Suing For Defamation
"Who wrote this report? Who have I
bribed? What judges? WHAT BULLSHIT!"
Private Guardian Jared E. Shafer
live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones ....
on image to see 91 year old WW2 hero plead to be allowed to spend his final
days with family in
Private Guardian Jared E. Shafer signals his displeasure to Family Court
Judge Jon Norheim
refused to permit senior to leave LV. Family followed patriarch's orders
and moved him to Santa Cruz
while funds were bled from his account in Nevada to pay Shafer's lawyers
to fight for his return.
INSIDE VEGAS by Steve Miller
July 29, 2013
LAS VEGAS - Rebecca Schultz must have really
touched a nerve when she removed her wealthy father from Jared E. Shafer's
"guardianship" back in September 2010.
In circumstances when an older wealthy
married couple decide to retire to another state far away from their family,
and then a spouse dies, a horrifying chain of events can occur.
In the case of Guadalupe Olvera, soon after
re-locating to Sun City in Henderson, Nevada from their home in California,
Carmela Olvera suddenly died. Based on Mr. Olvera's multiple physical disabilities
and his desire to stay in Nevada until his paid-for half million dollar
home could be sold and his other financial affairs settled, Nevada law
required that he be evaluated to make sure he was mentally and physically
capable of handling his own affairs.
In the absence of a relative living in
Nevada, the clerk for Clark County Family Court Judge Jon Norheim recommended
private guardian Jared E. Shafer be hired as temporary guardian over Olvera's
person and finances. The guardianship was supposed to be temporary and
last only until Olvera's financial arrangements were in order, but in opposition
to Olvera's wishes and the court pleadings of his only child Rebecca Schultz,
the "guardianship" dragged on and on for over two years while Shafer bled
Olvera's trust and bank account of over $300,000.
to see some of Shafer's fraudulent billings to Olvera's trust including
$7,475 for "E-mail."
According to Schultz; "Shafer did not have
my father evaluated as required, and in fact, had in his hands a 2007 report
from Dr. Louise Sherk that stated dad WAS competent, yet he conveniently
refused to acknowledge this document and all subsequent positive evaluations
done after dad moved to California by the Veterans Administration, Dr.
Einhorn, and Dr. Aron who all confirmed dad's competency. Shafer blatantly
told my dad's California attorneys that he 'would not accept a California
the two years Olvera lived alone in Henderson, Olvera's family was discouraged
from visiting him or asking about his finances. Ms. Schultz (shown with
her father on July 4, 2013) conducted her own investigation and discovered
suspicious withdrawals from her father's accounts.
She informed her dad of the withdrawals
while he was confined to his 3,000 square foot Sun City home without friends
or family, cared for by a stranger from "Keep You Company." Research indicated
that at the time, Shafer was on the Board of Directors of the firm. The
average billings from Keep You Company were over $7,000 a month, well over
Mr. Olvera?s monthly income, therefore depleting funds in his trust. Rebecca
argued it was much more affordable for her father to live with family,
but Shafer and the court painted her as ?unfit.?
Upon hearing that his daughter was called
"unfit," Olvera immediately took charge, and things began to happen.
Against Shafer's orders, Olvera appeared
in court to demand that Shafer be fired and he be allowed to leave Nevada.
Judge Norheim condescendingly refused to honor his demand (click HERE
to see court video).
Soon after the hearing, Rebecca, upon her
father's orders, removed him from Shafer's custody and returned him to
Santa Cruz where he lives happily and healthfully to this day in the loving
care of his family. The last caregiver assigned to Olvera reportedly said
that after he left for California, Keep You Company told her ?We just lost
our biggest client.?
In retaliation, Shafer went to court and
had Norheim issue a Warrant
for Rebecca's arrest if she ever returned to Nevada. He also spent
Olvera's money to hire a California law firm to try to have the warrant
honored in that state. He also continued draining Olvera's trust to pay
his high priced LV attorney-friends to try to force Olvera to return to
Based on the warrant, Rebecca could not
re-enter Nevada to list her father's home with a realtor, or attend court
hearings without fear of being arrested. Shafer billed Olvera about $12,000
in legal fees for trying to transfer the arrest warrant to California,
but authorities there refused to honor the warrant.
After careful research, I discovered that
the granting of Guadalupe Olvera's wish to forcefully terminate Shafer's
"guardianship" and move back with his family was the first time one of
Shafer's "wards" has ever defied his unlimited power over their person
and estate and escaped from his custody. In all other cases I investigated,
Shafer defeated all attempts by family members to terminate him by convincing
Clark County Family Court judges like Norheim that the relative was either
a financial "exploiter," or "unfit" to be their loved one's legal guardian.
But Jared Shafer was not finished with
the Olvera family. Three years after Guadalupe moved back home, Shafer
filed a libel law suit against Rebecca claiming she authored anonymous
Internet reports that damaged his and his cronies' reputations. He did
so without any proof Schultz authored the reports. Many believe Shafer's
libel suit was meant to send a message to the families of his other "wards"
to not challenge his authority.
(Anyone can access the reports in question
by doing a Google search of "Guardian Jared E. Shafer.")
I view his baseless lawsuit against Schultz
as a perfect example of a SLAPP
suit (strategic lawsuit against public participation) meant to silence
future exposés of his highly questionable business practices.
But who are those who claim their reputations
have been damaged?
Date Filed: 11/02/2012
Judge Joanna Kosher
E. SHAFER; an individual;
SOLOMON DWIGGINS & FREER, LTD.,
a Nevada professional limited partnership;
ALAN D. FREER, an individual; ROBERT
D. SIMPSON; an individual; PATIENCE
an individual; AMY DEITTRICK,
an individual; PROFESSIONAL
FIDUCIARY SERVICES OF NEVADA,
INC., a Nevada corporation; AVID
BUSINESS SERVICES OF NEVADA, INC.,
a Nevada corporation; SHAWN
individual; GAMETT & KING, a
REBECCA SCHULTZ, an individual;
DOES I through 20, inclusive;
In my opinion, the names listed above in
LETTERS have "unclean hands," and will
have a difficult time proving that Rebecca Schultz, or anyone else for
that matter, could have damaged their already sullied reputations.
"Unclean Hands" means a litigant in a court
action has a blemished record, a record of proven fault, improper history,
personal deficiencies, personal problems, problems in the past, or a tainted
past. Its fair game to ask a Plaintiff or Defendant in a libel law suit
to fully explain to the jury any aspects of their lives that could prove
their reputation was so previously tarnished that suing for defamation
could not reverse past damage. I believe that at least three Plaintiffs
in the above case fit this description and would only further damage their
reputations if cross examined before a jury.
Following a previous INSIDE VEGAS column
about the libel lawsuit, I was contacted by three persons who identified
themselves as the actual authors of the defamatory reports. They said they
wanted to set the record straight that they have never spoken to Rebecca
Schultz, and they wrote the reports on their own volition. (The person's
names cannot be disclosed under the Nevada Reporter's Shield Law.)
I am extremely familiar with what its like
to be a Plaintiff in a libel lawsuit. I prevailed before the Nevada Supreme
Court in MILLER
v. JONES. My lawsuit is often used as case law for reference in national
read the Nevada Supreme Court's findings in my case to get a liberal
education on the laws of libel and defamation, a specialized part of law
Mr. Shafer's attorneys seem to have little knowledge of exemplified by
their inability to positively identify the name of the person or persons
who purportedly defamed their clients.
to read Shafer's complete lawsuit.)
During my four week televised trial in
2001, I was subjected to days of cross examination by some of the best
attorneys in Nevada. They had the legal right to ask me questions far beyond
the scope of my case to try to paint me as a person with little or no reputation
or integrity to protect. Had I ever been in trouble with the law, it would
have been thoroughly brought out for close examination by the jury. Through
it all, my reputation and integrity remained unscathed, however, it's uncertain
if Jared Shafer and two of his co-Plaintiffs could overcome the same level
of scrutiny I overcame.
For example, in 2009, Shafer and several
cronies avoided criminal prosecution by the SEC by returning money they
invested in a Ponzi scheme in which investor
funds were used, among other things, to pay promised returns to earlier
investors and for family living expenses. Most of the money was
fraudulently obtained from unknowing senior citizens.
According to court records, in 2009, Shafer
and two accomplices were accused of receiving commissions for the sale
of securities without a license -- information the jury in SHAFER v. SCHULTZ
would likely want to know.
|IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
ROBERT G. WING, as Receiver for
VESCOR CAPITAL CORP, et al,
GAMETT & KING, a Nevada Professional
Corporation, SHAWN D. KING,
individual, BRUCE GAMETT, individually
and as Trustee for the Evelyn Gamett Trust,
JAMES GAMETT, an individual,
REBECCA GAMETT, an individual,
DONNA CARBONI, an individual,
MICHAEL CARBONI, an individual,
PETER CARBONI, individually and as
Trustee of the Carboni Charitable
Remainder Trust, PAUL HILTON, an
individual, ROBERT MILLER, an
individual, JACQUELINE MILLER, an
individual, JARED E. SHAFER,
individually and as Trustee for the Kathryn
Waldman Charitable Remainder Trust,
JEFFREY L. BURR as Trustee for the Tia
B. Green Trust, and WANDA MARKS as
Trustee of the Marks Exemption Trust,
Marks Marital Trust and Marks Survivor
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
1. Defendants Bruce Gamett, Shawn
King and Jared Shafer referred investors
to VesCor and received commission payments from VesCor for those referrals.
The other Defendants in this action were VesCor investors who received
payments which either exceeded the amount they originally invested or received
payments at a time when they were on notice that VesCor was insolvent or
was being operated fraudulently. The
transfers of commissions from VesCor constitute fraudulent transfers;
in addition, the transfers of interest payments and principal payoffs are
fraudulent transfers, at least to the extent they exceed the amount originally
invested by Defendants, or when they were received at
a time when the investors were on notice of VesCor?s insolvency or fraud.The
Receiver seeks the return of those commissions, interest payments and principal.
According to a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission PRESS
RELEASE: "On February 8, 2008, the SEC filed a civil action against
Val E. Southwick and four related companies he controlled alleging they
offered and sold approximately $180 million in unregistered notes to more
than 800 investors, many of whom were senior citizens. According
to the complaint,
promised investors they would receive annual returns of 8 to 24 percent,
ostensibly from the profits from the financing of several real estate developments.
In fact, the SEC alleged the defendants operated a Ponzi scheme
in which investor funds were used, among other things, to pay promised
returns to earlier investors and for family living expenses.
Agreement reached w/ Defendants Bruce Gamett, Shawn
King and Jared Shafer individually and approved by the
Court 9/22/09; all other defendants voluntarily dismissed
Shafer and CPA Shawn King were forced to
return the fraudulently obtained commissions, interest payments and principal.
Though not convicted of a crime, Shafer was allowed to continue handling
the finances of his wealthiest "wards" undaunted.
Then there's the Arrest Warrants issued
against Plaintiff Patience Bristol and also Shawn King, evidence that will
certainly be heard by the jury if their libel suit goes to trial.
Shafer protégé and co-Plaintiff
Patience Bristol is currently awaiting trial for writing bad checks. This
is her second offense for the same crime. Nonetheless, she is also allowed
to continue acting as "guardian" over the persons and finances of a number
of wealthy Nevada senior citizens.
|GUARDIANSHIP SOLUTIONS, INC.
Business Entity Information
Status: Default File Date: 5/29/2012
Type: Domestic Corporation Entity Number: E0293752012-0
Qualifying State: NV List of Officers Due:
Managed By: Expiration Date:
NV Business ID: NV20121340979 Business License Exp:
President - PATIENCE BRISTOL
If called to the witness stand, Bristol
will likely be asked to explain why she twice was charged with passing
bad checks and once charged with theft. And Plaintiff Shaun D. King will
be asked to explain his participation in a Ponzi scheme, and why an Arrest
Warrant was issued against Shaun Dewayne King
in 2006 for Felony Possession of a Stolen Vehicle?
BRISTOL, PATIENCE M
Case No. 12M36736X
Charges: BRISTOL, PATIENCE M
Non sufficient funds/checks,
Request For Arrest Warrant
PREVIOUS CRIMINAL CHARGE:
Case No. 04M16475X
State of Nevada vs Bristol,
Case Type: Misdemeanor
1. NON SUFFICIENT FUNDS/CHECKS
2. THEFT (MISD)
OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS
ARREST WARRANT ISSUED
(Judicial Officer: Jansen, William D. )
Would you want a person like Bristol to
be the "guardian" of your loved one's person and fortune?
|06F03586X King, Shaun
JC Department 3 Felony
Bound Over to District Court POSSESSION
OF STOLEN VEHICLE
In my opinion, Shafer, King, and Bristol's
"unclean hands" should disqualify them from effectively claiming Schultz,
or anyone else, could have damaged their reputations.
According to an attorney consulted by INSIDE
VEGAS; "Shafer should not have received commissions for the sale of securities,
mainly to senior citizens. The license we're talking about would be issued
by FINRA, a federal regulatory agency that has a contract with the Securities
and Exchange Commission to regulate broker dealers. A broker dealer is
someone who sells securities. In order to market any type of security in
the U.S. an individual must pass a series of license exams which are regulated
by FINRA. These guys settled in federal court, which was an admission of
guilt for selling these securities in a real estate project which filed
"Shafer received commissions for the sale
of securities without a license. A broker dealer is someone who sells securities
to the public. In order to market any type of security in the U.S., an
individual must pass a series of license exams which are regulated and
controlled by FINRA. Shafer obviously skipped this step. Securities sold
to the public must undergo a due diligence process, which states that securities
must be audited by the broker dealer and an independent CPA. The regulations
also state both the broker dealer and the person selling securities must
be licensed. Depending upon where these securities were sold, some
states also require an additional state securities license. These guys
were selling securities in a Ponzi-type real estate project which filed
for bankruptcy. Questions still remain regarding the suitability of these
securities being sold to senior citizen investors who couldn't afford to
risk their funds in a project which appeared to be extremely undercapitalized."
"The fact Shafer and King sold securities
to people who possibly couldn't afford to lose; didn't understand the investment;
didn't read the prospectus; and they obviously misrepresented the risk
is quite enough to let the public know the nature of the white collar crime
committed, which caused the group to settle."
The attorney went on: "Settling out in
a civil case like this one is the same as a criminal equivalent of a nolo
contendere plea. Defendant doesn't submit a guilty plea, but pays
a fine. An attorney will usually negotiate this type of settlement
so his client can continue their life without a blemish on their record.
The plaintiffs settle for something like this because they are tired of
fighting and want to save a prolonged trial and collection process.
Also perhaps there was no real assets to grab."
Now, people claim their reputations have
been damaged by a woman who they cannot prove wrote anything about them
in the first place. Curiously, even Shafer has admitted he doesn't know
who wrote the defamatory Internet articles he's blaming on Schultz.
On September 13, 2011, Shafer charged an
unrelated "ward" $375 to "Read Ripoff Report submitted by C ------ P------."
The reason this account was billed $250 per hour for Shafer to read Internet
reports about himself is unclear, as are many other PFSN,
Inc. billings discovered by INSIDE VEGAS. According to the invoice
(below), Shafer believed a person with the initials "CP" was the author
of the reports instead of Schultz.
Shafer went on to complain: "Who wrote
this report? Who have I bribed? What judges? WHAT BULLSHIT!"
Nowhere in Shafer's Invoice is Rebecca
Schultz mentioned as the author of the defamatory material, just the words
"Who wrote this report? So why is he suing her only? It looks to me like
his case is based solely on retaliation.
Because Rebecca Schultz, based on Shafer's
Arrest Warrant, could have been arrested if she attended the initial hearing
on Sfafer's lawsuit, she didn't appear in the courtroom of Clark County
District Judge Joanna Kishner to defend herself. Consequently, Judge Kishner's
clerk issued a Default Judgment in Shafer's favor. A hearing is scheduled
on August 6, asking Judge Kishner to dismiss the Default Judgment and schedule
Shafer's libel action for Trial by Jury.
Believing they're protected by the judges
and high officials they've taken care of, vultures like those described
above circle their prey each year waiting for similar scenarios to happen
so they can bleed away the elderly's life savings and loved one's inheritances
with no consequence. If you have someone living in similar circumstances,
heed Rebecca Schultz's example and fight for your loved one's God given