THE CASE THAT IS BRINGING DOWN SAINT LUCIA'S PRIME MINISTER PHILLIP JEAN PIERRE

St. Lucia Prime Minister Phillip J. Pierre

This is Part Three of our continuing series on the unfolding  scandal that we refer to as the Fraud against the Bank of Saint Lucia in the Scandal involving the country's Prime Minister,          PHILLIP J. PIERRE.

Let's first start with a short summary of the applicable laws:

Regardless of whether a person owes another billions of dollars ,15 USC 1692d § 806 mandates  and prohibits collectors from engaging in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of said debt as follows:

(1) The use or threat of use of violence or other criminal means to harm the physical person, reputation, or property of any person.

(2) The use of obscene or profane language or language the natural consequence of which is to abuse the hearer or reader.

(3) The publication of a list of consumers who allegedly refuse to pay debts, except to a consumer reporting agency or to persons meeting the requirements of section 1681a(f) or 1681b(3)1 of this title.

(4) The advertisement for sale of any debt to coerce payment of the debt.

(5) Causing a telephone to ring or engage any person in telephone conversation repeatedly or continuously with intent to annoy, abuse, or harass any person at the called number.

While this Federal statute is the law of our land, North Carolina has strong debt collection laws: the North Carolina Debt Collection Act, and the Consumer Economic Protection Act of 2009. These laws protect North Carolinians from the unethical, dishonest, and criminal intent of individuals or people in debt collection practices.

Corrupt and criminal operatives DIANE SPENCER MAURICETTE,  her unscrupulous brother, CHRIS ANTHONY SPENCER,  and nephew KEVIN SPENCER ( shown in his United Airlines Uniform), violated both state and federal laws when they violently trespassed into the victims' garage and forced them to drive them to their bank, under the threat of great bodily harm and having fraudulent liens placed upon their property.

Dianne Spencer Mauricette

   

                                                                 Chris Anthony Spencer                                                                       

Kevin Spencer

The victims under extreme duress, in particular due to Chris Anthony Spencer ‘s threats, were within their legal rights not to participate in the Spencer’s unlawful efforts to launder the stolen funds from the Bank of St. Lucia.The Spencers' victims bank accounts were accessed without authorization,, by Chris Spencer posing as the victim. Chase Bank international security has launched an Investigation and has reportedly notified federal banking regulators of the event.

Consider this as well;  the victims were aware that the $300,000.00 in question was fraudulently obtained from the Bank of St. Lucia, and was then deposited into their bank account, triggering Capital Gain (Tax Liability) for them, owing the State and Federal governments in their  forthcoming income tax filings, which warranted their refusal to adhere to the Spencer’s demand until their Tax Preparer could determine they full Tax liabilities.

More Importantly, participating in DIANE SPENCER MAURICETTE’s scheme to launder the illegal obtain funds would have subjected the victims to probable Federal criminal prosecution for money laundering, which carries with it a maximum twenty year prison sentence.

Even as the biased and corrupt St. Lucia media turns a blind eye to reporting on this important story, solely in order to protect the corrupt Labour administration and PM Phillip Jean Pierre from what constitute international money laundering and other criminal acts by those who have boasted of their influence on the St. Lucian judiciary, which they assert will always protect them from extradition, they have mistakenly ignored the current political climate in Washington DC, which could involve direct, or even covert, methods to bring them to justice in the United States.

Our reporting on this scandal will continue, and we are especially interested in the potential civil and criminal liability of all we have identified, as well as any possible contingent liability of United Airlines and other entities which may have been involved.