COMBAT FAMILY COURT MISINFORMATION AND PERJURY
This is a South Carolina case which is being dealt with by the UK court. We need to transfer it to New York for the following reasons.
.I am an immigrant from Zimbabwe in the UK. I need help with a legal case based in South Carolina which has been subjected to significant perjury.
The callous manipulation of truth prevents justice and has caused great suffering for an innocent little boy.
Attached is US documentary proof that the court was lied to.
Included is the income statement that Jenks submitted to the court.
I am in a crisis situation or perhaps I would not be upturning every stone in my pursuit of justice - you are one of those stones.
Please be patient and read the following forwarded emails.
with thanks
To Whom It May Concern0
It has become clear to me that unless you intervene neither the South Carolina nor the English court will be able to bring about a just or truthful court decision.
Nicholas Jenks' details on the Yorkville Capital Management website were used to locate him in 2013. At the time New York stated that there was no one resident in New York by that name. Now there are suddenly two Nicholas Jenks - one in South Carolina and one in New York.
New York referred me to Washington dc and a court case was started there. In the Washington dc court transcript (in which Mr Jenks refers the case to South Carolina) Mr Jenks states under oath that he is a freelance consultant for the World Bank (on good authority he would have been earning 500USD a day.) He also states that he has business interests in the British West Indies and in central Africa. Mr Jenks also states that he has a farm in South Carolina.
However, In the subsequent South Carolina court case we hear none of this. In fact, South Carolina maintains that he is 'retired' and more recently 'on social benefits'. No explanation has ever been given for this huge financial discrepancy.
It is really difficult to understand how a totally different Nicholas Jenks could have tested positive to a paternity test.
It is also difficult to understand how a man with exactly the same life history as Ralph's father and whose details were used to locate him (the father) is another heretofore unheard of Nicholas The Nicholas Jenks of Yorkville Capital Management, New York.
I have been told that these two Nicholas Jenks' are two different people but I have been offered no verification. Why have they not compared the social security numbers of these allegedly different Jenks identities? Why hasn't a five year tax return report been asked for? Are their middle names the same?
South Carolina's counter argument is baseless and refuted both by the Washington dc court transcript and other surrounding details.
I was asked to approach my 85 year old aunt (who is on oxygen) to verify my account. This is her response:
To validate my relationship with the New York Nicholas Jenks the following people can be contacted:
Rosemarie Depp, USAID director in Zimbabwe in 1991 - the year I met Nicholas Jenks. He was a freelance consultant for USAID then. A letter from Rosemarie Depp is attached.
Tonya Himelfarb can be contacted. She is another former Director of USAID who is familiar with my dilemma. Letter attached.
Mary Barton who married Alan Doc from Zimbabwe is another USAID director - the one who introduced Nicholas Jenks to my family and I in 1991. Most recently Mary was the head of Haiti USAID.
I guess this 'new' Nicholas Jenks from Yorkville Capital Management has made it clear that he does not know me?
Mr Nicholas Jenks records at USAID should be subpoenaed. USAID has been unable to grant this request from me in the past. But legally they should be compelled to do it.
It is crucial that we prove that these two identities belong to the same man. Not to do so would make a mockery of the judicial system. Further as Mr Nicholas Jenks veracity cannot be relied on he may endeavour to use another (unnecessary) DNA test to falsify findings. These two Jenks identitys are one and the same.
I would appreciate a genuine attempt to reach a just and truthful conclusion.
Barbara
Forwarded correspondence between myself and Rosemarie Depp (former USAID Director and Head of Zimbabwe USAID in 1992 - the year I met the defendant, Nicholas Jenks). Please note his position is indefensible.
"Press is also an option. Target first his home-town papers.
Unfortunately never had responsibility. If you recall that when Heather asked me to investigate i think it was 2002 when I was headed back to DC to take over director job of Human Resources. Among the first things I did was consult USAID attorneys to see what could be done. I communicated to Heather that the sad answer was nothing. Employers do not get involved in family matters. During my time on the job i found that there were numerous child/divorce/custody cases where I could only listen and try to help informally. I also advised Heather about service of legal suit or any other notice saying that from overseas it is very hard and that the best way to get him was from the U.S.
one case where the USG as employer would get involved is from the standpoint of granting security clearances. Among the factors they consider would be If the employee's private behavior is having impact on work, demonstrates a pattern of lying and therefore lack of crediblity, has debts, etc. If these kinds of things are found then the person can have their clearance revoked or suspended. But since he is no longer an employee, this route is not open either unless he is consulting for a USG agency that requires a security clearance.
I was always glad but surprised that UK authorities would get involved but it seems they have run out of steam/options. If he's evading, it really is hard for you to do anything from the UK. As said, look for a US-based NGO that can help. If you know what state and county in which he resides, check website for family court and maintenance services and see if they have any way to help."
{end of communique by former USAID director]
Thank you for your coherent answer. Looking after your child is actually an international law and in Africa the employers do get involved. The UK naively stated that 'any court in the world would have heard (my case)". But they appear to be wising up. The letter I received yesterday instructed the US instead of asking them. Their diction did not prevaricate. They used the word "that" instead of "if."
Jenks has committed perjury by lying to several courts. Obstruction of justice. Financial Crime/ fraud. Even fabricated another identity. If the South Carolina court is to be believed (which is difficult but I will try). Benefits fraud too - he is claiming social security. That's my strong point - he is a criminal in more ways than one. (Child rights being of no import). He appears to believe that he can behave with impunity.
Why am I doing this? Jenks has been legally proven to be Ralph's father and Ralph needs support. Heather, (although she would never say so) needs a debt repaid. She also needs to see justice as she, too, has suffered. It took a toll on our relationship but I think, after all of this, we have grown close and learnt to appreciate each other. It hurts terribly that I may be, even in an indirect way, the cause of her distress.
To excuse Jenks from his responsibility conveys the message that if you are a criminal the law won't hold you to account. I think that is the wrong message.
If single mothers continue to accept injustice it will only get worse. Child rights will never mean anything at all - It has to stop.
I never got the sense that the US would protect my unborn child in any way whatsoever. I wanted my own people - the South Africans - which would have been right under international law, as it was the country in which the child was resident - to take the case.
When Ralph was six months old I approached the South African courts. They, at least, were sympathetic. But there was a long list of countries with which the South Africans did not share a legal contract enabling them to act. At the time this list was with the Minister of Internal Affairs and I was told it could take years for these issues to be resolved, At the time I felt that the US reaction to my little boy was utterly callous and I did not feel inclined to explore the nature of their compassion or lack thereof. The case had to wait until I was able to act. Officially, I have fought this case for five years.
Thank you for your coherent answer. Looking after your child is actually an international law and in Africa the employers do get involved. The UK naively stated that 'any court in the world would have heard (my case)". But they appear to be wising up. The letter I received yesterday instructed the US instead of asking them. Their diction did not prevaricate. They used the word "that" instead of "if."
Jenks has committed perjury by lying to several courts. Obstruction of justice. Financial Crime/ fraud. Even fabricated another identity. If the South Carolina court is to be believed (which is difficult but I will try). Benefits fraud too - he is claiming social security. That's my strong point - he is a criminal in more ways than one. (Child rights being of no import). He appears to believe that he can behave with impunity.
Why am I doing this? Jenks has been legally proven to be Ralph's father and Ralph needs support. Heather, (although she would never say so) needs a debt repaid. She also needs to see justice as she, too, has suffered. It took a toll on our relationship but I think, after all of this, we have grown close and learnt to appreciate each other. It hurts terribly that I may be, even in an indirect way, the cause of her distress.
To excuse Jenks from his responsibility conveys the message that if you are a criminal the law won't hold you to account. I think that is the wrong message.
If single mothers continue to accept injustice it will only get worse. Child rights will never mean anything at all - It has to stop.
I never got the sense that the US would protect my unborn child in any way whatsoever. I wanted my own people - the South Africans - which would have been right under international law, as it was the country in which the child was resident - to take the case.
When Ralph was six months old I approached the South African courts. They, at least, were sympathetic. But there was a long list of countries with which the South Africans did not share a legal contract enabling them to act. At the time this list was with the Minister of Internal Affairs and I was told it could take years for these issues to be resolved, At the time I felt that the US reaction to my little boy was utterly callous and I did not feel inclined to explore the nature of their compassion or lack thereof. The case had to wait until I was able to act. Officially, I have fought this case for five years.
