Interned Japanese Canadians receive degrees
University recognises students of Japanese origin forced to give up studies during World War II.
Last Modified: 31 May 2012 16:41
During World War II, Canada held thousands of people of Japanese origin in internment camps. Some of them were students who never had the chance to finish their studies.
Seventy years later, the University of British Columbia (UBC) is trying to right what is now seen as a historic wrong.
Al Jazeera's Daniel Lak reports from Vancouver.
http://www.aljazeera.com/video/americas/2012/05/2012531114940319535.html
KawamotoDragon.com
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Hung jury in trial of woman accused of bilking elderly Boulder man
Hung jury in trial of woman accused of bilking elderly Boulder man
By Joe Rubino Camera Staff Writerdailycamera.com
Posted: 05/24/2012 09:19:33 PM MDT
Julianna Rigby A jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict Thursday in the trial of a woman accused of trying to swindle an elderly Boulder man into leaving much of his nearly $1 million estate to her.
A 12-person jury spent seven hours deliberating the case against Julianna Rigby, 50, of Fort Collins. Rigby was facing one count of attempted theft after prosecutors say she befriended retired University of Colorado professor Louis Hall and tried to manipulate him into changing his will before he died in 2011 at the age of 93.
The jury voted 9-2 in favor of conviction, with one undecided juror. The result was a mistrial.
The Boulder County District Attorney's Office plans to retry the case, and a status hearing for the next trial is already scheduled for 8:15 a.m. June 8, prosecutor Jane Walsh said.
"We feel that (prosecuting) this type of exploitation of the elderly is a priority," Walsh said.
Rigby's attorney, Jason Cuerdon, argued during the trial that Rigby never took advantage of Hall or manipulated him but was merely trying to help a man whom she cared for deeply.
Rigby first met Hall while she was working as a receptionist at a Boulder ophthalmologist's office in 2007. She reconnected with him in 2010 -- as he was dying of bone cancer -- at first having breakfast with him and taking him to doctor's appointments.
Eventually she moved into his house on Sioux Drive and, prosecutors say, began trying to turn him away from his family and financial advisers. In December 2010, two months after Rigby moved in with him, Hall changed his will, giving much of his estate to "my friend Julianna Rigby," instead of one of his nieces as his original will outlined.
A probate and estate planning attorney obtained a protection order keeping Rigby away from Hall, and she was later removed from the will.
According to court documents, Hall's home was worth between $400,000 and $450,000, and he had between $520,000 and $570,000 in various bank accounts and investments.
Rigby's attorney said the prosecution's allegations that she pressured Hall to fire his attorney and conservator were false, and that Hall proposed it himself because of the rates they were charging. He also pointed out that in the end, Rigby did not receive any money from Hall's estate.
Coloradodaily.com
http://www.coloradodaily.com/news/ci_20706399/hung-jury-trial-woman-accused-bilking-elderly-boulder#axzz1wAdsqXju
By Joe Rubino Camera Staff Writerdailycamera.com
Posted: 05/24/2012 09:19:33 PM MDT
Julianna Rigby A jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict Thursday in the trial of a woman accused of trying to swindle an elderly Boulder man into leaving much of his nearly $1 million estate to her.
A 12-person jury spent seven hours deliberating the case against Julianna Rigby, 50, of Fort Collins. Rigby was facing one count of attempted theft after prosecutors say she befriended retired University of Colorado professor Louis Hall and tried to manipulate him into changing his will before he died in 2011 at the age of 93.
The jury voted 9-2 in favor of conviction, with one undecided juror. The result was a mistrial.
The Boulder County District Attorney's Office plans to retry the case, and a status hearing for the next trial is already scheduled for 8:15 a.m. June 8, prosecutor Jane Walsh said.
"We feel that (prosecuting) this type of exploitation of the elderly is a priority," Walsh said.
Rigby's attorney, Jason Cuerdon, argued during the trial that Rigby never took advantage of Hall or manipulated him but was merely trying to help a man whom she cared for deeply.
Rigby first met Hall while she was working as a receptionist at a Boulder ophthalmologist's office in 2007. She reconnected with him in 2010 -- as he was dying of bone cancer -- at first having breakfast with him and taking him to doctor's appointments.
Eventually she moved into his house on Sioux Drive and, prosecutors say, began trying to turn him away from his family and financial advisers. In December 2010, two months after Rigby moved in with him, Hall changed his will, giving much of his estate to "my friend Julianna Rigby," instead of one of his nieces as his original will outlined.
A probate and estate planning attorney obtained a protection order keeping Rigby away from Hall, and she was later removed from the will.
According to court documents, Hall's home was worth between $400,000 and $450,000, and he had between $520,000 and $570,000 in various bank accounts and investments.
Rigby's attorney said the prosecution's allegations that she pressured Hall to fire his attorney and conservator were false, and that Hall proposed it himself because of the rates they were charging. He also pointed out that in the end, Rigby did not receive any money from Hall's estate.
Coloradodaily.com
http://www.coloradodaily.com/news/ci_20706399/hung-jury-trial-woman-accused-bilking-elderly-boulder#axzz1wAdsqXju
Judge orders Rep. Aldridge to pay aunt for estate losses
Judge orders Rep. Aldridge to pay aunt for estate losses
by Patsy R. Brumfield / Daily Journal Djournal.Com
05.23.12 - 12:18 pm
TUPELO – State Rep. Brian Aldridge owes $218,355 to his aunt, whose estate was plundered by Brian’s father while he had her power of attorney.
Chancellor Michael Malski today ordered Brian to pay Florence Aldridge the money because, the judge said, even though Brian was not personally liable for the more than $522,000 she lost to Louis Aldridge, Brian was legally responsible for whatever happened through the charity through which Louis funneled some of her money.
Brian is chief executive officer of Touched By An Angel Ministries Inc., which operates a camp for disabled children and adults near Tupelo. His father was once the charity’s chief financial officer.
“Brian breached his duty as an officer of Touched By An Angel Ministries Inc. and is individually liable to Florence,” Malski wrote in ordering the total judgment amended.
Brian’s attorney, T.K. Moffett of Tupelo, could not be reached for comment immediately after the order was filed.
Florence, a 67-year-old Tupelo piano teacher, sued Brian, Louis and Louis’ wife Janice a few years ago after she discovered that her estate she’d entrusted to Louis, her brother-in-law, was gone.
Last December, Malski ordered Louis and Janice to repay Florence $552,000 and the charity Touched By An Angel Ministries Inc. to repay her $140,100 which came from Florence's estate.
However, the judge dismissed Brian from any financial damages, saying that while the legislator should have known about the source of the charity's finances as its chief executive officer, he had no legal obligations to his aunt.
Today’s ruling answers Florence's attorneys, Rhett and Frank Russell of Tupelo, who came back to court to return Brian to the damages judgment.
Malski’s total comes from $140,100 Louis deposited into the charity from Florence’s estate, plus another $78,355 Louis flowed into the charity from his legally defunct for-profit business, TBAAM Enterprises Inc. It wasn’t immediately clear why the total wasn’t $218,455.
In their eight-page request to the court, the Russells insisted that Mississippi law deems participants in a defunct corporate entity liable for its debts and claims.
Florence also asked for Brian's liability when she claimed he "fraudulently and unlawfully" benefited from her estate as the charity's CEO.
• Read Thursday’s Daily Journal for more information.
http://djournal.com/view/full_story/18698667/article-Judge-orders-Rep--Aldridge-to-pay-aunt-for-estate-losses?instance=popular
Replacing Griffith with Simeck Maintains Status Quo
Replacing Griffith with Simeck Maintains Status Quo
Posted on May 30, 2012 at 5:58 am Email Print 1 Comment
‹ Back to Blog Post new Embed
Share
Michael Simeck context
Photos (1) Photos Credit LFHS Communications
Upload Photos and Videos
Search Patch Archive
http://lakeforest.patch.com/blog_posts/replacing-griffith-with-simeck-maintains-status-quo/media_attachments/edit?upload_started=1338407314asset[new_asset_attachment_attributes][to_id]120246asset[new_asset_attachment_attributes][to_type]BlogPostblog_post[new_asset_attachment_attributes][user_id]new_asset_attachment_attributes
With the official retirement of Lake Forest District 67 and 115 Superintendent Dr. Harry Griffith shortly approaching on June 30, there has been much refection as well as controversy over his tenure of overseeing Lake Forest schools since he was hired by Lake Forest District 67 from a school district in Texas to become superintendent in 1994.
It was in 2004 when Griffith took on the additional role of superintendent of District 115 in a "shared services" arrangement.
Recently, residents of Lake Bluff and Lake Forest had the opportunity to attend a Community Retirement Reception honoring Dr. Griffith.
Whether all the accolades being bestowed upon Griffith as he retires are merited is akin to water over a dam. Argument to the contrary would be non-productive as Griffith's tenure as superintendent of District 67 and 115 is done, finished.
One thing that cannot be denied, however, is that Superintendent Griffith's shared superintendency compensation as he completes the current 2011-2012 school year has mushroomed into the highest paid superintendent in Illinois, even exceeding that of our governor.
In addition, Dr. Griffith has a lucrative retirement package to carry him into his sunset years. He will collect over $300,000 every year from the Teacher Retirement System in Illinois with a guaranteed increase of 3 percent per year every year thereafter.
Dr. Griffith also has a lavish annuity of hundreds of thousands of dollars that the school district has purchased for him over the years to augment his retirement income. Information received from a FOIA request.
Attention must now be directed to Michael Simeck, whose hire was announced on Feb. 13 at a Lake Forest School District 67 Board of Education meeting to assume the shared superintendency position starting July 1.
Not even the presentation by District 67 board member Rich Schuler, in which he detailed the search process used from start to finish in the selection of Simeck, could quell concerns which still linger on.
My concerns are not with the Executive Search Firm, but with the community input and feedback which took place during the two-year search period. Was the community input and feedback really taken seriously in the selection of Simeck or was it just all for show?
After reading numerous media accounts of Simeck’s hire, curiosity got the best of me. All of the accounts contained little more than what was released to the press. I wanted to know more about Simeck other than his glowing bio and statements presented at the meeting and related to the media.
Research led me to an article by Jack Lessenberry published on March 11, 2011, “Education Cuts Based on a Hunch.” In the Lessenberry’s article, Simeck expressed deep concerns that Michigan’s governor, Rick Snyder, with his proposed fiscal year 2012 budget, would result in deep cuts to education and a sudden budget deficit of $4.9 million in his district.
What Simeck feared did come to pass. The 2012 budget signed by Michigan Gov. Snyder on June 21, 2011, called for $1.5 billion in budget cuts in fiscal year 2012 with a two percent cut in education.
Research likewise located a 2010 media report which pointed to a lack of satisfaction Simeck was experiencing from his Berkley shared superintendent position. Simeck's displeasure had to do with his attempt to get passed a huge bond issue during a time when a financial recession was the norm all over this nation.
At a monthly meeting of the Berkley school board, citizens took advantage of the public comment period to vent their displeasure with a ballot proposal which was ultimately voted down. The proposal was to have authorized the board to issue bonds totaling approximately $167 million, to be paid for with the proceeds of an additional $4.27 million tax levy.
No wonder Simeck was reported as being ecstatic when he was selected out of 99 other candidates to assume the shared superintendency of Lake Forest Districts 67 and 115. There was a highschool which Simeck could only dream about.
Michael Simeck was accused of handpicking members of a bond committee who would be willing to work as advocates instead of finding community members. Simeck denied this charge.
In the aftermath of the dust-up, Simeck started to look for another position.
One job position Simeck did apply for in 2010 was superintendent at Bloomfield Hills Schools in Michigan. The search narrowed down to two candidates, Robert Glass and Simeck. In interviews over two days (one candidate per day) and arranged by the search firm, School Exec Connect, the Bloomfield Hills Schools in Michigan selected Glass over Simeck.
Regarding Bloomfield Hills Schools in Michigan, there was an opportunity for community members to meet Glass and Simeck and to ask them questions. Such an opportunity was not afforded community members in Lake Forest/Lake Bluff before Simeck was hired.
It was refreshing that two District 67 board members did express their misgivings by voting “no” on approving Simeck’s three-year contract, Laurie Rose and Bill Anderson.
Laurie Rose questioned why Simeck in his three-year contract should start out with a base salary of $220,000, augmented by an additional $30,000 for managing two districts, with further perks and additional benefits forthcoming, to oversee 4,000 students with the aid of four Assistant Superintendents and six directors. On the other hand, the NYC Chancellor of Schools oversees 1.1 million students and earns $123,000.
As Simeck did oversee a shared superintendent position in the Michigan Berkley Schools, it is fair to question why the need to give him an extra $30,000 to assume the same shared position in the Lake Forest School System?
Does Simeck really need $500 per month in auto reimbursement? Will Simeck be given the car he is assigned to tool around town, paid for by the Lake Forest School Districts, as will be the case with Griffith upon his June 30 retirement? What happened to the gold watch? (Simeck's contract by Lake Forest School District 67 and 115 is 20 pages. Item 24 reads in part: Automobile/Travel Expenses. "The Board shall provde the Superintendent with an automobikle expense reimbursement stipend of FIVE HUNDRED AND NO/L00 ($500.000) dollars per month for travel within the Schoool District and the Chicago metropolitan area.")
In response to a FOIA request dated Feb. 28 from the Berkley Schools, Simeck's base salary when hired in 2007 was $150,000; additional compensation of $2,500 annually was to be added when he earned his doctorate from an accredited institution (Simeck has yet to earn his degree.); and after the first payroll period occurring in February of each year, Berkley Schools contributed $14,000 on Simeck's behalf to a tax sheltered annuity plan chosen by Simeck and approved by the board.
The fringe benefits Simeck enjoyed while employed in Michigan are similar to those that will be provided in his new positions in the Lake Forest school system. The Berkley Schools provided Simeck with hospitalization, dental and long term disability insurance and a term life insurance policy with a death benefit of three times his annual salary.
Berkley assumed the full cost of Simeck's contributions to the Michigan Public School Employees Retirement System. Lake Forest taxpayers will likewise assume Simeck's contributions to the Teachers Retirement System here in Illinois.
With Simeck's annual salary at $250,000 to start, at age 50 he will have plenty of time to perhaps even top the ending compensation of Griffith; that is, unless Lake Forest and Lake Bluff citizens and tax payers unite to stop the yearly increases of salaries which are a given to teachers and those in supervisory positions.
On the average teacher salaries have increased by more than seven percent per year since 2000. In Lake Forest District 67, 35 teachers make in excess of $100,000 a year. In Lake Forest District 115, 92 teachers are members of the $100,000 plus club and many more make $90,000 to $100,000.
Although opinions may vary about the hiring of Simeck, he certainly deserves watching and observing as he assumes the shared superintendent position at Lake Forest Districts 67 and 115 on July 1.
http://lakeforest.patch.com/blog_posts/replacing-griffith-with-simeck-maintains-status-quo
Posted on May 30, 2012 at 5:58 am Email Print 1 Comment
‹ Back to Blog Post new Embed
Share
Michael Simeck context
Photos (1) Photos Credit LFHS Communications
Upload Photos and Videos
Search Patch Archive
http://lakeforest.patch.com/blog_posts/replacing-griffith-with-simeck-maintains-status-quo/media_attachments/edit?upload_started=1338407314asset[new_asset_attachment_attributes][to_id]120246asset[new_asset_attachment_attributes][to_type]BlogPostblog_post[new_asset_attachment_attributes][user_id]new_asset_attachment_attributes
With the official retirement of Lake Forest District 67 and 115 Superintendent Dr. Harry Griffith shortly approaching on June 30, there has been much refection as well as controversy over his tenure of overseeing Lake Forest schools since he was hired by Lake Forest District 67 from a school district in Texas to become superintendent in 1994.
It was in 2004 when Griffith took on the additional role of superintendent of District 115 in a "shared services" arrangement.
Recently, residents of Lake Bluff and Lake Forest had the opportunity to attend a Community Retirement Reception honoring Dr. Griffith.
Whether all the accolades being bestowed upon Griffith as he retires are merited is akin to water over a dam. Argument to the contrary would be non-productive as Griffith's tenure as superintendent of District 67 and 115 is done, finished.
One thing that cannot be denied, however, is that Superintendent Griffith's shared superintendency compensation as he completes the current 2011-2012 school year has mushroomed into the highest paid superintendent in Illinois, even exceeding that of our governor.
In addition, Dr. Griffith has a lucrative retirement package to carry him into his sunset years. He will collect over $300,000 every year from the Teacher Retirement System in Illinois with a guaranteed increase of 3 percent per year every year thereafter.
Dr. Griffith also has a lavish annuity of hundreds of thousands of dollars that the school district has purchased for him over the years to augment his retirement income. Information received from a FOIA request.
Attention must now be directed to Michael Simeck, whose hire was announced on Feb. 13 at a Lake Forest School District 67 Board of Education meeting to assume the shared superintendency position starting July 1.
Not even the presentation by District 67 board member Rich Schuler, in which he detailed the search process used from start to finish in the selection of Simeck, could quell concerns which still linger on.
My concerns are not with the Executive Search Firm, but with the community input and feedback which took place during the two-year search period. Was the community input and feedback really taken seriously in the selection of Simeck or was it just all for show?
After reading numerous media accounts of Simeck’s hire, curiosity got the best of me. All of the accounts contained little more than what was released to the press. I wanted to know more about Simeck other than his glowing bio and statements presented at the meeting and related to the media.
Research led me to an article by Jack Lessenberry published on March 11, 2011, “Education Cuts Based on a Hunch.” In the Lessenberry’s article, Simeck expressed deep concerns that Michigan’s governor, Rick Snyder, with his proposed fiscal year 2012 budget, would result in deep cuts to education and a sudden budget deficit of $4.9 million in his district.
What Simeck feared did come to pass. The 2012 budget signed by Michigan Gov. Snyder on June 21, 2011, called for $1.5 billion in budget cuts in fiscal year 2012 with a two percent cut in education.
