is rubbish. Numerous aspects of the matter warranted investigation by the Ombudsmen. The CYPS investigation in particular was clearly corrupt and the evidence is indisputable, as is the fact the involvement of the District Council, refusals to provide information, etc, was certainly a matter for the Office of the Ombudsmen and clearly worthy of investigation. I provided Mr Appleby with the documentary evidence, which he refuses to return to this day.


Mr Appleby had also agreed to represent me on 3 appeals. He deliberately lost the appeals, which included the matter of Rachel Betteridge, who had sent me text messages threatening to kill me, which the police had ignored, and had charged me with sending abusive messages to her despite the lack of any evidence whatsoever (- because there wasn't any, because as the police knew perfectly well, I hadn't done anything). I had indisputable evidence of the messages sent to me by Betteridge and her husband, saying "You need a bullet" and "Watch your back", etc, but Appleby made sure that the Court did not see that evidence, or the statements from two Justices of the Peace, and the phone with the messages on it. He billed me about $4500 for that matter alone. The other two appeals were based on similarly indisputable evidence, with complainants like Larry Manson, with 68 convictions for dishonesty, many recent, but Mr Appleby managed to lose them also somehow.


Mr Appleby then sent me itemised written accounts for over $40,000, and refused to follow up the refusal of the PCA to acknowledge the letter of 16 February 2008, or the main part of the 30 May 2007 complaint. Mr Appleby then actively went out of his way to pervert the course of justice in seeking the letter from Leo Donnelly, he knows perfectly well that the investigations by CYPS and WINZ, Internal Affairs, etc, were corrupt.


The Minutes and the Financial Reports of the Carterton Community Centre show that large sums of money were regularly given to individuals claiming "grievances" against the former Carterton Community Centre, which was mismanaged by a committee, a group of people mainly associated with the Carterton District Council, a major funder of the CCC, and the same people associated with the widely unpopular 'Carterton Event Centre". The particular payment referred to in the letter from Mr Daniels to the Police involves around $7500 listed in the accounts as "Miscellaneous", taken from various different bank accounts controlled by the committee. At least one of the signatories was not even on the committee, CYPS contracts were being signed illegally. The letter below, from Ken Daniels to the Police refers to fraudulent use of the grant from the Tindall Foundation, the Carterton District Council was also a major funder of the Centre and the actions of the group of people associated with the Council certainly warrant the investigation of the Ombudsmen.


Well informed Carterton residents want an inquiry into the fraud and misfeasance at the former Carterton Community Centre and the actions of the individuals concerned. Well informed New Zealanders want an inquiry into the politically motivated corruption of the Wairarapa Police.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Ken Daniels
Lawyer
Chapel St
Masterton


The Area Commander
New Zealand Police
P O Box 443
Masterton


26 August 2004


Dear Sir


Re: Katherine Raue


There have been numerous items of correspondence written between Kate Raue and yourself and correspondence with the Police Complaints Authority over a number of issues that she has raised in recent times.


I must confess that I have not given what I believe was sufficient attention to some of the matters that Kate Raue had raised with me in the past mainly I suspect because the matters appeared to be far too complex and involved and I tended not to see any relevance in some of the complaints that she was making.


On a recent visit to me however and after spending some time looking at documentary evidence that she showed me, I largely changed my view and believe that there genuinely are matters of concern that do need to be investigated.


I have not got to the bottom of all the matters Kate Raue complains about but there is one instance that does seem to suggest that there has been fraud at the Carterton Community Centre which has diverted funds designed for one purpose deliberately to another.


I enclose with this letter a copy of the accounts which appear to represent income and expenditure from the Carterton Community Centre for the financial year 01 April 2000 to 31 March 2001 as they related to the Community Gardens. You will notice how in the income received, there was a sum of $9,000 received from the Tindall Foundation. It is assumed that this money was received following an application for a grant from that Charitable Foundation. The monies would have been requested and received for purposes relating to the Community Gardens in Carterton. The sum of $9,000 was received in April of 2000.


The following month in May there was a payment of $6,000.00 paid from the Community Gardens account for a personal grievance payment. The information that apparently exists although I have not personally seen it is that there were insufficient funds to pay a personal grievance from the Community Gardens and the funding that was obtained from the Tindall Foundation was immediately paid out as at least part payment on that personal grievance. The payment apparently could not be made at an earlier stage and the fundng received from Tindall Foundation was a necessary receipt to enable the payment to be made to settle the personal grievance.


If the above set of circumstances is accurate then there is no doubt whatsoever that there was a fraudulent use of the monies received from the Tindall Foundation. There had been no budgeted allowance made for personal grievances. This can be seen from the budget column in the expenditure part of the accounts where an amount of only $220 was allowed for the twelve months involved. A payment of $6000 was needed and this was paid directly from the charitable donation.


I believe that the affairs fo the Carterton Community Centre are in disarray. There is currently an application before the High Court to have them wound up because of insufficient numbers. There are numerous other complaints as well about the way in which members of the public including members were excluded from meetings etc. This letter does not purport to address all those issues but I am deeply concerned after having seen the information supplied to me by Kate Raue that monies received for one purpose be used for an incorrect purpose.


I have been advised that a similar improper payment may have been made in respect of the account that was run for the disadvantaged members of the community. This apparently exists under the copy of the account also enclosed which is headed up VOSP 2000 – 2001. You will see also that there is a “miscellaneous” payment of $1,000.00 made in September of 2000 following receipt of a substantial amount fromWINZ funding. It is understood that this also was a payment to an individual who claimed to have a personal grievance.


I am not an accountant (as will be obvious) but I believe there are sufficient genuine concerns raised here to warrant some investigation. These are community funds which were largely received from charitable donations which appear to have been siphoned off improperly.


I should add that according to Kate Raue there was possibly legal advice given to the people running the Carterton Community Centre that they should not make personal greivance payments in the way that they did. This is another matter that may need to be looked into because it would make the payments even less appropriate if they were done contrary to legal advice.


I appreciate the fact that earlier complaints may have been thought to be ill-founded or frivolous or for whatever reason were not properly investigated but I believe that there actually does exist hard evidence to suggest that a reopening of the investigation should be made with urgency. As I have said the Community Centre and its funds are currently subject to a High Court Application.


If it is more convenient for you to do so I would be happy to act as a go-between between yourselves and Kate Raue so that I can request further details from her.
Are you able to assist with what I believe is now a genuine complaint?


Yours faithfully


Ken Daniels

__________________________________________________________________________________
Police, and the IPCA, have repeatedly ignored the letter of 16 February 2008, and Mr Appleby has thus far refused to follow up these matters unless I agree that he limit his "work" for me to the matter of the five charges arising from the meeting, and not bother him with any additional issues, such as the refusal of the police and the PCA to investigate the complaints and concerns of several other lawyers and many members of the community who signed petitions calling for an inquiry into the affairs of the Carterton Community Centre and the involvement of Constable Steve Wakefield with Jo Roffe, which was the reason for his corrupt refusal to investigate the formal complaints, and has now caused a great deal of further corruption as various other police officers and members of the community have been dragged in to the corruption and incompetence which has characterised the Wairarapa police for so long under the administration of Area Commander John Johnston.


Mr Appleby refused to follow up the lack of response to this letter:


Michael Appleby B.A. LL.B. LL.M. (Hons), Barrister of the High Court of New Zealand

15 Fairview Crescent
Kelburn
Wellington
Phone: (04) 9349 389
Mobile: (0274) 40 33 63
Email: m.g.appleby@gmail.com

Police Complaints Authority
Level 5
342 Lambton Quay
P O Box 525
Wellington

16 February 2008

Your Honour,
Re: Kate Raue – your ref 05-0761/ghe:bpd

  1. Thank you for your letter of 1 February 2008, enclosing the documents sought.
  2. The letter of complaint dated 8 June 2007 contained a further paragraph 5 that appears to have been inadvertently deleted from the actual letter which you received.
  3. I attach a copy of the letter as it should have been, and you will note that Mrs Raue wished a further separate investigation into the reluctance of the Masterton Police to actually investigate the frauds and illegal takeover of the Carterton Community Centre, frauds which her previous lawyer, Mr Ken Daniels, himself believed to have been committed.
  4. This protest at the refusal by the Masterton Police to investigate these matters was explicit in the paragraph 5 that was inadvertently omitted from the letter actually sent to you.
  5. In spite of the implicit complaint against Police Officer Murray Johnston in paragraph 4, the response ignores this.
  6. A copy of the response from the Masterton Police to me dated 22 November 2007 was sent to me at the address of the Police Complaints Authority, PO Box 5025 Wellington, and it was finally resent to me on 10 December 2007, but not received by me until 5th February.
  7. It seems from that response by Inspector Johnston that he has not addressed the refusal to investigate the fraud by Sgt Murray Johnston. Are the two men related?
  8. The protest in the complaint at the refusal by the Police to investigate these allegations was certainly made explicit in the missing paragraph 5, but it is clear from paragraph 4 that this refusal by Sgt Murray Johnston should have been investigated by Inspector Johnston. It was not.
  9. His response dated 22 November 2007 makes no reference to it at all, and in view of the inability of the Authority to complete its investigation for several more weeks (as advised to me by your office on 5 February 2008), there appears to be time for the Authority to ask the Masterton Police as to why they treated the original complaint into fraud in such a cavalier way, when Mr Daniels had clearly indicated that he himself had serious concerns.
  10. A further example of their cavalier attitude is contained in their letter of 28 July 2003, attached “A”, to Mrs Raue, as if the Mayor and MP, Georgina Beyer, were sacrosanct, and immune from investigation.
  11. Please investigate Officer Murray Johnston’s behaviour, as well as the other breaches of Mrs Raue’s human rights as set out in the actual letter sent to you by me on the 8th June 2007.
  12. I look forward to your advice as to this further explicit complaint, as well as the other complaints regarding the breaches of Mrs Raue’s rights.
  13. Moreover the response dated 22 November 2007 by Inspector Johnston, at page 3, comments that it is standard policy and practice at the Masterton police station not to have accepted Mrs Raue’s handbag from her friend Mr Allomes even though her medicine was in it, yet another admission by the Police that their particular branch appears to ignore the fundamental right set out more particularly by me in the “Twenty Third Breach” that “everyone deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the person.”
  14. The Police could have quite easily searched the handbag, and confiscated any items that they thought were inappropriate, before giving the handbag containing her personal items and medicine to Mrs Raue.
  15. Moreover, Inspector Johnston’s comment in his penultimate paragraph, that “from the Doctors observations of her, he was able to give an opinion, which was that she did not require medication at the time” is simply quite untrue.
  16. A copy of the relevant Trial transcript containing the Doctor’s evidence is attached “B” from which it can be seen that the Police Doctor, Dr McGrath actually stated under oath that he did not even recall seeing Mrs Raue at the police station, at all, and that he had no record of seeing her.
  17. Although Inspector Johnston has conceded in his response that a number of Mrs Raue’s rights were breached, I believe it was appropriate, really, that he address each and every breach of Mrs Raue’s rights as set out in my letter: i.e: all twenty seven breaches individually, rather than the selective approach he has taken, merely responding to four of the criticisms by Judge Behrens, or the five matters he chooses to deal with as set out on page 2 of his letter.
  18. It would have been of more assistance, surely, if Inspector Johnston had dealt on a thorough and professional basis with the twenty seven breaches complained of.
  19. It should also be noted that Inspector Johnston was actually rung up personally the day after the political meeting by Mr Kennedy, a concerned citizen who was aghast at the treatment meted out to Mrs Raue.
  20. Inspector Johnston however refused to either interfere in the prosecution of Mrs Raue, or to order his officers to at least question, and take statements from, other more neutral witnesses.
  21. Inspector Johnston’s own behaviour in this sorry saga seems to not be beyond reproach, and it appears inappropriate that he has conducted the investigation. A neutral Investigator would be more appropriate to investigate the background of the behaviour of the local police, rather than the local Inspector, who seems part of the problem.
  22. I would be grateful if you would advise the Authority’s next step, and the time frame within which you expect the complaint to be finalised.
Yours sincerely,

Michael Appleby
________________________________________________________________________


Julian Tyerman is now babbling on thus:

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 5, 2011

KATHERINE RAUE:

Katherine,
It is with genuine regret that you appear to of [sic] not been able to read between the lines .
At no time, would I, for a second advocate suicide .
My disgust in your cry of wolf that you may do so, in order that you may secure an opportunity to not appear before the court and be answerable to your own actions, was indeed my focus.
Katherine, my brother commited suicide ... do you really think that I would condone such an action ?
I was sickened by your squeal to do so, because by God if I had known for one second that was my brothers intent, he would still be here today.
May I ask that you look back over my posts, and try to understand exactly what it is that Im unhappy about.
It is evident to all that you need help and Im appalled that you are not being offered it, and that is that !.
Katherine the more you imbed me on the net, the happier I become.
Happy because I have shifted your focus on to me, and happy that those you have taken advantage of can now live a normal life, without your misguided interference.
I challenge you to imbed this, and embrace you doing so .

Julian Tyerman
_____________________________

He's removed the post dated December the 9th 2010, and one comment (I've got better things to do than look for it just at the moment, maybe later) the deleted post contained these words:

"If it were not for the fact I feel intensely sad whenever a suicide happens, I would urge Katherine Raue to hurry up and get it over with.
Why on earth can she not be afforded the help she so desperatly (sic) requires, before the owners of the backpackers on High street Carterton have to deal with what for me seems like an inevitable end ."
__________________________

Julian Tyerman's brother committed suicide, according to him. Julian Tyerman is living proof of why people in the Wairarapa commit suicide at around twice the national average, regularly, in a country with the highest rates of suicide in the world. And living proof of Michael Appleby's unprofessional conduct.

There is absolutely no point throwing money at self appointed 'experts' in the field of suicide prevention, they routinely ignore their clients and are only interested in how many funding applications they can fill in most of the time. The 'help' I (and other people) need is for the police to stop corruptly focussing their attention on me and constantly issuing me with bike helmet tickets, etc, which results in $25 a time deductions from my pathetic invalid benefit each time, then I could more realistically afford to pay the Good(all good) people at the wonderful Carterton establishment he refers to. No useful purpose is served by this focus of attention, especially while there are hundreds of uninvestigated child abuse allegations being thrown in the bin and lied about!
Another thing that would certainly be helpful is if corrupt local Police stopped lying to my employers all the time in an effort to further cut down my income, and ability to live in the community, and destroy my reputation.

If anyone was serious about preventing suicide and bullying in NZ, Rachel Betteridge, Julian Tyerman and Robert Brook(s) would be in jail long ago!
More at this link about these local nutters and the evidence about how the police protect them, and more here.
__________________________

But back to the question of the Law Society. Here is their response to my complaint, it's a joke really: