---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: WC:SCCU Statutes <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 8:34 AM
Subject: RE: (goes with CIJ email) Fwd: Response
To: Gregor Press <[email protected]>
Dear Mr. Gregg Press
I have read the emails between you and Caroline, which were forwarded to this office.
The fact that they did not complete the documentation in respect of a known address seems not to be in dispute by her or any other party. This on its own constitutes a misrepresentation of the true facts. It is possible that you could have suffered a loss through this action.
From the contents of Caroline’s email is it however difficult to ignore her believes that she at the time acted in your best interest.
This makes it difficult to prove that she had any intention to commit an act that would financially harm you. I am also of the opinion that although the policy, as a part of your inheritance, matured is it still available for collection by you and with the accrued interest.
The issue here seems to be more than what meets the eye.
You are welcome to continue to register a criminal case with your nearest police station for their investigation. This office will not deal with the matter as it does not form part of our mandate.
I do wish to point out again that in my view the fraud charge would be difficult to proof as all the elements of the crime must be present and not only some parts. A second problem will be the fact that your sister are resident in Australia, a sovereign state that does not extradite to South Africa.
I hope that this provide you with the needed answers.
Kind regards
C J Lourens
Luitenant Kolonel / Lieutenant Colonel
Groepbevelvoerder / Group Commander: Statutes
DPMO :Handelsmisdaad
DPCI : Commercial Crime
S A Polisiediens / S A Police Service
Privaatsak / Private Bag X9004
KAAPSTAD / CAPE TOWN
Tel nr 021 - 918 3141
Fax nr 021 - 918 3306
e-mail wc:[email protected]
(original was signed and filed)
From: Gregor Press [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 1:23 PM
To: WC:SCCU Statutes
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: (goes with CIJ email) Fwd: Response
From: WC:SCCU Statutes <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 8:34 AM
Subject: RE: (goes with CIJ email) Fwd: Response
To: Gregor Press <[email protected]>
Dear Mr. Gregg Press
I have read the emails between you and Caroline, which were forwarded to this office.
The fact that they did not complete the documentation in respect of a known address seems not to be in dispute by her or any other party. This on its own constitutes a misrepresentation of the true facts. It is possible that you could have suffered a loss through this action.
From the contents of Caroline’s email is it however difficult to ignore her believes that she at the time acted in your best interest.
This makes it difficult to prove that she had any intention to commit an act that would financially harm you. I am also of the opinion that although the policy, as a part of your inheritance, matured is it still available for collection by you and with the accrued interest.
The issue here seems to be more than what meets the eye.
You are welcome to continue to register a criminal case with your nearest police station for their investigation. This office will not deal with the matter as it does not form part of our mandate.
I do wish to point out again that in my view the fraud charge would be difficult to proof as all the elements of the crime must be present and not only some parts. A second problem will be the fact that your sister are resident in Australia, a sovereign state that does not extradite to South Africa.
I hope that this provide you with the needed answers.
Kind regards
C J Lourens
Luitenant Kolonel / Lieutenant Colonel
Groepbevelvoerder / Group Commander: Statutes
DPMO :Handelsmisdaad
DPCI : Commercial Crime
S A Polisiediens / S A Police Service
Privaatsak / Private Bag X9004
KAAPSTAD / CAPE TOWN
Tel nr 021 - 918 3141
Fax nr 021 - 918 3306
e-mail wc:[email protected]
(original was signed and filed)
From: Gregor Press [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 1:23 PM
To: WC:SCCU Statutes
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: (goes with CIJ email) Fwd: Response
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Quadratic Entropy <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 1:37 PM
Subject: Attention: Lieutenant Colonel Lourens; Group Commander: Statutes. From: Gregory Press
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Dear Lieutenant Colonel Lourens,
I fully agree: Caroline's posed belief she acted in my best interest has been extremely hard to ignore / see past. She delayed me many long years from coming to the police by pretending so convincingly this carefully premeditated and thought out posture was entirely sincere.
She... fooled me into thinking if she couldn't extricate herself from the (alleged) conditioning [emotional bullying] by other members of the family - who urged her to do this culpable deed - I am meant to prove I am a loving brother by getting them to admit they forced her into it. And THEREFORE she's innocent. The actual reality is something like: she carefully and knowingly gave them precisely what they wanted in exchange for benefits she received [extracted] from them that she tried to conceal from me. (By hiding them in "blind spots" I didn't know I had.)
