The Jeffrey Epstein & Jes Staley Blackmail Ring
Mel Stride, Chairman of the TSC The Treasury Select Committee Theodora Clarke – MP for Stafford
The Epstein-Staley Blackmail Ring
Dear Mr Stride,
It appears civil servants in the Treasury Select Committee have copies of emails sent from Jeffrey Epstein blackmailing Parliament into accepting Jes Staley as CEO for Barclays. Even after Epstein's death Staley remains in charge of Barclays, which leads me to conclude that the blackmail operation is still in effect. His predecessors include one Roger Jenkins, now under prosecution for the Qatari secret deals. Jenkins was accused of being involved with elite paedophile parties only a few years ago, along with his wife Diana. Now that we know that Epstein was running such parties even after he had been incarcerated, we have strong reason to suspect that Jenkins and Epstein were at the same parties. It was also alleged that these parties are where the Jenkins met Qatari royals. So it is a strong possibility that Epstein had been blackmailing Parliament well before Staley's appointment and had hand picked the CEOs of Barclays for some time. As a side effect the Qataris would thus be in a position to blackmail Barclays for favourable terms. The allegations against Jenkins came well before the SFO prosecution and well before the scope of Epstein's ring became public domain.
My friend Katherine Frisk, editor of the International Reporter, may have been murdered for exposing the Epstein-Staley paedophile ring in 2017.
I believe it is wholly in the public interest for those emails to be put into the public domain.
My previous constituency MP, Jeremy Lefroy, spoke to Nicky Morgan, former chair of the TSC, asking for some resolution, but was stonewalled. Parliament's FOIA team has been more helpful and has identified the TSC's role in misleading the Daily Mail.
I direct you to the responses here:
The FCA, the FRC and the PRA all have a duty to strip Staley of power. A number of sources have identified that Staley was groomed by Epstein, having overruled auditors at JP Morgan who flagged contracts that came by way of Epstein. Staley was thus the principal agent in laundering money from his paedophile ring.
The evidence in the FOIAs, showing Parliament misled the Daily Mail, was presented to the Birmingham Mercantile Court in B40BM021 under Judge David Worster. This was in 2017, well before the revelations in 2019 came out. Roger Jenkins' conduct was also expounded in the hearing, although at the time I had not tied Epstein to Jenkins.
Worster slapped two restraining orders on me – effectively covering up the blackmail. He also awarded damaged to the defendants for what I had written about now disgraced ex-judge Simon Brown QC. Brown retired ten years early and he was judged in three independent appeals to have given perverse verdicts. In each case the appellant was financially distressed and the respondent had substantial financial wealth, suggesting Brown was systematically taking bribes.
I wrote to Worster that it was not for third parties to claim damages for what I had said about other people and demanded a recording of the hearing. He refused, however the defendants wrote back to me and dropped all costs and damages. The defendants included Deutsche Bank, which is now known to have laundered money for Jeffrey Epstein. Prior to the hearing Jes Staley had threatened a restraining order and costs against me if I pursued Deutsche Bank for gold rigging and money laundering.
Worster would have known that Staley had blackmailed the Judiciary, so the possibility that Katherine Frisk was murdered to cover up Staley's crimes would be obvious to him. Whoever was coercing him had every motive and every means to kill Frisk.
It should be obvious that Epstein having effectively blackmailed Parliament, the FCA, the FRC and the PRA, that the judgements of the judiciary would not be left to chance and so judges would have to be bribed, blackmailed or threatened to get what he and Staley wanted.
Lord Chief Justice, Sir Ian Burnett, has signed two court orders in 2016 that claimed allegations against Deutsche Bank for gold and silver rigging were 'totally without merit' He also claimed my allegations against Simon Brown QC were scurrilous and prevented me opening an appeal. His judgements contradict that of nine Court of Appeal judges – all of whom found against Brown. Given the settlements forced upon Deutsche Bank in New York and the subsequent prosecutions of traders for gold and silver rigging, and given the fines from the CFTC, and the conduct of its co-defendants JP Morgan and HSBC, all of which hare been proven to be involved with gold and silver rigging, we have every reason to believe that Staley had used his influence to corrupt the judiciary at the highest levels from the very beginning.
The ICO, the FCA, the Judiciary and the SFO have all refused to force Deutsche Bank to disclose my bank statement and bullion trading receipts. I believe that they destroyed them en masse as part of the Danske laundering operation and that of Laundromat. Danske, through its Estonian branch, managed $200 billion of wealth from Russian oligarchs. It is knowns that they were selling bullion to their Russian clients and bragging that certificates and seals would not be supplied – only criminals would want to buy bullion in large quantities without leaving a paper trail.
Given Deutsche Bank's role in Laundromat, and given that bullion was laundered in large quantities there would be substantial inventory discrepancies – which is why they would want to destroy receipts.
Deutsche Bank, with the help of Simon Brown QC, allowed applicants of an oral hearing against me to get away with non-attendance. The applicant in question was Anshu Jain. Jain would have been at the centre of money laundering, both from Jeffrey Epstein and the Russian Mafia. The last thing he could afford was establishing as fact that his banks had receipts illicitly destroyed. And for that he had to avoid cross-examination.
Burnett knew that Jain had not attended his own hearing and he knew that Linklaters LLC were allowed to get away with not filing key evidence against Deutsche Bank in the evidence bundle. This is a classic symptom of corruption in courts – lawyers for the represented client fail to file key evidence and judges are bribed. It has come to my attention that mine is not the first such example in the Birmingham Mercantile Court.
I therefore reiterate – we need the blackmail emails to be brought to public scrutiny – the secrecy is allowing banks to get away with murder – and the FOIAs show the TSC has them. We need Staley to be held accountable for the blackmail and to explain to the TSC why he overrode auditors at JP Morgan to accept business from Epstein. What is he doing running Barclays?
When is the judiciary going to be scrutinized for its role in the Epstein-Staley paedophile ring?
Yours sincerely Mark Anthony Taylor