Litigation and Evidence of Organised Crime

Below is the history of organised crime, litigation and harassment that has taken place at 91 Frangipani Street, Kleinbron Estate, Brackenfell, Cape Town, South Africa, from 2019 to present.

The purpose of the organised crime, litigation and harassment is for the illegal eviction of the homeowners of 91 Frangipani Street (Mr and Mrs Fitchat) from their home, so that the organised crime syndicate may take take ownership of the house, sell it to the next homeowner, then illegally evict the next homeowner again, and sell the house again to the homeowner after that, and repeat the process indefinitely.

This page serves two purposes: first, as a source of verifiable evidence, to prospective and current homeowners, of what may happen to you if you purchase property in Kleinbron Estate and become a target and victim of organised crime and theft of real estate, and second, as a way to democratise the legal system and the legal process by providing real-life example legal documents, to remove it from the controlling hands of organised crime, and release it into the hands of regular people, so that anyone can rise up and fight against organised crime.

You can, and should, do it yourself, you should be self-represented, you should do self-representation. Legal representation is, in itself, a racket, it is a part of organised crime. It’s an ambush, because judges have already been bribed and turned against you, long, long before you enter the courtroom, and thus, you cannot “win” in any normal sense. And your “legal representation” (“attorney”) will not help you either. So, it’s not about winning or losing – it’s simply about representing yourself.

Don’t fall for the empty threat that, if you are self-represented, you have a fool for a lawyer. Even the absolutely best of the best of the best lawyer in the whole, entire universe, cannot win when there is a corrupt judge with criminal connections and who is protected by the government, no matter how good the lawyer is. In yourself, you have the best do-it-yourself lawyer available in the whole entire universe, ever.

Stand up for yourself and represent yourself.

The below litigation matters are/were all conducted through the Kuils River Magistrates Court in Cape Town, South Africa.

1. Mr and Mrs Fitchat (Purchasers) v Mr Hohng (Seller)

  • Matter: House purchase (2019) – Law Firms: MHi Attorneys, BMH Law
  • Offer to purchase (OTP)
  • Home loan offer
  • Progress report
  • Invoice (conveyancer for seller)
  • Statement of account (registering attorney for purchaser)
  • Conditions report
  • Structural engineer report
  • Addendum to OTP
  • Settlement agreement (between Mr and Mrs Fitchat, Mr Hohng, MHi Attorneys and Seeff Properties)
  • Kleinbron Estate HOA Constitution & Rules
  • Title deed (disputed)
  • The above matter is concluded.
  • Ms Riëtte Smuts (MHi Attorneys) used the allegation that the seller had lost their title deed, and as such, that the property transfer could not proceed from the seller (Mr Hohng) to the purchasers (Mr and Mrs Fitchat) at the deeds office without the title deed, as a means to charge extra occupational rent from the purchasers, before the house was transferred to the purchasers. When the purchasers stopped paying occupational rent (19 July 2019), the seller (miraculously) found the title deed and the property transfer occurred two weeks later (2 August 2019).
  • The title deed contains a paragraph indicating that homeowners cannot resign as members of the HOA and that the house cannot be transferred (i.e. sold) without the permission of Kleinbron Estate HOA.
  • The paragraph was inserted into the purchasers’ title deed by Kleinbron Estate HOA without the purchasers’ knowledge, agreement or consent.
  • The purchasers were not aware of the paragraph in the title deed, as Ms Riëtte Smuts (MHi Attorneys) hid the title deed from the purchasers during the conveyancing process. Ms Smuts indicated that the seller (Mr Hohng) had “lost” the title deed and thus that it was not available for inspection by the purchasers (i.e. the new homeowners).
  • When the title deed was subsequently “found”, it was registered at the Cape Town deeds office without the purchasers being aware of the contents of the title deed.
  • The purchasers did not sign, or agree with, the title deed, and thus, the purchasers are not bound by the fraudulent title deed, which was subsequently used as the legal basis for Kleinbron Estate HOA to proceed with legal action against the purchasers for alleged unpaid levies.
  • It is reasonable that the organised crime syndicate uses a sustainable house harassment business model, i.e. they use a portion of the purchase price each time the house is sold, to fund harassment of the new homeowners. So when new homeowners buy the house, they unknowingly fund their own harassment, and thereby, harassment is funded over and over again, each time performed on the new homeowners, who are never made aware of the history or the previous owners of the house, in a sustainable manner, each time that the house is sold.
  • It does not help to report law firms or attorneys to the Legal Practice Council, the Law Society, the police, or to anyone else. They are all part of the same organised crime syndicate. It’s the same as reporting a person, to that person themselves.

2. Sealtek Cape (Pty) Ltd (Plaintiff) v Mrs Sonet Fitchat (Defendant)

3. Sealtek Cape (Pty) Ltd and Mr Charl Johnsen (Plaintiffs) v Mr Theo Fitchat (Defendant)

  • Matter: Defamation (2020) – Law Firms: FPS Attorneys, Abrahams & Gross
  • Letter of demand
  • Company report (Sealtek Cape / Rodenburg Deli)
  • Correspondence with Tiefenthaler
  • Correspondence between Hellopeter and Tiefenthaler
  • Correspondence with Abrahams & Gross
  • The above matter was a SLAPP suit, concealed as a defamation lawsuit.
  • Mr Fitchat wrote several posts exposing the scam of Sealtek Cape, and FPS Attorneys’ complicity in the scam, on Hellopeter. Mr Fitchat subsequently removed the Hellopeter posts, following the letter of demand from Abrahams & Gross and upon the insistence of Mrs Laverne Portellas to “protect the good name of her colleagues”, and in order to prevent defamation litigation in the matter.
  • The company report for Sealtek Cape indicates that it was registered in 2006 (company registration number 2006/028931/07), and it is registered for SARS tax as operating in the industry of “agriculture and hunting”. Sealtek Cape was originally named “Sandrivier Vars Produkte”, then renamed to “Limpopo Fencing and Construction”, and then renamed to “Sealtek Cape” in 2019, when it started with the deficient renovation work at 91 Frangipani Street, Kleinbron Estate, Cape Town. Sealtek Cape renamed itself again in 2020 to “Rodenburg Deli”.
  • The above matter prescribed after three years and did not proceed in itself.
  • See Tiefenthaler matter below.

4. Tiefenthaler (Mrs Laverne Portellas) v Mr Theo Fitchat

5. Mr Theo Fitchat (Plaintiff) v Ambassador Pools (Defendant) and Mr Richard Husted (Third party)

  • Matter: Swimming pool renovation (2020) – Law Firm: Maurice Phillips Wisenberg
  • Letter of demand
  • Summons
  • Notice of intention to defend
  • Expert report for Ambassador Pools’ work (in addition to Sealtek Cape)
  • The above matter prescribed after three years and did not proceed.
  • There was collusion between MPW Attorneys and FPS Attorneys in the following manner: On the same day that Mr Antony Arvan (MPW Attorneys) received Ambassador Pools’ summons, Mr Louis Lourens (FPS Attorneys) arranged a pre-trial hearing for the Sealtek Cape matter, i.e. Mr Arvan used the existence of the Sealtek Cape matter that the plaintiff was involved in, to apply pressure on the plaintiff to withdraw the matter against his own clients, Ambassador Pools and Mr Richard Husted, causing the above matter against them to not proceed, and the Sealtek Cape matter to proceed instead.

6. Cape Town Municipality and Kleinbron Estate v Mr and Mrs Fitchat

  • Matter: Tree removal (2020)
  • Email
  • The above matter is concluded.

8. Mr and Mrs Fitchat (Applicants) v Mrs Mariné Franken et al (Respondents)

9. Mr Theo Fitchat (Plaintiff) v Mr Tyrone Johnson (Defendant)

  • Matter: Defamation (2022 – present) – Law Firm: Rianna Willemse Solms Attorneys, Attorney: Francis Erasmus
  • Video recording by Mr Fitchat on 10 January 2022. The Defendant claimed he caught Mr Fitchat filming the Defendant’s child (Luke Johnson) in a towel on his balcony.
  • Letter of demand
  • Summons
  • Application for default judgement
  • Default judgement
  • Notice of set-down for default judgement
  • Notice of intention to defend
  • Defendant’s plea
  • Plaintiff’s reply
  • Discovery
  • Pre-trial minute
  • Supplementary discovery
  • Trial enrolment (Notice of set-down of trial)
  • Plaintiff’s heads of argument
  • Defendant’s heads of argument
  • Verdict by Magistrate Judge David Lakey (fabricated by Defendant) (court order stating that the case is dismissed with punitive costs against the Plaintiff between attorney and client, i.e. the verdict is absurd, and created for the purpose of legal fee extortion)
  • Notice of intention to tax bill of costs (fabricated by Defendant)
  • Notice of taxation – total: R 40,085.50 (fabricated by Defendant)
  • The Defendant, Tyrone Johnson, lives in 19 Klein Bron Avenue, Kleinbron Estate, Cape Town, with his alleged wife, Mrs Marianne Johnson, and his two alleged children, Luke Johnson and Elizabeth Johnson.
  • This case is an example of entrapment and legal fee extortion. The Plaintiff was defamed, and compelled to legally restore his reputation and standing in the community, by taking legal action against the Defendant for defamation, after the Defendant alleged in public that he caught the Plaintiff filming the Defendant’s son (Luke Johnson) in a towel. The Defendant (Mr Tyrone Johnson) is the neighbour of the Plaintiff (Mr Theo Fitchat). The Defendant essentially accused the Plaintiff of being a pedophile, for the purpose of real estate harassment and house theft (as part of a coordinated process by Kleinbron Estate, Osro, Ms Riëtte Smuts, Mrs Mariné Franken, Mr Elmo Franken, Mr Thys van Tonder, Mr Johan Basson, Mr Tyrone Johnson, Mrs Marianne Johnson, Ms Francis Erasmus, Sealtek Cape, Mr Charl Johnsen, FPS Attorneys, MHi Attorneys, Mr Charl du Toit, SJC Security, South African Police Service, Kuils River Magistrates Court, and various children and other law firms), so that the Plaintiff would move away from his house, so that the Defendant could obtain the house for a lower price, and re-sell it again at a higher price, thereby making a profit. The judge was already bribed beforehand to ensure the verdict (court order) would be in favour of the Defendant. The judge’s verdict was a court order to dismiss the case with punitive costs against the Plaintiff, with costs between attorney and client. In essence, the Plaintiff (Mr Fitchat) therefore has to pay extortion legal fees to the Defendant’s attorneys, Ms Francis Erasmus and Rianna Willemse Solms Attorneys (Durbanville, Cape Town, South Africa), for being defamed.
  • Plaintiff’s witnesses (for Mr Fitchat):
    • Detective Bezuidenhout (SAPS Brackenfell Detectives)
    • Mr Alex van Niekerk (Kleinbron Estate manager), declined to testify
    • Mr Charl du Toit (SJC Security owner)
    • Mrs Le-Lue van der Sandt (Kleinbron Estate resident, wife of Bok Radio owner), declined to testify
  • Defendant’s witnesses (for Mr Johnson – all of Mr Johnson’s witnesses were alleged residents of Kleinbron Estate):
    • Mr Thys van Tonder
    • Mrs Marianne Johnson
    • Mrs Mariné Franken
    • Ms Chantel Lober
  • The trial for the above matter is concluded. The correspondence emails between Mr Fitchat and Mr Tyrone Johnson’s attorney (Ms Francis Erasmus) was an exercise in vitriolic deception and futility, but it did eventually yield the set of above documents. The trial transcript is available by request. The subsequent fabricated taxation (cost order) and fabricated “allocator certificate” of the fabricated bill of costs of the fabricated verdict and fabricated court order is ongoing. The fabricated final taxation cost order and “allocator certificate” will be posted here when it becomes available, as well as the subsequent fabricated debt collection litigation documents from the Defendant’s attorneys to the Plaintiff for non-payment of the fabricated cost order, and attachment and auctioning of the Plaintiff’s house and assets, and freezing of the Plaintiff’s bank accounts.
  • Mr Tyrone Johnson defamed Mr Fitchat (he made a public statement that he caught Mr Fitchat filming his child (Luke Johnson) in a towel), he ceaselessly and relentlessly harassed and monitored Mr Fitchat, he said he would kill Mr Fitchat and his wife, Mr Johnson and his alleged wife fabricated protection orders against Mr Fitchat, he had Mr Fitchat’s firearms confiscated, had Mr Fitchat arrested and put in jail, he fabricated the above verdict (court order), and he is in the process of fabricating a taxation (cost order) and debt collection to try to coerce Mr Fitchat into moving out of his house, giving him all of Mr Fitchat’s money and possessions, and into mediation with an organised crime syndicate. Nothing can or will stop him. Everyone at court, everyone in the police, everyone in the legal system and everyone else is working alongside him.
  • It will not help to hire an attorney. As per the Tiefenthaler matter above, an attorney was assigned to the Sealtek Cape case. Tiefenthaler refers to itself as “Construction Law”. They damaged and prolonged the case instead of settling it, charged unnecessary and extortionary legal fees, and threatened to take criminal and civil legal action against Mr Fitchat if he went public with what they were doing, and if he didn’t pay the extortion fees they charged after their services were cancelled.
  • Mr Johnson threatened Mr and Mrs Fitchat that 1) “there’s a huge legal bill coming” and 2) “I am going to kill you”. The punitive cost order is the “huge legal bill”, and since it was a threat that has become true, it is thus propaganda, Neuro-Linguistic Programming, which “thereby implies” that Mr Johnson’s second threat, that he will kill Mr and Mrs Fitchat, will thus reasonably also happen with 100% certainty, by virtue of Mr Johnson’s first threat having become real.
  • 10. Mr Theo Fitchat and Mrs Sonet Fitchat (Applicants) v Mr Tyrone Johnson (Respondent)
  • Matter: Protection order (2022 – 2023) – Attorney: Francis Erasmus
  • Protection order application
  • Interim protection order
  • Counter interim protection order (Johnson v Fitchat)
  • SJC Security report (Johnson v Fitchat)
  • Firearm purchase
  • Mr Fitchat’s firearm license (confiscated by SAPS Brackenfell after Mr Johnson’s interim protection order against Mr Fitchat)
  • Confiscation of Mr Fitchat’s firearm, ammunition, airgun and license
  • Application for warrant of arrest (Fitchat v Johnson)
  • Mr Johnson’s opposing affidavit (Fitchat v Johnson)
  • Interim protection order amendment (Johnson v Fitchat)
  • Mr Fitchat’s opposing affidavit (Johnson v Fitchat)
  • Warrant of arrest of Mr Johnson by Mr Fitchat (Fitchat v Johnson)
  • Final protection order (Fitchat v Johnson)
  • Final protection order (Johnson v Fitchat)
  • Detainment slip for Mr Fitchat’s arrest for alleged breach of protection order
  • The above matters are concluded.
  • The above protection order matters consisted of Mr and Mrs Fitchat applying for a protection order against Mr Tyrone Johnson due to harassment. Thereafter, Mr Tyrone Johnson applied for a counter protection order against Mr Fitchat. All protection orders were granted.
  • Mr Tyrone Johnson’s protection order witnesses:
    • Mr Charl Johnsen (director of Sealtek Cape)
    • Mr Joel Redelinghuys
    • Mrs Mariné Franken
    • Ms Nozibele Xotyeni
  • Statements made by Mr Tyrone Johnson towards Mr and Mrs Fitchat in and around 91 Frangipani Street, Kleinbron Estate, and at the Kuils River Magistrates Court:
    • “Guys, just caught the guy from 91 Frangipani [Mr Fitchat] filming my child [Luke Johnson] in a towel, not cool” (10 Jan 2022)
    • “We’ve always been good to you, we never complained once” (28 Jan 2022)
    • “Coward [spoken by Mr Johnson while blocking Mr Fitchat’s entry into his house]” (March 2022)
    • “Is this about money? [‘this’ likely referring to the defamation summons Mr Johnson received from Mr Fitchat, which, yes, if construed and reduced as such, was ‘about money’ in the form of damages caused by Mr Johnson’s allegation on a public Whatsapp group that he had caught Mr Fitchat filming his child (Luke Johnson) in a towel]” (March 2022)
    • “Look guys, there’s the pedophile” (April 2022)
    • “That’s rich, bringing your kids out [to the park across 91 Frangipani Street]. If you threaten me and my wife again, I will kill you. Did you hear me Fitchat? I will kill you” (July 2022)
    • “I have two black guys watching you” (July 2022)
    • “You think you’re a lawyer? There’s a huge legal bill coming” (July 2022)
    • “I hear the Hawks are investigating you again” (Aug 2022)
    • “I know all about you Mr Bitcoin [then followed by some form of sexual grunts or gorilla noises]” (Aug 2022)
    • “Get out of my way [after Mr Johnson had stopped his vehicle behind Mr Fitchat’s vehicle as Mr Fitchat was reversing on to his driveway into his garage]” (Aug 2022)
    • “I hear you’re looking for me [after Mr Johnson’s receipt of the interim protection order against him and after making gun hand gestures]” (Sep 2022)
    • “We’re very fond of Reinhard [Mr Fitchat’s son]” (at cross examination 28 Nov 2022)
    • “I caught you filming me in my house in my underwear [Mr Johnson testified under oath that Mr Fitchat filmed him in his house while Mr Johnson was in his underwear – it is not true]” (at cross examination 28 Nov 2022)
    • “He works in IT but we’re not sure what he does [spoken by Mr Johnson from a window inside his house while Mr Fitchat was outside his house]” (Dec 2022) (after the interim protection order prohibiting communication by Mr Tyrone Johnson)
  • The protection order lodged by Mr Tyrone Johnson was fabricated. It was a SLAPP suit with fictitious claims that Mr Fitchat was harassing Mr Johnson, i.e. that filming Mr Johnson harassing Mr Fitchat was in itself also harassment, and that Mr Fitchat’s response to Mr Johnson’s death threat, by saying that he would use his firearm on Mr Johnson, if Mr Johnson should make an attempt to murder someone in Mr Fitchat’s family, itself also amounted to harassment. The purpose of Mr Johnson’s protection order was to conceal the real estate harassment that he is performing on Mr and Mrs Fitchat, as a dispute between neighbours.
  • Mr Tyrone Johnson claimed that Mr Fitchat had walked around in Kleinbron Estate with his firearm, and that he had threatened him with his firearm, i.e. Mr Johnson’s claim was that he was allegedly afraid that Mr Fitchat would point and/or use a firearm upon him. Mr Fitchat never took his firearm out of his safe after he purchased the firearm, so it was not possible for Mr Fitchat to have walked around in Kleinbron Estate with his firearm or to have threatened Mr Johnson with his firearm. Mr Fitchat’s firearms (one handgun and one airgun) were confiscated by Brackenfell SAPS as a result of Mr Johnson’s allegation that Mr Fitchat had threatened him in Kleinbron Estate with his firearm, and presumably allegedly also because Mr Johnson felt threatened by Mr Fitchat (as per his counter protection order against Mr Fitchat) who had indicated in his letter of demand to Mr Johnson that he would use his firearm on Mr Johnson, if Mr Johnson were to try to make good on his death threats to Mr and Mrs Fitchat, in order to portray Mr Fitchat as paranoid and a danger to children and to his neighbours, to compel him to abandon his property and move away, so that the organised crime syndicate can take ownership of the house.
  • It would be of interest to find out if Mr Fitchat’s confiscated firearms were smuggled by SAPS, and if anyone has been murdered with the firearms after they were confiscated, and/or if they were smuggled back to the manufacturer or reseller (maybe with different serial numbers), so that the same weapons could be sold again to someone else.
  • The reason why Mr Tyrone Johnson began to harass Mr Theo Fitchat was because Mr Fitchat was approached for a sexual advance by Mrs Marianne Johnson around July 2021, but he did not accept her offer and he did not fall for the vaginal camel-toe seduction/ambush/invitation/entrapment offer that she set for him, for him to be lured into her house and have an affair with her (or whatever the plan was), and so Mr and Mrs Johnson weren’t able to entrap Mr Fitchat into an “affair”, and so they couldn’t blackmail the house out of Mr Fitchat by “threatening to tell Mr Fitchat’s wife that he had an affair with Mrs Johnson”, and so they had to resort to Mr Johnson (and his accomplices/agents) doing eviction-style harassment on Mr and Mrs Fitchat, to try to take ownership of their house for the organised crime syndicate.
  • Mr Tyrone Johnson continued harassing Mr Fitchat, after the interim protection order was served on him on 15 September 2022, and after the final protection order was served on him on 7 February 2023, when Mr Fitchat and his wife obtained a protection order against him to prohibit him harassing either of them.
  • At the protection order hearing on 7 February 2023, the presiding magistrate (possibly Ms Muller) declined to see evidence of the harassment, insisting on only verbal testimony. The magistrate asked Mr and Mrs Fitchat to describe how they thought Mr Tyrone Johnson would kill them, and which weapon he would use, since Mr Johnson only said he would kill them, but he did not indicate which method he would use to do so. The magistrate indicated that trimming tree branches hanging over into one’s garden from a neighbour (Mr Johnson’s tree branches hanging into Mr and Mrs Fitchat’s garden) legally always amounts to destruction of property, and the reason why Mrs Fitchat did not know this, was because she had not completed a Law of Property course yet as part of her legal studies. The magistrate declined to provide a reason for her verdict to grant protection orders to all parties.
  • The police and the court are complicit with Mr Johnson, and they thus encourage Mr Johnson to continue engaging in harassment of Mr and Mrs Fitchat. The following harassment events were enacted by Mr Johnson and his agents, after the interim and final protection orders were served:
    • On 3 February 2023 (four days before Mr Johnson’s final protection order hearing on 7 February 2023), Mrs Marianne Johnson (Mr Johnson’s alleged wife) had Mr Fitchat arrested for not withdrawing his query to Stellenbosch University, as to whether she is employed as an anaesthetist at Tygerberg Hospital in Cape Town. Mr Fitchat was released from custody the next day.
    • On 23 May 2023, Mr Johnson had Mr Fitchat arrested for recording him, Mrs Marianne Johnson, Mrs Mariné Franken, SJC Security, and children surrounding them, with his cellphone, while they were loitering in front of his house (i.e. street theatre – the staged incident occurred in May 2023, and Mr Fitchat had stopped paying a levy to Kleinbron Estate HOA in April 2023, so it appears the arrest was an attempt to try to coerce Mr Fitchat into resuming his levy payments again, and/or to move out of Kleinbron Estate. Kleinbron Estate HOA also took legal action against Mr Fitchat in July 2023, after the arrest did not persuade Mr Fitchat to resume paying a levy again). During the interrogation for the arrest, the police officers indicated to Mr Fitchat that the reason for the arrest was because Mr Fitchat had allegedly “recorded children”, i.e. the harassers loitered in front of Mr Fitchat’s house to coerce him to record them, so that they could then report to the police that they had witnessed the “crime” of “children being recorded”, and therefore have Mr Fitchat arrested. The hearing for Mrs Johnson’s protection order would have been held on the next day, 24 May 2023, which could not proceed due to Mr Fitchat’s plea hearing to be held at the same time, for the alleged child recording. Mr Fitchat was released from custody on 24 May 2023 before pleading, and Mrs Johnson’s protection order matter was postponed to 24 August 2023 (and thereafter finally postponed again to 6 November 2023).
    • On 6 November 2023, as Mr Fitchat was returning from the protection order hearing between him and Mrs Johnson (Mr Johnson’s alleged wife), Mr Tyrone Johnson stood and smirked at Mr Fitchat on his driveway as he returned home, seemingly to show his gratification that Mrs Johnson’s protection order was granted against Mr Fitchat.
    • On 14 December 2023, Mr Johnson stalked and timed Mr Fitchat’s arrival at the Kleinbron Estate Sheba Gate entrance and hooted his car to mock Mr Fitchat as if they are immensely good friends who just also happen to have protection orders against each other.
    • Mr Johnson’s harassment of Mr and Mrs Fitchat must continue, even after protection orders were granted against him, it must eternally and ceaselessly persist forever, out of necessity, due to Kabbalistic principles (i.e. everything – literally, each and every single thing – that a victim says and does, must be systematically opposed, one by one, to take control of the victim’s thoughts and actions), because the point of the harassment is to harass Mr and Mrs Fitchat out of their house, which the organised crime syndicate wrongly believes to be their property instead of Mr and Mrs Fitchat’s property, which is thus a pipe dream because it will not happen, but regardless, the harassment will also happen and persist for anyone else who is targeted by the organised crime syndicate in Kleinbron Estate, and anywhere else where the organised crime syndicate operates.

11. Mrs Marianne Johnson (Applicant) v Mr Theo Fitchat (Respondent)

12. Mrs Mariné Franken (Applicant) v Mr Theo Fitchat (Respondent)

13. Mrs Yvonne Viljoen (Applicant) v Mr Theo Fitchat (Respondent)

14. Kleinbron Estate HOA (Applicant) v Mr Theo Fitchat (Respondent)

15. Mr Theo Fitchat (Plaintiff) v Mrs Mariné Franken (Defendant)

  • Matter: Defamation (2022 – 2023) – Law Firms: Van Zyl Attorneys, Hickman Van Eeden Phillips Attorneys
  • Letter of demand
  • Summons
  • Notice of intention to defend
  • Notice of bar
  • Defendant’s plea and counterclaim
  • Plaintiff’s reply and plea
  • Discovery
  • Pre-trial minute
  • Amendment to plaintiff’s pleadings
  • Defendant’s amended counterclaim
  • The Defendant claimed that the Plaintiff used his security cameras to record the Defendant’s daughter in her bedroom and bathroom.
  • The Defendant, Mariné Franken, lives in 89 Frangipani Street, Kleinbron Estate, with her husband, Elmo Franken, and her two children, Caden Franken and Alaina-Jane Franken.
  • On 24 April 2023, at the first pre-trial hearing attended by Mr Deon Phillips (Hickman Van Eeden Phillips Attorneys), the court indicated that the pre-trial minute had to be handed in 5 days before the pre-trial hearing, instead of being handed in on the day of the pre-trial. The pre-trial hearing was postponed to 15 May 2023.
  • On 15 May 2023, at the second pre-trial hearing, the court indicated that the parties’ claims had to be amended from R400,000.00 to R200,000.00, as the Kuils River Magistrates Court was just a regional court.
  • On 21 August 2023, at the third pre-trial hearing, the clerk of the court, Mr Babile Onke, indicated that the court had misplaced the case file for the above matter.
  • On 16 October 2023, at the fourth pre-trial hearing, Magistrate Roelofze said she will not entertain the case, as it was not properly set down, she doesn’t know how it even got on to the roll, and therefore that she would remove it from the court roll.
  • The above matter is concluded, however, it is reasonable that the Defendant will continue harassing the Plaintiff (as she indeed does), as the purpose of the harassment is for the Plaintiff to abandon his house so that the organised crime syndicate can take ownership of it.

