Woo vs. Harmon - Witness Attorney General Mark Bennett

Mark Bennett, Attorney General, State of Hawaii, took office on January 2, 2005, after being appointed by Governor Linda Lingle; former law clerk to the Hon. Samuel P. King, Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii.

From 1991 through his appointment as Attorney General, Mark Bennett was a partner in the law firm of McCorriston Miller Mukai MacKinnon LLP; defended Chevron-Texaco in Hawaii anti-trust suit *; as Attorney General, represented Hawaii in Linda Lingle vs. Texaco U.S.A *.

Chair of the National Anti-trust Committee of the National Association of Attorneys General *; married to attorney Patricia Tomi Ohara.

Judson ON THE RECORD - VERY IMPORTANT!! New Member, Sheldon, is Pres. of YAL @ Idaho State, seeking Utah YAL...& member Judson Witham has filed the Utah lawsuit against Obama!

To: ronpaul-16-announce@meetup.com, "Vaughn & Lynda Robison" <ronpaulslcutah@yahoo.com>

Cc: sam@audiocanyon.com, letters@news-jrnl.com, stewwebb@sierranv.net, stich@unfriendlyskies.com, bobby_n_harmon@yahoo.com, blumberg@cyberport.net, Specialops@huffingtonpost.com, hwburgess@hawaii.rr.com, Ken_Conklin@yahoo.com, info@votevets.org, Hapa1234@aol.com, "MadMax@RoadWarriorRadio.com, Curt Crosby" <curtcrosby@gmail.com>, richardhayesphillips@yahoo.com, johnstadtmiller@hotmail.com, jack@cybrquest.com, stangfeedback@gmail.com, wmreditor@waynemadsenreport.com, jamesedwards@thepoliticalcesspool.org

BYU LAW LIBRARY after sending and receiving FAXES for me for YEARS, suspended my use of the FAX services et al AS Channel 5 Salt Lake called them asking about me ?? YUP BYU retaliated because ?????

My position is to UPHOLD the LAW to see to it that QUALIFIED CITIZENS are our representatives and IF NOT, well, you do the math. My filing speaks for itself.

§4. Citizenship. That all persons who were citizens of the Republic of Hawaii on August twelfth, eighteen hundred and ninety-eight, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States and citizens of the Territory of Hawaii.

And all citizens of the United States resident in the Hawaiian Islands who were resident there on or since August twelfth, eighteen hundred and ninety-eight and all the citizens of the United States who shall hereafter reside in the Territory of Hawaii for one year shall be citizens of the Territory of Hawaii.

This section was supplemented by the Act of July 2, 1932, 47 Stat 571, amended by the Act of July 1, 1940, 54 Stat 707, providing that for purposes of Act of Sept. 22, 1922, 46 Stat 1511, women born in Hawaii prior to June 14, 1900 deemed U.S. citizens at birth. But Act of Sept. 22, 1922 was repealed by Act of Oct. 14, 1940, 54 Stat 1137, which in turn was repealed by Act of June 27, 1952, 66 Stat 166 (McCarran-Walter Act), and the present provisions are contained in 8 U.S.C.A. 1435(a).

Under Art. 17, §1, of the Const. of 1894 (adapted from the 14th Am. of the U.S. Const.) all persons born or naturalized in the Hawaiian Islands and subject to the jurisdiction of the Republic of Hawaii were citizens thereof. Between 1842 and 1892, 731 Chinese and three Japanese were naturalized in Hawaii; since 1892, none. Birth certificates by the Territory of Hawaii are not controlling, and persons applying for admission to the United States with such certificates may be detained by immigration officers for the purpose of determining citizenship, 35 Ops. 69. The secretary of Hawaii may issue to persons born in Hawaii certificates of Hawaiian birth, which are prima facie evidence: HRS §§338-41 to 44, see also former law: L. 1905, c. 64; am. L. 1907, c. 79; rep. L. 1909, c. 15; R.L. 1915, p. 1487; R.L. 1925, c. 21; R.L. 1935, c. 247. A person born in the Kingdom of Hawaii of British parents domiciled there was held to be a citizen of the Republic of Hawaii although he was registered at birth at the British consulate and had never renounced allegiance to the British crown nor sworn allegiance to the Hawaiian government: 11 H. 166. On citizenship of persons born in the United States of alien parents, see 169 U.S. 649. Mere residence in foreign state after majority does not expatriate, 31 F.2d 738. But son of naturalized Hawaiian citizen became expatriated through residence in foreign country of birth. 89 F.2d 489, cert. den. 301 U.S. 682, reh'g den. 301 U.S. 713. Naturalization as Hawaiian citizen did not occur under Const. of 1894 by issuance of certificate of Minister of Interior where allegiance to native land not renounced and court order not obtained. 117 F.2d 588, reh'g den. 120 F.2d 760, aff'd by divided court, 315 U.S. 783.

Chinese who were Hawaiian citizens on Aug. 12, 1898, by either birth or naturalization, whether under the monarchy or the republic, became American citizens under this §: 23 Ops. 509; 1 U.S.D.C. Haw. 118; and their wives and children were thereafter entitled to enter the Territory; 23 Ops. 345; and such a citizen could take oath that he was such, and obtain an American register for a vessel which had a Hawaiian register on that date and was then owned and continued to be owned by a Hawaiian citizen until purchased by such Chinese; 23 Ops. 352. Son of Chinese, naturalized Hawaiian citizen, born in China in 1894 and remaining there through minority, did not become citizen and not entitled to enter U.S. 69 F.2d 681. Chinese held for deportation may set up American citizenship in habeas corpus or deportation proceedings, but the burden is on them to prove such citizenship: 1 U.S.D.C. Haw. 6; 1 U.S.D.C. Haw. 44; 1 U.S.D.C. Haw. 104; 1 U.S.D.C. Haw. 113; 1 U.S.D.C. Haw. 234; 270 Fed. 57.

Habeas corpus lies to protect immigrant's right to have question of citizenship determined; 160 Fed. 842, affirming 3 U.S.D.C. Haw. 168. See also §§100 and 101, and notes thereto; also note to Joint Resolution of Annexation, RLH 1955, page 13.

Woman of Chinese ancestry, born in Hawaii in 1894 but married to Chinese alien in 1910, could not be naturalized under the Acts cited in first paragraph of this note as they stood prior to 1940 amendment, because of her nonresidence on July 2, 1932, 88 F.2d 88.

For decisions generally on immigration and citizens see notes to §§100 and 101, and note to RLH 1955, §57-43; also, presumptions: arising from findings of Board of inquiry or certificate of identity, 29 F.2d 500; 30 F.2d 516; 49 F.2d 19 and 24; may be rebutted, 30 F.2d 65; lack of, prima facie supports right to deport, 36 F.2d 563; fraud must be alleged in complaint, 63 F.2d 375 and 377. Delay for depositions may be a matter of right, 33 F.2d 236. Proof of Chinese descent shifts burden of proof: 104 F.2d 21, 111 F.2d 707. Finding of citizenship on previous entry not binding: 124 F.2d 21; but see 188 F.2d 975.

Under the treaty with Spain and Acts of Congress, a Puerto Rican, residing in Puerto Rico on April 11, 1899, and a year thereafter, who did not declare his decision to preserve his allegiance to Spain, did not lose his political status by removing to Hawaii in 1901, but became a citizen of the United States under a subsequent Act of Congress and hence entitled to vote in Hawaii: 24 H. 21.

Although §8(a)(1) of the Act of March 24, 1934, c 84, 48 Stat 456, 462, provides that Filipinos shall be placed on the quota basis as aliens, it is specifically made inapplicable to Hawaii and immigration is determined by the Interior Dept. on basis of industrial needs.

Filipino national in Hawaii became alien by proclamation of Philippine Independence, 183 F.2d 795.

Subject: [ronpaul-16] VERY IMPORTANT!! New Member, Sheldon, is Pres. of YAL @ Idaho State, seeking Utah YAL...& member Judson Witham has filed the Utah lawsuit against Obama!!

1. Sheldon Kreger is Pres. of the Idaho State Univ. Young Americans for Liberty (YAL). He says Univ of Utah/BYU have not got a YAL organized and wants to help Utah get them started and coordinate between Utah and Idaho YAL groups. Dave used to be President of the Univ of Utah Students for Ron Paul, and organized a rally downtown for all of us on Oct. 13, 2007 (still on our calendar of past events). And David Garber & Ken were with the BYU Students for Ron Paul. We passed these names on to Sheldon. Click on his name and send him an email if you have any new details to add for helping him contact people interested in organizing YAL groups in Utah.

2. Judson Witham -- over 30 lawsuits against Obama nationwide regarding his lack of citizenship to be running for President -- the Internet listed that Utah had a lawsuit, also, and after more digging, we found that the person filing the lawsuit against Obama in Utah was our very own member Jud Witham!! How COOL is that!!!! Jud, do you need any help and/or support on this lawsuit? Thank YOU for taking a stand against those attempting to steal the US Constitution!!

(Anybody who wants to help Jud with this lawsuit, feel free to contact him. Likewise, anybody who is able to help Mike Ridgeway finish paying off his lawyer for a very successful lawsuit against the Utah GOP leaders who did their malicious scam on him---the judge declared Mike innocent last July---please feel free to contact him, also ---- Ron Paul has asked all of us to clean house with the local party first, and Mike, et.al, has been doing that for 10 years on their own--we encourage all meetup members to join with Mike Ridgeway and the others who are ashamed and disgusted at the party's corruptness in our state that must be replaced with "good, honest, and wise" leaders before we can ever get liberty-minded candidates with integrity elected here in Utah!)

HAVING UTAH INCLUDED IN THE OBAMA LAWSUITS AGAINST HIS FRAUDULENT CLAIM OF BEING A LEGAL CITIZEN IS AWESOME!!

Watch reports on this from Devvy Kidd at WND (World Net Daily). She's contacted the FBI to do a check on campaign funds fraud by Obama, she's talking and reporting about all 30 lawsuits (which include 2 more at the US Supreme Court level by a Democrat named Berg and another lawsuit by the presidential candidate Alan Keyes!!--the rest all seem to be lawsuits that are against their state's Secretary of State, demanding answers for Obama's proof of citizenship), and she's contacting the Electoral College about not voting until this is settled.

Allegedly, the Hawaii governor swore under oath 2 months ago that Hawaii does NOT have any birth certificate, and that the governor has allegedly sworn under oath that Obama was born in Kenya. This is a direct attack on the US Constitution, nothing to do with race.

It is to take down the last of the US Constitution, which is to take down the Electoral College (having the US public manipulated into demanding the "people's vote" is more important than the Electoral College vote, and to throw away the US Constitution or have it "re-written"---not realizing the "people's vote" is a rigged election), and to also take down the "natural born citizen" requirement.

Obama has hired THREE LAW FIRMS, not 3 lawyers, but 3 law firms, to handle this first lawsuit by Leo-Somebody at the US Supreme Court. There's been monkey-business with clerks stalling all of the 30 lawsuits, with the excuse that it was "not filed correctly." Leo's lawsuit was stalled by the clerk having an anthrax search on the papers/envelope he'd had filed with them.

They're stalling big time. Stalling until after the Dec. 15 Electoral College vote. Stalling until after he gets into office on January 20th.

And mainstream media had a complete blackout on this story until today (Friday, 12-5-08) when the Chicago Tribune ran the story, with the L.A. times picking up on it, and now many major papers nationwide, including "Drudge" on the Internet, are finally running this story (that started last June or before). But none of the Salt Lake papers are running any of it yet. Why is that, when we're a "red state" and allegedly all voted for McCain?

The question has already been posed as to what to do if Obama is declared unable to take the presidential office because "the US Constitution doesn't tell us what to do." Well, yes it did. It said a "natural born citizen." When you break a rule, you go back to the beginning. You don't use the broken rule as an excuse to change the rules.

Yeah, that probably means another election. We say have lawsuits filed against McCain, again (they got dismissed earlier), to undo Congress' "resolution" that stated that his illegal immigrant status was ok with them, and then have all the rest of the candidates put back on the ballot who got left off even though they were only suspending their campaign, including Ron Paul.

Don't know if that means Pelosi would be the temporary prez after January 20 until a new election is handled or not. Don't know what options are out there that are legal for this. But the "Establishment" having 2 illegals running for president at all, is beyond a reasonable doubt that this was an "accident."

--This message was sent by Vaughn & Lynda Robison (ronpaulslcutah@yahoo.com) from Utah Campaign for Liberty.

RE: CV05-00030 - David Farmer vs. Harmon - Exhibit: "The Freedom To Sing"
and Witnesses: Michael Mukasey and Alberto Gonzales

To: "David Farmer" <farmerd001@hawaii.rr.com>, "Steven Guttman" <sguttman@kdubm.com>, "Carol K. Muranaka" <ustp.region15@usdoj.gov>

Cc: "Michael Mukasey <AskDOJ@usdoj.gov> ACLU Hawaii" <office@acluhawaii.org>, "All Representatives" <reps@Capitol.hawaii.gov>, "All Senators" <sens@Capitol.hawaii.gov>, "Andrew Walden" <hfpeditor@email.com>, "Andrew Winer" <winer@pacificlaw.com>, "Aon Insurance Managers" <mike_coulter@agl.aon.com>, "Arnold T. Phillips" <arnold.t.phillips@verizon.com>, "Arthur Rath" <imua@spamarrest.com>, "Barry M. Kurren" <richlyn_young@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Benjamin Kudo" <bkudo@imanakakudo.com>, "Blossom Tong" <blossom.d.tong@marsh.com>, "Bradley Tamm" <btamm@hawaii.rr.com>, "Carl Morton" <ethics@hawaiiethics.org>, "Charles Goodwin" <HONOLULU@FBI.GOV>, "Charles Hurd" <mcp@mediatehawaii.org>, "Colbert Matsumoto" <service@islandinsurance.com>, "Craig Watanabe" <captiveins@dcca.hawaii.gov>, "Dane Field" <danefl@gucl.com>, "Dave Shapiro" <volcanicash@gmail.com>, "David A. Ezra" <theresa_lam@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Dee Jay Mailer" <ksinfo@ksbe.edu>, "Dorothy Sellers" <hawaiiag@hawaii.gov>, "Exececutive Office for U.S. Trustees" <ustrustee.program@usdoj.gov>, "Hugh Jones" <hugh.r.jones@hawaii.gov>, "Insurance Division Fraud Branch" <insfraud@dcca.hawaii.gov>, "J C Shannon" <Hapa1234@aol.com>, "James B Nicholson" <jamesbnicholson@aol.com>, "James B. Farris" <Farrisj@adr.org>, "James Cribley" <jcribley@caselombardi.com>, "James Duca" <jduca@kdubm.com>, "James Paul" <jpaul@pjpn.com>, "James Wriston" <jwriston@awlaw.com>, "Jeffrey Sia" <Jeff.Sia@excite.com>, "Jeffrey Watanabe" <jwatanabe@wik.com>, "Jim Dooley" <jdooley@honoluluadvertiser.com>, "Jo Ann Uchida" <rico@dcca.hawaii.gov>, "Joe Moore" <news@khon2.com>, "John D. Finnegan" <info@chubb.com>, "John Goemans" <wip@kamuela.com>, "Judge Lloyd King" <hib@hib.uscourts.gov>, "Judith Neustadter" <Judy@tiki.net>, "Judson Witham" <jurisnot2@yahoo.com>, "Ken Conklin" <ken_conklin@yahoo.com>, "Kenneth Hipp" <khipp@marrhipp.com>, "Kevin S.C. Chang" <shari_afuso@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Lawrence Reifurth" <dcca@dcca.hawaii.gov>, "Linda Lingle" <governor.lingle@hawaii.gov>, "Lyn Flanigan Anzai" <lflanigan@hsba.org>, "Margery Bronster" <info@bchlaw.net>, "Marsh Affinity Group" <prosecure@marshpm.com>, "Michael N. Tanoue" <mtanoue@paclawgroup.com>, "Michelle Tucker" <michelle@sterlingandtucker.com>, "Nathan Aipa" <nathan@pitluck.com>, "Office of Inspector General Civil Rights Complaints" <inspector.general@usdoj.gov>, "Office of the U.S. Trustee District of Hawaii" <ustp.region15@usdoj.goV>, "Paul Alston" <palston@ahfi.com>, "Peter Carlisle" <emeguro@co.honolulu.hi.us>, "Randall Roth" <rroth@hawaii.edu>, "Rick Daysog" <rdaysog@honoluluadvertiser.com>, "Robert Bruce Graham" <bgraham@awlaw.com>, "Robert F. Miller" <info@robertfmiller.com>, "Robin Campaniano" <aigh001@aighawaii.com>, "Roy F. Hughes" <hthughes@hawaii.rr.com>, "Samuel P. King" <leslie_sai@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Susan Tius" <STius@rmhawaii.com>, "V K Durham" <vkdtdht@pionet.net>, "Valerie U. Katz" <clmrpt@islandinsurance.com>, "William K Slate" <Websitemail@adr.org>, "Jim Terrack" <tnthawaii@aol.com>, "Don Michak" <dmichak@journalinquirer.com>, "Rocco Sansone" <rocco.c.sansone@marsh.com>, "Ted Pettit" <tpettit@caselombardi.com>, "Mark Burch" <burch@hawaii.edu>, "Laura Thielen" <dlnr@hawaii.gov>, "Michael Moore" <MMFlint@aol.com>, "John D Zalewski" <jzalewski@caselombardi.com>, "Robert M. Kohn" <rkohn@polhawaii.com>, "Haunani Apoliona" <info@oha.org>, "Malia Zimmerman" <Malia@hawaiireporter.com>, "CPCU Society Hawaii Chapter" <kkanehiro@gmail.com>, "Hawaii Independent Insurance Agents Assoc." <hiia@hawaii.rr.com>, "Hawaii Insurance Bureau Inc" <dpeters@hibinc.com>, "Hawaii Insurers Council" <apowershawaii@yahoo.com>, "Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press" <rcfp@rcfp.org>, "CND 48 Hours" <48Hours@CBSnews.com>, "American Bar Association" <dispute@abanet.org>, "Electronic Frontier Foundation" <information@eff.org>, "First Amendment Center" <info@fac.org>, "Council for the National Interest Foundation" <cnif@democracyinaction.org>, "Free to Know-Hawaii" <freetoknowhawaii@yahoo.com>, "ImpeachBush.org" <impeachbush@votetoimpeach.org>, "Wayne Madsen" <wmreditor@waynemadsenreport.com>, "National Whistleblower Center" <mc@whistleblowers.org>, "Editor New York Times" <managing-editor@nytimes.com>, "Greg Palast" <palast@gregpalast.com>, "Pension Benefit Guaranty Association" <participant.pro@pbgc.gov>, "Public Citizen" <publiccitizen@mail.democracyinaction.org>... more

Due to the discovery of NEW FACTS, I am updating the subject Exhibit and the witness information for U.S. Attorneys General Michael Mukasey and Alberto Gonzales, which you will find attached and on-line at:

As Judge David Ezra's Order constitutes a PRIOR RESTRAINT of my freedom of speech -- and that of all others who published their opinions in The Catbird Seat website, I regret that I must continue to submit each of these new and updated exhibits and witness descriptions for your review and approval in the event they may contain any prohibited "Protected Subject Matter". If you would like to avoid this approval process, then I would again suggest that we attempt a good-faith settlement of this case through confidential negotiation or mediation.

A prior restraint is an official restriction of speech prior to publication. Prior restraints are viewed by the U.S. Supreme Court as "the most serious and the least tolerable infringement on First Amendment rights." Since 1931, the Court repeatedly has found that such attempts to censor the media are presumed unconstitutional.

In the 1976 landmark case Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart, the Court addressed the constitutionality of an order prohibiting the media from publishing or broadcasting certain information about Erwin Charles Simants, who was accused of murdering the Henry Kellie family in a small town in Nebraska. This case pitted the First Amendment rights of a free press against the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial.

To ensure that Simants received a fair trial, the Nebraska Supreme Court modified the district court's order to prohibit reporting of confessions or admissions made by Simants or facts "strongly implicative" of Simants.

On appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the prior restraint order. The Court emphasized that the use of prior restraint is an "immediate and irreversible sanction" that greatly restricts the First Amendment rights of the press. "If it can be said that a threat of criminal or civil sanctions after publication `chills' speech, prior restraint `freezes' it at least for the time," Chief Justice Warren Burger wrote for the Court.

To determine whether the prior restraint order was justified, the Court applied a form of the "clear and present danger" test, examining whether "the gravity of the `evil,' discounted by its improbability, justifies such invasion of free speech as is necessary to avoid the danger."

In applying this test, the Court articulated a three-part analytical framework, which imposed a heavy burden on the party seeking to restrain the press. First, the Court examined "the nature and extent of the pretrial news coverage." Second, the Court considered whether other less restrictive measures would have alleviated the effects of pretrial publicity. Finally, the Court considered the effectiveness of a restraining order in preventing the threatened danger.

The Court found that the trial judge reasonably concluded that the "intense and pervasive pretrial publicity" in the Simants case "might reasonably impair the defendant's right to a fair trial." However, the trial judge did not consider whether other measures short of a prior restraint order would protect the defendant's rights. The trial judge should have considered changing the location of the trial, postponing the trial, intensifying screening of prospective jurors, providing emphatic and clear instructions to jurors about judging the case only on the evidence presented in the courtroom or sequestering the jury.

The Court also found that the effectiveness of the trial judge's prior restraint order to protect Simants' right to a fair trial was questionable. Because the prior restraint order is limited to the court's territorial jurisdiction, it could not effectively restrain national publications as opposed to publications within the court's jurisdiction.

Moreover, it is difficult for trial judges to draft effective prior restraint orders when it is hard "to predict what information will in fact undermine the impartiality of jurors." Finally, because this trial took place in a town of 850 people, rumors traveling by word of mouth may be more damaging to the defendant's fair-trial rights than printed or broadcasted news accounts. In short, the probability that the defendant's fair-trial rights would be impaired by pretrial publicity was not shown with "the degree of certainty" needed to justify a prior restraint order.

Because the "barriers to prior restraint remain high and the presumption against its use continues intact," prior restraint orders are rarely upheld. As a result, editorial decisions about publication of information the government deems sensitive are generally left solely to the discretion of news organizations. Nevertheless, government officials and private individuals occasionally attempt to stop publication....

