ACCforum: Remove Alan Thomas as a Member fron ACCForum.org. - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

Remove Alan Thomas as a Member fron ACCForum.org.

#1 User is offline   greg 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1136
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 09 January 2018 - 07:34 PM

Is there anyway members of this forum can expel this member for his constant lies
and mis-truths , he constantly offers while taking over every posting back to his failed claim.

Mr Thomas is a convicted criminal by NZ Courts .
5

#2 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8505
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 09 January 2018 - 08:15 PM

View Postgreg, on 09 January 2018 - 07:34 PM, said:

Is there anyway members of this forum can expel this member for his constant lies
and mis-truths , he constantly offers while taking over every posting back to his failed claim.

Mr Thomas is a convicted criminal by NZ Courts .

REPORTED
wrong in fact hate speech
0

#3 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1608
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 09 January 2018 - 08:32 PM

Should be able to be completed as other members have been expelled for there dishonesty against claimants
4

#4 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8505
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 09 January 2018 - 08:32 PM

Greg why would you, in your wildest dreams, think that the medical profession are incorrect.

Are you aware that the ACC have never once accused me of having a capacity to work?

Are you aware that the ACC's allegation was that I was working while incapacitated to work?

The ACC claim to possess information that I was working yet never provided a single piece of evidence to identify whether or not they actually had in the information or not. One thing is was certain they didn't disclose any information to any court, not once, not ever, even when the court directed the ACC to disclose the information they claimed to possess!

Greg why do you imagine in your wildest dreams that I have not been set upon by the ACC simply because the ACC did not want to pay for the expensive surgery that the reviewers had directed that they pay for and that they continue paying earnings compensation for the rest of my life if they don't pay for that surgery and that the surgery is successful to return me to my preinjury occupation..

Greg you are just a complete moron whereby you come on with your hate speech in some wild ridiculous plan to become popular on this site. Why do you have a need to attack someone to become popular? This is not the normal behaviour of a sane and rational person!

Greg you come on here with this high and mighty attitude yet you do nothing to help anybody. It is one thing to try and help people and fail but it is quite another thing to do the exact opposite where you actually try to make someone's life a misery and do all you can to unto all the good that many of us do in our little group. Shame on you as you have become as monstrous as those that we speak against to the extent that we can only conclude that you are suffering from the same problem as some of the ACC are suffering from whereby they make ridiculous allegations of fact without any information and then punish all around them when they find that they cannot sustain the illusion that they seek to create..
0

#5 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8505
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 09 January 2018 - 08:34 PM

View Postdoppelganger, on 09 January 2018 - 08:32 PM, said:

Should be able to be completed as other members have been expelled for there dishonesty against claimants


It would be preferable that we continue to help Greg with his problems.


Greg is making dishonest allegations against me and of course that is against the rules of the site which is the reason why I have reported him. Obviously be keeps this up he will suffer from increasing periods of time out until for all intents and purposes as membership is cancelled.
1

#6 User is offline   Hemi 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1506
  • Joined: 05-January 12

Posted 10 January 2018 - 06:27 AM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 09 January 2018 - 08:34 PM, said:

It would be preferable that we continue to help Greg with his problems.


Greg is making dishonest allegations against me and of course that is against the rules of the site which is the reason why I have reported him. Obviously be keeps this up he will suffer from increasing periods of time out until for all intents and purposes as membership is cancelled.


Thomas
You have been Judged by the Courts and found Guilty Fraud against ACC and in your words the first convicted for planning to Blow up the ACC and anyone in the vicinity,under the new revamped laws of NZ ,now inclusive of terrorism activity -after 9/11
You also daily ,have been judged by your peers in here
On both accounts you should take the hint and withdraw from this site as you ARE THE ONE CREATING ALL THE PROBLEMS

Hemi
pp
Your rhetoric mannerisms as published is merely only your excuses [NEVER PROVIDE TO THE COURTS Posted Image/>as opposed to the courts decisions apon/AGAINST you so you could respond more properly to greg and show conclusive documented proof of what at the present time can only be FALSE excuses FROM YOU.and that proof is Something you have been UNABLE to do for over 25 years.
3

#7 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8505
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 10 January 2018 - 07:49 AM

View PostHemi, on 10 January 2018 - 06:27 AM, said:

