WITHOUT PREJUDICE
‘and then there were four’.
Four what you may ask, and I will tell you. Four Libel Writs served on Pauline Read by Akfinans Bank Limited.
The first Writ was served on the 9th February 2012. You will all recall, the same day the Bailiff and two plain clothes police officers turned up outside the court where a Kulaksiz 5 hearing was about to take place. There were two Writs served on her that morning. One was the Libel Writ, the other a Writ demanding payment for the costs of a case lost jointly by the litigants (K5) on the 26th August 2011. It is of note that the one litigant Mr. Richard Barclay who is acting as Power of Attorney for his mother, is currently the only one receiving income from his K5 property and another such property in Karsiyaka and is also the only litigant refusing to meet his legal obligation for his share of the costs which were collected from Pauline Read on that morning, some seven months ago.
Yesterday Kulaksiz 5 heard the decision by Judge Talat after he was again asked to issue an interim injunction forbidding the sale of the properties at Karsiyaka, Judge Talat refused to give the order. This morning Ertu Kader was observed putting FOR SALE signs outside all the villas on Kulaksiz 5. When one of the residents came outside, Kader asked what they were looking at. The resident informed Kader that he could look wherever he liked.
An amusing aside, after the Kaders left the Pauline Read’s villa following their weekend break, a kitten appeared in the garden of one of the residents. The resident fed the kitten and took care of it, as you would and later found out it belonged to the Kaders. However this morning Kader was asked if he wanted the kitten back, he said yes if you don’t give it back I will call the (not sure of the last word). It seems the Kaders love animals as much as they love pensioners, how did they think the kitten would survive for a week?
There is an Appeal at the High Court on 19th September 2012 against the decision given by Judge Talat Usar on the 26th August 2011 when he refused an Interim Injunction to stop the Bank selling the properties before the legal outcome of the case is known.
Now back to the Libel Writs. The second Writ was issued on the 26th May 2012, it was served to her front door by sellotaping it there. This unusual method is allowed by the issuing of a court order, signed by a Judge. Miss Read was in the US at that time.
The third and fourth Libel Writs were served in the same manner i.e. to the door and by being sellotaped to said recipient; both were put on the door on Thursday 23rd August 2012 even though both Pauline Read and her partner were home.
Miss Read intends to defend herself in the cases of of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Libel Writs.
It is interesting that this drip feed method of serving Writs is even allowed in a civilised country. When you consider the alleged Libel took place between May 2010 and March 2011, it means that all the alleged libellous articles PRE-DATE the first Writ. You have to ask WHY are not all the alleged offences on that first Writ. If someone were so aggrieved by an article, surely they would first demand its removal, and secondly take legal action immediately. The answer of course seems fairly simple to a layman like myself, maximise the intimidation. The word harassment springs to mind as does vexatious litigation.
I put it to Miss Read that both she and her partner have been libelled by the articles that appeared in Yeniduzen and Halkin Sesi in March of this year, why did she not take out similar such Writs? She assured me she had been advised to and she was keeping her options open.
Power to the people
Citizen Smith
Recent Comments