Research likewise located a 2010 media report which pointed to a lack of satisfaction Simeck was experiencing from his Berkley shared superintendent position. Simeck's displeasure had to do with his attempt to get passed a huge bond issue during a time when a financial recession was the norm all over this nation.
At a monthly meeting of the Berkley school board, citizens took advantage of the public comment period to vent their displeasure with a ballot proposal which was ultimately voted down. The proposal was to have authorized the board to issue bonds totaling approximately $167 million, to be paid for with the proceeds of an additional $4.27 million tax levy.
No wonder Simeck was reported as being ecstatic when he was selected out of 99 other candidates to assume the shared superintendency of Lake Forest Districts 67 and 115. There was a highschool which Simeck could only dream about.
Michael Simeck was accused of handpicking members of a bond committee who would be willing to work as advocates instead of finding community members. Simeck denied this charge.
In the aftermath of the dust-up, Simeck started to look for another position.
One job position Simeck did apply for in 2010 was superintendent at Bloomfield Hills Schools in Michigan. The search narrowed down to two candidates, Robert Glass and Simeck. In interviews over two days (one candidate per day) and arranged by the search firm, School Exec Connect, the Bloomfield Hills Schools in Michigan selected Glass over Simeck.
Regarding Bloomfield Hills Schools in Michigan, there was an opportunity for community members to meet Glass and Simeck and to ask them questions. Such an opportunity was not afforded community members in Lake Forest/Lake Bluff before Simeck was hired.
It was refreshing that two District 67 board members did express their misgivings by voting “no” on approving Simeck’s three-year contract, Laurie Rose and Bill Anderson.
Laurie Rose questioned why Simeck in his three-year contract should start out with a base salary of $220,000, augmented by an additional $30,000 for managing two districts, with further perks and additional benefits forthcoming, to oversee 4,000 students with the aid of four Assistant Superintendents and six directors. On the other hand, the NYC Chancellor of Schools oversees 1.1 million students and earns $123,000.
As Simeck did oversee a shared superintendent position in the Michigan Berkley Schools, it is fair to question why the need to give him an extra $30,000 to assume the same shared position in the Lake Forest School System?
Does Simeck really need $500 per month in auto reimbursement? Will Simeck be given the car he is assigned to tool around town, paid for by the Lake Forest School Districts, as will be the case with Griffith upon his June 30 retirement? What happened to the gold watch? (Simeck's contract by Lake Forest School District 67 and 115 is 20 pages. Item 24 reads in part: Automobile/Travel Expenses. "The Board shall provde the Superintendent with an automobikle expense reimbursement stipend of FIVE HUNDRED AND NO/L00 ($500.000) dollars per month for travel within the Schoool District and the Chicago metropolitan area.")
In response to a FOIA request dated Feb. 28 from the Berkley Schools, Simeck's base salary when hired in 2007 was $150,000; additional compensation of $2,500 annually was to be added when he earned his doctorate from an accredited institution (Simeck has yet to earn his degree.); and after the first payroll period occurring in February of each year, Berkley Schools contributed $14,000 on Simeck's behalf to a tax sheltered annuity plan chosen by Simeck and approved by the board.
The fringe benefits Simeck enjoyed while employed in Michigan are similar to those that will be provided in his new positions in the Lake Forest school system. The Berkley Schools provided Simeck with hospitalization, dental and long term disability insurance and a term life insurance policy with a death benefit of three times his annual salary.
Berkley assumed the full cost of Simeck's contributions to the Michigan Public School Employees Retirement System. Lake Forest taxpayers will likewise assume Simeck's contributions to the Teachers Retirement System here in Illinois.
With Simeck's annual salary at $250,000 to start, at age 50 he will have plenty of time to perhaps even top the ending compensation of Griffith; that is, unless Lake Forest and Lake Bluff citizens and tax payers unite to stop the yearly increases of salaries which are a given to teachers and those in supervisory positions.
On the average teacher salaries have increased by more than seven percent per year since 2000. In Lake Forest District 67, 35 teachers make in excess of $100,000 a year. In Lake Forest District 115, 92 teachers are members of the $100,000 plus club and many more make $90,000 to $100,000.
Although opinions may vary about the hiring of Simeck, he certainly deserves watching and observing as he assumes the shared superintendent position at Lake Forest Districts 67 and 115 on July 1.
http://lakeforest.patch.com/blog_posts/replacing-griffith-with-simeck-maintains-status-quo
The death of the newspaper?
The death of the newspaper?
As more Americans go online to consume their news, we ask if we are witnessing the death of the newspaper industry.
Inside Story Americas Last Modified: 30 May 2012 14:06
New Orleans will soon become the largest US city without a daily newspaper. And as many other titles struggle in the digital age, we ask: How will traditional newspapers survive?
"Ultimately, at any given newspaper, there's only five to 10 per cent of the readers who really care if the paper lives or dies - for whom it's not just a convenience ... and that core I think is increasingly going to be the people propping those newsrooms up from the customers' side."
- Clay Shirky, a new media expert at New York University
The Times Picayune played a crucial role in helping New Orleans and its people in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina - earning it the Pulitzer Prize for journalism. But now, after more than 175 years, the daily has announced that it is slashing its print publications from seven to three days a week.
The reason behind the cutback is the continuing digital revolution in the way news is consumed - with more and more people preferring to pick and choose stories from a variety of online sources.
In the face of this, traditional news outlets have been struggling to find the perfect online business model, with many of us too used to getting our news for free.
But the Times Picayune joins hundreds of others in the US who have closed down or drastically cut operations since the beginning of 2009.
Among those forced out of print are the Rocky Mountain News in Denver and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. The Christian Science Monitor has shifted online, with only a weekly print edition now.
Others, such as Detroit's two newspapers, have slashed home delivery to three days a week, while the San Francisco Chronicle narrowly avoided closure after employees made steep concessions.
"Most newspapers are still in business. They were incredibly profitable throughout the 90s and throughout much of the first half of this century as well .... The newspaper business is about half the size it was just five years ago. There is no question that there is trouble but we are falling from such a tremendous height that we still haven't hit the ground yet."
- Paul Farhi, a media reporter at the Washington Post
Some newspaper companies, such as the Tribune Company, the Minneapolis Star Tribune and Freedom Communications, have filed for bankruptcy protection.
But then there is the American billionaire entrepreneur Warren Buffet, who appears to still have faith in print journalism and just last week bought more than 60 newspapers.
"We must rethink the industry's initial response to the internet," Buffet said. "The original instinct of newspapers then was to offer free in digital form what they were charging for in print. This is an unsustainable model."
Buffett went on to describe his future purchasing plans: "We will favour towns and cities with a strong sense of community. If a citizenry cares little about its community, it will eventually care little about its newspaper ... we will focus on small and mid-sized papers in long-established communities."
But what has been lost in print has been gained online. Newspapers across the US have gained readers in the past few months as more have purchased digital subscriptions. Digital circulation now accounts for more than 14 per cent of overall circulation - up from 8.6 per cent in March 2011.
The New York Times reported a 73 per cent gain in circulation thanks to digital gains after establishing an online paywall - in fact, it now has more digital subscribers than print subscribers on weekdays.
So, is it premature to say that we are witnessing the death of the newspaper industry? And where should it go from here?
Inside Story Americas, with presenter Anand Naidoo, discusses with guests: Paul Farhi, a media reporter for the Washington Post; Andrea Stone, the senior national correspondent for the Huffington Post, a leading online newspaper; and Clay Shirky, a professor and new media expert at New York University.
THE US NEWSPAPER INDUSTRY:
•The internet surpassed newspapers as the main news source in 2010
•Print ads account for 86% of the newspaper industry's revenue
•Daily newspapers still have about 45 million paying customers in the US
•Vocus report: 152 newspapers stopped operating in 2011
•State of the Media report: 151 newspapers stopped operating in 2010
•Thousands of journalists have been laid-off as newspapers close around the US
•Print advertising revenue fell by $2.1bn in 2011
•Half of all smartphone owners say they use their devices for news
•The newspaper industry is worth about $34bn yearly - down from $59bn in 2000
•Stock prices for newspapers fell by about 25% in 2011
•Digital circulation now accounts for 14% of newspaper circulation
•Weekday digital circulation has grown by nearly 62%
•Total online ad spending grew 23% in 2011, to $32bn
•Digital ads now make up at least 20% of total US advertising
http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestoryamericas/2012/05/2012530103958765192.html
As more Americans go online to consume their news, we ask if we are witnessing the death of the newspaper industry.
Inside Story Americas Last Modified: 30 May 2012 14:06
New Orleans will soon become the largest US city without a daily newspaper. And as many other titles struggle in the digital age, we ask: How will traditional newspapers survive?
"Ultimately, at any given newspaper, there's only five to 10 per cent of the readers who really care if the paper lives or dies - for whom it's not just a convenience ... and that core I think is increasingly going to be the people propping those newsrooms up from the customers' side."
- Clay Shirky, a new media expert at New York University
The Times Picayune played a crucial role in helping New Orleans and its people in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina - earning it the Pulitzer Prize for journalism. But now, after more than 175 years, the daily has announced that it is slashing its print publications from seven to three days a week.
The reason behind the cutback is the continuing digital revolution in the way news is consumed - with more and more people preferring to pick and choose stories from a variety of online sources.
In the face of this, traditional news outlets have been struggling to find the perfect online business model, with many of us too used to getting our news for free.
But the Times Picayune joins hundreds of others in the US who have closed down or drastically cut operations since the beginning of 2009.
Among those forced out of print are the Rocky Mountain News in Denver and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. The Christian Science Monitor has shifted online, with only a weekly print edition now.
Others, such as Detroit's two newspapers, have slashed home delivery to three days a week, while the San Francisco Chronicle narrowly avoided closure after employees made steep concessions.
"Most newspapers are still in business. They were incredibly profitable throughout the 90s and throughout much of the first half of this century as well .... The newspaper business is about half the size it was just five years ago. There is no question that there is trouble but we are falling from such a tremendous height that we still haven't hit the ground yet."
- Paul Farhi, a media reporter at the Washington Post
Some newspaper companies, such as the Tribune Company, the Minneapolis Star Tribune and Freedom Communications, have filed for bankruptcy protection.
But then there is the American billionaire entrepreneur Warren Buffet, who appears to still have faith in print journalism and just last week bought more than 60 newspapers.
"We must rethink the industry's initial response to the internet," Buffet said. "The original instinct of newspapers then was to offer free in digital form what they were charging for in print. This is an unsustainable model."
Buffett went on to describe his future purchasing plans: "We will favour towns and cities with a strong sense of community. If a citizenry cares little about its community, it will eventually care little about its newspaper ... we will focus on small and mid-sized papers in long-established communities."
But what has been lost in print has been gained online. Newspapers across the US have gained readers in the past few months as more have purchased digital subscriptions. Digital circulation now accounts for more than 14 per cent of overall circulation - up from 8.6 per cent in March 2011.
The New York Times reported a 73 per cent gain in circulation thanks to digital gains after establishing an online paywall - in fact, it now has more digital subscribers than print subscribers on weekdays.
So, is it premature to say that we are witnessing the death of the newspaper industry? And where should it go from here?
Inside Story Americas, with presenter Anand Naidoo, discusses with guests: Paul Farhi, a media reporter for the Washington Post; Andrea Stone, the senior national correspondent for the Huffington Post, a leading online newspaper; and Clay Shirky, a professor and new media expert at New York University.
THE US NEWSPAPER INDUSTRY:
•The internet surpassed newspapers as the main news source in 2010
•Print ads account for 86% of the newspaper industry's revenue
•Daily newspapers still have about 45 million paying customers in the US
•Vocus report: 152 newspapers stopped operating in 2011
•State of the Media report: 151 newspapers stopped operating in 2010
•Thousands of journalists have been laid-off as newspapers close around the US
•Print advertising revenue fell by $2.1bn in 2011
•Half of all smartphone owners say they use their devices for news
•The newspaper industry is worth about $34bn yearly - down from $59bn in 2000
•Stock prices for newspapers fell by about 25% in 2011
•Digital circulation now accounts for 14% of newspaper circulation
•Weekday digital circulation has grown by nearly 62%
•Total online ad spending grew 23% in 2011, to $32bn
•Digital ads now make up at least 20% of total US advertising
http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestoryamericas/2012/05/2012530103958765192.html
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Sister allegedly exploits sick brother
Sister allegedly exploits sick brother
Posted: May 16, 2012 7:57 PM CDT
Updated: May 16, 2012 7:57 PM CDT
By Sarah Eisenmenger - email
LOUISVILLE, KY (WAVE) – An employee of the Jefferson County Clerk's Office is facing charges accused of exploiting her brother's health condition so she could dip into his finances.
According to the arrest warrant, 40-year-old Jennifer Reardon was awarded guardianship of her brother from August 2009 to November 2011. Police said she was put in charge of her brother and his finances due to his numerous health issues.
The money was supposed to benefit her brother, but instead investigators said she spent $17,000 on other things.
Reardon is being charged with exploiting an adult.
http://www.wave3.com/story/18441911/sister-alledgely-explots-sick-brother
Posted: May 16, 2012 7:57 PM CDT
Updated: May 16, 2012 7:57 PM CDT
By Sarah Eisenmenger - email
LOUISVILLE, KY (WAVE) – An employee of the Jefferson County Clerk's Office is facing charges accused of exploiting her brother's health condition so she could dip into his finances.
According to the arrest warrant, 40-year-old Jennifer Reardon was awarded guardianship of her brother from August 2009 to November 2011. Police said she was put in charge of her brother and his finances due to his numerous health issues.
The money was supposed to benefit her brother, but instead investigators said she spent $17,000 on other things.
Reardon is being charged with exploiting an adult.
http://www.wave3.com/story/18441911/sister-alledgely-explots-sick-brother
Sunday, May 27, 2012
Pismo Beach lawyer gets 5 years of probation for embezzling $275,000
Published: 4:42 pm Monday, May. 21, 2012
Updated: 5:11 pm Monday, May. 21, 2012
Pismo Beach lawyer gets 5 years of probation for embezzling $275,000
William Peter TerhuneBy Nick Wilson
nwilson@thetribunenews.com
Nick Wilson The Tribune
Correction: William Terhune received a sentence of five years of probation, not five years in prison.
A South County lawyer was sentenced to five years' probation and credit for 213 days of time served in County Jail today after pleading no contest to felony grand theft by embezzlement.
Similar stories:
Attorney pleads no contest to theft
Attorney pleads no contest to theft A Pismo Beach lawyer accused of taking money from a client has pleaded no contest to felony grand theft by embezzlement. William Peter Terhune, 57, was arrested in July on suspicion of transferring about $275,000 to his business account from the estate of Junko S. Hensling, which he had been administrating, according to a report filed by the San Luis Obispo Police Department. Hensling, a native of Japan, was a resident of Los Osos at the time of her death in December 2007, according to a police report. She willed her estate to a sole beneficiary, Momoko Sasaki of Japan.
Pismo Beach lawyer pleads no contest to embezzling $275,000 from client
Pismo Beach lawyer pleads no contest to embezzling $275,000 from client William Peter Terhune, 57, a Pismo Beach lawyer accused of taking money from a client, pleaded no contest Thursday to felony grand theft by embezzlement.
Terhune transferred about $275,000 to his business account from the estate of Junko S. Hensling, which he'd been administering, according to a report filed by the San Luis Obispo Police Department.
Hensling, a native of Japan, was a resident of Los Osos at the time of her death in December 2007, according to a police report. She willed her estate to a sole beneficiary, Momoko Sasaki of Japan.
Terhune has a restitution hearing scheduled for Dec. 17 at 8:30 a.m.
Read more here: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2012/05/21/2075887/william-terhune-lawyer-grand-theft.html#storylink=cpy
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2012/05/21/2075887/william-terhune-lawyer-grand-theft.html
Editor's note: To Any-Mouse commenter.(a military expression) If this Shark robbed a bank of $275,00, he would be facing 20 -30 years in the pen. How can a lawyer get away with the same thievery and receive only 5 years probation? Why is this article considered drivel and demeaning to our country? Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Updated: 5:11 pm Monday, May. 21, 2012
Pismo Beach lawyer gets 5 years of probation for embezzling $275,000
William Peter TerhuneBy Nick Wilson
nwilson@thetribunenews.com
Nick Wilson The Tribune
Correction: William Terhune received a sentence of five years of probation, not five years in prison.
A South County lawyer was sentenced to five years' probation and credit for 213 days of time served in County Jail today after pleading no contest to felony grand theft by embezzlement.
Similar stories:
Attorney pleads no contest to theft
Attorney pleads no contest to theft A Pismo Beach lawyer accused of taking money from a client has pleaded no contest to felony grand theft by embezzlement. William Peter Terhune, 57, was arrested in July on suspicion of transferring about $275,000 to his business account from the estate of Junko S. Hensling, which he had been administrating, according to a report filed by the San Luis Obispo Police Department. Hensling, a native of Japan, was a resident of Los Osos at the time of her death in December 2007, according to a police report. She willed her estate to a sole beneficiary, Momoko Sasaki of Japan.
Pismo Beach lawyer pleads no contest to embezzling $275,000 from client
Pismo Beach lawyer pleads no contest to embezzling $275,000 from client William Peter Terhune, 57, a Pismo Beach lawyer accused of taking money from a client, pleaded no contest Thursday to felony grand theft by embezzlement.
Terhune transferred about $275,000 to his business account from the estate of Junko S. Hensling, which he'd been administering, according to a report filed by the San Luis Obispo Police Department.
Hensling, a native of Japan, was a resident of Los Osos at the time of her death in December 2007, according to a police report. She willed her estate to a sole beneficiary, Momoko Sasaki of Japan.
Terhune has a restitution hearing scheduled for Dec. 17 at 8:30 a.m.
