Why are judicially ordered exams of potential wards/victims called “incapacity” determinations rather than “capacity” determinations?
Why is hard proof of a ward’s capacity submitted to the court called “a suggestion of capacity”?
Why are so many court examiners’ reports so often identical as if they were copied and unanimous in favor of total incapacity?
Why does guardianship legislation allegedly intended to limit the court’s enormous latitude in these cases constantly use the highly fluid and permissive terms “may”,
“shall” or “can” instead of the term “must” when referring to the court’s obligation to follow the statutes?
Why are guardianship hearings often closed and sequestered?
Why are there no juries in guardianship matters?
Why is valid evidence of capacity so often discarded by the court?
Why do the courts constantly fail to monitor abuses in the guardianships they create?
The answers are simple.
The rather obvious function of the court–especially in hotspot districts–the default position of the court and the revenue generated by the court and the power held by the court is firmly rooted in identifying, conscripting and quickly and irreversibly declaring innocent citizens as “incapacitated” whether they are or not!
The court could not and would not be sustained (funded) if there were not a steady stream of new victims and cash flow. That steady and growing revenue stream justifies the demands for even more court funding and more court power and, of course more money for the real beneficiaries of this court process, the court insiders. Once that goal is accomplished and another innocent is thrown to the guardianship wolves, the court has little interest or time to spend with what happens next–they are well aware of how their system works and do not want to hear about the abuses they have empowered and abetted because to do so would impugn their imperious rule and bring into question their decisions to hand over lives to court insider predatory lawyers and barbaric guardians.
In effect, the court exists to perpetuate its own power.
So, rather than adhering to advance directives, the court bypasses them to advance the unspoken but very real aim of the court which, as we have shown, is to create profitable guardianships and fuel the predation industry. Rather than solving problems within dysfunctional families, the court creates far more severe new problems that force families into needless, costly, never ending litigation that massively benefits only the working machinery of the racket–court insiders. Rather than actually protecting vulnerables, the court is fully complicit in their exploitation and denouement.
This bias is a horrifying reality and an unspeakable affront to the the public who justifiably, lose faith in the judiciary every day these egregious cases are exposed.
Abuses in probate guardianship (conservatorship in some states) ALWAYS track back to the the same cabal of (mostly elected) state judges and magistrates whose dubious, logic defying decisions become the genesis of many years of pain, suffering and exploitation at the hands of the court insiders. It is these supercilious, arrogant and untouchable judges who create far too many guardianships with their insider buddies and then complain that these cases overwork them!
Flagrant Judicial bias and abuse of process is nothing new and it can have many origins, but it is wholly unacceptable. Whatever the inducement or even absent any inducement, the deadly multigeneration destructive fallout from equity probate court must be exposed for what it is–a cancerous black spot on our legal system. The hands on privileged perpetrators of this racket–insider lawyers and professional guardians–must no longer be allowed to leverage the bias of of these courts/judges into windfalls they steal with ease from innocent families.