Sir Fredrick Barclay, one brother of the multi-billionaire twinship, has come up with video tape footage to prove that his very own nephew installed an espionage device at the Ritz hotel that was occupied for his business meetings.In what seems like a scene from a Bond film, the 85-year-old business tycoon and aristocrat obtained the said video film, demanding its verification as a show of the other side’s ‘deliberate and premeditated invasion’ of his privacy.
Currently the Uncle is interconnected with a legal feud with his brother Sir David’s sons over secret recordings, described tartly by his lawyers as ‘commercial espionage on a vast scale’.
The disclosed footage reveals most of what the claimant is issuing as being true.
Alistair Barclay, the nephew, returns on 11pm on January 13 with the said device in his hands, allegedly used to capture nearly 1000 separate business and private conversations.Sir Frederick defiantly claimed in a statement: ‘I do not want anyone else to go through the awful experience of having their personal and private conversations listened to by scores of strangers.
‘It is surely in everyone’s interests for the law to be changed to prevent people, outside the authorities, using sophisticated spying devices that have such an intrusive impact.I am putting this video evidence forward as a graphic demonstration of how easy it is to spy on people in public places and to help bring about legislation to prevent such damaging intrusion.
Sir Frederick and his daughter Amanda are suing Alistair, Aidan and Howard Barclay, Aidan’s son Andrew and Philip Peters – a director of a number of family companies – after the ‘elaborate system of covert recording’ came to light in January.
Rees QC, representing Sir Frederick and Amanda, said the recordings ‘captured over 1,000 separate conversations over a period of months’, including conversations with their lawyers as well as ‘bankers and business people’.
He said that ‘a separate Wi-Fi bug was also used’ which was supplied by private investigations firm Quest, which ‘invoiced for 405 hours of their time to listen and transcribe the recordings’, with transcripts later ‘shared amongst the defendants and others’.
The future proceedings of the case will be needed to be put on review.
If you liked this article, please LIKE SHARE AND COMMENT below! And don’t forget to check our other articles along the way!
RECOMMENDED VIDEO FOR YOU!
“Passerby Sees Officer Laying With His Horse In The Street, Quickly Realizes Tragic Reason”