Archive for May 2017

There is profit in animals .. or why is the RNZSPCA restructuring and what is Neil Wells connection.

The  Poster  shown along side comes from a 1998 document  which was presented to the Waitakere city council  by Neil Wells  when he was first  promoting himself and the concept of a  trust to the Waitakere city council  . He has not been devoting his life to animal welfare  out of any charitable purpose  his fees were shown to be  $19950 for a three month project  ( this was in 1998 )see page 17 . But his ultimate  goal was gold . Something got in the way .. me   well Neil if you had not sued me, denied me a right to justice and continued to  impose in my life  you may have got away with the perfect fraud.

On the occasion of the publication of this poster , he calls the proposed  trust   ” national animal welfare trust of new Zealand ”  He was to later incorporate a trust by the name of the national animal welfare trust with a Canadian  gentle man  Michael Edward O’Sullivan the trust still exists I  don’t think it functions but it proves at least that Neil wells knew the process of incorporating trust  the trust deed is located here . It was registered 28 July 1999 ( it also proves that he lied to the minister in correspondence but more on that later  )

Currently the RNZSPCA  is  talking about  amalgamating its  various branches , this is, I believe  again  due to   the profit in animals.  Events like the Betty Napier  trust  where 1 million dollars was left to a region  left   various  branches fighting over the spoils.

So Instead of planting a tree and using the fruits they chopped the  funds up and  burnt it in a very short time , I would speculate boldly on  hefty consultant fees  .

Historically the SPCA gets a lot of bequests , but with more charities the spoils are  smaller  and those   who want corporate wages (while  volunteers slave away over  cat trays) are constantly wanting more .

I have it on good authority  that Neil Wells was one such person  he  could not even wait  for the poor old duck to pass on before he started dipping into her funds and in my sincere opinion everything he did  he apparently did for $$$ not for the love of animals .

Wells uses people  e.g  Sarah Elliot  has been  associated with him for a very long time  and a search on her name shows her up to her neck in the  activity of the  RNZSPCA take over and the mysterious  administration tactics used to  take over  control   of incorporated societies. . Sarah Elliot worked on the lord of the rings trilogy in  1999  supposedly for the fictional AWINZ     see also the  AHA investigation

I am going to refer to the following documents found on the  incorporated societies web site

Rules, Alteration to Inc Soc Rules, Full 10-MAY-1995 10:46:02 10001612817 Rules, Alteration to Inc Soc Rules, Full 713.6 Kb
Alteration Of Rules 26-JUL-1983 11:52:34 10042395684 Alteration Of Rules 59.6 Kb
Alteration Of Rules 15-JUN-1981 09:05:00 10042395742 Alteration Of Rules 1123.7 Kb
Alteration Of Rules 11-SEP-1979 11:58:56 10042395731 Alteration Of Rules 467.1 Kb
Alteration Of Rules 05-SEP-1975 12:21:52 10042395844 Alteration Of Rules

the 1975  document is actually the constitution of  the federation   it is signed on the margins  and at the bottom By Neil Wells

the 1979  Constitution is again that of the federation filed   for the RNZSPCA

Wells had been the president of the  RNZSPCA  He left the SPCA rather    allegedly left in 1978   but obviously still had involvement in 1979  and 1981 as his signature appears  on the   alteration of rules  During this time he was obtaining his law  degree  CV attached to this letter   I believe it was funded by the the RNZSPCA . He returned and  appears to commence the restructure of the  RNZSPCA  contemporaneously  with the setting up of AWINZ 

In my experience I have noticed that Wells works  with a process of making small changes and suggesting that things exist  when they actually do not, He makes mistakes and over sights  which  are intentional and all part of his  plan to bring about a  massive change  one step at a time

Basically Wells signed the constitution changes  between 75 & 83   and the next big one was signed by  Graeme Coutts

I believe he was responsible for  dissolving the federation which had been formed on 09-AUG-1965 .  The federation  was formed when  various  the  various societies set up one  the federation to provide a link between the various bodies .

1995 saw the next big change  this was at the time that Neil Wells was  at the time when Neil Wells was   promoting his concept of territorial animal welfare offices  a link between councils and animal welfare .

the membership criteria for the organisation which was

restricted to the branches  and the   member societies   now had a  further four categories  annual members, corporate members  Life members and honorary life members .  The RNZSPCA   was now no longer  a body whihc was controlled by the member societies and  Branches. It had taken on a life of its own .


It is  interesting that this constitution change occurred when Neil wells  had an office on the same floor as the RNZSPCA along with the JP  who witnessed the changes Graeme Coutts 


Graeme Coutts  will become more significant as we go along .  evidence of their  offices being on the same floor is  here   .  see contacts RNZSPCA     and company records for Coutts    for Neil Wells see bottom of first page on this document

When the RNZSPCA shifted, Graeme Coutts shifted with them and was again in an  office   adjacent to the RNZSPCA. The address is   shown on the  annual return  in 2004 which is signed off by Mr Joe Bloggs ( are you kidding me ? what happened to transparency  )

Wells went on to write the animal welfare bill and advised on it and made provisions for his own business plan  and made the fraudulent application to the minister in the name of AWINZ .

in 2006  when we proved conclusively  that AWINZ did not  not exist , Neil Wells created  an identically named trust   and  roping in  Barrister Wyn Hoadley who did not ask any questions and appears to know nothing of the laws surrounding trusts .

Wells  set up a new trust  also called AWINZ and because the names were the same  falsely alleged that this trust was the law enforcement body .

Wyn Hoadley had been on the animal welfare advisory board   was a QSM, a  title which put her beyond question  . this is  after all about  reputation and not about evidence .

And so she was appointed to the the alleged board of the fictional AWINZ at a time when the trust deed was missing ( that was no surprise the ink was probably  still drying ) and without  following  prescribed procedure under the  charitable trust act. see  the minutes   all was going well but then  Nuala Grove and  Sarah Giltrap who Wells had alleged were trustees got cold feet and resigned .

Nuala  I believe was the   widow of a former Judge and  Sarah Giltrap the  daughter in Law of the Giltrap  family.  again  by using  well known people there is a protection as these people  trust and believe barristers and like little animals  they don’t ask too many questions and stand by when a whistle-blower is beaten to pulp.

So in desperation Tom Didovich became the  fourth trustee  Tom Didovich was the manager of dog and stock control in Waitakere  who had been a  naughty boy and  had to resign. Wells took his job   to conceal the plot that was in the making .

Tom Didovich went to the RNZSPCA and worked there for a while before becoming a Councillor  at talking works   see the post Talking Works Tom Didovich!   Tom is very much an accessory to this fraud  having  given consents to MAF on behalf of  Waitakere city council  way beyond his pay station .

Neil Wells Moved to Te Kuiti  and  organised the demise of the local SPCA  again coming up with  false identities  see

The significance of a name change Te Kuiti RNZSPCA or King Country SPCA.

Central King Country SPCA and the Te Kuiti Branch of the RNZSPCA fact or fiction

Te Kuiti Branch of the RNZSPCA committee resigns

Now on the agenda is the amalgamation of all the local SPCA’s   this is akin to asset stripping   the process is  back to front  and No one will be able to convince me that Neil Wells is not behind this some how.

see Open letter to Maria Clarke lawyer for the RNZSPCA

Members in local SPCAs are not allowed to know  who the other members are, there are many branches which have been  placed into ” administration ” when no such facility exists . Its a power game    more information  to come  on why the  Animal welfare act is so very dangerous.

In the mean time  I would love some one to supply me with any notices which give legitimacy to the 1995  and 2015   constitution changes , the local  Branches were asked to adopt these changes    in the end this was all about    $$$$ in animals

next  up  how to move $400,000  side ways.. the  Waikato spca  or is that the  spca Waikato   why the SPCA pleads poverty


Waitakere council Fraud Public office for private pecuniary gain















The evidence  will follow   there is a ton of it    the buildings above  are council buildings which Neil Wells re branded to appear like his  fake animal welfare trust

the logo at the top right is the logo he used on his  fake trusts letter heads . It made every one think that it was a real organisation   and owned the property  it was in fact the council pound. Where Neil wells  was manager  he got the job without disclosing that he had a conflict of interest  see his job application  here  and the  documents he had signed in his capacity  for the fake trust MOU waitakere 

MAF in a an audit had trouble differentiating  the  approved organisation from the council  see  the audit report




Helping the Napier Police catch real criminals ..

Good Morning  Detective Simcox

I am so pleased that you are not busy with real crime  this means that you  will have time to look at this old file

step 1. Please  obtain the police file which I   provided to the police many years ago and remains   untouched

I will go through the steps to help you under stand it  Please note there are links in this document which open up the evidence

the first part of the  complaint relates to   the circumstances of setting up AWINZ

to help you understand  the animal welfare institute of New Zealand  had coercive law enforcement powers  under the animal welfare act

see section 120  of the animal welfare act 

an approved organisation is approved organisation means an organisation declared, under section 121, to be an approved organisation for the purposes of this Act

121Approved organisations

(1)The Minister may from time to time, on the application of any organisation, declare that organisation, by notice in theGazette, to be an approved organisation for the purposes of this Act.

(2)The application must include—

(a)the full name and address of the applicant; and
(b)the area in which the applicant will, if declared to be an approved organisation, operate as an approved organisation; and
(c)information that will enable the Minister to assess whether the organisation meets the criteria set out in section 122.

The RNZSPCA is an approved Organisation  m the RNZSPCA is an incorporated society and therefore by definition  a legal person .

The animal welfare institute of New Zealand  on the other hand was a totally fictional organisation in 1999 and did not exist in any other form than as a name which Neil Wells, the author of the no 1 bill for the animal welfare act and ” independent  adviser” to the select committee.

In a hand book written  for animal welfare students  by Mr Wells he  himself  gives  an outline of what approved organisations are note that  it states “In deciding whether to recognise an organisation, the Bill provides that the Minister must be satisfied that an organisation meets specific criteria including adequate provision for training of Inspectors, robust accountability, financial and management arrangements and absence of conflicts of interest.”

He was motivated to   extend the power of  animal welfare enforcement  beyond the police,  and the RNZSPCA because he  had been voted off the RNZSPCA  he had developed his own business plan   to amalgamate dog and stock control  a local body  responsibility  with  animal welfare a central government   responsibility  he called this plan  the Territorial animal welfare 

while writing he bill and advising on the new legislation  he starts feeding the name AWINZ to MAF  and pretending that it exists  an early concept of his plan  was shown by him as shown below or at the link 

Where the diagram  shows Wells and associates this part later became the fictional AWINZ .

In 1998 Wells promotes AWINZ by way of borchure each time inferring that AWINZ exists  bu the reality is that id does not exist .

When the  bill is about to pass into law he writes to MAF  and  files a notice of intent for AWINZ to become a law enforcement authority  under the new act

this notice   falsely claims that the applicant is the Animal welfare institute of New Zealand .

He also includes   his cover sheet showing that he is a barrister . A barrister would  know that  only real and legal persons can make applications. He fraudulently signs it  “For the Board of Trustees of the Animal Welfare Institute of New Zealand ”  He knew that there was no  board, or trustees  and this was all part of the  overall fraud on the government.

Maf sets out the criteria for approved organisations  the discussion shows that this  excludes individuals  it specifically   states ..

 this posed a problem for wells as there was no trust   so He made  his formal application  on 22 November 1999 making multiple fraudulent assertions that  the animal welfare institute of New Zealand exists and that he himself is a trustee.

He attaches  a un-executed trust deed and  falsely states  that the trust has been formed by way of trust deed  and is being registered under  Part 11 of the charitable trust act .

the significance of incorporation is  set out here  , it makes a  trust comprising of a group of people a legal entity in its own right

AWINZ was not a trust  it did not have a signed trust deed  , it was  a total fiction, it could not apply for incorporation   because the first thing it needed was a trust deed.

more on the fraudulent application   tomorrow .

Your home work for today is to  learn to understand what a trust is and  the effect of  incorporation

also  crimes act 1961  240Obtaining by deception or causing loss by deception

in that Neil wells  obtained law enforcement powers for himself through   deception

Every one is guilty of obtaining by deception or causing loss by deception who, by any deception and without claim of right,—

(a)obtains ownership or possession of, or control over, any property, or any privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit, or valuable consideration, directly or indirectly; or
(c)induces or causes any other person to deliver over, execute, make, accept, endorse, destroy, or alter any document or thing capable of being used to derive a pecuniary advantage; or

Please let me know  if there is something you don’t understand   happy to help

More tomorrow

Open letter to the Napier Police Prosecutions

The officer in charge  prosecutions, copy to minister of justice

This morning I appeared in the  Napier district court

I have been charged with four counts  of ” while a suppression order was in place  Published the name of a person who has been  granted  name suppression”

I have been  bailed  to appear in two weeks time The conditions are to live in the house where I live any way  and not to publish the name of the Practitioner and his former client  with relation to the suppression order .

the  four offences being  as this  one  but on the dates 

18 April 2017  the  post being Was XXXXXXX censured ? is this why this animal welfare lawyer has gone?  ( now sanitized to  comply with bail conditions )

9 May 2017 Why I am a danger to society….. I must not lift rugs

17th May 2017 Time to support Whistle-blowers …. why we need an independent commission against corruption

22nd May  2017 Whistle-blowers .. Government fights back… Police make up offences to attack whistle-blower

The problem is  in the discovery  which you have supplied me  does not support the charges .  letter to police from justice        alleged suppression order

As a former police prosecutor  I identify the matters which you have to prove  as being

  1. that there was a  legal suppression order
  2. that the suppression order was with regards to the person named
  3. That I knew it was the person named  referred to in  the  article and not just speculation

to that end  you were  to provide me by way of discovery a suppression order, this is the first issue

If you were to search the lawyers and conveyances act  you will note that   there is no scope   for  suppression orders in that legislation .  The word suppression only appears three times see this 


This makes it clear that  there can be no orders for  Name suppression  under the lawyers and conveyances act 

Yet the charge sheet clearly states  that there was a suppression order and I breached it .

The alleged suppression order  that was supplied to me  was almost  totally redacted   showing only two paragraphs

From the redacted version  I  presume that   you rely  on paragraph 28  for  the existence of a  order   yet it states only

” [28] Given that there is no risk to the public posed by this practitioner in the future,we consider that the combination of factors referred to above do, in this unusual set of
circumstances, justify the permanent name suppression of the practitioner, his former client and any identifying details.”

this left me to wonder if there  was an order some where else in the document.   How that I had a court number I ws able to search the tribunals web site and located the full underacted   document the on  the Justice web site  see this link here

reading this document we note that the law society opposed the  the suppression  application  and under   orders   there is no mention of any order  in terms of section 240(1) (c)  and it could well be that the suppression was given   for the purposes of  their published  decision    only.

As such there appears to be no evidence of existence   of an order under section  240(1) (c)  being

240 Restrictions on publication

(1)If the Disciplinary Tribunal is of the opinion that it is proper to do so, having regard to the interest of any person (including (without limitation) the privacy of the complainant (if any)) and to the public interest, it may make any 1 or more of the following orders:……

(c)an order prohibiting the publication of the name or any particulars of the affairs of the person charged or any other person.

Since  no such order exists  so it would appear that I have been wrongly charged as  no one can breach an order which has not been made and  section 263 states

Every person commits an offence who, without lawful excuse, acts in contravention of any order made by the Disciplinary Tribunal under any of paragraphs (a) to (c) of section 240(1).

Until  I received the  discovery today I was unaware of  the content of the decision  I was merely commenting on a news item on the law society web site .  “Name suppression granted to censured lawyer

I was not at the hearing  and the information I had was nothing I gained from any  tribunal process but knew from my own involvement with mr X

Mr XXXX is in the habit of telling the  government and other people what to do and they accept that what he tells them  is true  Because he was a barrister. he continually gives false information and again he  has made out  to the case manager  for the tribunal * that there was a decision in his favour when none existed.   As Usual No one checks .

the full version of the decision states

He has been an advisor to Government.

