THE WALL OF SHAME - Zuerich's Judges!

The judges below reviewed the case of the "Causa Elmer" in detail and wrongly and deliberately concluded that Rudolf Elmer was an employee of Julius Baer & Co. AG, Zuerich.

 

The judges, therefore, concluded that the Swiss Bank Secrecy Article 47 of the Swiss Banking Law is applicable in respect of data from a Trust Company of the Cayman Islands (Julius Baer Trust Company Ltd., Cayman Islands).

 

All the judges below had to review the "Expatriate Agreement" and the "Employments contracts including the Asignement as Chief Operating Officer", the decision taken by the Prosecution Office in 2007 (Rudolf Elmer is not an employee of Julius Baer Bank & Co. AG, Zurich confirmed by Julius Baer & Co. AG, Zürich itself), the source of the data (a trust company called Julius Baer and Trust Company Ltd., Cayman Islands (JBTC)) and what kind of data is in question (data of JBTC and not a bank), the certification upon termination of Rudolf Elmer and lastly but most importantly the fact if Swiss Bank Secrecy Art. 47 is applicable which Prosecutors Alexandra Bergmann and Dr. Peter C. Giger wanted to make the judges and the public believe!

 

Drawing the wrong conclusion by the judges (Rudolf Elmer is an employee of a Swiss Bank in Switzerland and the data is protected under Swiss Bank Secrecy in the Cayman Islands) is obviously not an accident, it was deliberately wrongly concluded in my view!  It is out of question that so many judges did make the very same mistake!

 

The famous Law Firm Baer & Karrer, owned by Dr. Thomas Baer and former President of Julius Baer Holding, Zuerich issued  an excellent Briefing on Whistleblowers in Switzerland and the Causa Elmer (page 4).

 

Nov 10th,

2005

 


 

 

Jan 17th,

2011

 



 

 

Nov 17th,

2011

 




 

 

Jan 22nd,

2011

 


Feb 15th,

2011

 


 

 

Apr 14th,

2011

 



 

Jun 10th,

2011

 

 


 

Dec 10th,

2014

 





 






Mar 7th, 2011




 

Jul 10th, 2012

 








Dec 3rd,

2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 23rd,

2016

 

Judge Dr. E. Zweifel

 

 


Judge Lower Court:


Dr. Sebastian Aeppli

 

 

 

 

 Judges Higher Court:

 

P. Marti, R. Naef,

 

E. Leuenberger



Judge H.-J. Zatti

 



Judges Higher Court:


Dr. P. Martin, W.


Meyer, A. Schärer

 

 Judge F. Hürlimann

 



 

Judge I. Erb

 

 


Judges Lower Court:


Dr. S. Aeppli, Dr. R.


Schöning, R. Faga







Other Rulings of Courts of Zurich


Judges High Court:

K. Balmer, D. Glur, R. Affolter



 

 






 

 

 

 

 

 

Judges Higher Court:

 

Th. Meyer, W. Meyer,

 

A. Schärer

 

 

 

 Judges Higher Court:

 

Peter Marti, R. Naef, M. Langmeier


Judge Zweifel, the examining magistrate, decided that Rudolf Elmer stays in custody for the next three months. After 30 days Rudolf Elmer was released.


 

Judge Dr. Aeppli, the judge of the Lower Court concluded that Rudolf Elmer violated Swiss Bank Secrecy and Rudolf Elmer was an employee of Bank Julius Baer & Co. AG, Zürich.

 

 

 

The Judges of the Higher Court Marti, Naef and Leuenberger concluded that Rudolf Elmer was an employee of Bank Julius Baer & Co. AG, Zürich. However, they do not know of what kind of data Prosecution refers to because there is no evidence. Therefore, they decided to restart the investigation under their supervision!



Judge Zatti, the examining magistrate, decided that Rudolf Elmer stays in custody for the next three months.

Judges of the Higher Court  Dr. Martin, W. Meyer, A. Schärer turned down Rudolf Elmers appeal in respect of judges Zatti ruling.



Judge Hürlimann, the examining magistrate, decided to remand Rudolf Elmer in custody for another three months.

 

Judge, the examining magistrate, decided to remand Rudolf Elmer in custody for another three months. On July 25th 2011 Rudolf Elmer was released.


 Judge Dr. LAeppli, the judge of the Lower Court of Jan 17th, 2011 with the judges Dr. Schöning and Faga concluded that Rudolf Elmer violated Swiss Bank Secrecy and Rudolf Elmer was an employee of Bank Julius Baer & Co. AG, Zürich.



The webpage "How to manipulate a verdict" provides you with an avalanche of evidence!





 The judges of the Federal Court of Switzlerand called the act of turning down of Rudolf Elmers complaint at the Higher Court of Zurich by the judges Balmer, Glur and Affolter an arbitrary act and returned the entire case to the Courts of Zurich.


 

 

 The listed judges of the Federal Court of Switzerland turned down in essence Rudolf Elmers appealed in respect of the decision of "Management of the State of Zurich" (Geschäftsleitung des Kantonsrates des Eidg. Standes Zürich) to perform an investigation against the judges of the High Court K. Balmer, D. Glur and R. Affolter in the matter of their arbitrary act of Aug 10th, 2010. No criminal investigation was performed  against these three judges of the High Court even though they acted  in an arbitrary way.



 

Head Judge Th. Meyer, Judge W. Meyer and judge A. Schärer turned the complaint of Rudolf Elmer down and request that Rudolf Elmer  pays a Court fee of CHF 3000 and another CHF 2000 to the journalist Leo Müller. The Federal Court of Switzerland reversed the ruling of the High Judges of Zurich and requested to review the entire decision because the decision violated Swiss Federal Law!

Head Judge Peter Marti, Judge R. Naef, Judge M. Langmeier could not prosecute me violating Swiss Bank Secrecy! However, it appears that they took revenge and found me guilty in two minor issues. The punishment is extra-ordinary hursh with 14 months suspended prison sentence and covering approx CHF 350`000 of the legal cost without and compensation for imprisonment etc. It is obvious that they cruxified me right know with this verdict at the Paradeplatz of Zurich! Obviously, they did not consider the harrassment that my family and me were exposed to. Head Judges Peter Marti stated in the verdict: "It is not enough of harrassment the family encounter to reduce the sentence!!! Even though he had all the details of the harrassment he simply ignored it as he did with other matters. He belongs to the political party which wants Swiss Bank Secrecy in the Swiss Constitution! That says it all!

 

 

The final question in Swiss Society is:

 

Where is the difference between a Swiss Banker and one of those  Judges of the state of Zurich listed on this page?