CAPTAIN'S BLOG: Court of Public Opinion

THE THERESA KEEPING SAGA CONTINUES ...

by Captain Chuck Foster on 01/28/14

"Out of sight" does not mean "out of mind," at least in the Foster vs. Keeping case, and since my last blog posting, a great deal of legal maneuvering has been happening this side of the Canadian/United State border.

This link will produce a 240+ page documents with exhibits and bring you up to speed on what's been happening in both the California Superior Court and the U.S. District Court.

The short version is that Keeping retained Keith Davidson, a Beverly Hills attorney who, albeit intentional and/or unintentional misconduct, has created yet more suspicion, complication and resulting delay which prolongs the now two lawsuits involving defendant Keeping. [Noteworthy is Mr. Davidson's disciplinary record for attorney misconduct with the California State Bar Association].

Attorney Davidson's Motion to Quash was filed on the same day I sought to have the matter resolved by default. Interestingly, the attorney set the hearing date for February 27, 2014 -- 133 days beyond what the statute allows. The issue was that the Canadian attorney upon whom the Summons and Complaint were served denied having the authority to accept service of process. As a result, the next time Keeping and Merkel appeared in Court regarding attempted take-over of Vinking Marine, they were personally served with the Summons and Complaint.

Also interesting is the anomaly that this Motion to Quash was filed with the attorney name of David Kashani who initially denied this was his case and that he knew nothing about it. Later, Mr. Kashani acknowledged that it was "really Keith Davidson's case" and any related matters needed to be discussed with Mr. Davidson!?

The second service of process upon Keeping and Merkel rendered the Motion to Quash moot (means not no longer relevant or applicable) but when requested, attorney Davidson refused to dismiss this now moot motion!?

Before I could get the Motion to Quash issue resolved, defense counsel served a (defective and problematic) Notice to Remove and had the matter transferred from California Superior Court to U.S. District (Federal) Court.

Really strange was my and the Superior Court receiving a Notice of Removal document that were substantially different that what was filed with the District Court!? [The defects and ramifications can be seen by reviewing my (link-accessible) Opposition to Notice of Removal and Request for Sanctions document.

Now defense counsel seeks to have the Foster vs. Keeping matter (now seeking only $50,000 + costs and a 1-day court trial) merged with the WishCruise Pirate Adventures, Ltd. case which involves a jury trial with multiple (8) Canadian defendant parties and damages in excess of $1.4+ million dollars.

To be continued ...

Comments (0)

Hugh Cooper and Simon Brothers Linked to Canadian Developers Theresa Keeping/Dale Merkel Charged with Fraud and Conspiracy in Related Children's "Wish" Charity Litigation

by Captain Chuck Foster on 09/11/13

Sept. 12, 2013, Orange County, CA) - Who and what is a Hugh Cooper? Or, for that matter, who and what are the Simon brothers?

Not to be confused with the small, "mini cooper" sports import, this Cooper is a known link to Canadian developers Theresa Keeping and Dale Merkel currently charged with fraud, conspiracy and other statutory violations.

Cooper is also a currently named defendant in the U.S. District Court, Western District of North Carolina's class action lawsuit involving "Violation of the Federal Securities Act" including "fraud and deceit" and "to influence and cause ... unlawful conduct and practices."

So how, if, and to what degree are Cooper (and the Simon brothers) connected to Theresa Keeping and Dale Merkel? And what role, if any, does or did they have regarding current Keeping/Merkel fraud, conspiracy and other related litigation?

"Hugh Cooper" was the name flaunted by Keeping and Merkel in conjunction with their wealth and philanthropy claims, the expressed desire to become financially supportive of the childrens "wish" charity, and in conjunction with Keeping's $1.5MM capitalization payment to acquire the position of President along with a 49% equity/revenue sharing interest in the WishCruise Pirate Adventures, Ltd. management company.

It was also Cooper who introduced and spearheaded Keeping/Merkel's effort to purchase the Simon property, Port Harmon Authority, and to acquire executive positions and majority stock interest in VinKing Marine Enterprises; and concurrent with these business transactions, Cooper was VinKing's vice-president, treasurer and chief financial officer.

Most recently, Cooper purportedly gave his stock voting "proxy" in VinKing to Keeping to help her hostile takeover and control of the company.

And Cooper's motivation for this purported proxy gift was what?

Maybe it had something to do with Hugh Cooper's wife being Theresa Keeping's cousin!?

The textbook approach to truth-finding is to "connect the dots" which, in most instances, means "follow the money."

One of the "money dots" connects to the lawsuit involving a U.S. childrens "wish" charity wherein Keeping and Merkel are charged with fraud, conspiracy and other statutory violations.

"Money dots" two and three connect to Keeping and Merkel's suspected fraud and conspiracy acts against the Simon Brothers and former Port Harmon Authority owner, Cecil Stein - acts that occurred when Keeping/Merkel unlawfully took money from a childrens "wish" charity trust/holding account and used it to purchase property (building and land adjacent to Port Harmon) from Simon Holdings (brothers Randy and Sean Simon), and the Port Harmon Authority business from Stein.

The fourth "money dot" connects Cooper, Keeping and Merkel to VinKing Marine Enterprises due to the assets purchased with fraudulently obtained money from the Simon brothers and Stein became the capitalization payment and bases for vice-president positions for Keeping and Merkel, along with a major stock interest in the VinKing company.

"Money dot" number five connects back on the Simon brothers and their "Simon Holdings" company which was the recipient of the fraudulently obtained money paid by Keeping/Merkel.

Until recently, Simon Holdings (and the Simon brothers) were believed to have been victims of Keeping/Merkel's fraud by accepting the $600,000+ fraudulently obtained money used by Keeping for the property purchase. Now, however, the Keeping/Simon property purchase is being questioned and the concern being that, from the funds Keeping purportedly paid for the Simon property, Keeping/Merkel are believed to have gratuitously received an undisclosed sum of cash and/or in-kind benefits.

What fuels this belief is, in part, due to Cooper misrepresenting to VinKing management that an environmental impact report was needed in order to complete the Simon property purchase. However, when a brief (30 or 60 day) time extension was requested to complete the purchase, Simon brothers demanded an additional half-million dollars upping the property's initial purchase price from $115,000 to $620,000!?

Notwithstanding the outrageous and seemingly unjustified 500% price jump, Keeping and Merkel seemed unfazed with a seeming usury-level price increase, and surprisingly volunteered to pay -- and did pay -- the Simon brother's price demand!?

But why? Why would Keeping be so willing to pay a half-million dollars than the original property sales price, especially since the Simon brother's "Building Depot" business was already making good money off Keeping's construction business purchases?

A better question might be, "Why would the Simon brothers ask, let alone accept, such an inflated sum of money from their 'Aunt Theresa!?'"

An even better question would be, "Why did Keeping/Merkel conceal from VinKing management and investors that the Simon brothers were her nephews!?"

Given these recent discoveries, my intended Default Judgment filing in the Keeping/Merkel lawsuit by week's end may be delayed, at least long enough to determine if an Amended Complaint is warranted, and should Simon Holdings, Randy and Sean Simon be named as additional co-defendant parties!?

--------------------------------------

In a related matter, Randy Simon and Cecil Stein were given written notice that they were the recipients of unlawfully obtained/embezzled funds belonging to WishCruise Pirate Adventures, Ltd., and that this money was to have been distributed to WCPA by a trust/holding company at the Royal Bank of Canada. Both were also informed of the laws and consequences pertaining to receiving stolen, embezzled, and fraudulently obtained property/money.

In good faith, both were invited and given the opportunity to contact me to discuss how the timely return of this money could be to our mutual benefit. To date, neither Simon nor Stein have contacted me about this invitation opportunity.

