| Home | Books and Gifts | Photo Album | Mob Busters | Mafia Site Search |
Inside Vegas - Steve Miller

Steve Miller is a former Las Vegas City Councilman. In 1991, the readers of the Las Vegas Review Journal voted him the "Most Effective Public Official" in Southern Nevada. Visit his website at:

"Unclean Hands" Suing For Defamation
"Who wrote this report? Who have I bribed? What judges? WHAT BULLSHIT!"
- Private Guardian Jared E. Shafer

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones ....

Click on image to see 91 year old WW2 hero plead to be allowed to spend his final days with family in
California. Private Guardian Jared E. Shafer signals his displeasure to Family Court Judge Jon Norheim
who refused to permit senior to leave LV. Family followed patriarch's orders and moved him to Santa Cruz
County 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.

Click HERE 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 doctor's opinion.'"

During 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 Nevada.

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?
Case No. A-12-671427-C
Date Filed: 11/02/2012
Department 31
Judge Joanna Kosher

JARED E. SHAFER; an individual; 
a Nevada professional limited partnership; 
ALAN D. FREER, an individual; ROBERT 
D. SIMPSON; an individual; PATIENCE 
BRISTOL; an individual; AMY DEITTRICK, 
an individual; PROFESSIONAL 
INC., a Nevada corporation; AVID 
a Nevada corporation; SHAWN KING, an 
individual; GAMETT & KING, a Nevada 
REBECCA SCHULTZ, an individual; and 
DOES I through 20, inclusive; 

In my opinion, the names listed above in BOLD 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 cases. Please 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.

(Click HERE 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.

ROBERT G. WING, as Receiver for
GAMETT & KING, a Nevada Professional
Corporation, SHAWN D. KING, an
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

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 fraudulently offered and sold approximately $180 million in unregistered notes to more than 800 investors, many of whom were senior citizens. According to the complaint, the defendants 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.

Settlement 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

"Clean hands?"

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.
Business Entity Information 
Status:   Default File Date:   5/29/2012 
Type:   Domestic Corporation Entity Number:   E0293752012-0 
Qualifying State:   NV List of Officers Due:   5/31/2013 
Managed By:    Expiration Date: 
NV Business ID:   NV20121340979 Business License Exp:   5/31/2013 

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?
Case No. 12M36736X
Non sufficient funds/checks
Criminal Complaint 
Request For Arrest Warrant 
Case No. 04M16475X
State of Nevada vs Bristol, Patience Marie
Case Type: Misdemeanor
Date Filed:
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 Dewayne 03/29/2006
JC Department 3 Felony

"Clean hands?"

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 for bankruptcy."

"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 rights.


* If you would like to receive Steve's frequent E-Briefs about Las Vegas' scandals, click here: Steve Miller's Las Vegas E-Briefs

Copyright © Steve Miller

email Steve Miller at:
div. of PLR International

Copyright © 1998 - 2013 PLR International