This POST is UPDATED because the "Minor and Incompetent Class Member Settlement Provision" of the BP Oil Spill Proposed Settlement offers to nominate a Guardian Ad Litem pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 17(c), for the purpose of protecting the legal rights of minor claimants and incompetent claimants. http://www.bpmdl2179.com/
But what is the use of taking these steps if there is no effort to protect minor or incompetent claimants who are de jure, or de facto owners or co-owners of businesses whose ownership are in dispute?
Minors and especially incompetent persons, are routinely targeted for theft of their valuable possessions; accordingly, whenever a business is found to be eligible for settlement payments in these proceedings, and such eligible business ownership is in dispute, and an incompetent claimant is a de jour, or de facto owner or co-owner, each such incompetent co-owner should DIRECTLY receive his or her proportional share of the settlement's cash payments, if the interests of Due Process rights, or the interests of Justice require it.
The BP litigation team along with the Plaintiffs Steering Committee have filed an "universal" settlement agreement in this multi-district litigation case, in April. I am seeking legal representation to protect the Due Process rights of the disabled litigants in this case. Disabled claimants are entitled to have the Plaintiffs Steering Committee attorneys provide EXTENDED representation and advocacy to them based upon the following theories:
"The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Americans With Disabilities Act, and/or prior Supreme Court cases involving Due Process rights, require that the new fund set up to compensate Plaintiff Steering Committee attorneys, that withhold 6% of settlements, as ordered by Judge Barbier, http://www.laed.uscourts.gov/OilSpill/Orders/01182012Order(Reserve%20Account).pdf BE JUSTIFICATION for this Court to order these attorneys to provide EXTENDED representation and advocacy to disabled claimants---Even if these attorneys obtain settlement agreements for their primary clients."
I have unique facts and evidence relevant to this litigation, will compensate the attorney(s) who assist me to enforce these Due Process rights. And/or the the attorney(s) that will assist me may also be compensated, from said fund created by Judge Barbier's order; and possibly compensated by qualified disabled claimants in the case.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE LEGAL OR ANY OTHER ASSISTANCE PLEASE LEAVE CONTACT INFORMATION THROUGH THE "COMMENT" PROCESS BELOW!
My BP Oil Spill Claim
1. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Americans With Disabilities Act, and prior Supreme Court cases involving Due Process rights, require that the new fund set up to compensate Plaintiff Steering Committee attorneys, that withhold 6% of settlements, as ordered by Judge Barbier, http://www.laed.uscourts.gov/OilSpill/Orders/01182012Order(Reserve%20Account).pdf BE JUSTIFICATION for these attorneys to provide EXTENDED representation and advocacy to disabled claimants---Even if these attorneys obtain settlement agreements for their primary clients. Please bring this to the attention of others.
1.1. All claimants that wished to be declared "incompetent," were in the legal position of having the right to demand that the Plaintiffs Steering Committee force the inclusion of a "very liberal finding of incompetency" policy, in any class-action settlement; especially where the cash payout fund of the settlement was open-ended and begins at $7.8 billion, and where another fund, the Judge-Ordered Fund existed.
1.2. Based on the overall circumstanses above, Plaintiffs Steering Committee attorneys were obligated to vigorously advocate for the finding/acceptance of "incompetency" of all claimants who would and could show a reasonable possibility of being incompetent, not withstanding proof of competency. This is especially true where any resulting effect would only harm those who would be shown to have stolen business-ownership legally belonging to the "incompetent" claimants.
2. The December, 2001, San Francisco magazine article, "Trouble In The Presidio," by Kerry Tremain, was commissioned, written, and/or published, primarily to cause, justify, and/or support, the removal and replacement of one or more top contract proposal decision-makers at the Presidio Trust, such as the then Executive Director, James Meadows, the then Director of Operations, Bruce Anderson, etc., so that the conspirators could better empower one or more other person(s) to make the types of contract-proposal award decisions that would better faciliate the conspirators efforts to ulitize fraud in their misappropriation of the extremely valuable confidential information belonging to Robert Evans, the owner of this BiggestCrime.Com Blog.
