More on Julian Batchelor's retaining wall:

This photo shows the damage to the trees and vegetation, Batchelor chopped down the historic pohutukawa tree and has erected a garish 'Christmas tree' instead.

The original retaining wall Mr Batchelor erected, which soon collapsed.  The shoddy standard of work is clearly apparent

The wall collapsed, taking the land with it.  At the same time, the road in front of the property collapsed, falling onto the beach.

Here is the link to Julian Batchelor's application for resource consent to "construct a retaining wall within the road and boundary set up." (sic)

Note Mr Batchelor only lists a Post Office box and writes "NA" - not applicable in the space where he is required to provide another address.

The Far North District Council gave "verbal consent" to Mr Batchelor, whereupon Mr Batchelor took the liberty of carrying out a considerable amount of vandalism and destruction, which was done without consent - the "verbal consent" applied to unspecified minor repairs, not the large scale earthworks which were actually carried out.

Here is the link to the letter the Council sent him requiring him to provide more information, specific information, by the 4th December 2015, according to section 92 of the Resource Management Act.  Mr Batchelor hasn't provided any of it, showing a further blatant disregard for due process or the law, and Council are now saying that that they are "trying to get hold of Mr Batchelor and speak with him but are unable to get hold of him."

Formal requests have been made to Council to issue a Stop Work Notice immediately pending further consultation with tangata whenua and local hapu and further investigation by Council and independent engineers into the damage done to the land and surrounding areas and the significant environmental and cultural effects.

Formal application for stop work notice to be served on Julian Batchelor:

Te komiti o nga Kaitiaki o Opourua me Araaka me Hauai have requested that the Far North District Council issue Julian Batchelor with a Stop Work Notice and Abatement Notice and ensure that he ceases the works and developments he is carrying out on the property at 147 Rawhiti Road at Hauai because of serious damage to the surrounding environment and the effect of this damage on the local people, as well as breaches of Far North District Council bylaws.

Above is an image on Mr Julian Batchelor's slick website, this is one example of the scope of Mr Batchelor's plans for not only the land he occupies, which is under Treaty claim and should have been returned to iwi by the former occupier as Mr Batchelor is well aware, but his plans to control access to and exclusive use of everything in sight including the track to Rakaumangamanga which currently under Department of Conservation management.  Mr Julian Batchelor has also taken the liberty of renaming everything in sight too, including our maunga tapu Rakaumangamanga (which he and others refer to as "Cape Brett"), our moana, Opourua, which he (and others) have renamed "Oke Bay", among other taonga and cultural heritage.  Not only is this disrespectful in the extreme, it would seem to be illegal.  The recent earthworks certainly are.

REQUEST TO FNDC FOR INFORMATION REGARDING BATCHELOR'S UNCONSENTED WORKS:

Far North District Council

6 December 2015

Tena koutou katoa,

This is to confirm our request made verbally to Kyra earlier this afternoon for all information regarding resource consent application number 2160177-RMALUC for147 Rawhiti Rd by Julian Batchelor, and all information regarding all other applications for resource consent applications for this property and any of Mr Batchelor's other properties at Rawhiti. 

In particular, and with urgency, we request all information which Mr Batchelor was required to provide to the Far North District Council by 4th December 2015 regarding the application referred to above, and clarification as to whether or not Mr Batchelor actually had proper consent or not when he went ahead with recent major earthworks etc on the property.

Would you please confirm today whether or not Mr Batchelor provided all the information required by the due date, and provide it and the other information as soon as possible.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Katherine Raue
Te Komiti o te Kaitiaki o Opourua

Justice system - what justice system?

The decision of Brown J is still not on the Ministry's website despite the public interest in the decision.

That's hardly surprising considering what the decision actually says.

The decision is embedded below but can also be accessed at this link for easier viewing.

The New Zealand government is held in contempt overseas as well as on home ground for the manner in which they have manipulated the miners and their families, the money, the propaganda, and everything that's gone with it, toying with the baubles of office, telling tall stories, playing with so many lives.

This is a dangerous precedent and can not be allowed to go unchallenged.

Worksafe prosecuted Peter Whittall, not the Crown Prosecutor, 'Worksafe' - the former Department of Labour - the very people who should have been standing in the dock alongside Peter Whittall.  The real reason the charges were dropped, as we all know, is because it was clearly apparent that Whittall's evidence was going to incriminate the prosecutor - Worksafe.  

Para 31 looks at whether the prosecution decision was reviewable and talks about whether prosecutorial discretion was exercised or not - but crucially, not whether it was exercised PROPERLY, or fairly, or in an ethical manner.

This is why there is so much injustice and why the Ombudsmen and other agencies dealing with complaints are swamped with them, because the so called justice system is seriously dysfunctional and one of the main reasons for that is the difficulty in having prosecutorial decisions judicially reviewed.

The decision refers to precedents which established that prosecutorial decisions should only be subject to judicial review if they are in regard to abuse of process.  This case certainly seems to fit the bill in that department . . .

In paragraph 42 Brown J states "I do not consider that the impugned process is of such gravity that the high level of restraint should be relaxed and judicial review permitted."  Twenty nine men are dead.  What exactly does constitute "gravity" in his book I wonder?

The simple fact is this, if the Police or the Crown Prosecutors make the decision to prosecute they should get it right BEFORE they lay the charge, not after, and certainly not after making some dirty little back room Pontius Pilate deal like this one.  Otherwise, they should be subject to judicial review - especially after they lay a charge and then withdraw it or offer no evidence. 

Poor wee Joseph.  Look at him, full of hope for the future, all he wanted was a job, full of trust, we should be demanding accountability for Joseph and the other men - look at this young man - barely more than a child, and killed inside a mine that everyone knew was a time bomb!

And have a look at the ladder - the emergency exit - what a joke!  The shaft collapsed during construction, the whole mine was an utter death trap and a catastrophe just waiting to happen.

Related links are here.

Recommended reading - Rebecca Macfie's book - Tragedy at Pike River Mine

At this link is an unrelated example of a seriously flawed and blatantly and indisputably corrupt prosecutorial decision of similar magnitude, which also shows how even the threat of judicial review was enough to make the prosecutor think again, suddenly announce they intend offering no evidence and run for the hills.  In order for there to be justice and transparency in New Zealand prosecutorial decisions must be subject to  review.  This site's full of such examples - must make a new label - never enough hours in the day - this post will be updated, but is being published now due to public interest in the decision.

Karakia me te waiata tino aroha nui

Te Komiti o te Kaitiaki o Opourua is committed to bringing healing, to bringing peace through truth and love, with the guidance of our tupuna, atua, kuia me kaumatua, me waiata.

Getting away with murder - Open letter from the family of Murray Christensen:

 Dear All - (from Murray's sisters - Lynette Stevens and Sandra Heke)

Lynette and I are seeking your help. We've turned to Social Media to get our message out there. I am genuinely worried about our situation and especially for Lynette, who co-incidentally? had her car windscreen broken this week outside her house when they were out on Christmas morning).

We are asking for your help in seeking justice for our brother, Murray who was killed at his workplace 11/11/11. If you could like and share this, it would help us to know as many kiwis as possible know of our situation and what we are trying to do. We all want to feel proud when we talk about 'home' and what it means to be a kiwi. One thing I think is clear about Kiwis is that we all hate 'injustices' and our desire to seek an end to any is strong. So this is why 'Murray's story' needs to be told. If all of us can fight corruption - there will be no corruption. We extra'ordinary' kiwis can only fight corruption and injustices with information so this is Murray's story:-

Murray went to work in Koheroa Road, Mercer, South Auckland on 11/11/11 but never returned home (to his then 9 year old daughter). He worked for the Balle Bros - (there's many of them and previous to working for them, worked for James Chapman). They all own many businesses and entities in South Auckland/Waikato, including Pukekohe, Mercer, Pukekawa etc etc etc). The 'Company' have so many entities, in fact, and their businesses are so complex, that 3 years after Murray's workplace death, the correct entity to be prosecuted for Murray's death has still not been identified, and Worksafe have told our family, it is very unlikely that will ever happen. But I'm digressing because that's another story (still, can you believe that in New Zealand in 2014 that there is such a gap which allows a company to avoid prosecution for a workplace death?).

Lynette has always 'felt' there was something 'very wrong'. You see, she went up to the site on the Monday, (he died on a Friday), after Murray died to get some CD's out of his car for the funeral. The farm managers wife was there and told Lynette she heard yelling and abusing from Murray at the time he died and a 'WHOA WHOA WHOA'. One of the 'bros', (who later in the court case, Police vs Karl Lobb said he was the spotter but wasn't looking at the time of the accident but said Murray must have slipped and fell and was run over by the bulldozer because he had "like a sixth sense, um yeah, a sixth sense"), but that day when Lynette and Roger and another witness went up to the farm, he told Lynette he wasn't there at all. Um? So which one was it? Were you ACTUALLY there or not JB?

