Denouncing Fiona Brassil – Family Law Lawyer – Dublin Ireland

0
91

You can watch a video of this blog post here or read it for your self:


Hello and welcome to this latest blog post.

Something interesting is happening out there in the big wide world. A very, very, VERY small number of women are realizing that championing and supporting the criminal abuse of men in the divorce courts has pissed men off.

S-H-O-C-K-I-N-G!

After decades of hating on men and inciting the government to ruin their lives and then sneering at them for being impoverished and hurling abuse in to their graves after they commit suicide.

A few men like me are willing to stand up in the public in our own names and denounce these women as vile, disgusting deeply evil creatures worthy of the hatred and contempt of us men.

And women don’t like being told they are vile, disgusting deeply evil creatures worthy of the hatred and contempt of us men.

Sure, they will solve the problem of being called “vile, disgusting deeply evil creatures worthy of the hatred and contempt of us men” by, you know, calling me a paedophile or a wife beater or a rapist or a child abuser.

They will hurl abuse and insults at me endlessly because, you know, committing the further crime of slander and hurling abuse at a man who is the victim of 13 years of crimes is how you show him that you are a really nice woman! Right?

Oh. No. That’s right.

Committing the further crime of slander and hurling abuse at a man who has been criminally abused for 13 years is just adding more evidence that women are, in fact, “vile, disgusting deeply evil creatures worthy of the hatred and contempt of us men.”

And low and behold some women are actually noticing this now after 13 years.

If you don’t want to be called a “vile, disgusting deeply evil creatures worthy of the hatred and contempt of us men” then probably best not to be that when you are addressing a man who has been criminally abused for 13 years.

And some women on Parler are noticing.

So. Now that us men are fighting back via MGTOW and fighting back by teaching young men and boys as young as 10 that it is fair, right and just to hate and despise women?

The women are FINALLY stopping to think about whether they want to keep hurling abuse at us men and slandering us and lying about us and to us.

Only took 13 years, right?

So now I am telling women.

“You are very good at lying about men and slandering men to try and get them fired from their jobs and get them to commit suicide.

The most notable such case of perjury being used to attack a man being Christine Blasey Fords perjury against Brett Kavanaugh trying to derail his nomination to the supreme court.

But you women are NOT very good at denouncing criminal women and man hating women and getting them fired from their jobs and ruining their incomes.”

So you women?

I am going to give you some practice at destroying a woman’s ability to earn her income.

And believe me, the two women I am going to give you practice with fully deserve to be attacked and publicly denounced and have their ability to earn their incomes destroyed because they were active participants in destroying my ability to earn my income.

These are:

  1. Sarah Bevan
  2. Fiona Brassil.

They were my ex wifes family law lawyers and they are man haters and rabid feminists.

This blog post is the blog post for Fiona Brassil.

Just for a start?

You can get copies of all Jennifer’s perjurous divorce court documents in Ireland on this button.

Irish Court Docs

You can get the full case file on this button:

Get Full Case File

So? How much of a man hater is Fiona Brassil?

Fiona Brassil is such a man hater that she:

  1. Told my wife that “perjury is just a negotiating tactic”.
  2. Told my wife that ebezzling EUR18,000 from our company as a company director was perfectly ok.
  3. Supported the false allegation (under oath) that I committed adultery.
  4. Supported the false allegation (under oath) that I “attempted to hit Jennifer with a wine bottle” in a DV incident in 1997.

 

So I want to deal with each of these issues in that order.

Jennifer’s affidavits, obviously, were submitted to the court with the full agreement of Fiona Brassil.



1. Perjury is a negotiating tactic.

Apparently, Fiona Brassil, and all women lawyers, consider perjury as a negotiating tactic knowing that no woman in the western world has ever been jailed for perjury in a divorce court.

The claim is that the divorce courts are civil courts and not criminal courts so perjury is not a crime in these courts.

The problem women have with this comment is that MEN are jailed for perjury in these courts routinely.

Men are routinely jailed for non payment of orders of these civil courts where payment of orders is voluntary.

So. Perjury is a crime. Even when women do it. Even in a divorce court.

Women refuse to take that position because they are evil man haters.


 

2. Embezzlement is fine.

I have the email trail between Jennifer and Fiona from August 2007 were Jennifer informed Fiona that she embezzled EUR18,000 from our company.

Fiona did not respond with an objection to that email.

At a later date Jennifer said to me “Fiona told me that taking the money from the company was ok”.

I told Jennifer that she should ask for that comment in writing from Fiona.

Not surprisingly Fiona was not willing to put that comment in writing.

It was only then that Jennifer realized that her lawyer had told her to take the money verbally but would not put it in writing.

Of course, if you put Fiona Brassil on the stand she would deny ever saying to Jennifer that she could embezzle EUR18,000.

And, of course, Jennifer is a proven criminal perjuror so nothing she says can be taken at face value.

Her word is worthless. She requires evidence to back up what she says.

However, I have the email from Jennifer to Fiona telling Fiona that Jennifer embezzled EUR18,000 from our company and there was no objection in email from Fiona in return.

All men know the reason there was no objection is that she supported the crime.

But that’s not proof. We just know it’s true.


3. The false allegation I committed adultery.

This is what was written in Jennifer’s affidavit with the full approval of Fiona Brassil.

“There was trouble in the marriage between the parties right from the beginning of said marriage. The Respondent (meaning me) was involved with a third party and committed adultery with the said third party within six months of the date of the marriage. In 1993 he wanted to move in with the said party. The Respondent told the Applicant that she was not a satisfying wife to him. The Respondent still has contact with this woman. However, the trust between the parties was severely tested.”

Those are the lies, perjury, that Fiona Brassil was willing to put before a court.

With respect to this allegation?

I contacted the woman in question and I asked her if she was willing to sign an affidavit under oath to say that we did not commit adultery.

She was more than happy to sign that affidavit because we did not commit adultery.

I went back to Fiona Brassil and Jennifer and pointed out that the woman in question was willing to sign an affidavit stating she never committed adultery with me and that the adultery allegation was perjury which I could prove in a court if need be.

There was no retraction of the false allegation and no apology for the false allegation.

Apparently false allegations of adultery by women in divorce courts is ok by Fiona Brassil.

Now. There are some true statements in that passage.

“There was trouble in the marriage between the parties right from the beginning of said marriage.”

This is true.

Jennifer chose to treat me like crap right from the get go including rejecting my “advances” lets call them on our wedding night.

“The Respondent told the Applicant that she was not a satisfying wife to him.”

Absolutely true.

With Jennifer’s dramatic change in behavior right after getting married I consistently told her she was a bad wife and I wanted back the woman I fell in love with.

Indeed, I gave Jennifer the feedback she was a bad wife for all but 6 months of our 18 year marriage. The 6 months right after the forum in February 1995.

Indeed, if I had not been lied to about the true nature of women by my father, my mother, my aunts, my uncles, my grand mothers and pretty much every woman and girl I ever met? I would have divorced Jennifer within months of getting married.

But I thought the woman who I had known for the prior 13 years was the REAL Jennifer and this hateful abusive shrew who showed up AFTER the wedding was the FAKE Jennifer.

Having been so propagandized for so long about “women are wonderful” the thought never crossed my mind that the Jennifer of the prior 13 years was the FAKE Jennifer and this hateful abusive shrew was the REAL Jennifer.

Indeed, it was not until 2010 when I was dating a Ukrainian woman and we were talking about Jennifer and her terrible behaviour for the purpose of me explaining to this woman the behaviour that was NOT acceptable to me that she asked me:

Sue: “Didn’t your mother warn you about what women are really like? Didn’t she tell you that most women are like Jennifer. Didn’t she teach you how to know the true nature of a woman?”

Peter: “No, she taught me none of that.”

Sue: “Wow, your mother was a complete bitch.”

Peter: “Oh. that’s a bit harsh don’t you think?”

Sue: “No. I am a mother of one son. It is my job to make sure he is taught just how evil so many women are. Women are far more evil and deceptive than men. A man who is evil will tell you so. A woman who is evil will tell you she loves you to win your trust.

Your mother sent you out in to the world completely defenseless against evil women like Jennifer. She did not become evil after your wedding. She was always evil.

She just showed her true self after your wedding because she knew you were a good Christian man who took his vows seriously and that you sincerely loved her.

Your mother betrayed you. She is a complete bitch.”

Ouch, eh?

And when this Sue said:

“She did not become evil after your wedding. She was always evil. She just showed her true self after your wedding because she knew you were a good Christian man who took his vows seriously and that you sincerely loved her.”

That was the first time it ever crossed my mind that Jennifer was a truly evil woman right from the get go. That all her protests of how she had been bullied and how she had been the victim all across her lifetime was her evil way of bullying others.

It was not a “mistake”. It was not an “accident”. It was her STRATEGY!

This is why Jennifer could never make it to “honest”. Her STRATEGY in life was to lie.

Now, women say “Not all women are like that” and say that “men must be careful selecting women” and put the blame of a man being successfully lied to on the man.

It is HIS FAULT he was successfully lied to for choosing the wrong woman.

It is not HER FAULT she is a liar.

Funny, but when a husband hits his wife I have never heard a woman say:

“It is HER FAULT for selecting the violent husband it is not HIS fault for being violent”.

And that’s how evil women are.

Women will not hold a woman at fault for perjury.

Women will say “it is HIS FAULT for marrying her”.

This is why I teach young men ALL WOMEN ARE PATHOLOGICAL LIARS.

The women object and the women get upset.

They say “you hate women and not all women are like that”.

Well?

Which ones?

Which women are NOT pathological liars?

How can we tell?

And the answer is we men can’t tell which women are pathological liars and you women won’t tell us.

So to protect the young men we teach them ALL WOMEN ARE PATHOLOGICAL LIARS the same way we teach small boys ALL SNAKES AND SPIDERS ARE DANGEROUS.

And by teaching young men ALL WOMEN ARE PATHOLOGICAL LIARS we remove the ability of those women who are pathological liars to harm them.

The women who are NOT pathological liars?

The women who are self described “good women”?

They should have supported the good men.

But they supported the evil women.

So they are no better than the evil women they supported.

Evil women like Fiona Brassil and Jennifer Toal who have been supported by ALL WOMEN.

There have been NO WOMEN publicly denounce these criminal women.

So ALL WOMEN are to be treated just like these two criminal women.


 

4. The allegation that I “TRIED” to hit Jennifer with a wine bottle.

Written in the affidavit is this statement:

“There have been violent instances towards the Applicant but she was afraid to apply for a barring order. On one occasion the Respondent was arrested when he tried to hit the Applicant with a wine bottle. The children were in the house at the time and were very frightened.”

The patent absurdity of this lie is obvious to all men and even most women.

I am 187cm tall (6′ 1″) and at that time, 1997, I weighed 90kgs (200lbs).

Jennifer was 154 cm tall (5′ 4″) and weighed about 60kgs (132lbs)

The assertion I “TRIED BUT FAILED” to hit her with a whine bottle is beyond absurd and laughable.

If I wanted to hit Jennifer with a whine bottle I would have hit her with a whine bottle.

And there is nothing she could have done to stop me.

And if anyone doubts that? Then let us go to a court room in front of a jury now and hand me a whine bottle and let Jennifer defend herself from me with a wine bottle in my hand and have her show the jury how she defended herself when I “TRIED” to hit her with a wine bottle.

Anyone want to do that? Or do you think Jennifer might just wind up dead if I am given a free shot at her with a wine bottle in my hand?

With our size and strength difference I could EASILY KILL Jennifer by hitting her over the head with a wine bottle and she would have absolutely no way to defend her self.

To say I TRIED to hit her with a wine bottle and FAILED is LAUGHABLE!

What REALLY happened?

As the statement notes her two children were there.

This was April 1997, Easter, and Jarrod was 14 and Kristen was 16.

So, according to this statement, we are to believe that Jennifer’s 14 and 16 year old children just stood there and let me attack their mother with a wine bottle?

N-O-N-S-E-N-S-E-!!

What really happened was Jennifer had lied to me and caused me great inconvenience.

