Charlie Johns – Corrupt Real Estate Agent

Defying Defamation for exposing the zionist criminals in Wingecarribee Shire Council
User avatar
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2019 6:29 pm

Charlie Johns – Corrupt Real Estate Agent

Postby WingecarribeeCouncilCorruption » Mon Jan 07, 2019 5:52 pm

Charlie Johns – Corrupt Real Estate Agent

Here’s another example of Charlie Johns harassing Jane and Cristian King, the publishers of LattéLife. See attached.

As a “fellow real estate agent”, Charlie Johns contacted Sue from McGrath’s Real Estate and proceeded to tell her all sorts of horrible things about the Kings (prior to the 2016 council elections, of course).

Sue immediately passed the email on to Jane King.

When Charlie Johns found out that Sue had ratted him out, he sent her a very stern rebuke – like only Charlie Johns can.

First of all, please note the constant use of the ampersand (&) symbol. This is synonymous with Charlie’s very distinct style of writing, and it can be found throughout the poison pen letter he sent to the advertisers of LattéLife at around the same time he was sending a derogatory email to Sue at McGraths.

In the second paragraph of the attached letter, Johns is upset with Sue for leaking such damaging information about him, especially as a “past client & friend” (again note the use of the ampersand (&)) .

Sue was obviously no friend of Charlie’s, as she promptly gave him up.

In the same paragraph, Charlie states that he was just providing a community service to another real estate agent in warning them about having the Kings as clients. But what Charlie Johns was really trying to do – he was attempting to intimidate the senior manager at McGraths into evicting the Kings as part of a conspiracy to have the newspaper, LattéLife, shut down for good. This is Charlie’s MO as a political fixer, a standover man, and as a corrupt campaign manager.

In the third and fourth paragraphs, note the continued use of the ampersand symbol (&). Johns’s use of the ampersand to replace the word “and” is incorrect. The ampersand is only ever used to replace “and” in names and titles – like Tom & Jerry and Dolce & Gabbana.

There’s a certain irony in paragraph four. Jane and Cristian King are well known for not paying their employees, they've been short-changing contributors, distributors and staff for years and years. The author is one of their victims, and they still owe me around $4400 from 2017. When I recently asked Cristian King to honour the debt, he told me to go through the Small Claims Court. This is after he admitted that LattéLife has a history of not paying their employees, “But I always sorted it in the end," he stated, "and everybody got their money”. Well, I certainly didn’t get mine because the Kings are con-artists and frauds.

Anyway, the irony is this – a notorious criminal like Charlie Johns is calling out the Kings for criminal behaviour, and they’re both as bad as each other.

In paragraph five, Charlie tries to back peddle after he called on the McGraths to evict the Kings. As a real estate agent, it’s against code of conduct regulations to coerce another agent into evicting a tenant based on allegations of wrongdoing without evidence. Charlie realised he could be in serious trouble with authorities in the real estate industry, so he was sure to deny saying anything about eviction.

The reason the Kings (in paragraph six) needed a bodyguard before the elections of 2016 – Johns and Co were bullying and intimidating the newspaper publishers and their staffers (and also their children). I witnessed the abuse numerous times during the three years I worked with the Kings, especially at election time when Cristian King was running for council.

Charles Frederick Johns has been using dirty tricks for years (see attached). Due to local police protection, Johns has been committing these types of crimes with total immunity.

For the sake of the community, this petty thief needs to be incarcerated.
Charlie Johns – Corrupt Real Estate Agent.jpg
Charlie Johns – Corrupt Real Estate Agent.jpg (75.64 KiB) Viewed 267 times

Return to “Defying Defamation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests