CAUSA: Rudolf Elmer - Bank Julius Baer & Co. AG, Zurich - Judical System

The big scandal / Der grosse Skandal

 

Prosecution and the Bank itself confirmed already in 2009 Elmer was not an employee of Julius Baer, Zurich! Therefore, without any doubt the case against Rudolf Elmer should have been closed immediately in 2009 that did happen! Why? On the other hand with the very reasoning the fraud investigation against the bank was closed. Moral corruption?

 

Die Staatsanwaltschaft und die Bank bestätigten bereits im Jahr 2009, dass Rudolf Elmer kein Angestellter der Bank Julius Bär & Co. AG, Zürich war. Logischerweise und diese ohne Zweifel hätte das Strafverfahren gegen Rudolf Elmer im Jahr 2009 umgehend eingestellt werden müssen, das geschah nicht! Warum? Anderseits wurde das Strafverfahren "Sozialversicherungsbetrug" gegen die Bank Julius Bär 2009 eingestellt! Moralische Korruption?

FIRST SCANDAL: Strafanzeige der Julius Bär / Complaint of Julius Baer filed against Rudolf Elmer
The first lawyer of Baer Holding/GAM Holding, Ch. Hiestand filed the complaint against Rudolf Elmer. He had not to provide any evidence that Rudolf Elmer was an employee of Julius Baer Bank & Co. AG, Zuerich even though it is key to be an employee of a Swiss domiciled bank in order to apply Swiss Bank Secrecy. Secondly, Ch. Hiestand had not to prove that any Swiss Bank accounts have been disclosed because only Swiss bank accounts are subject to protection under Swiss Law. On the contrary, the prosecutor Alexandra Bergmann presented in the attachment to her complaint to the Court of Zurich on January 17th, 2010 the bank accounts of Julius Baer, New York!

Der erste Jurist Ch. Hiestand reichte die Strafanzeige ein und musste nicht nachweisen, dass Rudolf Elmer einen Arbeitsverhältnis mit der Schweizer Bank hatte, um sicherzustellen, dass das Schweiz. Bankengesetz BaG 47 angewendet werden kann. Hinzu kommt, Ch. Hiestand musste auch nicht nachweisen, dass schweizerische Bankkonten offeng
20050617 Strafanzeige Julius Bär CH. Hi
Adobe Acrobat Dokument 215.9 KB
SECOND SCANDAL: Bank Julius Baer & Co. AG, Zürich : Rudolf Elmer is not a Swiss employee/kein Schweizer Angestellter Jan 30th, 2009
Julius Baer & Co. AG, Zürich confirmed in the letter Rudolf Elmer is not a Swiss employee, he was employeed with Julius Bär Cayman, his salary was paid in the Caymans, he had to report to the Cayman CEO etc.

Die Bank Julius Bär & Co. AG, Zürich bestätigt in ihrem Brief an die Staatsanwaltschaft, dass Elmer seit 1994 für eine unabhängige Gruppengesellschaft mit Sitz Cayman, mit lokalem Arbeitsvertrag, mit lokaler Entlöhung sowie lokalen Subordinationsverhältnis stehend auf den Cayman Islands tätig war!
20090130 Einstellungsverfügung SozVersBe
Adobe Acrobat Dokument 202.0 KB
THIRD SCANDAL: Prosecution closed a fraud case vs Julius Baer due to the fact "Elmer was not an employee of a Swiss Bank" /Strafverfahren eingestellt gegen Julius Bär
Head Prosecutor Frauenfelder Nohl and Prosecutor Neff closed a fraud case against Julius Baer Bank & Co. AG, Zurich in 2009 due to the only fact "Elmer was not an employee of the Swiss bank".

Prosecutor Frauenfeld Nohl was also supervisor of prosecutor A. Bergmann who investigated the violation against Rudolf Elmer since 2005. Why did the Head Prosecutor not also immediately close the case against Elmer due to the fact he was not an employee of a Swiss Bank.

Die leitende Staatsanwältin Frauenfelder Nohl und Staatsanwalt Neff haben ein Betrugsverfahren gegen Bank Julius Bär & Co. AG, Zürich im Jahr 2009 eingestellt mit dem einzigen Argument "Elmer war nicht Angestellter einer Schweizer Bank".

