Bent Cops

33 Crown Prosecutor Harry Mallalieu and his chum Judge David Cameron

“It’s very silly to take the police on – do you know why? Because you’ll never win.” Judge David Cameron.

“I recall in his defended hearing he was quite open about his dislike of police.”

Judge Cameron said it was a “very foolish attitude to have”.

In other words, It pays to hide your contempt of bentcops and equally bent Judges when you are in David Cameron’s Court.

At the time of sentencing, on March 5 2013, Judge Cameron said brandishing and discharging a firearm in a public place needed to be met by a stern response from the courts, “even more so when it’s pointed directly at people”. Except when it’s Stephen Poynter holding/firing the gun at or near a vdL family member.


These cases more often than not reek of collusion on the part of the police, crown law and the courts responsible for the decisions. Judicial connivance.

The judge in my case could, and did, cheat. Crown prosecutors and  police could, and did, cheat. And once they coordinated their cheating, no fact, law or procedure could save me. I was set up to lose.

When you think of a “corrupt” judge, you may think of one who trades rulings for cash. As far as we know, that obvious sort of corruption is rare. You must appreciate however, that corruption may take subtle but equally destructive forms.

Among other things, a dishonest judge can ignore evidence, twist rules and procedure, obstruct the record, retaliate, manufacture facts or ignore others, allow infirm claims or dismiss valid ones, deny admission of evidence prejudicial to the favoured party, suborn perjury, mischaracterize pleadings, engage in ex parte communication and misapply the law.

When he or she does these things intentionally, (motivation is a separate issue) he commits a crime. Petty or grand, the acts are still crimes. It takes surprisingly little to “steer” a case.

New Zealand’s political movers and shakers have been very slow to wake up to a new reality, that being that there are now a great many foreign eyes watching their every move, their thoroughly corrupt behaviour and the actions of New Zealand’s corrupt police force and it’s politically active ever so obliging bent judiciary.


Cameron 4

I, DAVID CAMERON swear that I will well and truly serve Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Her heirs and successors, according to law, in the office of District Court Judge; and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of New Zealand without fear or favour, affection or ill will. So help me God.”

Whanganui Law Society

9 Market Place,

Whanganui 4500,

New Zealand

Dear Ms Yvonne Nyenhuis

This is a very serious complaint against your Branch Vice President Harry Mallalieu.

I refer to the Court record where the Crown Prosecutor Harry Mallalieu asks Crown witness Stephen Poynter a few leading and Court misleading questions. See attached Court documents.

Q   Now if I could take you back to August of 2011, the first being the 3rd of August?

A   Hmm

Q   Do you recall particular use of your firearm on that day?

A   No I don’t, no, I mean, I’ve, you know, it doesn’t, that day to any other day is just a-     [A stupid liar struggling and failing to come up with a plausible lie]

 So you wouldn’t be able to tell us exactly what you were doing-

A   On that day?

Q    -shooting on that day?

A   No.

If you refer to his attached Brief of Evidence signed and dated 7/5/2012 you will see that Poynter did remember what he did that day the 3rd of August. But Mr Mallalieu knowing that Poynter was lying with his final “No” answer was satisfied with Poynter’s false replies and moved quickly on to his next attempt to pervert the course of justice.


Q And what about the 23rd of August?

A   Ah, I think it says there that I was, I would’ve rung the police and said what was happening so if I was – if there was being a home kill done with a pig then that’s what I would’ve been doing, yeah.

Q   But you don’t specifically remember that date because –

A   Well no.

Q   – a long time ago I suppose?

A     A long time ago and they weren’t, they were just a, just another occurrence. Another event.

I have highlighted part of the above sentence because when Poynter said that he was letting slip that he had been reading his attached Brief of Evidence just prior to taking the witness stand and that he was fully conversant with it and that the Crown Prosecutor induced answer that he could not remember what he was doing that day was another deliberate lie.

So what we have here is Officer of the Court, Crown Prosecutor and Whanganui Law Society Branch Vice President Harry Mallialieu twice attempting to pervert the course of justice by firstly, knowingly and willingly eliciting false testimony from a sworn witness and then again by contradicting that same witness’s true testimony with another attempt  to nullify that testimony by again introducing the false notion that Poynter’s memory of what he did that day was either faulty or non existent.   It is clear from the Court record that Poynter told the Court that he did remember what happened that day, the 23rd of August 2011. He told the Court that he’d rung the police and told them he was intending to home kill a pig, but Mr Mallialieu then attempted to muddy the waters with a question very similar to his earlier one, “So you wouldn’t be able to tell us exactly what you were doing-“. This time he asked Poynter, “But you don’t specifically remember that date because -“, and he asked that leading question solely to get another no answer in order to mislead the Court into accepting the lie that Poynter suffers from a noticeable form of time induced memory loss and also to make sure that Poynter was fully aware that Judge Cameron wouldn’t censure him if he continued to feign memory loss when he didn’t want to answer awkward questions during cross-examination. From that time on whenever Poynter didn’t want to answer a question with a provable lie he either feigned memory loss or deflected the question with, “the Police will have those records.”

Also, Mr Mallialieu asked Poynter the Court recorded question, “But you don’t specifically remember that date because -“, because he was fully aware that Poynter was acting illegally and contrary to written police instructions when he fired his high-powered 243 rifle FOUR times on the night of the third of August 2011 and had lied to police about it in his attached Brief of Evidence. See attached Police instructions. So that makes it three, and if you accept the above underlined sentence as correct, four times in the space of about 1 minute that your Mr Mallialieu attempted to pervert the course of justice in a Court of law.

It’s all there in black and white, no ifs and no buts; the red herrings about remembering or failing to remember what happened on SPECIFIC dates do not rule out the instances of serious malfeasance in any way.

Yours truly,

J Van Der Lubbe

22A Paterson Street,


Poynter Statement 7 5 12

PS 2

Poynter statement 3

Comms Printout


Me and Sergeant Colin Wright on the evening of the 23/4/2010.


Me……………..”Can you see the point that you should have warned me?” [That Poynter had warned the Police that he was about to discharge firearms near us]

Wright………..”I hear what you’re saying, the problem is if he’s shooting on his land there’s no need to warn anybody else.”

Me……………..”And ricochets don’t matter? [Or shocking gunfire either?]

Wright………..”Well we don’t know that you’re on the back of your land do we.”

Me……………..”That’s the whole point, ring me, warn me, if he rings you to say he’s going to fire a shot, warn me so I’m not up the back and get accidentally shot.”

Wright………..”OK I hear what you’re saying and I’ll take that on board.

Me……………. “Nothing’ll happen though aye, It’ll happen again, I won’t be warned, I’ll never be warned.”

Wright………..”Just a moment, if you’re at the back of your land how will we be able to warn you, have you got a cell phone?”


Me………………”I want to be warned.”

Wright…………”If he’s shooting on his land and he phones us to say he’s doing that…………….

Me……………….”Prior, I want to be warned.”

Wright…………”You want a phone call to say that he’s doing that?”

Me………………”Before, so I don’t go up there.”

Wright…………”So what you’re saying is that you deserver a warning as well?”

Me………………”I deserve a warning because I am the person effected most.”

Wright………….What you’re saying is if he is going to do some shooting you want to be told about it as well.”

Me……………….Yeah prior, so I’ve got time to not go there or be warned so I don’t shit my pants when he fires it off. That’s fair enough isn’t it?”

Wright…………”I understand what you are saying and it is a fair point.”

Me………………”Yeah good.”

Wright…………”Any other issues.”


Eight times I said warn, warned or warning but I was talking to deliberately deaf ears.

And did their ’DO NOT  WARN  the Van Der Lubbes’ if Poynter rings to warn police that he is about to shoot policy change? Of course not, they want us to be shocked or better still shot.. Do you now see why I loath the cops?



District Court Judge David Cameron

C/- The Whanganui District Court

Cnr 10 Market Place & Bates Street,


Dear Sir,

Further to my letter dated 17 June 2013.

Guess what? For the first time ever the Wanganui Police rang and warned me that my nutty neighbour Stephen Poynter was about to fire off one of his guns near me.

At 4.50pm on the 19th of September 2013 Sergeant Shawn Jones rang me on my cell phone (So effortless and reasonable) and said that Stephen Poynter was about to shoot some goats on his place with his suppressed 22 rifle. I asked Sergeant Jones why the cops hadn’t given me warnings of imminent gunfire years ago but all he had to say was that he was given the job to warn me.  Anyway, I thanked him for the warning and ended the conversation. I should have asked Jones why “in the realms of Christendom” does the psychopathic provocateur Stephen Poynter still possesses firearms, but unfortunately I didn’t think of it at the time.

