Talk:Hervé Jaubert

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 2011 edit war[edit]

  • From 16:47, 17 March 2011 to 02:08, 18 March 2011, page Hervé Jaubert has been subject to an edit war of about 100 edits between about 4 main users. I have reverted this page to as before this edit war, but with the disputed criminal accusations deleted (except for the dispute about submarines with Dubai authorities). Any such accusations, please do not insert them directly but discuss them here and provide adequate neutral and unbiased references and prove that they are relevant. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:12, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS ticket[edit]

Editing?[edit]

  • Hmm. The article is full protected. Does anyone have objection to me doing this anyway while the article is still protected? We will need to excise all of the blog links and anything that fails WP:RS and WP:V/WP:NOR. That's going to include a lot of the court related stuff -- so much so there would be no context left, so it'd be best to remove entire section while the sourcing gets figured out and what references are appropriate gets determined by you guys here. Also a lot of this article is blatantly plagiarized from the Telegraph article with a bit of rewording. That's not technically wrong, but it could do with better prose rather than following the Telegraph article so precisely. ⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 08:15, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Admittedly Hervé Jaubert#Dubai authorities' statement and Hervé Jaubert#Jaubert's statement both describe perhaps-biased statements, but they are biased in opposite directions and together they give a more neutral description of the events; that there is a strong dispute, is itself relevant.
    • The blog link [1] is to an image of the frogman's kit that he used to escape: scuba divers reading this article would appreciate this information. Most of the <ref>--</ref> references are to newspapers and similar.
    • The protection on page Hervé Jaubert is currently set to automatically expire at 02.43 am on Saturday 26 March 2011. Perhaps merely discuss things here until then.
    • Is there a way to find via users' IPA addresses, where the main editors in this edit war are editing from? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:40, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, looks like waiting through Saturday to make the changes is probably best. In no particular order with your questions -- for anon editors you can use a WHOIS search to get a decent idea, maybe. For registered editors, it'd be against checkuser policy. As for the blog link -- the image one is OK, but have the links been double checked for validity and veracity? i.e. do they still work, and do they support what the article says? For the opposing biased statements, it'd be more readable if we could combine them into one paragraph of prose, rather than two separate areas. I'm going to work on a combined version of the two opposing subsections (Jauberts statement and Dubais statement) later tonight, and post it on here for discussion -- I got halfway done but I caught a cold and have been on my back the past couple days. ⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 20:15, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Workshop Area[edit]

Hello! It recently occurred to me that this page is locked and contains, in this version, some serious and potentially libelous errors you should know about. I would like to explain the edits I've previously inserted, and describe where clear errors exist in the current version. The current page is clearly constructed by Jaubert himself, or by someone acting directly on his behalf. This site is not designed to serve as free advertising space, nor is it intended to spread lies, and much of this content in incorrect and untrue. When the choice of material comes either from sworn testimony given under oath at a federal trial, or in unsupported anonymous submissions by an advocate, the former should control. Also, I do not appreciate the reference to my edits as being part of an "edit-war" since I simply did not see any problems with my insertions given there have been recent and public updates to this story. The following is a section by section explanation of the errors in the article as it currently stands:

"Hervé Jaubert (born 1956) is a former French Navy officer and marine engineer, who operated as a secret agent for the DGSE until 1993,[citation needed] when he moved to Wellington, Florida where he set up a company to build and operate recreational submarines."

Whether Jaubert was a DGSE "secret agent" – and whether he is breaking French law by revealing this – is unsupported by any reliable reference and should be removed. Jaubert moved to Puerto Rico before coming to Florida. His move to Puerto Rico immediately followed his arrest in France. See: CBC News- Dead In The Water Jaubert denies his arrest, but this, and his conviction, are proven by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation article and original French Criminal Court records from Paris (November 1997 original judgment and subsequent appeal). This is not a topic for debate. It is a fact. In Puerto Rico, Jaubert bought an out-of-the-box submarine that he used for tourism. The business was ultimately a failure and he and his wife (from Puerto Rico) moved to Florida. Jaubert's wife testified, under oath, to this series of events at trial in February 2011.

15:52, 24 March 2011 User:Astair85
  • Canadian Broadcasting Corp cannot prove any conviction, original court records can, anything else is gossip 21:10, 25 March 2011 User:75.224.102.94
  • We're not here to prove anything. I think you need to reevaluate what Wikipedia is, and review our policies before you participate further. ⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 20:01, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the Persian Gulf area[edit]

"In 2004 Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem visited his factory in Florida and invited him to move his firm to the Persian Gulf. Jaubert accepted the invitation and bin Sulayem put him in charge of a new subsidiary of Dubai World. There Jaubert set up a submarine manufacturing company with a factory, which after two years started making tourist submarines and superfast boats: it made 4 mini-submarines, a submersible yacht, and a larger submarine called Nautilus which could carry 9 people. His firm ran into difficulties: accounts differ as to what happened."

In 2004 Jaubert met with Dubai World representatives. The Chairman of Dubai World did not come to Jaubert's garage operation alone. Jaubert, and others, testified to this at trial.

At trial, accounts differed as to whether Jaubert suggested that he move his operation to Dubai or whether Dubai World representatives invited him to move his operation.

At trial, accounts differed at court as to who should be credited with building the facility in Dubai. Evidence was presented that the late Sanil Subair, an Indian structural engineer in Dubai, who had built several other commercial structures in Dubai, was actually responsible for constructing the facility. Jaubert alone claims that he is owed credit for the construction of this facility.

Evidence presented at trial revealed that all Jaubert's submarines leaked, and suffered from serious safety hazards and design defects. Jaubert's claims to have built a "submersible yacht" and the "nautilus" fails to mention that neither of these vessels was ever tested in open water. None of Jaubert's submarines in Dubai were insured, nor were they capable of being insured. Jaubert's purported engineering of these vessels was never proven. In fact, the designs were challenged by his own engineers, world-renowned submarine designers, and other independent consultants.

Jaubert created shells of submarines that were never safe enough to insure and not adequately engineered to receive classification. Indeed, his head of production, Paul Rodig, who Jaubert brought with him from Florida to Dubai, was referred to by the Judge as a "plumber" building submarines, at trial.

At trial Jaubert admitted that he never sold a single submarine in Dubai.

Jaubert entered contracts to build submarines for Dubai World. When the submarines (or rather, their shells) were delivered, they were faulty, did not work, and were never completed. "Several witnesses for Dubai World states that Jaubert's submersibles never worked." – See: The National- Dubai World defeats French ex-spy in Florida court and Arabianbusiness.com - Submarine fraudster stole millions, Dubai World tells US court The Federal Court Judge agreed that Jaubert's company was in breach of two contracts and the final judgment, including the jury's verdict, awarded Dubai World over $335,000 for these breaches of contract.

15:52, 24 March 2011 User:Astair85
  • Court records show and Sultan bin Sulayem in his deposition under oath clearly states, that he traveled and visited Jaubert in Florida, he invited him to Dubai and offered the opportunity to build submarines in Dubai. Any other person visiting or talking to Jaubert were acting on Sultan bin Sulayem instructions.
    The previous editor is clearly trying to remove Sultan bin Sulayem from this article. Sultan bin Sulyem initiated the whole process, his name should be mentionned. 21:10, 25 March 2011 User:75.224.102.94

Dubai authorities' statement[edit]

"After Jaubert escaped, Dubai World and Dubai's police accused him of embezzlement and said that at least two of his submarines did not work."

Jaubert fled the country to avoid facing judgment (again). The fact that he fled is supported by the red notice issued by Interpol's General Secretariat. Jaubert characterizes his circumstances as an "escape." He is trying to ascribe his own point of view even to the so-called "Dubai Authorities' Statement."

The statement "at least two" is misleading. Jaubert entered contracts and was paid to build submarines. The Florida Federal Court found that he had breached two contracts entered into before Jaubert moved to Florida. Dubai World further asserted that none of the submarines Jaubert designed and built while in Dubai worked. This was supported at trial by third party consultant's reports. Three sets of independent consultants commissioned to study his submarines who concluded all of them were insufficiently designed and did not meet submarine operating standards. See: The National- Dubai World defeats French ex-spy in Florida court

15:52, 24 March 2011 User:Astair85

"An Arabian Business[1] article says that Jaubert embezzled 14 million dirhams ($3,000,000) (including 1,400,000 dirhams in kickbacks) from his employer Exomos Submarines; this was said to explain his lifestyle[1] when he was chief executive officer of a money-losing startup. Jaubert denied all charges in the press and declared that his promise to pay Dubai World, the parent company of Exomos, was under duress and only to buy him time preparing his escape. He went undercover and escaped the country in May 2008."

This sourcing is faulty. A Dubai court found Jaubert guilty of fraud and embezzlement. Jaubert fled the UAE, as he had fled France, rather than face charges. Additionally, Jaubert's wife testified that they created a bank account in Florida while living in Dubai into which they transferred millions of dollars before fleeing the UAE.

