I am seeking Deutsche Bank 's help in this serious matter which seems to continue to escalate. This process began with XXXX XXXX and they appear to be unwilling to help as I feel they do not have all the facts. I also need Deutsche Bank 's help to verify documents and emails sent from your client server account from around XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX. 

You employed XXXX XXXX XXXX during the time I, as a co-Trustee, opened up an account titled The XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX in or around XX/XX/XXXX. Initially, I sent in a complaint XX/XX/XXXX to XXXX XXXX because I thought they purchased all of your accounts and liabilities when XXXX XXXX moved over to XXXX XXXX XXXX. In their letter dated XX/XX/XXXX, their attorney, XXXX XXXX, asked that I direct my inquires to Deutsche Bank. Honestly, she seemed to oversimplify the issue into a personal matter between myself and XXXX XXXX. They believe that because I was not invited to a XX/XX/XXXX, that my feelings were hurt so significantly that I would maliciously complain. 

Far from the truth. XXXX XXXX had an opportunity to address the issue honestly when I did call him as my stock broker to ask " Why would he invited my wife to his home when we had an agreement that there would be no private dealings? '' He had the choice to say he made a choice to invite her and not me and that he would understand if I wanted to transfer the account. Instead, he first lied about not knowing I was not invited. And then he chose to be highly offensive threatening me and intimidating with statements including my XXXX year old son. 

I ASKED XXXX XXXX FOR HELP : XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX appear to be unwilling to contain the behavior of XXXX XXXX who continues to make false reports to his branch manager at XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and also is now making false reports about threatening voice mails. I never left any threatening voice mails. To date, all my complaints have been in written form through this agency and or to the managers and compliance officers at XXXX XXXX. 

However, I initially complained to XXXX XXXX when he was Deutsche Bank regarding the muni bonds interest rate being below what was agreed when he sold me on the product. The interest rates were supposed to be 1.75 % and 3 % respectively. Instead, they appeared to be below XXXX percent which made no sense. XXXX XXXX said he wanted to focus my attention on making money in private equity funds. He sent me various proposals between XX/XX/XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX, but they required minimums of {$250000.00} to {$500000.00}. Also, I had no prior experience with private equity so it appeared he was disappointed when I could not invest in these products. 

However, he made false claims in his legal brief that he did not ever allow any more investments. XX/XX/XXXX he sent me a XXXX XXXX XXXX from your client server. XX/XX/XXXX, from your client server, XXXX XXXX sent me a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. This was about 9 months into our working together. 

However, in late XX/XX/XXXX, after he was informed of my marital dissolution, he began to develop a relationship with the co-Trustee, through his wife XXXX XXXX. For reasons that are not clear to me other than that XXXX XXXX, who is estranged to me, is a minor celebrity on television, he wanted to become closer to her and despite his agreement and understanding that finances were a big concern in our dissolution, he engaged in dialogues with my estranged wife and co-Trustee of the XXXX XXXX XXXX. The discussions were memorialized by text messages that XXXX XXXX actually turned over in superior court on XX/XX/XXXX. 

And then, apparently, on XX/XX/XXXX, the same day I was mediating my dissolution case, he directed his wife XXXX XXXX to contact XXXX, the co-Trustee. This is confirmed by XXXX in her letter to me dated XX/XX/XXXX. 

XXXX XXXX made representations in his legal brief on XX/XX/XXXX, that he was not in contact with either myself nor XXXX XXXX since XX/XX/XXXX. However, he clearly is not addressing the fact that his wife is in communication and under Rule 5-100, in the dissolution case, XXXX XXXX 's legal team may not be coordinating other latter legal events to gain an advantage. The same holds true for XXXX XXXX and for XXXX XXXX legal team. There is an inherent conflict of interest in that XXXX XXXX participated in both the breach of their duties to me and the Trust as well as posting a defaming photograph with my full name in full public view at their prominent XXXX XXXX Building. I believe Deutsche Bank also has office in the same location. 

Despite the fact that in a background check, you would or should have determined that XXXX XXXX has a history of dealing with complaints on his character by making and filing false reports, and the understanding that XXXX XXXX directed my concerns to your company, I am enclosing supporting documentation with the hopes that your company will help me in dealing with this extremely combative and unprofessional individual. He also has a history of " muddying the waters '' in litigation with false statements. For instance, in his legal papers that XXXX XXXX helped him to prepare, he says that he more or less was hesitant to handle our family 's money. Yet, an email from your server on XX/XX/XXXX shows him soliciting a mortgage deal through XXXX XXXX. 

He is also willing to mislead Judges in civil court. He made false statements, according to XXXX XXXX, my estranged wife and co-trustee, that " she is in fear of me. '' In fact, we had a successful co-parenting relationship from XX/XX/XXXX and during that time period in XX/XX/XXXX. It is well documented and there is a joint custody agreement in place. 

It appears that he keeps using his own unfortunate marital disputes to color how XXXX XXXX should deal with hers. I am not clear about what your company or XXXX XXXX responsibilities are in these strange situations, but at least I would expect the firms to tell the employee to simply stop it. See the attached declarations from his XXXX XXXX and her friends and doctors to gain insight into my points. 

From XX/XX/XXXX through XX/XX/XXXX, I had concerns for my estranged wife who was also making statements about certain events that turned out to be false and misleading me to be believe she was harassed. The bottom line is that neither XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX or XXXX XXXX have been truthful on their initial responses to my concerns. I believe XXXX XXXX used and continue to use his prominent position at your bank as well as XXXX XXXX to gain credibility advantages. The facts eventually will show that he acted maliciously and aggressively towards me personally and breach his fiduciary duties from XX/XX/XXXX and again in XX/XX/XXXX and again in XXXX and XX/XX/XXXX. The evidence also will show text messages that indicate conspiracy to alienate me from my son, XXXX. Please note the text message on XX/XX/XXXX whereby XXXX XXXX convoluted his personal concerns about the complaint I made at XXXX XXXX against his behavior with what he says to my estranged wife " We are just concerned for you and XXXX. '' It implies that in his dialogue, he involves him self in my custody. And he went so far as to file a false police report around XX/XX/XXXX for which the investigation seemed to go no where despite my reaching out on several occasion to the XXXX XXXX Police. In court documents, he claims that it was XXXX XXXX who told him to make a false police report. They must have based their concerns on statements XXXX XXXX made to XXXX XXXX, the branch manager. I spoke with her on two occasions and I was always professional and after speaking to me around this time, she admitted to making the decision to post a security notice based on XXXX XXXX 's statement that I threatened him and his family, but did not believe it to be true for why would she remove the security picture within 45 minutes of our discussion. She was also concerned that two bankers relayed the picture to me which is technically defamation. I have reason to believe that XXXX XXXX is seeking revenge and making up false information to create a defense. His focus is on the funds, but he has made statements to the co-Trustee that he harbored some sort of vendetta against me about the stock market. If he felt this way during his time at your bank, why did he not raise the issue professionally whereby I could have taken my business elsewhere and avoided this legal problem and the awkward position of dealing with his conspiracy to separate me from my son? I have second belief, through the mediation, that XXXX XXXX no longer wants to have any friendship or professional relationship with either XXXX or XXXX XXXX. However, today, she agreed to use best efforts to keep our son XXXX away from them both. Finally, the documents pertaining to case number XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX vs. XXXX XXXX XXXX are presented to provide evidence of his prior similar conduct. Also, it shows evidence through declarations from doctors to his ex-wife that he has history of aggression, violence, and especially there are statements about his willingness to grab his wife by the throat in front of his at the time, XXXX year old son. He also allegedly tried to strike his ex-wife with his car. He was ordered into PACT to contain his anger issues. I do not feel that my doing business with you, or your employee and setting up the account under your company should have put me at such a severe disadvantage or legal problems. I expected to be able to transfer the account away from your company and subsequently XXXX XXXX without issue. And certainly no fees. The problem is that XXXX XXXX set up CDs and I have no idea if there are surrender fees in order to move them to another bank. Also, XXXX XXXX continues to protect XXXX XXXX without carefully reviewing his past history of violence and  making false statements to gain litigation advantage. 

IF THERE WAS TRUTH TO BEING THREATENED, WHY THE MOCKERY Please pay special attention to the tone of his text messages on XX/XX/XXXX whereby he actually says the situation is " ( laughable ) '' and in his court documents he makes the admission that " he is not intimidated by me. '' Please see the attached text messages with XXXX and/or his wife 's handwriting so the Judge can understand what the documents are. XXXX and XXXX are in BLUE and the co-Trustee, XXXX XXXX, in WHITE. 

Both parties seem to find the predicament they created for me funny. If XXXX XXXX was really afraid as he now says he was during that exact time, how come none of the communications he shares matches his narrative? 

It also seems to underscore why XXXX XXXX initially reported to me that she felt pushed into the situation by XXXX XXXX. You can see that she is focus on auditions and our son XXXX. Meanwhile, XXXX XXXX mocks the co-trustee, me, knowing that it will gain favor with XXXX XXXX since we are divorcing. 

XXXX XXXX USES HIS POSITION OF POWER FOR HIS PERSONAL PLEASURE : XXXX XXXX appears to have been getting some twisted personal pleasure out of the hurt and discomfort the situation he and his wife created. Also, if they were honest in their concerns for their safety, why is there nothing in the texting between themselves and XXXX XXXX? Why, if I clearly know how to use the services of this agency and to speak with compliance, would I need to resort to such tactics as XXXX XXXX casually describes in his documents that only when his bosses told him to call the police, he did. Why would a grown man of about XXXX years old not hang up and dial XXXX? When he makes these statements, and certainly this is likely documented by XXXX XXXX Police, it appears that he and XXXX XXXX are trying to cover up for his actions. I believe, according to XXXX XXXX, he is a managing director and has people under his direction. He also, from what he says, has clients of significant wealth. He stated he has XXXX XXXX and the owner of XXXX and even the head of XXXX television has clients. 

XXXX XXXX, based on their letters from XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX seem to unwilling to contain his aggressive behavior towards me. My account is still stuck there. 

CONVOLUTING PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL BUSINESS : Consider that XXXX XXXX used his Deutsche Bank email account for both personal and business emails to his clients including his political agenda. Yet, in his court documents, he claims that my complaining on or around XX/XX/XXXX was not valid because I left a voice mail with his cell phone and not at the office. Yet, he used his cell phone to call me - a complete contradiction. In that XX/XX/XXXX solicitation, XXXX XXXX says in the email to call XXXX XXXX 's cell phone. And contradictions were wisely pointed out by XXXX XXXX part of the filed and documented paperwork from case XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

Again, XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX make this about a personal issue of being slighted without looking into the nature of his dealings with the co-Trustee and the veracity of their text messages vs. their statements they provided to compliance. 

Nothing adds up except that they have a mutual interest in harming my legal status with both my marriage case and also my standing within the finance community and within the community in general. 

XXXX XXXX is a series 7 licensed individual and his veracity is expected to be 100 percent on all matters when it comes to dealing with his client and their investments. Had Deutsche Bank vetted XXXX XXXX, I do not believe he would be in this position to bully me currently.