14 December 2018
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern
Prime Minister of New Zealand
Members of the Justice Committee of New Zealand Parliament
Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the House; Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Justice and for Courts; Hon Stuart Nash, Minister of Police; Hon Dr David Clark, Minister of Health and MP for North Dunedin; Hon David Parker, Attorney General
New Zealand Police (Commissioner Mike Bush); Serious Fraud Office; Chief Justice of New Zealand; New Zealand Law Society; Ministry of Justice; State Services Commission; Auditor-General; Human Rights Commission; Wellington High Court
Dear Prime Minister
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
You, as Prime Minister of New Zealand, have witnessed that there is absolute certainty that the organised crimes, using Justices Clifford and Collins of the High Court for fraud, took place in Wellington High Court, and the criminals used the false, forged documents for another organised crimes for the illicit purpose of bankruptcy fraud, bank robbery, and perverting the course of justice in Dunedin High/District Courts.
Now, you must ask the following question: “was it possible for the costs order to be made without the Court receiving any submission on the costs, without having any hearing the Court?”
Was it even possible for any costs order be made without involving a High Court judge in the decision-making process in the High Court of New Zealand?
IT IS EXPECTED THAT YOU AS PRIME MINISTER OF NEW ZEALAND TO DO THE FOLLOWING:
A. Ask Wellington High Court whether it is the normal procedure of the Court to send a costs order only to one of the litigants after the expiration of the appealing period, so that no appeal can be made on the costs order.
Letter of Paul Collins, Barrister, Shortland Chambers, dated 12 November 2013 “I enclose a sealed duplicate original of the costs order made by the Court on 4 June 2013, which I received in the mail on Friday, 29 November, from the High Court Registry. You will see that costs have been ordered in the sum of $9,210 and disbursement of $1,439.88” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MmM2YmVhYzZhMjY1OWJjYQ
The FALSE sealed costs order, dated 4 June 2013, was sent ONLY to Paul Collins, without sending it to Tatsuhiko Koyama, one of the litigants in the case, by Wellington High Court on or around 29 November 2013, AFTER MORE THAN 6 MONTHS since the costs order was supposedly made, making it impossible for Tatsuhiko Koyama to appeal this matter due to the expiry of the appealing period.
B. Ask Wellington High Court and see if they received any costs application on the costs order, dated 4 June 2013, on or around 4 June 2013.
Wellington High Court confirmed that no costs application submitted to Wellington High Court on or around 4 June 2013.
C. Ask Wellington High Court and see if there was a hearing on 4 June 2013 for the costs order, dated 4 June 2013.
Wellington High Court confirmed that there was no hearing for the case of CIV-2010-485-001493 on 4 June 2013.
D. Ask Wellington High Court and find out the name of the High Court judge who made the costs order, dated 4 June 2013.
Wellington High Court could not provide the name of the High Court judge who supposedly made the costs order, dated 4 June 2013.
E. Ask Wellington High Court about the fact that the confirmed, false, forged document, dated 4 June 2013, was used for another confirmed organised crimes, committed in Dunedin High Court (the crimes of using false document for pecuniary gain, bankruptcy fraud, bank robbery by deception, etc.), in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
Letter of Mitch Singh, Associate, Glaister Ennor, dated 28 January 2016 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NzhjM2M4MWVmMWM4NWI4Mw
F. Ask Wellington High Court or Ministry of Justice to provide a copy of the audio-recording of the hearing in Wellington High Court on 11 July 2012 for the case of CIV-2010-485-001493.
CONFIRMED, FALSE, FORGED DOCUMENT OF THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND (RESERVED JUDGMENT OF DOBSON J, DATED 17 JULY 2012, sent by Sheena Spiers, Team Leader (Civil), Ministry of Justice, on 17 July 2012) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjdkOTM2Y2MwYTc2NGNjYg https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MWZkYjY4N2Q1Mzk5ZDhmZA
There are two documents with different signatures of Justice Dobson of the High Court of New Zealand; these documents have their respective dates only a month part.
(1) Signed letter of Dobson J, dated 16 August 2012, to Winkelman J; and https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NDVlZjg4YzI5ZmQ0NGVlYg
(2) Signed "RESERVED JUDGMENT OF DOBSON J," dated 17 July 2012, (sent by Ministry of Justice on 3 May 2017). https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MzAyM2Y1NGYwZjI0YzFkZg https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MThjYTNiZDViODRkNjc4MA
(3) DIRECT COMPARISON OF THE SIGNATURES, CLEARLY INDICATING THE FORGERY OF THE DOCUMENT, DATED 17 JULY 2012 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NzE4MDgyYjE2YzBjY2E2Ng
(4) Neither Wellington High Court nor Ministry of Justice could provide the audio-recording of the hearing in Wellington High Court on 11 July 2012 in this case.
As with other confirmed fake costs orders, using the names of Justices Clifford and Collins for fraud, the fake costs order, dated 4 June 2013 is a FALSE, FORGED document, issued by Wellington High Court, which was used in the confirmed organised crime in Dunedin High/District Courts for bankruptcy fraud, bank robbery by deception, perverting the course of justice, very serious offences under the Crimes Act 1961.
This matter requires your leadership, due to the endemic, widespread corruption in New Zealand.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
12 December 2018
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern
Prime Minister of New Zealand
Members of the Justice Committee of New Zealand Parliament
Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the House; Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Justice and for Courts; Hon Stuart Nash, Minister of Police; Hon Dr David Clark, Minister of Health and MP for North Dunedin; Hon David Parker, Attorney General
New Zealand Police (Commissioner Mike Bush); Serious Fraud Office; Chief Justice of New Zealand; New Zealand Law Society; Ministry of Justice; State Services Commission; Auditor-General; Human Rights Commission; Wellington High Court; Supreme Court of New Zealand
Dear Prime Minister
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
We all must have the common background (if we are to live in civilised societies) that what is physically impossible means absolute certainty on the certain fact (no reasonable person can dispute it).
In my previous email, I adduced the solid evidences, absolute certainty on the commission of the organised crimes, using the name of Justice Clifford of the High Court of New Zealand for fraud, in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
Now, I adduce another set of solid evidences on the commission of the organised crimes, at this time, using the name of Justice Collins of the High Court of New Zealand for fraud, in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
IT IS EXPECTED THAT YOU AS PRIME MINISTER OF NEW ZEALAND TO DO THE FOLLOWING:
A. Ask Justice Collins of Wellington High Court about the PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY, i.e. plain and obvious FRAUD IN THE COURT, in which his name was used for the fake decision of the High Court, dated 14 October 2014, in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
Letter of Paul Collins, Barrister, Shortland Chambers, dated 21 November 2014
“This letter accompanies the sealed judgment of the High Court…including costs orders. It is served on you in compliance with Rule 11.11(5)(a) of the High Court Rules.”
"Judgment dated 14 October 2014" FALSELY states: "This proceeding was heard on 20 August 2014 at Wellington before the Honourable Justice Collins, who having heard from Paul Collins…and Helen Carrad…gives judgement that …
(b) The first respondent is entitled to…$7,064.50 and disbursement of $50…
(c) The second respondent…$1,840.75…" https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MjY0YTZkOGMxZWExM2ExNA
IT WAS “PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE” FOR JUSTICE COLLINS OF THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TO HEAR THE COSTS APPLICATION ON 20 AUGUST 2014 for several reasons.
(1) There was no submission on the costs was made to Wellington High Court on or prior to 20 August 2014, the date of the alleged hearing in the High Court.
The letter of Helen Carrad, Crown Counsel, Crown Law, dated 24 November 2014, states, "Following the judgment of Justice Collins [on 14 October 2014], counsel for the NZLS and counsel for the Attorney-General filed costs schedules in the High Court..." https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6YjMxYzI5MWFhNmVmOGNj
The Crown Counsel in her letter, dated 24 November 2014, clearly negates any possibility of Justice Collins making the costs orders on 20 August 2014 at the alleged hearing in Wellington High Court.
Wellington High Court confirmed that no costs application was filed in the Court for the case of CIV- 485-2343.
(2) There is no evidence on the submission on the costs on or prior to 20 August 2014 to Wellington High Court, in the fake transcript of the alleged hearing in the High Court.
As in the case of the organised crimes, using the name of Justice Clifford for fraud; there is another fake transcript for the alleged hearing in Wellington High Court on 20 August 2014.
FAKE TRANSCRIPT ON THE NON-EXISTENT HEARING (LEGAL DISCUSSION BEFORE THE HON JUSTICE D COLLINS, DATED 20 AUGUST 2014) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NWRhNzJkNGIzMzM0ZGI4MA
Even in this fake transcript, there is no evidence to indicate that Justice Collins made the costs order at the alleged hearing on 20 August 2014, nor Helen Carrad, Crown Counsel, made any costs submission at or before the alleged hearing on 20 August 2014.
The fake transcript states:
“MS CARRAD: Sorry. Your Honour, perhaps just before I go, I have made the application that if the strike out, if you’re not minded to grant the striking out, whether you would be prepared to direct that the Attorney-General be removed and the Human Rights Review Tribunal substituted as a party?
THE COURT: I don’t think you need to worry yourself.
MS CARRAD: Thank you Your Honour.”
"MR COLLINS: Thank you Sir. There is an indication that costs are sought.
THE COURT: Yes and I will deal with that in my judgment." https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NWRhNzJkNGIzMzM0ZGI4MA
Neither Ministry of Justice nor Wellington High Court could produce the audio-recording of the alleged hearing in Wellington High Court on 20 August 2014, for the case of CIV-485-2343.
IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANYONE TO MAKE A TRANSCRIPT OF A HEARING WITHOUT HAVING THE RECORDING OF THE HEARING, FROM WHICH TO TRANSCRIBE WHAT WAS SAID FOR EVIDENTIAL PURPOSES.
The fake transcript was sent by Michaela Stack, Court Registry Officer, High Court of New Zealand, on 8 September 2014. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MzJiNTNjYmNkNTE0ZjNjNw
(3) There is no evidence that Helen Carrad, Crown Counsel, Crown Law, made the costs application nor submitted the costs schedules to Wellington High Court on or around 13 August 2014, about a week before the alleged hearing date of 20 August 2014.
SUBMISSIONS OF COUNSEL FOR SECOND RESPONDENT RELATING TO APPLICATION ON FIRST RESPONDENT FOR STRIKES OUT, dated 13 August 2014 (Helen Carrad, Crown Law) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6M2NmYzkzYjVjNDNjMTRm
(4) The High Court of New Zealand did not have the jurisdiction to hear the case on 20 August 2014 when the Supreme Court of New Zealand had the jurisdiction to hear the case since 15 August 2014.
The letter of the Supreme Court of New Zealand, dated 15 August 2014, states, “SC 83/2014 – Tatsuhiko KOYAMA v New Zealand Law Society and ANOR”, “I acknowledge receipt of the above application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, accepted for filing on the 15th of August 2014,” “Ani Chan CASE OFFICER.” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NGJiMjY5NmE4NDQ2MTQ4YQ
(5) There is no evidence of Paul Collins travelling from Auckland to Wellington on or around 20 August 2014; no one could produce the flight number of Paul Collins making the journey to attend the alleged hearing in Wellington on 20 August 2014; Paul Collins himself did not seek the travelling costs, due to his inability to produce the evidence of his travelling to from Auckland to Wellington.
(6) Wellington High Court confirmed that there was no hearing in the case of CIV-485-2343 on 20 August 2014.
B. Ask Justice Collins about the fact that the confirmed, false, forged document, dated 14 October 2014, with his name on it, was used for another confirmed organised crimes, committed in Dunedin High Court (the crimes of using false document for pecuniary gain, bankruptcy fraud, bank robbery by deception, etc.), in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
Letter of Mitch Singh, Associate, Glaister Ennor, dated 28 January 2016 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NzhjM2M4MWVmMWM4NWI4Mw
Absolute certainty on the commission of the organised crimes in the Court leaves no room, even for the judges whose names were used in the organised crimes, to prevent criminal investigation (and subsequent prosecution) on the confirmed systemic organised crimes, without the judges themselves violate the Crimes Act 1961.
This matter requires your leadership, due to the endemic, widespread corruption in New Zealand.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
10 December 2018
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern
Prime Minister of New Zealand
Members of the Justice Committee of New Zealand Parliament
Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the House; Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Justice and for Courts; Hon Stuart Nash, Minister of Police; Hon Dr David Clark, Minister of Health and MP for North Dunedin; Hon David Parker, Attorney General
New Zealand Police (Commissioner Mike Bush); Serious Fraud Office; Chief Justice of New Zealand; New Zealand Law Society; Ministry of Justice; State Services Commission; Auditor-General; Human Rights Commission; Wellington High Court
Dear Prime Minister
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
I understand that you are closely following the matter of the confirmed systemic organised crimes, committed in New Zealand Courts, aided by New Zealand Government, covered up by New Zealand Media (“New Zealand Justice Scam”).
As previously stated, “New Zealand Justice Scam represents more than just the norm of systemic organised crimes in the Court; it is part of the wider problems of the clandestine publicly funded criminal enterprise of New Zealand in which the organised crimes are using public institutions and state power for nefarious ends, in violation of the law of New Zealand.”
New Zealand Courts provide the perfect cover for the organised crimes to operate their criminal activities; the criminals are taking advantage of the secrecy in legal proceedings in the Court, including inaccessibility to public records in the Court by litigants and members of the public.
Peculiar to New Zealand, which I have not seen anywhere, is the solidarity among professionals in the Courts, Government, Media, to commit organised crimes in violation of the laws of New Zealand, disregarding their professional ethics, in their efforts to establish and maintain the clandestine publicly funded criminal enterprise, leaving the nation without any means to protect rights, including Human Rights, nor remedy wrongs which have been done by the criminals who are immune from prosecution for their organised crimes, due the protection afforded by the law enforcement in New Zealand. https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/new-zealand-scam
IT IS EXPECTED THAT YOU AS PRIME MINISTER OF NEW ZEALAND TO DO THE FOLLOWING:
A. Ask Justice Clifford about the PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY, i.e. plain and obvious FRAUD IN THE COURT, in which his name was used for the fake decision of the High Court, dated 28 May 2014, in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
Letter of Paul Collins, Barrister, Shortland Chambers, dated 9 June 2014
“This letter accompanies the sealed judgment and costs order following the delivery of His Honour's judgment on 28 May 2014."
“This proceeding was heard on 16 April 2014 at Wellington before the Honourable Justice Clifford, who, having heard from Paul Collins, counsel for the respondent, gives judgment that:… The respondent is entitled…$11,940.00 and disbursement of $50.00…” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6ZjU0NWQwZmZjOTIwNTZl
IT WAS “PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE” FOR JUSTICE CLIFFORD OF THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TO HEAR THE COSTS APPLICATION ON “16 APRIL 2014,” when Paul Collins sent the application for the costs order on “3 June 2014,” about 2.5 months after the date of hearing of 16 April 2014 when Clifford J was alleged to have heard the costs application.
(a) Email of Paul Collins, dated 3 June 2014; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo1MmNlZDBjMDdlZWUwOQ
(b) Letter of Paul Collins, dated 3 June 2014; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo3YzNkOWYzNTEwM2Y4MDk0
(c) Memorandum of Paul Collins, dated 3 June 2014; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo2YmI3Y2NhZWE2ZjU5YjM4
(d) "Judgment Dated: June 2014"; and https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDplNGE3YmFlYzFjOGQzMDU (e) "Order of the Court (costs) Dated: June 2014." https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDozNzZjNzNiODkyZWM1ZmI4
B. Ask Justice Clifford about the confirmed FAKE TRANSCRIPT on the non-existent hearing (Wellington High Court confirmed that there was NO hearing in this case), for which his name was used for the false document, in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
Was it possible to produce any transcript of a hearing without having any recording of the hearing (both Ministry of Justice and Wellington High Court confirmed that there was NO recording of the hearing)?
FAKE TRANSCRIPT ON THE NON-EXISTENT HEARING (LEGAL DISCUSSION BEFORE THE HON JUSTICE CLIFFORD, DATED 16 APRIL 2014) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NmJlMTZhMTcyYzdhNTJiYQ
C. Ask Michaela Stack, Court Registry Officer, High Court of New Zealand, about the confirmed fake transcript and the apparent contradiction in her emails, dated 13 June 2014 and 8 September 2014.
From: "Stack, Michaela"
I acknowledge receipt of your email dated 9 June 2014.
In general civil proceedings, a typed transcript is provided by our transcription service where evidence is given by witnesses who appear and are cross examined by counsel. The provision of a transcript in these circumstances occurs automatically.
An appeal hearing does not involve evidence from witnesses appearing in court or any cross examination. Therefore a transcript is not prepared automatically. This situation applied to your hearing on 16 April 2014.
If you wish to pursue this request, you will need to file a formal memorandum for consideration by Justice Clifford. You will need to include your reasons in the memorandum. Orders for the preparation of transcripts, can only be made by the presiding Judge. I cannot make a request without a Judge’s authority.
In paragraph 18 of his judgment, Justice Clifford awarded costs to the respondent on a scale 2B basis. The costs sought by the respondent and approved by the Court were consistent with Schedule 3 of the High Court Amendment Rules 2012.
Kind Regards
Michaela Stack
Court Registry Officer | High Court of New Zealand
Phone: +64 4 914 3616 | Fax: +64 4 914 3603
www.courtsofnz.govt.nz
From: "Stack, Michaela"
Mr Koyama
Please find attached the transcripts that you requested for the hearings on 16 April and 20 August 2014.
Kind Regards
Michaela Stack
Court Registry Officer | High Court of New Zealand
Phone: +64 4 914 3616 | Fax: +64 4 914 3603
www.courtsofnz.govt.nz
D. Ask Justice Clifford about the fact that the confirmed, false, forged document, dated 28 May 2014, with his name on it, was used for another confirmed organised crimes, committed in Dunedin High Court (the crimes of using false document for pecuniary gain, bankruptcy fraud, bank robbery by deception, etc.), in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
a. Letter of Mitch Singh, Associate, Glaister Ennor, dated 25 September 2015 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6N2U3NjgxNzU0NDA2OTc3Zg
b. Letter of Mitch Singh, Associate, Glaister Ennor, dated 28 January 2016 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NzhjM2M4MWVmMWM4NWI4Mw
c. Letter of Hayley McKee, Senior Associate, Glaister Ennor, dated 9 March 2016 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MWE0ZjU2MTJhZDAwZjc0Nw
d. The collaboration among various actors, including court officials, lawyers, police officers, public officials, and journalists in the confirmed organised crimes, committed in New Zealand Courts. https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/new-zealand-scam
Crimes Act 1961
66 Parties to offences
(1) Every one is a party to and guilty of an offence who—
(a) actually commits the offence; or
(b) does or omits an act for the purpose of aiding any person to commit the offence; or
(c) abets any person in the commission of the offence; or
(d) incites, counsels, or procures any person to commit the offence.
256 Forgery
(1) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years who makes a false document with the intention of using it to obtain any property, privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit, or valuable consideration.
257 Using forged documents
(1) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years who, knowing a document to be forged,— (a) uses the document to obtain any property, privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit, or valuable consideration; or
(b) uses, deals with, or acts upon the document as if it were genuine; or
(c) causes any other person to use, deal with, or act upon it as if it were genuine. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/137.0/DLM327382.html
What is obvious to you, as Prime Minister of New Zealand, is that the series of very serious offences under the Crimes Act 1961 was committed in New Zealand.
What must be realised by you is that the normalisation of fraud in the Court, supported and concealed by New Zealand Government, shows some very serious problems in the governance of New Zealand.
This matter requires your leadership, as the problems are severe and deeply entrenched, widespread in New Zealand.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
7 December 2018
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern
Prime Minister of New Zealand
Members of the Justice Committee of New Zealand Parliament
Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the House; Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Justice and for Courts; Hon Stuart Nash, Minister of Police; Hon Dr David Clark, Minister of Health and MP for North Dunedin; Hon David Parker, Attorney General
New Zealand Police (Commissioner Mike Bush); Serious Fraud Office; Chief Justice of New Zealand; New Zealand Law Society; Ministry of Justice; State Services Commission; Auditor-General; Human Rights Commission; Christchurch High Court
Dear Prime Minister
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
I understand that you are closely following the matter of the confirmed systemic organised crimes, committed in New Zealand Courts, aided by New Zealand Government, covered up by New Zealand Media (“New Zealand Justice Scam”).
IT IS EXPECTED THAT YOU AS PRIME MINISTER OF NEW ZEALAND TO DO THE FOLLOWING:
A. Ask Justice Mander of Christchurch High Court on the fact that his name was repeatedly used in the confirmed systemic organised crimes in the Court.
(1) FALSE DOCUMENT - “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 26 February 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 26 February 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6M2M0MmNjMDI5YTJjNTFjNg https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTNlOWYzZDAzMzFmYjIzNg
(2) FALSE DOCUMENT - Signed, “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 26 February 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 5 August 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NjkxMjgwZmI0ZmYzMTFkMA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MWQ0ZjM3MzcxNDhjYzQyYw
(3) FALSE DOCUMENT - Handwritten minute of Mander J, dated 27 February 2015, (retrieved from the official court file found in Dunedin High Court on 19 February 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NjM5YmRjZGVjNDBkOWY0
(4) FALSE DOCUMENT - “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 5 March 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 5 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NmNlN2FkYjg0NzU4NThjMQ https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NmIxMWU1N2I3ZGYzNDU1NQ
(5) FALSE DOCUMENT - Signed, “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 5 March 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 13 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NTQ3ZTVjZGM1NmFkZDJiMg https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MjMzM2VhOGUxMDk5YWU1Yw
(6) FALSE DOCUMENT - Unless order of Mander J, dated 12 March 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 12 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NGJmY2NkMWMzMDc1YWZmMQ
(7) FALSE DOCUMENT - Handwritten minute of Mander J, dated 12 March 2015, (sent by sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 13 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NDYzYTYwMGFhMjMxNTk2NA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6N2VlYWI4MGFjNTMxMTAzYg
(8) FALSE DOCUMENT - Signed, “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 13 March 2015 (sent by sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 13 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MmU0MDM1ZDQwMjU5MWZkMA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NzQyYzgyNzRmZjJjYjE5NA
(9) FALSE DOCUMENT - “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 13 March 2015 (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 16 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NmFkYWUxNjFiYWFmMzA2Mw https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MjM5NTdlNjg4MTliM2U0OQ
(10) FALSE DOCUMENT - “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 17 March 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 17 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MTIwNTM2MzAwMjQ3NjdjYQ https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NWZhZDIwN2JiZWYxZjk2Mw
(11) FALSE DOCUMENT - Signed, “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 17 March 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 17 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MWUzZGY3NDUyZjBjZjZlZQ https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjdlMGRmNzBhMDdjYjdm
(12) FALSE DOCUMENT - Email of Mander J, dated 20 March 2015 (at 12:11 pm), (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 10 August 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NzA4Y2U2YzYxYTBmY2Q3YQ https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTJhNjQxYjZkMTM4ODRmNA
(13) FALSE DOCUMENT - Email of Mander J, dated 20 March 2015 (at 12:18 pm), (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 12 August 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MzA4NTIwYWIyYzkxM2IzMA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NWQ4N2NkYmI5YzU1ODUwNw
(14) FALSE DOCUMENT - Order of Mander J, dated 20 March 2015 (at 12:26 pm), (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 20 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6Njc1ODNkZGYzMzg2N2EzOQ
(15) FALSE DOCUMENT - “JUDGMENT OF MANDER J,” dated 23 March 2015, (sent by Rebecca Fahey, Civil Caseflow Manager, Christchurch High Court, on 23 March 2015, on the same day when a telephone case management conference was held and before the scheduled hearing on 5 April 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6ZmNjOThjMDgwMTJmMGM3 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTAyZDI0YjkzZWU3ZDU4Zg
(16) FALSE DOCUMENT - Signed, “JUDGMENT OF MANDER J,” dated 23 March 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 24 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NmY4MzdlNmQxYTQ4MTFkYQ https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6N2YyYTRkMGU1NWEyZTkzZg
(17) FALSE DOCUMENT - “JUDGMENT OF MANDER J,’ dated 26 May 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 26 May 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NDkzOTE5YTVhMWQwMTQ1Ng https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MTEzNjI5MTM5ZDY5OTc2OA
(18) FALSE DOCUMENT - Signed, “JUDGMENT OF MANDER J,’ dated 26 May 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 5 August 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6ZDlhM2Y0OTNiYjUyN2Jm https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MWQ0ZjM3MzcxNDhjYzQyYw
(19) FALSE DOCUMENT - Minute of Mander J, date 5 June 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 5 June 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NGM3NjViNDljNTM2NWFkNw
(20) FALSE DOCUMENT - Handwritten minute of Mander J, dated 5 June 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 14 July 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NGM3NjViNDljNTM2NWFkNw https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjZhMGFkYzkwOTU5YmMwNQ
(21) FALSE DOCUMENT - “Order for Costs,” dated 12 June 2015, (sent by Grant Macdonald on or around 15 July 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NjU2N2ViMGMxOTAyYmEwMQ
B. Read “Analysis of signatures for detection of forgery,” by Mr Andrew Straw, US lawyer and notary public, on the forgery. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NmIxNzZiMjQwNjc2ZDJiZQ
C. Ask Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, where Justice Mander was on 20 March 2015 (Wellington or Auckland?) and ask her the reason for not having the official court document with the signature of Justice Mander on his decision on 20 March 2015.
From: "Nicholson, Amelia"
Dear Tatsuhiko,
Many thanks for your email. All our Christchurch Judges are in Wellington today and Friday attending a conference but as the Unless Order is for close of business tomorrow I will forward this application and any other relevant documents on to the Honourable Justice Mander to deal with as soon as he has the opportunity.
If counsel for the respondent wishes to reply to this application could they please let me know as soon as possible.
Kind regards,
Amelia
From: "Nicholson, Amelia"
Dear Counsel and Mr and Ms Koyama,
Following the receipt of the appellants application for an extension of the unless order and the respondents memorandum in reply, the Honourable Justice Mander has minuted the above named matter as follows:
"The appellants' application for an extension is declined.
The appellants cite Rule 12.7(1) HCRs as providing a time requirement for service, however this rule concerns summary judgment applications and does not apply to the present situation.
The appellants appeal remains extant notwithstanding the operation of the unless order.
I also note for completeness that a hearing of the respondent's application was attempted to be convened however the appellants declined to make themselves available despite repeated efforts by the Registry. The matter was dealt with by way of memorandum.
The appellants have still not provided reasons for their non-compliance.”
Kind regards,
Amelia
Amelia Nicholson Deputy Registrar | Christchurch High Court DDI: +64 3 962 4273 | Ext 54273
www.courtsofnz.govt.nz
From: "Nicholson, Amelia"
Dear Mr Koyama,
I do not have a hand written copy of this minute as the Honourable Justice Mander was in Auckland for a conference. This minute was given to me by way of email which I have attached a copy of now.
Kind regards,
Amelia
THERE IS NO CONTROVERSY ON THE ENDEMIC AND WIDESPREAD CORRUPTION IN NEW ZEALAND JUSTICE SYSTEM; THERE IS NO COURT LEFT IN NEW ZEALAND, WHICH IS NOT TAINTED WITH CORRUPTION.
The problem in New Zealand is very severe.
This matter requires your leadership.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010 TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
3 December 2018
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern
Prime Minister of New Zealand
Members of the Justice Committee of New Zealand Parliament
Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the House; Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Justice and for Courts; Hon Stuart Nash, Minister of Police; Hon Dr David Clark, Minister of Health and MP for North Dunedin; Hon David Parker, Attorney General
New Zealand Police (Commissioner Mike Bush); Serious Fraud Office; Chief Justice of New Zealand; New Zealand Law Society; Ministry of Justice; State Services Commission; Auditor-General; Human Rights Commission
Dear Prime Minister
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
I understand that you are closely following the matter of the confirmed systemic organised crimes, committed in New Zealand Courts, aided by New Zealand Government, covered up by New Zealand Media (“New Zealand Justice Scam”).
New Zealand Justice Scam represents more than just the norm of systemic organised crimes in the Court; it is part of the wider problems of the clandestine publicly funded criminal enterprise of New Zealand in which the organised crimes are using public institutions and state power for nefarious ends, in violation of the law of New Zealand, indicating the profound lack of professionalism among judges, court officials, lawyers, police officers, public officials, and journalists of New Zealand.
IT IS EXPECTED THAT YOU AS PRIME MINISTER OF NEW ZEALAND TO DO THE FOLLOWING:
A. Ask Associate Judge Matthews of Christchurch High Court on the fact that someone impersonated him in the fake hearing in Dunedin High Court on 3 March 2016. https://youtu.be/f1nzidjU7Qo
B. Ask any of the judges whose names were used in the systemic organised crimes in the Court on the fact that their names were used in the organised crimes.
THE FOLLOWING NAMES OF JUDGES WERE USED IN THE CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES OF FRAUD IN NEW ZEALAND COURTS:
(a) Phillips J, Crosbie J of the District Court;
(b) Dobson J, Kos J, Simon France J, Young J, Clifford J, Collins J, Gendall J, Mander J, Davidson J, Osborne AJ, Matthews AJ of the High Court;
(c) O’Regan J, Wild J, White J, Ellen France J, Cooper J of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand; and
(d) Glazebrook J, McGrath J, William Young J, Arnold J of the Supreme Court. https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/forgery-in-new-zealand-courts
C. See the collaboration among various actors, including court officials, lawyers, police officers, public officials, and journalists in the confirmed organised crimes, committed in New Zealand, and what do you think? https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/new-zealand-scam
POINTS TO PONDER
1. Should People, Business, or Government use the Courts for some ulterior purposes, i.e. getting what they want by paying bribe or hiring lawyers who have connection with court staff or judges for the illegal purpose of circumventing legal processes or other way to subvert the law?
2. Should there be different treatments between the insiders and the outsiders, in the justice system?
3. What are the essence of the Judiciary and roles of judges who preside the Courts which are used as the instruments of the organised crimes in violation of the law?
4. Should taxpayers of New Zealand be liable to pay for the confirmed clandestine criminal enterprise in which New Zealand Courts are used as the instruments of the organised crimes?
It is axiomatic as one of the most important principles of constitutional liberal democracy that NO Court should be used as the instrument of organised crimes; the problem in New Zealand is very severe, there is NO Court left, which is not tainted with corruption, as all Courts in New Zealand, from the District Court to the Supreme Court, are used as the instruments of the organised crimes.
In the preface of “Global corruption report 2007: Corruption and Judicial Systems,” published by Transparency International, we find:
“…the fight against corruption depends upon it [the judicial system]. The expanding arsenal of anti- corruption weapons includes new national and international laws against corruption that rely on fair and impartial judicial systems for enforcement. Where judicial corruption occurs, the damage can be pervasive and extremely difficult to reverse. Judicial corruption undermines citizens’ morale, violates human rights, harms their job prospects and national development and depletes the quality of governance.” http://issuu.com/transparencyinternational/docs/global_corruption_report_2007_english?mode=wi ndow&backgroundColor=%23222222
Obviously, you, as Prime Minister of New Zealand, with all the information that is available to you on this matter, know that the series of very serious crimes were committed in New Zealand and the organised crimes are using public institutions and state power for illegal purposes in violation of the law of New Zealand.
Crimes Act 1961
71 Accessory after the fact
(1) An accessory after the fact to an offence is one who, knowing any person to have been a party to the offence, receives, comforts, or assists that person or tampers with or actively suppresses any evidence against him or her, in order to enable him or her to escape after arrest or to avoid arrest or conviction. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/137.0/DLM328515.html
THE QUESTION FOR PRIME MINISTER - Will you become an accessory after the fact and suppress the systemic organised crimes, committed in New Zealand, maintaining the status quo of having the clandestine publicly funded criminal enterprise of New Zealand, or alternatively will you take leadership and fight against the endemic and widespread corruption in New Zealand Judiciary, opening New Zealand for truth and justice?
I hope that your choice is something that you can live with for the rest of your life.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama Sent: Friday, November 30, 2018 9:23 AM
To: Stuart Nash ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; BINKS, Elizabeth ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; Serious Fraud Office ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; ContactUs ; CourtofAppeal ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; invercargill[email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; rotorua[email protected] ; tauranga[email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] Subject: Should New Zealand Courts be the instruments of the organised crimes?
Dear Sir/Madam
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
Attached below, you can find numerous evidences of the confirmed systemic organised crimes, committed in various New Zealand Courts, from the District Court to the Supreme Court of New Zealand.
All the illegal documents have been confirmed by the respective Courts, and there is NO dispute on the commission of the systemic organised crimes in New Zealand.
All of them are very serious offences under the Crimes Act 1961.
Shouldn’t you be concerned about such a series of serious violations of the law?
THIS MATTER REQUIRES YOUR OWN INVESTIGATION.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
29 November 2018
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern
Prime Minister of New Zealand
Members of the Justice Committee of New Zealand Parliament
Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the House; Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Justice and for Courts; Hon Stuart Nash, Minister of Police; Hon Dr David Clark, Minister of Health and MP for North Dunedin; Hon David Parker, Attorney General
New Zealand Police (Commissioner Mike Bush); Serious Fraud Office; Chief Justice of New Zealand; New Zealand Law Society; Christchurch High Court; Dunedin High Court; State Services Commission
Dear Prime Minister
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
I understand that you are closely following the matter of the confirmed systemic organised crimes, committed in New Zealand Courts, aided by New Zealand Government, covered up by New Zealand Media (“New Zealand Justice Scam”).
COMPLETE ABSENCE OF JUSTICE IN NEW ZEALAND – In New Zealand, there is NO Court left which has not been tainted with New Zealand Justice Scam; the criminal syndicates are using New Zealand Courts as their instruments of organised crimes; their crimes are protected by the law enforcement, aided by the government, concealed by the media; the law has become meaningless in the Court where circumvention of legal processes and subversion of the law are the norm, rather than an exception.
INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES - “With the privy council now gone, this [certain systematic organised crime in New Zealand] needs to be exposed by the media of another country. I am a medical doctor, with 3 medical science books published internationally. I am also an authority on Narcissistic Personality Disorder, sociopathy and psychopathy - and the people we are dealing with are extreme examples of this trait. However, the problem in NZ is the apathy, timidity and cognitive dissonance of the people. We have built up conclusive evidence - all in the public domain. Are there any university professors of law who have the integrity to join our fight?” (UK medical professional) - “I think the courts are really the most fundamental and important part of government. If you cannot get justice, none of your rights exist,” “Life liberty and property cease to exist,” “I think the word you're looking for [the criminals using the Courts for systematic organised crimes] is psychopathy,” “Group psychopathy,” “If you can reform the New Zealand courts with the support of New Zealand people, that will be a miracle” (US lawyer).
CLANDESTINE PUBLICLY FUNDED CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE - The mob, with their uninhibited herd mentality and naked aggression, prey on the isolated, vulnerable, unsuspected individuals; no one can stop them from committing their crimes when they are protected by the law enforcement, aided by the government, concealed by the media, evading public scrutiny and international attention; they are immune from prosecution under the perfect cover of New Zealand Courts, and the criminal syndicates are allowed to use public institutions and state power for their illicit ends in violation of the laws of New Zealand; all of their crimes are perfect with comprehensive cover-ups, leaving no trace of their criminal activities, with the complete absence of evidences (destroyed or removed illegally) in public institutions and absolutely unreliable public records (with forgery and fictitious facts), including fake news disseminated by the media, creating the eerily atmosphere in which the people are disoriented by the public disinformation, propaganda, and indoctrination of the state which Is ruled in the shadow where the real power is exercised.
NEW ZEALAND SCAM – CLANDESTINE PUBLICLY FUNDED CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE OF NEW ZEALAND, COMMITTED IN THE COURT, SUPPORTED AND CONCEALED BY THE GOVERNMENT AND MEDIA OF NEW ZEALAND, EVADING PUBLIC SCRUTINY AND INTERNATIONAL ATTENTION.
THERE IS NO CONTROVERSY - ALL ILLEGAL, FAKE, FORGED DOCUMENTS OF NEW ZEALAND COURTS, USED IN VARIOUS ORGANISED CRIMES COMMITTED IN NEW ZEALAND, HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED WITHOUT ANY DISPUTE.
Now, you, as Prime Minister of New Zealand, must see, for yourself, the evidences of the confirmed systemic organised crimes, committed in the Court, supported and concealed by the government of New Zealand, in violation of the laws of New Zealand and several international treaties for which New Zealand is a signatory.
CONFIRMED EVIDENCES OF THE SYSTEMIC ORGANISED CRIMES COMMITTED IN NEW ZEALAND – CONFIRMED BANKRUPTCY FRAUD, BANK ROBBERY BY DECEPTION, PERVERTING THE COURSE OF JUSTICE, COMMITTED IN THE COURT, PROTECTED BY THE LAW ENFORCEMENT, AIDED BY THE GOVERNMENT, CONCEALED BY THE MEDIA OF NEW ZEALAND.
(1) Letter of Mitch Singh, Associate, Glaister Ennor, dated 25 September 2015 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6N2U3NjgxNzU0NDA2OTc3Zg
- “Judgment Dated: 28 May 2014” is a FALSE, FORGED DOCUMENT of the High Court of New Zealand.
- Tatsuhiko Koyama did not receive any demand letter from the New Zealand Law Society prior to receiving the confirmed false document of the High Court of New Zealand for extortion.
(2) FALSE DOCUMENT - “ORDER OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE AS TO SUBSTITUTED SERVICE OF A BANKRUPTCY NOTICE,” dated 18 September 2015, (sent by Mitch Singh on or around 25 September 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6N2U3NjgxNzU0NDA2OTc3Zg
(3) FALSE DOCUMENT - “JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE as to substituted service of Bankruptcy Notice,” dated 18 September 2015, (sent by Dunedin High Court on 1 October 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NmYwNjIzOTkwMTVlM2EzZA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTViMzBmZTExYTU1YWRkYQ
(4) FALSE DOCUMENT - “ORDER OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE AS TO SUBSTITUTED SERVICE OF A BANKRUPTCY NOTICE,” dated 18 September 2015, (sent by Dunedin High Court on 1 October 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NzBjZWM4NGFhNmQxNTE2Yw https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTViMzBmZTExYTU1YWRkYQ
* The signature on the document, dated 18 September 2015, is a computer-generated image, pasted on the document. There is NO practice in the High Court of New Zealand to put an digital image on the original court document.
(5) FALSE DOCUMENT - “INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION WITHOUT NOTICE FOR SUBSTITUTED SERVICE ON JUDGMENT DEBTOR,” dated 10 September 2015, (sent by Brian Sceats, Deputy Registrar, Dunedin High Court, on 2 October 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6YzU1NGNhZTIwY2VkYjU5 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MTI2OGU5Y2I0YWVkZmJmMA
(6) FALSE DOCUMENT - “AFFIDAVIT OF MARY ELIZABETH OLLIVIER IN SUPPORT OF INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION WITHOUT NOTICE FOR SUBSTITUTED SERVICE ON JUDGMENT DEBTOR,” dated 9 September 2015, (sent by Brian Sceats, Deputy Registrar, Dunedin High Court, on 2 October 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6YzU1NGNhZTIwY2VkYjU5 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MTI2OGU5Y2I0YWVkZmJmMA
(7) Letter of Mitch Singh, Associate, Glaister Ennor, dated 28 January 2016 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NzhjM2M4MWVmMWM4NWI4Mw
* “DECISION OF TRIBUNAL ON COSTS APPLICATION BY DEFENDANT,” dated 28 May 2013, is an interim decision of the Human Rights Review Tribunal, issued before the deadline for the parties to make their submissions.
* “Order of the Court (Costs) Dated: 4/6/2013” is a FALSE, FORGED DOCUMENT of the High Court of New Zealand. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MmM2YmVhYzZhMjY1OWJjYQ
* “Judgment of the Court,” dated 8 November 2013 is a FALSE, FORGED Document of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NDlkNDQ5ZGUyZWFmZTMzYw
* “Judgment Dated: 28 May 2014” is a FALSE, FORGED Document of the High Court of New Zealand. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6ZjU0NWQwZmZjOTIwNTZl
* “Judgment dated 14 October 2014” is a FALSE, FORGED Document of the High Court of New Zealand. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MjY0YTZkOGMxZWExM2ExNA
* “Judgment of the Court,” dated 20 October 2014, is a FALSE, FORGED Document of the Supreme Court of New Zealand. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NGRjMTI1MmI2ZDhiMjE2ZA
(8) FALSE DOCUMENT - “FURTHER ORDERS OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE AS TO SUBSTITUTED SERVICE OF SUMMONS TO DEBTOR AND CREDITOR’S APPLICATION,” dated 26 January 2016, (sent by Mitch Singh on or around 28 January 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NzhjM2M4MWVmMWM4NWI4Mw
(9) FALSE DOCUMENT - “SUMMONS TO DEBTOR,” dated 21 January 20 16, (sent by Mitch Singh on or around 28 January 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NzhjM2M4MWVmMWM4NWI4Mw
(10) FALSE DOCUMENT - Handwritten minute of Associate Judge Osborne, dated 26 January 2016, (sent by Rebecca Fahey, Civil Caseflow Manager, Christchurch High Court, on 18 February 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MzBhMjViOGUxMGJlOTk1Yg https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MTcwYmI2N2EwYTQxYTVmYw
(11) FALSE DOCUMENT - “JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE upon review of Deputy Registrar’s decision,” dated 1 March 2016, (sent by Keroli Smith, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 1 March 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NTI4YzlhYjcwNzI0MzEwOA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6ZWM1NzNiM2QwNDQwOTVi
(12) FAKE HEARING IN DUNEDIN HIGH COURT on 3 March 2016 https://youtu.be/f1nzidjU7Qo
* Associate Judge Matthews was NOT at the hearing; someone impersonated the judge at the hearing.
(13) FALSE DOCUMENT - “ORAL JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE MATTHEWS,” dated 3 March 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 4 March 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NGFjYjdjMWY3NTlhODk3NQ https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NmYyZTcwY2M2ZjdkNmU
(14) Letter of Hayley McKee, Senior Associate, Glaister Ennor, dated 9 March 2016 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MWE0ZjU2MTJhZDAwZjc0Nw
(15) FALSE DOCUMENT - ”ORDER ADJUDICATING DEBTOR BANKRUPT,” dated 8 March 2016, (send by Hayley McKee on or around 9 March 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MWE0ZjU2MTJhZDAwZjc0Nw
(16) FAKE NEWS – “Decade-long legal stoush ends with lawyer declared bankrupt” - Hamish McNeilly, Dunedin Bureau Chief, Fairfax Media / stuff, personally tended the confirmed fake hearing in Dunedin High Court on 3 March 2016. Then, he wrote the fake news with fed information which was not available to him and published the false information on 16 March 2016. https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/77939021/decadelong-legal-stoush-ends-with-lawyer- declared-bankrupt
(17) FALSE DOCUMENT - “MINUTE OF DAVIDSON J (following memorandum of counsel for judgment creditor dated 9 March 2016 in relation to alleged recording of hearing by judgment debtor),” dated 12 April 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 12 April 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MTVkYWIyYzIyZWYzM2E5OA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MWUxMTNiMmVhODJhN2M2ZQ
(18) FALSE DOCUMENT - “MINUTE OF DAVIDSON J (following memorandum of counsel for judgment creditor dated 9 March 2016 in relation to alleged recording of hearing by judgment debtor),” dated 12 April 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 12 April 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NDdiZTY0NzcwNTY2Yzk4Mw https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MWUxMTNiMmVhODJhN2M2ZQ
(19) FALSE DOCUMENT - Signed “MINUTE OF DAVIDSON J (following memorandum of counsel for judgment creditor dated 9 March 2016 in relation to alleged recording of hearing by judgment debtor),” dated 12 April 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 12 April 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NDliZmJmMzE3OTIyNWEwMA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MzcyZjg0MzBjMWZkNTQ1Ng
(20) NEW ZEALAND POLICE OFFICER, REMOVING INCRIMINATING EVIDENCES FROM THE POLICE PREMISES
(a) Email of John Ferguson, New Zealand Police, dated 4 April 2016 From: FERGUSON, John Sent: Monday, 4 April 2016 12:06 p.m. To: 'Tatsuhiko Koyama'
Dear Mr Koyama As discussed last week when you came to the Dunedin Police Station to see Inspector Guthrie The Otago Coastal Area Commander. I have consulted with him about your request for a meeting, I have initially booked a time this Friday 8/4/16 at 1:00 pm (1300 Hrs) for you and your wife. Can you please confirm by return email that this time is suitable for your attendance, so I can finalise the booking with Mr Guthrie regards
John Ferguson
Detective Senior Sergeant Area Investigations Manager| Otago Coastal | New Zealand Police P +64 03 4714937 Extn: 33137 | M +64 021 1914990 | E [email protected] Central Police Station, 25 Great King St, Private Bag 1924, Dunedin, www.police.govt.nz Safer Communities Together
(b) Email of John Ferguson, New Zealand Police, dated 5 April 2016 From: "FERGUSON, John"
Dear Mr Koyama I have not received a confirmation that you are able to attend the meeting you requested with Inspector Guthrie this Friday as proposed below, I have sent this second email to you to ensure you receive notification and will confirm by return email this date and time is suitable regards
John Ferguson
Detective Senior Sergeant Area Investigations Manager| Otago Coastal | New Zealand Police P +64 03 4714937 Extn: 33137 | M +64 021 1914990 | E [email protected] Central Police Station, 25 Great King St, Private Bag 1924, Dunedin, www.police.govt.nz Safer Communities Together
(c) Letter of John Ferguson, Detective Senior Sergeant, New Zealand Police, dated 1 December 2017 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NzQzYjMyY2Q0NmRlNjYy
- John Ferguson, Detective Senior Sergeant, New Zealand Police, removed the incriminating evidences of the confirmed systematic organised crimes committed in New Zealand from the office of New Zealand Police, without any investigation, such as contacting those judges whose names were used in the confirmed crimes of forgery and use of false documents for extortion and robbery. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MWMyYzUxNmU5ZWI3Y2YxMA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjY1NGFkMTA1OTViNjljMw https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDozNWI5OThlYTUwZjgxMGQx https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDozNDk5NTFlOTQ2MGJkYjc1 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo0YmM4YjFiMWFhMTFmNDI5 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDoxMmM3MzFjZDRhYzU1NWVl
(21) GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL, PERVERTING THE COURSE OF JUSTICE, EXTORTION, INTENTIONAL DEFAMATION, AND THEFT WITHOUT ANY COURT ORDER
(a) Email of Rob McDonald, Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment, dated 6 April 2016 From: Rob McDonald
Dear Mr Koyama,
Please refer to my previous emails dated 9,10 & 15 March 2016. I am emailing you a final time to request that you complete and submit a Statement of Affairs as required by the Insolvency Act 2006, section s67. This document has been supplied to you previously. Should we not receive this completed document by 20 April 2016, we intend advertising your bankruptcy in the Otago Daily Times and the Christchurch Press. We have to ensure that all your creditors are aware of your bankruptcy and have the opportunity to submit a proof of debt. At this point we have two creditors who have filed proofs of debt. Please see the attached claims list. Once we are satisfied that we have taken all reasonable steps to contact known creditors (whether this includes a review of your completed Statement of Affairs or not), we will:
1. Pay our costs of administration, currently $...4,083.65. This will increase until the estate is closed and we finalise the administration. 2. Pay all known creditors including interest. If there are no more creditors, I estimate this to be around $62,500 if paid on 31 July 2016. 3. Apply to the High court for your annulment pursuant to section 309(1)(b) of the Insolvency Act 2016. 4. Refund to you any excess funds we hold. We currently hold $... As you can see, if matters proceed smoothly there will be a considerable refund to you.
Regards,
Rob McDonald | Deputy Assignee | Insolvency and Trustee Service | Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment | DDI +64 3 962 6186 | Fax +64 3 962 6200 | Freephone 0508 467 658 | Private Bag 4714, Christchurch 8140 | www.insolvency.govt.nz www.govt.nz - your guide to finding and using New Zealand government services
- The Insolvency and Trustee Service illegally stole the personal property of Tatsuhiko Koyama and placed a caveat on the house that he and his wife lives in Dunedin, New Zealand, without any signed court order from a High Court judge.
- Kiwibank, the state-owned bank in New Zealand, cooperated with the criminals in the Insolvency and Trustee Service, transferred the bank deposit to the criminals, without any signed court order from a High Court judge.
- Tatsuhiko Koyama did NOT file any statement of affairs with the Insolvency and Trustee Service.
(b) Email of Rob McDonald, Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment, dated 19 April 2016 From: Rob McDonald
Dear Mr Koyama, Our solicitor has spoken to Mr McKenzie whom I understand will be in touch with you in due course. Unfortunately the funds held in your estate are not available to you for payment of his fees (or for any other purposes unless an allowance is made to you under s 163 Insolvency Act 2006), as section 101 Insolvency Act 2006 has extinguished all of your rights and interest in them. I understand that you have now applied for an extension of time to appeal your adjudication and that it may be some time before that is determined by the Court of Appeal. In light of that we will not proceed as indicated in my previous email dated 6 April 2016, and will await the determination of your extension of time application. This does not excuse your failure to file a statement of affairs, however, as there is no stay of administration in place that could have that effect. Please note that your failure to comply with s 67 Insolvency Act 2006 may constitute a summary offence under s 433(1)(a) of the Act.
Your statement of affairs is awaited accordingly.
Regards, Rob McDonald | Deputy Assignee | Insolvency and Trustee Service | Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment | DDI +64 3 962 6186 | Fax +64 3 962 6200 | Freephone 0508 467 658 | Private Bag 4714, Christchurch 8140 | www.insolvency.govt.nzwww.govt.nz - your guide to finding and using New Zealand government services
- The criminals in the Insolvency and Trustee Service committed the further crime of obstructing the course of justice by not releasing the money that they held, ensuring Tatsuhiko Koyama not getting his legal representation using his own money.
(22) FALSE DOCUMENT - Singed “ORAL JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE MATTHEWS,” dated 3 March 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 13 June 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NTdlMWE3YzAyOTE0Y2Y3Mg https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjY2NzI1ZWNiZDM1ODNmOA
(23) FALSE DOCUMENT - Minute of Associate Judge Matthews, dated 13 June 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 13 June 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6N2EyYTJkZmQ5NjY5Y2QyNg
(24) FALSE DOCUMENT - Handwritten minute of Associate Judge Matthews, dated 13 June 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 13 June 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MTZkZTU4NDEzNzI1NWE5NA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6M2JkMmYyOTI4NGY4MzYx
(25) FALSE DOCUMENT - Signed “MINUTE OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE MATTHEWS,” dated 17 June 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 17 June 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NzNiN2ZiZmI4MDhhZmUyYg https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MjVjZWUyYWJmYTM1NTUwNQ
(26) COURT OFFICIAL, DESTROYING THE FILED CHARGING DOCUMENTS (a) Email of Alister Frengley, Court Services Manager, Dunedin High/District Court, dated 1 June 2016 From: "Frengley, Alister"
Dear Mr Koyama, With regard to your email concern below to the Chief District Court Judge regarding your Charging Documents in the Dunedin District Court As you are aware you filed 4 charging documents in the Dunedin Court on 26 May 2016. As you were informed by me at the time, these documents would be referred to a District Court Judge who will determine if the charging documents are accepted for filing. The charging documents have been referred to a District Court Judge for direction and we will inform you once he has made his decision concerning the filing of your charging documents. kind regards
Alister Frengley
Alister Frengley
Court Services Manager | Customer Services, High Court, Family, Civil, Tenancy Dunedin High/District Court 184 High Street, Dunedin DDI 03 4715118 | Ext 52118 | DX YX 10176 | Mobile 021 365068 (b) Email of Alister Frengley, Court Services Manager, Dunedin High/District Court, dated 12 July 2016 From: "Frengley, Alister"
Dear Mr Koyama, As you are aware, you lodged 4 charging documents at the Dunedin District Court. These charging documents, as you have been informed, have been submitted to a District Court Judge for a decision regarding whether they are accepted for filing. It has now been found that these files are not able to be filed in the Dunedin District Court as this is the wrong court for filing. Below is the relevant section of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 relating to where charging documents should be filed.
Section 14 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 states: 14 Commencement of criminal proceedings
(1) A criminal proceeding in respect of an offence is commenced by filing a charging document in the District Court that is—
(a) nearest to where the offence is alleged to have been committed; or
(b) nearest to where the person filing the charging document believes the defendant can be found.
(2) Despite subsection (1),—
(a) if all the parties to the proposed proceeding agree, the charging document may be filed in another District Court; and
(b) if 2 or more charging documents are to be filed in respect of the same defendant, they may all be filed in a District Court in which any 1 of them could be filed.
(3) A failure to file a charging document in the correct District Court in accordance with this section does not invalidate any proceeding.
It appears all of the defendants named in the charging documents are resident in Auckland and therefore these charging documents cannot be filed here in Dunedin. .At the time of filing these documents you paid the required fee of $30 per charging document. This was receipted on the back of the filing letter you submitted with the charging documents. If you choose to file these charging documents in the correct court you can show that the filing fee has been paid. If you choose not to file them , I can arrange for a refund of the $120. The documents are available for you to pick up at the front counter of the Dunedin District Court
regards
Alister Frengley
Alister Frengley Court Services Manager | Customer Services, High Court, Family, Civil, Tenancy Dunedin High/District Court 184 High Street, Dunedin DDI 03 4715118 | Ext 52118 | DX YX 10176 | Mobile 021 365068 (c) Email of Alister Frengley, Court Services Manager, Dunedin High/District Court, dated 13 July 2016 From: "Frengley, Alister"
Dear Mr Koyama, At the time you sent emails to me last night I was no longer at work. I am replying to your emails below now. The decision to return the charging documents to you was not made by a District Court Judge. The decision was made by a Deputy Registrar, myself, when I realised that the documents were not filed in the correct Court. A Deputy Registrar has the authority to make that decision.
I apologise that this was not noticed at the time you originally filed the documents. regards
Alister Frengley
Alister Frengley
Court Services Manager | Customer Services, High Court, Family, Civil, Tenancy Dunedin High/District Court 184 High Street, Dunedin DDI 03 4715118 | Ext 52118 | DX YX 10176 | Mobile 021 365068 (d) Letter of Alister Frengley, Court Services Manager, Dunedin High/District Court, dated 18 July 2016 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MzkzZWZmNTIyYTFhNzI4ZQ
- Alister Frengley, Court Services Manager, Dunedin High/District Court, illegally blocked the private prosecution and removed the incriminating evidences from the Court, in his effort to conceal the confirmed bankruptcy fraud, committed in Dunedin High Court.
(27) FALSE DOCUMENT - Minute of Associate Judge Osborne, dated 5 December 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court ONLY to Grant Slevin, Senior Investigating Solicitor, Insolvency and Trustee Service, Ministry of Innovation and Employment of New Zealand Government, while Tatsuhiko Koyama WAS NOT in New Zealand, on 5 December 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo2MGNiZmI4ZDk2NDNhOGIz
(28) GOVERNMENT LAWYER, PERVERTING THE COURSE OF JUSTICE, COMMITTING BANK ROBBERY USING FALSE DOCUMENTS AND OTHER MEANS OF DECEPTION
(a) Email of Grant Slevin, Senior Investigating Solicitor, Insolvency and Trustee Service, dated 5 December 2016
From: Grant Slevin
Date: Monday, 5 December 2016 at 4:18 PM
To: Tatsuhiko Koyama
Cc: Rob McDonald
Dear Mr Koyama,
The court has today made an order directing me to serve you with this proceeding by email, which I now do.
Please note that the hearing scheduled for 15 December 2016 has not been vacated at this stage.
I would still like to have that hearing, which will just deal with timetabling matters, conducted by way of telephone conference. This so that your estate need not incur the costs associated with my travelling to Dunedin for the hearing or instructing an agent to appear on my behalf.
Please let me know if you agree that this first hearing can be held by way of a teleconference.
Regards,
Grant Slevin | Senior Investigating Solicitor | Insolvency and Trustee Service | Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
DDI +64 3 9626194 | Freephone 0508 467 658 | Private Bag 4714, Christchurch 8140 | www.insolvency.govt.nz
- Tatsuhiko Koyama was ABSENT from New Zealand for the entire month of December 2016; NO New Zealand Court had any jurisdiction on him in his absence from New Zealand.
(b) Email of Grant Slevin, Senior Investigating Solicitor, Insolvency and Trustee Service, dated 12 December 2016
- Grant Slevin, Senior Investigating Solicitor, Insolvency and Trustee Service, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, in his email, dated 12 December 2016, wrote: “I would be grateful if you could refer it to Associate Judge Osborne and let me know in due course if my appearance on Thursday 15 December is excused.” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo3YzZkMmVkYTM1ZjhlNDUy
- Memorandum of Grant Slevin, dated 12 December 2016, states, “the counsel submits the hearing scheduled for 15 December should be vacated and a date in January 2017 allocated for a determination on the papers or, if the need arises, a case management conference by way of telephone conference.” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo3Mjg4YWE3MDMyNTQxMzU5
(c) Email of Grant Slevin, Senior Investigating Solicitor, Insolvency and Trustee Service, dated 23 December 2016
From: Grant Slevin
Date: Friday, 23 December 2016 at 10:30 AM
To: Tatsuhiko Koyama
Subject: RE: URGENT - RETURN LEGAL DOCUMENT - VIOLATION OF THE HAGUE CONVENTION (7) [UNCLASSIFIED] Dear Mr Koyama,
If what you say is true you have committed an offence under s 433(f) Insolvency Act 2006 by leaving New Zealand without the Assignee’s consent.
A person who commits this offence is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or a fine not exceeding $5,000, or both.
Regards,
Grant Slevin | Senior Investigating Solicitor | Insolvency and Trustee Service | Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
DDI +64 3 9626194 | Freephone 0508 467 658 | Private Bag 4714, Christchurch 8140 | www.insolvency.govt.nz
(29) FALSE DOCUMENT - "JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE annulling adjudication," dated 13 December 2016, (send by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, BEFORE the scheduled hearing on 15 December 2015, while Tatsuhiko Koyama WAS NOT in New Zealand, on 13 December 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo1MmQyZmUwZWM3NzgwMjc3 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MmUxODFlOWFmMDI0YWI2OQ
(30) FALSE DOCUMENT - Signed "JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE OSBORNE annulling adjudication," dated 13 December 2016, (Sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 4 January 2017) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjFhNzA4MzVkZWFhNjk1NQ https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTYxN2RiNmVlMDQ0OTIxOQ
* The signature on the document, dated 13 December 2016, is a computer-generated image, pasted on the document. There is NO practice in the High Court of New Zealand to put a digital image on the original court document.
(31) FALSE DOCUMENT - "ORDER ANNULLING AN ADJUDICATION," dated 13 December 2016, (Sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 4 January 2017) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MjRmMDY5Y2ExZjgwYmZm https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTYxN2RiNmVlMDQ0OTIxOQ
ALL the FALSE, FORGED DOCUMENTS, issued by various Courts of New Zealand, have been accepted as ILLEGAL DOCUMENTS by the Courts themselves; there is NO DISPUTE on the commission of the systemic organised crimes, committed in New Zealand.
This matter requires your leadership, due to the endemic nature of the corruption in the Court, Government, and Media of New Zealand.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama Sent: Friday, November 23, 2018 6:59 AM
To: [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; ContactUs ; CourtofAppeal ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected]
Subject: CONFIRMED JUSTICE SCAM - FUNDAMENTAL LAWLESSNESS AND PERVERTED MORALITY IN THE GOVERNANCE OF NEW ZEALAND
Dear Sir/Madam
THIS MATTER REQUIRES YOUR OWN INVESTIGATION.
SEE THE EVIDENCES OF THE SYSTEMIC ORGANISED CRIMES, COMMITTED IN NEW ZEALAND COURTS.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
22 November 2018
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern
Prime Minister of New Zealand
Members of the Justice Committee of New Zealand Parliament
Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the House; Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Justice and for Courts; Hon Stuart Nash, Minister of Police; Hon Dr David Clark, Minister of Health and MP for North Dunedin
New Zealand Police (Commissioner Mike Bush); Serious Fraud Office; Chief Justice of New Zealand; Supreme Court of New Zealand
Dear Prime Minister
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
I understand that you are closely following the matter of the confirmed systemic organised crimes, committed in New Zealand Courts, aided by New Zealand Government, covered up by New Zealand Media (“New Zealand Justice Scam”).
For your information, many people around the world, including several overseas governments and media, are also closely following on this matter, due to the apparent duplicity and flagrant violation of the international law by the state of New Zealand.
The confirmed NEW ZEALAND JUSTICE SCAM shows something peculiar to the culture of New Zealand Judiciary and the nation where systemic organised crimes in the Court are normalised and protected by the law enforcement, aided by the government, concealed by the media.
NEW ZEALAND NORMALITY – People do not feel shame for what has been normalised; there is no stigmatisation for systemic organised crimes in the Court because there is no possibility for the prosecution on the crimes when the criminals are protected by the law enforcement, aided by the government, concealed by the media; no one asks any question on things that are normalised, even though they may be atrocious or serious violations of the law; the nationwide moral disengagement creates the culture of impunity for the perpetrators and the culture of complete disempowerment and permanent marginalisation for the silenced victims in New Zealand (“New Zealand Normality”).
INTERNATIONAL CONCERN - The problem, from the perspectives of the international community, is the fundamental lawlessness and perverted morality in the governance of New Zealand, which are evidenced by the confirmed justice scam, the systemic organised crimes, committed in the Court, protected by the law enforcement, aided by the government, concealed by the media; the concealed arrangement by New Zealand Government ensures the continuous viability of the clandestine criminal operations, by which certain organised crimes are allowed to use public institutions, funded by taxpayers, for their illicit ends, in violation of the laws of New Zealand and international treaties that New Zealand has signed and ratified, raising very serious concerns for the international community, due to the apparent lack of commitment of New Zealand to the accepted norms of the international community and the international law.
POINT TO PONDER – What is the essence of New Zealand Judiciary? What is the expected role of the judges who are presiding New Zealand Courts which are the instruments for the organised crimes to commit systemic organised crimes in violation of New Zealand laws?
Now, you must see NEW ZEALAND JUSTICE SCAM at the pinnacle of the justice system of New Zealand, the Supreme Court of New Zealand.
As with other FALSE documents, issued by various Courts of New Zealand, several FALSE documents, issued by the Supreme Court of New Zealand, were later used in the confirmed bankruptcy fraud and bank robbery by deception in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
Crimes Act 1961
Using forged documents
Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years who, knowing a document to be forged,—
(a) uses the document to obtain any property, privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit, or valuable consideration; or
(b) uses, deals with, or acts upon the document as if it were genuine; or
(c) causes any other person to use, deal with, or act upon it as if it were genuine. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/137.0/DLM330446.html
Conspiring to defeat justice
Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who conspires to obstruct, prevent, pervert, or defeat the course of justice in New Zealand or the course of justice in an overseas jurisdiction. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/137.0/DLM329005.html
The Judges who are allowing the Supreme Court of New Zealand to be used as the instrument of organised crimes are enjoying their highly lucrative salaries for their complicity in the systemic organised crimes, committed in New Zealand.
Judicial Salaries and Allowances Determination 2017
Chief Justice $530,400 ($522,500 + $7,900)
Judge of the Supreme Court $497,000 ($490,500 + $6,500) http://www.nzlii.org/nz/legis/repealed_reg/jsaad2017382.pdf
CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES OF FRAUD IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
A. FALSE DOCUMENT - “Judgment of the Court,” dated 20 October 2014 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NGRjMTI1MmI2ZDhiMjE2ZA
This FALSE document, issued by the Supreme Court of New Zealand, was attached to the letter of Paul Collins, dated 28 October 2014.
It is INCONCEIVABLE that the Supreme Court of New Zealand, comprising of McGrath, William Young, and Arnold JJ, made the costs decision, dated 20 October 2014, when the Court had received the application for recall of the decision, dated 10 October 2014, before 20 October 2014 [the date of “Judgment of the Court”].
The letter of the Supreme Court of New Zealand, dated 20 October 2014, signed by Ami Chan, Case Worker, Supreme Court of New Zealand, states: “The Court has received…your application for recall (dated 12 October 2014).” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MTRkOGU3YmEwMTIyNDI0Yw https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6OWRjYTBjYTE1MTBhMWE0
Apparently, the draft of “Judgment of the Court” was received by the Supreme Court of New Zealand on 16 October 2014, which was 4 days prior to the letter of acknowledgement of the receipt of the application for recall, dated 20 October 2014. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NGRjMTI1MmI2ZDhiMjE2ZA
For your information, on 16 October 2014, I received an email from Tina Chiles, Executive Assistant, Regulatory, New Zealand Law Society, extorting $37,157.98, by using the CONFIRMED FALSE, FORGED documents, issued by various Courts of New Zealand. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDoxMjViYWU3OTNlZDc0NjE5
This extortion followed after 5 reports on the organised crimes in various Courts of New Zealand, with evidences, were sent to the Chief Justice and Supreme Court of New Zealand, making the crime, very sinister:
(1) “Report on the organised crime by the New Zealand Law Society and Wellington High Court,” dated 21 September 2014 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6N2QxMWNlMzNlNTg0M2Q5Zg
Evidences https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NDQzZjdhYTIwMmVkNjJkMg (2) “Second report on the organised crime by the New Zealand Law Society and Wellington High Court,” dated 29 October 2014 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MmZmMDgxZmZmZDY5OTE0MQ
Evidences https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MmNmNmM0OWI3N2E2N2VlOQ
(3) “Third report on the organised crime by the New Zealand Law Society and Court of Appeal,” 1 October 2014 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MmRmNzg1YWNjMmI3MmZkMg
Evidences https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MzliYWUwNjBmZTE1ZGQ1MA
(4) “Fourth report on the organised crime by the New Zealand Law Society and Wellington High Court,” 4 October 2014 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NTM1ZmExYWM0ZjA4YmY3OA
Evidences https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MTA5NmJlNjU4ZmI5ZmU1OQ
(5) “Fifth report on the organised crime by the New Zealand Law Society, Supreme Court, and Wellington High Court”, dated 15 October 2014 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6M2QwNDVkZTNmMDY2NjIyZg
Evidences https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MWE2MThjYzBmMWYzODI4Yg
For your information, regarding these confirmed organised crimes in New Zealand Courts, I received an email from Tina Chiles Executive Assistant, Regulatory, New Zealand Law Society, on 27 February 2018, with a letter of Neil Mallon, General Manager, Regulatory, New Zealand, dated 26 February 2018. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjFhODY3MTE0NTA4OThiNg https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NDNjNDQ5ZWZmOGQ5YmU1OQ
This email was followed by Neil Mallon, General Manager, Regulatory, New Zealand Law Society, on 28 February 2018. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6M2ExZmY0MGNmYTRmNDRkZQ
As with other FALSE documents, issued by various Courts of New Zealand, this FALSE document, dated 20 October 2014, was accompanied by several FALSE, documents, issued by the Supreme Court of New Zealand.
The Supreme Court of New Zealand has confirmed that the following documents are FALSE:
B. FALSE DOCUMENT - “JUDGMENT OF GLAZEBROOK J,” dated 1 April 2014; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NDBiMDk1Y2E0NjU5MGI3MQ
* This FALSE document was sent by the Supreme Court of New Zealand on 1 April 2014). https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6Yzk5Njc4ZTA5YmE2MmNk
C. FALSE DOCUMENT - Handwritten decision of Glazebrook J, dated 2 April 2014; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NjA3ZjVmOThkYmRhZTM1MA
* This FALSE document was sent by the Supreme Court on 2 April 2014. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjFmZDAzYTZmNDdlYjA4ZQ
* This FALSE document was sent by the Supreme Court of New Zealand, PRIOR to receiving the original document of the application for recall, which was sent from Dunedin, New Zealand, on 2 April 2014.
D. FALSE DOCUMENT - “MINUTE OF McGRATH J REVIEWING REGISTRAR’S DECISION,” dated 30 July 2014; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6M2JiODgzYmE5M2QyNzAwYQ
E. FALSE DOCUMENT - “JUDGMENT OF THE COURT,” dated 10 October 2014; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MjIwNTZkYzhkNGYwNTg5MQ
* This FALSE document was sent by Ani Chan, Case Officer, Supreme Court of New Zealand, on 10 October 2014. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NzI5MTMzYmJiYTQxOGYxMw
F. FALSE DOCUMENT - Signed, “JUDGMENT OF THE COURT,” dated 10 October 2014; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NDQxMDJlYzJiNzJhOTc
* This FALSE document was sent by Gordon Thatcher, Registrar, Supreme Court, on 13 October 2014. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTE1NzQ0OTMyM2Q1YTkxYg
Mr Andrew Straw, US lawyer and notary public, in “Analysis of signatures for detection of forgery,” dated 6 May 2016, stated, “…there is a strong chance that a different person wrote the above signature [on the document, dated 10 October 2014], given the many differences.” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NmIxNzZiMjQwNjc2ZDJiZQ
* Mr Straw was given the following samples of signatures of Mr Terence Arnold in several documents which had his true signatures: a. Report of the Crown Law Office for the year ended 30 June 2004; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MjI5YjMzMmQzMTkwMmJjOQ b. Crown Law Office Statement of Intent for the year ending 30 June 2005; and https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NzA5Njk4MGY1M2Y2YzJiOA c. Crown Law Office Statement of Intent for the year ending 30 June 2007. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MzRjYjRkZGIxMzQzYjM1NA
G. FALSE DOCUMENT - Signed, “JUDGMENT OF GLAZEBROOK J,” dated 1 April 2014; and https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MjdhMDg1OGY4NzU3Y2ZkMg
* This FALSE document was sent by Ani Chan, Case Officer, Supreme Court of New Zealand, on 21 October 2014. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTg3MjNlODQ2MTQwYzc0
H. FALSE DOCUMENT - Signed, “MINUTE OF McGRATH J REVIEWING REGISTRAR’S DECISION,” dated 30 July 2014. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6NjEwYTRjNTlkOTEzMTRmZA
* This FALSE document was sent by Gordon Thatcher, Registrar, Supreme Court, on 10 February 2015. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MTFmMmJjMWE2MjYyMDIzZA
All the FALSE, FORGED, documents, issued by various New Zealand Courts, are confirmed and accepted as illegal documents by the Courts themselves; there is NO reason whatsoever for you, Prime Minister of New Zealand, not launch criminal investigation.
This matter requires your leadership as the corruption is very much entrenched and widespread in New Zealand.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
16 November 2018
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern
Prime Minister of New Zealand
Members of the Justice Committee of New Zealand Parliament
Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the House; Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Justice and for Courts; Hon Stuart Nash, Minister of Police; Hon Dr David Clark, Minister of Health and MP for North Dunedin
New Zealand Police (Commissioner Mike Bush); Serious Fraud Office; Chief Justice of New Zealand; Court of Appeal of New Zealand
Dear Prime Minister
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
I understand that you are closely following the matter of the confirmed systemic organised crimes, committed in New Zealand Courts, aided by New Zealand Government, covered up by New Zealand Media (“New Zealand Justice Scam”).
I would like to inform you that I received the following message of the Justice Committee of New Zealand Parliament, acknowledging New Zealand Justice Scam, on 12 November 2018:
Kia ora Tatsuhiko,
Thanks for your message. It looks like you've already sent this email directly to the Chair of the Justice Committee and other addressees. You have also sent this to several select Facebook pages of the New Zealand Parliament and its select committees.
There is no need to send any further copies of this email – please do not do so, as our Community Standards policy asks users not to re-send the same comments multiple times: https://www.facebook.com/notes/justice-committee/our-community-standards- policy/1996672260345910/
Ngā mihi nui,
- Hans from the Parliamentary Engagement team
As Prime Minister of New Zealand, you must be convinced of NEW ZEALAND JUSTICE SCAM, with more than enough evidences which are available to you personally on this matter.
NEW ZEALAND LAW - SYSTEMIC ORGANISED CRIMES IN NEW ZEALAND COURTS ARE PATENTLY ILLEGAL AND VERY SERIOUS OFFENCES UNDER THE CRIMES ACT 1961.
POINT TO REMEMBER - New Zealand corruption has some peculiar characteristics, with the endemic and entrenched corruption in the Judiciary, aided by the Government, covered up by the Media, comprehensively concealing systemic organised crimes, committed in New Zealand, allowing certain organised crimes to use public institutions and state power for their nefarious purposes, with impunity, protected by the law enforcement.
WHAT IS POLITICALLY SIGNIFICANT? – The confirmed New Zealand Justice Scam (normalisation of systemic organised crimes in New Zealand Courts) is continuously eroding the rule of law and principles of constitutional governance of New Zealand, depleting the social capital, causing damages to the already fractured societies, while the people of New Zealand are losing their confidence and trust in New Zealand Government and Courts as the state of New Zealand is continuing to violate the international law for its sponsoring and protecting organised crimes within its jurisdiction, destabilising the international order and raising some serious issues for the international community.
QUESTION FOR TAXPAYERS OF NEW ZEALAND – “Why do we want to pay such high salaries to unelected and unaccountable judges who are allowing the Courts, public institutions, to be used as the instruments of the organised crimes who are openly and flagrantly violating the laws of New Zealand?”
NATURE OF THE PROBLEM - The criminal syndicates, using public institutions and state power for their illicit purposes in violation of the laws of New Zealand, will not end their lucrative criminal activities on their own.
You must see another example of New Zealand Justice Scam, at this time, the confirmed organised crimes, committed in the Court of Appeal of New Zealand.
The Judges who are allowing the Court of Appeal to be used as the instrument of organised crimes are enjoying their highly lucrative salaries for their complicity in the systemic organised crimes, committed in New Zealand.
Judicial Salaries and Allowances Determination 2017
President of the Court of Appeal $497,000 ($490,500 + $6,500)
Judges of the Court of Appeal $466,100 ($460,500 + $5,600) http://www.nzlii.org/nz/legis/repealed_reg/jsaad2017382.pdf
Several FALSE documents, issued by the Court of Appeal of New Zealand, were later used in the confirmed bankruptcy fraud and bank robbery by deception in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES, COMMITTED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND
A CONFIRMED FALSE DOCUMENTS, ISSUED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND ON THE CONFIRMED BANKRUPTCY FRAUD AND BANK ROBBERY BY DECEPTION
1. FALSE DOCUMENT - "Judgment of the Court," O'Regan P, Wild and White JJ, dated 8 November 2013 (sent by Paul Collins, Barrister, Shortland Chambers, on or around 12 November 2013)
This document FALSELY states, "At 3:00pm on 17 April 2013, the Court of Appeal of New Zealand…delivered a judgment… The Court of Appeal determined:…
C The applicant must pay the respondent costs for a standard application on a band A basis and disbursements.
With reference to Order C, the Court of Appeal orders the applicant to pay costs to the respondent in the sum of $3,383.00 and disbursements in the sum of $635.10…" https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NDlkNDQ5ZGUyZWFmZTMzYw
The following facts show that O'Regan P, Wild and White JJ of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand did NOT make the costs order on 17 April 2013, stated in “Judgment of the Court,” dated 8 November 2013.
The amounts in the costs sought or ordered in the case increased from 24 April 2013 to 8 November 2013 "AFTER 17 APRIL 2013."
(i) $2,386.90 ($1,782.00 + $604.90) - 24 April 2013; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NzI4N2EwZGY1MDE2YmMzYQ
(ii) $2,848.90 ($2,244.00 + $604.90) - 26 April 2013; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6Mjc0ZmQ1Y2RjMDNiNTk5Zg
(iii) $2,879.10 ($2,244.00 + $635.10) - 22 May 2013; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MTU4MTNhNzg3NDFkNzNkMA
(iv) $4,018.10 ($3,383.00 + $635.10) - 6 November 2013; and https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NjlkMWI4Y2M4Y2JjZWQ3ZA
(v) $4,018.10 ($3,383.00 + $635.10) - 8 November 2013. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NDlkNDQ5ZGUyZWFmZTMzYw
Obviously, it was IMPOSSIBLE for the Court of Appeal of New Zealand to make the costs order on 17 April 2013 for the amount, which was submitted on or after 6 November 2013.
Furthermore, the Court of Appeal of New Zealand did “NOT” have the jurisdiction in the case on or around “8 November 2013” since the High Court of New Zealand had the jurisdiction in the case from “4 October 2013.” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6N2JjYTZjMzU1NjNmMTQxMA
On 11 November 2013, when I received the draft document from Paul Collins, enclosed in his letter, dated 6 November 2013, Clare O’Brien was informed that there was a case management conference scheduled in Wellington High Court in this case on 9 December 2013. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MmY4YjM2YTUyYTVlYzdiYg
It is highly likely that Paul Collins sent the draft of the costs order, enclosed in his letter, dated 6 November 2013, AFTER the costs order was signed and sealed by Clare O'Brien on 8 November 2013.
For your information, Paul Collins did NOT attend the case management conference in Wellington High Court on 9 December 2013.
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER THAT O’REGAN P, WILD AND WHITE JJ OF THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND MADE THE COSTS ORDER, DATED 8 NOVEMBER 2013.
2. FALSE DOCUMENT - “JUDGMENT OF THE COURT,” O'Regan P, Wild and White JJ, dated 17 April 2013 (sent by Melissa Cathro, Court Registry Office, Court of Appeal, on 17 April 2013) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6OTA2YWZkNDc4MzRhYzYw https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NDlhMjJmM2M0ZGQ1YjQ3Zg
There is "NO" signed decision of "JUDGMENT OF THE COURT," dated 17 April 2013.
