Microcosm of the accountant's dynamics using the known accounting entanglement trail $1,475.97 – $816.00 = $659.97 and the disappearance of the $545,820 paid to the estate on April 21, 1992.
Please judge for yourself
- Does the established legal structure not offer a way for the family to protect itself from being divided and rendered powerless by the accountants? Is the family's only option a civil action? Would the structure of a civil action set innocent family member against innocent family member if one innocent family member trusts the accountant's instructions? Would a civil action divide the family further? And further when the trusting innocent family member is prevented from getting bonded (Edward White letter of November 5, 1993).
- Is there a connection between the unrecognized payment of $545,820 to the estate on April 21, 1992, and Mr. White's letter to innocent Jean Nader on April 22, 1992? Is there a pattern of the accountants inflicting more damage on the family when the accountants want more protection? Does more damage to the family mean more protection for the accountants?
From the Bar's letter of November 1, 1993, to Anthony O'Connell:
"Finally, you indicate that Mr. White, over a period of seven years, has made defamatory and divisive statements which you consider to be far more damaging than the issue regarding the real estate settlement. The Code of Professional Responsibility does not proscribe defamatory statements by an attorney, and our office is not the appropriate forum
to investigate or prosecute your claim. If you feel that you have been defamed or libeled by the Respondent, then your remedy is to file a civil action, but a Bar complaint is not an appropriate vehicle to resolve that issue."
From the Office of the Attorney General's letter of September 16, 1997, to Anthony O'Connell:
"Attorney General Cullen asked that I respond to your letter dated September 23, 1997. In that letter you have asked the Attorney General to address a particular phrase in a 1935 contract between the Commonwealth and the Hiners.
A review of the materials you mailed with your September 3, 1997 letter (in particular, page 501 - 505) demonstrates that your concerns involve issues related to what may amount to a private cause of action. Accordingly, I would suggest that you consult with private counsel.
As I mentioned in my previous reply, a letter which you referenced, the office of the Attorney General is the law firm for the various state agencies of the Commonwealth.
With kindest regards, I remain
Very truly, Stephen U. Baer Assistant Attorney General"
From Commissioner Jesse Wilson's letter of August 8, 2000, to Anthony O'Connell:
"Dear Mr. OConnell
This will acknowledge receipt of a copy of your letter of July 24, 2000 to Judges of the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit Court of Virginia.
While I do not presume to speak for the Court or any of the Judges, I think that it is safe to say:
(1) the Court is not organized or constituted for the purpose of conducting the sort of investigation required to establish the facts that you allege in your letter. The Court can only decide cases based on evidence produced by others;
(2) the officials who are responsible for conducting investigations of alleged crimes in Virginia are the Commonwealth Attorneys (the prosecutors) in each jurisdiction and the police departments and their detectives. If the available facts are sufficient to convince the Commonwealth's Attorney that it can be proved that a crime has been committed, and that a prosecution is not barred by the statute of limitations, his/her job is to bring the matter before the Court.
I hope this will be helpful."
Can we expose the accounting trails behind Bk467p191 and find out where the money went?