Marti Oakley

Originally posted in 2016.  Nothing has changed.


“It is disingenuous to say that judges, lawyers or politicians don’t know about the trafficking of human beings through this arbitrary system of tribunals called , “family court, divorce court, probate court or any of the other unconstitutional constructs used to prey on the public at large.. They all know, whether they feign ignorance of these issues or not.”


uncle-samWhat is euphemistically called our “judicial system” has become the weapon of choice for estate theft, child trafficking, and the destruction of the family unit. The creation of administrative tribunals no longer alluded to as a system of laws applied equally to everyone, has been twisted into an ugly and dangerous system of corruption, persecution and prosecution of those who refuse to submit to organized and criminal government organizations, agencies and political interests. Money talks in this system, even if it is stolen from the estate of a targeted elder victim, received as a result of child trafficking through CPS, or, from the disabled who might have a trust account or who could be used as an Medicare/Medicaid ATM..

Across the country families are fighting one of the most insidious and corrupt systems ever devised; a system of human trafficking under the guise of protection and care. If you have ever wondered who really is destroying the family unit in this country, you need look no further than the agencies and tribunals that work daily to kidnap and isolate the elderly with the intent of stealing their assets under the guise of guardianship. And when it comes to our children, Child Protective Services is predicated upon wrenching as many children as possible away from their families with or without cause. Children are worth an absolute fortune in the CPS system. The disabled are equally vulnerable to this system.

We have been battling this legalized racketeering for several years. The entire system was set up intentionally to allow for the wholesale theft of estates under the protection of a probate tribunal. These are NOT courts of law. If in fact a person does need a guardian, being deemed a “ward of the state” should not mean being stripped of all your rights and liberties. If a person is actually so vulnerable that they need a protector, would their rights not also need to be reinforced and protected to secure their safety and equal protection under the law?

Causing the civil death via probate, of a living human being needs to be called what it is. Modern day slavery……and the new slave owner now possesses everything the new age slave acquired over a lifetime. Taking their possessions is bad enough, but when you deprive them of their life, their families, their religion and most especially their freedom, you have created a new class of slaves.

This is human trafficking for profit. We just haven’t gotten to the point where we openly auction them off to the highest bidder, although in some instances we have found one state “loaning” another state wards to ensure they fill their targeted quotas for the quarter.

It is not safe in America for the elderly, children or the disabled

The greatest transfer of wealth in the U.S., is the transfer of the wealth of a targeted elderly victim who committed the new age crime of aging with assets, and securing those assets in the name of and the accounts of, a predatory guardian who enjoys the protection of these kangaroo tribunals. It is estimated that 3-5 billion is stolen annually from families through this system.

It is disingenuous to say that judges, lawyers or politicians don’t know about the trafficking of human beings through this arbitrary system of tribunals called , “family court, divorce court, probate court or any of the other unconstitutional constructs used to prey on the public at large.. They all know, whether they feign ignorance of these issues or not.

Bouncing advocates, activists, and families back and forth between the judiciary and the legislative branches, each claiming they cannot intervene due to separation of powers, neither will tell you that the door you need to be knocking on is, the governors (or president’s). Administrative tribunals are executive cabinet and agency appointments and creations and are under the direct control of the executive branch whether state or federal. All tribunals are associated with these executive offices, and ultimately responsible to the executive.

All administrative tribunals that deal with individuals or families, operate under a state operated umbrella agency such as social service, for example. These are cabinet agencies under the direct control of the governor. That state agency has contracted with a similar federal agency and receives funding from that federal agency as part of the agreement to implement the business plan laid out in the memorandum of understanding and the formal contract that follows that was struck between the state agency and the federal agency.. In the case of specially created statutes and regulations, state agencies are paid to to capture as many families and individuals as possible during a specified quarter.

There are exceptions to the umbrella agency construct, such as Illinois which has somehow secured the probate system under the supervision of the district courts. Not that this arbitrary attachment provides any benefit to those caught in the web of human trafficking regularly taking place in Illinois; it does not.

In Minnesota and Georgia along with other states, probate is protected by the Supreme Court of the state.  This provides protection from prosecution as those working in probate are now deemed to have “immunity” via their connection to the Supreme Court.

Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Definition

An independent hearing examiner who presides at an administrative hearing. An ALJ has the power to administer oaths, receive evidence, take testimony, and make initial findings of fact or law. An ALJ’s findings are subject to review and modification by agency heads. Also termed hearing examiner; hearing officer; and trial examiner. (emphasis, mine)

And not mentioned in this brief description of the administrative executive posing as a judge, is the fact that these AJL’s can refuse evidence, refuse to look at or hear evidence and do not have to operate under the code of civil procedure. As many of these AJL’s have stated to their victims…..”The law is what I say it is”.

The Probate Exception in the Supreme Court

This is the concept used to make stolen probated estates unable to access the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court decided that all the property within a state was under state control, and that included the human property. Because the people of the state were deemed to be property of the state, the Supreme’s said they could not hear cases that involved state property. Imagine that.

The right of the owner to direct the descent of this property by will or permit it under statute, as well as the right of a legatee, devisee or heir to receive the property, are rights exclusively derived from and regulated by the state. Plummer v. Coler, supra, page 137.

During the process of administration the estate, in contemplation of law, is in the custody of the court exercising probate powers, and to this court the executor or administrator is an officer. Yonley v. Lavender, 21 Wall. 276, 280 (22 L. Ed. 536). ‘

An administrator appointed by a state court is an officer of that court; his possession of the decedent’s property is a possession taken in obedience to the orders of that court; it is the possession of the court. * * *’ Byers v. McAuley, 149 U. S. 608, 615, 13 Sup. Ct. 906, 37 L. Ed. 867.

Some of these exceptions to diversity jurisdiction are provided by statute.
For example,28 U.S.C. § 1359 (1976) prevents a federal court from exercising jurisdiction
if a party is improperly or collusively joined.
Federal courts also may not entertain an in rem action if the property is already in the hands of a state court.

The questions we all need to be asking now is:

1)What interest would the federal government have in allowing the continuance of administrative tribunals known for violating individual rights? And,

2) Why has the federal government refused to provide equal protection under the law, or to actively intervene to stop the trafficking of the elderly, children and the disabled by protected state actors?

Administrative codes, regulations and statutes are routinely written to be devoid of sighting of criminal activity by professionals working with and through the probate system. If activities are listed as crimes, they apply only to non-affiliated friends and family with a special notation below the statute that it does not apply to professional guardians or selected others.

The question no one seems willing to ask, and even fewer would consider answering is: “Why do these tribunals exist at all? “

The common excuse given for creating administrative tribunals is that the state courts of law are so bogged down that the cost of hiring more judges and acquiring more space and personnel to manage new courts is prohibitive. So….. they created administrative tribunals, hired administrative executives (acting in lieu of actual judges), acquired more space for conducting these kangaroo tribunals (courts), and a blizzard of, most times, obtuse and incompetent individuals to manage the business of the tribunals. The cost is staggering for these specialized tribunals. The cost to families and individuals caught up in this arbitrary and unconstitutional system is unimaginable.

The administrative law system is an oxymoron. It is not a system of laws at all, but rather, a systematic construction of arbitrary codes, regulations and rules used to by pass the Constitutions, both state and Federal and to avoid the actual common law, yours or a victim’s rights, at all costs. Virtually every bill passed creating or directing a state or federal agency includes the provision for creating a companion administrative tribunal for that agency. A requirement that you must petition that tribunal before you can access an actual court of law is an intentionally constructed obstacle meant to keep you out of a legitimate, constitutional courtroom and to prevent you from using actual law to defend yourself or prosecute your case. It is also quite unconstitutional.

But who pays any attention to that these days?