From FB; Great article on how judges often award visitation to the abuser and ignore the warnings of the protective parent

https://masslive.com/expo/news/erry-2018/07/1d8d81b44f6371/domestic-violence-victims-stru.html

Domestic violence victims struggle in family courts to retain custody of children

From FB: $21 million missing from the US treasury, is anyone shocked?

https://exopermaculture.com/2017/12/10/forbes-magazine-21-trillion-missing-u-s-treasury/

Forbes magazine just yesterday became the first major media to blow the lid off of $21 trillion that have gone missing from the US treasury. The entire article is copied below. To give an idea of how much money that is, if you divide the entire US population of around 325 million into $21 trillion, the amount missing is equivalent to $65,000 for every man, woman, and child in the country.

CBS News in 2002 was the first to report on the much smaller amount of $2.3 trillion missing from the Pentagon, as acknowledged by then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in a report on the Dept. of Defense website. Rumsfeld’s report was later strangely removed from the website, but is still available on the Internet archive.

No other media picked up on this mind-blowing story. What should have been a top headline-grabbing story of highest concern to all Americans was simply dropped. Since then, a few major media have published isolated articles on missing trillions, as summarized on this revealing webpage, yet again, these stories were not given the top headlines they deserved. They thus attracted little notice and were dropped, so the public remained uniformed of this concerning news.

A courageous former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under George H. W. Bush by the name of Catherine Austin Fitts couldn’t believe this vitally important story was being largely ignored by the media. An incredibly sharp economist who once served as managing director of the Wall Street investment bank Dillon, Read & Co, Fitts researched further and has been reporting regularly on the many trillions missing on her highly informative and inspiring website solari.com. The media has conspicuously avoided her detailed work on this.

Michigan State professor of economics Mark Skidmore discovered the excellent work of Fitts several years ago. He couldn’t believe Fitts claim that $6.5 trillion were missing from the US government. Thinking she had mistakenly written trillions instead of billions, he and his graduate students sifted through thousands of US government reports and were astounded to find not only that Fitts was right, but that the amount was even greater that Fitts had thought.

Skidmore eventually worked together with Forbes magazine contributor Prof. Laurence Kotlikoff of Boston University to compose the below article blowing the lid off this huge cover-up of $21 trillion gone missing from government coffers. Note that once certain officials saw Skidmore exposing this, the government removed many of the incriminating documents from their websites. But he wisely had downloaded all of the documents and has reposted this incriminating information on the website of Fitts on this webpage.

You can help to inform the public of this huge cover-up by spreading this news to all of your friends and colleagues. It’s time for us to join in demanding full transparency on how our tax dollars are used and to expose the major corruption taking place. See the “What you can do” section below the article for more ways you can make a difference. Thanks for caring. Together, we can build a brighter future for us and our children.

With best wishes for a transformed world,
Fred Burks for PEERS and WantToKnow.info
Former White House interpreter and whistleblower
December 9, 2017

Note: Watch Prof. Skidmore discussing this astounding news in this interview.

Has Our Government Spent $21 Trillion Of Our Money Without Telling Us?
By Laurence Kotlikoff
Forbes magazine, Dec 8, 2017

I am co-authoring this column with Mark Skidmore, a Professor of Economics at Michigan State University.

“No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.” ~ Article I, Section 9, Clause 7, The US Constitution

On July 26, 2016, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) issued a report “Army General Fund Adjustments Not Adequately Documented or Supported”. The report indicates that for fiscal year 2015 the Army failed to provide adequate support for $6.5 trillion in journal voucher adjustments.

According to the GAO’s Comptroller General, “Journal vouchers are summary-level accounting adjustments made when balances between systems cannot be reconciled. Often these journal vouchers are unsupported, meaning they lack supporting documentation to justify the adjustment or are not tied to specific accounting transactions…. For an auditor,journal vouchers are a red flag for transactions not being captured, reported, or summarized correctly.”

(Note, after Mark Skidmore began inquiring about OIG-reported unsubstantiated adjustments, the OIG’s webpage, which documented, albeit in a highly incomplete manner, these unsupported “accounting adjustments,” was mysteriously taken down. Fortunately, Mark copied the July 2016 report and all other relevant OIG-reports in advance and reposted them hereMark has repeatedly tried to contact Lorin Venable, Assistant Inspector General at the Office of the Inspector General. He has emailed, phoned, and used LinkedIn to ask Ms. Venable about OIG’s disclosure of unsubstantiated adjustments, but she has not responded.)

Given that the entire Army budget in fiscal year 2015 was $120 billion, unsupported adjustments were 54 times the level of spending authorized by Congress. The July 2016 report indicates that unsupported adjustments are the result of the Defense Department’s “failure to correct system deficiencies.” The result, according to the report, is that data used to prepare the year-end financial statements were unreliable and lacked an adequate audit trail.

The report indicates that just 170 transactions accounted for $2.1 trillion in year-end unsupported adjustments. No information is given about these 170 transactions. In addition many thousands of transactions with unsubstantiated adjustments were, according to the report, removed by the Army. There is no explanation concerning why they were removed nor their magnitude.

The July 2016 report states, “In addition, DFAS (Defense Finance and Accounting Service) Indianapolis personnel did not document or support why DDRS (The Defense Department Reporting System) removed at least 16,513 of 1.3 million feeder file records during the Third Quarter.”

An appendix to the July 2016 report shows $2 trillion in changes to the Army General Fund balance sheet due to unsupported adjustments. On the asset side, there is $794 billion increase in the Army’s Fund Balance with the U.S. Treasury. There is also an increase of $929 billion in the Army’s Accounts Payable.

This information raises additional major questions. First, what is the source of the additional $794 billion in the Army’s Fund Balance? This adjustment represents more than six times appropriated spending. Second, do these transfers represent a flow of funds to the Army beyond those authorized by Congress? Third, were these funds authorized and if so when and by whom? Fourth, what is the source of these funds? Finally, the $929 billion in Accounts Payable appears to represent an amount owed for items or services purchased on credit. What entities have received or will receive payment?

Note: The above article is copied from the Forbes magazine website on this webpage.Watch Prof. Skidmore discussing this astounding news in this interview.

From FB: Video of mom having phone grabbed, surrounded by sheriffs, all for trying to set motion hearing

from https://custodywars.com/2018/07/alex-jones-exs-custodywars-com-announces-video-series-footage-the-jury-never-saw-2/

When Judge Orlinda Naranjo refused to even set a Hearing for Kelly Jones’ Emergency Temporary Restraining Order, Kelly said she wouldn’t leave the Courthouse until her Motion was set.

The Emergency TRO was filed the same week that Kelly’s ex, Alex Jones, was taken off YouTube and Facebook (blocked) for Hate Speech and Child Endangerment.

When an Emergency Ex Parte TRO is filed, it is the Judge’s duty to hear it immediately.

Kelly stayed in her car overnight with her friend, Dawn Balli, who lost her daughter in Naranjo’s Court.

The next morning, when Kelly went to the Administrative Court to get the Hearing set, she found herself surrounded by five Sheriff’s Deputies.

One grabbed her phone.

Kelly has experienced years of bias, intimidation and injustice in the Travis County Court system.

Please watch and share this far and wide. Kelly needs people to understand and get outraged about Court corruption in Travis County, so that she will finally get her children the protection they need and deserve from abuse and endangerment while in the possession of Alex Jones.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

From FB: WH issues decision that it is okay to abuse and neglect the elderly in nursing homes

We all know that nursing homes are the gulags and poor houses for the elderly. The courts force them there. Every resident in a nursing home cries out to go home or go to a home like setting. Their civil and human rights are ignored because they are over 70, over 80 or whatever. They are in wheel chairs. They are drugged with chemical restraints. No one cares. Unless they have insurance or medicare money, then they are traded like chips at a casino for profit.

After my numerous faxes to the White House about the death and destruction of the elderly, what happens?  Read on.

https://shareblue.com/trump-gives-nursing-homes-shocking-green-light-to-abuse-elderly-to-point-of-death/

Trump gives nursing homes shocking green light to abuse elderly to point of death

The Trump administration has told nursing homes that they can feel free to abuse or neglect the elderly, even to the point of death, and see almost no repercussions for it.

A nursing home can abuse an elderly resident to the point of death and not be subject to a fine, thanks to the Trump administration.

Reacting to the demands of lobbyists, the Trump administration has struck down several regulations that have governed the nursing home industry. The New York Times reports that this now means several common citations that used to result in fines will either see reduced penalties or no penalties at all.

These citations have included “failing to protect residents from avoidable accidents, neglect, mistreatment and bedsores.” Americans can now know that their grandparents, parents, or great-grandparents can be neglected and abused without the government exercising oversight.

Toby Edelman, a senior attorney at the Center for Medicare Advocacy, told the Times, “They’ve pretty much emasculated enforcement, which was already weak.”

The fines, designed to prod nursing homes into treating elderly Americans with more care, respect, and dignity, were put in place by President Barack Obama and sought to make the institutions answerable to standards put together by Medicare.

Between 2013 and this year, 6,500 nursing homes — 4 out of every 10 — have been cited for serious violations. Under the Obama policies, two-thirds of those homes were fined.

In his eagerness to undo as many regulations as possible, regardless of consequence, Donald Trump has thrown those policies out the window after the lobbyists for companies that operate the homes got the ear of his administration. A memo from the Trump administration referred to these fines as penalizing a “one-time mistake.” Even if that “one-time mistake” killed someone’s grandmother.

The Times notes one nursing home where the failure to monitor and treat a patient’s wound led to a pain-medication pump slipping through a ruptured suture, protruding from her abdomen. Under the Obama rules, the nursing home at fault — Lincoln Manor in Illinois — was fined $282,954. Under Trump, the home where a person died because of neglect would be fined less than $21,000.

This sets up a perverse incentive system that tells nursing homes they can abuse and neglect human beings up to and including death and still be exempt from many, if not all, fines.

Callous treatment of the most vulnerable in society is abhorrent and cruel. But it’s just another day with Trump.

From the New York Times Article:

https://nytimes.com/2017/12/24/business/trump-administration-nursing-home-penalties.html?_r=0

The Trump administration is scaling back the use of fines against nursing homes that harm residents or place them in grave risk of injury, part of a broader relaxation of regulations under the president.

The shift in the Medicare program’s penalty protocols was requested by the nursing home industry. The American Health Care Association, the industry’s main trade group, has complained that under President Barack Obama, federal inspectors focused excessively on catching wrongdoing rather than helping nursing homes improve.

“It is critical that we have relief,” Mark Parkinson, the group’s president, wrote in a letter to Mr. Trump in December 2016.

Since 2013, nearly 6,500 nursing homes — four of every 10 — have been cited at least once for a serious violation, federal records show. Medicare has fined two-thirds of those homes. Common citations include failing to protect residents from avoidable accidents, neglect, mistreatment and bedsores.

The new guidelines discourage regulators from levying fines in some situations, even when they have resulted in a resident’s death. The guidelines will also probably result in lower fines for many facilities.

The change in policy aligns with Mr. Trump’s promise to reduce bureaucracy, regulation and government intervention in business.

 

Dr. Kate Goodrich, director of clinical standards and quality at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said in a statement that unnecessary regulation was the main concern that health care providers raised with officials.

“Rather than spending quality time with their patients, the providers are spending time complying with regulations that get in the way of caring for their patients and doesn’t increase the quality of care they provide,” Dr. Goodrich said.

But advocates for nursing-home residents say the revised penalties are weakening a valuable patient-safety tool.

“They’ve pretty much emasculated enforcement, which was already weak,” said Toby Edelman, a senior attorney at the Center for Medicare Advocacy.

Medicare has different ways of applying penalties. It can impose a specific fine for a particular violation. It can assess a fine for each day that a nursing home was in violation. Or it can deny payments for new admissions.

The average fine in recent years has been $33,453, but 531 nursing homes amassed combined federal fines above $100,000, records show. In 2016, Congress increased the fines to factor in several years of inflation that had not been accounted for previously.

The new rules have been instituted gradually throughout the year.

In October, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services discouraged its regional offices from levying fines, even in the most serious health violations, if the error was a “one-time mistake.” The centers said that intentional disregard for residents’ health and safety or systemic errors should still merit fines.

A July memo from the centers discouraged the directors of state agencies that survey nursing homes from issuing daily fines for violations that began before an inspection, favoring one-time fines instead. Daily fines remain the recommended approach for major violations discovered during an inspection.

David Gifford, the American Health Care Association’s senior vice president for quality, said daily fines were intended to prompt quick remedies but were pointless when applied to past errors that had already been fixed by the time inspectors discovered them.

“What was happening is you were seeing massive fines accumulating because they were applying them on a per-day basis retrospectively,” Mr. Gifford said.

But the change means that some nursing homes could be sheltered from fines above the maximum per-instance fine of $20,965 even for egregious mistakes.

