Now that I've got to the end of my money and am now living from credit cards (with no certainty of any conceivable income) I'm having to take a long, hard look at what got me to this situation and, more importantly, what thinking patterns have created this scary predicament.
My conscious mind tells me, "There is no way I would have chosen this … even for my own worst enemies!" So, if I wouldn't choose it for my worst enemies, why did I choose it for myself? Am I my own really, really worst enemy of all time? Obviously, the logic says I must be my own worst enemy and so I must ask why I choose to live in such precarious situations - is there, at some level, a delight in the fearful, the unpredictable and the sleepless nights that go with it all? Maybe, in some bizarre way, I'm a thrill-seeker, a boundary stretcher and a basket case!! A basket case as I really do not like living this way … though, as my friend Nick says, the evidence does not lie - the facts of my life give undeniable testament to what my thinking has created. That's obviously right but I do wish I knew what (hidden) part of my thinking keeps me here.
Also, living with such stress is not a good recipe for creativity. I'm trying to write a fictional book and the best way to get the words to fall to the page is to be calm and open with oneself … a stance I'm finding very difficult at the moment!
I just wish I could have a wander round inside my head and have a good spring-clean of the all the dirty, negative thoughts there, so my life can be on a more sure footing ... how can I do that?
Arthur Bayly would also like to have a more sure footing on his investigation - his story continues from the previous blog ...
The fire brigade report confirmed fire and smoke damage as per the police report, and concluded the fire was started by a petrol-soaked rag which had been tossed through a broken window of the office, near the tyre marks on the lawn.
The report from the ambulance people confirmed the injuries and discomfort as per the police report and that they were ordered from the property by the second group of police. This, again, was most irregular and the ambulance driver and medical assistant both reported their concern, in writing and verbally, to their supervisor at the hospital. The Lord and Lady were later brought in to the hospital by persons unknown in a civilian car. Lord Atkinson's arm was put in a plaster and sling and his rib cage was bandaged. He was released and soon returned with his daughter and son-in-law, who all took turns to be with Lady Atkinson. Lady Atkinson was still suffering from lack of breath and was put on oxygen and was kept in hospital for 26 hours for observation.
A succinct report from MI5 confirmed that they were called to the house, found unqualified and unauthorised people attending the scene. These people were sent away and they then tried to obtain evidence from the Atkinsons as to why they would try to set fire to their own house and what were they trying to hide. The Atkinsons proved to be particularly uncooperative and were dispatched to the local hospital for attendance on their wounds. The report also briefly mentioned that the daughter and son-in-law (Melinda and John Maranui) had been taken to the Croydon office for questioning and no results of that were indicated.
What the MI5 report did not mention was that Melinda and John Maranui were questioned (interrogated?), separately, for four hours without break, in a military-like establishment on the outskirts of Croydon. They were asked about every moment of their lives for the past six years. They averred that they had nothing to hide but the relentlessness of the interrogation team suggested MI5 did not believe this. The guards on the gates kept everyone away until then and, though they were efficient in their duties, their presence awakened an unknowing press contingent that grew by the hour and made it impossible for the incident to remain secret. The more these authorities tried to batten down any information, the more the rumours and misinformation spread.
The report also omitted to mention that a Mr Brown (later presumed to be the lead character of the MI5 team) initially refused to allow Ahmed and his two assessors to enter the property. The insurance team was eventually allowed in, thanks to pressure from the persistent reporters, on the second morning. Ahmed and his team found no smashed windows or doors, but newly-repaired ones. The lawn near the corner of the burned library looked like it had been run over by a hundred different vehicles and no tyre treads could be traced in the remaining slush. Their discoveries differed from all other reports on evidential grounds. Ahmed had also added subjective, speculative notes, suspecting that the MI5 chaps had not found what they were looking for and had given up.
Lord and Lady Atkinson had written a statement, along with his insurance claim for property missing - none of it particularly valuable and all of it portable. Their statement confirmed that, at 10.30 pm, they were about to leave for Heathrow airport to pick up their daughter and son-in-law when they heard a crash downstairs and, shortly after, four men in black (including balaclavas) burst into their bedroom as they were putting on their jackets and tied them up. The four men, who could not be identified as they said nothing and their faces were covered, proceeded back down the stairs to ransack the office downstairs. A vehicle, probably a four-wheel-drive, by the sound of it, drove off at high speed and the smell of burning was soon detected.
Arthur felt that it was all quite clear but for the dissenting report from MI5, which could not be ignored. And, what were they doing at the scene, ordering everybody about? Lord Atkinson may have been a politician but a break-in was hardly cause for such tactics or such high-level investigation … unless they knew something no one else did. Surely such a high profile person as the Minister of Immigration wouldn't risk his reputation and position with silly misdeeds.
The uncomfortable truth - something he did not really want to admit to himself - was that he needed to meet with Lord Atkinson and hear his story. Arthur had the claim he and his wife had completed but there was something behind the facts, the bland objectivity of a list of items missing and actions taken, that Arthur needed to get to. In order to accept or reject part or whole of any claim, there had to be clear evidence (or lack of it) to substantiate his decision. With the FSA breathing down his neck, he could not take any chances or have any ambiguity. Somehow, he needed to talk to Lord Atkinson and/or his wife. As these unwelcome thoughts crowded his mind, his phone rang.
"Good morning, Arthur Bayly speaking," said Arthur.
"Arthur, how are you? How is it all going? Any progress?" asked a breathless Mary.
"Yes, yes, making progress …"
"Good, good, Arthur," said Mary, interrupting. "Now, I have a favour to ask and I know it would help. It would speed up your investigation."
"Oh?" said Arthur, thinking this was beginning to sound like a request he couldn't refuse.
"Now, I hope you don't mind, but Lord Atkinson wanted to know who was dealing with the case," said Mary, in full flight. "I gave him your name."
"Oh! Mary!" said Arthur. "Is that a good idea? Should we be talking to him directly?"
"Arthur, we're insurance investigators, not solicitors," said Mary, as if telling off a young child. "We're not acting for his prosecutors, we're assessing his insurance claim and we need all the facts we can get, from any source available."
My conscious mind tells me, "There is no way I would have chosen this … even for my own worst enemies!" So, if I wouldn't choose it for my worst enemies, why did I choose it for myself? Am I my own really, really worst enemy of all time? Obviously, the logic says I must be my own worst enemy and so I must ask why I choose to live in such precarious situations - is there, at some level, a delight in the fearful, the unpredictable and the sleepless nights that go with it all? Maybe, in some bizarre way, I'm a thrill-seeker, a boundary stretcher and a basket case!! A basket case as I really do not like living this way … though, as my friend Nick says, the evidence does not lie - the facts of my life give undeniable testament to what my thinking has created. That's obviously right but I do wish I knew what (hidden) part of my thinking keeps me here.
Also, living with such stress is not a good recipe for creativity. I'm trying to write a fictional book and the best way to get the words to fall to the page is to be calm and open with oneself … a stance I'm finding very difficult at the moment!
I just wish I could have a wander round inside my head and have a good spring-clean of the all the dirty, negative thoughts there, so my life can be on a more sure footing ... how can I do that?
Arthur Bayly would also like to have a more sure footing on his investigation - his story continues from the previous blog ...
The fire brigade report confirmed fire and smoke damage as per the police report, and concluded the fire was started by a petrol-soaked rag which had been tossed through a broken window of the office, near the tyre marks on the lawn.
The report from the ambulance people confirmed the injuries and discomfort as per the police report and that they were ordered from the property by the second group of police. This, again, was most irregular and the ambulance driver and medical assistant both reported their concern, in writing and verbally, to their supervisor at the hospital. The Lord and Lady were later brought in to the hospital by persons unknown in a civilian car. Lord Atkinson's arm was put in a plaster and sling and his rib cage was bandaged. He was released and soon returned with his daughter and son-in-law, who all took turns to be with Lady Atkinson. Lady Atkinson was still suffering from lack of breath and was put on oxygen and was kept in hospital for 26 hours for observation.
