Crystal L. Cox
BankruptcyCorruption.com
" CRIMES, CONSPIRACY & NEED FOR FEDERAL PROSECUTION
Director of the FBI, Robert Mueller stated, “It does not matter if it is millions of
dollars, or merely hundreds. There is no level of acceptable corruption. The
violation of trust is the same. The damage to the taxpayers is the same.”
In order to understand the sophisticated schemes concocted by the Trustee and his
attorney, and to appreciate the intricate layers of the parts, we must first look at the
motives, the relationships, the crimes, and the conspiracy which fortunately are the record
of this case.
Additionally you must understand that the Debtor is required to bring his
charges or claims to Judge Bowie as the gate keeper for the bankruptcy case. Every
offense the Debtor has brought to Judge Bowie’s attention has been frustrated, ignored,
discouraged, thwarted, foiled, blocked and summarily dismissed with him chastising the
Debtor for even raising an issue.
Also it is imperative that you understand how difficult, no impossible, it had been to get the Courts Transcripts. This is because of the inflammatory and damaging nature of Judge Bowie’s comments and pronouncements thus revealing his unbridled bias contained therein.
The parties involved in this scheme, in particular, the brain trust of Judge Bowie, former Judge and Trustee Pyle and attorney Isaacs among others make it absolutely necessary, that after examination of their conduct and the events contained herein it becomes crystal clear why this case must be Pursued and Prosecuted by the Federal Government.
MOTIVE: Driven by their avaricious appetites, Trustee Pyle and attorney Isaacs realized this case represented a tremendous opportunity to reap huge fees. It was about the big money opportunity.
It was the end of Pyle’s career. He had not been reappointed to the bankruptcy bench.
This was his “retirement” case (according to some attorneys and the U. S. Trustee Mary Testerman, as well as his attorney Jeff Isaacs). He was scheming. He saw an opportunity to line his own pockets, and the pockets of his friends.
The actions of Pyle and Isaacs demonstrate their intention to exhaust all the resources of the Debtor’s estate and leave him with nothing so he would be unable to afford professionals to pursue their misconduct.
RELATIONSHIPS: Ross M. Pyle was a federal judge (formerly the Presiding Judge of
the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in San Diego) and he sat on the bench at the same time as
Judge Peter W. Bowie, working daily with him in a collegial environment that was both
social and professional.
To appreciate the dynamics of the San Diego Judiciary and
particularly the San Diego Bankruptcy Court you must consider this a “cabal,”7 a sect, a
unit, a unified group only watching out for each other.
The corruption of the Judicial Process in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in San Diego occurs
because it can.
The Bankruptcy Court is a Court of limited jurisdictions under the Federal District Court.
The problem is that the District Court does not, will not or perhaps cannot supervise the Bankruptcy Court.
The District Court Judges either lack the time, the needed expertise, or the judicial will to do so.
The Office of the U.S. Trustee also chooses not to intervene and sidesteps its supervisory authority.
The Debtor’s personal experience in this case is evidence of the incestuous cronyism infecting this Court.
8 The number of complaints reporting this conduct would go up substantially if it were
The “carrying on” of business has been interpreted to mean operating the debtor’s business in the ordinary sense of the word — running the business as an “operating enterprise.”Muratore v. Darr, 375 F.3d 140 (1st Cir. 2004).
This is what the Trustee did with the Debtor’s Business.
He put all of the Debtor’s Properties into the estate name and he ran the businesses like they were his own with the exception he would never have approved these transactions if in fact they were his own.
Non-appointing courts are understandably reticent to hear cases because they cannot impose sanctions for conduct in their court without the prior permission of another court. This creates the “chicken and egg” dilemma mused about by Bowie in the September 11, 2000 hearing cited above.
Where is the Department of Justice Oversight?
Where is the Department of Justice ? As Usual they are no where to be found... To much money and power.. Well OPM (Other People's Money) - they worked a lifetime for and the Bankruptcy Courts let Corrupt Bankruptcy Trustees control and steal this lifetime of work with NO Highest Fiduciary Duty and NO Oversight by the Department of Justice- even though the Department of Justice PRETENDS that they Take Bankruptcy Corruption Seriously - they Certainly DO NOT... they are Not Even Looking...
BankruptcyCorruption.com
"" What a Crock - The FBI is Not paying ANY Attention To Bankruptcy Fraud, NONE What So Ever. In Fact the FBI in the Summit 1031 Bankruptcy Claimed they do NOT know Bankruptcy Laws and they were there Only for an Indictment. So the Creditors and Investors Money, HUGE Money - They Did not Even Look.. nor did they Listen to bankruptcy insider Stephanie DeYoung tell the TRUTH about what was going on with the MONEY that belonged to the Summit 1031 Investors and Creditors. ~ Crystal L. Cox, Investigative Blogger.
More to the San Diego Corruption Document.. (Pattern and History Looks Easy to Prove in U.S Bankruptcy Courts to Me. The Model of Corruption is the Same over and Over - RICO Lawsuit Time I Sway..
Director of the FBI, Robert Mueller stated, “It does not matter if it is millions of
dollars, or merely hundreds. There is no level of acceptable corruption. The
violation of trust is the same. The damage to the taxpayers is the same.”
In order to understand the sophisticated schemes concocted by the Trustee and his
attorney, and to appreciate the intricate layers of the parts, we must first look at the
motives, the relationships, the crimes, and the conspiracy which fortunately are the record
of this case.
Additionally you must understand that the Debtor is required to bring his
charges or claims to Judge Bowie as the gate keeper for the bankruptcy case. Every
offense the Debtor has brought to Judge Bowie’s attention has been frustrated, ignored,
discouraged, thwarted, foiled, blocked and summarily dismissed with him chastising the
Debtor for even raising an issue.
Also it is imperative that you understand how difficult, no impossible, it had been to get the Courts Transcripts. This is because of the inflammatory and damaging nature of Judge Bowie’s comments and pronouncements thus revealing his unbridled bias contained therein.
The parties involved in this scheme, in particular, the brain trust of Judge Bowie, former Judge and Trustee Pyle and attorney Isaacs among others make it absolutely necessary, that after examination of their conduct and the events contained herein it becomes crystal clear why this case must be Pursued and Prosecuted by the Federal Government.
MOTIVE: Driven by their avaricious appetites, Trustee Pyle and attorney Isaacs realized this case represented a tremendous opportunity to reap huge fees. It was about the big money opportunity.
It was the end of Pyle’s career. He had not been reappointed to the bankruptcy bench.
This was his “retirement” case (according to some attorneys and the U. S. Trustee Mary Testerman, as well as his attorney Jeff Isaacs). He was scheming. He saw an opportunity to line his own pockets, and the pockets of his friends.
The actions of Pyle and Isaacs demonstrate their intention to exhaust all the resources of the Debtor’s estate and leave him with nothing so he would be unable to afford professionals to pursue their misconduct.
RELATIONSHIPS: Ross M. Pyle was a federal judge (formerly the Presiding Judge of
the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in San Diego) and he sat on the bench at the same time as
Judge Peter W. Bowie, working daily with him in a collegial environment that was both
social and professional.
To appreciate the dynamics of the San Diego Judiciary and
particularly the San Diego Bankruptcy Court you must consider this a “cabal,”7 a sect, a
unit, a unified group only watching out for each other.
The corruption of the Judicial Process in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in San Diego occurs
because it can.
The Bankruptcy Court is a Court of limited jurisdictions under the Federal District Court.
The problem is that the District Court does not, will not or perhaps cannot supervise the Bankruptcy Court.
The District Court Judges either lack the time, the needed expertise, or the judicial will to do so.
Therefore, the Bankruptcy Court is free to set up or carve out its own little fiefdoms.
With No Real Supervising Authority or Oversight, certain preferred court professionals are able to literally breach every fiduciary duty and commit crimes at will.
The Office of the U.S. Trustee also chooses not to intervene and sidesteps its supervisory authority.
The Debtor’s personal experience in this case is evidence of the incestuous cronyism infecting this Court.
8 The number of complaints reporting this conduct would go up substantially if it were
easier to report. Additionally, many Debtors are left broke and broken by this process.
This conduct defies the “fresh start” concepts of the Bankruptcy Code.
CRIMES: Below listed are the laws (Bankruptcy Code) that have been breached over
the last fifteen years by The Judge, the Trustee, his attorney and the other chosen
conspirators who were needed for their scheme.
The triad who masterminded this scheme (Bowie, Pyle and Isaacs, aka as Bowie’s Bankruptcy Bandits) were able to recruit additional members offering money and an indemnity provision written into the Trustee’s Plan of Reorganization. It is not the Debtor’s intention to list each crime or offenses that has occurred over the course of this case. What is important to comprehend here is that all Creditors had been paid in full with interest for over ten years and the triad has been applying various forms of threats, duress and coercion trying to extract
The triad who masterminded this scheme (Bowie, Pyle and Isaacs, aka as Bowie’s Bankruptcy Bandits) were able to recruit additional members offering money and an indemnity provision written into the Trustee’s Plan of Reorganization. It is not the Debtor’s intention to list each crime or offenses that has occurred over the course of this case. What is important to comprehend here is that all Creditors had been paid in full with interest for over ten years and the triad has been applying various forms of threats, duress and coercion trying to extract
this pervasive release they needed from the Debtor.
9 While creating his “Plan” the Trustee also saw a need for covering his pre-plan transgressions so he inserted another provision to afford protection to himself and the other conspirators, the “Exculpation and Limitation of Liability”10 keeping everyone safe. We will provide examples of his conduct in detail in the next section but here is a partial list of the offenses Bowie’s
9 While creating his “Plan” the Trustee also saw a need for covering his pre-plan transgressions so he inserted another provision to afford protection to himself and the other conspirators, the “Exculpation and Limitation of Liability”10 keeping everyone safe. We will provide examples of his conduct in detail in the next section but here is a partial list of the offenses Bowie’s
Bankruptcy Bandits are guilty of: Needlessly liquidating assets of the estate; selling,
settling or compromising assets at a loss to the estate; giving away assets of the estate;
plundering the Debtor’s business; taking over entities (i.e. corporations, partnerships) not
in bankruptcy; and looting Mikal Inc.; withholding documents; destruction of records;|
Perjury; and withholding court transcripts among others.
1. Concealment of assets 18 U.S.C.§152(1)
2. False oaths, accounts, and declarations 18 U.S.C.§152(2) & 152(3)
3. False Claims 18 U.S.C.§152(4)
4. Concealment or destruction of records 18 U.S.C.§152(8) and (9)
5. Embezzlement against the estate 18 U.S.C.§153 (destruction of records and
transcripts)
6. Adverse interest and conduct of officers 18 U.S.C.§154
7. Fee agreements in cases under Title 11 and receiverships 18 U.S.C.§155
8. Bankruptcy fraud 18 U.S.C.§157
9. Conspiracy 18 U.S.C.§371
10. False statements 18 U.S.C.§§1001, 1014, and 1032
11. Mail fraud 18 U.S.C.§§1341-1344
12. Perjury 18 U.S.C.§§1621-1623
13. Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (R.I.C.O.) 18
U.S.C.§§1341-1344
All of the above actions can be readily understood when viewed globally. It also becomes
clear that without the courts participation none of this could have happened.
CONSPIRACY: Comprehending the time and the magnitude of what has transpired
here, one becomes shocked, stunned, dumbstruck, and then offended, appalled and finally
outraged at how could this happen.
Clearly no mere mortal could pull-off what can only be described as stealing, thievery or robbery unless they are people in position of great authority that have allowed it to happen like Judge Bowie. Even then it’s incomprehensible to believe that this mugging could take place.
The U.S. Trustee in this case, stood by and did nothing, even after the Debtor complained numerous times and presented evidence and pleaded for their help.
Ross Pyle, the court appointed case Trustee, has leveraged his position as a former bankruptcy judge, using his reputation and stature in the bankruptcy world to pull off a conspiracy of this magnitude for over
Clearly no mere mortal could pull-off what can only be described as stealing, thievery or robbery unless they are people in position of great authority that have allowed it to happen like Judge Bowie. Even then it’s incomprehensible to believe that this mugging could take place.
The U.S. Trustee in this case, stood by and did nothing, even after the Debtor complained numerous times and presented evidence and pleaded for their help.
Ross Pyle, the court appointed case Trustee, has leveraged his position as a former bankruptcy judge, using his reputation and stature in the bankruptcy world to pull off a conspiracy of this magnitude for over
fifteen years.
Trustee Pyle with obvious clarity about how the system works, combined with his
relationships with Judge Bowie, and his hiring Jeff Isaacs as his attorney was well
positioned to begin his diabolical plan. With the pieces in place, the germination of his
scheme unfolded.
Trustee Pyle met with the Debtor and his CPA to familiarize himself with the economics
of the Debtor’s business and to review his assets. The Trustee made several visits to the
Debtor’s office. The Debtor took the Trustee to each of his properties with the exception
of University Village apartments located in Riverside. Trustee Pyle was now ready to
implement his devious plan.
Trustee Pyle first joined the Debtor in his appeal of the Keenan v. Satten case, professing
the injustice of the verdict.
The Debtor was unaware of the Trustee’s secret intention to fashion a settlement with Satten only a short time after joining him in his appeal.
The Debtor was unaware of the Trustee’s secret intention to fashion a settlement with Satten only a short time after joining him in his appeal.
Amazingly, this so called settlement was really an assignment of the judgment to the
estate.
Utilizing the judgment as a threat, the Trustee was able to leverage the Debtor’s
Utilizing the judgment as a threat, the Trustee was able to leverage the Debtor’s
partners and shareholders into assisting him in his scheme.
With Bowie’s approval, they started “fire-selling” the Debtor’s properties as quickly as
possible, giving incredible deals to their clients and giving away one of the Debtor’s
crown jewels, the Oceanside Pier Property.
11 Like bandits, they did this to recruit the Debtor’s partners, garnering their support for Trustee Pyle’s anticipated assault on the Debtor’s estate.
Additional incentives were awarded in the form of un-entitled windfalls, debt forgiveness, increasing their ownership interests with all costs being paid by the Debtor’s estate. On top of all those Benefits the Trustee also guaranteed them indemnity. Sweet deal!
Nine properties were sold prior to a plan being approved with seven properties closing within four months of the Plan’s adoption, which occurred on May 13, 1998.
11 Like bandits, they did this to recruit the Debtor’s partners, garnering their support for Trustee Pyle’s anticipated assault on the Debtor’s estate.
Additional incentives were awarded in the form of un-entitled windfalls, debt forgiveness, increasing their ownership interests with all costs being paid by the Debtor’s estate. On top of all those Benefits the Trustee also guaranteed them indemnity. Sweet deal!
Nine properties were sold prior to a plan being approved with seven properties closing within four months of the Plan’s adoption, which occurred on May 13, 1998.
When Trustee Pyle proposed his Plan of Reorganization, it was not a plan to reorganize
the Debtor; surprisingly it was a Liquidating Plan.
12 This so called “liquidating” plan contained the above footnoted indemnification and exculpation and limitation of liability clause providing the Trustee, et.al. with an additional layer of protection.
By virtue of being a Liquidating Trustee and receiving permission and approval from the Court for any actions taken, they were shielded from prosecution to the extent that any action would have to go through their “gate keeper,” Judge Bowie.
