1 November 2017
LIST OF ADDRESSES TO COME
LAW SOCIETY LEADERS
SIAN ELIAS – LAW COMMISSION ETC
This is a formal complaint of corruption, perversion of justice, deceit, discrimination, bigotry, fraud, elitism and unethical behaviour by Central Standards Committee 1 in decision number 16544 – complaint about Sean Kinsler by Jayne Routhan.
Please advise under Privacy Act who the members of this committee were so I can start proceedings to sue them for their gross perversion of justice and discrimination.
The following is my response to the comments made by this committee and should read in conjunction with my original complaint.
This was not the background that lead to my complaint, to say the latest attempt at intimidation and victimisation by ACC using the police and justice system is background is deceitful and grossly misleading.
I had phoned ACC in a psychotic/tourettes type state screaming at them to reinstate my care after winning two reviews and waiting 7 years – I had been doing it for months as my living situation had caused me extreme stress and trauma I was trying to also deal with – without killing myself.
ACC had a report from Dr Alan Doris that said about the ‘tourettes’ type responses I was having when upset – that I had no or little control over. They said nothing about the repeated messages left on their answerphone until I made a Privacy Act request for a copy of one of the recordings. I wanted proof of how unwell I was and what was happening. I have documents to prove ACC refused this information on the basis they did not keep those recordings. Yet six weeks later they gave copy of latest recording and had police come to my home and terrorise me through the courts – yet again. I have been escorted from court many times and yelled at court staff/judges about the injustices I am facing at the hands of ACC, the very agency who is legally supposed to provide me care – because I have read the ACC legislation.
They then dropped the charges, while every time going to court got worse and worse for me. Six weeks later they did new charges for Misuse of a Telephone and was extremely upset. I went to Carterton police station and challenged what was happening, I got insulted, degraded and discredited by two officers. (Feel free to contact those two officers who now know the situation with my health care and it was the opposite to what they had been told.) I proceeded to vent my rage at the injustice/discrimination I had just experienced and chalked an international symbol of govt oppression on the front window of the police station. For that I was violently assaulted, arrested and am up on charges of graffiti.
It is not only me who says I am entitled to these services, it was two ACC Reviewers, Dr Doris, Jenny Kirby counsellor, Tina Hemi WINZ case manager, Louise Grant HDC Advocate, Glenda van dervenlong, Adapt Therapy, etc, so does my current public defence lawyer. All my friends say I should be entitled to services I am screaming for, so does every social agency, mental health provider and policeman I talk to.
Sean Kinsler also agreed with me when I spoke to him recently about my situation, that ACC Review decisions are as legally binding as any court and ACC should have reinstated my care by now, as decisions were made in 2010 and 2011. That is the background that should have been considered in this complaint, not his loyalty to his client even with the knowledge he was terrorising a suicidal mentally injured sensitive claimant.
Mr Kinsler also advised me he believed I should have a lawyer – which I have been unable to get for the past 15 years. I have a letter from my current public defence lawyer that I cannot get legal representation and definitely have serious unmet legal needs that she does not have the skills to meet – that are affecting and threatening my life.
It is an insult and extremely offensive (or is it simple elitist bigotry) to suggest me not wanting Misuse of a Telephone charges dropped had anything to do with airing my concerns and grievances. I did not want them dropped because it was these charges that lead to the other protests I did and why I was in court for multiple others. It was the prolonged injustices and illegal withholding of essential health services – which is called persecution and torture according to the Oxford dictionary – that proves my case of reasonableness under the NZBORA or as my lawyer refers to it, proportionality. I have already told you this and you completely ignored it in this decision.
Has Mr Kinsler breached a duty owed to Ms Routhan?
There has been no misunderstanding or misconception on my part and I find it extremely disturbing you would insult my intelligence like that. (This sort of comment reminds me of what people call cognitive dissonance.) I suggest you contact Mr Kinsler and ask him now if he would support ACC in forcing police to charge me for Misuse of a Telephone now he knows more of the situation. I phoned ACC a few days ago in a really bad way and flipped out screaming at them – things are really bad at the moment, too many serious issues I have no control over.
Mr Kinsler had been told he was obliged to do what ACC told him, I am sure me challenging that has made him consider his morals and ethics and oaths he swears to uphold justice and right. Even this appalling decision will be seen for what it is, Mr Kinsler will be deeply embarrassed at the language, deceit and tone used I’m sure.
I don’t believe ACC are being unfair, they are being criminally negligent, abusive, bigoted, UNJUST and what they are doing is definitely NOT RIGHT.
UNFAIR is something that happens to children (and childish adults) over unimportant things – UNJUST is what happens to terrorised, abused, persecuted, disabled, suicidal, women & civil society activists, at the hands of a corrupt government agency charged with treating, caring for, rehabilitating and housing disabled, mentally injured, sexual abused men women and children SO REST OF THEIR LIVES AND FUTURE GENERATIONS AREN’T DESTROYED.
I am sure this information is challenging your most basic schemata of the world being a just and good place with leaders/bosses who can be trusted. It is my lay-expert explanation for this type of bigoted response. After years of research as to the current mass psychosis going on with most NZers while vulnerable minorities are being terrorised with homelessness, lack of income, discrimination and degradation by governments.
(6) You self-righteous condescending elitist bigots, I did not make this complaint to progress my concerns about ACC – I did this to challenge the legal system, the very principles of justice and this decision shows you have become yet another unchecked neo-liberal ABOMINATION.
To finish I will advise I do not have $50 to review the decision and in fact I am so appalled by the language used in it that I see absolutely no point in having my complaint reviewed at all – or any in future. Anything Sean Kinsler did out of misguided loyalty and fear of his employer pales into insignificance in comparison to this Central Standards Committee 1 wording of their decision.
I found it interesting you would tell me after the fact I wasn’t allowed to make this decision public – which of course I would never have agreed to and will be making public, along with this response and the list of people I am going to send it to throughout the law fraternity.
I really want to end this response with a string of highly appropriate swear words, but I’ll just think them instead.
CIVIL SOCIETY ACTIVIST