On November 11, 2013, this Examiner sent the following email to Senior Deputy Public Guardian Teri Scarlett.
Ms. Scarlett,
Improperly suppressed evidence requires your immediate attention. A report with additional information will be released later in the week.
Monterey County Deputy Public Guardian Jennifer Empasis alleged that Patricia Conklin financially abused her mother, Margarita Zelada. Ms. Zelada clearly stated that Ms. Conklin did not abuse her in any way. After months of investigation, Ms. Empasis did not identify any financial abuse. However, Ms. Empasis refused to terminate the conservatorship of Ms. Zelada’s estate.
Please see December 13, 2012 video of Ms. Zelada on YouTube.
http://youtu.be/RoPe8hkNGFA
Ms. Empasis escalated her allegations to include physical abuse after Ms. Zelada experienced an accidental fall on March 1, 2013. The attached March 29, 2013 letter from Ms. Zelada’s court appointed attorney Chris Campbell states:
My client is adamant that she does not hold her daughter responsible for this injury and that she has no desire to see her daughter prosecuted. She has been clear about this ever since I first saw her in the hospital one day after the injury. My client and her daughter have an extraordinarily close relationship, and they have lived together for many years; Patricia is Mrs. Zelada’s only child, and Mrs. Zelada has no other family in this country. There is no one in the world more important to Mrs. Zelada than her daughter, and the fact that Mrs. Zelada has been unable to see Patricia since she was taken into custody has been a devastating blow to her.
The above video and letter were not presented at Ms. Zelada’s general conservatorship hearing, nor were they presented at Ms. Conklin’s criminal trial. It is my understanding that additional similar videos exist on personal electronics that Ms. Empasis removed from Ms. Conklin’s home on March 25, 2013. Those items have not been returned to Ms. Conklin.
Please forward this evidence to the District Attorney for immediate review. Please file a petition to terminate the conservatorship of Margarita Zelada no later than Friday, November 15, 2013.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.Full Article and Source:
Linda Kincaid, MPH
Elder abuse by Monterey County Public Guardian: Evidence suppressed
33 comments:
Linda Kincaid, you are a dream come true!
I commend you for your commitment, Linda, and I feel like it will pay off in getting freedom for Mrs. Zelada.
Thank you, Linda!!
Linda, have you done your home work. Margarita's daughter assaulted her and she was convicted in a court of law by a jury of her peers. Shame on you for manipulating the truth to fit your agenda. The evidence was collected by law enforcement, statements were obtained and there was expert testimony from people in the medical field as well as other agencies and not just the public guardian's office. I know this will not get posted because NASGA is a joke. The president herself is a fox guarding the hen house. Shame on her for stealing money from her own mother. And Linda you were unfit to care for your mom so don't blame it on others because it didn't go your way.
Obviously, Mr. Perez, you don't actually think NASGA is a joke or you wouldn't bother commenting. Seems more like you are worried that people are actually paying attention to what is transpiring. Where do you fit in? How are you involved in the Zelada case that you feel it necessary to fling insults and throw around allegations, rather than to simply disagree?
Excuse me, have you even read the other cases in Santa Clara County, San Bernandino County and the others throughout the U.S. This blog is peppered with insults from the uninformed reader. Have you forgot that in the U.S. you are innocent until proven guilty. You and many others do not care for the facts because it might undermine your message. What I am trying to bring out is that this blog as well as many like it have an agenda. Yes I believe that elder abuse should be stopped. Do I believe every case that's being posted in a negative manner, No I don't. Now that I've brought this out, I hope you will discount the attempts by Kincaid and others like her to manipulate the truth.
What does my reading "... other cases in Santa Clara County, San Bernandino County and the others throughout the U.S...." have to do with this discussion?
Oh, I get it... that was one of those attempts to set the stage and suggest that I am uninformed and therefore lift you up into a position of superiority and with authority to lecture me on my ignorance.
You made statement of fact, "You and many others do not care for the facts because it might undermine your message."
You further ask me if I have forgotten that in the U.S. you are innocent until proven guilty. No, I haven't forgotten. Have you? In the above statement alone, you entered into libelous territory.
Without proof, you suggest I disregard facts and that I am uninformed. Forget "suggest" -- You actually say I do not care for the facts and readers are "uninformed", though you have no proof of such. I guess you forgot the "innocent until proven guilty" part, when referring to people who have strong opinions unlike your own.
Many people you are referring to have been the victims of guardianship abuse. You know, people who have lived through the devastation of inadequate laws & safe-guards. People who have been forced to stand alone against a massive system that often thinks it knows better and deserves to be paid big bucks to isolate and control and use of what they did not earn.
An agenda? You think this blog and others like it have an agenda? Of course they do! Their agenda is to inform the public of what is TOO OFTEN "actually" transpiring out there in the world of conservatorship/guardianship. Their agenda is to educate the people on the inadequate or wrongful laws and to encourage involvement in changing and replacing the inadequate ones to better protect the vulnerable. It's agenda is to out the corrupt and/or irresponsible appointed ones who have caused harm, so as to prevent further victims at their hands. You find something wrong with this agenda. Really?
Mr. Perez,
You still haven't explained why Santa Clara, San Bernandino and others throughout the U.S. has anything to do with "our" discussion.
In "our" discussion, you stated that I "...do not care for the facts because it might undermine your message." This is quite untrue and does fit under the definition of libel. It is a false and malicious statement.
Once again, you made a libelous statement:
"You and people like Kincaid have no problem in the defamation of innocent participates who act within the rules and policies of their job. You present no solid proof only opinions that are titled it a way that makes the uninformed believe in those fallacies."
Mr. Perez, you are repeatedly making libelous statements about me to me. You are throwing these statements out there without anything to back them up. You know why you can't back them up? Because they are untrue. I have never made statement of fact without evidence to prove such to be so.
Does it ever occur to me that it takes evidence before anyone can be rightfully charged, prosecuted and convicted? You ask me such a question and then expect me to take you seriously?
Mr. Perez, there are bad laws. There are laws that have loop-holes that allow for inappropriate actions. There are laws that are easily abused because the lawmakers didn't (and couldn't) consider all the ways in which they could be. Laws and rules are subject to interpretation. Many are rewritten and replaced after it becomes evident that they are ineffective, abusive, discriminatory or harmful and this is just to mention a few reasons for change.
Keep in mind that not everyone can find, much less afford, an attorney willing and capable of handling cases in this area of the law. Hiring an attorney is expensive and many do not handle guardianship fights, nor do they have experience in doing so. Furthermore, not all attorneys are prepared to go up against a pack of attorneys from a hospital, nursing home or from government agencies. It's one against all of them. And sometimes... sometimes... an attorney messes up and you know who pays the price? The client.
Since you wish so badly to discuss the court system and how it works...
I remember a case where an individual accidentally sat some evidence down. The person begged the court for a brief break to run and get it. The court refused. The person lost, though the person had absolute proof that should have ensured a win. The person was unable to get the money in time to file for an appeal. So now, there is a court case that makes the lie appear to be truth and the truth appear to be a lie. After all, a judge did make a decision and create an official record of it.
Tell me, Mr. Perez... while the judge did have the authority via the laws & rules to deny this brief break of five to ten minutes, do you think it was right? Do you think justice was served that the liar got away with the lie and the truth-teller was punished merely for accidentally laying down the evidence? And even if you think the person should be held accountable for the mistake, do you claim because the mistake was made that the lie has somehow become the truth and the truth is somehow now the lie because the court record says what it says? Or, is the truth -- recorded or not -- still the truth?
Ok I'll simplify it for you since you think I'm being libelous. Lets go to this first posting from Rocky. Here it is:
Rocky said...
Way to go Linda!!! It warms my heart to see the huge potential that justice will be serverd in this case. This guardian is obviously as crooked as snake and as greedy as maggot. ...Reminds me of the one who kidnapped my loved one here in Pinellas County, Fl. These predatory guardians need to rot in prison for thier evil crimes against humanity. They are cold, heartless, scum who are useless, cheap, excuses of human beings! Sorry for being so blunt. I call it as I see it> THANKS AGAIN FOR ALL YOU ARE DOING!
