Corruption by public administrators robbing estates

03/26/2025

08/19/2023

Mo democrats club

05/17/2023

In 1977 my income tax exceeded my income by $25,000. I had a loss of $8,000 and my income tax was $17,000. This was the only year I ever lost money. The I.R.S. audited me and claimed that I had a capital loss and not an business loss. My negative cashflow was for the purchase of inventory. The I.R.S. claimed that A capital loss is limited to $3,000. I looked up the Statue 1211 The proper interpretation is a capital gain is a 50% deduction limited to $3,000. The unused credit is carried forward and called a NET LONG TERM OR SHORT TERM CAPITAL LOSS. You cannot have a net capital loss, if losses exceed gains everything is treated as ordinary. This opened the door for wealthy people to take their income in dividends and pay 1/2 tax. The error creates a cashflow tax. If you make $3,000 and loose $3,000 you owe no income tax, but if you make $1,000,000 and loose $1,000,000. You owe income tax on $997,000. even though you have no income and no ability to pay. We have a graduated income tax in order to redistribute wealth. This challenges that. I'm of the opinion that was done on purpose.

Send a message to learn more

10/30/2022

Y ju

10/04/2022

This was a 2 day hearing with witnesses. The probate court had no authority to transfer anything. Judge Pfister gave a summary judgment to Sheryl. I waited to see what atty. Wendt would do. He petitioned the appellate court. I immediately petitioned the circuit court and asked for a jury trial. Neither thing happened. A summary judgment is a pretrial event. I did not realize that the hearing was a pretrial until I received the summary judgment. I was listed as a defendant while my sons were listed as plaintiffs. The case had been closed in 2015. Ther was never a formal entry. It just said no further entry.

10/04/2022

I submitted a 1991 will. It was challenged by Administrator Nancy Jennings Public administrator and atty Wendt. I had fired Wendt years earlier He claimed that he was representing me. Why would I submit a will and hire an atty to challenge it. He won and I lost. Judge Pfister.

10/02/2022

yesterday my wife hollered the tractor is on fire. It has been setting between the house and the barn for 2 days and yes there was at least 2 feet of fire coming from the tractor. I had a water hose that would reach it and soon had it out. The tractor had the key turned off and the generator disconnected. I disconnected the battery and will look into it today. I did notice that the fire cooked the regulator. It has been out of the circuit for years as I had replaced the generator with an alternator.

08/20/2022

7/8/2022 STORY RUSSELL ATKINSON’S FARM
Bertha Don Carlos died 2009
The farm went into Russell’s name, via beneficiary deed one year later 2010.
The beneficiary deed preceded probate.
No one could challenge Bertha’s ownership of the farm after it became Russel’s.
The court appointed administrator had no legal right to challenge the beneficiary deed.
09JO-PR00139-05 Jennings vs Atkinson,
Jennings asked for a summary judgment
This is a probate case no. and cannot transfer property as it is an inferior court. (does not have Jury’s).
Russell Atkinson did not owe Nancy Jennings any money which is a requirement to enter the CIRCUIT DIVISION of the court.
Jennings asked to appeal the summary judgment. Judge Crouch told her that she could not go from the probate to the appellate court, she must go to the trial court and get a judgment. She had the option of a jury trial or a bench trial. Judge Crouch told her that if she had a bench trial he would be the judge and she would lose. She asked for the bench trial anyhow. The appellate court is not a trial court, it can only set a judgment aside and return it to the trial court.
It was a crime for Jennings to enter the trial court. To avoid that, the case was not given a case no. It should have started with the year which was 14JO-CV?????. The case entered the appellate court with a probate case no. That was illegal. The Appellate court REVERSED THE JUDGMENT, SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT, AND GAVE A JUDGMENT TO THE ADOPTED DAUGHTER. The only legal authority they had was to set aside the judgment and the farm would have stayed in Russell’s name.
It was returned to the ? Court. It was given the case no. 09JO-CV00139-06. This case no. does not exist. If you remove the suffix which is a challenge to the case no. then in 2009 the case was assigned to the CAPITAL ONE BANK OF WARRENSBURG vs AMANDA NEAL. It had nothing to do with Russell Atkinson. This case no. was used to remove Judge Crouch’s Judgment which had an improper case no. and to void Russell’s beneficiary deed.
Casenet has no record of any circuit court CV case numbers with Russell’s name on them.

09/01/2020

Judge Crouch selected Nancy Jennings
to administer the Don Carlos estate claiming that she was a disinterested third party and not on any will. In spite of that she challenged Bertha's wills 7 times. Bertha had no say as to who received her estate. She refused to allow the case to go to a jury trial. Even though Bertha and Frank wrote into their wills that the adopted daughter was to receive nothing she received all of the estate. approximately 2.5.million dollars. The heirs Bertha named received nothing. It took a group of crooked attys. and Judges 10 years to accomplish this injustice