MY POSTS ARE BEING BLOCKED INTERMITTEDLY!
UPDATE ON MY CASE
I have been able to piece together evidence proving that Theoktisti tried to bribe my lawyer Konstantinos Christopoulos at 11 46 am on April 27th 2015 on behalf of Theodekti Vallianatou.
Proving the bribery attempt is crucial for my case, and by luck, I have been able to find six vital documents related to the event that prove beyond reasonable doubt my claim.
The reason why the occurrence of the bribery attempt is so important to prove is that proof of it indirectly proves that everything I have alleged about Theodekti Vallianatou, Theonike and others, is true. There is no need to attempt to bribe a lawyer unless a crime occurred.
Secondly, proof that Theoktisti’s bribery attempt occurred in turn serves as proof that Christopoulos together with state prosecutor Christina Fasoula systematically withheld evidence of it in order to throw my case. The removal of all traces of the bribery attempt was necessary to free Christopoulos and Fasoula of throwing the case on behalf of Theodekti Vallianatou and her associates in the church and elsewhere.
This is the claim I made in an email sent to the Bishop of Volos and other clegy at 19 25 pm April 27th, the evening after the bribery attempt occurred.
“I am writing to you t inform you that the police have filed charges against Theoktisti Emsley, nun at St John the Forerunner monastery in Anatoli for an attempt to bribe my lawyer. After obtainting the details of my lawyer under false pretences this morning, Theoktisti Emsley rang one hour later when I was with the lawyer in a bank and tried to influence him by offering a secret talk with Gerondissa Theodekti. She told him to suppress the charges, warned me off asking for the return of my money and from returning to Greece.
The lawyer immediately informed the police and lawyers chamber and the police filed charges againt Theoktisti Emsley.
Bribery of a lawyer under art 237 par 1 of the crimindal code in Greece carries 5 to 20 years in prison anda fine of 15,000 to 150,000 euros.”
That my claim made in this email is factual and valid is proven by the following six pieces of facts and circumstantialevidence.
First, in an email I sent to Theoktisti Emsley at 10 46 am on April 27th I gave her the name and contact details of Konstantinos Christopoulos. Theoktisti Emsley had suggested to me that she was being subjected to violence from Theodekti Vallianatou in order to trick the number of my lawyer out of me after I refused to give it to her.
Second, bank statements from Eurobank prove that Christopoulos used his bank account to transfer some cash I had to my bank account.
One bank statements gives the exact time of transaction as 11 44 am, 27th April 2015, and another gives the name the parties involved in the transaction as Christopoulos and myself. I had to be present because I had to give him the cash to put onto his bank account before he transferred it, in turn, to my bank account.
Bank document identifying the parties of the above transaction as myself and Christopoulos.
Third, a handwritten note in Christopoulos file gives the name Sister Theoktisti, the date 27 April 2015, the time 11 46, the number 6944687275 . This is not the mobile number of Theoktisti, which is 6932241766. I believe it is the number of Theodekti or another monastic.
Fourth, a formal complaint note dated April 27th 2015 signed by state prosecutor Christian Fasoula naming me, Theoktisti and Theodekti, apparently directing me to the police headquarters in relation to these events.
Fifth, a police headquarters report dated May 6th which times my visit to there as 13 20 pm on April 27th. The report describes the phone call of Theoktisti to Christopoulos as the subject of the complaint and gives the answer of Theodekti and Theoktisti to a police inquiry in which they confirm ringing my lawyer but deny the charge.
Six, Kirsten Funke in an email from May.
Kirsten Funke was enaged in a civil libel case with Theodekti Vallianatou in Muenster, Germany. Christopoulos represented me while Sybille Boettger represented Kirsten Funke.
Funke’s email shows that Christopoulos must have confirmed to Sybille Boettger or Kirsten Funke that an attempt had been made to bribe him because Kirsten Funke refers to it as a fact she has been told by someone and calls this a good card in my case.
These six separate pieces of evidence together prove beyond reasonable doubt that the claim I made in my email in the evening of 27 April is the true version.
That Christopoulos went with me to the police station to file charges against Theoktisti is indirectly proven by vrious facts.
First, the fact that I refer in my April 27th email to the Bishop of Volos to the precise paragraph in Greek law of bribery of a lawyer which Christopoulos himself looked up and told me.
“Bribery of a lawyer under art 237 par 1 of the crimindal code in Greece carries 5 to 20 years in prison anda fine of 15,000 to 150,000 euros,” I note in my email in the evening of April 27th.
Also, because I do not speak Greek, I cannot go to a police station on my own and make a complaint. For this purpose, I have to go either with a lawyer or a translator.