12 This so called “liquidating” plan contained the above footnoted indemnification and exculpation and limitation of liability clause providing the Trustee, et.al. with an additional layer of protection.
By virtue of being a Liquidating Trustee and receiving permission and approval from the Court for any actions taken, they were shielded from prosecution to the extent that any action would have to go through their “gate keeper,” Judge Bowie.
The Plan was established to cloak the Trustee and his court professionals under the
Barton Doctrine.
13. It is well recognized that bankruptcy trustees are officers of the
13. It is well recognized that bankruptcy trustees are officers of the
appointing court and are entitled to quasi-judicial immunity, which Judge Bowie asserted
in the latest attempt to bring these men to justice.
This is why the Trustee had a Liquidating Plan approved, when a true plan of reorganization would have been the proper venue; it relieved the Trustee of his fiduciary responsibility to the Debtor.
This is why the Trustee had a Liquidating Plan approved, when a true plan of reorganization would have been the proper venue; it relieved the Trustee of his fiduciary responsibility to the Debtor.
Congress created one exception to the Barton doctrine, codified in 28 U.S.C. §959(a),
which permits lawsuits against a trustee where he/she is “carrying on business” connected with property of the estate.
The “carrying on” of business has been interpreted to mean operating the debtor’s business in the ordinary sense of the word — running the business as an “operating enterprise.”Muratore v. Darr, 375 F.3d 140 (1st Cir. 2004).
This is what the Trustee did with the Debtor’s Business.
He put all of the Debtor’s Properties into the estate name and he ran the businesses like they were his own with the exception he would never have approved these transactions if in fact they were his own.
The typical fact scenario of existing case law is that if an aggrieved party files a lawsuit
against a Trustee in any court other than the bankruptcy court, he or she is out of luck.
An aggrieved party, such as the Debtor here, must try to carve out an exception.
Nevertheless, the courts are uniform in holding that other courts lack subject-matter
jurisdiction without the prior consent of the Trustee’s appointing court, although it is
fairly common for trustees to avail themselves of the jurisdiction of other courts to pursue
preference actions, but not, to if they are being pursued.
The question then arises; “What is an aggrieved, defrauded Debtor to do?” Approaching
a non-appointing court for redress is futile because the Barton Doctrine renders them
unable to impose sanctions against a trustee or trustee’s counsel without leave of the
appointing Bankruptcy Court.
How then can the Debtor receive appropriate sanctions from and the protection of the law, particularly when the trustee initiated the misconduct and abuse the system with such impunity? Absent the appointing court’s consent, the Debtor cannot make use of the state courts because they lack subject-matter jurisdiction over a request for sanctions.
How then can the Debtor receive appropriate sanctions from and the protection of the law, particularly when the trustee initiated the misconduct and abuse the system with such impunity? Absent the appointing court’s consent, the Debtor cannot make use of the state courts because they lack subject-matter jurisdiction over a request for sanctions.
Non-appointing courts are understandably reticent to hear cases because they cannot impose sanctions for conduct in their court without the prior permission of another court. This creates the “chicken and egg” dilemma mused about by Bowie in the September 11, 2000 hearing cited above.
This Barton Doctrine permits the Bankruptcy Court to supervise, (or not), the conduct of
its appointed officers, and provides trustee’s protection while they administer the estate;
or in this case plunder and loot the estate.
The Ninth Circuit recently considered the applicability of the Barton Doctrine to liquidating trustees holding that the liquidating of estate assets is not the equivalent of operating a debtor’s business. Another reason the Trustee Pyle put together a Liquidating Plan.
In sum, the Barton Doctrine allows Judge Bowie’s court to function as the “gatekeeper” of claims against the Trustee and his counsel. This ensures freedom of action in the administration of the case, or as here the plundering of the estate, and a measure of comfort in the extorting of a “pervasive release” as a condition of the return of the Debtor’s residual estate which Judge Bowie is, in fact, unable to order. This is the “conundrum.”