His reputation with  government is such that  he is trusted  to the point that  the trust in him  allows him to perpetrate offences   such as making a fraudulent application to the minister of agriculture for a fictional trust to   be granted law enforcement powers  under the legislation  which he advised on  and wrote to facilitate his own business plan

I have 12 years  of experience of this   and this again is an example of mr XXX saying jump and every one says how high  and again he   gets to  get away with  his crimes. This time he has had me charged when there are no grounds   and because  he says so.

If only 1/10th  of the  effort had gone into him that has gone into me then he would be behind bars.

I will be providing transparency to  this matter through this site  using this  site . I am a whistle blower and in 11 years the police have not acted yet   mr X writes to  the ministry of justice and  within two weeks I am charged with  four offences I could not have  committed .

I look forward to   whistle blowers being taken seriously , I don’t care about mr XXX  health  he did not care about me when  he destroyed my family and repeatedly tried to bankrupt me, his dirty tactics  are un unprecedented.    His ability to call  the authorities to  action show the the regard they have for him and  how   the bias  wold   possibly have prevented investigations in to his  very public fraud  .

I note that this week is anti bullying week  and I can assure you I feel bullied.

Your officers have to ensure that the ingredients of an offence are met  and they fall well short  even to the  extent of supplying me a  redacted document when the full version is publicly available.

Request to prosecutions

Due to your lack of  evidence  I request that

  1. the charges are withdrawn forth with
  2. That I receive an apology
  3. that the police deal with the historic file   relating  to the fraudulent application for law enforcement powers
  4. the use of the  civil court to conceal criminal action
  5. and the identity fraud  practiced   using  various AWINZ trusts.
  6. there is more  e.g. misappropriation of charitable  funds   but   in the fist instance  please  provide the order or  withdraw   the   charges.

Should you continue with the prosecution  I  will be pleading not  guilty  and  will seek indemnity costs for my legal representation  . loss of income  and stress caused.

regards Grace Haden



*as provided by police in discovery

Whistle-blowers .. Government fights back… Police make up offences to attack whistle-blower

Whose side are the police on  !!    this after noon I received a phone call from Detective Simcox  he told me that he wanted to talk to me about the breach of suppression order. I asked him who it was regarding and he told me he could not say so  as this would breach the suppression order.  I replied that not being able to tell me who it is in relation to would make things very  interesting .

He then said that it was with regards to a lawyer  who I had mentioned in blogs and who had had his name suppressed by the law society  .  I said XXXXX  he said yes.  To which I   roared with laughter and said thank you for confirming my suspicions.

He asked if he could come and speak to me about it , I said there was no point  I did not believe that I had breached an order as I had never seen one and did not know what  the scope of it was if there was one  and  I was not a party to the hearing.

I told him to send me a copy of any order and on receipt I would immediately comply  with it .

I  invited him to come round on the condition that he would investigate the frauds  relating to Mr XXXXXX, but he said he would not be  doing that .

Less than 10 minutes later  I was served  a summons. Two cops came to my door  to deliver it . I told them that the summons  did not fairly inform me of   a charge  it simply said  that on 18 April, 9 May and 17 May  I breached a suppression order  under the lawyers and conveyances act

the posts which they are referring to are

Was XXXXXX censured ? is this why this animal welfare lawyer has gone? I have since taken this down and amended the following

Why I am a danger to society….. I must not lift rugs

Time to support Whistle-blowers …. why we need an independent commission against corruption

This obviously means that the police have read these posts   and are choosing to defend a fraudster  and crucify a whistle blower. this is despite the fact that  I have had complaints in with the SFO and police for years    see letter from Bill Searle  AWINZ corruption letter sfo & sfo letter and  sfo email

Auckland University Law Professor Bill Hodge said it was ”ironic” that someone from the legal profession should be keeping their name secret when openness was one of the key attributes of a democratic legal system.

”Justice is a public virtue. It should not be like a priesthood with secret rites behind closed doors and in secret chambers.”

Hodge said if lawyers faced allegations relating to conduct then they deserved to be known by the public.

”People should be able to take those into account when choosing a lawyer. Clients should be able to make an informed decision.”

He said lawyers, like any other profession, should be subject to open court action.

Hodge said he disagreed with the argument that a lawyer’s reputation would be tarnished even if he or she was cleared.

”They can tell the truth about that too. People will judge them with the view that they were wrongly charged.”

The Government has recently moved to tighten up name suppressions which it said were being granted ”too readily and inconsistently”.

The Criminal Procedure Bill was passed in October and comes into effect in March.

It clarifies that ”wealth, reputation or public awareness” should not be taken into account when judges grant name suppression see more 

Ironically the comment made by a police woman  on a police file about me in 2012  was so confidential that I was not allowed to see it  yet it ended up having an impact on my career in 2017 and splashed all over the papers.

this is just so in line with my last post re whistle blowers

What makes it even more interesting is that there is no such offence as breaching a suppression order , pity they had to be in such a rush  and were not able to check the law before they dashed off to serve me .

the summons was under section 28 criminal Procedure act

28 Summons in relation to charge may be served

(1)A constable or any other person may issue and serve a summons on a person if that constable or other person—

(a)has good cause to suspect that the person has committed an offence

Now   Good cause to suspect  can only come after  identifying the act and section

It would appear that in his haste   detective Simcox  did not identify   any  offence   or even investigate that there was  one.  will be interesting to see what he comes up with  .. will keep you posted.

