Tuesday, June 30, 2015

A Taste For Fine Wine At No Cost

Kathleen Maloney reports this discipline decision on the web page of the Ohio Supreme Court
In a unanimous ruling, the Ohio Supreme Court suspended Rodger W. Moore of Fort Mitchell, Kentucky, for two years with one year stayed because he had shoplifted on seven occasions and later lied about it to the Cincinnati Bar Association.
Admitted to practice in Ohio in 2001, Moore was arrested the same year in Atlanta, Georgia, for allegedly stealing 12 bottles of wine from a grocery store. The wine averaged a little more than $12 per bottle. He agreed to do 65 hours of community service.
In March 2012, Moore again was caught shoplifting three bottles of wine – more expensive vintages this time – along with olive oil at a Cincinnati grocery store. Instead of walking out with the items, he brought UPC codes for less pricey items with him and scanned those at the self-checkout. The false UPC codes reduced the price of the groceries by $359.10.
Moore pled guilty and was allowed to enter a diversion program. He also confessed he had taken expensive bottles of wine this way from the same store five other times.
His lawyer advised him to report the March 2012 charge to the bar association. In correspondence, as well as an interview, with the bar association during an investigation, Moore made false statements about the incident and did not disclose his other thefts.
In imposing the sanction, the court noted that Moore showed an unwillingness to take responsibility for his misconduct. The decision set out specific conditions the attorney must follow to have one year of the two-year suspension stayed and described other requirements for his reinstatement.
2014-1737Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. MooreSlip Opinion No. 2015-Ohio-2488.

A Myrtle Beach-area attorney has been suspended from practicing law




Monday, June 29, 2015

Betrayal of trust: Part 1

Betrayal of trust: Part 1

An attorney's shocking crimes show how easy it is to steal millions from seniors.

Part One

Shannon Mullen, @MullenAPP

She has broken no law, committed no crime.

Yet Helen Hugo, a soft-spoken, grandmotherly, 84-year-old "Wheel of Fortune" fan, is a prisoner of the state.\

Its laws and bureaucracy have forced the retired secretary into a nursing home. Disposed of her antiques and other belongings. Separated her from her cat, Sweetie Pie. Barred her closest relatives from visiting her, and exhausted her life's savings to pay the legal fees of the attorneys involved in her guardianship case.

In the court's eyes, Hugo is mentally incapacitated and requires a state agency to serve as her guardian and manage her care and finances.

That's what a judge ruled in 2012, after a five-day trial that Hugo didn't attend, except for a private conversation with the judge. She spent all of 33 minutes in the courtroom.

A sturdy, brown-eyed woman with warm, silky hands and wavy hair that's still more brown than gray, Hugo says the court ruling three years ago was "a lot of nonsense."

"Probably the people calling me nuts," she says, "are crazy themselves."

The terms of her guardianship aren't so easily dismissed. As a ward of the state, Hugo can't vote, write a check, receive her own mail, or make decisions for herself. Inmates in New Jersey have greater legal autonomy.


Helen Hugo, trapped by New Jersey's guardianship laws, was declared incapacitated and left broke by the court system.

Hugo has lived under those restrictions since the day she first met Barbara J. Lieberman.

An esteemed elder law attorney and respected member of the New Jersey bar, Lieberman, 63, served as Hugo's court-appointed temporary guardian prior to Hugo's capacity trial.

Attorney Barbara Lieberman in Superior Court in Atlantic County earlier this year.
(Photo: Staff photo/Bob Bielk)


At the same time, Lieberman was leading a double life as a thief. Using her legal skills and her status as a trusted insider, she stole millions of dollars in other cases involving 16 seniors in their eighties and nineties.

Among them was the 85-year-old widow of the former head of the Ocean County Police Academy in Lakewood.

Lieberman moved some into nursing homes and sold their homes. With several, she manipulated their wills so she could keep stealing from them even after they died, authorities have said.

More than a year after Lieberman's crimes came to light, Hugo, who never married and was living alone prior to her guardianship, is still fighting to be free again, to go where she wants, when she wants, even to be reunited with her beloved Sweetie Pie.

The problem is, she can't.

(Continued in Section 2)

Full Article & Source:
Betrayal of trust:  Part 1

Betrayal of trust: Part 1 - Section 2

Too much authority

A secret system

Like tens of thousands of elderly New Jerseyans, and at least 1.5 million Americans, she's consigned to a guardianship system that's shrouded in secrecy, tangled in red tape, and rife with corrupting temptation.

Across the U.S., the vast majority of court-appointed guardians do difficult, honest work, providing a critical service for society's most vulnerable citizens.

But there are some who have exploited a system with few checks and balances, using the supreme authority the courts grant them over their wards' lives to enrich themselves.

The lawbreakers have included family members, attorneys, professional guardians, even a high-ranking judge in Minnesota.

Guardianship investigations in New Jersey and other states.
Corrupt guardians have stolen millions in New Jersey in recent years, and perhaps billions across the country.

No one knows for sure.

New Jersey's top judge says these crimes are "deeply troubling."

"There are simply too many cases in which individuals who've been granted authority, who've been granted responsibility, take advantage of the very people that they have ...promised to assist," New Jersey Chief Justice Stuart Rabner said June 15 at an elder abuse conference at Stockton University in Galloway.

The crimes are easy to commit and even easier to hide. Few courts across the country have the resources, or will, to police the guardians they appoint.

State Supreme Court Chief Justice Stuart Rabner
At risk is the biggest treasure chest of all: $30 trillion — yes, trillion — that today's graying baby boomers have amassed in assets over the last 50 to 70 years. That's enough money to run the U.S. government for three decades.

Why does all this matter to you? Because every cent stolen is more money that the government will have to pony up through Medicaid payments, and your tax dollars, to care for the elderly and infirm admitted to nursing homes.

And the next victim could someday be your loved one — a parent, a brother or sister, an aunt or uncle.

Maybe even you.

(Continue to Section 3)

Full Article & Source:
Betrayal of trust:  Part 1

Betrayal of trust: Part 1 - Section 3

'Not a normal life'

Pining for the way things were

Hugo's story shows just how convoluted and confounding guardianship cases can be.

Lieberman hasn't been charged with any wrongdoing in her handling of Hugo's affairs, and a New Jersey appellate court has affirmed the judge's decision to strip Hugo of her legal rights.


Helen Hugo speaks about her life after a guardian took control. 

Yet four different psychiatrists who have examined Hugo have said she doesn't need to be in such a restrictive type of guardianship.

One even said she showed no signs of dementia.

On her most recent cognitive test, earlier this year, Hugo scored 28 out of a possible 30 points. A score of 23 or lower is considered a indicator of cognitive impairment.

Nearly four years after being diagnosed with "progressive cognitive decline," she's sharp enough to hold a long conversation, critique President Barack Obama's leadership skills, and discuss the legal process that led to her placement in a county-owned nursing home, Meadowview Nursing and Rehabilitation Center, in Northfield, Atlantic County.

"Did I need to be here? No," Hugo told an Asbury Park Press reporter who visited her in the cramped room she shares with another resident.

"Because my life was OK before. I used to go to the senior center. I had Meals on Wheels," she said.

The life she knew is a distant memory now. Outside the window by her bed, a summer sunset splashed golden light and lengthening shadows across the grass and trees.

Another day had passed her by.

"I miss my own stuff. I miss my cat. I miss being able to come and go, cook my own food. I just miss having a normal life.

"And this," Hugo said, looking around her disinfectant-scented surroundings, "is not what I consider a normal life."



(Continue Reading)

Full Article & Source:
Betrayal of trust:  Part 1

Sunday, June 28, 2015

9 Investigates mysterious hospice death

9 Investigates mysterious hospice death

 
MELBOURNE, Fla. —
The children of a decorated Marine want justice for their father after they learned he died with four times the lethal limit of morphine in his system, yet there was no autopsy performed or thorough investigation into his death.
John McDonough survived the Korean War, and his children said he remained a fighter at age 85.
“Talking about going to Texas for his grandson's graduation,” said his daughter, Moe Roddy.
But three days after that, Roddy, a cardiac nurse, discovered her dad was under hospice care at his Melbourne home.

