Has my lawyer been bribed? And is the Orthodox Church involved again?






Today, I terminated my contract with my lawyer Konstantinos Christopoulos in Larisa, Greece. There is too much evidence he has been influenced, bought, or given favours to throw my case. The letter of his resignation is here…But it was not easy to get…


There is even suspicion that a lawyer called Simos Samaras from Thessaloniki, who appears to have specialized in Ecclesiastical law and who has links to the Orthodox Church, could be involved.

I will present these facts to the state prosecutor for investigation and post the details on this blog.

Keen eyed readers of my blog will not be surprised. They will have noticed that I handed in my report about the evidence that George Soros and Alexis Tsipras are involved with my blog to the state prosecutor at Larisa yesterday myself, the 27th January. That is almost ten days after I finished the report on 18th January, and  sent it to my lawyer by email to hand over as a matter of urgency.  Christopolous told me the state prosecutor would take only about one month to make a decision.


Although Christopoulos sent me an email telling me the report was in order, he did not hand it in, after all. But he did not tell me either. Days passed…

Luckily, I have suspected for various reasons Christopolous is bought for a some time, which is why I wrote my appeal to the civil court in Munster myself as well as my report  on Soros and Tsipras myself. I also insisted that he did not change my report. To double check, I rang him yesterday and asked him if he had, indeed, handed it in, something that should be self evident. But he told me he had not…

He claimed he did not know that the report was meant for the state prosecutor even though it says clearly says at the beginning “To the state prosecutor”. He denied I had told him that the report was for the state prosecutor and asked for proof in the form of emails. Fortunately, I was able to give him plenty of proof in emails.

In addition, he himself offered to hand in the report for the state prosecutor in December, but apparently only on the assumption he could rewrite it. When it became clear to him, he could not rewrite the report, the plan appears to have changed. The report would  not be handed in at all and I would be left in the dark about this fact until it was too late.

After I told Christopoulos yesterday I would hand in my report myself, he insisted several times the state prosecutor would not accept my report. He was not able to give me a reason for why the state prosecutor would refuse my report.

I pointed out the state prosecutor had to accept new evidence pertinent to my case. Christopolous realized I was determined to hand the evidence in and get written confirmation, he offered to hand it in himself later. But I doubted his truthfulness given his lies, contradiction and false advice.

Anyway, I managed to get my report with the file number from Christopoulous, and set off for the state prosecutors office with him. I managed to hand in my report and get written confirmation of this fact while Christopoulos kept insisting until the last moment the prosecutors would not take my report.

In Austria, the state prosecutors removed evidence from files after I managed to get it in mainly because, warned against corrupt lawyers, I always represented myself. In Greece, it seems compliant lawyers make sure the evidence does not get into the file in the first place.

This is not the first time Christopoulos has dropped the ball and this  pattern of repeated failure is most likely explained by corruption rather than incompetence, also an explanation, albeit not very flattering.

Although Christopoulos represented me in the civil libel case between Kirsten F and Theodekti Vallianatou in Munster when Kirsten F asked me to be a witness, I was not informed by him of the Munster court judgement in June in which I was dismissed as a “well known conspiracy theorist”. A lawyer is obliged to adhere to certain professional standards and procedures and that includes finding out how a case is progressing and if there is a judgement informing his client, especially if that judgement is false and hugely damaging.

Readers of my blog will know I had to write my own appeal about ten days ago after I found out about the judgement by chance.

I will summarize the many failures of Christopolous for the state prosecutor at Larisa and for the local lawyer’s association.

But where does the Orthodox church fit into all this?

Well, when I went to Christopoulos’ office this evening to terminate our contract and collect my file, I found a stranger sitting behind his computer in his chair behind his desk.

When I asked Christopoulos for a letter confirming he was no longer my lawyer, he looked to this stranger for his answer for instructions and then repeated everything this man said. This man, who later revealed his name reluctantly after I repeatedly asked who he was, as Simos Samaras from Thessaloniki, told Christopolous that I did not need a letter. His tone was not the friendly or respectful tone of a colleague or friend. It was the tone of a boss giving orders to an employee.

I pointed out the power of attorney is significant. Without a letter of resignation, Konstantinos Christopoulos was still formally and technically my lawyer. He could exercise that power of attorney without my knowing it, for example, to access my file and remove documents etc.

Also, I pointed out my contract was with Christopoulos and not Simos Samaras. Christopoulos was required to fulfil professional standards independently of anything Simos Samaras. Among those standards was giving a client a formal letter of resignation if required so that there was clarity about who had the power of attorney.

When I said I would inform the state prosecutor, I finally got my letter of resignation. Simos Samaras dictated it to Christopoulos.

On the way to the internet shop to get a copy, I asked about Christopolous about  Samaras and their relationship. I noted Samaras seemed to be able to give him instructions. Christopoulos said Samaras was a colleague and they cooperated on cases, but denied he had influenced Samaras in connection to my case.

Anyway, after I quick google search, I found out that Simos Samaras has Ecclessiastical law as a speciality. His blog Nomologia lists an impressive CV, including Ecclesiastical law.


Is that a coincidence? It may be. But it given the context, it seems unlikely. At the very least, there is a conflict of interest. Here is a lawyer specialized in Ecclesiastical law telling Christopoulos how to handle my case.

Given the fact that Theodekti Vallianatou tried to bribe my lawyer in April, it is reasonable to consider the possibility that the Orthodox Church tried again and that Simos Samaras, with his close links to the church and knowledge of Ecclesiastical law, was chosen as an instrument to influence Konstantinos Christopoulos to suppress vital documents and evidence as my case has made better progress than the church thought.

Now, I intend to represent myself at this critical stage in my case with the help of translators since I don’t have time to find a really good lawyer.

I am handicapped by a lack of Greek, but more handicapped by a useless lawyer. And my Greek is getting better as I interact with the very nice! people of Larisa.

Christopoulos has threatened me if I publicize these facts. But my claims are based, indeed, on emails, documents and other facts and, therefore, protected by my right to freedom of the press and speech. I have a right to present evidence that a specific lawyer is failing in their duties, and in such a systematic way, that the most likely explanation is that they have been improperly influenced. I will not be threatened.

Also, I want to stress that my experience of Greek people and the police is that they are very, very honest. But there are bad apples, as everywhere.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: