Dear Alderman Robinson,
MRS WRIGHT/FREDDIE ANDREWS
Your letter of 10 February 1992 and enclosure refers.
This was a complex matter and the subject of protracted investigation by the Royal Ulster Constabulary Fraud Squad. [That is true.]
D/Constable Patterson was one of a number of Officers engaged in the enquiry. [That is also true.]His findings were fully reported to the Director of Public Prosecutions in a series of written reports and meetings, as were the findings of the other Officers involved. [I doubt that very much, but if it was true, then the Office of the DPP has a lot of very searching questions to answer.]
All information uncovered during the course of the investigation [There must have been a large amount of information uncovered given the number of officers involved over a three-year period.] was placed before the Director of Public Prosecutions whose decision was to proceed criminally against a former Solicitor, Herbert Wright, late of Tughan and Company, Solicitors. [That is where Superintendent Albiston begins to deceive.] The direction was to prosecute on a charge of Criminal Deception arising from a false representation as to title on premises known as 60/65 Smithfield Square, Belfast. Mr Wright pleaded 'Guilty as Charged' at Belfast Crown Court on 9 January 1989 and received a Suspended Prison Sentence. [This DPP direction must be looked at. The summons stated that Herbert Wright "dishonestly obtained from Ryland Vehicle Group Limited £375.000 with the intention of permanently depriving the said Ryland Vehicle Group Limited thereof by deception, namely by falsely representing Neville Johnston (Garages) Limited had a good and marketable title to premises known as 60/65 Smithfield Square, Belfast". As the Fraud Squad findings would have shown, the reason Neville Johnston (Garages) Ltd did not have a "good and marketable title" was that Tughan & Co assisted them in taking over - illegally - my brother Freddie's property at 60-65 Smithfield Square, Belfast in order to offer it to the Ryland Vehicle Group. In fact the summons issued against Herbert Wright identified the THIRD illegal and criminal transaction involving 60-65 Smithfield Square, Belfast and the reason Herbert Wright was prosecuted was because he had caused the Ryland Vehicle Group to pay £375,000 for property that he, Tughan & Co and Charles Gilpin had stolen. 60-65 Smithfield Square, Belfast was at the time in question, stolen property. The question is why did the DPP, who, as Albiston stated, had all the information gathered by the Fraud Squad officers, not prosecute Herbert Wright, Tughan & Co and Neville Johnston (Garages) Ltd for the second theft as well? Charles Gilpin's son married Neville Johnston's widow, so Gilping would have exercised his authority in his usual manner in that firm.
The first and initial theft was managed by Charles Gilpin himself when he removed the family safe containing all my father's private documents including deeds from my mother's keeping and caused her to transfer all our family documents from solicitors Boston & Sullivan to his own solicitors Tughan & Co.
If the Fraud Squad findings were sufficient to be used in a Court of law to have the Ryland Vehicle Group's stolen £375,000 reinstated to them and the perceived perpetrator punished, why was it not sufficient to be used in a Court of law to have my brother's greater loss reinstated including his magnificient home Tara House especially when my brother's loss was the reason for the Fraud Squad investigation in the first place? Also, since the Fraud Squad findings were sufficient to convict a solicitor employed by the biggest legal firm in Belfast of such serious conduct, why did the Official Solicitor F. Brian Hall refuse to present those same findings to the High Court judge on my brother's behalf by making the excuse that the Fraud Squad findings were only "notes and jottings"? What, under God, has gone on in the High Court buildings in Belfast and what is continuing to go on there. There seems to be a criminal gang within the High Court buildings supported on the outside by a conglomeration of business and professional men and women who would seem to be running a criminal ring, the victims of which are helpless, defenceless Patients in Care. My brother is not the only victim of this ring.]
The Police investigation has now ended, however, Mrs Wright is aware that should any new evidence come to light it will be considered accordingly. [What Police investigation has now ended, Superintendent Albiston? Here you state that the police investigation into the plundering of Freddie Andrews' estate has now ended as a result of the above prosecution of solicitor Herbert Wright for cheating the Ryland Vehicle Group out of £375,000, but you know that Freddie Andrews was never mentioned on the summons you refer to above, and while the Ryland Group got satisfaction the legal birds of prey were allowed to continue their ravaging of Freddie's estate. You know that this summons referred to an action taken against Herbert Wright by the Ryland Vehicle Group, and it had absolutely NOTHING to do with the three-year investigation carried out by the RUC Fraud Squad into the criminal plunder of my mentally handicapped brother's estate. It was because those findings of the three-year Fraud Squad investigation were not acted upon when they should have been acted upon both by the RUC and the DPP several years earlier, that Tughan & Co through Herbert Wright had the opportunity to try to cheat the Ryland Vehicle Group out of £375,000.
Superintendent Albiston used the conviction of Herbert Wright in this third case as an excuse to close the cases against multi-millionaire Charles Gilpin (by that time deceased), Neville Johnston (Garages) Ltd, solicitors Tughan & Co including the same Herbert Wright, several other solicitors, several Official Solicitors, estate agents and valuers and probably others, for their criminal involvement in the plunder of Freddie Andrews' estate. This letter from Albiston confirms the RUC top brass are involved in the coverup, at least, of this criminal plunder, as well as the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Superintendent Albiston stated above that the DPP had been presented with all the findings of the Fraud Squad Officers' three-year investigation into the theft of my mentally-handicapped brother's property and money, and although the DPP actually did NOTHING to assist in the reinstatement of all his stolen property and money, the DPP used all the findings of that three-year investigation instead to reinstate the money of a careless English car company stolen from them by the same solicitors who had assisted in the plunder of my brother's property in the first instance. This is criminal conduct by the Officers of the RUC and the Office of the DPP. In fact, neither the RUC nor the DPP initiated the above case against Herbert Wright on behalf of the Ryland Vehicle Group Limited. The Ryland Vehicle Group Limited forced the DPP to take that action as a direct result of my repeated correspondence to the Ryland Vehicle Group Limited telling them that they had purchased stolen property. Albiston and his friends then used this opportunity to try to bluff and lie and cheat and bully us into believing that they had done such a great job on Herbert Wright that there was no need of further investigation into the affairs of a simple useless Patient.
Let me tell Albiston, Hall and all the rest of the gang involved that I will not be bluffed, lied to, cheated nor bullied by them or anyone else, even High Court judges!]
I trust that this is of assistance to you. [Actually, Superintendent, I trust that what I have said will be of assistance to both you and the rest of the gang!]
for Chief Constable