The police report from May 6th shows the visit as occuring at 1 20 pm, explaining the hour or more it took Christopoulos to file the charges.
At the police, I witnessed Christopoulos file charges for attempted bribery. I saw him go through the whole process of talking to the relevant police officials, giving a statement to the police, showing his phone etc. The police prepared a written statement. He signed the statement. He gave me a quick oral translation of the content into German. It concerned charges of bribery.
Because the bribery attempt involved directly Christopoulos, I did not get a copy of the charges or make a statement.
A more detailed account of what happened
In the morning of April 27th, I spoke to Theoktisti on the phone. She had asked me to tell her when I left for Ireland. I had just booked my flight for the next day and begun preparations to leave, and told her about it. Because Theoktisti had tried to help me on April 27th, I trusted her. But when she asked me point blank for the name of my lawyer, I refused to give to her since the reason could only be to contact him and influence him.
Theoktisti denied this as the reason and suggested to me that she needed help because she was being subjected to violence and bullying from Theodekti.
As my email to Theoktisti at 10 46 am morning clearly shows, I was responding to her request for help. In response to her request for help, I rang my lawyer and asked if he would help. When he said he would, I emailed Theoktisti at 10 46 am and confirmed that he would help her and gave her his name and number. Also, in my email it is clear I am offering advice to Theoktisti that if she was being subjected to violence, she should seek help from my lawyer and others. I do not make any claim that she has suffered violence at the hands of Theodekti. Since I myself had suffered violence myself at the hands of Theodekti Vallianatou and Theonike, Theoktisti’s claims that she had suffered violence were plausible to me.
Within one hour of obtaining the lawyer’s number, the attempt at bribery occurred. The short time that elapsed shows that there was a plan to bribe the lawyer. Unknown to Theoktisti and Theodekti, however, I happened to be with him in the bank when the bribery attempt occurred. It was the day before I was due to leave Greece and I decided, at the last moment, to transfer some of my cash back to my bank account in Germany. I did not have a bank account in Greece. After talking to Theoktisti on the phone, I rang Christopoulos and he offered to help me. We met ten minutes later and went together to his bank on the central square. On the way there, we also discussed Theoktisti’s phone call. We were sitting in the bank in the middle of the transaction as the bank statement shows when Theoktisti rang using the number XXX as the handwritten note by Christopoulos shows.
This mobile number is not Theoktisti’s mobile number. I believe it is Theodekti’s mobile number.
As soon as Christopoulos answered the phone in the bank, he made a signal to me and told me in an aside it was Theoktisti.
I was sitting beside him at the desk and listened to the conversation. It lasted for about ten minutes and was conducted in German, which Theoktisti also speaks. The bank employee also listen or rather was forced to listen for about ten minutes before it ended and the papers related to the transaction could be completed.
From listening to Christopoulos, it was clear to me that Theoktisti was trying to find out as much information as she could about my case, and then set up a meeting “under four eyes” with Theodekti Vallianatou to bribe him.
After the call ended, I asked Christopoulos what Theoktisti had said and he confirmed that Theoktisti had tried to set up a meeting to bribe him. He said she had told him to see to it that my case was dropped, that I did not get my money back. I should leave Greece immediately and not come back. I was not welcome in Greece.
As soon as I heard confirmation from Christopoulos, I rang Theoktisti myself on her mobile number and expressed my anger and disappointment that she had abused my trust to obtain the number of my lawyer and tried to bribe him.
After finishing this call, I talked to Christopoulos and we decided to press charges. We crossed the road together from the bank on the main square to the main court house.
Christopoulos brought me to the office of state prosecutor Christina Fasoula. He spoke to her at length in Greek. She signed a note directing me to the police.
We went to his office where he looked up the relevant paragraphs and laws related to the attempt to bribe a lawyer. It is only because Christopoulos told me the paragraph that I was able to name it in my email to the Bishop of Volos that evening.
Then we went to the police headquarters where I saw Christopoulos go through the whole process of filing charges. I had become familiar with the process becaue I had filed charges against Theodekti Vallianatou at the same station on April 22nd. At the end of the process, Christopoulos signed his witness statement and it was counter signed and stamped by the police.
Theoktisti and Theodekti’s confirm in the police report of May 6th phoning Christopoulos but deny it was bribery. They claim I recommended they ring my lawyer when Theoktisti had to trick the number out of me under false pretenses because I was afraid an attempt would be made to bribe him. Theodekti and Theoktisti also appear to make the false claim in the police report, translated orally for me, that I claimed that Theodekti was violent to Theoktisti.
