On 22 October I sacked my lawyer citing irreconcilable differences after he insulted me and discriminated against me multiple times. The final straw were two conversations where he asked me repeatedly what health care I wanted, firstly not allowing me to answer, then when I started to explain my ACC rehab plan from 2009 he told me it was meaningless. He then started repeating the same thing about what care I wanted over and over again, one of the times he did it very slowly. There is something seriously wrong with the man and I refuse to deal with him, also given my severe stress disorder I no longer trusted him. He also called me things that were sexually derogatory in nature and extremely offensive to any woman my age.
I sent WGNCriminallegalAid all the correspondence between me and the lawyer to prove my case as I have had serious issues with in the past. Although I emailed the complaint they have refused to send me the legal aid decision electronically, they sent it by mail so I have had to type it out to post it here. Firstly my response to their decision letter. then you can see their decision letter which will shock you.
Last time they refused me legal aid for this current case that is now almost two years old, I was not quick enough – because I was so unwell and did not know what to do that I missed the 10 day deadline. This time the letter dated 5 November arrived at my home on 10 November so I only have 5 days to get it done. These complaints are very distressing – mostly because I know I will be ignored but also because of the gross injustice I am being subjected to just for wanting my ACC care reinstated after winning two reviews nine years ago.
11 November 2019
I disagree with the decision to withdraw legal aid and not provide another lawyer and want it reviewed by someone who isn’t corrupt for the following reasons.
- The first lawyer you gave me didn’t work in the Wairarapa region, it was only two days before court and I contacted him, he had never heard of me. He told me then he didn’t work in the Wairarapa and hadn’t for years. Legal Aid Services already know this from previous complaints that were ignored.
- The second lawyer was Jock Blathwayt and at the time there was a conflict of interest and Jock agreed it wasn’t appropriate for him to be my lawyer. Legal Aid Services knew this and still prevented me from getting a lawyer for over a year, illegally.
- Preventing me from getting a lawyer not only seriously traumatised me and caused me humiliation and harm, it also delayed my case and perverted justice. Which has resulted in me being charged with 25 different minor spurious crimes since.
- The relationship with the lawyer broke down as my valid complaint and request to have my case reassigned proves. Which you are unjustly and cruelly ignoring. This is a valid reason to be given a new lawyer according to laws you quote.
- It would be an injustice for a purposely impoverished disabled Civil Society Actor in area of suicide, abusive mental health, sexual abuse care, homelessness, civil/human rights and inequality, to be denied a lawyer. Especially when I live in the district with highest rate of suicide and self-harm in New Zealand.
As Jock Blathwayt and I are no longer in this legally conflicting situation, if you want to reassign Jock that is fine with me. It is not me who the problem here, it is corrupted Legal Aid Services and the appalling disrespectful behaviour of your staff and lawyers like Alisdair Ross who specialise in denigrating victims of abuse with mental health issues.
Still horrified you stated in your letter that the first lawyer was forced to withdraw or dismissed by me when you know from previous complaints he didn’t work in Wairarapa.
Civil Society Activist
On behalf of the Legal Services Commissioner
5 November 2019
Ms J R
(for enquiries: Kathryn Ross 0800 253 425)
Legal aid no: (which I won’t give you
Lawyer : (which I will give you if you want me to)
Your Case: Fail to answer bail: other acts/statues; Wilful Damage, Other charges < 6 mths x2
Dear Ms J R
About your legal aid
On behalf of the Commissioner, we write in response to your numerous emails requesting us to reassign this matter from Alisdair Ross to a new lawyer. We have considered your request and now respond as follows:
- We will not assign you a new lawyer, and we have decided to withdraw aid, because it is no longer in the interests of justice for you to receive it (s 29(a)(ii) of the Legal services Act 2011 – “the Act”)
- We refer to the Commissioner’s “Granting Decisions – Guidelines”, which set out the grounds for reassigning or terminating aid. The relevant part of the guidelines reads:
- It is expected that reassignment and terminations of assignment will occur infrequently.
- To request termination of an assignment the lead provider (lawyer) and/or aided person must submit a written request to the legal aid office, which sets out the reasons termination is sought,
- The aided person can request a change of provider once: a second reassignment may be only in exceptional circumstances. Grounds for reassignment are:
- Conflict of interest.
- The provider has insufficient time available.
- — not relevant
- —- not relevant
- A genuine breakdown in professional relationship such that the case is unable to be advanced.
- ——- not relevant
- To date, you have had 2 lawyers assigned to act for you in these matters. We do not accept it would be in the interests of justice for a third lawyer to be assigned to represent you, or for aid to continue, for these reasons:
2.1 The 2 lawyers who have represented you are competent and experienced. They have been dismissed by you, or been forced to withdraw, for reasons which have no bearing on their competence or skill.
