MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 3 May 2023 20:29:59 +0100 Bcc: Dave Davies , len lawrence , Jean James Message-ID: Subject: Russian Collusion & Interference Began with the UK Judiciary in 2012 and onwards From: TheAbstraction To: ben.bradshaw.mp@parliament.uk Cc: alyn.smith.mp@parliament.uk, caroline.lucas.mp@parliament.uk, tgregory@leighday.co.uk, tshort@leighday.co.uk, strasburgerp@parliament.uk, contactholmember@parliament.uk Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e6dce305facf14a6" --000000000000e6dce305facf14a6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Kalamata, Billington Lane, Derrington, Stafford, ST18 9LR To: Lord Strasburger Baroness Wheatcroft Ben Bradshaw Alyn Smith Caroline Lucas Tom Short Tessa Gregory I thought you may be interested in a parallel lawsuit B40BM021 to the ECHR case against the UK Government with respect to Russian interference. I brought the lawsuit to the Birmingham High Court in 2015, after I identified audit irregularities in Deutsche Bank's bullion trades. By 2019 it became transparent that the irregularities arose as a result of the $1.4 trillion of money laundering from DB that underwrote the Danske-Estonia operation. The whistleblower for Danske-Estonia identified that Putin's family ran the operation, contrary to both Russian and EU AML laws. DB et al were shipping unsealed bullion bars to Danske. I know court cases are boring, but in this case* I can spell out exactly who was responsible for dismissing your application to the High Court.* I discovered that the former Lord Chief Justice Baron Thomas, had been President of the Queen's Bench while Oleg Deripaska had laundered $100 million to Michael Cherney through the Court of Appeal in 2012. Both men are suspected of gangland shootings. Deripaska was laundering $21 billion through Deutsche Bank, which FinCEN disclosures identified as having flagged AML suspicious activities dozens of times. Thomas thus had every reason to bury audit irregularities at Deutsche Bank, because they identified that Deripaska's money was illicit, and the CoA was used to illicitly enrich a Russian gangster. Thomas oversaw the appeal to my hearing in 2015, having appointed the current Lord Chief Justice Ian Duncan Burnett to handle the appeal. There was a gross coverup, with Burnett signing off two court orders dismissing allegations of silver and gold price manipulation as 'totally without merit.' The head of JACO in 2016, Paul Kernaghan, wrote to me and said that he 'could not believe that Deutsche Bank would launder money. By 2021 findings from the US authorities showed JP Morgan, a co-defendant and Deutsche Bank were running a criminal enterprise rigging the bullion markets and laundering for the Russian Mafia. Burnett had been given some twenty points of misconduct against the judge, Simon Staley Brown QC,and dismissed all without having possession of a transcript of hearing. It took the Judiciary six months to admit no transcript hearing ever existed. Last year I attempted to resurrect the lawsuit by contesting a number of restraining orders from Judge David James Stewart Worster from the High Court. Worster on 6th April 2022, dismissed my application, even though no defendant contested my application. On the 4th of April 2022 I emailed the court to ask for a telephone hearing, as my mother had cancer, chemotherapy and suffered a fall that day. I gave the ambulance call out number in case there was any dispute of the facts. On the 5th of April 2022 I phoned the court on my landline and each time the phone connection terminated, as if it had been listed for blocking from the internal phone system. I tried on my mobile and got an instant connection. I learnt several things. The first is that Worster was handling the case in which almost all the evidence was his misconduct in 2017 and 2019 and 2021. I also discovered that he had read all emails, including those from the 4th of April , and refused to answer any of them. I had asked the court to provide the points of contest since no defendant or their counsel had written to contest any points. The court was thus rigged from the outset to spring a surprise ambush against me. Entirely against CPR. On the 9th of April 2022, Worster supplied me with a court order telling me nobody appeared for his hearing, but he found against me, since I did not turn up for court. He wrote to say he refused to phone me because I was a danger in that I may secretly record the phone hearing. A crime I have never threatened or been investigated for. On the 26th of May 2022 I issued a bundle to the Court of Appeal to challenge Worster's hearing from 2017. Following the transcribers draft transcript of hearing and judgement, I challenged them, as it seemed to omit key events that I had referred to in an email in 2017, so I had historic corroboration that the transcripts were deficient. The transcribers wrote to me to tell me the High Court Transcription Service stonewalled questions regarding my recording, but would talk to them in all other matters. I had a Subject Access Request to both the transcribers (Ubiqus) and the Judiciary to identify who was stonewalling their questions. Ubiqus showed me their emails, with the email address redacted, but it clearly showed they had done a good job trying to get validation why the court's transcription of judgement was missing material that I referred to in 2017. The Judiciary refused to answer the SAR. Earlier this year after neither receiving a validated Transcript of Judgement or Transcript of Hearing, I refused to file an appeal bundle. My appeal was thrown out, and I had the chance to countermand the order. Lord Justice Males dismissed my request for a countermand. My application consisted of more than a dozen pages of evidence showing the High Court and the CoA had conspired to ensure no validated transcripts existed - sabotage of the appeal. Males dismissed the application in two paragraphs - to the effect - *Worster was right - and you were wrong.* It is clear the CoA admin staff and CoA judges are protecting Burnett's reputation. He was obviously put in by Liz Truss to cover up serious money laundering into the Conservative Party. Burnett is friends with Alan Duncan who was doing oil deals with Putin. Clearly a conflict of interest. Burnett would have had to expose both his friend and his predecessor if he allowed the appeal to go through. There is no abuse of process that Burnett will refrain from using to protect himself. The ECHR will not likely want to touch your case because it would lead to Deutsche Bank and the German State's role corrupting the British Judiciary. -- Mark Anthony Taylor --000000000000e6dce305facf14a6 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Kalamata,
Billington Lane,
Derrington,
Stafford,
ST18 9LR

To:
=C2=A0 Lord Stras= burger
=C2=A0 Baroness Wheatcroft
=C2=A0 Ben Bradshaw
=C2=A0 Alyn = Smith
=C2=A0 Caroline Lucas
=C2=A0 Tom Short
=C2=A0 Tessa Gregory<= div>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0I thought you may be interested in a= parallel lawsuit B40BM021 to the ECHR case against the UK Government with = respect to Russian interference. I brought the lawsuit to the Birmingham Hi= gh Court in 2015, after I identified audit irregularities in Deutsche Bank&= #39;s bullion trades. By 2019 it became=C2=A0transparent that the irregular= ities arose as a result of the $1.4 trillion of money laundering from DB th= at underwrote the Danske-Estonia operation. The whistleblower for Danske-Es= tonia identified that Putin's family=C2=A0ran the operation, contrary t= o both Russian and EU AML laws. DB et al were shipping unsealed bullion bar= s to Danske.=C2=A0 I know court cases are boring, but in this case I can= spell out exactly who was responsible for dismissing your application to t= he High Court.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 I discover= ed that the former Lord Chief Justice Baron Thomas, had been President of t= he Queen's Bench while Oleg Deripaska had laundered $100 million to Mic= hael Cherney through the Court of Appeal in 2012. Both men are suspected of= gangland shootings. Deripaska was laundering $21 billion through Deutsche = Bank, which FinCEN disclosures identified as having flagged AML suspicious= =C2=A0activities dozens of times. Thomas thus had every reason to bury audi= t irregularities at Deutsche Bank, because they identified that Deripaska&#= 39;s=C2=A0money was illicit, and the CoA was used to illicitly enrich a Rus= sian gangster.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Thomas oversaw the ap= peal to my hearing in 2015, having appointed the current Lord Chief Justice= Ian Duncan Burnett to handle the appeal. There was a gross coverup, with B= urnett signing off two court orders dismissing allegations of silver and go= ld price manipulation as 'totally without merit.' The head of JACO = in 2016, Paul Kernaghan, wrote to me and said that he 'could not believ= e that Deutsche Bank would launder money. By 2021 findings from the US auth= orities showed JP Morgan, a co-defendant and Deutsche Bank were running a c= riminal enterprise rigging the bullion markets and laundering for the=C2=A0= Russian Mafia. Burnett had been given some twenty points of misconduct agai= nst the judge, Simon Staley Brown QC,and dismissed all without having posse= ssion of a transcript of hearing. It took the Judiciary six months to admit= no transcript hearing ever existed.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0= Last year I attempted to resurrect the lawsuit by contesting a number of re= straining orders from Judge David James Stewart Worster from the High Court= . Worster on 6th=C2=A0 April=C2=A0=C2=A02022, dismissed my application, even though no defendant c= ontested my application.=C2=A0

