SHELL UNCOVER ACTIVITY/WITNESS INTIMIDATION RELATING TO THE SHELL SMART LITIGATION: My son subsequently sued Shell for breach of confidence and breach of contract in respect of another proposal put to Shell in strictest confidence (which became known as the Shell Smart litigation). The Guardian newspaper expressed an interest in our legal battles with Shell after Shell lawyers were cornered into admitting using undercover agents against us in the Smart litigation. 

Basically a number of sinister characters suddenly came on the scene in a short period of time, including an American gentleman who arrived from overseas and tracked down and interviewed our key witnesses, falsely claiming to be a journalist for The European newspaper.

Another undercover agent had been caught red-handed illegally opening private mail at our offices. The homes of our solicitor, a key witness and our own home were all burglarised in the run up to the Smart Trial and related documents examined. Shell denied any association with the burglaries and the intimidation of our witnesses. Copies of a selection of relevant self-explanatory correspondence is published below.

LETTER DATED 16 JUNE 1998 FROM MR COLIN JOSEPH, SENIOR PARTNER OF DJ FREEMAN (NOW KNOW AS KENDALL FREEMAN), THE SLEAZY SOLICITORS REPRESENTING THE ROYAL DUTCH SHELL GROUP

LETTER DATED 23 JUNE 1998 TO SHELL LEGAL DIRECTOR RICHARD WISEMAN

LETTER FAXED ON 10 JULY 1998 TO COMPLAINTS DEPT, OFFICE FOR THE SUPERVISION OF SOLICITORS REGARDING SHELL UNDERCOVER ACTIVITY AND WITNESS INTIMIDATION

LETTER FROM SHELL LEGAL DIRECTOR RICHARD WISEMAN ADMITTING THE "ACTIVITIES" OF UNDERCOVER AGENT "MR PHILLIPS" (NO TRACE HAS EVER BEEN FOUND OF HIM OR HIS FAKE COMPANY, "COFTON CONSULTANTS")

LETTER DATED 29 OCT 1998 FROM DJ FREEMAN, (NOW KNOWN AS KENDALL FREEMAN) THE SLEAZY SOLICITORS ACTING FOR THE DISREPUTABLE ROYAL DUTCH SHELL GROUP

MY SELF-EXPLANATORY RESPONSE LETTER DATED 29 OCTOBER 1998

Reference is made in my response letter to a leaflet concerning Mark Moody-Stuart which was distributed at Shell HQ buildings on an international basis. It warns of the failure of Shell management to abide by its own code of ethics - the Statement of General Business Principles - and that Shell was being completely eclipsed by "a more talented management at BP". Events have proven me right on both subjects. The leaflet can be read below.

LEAFLET ENTITLED "IS MR MARK MOODY-STUART A "GREEDY BAS***D"?

Returning to the uncover activity, Shell did not disclose to the Guardian or the Police who carried out the investigation, that at the time in question, Shell shared common directors/shareholders with a private spy firm, Hakluyt Limited. Directors of Shell Transport were also directors/shareholders of Hakluyt, a sinister organisation set up by former/current senior MI6 officials. In all innocence my son wrote to Shell directors at various times bringing matters to their attention including how Shell management was deliberately preventing information from reaching Shell shareholders. An example of one such letter to Sir Peter Homes can be accessed below:

LETTER TO SHELL TRANSPORT DIRECTOR SIR PETER HOLMES, FORMALLY CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE Of MANAGING DIRECTORS OF THE ROYAL DUTCH SHELL GROUP

Sir Peter and his fellow Shell director/Shell shareholder, Sir William Purves, were at the very time in question senior directors and major shareholders of Hakluyt - Sir Peter was President of the Hakluyt Foundation and Sir William was Chairman of Hakluyt & Company Limited. In other words they were the spy masters of this sinister organisation which has tentacles reaching into the very heart of the British Establishment. Indeed, the directors and associates of Hakluyt reads like a titled roll call of the British Establishment.

Shell later admitted using a Hakluyt undercover agent to infiltrate and sabotage NGO's campaigning against Shell during the same period: see: MI6 'Firm' Spied on Green Groups (Sunday Times archive article 17 June 2001).

We wrote repeatedly to Shell directors pleading with them to call off the undercover activity because it was scaring off our witnesses (which was no doubt the objective Shell had in mind). Examples below:

LETTER FROM ALFRED DONOVAN, SHELL SHAREHOLDERS ORGANISATION, TO MALCOLM BRINDED, CHAIRMAN, SHELL UK LTD 18 Jan 1999: Letter proposes Shell should cease using UNDERCOVER Agents in the Smart litigation

LETTER TO MAARTEN VAN DEN BERGH, PRESIDENT ROYAL DUTCH PETROLEUM COMPANY, 27 Jan 1999 WITH COPY OF LETTER SENT TO MALCOLM BRINDED CONTAINING PLEA FOR SHELL TO CEASE THE UNCOVER ACTIVITY

REPLY LETTER FROM MALCOLM BRINDED AS MANAGING DIRECTOR OF SHELL U.K. EXPLORATION AND PRODUCTION dated 27 Jan 1999: IGNORES PLEA TO CALL OFF UNDERCOVER ACTIVITY

REPLY LETTER FROM MAARTEN VAN DEN BERGH, VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE OF MANAGING DIRECTORS OF THE ROYAL DUTCH SHELL GROUP: HE ALSO IGNORES PLEA FOR SHELL TO CEASE UNDERCOVER OPERATIONS AGAINST MY FAMILY IN RUN UP TO SMART HIGH COURT TRIAL

FURTHER LETTER TO ROYAL DUTCH SHELL GROUP MANAGING DIRECTOR, MAARTEN VAN DEN BERGH, 15 February 1999

Maarten van den Bergh remains a director of Royal Dutch Petroleum and is currently on the steering committee dealing with possible changes in the structure of the Royal Dutch Shell Group

I believe that Shell's undercover activity in the run up to the Smart Trial perverted the course of justice.

I am currently awaiting a response from the Home Office on these and other associated matters including an undisclosed link between Mr Justice Laddie QC (the Judge who heard the Smart trial, which was settled in unsatisfactory/highly dubious circumstances) and the Moody-Stuart family.

During a meeting at Shell-Mex House on 10 September 1998 between an investigative journalist Simon Rines on behalf of the Guardian and Mr Richard Wiseman and Colin Joseph representing Shell, Mr Wiseman acted in material breach of the Funding Deed by handing Mr Rines a document containing details of the Funding Deed. Both sides tape-recorded the entire interview. Mr Rines retains a copy of his tape recording to this day.