johncons

Stikkord: Arvato-case

  • Enclosure 3.

    SUMMARY MEETING 28/11/06

    Sarah Rushby, HR, Arvato Services.

    Chris Baines, Team-leader, Bon Prix, Arvato Services.

    Aidan Tippins, Senior Team-leader, Arvato Services.

    Erik Ribsskog, Contact Center Representative, MSPA, Arvato Services.

    When the meeting started, I asked Mr. Tippins if it was me that should lead the meeting

    since it was me who wanted to have a meeting regarding this.

    Mr. Tippins said that it wasnt. Then I asked if I could make a presentation, and Mr.

    Tippins said that this was ok.

    I started with handing out an agenda for the presentation, and also copies of the

    summary from my meeting with Line Sletvold on Sunday 26/11/06.

    I suggested that everybody started with reading the summary from that meeting,

    because then everybody would have the details fresh in their head.

    Rushby and Baines read the summary. Tippins said that he had got the summary

    from before.

    When they were finished reading, Rushby asked if she could ask a question, and

    I answered that it was ok.

    Rushby asked me to confirm that the person who had been harassing me in the

    episode surrounding the extra headphones, was wearing a white hooded sweater.

    Rushby and Tippins said that Mr. Baines had told them that he didnt have a

    sweater like this.

    Mr. Tippins said that Mr. Baines most often was wearing black t-shirts, Mr. Tippins

    had himself noticed this, so he didnt think it could have been Mr. Baines.

    I confirmed that I had seen Mr. Baines sit down by a workstation situated on a row

    two rows from the workstation I was sitting with.

    Mr. Tippins said that Mr. Baines was working on the Bon Prix campaign, who were

    situated furter away from our campaign, by the exit-door, so it couldnt have been

    Mr. Baines.

    They said that I must have been mistaken Mr. Baines with another team-leader, a

    team-leader who was working on a campaign closer to our campaign.

    I said that I was sorry if I had made a mistake, but that I would still like to use my

    own judgement regarding this. By that I mean waiting til I had seen what this other

    team-leader looked like, before I would decide if I thought I could have made a

    mistake.

    [After this first episode, I started noticing Mr. Baines, and recognized him on several

    occations every week, so I meant that I had been keeping good track of who he

    was, and before this I hadnt been in any doubt about that it really was him that

    was involved in this episode.

    (From Mr. Tippins unsheduled meeting, earlier on the same day as this meeting, I

    could remember that I got a bit uncertain, but really more confused, because I

    didnt understand what the purpose of this unsheduled meeting really was.)

    This other team-leader must have recembeled Mr. Baines very much. I was 100%

    certain that the person had been wearing a white hooded sweater, with a Nike

    logo on it, so when they told me that Mr. Baines didnt own a sweater like this,

    then this made me a bit uncertain, but I still wanted to trust my own judgement,

    and see with my own eyes how this other team-leader looked, before I said

    anything more about this].

    Mr. Tippins said that he had been showing me the other team-leader earlier this

    day.

    I answered yes, but he was standing quite far away and was wearing office-clothes.

    The persons Mr. Tippins were showing me, one a quite heavily built person, and

    another much less heavily built, was standing with their backs towards us, and

    was about 10-12 meters away.

    I was tired on this meeting, but I could see that they both had short hair, and their

    body-types/(Norwegian ‘holdning’) didnt match eighter.

    I didnt want to acuse the people on this meeting of lying. I thought that the only

    possibilty that it wasnt Mr. Baines, was if it was a person looking almost excactly

    like him that was working there. A relative of Mr. Baines or something like that.

    When Mr. Tippins said that they were thinking of [I asumed] the least heavily built

    of the persons he had been showing me, then I at once was certain that it couldnt

    have been this person, but I wouldnt acuse the people on the meeting of lying.

    So I was feeling a bit uncomfertable, and wanted to speak about something else.

    But when I understood that it was one of the two persons (and then probably the

    less heavily built person) that they were thinking about, then I got suspicious

    that something could be wrong.

    At once when they said that Mr. Baines didnt own a sweater like that, then I got

    suspicious.

    I noticed that Rushby and Tippins was looking "tellingly" at eachother, after they

    saw that I got uncertain when they told me that Mr. Baines didnt own a white

    hooded sweater.

    Like they were having a ‘battleplan’, and that they now had reached a ‘milestone’,

    and that they after this would continue to follow a certain pattern.

    From the beginning of the meeting:

    Rushby: ‘You said that he was wearing a white hooded sweater’.

    Ribsskog: ‘Yes’.

    Tippins: ‘Chris says that he has never owned a sweater like that’. ‘Have you ever

    owned a sweater like that Chris?’.

    Baines: ‘No’.

    Tippins: ‘Chris is usually wearing black t-shirts, so it couldnt have been him’.

    At this point in the meeting, several things hade made me suspicious:

    – The other three persons seemed like they were co-operating, and like they had

    planned a strategy on how they were going to go through with the meeting.

    – Baines almost didnt say anything at all. It seemed clear that he let Tippins

    and Rushby control the meeting. It was like they were defending him.

    – They were saying that Mr. Baines didnt have a white hooded sweater.

    – Mr. Tippins said that Mr. Baines mostly was wearing black t-shirts, so he

    couldnt have been wearing a white hooded sweater (Mr. Tippins meant

    that wearing a white hooded sweater wouldnt be Mr. Baines style).

    But it could have been that Mr. Baines owned a white hooded sweater, but that

    he only had used it one or two times at work, eg. when Mr. Tippins had been having

    a rest-day etc.

    On the meeting earlier this day, the one Mr. Tippins asked for, I was tired. I almost

    never had any conversations with Mr. Tippins. I had been having 3 or 4 conversations

    with Mr. Tippins during a years time.

    1. When Mr. Tippins complained about me reading the newspaper.

    2. When Mr. Tippins asked me if I knew a particular computer-programme, and later

    on the same day when Mr. Tippins didnt say hi when I walked past him.

    3. The meeting when I asked Mr. Tippins about the reasons for why I didnt get to get

    a job-interview etc. [regarding the team-leader position I applied for].

    4. The episode when I got back from my rest-days, and Mr. Tippins had stolen the

    place I used to sit at by the campaign-table.

    He didnt use to say hi when we met [I thought that this could maybe be because of

    some English tradition, because it was a quite big step in status between our positions

    in the company].

    One day, the day of the second episode, I walked past Mr. Tippins on the sidewalk

    outside of the Cunard building. (I was on my way back from my lunch-break). I went

    passed him on the sidewalk, maybe a meter away, turned my head to say hi, but

    he only looked away/down. He didnt want to say hi.

    Recently there had been an episode (episode 4), where Mr. Tippins stole my place

    by the campaign-table while I had some rest-days, about a week before this meeting

    [28/11/06].

    [When I got back after my rest-days, I sat down at my usual place, and when Mr.

    Tippins got to work a couple of hours later.]

    He gave me an ultimatum. He said I had to move within five minutes, or else. (He

    didnt say what would happen, but I feared that I could get fired, so I thought it best

    to move to another workstation).

    And it also was an episode with the newspaper.

    And also a meeting regarding why I hadnt got any feedback on my application for

    the team-leader job.

    I was tired on the unsheduled meeting. But even I was tired, I still was focused and

    aware, because of the episodes earlier [involving Mr. Tippins,. I wasnt used to speak

    much with Mr. Tippins, so the fact that Mr. Tippins asked for an unsheduled meeting

    woke me up]. So I still remember every word from this meeting.

    When Mr. Tippins said that we didnt have a team-leader with the name of Chris

    Baines, then I at first thought that he meant that it must have been a typo

    surrounding a letter in the name, or something like that. That he was picking on

    a detail.

    That his name was Christopher, and only was called Chris, or something like that.

    I didnt ask any questions on this meeting, to make things more clear, because I

    had things like the problems surrounding episode three and four in the back of

    my mind.

    I thought that I had better watch out so that I didnt get even more on bad terms

    with Mr. Tippins, because I didnt want to loose my job or anything like that.

    I thought that the reasons for these questions would seem clearer to me after we

    had been having the sheduled meeting at 11.30.

    So then, when he in the meeting at 11.30 says that the team-leader in the episode

    with the extra headphones, was the same guy (I asumed the one that was least

    heavily built), then I understood that this couldnt be right.

    I thought back on the uncheduled meeting with Mr. Tippins at around 10 am, and

    remember what Mr. Tippins had been saying then, that we didnt have a team-leader

    with the name of Chris Baines.

    I hadnt taken what he said to be very important earlier, because I reconed that the

    reason of why he brought up this with the name, was because there was a problem

    regarding a technicality with the name. And I asumed that the reason for why he

    asked me if it was the small guy standing next to the big guy, would be made

    clear later.

    Now I suddently understood that this wasnt at all about a technicality with the name.

    I now understood that Mr. Tippins wanted me to think that there wasnt any team-

    leader with the name of Chris Baines employed in the company.

    And when I told Mr. Tippins, that [my team-leader] Line Sletvold had told me that his

    name was Chris Baines, then Mr. Tippins must have changed strategy, it seemed,

    and wanted me then to belive that the team-leader was one of the two guys he was

    showing me.

    This was how it seemed to me.

    It was clear to me that something was wrong, but I was still uncertain because of

    the fact that they were saying that Mr. Baines didnt own a white hooded sweater.

    So later, when we were discussing the next incident, and they claimed that Mr.

    Baines behaviour when he didnt say bye, was acceptable and usual, then I

    accepted the appology from Mr. Baines regarding this, even if I thought that

    this behaviour wasnt acceptable for a team-leader.

    Tippins said that in a hectic work environment, it was often that these things

    happened. (That one ignored people and didnt say hi or bye).

    I was a bit afraid that I would end up loosing my job the way the meeting was

    going, so I therefore accepted the appology and we went on.

    Baines said that he had said bye to me once.

    I couldnt remeber this at the meeting, [but I later remembered that it must have

    been probably the Sunday, the first day after the first incident, when I sayd

    load and clear: ‘Bye’, and Baines answered: ‘See you’].

    Baines said that he could remeber having said bye to Osman and me.

    [Baines, by the way, mixed up all the incidents all the time. For instance he

    mixed up the situation when he didnt say bye to me [when I was alone], with the

    incident when Osman and I finished work, and went out at the same time.

    Baines seemed unfocused and disinterested. He let Tippins and Rushby take

    charge in sorting the situation.

    Mr. Tippins and me had to all the time help Mr. Baines, and explain which

    incidents we were discussing.

    Line Sletvold had told me that Mr. Baines was working at the Bon Prix campaign.

    I noticed that he was working with the mail-bags on Sunday [26/11]. On Monday

    [27/11] he had the day off. On Tuesday[28/11], I tryed to notice if he was working,

    when I passed the Bon Prix campaign area, on the way to the toilet.

    And I also tryed to look around and see if I could see him (inbetween the phone-

    calls), butI didnt see him untill about 5 or 10 minutes before the meeting was

    starting, when he was standing [together with Tippins I think] not far from our

    campaign area.

    (Im writing this because Mr. Tippins was asking me in the unsheduled meeting

    if I had been seeing Mr. Baines at work that day.)]

    Then we started talking about the episode surrounding Mr. Baines following me

    on my way home after work.

    Baines said that he hadnt seen me turn around, even if I turned around a lot of

    times, and looked straight at him each time.

    Mr. Tippins said that Mr. Baines probably was wearing his headphones.

    How Rushby acted in the meeting:

    – Was jumping from point to point.

    – Was talking fast.

    – Was interupting.

    – Was having long, fast-speaking summaries, where she mixed together several

    things (Norwegian word: ‘Vas’), to then sneak in a conclusion that was meant

    to be a conclusion that we both agreed on.

    It seemed like she wanted to overload my brain with information/unimportant talk.

    To tire me out, to then sneak in a conclusion, that she meant that we both were

    agreeing on.

    Time after time, I had to ask her to let me finish, to not interupt, to talk clearly

    [so that I could understand what she was saying even if Im Norwegian], and ask

    her to talk about one subject at a time.

    She was trying to confuse me, to get me out of track. All the time I had to try

    to backtrack the discusion, to try to find out what I was really trying to say,

    since she all the interupted me, and tryed to get me out of track.

    Rushby didnt take any consideration to the fact that English is only my second

    language, but was talking fast and tryed to get me out of track.

    I think it would be difficult for someone to follow her, even if they had been living

    in England all their life.

    All the time I had to ask her to let me finish and not interupt me.

    And none of them brought up the point surrounding me been having problems with

    organised criminals in Oslo and Liverpool.

    Noone mentioned this.

    They seemed like they were in balance and acted naturally.

    Mr. Baines seemed dozy and disinterested. Mr. Tippins seemed to act like usual.

    And also Rushby seemed to act natural, even if she got tears in her eyes a couple

    of times, when she didnt sucseed in confusing me/getting me out of track.

    They said that Mr. Baines hadnt seen me, and was only walking the usual way

    he used to walk to the bus.

    I said that I was looking straight at him several times [he looked back at me].

    I was turning around so many times that he must have noticed it.

    I noticed that he wasnt looking straight down, and wasnt looking straight ahead.

    Mr. Tippins said that Mr. Baines probably was walking in his own world listening

    to his walkman.

    [But at the bus-stop, Mr. Baines wasnt wearing any headphones.

    He didnt need to remove any headphones. He put up a ‘stone-face’, he was looking

    unshaven, with long ‘fjones’/hair in his face, and looked a bit unrested.

    He didnt look like he recongnized me at all.

    But I recongnized him. And when I asked him if it was him that was working at

    Arvato, then he said yes.

    I again recognized, like I did when he was passing Leather Lane [the Lane where

    my flat is], that he was wearing a dark coloured parkas with a many-coloured

    (Norwegian: ‘Spraglete’) fur-colar.

    He was also wearing this jacket to work the day after, on Sunday, when he showed

    up at work at Arvato a bit before 12 oclock.]

    Mr. Tippins asked Mr. Baines if he had noticed that it was me [walking in front of him].

    Mr. Baines answered that he hadnt noticed me at all.

    I continued to explain another reason why I found it not likely that Mr. Baines hadnt

    noticed me, people skills.

    When I was working as a store manager in Norway, and was closing the store, then

    I always tryed to remember whom I had said bye to, which way people used to

    walk home etc.

    This to avoid ’embarrasing’ situations, like saying bye to the same person twice etc.

    Because when you are working with people, then you should have a certain amount

    of social intelligence.

    [better: one would asume that to have at least a certain amount of people skills/

    sosial inteligence would be a prerequisite to get a job as a manager.]

    [And its clear that Mr. Baines have got social inteligence/people skills. He smiles,

    has got charm/charisma, it seems to me when his speaking with other people.