With this, Trustee Pyle and his cohorts are free to abuse the system and the laws because of
The Ninth Circuit recently considered the applicability of the Barton Doctrine to liquidating trustees holding that the liquidating of estate assets is not the equivalent of operating a debtor’s business. Another reason the Trustee Pyle put together a Liquidating Plan.
In sum, the Barton Doctrine allows Judge Bowie’s court to function as the “gatekeeper” of claims against the Trustee and his counsel. This ensures freedom of action in the administration of the case, or as here the plundering of the estate, and a measure of comfort in the extorting of a “pervasive release” as a condition of the return of the Debtor’s residual estate which Judge Bowie is, in fact, unable to order. This is the “conundrum.”
With this, Trustee Pyle and his cohorts are free to abuse the system and the laws because of
the special protection afforded them by their gate keeper, Judge Bowie and now begin the
take-over of Mikal Corporation, the settling of the Kolondny & Pressman lawsuit and the
Caltrans lawsuit.
With an unlimited budget at their disposal, they continued to hire additional attorneys to combat the Debtor (who is without the resources of his estate); figuring out various schemes to circumvent the law.
The plan is to Keep the Debtor Broke so he would be unable to fight them and protect his legacy. It could best be described as sending an unarmed man to fight a war with a well-trained and a well-equipped army.
With an unlimited budget at their disposal, they continued to hire additional attorneys to combat the Debtor (who is without the resources of his estate); figuring out various schemes to circumvent the law.
The plan is to Keep the Debtor Broke so he would be unable to fight them and protect his legacy. It could best be described as sending an unarmed man to fight a war with a well-trained and a well-equipped army.
Remember, a Trustee was brought on to safeguard the estate, but not this one; he became a
Liquidating Trustee with no obligation to the Debtor or the estate, only the Plan which
contemplated keeping the Debtor’s estate open until they extracted and received a release.
Trustee Pyle and his attorney became alarmed when the Debtor brought forth his MOTION
TO COMPEL PAYMENT OF ALL ALLOWED UNSECURED CLAIMS AND TO
DETERMINE RATE OF INTEREST AND COMPEL PAYMENT OF INTEREST ON
ALL ALLOWED UNSECURED CLAIMS AND FOR DISMISSAL OF CASE, OR, IN
THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR RETURN OF THE RESIDUAL ESTATE TO DEBTOR.
14. The Trustee had total cash on hand $4,137,904.85 at that time, which was more than
14. The Trustee had total cash on hand $4,137,904.85 at that time, which was more than
enough to pay all creditors including the as yet undetermined rate of interest which should
have been the federal rate (5.4%).
Trustee Pyle realizing the cash flow from the Debtors properties was accumulating faster than he could spend it started what we should call his all-out push to gain a “pervasive release” from the Debtor. "
Trustee Pyle realizing the cash flow from the Debtors properties was accumulating faster than he could spend it started what we should call his all-out push to gain a “pervasive release” from the Debtor. "
Where is the Department of Justice Oversight?
Where is the Department of Justice ? As Usual they are no where to be found... To much money and power.. Well OPM (Other People's Money) - they worked a lifetime for and the Bankruptcy Courts let Corrupt Bankruptcy Trustees control and steal this lifetime of work with NO Highest Fiduciary Duty and NO Oversight by the Department of Justice- even though the Department of Justice PRETENDS that they Take Bankruptcy Corruption Seriously - they Certainly DO NOT... they are Not Even Looking...
Crystal L. Cox
Bankruptcy Corruption Blogger
Investigative Blogger
Crystal@CrystalCox.com
NOTE To Post: the Summit 1031 Bankruptcy had the Same Model of Corruption, as Does the Yellowstone Club Bankruptcy and the Tom Petters Bankruptcy.
Other Resources to the Keenan Bankruptcy Case
Other Resources to the Keenan Bankruptcy Case
No comments:
Post a Comment