by Marti Oakley
We should have taken a lesson; we should have paid attention because
we all know that what the government gets away with in other places will
soon be brought home and visited upon us. So it is with what is
referred to as “extraordinary rendition”. ( explanation provided below)
Now this same methodology is used to cull and and disappear senior
citizens. No crime has been committed. No evidence is produced to
substantiate the capture, imprisonment, robbing, and eventual
serendipitous deaths of America’s senior citizens.
The Rendering of America’s Seniors
We have a system of extraordinary rendition occurring right here at
home and utilized to traffic and cull senior citizens. But in this
system it isn’t the military or CIA who are taking prisoners. It is
attorney’s, predatory for-profit guardians, Adult Protective Services
and other “stakeholders” who have been given the green light to capture,
isolate, psychologically torture, forcibly medicate, rob and eventually
end the lives of seniors. And these prisoners of guardianship are held
in secret locations; the floating prisons and black ops sites now
replaced with “nursing homes”, “hospice” and of course hospitals where
they can languish for years as insurance and medicare is exploited.
As no crime has been committed by the elder that is targeted, that
would activate civil or criminal courts, the probate system was
constructed to treat them as though some nonchargeable crime had
occurred. In this system they have no rights, and are treated worse than
a felon with even fewer options.
Every day these predators kidnap unsuspecting elders, snatching them
from their homes, from hospitals and from their families, friends and
others. Their crime? Usually just aging with assets that the predators
have decided should belong to them. We don’t call the elderly prisoners
of war, we call them wards of the state. But they are prisoners
none-the-less. And even though statutes supposedly restrict isolation,
forced medication, and abuse, prisoners of the guardianship system are
immediately isolated. No reason needed other than the predator ordered
it. Medications are forced on the elderly, and many are left in such
neglect and despair that they quickly deteriorate mentally from these
things and the forced isolation. Many families have no idea where their
family member is being held prisoner.
Who else helps work this system?
Trolls, spotters and other useful low-life’s make a living
identifying possible targets. These people troll neighborhoods with a
high number of elderly home owners and report back to the people who
employ them when they spot a home up for sale, or maybe the yard just
isn’t mowed. Anything is an excuse when you are looking for one. They
also rifle through property tax files which are a wealth of information
and statistics; very useful for identifying potential profit prospects.
They can also be the admission clerk at your local hospital, or a floor
charge nurse who has a predatory guardian on speed dial. And the ever
present and always threatening, social services agent who just wants to
visit with you and make sure you aren’t being abused. Even if you refuse
the interview, even if you order this person to leave you alone, they
will write up a report as if they had a long conversation with you and
you showed all the signs of abuse. These individuals are no different
than the Egyptian/Saudi kidnappers; they make their money delivering
bodies.
Once captured, the elder is immediately guardianized via an emergency
petition for guardianship. No due process, no notice of hearing. Not
that it matters, the targeted victim would not be allowed to speak
anyway. The probate examiner turns a blind eye to the lack of evidence,
to random and malicious charges levied against family and friends, and
accepts on face value whatever charges are presented as the excuse for
what is about to happen.
He Who Claims Must Prove
This is an old maxim of law, and exactly the reason that all guardian
cases are administered in tribunals instead of courts of law. In a
court of LAW you would have to follow the rules of evidence and the code
of Civil Procedure.
In a tribunal you can do what ever you like, no problem. In a probate
tribunal, you are not dealing with law, rights, or anything you would
recognize as supposedly being integral to the legal system of justice
that is supposed to exist in this country. Which is exactly why these
tribunals were created; to avoid all that pesky stuff like
constitutional rights and protections and actual law.
Usually, these motions for
guardianship are granted without notice to the person, without due
process, without any verifiable evidence, and are granted without
question. What is about to commence is kidnapping, identity theft,
isolation, forced medication, abuse, neglect and estate theft. Everyone
involved from the hearing examiner on down, including medical providers,
will be making money off this one victim. The attorney’s, predatory
guardians, medical providers, nursing homes, hospitals, agencies, ..all
extracting every last dollar they can using whatever means necessary, to
enrich themselves, their agency or organization.
But what about those charges made, those claims against the elder
himself/herself? Or those made against family and/or friends? Have you
ever wondered why, not one time after making these charges, all of which
are crimes under various state and federal laws,…. no one is ever
charged or prosecuted?? There is a good reason for this. This would
allow access to actual courts. In a court of LAW you would have to
provide evidence, and prove your claims in front of a jury. There
wouldn’t be any of this “its true because I said so”. Imagine how things
would change if this happened.
As it is a very rare occasion that any such evidence exists, no
charges are ever filed. But the person whom these charges were made
against now has them listed on their public record as if they were a
proven fact. The ministerial clerk, administrative hearing examiner or
magistrate or whatever euphemistic title they operate under in your
state will accept the charges made by the predators as if they were
spoken by the Lord himself.
No, you may not present any evidence refuting these claims.
No, you may not speak up in your own defense, and,
No…your family member, friend, companion.. cannot be the guardian.
If any of these people were the guardian, should one actually be
needed, these predators couldn’t steal the estate. They couldn’t convert
the real property into their own names and sell it. They couldn’t rifle
through personal possessions and steal anything of value, and they most
certainly would not be able to access liquid accounts. And to add
another level to this sick business, these predators make themselves the
assigned payee on all Social Security benefits, and railroad retirement
pensions, any military benefits and any other source of dedicated
retirement income. After all, according to the probate tribunal, these
predators are now in fact….you. The real you doesn’t exist any longer
and the law will not recognize you as existing.
But don’t think for one moment that just because you might not have
property or liquid assets, that you would be exempt from this human
trafficking for-profit scheme. We now have numerous predators across the
country who are doing business based on volume. In other words, they
capture as many vulnerable seniors as possible who have nothing more
than the above mentioned benefits. But multiply those benefits by
hundreds of prisoners of guardianship….excuse me…”wards of the state”,
held hostage by one of these predators and this provides an individual
predator with a hefty monthly income.
The concerted efforts not only here in the US, but globally, to
capture, cull and reduce the number of elderly is growing. We have been
determined to be a waste population and one that has no other value than
the accumulation of whatever level of wealth we have.
In the US, people over 60 are the largest block of actual homeowners
and actually comprise at least 50% of the real wealth of this nation.
What is happening to us is not only the eradication of the aging
population, but a dispossession and disinheriting of generational wealth
that was intended to be passed on to the next generation of our
families.
And while this generational harvesting machine rolls on, our elected
officials mouth platitudes, pass fluff & buff useless bills and
pretend they care. They don’t.
Background on extraordinary rendition.
During the Iraq war, and I would assume ongoing even today, was
the practice of kidnapping so-called “terrorist” suspects, who were then
taken to black ops prisons. No charges. No actual evidence of any
terroristic activities, but many times simply kidnapped off the streets
and sold for bounty to the US military, CIA and other US agencies and
organizations. Egypt and Saudi Arabia made many millions of dollars
kidnapping unsuspecting Iraqi’s and others, usually for about $5000 US
per head. As the majority of them were never charged with a crime, they
were none-the-less held indefintely, some still held in captivity these
18 years later. Most of these “suspects” were imprisoned on floating
prisons at sea where US laws and access to courts was not an issue. The
floating prisons, the black op sites in several mid-eastern countries
and of course the infamous Gitmo were and are notorious for their
torture and severe abuse of the detainees. Their families never knew
what happened to them, where they were or if they were even still alive.
https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2018/may/9/us-coast-guard-operating-inhumane-floating-prisons/
http://www.historycommons.org/project.jsp?project=us_torture_abuse
https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/voices/20-extraordinary-facts-about-cia-extraordinary-rendition-and-secret-detention
https://fas.org/irp/congress/2007_hr/rendition.pdf
https://www.vox.com/2014/12/9/7361291/map-cia
Full Article & Source:
Extraordinary Rendition: An Act of War on America’s Seniors
Showing posts with label for-profit guardian. Show all posts
Showing posts with label for-profit guardian. Show all posts
Thursday, May 30, 2019
Monday, April 3, 2017
Journal seeks to open guardian mismanagement lawsuit
Annette Rosenstiel lived to be 101 years old.
But what happened to her and her assets during the nine years before her death in 2012 is mired in court-ordered secrecy that is opposed by her only child.
Annette Rosenstiel, an author who was married to New York financial heavyweight Raymond S. Rosenstiel, had been the ward of a for-profit guardian/conservator, Decades LLC of Albuquerque, since about 2003.
After her death, Annette’s daughter and personal representative, Leonie Rosenstiel, filed a lawsuit against the company and its founder, Nancy Oriola, alleging negligence and mismanagement of her mother’s assets. But her court complaint, the defendants’ response and more than 20 other documents filed by the parties in the civil negligence case are under seal on the order of a state district judge in Albuquerque.
Leonie Rosenstiel has tried to open up her own case, and on Wednesday the Albuquerque Journal filed a motion seeking to unseal the records, arguing that information about “alleged misbehavior of guardians or conservators should be made public because it is plainly a matter of public concern.”
“Affording blanket protection to information related to Defendants’ alleged mismanagement of a conservatorship or guardianship, when mismanagement by court-appointed guardians or conservators is a critical matter of public concern, offends the notion of the First Amendment right of access to the courts,” the newspaper argued in its motion.
A handful of records that aren’t sealed offer a glimpse into the allegations, which in essence contend that Decades mismanaged the Rosenstiel assets and abused its position as court-appointed guardian and conservator.
One document alleges breach of fiduciary duty, negligent handling of assets, negligence in the administration of the guardianship and conservatorship by a commercial entity and violation of the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act. An accounting is also requested.
Leonie Rosenstiel has tried to have the files in her own lawsuit opened.
Based on what is known, the Journal argues in its motion, that the only interest being protected is the defendants’ interest in avoiding disclosure of Rosenstiel’s allegations against them.
None of the attorneys in Rosenstiel’s civil lawsuit responded to Journal requests for comment on Wednesday, but the lawyer for Decades said his client would oppose the Journal’s efforts to unseal the case.
State law makes virtually all information in a guardianship/conservatorship case confidential, except for the court docket sheet, the kind of guardianship and the name of the allegedly incapacitated person for whom a guardian was appointed.
But this isn’t the guardianship case of Annette Rosenstiel; rather, it is a claim of negligence against the guardian/conservator that was filed after the ward had died. District Judge Alan Malott, siding with Decades and against Rosentiel, ruled earlier that the case would remain sealed because it was related to a guardianship matter.
Full control
A court-appointed guardian is responsible for the day-to-day life decisions of a ward, while a conservator manages the financial affairs of a ward. In some cases, the guardian and conservator are one and the same.
Most guardians appointed in New Mexico are family members of the incapacitated person, but in some cases, judges decide a nonrelative should be appointed.
Decades, which has operated since 2001, is among the for-profit corporate companies in the state providing such services.
Leonie Rosenstiel originally initiated the guardian/conservator proceeding in 2003, according to court records, but, because of the secrecy, it isn’t known whether she sought to be her mother’s guardian or why the court appointed Decades LLC.
Records in the negligence case indicate there was a court-ordered forensic audit into some of Decades’ actions as Annette Rosenstiel’s guardian and conservator, although the results are secret.
The lawsuit was initially filed under seal. Rosenstiel subsequently asked for the court records to be unsealed, while the defendants contended they should be automatically kept from the public because they related to guardianship/conservatorship matters. Her lawyer also asked to be able to use portions of the guardianship case in the civil lawsuit.
“The former ward has passed away, and accordingly will suffer no embarrassment if the Sealed Records are unsealed,” Rosenstiel’s attorney, David A. Garcia, argued in a motion filed in 2013.
“Courts seal their records to protect the ward, not to protect the interests of private corporate guardians and conservators.
“Parties to litigation in civil cases would often prefer that as many particulars of the litigation as possible be hidden from the public,” he wrote. “But that isn’t the way court records are handled in the vast majority of cases like the one at bar.”
Decades, in arguing to keep the case sealed, said Annette Rosenstiel’s privacy interests didn’t end simply because she died.
The Journal’s motion to unseal the records in the negligence case, filed by attorney Matt Hoyt, said Malott appeared to interpret state law as automatically requiring that almost all information and documentation related to a guardianship and or/conservatorship proceeding be kept confidential – even though the civil negligence case is not itself such a proceeding.
“There was also no “separate consideration of reasons why the records in this (civil negligence) lawsuit should be sealed,” the Journal said.
The Journal also argued in its motion that the judge has a duty to seal only portions of the records rather than entire documents.
Malott, in his earlier denial of Garcia’s request to unseal the documents, said it would be “overly burdensome and expensive for the parties, and markedly inefficient for the Court, to determine confidentiality of each separate document or item of information as this matter is developed for trial.”
So the judge ordered the sealing of “any pleadings” related to the guardianship/conservatorship proceeding. Actual trial testimony and exhibits would be publicly available if and when the case goes to trial. A trial date is set for later this year.
Full Article & Source:
Journal seeks to open guardian mismanagement lawsuit
But what happened to her and her assets during the nine years before her death in 2012 is mired in court-ordered secrecy that is opposed by her only child.
Annette Rosenstiel, an author who was married to New York financial heavyweight Raymond S. Rosenstiel, had been the ward of a for-profit guardian/conservator, Decades LLC of Albuquerque, since about 2003.
