Sign In Sign-Up

Carr swears below, " The situation was eventually resolved when Mr  & Mrs Green had the property connected to the main drainage system in February, 1986." This was evidence herein shown has been produced to judges and  policemen who choose to ignore it. Clearly, this has an evil reasoning behind it. On February 8 1988 Shirley Carr became the applicant for drainage proposals to Green's property. In fact she paid out to the local authority more than two thousand pounds for them to carry out that work in February 1988. Would you pay out that sort of cash when the property subject of that work was not yours? Further it was not clear until the local authority had carried out their excavations whether or not it was possible to connect the frontage of No. 16 onto the main public sewers. That work was carried out more than some six months before Shirley Carr and and another former man she lived with, Mr T. McCabe, purchased No 16 on August 26 1988. At this same time of February 1988 a string of three statutory declarations commenced to be sworn for use in lodging a caution against first registration on the alleyway land that was subject of dispute between Carr and I. As Green's were clearly then going to sell their property to Carr, why would they want to go the expence of having those statutory declarations sworn when they were not to be the beneficiaries of them?  One of those statutory declarations contained gross perjury sworn by solicitor Paul Graney of Newbottle Street, Houghton-le-Spring, Tyne-Wear. In the conveyance of No. 16 Green's did not convey any alleged interest in the alleyway. Carr was to become the only benificiary. There are more facts surrounding this matter which I hope to detail in greater depth later.

I will detail paragraph 4) of criminal Carr's affidavit copied below later. Note she swears. " I was not aware of the possible existence of party walls or alleged rear drainage problems."

Would you, six months before you were to buy a property, pay out more than two thousand pounds to see if it was going to be possible for its frontage to be connected to the public sewers without first carrying out enquiries about the rear drainage facilities or rather lack of them on that same property? Shirley Carr and her then residential partner Mr T. McCabe, had been told by my wife in January 1988 that the rear of No. 16 was without drainage facilities. She clearly tries to deceive even more by swearing that she had only been told that the property was only without means of sewerage disposal. The latter argument again applies. Shirley Carr had to try to exclude the fact that she knew the rear of No. 16 was without drains, because placing it onto the public sewers was too complex and expensive. More about this later.

Note: Would you as a prospective purchaser of property such as No. 16 The Lyons,, not become extremely cautious in your dealings with the vendor when you had already learned that they were concealing the fact that the property they were trying to sell was without any drainage facilities when they placed the property up for sale? That was the true situation existing in early 1988.

Go direct to evidence that it was Shirley Carr not Mrs & Mrs Green as sworn by Shirley Carr who had the drainage work carried out on No 16 in February 1988.

Go direct to evidence that it was not the Greens who were responsible for drainage work carried out to their property in February 1988.

Go to crime pages index.

Go to general index.

Go to home page.