Before continuing the story it is worth looking at my position here and the proof of my innocence, this was the problem IAG faced when they decided to attempt to frame me so as to avoid meeting the insurance claims.

They produced masses of CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence relating to motive, almost all based on the brief interviews by ex Policeman Maurice Fletcher, none of it was ever stated in Court where it could have been refuted but it is totally useless to them in the real world.

In criminal law, means, motive, and opportunity is a common summation of the three aspects of a crime that must be established before guilt can be determined in a criminal proceeding. They refer to: the ability of the defendant to commit the crime (means), the reason the defendant committed the crime (motive), and whether the defendant had the chance to commit the crime (opportunity).

In this case, the obvious difficulty for IAG was my lack of opportunity to cause the fire. It has never been disputed that my wife, daughter and I were in Hamilton at the time the fire started. The Police checked for the possibility of me possibly returning to Kerikeri and back to the Motel before the Police called us at about 9am but with a 5-6 hour trip each way and with the additional traffic in Auckland that night due to the opening match of the 2011 Rugby World Cup it was logistically impossible. They also had the issue that the motel receptionist remembered us collecting a loan video from reception at around 8:30pm. We hate rugby and the TV was giving the Rugby World Cup 2011, multi-channel coverage.

That left IAG with the problem of finding a way to tie me to the fire from 400Km away, tricky when all the investigators had found in the debris was the remains of a couple of printers. No timer device, no candles or anything abnormal at all. They hooked on to my attempts to check the security webcam system, the last attempt being 84 minutes prior to the fire being seen and came up with theories all based on an ignition caused by the printer.

This was totally impossible, of course, but it took three and a half years before Jorgensen introduced the final piece of evidence at a hearing in 2015 that cleared me. Modern Windows PC’s record every change made to the Windows operating system and most of the daily activities of the PC. Due to the fact that the PC had suddenly crashed, it had not done an orderly shutdown, the registry of the PC had a record that recalled the last actions of the PRINT SPOOLER. Most people use the spooler every day, when you press print on 

your PC the requested page or image is saved first to the print spooler which then feeds the data to the printer whilst you get on with other things. Jorgensen agreed that the print spooler record showed that the LAST time the printer had printed was around 11pm on the 8 September 2011, over 24 hours prior to the fire and giving me a perfect alibi since no other method of causing the fire from 400Km way had ever been suggested yet alone evidenced.

He tried desperately to get around this point, stating that the print spooler can be turned off and the printer operated directly by the PC. On the next day after going back to Wellington to check his system he introducing a PART of a registry entry that he purported showed that this had occurred after 11pm on 9 September 2011, the night of the fire.

Unfortunately for him, we had a real expert in the courtroom who printed the FULL registry record that Jorgensen had used part of in the Courtroom as seen below.  

The top line of this full page stated that the last time the record had been modified was in April 2011 some six mo
nths prior to the fire. Jorgensen had been caught falsifying evidence and he had no escape. The Judge said little but my alibi was complete. The actual evidence revealed is all covered with full details later in my book, 100% New Zealand.

I was 400Km away from the fire scene, the ignition models suggested by IAG all depended on the printer operating since no other items that could possibly cause the fire remotely had been found and the printer hadn’t printed at all on the day of the fire.

The case against me was finally dismissed! There had never been any evidence, it was all just a theory that suited IAG, nothing more.

There is no level of proof argument here, the civil courts require a lower standard of proof but my alibi applies equally in the civil court, I was 400Km away and nothing had been found to connect me with the fire. The evidence that the printer did not print on the day of the fire is an unchallenged computer record so any remote connection I made didn’t cause anything at all. No amount of circumstantial evidence can get past the fact that I had NO opportunity to cause the fire.

Without means and opportunity the charges against me can be seen for what they are, false!

The other factor is MOTIVE! Throughout the last 5 years we have been bombarded with statements about out financial difficulty, based on an interview with Fletcher directly after the fire. ASB did in 2013 make us bankrupt, common when you lose everything including your business in a major fire but ASB were the only creditor in the bankruptcy apart from Law North Solicitors in Kerikeri for $900 due to a disputed account. The total bankruptcy was under $500,000 and the house had a valuation of $2,995,000 based on an offer to purchase which failed only due to the mortgage crunch at that time. With our possessions we had equity in the property of well over $3,000,000 so why on earth would you destroy it by Arson to possibly get paid by an insurance company? Some strange motive that one, made even more ridiculous by the fact that we suspended a $500,000 contents policy by InnSure covering the business operation just months earlier and hadn’t increased the home contents cover to compensate. We were $500,000 under insured in any case!

An odd definition of financial difficulty but the NZ legal system allows claims like this to be made without the defendant having a right of reply at the time, objections by council seem to be frowned upon so we never had the opportunity to challenge the financial status claims made by IAG.

IAG however continue to refuse to meet the insurance claims confirming on a letter of 26 May 2017 from their Solicitors, DLA Piper of Wellington NZ.

No Comments