Home

Stop the horrific abuse of Michigan’s vulnerable by attorneys and judges.

Leave a comment

For almost 30 years, tens of thousands of Michigan’s elderly and developmentally disabled citizens have been subjected to neglect, abuse, torture, forced isolation, exploitation and embezzlement by the state’s probate judges and attorneys, professional guardianship companies and public administrators. 

Declared incapacitated “wards” by a probate court judge, with little or no corroborating medical evidence, Michigan’s most vulnerable are stripped of their statutory, civil, constitutional. and human rights and handed over to a court appointed guardian.

Even though wards are innocent, it is a life sentence during which they are forced from their homes and into a long-term nursing care, assisted living or unlicensed group home with subhuman living conditions. 

In as little as a year, wards have been rendered completely indigent and reliant upon social services and benefits such as Medicaid. Their homes are sold off, their savings accounts, IRAs, investment accounts, cars, personal belongings, keepsakes, heirlooms and jewelry stolen.

Recent media investigations have implicated guardians and judges in the forced separation of families and isolation of the vulnerable; massive over-abolishing [robate,billing real estate fraud; and missing assets that number in the millions of dollars.

An in-depth investigation into elder abuse at the Detroit-area Oakland County Probate Court found campaign ties between Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, Governor Gretchen Whitmer and Oakland County Probate Court Chief Judge Kathleen Ryan. 

Nessel’s Elder Abuse Task Force has accomplished nothing.

  • Judges already do not obey the law as written so it’s announced legislative probate reform initiatives are pointless. Reforms are pointless without consequences to those who have flagrantly violated and continue to violate Michigan law.
  • Nessel’s recent, unexplained firing of public administrators John Yun. Jennifer Carney, Thomas Brennan Fraser and Robert Kirk accomplished nothing since they can still take roles as court-appointed guardians and conservators.
  • Nessel and Whitmer both know about the abuse of Michigan’s vulnerable by it’s probate courts. State Court Administrator Milton Mack,Jr.l and the Michigan Supreme Court have actively shielded probate court judges from investigation. 

We, the undersigned, demand that the abuse, neglect and exploitation Michigan’s elderly and developmentally disabled individuals by the state’s probate courts must stop!

We demand criminal investigations into any and all probate attorneys, public administrators, guardianship companies and judges suspected of criminal behavior and abuse of power. 

We demand investigations not initiatives.

We demand the immediate resignation of the State Court Administrator. 

We demand an explanation as to why no action has been taken against judges or their appointees who have donated to or accepted donations from the Nessel and Whitmer campaigns. 

#explainyourselfdana. #investigationsnotinitiatives. 

 

 

 

TS Radio Network: Tanya TalkS with Oklahoma Advocates

Leave a comment

Join us Sunday evening June 2, 2019 at 7:00 CST!

More

The Rutherford Institute: War on Kids, Family

Leave a comment

WAR ON KIDS, FAMILY

Doctor Reveals Dangerous Content In YouTube Kids Videos

Thousands of Migrant Children Report They Were Sexually Assaulted in U.S. Custody

Filmmaker Documented Abuses in CPS and Children Murdered under State Custody

Is Scared Straight Program Child Abuse?

SURVEILLANCE & PRIVACY

The Microphones That May Be Hidden in Your Home

Those Health Apps Send Your Biometric Data Straight to Facebook

The Cellebrite and Its Threat to Your Constitutional Rights

Digital Drivers Licenses and Smartphones Will Be Searched by Police

Police in Canada Are Tracking People’s ‘Negative’ Behavior In a ‘Risk’ Database

ASSET FORFEITURE

Michigan May Stop Police From Seizing Property Without Getting a Conviction First

Barratry and Personage : How the BAR Associations and Professional Predatory Guardians Traffic the Elderly and Disabled.

Leave a comment

Marti Oakley

©copyright 7-01-18

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

“It would seem to me that if you are intent on depriving a targeted victim of their identity, this should be done in a civil court, where evidence would have to be provided under oath attesting to the charges being levied. Let a jury decide if your personal identity should be taken from you and gifted to a professional predator that most likely has a long and sordid history of preying on those they perceive to be vulnerable.”

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

Declaring the living individual dead to enable the theft of the estate.

Barratry, a term that is now referred to as archaic, rarely, if ever, appears in the legal lexicon. It is the act of knowingly bringing false claims and charges against a targeted individual by members of the BAR Associations. And, it is the result of “the frequent incitement of lawsuits and quarrels that is a punishable offense.”

Every such individual ever forced into one of these pseudo “courts” that are in reality, tribunals, has suffered barratry and been subjected to a foreign jurisdiction and form of “pseudo law”, within which they were specifically disabled and unable to defend themselves. These unconstitutional tribunals were specifically created for this purpose: to leave the individual totally unable to defend themselves against a system devised to render them without any rights or protections. The Constitutional authority for these tribunals has been argued under the 1st, 3rd and 4th Articles of the Constitution, the sheer number of these treatises being a clear indication that they are not Constitutional.

Next, is the use of personage ( a term redefined for obvious reasons). Both barratry and personage are crimes against the individual by members of the BAR. Both of these criminal acts are used to enact foreign statutory law against living people. Foreign to the people, as statutory law circumvents the natural rights and liberties guaranteed in the Constitution and erects a legal fiction contradicting and adverse to the Constitution Bill of Rights, to directly benefit its creators. Which is exactly the only purpose of statutes.

The term “personage” has now been redefined to mean a person of importance or rank. Originally, it meant to assume another individuals’ identity with the intent of accessing their property; an act criminally prosecutable.

Today we recognize personage as identity theft. Of course its only a crime if you do it…if a member of the BAR Association does it in collusion with a for-profit guardian intent on availing themselves of your identity with the intent of fraudulently accessing your assets, it is not a problem; just all in a day’s work. Once the identity theft has been secured, testamentary powers are gifted to the predators who now present themselves as the civilly dead person so that the liquidation of the estate assets can begin in earnest. More

Never, Never Land

9 Comments

Author,
Chuck Frank

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

NSA Operations Center

A national voter referendum has taken place in the Netherlands this week with regard to a vote in the Netherlands that has narrowly rejected online data collection powers for intelligence agencies.  With about 90% of the votes counted, 48.8% have rejected the spying powers, while 47.3% voted in favor.

Why is this so important? For some, it will be business as usual. For others it is a victory over the invasion of privacy and freedom. The Dutch process differs tremendously from the U.S. to where it would take an “act of Congress” to put the brakes on phone taps or e-mail gatherings.

With as much corruption going on within the halls of Congress and other agencies who’s swamp still needs to be drained, isn’t it about time that “we the people” had the same National Referendum opportunity as the Dutch in order that privacy is upheld per the people’s constitutional rights, while at the same time, requests for wire surveillance may only be used when a warrant from a judge is issued on “probable cause.”

Since government and eaves dropping agencies cannot totally be trusted when it comes to a police state, should not the American people, as with the Dutch, have a choice in the matter? And if not, we the people will surely be stuck with an Orwellian police state which has already exceeded 1984 expectations and taken us to never, never land. More

Stop A Court Case With One Question – Right to Subrogation

2 Comments

The Rutherford Institute: Constitutional Q&A: American Community Survey

2 Comments

Resources

PDF VERSION AVAILABLE HERE

Also available, The Rutherford Institute has developed a form letter that you may use in standing up against the government’s attempt to force you to disclose personal information

© 2017 The Rutherford Institute[1]

In an age when the government has significant technological resources at its disposal to not only carry out warrantless surveillance on American citizens but also to harvest and mine that data for its own dubious purposes, whether it be crime-mapping or profiling based on race or religion, the potential for abuse is grave. As such, any attempt by the government to encroach upon the citizenry’s privacy rights or establish a system by which the populace can be targeted, tracked and singled out must be met with extreme caution.

The American Community Survey (ACS) qualifies as a government program whose purpose, while seemingly benign, raises significant constitutional concerns.

Empowered by Congress with greater powers to amass information about citizens, the Census Bureau introduced the ACS in 2005. Unlike the traditional census, which is limited to a simple head count every ten years for the purpose of establishing representation in Congress, the ACS is sent on an ongoing basis to about 3 million homes every year at a reported cost of hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars.[2]

Individuals who receive the ACS must complete it or be subject to monetary penalties. Although no reports have surfaced of individuals actually being penalized for refusing to answer the survey, the potential fines that can be levied for refusing to participate in the ACS are staggering. For every question not answered, there is a $100 fine. And for every intentionally false response to a question, the fine is $500. Therefore, if a person representing a two-person household refused to fill out any questions or simply answered nonsensically, the total fines could range from upwards of $10,000 and $50,000 for noncompliance. More

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: