|
Legal complaint filed against the State of Vaud and the State of Geneva as well as against the Examining Magistrates, Carole BARBEY (GE) and Ives NICOLET (VD) for Abuse of Power and complicity to Defraud. Concerning Carole BARBEY, I would add the charges of Threats and of Forgery. This complaint is linked to the FERRAYE affair and the 34 billion dollars embezzled with the connivance of the judicial systems in Geneva and in Vaud...
I am also filing a legal complaint against Me Pierre MOTTU, Notary in Geneva and against unknown individuals according to the various actions hereafter denounced.
Dear Sir,
Please note that concerning the Law, I am a lay-person and there is therefore an obligation on your part to take Swiss jurisprudence into account in this matter and I quote « Le destinataire d'un acte, soit, en l'espèce, le juge, doit interpréter la portée de celui-ci d'après le sens qu'il «pouvait raisonnablement lui attribuer en le considérant comme réellement voulu, sur la base de l'attitude antérieure du déclarant et des circonstances qu'il connaissait au moment où la déclaration lui a été faite (ATF 94 II101, pp. 104-105, JT 1969 I 27, P. 28, cité par Engel, Traité des obligations en droit suisse 2è éd. 1997, pp. 238-239). Une déclaration adressée à une autorité doit être comprise selon le sens que, de bonne foi, son destinataire doit lui prêter (ATF 102 Ia 92, c.2, rés. In JT 1978 I 30).
L'administration étant davantage versée dans les matières qu'elle doit habituellement traiter, du moins formellement, on peut attendre de sa part une diligence accrue dans l'examen des actes qui lui sont soumis, notamment lorsqu'ils sont rédigés par des profanes, afin de leur donner un sens raisonnable, sans avoir à s'en tenir aux expressions inexactes utilisées (Egli, la protection de la bonne foi dans le procès, en Juridiction constitutionnelle et Juridiction administrative, Recueil des travaux publiés sous l'égide de la Première cour de droit public du Tribunal fédéral suisse, pp. 225ss, spéc. Pp. 236-237 et
les exemples cités). »
Citing the cases of Mr. Werner RATHGEB for the State of Vaud and Mrs. D. B*** for the State of Geneva, proof has been shown that the Rule of Law has been flouted, that within these two states, the separation of judicial and political power does not exist and that the Swiss State has made “judgements” as a function of its own needs. www.googleswiss.com/rathgeb. Mrs. B***’s file is not online but was returned to you on the 15th of this month.
This legal complaint is based on the two current proceedings GEP / 1362 / 20005BAC in the affair MOTTU versus DUBUIS and the complaint filed by Mr. Pierre MOPTTU on 9 February 2005 addresses to the Director of Public Prosecutions ZAPPELLI, transferred to the Vaud “Judiciary” and recorded under the reference VD PEO5.000284.
In both cases, it is evident that Pierre MOTTU, Notary sworn in by the State of Geneva, is a professional defrauder and that the judges with whom he has associated and who appear
to have been corrupted by him, are consequently his accomplices.
Introduction :
In order to consider the scope of the FERRAYE affair, I suggest that, first of all, you access www.googleswiss.com/ferraye and www.googleswiss.com/ferraye-video so that you may better understand the scale of corruption of the States and politicians concerned, in the knowledge that during this period, Micheline CALMY-REY was in charge of Finance for the State of Geneva when CHF 20 million in stamp duty disappeared and that the Federal Magistrate, Bernard BERTOSSA, held the position of Director of Public Prosecutions during the period when 20 files of documentary evidence went missing...
This affair cannot be considered without taking into account the involvement of “World Government”, “Trilaterals – Chirac”, “Bilderberg – French Ministers and Swiss Bankers” and “Freemasonry – to which a good number of well-known personalities, magistrates and politicians belong”. On this last point, I suggest you consult www.googleswiss.com/nwo
As mentioned above, the separation of power in Vaud and Geneva is inexistent, even though this separation is the core of a Democracy, deserving of this title. Once the line of separation becomes blurred, then the attitude of “anything goes” becomes the norm, clearly demonstrated by the Geneva and Vaud State “authorities” and their “arrangements” between members of the same secret sects. The next step is to accept a corrupt
and authoritarian state followed by a Dictatorship !