A succinct report from MI5 confirmed that they were called to the house, found unqualified and unauthorised people attending the scene. These people were sent away and they then tried to obtain evidence from the Atkinsons as to why they would try to set fire to their own house and what were they trying to hide. The Atkinsons proved to be particularly uncooperative and were dispatched to the local hospital for attendance on their wounds. The report also briefly mentioned that the daughter and son-in-law (Melinda and John Maranui) had been taken to the Croydon office for questioning and no results of that were indicated.
What the MI5 report did not mention was that Melinda and John Maranui were questioned (interrogated?), separately, for four hours without break, in a military-like establishment on the outskirts of Croydon. They were asked about every moment of their lives for the past six years. They averred that they had nothing to hide but the relentlessness of the interrogation team suggested MI5 did not believe this. The guards on the gates kept everyone away until then and, though they were efficient in their duties, their presence awakened an unknowing press contingent that grew by the hour and made it impossible for the incident to remain secret. The more these authorities tried to batten down any information, the more the rumours and misinformation spread.
The report also omitted to mention that a Mr Brown (later presumed to be the lead character of the MI5 team) initially refused to allow Ahmed and his two assessors to enter the property. The insurance team was eventually allowed in, thanks to pressure from the persistent reporters, on the second morning. Ahmed and his team found no smashed windows or doors, but newly-repaired ones. The lawn near the corner of the burned library looked like it had been run over by a hundred different vehicles and no tyre treads could be traced in the remaining slush. Their discoveries differed from all other reports on evidential grounds. Ahmed had also added subjective, speculative notes, suspecting that the MI5 chaps had not found what they were looking for and had given up.
Lord and Lady Atkinson had written a statement, along with his insurance claim for property missing - none of it particularly valuable and all of it portable. Their statement confirmed that, at 10.30 pm, they were about to leave for Heathrow airport to pick up their daughter and son-in-law when they heard a crash downstairs and, shortly after, four men in black (including balaclavas) burst into their bedroom as they were putting on their jackets and tied them up. The four men, who could not be identified as they said nothing and their faces were covered, proceeded back down the stairs to ransack the office downstairs. A vehicle, probably a four-wheel-drive, by the sound of it, drove off at high speed and the smell of burning was soon detected.
Arthur felt that it was all quite clear but for the dissenting report from MI5, which could not be ignored. And, what were they doing at the scene, ordering everybody about? Lord Atkinson may have been a politician but a break-in was hardly cause for such tactics or such high-level investigation … unless they knew something no one else did. Surely such a high profile person as the Minister of Immigration wouldn't risk his reputation and position with silly misdeeds.
The uncomfortable truth - something he did not really want to admit to himself - was that he needed to meet with Lord Atkinson and hear his story. Arthur had the claim he and his wife had completed but there was something behind the facts, the bland objectivity of a list of items missing and actions taken, that Arthur needed to get to. In order to accept or reject part or whole of any claim, there had to be clear evidence (or lack of it) to substantiate his decision. With the FSA breathing down his neck, he could not take any chances or have any ambiguity. Somehow, he needed to talk to Lord Atkinson and/or his wife. As these unwelcome thoughts crowded his mind, his phone rang.
"Good morning, Arthur Bayly speaking," said Arthur.
"Arthur, how are you? How is it all going? Any progress?" asked a breathless Mary.
"Yes, yes, making progress …"
"Good, good, Arthur," said Mary, interrupting. "Now, I have a favour to ask and I know it would help. It would speed up your investigation."
"Oh?" said Arthur, thinking this was beginning to sound like a request he couldn't refuse.
"Now, I hope you don't mind, but Lord Atkinson wanted to know who was dealing with the case," said Mary, in full flight. "I gave him your name."
"Oh! Mary!" said Arthur. "Is that a good idea? Should we be talking to him directly?"
"Arthur, we're insurance investigators, not solicitors," said Mary, as if telling off a young child. "We're not acting for his prosecutors, we're assessing his insurance claim and we need all the facts we can get, from any source available."
No comments:
Post a Comment