--------------------------------------

The Trial Judge for the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador, that's overseeing the VinKing Marine Enterprises hostile take-over battle, recently ruled in VinKing's favor by denying Keeping/Merkel's request for an immediate hearing, and continued the matter until December.

--------------------------------------

Notwithstanding additional civil litigation, U.S. and Canadian revenue agency and law enforcement agencies have been contacted and asked to look into this matter and, if confirmed, pursue whatever criminal charges are deemed applicable and against all involved parties.

--------------------------------------

(*) Upon information and belief, all blog and media release information made by me is accurately and truthfully communicated -- RCF

Comments (0)

As Prelude to Default Judgment, $825,000 "Statement of Damages" Notice Served on Attorney for Canadian Developers, Theresa Keeping and Dale Merkel, in Children's "Wish" Charity Fraud/Conspiracy Case

by Captain Chuck Foster on 08/28/13

(August 28, 2013, Orange County, Calif.) - California Superior Court records reveal defendant's Theresa Keeping and Dale Merkel failed to timely file the required Answer to lawsuit charges of fraud, conspiracy and other related claims in the required 30-day statutory mandated response period.

As a result, Canadian process server, William Earle, served an $825,000 "Statement of Damages" notice upon Keeping and Merkel's attorney, Greg Moores, during his 8/27/2013 afternoon appearance at the Supreme Court building in Newfoundland and Labrador.

According to Earle, and purportedly witnessed by three Sheriff's Deputies and another attorney, Moores "was argumentative ... attempted to resist service of process ... and demanded to know how I knew about his court appearance date."

Earle said he told Moores, "As an attorney, you and I both know that you've been properly served, and it doesn't matter how I knew you'd be here to do it."

As the above provided link will reveal, this copy of the $825,000 "Statement of Damages" explains: $50,000 for General Damages, that being the amount of non-reimbursed money defendants' fraudulently induced plaintiff to provide on their behalf; $25,000 for Compensatory Damages, that being expenses incurred, or to be incurred, including case-related costs and lost employment revenue from February 6, 2013, to date of Default Judgment or at time of trial; plus, $750,000 for Exemplary/Punitive Damages, that amount being the 10x the total of General and Compensatory Damages.

[Exemplary/Punitive Damages is an award intended to "penalize a party, and to deter others, for acting with fraud, oppression, or malice against another."]

The question now is whether or not Keeping and Merkel will continue to evade and disregard the litigation proceedings, refuse to communicate and, by omission, reject any of the proposed settlement offers whereby allowing this case to be determined by Default Judgment!?

My preference was, and continues to be that:

1. Keeping reimburse the $50,000 as promised, plus $25,000 for case-related costs, including lost employment revenue; and

2. Keeping make good on her initial $1.5MM support commitment with the condition that, within three years after the WishCruise Navy flagship has been completed, Keeping's financial contribution will be repaid in full!

Alternatively, I'd prefer Keeping and Merkel timely file an Answer to the charges against them versus my getting a Default Judgment award.

That's because truth and integrity are important issues in this case, and the litigation process would allow video-taped, under oath depositions to be taken; by Court Order or Subpoena, I could obtain bank, business and personal fact-confirming documents; and both Keeping and Merkel would be required to testify under oath during a public trial.

Maybe the Statement of Damages notice will be the necessary "wake-up" call and, if not through litigation participation, at least open the door to productive settlement communication.

Keeping and Merkel have 30 more days to respond to the Statement of Damages notice which, if not timely received, will result in the filing of a Notice of Default, then a Request for Default Judgment for the stated $825,000 damages, or such damages the Court deems appropriate given the circumstances involved.

-- RCF

Comments (0)

Why won't Canadian news media ... ?

by Captain Chuck Foster on 08/22/13

Why Won't Canadian News Media ..."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Wed. August 21, 2013, Orange County, Calif.) -- As a result of The Court of Public Opinion Captain's Blog postings and media releases, the most asked "juror" question of late is, "Why won't the Canadian news media investigate and report about this ...?"

