In my " case " from 09.07.2010 to complications have occurred.
Parallel to check my reply to Peter R ** reported this in writing to me again, this time by registered post. He began excited about the fact that he had to question his letter did not even get an answer (well, that's done by now).
He repeated that he wanted to know only the current registered capital owner of the said GmbH and leads literally on (the punctuation is reproduced original):
If you do me this (Note: information) , in a short path, but have yet to come, the following purpose for you! Otherwise
will also be your attitude very subject of critical media reports! For the third recent case law democratic state column (prosecutor, judge, justice officials) has in fact enormous criticism accumulated! The judiciary seems to be: from a pillar of democracy to a "präpotenten, autocratic have developed caste "to? It often seems to remain inactive when they should be strongly active and appears often convenient or even to decide clearly wrong to then meet at the appeal itself? - And that's all part of examples shows relentlessly, widely discussed and hard!
The press is very interested in the topic anyway! - And you could be part of this discussion.
Sincerely
Peter R **
Now I'd be scared not particularly pleased to be part of such discussions, one might dismiss the whole thing with a smile, to laugh I do not feel like anyway.
self a (seemingly) insignificant event like a lead inspection in the Company's means that, after the media jumped on the train that carries the images of a scandal permeated justice.
** Now I know Peter R can also (have to) that he can indeed have the desired information, but € 10, - did not spend. I would be surprised not more, when appropriate leaves to produce a thick headline. submitted
the way, if I Peter R ** again by registered his view of things, the postage costs are approaching more and more the € 10, - an ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment