Key

1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97

"Debt fm Harold O’Connell Trust ............................................................. 659.97"  (Estate, bk467p192)
"Int fm Harold O'Connell Trust  ................................................................ 816.00"  (Estate. bk467p192)
"Payable to the Estate of Jean M. O'Connell ... ... ............................ ... $ 1,475.97" (Trust, bk480p1768)

"2. The K-1 filed by the Trust showed a payment of $816.00 in interest to the estate. You sent a check in the amount of $1475.97 to the estate. What was the remaining $659.97? Do I have this confused with the tax debt/credit situation which ran from the Third Accounting?"
(From Attorney Edward White's letter of May 19, 1992, to Trustee, Anthony O'Connell)


I believe the key to exposing the accounting trails behind Bk467p191 is to use the accounting trail 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 as a guide; as a bench mark; as a prerequisite. It is a toe in the door.

The clearest description of the accountant's accounting trails is in Edward White's letter of May 19, 1992. So much so that it can be used as a blueprint to show how Joanne Barnes created the accounting entanglements using the trust's K-1's when she did the accounting for the trust in 1991. I don't understand why Joanne Barnes reported different amounts to the IRS than she did to the Court when the amounts should be the same, or why Edward White reported the differences to the Court and the IRS, or why he is asking me about Joanne Barnes accounting.

An accounting entanglement is used as a wedge and takeover tool and as cover. Who ever controls the accounting entanglement controls the people and assets that are entangled. The family is powerless to remove the accounting entanglements and powerless to stop the accountants from using the entanglements against the family.

The simplest example of an accounting entanglement in the May 19, 1992, letter is: 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97:

"2. The K-1 filed by the Trust showed a payment of $816.00 in interest to the estate. You sent a check in the amount of $1475.97 to the estate. What was the remaining $659.97? Do I have this confused with the tax debt/credit situation which ran from the Third Accounting?"

The patterns for creating accounting entanglement are not intended to be recognized but if you can recognize the dynamics in the simple accounting entanglement 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 you can recognize the same dynamics in the more complicated examples. The key to recognizing the ubiquitous accounting entanglements at Bk467p191 and exposing the accounting trails behind them is to use 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 as a guide. It is a toe in the door.

The accounting entanglement 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 has remained unrecognized and the family has been made to appear responsible for it for nineteen years now. It is in an invisible box and history suggests that it and all the other accounting entanglements will be used against the family in a sale of Accotink. The entanglements give the accountants control of the family and the family's assets and render the family powerless.

I believe the key to exposing Bk467p191 is to use the known accounting trail 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 as a reference and reality test. Think of Bk467p191 as a big ball of confusion with a few recognizable or potentially recognizable accounting trails through it. One is the accounting entanglement 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 and one is the accounting entanglement $2,000.00 described in Note 5. The $2,000 should be zero because the Trust had the appraisal done and the trust paid for the appraisal, and the Estate did not reimburse the Trust. These two accounting trails are the only accounting trails that I have been able to expose behind Bk467p191 in nineteen years with certainty. Neither is recognized by the accountants who created the, reported them, and approved them.

When in doubt I find a good way to get back to a solid foundation is to ask myself:

(1) Does 1,475.97 less 816.00 equal 659.97?  

(2) If 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 is not recognized, does it still exist?

(3) Did the accountants create, report and approve these numbers? Do the accountant's recognize the accounting trail 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 or any accounting trail for these numbers? If you did not know this accounting trail before would you know it after asking the accountants? Do the accountants make it appear that the family is responsible for these numbers?

(4) Do the accountants make $659.97 appear and disappear at will? If so, is it understandable how large amounts such as $545,820, $125,188, and $70,0511 can disappear?

(5) Can we connect the dot for Bk467p191 being closed for nineteen years with the dot for killing the messenger who has been trying to open it for nineteen years; can we find out where the money went?