    Its seems to me that other people treats him with respect, that hes seem smart,

    that hes aware. And it seems like hes got inteligence from how the look in his

    eyes look.

    It seems clear to me that he doesnt lack eighter regular or social intelligence,

    in other words, he would know how to act if he wants to [it isnt like hes challenged

    when it comes to social or regular inteligence].

    When Mr. Baines is ignoring people, and when hes not acting polite, then his

    doing this on purpose. [he isnt doing this because his challenged when it

    comes to social intelligence].

    So that Mr. Baines shouldnt be aware of the fact that it is me that is walking in

    front of him on the other side of the street, when he a minute or two earlier have

    turned off the lights at Arvato. (Been responsible for ending the shift).

    (To end the shift he needs to know things like that everybody has left the Arvato

    company area, he probably have to check that everyone has written them self

    out on the timesheet, and things like managers have to do when they close

    the Arvato work area.)

    So at this time, he has got the overview of the company-area, and knows that

    Osman and me are the last employees to leave the company-area.

    He refered to Osman in the meeting, so he knew who Osman is, and its no

    doubt that he also knows who I am.

    [Since I have been worked there much longer than Osman, and because of

    the several incidents surrounding him and me earlier, and because he from

    time to time, like this day, is the shift-leader for our campaign, when our

    campaign havent got any team-leader working on a particular shift.]

    So I dont find it probable at all that he doesnt know that its me that is walking

    in front of him.

    Its clear to me that he must know that its me that walks a bit infront of him

    when he walks out of the Cunard builidng.

    Hes walking on the other side of the street. He sees that it is me that turns

    around several times. Hes ignoring me as usual. He puts up a stone-face.

    On purpose he continues to follow me into Dale St, even it must be obvious

    to him, that I dont like that he is following me.]

    The reason that I start to turn around to see if he was walking the same way

    as me, is that I had the previous incidents with him in the back of my head.

    [I think he acted so cold in the incident when he didnt say bye, and from

    the other incident on the same day as he followed me (25/11), when Mr.

    Baines kept starring at me, without any reason, and for a long time, while

    I was working on translating to English the summary from the meeting with

    Line Sletvold 31/10/06 and 11/11/06 on the computer at my workstation by

    our campaign-table.]

    Mr. Tippins says that Mr. Baines have appologised for not saying bye, so I

    didnt have any reason to worry about this incident.

    I understand that Mr. Tippins wants us to shake hands and square it up.

    I answer that Mr. Baines had appologized now in the meeting.

    What Mr. Baines says in the meeting today, didnt have any influence on how

    threatened I felt by the situation on Saturday, three days earlier.

    [Mr. Tippins is trying to bring things out of context].

    I also explain that even if I personaly acepted Mr. Baines’ appology [for not

    saying bye] in the beginning of the meeting, I [looking at the incident in a

    stricly professional way] thinks that Mr. Baines behaviour [in this incident]

    was unaceptable [for a team-leader].

    I explained that the manager (who works with people), is the person who is

    responsible for the communication, who is the professional in this interaction.

    So for a manager, in this very inpolite way, ignoring an employee, and dont

    want to say bye, I find unaceptable.

    Mr. Baines was also my shift-leader on this shift (since our campaign didnt

    have a team-leader on this shift) [and this makes it even less aceptable].

    Noone gives any answer to this.

    We agree that well find out if its probable that the person Mr. Tippins noded

    towards [in the unsheduled meeting 28/11/06], could be the team-leader

    in the first incident.

    The shift-plans would be studied to find out who was working on this

    specific day (the day that incident with the extra headphones happened).

    Then we were going to have a new meeting.

    Rushby asked me what I would do regarding this case in the mean-time.

    I answered that I would continue to seek advice from indipendent

    organisations/institutions regarding how to deal with this matter.

    The meeting is over, Im writing down what we were agreeing. The other

    participants at the meeting is leaving the room while Im writing.

    Rushby enters the room again for some reason.

    She walks out after me, I hold the door to be polite.

    Then we enter the hall in the 2nd floor.

    I waited to see if she would head for the stairs or the elevator. She head

    for the stairs, so I chose to take the elevator.

    Because it became a bit akward when she entered the meeting-room

    again, and I held open one or two doors for her.

    So I found it best to take the elevator, since I thought the situation

    became a bit to social-like, and I thought the situation lacked a bit of

    the distance you’d expect situations at work to have.

    I didnt quite understand the reason for why Rushby went back into the

    meeting-room again.

    She didnt say anything. She didnt explain the reason. And I couldnt see

    that she picked up anything, like something she had forgotten, eighter.

    She also used very long time, and walked very slowly in front of me,

    before it was possible for me to see if she headed for the stairs or

    the elevator.

    So I remember I found the way she behaved a bit peculiar. [thats why

    I chose to include it in the summary].

  • Enclosure 2.

    CONTENCE OF E-MAIL SENT TO MANAGING DIRECTOR IAN CARROL, ARVATO SERVICES

    LIVERPOOL 29/11/06

    Advice from police regarding harassment case

    Hi,

    I went to the St. Annes police office yesterday, regarding a harassment issue that

    has been happening at work and after work, involving Chris Baines, team-leader

    Bon Prix, and me.

    After I got home, the police called me, and adviced me to contact higher management

    because of the obvious problems Ive been having with this person.

    I asked if they meant the Managing Director, and the police-officer said yes.

    We had two meetings about this case at work yesterday. In one meeting, involving

    Senior team-leader Aidan Tippins and me, it seems clear to me that Mr Tippins

    was lying.

    Mr. Tippins said that we didnt have a team-leader with the name of Chris Baines

    in the company.

    I’ll send a summary from this meeting ASAP.

    In the other meeting about this harassment-case, involving Sarah Rushby, Aidan

    Tippins and Chris Baines, it seemed clear to me that they were trying to help

    him covering up.

    It was really three against one. They kept interupting me and bringing things out

    of context. They showed no interest in helping me, or see the case from my

    side. They seemed more interested in what Ive told the police.

    I’ll write a summary from this meeting aswell.

    In another harassment case, which I have contacted core-care about, Mr. Tippins

    have said that he wants to bypass the sequence of events which my line-manager

    and I had agreed on. He wanted to have a meeting about this in the near future.

    My line-manager and me agreed that the sequence of events should be:

    1. I contact core-care and get advice on how tho deal with the harassment-case.

    2. Line (my line-manager) and I, where to have a meeting deciding how we

    should deal with this issue further.

    Mr. Tippins is not paying regards to this agreed schedule, but wants to have the

    meeting when it suits him.

    I’ll send a copy of the e-mail regarding this issue.

    Im going to translate to English a summary from a meeting with my line-manager,

    where I address several other cases.

    These issues seems clear to be serious cases of harassment and breach of

    company-policy.

    I’ll send a copy of the summary ASAP.

    I think these harassment-cases, lies, covering-up and breaching of agreements,

    are so serious, that the only responsible thing to do would be to have a meeting

    about this as soon as possible.

    It seems clear to me that most of, or all of, these harassment-cases and other

    cases, are organised.

    I’ll keep being in contact with the police, core-care, and other relevant institutions,

    to get advice on how to deal with this as professional as possible.

    So hope to hear from you about this as soon as possible.

    Thanks in advance and regards,

    Erik Ribsskog, MSPA.

  • E-mail to the Ministry of Justice, 5/6/08.







    Google Mail – Our ref: TO08/2153







    Google Mail



    Erik Ribsskog

    <eribsskog@gmail.com>




    Our ref: TO08/2153





    Erik Ribsskog

    <eribsskog@gmail.com>





    Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 1:50 AM





    To:

    "Holmes, Ryan" <Ryan.Holmes@justice.gsi.gov.uk>



    Hi,

     

    thank you very much for your e-mail!

     

    I have been thinking about contacting the Law Society, regarding getting a list, like you say,

    for law firms, who take on law-cases on a 'pro bono' service basis.

    But, like I might have forgotten to explain, the Law Society, are already involved in this,

    I have complained about them to the Legal Services Ombudsman, who I have been contacting

    you about.

    So I've maybe lost a bit of confidence, in the Law Society, since I think they gave a bit of wrong

    information, and some errors, that I thought were a bit strange, so they are really involved in this

    from before.

    So then I was wondering about, if it would be right to involve the Law Society again, since they

    are involved from before.

    Maybe there is someone else one could contact about getting the name of companies like this?

    Sorry if I'm asking a lot of questions.

    I've also sent a complaint, on the Merseyside Police, to the IPCC.

    But the IPCC, aren't dealing with the complaint at all, it seems, so I was wondering who I should

    contact then, if I wanted to compain about the IPCC not dealing with the complaint on the Police?

     

    Sorry again that I'm asking so many questions!

    Thanks in advance for the reply!

     

    Yours sincerely,

    Erik Ribsskog

     


    On 4/25/08, Holmes, Ryan <Ryan.Holmes@justice.gsi.gov.uk> wrote:

    Dear Mr Ribsskog

    Thank you for your email reply of 7 April, in which you request further advice on ways to proceed forward with your complaint against the Legal Services Ombudsman (LSO).  To assist you with your concerns, I shall set out the avenues of legal assistance available to you that acknowledge your specific financial concerns.

    Firstly, while I understand you have already been in contact with the Citizen's Advice Bureau (CAB), you may also wish to consider contacting your local Law Centre.  Contact details for your local Law Centre can be found via the Law Centres Federation on 0207 428 4401, or by accessing their website www.lawcentres.org.uk. You may also find it helpful to access the Community Legal Services Direct website for information on providers of legal advice at www.clsdirect.org.uk.  Alternatively, you may choose to contact Community Legal Advice for free confidential help regarding your legal queries on 0845 345 4345.

    Secondly, it may be worth investigating the possibility of a Conditional Fee Agreement (CFA).  This allows a solicitor to accept a case on a 'no won, no fee' basis, under which they receive a fee from you only if the case is won.  It is worth pointing that the solicitor's standard fees can be increased by up to 100% to reflect the degree of risk to the solicitor in taking the case on (the 'success fee').  However, should you lose your case, you may still be liable to pay the successful party's costs, as well as expert witness fees and other disbursements.  There are insurance schemes that, for a premium, provide cover for these items.  As part of the implementation of the Access to Justice Act 1999, we have made it possible for the successful side to recover their lawyer's success fee and insurance premium form the loser. Effectively, this has made the operation of conditional fees fairer and more attractive to clients.

    Thirdly, some solicitors may be prepared to take on your case on a pro bono agreement (i.e. provide you with a free service).  You can contact the Law Society who can provide you with a list of solicitors that may provide pro bono services.  The Law Society is the regulatory body for solicitors in England and Wales and you can write to them at the following address:

    The Law Society

    113 Chancery Lane

    London

    WC2A 1SX

    Tel: 0870 606 2555.

    Alternatively, you can access the Law Society's website at www.solicitors-online.com.

    I do hope that you find this information useful.

    Yours sincerely

    Ryan Holmes

    Legal Services Regulation and Redress Division

    This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

    Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

    This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

    The original of this email was scanned for viruses by the Government Secure Intranet virus scanning service supplied by Cable&Wireless in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM Certificate Number 2007/11/0032.) On leaving the GSi this email was certified virus free.

    Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or recorded for legal purposes.







  • Da jeg ble arrestert for å ødelegge krigsmonumentet utenfor the Cunard Building i Liverpool. (In Norwegian).

    Da jeg ble arrestert for å ødelegge krigsmonumentet utenfor the Cunard Building i Liverpool. (In Norwegian).







    Det var altså politikonstabel James, som satt med hånden foran ansiktet, i første intervju.

    Så sa han, at han hadde ‘doubt’, fordi jeg begynte å prate om mobsters i Arvato-firmaet, i Cunard-building, og at det monumentet var noe Illuminati-greier, og jeg sa at jeg trodde dem brukte nordiske damer som horer/slaver på Microsoft kampanjen, i hvertfall ble dem kontrollert der, og ble fortalt hvor de skulle sitte osv., (har jeg husket/funnet ut etter at jeg jobbet der, og tenkt mer på hva som skjedde der, for det var ganske hektisk).

    Så han konstabel James, sendte meg til legen, for å undersøker om jeg hadde mentale problemer.

    Men legen sa jeg var hundre prosent bra både fysisk og psykisk, og sa jeg prata bedre engelsk enn dem som hadde bodd i England hele livet, så da sa jeg at jeg hadde sikkert blitt dårligere i norsk. (Det var vel fordi jeg prater jo nesten aldri med noen norske for tida antagelig).

    Men men.

    Jeg sa, at om jeg kunne få en ‘norwegian translator’, så sa de at det var ikke noen språkproblemer, fordi de synes jeg prata bra engelsk.

    Men jeg sa, at jeg ville ha det, fordi, at han konstabel James, satt med hånden foran ansiktet, under møte, og mumla (og hadde rare pauser osv).

    Så sa legen at det var greit, pluss en annen konstabel, skallet i 30-årene vel, som var med på møtet hos legen.

    Så klarte de ikke å få tak i noen norsk oversetter.

    Og ‘the solicitor’, Mark, ringte, og han hadde misforstått litt, han begynte å prate om ‘mentale problemer’, (det var det konstabel James, trodde jeg hadde, siden jeg pratet om Illuminati og ‘freemasons’, osv., som han sa, til Sgt. Oldman, etter møte, mens jeg satt like ved.

    The Solicitor, sa også, at jeg ikke måtte sitte med hånden foran munnen, under intervjuet.

    Så han hadde nok misforstått, fordi jeg reagerte på at konstabel James, satt med hånden foran ansiktet, og derfor ville jeg gjerne ha Norwegian translator, siden dette var egentlig en lang historie, som gikk tilbake fra da jeg jobba i Arvato i 2005 og 2006, og det var komplisert å forklare, og det virka litt rart å gå løs på monumentet sånn uten videre, og siden konstabelen hadde ‘doubts’, så synes jeg det ville være bedre å ha en ‘Norwegian translator’, for å unngå eventuelle misforståelser, siden kommunikasjonen mellom meg og konstabel James ikke var helt høyden, med manglende kontakt osv, pga. at konstabelen holdt hånden foran ansiktet under møtet, og mumlet litt, må man vel nesten si, osv.

    Så det var bare meg og konstabel James under det andre intervjuet, men da prata jeg ikke så mye om Illuminati osv., så da fikk jeg gå hjem.

    Så sånn var det.

    Med vennlig hilsen

    Erik Ribsskog

  • Skjult politistat i England? (In Norwegian).

    JA, her gikk venstresidens wonderboy rett til HELVETE!

    Skrevet av Amadeus 03.05.2008 kl. 10:13

    Etter 8 år med venstreradikalt vanstyre, så fikk Livingstone sparken av folket.

    Labour fikk nå det dårligste resultatet på 40 år.

    Bare vent, om ikke lenge så gjør folket det samme med vår udugelige regjering.

    Nytt innlegg Svar på innlegg Varsle

    4

    anbefalinger

    Bra!

    RE: JA, her gikk venstresidens wonderboy rett til HELVETE!

    Skrevet av God Save The Queen! 03.05.2008 kl. 10:23

    Folket?

    Hahahahaha!

    Whatever you’re having i want some!

    Folket (the commons) har aldri hatt en DRITT å si i den

    skjulte politistaten som er England!

    Han gikk nok av fordi høyere skjulte makter ønsket det

    så ellers hadde han ennå sittet.

    Og folket i Norge?

    De har aldri hatt baller nok til å gjøre annet enn å

    gå i udugelige fakkeltog!

    Nytt innlegg Svar på innlegg Varsle

    11

    anbefalinger

    Bra!

    RE: JA, her gikk venstresidens wonderboy rett til HELVETE!

    Skrevet av Amadeus 03.05.2008 kl. 10:32

    Å joda, det var folket som avsatte ham, ikke noen høyere makt.

    Vanlige folk ble dritt lei av hans vanstyre.

    Det er forøvrig ikke "vanlige" folk som går i fakkeltog i Norge.

    Det er vanligvis raddissene og dagdriverne som gjør det.

    Folket, dvs folk flest. De arbeider og skaper de verdiene som gjør at landet er beboelig.

    Raddissene og dagdriverne har ikke satt seg som mål å skape verdier akkurat.

    Nytt innlegg Svar på innlegg Varsle

    4

    anbefalinger

    Bra!

    RE: JA, her gikk venstresidens wonderboy rett til HELVETE!

    Skrevet av Mannen 03.05.2008 kl. 11:47

    Folket flest jobber for de gjeldslaver til de internasjonale bankfamiliene som har infiltrert hver JÆVLA regjering som finnes din fucking idiot!

    Get the bigger picture!

    Eller lev vidre med at "arbeid til folket skaper verdier"!

    Bitch, whatever!!

    Nytt innlegg Svar på innlegg Varsle

    0

    anbefalinger

    Bra!

    RE: JA, her gikk venstresidens wonderboy rett til HELVETE!

    Skrevet av cons 03.05.2008 kl. 21:59

    Jeg tror du kan ha rett i, at det, mer eller mindre, er en skjult politistat, i England.

    Jeg prøvde å rapportere firma jeg jobbet i, Arvato Services Ltd., som drev den skandinaviske Microsoft produkt-aktiveringen i Liverpool, til politiet, for organsiert vedvarende trakassering fra flere ledere og avdelinger i firma, ulovlige ledelsesmetoder (straff, negativ forsterkning/negative reinforcement), og mistanke om misbruk av de nordiske damene som jobbet der.

    Det var omtrent som slaveri å jobbe der.

    Man måtte sitte hele dagen å svare telefoner, og fikk fem sekunder mellom hver telefon, for å logge den forrige telefonen.

    Jeg, som nordmann, måtte svare danske samtaler, på like kort tid, og med høy kvalitet, som f.eks. finner svarte finske samtaler.

    Så det var helt høl i hue, for å si det på godt norsk.

    Og, hvis man brukte mer enn fem sekunder, mellom samtalene, så ble man kjefta på og herja med.

    Også når det gjaldt alt mulig annet.

    Man ble herja med av lederne (team-leaderne) der, og også høyere ledelse, og andre avdelinger i bedriften.

    Og jeg lurer på om noen av de nordiske damene som jobbet der, kom under kontroll av noe lokal mob, som var i f.eks. de andre kampanjene, i dette store firma, som har flere hundre ansatte, i et veldig stort kontorlandskap, i the Cunard Building, som vel må være en av de største kontorbygningene i Nord-Europa, i allefall i Nord-England.

    Men fikk man noe hjelp av poltiiet?

    Neida, de sender en brev, hvor man blir kallt ‘miss’ osv.

    Når man gir dem masse referater fra møter, og kopier av e-poster osv., som viser hva som har foregått.

    Så jeg tror heller poitiet er med på å beskytte den her slavedriften, av nordiske og andre ansatte, både før og etter jobb.

    Med vennlig hilsen

    Erik Ribsskog

    PS.

    Her er link til en side hvor jeg har skrevet litt mer om dette, og man kan se det brevet fra politiet mm.:

    http://nb.xiandos.info/Politiet_i_England

    http://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/2008/05/03/534279.html#comments_container

  • European Human Rights Court: E-mail sent 12/4/08.

    From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
    To: ECHRvisitors@echr.coe.int
    Date: Sat, 12 Apr 2008 00:14:59 +0100
    Subject: Being used as a ‘target guy’ by three different governments.

    Hi,

    I’m a Norwegian citizen living in Britain.

    I have to say I’m a refugee from Norway.

