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

Missing Legal Documents in New Zealand

Filed under: General,Men's Health — Downunder @ 12:27 pm Tue 15th December 2015

This will be of interest to anyone who deals with an ex-partner through legally transferred communications only, or who has communicated this way in the past.

I’m looking at an interesting case, where many years ago, a group of Labour Party professionals (during labour’s time in power) constructed a court case in favour of another Labour Party member, against her ex-husband.

Now that this couple is older (and the children all adults) and the children having necessarily become involved in the parent’s affairs because of health issues, some interesting things have come to light.

It happens that the ex-husband was not on the Labour Party’s preferred list of people because of his own involvement in politics and it transpires that they have different sets of documents, there being a hole in what was actually given to the wife.

In other words these Labour Party professionals constructed a court case to launch their own independent attack on this father using his ex-wife’s name.

At the moment this is being denied, likewise is the legitimacy of the ex-husband’s documents. He now ‘appears’ to be the only one that has these.

This raises a question as to whether this case was actually a Family Court Case, and if so has someone been through the Family Court sanitising some of our court cases?

Is anyone else finding they have disappearing documents or disappearing court cases?

As it never actually made it to a hearing (and was probably never intended to) the other possibility is that this group, including the judge, and the ex-husband’s legal representatives, set up a ruse outside of the court, but now deny the existence of their documents.

Is anyone in a similar situation where they have been attacked with the unauthorised use of another person’s name, using the secret confines of the Family Court?

I’ve viewed a complaint that’s now been sent to the New Zealand Law Society.

It will be interesting to see what they do about this, other than run for cover and pretend it never happened.

I’ll keep you updated.


  1. Many years ago Andrew Wooton said about the familycaught$ “lift a rock and you will see cockroaches scuttling in all directions to get out of the sunlight”.

    I thought he was being rude, but having seen familycaught$ in action many times, I now think he was spot on.

    All of this does show that if we ever wanted the familycaught$ to be functional, we would have to have:

    1. judges and lawyers with training and skills relevant to protecting vulnerable individuals (m, w &c),
    2. pay and incentivise them to work in the interests of parties, not simple plunder, as at present,
    3. have a competent, proactive, functional complaints system, that professionals can learn from,
    4. incentivise professionals to actually learn from past problems (not just do “problems” better!),
    5. parties pay professionals themselves, so that normal consumer protections apply.

    So, don’t give up:
    – keep all of your original documents safe, for a competent investigation at some time in the future.
    (This includes medical records, especially about mental health and financial records.)

    If your documents remain available, you can keep fighting even after your death.

    I hope that you can bring more of this into the open.
    The secrecy that operated, allowed legal workers to self delude that they would never, ever be held accountable. What clinical arrogance, it just ups the ante until citizens do defend themselves.
    As computers gain the ability to analyse natural language, the cost of complaints investigations will fall to practically zero. At present the cost of an investigation is a huge barrier that protects scoundrels, rogues and thieves, as well as the incompetent. Those days will be gone in about 10 years time. (This is why legal workers try to stop litigants getting copies of all documents, so they can hide behind incompleteness in files.)

    I have long been concerned about manufacture of precedents, that were not publicly accessible, but seemed to sometimes have effect in familycaught$. If we ever want to have a common law system with legal integrity, that would never even be of concern, let alone happen often.

    MurrayBacon – insatiable axe suicide murderer………….

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Wed 16th December 2015 @ 10:40 am

  2. Secrecy is proof of conspiracy and corruption.

    Comment by phil watts — Wed 16th December 2015 @ 10:47 am

  3. If government or mothers can kidnap children from their 5050 parental right, especially without trial by jury under the only real law of ‘do no harm’ (common sense law) then we are all slaves and cowards.

    Comment by phil watts — Wed 16th December 2015 @ 10:49 am

  4. @Murray didn’t you write about bench books once, and how we don’t have them in NZ.

    Comment by Downunder — Wed 16th December 2015 @ 3:47 pm

  5. I believe that “we” have them, just that when I asked under the Official Information Act, I was told by telephone that it would be a simple formality to release. Later I received a letter from some nobody with a name, called Mahony, that they weren’t a public document and would not be made available. It sounded like an invitation, sue me, from a well overpaid official, supported by free Government legal workers, to a child support paying father with few spare coins to risk.

    Usually, internationally, they are just a convenient binding of publicly available documents, eg Care of Children Act, CYFs Act, DV Act, Child Support Act, fc rules and maybe a few others. So, just providing a Table of Contents would have been sufficient to meet OIAct disclosure. But I wasn’t going to get that from him! I had even enclosed a Justice Department pamphlet showing that the benchbook was subject to OIAct. I am hoping that the letter will increase in value for its notoriety, if NZ ever becomes a common law country?

    The poor befuddled idiot even gave me his own signature. Either arrogant or stupid, I am not sure which.

    I was very unimpressed and I would be quite worried if Mahony ever rose to any position of importance in the NZ legal system! [Don’t tell me!]

    This incident is on a long list of why I sure don’t respect judges for their ostensible role. As theatrics professionals and plunderers, sure.

    MurrayBacon – qualified lunatic.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Wed 16th December 2015 @ 8:36 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar