Updated 27th of September 2013 due to new events: see end of page
GOODBYE MISTER MUHLBERGER!
Letter to the Monegasque Police Chief, Mr André Muhlberger
During this flagrant and continuous denial of justice in the present scandal, the Department of Public Safety, La Sûreté Publique (The Police, and its Monegasque headquarters) got itself a new chief, i.e. Director, Mr. André MUHLBERGER.
Underneath, the reader will be able to take part of a letter sent to the said director.
He did not have the decency to reply to it!
The Police was duly warned already on 13 May 2004 of this individual named Charlotte Shahzada, and of her criminal intentions.
Now not only were the authorities to obey her in her slightest criminal whims, caprices or tantrums. The same authorities let her use the head stationary of a Monegasque defense lawyer, Maître Didier ESCAUT, in a unilateral way.
Thus, the Vice-President of the Court, Mrs Brigitte GAMBARINI was to acknowledge such monstrosity of a document as an order which was to be known as
The Criminal Gambarini Ruling
by now known by the Minister of State, Mr Michel ROGER, who has responded as to demands of legal action regarding this matter.
The incriminated Gambarini has evidently taken direct orders of a swindler, by the remotest ways from any legal a procedure.
The said Brigitte Gambarini is wanted for investigation regarding crimes according to registered complaints that are still pending.
Mrs Gambarini is now President of the Court of first instance, after Mr Philippe NARMINO, responsible nr 1 since the beginning of the present, was to have himself moved up as Director of Judicial Services. Mrs Gambarini has acted within the frame of State-sanctioned burglary, with blackmail on an international scale through means of public forgeries made by public ministerial officials who base themselves on her criminal ruling.
The said Philippe Narmino, President of the Monegasque Red Cross, President of the State Council, Director of Judicial Services, Plenipotentiary Minister (i.e. who alone can legally pronounce a member of the prosecutors’ office to stand in for him, in violation of article 5 § 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights), member of the ex Ambassadors’ Club, President of the new High Council of Magistrates, holder of all powers in Monaco, above those of the Minister of State, among others, chief of the judiciary as of the executive is also wanted for false statement.
The Supreme Court acknowledging the facts of the present affair, there came to be some sixty victims that were to suffer the Police’s selective deaf ear, alongside its active participation in the possibilities for the recently and criminally convicted swindler to take on a criminal career in the Principality.
Some police inspectors have testified their frustration in this case, not least with the following words: “Once arrested and detained [Charlotte Shahzada], the decision to set her free was surely not helping the investigation!”
Whilst the Police made its best, so to speak [sic] to not register the filed complaints from Mrs Monica Fristedt and those of her son, Mrs Fristedt – deprived of accommodation of any kind due to the crimes of which she had just become a victim – was to stay at the Columbus Hotel (ex Abela Hotel).
No sooner had she checked in at the said hotel than she was notified by the police, who had been following her, in rather clumsy a way, regarding “matters concerning her”, to be dealt with at the Police headquarters.
It all turned out to be a failed, uncouth attempt of intimidation.
Contrary to this lousy attempt, Mrs Monica Fristedt used her time to confront the Police with the whole bundle of her case, and signed a complaint that is to be seen as peculiar to the least.
Nevertheless, the Police (André Muhlberger) refuse to this day, nearly seven years later, to give out a copy of the complaint in question. Indeed, the said complaint remains unknown to the Supreme Court, the members (includingcurrent Minister of State Mr. Michel Roger) of which refused the hearing of the police officers summoned to testify as to the mere existence of the said complaint.
To sum it up, one cannot but see for oneself, that the Police refuse to register complaints from their long time privileged (PR on the “Carte de séjour”) residents regarding burglaries.
Even the current Counselor for Foreign Relations, then Counselor for domestic affairs, Mr José BADIA, tried in writing to diminish the value of the claims as well as the seriousness therein amidst the desperate cry for help of Mrs Fristedt, by illegally taking the place of public action, ignoring thus the device according to which criminal matters have priority over the civil ones: “le pénal l’emporte sur le civil“.
He is now to take over after late Mr Rainier IMPERTI, something that we shall not fail to follow, regarding the continuous and / or continuing crimes, not least those pertaining to the staples, marker pen and “IT-bug Affair”.
The Supreme Court wrongly refers to the inexistence of any filed complaints against police officers.
The same Supreme Court, which acknowledges the facts, hence obviously formulates a decision that in itself is legally null and void, taking into consideration the fact that the Chief prosecutor had indeed registered the so called missing complaints against the Police itself, a sine qua non condition, but that said chief prosecutor never gave the whole file to the Supreme Court, since he was one of the accused, and since he obeyed under Mr Narmino, also accused, and summoned to testify as a witness himself, regarding lese-majesty.
Mr André Muhlberger was summoned as a witness before the Supreme Court. His testimonial was refused, as were those of all witnesses, rendering thus the present scandal its continuous and/or continuing character.
Please find below a translation of the letter to which André Muhlberger did not have the decency to respond to, leaving hence Charlotte Shahzada free to pursue her criminal career, with effects far more detrimental than what appears in this judgement.
6 Lacets Saint-Léon
MC 98000 Monaco
Temporary address : […]
E-mail : […]
Le Directeur de la Sûreté Publique, Chief of Monaco’s Police
Monsieur André MUHLBERGER
La Direction de la Sûreté Publique
3 Rue Louis Notari
[…], le 26 octobre 2006
Object : Theft of my jewellery in my apartment, in autumn 2004
On 3 December 2004, I filed a criminal complaint for theft before Capitaine Médard, at the Sûreté Publique.
On the 8 June 2005, I was interrogated by her in the premises of the Sûreté Publique, and I shared then a minutely detailed description of the facts substantiated by pictures of the stolen jewellery, as well as by a certificate of one pair of emerald ear rings of great value (document 1). I also gave her the written confessions by a certain Mrs BOOF, as well as those by the clerc of Maître ESCAUT-MARQUET, Mrs Corinne METIVIER, in which it is stated that these two individuals have carried my jewellery out of my apartment, on the 27 July 2004.
I now wonder about the methods used regarding the Police investigation, especially since I received a strange letter from the Chief prosecutor, Mrs BRUNET-FUSTER, in which she wrote: “non characterized” (document 2). This looks like she has not been given Capitaine Médard’s file.
On 3 January 2005, I gave per fax to the Chief prosecutor at the time, Mr. Daniel SERDET, the names and addresses of all persons connected with the present (proven fact) as well as the name of the individual concerned by my criminal complaint, Miss Charlotte SHAHZADA, since it has been shown that the latter was resident at the location of her address in Nice, before, during and after the burglary (document 3).
As long as my jewellery and other belongings have not been recovered, the police investigation must imperatively go on.
The thefts as such should be a piece of cake to resolve, for any a police officer, since the names of the persons are known to us, but especially since it has been proven that only one person had the keys to my apartment during the period of time when the thefts were committed : Miss Charlotte SHAHZADA.
This person works since a while at MONTE-CARLO TRAVEL MARKET, Hôtel Mirabeau, 1 Avenue Princesse Grace in Monaco.
She illegally uses my name. If she was married to my son David FRISTEDT, a definitive divorce judgment was pronounced last spring. What more is, she seems to indicate to the IPA [International Police Association, Monaco] not only a false name, but also a false address: Indeed, the IPA sends her mail to my address, as if she lived in my place, at the scene of the crime! (document 4)
After a long time without news from the Police, and taking into account the fact that the latter in no way has recovered my jewellery, I asked Capitaine MEDARD to contact Interpol. It seems like she failed to do so (document 5).
For this reason, I contacted Interpol myself, to show them the following website:
Interpol gave me the following advice:
“You should inform the police authorities in charge of the investigations (where you have filed your theft report, probably in Monaco). If they then need international legal assistance, they dispose of the right channels to request this, including Interpol network.”
Evidently, searches through warrants should already have taken place at the home of Charlotte SHAHZADA, but also at the home or offices of her lawyer and the latter’s wife, the bailiff. The person who worked for the bailiff, Mrs Marie BOOF, is of course a key individual in the present.
Nevertheless, it is not too late.
Now I count on You to catch the thief with any co-perpetrator or accomplice in order to find, maybe, the jewellery and other belongings.
Attached documents to the present which contains two pages : nr 1: 10 pages; nr 2: 1 page; nr 3: 2 pages; nr 4: 2 pages; nr 5: 1 page. In all, 18 pages
It is worth keeping in mind the fact that it is by the active assistance of the authorities that the Police chose to give a work permit to a non resident against which criminal complaints had previously been filed.
One is asking how many pieces of evidence or warnings it should take for long time privileged residents (PR), victims of continuous and / or continuing crimes in Monaco before some just take it to move it!
Indeed, the Fristedt family has resided in Monaco since 1977.