Have just spoke to  detective Simcox  who informs me that I have breached section  241 c of the lawyers and conveyancers act and section  263 1 & 2 .

Obviously this is being driven by some one who  want to see my Private investigator licence revoked    section  241  doe snot even apply to any one other then lawyers   and relates to appearing before the disciplinary tribunal

section 263  relates to   the breach of an order to that end I have invited him to send me a copy of the order and on receipt of it  and  noting its validity I will remove all content which is in breach of the order .  he told me that  he  knew it existed , I told him that after 15 years in the police Iknew that cops can tell lies and that I want a copy  of the order so that I could see for myself.  I cannot comply with an order if I don’t know it exists  or what the order is.

he said  he would check with the legal team   , I  told him if  I don’t know what the order is then I do have  a lawful excuse.

Strangely enough   wouldn’t it have been  good police work if   Simcox or some one had said   here is an order  it appears your  in breach of it  . rather than  we are  going to prosecute you   were not   giving you any info…

I have now spoken to  his boss senior sergeant  Darren Pritchard.   I explained the background with he who must not be named and asked for  a copy of the suppression order, he said that he did not have a copy of it  but I would get one as soon as they had it.  I  told him that I was prepared to take  the name down   but I should not be charged as I have not got a copy of the suppression order  and don’t know the terms .    he said I would get things under discovery.

I am totally astounded that the police act so quickly  for me  naming  now a confirmed corrupt lawyer . The   complaint was made  by the ministry of justice  who on their web site say this about corruption


I think I have just proved   how dangerous New Zealand is with regards to exposing corruption.

Time to support Whistle-blowers …. why we need an independent commission against corruption

In this  the ” perceived  ” least corrupt county in the world  it is very unwise to be a whistle-blower.  Believe me I know.

The events surrounding  Joanne Harrison Transport Ministry fraud case   and see here  and here  and here have again highlightes the plight of whistle -blowers

 MoT fraudster’s ‘destructive streak’
Joanne Harrison’s $725,000 ‘web of deception’ revealed
Fresh claims prompt call for new investigation into Transport Ministry fraudster

Three whistle-blowers at the MoT were treated “abysmally”… Winston Peters

The outcome  may be different  but the story is basically the same as the animal welfare fraud that saw me crucified as a  Whistleblower even to the extent that  11 years later  a news item has to be published labeling me with names  which were used by a police woman in 2012 . Her comments were so confidential that the police refused to release them to me under  the privacy act but some how   they ended up in the news in 2017.

To me this shows the  massive undercurrent of how we deal with  Whistle-blowers in New Zealand .

In the instance of Joanne Harrison , her former boss  claimed that  he had ” handled the saga decisively, and investigated it thoroughly.” But despite this Joanne Harrison  was proved to be a fraudster  partly by invoicing Fake  companies.

My saga began in 2006  when I discovered that a fictional trust  had been given law enforcement powers, because no one checked to see if it existed  .

Like the  Harrison Case  we have the  former  boss taking on a higher role in Government.   That is what happened in  my case with AWINZ ( the Animal Welfare institute of New Zealand ) .

Had Harrison been a lawyer  she would have taken her  whistle blowers to court for defamation.  For good measure  she would have manipulated the proceedings and had their defence of truth and honest opinion struck out ,  bankrupted them, discredited them and   she would have got away with it .

Our courts are  routinely used  to  legitimize fraud , if you have the money  and or connections anything is possible including a few extra words from the judge  totally slating your   whistle blowers reputation  .

Harrison was not so lucky , but so far  Wyn Hoadley, Graeme Coutts , Tom Didovich and  Neil Wells  have been able to get away with  their respective roles in the concealment of what  had the makings of a massive public fraud .

In the AWINZ matter a lawyers a crown law  gave a legal opinion in the application process for AWINZ to be granted statutory  law enforcement powers for  search seizure and  prosecution of animal welfare   offences, in the statute which Mr Wells  had  been  the author of the No 1 bill and  as ” independent” adviser to the select committee .

While the legal opinion may have been sound he never checked the  fundamental  ….Does the   trust actually exist   , Had he done so he would have found that  it did not  .

This  lawyer  went on to become chief  legal officer to  the  MPI.   So to admit that a fraud had occurred would have been to admit to his own negligence. see AWINZ deception  evidence   I also raised the question

Can MPI legally conceal fraud or does that make them an accessory after the fact?

Martin Matthews  the Controller and Auditor-General   will also find himself in this conflicted situation.

I have long been critical of Transparency International New Zealand  , they claim to be

Transparency International New Zealand (TINZ) is the recognised New Zealand representative of Transparency International, the global civil society organisation against corruption. We are a not-for-profit incorporated society with charitable status. We are non-political and non-partisan.

We Are

The reality is that   Transparency International  is funded by the very people they measure . this means that there is no independence and  if TINZ was to write something bad about the  departments who   sponsor them then those who write  the reports will not be funded  .

It is useful to note that  the office of the auditor general is the corner stone  Platinum   partner . The  office of the auditor generals  is  effectively  ” independently ”  rated by Transparency International  who are sponsored by them .. CONFLICT of interest!

