top of page
Writer's pictureDino Mendoza

What You Don't Know Can Really Hurt You! Usurping Your Civil Liberties Through Policy Language.

Updated: Jun 18, 2023

The following post is being guided by a study of the Constitutional Rights Guaranteed but

it also includes the Administrative Law Codes, Statutes and Regulations for a comparison of Constitutional Law and Administrative Law. For reference I am incluqding the Department of

Justices own information link here: https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-27000-principles-federal-prosecution#9-27.150 in order to illustrate deficiencies in the current cases.


Although there are no signed affidavits from an injured party, Real Party of Interest (Collateral Loan Partners in the case of Mike Glaspie), in all other cases, civil or criminal there is a claim that there are 10,000 victims (Investors).


One of the biggest questions in this case is how it got by a grand jury and defense attorneys when the court record (docket) does not show one affidavit of fact of an injured party. A real person of interest in the case.


The evidence has not been presented to have brought the case this far. But let's say there are investors (victims), and they file an affidavit of fact claiming an injury through breach of contract or fraud. It would still have to be produced in an affidavit predating The grand jury indictment and the initial arraignment. A complaint and investigation based on the affidavit should be on record. Well...Where is it?

Crunching the Numbers

What is to be gained by 10,000 victims in either case? In the case where 45 million dollars is claimed there's only mention of the disgorgement, which obfuscates what the supposed victims would receive after conviction. There is certainly enough information on the DOJ site of previous criminal asset forfeitures audits, which are done annually, to suggest that victims are paid last if ever with the total in this case bring $4,500 per person with simple math. That's supposing that each victim had invested that amount and not more or less.


In the case where the defendant is said to have misused funds amounting around 2 million dollars that amount would equal $200 per victim (Investor), without any deduction for criminal asset forfeiture taken by and dispersed to the equity sharing agencies.


In a recent plea deal hearing it was stated by the judge and prosecutor that forfeiture wasn't being mentioned, not necessarily that wasn't being sought, and that restitution was going to be part of the penalty for the plea.




In any of the cases stated there is still the issue of the Supreme Court ruling that only the tainted amount that can be proven should be part of a criminal or civil forfeiture.

Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 154 (1972)


I just don't see how this is going to work out for the supposed victims in the case. It seems that victims are needed to substantiate the charges and all other consideration involving them is incidental.


As it concerns Victims and Witnesses here is a PDF from the U.S. Attorney's Guidelines.


Facts concerning plea agreements and victim impact statement in their own words.

And of the agreement it is stated by the court that it does not have to be recognized by the appointed District Judge. DOJ Plea Agreements Policy


Restitution and criminal asset forfeiture (disgorgement) are not the same. Restitution is the direct responsibility of the defendant after he's found guilty.


Victim impact statements states that the victim is not guaranteed to be paid restitution.


So what exactly is going on here?

Criminal asset forfeiture is being used to finance agencies and other equity sharing organizations for state and local law enforcement and whistleblowers. This does not include victims!

The state or federal agency is circumventing habeas corpus since they are not an injured party, they are an artificial person, this is done by creating victims of a crime.

Read and Review Links In This Post!

Remember, What You Don't Know Will Really Hurt You!

1,154 views7 comments

7件のコメント


Warren Wimmer
Warren Wimmer
2023年3月13日

Ok! I think I understand why the government wants us to be investors and not loan partners. As a investor, we all took a risk to invest money. So if business fails. We get nothing in return. But if we are loan partners. We could sue for compensation and aquire/ sell property for trying o get our loan repaid. Such as a repo car or house. Are the business assets something that we should look at. And should we look at filing for hose assets? Should we inform the current court with filings of our position as loan parteners? I am no attorney. And this is my interpretation. Any thoughts?


いいね!

Albert Rodriguez
Albert Rodriguez
2023年3月13日

So can we as loan partners file a breach of contract affidavit for failure to pay back our loans ( 7% over 3 years ) once and if he goes to jail . We all should have receipts stating that from mikes assistants for every loan we made that stated the payback . There are many loan partners that made loans to Mike in the 10s and hundreds of thousands .. while some came in with only $100 , $500 or $1000 trying to grab quick millions for little amount of money . There were partners like myself that have been giving loans to him since late 2018 which have amounted to staggering $$$s ….. In the beginning, when h…

いいね!
Albert Rodriguez
Albert Rodriguez
2023年10月30日
返信先

Yes but was trying to confirm if this was breach of contract for the loan partners . I have every receipt from Fran and Amy for the loans .. around 200k ..

いいね!

Jessica Weiss
2023年3月13日

So what now, if anything do you need from current loan partners to assist in this situation ?

いいね!

Warren Wimmer
Warren Wimmer
2023年3月12日

So, regardless of our involvement as loan partners, we were to be seen to the court as investors and victims of a crime. But only if we fill out the victim paperwork of the DOJ?

Is there a solution?


いいね!
Dino Mendoza
Dino Mendoza
2023年3月13日
返信先

Yes, that is correct. The DOJ went into this case without an injured party. The naysayers were not party to any contract of Neil. Hell, no one even knew who he was until shortly before they arrested him.


What was needed was to reverse engineer the complaint to fit the allegations. Still 10,000 is a very large number I don't know how they expect to demonstrate that. Even if you have a hundred or so collateral loan partners pretending to be investors in order to file a victim impact statement, you still have thousands who have not and will not.


It's enough to create a controversy within the case itself. There has been so many errors made that it cannot…


いいね!
bottom of page