Crooked Solicitor16

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" colspan=2 height=90 BGCOLOR="#006699" TEXT="#080000" background="154fd5a3.jpg"> <div> <FONT SIZE="6" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" ><B>Phoney Titles of Nobility: British Feudal Investments, Ltd. Exposed</B></FONT><B>    </B><B> |  </B></div> <div> <A HREF="id48.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="News"><U>News</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id47.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Summary of Theft"><U>Summary of Theft</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id54.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Boadas Foul and Deceitful Claim"><U>Boada's Foul and Deceitful Claim</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id55.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Core Issue"><U>Core Issue</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id58.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="The Answer"><U>The Answer</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id19.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Website1"><U>Website1</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id20.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Website2"><U>Website2</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id21.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Revealing Article"><U>Revealing Article</U></A>   |   <A HREF="antony_boada.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Deceptions1"><U>Deceptions1</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id25.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Deceptions2"><U>Deceptions2</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id40.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Deceptions3"><U>Deceptions3</U></A>   |   <A HREF="antony_boada1a.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Scams1"><U>Scams1</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id27.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Scams2"><U>Scams2</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id29.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Scams3"><U>Scams3</U></A>   |   <A HREF="antony_boada___roger_pitts_tucker.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Proof of Fraud"><U>Proof of Fraud</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id34.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Accomplice1"><U>Accomplice1</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id50.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Accomplice2"><U>Accomplice2</U></A>   |   <A HREF="antony_boada26.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Fake Titles"><U>Fake Titles</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id45.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="New Discoveries1"><U>New Discoveries1</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id51.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="New Discoveries2"><U>New Discoveries2</U></A>   |   <A HREF="roger_anthony_pitt_tucker.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor1"><U>Crooked Solicitor1</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id46.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor2"><U>Crooked Solicitor2</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id62.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor3"><U>Crooked Solicitor3</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id63.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor4"><U>Crooked Solicitor4</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id64.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor5"><U>Crooked Solicitor5</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id65.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor6"><U>Crooked Solicitor6</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id67.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor7"><U>Crooked Solicitor7</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id66.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor8"><U>Crooked Solicitor8</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id68.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor9"><U>Crooked Solicitor9</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id69.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor10"><U>Crooked Solicitor10</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id70.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor11"><U>Crooked Solicitor11</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id71.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor12"><U>Crooked Solicitor12</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id72.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor13"><U>Crooked Solicitor13</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id73.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor14"><U>Crooked Solicitor14</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id74.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor15"><U>Crooked Solicitor15</U></A>   |   <B>Crooked Solicitor16</B>   |   <A HREF="id76.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor 17"><U>Crooked Solicitor 17</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id77.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor18"><U>Crooked Solicitor18</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id78.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor19"><U>Crooked Solicitor19</U></A>   |   <A HREF="irish_and_english_baronies.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Selling the Forbidden"><U>Selling the Forbidden</U></A>   |   <A HREF="antony_boada___roger_pitts_tucker24.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="The Challenge"><U>The Challenge</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id60.