PBy the laundering of information, the Press carries a heavy responsibility for our corrupt
and dysfunctional state. To understand the mockery of “justice” with which our “false judiciary” is involved, one must be aware that it is immerged in a disgusting environment of Freemasonry at the highest level directly manipulated by « World Government » and the Bilderberg.
To confront Freemasonry, is to face a secret criminal organization whose internal laws prevail over the LAWS laid down by the State Legislators… In other words, their
actions highjack official legislative procedures and enquiries to the advantage of members
of a Secret Sect, which includes branches of freemasonry, Rotary Club, Lion’s Club and Ambassador etc.
EDIPRESSE maintains a policy of information laundering in the states of Vaud and Geneva.
EDIPRESSE is an integral part of the aforementioned secret sect at the highest level, because it holds a dominant position in the Freemason Government known as Bilderberg.
Let us examine more closely the aforementioned denouncements by observing its Board of Directors. Apart from information which I have received that the Lamunière brothers are Freemasons, the fact that EDIPRESSE is affiliated with the BILDERBERG (World Government) is confirmed by the presence of André KUDELSKI on its Board of Directors.
He has participated in several, highly secretive, BILDERBERG annual reunions and is in regular contact with its members.
LThe members of this sect have a mandate to control the World Economy, in order to embezzle its assets in favour of three family groups, who hold world power and who control its governments. The servile and fawning manner of Pascal Couchepin, in this regard, is significant. He is a traitor to his country ! www.googleswiss.com/nwo and www.googleswiss.com/bilderberg-f (France - Switzerland - etc.)
Apart from André KUDELSKI, also a traitor to the Swiss State and accomplice, not only in
the dismantlement of SWISSAIR, followed by that of SWISS, but also in the dismantlement
of the Pension Funds, we also find another member of the EDIPRESSE Board of Directors, in the person of Claude SMADJA, former director of the World Economic Forum (WEF), the executive organ of the decisions taken during the BILDERBERG meetings.
Finally, to complete the range of Freemasons who control and manipulate public opinion in the Suisse Romande area, we should consider EDIPRESSE Board members Paul REUTLINGER, former Board member of SWISSAIR, former Director of SABENA (Sic!) and Board member of the CFF, and Olivier STEIMER of the BCV... etc. et on a la panoplie complète des Francs-maçons qui opèrent le contrôle de la manipulation de l'Opinion publique en Suisse Romande. EDIPRESSE washes information whitest of all !
Facts :
1. By letter on 21 April 2005, I was ordered to appear before the ”false Examining Magistrate” Carole BARBEY in Geneva in the case « against Mr. DUBUIS ».
Proof : Document 01 Citation of 21.04.2005
2. I had no knowledge at that time of who had filed the complaint and I did not know
Mr. DUBUIS.
3. On entering the court room, six persons were already present and I immediately recognized the magistrate and the Court Clerk. I also recognized Pierre MOTTU, Notary,
the aforementioned defrauder but I did not know the other participants. I have since learned that they were Pierre MOTTU’s lawyer, whose name I do not know, Mr. Pascal DUBUIS and his lawyer, Mr. FIVAZ.
4. As the following facts will show, I was confronted by the most impressive band of swindlers, forgers and plotters that the States of Vaud and Geneva have to offer.
5. I learned that Pascal DUBUIS owns a toy shop (le Train bleu), rue de la Tour 6, 1004 Lausanne, Tel. 021 320 88 88.
6. Mr. DUBUIS had been accused by the « judge » BARBEY of sending an e-mail on 10 January 2005 to Pierre MOTTU, requesting the payment of CHF 5 billion the recipient of which I have no knowledge, within the context of the FERRAYE affair. May I remind you that during that period, the FERRAYE affair was covered in the media following the offer which the inventor made, proposing to buy F.C. Servette. The dossier was also online at www.googleswiss.com/ferraye
7. The “judge” asked me if I had ever written to Mr. DUBUIS by e-mail. I responded that I
had not, unless Mr. DUBUIS was a politician or a communal council member to whom messages could have been addressed in the context of my denouncements. This was not the case.
8. The affair became farcical when Mr. DUBUIS, who had been presented to me as a rather simple person of low intelligence, affirmed that he had addressed the message to Pierre MOTTU as a result of a threat made to him on my part and that this threat was linked to a tragic event which Mr. DUBUIS had experienced on 4 September 2004.
9. It seems that I had threatened this poor man by an action which had taken place on that date and that he had become so afraid that he had lost the control of his intestinal function...
10. When I smiled and reminded the Court that I did not need the help of some unfortunate individual to inform Pierre MOTTU of my opinion of him and that claims in the name of Mr. FERRAYE exist on the Internet and had been the subject of television programmes, “judge” BARBEY threatened to accuse me of serious offences, as the police had found an e-mail with my e-mail address marc.burdet@c9c.org on Mr. DUBUIS’ PC. I hereby state that at the moment when these actions are supposed to have taken place, I did not hold the e-mail address cited, a fact of which the SWINDLERS were clearly unaware...
11. Of course I asked to see the e-mail but there was a problem! When the Geneva and Vaud police tried to copy this famous e-mail from Mr. DUBUIS’ PC, it was erased …(sic!). However, incredibly, “judge” BARBEY remembers word-for-word the content of the e-mail and she repeated it several times… Mr. DUBUIS also had a good memory of the message and had been able to repeat it to the judge but at that moment, in Court, he was incapable of recalling the content of it...
12. This e-mail, it would appear, was sent from my e-mail address marc.burdet@c9c.org.
I had, it seems, informed Mr. DUBUIS that I did not want my name mentioned… even though the site www.googleswiss.com/ferraye denounced MOTTU and requested that he pay back the embezzled money… but my name must not appear, according to Mr. DUBUIS… We are dealing with a truly rotten bunch of criminals here !
13. I have also learned that I could have become familiar with the element with which I was supposedly blackmailing him. DUBUIS during a hearing at the Montbenon Court House,
on 4 September 2004 concerning a locomotive and some miniature trains… I will not even waste my time on such stupidity. According to my records, 4 September 2004 was a Saturday… Either I have misunderstood the date or the Vaud Courts do their dirty work on weekends ?
14. In any case, during 45 minutes of interrogation, as it was no longer the hearing of a witness, considering the change of tone which took place, Mr. Fivaz, (lawyer in Geneva for
an accused individual answerable to the State of Vaud… who mandated him and who paid him?), suggested to “judge” BARBEY to confiscate my PC, I remembered that on
10 January 2005, the date on which I supposedly sent the cited e-mail, I did not yet hold the e-mail address in question...
15. These swindlers mismanaged their plot!!! My Internet host informed me that the above-cited e-mail address was only allocated to me after 20 March 2005 !
16. I therefore accuse this entire band of rogues, including lawyers, of forgery, connivance
to defraud, threats and all other possible accusations imaginable in the context of the actions which I have denounced !
17. I would like to make it clear that throughout the hearing, Mr. DUBUIS who it would appear is truly very simple, did not cease to compliment Mr. MOTTU on his sense of ethics, his serious attitude etc. while accusing me of intimidating him and blackmailing him, that God would make me pay for verbally attacking such a good person as Mr. MOTTU...
18. My conclusions in this case are the following :
DUBUIS knew about the FERRAYE dossier on the Servette affair and the involvement of MOTTU. He attempted to use the denouncements made on the Internet to misappropriate part of the embezzled capital, by bringing pressure to bear on MOTTU, with the intention of claiming compensation for assistance provided. This is not the first time that an attempt of this kind has been made, in this affair. All the other cases have been settled before reaching court !
19. Immediately noting the limited intellectual level of his adversary in this case, MOTTU
saw a possibility of disarming me so that I no longer posed a threat to his activities, by using as an intermediary, an individual who will obviously be declared as totally inept, following the act that he has committed. But this warped swindler made a big mistake in attributing to me an address which I did not own !
20. This is the formal proof of a plot hatched by MOTTU and his lawyer with the connivance of Mr. FIVAZ, lawyer to DUBUIS! It remains to be seen what responsibility the Vaud and Geneva police have in supposedly, finding an e-mail which has clearly never existed !
21. In her letter of 31 January 2005, Micheline SPOERRI, State Counsellor responsible for the Geneva Judiciary, stated that I was not party to the disciplinary procedure, that I was therefore not apt to show that MOTTU had neglected his professional duty and should this prove to be true, be sanctioned !
Proof : Document 02 Letter SPOERRI from 31 janvier 2005
22. Now, of course, I am party to the disciplinary procedure and I demand that emergency provisional measures be taken to accuse Mr. MOTTU and to remand him in custody to
avoid any collusion (in the Marc Roger affair, a lot less was required to imprison the accused for 3 months) and that his Notary’s licence be suspended with immediate effect.
23. While referring to the possibility of collusion, I would like to add Mrs. Braunschwig-Graf, State Counsellor and National Counsellor, who at the moment of the embezzlements, sat on the Board of Directors of the Foundation WINSDORF (TOLEX) in company
with President MOTTU...
24. It would be interesting to analyze the expansion of ROLEX between 1995 and 2000, to analyze its multiple acquisitions, the building construction worth hundreds of millions of francs and the explosion of employed staff… How was it financed and who financed such
an expansion?
25. How were Mr. MOTTU’s work premises financed, by this I mean the veritable palace of 1000 m2 and 5 floors in the centre of Geneva which he now has at his disposal’ Until the moment when the FERRAYE funds were liberated, the MOTTU office was located on the
2nd floor of an old building...
26. The same applies to the legal premises of marc BONNANT and Dominique WARLUZEL, the true instigators of the embezzlement… There again, a modest legal practice until the liberation of the FERRAYE funds… and then one of the most luxurious mansions of the city of Geneva… to be completed in the case of Dominique WARLUZEL, by the Ferrari and the yacht worth several millions...
27. You will also note in the dossier www.googleswiss.com/ferraye, that the awarding of the “Cross of the Legion of Honour” to Marc BONNANT is not unconnected with his role in the embezzlement of funds in favour of members of the French Government. Dominique WARLUZEL has also recently been a recipient of this award… This gives a new value to
this honourable distinction… It glorifies the swindlers who corrupt the French Government !
Consult : www.googleswiss.com/ferraye-video
28. On 9 February 2005, the Notary Pierre MOTTU filed a legal complaint against me, through the intermediary of his lawyer Mr. Alec REYMOND
Proof : Document 03 Complaint MOTTU from 9 février 2005
29. I refer to Point 1 of his complaint, that MOTTU is described as an honourable Notary, well-known in Geneva and never having been the subject of sanctions.
30. The first part of the present complaint shows clearly that MOTTU is a SWINDLER and if he has not been called to account until now, it is because he has been able to corrupt key persons who are in a position to take action against him !
31. Point 5 of the MOTTU complaint is a pure lie. MOTTU retained the capital. He even paid CHF 20 million in stamp duty as confirmed on p. 4 of his own testimony of 03.04.1996.
Proof : Document 04 Page 4 of the MOTTU hearing of 03 April 1996
32. In his hearing of 19.11.2002, Mr. St.-Hilaire, French associate of MOTTU in this affair, also confirmed that MOTTU and BRUPPACHER were holding funds (worth around
12 billion, between two of them) and that these accounts had been shown to FERRAYE’s associates (who had defrauded him) who were asked to sign bank transfers.
Proof : Document 05 Hearing of Eric de la Haye Saint-Hilaire of 19.11.2002
33. The Examining Magistrate, Christine Junod, also confirmed that she held bank statements referring to USD 24 billions
Proof : Document 06 Confirmation from Mr. Clerc of 06.08.2004
34. Point 8 confirms that MOTTU is a defrauder ! Since when does a Notary notarize simple “projects” ?
Proof : Document 07 Agreement with Mr. Basano of 15.11.1995
I hold some documentary proof for the other associates of FERRAYE, for a total of
USD 5.9 billions, at your disposal.
Concerning these agreements, MOTTU stated that the originals had been destroyed. In this case, how does he justify the establishment of certified copies on the same day as the originals were destroyed ?
35. Furthermore, as shown in document 8 below, the reference in the letter of 24 January 1996 “cb 912634” only relates to an agreement concerning GEBRANE, HOBEICH and REBOURS, the three major defrauders of FERRAYE. There was no question of destroying other agreements which all carried different references.
Proof : Document 08 Letter from 24 January 1996 – Mottu confirms the destruction of the agreements
36. Moreover, how can MOTTU certify official bank transfers on 25 January 1996 on the orders of 16 and 23 November 1995 and for an amount of USD 5’240’527’000 if the agreements were annulled the day before, on 24 January 1996, as he claims...
Proof : Document 08 - Letter of 24 January 1996 – Mottu confirms destruction of agreements
Document 09 - Four irrevocable, officially certified bank transfers from 25 January 1996
for a total of USD 5’240’527’000.-.
I see this is a deliberate attempt to defraud Joseph FERRAYE, by trying to make him believe that the agreements had been destroyed and subordinated by copies of the originals ?
37. In point 11, it is obvious that MOTTU is lying because he had the capital in his possession. He confirms this on page 5 of the agreements (see page 5 of document 7)
“The cessionary transferred the amount of 0ne billion USD to the Notary Office Accounts", etc. The hearing of Mr. de la Haye Sainte-Hilaire, document 5 also confirms that accounts were made available to the Associates...
38. In point 14, the judge was not misled. He simply did hid job until the moment when MOTTU corrupted him. While the Examining Magistrate JUNOD had conducted a search of the MOTTU Notary office, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Jean-Louis CROCHET, following the orders of Bernard BERTOSSA, had stated that Joseph FERRAYE was
mentally unstable (which has since been proved false and in fact his mental function is
above average) and had then asked MOTTU to choose which documents he wished to remove from the file...
Proof : Document 10 Letter from the Director of Public Prosecutions in Geneva, of 28 April 1997.
In the context of corruption, they could not have been more successful and legal
proceedings should be instigated against them, as well as MOTTU !
39. Point 15 and 16 - It is not surprising that in such a context, a Director of Public Prosecutions who had obviously been corrupted, should file away the proceedings along
with all complaints that followed !
40. Point 20 - the inopportune actions of Joseph FERRAYE… it is surprising that
considering these inopportune actions, the defrauder MOTTU, did not take his victim to
court. There lies the proof that he feared that Joseph FERRAYE would raise the subject of his complaints and open up an enquiry which would oblige MOTTU to face up to his responsibilities.
41. It is therefore much easier to attack me !
42. Point 22 - the proof given under this point is, in itself, sufficient to indicate the crime committed by MOTTU and I steadfastly maintain my accusations.
43. Point 23 - in common with the swindlers, MOTTU goes as far as to deny statements which he, himself, has made concerning “stamp duty” and the CHF 20 million paid for the purpose! (see point 28 below).
At the time, Mrs. SPOERRI held the documentary proof of FERRAYE’s denouncements and if she allied herself to the cause of MOTTU, it signifies that, in so doing, she became his accomplice. Has she therefore also been corrupted? Only the enquiry can tell !
Regarding the mention of assassinations, I enclose an appeal from 15 July 2005 on the connivance of EDIPRESSE with Freemasonry where there is a question of whether or not the “judicial system” was implicated in the deaths of SANCHEZ and LEVAVASSEUR, both linked to the FERRAYE affair… Two sudden deaths at the moment when the plot was about to be revealed...
Proof : Document 11 RAppeal of 15.07.2005 EDIPRESSE
44. Point 25 - A swindler has no sense of honour! How can he call upon the judicial system to protect a quality that he does not possess !
On this point it seems that MOTTU has received threats from individuals who could turn out to be Servette supporters. Could Mr. DUBUIS mentioned earlier in this complaint, be such
an individual ?
The facts cited earlier are real; therefore MOTTU cannot invoke Articles 173 and 174 CP. In fact on the contrary he should be prosecuted for crimes committed.
45. During my hearing of 21 June 2005 with the “Examining Magistrate” Ives NICOLET,
I was accused of slander as well as libel, despite the proof that is contained in the file and obtainable from the study of the Internet site that the “judge” had most certainly undertaken.
Accordingly, I consider that the “Magistrate” NICOLET is also an accomplice of MOTTU
and I do not exclude the possibility that he has also been corrupted. Only the enquiry can ascertain these facts.
It was obvious that during the hearing, the judge did not seek the Truth, just my prosecution.
While I denied the accusations against me by showing him that contained within his own dossier, were documents which proved my denouncements, he refused to take this proof into consideration and pronounced the charge against me.
46. This is a violation of Art. 173.2 CP and an abuse of power as defined !
47. The complaint in question has once again been handled in a partisan manner, to the advantage of a notable personality who has corrupted the system.
The partisan and arbitrary attitude of the false judge Ives NICOLET is a blatant violation of the Code of Penal Proceedings, of Art. 5-8-9-29 and 30 of the Federal Constitution and of
Art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Reserving the right to provide further decisive elements to this complaint, I demand that Justice be done and that the protagonists of this gigantic fraud be prosecuted.
I hereby attack in justice, the Examining Magistrate Yves NICOLET for complicity to defraud and for abuse of power.
Furthermore, I demand that on the basis of the EDIPRESSE complaint of 15 July 2005, the Ministry of the Confederation opens an enquiry into the reasons for which “judge” Jean-Marie RUEDE did not investigate the death of SANCHEZ and the cassette which denounced the plot
Proof : Document 12 Transcription of the cassette
When Mr. Sanchez speaks of the examining magistrate on this cassette, it is to “judge” RUEDE that he is referring. If RUEDE avoided an enquiry into this cassette, it was to avoid being implicated and to maintain his complicity with MOTTU hidden.
This cassette also mentions the Deutsche Bank. The table « économic Imbroglio » on www.googleswiss.com/nwo prove the directs links between Rainer E. GUT and the Deutsche Bank...
Rainer E. GUT GUT was also a signatory for the accounts of
EVERTON Enterprises Ltd, the company used to dissimulate the transfer of several billion dollars.
The Swiss federal Commission of Banks (CFB) is also probably involved. You will find under www.googleswiss.com/ferraye under the link « UBS SA - CSG - Opérations troubles », the registration of screen banks on the Commercial Register. I received a confirmation by telephone from the CFB that the bank registered under the name UBS SA – Federal number CH – 660 – 1164999 – 1 had never been registered as a banking entity. Since then, the CFB have no longer been willing to respond to me...
The same thing applies to other banks such as CREDIT SUISSE, or SBS...
Kurt SENN, Federal Agent, ahas also been corrupted. The transcribed recording of a telephone call between this inspector in the Federal Police and Lucy Komisar, a New York journalist, confirms the corruption of this agent. On the cassette of this recording (in accordance with US law), Kurt SENN confirms that he sent banking documents to the Director of Public Prosecutions, Bernard BERTOSSA
Proof : Document 13 Transcription of dialogue tel. SENN – KOMISAR of 07.01.2003
During the hearing of 12 November 2002 in Geneva, Federal Inspector Kurt SENN, states the contrary...
Proof : Document 14 Audition Kurt SENN du 12.11.2002
Yves NICOLET Examining Magistrate in the State of Vaud, refuses to accept the Truth, in order not to involve his DISHONEST colleagues. With prior knowledge of the behaviour of MOTTU and his cronies in the FERRAYE case, he is not the first “judge” to have been paid
to not initiate an enquiry...
I thank you for the attention you have given to this complaint and I remain.
Yours sincerely
Marc-Etienne Burdet
Annexes : ment
Copies : State Examining Magistrate of whom I demand the immediate annulment of
my prosecution
To whom it may concern
|
