Biderman’s Chart of Coercion: The template for guardian abuse

by Marti Oakley 

As often happens when I am researching one thing, I stumble across something totally unrelated, but valuable. This happened recently when I stumbled across Biderman’s Chart of Coercion. The chart lists eight progressive steps of torture to break an individual down. What caught my attention was that I was reading the exact method of operation used by professional predatory guardians once they target a victim and take them prisoner. And this is a hostage situation.

Because this is a tribunal setting, set up specifically to avoid the law and any Constitutional protections, the rules of evidence and the code of civil procedure are not required. Basically a probate predators ball!

Vulnerable adults along with those with handicaps and children are seized by the state and declared a “ward” of the state. Essentially this designation redefines the individual as property of the state, no longer recognizable as a living, breathing human being, as legal capacity and legal agency are immediately removed along with the right to use their own name.

As probate is only suppose to come into play upon presentation of the death certificate, the “ward of the state” designation signifies a civil death that the tribunal relies on to proceed, even though it is this same tribunal who declared the living individual a ward.

As a ward, these civil deaths prevent them from accessing state courts which are based in the law, as they no longer are recognized as having any rights whatsoever. After all a probate examiner essentially declared them dead in the law. This designation (ward of the state) is used by the Supreme Court in its refusal to hear any of these cases. Their refusal is based upon the idea that these cases are the property and control of the state.

How to destroy a “ward of the state” with judicial approval

I had noted a long time back that the actions of the predators seemed to follow a distinct pattern in their application. After reviewing the chart below, I now realize that they are using a tried and true method of psychological torture, brainwashing and terror to overtake the victim. The chart lists eight chronological general methods of torture that will psychologically break an individual. It has also been applied to the psychological abuse used by perpetrators of domestic violence. The psychological and physical methods used by abusive guardians are virtually identical to those of the chart. These methods are actually used by our government and military on prisoners of war.  This system deprives the victim of all social support and makes the victim dependent upon the abuser.

The chart includes the following coercion methods:

1. Isolation
2. Monopolization of perception
3. Induced debilitation and exhaustion
4. Threats
5. Occasional indulgences
6. Demonstrating “omnipotence” and “omniscience”
7. Degradation
8. Enforcing trivial demands

Even armed with this little bit of information, do not expect any politician to intervene and actually try to end this. Too much money gets dumped into their campaign funds from BAR Associations, guardianship associations and others who have a vested interest in allowing the system to run unimpeded. Money talks even if it’s money stolen stolen from an estate at the expense of a captive elderly individual.

Human bondage

A so called “guardian” is given title to the person as if they were an object or thing, and to the estate of the individual with little to no oversight. The abuse, neglect and trauma are standard procedure in these cases. And the very first thing the predator does, is to isolate the individual. Virtually every state has statutes prohibiting isolation yet it is the first action taken. The predators make spurious claims as to why isolation should happen, but provide little to no evidence to support their claims.

The effect, especially on the elderly is terror that results from the sudden and terrifying separation from everyone and everything known to them. And politicians and so-called “judges” turn a blind eye and yawn. They pen fluff and buff bills that have no teeth in them and do not address any of the serious human rights violations, violations of due process, or the obvious intent to access assets for personal gain.

While our elected officials concoct one useless bill after another supposedly to address the abuses in the probate system, not one will even say the word isolation much less address it head on. Not one of them will sight as criminal the abuses of probate tribunals and their guardians whose lives are predicated upon a parasitic existence at the expense of the vulnerable. Instead we get one bill after another that creates more agencies, delivers more funding to the very system we fight, and which will produce nothing other than another obstacle to those trying to escape this system of government sanctioned human trafficking.

And where were all your elected officials while this system of human trafficking operates in full view of the public?

Well! They were pretending it was an isolated incident. Not that? Oh! Well they never heard of such a thing. That didn’t work? Ok…how about this one: Let me look into this and I’ll get back to you. (Please don’t sit by the phone and wait for that return call…it isn’t coming.) the excuses elected people come up with are staggering in not only the dishonesty, but also in it’s blatant disregard for human life.

Guardianship never had a noble purpose. It has always been about capturing the vulnerable and taking whatever property or assets they had. It was and is a system populated by otherwise socially unacceptable people from the hearing examiners and guardians and on to the politicians who protect and facilitate this system. This system of human trafficking has always been corrupt and cannot be repaired. There is no “fixing” the probate system. It must be abolished in total. In its place, supported decision making is a viable and worthwhile effort and I am sure we can devise a system that functions far better and equitably than so-called “probate”.

These are just a few of the suggestions I received concerning what needs to occur:

• Isolation must never be tolerated, allowed, or otherwise used to torture and torment a vulnerable individual.
• The guardians and attorneys must be prohibited from using the intended victims own funds to attack them.
• A cap in place on fees and other charges.
• Petitions for guardianship must be heard in civil courts outside of probate tribunals and a trial by jury allowed
• Verifiable evidence must be presented for any charges levied.
• The hearing examiner must not dismiss personal attorneys or medical providers.
• Guardians should be prosecuted and jailed for human rights abuses and numerous other violations of law and rights.
• Probate examiners (mistakenly called “judge”in most cases) MUST NOT discard standing POA’s, Trusts, Wills or other legal instruments in order to allow the predator guardian full access to the estate.
• No one associated with probate has immunity from prosecution for rights violations, estate theft, elder abuse, elder isolation, absence of due process, or other violations of law and rights. They must be prosecuted as any other person.

There is much more that needs to be added. Please send along any items you believe should be added to this list of demands to reign in the corrupt probate system.

In the meantime, review Biderman’s list of techniques and compare it to your case. Let us know what you find.

tsradMJO@protonmail.com

legal capacity

a person’s authority under law to engage in a particular undertaking or maintain a particular status such as the right to be recognized as a specifically named living, breathing man or woman.

(Click to see chart) 

Full Article & Source:

Biderman’s Chart of Coercion: The template for guardian abuse

PREDATORY GUARDIANSHIPS – Governor’s Appointee Marsha Kazarosian at Center of Alledged Retribution

‘Evidently $7 Million Wasn’t Enough … They Needed to Try to Destroy Me’

Attorney Lisa Siegel Belanger Now Facing Loss of Law License for ‘Exposing Racketeering Ring that Preys on Seniors’

Governor’s Appointee Marsha Kazarosian at Center of Alleged Retribution

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
by Lonnie Brennan

BOSTON − In an emotional speech before the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers (BBO), Attorney Lisa Siegel Belanger gave as good as she got. Using her allotted 15 minutes she called out the actions of BBO member Attorney Marsha Kazarosian and the law firm Burns & Levinson for their “fabrication” and exaggeration of charges against her as “retaliation” for her exposure of their “racketeering ring which has preyed on seniors,” including her father, Marvin H. Siegel. The BBO seeks to strip Belanger of her license to practice for two years.

Belanger noted in her speech that despite five years of her filing complaints to the BBO against Attorney Kazarosian, the BBO refused to conduct any investigation against the powerful political figure (and Mass. Gov. Charlie Baker’s high-profile appointee). She also noted that both Kazarosian and BBO Chair Jeffrey R. Martin were absent from the hearing, and that she was again stripped of the opportunity to question her accusers. She pointed out that Martin serves as partner in the firm Burns and Levenson, a firm also at the center of Belanger’s complaint. (Yes, Belanger took on some of the most connected lawyers in Massachusetts.)

With no relief from the courts for years (fighting against those she documented as preying upon seniors), Belanger finally went public. Her case as well as the systemic draining of millions from her now deceased father’s accounts have been chronicled in a series of articles in The Boston Broadside. Belanger noted that while no actions were taken against Kazarosian, and no charges were ever taken against her, everything changed when her family’s plight became public.  READ MORE HERE

Full Article & Source:
PREDATORY GUARDIANSHIPS – Governor’s Appointee Marsha Kazarosian at Center of Alledged Retribution

Barratry and Personage : How the BAR Associations and Professional Predatory Guardians Traffic the Elderly and Disabled.

Declaring the living individual dead to enable the theft of the estate.

 

Barratry, a term that is now referred to as archaic, rarely, if ever, appears in the legal lexicon. It is the act of knowingly bringing false claims and charges against a targeted individual by members of the BAR Associations. And, it is the result of “the frequent incitement of lawsuits and quarrels that is a punishable offense.” 

 

Every such individual ever forced into one of these pseudo “courts” that are in reality, tribunals, has suffered barratry and been subjected to a foreign jurisdiction and form of “pseudo law”, within which they were specifically disabled and unable to defend themselves. These unconstitutional tribunals were specifically created for this purpose: to leave the individual totally unable to defend themselves against a system devised to render them without any rights or protections. The Constitutional authority for these tribunals has been argued under the 1^st, 3^rd and 4^th Articles of the Constitution, the sheer number of these treatises being a clear indication that they are not Constitutional.

Next, is the use of personage ( a term redefined for obvious reasons). Both barratry and personage are crimes against the individual by members of the BAR. Both of these criminal acts are used to enact foreign statutory law against living people. Foreign to the people, as statutory law circumvents the natural rights and liberties guaranteed in the Constitution and erects a legal fiction contradicting and adverse to the Constitution Bill of Rights, to directly benefit its creators. Which is exactly the only purpose of statutes.

 

The term “personage” has now been redefined to mean a person of importance or rank. Originally, it meant to assume another individuals’ identity with the intent of accessing their property; an act criminally prosecutable.
 
Today we recognize personage as identity theft. Of course its only a crime if you do it…if a member of the BAR Association does it in collusion with a for-profit guardian intent on availing themselves of your identity with the intent of fraudulently accessing your assets, it is not a problem; just all in a day’s work. Once the identity theft has been secured, testamentary powers are gifted to the predators who now present themselves as the civilly dead person so that the liquidation of the estate assets can begin in earnest.

Personage was known to be the act of knowingly mis-characterizing the living man or woman as deceased in the law, and then assuming their identity and by extension, access to all their assets. The purpose of knowingly misrepresenting the living human being as deceased (statutory civil death), is exactly what occurs in probate tribunals across the country. This is the ultimate in identity theft. It is also human trafficking with the intent to profit and precisely what happens every day of the week in these administrative tribunals across the country.

These criminal acts defraud and deprive individuals of their life, liberty and property. The collateral consequences and damages that result from the many times exaggerated and fabricated claims of eminent danger to, or from, the victim seldom have any validity. But none is needed in these kangaroo tribunals and rarely is any ever produced or required.

As a result, the ensuing collateral damages to the victim and the intended heirs are civil and regulatory (statutes) and so are not subject to, or applicable to, criminal punishment under actual law.

But the real perk in all of this criminal activity is the clever arrangement that forces the targeted victim to pay all expenses of any kind associated with the unwarranted actions against them by the very predators who bring those actions.

In fact, probate determinations, including the ensuing identity theft and theft of property and the individual’s freedom have been carefully constructed to avoid the Constitution and any rights or protections contained therein. And successful identity theft in these tribunals is totally dependent upon the hearing examiner, around whom all activities and proclamations pivot.

Probate Administrative Tribunals: How the living human being is declared dead, while still breathing

Probate administrative tribunals are to become active only upon presentation of the death certificate. The only supposed intent of the tribunal is to determine if the death is testate, or intestate; meaning with a will or without a will and to make sure that the estate is distributed in the manner the deceased intended.

So how does the living human being become subject to a tribunal that is supposed to become active only upon presentation of a certificate of death?

And how does this fictional death allow for the theft of estates, the disinheriting of families and designated heirs? The discarding of pre-standing legal instruments and instructions is pivotal in the theft of the assets and this is routinely done by hearing examiners, (euphemistically “judges”) working in tandem with predatory guardians and unethical attorney’s and law firms.

An individual subject to probate suffers a statutory civil death. This civil death is equal in its legal consequences to an actual physical death. The victim cannot speak, defend or otherwise refute the claims of the predators. Rarely are they even allowed into one of these kangaroo tribunals and, when they are, they are they are often intentionally drugged with any number of psychotropic drugs to make them appear delusional and dysfunctional. The hearing examiner is fully aware of what is taking place, but since they they receive an annual percentage of the value of the estate just for operating this kangaroo tribunal, they aren’t about to say a word. In fact, this whole operation pivots around the collusion of the hearing examiner, with the predators.

Supposedly, an adult ward of the state is protected by law once he/she is deemed incapacitated ( formerly, incompetent). But the guardian now has control over all monetary and property decisions. As such, they now present themselves as the lawful owners of the property in question including access to all bank accounts or investments and property.

The loss of legal status that is the result of guardianizing the living individual and declaring them dead in the law, is an inherent element of criminal—not civil, punishment. This “civil death” is usually the result of conviction of a crime. But, what crime did the newly declared dead person who is still alive and breathing, commit? Where is the injured party? What damages resulted from the victims actions? Apparently, aging with assets that someone else has decided they want, is now a crime.

It is precisely because no crime has been committed that the targeted victim is subjected to the probate tribunal. There has been no crime, no injury to another, no damages that could be addressed in an actual court of law. No state or federal laws have been violated that would have come into play and which would have required they be brought into an actual court of law.

It would seem to me that if you are intent on depriving a targeted victim of their identity, this should be done in a civil court, where evidence would have to be provided under oath attesting to the charges being levied. Let a jury decide if your personal identity should be taken from you and gifted to a professional predator that most likely has a long and sordid history of preying on those they perceive to be vulnerable.

Once the living individual is subjected to probate, now having suffered a civil death, they are not allowed to speak. After all, dead people can’t talk…can they? And while many friends or family members are willing to care for the individual, they are not allowed to speak either. Then the transcripts from the hearings read as if no one stepped forward willing to care for the individual. That is, if you can even obtain a transcript. In virtually every probate tribunal across the country, all video, audio and court transcriptionists have been done away with. In many cases, even the individuals present in these tribunals are prohibited from hiring their own transcriptionists or recording or taping the proceedings. And of course now, with all of the growing outrage over this trafficking of the elderly through this predatory system, the public is not allowed in to view first hand the overwhelming corruption, violations of rights and dehumanizing activity facilitated by these tribunals and are prevented from being present in the tribunal to witness the corruption first hand.

The generally unfounded claim of “incompetence” has been replaced with the word “incapacitated”. Incompetence required some form of evidence if enough pressure could be applied to the predators to prove their claims. That evidence was usually obtained by obtaining a written diagnosis of mental impairment from an on-board psychiatrist who rarely ever interviews the victim, but claims upon hearsay evidence from others involved that XYZ mental illness is present and therefor the victim was incompetent.

Incapacitated, on the other hand, can mean simply that you have a bad cold that is causing you to spend your time in bed recovering. It can mean virtually anything, or more than likely means nothing at all, and usually does. And of course, that attorney and potential guardian can make any number of false and exaggerated claims in a probate tribunal without ever producing any evidence that what they say is true or valid. And don’t even think about attempting to present any countering evidence to refute the claims of these predators. The hearing examiner will not allow or accept any evidence that refutes the allegations made by those who are anticipating profiting from the estate.

As the number of retirees grows, so does the number of sociopathic predators who make their living preying on the public. This is a dangerous time to be an elderly or disabled individual in this country.

