Interested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
RTEs Sarah McInerney ? Fianna Fail supporter? Anthony
Joe Duffy is dishonest and untrustworthy Anthony
Robert Watt complaint: Time for decision by SIPO Anthony
RTE in breach of its own editorial principles Anthony
Waiting for SIPO Anthony
Public Inquiry >>
A Blog About Human Rights
UN human rights chief calls for priority action ahead of climate summit Sat Oct 30, 2021 17:18 | Human Rights
5 Year Anniversary Of Kem Ley?s Death Sun Jul 11, 2021 12:34 | Human Rights
Poor Living Conditions for Migrants in Southern Italy Mon Jan 18, 2021 10:14 | Human Rights
Right to Water Mon Aug 03, 2020 19:13 | Human Rights
Human Rights Fri Mar 20, 2020 16:33 | Human Rights
Human Rights in Ireland >>
News Round-Up Sat May 04, 2024 00:22 | Toby Young
A summary of the most interesting stories in the past 24 hours that challenge the prevailing orthodoxy about the ?climate emergency?, public health ?crises? and the supposed moral defects of Western civilisation.
The post News Round-Up appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Labour ?Set to Lose in West Midlands? as Muslims Desert Party Over Gaza Fri May 03, 2024 17:44 | Will Jones
Labour is set to lose the West Midlands Mayoral election because of anger among Muslim voters over its stance on Gaza, party sources fear, adding to the shock loss in Oldham and struggles elsewhere.
The post Labour “Set to Lose in West Midlands” as Muslims Desert Party Over Gaza appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Watch: Government Minister Admits Covid Vaccines Did Not Prevent Transmission Fri May 03, 2024 15:00 | Will Jones
Watch a Government Minister admit to Dan Hannan that the Covid vaccines did not prevent transmission, prompting Hannan to ask: "So why the hell did we force them on to young people? Why did we insist on vaccine passports?"
The post Watch: Government Minister Admits Covid Vaccines Did Not Prevent Transmission appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
As the World Takes Off, Net Zero Britain Stays Grounded Fri May 03, 2024 13:00 | David Craig
All around the world airports are being built and enlarged in countries which appear to realise the 'climate crisis' is just a load of nonsense. But not in poor, gullible Britain.
The post As the World Takes Off, Net Zero Britain Stays Grounded appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Reform Might be About to Wipe Out the Tories Fri May 03, 2024 11:12 | Will Jones
The local election results are as terrible for the Conservatives as feared and thanks to Reform they would have been lucky to have had only a 1997-style wipeout, says veteran pollster John Curtice.
The post Reform Might be About to Wipe Out the Tories appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Lockdown Skeptics >>
Voltaire, international edition
Voltaire, International Newsletter N°85 Fri May 03, 2024 14:25 | en
The Kastner case resurfaces Fri May 03, 2024 14:06 | en
Non-Semite (sic) Khazar Netanyahu calls US anti-genocidal academics "anti-Semite... Fri May 03, 2024 07:13 | en
Paris 2024 and Berlin 1936 in the service of an impossible imperial dream, by Th... Tue Apr 30, 2024 07:07 | en
Georgia and the financing of political organizations from abroad Sat Apr 27, 2024 05:37 | en
Voltaire Network >>
national |
rights, freedoms and repression |
event notice
Monday March 19, 2007 00:15
by LM - Victims of Legal Professions Society
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (20 of 20)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20At VLPS meetings, people share experiences of fighting incompitance and / or criminality among legal professions and the Court/Judicial system. There have been nine big meetings since January in all parts of the country.
With support from John Gill and other VLPS members, people are standing up in courts and telling their own stories without fear. The most recent is John McMahon of Castleblaney who has been representing himself in a High Court case against a Castleblaney Solicitor who has ended up owning his very valuable ancestral home by very dubious means.
This case raises three important issues
1. The ability of solicitors to pass property to themselves through connected companies.
2. The ability of solicitors to alter and or disappear documents in their posession such as wills and contracts
3. The right of people, who are dispossessed by alleged closer next of kin , to be certain that the alleged next of kin are in fact bona fide. High Court Judge McMenamin has so far refused to support John McMahon's reasonable request that the court would order them to appear or at least obtain the birth certs of the alleged next of kin. So far John's private investigators in New York have not found anyone of those names at the addresses claimed by the solicitors. A fraud is evident. Read more here
http://www.rate-your-solicitor.com/forum/viewtopic.php?...#p359
John should get a better private investigator. The people in question are listed in the phone book. Tell the truth.....
The next hearing of the case is on 20th April. Please give these people a ring and ask them to send their birth certs to Judge McMenamin in the Four Courts so that everything can be cleared up.
John has their adresses, he has been sendiung them mail for the past year. Let me give this top notch New York Private Investigator a hint, respond to those addresses and you will find them. If not open up a phone book.
It is reasonable and fair to draw inferences from peoples behaviour.
Suppose, you or I benefitted from the inheritance law in US and we benefitted to the tune of 10 million dollars from the death of a relative we had never met. And suppose we became aware that another relative in the US, who had cared for the deceased over many years was questioning our existance. I believe that you or I, would do all reasonable things to try to resolve matters ie by going over to US or by sending your birth cert or even offering a DNA test, regardless of whether a court had power to request it. It is not John's responsibility to find them, but the otherway around.
In this case, this is not happening. John has said that he will walk away as soon as he gets assurances that they are bona fide. In their absence, It is entirely open to John and any other person to draw any reasonable inference from this situation. It is reasonable therefore, to infer that they may be bogus and/or there may be fraud. If they are genuine, the ball is in their court, they know this case is being heard, why have they not moved to reassure people?
Since you appear to be in posession of relevant information, Please direct it to John McMahon and Judge McMenamin as requested earlier
If these relatives are actually non existent it would be great to have your crack private investigator swear in court that they are such.
Why hasn't that happened. Maybe another lie......l
"Suppose, you or I benefitted from the inheritance law in US and we benefitted to the tune of 10 million dollars from the death of a relative we had never met. And suppose we became aware that another relative in the US, who had cared for the deceased over many years was questioning our existance. I believe that you or I, would do all reasonable things to try to resolve matters ie by going over to US or by sending your birth cert or even offering a DNA test, regardless of whether a court had power to request it. It is not John's responsibility to find them, but the otherway around."
Why would they do that? Someone makes an accusation that they find offensive and they are the ones who are supposed to undergo tests and supply documents or even travel to another country!
Its Johns responsibity to provide proof. He is the one who is making accusations. No Irish Court can force people living in another country to undergo tests , provide documents or appear before it.
If John wants to win this one then hes going to have to take legal action in the US. If John has a reasonable case then he will have no problem getting a US Judge to make such orders
"Why would they do that? Someone makes an accusation that they find offensive and they are the ones who are supposed to undergo tests and supply documents or even travel to another country!"
The estate was in Ireland, they took the money out of Ireland. John cared for Peter Shevlin like a brother. He was with him when he was killed by a Statoil tanker. The property was John's grandfathers place. John has his own children to think about therefore he is asking questions. How is that offensive?
On the other side, the alleged US relatives never met Peter Shevlin but they have got all the money. From their position of strength, why, for a quiet life and family pride, will they not do the necessary to end the row? Why instead of faxing on their birth certs, did they engage a Dublin firm of solicitors to attend court to stand on legalities. A 50c fax versus a €1000 fee. It smells!
You still haven't answered the question posed earlier. The soultion is simple. If it is believed that these relatives are not real, this top notch private investigator in New York should get their information at the Records Bureau. He can then testify to the court. I am sure that would be done if he truly believed what he says. Tell the truth.....
It is reasonable and fair to draw inferences from peoples behaviour.
And looking at the past behaviour of John Gill, it seems that he's been involved with people that make wild personal accusations about members of the legal profession. Sure, he was taken to court for having put up nasty sexual accusations about some barrister. The judge told him that if the website didn't remove the gossipy slurs then he'd be in hot water. Lo and behold the website that he had "nothing to do with" removed the personal attacks on yer one. John Gill and the VLPS crowd seem to be a group of nuts that specialise in casting smears and slurs. If anyone has a problem with a solicitor, barrister or judge they'd be well advised to stay clear of these headcases. That's my inference Watson.
"The estate was in Ireland, they took the money out of Ireland. John cared for Peter Shevlin like a brother. He was with him when he was killed by a Statoil tanker. The property was John's grandfathers place. John has his own children to think about therefore he is asking questions. How is that offensive?"
Because you & John are suggesting they got it through underhand means. You have not provided proof. Sometimes people are not left what they feel they deserve. Its tough.
"On the other side, the alleged US relatives never met Peter Shevlin but they have got all the money. "
There you go again. "Alleged". Why are you so passionate about this? What evidence have you seen that convinces you?
"From their position of strength, why, for a quiet life and family pride, will they not do the necessary to end the row? "
You ask so I'll give my opinion: if I was in their position I'd tell John to get lost. Its up to him to prove that something wrong happened. The relatives dont have to prove their innocence.
"Why instead of faxing on their birth certs, did they engage a Dublin firm of solicitors to attend court to stand on legalities. A 50c fax versus a €1000 fee. "
Again because its not just about a birth cert. John also wants dna tests, he wants them to appear in a Dublin court. I'd engage a solicitor if I was in their position.
"It smells!"
To someone who is a friend of Johns and who can only see things from his perspective I guess it would smell. But not to normal objective people.
I wonder what (?) the anonymous contriputors to this thread think of the following statement:
"Legal Abuse Syndrome is a psycho-legal trauma (a form of post traumatic stress disorder), which often develops in individuals dealing with abusive court settings. Abuse of authority and a profound lack of accountability in our courts have become rampant. This adds greatly to the original distress requiring court assistance in the first place. "
"This stress can and does lead to physical illness. AMA statistics show that around 85% of all physical illness is directly attributable to stress. Legal Abuse Syndrome is a public health menace in this country; it leads to massive medical intervention costs, burdens insurance companies significantly, adds to Medicare and Social Security costs. Legal Abuse Syndrome is detrimental to all of society, and nobody is immune."
The above statements have been copied from the following address:
http://www.legalabusesyndrome.org/
I am having a hard time following this thread. John says the deceased was his cousin but the lands were his grandfather's. That doesn't make sense. Somebody should ask for documentation proving that John is a relative.
Is John using a solicitor? This would be a bit odd seeing as he is represented by a group which has a pathological hatred of solicitors.
Maybe he should just use a MacKenzies Friend.
I am sure the relative who was the executor had to prove to the court through documentary proof that they were related to the deceased. I can't believe that they would allow anyone to act in this position.
Thank you for the last line of your posting. You are in fact admitting that from John's perspective and that of those who understand his point of view, matters will remain unresolved and suspicions will remain. Such uncertainty is a bad outcome for a Court case and for the community at large.
On a more general note, What precautions do Co Registrars take when assessing the bona fides of persons presenting to claim estates as next of kin?. Do they look for birth certs, geneology reports or DNA or do they merely take people on sworn affidavit?
If, as I believe, it is the latter, then the procedure is wide open to abuse. Day in and day out, people swear falsehoods under oath in Irish courts. When big money is involved, the sworn affidavit of persons from outside the jurisdiction could hardly be a cast iron proof of veracity. I am aware that in this case an official of the Revenue Commissioners asked to meet these persons but the Castleblaney solicitors, prevented this happening.
Too many questions and too few answers.
There are a number of points to be made here.
i. John's grandfather and John's deceased cousin were both called Peter Shevlin. John is in posession of documentation (indeed this documentation was appended to an affidavit submitted to Judge MacMenamin some weeks back) that shows that Peter Shevlin senior (grandfather) died also without making a will also. The documentation John has, is from the probate office and it states that a probate was never taken out on the Peter Shevlin estate. Peter Sevlin senior died in 1979, so the 7 year period to take out probate has long expired. Nonetheless solicitors acting on behalf of the Comers (Cromers?) managed to appoint them as executors of this estate; eventhough paperwork that postdates this act shows that the estate has no executor.
ii. When the Comers were initially contacted in the US, sworn paperwork was sent from the US to Ireland. This paperwork contained the name 'Cromer' not 'Comer.' This error was literally just crossed out when it reached Ireland and the name 'Comer' inserted instead. This documentation was not sent back to the US to be re-sworn.
iii. In Judge MacMenamin's recent ruling, he states that John has offered no evidence to fight the motion of strike out that he was fighting. This is in my opinion quite unfair, documentary evidence (including probate documentation as mentioned above) was submitted.
iv. Many on this thread that are baying for blood have said that John McMahon has not proven that he was related to the late Peter Shevlin Junior (his cousin). This fact was not and is not in dispute, John McMahon was Peter Shevlin Junior's cousin. The problem that arises is not one of identifying John as a relative, but one where John's ex-solicitor, failed to include him in the process. Despite being under instruction too. Oops!
v. John has argued passionately for his rights as an Irish citizen and of the Court's obligation to uphold his rights. Judge MacMenamin has ignored these arguments and put technicalities above these arguments. Despite granting the motion to strike, Judge MacMenamin has called for mediation to occur. John McMahon, has argued and has done so consistantly throughout his ordeal, that if the Comers (Cromers) are his relatives, that he has no problem recognising their rights with regard to the Shevlin estate. However, he does argue that before this recogntion can happen, proof of identity must be tendered.
vi. The Shevlin estate was sold without auction, whilst these matters were before the courts.
vii. The Strike Out motion was aimed and enacted at the Plaintiff's right to take the current case. This motion was granted by Judge MacMenamin. This is all despite the fact that John McMahon was granted leave to take this case in the Master's Court and that any subsequent motions to Strike should included a motion to overturn the Master's ruling.
1) If Peter Sr is Peter Jr's father.
2) If John is Peter Jr.'s cousin, How can Peter Shevlin Sr. be John's grandfather?
3) 1 + 1 doesn't equal 3
Since the people raising relationship queries are so persistent and appear to lack understanding of traditional farming families!
First cousins share a common grandfather OK?
This farm is the homeplace of the family, OK?
John McMahon's mother was a sister of Peter Shevlin Jrs Father. Both were children of Peter Shevlin Sen (the Grandfather)
Peter Shevlin Jr was last occupier of the farm but never married OK?
In farming families it has been very common for farms to pass from generation to generation without registering title OK?
The alleged Comers (or Cromers depending on which sworn affidavit you are reading) if genuine, would be children of the late Peter Shevlin's deceased sister who went to US
I noticed the following statement (which is not directly mentioned above): "The estate has been independently valued at over €22 million and due to the proposed ring road round Castleblaney, the value is rising." (Copied from http://www.rate-your-solicitor.com/forum/viewtopic.php?...#p359 )
Might this mean the banks have taken an interest in things? If so, it may be worth considering the following words of Thomas Jefferson (principal author of the American Declaration of Independence): "Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies". (Copied from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson )
Much more recently, and as some will already know, there are reports on the internet which claim: "The banks have corrupted parliaments and courts in order to achieve their seemingly invincible position. They do this by firstly controlling the judges and secondly eliminating juries - thereby removing any possibility that the judges may 'do right' or that the people may exercise their will." (Copied from http://www.rightsandwrong.com.au/ )
All of these statements might be worth keeping in mind in connection with Mr McMahon's case?