Evidence Attorney Malice – Omni

You be the Judge

Do you believe malicious intent was a factor in this case? Will the material facts now established in the record unlock the door to the hidden truth of whether corruption occurred, and if so the level of corruption?

Prior to any of the Bell Family legal issues or my professional involvement in trying to resolve those issues I was hired as a consultant and my path crossed with that of attorney Jeffrey Ackermann of the firm Durio, McGoffin, Stagg and Ackermann in Lafayette, Louisiana.

I was appointed by the Court in a professional capacity to investigate whether preferential or fraudulent transfers occurred in the Omnicraft Industries, Inc. bankruptcy case. I provided a report of my findings to the Court. I never thought our paths would cross again. However, years later during the Bell Family matters, attorney Jeffrey Ackermann suddenly appeared in an ongoing litigation case against me, in my capacity as the trustee of the Bell Family trust. The display of unorthodox pursuit against me was one of vengeance. The only prior association I had with this attorney was in the case of Omnicraft Industries.

In trying to determine his posture I obtained the Omnicraft record for review and found that after providing my report and my departure from that case Mr. Ackermann was sued for negligence and malpractice Jeffrey Ackermann represented both the seller and the buyer of Omni Craft assets, which apparently laid ground for the litigation filed against him.

I corresponded with Paul Blanco and notified him of my concerns and he terminated Jeffrey Ackermann. Both Paul Blanco and myself were deposed at length in that litigation.

In reviewing the case file, I found that oddly neither Paul Blanco nor I were called upon to testify on behalf of the creditors to prove the case of negligence. The necessary “expert” witness apparently was not called to provide the “required” testimony to benefit the creditors.

As you can see it appears that $226,000 was approved by the trustee in that case, William Simm Sandoz ,as administrative fees in the Omnicraft case.

What are your thoughts, if you wanted to be successful in recovering damages for the creditors in the Omnicraft case, why would you not call as witnesses the seller of assets, or me, who investigated the transfers, or the required expert necessary to prove negligence and malpractice? Do you believe the trustee was appropriate to incur $220,000 in administrative fees if there would be virtually no possibility of recovery?

It is an important note the trustee assigned to manage the Omnicraft case is the same trustee assigned to manage the Bell Family Trust case.

FURTHER EVIDENCE OF ATTORNEY MALICE

The litigation against me began in state court with a suit filed in haste prior to any investigation. The original attorney testified at the trial against me that he denied an accounting. You be the judge Ruby Bell testified she thought that was why they filed suit to obtain an audit, she didn’t know we tried everything to present an audit. Were they misinformed? Was expensive litigation in haste filed? Did attorneys perhaps believe they would prosper personally from a lucrative trust? Was information withheld from their clients?

Short lived in the state court, that state proceeding was transferred to the bankruptcy to preserve all rights I would have to pursue future litigation for damages. The state Court transcripts confirmed a wrongful Temporary Restraining Order was filed, which the court dismissed as wrongfully filed with “only” the issue of damages being relegated to another hearing.

Jeffrey Ackermann joined the suit during the state court proceeding. Both he and attorney Glenn Marcantel, in filing their application for employment in the bankruptcy jurisdiction, violated Rule 11, in that they did not disclose they were already a party to having caused damages by the wrongful TRO, with only damages to be determined. When completing their applications they violated Rules of Professional Conduct; Rule 8.2 Judicial and Legal Officials : (a) A lawyer shall not make a statement that the lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity…

We filed a motion arguing among other things conflicts, but they were allowed to proceed in spite of our arguments of conflicts.

DEFENDANTS ATTEMPTED SANCTIONS FAILED as cited in the record memorandum

“It is going on two years now defendants admitted they obtained knowledge of my intention of filing future actions to recover damages. In an apparent fraught effort to deter, they filed an unrelated pleading prior to a hearing scheduled to address bankruptcy claims. Pleading with the Court in an attempt to sanction and have an injunction executed against Bell in part arguing;

“Mover respectfully asks that this court fashion a sanction for Bell’s violations that will have a serious chilling effect on her desire to continue to use the courts to advance positions that are now res judicata have no relationship to the administration of the estate and only serve to injure the reputation of others through half truths and unsubstantial allegations. No doubt Bell will consider going to another court to file the same types of action as have been filed with this court if she can find a lawyer to do so. She may do it pro se like she has when lawyers refuse to indulge her. No doubt Bell hoped that a new Bankruptcy Judge would consider her claims without the burden of having witnessed Bell’s historic abuse of process with unfounded allegations. Mover asks that the court award a monetary find of $10,000.00 against Bell and her counsel insolido, and issue an injunction against Bell filing any other proceeding in this court without first seeking leave of court to do so”

It is almost beyond believable that one would continue for years, as in the above paragraph, to falsely accuse anyone in every effort to destroy and deter any opportunity so that a established record would not surface.