	Powers of testamentary guardian		28. Where a guardian has been appointed by will or other instrument, his power to mortgage or charge, or transfer by sale, gift, exchange or otherwise, immovable property belonging to his ward is subject to any restriction which may be imposed by the instrument, unless he has under this Act been declared guardian and the Court which made the declaration permits him by an order in writing, notwithstanding the restriction, to dispose of any immoveable property specified in the order in a manner permitted by the order.

barratry

Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Medical, Financial, Wikipedia.

Barratry

In Criminal Law, the frequent incitement of lawsuits and quarrels that is a punishable offense.

Barratry is most commonly applied to an attorney who attempts to bring about a lawsuit that will be profitable to her or him. Barratry is an offense both at Common Law and under some state statutes. The broader common-law crime has been limited by certain statutes. An attorney who is overly officious in instigating or encouraging prosecution of groundless litigation might be guilty of common barratry under a particular statute. The requirement for the crime of barratry is that repeated or persistent acts of litigation are performed by the accused. Barratry is generally a misdemeanor punishable by fine or imprisonment. In the case of an attorney, disbarment is the usual punishment. Since few cases have been prosecuted, barratry is considered by the legal community at large to be an archaic crime. This is particularly true today due to a highly litigious atmosphere. West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved. 

https://www.educatedinlaw.org/2017/04/personage-barratry/

“It is a crime known as “personage”. By arbitrarily creating an Estate trust named after you and claiming to own this thing they created, they have falsely claimed to own you and your assets and to literally buy and sell “you” on stock exchanges, ship “you” out of ports, and tax “you”…

“Hand in hand with personage comes “barratry” — the crime of knowingly bringing false claims into court. So what happens every day all across America, when charges are brought against the ESTATES of “dead men” who are standing right in front of the judge and jury? Barratry — a crime that is appropriately named after the “Bar Association”.

Full Article & Source:
Barratry and Personage : How the BAR Associations and Professional Predatory Guardians Traffic the Elderly and Disabled.

Fatally Flawed Justice System: The Monopoly of the Corporate BAR Associations

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“There is absolutely nothing in the Constitution for the United States authorizing, or otherwise directing the creation of these self protecting unions that have monopolized our judicial system at every level and use that monopoly to profit at the public’s expense. And, there is nothing authorizing the incorporation of these specialized unions or of the Supreme Court itself. Yet here we are in the grips of these corporate entities who have monopolized the very judicial system meant to protect America from just such things.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

by  Marti Oakley 

In every state and on the Federal level, the BAR Associations have established a monopoly on our courts and our so-called judicial system. The existing Sherman Act: the Clayton Act and FTC Act only become active when the monopolized systems that have been established harm consumers. I can think of no other more harmful monopoly to the American public overall, than what passes for the judicial system in America and its associated BAR unions that not only control and own our courts, but also profit mightily from doing so. The law is what they say it is regardless of what the law might actually be.

The Sherman Act outlaws “every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade,” and any “monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize.” Long ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Sherman Act does not prohibit every restraint of trade, only those that are unreasonable. Obviously, the Supreme Court has decided that the monopolies that exist in our courts are not unreasonable. Especially since they too, participate in that monopoly. 

Q: Do you believe the monopolies on our courts at every level via so-called BAR Associations are unreasonable?

When individuals go to all the expense and time of acquiring a degree in law, why should they then be required to pass some contrived test, many times at great expense, to acquire a union card (The BARS are UNIONS) permitting them to work in the field they trained in or to practice their trade in any court room in this country? No union card? No access to the courts. Didn’t pay your BAR union dues for access to the courts they monopolize? Too bad for you!

Even the Supreme Court of the United States has established itself as its own BAR. To be heard in this highly politicized “court”, you must be a member in good standing for four years in another BAR union before you can apply to appear in their closed union shop called the Supreme Court.

