Gangs - Go Rob Mark Bardell of Ill-Gotten Millions?

[I***@nirvanah.com]

Gangs to Rob Mark Bardell?

It seems that some of the gangs in Washington DC are now taking an interest in
Mark Bardell.
Who will be robbing him first?
Will it be Mara Salvatrucha 13?
Or will it be the Bloods & Crips?

These gangs are very interested in ripping off scammers who have many millions
of undeclared wealth.

And don't forget the FBI and IRS, who are investigating for RICO, Proceeds of
Crime, International Money Laundering, plus massive TAX FRAUD.

Gangs, just go to:

Mark Bardell
6 Aspen Glen Ct
Owings Mills, MD

410) 998-9002

Since Bardell has another property in Birmingham England, which of the
Birmingham gangs will be razing it to the ground?

Will it be the Stonehouse Gang, or the Muslim BirminghamPanthers?
Or perhaps the Lynx Gang, or Johnson Crew?

His insurance companies will be cancelling policies, since he is such a bad risk
now, and they would have to pay when he gets burned out.

One of Bardell's biggest victims, from whom he stole many millions in valuable
collections which the senior had consigned, has now had a near-fatal heart
attack. He has so far had 2 heart operations to save his life. The family are
now mproviding all kinds of documentary evidence, together with USPS.

They pray daily, that Bardell gets stomach cancer, or else gets incinerated.

[Sario MacGrosvenor]

Post by I***@nirvanah.com
Gangs to Rob Mark Bardell?

<http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/g/grosvenor-william>

International Institute of Management Inc.
v.
Edmonton Co-Operative Association Ltd.,
2003 ABQB 502
Date: 20030605

Action No. 9003 16223

IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH OF ALBERTA
JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF EDMONTON

BETWEEN:

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT INC.,
OPERATING AS GROSVENOR STAMP CO.
Plaintiffs

- and -
-
EDMONTON CO-OPERATIVE ASSOC'N LTD. AND
FEDERATED CO-OPERATIVES LTD.
Defendants
_______________________________________________________
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
of the
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.D. CLACKSON
_______________________________________________________

APPEARANCES:
Mr. Grosvenor for the Plaintiffs

Mr. Vaughn Cox
Chatwin, Cox for the Defendants

...

[17] Additionally, the Defendant points to a number of other
concerns which reflect poorly on the credibility of Mr.
Grosvenor. A sample of those concerns follow:

(a) The income that Mr. Grosvenor says he earned for 1987
in the mail bid auction is not reported on the Plaintiff's
returns or on Mr. Grosvenor's personal tax returns.

...

[18] The Defendant also suggests that Mr. Grosvenor is prone
to exaggeration and therefore his evidence should be approached
with caution. The Defendant points to the following examples:

(a) The Amended Amended Statement of Claim respecting the
dust loss suggests several inches of dust covering the entire shop.
However the Plaintiff's actual evidence was that the dust was a
quarter inch or more in some places, less in most.

(b) That the records of purchase and sale and virtually
every other relevant document which might assist on the subject of
the damage and value of the claims may have been destroyed
after the actions were contemplated and commenced.

(c) The many instances where what appear to be identical
stamps are described in the 1987 bid catalogue and the list of loss
inventory but the values on the latter are invariably much
higher.

...

I have concluded that Mr. Grosvenor has been guilty of many
inconsistencies, incongruities and exaggerations. I also
conclude that Mr. Grosvenor has over the many years that this lawsuit
has been his life's focus come to accept as fact much which
is not accurate. Mr. Grosvenor has allowed righteous
indignation to colour his memory of the events surrounding these claims.
Mr. Grosvenor's conduct, the manner of his speech and the many
unsubstantiated derogatory comments made by him are
compelling evidence of exactly that memory colouration process. I have
no doubt that Mr. Grosvenor firmly believes that the Defendants
and the Defendants' counsel and the witnesses called by the
Defendants have lied, cheated, misrepresented, misled and
are in league to deprive him of his rightful due. Clearly, the
Defendants do not admit responsibility and have been
vigorous in attempting to answer the Plaintiff's claim. However, that
approach does not justify Mr. Grosvenor's beliefs. In my
view, Mr. Grosvenor has lost complete objectivity and is consumed
by this litigation and the imagined nefarious activity of the
Defendants. As such, in most instances where his evidence is
contradicted by other evidence, that other evidence must be
preferred.

...
[62] Mr. Spencer said that by reputation and
observation Mr. Grosvenor's materials were seconds,
remnants or remainders and consequently of little value.