BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB

MY ISSUE WITH BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB: Denial of previous contact aside, Sandra Holleran was correct in one respect: due to the actions of Eversheds, I was no longer in conflict with the division. The undertaking I signed in 2002 was in respect of issues highlighted on the legalrights.co.uk website. Quite clearly, from what Sandra Holleran writes, the division and herself were aware of the website and the undertaking I signed.

On the website I'd questioned Thomas J Pickard's involvement and actions. I think any fair-minded person would conclude, Sandra Holleran knew about my issues regarding Thomas J Pickard. What she failed to mention was that at the time of investigating my complaint she reported to Thomas J Pickard in his expanded role as Bristol-Myers Squibb Chief Compliance Officer. I consider that to be a conflict of interest.

I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THE DIVISION. The account I have given in relation to Health and Safety lapses and reported corruption in the division, is published as a matter of public interest, as I believe both issues would have been material to a reasonable investor. I accept that the division acted in accordance with the legal advice they received from Eversheds.

MY ISSUE WITH EVERSHEDS: Eversheds who studied my documentation and advised me in 2001, then subsequently represented the division against me in 2002, are fully aware of all aspects of this case. I have emailed Peter Norbury to seek assurance Eversheds knew nothing of Thomas J Pickard's activities when they advised me in 2001. He has failed to give that assurance. Going back to the 9th November, 2004, I asked Eversheds to provide terms of reference for their Ombudsman/complaints department. No reply. I still seek assurance that Eversheds knew nothing of Thomas J Pickard's activities when they advised me in 2001.

Source and Lots More Good Stuff..

http://www.lawsatwork.co.uk/

r
r