MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

The Domestic Violence Industry of Waitakere would seem to permeate within all levels of the Judicial System thereby control.

What started off with a simple request which would verify the accuracy of data provided by the court is now starting to become either a rightly or wrongly, a “Kennedy” conspiracy.
Jim B suggested that I post this side issue for the Peoples Court to decide.

Copy of E-mail to Mark Burton, Minister of Justice and others

Dear Sir,

I have recieved a minute from Judge Lisa Tremewan which is copied as follows:

(1) Mr Catton seeks copies of the Court tapes of the hearing to be personally released to him.

(2) Transcripts have already been provided to him, The Court does not consider that there are justified grounds, in law, to release the the court tape recording.

(3) This request is declined and the Registar is to advise him accordingly.

This is Judge Tremewan’s final recorded position.
I dispute the content of the transcript against what I believe to be on the recording due to anomalies in the transcript.
This might be due to a simple misinterpretation on the transcribers part, an oversight, or perhaps my own recollection of what was or was not said.
The stance by Judge Tremewan throws weight into an allegation of something more sinister that would now require investigation.
The trail of correspondence is documented below.

Kind Regards

Paul Catton

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

From Paul Catton
To Jared Trail

Dear Sir

It is not I who is required to provide the burden of poof for you to accede
my request, on the contrary, it is Ministry of Justice who need outline the
Jurisdiction in this refusal of my request.
I have requested the information under the Official Information Act

OFFICIAL INFORMATION ACT 1982

2.Interpretation-

“Document” means a document in any form; and includes-

(b)Any information recorded or stored by means of any tape-recorder,
computer, or other device; and any material subsequently derived from
information so recorded or stored:

3.Act to bind the Crown-

This Act shall bind the Crown.

PART 1 - PURPOSES AND CRITERIA

4.Purposes-

The purposes of this Act are, consistently with the principle of
the Executive Government’s responsibility to Parliament,-

(a) To increase progressively the availability of official
information to the people of New Zealand in order-

(i) To enable their more effective participation in the making and
administration of laws and policies; and

(ii) To promote the accountability of Ministers of the Crown and
officials,-

and thereby to enhance respect for the law and to promote the good
government of New Zealand:

PART 2 - REQUESTS FOR ACCESS TO OFFICIAL INFORMATION

12.Requests-

(1) Any person, being-

(b) A permanent resident of New Zealand; or

(c) A person who is in New Zealand;

may request a Department or Minister of the Crown or organisation to
make available to him or it any specified official information.

13.Assistance-

It is the duty of every Department, Minister of the Crown, and
organisation to give reasonable assistance to a person, who-

(a)Wishes to make a request in accordance with section 12 of this
Act.

16.Documents-

(1)Where the information requested by any person is comprised in a
document, that information may be made available in one or more of the
following ways:

(c) In the case of a document that is an article or thing from which
sounds or visual images are capable of being reproduced, by making
arrangements for the person to hear or view those sounds or visual
images;
———————————————————————————————————————————————————-

I do consider this to be a “hoop” jumping exercise when clearly this could
have been sorted out with simple efficiency on Thursday 8th December between
9.30am and 1.15p.m. while I was in attendance at the Waitakere Court.

Kind Regards
Paul Catton

From: “Jared Trail”
To: Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 12:18 PM
Subject: Re: Beyond Belief

Dear Mr Catton,

You were declined by a Judge to have the tapes released to your person and I
forwarded your further request to that Judge to consider your new request
also. You are not going through hoops as we do not have hoops, you are
going through the same process as anyone else would go through, you are the
one who is making the conspiracy accusations, this is not a movie, it is
real life and we at the New Zealand Ministry of Justice have integrity and
are impartial therefore have no reason to be at the heart of a conspiracy.

On the matter of proving legislative requirements, you are the person making
this request, please prove to me that there is no Judicial Jurisdiction or
is that just another whimsical assumption on protocol that you perceive we
have.

Please await response as per earlier request on previous e-mail.

Ka kite a te wa’

J Trail
Criminal Caseflow Manager
Ministry of Justice

>>> “Paul Catton” 12/08/05 10:43 >>>
To Jared Trail

Dear Sir,

This saga of trying to verify the factual content of audio tape against
transcript from the hearing on October 11th 2004 is transgressing from a
simple perfunctory duty to now a consideration of State Conspiracy.
The fact that the “Administrators of the Court” sought a Judicial Ruling on
this matter which in fact has no Judicial Jurisdiction (unless you of course
can provide otherwise) therefore no ground for observance,on this purely an
administrational matter under the Official Information Act, could lead to
suggest duplicity.

I am disheartened with the continuing hoops I have to jump through to
villify myself in respect of Justice in Waitakere.

Please forward a copy of the tape forthwith as I am unable to avail myself
of your audio playback facilities and will not be in Waitakere until the
20th January 2006 as has been directed.
I am able to arrange a Courierpost Freight Forward pickup to ensure security
and traceability of the consignment therby relieving you of the cost and
logistics.

Kind Regards
Paul Catton

From Paul Catton
To Jared Trail

Dear Sir,

It is correct that I am in receipt of the transcript from the hearing of
11th October 2005.
I contend that there is a level of misinterpretation with regard to the
translation to transcript.
You have been requested to supply copy of actual audio for independent
analysis.
This has been denied by a District Court Judge with a claim of adherence to
“normal protocol”.
Your dictation equipment provides for duplicate recording which as observed
is utilized.
This request due to its nature eclipses normality and I believe that failure
to accede may even suggest a level of dishonesty.
As I had no control over the date set, in fact the Court set the date for
the Pre-depositions hearing, being the 8th December 2005 it is a fundamental
requirement that
it be made available for perusal and information contained applied
appropriately for the hearing.

Kind Regards
Paul Catton

—– Original Message —–
From: “Jared Trail”
To: Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 4:34 PM
Subject: Collection & Further Tape/Transcript

Mr Catton,

I passed the request on to Judge Tremewan, her direction is as follows:

‘Mr Catton is entitled to both the transcripts already transcribed relating
to the 11 October 2005 and 13 October 2005 appearances. The court is to
transcribe the tape relating to the 18 May 2005 hearing and release to
parties. Actual tapes (the court record) not to be released, as per normal
protocol.’

The 11th has been signed and forwarded to you earlier. The 13th will be
signed once the Judge has returned to work, he is currently on leave and
should be back next week, we will forward that document once signed. The
18th is currently getting typed and will be forwarded once signed by Judge
Tremewan.

Regards.

Ka kite a te wa’

J Trail
Criminal Caseflow Manager
Ministry of Justice

Mr Catton,

I don’t generally work on Saturdays so could not reply prior to Monday, a bit unrealistic. The answer is no, and also the tape request will be put before a Judge to grant/decline the request, you may not get it in any event. I will advise you whether the request has been granted/declined in due course.

The request for the transcript will actioned when the transcript has been typed, which does take time to type back.

Please wait for me to contact you.

Ka kite a te wa’

J Trail
Criminal Caseflow Manager

>>> “Paul Catton” 11/27/05 10:53 >>>
To Jared Trail

Dear Jared,

Please advise when the tape requested will be made avialable for collection on Monday so that a representative can call in to uplift.
Further, I now require transcript or tape from the hearing 18th May 2005.
This material is urgently required as there is to be a pre-depositions hearing scheduled for the 8th of December and an analysis needs to be conducted in a suitable unrestricted manner beforehand.

Kind Regards
Paul

From Paul Catton
To Jared Trail

Dear Jared,

There appears to be discrepancy between the typed transcript and my recollection from the actual hearing.
Please provide the tape for an independant analysis.

Kind Regards
Paul Catton