It is a fact that the Crown lawyers have come into the possession of my 17 June letter to you because they have added it to their Appeal Court documents (The mud slinging continues!) so I presume you gave a copy of it to either them or the cops.

  Here’s what I reckon has happened and feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.

When you read the Police Comms Event Chronology where it says, “Apparently the neighbours don’t get on and the neighbour at 26A is supposed ring us if he is going to be shooting but we never tell informt.” [my emphasis] you realised that the Police and their complicit henchmen Rowe and Mallalieu had used you as an eager dupe to further their perverse, get that Dutch bastard no matter what plan, and you, in a justifiable fit of embarrassed anger, tore a strip off the corrupt cops who then decided it might be wise to reverse their sadistic “we never tell informt” policy.

The cops gave habitual perjurer Stephen Poynter carte blanch to provoke me into taking the law into my own hands (the serious danger to my life and limb was a bonus for them) and when their corrupt scheme finally paid dividends they, or the crooked Lance Rowe, roped you in (your oppressive demeanor from day one leaves little doubt about you having been thoroughly primed) by telling you that I am some sort of deluded “attention seeker” who needed to be beaten into submission. Well I don’t feel at all intimidated by the temporarily negative Court outcome but I am very pleased that the manic shit-stirring and unannounced gunfire (thanks for that) has finally ended.

Yours truly,

Jacobus Van Der Lubbe,

22B Paterson Street,



Cameron hasn’t commented on my letter so my scenario must have been correct.



Jury no-shows prompt fine warning

By Court Reporter

Nov 27, 2014

A judge has blasted Wanganui people for not turning up for jury service.

The trial of a woman charged with failing to provide the necessaries for a child under 16 has not been able to proceed for two days because of a lack of jury members.

The woman, who has name suppression, pleaded not guilty.

The trial was set to begin this week in the Wanganui District Court.

However, a lack of people answering their jury summonses meant that the trial was unable to go ahead.

After too few turned up on Tuesday morning, an effort was made to physically contact those summoned. But yesterday only eight jurors had taken their seats in the box before the court ran out of people to call.

Judge David Cameron said those who didn’t show up would face the consequences.

“I send a clear message to the Wanganui community that failing to attend jury service is totally unacceptable because the court can’t function properly,” he said.

“Those who blatantly disregard their summons will be arrested and fined.”

He thanked those who had turned up and acknowledged they had been “significantly inconvenienced because of the selfishness and dereliction of duty of others”.

Judge Cameron said it was also unfair on the defendant.

The woman was remanded on bail to appear today.



Weapon leads to community work sentence

By Melissa Wishart

May 15, 2015

A WOMAN who revealed to police she was carrying an offensive weapon told the Whanganui District Court she needed the weapon because she couldn’t trust the police to protect her.

Lynley Anne Bowlin pleaded guilty to possessing an offensive weapon following an incident where she went to a Gibson St address and yelled at the occupants. Police arrested her and, on the way to the police station, she told the officers she had a jemmy bar with her, police prosecutor Sergeant Rachel Willemsen said on Tuesday.

Bowlin told police “she always has something on her when she’s in Aramoho”.

Defence lawyer Anna Brosnahan said Bowlin “had a chequered history in terms of being the victim of violence in Wanganui,” which was why she carried the bar.

She said Bowlin went to the house because the occupants had stolen her son’s car and she wanted to ask “what was going on and why”.

During her sentencing, Bowlin gave an impassioned speech to Judge David Cameron, saying she had been stalked and attacked at times throughout her life.

“I don’t trust the police to protect me, they didn’t when I needed them,” she said.

She continued speaking about how she could not rely on police to keep her safe.

Judge Cameron told Bowlin “that’s your point of view”, to which she responded: “That’s my life, sir.”

A heated exchange followed, in which Judge Cameron said he was “not going to put up with people like you carrying weapons around for whatever reason”.

“It’s totally unacceptable,” he said.

He sentenced Bowlin to 40 hours of community work.

“Well I won’t be doing it,” she told him, before being guided out of the dock by an officer, swearing as she went.

Judge Cameron warned Bowlin as she left to do her community work, otherwise he would send her to prison.


“that’s your point of view”, Is Cameron’s answer to anything that doesn’t agree with his pro-police/prosecution point of view.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: