Marti Oakley

Comment:  If ever there was a valid reason for disbarring the BAR, making it unlawful for individuals in this closed union to assemble or to attempt to influence laws affecting the public, Massachusetts H 3027 surely has to be one of those reasons. MJO

 

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

Note to Mr. Harshbarger: What exactly is “ordinary negligence?”

The first thing we need to clarify is that probate tribunals (and these are tribunals) operate only under a intentionally constructed system of statutes, rules and regulations that exist only to avoid the common law and access to courts of law. You cannot use the Constitutions, neither state or federal to defend yourself from the predatory activities of these tribunals and the predators who access them for the specific purpose of exploitation and self-enrichment. You have no rights in these tribunals. You have no protections.

Gloucester Times

Harshbarger on Monday asked the Judiciary Committee to throw its support behind a bill that would establish a state office of adult guardianship as a public-private partnership that would handle the appointment of guardians for adults who cannot make their own legal decisions and lack family, friends or access to volunteers who could step into the role.”

At issue is the bill H 3027 currently in the Massachusetts Judiciary Committee. What is clearly a bill meant to legitimize and provide immunity for the predators in the guardianship-for-profit system, the former AG of Massachusetts, Mr. Harshbarger, now newly installed with the Boston lawfirm of Casner & Edwards, is hawking this bill which has no other purpose than to provide protection to the predators.

The first question we all need to ask is:

Who comprises the private part of this so-called “public/private partnership” (ppp)? And why would they be willing to fund a public agency that will supposedly only cost the state about $400 thousand a year to operate?

Sounds tantalizing doesn’t it?! Doesn’t it just give you the warm fuzzies to think there are actually individuals out there who are so altruistic, so philanthropic, that they would fund a public agency dedicated to protecting vulnerable people while saving the state a bucket of money at the same time!! Does it get any better than this? Apparently it does if you are part of the system!

Not so fast.

From Section 3 (c) in the bill:

  1. Members of the council shall not receive a salary or per diem allowance for serving as members of the council, but shall be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses reasonably incurred in the performance of their duties.

Q: So…if they don’t get a salary or even a per diem allowance, but they still somehow get paid………Where does that money come from?

A: The same place it comes from now! Straight out of the estate of the targeted vicitm! Only under this new bill, even if you can prove they are padding their billing, neglecting the victim or otherwise abusing the victim or their assets….you can’t hold them responsible.

Section 4C. Fees for Service.

(a) The Public Guardian may charge fees for service, pursuant to a fee schedule developed by the executive director, upon approval of such schedule by the Chief Justice, which shall identity in reasonable detail the circumstances under which an incapacitated person is deemed to have sufficient available income or assets to pay for such services. (emphasis, mine)

And of course, there is no actual cap on fees.

The executive director will establish a fee schedule? Gosh… I wonder how thats going to turn out since the Director will most likely be someone in bed with those “private” investors who will have invested in this system to make a profit. Where will that profit come from? Any guesses??

Circling the protection racket wagons

As one bill after another comes out federally and in the states, it becomes readily apparent that every effort is being made to circle the wagons in order to secure the protection racket that provides cover for the kidnapping, warehousing, isolation of, and theft of estates from the elderly targeted by professional predators calling themselves attorney’s and guardians. Also specifically targeted in this bill are the intellectually/mentally or, developmentally disabled individuals. There is money to be made preying on these people!

Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that all of the people captured under this system truly do need a “guardian”, that they do need someone to manage their lives for them. If they are in fact this vulnerable, this unable to care for themselves,:

Q: Why would it be necessary to reduce them to chattel property, thereby stripping them of all their constitutional rights and protections? Wouldn’t the proper thing to do be, if the intent was to protect them, be to reaffirm their rights and enhance the protections available? To protect their person and their property?

A: Because if you steal from a recognized living person..that’s theft! This can be prosecuted!  If you declare the living person dead in the law and take away all their natural rights and liberties, assume their identity and lay claim to everything they did own, it is not a problem.

Have you ever asked yourself how or why, the living person is brought before a probate tribunal which is supposed to become active only upon presentation of the certificate of death?

Being declared a “ward of the state” is the defacto death certificate: The civil death of the living person.

This civil death is necessary to void the common law and, the constitutions both state and federal. You must be reduced to a piece of property in order for this system to work. Once this occurs, the guardian now assumes not only ownership, but by tribunal ordered proxy, the identity of the victim and by extension, all of their assets.

So why didn’t this bill address any of the underlying commonly known causes of guardianship abuse? Why does it concern itself only with establishing another unaccountable agency whose purpose it appears, is to establish immunity for wrong doing and criminal activity by those most notorious for these activities? Why is there nothing of any worth in this bill to protect the vulnerable from these well-known predators who make their living stealing the life’s work and assets of another human being?

This current Massachusetts bill, goes so far as to explicitly provide immunity for wrong-doing by guardians.

Section 4D. Standards and records; disclosure:

(e) So long as the Public Guardian, through its employees and/or volunteers, has complied with the requirements of this chapter with respect to a matter concerning its duties or powers as guardian and/or conservator –

(i) If the employee or volunteer in good faith intended to perform said duties and exercise said powers with respect to such matter in accordance with applicable standards of law, the Public Guardian and any employee or volunteer whose conduct is or may be at issue shall not be liable for ordinary negligence to (A) the protected or incapacitated person for whom the Public Guardian has been appointed, or (B) any third party who reasonably relies upon the Public Guardian’s performance of those duties.

(ii) The immunity herein shall apply, even though it would have been prudent to have made a different decision, or to have intervened (or not intervened), or to have taken steps to gather more or better information about the circumstances, or otherwise to have acted with ordinary care.

(iii) The immunity herein shall not apply to any acts or omissions constituting gross negligence or willful misconduct; to any intentional breach of ethics; to any conflict of interest; or to any circumstance in which the Public Guardian or its employee or volunteer gained, or reasonably would have expected to gain, any direct or indirect benefit as a result of the manner in which said duties were performed or powers were exercised.

As for (iii) above: This is all subject to whomever is making the determinations.

The wolves are hungry!

It seems to me that anyone with even a modicum of decency would reject this bill on its face, recognizing it for the aiding and abetting of criminal activity that is rampant across the country targeting the elderly with assets. The wolves in the system have smelled blood. The opportunity to profit at the expense of a vulnerable senior or others similarly challenged in this system is apparently driving the pack wild.

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

 

Advertisements