Britney Spears Conservatorship Wins Court Battle ... In Free Britney Movement

Britney Spears and company mean business when anyone insinuates her conservatorship is secretly harming her ... because her people just nailed a hater with a big, fat injunction.

Britney's dad, Jamie, just got the order, prohibiting a guy named Anthony Elia from talking smack about the conservatorship. As we reported, Elia created the "Absolute Britney" blog suggesting Jamie and his team were manipulating Britney's Instagram account to make it look like she needs help when she did not ... in other words to make it look like she needs a conservatorship.

Elia went so far as to call the treatment of Britney "a human rights violation." What especially enraged Jamie ... that Elia says he came to the conclusion on a "gut feeling."

Jamie and his lawyer, Larry Stein, claimed this is defamation, pure and simple, and went to court to muzzle Elia.

The judge saw it Jamie's way and ordered Elia to immediately stop his claims ... especially those suggesting the conservatorship is harming Britney.

One of the reasons for the injunction ... the blog triggered a number of death threats against the folks involved in the conservatorship ... some of which cops took seriously.

Full Article & Source: 
Britney Spears Conservatorship Wins Court Battle ... In Free Britney Movement

Convoluted Case: How a Contentious Michigan Guardianship Devolved into a Probate Court Battle That Could Affect All Bloggers’ Rights

An Oakland County Probate Court judge is being asked by a court-appointed guardian to issue a ruling on May 4 that could ultimately impact all bloggers’ rights to free speech.

Oakland County Probate Court Judge Kathleen Ryan has been asked by Steve (Steven) Siporin of Royal Oak, Mich.-based  Siporin & Associates to order a Farmington Hills, Mich. man to, among other things, redact all references on the website to persons or organizations associated with the case involving one of his wards.

Tom Nithyanand

Siporin has been sole guardian of the ward – Tom Nithyanand – since last July. Nithyanand, 21, and his family, including his father, Anand Sadashivan, admit to not learning enough about how such a guardianship could essentially set Tom back in his recovery from a 2010 traumatic brain injury.

To help others avoid the situation they launched LearnFromTom.com to raise awareness of how a guardianship can go wrong and prompt Michigan legislators to take action as their counterparts in Ohio recently have done.

Anand Adishivan

“LearnFromTom.com is a blog we launched that contains facts that we believed to be true at the time of posting and our opinions,” says Anand.

“We want to help people. We believed that was the intent of the guardian when he met with us a year ago so it seems odd that he is so anxious about the blog.”

Monday’s hearing in Pontiac is a result of Anand petitioning the court to remove Siporin as guardian, claiming his son has not improved since Siporin became guardian in July 2014. In fact, the family claims Tom has worsened in many ways over the course of the year.

Originally, the family asked for a court-appointed guardian because Tom received a large insurance settlement as a result of being hit while walking in 2010. As non-U.S. citizens, the family asked the court to appoint a co-guardian. Siporin and the family met a couple of times in early 2014 and Anand says a kind of trust was established – so much so that Anand asked the court to appoint Siporin.

When Anand and Tom argued over spending money last June, Siporin used a typical father/son verbal spat to get a court order that named him sole guardian and gave him the right to take Tom from his home and to Rainbow Rehabilitation of Farmington Hills. It also gave him control over all of Tom’s medical care and assets, such as the limitless funds received by Tom through Michigan’s no-fault insurance laws and intended to be used for his continued recovery.

At first, Tom was confined to remain under care of Rainbow Rehabilitation 24 hours a day, seven days a week. That loosened at the end of 2014 and he’s been able to go home on weekends since. But the fact remains that every Monday he must go back to Rainbow Rehabilitation.

“It’s amazing and scary how fast things involving my son’s well-being devolved from Mr. Siporin sitting with us, establishing trust and developing the framework of a plan for my son’s future to a debate over basic media law,” says Anand. “Let us not forget the point – we asked for help. We do not want others to have to needlessly go through what we have, so we started our
LearnFromTom.com blog to raise awareness of how the system can work or not work.”

Full Article and Source:
LearnFromTom.com

Commission recommends 1-year suspension for lawyer due to email criticism of judge

Indianapolis attorney and blogger Paul K. Ogden should be suspended from the bar for a year without automatic reinstatement for private communications criticizing a judge, the Indiana Disciplinary Commission recommended Monday.

The commission recommended to the Indiana Supreme Court that Ogden receive the sanction for emails that he sent to another attorney accusing Hendricks Superior Judge David Coleman of mishandling an estate case in which Ogden represented an heir. Coleman was removed from the case under a lazy judge motion Ogden filed, and Ogden claimed the judge made numerous mistakes handling the years-long case.

Ogden’s brief in reply says his speech was private and protected and there should be no sanctions.

At the heart of the complaint against Ogden is an email he sent to opposing counsel Steve Harris of Mooresville, who represented the estate of Robert P. Carr that was administered by Carr’s son, Robert Carr Jr. Ogden represented another heir in the matter.

Among other things, Ogden said in the email that Coleman “should be turned in to the disciplinary commission for how he handled this case.”

In the commission’s tender of proposed hearing officer’s findings of facts, it recommends that hearing officer Robert W. York find that he “cannot stress enough the conclusion that (Ogden) has a profound lack of both insight into his own conduct and lack or respect for those who disagree with him in any way.”

Full Article & Source:
Commission recommends 1-year suspension for lawyer due to email criticism of judge

Recommended Blog: The Myths of Guardianship

Joe Roubicek, Author of "Financial Abuse of the Elderly - A Detective's Case Files of Exploitation Crimes" and a new book in progress, "KILL MOM, KILL DAD; Disposing of the Elderly for Profit" has also started a new Blog, "The Myths of Guardianship."   

CLICK HERE to join the discussion on "The Myths of Guardianship"

Joe Roubicek has 28 years of first-hand experience investigating exploitation crime. 

CLICK HERE to take advantage of a simple consultation with Joe for only $25

Indianapolis attorney-blogger Paul Ogden faces judicial disciplinary complaint

All he had to do was apologize.

 But Paul Ogden wouldn’t — and now the Indianapolis attorney may lose his license to practice law for privately criticizing a judge. Today, Ogden will attempt to acquit himself at a public hearing conducted by the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission.

He’s hanging his defense on the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech. But the ability to exercise that basic right gets murky when it comes to working lawyers, who relinquish some of their speech protections.

Ogden is expecting the worst but said he’d rather face a suspension or lose his law license than hold his tongue.

That response comes as little surprise to those who know Ogden or read his blog at OgdenonPolitics.com, where he often unleashes caustic attacks on politicians and bureaucrats, the legal community and media. Among his targets: the disciplinary commission that now holds his fate.

It was Ogden’s criticism of Hendricks Superior Court Judge David H. Coleman in a private email, however, that landed him in trouble with the commission. The judge learned of Ogden’s comments alleging he had a conflict of interest in a case in which Ogden represented a client. The judge asked for an apology. When the attorney refused, the judge filed a complaint. "I was standing up for a client who got a raw deal,” Ogden said. “As far as I can tell, this is the first time they have gone after an attorney for something said in a private context. My question is: How far are they going to go? Attorneys criticize judges all the time, and this could have a real chilling effect. This is about more than me.”

While Ogden appears to face an uphill battle in the fight for his legal future, the First Amendment protects his speech, said Margaret Tarkington, an associate professor at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law in Indianapolis. Tarkington, who has written extensively on professional conduct and the free speech rights of attorneys, said Ogden is not alone in finding himself at odds with an attorney disciplinary system for comments that most other citizens are free to make. It is an issue that free speech advocates and legal scholars say is becoming more common — and troubling — across the U.S.

It is not just the attempts to stifle criticism, particularly statements made outside the courtroom, that Tarkington and others find troubling. It also is how the disciplinary process works.

In defamation cases regarding public officials, the First Amendment requires that the victim prove the statement was false and that the speaker knew it was false or entertained serious doubts as to its truth. Yet in many states, attorney discipline cases require the accused to prove their statements are true, which Tarkington opines is in direct violation of established First Amendment law.

Then there’s the reality that, in cases involving criticism of judges, it ultimately is a panel of judges — the Supreme Court in Indiana — that makes the final determination on guilt and punishment.

Unlike other public and elected officials, Tarkington said, judges can insulate themselves from public criticism by the people who know the most about them — attorneys.

Lawrence G. Walters, a Florida-based attorney who has a national First Amendment law practice, said there are some legitimate reasons for limiting what attorneys can say, but those are primarily related to comments inside the courtroom and about pending cases.

"There’s a certain level of decorum and formality that is essential to permit the proper administration of justice,” he said. “The public has to have faith in the system, that it’s not a circus.” Attorneys should have more freedom outside the courtroom, Walters said, “so long as it doesn’t affect the administration of justice.”

Ogden contends his comments had no bearing on the case. The judge he criticized already had been removed, at Ogden’s request, for failing to act within established time frames. "I have been very critical of the commission,” he said. “I think a lot of it has to do with that.” His past complaints have included asking the Supreme Court to “take a good look at what is going on at the disciplinary commission and investigate how it operates,” Ogden said. In fact, the charges that he violated professional conduct standards came not long after Ogden wrote a blog post criticizing the commission. His claim: The panel recommended action more often against individual and small-firm attorneys, while ignoring the actions of attorneys with the state’s big law firms.

"Maybe I’m paranoid,” Ogden said, “but shortly after that, I started getting things filed against me.”

Ogden contends his comments had no bearing on the case. The judge he criticized already had been removed, at Ogden’s request, for failing to act within established time frames. He suspects the disciplinary action really is more about his criticism of the commission. “I have been very critical of the commission,” he said. “I think a lot of it has to do with that.”

His past complaints have included asking the Supreme Court to “take a good look at what is going on at the disciplinary commission and investigate how it operates,” Ogden said. “They need to go after attorneys doing unethical things, who are endangering the public.”

In fact, the charges that he violated professional conduct standards came not long after Ogden wrote a blog post criticizing the commission. His claim: The panel recommended action more often against individual and small-firm attorneys, while ignoring the actions of attorneys with the state’s big law firms. “Maybe I’m paranoid,” Ogden said, “but shortly after that, I started getting things filed against me."

Full Article and Source:
Indianapolis attorney-blogger Paul Ogden faces judicial disciplinary complaint

Nursing Home Reality Blog

A visitor to this blog shared the following comment a few days ago. I think her comment speaks directly to the issue of corporate greed and that leads to both the neglect of nursing home residents as well as mistreatment of nursing staff. A nurse wrote:

"At one time I worked in a nursing home that was so understaffed that I dreaded work every day. I provided care to 24 residents at one time (on a unit with a total of 48 residents).

On my shift there were just two CNAs and two nurses for 48 residents.

One time I was forced to work while having the flu and a 102 degree fever. Management told me that I would be fired if I didn’t report to work and they would demand the state revoke my licence for abandonment. It is really sad what happens in these nursing homes.”

Source:
NursingHomeReality

Recommended Blog: FiduciaryWatch

FiduciaryWatch.org has filed for nonprofit incorporation, and wishes to promote and support the interests of seniors, disabled adults, minors, and non-disabled minors who are consumers of licensed private fiduciaries, and suffering emotionally, physically, and or financially at the hands of the private fiduciary industry in California and or Nationwide.

This page is a general outline of what we here at fiduciarywatch.org would like to see provided to advocate for the protection of seniors, disabled adults and minors, and non-disabled minors and their families, whom are consumers of the merging industry of the private fiduciary in both California and nationwide. Fiduciarywatch.org welcomes input and participation. Please feel free to explore our blog, send in e-mails, write articles, produce journalistic reporting, journalistic documentaries, u-tube reports, etc., informing us, and the public, about any senior citizen, disabled adult and or minor, non-disabled minor, and their family/families who are being taken advantage by those who earn their livelihood in the new and merging industry of the private fiduciary, estate managers, court appointed guardians, court appointed trustees, probate court investigators, lawyers, and or probate judges.

Source:
Fiduciary Watch

Recommended Blog: Medical Whistleblower

Dr. Janet Parker began her advocacy work with an internship at a residential facility that served children with emotional needs. She went on to attain a Masters in Science in Education (Curriculum Development, Supervision and Administration). Dr. Parker was a trained foster parent and worked with foster child advocacy issues. She worked in humane education as Farm Supervisor at the Massachusetts American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and worked to help develop animal assisted therapy in conjunction with Dr. Leo Bustad’s Delta Society Program at Washington State University. At WSU, she took graduate study in neuroanatomy and neuropharmacology at the Washington State University School of Veterinary Medicine and then went on to complete a doctorate degree in Veterinary Medicine and the practiced clinical veterinary medicine for 10 years. Now retired, she works as a human rights advocate providing information and advocacy support for others.

 

Source: Medical Whistleblower Blog

Public Servants

Legal minds have recognized that the internet is the greatest tool Democracy has provided to individuals for seeking Justice in a Legal System run amuck, and is the new frontier for Freedom of Speech and protection of Individual Liberties.

Know This, that when you exercise Freedom of Speech, you are also held accountable for everything said when exercising this Freedom, and you put your Individual Liberties at risk if you do not constrain your words by fact and rigorous honesty, and do not libel for libel’s sake, unless truth is the absolute defense.

Judges, Attorneys, any Officers of the Court, and including Governors, Legislators, Law Enforcement Agencies, State Militias, and especially any Branch of Federal Government that includes the Legislature, the President and especially The Judiciary, even standing Armed Forces, for all of these bodies are considered entities composed of Public Servants, whose sole purpose is to serve the public by whom they have been Vested with any Authority or Power, and that the Consideration of Individual Liberties is paramount when sitting as a Public Servant, and that our Sovereign Rights as Individuals be kept in the forefront of all Legal Process, especially in consideration of Due Process.

Full Article and Source:
Pauper V Probate - Pledges and Declarations

'Bringing Dorothy Home'

Purpose: to raise awareness of the growing phenomenon of nursing homes bypassing families' legally established authority in order to seize the assets of their "residents" ~ whether there by choice, or, as in my mother's case, not. Families can even lose their rights to VISIT their loved ones, as these predators follow their usual procedure of: "Isolate, Medicate, Liquidate."

I kept my mother out of a nursing home for more than seven years before she went to Wilton Meadows for stroke rehab and was kidnapped by them. We also paid considerably into a "state-wide asset protection plan" ~ a partnership between her LTC insurance carrier [Met Life] and the state, to protect the house. This was paid into for several years, earning "credits" against potential Medicaid claims on the property. Under the Medicaid "Caregiver's Exception," I am also entitled to keep the house. And, finally, under her Durable POA I also could have (and should have) transferred everything into my own name. This never would have happened to her if I had done so, to my terrible regret now. I was never in a rush to do that, however, because I never intended to allow my mother to go into a nursing home. It was always my intention to create whatever she needed at home. Had I ever anticipated this turn of events, I would have sold the Roton Point property to pay for the house, and put it into my name, for her protection. But I was preserving her familiar status quo for her sake and simplicity for tax purposes.

Source:
Blog: Bringing Dorothy Home

How to File a CMS Freedom of Information (FOIA) Request

Step 1 -In order to make a FOIA request, simply e-mail to: FOIA_Request@cms.hhs.gov or write to the CMS FOIA Office or the appropriate CMS Regional Office. The addresses and fax numbers for the CMS FOIA Office and the addresses, fax numbers, and e-mail addresses for the CMS Regional Offices are available at the "Where to File" link below.

Step 2 -For the quickest possible handling, please mark both your letter and the envelope "Freedom of Information Act Request." You should identify the records that you seek as specifically as possible in order to increase the likelihood that the CMS will be able to locate them. Any facts that you can furnish about the time, place, authors, events, subjects, and other details of the records will be helpful to us in deciding where to search for the records that you seek.

We have provided several sample FOIA request letters that you may want to use as a guide based on the type of information you are requesting from CMS.

Step 3 -Please note that if you are requesting medical records for someone other than yourself, you will need to complete a Medicare Authorization To Disclose Personal Health Information form along with your request. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) authorization form can be found in "Downloads" as Medicare Authorization To Disclose Personal Health Information. If the individual signing the valid authorization is not the beneficiary, then a Power of Attorney must be provided along with your request.

Step 4 -If you are requesting medical records for a deceased person, you must either A) include a copy of the document authenticating your authority as the executor, administrator, or other person authorized to act upon the behalf of the person for whom records are sought (such as probate court document, or orders of administration and/or executorship); or B) if you are not the executor of the estate, you must include a signed release authorization from the legal representative of the deceased, as well as the document authenticating the representative's authority (such as probate court document, or orders of administration and/or executorship).

Source:
ProbateAbuseManual: How to File a CMS FOIA Request

See Also:
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)

'Judge Kennedy Should Resign'

(Case# 06P-1603) Allows serious felony crimes to continue:

1) False imprisonment (isolate)
2) Aggravated assault (medicate)
3) Conversion of assets (liquidate)

Tacitly participates with lawyers in his court to liquidate ward's estate in order to enrich the attorneys and to spite me, the petitioner. Ruled that the respondent was incompetent solely to prevent me from withdrawing the petition when my first withdrawal was procedurally deficient (didn't notarize affidavit of service). Respondent was not incompetenet at that time, and the court didn't have sufficient evidence that he was.

He jailed me for 330 days for not abiding by his illegal order to shutdown my first website. Illegally ordered me not to use my father's name or his wife's name by email or by internet (it was finally overturned).

Source:
Judge Kennedy Should Resign

Abolishing Judicial Immunity

I realize that abolishing judicial immunity opens up an entire new “can of worms”, but this must be accomplished.

(I am busy “holding the wolves at bay” in all the various suits, etc. I face as a result of my ill-founded and illegal conservatorship)

When I have more time to consider this topic, I will present to you how we can effectively abolish judicial immunity and control the “tsunami” of law suits that would tend to follow.

Abolishing judicial immunity would have an immediate and definitive impact on judicial conduct, and do more for correcting the now-listing ship of our judiciary than any new form of “COJ” [Court of the Judiciary] could accomplish, though I do believe I’ve offered a substantial proposal of composition for a new governing body that represents Constitutional intent, and we would still need a judicial governing “watch dog” body.

I believe abolishing judicial immunity is consistent with the founding father’s intent [TN Constitution Judicial Election and Selection], and would ultimately stream-line government as well as bring immediate correction, governed by conscience as opposed to rule.

Full Article and Source:
Pauper v Probate: Abolishing Judicial Immunity

TN: Proposed Legislation for Reform in Conservatorship Adjudication

[On 1/26/12], I hand delivered a copy of this proposed legislation to Senator Mae Beavers, Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and to Senator Joe Haynes. At a luncheon that was addressing an amendment to the Tennessee Constitution pertaining to the Tennessee Plan, a plan that is utterly unconstitutional, now there is proposed legislation to amend the Constitution to fit the law they’ve been breaking pertaining to judicial selection. Senator Beavers has championed judicial reform and is for judicial election, not selection, which is consistent with the Tennessee Constitution.

A miracle occurred when Senator Beavers addressed the issue of Conservatorships and the complaints that have come across her desk addressing the abuse of this Conservatorship Code.

The fundamental problem lies in the venue where this law is adjudicated, the Probate Court. A law of preservation adjudicated in a court of liquidation. The Probate Court is the venue where the deceased’s estate is liquidated and divided amongst the heirs, yet this same court has been vested with the authority to adjudicate a law protecting the assets of the incompetent. It’s an utter contradiction in jurisprudence.

Please read and consider this legislation. It’s a reasonable and logical proposal. The probate court is the wrong venue and there are inherent conflicts of interest with this law being adjudicated in the probate court.

I’m calling on each and every one of you to do your part to effect change. Not often does a legislation like this require from a moral imperative. We don’t all have the responsibility to stand up and choose sides over every issue that comes down the pike, but we all have a moral responsibility to stand up for those that cannot stand up for themselves, and there are countless legions of elderly victims, locked away and silenced while there estates are looted before they are in the grave. This is the moral imperative and I challenge you all to make the calls, write the letters, send the emails and let your voices be heard.

“All power is inherent with the people…” (TN Constitution)

Now is the time to remind our public servants who possesses the power. ”We, the people…”, that’s who. And in this important moral issue, we must all take a stand to protect those who cannot protect themselves. The adjudication of this law must be removed from the probate court and put in a venue where its intent can be faithfully effected.

