Norman Joseph Fowler – Another Victim’s Thoughts

There are three ‘R’s that could be used to describe Norman Joseph FOWLER, “Rotund, Repugnant and Recidivist”, not quite the same three ‘R’s that were touted by Tony Blair in his hay-day! But lovely descriptive words none the less!

Unfortunately, FOWLER hasn’t done anything to prove that the application of these words to his name couldn’t be justified. Although innocent until proven guilty, all the evidence stacks up to prove that these accurately descriptive words could possibly be applied.

Lets just take a look at the evidence of the cheque fraud to see how applying these world could possibly be justified, then I’ll leave it up to you to decide.

We know that several cheques have been used from a Barclay’s cheque book, (a/c 8021579 s/c 20-22-67), in the name of J Broadley, which has been revealed to be his partner.

J Broadley Cheque Scam

J Broadley Cheque Scam

It is alleged that his partner (J Broadley) wrote these cheques, interesting to see how the handwriting of the cheques matches other documentation that has been written by FOWLER.

This means that either she is lying to protect her beloved scam artist, of she is part of it.

The worst thought is that she’s victim to him too, now I’m not saying that this is the case or not, but you do hear of domestic abuse and it makes you wonder if there is some form of domestic hold that FOWLER has over her, maybe she’s scared of him and that’s why she lied to cover up? Who knows, we can only circumvent until the case is closed, but like everything else, the truth always comes out in the end!

Anyway, apparently this account was closed in mid-2010, and the cheques were written from this cheque book by mistake, well FOWLER knew that they bounced and still continued to write cheques from the same cheque book some months later! This was despite being told by several of his victims that they had bounced.

When you close an account, aren’t you supposed to return all bank stationary? And isn’t it a criminal offence not to do so?