In September 2016, for instance, health inspectors faulted Lincoln Manor, a nursing home in Decatur, Ill., for failing to monitor and treat the wound of a patient whose implanted pain-medication pump gradually slipped over eight days through a ruptured suture and protruded from her abdomen. The patient died.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services fined Lincoln Manor $282,954, including $10,091 a day for 28 days, from the time the nursing home noticed the problem with the wound until supervisors had retrained nurses to avoid similar errors. An administrative law judge called the penalties “quite modest” given the “appalling” care.

The fines were issued before the new guidelines took effect; if the agency had issued a one-time fine, the maximum would have been less than $21,000.

Lincoln Manor closed in September. Its owner could not be reached for comment, and his lawyer did not respond to an interview request.

Advocates for nursing home residents say that relaxing penalties threatens to undo progress at deterring wrongdoing. Janet Wells, a consultant for California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform, said the changes come as “some egregious violations and injuries to residents are being penalized — finally — at a level that gets the industry’s attention and isn’t just the cost of doing business.”

In November, the Trump administration exempted nursing homes that violate eight new safety rules from penalties for 18 months. Homes must still follow the rules, which are intended, among other things, to reduce the overuse of psychotropic drugs and to ensure that every home has adequate resources to assist residents with major psychological problems.

ADVERTISEMENT

In June, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services rescinded another Obama administration action that banned nursing homes from pre-emptively requiring residents to submit to arbitration to settle disputes rather than going to court.

“We publish nearly 11,000 pages of regulation every year,” the agency’s administrator, Seema Verma, said in a speech in October. That paperwork is “taking doctors away from what matters most: patients.”

Janine Finck-Boyle, director of health regulations and policy at LeadingAge, a group of nonprofit nursing homes and other entities that care for older people, said the group’s members had been struggling to cope with regulations.

“If you’re a 50-bed rural facility out West or in the Dakotas,” she said, “you don’t have the resources to get everything done from A to Z.”

Jordan Rau is a senior correspondent for Kaiser Health News, a nonprofit news service covering health issues that is an editorially independent program of the Kaiser Family Foundation and not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

A version of this article appears in print on , on Page B1 of the New York edition with the headline: Nursing Home Industry Wins As Penalties Are Relaxed. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

Trump Moves to Impede Consumer Lawsuits Against Nursing Homes

Image

Trump Moves to Impede Consumer Lawsuits Against Nursing Homes

Poor Patient Care at Many Nursing Homes Despite Stricter Oversight

Image

from Forbes: Follow the money: 35K state employees in Florida earn $100k or more

https://forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2018/07/27/follow-the-money-in-florida-34873-public-employees-with-100000-salaries-cost-taxpayers-5-5b/#587bda652ce5

Follow the Money in Florida: 34,873 Public Employees with $100,000+ Salaries Cost Taxpayers $5.5B

Adam Andrzejewski

Top 10 highly compensated small town and city administrators in Florida (FY2017).OPENTHEBOOKS

When our team of auditors at OpenTheBooks.com reviewed the most highly compensated employees at every level of government in Florida, we found more than 35,000 state and local government employees brought home six and seven-figure salaries, costing taxpayers $5.5 billion annually.

Since last year, the headcount of these high-compensated Florida government workers jumped by nearly 4,000 employees.

The list of high earners includes an airport director accepting retirement payments and a working salary; a city attorney making $436,918; a junior college president making $386,578; and a county administrator making $346,722. There are even 26 small-town, village, and city managers out-earning every governor of the 50 states.

Using our interactive mapping tool, quickly review (by zip code) the 34,873 Florida public employees earning $100,000+ each, costing taxpayers more than $5.5 billion annually. Just click a pin and scroll down to see the results rendered in the chart below the map.

Search all six-figure employees in Florida mapped at OpenTheBooks.com.OPENTHEBOOKS

To see all 2017 Florida state and local payroll data at OpenTheBooks.com, click here.

MORE FROM FORBES

Searching the map by zip code, here are a few examples of what you’ll uncover:

  • 717 small-town, city, and village employees – including 26 municipal leaders out-earning every U.S. governor at $180,000. These managers include Ron Ferris (Palm Beach Gardens – $261,987); James Chisholm (Daytona Beach – $214,669); Christopher Russo (Sunny Isles Beach – $226,314); Alex Rey Panama (Miami Lakes – $189,800); Michael McNees (Melbourne – $184,085).
  • 2,484 State of Florida employees – including $276,000 for Commissioner of Education Pamela Stewart; $218,925 each for Department of Children and Families Medical Executive Directors Josefina Baluga and Steve Brasington; and $199,999 for Department of Education Board of Governors Chancellor Marshall Criser.
  • 3,195 teachers and school administrators – including chief academic officer Daniel Gohl ($196,001) in Broward County School District; minority achievement officer James Lawson ($181,120) in Orange County School District; and English and Journalism teacher James Johnson ($121,493) in St. Johns County School District.
  • 13,305 college and university employees – The University of Florida paid out 3,234 six-figure salaries – the most of any university in the state. Their high earners included the Vice President of Health Affairs David Guzick ($1.2 million) and Director of the Graduate Tax Program Martin McMahon ($780,392). 

Top 10 Florida employers paying six-figure salaries in FY2017.OPENTHEBOOKS

Taxpayer-Expensive Educators

Data revealed 3,195 Florida teachers and administrators earned $100,000+ incomes, costing taxpayers nearly $400 million last year.

  • Former Palm Beach County SD Superintendent Robert Avossa received the largest superintendent paycheck ($365,042). In February 2018, he resigned. The Palm Beach County School Board employed 359 six-figure educators for $41 million in 2017.
  • Miami-Dade SD Superintendent Alberto Carvalho was the second-highest-paid educator. In 2017, he pulled down $343,386. The Miami-Dade School Board paid $1.5 billion in total payroll during 2017 with 738 employees earning six-figures.
  • Public school employees across the state raked in six-figure paychecks including Duval County Superintendent Nikolai Vitti ($302,394); Orange County Superintendent Barbara Jenkins ($281,037); Pinellas County Superintendent Michael Grego ($273,509); Collier County Superintendent Kamela Patton ($230,640); Hillsborough County Superintendent Jeffrey Eakins ($225,000); Lee County School District Attorney Keith Martin ($198,281); and Sarasota County Assistant Superintendent Scott Lempe ($178,776).

Top 10 Florida School Boards paying six-figure salaries in FY2017.OPENTHEBOOKS

Public College and University Employees

Public colleges and universities in Florida paid 13,305 six and seven-figure salaries in 2017, costing taxpayers $2.5 billion. These salaries flowed to coaches, presidents, professors, and more.

Division I colleges and universities awarded huge salaries to athletic coaches. Florida Atlantic University’s (FAU) head football coach Lane Kiffin received $436,781. Even the FAU former Head Football Coach Charlie Partridge made $294,784 in 2017. Florida International University Head Football Coach Paul “Butch” Davis took home $737,931. While new Florida State University (FSU) Football Coach Willie Taggart will receive $5 million per year and UF Football Coach Dan Mullen makes $6 million per year, taxpayers fund just a small fraction of these salaries.

Highly compensated university presidents included John Hitt, University of Central Florida president, made $898,092. Former President of Florida A&M Elmira Mangum made $638,907 in 2017. Randy Avent, president and founder of Florida Polytechnic, received $478,850. Wilson Bradshaw of Florida Gulf Coast earned $425,823 – although he retired on June 30, 2017 – while his successor, Mike Martin, brought home $392,718.

Even junior colleges doled out huge paychecks. Sanford “Sandy” Shugart, Valencia Community College president, pulled in $386,576. Kenneth Atwater, president of Hillsborough Community College, made $324,617 and James Murdaugh, president of Tallahassee Community College, received $304,834.

Other highly-compensated university employees included University of South Florida Vice President of Alumni Relations and foundation CEO Joel Momberg ($897,279); Florida Atlantic University Medical Science Professor John Newcomer ($560,638); University of North Florida Dean Mark Tumeo ($550,841); and University of West Florida Provost George Ellenberg ($423,545).

Top 10 Florida universities paying six-figure salaries in FY2017.OPENTHEBOOKS

County Employees

Even county employees got in on the largess. For example, the Miami-Dade County Board of Commissioners pays 5,476 employees more than $100,000 each – that’s twice as many six-figure employees as the Florida state government. Additionally, Palm Beach County’s Board of Commissioners paid out 1,214 six-figure salaries.

  • County workers received huge compensation including Hillsborough County Administrator Mike Merrill ($273,600); Pinellas County Administrator Mark Woodard ($261,478); Volusia County Manager James Dinneen ($259,954); Manatee County Administrator Ed Hunzeker ($220,300); and Osceola County Manager Don Fisher ($215,830).
  • Law-enforcement officers including sheriffs, highway patrolmen and policemen pulled in large salaries. Palm Beach County Sherriff’s Department Chief Operating Officer George Forman made brought home $227,093. At the Broward County Sheriff’s Department, 1,516 employees made six-figure salaries, including Sheriff Scott Israel, who made $189,070.
  • Even solid waste managers make a lot, including Palm Beach County Solid Waste Authority Executive Director Mark Hammond ($205,019); Miami-Dade County Water and Sewer System Deputy Director L.D. Yoder earned $208,593; and Hillsborough County Solid Waste Services Director Kimberly Byer ($143,239).

Not even resignations and retirements can stop some public employees from receiving huge payouts. Consider two examples:

Bruce Pelly, Palm Beach County’s airport director, pulled in $236,768 in 2017 on top of at least $70,968 in annual retirement checks. Pelly worked for more than 20 years before “retiring” in 2010 to collect a $304,000 lump sum payout – plus his monthly annuity checks. Just 30 days later, he was rehired in the exact same position.

Richard Anderson retired from his position as Apopka City Manager in 2014 with $510,296 in final-year compensation on top of two pensions he was able to collect. Then, the city rehired him as a lobbyist with a two-year contract for another $528,000.

Florida was ranked the number one fiscally responsible state in 2017. However, with public higher education employees bringing home six and seven figures, numerous small-time municipal leaders earning more annually than state governor, and a history of high earners accepting pensions and active paychecks at the same time, perhaps its practices are worth reevaluating.

Note: Only two of Florida’s 477 pay and pension systems were reviewed for this column: Florida People First Personnel Information System and Florida State Management Services Retirement System. All data is made available under Florida transparency laws. Together, these two systems have nearly 800,000 public employees and are estimated to cover two of every three FL public employees.

Furthermore, we reached out to many of the government entities mentioned in the piece and none have responded with comments. Anyone mentioned in the piece wanting to add context or comment should contact the author Adam Andrzejewski.

Adam Andrzejewski (say: Angie-eff-ski) is the CEO and Founder of OpenTheBooks.com – one of the largest private databases of government spending in the world. Our mission is to post “every dime, online” of all local, state, and federal government spending at OpenTheBooks.com …

MORE

From Joanne
Of course in Illinois, we don’t know how much Larkin, Opryszek, Splitt and others are paid to harass and intimidate innocent lawyers Ditkowsky, Denison and Amu for revealing corruption in the courts publicly, but we can see from their property records (Larkin, Smart) there’s some pretty fishy activities going on.
If anyone knows  a good volunteer investigator to get to the bottom of this corruption, please have them contact me. It’s time to clean the house here in Chicago.
JoAnne

from MG: the APA or American Psychological Association is currently soliciting comments on Custody Evaluations

http://apps.apa.org/commentcentral2/Default.aspx?site=52

When you visit this link, please be aware that it times out in 20 minutes so you might want to type up your comments first and then cut and paste them into the browser window.

You may wish to comment:  1) therapists should be trained and certified in the area of Custody Evaluations; 2)there must be set in forth strict standards as to how long the professional must meet with the parties, their children, teachers, the family’s health care professionals and anyone licensed who spends more than an hour or two during each year observing and/or working with the children and/or family in the area of heath, welfare and behavior; 3) the therapist should be familiar in the area of parental alienation; 4) the therapist should subject to online evaluation by the parents who have used the therapist in the past; 5) a budget should be set in advance and provided to both the court and the parties; 6) the therapist/evaluator should be tested for psychopathy with a PET brain scan as should the parents.

anything else?

Please make additional suggestions in the comments.

Joanne

From KKD: Murder of Mother in guardianship fueled by the money

Time to fight back

The amount of money that is garnered from the felonies of ELDER CLEANSING/HUMAN TRAFFICKING in thhe Elderly is amazing.   Philip Esformes is charged by the Government in stealing a billion dollars from Medicare.   He is small potatoes.    Others have stolen much more and continue to do so.    Health Care programs are deemed to failure because of the booty to be obtained and the POLITICAL and JUDICIAL elite to be garnered.

 

Your first step is to prepare an accurate, clear and concise timeline so that any honest investigator looking at your claim can honestly evaluate it and based an HONEST INVESTIGATION thereupon.    When you have the documents put together in an organized and cogent form make an appointment with the AG’s office and the FBI and present your case.

 

There are no short cuts.    The corruption is systemic!    It is so deeply rooted in our government that the mission of the taskforce is almost impossible.   Few in law enforcement want to get involved as 1) they will make lasting enemies – who could do them harm, and 2) they are signing up for an impossible work schedule.   Here in Illinois the corruption is so deep that the administrator of the IARDC (attorney disciplinary commission) stated with a straight face in the JoAnne Denison case that her blog exposing JUDICIAL CORRUPTION was akin to yelling fire in a crowded theater.  The Illinois Supreme Court agreed and Attorney Denison was suspended for 3 years despite posting only the unvarnished truth about Illinois Probate Court operations.   Apparently the ABA agreed as they and the 2nd oldest profession were actively mute!

On ‎Thursday‎, ‎July‎ ‎26‎, ‎2018‎ ‎08‎:‎49‎:‎55‎ ‎AM‎ ‎CDT, Dede Martin <denimarti2003@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Wednesday, July 25, 2018, 10:47:39 PM EDT, kenneth ditkowsky <kenditkowsky@yahoo.com> wrote:

You must ask the Court for time to find new counsel – also ask the Court for a referral     This is a CIVIL RIGHTS case.    For the record, you have rights in the life of you mother and other next of kin.   No public official has a right to forfeit those rights.    You are entitled to personal damages and punitive damages.  If is obvious that the defendants have been successful in intimidating your lawyer with their sanction motions.   Inexperienced and young attorneys are prone to such ethically challenged conduct and worry that the Court will bankrupt them.   

 

NB.   Your first priority to create an annotated TIME LINE.    The time line should be clear concise statements backed up with whatever evidence you have to substantiate your position.   This should be made available to the TASK FORCE at your earliest convenience.

 

This is not a game  – it is a very serious matter as from what you described the worse form of human trafficking was performed on your mother.    Federal Health care funds obviously were accessed and if the pattern was followed serious felonies occurred.

 

 

 

Ken Ditkowsky.ditkowskylawoffice.com

 

 

 

 

from PS: the New Yorker recognizes that Guardianship is akin to workhouses and gulags–a place to be sent to wither and die.

Finally the NEW YORKER recognized that guardian ships are in too many cases akin to Gulags – with a profit motive.   (The usual Gulag is political – however, it is appearing that the level of corruption associated with the criminal enterprise that a political motive may also exist)
Why protection of the elderly from the abuse of guardianships has not been a high priority is not a mystery!     The money to be garnered is outrageous!   (Sykes 3 million, Gore 1.5 million, Tyler 8 million***** plus MEDICARE FRAUD – plus sur charge of 700%   AND the 18 USCA 371 co conspirators being ignored by the STate and Federal Taxing authorities).
Under ADA and the Federal and State Constitution many of these guardianships are patently UNCONSTITUTIONAL  = BUT the fraud is way too profitable.   (Philip Esformes was indicted for stealing a billion dollars – here in Illinois the GAL who allegedly orchestrated the Gore Estate, went down to Florida and bilked the F Estate out of million dollars pursuant to a settlement with the Florida Attorney General.     Also in Illinois, Robert Jaycox went to his ultimate reward after the public guardian was unable to obtain a guardianship through the usual channels –He was then fed in a prone position, was rewarded with Aspirated Pneumonia and died.   Cremation followed “post haste” and the good old USA paid!
On Monday, October 2, 2017, 9:37:43 PM CDT, j. d. <jdit@aol.com> wrote:
For years, Rudy North woke up at 9 a.m. and read the Las Vegas Review-Journal while eating a piece of toast. Then he read a novel—he liked James Patterson and Clive Cussler—or, if he was feeling more ambitious, Freud. On scraps of paper and legal notepads, he jotted down thoughts sparked by his reading. “Deep below the rational part of our brain is an underground ocean where strange things swim,” he wrote on one notepad. On another, “Life: the longer it cooks, the better it tastes.”

Rennie, his wife of fifty-seven years, was slower to rise. She was recovering from lymphoma and suffered from neuropathy so severe that her legs felt like sausages. Each morning, she spent nearly an hour in the bathroom applying makeup and lotions, the same brands she’d used for forty years. She always emerged wearing pale-pink lipstick. Rudy, who was prone to grandiosity, liked to refer to her as “my amour.”
On the Friday before Labor Day, 2013, the Norths had just finished their toast when a nurse, who visited five times a week to help Rennie bathe and dress, came to their house, in Sun City Aliante, an “active adult” community in Las Vegas. They had moved there in 2005, when Rudy, a retired consultant for broadcasters, was sixty-eight and Rennie was sixty-six. They took pride in their view of the golf course, though neither of them played golf.
Rudy chatted with the nurse in the kitchen for twenty minutes, joking about marriage and laundry, until there was a knock at the door. A stocky woman with shiny black hair introduced herself as April Parks, the owner of the company A Private Professional Guardian. She was accompanied by three colleagues, who didn’t give their names. Parks told the Norths that she had an order from the Clark County Family Court to “remove” them from their home. She would be taking them to an assisted-living facility. “Go and gather your things,” she said.
Rennie began crying. “This is my home,” she said.

ADVERTISEMENT

One of Parks’s colleagues said that if the Norths didn’t comply he would call the police. Rudy remembers thinking, You’re going to put my wife and me in jail for this? But he felt too confused to argue.
Parks drove a Pontiac G-6 convertible with a license plate that read “crtgrdn,” for “court guardian.” In the past twelve years, she had been a guardian for some four hundred wards of the court. Owing to age or disability, they had been deemed incompetent, a legal term that describes those who are unable to make reasoned choices about their lives or their property. As their guardian, Parks had the authority to manage their assets, and to choose where they lived, whom they associated with, and what medical treatment they received. They lost nearly all their civil rights.
Without realizing it, the Norths had become temporary wards of the court. Parks had filed an emergency ex-parte petition, which provides an exception to the rule that both parties must be notified of any argument before a judge. She had alleged that the Norths posed a “substantial risk for mismanagement of medications, financial loss and physical harm.” She submitted a brief letter from a physician’s assistant, whom Rennie had seen once, stating that “the patient’s husband can no longer effectively take care of the patient at home as his dementia is progressing.” She also submitted a letter from one of Rudy’s doctors, who described him as “confused and agitated.”

Rudy and Rennie had not undergone any cognitive assessments. They had never received a diagnosis of dementia. In addition to Freud, Rudy was working his way through Nietzsche and Plato. Rennie read romance novels.
Parks told the Norths that if they didn’t come willingly an ambulance would take them to the facility, a place she described as a “respite.” Still crying, Rennie put cosmetics and some clothes into a suitcase. She packed so quickly that she forgot her cell phone and Rudy’s hearing aid. After thirty-five minutes, Parks’s assistant led the Norths to her car. When a neighbor asked what was happening, Rudy told him, “We’ll just be gone for a little bit.” He was too proud to draw attention to their predicament. “Just think of it as a mini-vacation,” he told Rennie.

After the Norths left, Parks walked through the house with Cindy Breck, the owner of Caring Transitions, a company that relocates seniors and sells their belongings at estate sales. Breck and Parks had a routine. “We open drawers,” Parks said at a deposition. “We look in closets. We pull out boxes, anything that would store—that would keep paperwork, would keep valuables.” She took a pocket watch, birth certificates, insurance policies, and several collectible coins.
The Norths’ daughter, Julie Belshe, came to visit later that afternoon. A fifty-three-year-old mother of three sons, she and her husband run a small business designing and constructing pools. She lived ten miles away and visited her parents nearly every day, often taking them to her youngest son’s football games. She was her parents’ only living child; her brother and sister had died.
She knocked on the front door several times and then tried to push the door open, but it was locked. She was surprised to see the kitchen window closed; her parents always left it slightly open. She drove to the Sun City Aliante clubhouse, where her parents sometimes drank coffee. When she couldn’t find them there, she thought that perhaps they had gone on an errand together—the farthest they usually drove was to Costco. But, when she returned to the house, it was still empty.
That weekend, she called her parents several times. She also called two hospitals to see if they had been in an accident. She called their landlord, too, and he agreed to visit the house. He reported that there were no signs of them. She told her husband, “I think someone kidnapped my parents.”

On the Tuesday after Labor Day, she drove to the house again and found a note taped to the door: “In case of emergency, contact guardian April Parks.” Belshe dialled the number. Parks, who had a brisk, girlish way of speaking, told Belshe that her parents had been taken to Lakeview Terrace, an assisted-living facility in Boulder City, nine miles from the Arizona border. She assured Belshe that the staff there would take care of all their needs.

“You can’t just walk into somebody’s home and take them!” Belshe told her.
Parks responded calmly, “It’s legal. It’s legal.”
Guardianship derives from the state’s parens patriae power, its duty to act as a parent for those considered too vulnerable to care for themselves. “The King shall have the custody of the lands of natural fools, taking the profits of them without waste or destruction, and shall find them their necessaries,” reads the English statute De Prerogative Regis, from 1324. The law was imported to the colonies—guardianship is still controlled by state, not federal, law—and has remained largely intact for the past eight hundred years. It establishes a relationship between ward and guardian that is rooted in trust.

In the United States, a million and a half adults are under the care of guardians, either family members or professionals, who control some two hundred and seventy-three billion dollars in assets, according to an auditor for the guardianship fraud program in Palm Beach County. Little is known about the outcome of these arrangements, because states do not keep complete figures on guardianship cases—statutes vary widely—and, in most jurisdictions, the court records are sealed. A Government Accountability report from 2010 said, “We could not locate a single Web site, federal agency, state or local entity, or any other organization that compiles comprehensive information on this issue.” A study published this year by the American Bar Association found that “an unknown number of adults languish under guardianship” when they no longer need it, or never did. The authors wrote that “guardianship is generally “permanent, leaving no way out—‘until death do us part.’ ”

When the Norths were removed from their home, they joined nearly nine thousand adult wards in the Las Vegas Valley. In the past twenty years, the city has promoted itself as a retirement paradise. Attracted by the state’s low taxes and a dry, sunny climate, elderly people leave their families behind to resettle in newly constructed senior communities. “The whole town sparkled, pulling older people in with the prospect of the American Dream at a reasonable price,” a former real-estate agent named Terry Williams told me. Roughly thirty per cent of the people who move to Las Vegas are senior citizens, and the number of Nevadans older than eighty-five has risen by nearly eighty per cent in the past decade.
In Nevada, as in many states, anyone can become a guardian by taking a course, as long as he or she has not been convicted of a felony or recently declared bankruptcy. Elizabeth Brickfield, a Las Vegas lawyer who has worked in guardianship law for twenty years, said that about fifteen years ago, as the state’s elderly population swelled, “all these private guardians started arriving, and the docket exploded. The court became a factory.”
Pamela Teaster, the director of the Center for Gerontology at Virginia Tech and one of the few scholars in the country who study guardianship, told me that, though most guardians assume their duties for good reasons, the guardianship system is “a morass, a total mess.” She said, “It is unconscionable that we don’t have any data, when you think about the vast power given to a guardian. It is one of society’s most drastic interventions.”
After talking to Parks, Belshe drove forty miles to Lakeview Terrace, a complex of stucco buildings designed to look like a hacienda. She found her parents in a small room with a kitchenette and a window overlooking the parking lot. Rennie was in a wheelchair beside the bed, and Rudy was curled up on a love seat in the fetal position. There was no phone in the room. Medical-alert buttons were strung around their necks. “They were like two lost children,” Belshe said.

She asked her parents who Parks was and where she could find the court order, but, she said, “they were overwhelmed and humiliated, and they didn’t know what was going on.” They had no idea how or why Parks had targeted them as wards. Belshe was struck by their passive acceptance. “It was like they had Stockholm syndrome or something,” she told me.
Belshe acknowledged that her parents needed a few hours of help each day, but she had never questioned their ability to live alone. “They always kept their house really nice and clean, like a museum,” she said. Although Rudy’s medical records showed that he occasionally had “staring spells,” all his medical-progress notes from 2013 described him as alert and oriented. He did most of the couple’s cooking and shopping, because Rennie, though lucid, was in so much pain that she rarely left the house. Belshe sometimes worried that her father inadvertently encouraged her mother to be docile: “She’s a very smart woman, though she sometimes acts like she’s not. I have to tell her, ‘That’s not cute, Mom.’ ”
When Belshe called Parks to ask for the court order, Parks told her that she was part of the “sandwich generation,” and that it would be too overwhelming for her to continue to care for her children and her parents at the same time. Parks billed her wards’ estates for each hour that she spent on their case; the court placed no limits on guardians’ fees, as long as they appeared “reasonable.” Later, when Belshe called again to express her anger, Parks charged the Norths twenty-four dollars for the eight-minute conversation. “I could not understand what the purpose of the call was other than she wanted me to know they had rights,” Parks wrote in a detailed invoice. “I terminated the phone call as she was very hostile and angry.”

A month after removing the Norths from their house, Parks petitioned to make the guardianship permanent. She was represented by an attorney who was paid four hundred dollars an hour by the Norths’ estate. A hearing was held at Clark County Family Court.
The Clark County guardianship commissioner, a lawyer named Jon Norheim, has presided over nearly all the guardianship cases in the county since 2005. He works under the supervision of a judge, but his orders have the weight of a formal ruling. Norheim awarded a guardianship to Parks, on average, nearly once a week. She had up to a hundred wards at a time. “I love April Parks,” he said at one hearing, describing her and two other professional guardians, who frequently appeared in his courtroom, as “wonderful, good-hearted, social-worker types.”

Norheim’s court perpetuated a cold, unsentimental view of family relations: the ingredients for a good life seemed to have little to do with one’s children and siblings. He often dismissed the objections of relatives, telling them that his only concern was the best interest of the wards, which he seemed to view in a social vacuum. When siblings fought over who would be guardian, Norheim typically ordered a neutral professional to assume control, even when this isolated the wards from their families.       Comment:    So much for the RULE OF LAW!

Rudy had assured Belshe that he would protest the guardianship, but, like most wards in the country, Rudy and Rennie were not represented by counsel. As Rudy stood before the commissioner, he convinced himself that guardianship offered him and Rennie a lifetime of care without being a burden to anyone they loved. He told Norheim, “The issue really is her longevity—what suits her.” Belshe, who sat in the courtroom, said, “I was shaking my head. No, no, no—don’t do that!” Rennie was silent.
Norheim ordered that the Norths become permanent wards of the court. “Chances are, I’ll probably never see you folks again; you’ll work everything out,” he said, laughing. “I very rarely see people after the initial time in court.” The hearing lasted ten minutes.
Comment: so much for the victims assets!
The following month, Even Tide Life Transitions, a company that Parks often hired, sold most of the Norths’ belongings. “The general condition of this inventory is good,” an appraiser wrote. Two lithographs by Renoir were priced at thirty-eight hundred dollars, and a glass cocktail table (“Client states that it is a Brancusi design”) was twelve hundred and fifty dollars. The Norths also had several pastel drawings by their son, Randy, who died in a motorcycle accident at the age of thirty-two, as well as Kachina dolls, a Bose radio, a Dyson vacuum cleaner, a Peruvian tapestry, a motion-step exerciser, a LeRoy Neiman sketch of a bar in Dublin, and two dozen pairs of Clarke shoes. According to Parks’s calculations, the Norths had roughly fifty thousand dollars. Parks transferred their savings, held at the Bank of America, to an account in her name.
Rennie repeatedly asked for her son’s drawings, and for the family photographs on her refrigerator. Rudy pined for his car, a midnight-blue 2010 Chrysler, which came to symbolize the life he had lost. He missed the routine interactions that driving had allowed him. “Everybody at the pharmacy was my buddy,” he said. Now he and Rennie felt like exiles. Rudy said, “They kept telling me, ‘Oh, you don’t have to worry: your car is fine, and this and that.’ ” A month later, he said, “they finally told me, ‘Actually, we sold your car.’ I said, ‘What in the hell did you sell it for?’ ” It was bought for less than eight thousand dollars, a price that Rudy considered insulting.
Rudy lingered in the dining room after eating breakfast each morning, chatting with other residents of Lakeview Terrace. He soon discovered that ten other wards of April Parks lived there. His next-door neighbor, Adolfo Gonzalez, a short, bald seventy-one-year-old who had worked as a maître d’ at the MGM Grand Las Vegas, had become Parks’s ward at a hearing that lasted a minute and thirty-one seconds.
Gonzalez, who had roughly three hundred and fifty thousand dollars in assets, urged Rudy not to accept the nurse’s medications. “If you take the pills, they’ll make sure you don’t make it to court,” he said. Gonzalez had been prescribed the antipsychotic medications Risperdal and Depakote, which he hid in the side of his mouth without swallowing. He wanted to remain vigilant. He often spoke of a Salvador Dali painting that had been lost when Parks took over his life. Once, she charged him two hundred and ten dollars for a visit in which, according to her invoice, he expressed that “he feels like a prisoner.”
Rudy was so distressed by his conversations with Gonzalez that he asked to see a psychologist. “I thought maybe he’d give me some sort of objective learning as to what I was going through,” he said. “I wanted to ask basic questions, like What the hell is going on?” Rudy didn’t find the session illuminating, but he felt a little boost to his self-esteem when the psychologist asked that he return for a second appointment. “I guess he found me terribly charming,” he told me.

Rudy liked to fantasize about an alternative life as a psychoanalyst, and he tried to befriend the wards who seemed especially hopeless. “Loneliness is a physical pain that hurts all over,” he wrote in his notebook. He bought a pharmaceutical encyclopedia and advised the other wards about medications they’d been prescribed. He also ran for president of the residents, promising that under his leadership the kitchen would no longer advertise canned food as homemade. (He lost—he’s not sure if anyone besides Rennie voted for him—but he did win a seat on the residents’ council.)   comment:  How can such a situation exist in America?

He was particularly concerned about a ward of Parks’s named Marlene Homer, a seventy-year-old woman who had been a professor. “Now she was almost hiding behind the pillars,” Rudy said. “She was so obsequious. She was, like, ‘Run me over. Run me over.’ ” She’d become a ward in 2012, after Parks told the court, “She has admitted to strange thoughts, depression, and doing things she can’t explain.” On a certificate submitted to the court, an internist had checked a box indicating that Homer was “unable to attend the guardianship court hearing because______,” but he didn’t fill in a reason.
The Norths could guess which residents were Parks’s wards by the way they were dressed. Gonzalez wore the same shirt to dinner nearly every day. “Forgive me,” he told the others at his table. When a friend tried to take him shopping, Parks prevented the excursion because she didn’t know the friend. Rennie had also tried to get more clothes. “I reminded ward that she has plenty of clothing in her closet,” Parks wrote. “I let her know that they are on a tight budget.” The Norths’ estate was charged a hundred and eighty dollars for the conversation.
Another resident, Barbara Neely, a fifty-five-year-old with schizophrenia, repeatedly asked Parks to buy her outfits for job interviews. She was applying for a position with the Department of Education. After Neely’s third week at Lakeview Terrace, Parks’s assistant sent Parks a text. “Can you see Barbara Neely anytime this week?” she wrote. “She has questions on the guardianship and how she can get out of it.” Parks responded, “I can and she can’t.” Neely had been in the process of selling her house, for a hundred and sixty-eight thousand dollars, when Parks became her guardian and took charge of the sale.
The rationale for the guardianship of Norbert Wilkening, who lived on the bottom floor of the facility, in the memory-care ward, for people with dementia (“the snake pit,” Rudy called it), was also murky. Parks’s office manager, who advertised himself as a “Qualified Dementia Care Specialist”—a credential acquired through video training sessions—had given Wilkening a “Mini-Mental State Examination,” a list of eleven questions and tasks, including naming as many animals as possible in a minute. Wilkening had failed. His daughter, Amy, told me, “I didn’t see anything that was happening to him other than a regular getting-older process, but when I was informed by all these people that he had all these problems I was, like, Well, maybe I’m just in denial. I’m not a professional.” She said that Parks was “so highly touted. By herself, by the social workers, by the judge, by everyone that knew her.”
At a hearing, when Amy complained to Norheim that Parks didn’t have time for her father, he replied, “Yeah, she’s an industry at this point.”
As Belshe spoke to more wards and their families, she began to realize that Lakeview Terrace was not the only place where wards were lodged, and that Parks was not the only guardian removing people from their homes for what appeared to be superficial reasons. Hundreds of cases followed the same pattern. It had become routine for guardians in Clark County to petition for temporary guardianship on an ex-parte basis. They told the court that they had to intervene immediately because the ward faced a medical emergency that was only vaguely described: he or she was demented or disoriented, and at risk of exploitation or abuse. The guardians attached a brief physician’s certificate that contained minimal details and often stated that the ward was too incapacitated to attend a court hearing. Debra Bookout, an attorney at the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada, told me, “When a hospital or rehab facility needs to free up a bed, or when the patient is not paying his bills, some doctors get sloppy, and they will sign anything.” A recent study conducted by Hunter College found that a quarter of guardianship petitions in New York were brought by nursing homes and hospitals, sometimes as a means of collecting on overdue bills.
It often took several days for relatives to realize what had happened. When they tried to contest the guardianship or become guardians themselves, they were dismissed as unsuitable, and disparaged in court records as being neglectful, or as drug addicts, gamblers, and exploiters. (Belshe was described by Parks as a “reported addict” who “has no contact with the proposed ward,” an allegation that Belshe didn’t see until it was too late to challenge.) Family who lived out of state were disqualified from serving as guardians, because the law prohibited the appointment of anyone who didn’t live in Nevada.
Once the court approved the guardianship, the wards were often removed from their homes, which were eventually sold. Terry Williams, whose father’s estate was taken over by strangers even though he’d named her the executor of his will, has spent years combing through guardianship, probate, and real-estate records in Clark County. “I kept researching, because I was so fascinated that these people could literally take over the lives and assets of people under color of law, in less than ten minutes, and nobody was asking questions,” she told me. “These people spent their lives accumulating wealth and, in a blink of an eye, it was someone else’s.”

Williams has reviewed hundreds of cases involving Jared Shafer, who is considered the godfather of guardians in Nevada. In the records room of the courthouse, she was afraid to say Shafer’s name out loud. In the course of his thirty-five-year career, Shafer has assumed control of more than three thousand wards and estates and trained a generation of guardians. In 1979, he became the county’s public administrator, handling the estates of people who had no relatives in Nevada, as well as the public guardian, serving wards when no family members or private guardians were available. In 2003, he left government and founded his own private guardianship and fiduciary business; he transferred the number of his government-issued phone to himself.
Williams took records from Shafer’s and other guardians’ cases to the Las Vegas police department several times. She tried to explain, she said, that “this is a racketeering operation that is fee-based. There’s no brown paper bag handed off in an alley. The payoff is the right to bill the estate.” The department repeatedly told her that it was a civil issue, and refused to take a report. In 2006, she submitted a typed statement, listing twenty-three statutes that she thought had been violated, but an officer wrote in the top right corner, “not a police matter.” Adam Woodrum, an estate lawyer in Las Vegas, told me that he’s worked with several wards and their families who have brought their complaints to the police. “They can’t even get their foot in the door,” he said.

Acting as her own attorney, Williams filed a racketeering suit in federal court against Shafer and the lawyers who represented him. At a hearing before the United States District Court of Central California in 2009, she told the judge, “They are trumping up ways and means to deem people incompetent and take their assets.” The case was dismissed. “The scheme is ingenious,” she told me. “How do you come up with a crime that literally none of the victims can articulate without sounding like they’re nuts? The same insane allegations keep surfacing from people who don’t know each other.”
In 2002, in a petition to the Clark County District Court, a fifty-seven-year-old man complained that his mother had lost her constitutional rights because her kitchen was understocked and a few bills hadn’t been paid. The house they shared was then placed on the market. The son wrote, “If the only showing necessary to sell the home right out from under someone is that their ‘estate’ would benefit, then no house in Clark County is safe, nor any homeowner.” Under the guise of benevolent paternalism, guardians seemed to be creating a kind of capitalist dystopia: people’s quality of life was being destroyed in order to maximize their capital.
When Concetta Mormon, a wealthy woman who owned a Montessori school, became Shafer’s ward because she had aphasia, Shafer sold the school midyear, even though students were enrolled. At a hearing after the sale, Mormon’s daughter, Victoria Cloutier, constantly spoke out of turn. The judge, Robert Lueck, ordered that she be handcuffed and placed in a holding cell while the hearing continued. Two hours later, when Cloutier was allowed to return for the conclusion, the judge told her that she had thirty days in which to vacate her mother’s house. If she didn’t leave, she would be evicted and her belongings would be taken to Goodwill.
The opinions of wards were also disregarded. In 2010, Guadalupe Olvera, a ninety-year-old veteran of the Second World War, repeatedly asked that his daughter and not Shafer be appointed his guardian. “The ward is not to go to court,” Shafer instructed his assistants. When Olvera was finally permitted to attend a hearing, nearly a year after becoming a ward, he expressed his desire to live with his daughter in California, rather than under Shafer’s care. “Why is everybody against that?” he asked Norheim. “I don’t need that man.” Although Nevada’s guardianship law requires that courts favor relatives over professionals, Norheim continued the guardianship, saying, “The priority ship sailed.”
When Olvera’s daughter eventually defied the court’s orders and took her father to live at her seaside home in Northern California, Norheim’s supervisor, Judge Charles Hoskin, issued an arrest warrant for her “immediate arrest and incarceration” without bail. The warrant was for contempt of court, but Norheim said at least five times from the bench that she had “kidnapped” Olvera. At a hearing, Norheim acknowledged that he wasn’t able to send an officer across state lines to arrest the daughter. Shafer said, “Maybe I can.”
Shafer held so much sway in the courtroom that, in 2013, when an attorney complained that the bank account of a ward named Kristina Berger had “no money left and no records to explain where it went,” Shafer told Norheim, “Close the courtroom.” Norheim immediately complied. A dozen people in attendance were forced to leave.
One of Shafer’s former bookkeepers, Lisa Clifton, who was hired in 2012, told me that Shafer used to brag about his political connections, saying, “I wrote the laws.” In 1995, he persuaded the Nevada Senate Committee on Government Affairs to write a bill that allowed the county to receive interest on money that the public guardian invested. “This is what I want you to put in the statute, and I will tell you that you will get a rousing hand from a couple of judges who practice our probate,” he said. At another hearing, he asked the committee to write an amendment permitting public guardians to take control of people’s property in five days, without a court order. “This bill is not ‘Big Brother’ if you trust the person who is doing the job,” he said. (After a senator expressed concern that the law allowed “intervention into somebody’s life without establishing some sort of reason why you are doing it,” the committee declined to recommend it.)

Clifton observed that Shafer almost always took a cynical view of family members: they were never motivated by love or duty, only by avarice. “ ‘They just want the money’—that was his answer to everything,” she told me. “And I’m thinking to myself, Well, when family members die they pass it down to their children. Isn’t that just the normal progression of things?”
After a few months on the job, Clifton was asked to work as a guardian, substituting for an absent employee, though she had never been trained. Her first assignment was to supervise a visit with a man named Alvin Passer, who was dying in the memory-care unit of a nursing home. His partner of eight years, Olive Manoli, was permitted a brief visit to say goodbye. Her visits had been restricted by Shafer—his lawyer told the court that Passer became “agitated and sexually aggressive” in her presence—and she hadn’t seen Passer in months. In a futile attempt to persuade the court to allow her to be with him, Manoli had submitted a collection of love letters, as well as notes from ten people describing her desire to care for Passer for the rest of his life. “I was absolutely appalled,” Clifton said. “She was this very sweet lady, and I said, ‘Go in there and spend as much time with him as you want.’ Tears were rolling down her cheeks.”
The family seemed to have suffered a form of court-sanctioned gaslighting. Passer’s daughter, Joyce, a psychiatric nurse who specialized in geriatrics, had been abruptly removed as her father’s co-guardian, because she appeared “unwilling or (more likely) unable to conduct herself rationally in the Ward’s best interests,” according to motions filed by one of Shafer’s attorneys.
She and Manoli had begged Norheim not to appoint Shafer as guardian. “Sir, he’s abusive,” their lawyer said in court.
“He’s as good as we got, and I trust him completely,” Norheim responded.
Joyce Passer was so confused by the situation that, she said, “I thought I was crazy.” Then she received a call from a blocked number. It was Terry Williams, who did not reveal her identity. She had put together a list of a half-dozen family members who she felt were “ready to receive some kind of verbal support.” She told Passer, “Look, you are not nuts. This is real. Everything you are thinking is true. This has been going on for years.”

During Rennie North’s first year at Lakeview Terrace, she gained sixty pounds. Parks had switched the Norths’ insurance, for reasons she never explained, and Rennie began seeing new doctors, who prescribed Valium, Prozac, the sedative Temazepam, Oxycodone, and Fentanyl. The doses steadily increased. Rudy, who had hip pain, was prescribed Oxycodone and Valium. When he sat down to read, the sentences floated past his eyes or appeared in duplicate. “Ward seemed very tired and his eyes were glassy,” Parks wrote in an invoice.   Comment – here is your oxioid problem – and American health care pays for it!
Belshe found it increasingly hard to communicate with her parents, who napped for much of the day. “They were being overmedicated to the point where they weren’t really there,” she said. The Norths’ grandsons, who used to see them every week, rarely visited. “It was degrading for them to see us so degraded,” Rudy said. Parks noticed that Rennie was acting helpless, and urged her to “try harder to be more motivated and not be so dependent on others.” Rudy and Rennie began going to Sunday church services at the facility, even though they were Jewish. Rudy was heartened by what he heard in the pastor’s message: “Don’t give up. God will help you get out of here.” He began telling people, “We are living the life of Job.”
At the end of 2014, Lakeview Terrace hired a new director, Julie Liebo, who resisted Parks’s orders that medical information about wards be kept from their families. Liebo told me, “The families were devastated that they couldn’t know if the residents were in surgery or hear anything about their health. They didn’t understand why they’d been taken out of the picture. They’d ask, ‘Can you just tell me if she’s alive?’ ” Liebo tried to comply with the rules, because she didn’t want to violate medical-privacy laws; as guardian, Parks was entitled to choose what was disclosed. Once, though, Liebo took pity on the sister of an eighty-year-old ward named Dorothy Smith, who was mourning a dog that Parks had given away, and told her that Smith was stable. Liebo said that Parks, who was by then the secretary of the Nevada Guardianship Association, called her immediately. “She threatened my license and said she could have me arrested,” Liebo told me.
After Liebo arrived, Parks began removing wards from Lakeview Terrace with less than a day’s notice. A woman named Linda Phillips, who had dementia, was told that she was going to the beauty salon. She never returned. Marlene Homer, the ward whose ailments were depression and “strange thoughts,” was taken away in a van, screaming. Liebo had asked the state ombudsman to come to the facility and stop the removals, but nothing could be done. “We stood there completely helpless,” Liebo said. “We had no idea where they were going.” Liebo said that other wards asked her if they would be next.
Liebo alerted the compliance officer for the Clark County Family Court that Parks was removing residents “without any concern for them and their choice to stay here.” She also reported her complaints to the police, the Department of Health Services, the Bureau of Health Care, and Nevada Adult Protective Services. She said each agency told her that it didn’t have the authority or the jurisdiction to intervene.
At the beginning of 2015, Parks told the Norths that they would be leaving Lakeview Terrace. “Finances are low and the move is out of our control,” Parks wrote. It was all arranged so quickly that, Rudy said, “we didn’t have time to say goodbye to people we’d been eating with for seventeen months.” Parks arranged for Caring Transitions to move them to the Wentworth, a less expensive assisted-living facility. Liebo said that, the night before the move, Rudy began “shouting about the Holocaust, that this was like being in Nazi Germany.” Liebo didn’t think the reference was entirely misguided. “He reverted to a point where he had no rights as a human being,” she said. “He was no longer the caregiver, the man, the husband—all of the things that gave his life meaning.” Liebo also didn’t understand why Belshe had been marginalized. “She seemed like she had a great relationship with her parents,” she said.

Belshe showed up at 9 a.m. to help her parents with the move, but when she arrived Parks’s assistant, Heidi Kramer, told her that her parents had already left. Belshe “emotionally crashed,” as Liebo put it. She yelled that her parents didn’t even wake up until nine or later—what was the rush? In an invoice, Kramer wrote that Belshe “began to yell and scream, her behavior was out of control, she was taking pictures and yelling, ‘April Parks is a thief.’ ” Kramer called the police. Liebo remembers that an officer “looked at Julie Belshe and told her she had no rights, and she didn’t.”
Belshe cried as she drove to the Wentworth, in Las Vegas. When she arrived, Parks was there, and refused to let her see her parents. Parks wrote, “I told her that she was too distraught to see her parents, and that she needed to leave.” Belshe wouldn’t, so Parks asked the receptionist to call the police. When the police arrived, Belshe told them, “I just want to hug my parents and make sure they’re O.K.” An officer handed her a citation for trespassing, saying that if she returned to the facility she would be arrested.

Parks wrote that the Norths were “very happy with the new room and thanked us several times,” but Rudy remembers feeling as if he had “ended up in the sewer.” Their room was smaller than the one at Lakeview Terrace, and the residents at the Wentworth seemed older and sicker. “There were people sitting in their chairs, half-asleep,” Rudy said. “Their tongues hung out.”
Rennie spent nearly all her time in her wheelchair or in bed, her eyes half-closed. Her face had become bloated. One night, she was so agitated that the nurses gave her Haldol, a drug commonly used to treat schizophrenia. When Rudy asked her questions, Rennie said “What?” in a soft, remote voice.

Shortly after her parents’ move, Belshe called an editor of the Vegas Voice, a newspaper distributed to all the mailboxes in senior communities in Las Vegas. In recent months, the paper had published three columns warning readers about Clark County guardians, writing that they “have been lining their pockets at the expense of unwitting seniors for a very long time.”

At Belshe’s urging, the paper’s political editor, Rana Goodman, visited the Norths, and published an article in the Voice, describing Rudy as “the most articulate, soft spoken person I have met in a very long time.” She called Clark County’s guardianship system a “(legal) elder abuse racket” and urged readers to sign a petition demanding that the Nevada legislature reform the laws. More than three thousand people signed.
Two months later, the Review-Journal ran an investigation, titled “Clark County’s Private Guardians May Protect—Or Just Steal and Abuse,” which described complaints against Shafer going back to the early eighties, when two of his employees were arrested for stealing from the estates of dead people.
In May, 2015, a month after the article appeared, when the Norths went to court to discuss their finances local journalists were in the courtroom and Norheim seemed chastened. “I have grave concerns about this case,” he said. He noted that Parks had sold the Norths’ belongings without proper approval from his court. Parks had been doing this routinely for years, and, according to her, the court had always accepted her accounting and her fees. Her lawyer, Aileen Cohen, said, “Everything was done for the wards’ benefit, to support the wards.”
Norheim announced that he was suspending Parks as the Norths’ guardian—the first time she had been removed from a case for misconduct.
“This is important,” Rudy, who was wearing a double-breasted suit, said in court. “This is hope. I am coming here and I have hope.” He quoted the Bible, Thomas Jefferson, and Euripides, until Belshe finally touched his elbow and said, “Just sit down, Dad.”
When Rudy apologized for being “overzealous,” Norheim told him, “This is your life. This is your liberty. You have every right to be here. You have every right to be involved in this project.”
After the hearing, Parks texted her husband, “I am finished.”

Last March, Parks and her lawyer, along with her office manager and her husband, were indicted for perjury and theft, among other charges. The indictment was narrowly focussed on their double billings and their sloppy accounting, but, in a detailed summary of the investigation, Jaclyn O’Malley, who led the probe for the Nevada Attorney General’s Office, made passing references to the “collusion of hospital social workers and medical staff” who profited from their connection to Parks. At Parks’s grand-jury trial, her assistant testified that she and Parks went to hospitals and attorneys’ offices for the purpose of “building relationships to generate more client leads.” Parks secured a contract with six medical facilities whose staff agreed to refer patients to her—an arrangement that benefitted the facilities, since Parks controlled the decisions of a large pool of their potential consumers. Parks often gave doctors blank certificates and told them exactly what to write in order for their patients to become her wards.
Parks and other private guardians appeared to gravitate toward patients who had considerable assets. O’Malley described a 2010 case in which Parks, after receiving a tip from a social worker, began “cold-calling” rehabilitation centers, searching for a seventy-nine-year-old woman, Patricia Smoak, who had nearly seven hundred thousand dollars and no children. Parks finally found her, but Smoak’s physician wouldn’t sign a certificate of incapacity. “The doctor is not playing ball,” Parks wrote to her lawyer. She quickly found a different doctor to sign the certificate, and Norheim approved the guardianship. (Both Parks and Norheim declined to speak with me.)
Steve Miller, a former member of the Las Vegas City Council, said he assumed that Shafer would be the next indictment after Parks, who is scheduled to go to trial next spring. “All of the disreputable guardians were taking clues from the Shafer example,” he said. But, as the months passed, “I started to think that this has run its course locally. Only federal intervention is going to give us peace of mind.”
Richard Black, who, after his father-in-law was placed into guardianship, became the director of a grassroots national organization, Americans Against Abusive Probate Guardianship, said that he considered the Parks indictment “irrefutably shallow. It sent a strong message of: We’re not going to go after the real leaders of this, only the easy people, the ones who were arrogant and stupid enough to get caught.” He works with victims in dozens of what he calls “hot spots,” places where guardianship abuse is prevalent, often because they attract retirees: Palm Beach, Sarasota, Naples, Albuquerque, San Antonio. He said that the problems in Clark County are not unusual. “The only thing that is unique is that Clark County is one of the few jurisdictions that doesn’t seal its records, so we can see what is going on.”
Approximately ten per cent of people older than sixty-five are thought to be victims of “elder abuse”—a construct that has yet to enter public consciousness, as child abuse has—but such cases are seldom prosecuted. People who are frail or dying don’t make good witnesses—a fact that Shafer once emphasized at a 1990 U.S. congressional hearing on crimes against the elderly, in which he appeared as an expert at preventing exploitation. “Seniors do not like to testify,” he said, adding that they were either incapable or “mesmerized by the person ripping them off.” He said, “The exploitation of seniors is becoming a real cottage industry right now. This is a good business. Seniors are unable to fend for themselves.”
In the past two years, Nevada has worked to reform its guardianship system through a commission, appointed by the Nevada Supreme Court, to study failures in oversight. In 2018, the Nevada legislature will enact a new law that entitles all wards to be represented by lawyers in court. But the state seems reluctant to reckon with the roots of the problem, as well as with its legacy: a generation of ill and elderly people who were deprived of their autonomy, and also of their families, in the final years of their lives. Last spring, a man bought a storage unit in Henderson, Nevada, and discovered twenty-seven urns—the remains of Clark County wards who had never been buried.

In the wake of Parks’s indictment, no judges have lost their jobs. Norheim was transferred from guardianship court to dependency court, where he now oversees cases involving abused and neglected children. Shafer is still listed in the Clark County court system as a trustee and as an administrator in several open cases. He did not respond to multiple e-mails and messages left with his bookkeeper, who answered his office phone but would not say whether he was still in practice. He did appear at one of the public meetings for the commission appointed to analyze flaws in the guardianship system. “What started all of this was me,” he said. Then he criticized local media coverage of the issue and said that a television reporter, whom he’d talked to briefly, didn’t know the facts. “The system works,” Shafer went on. “It’s not the guardians you have to be aware of, it’s more family members.” He wore a blue polo shirt, untucked, and his head was shaved. He looked aged, his arms dotted with sun spots, but he spoke confidently and casually. “The only person you folks should be thinking about when you change things is the ward. It’s their money, it’s their life, it’s their time. The family members don’t count.”

Belshe is resigned to the fact that she will be supporting her parents for the rest of their lives. Parks spent all the Norths’ money on fees—the hourly wages for her, her assistants, her lawyers, and the various contractors she hired—as well as on their monthly bills, which doubled under her guardianship. Belshe guesses that Parks—or whichever doctor or social worker referred her to the Norths—had assumed that her parents were wealthier than they actually were. Rudy often talked vaguely about deals he had once made in China. “He exaggerates, so he won’t feel emasculated,” Belshe said. “He wasn’t such a big businessman, but he was a great dad.”
The Norths now live in what used to be Belshe’s home office; it has a window onto the living room which Belshe has covered with a tarp. Although the room is tiny, the Norths can fit most of their remaining belongings into it: a small lamp with teardrop crystals, a deflated love seat, and two paintings by their son. Belshe rescued the art work, in 2013, after Caring Transitions placed the Norths’ belongings in trash bags at the edge of their driveway. “My brother’s paintings were folded and smelled,” she said.
The Norths’ bed takes up most of the room, and operates as their little planet. They rarely stray far from it. They lie in bed playing cards or sit against the headboard, reading or watching TV. Rudy’s notebooks are increasingly focussed on mortality—“Death may be pleasurable”—and money. “Money monsters do well in this society,” he wrote. “All great fortunes began with a crime.” He creates lists of all the possessions he has lost, some of which he may be imagining: over time, Rennie’s wardrobe has become increasingly elaborate and refined, as have their sets of China. He alternates between feeling that his belongings are nothing—a distraction from the pursuit of meaning—and everything. “It’s an erasure,” he said. “They erase you from the face of the earth.” He told me a few times that he was a distant cousin of Leon Trotsky, “intellect of the revolution,” as he called him, and I wondered whether his newfound pride was connected to his conflicted feelings about the value of material objects.
A few months after the Norths were freed, Rudy talked on the phone with Adolfo Gonzalez, his neighbor from Lakeview Terrace, who, after a doctor found him competent, had also been discharged. He now lived in a house near the airport, and had been reunited with several of his pets. The two men congratulated each other. “We survived!” Rudy said. “We never thought we’d see each other on the other side.” Three other wards from Lakeview Terrace had died.
Rennie has lost nearly all the weight she gained at Lakeview Terrace, mostly because Belshe and her husband won’t let her lounge in her wheelchair or eat starchy foods. Now she uses a walker, which she makes self-deprecating jokes about. “This is fun—I can teach you!” she told me.
In July, Rennie slipped in the bathroom and spent a night in the hospital. Belshe didn’t want anyone to know about her mother’s fall, because, she said, “this is the kind of thing that gets you into guardianship.” She told me, “I feel like these people are just waiting in the bushes.”
Two days after the fall, Rennie was feeling better—she’d had thirteen stitches—but she was still agitated by a dream she had in the hospital. She wasn’t even sure if she’d been asleep; she remembers talking, and her eyes were open.
“You were loopedy-doopy,” Scott Belshe, Julie’s husband, told her. They were sitting on the couch in their living room.
“It was real,” Rennie said.
“You dreamed it,” Scott told her.
“Maybe I was hallucinating,” she said. “I don’t know—I was scared.” She said that strangers were making decisions about her fate. She felt as if she were frozen: she couldn’t influence what was happening. “I didn’t know what to do,” she told Scott. “I think I yelled for help. Help me.” The worst part, she said, was that she couldn’t find her family. “Honest to God, I thought you guys left me all alone.” ♦
THIS SITUATION IS GOING ON IN ILLINOIS, IN FLORIDA, IN CALIFORNIA, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA, NEW YORK and is being covered up  by a massive conspiracy of public officials  that include the POLITICAL ELITE, Judicial elite – including judges, lawyers, et al.    Here in Illinois one of the miscreants was very candid – he referred to the elderly as a commodity.
Here in Illinois the suggestion that corruption existed and an HONEST INVESTIGATION be conducted not only was not well received, but yours truly and other lawyers who would not remain silent were punished by suspension of their law licenses by the Illinois Supreme Court.  so arrogant are the 18 USCA 371 co conspirators that under the name of JEROME LARKIN the lawyer rule 8.3 and the 18 USCA 4 reporting of the felonies similar to those noted in the NEW YORKER magazing article by judges (and other judicial officials) was analogized to be akin to “yelling fire in a crowded theater!”
The Las Vegas terrorism was reported to be the biggest single murder spree in American History – however – that is not accurate.    More senior citizens are killed (elder cleansing) by wrongfully appointed guardians that  the Vegas killer!     Equally disturbing is the fact that each of us — you and me – is a potential victim.

from fb: court watchers needed tomorrow Jul. 25, 2018 in both NYC and Chicago

In New York City:

I need people to come to NYC 60 centre street tomorrow afternoon 1:45 2:00 p.m. room 212 supreme court Judge Matthew Coopers room for court watching and legal friend support. This is evette mobile is 917 902 5798 thank u.
Wednedsay July 25th, 38th anniversary, really ironic.
In Chicago:
Probate Court, decedent’s estate, Chicago.
Name of case: Teichert.  11:30 am.  Client Linda Scully.  18th floor Chicago Daley Center.  Judge Malone.  phone 312 549 2112
thanks to all out there that can go
Joanne

Medical Kidnap: Justina’s story from probate in Mass.

 

Computer Hacker Who Defended Justina Pelletier When Medically Kidnapped Speaks Out From Jail Where he has been for 2 Years Without a Trial

marty

Health Impact News

MartyG: “My Prosecutor Quit His Job”

by Marty Gottesfeld
from jail

Was a recent courtroom confrontation the last straw or was there more?

My name is Marty Gottesfeld and I defended Justina Pelletier and her parents’ rights when she was medically kidnapped by Harvard’s Boston Children’s Hospital (BCH) in 2014.

Shortly thereafter the FBI and U.S. Justice Department began systematically trying to destroy the lives that my lovely and courageous wife Dana and I had built for ourselves in nearby Somerville, Massachusetts.

They nearly succeeded. This month marks the beginning of my third year in jail awaiting trial for helping to save Justina’s life.

It also marks the beginning of the end of the 5-year federal criminal statute of limitations on the crimes perpetrated by the hospital and its staff, who accepted hundreds of thousands of Medicaid dollars to treat Justina for a condition that she never had in the first place.

I’ve been called Justina’s “Guardian Hacktivist.” Rolling Stone calls me “The Hacker Who Cared Too Much.” I’ve also been called a “political prisoner.”

As many victims of medical kidnapping are acutely aware, unfortunately political connections matter more than facts in these cases and the one common thread which weaves its way through nearly every party that chose to persecute the Pelletiers as well as my family and me is Harvard.

You see, not only is BCH a Harvard institution whose employees use Harvard email addresses, not only is it a local hotspot for medical kidnappings, but the former U.S. attorney who chose to indict me, as well as the acting U.S. attorney who replaced her before Trump was sworn in and the former governor of Massachusetts who ignored Justina’s plight until she was crippled and nearly dead are all closely-aligned with the Ivy League university.

In fact, federal Magistrate Judge Marianne Bowler, who signed off on the search warrant for my home and who ordered me detained without bail, worked at Harvard Medical School, she is married to a current Harvard medical school professor and she was the director of a foundation which still raises money for Justina’s torturers.

She didn’t recuse herself from my case, though this past summer she recused herself from another matter involving Harvard hospitals.

Throughout this whole ordeal, until recently, there was also Adam J. Bookbinder, the former top federal cybercrime prosecutor in Boston and – you guessed it – he’s a Harvard grad. It was Bookbinder who applied for a wiretap on my cable modem as well as for a search warrant for my home.

He had the FBI hand-deliver me a target letter after they seized thousands of dollars of my computer equipment. And that was before the FBI went to see my in-laws in California to try to intimidate them as well. It was also Bookbinder who hand-picked magistrate Bowler and lied by omission about her conflicts of interest.

And when we started exposing all of this, it was Bookbinder who threatened my wife for posting things to YouTube. He’s now been lampooned by the left and emasculated by the right.

Then, at the last court hearing that I attended, I confronted Bookbinder while Dana held up before and after photos of Justina, showing how his alma mater had transformed her from vibrantly figure skating into barely being able to push her wheelchair.

See: ‘Hacktivist’ begins hearing with outburst, wife asked to leave

For the record too, there are other things about Bookbinder that I look forward to exposing soon, but that will be another story.

Regardless, right after the hearing above a new prosecutor was assigned to my case. Then Bookbinder withdrew from it.

Fast forward a month or two, and we have just learned that Bookbinder – a career prosecutor and division chief – quit his job to go into private practice as a partner at the firm Holland and Knight LLP.

I wonder, do they really know who they just hired? And did Bookbinder leave his career as a prosecutor because of the facts that are already out there or was there more?

It’s no secret to the Boston U.S. attorney’s office that I’ve long been suspicious of Bookbinder and that we’ve been digging into his background…

MartyG

The author, Marty Gottesfeld is a political prisoner. To learn more about his case, please go to FreeMartyG.com.

Medical Kidnapping: A Threat to Every Family in America T-Shirt

Medical Kidnap t-Shirt

100% Pre-shrunk Cotton!

Order Here

Medical Kidnapping is REAL!

From JL: Defending a deposition pro se

 

Basic objections

  1.  Hearsay or calls for hearsay.  As soon as you hear the words “conversation”, “he said”, “she said”, think about a hearsay objection.  All you have to say is “objection, hearsay.”  you really don’t have to explain.  Hearsay is defined as an “out of court statement to prove the truth of the matter asserted.  There are many exceptions to hearsay, including “excited utterance”, you’re introducing it for other purposes, etc.
  2. Irrelevant.  If the issue has nothing really to do with your case, just say “objection, irrelevant.”  Generally matters and documents which arose more than 2 years to anything alleged in the complaint is irrelevant.  The standard is whether the information is directly relevant to your case and therefore admissible evidence or it may lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
  3. Calls for speculation.  “Objection, calls for speculation.”  Some examples, if you are asked about how your kid felt about something.  You don’t know how someone else feels.  You don’t know what someone else is thinking.
  4. Vague.  If you really don’t understand the question, say “objection, vague” and ask the attorney or whomever to rephrase the question so you understand it.  Never answer a question you don’t understand.  You can even repeat it and make it clearer, but try to avoid that.  Make the questioner do his or her work.
  5. Compound.  “Objection compound question.”  The questioner is only allowed to ask you about one question or thing at a time.  For example,”  when did you go to your mother’s home and where did you find the lamp and was it broken then”.  This is too much and should be broken up into 3 separate questions.
  6. Calls for a legal conclusion.  These are kind of fun.  You might want to answer them anyway, but start with “calls for a legal conclusion and I am not a lawyer.”  then you can say “of course, I’m not liable” or whatever your excuse was for breaking a law or your belief it does not apply to you.

You should be following the Illinois Rules of Evidence and read those provisions carefully before your deposition

You can find the Illinois Rules of Evidence here:

Click to access C6311_Illinois_Rules_of_Evidence_Color-Coded_Guide.pdf

https://store.lexisnexis.com/nita/categories/area-of-practice-153/illinois-rules-of-evidence-with-objections-and-responses-skuusSKU5628680

you might try the above book from the Daley Center Law Library

There are also many good youtube videos on how to defend a deposition and I will post some here.

Good luck to all of you who cannot afford an atty.

JoAnne

basic video on you tube about defending a deposition (short), 3 min

another youtube on deposition objections

this is better and more specific.  note the types of objections you can make

From GG: More great cases on Fraud on the Court

  1. Who is an “officer of the court”?
    2. What is “fraud on the court”?
    3. What effect does an act of “fraud upon the court” have upon the court proceeding?
    4. What causes the “Disqualification of Judges?”
  2. Who is an “officer of the court”?

A judge is an officer of the court, as well as are all attorneys. A state judge is a state judicial officer, paid by the State to act impartially and lawfully. A federal judge is a federal judicial officer, paid by the federal government to act impartially and lawfully. State and federal attorneys fall into the same general category and must meet the same requirements. A judge is not the court. People v. Zajic, 88 Ill.App.3d 477, 410 N.E.2d 626 (1980).

  1. What is “fraud on the court”?

Whenever any officer of the court commits fraud during a proceeding in the court, he/she is engaged in “fraud upon the court”. In Bulloch v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985), the court stated “Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury. … It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced or influence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function — thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted.”
“Fraud upon the court” has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to “embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery can not perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication.” Kenner v. C.I.R., 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore’s Federal Practice, 2d ed., p. 512, ¶ 60.23. The 7th Circuit further stated “a decision produced by fraud upon the court is not in essence a decision at all, and never becomes final.”

  1. What effect does an act of “fraud upon the court” have upon the court proceeding?

“Fraud upon the court” makes void the orders and judgments of that court.
It is also clear and well-settled Illinois law that any attempt to commit “fraud upon the court” vitiates the entire proceeding. The People of the State of Illinois v. Fred E. Sterling, 357 Ill. 354; 192 N.E. 229 (1934) (“The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters applies to judgments as well as to contracts and other transactions.”); Allen F. Moore v. Stanley F. Sievers, 336 Ill. 316; 168 N.E. 259 (1929) (“The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters …”); In re Village of Willowbrook, 37 Ill.App.2d 393 (1962) (“It is axiomatic that fraud vitiates everything.”); Dunham v. Dunham, 57 Ill.App. 475 (1894), affirmed 162 Ill. 589 (1896); Skelly Oil Co. v. Universal Oil Products Co., 338 Ill.App. 79, 86 N.E.2d 875, 883-4 (1949); Thomas Stasel v. The American Home Security Corporation, 362 Ill. 350; 199 N.E. 798 (1935).
Under Illinois and Federal law, when any officer of the court has committed “fraud upon the court”, the orders and judgment of that court are void, of no legal force or effect.

  1. What causes the “Disqualification of Judges?”

Federal law requires the automatic disqualification of a Federal judge under certain circumstances.

In 1994, the U.S. Supreme Court held that “Disqualification is required if an objective observer would entertain reasonable questions about the judge’s impartiality. If a judge’s attitude or state of mind leads a detached observer to conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is unlikely, the judge must be disqualified.” [Emphasis added]. Liteky v. U.S., 114 S.Ct. 1147, 1162 (1994).

Courts have repeatedly held that positive proof of the partiality of a judge is not a requirement, only the appearance of partiality. Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp., 486 U.S. 847, 108 S.Ct. 2194 (1988) (what matters is not the reality of bias or prejudice but its appearance); United States v. Balistrieri, 779 F.2d 1191 (7th Cir. 1985) (Section 455(a) “is directed against the appearance of partiality, whether or not the judge is actually biased.”) (“Section 455(a) of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C. §455(a), is not intended to protect litigants from actual bias in their judge but rather to promote public confidence in the impartiality of the judicial process.”).

That Court also stated that Section 455(a) “requires a judge to recuse himself in any proceeding in which her impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Taylor v. O’Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989). In Pfizer Inc. v. Lord, 456 F.2d 532 (8th Cir. 1972), the Court stated that “It is important that the litigant not only actually receive justice, but that he believes that he has received justice.”

The Supreme Court has ruled and has reaffirmed the principle that “justice must satisfy the appearance of justice”, Levine v. United States, 362 U.S. 610, 80 S.Ct. 1038 (1960), citing Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14, 75 S.Ct. 11, 13 (1954). A judge receiving a bribe from an interested party over which he is presiding, does not give the appearance of justice.

“Recusal under Section 455 is self-executing; a party need not file affidavits in support of recusal and the judge is obligated to recuse herself sua sponte under the stated circumstances.” Taylor v. O’Grady, 888 F.2d 1189 (7th Cir. 1989).

Further, the judge has a legal duty to disqualify himself even if there is no motion asking for his disqualification. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals further stated that “We think that this language [455(a)] imposes a duty on the judge to act sua sponte, even if no motion or affidavit is filed.” Balistrieri, at 1202.

Judges do not have discretion not to disqualify themselves. By law, they are bound to follow the law. Should a judge not disqualify himself as required by law, then the judge has given another example of his “appearance of partiality” which, possibly, further disqualifies the judge. Should another judge not accept the disqualification of the judge, then the second judge has evidenced an “appearance of partiality” and has possibly disqualified himself/herself. None of the orders issued by any judge who has been disqualified by law would appear to be valid. It would appear that they are void as a matter of law, and are of no legal force or effect.

Should a judge not disqualify himself, then the judge is violation of the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution. United States v. Sciuto, 521 F.2d 842, 845 (7th Cir. 1996) (“The right to a tribunal free from bias or prejudice is based, not on section 144, but on the Due Process Clause.”).

Should a judge issue any order after he has been disqualified by law, and if the party has been denied of any of his / her property, then the judge may have been engaged in the Federal Crime of “interference with interstate commerce”. The judge has acted in the judge’s personal capacity and not in the judge’s judicial capacity. It has been said that this judge, acting in this manner, has no more lawful authority than someone’s next-door neighbor (provided that he is not a judge). However some judges may not follow the law.

If you were a non-represented litigant, and should the court not follow the law as to non-represented litigants, then the judge has expressed an “appearance of partiality” and, under the law, it would seem that he/she has disqualified him/herself.

However, since not all judges keep up to date in the law, and since not all judges follow the law, it is possible that a judge may not know the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court and the other courts on this subject. Notice that it states “disqualification is required” and that a judge “must be disqualified” under certain circumstances.

The Supreme Court has also held that if a judge wars against the Constitution, or if he acts without jurisdiction, he has engaged in treason to the Constitution. If a judge acts after he has been automatically disqualified by law, then he is acting without jurisdiction, and that suggest that he is then engaging in criminal acts of treason, and may be engaged in extortion and the interference with interstate commerce.

Courts have repeatedly ruled that judges have no immunity for their criminal acts. Since both treason and the interference with interstate commerce are criminal acts, no judge has immunity to engage in such acts.

Fraud Upon The Court

 

From Joanne:

GG also tells me that while the US Supreme Court had an unanimous decision on TILA that he homeowner can just send a certified letter to terminate all payments under his or her contract and get a new mortgage (yes, did you know you could do that?), state courts, including Illinois are trying to ignore that ruling or craft around it.  I have asked him to write up a case quote/case digest article on it.  I do not see one on the internet.

From DR: Some Great Cartoons on what really goes on in Guardianship court

elephant-guardianship-fraudianshipguardzilla-guardianship-monsterguardian-repellant-spray

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

I think Daniel did  a great job and thanks for doing these!

From AP: Judge Claps drops gun at 26th and Cal. and gets charged

http://chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-met-judge-misdemeanor-gun-charge-20180710-story.html

What’s interesting about this story is that the judge is charged for dropping a loaded gun that did not hurt anyone.

However, if a Judge in probate allows the drugging, forcing a senior into a nursing home against his or her will, isolating them from family and friends, selling the home for a reduced price, and all sorts of horrible harm to a ward of the state, no one, not the states attorneys, not the FBI will touch that one.

Mary Sykes, Al Frake, Carol Wyman, Mary Jane Teichert, and the list goes on and on, were all murdered, but THAT the authorities can ignore.

Who care about a dropped gun when the judges are involved in torture and murder of the elderly?

JoAnne

From FB: Need a Writ of Habeas Corpus for someone wrongfully imprisoned? Here is the Federal Court form and a state court form.

From the US govt forms data base:

Click to access ao241.pdf

From the internet for state court (you have to file in state court first)

here is the link in google docts

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NuZZvRxKg2Z7Pl3AOy1BecX3_iCFoaAJT7Qym3SAYSw/edit

 

please print this out and mail it to all state prisons that you know of.  Many people are wrongfully arrested and imprisoned.  This should be sent to the law librarian at the prison so prisoners can print this out and fill it out and send it in.  It might have to be accompanied by a Motion or Petition for Waiver of Fees (aka “Paupers Petition” or “Indigent Petition.”

Good luck and best wishes to all those out there wrongfully imprisoned.

joanne

List of the 5 GAO reports on Guardianship

Sept 2010:

Click to access d101046.pdf

Nov. 2016

Click to access 681088.pdf

The 2004 report:

Click to access 243297.pdf

The 2006 report

Click to access 114716.pdf

The 2011 Report

Click to access 321761.pdf

 

 

From MWD: Useful Words in Court

Remember, in court you can’t call your opponent a liar, the judge a liar, that both the judge and opposing counsel is working to rubber stamp corruption. You have to be more subtle.  Best defense:  give them all a word they have to look up.

So this is a beginning series of Useful Words you can use in court:

Bloviate:  Long winded and wordy.

Example:  Mr. X is a bloviate attorney indulging in numerous obtuse excuses for his client’s illegal behavior.

Sophistry:  Deceptive Arguments

Example:  Mr X’s brief is filled with nothing by sophistry

Or, ah a new pleading from Mr. X filled with his magnificent Sophistry

Asserverate:  Confirm or affirm in an earnest manner

The Office of Public Guardian is always asserverate in dispensing with wards or their property.

 

 

 

 

From RM: Ohio Supreme Court finds appointment of GAL in divorce is final and appealable order

you can find this case at:

Click to access 2018-ohio-2417.pdf

 

selections from this case:

 

Divorce—A trial court’s order appointing a guardian ad litem to represent an adult
in a divorce case is a final, appealable order under R.C. 2505.02(B)(2)
when adult has not been adjudicated incompetent subsequent to providing
parties with notice and opportunity to be heard on issue of adult’s
competency—Court of appeals’ judgment reversed, trial court’s order
appointing guardian ad litem vacated, and cause remanded to trial court.
(No. 2016-1629—Submitted November 21, 2017—Decided June 27, 2018.)
APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga County, No. 104579.

 

{¶ 1} Appellant, Carol J. Thomasson (“Carol”), has asked us to reverse a
judgment of the Eighth District Court of Appeals and hold that the trial court’s order
appointing a guardian ad litem (“GAL”) to act on her behalf in her divorce case is
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
2
a final, appealable order under R.C. 2505.02(B)(2). Carol has also asked us to
conclude that the order violates her due-process rights and that it should be vacated
as a result.
{¶ 2} In the case at bar, the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas,
Domestic Relations Division, issued an order appointing a GAL to represent Carol
without providing her with prior notice or an opportunity to be heard on the issue.
The order was issued during a special proceeding and affects a substantial right,
and Carol will not be provided adequate relief if she is not permitted to immediately
appeal the order. Therefore, the order is a final, appealable order under R.C.
2505.02(B)(2), and we reverse the judgment of the court of appeals. Further, the
lack of proper process violated Carol’s due-process rights, and we therefore vacate
the trial court’s order and remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings

***********

{¶ 11} Thus, to demonstrate that the trial court’s order appointing a GAL
for her is a final, appealable order, Carol must show (1) that the order was made in
a special proceeding, (2) that the order affects a substantial right, and (3) that she
would not be able to effectively protect her substantial right without immediate
review.