Read more here: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2012/05/21/2075887/william-terhune-lawyer-grand-theft.html#storylink=cpy
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2012/05/21/2075887/william-terhune-lawyer-grand-theft.html
Editor's note: To Any-Mouse commenter.(a military expression) If this Shark robbed a bank of $275,00, he would be facing 20 -30 years in the pen. How can a lawyer get away with the same thievery and receive only 5 years probation? Why is this article considered drivel and demeaning to our country? Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
Saturday, May 26, 2012
Hitler's Generals and American Politicians
22.05.2012 12:20
AP photoBy Lawrence Sellin
At the end of World War Two, German Army generals denied any knowledge of the Holocaust and the massive atrocities committed on the Eastern front.
They were lying.
Between 1942 and 1945, British Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) recorded no fewer than 64,427 private conversations between captured German generals and other senior officers while held in the comfortable accommodations of Trent Park house in the north London suburb of Cockfosters.
As it turned out, the conversations were only of limited usefulness toward the conduct of the war, but they did supply a wealth of information on the nature of the Nazi regime and the actions and opinions of the highest ranking officers in the German military.
Sönke Neitzel, a professor at the University of Mainz, has edited a volume of key extracts from the tape-recorded discussions, "Tapping Hitler's Generals: Transcripts of Secret Conversations 1942-45."
Over the three years during which the recordings were made, the mass murder of Jews, the shooting of hostages, the burning down churches filled with victims and a range of other war crimes against Russian and Ukrainian civilians are acknowledged and described.
There is no longer any doubt about the complicity of the German general staff in some of the most horrendous atrocities of the 20th century.
Why did they do it?
Contrary to the conventional wisdom, many German officers favored the rise of Adolf Hitler because he promised to increase the size of the military and, thereby, increase their own power and prestige. Not surprisingly, the subsequent reluctance of German generals to challenge Hitler's atrocities stemmed largely, not from fear, but from the risk of losing that power and prestige.
Similar in intent, if not degree, American politicians and their enablers in the mainstream media are presently complicit in a cover-up of the greatest fraud in the history of the United States because the truth would expose the endemic corruption in the U.S. Government, rock the political system to its core and place in jeopardy their power and prestige.
Barack Hussein Obama is a Constitutionally illegal President, who, on April 27, 2011 on national television, presented a forged birth certificate to the country as his own, who likely never registered with the Selective Service System, a crime which would prevent him from ever holding federal office, and uses a Social Security Number not issued to him.
On May 17, 2012, Breitbart reported that a promotional booklet, produced in 1991 by Barack Obama's then-literary agency, Acton & Dystel, touts Obama as "born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii."
As late as April 2007, two months after he announced his Presidential campaign, Obama was still being described by Acton & Dystel as being "born in Kenya."
If Obama was not born in the United States, he would not qualify to obtain U.S. citizenship from his U.S. citizen mother. A child born in wedlock and abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA, provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. For births between December 24, 1952 and November13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen, are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.
Barack Obama's mother was only eighteen years old at the time of his birth. If he was born in Kenya, then according to Section 301(g) INA and the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, he was not a U.S. citizen at birth.
If true, even if he later became a "naturalized" U.S. citizen, Obama, like Arnold Schwarzenegger, would never, by law, be eligible for the U.S. Presidency.
Despite the enormous political and historical implications of such a scenario, American politicians and the mainstream media refuse to investigate or even discuss any questions being raised about Obama's background.
Their silence is both significant and revealing.
Why do they do it?
Because of their complicity, American politicians ignore any evidence of fraud by Obama or his facilitators in order to protect their privileged status and wealth now and to provide plausible deniability if, in the future, they become vulnerable to criminal prosecution.
Like the German generals, American politicians reject moral accountability and value their power and prestige more than their duty to their country.
Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve and a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq. Colonel Sellin is the author of "Afghanistan and the Culture of Military Leadership". He receives email at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/22-05-2012/121200-hitler_generals_american_politicians-0/#
Editor's note: Dear Any-Mouse, ProbateSharks Blog prides itself on revealing many facets and viewpoints, some of which may not appeal to all viewers. Your ProbateShark is proud to be a Liberal Conservative who encompasses all viewpoints and will not remove this posting. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
22.05.2012 12:20
AP photoBy Lawrence Sellin
At the end of World War Two, German Army generals denied any knowledge of the Holocaust and the massive atrocities committed on the Eastern front.
They were lying.
Between 1942 and 1945, British Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) recorded no fewer than 64,427 private conversations between captured German generals and other senior officers while held in the comfortable accommodations of Trent Park house in the north London suburb of Cockfosters.
As it turned out, the conversations were only of limited usefulness toward the conduct of the war, but they did supply a wealth of information on the nature of the Nazi regime and the actions and opinions of the highest ranking officers in the German military.
Sönke Neitzel, a professor at the University of Mainz, has edited a volume of key extracts from the tape-recorded discussions, "Tapping Hitler's Generals: Transcripts of Secret Conversations 1942-45."
Over the three years during which the recordings were made, the mass murder of Jews, the shooting of hostages, the burning down churches filled with victims and a range of other war crimes against Russian and Ukrainian civilians are acknowledged and described.
There is no longer any doubt about the complicity of the German general staff in some of the most horrendous atrocities of the 20th century.
Why did they do it?
Contrary to the conventional wisdom, many German officers favored the rise of Adolf Hitler because he promised to increase the size of the military and, thereby, increase their own power and prestige. Not surprisingly, the subsequent reluctance of German generals to challenge Hitler's atrocities stemmed largely, not from fear, but from the risk of losing that power and prestige.
Similar in intent, if not degree, American politicians and their enablers in the mainstream media are presently complicit in a cover-up of the greatest fraud in the history of the United States because the truth would expose the endemic corruption in the U.S. Government, rock the political system to its core and place in jeopardy their power and prestige.
Barack Hussein Obama is a Constitutionally illegal President, who, on April 27, 2011 on national television, presented a forged birth certificate to the country as his own, who likely never registered with the Selective Service System, a crime which would prevent him from ever holding federal office, and uses a Social Security Number not issued to him.
On May 17, 2012, Breitbart reported that a promotional booklet, produced in 1991 by Barack Obama's then-literary agency, Acton & Dystel, touts Obama as "born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia and Hawaii."
As late as April 2007, two months after he announced his Presidential campaign, Obama was still being described by Acton & Dystel as being "born in Kenya."
If Obama was not born in the United States, he would not qualify to obtain U.S. citizenship from his U.S. citizen mother. A child born in wedlock and abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA, provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. For births between December 24, 1952 and November13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen, are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.
Barack Obama's mother was only eighteen years old at the time of his birth. If he was born in Kenya, then according to Section 301(g) INA and the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, he was not a U.S. citizen at birth.
If true, even if he later became a "naturalized" U.S. citizen, Obama, like Arnold Schwarzenegger, would never, by law, be eligible for the U.S. Presidency.
Despite the enormous political and historical implications of such a scenario, American politicians and the mainstream media refuse to investigate or even discuss any questions being raised about Obama's background.
Their silence is both significant and revealing.
Why do they do it?
Because of their complicity, American politicians ignore any evidence of fraud by Obama or his facilitators in order to protect their privileged status and wealth now and to provide plausible deniability if, in the future, they become vulnerable to criminal prosecution.
Like the German generals, American politicians reject moral accountability and value their power and prestige more than their duty to their country.
Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve and a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq. Colonel Sellin is the author of "Afghanistan and the Culture of Military Leadership". He receives email at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com
http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/22-05-2012/121200-hitler_generals_american_politicians-0/#
Editor's note: Dear Any-Mouse, ProbateSharks Blog prides itself on revealing many facets and viewpoints, some of which may not appeal to all viewers. Your ProbateShark is proud to be a Liberal Conservative who encompasses all viewpoints and will not remove this posting. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
New Jersey Considers Law to Prevent ‘Granny Snatching’
New Jersey Considers Law to Prevent ‘Granny Snatching’
Law would alleviate jurisdictional issues when families feud over guardianship.
By Beth Fitzgerald, NJ Spotlight Email the authorMay 21, 2012 Email Print 2 Comments
The New Jersey Legislature is considering a new law to prevent an elder abuse known as “granny snatching” by joining a multi-state network that protects adults who need the assistance of a guardian when families feud.
“There has been one case after another where we have venue challenges and jurisdictional challenges that have caused a lot of problems,” said Sen. Fred H. Madden (D-Gloucester), co-sponsor of the legislation.
Typically, a NJ court appoints a daughter as guardian for an elderly mother incapacitated by Alzheimer’s. The mother then visits another daughter in Florida, who goes to court seeking to overturn the New Jersey guardianship order and be named the new legal guardian.
The bill now under consideration in Trenton -- the New Jersey Adult Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Jurisdiction Act -- would allow New Jersey’s guardianship orders to be recognized by other states with the law.
The bills, S1755 and A2628, establish uniform procedures for addressing interstate conflicts regarding adult guardianship issues, and brings New Jersey into an national guardianship reciprocity network that includes more than 30 states.
The bill has bipartisan support and was approved last week by the Senate’s health committee. Co-sponsors are Madden and Sen. Dawn Marie Addiego (R-Burlington).
“There have been cases where another family member moved to establish guardianship in another state, and they prevailed,” Madden said. “We had no strength to bring the individual back to New Jersey, which was where the original guardianship had taken place.”
Such feuds can lead to costly court that deplete the elderly ward’s resources and tie of up courts, at taxpayer’s expense.
“I am hoping [the bill] will save money, and it will help family members in different states by making laws uniform and consistent,” Addiego said. “Guardianship cases stretching beyond state boundaries raise questions about jurisdiction, laws and rights in today’s mobile society.”
Elder law attorney Sharon Rivenson Mark, president of the Guardianship Association of New Jersey, said the legislation would not put an end to dispute among family members. What the legislation will do, however, is address the issue of how to determine which state has jurisdiction in a guardianship case.
In the event of a disagreement among the relatives over which state has proper authority, the law provides that the individual’s home state has primary jurisdiction, followed by the state where the individual has a significant connection. The bill defines “home state” as the state in which the respondent was physically present for at least six consecutive months.
Hudson County Surrogate Donald W. De Leo said there are thousands of adults in New Jersey who have been placed under the care of court-appointed guardians. When a ward living in Hudson County is relocated out of New Jersey, the guardian has to notify his office that a new guardianship order was issued in the new state.
“We don’t want the ward to fall through the cracks, with no one officially in charge,” he said.
Marilyn Askin, chief legislative advocate for AARP, said 31 states and the District of Columbia have enacted this law since 2007. It is on the governor’s desk in Hawaii and is pending in seven states, including Florida. If an incapacitated person moves from one state to another, and both states have adopted this law, there is no need to commence a full guardianship procedure in the individual’s new state of residence.
Mark is currently working on a case that illustrates the complexities. She is the court-appointed guardian for a New Jersey man whose family wants him to move to Alabama to be near his relatives, where a member of the family has agreed to take over as guardian. The new guardian must go into court in New Jersey and be appointed guardian, then initiate a new procedure in Alabama to have the Alabama court appoint him as guardian. But if both states had adopted this law, the relative could become the guardian in New Jersey, and then just file his guardianship papers in Alabama.
“You file the order in the new state, and that is the end of it,” Mark said. “Because if you are the guardian in New Jersey, you will be recognized as the guardian in any other state that passes this law.”
The Alabama case is uncontested, simple and straightforward, Mark noted, “but they still have to spend money and use court time in Alabama to have the guardianship approved in Alabama.”
James W. McCracken, the state ombudsman for the institutionalized elderly, is charged with investigating allegations of abuse of the elderly living in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities. While his office has not been actively engaged in pushing for this legislation, “we are supportive of a consistent approach among states about how to deal with jurisdictional, transfer, and enforcement issues that will minimize complications for individuals with guardians and ensure that their rights are protected.”
Mary Kubiak, chair of the South Jersey Advocacy Committee of the Alzheimer’s Association Delaware Valley Chapter, testified last week in favor of the law. “Not all family members may live in the same state and are often limited by the guardianship restrictions specific to each state. The family priority must be caring for their loved one, not fighting inconsistent legislatures.”
While the law alleviates jurisdictional issues, it is not expected to put an end to family quarrels over how to deal with an incapacitated family member.
Among the best-known cases is that of Lillian Glasser, a multi-millionaire Highland Park widow who suffered from dementia and Parkinson’s. While Glasser was visiting her daughter in Texas in 2005, the daughter applied for and was awarded guardianship. Relatives in New Jersey opposed the guardianship on the grounds that Glasser was a New Jersey resident. The cost of the ensuing legal dispute was estimated at more than $1 million.
Continue reading on NJSptlight.com
http://eastwindsor.patch.com/articles/new-jersey-considers-law-to-prevent-granny-snatching
Law would alleviate jurisdictional issues when families feud over guardianship.
By Beth Fitzgerald, NJ Spotlight Email the authorMay 21, 2012 Email Print 2 Comments
The New Jersey Legislature is considering a new law to prevent an elder abuse known as “granny snatching” by joining a multi-state network that protects adults who need the assistance of a guardian when families feud.
“There has been one case after another where we have venue challenges and jurisdictional challenges that have caused a lot of problems,” said Sen. Fred H. Madden (D-Gloucester), co-sponsor of the legislation.
Typically, a NJ court appoints a daughter as guardian for an elderly mother incapacitated by Alzheimer’s. The mother then visits another daughter in Florida, who goes to court seeking to overturn the New Jersey guardianship order and be named the new legal guardian.
The bill now under consideration in Trenton -- the New Jersey Adult Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Jurisdiction Act -- would allow New Jersey’s guardianship orders to be recognized by other states with the law.
The bills, S1755 and A2628, establish uniform procedures for addressing interstate conflicts regarding adult guardianship issues, and brings New Jersey into an national guardianship reciprocity network that includes more than 30 states.
The bill has bipartisan support and was approved last week by the Senate’s health committee. Co-sponsors are Madden and Sen. Dawn Marie Addiego (R-Burlington).
“There have been cases where another family member moved to establish guardianship in another state, and they prevailed,” Madden said. “We had no strength to bring the individual back to New Jersey, which was where the original guardianship had taken place.”
Such feuds can lead to costly court that deplete the elderly ward’s resources and tie of up courts, at taxpayer’s expense.
“I am hoping [the bill] will save money, and it will help family members in different states by making laws uniform and consistent,” Addiego said. “Guardianship cases stretching beyond state boundaries raise questions about jurisdiction, laws and rights in today’s mobile society.”
Elder law attorney Sharon Rivenson Mark, president of the Guardianship Association of New Jersey, said the legislation would not put an end to dispute among family members. What the legislation will do, however, is address the issue of how to determine which state has jurisdiction in a guardianship case.
In the event of a disagreement among the relatives over which state has proper authority, the law provides that the individual’s home state has primary jurisdiction, followed by the state where the individual has a significant connection. The bill defines “home state” as the state in which the respondent was physically present for at least six consecutive months.
Hudson County Surrogate Donald W. De Leo said there are thousands of adults in New Jersey who have been placed under the care of court-appointed guardians. When a ward living in Hudson County is relocated out of New Jersey, the guardian has to notify his office that a new guardianship order was issued in the new state.
“We don’t want the ward to fall through the cracks, with no one officially in charge,” he said.
Marilyn Askin, chief legislative advocate for AARP, said 31 states and the District of Columbia have enacted this law since 2007. It is on the governor’s desk in Hawaii and is pending in seven states, including Florida. If an incapacitated person moves from one state to another, and both states have adopted this law, there is no need to commence a full guardianship procedure in the individual’s new state of residence.
Mark is currently working on a case that illustrates the complexities. She is the court-appointed guardian for a New Jersey man whose family wants him to move to Alabama to be near his relatives, where a member of the family has agreed to take over as guardian. The new guardian must go into court in New Jersey and be appointed guardian, then initiate a new procedure in Alabama to have the Alabama court appoint him as guardian. But if both states had adopted this law, the relative could become the guardian in New Jersey, and then just file his guardianship papers in Alabama.
“You file the order in the new state, and that is the end of it,” Mark said. “Because if you are the guardian in New Jersey, you will be recognized as the guardian in any other state that passes this law.”
The Alabama case is uncontested, simple and straightforward, Mark noted, “but they still have to spend money and use court time in Alabama to have the guardianship approved in Alabama.”
James W. McCracken, the state ombudsman for the institutionalized elderly, is charged with investigating allegations of abuse of the elderly living in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities. While his office has not been actively engaged in pushing for this legislation, “we are supportive of a consistent approach among states about how to deal with jurisdictional, transfer, and enforcement issues that will minimize complications for individuals with guardians and ensure that their rights are protected.”
Mary Kubiak, chair of the South Jersey Advocacy Committee of the Alzheimer’s Association Delaware Valley Chapter, testified last week in favor of the law. “Not all family members may live in the same state and are often limited by the guardianship restrictions specific to each state. The family priority must be caring for their loved one, not fighting inconsistent legislatures.”
While the law alleviates jurisdictional issues, it is not expected to put an end to family quarrels over how to deal with an incapacitated family member.
Among the best-known cases is that of Lillian Glasser, a multi-millionaire Highland Park widow who suffered from dementia and Parkinson’s. While Glasser was visiting her daughter in Texas in 2005, the daughter applied for and was awarded guardianship. Relatives in New Jersey opposed the guardianship on the grounds that Glasser was a New Jersey resident. The cost of the ensuing legal dispute was estimated at more than $1 million.
Continue reading on NJSptlight.com
http://eastwindsor.patch.com/articles/new-jersey-considers-law-to-prevent-granny-snatching
Friday, May 25, 2012
Publicly admonished a Merced Superior Court judge for holding cases under submission beyond the 90-day limit
Metropolitan News-Enterprise
Thursday, May 17, 2012
The Commission on Judicial Performance yesterday publicly admonished a Merced Superior Court judge for holding cases under submission beyond the 90-day limit and falsely swearing that he was not doing so.