BELL’S ANSWER TO MOTION FOR SANCTION (in part)

“It will be proven the trustees attorneys, knowingly in “post” trial briefs when the material record was already established in the proceeding, restated false arguments to the Court that were entirely unsupported.”

Including but not limited to the very serious criminal allegation that Bell committed crimes of elderly abuse, found unsubstantiated , and conspired to hide money. when the criminal attorney testified the government knew about the cash that was divested. I testified the government knew about the divestiture. There was no evidence to support the known malicious false allegation meant to damage my name and career. Without any evidence that Bell committed any bankruptcy fraud yor that she committed any fraud against the trust beneficiaries.

The known to false allegations were written in “post” trial briefs. Barred until the conclusion of the case, Bell is able now to file defamation, libel, slander actions for recovery. It will be proven that defendants were desperate to impose a “serious chilling effect” and why the request to impose an injunction that would have in effect continued to deter Bell’s civil rights or ability to file entitled actions.

The Court denied defendants attempt to sanction and did not grant any injunction against Bell. The trustees attorneys also made allegations that I acted in bad faith and solely to my personal benefit. The established record confirmed I took direction from Attorney Frank Dawkins, Attorney James Bullen, the law firm of Amato & Creely, Attorney Bill Friedman, the FBI agents and the directives from the U.S. Federal Prosecutor. My Attorney Stan Gauthier testified, in accordance with Louisiana trust law, that he did not need the authorization of the beneficiaries to pay my six year invoice.

The trust attorney wrote a letter I would not likely succeed in saving the assets. The leading trust expert Paul Hood testified in my behalf. Meg Ritchie, their trust expert testified she would not have taken on this trust. Lou Mull the oldest sibling testified she advised me not to even try and save the assets. So that you can have a window to know what I was dealing with my father was evaluated by two psychologist and found to be psychotic believing he did nothing wrong. My mother wrote a recent letter to the court asking the court to take a closer look at this case, to no avail. I incurred personal debt approximated at $84,000 to clean up this family mess. My legal debts approximated upward to six figures to fight a battle of injustice I would never rise above.

My father did not serve out his life in prison, the assets were saved, ungrateful siblings collected $60,000 each that I knew I would have to reconstitute myself given any revocatory action and, I am the only descendent who has provided for my elderly mother for years now.

All a matter of established record.

Still, I guess a chilling mindset meant to destroy, would that ever be allow when pursuing known false allegations? You be the Judge

RELIANCE UPON THE ADVICE OF COUNSEL:

Under the theory of this defense, an individual may be excused from wrongdoing if he acted on advice from his attorney. Courts will require that defendants show (1) before taking the action in question; (2) the defendant sought the advice of an attorney in good faith, an attorney whom he considered to be competent; (3) for the purpose of receiving advice on the legality of his future conduct; (4) made a full and accurate report to the attorney of all of the facts; (5) acted strictly in accord with the advice the attorney gave.

Bell urges, defendants should not be taken lightly but rather to their written mindset; “SERIOUS CHILLING EFFECT cautioning she is subject to harm by continuing her efforts to publish egregious actions, in spite of defendants destructive misconduct, warning and threats. Please see drop down (persecution – prosecution) that documents ad infinitum of fraud misrepresentations that case precedent confirms as proof of malicious intent.

The Court’s denial of sanctions or an injunction against Bell does not deter the lengths defendants have pursued in their clandestine actions but rather cautions why Bell’s fears are of legitimate concern. Defendants sought to and silenced her civil right during the trial, manipulated and entirely avoided factual evidence in a series of fraudulent misrepresentations to the Court.

Its all there take a look at the truth of the “RECORD”, and testimony by attorneys as to the pattern of unprofessional misconduct by defendants.