Sam in court on death threats

Sam in court on death threats

Print This Post Print This Post

After making two death threats against me, Mr Sam Cohen was ordered to attend Court on Tuesday 21 June 2011. Police knocked on the door of his home on the night of Wednesday 15 June, and served him with an Order to attend Court, while making it clear to Mr Cohen that an interim Apprehended Violence Order (AVO) was already in force. The document which Mr Sam Cohen received from Police had stated, ‘If you fail to attend, the court may make orders against you or issue a warrant for your arrest to bring you before the Court. If you fail to comply with any condition of the AVO, you may be immediately arrested and charged. The maximum penalty for failure to comply with an AVO is a fine of $5,500 and/or 2 years in gaol.’

Mr Cohen did not attend Court. Instead, his lawyer sent another lawyer to say that Mr Cohen wished to object to my request for a Personal Violence Order. The Magistrate asked me to send a Statement to Mr Cohen’s lawyer by 18 July. The matter was set for a hearing on Monday 22 August 2011.

Evidently, Mr Cohen would rather resort to violence and death-threats, than behave like an upright citizen. It seems that it still has not crossed his mind that he can make all this trouble go away simply by obeying the laws of this land. Mr Cohen could stop lying to people. He could desist from making false and misleading claims in his ads and his tricky contract. He could refrain from stealing thousands of dollars from innocent people whom he deceives about his phantom Indian Curries and his non-existent herbal extracts (notwithstanding that since my uproar, he started to ask his pharmacists to mix in some useless vitamins in the formula just so that he can say that he does have a secret formula).

Sam Cohen not only has a foul mouth and a dirty mind, he is also a con-artist who struggles to fit in society. Through his dubious business called IHRB, Mr Cohen does not hesitate to put his clients at serious health risks. When challenged by the Commissioner of the Health Care Complaints Commission about why he takes such liberties with people’s health and safety, Mr Cohen said that he did not see it as his role in life to warn customers about the risks of taking the dangerous non-approved medications. Here is a quote from the HCCC report that highlights Mr Cohen’s nonchalant profit-seeking attitude: ‘When asked if he tells his clients that loniten is not approved by the TGA when he recommends it he states “sometimes I say it, sometimes I don’t”. When asked if it is ethical for him to recommend loniten when the prescribing doctor does not realise that it isn’t approved by the TGA, Mr Cohen replied “no, if he’s a doctor, he should realise. My job is to try and get the utmost out of a customer to regrow his hair. That is my job”… Mr Cohen does not inform the potential prescribing doctors that loniten is not approved by the TGA… On his own admission, Mr Cohen recommends loniten tablets to clients knowing that it is not approved for hair growth by the TGA and without advising clients of its status.’

Outsiders fail to understand how a 75-year-old man could be so boisterous. Alas, Mr Cohen seems fit and feisty. He loves to laud it over people. Recently, while I was at CTTT to help one of Mr Cohen’s victims, Mr Cohen wanted to thump me out of the conciliation room with his chest, with his motor-mouth in full throttle, swearing and cursing. One of the CTTT Officers must have noticed the altercation, and called security. For the entire time that our case was running, security personnel were hovering around us — pacing up and down, and looking at me to check if I was ok. Then later, on the way out, Mr Cohen was shouting obscenities at me. I would like for Mr Cohen to deny this so that I can furnish the proof caught on camera. If he denies it, I can post it online and on YouTube. He can’t object because according to him, he did not do this, so anything on YouTube would have to be a fabrication, so how can he object to a video of him doing something which he says he never did. I would be broadcasting footage from a public place, about an incident that he firmly believes never took place. The incident occurred in full view of the public at CTTT’s Level 12 waiting room, and in view of the security guards by the X-Ray scanner. Mr Cohen made lewd gestures, pointing at his penis and saying, ‘Stick it’, at least three times. Ask him to deny it in writing and to give me permission to post the audio and video evidence that I and other clients have of our respective encounters with Mr Cohen.

The Hon Anthony Roberts MP

The penis thing was taking place less than 10 feet away from The Hon Anthony Roberts MP, the Minister for Fair Trading who was there with his Chief of Staff and Executives from CTTT. What an occasion! All the top-brass where there, standing nearby having a quiet discussion, while Mr Cohen was pointing at his penis and saying to me, ‘Stick it!’. It seemed to me like a vulgar gesture that came naturally to him. Bad language, inappropriate behaviour, a smug look on his face, defiant, bombastic, and rude with it. ‘Stick it!’ he would say again and again as an exclamation-mark at the end of bursts of expletives and hideous statements about his feigned indignation that I should be there to offer moral support to one of his victims. ‘Stick it’ he said yet again, like a music rapper moving to a beat. I’ve been assisting some of his victims, so I do not know why he was surprised that I was there. He knew that I would be there. In an email to the client, Mr Cohen had said that I could ‘go to hell’. He will soon get used to it. I’m not going away. Maybe he knows it, and that is why he thought to arrange for me to be ‘knocked off‘.

Funnily enough, prior to this, while inside the CTTT Hearing Room, and just after the Orders were made by the Member, Mr Cohen walked over from the far end of the room, and faced me. He stood there making rude remarks. There was no reason for him to have detoured past me. The room was large, and he had other clear passages. But he is a stirrer. I expect his stupid remarks and insults would have been caught on tape, because CTTT Hearing Rooms have open microphones during Hearings. The Member had enough of Mr Cohen’s inappropriate heckling, so she politely said something about letting the matter drop. He just does not know how to behave in a civilised way. I found that out from the moment he put his fist to my face and threatened to ‘f#cking smash my face in’ when I first told him that I expected a refund. I have audio proof of this.

Anyway, after his first threats of violence, and subsequent two death threats, I felt that it was time to take the matter to Court.

Initially, Mr Cohen’s death threats were reported at my local police station who now have an open file on Mr Cohen. I then attended Parramatta Court and later Hornbsy Local Court to seek a Personal Violence Order.

On the 14th of June 2011, in Mr Cohen’s absence, and on the evidence presented to the Magistrate, the Local Court made an Apprehended Violence Order against Mr Sam Cohen in the following terms:

1. (a) The defendant Mr Samuel Cohen must not assault, molest, harass, threaten or otherwise interfere with the protected peron or a person with whom the protected person has a domestic relationship.

b) The defendent Mr Samuel Cohen must not engage in any other conduct that intimidates the protected person or a person with whom the protected person has a domestic relationship.

c) The defendant Mr Samuel Cohen must not stalk the protected person or a person with whom the protected person has a domestic relationship.


4. The defendant Mr Samuel Cohen must not go within 50 metres of the premises at which the protected person my from time to time reside or work, or other specified premises: both home and work.

7. The defendant Mr Samuel Cohen must not approach or contact the protected person by any means whatsoever except through the defendant’s legal representative.

11. The defendant Mr Samuel Cohen must not destroy or deliberately damage or interfere with the property of the protected person.

On Tuesday 21 June 2011, the matter was listed for a second time. Mr Cohen did not attend.


1) On the 11th of September 2008, I became a client of Mr Sam Cohen who is the CEO of the Institute of Hair Regrowth & Beauty (IHRB).

2) After twelve months, I had lost more hair than ever before and suffered a rash. While I was at his office on 31 August 2009, Mr Cohen refused to honour his advertised guarantee. He put his fist to my face while he was wearing two large theatrical (Liberace style) rings on each of his last two fingers (four large rocks in total) saying that he will ‘f#cking smash my face in’. There were many people in his office, so his verbal abuse and threats of violence did not amount to physical violence because I think Mr Cohen understood that there were witnesses around. He tried to provoke me several times.

He called the police in anticipation of a fight, and I later also called a second police unit when his abusive behaviour got out of hand.

3) I filed a case at CTTT and Mr Cohen began to lie about every aspect of our transaction. He also presented fabricated documents. After 383 days of legal battles at CTTT, I was given a refund as his strategic move to stop the investigation because he knew that I was about to expose his scam, having issued summonses on him, his company, and his pharmacist. I was left holding the can for expenses that amounted to more than the original claim, so the refund was a pittance considering the expenses incurred.

4) I learned that IHRB is a 100% scam that had taken potentially millions of dollars from hundreds of clients (he purports to have thousands of clients) over nine years. I started to take consumer action to report him to the authorities.

5) When the authorities learned about his misconduct, Mr Cohen’s office was raided by the police. The evidence they seized was given to the Health Care Complaints Commission who placed a Permanent Prohibition Order on Mr Cohen. I exposed his malpractice on Channel 7’s Today Tonight. I started this website ( to warn the public. I involved a range of departments such as Fair Trading who prosecuted Mr Cohen for lying.

6) Mr Cohen’s clients started to contact me for information. Mr Cohen was upset that I was now exposing his scam and helping clients to seek a refund according to the terms of the contract.

7) On 16 September 2010, while assisting an IHRB victim (Mr Jxxx) at CTTT, there was an occasion when Mr Cohen and I were left in a room on our own. Mr Cohen stared at me and said, ‘What am I going to do with you? You don’t know who you’re f#cking dealing with. Your day will come. You’ll get your just deserves.’ While he was saying, ‘You’ll get your just deserves’, he turned around to see if anyone was outside the door, and he held his hand to his temple in the shape of a gun and cocked it as if signalling that he is pulling a trigger to the imaginary pistol. I did not do anything because I had no witnesses to this. I was so shaken by it that I stopped assisting Mr Jxxx and I did not attend Mr Jxxx’s hearing, fearing Mr Cohen. Needless to say, Mr Jxxx won his case and was awarded a refund, and justly so.

8) On 28 April 2011, while an IHRB client/victim (Mr Rxxx) was visiting Mr Cohen for his final meeting, Mr Cohen said about me, ‘He’ll get his just deserves’. This was the same phrase that Mr Cohen used when he put the imaginary pistol to his temple to signify an earlier death threat against me. I found this link chilling, and then sought a Private Violence Order (which is like an AVO). Mr Rxxx has an audio recording of Mr Cohen saying something to the effect that he has connections to knock me off, but that he can’t do it just now because it would be obvious that he was behind it, so he would have to wait for the right moment to knock me off. Mr Cohen had no idea that Mr Rxxx had been in contact with me. So it seems that Mr Cohen has been making such claims to random clients, trying to protest his innocence.


On Monday 22 August 2011, Mr Cohen attended Court with his Solicitor. Dressed in a three-piece grey suit, he came without his briefcase — the hard-cased briefcase that he had stuck up my groin while trying to push me out of the CTTT room several weeks prior.

The Court Officer swore me in and I took the stand. Mr Cohen’s solicitor was asking me questions to try to prove that it was I who was harassing Mr Cohen. He showed images of this website, explaining the extent of the 100 or so articles on this site. He then tried to make some obtuse point about me and my work within the fields of national security and terrorism and fraud, as if to maybe suggest that I am a terrorist or some such thing. I could not fathom where he was going with that, and the Magistrate cut him short.

