Private prosecution for perjury against a solicitor
Discussion
Filed a private prosecution for perjury against a solicitor a couple of days ago (in New Zealand).
I don't see why such vile scum should get away with such things.
It's part of a long story. This solicitor swore on oath in an affidavit he was the sole shareholder in a small Ltd company, when in fact he was a 50% shareholder. The other 50% shareholder was the only director.
It was part of a scam to defraud the director out of £100,000. The solicitor also appointed himself as instructing solicitor for a court case, which the director was never informed about.
Fortunately the scam failed.
And Mr s
t for Brains never even paid for the shares.
Filing fee for a private prosecution here is £15, I'm going to have some fun over the next few months.
I don't see why such vile scum should get away with such things.
It's part of a long story. This solicitor swore on oath in an affidavit he was the sole shareholder in a small Ltd company, when in fact he was a 50% shareholder. The other 50% shareholder was the only director.
It was part of a scam to defraud the director out of £100,000. The solicitor also appointed himself as instructing solicitor for a court case, which the director was never informed about.
Fortunately the scam failed.
And Mr s
t for Brains never even paid for the shares.Filing fee for a private prosecution here is £15, I'm going to have some fun over the next few months.
caziques said:
Filed a private prosecution for perjury against a solicitor a couple of days ago (in New Zealand).
I don't see why such vile scum should get away with such things.
It's part of a long story. This solicitor swore on oath in an affidavit he was the sole shareholder in a small Ltd company, when in fact he was a 50% shareholder. The other 50% shareholder was the only director.
It was part of a scam to defraud the director out of £100,000. The solicitor also appointed himself as instructing solicitor for a court case, which the director was never informed about.
Fortunately the scam failed.
And Mr st for Brains never even paid for the shares.
Filing fee for a private prosecution here is £15, I'm going to have some fun over the next few months.
I have a friend that lives in New Zealand, from what he tells me it's a great place for activities.I don't see why such vile scum should get away with such things.
It's part of a long story. This solicitor swore on oath in an affidavit he was the sole shareholder in a small Ltd company, when in fact he was a 50% shareholder. The other 50% shareholder was the only director.
It was part of a scam to defraud the director out of £100,000. The solicitor also appointed himself as instructing solicitor for a court case, which the director was never informed about.
Fortunately the scam failed.
And Mr s
t for Brains never even paid for the shares.Filing fee for a private prosecution here is £15, I'm going to have some fun over the next few months.
Based on your post I don't quite believe him now...
caziques said:
Filed a private prosecution for perjury against a solicitor a couple of days ago (in New Zealand).
I don't see why such vile scum should get away with such things.
It's part of a long story. This solicitor swore on oath in an affidavit he was the sole shareholder in a small Ltd company, when in fact he was a 50% shareholder. The other 50% shareholder was the only director.
It was part of a scam to defraud the director out of £100,000. The solicitor also appointed himself as instructing solicitor for a court case, which the director was never informed about.
Fortunately the scam failed.
And Mr st for Brains never even paid for the shares.
Filing fee for a private prosecution here is £15, I'm going to have some fun over the next few months.
How are costs dealt with over there? It's all fun and games paying £15 to file the prosecution - less fun if you lose and have to sell your house to pay the costs.I don't see why such vile scum should get away with such things.
It's part of a long story. This solicitor swore on oath in an affidavit he was the sole shareholder in a small Ltd company, when in fact he was a 50% shareholder. The other 50% shareholder was the only director.
It was part of a scam to defraud the director out of £100,000. The solicitor also appointed himself as instructing solicitor for a court case, which the director was never informed about.
Fortunately the scam failed.
And Mr s
t for Brains never even paid for the shares.Filing fee for a private prosecution here is £15, I'm going to have some fun over the next few months.
Google suggests that a judge needs to approve a private prosecution in NZ. Not as simple as paying £15 and getting your target in court.
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2011/008...
Have the police failed to take action?
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2011/008...
Have the police failed to take action?
caziques said:
Filed a private prosecution for perjury against a solicitor a couple of days ago (in New Zealand).
I don't see why such vile scum should get away with such things.
It's part of a long story. This solicitor swore on oath in an affidavit he was the sole shareholder in a small Ltd company, when in fact he was a 50% shareholder. The other 50% shareholder was the only director.
It was part of a scam to defraud the director out of £100,000. The solicitor also appointed himself as instructing solicitor for a court case, which the director was never informed about.
Fortunately the scam failed.
And Mr st for Brains never even paid for the shares.
Filing fee for a private prosecution here is £15, I'm going to have some fun over the next few months.
How have you prosecuted a solicitor for perjury?I don't see why such vile scum should get away with such things.
It's part of a long story. This solicitor swore on oath in an affidavit he was the sole shareholder in a small Ltd company, when in fact he was a 50% shareholder. The other 50% shareholder was the only director.
It was part of a scam to defraud the director out of £100,000. The solicitor also appointed himself as instructing solicitor for a court case, which the director was never informed about.
Fortunately the scam failed.
And Mr s
t for Brains never even paid for the shares.Filing fee for a private prosecution here is £15, I'm going to have some fun over the next few months.
Perjury is a criminal offence not a civil tort.
There is no way of suing anyone for purjury, at least not in the UK. NZ law is very similar to UK law! Judges have persistently ruled against a civil tort of perjury!
If you have put information before a criminal court so that the state can take action for perjury against the solicitor how did you do it?.
How much does it cost?
Are you liable for costs of the case?
Wouldn't you better taking advice here first?
https://www.lawsociety.org.nz/for-the-community/la...
(NZ's equivalent of the SRA)
https://www.lawsociety.org.nz/for-the-community/la...
(NZ's equivalent of the SRA)
A good friend of mine has is willing to write a book about this individual - there is more than enough material.
Same solicitor tried to sue me as I repossessed an item of industrial equipment of him as he hadn't paid £25,000 - yes, he tried to sue me (and stole it back).
It's a private criminal prosecution, I suspect the crown solicitors will take over, although in NZ they don't have to.
There are a number of matters before various courts concerning other people and the same solicitor, as I said, there is far too much information for this forum.
The court will look at the file and accept it, ask for more information, or reject it. As there is a prima facie case of criminality I doubt it will be chucked out. There are another three criminal matters waiting in the wings in any case.
Same solicitor has also just liquidated a phoenix company, total shortfall from a turnover of £125,000 was £280,000 - almost all of it owed to himself! - reported to Inland Revenue as tax evasion (creating an artificial loss to avoid paying tax).
There is a possibility these matters will be big news.
If a member of a regulated profession has demonstrably done bad deeds, why not complain to the regulator? If you have a story to tell, why not tell it plainly and ditch all the hint-hint opacity? Otherwise, you might come across as one of those nutter litigants in person with a beef that may be legit or may be nutso. Are you planning to stand outside court houses with large home made banners blaming the Illuminati, and send lots of Petitions to the Queen, the Pope, Lord Lucan etc , or is that still a few years down the line?
PS: I am deliberately pulling your dangly bits. The thread is coming across as a bit Full-Loon at present. maybe it is not Full-Loon. Tell us the tale. Please note that a common misunderstanding of the sub judice principle, ie: the urban myth that a case before a court can never be discussed on the internet is, well, an urban myth. There are some limited and specific rules about media reporting of jury trials. That's all.
Broadly speaking, the rules tend to be similar (ish). The thing with the law in Commonwealth (or non Commonwealth but common law) countries is that it is usually pretty much the same as English law, until, er... it isn't. The trick is to notice when it stops being the same. The common law (one of the greatest things ever invented by those very annoying people the Anglo-Norman Brit whatevers) develops differently across the common law World, but because common law is more often than not also common sense, the divergences tend to be gradual and not all that huge. The US, being the first branch to split from the tree, is perhaps the most divergent system. New Zealand diverges notably on the law of negligence, for example, and has a whole bunch of stuff to do with Maoris and what not that are situationally specific, but is pretty much English stylee on things like perjury, contempt of court, and so on.
I'm not trying to do hint-hint stuff - there is a huge amount of material - way too much to try and explain it all.
The NZ Law Society are proving to be utterly useless, every complaint is always "no further action".
I sold a steel framing machine (makes steel framing for houses) to a Ltd company. 2012
s
t4brains solicitor gets involved a couple of months later, and proceeds to try and defraud various people and refuses to pay £25,000 for steel framing machine. Mid 2013I repossessed it. November 2013
He tries to sue me. November 2013
Steals machine back. November 2014 (civil matter according to police).
Court case settled Jan 2018. Pays me £5000.
Meanwhile everything is mixed up with shares being transferred illegally and unlawful receiverships.
So far s
t4brains has bankrupted two people, lost another court case, had a company liquidated that owed £280,000 etc etc etc.His first line of a sworn affidavit (in 2013) was "I am the sole shareholder of A Ltd" when he was only a 50% shareholder. A statement he knew to be untrue, that was relevant to the proceedings, and was intended to mislead the court- ie perjury.
Fortunately I have no assets, and bankruptcy (which is what he is trying to do in an attempt to shut me up (it's the Kiwi way)), will have almost zero effect on me.
I'm going to do everything I can to get him put inside for a few years.
Ask yourself, what benefit is it to me to invent stories about a corrupt solicitor? None, - he attacked me, I don't see why anyone, especially a solicitor with their unique privileges, should get away with fraud and perjury.
I have a few more private prosecutions lined up, just to make life interesting.
How was that false statement dealt with at court? It's easy enough to present the share breakdown of a ltd company.
If there's a legitimate wrong to right through the legal system, then that's one thing. If it's revenge / spite / 'principled' (the last line nods towards this) then that may not be the best way forward for various reasons.
Have you sought objective, competent legal advice?
If there's a legitimate wrong to right through the legal system, then that's one thing. If it's revenge / spite / 'principled' (the last line nods towards this) then that may not be the best way forward for various reasons.
Have you sought objective, competent legal advice?
Satellite and repeat litigation are generally discouraged by sensible courts. If you have won your cases and obtained remedies, well fine. What else do you want? If you think that the Regulator got it wrong, it is amenable to judicial review, but only on proper grounds.
Why are you telling us all this? As La Liga asks, have you taken advice?
A note: Courts do not exist to provide, and do not provide, any of the following:
1. Vengeance.
2. Moral vindication.
3. Peace and quiet of mind.
4. Closure.
5. Any other psychoblah stuff.
Picking at scabs makes them bleed and maybe go septic.
Why are you telling us all this? As La Liga asks, have you taken advice?
A note: Courts do not exist to provide, and do not provide, any of the following:
1. Vengeance.
2. Moral vindication.
3. Peace and quiet of mind.
4. Closure.
5. Any other psychoblah stuff.
Picking at scabs makes them bleed and maybe go septic.
caziques said:
...I'm going to do everything I can to get him put inside for a few years.
...a solicitor with their unique privileges,...
1. Likely outcomes - ...a solicitor with their unique privileges,...
(a) you will fail; and
(b) you will lose your mental health (assuming that you have not already lost it).
2. Solicitors have no unique privileges.
Breadvan72 said:
caziques said:
...I'm going to do everything I can to get him put inside for a few years.
...a solicitor with their unique privileges,...
1. Likely outcomes - ...a solicitor with their unique privileges,...
(a) you will fail; and
(b) you will lose your mental health (assuming that you have not already lost it).
2. Solicitors have no unique privileges.
Solicitors are uniquely privileged in NZ as the court always believes everything they say, and the Law Society in NZ only exists to protect their own.
.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff