Mr. A. H. Winter
This is the first of a series of exhibits at an index level, that shall be followed by exhibits going in depth with details of the meanings of elements involved in the relationship between a controlling or directing mind, and a computer operator whose behavioural pattern would very distinct from that of the controller.
EVIDENCE in support of previous emails. EXHIBITS 1,2,3 with illustrations.
OPEN LETTER by emails to,
President of the European commission, José Manuel Barroso
Vice President Franco Frattini
EU Enlargement Commissioner, Olli Rehn
Wed, 5 Apr 2006 14:49:27
Ref: AW / 07031322b Dossar 9288/2003, Timisoara.
Dear kind Sirs,
Following my letter of yesterday, please find enclosed a mere sample of the evidence I have to rely on for the allegations made so far.
I should point out that this is partial evidence only, and a considerable file exists of telephone conversations and other exchanges. The conclusions are colorised in blue.
The three illustrations shown represent about 5-8% of all communications to date, not including Faxes, Telephone calls, and Letters by post.
They are only the synopsis, each entry can be investigated to detail with precision for the machine specifics, and location it was opened on. One could go to the ISP with a court order and thereafter get the physical address.
A brief explanation of the value of this evidence follows.
Thank you for your kind attention.
Yours sincerely,
A. H. Winter.
A.H. Winter B.A. Lit., B.A. Phil (Hons), Additional interests: Psychology, Law, Shakespeare, Music. Email: general_aw@btinternet.com
Illustration 1. Details
This illustration is similar to 3 below, except it shows emails dated October and November 2003.
All those marked with a green tick on the left, and showing a date on the right are those that were opened and read.
The right hand date can be analysed further, since in the first entry, it shows an opening date of 26th Nov, on sending of 16th,
Further analysis can show it had been opened a number of times, and the date on the right is merely the final opening to date as at 6th April 2006
MOST IMPORTANTLY AGAIN those opened were never replied to also.
The parties that opened the emails are Government website, President, Webmaster in charge of the site who was asked to forward the email to several persons, and the Mayor of Timisoara, who it is alleged may well be implicated in the bribery corruption allegation since the present relative in possession of the property is the grandson of another Mayor in Romania, whose father spent at least three times in prison during the past dictatorship, on charges of theft and deception. Mrs. Winter had visited him in the prison as a young child.
The reasonable inference to be drawn from the last illustrations is that the emails WERE opened and read, and the absence of response is substantive, and unequivocal evidence of willful negligence where the agenda is of a most serious kind having a bearing on the criminal allegations I have been making for some years.
These emails, were ALL copied and faxed to the court in Timisoara, and their very important contents were:
A request that the Mayor pass the contents to the Land Registry Office (In the same building) that the property in question was to have a Charge. Caution and Freezing order, on it prior to succession to the remaining relative. The Romanian term used was 'intimpinare'.
A separate request that the documents of the claim and defence service pack be sent to the defendant.
A further request that an 'ex parte' application for seizure of all the deceased documents, bank details etc, were to be taken from the property of the deceased, and held at the Court.
All the requests and applications under 4 above were read, understood, payment locally was ready, and all willfully ignored.
Illustration 1.
Illustration 2. Details.
This is a simple screen copy of the final email attempting to persuade the monitors that while preferring to keep the complaint within the borders of Romania, the response, and consequential insult to ones intelligence is a complete exhaustion of all possible remedies locally, under the rules for monitoring judicial complaints, and the complaint would now move to the European authorities, commencing with yourselves, then Foreign ministers, the OHCHR, other relevant countries Ministers, and the world wide web.
The illustration is a screen copy that is the RESULT of sending an email, it is the sender's and website's copy of what has been transmitted, but of course the reading of it relies on the telephonic confirmation that such emails do get scrutinised.
Please note the name of the newly appointed minister for anti corruption and abuse remedial reforms, Ms. Macovei.
It is reasonable to infer that if all parties to whom the emails were sent, DID read them, then the omission of a reply is WILLFUL NEGLIGENCE, and of a very severe kind bearing in mind what the Government is attempting to present for its candidature.
The willful negligence is probably the result of a policy decision at central government level.
Illustration 2.
Illustration 3 details:
is a section of 14 Emails sent to various departments of Public relations at the Ministry of Justice, (eg: relatiipublice@just.ro) each is an open letter to different departments, no duplication in the set. The right hand column is the opening status as at todays date 6th April 2006. NONE opened.
Those marked retract on the right hand side, are sent using a method that is legally registered, namely it cannot be viewed without opening it on the site where the Email resides. Once opened I am notified.
Those sent marked 'not yet', are transmitted openly trusting the recipient will read them normally, but with some knowledge and skill can be defeated in notification.
The entire set was duplicated through the normal Email channels on the government website as shown in illustration 2. They may have been read, and I have no knowledge of the reading since it is a government website.
Most importantly however, NONE have been replied to.
Most likely the copies sent through the government website were opened, and SHOULD have been passed on to the Prime Minister, President and Minister of Justice. If not then the scrutiniser is guilty of misprision of duty.
I was assured, on the telephone, that all emails through the government website get examined by the two people referred to in the first letter of yesterday.
A reasonable and unequivocal inference from the contextual evidence would be for the 1st illustration that the copies sent via the government website, were examined, it is undetermined if the observers carried out their duties to pass them on, but in Romania such an omission would have sever consequences.
All other transmissions especially the retract ones have not been opened at all, making all web addresses a complete sham, empty letterbox or disposal bin where Emails merely accumulate and NEVER get read. Please see Illustration 1, showing the same situation for 2003, but with some readings having been recorded.
Illustration 3.
ALL sent (March 2006) Open letter, copied to various departments.
End of exhibits 1,2,3