The commission said that Judge John D. Kirihara had appeared before it on May 8 to object to the discipline, but that it had approved the discipline by a vote of 8-0, with two members recused and one not participating.
Kirihara, the commission said, violated the 90-day rule three times in 2010. He had one civil case under submission for 320 days, a probate matter under consideration for 237 days, and a matter involving a trust under submission for 110 days.
The commission also noted that with respect to the probate matter, the judge was specifically advised that the case had been under submission for five or six months, yet took another 59 days to submit his decision.
The judge committee further misconduct on 11 occasions, once a month from May 2010 through March 2011, by falsely swearing that he had no cases under submission for more than 90 days, the CJP found.
The commission also found that the judge violated the Rules of Court or the ethical canons by failing to keep a list of cases he had under submission, even during a period that he was presiding judge of the court and obliged by the rules to circulate such lists among the judges.
“Presiding judges have the responsibility of monitoring the cases under submission on their county and ensuring that no cases remain undecided for more than 90 days,” the commission said. “Consequently, a presiding judge should be particularly vigilant about monitoring his or her own submitted matters.”
Kirihara, a judge since 2001, was presiding judge from April 2007 through the end of 2010, the commission said.
http://www.metnews.com/
Thursday, May 17, 2012
The Commission on Judicial Performance yesterday publicly admonished a Merced Superior Court judge for holding cases under submission beyond the 90-day limit and falsely swearing that he was not doing so.
The commission said that Judge John D. Kirihara had appeared before it on May 8 to object to the discipline, but that it had approved the discipline by a vote of 8-0, with two members recused and one not participating.
Kirihara, the commission said, violated the 90-day rule three times in 2010. He had one civil case under submission for 320 days, a probate matter under consideration for 237 days, and a matter involving a trust under submission for 110 days.
The commission also noted that with respect to the probate matter, the judge was specifically advised that the case had been under submission for five or six months, yet took another 59 days to submit his decision.
The judge committee further misconduct on 11 occasions, once a month from May 2010 through March 2011, by falsely swearing that he had no cases under submission for more than 90 days, the CJP found.
The commission also found that the judge violated the Rules of Court or the ethical canons by failing to keep a list of cases he had under submission, even during a period that he was presiding judge of the court and obliged by the rules to circulate such lists among the judges.
“Presiding judges have the responsibility of monitoring the cases under submission on their county and ensuring that no cases remain undecided for more than 90 days,” the commission said. “Consequently, a presiding judge should be particularly vigilant about monitoring his or her own submitted matters.”
Kirihara, a judge since 2001, was presiding judge from April 2007 through the end of 2010, the commission said.
http://www.metnews.com/
Family of boy disabled at birth to get $35 million
Family of boy disabled at birth to get $35 million
February 21, 2004
By Patrick Rucker, Tribune staff reporter.
A 5-year-old boy who suffered a severe brain injury during birth while his mother's attending anesthesiologist was allegedly in the company of a hospital nurse was awarded $35 million in a record settlement Friday.
The settlement was ordered Friday by Judge Dennis Burke in Cook County Circuit Court on the advice of a court-appointed guardian for the child, Andrew "A.J." Arkebauer. Arguments in the three-week trial had ended a day earlier, and the jury had just begun deliberations when the settlement was announced.
"We're relieved to know that A.J. will be taken care of even when we're gone," his mother, Evelyn Arkebauer, said. "It gives us tremendous peace of mind not to have to worry about him when we're not here."
Friday's decision was Illinois' largest settlement or award in a lawsuit involving a brain injury at birth, said John Kirkton, editor of the Jury Verdict Reporter. "This is a huge medical malpractice settlement. Thirty-five million dollars is substantially higher than any other brain-injury-at-birth case," he said.
The child's injuries were sustained as doctors performed an emergency Caesarean section delivery at Northwestern Memorial Hospital on the evening of Oct. 4, 1998. Evelyn Arkebauer arrived at the hospital that morning experiencing labor pains.
But by the evening, after spending all day in a hospital birthing room she still had not given birth.
Just before 8 p.m., Dr. Stanley Friedell, Arkebauer's obstetrician ordered a Caesarean section and paged Dr. Edwin Lojeski, a senior attending anesthesiologist, according to Kevin Burke, an attorney for the Arkebauer family. Lojeski did not respond to that first page or a second, according to Burke. At 8:30, after having been paged a third time, Lojeski answered that he was on his way, but he did not arrive at the fifth-floor operating room until after 8:45 p.m.
Attorneys for the Arkebauer family said that an off-duty nurse testified she was alone with Lojeski in a private call room one floor below the operating room when he was being paged.
By the time Lojeski arrived at the operating room, Arkebauer's child was in fetal distress, the family said.
Andrew Arkebauer survived the birth, although Evelyn Arkebauer suffered a ruptured uterus. But her son cannot walk, talk or feed himself and will require full-time care for the rest of his life, the Arkebauers said.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-02-21/news/0402210265_1_caesarean-section-birth-brain-injury
February 21, 2004
By Patrick Rucker, Tribune staff reporter.
A 5-year-old boy who suffered a severe brain injury during birth while his mother's attending anesthesiologist was allegedly in the company of a hospital nurse was awarded $35 million in a record settlement Friday.
The settlement was ordered Friday by Judge Dennis Burke in Cook County Circuit Court on the advice of a court-appointed guardian for the child, Andrew "A.J." Arkebauer. Arguments in the three-week trial had ended a day earlier, and the jury had just begun deliberations when the settlement was announced.
"We're relieved to know that A.J. will be taken care of even when we're gone," his mother, Evelyn Arkebauer, said. "It gives us tremendous peace of mind not to have to worry about him when we're not here."
Friday's decision was Illinois' largest settlement or award in a lawsuit involving a brain injury at birth, said John Kirkton, editor of the Jury Verdict Reporter. "This is a huge medical malpractice settlement. Thirty-five million dollars is substantially higher than any other brain-injury-at-birth case," he said.
The child's injuries were sustained as doctors performed an emergency Caesarean section delivery at Northwestern Memorial Hospital on the evening of Oct. 4, 1998. Evelyn Arkebauer arrived at the hospital that morning experiencing labor pains.
But by the evening, after spending all day in a hospital birthing room she still had not given birth.
Just before 8 p.m., Dr. Stanley Friedell, Arkebauer's obstetrician ordered a Caesarean section and paged Dr. Edwin Lojeski, a senior attending anesthesiologist, according to Kevin Burke, an attorney for the Arkebauer family. Lojeski did not respond to that first page or a second, according to Burke. At 8:30, after having been paged a third time, Lojeski answered that he was on his way, but he did not arrive at the fifth-floor operating room until after 8:45 p.m.
Attorneys for the Arkebauer family said that an off-duty nurse testified she was alone with Lojeski in a private call room one floor below the operating room when he was being paged.
By the time Lojeski arrived at the operating room, Arkebauer's child was in fetal distress, the family said.
Andrew Arkebauer survived the birth, although Evelyn Arkebauer suffered a ruptured uterus. But her son cannot walk, talk or feed himself and will require full-time care for the rest of his life, the Arkebauers said.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-02-21/news/0402210265_1_caesarean-section-birth-brain-injury
Chicago commodities trader charged in $8M Ponzi scheme
Chicago commodities trader charged in $8M Ponzi scheme
By Gregory Karp
Tribune reporter
5:07 PM CDT, May 24, 2012
A Chicago commodities trader was charged Thursday with allegedly operating a Ponzi scheme, soliciting nearly $8 million from investors, lying to them about his investing success and using some of their money to support his own "lavish lifestyle," according to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
The commission on Thursday filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, charging Bradley Scott Schiller, 36, of Chicago with solicitation fraud, misappropriating investors' funds and issuing false statements in connection with soliciting $7.8 million from six investors to trade commodity futures contracts in managed accounts.
The CFTC complaint alleges that since at least January 2008 to February 2012, Schiller solicited investors by lying about his success as a trader and using altered account statements to bolster his claims. His actual trading in the accounts resulted in losses, the commission said. And when investors demanded their money back, Schiller put them off until he could solicit funds from new investors. Schiller then used much of that money to pay back old investors, a Ponzi scheme, according to the complaint.
According to the complaint, Schiller deposited in trading accounts only $3.7 million of the $7.8 million he received from investors. He lost about $1.6 million in trading and withdrew more than $2.1 million from the accounts, leaving near zero balances.
Schiller used investor money to purchase expensive automobiles and a pricey high-rise condominium and pay personal expenses, according to the complaint.
Schiller could not be reached for comment.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-chicago-commodities-trader-charged-in-8m-ponzi-scheme-20120524,0,2712354.story
Editor's note: We can hope that our new U.S. Attorney will prosecute the legal "Ponzi" scheme perpetrated in the Probate Court of Cook County. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, Probate Sharks.com
KawamotoDragon.com
By Gregory Karp
Tribune reporter
5:07 PM CDT, May 24, 2012
A Chicago commodities trader was charged Thursday with allegedly operating a Ponzi scheme, soliciting nearly $8 million from investors, lying to them about his investing success and using some of their money to support his own "lavish lifestyle," according to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
The commission on Thursday filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, charging Bradley Scott Schiller, 36, of Chicago with solicitation fraud, misappropriating investors' funds and issuing false statements in connection with soliciting $7.8 million from six investors to trade commodity futures contracts in managed accounts.
The CFTC complaint alleges that since at least January 2008 to February 2012, Schiller solicited investors by lying about his success as a trader and using altered account statements to bolster his claims. His actual trading in the accounts resulted in losses, the commission said. And when investors demanded their money back, Schiller put them off until he could solicit funds from new investors. Schiller then used much of that money to pay back old investors, a Ponzi scheme, according to the complaint.
According to the complaint, Schiller deposited in trading accounts only $3.7 million of the $7.8 million he received from investors. He lost about $1.6 million in trading and withdrew more than $2.1 million from the accounts, leaving near zero balances.
Schiller used investor money to purchase expensive automobiles and a pricey high-rise condominium and pay personal expenses, according to the complaint.
Schiller could not be reached for comment.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-chicago-commodities-trader-charged-in-8m-ponzi-scheme-20120524,0,2712354.story
Editor's note: We can hope that our new U.S. Attorney will prosecute the legal "Ponzi" scheme perpetrated in the Probate Court of Cook County. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, Probate Sharks.com
KawamotoDragon.com
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Monsignor: I didn't put list of predators in safe
May 24, 5:43 PM EDT
Monsignor: I didn't put list of predators in safe
By MARYCLAIRE DALE
PHILADELPHIA (AP) -- A Roman Catholic church official testified Thursday that he typed a list of suspected pedophile priests on his computer, but couldn't find it 10 years later to show a grand jury.
Monsignor William Lynn endured a second day of searing cross-examination as he fights charges he endangered children by protecting priests. He's due back on the stand Tuesday.
Lynn denies locking the 1994 list in an archdiocese safe, where church employees say it was found in 2006 and then buried in a lawyer's files until this year.
The list was turned over to city prosecutors in February, days after Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua died. They've made it something of a smoking gun since the trial started in March.
Prosecutors believe it shows the Philadelphia archdiocese knew it had diagnosed pedophiles and other predators on duty, but left them in jobs with access to children.
"They have that collar on. It attracts kids like candy," Assistant District Attorney Patrick Blessington said as he peppered Lynn with questions.
Lynn - the first U.S. church official ever charged for his handling of abuse cases - insisted he did the best he could as secretary for clergy from 1992 to 2004 to help victims. He said he prepared the list to get superiors to address the problem.
Bevilacqua ordered the list shredded, although Lynn said he only learned that when the surviving copy and a "shred memo" surfaced this year.
"I'm not perfect," Lynn said at one point, referring to a seminarian's 1992 abuse complaint that he admits "fell through the cracks."
At the time, Lynn was new on the job, juggling a dozen active complaints, and dealing with his mother's death and father's illness, according to his testimony.
The seminarian said he had been raped throughout high school by the Rev. Stanley Gana, who Lynn acknowledged "did horrible things" to children. Gana was defrocked in 2006.
"I'm not happy it fell through the cracks, and I'm sorry it did," Lynn testified.
A phone listing for Gana, who has never been criminally charged, could not be located Thursday. Gana has previously denied accusations against him.
Lynn is charged with endangering two children by leaving the Rev. James Brennan, a co-defendant charged with attempted rape, and former priest Edward Avery, who pleaded guilty to sexual assault, in ministry despite earlier red flags. Lynn surprised some court observers by taking the stand Wednesday after two silent months at the defense table.
During the intense cross-examination, Lynn was forced to backpedal at times and took several long pauses.
At one point, Blessington compared the treatment of a pastor who had complained about a bad apple to the problem priests left in ministry. The pastor's case went to a disciplinary board, and he had to meet twice with an irate Bevilacqua about his "disobedience."
"How many priest personnel board meetings were convened because you passed up information about a serial pedophile?" Blessington asked.
"None," Lynn acknowledged.
Lynn said he never wanted the job and took orders from Bevilacqua and the cardinal's top aides: the Rev. Joseph Cistone, now bishop of Saginaw, Mich.; the Rev. Edward Cullen, now the retired bishop of Allentown; and the Rev. James E. Molloy, who died in 2006.
On Bevilacqua's orders, Molloy shredded Lynn's list of predators in February 1994, an act witnessed by Cistone, according to the "shred memo," which was shown in court.
Prosecutors have not charged anyone else in the alleged conspiracy to cover up priest-abuse complaints, and did not call Cullen or Cistone to testify. And neither bishop appears waiting in the wings to testify on Lynn's behalf. They have not returned calls for comment left this month through the diocese or legal counsel.
That leaves Lynn alone to defend the archdiocese's response to distraught adults streaming into Lynn's office by the 1990s to report that priests had molested or raped them. The archdiocese never contacted police.
According to Lynn, Bevilacqua wouldn't let staff tell an accuser that anyone else had accused the same priest of abuse, or tell parishes the real reason priests were being removed.
"I was following the directions I got," Lynn said Thursday.
Lynn said he prepared the list of 35 accused priests for a February 1994 meeting of Bevilacqua and his top two aides. Lynn, not a regular participant, was called in for the briefing. He said he doesn't remember much about the discussion, other than the case of a priest accused of having sex with a 17-year-old girl in Venezuela years earlier.
"The cardinal did not consider that pedophilia, because it was a different culture and a different atmosphere," Lynn recalled. The priest remained in ministry until March, when he was removed from the South Philadelphia parish he led.
Blessington repeatedly called the monsignor a liar.
Asked about his job performance, Lynn said, "I thought I was doing adequately."
But he conceded that he "forgot" to tell a police officer investigating abuse claims against a notorious priest in the early 1990s that the archdiocese knew of at least eight other victims. Lynn said he did volunteer to the officer that three relatives had once accused the priest of fondling them.
"I did my best for the people that were injured by priests," Lynn said.
"Your best is nothing," Blessington fired back.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_PRIEST_ABUSE_TRIAL?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-05-24-17-43-27
Monsignor: I didn't put list of predators in safe
By MARYCLAIRE DALE
PHILADELPHIA (AP) -- A Roman Catholic church official testified Thursday that he typed a list of suspected pedophile priests on his computer, but couldn't find it 10 years later to show a grand jury.
Monsignor William Lynn endured a second day of searing cross-examination as he fights charges he endangered children by protecting priests. He's due back on the stand Tuesday.
Lynn denies locking the 1994 list in an archdiocese safe, where church employees say it was found in 2006 and then buried in a lawyer's files until this year.
The list was turned over to city prosecutors in February, days after Cardinal Anthony Bevilacqua died. They've made it something of a smoking gun since the trial started in March.
Prosecutors believe it shows the Philadelphia archdiocese knew it had diagnosed pedophiles and other predators on duty, but left them in jobs with access to children.
"They have that collar on. It attracts kids like candy," Assistant District Attorney Patrick Blessington said as he peppered Lynn with questions.
Lynn - the first U.S. church official ever charged for his handling of abuse cases - insisted he did the best he could as secretary for clergy from 1992 to 2004 to help victims. He said he prepared the list to get superiors to address the problem.
Bevilacqua ordered the list shredded, although Lynn said he only learned that when the surviving copy and a "shred memo" surfaced this year.
"I'm not perfect," Lynn said at one point, referring to a seminarian's 1992 abuse complaint that he admits "fell through the cracks."
At the time, Lynn was new on the job, juggling a dozen active complaints, and dealing with his mother's death and father's illness, according to his testimony.
The seminarian said he had been raped throughout high school by the Rev. Stanley Gana, who Lynn acknowledged "did horrible things" to children. Gana was defrocked in 2006.
"I'm not happy it fell through the cracks, and I'm sorry it did," Lynn testified.
A phone listing for Gana, who has never been criminally charged, could not be located Thursday. Gana has previously denied accusations against him.
Lynn is charged with endangering two children by leaving the Rev. James Brennan, a co-defendant charged with attempted rape, and former priest Edward Avery, who pleaded guilty to sexual assault, in ministry despite earlier red flags. Lynn surprised some court observers by taking the stand Wednesday after two silent months at the defense table.
During the intense cross-examination, Lynn was forced to backpedal at times and took several long pauses.
At one point, Blessington compared the treatment of a pastor who had complained about a bad apple to the problem priests left in ministry. The pastor's case went to a disciplinary board, and he had to meet twice with an irate Bevilacqua about his "disobedience."
"How many priest personnel board meetings were convened because you passed up information about a serial pedophile?" Blessington asked.
"None," Lynn acknowledged.
Lynn said he never wanted the job and took orders from Bevilacqua and the cardinal's top aides: the Rev. Joseph Cistone, now bishop of Saginaw, Mich.; the Rev. Edward Cullen, now the retired bishop of Allentown; and the Rev. James E. Molloy, who died in 2006.
On Bevilacqua's orders, Molloy shredded Lynn's list of predators in February 1994, an act witnessed by Cistone, according to the "shred memo," which was shown in court.
