accountants: Because Edward White speaks for Joanne Barnes and it is not certain who is doing what accounting, I use the term "the accountants" to mean anyone who does the accounting except our family.

(1) Edward White speaks for Joanne Barnes, but accountability can be toggled between them or to some unidentified source:

1992.11.16   (Edward White to Anthony O'Connell, Jean Nader, and Sheila O'Connell)
"Regretfully I have to amend my letter of Friday. There is no "stepped up basis" on the Lynch note according to the accountants who are preparing the fiduciary income tax return. This is subject to a credit for tax paid on part of it in the estate tax return, but it will result in an estimated $35,000 to $40,000.00 in tax to the estate due to the note payoff. This is one of the reasons why a further disbursement would not be vise.
In addition, Jo Ann Barnes commented to me today that the Accotink valuation could well result in a question by the IRS and she feels no disbursement should be made.
Some sale of the Edwards accounts will probably be needed.
Jo Ann also reminds me that each of you should check with your own tax adviser after receiving the K-1 forms as to payment of estimated income taxes.
Sincerely, Edward J. White"

(2) Edward White can says he did the accounting when he does not want Joanne Barnes to be accountable (Bk467p19x, note 6) and Jesse Wilson can make it appear that I did the accounting when Joanne Barnes did it.

(3) The accountants use innocent Jean Nader to give their accounting instructions to me which makes Jean Nader appear responsible rather than the accountants.

(4) If you researched the court records, could you tell who changed the Trustee's 11th account from "This is not a final account" to "This is a final account"?

(5) Can any of the accountants recognize the accounting trail $1,475.97 - $816.00 = $659.97 or recognize who created it?

accounting entanglement:
The accounting trail 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 is the simplest example of an accounting entanglement. An accounting entanglement is used as a wedge and takeover tool and as cover. Whoever controls the accounting entanglements controls the people and assets that are entangled. Small amounts are used to make them appear insignificant. They are ubiquitous; all seven notes at Bk467p193-p194 describe what are actually accounting entanglements; all but note six are made to appear as if the family created them.

blueprint: In Edward White's letter of May 19, 1992, the description of the accounting trails is clear enough for the reader to see how Joanne Barnes created the accounting entanglements. You can follow them like a blueprint.

carryover tools: Accounting issues or entanglements that should have been taken care of previously but are carried over to a time when the family and it's assets are vulnerable, such during the accounting of an estate or after a real estate sales contract is signed and before the settlement. Examples are the still unknown "come-in-lawyer-fix" document(?), the still unknown "bond problem", the still unknown car problem # 1, the new car problem # 2, the previous years undone gift taxes, the unrecognized 1992 deed for Accotink, and the back and forth of Anthony O'Connell qualified or could not qualify as co-trustee u/w of H. A. O'Connell. It's been 25 years now and we can't get the accountants to take an accountable position on this.

ddhm: Acronym for "draft-deed-howmuch"; the accountant's covert agenda in 1985.

Do the math: Expose the accounting trails

innocent or trusting Jean Nader: I add the adjective "innocent" or "trusting" to Jean Nader as a reminder that Jean Nader is not responsible for what the accountants tell her. If I say the co-executors (Jean Nader and Edward White) did X it automatically appears as if I am including Jean Nader for what the accountants did.

invisible box: To illustrate a concept. The family is put in an invisible box closed to outside observation. The family is led to believe that what appears to come from independent and trustworthy sources is the real world of accounting principals and the law..

na: "not accountable". Something makes the accountants not have to be accountable.

sunshine: Exposure to the light of day, transparency

"Blind spot", things that are not recognized: The family is not source of the confusion and conflict that covers the accountant's accounting trails. The accountant's accounting trails are so secret it's a secret their a secret. The straight forward accounting entanglement 1,475.97 - 816.00 = $659.97 is not recognized, etc.,

The evidence: The accounting trails behind Bk467p191.

Blueprint: Edward White's letter to me of May 19, 1992, where he asks me about Joanne Barnes accounting (Which makes it appear as if I and not Joanne Barnes were responsible for Joanne Barnes accounting). His description of the accounting entanglements shows how Joanne Barnes created them.

Turning point: Turning from assuming that the family is the problem and therefore it is not necessary to try to look at the evidence, to stopping the accountants from using the family as cover and looking at the evidence.

Reality test 1: 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97..

Report: Commissioner of Accounts Jesse Wilson's report to the Judges of August 8, 2000, where he describes and dismisses the trust's 12th court account, and closes the trust's accounting before the trustee can untangle the accounting entanglements.