Standart News

1.    The establishment of a contact with M. was initiated by all four, including the two travelers and my friend. Currently the task is to get in touch with her when and if she comes here.
2.    After weighing up all facts, looking through the replies of the travelers and meetings with our lawyers (see below)  I arrive at a conclusion that all this is redundant.
3.    We have managed to accelerate the case, your answer is positive, the meeting with the lawyers was fruitful and business-like. Emotions cannot solve any problems.
4.    The idea to step up the case landed on me as early as July – it was a complex idea, one of the stages, should the scenario unfold as it is unfolding nopw – M.Ch. has frozen the case, his case in BAGATZ has lost its topicality, the issue of his citizenship was submitted to the district court exactly due to the adoption of the new law. Of course, no one could foresee the the situation that we are now reading about in the press.  

There are two other indefinite factors:

A)    the case of Raffi and A. – when the prosecution will submit it to court (if at all). We cannot overlook this circumstance
B)    early elections in the country, that might affect the submittance to the court for political reasons; in this sense they only add up the indefinite flavor.
C)    Ensuing from that the very fact that our leading lawyers were prepaired to accelerate the case via the address of Leshem to Weinroth , as well as their consent to keep on writhing legal letters to the newspapers and threatening to lodge a claim for libel (following the example of MIG) is a sufficient impetus under the existing circumstances. The third point are the investigators who were defamed on all levels.

Now comes a serious remark concerning the proceeding of this case:

There is a “plonter” that I can mention today after the analysis of the information.

1.    The situation is deteriorating, up to the failures with Berkovich in Britain. This happened not so much because the system itself is bad, the team is stupid or the rival is stronger. Just the contrary. Here there are many interwoven factors and personalities. This is a long-playing record so we can keep our finger of the pulse only in some definite cases. 2. If we add up the distinct division of the privileged level from the clients, both here and and in your place, we witness lacunas that we could otherwise avoid. The example with the call my friend placed to Berkovich is just a particularity. Berkovich is something more serious. You should note that as early as April, when I found some discrepancies in the letter, in the claim and publications posted on websites, a special man was hired who was assigned a task to prove that these letters were not mailed to Sam from the computer of A.D. Respectively no one authorized Sam himself to represent the organization. By July he had to complete his work. In the end of June I asked him if everything was OK, and he said ‘yes’, he keeps in touch with Ronnie’s lawyers and everything was alright. Now it has all surfaced in the London court and the British press. When I asked Weinstein two days ago whether  he was paid for his work and if he completed it, he answered he didn’t remember. So, why the hell?!

How could we avoid this strategic defeat?

If the privioledged level, which lured me into partnership, could keep on this cooperation we would have had some positive results and the work would have been completed on time. All people would have been informed on both the legal and the PR levels. Both here and there. This is exactly what I one did for Gusinsky without being an expert in jurisprudence, sociology, nor in accounting. I just saw to it that the work entrusted to me keeps on going, giving detailed reports and recommendations to the lawyers and the boss and controlled the executives who took up the orders coming from the office from other agents. To make the budgeting smooth and buttress the whole process. To this end we need only two things: the trust of all acting parties and authorities.  Such a man – in this case – is not needed for management but for following the situation closely and give good and timely  recommendations. To provide a link between the privileged and clients’ levels. Otherwise the mistakes will be repeated in the future only because we failed to closely follow the situation in all its complexity and keep it under control.
Evidently, the privileged level as such cannot do it. It is only a barrier, A fact proving that we are relevant. This cooperation is essential and our ideas sometimes help us.
If you and Marina do not have anything against such a link then we may talk it over. Our lawyers will not oppose it either, for no one will intervene into purely legal matters, of course. It is important to them, too, that your people also know what they are doing, the budgets for the strategic tasks should be ensured on time, as it was in the above-mentioned case,  and that they feel that all issues may be resolved in a prompter way, if necessary, If no – no.

The contact of my friend with M. was her own initiative. This is the reason why I won’t discuss her telephone calls with you. She pursues the legal course and we have nothing to do with it.