“From Pakistan to Brazil, from Hong Kong to Norway, from Canada to Yemen… even Palestine… Documents leaked to the BBC say €4bn [was invested in OneCoin] between August 2014 and March 2017.
I’ve also been told by more than one person that it could be as much as €15bn.”
What ostensibly once was meant to be a low key affair that began in 2014, grew to a global phenomena as cryptos went mainstream in 2017.
Yet crypto media warned of it as early as May 2015. Around a year later, on the 8th of July 2016, Peter Smith, described as an employed barrister for Carter Ruck, CC-ed Nigel Tait – described as “one of only two ‘star individuals’ to feature in the Defamation and Reputation Management section of the Chambers and Partners Client’s Guide to Solicitors” – in an email to crypto journalists and editors demanding the removal of what must be the first expose of this massive global scam.
In a document labeled as private and confidential, which is now to become neither private nor confidential, Carter Ruck states:
“OneCoin is neither a ‘Ponzi Scheme’ nor a ‘pyramid scheme’. OneCoin’s business model is a form of legitimate and lawful network marketing.”
OneCoin sold “packages,” the tycoon one amounting to $5,000 with the higher ones amounting to more than a hundred thousand, which included “tokens” that can be assigned to mine OneCoins.
The problem is there was never a coin or token, there was no blockchain. This was a pure pyramid scheme where multi level marketers would get a cut from those they referred to the ponzi until the music stopped with the disappearance of Ruja Ignatova in October 2017, near the very hight of the crypto bubble.
It remains unknown where she is, but “a US lawyer has been found guilty for his role in the OneCoin cryptocurrency scam,” says the BBC.
The Australian reports today of a deep international intrigue affecting the horse racing industry because of this OneCoin heist.
A theft of massive magnitude that could have been mitigated by greater awareness which was prevented by the stifling actions of Carter Ruck that used protected titles like solicitor and barrister as a “legal” sword upon reporters.
“No individual by the name of Sebastian Greenwood or Nigel Allan is a director of OneCoin,” Carter-Ruck said in July 2016.
“OneLife Network Ltd (registered in Belize), was founded by Ruja Ignatova in concert with Sebastian Greenwood,” says Wikipedia citing a Norwegian paper.
Quite conveniently the letter sent in 2016 was a PDF image from which you can’t easily copy paste to quote, so we have uploaded it in full.
A second letter was sent on the 12th of July, this time by Helen Steele of Carter-Ruck, CC-ing Tait and Smith, ending with:
“We urge you to refrain from publishing any fresh articles about this correspondence, which are only likely to make matters worse,” the correspondence being the uploaded letter threatening defamation action.
The Law Society of England and Wales has refused to issue even a warning to this “law” firm that some accuse of being a hyena acting on behalf of entities like Scientology.
These “law” thugs have gone so far as to prevent the Guardian from reporting on even parliament.
“Today’s published Commons order papers contain a question to be answered by a minister later this week. The Guardian is prevented from identifying the MP who has asked the question, what the question is, which minister might answer it, or where the question is to be found.
The Guardian is also forbidden from telling its readers why the paper is prevented – for the first time in memory – from reporting parliament. Legal obstacles, which cannot be identified, involve proceedings, which cannot be mentioned, on behalf of a client who must remain secret.
The only fact the Guardian can report is that the case involves the London solicitors Carter-Ruck.”
An accomplice is defined as “a person who helps someone else to commit a crime or do something morally wrong.”
“OneCoin sells genuine products of genuine value, such as the OneCoin cryptocurrency,” Carter-Ruck said, matter of factly, without clarifying it was what their client claimed.
Instead they made many of the statements now fully revealed appear as coming from licensed solicitors or barristers, so giving these statements the perceived authority of protected titles which are protected on the basis that one must be trained and qualified and must abide by certain rules to present themselves as having such authority.
As such, it appears self evident they have followed no rules of basic fact establishment, not least because they sent the defamation threat to all reporters for Cointelegraph, or at least the most prominent ones, instead of just the author and chief editors, and after being made aware of their mistake they continued to nonetheless hold completely unrelated reporters as somehow accountable.
The visible and invisible chill this act by Carter-Ruck must have sent throughout the crypto reporting industry, and so thus its assistance in propagating a global scam, is not measurable.
Their failure to establish even basic facts, and their deception in appearing to speak from their own tongue instead of on behalf of their client, puts the entire english legal system in disrepute, and makes this “law” firm an accomplice in one of the greatest scam in history.