Prosecutors have not charged anyone else in the alleged conspiracy to cover up priest-abuse complaints, and did not call Cullen or Cistone to testify. And neither bishop appears waiting in the wings to testify on Lynn's behalf. They have not returned calls for comment left this month through the diocese or legal counsel.
That leaves Lynn alone to defend the archdiocese's response to distraught adults streaming into Lynn's office by the 1990s to report that priests had molested or raped them. The archdiocese never contacted police.
According to Lynn, Bevilacqua wouldn't let staff tell an accuser that anyone else had accused the same priest of abuse, or tell parishes the real reason priests were being removed.
"I was following the directions I got," Lynn said Thursday.
Lynn said he prepared the list of 35 accused priests for a February 1994 meeting of Bevilacqua and his top two aides. Lynn, not a regular participant, was called in for the briefing. He said he doesn't remember much about the discussion, other than the case of a priest accused of having sex with a 17-year-old girl in Venezuela years earlier.
"The cardinal did not consider that pedophilia, because it was a different culture and a different atmosphere," Lynn recalled. The priest remained in ministry until March, when he was removed from the South Philadelphia parish he led.
Blessington repeatedly called the monsignor a liar.
Asked about his job performance, Lynn said, "I thought I was doing adequately."
But he conceded that he "forgot" to tell a police officer investigating abuse claims against a notorious priest in the early 1990s that the archdiocese knew of at least eight other victims. Lynn said he did volunteer to the officer that three relatives had once accused the priest of fondling them.
"I did my best for the people that were injured by priests," Lynn said.
"Your best is nothing," Blessington fired back.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_PRIEST_ABUSE_TRIAL?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-05-24-17-43-27
I had a telephone call
I had a telephone call a short while ago and was asked: "is there a new blackout on the subject of Elder Abuse/Financial Exploitation of senior citizens?"
Quite frankly I do not know - After Mr. Lyman published his book and was interviewed by CBS I would have thought that some progress in getting protection for grandma was being made. I do not know how America can sit back and allow grandma to be deprived of her liberty, property, civil and human rights and the press is so disinterested. I do understand why the political class is so silent - to some it appears that grandma's assets make great campaign war chests. To others protecting grandma is just too risky! Some have come forth but so far *****
Anyhow - I thought the following was a good summary of the law, to wit:
2 Horner Probate Prac. & Estates § 35:2
Horner Probate Practice and Estates
Database updated May 2012
Chapter 35. Eligibility, Appointment, and Qualification of Guardians of Disabled Persons
Michael P. McElroy, J.D.
Summary
§ 35:2. Jurisdiction and venue
Upon the filing of a petition by a reputable person or by the alleged disabled person personally, or on its own motion, the court may adjudge a person to be a disabled person only if it has been demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that the person is a disabled person as defined in section 11a-2 of the Probate Act.1 If the court adjudges a person to be a disabled person, the court may appoint: i) a guardian of his or her person, if it has been demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that because of his or her disability the disabled person lacks sufficient understanding or capacity to make or communicate responsible decisions concerning the care of his or her person; or ii) a guardian of his or her estate, if it has been demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that because of his or her disability the disabled adult is unable to manage his or her estate or financial affairs; or iii) a guardian of his or her person and of his or her estate.
In re Estate of Steinfeld, 158 Ill. 2d 1, 196 Ill. Dec. 636, 630 N.E.2d 801 (1994) (sibling had standing to challenge disability and guardianship order).2
The court has no jurisdiction to appoint a guardian for a nonresident of the county3 or state.4 A "nonresident" in this limited context means a disabled person who is beyond the jurisdiction of the Illinois courts and who has been adjudged a disabled person, and for whom a guardian has been appointed by a foreign court.5 Illinois courts should recognize the acts of foreign courts as valid, and recognize the guardian appointed by the foreign court as the guardian of a nonresident disabled person.6 However, the court may appoint a guardian over the estate of an adult domiciled in Illinois, but absent temporarily.7
When an alleged disabled person is a resident of Illinois, the proceeding must be instituted in the court of the county in which he or she resides.8 However, if the alleged disabled person is not an Illinois resident, the proceeding must be instituted in the court of a county in which his or her real estate or personal property is located.9
A proceeding to appoint a guardian of the person of an alleged disabled person is a proceeding in personam and is based on jurisdiction of the person.10 The status of disability may be determined only by a hearing on the petition and by overcoming the presumption that the respondent is not disabled.11 It is the finding of the court or the jury that a person is disabled which creates the status of disability.12 Disability cannot be presumed in order to establish jurisdiction.13 One of the requirements for obtaining proper jurisdiction is that service be made upon those relatives listed in the guardianship petition.14 [NB - all the cost relatives are required to be named - this was not done in Sykes! The attorney for the plenary guardian admitted on the transcript this failure - thus, as Mary Sykes has about a million dollars in fungible gold coins and similar assets the mention of this fact promulgates an angry letter by the guardian ad litem to the Illinois ARDC]
Where the probate court assumes jurisdiction of the person and estate of a disabled person, but another court acquires jurisdiction and appoints a guardian before the probate court does so, the appointment is valid and binding on all parties in any collateral attack.15 However, a finding by a court of another state, in a commitment proceeding, that a person borders on mental illness, does not constitute an adjudication of mental illness.16
Westlaw. © 2012 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.
Footnotes
1
755 ILCS 5/11a-3(a).
2
See In re Estate of Nelson, 250 Ill. App. 3d 282, 190 Ill. Dec. 212, 621 N.E.2d 81 (1st Dist. 1993).
3
Laird v. Dickirson, 241 Ill. 380, 89 N.E. 795 (1909).
4
McCormick v. Blaine, 345 Ill. 461, 178 N.E. 195, 77 A.L.R. 1215 (1931); In re Oelerich's Estate, 31 Ill. App. 2d 457, 176 N.E.2d 549 (1st Dist. 1961).
5
Parcher v. Reese, 202 Ill. App. 509, 1916 WL 2689 (3d Dist. 1916).
6
Parcher v. Reese, 202 Ill. App. 509, 1916 WL 2689 (3d Dist. 1916).
A one-time Illinois resident, subsequently adjudged a disabled person in Canada, is a "nonresident," entitling the Canadian representative to the Illinois funds and assets of the disabled person's estate as against the Illinois guardian. In re Spengler's Estate, 282 Ill. App. 607, 1935 WL 3762 (1st Dist. 1935).
7
See McCormick v. Blaine, 345 Ill. 461, 178 N.E. 195, 77 A.L.R. 1215 (1931).
8
755 ILCS 5/11a-7.
9
755 ILCS 5/11a-7.
10
In re Oelerich's Estate, 31 Ill. App. 2d 457, 176 N.E.2d 549 (1st Dist. 1961).
11
In re Oelerich's Estate, 31 Ill. App. 2d 457, 176 N.E.2d 549 (1st Dist. 1961).
12
In re Oelerich's Estate, 31 Ill. App. 2d 457, 176 N.E.2d 549 (1st Dist. 1961).
13
In re Oelerich's Estate, 31 Ill. App. 2d 457, 176 N.E.2d 549 (1st Dist. 1961).
14
In re Estate of Debevec, 195 Ill. App. 3d 891, 142 Ill. Dec. 302, 552 N.E.2d 1043 (5th Dist. 1990); Matter of Sodini, 172 Ill. App. 3d 1055, 123 Ill. Dec. 67, 527 N.E.2d 530 (4th Dist. 1988).
15
People ex rel. Kagy v. Seidel, 22 Ill. App. 2d 316, 160 N.E.2d 681 (1st Dist. 1959).
16
Moneta v. Hoinacki, 394 Ill. 47, 67 N.E.2d 204 (1946).
2 Horner Probate Prac. & Estates § 35:2
Ken Ditkowsky
www.ditkowskylawoffice.com
Quite frankly I do not know - After Mr. Lyman published his book and was interviewed by CBS I would have thought that some progress in getting protection for grandma was being made. I do not know how America can sit back and allow grandma to be deprived of her liberty, property, civil and human rights and the press is so disinterested. I do understand why the political class is so silent - to some it appears that grandma's assets make great campaign war chests. To others protecting grandma is just too risky! Some have come forth but so far *****
Anyhow - I thought the following was a good summary of the law, to wit:
2 Horner Probate Prac. & Estates § 35:2
Horner Probate Practice and Estates
Database updated May 2012
Chapter 35. Eligibility, Appointment, and Qualification of Guardians of Disabled Persons
Michael P. McElroy, J.D.
Summary
§ 35:2. Jurisdiction and venue
Upon the filing of a petition by a reputable person or by the alleged disabled person personally, or on its own motion, the court may adjudge a person to be a disabled person only if it has been demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that the person is a disabled person as defined in section 11a-2 of the Probate Act.1 If the court adjudges a person to be a disabled person, the court may appoint: i) a guardian of his or her person, if it has been demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that because of his or her disability the disabled person lacks sufficient understanding or capacity to make or communicate responsible decisions concerning the care of his or her person; or ii) a guardian of his or her estate, if it has been demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that because of his or her disability the disabled adult is unable to manage his or her estate or financial affairs; or iii) a guardian of his or her person and of his or her estate.
In re Estate of Steinfeld, 158 Ill. 2d 1, 196 Ill. Dec. 636, 630 N.E.2d 801 (1994) (sibling had standing to challenge disability and guardianship order).2
The court has no jurisdiction to appoint a guardian for a nonresident of the county3 or state.4 A "nonresident" in this limited context means a disabled person who is beyond the jurisdiction of the Illinois courts and who has been adjudged a disabled person, and for whom a guardian has been appointed by a foreign court.5 Illinois courts should recognize the acts of foreign courts as valid, and recognize the guardian appointed by the foreign court as the guardian of a nonresident disabled person.6 However, the court may appoint a guardian over the estate of an adult domiciled in Illinois, but absent temporarily.7
When an alleged disabled person is a resident of Illinois, the proceeding must be instituted in the court of the county in which he or she resides.8 However, if the alleged disabled person is not an Illinois resident, the proceeding must be instituted in the court of a county in which his or her real estate or personal property is located.9
A proceeding to appoint a guardian of the person of an alleged disabled person is a proceeding in personam and is based on jurisdiction of the person.10 The status of disability may be determined only by a hearing on the petition and by overcoming the presumption that the respondent is not disabled.11 It is the finding of the court or the jury that a person is disabled which creates the status of disability.12 Disability cannot be presumed in order to establish jurisdiction.13 One of the requirements for obtaining proper jurisdiction is that service be made upon those relatives listed in the guardianship petition.14 [NB - all the cost relatives are required to be named - this was not done in Sykes! The attorney for the plenary guardian admitted on the transcript this failure - thus, as Mary Sykes has about a million dollars in fungible gold coins and similar assets the mention of this fact promulgates an angry letter by the guardian ad litem to the Illinois ARDC]
Where the probate court assumes jurisdiction of the person and estate of a disabled person, but another court acquires jurisdiction and appoints a guardian before the probate court does so, the appointment is valid and binding on all parties in any collateral attack.15 However, a finding by a court of another state, in a commitment proceeding, that a person borders on mental illness, does not constitute an adjudication of mental illness.16
Westlaw. © 2012 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.
Footnotes
1
755 ILCS 5/11a-3(a).
2
See In re Estate of Nelson, 250 Ill. App. 3d 282, 190 Ill. Dec. 212, 621 N.E.2d 81 (1st Dist. 1993).
3
Laird v. Dickirson, 241 Ill. 380, 89 N.E. 795 (1909).
4
McCormick v. Blaine, 345 Ill. 461, 178 N.E. 195, 77 A.L.R. 1215 (1931); In re Oelerich's Estate, 31 Ill. App. 2d 457, 176 N.E.2d 549 (1st Dist. 1961).
5
Parcher v. Reese, 202 Ill. App. 509, 1916 WL 2689 (3d Dist. 1916).
6
Parcher v. Reese, 202 Ill. App. 509, 1916 WL 2689 (3d Dist. 1916).
A one-time Illinois resident, subsequently adjudged a disabled person in Canada, is a "nonresident," entitling the Canadian representative to the Illinois funds and assets of the disabled person's estate as against the Illinois guardian. In re Spengler's Estate, 282 Ill. App. 607, 1935 WL 3762 (1st Dist. 1935).
7
See McCormick v. Blaine, 345 Ill. 461, 178 N.E. 195, 77 A.L.R. 1215 (1931).
8
755 ILCS 5/11a-7.
9
755 ILCS 5/11a-7.
10
In re Oelerich's Estate, 31 Ill. App. 2d 457, 176 N.E.2d 549 (1st Dist. 1961).
11
In re Oelerich's Estate, 31 Ill. App. 2d 457, 176 N.E.2d 549 (1st Dist. 1961).
12
In re Oelerich's Estate, 31 Ill. App. 2d 457, 176 N.E.2d 549 (1st Dist. 1961).
13
In re Oelerich's Estate, 31 Ill. App. 2d 457, 176 N.E.2d 549 (1st Dist. 1961).
14
In re Estate of Debevec, 195 Ill. App. 3d 891, 142 Ill. Dec. 302, 552 N.E.2d 1043 (5th Dist. 1990); Matter of Sodini, 172 Ill. App. 3d 1055, 123 Ill. Dec. 67, 527 N.E.2d 530 (4th Dist. 1988).
15
People ex rel. Kagy v. Seidel, 22 Ill. App. 2d 316, 160 N.E.2d 681 (1st Dist. 1959).
16
Moneta v. Hoinacki, 394 Ill. 47, 67 N.E.2d 204 (1946).
2 Horner Probate Prac. & Estates § 35:2
Ken Ditkowsky
www.ditkowskylawoffice.com
Public's right to know trumps seal
May 22, 2012
Public's right to know trumps seal
Court precedent was disregarded in Witherspoon case
Our View
The guardianship case of Dr. John D. Witherspoon has taken a bumpy course through Davidson County Circuit Court, marked by an attempt to skirt the First Amendment that should give the public cause to reflect on how easily the right to know can be taken away from us.
Judge Randy Kennedy not only closed a hastily called hearing on May 11 regarding whether the doctor should be placed in a conservatorship; he sealed the court record, as well. Those moves violated legal precedent established in Tennessee by the 1985 State vs. Drake court case, as well as the state Supreme Court’s long-held belief that the public has a qualified right to attend judicial proceedings and read documentation of those proceedings.
The Tennessean and WSMV, whose representatives were kicked out of the May 11 hearing, may be accused of trying to intrude on private matters of the Witherspoon family solely because the doctor’s daughter, actress Reese Witherspoon, is a celebrity. But the real issue for these media outlets is the broader question: If court cases are entirely sealed, where is the oversight of the judicial process?
We ask that question because of Jewell Tinnon.
She is the 80-year-old Nashville resident who was placed in a conservatorship without her knowledge or consent nearly two years ago, and as a result lost all her possessions. Tinnon has since fought Kennedy’s ruling in her case, and is suing the attorney and social services agency who handled her conservatorship.
Of course there are many other Tennesseans who potentially face similar fates — and if those records are sealed there is opportunity for abuse and no public scrutiny.
That is why The Tennessean on Monday filed an emergency motion to intervene for the purpose of getting the Witherspoon record unsealed and to object to the closed proceedings and lack of camera access.
The personal details that the Witherspoons convinced Judge Kennedy were too sensitive for public disclosure had, in fact, already been made public in an affidavit that the doctor’s wife, Betty Witherspoon, had given earlier that week, as she sought an annulment of her husband’s marriage to another woman. In her lawsuit, she also willingly provided details of what she alleged were Dr. Witherspoon’s troubles with drinking, dementia, hoarding and overspending.
On Monday, Judge Kennedy acknowledged that he might have acted differently on May 11 had he known how much was already public. That still does not explain why the judge allowed an emergency hearing without following standard procedures.
The judge on Monday scheduled a hearing for June 1 on the media outlets’ emergency motion, and that’s a step in the right direction toward equal justice instead of the celebrity variety.
http://www.tennessean.com/print/article/20120522/OPINION01/305220008/Public-s-right-know-trumps-seal
Editor's note:
Reese, join the club... An Alice Gore relative filed a motion producing certified court transcripts proving that judge Kawamoto had appointed a severly mentally ill person as Alice' guardian. Furtheermore, the motion requested that the court investigate the present mental status of the guardian. What did the judge do? She would invesigate, but seal the records. Lots of luck with Randy K. Reese.
Alice R. Gore Estate value about 1 million dollars: Alice R. Gore, deceased, a disabled 99 year old ward of the Probate Court of Cook County, Judge Kawamoto’s courtroom was hours away from ending up in the Cook County Morgue. Alice's estate was depleted by probate court parasites and there were reportedly no funds to bury her. Her loving family paid for the burial expenses so that Alice would not have to suffer the indignity of being stacked like an Auschwitz inmate in the Cook County morgue. The judge allowed an easily manipulated, court documented, mentally disabled granddaughter to be appointed as Alice’s guardian and yet no sanctions were instituted against the judge or court officers for this blatant infraction of the law.
Strangely, 16 of Alice’s annuity checks, two of which show forged endorsements, disappeared. Alice’s daughter has a copy of a check with her signature possibly forged. The daughter’s attorney has been trying to obtain copies of the 16 other annuity checks for two years without success. Even more puzzling is a $150,000 life insurance policy owned by Alice and not inventoried into the estate by the court. The Probate Court of Cook of Cook County refuses to investigate these blatant infractions of the law. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
.KawamotoDragon.com
Public's right to know trumps seal
Court precedent was disregarded in Witherspoon case
Our View
The guardianship case of Dr. John D. Witherspoon has taken a bumpy course through Davidson County Circuit Court, marked by an attempt to skirt the First Amendment that should give the public cause to reflect on how easily the right to know can be taken away from us.
Judge Randy Kennedy not only closed a hastily called hearing on May 11 regarding whether the doctor should be placed in a conservatorship; he sealed the court record, as well. Those moves violated legal precedent established in Tennessee by the 1985 State vs. Drake court case, as well as the state Supreme Court’s long-held belief that the public has a qualified right to attend judicial proceedings and read documentation of those proceedings.
The Tennessean and WSMV, whose representatives were kicked out of the May 11 hearing, may be accused of trying to intrude on private matters of the Witherspoon family solely because the doctor’s daughter, actress Reese Witherspoon, is a celebrity. But the real issue for these media outlets is the broader question: If court cases are entirely sealed, where is the oversight of the judicial process?
We ask that question because of Jewell Tinnon.
She is the 80-year-old Nashville resident who was placed in a conservatorship without her knowledge or consent nearly two years ago, and as a result lost all her possessions. Tinnon has since fought Kennedy’s ruling in her case, and is suing the attorney and social services agency who handled her conservatorship.
Of course there are many other Tennesseans who potentially face similar fates — and if those records are sealed there is opportunity for abuse and no public scrutiny.
That is why The Tennessean on Monday filed an emergency motion to intervene for the purpose of getting the Witherspoon record unsealed and to object to the closed proceedings and lack of camera access.
The personal details that the Witherspoons convinced Judge Kennedy were too sensitive for public disclosure had, in fact, already been made public in an affidavit that the doctor’s wife, Betty Witherspoon, had given earlier that week, as she sought an annulment of her husband’s marriage to another woman. In her lawsuit, she also willingly provided details of what she alleged were Dr. Witherspoon’s troubles with drinking, dementia, hoarding and overspending.
On Monday, Judge Kennedy acknowledged that he might have acted differently on May 11 had he known how much was already public. That still does not explain why the judge allowed an emergency hearing without following standard procedures.
The judge on Monday scheduled a hearing for June 1 on the media outlets’ emergency motion, and that’s a step in the right direction toward equal justice instead of the celebrity variety.
http://www.tennessean.com/print/article/20120522/OPINION01/305220008/Public-s-right-know-trumps-seal
Editor's note:
Reese, join the club... An Alice Gore relative filed a motion producing certified court transcripts proving that judge Kawamoto had appointed a severly mentally ill person as Alice' guardian. Furtheermore, the motion requested that the court investigate the present mental status of the guardian. What did the judge do? She would invesigate, but seal the records. Lots of luck with Randy K. Reese.
Alice R. Gore Estate value about 1 million dollars: Alice R. Gore, deceased, a disabled 99 year old ward of the Probate Court of Cook County, Judge Kawamoto’s courtroom was hours away from ending up in the Cook County Morgue. Alice's estate was depleted by probate court parasites and there were reportedly no funds to bury her. Her loving family paid for the burial expenses so that Alice would not have to suffer the indignity of being stacked like an Auschwitz inmate in the Cook County morgue. The judge allowed an easily manipulated, court documented, mentally disabled granddaughter to be appointed as Alice’s guardian and yet no sanctions were instituted against the judge or court officers for this blatant infraction of the law.
Strangely, 16 of Alice’s annuity checks, two of which show forged endorsements, disappeared. Alice’s daughter has a copy of a check with her signature possibly forged. The daughter’s attorney has been trying to obtain copies of the 16 other annuity checks for two years without success. Even more puzzling is a $150,000 life insurance policy owned by Alice and not inventoried into the estate by the court. The Probate Court of Cook of Cook County refuses to investigate these blatant infractions of the law. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
.KawamotoDragon.com
Texas at top of list for convictions for stealing assets from disabled GIs
Texas at top of list for convictions for stealing assets from disabled GIs
By Lisa Olsen and Lindsay Wise
Updated 06:26 a.m., Monday, May 21, 2012
1 of 4.
View: Larger
Hide . Rosa Avila. Courtesy photo
/ SA Rosa Avila. Courtesy photo
Eulalia Avila. Courtesy photo
/ SA Eulalia Avila. Courtesy photo
Charles David Stange Jr.
/ SA Charles David Stange Jr.
The grave of Grady Green, WWII veteran, buried at Houston National Cemetery, Tuesday, May 15, 2012, in Houston. investigative story about veterans all across Texas who were ripped off by the people who were supposed to take care of their money. This veteran had his money stolen by a Houston woman who was supposed to be his caregiver - she got $5,000 to buy him a grave and pay for his care and instead blew it on her own bills, traffic tickets and plumbing repairs. He died before the VA got around to investigating the case or prosecuting the woman who stole from him.
Photo: Karen Warren, Houston Chronicle / © 2012 Houston Chronicle The grave of Grady Green, WWII veteran, buried at Houston Natio...
An interactive map showing the 20 cases involving fiduciaries or family members prosecuted for stealing from disabled vets across Texas.
Armed Sources blog
Recent Headlines .Texan convicted of helping al-Qaida to learn fateGulf fishermen reel from seafood troublesPrivate supply ship flies by space station in testMan accused of killing officer hospitalizedSD murder suspect details problems in her life
(Page 1 of 2)
Creditors just kept calling a permanently hospitalized San Antonio veteran about the delinquent payments on his 2006 Ford Focus, but Joe Cubillos, so disabled that he rarely left the veterans care center, no longer drove and knew nothing about a car.
An investigation revealed that his sister, Rosa Avila, and her daughter had used $180,000 of his money over five years — draining bank accounts, running up credit card debts and buying a new car, while providing Cubillos with pocket money of no more than “$20 at a time.”
Even after their 2011 convictions, the pair claimed they were innocent. Cubillos was generous and had always given away his money to family, they said.
Such swindles aren't uncommon.
The Veterans Affairs Department's inspector general has repeatedly warned about a plague of fraud and theft in a national program that appoints family members and VA-approved fiduciaries to protect a whopping $3.1 billion in assets belonging to veterans the government considers too disabled to manage their own money.
In the past decade, twice as many Texans have been convicted for stealing from disabled veterans enrolled in the VA fiduciary program as in any other state, records obtained from the inspector general by the Houston Chronicle show.
More than 20 veterans' family members and trusted members of the community — including a former police officer, a federal employee and an optometrist — have been convicted. Others, including two attorneys, face pending charges for stealing assets from disabled veterans who they'd been assigned to protect, according to related records from across the state.
Waco optometrist David Fram stole $126,250 from veterans to help prop up his private business, thefts he meticulously documented in financial records later used against him.
Charles Stange Jr., a former Bexar County sheriff's jailer and ex-military policeman, went to prison for stealing $272,000 he'd supposedly been safeguarding for his disabled veteran father.
And a Houston lawyer, Joe Phillips, and his wife, Dorothy, both in their 70s, allegedly stole $2 million from 28 veterans in a pending case described as the largest rip-off ever reported in the VA fiduciary program. The two allegedly hid their thefts for years by forging bank officers' signatures, inventing fake money market accounts and shifting money between various Texas and out-of-state banks.
Dorothy Phillips has pleaded guilty. Her sentencing is pending.
Many swindles were perpetuated on veterans too ill or disabled to report the crimes, records show. Some crimes went undetected for years before being uncovered through tips, thieves' confessions or the VA's own infrequent checks, interviews with attorneys and court records show.
At least two Texans convicted in veteran scams had previous criminal records but still got approved by the VA as fiduciaries. One Houston veteran's sister got approval despite two previous theft convictions. Then she blew part of her brother's $30,000 in at least 20 casino trips, records show.
In interviews and written statements, VA officials said they have set up a new “hub system” to improve oversight: Texas will now be overseen by a Nebraska office. Officials require background and credit checks for newly appointed money managers, ban ATM withdrawals and review bank statements annually.
Reports of theft remain rare, they say, given that 96,000 fiduciaries assist veterans nationwide; about 6,200 in Texas.
David Autry, spokesman for the nonprofit organization Disabled American Veterans, called on the VA to exercise greater oversight and to punish anyone who financially exploits vulnerable veterans.
“It's an outrageous situation when someone takes advantage of veterans who have served and sacrificed for their county,” he said. “I think that's one of the lowest things you can do.”
Alan Jackson, criminal chief of the Eastern District of Texas, said his office has prosecuted even some small-time family scammers to try to deter others from dipping into cash or benefits rightfully belonging to the disabled. Jackson said the feds have more tools to help recover veterans' money than many rural county DAs, who often lack experience prosecuting corruption or in managing forfeitures.
“My thought is, if we don't prosecute them, that's an invitation to somebody else to think: ‘I can do it,'” he said. “Your typical offender is not a repeat criminal sort of person — it's somebody who sees the opportunity and decides nobody is going to get hurt, and boom.”
His district's most recent case involved Tiawa Braxton, a 31-year-old self-styled hip-hop recording artist from Texarkana who was convicted of stealing $45,000 from the VA after he failed to report his father's 2007 death and continued collecting benefits for two more years in the dead man's name.
Most VA fiduciary scams took at least two years to prosecute, and perpetrators often received probation — conditional upon repaying stolen money. Efforts to recover vets' money have been mixed.
As part of Fram's federal probation, the Waco optometrist last year finished repaying more than $120,000 he took from at least one of 15 vets whose accounts he managed for years as a paid VA fiduciary.
Stange, the former Bexar County jailer and a Gulf War-era veteran, lost his house in a federal forfeiture action that a judge ordered in an attempt to recover the “loans” that Stange took from the assets of his disabled father.
VA officials attempted to remove Stange as a fiduciary after discovering the “loans,” but he refused to turn over control, records show. He died last year after completing a 30-month prison term.
The VA has been forced to repay much of the $2 million allegedly taken from vets by Joe Phillips, the Houston lawyer, who retains his law license two years after his 2010 indictment. Phillips, a former VA employee, declared bankruptcy and successfully argued in related civil lawsuits that the government should repay veterans for their losses because of its lax oversight. His criminal trial is set for next month.
In the case of San Antonian Cubillos, sister Avila's defense attorney Andrea Polunsky said Avila and her daughter agreed last year to repay all the money they'd taken and distributed to various family members, but without admitting guilt.
“She disputed that she did owe the money. She claimed the expenditures were done with his knowledge,” said Polunsky, who said her client's poor record-keeping skills and lack of education, along with a paucity of VA oversight, contributed to the problems, which persisted for five years before the thefts were detected.
The most recent Texas conviction involved a 40-year-old Fort Worth woman who got approved to manage her father's VA benefits in July 2008, stuck him in a nursing home and spent his money on herself. Yolanda Robinson got probation and was ordered to repay $9,305 in January 2012.
Justice came too late to help her disabled father. He died in 2010.
lise.olsen@chron.com
lindsay.wise@chron.com
Express-News Staff Writer Craig Kapitan contributed to this report.
Read more:
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Texas-at-top-of-list-for-convictions-for-stealing-3571727.php#ixzz1vnAUlNY7
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Imperial couple leaves for Britain
Imperial couple leaves for Britain
Japan's Emperor and Empress are on their way to Britain for the 60th anniversary celebration of the reign of Queen Elizabeth the Second.
Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko departed from Tokyo's Haneda airport on Wednesday. Imperial family members and the Prime Minister, Yoshihiko Noda, were there to see them off.
The Emperor said he is glad to be able to congratulate the Queen in person on her diamond jubilee.
He said he is also looking forward to meeting British people who engaged in relief activities for Japan after the March 2011 disaster, to thank them on behalf of the Japanese people.
The Imperial couple along with royals from other countries will attend a luncheon on Friday hosted by Queen Elizabeth and her husband, Prince Philip, at Windsor Castle near London.
They will return to Japan on Sunday.
May 16, 2012 - Updated 03:56 UTC (12:56 JST)
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/20120516_21.html
KawamotoDragon.com
Japan's Emperor and Empress are on their way to Britain for the 60th anniversary celebration of the reign of Queen Elizabeth the Second.
Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko departed from Tokyo's Haneda airport on Wednesday. Imperial family members and the Prime Minister, Yoshihiko Noda, were there to see them off.
The Emperor said he is glad to be able to congratulate the Queen in person on her diamond jubilee.
He said he is also looking forward to meeting British people who engaged in relief activities for Japan after the March 2011 disaster, to thank them on behalf of the Japanese people.
The Imperial couple along with royals from other countries will attend a luncheon on Friday hosted by Queen Elizabeth and her husband, Prince Philip, at Windsor Castle near London.
They will return to Japan on Sunday.
May 16, 2012 - Updated 03:56 UTC (12:56 JST)
http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/20120516_21.html
KawamotoDragon.com
Video-taping a sore subject at North Chicago council meetings
Video-taping a sore subject at North Chicago council meetings
By Judy Masterson
jmasterson@stmedianetwork.com
Last Modified: May 15, 2012 08:23PM
A renewal of the practice of videotaping North Chicago City Council meetings has been a sore point between Mayor Leon Rockingham and some council members, especially those who are after his job.
Council meetings have not been video-recorded since Mayor Bette Thomas left office in 2005, according to 7th Ward Alderman Charles January, who plans to challenge Rockingham in the next mayoral election. January arranged for the taping of meetings about four months ago with the help of local cable talk show host Wadell Brooks, who provided equipment and the services of his videographer. The meetings air from 6 to 8 p.m. Sunday on Comcast cable access Channel 17.
The videotaping was restarted at the height of an ongoing protest against police brutality in the city in the wake of the arrest and subsequent death of Darrin “Dagwood” Hanna. Protestors, who packed council chambers in the months after Hanna’s death on Nov. 13, have been highly critical of Rockingham and his administration, venting their anger and frustration during lengthy public comment sessions.
“I want transparency,” January said.
Last week, the city took over the taping of its own meetings. But January, who said he will keep taping an unofficial or “people’s” version, is refusing to let go of his prime time Sunday slot on cable access, leaving the city a less desirable time — from noon to 2 p.m.
The disagreement came to a head after a committee meeting on Monday, when the tape kept rolling after the meeting was adjourned. January’s wife, Kathy January, who was acting as the unofficial videotaper, attempted to catch a verbal confrontation between Rockingham and her husband, when Shawna Huley, a Rockingham ally, approached and blocked her lens.
January said she felt threatened by Huley, who she said accused her of editing the tapes and “not telling or showing the truth.”
Learning of the altercation, Charles January said he caught up with Huley just outside City Hall and warned her not to harass his wife. He said Huley then accused him of threatening her.
Huley, operator of Huley 10 Productions, could not be reached for comment. Rockingham did not return a phone call.
Aldermen on Monday discussed how often to videotape and whether to continue to allow public comment after every meeting, or to limit it to twice-monthly, full-council sessions.
City attorney Chuck Smith alluded to past lengthy and boisterous public comment periods in suggesting that the council consider adopting a Committee of the Whole format and allowing comment “at that meeting.”
“At some point you’ve got to get some work done,” Smith said.
January and 3rd Ward Alderman Valerie DeVost, who also plans to challenge Rockingham, want comments, now limited to three minutes per person, allowed at every meeting. DeVost also wants them noted on every agenda.
“The taxpayers are paying us and they have the right to speak,” DeVost said.
“Let them come here and vent and speak their conscience and their minds,” January said.
Rockingham said he supports public comment at full council meetings and he prefers taping limited to those meetings.
The council is expected to vote this spring on a contract for a media person who will be paid $150 to videotape designated meetings.
http://newssun.suntimes.com/news/12528036-418/video-taping-a-sore-subject-at-north-chicago-council-meetings.html
By Judy Masterson
jmasterson@stmedianetwork.com
Last Modified: May 15, 2012 08:23PM
A renewal of the practice of videotaping North Chicago City Council meetings has been a sore point between Mayor Leon Rockingham and some council members, especially those who are after his job.
Council meetings have not been video-recorded since Mayor Bette Thomas left office in 2005, according to 7th Ward Alderman Charles January, who plans to challenge Rockingham in the next mayoral election. January arranged for the taping of meetings about four months ago with the help of local cable talk show host Wadell Brooks, who provided equipment and the services of his videographer. The meetings air from 6 to 8 p.m. Sunday on Comcast cable access Channel 17.
The videotaping was restarted at the height of an ongoing protest against police brutality in the city in the wake of the arrest and subsequent death of Darrin “Dagwood” Hanna. Protestors, who packed council chambers in the months after Hanna’s death on Nov. 13, have been highly critical of Rockingham and his administration, venting their anger and frustration during lengthy public comment sessions.
“I want transparency,” January said.
Last week, the city took over the taping of its own meetings. But January, who said he will keep taping an unofficial or “people’s” version, is refusing to let go of his prime time Sunday slot on cable access, leaving the city a less desirable time — from noon to 2 p.m.
The disagreement came to a head after a committee meeting on Monday, when the tape kept rolling after the meeting was adjourned. January’s wife, Kathy January, who was acting as the unofficial videotaper, attempted to catch a verbal confrontation between Rockingham and her husband, when Shawna Huley, a Rockingham ally, approached and blocked her lens.
January said she felt threatened by Huley, who she said accused her of editing the tapes and “not telling or showing the truth.”
Learning of the altercation, Charles January said he caught up with Huley just outside City Hall and warned her not to harass his wife. He said Huley then accused him of threatening her.
Huley, operator of Huley 10 Productions, could not be reached for comment. Rockingham did not return a phone call.
Aldermen on Monday discussed how often to videotape and whether to continue to allow public comment after every meeting, or to limit it to twice-monthly, full-council sessions.
City attorney Chuck Smith alluded to past lengthy and boisterous public comment periods in suggesting that the council consider adopting a Committee of the Whole format and allowing comment “at that meeting.”
“At some point you’ve got to get some work done,” Smith said.
January and 3rd Ward Alderman Valerie DeVost, who also plans to challenge Rockingham, want comments, now limited to three minutes per person, allowed at every meeting. DeVost also wants them noted on every agenda.
“The taxpayers are paying us and they have the right to speak,” DeVost said.
“Let them come here and vent and speak their conscience and their minds,” January said.
Rockingham said he supports public comment at full council meetings and he prefers taping limited to those meetings.
The council is expected to vote this spring on a contract for a media person who will be paid $150 to videotape designated meetings.
http://newssun.suntimes.com/news/12528036-418/video-taping-a-sore-subject-at-north-chicago-council-meetings.html
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Lake County announces new arrests in killings once linked to other men
Lake County announces new arrests in killings once linked to other men
By Dan Hinkel
Tribune reporter
4:06 p.m. CDT, May 15, 2012
Lake County prosecutors this afternoon announced new murder charges in two notorious slayings that had been attributed to other men until DNA pointed away from the suspects.
The announcement comes on the same day prosecutors dropped rape charges against a man whose case was also torpedoed by DNA evidence.
Prosecutors have charged Jorge Torrez, 23, with killing 8-year-old Laura Hobbs and 9-year-old Krystal Tobias in a Zion park in 2005. Jerry Hobbs, Laura’s father, spent five years in jail awaiting trial for the crime before semen evidence found in one girl’s body was matched to Torrez, according to court records, and Hobbs was released in August 2010. Hobbs had confessed to the crime, though he said his confession was coerced during nearly 24 hours of interrogation.
Torrez, once a close friend of Tobias’ brother, is currently serving five life sentences in prison for a separate series of brutal attacks on women in Virginia. He also faces federal murder charges in the 2009 killing of a 20-year-old Navy petty officer in her Virginia barracks, and federal authorities are seeking the death penalty.
In a second written statement released to the media simultaneously, prosecutors announced charges against 42-year-old Hezekiah Whitfield of Chicago in the 1994 bludgeoning death of 71-year-old Waukegan appliance store owner Fred Reckling. Whitfield was arrested this morning and a judge ordered him held on $3 million bail, according to the news release.
James Edwards was convicted of that crime in 1996 after he confessed. The case was recently called into question by blood evidence linking the crime to another man but Lake County had not named any alternate suspect until this afternoon. Lake County State’s Attorney Michael Waller personally helped to prosecute Edwards, who is now serving a life sentence at Menard Correctional Center.
Edwards is set for a hearing in Lake County on May 25. He is not expected to go free, however, because he has yet to begin serving a life sentence for a 1974 murder in Ohio, a crime to which he confessed at the time of his arrest in the Reckling case.
“I would anticipate…charges will be dismissed against James Edwards,” said Paul DeLuca, Edwards’ defense attorney. “Everyone who doubts false confessions exist, here is another example.”
On Tuesday morning, prosecutors dropped charges against 52-year-old Bennie Starks in the 1986 rape of a 69-year-old woman in Waukegan. Starks has been free on bond since 2006 when the appeals court ordered a new trial after DNA evidence was found to point away from him, but prosecutors had not announced whether they would retry him.
The three cases are especially noteworthy because, in each one, prosecutors continued to insist on the original suspect’s guilt after DNA evidence suggested his innocence.
Freelance reporter Ruth Fuller contributed.
dlhinkel@tribune.com
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-lake-county-announces-new-arrests-in-killings-of-laura-hobbs-and-krystal-tobias-as-well-as-fred-reckling-all-once-linked-to-other-men-20120515,0,5372500.story
By Dan Hinkel
Tribune reporter
4:06 p.m. CDT, May 15, 2012
Lake County prosecutors this afternoon announced new murder charges in two notorious slayings that had been attributed to other men until DNA pointed away from the suspects.
The announcement comes on the same day prosecutors dropped rape charges against a man whose case was also torpedoed by DNA evidence.
Prosecutors have charged Jorge Torrez, 23, with killing 8-year-old Laura Hobbs and 9-year-old Krystal Tobias in a Zion park in 2005. Jerry Hobbs, Laura’s father, spent five years in jail awaiting trial for the crime before semen evidence found in one girl’s body was matched to Torrez, according to court records, and Hobbs was released in August 2010. Hobbs had confessed to the crime, though he said his confession was coerced during nearly 24 hours of interrogation.
Torrez, once a close friend of Tobias’ brother, is currently serving five life sentences in prison for a separate series of brutal attacks on women in Virginia. He also faces federal murder charges in the 2009 killing of a 20-year-old Navy petty officer in her Virginia barracks, and federal authorities are seeking the death penalty.
In a second written statement released to the media simultaneously, prosecutors announced charges against 42-year-old Hezekiah Whitfield of Chicago in the 1994 bludgeoning death of 71-year-old Waukegan appliance store owner Fred Reckling. Whitfield was arrested this morning and a judge ordered him held on $3 million bail, according to the news release.
James Edwards was convicted of that crime in 1996 after he confessed. The case was recently called into question by blood evidence linking the crime to another man but Lake County had not named any alternate suspect until this afternoon. Lake County State’s Attorney Michael Waller personally helped to prosecute Edwards, who is now serving a life sentence at Menard Correctional Center.
Edwards is set for a hearing in Lake County on May 25. He is not expected to go free, however, because he has yet to begin serving a life sentence for a 1974 murder in Ohio, a crime to which he confessed at the time of his arrest in the Reckling case.
“I would anticipate…charges will be dismissed against James Edwards,” said Paul DeLuca, Edwards’ defense attorney. “Everyone who doubts false confessions exist, here is another example.”
On Tuesday morning, prosecutors dropped charges against 52-year-old Bennie Starks in the 1986 rape of a 69-year-old woman in Waukegan. Starks has been free on bond since 2006 when the appeals court ordered a new trial after DNA evidence was found to point away from him, but prosecutors had not announced whether they would retry him.
The three cases are especially noteworthy because, in each one, prosecutors continued to insist on the original suspect’s guilt after DNA evidence suggested his innocence.
Freelance reporter Ruth Fuller contributed.
dlhinkel@tribune.com
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-lake-county-announces-new-arrests-in-killings-of-laura-hobbs-and-krystal-tobias-as-well-as-fred-reckling-all-once-linked-to-other-men-20120515,0,5372500.story
After 20 years in prison, man cleared in '86 Waukegan rape
After 20 years in prison, man cleared in '86 Waukegan rape
By Dan Hinkel
Tribune reporter
12:03 PM CDT, May 15, 2012
Lake County prosecutors have dropped rape charges against Bennie Starks, who spent 20 years in prison before DNA pointed away from him.
Assistant State's Attorney Jim Newman appeared at a brief hearing and dropped the sexual assault charges.
"He is a free man and he is not guilty," said Starks' lawyer, Jed Stone.
Starks, dressed in a burgundy sport coat and black and white checked shirt, accepted a hug around the shoulder from another of his lawyers, Vanessa Potkin from the New York-based Innocence Project.
"This has been a great day," Starks said.
As to his plans, he said, "Spend time with my grandkids and just...living."
Starks, 52, of Chicago was convicted in 1986 of raping a 69-year-old woman in Waukegan. He was in the middle of a 60-year sentence when the appeals court ordered a new trial in 2006 and he was released on bond. As with three other recent Lake County cases, prosecutors insisted on his guilt even after DNA pointed toward someone else as the attacker.
The possibility of a retrial had been thrown into doubt by court rulings barring prosecutors from using the testimony of the victim, who identified Starks as the rapist.
She died several years ago, and a Lake County judge ruled in January 2011 that prosecutors could not use her past testimony at the retrial.
The state appeals court affirmed that decision in February, writing that Starks' lawyers would not have a fair shot at cross-examining her and holding that the original cross-examination was inadequate.
Since February’s ruling, Starks has waited to learn whether prosecutors planned to retry him.
After the conflicting DNA evidence became public in the early 2000s, prosecutors responded much as they did to other cases involving forensic evidence suggesting a suspect's innocence.
Prosecutors argued that the DNA did not clear Starks because the woman could have had consensual sex with someone else, although she said at trial she had not had sex in the weeks before the attack.
The woman identified him as the man who pulled her into a ravine and beat, bit and raped her. A dentist said bite marks on the victim matched Starks, and his jacket was found at the scene.
Starks said the jacket and money were stolen from him after he passed the evening in a local tavern, and the defense attorneys have called the scientific rigor of the bite-mark evidence into question.
In the early 2000s, testing turned up a genetic profile from another man on the victim’s underwear. Later, testing on a vaginal swab found DNA that didn’t come from Starks, and the appeals court ordered a new trial in 2006.
Starks was also convicted of battery in the 1986 attack, and his attorneys hope to have that conviction vacated.
dhinkel@tribune.com
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-after-20-years-in-prison-man-cleared-in-86-waukegan-rape-20120515,0,1125375.story
By Dan Hinkel
Tribune reporter
12:03 PM CDT, May 15, 2012
Lake County prosecutors have dropped rape charges against Bennie Starks, who spent 20 years in prison before DNA pointed away from him.
Assistant State's Attorney Jim Newman appeared at a brief hearing and dropped the sexual assault charges.
"He is a free man and he is not guilty," said Starks' lawyer, Jed Stone.
Starks, dressed in a burgundy sport coat and black and white checked shirt, accepted a hug around the shoulder from another of his lawyers, Vanessa Potkin from the New York-based Innocence Project.
"This has been a great day," Starks said.
As to his plans, he said, "Spend time with my grandkids and just...living."
Starks, 52, of Chicago was convicted in 1986 of raping a 69-year-old woman in Waukegan. He was in the middle of a 60-year sentence when the appeals court ordered a new trial in 2006 and he was released on bond. As with three other recent Lake County cases, prosecutors insisted on his guilt even after DNA pointed toward someone else as the attacker.
The possibility of a retrial had been thrown into doubt by court rulings barring prosecutors from using the testimony of the victim, who identified Starks as the rapist.
She died several years ago, and a Lake County judge ruled in January 2011 that prosecutors could not use her past testimony at the retrial.
The state appeals court affirmed that decision in February, writing that Starks' lawyers would not have a fair shot at cross-examining her and holding that the original cross-examination was inadequate.
Since February’s ruling, Starks has waited to learn whether prosecutors planned to retry him.
After the conflicting DNA evidence became public in the early 2000s, prosecutors responded much as they did to other cases involving forensic evidence suggesting a suspect's innocence.
Prosecutors argued that the DNA did not clear Starks because the woman could have had consensual sex with someone else, although she said at trial she had not had sex in the weeks before the attack.
The woman identified him as the man who pulled her into a ravine and beat, bit and raped her. A dentist said bite marks on the victim matched Starks, and his jacket was found at the scene.
Starks said the jacket and money were stolen from him after he passed the evening in a local tavern, and the defense attorneys have called the scientific rigor of the bite-mark evidence into question.
In the early 2000s, testing turned up a genetic profile from another man on the victim’s underwear. Later, testing on a vaginal swab found DNA that didn’t come from Starks, and the appeals court ordered a new trial in 2006.
Starks was also convicted of battery in the 1986 attack, and his attorneys hope to have that conviction vacated.
dhinkel@tribune.com
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-after-20-years-in-prison-man-cleared-in-86-waukegan-rape-20120515,0,1125375.story
California State Psychology Board Launches Psychiatric Probe of Activist Psychologist
Monday, May 14, 2012
California State Psychology Board Launches Psychiatric Probe of Activist Psychologist
Janet C. Phelan
Activist Post
The California State Psychology Board has launched an action against a Northern California psychologist and advocate for the disabled, and has ordered the practitioner into a psychiatric evaluation or face revocation of his license.
In an unprecedented deviation from the Board's mandate to investigate consumer complaints, the Board has involved itself in what appears to be an employer/employee dispute.
Psychology Board employee Gina Bayless refused to go on the record as to why the Board has taken such an unusual stance in the matter of Dr. Robert Fettgather. The State Psychology Board, which is housed in the State Department of Consumer Affairs, has placed on its website a legal document mandating Fettgather into the evaluation but omits any names of or details about his accusers.
This reporter has obtained the names of the four former employees of Dr. Fettgather who have filed complaints against him. Bayless refused to confirm or deny that these were the complainants due to what she called “privacy issues.”
Dr. Fettgather, who has been licensed to practice psychology in the State of California for 22 years without a complaint being lodged against him, came under scrutiny by the Board following a series of events surrounding his advocacy for his disabled son, David. David was born with Down Syndrome.
According to Fettgather, David was prompted by Herman Kothe, a caseworker at Alta Regional Center, to “scribble on the signature line (he cannot provide informed consent) and signed his life away into care home exile.”
His father refers to the warehousing of his son as “incarceration.” The Fettgathers had divorced many years ago and, up until the time that the mother moved from San Jose to Sacramento, were sharing custody of David. Around the time that David turned eighteen, he was placed by his mother into what Dr. Fettgather terms a “slum home.” Dr. Fettgather was erroneously informed by the Alta Regional center staff that David had to be conserved once he reached the age of eighteen. In fact, this is not the case in the State of California. According to the Director of Association of Regional Centers, Eileen Richey, there are very few DD adults under conservatorship in California and this generally takes place when the individual has no parents.
In an effort to comply with what he thought was a legal necessity and unable to work with his ex-wife on the issue of David’s care, Fettgather decided to look for a suitable guardian. Fettgather reports having interviewed Kay Carrigan and states he was satisfied that she was going to do the best for David. The last thing he expected was what followed.
Dr. Fettgather wanted his son to return to San Jose and live with him. Conservator Carrigan refused to permit this, and placed David into yet another home for the developmentally disabled. She then curtailed his education, removing him from the high school he had been successfully attending and putting him back into a segregated middle school. Fettgather reports his son began to decompensate.
As Fettgather's advocacy for his son continued, the conservator responded with further restrictions. She began to defame the father in the probate court and to limit his visits with his son.
In a letter dated 8/21/07 from Fettgather's attorney Betty Marshall to Carrigan's attorney, Fred Heise, Marshall alleges that Carrigan and Heise were “withholding information and conspiring to deprive David of Dr. Fettgathers legal mandated involvement in the IEP and IPP process for David.” State and Federal law mandate the IEP and IPP to protect the rights of the disabled.
Carrigan ultimately resigned and was replaced by conservator Betty Wright. Dr. Fettgather believes she resigned to avoid a possible lawsuit.
In the meantime, Fettgather became increasingly politically active around the issue of adult guardianship, which has become a “national nightmare,” according to elder advocate and activist Bonnie Reiter.
Reiter, who lost her mother, Corinne Bramson, to a conservator/hospice scam in Florida, has termed conservatorship a “holocaust on the elderly and disabled.” Fettgather began to join together with other conservatorship activists and set up a website, David Fettgather’s Circle of Support (friendsofdavidfettgather.blogspot.com).
He also started contacting his elected representatives concerning the abuses going on in David’s case. He filed, along with other conservatorship victims, a complaint with the State Attorney General. He also filed a complaint against the conservator with the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau (PFB) only to be advised that his sole remedy lay with the court. Jane Valdez, an erstwhile analyst with the PFB, which--along with the Psychology Board --is housed in the Department of Consumer Affairs, advised him of the closure in a telephone call and has refused to put this in writing.
The PFB got into hot water a couple of years back when it was determined that the agency was closing complaints and advising complainants that their remedy lay with the court. This is a departure from the mandate of that agency to investigate and prosecute conservator misconduct. The agency now appears to have adopted a policy of verbal notification of complaint closures and is reluctant to commit this type of questionable determination to writing. Recent revelations that the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau does not have a policies and procedures manual has raised alarm that the agency is in violation of the law in numerous aspects of its functioning.
Parenthetically, Fettgather's advocacy work spans several decades. In 1976, he first began advocating for those institutionalized in California State mental hospitals, which were considered by many to be the worst in the United States. Ultimately, the hospitals were shut down by Governor Ronald Reagan.
In 2008, Fettgather met with Assemblyman Jim Beall. When Beall failed to follow up on David's situation, Fettgather called him on it. Presenting at a Town Hall meeting in April of 2011, Fettgather told David's story and revealed that Beall had ignored his pleas. Beall was embarrassed. Following the meeting, Beall contacted the Dignitary Protection Section of the California Highway Patrol, alleging that Fettgather had “accosted” him.
The DPS investigator contacted the conservator and also at least one judge. Apparently at this juncture, a number of others in the conservatorship community were also notified. However, according to a press officer at the California Highway Patrol, the DPS investigator determined that no crime had occurred and that there was no threat.
Assemblyman Beall’s office replied to queries as to the nature of his complaint to the DPS and stated “Following the security protocols of the California Highway Patrol unit responsible for the safety of legislators, the Assembly District 24 office is precluded from commenting on any interactions Mr. Fettgather has had with authorities or Assemblymember Beall.” The Assemblyman’s office also stated that “Mr. Beall and his staff have brought Mr. Fettgather’s personal concerns regarding his son, as well as his allegations, to the attention of the Department of Developmental Services. Because of confidentiality regulations, the Assembly District 24 office is not allowed to share that information with you.”
Two days after the Town Hall meeting, Dr. Fettgather visited Alta Regional Center and asked to meet with David's caseworker.
A strong relationship exists between the regional centers and the conservators who take charge of the developmentally disabled. The RC’s work closely with the conservators as a team to locate services and vendors for the developmentally disabled.
Instead of meeting with a caseworker, Fettgather was taken into a private room by Alta Regional Center employee David Rydquist. Moments later, Executive Director Phil Bonnet joined them and began to level accusations against Dr. Fettgather. States Fettgather, “”Bonnet tried to provoke me at every turn....he made countless intimations about my mental status: are you going to kidnap your son; you've been acting pretty strangely...” According to Dr. Fettgather, Bonnet referenced the recent incident with Beall, stating he had already been informed about it.
Fettgather states that Bonnet manhandled him in an effort to forcibly escort him out of the building. Fettgather called the police and reported the assault. Fettgather's fiancée had accompanied him to the Alta RC and was reportedly badly shaken by the incident.
The police arrived and threatened Fettgather with arrest if he returned to Alta, stating he was “trespassing.”
Alta Regional Center Director Phil Bonnet did not return calls asking for his input on the incident with Dr. Fettgather.
A couple of days after this, Dr. Fettgather received a call from State Psychology Board investigator Jeremy Singleton who informed him there was a client complaint against him.