2.2 The Commissioner’s policy on applicants (such as yourself) requesting a change of lawyer is clear. You have previously been made aware of this policy.
2.3 Exceptional circumstances do not exist here which justify us granting you another lawyer. Any breakdown in professional relationship in this case has been caused by your behaviour towards previous lawyers.
2.4 This is not the first matter in which you have caused your relationship with lawyers to break down. We refer, for example, to legal aid file 18866786 which concerned a wilful damage charge you faced last year. (Note from me: I had a great lawyer, Suzie Barnes, we lost the case and the two officers who violently assaulted me and threatened me with worse lied in court – but Suzie was still a good lawyer, just way out of her depth. Especially when ACC lawyers Meredith Connell threatened a judicial review that would taken months if she kept asking for the REAL NAME (they give false names) of my ACC case manager to be subpoenaed as a witness to prove she contacted me by phone and promised me my care would be reinstated. When Suzie asked for CEO of ACC instead, the big guns really came out. Suzie is not part of a huge legal company like Meredith Connell, she could not defend me. There were also other perversions of justice. As a result of losing this case I threw red washable poster paint on the white ribbon banner inside Masterton police station that said SPEAK OUT AGAINST VIOLENCE TOWARDS WOMEN and left a piece of art as well.
2.5 We refer to Cant v R (2013) NZCA 513, Pitiroi v Police (CRI-2012-463-38), and Pointon v Police (2013) NZHC 2352. These cases establish the fact a defendant is not legally represented does not necessarily mount to a miscarriage of justice, or a breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act (BORA). (NOTE: I could not find these cases on any legal database.)
2.6 You have had ample opportunity and been given the right (more than once), to receive legal assistance without cost, as provided by s 24(f) of BORA. However the Supreme Court noted in R v Condon (2006) NZSC 62: “…. If the accused…. Is rightly refused legal aid….. there will have been no breach of the s 24 (BORA) rights.” (NOTE: Found this case and it doesn’t apply to my case at all.)
2.7 Here, it is reiterated, you have been given reasonable opportunity of legal representation twice. It cannot be argued unfairness accrues to you, based on this ground.
2.8 We have no confidence, if we assigned you a third lawyer, your behaviour towards that lawyer would be different from your behaviour towards your previous lawyers. (NOTE: What behaviour, last few lawyers been OK, just not Alisdair Ross.)
3.10 S 3 of the Act imposes a duty on the Commissioner to deliver legal aid efficiently and effectively. Given the above circumstances, it would be neither efficient nor effective for us to assign a third lawyer to act for you, or for aid to continue.
2.S 31(2) of the Act requires us to give you a reasonable opportunity to make submissions about why aid should not be withdrawn. Accordingly we will give you 10 working days from the date of this letter to make these submissions which, once received, will be considered by us. (NOTE: So if they weren’t forced by law to listen to reasons for not withdrawing legal aid then they would just ignore me anyway. Oh boy do these people hate poor people!)
We have written to your lawyer about this decision.
If you wish to discuss this further, talk to your lawyer or contact Kathryn Ross on 0800 2 LEGAL AID (0800 253 425) or by email WGNCriminallegalaid@justice.govt.nz
Yours sincerely (lol shd have been faithfully – no sincerity in this letter)
If you disagree with the decision made you may apply for a reconsideration using the reconsideration form on our website or calling Kathryn Ross………..
(I phoned and was told just to send an email).
This is the first time I have read the document properly and I found a whole heap of other BS I never saw before. Like my lawyer last year Susie Barnes was a good lawyer, just way out of her depth and resources. The lawyer I have had in the past have been OK, they all got me off vast majority of my charges – I only been convicted of 3 things – Wilful trespass of Law Society for going there and refusing to leave until I got a lawyer – graffiti a few years ago and wilful damage last year. I have been charged with DOZENS OF CRIMES, MULTIPLE TIMES – most of the charges never even ended up in court because police would drop the charges after three months, just before it got to a serious court sitting. Gee I wonder why!
I had to represent myself – I was capable of it then – against DHB wilfil trespass charges for a legal protest I did and I won – the case was so bad and their witness the security guard had never been told about BORA and the rights of people to protest on public property. I asked for compensation for being put through that court case unnecessarily – I was insulted, degraded and ridiculed by the CEO at the time for even asking.
Anyway, must get back to Criminal Legal Aid and add to my complaint above – I HAVE A LOT MORE TO FKN SAY NOW. WTF are these people on?? Lawyers don’t like me for my protests about wanting me and other mentally injured suicidal abuse victims – mostly women – to get the professional ACC treatment care rehabilitation and homes we are entitled to under NZ law. Mmmmm the legal profession – terrorising a victim of sexual abuse who asking for health care they entitled to – now why would they possibly do that – ewwwwww. Do you think Kathryn Ross might be these abusers in the system’s madam – just like that woman did for Geoffrey Epstein. Ewwwww
Below are more emails I have sent to Wellington Criminal Legal Aid, I post them to show people what goes on, validate if its happening to them and to give people knowledge of how they might approach something similar.
Sent: Tuesday, 12 November 2019 5:37 PM
To: email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: I have more to add to my complaint and request for a new lawyer
I have just read your decision thoroughly – I was too traumatised and unwell by what I had read earlier to do it. I see I have until the 19 November before the 10 days is up to provide the information necessary for you to consider. I have found several other things you have said that have me in shock, especially about lawyers, my lawyer Suzie Barnes was great, just way out of her depth. She still says hi to me in the street and has told me how deeply distressed she is that she cannot represent me due to her lack of resources and the horrendous injustices I am up against at the hands of very powerful cruel corrupt people. Injustices all people with mental health issues are experiencing at the moment according to the United Nations human rights reports I have seen and been involved in as a Civil Society Actor.
Please advise me urgently the names of these PREVIOUS LAWYERS where there was a breakdown of the relationship because of MY BEHAVIOUR towards them???? Please advise me what that breakdown was, you must have written record of it because I cannot recall many details after this long. You must have information on your file about what happened with each of these lawyers that is inaccurate and I am certainly not aware of. Did the bad ones I sacked for good reason say I was mean to them and lie about what happened – gee I wonder why they would do that?
Is this something to do with how all established lawyers accept #metoo sexual harassment and denigration of women as normal within your profession/industry, because that is what it feels like.
I think I might have sacked two really bad lawyers in the past nine years since I was forced to protest about being illegally denied ACC care, cause they were both really bad and didn’t know how to deal with my BORA related criminal charges for my NON-VIOLENT LEGAL CHALLENGES of people in power. I’m pretty sure I got better lawyers after those two and won both cases, one of them in the Appeal Court from what I remember of the years of fighting for health care and justice I am entitled to under NZ constitutional laws and signed ratified UN treaties. Please send me the details since you are using them to terrorise and pervert justice now – least you can do is full disclosure of these allegations and what I am up against so I can refute them.
Please advise how I look up the case law you quoted about what you are doing to me not being a violation of NZ BORA – which of course it is – I hadn’t actually thought of that, thanks for the tip. I didn’t realise I was supposed to be a qualified lawyer with access to case law in order to defend myself against the Legal Aid COMMISSIONER. I thought the point of disabled poor people getting legal aid and lawyers was because they didn’t know the law and particularly couldn’t access things like case law to defend themselves against very powerful abusers of power, right and justice. I am quite sure my situation is nothing like the case law you quoted, given the inaccurate and deceitful things you have referred to in your decision.
If you know I cannot access those case law examples of why you are not violating BORA through the internet then please provide copies of them in full.
Mmmm trying to think of those lawyers I had before Suzie Barnes? I remember one guy, who was a proud member of the National party, withdrew when I said I didn’t trust him, because I don’t trust anybody, I don’t know any badly abused and neglected abuse victim who does – I was in shock and very distressed he was allowed do that. You’ll have to remind me of any others, people with Complex PTSD who subjected to prolonged psychological, physical and economic trauma often forget things that aren’t important.
Sounds like you’ve all been discriminating against me, gossiping and illegally sharing information about me that isn’t even true. That must be why I have experienced such toxic hatred and bigotry from Legal Aid services – I could never understand why and what was going on. I would imagine cruel corrupt bigots within NZ police and mental health services would also have information you would be relying on, please provide anything like that as well. Is it any wonder at the UN Human Rights consultation process last year, the lecture theatre at Victoria of about 50 people, all but two were there about serious human rights abuses against people with mental health issues – just like me. Which it appears you are participating in with regards to me simply getting a lawyer.
From news reports and lawyers I have spoken to it appears to be more a case of lawyers choosing to do commercial and easy law for rich people that pays well, rather than actually uphold law and protect poor and disabled people from abuses of power.
I would also point out I have a serious life-threatening stress disorder with related communication impairments, especially when subjected to discrimination, degradation, insults and bigotry, as is the life of a many disabled people with Complex PTSD – as a result of sexual violence and criminal neglect. I have serious, well founded, trust issues and once someone loses that trust the professional relationship can break down – YOU WOULDN’T BE ANY DIFFERENT IF IT HAPPENED TO YOU. No rich person would have accepted what was said to me, they would have got another lawyer immediately – so why should a poor person be punished and have their legal aid illegally withheld.
So please consider my email yesterday just the beginning of my evidence – you will have received all of it by the 19 November, when you can put it all together and consider it – lol. I expect the rest of your file in the next few days so I can check it for accuracy.
Also I would like to comment that your letter was extremely litigious considering I am a disabled lay person citizen and you are a Commission, not a court. Perhaps my idea of transferring all commissions, tribunals etc back under our traditional legal system has more merit than I first thought.
Please provide the information requested above in the next two days so I can be sure to provide all the evidence you need, within your 10 day time limit, to make a right and just decision.
I can certainly feel the bigotry, hatred and evil of passive inaction many affluent people who work in justice, welfare and health exhibit towards disabled people like myself.
Sent: Tuesday, 12 November 2019 6:40 PM
To: email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Sorry this wasn’t the case the numbers and names didn’t all match up
I can’t find Cant v R or Pointon v police or Pitiroi v police so far, please provide a link or copies of these cases.
I did find R v Condon – which has no relevance to my case whatsoever. My wanting to sack Alisdair Ross is to do with ongoing behaviour I didn’t like but put up with, but definitely could no longer cope with after his extremely bizarre bigoted insulting behaviour of recent phone conversations about me getting my ACC care reinstated and what that involved. Also about him making sexually inappropriate derogatory comments calling me a Cougar – ewwwww – which I had not done anything about, except tell him how bad it made me feel – which he did not acknowledge or apologise for. I felt it necessary to mention it after the phone calls as it was relevant and I should have made a formal complaint about it but was too scared I would end up with no lawyer and after the appalling treatment I had received from Legal Aid Services and Law Society in the past knew they would just abuse me for it. #metoo and kia kaha to all those innocent young women in the misogynist world of law.
EVERYBODY had been telling me for ages my criminal case had nothing to do with ACC illegally withholding health care and I even have a criminally corrupt psychiatric report to say I was delusional for even thinking my criminal case and civil rights abuses by ACC and others were related. So the discussion Alisdair and I were having wasn’t even related to my criminal case, it was related to what health care I needed, entitled to by law and wanted from ACC. Apparently ACC had a list of OTs to choose from and as soon as I made the decision my care would be reinstated after waiting nine years and winning two reviews. As they have said this at least three times before over past nine years and failed to do it I would only believe something like that unless it happened. ACC telling a lawyer (or ACC reviewer) they will do something doesn’t mean it will happen, ACC have told lots of people my care would be reinstated but it never did. Also I have been in regular contact with ACC begging for my care to be reinstated, they have never sent me a list of OTs to choose from. The one they guaranteed would reinstate my care last year refused to do it WITHOUT REASON – I made complaints, they were ignored.
My situation makes the Condon case irrelevant and that you quoted it, you corrupt! If you want to get really legal about it. I don’t blame the lawyer from withdrawing, I would have as well, this was a business deal gone wrong, nothing to do with politics or civil, disabled, human, economic social and cultural rights and violations of criminal law by police, ACC, Forensic Mental Health, DHB, etc WHICH MY CASE IS ABOUT. Thank you so much for the information though, its really interesting. I was at law school before I was raped and my life destroyed by ACC and those supposed to care for, rehabilitate and protect mentally injured victims of crime. It took me until 35 yrs old to work out what I wanted to be and it was all taken from me. I now live destitute and still fighting for ACC entitlements so I can heal, return to work and be able to live with dignity and in safety, now I am 54 I am not allowed a student loan. I also live with a $7,000 student debt from trying to get the qualifications to follow my talent and my passion.
Sent: Tuesday, 12 November 2019 7:08 PM
To: email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: I have searched the following database I found with no results, do these cases you refer to even exist?
Below is the database I searched with all the information you gave me about the case law you were relying on – they all came up NO SEARCH RESULTS.
I would have thought with all those numbers and details at least something would have come up. Do these cases even exist, are you that corrupt you make these things up to mislead and further oppress disabled oppressed #metoo victims of crime? I know there is a huge amount of evidence being presented by victims against Crown Law perverting justice in the current inquiry into abuse and torture in government institutions. Quoting Crown Law case in regards to a sexual abuse victim, fighting for treatment care rehabilitation and home they are entitled to in order to recover and return to as normal a life as possible under ACC and other laws, seems to me an even more evil crime against victims. What do you think?
I am due in court again on 18 November I will make sure to provide this information to the judge