Report: #1090767

Complaint Review: Brent Marshall Oesterblad - Phoenix Arizona

  • Submitted:
  • Updated:
  • Reported By: Sorarchives Victim — Alabama
  • Brent Marshall Oesterblad

    Phoenix, Arizona

Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...

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..

BRENT MARSHALL OESTERBLAD is wanted for service of process in the Arizona Federal District Court and also the Maricopa County Superior Court in Phoenox Arizona. Brent has been ducking service of the third party complaint and also the complaint filed in Federal court that was also filed against his cohort Charles Rodrick, which it is believed that Rodrick knows, and has had contact with Oesterblad about his whereabouts. Oesterblad maybe hiding in Rodrick's place of residence. If you or anyone spots Oesterblad call local law enforcement immediately.

Who is Oesterblad? He is the second identified operator of the extortion web sites, Sorarchives (formally Offendex), onlinedetective which his wife Sara Shea also plays a part in the operation of the web site. All other facts can be found about Oesterblad on rip off report and abroad all over the internet. But be careful dealing with Brent Oesterblad, he is very dangerous, mentally unstable, a sociopathic liar and a federal convicted felon.

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 10/09/2013 04:24 PM and is a permanent record located here: 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. READ: Foreign websites steal our content

Search for additional reports

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

Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
Also a victim?
Repair Your Reputation!

Updates & Rebuttals


#1 General Comment

The Facts Are Coming Out Now

AUTHOR: Just The Facts - (USA)

David Michael Ellis Should Be Banned From The Aerospace Industry.


UPDATE: We now have now uncovered solid  information from people with first hand information that worked under David M Ellis that support the claims that David Ellis did in fact approve faulty untested aerospace parts to Dillon and Goodrich Aerospace. David Ellis also is accused of committed other frauds in regards to aerospace parts at American Aerospace Technical Castings  The official complaint to the FAA and the known affected vendors as well as others involved will be released soon. Below are just a few quotes from emails coming in. For the sake of public safety we hope this will trigger an investigation into Major David M Ellis & American Aerospace Technical Castings.


“Aside from Goodrich, I know Dillon parts had/have altered CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE. David Ellis as well as David Pacheco are very good with computers and a back door was created in the chemical testing program so certs can “fixed”. Also the made it so everyones cert stamp and signature can be added to a cert by anyone who is using the computer. If a audit for NADCAP ISO etc. Was to find this, It would cause AATC to get in a lot of trouble”

“He was suppose to remain separate from material testing but he ran the lab. He would strong arm David Pacheco who was the “manager” of material testing. If a part needed to ship ASAP he would force it through the processes so AATC would meet the ship dead lines. He would tell everyone to just push the parts through and sign off on un tested parts and say they were tested.”

“All Dillon parts have to have Chemical analysis. Pacheco edited the path for the OES programs results to be able to open in exel so the certs can be edited and electronic stamp and signature added”

“As for dates they were between April 2013 and October 2013. One customer for sure was Goodrich. Yes we are talking Aerospace parts. Also, back in 2007 I witnessed David photo shop the picture of the Tam panel used for Pen testing so we could pass NADCAP. In 2013 when I was working at AATC I was filing calibration papers and saw they were still using the same picture.”

On October 21 2013 The post below was posted on ripoff report about David M Ellis AKA Major David Ellis USMC approving faulty aircraft parts at American Aerospace Technical Castings ( )  in Phoenix Arizona and “MULTIPLE” sexual harassment’s. Rodrick was accused of authoring and posting this information and ultimately swayed the jury to award damages.

Respond to this report!

#2 UPDATE EX-employee responds

Ex-employee want Ellis to realize he is not untouchable

AUTHOR: not4show - (USA)

I wrote the ex-employee report about David and AATC. David believes he is untouchable, he threatens, harrasses and does whatever he can to make his employees do whatever he says regardless of ethics. He has no respect for employees, the company or Gunner for that matter. If Gunner would have never given David the money to pay off the IRS when he got audited and was going to loose the house he and Margie lived in, David went crying to Gunner and got $25,000 approx. He is a pathetic excuse for a man, telling me he was only with Margie until her medical settlement came through. 

Respond to this report!

#3 UPDATE EX-employee responds

sexual harrasment

AUTHOR: not4show - ()

There is so much more to add to this. He is a liar, a cheat he will do anything to anyone to get ahead. He wanted Margie back only because of her lawsuit winnings. He has had multiple sexual harrasment s filed against him at work, but he knows how to turn it around away from him. Helps to be the puppet master of the President of American Aerospance. Gunner the owner is never around, as long as his company's show profit he could care less. If you don't do as David says you are as good as gone. That's what happened to me, questioned fault aerospace parts that were being signed off as good by David and being sent to the customer. Think twice before taking a flight. He falsified test results, forces the inspectors to say parts are good when he and everyone else knows they are no

Respond to this report!

#4 General Comment

Major David Ellis Involved In Child Molestaion News Case

AUTHOR: Adam Galvez - ()


Major_David_Ellis_Lies_To_News 12

“MAJOR” David Michael Ellis USMC (Retired) Caught Fabricating Lies To The Media.


 Did MAJOR David M Ellis USMC (Retired) Lie To The Media To Hide The Truth?


It is not surprising that Major David Michael Ellis, Retired Marine Corp Major and President of Interalpha Properties in Phoenix, Arizona, And quality manager for American Aerospace also located in Phoenix Arizona would take liberties with the truth when being interviewed for an article by an Arizona Republic investigative journalist (right after his deposition in which he is being sued in superior court). Major David Ellis has a long history of telling “stories”, just ask his 2 wives who became aware that their husband had engaged in extra-marital affairs during their marriage. We will discuss these circumstances in detail later in this piece.

Major David Ellis makes the claim that “his name, business address and phone number were published on sex-offender websites, …. Anyone searching the Internet for his name could find him listed there.” This information claimed to have appeared on SORArchives is a flagrant fabrication as it never occurred. Major David Ellis makes the claim, but apparently was not required by the journalist to provide any documentation or proof of his allegations. Apparently being an investigative journalist does not include basic due diligence to substantiate claims when researching a story (emphasis on “story”). He said it, thus by proxy validated as factual? SORArchives challenges the Arizona Republic to produce evidence of Mr. Ellis’s profile as claimed appearing at anytime in its database or web pages.

According to the article, Major David Ellis also claims “Information posted on the sites accuses Ellis of aiding a child molester with a campaign to smear the websites’ operators.” Once again, prior to this rebuttal, nothing has ever appeared on the web pages or database of SORArchives concerning Major David Ellis. However, it is true that Major David Ellis has aided and abetted convicted sex offenders in a campaign to smear an individual associated with the development of this website. In a civil litigation, it has been documented with supporting evidence that HUNDREDS of contacts were made, Mr. Ellis communicated with at least two convicted sex offenders and child molesters on an almost daily basis for months Examples of particular interest are Gordon Edward Grainger Jr., convicted of a sexual relationship with 15 year old girl, and Adam Galvez, convicted of child molestation of a 12 year old boy, who were also interviewed by the investigative journalist and were included in the expose. Yet no mention is made in the article of these connections with Major David Ellis. A particular egregious communication involved an email whereby Major Ellis detailed information about a 17 year old to Mr. Grainger and Adam Galvez (again, a convicted child molester) by providing the address of the local high school where the boy could be located on a specific schedule. Besides being a convicted sex offender, Mr. Grainger was also charged and convicted of stealing a car and a GUN, and that during his trial it was testified that he had “offered to kill” the girl’s parents. Adam Galvez has been arrested 12 times, beside the child molestation there have been assault charges, 3 DUIs, impersonating a Police Officer and many more. What is the possible explanation for Mr. Ellis providing information concerning a minor to persons with the criminal histories of Mr. Grainger and Mr. Galvez? That is the type of questions one would have expected an “investigative journalist” asking if the goal was a comprehensive expose’, as opposed to presenting conjecture packaged as “research”.

Another false claim appearing in the article made by Major David Ellis was that SORArchives published an accusation that he had an extra-marital affair. No such post appeared anywhere on the pages of SORArchives. However it is ironic, recent court documents filed in a civil litigation is sworn testimony given by Mr. Ellis where he confesses to not only one extra-marital affair, but two. The deposition occurred PRIOR to the publishing of the article. Instead of pressing for the truth, the journalist chooses to allow Mr. Ellis to glibly refer to his relationship as “the truth is more complex”. Although intentionally ambiguous, complex might be one way to describe having an affair with a married woman, hiring this mistress (with zero work experience) into the small office of just a few employees where he is the President of Interalpha Properties, he gets actively involved in the mistress’s divorce proceedings with the writing of letters to the Judge, he initiates contact and actively engages in supplying convicted sex offenders on an ongoing basis information to support the mistress’s efforts to attack her husband in the divorce proceedings,  he continues to post with online dating sites, and he refuses to fire the mistress when the his wife learns of the affair and the employment. All at the same time as he is duping his wife by claiming he is attempting a sincere reconciliation with her. To top off the deceptions, Mr. Ellis’s attempt at reconciliation with his wife coincidentally coincided with a sizable legal settlement won by the wife one month prior. Complex certainly, but most people would call such conduct deceitful and unscrupulous.  Somehow a professional “investigative journalist” was not able to uncover such relevant background material about a key source to an article that was so called “researched” for 8 months (imagine that). You would think a journalist would have, at the minimum, TRIED to contact the wife of Mr. Ellis to confirm some of his “story”. Alas, it would seem the old standards of professionalism practiced by newspapers have given way to the unsubstantiated prattle found in the online blog world, like that of Mr. Ellis’s friends and confidants Gordon Grainger and Adam Galvez whining that the public does not have the RIGHT TO KNOW about convictions of child molesters and child rapist.

Finally, “Ellis said  the accusations did tremendous personal damage, ending any chance he had of reconciliation with his own wife. She filed for divorce instead.” It is not unreasonable to assert Mr. Ellis’s own shameful conduct may have been a rather significant detriment to a meaningful reconciliation with his wife. IF there ever was a sincere attempt for reconciliation as opposed to just a money grab for the recent legal settlement monies. It is also worthy of note that the wife did NOT file “for divorce instead.” Had the “investigative journalist” simply checked the public records of Pima County he would have found that the wife had in fact filed for divorce in October of 2012, months before all of this began.  The attempted “reconciliation” began in December of 2012 and the official withdrawal of the divorce proceedings was filed by Mr. Ellis in January 2013. The article was published in May , 2013. Although it would not be unexpected for Mrs. Ellis to resubmit for divorce when considering the “complex” nature of the marital relationship with Mr. Ellis, as of this date a new divorce filing has not occurred. Apparently even the simplest of facts are no longer confirmed by an “investigative journalist.”

As a form of retaliation to a civil lawsuit filed by private parties (Not SORArchives) against Major David Ellis, he utilized major news outlets (Arizona Republic and Phoenix Channel 12 News) to spin a “STORY” with the intent to discredit and attack That he was violating a Court Order not to discuss HIS case with the media did not dissuade his efforts. Making false claims and not providing ANY evidence to support his ridiculous allegations inexplicably was not challenged by the interviewer or the editors in charge of the “STORY”. Prior to the posting of this rebuttal, Major David Ellis never appeared on the website. SORArchives challenges Major David Ellis to refute any aspect of our rebuttal with documentation of proof where he his name, photos, address, phone number or a profile listing him as a sex offender EVER appearing on the website. Such documentation will never be produced as it NEVER occurred. Exposing the false claims of Major David Ellis for the lies they are is the justified and legal right afforded SORArchives when dealing with a malcontent with an agenda of revenge, misrepresentation and deceit. Major David Ellis, as a retired Marine Corp Officer, discredits the fine men and women who represent the US Armed Services with honor and honesty by being an embarrassment to his former profession with his propensity to lying and being an adulterer (an activity he engaged in while still in active duty).


Original Article Source: “Investigative Reporter” Robert Anglen Arizona Republic

Respond to this report!

#5 Author of original report

U.S. v. Oesterblad

AUTHOR: Sorarchives Victim - ()

Sure looks like Brent Oesterblad who claims to be an attorney for Sorarchives lost his appeal. This is the same fat idiot that impersonates officers, attorneys and his victims.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
Brent M. OESTERBLAD, Defendant-Appellant.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
David OESTERBLAD, Defendant-Appellant.
Nos. 92-10383, 92-10384
*1 Brent and David Oesterblad appeal the denial of their motions to dismiss the indictment, which charged them with conspiracy, mail fraud and wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 1341, 1343. Brent Oesterblad also appeals his sentence.
Appellants contend that the conduct alleged in the indictment does not constitute a scheme or artifice with the specific intent to defraud Pan American World Airways, Incorporated (Pan Am) of property. The indictment alleged that the air travel awards were “unearned and fraudulently accrued,” obtained by means of “false and fraudulent pretenses, representations and promises” that ticketed Pan Am customers “were legally being sponsored by current Pan Am WorldPass Members, according to Pan Am eligibility requirements [;] [t]hat they truly resided at the addresses controlled by the defendants [; and] that their sponsors should earn 2,500 miles bonus credit for each sponsorship being reported by them.” The indictment also alleged that to conceal their scheme, “the defendants utilized mail receiving services as the purported addresses of individual enrollees.”
Dishonest methods or schemes designed “ ‘to wrong[ ] one in his property rights,’ ” or “ ‘the deprivation of something of value by trick, deceit, chicane or overreaching’ ” will fulfill the “scheme to defraud” element. McNally v. United States, 483 U.S. 350, 358 (1987) (quoting Hammerschmidt v. United States, 265 U.S. 182, 188 (1924)). “The requirement of specific intent ... is satisfied by ‘the existence of a scheme which was reasonably calculated to deceive persons of ordinary prudence and comprehension, and this intention is shown by examining the scheme itself.’ ” Schreiber Distrib. Co. v. Serv-Well Furniture Co., 806 F.2d 1393, 1400 (9th Cir.1986) (quoting United States v. Green, 745 F.2d 1205, 1207 (9th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 925 (1985) (internal quotations omitted)). The alleged activities easily constitute a scheme to defraud, the method of operation suggests that Appellants exercised the requisite intent to defraud Pan Am, and the “bonus miles” that Appellants fraudulently obtained from Pan Am satisfy the property element of the charged offenses. United States v. Mullins, 992 F.2d 1472, 1475 (9th Cir.1993) (mileage credits convertible to free airline tickets are a “thing of value” and hence property for purposes of the mail and wire fraud statutes), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 2997 (1993), and petition for cert. filed, (U.S. July 6, 1993) (No. 93-5096).1 The district court properly denied Appellants' motions to dismiss the indictment.
We also conclude that the omission of the word “property” from the conspiracy count constitutes an insignificant variance, causing no prejudice to Appellants, rather than an amendment that broadens the indictment. See United States v. Olson, 925 F.2d 1170, 1175 (9th Cir.1991). The indictment's detailed description of the means and overt acts of the conspiracy and its substantive charges of wire and mail fraud by scheme to obtain money or property adequately disclosed the government's theory. The omission of “property” in the conspiracy count did not alter the charging terms of the indictment. Id.
*2 As to Brent's sentence, we find that his plea agreement contains a waiver of his right to raise this issue on appeal. We acknowledge that a waiver will not prevent an appeal “where the sentence imposed is not in accordance with the negotiated agreement.” United States v. Navarro-Botello, 912 F.2d 318, 321 (9th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 1488 (1992). The facts here do not present such a circumstance, however.
Paragraph 3(a) of the plea agreement twice recognizes a distinction between information regarding the subject of the indictment and information about other criminal activity. First, paragraph 3(a) describes Brent's disclosure obligation as extending to “criminal activities of the defendant which have been the subject of [this indictment].” Two sentences later the agreement precludes determination of a guideline range based on information “involving criminal activity for which he has not been or will not be charged pursuant to this agreement.” Together, the two sentences clearly require the disclosure of Brent's criminal activities in the charged offenses without protecting him from the adverse consequences of such disclosure.2 The district court's reliance on information regarding Brent's involvement in the criminal activity for which he entered a plea of guilty was wholly consistent with the plea agreement.
Nor do we find that the district court's assessment of Brent's role in the offense should have been constrained by the facts set forth in the agreement. Those facts merely “represent the defendant's readily provable offense conduct and specific offense characteristics.” We conclude that the sentence imposed is not contrary to the plea agreement and accordingly find that Brent's waiver precludes our review of his sentence.
For these reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

United States v. Oesterblad, 12 F.3d 1110 (9th Cir. 1993)
Respond to this report!

#6 General Comment


AUTHOR: Gordon Edward Grainger - ()


 Gordon And Leanne Grainger helped post this and deserve some credit.


Convicted Sex Offender Gordon Grainger From Montana

Convicted Sex Offender Gordon Grainger

Leanne Grainger

Leanne Grainger (Gordon’s Wife)



Due to the content found on this website, we have experienced repeated attacks from spammers and would be hackers. This is to be expected as many of the individuals profiled in our database take exception to their factual criminal records being disseminated for your review. We however strongly support the public’s’ “Right to Know” as guaranteed by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Freedom of speech and the press has been the cornerstone for our society to become the greatest nation in history.