Die leitende Staatsanwältin war die Direktvorgesetzte von Staatsanwältin A. Bergmann, die den Fall Schweizer Bankgeheimnisverletzung seit 2005 untersuchte. Weshalb hat die leitetende Staatsanwältin nicht umgehend im Jahr 2009 das Strafverfahren gegen Rudolf Elmer eingestellt?
20090130 Einstellungsverfügung SozVersBe
Adobe Acrobat Dokument 167.6 KB
FORTH SCANDAL: Expatriate Agreement Sept 1st, 1999 - the "dubious Employment Contract" which was for more than a decade considered as Rudolf Elmer`s Employment Contract.True contract was concealed!
Prosecutors lic. iur. A. Bergmann, Dr. lic. iur. R. Jaeger, Dr. lic. iur. P.C. Giger and the following judges of the lower court Dr. iur. E. Zweifel (2005), lic. iur. Zatti (2011), lic. iur. Th Fleischer (2011), lic. iur. I. Erb (2011), Dr. lic. iur. S. Aeppli (2011 and 2014), Dr. lic. iur. R. Schönig (2011), lic. iur. R. Faga (2014) and the following judges of the Higher Court Dr. P. Martin, lic. iur. W. Meyer, lic. iur. A. Schärer (all 2011); lic. iur. Peter Marti, lic. iur. R. Naef, lic. iur E. Leuenberger (all 2011) confirmed with the rulings at the time and also in the indictments and their written verdicts that "The Expatriate Agrement" is THE EMPLOYEMENT CONTRACT WITH JULIUS BAER BANK CO. AG, Zuerich!! ONLY on August 23rd, 2016 the following judges lic. iur. P. Marti, lic. iur. E. Naef and lic. iur. M. Langmeier came to the conclusion that the "Expatriate Agreement" does not include all necessary requirements of an employment contract suchs as salary, holidays etc.!
19991216 Expatriate Agreement without si
Adobe Acrobat Dokument 993.8 KB
FIFTH SCANDAL: Evidence which Prosecution Office and Judges could have used but have ignored for more than a decade!!
For more than a decade these evidence was ignored! There are several documents (true employment contract, confirmations, correspondence, statements etc.) in which Julius Baer itself confirms to Rudolf Elmer, authorities and third parties that Rudolf Elmer is not an employee of a Swiss Bank (Bank Julius Baer & Co. AG, Zurich) but an employee of Julius Baer Bank and Trust Company Ltd., Cayman Islands since Sept 1st, 1994. The Prosecution Office due to the four house searches and confiscations of documents, computers etc. have had all this information since September 27th, 2005. This crucial information was simple not taken into consideration or say maybe even willfully ignored in order to pretend Rudolf Elmer was an employee of a Swiss Bank.!
Judicial scandals189.pdf
Adobe Acrobat Dokument 1.7 MB
SIXTH SCANDAL: Zuerich`s Tax Commission II did not approve an investigation of the Julius Baer Cayman Data
The Tax Commission II of the state of Zuerich did not allow that the Federal Tax Authorities of Switzerland to investigate the data of Julius Baer confiscated by the Police in Rudolf Elmer Swiss home Sept 27th, 2005. Reasoning it is unusal to confiscate data of a Cayman entity in Switzerland. FYI as an employee I could not have legally stolen the data, I was responsible for it! The excuse "stolen data" does not work in this case! According to my estimation Switzerland could have created at least CHF 100 Mio additional tax income! As a tax payer in the state of Zurich I do not accept this that the Tax Commission II of the state of Zurich turned down any investigation of data of Julius Baer Cayman!
Zurich Tax Commission turning down inves
Adobe Acrobat Dokument 14.3 MB
SEVENTH SCANDAL: The Federal Judges of Switzerland called it a despotic act turning down the complaint of Elmer`s family in respect of harrassment
The Federal Judges made it crystal clear that the turning down the complaint against Julius Bär & Co. AG, Zuerich and the private detectives of Ryffel AG, Zurich is an arbitrary act and a despotic ruling on March 7th, 2011. This was address also the the following judges of the high court: lic. iur. K. Balmer, lic. iur. D. Glur and lic. iur. R. Affolter.
BundesgerichtEntscheid Rudolf Elmer o703
Adobe Acrobat Dokument 3.2 MB
EIGHT SCANDAL: very heavy critisme by the Federal Court to the judges of the High Court of Zurich
In the cause journalist Leo Müller vs. Elmer the following judges of the High Court (lic. iur. Th. Meyer, lic. iur. W. Meyer and lic. iur. A. Schärer) used an outdated law in order to turn down Rudolf Elmer s request. Elmer was charged by those judges to cover an enormous amount of fees. Later the revised ruling by those very same judges came to the conclusion that Rudolf Elmer cannot be charged with any fees!
Federal Court of Switzerland 07112011.pd
Adobe Acrobat Dokument 2.1 MB
NINETH SCANDAL: The complaint against Julius Baer as a criminal organisation with the Federal Prosecution Office of Switzerland
In 2009 the Federal Prosecution Office within more or less 10 days not to investigate the data of Julius Baer due to the fact there is no link to Switzerland respectively there are no Swiss bank accounts involved. This is strange that there is no accountability of the headquarters in respect of the Groups subsidiaries all over the world!
Bundesanwaltschft Verfügung Gegenparteie
Adobe Acrobat Dokument 158.3 KB
TENTH SCANDAL: The "Hi Dirty Pig Story"
The information from the Attorney General of Isle of Man makes it crystal clear that Rudolf Elmer is NOT the SENDER of the "Hi dirty Pig email!! See attachment and the explanation below!
Hi Dirty Pig Story 191.pdf
Adobe Acrobat Dokument 900.7 KB
ELEVENTH SCANDAL: The Lies of General Counsel and lawyer Ch. Hiestand
The General Counsel of Julius Baer Group Ltd, Ch. Hiestand (lawyer) lied when he was interrogated by the Swiss prosecutor on August 14th, 2008. He made it crystal clear with his statement that Rudolf Elmer was subject to Swiss Bank Secrecy Law at the relevant time 1999 to 2002 of his a alleged offences (violating Swiss Banking Secrecy)! Ch. Hiestand stated clearly and without any doubt that Rudolf Elmer was formally employed by Bank Julius Baer & Co. AG, Zurich. If he had not lied and told the truth the entire legal case would have been closed in 2008 respectively had to be closed because Rudolf Elmer did not have a Swiss employment contract!
07 Beilage Aussage Hiestand 20080814.pdf
Adobe Acrobat Dokument 3.1 MB
TWELFTH SCANDAL: THE JUDGES OF THE HIGH COURT PROTECTED THE LIER CH. HIESTAND
The judges of the Higher Court of Zurich Th. Meyer, F. Schorta and Th. Vesely ignored the recent written complaint of Rudolf Elmer (Justice Leaks Zurich, ruling High Court of January 12th, 2017 etc.) and the fact about article 307 of the Criminal Law (false statment of a witness in a court proceeding) just as they ignored all the other lies of the General Counsel of Julius Baer.  Therefore, the prosecutors, the judges and eventually the courts of Zurich were  part of the plot of this dubious investigation which has lasted more than 12 years.
20170112 OG Beschluss Strafanzeige Hiest
Adobe Acrobat Dokument 2.2 MB
THIRTEENTH SCANDAL: Prosecutor decided to perform a second psychological evaluation of Rudolf Elmer in order to find out if he is a dangerous person!
After a few days Rudolf Elmer was already in solidary confinement Jan 23rd, 2011 General Counsel Ch. Hiestand and the lawyer of the bank Dr. K. Langhard visited the Leading Prosecutor Peter Pellegrini and told him they want to know when Rudolf Elmer will be released due to the fact that the bank considers him as a very dangerous person. On top of it those two gentlemen complained that just that very morning an attack was carried out against the bank. The way it was expressed it appeared that Rudolf Elmer is one of the culprits! This is the fine art of Julius Baer to spoil repuation of an innocent person! The prosecutor requested after that visit a second psychological evaluation of Rudolf Elmer in respect of being a dangerous person!
21 Beilage Aktennotiz RE gefaehrl 201101
Adobe Acrobat Dokument 1.0 MB

EXPLANATION: Prosecution and the judges made up a wonderful story, however, they lack of looking at the major and crucial question

 

"Who controlled the email account "Robin.hood3055@yahoo.com?"

 

This important question was not answered by the judges because it would have made clear that Rudolf Elmer could not have been the sender of the "Hi, Dirty Pig - email to Christoph Hiestand! The question was simple ignored because it is a crucial fact in favour of Rudolf Elmer!!

Here the facts: on Tuesday Sept 6th, 2007 an email was sent to Christoph Hiestand with "Subject: Are you still alive? That will change soon!" from the email account "robin.hood3055@yahoo.ca". The IP address of the sender was 80.65.241.180 which points to the ADSL account provided for telephone number 673843, the Sefton Hotel PLC, Harris Promenade, Douglas, Isle of Man.  
First conclusion: the sender of above email must have been in the Sefton Hotel at 01.32.22 - 0400 (EDT) which means at 01.32 AM night time!

The email "hi dirty pig" was sent from the email account "robin.hood3055@yahoo.ca" according to the attached indictment. From this account we have learned that it is controlled out of the Isle of Man respectively Selfton Hotel!

The Attorney General of Isle of Man confirmed to Zurich`s Prosecution Office on March 18th, 2008 that


1st) "there is no record of anyone by the name Elmer staying there (Sefton Hotel) at the relevant time


2nd) "there is no trace of the name Elmer Rudolf Mathias as a holder of an email account with Manx Telecom (robin.hood3055@yahoo.ca and rfdghdda@mail.com and robin.hood@yahoo.ca.

 

3rd) the relevant IP address (80.65.241.180) was assigned to the ADSL account provided for telephone number 673843, the Sefton Hotel PLC, Hariss Promenade, Douglas, Isle of Man.

 

4th) the bomb threat which was sent to Tagesanzeiger in Zurich related to Julius Baer from the email account of Isle of Man (ADSL account) which was set up with Manx Telecom DSL network again Isle of Man.