.I am an immigrant from Zimbabwe in the UK. I need help with a legal case based in South Carolina which has been subjected to significant perjury.
The callous manipulation of truth prevents justice and has caused great suffering for an innocent little boy.
Attached is US documentary proof that the court was lied to.
Included is the income statement that Jenks submitted to the court.
I am in a crisis situation or perhaps I would not be upturning every stone in my pursuit of justice - you are one of those stones.
Please be patient and read the following forwarded emails.
with thanks
To Whom It May Concern0
It has become clear to me that unless you intervene neither the South Carolina nor the English court will be able to bring about a just or truthful court decision.
Nicholas Jenks' details on the Yorkville Capital Management website were used to locate him in 2013. At the time New York stated that there was no one resident in New York by that name. Now there are suddenly two Nicholas Jenks - one in South Carolina and one in New York.
New York referred me to Washington dc and a court case was started there. In the Washington dc court transcript (in which Mr Jenks refers the case to South Carolina) Mr Jenks states under oath that he is a freelance consultant for the World Bank (on good authority he would have been earning 500USD a day.) He also states that he has business interests in the British West Indies and in central Africa. Mr Jenks also states that he has a farm in South Carolina.
However, In the subsequent South Carolina court case we hear none of this. In fact, South Carolina maintains that he is 'retired' and more recently 'on social benefits'. No explanation has ever been given for this huge financial discrepancy.
It is really difficult to understand how a totally different Nicholas Jenks could have tested positive to a paternity test.
It is also difficult to understand how a man with exactly the same life history as Ralph's father and whose details were used to locate him (the father) is another heretofore unheard of Nicholas The Nicholas Jenks of Yorkville Capital Management, New York.
I have been told that these two Nicholas Jenks' are two different people but I have been offered no verification. Why have they not compared the social security numbers of these allegedly different Jenks identities? Why hasn't a five year tax return report been asked for? Are their middle names the same?
South Carolina's counter argument is baseless and refuted both by the Washington dc court transcript and other surrounding details.
I was asked to approach my 85 year old aunt (who is on oxygen) to verify my account. This is her response:
To validate my relationship with the New York Nicholas Jenks the following people can be contacted:
Rosemarie Depp, USAID director in Zimbabwe in 1991 - the year I met Nicholas Jenks. He was a freelance consultant for USAID then. A letter from Rosemarie Depp is attached.
Tonya Himelfarb can be contacted. She is another former Director of USAID who is familiar with my dilemma. Letter attached.
Mary Barton who married Alan Doc from Zimbabwe is another USAID director - the one who introduced Nicholas Jenks to my family and I in 1991. Most recently Mary was the head of Haiti USAID.
I guess this 'new' Nicholas Jenks from Yorkville Capital Management has made it clear that he does not know me?
Mr Nicholas Jenks records at USAID should be subpoenaed. USAID has been unable to grant this request from me in the past. But legally they should be compelled to do it.
It is crucial that we prove that these two identities belong to the same man. Not to do so would make a mockery of the judicial system. Further as Mr Nicholas Jenks veracity cannot be relied on he may endeavour to use another (unnecessary) DNA test to falsify findings. These two Jenks identitys are one and the same.
I would appreciate a genuine attempt to reach a just and truthful conclusion.
Barbara
Forwarded correspondence between myself and Rosemarie Depp (former USAID Director and Head of Zimbabwe USAID in 1992 - the year I met the defendant, Nicholas Jenks). Please note his position is indefensible.
"Press is also an option. Target first his home-town papers.
Unfortunately never had responsibility. If you recall that when Heather asked me to investigate i think it was 2002 when I was headed back to DC to take over director job of Human Resources. Among the first things I did was consult USAID attorneys to see what could be done. I communicated to Heather that the sad answer was nothing. Employers do not get involved in family matters. During my time on the job i found that there were numerous child/divorce/custody cases where I could only listen and try to help informally. I also advised Heather about service of legal suit or any other notice saying that from overseas it is very hard and that the best way to get him was from the U.S.
one case where the USG as employer would get involved is from the standpoint of granting security clearances. Among the factors they consider would be If the employee's private behavior is having impact on work, demonstrates a pattern of lying and therefore lack of crediblity, has debts, etc. If these kinds of things are found then the person can have their clearance revoked or suspended. But since he is no longer an employee, this route is not open either unless he is consulting for a USG agency that requires a security clearance.
I was always glad but surprised that UK authorities would get involved but it seems they have run out of steam/options. If he's evading, it really is hard for you to do anything from the UK. As said, look for a US-based NGO that can help. If you know what state and county in which he resides, check website for family court and maintenance services and see if they have any way to help."
{end of communique by former USAID director]
Thank you for your coherent answer. Looking after your child is actually an international law and in Africa the employers do get involved. The UK naively stated that 'any court in the world would have heard (my case)". But they appear to be wising up. The letter I received yesterday instructed the US instead of asking them. Their diction did not prevaricate. They used the word "that" instead of "if."
Jenks has committed perjury by lying to several courts. Obstruction of justice. Financial Crime/ fraud. Even fabricated another identity. If the South Carolina court is to be believed (which is difficult but I will try). Benefits fraud too - he is claiming social security. That's my strong point - he is a criminal in more ways than one. (Child rights being of no import). He appears to believe that he can behave with impunity.
Why am I doing this? Jenks has been legally proven to be Ralph's father and Ralph needs support. Heather, (although she would never say so) needs a debt repaid. She also needs to see justice as she, too, has suffered. It took a toll on our relationship but I think, after all of this, we have grown close and learnt to appreciate each other. It hurts terribly that I may be, even in an indirect way, the cause of her distress.
To excuse Jenks from his responsibility conveys the message that if you are a criminal the law won't hold you to account. I think that is the wrong message.
If single mothers continue to accept injustice it will only get worse. Child rights will never mean anything at all - It has to stop.
I never got the sense that the US would protect my unborn child in any way whatsoever. I wanted my own people - the South Africans - which would have been right under international law, as it was the country in which the child was resident - to take the case.
When Ralph was six months old I approached the South African courts. They, at least, were sympathetic. But there was a long list of countries with which the South Africans did not share a legal contract enabling them to act. At the time this list was with the Minister of Internal Affairs and I was told it could take years for these issues to be resolved, At the time I felt that the US reaction to my little boy was utterly callous and I did not feel inclined to explore the nature of their compassion or lack thereof. The case had to wait until I was able to act. Officially, I have fought this case for five years.
Thank you for your coherent answer. Looking after your child is actually an international law and in Africa the employers do get involved. The UK naively stated that 'any court in the world would have heard (my case)". But they appear to be wising up. The letter I received yesterday instructed the US instead of asking them. Their diction did not prevaricate. They used the word "that" instead of "if."
Jenks has committed perjury by lying to several courts. Obstruction of justice. Financial Crime/ fraud. Even fabricated another identity. If the South Carolina court is to be believed (which is difficult but I will try). Benefits fraud too - he is claiming social security. That's my strong point - he is a criminal in more ways than one. (Child rights being of no import). He appears to believe that he can behave with impunity.
Why am I doing this? Jenks has been legally proven to be Ralph's father and Ralph needs support. Heather, (although she would never say so) needs a debt repaid. She also needs to see justice as she, too, has suffered. It took a toll on our relationship but I think, after all of this, we have grown close and learnt to appreciate each other. It hurts terribly that I may be, even in an indirect way, the cause of her distress.
To excuse Jenks from his responsibility conveys the message that if you are a criminal the law won't hold you to account. I think that is the wrong message.
If single mothers continue to accept injustice it will only get worse. Child rights will never mean anything at all - It has to stop.
I never got the sense that the US would protect my unborn child in any way whatsoever. I wanted my own people - the South Africans - which would have been right under international law, as it was the country in which the child was resident - to take the case.
When Ralph was six months old I approached the South African courts. They, at least, were sympathetic. But there was a long list of countries with which the South Africans did not share a legal contract enabling them to act. At the time this list was with the Minister of Internal Affairs and I was told it could take years for these issues to be resolved, At the time I felt that the US reaction to my little boy was utterly callous and I did not feel inclined to explore the nature of their compassion or lack thereof. The case had to wait until I was able to act. Officially, I have fought this case for five years.
View Comments