Home

Abolishing Probate # 10: Intro to the [Constitutional]Right to Trial by Jury [Due Process of Law]

Leave a comment

Join us this evening December 11, 2017 at 7:00 pm CST

Listen Live HERE!

Call in # 917-388-4520

Join Marti Oakley, Luanne Fleming and Randal Stone as we host Dr. C. Eric Durand and learn a thing or two about due process and our right to a trial by jury that is prohibited in most states’ administrative tribunals, otherwise know as “PROBATE” courts.

BIO:  I’m a Who’s Who In America Physician and Law Professor, 3+ Doctorates (Psychology, Theology,

Law) with Professional Degrees and Board Certifications. Enlisted in the USN-1982; Enrolled in the US Army ROTC in 1989 (Still, technically, a member and on Active Reserve with a J.A.G. and Medical Officer MOS)…Written several books, studied, taught and administered at several Colleges and Universities

Due Process

  1. What are the requirements for meeting due process
  2. How could these jury’s affect guardianship/probate?
  3.  in most every state, are administrative tribunal statutes written to prohibit jury trials?

“The trial jurys and grand jurys that are functioning in our courts today are also “citizens grand jurys”, they belong to and are comprised of the citizens of this country. While there are provisions of law to form independent jurys, for example in emergency circumstances, there are also some very important lawful thresholds/requirements that attach thereto in order to legitimize those activities, and give them the power of law.

Most of our research has concluded that the petitioning of our currently sitting grand (12 or more) jurys is where the jurisdiction currently resides, and their involvement in the process is primary/requisite to legitimacy, efficiency, and a necessary element to the peace and security of the nation. (in addition to some of the concocted “private form a jury” ideas being basically virtual legal suicide, and a danger to anyone involved—not necessarily beneficial to anyone, and a virtual life sentence behind bars)

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

to contact us:  tsrad1@outlook.com

Advertisements

An Open Letter to Minnesota AG:LPS/Black Knight consent judgement and to demand answers why LPS is not in compliance with the judgement

Leave a comment

Editor’s note:  In reference to the letter below

Black Knight Financial Services is an American corporation that provides integrated technology, services, data and analytics solutions to the mortgage and real estate industries. On January 3, 2014, Fidelity National Financial acquired Lender Processing Services “LPS”, renaming it Black Knight. Wikipedia

11/30/17

MN Attorney General Lori Swanson

445 Minnesota Street
Suite 1400
St. Paul, MN 55101-2131

Hello:

Under the Minnesota Data Practices Act § 13.01 et seq., I am requesting an opportunity to inspect or obtain copies of public records in order to obtain information about the LPS/Black Knight consent judgement and to demand answers why LPS is not in compliance with the judgement.

As you know, LPS/Black Knight was ordered to remediate forgeries and assignments and to notify people affected by the robo-signing of documents.  There is no indication this has been done.  There are approximately 2 million fraudulent documents in the public record that don’t appear to have been remediated by LPS.  Although LPS was to issue corrective assignments- there is no proof this was done.

If there are any fees for searching or copying these records, please inform me if the cost will exceed $_20.00. However, I would also like to request a waiver of all fees in that the disclosure of the requested information is in the public interest and will contribute significantly to the public’s understanding of the MN Attorney General’s public support in combating the still prevalent overabundance of mortgage servicing, foreclosure and securitization fraud. This information is not being sought for commercial purposes.

I am looking specifically for these answers:

  1. Has your office been receiving quarterly compliance reports as required in the consent judgement?
  2. How many people in the state were impacted by LPS’s illegal practices to include fabricated notes and assignments, forged documents or unreliable documents created for the purpose of foreclosing?
  3. What percentage of the funds the state received from the consent judgement have been used to help citizens of the state? Please provide a distribution report of the allocation of these funds.
  4. Will future homebuyers be vulnerable if they discover their title is clouded by a prior fraudulent note, assignment, endorsement or allonge that was not remediated? Plans to remediate? How?
  5. How did the individual servicers comply with the consent judgement? What were their duties to comply?
  6. If you accepted money from the settlement, why was no follow-up done on the consent judgement to confirm that servicers and their attorneys were in compliance?
  7. Why are these fabricated documents still polluting the public records of this state?
  8. I hereby request copies of all quarterly reports and correspondence.

I would request a prompt response to this request.  If you expect a significant delay in responding to or in fulfilling this request, please contact me with information about when I might expect copies or the ability to inspect the requested records.

If you deny any or all of this request, please site each specific exemption you feel justifies the refusal to release the information and notify me of the appeal procedures available to me under the law.

Thank you in advance.

Sincerely,

Tom Kibler

Governor Charlie Baker ‘Deepens and Widens the Democrat-Filled Judiciary with Influences of Known, Documented Perpetrators of Elder Exploitation’

Leave a comment

by Lisa Siegel Belanger, Esq.

SPECIAL TO THE BOSTON BROADSIDE 

http://www.freemarvin.com &
http://www.belangerlawoffice.com/classaction/

From the Boston Broadside’s 4-part series, ISOLATE, MEDICATE, LIQUIDATE: HOW TO FLEECE A SENIOR, subscribers and readers may be aware of my family’s personal 5-year and continuing travesty of justice inflicted by public officials of the Massachusetts Probate & Family Court. For those who are not, my family’s personal pursuit of justice involves the unlawful and literal seizure of my elderly father and his estate by the Commonwealth.

My article, entitled “Message to Citizens: Wake Up!” as published in the October 2017 edition of the Boston Broadside, alerts citizens that my family’s travesty is not an isolated incident but rather is a poster-child for what is happening to other families on a daily basis within the Massachusetts Probate & Family Courts.

In no uncertain terms, what has happened to my family is business as usual in the Massachusetts Probate & Family Courts and that all families are targets—it runs the full gambit from the poor to the wealthy.

The focus of this article is to alert citizens that all Massachusetts families need to be fearsome of Governor Charlie Baker’s outright disregard of known, established lawlessness by long-time public officials and his blatantly direct influence in having attorneys whom he has full knowledge of not just having acted lawlessly but actually having committed and continuing to commit elder exploitation through the Probate & Family Court system. More

U.S. Marshals in Hot Pursuit of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki

11 Comments

Michael Volpe

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

The US Marshals have an operation to bring in Sandra Grazzini-Rucki.

Grazzini-Rucki, who is currently in hiding in an undisclosed location, revealed she recently learned details of the operation.

She said she’s been told the US Marshals are treating her as a dangerous fugitive.

Grazzini-Rucki currently has no warrant for her arrest and is not a fugitive.

As such, any operation to bring her in by the US Marshals- which among its mandates tracks fugitives- would be illegal.

This would not be the first time that the US Marshals have inserted themselves in her case and both times previously it was also illegal. More

Judge Halbrooks: Sandra Grazzini-Rucki Too Poor For Court Costs But Can Pay Child Support

1 Comment

Michael Volpe

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

 

This is not the first time Judge Flaskamps-Halbrooks has ruled on matters related to Grazzini-Rucki.

In September 2012, Grazzini-Rucki was ordered out of her home, out of the state, and ordered not to contact anyone she knew.

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

Months after a Minnesota Appeal’s Court Judge ruled that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki was capable of paying nearly $1,000 per month in child support, the same judge ruled that paying several hundred dollars in her ex-husband’s court costs would be too burdensome.

On December 1, 2017, Minnesota Appeal’s Court Judge Jill Flaskamps Halbrooks ruled that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki paying for David Rucki’s court costs.

“Although David Rucki prevailed on appeal, it appears that allowance of the claimed costs and disbursements would cause financial hardship, in light of the district court’s determination that appellant (Sandra Grazzini-Rucki) is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis.”

When someone receives in forma pauperis status, they are deemed to poor to afford an attorney.

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki has been represented in her divorce since early 2013 by Michelle MacDonald, who has worked pro-bono since receiving a $5,000 payment at the beginning of the case.

The same Judge, Jill Flaskamps-Halbrooks, ruled in September 2017 that Sandra Grazzini-Rucki had the ability to pay her ex-husband $975 per month in child support, despite Grazzini-Rucki being convicted of six felonies, homeless, and unemployed.

“Grazzini-Rucki asserts that she had no ability to pay child support because her employment with the airline was ‘in flux’ and that the CSM made ‘vague, generalized and conclusory findings’ that did not justify imputing income under Minn. Stat. § 518A.32, subd. 1.5 But these assertions misconstrue the record, particularly the evidence admitted during the September 2016 hearing. The CSM found that after Grazzini-Rucki was released from jail, she submitted a document in March 2016 that stated that she currently worked as a flight attendant Grazzini-Rucki testified, and the CSM acknowledged, that her status of employment was unknown at the time of the September 2016 hearing. But Grazzini-Rucki did not provide any evidence that her employment status had changed or that her employment had been terminated after March 2016.” Judge Flaskamps-Halbrooks asserted in her August ruling, when she confirmed that an earlier ruling ordering Grazzini-Rucki to pay her ex-husband $975 per month was appropriate.

After Judge Flaskamps-Halbrooks ruled in his favor in the child support appeal, his attorney, Lisa Elliott, filed to recoup his court costs.

Elliott did not respond to an email for comment.

David Rucki was granted child support even though he already received 100% of a multi-million-dollar estate which included numerous homes, classic cars, and the entirety of a thriving trucking business. More

TS Radio: “Voices Carry for Animals #163”- White Coat Waste Project -Elizabeth Walker

Leave a comment

***Tune In Tuesday*** On Dec 5th, 2017 at 7:00 pm CST***

 

LISTEN LIVE HERE

More

Abolishing Probate # 9: Hospice hastening the end of life w/Carly Walden

2 Comments

Join us this evening December 4, 2017 at 7:00 p.m. CST

More

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: