GCSB & Telecom employees conspire with police, is Mark Lundy innocent?

GCSB and Telecom employees have for years been conspiring with police to convict hundreds of New Zealand citizens using fabricated Telecom records; this then begs the question, could Mark Lundy in fact be innocent?

“Telecom interacts with the Police and the GCSB, the GCSB has an office opposite.  They ask for circuits to be put in, they ask for all sorts of stuff to be put in, and at the end of it billing information is deleted or the tracking just disappears”

Continuing on from our last post we can now bring our readers the low down on the staff at all three entities relating to their respective behaviors and the cover-ups over the past two decades; it seems that the Dotcom fiasco of illegal search and wire taps is not an isolated incident.

Formed in 1977 the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) operates to insure that the following national security objectives are secured to the best of the agency’s ability. Firstly to provide around the clock foreign signals intelligence to inform the Government of various threats that may require decisions by the executive and the legislature. This role undoubtedly would include sharing intelligence with foreign friendly powers such as the United States, and Australia. The second role is to provide expertise to the executive and legislature on protecting the confidentiality of official information, which would include the critical national infrastructure from any kind of information based threat. In short it is a spy agency short and sweet.

What happens to such agencies with such amazing powers is that they become corrupted not only by internal forces, but equally by external forces. Recently the Prime Minister John Key was such a force, but to lay the blame on Mr Key is to blame a man that merely felt the power and could not resist his ability to make black seem like white, or in the case of Dot Com, white seem like black.

The truth of the matter was that when the GCSB was set up the legislature was aware of what impact the ‘information age’ would have relating to the manner that people communicated and the sheer level of information that could be accessed and shared.  But that was 1977 and the ‘Red Tide’ was still seen as a threat, and had taken as its latest victim, allegedly democratic South Vietnam.  But since the fall of Communism, which occurred with ever increasing speed since the iconic fall of the Berlin wall, what has the GCSB had to do relating to nay perceived threat in the antipodes.

Well like every corrupt government agency it turns on the citizens it was formed to supposedly protect from ‘outsiders’.  The term ‘outsiders’ means to the GCSB, anybody the Government dislikes.  Now this is where it gets interesting.  The term ‘government’ means anyone in a position where they could abuse power. This means the Police, the armed forces, the IRD, WINZ, the Accident Compensation Corporation, and of course the likes of the REAA.

But what we have identified as a key ‘contagion’ operating between the government organisations is the hiring of bent ex New Zealand Police Service such as Keith Manch, Ross Gouvernuer, and Dean Winter of the REAA, Mike Flahive of the Privacy Commission, (who ever else you have).   It is through this, [that is until the work of Lauda Finem (and other like minded anti corruption sites) that have now come along], undetectable spread of corruption that hundreds and possibly thousands of New Zealanders lives have been ruined.

It is our belief that no ex police officer should be allowed to work in any other Government agency or department where they will be involved in a position of significant power.   The level of corruption burgeoned in the late eighties early nineties as Police Officers ‘purfed’ and went into specialist ‘networking’ groups where the Government considered that having ex police officers in virtually all government agencies would enable a ‘tighter control’ over the unwanted activity of the countries citizens.  Although we have a lot more to bring our readership we bring you the names of those involved in the most disgraceful Police Service activity that is still active to this very day with people facing fabricated evidence in Court cases where the Crown want extremely lengthy prison sentences for those that actually assisted in bringing the evidence of their corruption to Lauda Finem, but more on that later.

Now for some of the real deal truth of how bad our police service, Crown Prosecution Service, Telecom, and the GCSB are.  Below is part of the transcript from a covert sting named operation ‘CANDID ON CAMERA’.

The sting involved recording the confessions of ex Telecom employee Mark Doyle confirming his involvement with the Police, the GCSB, and Crown Law, in planting and destroying evidence in order to obtaining unwarranted convictions and imprisonment for innocent, and possibly innocent persons.  From the video the following comments have been noted as relevant to what Kim Dotcom faces as at the moment;

Mark William Doyle:

“Telecom interacts with the Police and the GCSB, the GCSB has an office opposite.  They ask for circuits to be put in, they ask for all sorts of stuff to be put in, and at the end of it billing information is deleted or the tracking just disappears.

Dermot Nottingham:

“Who contacts you in the first instance?”