In answering his questions with well-consodered yes/no responses, the Magistrate advised me that my well considered responses are not wise, and that I should just react quickly to a question without thinking too hard about it. This is impossible. For example, Mr Cohen’s solicitor put it to me that I had said to Mr Cohen that I know people at Channel 7, and that I will set out to destroy his business. There can’t be a yes/no answer to this because it is a convoluted lie by Mr Cohen. I am not the type of person to boast about who I know. In all of my many books exceeding 500 pages each, I never mention who I know or who my associates or clients are. And I am definitely not the person to threaten people with what I might do. I am a man of action. I take action, as this website has proved. I never care to tell anyone who I know. I just go and get the job done. The fact of the matter was that I was in Mr Cohen’s office when he handed to me several colour copies of media reports that were exposing scams by some of his competitors. Mr Cohen’s colour printer was always running at full speed, printing media-clippings and such like. One page was from Channel 7, exposing one of his competitors. After Mr Cohen became violent, and after I had called 000 to call the police about his misconduct and threats, we were waiting for some time for the police units to show up. It was at that time that I called Channel 7. He was watching me and wondering who I was calling. I said to him something like, ‘You hand out media clippings from this TV Station; well, it just so happens that I know this guy (whose name was featured as the reporter), and I will call him, given that you like publicity.’ It was Mr Cohen who gave me a news clipping from Channel 7, that happened to have been written by someone I know, so I called the Producer to tell him what was going on. Channel 7 has a mind of its own. It’s not going to air any story that it does not believe to be in the public interest. So his exposure on Channel 7 was simply due to the amazing story itself, and not because of who I know. As for saying I will destroy his business, well, that’s not for me to do. Mr Cohen is destroying his own business by his illegal activities. I was in his office for a refund in accordance with his advertised offer. He conned me. He lied to me. He put my health at risk. I was scammed. He became violent when I insisted on a refund. I was about to leave his office when he became violent and he asked his secretary (daughter) to call the police. So I said I would stay until the police arrives. I wanted them to hear my version of events, and not allow him to dream-up his own story in my absence.

Later during the hearing at Hornsby Local Court on the 22nd of August, Mr Cohen’s solicitor was saying that I had contacted every possible agency, in order to complain about Mr Cohen. That was trying to suggest that I am obsessed by Mr Cohen and that I would stop at nothing to harm his business. The solicitor asked me to list some of those agencies. The Magistrate was given the impression that I was being vindictive. Well, dear reader, why would I file complaints to so many agencies? Because the laws in NSW are that way aligned. Our legal framework is fragmented. No department can prosecute Mr Cohen for all his misconduct because health matters can only be dealt with by the HCCC, and TGA matters only by the TGA, and consumer matters only by Fair Trading, and CTTT matters only by CTTT, and IHRB’s misleading ads can only be assessed by the Complaints Resolution Panel, and Mr Cohen’s pharmacists can only be investigated by the Pharmacy Board and so on. Each department performs a different function. To say that I reported him to every agency possible, is showing the extent of Mr Cohen’s misconduct, and therefore the wide scope of laws and codes that he was breaking. The fact that his misconduct stretches to so many departments is an indictment upon him, yet his lawyer was insinuating that I was running wild reporting him for the fun of it.

Then the question was put to me that I was attending many of the hearings, and as such, by offering moral support to Mr Cohen’s clients, I seemed to not fear him (indeed, it worries me more that he would suggest that he would arrange it for others to knock me off). The inference was that if I am bold enough to attend hearings, then I must not fear him, and as such, why should the Court issue a Personal Violence Order against Mr Cohen? This is pathetic and stupid. Are we saying that a person who threatens a judge can get away with it if the judge is foolish enough to attend court each day to do her job? If a person threatens teachers, is the teacher not deserving of protection because the teacher is silly enough to arrive at the school each day to do his job? I am doing my civic duty and supporting Mr Cohen’s victims and reporting him to the authorities because that’s why those Government Departments exist. I was a victim because no-one spoke up. Many people contact me and tell me that they do not wish to pursue Mr Cohen because they fear him. Many simply never show up at Hearings, or never fill in the forms, or never take the next step because they feel scared or intimidated or embarrassed or overwhelmed at the process. So if a rape victim is supported by a former rape victim, is that a bad thing? I am supporting victims who were conned and scammed and hurt medically and financially by Mr Cohen and IHRB (because I, too, was a victim who suffered medically and financially). To say that I should step-back if I were in fear for my life, is low and unintelligent and thoughtless because if it were not for brave citizens (rare as they are) who speak-up about crime and corruption, our Australian society would degrade to the galactic levels of crime and corruption that we see overseas, leading to wars and a degenerated putrid society. Is that what we want? So indeed, I am supporting victims. Mr Cohen has made death threats against me. He has not yet killed me. So is that proof that I do not deserve a Personal violence Order against him?

At no time did the Magistrate wish to allow the recordings into evidence. My witness was unable to attend that day. I had tried to change the court date, but that request was refused because the Magistrate said that the matter was too important to delay.

At no time was the magistrate interested in whether or not Mr Cohen did or did not make death threats. The spotlight was on me, and my supposed ‘obsession’. The fact that I have been pursuing Mr Cohen for two years, again played out as a negative against me. As if I have nothing better to do, and that I was on a ‘crusade’ (said the Magistrate) to expose Mr Cohen’s business, and that it might be said that I was potentially ‘harassing’ him, she said. Why have I been on this case for two years? Because our legal system is that way inclined. Because it took 383 days for my CTTT case to be terminated, unjustly and unfairly, after Mr Cohen and his cohort lied and refused to answer basic questions that were asked via three summonses that were all ignored. 383 days was not my doing. It was Mr Cohen’s shenanigans that resulted in that lengthy case, which ended in a farce that denied me justice due to his endless lies and fabricated evidence (one of which was taken up by Fair Trading which resulted in Mr Cohen being prosecuted at Parramatta Local Court on 22 July 2011, proving that he lied to the Tribunal). He is the convicted liar! I have been on this case for two years because certain departments do not like to work in tandem with other departments. Each one has to wait for one to finish its investigations before it can look into the matter. For example, one department clearly states in its statutes that it cannot investigate anything that is currently being investigated by any other legal process. So we have to wait; and time marches on. The Health Care Complaints Commission took approximately six months to conclude its investigations. Pursuing Mr Cohen for two years is not a hobby. It is a sad process over which I have no control. Unfortunately, it was all twisted-around to suggest that I was harassing Mr Cohen, and that I was the bad guy, and that he was the victim. Funny that! If he simply stopped conning people, it would not have dragged out for two years. If he obeyed the Permanent Prohibition Order, he would not continue to draw himself to the authorities. Two years does not show that I was attacking him, but that even after being exposed and found guilty, he continued to snub the Orders made against him.

The whole idea of a PVO is to protect me in some way, to keep Mr Cohen in check, and to let him know that if ever steps out of line, there will be immediate consequences. The question along these lines was asked: If I were scared of Mr Cohen, why did it take so long to seek a PVO? From day-one I called 000 when his behaviour became uncivilised. Later, I could not do anything about his first death-threat because I had no evidence, and I know how courts love proof and evidence. When Mr Rxxx came to me with evidence, catching Mr Cohen on tape, saying that he could knock me off, but he would have to wait, he said, lest it be obvious that it was he who arranged to have me knocked-off by his ‘connections’, I had evidence, and I submitted the papers in Court, but the Magistrate did not allow the tapes to be admitted, because my witness was not present.

Oh well, dear reader, the Magistrate did not see the value in extending the PVO. Never was Mr Cohen asked if he made the threats. The Magistrate said that she does not wish to go into Mr Cohen’s business dealings, which was strange considering that Mr Cohen’s lawyer was asking me questions about my responses to Mr Cohen’s business dealings.

Regarding the audio evidence, I do not know how Sam Cohen can deny them. We have two tapes proving his threats of violence. But when in court, I had no cuts and bruises and no bullet in the head to which to point. It seems that one has to wait to be stabbed or assaulted before the courts can take them seriously.

As with everything about this saga, I expect Mr Cohen to have his version of events. If he tries to tell you that he never made any threats against me, please ask him to give me permission to post the audio recordings on this site for the world to hear. If he wants to dispute my accusations, then he is saying that he never made those statements, in which case, he has nothing to fear. Ask him to prove his version of events by giving me and my witness permission to publish the tapes.

Comments are closed.