To all who ask, my answer is the same: "I don't have a clue?"

And while I may be clueless, an exponentially growing number of these Captain's Blog readers do have an opinion, for example:

"Canadian journalists are sensitive to reporting on matters that reflect badly on Canada, including its businesses and its citizens. What this Keeping woman and her partner did to the U.S. children's charity is not something our [Canadian] news media wants to publicize." -- Jeff/Alberta
"With a high profile government official like Victor Toews' getting involved, that brings politics into play and that can have a limiting effect on news coverage." - Alice/Stephenville
"People, who reside and make their living in places like St. John's and Ft. McMurray, or any small town, don't like publicity that reflects badly about them or their community. Theresa [Keeping] and Dale [Merkel] may also be friends with, or have business relationships at local newspapers, radio and television stations. Advertising revenue may be another issue." -- Robert/Ft. McMurray
"This Keeping/Merkel story doesn't measure up to the story importance given to violence or sex scandals involving well-known Canadian politicians or celebrities." - Ken/St. Johns.
"If this [story] involved a children's charity in Canada, the news coverage would be non-stop." - William/Stephenville
"When a lawsuit is involved, the news companies are afraid to do anything fearing it might show favoritism ... influence the outcome ... or cause them to get sued." -- Allison/Calgary

While I'm admittedly not familiar with the inner workings, disciplines, and possible politics involving Canadian news media, I can speak about what's become a story priority by many U.S. news media organizations:

"If it bleeds it leads!" is the mindset for decisions involving front page newspaper or magazine coverage, or the promotional tease and lead-off story of a given television or radio broadcast. In this instance "bleeds" means "violence" or some type of "catastrophe" resulting in, or potentially causing personal injury or death.

"Sex and crime!" is another prioritizing factor.

"Politics, jobs and economics" are also lead-type stories, but usually secondary to events involving "violence, catastrophes, sex and crime." 

Unfortunately, there are so many of the above - let's call them "sensational" type of stories - there is often little or no time for "less important" news, i.e., the one involving the fraud committed by Canadian developers, Theresa Keeping and Dale Merkel, and the resulting consequences upon the U.S children's "wish" charity and children suffering with a life-threatening illness!?

Why does this type of story profiling exist?

It exists because "violence, catastrophes, sex, crime, politics, jobs and economics = sensationalism = more viewers, listeners and readers = higher ratings = more sales and advertising revenue ... [and in many instances, peer industry bragging rights].

What about the "... not wanting to influence a lawsuit or get sued" argument?

Walt Disney believed, "The most worthless of any human invention is the excuse," and I believe that applies to story rejection decisions from news media "not wanting to influence a story ... show favoritism ... get sued, etc."

While I find it irritating and chicken-s _ _ _, what makes more sense, and is a more believable reason a story doesn't get covered is due to "sensational profiling, personal bias, political and/or financial concerns."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Criticism without a proposed alternative solution is meaningless," so as it relates to news media coverage of the Keeping/Merkel story, the first and predictably the most relevant solution issue is "newsworthiness!"

While admittedly biased, that doesn't change the fact that a story about a wealthy developer and self-proclaimed philanthropist who conspires and commits fraud, embezzlement, conversion, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and other civil and criminal statutory violations against anyone, is newsworthy!

How might the level of newsworthiness increase? Add victims to the above scenario like, in this instance, a children's "wish" charity benefiting kids suffering with a life-threatening illness; also juvenile delinquency diversion, character/self-esteem development and career pathway education programs for "at risk" teens.

Now add the fact that the responsible people refuse to accept/evade service of process; won't communicate or participate in the judicial process; ignore repeated efforts to prevent or mitigate damages; cause additional damage with more lies and deception; and you have a story not only warrants, but deserves media coverage!

No? Then what will it take to get Canadian news media to at least look into the validity of these charges, and then report on whatever the outcome might be?

Will a Court judgment with a large general and punitive damage award do it?

Is the filing of criminal charges and an arrest for fraud, embezzlement and conspiracy what's needed?

Honestly? I really don't know!

What I do know is that I have no control over why, what, how, when or if any news media will choose to publish or broadcast this story.

What I can do, however, is continue being that proverbial, "squeaky wheel," and provide the public and news media with accurate information via media releases and blog entries.

To do anything less would be a shameful disservice to the children who won't get their WishCruise experiences, and to the memory of Addison Glines, the courageous, cancer-battling teenager who was the inspiration for WishCruise Navy and its "make a difference" programs ...

-- RCF

Comments (0)

Money Received By People Who Innocently Sold Their Business And Buildings To Fraud/Conspiracy Defendants Theresa Keeping/Dale Merkel Given Notice Regarding Return of Embezzled/Fraudulent Obtained Childrens "Wish" Charity Funds ...

by Captain Chuck Foster on 08/22/13

Finder's keepers? Possession is 9/10th of the law? I didn't know ...?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Truth be told, if someone sells you stolen, embezzled, unlawfully converted or fraudulently obtained real or personal property (including money), you need to know and understand that this was not their property. That means they had no legal right to sell, trade, give, use damage or otherwise dispose of it.
     And even if you were the innocent recipient of this property/money, it's not legally your and you don't have a legal claim or right to possess it either.
   In fact, unless you work out some type of agreement with the person or entity having lawful ownership or control of this property, you'll likely have to return it!
     Moreover, if you knew or had reasonable cause to believe the property did not belong to the person you got it from, you could be sued or criminally charged.
     And if or when the rightful owner requests it be returned, your refusal to comply could also result in litigation.
     So what are your options if you voluntarily or are legally compelled to give up and return this property to the rightful owner?
     1. You can demand immediate reimbursement and compensation for any related damages from the person or entity from whom you received the embezzled, or fraudulently obtained property; or
     2. You can seek civil and/or criminal prosecution to recovery whatever money you may have paid, the property you lost, and/or be compensated for any other related damages.

------------------------------------------------

How does this apply to Theresa Keeping, Dale Merkel and the people who sold to them, and gave up possession, ownership and control of their property or business interest?
As you may also be aware, another civil action is contemplated which, upon information and belief and, in addition to the above existing charges, is expected to include embezzlement and conversion claims regarding the $1.4+ million dollars which was capitalization funds that Keeping paid WishCruise Pirate Adventures, Ltd. (WCPA).
This money was payment was the legal consideration for Keeping becoming President, Dale Merkel becoming Vice-President, and for Keeping acquiring a 49% WCPA partner/revenue-sharing interest.

Moreover, this money was purportedly deposited into a "trust/holding company account" on WCPA's behalf at the Main Street branch of the Royal Bank of Canada in St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.

     Witness testimony, bank, e-mail and other records will establish:
          a) this money was for the exclusive purpose of funding WCPA start-up/operating capital, and the $1.3MM construction cost of the "pirate ship" that was to be used by WishCruise Navy to provide celebrity co-captained Pirate Adventure WishCruise experiences for children suffering with a life-threatening illness; and
          b) By Keeping or at Keeping's direction and control, this money was fraudulently removed from the Royal Bank of Canada on or about February, 25, 2013, and thereafter used to purchase a building and a business in Newfoundland and Labrador, and to acquire a stock interest and executive positions in the purchased business.
     The prior owners of the building and business that were purchased with WCPA capitalization funds have been contacted and invited to contact me to discuss the return of WCPA funds, or come to some mutually beneficial agreement.

------------------------------------------------

    In the Court of Public Opinion Blog, many "jurors" took the time to contact me and share their opinions about the Keeping/Merkel saga.
      I asked most of these people to choose a single word they would used to describe what Keeping/Merkel did to WishCrusie Navy and it's childrens "wish" program.
      To review their word choices and definitions, click this link, or go to http://theresakeepinglawsuit.homestead.com/08NewsMedia.html.
-- RCF

Comments (0)

Main | Older Entries »