new-logo25Marti Oakley

June 2, 2016


NOTE: I am not, and have never claimed to be an attorney or an expert in the law. But, after reading through various legal doctrines, interpretations, SCOTUS rulings and other works readily available online, I have concluded that those who penned these verbose pieces of unintelligible, rambling discourses that are open to interpretations and which many times can never be determined to make any kind of sense, will resolve nothing. With this in mind I have concluded that one must be marginally insane to consider “the law” as it exists, as anything other than a collection of writings penned by lunatics at an asylum.


10155181_443009739167065_80556064_nWe need to abolish the probate system in its entirety and return to a system of common law. The claims of efficiency, and cost savings were more of the deceit perpetrated on the public as this system of human trafficking for profit was established for no other reason than to allow the profiteering by professional predators who make their living preying on the most vulnerable in society. We, as a collective society, have become the commodity on which the new economy is predicated.

How we ended up with the Probate Predator Based System

I have spent considerable time reading multiple arguments about the validity of the claim that probate tribunals (which includes all forms of family tribunals) are Article III courts. They are not. Probate tribunals, no matter which title they operate under, are administrative tribunals and exist under the executive branch of government both state and federal. These kangaroo tribunals do not have to follow rules of evidence, or rules of civil procedure, and do not recognize any Constitutional rights or protections as would be required in a legitimate Constitutionally established court under Article III.

These tribunals are guided by rules and regulations determined by the BAR Association, the College of Probate Judges (an oxymoron) and the National Guardianship Association.

Probate tribunals operate under the executive branch in government, another clear indicator that they are neither legislative nor judicial. These tribunals are almost always operated under an umbrella agency such as Social Services, Health & Human Services and other executive branch agencies. This allows them to access federal funding when available (and it almost always is available). There are a few states where Probate is handled under the district court, such as Illinois, although how they managed to accomplish this is a mystery.

In these kangaroo tribunals, hear-say evidence is allowed but only so long as it is uttered by one of the predators accessing the court to profit at the expense of the targeted victim. In an actual court of law this would never be tolerated.

Contrived medical reports by “experts” at the request of the predators who work routinely with the same attorneys, administrative appointees euphemistically called judges, and doctors and psychiatrists all contribute to the effort, and profit. Many times, psychiatric assessments are rendered to the tribunal without the issuing psychiatrist ever having spent a moment with the victim. Not a problem! No evidence is needed or required as long as you are not the victim.

Evidence produced by those attempting to save the victim from the predators is routinely denied entry into the record. Any one viewing the record of proceedings of the tribunal are led to believe that no evidence was submitted refuting the hearsay claims of the predators. After all, the record is intentionally blank except for the commonly false claims made by those waiting to plunder the estate.

When at first they practice to deceive……….

The fact that a myriad of opinions, legal interpretations, undecipherable arguments presented as authoritative confirmations of lawful legitimacy and commentary have been produced in an effort to justify and try to appear to make lawful the corrupt nature of these tribunals, only to become a testament to their lack of legitimacy and a clear indicator that these tribunals were constructed specifically to facilitate the human trafficking of individuals including the elderly, with the intent to profit. No amount of legalese rambling and obfuscation can make right what is clearly a horrific wrong.

Also to be considered is the fact that states such as Iowa, have intentionally removed the right to due process from their probate trafficking statutes. How could any so-called “court” be constitutional when it specifically violates the very tenants of the document it claims is the genesis of its existence?

Furthermore, that person sitting on the bench is NOT a judge as those who sit as members of the judicial branch are. They are in fact, executive administrative appointees and sit in place of and instead of an authentic judge because these tribunals are not concerned with the law. You might be wondering in what capacity they are sitting on the bench at all! They sit as appointees of the executive branch and are not part of either the legislative branch, nor the judicial branch of government. They administer code and statute, not the law and also perform non-judicial acts.

The Probate Exception: The Human Trafficking of the Elderly

One of the more insidious legal doctrines is that called “The Probate Exception”. This so-called doctrine is based on statutes and statutory interpretations, and exists outside the provisions of the Federal Constitution, and most state Constitutions. Statutory rules and regulations (these are artificial constructs intended to avoid any Constitutional prohibitions or provisions) routinely violate the natural rights and liberties guaranteed in both state and federal constitutions.

Your natural rights and liberties are very different than “civil rights”. The former are guaranteed in the Constitution(s) and are supposedly unalienable. The latter, are privileges granted by those in power. Civil rights can be taken away as quickly as they were given and are administered under contract law. Asking for your civil rights is to ask to contract with the government for special privileges. At this point, once that request is made, you have waived your natural rights and liberties as guaranteed in the Constitution.

As an aside regarding that last statement, try asserting your Constitutional rights in an administrative tribunal and see how quickly you get smacked down.

Probate Courts in whatever form they take are a resurrecting of the old slave laws. These laws make clear that some of us have value only in the fact that we can be bought, sold, and traded. We are to be viewed as chattel property, and we can be hunted down, and imprisoned and have all of our valuables taken from us, including our liberty and rights as someone else is given, and has claimed, ownership of our very person.

The doctrine of Probate Exception, is premised on the thinking that property held within a state is the states’ jurisdiction (even human beings). It is this interpretation that SCOTUS relies on when refusing to hear cases predicated upon the abuses of probate tribunals, even though these cases routinely involve kidnapping, isolation and chemical restraint to facilitate the theft of the estates of thousands of elderly individuals each year. These activities if handled in a legitimate court of law, would be considered felonies. Done under the protection of an administrative tribunal such as estate probate, these activities are treated as “business as usual”.

The Administrative Procedures Act was passed in 1946. This Act facilitated the creation of administrative agencies and was designed to allow the government to rule and regulate in areas not enumerated in the Constitution, or specifically prohibited by it. The Act was quickly adapted to state laws and was and is used to bypass constitutional provisions. Very nearly every thing done by agencies created under these Acts is a violation of the “Non-delegation doctrine”. Simply put: Congress cannot delegate its authority or power to an agency, nor can it delegate power or authority it does not possess, to any agency. This includes creating non-constitutional tribunals that are used to by pass the constitution, either state or federal.


John C.P. Goldberg& Robert H. Sitkoff,

Torts and Estates: Remedying Wrongful Interference with Inheritance, 65 STAN L.REV. 335, 338–40, 365–97 (2013).


SEC.2. As used in this Act—

(a) AGENCY.—”Agency” means each authority (whether or not within

or subject to review by another agency) or the Government of

the United States other than Congress, the courts (emphasis mine)

Non delegation doctrine