Email to French law professor Yves Strickler
X. (Anonymity granted by decision of the Court)
Subject: : Bonne Année!
Date sent: January 27, 2023, 16:53 (Beijing time)
To: Yves Strickler (French law professor)
Cc: Many people including the FBI and the State Department, I will update this section later
Dear Professor Strickler,
Thank you for reminding me to pay close attention to compliance. You are absolutely right!
Please don’t worry if you don’t immediately have the time to read all of the emails I am CCing to you regarding the pattern of racketeering activity McDonald’s Corporation has engaged into.
There are multiple reasons why I decided to CC these emails to you. I will explain why another time.
However, I can tell you now that I want to explain to journalists, to the FBI, and to other people, what happened during the various legal procedures in France.
If I don’t clearly explain what happened, they might wonder how come, if I am telling the truth, McDonald’s has never been indicted so far in France.
French authorities are obviously dangerously incompetent, it’s a fact and I have to be honest, I can’t lie. But I am also accusing McDonald’s and/or their accomplices of having corrupted some French officials.
The fact McDonald’s hired the law firm founded by the parents of Frédéric Péchenard, who used to be the General Director of the French National Police, is shocking. I believe it’s against the compliance policy of McDonald’s Corporation.
It’s especially surprising considering there was a time when McDonald’s France was accused by the Ministry of the Interior in France of running an illegal lottery.
Corruption is not easy to prove, but I believe I can do it.
That’s one of the reasons I want to quote a few things you told me since I first contacted you on June 28, 2017. I thought it wouldn’t be right to quote you without letting you know that I am publishing online some of the emails and explanations you sent to me. That’s one of the reasons (not the only one) I am CCing almost everything to you.
As for the pattern of racketeering activity (18 U.S. Code § 1961 - Definitions), not only did I realize that I could I demonstrate the guilt of McDonald’s beyond a reasonable doubt, after I’ve recently found out about the legal case McDonald’s Corp. v. Simon Marketing, Inc., I believe I can now demonstrate their guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt, that is with absolute certainty. 100%!
The Justice Manual of the United States Department of Justice even has a section related to “CORPORATE COMPLIANCE PROGRAMS” in Title 9 § 28.800:
The comment section clearly warns that “the existence of a corporate compliance program, even one that specifically prohibited the very conduct in question, does not absolve the corporation from criminal liability under the doctrine of respondeat superior. […]”
“Prosecutors should therefore attempt to determine whether a corporation’s compliance program is merely a “paper program” or whether it was designed, implemented, reviewed, and revised, as appropriate, in an effective manner.”
The compliance program of McDonald’s Corporation is indeed a paper program.
Back in 2015, I kept trying to warn the executives of McDonald’s Corporation. One of the executives I kept trying to notify, since 2012, was the General Counsel and de facto head of the Global Compliance Office Ms. Gloria Santona, even though someone else held the title of Chief Global Compliance Officer. In 2015, I succeeded to talk to Ms. Santona on the phone and she even answered me in writing to confirm that McDonald’s Corporation was “of course, [taking] such inquiries seriously.” You can see the evidence here:
The demonstration I made back then, regarding the Collect-to-Win fraud, was clear and articulate. McDonald’s executives understood instantly that they were committing fraud and money laundering.
Professor Strickler, you don’t to reply. If I have some questions, I will let you know but I feel I have no more questions and I am now trying to work with Mr. Lehman to see how to take this major criminal case to the United States. I told Mr. Lehman that according to me, it’s the FBI who should do the heavy lifting, not us. But as a key witness in this major case, I want to help the FBI and the DoJ and the SEC the best way I can.
I guess the FBI is already investigating, of course, even though they haven’t answered me yet. But as a federal crime victim, I have a number of rights “including the right to limited information about the status of the case” (Source: https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/financial_crime.pdf/view) so I will respectfully keep pressing them to let me know what’s the status of the case and who is the FBI Victim Specialist assigned to my case.
Professor Strickler, again, you’ve been incredibly helpful over the years and I feel extremely grateful for the help you provided. I will never forget how so many times I felt I was going to lose my sanity and how thanks to your replies I knew that the problem wasn’t me but the French authorities.
So, again, thank you 🙏
X. (Anonymity granted by decision of the Court)
Taiyuan, Shanxi, China,
January 27, 2023 16:53 Beijing time (+0800)