Why Is The United States Supreme Court Listed as a Private 

Corporation On DUN & BRADSTREET? 

From: John-Henry Hill Law blog

“Not only is the United States a corporation, but the “Judicial Branch of US Govt” is also a Delaware Corporation (Delaware SoS file number: 3383789), listed in Dun & Bradstreet: 

“The following is the DUNS number for JUDICIAL BRANCH OF US GOV: DUNS number: 956858625”, as well.

The “Judicial Branch of US Govt” (corporation) includes: “U.S. GOV’T LAW COURT ADMIN SUPREME & U.S. DISTRICT, APPELLATE, VETERANS PROBATE, BANKRUPTCY, STATE(S) COURTS, INC.”
 
So our courts from the Supreme Court down to state courts are corporate “policy” (as in police) courts.” 

About the Court https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/about.aspx

“EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW” – These words, written above the main entrance to the Supreme Court Building, express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court is the highest tribunal in the Nation for all cases and controversies arising under the Constitution or the laws of the United States. As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution.

Equal Justice Under the Law? Really?

R.I.P. Pro Se Litigants Before the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has finally revised its rules to prevent a non-lawyer from arguing before the Court.

When the Supreme Court issued its new rules for the Court in July of 2013, it curiously included rule 28.8. The move by the Court merely codified its standard practice of denying requests by non-lawyers ( no BAR union member) to argue their cases. In fact, the last time a non-lawyer managed to get in front of the Court was in 1978: 

Antitrust law only springs into action against a monopoly when it destroys the ability of another company to enter the market and compete. But! Since all courts and BAR Associations operate as corporations, does this not make them businesses operated with one fiduciary duty? That duty is to make a profit. 

Q: Does it not also make them invested competitors against the pro se litigant?

The key question, of course, is whether a particular monopoly is harming consumers – or merely harming its competitors for the benefit of those consumers.

Q: Who would be the competitors these closed union shops are competing with?

A: The pro se litigants who have realized that the thousands of dollars demanded for representation will likely produce few results. Because of this, they have chosen to learn the law and represent themselves.
 
“The answer isn’t as simple as “big equals bad”, or “competitor harm equals consumer harm.” Instead, courts must rely on complex economic analysis to determine whether consumers, not just competitors, have suffered harm.”

No they do not. They simply have to rely on the Constitution and the laws that are in compliance with it. But, as these “courts” have decided unilaterally that the Constitution applies only if and when it is to their benefit, or one of their corporate contractors, they have lost any relevance or reasonable excuse for their continued existence.

The Constitution provides no provision for the courts to declare themselves immune from prosecution for wrong doing or for their obvious pandering to their own members of their specific union.. Neither does it make any provision for the establishment of these unions or the monopolies that have resulted in what are supposed to be the people’s courts of law. 

If you or I cannot claim “ignorance of the law”…why is a judge or attorney allowed to? Aren’t they supposed to be experts in the law? Supposedly, this is the reason they voted to give themselves immunity. Otherwise they might be afraid to hand down certain rulings….like those where they ignored the law or where they knowingly violated the very principles that put them on that bench.

Practicing Law without a license

The Constitution does not say that we need to have a license to access the law. That is a self-protective declaration used to keep non-union members out of the courts. What it does say is that we are allowed to have representation i.e., someone who acts on our behalf. Not a word is said about hiring a BAR union member who will charge you unimaginable fees just to gain access to that court.

In Summary

We need to end the BAR Associations and return the law and the access to the courts to the people. No one should be forced to pay exorbitant fees to closed union BAR members to access the courts. What is the first question many judges ask before any court begins proceedings? “Has your attorney been paid?”. And that would concern that judge for what reason? 

Neither does any judge have the authority to order anyone to “hire an attorney”. Yet it happens everyday in court rooms across America.  (Click to continue)

Full Article & Source:
Fatally Flawed Justice System: The Monopoly of the Corporate BAR Associations