Mark William Doyle:

“it depend’s.  It can be the Police, and theres a couple – even the Crown Solicitors office direct, or theres various police liaison people who go between.  They can be Police but they can also be from Telecom.  [name redacted] is the Telecom guy that did most of the liason”.

Dermot Nottingham:

“Can you remember any names of Police Officers?”

Mark William Doyle:

“[name redacted but confirmed as being a person at that time that was in the position claimed],  I’ve kept records.”

Dermot Nottingham:

“Anyone from the Crown Solicitors Office?”

Mark William Doyle:

[name redacted, but confirmed was with the CSO at the time, now in sole practice]

Dermot Nottingham:

“and he would email you or phone?”

Mark William Doyle:

“phone. Occasionally you would get an email”

The Telecom informant also alleges the Corporation kept its security and data experts outside the Corporate fold in terms of their email and IT support, giving them non-telecom emails accounts to use.

Dermot Nottingham:

“Was there a reason for that?”

Mark William Doyle:

“It can’t be requested. You can issue a search warrant against Telecom email, but you are up against an entity which is owned by Telecom, but doesn’t go through the same email system because you would have to ask a very specific question, and generally people don’t ask specific questions”

Dermot Nottingham:

“And that particular way of doing things, was that designed by a particular person?”

Mark William Doyle:

“It was more of a group effort”

Dermot Nottingham:

“With the deletions, when you were told to delete files, were they phone records”

Mark William Doyle:

“Yes…….Every telecom account has a nine digit account number. All you do is you are given a request to delete files between such and such a date and such and such a date again on a nine digit account number”

Mark William Doyle:

“Did I know it was illegal?  No. Did I ever question the reasons No.  Did I actually care No.  I was well paid.   I do have issues with what I did in terms of looking back.  Yes, I realize that what I did was wrong, and yes, I realize I have messed up a lot of peoples lives. There are a lot of people who have had either convictions, or have had rather unfortunate things occur to them that needn’t have occurred, that were orchestrated for a greater purpose.  Its easy when you are part of a big entity to blame the big entity, but at the end of the day I helped out, I made the calls, I did a lot of that sought of stuff.  I’m not saying it occurs all the time, but I am saying most of the time justice is, or can be construed, in New Zealand it can bought.  If you piss them off enough it all comes down on you”

Dermot Nottingham:

“if a call had been made from a person’s house to the Justice Department – or hadn’t been made, lets put it the other way around..could you actually put in information that would falsely show that a call had been made”

Mark William Doyle:

“Yes”

Dermot Nottingham:

“So if you want to go back three years, and you want to produce a document that shows a phone call-that was in fact wasn’t made – was made….could another person put in-“

Mark William Doyle:

“Yes, very easily.  Essentially its just a text file.  A very big data base in a text file structure.  As long as something fits the format the systems will interpret it as a valid record”

Doyle also confirms that the people that organized the fabrication are usually the ones that turn up in Court as expert technical witnesses to explain to a none the wiser jury how the system works and how the information is an accurate record of the communication traffic.

Mark William Doyle:

“I am sorry about that, but that’s life.”

Justice Campaigner Dermot Nottingham felt that he had hit a jack pot when the ex telecom “fixer” thought he remembered the address that was of interest to Nottingham where it was alleged by the defence, at the time of the mans imprisonment, that something was wrong with the phone records adduced by the Police in the trial.

Mark William Doyle:

“120/D [redacted] Street is an address that is extremely familiar, and I think its familiar because its in relation to that that some stuff was modified.  And I am sorry for that, but that was what I did.  At the time I didn’t put a name to it and I don’t know the guy still so its not really an issue.  But the address is frighteningly familiar.  I have got a pretty good memory and I am pretty sure I’ve done something with that.”

Investigate Magazine’s chief investigating reporter Ian Wishart reported the all familiar response from the Phone companies that all is done legally.  Wishart reports;

“Investigate has spoken to its own sources inside the Phone Companies who reiterate the official policy that no on should lift a finger unless theres a Court approved search warrant, and that data should never have been altered.”

For Christchurch Businessman Miles Dixon it hasn’t been an easy decision to release the information that police and the Governments GCSB spy agency have been altering public phone records, but he makes the point that any member of the public is vunerable to having their life destroyed in the wrong circumstances by what is effectively high level corruption.

And as for the man that was possibly a victim of a false allegation, and then a conspiracy to fabricate evidence in order to wrongfully convict the man and have him incarcerated.  Well he said this to Wishart;

“I went to jail” he says  “for something that I just didn’t do”

Now we know the criminal history of Mr Mark William Doyle and we know that some of the names he mentioned were involved in putting Doyle in prison, but this does not mean that what he states is untrue, or even more likely true than not.  There is just too much information that only a person that had done this sort of thing would know, and Doyle confirmed his behavior in 2006 when New Zealanders would not likely have believed that the Deputy Prime Minister, and the Prime Minister of New Zealand, would have been involved in such skullduggery.  One of those named still remains a key person that authors protocols on interception; protocols of course that are for public consumption.

In further support of Doyle’s GCSB confessions being true we will be bringing an amazing story of Police corruption involving Mark Doyle and another person that Police sought to protect from being charged with blackmail of two Christchurch businessmen involved in the telecommunication business.  The blackmail attempt involved the perpetrators asking for initially $500,000.00 NZD, or they would make a false complaint of fraud against the two businessmen to a ‘friendly’ Christchurch CIB officer.

The two businessmen made a complaint to the police and the police put the complaint into the hands of the ‘friendly’ police officer who ignored it, and who would later charge the two innocent men with the false allegations made by the blackmailer.  The blackmailers then threatened the two businessmen with further embarrassment unless they complied with the initial demand for $500,000.00.

In furtherance of the blackmail the perpetrators then entered a related website used as a lead provider by the two businessmen, and changed email and other address details which would lead a browser away from the businessmen’s legitimate website and direct it to a webpage designed by Mr Doyle, and the other blackmailer which portrayed gay sex being performed.

When a further complaint was made to the Police about the blackmailers  behavior, yet again the complaint was put in the hands of the ‘friendly’ police  officer who again took no notice.  What then occurred was truly amazing.  When contacted by Dermot Nottingham and asked how much the blackmailers wanted they increased their demands to a sum approaching $700,000.00.  Again the businessmen complained and again the ‘friendly’ detective laughed at their protests.  But the businessmen would not pay as Mark Doyle and the blackmailer continued ruining their business, but this time with the active co-operation of the ‘friendly’ detective.  In fact the entire Christchurch CIB and the Crown Law were actively involved in providing assistance to blackmailers.

The Police Officer then charged the two businessmen with fraud when it was clearly impossible that anyone had been defrauded.  The Police then hid documents that proved the innocence of the two businessmen, and are still hiding further material that proves that the blackmailers are guilty of blackmail.

The police lied about the file having been closed at the request of one of the businessmen and the ‘friendly’ detective had obtained statements from the blackmailers which attempted to blame yet another innocent man for the illegal entry of the related computer system.  Investigations uncovered emails between the ‘friendly’ police officer and the blackmailers where the Police officer was clearly conspiring with the blackmailer as to how they could get witnesses to be intimidated into giving false evidence.  And it worked with at least five witnesses.  However investigations led the businessmen to secure evidence from truly reliable and independent sources that prove the evidence ‘obtained’ by the ‘friendly’ police officer is fabricated.

The Crown want the maximum penalty of 7 years and for hundreds of thousands of dollars in compensation to be paid by the businessmen to the blackmailers.  One businessmen went bankrupt and the other has settled with all creditors after he lost everything as a result of the actions of the blackmailers and the ‘friendly’ detective.  Now for the six degrees of separation.  One of the businessmen involved, facing the false charges, is the very same businessmen that was involved in the GCSB, Police and Crown corruption scandal, and when arrested the ‘friendly’ police officer jovially referred to the story in investigate magazine about the illegal activities of the GCSB, the police and the Crown law stating that it “was an enjoyable read”, and that Wishart did not know half of what had gone on, but that the businessmen would live to regret trying to clear his name.

Related articles

• Phone taping bombshell (Investigate Magazine)
• Dotcom: the men in black, the boys from the GCSB (laudafinem.wordpress.com)
• Dotcom’s lawyers question police statements (stuff.co.nz)
• Officer’s evidence ‘inconsistent’ – Dotcom (radionz.co.nz)
• Dotcom case: Earlier spying alleged (nzherald.co.nz)
• English knew of spies (nzherald.co.nz)
• Dotcom illegal spies (nzherald.co.nz)
• English defends signing Dotcom document (radionz.co.nz)
• Spies given wrong info on Dotcom: papers (stuff.co.nz)
• GCSB’s incompetence `difficult to believe’ (sfluxe.com)
• Greens lay police complaint over Dotcom spying (stuff.co.nz)