Unfortunately, our website has detractors who wish to suppress your rights. Two such individuals are Gordon Grainger and Leanne Grainger. We have been dealing with their multiple attempts to disrupt the operations of our website. This has manifested in THOUSANDS of spam messages attempted to be posted, innumerable emails and online postings on other sites spewing a particular vitriol stream of absurdity and disparage your “Right to Know.” Although we do respect Gordon and Leanne Gordon’s right to freedom of speech, they will not be allowed to do so here. We are aware of the many complaints received about the Grainger’s.

We apologize to all those that have been effected by their harassment and actions.

We promise to endeavor to minimize any continued attempts to disturb your use of this website.

For those that requested information on who has been responsible for the intrusions, please read the following:

Gordon Grainger Jr. is a convicted sex offender who committed his crimes in the State of Michigan. When he was 20 years old he instigated a sexual relationship with a 14 year old girl. When the child was 15 years old, Gordon Grainger stole the gun and car from the girl’s father and absconded with the girl. He was apprehended and charged for having sexual relations with a child and also larceny. Gordon is both a convicted sex offender and a thief.  He was sentenced to 10 years in prison. UPDATE: it has been recently learned that “Worm Worm” was Discharged from the MENTAL HOSPITAL in January of 2008. After serving his sentence, Gordon moved to Montana in hopes of hiding from his criminal history. His new life included marrying Leanne Grainger. It has not included being consistently employed. It has been the sole burden of Leanne to support the household as Gordon only temporarily takes on minimum wage work for a Pizza company, janitor or car wash before he is laid off(polite word for FIRED). Leanne both enables her unemployed husband to engage in his smear campaigns against this website all hours of the day and night, but also actively assist in his efforts to silence this website by making threatening phone calls claiming to be a detective for the State of Montana and an Attorney for the State of Massachusetts. Gordon has been attending classes online at Kaplan University to become a Para-legal. However, his poor grasp of logic, writing skills, being a convicted sex offender and thief may be significant detriments to finding a professional law office inclined to hiring an individual with such a resume. We do wish him success so that he can focus on taking care of his family instead of intruding upon others rights. We will attempt to block the Grainger’s from all future interaction with this website, however, we cannot guarantee this will be successful.

Related Links And Information Below.

It is important to note that Gordon Grainger Jr. is legally NOT on the current Sex Offender Registry in either Michigan or Montana. And that is our point here at SORArchives. It is all to easy to submit paperwork in Michigan and receive a rubber stamp removal from registration requirements, move to a different state – say Montana – and the past is buried. YOU now have a new next door neighbor with a criminal history of sex crimes against a 14/15 year old, larceny (stealing a gun)  and car theft for the get-a-way plan – PLUS a Discharge from a Mental Hospital  in 2008. The point is this type of information has been deleted from the public’s view with Government Agencies. SORArchives can provide this information as legally obtained PUBLIC RECORDS. We believe it is your RIGHT TO KNOW, which supersedes the desire of convicted sex offenders desire to hide in anonymity.

UPDATE: Turns out there is an explanation for the erratic behavior of the hacker Gordon Grainger (worm worm as his fellow inmates have nicknamed him) who has made a practice of harassing our users. We received some first hand information from some old buddies in Michigan – they wanted to give a shout out to “WORM WORM”. They haven’t heard from him since the “DISCHARGE FROM THE MENTAL HOSPITAL, JANUARY 2008.” Really… no joke, that sure explains A LOT. We are sure that future employment as a “paralegal” will be interesting to say the least when law firms are making decisions to hire a Convicted Sex Offender That was Institutionalized in mental hospital, stole a gun, was convicted of Larceny and threatened to kill “the parents” of a very young victim. (see official court documents above)



UPDATE  — ALERT: A user pointed out on the message board some very important facts in respect to Gordon Grainger’s criminal history. As documented in the appellante court official ruling (posted here), Grainger not only stole a gun, but also threatened to “Kill anyone that got in his way” and “he OFFERED to kill her parents.” As a public notice, it seems appropriate to warn our users that these individual may be  very dangerous people  and should you receive any further contact via emails or any form of communication, you may want to consider notifying the appropriate authorities.

Respond to this report!