Generally, employment is construed to
be a job which provides income to the individual. Yet because
avocational activities may also represent real value which are not
calculated in monetary terms these should also be included in any
accounting of 'employment.'
How do you report the activities which
bring in income when the source is less than legal? What constitutes
employment when lying and conning others is part of your strategy?
Examining the work and life history of Alexander, the Duke of
Manchester, provides valuable insights in all of these areas.
An examination of Montagu's
qualifications for employment, work history and avocational
pursuits, are far less than stellar. Expelled from every school he
attended, according to his mother, Lady Mary, he is barely literate.
Suffused with a sense of entitlement he is incapable of holding a
regular job or starting and running his own business.
While
LinkedIn
lists him as, “Executive Manager at Global Atlantic International
Security - Manager at Global Atlantic International Security,”
records from his divorce of 2007 reveal he generated no income from
this company for the entire 15 years of the marriage. A reasonable
search provided no website or other indication the corporation exists
in any form.
This article provides background and
documentation refuting claims made by Montagu, providing the facts
regarding his employment and sources of income.
The Murky Past of Alexander Montagu,
styled Duke of Manchester
During the summer of 2011 I was asked
to act as biographer for Alexander, 13th
Duke of Manchester. The duties, payment deferred until the book was
sold, included producing a time line for his life and activities. For
this purpose I took copious notes which remained unexamined until the
last few days, having completed a parallel interview with his former
wife of 15 years, Wendy Buford Montagu.
The original book was not written due
to events chronicled elsewhere. Wendy and I are now working together
on a website,
The
Duke and Doxie of Manchester intended to inform the public about
Alex and Laura while also using Alex as a documented example of the
behavior normal to an individual with psychopathic tendencies.
Alexander
George Francis Drogo Montagu, 10th Duke of Manchester, Alex's
grandfather, died November 23, 1977. Since there is no record of
Montagu's having finished school it
is possible his disgusted family, likely his mother, had allowed him
to enlist in the military, who gratefully allowed him to leave at
this time. Alternatively, he could also have left school at this
point, simply changing the story as having left the military.
Further research
will be necessary to confirm either scenario, or other variation.
However, this
leaves a gap of several years unaccounted for. There is no indication
Montagu served in the military. Consultations with covert-ops
personnel indicate those employed by the military in these positions
receive medical benefits. At no time has Montagu used or referenced
having benefits from the military from any country. Since he is not
shy about demanding he get any benefit he can in any way claim
logically it would seem he did not serve in the military long enough
to obtain benefits, if at all.
So,
where was Montagu from November 1977 until he surfaces, by his
admission, in Australia, living with Thomas Joseph Fabian Erikson, a
notorious individual who, according to this
article appearing
an Australian paper, written by Innes Willox and Paul Conroy, was
closely associated with Murder Inc., sometime in 1983?
To understand the
patterns of behavior, exhibited by an individual, you study known
behavior and correlate data.
Understanding
begins with the stories he relayed compared with the objective truth,
provided through published materials, documents and the experience of
others who had first hand knowledge. If it was in his interests to
withhold information he was very capable of remaining silent for as
long as necessary. Lying comes as naturally to Montagu as breathing
and he constructs stories, cobbling them together in continued
attempts to evade reality.
The interview with Wendy delved into
her recollections of her husband's work history during the period of
her marriage. Along the way, I was reminded of the earlier notes. It
seemed reasonable to include Duke Alex's earlier work experiences, so
these begin our account.
Several gaps in Montagu's story
immediately appeared. Alex's recollections, to both Wendy and
myself, never touched on the period after the death of his
grandfather in 1977 except to tell stories which were impossible to
put into a chronology. My interviews with Alex had not reached
further back than 1983. The five years between the two dates struck
both of us as odd, especially given what he admits to from 1983 on.
Alexander Montagu claims to have worked
for Thomas Joseph Fabian Erickson. Montagu identified Erickson as a
member of the underworld. He claimed however, Erickson had kept him
drugged. This struck me as strange since the duties required him to
repossess automobiles, which required one be quick on one's feet and
also able to drive reliably.
Montagu stated, for publication, he had
lived with Erickson and his family for a period of 11 – 12 months
during 1983 into 1984. Given the propensity for security Erickson,
evidently an underworld figure of some power, both in Australia and
around the world. This raised further issues.
Montagu's recounting of this period
asserted facts refuted by court documents which, ironically, he
provided to me himself. Going over my notes, made over a period of
around 7 weeks, I noticed his story changed even over this short
period.
Additionally, the language he generally
used sounded like a memorized script, endlessly repeated. This
changed when I asked him to pause, envision what he was seeing, and
give me details. No substantial details were forthcoming about his
first marriage, but either he or Laura sent me the documents along
with a transcript of a court proceeding. Montagu claimed these
documents were faked. At the time I did not examine them. When I
had occasion to do so I realized it was very likely he had either
never read them himself or could not understand what they said. If
he had he would never have sent them to anyone.
According to the documents, after his
marriage on March 17
th,
1984, Montagu lived with his wife and her two children from her
previous relationship. The wife, Marion Stoner Montagu, reports both
she and her daughter were abused by her new husband . As you read
the account, contained in an
Application
for Separation, these incidents are entirely credible, providing
evidence as to where Montagu was living.
Montagu told me he never lived with
Stoner and never slept with her. In 1988 a photo appears
illustrating an article in
The People - My
Barmy Wedding by Ian Dougall
Where court documents exist the dates
associated with the marriage can be relied on to be accurate and
reflect real events. Clearly, Montagu was anxious the real story not
be told.
The entire story, with multiple court
documents, is available
here.
Variously, Laura and Alex attempted to
persuade me the Stoner marriage was a joke; that Alex had been
drugged and forced into the marriage; that it was not legally
binding; that he never lived with Marion; that his mother took care
of the annulment, and, finally, that the whole was a nefarious plot
to ensure the Dukedom passed onto his brother, Kimble, carried out by
his mother.
Eventually, I built a time line using
the documents and Montagu's interviews which also included his
relationship with Erickson, though this also was subject to the same
clear attempts at revisionism by Montagu.
Alex seemed very concerned I believe
the relationship with Erickson began only in 1983. He claimed not to
have heard of him previously, though at the same time he said
Erickson was a close friend of his mother's. This may well be true.
As a gossip columnist, and socially, her range of acquaintance was
large and Erickson maintained relationships in the legal community
along with his criminal activities.
Montagu's activities from his
grandfather's death in 1977 until the 'first meeting' with Erickson,
as reported by Montagu, were explained as time spent in the military.
There is no supporting evidence for this and many reasons to assume
it is another Montagu fantasy.
The story of the first meeting with
Erickson was striking.
Montagu claimed Erickson found him a
few days after his return to Australia to find his mother, whose
address and phone number were unknown to him. Alex told me he was
staying at in very expensive suite at Regent Hotel in a large suite
on the 50th floor. He lead me to believe he had plenty of money but
did provide any source for these funds.
Erickson, Alex said, greeted him with,
“I understand you are looking for your mother.” Alex told
me he immediately was handed 10 thousand cash, a Walter P5 gun, and
a private investigator license and moved into the Erickson home to
work for him. It sounded more like a scene out of a movie than
reality.
The room described by Montagu at the
Erickson home in St. Eliza had its own bathroom and was 'posh,' as
was the entire mansion, which was far back from the street and
approached over a gulley or moat with very tight security, according
to Montagu, whose work was repossessing cars, he said.
When Erickson died in 1988 he was still
facing 230 charges, including kidnapping, threats to damage aircraft,
blackmail, threats to kill, and sexual assault against minors,
according to an article appearing in an
Australian
paper.
Montagu had also mentioned Erickson and
he conspired to carry out a plot to 'kidnap' him, Alex, and extort
money from the Manchester Trust for his return. Alex expressed no
particular shame or comment on this money-making scheme.
I received the impression his mother
was involved in the kidnapping scheme. In a curious way this makes
sense as she certainly would have liked to receive more from the
Trusts and this backdoor into the funds could have been attractive
and her placement of her son with Erickson would then make more
sense. This is, of course, speculation.
He also claims to have been in the
military, but told Wendy he left the service at the time his
grandfather died. This remark has higher reliability than other
stories told by Montagu because it was an off-hand remark and not
intended to aggrandize himself.
Lying
comes as naturally to Montagu as breathing and he constructs stories,
cobbling them together in continued attempts to evade reality.
The first example
of this is his criminal history, which he claims is an invention by
murky forces for reasons which are not in evidence. This was in
evidence as he tried to formulate denial of the facts surrounding his
first marriage.
Montagu's
criminal history, carried in the Australian media and later around
the world, was documented via articles published in Australian papers
during and after his incarceration on multiple charges for various
offenses from 1985 on. ARTICLES
Other criminal behavior is attested
to through examination of his divorce from Wendy Buford Montagu and
includes fraud upon the court, use of the legal system to libel,
theft, and a fraud carried out against Buford Montagu of monumental
proportions.
It
also includes the passing of bad checks, as a routine, while married
to Wendy, damage of properties rented by him, the illegal use of his
own son's social security number to obtain loans, and assault, none
of which have resulted in criminal charges as the vehicles were
successfully repossessed.
Montagu
is now awaiting pre-trial on another account of passing a bad check
in the purchase of vehicle in Las Vegas. At the same time, he and
Laura, his present wife, maintain the charges have been dropped and
they are relocating to England or Europe.
A
call to the Deputy District attorney, Frank Ponticelli, confirmed
charges have not been dropped in the Duke's case, No. 11F21867X. The
attorney of record, Steve Goldstein, Half Priced Lawyers Suite #100,
330 E Charleston Boulevard Las Vegas, NV 89104 (702) 400-0000,
who appeared for Montagu in March,
was also called but has, to date, not returned the call.
Montagu
has a history of talking about himself and even contacting the media
to make announcements about his activities, this reflected in
articles
appearing around the world. Many of his statements are deemed to be
scandalous and shocking, for instance the comment appearing in The
People, published in 1988, written by Ian Dougall. The comment which
most shocked was not the offer to sell the title of Duchess of
Manchester by marrying any woman who could put up 25 million Pounds.
It was the seemingly off hand comment on his father of, “
I'm
hoping my father won't be around much longer so the way will soon be
open for me to become the 13th
Duke.”
The article goes
on to quote Marion Stoner Montagu, then still legally Montagu's wife,
on the impossibility of marrying for money when Montagu is still
married. She further comments she was unable to find him to serve
divorce papers.
In May of 1993
Montagu, still married to Marion Stoner, again married, this time to
Wendy Buford in Orange County, California. Their son was born several
days later but the couple had been living together for for time. On
the marriage license filled out by Montagu he checked,
“Never
Married.” “Annulled” was an option on the form.
Neither before the
wedding, or later, did Wendy ever hear the name, “Marion Stoner”
on the lips of her husband or from any other member of his family,
though all knew.
Matters which are
impossibly awkward or dangerous are matters on which Montagu can
remain as silent as the tomb, so to speak.
Wendy discovered
the facts in 2009,two years after the couple's divorce, which took
place in August of 2007.
Montagu's apparent
motive for marriage was to evade deportation and increase his income
via larger payments from the Manchester Trusts. His 2009 motive for
revealing his bigamy was the misplaced hope the funds, no longer
available to his wife and children, would become available to him.
Comparing
Montagu's assertions regarding Wendy, who has been steadily employed
for 25 years, despite the 11 evictions caused by Montagu's
non-payment of rent or mortgage, are eye-opening.
A
transcript is available here
and includes comments by the judge on the hundreds of thousands of
dollars which flowed through his account during the less than one
year period of the divorce while he was claiming to be disabled and
indigent and had requested alimony from Wendy.
Montagu
also claimed his then fiancee's family was supporting them.
The title of Duke
of Manchester and any property from the estate on which he can lay
hands and sell are, arguably, the only asset available to Montagu
except the regular payments from the Manchester Trusts. (see end of
article)
Coming into the
title was a moment he expected, according to Wendy, to be monumental.
But it was not so, nor had it proven to be particularly posh for his
father, who also experienced straitened circumstances.
Clearly,
Montagu did not pause to consider the realities which faced him.
Just
months before his father, Angus, himself succeeded to the title of
Duke in June,
1985 Alexander
was sentenced to prison. Alexander, now the heir of a Duke, is
reported
to have wept while standing in the
dock ,although with 29 charges against him this should not have been
surprising. Public interest in his case was increased because of the
title, this revealed by the Herald article, published in 1986, which
accompanies his release, 1986
- Of
broken hearts and coronets ALAN
TATE
by Alan Tate .
Until 1985 there
was no guarantee Montagu would succeed to the title of Viscount of
Mandeville, the title accorded to the heir of the Duke of Manchester,
much less the dukedom.
Dukedoms are
associated in our minds with great wealth and this had once been the
case with the Manchester heritage. But times had changed.
The Manchester
Trusts had come into existence in an attempt to stem the loss of
accumulated wealth and long cherished properties from centuries past.
There was not one trust, but several. Each remains in control of
funds placed under their oversight to be doled out at their
discretion in accordance to preset guidelines.
Upon
becoming the heir, Montagu began receiving a stipend from the Trust.
But this was not large. When he succeeded to the title of Duke, upon
the death of his father, the 12th
Duke, the floodgates of wealth,
again, did not open.
While
interviewing Montagu he had told me he was raised to expect he would
be wealthy, this coming from his grandfather, the 10th
Duke who had largely contributed to
the demise of the family fortunes, according to Marcus Scriven in his
book, “
Splendor and Squalor.” This
was one of the reasons, he told me, he did not feel motivated to
apply himself in school. Of course, there is a large chasm between
'not applying yourself,'and leaving school, very competent and
expensive schools, barely literate.
For the record,
both of Montagu's younger siblings are professionals and hold jobs,
having attended the same schools.
Also
for the record, Alex held five jobs while he was married to Wendy.
The first of these was driving the shuttle Wyndham
Hotel in Costa Mesa, in
late 1994. The
couple lived within
walking distance. Alex, Jr. was less than a year old and Wendy was
working full time and taking care of the household when she came
home. This job lasted about a month, according to Wendy, who
remembers he was excited about the tips. She also noted losing the
job was never his fault. He
showed no sense of
having failed.
The
second job began in 1995,
lasted two weeks and involved scraping barnacles off boats in Newport
Harbor.
Wendy had to drop him off and pick him up.
The third job was
in 1999, driving a limo for a company whose name was something like
“Five Star Limo.” This ended after less than a month when he ran
over someone's foot, according to Wendy.
The fourth job
began while the couple was living in Irvine in early 2002. Alex
became a security guard for
Nordic
Security and drove a patrol car wearing a standard uniform.
Excited by this, he became very wrapped up in the job and, according
to Wendy, Alex decided he was actually a police officer, buying extra
uniforms in addition to a pair of handcuffs.
The handcuffs were
used these on Wendy, one evening, dragging her down the hallway and
bruising her badly during a disagreement. He lost the job because of
an altercation while on patrol at a movie complex area in Lake
Forest.
Wendy understood
the event which ended this employment was an altercation with a woman
manager at the Movie theater and the manager's boyfriend. Alex did
not confide in her further except to say he needed to break up a
fight. He told Wendy he was shoved and hurt on the job, evidently
this resulted in a claim for workman's compensation. Wendy believes
the job lasted perhaps, a month.
The fifth job was
his longest and lasted nearly two months.
Alex started
training in November 2005 at Disneyland for the Indiana Jones Ride.
Initially, he loved the work and made friends, occasionally having
drinks after work. But evidently this also meant he did not have the
money to pay the mortgage on the house they had finally managed to
buy. After the family was evicted from the home Wendy had made for
them the family moved to Laguna Niguel. This occurred around
Valentine's day, 2006 while Alex was still working at Disneyland.
This was the last job except a possible short stint at MacDonalds on
the fry machine.
According to Wendy
she knew of no serious avocational pursuits which occupied
Alexander's interest.
Sources of the Duke of
Manchester's Annual Income:
Manchester
Trust, UK(Monthly) Manchester Trust, US (Quarterly)
Annual Income:
$3,000 depending on
exchange rate $4,000 - $6,000
Understanding
the work history of Alexander, Duke of Manchester, is one of the keys
to understanding him – and the world of those without conscience.