Regarding the letter here below, certain letters of warning have even been refused with return of unopened post to the sender!
This was the case in one of the letters to His Serene Highness, the Sovereign Prince Albert II of Monaco.
This was also the case regarding a letter sent to and intended for the cousin and godson of the said Serene Highness,Baron Jean-Léonard Taubert-Natta de Massy, wedding witness to Mr David Fristedt. Indeed, the mentioned Baron’s lawyer, Maître Maxime GORRA did the same, i.e. the said lawyer refused a letter to his client and sent it back unopened (!), to the great dismay of many a victim.
Mr André Muhlberger did not respond to the letter above. Please find below a letter of warning towards one of the future victims; a letter then known by the authorities.
10th January 2006
LR/AR [Registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt]
MONTE-CARLO TRAVEL MARKET
ELYSE DANINO, PRESIDENT
HOTEL MIRABEAU 1
AV. PRINCESSE GRACE
MC 98000 MONACO
Dear Mrs Elyse Danino,
You have an employee, Charlotte Shahzada […]. She married my son 2002, hence the name Fristedt.
They will soon be divorced even if Charlotte has tried to avoid the divorce here in Sweden, by hiding her address from the Swedish Authorities, but they finally found her on your address in Mirabeau.
Charlotte Shahzada has been reported to the Police
1. for false allegations to the Court in Monaco
2. for attempt of blackmail regarding my person
3. for burglary and
4. for theft in my home in Monaco. She and/or her companions have stolen jewelleries and other valuable things estimated to about 100 000 Euros.
This is such an appalling matter for the Monaco Police and the affair is on the table of the General Prosecutor. It will probably take some time to find out how she has been able to manipulate so many people not only in Monaco, but also in Sweden. The scandal will probably become official within not too far a future, even if I had preferred if it was kept in a smaller circle of people.
It is impossible to manipulate people so far without using a lot of charm. My son, my friends and myself are the first to admit how easily we have been fooled. But now we are no longer talking about foolish behaviour.
This time it is called Criminal Behaviour.
If Charlotte Shahzada or worse, if she will use the name Fristedt, will represent Monte-Carlo Travel Market at the Grimaldi Forum, we do not think it is a good publicity for your Company.
There are already several people who know the facts in this affair who think it would be devastating if you decide to let Monte-Carlo Travel Market be represented by Charlotte at this important event .
Normally I could have sent this letter by email, but since you surprisingly share your email address with your employee Charlotte Shahzada, you will understand my being unable to do so.
I hope you see this letter as a private one from an old Monaco friend. I felt it was my duty to let you know.
Extract of attached document nr 22 of the filed criminal complaint 6th of June 2011 and HFD15 of the file of 5th of March 2012 before Sweden’s administrative Supreme Court, of public interest since new false allegations on an international level made by Philippe Narmino and Patricia Husson (extract):
Comments on Elyse DANINO’s [herewith ED] e-mail of 25 March 2011 for the attention of one of the victims of MONTE-CARLO TRAVEL MARKET; for all intents and purposes of international public interest..
Her intervention is remarkable and of public interest in the continuous and / or continuing criminal affairs. The Public Safety Department was hence informed the same day for all intents and purposes regarding my ongoing affairs. Considering the Swedish section of the present affair, I view ED’s intervention as övergrepp i rättssak.
Monica Fristedt [herewith MF] has had published a letter signed by herself and which constitutes one of the pieces of evidence in a European, public file.
It is while doing her own research once upon a time on the internet that she discovered that ED, president of Monte-Carlo Travel Market, was employing a swindler under a false name: MF’s family name. ED did not remedy to it, despite warnings. Her deaf ear, as well as her son’s, were to contribute to her company being swindled. ED did nevertheless give the swindler a second chance, which resulted in a criminal trial, in which the swindler was convicted of swindling and breach of trust. MF had declared herself a plaintiff in that affair. The now leaving chief prosecutor – the third in this international scandal – did not communicate this fact to the court, just as ED in turn omitted quite some information for justice as such, regarding the warnings that had been communicated to her and to her company.
On the website www.bimcam.com, she can read the letter of warning to the director of the Public Safety Department [Police], Mr André Muhlberger, in which this website is mentioned.
The Director of Judicial Services Philippe Narmino has been reported to the chief prosecutor for false statement, namely for having contributed to that the swindler could continue to work for Monte-Carlo Travel Market while committing her crimes under my name, i.e. the one preceded by “Madame”, considering the damages suffered not least by MF. Indeed, the swindler did not have the right to use that name, a fact that the Monaco Town Hall confirms, proving thus Mr Narmino’s false statement.
As ED should know, the judgment only takes three victims into consideration, despite their number amounting to dozens, and I am counting generously. These victims have a right to information. The fact for some authorities to not want to instruct filed complaints has lead to a trial that I am legally a stranger of, and which pieces of evidence now have become public. Such public evidence is what I know use and claim in turn.
It is of public interest to get to know which companies in Monaco knowingly employ criminals. ED should agree with that.
It is of public interest to know that the crimes continue to this day.
Thanks among others to ED, the swindler got a suspended sentence. The swindler – full of trust – is currently present on Facebook, let alone under another false name.
It is of public interest to get to know the part played by Monte-Carlo Travel Market in the biggest scandal that the country has known since 1297, especially since, as president of the company, ED has the nerve to exert pressure on MF in order for her to limit herself within her rights, granted by the universal declaration of human Rights.
It is of public interest to know that blackmail on an international scale against myself and mine have been perpetrated by one of Monte-Carlo Travel Market’s employees, and that said employee illegally used the family name of one of its victims.
Talking about internet, Monte-Carlo Travel Market displayed such false name with the culprit’s picture on the company’s own website.
The fact that the president of Monte-Carlo Travel Market shared e-mail address with the swindler of an employee was the reason for the impossibillity to issue any warning via e-mail. This also means that any correspondence between ED and her clients has been trappable and thus possibly copied by the swindler who – it warrants mentioning it – is only on conditional liberty from prison, with obligations attached to it. This situation may very well yield new blackmail situations – if that is not already the case – apart from the ongoing blackmails, to the detriment of Monte-Carlo Travel Market as well as to that of its clients, ancient or future ones.
It is of public interest for Monte-Carlo Travel Market and its clients, that ED declare intention to join as a plaintiff in the laid charge against Mr Philippe Narmino, signed by myself, and copy of which has been sent not least to two chiefs of state. Indeed, this is what awaits the new chief prosecutor on his / her desk.
Monte-Carlo Travel Market had firstly been reported to the Republic’s Prosecutor in Nice [Eric de Montgolfier], competent in view of the real address of the swindler. Several chiefs of state are now concerned. I note that in no way whatsoever, ED has shown herself interested in learning more.
After the telephone conversation that her son, who works for the company, had with me, ED did not act, and her clients were swindled. In spite of what she already knew, she did not deem it appropriate to contact me, not even before arguing her case in court. It is this that should interest her clients, since in her e-mail – the one that rendered the present concerns – she makes publicity for her company (it still blows my mind).
Monte-Carlo Travel Market has contributed to the criminality in Monaco, and to that it has been perpetrated in my name, and indeed in that of my mother, considering the word « Madame » that precedes the name. MF has suffered damages that it would be convenient for ED to repair, if only to prove an eventual good faith. While MF still hasn’t asked for compensation, ED’s mail has quite a lot annoyed me, and I consider it as another piece of information within the “staples, marker pen and IT-bug Affair”, a case for the new chief prosecutor, as well as for the new Councillor for Foreign Affairs, Mr José BADIA.
Copy of the judgment against the swindler has been asked for by a member of the Crown Council.
The European Court of Human Rights has made this file publically available during one year. ED was free to consult it. Now, it is among others I who have it, unless others have exercised their right to obtain copy of it from the said court within the time limit. Journalists have it in their possession too, abroad as well as in Monaco.
The ongoing criminal affairs also take place in Sweden. The documents sent to the Prime Minister, Statsminister Fredrik Reinfeldt, among others, are public, and of public interest.
In light of the crucial information that was given to ED before her employee were to continue her criminal career, and considering what ED did with such information, she should in my opinion show some humility. Indeed, and in retrospect, isn’t she glad that the swindler didn’t have the time to represent her company at the Grimaldi Forum? By all means, at least the Grimaldi Family should be.
Moreover, the people who continue to protect the swindler have shown that they won’t flinch in the face of anything [Article 137 of the Monegasque Criminal Code].
It seems that talking about taking my advice seriously, ED’s decisions so far have proven quite disastrous. Will she one day concur?
ED has been warned, has disregarded the warnings, has become a victim of her own decisions, has contributed to the fact that many another – not least her clients – were to become victims in turn. I note that it still has not crossed her mind to thank me for warning her.