My email from 10 46 am on April 27th, however, shows that I make no such claim. I direct Theoktisti to my lawyer in response to her request for help after ringing my lawyer to check if he would help. I just advise her that if she is subjected to violence, to get help.
The suppression of the bribery attempt by Christopoulos and Fasoula
All record of Theoktisti’s bribery attempt seems to be missing from the state prosecutor’s file.
In an unofficial meeting on Wednesday 3rd, February, 2016, in the office of state prosecutor Agori Papakosta, state prosecutor Fasoula confirmed to me there was no record of the bribery attempt in the file even.
Fasoula was the very same state prosecutor who registered the bribery attempt in April as her signed and dated note shows. Therefore, she must know about it and she must know it is vital evidence.
Fasoula also confirmed that there was no witness statement fromTheoktisti Emsely in the file. It is not clear if Theoktisti made a statement at the police station and the statement has been withheld because it incriminates Theodekti Vallianatou. Or if she did not make any statemnet at all to the police. Fasoula suggested Theoktisti had not made any statement because she offered as I was about to leave the office to have Theoktisti taken to the police to be questioned that same day, Wednesday, as long as I did not apply for a review of the case.
The witnesses statements in the file as listed by Fasoula were marginal witnesses or witnesses such as Theonike who had committed crimes against me ( strangulation, physcial assault, death threats) and who had no motive to confess, especially not if they realized the police, state prosecutor and lawyer were engaged in a cover up.
It is to be assumed that the only witness statements in the file are, therefore, tamper, altered, fake.
By contrast, important witnesses who were present such as Theososte, Theonymphe, Thekla and novice Angeliki, and who were named by me in my police report in July 2015, were not listed by Fasoula among those who had been questioned by the police.
There was also no copy of the charges for bribery that Christopoulos filed at the police headquarters on April 27th, 2015, in the file of my case he gave me when he resigned on Thursday 28th January.
At the police headquarters, I saw he was given a stamped and signed copy of the charges as the person directly involved.
Fasoula and Christopoulos have, therefore, systematically withheld evidence of the bribery attempt by Theoktisti Emsley. They have done so because it is a crucial piece of evidence against Theodekti Vallianatou. Suppressing the evidence that Theodekti Vallianatou was trying to influence and throw my case, allowed her and the Orthodox Church to make another attempt to influence my case.
The entire conduct of the investigation shows the police, state prosecutor and lawyer Christopoulos have conspired to throw my case.
Witness statements have been selected to include those in the monastery most likely to give false witness or to have no knowledge. By contrast, witness statements from those who were most likely to give true testimony and had knowledge have been excluded from the file.
A handwritten police note on a scrap of paper offered guidance to focus on my money transfers to the wrong monastery as well as to focus on the wrong person, namely some unidentifiable individual Th Ballianatou, while omitting the name of the suspect Theodekti and the right monastery.
I saw this same false name Th Ballianatou on the cover page of the state prosecutor’s file, which also omitted the name of the suspect Theodekti Vallianatou and, apparently, the right monastery. The same, false name also appears in an email sent to me by Christopoulos when he falsely informed me in July that the police headquarters had ordered an investigation into my case.
By systematically focussing on the wrong monastery, wrong money transfers and wrong person, the police, state prosecutors and lawyer were not just preparing to throw my case.
I allege they were preparing the ground to have me declared mentally ill and have me forcibly confined as soon as the verdict was issued to prevent my making an appeal.
As I found out in the monastery, this can be done very quickly in Greece. Just two witnesses are needed for an emergency confinement for one month. Christopoulos may even have been able to do it on his own having the power of my attorney.
The use of forced pyschiatrization in Greece is rather horrific.
The wife of the former defence minister accused of bribery was forcibly confined because, it seems, she may have known too much about the involvement of other individuals. The declaration that she was mentally ill is a legal way of limiting her ability to testify.
Stamati was forced to undergo a double mastectomy, a form of torture in this context. She was transferred to the psychiatric hospital in December 2013 after reportedly suffering a breakdown, attempting suicide and being diagnosed with severe depression. She escaped only apparently to have been turned in my her lawyer.
Interestingly, Stamati’s lawyer Alexis Kougias is also the major shareholder and president of the Larisa football team which staged a highly political protest for migrants this week.
Kougias also has personal links to the brother of Theodekti Vallianatou, Grigoris Vallianatos.
In addition, he has been linked to football match fixing scandals.
Players on a team he manages Nikos Vergos and Kargas were accused of scoring an own goal and blocking a goal to fix the Greek Cup in 2014.