What happened to the petition for a commission against corruption ?   see the evidence  here Evidence in support of the Petition of Grace Haden and others 5 11

Had something been done in the past then  we could have had systems in place  to deal with  the likes of Joanna Harrison . But in reality in the ” economic ”  Business structure we  run, we can afford he losses  its cheaper than checking.

Well   I can tell you as a whistle-blower  it has not been economic for me, it  cost me my marriage, initially my family,  11 years   and  well over $300,000.

While the government can expend heaps on crucifying me   they cannot spend time looking at the facts   to do so would mean that  more like  mr Martin Matthews  would be removed from the security of their high paying jobs ad an old boys net work could very well crumble.

Note  NZ ratified the United nations convention against corruption 1 December   2015.  Nothing has been done to set up an independent commission against corruption

How many more whistle blowers  have to be under attack  ?     Time to support whistle -blowers

Corruption and fraud in New Zealand – no place for ” she’ll be right “

Many New Zealanders have not woken up to the fact that  we are but a  bunch of ignorant and trusting   villagers   in a global market place just waiting to be ripped off .

Not only is it  buyer beware but  every one of us has to  diligent as every transaction has potential for fraud  and when it happens you are on your own.

One such story hit the headlines this morning .   Had Jackie and Murray Marquet known the most basic due diligence techniques they would  never have lost a cent.

Most people  just don’t know where to start checking things out  and many like  the Marquet’s say ” the emails and documents they received from the fraudsters looked genuine”   surprisingly  that is how fraud works    . It has to be  good to be convincing.

In their particular case  however  a 5 minute  due  diligence would have  saved them $32,000.

These are the tell tale signs

  1. email addresses   and
  2. the next clues are from the Purchase  order  shown to the right 

bill to:  University of Otago Holding  Ltd

09 886 2809

NZ business number

this is what they should have done

1       09 886 2809  this is an Auckland number  the university is in Otago  .


2       Google  Otago university   note that the   URL is phone number 03-479 7000

3.  Check the  who is  for , and

note that both are registered to  The USA  and were set up in  the not too recent past

respectively they are

Administrative Contact Information:

Name Carl Finocchiaro
Organization None
Address 9841 West 86th Place
City Arvada
State / Province Colorado
Important Dates
Expires On   2017-12-21
Registered On    2016-12-21
Updated On   2017-04-27
Organization None
Address 100 North Avenue
City Grand Junction
State / Province Colorado
Postal Code 81501
Country  US
Important Dates
Expires On 2018-02-06
Registered On 2017-02-06    Note this was only set up two days before the   order was sent  !
Updated On  2017-04-28
Name Bardot clothilde
Organization  None
Address  7431 Muirfield Road
City   Norfolk
State / Province   Virginia
Postal Code  23505
Important Dates
Expires On  2018-01-07
Registered On   2017-01-07
Updated On 2017-01-07
If this did not  make them suspicious then the order could have been easily confirmed by checking  with  the directors of the company .    a check with the directors  or sending an email to  the accounts section at  the Otago university and checking with them that this is a valid  purchase order .  Use the  on line email  address not the one you were given .
Prevention is  so very easy     the first thing that fraudsters tap in to   is greed  … goody a big sale    the second is  they get your trust  .
The first thing you  lose is your money  the second is the trust you had .
No point  going to the Police    they wont  do anything more than file the  complaint .
We may be the least corrupt country   but that is because  it is actually very difficult to report fraud and corruption. When the police turn  complaints like this away   the statistics  will reflect that  is  very little or no fraud .   That’s efficiency for you   – you cannot measure   anything that you do  not collect data for.
Don’t be Frauds next victim .. check it out   be Verisure

Open letter to transparency International -Integrity gets a seat at the top table in the Public Sector

To the executive of transparency International  NZ

This afternoon  I received your latest news release  which I always read with interest.

Download Media Release Document

I am not a member of TINZ , my application has been refused several times now  as it appears that I am an enemy of the state .

My crime was to expose corruption I stumbled on the evidence which proved that  a barrister, Neil Wells of Te kuiti  wrote  legislation for his own business plan to amalgamate dog and stock control with animal welfare . He  was an independent  adviser to the select committee  and then made a fraudulent application  to the minister making  a number of false allegations as to the  the existence of his fictional ” organisation ”

He covered it all up using  identity fraud  and  despite the fact that I have  supplied full details of this  to MPI, Attorney general , SFO, police  , Ministers, nothing has been  done.

In true whistle-blowers fashion I have been crucified and even now  we have to stoop so low as to have news  articles written about me based on a 2012 opinion of a Police woman who has never met me.

When I see an article such as this it confirms to me that  there are those out thee who are still quite concerned that one day some one  may believe me and actually independently investigate the matter.

While I appreciate that the Animal welfare institute of New Zealand ( AWINZ) matter is old it   has very  significant relevance to the events of today .

On a related post on  Open letter to Maria Clarke lawyer for the RNZSPCA I have covered off  the events whihc are occurring with the RNZSPCA .

The significance of this to AWINZ is that Mr Wells was the head of the RNZSPCA before bob Kerridge, Mr  Wells was involved in the winding up of the SPCA federation  and   through links I have connected him to the restructuring of the SPCA which  is on the agenda for  this year

According to the world bank “NZ easiest place to do business in world” but   it is also the easiest country to be ripped off .

Corruption is rife in companies, trusts and  incorporated societies.

your news release states

Transparency International New Zealand’s mission is to foster a New Zealand culture
where transparency, integrity, good governance and ethical standards and practices are
the core values for all New Zealanders.