15:52, 24 March 2011 User:Astair85
  • Jaubert could not flee a judgment simply because he escaped before a legal court process took even place. He escaped in April 2008, the trial started in April 2009, 1 year after his escape.
    The red notice was issued after the judgment in absentia.
    There is no evidence Jaubert fled France.
    Court records and Jury verdict show that Dubai World did not bring any evidence to the jury that Jaubert 's submarines were not working.
    Jaubert sold his house in Dubai and transferred the proceeds to the US. Nothing wrong here. 21:10, 25 March 2011 User:75.224.102.94

Jaubert's statement[edit]

"Jaubert said that the Dubai system was corrupt. He denied all charges and said he was having supply problems hiring qualified employees and purchasing parts for his submarines. Dubai's financial system was said to be in difficulties. He said that, although he was invited to Dubai to make submarines, when he was in Dubai, Dubai World chairman Sultan bin Sulayem told him to work on other projects.[2]"

Jaubert had faced the Dubai system before when he was arrested and convicted of illegal possession of .50 caliber sniper rifle bullets in Dubai, less than a mile away from a major port used by the U.S. Navy. In that case, Jaubert was convicted and fined about $2,800 for his illegal weapons possession. Jaubert's sentence did not include any time in prison.

Jaubert never denied these charges. He did claim that he was threatened with torture – a claim he has repeated all around the web and to reporters. However, under oath at trial he admitted that the "recording" he distributed to reporters to gain interest in his claims was actually a staged reenactment he made in Florida.

Also, your reference clearly does not meet NPOV standards. It is a wordpress blog with an author named "Cedaborg." According to an article written by TCPalm, quoting the line " 'In other words, he padded the price that he added the service charge to?' asked Dubai World attorney Jon C. Cederberg." Jon Cederberg is a Dubai World attorney. Names seem similar? See: Dubai World audits show ‘a lot of money' unaccounted for at subsidiary run by sub builder

15:52, 24 March 2011 User:Astair85
  • Jaubert said in court he left the original recording behind, in his phone, used as a beacon. 21:10, 25 March 2011 User:75.224.102.94

Escape[edit]

"A year after his first police questioning he got to Fujairah, where a set of frogman's kit was smuggled to him in parts. One night in May 2008 he put this frogman's kit on, and an Arab woman's abaya cloak (like a burqa) over it as a disguise. A newspaper photograph ([2]) shows him with a bag-on-chest rebreather with cylinder below bag, absorbent canister inside bag, no hard casing, and loop of two breathing tubes with mouthpiece (it appears to be an OMG Castoro C-96 Pro Italian-made oxygen rebreather (described here)), in its protective counterlung cover, and a handheld underwater navigation device about 30 cm square, and false breasts to fill out the ledge caused by the flat top of the breathing bag and make the overlying abaya drape more realistically like on a fat woman.

He slipped from his hotel to the beach at night disguised under the abaya [3] and swam to the area's only police patrol boat, which was in a coastguard station, and climbed on the boat and clogged its fuel lines to prevent pursuit. Next morning during the Fajr Muslim prayers when people would not be watching he made his escape on a rubber dinghy with a small outboard motor, and sailed and waited in international waters for 6 hours to a prearranged meeting with a former fellow spy in a sailing boat, just outside United Arab Emirates territorial waters. The sailing boat carried him in eight days to Mumbai in India, and from there in 2008 he went home to Florida."

This section does not come from a neutral party to reference and breaks NPOV standards. There is no evidence of accuracy with this section. Jaubert's story, now discredited through trial, is based entirelly on his own word, and no other source. During cross-examination in his recent trial which ended in February 2011, Jaubert admitted that he created the tape recording of his interrogation by the Dubai Police. This recording was used as a means to draw media attention to his "story". As such, his story fails to meet the standards required of an encyclopedic content based website. See last paragraph of: The National- Dubai World defeats French ex-spy in Florida court

At trial, Jaubert admitted that he did not take the staged pictures at the time that he fled the UAE to avoid prosecution for his crimes there. These were (again) a later fabrication.

Any value to SCUBA divers regarding rebreather and other underwater life-support apparatus is best kept to a topical section on such devices. (Here is the URL to the wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebreather) It is inappropriate to include here.

15:52, 24 March 2011 User:Astair85
  • As regards the details of the escape, obviously Jaubert had to escape unseen, or he would likely have been stopped, so he is the only information source for the details of the escape. Obviously he also had to protect the identity of the man who took him to India. We may have to add "Jaubert said that" and that the linked-to images are reconstructions. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:41, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • When you escape and run for your life, you don't take pictures and save receipts, obviously........ 21:10, 25 March 2011 User:75.224.102.94
  • I have prefixed: "According to Jaubert's account:". I have said that those images are reconstructions. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:29, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Book[edit]

Herve Jaubert published 2 books:

In 1995 he published a book called "Il n' y a plus de secrets dand les services" , (Odilon Media)98.77.205.27 (talk) 15:48, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"In 2009 Herve Jaubert published a book called "Escape from Dubai" (ISBN 978-0929915944) about his Dubai experience."

It is accurate, relevant, and neutral to include that Jaubert's book was self-published. There is no reason to delete objectively true facts about the publisher, Headline Books. The largest section of literature published by Headline Books is under the heading "Metaphysical Paranormal Spiritual" and includes titles such as "CE-VI: Close Encounters of the Possession Kind" and "West Virginia UFOs: Close Encounters In The Mountain State." http://www.headlinebooks.com/Headline Books

15:52, 24 March 2011 User:Astair85

Trial in absentia in Dubai[edit]

"On 28 June 2009 a court in Dubai tried Jaubert in absentia and found him guilty and sentenced him to 5 years imprisonment. George Dalton, Dubai World's chief counsel, had stated in an interview in September, 2009, that he was confident that a US Court would return a similar verdict against Mr. Jaubert."

"Trial in absentia" is not an appropriate title as it is intended to suggest that the trial was unfair. It is appropriate, however, for inclusion in the text of the article, if corrected as required. If included, "in absentia" should be linked to Wikipedia's page showing criminal convictions, in the US and over a dozen other countries, where the accused fled the country of his/her charges. Here is the wikipedia URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_absentia

Moreover, this passage is inaccurate to the point of being libelous. Jaubert's sentence upon being convicted of fraud and embezzlement (crimes which are omitted from this paragraph for some reason) included a financial penalty in excess of AED 14 million (UAE Dirhams – or about $3.8 million).

Dubai World filed their countersuit in U.S. Federal Court as a civil case. A criminal case is brought by governmental authorities. No prison sentence was contemplated by the litigation that ended in February 2011 in Florida. Dubai World's General Counsel could not have been "confident" of a "similar verdict" i.e. a jail sentence, since the case was filed as a civil case in the United States. Please see the wikipedia page re civil cases: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_case or dictionary.com: [2]

The implication that Dubai World's general counsel, himself a US attorney (See: http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/meet_some_of_the_senior_management_of_dp_world/http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/meet_some_of_the_senior_management_of_dp_world/), does not understand such basic elements of US law and approaches libel and should be removed immediately.

This article does not flow properly at all. There is no order following a proper time-line.

Between June 28th, 2009 to September 2009, there were two lawsuits filed: On September 9, 2009 Jaubert filed a lawsuit against Dubai World in State Court in Martin County, Florida for four causes of action: fraud, false imprisonment, abuse of process, and defamation. On September 15, 2009 Dubai World countersued in U.S. Federal Court, alleging breaches of contract, fraud and embezzlement. See: http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state/federal-jury-finds-in-favor-of-dubai-conglomerate-1288940.html

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/22574/

See Case No. 2:09-CV-14314 (S.D. Fla.) and Case No. 09 261 7CA (Martin County)

There is either a misunderstanding or a deliberate misstatement, of the differences between civil and criminal trials in the United States. [3]

15:52, 24 March 2011 User:Astair85
  • Is the quote from the Dubai World General Counsel accurate? We're not concerned whether he is correct on the merits or not -- we're quoting his words. As for the "inaccuracy's to the point of being libelous", you'll need to provide sources for what you're claiming about the details of his litigation, convictions, etc. ⇒SWATJester Son of the Defender 21:28, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The trial in Dubai was indeed in absentia, since Jaubert was not there , nor represented by an attorney. 21:10, 25 March 2011 User:75.224.102.94
  • Whether Georges Dalton could, or could not have been confident, mentioning his September 2009 statement that he was confident that a US Court would return a similar verdict against Mr. Jaubert, does not constitue libel, it is a fact, he said so and it was the official statement from the Chief legal consul of Dubai World and so it should be kept in this article. Because Dubai World lost all 5 counts against Jaubert, the Dubai World appointed editor is trying to remove Georges Dalton's statement. If the lawsuit had turned out in favor of Dubai World, this anonymous editor would not have had a problem to keep his statement . 23:08, 25 March 2011 User:65.8.107.131

