ACCforum: Transcripts for Alan Thomas courtcases etc - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Transcripts for Alan Thomas courtcases etc

#1 User is offline   anonymousey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2420
  • Joined: 04-April 06

Posted 02 October 2016 - 08:53 PM

.
1

#2 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 04 October 2016 - 09:18 AM

View Postanonymousey, on 02 October 2016 - 08:53 PM, said:

Following some discussions with Alan today, I have just opened this simple thread as a way to keep some of the court transcipts together etc Hopefully this will ensure that we are both discussing the same alleged facts etc




ps I am not sure how many court transcripts exist currently ... but it appears less than two years ago on the afternoon of 10 December 2013 there was another heated discussion between Alan and other members about his conviction for Fraud and some Appeal ???


I am of the thought that the missing files should have been seen to be missing by Thomas and his counsel before this trial got underway.

The point of the Trigon contract is very important as the date would show that ACC knew or did not know about it at the time it is stamped as received by them. In which case, monies should have been deducted from his ACC as abatement.
From reading this I can see that I too would be very worried about the lack of ACC paperwork/files with meaningful doucments in them. BUT then I don't think I would be going into court without all of mine.

Because NTV had all/most of hers is why she won her case.

Any paperwork that shows bias against the claimant by the ACC is very important.

Thanks for giving us a read of this.

I can also understand the Judges confusion, as to what the calculation has to do with the case.

Mini
1

#3 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 04 October 2016 - 12:40 PM

From the day that the ACC issued the decision to cancel my claim and entitlements I had sought the missing information.

The ACC claimed under the privacy act that they were entitled to withhold the information because they wanted to Carry at a private criminal prosecution against me.

Obviously there is no possibility I could win in the criminal Court without the critical information that I needed to disprove. The conviction was therefore going to be a foregone conclusion. Many ACC claimants have suffered the same fate.

Immediately after the criminal Conviction ffound that they had to identify and provide the information required for the civil proceedings.

The court directed the ACC to release the information they claim to possess forming the basis of cancellation of claim in the criminal prosecution so the ACC asked for continued adjournments for the next 10 years from the date of the decision at which time the court gave them until September 2006. The ACC simply breached the district court direction without the court in enforcing its own order in my request that the court find a my favour immediately given that there was no accusation to answer.

Mini how do you imagine anybody can possibly succeed in any kind of appeal against any kind of accusation when the details of the accusation are not provided? Any ideas? Obviously I have gone through all of the conventional procedures to have a fair hearing with the system refusing to adhere to its own rules.. I see the same animalistic behaviour occurring amongst many of the members on this site whereby they simply want a lynching based on the accusation without a trial rather than of the actual facts in accordance with civilised and lawful principles.. recognising that they had descended into anarchy they then assumed that I would do likewise when imagining that they were going to be blown up because they think I am going to behave like they behave. People who are like-minded to that kind of mental disposition don't seem to see anything wrong with that.
0

#4 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 04 October 2016 - 03:18 PM

Now why would I want to be discussing the hernia injury during a criminal trial?

The issue is that the ACC had failed to disclose any of the file, had obtained a search warrant to seize my files and had not returned them to me does preventing me from mounting any kind of defence against whatever the ACC might be relying upon to form the basis of their private criminal prosecution of fraud. Remember what I am telling you and then you won't make the same mistakes again.. The ACC cancelling my claim without disclosing why and went to a fraud prosecution also without disclosing the basis for that prosecution.. At the criminal Prosecution prehearings the ACC did not provide any documents of any sort in the form of any sort of evidence to justify the trial. The trial judge even delayed the ACC private criminal prosecution for one week to enable the ACC to make disclosure which they did not apart from a small portion of the fraud collected items to the exclusion of all of the documentation that would have been useful for any kind of defence. The ACC even had given to the court a number of written out statements that were even signed and when those witnesses came to court to give evidence about those statements that were produced on their behalf it was found that those statements did not even relate to their answers. They did not even know what was written on their behalf. One of the ACC witnesses apparently kept on rejecting the ACC statements refusing to sign it is a continued to be incorrect right up until the court hearing and even then he still didn't sign it..