So why  did reporting corruption have to devastate my life and destroy  my family ?

Why  do we focus on bullying and defaming   people then alleging that they are the bullies and defamers , we are more interested in giving some one a bad reputation than we are at looking at the facts.

I currently have an appeal for my  Certificate of approval for my Private investigator work. The former   Private security licencing authority(PSPLA), Mr Gill decided that  I am a conspiracy theorist and therefore   I should be thrown out of my  career a year before retirement he stated “[79] The applicant appears to hold very strong views on many matters and she is adamant that there is some form of conspiracy afoot, but in the absence of any evidence to support this theory it appears to boil down to a long-held obsession which can only harm her ability to carry out her duties as a private investigator in a rational and professional manner.  “

The amicus curiae appointed by crown law  appears to be pushing the case for the PSLA . It is indeed a pity that   crown law did not do anything to investigate the  complaint I made in  2014  with regards  to  investigating the various trusts which Mr wells created to   facilitate  the deceit in the  court  by using identity fraud.

But in the end  it is probably easier to trample one  woman in to the dust than it is to instill integrity and ethics into our government departments which   could result in more than   red faces and a  multitude of spin doctors out of work .

In 2005  when this saga began the  C word was  hardly heard. now every second  New Zealander  accepts that  corruption is rife , but we pretend with transparency   you  give me  the  cold shoulder and don’t  want to hear from me  some one who has been at the coal face of corruption for  far too long.

If  Transparency International   wishes to instill integrity  into the public sector it must  itself first embrace integrity and be prepared to listen to whistle-blowers. Ignoring us  is not going to make the  issue go away  it simply makes a mockery of what  you claim to do  .

I will keep  those  following my blog informed as to my membership application, the  acknowledgment  of which is here

From: []
Sent: Friday, 12 May 2017 5:49 p.m.
To: Grace Haden <>; Helen Bewley <>
Subject: TI-NZ Membership Application Information

Your TI-NZ Membership Application has been submitted.

Free Special One Year Membership

Why I am a danger to society….. I must not lift rugs

I am under attack  , yes  right left and center things are happening as if by magic , all these lightening strikes which  occur near me are totally coincidental .. I think  not …. but because I am suspicious of Lightening striking the same spot repeatedly I have been labeled a ” conspiracy theorist ”  and on that basis the Private security  Licencing authority has refused to   renew my Pi  certificate of approval.  Roger Gill  has repeatedly stated

“The applicant appears to hold very strong views on many matters and she is
adamant that there is some form of conspiracy afoot, but in the absence of any
evidence to support this theory it appears to boil down to a long-held obsession which can only harm her ability to carry out her duties as a private investigator in a rational and professional manner.”

It would appear that   One Ron Mc Quilter of Paragon investigations, the  president of the NZIPI  is right behind it all .He is a competitor of mine but I honestly  believe that he works  on the  shady side of the fence with such persons  as Trevor Morley , Mike Campbell and  Gary Swan .It appears to me that  all had  apparent fingers in the pie of making lightening strike on me at some time or another .Their actions have been quite  acceptable apparently  while  on my part  speaking the truth and exposing corruption is not acceptable.

Although Mc Quilter has  expressed his views as to my suitability to the PSPLA he has never made a complaint  and apparently  preferring to communicate through the back door   with the PSPLA  and feeding docuemtns to  him to  get rid of the competition . Ron there are  legal processes.. stick to them!

Since Ron thinks  that he is better than me  I have set him a challenge in my open letter to him  bet he ignores it  I think  its too difficult for him  in my opinion he  only likes simple things like finding dirt on people and making life hell for them . Ron’s police career was never in NZ and from what I have been told was measured in months not years , and in traffic not real crime .

I served as a police officer for 15 years and left when my daughter was born , in those days  the employment relations act was not  law and  I was transferred on to front line duties at 6 1/2 months pregnant as my boss did not think a that a pregnant police woman should attend court ( I was a prosecutor at the time ) I had also lost my promotion to senior sergeant because I refused to jump the 6 ft fences and do the  physical fitness test due to my pregnancy .

I became a PI in 2003  and in 2006   did a very simple  pro Bono job For Lyn Mac Donald the bird lady, which devastated my life  by tearing my family apart .

Lyn asked me to locate the animal welfare institute of New Zealand (AWINZ) , it had statutory powers  under section 120 of the animal welfare act  making it  equivalent to the RNZSPCA  and having the same powers of search seizure and  ability to impose  fines.

Except AWINZ did not exist in any manner or form. Neil Wells the  council manager , was a barrister ( he no longer is  ) he had been heavily involved in the drafting of the animal welfare  act  and had tailored it to  facilitate his own business plan.

When I asked  Waitakere  Council and The MPI ( then MAF )  for the trust deeds of this organisation they had purportedly contracted too, there was   a flurry of activity  , cover ups, withholding information and  denials  and  finally I was taken to court by Wells for  defamation.

Of course he had no show of winning as I had  so much evidence I could sink a battle ship.  so  Next step  we deny her a Defence .  Without a defence of truth and honest opinion  Defamation is not winnable  . Judge gets to make her out to be an axe murderer and this  decision  get waved in her face for ever more  .. even criminals have better rights to justice than I had.

I was surprised that my colleagues in the NZIPI  and those in the certified fraud examiners who I turned to  for help stood by and did nothing, they did not even offer to look at   evidence I had .