I had called her out on her lie in front of her children and called her a liar in front of her children because she lied to me.

I told her, in front of her children, that it was not acceptable for my wife to lie to me. And I was very angry at her lie and it is a long story as to why I was so angry with her lie.

She complained that she did not like being called a liar and that if I continued to call her a liar she would call the police.

I told her she was most welcome to call the police and complain to them her husband was calling her a liar and she didn’t like it because she was a liar.

So she called the police with Kristen, Jarrod and I standing next to her in the kitchen so we could hear what she said to the police.

We could only hear her side of the conversation.

Jennifer: “I want you to please send some police to my home because my husband is calling me a liar and I am really angry and upset that he is calling me a liar.”

Presumed likely response: “Did you lie to your husband maam?”

Jennifer: “Yes, I did lie to him and I did cause him great inconvenience but that’s no reason for him to call me a liar in front of my children.”

Presumed likely response: “This is not a police matter maam. We can not send officers to the home of a woman who has lied to her husband and she is upset he is calling her a liar.”

Jennifer: “So what do I have to say to get you to send police to my home?”

Presumed likely response: “You would have to tell us you feel fearful of your husband. You would have to say the words “I fear my husband”. Then we can send police to your home.”

Jennifer: (Remember, I have two witnesses who heard this) “So, if I tell you I feel fearful of my husband you can send police to my home?”

Presumed likely response: “Yes Maam”.

Jennifer: “I feel fearful of my husband”

Presumed likely response: “I will dispatch officers right away”.

Now, when the officers came to the home I showed them around, introduced them to the two teen age children, and showed them the sleeping children.

I told the officers Jennifer lied to the despatcher to get them to come to the home. The two teenage children confirmed that their mother had lied to me and to the despatcher.

The officers asked me would I be willing to come to the station and make a statement under oath of the matters at hand.

I said I would be pleased to come to the station with them and that once I had made my statement they could come and collect my wife and she could go to the station to make a statement as well.

The two officers then attacked me and violently assaulted me and badly injured me without any provocation on my part.

I had already agreed to accompany them to the station to make a sworn written statement.

It was later claimed (in April 1997) that there was legislation in the NSW Parliament that required the MANDATORY use of the element of surprise and overwhelming force to arrest the man at the scene REGARDLESS of what is found once the officers arrived.

Further, the two officers attempted the crime of murdering me by hurling me in to the paddy wagon head first with the intent of smashing my head against the metal plate at the end of the occupant area behind the drivers position.

It was only my many years of football experience that I got my now badly damaged arms up in front of my head before I smashed in to the metal plate.

But for that experience I could have been killed or badly injured.

I was thrown with more than enough force to break my neck if I hit the metal plate at the incorrect angle.

That was attempted murder.

Nothing less.

So in the statement “Respondent was arrested” the cause of the arrest was my wife lying to the police and a MANDATORY ARREST POLICY.

Nothing to do with me.

And Fiona Brassil knew this and put it in to this document anyway.

Further, Jennifer was required to attend a magistrates court the following Friday with a lawyer we had engaged to testify to a magistrate under oath in front of the two arresting officers.

Jennifer spent 20 minutes explaining to the magistrate how she had lied to the police. How once I was being assaulted and badly injured she had begged the arresting officers to let me go and told them she had lied.

She was required, by the magistrate, to convince him that she had lied to the police with a malicious false statement and that she was telling the truth now.

The officers told the truth about what happened at the scene and Jennifer was found to have lied to the despatcher and I was found completely innocent of the false claim.

My arrest record was expunged and the DVO was expunged because they were the result of a malicious lie.

Jennifer was also required, by me, to stand in front of her parents and my parents (separately) and tell each set of parents that the reason I was arrested and badly injured was that she had maliciously lied to the police and that it was all her fault and that I was faultless in this incident.

Jennifer was required, by me, to give me her solemn word that she would never lie to me or about me ever again.

I told her that if she ever lied to me or about me ever again in our marriage I would walk out that door that very minute.

Surprisingly for me at the time Jennifer took three days to come back to me and make that promise.

I didn’t know why then. Now I do.

So, dear reader, THAT is the TRUTH of that police incident.

Jennifer called the police and made a malicious false statement.

She lied.

I was attacked, badly injured and could have been killed as a result of that lie.

As I said. I was 187cm tall and 90kgs and in very reasonable physical condition in terms of being able to defend myself when attacked.

The two cops were about 195cm tall and about 100kgs and younger and obviously worked out regularly.

They knew when they attacked me using the element of surprise I was likely to fight back.

So they used overwhelming force and took the initiative to badly injured me to make sure I COULD NOT fight back.

Subsequent to the arrest and being released from my jail cell I spoke to the commanding officer.

I told him his two officers were in deep trouble for assaulting me.

The commanding officer said that I must hold them harmless because he was the commanding officer and he ordered them to use overwhelming force and the element of surprise.

He claimed that this was written in legislation.

I told him that on Tuesday (Monday was Easter Monday) I would be hiring a lawyer and if my lawyer did not confirm his statement I would be coming back to this station to kill him.

The commanding officer was slightly shocked at my statement and asked me what I meant.

I told him that it was his job to protect me and my family and that is what I pay my taxes for.

And if he had used my tax money to assault me and badly injure me and lock me in a cage and it was NOT written in legislation that he do so.

I would be back to kill him.

He held his nerve and responded that I would, indeed, be told that this was in the legislation by my lawyer because he himself had read that legislation.

My lawyer confirmed that written in legislation was that officers MUST MANDATORILY use overwhelming force and the element of surprise so as to ENSURE no officer is harmed in such arrests.

This was justified on the basis that some times during arrests men had harmed officers.

(NO SHIT!! You come in to a mans home and assault him and he harms you? Like really?!)

Funnily enough, none of the Premier of New South Wales, the Minister for Police, the President of the NSW Law Society, nor any member of parliament nor any lawyer nor any police officer has been able to bring forth a copy of this legislation in the last 23 years.

Isn’t THAT interesting.

Now, Fiona Brassil put that lie, that perjury, in to Jennifer’s statement knowing full well it was a lie.

Knowing full well it was perjury.

It was put there to slander my good name, under oath, as perjury.

Well you women?

ARE YOU GOING TO CANCEL FIONA BRASSIL FOR THESE CRIMES?!

ARE YOU GOING TO DESTROY HER ABILITY TO EARN HER INCOME LIKE SHE DESTROYED MY ABILITY TO EARN MY INCOME?!

AND IF YOU DO NOT!!

YOU ARE NO BETTER THAN SHE IS!!!

There were lots of other examples of perjury in Jennifer’s documents.

There are lots of other examples of the pure hatred and contempt that Fiona Brassil has for men in these documents.

Fiona Brassil thought it was just fine to demand 100% of my after tax income via the threat of being jailed.

Fiona Brassil thought it was just fine to freeze my bank accounts.

Fiona Brassil thought it was just fine to freeze the bank account of my company so that it could not pay it’s taxes and so it was shut down by the tax office.

ALL THAT WAS PERFECTLY OK BY FIONA BRASSIL AND IT IS ALL DOCUMENTED!!!

AND IF YOU WOMEN DO NOT DISPENSE JUSTICE TO THIS CRIMINAL WOMAN!?!?!?!

US MEN WILL!!!!!!!

AND IT WILL BE VERY, VERY, VERY SEVER JUSTICE BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE JAILS!!!

HOW DARE YOU WOMEN ALLOW THIS WOMAN TO COMMIT THESE CRIMES AND ALLOW THEM TO STAND FOR THIRTEEN YEARS!!!

JUST HOW DARE YOU!!!!

You women should be cancelling Fiona Brassil and destroying her business because her business is hatred and lies against men which is a very, very dangerous business because the blowback is against ALL WOMEN because YOU SUPPORT FIONA BRASSIL!

I think I have made my self clear.

You can put your comments below.

Here are the contact details for Fiona Brassils and her boss Donal Spring.

These are for you women who want to go and talk to them about giving YOU a bad name.

Fiona Brassil

Donal Spring

Peter Andrew Nolan.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here