And further: a huge component of this "benefit" was: enjoying a position of moral righteousness and (therefore) authority in the eyes of other siblings. Without me knowing it she began using me to coach her how to act out this role a long, long time ago!
She's VERY well aware she lacks the instinct or inner compass to guide her how to role-play or navigate in these complex and intricate family politics power-play scenarios without this coaching from me. Without my noticing she carefully - years in advance - set me up to provide this coaching without other family members knowing.
In our family politics the position of moral righteousness and authority she thus acquired gave her access to
· power, and
· MONEY
When all is said and done: Caroline's been the greatest - worst or most effective - emotional bully of all.
Where you write
The fact that they did not complete the documentation in respect of a known address seems not to be in dispute by her or any other party. This on its own constitutes a misrepresentation of the true facts.
you get directly to the point. Thank you! Her 'authentic' effective acting can't gainsay this.
Reading your succinct appraisal thirteen years after these events I reproach myself, and it causes me a lot of private grief, that I didn't put more trust in the police sooner. By this indescision, prevarication, and doubt I've wasted years of my life and of the lives of my wife and our son also. Now all "water under the bridge". You also state:
This makes it difficult to prove that she had any intention to commit an act that would financially harm you.
In our phone conversations around the practical matter of sending you the emails between [me] and Caroline, which were forwarded to [your] office (and confirming you received them) you noted someone else opening these forwards of her emails delayed your finding and reading them. Yes, this sometimes happens. Now it also appears (from your reply) you haven't yet read - or have not studied - two emails I sent to accompany this evidence. (At least you did find the scans of letters to Liberty Life attached to them.)
These emails do address the topic of the intention Caroline (and other siblings, acting in concert) have to have had - beyond any reasonable doubt - to commit several acts that (when all combined together) harmed me financially. And will go on to ruin me - if I continue letting this happen. You go on to state:
The issue here seems to be more than what meets the eye.
Correct. I've compressed what more there is into these two other (regrettably still lengthy) emails you can find by doing a search under this same email address: "[email protected]". They were sent on Fri, Nov 18, 2011 and Tue, Nov 22, 2011. The second one begins with a precis of the first one. (The first one - has more detail.)
They in essence describe perpetrators of this stop-at-nothing crime resorting to whatever it takes - over an extended period - to hold onto the proceeds from an initial culpable act - concealment of the benefits.
Once they had already crossed the boundary separating legitimate and criminal activity the frame of mind they developed based on the logic they had nothing to lose carried them down a spiral of increasing desperation that compounded their original bad deed. Of course they compensated for this with ever greater thoroughness [conviction] in their denial. Thus I went on and on giving them reason to believe - no matter how much I convinced myself I was doing the exact opposite - they could still get away with all of this. [The more they realized they had been successful in fooling me so far, the more convinced they became they could go on fooling me forever.]
As I kept going on and on asking questions that were gradually revealing more details of their plot, they developed a counter-attitude that answering all my questions was becoming a more and more boring chore for them. This is all this was about. Me asking questions: instead of getting on with my life.
One question they kept evading was: how I am going to get on with my life while my wife is disabled (because of them) our son's in foster care (because of them) and they are in possission of my share of this trust??
-
Elsewhere in your reply you state your "office will not deal with the matter as it does not form part of our mandate".
I'm sure you have a written statement of this mandate somewhere. Please do me the kindness of sending it to me, as a convenience. (Or if it's on the web e.g. in the Government Gazette please send key words for a search.)
· Colonel Van Zyl Lucas also mentioned this. I have no reason, and no intention of disputing your and his determination this falls outside your mandate.
· Your email goes on to state I am also of the opinion that although the policy, as a part of your inheritance, matured it is still available for collection by you and with the accrued interest. This is essentially correct. Insurance is compensation, not inheritance. In 1999 I collected the policy (and interest.)
· This is not a crime that happened once and now is over. The deliberate and (denied) malicious concealment of this policy became a stepping stone to an ongoing hoax that's drawing a vortex of accomplices into it - after the fact.
It's always tricky to prosecute members of the upper class in this - and any other - country. It already seems impractical to prosecute numerous accomplices whom are all being coached (and willingly and knowingly letting themselves be paid to receive this coaching) to maintain they are convinced there was no crime here.
There is another side to this coin.