In return, Kerry Tremain was rewarded with undeserved positions at University of California, at Berkeley, by person(s) who gained more decision-making power at the Presidio Trust, had decision-making power at San Francisco Magazine, and at UC Berkeley, and gained the most business and financial benefits from Presidio Trust contracts: Donald Fisher, chairman of the Real Estate committee of the Presidio Trust Board of Directors and founder of The Gap Corporation; and Richard Blum, husband of Senator Dianne Fienstein, a top executive of Coldwell Banker Richard Ellis, which is a real estate development company; Richard Blum is/was president of the Board of Regents, University of California.
Terry Tremain was first given the position of Editor, of California Magazine, then Director of a Media Studies Center. A February 4, 2005 Letter to the Editor, California Magazine, written by a UC Berkeley professor, demonstrated how the greater faulty at UC Berkeley felt that Tremain's appointments were undeserved..
Donald Fisher of The Gap, was under extreme pressure to make unfair and illegal contract-proposal decisions during the most crucial contract-proposal decision making period---because his company, The Gap Inc., was being vilified on an international level for profiting from "sweatshop" practices throughout the Third World. This pressure subsized after major, revelant, and illegal real estate development decisions were made at the Presidio Trust.
Jane Blackstone, then Deputy Director, Presidio Trust, was the contract person that I dealt with the most. She stated that (those who eventually won the first contract that I sought) were "loaded with cash." She stated this in a half-shouting, emotional manner, as if she was attempting to convince me to not press my contracting rights. This conduct had a hypnotic-like effect upon me. This contributed to discourage me from pursuing my contracting rights, especially my first contract proposal.
3. Until recently, it was customarily and legally for members of Congress to quietly obtain financial gain from their knowledge and use of confidential information and trade secrets of others. But no examination of the possibility of the presence of Fraud were considered in these situations. U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein help her husband's, Richard Blum, investments and financial interests, by using her position as Chairwomen and Ranking member of the Senate Military Constrution Subcommittee, Appropriations in ways that have raised concerns in republican AND democratic circles, as well as in the press and the public interest community. This conduct by Feinstein and Blum could help explain the "how" and the "why" pertaining to the misappropriation of my trade secrets. Given the fact that it seems like Senator Feinstein chose to join the senate subcommittee that oversee appropriations for national parks and the Presidio Trust to help her husband to secure the multi-million or multi-billion dollar contracts the he consequently obtained.
Senator Feinstein and Blum have been married for more than 30 years. They cannot be compelled to testify against each other. They have had plenty of time to "feel each other out" in regards to unlawfully conspiring to use Feinstein's positions to benefit Blum's financial interests.
As a member of the Senate Military Construction Appropriation subcommittee, Senator Dianne Feinstein voted for appropriations worth billions of dollars to her husband's (Richard Blum) firms. From 2001 to 2005, when Feinstein was either the chairperson or ranking member, this subcommittee approved $792 million in contracts to URS, and $759 million in contracts to Perini, both companies headed by her husband Richard Blum at the time.
Michael R. Klein, a top legal adviser to Feinstein, and long-time business partner to Blum, is/was a top leader of many companies that have obtained many large military contracts. 'Klein had routinely informed Feinstein about specific federal projects coming to her in which Perini had a stake.' This exacerbated the issue of Feinstein's conflict of interest, in the public's mind, since such information involving potential contracting activity is withheld from Congress by federal agencies.
Danielle Brian, then Executive Director, Project On Government Oversight, a nonprofit organization that analyzes defense contracts reportedly stated 'The paper trail showing Sen. Feinstein's conflict of interest is irrefutable.'
Melanie Sloan, Executive Director of Citizens for Responsible Ethics in Washington, remarks, 'There are a number of members of Congress with conflicts of interest. [California Republican Congressman John T.] Doolittle, for example, hired his wife as a fundraiser, and she skimmed 15 percent off of all campaign contributions. Others, like [former] Speaker [Dennis] Hastert and Cong. [Ken] Calvert were earmarking federal money for roads to enhance the value of property held by their families.
'But because of the amount of money involved,' Sloan continues, 'Feinstein's conflict of interest is an order of magnitude greater than those conflicts.'" Senate Feinstein's Iraq Conflict," Bohemian.com/metro, January 24, 2007, Peter Byrne. And "Feinstein's Conflict of Interest in Iraq," Project Censored, 2008, #23
More questions about possible corruption by Feinstein and Blum's financial interests are raised in the following news articles: "Exclusive: Senator's husband's firm cashes in on crisis. The Washington Times, April 21, 2009 Chuck Neubauer; "Hospital group wants auditor inspected (PRG-Schultz has ties to Sen. Dianne Feinstein's D-Ca hubby)," Sacramento Bee, June 21, 2007, David Whitney"
U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein help her husband's, Richard Blum, investments and financial interests, by using her position as Chairwomen and Ranking member of the Senate Military Constrution Subcommittee, Appropriations in ways that have raised concerns in republican AND democratic circles, as well as in the press and the public interest community. This conduct by Feinstein and Blum could help explain the "how" and the "why" pertaining to the misappropriation of my trade secrets. Given the fact that it seems like Senator Feinstein chose to join the senate subcommittee that oversee appropriations for national parks and the Presidio Trust to help her husband to secure the multi-million or multi-billion dollar contracts the he consequently obtained.
While serving as Chairwoman or ranking member, Senate Military Constrution Subcommittee, Appropriations, Feinstein have helped her husband's, Blum's, investments and financial interests--concerns have been raised in Democratic and Republican circles, and in the public interest watchdog community.
From 2000-2006, Richard Blum's company, Perini, received $200 million in contracts primarily with the Army, the largest or one of the largest contracting agency at Presidio National Park. Blum's company, URS, received $1.8 billion in contracts primarily from Air Force, Army, and Navy, during the same period.
4. The Presidio Trust's first Executive Director, James Meadows, publicly announced, during a recorded and publicly-held, "housing-scoping" workshop, that the Presidio Trust's Financial Plan is based upon "proprietory" information. Evidence will show that this "proprietory" information is my confidential trade secrets that I included in the two Contract Proposals/Responses to Requests for Qualifications that I submitted to the Presidio Trust. Meadow's statement, and other proceedings of this workshop were officially recorded. Also, my "proprietary" proposals identified Free Speech activity, such as film and television productions, internet ventures, etc. The Presidio Trust had enough financial resourses available to it, to put Free Speech obligations at the top of its to-do list.
5. The Presidio Trust acted against its own economic self-interest, OR, it acted in defiance of the Presidio Trust Act of Congress. Further information regarding this allegation involve matters that cannot be publicly disclosed at this time, in order to protect trade secrets. In any event, such action by the conspirators was committed to further their goal to misappropriate my trade secrets.
6. Disruptions leading to the "removal" of the first executive director, Meadows, occurred during the time that the most crucial development proposal decisions were being made.
7. No evidence exists to prove that anyone else had an idea exactly like, nor similiar to, my trade secrets.
8. All of the proposed subcontractors, listed in my two Contract Proposals/Response to Request For Qualifications which contained the confidential trade secrets that were misappropriated, demostrated that their sucess was the result of, or greatly aided by, the misappropriators decision to allow each of the listed subcontractors to benefit from the trade secrets, regardless of the fact of misappropriation.
9. Federal agencies created specifically by Congress to be financially self-supporting, and to operate through public-private partnerships, such as the Presidio Trust, should be subjected to civil proceedings (statues of limitations, burden of proof, etc.) more similar to private parties and less similar to the more favorable civil proceedings allowed for pure government agencies.
10. My confidential information/trade secrets/strategy are/were so valuable and innovative that the guilty parties could not prevent the governmental agencies that they are/were associated with, the Presidio Trust, the Department of Defense, the Department of State, the Department of the Interior, the National Park Service, etc., from outwardly benefiting from its use.
11. James Meadows, the first Presidio Trust Executive Director, was invited into the Intelligence Community and trained at an institution that specializes in training personnel for the Intelligence Community, after being involved in the misappropriation of my trade secrets. Public records exist to show this to be true.