What Lies Beneath
From: Ross Baker
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 7:36 AM
To: Iulia.Leilua@maoritelevision.com
Cc: John Ansell ; doutre@ihug.co.nz
Subject: Fw: Native Affairs programme – What lies beneath.
Iulia Leilua,
Maori Television.
Dear Iulia,
Re: “What Lies Beneath”.
While the One New Zealand Foundation Inc was not interviewed for your program although mention many times, we are very concerned by some of the comments made. The One New Zealand Foundation Inc has followed the acquisition of Mr Titford’s freehold titled property since Te Roroa lodged their claim.
At the time, Mr Titford was an innocent victim, he had bought a property under the laws of New Zealand and was issued with a freehold title by the Crown. The claim on his land had nothing to do with Mr Titford, it was an issue between Te Roroa and the Crown that had already had a judicial inquiry in 1939 and was rejected by Parliament in 1942 due to there being no evidence to support the claim. There was no further evidence supplied to the Waitangi Tribunal to over-rule the 1939 inquiry or the 1942 Parliament rejection.
It was stated in the program the Crown paid Mr Titford six times what he had paid when he bought the land. The fact is, the Crown (Taxpayers) accepted liability of $2.25 million debt that was incurred when the Rural Bank, with the Crown’s help froze Mr Titford’s accounts and took over the running of his farm. Interesting to note, the Crown included a clause in the Sale Agreement stopping Mr Titford from suing the Bank for, we believe, mismanagement. Attached, copy of debts incurred and accepted by the Crown, page 12.
I have also attached page 11 of the Sale Agreement signed by Mr Titford and witnessed by the Crown paid Notary Public but does not appear in the Sale Agreement executed by Mr Sam Brown the Minister of Crown Lands on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen or held in the Crown Law Office’s files. As can be seen from this page, Mr Titford did not agree with this draft agreement, but it was used by the Crown with page 11 substituted to acquire his farm under duress and without legal advice. Attached page 11.
While Mr Titford receive $1 million dollars for his farm no mention was made that this included $750,000 for stock and $50,000 for plant, leaving him just $200,000 to purchase 1750 acres of land to replace his farm in 1995. Mr and Mrs Titford were also forced to sign the Sale Agreements under duress and without legal advice or forced into bankruptcy with Mr Titford’s father’s farm also taken as he was guarantor.
Mr Titford was never compensated for the beachside subdivision he was in the process of selling when the claim was lodged, which would have clear all his debts. The beachside sections seemed be the catalyst for Te Roroa’s continuing harassment.
There was also no mention made that Mr Titford was not allowed one witness in his defense at his trial and two Affidavits, which you have copies show that the Police and his Crown paid lawyer withheld vital evidence from the trial that Mrs Titford’s father, Graham Cochrane set fire to the house to get his daughter away from Te Roroa’s continuing harassment, and not Mr Allan Titford.
The Hon John Carter, a Minister of the Crown at the time became very involved when he found Mr and Mrs Titford had matrimonial problems and offered Mrs Titford immunity if she would help the Crown silence Mr Titford over the treatment he had received from the Crown to acquire his farm for Te Roroa’s “alleged” claim. I was at this meeting with Mr Carter and Mrs Titford on the 10 February 2010 and also have emails to prove this point. “Our system of government requires that courts operate independently of Ministers of the Crown, and that there is no actual implied interference in decisions by the courts in individual cases”. Minister of Justice, Hon Simon Power.
After Mr and Mrs Titford separated, Mrs Titford allowed her 15 year old daughter to sleep with a 23 year old man under her roof. Later the daughter ran away with the 23 year old man and when the Police found her they handed her over to CYFS as they were concerned Mrs Titford and her family would beat her up and starve her if she was returned home. CYFS allowed the 15 year old girl to continue sleeping with the 23 year old man until she became pregnant, but the Police close a blind eye instead of charging the man under ‘Section 134 of the Crimes Act’ and the family with alleged Child Abuse. Could this be because all were Crown key witnesses to convict and jail Mr Titford for an unprecedented 24 years? Also interesting, at the same time Mrs Titford was accusing her husband of sex charges and child abuse, you have to ask yourself who was abusing who? See attached letter from Mrs Titford to the Commissioner of Police.
While we believe there are claims that must be settled, both for Maori and Pakeha that had land confiscated or taken unfairly, there is absolutely no evidence to show Te Roroa’s claim is one of them. This was even acknowledged by the Crown when the Minister of Justice, Hon Doug Graham signed the Deed of Sale that this was an “alleged” claim. See attached page 2 of Deed.
Hopefully Iulia, you will put the record straight, all this information is held in New Zealand’s Archives for all to see, it just takes a little longer to research all the facts than just “cherry pick” those that suit. We also have all these documents plus thousands more on file from those involved at the time.
If justice is to be done, then Mr Titford must have a retrial with out Crown and Police interference were all the documented evidence and witnesses in Mr Titford’s defense can appear before the court.
One of the most crucial aspects of a fair legal trial is the right to call witnesses on both sides, Mr Titford was never given this opportunity at his recent trial, the Crown made sure it never happened and we believe he was unfairly jailed for 24 years by this “Kangaroo Court”.
For more information, log onto www.onenzfoundation.co.nz or http://allantitford-politicalprisoner.com/wordpress/
Yours sincerely,
Ross Baker.
Researcher, One New Zealand Foundation Inc
