Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

About 25 years ago I was visiting my parents in the small village where they lived in Northern Ireland. Both were retired, my father as a sparks in the merchant navy. My mother as a head librarian. Their lives consisted of reading books and newspapers and playing bowls. They had a small car which they needed for shopping and getting to their bowls, a very modest affair which they kept for years. They had just recently traded in for a new car. They told me they had recently been surprised by a visit from the police. Their old car had been used in a crime and the police thought they were the owners. Fortunately my parents were thorough with their paperwork and were able to demonstrate that they had sold the car, perfectly legally, through a garage. I agreed with them it was odd and thought nothing more of it.

Twenty five years on I discovered I was a target of gang stalking and one of the dirty tactics gang stalkers use is accusing their target of criminal activity and manipulating the Target’s environment to make it look as if the Target is a criminal. I started to research everything I could find on criminal methods, corrupt police and dirty tactics. In the process I read the book written by Kevin Taylor, “The Poisoned Tree”. He tells how the smear campaign directed at John Stalker extended to him and describes a litany of dirty tactics, some legal, some decidedly shady which were employed against him. He was not engaged in any criminal activity but every attempt was made to make it look as if he was.

As a millionaire businessman he had owned a boat. As a result of the financial and legal attacks he was lumbered with huge solicitor’s bills and lost his house and sold his boat. After his boat was sold it was used for running drugs and the police tried to use this to support their allegations of criminal activities and associates.

Of course, this might all be coincidence. It was a coincidence that the old car my parents  had owned for years and legitimately traded in to a garage, just happened to be bought by a criminal who used it in a crime, and then did not destroy the car. And a coincidence that the garage somehow had not kept any records recording the sale. And a coincidence that a criminal bought a car to commit a crime with, rather than stealing one. And a coincidence that I am a target of gang stalking and it is known these are the kind of muddying the waters techniques that gang stalkers use.

And it was a coincidence that Kevin Taylor who happened to be a trusted friend of John Stalker, when he had to sell his boat as the result of the legal and financial attacks made against him, on no basis whatsoever, who also sold his boat in a completely above-board and legal manner, that the boat he sold just happened to be bought by a criminal, who just happened to use it for drug-running, something the police were trying to make out Mr Taylor was involved in.

As I see it there are two likely explanations for these unlikely events. One is a criminal conspiracy and the other is coincidence. And coincidence against a background of false allegations of criminal activity against people who are not criminals looks the least likely explanation.

No-one can control what happens to their property after they have sold it.

The biggest question of all though is how was it that criminals just happened to acquire a car and a boat with which to commit crimes? I do not see how this could have happened without police complicity. Which means there are police who work with criminals for the commission of crimes, the blame for which they then attempt to shift onto law-abiding people.

THE MYSTERY OF MY LATE HUSBAND’S CAR

After the first time my husband had cancer he bought a car. For practical purposes he didn’t need one, as the journey to work was literally crossing the road. It was his way of saying “I am back”.

When his cancer returned several years later when we had moved from London to Harrogate I experienced a series of odd events. At that stage I did not know I was being gang stalked .

1. Personal papers went missing from our flat. These included some short stories I had written and a short account of my father’s life. Also some paperwork surrounding my father’s death which included a photocopy of his obituary notice in the local newspaper, written by a relative, a Minister.

2. A relative of my husband under pretext of poverty, of which there was no evidence, she led a more affluent life than we did, persuaded my husband to change his Will to give her half. He went to the solicitor she recommended.

3. The solicitor’s work was very sloppy. For one example, I pointed out that if the Estate was to be equally divided, and my husbands possessions were not left to me I could be left in a very difficult position in disposing of them and could be trapped in accommodation I could not afford on my own, for an indefinite period. On this basis my husband’s personal possessions were left to me. This happened to include his car, which was of no interest to me as I cannot drive.

4. The relative, still pleading poverty, “borrowed” a substantial sum of money from my husband.

5. In the weeks coming up to my husband’s death the relative requested the car. I had no objection as it was no use to me. However it was odd because the relative not only had a car but was driving a very upmarket executive type car.

6. In the weeks before my husband’s death he transferred ownership to the relative and gave her one set of car keys.

7. On the day my husband was admitted to the nursing home when various nurses were at the flat, the relative had arranged for my husband’s ex-wife to be present. One of my relatives is a solicitor and when I told her this she snapped “And is this misrepresentation going to continue to the reading of the Will?”

8. When my husband was taken to the nursing home I did not wish to remain in the flat on my own. I moved out immediately taking the other car keys with me.

9. When I called back to the flat to collect any mail, my husband’s documents were missing. I had both sets of keys to the flat which our landlord had given us.

10.The next day the relative sent me a text asking me to give her the documents.

(It was this behaviour and other peculiar behaviour from the relative which led to my enquiry on Wikipedia reference desk, who told me this was “gaslighting”. While researching gaslighting I discovered gang stalking).

11. My husband died shortly after admission to the nursing home. I had two weeks to wait before moving to smaller accommodation. The car sat in the yard and the relative did not take it away despite my inviting her to do so. She stalled. Finally she said she couldn’t move the car because she did not have the key. I said I had been there when my husband had given her the key. She said she did not have both keys. I said she could use the key she had. She said she wanted the other. I said the fact that she had left her car sitting in my yard for several weeks without removing it had made me concerned whether she intended to remove it. If she didn’t I required the key so that the car could be delivered to her doorstep. I also pointed out it was against the terms of my contract with the landlord for a non-resident’s car to be permanently parked on the premises. She asked me if I intended to continue the tenancy. I asked her what business was it of hers.

12. The relative finally moved the car.

13. The Estate Agents of the place I was moving to put my entry date back an extra week which had the result I had to pay an extra months rent and utilities at the flat I was leaving. They denied they had changed the date.

14. I took most of my husband’s personal property to charity shops.

15. I contacted the Department of Vehicle Licencing Authority DVLA regarding the transfer of ownership of my husband’s car to the relative. I did not wish there to be any ambiguity concerning ownership of the car which had not belonged to me at any point. I pointed out that obviously, I shared the same name as the first wife and could they assure me that the car did not belong to anyone of my name living at my address. They confirmed that change of ownership had been registered.

16. Shortly after moving to the new address an electoral registration form arrived. I completed it and sent it back.

17. A year later I went to vote and was told I was not on the electoral register. (The first time in my life this has happened. I always vote).

18. Eighteen months after I had changed address I met my ex-landlord in the supermarket. He told me that my late husband’s first wife had taken over the tenancy after I had left. (Strange. She had much better Housing Association accommodation where she had lived for ten years at a peppercorn rent).

To recap. The relative asked for the car when it was plain she didn’t need one. The most likely purpose was to give it to the first wife.

She deliberately introduced an ambiguity concerning my identity as my husband’s wife by having the ex-wife present when the nurses were processing my husband’s entry to the nursing home. It was not usual for the relative and the first wife to be together as the ex-wife was the baby-sitter for the relative’s son.

The relative was unwilling to remove the car from the premises, and was very motivated to discover whether or not I was continuing with the tenancy.

The ex-wife took over the tenancy even though she had a superior Housing Association flat which was a fraction of the rent.

Coincidentally my electoral registration form went missing in transit. At the Council office I was told I was registered at my previous address up to October when the register was revised and the new tenants at that address were registered – who just happened to be a person with the same name. Meanwhile, from the point of view of official records, I did not exist.

 

.

 

Advertisements