Copyright 2007 by G. Tokas      All Rights reserved      E-Mail: gtokas@gtokas.com
SDOE = FRAUDS?
Part Three.
G. Tokas Digital Systems
Design by: G. Tokas
Few days before Thursday of 13 May 2005 the employee of SDOE in charge of the safekeeping and store of the computers that they took from me, presents himelf in my office delivered a call to testify again.
By the way he is the same individual that insisted to take the computers from my office and the one that did not answer in the telephone for 15 days.
I felt that something STINKS and I decided to go there better prepared.
At the 13th of May 2005 I went at the office of that particular employee.
The same fairy tale again. "We came to you, as you know after we made investigation on....."
Again I answered that I do not know that person, I do not have any idea where that place is located and all that had repeated so many times.
The one of the computers that they had taken from me was found right beside his own computer.
In fact the one that cost 3.500Euro and was made one month before they took it.
We set it in operation and when it presents the desktop surface of WindowsME it begins presenting error messages. I immediately ask: "What's all these" And take the ironic answer: "You mean that your computer was a model of stability"
That time precisely I understood that I HAD RIGHT AND SOMETHING STINKS.
Fortunately I went there prepared. I RECORDED THE DISCUSSION IN A KIND OF JOURNALIST RECORDER.
If anyone objects and states that this is highly illegal, the explanation that I have to give is in the end of this part.
Unfortunately I did not have the financial ability of bying a concealed camera.
OF COURSE IT WAS A MODEL OF STABILITY THE TIME YOU TOOK IT.
IT TOOK ME A WEEK IN ORDER TO I RESOLVE ALL THE PROBLEMS OF THE HARDWARE UPGRADE YOU RIDICULOUS PERSON.
Naturally and I did not say that out loud. What's the point anyway? At least I recorded everything in sound. He asked why I did not get there to take backup and I make clear to him that I don't like to be fooled.
We search to find the Accountant Software that does not exist as any sortcut icon on the desktop. We didn't found that software I used  but just previous versions.
QUESTION 1. Is it possible I issued invoices etc - a daily process in fact - and there ISN'T ANY SHORTCUT ICON in the desktop area?
He presents a list with names, VAT numbers, addresses etc and asks: "You know these gentlemen?"
The list was a piece of the database of accountant software and he claimed that it was found in a text file stored in the computer. QUESTION 2. What is a need of a text file with a piece of a database when I have the database itself stored? A copy of it - as database file - is reasonable, but a text file why? The direct analogue is that I have the computer in front me and on top I have it's photograph. Reasonable explanation somebody?
Also he presented printouts of files that he claimed that they were found in my computer that first time I saw. For example a file named "Pavlos.txt" and has as header "Pavlos Tripoli". I did not had never a customer with the name of Pavlos from Tripoli neither I know somebody that would come from there.  By the way, if anyone of you that you reading this text know of a person named Pavlos and comes from Tripoli or is a resident in Tripoli and had never in his possession Computers more than 3, I request you to notify me to ask him where he obtain them, because he didn't obtained by me. Nor in the entire database of accountant software I have or had a record for an individual with this name or any customer from that particular region and, naturally, didn't have issued any invoice.
He presented preliminary drafts with proposals as works that I had executed and paid.
He presented a printout from a file from my computer with regard to a charge to the committee responsible for authorizing games (Yes we had some here in Greece) with regard to a tournament of Counter Strike and that on 28 February 2003 I had sented that with a fax.
I answered that it was preliminary draft as all the other he show me and also it was result of indignation, but after advices from colleagues from the administrative council of our Association that I was - apart from member - and chairman of controlling committee, did not never send.
By the way that particular employee was member of the committee.
QUESTION 3. IS IT EVER POSSIBLE A NAMED CHARGE NOT TO HAVE THE SIGNATURE OF THE PERSON WHO MAKES IT?