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Declaration of Ownership"><U>Declaration of Ownership</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id57.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Diversion Tactics"><U>Diversion Tactics</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id42.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Reactions"><U>Reactions</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id33.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Disclaimer"><U>Disclaimer</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id23.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Contact "><U>Contact </U></A>   |   <A HREF="id44.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Index"><U>Index</U></A></div> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" width=210 BGCOLOR="#FFCC66" TEXT="#080000" background="155d2b03.jpg"> <div> <IMG SRC="157ae6c0.jpg" border=0 width="174" height="108" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></div> <div> <B>Justice is one of the greatest and most beautiful things next to life itself and the glorious principle of freedom.</B></div> <div> <B>This website is dedicated to bring some very despicable men to justice.</B></div> </td> <td valign="top" height=390 BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000"> <div> Crooked Solicitor16</div> <div> <A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Phoney Titles of Nobility: British Feuda"><U>Home</U></A>  <FONT SIZE="4" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >I </FONT><A HREF="id48.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="News"><U>News</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id47.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Summary of Theft"><U>Summary of Theft</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id54.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Boadas Foul and Deceitful Claim"><U>Boada's Foul and Deceitful Claim</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id55.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Core Issue"><U>Core Issue</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id58.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="The Answer"><U>The Answer</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id19.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Website1"><U>Website1</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id20.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Website2"><U>Website2</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id21.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Revealing Article"><U>Revealing Article</U></A>   |   <A HREF="antony_boada.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Deceptions1"><U>Deceptions1</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id25.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Deceptions2"><U>Deceptions2</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id40.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Deceptions3"><U>Deceptions3</U></A>   |   <A HREF="antony_boada1a.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Scams1"><U>Scams1</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id27.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Scams2"><U>Scams2</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id29.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Scams3"><U>Scams3</U></A>   |   <A HREF="antony_boada___roger_pitts_tucker.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Proof of Fraud"><U>Proof of Fraud</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id34.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Accomplice1"><U>Accomplice1</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id50.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Accomplice2"><U>Accomplice2</U></A>   |   <A HREF="antony_boada26.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Fake Titles"><U>Fake Titles</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id45.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="New Discoveries1"><U>New Discoveries1</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id51.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="New Discoveries2"><U>New Discoveries2</U></A>   |   <A HREF="roger_anthony_pitt_tucker.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor1"><U>Crooked Solicitor1</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id46.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor2"><U>Crooked Solicitor2</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id62.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor3"><U>Crooked Solicitor3</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id63.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor4"><U>Crooked Solicitor4</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id64.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor5"><U>Crooked Solicitor5</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id65.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor6"><U>Crooked Solicitor6</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id67.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor7"><U>Crooked Solicitor7</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id66.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor8"><U>Crooked Solicitor8</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id68.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor9"><U>Crooked Solicitor9</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id69.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor10"><U>Crooked Solicitor10</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id70.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor11"><U>Crooked Solicitor11</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id71.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor12"><U>Crooked Solicitor12</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id72.