The Many Losers

The Truth and Justice

The real losers were the truth and justice. Sadly because the truth did never come out – at least was not allowed to come out in the open.

Justice which turned into injustice which in reality took place – even in Denmark, a country which pride itself of human rights.

As I have stated other places on these pages it was not a “victory” for me to see Denmark judged, in fact, no victory at all. I felt like others who have suffered grave injustices that nothing can ever replace the injustices suffered and certainly not some court, even the European Court of Human Rights. A real victim of injustices is a corpse, not a living thing – it is lying there DEAD.

Denmark

Denmark was the real loser since the authorities broke the European Convention of Human Rights with their injustice; something which a state like Denmark is not worthy of. They did not break with something trivial in human rights, they broke one of the European Convention for Human Right which is the foundation of law, namely providing a fair trial.

Denmark had previously kept a “clean” slate and had not lost a case at the Court of Human Rights for more than forty years, since their accession to the Convention in 1949.

The Court of Human Rights verdict did bring some realism to the reality as to Denmark’s reputation because injustices did take place in Denmark and still do take place I am sure. Nevertheless, I believe that Denmark somehow lost something very special, like when a woman loses her virginity, which meant they could not just point at other nation’s injustices in the future since they were not faultless themselves. When you live in a glasshouse, you can hardly throw stones at others.

One respected academic Professor of Law Ditlev Tamm has said that a “judicial revolutions as to human right” has taken place in Denmark. Some law academics have expressed that big changes have taken place in the judicial mentality. Moreover, the judgement in my case at the Court of Human Rights was a “prestige loss” for Denmark causing tremors in the judicial system. I have always maintained that big changes to any system in Europe have to come from outside the country.

Since my judgement against Denmark, several more cases have gone forward to the European Commission of Human Rights and Denmark has also made more losses at the Court. Injustices do happen – even in Denmark!

Despite, the fact, that I won the first case against Denmark at the European Court of Human Rights, and a judgement by the full 17 member’s Court, if you search (https://www.humanrights.dk) for my name in their extensive online library, one will not find any result, neither by my name or my case at the ECHR. The institute operates with a budget well in excess of 130 million D.Kroner. Obviously, they are totally obedient to their paymaster, and the last thing they want to show the world is to show the truth as to torture, political and judiciary corruption in Denmark in 1980s. When I made my first application to the European Commission of Human Rights, in August 1980, I had no Human Rights lawyers to help me, moreover, anyone in Denmark. My defence lawyer Advocat Jørgen Jacobsen helped to get the proper forms for an Applications, but since his English was limited, he could not assist. The fact that I was alone, allowed the Special Prosecution to hold back all communication with the European Commission of Human Rights for 26 months, preventing me of taking my complaint as to my solitary confinement torture forward to the Court.

Jens Elo Rytter, Professor of Law at Copenhagen University stated some years ago (see Amnesty International Denmark) that the judgment in Strasbourg was a wake-up call for Denmark and came as a chock. According to Geoffrey Robertson QC, who represented me in the final stages at the court hearings in Strasbourg, Denmark was so confident of winning, that they invited every law student, in Denmark, to Strasbourg, and more than 100 law student went to Strasbourg. Considering that several countries TV crew was recording the court hearings, but not Danish TV, I am not surprised by this fact. This was the full Court with 17 Judges from 17 member countries. Geoffrey’s assistant Kier Starmer worked with me and made his first visit abroad to Strasbourg. Years later he becomes the head of the British Public Prosecution and later the possible leader of the Labour Party. Geoffrey claim in his new book: Rather His Own Man: In Court with Tyrants, Tarts and Troublemakers, that my case was the most important case, as to human rights, that he has been involved in and he was involved in so many cases. Geoffrey is the leading Human Rights barrister in the United Kingdom and a United Nation Judge.

The Danish Media

The Danish media was a great loser; they had an obligation to expose injustices in the system and bring the truth and the real story to the public. But instead, the media took the easy way out and served the authorities as henchmen, denying me a fair trial. The Danish press was not worthy of its responsibility. Media publishers have power without responsibility.

The free press does have a great responsibility as the most important mechanisms for ensuring that the government respects the rights of its citizens.

Most of the Danish media failed badly in ensuring my rights were met, such as being treated fairly and according to basic human rights – that you are innocent until proven guilty.

Most of the Clients of SCE

It is difficult for me to quantify the many losses since one cannot quantify other peoples’ anxiety and worry. So many hundreds of investors lost money as a result of Bagmandspolitiet action – totally unnecessary. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that my family and I lost the greatest amount, both intangibles and intangibles losses.

The large amounts of assets were totally squandered by the Bagmandspolitiet and the authorities’ concerted actions with regards to the companies, and the potential in the years to come for these entities.

I personally offered to bring DKr.12-14 million to Denmark in February 1980, just after my arrest and solitary confinement, but neither Bagmandspolitiet nor the authorities liked that because then they could not justify their actions on the 31st January 1980 – arresting me for open TV and most of all closing the companies.

As to the investors, I really felt bad that it was some of the loyal clients of the companies who lost out. These clients should know that I, “come snow, come rain“, would have fulfilled all of our obligations and their purchases and investments.

The companies and I had fulfilled our entire obligation until the day of my arrest and the closing of the companies, and this fact cannot be disputed.

Being unable to do anything from my solitary confinement in the four to six weeks after the event, I was unable to benefit from the knowledge I had on the markets and the considerable potential of the markets. This was a crucial time and a great opportunity which so rarely come along in life. Knowing that the prices of precious metal would crash for certain, and being unable to take advantage of this, caused me considerable frustration and pain in my solitary confinement, a frustration which turned to depression. Looking back today on the many investors, I with considerable effort had to convince, buying palladium through the years at under 50 US Dollars per troy. oz, I am pleased to see that palladium is trading at over 1500 USD today.

The many losses can be summarised somewhat by the tangible and the intangible losses, where I consider the intangible losses the greatest, like Denmark’s loss of reputation with regards to human rights.

The tangible losses were the money lost by the clients of the companies, the huge loss of my assets and my shareholdings in the many companies and the ultimate cost to the Danish taxpayers from the authorities’ actions.

The intangible losses included all the terrible anguish and distress felt by so many clients of the companies and their families, my staff of the companies and for my family and me.

The Danish Tax Payers

Although I consider that the biggest loser was Truth and Justice. The Danish taxpayers were the big losers in the action by Bagmandspolitiet (SØK) which cost the authorities possibly up to 50 million kroner. Nevertheless, the biggest tangible losses were made by the many investors in SCE ApS, the staff, my family and me because of the future potential and profitability of the companies.

The investors in SCE ApS, who speculated in 1977 – 1978, bought silver, platinum or rhodium by Deferred Delivery Contracts (margin speculation) and before October 1979 would have received their huge profits; instead they all lost out due to the action taken by the Danish authorities and the way the liquidators acted as henchmen for the Danish authorities. Worst the many investors who had taken my advice and purchased for delivery.

As to all these investors in SCE ApS, it is a fact that I had previously shown my total support to this company and my willingness to back up the company financially, including from my Swiss companies. Until my arrest, every client had received fulfilment on their contract and company undertaking.

Winners?

I did win against Denmark at the European Court of Human Rights, but it was not worth it considering all the injustices I suffered before since these injustices and losses were far greater to my family and me.

One can consider that Denmark was also a winner in many ways. The big changes to the Danish justice system had to come from outside, such dramatic changes could only be enacted from outside the system.

I understand that there have been many changes made to the Administration of Justice Acts (Retsplejeloven), since my time. As I am not familiar with these changes I leave it to others to comment, nevertheless big changes have been made since 1984 and after the judgement against Denmark at the European Court.

Other winners: some made concrete money on this tragic ordeal, such as the accountants helping Bagmandspolitiet to justify their actions; they walked away with more than to D.kr. 5 million in fees.

The leeches and vultures as I call them, the lawyers and liquidators made their fees and cuts as always, mostly on misery. After all, that is their profession. Following my case, many individual investors had cases running with the fiscal authorities for years where lawyers charged their fees, I am sure.

Possibly the biggest winners were the clients of the companies who had entered into contracts on margin “speculations” in the months before the closing of the companies.

These clients were able to get away with not paying for their true losses, even at the time of my arrest and the closing down of the companies. All of these investors would have made huge losses if the authorities had not closed SCE and arrested me.

Some of these investors had considerable influence in the Danish society and due to the action taken by the authorities, ultimately gained by not having to pay their losses from their speculations. Speculation they themselves had entered in to by buying precious metal on margin and indeed agreeing to a contract, which the Danish authorities conveniently made non-void.

In the age of WikiLeaks, it is my intention to list all of the clients, with names on this web site; this may bring out some dislikes, but it may also bring something positive with regards to the people of influence who either kept quiet or passively witnessed all the injustices at the time.

I said from the first day of my arrest that I was solvent – the auditors later confirmed this.

So how could the companies and I be declared bankrupt?

At the outset of the trial in the lower court (Copenhagen City Court), my defence attorney Folmer Reindel said to a leading newspaper, Berlingske Tidende:

 “With the collaboration between the judge (Claus Larsen), the prosecution and the prison services, which consequence seriously affected and prevented the defence – I fear a miscarriage of justice”

“Med det samarbejde, der I sagen foregår mellem dommeren, fængselsvæsenet og anklagemyndigheden, og hvis konsekvens er en væsentlig hindring af forsvarets mulighed, frygter jeg et justitsmord”

At the outset of the appeal trial at the High Court, Folmer Reindel said to the Court

“The Danish National Bank, the Ministry of Trade, the Company Register and Copenhagen tax authorities all conspired against Hauschildt and the companies whilst using the involvement of the Ministry of Justice, the Special Prosecution and court as henchmen”

It was obvious to everyone except the tabloid media.

Spreading the Cancer of Mediocrity

Denmark is a small community and is not the place for anyone who has something great to give or raise their head above the parapet.

Danes just have to be so proletarian – små borgerlige – this is their aspiration so very few Danes dare to be something different. To be a proletarian is their aim – and never forget – not to stray, to be just a little different can’t be accepted. This attitude can sadly also be found in many parts of the world and in different societies.

Many good Danes have fallen foul to the Danish “Jantelov”. Some left Denmark and created something great in other societies. A loss to Denmark of its sons and daughters.

As to the media, there seems to be a bias in most news reporting; it is daily that we see reporters lie by inference and omission without any accountability. I have seen well-intentioned news publications fly into a state of high dudgeon and defend their reporter’s dubious behaviour on the premise of newsroom morale and press independence.

Media publishers do have power without responsibility.

The Danish media failed in its responsibility; journalists made no objective inquiry to determine the real background of the events which took place on the 31st January 1980, moreover the damages which had been caused that first day with the closing of the companies.

After enduring 4 years of pre-trial restrictive imprisonment and long solitary confinement, I had to endure editorial in the tabloid press saying “The gilded Silver king was the best paid prisoned in the country, shovelling money from my prison cell”.

Apart from the fact that I was not a “prisoner”, such editorial at a time when 5 judges in the High Court was considering my appeal, shows clearly the pre-judicial bias from the Danish media – A Media Lynching.

A few serious journalists, such as Leif Blædel and Rolf Bagger, later became aware of what was taking place, but then it was too late and the damage had been done.

Rolf Bagger asked some serious questions as to the justice system in Denmark and Bagmandspolitiet in a large article in Berlingske Tidende Weekendavisen. (see: Bagmandspolitiet og Retsikkerheden ). The media really missed the underlying story and truth – the justice system reflected a political view where “profits” and “speculations” had become ugly words. The justice system had failed to furnish the mechanisms for preventing incompetent people from finding their way into the process, accumulating important responsibilities and surviving in spite of the glaring injustices that they perpetrate.

Something the media in Russia or DDR could do nothing about, whereas in Denmark it had such possibility, but moreover the obligation to do something about.