KFT / Brockwood Park Bogus Report Was Rejected by Swiss Police

KFT / Brockwood Park Bogus Report Was Rejected by Swiss Police


By Reza Ganjavi


In 2022 I received an email from the Gstaad police that they had received a complaint about some communication with the Brockwood Park / Krishnamurti Foundation Trust. In the months preceding that our taskforce was very busy investigating the management misconduct at the Trust which is a UK tax-exempt, "charitable", non-profit entity which is accountable to the UK Charity Commission and UK tax payers, the public, and friends and students of Krishnamurti ("K") since K was and is a very public figure, and the Trust solicits funding / donations from the public. So this is absolutely a matter of public concern. 


The complaint was absolutely frivolous, unfounded, and designed to silence the critics, and it targeted me because I was the lead investigator for the taskforce.


The Gstaad police wrote me a very inappropriate letter and I pushed back very heavily because it was clear they had not done their due diligence, had not seen any incriminating evidence, and were just contacting me to give me a speech because they had believed the lies of Raman Patel, Mina Masoumian and Nasser Shamim who turned out to be the complainer, based on the description of their profile that the police gave me, and Mina's name. 


KFT/Brockwood had done the same abusive dishonest police report to the UK Police which also rejected their complaint but that turned out to be a huge case of police misconduct because the Hampshire police, after they admitted they had contacted me without seeing any incriminating evidence, and admitting that KFT was NOT able to produce any evidence once it was asked to -- Hampshire police failed to admit to its clear mishandling of the case in regards to communication with me -- and instead decided to try to cover up for their misconduct by twisting facts, like using something that happened at a later date (our lawyer's letter to the Trust and the Trust's preposterous response, as justification for something that happened BEFORE that !!) you cannot justify A by B if B happened after A !! 


I pushed back hard at UK police and escalated the police misconduct to the highest level -- and that is all documented in this report: 


https://www.rezamusic.com/writings/on-j-krishnamurtis-work/uk-police-misconduct-kft-misconduct


UK Police did NOT investigate KFT / Brockwood's bogus report. 


Swiss police did not either. But the letters below illustrate how I pushed back at Swiss Police which did NOT want to tell me who had complained but using the legal process, and rationality, and inquiry and investigative techniques, Gstaad Police finally told me who the complainer was: Mina Masoumian -- and two other people with her -- an Iranian looking man and a tall Indian looking man: Nasser Shamim (Mina's husband) and Raman Patel. Their story of misconduct is documented in this massive investigative report: 


https://www.rezamusic.com/writings/on-j-krishnamurtis-work/uk-police-misconduct-kft-misconduct


Also see my letter to the UK Charity Commission: 


https://www.rezamusic.com/writings/on-j-krishnamurtis-work/krishnamurti-foundation-trust-kft-bogus-police-reports