16. Mr Theo Fitchat (Plaintiff) v Kleinbron Estate HOA (Defendant) & Mr Alex van Niekerk (Third party)

17. Mr Theo Fitchat (Plaintiff) v Mrs Yvonne Viljoen (Defendant)

18. Mrs Marianne Johnson (Applicant) v Mr Theo Fitchat (Respondent)

  • Matter: Protection order (2023) – Attorney: Francis Erasmus
  • Interim protection order
  • Detainment slip for Mr Fitchat’s arrest for alleged breach of protection order
  • Respondent’s opposing affidavit
  • Street theatre video recording by Mr Fitchat on 10 January 2022 following the alleged child recording. The applicant (allegedly an anaesthetist) is heard in the video referring to the respondent as “fucked-up” and “mental” for allegedly recording children.
  • Final protection order
  • The above protection order was a SLAPP suit, concealed as a dispute between neighbours.
  • The Applicant, Marianne Johnson, lives in 19 Klein Bron Avenue, Kleinbron Estate, with her husband, Tyrone Johnson, and her two children, Luke Johnson and Elizabeth Johnson.
  • The reason for this protection order is to coerce the Respondent to abandon his house, to serve to discourage the Respondent from resuming with the legal matters against Kleinbron Estate HOA (since the Respondent clearly has no legal knowledge and hence it is futile), and to hide the crime of house theft and real estate harassment being committed by Mrs Marianne Johnson and her accomplices (the management of Kleinbron Estate), by pretending that the Respondent is harassing her and that she is a victim of harassment.
  • The Applicant claimed that the Respondent harassed her by querying with the Applicant’s alleged employer, Stellenbosch University, whether the Applicant is employed as a doctor at Tygerberg Hospital in Cape Town.
  • The Respondent was arrested and detained by Brackenfell SAPS for allegedly breaching the protection order, by not withdrawing his query as to whether the Applicant is a doctor employed at Tygerberg Hospital.
  • On 5 April 2023, the Family Court magistrate (possibly named Ms Muller) indicated that she did not want to get involved in criminal matters, and so the matter was assigned to a senior magistrate and postponed to 24 May 2023.
  • On 23 May 2023, the Respondent was arrested by SAPS Brackenfell Detectives for alleged breach of the Applicant’s husband’s (Mr Tyrone Johnson’s) protection order, and the Respondent was detained overnight at the Brackenfell SAPS cells. The Applicant’s protection order matter was thus not heard the next day, for when it was scheduled, and the matter was postponed to 24 August 2023.
  • On 24 August 2023, the court indicated that it had misplaced the case file for the above matter. The matter was postponed to 19 October 2023.
  • On 19 October 2023, the Applicant’s attorney, Ms Francis Erasmus, indicated that the case file had been found. The presiding judge postponed the matter to 6 November 2023, and indicated that a “relief judge”, Magistrate Fucht, would be presiding over the matter.
  • On 6 November 2023, Magistrate Fucht granted a final protection order (with costs, allegedly on an attorney-to-client scale) against the respondent, Mr Fitchat. The final protection order is allegedly valid for 10 years, until 5 November 2033.
  • The day of the trial hearing, 6 November 2023, was again an action-packed display of street theatre:
    • Magistrate Fucht indicated that:
      • the Respondent did not provide any evidence that the Applicant is not a doctor;
      • the Respondent did not provide any evidence that the Applicant is in actuality the one harassing the Respondent (and the Respondent should have lodged a separate protection order against the Applicant, if that were the case, which thus “proved” that the Applicant is thereby not harassing the Respondent);
      • the Applicant exposing her vaginal camel-toe to the Respondent and attempting to seduce him, did not amount to sexual harassment, since the Applicant was just expressing a personal feeling to the Respondent, and since there was no ulterior motive that could in any way be ascribed to the incident other than personal feeling (according to Magistrate Fuchs), the attempted seduction could not possibly have been done for real estate harassment, house theft or blackmail, and as such, it was thus the Applicant’s fundamental right to try to seduce the Respondent;
      • the Respondent is not involved in real estate harassment or organised crime, and the Applicant’s allegation that the protection order was an attempt to cover up the Applicant’s crime, was simply a conspiracy concocted by the Respondent to defend himself in the matter, by “telling a story” about why he is harassing the Applicant;
      • the Respondent had shown his true character during the trial hearing (i.e. based on Magistrate Fucht’s value judgement of the Respondent, it was clear that the Applicant’s testimony was grounded in absolute truth and it therefore did not amount to perjury or mere assassination of the Respondent’s character);
      • the Respondent was not a whistleblower, he did not have a right to query whether the Applicant was a doctor or not, he did not have a right to have his identity protected, and he did not have a right to make an anonymous disclosure towards Stellenbosch University and HPCSA and for it to be treated with confidentiality, because he was not an employee of Stellenbosch University or Tygerberg Hospital;
      • the Respondent is not allowed to question whether the Applicant is a doctor on “any media”;
      • the Respondent should seek professional help (i.e. psychological help);
      • she (Magistrate Fucht, the “Judge”) had previously sentenced a man to 18 months’ imprisonment for merely swearing at his mother. Because, as we all know, when a criminal prostitute (the Applicant) swears at a man (the Respondent) and calls him “fucked-up”, that’s fine, highly desirable, and a mark of distinction. But: if that same man, in court, repeats the words of the criminal prostitute who called him “fucked-up”, then, in that single instant, that man would have committed the most heinous, severe and unforgivable criminal harassment and defamation that can ever possibly be perpetrated against someone, and justice, at its finest, would be served, by sending that man straight to prison – welcome to clown world.
    • The trial hearing was recorded on the court’s audio equipment, as “proof” that it was a “real” trial hearing, and not a mock trial and a fake protection order.
    • Ms Nel (Family Court clerk), Mr Babile Onke (civil court clerk) and Mr Phillips (Hickman Van Eeden Phillips Attorneys) were on duty in the halls of the Kuils River Magistrates Court to pretend that case files randomly go missing, to make it appear that “human error” is at play, and that the court isn’t complicit and being controlled by organised crime.
    • Magistrate Fucht walked around like a disabled zombie whose neck and head had been severed. “Magistrate Fucht” was an actress, paid to be a fake judge for the trial hearing.
    • Detective Erasmus was on his post at court to pretend he was going to arrest Mr Fitchat again, and he drove up next to Mr Fitchat as Mr Fitchat drove home from court after the protection order hearing. The whole point of the protection order hearing was perhaps even entirely just for that single purpose, as a means for Detective Erasmus to try to intimidate Mr Fitchat with his “Kleinbron Estate?” comment to draw Mr Fitchat’s attention, so that there could then be a staredown competition between Detective Erasmus and Mr Fitchat, which could then be used later as a construed “revenge justification” for Detective Erasmus to afterwards try to run his car into Mr Fitchat’s car as he was driving home.
    • The disgusting criminal Doctor of Prostitution (PhD) (Mrs Marianne Johnson – a lying sack of shit and cum) and her childless fat land whale attorney (Ms Francis Erasmus) were of course playing the victims from start to end.
    • The Applicant’s “husband”, Mr Tyrone Johnson, was walking up and down “his” driveway at 19 Klein Bron Avenue, Kleinbron Estate, and did his usual “Hi! I’m With Stupid” harassment smirk as Mr Fitchat drove past him on his way to court and back, to provocatively gloat that the organised crime syndicate was able to push his “wife’s” fabricated protection order through, as if having your slut wife get a fabricated protection order against an innocent man, instead of getting one against herself, is some sort of Godly achievement. Clown world.
  • The Applicant is involved in organised crime, the Applicant is a fraudster, the Applicant has no medical knowledge, the Applicant fabricated her medical qualifications and employment with Stellenbosch University and Tygerberg Hospital, the Applicant fabricated her professional registration with the HPCSA, the Applicant’s name is Mrs Marianne Johnson and her address is 19 Klein Bron Avenue, Kleinbron Estate, Cape Town, South Africa, and the allegations against her are upheld. The “final protection order” granted by “Magistrate Fucht” was an act of organised crime and as such it is null and void.
  • The reason for this protection order is to coerce the Respondent to abandon his house, to serve to discourage the Respondent from resuming with the legal matters against Kleinbron Estate HOA (since the Respondent clearly has no legal knowledge and hence it is futile), and to hide the crime of house theft and real estate harassment being committed by Mrs Marianne Johnson and her accomplices (the management of Kleinbron Estate, Kuils River Magistrates Court, Stellenbosch University and Tygerberg Hospital), by pretending that she is a victim of harassment, and “thus” that she is not a harasser, since “she is the one being harassed”, and the “Final Protection Order” ultimately is “proof by implication” that she “really is” a doctor, and thus that the Respondent’s query “definitely was harassment and not a legitimate query”, because “surely” the court would not have granted the final protection order if the Applicant was actually a criminal who was pretending to be a doctor, and who therefore could not have been harassed by the Respondent sending an email to expose her crime of pretending to be a doctor.
  • The above matter is concluded, however, it is reasonable that the Applicant will continue harassing the Respondent, as the purpose of the harassment is for the Respondent to abandon his house so that the organised crime syndicate can take ownership of the house.

19. SAPS Brackenfell unlawful arrests of Mr Theo Fitchat

  • Matter: Malicious prosecution, wrongful arrest (2023)
  • Arrest 1 video (for alleged breach of Mrs Johnson’s protection order) (3 Feb 2023)
  • Detainment slip for arrest 1
  • Arrest 2 audio (for alleged breach of Mr Johnson’s protection order) (23 May 2023)
  • Detainment slip for arrest 2
  • The charges were dropped and the arrest warrants withdrawn, on the next day after each arrest.
  • Videos of the interrogation at SAPS Brackenfell Police Station are available from SAPS Brackenfell Police Station and/or SAPS Brackenfell Detectives.
  • Detective Ms Shabalala conducted the interrogation of Mr Fitchat on 3 Feb 2023 at SAPS Brackenfell Police Station.
  • Detective Sergeant Ms Clifford conducted the interrogation of Mr Fitchat on 23 May 2023 at SAPS Brackenfell Police Station. Mr Fitchat sent a Whatsapp message to Ms Clifford on 3 January 2022 to request to discuss the criminal case he had opened against Mrs Mariné Franken, but Ms Clifford ignored Mr Fitchat’s Whatsapp message, and only made contact for the first time with Mr Fitchat over a year later in 2023 when she arrested and interrogated him.
  • The purpose of the above unlawful arrests were to:
    • Create an illusion of tension between neighbours, in order to be able to “explain” the situation away as being fully due to only a “bad neighbour” and nothing else, and that it is not related in any way at all to the estate management, in order to pretend that the management’s involvement is merely and completely coincidental, due to there being a “bad neighbour”, i.e. to direct attention away from the estate management who is hiding the crime of meticulously planning and coordinating the events, and hence, since there “is” a “bad neighbour” and it was only “the bad neighbour’s” fault, and nobody else’s, there is thus irrefutably logical proof that there could be no possible way that is due to anything other than the “bad neighbour”, and there is no possible way that the situation was in actual fact actually just the direct cause of the estate management in the first place;
    • As a convenient means to do a handover from a criminal harasser to an attorney for the purpose of legal harassment, to hold Mr Fitchat and his firearms as legal ransom, in exchange for Mr Fitchat’s house;
    • To attempt to insert/wedge/force/strongarm/relevantise “another woman” into Mr Fitchat’s life and marriage to “break his marital relationship apart” by trying to induce “feelings of lust and jealousy”, so that a divorce can take place and the house can be sold as a result. Not that a dirty, dumb, disgusting, disease-carrying criminal prostitute posing as a doctor (Mrs Marianne Johnson), or a fugly whale-size rat-inbred pig-slob posing as an attorney (Ms Francis Erasmus), or anyone else, would ever have a chance, but, whatever. Mrs Johnson exposed her vaginal camel-toe to Mr Fitchat through her pants and told Mr Fitchat that her husband (Mr Tyrone Johnson) was away from home for the weekend to play rugby – this, the same mother who later accused Mr Fitchat of filming her child (Luke Johnson) in a towel, and who insists that Mr Fitchat is harassing her, and whose husband said he would kill Mr Fitchat, if Mr Fitchat ever threatened him or his wife again – clown world. The only explanation ever offered for this behaviour was that they are “a group of Christian parents trying to protect the children of Kleinbron Estate from Mr Fitchat”. All of this happened in Kleinbron Estate in 2021-2022, in front of houses 91 Frangipani Street and 19 Klein Bron Avenue;
    • To physically back Mr Fitchat into a corner of the house, with nowhere to hide, so that the only escape route would be to abandon the house;
    • To coerce Mr Fitchat to obtain an attorney (to facilitate legal fee extortion);
    • To pressure Mr Fitchat to settle with the organised crime syndicate (unjustified enrichment, to pay them extortion money);
    • To convince Mr Fitchat that his neighbour “really is” a doctor/anaesthetist and that she is not a criminal harasser, or to reveal that she is in fact a harasser involved in organised crime, but that she is able to bribe, or work with, the police and the court, and hence enjoy enough protection that she is able to evade prosecution;
    • To compel and coerce Mr Fitchat to abandon his house and move away, so that the organised crime syndicate can take ownership of it and sell it again, so that the harassment and extortion process can be repeated on the next homeowner.

20. Kleinbron Estate HOA (Plaintiff) v Mr and Mrs Fitchat (Defendants)

  • Matter: Unpaid levies (2023 – present) – Law Firm: DNG Attorneys
  • Letter of demand
  • Summons – total amount claimed: R3,130,53
  • Notice of intention to defend
  • Defendants’ plea
  • Plaintiff’s reply to Defendants’ plea
  • Plaintiff’s notice in terms of rule 23(1), (6), (9) & (11)
  • Plaintiff’s notice of application to compel in terms of rule 23(8)
  • Kleinbron Estate HOA Constitution & Rules
  • Title deed (disputed)
  • Home loan offer
  • Notice of cancellation of contract between Plaintiff and Defendants (Apr 2023)
  • Levy statement (Feb – Sep 2023)
  • Ongoing levy statement (Apr 2023 – Mar 2024) – total arrear levies claimed: R 24,359.78, let’s take it to a billion Osro!
  • Osro Investments / Osro CC Property Managing Agents appears to operate under the guise of a levy collection agency for Kleinbron Estate. The ongoing levy statement from Osro on behalf of Kleinbron Estate includes “late payment” interest fees and legal fees. Osro and Kleinbron Estate are not credit providers or law firms. Osro appears to have a Close Corporation (CC) registration number (CK 97/54606/23), but it is unclear “where”, “what”, “who” or “why” Osro exactly is. Most likely, Osro being a “financial services provider” for “property investments” is a front for them to engage in legally harassing homeowners in Kleinbron Estate out of their houses for the purpose of house flipping (i.e. buying houses for low, and selling them for high, to make an “investment profit”). Osro has a Financial Services Board (FSB) number: FSB 6326. Kleinbron Estate, and the Kleinbron Estate Home Owners Association (HOA), are not incorporated as juristic persons under Company Law – not in South Africa at least, from what can be discerned. The Kleinbron Estate HOA appears to be registered with CSOS (registration number CSOS/REG/16/WC/003672), for whatever that is worth. The contract between Mr and Mrs Fitchat and Kleinbron Estate was cancelled in April 2023. Osro was notified that the contract was cancelled, but nevertheless, Osro and Kleinbron Estate ignored the cancellation, and continues to send ongoing monthly levy statements to the Defendants, and indeed proceeded with the legal action being discussed here, after the fact. It is possible Osro intends to keep compounding the balance “owed” to Kleinbron Estate until it reaches some large amount, in order for the Plaintiff (Kleinbron Estate HOA) to then amend the quantum of their pleadings in this matter to the large amount as per the ongoing statement balance, to maintain some sort of claim to have a quasi-legal stranglehold (extortion power) over the property, as  it were, to be able to collect their pound of flesh when the property is sold and transferred to another owner, over and over again. On the other hand, since what they are doing is so blatantly and humorously illegal, it is most likely just the organised crime syndicate trying to make a nuisance of themselves (as they do), to try to compel the Defendants to sell their house and move away. Haha.
  • The Defendants (Mr and Mrs Fitchat) cancelled (terminated/rescinded) the contract between themselves and the Plaintiff (Kleinbron Estate HOA) in April 2023. The Plaintiff claims that the contract between itself and the Defendants cannot be cancelled, on the basis of the title deed of the Defendants’ property not making it possible for the contract to be cancelled, and as such, that “arrear” monthly levy amounts after the contract between the parties was cancelled, remain payable to the Plaintiff by the Defendants, until the Defendants’ property is sold.
  • Despite the Plaintiff breaching the contract between the parties in April 2022, and the Defendants rescinding the contract as a result thereof in April 2023, the Plaintiff has continued to send monthly levy invoices to the Defendants, and proceeded with legal action against the Defendants in June/July 2023 to “recover” the levy amounts that it alleges is owed to it by the Defendants.
  • The purpose of the above legal action is to coerce the Defendants to abandon and sell their property by frivolous/vexatious litigation and busywork, so that the organised crime syndicate may take ownership of the Defendants’ property, and repeat the process of harassment and house theft on their next victims.
  • Mr Fitchat indicated to the Plaintiff (via a Whatsapp message to Ms Gene Coetzer, phone number +27 805 6856, on 17 October 2023, who contacted him to sell the house) that if the Plaintiff (a manifestation of the organised crime syndicate) returns the firearms that were confiscated from him as a result of Mr Tyrone Johnson’s protection order, that the Defendants would then put the property in the market, and sell and move away from the house. The Plaintiff did not agree to this resolution for the parties to go their merry ways, and as such, the above legal action proceeds.
  • Strictly legally speaking, since it is not necessary at all (not a prerequisite) for one party to first have to breach a contract before the other party can cancel the contract (since a breach already is a cancellation, and vice versa), it happens to be a legally irrelevant and superfluous sidenote that the Plaintiff happened to breach the contract before it was cancelled by the Defendants. The Defendants (or the Plaintiff) could have cancelled the contract regardless of anything else, they could have cancelled it even if the Plaintiff DIDN’T breach the contract. Therefore, the merits of this case will not be based on “evidence”, since the “evidence” that the Plaintiff breached the contract is irrelevant and superfluous, and the Plaintiff’s “evidence” is merely a legal point regarding contract law and the title deed of the Defendants’ property. Thus, the essence and the verdict of this matter will turn on one legal point and decision only: whether it was legally possible for the Defendants to cancel the contract between them and the Plaintiff, or whether it was an interminable indefinite term contract, i.e. whether, on the balance of probability, contract law and law of delict outweighs and overrides the title deed, or vice versa. Pacta sunt servanda – agreements must be kept.
  • The organised crime syndicate is, of course, fully aware of all the above (this isn’t rocket science or brain surgery, and after all, it was them – nobody else – who orchestrated everything in the first place), but it still pursues frivolous/vexatious legal action (it is also a multiplicity, since there already was a prior and ongoing legal matter since January 2023 between the parties, and the Plaintiff commenced with this additional matter against the same Defendant in June/July 2023, thereby creating two of the same civil litigation matters with the same Plaintiff and Defendant running in parallel, a multiplicity), rather than the less expensive, less time-consuming, less labour-intensive and easiest option that is on the table, which is to simply return Mr Fitchat’s firearms to him, upon which he will sell his property and move away, which is all the organised crime syndicate really wants to achieve (it is the motive for the crime), but for some reason doesn’t do (probably to make Mr Fitchat move away from his house of his own accord, and thus coerce him to remove this information about organised crime from the internet, to artificially shift the onus on to him to “freely and voluntarily ensure” that his house is marketable and sellable to the next victim, in order to hide the Plaintiff’s crime). I suspect there will probably be an implication on the future harassment of the next homeowner of 91 Frangipani, if Kleinbron Estate and the organised crime syndicate gives up now, and concedes to agree to return Mr Fitchat’s firearms, because then clearly they would have been “wrong” to confiscate his firearms in the first place, and the organised crime syndicate needs to appear to “always be right” and the victim needs to appear to “always be wrong”, to hide the pattern of organised crime, and to convince/persuade victims to abandon their houses as the only available option. If they return the firearms, then they were “wrong” and the victim was “right”. Everything is a poker/chess game – even crime – and the “game” is seeing who is better at bluffing. Anyway, nobody “wants” or “enjoys” or “prefers” legal action, even if they say they do, although I suppose on the other hand, realistically, if an organised crime syndicate is dead-set on suing you for whatever reason (and court officials are bribed and corrupted to be biased against you – probably to discourage the victim to engage in legal action), then you have to accept that it is what it is, you can’t run away and go hide under a rock in la-la land and think you can avoid it and wait for it to all go away, even if it is an artificially toxic situation from which the victim’s escape would be advisable. It won’t magically disappear by itself. If it’s inevitable, then it’s inevitable, and you must handle it, you have no choice, you cannot *not* handle it. If you run away, it will come after you. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result, I guess.
  • The above matter is currently ongoing.

21. Kleinbron Estate HOA (Applicant/Plaintiff) v Mr and Mrs Fitchat (Respondents/Defendants)

  • Matter: Breach of rules – weeds (CSOS and/or civil lawsuit) (2023 – present)
  • Warning – Weeds (6 Sep 2023)
  • Warning – Weeds (7 Nov 2023)
  • The emails sent by Kleinbron Estate HOA to Mr and Mrs Fitchat, rely on a contract between Kleinbron Estate HOA and Mr and Mrs Fitchat that was cancelled on 17 April 2023. Multiple similar emails to the above were sent by Kleinbron Estate HOA to Mr and Mrs Fitchat since 2020.

22. Neighbours and Property Deeds Office Searches

  1. 91 Frangipani Street, Kleinbron Estate, Cape Town (Theo Fitchat, Sonet Fitchat) (purchased April 2019)
  2. 19 Klein Bron Avenue, Kleinbron Estate, Cape Town (Tyrone Johnson, Marianne Johnson) (purchased July 2019)
  3. 89 Frangipani Street, Kleinbron Estate, Cape Town (Elmo Franken, Mariné Franken) (purchased August 2020)
  4. 58 Frangipani Street, Kleinbron Estate, Cape Town (Vincent Viljoen, Yvonne Viljoen) (allegedly purchased approx. 2014)
  5. 60 Frangipani Street, Kleinbron Estate, Cape Town (lesbian female couple) (purchase date unknown)
  6. 62 Frangipani Street, Kleinbron Estate, Cape Town (Marais, Olivier) (allegedly purchased approx. 2016)

Houses 2 and 3 were sold and purchased, specifically after House 1 was sold and purchased, in order to attempt to hide the fact that a real estate harassment and theft plan was set in motion by the management of Kleinbron Estate when House 1 was sold to its current owners in April 2019.

The owners of Houses 2, 3 and 4 are neighbours who are known to be visibly involved in the harassment of House 1. Various other people/neighbours have assisted the owners of Houses 2, 3 and 4 to harass the owners of House 1.

The owner of House 4 alleged that she purchased the house many years before 2019.

The inhabitants of House 5, a seemingly lesbian female couple with two children, a boy and a girl, with one partner alleging to be an Electrical Engineer working as an IT Project Manager, and the other partner appearing to stay at home, engage in street theatre by making noise to draw attention to themselves from their front yard, having loud street meetings in the street between their house and 91 Frangipani, and standing and talking in their yard with a group of neighbours and pointing at 91 Frangipani. It appears they are a “somewhat neutral” control group, like House 6, that only engages in “nuisance” harassment, and not full-on physical, confrontational harassment, to make it appear as if the direct harassment from Houses 2 and 3 are random and normal.

The inhabitants of House 6 alleged that they purchased their house in 2016, and it seems their purpose is to stay “under the radar” and be a “neutral/indifferent/apathetic” control group, whose duty it is to monitor House 1, but to not heavily engage in the visible activities of the harassment itself, to make it appear that “obviously not all of” the neighbours are “thus” taking part in the harassment, and “thus” that there is no concerted/appreciable harassment effort taking place – although the inhabitants of House 6 have, in hindsight, indeed also engaged in harassing Mr Fitchat, storming into his garage unannounced, failing to look after Mr Fitchat’s child after an au pair agreement, making noises at night, following Mr Fitchat around as he was taking a walk, telling him to move his car, etc.

23. Street theatre at court – Piercing the legal veil

Street theatre is conducted at the court, inside the halls of the court building and inside the court rooms themselves where the judges are presiding.

(Fake) attorneys pretend to strike up conversations with each other, discussing private details about their cases, and they weave private details/particulars of your life, into their stories.

Attorneys loiter close around you in racially-diverse groups and brush their robes, gowns and coats against you to try to offend you and make you uncomfortable, and even pretend to offer apologies to you afterwards as a forced means to get you to interact/engage with them.

They receive instructions on their cell phones while doing so.

Attorneys (and judges) openly engage in bullying and mocking behaviour, display personal biases and conflicts of interest towards you, and manipulate your coerced physical presence at court, your lack of power (influence) and legal knowledge as a childish excuse to harass you, for the purpose of achieving a hidden goal (i.e. to get you to move from your house so they can take ownership of it and to direct attention away from their instruction-givers).

Harasser actors, including children, sit, stand and stroll around in the halls of the court, pretending to wait for their cases to be heard.

Watchers are planted to observe your reactions and responses.

The police pretend to call out names of witnesses and defendants, and tell those present in court to remain quiet.

Court clerks carry case files around and pretend to hide them.

Judges also engage in the street theatre, conducting mock court sessions, pretending to make judgements and court orders, encouraging you to obtain legal advice, pretending to hear defendants’ cases before them, pretending that they don’t know and that they are not actively engaged and willfully taking part in your unlawful arrest and malicious prosecution, pretending to receive bail from fake defendants and warning them when next to appear at court, selecting court dates, etc.

Everything that is said and done is planned beforehand down to the smallest detail, nothing is left to chance, and it is executed methodically as one would perform the script of a movie/play, yet it is all done to make events appear random, unplanned and “normal”.

This happens at every occasion that one goes to court, to create the illusion of justice/injustice within the court system, as “smoke and mirrors” for misdirection and busywork to draw attention away from the real perpetrators, and to hide the actual crime being committed.

The moral justification for the above is that the victim has been labeled a pedophile and a dangerous criminal, and thus that they deserve the punishment because it fits the crime, and further, that it is a necessary evil without which the organised crime syndicate would not survive.

Targeted legal harassment is generally performed on males, as they generally are in control of money and assets, which the organised crime syndicate wants to obtain.

Street theatre may be performed on individuals who are not in control of money and assets, more often females, in order for them to be persuaded/coerced/influenced, so that they may, in turn, persuade/coerce/influence another person who is indeed in control of money and assets, which the organised crime syndicate wants to obtain.

The property appears to have multiple addresses:

  • 91 Frangipani Street
  • 91 Frangipani Road
  • 17 Klein Bron Avenue
  • 91 Frantanil Street
  • Erf 15152

“Kleinbron Estate” was shown under “Vredekloof Heights” in earlier maps.

Known participants in organised crime:

Attorney firms:

Abrahams & Gross (Cape Town) []
BMH Law (Bellville, Cape Town) []
C. George Attorneys (Mitchell’s Plain, Cape Town)
DNG Attorneys (Bellville, Cape Town) []
Everinghams Attorneys (Cape Town) []
FPS Attorneys (Brackenfell, Cape Town) []
Harmse Kriel Attorneys (Cape Town) []
Hayes Incorporated (Cape Town) []
Hickman Van Eeden Phillips Attorneys (Kuils River, Cape Town)
Maurice Phillips Wisenberg (Cape Town) []
MHi Attorneys (Bellville, Cape Town) []
Rianna Willemse Solms Attorneys []
Smit & Hugo Attorneys (Kuils River, Cape Town) []
Tiefenthaler Africa Attorneys (Cape Town) [,,]
Van Zyl Attorneys (Bellville, Cape Town) []
Werksmans Attorneys (Cape Town) []

Individual attorneys/advocates:

Adrian Kennedy (Everinghams Attorneys)
André van Zyl (Van Zyl Attorneys)
Antony Arvan (Maurice Phillips Wisenberg)
Ashley Branford (The Cape Bar)
Ashley Gardiner (STBB)
Deon Phillips (Hickman Van Eeden Phillips Attorneys)
Diaan Nel (DNG Attorneys)
Dipuo Titipana (STBB)
Francis Erasmus (Rianna Willemse Solms Attorneys)
Freddie Steyn (FPS Attorneys)
Guillaume Viljoen (The Cape Bar)
Henno Bothma (Abrahams & Gross)
Joseph Shaw (Shaw Attorneys)
Jurgens Tubb (MHi Attorneys)
Laverne Portellas (Tiefenthaler Africa Attorneys, LP Law)
Louis Lourens (FPS Attorneys)
Michiel Heyns (Werksmans Attorneys)
Nicoleen Gagiano Grobler (DNG Attorneys)
Niel Grundlingh (STBB)
Riaan Meintjes (Hayes Incorporated)
Rianna Solms (Rianna Willemse Solms Attorneys)
Riëtte Smuts / Elna Swart (MHi Attorneys)
Tertia Lizette Kriel (Harmse Kriel Attorneys)

Front companies:

Afrisist (Salo Cloete)
Avo Communities
Assupol Insurance
Bok Radio (Le-Lue van der Sandt)
Bosasa (Gavin Watson, Angelo Agrizzi, Leon van Tonder)
BuddyChoice / BüddyChoice (Mariné Franken, Johan Basson)
Cape Industrial Flooring
E-Volve Office (Tyrone Johnson)
Farrell Flooring
Francois Bezuidenhout Engineering
Jawitz Properties
Jonathan W Mitchell (Independent Building Consultant) []
King Price Insurance
MEMA (Quinton le Grange)
MiWay Insurance
Novo Group (Salo Cloete, his wife and daughter)
Old Mutual iWYZE
Ooba (Yvonne Viljoen)
Osro (Mary-Ann Aylward)
RAM Couriers
Remgro Limited
RCS Loans
Sanlam Indie Life
Sanlam Matrix Insurance
Sealtek / Sealtek Cape (Cornel Bornman, Charl Johnsen, Quinton le Grange, Kobie Holtshauzen Vollgraaff, Nico Schlechter)
SJC Security (Charl du Toit, Philip du Plooy, Pieter de Goede)
South African Post Office
Standard Bank
Wildman Cape Gate (Jacques Odendal)

Neighbour/community harassers:

Alaina-Jane Franken
Anton de Freitas
Antonette Esselaar
Bongi Xotyeni
Caden Franken
Elmo Franken
Inga Xotyeni
Jayden Barnard
Joel Redelinghuys
Johan Basson (and his wife and son)
Le-Lue van der Sandt
Lizette Krause (and her husband, André Krause)
Marianne Johnson
Mariette Swart (Leakfind)
Mariné Franken
Nozibele Xotyeni
Phillip du Plooy
René Cronjé (and her husband, Frans Cronjé – brother of Hansie Cronjé)
Salo Cloete (and his wife and daughter)
Sunelle Marais
Thys van Tonder (and his wife)
Tyrone Johnson
Unknown harasser (and presumably her child)
Wilhelm Steenkamp
Yolanda Barnard
Yun-Hee Hohng (and her husband, son and daughter, Paul and Paula Hohng)
Yvonne Viljoen

Kleinbron Estate:

Alex van Niekerk (estate manager)
Charl du Toit (SJC owner)
Kleinbron Estate HOA
Mary-Ann Aylward (Osro)
Osro (levy collection agency for Kleinbron Estate)

Estate agents:

Adele Louw (Propnet) []
Colleen Brand (Alexander Swart Property Group)
Jawitz Properties
Steven Sergeant (Seeff) []


Badisa Trio (childrens’ social welfare organization)
CSOS (Community Schemes Ombud Service)
Department of Justice and Constitutional Development
HPCSA (Health Practitioners Council of South Africa)
SAPS Brackenfell (South African Police Service)
SAPS Brackenfell Detectives

Kuils River Magistrates Court:

(Kuils River Magistrates Court is a harassment centre/central/headquarters, a venue-for-hire and front for organised crime that pretends to be a legitimate court)
Family Court judge and clerks
Magistrate Mr David Lakey (relief judge)
Magistrate Ms Jacobs (civil/criminal judge)
Magistrate Ms Fucht (relief judge)
Magistrate Ms Lewis (senior magistrate/criminal judge)
Magistrate Ms Roelofze (civil judge)
Mr Edwin Jansen (civil clerk)
Mr Onke Babile (civil clerk)
Ms I Nel (Family Court clerk)
Ms Muller (possible name of Family Court magistrate judge)


Kendyll Norman
Michelle Viljoen
Stellenbosch University, Department of Anaesthesiology

SAPS Brackenfell:

Detective Bezuidenhout
Detective Gio
Detective Shabalala
Sergeant Clifford
Sergeant Erasmus
Station Commander Westcott

You may also like...

Popular Posts