After her death, Annette’s daughter and personal representative, Leonie Rosenstiel, filed a lawsuit against the company and its founder, Nancy Oriola, alleging negligence and mismanagement of her mother’s assets. But her court complaint, the defendants’ response and more than 20 other documents filed by the parties in the civil negligence case are under seal on the order of a state district judge in Albuquerque.
Leonie Rosenstiel has tried to open up her own case, and on Wednesday the Albuquerque Journal filed a motion seeking to unseal the records, arguing that information about “alleged misbehavior of guardians or conservators should be made public because it is plainly a matter of public concern.”
“Affording blanket protection to information related to Defendants’ alleged mismanagement of a conservatorship or guardianship, when mismanagement by court-appointed guardians or conservators is a critical matter of public concern, offends the notion of the First Amendment right of access to the courts,” the newspaper argued in its motion.
A handful of records that aren’t sealed offer a glimpse into the allegations, which in essence contend that Decades mismanaged the Rosenstiel assets and abused its position as court-appointed guardian and conservator.
One document alleges breach of fiduciary duty, negligent handling of assets, negligence in the administration of the guardianship and conservatorship by a commercial entity and violation of the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act. An accounting is also requested.
Leonie Rosenstiel has tried to have the files in her own lawsuit opened.
Based on what is known, the Journal argues in its motion, that the only interest being protected is the defendants’ interest in avoiding disclosure of Rosenstiel’s allegations against them.
None of the attorneys in Rosenstiel’s civil lawsuit responded to Journal requests for comment on Wednesday, but the lawyer for Decades said his client would oppose the Journal’s efforts to unseal the case.
State law makes virtually all information in a guardianship/conservatorship case confidential, except for the court docket sheet, the kind of guardianship and the name of the allegedly incapacitated person for whom a guardian was appointed.
But this isn’t the guardianship case of Annette Rosenstiel; rather, it is a claim of negligence against the guardian/conservator that was filed after the ward had died. District Judge Alan Malott, siding with Decades and against Rosentiel, ruled earlier that the case would remain sealed because it was related to a guardianship matter.
Full control
A court-appointed guardian is responsible for the day-to-day life decisions of a ward, while a conservator manages the financial affairs of a ward. In some cases, the guardian and conservator are one and the same.
Most guardians appointed in New Mexico are family members of the incapacitated person, but in some cases, judges decide a nonrelative should be appointed.
Decades, which has operated since 2001, is among the for-profit corporate companies in the state providing such services.
Leonie Rosenstiel originally initiated the guardian/conservator proceeding in 2003, according to court records, but, because of the secrecy, it isn’t known whether she sought to be her mother’s guardian or why the court appointed Decades LLC.
Records in the negligence case indicate there was a court-ordered forensic audit into some of Decades’ actions as Annette Rosenstiel’s guardian and conservator, although the results are secret.
The lawsuit was initially filed under seal. Rosenstiel subsequently asked for the court records to be unsealed, while the defendants contended they should be automatically kept from the public because they related to guardianship/conservatorship matters. Her lawyer also asked to be able to use portions of the guardianship case in the civil lawsuit.
“The former ward has passed away, and accordingly will suffer no embarrassment if the Sealed Records are unsealed,” Rosenstiel’s attorney, David A. Garcia, argued in a motion filed in 2013.
“Courts seal their records to protect the ward, not to protect the interests of private corporate guardians and conservators.
“Parties to litigation in civil cases would often prefer that as many particulars of the litigation as possible be hidden from the public,” he wrote. “But that isn’t the way court records are handled in the vast majority of cases like the one at bar.”
Decades, in arguing to keep the case sealed, said Annette Rosenstiel’s privacy interests didn’t end simply because she died.
The Journal’s motion to unseal the records in the negligence case, filed by attorney Matt Hoyt, said Malott appeared to interpret state law as automatically requiring that almost all information and documentation related to a guardianship and or/conservatorship proceeding be kept confidential – even though the civil negligence case is not itself such a proceeding.
“There was also no “separate consideration of reasons why the records in this (civil negligence) lawsuit should be sealed,” the Journal said.
The Journal also argued in its motion that the judge has a duty to seal only portions of the records rather than entire documents.
Malott, in his earlier denial of Garcia’s request to unseal the documents, said it would be “overly burdensome and expensive for the parties, and markedly inefficient for the Court, to determine confidentiality of each separate document or item of information as this matter is developed for trial.”
So the judge ordered the sealing of “any pleadings” related to the guardianship/conservatorship proceeding. Actual trial testimony and exhibits would be publicly available if and when the case goes to trial. A trial date is set for later this year.
Full Article & Source:
Journal seeks to open guardian mismanagement lawsuit
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

