Another Witness Statement Adds Depth to Thomas Flohr's Fraud Trial

Dear Industry,

Please forgive the blurb at the front end of this article to Thomas Flohr and his legal team; it's needed just to dispel the "you can not share this as it's against the court order" or "it is all lies, and these statements do not exist" noise.

Brace for Boredom: The Legal Warm-Up (skip to the witness statement explained if you wish):

Dear Thomas: The Truth About This Data: It's Public and Lawful

Before your legal team begins expending unnecessary resources, it's crucial to understand that my statements are firmly rooted in publicly accessible information from the Rolls building in the Page , a source of undeniable credibility. This is further reinforced by a legal opinion from a reputable UK lawyer and pertains only to details disclosed in open court or outlined in the fraud particulars of the claim.

Furthermore, the narrative your PR has been disseminating in the private jet charter market is a stark departure from the truth. Given that?you have initiated litigation?in Malta against my company and staff, who?were not involved in discussing your accounts and fraud?trial, it is imperative that the truth be used.

Regrettably, the intriguing matter of how you gained access to my personal WhatsApp group, "Vista Comms", will not require justification for well over a year until the trial commences, as it's evident you will struggle to show clean hands. A question you keep avoiding. ?

Thomas, I am compelled to set the record straight and counter the distorted reality shaped by your public relations efforts Vs your accounts, the 安永 warning of material risk to going concern, your Fraud Trial Hearings, and the bond negative watch placed by S&P Global plus the removal of positive outlook by 穆迪分析

END OF THE BORING BIT!

Sorry to take up the reader's time with this. It's essential to clarify that this is simply stellar research, not the scandalous violation of the court order that Thomas's crew seems so eager to claim and gossip about.

With Flohr's Message Cleared Up, Let's Move to the Next Witness Statement!

Courage to Testify: Witness #2 Huber Testifies Against Thomas Flohr

This is the witness statement that has been read out in open court ahead of Thomas's appeal hearing and explains the experience of Mr Huber, which has a striking similarity to that of Mr Bublik.

There are a number of witnesses in this case; there are hundreds and hundreds of pages. I have attempted to simplify the background, the allegations, and where there are speech quotes; these are direct from the witness statement, where I will provide sources on page detail.

Important Note: Just like Tim Horlick, Frontiers Capital (the fund that invested into what they thought was the main and only "Comprenduim") and Mr Bublik, Thomas also denies everything that Mr Huber is saying that is of fraudulent reference.

let us begin!

Huber and Flohr: Early Days to Rising Tensions

Mr Huber, who had a longstanding professional relationship with Thomas Flohr, recalls their initial collaboration in the 1980s at "CSC Leasing GmbH", where their roles complemented each other's in the sales department.

Despite their synergy, Huber noted Flohr's unorthodox business moves, such as taking several contracts from CSC to Comdisco Inc., which catalysed Flohr's rapid ascent in the company. A move that significantly boosted his career trajectory - Huber's witness statement reflects on this, noting Flohr

"improperly took several contracts from CSC," a move that significantly boosted his career trajectory (p. 304).

Huber also criticised Flohr's decision to relocate the headquarters of Comdisco Inc. from Slough to London in 1997, which was

"decided to better suit his lifestyle and image" (p. 304).

The Downfall at Comdisco

By January 2001, Flohr's professional fa?ade began to crumble as Huber describes his dismissal from Comdisco Inc. due to poor performance and unprofessional behaviour, which starkly contrasted with the successful image Flohr projected. Huber detailed an incident at a corporate conference around 1999, which marked a significant turning point. Flohr’s behaviour at this event was

"erratic and unprofessional," leading senior management to "begin to reconsider his suitability for the role" (p. 304).

This culminated in his dismissal and subsequent legal entanglements with the company

The Comdisco Germany Plot

After his dismissal, Flohr’s desperate circumstances led him to seek Huber's aid in 2002 for acquiring Comdisco Germany. Despite their past, Huber was initially reluctant, knowing Flohr's weakened professional standing.

However, swayed by their history, Huber agreed to partner with Flohr, who promised to secure the necessary financing (we know Flohr at this time is selling this concept to the Fraud Claimant Tim Horlick and the fund) while Huber handled operational strategies.

They agreed to share the business equally. Huber undertook due diligence, fulfilling his part of the agreement, but Flohr became evasive as financing issues surfaced, failing to uphold his financial commitments.

Huber expressed his dismay, recounting that Flohr "claimed to have no recollection of the Comdisco Germany Agreement and refused to provide Mr Huber with his 50% share of the company" (p. 307).

Deception and Loss

Flohr's lack of transparency and failure to secure funding were only the beginning. Huber later discovered that Flohr had independently finalised the acquisition of Comdisco Germany without him, betraying their agreement and Huber's trust. Flohr's denial of their partnership when confronted, effectively excluded Huber from the profits of an acquisition he had helped to facilitate. Huber's frustration is evident as he details Flohr's denial of any previous agreement; Huber tried again to reason:

After the discovery of Flohr's independent purchasing of Comdisco Germany - Huber tries to reason again "Mr Flohr claimed to have no recollection of the Comdisco Germany Agreement" (p. 307).

Parallel Betrayals: Huber's Story Echoes Bublik's Ordeal

For those who read the last witness statement - there is a parallel building...

The alleged deceitful patterns in Flohr's behaviour as stated by Bublik are now claimed to be the same by Huber.

These experiences by Huber with Flohr bear a striking resemblance to the ordeal faced by Bublik.

In Bublik's case, after the bankruptcy of Comdisco Inc., he and Flohr planned a Management Buy-Out of Comdisco Switzerland. Flohr, mirroring his actions with Huber, initially entered the agreement under the guise of partnership. However, he soon manipulated the situation, ultimately acquiring the company entirely under his name and excluding Bublik from any rightful ownership, despite prior agreements. As expressed,

"Mr Flohr put a significant amount of pressure on Mr Bublik by tying the importance of being brought in on the deal to their personal relationship" (p. 299).

This manipulation culminated in Bublik being forcefully ousted from the company and coerced into a settlement far below his due share (p. 302).

Conclusion: A Pattern of Predatory Practices

These accounts from now on both Huber and Bublik illustrate a clear pattern in Flohr’s business dealings: using personal relationships and trust to enter business ventures, then they alleged Flohr deployed deceit and legal manoeuvrings to exclude his partners from their rightful shares.

Such consistent patterns of unethical behaviour not only damaged these individual partnerships but also revealed a fundamental disregard for fair business practices and the professional integrity of those around him.

Flohr Denies the witness statements are true, and refutes the Fraud Claim argued by Sir Geoffrey Cox. Flohr and his legal team are running a "strike out" application and are now up in front of the appeal court in October.

Warmest,

John