FINANCIAL FRAUDSTER NEWS INVESTIGATIONS: International Foundation Refutes Judge's 'Not Remotely Credible' Remarks, Raising Questions on Judicial Due Process
TEL AVIV, ISRAEL – 5 August 2025 – A recent judicial order from a knighted English High Court Judge, Sir Robert Miles, has sparked a vigorous response from the American-registered Gottlieb Cohen Family Foundation.
This outrage is echoed by its subsidiary, Gottlieb Cohen Family Foundation Israel, and its spokesman, Yosef Lichtenfeld. The Foundation has expressed profound shock and concern over what it describes as "incredulous" and "ill-informed" statements made in the order regarding its international business affairs, raising serious questions about the administration of justice and its impact on international entities operating within the UK.
In a statement to Financial Fraudster News, Mr. Lichtenfeld questioned the judge's actions directly, demanding transparency. "Who is this Judge and what evidence did he have?" Mr. Lichtenfeld asked. "Why did he make the order in private? The fact that it was not an open hearing speaks for itself." He added that the foundation finds the lack of an open judicial process to be a grave concern.
The controversy stems from comments made in a private court order that challenged the legitimacy of the Foundation's recent £1.42 billion acquisition of a 7% equity stake in Distressed Debt Xchange Group LLP (DDX Group).
The judge reportedly found the transaction to be "not remotely credible" and based his reasoning on what the Foundation asserts is a fundamental misinterpretation of public records. In its statement, the Foundation highlighted that the judge appeared to conflate the initials "GC" in its name with an unrelated individual and a different entity, a misattribution that formed a central premise of his findings.
Abe Zukerman, a press officer for the Gottlieb Cohen Family Foundation, publicly refuted the judge's claims in an interview, stating that the comments were not a simple legal error but a "willful act of personal misconduct" and a "blatant abuse of judicial power." The Foundation's statement, released from South Dakota, emphasized that its investment in DDX Group was a legitimate, multi-billion dollar transaction executed through standard corporate mechanisms and overseen by experienced legal counsel.
This situation has brought into sharp focus the standards of judicial conduct, including the principles of impartiality, integrity, and diligence, which are foundational to maintaining public confidence in the judiciary.
The Foundation's position is that justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done, and that a judge's reliance on factual errors and personal conjecture, particularly when delivered in a private setting, undermines these very principles.
The dispute has now expanded beyond the specifics of the case to a broader conversation about judicial accountability and the protection of foreign investment. As the Foundation's statement suggests, when a judicial officer's actions cause substantial harm to a reputable international company, it can erode trust in the legal system as a whole.
This is a matter of significant public interest, and observers are now looking to see how the UK legal system will respond to a complaint that challenges the integrity of its highest courts.
Financial Fraudster News will continue to monitor this developing story, focusing on the pursuit of accountability and transparency in the judiciary's proceedings.
For further inquiries, contact:
Financial Fraudster News Investigations Team
@FraudsterNews or @therealfinancialfraudsternews or @the_real_FFN
Related Articles:
A Crisis of Judicial Integrity: How Two Senior Judges Were Caught in a Compromising Position