O’REGAN P, WILD AND WHITE JJ OF THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND DID “NOT” MAKE THE DECISION, DATED 17 APRIL 2013.
B. CONFIRMED FALSE DOCUMENTS, ISSUED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND ON THE CONFIRMED INSURANCE FRAUD AND CONSPIRING TO DEFEAT JUSTICE
From: "Macdonald, Grant"
Dear Mr Koyama
We confirm that we were not served with your application to dispense with security. Your application was forwarded to us by the Registrar, who asked us to provide any comments to her. We perceived that we were only required to provide our comments directly to the Registrar in response to her request. We understand that we could have provided those comments informally, by way of a letter or email, but we nevertheless provided our comments by way of memorandum, which inadvertently omitted the Attorney General’s name in the intituling. In any event, you have now been forwarded a copy of our comments.
Grant Macdonald Partner
T +64 9 300 3896 F +64 9 303 2311 M +64 21 595 261 E [email protected]
From: University of Otago Registrar
Dear Mr Koyama,
I refer to your email of 17 July 2015 to the University’s Law Librarian, Ms Kate Thompson, in which you make requests under the Official Information Act and the Privacy Act. I am now responsible for dealing with the matter.
You seek the identity of the person advising us that certain documents held by the Library should not be released, and the content of the relevant communication from the person.
The relevant person was Clare O’Brien, Court Manager/Registrar of the Court of Appeal. Her communication regarding the appropriateness of the Library allowing you to see the documents involved was: “No you can’t. No judgment or any documents get issued for public release with judge’s signatures on them”.
The University now recognises that the documents in question (which were supplied to it by the Court of Appeal as administrative records and not as part of the Law Library’s collection) are held on that restricted basis.
Sincerely,
Jan A Flood Registrar
From: "Bird, Justine"
Dear Mr Koyama
Please find attached an application from the respondents. Could I please have your response to this application by 11 August 2015.
Regards
Justine Bird
Court Registry Officer | Court of Appeal | Te Kōti Pīra o Aotearoa
Phone: +64 4 914 3540 | Fax: +64 4 914 3585
www.courtsofnz.govt.nz
THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS OF THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED AS FALSE AND FORGED:
1. FALSE DOCUMENT - “MINUTE OF WHITE J,” dated 16 June 2015, (sent by Justine Bird, Court Registry Officer, Court of Appeal, on 16 June 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDoyOTE1MjkyY2QwOWEwNDk4 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDpiOWE1ZGYyMjdkYTkxNGU
The Court of Appeal of New Zealand did NOT have the jurisdiction on the matter; Tatsuhiko Koyama was NOT in New Zealand on or around 16 June 2015.
The signature on the document, dated 16 June 2015, is significantly different the true signature of Mr Douglas White QC. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NDk5YTZiNDdhYmI1NjM1Nw
2. FALSE DOCUMENT - “MINUTE AND DIRECTIONS OF WILD J,” dated 14 August 2015, (sent by Fiona McDonald, Fixtures Manager/Deputy Registrar, Court of Appeal, on 14 August 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDozMzlhNDI3OGYwMjUzZTc5 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MWQ2YTZhMGE5ZjgzZWUyMg
There is NO signed original document in the official case file.
3. FALSE DOCUMENT - “MINUTE AND DIRECTIONS OF THE COURT,” Ellen France P, Wild and Cooper JJ, dated 29 September 2015 (sent by Fiona McDonald, Fixtures Manager/Deputy Registrar, Court of Appeal, on 29 September 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo3ZTE4NDNhNWNkZGEyNDQ0 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjY0ZDIxOGM1ZWIxZGE0ZQ
There is NO signed original document in the official case file.
4. FALSE DOCUMENT - “JUDGMENT OF THE COURT,” Ellen France P, Wild and Cooper JJ, dated 5 October 2015 (sent by Justine Bird, Court Registry Officer, Court of Appeal, on 5 October 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDozZjc0OTEzNjkxOTNmYTRj https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MzVmYzRhZDMyZTg3MzUzNg
There is NO signed original document in the official case file.
5. FALSE DOCUMENT - “Judgment for sealing,” Ellen France P, Wild and Cooper JJ, dated 6 November 2015 (sent by Grant MacDonald, partner, DLA Piper New Zealand on or around 17 November 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MmQ4NDJkNWY4NWM0MWJk
ELLEN FRANCE P, WHITE, WILD, COOPER JJ OF THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND DID NOT MAKE THE DECISIONS, DATED 16 JUNE, 14 AUGUST, 29 SEPTEMBER, 5 OCTOBER, 6 NOVEMBER 2015.
IT IS ABOUT TIME FOR YOU AS PRIME MINISTER OF NEW ZEALAND TO START FIGHTING AGAINST THE CONFIRMED JUSTICE SCAM IN NEW ZEALAND JUSTICE SYSTEM!
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
11 November 2018
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern
Prime Minister of New Zealand
Members of the Justice Committee of New Zealand Parliament
Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the House; Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Justice and for Courts; Hon Stuart Nash, Minister of Police; Hon Dr David Clark, Minister of Health and MP for North Dunedin New Zealand Police (Commissioner Mike Bush); Serious Fraud Office; Chief Justice of New Zealand; Wellington High Court
Dear Prime Minister
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
I understand that you are closely following the matter of the confirmed systemic organised crimes, committed in New Zealand Courts, aided by New Zealand Government, covered up by New Zealand Media (“New Zealand Justice Scam”).
You must ask leaders of other nations and see what they think about New Zealand Justice Scam.
Many people around the world think that New Zealand norm of systemic organised crimes in the Court is abnormal, illegal, and wrong, outside the acceptable standards of the international community.
Now, please see another example of New Zealand Justice Scam.
CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES, COMMITTED BY THE NEW ZEALAND LAW SOCIETY, THE SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REGULATOR OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION IN NEW ZEALAND, AND CROWN LAW OFFICE, THE LAW OFFICE FOR NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT
In this example, several confirmed false, forged documents were issued by Wellington High Court, and these false documents were subsequently used for the confirmed bankruptcy fraud and bank robbery by deception, in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
1. Letter of Paul Collins, Barrister, Shortland Chambers, dated 9 June 2014
“This letter accompanies the sealed judgment and costs order following the delivery of His Honour's judgment on 28 May 2014." “This proceeding was heard on 16 April 2014 at Wellington before the Honourable Justice Clifford, who, having heard from Paul Collins, counsel for the respondent, gives judgment that:… The respondent is entitled…$11,940.00 and disbursement of $50.00…” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6ZjU0NWQwZmZjOTIwNTZl
IT WAS “PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE” FOR JUSTICE CLIFFORED OF THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TO HEAR THE COSTS APPLICATION ON “16 APRIL 2014,” when Paul Collins sent the application for the costs order on “3 June 2014,” about 2.5 months after the date of hearing of 16 April 2014 when Clifford J was supposed to have heard the costs application.
(a) Email of Paul Collins, dated 3 June 2014; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c 3VoaWtva295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo1MmNlZDBjMDdlZWUwOQ
(b) Letter of Paul Collins, dated 3 June 2014; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c 3VoaWtva295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo3YzNkOWYzNTEwM2Y4MDk0
(c) Memorandum of Paul Collins, dated 3 June 2014; https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c 3VoaWtva295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo2YmI3Y2NhZWE2ZjU5YjM4
(d) "Judgment Dated: June 2014"; and https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c 3VoaWtva295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDplNGE3YmFlYzFjOGQzMDU
(e) "Order of the Court (costs) Dated: June 2014." https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c 3VoaWtva295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDozNzZjNzNiODkyZWM1ZmI4
Wellington High Court confirmed that there was NO hearing in this case on 16 April 2014.
* No one can produce the evidence of Paul Collins’ traveling from Auckland to Wellington, such as the flight number of the airplane that he boarded for the traveling to Wellington on that day.
* No one can produce a copy of the audio-recording of the hearing, supposedly conducted in Wellington High Court on 16 April 2014.
The following false documents were issued by Wellington High Court:
(a) FAKE TRANSCRIPT ON THE NON-EXISTENT HEARING (LEGAL DISCUSSION BEFORE THE HON JUSTICE CLIFFORD, DATED 16 APRIL 2014); and https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NmJlMTZhMTcyYzdhNTJiYQ (b) FALSE, FORGED, DOCUMENT OF THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND (JUDGMENT OF CLIFFORD J, DATED 28 MAY 2014). https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NmRhYTgyNTU5YmRhNDY3
THERE IS “NO” EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER THAT A HEARING WAS CONDUCTED IN WELLINGTON HIGH COURT IN THE CASE ON 16 APRIL 2014.
* JUSTICE CLIFFORD OF THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND DID “NOT” MAKE ANY DECISION IN THIS CASE.
2. Letter of Paul Collins, Barrister, Shortland Chambers, dated 21 November 2014
“This letter accompanies the sealed judgment of the High Court…including costs orders. It is served on you in compliance with Rule 11.11(5)(a) of the High Court Rules.”
"Judgment dated 14 October 2014" FALSELY states: "This proceeding was heard on 20 August 2014 at Wellington before the Honourable Justice Collins, who having heard from Paul Collins…and Helen Carrad…gives judgement that …
(b) The first respondent is entitled to…$7,064.50 and disbursement of $50…
(c) The second respondent…$1,840.75…" https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MjY0YTZkOGMxZWExM2ExNA
Wellington High Court has confirmed that there was "NO" hearing for the case of CIV-2014-485- 2343 on 20 August 2014.
* The High Court of New Zealand did not have the jurisdiction to hear the case on 20 August 2014; the Supreme Court of New Zealand had the jurisdiction since 15 August 2014. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NGJiMjY5NmE4NDQ2MTQ4YQ
* No one can produce the evidence of Paul Collins’ traveling from Auckland to Wellington, such as the flight number of the airplane that he boarded for the traveling to Wellington on that day; due to his inability to produce any record of his travelling from Auckland to Wellington, Paul Collins did NOT seek any cost on the travelling.
The following false documents were issued by Wellington High Court: (a) FAKE TRANSCRIPT ON THE NON-EXISTENT HEARING (LEGAL DISCUSSION BEFORE THE HON JUSTICE D COLLINS, DATED 20 AUGUST 2014); and https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NWRhNzJkNGIzMzM0ZGI4MA
(b) FALSE, FORGED, DOCUMENT OF THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND (JUDGMENT OF COLLINS J, DATED 14 OCTOBER 2014). https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NzY0MGQwZjliMWMyYmU3Mg
Even in the FAKE transcript of the non-existent hearing in Wellington High Court on 20 August 2018, there is NO evidence to suggest that Justice Collins made the costs order, nor Helen Carrad making any costs application during the hearing; Paul Collins did not make costs application at the hearing, as itemised in "Judgment dated 14 October 2014" indicates; the FAKE transcript only states, "MR COLLINS: Thank you Sir. There is an indication that costs are sought. THE COURT: Yes and I will deal with that in my judgment." https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NWRhNzJkNGIzMzM0ZGI4MA
Furthermore, Helen Carrad, in her letter, dated 24 December 2014, stated: "Following the judgment of Justice Collins [on “14 October 2014”], counsel for the NZLS and counsel for the Attorney-General filed costs scheduled in the High Court…", clearly negating any possibility that Justice Collins heard the costs application on “20 August 2014,” more than 2 months after the costs application was supposedly submitted to Wellington High Court. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6YjMxYzI5MWFhNmVmOGNj
* No one can produce a copy of the audio-recording of the hearing, supposedly conducted in Wellington High Court on 20 August 2014.
THERE IS “NO” EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER THAT A HEARING WAS CONDUCTED IN WELLINGTON HIGH COURT IN THE CASE ON 20 AUGUST 2014.
* JUSTICE COLLINS OF THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND DID “NOT” MAKE ANY DECISION IN THIS CASE.
3. Letter of Paul Collins, Barrister, Shortland Chambers, dated 12 November 2013 “I enclose a sealed duplicate original of the costs order made by the Court on 4 June 2013, which I received in the mail on Friday, 29 November, from the High Court Registry. You will see that costs have been ordered in the sum of $9,210 and disbursement of $1,439.88” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbWFkb2N1bW VudHN8Z3g6MmM2YmVhYzZhMjY1OWJjYQ
Wellington High Court has confirmed that there was "NO" hearing for the case of CIV-2010-485- 001493 on 4 June 2013.
There was “NO” application for the costs filed in Wellington High Court on or around 4 June 2013.
The FALSE sealed costs order, dated 4 June 2013, was sent ONLY to Paul Collins, without sending it to Tatsuhiko Koyama, one of the litigants in the case, by Wellington High Court on or around 29 November 2013, AFTER MORE THAN 6 MONTHS since the costs order was supposedly made, making it impossible for Tatsuhiko Koyama to appeal this matter due to the expiry of the appealing period.
Regarding this FALSE document of the Court, I received the following FALSE information from New Zealand Law Society and Wellington High Court:
(a) "Notice of Decision by Wellington Standards Committee 3," dated 10 February 2014, FALSELY states, "On 4 June 2013, the New Zealand Law Society, represented by Mr Collins, applied for and was awarded costs…"; and https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo0ZWNkM2MxNDFlNWQ4ZjVk
(b) Carolyn Pritchett, Deputy Registrar, Wellington High Court, in her email, dated 26 September 2014, FALSELY stated, "It might be at the hearing or a Conference date that was when an oral application instead was made on 4 June 2013." https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo0OGY2OGJjNTlmNGY2NzEy
The following false document was issued by Wellington High Court:
FALSE, FORGED, DOCUMENT OF THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND (RESERVED JUDGMENT OF DOBSON J, DATED 17 JULY 2012). https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjdkOTM2Y2MwYTc2NGNjYg
For your information, there are two documents with different signatures of Justice Dobson of the High Court of New Zealand; these documents have their respective dates only a month part. i. Signed letter of Dobson J, dated 16 August 2012, to Winkelman J; and https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NDVlZjg4YzI5ZmQ0NGVlYg ii. Signed "RESERVED JUDGMENT OF DOBSON J," dated 17 July 2012, (sent by Ministry of Justice on 3 May 2017). https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MzAyM2Y1NGYwZjI0YzFkZg
DIRECT COMPARISION OF THE SIGNATURES, CLEARLY INDICATING THE FORGERY OF THE DOCUMENT https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NzE4MDgyYjE2YzBjY2E2Ng
THERE IS “NO” EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER THAT A HEARING WAS CONDUCTED IN WELLINGTON HIGH COURT IN THE CASE ON 4 JUNE 2013.
* “NO” JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND MADE THE COSTS ORDER, DATED 4 JUNE 2013.
No one, including you, Prime Minster of New Zealand, should have any confidence and trust in the SCAM New Zealand Judiciary.
New Zealand Courts provide the PERFECT COVER for the criminal syndicates to operate their organised crimes in some clandestine fashion, shrouded in secrecy, with no public access to court records and judges whose names are constantly used for forgery, in violation of the laws of New Zealand and international treaties that the state of New Zealand has signed and ratified.
SYSTEMIC ORGANISED CRIMES IN THE COURT MUST NOT BE ALLOWED IN NEW ZEALAND.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010 TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
5 November 2018
Justice Committee
New Zealand Parliament
Dear Members of Justice Committee
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
I understand that this matter of the endemic and widespread corruption in New Zealand Judiciary has been closely followed by Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister, Rt Hon Trevor Mallard, Speaker of the House, Hon Stuart Nash, Police Minister, and others.
NEW ZEALAND HAS VERY SERIOUS PROBLEMS IN THE GOVERNANCE.
YOU MUST SEE THE EXTENT OF CORRUPTION IN NEW ZEALAND FOR YOURSELF.
A. MEDIA COVER-UP OF THE CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES COMMITTED IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
Hamish McNeilly, Dunedin Bureau Chief, Fairfax Media / stuff, personally attended the confirmed fake hearing in Dunedin High Court on 3 March 2016. https://youtu.be/f1nzidjU7Qo
Then, he wrote the fake news with fed information which was not available to him and published the false information on 16 March 2016. https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/77939021/decadelong-legal-stoush-ends-with-lawyer- declared-bankrupt
B. COURT OFFICIAL REMOVING INCRIMINATING EVIDENCES ON THE CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES FROM THE COURT
From: "Frengley, Alister"
Dear Mr Koyama,
With regard to your email concern below to the Chief District Court Judge regarding your Charging Documents in the Dunedin District Court.
As you are aware you filed 4 charging documents in the Dunedin Court on 26 May 2016. As you were informed by me at the time, these documents would be referred to a District Court Judge who will determine if the charging documents are accepted for filing.
The charging documents have been referred to a District Court Judge for direction and we will inform you once he has made his decision concerning the filing of your charging documents.
kind regards
Alister Frengley
Alister Frengley Court Services Manager | Customer Services, High Court, Family, Civil, Tenancy Dunedin High/District Court 184 High Street, Dunedin DDI 03 4715118 | Ext 52118 | DX YX 10176 | Mobile 021 365068
From: "Frengley, Alister"
Dear Mr Koyama,
As you are aware, you lodged 4 charging documents at the Dunedin District Court. These charging documents, as you have been informed, have been submitted to a District Court Judge for a decision regarding whether they are accepted for filing.
It has now been found that these files are not able to be filed in the Dunedin District Court as this is the wrong court for filing. Below is the relevant section of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 relating to where charging documents should be filed.
Section 14 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 states:
14 Commencement of criminal proceedings (1) A criminal proceeding in respect of an offence is commenced by filing a charging document in the District Court that is—
(a) nearest to where the offence is alleged to have been committed; or (b) nearest to where the person filing the charging document believes the defendant can be found.
(2) Despite subsection (1),—
(a) if all the parties to the proposed proceeding agree, the charging document may be filed in another District Court; and (b) if 2 or more charging documents are to be filed in respect of the same defendant, they may all be filed in a District Court in which any 1 of them could be filed. (3) A failure to file a charging document in the correct District Court in accordance with this section does not invalidate any proceeding.
It appears all of the defendants named in the charging documents are resident in Auckland and therefore these charging documents cannot be filed here in Dunedin.
At the time of filing these documents you paid the required fee of $30 per charging document. This was receipted on the back of the filing letter you submitted with the charging documents. If you choose to file these charging documents in the correct court you can show that the filing fee has been paid. If you choose not to file them , I can arrange for a refund of the $120.
The documents are available for you to pick up at the front counter of the Dunedin District Court
regards
Alister Frengley
Alister Frengley Court Services Manager | Customer Services, High Court, Family, Civil, Tenancy Dunedin High/District Court 184 High Street, Dunedin DDI 03 4715118 | Ext 52118 | DX YX 10176 | Mobile 021 365068
From: "Frengley, Alister"
Dear Mr Koyama, At the time you sent emails to me last night I was no longer at work. I am replying to your emails below now.
The decision to return the charging documents to you was not made by a District Court Judge. The decision was made by a Deputy Registrar, myself, when I realised that the documents were not filed in the correct Court. A Deputy Registrar has the authority to make that decision.
I apologise that this was not noticed at the time you originally filed the documents.
regards
Alister Frengley
Alister Frengley Court Services Manager | Customer Services, High Court, Family, Civil, Tenancy Dunedin High/District Court 184 High Street, Dunedin DDI 03 4715118 | Ext 52118 | DX YX 10176 | Mobile 021 365068
Alister Frengley, Court Services Manager, Dunedin High/District Court, illegally blocked the private prosecution and removed the incriminating evidences from the Court, in his effort to conceal the confirmed bankruptcy fraud, committed in Dunedin High Court.
Letter of Alister Frengley, Court Service Manager, Dunedin High/District Court, dated 18 July 2016 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbW Fkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6MzkzZWZmNTIyYTFhNzI4ZQ
C. POLICE OFFICER REMOVING INCRIMINATING EVIDENCES ON THE CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES FROM THE POLICE PREMISES
From: FERGUSON, John Sent: Monday, 4 April 2016 12:06 p.m. To: 'Tatsuhiko Koyama'
Dear Mr Koyama
As discussed last week when you came to the Dunedin Police Station to see Inspector Guthrie The Otago Coastal Area Commander. I have consulted with him about your request for a meeting, I have initially booked a time this Friday 8/4/16 at 1:00 pm (1300 Hrs) for you and your wife.
Can you please confirm by return email that this time is suitable for your attendance, so I can finalise the booking with Mr Guthrie
regards
John Ferguson Detective Senior Sergeant Area Investigations Manager| Otago Coastal | New Zealand Police P +64 03 4714937 Extn: 33137 | M +64 021 1914990 | E [email protected]
Dunedin Central Police Station, 25 Great King St, Private Bag 1924, Dunedin, www.police.govt.nz Safer Communities Together
From: "FERGUSON, John"
Dear Mr Koyama
I have not received a confirmation that you are able to attend the meeting you requested with Inspector Guthrie this Friday as proposed below, I have sent this second email to you to ensure you receive notification and will confirm by return email this date and time is suitable
regards
John Ferguson
Detective Senior Sergeant Area Investigations Manager| Otago Coastal | New Zealand Police P +64 03 4714937 Extn: 33137 | M +64 021 1914990 | E [email protected]
Dunedin Central Police Station, 25 Great King St, Private Bag 1924, Dunedin, www.police.govt.nz Safer Communities Together
John Ferguson, Detective Senior Sergeant, New Zealand Police, removed the incriminating evidences of the confirmed systematic organised crimes committed in New Zealand from the office of New Zealand Police, without any investigation, such as contacting those judges whose names were used in the confirmed crimes of forgery and use of false documents for extortion and robbery. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3 RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MWMyYzUxNmU5ZWI3Y2YxMA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3 RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjY1NGFkMTA1OTViNjljMw https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRld GF0c3VoaWtva295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDozNWI5OThlYTUwZjgxMGQx https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRld GF0c3VoaWtva295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDozNDk5NTFlOTQ2MGJkYjc1 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRld GF0c3VoaWtva295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo0YmM4YjFiMWFhMTFmNDI5 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRld GF0c3VoaWtva295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDoxMmM3MzFjZDRhYzU1NWVl
Letter of John Ferguson, Detective Senior Sergeant, New Zealand Police, dated 1 December 2017 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3 RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NzQzYjMyY2Q0NmRlNjYy
D. GOVERNMENT AND COURT OFFICIALS COMMITTING THE CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES
From: "Stack, Michaela"
I acknowledge receipt of your email dated 9 June 2014.
In general civil proceedings, a typed transcript is provided by our transcription service where evidence is given by witnesses who appear and are cross examined by counsel. The provision of a transcript in these circumstances occurs automatically.
An appeal hearing does not involve evidence from witnesses appearing in court or any cross examination. Therefore a transcript is not prepared automatically. This situation applied to your hearing on 16 April 2014.
If you wish to pursue this request, you will need to file a formal memorandum for consideration by Justice Clifford. You will need to include your reasons in the memorandum. Orders for the preparation of transcripts, can only be made by the presiding Judge. I cannot make a request without a Judge’s authority.
In paragraph 18 of his judgment, Justice Clifford awarded costs to the respondent on a scale 2B basis. The costs sought by the respondent and approved by the Court were consistent with Schedule 3 of the High Court Amendment Rules 2012.
Kind Regards
Michaela Stack
Court Registry Officer | High Court of New Zealand
Phone: +64 4 914 3616 | Fax: +64 4 914 3603
www.courtsofnz.govt.nz
From: "Stack, Michaela"
Mr Koyama
Please find attached the transcripts that you requested for the hearings on 16 April and 20 August 2014.
Kind Regards
Michaela Stack
Court Registry Officer | High Court of New Zealand
Phone: +64 4 914 3616 | Fax: +64 4 914 3603
www.courtsofnz.govt.nz
Wellington High Court confirmed that there was NO hearing for the cases, and the following documents are false documents; there is NO audio-recording for these FALSE transcripts sent from Wellington High Court: FALSE TRANSCRIPTS FOR THE CASE WITH NOT HAVING ANY HEARING IN THE HIGH COURT
LEGAL DISCUSSION BEFORE THE HON JUSTICE CLIFFORD https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NmJlMTZhMTcyYzdhNTJiYQ
LEGAL DISCUSSION BEFORE THE HON JUSTICE D COLLINS https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NWRhNzJkNGIzMzM0ZGI4MA
From: "Nicholson, Amelia"
Dear Tatsuhiko,
Many thanks for your email. All our Christchurch Judges are in Wellington today and Friday attending a conference but as the Unless Order is for close of business tomorrow I will forward this application and any other relevant documents on to the Honourable Justice Mander to deal with as soon as he has the opportunity.
If counsel for the respondent wishes to reply to this application could they please let me know as soon as possible.
Kind regards,
Amelia
From: "Nicholson, Amelia"
Dear Counsel and Mr and Ms Koyama,
Following the receipt of the appellants application for an extension of the unless order and the respondents memorandum in reply, the Honourable Justice Mander has minuted the above named matter as follows: "The appellants' application for an extension is declined.
The appellants cite Rule 12.7(1) HCRs as providing a time requirement for service, however this rule concerns summary judgment applications and does not apply to the present situation.
The appellants appeal remains extant notwithstanding the operation of the unless order.
I also note for completeness that a hearing of the respondent's application was attempted to be convened however the appellants declined to make themselves available despite repeated efforts by the Registry. The matter was dealt with by way of memorandum.
The appellants have still not provided reasons for their non-compliance.”
Kind regards,
Amelia
Amelia Nicholson Deputy Registrar | Christchurch High Court DDI: +64 3 962 4273 | Ext 54273
www.courtsofnz.govt.nz
From: "Nicholson, Amelia"
Dear Mr Koyama,
I do not have a hand written copy of this minute as the Honourable Justice Mander was in Auckland for a conference. This minute was given to me by way of email which I have attached a copy of now.
Kind regards,
Amelia
Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, was involved with Grant Macdonald, Misha Henaghan, and Sacha Thom of DLA Piper New Zealand in the confirmed insurance fraud, causing loss by deception, forgery, using false document for pecuniary advantage, in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
From: "Macdonald, Grant"
Dear Mr Koyama
We confirm that we were not served with your application to dispense with security. Your application was forwarded to us by the Registrar, who asked us to provide any comments to her. We perceived that we were only required to provide our comments directly to the Registrar in response to her request. We understand that we could have provided those comments informally, by way of a letter or email, but we nevertheless provided our comments by way of memorandum, which inadvertently omitted the Attorney General’s name in the intituling. In any event, you have now been forwarded a copy of our comments.
Grant Macdonald Partner
T +64 9 300 3896 F +64 9 303 2311 M +64 21 595 261 E [email protected]
From: University of Otago Registrar
Dear Mr Koyama,
I refer to your email of 17 July 2015 to the University’s Law Librarian, Ms Kate Thompson, in which you make requests under the Official Information Act and the Privacy Act. I am now responsible for dealing with the matter.
You seek the identity of the person advising us that certain documents held by the Library should not be released, and the content of the relevant communication from the person.
The relevant person was Clare O’Brien, Court Manager/Registrar of the Court of Appeal. Her communication regarding the appropriateness of the Library allowing you to see the documents involved was: “No you can’t. No judgment or any documents get issued for public release with judge’s signatures on them”.
The University now recognises that the documents in question (which were supplied to it by the Court of Appeal as administrative records and not as part of the Law Library’s collection) are held on that restricted basis.
Sincerely,
Jan A Flood
Registrar
From: "Bird, Justine"
Dear Mr Koyama
Please find attached an application from the respondents. Could I please have your response to this application by 11 August 2015.
Regards
Justine Bird
Court Registry Officer | Court of Appeal | Te Kōti Pīra o Aotearoa
Phone: +64 4 914 3540 | Fax: +64 4 914 3585 www.courtsofnz.govt.nz
From: Grant Slevin
Dear Mr Koyama, The court has today made an order directing me to serve you with this proceeding by email, which I now do. Please note that the hearing scheduled for 15 December 2016 has not been vacated at this stage. I would still like to have that hearing, which will just deal with timetabling matters, conducted by way of telephone conference. This so that your estate need not incur the costs associated with my travelling to Dunedinfor the hearing or instructing an agent to appear on my behalf.
Please let me know if you agree that this first hearing can be held by way of a teleconference. Regards,
Grant Slevin | Senior Investigating Solicitor | Insolvency and Trustee Service | Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment DDI +64 3 9626194 | Freephone 0508 467 658 | Private Bag 4714, Christchurch 8140 | www.insolvency.govt.nz
From: "Nicholson, Amelia"
Dear Counsel and Mr Koyama,
Attached is a judgment of Associate Judge Osborne delivered today at 13:00 pursuant to R 11.5 of the High Court Rules.
Please acknowledge receipt.
This decision will be available on the Internet following delivery to the parties/counsel unless: • It is subject to any statutory prohibition on publication or • Any court order suppressing publication or • It is a bail decision or bail appeal
If you have a specific matter of concern regarding Internet availability of this decision, you must advise the court immediately.
Many thanks,
Amelia
Amelia Nicholson Deputy Registrar | Christchurch High Court DDI: +64 3 962 4273 | Ext 54273
www.courtsofnz.govt.nz
From: Grant Slevin
Dear Mr Koyama, If what you say is true you have committed an offence under s 433(f) Insolvency Act 2006 by leaving New Zealand without the Assignee’s consent. A person who commits this offence is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or a fine not exceeding $5,000, or both. Regards,
Grant Slevin | Senior Investigating Solicitor | Insolvency and Trustee Service | Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment DDI +64 3 9626194 | Freephone 0508 467 658 | Private Bag 4714, Christchurch 8140 | www.insolvency.govt.nz
Grant Slevin, Senior Investigating Solicitor, Insolvency and Trustee Service, Minister of Business, Innovation and Employment of New Zealand Government and Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, were part of the criminal ring which committed the confirmed bankruptcy fraud, bank robbery by deception. forgery, using false document for pecuniary advantage, in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
E. EVIDENCES OF FORGERY AND FALSE, FORGED DOCUMENTS, ISSUED BY NEW ZELAND COURTS, ON THE CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES
You can contact any of the judges whose names were used in the crimes of forgery and use of false documents for pecuniary advantage in the CONFIRMED organised crimes in violation of the Crimes Act 1961: (i) Phillips J, Crosbie J of the District Court of New Zealand; (ii) Dobson J, Kos J, Simon France J, Young J, Clifford J, Collins J, Gendall J, Mander J, Davidson J, Osborne AJ, Matthews AJ of the High Court of New Zealand; (iii) O’Regan J, Wild J, White J, Ellen France J, Cooper J of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand; (iv) Glazebrook J, McGrath J, William Young J, Arnold J of the Supreme Court of New Zealand. https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/forgery-in-new-zealand-courts
Andrew U.D. Straw, Notary Public, State of Illinois, USA, wrote “Analysis of signatures for detection of forgery,” dated 6 May 2016. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxrb3lhbW Fkb2N1bWVudHN8Z3g6NmIxNzZiMjQwNjc2ZDJiZQ
F. NEW ZEALAND LAW SOCIETY, THE SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REGULATOR OF LEGAL PROFESSION IN NEW ZEALAND, EXTORTING MONEY BY USING FALSE, FORGED COURT DOCUMENTS, REFUSING TO INVESTIGATE ON THE COMPLAINTS ON THE CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES, INCLUDING THE BANK ROBBERY BY DECEPTION, COMMITTED BY NEW ZEALAND LAW SOCIETY AND SEVERAL LAWYERS (MEMBERS OF NEW ZEALAND LAW SOCIETY)
New Zealand Law Society, the sole and exclusive regulator of legal profession in New Zealand, extorted $37,157.98, using several confirmed false, forged court documents, WHILE DENYING ACCESS TO JUSTICE, in violation of the Crimes Act 1961. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRld GF0c3VoaWtva295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDoxMjViYWU3OTNlZDc0NjE5
Letter of New Zealand Law Society, dated 26 February 2018, refusing to investigate on the complaints against lawyers who participated in the confirmed organised crimes, including the insurance fraud, bankruptcy fraud, bank robbery by deception, committed in New Zealand https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3 RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjFhODY3MTE0NTA4OThiNg https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3 RhdHN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NDNjNDQ5ZWZmOGQ5YmU1OQ
THE SCAM OF NEW ZEALAND JUSTICE SYSTEM MUST BE STOPPED IMMEDIATELY!
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
1 November 2018
Rt Hon Trevor Mallard
Speaker of the House of Representative
New Zealand Parliament
Dear the Speaker of the House
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
I understand that you are closely following the matter of the state-sponsored SCAM of the confirmed systemic organised crimes, committed in New Zealand Courts, aided by New Zealand Government, covered up New Zealand Police and Media.
NEW ZEALAND MUST STOP SPONSORING ORGANISED CRIMES, IN VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL TREATIES THAT IT HAS SIGNED AND RATIFIED.
The international community is not likely to remain silent as long as New Zealand continues to sponsor and protect organised crimes within the jurisdiction in violation of the international law.
Now, what must be seriously concerned by you, Speaker of the House of Representative of New Zealand Parliament, is that the confirmed facts show that the endemic nature of the government corruption shows that public officials in the Courts and Government (their salaries are PAID BY TAXPAYERS) are collusively working with the criminal syndicates to commit all kinds of organised crimes, using public institutions (which are ESTABLISHED AND MAINTAINED BY TAXPAYERS) and state power for illicit purposes, disregarding their professional ethics, in violation of the laws of New Zealand.
IS THERE ANY REASON FOR LEADERS OF THE MOB (UNELECTED AND UNACCOUNTABLE JUDGES OF NEW ZEALAND) WHO ARE ALLOWING THE COURTS OF NEW ZEALAND TO BE USED AS THE INSTRUMENTS OF ORGANISED CRIMES TO COMMIT ALL KINDS OF CRIMES, IN VIOLATION OF THE CRIMES ACT 1961, ACT OF NEW ZEALAND PARLIAMENT, TO BE PAID HIGHER THAN YOU OR OTHER MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT WHO ARE ELECTED AND ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PUBLIC?
Judicial Salaries and Allowances Determination 2017
Chief Justice $530,400 ($522,500 + $7,900)
Judge of the Supreme Court $497,000 ($490,500 + $6,500)
President of the Court of Appeal $497,000 ($490,500 + $6,500)
Judges of the Court of Appeal $466,100 ($460,500 + $5,600)
Chief High Court Judge $464,600 ($459,000 + $5,600)
Judges of the High Court $444,100 ($438,500 + $5,600)
Chief District Court Judge $443,500 ($438,500 + $5,000)
District Court Judge $$338,600 ($334,500 + $4,100) http://www.nzlii.org/nz/legis/repealed_reg/jsaad2017382.pdf
Parliamentary Salaries and Allowances Determination 2016 Speaker of the House of Representative $288,900
Each other member of Parliament $160,024 https://www.parliament.nz/media/3151/parliamentary-salaries-and-allowances-determination- 2016.pdf
WHAT MUST BE ACCEPTED BY YOU, THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, IS THAT THE ENTIRE NEW ZEALAND JUDICIARY IS A COMPLETE SCAM, FROM THE DISTRICT COURT TO THE SUPREME COURT, WITHOUT ANY EXCEPTION; AND THE SITUATION CALLS FOR YOUR URGENT ATTENTION AND ACTION.
THE FOLLOWING NAMES OF JUDGES WERE USED IN THE CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES OF FRAUD IN NEW ZEALAND COURTS:
(a) Phillips J, Crosbie J of the District Court;
(b) Dobson J, Kos J, Simon France J, Young J, Clifford J, Collins J, Gendall J, Mander J, Davidson J, Osborne AJ, Matthews AJ of the High Court;
(c) O’Regan J, Wild J, White J, Ellen France J, Cooper J of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand; and
(d) Glazebrook J, McGrath J, William Young J, Arnold J of the Supreme Court. https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/forgery-in-new-zealand-courts
NEW ZEALAND HAS VERY SERIOUS PROBLMES IN THE GOVERNANCE WHEN THE ORGANISED CRIMES ARE ROUTINELY USING PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS AND STATE POWER FOR THEIR CRIMES, WITH IMPUNITY, PROTECTED BY THE LAW ENFORCEMENT, IN NEW ZEALAND.
For your information, the state of New Zealand signed the UN Convention against Corruption on 10 December 2003 and ratified on 1 December 2015. https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/corruption/ratification-status.html
In the forward of the Convention, we find:
Corruption is an insidious plague that has a wide range of corrosive effects on societies. It undermines democracy and the rule of law, leads to violations of human rights, distorts markets, erodes the quality of life and allows organised crime, terrorism and other threats to human security to flourish.
This evil phenomenon is found in all countries-big and small, rich and poor… https://www.unodc.org/documents/treaties/UNCAC/Publications/Convention/08-50026_E.pdf
NOW, MANY PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD KNOW ABOUT THE SCAM OF NEW ZEALAND (THE CONFIRMED SYSTEMIC ORGANISED CRIMES, COMMITTED IN NEW ZEALAND COURTS, AIDED BY NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT, COVERED UP BY NEW ZEALAND MEDIA).
NEW ZEALAND MUST NOT BE THE EXAMPLE FOR DEVELOPING NATIONS TO FOLLOW.
Obviously, developing nations will follow the example of New Zealand and establish similar illicit schemes to sponsor and protect organised crimes within their jurisdictions, concealed by their Governments, Courts, and Media, disregarding their own domestic laws and international treaties that they signed and ratified, just like New Zealand is doing right now.
If a developed nation is doing it, why not developing nations?
IT IS DEFINITELY THE TIIME FOR YOU, THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, TO ACT, RATHER THAN THE SCAM OF NEW ZEALAND TO GO ON.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
23 October 2018
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern
Prime Minister of New Zealand
Dear Prime Minister
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
This email follows my emails, dated 9 October 2018, with the subject of “NEW ZEALAND REALITY – POST-JUSTICE JUDICIARY,” and https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTI5YTU3NDZmZTAyMzM3 dated 18 October 2018, with the subject of “NEW ZEALAND HAS VERY SERIOUS PROBLEMS IN THE GOVERNANCE.” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NzcyMjZjYmU2ZDIxMGQyNg
WHAT MUST BE ACCEPTED AS ABNORMAL, ILLEGAL, AND WRONG IS THAT NEW ZEALAND CONTINUES TO SPONSOR SYSTEMIC ORGANISED CRIMES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION, ALLOWING THE DOMINANT CRIMINAL SYNDICATES TO USE PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS AND STATE POWER FOR FRAUDULENT PURPOSES IN VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OF NEW ZEALAND AND INTERNATIONAL TREATIES THAT THE STATE OF NEW ZEALAND HAS SIGNED AND RATIFIED.
NOW, YOU MUST MAKE YOUR OWN ENQUIRY AMONG THE CABINET COLLEAGUES.
A. ASK HON ANDREW LITTLE, MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND FOR COURTS OF NEW ZEALAND
(1) WHO IS THE FRAUDSTER WHO STOLE THE IDENTITY OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE MATTHEWS AND ACTED AS THE FAKE JUDGE IN THE FAKE HEARING IN DUNEDIN HIGH COURT ON 3 MARCH 2016? https://youtu.be/f1nzidjU7Qo
(2) WHY ARE YOU BECOMING AN ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT IN CONCEALING THE CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES, COMMITTED IN THE COURTS OF NEW ZEALAND?
THE FOLLOWING NAMES OF JUDGES WERE USED IN THE CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES OF FRAUD IN NEW ZEALAND COURTS: (a) Phillips J, Crosbie J of the District Court; (b) Dobson J, Kos J, Simon France J, Young J, Clifford J, Collins J, Gendall J, Mander J, Davidson J, Osborne AJ, Matthews AJ of the High Court; (c) O’Regan J, Wild J, White J, Ellen France J, Cooper J of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand; (d) Glazebrook J, McGrath J, William Young J, Arnold J of the Supreme Court. https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/forgery-in-new-zealand-courts
HOW ABOUT THE CONFIRMED BANKRUPTCY FRAUD, COMMITTED IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND, USING VARIOUS NAMES OF HIGH COURT JUDGES FOR THE FRAUD? https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/law-practice-reform
B. ASK HON STUART NASH, MINISTER OF POLICE OF NEW ZEALAND
(1) WHY ARE NEW ZEALAND POLICE NOT INVESTIGATING THE “CONFIRMED” ORGANISED CRIMES, COMMITTED IN NEW ZEALAND?
They can contact of any of the judges whose names were used in the crimes of forgery and using false documents for pecuniary gain in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
How about contacting the court officials who participated in the organised crimes, committed in New Zealand Courts?
(2) IS THERE ANY REASON FOR POLICE MINISTER BECOMING AN ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT BY COVERING UP THE CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES?
CRIMES ACT 1961
71 Accessory after the fact
(1) An accessory after the fact to an offence is one who, knowing any person to have been a party to the offence, receives, comforts, or assists that person or tampers with or actively suppresses any evidence against him or her, in order to enable him or her to escape after arrest or to avoid arrest or conviction. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/137.0/DLM328515.html
IT DOES NOT MAKE ANY SENSE FOR NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT TO KEEP ON ACKNOWLEDGING THE CONFIRMED ORGANIED CRIMES, COMMITTED IN NEW ZEALAND COURTS, WHILE NOT DOING ANYTHING ON THE SERIES OF THE VERY SERIOUS OFFENCES UNDER THE CRIMES ACT 1961.
This is what a medical professional from Britain wrote about the criminals who were using the justice system of New Zealand for their crimes:
“With the privy council now gone, this [certain systematic organised crime in New Zealand] needs to be exposed by the media of another country. I am a medical doctor, with 3 medical science books published internationally. I am also an authority on Narcissistic Personality Disorder, sociopathy and psychopathy - and the people we are dealing with are extreme examples of this trait. However, the problem in NZ is the apathy, timidity and cognitive dissonance of the people. We have built up conclusive evidence - all in the public domain. Are there any university professors of law who have the integrity to join our fight?”
A US lawyer wrote about the situation, following:
“I think the courts are really the most fundamental and important part of government. If you cannot get justice, none of your rights exist,” “Life liberty and property cease to exist,” “I think the word you're looking for [the criminals using the Courts for systematic organised crimes] is psychopathy,” “Group psychopathy,” “If you can reform the New Zealand courts with the support of New Zealand people, that will be a miracle.”
In the preface of “Global corruption report 2007: Corruption and Judicial Systems,” published by Transparency International, we find:
“…the fight against corruption depends upon it [the judicial system]. The expanding arsenal of anti-corruption weapons includes new national and international laws against corruption that rely on fair and impartial judicial systems for enforcement. Where judicial corruption occurs, the damage can be pervasive and extremely difficult to reverse. Judicial corruption undermines citizens’ morale, violates human rights, harms their job prospects and national development and depletes the quality of governance.” http://issuu.com/transparencyinternational/docs/global_corruption_report_2007_english?mode=wi ndow&backgroundColor=%23222222
POST-JUSTICE JUDICIARY OF NEW ZEALAND WITH THE SYSTEMATIC ORGANISED CRIMES, “SCAM” IN THE ENTIRE NEW ZEALAND SYSTEM, FROM THE DISTRICT COURT TO THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND, REQUIRES INTERNATIONAL INTERVENTION DUE TO THE SEVERE ENTRENCHMENT OF THE ORGANISED CRIMES IN NEW ZEALAND, USING PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS AND STATE POWER FOR THEIR CRIMES, IN VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OF NEW ZEALAND AND INTERNATIONAL TREATIES THAT THE STATE OF NEW ZEALAND SIGNED AND RATIFIED.
NOW, PEOPLE IN NEW ZEALAND ARE NOT AFRAID OF SPEAKING OUT; ONCE THIS MATTER OPENS FOR PUBLIC DISCUSSION, THEN, THINGS WILL CHANGE FOR BETTER IN NEW ZEALAND.
Your leadership on this matter is urgently required to deal with the fundamental problems of the governance of New Zealand.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
18 October 2018
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern
Prime Minister of New Zealand
Dear Prime Minister
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
This email follows my email, dated 9 October 2018, with the subject of “NEW ZEALAND REALITY – POST-JUSTICE JUDICIARY.” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTI5YTU3NDZmZTAyMzM3
As you are fully aware now, NEW ZEALAND JUSTICE SYSTEM IS A COMPLETELY SCAM ENTIRELY FROM THE DISTRICT COURT TO THE SUPREME COURT, WITH NO EXCEPTION.
THE FOLLOWING NAMES OF JUDGES WERE USED IN THE CONFIRMED ORGANISED CRIMES OF FRAUD IN NEW ZEALAND COURTS: (a) Phillips J, Crosbie J of the District Court; (b) Dobson J, Kos J, Simon France J, Young J, Clifford J, Collins J, Gendall J, Mander J, Davidson J, Osborne AJ, Matthews AJ of the High Court; (c) O’Regan J, Wild J, White J, Ellen France J, Cooper J of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand; (d) Glazebrook J, McGrath J, William Young J, Arnold J of the Supreme Court. https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/forgery-in-new-zealand-courts
The reason for the endemic nature of the systemic organised crimes in the Courts of New Zealand exists is the multiple layers of protection, support, and cover-ups of the organised crimes, including New Zealand Police, various government agencies, and New Zealand media, as you have seen in my emails.
They work with the dominant criminal syndicates to ensure that their criminal activities are undetected and executed to their fullest extent, including complete destruction (and possibility disappearance) of the victims, using state power, in violation of the laws of New Zealand and international treaties that the state of New Zealand has signed and ratified.
The lack of professionalism among judges, lawyers, court officers, government workers, police officers, and journalists is very dangerous as you have seen in my cases.
New Zealand has the culture of impunity, and endemic, widespread corruption in the Government; the hallmark of the corruption is arbitrary, capricious, and illegal law enforcement by government officials for the benefits of the dominant criminal syndicates which are using public institutions and state power for their nefarious ends, in violation of the laws of New Zealand and various international laws.
Unfortunately , Ombudsman of New Zealand is among those who are part of the government corruption.
I received the attached letter, dated 6 June 2018, from the Ombudsman while I was away from New Zealand. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MzI1NzViYmNmYWY2ODAzMA
The Ombudsman sent this letter, AFTER THE NUMEROUS EVIDENCES OF THE INSURANCE FRAUD, COMMITTED BY SOUTHERN RESPONSE AND EQC, GOVERNMENT ENTITIES OF NEW ZEALAND, WERE SUBMITTED TO HON DR MEGAN WOODS, MINISTER RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EARTHQUAKE COMMISSION (these emails were copied to the Ombudsman).
In the letter, the Ombudsman wrote, “Our records showed that you have emailed copy correspondence to our office on two occasions,” “In view of your failure to comply with the restrictions placed upon you [the truth is, as you see from their email, dated 5 February 2018, THEY INITIATED THE CONTACT, NOT ME], I consider it necessary to maintain these for a further 12 months.”
- New Zealand Courts destroy court records which evidence organised crimes.
- New Zealand Police remove all evidences of organised crimes.
- New Zealand Ombudsman refuses to receive any evidence on organised crimes.
- New Zealand media publishes fake news to cover up organised crimes of the criminal syndicates.
Needless to say, NEW ZEALAND HAS VERY SERIOUS PROBLEMS IN THE GOVERNANCE.
Again, I ask you to allow the international community to intervene on this matter.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc, DipGrad
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
11 June 2018
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern
Prime Minister of New Zealand
cc: Hon Winston Peters, Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Hon David Parker, New Zealand Attorney General and Minister of Trade and Export growth; Hon Andrew Little, New Zealand Minister of Justice and for Courts; Hon Stuart Nash, New Zealand Minister of Police; Rt Hon Dame Sian Elias, Chief Justice of New Zealand; Hon Tracy Martin, Minister of Internal Affairs; State Services Commissioner; Serious Fraud Office; Auditor-General; and others
Dear Prime Minister
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
This email follows my email to you, dated 28 May 2018, with the subject of “NEW ZEALAND CORRUPTION OF NORMALISATION OF SYSTEMATIC ORGANISED CRIMES OF FRAUD REQUIRES INTERNATIONAL INTERVENTION.” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6N2UzYWQ3NzMwNDRjMmVkNQ
I understand that you read my email to the member of the Justice Committee Parliament, dated 1 June 2018, with the subject of “FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEMS IN THE GOVERNANCE - WIDESPREAD AND ENTRENCHED CORRUPTION IN NEW ZEALAND JUDICIARY,” attached below.
For your information, on 7 June 2018 I received 12th and 13th emails from Ministry of Justice on this matter. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NmViMjdkYmRmOGE0MGE4Mg https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NWVjYTQwMTkwNTMxMjI4Nw
The confirmed facts show that the following names of judges of New Zealand have been used in various organised crimes, committed in New Zealand Courts, including the bankruptcy fraud and insurance fraud, perverting the course of justice: (a) Phillips J, Crosbie J of the District Court of New Zealand; (b) Dobson J, Kos J, Simon France J, Young J, Clifford J, Collins J, Gendall J, Mander J, Davidson J, Osborne AJ, Matthews AJ of the High Court of New Zealand; (c) O’Regan J, Wild J, White J, Ellen France J, Cooper J of the Court of Appeal of New Zealand; (d) Glazebrook J, McGrath J, William Young J, Arnold J of the Supreme Court of New Zealand. https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/forgery-in-new-zealand-courts
IT DOES NOT MAKE ANY SENSE FOR THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE OF NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT TO KEEP ON ACKNOWLEDGING THE CONFIRMED ORGANIED CRIMES, COMMITTED IN NEW ZEALAND COURTS, WHILE NOT DOING ANYTHING ON THE SERIES OF THE VERY SERIOUS OFFENCES UNDER THE CRIMES ACT 1961.
THE CONFIRMED FACTS CLEARLY INDICATE THE FOLLOWING FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEMS IN THE GOVERNANCE OF NEW ZEALAND:
(1) the extensive networks of the criminal syndicates, using public institutions, including the Courts, for their crimes;
(2) the solidarity among judges, lawyers, court officials, police officers, public officials, and journalists of New Zealand, to commit and support organised crimes of fraud, indicating significant deficit in professionalism and ethics among them; and
(3) the New Zealand Law Society, the sole and exclusive regulator of the legal profession in New Zealand, to commit organised crimes and protect those criminals who are using the Courts and other public institutions of New Zealand for their crimes, indicating complete failure in the regulation of the legal profession and creating the culture of impunity among lawyers who are committing organised crimes in the Court.
This matter is no longer hidden and generating interests worldwide, and many people in New Zealand are very much concerned with the severe deficit in the governance in New Zealand where the people cannot rely on the Judiciary and Government to protect their rights, security, and lives.
It is not time for you, as Prime Minister of New Zealand, to conceal the normalisation of systematic organised crimes in the Judiciary and Government of New Zealand, but act on the severe problems in the governance of New Zealand and do something about the organised crimes, deliberately using public institutions and state power of New Zealand for nefarious purposes, in violation of the laws of New Zealand and international treaties that the state of New Zealand has signed and ratified.
I ask you to allow the international community to intervene on this matter, as the confirmed facts show that New Zealand is in breach of the international law, severely eroding the rule of law and protection of Human Rights in New Zealand, raising serious concerns for the international community.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
22, Takahatacho, Nishikujo, Minami-ku, Kyoto city
Kyoto Prefecture, Japan 601-8446 TEL: +64-75-681-2238
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
1 June 2018
Members of Justice Committee
New Zealand Parliament
Dear Sir/Madam
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
This email follows my email to you, dated 24 May 2018, with the subject of “FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEMS IN THE GOVERNANCE IN NEW ZEALAND - ENDEMIC CORRUPTION IN NEW ZEALAND JUDICIARY.” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6N2UzYWQ3NzMwNDRjMmVkNQ
In my previous email, I gave an example of the bankruptcy fraud to show you the interconnectedness of the organised crimes in operating their criminal activities in New Zealand Government (Insolvency and Trustee Service, Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment) and New Zealand Judiciary (entirely, from the District Court to Supreme Court of New Zealand).
At this time, I would like to give another example, the insurance fraud, to show you how the organised crimes are operating their criminal activities in New Zealand Government (EQC and Southern Response) and New Zealand Judiciary (from the District Court to the Court of Appeal of New Zealand).
Attached, please find two sets of FALSE documents, which were created and used by the criminals to defraud the insurance policy holders for financial advantage, in violation of the Crimes Act 1961. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTg2YjdlYmJkODNhYTRlMA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NmVmYTU0NzNhYzNjOTg1MA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NmIzY2I3ZWZlNjliZWJhNA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NDlmOWQwODMyM2JiZTEw https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MTM4NzM2ZjMzNTgyM2E1Nw
For the judicial fraud, please take time to read my email to Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister, dated 8 February 2018, with the subject of “Interconnected, collusive, organised crimes of fraud in New Zealand Government and New Zealand Courts,” attached below.
As stated in my previous email, the problems that I have identified in New Zealand are very severe.
THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEMS IN THE GOVERNANCE IN NEW ZEALAND (1) the extensive networks of the criminal syndicates, using public institutions, including the Courts, for their crimes;
(2) the solidarity among judges, lawyers, court officials, police officers, public officials, and journalists of New Zealand, to commit and support organised crimes of fraud, indicating significant deficit in professionalism and ethics among them; and
(3) the New Zealand Law Society, the sole and exclusive regulator of the legal profession in New Zealand, to commit organised crimes and protect those criminals who are using the Courts and other public institutions of New Zealand for their crimes, indicating complete failure in the regulation of the legal profession and creating the culture of impunity among lawyers who are committing organised crimes in the Court.
The hallmark of New Zealand corruption is the widespread and entrenched corruption in New Zealand Judiciary.
The corruption in the Judiciary has eroded the rule of law and protection of Human Rights, and is allowing the normalisation of systematic organised crimes of fraud in New Zealand, while making it impossible to prosecute the criminals who are using the Courts and other public institutions for nefarious purposes, in violation of the laws of New Zealand and international treaties that the state of New Zealand has signed and ratified.
The seriousness of the problems should not be underestimated, as the corruption goes to the heart of liberal democracy and good governance in New Zealand, and if nothing is done on the corruption, it is highly likely that New Zealand will lose its credibility in the international community, due to the lack of commitment to international treaties that the state of New Zealand has signed and ratified.
For your information, this matter has generated interests in and out of New Zealand, and many people around the world are aware of the situation in New Zealand.
It is my wish that you, members of Justice Committee of New Zealand Parliament, act on this matter promptly.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
31 May 2018
Hon Dr Megan Woods
Minister Responsible for the Earthquake Commission
New Zealand Government
Cc: Ombudsman of New Zealand; Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern (Prime Minister); Hon Stuart Nash (Police Minister); Mr Mike Bush (New Zealand Police Commissioner); Hon Andrew Little (Justice Minister); and others
Dear Hon Dr Megan Woods
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
I received your letter, dated 1 May 2018, regarding the reported insurance fraud, committed by EQC and Southern Response. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTdkYjkyODY1OTI5YjNjMg
For your information, recently I sent an email to Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister of New Zealand, dated 28 May 2018, with the subject of “NEW ZEALAND CORRUPTION OF NORMALISATION OF SYSTEMATIC ORGANISED CRIMES OF FRAUD REQUIRES INTERNATIONAL INTERVENTION.” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6N2UzYWQ3NzMwNDRjMmVkNQ
At this time, I would like to provide another evidence of their fraud.
I recorded the telephone conversation that I had with Emma Brown of Southern Response who explained about the fictitious FAKE EQC second assessment on the claim on “2 December 2013,” which is prior to “12 February 2014” when EQC supposedly generated the settlement recommendation. https://youtu.be/K4XPHfd3FJE
This is another evidence clearly to show that EQC and Southern Response committed the insurance fraud, by creating several false documents for financial advantage and used them for the insurance fraud, obtaining financial gain by deception, in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
This matter requires criminal investigation; there are more than enough evidences to support that the insurance fraud was committed by EQC and Southern Response.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama
20 February 2018
Hon Dr Megan Woods
Minister Responsible for the Earthquake Commission
New Zealand Government
cc: Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern (Prime Minister); Hon David Parker (Attorney General); Hon Dr David Clark; Dr Duncan Webb MP; Mr Mike Bush (New Zealand Police Commissioner), and others
Dear Hon Dr Megan Woods
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
I reported the insurance fraud, committed by EQC and Southern Response, regarding the claim that I lodged with EQC.
As explained in my email to Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister, dated 8 February 2018, attached, the insurance fraud was followed by another fraud in the Court for the crime of conspiring to defeat justice (committed in the District Court, High Court, and Court of Appeal of New Zealand), and, later, further bankruptcy fraud and bank robbery for the crime of obtaining by deception, stealing the money, deposited in Kiwibank (committed in the High Court of New Zealand).
As respective Courts have already confirmed on the fraud, there is NO dispute nor controversy on any of the matters, mentioned above.
At this time, I would like to submit further evidences of the insurance fraud, committed by EQC and Southern Response.
The insurance fraud commenced in or around October 2013 by Southern Response; probably, the scheme of the insurance fraud was created by Southern Response in or around August 2013.
I lodged a complaint on this matter, due to my suspicion on the fraud, committed by Southern Response, with Insurance and Savings Ombudsman Scheme Inc. around the end of November 2013.
Soon after lodging the complaint, I received several FALSE documents, purportedly the non- existent, fictitious, EQC second assessment on the claim, from Southern Response, on 11 December 2013, https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3Rhd HN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTg2YjdlYmJkODNhYTRlMA
These FALSE documents were enclosed in the letter from Southern Response, dated "9 December 2013," which was ABOUT 2 MONTHS PRIOR TO "12 FEBRUARY 2014" when the settlement recommendation, dated 12 February 2014, was supposedly created by EQC.
What is obvious from the evidences is that the data on the FALSE information on the non- existent, fictitious, EQC second assessment was created by Southern Response in or around December 2013, and, later, sent to EQC, after I lodged a complaint with Insurance and Savings Ombudsman Scheme Inc.
As with the office of Ombudsman, the role of Insurance and Savings Ombudsman Scheme Inc. was to cover up fraud for the members of the organisation, including insurance companies, such as Southern Response.