Rocky is an uninformed reader who knows nothing about the case and feels a need to comment on something he or she knows nothing about. Rocky accepts the notion that all guardians are corrupt. Rocky applauds Kincaid by using CROOK AS A SNAKE AND GREEDY AS A MAGGOT, etc, etc, etc. Do you condone this type of response from your readers? Can I say the same about Kincaid, Renoire and the others, without getting you upset and losing credibility? You said I was making libel statements about you. Isn't this blog all about making libel statements. I've demonstrated what Rocky said, you just now have to look into those articles about Santa Clara, San Bernardino and the others to see where I'm coming from. Do a Google search on Linda Kincaid and you will see that she attacks these county agencies because of the injustices she claimed was done to her. I'm not going to provide that to you with the internet posting because this blog only allows for about 4000 characters and you probably wouldn't read it away.
So what is your take on Elaine Renoire? I provided you with a portion of the court documents that were online for public viewing. Do you think she was wrong for doing what she did, or was she justified? Is she what you consider a perfect president for NASGA because she was once a person you are trying to expose.
As for your story where the individual asked the judge for some time to get evidence that was accidentally forgotten that would have exonerate the individual. How can you say with certainty that this would have change the outcome. I find that hard to believe that a police officer of your caliber would even think that could have occurred. You didn't elaborate on the type of court case it was so I'm going to assume it was your typical Judge Judy court trial.
Your inference of the lie becoming the truth and the truth becoming a lie is ridiculous? You're not a judge. In any court action, there are winners and there are losers. The loser is always going to feel that there was an injustice committed against them. They will become disgruntled by the judges decision. This is where the disgruntled become activist. Many feel that they have been wronged so many crusade against what they feel is a corrupt system. Many will argue that they are trying to bring awareness to what they feel is corrupt. So essentially they put themselves in a position of being judge, jury and executioner through the articles they write, the accusations they make, and the libelous and defamatory remarks they make on many they assume are guilty.
That's why I make reference to Elaine Renoire because of the mismanagement of her grandmother's money and the way she took that money without court approval. She is the president of NASGA and is fighting to expose those who are doing what she use to do. Sounds hypocritical. Your thoughts?
Can you tell me how many years of law enforcement you had before you resigned. Were you forced out or was it just time to venture out and become a writer? I noticed that you left that out in many of your postings. I just wanted to make sure I'm not conversing with someone that was force out or fired and is now on a crusade.
Let me simplify this for you, Mr. Perez.
This is not my blog. Yes, you did make libelous statements with regard to me.
I presented you with the example of the court case because of your comment, "...You and people like Kincaid have no problem in the defamation of innocent participates who act within the rules and policies of their job."
First of all, I do not falsely or carelessly accuse people of anything, which is more than I can say for what you have done and continue to do.
Second, the case is representative of a judge acting within the rules and policies of the job, but that doesn't make what was done right and just. (I saw the evidence and yes -- it would have changed the outcome.)
Mr. Perez, your willingness to accuse others of making statements that aren't factual, to then do it yourself, is quite interesting. For example, you say... "Rocky accepts the notion that all guardians are corrupt."
No, Rocky said "predatory guardians." He or she did not say "ALL" or simply "guardians." He or she defined the guardian group he or she was speaking of. Nevertheless, you are not qualified to decide what Rocky accepts and does not accept as truth. Yet, you present your opinion as fact.
This is my initial statement to you:
"Obviously, Mr. Perez, you don't actually think NASGA is a joke or you wouldn't bother commenting. Seems more like you are worried that people are actually paying attention to what is transpiring. Where do you fit in? How are you involved in the Zelada case that you feel it necessary to fling insults and throw around allegations, rather than to simply disagree?"
I asked your involvement because you went on the personal -- hit below the belt -- attack, rather than presenting your position and supporting it.
Here's a fact...
Advocates do have reason to fight against isolation of the vulnerable because of its dangers. Cause for concern: Isolation is too often used as a tool to control and manipulate by the unscrupulous. Does every guardian or spouse fall within the realm of unscrupulous? No, but some do.
This proposed order does not give you concern?
"IT IS ORDERED that the court approves the Monterey County Public Guardian’s continued allowance of supervised visitation between Patricia Conklin and its continued encouragement of visitation with Mrs. Zelada by old acquaintances and family members; and, under the particular facts set forth in this case, approves the Public Guardian’s utilization of its discretion to deny visitation, telephone calls, personal mail, or contact with Linda Kincaid, and other associates and persons who have never previously met Mrs. Zelada."
Who will speak for Mrs. Zelada, should any problem arise? Who will even know if it is the guardian, and not Mrs. Zelada, who decides who she shall speak and visit with?
Rather than discuss what your involvement is and what facts you feel you have that would suggest Ms. Kincaid has not fairly or fully presented this case -- you have chosen to attack people personally. It appears you are trying to take the attention away from "something" involving this particular case or away from some of the people involved. Are you?
Mr. Perez, I see the Saul Alinsky approach. Please do not think I am fooled or impressed.
Thank you Judge Carrie for bringing awareness to a problem of those readers who are easily manipulated by those who were wronged and are on a crusade. Your interpretation of seeing the evidence and your determining that it would have changed the outcome makes you superior over all judicial systems. It appears that your experience in a questionable law enforcement career and a cop turned writer makes makes your journalism on these issues a candidate for the Pulitzer Prize. You just made my case and thank you for your interpretation of Saul Alinsky. You apply it well yourself.
Mr. Perez, once again, you fail to present anything to support your allegations against Ms. Kincaid and her coverage of the Zelada case. Instead, you resort to personal attacks and insults. Why is that?
Hey, Perez:
Which one of the perps are you,
defending these outrages:
Guardian, Conservator, Judge, or just someone else involved in the same unjust cause - self- enrichment?
Thanks for the interesting reading!
John Perez wrote:
"Thank you Judge Carrie for bringing awareness to a problem of those readers who are easily manipulated by those who were wronged and are on a crusade ........."
Sue wrote: Thank you NASGA and Judge Carrie (and the fearless reporters) for bringing awareness of a national problem to unaware citizens who need to take defensive, protective actions now or we will be reading their profiles at the NASGA Victim Page along with shameful and disgraceful news articles of the protection industry.
And, May God have mercy on and help the families and victims of Nashville lawyer Conservator JOHN CLEMMONS.
November 15, 2013: Nashville lawyer admits to stealing $1.3 million, gets 18 years in prison: ".......Clemmons’ case moved through the courts in the aftermath of stories in the Tennessean about abuses in the handling of conservatorships in the state.
The law governing conservatorships was amended earlier this year after the Tennessee Bar Assocation held a series of hearings across the state, including in Nashville, in which citizens complained about abusive practices.........."
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20131115/NEWS/311150146/
November 27, 2013: Former conservator Clemmons gets potential break on prison sentence / Additional penalties will be applied after he gets out of prison
"Over the strong protest of the court official who first caught him stealing from a helpless ward, suspended Nashville attorney John E. Clemmons has won approval for a plea deal that could get him out of prison in five years and four months.
In a 30-minute session before Rutherford Circuit Judge David Bragg, Rutherford Chancery Court Clerk and Master John Bratcher said he was cut out of the negotiations leading to the plea arrangement and that it amounted to a travesty of justice.
It was Bratcher, in his role as clerk and master, who first discovered that Clemmons was, without court authorization, taking money from the accounts of wards who had been entrusted to him.
Since that discovery and subsequent criminal investigations, Clemmons has admitted to stealing at least $1.4 million from four wards......."
http://www.tennessean.com/article/DN/20131128/NEWS03/311280082/Former-conservator-Clemmons-gets-potential-break-prison-sentence?fb_action_ids=10201626510443570&fb_action_types=og.recommends&fb_ref=artsharetop&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%5B548264938594282%5D&action_type_map=%5B%22og.recommends%22%5D&action_ref_map=%5B%22artsharetop%22%5D
Here is the link to the actual Indiana Court of Appeals final response to what your president did. Read it and like I said, there are always two sides of the story. What she claims she didn't do and what the courts found that she did. Read it and tell me if this is the type of person you want as the president of NASGA?
Oh and one other thing, I for justice as long as it is backed by the truth.
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/archive/08160206.pdm.html
Mr. Perez, once again, you fail to present anything to support your allegations against Ms. Kincaid and her coverage of the Zelada case. Instead, you resort to personal attacks and insults. Why is that?
Because he must be one of the perps.
Again, you and your readers make my point. You're unwillingness to see two sides of the story, your unwillingness to admit your NASGA president is herself a predator, and your unwillingness to look into your own backyard.
Also to hide your identity through ANONYMOUS responses, come on, stand up and be proud of what you stand for.
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/archive/08160206.pdm.html
Who is this John Perez talking to? I'm a reader a target of Perez making his point? I know what's in my backyard. Some of the readers have living loved ones in the grips of the protection racket while their loved ones are alive many are unable to 'come out' because of the fear of swift, harsh retaliation is #1 tactic:
I S O L A T I O N from their mothers and fathers part of the national pattern of operation.
Sue, you are making my point. So you have a loved one in the "grips of the protection racket". Does that mean that all Public Guardians are bad people because they work in that line of business. Who would take care of these people if, let's say their most responsible relative doesn't want to take care of their love one. Who would take care of that love one if their son(s) or daughter(s) is not capable of caring for their elderly parent. Have you thought that it could be because they had a history of abuse on their parent, they are a criminal, they are a drug addict or they are just mentality unstable. Who???? Why didn't you step up in your case or why weren't you given conservatorship?
You know they are many disgruntled relatives who could care less about they're loved ones, but as soon as they see that maybe their inheritance is in jeopardy because it is being used to care for their loved one, it now becomes a travesty. They cry foul play and bring disparaging remarks to any agency that stands in their way, but they hide the real fact that all they are worried about is their inheritance. Pretty twisted you would think, but my guess is that you think I'm twisted for bringing it up. Many of these people would be perfectly ok if their inheritance wasn't being used and the care was being paid for by the tax payer. Yes it's true, I've seen it.
Well let me tell you that I'm not just saying this to be mean spirited, I'm saying it because I've seen it first hand and you cannot say that this does not occur. Maybe not in your case, but I have seen it and it is down right discussing.
Read my earlier post on Elaine Renoire the president of NASGA and you decide. This a double standard.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
California has a sick law, Welfare and Instutitions Code 15657.3(d)(2) that doesn't give family members civil standing for civil litigation of alledged elder abuse until the victim dies, often as a result of the abuse the family was tying to prevent.
The Court appointed conservator is now being sued in civil court by the family members for months of isolation, failure to provide routine medical care, etc etc.
Way to early to see if the family will be successful but with several dozen day long depositions on the books, the Court appointed conservatorship system is looking pretty bad and there isn't a single smoking gun pointing at the family to date. I am not saying every Court appointed conservator is bad, but there are more then there should be.
As long as John Perez does his job as well as he claims, he has nothing to fear about civil retaliation from families. If however Mr Perez doesn't follow the letter of the law, (not neccessarily what theway it has always been done as laws do change), I can only hope that the family involved has the financial resource to seek civil justice after the victim passes.
Since Mr. Perez has indicated in previous postings that we should be man enough to stand behind our opinions, maybe he his will to practice what he preachs and share his employment since he claims to he as seen it first hand. In may case, I chose to stay anonymous for many reasons.
John Perez you are so off base and obviously biased in favor of Team Guardianship, recklessly stating that there is abuse - tunnel vision that tells me you are imbedded and profiting from the DARK SIDE.
You are recklessly and wrongly assuming and accusing people of wrongdoing if they aren't appointed guardian of their loved one.
You are dead wrong and you will never admit to one case that is based on LIES and ALLEGATIONS with no consequences to the CROOK AND LIAR for engaging in lying to the court.
Upon filing a petition the AIP's net worth is submitted and therein lies #1 problem = ASSETS and real estate. and add in the income it's rare to 0 chance a family member will be appointed to a position of guardian of estate in CROOK COUNTY ILLINOIS as an example.