I had documents  from ministers which were redacted  and  obtained copies from council which were  un redacted,  what these revealed was gold  e.g “It is not appropriate for you  to approve a proposal which is contrary to law ”  

I failed to get  my complaints dealt with by the SFO  and the police , the police said it was too serious for them the SFO  said it was not serious enough. both groups of people had something in common, they all associated with Mc Quilter .

Suddenly  I was thrown out of the  Certified fraud examiners association .. never thought it was Mc Quilter  but his letter to the PSPLA in December speaks volumes.

An identically named trust  was formed  by Wells  and was switched for the  fictional organisation, Classic Identity fraud.

Here is the evidence

a trust deed was signed 5 December 2006 see here , 

It claims to be the same trust as one  established on 1.3.2000 see here    or see the copy  to MAF here ( why would they be different?) significantly   the trust deed   had never been seen by any one   prior to   late june 2006.

MAFS audit  , a report which was withheld from me at Wells request for some three years and was only released after AWINZ ceased being an approved organisation  identifies  significant trust issues   see here   it  states that the trustees   only met four times , the first being  allegedly  on 4 june 2004.  If you read the trust deed  then you will note that the  term of appointment of trustees is only three years.

There is evidence that the trustees never met  , never held a bank account  and never passed a resolution .. so how did  they  manage to apply for approved status  three months prior to the date of the deed and how  could they have committed to the  the functions  of the  approved organisation and its obligations to  accountability and transparency .

How were they able to be a “trust ” and how could they commence court proceedings when the trustees had changed without any legal  means of appointment or commitment to a trust let alone an  approved organisation which had public law enforcement  functions.

this new group became  a charity and assumed the identity of  the earlier  fictional trusts   How  is this transparent  and legally defensible  ?

The people involved were Wyn Hoadley , Graeme Coutts  JP  , Tom Didovich  and Neil Wells , supported by  brookfields law firm , David Neutze  and  former lawyer Nick Wright  and former wife

No one checked the facts , the dates the applications, a two year old can tell you that   there is no integrity in what they claim but detail apparently does not matter  when you have the right people on board.

A true colleague of mine  told me many years later   that one of the  parties had told him that   they were doing everything they would ” deal to me ”

The connection of these parties, the location the involvement of other  have been sufficient for  me to  believe that  Ron Mc quilter is in this up to his neck . His business partner  at the time was Bryan Mogridge  who was also trustee of  enterprise Waitakere  and  also a trustee of the committee for Auckland.

2008  I was the  secretary of the NZIPI   the  new Zealand institute of professional  Investigators , Trevor Morley was the  President .There were two people in  the institute who he wanted to  get rid of  as members, but hey were unable to remove them for  any breach of ethics. So Morley  decided to change the rules  so that we could effectively  kick these persons out , some three years after the alleged incident .  I felt that  it was unethical  to change the rules to remove some one  and left the society . Today  most  former police officer PI’s  who have integrity  choose not  to belong to the NZIPI . Trevor Morley has been in contact with  Malcolm North   as  shown in this  email 

So by expressing the fact that I did not think that the NZIPI was particularly  ethical I   became  an enemy of the state  yet again . I later caught vice president  Mike Campbell  spreading rumours about me that I was about to be arrested .

Transpired that that Ron was putting together a blackmail  complaint  with regards to me relating to the  Elizabeth Knox home . I  remember speaking to a cop on the phone in 2012    and   it turns out that on the basis of the emails  that Mc Quilter gave her she decided that I should be warned for black mail  except no one told me  .  I have no idea  what those  emails were and if they were even from me or  were doctored. The police woman who  had  elaborate opinions of me  yet had never met me  claimed that she had warned me  by phone , well she never did .  see the article here 

Strange things happened during  2012 , at about the same time as the allegation of blackmail my company went into liquidation, the company which did not serve papers on me and  filed a false affidavit was Translegal services  . fortunately the court reversed the bankruptcy .

There was also a strange coincidence that  Graeme Coutts  had an office on the same floor as the RNZSPCA  and a very short distance from  Translegal owned by another  NZIPI  member  and occupying the same building as the  ex husband of our former accountant Heather Whittle .

Heather Whittle had a few years earlier   told my  husband fairy stories , I knew they were lies  these all led to   my marriage breaking  down in 2008  , the other person telling    almost identical stories was the man across the road, two seemingly  unconnected persons  both   used as tools to break up  the marriage.

I was also warned by Maf for allegedly posing as a Maf officer  when  I had informed them that  a company was using  dodgy  import credentials, these people took me to  court for harassment  and ensured that I was inundated  with Chinese callers  see story here

AND so  things inter twine   and a whole group of PI’s   apparently working together  have  been  aiming at getting me out of the industry.  Yes I am a threat   I expose the  corruption which I believe that some PI’s  are  actively  concealing.

It is    humorous to  think that  the non service of court documents is not enough  to   put a PI ‘s licence at risk.  Lawyers can  have  drugs and be censured and have their names suppressed ,  But for speaking the truth and exposing corruption  I have to   face the music , threatened with loss of income  and have  news articles such as this written about me .

The matter is now in the hands of the privacy commissioner. The press totally defends their   actions   and yes  I happen to think  that if lightening repeatedly strikes then there is a theory  as to why.  some people would think that that is a conspiracy.

It proves that   there is much in NZ which is off the rails  .  I say  it is corruption that is starting to show from under the Rug .