The Falsification of the Bankruptcies

The Commercial Court (Sø- og Handelsretten)

What was most disgraceful was the incompetent way that the Maritime and Commercial Court (Sø-og Handelsretten) dealt with my companies and me.

The court totally ignored important facts and the law. Judge Mette Christensen acted with total contempt of facts; with a blatant disregard of the law and justice, making fatal and serious decisions without any documentation present.

I was brought straight from a solitary confined cell, taken out of bed early morning directly to the Commercial Court mostly without warnings – a confined cell where I had been alone for weeks without speaking to anyone – and now I had certainly found myself surrounded by many people in a courtroom filled with lawyers and civil servants.

I felt mentally ill from depression, despair, anxiety with lack of sleep having just been taken from a solitary confinement cell to the Commercial Court full of people.

Worst I did not have any legal representation or any documentation; everything I said was ridiculed and laughed at mostly by the several members from the Special Prosecution (Bagmandspolitiet) who had seized all documentation from our offices.

Judge Mette Christensen was without any morale and far too incompetent when it came to seeing the facts in front of her. Later I heard that Bøje Nielsen was equally subjected to the injustices some years later by the same court and Judge Mette Christensen – he should not have been declared bankrupt either.

How was this possible?

The Special Prosecution (Bagmandspolitiet) had seized all documentation and I had no legal representation during the important meetings at the Commercial Court.

I had no access to any papers and could only speak out about facts and figures in my head, which later was confirmed to be correct by the Special Prosecutions auditors. Nevertheless, at the time of these important court hearings in January and February 1980, everything I said was ignored and scorned upon by the many members present from the Special prosecution. The court simply did not want to hear anything related to the facts and truth and just acted as a henchman for the Special Prosecution, like a court in Moscow at the time.

Although, that Børsen newspaper reported that the defence had received permission from the court to employ an auditor, such an auditor was never given access to the companies account at the time. Not even my defence had access to see the accounts as they all were with Bagmandspolitiet seized from the offices of the companies.

I am still confounded by the fact that Bagmandspolitiet could steal so many of my companies and my assets abroad whilst using entirely direct lies as well as false statements and facts. I see no difference between their acts and that of a bank robber – both acts are criminal. Conveniently I was locked up in solitary confinement.

The above should be seen in relation to the fact that the auditors several years later confirmed that I was indeed solvent at the time of my arrest and it was correct what I had told the Commercial Court at the time. All this documentation had been seized by Bagmandspolitiet.

I told the court in detail of all my assets including my deposit in London of US$1,85 million (Bank Julius Baer – Sept. 2. 1980 Call Money US$ 1.85 M). All statements and confirmations were sent to Copenhagen to my office (see Bank Statement – M.Hauschildt & Cie 1980 Bank Julius Bar earning interest income of US$47.894.44 in the period 28th January until 31st March, an another US 56,777 to the end of June 1980 from Bank Julius Baer.)These statements were always being sent to me at my office in Denmark as I had nothing to hide as to such financial transactions. The National Bank had years earlier (when I moved to Denmark) accepted that I was both a foreign Dane and a Domestic Dane for Exchange Control purposes (Dansk valuta udlænding og dansk valutaindlænding).

The auditor also confirmed that one of my companies SCE A/S would be solvent with more than 60 million kroner less than two months after my arrest and the closing of the companies, something I pointed out to the Commercial Court at the time, but totally ignored, even by the Supreme Court two months later in May 1980.

The Need to Falsify the Truth and get the Companies Closed

It was imperative for the Danish authorities and the Special Prosecution to get the Danish companies wound up and closed and then to declare me bankrupt. When I was able to get a typewriter into my solitary confinement, I wrote to the Commercial Court (Skifterettens behandling April 1980) but such information from me was totally ignored by the Court. This action constituted a conspiracy by the Danish State and prejudice in that such irregularity took place:

– The formal registration of the new company (SCE A/S) was deliberately delayed by unnecessary actions, delaying the registration for more than five months according to reports by the Special Prosecution, therefore making me personally responsible.

– During the proceedings at the Commercial Court, I was directly prevented from proving the factual documentation and status of the companies by not having access to the seized material.

The very important auditing report produced by the Special Prosecution during February and March 1980, which clearly confirms my claims to the Court with regards to the company’s assets and liabilities, were never made available to me and the Commercial Court at the time. Neither was the Supreme Court given this data when the Court considered the appeal on May 1980. Bagmandspolitiet deliberately kept all of this data away from the courts. This resulted in the Supreme Court having insufficient and incorrect data at their disposal during the appeal hearing and therefore the judges just rubberstamped the work of Judge Mette Christensen.

I was prevented from a fair representation at the Commercial Court by not having any civil defence during the first seven weeks and actively prevented from any contact with the company’s advisors – thereby causing considerable losses. Furthermore, I was prevented from participating in some hearings at the Commercial Court despite my right to attend; conveniently I was locked up in solitary confinement, not even knowing that such meetings took place in flagrant disrespect for the law and my right to attend.

The dates selected by the liquidators and the henchmen of the Danish authorities for the various estates were the worst possible dates to cause maximum losses to the estate and support Bagmandspolitiet. 

 

 

 

 

How could the court declare me bankrupt?

I did not even have any debtors in Denmark as nearly all of my assets were abroad! Moreover, as even Bagmandspolitiet had to confirm (seeing the auditor’s report), I was solvent considering my assets in M. Hauschildt & Cie in Zurich and what Bagmandspolitiet never found – my assets in UniCapital in Liechtenstein.

I offered the Commercial Court to bring all my assets to Denmark – they just laughed at me and the members from the Special Prosecution chook their heads as “there is no money” – they did not want me to do this. Nevertheless, it was reported next day in the financial newspaper Børsen on the 6th of February 1980. – Considering this was six days after my arrest, how could this be ignored?

How could the Commercial Court declare the “solvent” company Scandinavian Capital Exchange A/S bankrupt, when on the 6th March 1980, the date of the bankruptcy, the company was solvent? How was it possible to keep all the seized documentation away from the Commercial Court and later the Danish Supreme Court?  The public and our client was made fool of by Bagmandspolitiet and the Commercial Court, ignoring what I told them.

Such a statement is not a claim, but facts see the various auditors’ reports, even spending close to 5 million kroner on some auditor Bagmandspolitiet had engaged before my arrest, they could not hide or change this fact. Moreover, the company than would have a surplus of D.Kr. 50 million or more.

I was the unlimited partner in M. Hauschildt et Cie in Zurich and we had net assets in excess of Sw.Fr. 6 million at the time, see below. See further The Companies

The Conspiracy of Holding Back the Company Registration for More than Three Months

The most devastating and worst action by the Danish authorities (apart from my three hundred and nine days of solitary confinement torture), in fact, a non-action which made everything possible for the Danish authorities – was as mentioned previously – the delaying and holding back the registration of SCE A/S for nearly three months. This action was most important for Bagmandspolitiet, otherwise, their action could not proper succeed. Such registration takes a few days but was deliberate delayed.

“The Danish National Bank, The Ministry of Trade and Copenhagen Inland Revenue all conspired against me and the companies whilst using the involvement of the Ministry of Justice, the Special Prosecution, the media and courts as henchmen”

– Advocate Folmer Reindel to the City Court

In early November 1979, we asked the Danish National Bank to bring DKr 5 million to Denmark from my British company, Capital Associates Limited, for Scandinavian Capital Exchange A/S which we had just established in mid-November.

I wanted to fully pay up the capital of DKr 5 million right away in order to show my commitment to the company and its future.

This payment of capital was refused by the Danish National Bank which only allowed DKr 1 million (as they already had plans to take the action against us), but to make matters worse month after month the Company Registrar (Aktieselskabsregisteret), under the Ministry of Industry and Trade (Handelsministeriet), held back the registration of SCE A/S. At one point in mid-January 1980, they told us that they had lost or misplaced all of the documentation and asked us to submit new documentation to the Register. This is the kind of actions which the Danish authorities took against me, the clients and my companies.

Advocate Folmer Reindel told the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg – 26th September 1988:

“It is clear that the Danish authorities had, for a long time, the objective to close down Hauschildt’s successful and profitable business, irrespective that the companies acted correctly and within the Danish law.

From the first day of the action against Hauschildt and his companies, it has been the objective of the Danish authorities to justify their illegal acts at any cost, including keeping Hauschildt in solitary confinement and pre-trial detention for more than four years as a hostage to justice.

The Danish authorities acted within total contempt for the Danish law and justice and the European Human Rights Convention.

Hauschildt and his companies became victims of the Danish State”

No doubt that the Company Register had been informed about my concern by Bagmandspolitiet (listening to our telephone conversations) where I expressed my considerable concern in conversations with the company’s lawyer and legal counsel.

This manipulated delay of holding back the registration for weeks and months by the Company Register ultimately played one of the most important parts in the authorities’ conspiracy since this justified my personal bankruptcy and the cancellation of legal contracts entered in to by the clients of the company. Moreover, the customers who purchased silver and gold during November, December 1979 and January 1980 at very high prices and all saw the price fall from mid-January on, did not have to take their losses, thereby depriving the company under incorporation millions in profit.

The Danish National Bank, The Ministry of Trade and Copenhagen Inland Revenue all conspired against me and the companies whilst using the involvement of the Ministry of Justice, the Special Prosecution and courts as henchmen.

When Inland Revenue asked Bagmandspolitiet to go to court and get a warrant issued for alleged tax evasion, they knew that there was no tax evasion but just a false fabricated claim, to this day I have not seen what alleged tax evasion I should have committed.

I was never prosecuted for tax evasion since there was no tax evasion taking place. What Inland Revenue wanted were the names of the companies’ customers, but what the Danish authorities wanted was to close the companies and stop investors from withdrawing money from their banks and buying gold and silver – all out of reach of the fiscal authorities.

From the first day, I became a prisoner of conscience. I always did consider myself as to “Systemfange” (a prisoner of conscience); the case against me my companies and some of our clients were entirely political. It “saved” Bagmandspolitiet and gave them a “positive” reputation among the public allowing them to continue misusing their power as police and prosecution. 

 

The companies had fulfilled all of their obligations until Mogens Hauschildt arrest for allege tax evasion

Advocate John Korsø-Jensen

The allegation for tax evasion, which was “used” to arrest Mogens Hauschildt with, was fabricated by the authorities in order to legitimise their illegal action and abuse of power.

The allegation was fictitious and never resulted in any indictment; there was no tax evasion.

From the first day of this miscarriage of justice, there has been a closed concerted conspiracy between the special prosecution, which they have themselves “fabricated” and thus instigated the case, the fiscal and financial authorities in Denmark, the courts and the Ministry of Justice.

Advocate Folmer Reindel

Most of the Danish media published, uncritically, all of the stories that they received from Bagmandspolitiet.

All giving headlines despite that most was fabricated lies and malicious innuendoes.

It was important to cause maximum losses for the investors and companies, through the use of the media providing false allegations, lies and a general cover-up of the truth.

After all, Mogens Hauschildt was locked-up and incarcerated in total Solitary Confinement.

Advocate Folmer Reindel

Share This