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
© 2003 RCFP. 1815 N. Fort Myer Dr., Suite 900, Arlington VA 22209 (703) 807-2100

NEW DISCOVERY (09-19-08): More undisclosed conflicts of interests between parties named in Defendant’s RICO lawsuit and the U.S. Department of Justice (Plaintiff), Mark Bennett, Hugh Jones, Dorothy Sellers, Margery Bronster, Earl Anzai, Lyn Anzai, Henry Paulson, AIG, Chubb Group, ACE, Aon, Marsh & McLennan, Goldman Sachs, Henry Peters, Robert Kihune, Douglas Ing, Louise Ing, Aloha Airlines, Hawaiian Airlines, Joshua Gotbaum, Judge Kevin Chang, Faye Watanabe Kurren, The Nature Conservancy, Judge Barry Kurren, Judge David Ezra, James Nicholson, Linda Lingle, Ben Cayetano, John Waihee, OHA, AIPAC, David Farmer, Steven Guttman, etc:

To: "David Farmer" <farmerd001@hawaii.rr.com>, "Steven Guttman" <sguttman@kdubm.com>, "Carol K. Muranaka" <ustp.region15@usdoj.gov>

Cc: "Michael Mukasey <AskDOJ@usdoj.gov> ACLU Hawaii" <office@acluhawaii.org>, "All Representatives" <reps@Capitol.hawaii.gov>, "All Senators" <sens@Capitol.hawaii.gov>, "Andrew Walden" <hfpeditor@email.com>, "Andrew Winer" <winer@pacificlaw.com>, "Aon Insurance Managers" <mike_coulter@agl.aon.com>, "Arnold T. Phillips" <arnold.t.phillips@verizon.com>, "Arthur Rath" <imua@spamarrest.com>, "Barry M. Kurren" <richlyn_young@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Benjamin Kudo" <bkudo@imanakakudo.com>, "Blossom Tong" <blossom.d.tong@marsh.com>, "Bradley Tamm" <btamm@hawaii.rr.com>, "Brian E. Schatz" <teamschatz@gmail.com>, "Carl Morton" <ethics@hawaiiethics.org>, "Charles Goodwin" <HONOLULU@FBI.GOV>, "Charles Hurd" <mcp@mediatehawaii.org>, "Colbert Matsumoto" <service@islandinsurance.com>, "Craig Watanabe" <captiveins@dcca.hawaii.gov>, "Curtis B. Ching" <Curtis.B.Ching@usdoj.gov>, "Dane Field" <danefl@gucl.com>, "Dave Shapiro" <volcanicash@gmail.com>, "David A. Ezra" <theresa_lam@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Dee Jay Mailer" <ksinfo@ksbe.edu>, "Dorothy Sellers" <hawaiiag@hawaii.gov>, "Excecutive Office for U.S. Trustees" <ustrustee.program@usdoj.gov>, "Hugh Jones" <hugh.r.jones@hawaii.gov>, "Insurance Division Fraud Branch" <insfraud@dcca.hawaii.gov>, "J C Shannon" <Hapa1234@aol.com>, "James B Nicholson" <jamesbnicholson@aol.com>, "James B. Farris" <Farrisj@adr.org>, "James Cribley" <jcribley@caselombardi.com>, "James Duca" <jduca@kdubm.com>, "James Paul" <jpaul@pjpn.com>, "James Wriston" <jwriston@awlaw.com>, "Jeffrey Sia" <Jeff.Sia@excite.com>, "Jeffrey Watanabe" <jwatanabe@wik.com>, "Jim Dooley" <jdooley@honoluluadvertiser.com>, "Jo Ann Uchida" <rico@dcca.hawaii.gov>, "Joe Moore" <news@khon2.com>, "John D. Finnegan" <info@chubb.com>, "John Goemans" <wip@kamuela.com>, "Judge Lloyd King" <hib@hib.uscourts.gov>, "Judith Neustadter" <Judy@tiki.net>, "Judson Witham" <jurisnot@yahoo.com>, "Ken Conklin" <ken_conklin@yahoo.com>, "Kenneth Hipp" <khipp@marrhipp.com>, "Kevin S.C. Chang" <shari_afuso@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Lawrence Reifurth" <dcca@dcca.hawaii.gov>, "Linda Lingle" <governor.lingle@hawaii.gov>, "Louise Ing" <ling@hsba.org>, "Lyn Flanigan Anzai" <lflanigan@hsba.org>, "Margery Bronster" <info@bchlaw.net>, "Marsh Affinity Group" <prosecure@marshpm.com>, "Matt Tsukazaki" <mat@torkildson.com>, "Michael N. Tanoue" <mtanoue@paclawgroup.com>, "Michelle Tucker" <michelle@sterlingandtucker.com>, "Na Kumu Book Project" <nakumu@ksbe.edu>, "Nathan Aipa" <nathan@pitluck.com>, "Office of Inspector General Civil Rights Complaints" <inspector.general@usdoj.gov>, "Office of the U.S. Trustee District of Hawaii" <ustp.region15@usdoj.goV>, "Paul Alston" <palston@ahfi.com>, "Peter Carlisle" <emeguro@co.honolulu.hi.us>, "Randall Roth" <rroth@hawaii.edu>, "Rick Daysog" <rdaysog@honoluluadvertiser.com>, "Robert Bruce Graham" <bgraham@awlaw.com>, "Robert F. Miller" <info@robertfmiller.com>, "Robin Campaniano" <aigh001@aighawaii.com>, "Roy F. Hughes" <hthughes@hawaii.rr.com>, "Samuel P. King" <leslie_sai@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Susan Tius" <STius@rmhawaii.com>, "V K Durham" <vkdtdht@pionet.net>, "Valerie U. Katz" <clmrpt@islandinsurance.com>, "William K Slate" <Websitemail@adr.org>, "Jim Terrack" <tnthawaii@aol.com>, "Don Michak" <dmichak@journalinquirer.com>, "Rocco Sansone" <rocco.c.sansone@marsh.com>, "Ted Pettit" <tpettit@caselombardi.com>, "Mark Burch" <burch@hawaii.edu>, "Laura Thielen" <dlnr@hawaii.gov>, "Michael Moore" <MMFlint@aol.com>, "John D Zalewski" <jzalewski@caselombardi.com>, "Robert M. Kohn" <rkohn@polhawaii.com>, "Haunani Apoliona" <info@oha.org>, "Malia Zimmerman" <Malia@hawaiireporter.com>, "DC Bureau Office of Hawaiian Affairs" <mathar@oha.org>, "CPCU Society Hawaii Chapter" <kkanehiro@gmail.com>, "Hawaii Independent Insurance Agents Assoc." <hiia@hawaii.rr.com>, "Hawaii Insurance Bureau Inc" <dpeters@hibinc.com>, "Hawaii Insurers Council" <apowershawaii@yahoo.com>, "Manuel Valenzuela" <manuel@valenzuelas.net>... more

Due to the discovery of NEW FACTS, I am adding the subject Exhibit which you will find on-line at:

As Judge David Ezra's Order constitutes a PRIOR RESTRAINT of freedom of speech, I regret that I must continue to submit each of these new and updated exhibits and witness descriptions for your review and approval in the event they may contain any prohibited "Protected Subject Matter". If you would like to avoid this approval process, then I would again suggest that we attempt a good-faith settlement of this case through confidential negotiation or mediation.

To: "David Farmer" <farmerd001@hawaii.rr.com>, "Steven Guttman" <sguttman@kdubm.com>, "Carol K. Muranaka" <ustp.region15@usdoj.gov>

Cc: "Michael Mukasey <AskDOJ@usdoj.gov> ACLU Hawaii" <office@acluhawaii.org>, "All Representatives" <reps@Capitol.hawaii.gov>, "All Senators" <sens@Capitol.hawaii.gov>, "Andrew Walden" <hfpeditor@email.com>, "Andrew Winer" <winer@pacificlaw.com>, "Aon Insurance Managers" <mike_coulter@agl.aon.com>, "Arnold T. Phillips" <arnold.t.phillips@verizon.com>, "Arthur Rath" <imua@spamarrest.com>, "Barry M. Kurren" <richlyn_young@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Benjamin Kudo" <bkudo@imanakakudo.com>, "Blossom Tong" <blossom.d.tong@marsh.com>, "Bradley Tamm" <btamm@hawaii.rr.com>, "Brian E. Schatz" <teamschatz@gmail.com>, "Carl Morton" <ethics@hawaiiethics.org>, "Charles Goodwin" <HONOLULU@FBI.GOV>, "Charles Hurd" <mcp@mediatehawaii.org>, "Colbert Matsumoto" <service@islandinsurance.com>, "Craig Watanabe" <captiveins@dcca.hawaii.gov>, "Curtis B. Ching" <Curtis.B.Ching@usdoj.gov>, "Dane Field" <danefl@gucl.com>, "Dave Shapiro" <volcanicash@gmail.com>, "David A. Ezra" <theresa_lam@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Dee Jay Mailer" <ksinfo@ksbe.edu>, "Dorothy Sellers" <hawaiiag@hawaii.gov>, "Excecutive Office for U.S. Trustees" <ustrustee.program@usdoj.gov>, "Hugh Jones" <hugh.r.jones@hawaii.gov>, "Insurance Division Fraud Branch" <insfraud@dcca.hawaii.gov>, "J C Shannon" <Hapa1234@aol.com>, "James B Nicholson" <jamesbnicholson@aol.com>, "James B. Farris" <Farrisj@adr.org>, "James Cribley" <jcribley@caselombardi.com>, "James Duca" <jduca@kdubm.com>, "James Paul" <jpaul@pjpn.com>, "James Wriston" <jwriston@awlaw.com>, "Jeffrey Sia" <Jeff.Sia@excite.com>, "Jeffrey Watanabe" <jwatanabe@wik.com>, "Jim Dooley" <jdooley@honoluluadvertiser.com>, "Jo Ann Uchida" <rico@dcca.hawaii.gov>, "Joe Moore" <news@khon2.com>, "John D. Finnegan" <info@chubb.com>, "John Goemans" <wip@kamuela.com>, "Judge Lloyd King" <hib@hib.uscourts.gov>, "Judith Neustadter" <Judy@tiki.net>, "Judson Witham" <jurisnot@yahoo.com>, "Ken Conklin" <ken_conklin@yahoo.com>, "Kenneth Hipp" <khipp@marrhipp.com>, "Kevin S.C. Chang" <shari_afuso@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Lawrence Reifurth" <dcca@dcca.hawaii.gov>, "Linda Lingle" <governor.lingle@hawaii.gov>, "Louise Ing" <ling@hsba.org>, "Lyn Flanigan Anzai" <lflanigan@hsba.org>, "Margery Bronster" <info@bchlaw.net>, "Marsh Affinity Group" <prosecure@marshpm.com>, "Matt Tsukazaki" <mat@torkildson.com>, "Michael N. Tanoue" <mtanoue@paclawgroup.com>, "Michelle Tucker" <michelle@sterlingandtucker.com>, "Na Kumu Book Project" <nakumu@ksbe.edu>, "Nathan Aipa" <nathan@pitluck.com>, "Office of Inspector General Civil Rights Complaints" <inspector.general@usdoj.gov>, "Office of the U.S. Trustee District of Hawaii" <ustp.region15@usdoj.goV>, "Paul Alston" <palston@ahfi.com>, "Peter Carlisle" <emeguro@co.honolulu.hi.us>, "Randall Roth" <rroth@hawaii.edu>, "Rick Daysog" <rdaysog@honoluluadvertiser.com>, "Robert Bruce Graham" <bgraham@awlaw.com>, "Robert F. Miller" <info@robertfmiller.com>, "Robin Campaniano" <aigh001@aighawaii.com>, "Roy F. Hughes" <hthughes@hawaii.rr.com>, "Samuel P. King" <leslie_sai@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Susan Tius" <STius@rmhawaii.com>, "V K Durham" <vkdtdht@pionet.net>, "Valerie U. Katz" <clmrpt@islandinsurance.com>, "William K Slate" <Websitemail@adr.org>, "Jim Terrack" <tnthawaii@aol.com>, "Don Michak" <dmichak@journalinquirer.com>, "Rocco Sansone" <rocco.c.sansone@marsh.com>, "Ted Pettit" <tpettit@caselombardi.com>, "Mark Burch" <burch@hawaii.edu>, "Laura Thielen" <dlnr@hawaii.gov>, "Michael Moore" <MMFlint@aol.com>, "John D Zalewski" <jzalewski@caselombardi.com>, "Robert M. Kohn" <rkohn@polhawaii.com>, "Haunani Apoliona" <info@oha.org>, "Malia Zimmerman" <Malia@hawaiireporter.com>, "DC Bureau Office of Hawaiian Affairs" <mathar@oha.org>, "CPCU Society Hawaii Chapter" <kkanehiro@gmail.com>, "Hawaii Independent Insurance Agents Assoc." <hiia@hawaii.rr.com>, "Hawaii Insurance Bureau Inc" <dpeters@hibinc.com>, "Hawaii Insurers Council" <apowershawaii@yahoo.com>, "Manuel Valenzuela" <manuel@valenzuelas.net>... more

Due to the discovery of NEW FACTS, I am adding the subject Exhibit which you will find on-line at:

Due to the new discovery of important FACTS related to this case, I am updating the information for the subject Exhibit and witnesses, which you will find on-line at:

These facts clearly show that there are numerous conflicting professional, financial and political relationships between entities involved in this case which cannot be dismissed as being merely “phantom dots”, “conspiracy theories”, “political opinions”, or “protected subject matter”.

As I have previously advised, I intend to file a MOTION TO REOPEN this case unless you are willing to try to resolve this matter NOW through voluntary NEGOTIATION or, as an alternative, through non-binding MEDIATION.

If you are not open to either of these alternatives, then please let me know immediately if you intend to file any Objections to my reopening this case.

This is to inform you that I have not received an acknowledgment of, or response to, my letter you dated August 1, 2007, regarding the referenced matter. A copy of this letter, and related information, can be found on the Internet at:

Since this information is necessary in order for the subject case to be finally closed, I ask that you provide to me, as soon as possible, an accounting of the settlement recovered for Kamehameha Schools and P&C Insurance Co., Inc. for the fraudulent overcharges which I reported beginning in November, 1996, and which may be continuing to this date.

Also, as a tax-payer, I ask that you provide to me. and to the general public, complete details– including reimbursement of premiums, damages for wrongfully denied claims, penalties, etc.– regarding the settlement negotiations and monies received which involved any and all claims made by the State of Hawaii against the insurance agents, brokers and carriers involved in your investigations and settlement negotiations.

Laurence Reifurth, Director, Dept. of Commerce & Consumer Affairs
(fax: 808-586-2640)

LA PAZ, BOLIVIA – Enron Development Corp. and Shell International Gas Ltd. announced today that the government of Bolivia has named the companies the successful capitalizing company for the transportation segment of the state oil and gas company, Yacimientos Petroliferos...

A lack of market access has constrained natural gas production in Bolivia. With little internal gas demand, all of the Company's Bolivian natural gas production is sold under contract to the Bolivian government for export to Argentina.

Major developments in South America indicate that new markets will open for the Company's production. Construction of a new 1,900-mile pipeline that will link Bolivia's extensive gas reserves with markets in Brazil commenced in 1997 and is expected to be operational in early 1999.

The owners of the new pipeline include Petrobras (the Brazilian state oil company), other Brazilian investors, Enron Corp., Shell International Gas Ltd., British Gas PLC, El Paso Energy Corp., BHP, and Bolivian pension funds. When completed, the new pipeline will have a capacity of approximately 1 billion cubic feet ("Bcf") per day.

To: "Bobby Harmon" <bobby_n_harmon@yahoo.com>, "David Farmer" <farmerd001@hawaii.rr.com>, "Michael Mukasey" <AskDOJ@usdoj.gov>, "Kevin Chang" <sa@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Robert Faris" <hib@hib.uscourts.gov>, "Barry M. Kurren" <richlyn_young@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Carol K. Muranaka" <ustp.region15@usdoj.gov>, "J P Schmidt" <insurance@dcca.hawaii.gov>, "Janet Kamerman" <HONOLULU@FBI.GOV>, "Mark Bennett" <hawaiiag@hawaii.gov>, "Hugh Jones" <hugh.r.jones@hawaii.gov>, "Linda Lingle" <governor.lingle@hawaii.gov>

"Mediation Center of The Pacific" <mcp@mediatehawaii.org>, "Sheryl Nicholson" <office@acluhawaii.org>, "Robert Bruce Graham" <bgraham@awlaw.com>, "James Wriston" <jwriston@awlaw.com>, "Andrew Winer" <winer@pacificlaw.com>, "James Cribley" <jcribley@caselombardi.com>, "Lawrence Goya" <hawaiiag@hawaii.gov>, "Pension Benefit Guaranty Association" <participant.pro@pbgc.gov>, "James B Nicholson" <jamesbnicholson@aol.com>, "Executive Office for U.S. Trustees" <ustrustee.program@usdoj.gov>, "Office of Inspector General US Dept of Justice" <oig.hotline@usdoj.gov>, "George Will" <georgewill@washpost.com>, "Haunani Apoliona" <info@oha.org>, "Leroy Colombe" <lcolombe@ckdbw.com>, "Scott Helman" <shelman@globe.com>, "Bob Nichols" <bob.bobnichols@gmail.com>, "Laura Thielen" <dlnr@hawaii.gov>, "Barry Taniguchi" <communications@hcf-hawaii.org>, "Paul Achitoff" <honoluluoffice@earthjustice.org>, "Laurie Bennett" <info@muckety.com>, "Dave Shapiro" <volcanicash@gmail.com>, "Gail Kim-Moe" <Gkim.moe@gmail.com>, "Marshall Chriswell" <mc@whistleblowers.org>, "Greg Palast" <palast@gregpalast.com>, "Dee Jay Mailer" <ksinfo@ksbe.edu>, "Laser Haas" <laserhaas@msn.com>, "Michael Moore" <mike@michaelmoore.com>, "Texas Observer" <editors@texasobserver.org>, "Brian W. Bisignani" <bbisignani@postschell.com>, "Aon Insurance Managers" <mike_coulter@agl.aon.com>, "William Burgess" <hwburgess@hawaii.rr.com>, "Brian E. Schatz" <teamschatz@gmail.com>, "Patricia Case" <pattycase@aol.com>, "Cheryl Nakamura" <CNakamura@rmhawaii.com>, "Bill Yuen" <billyuen@cymlaw.com>, "Randall W. Wulff" <rwulff@wqsadr.com>, "Karen Spiller" <karen.spiller@baesystems.com>, "Andrew Killgore" <akillgore@wrmea.com>, "Patrick Leahy" <senator_leahy@leahy.senate.gov>, "Pamela A. McCullough" <HONOLULU@FBI.GOV>, "James Duke Aiona" <ltgov@hawaii.gov>, "Ken Conklin" <ken_conklin@yahoo.com>, "William H. Donaldson" <enforcement@sec.gov>, "Ian Lind" <diary@ilind.net>, "Jim Terrack" <tnthawaii@aol.com>, "Andrew Walden" <hfpeditor@email.com>, "All Senators" <sens@Capitol.hawaii.gov>, "All Representatives" <reps@Capitol.hawaii.gov>, "Thomas Fitton" <info@judicialwatch.org>, "Stew Webb" <stewwebb@stewwebb.com>, "Judson Witham" <jurisnot@yahoo.com>, "J C Shannon" <Hapa1234@aol.com>, "Jeff Biener" <jeffandmary@ozarkopathy.org>, "V K Durham" <vkdtdht@pionet.net>, "Richard Grove" <Richard@8thEstate.com>, "Bradley Tamm" <btamm@hawaii.rr.com>, "Susan Tius" <STius@rmhawaii.com>, "Paul Alston" <palston@ahfi.com>, "John Goemans" <wip@kamuela.com>, "William K Slate" <Websitemail@adr.org>, "Lissa Andrews" <landrews@rmhawaii.com>, "John D. Finnegan" <info@chubb.com>, "Terry Mullen" <tmullen@johnmullen.com>, "Margery Bronster" <info@bchlaw.net>, "Michael N. Tanoue" <mtanoue@paclawgroup.com>, "Neil Ambercrombie" <Neil.Abercrombie@mail.house.gov>, "Lyn Flanigan Anzai" <lflanigan@hsba.org>, "Lorraine Inouye" <seninouye@Capitol.hawaii.gov>, "Samuel P. King" <leslie_sai@hid.uscourts.gov>, "Arthur Rath" <imua@spamarrest.com>, "Randall Roth" <rroth@hawaii.edu>, "Rick Daysog" <rdaysog@honoluluadvertiser.com>, "Jim Dooley" <jdooley@honoluluadvertiser.com>, "Robin Campaniano" <aigh001@aighawaii.com>, "Blossom Tong" <blossom.d.tong@marsh.com>, "Sammye Richardson" <sammyerichardson@yahoo.com>, "Daniel Hopsicker" <madcownews@gmail.com>, "Richard L Righter" <righterwmx@aol.com>, "Dirk Kempthorne" <webteam@ios.doi.gov>, "Jeffrey Sia" <Jeff.Sia@excite.com>, "Jim Babka" <downsizer-dispatch@downsizedc.org>, "Truth" <truth@grandecom.net>, "J. C. Jones" <JCJJONES@aol.com>, "Dane Field" <danefl@gucl.com>, "Jeffrey Watanabe" <jwatanabe@wik.com>

Kessner Umebayashi Bain & Matsunaga
220 South King Street, Suite 1900
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813

NEW DISCOVERY (04-22-08): David Farmer’s undisclosed connections with AIPAC and Attorney General Mark Bennett:

In his "MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO DEBTOR'S MOTION FOR ORDER TO DISAPPROVE APPOINTMENT OF DAVID C. FARMER AS SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE", filed with the Court on August 24, 2007, the Trustee's attorney, Steven Guttman, Esq., of the law firm, Kessner Umebayashi Bain & Matsunaga, stated to the Court:

"... Harmon is once again attempting to create issues of conflict where none exist by attempting to draw connections between phantom dots."...

Mr. Guttman does not elaborate beyond this simple statement of HIS PERSONAL OPINION, as to WHICH of the thousands of connections I have cited that he wishes the Court to accept, without question, as being merely "phantom dots". In other court filings, Mr. Guttman has characterized my Motions as consisting of "conspiracy theories" -- again with no specific references.

Despite these unnamed "phantom dots" and "conspiracy theories", the Court has blithely and unquestionably gone along with Mr. Guttman's opinions and has repeatedly denied ALL Motions that I have made. In fact, both Courts involved have ruled that the Court Clerk shall not accept any future filings from me without the Courts' prior approval - which it has repeatedly declined to give.

Therefore, due to the fact that I continue to discover new, material FACTS almost daily, I am preparing a set of NEW EXHIBITS in which I intend to document the financial, professional, personal, and political connections between the many various entities involved in this case.

The following is a listing of named witnesses in this case who have factual connections with the subject entity. Each underlined name has been linked to a detailed description of that witness to enable the reader to more easily CONNECT THE DOTS TO...

Summary: On May 25 and with little or no press coverage, the Supreme Court delivered a huge blow to freedom. Citizens are no longer entitled to reasonable Due Process requirements for property right cases.

The case, Lingle vs. Chevron fosters Sustainable Development policies.. The high court in this unanimous decision can no longer be said to be a protector of unalienable rights but instead has effectively adopted a political - economic system where rights are granted and rescinded by ruling edict. Saving the Republic will require an increasing public exposure of how the transformation of America is occurring. Apparently, the high court will not stand in the way of the globalist scheme to withdraw American's freedom. The court has sanctioned, by this decision, the nation's transformation of the economy from free enterprise to public/private partnerships. In doing that the court has abandoned Natural Law at its core.

In this review, Attorney Ronald A. Zumbrun, founder of the Pacific Legal Foundation and now of the Zumbrun law Firm in Sacramento California analyzes the shocking decision.

The state may have compromised its environmental policy because of pressure from Hawaii Superferry executives who were worried about financing for the interisland ferry project, the state auditor has concluded.

The auditor found that an internal June 2005 deadline imposed by Superferry executives "drove the process" and pushed the state Department of Transportation to bypass an environmental review. The deadline, according to the auditor, was tied to Superferry's agreement with Austal USA to secure financing to pay the Mobile, Ala.-based shipbuilder to construct two high-speed ferries.

The federal Maritime Administration, which approved a $140 million loan guarantee for ferry construction, wanted confirmation that no environmental assessment of harbor improvements would be required because of the risk that environmental concerns could jeopardize port access. But Maritime Administration officials told the auditor they did not set the June 2005 deadline as a condition of the loan guarantee.

"In the end, the state may have compromised its environmental policy in favor of a private company's internal deadline," state auditor Marion Higa concluded. "It remains to be seen whether these decisions will cost the state more than its environmental policy."

The performance audit was required by state lawmakers as part of a law passed in special session last fall that allowed Superferry to resume operations while the state conducts an environmental impact statement. Legal challenges and public protests had halted ferry service after the state Supreme Court ruled in August that the state's decision to exempt $40 million in state harbor improvements from environmental review was in error.

The auditor's main finding was that the June 2005 deadline was not imposed by the federal government, but related to an agreement between Superferry and Austal. The audit questions whether the state did "sufficient due diligence to verify whether the deadline was valid for the reasons Hawaii Superferry Inc. claimed."

John Garibaldi, Superferry's chief executive officer, said yesterday that Superferry has consistently portrayed the June 2005 deadline as necessary for both federal and private equity financing. He described the agreements with the Maritime Administration, Austal USA and primary investors J.F. Lehman & Co. as interrelated.

"They were all dependent upon each other. No one stood on its own," Garibaldi said. "I think that's what we tried to express to people."

Garibaldi declined to comment on other findings in the audit because he had not yet seen a copy.

The auditor's descriptions of the chain of events that led the state to exempt the project from environmental review in February 2005 are similar to reports in The Advertiser in September and January.

The auditor and the newspaper received many of the same documents, which were screened by the Lingle administration for attorney-client privilege and executive privilege before being released. The administration is preparing a privilege log for the auditor and the newspaper to describe the documents that have been withheld. The Advertiser requested the documents under the state's open-records law.

Most significantly, the auditor — like The Advertiser — emphasized a late December 2004 meeting at the governor's office that included the governor's then-chief of staff Bob Awana, department officials, and Superferry executives.

Staff in the department's harbors division had wanted to require a statewide environmental assessment of the project and to get Superferry to install a stern ramp on the vessel to give it more flexibility at Kahului Harbor on Maui. But Superferry executives, according an account by a department staffer, told the state that anything but an exemption was a deal-breaker and that they would not install any ramps.

"Decisions made: We need to pursue EXEMPTION; and HSF will not provide any ramps on vessel," one department staffer told colleagues afterward in an e-mail.

The auditor concluded that department e-mails showed a decision was made at this meeting, although who made the decision is not revealed.

"Current and former department officials and employees who worked on the ferry project were either unable to recall who made the decision at that meeting or chose to invoke executive privilege when asked who directed the team," the auditor found.

The department, in its written response to the audit, rejected any inference that a decision was made at the governor's office directing the department to pursue an exemption. The auditor countered that the department's e-mails about the meeting "are self-explanatory."

"Ultimately, a decision involving the governor's office was made that directed the 'ferry project team' to pursue scenarios that would exempt the ferry harbor work from environmental review," the auditor found.

Awana, who resigned last year, told The Advertiser in January that he had no role in the decision. Barry Fukunaga, who was then the department's deputy director of harbors and is now Gov. Linda Lingle's chief of staff, has said he made the decision in consultation with his construction and engineering staff and then-department director Rod Haraga. The department also consulted with the state Office of Environmental Quality Control and county planning agencies.

Fukunaga told The Advertiser in writing last year that he did not discuss his deliberations or his eventual decision with Lingle, Awana or state Attorney General Mark Bennett.

The audit is also similar to The Advertiser's reporting last September on the Maritime Administration's loan guarantee for Superferry. Maritime Administration officials told the auditor that loan guarantees are typically exempt from environmental review because they just provide financing for ship construction. The vessels typically use port facilities already in place.

Maritime Administration officials told the auditor that harbor improvements for Superferry could have triggered an environmental assessment that could have limited ferry access to ports. So the Maritime Administration added a condition that Superferry provide confirmation that no environmental assessment was required.

"MARAD's position was that it was not willing to finance the construction of any vessel that might be unable to operate because it has no port," the auditor found.

The audit recommends that the Legislature empower a state agency to enforce environmental review laws and require agencies to update exemption lists every five years. The auditor found that the public has little involvement in the exemption process other than the right to file a lawsuit to challenge an exemption.

Higa had complained to lawmakers that she missed a March deadline for a preliminary draft of the audit because of significant delays in obtaining documents from the Lingle administration. Higa repeated those complaints in the audit and said her staff would be preparing a second phase of the audit for a later report.

Higa described the Lingle administration's cooperation as "slow and incomplete, at best." The department called that description "wholly untrue" and said any delays were based on requests by Higa that the attorney general found were "unreasonably broad in scope."

The department chose not to comment on many of Higa's conclusions. Mike Formby, the department's deputy director of harbors, said last night that the administration's wants the opportunity to review the second phase of the audit.

I think what we wanted to do was reserve the right to see the full report, because it's really risky to look at half the report and respond knowing that they're out there still doing field investigation, interviews, reviewing documents," Formby said. "And basically, they look at the response you gave, and they go out and look for a way to rebut your response."

Gov. Lingle will pick the next chief justice unless
the people alter the Constitution

Gov. Linda Lingle says she wants the next chief justice of the Hawaii Supreme Court to be a hard-working legal scholar who will not legislate from the bench.

Candidates would not be favored if they were prosecutors, "but it wouldn't hurt their chances, either," the Republican governor said in a recent interview with the Star-Bulletin.

Although Attorney General Mark Bennett has been mentioned in legal circles as a top contender, the governor said it is too early to mention any names.

But in explaining the qualities she would like to see in judges, Lingle made clear that she believes they should interpret laws and leave legislation to elected officials.

Her remarks suggest that her appointment of the state's next chief justice could be monumental for the five-member high court. Known for a long tradition of rendering "activist" decisions, the court has been hailed by civil rights advocates but criticized by others as going beyond reviewing and applying the laws.

Lingle's appointment would be the first time that a Republican governor would name a chief justice in more than 40 years. Democratic Gov. John Burns appointed William Richardson in 1966, and Democratic governors appointed the next two: Herman Lum and the current chief justice, Ronald Moon.

The only way Lingle would be prevented from making the appointment is if state lawmakers place on this fall's ballot -- and voters approve -- a proposed constitutional amendment to lift the mandatory retirement for judges who turn 70.

Unless the state Constitution is amended, Moon must retire when he turns 70 on Sept. 4, 2010, about three months before Lingle's term expires.

The state Senate approved a controversial measure last week that raises the mandatory retirement age to 80, and sent the proposal to the state House. But key senators acknowledge that it will be difficult for the amendment to pass because voters rejected a similar proposal in 2006 that eliminated the mandatory retirement provision. Voters rejected the amendment by 80,000 votes, 58 percent to 35 percent.

"It's an uphill battle," said Sen. Brian Taniguchi, Senate judiciary chairman. "I'm not going to die if the bill dies."

Senate President Colleen Hanabusa agreed with the prognosis. "I'm not sure it will make it out of the Legislature because we just put it on the ballot," she said.

Taniguchi maintained that he views the proposal as a civil rights issue against age discrimination and a "compromise" by retaining the retirement age but raising it to 80.

Opponents, including Lingle, contend the measure is aimed at preventing her from naming the next chief justice.

Bennett and City Prosecutor Peter Carlisle, who opposed the 2006 proposal, submitted testimony in opposition to the current measure before Taniguchi's committee last month.

The proposal's supporters include the Hawaii Government Employees Association and the Japanese American Citizens League.

Republican Sen. Fred Hemmings, who voted against the measure last week, said in an interview that the proposal was "petty politics at its worst."

"I think they (Democrats) will try to do whatever they can to put it on the ballot," he said.

Taniguchi said he believes Moon is doing an "all-right job," but said the motivation behind the measure is not to keep him as chief justice. The senator noted that Moon was a Republican before he got to the bench.

The speculation that Bennett will be Lingle's choice has been fueled by his role as a trusted adviser to the governor. In addition, his was one of three names Lingle submitted to the White House for a lifetime tenure as a U.S. district judge here. In 2005, President Bush chose Michael Seabright, now a federal judge, from the list.

The speculation prompted Taniguchi to ask Bennett at last month's hearing about the chief justice's job.

In an interview, Bennett gave the same answer he gave to the senator: If the job somehow opened up now, he would not apply for it.

"My plans right now are, when I'm done as attorney general, to return to private practice and/or teach," he said. "But I would not even begin to speculate about what my feelings might be in two years."

Lingle's appointment would be subject to Senate approval. The Democratic-dominated Senate has rejected some of her appointments, including Ted Hong to the Circuit Court and Randal Lee to the Intermediate Court of Appeals.

But if Lingle gets the names for Moon's replacement early in 2010 and her appointment is rejected, she would be able to name another person from a list of four to six names submitted by the Judicial Selection Commission.

If the Senate rejects all of her choices, the commission would chose the chief justice from its list, according to the state Constitution. The commission's selection would not be subject to Senate approval.

Hanabusa said "it's almost positive" that Bennett will be appointed by the governor. She said one of the criticisms is that he is sometimes almost "overzealous" in representing the administration over the legislative and judicial branches. Hanabusa cited his efforts against the mandatory retirement amendment that was placed before the voters by the Legislature in 2006.

Hemmings, however, said he is a "big fan" of Bennett and applauded him for his work with prosecutors and police in pushing for legislation. "It's hard to deny his success and record," Hemmings said.

Another name mentioned is Mark Recktenwald, a former assistant U.S. attorney who was Lingle's director of the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs before the governor named him chief judge of the Intermediate Court of Appeals last year.

Hanabusa said Recktenwald is considered a good administrator and would have support, but indicated senators might wait to see how he does as the chief appeals court judge.

Recktenwald said he has been chief judge for only about 10 months and is focused on doing a good job. "I haven't given consideration to anything else," he said.

Lingle's appointment would oversee a Hawaii Supreme Court whose history includes expanding the public's rights to beaches and surface waters; recognizing the rights of native Hawaiians go onto private property for traditional religious and food gathering practices; and striking down laws the court believed infringed on the rights of criminal defendants.

In its landmark and highly controversial case, the high court issued a 1993 decision that paved the way for same-sex marriages in Hawaii. That ruling prompted state lawmakers to complain that the court was creating new law, and it led to a constitutional amendment that essentially negated the ruling.

"I continue to try to reflect what the public would like to see in a judiciary, and that is a judiciary that really interprets the laws that elected people pass rather than try to make law as a judge from the bench," Lingle said.

Lingle notes that unlike the three previous Democratic governors, she is not a lawyer who might be familiar with judicial candidates. She suggests that helps bring a fresh prospective to her judicial appointments.

Because her appointments are for 10-year terms, the judges Lingle has selected -- and will select -- will remain on the bench for years after she leaves office.

Lingle said she wants her legacy to be that the courts will be a place where people "get a fair shake."

"I think the very highest achievement you can have for a judiciary is that the average citizen of a state or of a country will get fair treatment no matter who they are," she said.

The Judicial Selection Commission reviews and evaluates applications for all judicial vacancies, and vote, by secret ballot, to select qualified nominees. Established by a 1978 state constitutional amendment, the Commission is governed by the Judicial Selection Commission Rules.

The names of the nominees are then forwarded to the appropriate appointing authority. The governor is the appointing authority to nominate judges of the Supreme Court, Intermediate Court of Appeals, and Circuit Court for an initial ten-year term. The governor selects appointees from a list of not less than four and not more than six names submitted by the Judicial Selection Commission. The commission submits a list of at least six names to the chief justice who nominates judges for district and district family court to six-year terms. All nominations are subject to confirmation by the state senate.

The Commission also determines whether a justice or judge shall be retained in office. The Commission publicizes the fact that a justice or judge is seeking retention so that all persons who might have an interest in the matter be informed of the opportunity to comment.

Comments about justices and judges seeking appointment or retention should be submitted to:

Contact Information:
Judicial Selection Commission
417 South King Street
Honolulu, Hawai`i 96813-2902
Telephone: (808) 538-5200

The Commission is composed of nine members, no more than four of whom may be lawyers. The members, who serve staggered six-year terms, are selected or elected as follows:

Chairperson
Rosemary T. Fazio	Chairperson
Philip Hellreich	Vice-Chairperson
Shelton G.W. Jim On	Secretary

Member	Term	Appointing/Electing Authority
Susan Ichinose	04/02/07 - 04/01/13	(Bar)
Frederick Okumura	04/02/07 - 04/01/13	(CJ)
Melvin I.Chiba	04/02/02 - 04/01/08	(Senate)
Rosemary T. Fazio	04/02/03 - 04/01/09	(Bar)
Thomas Fujikawa	04/02/03 - 04/01/09	(House)
Philip Hellreich	04/02/03 - 04/01/09	(Governor)
Shelton G.W. Jim On	04/02/05 - 04/01/11	(Governor)
Ralph R. LaFountaine	04/02/05 - 04/01/11	(House)
Sheri N. Sakamoto	04/02/05 - 04/01/11	(Senate)
Frederick T. Okumura	04/02/07 - 04/01/13	(CJ)

The Judicial Accountability Initiative Law, J.A.I.L., is a single-issue national grassroots organization designed to end the rampant and pervasive judicial corruption in the legal system of the United States. J.A.I.L. recognizes this can be achieved only through making the Judicial Branch of government answerable and accountable to an entity other than itself. At this time it isn't, resulting in the judiciary's arbitrary abuse of the doctrine of judicial immunity, leaving the People without recourse when their inherent rights are violated by judges.

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

NEW DISCOVERY (02-09-08): Kamehameha Schools made a “confidential” settlement agreement with the plaintiff in the John Doe vs. Kamehameha Schools case, which my former attorney, John Goemans, Esq., says, according to what he has learned from the IRS, violates the rules for a non-profit charitable trust:

Kamehameha Schools paid $7 million to settle a lawsuit filed by an anonymous student who claimed the schools' Hawaiians-first admissions policy violates civil rights laws, according to an attorney involved in the case.

Terms of the confidential settlement have been a closely guarded secret since it was signed in May just before the U.S. Supreme Court was to decide whether to hear the case.

The settlement ended a four-year effort by a non-Hawaiian teenager, known only as John Doe, to enter the Kamehameha Schools system.

Attorney John Goemans — who planned the legal action, found the plaintiff and brought the case to Sacramento private attorney Eric Grant to litigate — revealed the amount of the settlement in an exclusive interview with The Advertiser.

"The amount of the settlement is important public information that should be disclosed by a charitable institution that receives tax-exempt status from the Internal Revenue Service," Goemans said in a telephone interview.

The lawsuit challenging the schools' admissions policy was the first case of its kind to reach the doors of the U.S. Supreme Court and stirred enormous controversy in Hawai'i.

Critics of the settlement pointed out that additional legal challenges could still be mounted against the admissions policy, and news of the $7 million that the schools paid could increase the chances of new lawsuits.

Local attorney David Rosen, who made news last year by actively seeking plaintiffs for a new challenge to the admissions policy, said yesterday he is preparing a suit against Kamehameha Schools.

Kamehameha Schools, previously known as Bishop Estate, is a nonprofit organization with assets of $7.7 billion.

Grant, appearing yesterday at a University of Hawai'i law school symposium on the lawsuit, known as John Doe vs. Kamehameha Schools, declined to discuss the settlement when told that Goemans had disclosed the $7 million figure.

Kamehameha Schools' lead attorney in the lawsuit, Kathleen Sullivan, a former dean of the Stanford University law school, also declined comment.

"Terms of the settlement are inviolate," said Sullivan, also a participant at the UH symposium yesterday.

Ann Botticelli, spokeswoman for the Kamehameha Schools board of trustees, also declined to comment on Goemans' statements or the size of the settlement.

The settlement says that anyone who discloses its contents is subject to a $2 million penalty, but Goemans said he was not a party to the agreement and never signed it.

Goemans, who is recovering from heart surgery, said yesterday that he was opposed to the $7 million settlement but that "it was the client's decision" to accept it.

Goemans said an attorney representing Grant breached the confidentiality clause by mailing a copy of the agreement to Goemans last year.

Goemans added that Kamehameha Schools must disclose details of the settlement on its 2007 tax return, which is due to be filed later this year, and on annual financial reports the charity is required to file with the state attorney general's office and with the state court.

Tax returns of nonprofit institutions such as Kamehameha Schools are public records under federal law. The institution's annual financial accountings — which date to its founding by Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop in 1888 — are also open to the public.

Kamehameha operates three campuses — its flagship at Kapalama Heights on O'ahu, one on Maui and another on the Big Island — for the benefit of children of Hawaiian ancestry.

The institution plays a central role in Hawai'i society, in part because of its financial clout and in part because of its mission to educate children of Hawaiian ancestry. It is also the state's largest private landowner.

There are about 70,000 school-age children with Hawaiian blood, and 5,400 students were enrolled at Kamehameha's various schools last year. Kamehameha served 30,000 other children and adults through outreach programs and through its support of charter schools.

Hawai'i federal Judge Alan Kay initially dismissed the John Doe lawsuit in November 2003, upholding the schools' argument that the admissions policy helped address cultural and socio-economic disadvantages that have beset many Hawaiians since the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy.

The plaintiffs appealed that decision to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which overturned it in a three-judge decision in 2005. That ruling prompted protest rallies, prayer vigils and other gatherings around the state in support of the schools.

Lawyers for Kamehameha Schools then asked that all members of the appellate court review the matter and the full court reversed the three-judge panel's decision by an 8-7 vote in December 2006.

Grant then petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the case, and last May, on the eve of the high court announcement on whether it would take the case, the matter was settled out of court.

"We didn't think that there was a strong possibility (of losing) but that risk is always out there," J. Douglas Ing, chairman of the Kamehameha board of trustees, said in announcing the settlement in 2007. "There are no guarantees and there certainly were no guarantees from our lawyers that we would win the case."

Grant, the attorney for John Doe, said after the case was settled, "Obviously, a settlement is not exactly what either side wanted. But it is something both sides eventually came to terms on."

Goemans is involved in a continuing dispute with John Doe, whose identity has never been revealed, and with Grant over how much money Goemans should receive for his part in the case.

Grant received 40 percent of the overall settlement — $2.8 million — although he had to sue the plaintiff and the plaintiff's mother in federal court in Sacramento last year to collect the money, according to Goemans and federal court records.

That collection lawsuit was filed in June after Kamehameha had paid the $7 million settlement. The dispute over the payment of Grant's fee was settled and dismissed in September.

Goemans said he asked John Doe and Jane Doe for 25 percent of the total settlement — $1.75 million — but has not yet received a response.

Grant filed a separate lawsuit against Goemans in California state court last year regarding how much compensation Goemans is owed for his part in the case.

That suit is still pending, although Goemans said he believes it is groundless and will be dismissed.

Grant yesterday declined comment on the collection lawsuit he filed in Sacramento against his own clients or the related action he filed against Goemans.

Goemans said he has received $20,000 in compensation to date from John Doe and his mother and is contemplating filing a new legal action of his own against them.

Yesterday's disclosure of the $7 million payment made by Kamehameha Schools to settle a civil rights lawsuit prompted questions and anger from individuals on both sides of the schools' controversial admissions policy that gives preference to students of Native Hawaiian ancestry.

"It does seem like a lot of money. It sure would be if it was in my pocket," said University of Hawai'i law school professor Jon Van Dyke, who served as a legal consultant to Kamehameha in the lawsuit.

Van Dyke said yesterday he wasn't part of the settlement discussions and still believes the payment led to the right outcome for the school.

The settlement was signed in May just before the U.S. Supreme Court was scheduled to announce whether it would hear an appeal of the case. Terms of the settlement had been kept confidential until this week. John Goemans, an attorney for the plaintiff in the case, revealed the $7 million figure to The Advertiser.

The settlement meant that an earlier 8-7 vote by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in favor of Kamehameha's admissions policy is still the prevailing law.

H. William Burgess, a local attorney who filed legal papers with the U.S. Supreme Court supporting the plaintiff in the case, said yesterday, "Wow. The settlement was much larger than I thought."

Burgess said he still believes the case should have been heard by the Supreme Court so that legal questions surrounding the school's Hawaiians-first admissions policy were settled.

"I actually think the trustees of the Kamehameha Schools have a legal duty, when there's a legitimate legal question about what they're doing, to seek a resolution of the issue," Burgess said.

News of the $7 million payment provoked more than 500 online postings to The Advertiser that variously criticized school officials who approved the payment and the lawyers and the client who received the money.

Beatrice "Beadie" Dawson, a native Hawaiian attorney who is active in Kamehameha Schools affairs, said yesterday the settlement itself and now news of the $7 million amount "are like an open invitation for more lawsuits."

"I was very dismayed by news of the settlement last year and I was very surprised by the size of it today," Dawson said.

Hawai'i attorney David Rosen, who last year announced plans to file another legal challenge to the school's admission policy, confirmed this week that the lawsuit is taking shape but has not been filed.

He issued a news release yesterday reacting to the settlement amount that said, "The people of Hawai'i should be outraged that the trustees of Kamehameha Schools place a higher value on discriminating rather than educating."

Goemans, the lawyer who publicly revealed the $7 million figure, said he believes the settlement should be a matter of public record given Kamehameha Schools' status as a tax-exempt charitable institution.

Goemans helped bring the civil rights lawsuit against Kamehameha in 2003 on behalf of a non-Hawaiian student denied admission to the high school. The student and the student's mother, who live on the Big Island, have never been identified except as John Doe and Jane Doe.

