The Public Record
The Two Tony’s
In June 2012, Andrew Penman of the Daily Mirror ran an article calling us scammers. This article is full of misleading nonsense (see breakdown HERE ). They also claimed that we had used high-powered lawyers to protect us as we continued defrauding. This is complete rubbish and I would like to share the story with you based on FACTS and EVIDENCE.
DAVID HOGG CALL
“Investigative journalists” will often make enquiries or fill out forms online to speak to or attract sales calls from investment companies.
In 2011, one of our sales representatives made the mistake of calling journalist Tony Levene.
After this call, Tony Levene then went on to write a damaging article on the Love Money website based on the sales call he received. The problem is that Tony Levene had lied about most aspects of this call. He said that he was subjected to high-pressure sales tactics and was promised ‘big profits’. This was a lie. Naturally, we consulted our legal representatives and demanded that the damaging article be taken down.
YOU CAN LISTEN TO THE CALL HERE.
Levene and Love Money were forced to remove the article!
Tony Levene wasn't happy about this and decided to troll Tullett Brown on the internet under the name ScamBuster 66. He went into online forums claiming that Tullett Brown was a scam company and was now being investigated by the Daily Mail. How could he have known this? Is this the standard of behaviour of a practising investigative journalist?
Taking matters even further, he then went on to contact his Journalist friend Tony Hetherington of the Daily Mail.
We [Tullett Brown] then received a letter from Tony Hetherington who then proceeded to lie by claiming he had an enquiry from a genuine member of the public who was concerned about Tullett Brown’s trading activities. THIS WAS A LIE. The whole story was cooked up between himself and Tony Levene. SEE HETHERINGTON LETTER HERE
This is important to note because Tony Hetherington (The Reader’s Champion) should be investigating genuine stories from members of the public that have real concerns, not lying to promote stories from other journalists who have a personal vendetta against the company because they were forced to remove an article. This practice is still going on today.
After reading Tony Hetherington's letter, it was clear that our company had a problem with elements of the media that were not motivated by honesty and truth but in my opinion RACE!
We contacted CARTER RUCK, which is a well-known media law firm and set a plan into action.
After explaining the situation to Carter Ruck, it was plain to see that this was no longer standard journalistic practices we were dealing with but something far more personal and sinister. Tony Levene had an axe to grind.
The following letter was sent to Tony Hetherington and the Editor of the Daily Mail. In it, we answered Tony Hetherington's questions and laid out our concerns over poor journalistic practices between himself and Tony Levene. SEE THE LETTER HERE.
The Daily Mail decided not to publish their article and sent us the following letter….. SEE HERE .
No doubt, this would have infuriated Tony Hetherington, Tony Levene and the Daily Mail.
This had nothing to do with obstructing free speech and everything to do with what can only be described as a witch-hunt. If our argument had no merit, then the Daily Mail would have gone ahead and produced their article.
Since the closure of Tullett Brown, it has been ‘open season’ for these so-called journalists and they have gone on to write many shameful, under-researched articles since, not once contacting me to ask for a comment.
They are only investigative journalists by name. In my opinion, they are part of the old establishment, the ‘Fleet Street Boy’s Club’, abusing their power as journalists to project a narrative that suits their own, [in my opinion] racist agenda.
Carter Ruck's Wikipedia entry
They even went to the trouble of listing Tullett Brown in the Wikipedia notable clients and cases alongside stories involving Madeleine McCann, The Labour Party and The Government of Hungry. They were relentless!
As you have just read, our involvement with Carter Ruck never amounted to anything more than a letter to a national newspaper but somebody has decided that this is a famous CASE.
You have to bear in mind that Tullett Brown did not commit any crime. Did we deserve a place here? When your skin colour is of concern, then the answer is yes!
The Wikipedia section reads as follows:
Carter Ruck was reported as aiding 'scammers' Tullett Brown [27] enabling them to continue trading for 3 years whilst netting £3.2 million from investors. They threatened to sue journalists including Tony Levene if they reported the information publicly, thus stifling free speech. However, Levene himself stifled an investigation by another newspaper by alerting Carter-Ruck through his internet postings. Carter-Ruck appears to try and distance itself from criticism in the press by replying to The Guardian' s questions – "The partner who dealt with Tullett Brown is no longer at Carter-Ruck. Also, as you are aware, Tullett Brown is now in liquidation. We have no instructions to respond to your questions." [28]
No prizes for guessing who is behind this entry.
It's also worth noting another lie. We have just seen the content of the previous letter dated June 2012, yet in this Wikipedia entry, we were able to trade for three years after the Carter Ruck intervention. Carter Ruck did not defend us in the courts and our inclusion in this list is ridiculous. This is obviously from a journalist who has an axe to grind!
Andrew Penman’s article
This man is a liar. He turns up at my home wearing high-vis clothing pretending to be a courier. The true intention was for his hidden photographer to photograph me for his expose article, which ran in June 2012.
Although they took many photos during this brief encounter, he decided to use a photo, which caught my face in mid-expression, which would have given the reader the impression that I was angry or aggressive. This was done to feed into the stereotype that a 6ft black man is aggressive or violent. This certainly was not my demeanour during our encounter.
I know the racial stereotypes element to be true because Andrew Penman went on to write another article, this time calling me a conman but using a different picture (he obviously couldn't use the same image as before) from the same set of pictures they took from our first encounter. The picture was normal. So the mid-expression image they chose was deliberately done to con the public into thinking I was aggressive. Shameful journalism.
Joe Peacock from the Insolvency Service
Another liar and sue me if I'm wrong. He claimed that Carvier failed to cooperate with him.
Joe Peacock from the Insolvency Service has decided to include Tullett Brown in a recent blog post SEE HERE that he has written about a recent fraud case in which the owners of the company in question were convicted and jailed for 13 years. The blog leaves the reader with the impression that the Tullett Brown shareholders (the Nwikpos) also committed fraud and were jailed. This blog looks like it was designed to carry the Tullett Brown name to reignite the story, which is now 10 years old.
He even goes on to tell two blatant lies. He claims that Tullett Brown was the first company to sell carbon credits for investment. This is nonsense as there were plenty of companies operating in this area before we were involved.
He also claims that the land was sold on the basis that it WOULD have planning permission. As you now know from the document provided above that this simply isn’t true.
To make matters worse, Joe Peacock was one of the original investigators into Tullett Brown's activities and would have had access to all of the evidence provided on this website. He withheld all of this information.
Joe Peacock has access to our sales training manual, which said on the FRONT PAGE:
“Tullett Brown make no guarantees, only death and taxes”
“We do not have special relationships with local authorities”
“Investment in land is a long-term investment”
“All investments sold by Tullett Brown are for the long term”
Why would Joe Peacock go out of his way to mislead people about Tullett Brown 10 years after the event? My answer is institutional racism. Very sad but true.
Race and differential treatment
Compare our story to this actual criminal case resulting in jail sentences for the white directors.
You can read about this in the report below:
https://www.wired-gov.net/wg/wg-news-1.nsf/0/24830CB317A6000280257A0F005835EB?OpenDocument
Let’s compare our company to the one being discussed above:
· Both firms were incorporated near the same time
· Both firms were run and operated by brothers of similar ages
· Both firms operated in both land and carbon credits for investment
· Both firms operated in London
· Both firms raise circa £5,000,000
· Both firms were closed within months of each other
BUT ONLY ONE firm committed fraud – and it wasn’t our company.
The brothers were given custodial jail sentences, went on to commit more fraud, and were jailed again.
The difference between them and us?
- No faces splashed across a national newspaper
- No interest to cover the story from any national newspapers
- The brothers went on to commit more fraud and were jailed again
Where were the ‘investigative journalists’ Penman, Hetherington and Levene? In fact, where were any of the British press? They must have all had the day off.
EVEN AFTER COMMITTING FURTHER CRIME AND BEING JAILED AGAIN, THERE A BARELY ANY ARTICLES ON THIS.
Andrew Penman of the Mirror did write an article on the latest fraud. Interestingly, there are no photos of the brothers. Instead the article is centered on the Asian ‘Ring Leader’ complete with photos.
In writing this, we couldn't find any national newspaper articles concerning this case from 2012 at all. Only a few blogging websites made a mention.
Where was the famous case Wikipedia entry, next to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann etc.?
Where was their own dedicated Wikipedia page?
The sad truth is that they had white skin so they got a pass. Even though they committed fraud.
The brothers of Nigerian descent operated their business with integrity and took extra steps to ensure client safety, yet we were marched outside and publicly executed by the media!
Nearly every national newspaper covered the Tullett Brown story. Yet there was no crime, no criminal court, no jail sentence and we were called scammers and treated like criminals.
We see this level of racism in the mainstream constantly.
As an example, look at how the Daily Mail chose to report almost identical stories regarding two young footballers who bought homes for their mothers. The black player’s story is written in a completely negative light and his name isn't even mentioned in the title whilst the white player is called a starlet and is viewed in a much more positive light.
This is so racist it’s unreal! But at the same time, it’s subtle and could easily be missed if you are not paying attention. You need to look at these stories side by side, and then the inherent racism becomes obvious.
Check out the headlines for both stories below:
Does everyone see the problem here?
In her statement as the new Prime Minister on 13 July 2016, Theresa May said: “If you’re black, you’re treated more harshly by the criminal justice system than if you’re white.” My view is that differential treatment also occurs in press reporting. The speech addresses the justice system; it does not establish the motives of any journalist in this case.
Another example of how this sad system works today!
Look at this headline taken from an article written in the Mail on Sunday in August 2021. Tony Hetherington wrote it and the article is titled:
‘AT LAST, WATCHDOG BARKS AND “LOAN NOTE” FIRM FACES COLLAPSE.
This article is just another excuse to drag up the lies from the past, 10 years after the event. If I were white, he wouldn’t bother and would leave us alone because he is very aware that there is nothing interesting to report.