Later, I received the same FALSE documents, attached to the email of DLA Phillips Fox, dated 16 December 2014.
In this email, Southern Response, through their lawyer, FALSELY stated: "We refer to your requests in your memoranda dated 12 and 15 December 2014 that Southern Response provide copies of:
1. The communication between Southern Response and EQC on 26 August 2013.
2. EQC's second assessment completed on 29 March 2012.
We attach three documents and note that: · On 26 August 2013, EQC physically handed to Southern Response these three documents as part of a weekly collection of a batch of documents relating to various claims. · The first attachment is addressed to Southern Response employee Kate Legg because she was the person at Southern Response who requested the documents from EQC in relation to your claim. · Southern Response understands that EQC inserted Southern Response's logo at the top of the document in order to identify which insurer the document needed to be provided to. · The attached scope of works is the only document relating to EQC's amended assessment that was provided to Southern Response." https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NmVmYTU0NzNhYzNjOTg1MA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NmIzY2I3ZWZlNjliZWJhNA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NDlmOWQwODMyM2JiZTEw https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MTM4NzM2ZjMzNTgyM2E1Nw
THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON ANY ASSESSMENT ON 29 MARCH 2012 ANYWHERE IN THE FILES OF EQC AND SOUTHERN RESPONSE ON THE CLAIM.
CONTRARILY, THE ONLY ONSITE FULL ASSESSMENT ON THE CLAIM WAS COMPLETED ON OR AROUND "27 AUGUST 2012," ABOUT 5 MONTHS AFTER THE NON-EXISTENT, FICTITOUS, EQC SECOND ASSESSMENT ON "29 MARCH 2012" [Southern Response released the information on the only onsite full assessment on the claim, done by Arrow International, on or around 25 February 2015]. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3Rhd HN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NzZiNjI0ZjRlZmMxNjkxZA
Prior to receipt of the FALSE documents, I received "Response by defendant," dated 22 May 2014, which FALSELY stated:
"Second EQC Assessment 4.12 On 26 August 2013, EQC sent the defendant [Southern Response] a batch of reassessed claims which included a file note relating to the plaintiffs' claim. The file note said, '[a]s result of reviewed settlement this claim is now under CAP'. EQC had completed a further, paper-based review of the damage to the House on 29 March 2012 and had determined that the First EQC Assessment was incorrect and the total repair costs were $45,915.67 (Second EQC Assessment)." https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3Rhd HN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NThhMGY4Njc5NGU1Y2E0ZA
It is obvious that EQC could NOT send "a batch of reassessed claims" on "26 August 2013," if, in fact, EQC were to have generated the data on the second EQC assessment on the claim on or around "12 February 2014" as stated by EQC, which was MORE THAN 5 MONTHS LATER.
THERE IS "NO" EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER TO INDICATE THAT EQC CONDUCTED THE SECOND ASSESSMENT ON THE CLAIM.
FURTHERMORE, THERE WAS "NO" REASON FOR EQC TO CONDUCT THE SECOND ASSESSMENT ON THE CLAIM "AFTER" EQC SETTLED THE CLAIM MORE THAN 3.5 YEARS AGO.
Clearly, EQC and Southern Response collusively committed the insurance fraud and used FALSE documents for pecuniary advantage, in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
THERE IS "NO" DISPUTE NOR CONTROVERSY ON THE CONFIRMED INSURANCE FRAUD, COMMITTED BY EQC AND SOUTHERN RESPONSE.
THERE IS "NO" REASON FOR THE GOVERNMENT NOT TO INVESTIGATED THE FRAUD, WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY NUMEROUS UNDISPUTED EVIDENCES.
Please contact me, if anyone in the government or the Courts has any question on this matter.
If anyone requires more information on this matter, please let that person contact me.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2018 9:47 AM To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected] ; Andrew Straw ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; Stuart Nash ; [email protected] ; Winston Peters ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; Elizabeth ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; Editor ; [email protected] ; Office Davis ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; Leanne Stewart ; Serious Fraud Office ; Ombudsman ; Megan Woods ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected]
Subject: Interconnected, collusive, organised crimes of fraud in New Zealand Government and New Zealand Courts
8 February 2018
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern
Prime Minister of New Zealand
Dear Prime Minister
I am an enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand.
Now, there is NO dispute on the insurance fraud, committed by EQC and Southern Response, government agencies of New Zealand, if you read the attached emails.
But, the insurance fraud is just a tip of the iceberg of the bigger problem of the endemic corruption in New Zealand Justice System.
Now, it has been confirmed and accepted by various Courts of New Zealand that the following documents are FALSE documents, issued by the Courts, which have been used various criminal purposes, in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
DISTRICT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
(1) Letter of Brian Sceats, Deputy Registrar, Dunedin High/District Court, dated 27 May 2014 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo2Y2FkYTQ0ZDU5OWNmZmMy
* There was NO decision by any judge of the District Court of New Zealand on 27 May 2014 in the case.
(2) Letter of Brian Sceats, Deputy Registrar, Dunedin High/District Court, dated 20 November 2014 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDoxM2IzYmU4YTgxMGY0NmRm
* There was NO decision by Crosbie J of the District Court of New Zealand on 18 November 2014 in the case.
HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
(3) “MINUTE OF GENDALL J,” dated 17 December 2014, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 17 December 2014) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjM3YzU3ZTg3ZTMwNDI3 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MWM4Nzk5ZjhlODc5MTM5OA
(4) “MINUTE OF GENDALL J,” dated 9 February 2014, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 10 February 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6N2JhMzU2YjFhM2RlMzIzMA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6Mjc2MTE2NTFjMmM1YmM2Yw
(5) "MINUTE OF GENDALL J,” dated 16 February 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 16 February 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MjhjYTljZGFmM2VhYWI1Yg https://docs.google..com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MzU4Y2FkZmEwYjMzNGFhOA
(6) "MINUTE OF GENDALL J,” dated 23 February 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 23 February 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6OTFjYmUzZDM2NWMzZWEx https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NGYyMjQ5ZGU5ZDJlMmRmNg
(7) “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 26 February 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 26 February 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6M2M0MmNjMDI5YTJjNTFjNg https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTNlOWYzZDAzMzFmYjIzNg
(8) Signed, “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 26 February 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 5 August 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NjkxMjgwZmI0ZmYzMTFkMA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MWQ0ZjM3MzcxNDhjYzQyYw
(9) Handwritten minute of Mander J, dated 27 February 2015, (retrieved from the official court file found in Dunedin High Court on 19 February 2016) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NjM5YmRjZGVjNDBkOWY0
(10) “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 5 March 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 5 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NmNlN2FkYjg0NzU4NThjMQ https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NmIxMWU1N2I3ZGYzNDU1NQ
(11) Signed, “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 5 March 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 13 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NTQ3ZTVjZGM1NmFkZDJiMg https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MjMzM2VhOGUxMDk5YWU1Yw
(12) Unless order of Mander J, dated 12 March 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 12 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NGJmY2NkMWMzMDc1YWZmMQ
(13) Handwritten minute of Mander J, dated 12 March 2015, (sent by sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 13 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NDYzYTYwMGFhMjMxNTk2NA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6N2VlYWI4MGFjNTMxMTAzYg
(14) Signed, “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 13 March 2015 (sent by sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 13 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MmU0MDM1ZDQwMjU5MWZkMA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NzQyYzgyNzRmZjJjYjE5NA
(15) “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 13 March 2015 (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 16 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NmFkYWUxNjFiYWFmMzA2Mw https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MjM5NTdlNjg4MTliM2U0OQ
(16) “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 17 March 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 17 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MTIwNTM2MzAwMjQ3NjdjYQ https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NWZhZDIwN2JiZWYxZjk2Mw
(17) Signed, “MINUTE OF MANDER J,” dated 17 March 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 17 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MWUzZGY3NDUyZjBjZjZlZQ https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjdlMGRmNzBhMDdjYjdm
(18) Email of Mander J, dated 20 March 2015 (at 12:11 pm), (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 10 August 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NzA4Y2U2YzYxYTBmY2Q3YQ https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTJhNjQxYjZkMTM4ODRmNA
(19) Email of Mander J, dated 20 March 2015 (at 12:18 pm), (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 12 August 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MzA4NTIwYWIyYzkxM2IzMA https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NWQ4N2NkYmI5YzU1ODUwNw
(20) Order of Mander J, dated 20 March 2015 (at 12:26 pm), (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 20 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6Njc1ODNkZGYzMzg2N2EzOQ
(21) “JUDGMENT OF MANDER J,” dated 23 March 2015, (sent by Rebecca Fahey, Civil Caseflow Manager, Christchurch High Court, on 23 March 2015, on the same day when a telephone case management conference was held and before the scheduled hearing on 5 April 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6ZmNjOThjMDgwMTJmMGM3 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NTAyZDI0YjkzZWU3ZDU4Zg
(22) Signed, “JUDGMENT OF MANDER J,” dated 23 March 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 24 March 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NmY4MzdlNmQxYTQ4MTFkYQ https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6N2YyYTRkMGU1NWEyZTkzZg
(23) “JUDGMENT OF MANDER J,’ dated 26 May 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 26 May 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NDkzOTE5YTVhMWQwMTQ1Ng https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MTEzNjI5MTM5ZDY5OTc2OA
(24) Signed, “JUDGMENT OF MANDER J,’ dated 26 May 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 5 August 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6ZDlhM2Y0OTNiYjUyN2Jm https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MWQ0ZjM3MzcxNDhjYzQyYw
(25) Minute of Mander J, date 5 June 2016, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 5 June 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NGM3NjViNDljNTM2NWFkNw
(26) Handwritten minute of Mander J, dated 5 June 2015, (sent by Amelia Nicolson, Deputy Registrar, Christchurch High Court, on 14 July 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NGM3NjViNDljNTM2NWFkNw https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjZhMGFkYzkwOTU5YmMwNQ
(27) “Order for Costs,” dated 12 June 2015, (sent by Grant Macdonald on or around 15 July 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6NjU2N2ViMGMxOTAyYmEwMQ
COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND
(28) “MINUTE OF WHITE J,” dated 16 June 2015, (sent by Justine Bird, Court Registry Officer, Court of Appeal, on 16 June 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDoyOTE1MjkyY2QwOWEwNDk4 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDpiOWE1ZGYyMjdkYTkxNGU
* The Court of Appeal of New Zealand did NOT have the jurisdiction on the matter; Tatsuhiko Koyama was NOT in New Zealand on or around 16 June 2015.
* The signature on the document, dated 16 June 2015, is significantly different the true signature of Mr Douglas White QC. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NDk5YTZiNDdhYmI1NjM1Nw
(29) “MINUTE AND DIRECTIONS OF WILD J,” dated 14 August 2015, (sent by Fiona McDonald, Fixtures Manager/Deputy Registrar, Court of Appeal, on 14 August 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDozMzlhNDI3OGYwMjUzZTc5 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MWQ2YTZhMGE5ZjgzZWUyMg
* There is NO signed original document in the official case file..
(30) “MINUTE AND DIRECTIONS OF THE COURT,” dated 29 September 2015, (Ellen France P, Wild and Cooper JJ), (sent by Fiona McDonald, Fixtures Manager/Deputy Registrar, Court of Appeal, on 29 September 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDo3ZTE4NDNhNWNkZGEyNDQ0 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NjY0ZDIxOGM1ZWIxZGE0ZQ
* There is NO signed original document in the official case file.
(31) “JUDGMENT OF THE COURT,” dated 5 October 2015, (Ellen France P, Wild and Cooper JJ), (sent by Justine Bird, Court Registry Officer, Court of Appeal, on 5 October 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRldGF0c3VoaWt va295YW1hZG9jdW1lbnRzM3xneDozZjc0OTEzNjkxOTNmYTRj https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3RhdHN1aGl rb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6MzVmYzRhZDMyZTg3MzUzNg
* There is NO signed original document in the official case file.
(32) “Judgment for sealing,” dated 6 November 2015, (Ellen France P, Wild and Cooper JJ), (sent by Grant MacDonald on or around 17 November 2015) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxkb2N1bWVudHNrb 3lhbWF8Z3g6MmQ4NDJkNWY4NWM0MWJk
The organised crimes did not finish their crimes and committed further crime of bankruptcy fraud, using the High Court of New Zealand for criminal purposes, stealing money deposited in Kiwibank, in violation of the Crimes Act 1961.
For your information, the criminals placed the illegal caveat on the house that my wife and I live in Dunedin for the criminal purpose of property theft.
This illegal caveat was lifted after the criminals having stolen the money, deposited in Kiwibank; they stole more amount of money than they initially extorted, using the false documents.
I published the bankruptcy fraud, committed in the High Court of New Zealand, at the following URL: https://sites.google.com/site/tatsuhikokoyama/law-practice-reform
As stated several times, New Zealand requires international intervention on the endemic corruption in the Government and Courts of New Zealand.
The problem in New Zealand is VERY SEVERE, due to the entrenched and widespread corruption in the public sector of New Zealand, including New Zealand Courts.
It is my wish that you will allow the international community to intervene on this matter.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010, New Zealand
TEL: +64-3-473-7810
From: Tatsuhiko Koyama Sent: Monday, February 05, 2018 8:55 PM To: Leanne Stewart
Cc: Serious Fraud Office ; Ombudsman ; Megan Woods ; [email protected] ; Stuart Nash ; [email protected] Subject: INSURANCE FRAUD clearly evidenced, requires criminal investigation
5 February 2018
Ms Leanne Stewart
Senior Investigator
Office of the Ombudsman
cc: Serious Fraud Office; Hon Dr Megan Woods MP (Minister Responsible for the Earthquake Commission); Hon Stuart Nash MP (Minister of Police)
Dear Leanne
I received your email, dated 5 February 2018, attached, regarding the insurance fraud, committed by EQC and Southern Response Earthquake Services Limited [Southern Response].
In this email, I submit several evidences, which clearly show that insurance fraud was committed by EQC and Southern Response on the insurance claim on the damages, caused by the Canterbury Earthquake.
FALSE: “EQC has confirmed that the names of the EQC staff members who had completed assessment reports [dated 12 February 2014] following onsite scoping visits at the property have been disclosed to you.”
FACTS:
1. No staff member of EQC visited the site at 15 Bounty Street, Bryndwr, Christchurch on or around 12 February 2014 for any assessment purpose on the claim.
- I was not at the property in CHRISTCHURCH on or around 12 February 2014.
- Therefore, it was “impossible” for any EQC staff to disclose any matter, including the name of the assessor, to me while I was not in CHRISTCHURCH at that time.
2. I received a phone call from EQC on 13 February 2014 in DUNEDIN; I attached a copy of the phone call from EQC on 13 February 2014, along with the transcript of the call. https://youtu.be/x725ECxAnSM
- There was NO mention of any assessment on the damages to the property on or around 12 February 2014, a day before.
- Contrarily, the EQC caller stated, “Oh, yes, good. That's fine. OK [for Koyama to keep the money paid out by EQC]. So, that's fine from EQC's position. We are absolutely happy for you to proceed along the path [of repairing the property by Koyama without any involvement of EQC nor Southern Response]. That purpose of my call is simply to let you know, ah, what Southern Response has said on the bearings as well. Ah, as far as EQC is concerned, ah, that, that will be absolutely fine, and you are happy to manage your own repairs with the money that you received, and, then, we are happy to let it stay there.” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3Rhd HN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NWFiM2NjYjRlOTE3ODM5Nw
- Therefore, it is obvious from the call from EQC on 13 February 2014 that there was NO onsite assessment on the damages on the property on or around 12 February 2014.
3. Southern Response FALSELY stated in “Response by defendant,” dated “22 May 2014,” more than 3 months after “12 February 2014,” during the district proceeding CIV-2014-012- 186, following:
“Second EQC Assessment 4.12 On 26 August 2013, EQC sent the defendant [Southern Response] a batch of reassessed claims which included a file note relating to the plaintiffs’ claim. The file note said, ‘[a]s result of reviewed settlement this claim is now under CAP’. EQC had completed a further, paper-based review of the damage to the House on 29 March 2012 and had determined that the First EQC Assessment was incorrect and the total repair costs were $45,915.67 (Second EQC Assessment).” https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3Rhd HN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NThhMGY4Njc5NGU1Y2E0ZA
- There was NO “paper-based review” on the damage on the House on 29 March 2012; there is NO record of the paper-based review on the damage on the House in the files from EQC and Southern Response on the claim.
- It was “impossible” to do the “onsite” assessment on the damage on the House on or around “12 February 2014,” if the assessment was done on or before “26 August 2013” as stated in “Response by defendant” which was more than 5 months ago.
4. I received the ONLY “onsite” FULL ASSESSMENT of the damages to the property at 15 Bounty Street, Bryndwr, Christchurch, done by Arrow International on behalf of AMI Insurance, which stated, “Grant Total House (including GST) $218,519.55,” attached; this information was received from Southern Response on 27 February 2015. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzaXRlc3Rhd HN1aGlrb2tveWFtYWRvY3VtZW50czR8Z3g6NzZiNjI0ZjRlZmMxNjkxZA
These facts, above, clearly establish that insurance fraud was committed by EQC and Southern Response on the claim.
This matter requires criminal investigation, due to the clear evidences that I adduced on the insurance fraud, committed by EQC and Southern Response, regarding the insurance claim.
Yours truly
Tatsuhiko Koyama, BA, Juris Doctor, PGDipHealSc, MHealSc
Enrolled Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand
17 Radnor Street, North East Valley, Dunedin 9010
TEL: (03) 473-7810
From: Leanne Stewart
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2018 5:15 PM To: mailto:[email protected] Subject: OIA complaint - Name of person who made settlement recommendation
Dear Mr Koyama
I have made some enquiries of EQC regarding your complaint about access to the name of the person who generated the settlement recommendation dated 12 February 2014.
I note that in response to your request dated 19 December 2014 for ‘all information’, EQC provided you with a copy of settlement recommendation file note which included the first name of the staff member.
This disclosure of the first name only was in accordance with the report generated by the Chief Ombudsman and Privacy Commissioner in December 2013 entitled “Information fault lines”. http://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/ckeditor_assets/attachments/300/information_faul t_lines_-_accessing_eqc_information_in_canterbury.pdf
You will see that on page 18 of that report there is a discussion about the withholding of staff names below 3rd tier managers. It was accepted that there were grounds under both the Official Information Act and the Privacy Act to withhold these names when they appear in claim file documentation.
Accordingly, unless you consider that there is a particular reason why this approach was not appropriate in regard to this particular staff member’s name, the approach outlined in “Information fault lines” would apply.
EQC has confirmed that the names of the EQC staff members who had completed assessment reports following onsite scoping visits at the property have been disclosed to you.
I trust this advice resolves this particular complaint.
Kind regards
Leanne Stewart
Senior Investigator
Office of the Ombudsman | Tari o te Kaitiaki Mana Tangata
DDI 04 462 7846 | Phone 04 473 9533 | Fax 04 471 2254
Email [email protected] | www.ombudsman.parliament.nz
PO Box 10152, Level 7, SolNet House, 70 The Terrace, Wellington
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email may be confidential or legally privileged. It is intended solely for the recipient or recipients named in this message. Please note that if you are not the intended recipient you are not authorised to use, copy or distribute the email or any information contained in it. If you have received this email in error, please advise the sender immediately and destroy the original message and any attachments.
IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email may be confidential or legally privileged. It is intended solely for the recipient or recipients named in this message. Please note that if you are not the intended recipient you are not authorised to use, copy or distribute the email or any information contained in it. If you have received this email in error, please advise the sender immediately and destroy the original message and any attachments.