This soon morphed to a non-consumer complaint and ultimately he was told that four of his former employees had filed complaints against him. Also referenced is a complaint by a wife of a former patient. The wife was in treatment with one of the former employees.
Citing concerns about his mental status, the California State Psychology Board has ordered Fettgather into a psychiatric assessment. He has refused. The hearing is scheduled in Administrative Law court in Oakland on May 14.
At this juncture, Fettgather is permitted to see David every other weekend. Due to the length of the drive from San Jose to Sacramento, he has parked a houseboat in the Sacramento area for the weekend visits.
”I have spent over 100,000 in court fighting for David,” he reports. He refuses to go back into probate court, stating it is pointless. “There is a cozy relationship between the judges and the professional conservators,” he states. “The conservator's attorney has stated that I am a 'legal stranger' to my son. They own him now.” Incidentally, Fettgather has been paying half the conservator's fees, half her attorney’s fees and half the fees of the attorney appointed by the court to represent David, splitting these bills with his ex-wife. He states that he stopped paying on these bills a few months back, dismayed by the lack of attention to David's well-being.
“David is very unhappy,” says Dr. Fettgather. “He wants to come home.”
Fettgather fears that the attempt to revoke his license to practice will, if successful, negatively impact his ability to advocate for his son.
A growing number of people who have attempted to advocate for a family member under a conservatorship have found themselves the target of retaliation. Dr. Robert Sarhan of Florida, who lost his mother to highly questionable medical decisions made by her conservator, also lost his medical license and narrowly escaped an effort by Social Services to take away his son. A number of people, including Marty Prehn and Russell East, have found the financial retaliation for their advocacy has resulted in their homelessness. Others, such as Ray Fernandez, have left the U.S. due to perceptions of extreme prejudice by the conservatorship courts. Robert Gettinger was arrested by a SWAT team in Southern California when his internet postings about corrupt probate judges raised the ire of the legal community. No charges were ever lodged and Gettinger, a former police officer, was released after a couple of days in jail.
Others, such as Ricky Ritch, claim that they were assaulted by the police due to their attempts to advocate against abusive conservatorships. Jeannie Tanaka, who is an attorney for the State of California, was subject to a false arrest when Conservator Linda Cotterman made a false police report and had Jeannie taken into custody during a routine visit with her mother. Jeannie was released prior to being booked when the Beverly Hills police realized that there was no Restraining Order in effect against her.
Several attorneys, known to those in the guardianship reform movement to be aggressive in pursuit of justice in matters involving conservatorship abuse, have been suspended from the practice of law. Arizona JD Grant Goodman and California JD Jim Reiss are two of the more recent legal casualties.
Those concerned about the increasing use of psychiatry as a tool of control by the State are asked to contact Gina Bayless at the State Psychology Board and lodge your concerns. The number for the Board is 916 263-2699. Press 0 to be connected to the receptionist.
At the time of going to press, this reporter was informed that the document filed by the State Psychology Board describing its concerns about Dr. Fettgather was only served on his attorney May 10, a mere four days before his hearing. This document, prepared by clinical psychologist Francis Abueg, was submitted to the Department of Justice on August 3, 2011, nine months before the hearing, and appears to contain a number of inaccuracies, including the allegation that Fettgather never met with Dr. Abueg. In fact, Fettgather and his attorney, Dr. Bruce Ebert, met with Abueg for two hours per Abueg’s request.
A local attorney, speaking on conditions of anonymity, has expressed the concern that such withholding of the specific allegations against Fettgather and only releasing them to his legal team at the eleventh hour might violate his right to due process.
Read other articles by Janet Phelan HERE.
You can support this information by voting on Reddit HERE.
Janet Phelan is an investigative journalist whose articles have appeared in the Los Angeles Times, The San Bernardino County Sentinel, The Santa Monica Daily Press, The Long Beach Press Telegram, Oui Magazine and other regional and national publications. Janet specializes in issues pertaining to legal corruption and addresses the heated subject of adult conservatorship, revealing shocking information about the relationships between courts and shady financial consultants. She also covers issues relating to international bioweapons treaties. Her poetry has been published in Gambit, Libera, Applezaba Review, Nausea One and other magazines. Her first book, The Hitler Poems, was published in 2005. She currently resides abroad. You may browse through her articles (and poetry) at janetphelan.com
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/05/california-state-psychology-board.html
Editor's note: Alice Gore's daughter after confronting the court appointed GAL about Alice's poor treatment also had her visitation with her aged mother limited.
Alice R. Gore Estate value about 1 million dollars: Alice R. Gore, deceased, a disabled 99 year old ward of the Probate Court of Cook County, Judge Kawamoto’s courtroom was hours away from ending up in the Cook County Morgue. Alice's estate was depleted by probate court parasites and there were reportedly no funds to bury her. Her loving family paid for the burial expenses so that Alice would not have to suffer the indignity of being stacked like an Auschwitz inmate in the Cook County morgue. The judge allowed an easily manipulated, court documented, mentally disabled granddaughter to be appointed as Alice’s guardian and yet no sanctions were instituted against the judge or court officers for this blatant infraction of the law.
Strangely, 16 of Alice’s annuity checks, two of which show forged endorsements, disappeared. Alice’s daughter has a copy of a check with her signature possibly forged. The daughter’s attorney has been trying to obtain copies of the 16 other annuity checks for two years without success. Even more puzzling is a $150,000 life insurance policy owned by Alice and not inventoried into the estate by the court. The Probate Court of Cook of Cook County refuses to investigate these blatant infractions of the law. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
KawamotoDragon.com
California State Psychology Board Launches Psychiatric Probe of Activist Psychologist
Janet C. Phelan
Activist Post
The California State Psychology Board has launched an action against a Northern California psychologist and advocate for the disabled, and has ordered the practitioner into a psychiatric evaluation or face revocation of his license.
In an unprecedented deviation from the Board's mandate to investigate consumer complaints, the Board has involved itself in what appears to be an employer/employee dispute.
Psychology Board employee Gina Bayless refused to go on the record as to why the Board has taken such an unusual stance in the matter of Dr. Robert Fettgather. The State Psychology Board, which is housed in the State Department of Consumer Affairs, has placed on its website a legal document mandating Fettgather into the evaluation but omits any names of or details about his accusers.
This reporter has obtained the names of the four former employees of Dr. Fettgather who have filed complaints against him. Bayless refused to confirm or deny that these were the complainants due to what she called “privacy issues.”
Dr. Fettgather, who has been licensed to practice psychology in the State of California for 22 years without a complaint being lodged against him, came under scrutiny by the Board following a series of events surrounding his advocacy for his disabled son, David. David was born with Down Syndrome.
According to Fettgather, David was prompted by Herman Kothe, a caseworker at Alta Regional Center, to “scribble on the signature line (he cannot provide informed consent) and signed his life away into care home exile.”
His father refers to the warehousing of his son as “incarceration.” The Fettgathers had divorced many years ago and, up until the time that the mother moved from San Jose to Sacramento, were sharing custody of David. Around the time that David turned eighteen, he was placed by his mother into what Dr. Fettgather terms a “slum home.” Dr. Fettgather was erroneously informed by the Alta Regional center staff that David had to be conserved once he reached the age of eighteen. In fact, this is not the case in the State of California. According to the Director of Association of Regional Centers, Eileen Richey, there are very few DD adults under conservatorship in California and this generally takes place when the individual has no parents.
In an effort to comply with what he thought was a legal necessity and unable to work with his ex-wife on the issue of David’s care, Fettgather decided to look for a suitable guardian. Fettgather reports having interviewed Kay Carrigan and states he was satisfied that she was going to do the best for David. The last thing he expected was what followed.
Dr. Fettgather wanted his son to return to San Jose and live with him. Conservator Carrigan refused to permit this, and placed David into yet another home for the developmentally disabled. She then curtailed his education, removing him from the high school he had been successfully attending and putting him back into a segregated middle school. Fettgather reports his son began to decompensate.
As Fettgather's advocacy for his son continued, the conservator responded with further restrictions. She began to defame the father in the probate court and to limit his visits with his son.
In a letter dated 8/21/07 from Fettgather's attorney Betty Marshall to Carrigan's attorney, Fred Heise, Marshall alleges that Carrigan and Heise were “withholding information and conspiring to deprive David of Dr. Fettgathers legal mandated involvement in the IEP and IPP process for David.” State and Federal law mandate the IEP and IPP to protect the rights of the disabled.
Carrigan ultimately resigned and was replaced by conservator Betty Wright. Dr. Fettgather believes she resigned to avoid a possible lawsuit.
In the meantime, Fettgather became increasingly politically active around the issue of adult guardianship, which has become a “national nightmare,” according to elder advocate and activist Bonnie Reiter.
Reiter, who lost her mother, Corinne Bramson, to a conservator/hospice scam in Florida, has termed conservatorship a “holocaust on the elderly and disabled.” Fettgather began to join together with other conservatorship activists and set up a website, David Fettgather’s Circle of Support (friendsofdavidfettgather.blogspot.com).
He also started contacting his elected representatives concerning the abuses going on in David’s case. He filed, along with other conservatorship victims, a complaint with the State Attorney General. He also filed a complaint against the conservator with the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau (PFB) only to be advised that his sole remedy lay with the court. Jane Valdez, an erstwhile analyst with the PFB, which--along with the Psychology Board --is housed in the Department of Consumer Affairs, advised him of the closure in a telephone call and has refused to put this in writing.
The PFB got into hot water a couple of years back when it was determined that the agency was closing complaints and advising complainants that their remedy lay with the court. This is a departure from the mandate of that agency to investigate and prosecute conservator misconduct. The agency now appears to have adopted a policy of verbal notification of complaint closures and is reluctant to commit this type of questionable determination to writing. Recent revelations that the Professional Fiduciaries Bureau does not have a policies and procedures manual has raised alarm that the agency is in violation of the law in numerous aspects of its functioning.
Parenthetically, Fettgather's advocacy work spans several decades. In 1976, he first began advocating for those institutionalized in California State mental hospitals, which were considered by many to be the worst in the United States. Ultimately, the hospitals were shut down by Governor Ronald Reagan.
In 2008, Fettgather met with Assemblyman Jim Beall. When Beall failed to follow up on David's situation, Fettgather called him on it. Presenting at a Town Hall meeting in April of 2011, Fettgather told David's story and revealed that Beall had ignored his pleas. Beall was embarrassed. Following the meeting, Beall contacted the Dignitary Protection Section of the California Highway Patrol, alleging that Fettgather had “accosted” him.
The DPS investigator contacted the conservator and also at least one judge. Apparently at this juncture, a number of others in the conservatorship community were also notified. However, according to a press officer at the California Highway Patrol, the DPS investigator determined that no crime had occurred and that there was no threat.
Assemblyman Beall’s office replied to queries as to the nature of his complaint to the DPS and stated “Following the security protocols of the California Highway Patrol unit responsible for the safety of legislators, the Assembly District 24 office is precluded from commenting on any interactions Mr. Fettgather has had with authorities or Assemblymember Beall.” The Assemblyman’s office also stated that “Mr. Beall and his staff have brought Mr. Fettgather’s personal concerns regarding his son, as well as his allegations, to the attention of the Department of Developmental Services. Because of confidentiality regulations, the Assembly District 24 office is not allowed to share that information with you.”
Two days after the Town Hall meeting, Dr. Fettgather visited Alta Regional Center and asked to meet with David's caseworker.
A strong relationship exists between the regional centers and the conservators who take charge of the developmentally disabled. The RC’s work closely with the conservators as a team to locate services and vendors for the developmentally disabled.
Instead of meeting with a caseworker, Fettgather was taken into a private room by Alta Regional Center employee David Rydquist. Moments later, Executive Director Phil Bonnet joined them and began to level accusations against Dr. Fettgather. States Fettgather, “”Bonnet tried to provoke me at every turn....he made countless intimations about my mental status: are you going to kidnap your son; you've been acting pretty strangely...” According to Dr. Fettgather, Bonnet referenced the recent incident with Beall, stating he had already been informed about it.
Fettgather states that Bonnet manhandled him in an effort to forcibly escort him out of the building. Fettgather called the police and reported the assault. Fettgather's fiancée had accompanied him to the Alta RC and was reportedly badly shaken by the incident.
The police arrived and threatened Fettgather with arrest if he returned to Alta, stating he was “trespassing.”
Alta Regional Center Director Phil Bonnet did not return calls asking for his input on the incident with Dr. Fettgather.
A couple of days after this, Dr. Fettgather received a call from State Psychology Board investigator Jeremy Singleton who informed him there was a client complaint against him.
This soon morphed to a non-consumer complaint and ultimately he was told that four of his former employees had filed complaints against him. Also referenced is a complaint by a wife of a former patient. The wife was in treatment with one of the former employees.
Citing concerns about his mental status, the California State Psychology Board has ordered Fettgather into a psychiatric assessment. He has refused. The hearing is scheduled in Administrative Law court in Oakland on May 14.
At this juncture, Fettgather is permitted to see David every other weekend. Due to the length of the drive from San Jose to Sacramento, he has parked a houseboat in the Sacramento area for the weekend visits.
”I have spent over 100,000 in court fighting for David,” he reports. He refuses to go back into probate court, stating it is pointless. “There is a cozy relationship between the judges and the professional conservators,” he states. “The conservator's attorney has stated that I am a 'legal stranger' to my son. They own him now.” Incidentally, Fettgather has been paying half the conservator's fees, half her attorney’s fees and half the fees of the attorney appointed by the court to represent David, splitting these bills with his ex-wife. He states that he stopped paying on these bills a few months back, dismayed by the lack of attention to David's well-being.
“David is very unhappy,” says Dr. Fettgather. “He wants to come home.”
Fettgather fears that the attempt to revoke his license to practice will, if successful, negatively impact his ability to advocate for his son.
A growing number of people who have attempted to advocate for a family member under a conservatorship have found themselves the target of retaliation. Dr. Robert Sarhan of Florida, who lost his mother to highly questionable medical decisions made by her conservator, also lost his medical license and narrowly escaped an effort by Social Services to take away his son. A number of people, including Marty Prehn and Russell East, have found the financial retaliation for their advocacy has resulted in their homelessness. Others, such as Ray Fernandez, have left the U.S. due to perceptions of extreme prejudice by the conservatorship courts. Robert Gettinger was arrested by a SWAT team in Southern California when his internet postings about corrupt probate judges raised the ire of the legal community. No charges were ever lodged and Gettinger, a former police officer, was released after a couple of days in jail.
Others, such as Ricky Ritch, claim that they were assaulted by the police due to their attempts to advocate against abusive conservatorships. Jeannie Tanaka, who is an attorney for the State of California, was subject to a false arrest when Conservator Linda Cotterman made a false police report and had Jeannie taken into custody during a routine visit with her mother. Jeannie was released prior to being booked when the Beverly Hills police realized that there was no Restraining Order in effect against her.
Several attorneys, known to those in the guardianship reform movement to be aggressive in pursuit of justice in matters involving conservatorship abuse, have been suspended from the practice of law. Arizona JD Grant Goodman and California JD Jim Reiss are two of the more recent legal casualties.
Those concerned about the increasing use of psychiatry as a tool of control by the State are asked to contact Gina Bayless at the State Psychology Board and lodge your concerns. The number for the Board is 916 263-2699. Press 0 to be connected to the receptionist.
At the time of going to press, this reporter was informed that the document filed by the State Psychology Board describing its concerns about Dr. Fettgather was only served on his attorney May 10, a mere four days before his hearing. This document, prepared by clinical psychologist Francis Abueg, was submitted to the Department of Justice on August 3, 2011, nine months before the hearing, and appears to contain a number of inaccuracies, including the allegation that Fettgather never met with Dr. Abueg. In fact, Fettgather and his attorney, Dr. Bruce Ebert, met with Abueg for two hours per Abueg’s request.
A local attorney, speaking on conditions of anonymity, has expressed the concern that such withholding of the specific allegations against Fettgather and only releasing them to his legal team at the eleventh hour might violate his right to due process.
Read other articles by Janet Phelan HERE.
You can support this information by voting on Reddit HERE.
Janet Phelan is an investigative journalist whose articles have appeared in the Los Angeles Times, The San Bernardino County Sentinel, The Santa Monica Daily Press, The Long Beach Press Telegram, Oui Magazine and other regional and national publications. Janet specializes in issues pertaining to legal corruption and addresses the heated subject of adult conservatorship, revealing shocking information about the relationships between courts and shady financial consultants. She also covers issues relating to international bioweapons treaties. Her poetry has been published in Gambit, Libera, Applezaba Review, Nausea One and other magazines. Her first book, The Hitler Poems, was published in 2005. She currently resides abroad. You may browse through her articles (and poetry) at janetphelan.com
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/05/california-state-psychology-board.html
Editor's note: Alice Gore's daughter after confronting the court appointed GAL about Alice's poor treatment also had her visitation with her aged mother limited.
Alice R. Gore Estate value about 1 million dollars: Alice R. Gore, deceased, a disabled 99 year old ward of the Probate Court of Cook County, Judge Kawamoto’s courtroom was hours away from ending up in the Cook County Morgue. Alice's estate was depleted by probate court parasites and there were reportedly no funds to bury her. Her loving family paid for the burial expenses so that Alice would not have to suffer the indignity of being stacked like an Auschwitz inmate in the Cook County morgue. The judge allowed an easily manipulated, court documented, mentally disabled granddaughter to be appointed as Alice’s guardian and yet no sanctions were instituted against the judge or court officers for this blatant infraction of the law.
Strangely, 16 of Alice’s annuity checks, two of which show forged endorsements, disappeared. Alice’s daughter has a copy of a check with her signature possibly forged. The daughter’s attorney has been trying to obtain copies of the 16 other annuity checks for two years without success. Even more puzzling is a $150,000 life insurance policy owned by Alice and not inventoried into the estate by the court. The Probate Court of Cook of Cook County refuses to investigate these blatant infractions of the law. Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
KawamotoDragon.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)