Then add in the fraudulent petition claiming emergency situation without proof - the court will and has appointed a temporary guardian the same day the petition is filed with the court of course temp guardian has full powers. Temp G will go after the bank accounts immediately see: Rev. William Waddell Illinois Veteran a horrific case of the worst of the worst with no emergency and the facts of the case will prove that.
And write this one down in magic marker and tape it to your mirror:
(MS petitioner)files for Order of Protection. The Recipient (CT) of Petition for Order of Protection retains a snake Chicago lawyer, CT files a rush petition for emergency guardianship of Petitioner (MS), CT is appointed Plenary Guardian of the person asking the court for protection. MS has been isolated from her family, including her elderly sister and youngest daughter.
Related to my relative's case the TEMPORARY GUARDIAN went to prison with court ordered restitution for 20 years - the crook was prosecuted by the States Attorney General - so you are really barking up the wrong tree with me John Perez.
John Perez wrote:
'.....Who would take care of these people if, let's say their most responsible relative doesn't want to take care of their love one. Who would take care of that love one if their son(s) or daughter(s) is not capable of caring for their elderly parent. Have you thought that it could be because they had a history of abuse on their parent, they are a criminal, they are a drug addict or they are just mentality unstable. Who???? Why didn't you step up in your case or why weren't you given conservatorship?...........'
I will add to all of these distractions, I have been a juror more times than I want to remember including criminal case and I see what the court allows in and what the court rejects and how the records are fixed, cooking the books for the record, so don't even go there looking for something that is not there.
You still didn't answer my last response. You're too emotional and because you're so emotional you lump the entire system as being all bad if it goes against you're belief. Sorry that you have to be so ignorant. I guess there's no use in trying to convince you that there are two sides of the story. Get some help.
I believe Mr. John Perez is the person who needs to 'get some help'.
Read the comments from John Perez - let the readers come to their conclusion.
"....Those with narcissistic personality disorder believe that they're superior to others and have little regard for other people's feelings......"
Narcissistic personality disorder
Narcissistic personality disorder is a condition in which people have an excessive sense of self-importance, an extreme preoccupation with themselves, and lack of empathy for others.
Definition
By Mayo Clinic staff
Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance and a deep need for admiration. Those with narcissistic personality disorder believe that they're superior to others and have little regard for other people's feelings. But behind this mask of ultra-confidence lies a fragile self-esteem, vulnerable to the slightest criticism.
Narcissistic personality disorder is one of several types of personality disorders.
Personality disorders are conditions in which people have traits that cause them to feel and behave in socially distressing ways, limiting their ability to function in relationships and in other areas of their life, such as work or school.
Narcissistic personality disorder treatment is centered around psychotherapy
Please get help, this is you. Does you conservator know where you are?
Hey, Perez:
Which kind of perp are you -
lawyer, guardian, conservator,
other fiduciary, judge?
Or maybe you're an operator???
HUH? 'this is you' who exactly are you referring to as 'you'? is you? exactly? Mr. John Perez?
Mr. John Perez, the author of the comments here at this blog (sincere apologies to any/all others with the same name as this John Perez) is on the auto conservatorship mentality plan. Sort of like a right of passage which should be a warning to all good citizens there is a plan to get us before our rightful heirs inherit our estates.
Really people, you guys need to knock this off. Mr. Perez was only trying to tell you all that there are two sides of the story. What so wrong abot that. You people discuss me.
The comment allegedly posted by “Linda Kincaid” at 2:38 PM on Wednesday, December 18 was not posted by me. The comment was posted by an individual using my name without my knowledge or consent.
I would trust that any graduate of UC Berkeley’s School of Public Health learned to spell “you’re.” I would also trust that Berkeley alumni learned more appropriate and effective means of communicating.
