24. CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY at its worst

The DAY after the first Magistrate Court case by DBKK against my friendly dogs

1.      A DBKK vehicle came to my house at about 10am and two men came to my gate to tell me that they wanted to take photographs of my dogs.

1 Q.  Why take photographs only after I was charges?  Wasn’t proper investigation done prior to filing of documents in the Magistrate Court?  If no proper investigation done, then taking photographs can be the following:-

1Q1.  Contempt of Court and injustice

1Q2.  Invasion of privacy taking photo without Court Order – both front and back.

1Q3.  Intrusion without notice and what happened if I was not home.

1Q4.  The lorry to capture my dogs possibly for evidence could have happened as the lorry could be in the main road as it was before.  Anything could have happened if I was not home.

1Q5.  It was pre-arranged with my neighbour at house no. 26 as the son-in-law allowed the DBKK man in as per photo No. 1 at the back of that house to take photograph of my dogs at the back?   Allowing the DBKK man into the house was an aiding and abetting a serious crime in the context of CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY of SSY and YB Edward Yong in the same gang.  DBKK man could have taken my photo of the dogs if there was a Court Order to do so and enter my house alone.  This also prove that my neighbour at house 26 was wholly behind this CRIME against me and used the two proxies namely Puan Mariana and Pn Susie SOH – and not by chance any more.

Photo No. 1  DBKK came to collect evidence after I was charged, hence a mistrial

DBKK – two officers Willman B. Mihon and Weldie Majinki in the Dogs control unit came to my house about 10am on 27 March, 2014 and one of the officers took photographs of my dogs – 2 in the front portion and 2 in the back portion.  This happened after I was charged in the Magistrate Court on 26^th March 2014 for keeping “6” dogs in my house in July, 2014 based on two “complainants”  who are unknown to me but I believe my neighbour at house 26 is the main complainant using those two dubious complainants as these two complainants were not in the Court to be witnesses, and yet DBKK wanted to convict me without a proper trial.

AFFIDAVITS to support the criminal and civil cases against me by the MAYOR, KK

So the next question is why take photographs now and to prepare the complete affidavits and WHO are persons to sign the AFFIDAVITS with incorrect information as per documents already in Mayor’s documents?  Isn’t it DBKK acting on duress of the YB Edward Yong and the neighbour who is related to him?  So I am to pursue the case to the MACC already brought to its notice.  I think DBKK man only managed to take photographs of 3 dogs with one hiding behind the bushes when Court Document stated 6 dogs.  When we saw Mr Mohd Yaman recently in his office before the Court case commenced, he was telling myself and wife that we can rear as many dogs as possible.  Yet he filed the Court papers with a great discrepancy.

 Photo No. 2 -  a photo with his hands on the camera seen.

 No. 3  At the front gate before he took pictures of my two dogs.

 No. 4  at the gate preparing to take photographs of my dogs.

  No. 5  The photograph man leaving in his DBKK’s vehicle.  Without these photographs, DBKK would deny everything like in much early press reports, they would simply grab those dogs they wanted to destroyed or sold???