With regards to preinjury earnings of $38,000 that did not even remotely relate to even the part-time job as the part-time job income including fringe benefits just peaked over the top of the minimum amount allowed to be paid by ACC and that the ACC did not even bother counting my earnings from my self-employment activities which formed the primary earnings income which was many times greater than the part-time job. it does not serve you well when you simply guess at information based on the ACC misinformation. All you are doing is demonstrating what an idiot you are in your desperate enthusiasm of your job to disgraced me and impress your masters. Repeating the same role information ad nauseam as nauseous not to mention dishonest.

There has never been any official information from the ACC describing a single work task activity, any work task activities before my injuries nor after let alone any earnings before or after. I think what you have made the mistake of doing is reading the ACC media press release news items and have entirely neglected to read any of the exhibits going before the court. Remember that the ACC had no exhibits describing any work task activities or injuries nor provided any independent medical assessments of any sort to contradict the proof beyond reasonable doubt everybody else accepts as being irrefutable and its correctness..
-1

#5 User is offline   not their victim 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10829
  • Joined: 04-August 08

Posted 04 October 2016 - 03:34 PM

Absolute crock

Acc put me under PI

GP AUDITED ILLEGALLY

Photographed by pi with one arm in a sling and chipping concrete overlay off boxing for a new fence

So.....

Despite Acc setting the hounds onto me

No fraud charges have been laid

Why

Because the truth is the truth....

And the truth is you were convicted twice..
1

#6 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 09 October 2016 - 02:20 PM

View Postanonymousey, on 09 October 2016 - 02:08 PM, said:

As Alan is gaming another thread concerning the issue of transcripts ...I have transferred these comments here FYI



As you can see I have already placed up some legislation to show that I am seeing more correctness within the opinions from NTV once the wordgames from Alan are eliminated Posted Image



Alan

RE " I never provided those people the transcript"

So can I confirm that because you claim ^no responsibility^ regarding information disclosures - can I take it that you are now directly inferring that the NZ Courts has released copy of your court transcript to somebody without your permission??

Surely you realise that the courts will be able to immediately identify this USER ?


I can think of no circumstances where I would endorse your doing anything.
I cannot imagine why you would consider my opinion as being relevant. You seek my support to your speculations notwithstanding you continuously accuse me of misrepresentation.
I will not speculate who has possession of my transcripts,, how they got them all why they have them..

The court room was quite well attended including ACC for example who have had an appalling reputation of spreading my private information amongst significant numbers of people through to the media and a variety of legal professionals of which all clearly want to see whether or not it was possible to have someone convicted of a crime based on the recollections of a person who would confess to be drunk at the time while at the same time the judge wanted to make sure that another witness was not drunk in his court room giving evidence. I cannot see the difference whereby the judge accepted the recollections of a person who was drunk at the time they are referring to yet would not accept the evidence of a person giving of the evidence in the court while they were drunk. This of course represents a landmark in New Zealand criminal history which makes the transcripts of great interest to a large number of people including offshore interested parties.
0

#7 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 09 October 2016 - 03:33 PM


anonymousey



When you perceive an anomaly of what is written rather than draw your own conclusions it would be far better that you ask the author of a clarification an explanation between the anomalies that you are perceived. More often than not there will be a simple explanation and clarification for you not preventing you from compounding the difficulties you find yourself in.



0

#8 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 09 October 2016 - 03:44 PM


anonymousey



The reason why we have court hearings is for a judge to determine the facts. This of course is made difficult when people tell blatant lies to the judge. As the accused any hearing Starts with a plea of innocence or guilt. I pleaded not guilty. As I had no knowledge whatsoever of matters surrounding the allegations with the be ACC accusing me of working or planning to blow them up I can offer absolutely no evidence to the court. While I can hear lies been told to the court all I can do is sit back and relax and rely upon my statement of innocence. This in no way hinders my absolute and complete right to continue to proclaim my innocence which includes openly expressing my viewpoint that the judge has been lied to and the judges wrong in his decision. There is nothing wrong nor unusual about that and only a mentally deranged person with managed to perceive reality in a different way On the basis of a court decision. Observations of the judge admitting into evidence the recollection of a person claiming to recall matters while they were drunk while another witness coming before the judge to give evidence was checked to determine whether or not he was drunk at the time of giving evidence is normally worth commenting on, as did a very significant number of legal professionals. No one of course challenge the authority of the judge, including myself. To clarify that point my making an appeal against the judgement likewise would not be challenging the authority of the judge.. It is on this basis that I am fully within my rights of describing publicly where the judge went wrong. Likewise with the judgement of ACC fraud in the absence of a single work task activities at any material time or the ACC losing one single dollar is a horrendous inconsistency and speaks very loudly as to the judges competence particularly since the medical evidence was that there was no capacity to work at all while the ACC not providing one single shred of medical evidence that I could work for factual evidence that I did work. Therefore on what basis did the judge might be guilty if there was no evidence before him.



0

#9 User is offline   not their victim 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10829
  • Joined: 04-August 08

Posted 10 October 2016 - 09:00 AM

Netcoachnz...
under an assumed name of David Nicholas asked for the court transcript and was denied...

Its a known fact

Unless you appeal

You are not given the transcript...
0

#10 User is offline   Hemi 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2633
  • Joined: 05-January 12

Posted 10 October 2016 - 09:48 AM

View Postnot their victim, on 10 October 2016 - 09:00 AM, said:

Netcoachnz...
under an assumed name of David Nicholas asked for the court transcript and was denied...

Its a known fact

Unless you appeal

You are not given the transcript...

mr thomas would have transcripts then according to the accforum.org legal expert
0

#11 User is offline   not their victim 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10829
  • Joined: 04-August 08

Posted 10 October 2016 - 10:36 AM

Nope

They declined releasing them to ncnz

Keep up moron instead of being a 4 year mouthpiece of abuse ....

Too busy engaging the potty mouth and threats to use your moronic brain...
Or whats left of it
The other half must be lonely some days...
0

#12 User is offline   Hemi 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2633
  • Joined: 05-January 12

Posted 10 October 2016 - 12:04 PM

View Postnot their victim, on 10 October 2016 - 10:36 AM, said:

Nope

They declined releasing them to ncnz

Keep up moron instead of being a 4 year mouthpiece of abuse ....

Too busy engaging the potty mouth and threats to use your moronic brain...
Or whats left of it
The other half must be lonely some days...

im sure they would decline releasing them to netty
alan had appeal procedures in place so your irenes legal nouse of nope is more BULLSHIT from you irene
had you been honest and advised alan or the police that you had perverting the course of justice evidence available im sure you would have been interviewed on that evidence you ADMIT that YOU personally hold

NOTHING OF YOU AND YOU EVIDENCE AMONGST THE TRANSCRIPTS irene SO WHY HAVE YOU KEPT IT SECRET irene thats the big question asked of you now :o/>
0

#13 User is offline   not their victim 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10829
  • Joined: 04-August 08

Posted 10 October 2016 - 12:53 PM

Fuck off nutter butler

The 20k king of narksville

Go sell another dead friend to dermot...!
0

#14 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 15 November 2016 - 10:53 AM


anonymousey



I see that you and others, including a district Court judge, have been bamboozled by the ACC introducing all manner of irrelevancies when attempting to justify cancelling my claim and entitlements in 1997. The decision letter claim to possess information that I was working and that the information was in accordance with section 73 of the 1992 act.. How is this even remotely related to the criteria laid down by legislation..







Starting with section 73 the ACC may make a decision based on information in its possession but that information has nothing to do with "work".. 73 is referring to section 37 and 51. Section 37 is about the medical certificates and ongoing and capacity of which the ACC may validate from time to time by way of independent medical assessment. There is no other mechanism by which the ACC can generate their own section 37 information.. The other section, 51, is about the outcome of vocational rehabilitation into a new occupation. This section cannot possibly be relevant as my entitlement was contingent upon ongoing incapacity to return to the preinjury occupation by way of reconstructive surgery. This decision rremains binding upon all parties including the ACC and even the courts. Further as the ACC had been disobedient to the legislation by not creating regulations for the purposes of determining successful rehabilitation into a new occupation until November 1997 there is no possibility that the ACC had determined a successful rehabilitation into a new occupation as at August 1997. The judge agreed that section 51 could not possibly be relevant and the ACC even agreed with my presentation about this criteria..







