The Missing Trust Agreement, The Rabbi and the Diamond Dealer

Rabbi Berel Lazar and A Missing Trust Agreement Between Arkady Gaydamak and Lev Leviev

September 11, 2016/1 Comment/in Joe Levin /by Joe Levin

By this interview Rabbi Berel Lazar actually recognizes that he had received the envelope from Arkady Gaydamak or from Lev Leviev but by no means ever knew what this envelope contained.

As the Justice Lord Vos stated in his Decision, “since this TV interview Lazar (and Leviev) are not able to deny the fact that Lazar received for the safekeeping an envelope and thus each Party, Arkady Gaydamak and Leviev, should explain the content of the envelope”.

Thus, in front of the High Court of Justice, Rabbi Berel Lazar and other witnesses on Leviev’s side stated with great confidence that the envelope contained Gaydamak’s written commitments to contribute to the Federation of Jewish Organizations of FSU instead of, as Gaydamak stated, the copy of the signed Trust Agreement of December 13, 2001.

Leviev’s side even presented to the Court false, fabricated by the US Chartered Accountant Joel Zuller, Tax Return Forms, in order to support Leviev’s fraudulent allegations that Gaydamak had fulfilled his financial commitments of contribution to the Federation of Jewish Organizations.

The TV interview of Rabbi Berel Lazar evidenced premeditated, knowingly fraudulent statements and documents presented to the High Court of Justice in London by Lev Leviev and his accomplices.

Lazar’s affirmations are — that he did not know what the envelope contains; and that he had never understood the reason why he received the envelope; and he expressed his astonishment why Gaydamak did not keep with him one signed copy of such, in accordance with Gaydamak’s claim, an important document.

These kind of allegations, specifically expressed by Lazar, who pretends to be a Rabbi, are absolutely outrageous.

By his affirmations, Lazar rejects the basic Halachic Rule about the function of “Shomer Ne’eman” (safe-keeper or Jewish Notary, Trustee in duty).

In accordance with these rules, two Jews, in the case where they want to establish an important (from their point of view) confidential document– they should do it precisely in one signed copy and transmit it to a “Shomer Ne’eman” (for which any Rabbi can serve).

Only on condition when the document itself was established in accordance with the “Halacha” rules and “Mazal Ubraha” was pronounced, which is precisely the case, as the Justice Lord Vos has stated — the responsibility of “Shomer Ne’eman”, in this case Lazar, should be engaged.

In the case where “Shomer Ne’eman” (Lazar) is not able to return the document, specifically when the document did not disappear for the reason of Force Major (fire, flood, earthquake, and other kinds of “Plagues of Egypt”, etc.) and in the case of a dispute between the two parties that signed the document the Halacha says that the version of the complaining party (Gaydamak) should be accepted.

In this case, we have all the founded evidences at our disposal that Lazar had actually allowed this document to disappear intentionally for the reason of his acquaintance, connections with and dependence from Leviev (the Justice Lord Vos unambiguously stated it in his Decision of June 29, 2012).

Journalist:
Honorable Rabbi, Hello.

Rabbi Berel Lazar:
I will tell you what I told him. I told him a very simple thing. If you give me a paper… First thing, if you make an agreement with someone, it is very strange that you don’t keep a copy yourself.

It is a strange thing in my opinion. Second, if you give me such a paper, tell me what this paper is.

Of course I have never said to him that I kept it.

These are things that suddenly he thought that he had heard from me.

I had already said to him in a meeting: when did I tell you that?

He does not remember when I told him.

He does not remember if I told him. Maybe I did not tell him. And suddenly, afterwards, he decided that maybe there is a chance that he publishes that I was indeed heard nearby.

These are all, excuse me, fantasies of a person – that once he delivered to me a paper, in this paper something was written, something that he, himself, claims that he had not told me.

He does not remember when he delivered it to me, he does not remember who delivered it to me, but there is “as if”…

Journalist:
Do you remember that you received such a thing at all?

Rabbi Berel Lazar:
I do remember that once there was – that either HE or Leviev – gave me an envelope and that’s it. They did not even tell me to keep it.

Journalist:
Honestly, it does not make sense that a Rabbi who receives an envelope from Leviev or Gaydamak loses it, also in the case where he does not know what it contains.
Rabbi Lazar alleged in front of us that during his conversation with Leviev, the latter admitted in delivery of the envelope.

2 thoughts on “The Missing Trust Agreement, The Rabbi and the Diamond Dealer

  1. I should be grateful if your contributor would point me to which exactly of the 258 paragraphs of the judgment support the statement that “In this case, we have all the founded evidences at our disposal that Lazar had actually allowed this document to disappear intentionally for the reason of his acquaintance, connections with and dependence from Leviev (the Justice Lord Vos unambiguously stated it in his Decision of June 29, 2012).”

    Thanks

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s