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor13"><U>Crooked Solicitor13</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id73.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor14"><U>Crooked Solicitor14</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id74.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor15"><U>Crooked Solicitor15</U></A>   |   <B>Crooked Solicitor16</B>   |   <A HREF="id76.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor 17"><U>Crooked Solicitor 17</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id77.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor18"><U>Crooked Solicitor18</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id78.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor19"><U>Crooked Solicitor19</U></A>   |   <A HREF="irish_and_english_baronies.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Selling the Forbidden"><U>Selling the Forbidden</U></A>   |   <A HREF="antony_boada___roger_pitts_tucker24.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="The Challenge"><U>The Challenge</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id60.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Declaration of Ownership"><U>Declaration of Ownership</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id57.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Diversion Tactics"><U>Diversion Tactics</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id42.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Reactions"><U>Reactions</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id33.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Disclaimer"><U>Disclaimer</U></A>   |   <A HREF="id23.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Contact "><U>Contact </U></A>   |   <A HREF="id44.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Index"><U>Index</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <B>If you have been victimize by any of these despicable men, Antonio A. Boada, Mark T. Williams or Roger Pitts-Tucker, go to "</B><A HREF="id58.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="The Answer"><U><B>The Answer</B></U></A><B>" and learn how you can join in a class action suit against them.</B></div> <div> <B> </B></div> <div> <B>*************************************</B></div> <div> <B>Witnesses</B></div> <bR> <div> September 3, 2008</div> <bR> <div> Dear Mr. Pitts-Tucker,</div> <bR> <div> Mr. Pitts-Tucker, I understand you have not submitted your list of witnesses and their statements yet. </div> <div> Be sure to include the imaginary "<B>Peter Michael Hohenzollern- Saxe- Weimer- Civitella- Cessi-Lambrino</B>" as one of your witnesses. He could exonerate you. </div> <bR> <div> Or, could it be that he cannot be contacted because he never existed? Since he never lived on this earth or no such person was ever alive, perhaps, you will not be able to resurrect what never was and never will be---a name so full of ridiculous nonsense. (See comments below by Guy Stair Sainty) </div> <bR> <div> This name was fabricated and made up by a con artist and by now you know that as well as I do. Some well-known experts and scholars in royalty declared that this Peter Michael, etc., etc. was a fake about seven years ago. I sent you their words. I also sent you their addresses in early 2001, so you could inquire and learn this for yourself. So the question begs, Why didn’t you do your duty and checked this out? </div> <bR> <div> I hold this against you, because your negligence and irresponsibility not only cost me dearly financially, but many other people as well who later became victims of Mr. Boada. This kind of careless attitude is substandard behavior for a solicitor. It is a matter of professional misconduct. I don't know how many people suffered for your neglect, but I believe it was quite a few. </div> <bR> <div> I’d also recommend that Mr. Boada be chosen as a witness in your defense. He is noted to be an undependable liar and deceiver. The world renown scholar, Guy Stair Sainty, actually called him a "<B>fantasist and a liar</B>" twice. (<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><B><U>www.miaminewtimes.com/1997-08-07</U></B></FONT><B><U>/news/letters/2</U></B>) Then again, maybe, having a liar as a witness might not help your cause too much. You decide.</div> <bR> <div> Mr. Sainty (<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><B><U>www.chivalricorders.org/nobility</U></B></FONT>) is the senior editor for the book <I><B>World Orders of Knighthood and Merit, </B></I>second edition, published by Burkes Peerage. He is a recognized authority in nobility and royalty subjects. (<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><B><U>www.wokm.co.uk</U></B></FONT>) He commented back in 2001 about the phoney. made-up person "<B>Peter Michael Hohenzollern- Saxe- Weimer- Civitella- Cessi-Lambrino.</B>" He stated that part of this name was spelled wrong—obviously a real family member would not spell his name wrong. One of the names was totally out of place—it was a territorial designation that no member of this family ever uses. As such this name was "<B>silly</B>" and "<B>nonsense.</B>" It was as though someone haphazardly pulled names out of a list of royal and noble families and foolishly and ignorantly put these non-connected and incompatible names together. I sent this important observation to you including the words of the head of each royal or noble family declaring they never heard of such a person. Your firm even acknowledged having received it. </div> <bR> <div> A reasonable person would have been startled by this and the other expert comments I sent. Such a person would have checked this out. Why didn’t you? (See the <B>"Exhibits for the Investigator’s Report.</B>")</div> <bR> <div> I don't think I need to remind you that you really don’t have much to stand on, especially in light of the fact that you already revealed your guilt in two of your letters to the Law Society. You admitted in those letters that you knew all along that Mr. Boada was misrepresenting the truth. In other words, your confession told a completely different story than what Mr. Boada's website and the legal documents declared. Mr. Boada declared that the so-called <B>"feudal title," </B>the<B> "feudal principality of Halberstadt" </B>was an <B>"incorporeal hereditament" </B>and therefore had to be, and was, in fact, sold via the law of real property. You contradicted him. You declared the opposite. You said in those letters that the principality of Halberstadt was just a "<B>vanity,</B>" nothing more than a "<B>name,</B>" like a “<B>copyright,</B>” because, as you stated or expressed so well, "<B>German titles have been abolished in all but name.</B>" You, therefore, made the point that such a personal intangible item was not real property, not an "<B>incorporeal hereditament</B>" and did not have to be sold via the law of real property. Thus, you, in effect, made the point very well that what Mr. Boada did was wrong or a misrepresentation, in other words, a scam. Knowing this, for you "<B>knew or ought to have known</B>" this---any intelligent being would have seen it. You "<B>wilfully</B>"<B> </B>and<B> </B>"<B>knowingly</B>" went along with an outright lie. Not the kind of thing expect of an officer of the court. No one who condones and supports the sale of outright falsehoods is honest enough or worthy of the high status, honor and respect of being a solicitor of England or agent of the Privy Council. </div> <bR> <div> And how do I know you that you knew that Mr. Boada was conveying his so-called "<B>feudal property</B>" as "<B>incorporeal hereditaments</B>" via the law of real property? Because the legal documents said so, and in your firm's <B>December 11, 2000 </B>letter to Dr. [name redacted], who was inquiring about purchasing a German feudal principality, you declared that what Mr. Boada sold were "<B>incorporeal hereditaments</B>" and had to be conveyed via "<B>the law of real property.</B>" In addition, your firm’s letter declared that British Feudal Investments, Ltd. declared that these feudal properties were “. . . <B>more than a trademark or copyright,</B>” nor were they merely “<B>. . . a name change. . . .</B>” as you declared later in your letters to the Law Society.</div> <bR> <div> So there you have it. To the Law Society, you said one thing and to a potential buyer, your firm declared another. You knew Mr. Boada was selling via the law of real property, yet you declared from the onset that he was not doing so in your <B>March and September 2003</B> letters. Assuming you wouldn't lie to the Law Society, I must assume that you were in on the deception. You knew all about it.</div> <bR> <div> You even admitted that Mr. Boada did all his conveyances—all his "<B>business . . . through [your] firm. . . .</B>" and that this was his way of doing business---that is, only selling "<B>names,</B>" not "<B>incorporeal hereditaments.</B>" (Your <B>March 14 </B>&<B> September 29, 2003 </B>letters to the Law Society) </div> <bR> <div> With this understanding, you actually confessed that you knew that what Mr. Boada was representing to the public and in the legal papers you processed and signed was a big lie. Hence, you are guilty of being an accomplice, which by definition is, "<B>An associate in wrongdoing, especially one who aids or abets another in a criminal act, either as a principal or an accessory.</B>" (<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><B><U>www.answers.com/topic/accomplice</U></B></FONT>)</div> <bR> <div> In Mr. Boada’s March 5, 2003 letter to you, which you sent to the Law Society, Mr. Boada denied that he told me that HIRH Prince Louis Ferdinand, "<B>the [grandson] son and heir of the German Kaiser and King of Prussia,</B>" had anything to do with any of the transactions, sales or conveyances of Principalities. But he failed to mention the fact that the feudal Principality of Halberstadt was an imperial principality owned by the Imperial heir. Now, obviously, if the lawful owner of the principality had nothing to do with its sale or conveyance, then the principality was not legally or lawfully sold. </div> <bR> <div> The same would be true if you sold the Eiffel Tower to someone. That would be illegal. It would be an act of fraud and deception, because you don’t own it and therefore have no right to sell it---just as I have no legal right to sell your car, your house or your children. The obvious conclusion is that Mr. Boada had no legal or lawful right to convey an Imperial Principality without the owner’s authorization or the power of attorney to do so.</div> <bR> <div> Who were the owners?</div> <bR> <div> It is a well-known historical fact that Emperor Wilhelm II of Germany, the last emperor, owned all the sovereign "<B>de jure</B>" and "<B>defacto</B>" rights to the Principality of Halberstadt, which was among many of his "<B>sovereign</B>" possessions. He was, in fact, even recognized as the "<B>Prince of Halberstadt</B>" among others. (<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><B><U>www.geocities.com/henrivanoene/genprussia.html</U></B></FONT>) (<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><B><U>www.geocities.com/eurprin/brandenburg.html</U></B></FONT>) (<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><B><U>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_II_of_Germany</U></B></FONT>)</div> <bR> <div> In the <B>March and June 2000 Statutory Declarations</B> of Mr. Boada, it states that the "<B>HOHENZOLLERN FAMILY LAND TRUST, INC.,</B>" which sold the principality represents both the "<B>Heirs-in-Trust to the Imperial family patrimony</B>" and the "<B>desires of the Imperial German House of Hohenzollern.</B>" The Heirs-in-Trust to the Imperial possessions back in the year <B>2000</B> was HRH Prince Christian Sigismund of Prussia (Preussen), the senior Trustee and heir presumptive and son of HIRH Louis Ferdinand of Prussia, with HIRH Prince Georg Friedrich of Prussia, the heir apparent and grandson of HIRH Louis Ferdinand, as the secondary or ancillary trustee until he became 25 years old, which took place in <B>2002</B>. (See my <B>January 12, 2008</B> letter to you) They were in charge, really Prince Christian was in charge of all the affairs of the Imperial house back in the year <B>2000</B>, which would have included the Principality of Halberstadt and over 50 other ancient sovereign entities. </div> <bR> <div> Of course, they did not and could not own the principality, or any principality under domestic German law. All sovereign powers other than that which was held by the Republic were outlawed in <B>1919</B><B> </B>with the acceptance and recognition of the Weimar Constitution. But under international law, HIRH Louis Ferdinand became the "de jure" sovereign after the forced abdications of the Emperor, his grandfather, and the Crown Prince, his father. The reason why is because the monarchy was destroyed under duress or coercion, which is contrary to law and to justice under the Law of Nations, thus the rightful government was illegally and wrongfully stolen from them by the Allied forces. (See: "<B>Sovereignty & The Future of Nobility and Royalty</B>" at <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><B><U>www.nobility-royalty.com</U></B></FONT>) Thus, under international law, the monarchy became a government in exile, and the Imperial heirs became stewards of their "<B>de jure</B>" right to rule. Hence, Prince Louis Ferdinand really did own the rights to the Principality of Halberstadt and Prince Christian was fully in charge of all the family patrimony with Prince Georg as assistant in the year <B>2000</B>. So unless it can be proven the Prince Louis Ferdinand set in motion and authorized the right to sell, then Prince Christian was the only man alive who could have authorized the conveyance of any principality.</div> <bR> <div> 90% of Mr. Boada’s book was merely one scam after another, but Mr. Boada was right on one thing, when he wrote in his book <I><B>Instant Aristocracy</B></I><I> </I>that:</div> <bR> <div> <B>. . . German titles that were feudal in nature as long as the transaction is completed in a country other than the German Federal Republic, which . . . [other country has] legislation in force that provides a [legal] mechanism for the buying and selling of feudal incorporeal hereditaments [then this country is legally equipped to offer a legitimate means of conveying German feudal property]. (p. 94) </B></div> <bR> <div> That is, in another country where it is legal to sell such things, the rightful owners could "<B>. . . execute a deed of sale on a German feudal title as it would not be illegal.</B>" (Ibid.) In fact, it would be fully valid if sold by its rightful owners. </div> <bR> <div> Now this is were the main problem is—the Imperial family has categorically denied any involvement with Mr. Boada or that a so-called <B>Hohenzollern Family Land Trust, Inc.</B> exists, or about any <B>Trade Consult Group, Ltd.</B>, or the sale of any principalities to anyone. That is the <B>missing link </B>I first complained about in <B>August of 2000. </B>Everything was in good order, except not only did I have no evidence that the Imperial family were involved in the transaction, but by <B>2001, </B>I have their full denial that they were involved in any way, which is why I wrote the following in my complaint to the Law Society: </div> <bR> <div> <B>What would satisfy this particular grievance [the official complaint] is if Roger Pitts-Tucker would provide irrefutable proof that could be verified and confirmed that the transfer of the title was actually/truly conveyed by senior members of the Imperial and Royal House of Prussia through Antony Boada to me as claimed.</B></div> <bR> <div> This is the critical issue upon which everything revolves. The "<B>undertaking</B>" is completely involved in this basic concern, because that is the concern I was constantly bringing to your attention over and over again as my financial ship was sinking and I needed to have proof that the Imperial family was actually a party to this conveyance. </div> <bR> <div> As Mr. Boada made flimsy excuses about providing any proof, I sent him alternatives to overcome all his weak rationalizations, because I had a "<B>gurarentee of full title</B>" clause, I was supposed to have been given proof of "<B>good title</B>," and any latent incumberances where to have been revealed beforehand. I also had your firm's "<B>undertaking</B>." I was supposed to be supplied with confirmable and verifiable evidence that this conveyance was not merely a scam, but an authentic sale. But neither you nor Mr. Boada had the integrity, the professional standard, the common decency, the good character to do your rightful duty and help me. Or, you would have found a way. You would have made a way.</div> <bR> <div> Any rationale person who knew anything about the law would recognized and acknowledge his or her "<B>duty of care</B>" obligation in such a situation where there was an "<B>undertaking</B>" especially when that other person was relying on it. A reasonable person would have fulfilled their legal obligations and have proven that the Imperial family was actually a party to the transaction. Why did you neglect this important legal duty? You knew these malicious departures were a fundamental act of professional misconduct? Were you heartless about my financial situation, were you ignorant of the law, did you think you were above the law, or did you know all along that the Imperial family had nothing to do with the conveyance, and thus the whole transaction was a scam—bogus from the very start? Well, I guess your confession tells the real story. You knowingly went along with the crimes of your client. You even aided and abetted him. You defended him and threatened anyone who tried to disclose the real truth.</div> <bR> <div> Before ever hearing about this confession of guilt on your part, I wrote the following immediately after stating what would satisfy the complaint:</div> <bR> <div> <B>If he cannot do this [prove that the Imperial family actually conveyed the feudal property as claimed], and he can’t, then we have evidence sufficient [probable cause] to show that Roger Pitts-Tucker has helped perpetuate, aided and abetted a notorious fraudster. . . . [Mr.] Pitts-Tucker will employ [tactics] to derail you from [his] their inability to provide proof that the transfer was anything other than a legalized fantasy and therefore a fraud. </B></div> <bR> <div> The so-called <B>"terms or conditions of sale,</B>" which did not exist when I purchased, were created to protect Mr. Boada not the buyer. The terms were lopsided, unfair and provided no recourse in case of default. Your system of business ensured that the buyers could be robbed and cheated with impunity. There was no protection for created for the buyers, not even what the law prescribed. Yet the whole system of the law of real property was created according to Paul Kreling, an English barrister, to protect the buyer. He wrote, "<B>The present conveyancing system purports [that is, has the seminal intention] to have two main aims [or purposes]: the first is to protect the purchaser against ‘quasi legal defects’; the second is to establish the title of the vendor.</B>" (<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><B><U>www.libertarian.co.uk</U></B><B><U> /lapubs/legan/legan011.pdf</U></B></FONT>) </div> <bR> <div> What kind of solicitor would set up a business system in which none of the above lawful protections were established? If this is the kind of law practice you engaged in, then you are unworthy of being a solicitor and should be stuck off the list and be blackballed from ever practicing again, unless you fess up and work with the prosecutors to help bring Mr. Boada to justice and conviction.</div> <bR> <div> The important wrong was that the buyers, including myself, were denied their right to have a<B> "good and marketable title,</B>" which is contrary to the principles of fairness, justice and equity and this is also against English law and you “<B>knew or ought to have known</B>” this as a student and practitioner of the law. Is this how you practice your profession in virtual blindness, ignorance or is it in defiance of the law? What kind of solicitor are you? </div> <bR> <div> Every victim I talked to was horrified that Mr. Boada, who you stated did his business through you, left them high and dry with nothing, but "<B>bad title,</B>" which is the same thing as "<B>no title</B>" or "<B>no real ownership</B>" to the property they purchased. Talk about a scam! Talk about being ripped off! They got nothing for their money. Yet you approved of this way of doing business and defended your client’s right to do this? How could you do such a thing with a clear conscience? Where was your sense of fairness and right?</div> <bR> <div> Why did you defend Mr. Boada in such an ugly trade in falsehoods which robbed innocent, unsuspecting people of their money? All Mr. Boada did was cheat and rob people. How could you allow and defend such treachery? I can’t see any other reason except that you were involved as an accomplice in this despicable con game, especially when it is known that I sent you compelling evidence of outright fraud in <B>early 2001 </B>along with the contact information for you to check it out.</div> <bR> <div> By the standards of your profession, you "<B>know or ought to have known</B>" that there was a very serious problem going on. Did you have blinders on? So, again, why did you do it? And why after giving me an "<B>undertaking</B>" that the "<B>documents</B>" proving in effect "<B>good title</B>" would be sent to me, which created a legally binding obligation or "<B>duty of care</B>" on your part, why did you abandon me to the financial ruin that I told you over and over would take place if you did not provide as promised. </div> <bR> <div> The "<B>Exhibits of the Investigator’s Report</B>" shows that practically all the letters I sent you and Mr. Boada were pleadings for proof of "<B>good title</B>" that the Imperial family did, in fact, convey the Principality. But rather than prove you and your client were above board and ran an honest business, I was neglected, put off, given false hopes, strung along, then a new <B>Statutory Declaration </B>was given me in <B>November of 2000 </B>that had a hopelessly impossible name on it (the nonexistent Michael Hohenzollern, etc., etc.) This <B>Statutory Declaration </B>did not prove anything. It was evidence of fraud and deception.</div> <bR> <div> I also discovered that Mr. Boada did not graduate from the Modern University of Lisbon after talking to the University Registrars office in Lisbon. I sent this incriminating fact to you with the contact information so you could see for yourself that I was not blowing smoke, but telling you the truth. But like everything else, you turned a deaf ear to it. If you had just looked on the internet, you would have discovered that this university did not offer a degree in law, not in any kind of law, much less in something so remote and impractical as "<B>peerage law</B>" as Mr. Boada claimed in all three <B>Statutory Declarations</B>. </div> <bR> <div> To a reasonable person this fact alone would have sent chills up and down their spine and they would have investigated, but not you. Why? Where you so dead headed, so unprofessional, so neglectful, so malicious or professionally careless, or where you a party to this scam? Again, your confession reveals your true involvement.</div> <bR> <div> And what kind of solicitor making an oath to obey and defend justice would write to Mr. Branscum, one of the investigators in Florida:</div> <bR> <div> <B>It is disputed that the non-registration as companies of British Feudal Investments Limited, the Hohenzollern Family land Trust Inc and / or Trade Consult Group Ltd is against the law. As your client is alleging so, please identify to which legislation you refer. . . . </B>(Your letter to Mr. Branscum dated <B>August 17, 2001</B>—The Law Society has a copy of this letter)</div> <bR> <div> Does a practicing solicitor in English business law not really know the answer to this question? Is he so derelict and inept that he cannot find out. I sent you <B>Companies’ House </B>contact information. Were you so negligent and heedless that when I told you that your client was illegally operating in England, you did even lift your little finger to find out if any of this was actually true? How reckless and neglectful are you? Your indifference is an act of clear and unambiguous misconduct worthy of the heaviest penalty---that is to be struck off with prejudice along with an official referral for a criminal investigation and possible prison time.</div> <bR> <div> Your confession tells the story loud and clear that you were <B>willfully and knowingly </B>involved, which explains a lot of your odd or illogical doings, because so so much of your behavior was either obvious misconduct or it was hiding your involvement in the scam. Everything consistently points to guilt one way or another.</div> <bR> <div> In spite of your "<B>duty of care,</B>" you never tried to help me—you only worked to defend your client in his crimes. Finally you lied and wrote on <B>March 7, 2001 </B>that, "<B>. . . all matters have been carried out in the proper manner.</B>"<B> </B>But where was the proof I had requested. I had a legal right to this information? And you were obligated to give it to me, yet you never did. </div> <bR> <div> You said you looked at some stock certificates that Mr. Boada provided you, stock certificates that could have been forged. This is all you did in spite of the fact that I asked you to check them out and find out if the people were real and had indeed signed those certificates. You never did that—you never proved anything. And how could all your obligations be complete or proper when my "<B>undertaking</B>" was neglected, your <B>"duty of care</B>" was denied to me, and when there was a "<B>Full Guarantee of Title</B>" clause in the "<B>Deed of Transfer?</B>" Where was the "<B>root” or “abstract of title</B>?" Where was the statement that there was a fatal flaw or a serious defective of title to the property that would make the purchase worthless? Such are, by law, supposed to be revealed. Why didn’t you insist upon this instead of say, "<B>. . . all matters have been carried out in the proper manner?</B>" </div> <div> Why let anyone be cheated when it was your duty to do a "<B>root of title</B>" and ensure your client was being honest and doing the right thing. Then to top it all off, you said, "<B>caveat emptor</B>"—in other words, <B>you basically gave me the finger and said go jump off a cliff as far as I am concerned. I don’t care if you ship runs aground and you are financially ruined, I got my money, you can just go jump in a lake. I don’t care about your plight.</B></div> <bR> <div> Well, with this attitude, it is no wonder you never offered to refund my money. (The Law Society has copies of all your letters and emails to me including Mr. Boada’s---unlike you I do not withhold---I am a straight shooter and believe in sharing fully and completely---I have nothing to hide) Only Ms. Bromley representing Mr. Boada in about <B>January of 2003</B>, at the instigation of Mr. Branscum, offered to refund some of the money, but added an impossible requirement. That I could not tell the tale of deceit and deception---I could no longer tell the truth---I was to be muzzled. But this was unconsciousable and I told her that because I discovered that Mr. Boada was still engaged in robbing and cheating other people. I could not do this simply on the principle that “<B>all that is needed for the forces of evil to win is for good men to do nothing.</B>” (Edmund Burke) Instead I felt compelled to attempt to protect others from the scam and the scammers---you and your partner, Mr. Boada.</div> <div> But you threatened me as if I was in the wrong for sending you evidence of fraud. This is the attitude of a low life thug, not a responsible, prudent, respectable solicitor of England and Wales. Where was your sense of justice, fairness, equity—your ethical or moral standards? Remember, you advertised that you and your firm offered services in full accord with <B>"the highest standards of excellence and integrity.</B>" Where was your integrity back then and where is it now?</div> <bR> <div> I have consistently asked you over and over again to prove you were an honorable man instead of involved in fraud---that the conveyance of the feudal property was legitimately from the Imperial heirs of the Hohenzollern family as claimed, but you ignored me in spite of your “<B>undertaking</B>” or sacred promise. </div> <div> You have risked everything important to you, your money, your fortune, your business and livelihood, your reputation, your retirement, even your freedom if you have to go to prison, rather than prove you were honest and honorable and truthful about the conveyance. No one in their right mind would do such a thing, if they could prove what happened was legitimate. You obviously couldn’t or you would have---“<B>Where there is a will, there is a way.</B>” </div> <bR> <div> Even your refusal to discuss anything with me since 2003 or earlier despite invitations to prove yourself honorable at least every year, if not more, shows your inability to defend yourself in regard to the conveyance being valid and authentic. </div> <bR> <div> A reasonable and prudent man would have jumped at the privilege to shown himself to be above board, rather than risk everything he loves or everything that is important to him. Only a nutter or insane man would fail in this and just let everything get worse and worse till it has arrived at a point of great danger. Nevertheless, instead of proving your innocence, you only made things worse for yourself by giving lame excuses to the Law Society to the point that you unwittingly confessed to the crime of going along with what you knew was a scam or confidence game according to your own words. </div> <bR> <div> You obviously cannot prove anything was done right especially in my case or you would have happily done so. If it was true, you could have easily found a way to prove it was. The fact that you did not demonstrates more powerful than words can express that you could not prove the conveyance was legitimate, authentic and genuine if you tried. Hence, the obvious conclusion, the conveyance was purely as act of fraud, which you knowingly participated in. </div> <bR> <div> Remember, Mr. Boada did his business through you according to your own words, therefore, you are responsible for this whole ugly affair wherein many people were victimized. That is, all the theft and all the injustice that occurred, you knowingly promoted and encouraged. </div> <bR> <div> If you were honest and upright and had a solid respect for the law, you would have acted very differently. For example, if you had taken the evidence I sent you and had taken it seriously and behaved like a true and responsible solicitor of England, no more people would have been cheated. You would have been the hero and discovered the fraud. If you had only “<B>deduced title,</B>” no one would have been robbed, because you would have discovered your client was a thief and a liar and then you could have exposed him and turned him into the authorities, according to the Gudielines of your profession. If you had been reasonably diligent, you would have discovered latent encumbrances---fatal defects of title to ownership, and would have insisted that they were disclosed beforehand as the law prescribed, and no one would thereby have been defrauded. If you had insisted that your client disclosed the truth from the very beginning, none of this would have happened and I would not have been financially ruined and made to suffer all these years. You have wronged a lot of people because of your negligence. This is frankly extremely serious. </div> <bR> <div> And you still, after all this time, you still legally, according to your professional obligations, owe me the verifiable and confirmable "<B>documents</B>" that prove the Imperial family actually conveyed all the rights, etc. to the Principality of Halberstadt. This is a binding legal duty or obligation which you owe me. I cannot do what would help me financially without this solid evidence. I am now, still, relying on you to come through and by your legal “<B>duty of care</B>,” you must come through in a reasonable amount of time, not year later, but in <B>November of 2008</B>. You need to prove legitimacy or a real transfer of feudal property (all the rights of the Feudal Principality of Halberstadt) took place in the year <B>2000</B> from the Imperial Hohenzollerns to me through Mr. Boada. So far I have probably lost at least a quarter of a million dollars in lost revenue because of your negligence. I demand that you do your duty now. This is the only way you can partly right your wrongs—just do what you are professionally supposed to do. Just do it. </div> <bR> <div> If you can’t, you need to come clean and tell the truth about yourself and your client. Don’t hold anything back. Anything less than that will be seen for what it is----a cheap attempt to blow smoke, play games, cheat and lie when it is an obvious as the nose on your face that you are as guilty as a man could be. All your excuses, the ones that I have seen, are lame as they come and leave you with no foundation. You will be exposed—any thinking person will see through such a lame defense. Reality, in this case, sticks out like a sore thumb. Therefore, I look forward to the hearing, but suggest that you tell the truth, rather than have egg all over your face, because it is obvious you have been a scoundrel and a low life in your dealings myself and a lot of other people. But if you tell the truth now at least you can have some honor instead of shame.</div> <bR> <div> You can show you have something true and genuine about you by telling the full and complete truth and help convict Mr. Boada. This will, no doubt, help mitigate the situation in a major and important way. In this I truly wish you well.</div> <bR> <div> Sincerely yours,</div> <bR> <div> <B>If you have been victimized by Mr. Boada, Mr. Williams or Mr. Pitts-Tucker, it’s time to make criminal complaints and sue them for the detestable things they have done to you and many others. It’s like the saying, “United we stand divided we fall.” Only when the authorities see that hundreds have actually been robbed and cheated, will they put a priority on this serious case. Go to “</B><A HREF="id58.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="The Answer"><U><B>The Answer</B></U></A><B>” for more information.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Please read the "</B><FONT SIZE="4" COLOR="#BF0000" FACE="Benguiat Bk BT" ><A HREF="id33.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Disclaimer"><U><B>Disclaimer.</B></U></A></FONT><B>"</B></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id74.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor15"><U><B>Previous Page</B></U></A><B> /</B><A HREF="irish_and_english_baronies.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Selling the Forbidden"><U><B> </B></U></A><A HREF="id76.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor 17"><U><B>Next Page</B></U></A><FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Times New Roman" ><A HREF="id76.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Crooked Solicitor 17"><U> </U></A></FONT></div> </td> </tr></table></body>