Paul,

I have just read the latest article in the Northern Advocate and find you continue to mislead the public, that Allan Titford was a willing seller.

In a memo to you dated the 12/12/95, Helen Aikman, Crown Law Office warns you, "Don't push willing buyer/seller". She had
also amended the press release by deleting all references to "willing seller" and attached it to the memo. She knew this was a lie!!

The Ombudsman's investigation found the reason the memorandum that was attached to the Sale Agreement was removed was because,
“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”. This refers to the comment "at the end of the
document" that Mr Titford sold his properties "under duress".

The Ombudsman's investigation also found, “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 documents held by the Crown Law
Office and the Office of Treaty Settlements show Mr Titford sold his property "under duress". May pay to read them Paul!!

Paul, the Ombudsman investigation found the Crown's officials and/or its agents removed memorandums from the Sale Agreement without Mr
Titford's authority or knowledge after Mr Titford had signed and had it witnessed by the Crown's appointed, instructed and paid Notary Public
lawyer, Sam Samec but before the Commissioner of Lands, Mr Sam Brown had signed it on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen As well as being
a crime to "tamper with" legal documents after they have been signed, the documents are deemed null and void.

Paul, the memos between the Crown Law Office and the Office of Treaty Settlements shows you were part of the team with Mary Anne Thompson
(this name rings a bell!!) who received the documents when they arrived back from Tasmania, so who "tampered with" them?

Paul, it is no use lying about Mr Titford being a willing seller, the documented evidence and the Ombudsman's investigation show this
is not correct!! It's not good for the Director of the Office of Treaty Settlements to be continually misleading the public!!

Paul, when Mr Titford signed the agreement, he had a gun to his head and a pen in his hand, it was either his brains or his signature on the
document. But this was still not good enough Paul, the Crown had to tamper with it - remember - you were there at the time!!!!

Regards,

Ross Baker.

Researcher, One New Zealand Foundation Inc.


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