(Professional Guardianship Abuse is accomplished under “Color of Law” and Remains Hidden from Public Knowledge!)
By Michael Larsen February 9, 2018,
Published Feb 10, 2018 by the Reluctant Activists
Once judged incompetent and placed under a conservatorship [or guardianship], a citizen becomes a nonperson, with fewer rights than a convicted felon in a penitentiary. – Robert Case, Editor, Bloomberg Wealth Manager
Despite the recent valiant efforts by AARP, The New Yorker, U.S. News and World Report and a few other leading media organizations to shine a spotlight on professional guardianship fraud, it still remains unknown to most of the general public. This fraud is known to government officials who have pondered what to do for years. As stated in the REUTERS U.S. News article, “The abuses of private-guardian systems in some U.S. states have been on the radar screens of policy and legal experts for years.”
Most of us have no idea that professional guardianship fraudsters are able to successfully deflect and resist efforts to reform their lucrative but very corrupt misuse of the judicial system. How do they continue to get away with these crimes? They commit these crimes under “color of law!”
When judges in the courts render horrifically unjust decisions under “color of law,” and people like you and me complain to the police, the law enforcement agencies are normally not able to intervene at all because it appears that the courts are acting lawfully!
Though this is technically legal, it is supremely important that the public understands what “color of law” actually involves! Any government official acting in that role who acts in a way that violates the law regulating that function is acting under “color of law.” “Acting under color of law occurs when the official abuses their power in violation of the law while pretending to be acting in accordance with the law.”
For example, if a police officer shoots a defenseless individual for no justifiable reason at all, he would be acting under color of law.
Another example also occurs at times: if a District Attorney refuses to prosecute a criminal, because the accused is his best friend, he would be acting under color of law. If the same District Attorney then found some charge to prosecute the individual who brought the complaint against his criminal friend, the District Attorney would be acting under color of law.
In professional guardianship fraud, an Order of Contempt is also often used by corrupt judges and attorneys against a family member or close friends of the victim who are trying to help in hopes of derailing their efforts.
An Order of Contempt is a criminal charge and should not be used in a civil matter; however, corrupt civil judges have no problem misusing this charge in their courtroom under color of law. Two cases involving professional guardianship fraud that illustrate “color of law” and the illegal use of “Contempt of Court Orders” are given below.
The Case of Attorney Barbara Stone & Her mother Helen
Barbara Stone traveled to Florida from her home in New York to find her mother emaciated in a nursing home where she was under guardianship (Barbara mistakenly thought placing her in a nursing home for care would be a way to protect her mother from harm). Finding no one around to help her, Barbara used a wheelchair and put her mother in her car, and tried to take her to Denny’s Restaurant for lunch. Barbara was stopped by police and thrown in jail, and her mother was taken to a hospital where it was verified that she was malnourished, dehydrated, bruised, and a host of othermedical problems from lack of care under guardianship.
That was 2013. Fast forward to 2018 and consider that Barbara was thrown in jail four times in Florida trying to help her mother by going to police, FBI, and suing in court to get relief. She was placed on probation as the only means of getting out of jail and realizing she could be next, fled to Arizona to live.
Shockingly, Barbara was picked up there in Arizona and after a six month jail stay was extradited to Florida. At her first hearing, her attorney naively thought she would easily be released for time served, especially considering what most people would consider to be a minor offense in trying to take her mother to lunch. This was the offense:
On December 20, 2013, Barbara Stone was arrested for multiple charges involving her elderly mother, Helen Stone. Though Barbara removed her mother from the nursing home simply to feed her lunch, there was a restraining order and the court orders required that all contact with her mother had to be supervised. Barbara Stone was ultimately charged with one (1) count of custodial interference with an elderly person (her Mother), a Third Degree Felony and Level 4 Offense!
Barbara Stone was a former attorney with no prior criminal record. At the time of the Florida November 2017 hearing, who should appear in court but two former judges, several attorneys, the guardian and others all claiming Barbara had “ruined their lives” due to her letters and attempts to help her mother. The judge was a close associate of one of the former judges and recused herself. The next hearing was set for January 8, 2018 where this same group of predators came to scream at Barbara for several hours. The judge gave her three years in prison!
One of the reasons for the three year sentence was that a former judge said Barbara was in “contempt of court.” The former judge, Michael G, used his courtroom in Miami, Florida to isolate guardianship victims, harass and intimidate victims’ families and as in most probate court guardianship situations, operated under color of law.
As of February 2018, Barbara Stone is 65 years old, has been incarcerated since June 2017, and in the eyes of the guardianship predators, she is considered “dangerous.” She is taken to court hearings usually six or more hours prior to the hearing in shackles where she sits with other inmates who may be screaming, crying, yelling, etc. Jail itself is horrific – imagine yourself in a room with 40 or more other women all day and all night who are coming off drugs/alcohol addictions or mentally ill and screaming most of that time.
Another hearing is scheduled for the end of February 2018. Two attorneys are presenting two motions. One motion is to mitigate the sentence since Barbara has already served 508 days in jail which includes the time she was first jailed in Florida, then Arizona, and now again in Florida, and the other motion is to correct the illegal sentence and unjust punishment meted out to Barbara.
We hope this will end favorably and Barbara Stone will be released; however, favorable outcomes are rare in guardianship matters.
The Case of Mr. and Mrs. Peterson and Ted Mottman
[names changed to protect the innocent]
The second example of a court operating under color of law and the wrongful use of the charge Contempt of Court is taken from the book GUARDIANSHIP FRAUD and prepared by Anthony Damon who interviewed witnesses and took the major section for his story from the Appellate Brief written by attorneys for Mr. and Mrs. Peterson.
This matter involves a court-ordered guardianship victim named Ted Mottman who was living in Seattle, Washington, and his friends, Jerry and Janet Peterson, who live in Tucson, Arizona. Mr. Mottman inherited a sum close to $20 million from his parents in 2010. In early 2011, Ted Mottman, at 63 years old, filed for divorce from his 3rd wife whom he thought was a sociopath, and he visited his neurologist and received a clean-bill-of-health.
It is believed that when his wife found out Ted was planning to leave Seattle and fly to Tucson, Arizona to live until the divorce was finalized, she drugged him. She moved back into his home to keep him isolated, immobilized with psychotropic drugs, and unable to defend himself.
It was her plan to have his status as a competent adult nullified by a court so that he would be declared a vulnerable adult. She even presented as fact the completely false assertion that Ted had been declared to have dementia for several years. To declare someone legally incompetent to conduct one’s own affairs is a formal medical determination and requires a physician’s exam and finding to be valid legally.
The Petersons had been in almost daily contact with Ted regarding his renting a home in Tucson, his flight schedule, and concerns about Ted’s safety from the wife he was divorcing. Ted mentioned on several occasions his fear of his wife. Janet Peterson worked for the U.S. Attorney’s Office and Jerry Peterson had worked for The Boeing Company in their Defense Operations.
Because of their close relationship to Ted, they were sued to keep them quiet and to keep them from trying to help free Ted. The reason given for the lawsuit was that since Ted Mottman had been “declared to have dementia for several years” the Petersons were trying to take advantage of him for his money. Since this reason was false, it follows that all of the court proceedings and orders for the next two years were accomplished under Color of Law. They appeared to be lawful acts but were not.
The suit against the Petersons was filed in Commissioner V’s — (could this be KC Commissioner Carlos Velategui?) probate court by an attorney for those seeking to make Ted Mottman a “vulnerable adult,” to place him under their control, and to control of all his wealth and assets. The Petersons responded to this lawsuit by stating that Mr. Mottman had never been declared incompetent, that the lawsuit was ‘smoke and mirrors’ being used to hide the actual intent of his wife and her friend who wished to plunder Mr. Mottman’s assets.
Without medical records showing any prior determinations of incompetence or dementia, a pseudo psychological exam was done the day before the court hearing. Mr. Mottman’s wife answered most of the questions during the exam. With this stage set, the following comments are summarized from the Appellate Summary written two years later and illustrate Color of Law by attorneys, the court commissioner, Adult Protective Services, Bellevue Police, and the court-appointed guardian.
After the first court hearing in May 2011, the Petersons – who were trying to advocate for Mr. Mottman and prevent him from being victimized — were sued two additional times to keep them quiet. One suit accused them of being in Contempt of Court, because a friend of Ted Mottman, Mr. Kent, sent out emails about his situation. This was blamed on the Petersons. This should have been filed in a criminal court but was filed in Commissioner V’s civil court.
The purpose of the lawsuits against the Petersons, as in all improper professional guardianship cases, was to intimidate and threaten them to keep them quiet and to drain them of personal financial resources so that they were made to be completely unable to stop the predators from succeeding in their plot.
Astoundingly, in one lawsuit, the Petersons had to pay $60,000 for an email message that another of Ted’s friends wrote about his attempt to save Ted’s life. In addition to the $60,000 fine, the Petersons were given an Order for Protection that stated if they told anyone about Ted Mottman – including law enforcement or government agencies, they would face ten years in prison. Think about that; this is similar to Barbara Stone being incarcerated now for trying to help her mother!
Unfortunately, as was planned by the perpetrators, the Petersons had to end their appellate case due to lack of funds and a settlement was made, and it appeared that the other side wanted it ended too. The Petersons had to pay attorney fees for both sides, plus a color of law charge was made against the Petersons for defamation of Ted’s wife regarding things Ted said to others about her that appeared in others’ declarations to the court! Unbelievably, the Petersons had to pay Mrs. Mottman even though she had gained control over Mr. Mottman’s millions!
In addition to all of these payments, the Petersons would have to pay an additional fine of $80,000 if they said anything about Ted Mottman for the next five years (up through July 2017). A settlement was reached for three reasons: the Petersons had used up all of their life’s saving and borrowed from family, their attorneys could not be sure that an appellate judge would rule against a superior court judge no matter how blatantly his court operated illegally under color of law, and the perpetrators also could not be sure what the Appellate Court would do.
This uncertainty was a gamble for both sides. This crime could happen to anyone and is happening to people all over the country!
The Appellate Brief Summary illustrated that attorneys against the Petersons knowingly and willfully brought misleading and false charges to promote their cause from the onset. Below are some of the more startling of these statements and charges.
The attorney for the wife and her friend who helped drug Mr. Mottman brought their petition against the Petersons falsely stating Mr. Mottman had been diagnosed with dementia for several years, knowing the diagnoses was never done until the day prior to the hearing.
A few months later, a nurse friend of the Petersons reviewed the physician’s diagnostic report. Since this nurse had read these types of reports for 30 years, she stated to the Petersons’ attorney that this was not a standard report and lacked any firm evidence of dementia. Once this was reported to the attorney for the court-appointed guardian, all of the attorneys involved in putting Mr. Mottman into guardianship threatened to sue the Petersons if the Petersons didn’t sign an agreement that they would tell no one about Mr. Mottman’s situation, or they would be heavily fined.
The Petersons’ attorney told the Petersons emphatically that this commissioner always ruled in favor of the guardian and that they might lose “hundreds of thousands of dollars if they didn’t sign this document.”
The nurse was so upset about the situation facing Mr. Mottman that she wrote to the police and Adult Protective Services in Seattle asking them to investigate this matter. Her letter to Adult Protective Services was supposed to be confidential as are all complaints to Adult or Child Protective Services. The attorney for the guardian made false statements about the Petersons to the court in order to obtain the confidential documents that pertained to the complaint to Adult Protective Services.
The attorney for the guardian falsely stated in court that Ms. Peterson was a “stalker” and was behind emails and mailings sent out by others who were aware of Mr. Mottman’s sudden isolation.
The attorney for the guardian filed a request for finding of Contempt of Court against the Petersons in the same civil court rather than with the King County Prosecutor as should have been the case. The court commissioner ignored the Petersons’ attorneys’ request to identify any alleged act(s) the Petersons committed to warrant the finding and instead awarded unreasonable and excessive attorneys’ fees of $28,000 that the Petersons had to pay.
The commissioner also sanctioned the Petersons another punitive $20,000, which was imposed in violation of the law (RCW 7.21030(2)). In addition to that, the commissioner awarded another $30,000 in damages without a showing of actual damages incurred since the court issued its order in June 2012 with no showing that any injury was proximately caused by the Petersons’ conduct.
The attorney for the wife of Mr. Mottman falsely claimed to the Court that Ms. Peterson was responsible for defamation comments about Ms. Mottman when these comments were made by Mr. Mottman to others who wrote declarative statements of this fact that are part of the Court record.
Major witnesses reported to the Petersons’ attorney that the Bellevue Police Department and Adult Protective Services investigators never contacted them for an interview to ascertain the facts of this matter
Is it a coincidence that Mr. Mottman’s wife worked for the Bellevue City Prosecutor’s Office and that she requested Detective Thomas to call a major witness in order to intimidate him? According to Mr. Kent, a close friend of Mr. Mottman who spoke to Mr. Mottman on the phone and tried to rescue Mr. Mottman from the house following that conversation, Detective Thomas had no interest regarding the statements Mr. Mottman made to Mr. Kent in Mr. Mottman’s request for help from this friend of many years. The detective told him instead that Ms. Peterson was behind lies that Mr. Mottman was isolated, and that Mr. Mottman’s wife was just trying to keep Mr. Mottman safe from the harm of others since he had dementia and Alzheimer’s.
Detective Thomas called Ms. Peterson to intimidate her and stated that he was involved in reports from Mr. Mottman’s wife regarding her belief she was being harassed. It was a direct conflict of the agreement signed by all parties that no one would go to law enforcement.
As mentioned, the Tucson nurse also wrote to the Chief of the Bellevue Police Department requesting an investigation of Mr. Mottman. The Chief of Police responded to this request from the nurse by stating her department was not going to investigate this matter and referred her to Adult Protective Services, which she had already done.
Adult Protective Services not only ignored the request for an investigation, they sided in all ways with the court appointed guardian. The APS case worker, Marie Alex, responded to the nurse that all Mr. Mottman could say was “Yes” or “No” and that in her opinion Mr. Mottman had severe dementia. This was eight days after Mr. Mottman was seen by Dr. Wagner who reported that Mr. Mottman got up to greet him, they talked, and Mr. Mottman correctly identified the Governor of Washington and that Mr. Mottman needed stimulation.
Ms. Alex of APS also called Mr. Kent and told him that he must by lying about what Mr. Mottman said to him because Mr. Mottman was “not allowed to talk to anyone,” which clearly violates the Standards of Practice as set out by the National Guardianship Association and should have been investigated rigorously by APS.
These examples of the police and Adult Protective Service helping to promote this professional guardianship fraud scam against Mr. Mottman are common and illustrate how these organizations also operate illegally under color of law and how terribly difficult it is to fight this crime and save the life of a loved one once a motion to be appointed as a guardian has been filed and a corrupt judge acts to award the predatory guardianship.
In the case of Mr. Mottman, this guardianship racket was easily accomplished and without any sacrifice while the Petersons were financially destroyed! The predators made millions with little effort and the public knew nothing about the crimes that occurred.
Mr. Mottman died on December 5, 2015 as a ward of Guardian Services of Seattle (GSS). He was 68 years old. He had served in Vietnam and was a career law enforcement officer. The last four years of his life were spent in isolation and terror.
In their two year battle trying to save Mr. Mottman’s life, the Petersons spent around $250,000 in fees for all attorneys plus the fines imposed upon them. For a retired couple, these unjust fines and fees financially shattered them. Additionally they were threatened with ten years in prison and another $80,000 fine if they talked about this case for the next five years.
This pattern of widespread legal wrong-doing involving guardianship scams was further verified in the spring of 2017 when Ms. Peterson tried to re-enter the United States after visiting a friend in Mexico. When she was stopped by U.S. Customs Agents, Ms. Peterson was asked to pull over, her car keys taken, and was told to get out of her car. She was asked why she had an Order for Protection against her. As soon as she said that it was a guardianship matter, she was told to get back in her car and to proceed into the United States. The U.S. Customs Agent told her that those were “junk orders,” and he wished he could change her record to delete the Order for Protection but that he was unable to do so.
Thus, it’s clear that the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Customs Agents know that these guardianship abuse scams are accomplished under Color of Law. There are thousands of people like Ms. Peterson who have tried to re-enter the U.S. and have no criminal records, but have these Protection Orders issued by guardianship court judges. The agents know that these guardianship courts issue “junk orders” and therefore, they allow those individuals who were pulled over due to bogus “Orders of Protection” to re-enter the country without further delay.
These cases are given as illustrations of the total disregard that probate courts have for the rule of law. THE NEW YORKER article “How the Elderly Lose Their Rights” described how guardians can sell the assets and control the lives of senior citizens without their consent. Believe this: it happens every single day to an unsuspecting elderly person who is of sound mind and competent to handle their own affairs.
ARRP recent published an article, “State Guardianship Systems Require Expedited Reform” and referred to egregious acts conducted by court-appointed guardians such as those described in the two cases above.
The reader may be thinking that the likelihood of this happening to them is fairly small. Let me pose these questions:
Do you have parents that are perfectly safe at all times and are you planning on living a long time?
Please realize that wills, trusts and durable powers of attorneys are not only ignored by probate court judges, they are disclaimed since the ward becomes the property of the court-appointed guardian. A simple slip-and-fall can land someone in the hospital where they are scooped up by a guardian and hidden in another location – and this happens all the time, especially if there is money involved.
One of the things I did recently was to re-write my Durable Power of Attorney and Health-Care Directive to state: “I reject the appointment of a court-appointed guardian.” These documents were given to family members, my doctor, and to others. I do not use an attorney. My home is in a trust. I’ve put the trust into an LLC that is in the name of family members. My hope is that this is enough protection, but under color of law handed out by corrupt judges, no assumptions can or should be made.
Color of law:
U.S. Department of Justice: Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. For the purpose of Section 242, acts under “color of law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official’s lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim. The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.
Contempt of court:
There are essentially two types of contempt:
a) being rude, disrespectful to the judge or other attorneys or causing a disturbance in the courtroom, particularly after being warned by the judge;
b) willful failure to obey an order of the court. This latter can include failure to pay child support or alimony. The court’s power to punish for contempt (called “citing” one for contempt) includes fines and/or jail time (called “imposing sanctions”). Incarceration is generally just a threat and if imposed, usually brief. Since the judge has discretion to control the courtroom, contempt citations are generally not appealable unless the amount of fine or jail time is excessive. “Criminal contempt” involves contempt with the aim of obstruction of justice, such as threatening a judge or witness or disobeying an order to produce evidence.
Barbara Stone and her Mother Helen Stone:
Stone v. Hertz (1:14-cv-21776) (listing of legal motions/rulings)
US District Court, for Southern District of Florida
Filed: May 15, 2014 Accessed 2018 CourtListener.com
Florida’s Guardians Often Exploit the Vulnerable Residents They’re Supposed to Protect
MICHAEL E. MILLER | MAY 8, 2014
Tucson Court to Hear Extradition of Woman Accused of Feeding her Mother
Janet Phelan June 25, 2017 Photographyisnotacrime.com
Disability Rights: When Is Taking Your Mother to Lunch a Felony?
BY JANET PHELAN Accessed 2018 LAProgressive.com
Criminal Complaint filed nunc pro tunc vs Michael Genden, Roy Lustig, Jacqueline Hertz, Blaire Lapides and Alan Stone
By Barbara Stone September 2012
Complaint/Arrest Affidavit re Barbara Stone who took her mother to lunch at Denny’s Restaurant
Dec 19, 2103
Please consider calling or writing an email to the Judge in this case:
Read till the end. The guardian in this case is well known to victims in Florida.
When Julia Googins, a long-time healthy, active widowed resident (and pioneering female pilot) of Lido Beach, reported to the police in 2017 that her bank accounts had been pilfered and sought to revoke her Durable Powers of Attorney and Trust documents, her attorney, Christopher Smith, filed 3 court petitions against Julia in order for her to be determined
incapacitated and put into involuntary guardianship. In his petitions, Christopher Smith stated under oath that Julia’s former neighbors, while they were acting as Julia’s Durable Powers of Attorneys and Trustees, had “added their names to her accounts and have made large deductions from those accounts to their own personal accounts.”
On July 26, 2017, Julia was taken to court and placed under the control of professional guardian Anne Ridings, who subsequently obtained numerous court orders from Judge Charles Williams to have law enforcement remove Julia from her home, sell her cars, and sell Julia’s second home in Sarasota. Immediately, Julia lost all control over her homes, cars, bank accounts, personal possessions, choices of health care, choices of residence, and decision-making. Since August 2017, Julia has been forced to
live in a nursing home in Bradenton, far away from her own homes, friends, and beloved Lido Beach lifestyle.
In other motions to Judge Charles Williams, Anne Ridings sought to have the same neighbors reinstated as Julia’s DPOAs and Trustees, despite the fact that Julia’s friends and advocates vociferously opposed any such reinstatement. Elder Advocate Dr. Beverly Newman petitioned the court to appoint her as DPOA and Trustee for Julia and to let Julia return home to Lido.
In court on December 6, 2017, Dr. Newman and two other persons testified that Julia Googins should not be put under the control of the same DPOAs and Trustees that had already been in control of Julia’s finances and had “made large deductions from [Julia’s] accounts to their own personal accounts.” Although Julia’s hearing was public, Julia was not brought by her professional guardian to her own hearing to testify for herself; despite Julia’s good health and excellent communication skills. Instead,
Julia was left at the nursing home by herself, unable to exercise her due process rights to tell the court her wishes and the facts of her case.
While ABC Action News and the public were present in the courtroom during Dr. Newman’s testimony, Judge Charles Williams has refused to permit Dr. Newman to buy the audio recording of her own testimony, and Julia continues to live out her life in a nursing home against her will. You can support Julia in her right to return home and to choose the persons who will protect her from further disruptions of her life and exploitation of her
Judge Charles Williams
Lynn N. Silvertooth Judicial Center, Courtroom 8B
2002 Ringling Boulevard
Sarasota, Florida 34237
Phone: (941) 861-7942; Fax: (941) 861-7913
This message was sent by email@example.com
Dr. Terri Kennedy. Full article at Huffington Post
As the 71st session of the General Assembly of the United Nations begins this week to discuss international issues that affect the lives of millions throughout the world, the United States needs to step up its commitment to safeguard human rights and promote the rule of law in its own backyard — specifically, escalating abuse in the U.S. Elder Guardianship system.
It’s legal, but is it right?
Imagine you’ve worked hard all of your life and suddenly you are deemed incapacitated and are stripped of your dignity and basic individual rights. You have been abducted from your home, isolated from your family, and “placed” somewhere to be medicated while your assets are being pillaged. The authorities that should be protecting you are the ones committing these heinous acts. It sounds like Nazi Germany, but this is happening in the United States today.
The victims are seniors………………..
The Abduction of Lillie
Tuesday, September 6, 2016 was Lillie’s 88th birthday and her family didn’t know where she was. A week earlier, on August 30, the court-appointed Emergency Temporary Guardian abducted her from a doctor’s office while her niece was in the other room filling out papers. Although Lillie was happy and safe in her Palm Coast home of twenty years, the guardian “placed” her into assisted living and refused to tell her family the location. Lillie was not in danger and there was no emergency situation or other credible justification of such extreme and deceptive action. Video of Lillie from July 30, 2016 — just a month before — shows a vibrant African-American woman enjoying her home and family, and vocal about her financial affairs and this case. In fact, she does not seem incapacitated at all.
Since the case started in 2012, three good doctor’s reports that could have given Lillie her rights back went stale through a legal shell game of loopholes, frivolous objections and unethical behavior. Now, while she is sequestered and possibly sedated, they are pushing hard for plenary guardianship, which would take away her last two remaining rights: the right to vote (she is a registered Democrat excited about voting for Hillary Clinton) and the right to choose with whom she socializes. Over a dozen attorneys and others have been invoicing against Lillie’s assets, while the temporary guardian has not paid Lillie’s basic bills or given her a penny of her own money for food or personal living expenses. The temporary guardian has been neglecting her fiduciary responsibilities and violating standards of practice, but Lillie’s sister and over 50 nieces and nephews are the ones being shut out.
The sudden manner by which Lillie was involuntarily placed in an anonymous location and isolated from her family and support system was likely traumatizing to her particularly given her past victimization. The initial evaluation for incapacity happened in 2012 when she was held captive for eight months at the home of a family friend. She eventually called 911 and escaped. Now, after five years of systemic abuse, Lillie is being violated again — this time by the temporary guardian who is supposed to be her advocate. Getting old is not a crime, yet Lillie is being treated like a criminal. Tonight, she is somewhere alone in assisted living probably wondering why her family has abandoned her.
Captors use social isolation to torture prisoners of war. Social isolation of otherwise healthy, well-functioning individuals eventually results in psychological and physical disintegration, and even death. Nevertheless, the Emergency Motions filed in court to get Lillie returned to her home and family have been ignored.
Florida’s “Liquidate, Isolate, Medicate”
In Florida, there are 5 million people age 60 and older and that demographic is expected to account for most of the state’s population growth in the next 15 years. Yet, seniors who have come to this retirement haven are actively being deprived of life, liberty and property without due process of law. The guardianship system oversteps constitutional rights and goes against the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment that forbids states from discriminating invidiously against some of their citizens.
Professional guardianship is considered a “growth business,” with the number increasing from 12 registered professional guardians in 2003 to 456 in 2015, according to the Florida Department of Elder Affairs. The abuse is so rampant that the process itself has been called “Liquidate, Isolate, Medicate.” With 40 hours of training and a modest background check, a professional guardian can start earning $85 an hour and have control over a ward’s property, finances, medical decisions, housing and social relationships. In other words, the guardian has the ability to: liquidate your assets by selling your home, car, etc.; isolate you from your family as guardian of “your person;” and put you in a nursing home to medicate you until you die. All of this is supposed to be in your “best interest.” An ABC13 Investigates report dubbed it “The Grey Prison.”