In English, considering the extent of this affair, and in light of yesterday’s e-mail twaddle, Monte-Carlo Travel Market would come down to two words [in English in the original], that illustrate its president: poor judgment. Now she seems to reiterate.
Either ED behaves with ignorance and incompetence, to such extent that one may want to ask oneself how she can be allowed to be an entrepreneur, or she is an accomplice. Either way, it is of public interest to know where she stands.
Last but not least, one may ponder the question as to whereas she has really told everything she knows to her lawyer. I am prepared to inform him / her.
This does not constitute a private letter. Its content is in no way exhaustive.
Kingdom of Sweden, the 26th of March 2011.
[the original signed]
Attached : The questioned e-mail, with its errors and its publicity.
Update 10th of November 2012
“We wish you a hearty welcome in the Principality of Monaco.
These are the last official words of within article 137 of the Monegasque Criminal code incriminated André MUHLBERGER to the FBI (http://www.fbinaa2012.mc/), which he never got the chance to welcome personally before being fired. This seemingly cocaine-tolerant womanizer, appointed to no surprise by NARMINO and H.S.H. Albert II of Monaco “by the Grace of God”, was responsible notably for the security of the Royal guests during the princely wedding of 2011, despite warnings..
So finally, some were forced to realize that Monaco’s very police chief was a real security risk. This is a fact that BIMCAM has known since the beginning, and the logo was well researched. Now the still not free Monaco press was allowed to write about André MUHLBERGER as ex-director. This is unfortunately a late wake-up-call.
Lately, André MUHLBERGER went forum shopping in Paris to have his established nick-name “The Mule” removed from the internet. It was a picture of a mule with his face on top of it.
Apart from lack of legally binding ratione loci (notice to GRECO of the European Council) and amidst a flagrant obstruction of justice on an international scale, BIMCAM notices that this former chief of the Monegasque police did not want to have his own police files against NARMINO removed from the web. These appear as attachment HFD12 in case # 1226-12 before the Kingdom of Sweden’s Administrative Supreme Court.
As stated under topic 13 on this web-based publication, a CV with the names of NARMINO and MUHLBERGER is not the best…
The convicted swindler Charlotte SHAHZADA has a lot to thank André MUHLBERGER for, not least since the 22 of September 2012(end of probation). So can Marie BOOF, bailiff clerk Corinne MÉTIVIER and quite a few more. But trusting criminals is never a good choice: that rule is older than the world’s oldest profession, regarding which André MUHLBERGER lately stated, out of his own volition, that no prostitutes in Monaco are from Asia (which includes Russia east of Ural as well as the Middle East). Why in the world would he specifically feel the urge to come up with such another blunder of his?
Since André MUHLBERGER and convicted swindler Charlotte SHAHZADA are not Monegasques, they can now enjoy one and each others’ company in the Casino de Monte-Carlo.
MIAMI DUDE VS MIAMI DADE CRIMINAL RECORD
André MUHLBERGER’s total lack of moral and judgement is now widely known. To imagine that such an individual bore the heavy responsibility for the princely wedding in Monaco anno 2011 is a chilling thriller, and another scandal in the row, one which responsibility falls upon incriminated Philippe NARMINO’s (see topic 9), a task or stain on Mr DRENO’s desk, fourth chief prosecutor in this stinking scandal (topic 10).
It would henceforth be extremely naive to think that just because Monaco gets a new police chief, the public order were to be reinstalled. Nothing could be further from the truth during NARMINO’s “reign”: the scandals will invariably pop up one after the other, as foreseen.
The faith in law and order has completely crumbled since Philippe NARMINO was put on his throne despite the police reports on him and the strong advice by the founding Director of Monaco Intelligence Service not to appoint NARMINO (see topic 10). Such fact has undoubtedly let some officials feel free to try their wings and enter the criminal world, under NARMINO’s protection, in the misguided belief that as long as one remains loyal to the group, one would be protected. See furthermore on the distinction between practicing members and full members of what BIMCAM after the 2nd of November 2012 has baptized the “Club 137” (topic 15).
NARMINO has shown the path to the abyss, and in Monaco’s interest, it must end NOW! The country can collapse in no time. Its good reputation took a long time to develop. It can be gone sooner than later, and the builders of Monaco as a lucrative, safe place for investors are dead. Monaco’s time in the sunshine might be forever gone, less the laws of Monaco and the latter’s commitments to the Council of Europe be respected without delay whatsoever.
In his letter of resignation, published around the world at the same time as this present publication, the former director of the CIA, Mr David PETRAEUS stated: “I showed extremely poor judgment” and “Such behavior is unacceptable”. Advice to Philippe NARMINO within his preferably imminent letter of resignation in the interest of Monaco’s national security.
The director of Monte-Carlo Travel Market Mrs Elyse DANINO was fooled by André MUHLBERGER – under Philippe NARMINO’s supervision – through a non resident’s work permit within her company under one of NARMINO’s main victim’s name. Mrs DANINO gave the swindler another chance (see above). She paid dearly for such mistake, and for not having listened to the warnings. Now André MUHLBERGER, merely a couple of weeks before being fired, saw to that the swindler not be arrested within her probation time. It is a safe bet that André MUHLBERGER will regret this big time. Some people just never learn…
In view, since the 12th of October 2012, of article 223-6 of the French Criminal Code in relation with the IT-bug..
Update 27 September 2013
HORRIFIC DEATH OF ANDRÉ MUHLBERGER IN FRANCE
PARIS-MATCH: “FIRST DEGREE MURDER?”
The headline “Goodbye […]” on top of this page requires knowledge in French. “Au revoir” (meaning “see you again”) was referring to an oncoming trial against Philippe Narmino in which André Muhlberger was to testify; it was not a “goodbye forever” (adieu) at the time.
Late June 2013, André Muhlbeger died in a horrific way, some 2/10M (185,2 x 2 meters) from the beach Plage des Pissarelles, in Cap d’Ail, France. His body had not yet been fully examined by forensics before his ex-Monegasque employer, the Princely Government who recently fired him (Cf. supra) officially proclaimed that it was an accident. The height of cynicism was reached when this very state announced a mass within the Sainte-Dévote Church – a church that is particularly badly chosen with regards to those who know their Monegasque history – and held on the 5th of July 2013. All before even getting to know the stance of the deceased’s family members, of which at least one is said to have pressed charges, with a second one to follow. Indeed, after Monaco’s communiqué, the Prosecution’s Office in Nice declared that it was not disregarding any trail.
André Muhlberger is said to have been hacked by the propeller or the propellers of a boat / ship of any a mysterious kind. He is said to have suffered lethal wounds involving head and legs.
According to some sources, the Gendarmerie Maritime de Toulon was to take over MRCC (Maritime Rescue Coordination Center). It is this very Gendarmerie that once upon a time was following Philippe Narmino, known – still according to André Muhlberger’s dossier (HFD12, Case 1226-12, Cf. supra) – from the nudist beach located at some 2/10M from the place of the death of The Mule (Monegasque nick-name since 2007 confirmed by Paris-Match).
The very fact for Monaco to enlist before French call up of the successor of Nice’s Chief Prosecutor Monsieur Éric de Montgolfier almost prior to rigor mortis gives hence the officially proclaimed accident, by a foreign State (!) all its never ending doubts, regardless of any a hopefully perfect future investigation by the competent authorities.
The death of André Muhlberger is highly convenient for some, accident or not: a key witness has just been silenced for good, at least as future, verbal testimonials of his be concerned. Indeed, André Muhlberger’s top priority – according to his own verified words, legally certified internationally – and obligation (article 279 of the Monegasque Criminal Code) was at least initially to see to that the ever so alarming police reports on Philippe Narmino be instructed.
Promoted (or forced to become promoted) to the “Police of the Polices” in France after being expelled from Monaco, late André Muhlberger is said to have been longing to go to the Philippines. According to Criminology and Police Research Professor Leif G.W. Persson,, the former police chief and head of the Swedish Police Academy (currently in jail for aggravated rape, torture, abduction and more) Göran Lindberg ought to be thinking of going there too http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/miljonar-efter-ar-i-fangelse, after his release, due in January 2014, after serving 2/3 of his sentence. Any a future relation between Göran Lindberg and Monaco must be monitored, in light of the police reports on Narmino, and in light of Patricia Husson’s dual loyalties, considering Monaco’s unofficial and illegal contacts with Swedish police.
Interpol was given the link to the present website in 2006. When André Muhlberger refused to answer the letter shown above, signed one of the victims, one has to bear in mind that Interpol’s reply was quoted therein:
“You should inform the police authorities in charge of the investigations (where you have filed your theft report, probably in Monaco). If they then need international legal assistance, they dispose of the right channels to request this, including Interpol network.”
The police authority at the time was however the very late André Muhlberger himself.
The chief of Interpol at that very time was Jackie Selebi, now released (for health reasons) from prison despite a conviction of 15 years in jail.
To be continued…