Goemans also said the settlement is subject to review by the Internal Revenue Service and by the state attorney general's office, which oversees Kamehameha Schools' annual financial accountings filed with state Probate Court.

David Fairbanks, a Honolulu lawyer serving as the appointed "master" who must review Kamehameha's financial fillings for the Probate Court, did not respond to a telephone message for comment yesterday.

An attorney involved in a challenge to Kamehameha Schools' Hawaiians-only policy reveals the amount of a settlement

Kamehameha Schools made the first move to settle a legal challenge to their admissions policy giving preference to native Hawaiians and later agreed to pay $7 million, a lawyer involved in the case said yesterday.

John Goemans, an attorney for an unnamed non-native Hawaiian student who filed a lawsuit contesting the policy, said the charitable trust offered for the first time to talk about an out-of-court settlement last May, just days before the U.S. Supreme Court was to decide whether to hear the case.

Goemans, a former Big Island attorney recuperating in Florida from heart surgery, and Sacramento, Calif., lawyer Eric Grant, the lead attorney, represented the unnamed student and his mother.

"They (the schools) approached Eric and said we wanted to settle and we have to settle by Friday morning," when it was believed the high court was to make a decision about accepting the case, Goemans said.

He said it appeared the high court would accept their appeal of an 8-7 decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld the policy.

"They (the schools) were worried about losing in the Supreme Court," Goemans said.

Goemans said he did not know how Grant and the Kamehameha Schools arrived at the $7 million figure.

The hotly disputed federal civil rights lawsuit caused a firestorm of controversy among Kamehameha Schools supporters who believed the challenge struck at the more than century-old admissions policy and the heart of the charitable trust's mission to educate children of Hawaiian ancestry.

The confidential settlement was announced on May 14. Those connected with the case repeatedly refused to disclose the terms.

Goemans said he was disclosing the amount because he said he recently learned from Internal Revenue Service officials that Kamehameha Schools, a tax-exempt charitable trust, cannot keep the figure confidential.

"Because exempt organizations operate in the public good, you got to report all your expenses with particularity, and you cannot keep information relative to those expenses confidential," he said. "It's in the public interest to have full disclosure."

Ann Botticelli, Kamehameha Schools spokeswoman, said yesterday the settlement contained a confidentiality clause.

"We intend to honor the terms, and we will not be discussing the settlement or John Goemans' assertions," she said.

Kamehameha Schools, a multibillion-dollar charitable trust and the state's largest private landowner, was established under the 1883 will of Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop. It educates more than 6,700 students at its flagship campus at Kapalama Heights, two other campuses on Maui and the Big Island, and 31 preschools throughout the state.

Senior U.S. District Judge Alan Kay upheld the school's Hawaiians-first policy, but a panel of the appeals court in San Francisco ruled 2-1 that the practice violated federal civil rights laws. That decision triggered statewide protests and marches by school supporters.

It was an appeal by Grant of that 8-7 ruling that was on the doorsteps of the U.S. Supreme Court when the settlement was announced.

At the time, school officials indicated that the settlement calling for the dismissal of the lawsuit leaves intact the appeals court's 8-7 decision upholding the admissions policy.

But the dismissal does not guarantee that another lawsuit might surface and make its way to the high court, although it would first have to go through the federal trial and appeals courts, where the 8-7 ruling would be considered to be binding on the issue. But even if those who file the new lawsuit lose on those two levels, they could still ask the high court to review the case.

Honolulu attorney David Rosen said he has plaintiffs for a lawsuit to challenge the admissions policy. He said the settlement does not affect his case. Rosen said he expects the suit will be filed this year.

Goemans said Grant received 40 percent, or $2.8 million of the $7 million. Goemans said he is preparing to file his own lawsuit seeking to recover a "reasonable percentage" of the $7 million for his work in the case.

Goemans said he found the unnamed student and arranged for Grant to be the attorney for the student and his mother.

"I put the whole thing together," Goemans said. "But for me there would not have been a $7 million payment."

The student never was admitted to Kamehameha Schools because his case was pending. He has since graduated from high school and had been attending college, Grant said last year.

Supporters and critics expressed surprise yesterday at the $7 million Kamehameha Schools paid a student to settle a lawsuit disputing its Hawaiians-first admission policy.

One Kamehameha Schools alumnus says disclosure of the settlement with the anonymous, non-Hawaiian student will prompt questions among Hawaiians.

"I'm not happy with $7 million," said Kamehameha Schools alumnus Jan E. Hanohano Dill. "Unfortunately, that's a lot of money, and it's going to create a lot of questions in the Hawaiian community whether it was right or wrong and to continue."

Dill, also a board member of Na Pua a Ke Ali'i Pauahi, a nonprofit group whose members include students, parents, and alumni of Kamehameha Schools, said he continues to support the school's decision.

"I don't know the details, and I think that's something that has to be cleared," he said. "You settle because you want to avoid costs that would be incurred as you go forward."

He added, "I have to believe that they understood that this was something good for the Hawaiian people. ... It will be clear as things unfold whether that was true."

Dill, who is also president of the nonprofit Partners in Development Foundation, said the admissions policy must eventually be addressed and that the settlement avoids this case but does not stop other cases.

Marion Joy, former vice president of Na Pua, called the settlement a "misuse of trust funds."

"The trust is continually going to be challenged," she said. "This is not going to be the last. ... As far as settling for the particular lawsuit, it's not in the best interests of the beneficiaries (of the 1883 will of Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop)."

Honolulu attorney David Rosen, who has sought potential clients to sue Kamehameha over its admissions policy after the settlement, sent out a statement yesterday that said the $7 million settlement was used to "buy off this case."

He added that the trustees should open a campus on the Leeward Coast of Oahu and possibly Molokai where increased educational opportunities are needed.

H. William Burgess, a retired attorney and founder of Aloha for All, a group opposed to Hawaiian sovereignty, said the settlement raises questions about the proper use of the trust funds.

"Normally, trustees, if they're doubtful about doing something, they ask the court to give them instructions," he said. "Yet in this case, the biggest charitable trust, probably in the nation, instead of welcoming the opportunity to get the highest court in the land to settle it, they pay $7 million to leave it open. And it is very much open."

The Wise Old Owl asks: How much of the settlement amount came from Kamehameha’s insurance companies, and how much came from the trust funds? How much did Kamehameha Schools (and/or their insurance company) spend for defense costs in this case before they decided to settle? Who is their insurance company? Their insurance broker? Who actually signed the Settlement Agreement?

A Bishop Estate official who says he was fired last year for raising questions about irregular and possibly illegal activities has been interviewed by state attorneys ordered by the governor to investigate the estate.

Bobby Harmon served for eight years as head of the estate's insurance programs and ultimately served as president of P&C Insurance Co., a for-profit subsidiary of the $10 billion charitable trust that supports Kamehameha Schools.

> His salary for the profit-making organization being paid by the nonprofit trust in apparent violation of IRS rules;

Harmon met for 1-1/2 hours yesterday with Senior Deputy Attorney General Lawrence Goya and the attorney general's auditor, he said.

They expressed interest in obtaining a 50-page document he prepared detailing questionable and possibly illegal activities by Bishop Estate's trustees and top executives, Harmon said.

Bishop Estate, however, earlier obtained a Circuit Court injunction against the release of the document, claiming it contains confidential and proprietary information that should not be made public.

Harmon has also offered to share his papers with retired Circuit Judge Patrick Yim, who is also conducting an investigation into the management of Bishop Estate and Kamehameha Schools at the request of the probate court.

Harmon said he was fired in November after he refused to sign off on a required financial report involving the estate's contract with Marsh & McLennan Inc. as the estate's insurance broker.

He said was worried about a $200,000 annual flat fee superiors wanted him to pay to MMI because there was no accounting why it was being paid, Harmon said.

Harmon said he felt if he "looked the other way" as encouraged by his superiors, "I would be breaching my fiduciary duties to the organization."

Harmon also questioned why his salary was from the nonprofit trust when almost all his time was spent working for the for-profit P&C captive insurance company.

This appears to violate IRS rules against using tax-exempt trust funds to subsidize a profit-making company, he said.

It appeared that Bishop Estate attorney Nathan Aipa, Harmon's direct supervisor, and trustee Henry Peters wanted to maintain tight control over all insurance matters, including parceling out related legal work to selected attorneys, he said.

Estate spokeswoman Elisa Yadao has declined to comment on Harmon's allegations, but said they will be challenged in court.

Harmon's documents support his proposed settlement for what he claims was his wrongful termination by Bishop Estate. It seeks up to $1.8 million.

The use of trust funds to support Bishop Estate's various taxable subsidiaries was common, yet not reported on IRS forms as required, Harmon said.

The state Attorney General's office is conducting a criminal investigation of the purchase and operation of the RightStar group of funeral and cemetery companies in Hawai'i, according to state officials and private attorneys familiar with the investigation.

The criminal probe is separate from a civil lawsuit filed last year by the Attorney General's office that accuses RightStar officials and four local lawyers, including former Gov. John Waihee, of mismanaging more than $20 million in RightStar funds held in trust for thousands of Hawai'i customers who purchased "pre-need" funeral services and cemetery plots.

RightStar owns and operates four cemeteries: Valley of the Temples on O'ahu, Maui Memorial Park on the Valley Isle, and Homelani and Kona Memorial Parks on the Big Island.

The company purchased the cemeteries and related mortuary and funeral plan trust assets in 2001, and the state licensed RightStar to operate them in November 2001.

William McCorriston, attorney for Waihee and the other three lawyers who acted as trustees of the RightStar customers' trust funds, said he does not believe his clients are targets of the criminal investigation.

"We have informed the Attorney General of irregularities and delinquencies which had concerned us," McCorriston said. "We believe our information was the genesis of their investigation."

Attorneys for RightStar officials and Vestin Mortgage Inc., a Las Vegas-based lender that financed RightStar's purchase of the companies and filed a mortgage foreclosure lawsuit against RightStar for failure to repay $34 million in loans, said their clients have done nothing wrong. They said company officials are cooperating in the criminal and civil probes conducted by the Attorney General.

State Attorney General Mark Bennett and Deputy Attorney General Lawrence Goya confirmed the criminal investigation but would not elaborate on details of the case.

RightStar's financial problems have spawned a welter of lawsuits in state and federal court here, and involved the companies and its officials in at least one other ongoing criminal investigation, according to court records.

Most of the civil cases center on how the companies and trustees managed trust-fund assets.

The trust funds contain money from cemetery plot and funeral plan buyers that is supposed to be held in trust for the customers until they die. The funds also contain money set aside for "perpetual care" of the cemeteries.

According to state figures, the value of the trust funds stood at $63.2 million when RightStar took control of them. A year later, the value dropped to $40 million.

The foreclosure lawsuit filed by Vestin Mortgage claims that RightStar defaulted on loans that were used to purchase the companies. A state judge handling that case has appointed an independent receiver, Guido Giacometti, to run the cemeteries and funeral businesses and protect the rights of customers while the competing claims from numerous parties are sorted out.

In his two most recent monthly reports filed with the court, Giacometti said the companies have a "critical need" for additional money and are attempting to develop new cemetery plots and sell new funeral plans to increase cash flow.

"We're doing OK — sales volumes are relatively consistent," Giacometti said. "We'd like them to be higher but we inherited a company that had not reinvested in itself. There are a limited number of cemetery plots available, so we're working toward development of future areas."