 

****************

{¶ 13} In 1998, the legislature amended R.C. 2505.02 and provided a
definition of “substantial right.” Sub.H.B. No. 394, 147 Ohio Laws, Part II, 3277.
R.C. 2505.02(A)(1) defines “substantial right” as “a right that the United States
Constitution, the Ohio Constitution, a statute, the common law, or a rule of
procedure entitles a person to enforce or protect.” Carol argues that the trial court’s
order violates her “right to procedural due process” and that “due process is a
substantial right that the United States Constitution entitles a person to enforce
and/or protect.”
{¶ 14} In support of this argument, Carol asserts that before appointing the
GAL, the trial court did not provide the parties with notice or the chance to be heard
regarding the appointment. These assertions are supported by the record. The
record does not reflect that the parties were notified that the court was considering
appointing a GAL for Carol, and the record includes no evidence from which we
could conclude that Carol was provided any opportunity to be heard prior to the
appointment of the GAL.
{¶ 15} Ohio courts have not previously addressed whether an order
appointing a GAL to represent an adult without an adjudication that the adult is
incompetent—that is, without a hearing on the matter and prior to any notice to the
adult—violates the adult’s right to due process. Several other state courts have
addressed similar situations. Those courts have concluded that such an
appointment is improper, many specifically holding that the improper appointment
violates due-process protections.
{¶ 16} In In re Joann E., 104 Cal.App.4th 347, 128 Cal.Rptr.2d 189 (2002),
the California Court of Appeal reviewed a lower court’s order appointing a GAL to
act on behalf of a grandmother who was attempting to retain custody of her minor
grandchild. The reviewing court found that the lower court’s order violated thegrandmother’s right to due process because the court had failed to provide prior
notice and hold a competency hearing. Id. at 349.
{¶ 17} In State v. Ladd, 139 Vt. 642, 644, 433 A.2d 294 (1981), the
Supreme Court of Vermont held that a lower court’s decision not to remove a GAL
for an adult defendant who was determined to be competent “seriously impinge[d]
upon the defendant’s rights to due process guaranteed by the United States
Constitution.”
{¶ 18} In J.H. v. Ada S. McKinley Community Servs., Inc., 369 Ill.App.3d
803, 861 N.E.2d 320 (2006), an Illinois Court of Appeals cited the federal Due
Process Clause when determining that two former foster children should not have
been appointed a GAL after they had become adults because they had not been
adjudicated incompetent. Id. at 816, citing Ladd at 644.
{¶ 19} And in Graham v. Graham, 40 Wash.2d 64, 240 P.2d 564 (1952),
the Supreme Court of Washington issued a writ of prohibition to prevent a lower
court from appointing a GAL for an adult without providing the adult a hearing and
the opportunity to be heard. The supreme court did not cite the Due Process Clause,
but the court’s reasoning clearly expresses due-process concerns:
The interposition of a guardian ad litem could very well substitute
his judgment, inclinations and intelligence for an alleged
incompetent’s; furthermore, the retention of legal counsel or the
employment of a different attorney could be determined solely by
the guardian ad litem, subject, of course, to some direction and
control by the court, and the latter might be open to some question.
In any event the changes which might result from the appointment
of a guardian ad litem are of such significance as to be permitted
only after a full, fair hearing and an opportunity to be heard is
accorded to an alleged incompetent.Id. at 68.
{¶ 20} We agree with the determinations and reasoning of these several
courts. When a GAL is appointed by a court to represent an adult, that adult loses
some autonomy in directing the litigation. It violates an adult’s right to due process
to treat the adult as an incompetent and to deprive that adult of his or her autonomy
without an adjudication that the adult is incompetent and without prior notice and
an opportunity to be heard on the issue of his or her competency.
{¶ 21} The trial court’s order treated Carol as though she had been
adjudicated incompetent and appointed a GAL to represent her interests, but the
order was not preceded by an adjudication of incompetency, prior notice, and any
opportunity to be heard on the issue. This lack of process violates Carol’s right to
due process and, therefore, implicates a “substantial right” as defined in R.C.
2505.02(A)(1).

 

{¶ 24} In Wilhelm-Kissinger, this court determined that an order denying a
motion to disqualify opposing counsel in a divorce proceeding was not a final,
appealable order under R.C. 2505.02(B)(2). Id. at ¶ 12. The court distinguished an
order denying a motion to disqualify counsel from an order granting such a motion.
The court noted that “an order granting disqualification immediately and definitely
affects the party it deprives of chosen counsel; the purpose of appealing such an
order is to prevent the removal itself.” Id. at ¶ 9. The court also noted that the
granting of a motion to disqualify counsel has a permanent effect because it is
unlikely to be revisited by the trial court. Id. at ¶ 10. Similarly, in State ex rel.
McGinty v. Eighth Dist. Court of Appeals, 142 Ohio St.3d 100, 2015-Ohio-937, 28
N.E.3d 88, ¶ 27, this court held that an order denying a criminal defendant’s motion
to disqualify the prosecuting attorney was not a final, appealable order. The court
noted that allowing an interlocutory appeal in such circumstances would enable a
criminal defendant to get “an automatic, months-long delay in his or her
prosecution by moving to disqualify the prosecutor and then appealing the resulting
denial.” Id. at ¶ 25.

{¶ 26} Finally, in Blackburn v. Ward, 4th Dist. Scioto No. 05CA3014,
2006-Ohio-406, ¶ 13, the Fourth District held that a probate court’s determination
that certain assets belonged to one party and not another was a final, appealable
order, despite other issues in the case remaining before the court. The Fourth
District reasoned that the assets, which included a farm and personal property,
could be liquidated easily and that the appellants, even if successful in a future
appeal, would not be able to recover assets that were previously liquidated.

{¶ 27} These cases are instructive. In the case at bar, similar to the situation
described by this court in Wilhelm-Kissinger regarding disqualification of chosen
counsel, the trial court’s order appointing a GAL to represent Carol, if left
undisturbed, would have an immediate effect; Carol’s autonomy would be
immediately diminished because she would be treated as though she had been
adjudicated incompetent and as a result, her judgment, inclinations, and intelligence
would be replaced, at least to some extent, by those of the GAL. Additionally, and
again analogous to this court’s reasoning in Wilhelm-Kissinger, since Carol was not
actually adjudicated to be incompetent, it is hard to understand how the trial court
could revisit a nonexistent adjudication

Here, the court’s order sua sponte appointing a GAL to
represent Carol without prior notice and an adjudication of incompetency was
entirely beyond Carol’s control. In such circumstances, any delay caused by an
immediate appeal should not be attributed to Carol

{¶ 30} In addition, negotiation often involves tactics and a careful and
selective exchange of information. The tactics used and information revealed by
Carol’s GAL could not be clawed back—much in the same way that the revelation
of confidential information cannot be undone. Thus, as in Cleveland Clinic Found.
and Sahady, confidential information could be exchanged during negotiations and
Carol would not have full control over the dissemination of that information. An
appeal after final judgment could not undo the damage that she would suffer in such
a situation.

{¶ 34} For these reasons, we set forth the narrow and limited holding that
under R.C. 2505.02(B)(2), a trial court’s order appointing a GAL to represent an
adult in a divorce case is a final, appealable order when that adult has not been
adjudicated incompetent subsequent to providing the parties with notice and an
opportunity to be heard on the issue of the adult’s competency. In this unique case,
the order appointing a GAL to represent Carol is a final, appealable order.

 

 

From JC: A List of Tactics Corrupt Judges use to Wrongfully Take Children from Protective Parents

Tactics Judges Use to Take your Children
• Judges often meet in Chambers with all Attorney’s, G.A.L’s to make deals without client present. Where no court reporter is present and no audio video proof of what being said.
• Judges will ignore testimony, facts and witnesses
• They will confuse issues in cases
• They will use Courthouse Security Guards to intimidate people, by interrogation or by following you
• They will collude with G.A.L and make decisions without reason or proof, usually an oral reason with no basis or fact
• They will give you no due process
• Frequently ignore the law and your Constitutional rights
• Make biased judgements against a certain party, where the other party will break court orders with full judicial immunity
• Threaten you to sign paperwork under duress without discovery
• Allows certain parties to create Fraud upon the court, “Perjury” while the other is threatened into silence
• Judge will institute court orders in which she will break, or allow certain parties to break, while other parties cannot
• They will never admit wrong doing, even after proven they did
• Judge will ignore Witnesses or evidence that does not fit objective
• Judge will continuously side against one party
• Ignores crimes from certain parties
• Rubber stamping everything one side does
• Sealing documents so crimes are hidden
• Changing or removing the court reporters record
• Failure to consider evidence or hear petitions
• Denying constitutional or civil rights
• Stopping you from representing yourself
• They will create Orders based on insufficient evidence from certain parties
• They will create Orders based on Fiction that will force you into contempt of court

From SK: Courtroom Justice Activists needed in Wheaton Tomorrow at 9:30 to ralley for justice an accountability

Tomorrow there will be a number of Judges at the Wheaton 4th of July parade that I have received  a lot of complaints about.

Litigants who believe that they have not received justice in the DuPage County courts are welcome to come out and meet up with other protesters to rally for justice and accountability at the following address:

The parade starts out at 5/3 Bank
1500 North Main Street Wheaton, IL 60187
815 715 0930 and ask for Silvia
There will be sign boards and lots of flyers to pass out.
Please call the above phone number if interested.
We are actually trying to get together a group of protesters to do each courthouse in Illinois in each county until we have justice and accountability in our Illinois court system.
for more info see the facebook page for Unified Alliance Illinois

From MF: Why don’t the authorities respond to complaints regarding clergy sexual abuse?

Mike Ference works tirelessly to help victims of clergy sexual abuse.  These people have no place in our churches.  Pray for our churches to stay pure.  Pray for justice for these victims.

from Mike:

Sadly, more whistleblowers of Catholic clergy sex abuse and cover-ups continue to reach out to me; a $10.00 an hour security guard for help in lieu of government agencies and law enforcement officials. We can only assume they trust me more than any PA government official to do the right thing, or to at least try and do the right thing.
Perhaps, it’s time that PA Attorney General Josh Shapiro hire me as independent agent for his office. I would be willing to work as an independent contractor. I would even be willing to work for a measly $10.00 an hour, no benefits, certainly no pension or 401 plan.
Maybe, some of my passion, dedication and hunger for the truth would rub off on some of the highly paid nitwits who tried to convince me that the attempted murder of my son was an accident.
I’m reaching out to any former student, parishioner of St. Phillip’s Parish in Crafton, PA who would be aware of the sexual abuse of students their dating back to the 70s and 80s. At least 3 to 5 young men have committed suicide. While other males have led a life of crime, alcoholism, drugs, etc. All signs of some type of abuse possibly sexual abuse.
I’m only releasing bits and pieces of my investigation so far, but at least one suicide victim told a fellow classmate(s) he wanted to cut off his penis. This student also told the classmate(s) his mother had stopped him from doing it on at least one occasion.
Father Richard Dorsch a convicted Child molester was a priest assigned to this parish back in those days. I was told he would babysit for a family with six children while the parents would go out. Sometimes he even stayed over night.
Father Ron Lenguin, current spokesperson for the Pittsburgh Diocese was also assigned to this parish back in the day.
Much more to come. Please share this post.

From NASGA: Oh, no no no! Kids for cash judge asks for Clemency?

What Chutzpah.  About the worst criminal on earth, a judge that literally ruined the lives of nearly 2,000 innocent children, he files for Clemency?

Let’s repeat what his buddy said, his partner in crime, Ciavarella, — zero tolerance and maximum sentence, always guilty, no attorney and no appeals.

I guess they don’t like their own medicine.

Judges are not above the law.

Joanne

https://www.thetimes-tribune.com/news/kids-for-cash-judge-seeks-clemency-1.2356664

Kids-for-cash judge seeks clemency

SCRANTON — Disgraced former kids-for-cash Judge Michael T. Conahan seeks clemency on the 17½-year federal prison sentence he is serving.

Conahan, 66, pleaded guilty to racketeering conspiracy charges in the scandal and has been behind bars since he was sentenced in September 2011. A searchable database on the Department of Justice’s website that was made public in March shows Conahan has a pending request for a sentence commutation, or reduction.

The database does not provide any information about the reason for the request. Justice Department spokeswoman Nicole Navas Oxman said the pardon attorney’s office does not disclose where in the process a case is pending.

Conahan and fellow Judge Mark A. Ciavarella Jr. were convicted of accepting kickbacks in exchange for funneling juvenile defendants to detention centers built by developer Robert K. Mericle’s construction firm and operated by companies controlled by former local attorney Robert Powell.

Ciavarella went to trial and was initially convicted of 12 of 39 charges, receiving a sentence of 28 years in prison. But he appealed and saw a federal judge reverse three of the most serious convictions earlier this year.

Conahan, however, reached a plea deal with prosecutors. He initially had a deal that would have put him in prison for just over seven years, but a federal judge rejected it because Conahan refused to accept full responsibility for the kids-for-cash scheme.

He ended up being sentenced to 17½ years in prison — more than a decade longer than called for under his initial deal.

Conahan is serving his time at Federal Correctional Institution, Miami, while Ciavarella is at Federal Correctional Institution-Ashland in Kentucky.

Contact the writer:

jhalpin@citizensvoice.com

570-821-2058