Law office in Dublin – Ireland – update 10/6/24

In Dublin – Ireland, as already referred to, the victim and law office Kennedy Solicitors signed the Agreement Letter on 30th December  2015 (see first post: Kennedy Solicitors in Dublin – Ireland). Having that in mind it is important to point out what the victim was confronted with seven years and eight months later. This document is only the beginning of testimony.

In the first section of the letter to this law office in Dublin – Ireland the victim wrote…“I understood you when we talked last time that I can phone today, Friday 7th July 2023 about 3 or 4 pm. I tried several times but did not manage to reach you.” (see nr 7…letter to Leo Fay). “when we talked last time” (in nr 7) refers to the phone call that took place on 4th July 2023 at 09:58 (see nr 1…appendix phone call)

On that occasion the victim did talk to Mr Leo Fay in Dublin – Ireland and understood that the case was going to be closed in July as said in nr 8….. letter to Leo Fay …..“Further, Leo I also understood you that we will have my case closed in July 2023.”

Having in mind the talk on 4th July 2023 (see nr 1…appendix phone call) in which Mr Leo Fay of Michael J. Kennedy Solicitors invited the victim to phone him on Friday 7th July, we point to the unsuccessful attempts of the victim to reach Mr Fay on that day as follows:

– At 15:17 in nr 9…letter to Leo fay
(see also nr 9…appendix phone call )

– At 15:18 (two times) in nr 2…letter to Leo Fay
(see also nr 2…appendix phone call)

– At 15:19 (two times) in nr 3…letter to Leo Fay
(see also nr 3….appendix phone call)

– At 15:20 in nr 5….letter to Leo Fay
(see also nr 5…appendix phone call….It is notable as this appendix testifies that the  victim at 15:20 attempted two times to reach Leo Fay – unsuccessfully though)

– At 15:22 in nr 6…letter to Leo Fay the victim attempted to reach directly Mr FAY  (see also nr 3…appendix phone call one)

The foregoing attempts of the victim, to talk to Mr FAY or anyone in the office were not the only ones. Letter to Leo Fay does not mention but appendix phone call one  testifies that the victim, on the same day, tried (unsuccessfully) to learn what was happening at:

– 15:21 (see nr 4….appendix phone call one)
– 15:22 (see nr 2….appendix phone call one)
– 15:24 (see nr 1….appendix phone call one)

After all it is notable that contents of  letter to Leo Fay, appendix phone call and appendix phone call one create quite clear circumstances.
A  very interesting moment took place at the  15:19 attempt. (see nr 4…letter to Leo Fay and see also nr 3….appendix phone call). The victim writes….



How could the lady respond negatively if she did not hear what the victim was asking?!

It is indeed necessary to point out that we have all (literally all) documents, evidence and exhibits which law office Michael J. Kennedy Solicitors have received from the victim. We also have all the proofs of posting of all those documents and what is more important proofs of delivery confirming that this law office in Dublin – Ireland did receive all those documents and exhibits, dates when the documentation was received, the exact time of reception and, what is very important, these postal receipts contain also signatures  of who took over the documentation.

The overall file is huge; its uploading to internet will last for years and for security reasons we have taken all the documentation from the victim! Letter to Leo Fay, page two, is the proof of posting and page three testifies  that  this law office in Dublin – Ireland did receive the document, when, what time and who took it over. Today is 10th June 2024; three hundred and thirty nine days have passed after 7th July 2023 when this criminal brutally rejected to talk to the victim and has not explained it yet. We, 48th time,  call on……

  • Fay Leo to explain, deny or justify loud silence coming out of his office – silence rupturing the eardrums.
  • Fay Leo to explain, deny or justify content of Analysis in post “Law office in Dublin – Ireland” (regularly updated) as he is well aware of its undeniable exhibits. 

Apart from criminal offences which Leo Fay perpetrated himself (see Analysis in post In flagrante delicto in Dublin – Ireland: regularly updated) he concealed the huge documentation (pointed to in the same Analysis and post ).

In that way he hid the enormous evidence and names of perpetrators of numerous criminal offences. Having that in mind, we suggest this gentleman to methodically examine what  Sections 7 and 8 of Criminal Law Act, 1997 refer to. Helen McEntee (justice minister) and Catherine Pierse (director of public prosecutions), how are you keeping? We appreciate that this Analysis is particularly painful for both Leo Fay and Paul Comerford of Legal Services Regulatory Authority in Ireland. However, our Abraham Lincoln would say “…better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.” What about the Agreement Letter (pointed to in the first post) and law? Well, the victim is a lower being and law does not apply to him; the facts and exhibits are undeniable! Ending the letter to Leo Fay the victim writes “As soon as I finish them (the preparations) I leave Ireland irrespective of whether the case is closed or not because my illness forced me to do it.” Having in mind ‘my illness’ we believe it will be interesting when we start uploading documentation revealing who caused the victim’s illness, in which way, who was involved, who went to extreme lengths to conceal what happened and what was the role of  Leo Fay  and his law office in Dublin – Ireland in all that. 

Letter to Leo Fay

Appendix phone call


Appendix phone call one



Share on Social Media:

Similar Posts