Jailed in 2004 for 16 months after being convicted of phone threats to kill Auckland barrister Gary Gotlieb former Huntly resident Myles James de Montalk launched a campaign of “scandalous” allegations.

Among other things Mr de Montalk accused Mr Gotlieb, who is currently president of the Auckland district law society, and various judges of making false statements, denying him justice, abusing the law and generally conspiring criminally against him.

As a result of what he termed “blatant criminal activity” Mr de Montalk said he planned to file criminal charges against judges.

Mr Gotlieb had a long association with Mr de Montalk relating to various legal matters and over several years Mr de Montalk had voiced grievances about them to Mr Gotlieb.

Things came to a head in 2003 when Mr de Montalk made 21 progressively more threatening phone calls to Mr Gotlieb.

According to the Court of Appeal Mr de Montalk said in one message: “I am going to shoot you Gotlieb,” and in another, “You won’t know where, you won’t know when, you’re mine, Gotlieb.”

When he turned up in person at the Court of Appeal last year to appeal his conviction for threatening to kill Mr Gotlieb he objected to Justice Peter Salmon hearing his case.

Justice Salmon, perhaps thankful to be shot of the de Montalk affair, stood down and was replaced by Justice Hugh Williams, who joined Justice Bruce Robertson and court president Justice Noel Anderson.

The appeal did not go ahead at that time and was later listed to be heard by Justices Willie Young, Judith Potter and Rodney Hansen.

Mr de Montalk did not attend that hearing and the appeal was again adjourned to be finally dealt with by Justices Grant Hammond, Lester Chisholm and Mark Cooper.

The basis for Mr de Montalk’s appeal was his belief he was “fitted up” and that telephone recordings of numerous calls to Mr Gotlieb were “doctored.”

He contended, among other things, there was no proof the voice on the telephone was his.

Throughout his failed campaign to clear his name Mr de Montalk made “outrageous allegations” against Court of Appeal president Justice Anderson and the court’s registrar; he filed documents that contained inappropriate and “scandalous material” and were ordered removed from the court file; he accused Justice Hammond and Crown lawyer Kit Toogood QC of “conspiracy;” and some of his points of appeal were deemed offensive.

Delivering the Court of Appeal’s dismissal in June, Justice Hammond said Mr de Montalk had received “very considerable tolerance and assistance” from the district court judge who sat on the original trial, whom Justice Hammond said gave him “a very fair crack of the whip.”

Not surprisingly, and despite Mr de Montalk’s complaints of unlawful arrest, conspiracies and perjury, intimidation and the conduct of judicial officers, the Court found nothing concrete at all was placed in front of it to demonstrate that this was a case of fabricated evidence.

Feedback on this story to jockanderson@ihug.co.nz    Posted June 30, 2006.