Raw: Family questions father's morphine overdose death

“I believe he was incoherent because he was drugged," Roddy said.
Patients under hospice care often receive high levels of morphine to make them comfortable before an imminent death.
But McDonough's three children want to know why their dad was even admitted to home hospice just after being discharged from rehab with "improved health."
“There is no record of him being involved in the decision," said McDonough's son, Tim McDonough.
John McDonough's wife signed the hospice agreement using a power of attorney she had gotten two years earlier, while her husband was ill. He had later recovered.
Three days after his home hospice admission, records show his step granddaughter, a nurse, administered double the amount of morphine prescribed by his doctor in one hour and forty minutes.
When the hospice nurse heard the dosage amounts over the phone, she told the granddaughter not to give him any more.
Eighteen hours later, McDonough was dead.
Months after McDonough's death, a toxicology report showed he had four times the lethal limit of morphine for a nontolerant patient, but the medical examiner did not perform an autopsy.
With no autopsy, there is no way to know if the morphine is what killed McDonough.
Channel 9's Lori Brown asked the Brevard medical examiner if someone dropped the ball.
“That I don’t know,” Dr. Sajid Qaiser said. “I have no idea.”
The medical examiner said he's satisfied with the investigation, but the family is not.
They hired Rhode Island's former chief medical examiner to review their dad's records.
"A full autopsy in this case would definitely have answered questions," Dr. Elizabeth Laposata said.
The Florida Department of Law Enforcement is now investigating how the medical examiner handled the case.
“This is just the tip of the iceberg,” Tim McDonough said. “If this one is wrong, how many others are wrong?"
Hospice of St. Francis has not returned Channel 9's calls asking why John McDonough did not sign the hospice admission form.
The sheriff's office interviewed officials with hospice and declared the case cleared without charging anyone.
Channel 9 reached out to John McDonough's wife, but she said she would not answer any questions and hung up.

Property: Daughter has share but father has will

RELATED KEYWORDS: Hindu-Succession-Act|Hindu-inheritance-law|Hindu-Code-Bill|domestic-violence-law

Property: Daughter has share but father has will

Share on Linkedin
will
It is 10 years since the daughter has been brought on a par with the son under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (HSA)
Despite a historic amendment in 2005, the Hindu inheritance law still suffers from gender bias.

It is 10 years since the daughter has been brought on a par with the son under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (HSA). This historic amendment of 2005 never made much of a splash though, unlike other farreaching enactments of the same year such as RTI, NREGA and even the domestic violence law.

The lack of buzz about giving the daughter as much share as the son in the joint family property may seem ironic considering that this very proposal was one of the main reasons why the consolidated Hindu Code Bill championed by India's first law minister B R Ambedkar had been scuttled in the nascent republic to appease conservative forces.

 
Does this mean that the notoriously patriarchal Hindu society has since become more accommodating of gender equality? Not necessarily, for there is little data available on the extent to which the amended Section 6 of the HSA conferring the same rights and liabilities on the daughter and the son in the ancestral property has been implemented across the country.

Unlike in the case of RTI and NREGA, there has been no noticeable attempt on the part of the government to spread awareness about the change in property rights. Nor have civil society groups been anywhere as vigilant in monitoring the enforcement of HSA 2005 as they have been about the accrual of benefits from the more high-profile laws of that year.

Rights vs relations

Anecdotal evidence suggests that the import of the 2005 amendment is yet to sink in among the intended beneficiaries. Whether the women concerned are still ignorant about their new succession rights or have chosen to ignore them, Hindu ancestral properties have largely remained the preserve of their male counterparts.

As a study conducted by a feminist group, Partners for Law in Development, put it, "The de facto situation continues to be one where women forfeit these rights to avoid strained family ties." What is particularly difficult for the daughter is to invoke her entitlement, under the 2005 amendment, to claim par tition of an ancestral home even when male heirs from her family are residing there.

Apart from the lag in the implementation of the 2005 amendment, the Hindu inheritance law is in need of further changes for it to be rid of the remnants of gender discrimination.

Heirs of a woman

One such remnant flagged by the Law Commission in 2008 relates to the implications of a Hindu woman dying without leaving behind a will. If she dies as a childless widow, the husband's heirs alone inherit her estate. But then, since she is entitled post-2005 to inherit property from her parents' side as well as her husband's side, would it not be logical to give equal rights of succession to her heirs from both sides?

The Law Commission suggested that Section 15 of the HSA 1956 be amended so that "in case a female Hindu dies intestate leaving her self-acquired property with no heirs, the property should devolve on her husband's heirs and also on the heirs of her parental side". This would surely be an apt sequel to the 2005 amendment, which too had been effected at the instance of the Law Commission.

Another retrograde provision waiting to be discarded is a gratuitous concession made to the Hindu right in 1954 while enacting a secular law for solemnising nondenominational "civil marriage". Section 19 of the Special Marriage Act says that any marriage performed under that law of a Hindu belonging to an undivided joint family shall be deemed to result in his "severance from such family".Thus, there is a statutory sanction to disinheriting from the ancestral wealth any Hindu who resorts to civil marriage, which is an option available to those who wish to avoid religious rituals or marry outside the community (without converting the spouse).

Such a disincentive to civil marriage is out of sync with the spirit of the 2005 amendment and the social trend towards inter-caste and inter-community marriages. It also serves as an obstacle to India moving towards its constitutional goal of uniform civil code.

Muslim daughters better off

The 2005 amendment is also a reminder of India's failure to reform the Muslim personal law, which allows polygamy and extra-judicial divorce. When it comes to property rights, the Muslim law gives the daughter no more than one half of the share of her male counterpart.All the same, since the Muslim daughter has such an entitlement even in the self-acquired property of her father, she is better off than her Hindu counterpart. After all, the proportion of nuclear families and self-ac quired properties is rapidly increasing across all communities.

Given that the 2005 reform is only about ancestral properties, the Hindu father continues to enjoy unfettered discretion to bequeath his self-acquired properties to whoever he wishes. "This is a loophole that still allows Hindu patriarchs to discriminate against daughters with impunity ," according to Delhi-based lawyer and feminist author Arvind Jain.Out of some 100 wills drafted by him for clients generally perceived to be "progressive", Jain estimates that barely two or three of them have made any provision for their daughters in the disposition of their self-acquired properties.

Biased wills

One way to mitigate this rampant gender bias is to take a leaf out of the Muslim law, which imposes a limit on the freedom of testamentary disposition. The Muslim father can will away a maximum of one-third of his property while the rest is divided among his legal heirs of both genders.

Significantly, when the Law Commission asked in 2000 whether such a restriction should be imposed on the freedom of the Hindu father as well, the majority of the respondents favoured this radical idea. Those reform seekers were, however, almost evenly divided on whether the right of testamentary disposition should be confined to one-third or one half of the Hindu's self-acquired properties. Even as it admitted that "there has been a strong demand for placing a restriction on the right of testamentary disposition", the Law Commission without giving any reasons said that after "due deliberation" it was "not inclined" to go so far in its recommendations.

The equality granted to the Hindu daughter in the context of ancestral property cannot make much difference on the ground unless this concept of curtailing the right to will away self-acquired properties is adopted. This may , however, amount to privileging equality over liberty to check a mischief.
    Stay updated on the go with Times of India News App. Click here to download it for your device.

    Saturday, June 27, 2015

    The $2,000,000 Irving (Fisk) Faskowitz Florida Estate Post.

    Tuesday, October 16, 2012


    The $2,000,000 Irving (Fisk) Faskowitz Florida Estate Post.

    The Irving (Fisk) Faskowitz Florida Estate Post is under construction...pardon our dust.