QUESTION 4. WHERE IS THE LABEL ON TOP OF THE DOCUMENT PROVES THAT THIS DOCUMENT DID COME OUT FROM FAX MACHINE AND IT DECLARES THE DATE RECIEVED AND THE THELEPHONE NUMBER?
QUESTION 5. PROVIDED THAT IT IS A NAMED CHARGE THAT REACHED WITH FAX WHY IT DOESN'T HAVE NUMBER OF REGISTRATION AND (NATURALLY) NEVER ANSWERED?
QUESTION 6. WOULDN'T I BE JUSTIFIED TO MAKE SUCH A CHARGE - THAT I DIDN'T MADE - WHEN THERE WAS EXISTED A LAW THAT BANNED ALL GAMES REGARDLESS OF THE  PLATFORM EVERYWHERE IN TERRITORY OF GREECE (3037/2002) AND SOME  PEOPLE ADVERTIZED ALSO MONEY PRIZE REWARD WHILE MY PERSONAL DEDICATED GAME MACHINES VALUED MORE THAN 50,000,000 DRS DID ROT AT THAT TIME AND NOW APART FROM COMPLETLY ROTTEN HAVE ALSO NULL VALUE?
QUESTION 7. WHY IN PURPOSE LIES THAT EMPLOYEE? AS MEMBER OF COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE KNEW THAT I DID NOT NEVER SENDED SUCH A CHARGE.
For your information that competition didn't made real, not because of me, but because OPAP stopped it and in particular MORE than once. Hellas Online (www.hol.gr) can confirm it because was sponsor in one from the next similar events.
And then begun questions on the subject of code and programming languages.
I was allready angry and only the reason that I recorded everything kept me  not his to break his head.
Every question and every ridiculous category he made except vexed me appearred that it was piece of fabrication that he setted up.
He opens a file in assembly programming language and for  a microprocessor from the company ATMEL and he asks what function a subroutine with the name "klepse"(steal) is doing. I had no idea what was the function of that subroutine, the one and only time where I used similar name in programming language was when I wanted to control the  frequency of displayed frames on the PC and in case where they were less from what I wanted to display I cut - I stole - some.
QUESTION 7. Where is the relation of machine code of microprocessor ATMEL with executable files on PC?
If that code was written from me it would be written in language C using as a Compiler EWAVR of Swedish company IAR that I had bought and installed in the computer. And finaly does this file with ANY installed software in the computer produce result - a hex file of memory external or internal in the microprocessor - to place it in HARDWARE for checking the functions?
Regarding software that I developed and present butterflies, animals, cars and resembled with in the old days said "fruit machines" they were developed for advertising reasons in order to show my abilities (picture 1) and did not give to  anyone the possibility of gambling and that is obvious because:
a. It becomes immediately comprehensible that it is application for a PC and not for any type of dedicated game machine.
b. AT LEAST one of the pictures - in fact the picture of the butterfly - is COMPLETELY different from corresponding one on the dedicated game machine.
c. ALL THE GRAPHICS SURROUNDING THE CHARACTERS are different from the equivalents on the dedicated game machine.
d. There existed TWO ways of import and export POINTS. From the keyboard and from the game port of the PC. These PARTICULAR operations existed in all the versions developed.
e. Does not exist Double Up feature.
f. Exists "AUTOPLAY"  feature which did not exist on the dedicated game machine.
g.The name was "Butterfly" in one line and in the next the word "DEMO" or a chronology 2002,.2003 etc and NOT "Butterfly Video game" presented from a picture as it is on the dedicated game machine.
Unnecessary to report that statements for connections with a Server and the rest as said the employee was at minimal ridiculous once existed at least 2 ways of import of - export points.
You can download and play that particular DEMO from here.
With THIS FILE I presented my abilities to the editor of THE ONE AND ONLY online magazine deals with programming with C ++ Builder    http://bcbjournal.com where I'm contributing author continuously from the issue of February 2006.