Thomas
You have been Judged by the Courts and found Guilty Fraud against ACC and in your words the first convicted for planning to Blow up the ACC and anyone in the vicinity,under the new revamped laws of NZ ,now inclusive of terrorism activity -after 9/11
You also daily ,have been judged by your peers in here
On both accounts you should take the hint and withdraw from this site as you ARE THE ONE CREATING ALL THE PROBLEMS

Hemi
pp
Your rhetoric mannerisms as published is merely only your excuses [NEVER PROVIDE TO THE COURTS Posted Image/>as opposed to the courts decisions apon/AGAINST you so you could respond more properly to greg and show conclusive documented proof of what at the present time can only be FALSE excuses FROM YOU.and that proof is Something you have been UNABLE to do for over 25 years.


ACC initiated a private criminal prosecution for fraud based on their allegation that they possessed information I was working. ACC have now acknowledged in the High Court that they have committed perjury.

The fact remains that prior to being injured I was an earner and can no longer earn because of my injuries. This fact is generated not by myself but rather by the most highly qualified medical professionals in their particular fields in the country.. Anyone putting forward an alternative opinion without relevant qualifications and experience at all much less periods of these qualifications demonstrate themselves to be not only arrogant but suffering from a detachment from reality which is otherwise recognised as a mental disorder Or gread and dishonesty.

It is not for me to prove the ACC and others allegations to be wrong but rather is up to those people to prove their allegations. Any more on can make up anything and say anything without regard to the moral high ground or truth. It is their arrogance the drives them to believe that I must prove them wrong. That is not how an orderly society like New Zealand who has rules of law operates and it is arrogant for these people to think that they are above the law.

This site would not have existed without myself.

ACC do not like this site

Douglas weal, Kenneth Miller and their close and personal friends set up an opposition side to this one while attempting to unlawfully transfer intellectual property and membership from the site to their own but were caught red handed with the result that they accused me of planning to blow up the opposite investigating Douglas weal for fraud. Douglas weal offered himself as a conduit to the ACC with the result that the ACC thought they could kill two birds with one stone thus a second conviction being a cheap based on information the ACC knew to be false.

A variety of disenfranchised morons such as David Butler (yourself) like these other fellows seek to make a name for themselves by repeating the same nonsense over and over despite the originators of such nonsense acknowledging it to be untrue.. Why do these morons behave in such a way we can never know except that they are somewhat detached from reality and have personality disorders.

Why did the ACC commit perjury. That is it obvious to any person participating in the site as they themselves have fallen victim to ACC generating false information for their own financial gain knowing that information to be going through the courts with the result that the ACC are aware that they are committing perjury for financial gain.

Without ACC dishonesty this site would never exist.

If you want the site to shut down or even to shut myself down you need to solve the ACC dishonesty..
-2

#8 User is offline   Brucey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8132
  • Joined: 26-January 07
  • LocationEarth

Posted 10 January 2018 - 10:37 AM

I agree that he should be booted off, after he supported and backed up those other two trolls that were recently removed. clearly of the same ilk.
He is a lying twice convicted criminal who is giving false and misleading advice and attaching himself to almost every thread, thus taking it off subject and into his own little delusional never never land.
5

#9 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8505
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 10 January 2018 - 11:29 AM

View PostBrucey, on 10 January 2018 - 10:37 AM, said:

I agree that he should be booted off, after he supported and backed up those other two trolls that were recently removed. clearly of the same ilk.
He is a lying twice convicted criminal who is giving false and misleading advice and attaching himself to almost every thread, thus taking it off subject and into his own little delusional never never land.


Brucey first of all this is not a democracy and there is no voting of any sort let alone anyone off. If you feel I have broken forum rules for them report the matter to admin.

I have no idea what you are trying to accuse me of re-"supported and backed up those other two trolls that were recently removed". Please identify what you think the problem is by providing specific information.

If you believe I have told a lie how about identifying what you think that lie is. I did not work and I did not hatch a plan to harm ACC. Those to accusations originated from one person with the ACC seeking to take advantage of that person on each occasion.
Do you have any information that describes any single work task activity in any material time?
Do you believe for one moment that I would threaten ACC with arm to frighten those who seek to investigate Douglas weal for fraud?
Do you really believe that the ACC would not stoop to tell lies to cover over their own perjury and the courts?

If you believe I have provided any kind of misleading advice you need to take advantage of the nature of this forum by expressing your own opinion. Multitudes of opinions that are supported by fact, logic and law Benefits everybody but if you to simply rant and rave you are of no use to anybody..

I think you'll find that's on the majority of occasions when I make a posting with my opinion regarding any topic that others will come along and attack me personally as if I have discussed something other than the topic in the thread. That seems to be the modus operandi of the tagteam which seems to include yourself.

One thing is for certain and that is I am never delusional.. I am well grounded and give well thought out opinions based on points of law and facts as they relate to those laws.
2

#10 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7362
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 10 January 2018 - 11:59 AM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 09 January 2018 - 08:15 PM, said:

REPORTED
wrong in fact hate speech


He is telling the truth Alan Thomas and backed them up with the truth from you own online.

BUT the problem is you are taking over every thread with your tired old lies and bashing others and using every thread to do it. You repeat your failed cases over and over in every post.

You are a criminal the courts showed it and why. No need to repeat it continuously. If you intend to fight them you can do so on your own thread and leave the others to their topics.

Mini
4

#11 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8505
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 10 January 2018 - 12:25 PM

View PostMINI, on 10 January 2018 - 11:59 AM, said:

He is telling the truth Alan Thomas and backed them up with the truth from you own online.

BUT the problem is you are taking over every thread with your tired old lies and bashing others and using every thread to do it. You repeat your failed cases over and over in every post.

You are a criminal the courts showed it and why. No need to repeat it continuously. If you intend to fight them you can do so on your own thread and leave the others to their topics.

Mini


Mini you are confusing accusation with the concept of truth..

Protesting against an accusation by asking for evidence of the allegation is not unreasonable..

Making an accusation without evidence is unreasonable.

You would have to be quite a ridiculous person to believe that the accused needs to give evidence to disprove the allegation when the allegation itself has never had any evidence. Mini you seem to be one of these ridiculous persons along with other members of your clique, the tagteam.

The tagteam will never seize control of this site. They have tried on many occasions and always fail.

As for your assertion that criminal courts have shown me to be a criminal is a false statement. No evidence of any sort has ever been described by any court as there is no evidence to be described. The abuse of power however seems to be quite commonplace with regards to ACC issues..

The site primarily deals with the commonplace behavioural pattern of the ACC who continuously misrepresent or simply make up facts for their own financial gain and seek to crush others who don't go along with their behaviour.

Keep in mind mini that it is you who are talking about me and not me talking about me on the site
0

#12 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7362
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 10 January 2018 - 12:27 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 10 January 2018 - 11:29 AM, said:

Brucey first of all this is not a democracy and there is no voting of any sort let alone anyone off. If you feel I have broken forum rules for them report the matter to admin.

I have no idea what you are trying to accuse me of re-"supported and backed up those other two trolls that were recently removed". Please identify what you think the problem is by providing specific information.

If you believe I have told a lie how about identifying what you think that lie is. I did not work and I did not hatch a plan to harm ACC. Those to accusations originated from one person with the ACC seeking to take advantage of that person on each occasion.
Do you have any information that describes any single work task activity in any material time?
Do you believe for one moment that I would threaten ACC with arm to frighten those who seek to investigate Douglas weal for fraud?
Do you really believe that the ACC would not stoop to tell lies to cover over their own perjury and the courts?

If you believe I have provided any kind of misleading advice you need to take advantage of the nature of this forum by expressing your own opinion. Multitudes of opinions that are supported by fact, logic and law Benefits everybody but if you to simply rant and rave you are of no use to anybody..

I think you'll find that's on the majority of occasions when I make a posting with my opinion regarding any topic that others will come along and attack me personally as if I have discussed something other than the topic in the thread. That seems to be the modus operandi of the tagteam which seems to include yourself.

One thing is for certain and that is I am never delusional.. I am well grounded and give well thought out opinions based on points of law and facts as they relate to those laws.


Thomas

So we can rule PTSD out then can we???

Mini
2

#13 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7362
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 10 January 2018 - 12:36 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 10 January 2018 - 12:25 PM, said:

Mini you are confusing accusation with the concept of truth..

Protesting against an accusation by asking for evidence of the allegation is not unreasonable..

Making an accusation without evidence is unreasonable.

You would have to be quite a ridiculous person to believe that the accused needs to give evidence to disprove the allegation when the allegation itself has never had any evidence. Mini you seem to be one of these ridiculous persons along with other members of your clique, the tagteam.

The tagteam will never seize control of this site. They have tried on many occasions and always fail.

As for your assertion that criminal courts have shown me to be a criminal is a false statement. No evidence of any sort has ever been described by any court as there is no evidence to be described. The abuse of power however seems to be quite commonplace with regards to ACC issues..

The site primarily deals with the commonplace behavioural pattern of the ACC who continuously misrepresent or simply make up facts for their own financial gain and seek to crush others who don't go along with their behaviour.

Keep in mind mini that it is you who are talking about me and not me talking about me on the site


Again you continue to surmise and keep your options open by calling a group of people on here as Tagteam. It is monotonous and harmful as we do not who you are referring to at all. I know you call me one and perhaps David Butler, but if you believe hemi is NOT David Butler, then David Butler is not here, so how could you know if he is one of your so called Tagteam or not. You are surmising again I expect?

Mini
0

#14 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8505
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 10 January 2018 - 04:11 PM

View PostMINI, on 10 January 2018 - 12:36 PM, said:

Again you continue to surmise and keep your options open by calling a group of people on here as Tagteam. It is monotonous and harmful as we do not who you are referring to at all. I know you call me one and perhaps David Butler, but if you believe hemi is NOT David Butler, then David Butler is not here, so how could you know if he is one of your so called Tagteam or not. You are surmising again I expect?

Mini


You repeatedly make inappropriate guesses that have no relevance with reality
1

#15 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7362
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 15 January 2018 - 04:51 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 10 January 2018 - 07:49 AM, said:

ACC initiated a private criminal prosecution for fraud based on their allegation that they possessed information I was working. ACC have now acknowledged in the High Court that they have committed perjury.

The fact remains that prior to being injured I was an earner and can no longer earn because of my injuries. This fact is generated not by myself but rather by the most highly qualified medical professionals in their particular fields in the country.. Anyone putting forward an alternative opinion without relevant qualifications and experience at all much less periods of these qualifications demonstrate themselves to be not only arrogant but suffering from a detachment from reality which is otherwise recognised as a mental disorder Or gread and dishonesty.

It is not for me to prove the ACC and others allegations to be wrong but rather is up to those people to prove their allegations. Any more on can make up anything and say anything without regard to the moral high ground or truth. It is their arrogance the drives them to believe that I must prove them wrong. That is not how an orderly society like New Zealand who has rules of law operates and it is arrogant for these people to think that they are above the law.

This site would not have existed without myself.

ACC do not like this site

Douglas weal, Kenneth Miller and their close and personal friends set up an opposition side to this one while attempting to unlawfully transfer intellectual property and membership from the site to their own but were caught red handed with the result that they accused me of planning to blow up the opposite investigating Douglas weal for fraud. Douglas weal offered himself as a conduit to the ACC with the result that the ACC thought they could kill two birds with one stone thus a second conviction being a cheap based on information the ACC knew to be false.

A variety of disenfranchised morons such as David Butler (yourself) like these other fellows seek to make a name for themselves by repeating the same nonsense over and over despite the originators of such nonsense acknowledging it to be untrue.. Why do these morons behave in such a way we can never know except that they are somewhat detached from reality and have personality disorders.

Why did the ACC commit perjury. That is it obvious to any person participating in the site as they themselves have fallen victim to ACC generating false information for their own financial gain knowing that information to be going through the courts with the result that the ACC are aware that they are committing perjury for financial gain.

Without ACC dishonesty this site would never exist.

If you want the site to shut down or even to shut myself down you need to solve the ACC dishonesty..


Thomas

You quote: "This site would never have existed without me." That is a lie. A site like this would have existed, as the number of persons involved has shown.

It is staying alive by someone who pays the six monthly fee to the 'provider'. If that is you who pays the fee, then yes you are right, but if you do pay the fee, you also carry the mantel of being responsible for what is allowed to stay up in here. You can therefore be sued.

You are as the others say taking up every thread. You ask me question when I answer another other than yourself, if I have any scholoships to allow me to comment on the topic. I take this chance to ask what right you have to question my right to post on this forum. You are so quick to tell us all that you are the same as us. What right have you to query what subjects I graduated in.

As my reddie answered you, you have none. If you wish to say you pay the fee to keep this little site afloat, then I may think of telling you, but you are worth no more than a jolly little reddie as it all stands. I have counted five or six people want you to disappear. That is just about all who come to this site and actually write. Shall we take a count, or don't you trust some with extra names (aka's) to only use one. This is far more important that you knowing what I graduated in.

Mini
0

#16 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8505
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 15 January 2018 - 05:06 PM

View PostMINI, on 15 January 2018 - 04:51 PM, said:

Thomas

You quote: "This site would never have existed without me." That is a lie. A site like this would have existed, as the number of persons involved has shown.

It is staying alive by someone who pays the six monthly fee to the 'provider'. If that is you who pays the fee, then yes you are right, but if you do pay the fee, you also carry the mantel of being responsible for what is allowed to stay up in here. You can therefore be sued.

You are as the others say taking up every thread. You ask me question when I answer another other than yourself, if I have any scholoships to allow me to comment on the topic. I take this chance to ask what right you have to question my right to post on this forum. You are so quick to tell us all that you are the same as us. What right have you to query what subjects I graduated in.

As my reddie answered you, you have none. If you wish to say you pay the fee to keep this little site afloat, then I may think of telling you, but you are worth no more than a jolly little reddie as it all stands. I have counted five or six people want you to disappear. That is just about all who come to this site and actually write. Shall we take a count, or don't you trust some with extra names (aka's) to only use one. This is far more important that you knowing what I graduated in.

Mini


Mini we are not talking about some form of a site, we are talking about this site.

In addition there have been others that have tried to set up a site but none have the same level of interaction and the reasons they don't is because of the principles that this site is based on.

We are also not talking about anything to do with funding but rather the principles involving free speech and suchlike. Funding has never been a problem and neither will be.

We are not talking about ongoing administration either as that is purely a functionary activity that does not involve itself with anything to do with the principles involved thhat form the basis of the site nor even the subject matter.

We are not talking about my being involved with any day to day functions with the site nor want anyone rights on the site in the various threads and postings et cetera as I have never had any involvement nor desire to have any involvement in such matters. As such you cannot look to me for any form of responsibility with regards to what other people right as each person is responsible for their own contributions.If you feel the need to sue someone you need to be thinking about the individual who has offended you.

As this Forum serves as a vehicle for each person to discuss their own Opinions you are going to find that not everyone is going to agree with you and that most certainly they will put their opinions forward regardless as to whether or not they are in agreement or oppose yours. This is the nature of a forum.In this regard it would come as no surprise that members would want to determine whether or not your opinions are valid or based on any form of qualification or experience.

Further we can see the example of David Butler, Kenneth Miller and Douglas weal setting up and other site and trying to steal the information from this one and to close the site down without success. Such individuals are ridiculous yet there we have it,, there are idiots that walk amongst us. Likewise we can have individual from time to time who seek to destroy the site and imagine that I might in some way be responsible for the site so like those others try to destroy me.. Again we have idiots the walk amongst us..

Mini you still have not appreciated the fact that the site is not a democracy where the majority rules but rather an opportunity for both the greatest and the weakest to have their say.. The fact that you would like to have someone tell you what to believe is your own problem just as Your thoughts that others on this site should believe what you believe also is your own problem. In particular it is your problem that you do not comprehend the nature of individual self-determination for freedom of speech. It is for this reason that the ACC continues to successfully abuse those they are assigned to serve. You simply do not understand and I can accept that you don't understand. But you must appreciate that you will be prevented from forcibly removing someone's rights because they don't agree with your world viewpointWith.
0

#17 User is offline   Hemi 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1506
  • Joined: 05-January 12

Posted 15 January 2018 - 08:23 PM

The only idiot is you Thomas
A very dangerous idiot convicted of terrorism activity against the acc and you used this site to promote your nasty ways
That’s why your not welcome here so >> off
0

#18 User is offline   DARRELLGEMMA 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 440
  • Joined: 03-February 07

