The accounting trails at Bk467p191 are so secret it's secret that they're a secret. In nineteen years I have only been able to expose two of it's accounting trails with certainty and neither of those is recognized by the accountants. I have no power or voice to expose Bk467p191 so I have to go outside the established structure and try to get the attention of those who do. This is diffficult.

(1) If I say that the accountants make money disappear and cover it by creating confusion and conflict and make it appear as if it came from the family by using a trusting family member to carry out their instructions, the reader is not going to believe it.

(2) If I say that there is no remedy in the established structure, the reader is not going to believe it.

(3) The remaining option is to get the reader to see for themselves; I supply the documents and the reader connects the dots.

(4) The reader expects what he or she is being asked to read will be clear and understandable.

(5) But it is not clear and understandable, and that makes the reader want to kill the messenger out of frustration.

Please try to avoid preconceptions and assumptions; do not expect to immediate understand this as you normally would when you read something. Please do not buy the-family-is-the-problem-so-it's-not-necessary-to-expose-the-accounting-trails, or that taking over the family's assets is to protect the family. Please do not buy style, power, confusions, kill the messenger, innocent members of my own family repeating what the accountants have told them, approvals and procedures done for appearances, or any forms of opaque no matter what they're called or how artfully they're presented. Please do not give any weight to anything other than exposing the accounting trails

Accounting like a book; it has to be opened to see what's inside. Exposing the accounting trails trumps everything, and to not be diverted from that. Exposing the accounting trails is the only way, the only way, and there is no other way, to find out where the money went and how accounting entanglements such as 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 are created and used. Exposing the accounting trails is what the law and common sense says has to be done and what the public believes is done. It should be that simple. If it is actually done that is all that is needed and this web site would not be necessary.

The basis for judgment has to be 100% in exposing the accounting trails and 0% on anything else. Please buy the math, the accounting trails, the document trails, the instructions to the family trails, and not just the trails the accountants put in the court records. There are two trails where there should be one. Recommended reading: "No one would listen" by Harry Markopolos, who exposed Bernie Madoff. Please judge for yourself. If you read the correspondence and documents and connect the dots using common sense, does it look as if:


(0) Why has Joanne Barnes or the accountants never been required to expose and explain their accounting trails at Bk467p191?

(1) The accountant's make their agenda appear as the family's agenda by using a trusting family member to carry out their instructions?

(2) The family is put in an invisible box and led to believe that it is the real world of accounting and law, with the trusting family member not knowing that the instructions from what appears to be independent and trustworthy sources would not stand in the light of day?

(3) The family becomes divided and powerless if one family member trusts the accountant's instructions?

(4) There is no remedy in the established structure?

(5) Opaque is fatal to the family?

(6) Have the accountants led you to believe that your established advisors and fiduciaries should be removed?

(7) Did the accountants supplant the family's established advisors and fiduciaries? Are the accountants now in control of your assets?

1988.09.06 (Jean O'Connell to Anthony O'Connell, in part)
"I also would like you to be at least courteous to my friends. They know you do not want them around so you may not see much of them. They are people who helped me when I was desperately in need of help and had no place to turn.  Joanne especially was helpful.  When Ed Prichard [long time family lawyer] was going to charge me ¼ of your Dad's estate for his fee and Shalloway [long time family lawyer] had a mental break down when he was going to work on the estate it was Joanne who helped me by explaining what I had to do.  She did not want to be a co-trustee but I begged her and she agreed reluctantly tho she had never done it for anyone else. I still think you [long time name executor in Jean O'Connell's Will] owe her an apology and a box of candy or bouquet of flowers."

(8) Do the accountant's avoid accountability?

(9) Do the accountant's ask you to keep ther instructions to you a secrect from other family members?

(10) Are you given instructions that don't make common sense but you assume it is because you don't understand accounting or court procedures? Such as Edward White speaking for Joanne Barnes; or Edward White not wanting you to identify him by name, or of his existence to other members of your family?

(11) Have you been led to believe that you have done something wrong and that the accountants are trying to protect you from the IRS, etc., so you must do as they say, such as keep their accounting secrect?

(12) The concept of accounting entanglements. The simplest example of what I am calling an accounting entanglement is the accounting trail 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97. An accounting entanglement is used as a wedge and a takeover tool and as cover. Who ever controls the accounting entanglement controls the people and assets that are entangled. The patterns of creating accounting entanglements are not intended to be recognized but if you can recognize the patterns in this simple example you can recognize the same patterns in the more complicated examples. The amount of money used in the accounting entanglement is not the issue. The small amounts make the numbers appear insignificant and not worthy of attention when the issue is assumed to be the amounts. The issue is not the amounts, the issue is that they are accounting entanglements. One measure of the significance of accounting entanglements such as 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 is the the degree that the accountants go to not recognize it. All the notes at Bk467p191 address small numbers and all are accounting entanglements except note 3. These accounting entanglements make the accounting at Bk467p191 impenetrable.

The items under "Intro" are the easest; to get the idea of it. I believe the rest (except the references) would take weeks on months to recognize.