Marianne Grin (Марианны Гринь) – Discovery of Fraud – part 1

Marianne Grin, before resorting to the crime of parental child abduction in September 2011, where she violated an Italian custody decree and secretly escaped from Florence via Venice, Italy to St. Petersburg, Russia, embarked on a strategic campaign of false accusations against anyone she viewed as being against her.

The Italian custody decree stated than neither parent could take the children out of Italy without consent of the other. The father did not consent to having the children removed from their birthplace and home, to missing a year of education, and certainly not to locking them up in Russian institutions away from their family and friends.

See the key points of Judge Papait’s June 2011 decree (from the Florence court files):

Judge Papait Decree June 2011 Key points (taken from the official English Translation of the Italian Court document)

Ms. Grin had done the same thing at least once before, against her own mother, in the US. (see the blog post on Inessa Grin, ‘Isolated Grandmother, Statement of Despair, Jan 2009)

In her campaign of accusations in Italy, Grin targeted a number of women for her complaints: her sister-in-law, her former nanny, her former husband’s fiancé, his lawyer (female), the judge in the divorce case (female), her youngest son’s psychologist (female), as well as the court-appointed psychologist (male).

Why? False criminal accusations in Italy can tie up a divorce and custody case for years. This was legal strategy.

How do we know this? Because that’s exactly what Grin told her lawyers. She told them, “we must agree on domestic violence accusations as strategy.”

None of the accusations were based on reality.

Ms. Grin left behind boxes of documents in Florence, in her ex-husband’s apartment, located in the historic center 0f Florence, which the court had awarded her use of for her visitation with the children. Among them were a handwritten fax to her lawyers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The example above is one dated March 10, 2009 (after the children were placed in legal custody of Social Services, before custody was awarded to the father), she asked her lawyers for a meeting to discuss a “strategy of violence”.

The “strategy”, she was clear, was a tool to gain sole custody. Her fax expresses anger that her former husband has left her and was with another woman, and also that she wants revenge against his lawyer (Zazzeri).

(Unofficial English translation made from the official Italian court document)

She even attached comments on US law stating that a “victim of domestic violence is virtually assured sole custody” in a divorce case.

Letter to Lawyer, March10, 2009 with legal authorities (Here you can see the second page where Grin highlights the US law and tactic to ensure sole custody)

Around the same time she sent another fax to her lawyers explaining how her last lawyer had damaged her by not advising her correctly on how to make the accusation of violence.

 

 

 

Unofficial English Translation:

“I have understood also, with shock again, that she has gravely damaged my rights under criminal law.

 She did not tell me the most important thing of all in my situation: that without an Emergency Room report, the criminal accusations of violence have little value.

 Italy has a system (that does not exist in other countries, and you have to know that I would not know that) where the Emergency Room is used for legal purposes. In the other countries the Emergency Room is a medical structure therefore used only for medical purposes.  That is: if there is not a medical reason to go to the Emergency Room, where I come from the Emergency Room will not accept you. They would tell you to call the police. Here though, you call the police, but if you do not go to the Emergency Room, the call and the police testimony has little value, as was explained to me by lawyer Bellxxxxx.”

A month later, on April 14, Grin began to implement her “violence strategy.” The charges were dismissed as being baseless. She would file more accusations later, and these also were dismissed as baseless.

The ex-husband also found drafts of pre-prepared witness statements, hand-written by Grin. It seems she prepared the accusations first, then decided who she would name as a witness. Here is an example (Taken from Russian Court documents):

Unofficial English translation of the Blank Witness Statement is posted here.

 

 

These are just examples. But Grin’s systematic invention of violence accusations were never accepted by the Italian prosecutors or judges, nearly a dozen of whom rejected them after noting Grin’s unreliability, and her tendency to “create and exaggerate situations of conflict.” (Taken from one of the judge’s dismissals)

Watch this space. In the future we’ll post documents showing how Grin falsified documents and other accusations, and used these to recruit naive parties to help “protect” her from non-existent violence that had not once been reported in 12 years of marriage, before she had a need for a “strategy” in court and before her husband wanted the separation and started a new relationship with another woman.

One response to “Marianne Grin (Марианны Гринь) – Discovery of Fraud – part 1

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s