“…Harassment is a persistent and deliberate course of unreasonable and oppressive conduct, targeted at another person, which is calculated to and does cause that person alarm, fear or distress…”
“4. The court acts on evidence, not speculation or assumption. It acts on facts, not worries or concerns. 5. Evidence comes in many forms. It can be live, written, direct, hearsay, electronic, photographic, circumstantial, factual, or by way of expert opinion. It can concern major topics and small details, things that are important and things that are trivial. 6. The burden of proving a fact rests on the person who asserts it. 7. The standard of proof is the balance of probabilities: Is it more likely than not that the event occurred? Neither the seriousness of the allegation,nor the seriousness of the consequences, nor the inherent probabilities alters this. (1) Where an allegation is a serious one, there is no requirement that the evidence must be of a special quality. The court will consider grave allegations with proper care, but evidence is evidence and the approach to analysing it remains the same in every case. In my view, statements of principle (some relied on in this case) that suggest that an enhanced level of evidential cogency or clarity is required in order to prove a very serious allegation do not assist and may lead a fact-finder into error. Despite all disclaimers, reference to qualitative concepts such as cogency and clarity may wrongly be taken to imply that some elevated standard of proof is called for. (2) Nor does the seriousness of the consequences of a finding of fact affect the standard to which it must be proved. Whether a man was in a London street at a particular time might be of no great consequence if the issue is whether he was rightly issued with a parking ticket, but it might be of huge consequence if he has been charged with a murder that occurred that day in Paris. The evidential standard to which his presence in the street must be proved is nonetheless the same. (3) The court takes account of any inherent probability or improbability of an event having occurred as part of a natural process of reasoning. But the fact that an event is a very common one does not lower the standard of probability to which it must be proved. Nor does the fact that an event is very uncommon raise the standard of proof that must be satisfied before it can be said to have occurred. (4) Similarly, the frequency or infrequency with which an event generally occurs cannot divert attention from the question of whether it actually occurred.” (1) Where an allegation is a serious one, there is no requirement that the evidence must be of a special quality. The court will consider grave allegations with proper care, but evidence is evidence and the approach to analysing it remains the same in every case. In my view, statements of principle (some relied on in this case) that suggest that an enhanced level of evidential cogency or clarity is required in order to prove a very serious allegation do not assist and may lead a fact-finder into error. Despite all disclaimers, reference to qualitative concepts such as cogency and clarity may wrongly be taken to imply that some elevated standard of proof is called for. (2) Nor does the seriousness of the consequences of a finding of fact affect the standard to which it must be proved. Whether a man was in a London street at a particular time might be of no great consequence if the issue is whether he was rightly issued with a parking ticket, but it might be of huge consequence if he has been charged with a murder that occurred that day in Paris. The evidential standard to which his presence in the street must be proved is nonetheless the same. (3) The court takes account of any inherent probability or improbability of an event having occurred as part of a natural process of reasoning. But the fact that an event is a very common one does not lower the standard of probability to which it must be proved. Nor does the fact that an event is very uncommon raise the standard of proof that must be satisfied before it can be said to have occurred. (4) Similarly, the frequency or infrequency with which an event generally occurs cannot divert attention from the question of whether it actually occurred.”
“It is an elementary proposition that findings of fact must be based on evidence, including inferences that can properly be drawn from the evidence and not on suspicion or speculation.”
“became rather very violent and his course of conduct towards me was entirely unacceptable, a threatening course of demeanour intended to cause me alarm and distress. He was verbally abusive towards me telling me “I fucked you good, and I will do you more.”
“Despite the High Court of Justice judgment decision and the conclusive evidences, Noapologies have been forthcoming verbally or in writing not even during the last Christmas party, neither from Mr Graeme, the Board Members or the Management(s)”
“52. About 3 years ago, I was provided with some documents by a prominent resident of Albert Court, who I do not wish to name, which show that DBR made payments to some of the directors, and certainly to Genevrier Ltd, to secure the tenders. 53. The documents provided appear at [MNF 1/30-33]. They show the various companies that Mr Aarons and his wife, Jing Jong, have interests in, and a suggestion that monies were paid to those companies by DBR. 54. One particular document was shown to me. That document appeared to be a page of an HSBC bank statement for an account in the name of DBR (London) Ltd. On that document, which I believed to be a true copy of a genuine HSBC statement, there is an entry which read:11 Oct 2016 TRF400525 51374521 100,000.00 INTERNET TRANSFER Genevrier Limited11 Oct 2016 TRF400525 51374521 100,000.00 INTERNET TRANSFER Genevrier Limited 55. I was naturally shocked at seeing that document because on the face of it, it shows that DBR paid what can only be described as a bribe (for want of a better and more appropriate word), to Genevrier Ltd to allow DBR to secure the tender for a particular job at Albert Court. The documents referred to above [MNF 1/30-33] also suggest that other payments were made to various companies in which Mr Aarons and Mr Rubie had an interest.”
“I have in my possession bank statements showing bribes being paid to the so-called volunteer directors and into their spouse's offshore bank accounts.”
“Call in from Mr Fetaimia at 17:42. Mr Fetaimia very angrily telling me that I don’t know what I have done, that he will fuck me up for what I have done to his wife, that I will end up in prison with Graham Aarons. I told Mr Fetaimia that he should not be calling me or speaking to me in this way. He ended the call at that stage. The entire call lasted for 46 seconds and was mainly Mr Fetaimia raging at me.”
“I said that to Mr Aarons. You and Mr Aarons were in a very heated conversation. I said to Mr Aarons to “back off” ….. I recall saying Graham walk away.”
“Mrs Fetaimia started to get irate. She went and stood next to Peter [Mr Merriman] and made a comment that he should stand up but he didn’t. She moved off wafting papers around of some description. She moved off again, and I went to stand next to Peter in case she came back and decided to throw something at him. It was quite shocking.” “I stood behind Peter …. I don’t know who was screaming ‘sit down, sit down’ I was too busy concentrating on Mrs Fetaimia. I was standing there to make sure that Mrs Fetaimia didn’t do something she would regret. I was facing the front – the audience.” “The night was memorable in many ways but everything went very quickly. It was a bit of a free for all.” “Mrs Fetaimia was very upset that evening”
“that is the reason why I am here today. To embellish a lie with another lie is too much to bear.”
“…to cease the continuous aggressive and uncalled for attacks on directors and cease speaking to us in an aggressive demanding tone”
“You like to live here — then you will not be living here long”
“We didn’t want to get involved but you never take no for an answer. At one point you were going too far – chasing Mr Aarons on the street. He’s an old person and should be treated with respect.”
“Mr Fetaimia let me repeat what I have told you many times. I’ve told you when you’ve made allegations of fraud and corruption, I’ve said if there is a case bring forward the evidence and the Board will examine it. You have never once got to me any evidence.”
“I don’t know the credibility of the statement which is why I did not supply or give it to anyone”
“I’m 50/50 about it …… I told my husband there’s a 50/50 chance it’s real”
“I know Victoria very well but I’ve never seen her like she was that evening – it was chaos and the shouting and screaming was appalling. I do remember “we will get you and you will be dead”
“The criticisms to Rubie and Aarons are an anathema to me. Mr Fetaimia knows this. I told him there is no way money could be stolen because the amount of service charges that are collected, you can’t take hundreds and thousands of pounds out of that money and run the building. You wouldn’t have the money to run it.”
“During this meeting, we were approached by a lady stating that subsequently I learned was a lessee at Albert Court. To my surprise she launched into a verbal barrage, accusing you and Tim Murray of not being professionals, making allegations against your wives, and making accusations as to the proper management of the block. The rant went on for several minutes. Later that morning, after you and Tim Murray had left, the same lady returned and demanded to know (in a very loud and threatening manner) who I was, what I was doing in her house, who instructed me, what was my company name. I told her my name and my company, why I was there and who instructed me. The same accusations re you not being a proper surveyor was made. I believe that she may also have been filming me without asking my permission. ….. In all my years as a professional, I have never been spoken to by a client, resident or lessee, or indeed by anyone, in such an unnecessary or indeed intimidating way.”
“I didn’t know who he was until he threw the share document to Mr Rubie. That’s when I decided that he was the man running the show.”
“She [meaning Mrs Fetaimia] was accepted like a second class person.”
“You guys sent those dogs. You’re going to face the story. You’re not going to get away with it.”
“I do not have the convictions that Mr Aarons refers to save that I did have a conviction, in 1984, for driving under the influence. I was deported from the USA because of the 9/11 incidents because I was a pilot, aircraft owner, running a flight school and of Algerian origin. Need I say more?”
“Yes I did. I didn’t want Mr Aarons to choose and pick who came here. That is why I put my witness statement as I did so Mr Merriman would come to court and have his day in court.”
“I’m a victim of a sophisticated international property scam concocted by Mr Graeme Aarons professed lawyer unknown to the SRA here or in Australia, he claims to work as a volunteer director with Albert Court Westminster management which manages my building Albert Court. Since I found out that some of Albert Court directors have been embezzling our service charges funds in tunes of millions per year to theirs and their spouses offshore bank accounts, they have embarked on witch hunt trying everything imaginable to evict me and my family from my hard-earned paid off flat without a resolution let alone me owing any money for the service charges or otherwise.”
“26. At a later stage, Mr Fetaimia came to the table where I was sitting and leant over towards me in a threatening manner and said, “Iwill get you killed". This was the second of a similar threat and I began to think that they must have something specific in mind. I was also concerned for my wife and children and the impact on them. 27. I don't believe this threat towards me by Mr Fetaimia was overheard by anyone else because at that time I was the only person seated at the table whilst Mrs Fetaimia was prancing around shouting and Mr Rubie was trying to calm her down.”
“The allegation about Victoria being assaulted and subject to gross indecency by Mr Merriman was not false. Mr Merriman was extremely ashamed of his conduct and apologised to both Victoria and I after his attendance at the police station in January 2020.”