The rewards of success will be substantial. Making an example of the culprits will (a) encourage others to report similar transgressions, and (b) dissuade (other) others from starting down the same doomed criminal path.
There's great potential here to radically cleanse society of do-nothings who sit around earning their livelihood from the hard work and effort of those of us whom are productive.
Let's explore if - and how - the successful prosecution (of these few members of, or dropouts from, the upper classes) can be achieved: together.
Detective W/O Van der Merwe of the Gordon's Bay SAPS has consulted the prosecutor here who advises that I should open a case here and then (if I understand him correctly) transfer it to the Braamfontein or Hillbrow SAPS in Johannesburg where further investigation can more easily be done at the Liberty Life head office.
It's not outside their mandate.
Wherever it falls outside their field of expertise I'm sure they will consult the Western Cape and Gauteng DPCI.
-
You have noted my "sister [is] resident in Australia, a sovereign state that does not extradite to South Africa". Does America extradite to here? Law enforcement in the USA will co-operate with you. Caroline can't go on perpetrating this crime, with impunity, while residing in New York City much longer. I'm also a US citizen; resided there 17 years; attended a top school; two prestigious universities; and can access hugely influential people there.
Since I returned here (in '91) I reconnected online with my circle of friends several years ago. They have made it pretty clear they just don't understand what's held me back from being more productive with my life.
After I waited all this time - my influence and perseverance will soon be felt there, as well as here.
The greatest obstacle to my own progress to date has been my own belief that by failing to be more productive over the past two decades I somehow forfeited my position in society.
And therefore... I could never really count on getting full co-operation from the police.
Your straightforward, frank, honest, and open reply has proven me wrong.
Thanks!
Gregory Press
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 6:45 AM, Gregor Press <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi Col Lourents,
OK, found your reply to this other addr
Will study it and get back to you if I still have questions.
Thank you!
G. Press
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 6:48 AM
Subject: Response
To: [email protected]
Greg,This is what I recall:
Several people in the family advised me and Roger not to give you the life insurance funds that you inherited from Sydney: Victoria, Clifford, William knew about it, Suzanne and Jane may not have known, I'm not sure. The reason we all did this is that we thought you would spend the money very quickly, and likely use it to sue the family, which you had done several times in the past. I wasn't really comfortable with concealing the funds, but went along with it because of your past behavior, and also because if you misused the funds and sued the family, everyone else would tell me I had been foolish. So I went along with the group decision. Nobody ever thought of taking the money away from you indefinitely; rather it was supposed to be used to support you and pay your living expenses, like the rest of the trust funds that have been set aside for maintaining your support, as I have told you before.
When you phoned to tell me that Peta had gone to hospital, I was very concerned and stayed up late at night making long distance phone calls to reach the doctor at the Johannesburg General Hospital to find out what was going on, and to ask his advice about the best course of action. I remember phoning Willliam as well and discussing with him the best thing we could do to help from a far distance. I remember eventually getting through to the doctor who treated Peta first, and he explained to me that she had an episode, I cant remember if he said it was a stroke, but he did say he gave you medicine for Peta which was a blood thinner to prevent any further episodes. He was worried that you seemed very distrustful of the medical profession and unlikely to give Peta the medicine as prescribed. Later I remember talking to you about the fact that you did not give Peta the medicine and for that reason you might yourself be partly responsible for her second episode, which I think was a stroke.
When you phoned to ask for family help to get Peta into a private clinic, I was very alarmed by the news of her recurrent illness and very concerned about what to do to assist you and her. I remember feeling worried that there would not be wholehearted family support to pay for an expensive private clinic. I remember talking it over with William on the phone, and possibly Clifford as well. It was at this time that I remembered about the life insurance policy and I decided very quickly to use this information as leverage to persuade everyone to support sending Peta to a private clinic. Once I mentioned that this money could be used, I got agreement from others who had been dragging their feet about the private clinic.
Remember, you could have taken Peta to the General Hospital meanwhile if you wanted her to have immediate and expedient treatment.
I'm not sure if I remember the details correctly but you did take Peta to a private clinic where she was treated. I do not know what the delay was, what time took place before I remembered about the life insurance policy. I think it was a matter of hours during the night. But I can state plainly that as soon as I realized there was not unanimous support for the private clinic, I tried hard to think of a way to help, and it was not long before I remembered about the insurance policy and used that as backup to pay for the private clinic.