My Urgent Appeal to Cédric Villani: Exposing McDonald’s Sweepstakes Frauds

My Urgent Appeal to Cédric Villani: Exposing McDonald’s Sweepstakes Frauds

To describe Cédric Villani’s former position at the French Assemblée Nationale in terms Americans might easily understand, you could explain that he served in a role similar to that of a U.S. Congressman. Specifically, Villani was a Member of Parliament (MP) in France, representing a legislative district and participating in the creation and passage of national laws.

In France, the Assemblée Nationale is the lower house of the French Parliament, akin to the U.S. House of Representatives. Members of the Assemblée Nationale, like Villani, are directly elected to represent geographical constituencies and have responsibilities including debating bills, voting on national legislation, and overseeing the government.

This comparison helps contextualize his role within the French governmental system in terms familiar to an American audience, highlighting similarities between democratic institutions in both countries.

From: Vincent B. Le Corre
Subject: Mr. Villani, I implore you, help me
Date sent: July 26, 2019, 02:00 +0800 (China Standard Time)
To: Cédric Villani (Member of the French Parliament)
Cc: Cédric Villani (his personal email address)

Dear Mr. Villani,

My name is Vincent Le Corre. I am a French citizen currently residing in China. Attached to this email are scans of my Chinese permanent resident card, my French identity card, and my passport.

I implore you, please help me.

I am writing to request your assistance and public support in what could be governmental scandal (maybe, hypothetically) but is certainly, without any doubt, one of the largest frauds in history, if not the largest one ever.

This fraud involves a very powerful entity, McDonald’s Corporation.

In a sense, you can think of me as a whistleblower, though initially I was a victim of this fraud. It is pertinent to mention that according to the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, it is possible to be both a victim and a whistleblower, though admittedly, it can be more complex when one is both.

I realize you must be very busy, but to expose the frauds perpetrated by McDonald’s, one sometimes needs to resort to mathematics.

I urge you to read the first four paragraphs of the SHORT VERSION on this page:

https://www.francoismolins.com/fr/lettres-ouvertes/1/escroquerie-mcdonalds-1-chance-sur-4-faux-1-chance-sur-8-en-realite

Here is a copy-paste if you prefer not to click on the link:

McDonald’s claimed, during several national advertising lotteries called McDonald’s Monopoly, that consumers had “1 in 4 chance of winning instantly.”

However, this was a lie. The game was rigged, and consumers did not have a 1 in 4 chance of winning immediately as McDonald’s fraudulently claimed, but in reality only had a 1 in 8 chance.

The only randomness McDonald’s provided to consumers, for those who might have seen it as the randomness was written in such small characters that it was almost illegible, was that the probability of winning was calculated based on winning stickers.

However, this makes absolutely no sense and is even contradictory. Indeed, any probability of winning calculated on the basis of something winning is necessarily certain to occur since the basis is precisely winning.

McDonald’s claimed during several national-scale sweepstakes, called McDonald’s Monopoly, that consumers had a “1 in 4 chances of winning instantly.” Yet, this was false. The game was rigged, and the actual probability wasn’t 1 in 4 as McDonald’s fraudulently asserted, but rather 1 in 8. The only disclaimer McDonald’s provided to consumers, for those who might have noticed it since it was displayed in the fine print in an almost illegibly small text, was that the winning probability was calculated based on winning stickers. However, this statement is nonsensical and contradictory. After all, any probability of winning, calculated based on a winning premise, is necessarily certain to happen since the basis is already a winning one.

Mr. Villani, once again, I understand that your time is incredibly valuable, but at this stage, please, just let me know if you agree with my assertion that any probability of winning calculated on a winning basis is 100% certain to occur.

Am I mistaken, or am I correct?

I should mention that I hastily set up the site FrancoisMolins.com a few months ago after being summoned by the Chinese police who questioned me whether I was using a VPN and asked for a complete list of the foreign social media accounts I was using. I will not delve into the details at the moment.

The fraudulent claim that consumers had a 1 in 4 chance per game stamp of winning instantly is not the only instance of fraud committed by McDonald’s. There have been numerous other frauds. Many, in fact.

The most serious issue is that I have warned McDonald’s executives, who chose to ignore my warnings.

I got the impression that they felt… how to put it… untouchable. As if they were protected, as if nothing could happen to them.

Indeed, I have always sensed that some kind of invisible force was preventing the truth from emerging in this case.

Mr. Villani, I beg you, help me. I really need your help because I need a credible mathematician who can have the courage to publicly confirm my claims.

I desperately need your help. Please, I implore you. You are the only person who can validate my statements. If I were to ask another Member of the Parliament, no one would dare speaking up knowing that you are the Fields Medal winner.

I am planning to write to all the members of the National Assembly to denounce the incredible inaction of the French authorities in this case of aggravated fraud.

I am prepared to come and beg you in person if necessary, but please, help me. I am under tremendous pressure. Once you know the entire story, you will understand that if the rule of law is upheld, McDonald’s is bankrupt.

In summary, we cannot legalize lies. It would spell the end of contract law. The Public Prosecutor is under legal obligation to prosecute, he cannot falsely claim that what McDonald’s did doesn’t constitute serious criminal offenses. It’s absurd, it’s madness.

Furthermore, failing to compel McDonald’s to compensate consumers for their lost chances of winning—due to the company rigging its own sweepstakes to defraud them—would essentially make the crime of fraud profitable. Once again, this must not happen, and McDonald’s should be required to provide restitution to millions of consumers for their lost chances of winning. Please note that the fraud I described in this email is not the one that will bankrupt McDonald’s, though it will contribute to it.

Mr. Villani, help me! Please! Thank you!

Sincerely,

Vincent Le Corre

To gain a clearer understanding of the sequence of events in this case, I invite you to view a detailed timeline at the following link:
https://www.ECTHRwatch.org/timeline/mcdonalds/
This timeline provides a comprehensive overview of the key milestones and developments.