Latest Allegations and Litigation Relating to Warring Spymasters in Shell’s Corporate Security Department 

 

These filings contain serious allegations that, if substantiated, could negatively affect Shell’s reputation and, consequently, its share value. 

Posted by John Donovan: 15 Dec 2023

On 13 December I supplied a senior official at Shell Centre with copies of two legal motions filed in the U.S. courts earlier this month.

Extract from my email:

Enclosed with this email, you’ll find two filings submitted earlier this month to U.S. authorities by a former U.S. Federal Agent, Mr. Walied Shater. These filings contain serious allegations that, if substantiated, could negatively affect Shell’s reputation and, consequently, its share value.

In light of the gravity of these claims, I believe it is only fair to offer Shell an opportunity to respond. Your confirmation of the filings’ authenticity would be appreciated, and should you choose to acknowledge them as genuine, Shell is welcome to provide a statement for inclusion in an extensive article I am currently preparing.

As stated in the filings: “It is noteworthy that Shell Oil Company has not denied or refuted any of the previously submitted allegations.” This presents an opportunity for Shell to address these claims.

Extract ends

Since Shell has not replied, I am moving forward on the basis that the legal filings are authentic and I am publishing them on that basis.

Shell has faced a succession of related serious allegations, kicked off with a case brought by the Security Manager for Shell Oil Company, Crockett Oaks III. Shell settled his claim.

Mike Oliveri, another spook with a senior military/security affairs background also sued Shell on related allegations which also involved the head of Shell Corporate Affairs (AKA Shell Global Security), a mysterious Brit, Mr James W.D. Hall. Mr Oliveri is a decorated war veteran and a Colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve.

The current complainant/whistleblower extraordinaire is Mr Walied Shater a former US Secret Service agent with impeccable credentials.

It is safe to assume that all of these senior disgruntled former Shell security managers know many Shell secrets and therefore remain a potential danger to Shell, subject to settlement terms secretly agreed. Clearly, Mr Shater has considerable ammunition and intends to fire it.

This website will happily provide a global platform to publish the promised “compelling evidence” if mainstream news organisations are frightened to do so.

See a selection of related articles below, one of which confirms how this website became involved in the litigation.

The allegations against Shell in the new legal motions “supported by compelling evidence” include:

• Alleged Bribery Activities In Seeking An Exploration Deal

• Alleged Spying On Advocacy Groups (GREENPEACE TAKE NOTE)

• Alleged Accusations Of Stealing From A Large Asian Partner

• Alleged Claims Of Negligence Leading To The Death Of Shell Staff

• Alleged Allegations Of Document Fraud In Obtaining Work Permits

• Alleged Turning A Blind Eye To Human Trafficking

A full list of allegations in the legal motions filed earlier this month in the USA is accessible via the links provided.

2-page legal motion

3-page legal motion

The alleged activities are incompatible with Shell’s claimed business principles.

AI analysis of the legal motions starting with the 2-page legal motion seeking to refer a case to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

This document is a legal motion filed by Walied Shater, the complainant, in a case against Shell Oil Company. It’s presented to the Executive Office for Immigration Review under the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer, which is part of the U.S. Department of Justice. The motion seeks to refer the case to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Here’s a breakdown:

1. Introduction (I): Walied Shater requests the court to refer his case against Shell Oil Company to the SEC, pursuant to 28 C.F.R. § 68.11(a). This request is based on evidence suggesting violations of SEC reporting requirements and securities laws.
2. Summary of Alleged Violations (II): The motion details allegations against Shell Oil Company, which are relevant to the SEC’s area of authority. These include:
   • False Statements (Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5): Accusations of bribery and document fraud potentially involving making false statements in violation of securities laws.
   • Failure to Disclose Material Information (Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5): Allegations that Shell Oil failed to disclose important information, such as human rights violations and corruption claims, which could be a violation of rules requiring accurate and complete information disclosure.
   • Failure to Maintain Internal Controls (Section 13(b)(2)(B)): Claims related to negligence leading to the death of Shell staff, implicating a potential failure in maintaining effective internal controls.
3. Grounds for Referral (III):
   • A. Potential Criminal Violations: The motion suggests that the evidence points to potential criminal misconduct, which falls under the SEC’s purview.
   • B. Human Rights Violations: Allegations of human rights violations are presented as needing SEC review to assess breaches of federal securities laws related to disclosure and corporate responsibility.
   • C. Violations of Public Interest: The motion argues that alleged corrupt business practices impact public interest, justifying SEC involvement to ensure fair and transparent markets.
   • D. Necessity of SEC Expertise: The SEC’s expertise in securities-related matters is highlighted as necessary for a thorough investigation.
   • E. Federal Agent Experience: Shater’s background as a former federal agent is used to emphasize the seriousness of the allegations and the need for a regulatory response.
4. Shell’s Response (IV): The motion notes that Shell Oil Company has not denied the allegations, suggesting the importance of an independent regulatory investigation.
5. Conclusion (V): The motion concludes by urging the court to refer the case to the SEC, based on compelling evidence of potential violations of specific SEC reporting requirements, securities laws, and the public interest. The alignment of the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer and the SEC in upholding justice and regulatory principles is emphasized.

In summary, this legal motion seeks to have the case involving serious allegations against Shell Oil Company referred to the SEC for investigation, given the nature of the allegations and the SEC’s expertise in securities laws and regulations.

AI analysis of the 3-page legal motion

This document is a legal motion filed by Walied Shater, the complainant, in a case against Shell Oil Company. It’s presented to the Executive Office for Immigration Review under the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer, which is part of the U.S. Department of Justice. Here’s a breakdown of the key elements:

1. Introduction (I): Walied Shater requests the court to refer his case against Shell Oil Company to the Department of Justice (DOJ). This request is based on 28 C.F.R. § 68.11(a), a specific regulation that governs such referrals.
2. Summary of Alleged Violations (II): The motion details serious allegations against Shell Oil Company, including violations of Syria sanctions, bribery, human rights abuses, spying, and other criminal activities. These allegations suggest that Shell Oil Company engaged in a variety of illegal and unethical activities in different regions.
3. Grounds for Referral (III):
   • A. Potential Criminal Violations: The motion argues that the evidence indicates possible criminal misconduct by Shell Oil Company, necessitating DOJ’s involvement for a thorough investigation.
   • B. Human Rights Violations: Serious accusations of human rights violations are made, which would require DOJ review to assess federal law breaches.
   • C. Violations of Public Interest: Alleged corrupt practices by Shell Oil Company are believed to impact public interest, highlighting the need for DOJ intervention.
   • D. Necessity of DOJ Expertise: The DOJ’s expertise and resources are deemed necessary for investigating both the criminal and human rights aspects of the case.
   • E. Federal Agent Experience: The complainant’s background as a former federal agent is mentioned to underscore the seriousness of the allegations and the need for a federal response.
4. Shell’s Response (IV): It’s noted that Shell Oil Company has not denied any of the allegations previously submitted.
5. Conclusion (V): The motion concludes by urging the court to refer the case to the DOJ, emphasizing the alignment of the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer and the DOJ in enforcing law and justice. The referral is seen as essential for ensuring a fair and impartial administration of justice.

In summary, this is a legal motion requesting the transfer of a case involving serious allegations against Shell Oil Company to the Department of Justice for a more thorough and specialized investigation.

AI analysis ends. Note that AI can make mistakes. Consider checking AI-generated information with appropriate professional advisors. 

SELECTION OF RELATED ARTICLES

SHELL’S TOP SPOOKS AT WAR WITH EACH OTHER: 17 August 2019

By John Donovan

Earlier this year we published an article about a spectacular falling out of ‘Security Professionals’ at the top of Shell.

Readers may recall the Mooch-like comments attributed to Shell’s US boss Bruce Culpepper about Shell’s Business Integrity Department. He said that they “could not investigate their way out of a wet paper bag;” “they cannot investigate worth a shit;” and that he “did not want those fuckers involved…” If Bruce Culpepper denies that he made these memorable comments, then he is free to sue me for defamation.

Former FBI Special Agent Crockett Oaks III joined Shell in 2003 and until recently was paid over $325,000 per year as head of Shell Security in the Americas. He fell out with his bitchy boss, the British spook James W.D. Hall, Vice President of Corporate Security, located at Royal Dutch Shell plc’s Global Headquarters in the Netherlands.