Posted 18 January 2018 - 10:44 AM

Mr Thomas was meant to have cancelled his membership to this site as part of a court order imposed on him by Judge Laurence Hinton in the North Shore district court. That is a breach of court order. Although i very seldom come on this site. Mr Thomas is a convicted fraudster sentenced to 3 years jail threatening to blow up the ACC Takapuna Branch 10 months home detention with post sentence order to cancel his membership to this site. We should not be subject to threats like this whatsoever. No excuses whatsoever. I know for a fact that if you make these types of threats ACC, WINZ take them very seriously & police will be call as well. The only way we can him removed is by asking for a court order from a high court judge. I don't know if the district court has the power to remove him as well. I will look into further for you all next week & i will post more up once i have been to see my lawyer.
3

#19 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8505
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 18 January 2018 - 11:54 AM

View PostHemi, on 15 January 2018 - 08:23 PM, said:

The only idiot is you Thomas
A very dangerous idiot convicted of terrorism activity against the acc and you used this site to promote your nasty ways
That’s why your not welcome here so >> off


This site is to assist one another support each other against false allegation made by ACC.

With regards to the allegation of terrorism despite the ACC achieving a conviction the question remains as to whether or not the conviction is actually believable.
Strike 1..David Butler initially contacted ACC to set the ball rolling. He did not know why he was making allegations that I was dangerous because he says that Douglas weal had not yet told him what to say but that he was contacting the ACC anyway.
Strike 2 Kenneth Miller said ACC a fragment of an email produced by Douglas weal that makes and nondescriptive allegation without any form of corroborative evidence of any sort.
Strike 3 Douglas weal remains hiding even though he has persuaded his two minions to make contact with the ACC. If there was any kind of belief that terrorism was afoot any normal person would have contacted the police immediately but not only did Douglas weal wait for six months but even then he still did not go to the police. Why? What was his plan?
Strike 4 ACC did not go to the police but rather felt the need to try and make a case against me as opposed to seeking real information. No effort was made to determine whether or not Douglas weal was telling the truth.. Indeed ACC did not even contact Douglas weal despite the fact that he had offered himself as a top secret agent for the ACC by way of a conduit to the big boss And the ACC apparently condoning such secret Auckland this time interaction. Nonetheless the fact remains that ACC did not actually seek truth but rather a free ticket to make a false allegation.
Strike 5 ACC eventually went to the police but still did not perceive a terrorist threat. The police likewise did not perceive a terrorist threat and did not even see fit to make an investigation but rather simply go through the various items that the ACC had placed within a letter with the letter having a tick by each thing that the ACC have placed in the letter such as verifying that Douglas weal was behind everything.
Strike 6 the only evidence presented to the court was a claim by Douglas weal that he thought I had planned to blow up ACC based on his recollections while he was drunk in my home.
Strike 7 Douglas weal sends David Butler a threatening email which involved him persuading David Butler not to give evidence in court as by that time he was aware that David Butler have turned against him after hearing that he was going to give evidence against him.
Strike 8 Douglas weal communicates with the various other witnesses prior to the trial such as providing copies of his police statement in order to get everyone story straight and subsequently checking up on them during the trial. Once this has been discovered by the court the normal course of action was to abandon the trial and prosecute those who sought to pervert the course of justice but quite bizarrely the trial continued.
Strike 9 incidentally a search warrant was ordered with the police star witness being informed of the search warrant being about to be exercised with the result that within a day or so to computers at my home had been accessed and information downloaded that had not been accessed by myself, which is the evidence that a remote third party was involved As otherwise different information would have been automatically placed into the computer indicating local involvement..
Striker 10 also incidentally the search warrants resulted in computers with court submissions being removed thus preventing submissions being made in the appeal to the court regarding the ACC decision of 10 years earlier resulting in it being beyond coincidental that ACC should be making a complaint that initiated a search warrant that would remove the computers. There has never been a suggestion that computers were involved in the allegations made by Douglas weal as there was nothing to connect his allegation with computers.

Strike 11 what is most bizarre as that the so-called Fitzy report Never came to light during the police investigation. Douglas weal would of course Been asked as a result of an extensive interrogation what he knew about myself and whatInformation he could provide the police that might help their investigation. Obviously Douglas weal and did the police investigation by not immediately providingthe police with a copy of the so-called Fitzy report. This is perhaps the most damning evidence of all that Douglas weal had a Totally separate agenda of which he had convinced others to participate in with them such as everyone who has received oral, à la Tronic and other communications from him that did not come forward to give evidence to the police.