This leave section 37 as to whether or not the ACC had carried out any assessment procedure to determine that I was no longer incapacitated and could safely return to my preinjury occupation. This is not something the judge can do is legislation instruction the ACC to have done this for the purposes of their decision. The only thing the judge can do is to determine whether or not be ACC had complied with the legislation. The ACC not only did not require any secondary medical opinion to challenge the medical certificates but they did not even submit anything remotely connected to the ACC legislation criteria concerning section 37. Initially the ACC even denied the decision was even connected to section 37 when they based their decision on section 73(1) thinking that the information could be related to "work". Oddly two months before the decision the ACC had suspended my earnings compensation Based on section 73 (2) because I had not carried out the assigned work in relation to vocational rehabilitation but then reinstated my compensation when being reminded that I had indeed carried out the work which they then related to section 73 (1).





As to the judge's decision to uphold the status quo after cancelling the ACC decision made his own decision based on section 37.. The judge determined that in order for the status quo to be maintained the only possible outcome was that the medical profession must have been deceived so the judge determined that I had also been deceiving him during a trial based on his 17 years of experience and a judge. So there we have it the judge determines that the medical profession is stupid and incompetent after relying upon CT and MRI scans including the surgeon who actually examine the insides of my body to confirm his diagnosis with the judge making is finding a medical fact based on his intuition concerning my beings a liar of such skill and prowess as to deceive the entire medical profession but not him and his medical expertise that determined it was safe for me to return to my preinjury occupation after being told by the ACC entirely different work task activities. There is no circumstantial whereby the judge can generate his own information by contradicting the medical profession and then making an outcome decision based on his own medical expertise as such behaviour would be ultra vires..



0

#15 User is offline   not their victim 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10829
  • Joined: 04-August 08

Posted 15 November 2016 - 01:28 PM

Bullshit

You can fool some of the people some of the time

Yet each of the medicos state:

Self reported....

No substantiating evidence....

The munchausen style
"doctor google research" has been disproven on many occassions...

By the medicos themselves...
0

#16 User is offline   tommy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1965
  • Joined: 21-September 05

Posted 15 November 2016 - 02:07 PM

in simplicity as in when a claimant does have an association in their pre injury employement, and in receipt of erc workers compo, and then whom monitors their inputs of work capacity , ie as in a sleeping partner or not , apart from maybe investigators etc tracking movements , and then presenting those for reference to the courts , asin if they are correct or not, as the higher percentage of claimants have been employed ,by an employer, which i believe the corporation has more control ,
0

#17 User is offline   tommy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1965
  • Joined: 21-September 05

Posted 15 November 2016 - 02:13 PM

you mention the 5 eyes ntv , will they work in conjunction with your minister to get the result you you believe those whom are are responsible to these actions which have been placed upon you
0

#18 User is offline   tommy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1965
  • Joined: 21-September 05

Posted 15 November 2016 - 02:23 PM

the forum , is ticking over , as usual , with the normal attack mode upon allan thomas , and nothing has changed, apart from when are these supposed convictions taking place , which ntv seems to relish in the fact of putting allan thomaas behind some instituion to justify her beliefs in his actions towards her , and may i add what were these death threats about and for what reasons ntv
0

#19 User is offline   tommy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1965
  • Joined: 21-September 05

Posted 15 November 2016 - 02:35 PM

and also i will add , any individual person etc , has a right to the forum , and issues of some are their personal issues, which should not disrupt this forum in my view
0

#20 User is offline   not their victim 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10829
  • Joined: 04-August 08

Posted 15 November 2016 - 02:42 PM

Ask alan

Hes the knowall....

And i never attacked alan thomas..with one l

Get your facts straight before making statements

I would not engage with alans whining

So he uplifted my posts and placed them into his thread to make it "look like" i was engaging with him

Wrong....

I dont consort with criminals or narcissists...nor was involved in his fantasy tagteam....

He was already under criminal process in 2007 early 2008.....

i didnt know of this place until aug 2008

Facts tommy

Get your facts straight and butt out if its nothing to do with you...
You like to poke all if alans commentary esp when it hasnt been touched for ages

Very provocative.....and stupid

He has been informed by acc thst even his complaints..
( whinging lies and obsession)
Will no longer be responded to...

Dont invite trouble...esp not on his behalf
0

Share this topic:


  • 3 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users