Counter-suit[edit]

"On 9 September 2009 Jaubert filed a lawsuit in Martin County Court in Florida against Dubai World, for defamation (based on a Dubai World statement in the Washington Post "Jaubert and his submarine venture ran into trouble for other reasons: his submarines didn't work, and auditors uncovered evidence of fraud involving overbilling for equipment purchases".), fraud, abuse of process by the Dubai police, and false imprisonment. [3][4]"

"Counter-Suit" is an inaccurate title for this section. Jaubert was the first to file a lawsuit in this dispute. He did so on September 9, 2009.

15:52, 24 March 2011 User:Astair85
  • All Federal court documents show that Jaubert is defendant and Dubai World is plaintif, which means Dubai World is suing, and Jaubert is countersuing.
    Also, Georges Dalton, chief counsel for Dubai World , said in this interview that Dubai World was suing Jaubert in the US because he escaped and because that s where he lives, so it s not because whether he sued first or not. quote: 'If you don't want to come to Dubai and face up to what you've done ... we'll come to your home court in Florida, where you live, and play the game with you.' Conveniently, Dubai World has removed Georges Dalton's statement from their website, however it is still present in several articles. http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news/courts/submarine-con-man-sued-by-dubai-world —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.233.97.90 (talk) 16:47, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Statement by Dubai authorities[edit]

"On 15 September 2009 Dubai World posted this statement on their website at http://www.dubaiworld.ae/en/Media%20Center/News/news_detail_DW-Statement.html :-

'Dubai World has filed a suit against former employee Herve Jaubert in the United States federal court, Southern Florida. The company is accusing him of fraud, theft and related charges linked to his time as CEO of Dubai World subsidiary Exomos, established in 2004 to design and make submarines. The suit is in Florida because Mr. Jaubert chose to flee there from the UAE instead of signing an agreement he had made with Dubai World to repay money he stole from the company. Dubai World is fully confident that the US court will come to the same conclusion as a Dubai court did in April 2009: that Mr. Jaubert misrepresented his ability to design and build submarines to obtain his position as CEO of Exomos, and then used that position to steal millions of dollars from Dubai World.' "

The cited page does not link through to anything.

15:52, 24 March 2011 User:Astair85

Acquitted in re-trial in Florida[edit]

The judgment granted to Dubai World is against Seahorse Submarines Inc, not Herve Jaubert, it is misleading and taintfull, there should not be any mention on Herve Jaubert's page about court decisions in favor of Dubai World that are not against Herve Jaubert98.77.205.27 (talk) 15:54, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"On 9 February 2011, Federal Court Judge Jose E. Martinez dismissed Jaubert’s fraud and defamation claims. [5]

On 28 February 2011 at Fort Pierce, Florida Herve Jaubert was again tried, under Judge Martinez, in the Federal Court, District of Southern Florida in a civil complaint with Dubai World Corporation as plaintiff for 5 counts similar to the 2009 criminal charges: breach of contract, fraudulent representation regarding his abilities as an expert submarine designer, negligent representation regarding same, breach of fiduciary duty, and conversion, and acquitted Jaubert on all 5 counts. [6] [2]"

The court granted Dubai granted Dubai World judgment on its breach of contract claim. Following the jury verdict, the Court’s final judgment awarded Dubai World $335,818 for breaches of contract. The court found against all remaining Jaubert claims, including his allegations of abuse of process. Jaubert was not awarded any money damages or other relief.

The jury also found that Mr. Jaubert's abuse of process claim against Dubai World was not supported by the evidence provided. Earlier the judge had dismissed Herve Jaubert's claims for fraud, defamation, and false imprisonment; it is stated that this claim failed because the judge did not let the jury hear testimony from two witnesses (a former employee of Exomos, and the wife of a former employee of a related Dubai World investment company) who both suffered similar abuses of process at the hands of the plaintiffs.

The word "acquitted" in the heading and in the second paragraph, again, is an obvious misrepresentation of the type of case. You cannot be "acquitted" in a civil case (which you reference in the second paragraph, first line, under this category). See definition of acquit: [4]

On February 28, 2011, the Court awarded Dubai World $335,818.00. The jury also rejected all Jaubert's claims. See: [5] ; [6] ; [7]

"Jaubert was again tried, under Judge Martinez…" This sentence is incorrect and misleading. Jaubert was a defendant, along with his company, Seahorse Submarines International Inc., in a civil action. He was also a counterclaim plaintiff, based on the claims he made in the first lawsuit – which he filed – in State Court. Again, this was a civil case, and Jaubert was the first plaintiff, though not the named plaintiff due to technical legal reasons.

In the last paragraph, Jaubert's claim of False Imprisonment was not dismissed by the judge. Rather, Jaubert voluntarily dismissed that allegation by amending his counterclaim without including that action.

Wikipedia is not the proper forum to appeal the decision of a Federal Court Judge, as Jaubert apparently seeks to do by predicting that the outcome would have been different based on two of the judge's hundreds of evidentiary rulings. The lead in, "it is stated that this claim failed because …." attributes this conjecture to nobody. The last half of the last paragraph should be taken down.

15:52, 24 March 2011 User:Astair85
  • The jury verdict, public records, show that all 5 counts against Jaubert by Dubai World were rejected. This is a fact.
    The court awarded a judgment against Seahorse Submarine, not against Herve Jaubert 21:10, 25 March 2011 User:75.224.102.94

Currently[edit]

The Interpol link is a dead link, furthermore, a search on Interpol Website shows that Herve Jaubert is not wanted by Interpol at all.98.77.205.27 (talk) 20:19, 7 November 2011 (UTC) [9][reply]


"There is an Interpol red notice issued for Jaubert (wanted in Dubai for alleged fraud).[8]"

Since this is not considered a current update, this category is mis-titled as "Currently." Why was the below taken out when all references were accurate and supported? I propose moving this information as the first category under the basic information. I also do not understand why this information was deleted since it is documented that Jaubert was involved in the below incidents:

Jaubert is not wanted in Dubai for "alleged" fraud," he is wanted for actual fraud. He was tried in the courts of the UAE found guilty for fraud which is notated on the Interpol Website. Why would you omit this piece of information? Please refer your category titled "Trial in absentia." The Interpol Red Notices are widely recognized as having the legal value to serve as a basis for provisional arrest. Please see: http://www.interpol.int/public/Data/Wanted/Notices/Data/2010/89/2010_7489.asp

In 1997 Jaubert was convicted of attempted intimidation (participation in a criminal association), and illegal possession and transportation of controlled weapons in France, following his arrest in Paris where he was found with an accomplice carrying wigs, gloves, handcuffs, a roll of tape, a sawed-off shotgun, a 9 mm pistol, shotgun shells, brass knuckles, sunglasses, a truncheon, smoke and tear gas grenades, and train tickets to the town where their intended victim lived. Please see: "Jaubert and Pommier were both found guilty and sentenced to two years in prison."

In December 2007, Jaubert was convicted in the UAE of illegal possession and importation of .50 caliber sniper rifle bullets. Please see: [8]

15:52, 24 March 2011 User:Astair85

References[edit]

External links[edit]

Reliable source or blog?[edit]

Florida Federal Jury Clears Submarine Builder in Dubai Case Update 2 (2 March 2011) is an "article" from sofloreporter – discussed above – this appears to be a wordpress blog created by Jaubert or his Wikipedia site's ghost writer. It is allegedly authored by "cedaborg." Jon Cederberg was one of the Dubai World attorneys at trial. This is a transparent attempt to introduce self-serving non-factual, unsupported content into Wikipedia.

http://www.detainedindubai.org/Detained_In_Dubai/Herve_Jaubert_Case.html -- embeds content it claims to be derived from Wikipedia – which it clearly is not. Jaubert should not be allowed to cite to information which is incorrectly ascribed to Wikipedia.

fff (talk) 15:49, 24 March 2011 (UTC) (= User:Astair85)[reply]

Tidying this talk page[edit]

  • I have done this, with information from its history list:
    • Added times & signatures to several unsigned replies by anonymous IPA users.
    • Added signatures to various points where User:Astair85's original long message was later broken by other users inserting replies.
    • Indented to let the structure of messages show clearer. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:12, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dual French-American citizenship since 2008 ???[edit]

The article states that Hervé Joubert has been a dual French-American national since 2008. However, this article from 2009 clearly states the opposite: 

Now in the US, Jaubert, who is not an American citizen, but said he holds a green card for permanent residency, 
feels confident he has evaded the authorities in the UAE: "If they want to extradite me from the US, it's going to take some legwork."

So, I would like to know on what information or source the above mentioned year of dual citizenship (2008) is based.--91.61.103.85 (talk) 14:07, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hervé_Jaubert&oldid=1202857299"