ONE NEW ZEALAND FOUNDATION INC
P. O. Box 1, Awanui, Northland, New Zealand. www.onenzfoundation.co.nz

10 December 2008.

Att. Paul DIMERY,

Area Commander,

Police Station,

Private Bag 9016,

Whangarei.

cc. Sergeant Jonathan Tier.

Thank you for the unsigned email below dated the 4 December 2008 using Sergeant Jonathan Tier’s email address. We believe it was Sergeant Jonathan Tier who wrote and sent this email, but failed, for some reason only known to him, to put his name to it.

The email states, “We are satisfied that the land formerly owned by TITFORD is now legally owned by the Te Roroa people”, but from the email below, the Police base their “stance” on the Ombudsman's opinions written some 18 months ago and not the Ombudsman's “official” investigation held under the Ombudsman's Act, which is still continuing to this day. It must be remembered, the Police have referred to this land as “Maori Land” since the claim was placed on it in 1987 and have continued to act like “puppets on a string” for the Crown on this matter ever since, not a Police Force to uphold and protect the laws of the land for its people!! It must also be remembered; the Crown is not above the Law!!!

Below are the findings of the Ombudsman’s “official” investigation to date and attached is an article written from the “paper trail” left by those involved at the time.

UNDER DURESS

In the Ombudsman's letter dated the 27 June 2007, the investigation found, (5) "From my Officer’s perusal of a substantial number of files held by the Office of Treaty Settlements and by the Crown Law Office, there is no doubt that Mr Titford had, rightly or wrongly, a sense of grievance about the sale of his farm. He held the view he was pushed into the sale without justification”. The Ombudsman then quotes, (underlined) "I should make it quite clear I have not examined that question and have not formed any opinion. I simply record Mr Titford attitude as part of the history.

In the Ombudsman's letter to Mr and Mrs Titford dated the 20 December 2007, the investigation found, “It may well be that the memorandum was not initialled by Mr Brown, or perhaps even seen by him, because it was not regarded as being part of the formal Agreement. The Crown’s officials perhaps did not consider it appropriate for it to be authenticated as part of the agreement in view of the comments at the end of the document. For the documents to have been initialled might have suggested agreement with the views you had stated”.

Mr Titford "comment/view" stated at the end of the memorandum, signed by Mr Titford and witnessed by Mr Samec and attached to the Sale Agreement on the 12 December 1995, stated, “I, Allan Titford believe we have been pushed into this list of creditors as a result of the Waitangi Tribunal claim”.

Mr Titford's "comment/view" at the end of the document, referred to the Waitangi Tribunal claim causing his creditors debts to escalate to $2.25 million until the National Bank threatening to bankrupt him and take his father's farm held as security by the Bank, unless he sold to the Crown. The Ombudsman’s Officer's perusal of a substantial number of documents found, "He had a sense of grievance about the sale of his farm, he held the view he was pushed into the sale without justification".

The Ombudsman's Investigation found, " Mr Titford had a sense of grievance about the sale of his farm, he felt he was pushed into the sale without justification" and Mr Titford wrote at the end of the document he signed on the 12 December 1995, " I, Allan Titford believe we have been pushed into this list of creditors as a result of the Waitangi Tribunal claim ", but in the same letter, the Ombudsman wrote, “(30.1). I have seen nothing to suggest that any 'duress' was exercised in Tasmania when he signed the documents on 12 December 1995". Very confusing!!

From the Ombudsman’s Investigation findings above, Mr Titford’s comment and “The Paper Trail” attached, there is no denying, Mr Titford made amendments to the Sale Agreement stating, he was selling his farm “under duress” when he signed the Sale Agreement and Deed on the 12 December 1995.

DOCUMENTS TAMPERED WITH

In the Ombudsman's letter to Mr and Mrs Titford dated the 20 December 2007, the investigation found, “It may well be that the memorandum was not initialled by Mr Brown, or perhaps even seen by him, because it was not regarded as being part of the formal Agreement. The Crown’s officials perhaps did not consider it appropriate for it to be authenticated as part of the agreement in view of the comments at the end of the document. For the documents to have been initialled might have suggested agreement with the views you had stated”.

As the Crown’s Officials removed the memorandum before Mr Brown was given the Sale Agreement to sign, the Crown’s Officials “illegally tampered with” the Sale Agreement after Mr Titford had signed it and Mr Samec had witnessed it.

In the Ombudsman's letter to Mr and Mrs Titford on the 21 August 2007, the investigation found, "“I can only conclude, therefore, that for whatever reason, Mr Samec did not transmit the memorandum to the Crown Law Office, or make any reference to it. It is not appropriate for me to speculate upon why that may have been so, and I do not propose to do so”.

While it is not appropriate for the Ombudsman to, "Speculate upon why Mr Samec did not transmit the memorandums to the Crown Law Office or make any reference to it", the Ombudsman concluded, "Mr Samec did not transmit the memorandums to the Crown Law office", therefore the documents Mr Titford signed and Mr Samec, the Crown’s appointed, instructed and paid Notary Public Lawyer “to assist in the matter”, witnessed in Tasmania on the 12 December 1995, were "illegally tampered with", before they were returned to New Zealand.

From the attached article, “The Paper Trail” written from the paper trail by those involved at the time, the findings of the Ombudsman's “official” investigation and Mr Titford’s memorandums, which the Crown Officials removed, there is no denying, Mr Titford sold his farm "under duress" and the Sale Agreement, Deed and Memorandum of Transfer to acquire his farm, were "tampered with" making the sale “legally, null and void”!!!

Yours sincerely,

Ross Baker.

Researcher, One New Zealand Foundation Inc.

cc. Allan and Sue Titford.

Hon Judith Collins, Minister of Police.

This letter, email and attachment may appear on our website, www.onenzfoundation.co.nz

----- Original Message -----
From: Jonathan.Tier@police.govt.nz
To: rossbaker@austarnet.com.au
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 1:41 PM
Subject: Re: Former TITFORD farm Aranga.

Mr Ross BAKER,

Regarding allegations of corruption and tampering of documents, sale of TITFORD farm under duress etc.

Thank you for your letters from the Ombudsman's office dated 27 June, 2007, 21 August, 2007, 20 December, 2007 and 3 June, 2008.

The Ombudsman's office has reported that;
Letter dated 27 June, 2007.

30. 1. "I have seen nothing to suggest that any 'duress' was exercised in Tasmania when he" (Mr TITFORD) "signed the documents on 12 December".

31. 'There is nothing to support the allegations you make on pages 2 and 3."

34. "I regard my investigation into the matters which I undertook to consider as being complete. I hope that I shall not be troubled further with these baseless allegations".

Letter dated 3 June, 2008

The Ombudsman's office writes in regard to you misrepresenting or misunderstanding, information provided to you by her. She does not agree with your proposition that there was any 'tampering' of 'those documents'. The Ombudsman says there is no substance in your allegations made in your letter to the Solicitor General of 26 March, 2008.

The police stance is such that we will not be investigating this matter any further.

We are satisfied that the land formerly owned by TITFORD is now legally owned by the Te Roroa people.

If you have any further queries please direct your enquiries to Inspector Paul DIMERY, Area Commander, Police Station, Private Bag 9016, Whangarei.