Strike 12 Quite clearly a conspiracy to make false allegation had existed the whole time.. The police made no investigation whatsoever and nobody volunteered any information in their possession to the police either, including Douglas weal and self. Obviously the matter cannot be taken seriously when Douglas weal at no time ever came forward to the police nor co-operate with the police by providing them with any actual information other than a rather dreamy nondescriptive representation of his perceptions of what he believed Was discussed while he was drunk while at all times throughout the whole episode he had very carefully documented his stratagem to make false allegation which Including involving his minions to carry out certain elements for him to promote the false allegation without him actually making an allegation.

Hardly enough to be called a satisfactory outcome after 10 or 15 police had carried out an investigation.
When top legal experts have looked at the entire trial the impression they have is this has been set up from the beginning to the end with court involvement in a preconceived outcome. The reasoning as that this case is just been too bizarre to result in a conviction of any sort and if guilty there would never have been a result of home detention but rather are considerably lengthy period of incarceration which indicates that someone just wanted me out of the way and under control for a short period for reasons that had absolutely nothing to do with the allegation of terrorism ..

The normal purpose of this site is to analyse such circumstances whereby ACC involvement has resulted in gross injustice such as the above which incidentally has been observed by international parties including but not limited to the copy documents addressing the Fitzy report.
1

#20 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8505
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 18 January 2018 - 12:05 PM

View PostDARRELLGEMMA, on 18 January 2018 - 10:44 AM, said:

Mr Thomas was meant to have cancelled his membership to this site as part of a court order imposed on him by Judge Laurence Hinton in the North Shore district court. That is a breach of court order. Although i very seldom come on this site. Mr Thomas is a convicted fraudster sentenced to 3 years jail threatening to blow up the ACC Takapuna Branch 10 months home detention with post sentence order to cancel his membership to this site. We should not be subject to threats like this whatsoever. No excuses whatsoever. I know for a fact that if you make these types of threats ACC, WINZ take them very seriously & police will be call as well. The only way we can him removed is by asking for a court order from a high court judge. I don't know if the district court has the power to remove him as well. I will look into further for you all next week & i will post more up once i have been to see my lawyer.


I think you'll find that a rather incompetent direction was given that in itself Was contradictory. I was told that I could not communicate which meant that I could not cancel during the course of parole. After parole there are no orders from the.. A full-time jobs a big into the court as I am a legal Abiding citizen.There was no breach of any court order.


You used term that you should not be subject to any threats like this that do not stipulate what threat you are referring to.. Please elaborate.

There has been no evidence of any sort that I ever made any threat against anybody. Douglas weal did not claim to possess any kind of evidence and did not present himself as providing evidence but rather described his perception that he had gleaned from interactions while he was drunk. In other words he made no clear statement of fact.

As you have met me and lonely your umbrella,, spent time with me at lunch and suchlike you would have a reasonable idea of the neck of individual I am to enable you to make a comparison with the allegations as opposed to your personal interactions. Obviously you would be forced to agree that there is an inconsistency between what the allegations are and your interactions. You also note that on the site all of my interactions and postings involve legal remedies with not one indication of any kind of verbal anger or violent outburst, not once so in the light of many thousands of words directly from me as opposed to an impression of a drunken individual combined with the balance of probability you need to take a close look at the way in which you are influenced in your capacity to perceive reality.

So on what basis would you have me removed from the site. You think it is fair and reasonable that one individuals drunken recollections is sufficient to have someone removed from the site who incidentally was involved in those who broke into the site to steal personal information from all the members while also stealing intellectual property and other information from the site when setting up their own opposition site at the same time as making this allegation with all of the accusers standing united yet presenting themselves to the court is not even knowing each other. Do you think it is honourable to join a lynch mob to satisfy the lust and demands of those who want to set up a commercial site and destroy this one in the process so as they may take over everything that the site has set out to do. Do you really think you can trust the likes of Kenneth Miller who has an extensive list of criminal convictions who worked with Douglas weal?

What on balance of probability would anyone in their right mind,, after reading my postings, would conclude that I was an angry person and we plan and plot to harm anybody?

What is the driving force that you claim to possess it would cause you to desire to have me removed from the site? Are you so heavily influenced by multiplicative effect that criminals who have a very clear agenda to destroy this site for the purposes of promoting their own site and see me as a target to achieve that end that you are prepared to allow yourself to be used in the way that you demonstrate you will be used?
1

Share this topic:


  • 34 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »
  • 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