0110 Pauline Caby substitute for complacency, is the Parquet de Paris TGI

Pauline Caby gets the prize for the most corrupt substitute:

blackmail, threats, perjury, complicity to forgery of public ..... the list is particularly edifying !!!!!!

"we'll look after you"

!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!

The substitute Pauline Caby, must therefore respond

"Pressure and threats to lawyer."

Given the relative independence of prosecutors, and if France were to follow the recommendations EU on the subject, there is no doubt that, when added turpitude to sitting judges, we could see a complete sinecure in court "French".

Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris

First House Civil Section One

Procedure RG No. 10 / 06 603

Mr Jacques ROBERT GONDRAN

judge pretrial

1. SCI ROSANAH and Mrs. Muriel LESPINASSE have through a procedure of forgery, filed requesting conclusions:

- Transport Minute of a notarial deed in the registry of the court;

- filing in the office the jurisdiction of the copy enforceable moose

- Minutes of the Board of Directors has revoked SOCIETE GENERALE Marc VIÉNOT in 1995.

2. The opponents have objected to these requests.

3. The Public Ministry, in the person of Pauline Caby also objected to the disclosure of these pleadings.

4. SCI ROSANAH and Mrs. Muriel LESPINASSE believe that this hearing was tainted by a violation of rights of defense and the contradictory insofar as the prosecutor spoke at the hearing are attached as a party to issue a notice without have previously communicated to the parties thus preventing this Notice to respond and this, even though it is a written procedure.

5. Therefore SCI ROSANAH and Mrs. Muriel LESPINASSE request to reopen the hearings to allow parties to take cognizance of the notice of the public prosecutor to answer it.

II Discussion

6. SCI ROSANAH and Mrs. Muriel LESPINASSE produce the following observations on the violation of adversarial by the Public Prosecutor (A), on production of original pieces (B) and on the possible prescription of a bailiff (C).

A) Breach of contradiction by the prosecutor

7. Section 424 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides:

"The public prosecutor shall be a party when it intervenes to give its opinion on the application of the law in a case which has communication"

8. Section 303 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides:

"The cons of forgery an authentic communication gives rise to the Crown"

9. In terms of false registration before the Court, the prosecutor acts as an added party.

10. The procedure is written and no exceptions have been provided for the benefit of the public prosecutor, Pauline Caby had an obligation to make records and to communicate to the parties before the hearing,

Cass. Com., October 30, 2007, Appeal No. 05-20363:

"But whereas when the prosecutor, speaking as an added party to the proceedings ... ... ... ... ...; than X. .. not supporting the conclusions of the prosecution have not been made available at the hearing, the plea is inoperative "

11. In this case, the Public Prosecutor's conclusions were not communicated to the parties before the hearing, nor at the hearing.

12. SCI ROSANAH and Mrs. Muriel LESPINASSE have therefore discovered the Department's findings public at the end of the hearing (Article 443 Code of Civil Procedure) and can not respond.

13. It is a violation of rights of defense and the contradictory require a reopening of discussion in accordance with Article 444 of the Code of Civil Procedure which provides:

"The president can order the reopening of the debate. He must do so whenever the parties have not been able to explain the contradictory explanations of law or fact which had been requested "

14. SCI ROSANAH and Mrs. Muriel LESPINASSE therefore ask Mr Jacques ROBERT GONDRAN are as a judge of the pretrial kindly reopen discussions.

B) The production of original coins

15. By settled case the Supreme Court established the principle that a photocopy is a prima facie case and that the parties in all cases the right to obtain production of documents and pleadings in original

Cass . Com., December 20, 1976, Appeal No. 75-12190

: "ON THE AVERAGE SINGLE TAKEN INTO ITS TWO BRANCHES: AS THE COMPANY FOR COMMERCIAL EXPLOITATION OF BARS, RESTAURANTS AND NIGHTCLUBS ( THE SCEBRED) KALICKY WHICH CLAIMED PAYMENT HAS PRODUCED TO PROVE HIS RELEASE, THE COPY OF A RECEIPT FOR BALANCE OF ANY ACCOUNT

HE IS CHARGED IN ATTACK OFF (PARIS, January 13, 1975) TO HAVE REJECTED THE CLAIM, THEN BY APPEAL, THAT PART OF THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS LEFT UNANSWERED THE OPINION OF THE SCEBRED, CLAIMING SHE WAS UNABLE TO RECOVER

THE ORIGINAL RECEIPT AND THEN

CLAIMS THAT THE OTHER HAND, A PHOTOCOPY is not devoid of any probative value, IT CAN BE CONSIDERED AS BEGINNING OF PROOF IN WRITING AND THAT THE COURT OF APPEAL SHOULD THEREFORE WHETHER OTHER INDEXES came not corroborate this PROOF OF BEGINNING;

BUT CONSIDERING THE ONE HAND, IT DOES NOT SUBJECT TO THE CLAIMS COURT OF APPEAL, WHICH WAS NOT TO EXPLAIN THIS RESPECT THAT HAVE CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN SCEBRED IN INABILITY TO RECOVER THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT THAT BECAUSE;

WHEREAS THE OTHER HAND, AFTER POINTING OUT THAT THE FACT OF CLAIMS RECEIVED BY THE SCEBRED WAS SPECIFICALLY DENIED BY KALICKY, who had vainly REQUEST ONLY THE ORIGINAL OF THIS DOCUMENT IS IT NEWS THE COURT OF APPEAL UPHELD A PROPERLY, THE DEBATES TO COPY PRODUCED
WAS NOT LIKELY TO DEPUTIZE
THE ORIGINAL AND HAS DONE THAT EXERCISE HIS AUTHORITY TO DECIDE THE SOVEREIGN THE EVIDENCE WHICH WAS SUBMITTED; THE MIDDLE, WHICH FAILED IN ITS FIRST BRANCH IN FACT, THERE IS NO BASIS IN ITS SECOND PART; FOR THESE REASONS: THE REJECTS APPEAL AGAINST FORM THE JUDGEMENT OF 13 JANUARY 1975 BY THE COURT OF APPEAL OF PARIS "

16. SCI ROSANAH and Mrs. Muriel LESPINASSE are entitled to produce the required documents in original and will not be able to conclude on the merits, as long as these parts have not been produced in the original.

C) On the prescription of a bailiff

17. Section 147 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides:

"The judge should limit the choice of the measure which is sufficient to resolve the dispute, endeavoring to keep what is the simplest and least consideration '

18. At the hearing on November 10, 2010, President Jacques GONDRAN ROBERT proposed to SCI ROSANAH and Mrs. Muriel LESPINASSE to order a bailiff to go to the notary's office where he is to draw a bailiff.

19. SCI ROSANAH and Mrs. Muriel LESPINASSE do not accept this solution for two reasons:

- This request has been made by either party to the dispute, the judge can rule on claims that have not been made (Article 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure);

- The judge must confine its decision to what is the simplest and least expensive. The transport of the Minute of a deed costs nothing to parties in dispute while a bailiff made on a notarial Minute costs nearly 1500 Euros (performed in Finding Mr. Bernard DANMARINE CHOICE in the matter).

20. That is why Mr Jacques ROBERT GONDRAN are as a judge of the pretrial order can a bailiff because nobody has ever asked such a request.