Perverting the Course of Justice (x±)
20170306 UPDATE – MORE RECOVERED FORENSIC EVIDENCE, BEING INSERTED SOON
updates in progress – check back frequently
Example of Data Destruction by the Australian Fraudsters
The Plaintiff’s claim of AUD 697,248.60 is for liquidated damages in relation to recovery of Data and Evidentiary Material destroyed by the Defendants, pursuant to the Plaintiff’s overarching RHOAU Contractor Services Agreement and subsequent revisions, agreed by the Defendants upon the provision of their services to the Plaintiff and/or Rhodium Australia Pty Ltd (“RHOAU”) from 2007 onwards. The Plaintiff’s Liquidated Damages clauses, including but not limited to (a) Section 3.0 of the RHO InfoSec 2009 IT/IS Policy define the pre-agreed method of calculation giving rise to the amount of AUD 697,248.60 as the AUD equivalent of the Plaintiff’s normal hourly rate of CHF 9,888 per hour multiplied by the time expended (60 hours of forensic analysis and recovery performed), and (b) Section 6.0 which relates to litigation and costs incurred. The 3rd Defendant (Margaret Teresa Cunniffe) was the De Jure Director of the 1st Defendant (Synergize Consulting Pty Ltd) until her Bankruptcy in October 2009 at which point she maintained its Management and Control as Shadow Director of the 1st Defendant. The 2nd Defendant (David Andrew Brown) was the De Facto Director of the 1st Defendant from 2011 onwards. The 2nd Defendant and 3rd Defendant are De Facto Partners having been so for around 3.5yrs.
Notwithstanding the fact that the 1st Defendant is a façade used by the 2nd and 3rd Defendants, or in the alternative, the 1st Defendant is the Agent of the 2nd and 3rd Defendants, under Section 4.0 of the RHO InfoSec 2009 IT/IS Policy, the 2nd and 3rd Defendants as Directors and Controllers of the 1st Defendant are ‘personally liable on a full indemnity basis’ and the Plaintiff ‘may take action against the Supplier and/or Management interchangeably as if they were one and the same on a joint and several basis’.
On 30 January 2013 RHOAU, an entity financed by the Plaintiff, commenced judicial proceedings namely WA MC 1908 of 2013, against the 1st Defendant, the 2nd Defendant and the 3rd Defendant. On 11 April 2013 the 2nd Defendant commenced VIC CC CI-13-01735 against the Plaintiff. The 3rd Defendant is also named in the Plaintiff’s Counterclaim in VIC CC CI-13-01735.
On 20 December 2013 attorneys of the Plaintiff in Victoria demanded via registered letter and facsimile to the attorneys of the Defendants McDonald Slater & Lay, the return of assets which belonged to the Plaintiff and/or RHOAU which had been unlawfully retained by the Defendants. The Plaintiff had originally loaned the assets to the Defendants to enable the Defendants to perform their obligations under the overarching RHOAU Contractor Services Agreement.
The assets, included but were not limited to, accounting data, project data, technical schematics, various work-in-progress materials, and extremely valuable intellectual property, collectively ‘Data and Evidentiary Material’.
On 20 December 2013 McDonald Slater & Lay confirmed by letter ‘Our clients deny that they hold any personal or real property which belong to your clients and deny holding any confidential information which belong to your clients’.
On 12 February 2014 attorneys for the Plaintiff in Victoria made a further demand to McDonald Slater & Lay stating that the data was ‘not only sensitive and confidential, it is also critical to our clients being successful in the defence to your client’s claim and in prosecuting our clients’ Counterclaim (presently stayed).’
Following the Plaintiff’s further demand, on 20 February 2014 the 2nd Defendant delivered some of the aforementioned assets to the attorneys of the Plaintiff. The Defendants and McDonald Slater & Lay had previously denied those items as being in their possession on 20 December 2013.
The Plaintiff, who has professional qualifications in Information Security and Forensic Investigation, reviewed the returned equipment and noted that the required Data and Evidentiary Material previously present on the laptops and mobile phone had been deliberately deleted by the Defendants in their attempt to evade Criminal Culpability.
The Plaintiff was forced to incur significant costs and undertake forensic analysis and the overall analysis confirmed the considerable effort on the part of the Defendants to destroy data and logs irrecoverably on the laptops. The Defendants had also deleted SMS messages, logs and contacts from the mobile phone, which was also Evidentiary Material.
The analysis revealed the existence of evidence obfuscating software ‘HideMyAss’ and a subscription linked to the Defendants, that the Defendants had disposed of various assets of the Plaintiff via Criminal Conversion and credited the proceeds of those sales to the bank account of the 2nd Defendant, and that McDonald Slater & Lay may have assisted the Defendants in Perverting the Court of Justice.
The Defendants’ Destruction of Evidence has compromised the Plaintiff’s and/or RHOAU’s position in various judicial proceedings, including but not limited to, WA MC 1908 of 2013, WA DC APP 94 of 2013, and WA DC 730 of 2014.
The Plaintiff’s case of S1029/2012/R in the Singapore High Court has been similarly compromised and losses arising from the Destruction of Evidence were foreseeably significant prior to and at the time of its destruction.
The Plaintiff would have been able to properly plead his Cases against the Defendants but for the Defendants’ Destruction of Evidence to their obvious advantage.
The absence of the data at the required time has already prejudiced the Plaintiff’s and.or RHOAU’s position in relation to timings of production of Evidentiary Material in the judicial proceedings referenced, and has directly caused the Plaintiff to fail to comply with Orders of Court, caused the Plaintiff to have extremely significant issues of credibility within Court, caused the Plaintiff to have had adverse costs orders awarded against himself, and which therefore directly led to actual judgments being awarded against himself.
Notwithstanding the fact that the Destruction of Evidence is a Criminal Offence under the WA Criminal Code Compilation Act 1913 Section 132 (liable to imprisonment for 7 years) and a Criminal Offence under the VIC Crimes Act 1958 Sections 253-255 (liable to imprisonment for 5 years), the actions of the Defendants have caused significant financial losses to the Plaintiff.
Notwithstanding the commencement of judicial proceedings on 30 January 2013 involving the Defendants which would have immediately classified the Data as Evidentiary Material, the Defendants were put on specific written notice on 20 December 2013 and 12 February 2014 that the Data was in fact Evidence specifically required by the Plaintiff in order to properly defend his case in VIC CC CI-13-01735 involving the Defendants.
The Plaintiff, having now recovered the Data and Evidentiary Material, has appealed VIC CC CI-13-01735 to the Supreme Court of Victoria under S APCI 2014 0083. WA DC APP 94 of 2013 has been appealed to the Supreme Court of Western Australia under WA SC APP CACV 52 of 2014.
The Plaintiff’s therefore claims AUD 697,248.60 as liquidated damages being due and immediately payable by the Defendants to the Plaintiff in relation to only the recovery of Data and Evidentiary Material, and further claims will be brought in due course as losses are calculated under the Liquidated Damages and other clauses.
Classic Perversion of the Course of Justice by Edward de Saram and Praxy de Saram
I was brutally assaulted after telling Edward de Saram that I would open him up with Court Orders following my discovery of Edward de Saram’s involvement in the destruction of evidence and electronic surveillance. Edward de Saram responded with diversionary tactics and gaslighting. But the best part of all was the audio recordings of Edward de Saram and Praxy de Saram, documenting their Fraud, which I extracted in a forensically sound manner off a Nokia N8 that I found in his house, after I got myself out of the Psychiatric Facility.
Renzie Arsecularatne Presidents Counsel, confirmed to Edward de Saram and Praxy de Saram that there was no process that I could be forcibly removed and taken to hospital. This position is crystal clear from the recording. Furthermore if I had gone to visit a doctor, but could not stay for long because I was pressed for time, then that is not refusal to see a doctor! This is another Fraud in that ‘Joe refuses to see a doctor’ – that is nonsense – I was always going to Asiri Surgical but after the events of December 2015 I have been unable to leave my house for personal security reasons. If I were living somewhere else then this issue would not arise. All these fools come and have conversations with me trying to get me to confirm certain things – it is laughable how they think they have got one up on me!!
Given the fact that Edward de Saram and Praxy de Saram were put on specific notice on 13 December 2015, that their plan was completely unlawful, then I will obviously be bringing a Criminal Prosecution in the UK with a damages claim on a full indemnity basis.
PDS alleges that JDS called her and said he would go nowhere. PDS asks EDS what to do. EDS pretends he has a Court Order from Hospital as he informs PDS. EDS clearly does NOT have a Court Order and looks to PDS to confirm the non-existent Court Order. PDS states that JDS has said that he is not going anywhere. JDS is not sure if this is entirely true. EDS says that unacceptable. PDS ask if JDS is not opening the door? Instead of answering that EDS states he is going to break down the door. PDS is concerned that JDS might jump. EDS asks PDS if JDS has agreed to open the door. PDS responds that JDS has said he is not going anywhere. PDS lies and states that JDS said that even if there is a Court Order he is not going anywhere.
EDS tells PDS to tell I that there is a Court Order from the Hospital and if he does not comply then they will break down the door. Interesting that there is no Court Order and that the plan is premeditated to break down the door. And if I will not be able to take his things. PDS asks EDS whether to pretend that there is a Police Order. EDS responds by saying to pretend there is a Court Order from a Sri Lankan hospital and they can go and take JDS by force. EDS tells PDS to say that they have already informed the police and the police are already with him. EDS tells PDS if they have to drag him then I will not be able to take anything. If I co-operates then I will be allowed by EDS to take his laptops etc. As it happens PDS is not that bright and for her to come out with ‘Police Order’ which confirms that there may have been a Search & Seizure Order and EDS and PDS prevented me from complying with it or challenging it.
Edward de Saram and Praxy de Saram were obsessed in having me sectioned and harming me via Electroconvulsive Therapy. It was the classic Problem>Reaction>Solution to get me out of the way to facilitate the fraudulent destruction of my evidence. Edward de Saram clearly takes offence to his perceived ‘reputational harm’ of Edward de Saram abusing Tania – of course he did – Tania has confirmed it herself and his behaviour is clearly that of someone attempting to destroy me because me is right and defending his beloved sister.
If you listen to this recording alone, you can understand Edward de Saram’s thought processes, of wanting to make things ‘look’ acceptable by getting a Cardiologist!
Obviously unethical and of course legal malpractice for Rienzie Arsecularatne to be working against the interests of his client Joe and misleading me to my detriment. This was when I was in the Mental Facility. PDS says ‘If you can see him then he will know you are not on our side’ – it is clear that Rienzie is obviously on the side of EDS and PDS and this is PDS instructing Rienzie to ‘merely go through the motions’. Rienize is following the instructions of PDS so it is clear whose side Rienzie is on and the game of PDS. The earlier part of the conversation has EDS stating he wants an ‘arms length lawyer’ so as to appear that there is no connection. Serious Fraudsters!
By way of information given the corruption occurring in Sri Lanka I will ONLY be seeing UK doctors from an agreed panel who has no connection to Edward de Saram or Praxy de Saram or their agents.
Multifaceted Frauds against Me – Areas
These are the areas which I have elucidated are the aspects which various parties are promoting, obviously they are denied:-
(a) Schizophrenia – I have never suffered from Schizophrenia – it is merely the fabrication of Edward de Saram and Newton Ranasinghe from 2001 onwards to pervert the course of justice in UK issues at the time, particularly after Edward de Saram assaulted me in Kandalama Hotel and then blamed me. Both then relied on the same in December 2015 onwards to their obvious advantage;
(b) Arms Dealing – my cryptographic work for clients comes under the Wassenaar Arrangement relating to Dual Use products, what they do with the technology is not my concern or under my control;
(c) Tax Fraud – neither my tax returns are fake nor we are claiming back GST unlawfully. We are currently obtaining original tax invoices from all parties. There have been no sales apart from rental income for various structures after 2012. That’s why there has been no tax returns in the last few years;
(d) Aerospace & Defence – I have excellent experience in this area but am not able to discuss the same – this seems to be one of the main issues, as is ‘who are my clients’ and ‘where is the money going’ 🙂 Additionally parties in Sri Lanka are stating that I have said that I advise the SL Army or words to that effect – that is absolute nonsense, and I will be expanding upon this. I know how these lies have started and they are in relation to an e-mail I sent Margaret Cunniffe (that name again) in February 2014.
(e) Google Articles – I never fled the UK after Rhodium PLC went into liquidation – simply obtaining my passport records from the UK Passport Office will confirm that;
(f) Being ‘Afraid’ to go to the UK – nonsense, in July 2015 I began setting up new structures with a view to transferring assets there. Unfortunately from 2001 onwards Edward de Saram controlled me with unnecessary medication and convinced me that there was a problem even though I did not find anything insurmountable – this is called Gaslighting. Any delays in the original matters are due to the fears of bad publicity of Edward de Saram and I have delayed nothing. Article 6 is relevant. Once I have regularised the asset positions and can fly, I’ll be back;
(g) Accounting Fraud – there is nothing wrong with our financial position – we just don’t know what it is because of the Australian fraudsters, but my sister is resolving that at speed. Nevertheless entities are solvent and have access to funds, but need a bit of time to mobilise;
(h) Computer Hacking – my skills in this area are weak, but I am sure that various disinformation I provided during July / August 2015 onwards has once again been manipulated and used against me by retards:-
(i) Being a CIA Agent – no way, but of course I know/knew various parties involved with Military Intelligence and Law Enforcement. When people in Sri Lanka ran various operations against me, I responded with training, and then people then took my response to confirm their original conclusion;
(j) Relationship with Parents – regrettably they have some desire to control me and continually promote themselves at the expense of my sister and I. Whilst they have been good at times, they also are self-destructive and inept in virtually all area. They have loaned funds but the amounts they owe me are much larger, which they forget when propagating lies to all and sundry. Clearly they are aware of impending issues and they are trying their utmost to disown me – the feeling is mutual however and they sabotage Tania and I and then complain about not repaying softloans etc. Everything is about to be audited and then we can see;
(k) Asset Freezing / Mareva Injuction – please do not do this, as I will be challenging it easily, on the basis of the plaintiff’s fraud, and their abuse of process. If there is something particular that people want then simply ASK ME DIRECTLY instead of demonising me and inciting violence;
(l) Paedophilia and Being Framed – what I said in various specific situations, has been taken out of context, and my sentences edited. This is a very interesting area, and I think the reason that people are avoiding me. Chamaree Silva is the fabricator of associated nonsense. I will be addressing this area in phenomenal detail and of course it is not true;
(m) Money Laundering – I have experience spanning 20yrs, from being involved in designing fake bank systems, to various investigations in the last few years. But I am NOT laundering money and my cash balances in all accounts are small as I have not been earning an income;
(n) Coronary Artery Ectasia – my coronary angiograms are on YouTube and unstable angina which I suffer from is unpredictable and debilitating. I also have Transient Ischaemic Attacks caused by the clotting. I do NOT use medicals reports to buy time in legal proceedings – this is the nonsense that Edward de Saram started by fraudulently self-prescribing psychotropic medication when I did not need it in the mid-2000s and further promoted by parties in Singapore and Australia, whilst they colleagues in Sri Lanka are stealing my possessions. If I need an Extension of Time then that is obtained on the merits – people destroying my evidence is a classic problem.
(o) Editing Videos – in relation to videos, when I say ‘I am going to edit them and put them on YouTube’ then I am obviously referring to highlights. We maintain the original and edited version. By edited I mean how 30mins of ‘cricket highlights’ are the best parts of the game. It does not mean that an LBW suddenly becomes a catch, and a ‘yes’ on an audio recording does not become a ‘no’;
(p) Recorded Calls – I record virtually all communications, because my own speech is continually manipulated and falsified. I do not modify evidence despite the lies of parties in Sri Lanka and Australia. Highlights are a subset of the original and we maintain both on systems;
(q) Fraudulent Judgement of David Brown – Margaret Cunniffe is the source of the lies – the agreement was inchoate and he had also stated it was null and void in 2012 but used it in 2014 to obtain judgment. Frankly I am tired of these fraudsters and now arming myself in no uncertain terms.
(r) October-December Scam – Margaret Cunniffe knows of my PTSD and she was instrumental in trying to create a worrying situation in relation to surveillance mirroring 2000. It failed miserably and I did not react to that but was continually poisoned by Chamaree Silva and exposed to microwave radiation. The plan was then to kill Shihara the Cat and cause me to require Electroconvulsive Therapy. It failed miserably because I identified it and got myself out of the Psychiatric Facility on my own merits.
(s) Not taking Medicine – another scam in which Margaret Cunniffe is trying to say that me not taking medication in November 2012 is the reason that she was head-butted. First and foremost I did not headbutt her and secondly I was not taking antipsychotic medication, the absence of which caused the fictitious headbutt. Absence of antidepressants makes someone depressed not violent in the manner she claims. She was my best friend in the whole world. Whilst I shout at everyone I never shouted at her. Thousands of call recordings and videos confirm this and I am going to upload them. I have given Margaret Cunniffe more money and helped her more than everyone else in my entire life combined. We are obtaining audited figures presently. Drawing pointless analogies is a joke and everyone in Sri Lanka then got onto this bandwagon about taking medicine. The people here seem to be told a topic and then they just repeat it like sheep. This is how violence was incited against me – a self-fulfilling prophecy and they destroyed my evidence and framed me thinking that they were doing something good. Chamaree Silva attempted to recreate the scene which fooled no-one except dim lawyers in Australia and elsewhere. SO when people were asking me to take medicine or go and see a doctor, I just bluffed as part of disinformation – I knew what they were angling for and I simply told them what they wanted to hear. It is not my problem if they are not sophisticated enough to understand what disinformation is 🙂
However the actual person who does not take medication and just chooses to stop is Margaret Cunniffe – her blaming me for exactly what she is guilty of is called Psychological Projection.
This is a recording from 20130519 in which I was in hospital after my first heart attack. At 05m:10s Margaret Cunniffe clearly states that she has stopped all her medication for ‘clarity of mind’.
This is a classic logical fallacy in which Margaret Cunniffe thinks ‘I take medication. Only sick people take medication. Therefore if I stop taking my medication then I will not be sick’.
Furthermore (at 09m:05s) if my Creatine Phosphokinase is at 402ug/L (normal level between 10 and 100ug/L) then my heart attack is confirmed enzymatically.
My response is that a person should not suddenly stop medication in an uncontrolled manner. As such if I am aware of the danger so of doing so in an uncontrolled manner, then why on earth would I do it? Obviously I would not!! This is all part of the Fraud against me – and the theme here is ‘Joe does not take medicine’ – which of course is denied.
When Chamaree Silva was in the house she was poisoning everything, so that was a slightly different situation. But when I obtained non-contaminated medicine then it was okay to take.
The bottom line is this – I had excellent relationships before the scam, and this is reflected in tens of thousands of recorded calls. After December 2015, parties have been going around asking my colleagues to say certain things which fits their agenda. This includes foolish lawyers who have become involved. They are then coming out with the usual signature themes, at the same time and it is laughable – simply comparing the recorded calls from before December 2015 and afterwards confirms the tortious interference.
As such I will be getting e-mail, call logs and other items and then we can see the extent of the fraud – not rocket science really is it 🙂
This is a good example of how I want to help Sri Lanka and how I am not worrying in the slightest about the clowns following – it was so easy to identify from training I had had previously 🙂
And I almost forgot, the people that visited Sri Lanka in September / October 2015 promising visas and education abroad, and how they bought people up here with low amounts of money. Simple immigration checks and movement record analysis will end the case in my favour!
Thankfully I know how these Lawyer’s Constructs have arisen and it is the product of various parties in Australia and Sri Lanka. I will be addressing all these points. I would also mention that parties of inferior intellect have attempted to explain various things that only someone at a higher level of intellect can understand, which leads to flawed conclusions 🙂
Joseph S R de Saram (JSRDS)