Kalamata

Billington Lane

Derrington

Stafford

ST18 9LR

Email: mark.anthony.taylor@gmail.com

Phone: 01785 248865

11 November 2016





How the Supreme Court undermined the government's appeal against the Gina Miller Brexit lawsuit benefiting Deutsche Bank





An open letter to David Neuberger, President of the Supreme Court, demanding action or recusal from office.





Supreme Court previously notified of Lord Chief Justice's cover up of Deutsche Bank's perjury, gold rigging and money laundering frauds.

The SFO, under the Attorney General, the defence counsel in the Gina Miller lawsuit, refused an investigation petitioned by HMRC against Deutsche Bank for gold rigging and money laundering – allegations validated in pubic domain materials.

Lord Chief Justice, Baron Thomas, violated the Data Protection Act to cover up Deutsche Bank's perjury in the High Court and Court of Appeal.

Lord Chief Justice - by protecting Deutsche Bank from prosecution for perjury - covered up Deutsche Bank's gold rigging and money laundering.

Attorney General and Bob Neil prevented illumination of corroborative evidence from the SFO that would have incriminated the Lord Chief Justice immediately before Gina Miller's hearing.

Deutsche Bank, Gina Miller's business partner, stands to make tens of billions out of government procrastination to invoke Article 50.





Dear Mr Neuberger,

I write to you to remind you of the failings of the Supreme Court, that allowed the Lord Chief Justice, Baron Thomas, to get away with a conspiracy to commit fraud and misconduct in public office. Had the Supreme Court acted promptly then Baron Thomas' rigging of the Gina Miller lawsuit could have been averted. I will ask you to correct those failings, by proper application of CPR rules, or recuse yourself from office.





Gina Miller's principal business is SCM Private which is in a partnership with Deutsche Bank, which stands to make billions out of government procrastination invoking Article 50 since Deutsche Bank is insolvent and is currently negotiating an interim bailout from the ECB in excess of £130 billion.





Deutsche Bank was rendered insolvent as a result of the liabilities that emerged from its market rigging. Added to its list of liabilities are those that arise from precious metal rigging, which it confessed to in a New York lawsuit earlier this year under Valerie E Caproni, settling for $38 million, and incriminating Scotiabank and HSBC as co-conspirators. Subsequently a $1 billion lawsuit for the same allegations was filed, using the settlement as the basis of the claim.





Contrary to all honest explanations, rhe SFO under Jeremy Wright MP, the Attorney General, cancelled an investigation into Deutsche Bank for gold rigging and money laundering around the 23th of October. The investigation was requested on my behalf by Jon Thomson, head of HMRC and the petition has reference #9559. The Justice Committee, whose duty it is to oversee the SFO, represented by Bob Neil MP, refused to question the Attorney General or the head of the SFO on the matter, even though it knew the issue was pertinent to the Gina Miller lawsuit, having undermined both judges and defendant, giving Miller the ammunition to blackmail the government and the judiciary. The Exiting the European Union Select Committee, headed by Hillary Benn, knew that the Justice Committee was guilty of misfeasance, and violated the duties of their offices by doing nothing. (I can forward you on the Google signed email records should you require proof, alternatively you can ask Parliament to disclose emails from me sent to the appropriate recipient to confirm the allegations herein).





With both Bob Neil and Hillary Benn being former remain campaigners, in common with Theresa May, and the fact that all parties knew that the Lord Chief Justice was compromised before Gina Miller's hearing undermines Theresa May's public narrative in these matters. Neither she, nor her appointees has any credibility.





Since the sum laundered from DB's Russian offices into London is estimated to be $10 billion, we can figure that at the very least the Attorney General's interference with due process of law has cost the treasury $10 billion, as the penalty for money laundering normally entails 100% confiscation. Even if this is overestimated, one would expect at least $2 billion given Corporation Tax of 20%. I believe the FCA and BaFin fines against Deutsche Bank for money laundering are only for AML control violations, not for the deliberate setting up of Russian offices to capitalize on sanction violations. The fines, in the tens of millions of sterling, do not measure up to the billions laundered to London.





Under the Attorney General, the SFO has covered up gold rigging that would have further incriminated the Lord Chief Justice, who I demonstrated to you, had violated the Data Protection Act to protect a number of judges from due scrutiny. Thomas had refused to admit that a transcript of hearing for BM40B021, under Simon Brown QC, was never commissioned – a fact established by the ICO recently who confirmed that it does not exist and never existed. Ian Burnett, the appeal judge, who had been tasked by JACO to handle the accusations of twenty point of misconduct, whitewashed the appeal application - he was in no position to judge judicial misconduct because he did not have the means to test the allegations.





How the Attorney General and Lord Chief Justice undermine the fight against terrorism

Deutsche Bank were accused by me of destroying OTC bullion trading receipts, in violation of Anti Money Laundering laws. All the SFO had to do to refute my assertions, based on Deutsche Bank's deficient defence and to force Deutsche Bank to disclose its copy of my receipts. As the FCA have said (leaked by the Financial Times), Deutsche Bank could well have laundered money to terrorists. An honest regulator could have Deutsche Bank disclose all of its OTC receipts and cross reference the traders to those names on MI5's terrorist watch list. If any ISIS sympathizer was buying and selling large amounts of OTC bullion that would establish a lead for investigation. ISIS is known to trade between bullion, oil and munitions.





All four heads of the Supreme Court ignored Deutsche Banks' perjury.





I remind you, Mr Neuberger, that you and the other three heads of the Supreme Court were notified by me of the Lord Chief Justice's malfeasance. You did nothing – you stonewalled me. We see the result of that largesse is yet more injustice, more crimes, more cover-ups and the crimes escalate. It started as one judge covering up another judge's corruption: Charles Haddon-Cave covering up Simon Brown's scurrilous and outrageous verdict. Now we have a judge so compromised - the Lord Chief Justice – that he can be blackmailed to give large chunks of the British taxpayers wealth to foreign fraudsters. Should you continue to do nothing you will be held as compromised as he.





The Supreme Court needs to act prior to handling Gina Miller's lawsuit to show good faith and penitence. You should ask the Lord Chief Justice to stand down from office and you should re-open the appeal against Simon Brown's hearing A2/2015/2818. Deutsche Bank committed perjury and they issued a bare denial. They never had a legal defence. Their co-defendants who claimed to agree with their defence are incriminated as co-conspirators. The 'explicit' bare denial in Emma Slatter's defence (Deutsche Bank's lawyer who refused to attend the oral hearing for which she applied), was no more than an in-yer-face brag of judicial corruption – a psi-op.





I can inform you that Elizabeth Truss, the Lord Chancellor, was notified of all these matters months ago, and also did nothing. She knows that the Lord Chief Justice compromised himself, and she, along with the Prime Minister, deceive Parliament and the general public, when she keeps her silence, and pretends government is separate from the judiciary She knows, for example, that the Lord Chief Justice, violated the Data Protection Act to cover up Ian Burnett's whitewash of Deutsche Bank's perjury. I have issued a Freedom of Information Act request to determine whether Truss has given Thomas immunity from prosecution for that violation, since the responsibility for exemptions is hers. While he may be given immunity, the fact that the purpose of his obstruction was to pervert the course of justice, such immunity would only drag Ms Truss deeper into the conspiracy and the subsequent liabilities that will inevitably emerge.





This letter is public, and all responses shall be made public. Should you refuse to supply a constructive reply I think the public can take it the Supreme Court intends to yield an appeal as corrupt as the original verdict. - that it has gifted Deutsche Bank with British bailout, while the army of bent judges and politicians on the receiving end of its $10 billion laundering retire to Money Carlo.





I also remind you that on Master Judge Marie Bancroft Rimmer's Facebook page she lobbied to prosecute Nigel Farage for his Brexit poster campaign. Paul Kernaghan refused to comment, even though it is the duty of his office to investigate judicial misconduct. Misconduct is patent because one cannot act as judge and prosecutor at the same time. Kernaghan is as incriminated as the Lord Chief Justice, and JACO staff all need the sack. If Kernaghan is doing an honest job then why did Deutsche Bank get away with a bare denial in the Birmingham High Court, while confessing to the same matters in New York. He knew all the allegations of misconduct against Simon Brown were whitewashed by Ian Burnett. He knew that no transcript of hearing existed, and he knew the Lord Chief Justice was obstructing justice.





Is the Judiciary part of the official Remain campaign now?









Regards

Mark Anthony Taylor





I believe everything is this document is true.