    This Shark post is a dedicated terminal link for the entire file, including the Florida Appellate Court Appeal of Rabbi Moshe Faskowitz which will be displayed on the dedicated Shark Drop Box toggle link. An independent genealogy refutes the Rabbi Moshe Faskowitz claim. This genealogy corroborates the suspicion of the Florida Assistant Attorney that the appellant was not entitled to the proceeds of the Estate of Irving (Fisk) Faskowitz. It is the sincere hope of this Shark that the two younger brothers of Irving (Fisk) Faskowitz, Samuel and David or their progeny would be located and claim the estate that they are justifiably entitle to. In addition, the FBI had started a case back in 2008 on the alleged fraud perpetrated , but never had the benefit of the genealogy created by Arden White. They really should take another look at this estate.



    Updated 10-17-2012

    http://www.flprobatelitigation.com/2006/04/articles/new-probate-cases/practice-procedure/unclaimed-property-when-in-doubt-who-gets-it/

    Updated 10-18-2012

    This link is to the correct geneology of Irving (Fisk)Faskowitz.  It is the hope and prayer of this Shark that the younger brothers of Irving, Samuel and David, or their progeny of will be found and can claim their $2,000,000 estate from those who are not entitiled to it. Since due dilligence was not performed by the court and  alleged fraud was involved by others, much of this estate can still be recovered by a capable attorney.

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/15658009/FASKOWITZ%20-%20CORRECT%20GENEOLOGY%2010-18-12.pdf.url


    Updated 10-21-2012

    http://businessprofiles.com/details/rabbi-chaim-boruch-faskowitz-charitable/IL-60750351


    Updated 10-23-2012

    The link below constitutes about 85 pages of a geneology presented to the County Court in Florida regarding the Estate of Irving (Fisk) Faskowitz by Rabbi Moshe Faskowitz and his three sisters.  It is extensive, complex and confusing to any persons not familiar with European Jewish family history. It is missing two very important pieces of evidence. 1. Moshe Faskowitz has three sisters and ONE BROTHER, MORDECHAI (MORDY) FASKOWITZ.  Mordy, a disabled person was alive and well living in Chicago at the time of the attached documents and 2. Irving (Fisk) Faskowitz's YOUNGER BROTHERS SAMUEL AND DAVID OR THEIR PROGENY are not mentioned.  Is the ProbateShark the only fish that smells something fishy. 

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/15658009/FASKOWITZ%20FILES%20SENT%20TO%20FL%20AG%2010-23-12.pdf.url

    Updated 11-3-2012

    The links below are supplementary to the  Estate of Irving (Fisk) Faskowitz Estate. These links, while suspicious in nature, are not meant to imply any nefarious or untoward activity by the parties mentioned. They include some of the first files presented to the Sebring, Florida Probate Court by Miriam Solo, aka Miriam Soloveichick, aka Miriam Greenfield, aka etc. and her siblings.  Also included are photos taken by investigators of the graves of Irving and his wife Sophia.  As this Shark delves through the voluminous estate and Florida Attorney General files, one glaring omission is evident; no mention by the Solo-Faskowitz clan of Irving (Fisk) Faskowitz's brothers, David and Samuel or their progeny or Miriam Solo's disabled brother Mordy who was left off as an heir. In  documentation presented as evidence by the Solo-Faskowitz clan to the Sebring court, Miriam's father, the senior Rabbi Faskowitz, was documented by his wife as having lengthily religious phone conversations with Irving. Did Irving ever mention his brothers or their families to the Senior Rabbi Faskowitz? This Shark does not presume to understand probate law, however, brothers under Florida law have precedence over distant cousins.  Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, Probate Sharks.com.

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/15658009/GRAVE%20OF%20IRVING%20FASKOWITZ%2011-3-12.jpg.url

    http://dl.dropbox.com/u/15658009/Irving%20Faskowitz%20Estate%20documents%20presented%20to%20court%20in%20Sebring%20FL%2011-3-12.pdf



    Coming Attractions: The complete Florida Appellant Court of the Estate of Irving (Fisk) Faskowitz and Attorney General Office's statement.

    KawamotoDragon.com

    2 comments:

    1. Wasnt exactly looking for this story, but now I am somewhat intrigued. I was searching for more info on the murder of my precious Aunt Marjorie G. Ivy. Killed by her longtime "friend" Mordechai Faskowitz.
      ReplyDelete
      Replies


      1. Dear Anonymous, I am very sorry for your loss of Aunt Marjorie. Please email me at verenusl@gmail.com so that we may discuss Mordechai Faskowitz outside of the blog's public forum. Sincerely, Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
        Delete


    Supreme Court Names Guardianship Commission Members

    Supreme Court Names Guardianship Commission Members

    6/26/2015 3:32:50 PM
    Editor's note: Let's hear it for NASGA's Rana Goodman and the Supremes!  Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com
     
    NASGA's RANA GOODMAN, who heads up NASGA's Nevada Chapter and is also a political writer for The Vegas Voice!
     
    Chief Justice James W. Hardesty has appointed 25 members of a Commission created by the Nevada Supreme Court in May to study guardianships in the state.


    Between now and the end of December, the Commission to Study the Administration of Guardianships in Nevada's Courts (ADKT 0507) will review the processes for creating guardianships and conservatorships in Nevada, stakeholder accountability, judicial training, court documentation and tracking, and any resources available or needed to assist Nevada's courts in administrating guardianships.
    Chief Justice Hardesty will serve as chairperson and was authorized by the Supreme Court to appoint up to 30 Commission members who speak for the guardianship system. The Commission membership is as follows:
    Members 
    James W. Hardesty, Chief Justice
    Nevada Supreme Court 

    Frances Doherty, Judge
    Second Judicial District Court
    Department 12

    Cynthia Dianne Steel, Judge
    Eighth Judicial District Court
    Department G

    Egan Walker, Judge
    Second Judicial District Court 
    Department 2

    Michael C. Sprinkle, Assemblyman
    Nevada Legislature 

    Trudy Andrews
    Pacifica Senior Living 

    Deborah Bookout
    Legal Aid of Southern Nevada 

    Rana Goodman 
    The Vegas Voice
     

    Jay P. Raman
    Clark County District Attorney’s Office 

    Terri Russell 
    KOLO Channel 8

    Kim Spoon
    Guardianship Services of Nevada, Inc.

    Susan Sweikert
    Victim’s Advocate
     
    Michael Gibbons, Chief Judge
    Nevada Court of Appeals 

    Nancy Porter, Judge
    Fourth Judicial District Court 
    Department 1

    William Voy, Judge
    Eighth Judicial District 
    Department A

    Becky Harris, Senator 
    Nevada Legislature 

    Glenn E. Trowbridge, Assemblyman 
    Nevada Legislature 

    Julie Arnold
    Southern Nevada Senior Law Program 

    Kathleen Buchanan
    Clark County Public Guardian 

    Susan Hoy 
    National Guardian Services, LLC 

    Kim Rowe
    Maupin, Cox, and Legoy 

    David Spitzer
    Washoe Legal Services 

    Timothy Sutton
    Nye County District Attorney’s Office

    Elyse Tyrell
    Private Attorney
     
    Ex Officio Member 
    Christine Smith
    University of Nevada, Las Vegas
    William S. Boyd School of Law
     
     
    The first meeting of the Commission is expected to be held in mid-July. Commission members will listen to public testimony, write proposed rules, and develop a new model for Nevada guardianships within Nevada Revised Statutes Chapter (NRS) 159 and court rules, policies, and procedures.
    The Commission is expected to make its recommendations to the Supreme Court by December 31, 2015.