It has taken our family a while to start asking questions. It's only now we have the strength to 'fight this'. Those of you who know us, know that Dad died six months after Murray, heartbroken, really. Dad was sick with emphysema but we truly believe his death was precipitated by the stress of Murray's death. Mum had to move from Palmerston North to Auckland to be near, Lynette, Ken and Murray's daughter, (who misses her beloved Daddy so much). Lynette has 'nursed' Roger through cancer and a subsequent heart attack. I've just finished my breast cancer treatment and prior to that was assaulted whilst doing my job as a bus driver. Yes, it's been an horrific period but I'm not being so transparent to seek sympathy - rather to explain its BECAUSE our family have endured so much, it has had the opposite effect - and that is - it has strengthened our resolve. It gives you perspective too. Family is everything and that's why I know you will all understand when I say, "if it was your brother/son/father, what would you do?"

We have in our possession TWO pathology reports by the ONE pathologist, Dr Jane Vuletic, - there are different causes of death on each report. The two reports are dated THREE months apart. Murray was cremated the day of his funeral - only 1 day after the Serious crash Unit Investigator had stated he had not slipped and run over as 'everyone else' including the pathologists' first report was trying to claim. We got hold of the court transcripts of the Police vs Karl Lobb court case and we learn that the Serious Crash Unit investigator told the Patholgist Murray was crushed, not that he had slipped and because the Pathologist then was most likely forced to change to the correct cause of death, she 'disappeared' and was not even available to give evidence by video link. (She disappeared to Newcastle, NSW and we have laid complaints to the relevant authorities to ensure she never practises in either country again). This comprised the prosecution so our family were forced to accept a 'restorative meeting' with *KL*, the bulldozer driver who crushed Murray between his digger and the bulldozer. (With regards to Dr Jane Vuletic, try googling - Kahui twins trial + Dr Jane Vuletic - this medical 'expert' was questioned by Dr Ferris - check what she DIDN'T do which compromised that prosecution).

In our endeavours to seek answers and justice for Murray, witnesses have started to talk. We know the 'brothers' were 'very unhappy when the Pathologist changed the cause of death - so then she is unavailable for the court case? hmmm. And the farm managers wife, KW, (who has just rung us today trying to recant on her statements to us? Why? Someone is *warning her off*?), why she was never even interviewed by the Police in the first instance! Why not Counties Manuaku? Or the neighbour who was a volunteer fireman and turned up with his truck and who Worksafe tell us they have no record of him being there? So what WAS he doing there? But hang on, we rang the Mercer fire station and they said they had a call but it was cancelled and they were told they weren't needed. So Mercer don't have any record of the Company's neighbour/their volunteer? being there either? So it must have been the ambulance called first, right? Well no - So who was first to the site? Oh, that was a daughter of one of the brothers, supposedly as the 'health and safety officer' of the 'Brothers' company. The daughter, (RC), who we now find out, rang the Dept of Labour at 2:45 pm and told them'she was on her way to the accident where there was a possible fatality" when the farm managers wife told Lynette that this same daughter was first on the site. The farm managers wife knew who arrived and in what order because she was there all day and asked another mother to pick up her children from school and keep them away from the site because there had been a bad accident. Maungatawhiri school finishes at 2:30!!! So, back to the Police - Counties Manukau - why weren't these witnesses questioned? Why weren't they called in the pathetically inadequate court case? We've given you their information and still not?

We've also given them some more information because in trying to seek answers about Murray, a connection, or two!, to the CREWE murders in Pukekawa came up. (For those of you, too young, ask someone older and they'll know - one of the most well know unsolved murders in New Zealand.) Check out the Police Crewe Homicide Review finished only this year - go to Page 124 - see the conflicting statements 10 years apart of one 'Karl Lobb'. (One and the same man who crushed Murray!). Turns out most of the 'brothers', Chapman, Lobb, Thomases' Crewes, Stuckey, all have 'quite some history together' in South Auckland and the Policeman from Counties Manukau who was 'supposedly' overseeing Murray's case, well he was 'involved' in the police Crewe Homicide Review as well! He couldn't find anything wrong with Murray's case??!!

And there was, supposedly, nothing new that came out of the Police Homicide Review either. (Just for your info - Note - Lawyer Peter Williams, QC, who represented Arthur Allan Thomas at the Royal Commission, said "the whole case just reeks and reeks of Police corruption" and is disappointed by the findings. Meanwhile, Mr Mike Bush, Police Commissioner says "the review findings add to his regrets about having spoken at the funeral of Mr Hutton - the Policeman who perverted the course of justice by planting evidence implicating Arthur Allan Thomas)", praising him as an officer whose integrity was BEYOND REPROACH.

Now, back to Murray's case.

There were apparently no notes taken by Police when they arrived at the accident?

The first Dept of Labour investigator who arrived at the site later that day on the 11/11/11, was replaced on the 14/11/11 by another. TMcG, wrote her report claiming Murray 'had been run over'. We now have information that the Pathogist agreed to this 'cause of death' without even seeing Murray? (Surely not?), and Murray was cremated the day of his funeral and BEFORE she changed the 'cause of death' THREE months later. We know this TMcG rang a Solicitor at some stage, (why? - Did she begin to realise the implications?) and was told by that Solicitor that there was a 'conflict of interest'? Hmmm, and so rang a Dept of Labour solicitor. She is no longer with MBIE (used to be DOL). She did not appear in the court case, Police vs Kark Lobb. Why not?

The Serious Crash unit weren't invited up there until FOUR days after Murray was killed and only a day before Murray's funeral and cremation.

That Serious Crash Unit Investigator, (who was the ONLY one who stated Murray was crushed and whom we believe acted with integrity by stating to the Pathogist "there was no way he was run over - can't see any tread marks on him"), had to take a year off after Murrays case and moved from Counties Manukau to Taupo! hmmm.

When we relayed information to the Police about the Crewes, (being the transparent kiwis the Hon Amy Adams, Justice Minister, talks about in her latest Media release), the Police Commissioner who had originally sent Murray's file to Hamilton, suddenly detected an 'admin problem', and the file HAS to be sent back to Counties Manukau who are the very people who 'mishandled' Murray's case in the beginning and since. And the Detective who was 'handling' Murrays case and couldn't find anything wrong with it, well, he NEED'S it back. (Hence we are now 'putting 'Murrays story' out there' - we need to know you all know - better to be safe than sorry).

We still don't know who or at what time, if any, an ambulance was called, as Murray lay dying at his workplace. (We've been told he was still alive after the 'crushing'). Do you know how that makes us feel knowing Murrays best interests were not the focus that day as he lay there dying at his workplace?

Murray's upper clothing which lay beside his body (and yes we have had to witness that too in court - can you imagine what that was like for mum?), has 'mysteriously' disappeared after making the police photo and before the court case. The 'brother' who we now know perjured himself in court, tried to sway the court that that clothing would show Murray slipped and that he was run over but oh, he didn't know where they were or who took them.

This company has in effect, paid their way out of being held accountable for a workplace death. Wonder who paid for the best lawyer for KL? (That lawyer was GF - who acted for one of the three DOT COM defendants). Wonder if this lawyer was paid by you, the Taxpayer, or was it the 'Company'? My mum can't get legal aid to find out what happened to her youngest when he died at his workplace - No - it seems Mum doesn't 'fit the criteria' even though she lives in a mobile home in a caravan park, (in amongst all the Company's many farms). Ironic isn't it?!!! but Mum felt the need to be close to her granddaughter who also lives in the area.

Oh and check out one Solvent action of 'Mercer Ferry Properties No 5 Ltd' - all the directors being 'the brothers' who employed Murray - this entity was struck off after Murray's death. (The police homicide review tied the Crewe murders to the Thomas'es 'Mercer Ferry Road farm'. The Thomas farm where police evidence against Thomas had been forged). Maybe the 'brothers' wanted to avoid the possibility of any connection with Lobb in both Murrays case and the very old unsolved Crewe murder case which the Police have only just finished 'reviewing'? But what they didn't reckon on was that there would be two persistent sisters who want our brother to rest in peace. Some of these farmers know 'more' but they reckon it's 'better to let sleeping dogs lie".

That'incident report' - written by the 'daughter' - was reviewed by 'Safewise' owner -the Dept of Labour didn't have any record of her being there that day but they did her husband? At what capacity was he there?

For our whanau - (Love you all so much)!The 'brothers'made special note of the fact they had had the local Kaumatua to bless the site where Murray died. But we've asked and now believe it didn't happen at all? Maybe some of you might know if this happened? Because this Heke family weren't invited, or Murray's mum? Or brother? Or his sister Lynette or Murray's little daughter maybe? And then, these 'brothers' go and name the road where Murray died, "Murray Christensen" road. Maybe they 'felt better' but can you imagine my mother and Lynette's shock when they drove past and they hadn't been notified. I mean how much is this family supposed to take?

Thank you for supporting us in seeking justice for Murray. It was never our intention to do anything but act with transparency and we have, in hindsight, naively thought we would be accorded the same treatment by all Authorities, the Company and MP's etc.  It hasn't been afforded us at all. In fact, our worse fears have been realised and then some, after witmesses have started to talk - there is a cover-up of monumental proportions and indisputable evidence of serious corruption involved in covering up Murray's murder.

There is another person who deserves answers too - Rochelle Crewe.

Please help us all in seeking transparency and justice for Murray. That is all we have ever wanted and that should never be too much to ask especially in a country like NZ where Transparency International voted them No 2 in the world, only behind Denmark, in the least 'perceived' corrupt and for transparency. Well Murrays case is as clear as mud and the murky depths are frightening.  The public are being conned by the media trumpeting about Transparency International and their focus on the PERCEPTION of corruption - the PERCEPTION of the world is carefully controlled by the media and those who fund them.

We had a meeting with Worksafe, they came from Wellington to Auckland, their CEO and their Chief Inspector. They admitted 'failings'. We have contacted all the relevant MP's, the Solicitor-General, Transparency International, the Attorney General and many more.

To finish - maybe the 'Company' felt better after their apology in a letter stating, "we are sorry Murray was hurt that day.

Hurt? Really?

Murray was not just hurt, he was KILLED.  By a man who had repeatedly threatened to kill him, which establishes a case to answer for a charge of premeditated murder.

My poor mum - Her son is killed, her husband dies heartbroken, she moves to another city, away from her family home, to support her granddaughter, the young girl who lost her beloved daddy.  Mum has had to witness a photo of her son lying dead at his workplace, after he went to work on his day off for a co-worker who had cancer, her son-in-law is diagnosed with cancer and has a subsequent heart attack, a daughter gets assaulted at work, and gets breast cancer, her other son has been suicidal after suffering the loss of his brother, (they were SO close)), her daughter gets her car window smashed in, she goes past a road (erected without her knowledge), named after her son at the site where he died and where she was not invited to the blessing - but hey, she got her apology said the Company. ("Sorry Murray was hurt that day") - what more do you want?" - Justice, actually - that's all we've ever wanted.

Henry Rongomau Bennett Centre - Lunatics running the asylum:

If the regional mental health facility, the Henry Rongomau Bennett Centre, wasn’t already a circus, it soon will be when ringmaster and Director of Mental Health, John Crawshaw send’s in the clowns for another token inspection to ascertain why this service is failing so miserably.

And what a dismal track record this outfit has.

In 2010 Christine Morris scaled the security fence and bludgeoned her neighbour, Diane White, to death. Coroner Peter Ryan recommended that the DHB erect a higher fence, Clinical Director of the Henry Bennett Centre, Rees Tapsell refused.

In 2013, it was reported that psychiatrist Paul Fox, who had been de-registered in the USA for sexual misconduct, and was the former clinician for the Sandy Hook Elementary School mass murderer Adam Lanza was employed by the DHB. Fox was de-registered in NZ by the Medical Council in February 2014.

In March 2015 Nicky Stevens, known to be suicidal, was allowed to leave the wards for an unsupervised cigarette break, despite the families’ pleas to keep him safe. Nicky’s body was recovered from the Waikato River three days later.

The following month two patients with a history of violence scaled the security fence and fled the city.

More recently it was discovered that a man gained employment with Waikato Mental Health Services posing as a psychiatrist. Mohamed Shakeel Siddiqui has been arrested and charged with obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception.

It certainly is quite a pitiful rap sheet for a service designed to care for and protect a very vulnerable group within the community.

Should we really be surprised though? Are the lunatics in fact running the asylum? It seems so;
In addition to the dubious hiring practices highlighted by the examples above, one member of staff who understands forensic Mental Health treatment first hand is Peer Support Worker Trudi Tapsell, yes sister of Clinical Director Rees Tapsell.

She was once a special patient herself, detained under the Mental Health Act. Ms Tapsell, as a 26 year old, was found not guilty by reason of insanity of the brutal murder of her grandmother, whose decapitated body was found wrapped in plastic bags in a freezer, her head was found in a rubbish bag nearby. Ms Tapsell, with the help of her brother, has now moved on from being the patient to being the clinician, working with a very vulnerable group of people.

Clearly her current employers know her background (given it is a family affair), but considering she carries no conviction for the murder of her grandmother, because Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity is an acquittal of sorts, is it not appropriate that in the interests of transparency and trust, the patients she works with, and their families, know her background?

One would think so, although unfortunately this is not the case.