For example, 89-year-old Marie, featured in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune‘s Elder guardianship: A well-oiled machine, had her rights removed at the request of her stepson-in law. The court ordered a trust company to pay out some $635,000 to attorneys, guardians and other involved in her case. She survived wartime Poland and said even Hitler’s Germany failed to prepare her for this travesty. Republican member of the Florida House of Representatives Larry Ahern said, “In extreme cases, the wards are sometimes prevented from regaining their competency and remain, in effect, prisoners of guardians.” How many seniors, like Lillie and Marie, are being exploited in this cruel and systemic manner?
Due to a string of horror stories and rising complaints, on March 10, 2016 Governor Rick Scott signed into law Senate Bill 232creating the Office of Public & Professional Guardians to replace the Statewide Public Guardianship Office within the Florida Department of Elder Affairs. In April, they initiated rule making procedures to address the regulation of professional guardians, including standards of practice and disciplinary guidelines. These are expected to be in place October 2016. While these necessary changes are underway, what happens to seniors, like Lillie and Marie, who are being victimized this moment in Florida? Will they get a pardon and be set free?
A New Form of Human Trafficking?
Please read the Full article at Huffington Post
Disability Rights: When Is Taking Your Mother to Lunch a Felony?
Full article at above link. This case posted with permission of Patty Reid:
Nor were there any legal repercussions when a Florida guardian put Corinne Bramson, an elderly Florida woman, into hospice with no terminal diagnosis. Bramson was given heavy doses of morphine and expired within ten days.
It is not news to those in the disability rights movement that such abuses are going on. So when Patty Reid’s son, Landon, who had been blind since birth but did not have any documented mental incapacity, was ordered by Judge Speiser in Broward County Court (Florida) to be remanded into an institution, Reid felt the cold chill of potential undesirable futures for her son emerge. She had custody of Landon and had been his caretaker since birth, so she did what other mothers have done when faced with the prospect of an unnecessary institutionalization – she fled the jurisdiction with her son.
In April of this year, Patty Reid was arrested and her son taken from her. She is being charged with “custody interference,” which holds a potential sentence of five years in prison. In an interview last week, Reid stated that she does not know where her son is and has been denied any contact with him since her arrest. She states that the charges make no sense as she has always had custody of her son.
While still a minor, Landon had been appointed a guardian, South Florida Guardianship. “They handled the money,” stated Reid in a recent interview, “and I took care of my son.” Landon, age 19, is no longer a minor and Reid states she cannot understand why the guardianship has not been legally terminated.
Reid’s lawyer, Sue Ann Robinson, is concerned about the legality of Reid’s arrest. According to Robinson, the probable cause affidavit, used as the official document to launch Reid’s arrest, is inaccurate. “The document says that Patty Reid missed a hearing in June, 2016,” says Robinson. “That is two months before she was arrested. You cannot arrest someone for doing something in the future.”
Reid is currently out on bail.
Dear Washington State Leaders:
RE: Exploitation, abuse and fraud against retired American workers and older adults under the guise of guardianship taking place throughout the country
Older, retired and defenseless Americans with financial assets are being put to their death in illicit guardianship courts that operate under color of law in order to steal their life savings. Their families are being falsely imprisoned and retaliated for speaking up to expose these crimes against humanity.
These American citizens who have financial assets are targeted by rogue attorneys and guardians who strategically have these Americans declared “incapacitated” by their colluding medical providers as a justification to force defenseless adults into a guardianship nightmare – they are living adults in a system of probate laws dealing with the dead. They lose all of their civil rights and liberties. They have less rights than death row prisoners.
In essence, they are incarcerated in undisclosed facilities. Health Care agents designated by an elderly person in documents they have prepared are often cast aside or simply ignored and cases exist where Living Trusts and similar instruments, once thought impenetrable, are broken making room for the fee driven professionals / attorneys in a system with no checks and balances. They are forcibly removed from their home. Their family members are barred from seeing them on the basis of perjured false accusations against them by the predator attorneys and guardians who are financially extorting them. Not only are the older Americans and retirees being terrorized, but their family members and others who expose this syndicate are also victims… they are being threatened, retaliated and falsely arrested.
When the money runs out, the American Taxpayers will pick up the tab for Medicaid, Social Security dollars and other applicable tax-payer funded programs. More often, when their funds are all gone, they are illegally chemically restrained with psychotropic drugs to cause their death.
These activities fall under the Federal Hobbs Act, Title 18 U.S.C § 1951. They are a form of human trafficking under 22 U.S.C. § 7102 and similar state laws. They are acts of tyranny, oppression and obstruction of justice of the worst form equal to homeland terrorism.
We have a litany of laws to protect our older Americans, including The Elder Abuse Victims Act, The Elder Justice Act, The Olmstead Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Senior Financial Protection Act and mirror laws of each state. However, all these laws go out the window when an American adult is forced into guardianship because law enforcement ignores enforcement when criminal violations take place in a color of law court.
Because the guardianship ruse and crimes have been ignored by American legislators and law enforcement for years, it has proliferated into a wide-reaching syndicate of attorneys, judges, professional guardians, medical providers and state agencies who operate a business of murdering American workers and older adults to steal their assets through a simulated court process called guardianship. They use an illegitimate guardian court to effectuate a false perception of legitimacy to conceal criminal activities.
Prominent cases like the Astor case in New York, the Anna Nichol Smith case and the Sumner Redstone case receive media attention and resolve, while the millions of cases of hard working every day middle class Americans are ignored.
This is the most insidious of crimes carried out in secrecy against our most vulnerable citizens. This crime undermines every one of our inalienable rights and our core American values under the United States Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. This syndicate that has taken control of our court system is doubly offensive – it engages in crimes of the most heinous nature and its operation under color of law is unconstitutional.
This is not a State issue. The States themselves are the perpetrators of this crime. It has become a state-sponsored and run operation with the citizens of every state being affected. All of the Federal agencies are involved, Social Security Fraud, Health Care Fraud, Medicare Fraud, IRS Fraud for failure to report the income from this color of law operation, U.S. Codes are being violated and Federal Taxpayer Dollars are being used up. This problem must be dealt with swiftly and forcefully with an arm of justice and with legislation and reform that had a nationwide reach and that has jurisdiction over Civil, Constitutional and Human Rights Issues.
You took an oath of office under Title 5 § 3331 of the United States Code to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and faithfully discharge the duties of your office. However, millions of American families are being shattered by this simulated guardian court proceeding.
This country was based on the concepts of individual liberty and property rights. Guardianships destroy not only these freedoms, but also the spirit in which they were established. Nothing is more sacred in our country and more protected by the Constitution than the protection of our families, our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, to due process, religious freedom and freedom of speech.
Time has run out. We have millions of older Americans and retirees who are in reckless endangerment and being put to death by guardianship torture and terrorism. We have millions of older Americans who are barred from seeing their children and their families. We have a problem of national epidemic proportion; it must be fixed immediately.
We urgently seek:
1. That you request a state of emergency be declared by the President to immediately remove the imposter judges who are perpetuating this atrocity and release the American citizens who have been imprisoned.
2. That you request the President and Federal Law Enforcement to commence an urgent investigation of the judges, attorneys, guardians, medical providers and others who are parties to this syndicate.
3. That you request the President sign an Administrative Order to eliminate guardianship.
4. That each county designates an ADAA certified mediator to assist in the event of family disagreement regarding the care of their relative and there shall be no involvement by any court.
5. That a federally based system be instituted to provide Federal funds for a county ombudsman to provide any needed assistance to an older adult only in the event they have no family members or if there is suspected abuse or exploitation by a family member or where family members are unable to agree on the care of their relative after they have sought assistance by the certified mediator.
Boycott Lawyer Fraud
Cc: Media, Activists and other interested parties
NASGA Exert: “If you are in guardianship/conservatorship litigation, or about to enter litigation, the first thing to do is read and devour the guardianship and conservatorship laws of your state.* You may think it’s your attorney’s job to know, advise, and take care of you. After all, that’s what you’re paying dearly for. Continue reading National Association to Stop Guardianship Abuse: NASGA : know-your-rights
Excerpt: “The guardianship system is in a state of crisis as it continues to undermine the interests of the elderly.
Exert: “A large part of the victim’s money is spent on attorney’s fees and guardian’s fees. As long as there is ample money in the victim’s guardianship account, the guardian and her attorney cohorts will file motion upon motion after motion to the courts, such as:”