On the 4th of April= 2022 I emailed the court to ask for a telephone hearing, as my mother had = cancer, chemotherapy and suffered a fall that day. I gave the ambulance cal= l out number in case there was any dispute of the facts.

On the 5th of=C2=A0 April=C2=A0=C2=A02022 I phoned the court on my landline and each time the p= hone connection terminated, as if it had been listed for blocking from the = internal phone system. I tried on my mobile and got an instant connection. = I learnt several things. The first is that Worster was handling the case in= which almost all the evidence was his misconduct in 2017 and 2019 and 2021= . I also discovered that he had read all emails, including those from the 4= th of=C2=A0 April=C2=A0, and refused to answer any of them. I had asked the court to pr= ovide the points of contest since no defendant or their counsel had written= to contest any points. The court was thus rigged from the outset to spring= a surprise ambush against me. Entirely against CPR.

On the 9th of=C2=A0 April=C2=A0=C2=A02022, Worster supplied me with a court order telling me no= body appeared for his hearing, but he found against me, since I did not tur= n up for court. He wrote to say he refused to phone me because I was a dang= er in that I may secretly record the phone hearing. A crime I have never th= reatened or been investigated for.

On the 26th of = May 2022 I issued a bundle to the Court of Appeal to challenge Worster'= s hearing from 2017. Following the transcribers draft transcript of hearing= and judgement, I challenged them, as it seemed to omit key events that I h= ad referred to in an email in 2017, so I had historic corroboration that th= e transcripts were deficient. The transcribers wrote to me to tell me the H= igh Court Transcription Service stonewalled questions regarding my recordin= g, but would talk to them in all other matters. I had a Subject Access Requ= est to both the transcribers (Ubiqus) and the=C2=A0 Judiciary to identify w= ho was stonewalling their questions. Ubiqus showed me their emails, with th= e email address redacted, but it clearly showed they had done a good job tr= ying to get validation why the court's transcription of judgement was m= issing material that I referred to in 2017.=C2=A0 The Judiciary refused to = answer the SAR. Earlier this year after neither receiving a validated Trans= cript of Judgement or Transcript of Hearing, I refused to file an appeal bu= ndle. My appeal was thrown out, and I had the chance to countermand the ord= er.=C2=A0

Lord Justice Males dismissed my request = for a countermand. My application consisted of more than a dozen pages of e= vidence showing the High Court and the CoA had conspired to ensure no valid= ated transcripts existed - sabotage of the appeal. Males dismissed the appl= ication in two paragraphs - to the effect - Worster was right - and you = were wrong.

It is clear the CoA admin staff an= d CoA judges are protecting Burnett's reputation. He was obviously put = in by Liz Truss to cover up serious money laundering into the Conservative = Party. Burnett is friends with Alan Duncan who was doing oil deals with Put= in. Clearly a conflict of interest. Burnett would have had to expose both h= is friend and his predecessor if he allowed the appeal to go through.
=

There is no abuse of process that Burnett wil= l refrain from using to protect himself.

The ECHR = will not likely want to touch your case because it would lead to Deutsche B= ank and the German State's role corrupting the British Judiciary.
= --
Mark Anthony Taylor=
--000000000000e6dce305facf14a6--