    I know I’m supposed to send a letter to the Hich Court of Human Rights in
    Europe, but I’m having some problems with my printer,
    so I hope it’s alright that I’m sending an e-mail.

    I’ve overheard that I have been followed by some ‘mafia’ in Norway, in 2003.

    In 2005, I was chased away from my uncles farm in Norway, by some people
    with guns and dogs, that I overheard saying that were going
    to shoot me.

    This year, I’ve overheard that I’ve been used as a ‘target-guy’.

    And it seems that I have been having phoney water-meter inspectors from
    probably the CIA in my flat, in 2007.

    I think this started when I went to Detroit in 2005.

    Then I had to wait at the imigration-control, for several hours, being
    questioned, inbetwen the questioning-offices was taking phone-calls.

    Then he said they couldn’t let me in, since I didn’t have a bond in Norway.

    So then I think they started to use me as a target-guy.

    And I also suspect that the Norwegian and British governments are involved.

    Then americans sent me back to Oslo, via Paris, in what seemed like a
    ‘terminal’ (like in the movie) plot, since they had written something in my
    passport,
    that I suspect would have led the French imigration-control, to send me back
    to America again, had they seen what the Americans had written in my
    passport.

    Also, in Britain, the Police have refused to give me any help, but I think
    have just let me go on, even if I suspect there was some mafia, in the
    company, Arvato
    Service Ltd., that I have been working in, in Liverpool, in 2005 and 2006.

    The Police didn’t give me any help or advice, even if I contacted them many
    times, and they still just pretend that there is nothing going on.

    And there are collegues that were working there, that I suspect something
    could have happened with, but the Police just pretend there have been
    nothing going
    on, even if I think it is my right to know what has been going on there,
    since I was working there.

    It was like slavery, working there, and I’m trying to a case ran throug the
    British court-system.

    But the Police wont even look at the case, even if there were being used
    illigal management methods there etc.

    The Police sent me to the CAB, to get the case up for the Crowns Court, but
    no lawyers want to help me, under the Duty Solicitors Programme, and the
    British Police are just harassing and lying etc, so I suspect that there
    could be some type of intellegence-activity, behind this, that no
    organisations or
    institutions want to help me in Norway or Britain, including Amnesty, the
    Red Cross and Human Rights Watch etc.

    I suspect that this could be due to some type of Goverment cover-up plan, in
    connection with what went on at Arvato, where I suspect Nordic women were
    being the subject of traficcing etc.

    I’ve been contacting the Norwegian Special Police, Kripos, but they dont
    anser my calls/emails.

    The organisation responsible for them, Politidirektoratet, dont answer my
    emails.

    The Norwegian embassy in London, and three Norwegian ministries,
    Justisdepartementet (The Justice Dep.), UD (The Foreign Ministry), and
    Fornyings og
    Adminstrasjonsdepartementet. (Translates to Renewal and Administration
    Minstry).

    Neighter of these institutions/ministries are answering my emails.

    I contacted the SMK (The Prime-ministers Office), in Norway.

    And complained on the three ministries.

    But they are ignoring my complaint, they are acting irresponsible, I would
    say, and are just refering me to the Sivilombudsmannen.

    Who is the Ombudsman, in Norway, that deals with irregularitites from the
    Goverment administration.

    But I think, that the Prime Ministers Office, should have a look at this,
    because this is regarding three ministries.

    I think, that the SMK probably are involved, since they wont even look at
    this.

    And it’s not allowed to use ones citizens as target-guys/spies, which it
    seem’s to me that has been going on.

    And I’m not sure if the Sivilombudsmannen, have any real power over the
    Government.

    And I think, using ones citizens as target-guys/spies, on some mafia etc.,
    without even asking the citizen if he want’s this.

    I think this is a serious crime towards the human rights.

    And neighter the Norwegian or British Amnesty or Human Rights Watch, wants
    to help me with this, so I think they are probably being
    told by some Government inteligence not to help me, or something like this.

    So I don’t really know who else that could look at this.

    So I hope the European Human Rights Court have the chance to have a look at
    this!

    Yours sincerely,

    Erik Ribsskog

  • Telefon forrige uke. (In Norwegian).

    Jeg husker fattern ringte i forrige uke.

    Så spurte han hvorfor jeg ikke flytta tilbake til Norge, siden jeg hadde så bra CV osv.

    Så sa jeg det, at jeg dreiv med en sånn Arvato, harassment at work case, osv.

    Og at jeg ikke visste hva som foregikk i forbindelse med det her mafia greiene osv.

    Så sa jeg også det, at det var noen damer på jobben, som hadde vært sykmeldt i to måneder osv., som jeg lurte på hva som hadde skjedd med.

    Så sa fattern, at det var mye misbruk i forbindelse med sånt.

    Med sykelønnsordninger osv.

    Så det bare kom jeg på nå.

    Han sa han hadde begynt med noe distribusjon osv.

    Så det er bra det at han har fått seg jobb osv.

    Selv om han prater litt rart noen ganger.

    Men man kan jo ikke skjønne alt.