Spectacular falling out of ‘Security Professionals’ at the top of Shell: Latest News 19 Jan 2019

Oaks refused to countenance a policy of illegal discrimination insisted upon by his boss James W.D. Hall, Vice President of Corporate Security, located at Royal Dutch Shell plc’s Global Headquarters in the Netherlands. Hall, a mysterious British Citizen, is the alleged Mr Nasty in this matter. He is described in the Complaint as “the top executive in Shell’s entire Corporate Security Organization…

Vicious Infighting at the top of Shell Corporate Security: 21 December 2021

Former high-level American spooks at Shell Corporate Security, including Mr Crockett Oaks III, have made serious discrimination accusations against the mysterious Brit, Mr James W.D. Hall.

Mr Hall was once described as the top executive in Shell’s entire corporate security organization, including the Business Integrity Department. He worked for the UK Foreign Office for many years, perhaps as a spymaster. In legal papers filed yesterday, it is alleged that “Hall is a professional peddler of falsehoods”. At the time of publication of this article, Mr Hall is Business Advisor, Project Lead and Chief of Staff to the Group Crisis Team at Shell. They must be busy.

Shell gripe website sucked into US litigation between warring Shell global security spymasters: 11 Jan 2022

Our article – “Spectacular falling out of ‘Security Professionals’ at the top of Shell” – is reprinted on several pages of a recently filed 177-page “Exhibit A” in an astonishing lawsuit involving the head of Shell Global Corporate Affairs Security, James W.D. Hall.

Mr Hall has faced a succession of accusers, starting with the Security Manager for Shell Oil Company, Crockett Oaks III. Shell settled his claim. Mr Mike Oliveri, another guy with a senior military/security affairs background also sued Shell on related allegations involving Mr Hall. Mr Oliveri is a decorated war veteran, a Colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve. Mr Hall’s current accuser is Mr Walied Shater a former US Secret Service agent.

The U.S. law firm gaining a reputation for successfully suing the oil giant Shell: 31 March 2022

Printed below is a Google Review of the employment attorney law firm Oberti Sullivan LLP fast gaining a reputation for successfully suing the unscrupulous oil giant Shell, multiple times.

It was posted by Michael Oliveri, the former senior U.S. military officer who sued Shell for age discrimination and retaliation after the energy giant revoked his job offer. His posting seems to confirm, as previously stated online, that Shell settled his claim.

HIS POSTING

Mark Oberti and Ed Sullivan are two fine attorneys. They recently represented me in an age discrimination case, taking on one of Houston’s oil giants. They brilliantly went toe to toe with their company’s battery of attorneys. Mark and Ed continuously provided their insight, guidance, and represented me vigorously. They quickly understood the nuances of my case and developed a winning strategy. They were always open, honest, and straight forward. If you’re seeking legal representation, Mark and Ed are your guys.

The same law firm has sued Shell several times on behalf of individuals, all making allegations against the boss of Shell global security James W.D. Hall (a British spook). They have represented Crockett Oaks III (former FBI agent), Michael Oliveri and Walied Shater (a former U.S. Secret Service Agent) and appear to be on a winning streak.

I invite Shell to contact me if, in fact, Shell did not settle the relevant claims for pots of money and I will happily publish a correction.

Today, we have news that Oberti Sullivan is representing Julia Shur, an employee of Shell who was diagnosed with Stage 4 colon cancer in June 2019. A year later, she was terminated for alleged performance reasons despite having led two transactions that resulted in more than $160 millionin revenue for Shell that year.

Shell Terminated Executive After Stage 4 Cancer Diagnosis

British Spies, British Lies (James Hall vs Walied Shater): 30 Sept 2022

Extracts

I have never before seen a court document containing so many allegations of repeated lies by a top-level Shell official, supported by copious similar fact evidence of his alleged deceit.

I reported in August 1917 that Mr Crockett Oaks III, Shell security manager for the Americas, received a ‘big bucks’ court case settlement from Shell.

The litigation arose from an alleged pattern of discrimination in favour of ‘White Brits’ by Shell and Shell Corporate Security VP James WD Hall, a British national.

Allegations and Litigation Relating to Spymasters in Shell’s Corporate Security Department: 15 July 2022

Extracts

This website and sisters royaldutchshellgroup.com, shellnazihistory.com, royaldutchshell.website, johndonovan.website, and shellnews.net, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.