There were not ONLY these statements from that employee. Continuously reported of functions that never existed in any project that I developed. Reached to my limits I say:
"Show me ONE file that you found in the computers you showed me and were confiscated from that particular place, and the SAME ONE HERE on the computers that YOU SAY that it was created and with the tools that it has installed (explanation: C ++ Builder). Logically it will be supposed to be created the same file with the one "you found". THEN SHOW ME the functions you are reporting in the code."
His answer YOU CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE:
"NO ONE OF THOSE COMPUTERS DOES FUNCTION".
WHAT A COINCIDENCE!!!
BUT I I HAD DEVELOPED THE SOFTWARE THAT FUNCTIONED THERE AS YOU CLAIM EMPLOYEE?
Naturally and I meant the program "Browser" with the functionality described to me, that if you place the word "games" in the address bar would present the webpage THAT WAS IN A SUBDIRECTOTY in my personal web space.
I made the following question loud:
QUESTION 8. Am I THAT IDIOT and use my PERSONAL web page in a piece of software developed by MYSELF? HUNDREDS of web pages I could use, what is the reason of using MY OWN ONE?
From that point on I understood that all had been manufactured, modified, counterfeited and twisted in order to presented as "proofs". I was puzzled about  his question for certain files named "shutdown" which were freeware, small in size (less than 10KB) that in cases of virus attack powering down the computer. The explanation for the question and his insistence in a part will follow.
Up to moment I reported things regarding the PC which was the most important one and had stored the most important data.
He presented one more and also asked if I recognize it.
NO RELATION. THAT WAS NOT MINE. The box had a sticker from a company named "ZERO ONE" and it was smaller than the boxes I used. From that particular company I have not passed nor from it's window rather I buy any product. The graphics card that was in the computer came from NVIDIA therefore could be the one that was installed inside my own PC and it is the only company that I entrust the products and at 99% I trade them. The motherboard came from the  company MSI which I HATE because their support sucks.
The hard disk however was my own one and it had a sticker WITH MY OWN LETTERS and wrote "PRIMARY 6 PARTITIONS".
For ALL the parts installed inside the first computer I had (and I have stored) and the corresponding invoices, for the other one and for the  parts that I reported that they were not mine, as it is natural, I did not have.
I asked to set it in operation to see what will show on the screen AND WHAT A COINCIDENCE!!!
IT DID NOT FUNCTION!!!
NEITHER the CONTENT of DISK WE COULD SEE!
I have to insist on this and it is important. First I said "THIS THING ISN'T MINE", then getting closer I recognize the hard disk beyond any doubt, with doubt about others - DVD,  card graphic - AND ONLY AFTER THAT we tried to put in operation.
His statement that it was mine it is as reasonable as to claim that the chairman of MERCEDES-BENZ drives a HUNDAI.
No sane programmer, especially someone with knowledge and object of work AND electronics, will develop applications, NEITHER would  use a computer that exists even a SLIGHTEST probability it does not work perfectly.
I testify knowing the purpose the employee has, answering formally certain times, with audacity certain other and in the last questions I ACCUSED them for falsification of matters.
Because certain questions were result of reading of programming code that - at my opinion -  HAVE NO RIGHT TO MAKE, NOR READ THE CODE (intellectual rights) without at minimal a notification to me in order to I use a legal process as well as seeing falsifications and twistings I ask at the end of the testimony to write that I ask for copy in order to I to start a legal process.
Naturally copy to me was not given.
FRENETIC henceforth I visit my lawyer and after screaming at his office from anger the next day he sent extrajudicial document that required on behalf of me copies of data from disks before everything disappearred, stressing that they were been compelled from the beginning to give with their own responsibility.
For whoever has objection regarding the way I chose - recording - having in mind that the particular action is outlaw I answer:
With what other UNCONTRADICTABLE way you believe that I could prove what I'm saying and that this particular recording proves and the lies that WITH INTENTION that person wrote in the "Findings Report" , as we will see in next part.
The continuation is HERE.