to "john perez" et all that DO NOT KNOW THE SYSTEM of these CIVIL courts which are NOTHING MORE THAN kangaroo courts- In these settings YOU ARE GUILTY until YOU PROVE your innocence and YOU ARE GUILTY based ONLY ON THEIR OPINIONS. there IS NO DUE PROCESS--and TO ALL KEEPING SILENT on the OUTRIGHT ABUSE OF THEIR OWN FAMILY MEMBERS ? I have NOTHING MORE THAN OUTRIGHT CONTEMPT FOR YOU AND YOUR COWARDICE in fearing retaliation !!!--WHAT MORE CAN THEY DO ? your cowardice MAKES YOU AN ENABLER of THEIR UNCONSTITUTIONAL ACTIONS,their UNCONSTITUTIONAL COURTS and KEEPS THEM IN BUSINESS--I CAN'T WAIT TO GET MY CASE HEARD as THEY ARE BEING SUED along the lines of 42USC 1983 and IF MORE SNAPPED OUTTA IT AND FILED,THEY'D BE STOPPED DEAD IN THEIR TRACKS.
mygawd ! WHAT ARE YOU AFRAID OF ? EITHER WE HAVE LAWS OR WE DON'T.
retaliation ??? THEY ALREADY DID THE ULTIMATE AND CANNOT ADD TO IT and the ULTIMATE IS THEIR REMOVAL FROM noncriminal families our disabled adults or frail and elderly and ISOLATING THEM FROM THEIR FAMILIES under some BS perception of LAW==hate to tell ALL,there IS NO LAW and THEY ARE OPERATING ILLEGALLY.
WHERE ARE THE CHARGES ? THERE ARE NONE, no allegations,declarations,NO PROOF of negligence or abUse BUT THEY SHOVED IN.
WAKE UP and STAND UP, OR SHUT UP.
carrie hutchins ? HOW MANY HEARINGS have YOU personally attended ?
either CPS or probate ? they're BOTH THE SAME.
no due process,no evidence presented=SIMPLY the declarations of some BIASED court appointee LEADING to removal of an individals RIGHTS,illegal dententions,forced isolation etc and GUESS WHAT ? IT'S ALL UNCONSTITUTIONAL and APPARENT THAT YOU NEVER WITNESSED these hearings which are NOTHING MORE THAN KANGAROO courts and definitely a KANGAROO has MORE PROTECTION via animal rights ADVOCATES than WE DO.
Ok Hutchins here is my response to your lane post. Justice normally takes time to play out. Thats because the truth needs to be weighed out and decided by the courts as to who is the perpetrator. Well it looks like your little group got it wrong. Here are the results. It you don't like it, take it up with the judge who imposed the sentence. Take it up with the numerous agencies that investigated their portions of responsibility. Your so called innocent Conklin isn't so innocent after all, but hey, I'd never convince you or your crazy little group that seems to feed on the lies that are spread amongst you all. You deserve each other, haha read it and weep.........
http://www.kionrightnow.com/news/local-news/pacific-grove-woman-sentenced-to-8-years-in-prison-for-abusing-her-mother/29329266
Pacific Grove woman sentenced to 8 years in prison for abusing her mother
POSTED: 05:28 PM PDT Oct 24, 2014
Print
SALINAS, Calif. -
A Pacific Grove woman has been sentenced to eight years in state prison for abusing her 77-year-old mother.
Patricia Conklin, 47, was convicted of three counts of elder abuse at a jury trial in August 2013. At the time, she was placed on felony probation with the eight-year prison sentence suspended pending successful completion of probation.
In July, Conklin was found to be in violation of several terms and conditions of here probation, prompting imposition of the full eight-year sentence.
Her conviction stemned from two separate incidents. The first involved an argument at their home in Pacific Grove where Conklin pushed her mother who fell and was injured.
Conklin called 911 and said her mother slipped but her mother could be heard yelling that she was thrown down. She suffered a leg fracture that required major surgery.
The second and third counts related to endangerment of her mother on March 9, 2013. On that day the defendant went to a skilled nursing facility where her mother was recovering from the surgery. Conklin went to the facility and demanded the release of her mother while accusing the staff of wanting her mother’s money.
"She also made threatening statements to the staff. She then took her mother home where she had failed to prepare for her mother’s return," the District Attorney's Office said in a release. "The home had numerous tripping hazards, no assistive devices to help her mother and no qualified nursing care. The defendant also told police the toilets weren’t working."
The case was investigated by the Pacific Grove Police Department and the Monterey Police Department. The victim was represented by Deputy Public Guardian Jennifer Empasis throughout the investigation and the entire court proceedings.
Post a Comment