Archive for May 2017
There is profit in animals .. or why is the RNZSPCA restructuring and what is Neil Wells connection.
May 31, 2017 | 
Author 
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
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
Posted in 
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 pps.napier@police.govt.nz, 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
- that there was a legal suppression order
- that the suppression order was with regards to the person named
- 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
being
- 235 Quorum…which relates to interim name suppression orders), and for the purposes…
- Schedule 6 Enactments amended…in the Act(s). Terrorism Suppression Act 2002 (2002 No 34…
- 1 Title…the making of interim name suppression orders (to align it with…
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
- the charges are withdrawn forth with
- That I receive an apology
- that the police deal with the historic file relating to the fraudulent application for law enforcement powers
- the use of the civil court to conceal criminal action
- and the identity fraud practiced using various AWINZ trusts.
- 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
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 https://www.justice.govt.nz/justice-sector-policy/key-initiatives/bribery-corruption/
and https://www.justice.govt.nz/justice-sector-policy/key-initiatives/bribery-corruption/how-to-report/
I think I have just proved how dangerous New Zealand is with regards to exposing corruption.
Corruption In New Zealand .. Practiced and concealed at highest levels.
A news item was sent on to me this morning Whistleblowers tell of ‘incredible’ day their jobs were axed
The workers at the Ministry of transport noticed false invoices raised their concern and lost their jobs. The boss Martin Matthews apparently did not act despite widespread concerns he has now been appointed Auditor General.
As we have shown earlier the auditor generals office is the Platinum supporter of Transparency International NZ who work so had to ensure that New Zealand retains its ” least perceived corruption status” .
As for integrity there is none .. as integrity would reveal that there is fraud and corruption in New Zealand and by far the easiest way to avoid fraud and corruption is not to define them or have policies whihc seek to identify them
Currently the New Zealand police do not generally investigate fraud, it is handed to the SFO who have a very high threshold in $$$$
Its all based on economics meaning that we can turn a blind eye to losses which would cost less than they would to police and prosecute.
This may be a great business model in the first year but what happens in the second and third when those without stringent ethics realize that they can do such things and not be caught .. well it becomes a free for all.. I know about such things because I am a MUM .
Let a kid get away with something and it become s the norm . so where do you set the threshold for theft , fraud.. is there a $ value or is the very act of fraud and theft and offence .. bit like Parking .. park 10 minutes over time you are fined but you can commit all the fraud you like and get away with it .
If you are caught out and are fortunate enough to belong to a wider network and have friends in high places then you are protected. Bit Like Mr Gavin Hunt of signature homes who had his very own tame judge sit on the case.
Justice Woolford has not just a share holder in a company Hunt directed but Woolford became a shareholder when the company was formed and the shareholders appoint the directors Hunt’s directors certificate is dated 28 August 06 and Woolford’s 29 August 06. this is a massive project meaning that the two would have been known to each other in more than a passing manner.
If our courts have integrity the judges would not place themselves in a position of conflict of interest.
If our public service has integrity then those who raise concerns would be listened to and not fired.
If our building industry had integrity all large building firms would set a standard for performance and ensure compliance.
If our laws were written to be enforced then the companies act would be honoured by the court in proceedigns and blatant breaches of the companies act would not be condoned , e.g the transfer of shares booting out of directors false accounting more on this later .
New Zealand’s laws give us protection but when they are not enforced and people are not held accountable to the law then the law truly is an ass and facilitates corruption .
Lawyers and judges and high ranking public servants cannot condone breach’s of the law to do so in terms of criminal law makes them an accessory after the fact .
Its time judges lawyers and public service started observing the criminal law.
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
- A caretaker of New Zealand’s high trust, high integrity society
- Author of the “2013 New Zealand Integrity Plus National Integrity System Assessment“
- The local chapter of Transparency International, the world leading anti-corruption agency and publisher of the Corruptio
n Perceptions Index
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
- email addresses procurement@otago-ac.net and purchasing@otagoac-nz.org
- the next clues are from the Purchase order shown to the right
bill to: University of Otago Holding Ltd
09 886 2809
accounts@otago-acc.net
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 www.otago.ac.nz. phone number 03-479 7000
3. Check the who is for otago-ac.net , otagoac-nz.org and otago-acc.net
note that both are registered to The USA and were set up in the not too recent past
respectively they are
Administrative Contact Information:
Open letter to transparency International -Integrity gets a seat at the top table in the Public Sector
To the executive of transparency International NZ executive@transparency.org.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 Anticorruption.co.nz 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: No-Reply@transparency.org.nz [mailto:No-Reply@transparency.org.nz]
Sent: Friday, 12 May 2017 5:49 p.m.
To: Grace Haden <Grace@verisure.co.nz>; Helen Bewley <accounts@transparency.org.nz>
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 .