I am thankful to Gstaad Police for their cooperation. And I know they learned something from this investigation: NEVER contact a member of public with an accusation unless you have incriminating evidence. 


~~~

27 Jul 2022

 

Dear Mr Sahli

 

I am in receipt of your email. I am sure you're a good man and a professional and good at what you do. However, I am very curious if you have investigated the case before you contact me with the warning. I am not at all happy about the warning that you have issued because the complaint that you received is entirely frivolous.

 

I need to see a copy of the complaint that you received in its entirety under GDPR. Please let me know if you can send this to me via email. That would be the preferred way for me. Please let me know when I can expect to receive this. 

 

If you have investigated the case I would like to see evidence to support their claim.

 

The fact is they have no supportive evidence and their claims are just hot air. I act with a team of people who were friends of Krishnamurti and we are very concerned about what is happening there. It is not a private venture. It is a nonprofit charitable trust and it's regulated by the UK charity commission. We have been in touch with the charity commission and we have followed its procedure by contacting the Trust and asking for accountability. They consider this as harassment But it is not. 

 

We have never harassed them and we have never stalked them. Asking for accountability from a charitable trust is not stalking. And we are not at all happy to receive such a warning from the police without supporting evidence. 

 

Please also let me know exactly which book and which articles of law are you alleging that we have violated. I know the StGB quite well. No prosecutor would ever take their case. 

 

Keep in mind evidence has to withstand judicial scrutiny. There are specific laws against harassment, stocking and other unlawful conduct with specific criteria which needs to be fulfilled. Only such evidence is considered as valid. Please provide such evidence to me. But I don't believe you can because we have never acted unlawfully. I await your response and a copy of their complaint. 

 

Regarding the publications, we have acted under our freedom of speech which is a right we must cherish in Switzerland and UK etc. We're not living in a dictatorship where free speech is squashed. We have never defamed them. We have never insulted them. And we have always acted in good faith for the benefit of the Trust. If you have evidence to the contrary please provide it.

 

Also I need to see the date and time of the alleged harassing calls and emails as well as any alleged harassing content or evidence of harassment or other unlawful behavior. I can assure you with great confidence, having studied law deeply around these topics, that there has been no instance of any unlawful behavior from me or our group towards the Trust or School.

 

On the contrary, we have plenty of evidence of mismanagement on their part supported by statements of over 60 people which is being formulated for a formal complaint to the Charity Commission and other UK authorities. We have no plans to change our course of action whatsoever. 

 

If you have not investigated the case and have not seen evidence and yet issued the warning then I expect an apology from the police because that would be very unprofessional. If you have seen the evidence I would like to also see it. I am entitled to it under law.

 

Also keep in mind that false accusation is a criminal offense.

 

Also the entire topic of whether Swiss law has jurisdiction or not is questionable. But it's a moot point because neither I nor any of our group members who live in different countries have in any shape or form violated anyone's rights and we take false accusations very seriously.

 

In fact the Swiss Supreme Court has ruled that defaming parties to authorities is still defamatory.

 

Therefore the Trust has probably broken the law unless you can substantiate your warning with evidence. 

 

And if you merely acted as a transmitter of a message without examining the evidence then please request to see the evidence and if they fail to provide it issue apology to me.

 

You can write me back in German. 

 

Thank you very much for your service to the community. 

 

Best regards


Reza Ganjavi, MBA

_________________________________________________________

 

3 Aug 2022


Dear Mr. Sahli. I am writing to follow up on the email below which I sent you on 27 July. Kindly let me know when I can expect an answer or should I need to escalate. I need a copy of the complaint you received in its entirety. I know under Swiss law and GDPR I am entitled to it. It's just a matter of your procedure. Do you need a copy of my ID in order to send me a PDF? Or ??? I am not in Switzerland so a personal visit to pick it up is not an option. I also have questions for you regarding your investigation of the matter which I need answered but first and foremost is the document itself. I need to know exactly what the accusations are, and if there's any evidence provided (I assume not), and need to know the specifics, and need to know who has specifically filed it, who's signed the complaint, and how the letter was delivered to Gstaad KAPO office.


Please let me know by the end of the day on Monday 8 July 2022 otherwise I will start an escalation process with chief of police in Gstaad, and later chief of KAPO in Bern, and Kantonal Ombundsmann, and whatever else it takes to get the document, and answers to my modest questions.


Many thanks and best regards


R. Ganjavi

_________________________________________________________

 

9 Aug 2022


WICHTIG & ZEITKRITISCH / IMPORTANT & TIME SENSITIVE


Dear Mr. Sahli, please forward a copy of this to Ms. Mani, as you told me on the phone you will. Thank you.


To:


 Dear Ms. Mani, Mr. Sahli


In my talk with Mr. Sahli today several important facts came to surface:


- Three (3) people came to the Gstaad station portraying themselves as representatives of Brockwood Park.


- They did not submit a written complaint.


- Mr. Sahli did not check their IDs, and has no way of knowing if they really were official representatives of Brockwood or not.


- Mr. Sahli trusted them by default and took their word that their rights were violated.


- Mr. Sahli did not examine any evidence.


- Mr. Sahli did not see any evidence of wrongdoing by me or anyone in our team who have been working diligently at receiving and analyzing statements by over sixty (60) people who've reported about alleged mismanagement at Brockwood Park School / Krishnamurti Foundation Trust (KFT).


- Mr. Sahli said he did not have time to read anything and that the police don't have the time to look at evidence in a case where they think about making a quick "friendly" solution. But in this case, as much as Mr. Sahli's desire to for a friendly solution is admirable, it is absolutely unacceptable that this so-called friendly solution would involve implicit false accusation of wrongdoing of someone who is totally innocent, who has not violated anyone's right, and there's absolutely no evidence to the contrary. Mr. Sahli not having time to look at evidence is not an acceptable excuse. The police must do its due diligence before it contacts people, even with a so-called friendly solution which in this case turned out to be extremely offensive.


- Despite not having seen any evidence, Mr. Sahli decided to write to me and propose a "friendly solution" which implied there was some wrongdoing, any wrongdoing, even one instance -- but fact is Mr. Sahli did not have evidence of even one instance of wrongdoing -- therefore, his writing to me was premature, unprofessional, inappropriate, wrong, and offensive to me and to our group (since we are a group and despite Brockwood's attempts to try to blame the work of our team and over 60 witnesses, on one person, fact is this is a group effort, and KFT/Brockwood's lame attempt at trying to personalize it, minimize it, reduce it, down to one person, is incredibly unintelligent and inappropriate.


- On our call today, Mr. Sahli agreed with me that the correct procedure would have been for the police to examine the evidence and then only contact an accused person if there's any evidence. In this case, there was no evidence.


- I have checked with Cantonal Police offices of three (3) different Swiss Cantons and they have all, unequivocally agreed that the police should not contact an accused person unless there is some evidence of violation of law. In this case there was no evidence. Therefore, Gstaad police made a mistake, and it seems to recognize it, based on my talk with Mr. Sahli -- therefore, I expect an apology.


- I do understand the circumstances that led to Mr. Sahli making the mistake -- he seems to have fallen for their lame strategy to try to quash freedom of speech: They walked in -- and he trusted them -- and acted on it -- but Mr. Sahli made a mistake in trusting them, and made a mistake in not examining if there is evidence.


- Swiss citizens' free speech is protected by Swiss constitution. I and the team of people I am with, have never violated KFT/Brockwood's rights. Just because they do not like us pointing out their alleged mismanagement at KFT/Brockwood evidenced by consistent statements of over sixty (60) people, it does not mean that we are violating their rights.


- For the record, they have never told me or anyone in our team to not contact them except when we wrote back to their lawyer, whose answer to our lawyer's letter contained misrepresentations, distortions, and an utter falsehood presented as fact, and threats. In our response to their lawyer's response to our lawyer, we called out their bluff. We asked them for evidence to support their assertions and threats. In response their lawyer wrote to us that   

That's the only time they asked us not to contact them, and we haven't since because we haven't needed to, and we will contact them if we think we need to - but so far we haven't needed to. We have always had something important to tell them when we did contact them. That will not change in any way. And we have at no time ever engaged in unlawful action against them. They may not like criticism or call for accountability, but that's not harassment or stalking.


- KFT's former director who is still very much close to center of power is a lawyer. So their going to the police was not an act of total ignorance. They should have known that there's absolutely no judicial quality evidence to prove any unlawful behavior on our part. Nevertheless they went to the police to file what we consider to be a bogus complaint. This is in our view similar to a SLAPP lawsuit which is a current topic in UK law and already legislated in the USA: to prevent entities from filing bogus lawsuits designed to shut up critiques.


- We view this going to the police; and then telling the police they do not want to be identified; and then having no evidence to support their claims; as similar to a SLAPP action; except that they apparently used the police -- instead of going through the effort of a civil litigation and the burden of proof, and having to show damages, and having to prove their baseless claims to be true -- as a shot in the dark, to get the police to try to scare or intimidate us in order to quash our freedom of speech. How silly of them if this is what they thought (we can't think of what else could have gone in their minds).


- And how sad that the police fell for their strategy which was apparently to use the police in that way; which is not appropriate, in our view. The police trusted them that they were reporting something legitimate, and the police made the mistake of not looking for any evidence. Evidence matters. Truth matters. Facts matter. No law enforcement or judicial authority should ever act without seeing evidence. Seeking evidence is at the heart of any matters pertaining to law. That step went completely missing in this case, which is a huge police error.

 

NEXT STEPS


I need to know the names of the people who made the complaint. Mr. Sahli said to get their names I have to go to the Cantonal Prosecutor and get them to order the police to give me their names. I checked with other police agencies and did more research about the topic. My conclusion is that under Swiss law, a person who is being complained about has the right to know who the complainer is, unless it's a matter of a law which effects the public, e.g., loud noise at night. In this case, the matter only pertains to me. A bogus complaint was made -- so bogus that the complainer was even afraid of divulging their name -- this is how fake and unsubstantiated the complain was -- and there is no evidence whatsoever of any violation of law.


I have other legal remedies I can utilize to protect my rights, but I'd rather see this topic of the visit to police office by them, which is nothing but noise, finish quickly. But first I need their names and if I get their names, I will not file any complaints with the Swiss authorities against them, or against the police.


I do not believe it should be necessary to burden a cantonal prosecutor to compel the police to release their names. 

But I am hoping that Gstaad police will be cooperative and give me their names, and that will be the end of any legal process in this regard.


So in summary:


Please let me know your decision regarding these two matters by the end of the day on Tuesday 16 August 2022. If you need more time please let me know.


Kind Regards


 Reza Ganjavi

_________________________________________________________

 

10 Aug 2022

 

Rückmeldung von Staatsanwaltschaft Kanton Bern / Time critical | Feedback from prosecutor Canton Bern

 

DEUTSCHE VERSION FOLGT / GERMAN VERSION FOLLOWS


Dear Mr. Sahli, please forward a copy of this to Ms. Mani, as you told me on the phone you will. Thank you.

To:


 Dear Ms. Mani, Mr. Sahli


I just spoke with a prosecutor in canton Bern. He said the police must give me the name, otherwise the police has to provide a specific reason and cite an article of law which gives the police the right to not provide the name. I am entitled to get all the names you have (of all or any of the three persons who came to you in Gstaad purporting to be representatives of Brockwood) under Swiss data protection laws, and BSG 551.1 - Polizeigesetz (PolG) which does not give the police the right to withhold the name of a complainer from a complainee, except in specific cases involving public laws (e.g. making noise late at night) but this is not such a case. This is a (false) private accusation (and without any judicial quality evidence or any evidence to support any accusation of wrongdoing because simply everything we did have been lawful and we have never violated Brockwood's rights, and they have never been able to show any evidence to the contrary).

The prosecutor said the fact that the complainers asked you to not give me their name is not proper legal grounds for withholding their names.

Therefore, I need you to send me the names of the complainers. Please do so via email, or if you must, via secure mail but normal email is ok for me.

If you will not provide the names, please inform me via email and cite the specific article of law that allows you to withhold the name. And please provide the escalation path: to whom I can write to obtain the names?

Please send me this information by the end of the day on Tuesday 16 August 2022. If you need more time please let me know.

Many Thanks & Kind Regards


 Reza Ganjavi

_________________________________________________________

 

17 August 2022

 

Dear Ms. Mani


I have been in touch with your colleague, Mr. Roland Sahli. I sent him two emails last week and asked him to forward them you. I like to have a short phone conversation with you as soon as possible, unless you can send me the names of the people who complained about me (with a totally bogus complaint).


I will forward the emails to you just now. I await your answer, or a time that's good for you for a conversation.


Many thanks and best regards


R. Ganjavi

_________________________________________________________

 

18 August 2022

 

Eskalation / escalation


 Dear Mr. Sahli

 I didn't hear back from you. I am starting to escalate the case. But I want a quick solution ideally. If you give me the names of the persons, I will drop the case and will not file administrative complaints, etc. -- you give me the names and we close the case.

 I will get the names anyway. The easiest way is to get them from you right now and we close the case. Otherwise I have to keep escalating till I get the names, and file administrative complaints along the way about the way this case was handled (no evidence was examined). Going through the prosecutor is not the right way. You saw my note from last week I hope. I have other legal options, but everything is more complicated than you just giving me the names, or telling me in writing on what basis (citing article number) you're withholding the names. They should not be withheld.

 Please let me know.


 Thanks and regards
 R. Ganjavi

_________________________________________________________

 

19 August 2022

 

Case closed

 

Dear Ms. Mani


I obtained the information. Case closed. I would like to thank Mr. Sahli for his cooperation. I understand it was Mina Masoumian who gave her name, and there were two other men with her -- one a tall Indian looking man who was most likely Raman Patel who is an employee of Friedrich Grohe who lives in Rougemont, and the Persian looking man couldn’t be anyone but Mina’s husband Nasser Shamim! How surprising that the very same people who are the heart of the scandals we are investigating made a bogus police report to quash free speech!


I hope Gstaad police learned a lesson from this experience and next time someone comes to the office with a certain claim, the police should check the merits of the claim before acting on it. In this case, their claim had absolutely zero merit, and the police would have come to realize this if it obtained evidence, and examined it critically. I completely understand Mr. Sahli's intentions which were rooted in goodwill and trust of the person who filed the bogus complaint. I hope next time the police investigates if there's evidence, and if necessary the other party can be contacted with a request for information and clarity, and not with an accusatory tone despite the fact the police did not initiate an investigation and effectively did not take the case.


This is a complex area of law, as with defamation -- because many people don't understand laws and think for example, if someone criticizes them they're committing harassment, stalking or defamation -- but the legal threshold for illegal activity needs to be met before presumption of guilt, otherwise, it jeopardizes a fundamental pillar of a civil, democratic society: freedom of speech.


Neither I nor anyone from our team have ever acted unlawfully and disrespectfully towards KFT/Brockwood. We are friends of the founder and have deep concerns about the alleged mismanagement. The document we produced echos voices of over 60 people. KFT/Brockwood has never been able to show any evidence of harassment or stalking. When we asked their lawyer who mentioned those things, to provide any evidence -- even one instance -- she failed, and her response was she's no longer representing them.

Our next step is to file with UK authorities who may decide to investigate KFT/Brockwood and hold it to account.


Best Regards

R. Ganjavi


_________________________________________________________

 

20 August 2022

 

Case closure call

 

Dear Ms. Mani


I hope you had a good vacation. I am assuming you speak English as most Swiss people do, especially in Gstaad area :-)

I spoke with Mr. Sahli and got the information. So I will not file administrative complaint or further escalate the case.


However, I would like to speak with you briefly at your convenience, about the administrative implication of this mishandling of the case by the police, and how to remedy it - which may be as simple as including my correspondence or a declaration I will write to you, in the police records, for the sake of clearing my name -- since the police mistakenly presumed me to be guilty, without having examined any evidence, and without any proof of guilty. I have the right to be innocent until proven guilty (which will never happen).

We can cover this on a short call - it's more efficient. So we can close the case quickly.


Please let me know when you have time for a call. Late afternoon your time is best for me (e.g. after 3:30 pm).


Many thanks and best regards


R. Ganjavi - Swiss Citizen

 

_________________________________________________________

 

1 September 2022

 

Dear Ms. Mani


Ten days have passed. Could you give me an idea of when you expect to get back to me with answer to my request on enclosing a letter from me in the police file associated with the bogus complaint they filed. Also mind you, they have no evidence that they ever asked me personally not to contact them. They asked our group, much later in the process, and we didn't contact them since.

Anyway, none of our contacts were harassing or stalking, and I'm not even sure as a charitable trust which is tax-exempt they can block the public from communicating with them as long as the communication is not harassing by legal definition -- to not like criticism doesn't make the criticism harassment.


Thanks & Regards


R. Ganjavi

_________________________________________________________

 

2 September 2022

 

Dear Ms. Mani


Thanks for your email but it seems that you did not read all the emails since there was an update which is not reflected in your email. You did not look at the big picture before you write to me. You gave me a definitive answer, without understanding the status of the case.


"I am not allowed/able to send you any further information or documents. I ask you to accept this answer, which has already been communicated to you by Mr Sahli."


Sorry to disappoint you: I am not asking you to send me any more information or documents. So there's nothing to accept about your answer since you answered a question I didn't ask, and didn't answer the question I asked!


I have checked with the prosecutor's office in Canton Bern and they said that the police can tell me who complained about me, or the police has to cite article of law which gives the complainer the privilege to remain anonymous. Mr. Sahli did tell me the name of the complainer and described the other two - they came as a group of 3 to file the completely bogus complaint, and your office failed to assess any evidence before contacting me -- Mr. Sahli admitted to that -- he did not have time to look at the papers they sent and instead wrote me an email which I should have never received, because I have acted lawfully at all times, and there's no evidence whatsoever of any wrongdoing under Swiss law.


I know some areas of Swiss law quite well including areas the purported false accusation is about. I won two cases against SRF, and I've had more than one racist person who committed crimes against me handed criminal convictions, and I've litigated in the Swiss Supreme Court without a lawyer, and I've fought cases against racists in the USA Federal Court and got what I wanted. I stand up for my rights, and I respect others' rights.


Your office should have evaluated the evidence BEFORE contacting me, and then your contact with me would have been very different: you could have asked me for my view on things before accusing me of wrongdoing without having seen any evidence. This is allegedly police misconduct and can be punished at least administratively.


I decided not to go that path because I spoke with Mr. Sahli and he gave me the name, and I don't have time to go after the police in Gstaad, and I don't think it's necessary, because I feel Mr. Sahli learned something from this experience. Next time this happens, I believe he will


1) demand evidence and read the purported evidence


2) not finding any abusive content, on the basis of contact alone, he would ask: did you inform Mr. Ganjavi not to contact you? Provide evidence. And he'd find no evidence of any such contact prior to the dates of the purported communications which were done as part of the investigation of mismanagement and in line with UK Charity Commission's requirements -- it was NOT stalking or harassment, EVER.


Unfortunately I began the escalation process (starting with you) as I informed Mr. Sahli before I got the name of the complainer which I am legally allowed to have since the police was never able to provide legal evidence that the complainer has the right to remain anonymous -- that's how you got involved. You apparently didn't read all the emails (as you're admitting you didn't catch up with your colleague) but you went ahead and wrote to me a final decision without having read all the communications! This is not cool!


And -- you did not address my main question which I repeat here:

I want to write a letter to you and have it inserted electronically and in paper form in whatever file you may have about this case -- because false allegations made about me by the complainer, and the police's wrong response are bad for my reputation even within the police systems. The Swiss Supreme court has stated lying to authorities is also defamatory (criminal) but at this stage I might not press charges against the defendant, and depending on your answer, I will decide if I escalate the matter against the police, depending if you answer my question adequately. I know legally you can insert my letter that I will write in the case file. Please let me know.


Many Thanks.


Have a nice day.


R. Ganjavi



PS --


you wrote


Ein Gesuch um Akteneinsicht kann zudem an die Innenfahndung der Kantonspolizei Bern gerichtet werden. Folgende Adresse zu Ihrer Kenntnis:

 

Kantonspolizei Bern

Innenfahndung

Kontaktstelle Aktenauskunft

Postfach

3001 Bern


Does this mean to inspect a file at the Gstaad station, I have to contact the Innenfahndung and then organize that I inspect the file in Gstaad?


Or do you send files to Bern and I go to Bern to inspect it?

I want to know what purported evidence they provided to you which should be part of the police file and should be available to me for inspection.


Is the above true even when you do not initiate an investigation, like in this case, and there's no case for the prosecutor?

Thanks for clear answers, and sooner than 10 days, like the last answer which didn't even answer my question. I would have preferred to wait till you understand the case and my question before answering something I didn't ask and not answering something I asked.


Best regards


R. Ganjavi

_________________________________________________________

 

2 Sep 2022

 

Ok perfect, thanks.


And answer to my second question about file inspection? Is the file physically in Gstaad ? And it needs to be coordinated from Bern?


I will write you the letter as soon as possible. It is necessary to insert it in the files, both physical and electronic. Many thanks for your cooperation.


Best regards


PS -- I can't believe you don't speak English as head of police in a village which thrives on international tourists. But you say you don't, so I accept it as a fact.

 

_________________________________________________________

 

2 Sep 2022


Thank you. Is the physical file in Gstaad or in Bern?


They brought a set of papers with them, and the police must have kept internal notes about this case.


Are these papers and police notes in Gstaad or in Bern (Waisenhausplatz)? Perhaps police notes are only electronic. I know that police keeps electronic files, as well as paper, depending on the case. I would appreciate clarify on this.


Many Thanks

_________________________________________________________


2 Sep 2022


Thanks. So you scanned all the papers that they brought in and it's all in digital form? 

It helps me understand this so I go through the right channel efficiently.


Kind Regards 

_________________________________________________________

 

2 Sep 2022

Dear Ms. Mani

Please take ownership of this issue to closure. Many thanks for your help.

Where are the documents that the 3 persons who came to file the bogus complaint, brought with them?

Are they scanned? Are they in paper form? They were given to your office, therefore they must exist in digital, physical, or both forms. If they're in paper form, where are they physically? You sent them to Thun, to Bern, or you retain physical files in Gstaad. Would you kindly inform me of what the truth is regarding this question.

It makes it much easier for me to knock on the right door if I have this information, rather than other parties getting involved. Please bear in mind the way this case was mishandled by your organization, and help me out in closing it. We each have an action item to take this to finish line:

Many thanks and best regards

 

_________________________________________________________


3 Sep 2022


Dear Ms. Mani


Is filing a false police report against the law?


I know false-accusation article in StGB but that requires that official proceedings are initiated.


Otherwise, I guess it would be only defamation (per Bundesgericht decision that lying to authorities is also defamatory) - but defamation is difficult to prove.


Is there any other option / any law that may have been broken by making a false fake unsubstantiated police report? They could not prove they ever told me not to contact them before the purported abusive emails (which had no abusive content).


Thanks a lot


I know you're not a lawyer, but as police, would you take a case of lying to police or filing a false unsubstantiated case, as a prosecutable case?


Thanks for your opinion.


Kind Regards


R. Ganjavi

 

_________________________________________________________

 

3 Sep 2022

 

Dear Ms. Mani


Many thanks for the clarification.


Mr. Sahli told me that they brought papers to the station. I suppose Mina Masoumian had sent you those items digitally later, or, your office scanned the paper -- since you say you only have a digital version. I would like to inspect them at an appropriate time.


So I will write to the address you gave me and request file inspection.


I called them and they said I have to send my ID copy with the request.


I don't know if I need to go there personally which is a challenge as most of the time I'm not in Switzerland -- of if they send it by post -- and if by post, if they charge per page -- and if so it will be very expensive since they may have included the 200+ page we wrote about them.


If you happen to know, I'd appreciate it.


Best regards


R. Ganjavi