Attn:     Nesheiwat and Assaf, attorneys for Mariya Basheva-Petrova

CC:      Hon. Neary, Acting judge

CC:      Anne O’Grady, attorney for Mariya Basheva-Petrova

CC:      Rosalie Lesley, Court appointed Law Guardian of my 6 year old son

CC:      The Press

Re:       Divorce case “Petrov v. Basheva-Petrova”, index #21006-05

Dear Ms. Nesheiwat, Mr. Assaf,

1. I am politely requesting you to hand a copy of this letter to your client.

2. I am in receipt of a letter to Mr. Assaf from the office of “Hon.” Neary, dated December 13, 2007.

The “concern about Ms. Basheva-Petrova and her child’s interests” that the Court expresses and the threat of imposing sanctions against Mr. Assaf, are solely designed to trick Ms. Basheva-Petrova into thinking that “Hon.” Neary and his sponsor Nesheiwat and Assaf are not partners in a racketeering scheme, designed to deprive the broken family of their savings.

The facts show clearly show that “Hon.’ Neary and his sponsors Nesheiwat/Assaf play in the same team and with the same goal – to pocket all of the hard earned non retirement savings of Mr. Petrov. To appease the Defendant and somehow “reward” her for her pitiful role in the racketeering scheme the trio grants her (on paper) the half of non existing retirement funds, amounting to over $60000 as well as a “generous” spousal support, that Mr. Petrov  is not likely able to pay (even if he forgo his right to appeal, something that he is not likely to do)  (see the point 3. bellow).

3. I respectfully inform you that the consultant services contract between my employer Triple Point and the company I work for as a consultant (Morgan Stanley) has expired.

Also I recently learned that due to the financial difficulties that Morgan Stanley has (the company was hit by the sub prime mortgage crisis which resulted in a recent $3 billion charge) the procedure of my transfer as a full time employee of Morgan Stanley was scrapped.

Please find the attached e-mail correspondence regarding my scrapped transfer of employment.

You can also double check the facts regarding my employment situation by calling my Triple Point manager Mr. Brad Hamlin (203.434.5030 ext. 144).

This means that in a couple of weeks (as soon after I finish the project I currently work on) I will no more enjoy the lucrative pay that I enjoyed as a Morgan consultant. Even if I manage to escape the Triple Point routine practice of laying off their employees, whose consultant contract expired without a transfer of employment (Ms. Basheva-Petrova is fully aware of this as I often discussed it with her), I would have to accept my pay reduced to the $87000 annually that I used to make before I joined Morgan Stanley. (I made the Court aware during the trial, that during my marriage, when not being unemployed I earned between $48,000 and $87,000 annually).

Regardless of whether I become unemployed or accept switching back to the usual in-house Triple Point pay rate (around $87,000 annually), I soon wouldn’t be able to pay the $3000 monthly compensation that Ms Basheva-Petrova receives for her participation in the scam of pocketing all my savings by Nesheiwat/Assaf partnership.

This would mean that the present litigation would have to continue in Family Court (along with the pending appeal proceedings).

4. As ordered by “Hon” Neary, the “Proposed Findings of Fact” must incorporate the “facts and findings” from The Decision and Order; Order for Disposition”, issued by “Hon.” Neary on Agust 28, 2007.

Please be advised that the findings in Mr. Neary’s Aug 28, 2007 decision grossly misrepresent the reality.

My retirement savings that “Hon.’ Neary generously distributes between the litigants are overestimated by 80%. (These are the only savings that are left to the parties, since all non retirement savings of Mr. Petrov are handed to the pockets of the partnership Nesheiwat/Assaf, who happened to be main contributor to “Hon.” Neary’s 2004 unsuccessful election campaign).

Ms. Basheva-Petrova should be well aware that over $60000 of a company pension, half of which are generously allocated of her, exist only in the imagination of “Hon.” Neary.

It is a conundrum to me how Mr. Assaf could write “Proposed Findings of Fact” given that the trial as handled by “Hon.” Neary produced such enormous misestimates even of the existing funds. Shouldn’t Ms. Basheva-Petrova be fearful that the ability to pay her and the earning potential of her husband are even more overestimated?

5. Given the above facts and considerations, Ms. Basheva-Petrova’s duty (at least as a mother) is to request reversal of the pillage of family assets by immediately filing a grievance complaint against Nesheiwat/Assaf and judicial conduct and FBI RICO complaint against the corrupt “Judge” Neary.

If she failed to do so, or do it after the finalization of the divorce and the above described outcome becomes reality, the Grievance Comity and other institutions would reject her complaint as solely based on her frustration that the “harsh” economic reality has made her husband unable to pay her [compensation for the pillaged savings]. (I put harsh in quotes – it is harsh only compared to its embellished fantasies of “Hon.” Neary’s)

Sincerely,

Peter Petrov,

December 17, 2007,

Purchase, NY

Attn:     Hon. Neary, Acting Judge

CC:      Anne O’Grady, Neveen Nesheiwat, Michael Assaf, attorneys for the Defendant

CC:      Rosalie Lesley, Court appointed Law Guardian of my 6 year old son

CC:      The Press

Re:       Divorce case “Petrov v. Basheva-Petrova”, index #21006-05

Dear Honorable Neary,

I.

Please find the attached copy of a letter from my wife’s attorney Mr. Michael Assaf, dated 11/06/2007, which reveals the address of my wife and advises me to address all future communication regarding an appeal directly to her.

This letter raises a couple of questions that should be addressed ASAP.

During the two year divorce litigation that me and my wife had, at the beginning of each court appearance, when asked to state her name and address, my wife was stating hat she wanted her address to remain confidential (she claimed she was afraid of me). Now, when the trial is over and you already issued your “Decision and Order” for divorce granting her a 5 year “Protection Order”, her lawyer suggests that her address does not need to be kept confidential any more.

I’m respectfully asking you to:

1.       If you really believe that I’m dangerous to my wife, to sanction Mr. Assaf for compromising the security of his client

2.       If you think that Mr. Assaf should not be sanctioned and it is now safe for him to reveal the address of his client to me, to let me know how the circumstances have changed since our latest court appearance before you in May 2007, so that keeping my wife’s address secret from me is no longer necessary. Please advice me if this change of circumstances affects the access to my 6-year old son. Do we need (you are also obliged by law to act in the best interest of my child) to have a hearing before you to address this change of circumstances that have the potential to improve the disgraceful situation of my son (he is allowed to speak to his father only in English, a language that my son does not speak well; He now visit a school in the Bronx, while me as his father am able and willing to provide him access to a much better school; He is virtually deprived from access to his father (as your order implies that I need to pay about $3000 a month for visitation with a supervisor (a retired policeman who refers to you as “Bobby” – obviously you know him from your previous job as an Assistant DA).

If you refuse to take either of the actions listed above, I’m respectfully asking you to provide me an detailed explanation as of why. 

II.

Six months after the end of the divorce trial (and three months after you issued a “decision and Order; Order for Disposition”, you haven’t issued a Decree of Divorce.

Please let me know whether and when do you plan to issue such a document.

I have already declared my refusal to write or participate in writing of a proposed divorce decree. My refusal is based on the fact that I consider the divorce trial as handled by you a simple racketeering scheme, designed to deprive my child and me (and my wife too, ironically) of my hard earned savings. As you know the $80,000 cash and cash equivalents that I started the divorce with had disappeared without my wife and I receiving a single dollar (most of the money went into the pockets of my wife’s attorneys, who happened to be main contributors to your failed 2004 judicial election campaign).

My personal belief is that the reason you haven’t issued a divorce decree is your fear that issuing an appealable document would lead to the exposure of your misdeeds, as I certainly would appeal such a document. If you don’t plan to issue a divorce decree in the next few days or weeks, I respectfully inform you that I will start divorce actions in Bulgaria (as only a Bulgarian court has a jurisdiction and competence to rule over a marriage contract, whose terms are set by the Bulgarian Family Code – within this respect the action that you presided over is to be considered null and void.) A feasible outcome of the deplorable situation you as a judge and we as litigants are currently in, would be to dismiss the action altogether as my wife’s counsel expressed lack of seriousness in proposing you a divorce decree.

Sincerely,

Peter Petrov,