    Friday, June 26, 2015

    Surrey County justice is the ruin of William Neal Shelton

    Editor's note: This Shark believes that the Shelton forged checks are reminiscent to the purposeful failure of the Probate Court of Cook County to punish the forgeries of the annuity checks belonging to Alice R. Gore.  Lucius Verenus, Schoolmaster, ProbateSharks.com 

     

    Surrey County justice is the ruin of William Neal Shelton

    by -
    2 556

    William Neal Shelton was a successful entrepreneur who was the victim of an embezzler, bad lawyers and a wife. Shelton’s ruin was fast and furious, aided by a vindictive attorney and a perfect storm of bad luck.
    image: http://commdiginews.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Equal_Justice_Lady_Liberty_statue-cc-700x422.jpg
    Image credit: “Justice” by mindgutter on Flickr via Creative Commons
    Image credit: “Justice” by mindgutter on Flickr via Creative Commons





    MOUNT AIRY, N.C., June 22, 2015 — Five years ago, William Neal Shelton was a successful entrepreneur. He had a nice home, a wife, a child, and another child on the way. Today, Shelton is unemployed, unemployable and divorced, and he hasn’t seen his children in three years.
    Shelton’s ruin was fast and furious, which he says was aided by a vindictive attorney and a perfect storm of bad luck.
    The embezzlement
    Shelton’s problems started in 2010. At that time, he had a successful business buying and selling high-end cars. In July 2010, checks on his business account began to bounce. Shelton’s wife, an accountant, examined the account and found 117 checks totaling about $100,000 made out to “cash.”
    The checks appeared to have been forged.
    Shelton also realized that some of his personal property was missing from his office.
    Shelton said he and his wife identified Jody Inman, an employee who washed his cars, as the likely perpetrator. Some of the checks were signed with Inman’s name, and Inman and Shelton were the only employees with keys to the office where the checks were kept.
    Shelton did not know that Inman had previously been convicted of embezzlement in 2005.


    On July 24, 2010, Shelton went to the Mount Airy Police Department to file a formal complaint regarding the forged checks and theft of personal property. Police officials told Shelton he needed an affidavit from the bank for each forged check before he could file a complaint.
    Shelton then took the suspected forged checks to his bank, Surrey Bank, to obtain the affidavits. Shelton remembers the bank manager proclaiming, “Oh my God. Those are clearly not your signatures. We have to turn this over to the operations department. An affidavit has to be done for each forged check and due to the large number of checks it will probably be Monday before they are done.”
    However, Shelton said that instead of returning the affidavits promptly, the bank stalled. This delay resulted in more bounced checks for his business, which ultimately forced Shelton to close his business.
    Shelton said over the next several months he tried with no success to get affidavits from Surrey Bank so he could file formal charges with the police department.
    Shelton’s situation deteriorated after that incident.
    On July 29, 2010, Shelton was arrested for the first time. He says that on that day, he arrived at the lot where he kept his car and found the car doors chained and padlocked together with one of his chains. Shelton began cutting the chain when two officers from the Mount Airy Police Department arrived. After a short conversation with Shelton, he was arrested for breaking and entering, larceny for the chain and possession of larceny tools.
    In August 2010, Shelton said he went to First Citizen’s Bank, where he had a small business account, to inquire about a few checks totaling $175, which he also believed were forged. Shelton told Crime Magazine that First Citizen’s immediately identified the forged checks and provided affidavits for all forged checks the same day.
    However, First Citizen’s said Shelton would have to pursue his own action to recoup the funds.
    On August 5, 2010, Shelton was again arrested by the Mount Airy Police Department. Shelton said his arrest took place after the police department called and said he could pick up some of the items he had reported stolen.
    Shelton said he then met a Mount Airy police officer and Jody Inman. Inman had some of the items Shelton had reported stolen and took them from his own car and placed them into Shelton’s car with the officer present.
    Minutes later, the officer told Shelton to go into the police station, where Shelton remembers the officer saying, “Mr. Shelton, I am placing you under arrest for two charges of felony attempting to obtain property by false pretense and two charges of filing false reports as well as two charges for felony attempting to obtain property by false pretense from the DMV.”
    Shelton said the officer had affidavits signed by Inman and others about the missing items and alleged forged checks in which Inman stated that Shelton had given him permission to remove the items and use the checks.
    Over the next year, Shelton was charged with four more felonies: two felony writing worthless checks and two felony paying property under false pretenses.

    Read more at http://www.commdiginews.com/life/surry-county-justice-systems-ruination-william-neal-shelton-43713/#OzreKu73St0O74bu.99