• Report: #32426

Complaint Review: State of Arizona, Janet Napolitano

Thank You

Read how Ripoff Report saves consumers millions.

  • Submitted: Sat, October 12, 2002
  • Updated: Thu, December 19, 2002

  • Reported By:T AZ
State of Arizona, Janet Napolitano
1275 West Washington Street Phoenix, Arizona U.S.A.

State of Arizona, Janet Napolitano ripoff political corruption Phoenix Arizona *UPDATE ..Arizona appointed receiver Lawrence J. Warfield 2 other cases same path of disaster! *UPDATE ..Arizona Corporation Commission found gulity of Fraud

*0: Arizona Corporation Commission found gulity of Fraud in Arizona

*0: Arizona Corporation Commission found gulity of Fraud in Arizona

*0: Arizona Corporation Commission found gulity of Fraud in Arizona

*0: Arizona Corporation Commission found gulity of Fraud in Arizona

*0: More stuff...November 27th 2002

*Consumer Comment: You'd be amazed how politicians use their power.

*0: MORE INFORMATION!

What's this?
What's this?
What's this?
Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™

SEO Reputation Management at its best!

In July 2000 the Janet Napolitano's State appointed receiver named Lawrence J. Warfield who is an employee of Janet Napolitano came into our home while we were out of the country attending to our other business.

We were told there would be no problems during the time we were out of the country and nothing to worry about since the receiver came into our home and seized computers- business and personal files in June 2000.

We listened to our attorneys, Ed Novak and Darrow Sol at the time Streich Lang and believed they would handle the matter appropriately and our rights would be preserved.

We later found out they handed our retainer to the State appointed receiver, did not give us proper legal advise during this time and just abandoned us since we could not pay them $50,000. Streich Lang relinquised out retainer of $77,000. We later found out they could have petitioned the courts for legal fees and such. Ed Novak and Darrow Sol never gave us information on the receivership orders and we did not even see a copy until late October 2000 to early November 2000.

We were not given this information by the State of Arizona or the State appointed receiver or his agents at any time until late October or November 2000.

When Janet Napolitano's State appointed receiver did come into our home in July 2000 he seized all property in our home and at two separate offices and left no inventory. NO INVENOTY AT ALL!

We did not receive any inventory from Janet Napolitano's State appointed receiver for 4 months and when we finally did it was missing hundreds of thousands of dollars of jewelry and assets that were seized and can be proved due to witnesses and investors in our company.

We had pledged all our personal assets and art collection to the investors of Safari Media inc as liquidation was to occur in just 9 days after the state appointed receiver seized everything.

Our home was placed in forfeiture and so were our personal vehicles. The State appointed receiver said all funds were tainted and seized it all. Like I said there was no inventory of anything was taken by the State appointed receiver.

When we returned our house was gutted.

Now it has been impossible to gather any accounting from Janet Napolitano's State appointed receiver.

The State appointed receiver has only done one accounting and that was in late 2000. Due to pressure Janet Napolitano's state appointed receiver has now done another accounting that encompassess 2 years. Janet Napolitano's state appointed receiver says he has only taken in 1.3 million, but proceeded to spend 1.1 million on himself and his agents. This still leaves $209,000 and it looks like none of it will be going to the investors. The receiver has spent 84% of all money brought in and given nothing to the investors.

The state appointed receiver however has paid him and his lawyers over $600,000...nothing to the investors of Safari. Now the total has gone up to 1.1 million.

Many witnesses have said our assets have been sold or seen at auctions, or various retail establishments. None of this was entered or documented in the courts or on paper.

The State appointed receiver was even driving my wife's Mercedes over a year after it was taken from us..he received a ticket with this car on New Years Eve 2002. My Land Cruiser is believed to have been driven by Stan Tadlock from the ACC for a couple of months before its sale at auction.

Janet Napolitano's State appointed receiver also told all investors our estate was worth only 2.1 million to $154,000 and did not put Safari Media Inc. in bankruptcy protection...allowing Safari to incur millions in interest on an Amex Corporate Credit Card. We and investor witnesses still have proof the whole estate is worth at least 25 million.

Others have been arrested and found guilty of wrong doing in this case and a summary judgment was just found against us without any sort of discovery from the State or their appointed receiver.

Moira McCarthy, Janet Napolitano's counsel and assistant attorney general, had received documentation and withheld it from the court to allegedly make sure the summary judgment would be in her favor by Judge Burke. Judge Burke decided the 22 million summary judgment without any consideration and when we finally refiled all documents Judge Burke denied our Rule 56 (f) motion and maintained his tainted judgment. We have witnesses and proof we filled all documents and that Moira McCarthy had received all this documentation. We are appealing the matter.

We have had a total of three different seizures where all our files and computers were taken. Many of these computers and files contained our defense as we can prove through counsel.

Janet Napolitano's state appointed receiver no longer converses with investors of Safari and even let the web site www.safari-receivership go down for a month in the end of July 2002.

One can also see that Janet Napolitano's state appointed receiver's website www.safari-receivership.com court documents have not been updated since October 2000 and the last letter to the investors was in January 2001.

This is not preserving and protecting assets for the investors. This is not being a receiver.

Janet Napolitano's State and Janet Napolitano's counsel Moira McCarthy, assistant attorney general, refuse to give discovery and we are going to have to have them compelled by the courts. We have documentation of this as well.

I see where Mrs. Napolitano does not take responsibility for her employees or their actions at time and I was wondering if you as governor would be any different? I feel a governor of a State should be responsible and accountable for actions of their staff. Janet Napolitano is making sure we are being held accountable while I feel she does not do the same thing for her employees and agents.

I am a very political and tenacious individual and would like to know that all politicians have not been compromised.

You can read about our whole case along with court documents and third party verification at www.mapofthepsyche.com/facts which tells of our 2 year battle for truth and justice for our investors of Safari Media Inc..

Please help!

Mark
Tucson, Arizona

Click here to read other Rip Off Reports on Mesa Arizona, the main cause of corruption in Arizona

Click here to read other Rip Off Reports on Sheriff Joe Arpaio, all part of the despicable corruption in Arizona

Click here to read other Rip Off Reports on CP Direct

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 10/12/2002 05:57 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/State-of-Arizona-Janet-Napolitano/Phoenix-Arizona-85007/State-of-Arizona-Janet-Napolitano-ripoff-political-corruption-Phoenix-Arizona-UPDATE-A-32426. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.

Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on State of Arizona, Janet Napolitano

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
0Author 7Consumer 0Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1 0

Arizona Corporation Commission found gulity of Fraud in Arizona

AUTHOR: - ()

60 million dollar verdict against Irvin and the Arizona Corporation Commission for acts of corruption in Southwest Gas case. This at the very least helps establish a serious precedent for corruption in the ACC for fraud.



http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/business/12_19_02irvin.html
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 0

Arizona Corporation Commission found gulity of Fraud in Arizona

AUTHOR: - ()

60 million dollar verdict against Irvin and the Arizona Corporation Commission for acts of corruption in Southwest Gas case. This at the very least helps establish a serious precedent for corruption in the ACC for fraud.



http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/business/12_19_02irvin.html
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 0

Arizona Corporation Commission found gulity of Fraud in Arizona

AUTHOR: - ()

60 million dollar verdict against Irvin and the Arizona Corporation Commission for acts of corruption in Southwest Gas case. This at the very least helps establish a serious precedent for corruption in the ACC for fraud.



http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/business/12_19_02irvin.html
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#4 0

Arizona Corporation Commission found gulity of Fraud in Arizona

AUTHOR: - ()

60 million dollar verdict against Irvin and the Arizona Corporation Commission for acts of corruption in Southwest Gas case. This at the very least helps establish a serious precedent for corruption in the ACC for fraud.



http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/business/12_19_02irvin.html
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#5 0

More stuff...November 27th 2002

AUTHOR: - ()

Well taled about in the rebuttal our old bisiness and personal attorneys used to be Streich Lang and they were a train wreck.



In regards to our case we are now fighting in 3 different courts and it is funny now everyone is trying to make it so we cannot use any of the evidence in regards to mishandling by the State of Arizona appointed receiver Lawrence J. Warfield as receiver of our estate. We have been saying for years that he has done things wrong and not preserved and protected our assets big time and now everyone it seems is trying to not allow any sort of testimony of defense when it comes to Lawrence J. Warfield at all in any situation. I wonder WHY?



The State of Arizona appointed receiver Lawrence J. Warfield has also taken over 2 other cases this year and things are going down the same path of disaster. The two companies are RDI and CP Nutritionals! Why is Lawrence J. Warfield being allowed to take control of another two companies with millions in assets. I keep asking myself...WHY?



Mark
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#6 Consumer Comment

You'd be amazed how politicians use their power.

AUTHOR: Donna - ()

If you you've ever heard of the Spann family debacle, you'd understand how Napolitano's "friends" can get away with their crimes. Many lawyers and politicians and one holding company of APS, (Pinnacle West) using crooked US Marshalls, took all their land away and gave them a measly offer for land real close to the airport.



This was not a comndemnation for public use, but for a bank that wanted to lease the property that Pinnacle West developed. The Mayor for the City of Phoenix was involved, the attorney general's ofc. and a host of attorneys, including one who is now the mayor or is it governor of Las Vegas/Nevada.



These people got screwed and lost their parents right after the false arrest of two of their children. So I'm not surprised of the power of these ruthless people to screw the public. I will however remember the names of the lawyers, the law firm (Streich Lang) and of course Napolitno, who of course, I did not vote for.



Just call me Blonde Justice
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#7 0

MORE INFORMATION!

AUTHOR: - ()

10/13/02: Sunday



We all received the letter that went out to the supposed victims of this whole thing from some loyal supporters and investors.



The letter stated that a rule 11 motion was initiated by the Attorney General Janet Napolitano on our behalf based on our claims of of as well as evidece we all supplied including medical records and evidence.



THIS IS A BOLD FACE LIE ON THE PART OF THE ATTORNEY GENERALS OFFICE.



WOW!!! I cannot believe the State would lie like this just to get what they wanted. No one on our case asked for a

Rule 11 based on mental illness or any other reason.



No one on our case did not supply anything like medical records or evidence. We do not have that evidence, plain and simple.



The first anyone on our case heard about this was a few days ago and we all read up on Rule 11 just this last week. Our attorneys and us went through the Rule on Monday, last week.



We all felt we might be able to use Rule 11.2 upon further reading of the rule on Monday, but we did not file anything. Rule 11.2 states possibly that the drugs prescribed by Shelly Susman-Breen caused diminished capacity, but not mental illness at the time of the supposed offenses.



We all found that all the counts except 2 are all between February 1999-June 2000. This is the exact time of the overmedicated by Shelly Susman-Breen with a myriad of potentially deadly medication.



We all have never claimed any sort of mental illness. We all have claimed overmedication in the past, but this has never been filed and has just been discussed recently with counsel.



It seems like we are being forced into a mental illness Rule 11 motion if we want to have our diminished capacity or over medication theory looked at. Our attorneys have stated that there are two criteria for mental competence. 1. Not able to understand court proceedings including right and wrong and 2. not able to assist in ones defense. our attorneys do not believe either of these criterion are met at all. Now, you can also look back to the time of the offenses... there was diminished

capacity thanks to over medication.



How can the State of Arizona say we asked for this and we provided evidence...THIS IS 100% FICTION...this is malicious prosecution and FRAUD!



The steps cornered animals will go through to not get caught...I

cannot believe the state is this cornered that they need to resolve to these kind of tactics.
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.



Ripoff Report Legal Directory