Full Article and Source:
Pauper v. Probate: Proposed Legislation for Reform in Conservatorship Adjudication

"Fifth Third Bank, Co-Conspirators in the Probate Racket"

It’s a well-established fact that banks conspire with the crooked probate courts to loot estates and facilitate the looting thereof.

Such is the case with Fifth Third Bank in The Conservatorship of John Daniel Tate.
The atrocious and criminal conduct of this banking institution is an example of how our government has become corrupt within itself at a level never before in the history of the United States.

As the economy went south, Uncle Sam bailed out the banks, but where has he been for “we, the people”?

Fifth Third Bank continues to refuse Danny Tate access to the conservatorship account they housed from the illegal inception of the conservatorship even though they have had an Order from the 7th Circuit Court terminating the conservatorship on May 24, 2010, nunc pro tunc (the minute it rolled off the judge’s tongue).

They participated illegally in the fraudulent and hostile take over of Danny Tate’s account when David Eugene Tate showed up with a cooked DPOA (this is already well established) and allowed David Tate to proceed in cleaning out the accounts for his own use (we will start a series very soon specifically on David E. Tate and his illegal, deviant actions, for it will take a series to cover it all, and we will present the necessary documentation to substantiate every allegation).

Full Article and Source:
Fifth Third Bank, Co-Conspirators in the Probate Racket

Mary G. Sykes Speaks Her Mind

Gloria J Sykes and Mary G Sykes at a "visit" with mom, which was "allowed" by the Probate court--but only with a "supervisor" because allegedly Gloria is "dangerous" and her mother is "incompetent." (This is according to GAL's Adam Stern, attorney, and Cynthia Farenga, attorney.) Interestingly enough the voice in the background is Tom, an ordained minister providing comments and advice to Gloria and Mary.

Source:
YouTube: Mary G. Sykes Speaks Her Mind!

Watch Mary G Sykes speak her mind and what she wants done. Amazingly enough, she is supposed to be incompetent and her GAL's Adam Stern GAL and Cynthia Farenga GAL have conveniently arranged a guardianship where her desires are NOT being carried out. She wants to live at home and have her daughter Gloria care for her in Mary's home until she dies. Carolyn Toerpe had her execute a will where once Mary's home is sold the proceeds are put in Trust and Carolyn Toerpe takes it all upon Mary's death. Now Carolyn Toerpe has had Mary declared incompetent and is seeking to have both Mary's home and Gloria's home sold and the proceeds put in Carolyn's trust. All of this has been done under the authority of the Probate Court of Cook County and GAL's Cynthia Farenga Attorney and Adam Stern, Attorney. This proves that evil never sleeps.


Source:
YouTube: Mary G. Sykes Writes Letters for Help and Speaks Her Own Mind

See also:
MarySykes.com
Mary Sykes, Illinois Victim

Probate Sharks: New Blog - Cook County Guardianship Abuse Victims Manual

We are pleased to announce the unveiling of a new guardianship abuse resource blog for the victims of the Cook County Probate Court. The purpose of this blog is solely to provide easy-to-locate resources for identifying and reporting the illegal and unethical activities that occur in the Cook County Probate Court. The blog is dedicated to fellow guardianship victims and their loved ones, with the hope that it will help to bring an end to the criminal activity being endured.

The new blog can be viewed at:

http://www.ProbateAbuseManual.blogspot.com

We at ProbateSharks will continue to bring our readers the same resource information as can be found on the new blog, along with personal and special interest stories as we have in the past.

Signed,

Your ProbateSharks Advocate to End Guardianship Abuse

Source:
ProbateSharks.com

The Twelve Steps to Recovery of the Legal System

1. Admit you are a citizen of the United States of America and have power over the legal system.

2. Convince yourself that “we, the people” are a Power greater than the legal system and will restore it to sanity.

3. Make a decision to never turn complete control of your case over to an attorney and make sure they understand that.

4. Make a vigilante effort to keep an ethical and legal inventory of all actions of attorneys, judges and officers of the court and be prepared to call them out on the rug if they even suggest or witness an error.

5. Determine to God, yourself, and then to your attorney the exact strategy you want pursued in your legal action. Never listen to an attorney who says, “Just let me be the attorney”.

6. Be entirely ready to file a complaint against any attorney, judge or officer of the court with the appropriate governing body.

7. Persistently appeal the complaint since they are routinely denied by these governing bodies because they are made up of attorneys and judges who have broken the same rules and code of ethics and, because of that, “presumed correctness”, though errant, on the part of any attorney, judge or officer of the court.

8. Keep a list of all persons harmed, all co-conspirators, all rules and ethics broken, including your own attorney if HE doesn’t file a complaint on your behalf, and become willing and diligent in reporting them all to the appropriate governing body and make sure the appropriate discipline is followed through by the various governing bodies. Law is 90% logic. If it feels like something is wrong, it probably is; and DON’T trust any attorney. If you hear an attorney say, “I’ve got to work in this town”, they have just breached The Rules of Professional Conduct.

9. File direct complaints to any legislator who represents the jurisdiction in which your original complaint was levied, or to such people wherever possible, and don’t worry about an attorney telling you it will bring bias from the court, because that is grounds for a complaint and recusal. File a copy of your complaint directly to the attorney, judge or officer of the court and then file a motion for recusal in an effort to get an unbiased court.

10. Fire your attorney, file a complaint and file a legal malpractice suit with their bonding company, “omissions and errors”; because after three complaints, an attorney is out of luck getting malpractice insurance.

11. Seek through study and review to improve your conscious efforts and knowledge of the code of ethics, which are based on logic, with God’s help, and pray like hell that the powers that govern officers of the court do their job; if not, file a suit against the state because your public servant, be it the Court of the Judiciary, The Board of Professional Responsibility, The Senate Judiciary Committee, and all Legislators, failed in their duty to their oath and are not immune from legal action just because they passed some law proclaiming they are immune.

12. Having had a legal awakening as the result of these Steps, try to carry this message to other victims of an errant legal system, and to practice these principles in all your legal affairs.

Source:
The Twelve Steps to Recovery of the Legal System

How to File a Complaint...The Fatal Shot Heard Round the World (part 2)

Mr. David Callahan, III, Guardian Ad Litem in The Conservatorship of Robert Thurman, has an oath and legal obligations to adhere. Considering the egregious nature of the Thurman conservatorship, it’s important that this be made public. The Thurman case also shows a pattern of illegal activities, not to mention ethics violations, in Judge Randy Kennedy’s probate court that are routinely carried out on a day-to-day basis.

Again, Mr. Callahan, III, in my opinion, is the least deserving of this public scrutiny, but he did and does have a legal obligation to report to the various authorities what he has witnessed and been made aware of. He also had the obligation as Guardian ad Litem to protect Robert Thurman from the atrocities that followed the Petition for Conservatorship.

Another thing to keep in mind, the probate courts are the biggest business in America, dwarfing any business, because the wealth of the nation eventually passes through probate. See what I’m getting at? So, that’s why they do their actions in such a self-contained manner. In order to maintain “ownership” of the biggest business in the world, they can’t “out” themselves on what is going on.

Full Article and Source:
How to File a Complaint...The Fatal Shot Heard Round the World (part 2)

How to File a Complaint...The Fatal Shot Heard Round the World (Part 1)

Now here’s the zinger and the power “we, the people” possess but are kept in the dark: If the attorney, with knowledge of, DOES NOT report the violation of The Rules of Professional Conduct or the Judicial Code of Ethics, WE, as observers, have the right to file a complaint against the attorney who has not reported the violation as well as the attorney(s) who committed the original violations. In other words, if the attorney witnessing the violation does not report (file a complaint, charges, etc.), he becomes, in fact, an accessory (co-conspirator) to the breaking of the rules of violation of ethics (if the BPR does their job and takes appropriate action according to the rules and their standard of discipline).

ARE YOU GETTING WHAT THIS MEANS?

If you, as an observer and citizen of the United States, witness or are made aware, and can prove unethical and/or illegal conduct on the part of an attorney or judge, and if the attorney(s) involved in the matter have not corrected the error/breach/rule-breaking, then you, as an observer (you don’t even have to be involved in the case or “have a dog in the fight”) can report the violation to the appropriate governing body, including the attorney(s) who have failed in reporting the misconduct.

Full Article and Source:
How to File a Complaint...The Fatal Shot Heard Round the World (part 1)