Local resident John Quinores bought four burial plots for himself and his family at Valley of the Temples in the 1960s and said he's worried about his investment. After agreeing to buy the cemetery plots, Quinores later supplemented that purchase with "pre-need" plans designed to provide funeral services when he dies.

"I'm still paying," Quinores said. "I called the company a couple of months ago with some questions but the lady that answered was vague and defensive."

Giacometti said he has made customer service a top priority and also is dealing with a variety of other pressing issues, including satisfying a dozen consumer complaints filed with the state Regulated Industries Complaints Office. Also unresolved are numerous other complaints about RightStar's decision last year to sell burial plots and funeral services contracts at a discount to a company called Alternative Debt Portfolios.

That sale was an effort by previous RightStar management to raise funds, Giacometti said.

"About 2,100 cemetery plot contracts were sold, but some of the contracts had already been paid in full and should not have been included in the deal," Giacometti said. "There are also some questions about who is responsible for the funeral services that are included in some of the other contracts."

Giacometti said he's cooperating in state and federal tax investigations of RightStar as well as a separate FBI investigation of Funding Solutions Inc., a company in Stamford, Conn., to which RightStar turned for financial assistance in 2004.

RightStar "made a $250,000 payment to them in return for a loan commitment, but then never got the loan," Giacometti said.

When Giacometti asked the company for a refund, "we ran right into an FBI investigation," he said. "They are investigating Funding Solutions and principals of the company and we are cooperating in that investigation."

According to federal court records, Funding Solutions executives Leonard Kalish and Joel Pondelik were charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud in a criminal complaint filed by the U.S. Attorney's office in New York City in January.

A call to the company for comment was returned by Kalish's New York attorney, Martin Adelman, who said only that Kalish "will answer any and all official inquiries (about RightStar) when they are made."

Hawai'i Circuit Judge Sabrina McKenna ruled last month and again Friday that Vestin had the right to foreclose on RightStar, with the companies to be sold "to a licensed and qualified buyer" who would protect "the interests of consumers."

Attorney Grant Kidani, attorney for Alternative Debt Portfolios, had asked McKenna to delay foreclosure proceedings for 120 days, arguing that documents filed in another RightStar-related lawsuit, now pending in federal court here, showed both Vestin and RightStar had "unclean hands." Their relationship should be examined more closely before foreclosure takes place, he said.

The other federal court suit, first filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Delaware and now pending before Hawai'i Federal Judge Helen Gillmor, alleges that Waihee and three other local attorneys who acted as RightStar funeral plan trustees were part of a fraudulent conspiracy to "strip the assets" of RightStar.

The suit was filed against RightStar by Alderwoods (Hawai'i) Inc., which purchased the assets of the cemetery and mortuary business in a Delaware bankruptcy court sale and then resold it to RightStar in 2001.

Charges in the suit are based in part on allegations from David Jackson, a former financial controller of RightStar Hawaii Management, who charged that Waihee used his "political influence" to smooth the company's dealings with state regulators.

McCorriston, Waihee's attorney, said Jackson's allegations "are part of an effort to besmirch Waihee's and the other trustees' reputations. RightStar has gone belly-up, so instead they're pointing their guns at the trustees."

Candace Ito, executive officer of the state Cemetery and Funeral Trusts Program, also denied Jackson's allegations, saying that "RightStar did not receive any special treatment" from the state.

RightStar President John Dooley said Waihee "did nothing improper while representing the company in the licensing process. He used his abilities to assist a private business attain licensing in the state of Hawai'i in much the same way that other former governors have assisted businesses in the past."

RightStar attorney James Wagner added, "Jackson is a disgruntled former employee who was fired for incompetence."

The state has charged in its civil suit against RightStar that the company and the former trustees improperly removed about $20 million in trust fund assets in 2002, transferring the money to RightStar's operational accounts. The state said the transfers should only have been made after a full accounting of the finances of the cemeteries and trust funds had been completed and filed with the state. Such financial statements have yet to be filed by RightStar, according to court records.

The Attorney General's suit also charged that the trustees removed another $20 million in trust fund assets and improperly invested the money in a Nevada real estate venture called Vestin Fund II. That fund is managed by Vestin Mortgage, the same company that financed RightStar's purchase of the cemeteries and trust funds in the first place.

An independent expert, John Candon, has been appointed by the court in the Attorney General's civil lawsuit to examine the finances and activities of RightStar and the trust funds and to make sure the money is properly accounted for and protected.

Last year, the U.S. Securities Exchange Commission revealed that it was investigating Vestin Fund II. Vestin called the SEC probe an "informal inquiry" that appears to focus on its financial reporting to the SEC.

Vestin attorney Paul Alston said the investment has yielded a return of 9 percent interest per year and is probably one of the best investments the trustees made."

And Alston said at least some of the blame for RightStar's problems belongs with the state. "It appears that the trusts were mishandled under the state's proverbial nose, and it is only because of Vestin's complaints ... that the state has stirred to action," Alston said in a letter to Judge McKenna.

In late May, state Deputy Attorney General James Paige said in a letter to Judge McKenna that the state had attempted unsuccessfully to recover $20 million in RightStar trust money from Vestin Fund II.

Under the terms of the investment, Paige said, the fund can give back no more than 10 percent of an investment per year. At that rate, the consumer trust funds that the state wants back will not be fully recovered "until approximately the year 2015," Paige wrote.

Last week, a class-action lawsuit was added to the legal woes besetting RightStar. One plaintiff in the suit, Yahnina Hackney, repeated claims reported earlier by The Advertiser that RightStar improperly canceled her stepmother's funeral services contract after the elderly woman became sick and failed to make monthly payments to the company.

The company said in response that the cancellation was made by previous owners of the company and some of the disputed funds are still being held in trust.

Hackney said when her stepmother died, there was no money to pay for her burial. "I had to ask the state to do it," she said. "It was very sad. She was cremated. She didn't want that. I have her ashes at home."

She said she "would like to see everybody wake up and take a look at this issue. It's very important and it's something we all will have to face."

The Attorney General's office must keep its civil and criminal probes of RightStar separate and has taken steps to prevent any collaboration between the lawyers and staffers involved in two cases, attorneys said.

The separation is important because it is improper to use the threat of criminal action to advance a civil case, or vice versa.

Similar ethical barriers, informally called "Chinese walls," were erected inside the Attorney General's office when simultaneous civil and criminal investigations were conducted in the late 1990s of the Kamehameha Schools/Bishop Estate trustees and their management of the estate.

In fact, two lawsuits are still pending in state courts here — filed by former Bishop Estate trustee Richard "Dickie" Wong and his former brother-in-law, developer Jeffrey Stone — alleging that the Attorney General's office illegally used the separate civil and criminal probes as leverage to force Bishop trustees to resign.

Deputy Attorney General Lawrence Goya, who filed and later dropped criminal charges against Wong, Stone and former Bishop Estate trustee Henry Peters, is a defendant in both pending suits. One filed by Wong was dismissed by a Circuit Court judge, but that ruling is now under appeal before the state Supreme Court. The other, filed by Stone last year, is scheduled to go to trial next year.

Attorney William McCorriston, who represents four former RightStar trustees named as defendants in the attorney general's civil lawsuit said, "There's always a concern in a 'Chinese wall' situation, because there's an inherent tension between civil and criminal proceedings conducted by the same office."

Another ethical issue arises because Attorney General Mark Bennett and First Deputy Attorney General Lisa Ginoza are former partners in the McCorriston law firm.

Bennett said last week he departed from the firm long before it became involved in the RightStar case and thus has no conflict of interest in overseeing his office's RightStar-related activities.

Ginoza left the McCorriston firm in January of this year to join Bennett's staff and "has recused herself from any involvement" in the current cases, Bennett said.

"It wasn't clear that recusal was necessary but it was decided it was best for her to play no role," Bennett said.

'Watery Wall of Death' Wipes Out Dreams, Future of Kauai Families; Kauai Residents Deal with Death, Destruction Brought on by Ka Loko Dam Breach; New Ka Loko Dam Breach Action Alliance Calls for Independent Investigation

Editor’s note: This story came after a day of interviews with several people on Kauai affected by the Ka Loko Dam break, including Bruce Fehring at his home in Kilauea, Kauai. James Pflueger, owner of the dam, and his attorney Bill McCorriston, have not returned calls to Hawaii Reporter.

Kauai, Hawaii: The most difficult part of the March 14 Ka Loko Dam Breach tragedy for Bruce Fehring to talk about is the death of his nearly 2-year-old grandson, Rowan Fehring-Dingwall, who was swept away at 5:30 on that terrible morning in what Bruce describes as a "watery wall of death."

When the sun rose just an hour later that day revealing the magnitude of the destruction that more than 300 million gallons of water from Ka Loko Dam let loose upon his family and property, Bruce learned his eldest daughter, Aurora Fehring, her husband Alan Dingwall, and their son Rowan, were missing.

Also vanished when the 118-year-old dam burst above them sending a 35-foot high, 300-foot wide, violent, muddy wave down the mountainside, was his friend, Wayne "Banyan" Rotstein, who was the caretaker for the property and a partner in a new business to locally sell produce and flowers.

Missing also were three guests staying on the Fehring property. That included Tim Noonan, a carpenter who was between jobs and living on the beach, and had been invited by the Fehring family just weeks before to stay with them. And there was Christina "Sunny" MacNees, who was thrilled to be 8 months pregnant, and excited about marrying her fiancée, Daniel Arroyo, the following weekend. Those who knew MacNees say she lived up to her nickname "Sunny" with a sparking personality and radiant features, and was ecstatic about starting a new family.

Standing on what he feels like is his personal "Ground Zero" where his home once stood, and now there is only rubble and a hint of a cement foundation, Bruce recounts the tragedy and loss. Nearby, there is a twisted white lawn chair he has never seen before, one of his rowing shelves 25-feet up in the branches of a tree, and there are piles of more than 100-year-old trees uprooted when the "tsunami from the mountain" came down upon Kilauea town and decimated everything in its path. Just below is a sea of large copper-colored boulders exposed when the raging river viciously scarred his property. Where there was a clear-flowing stream, is now an angry river of mud racing down the mountain.

And most tragic, eight people including Sunny’s soon-to-be-born baby, who in one moment vanished from his home. The home he built 19 years ago to keep his five children and grandchild safely together -- a home he opened to friends -- on land he used to farm and grow produce they sold to support the family.

Bruce’s anger and grief over what happened has led him, and several other property owners living along Wailapa Stream who were impacted by the Ka Loko Dam breach, to form the Ka Loko Dam Breach Action Alliance. The 35-plus members want to ensure that the public and law enforcement investigating the breach remember it affected real people, destroyed precious property, homes, and crops, and tore apart families forever.

The members are a wide collection of people including farmers, a retired judge, a real estate broker as well as a representative for mega movie star Bette Midler, whose property sits just across from where Bruce’s family and friends were swept to sea, he says. Bruce says, "We reached out to more people along the stream, and about 80 percent of them joined our alliance."

Most importantly, the Alliance members want to make sure that whoever is responsible for the dam breach -- quite possibly James Pflueger, who owns most of the land on which the dam sits -- is held responsible and legally liable for the havoc reaped on so many lives.

Many of the members believe it was Pflueger’s alteration of the dam and spillway that caused the reservoir to fill up with more water than the dam was ever intended to hold, water that Pflueger wished to used for recreational purposes.

These are accusations Pflueger adamantly denies in statements issued through his public relations firm and attorneys, but that is under investigation by the state attorney general and Army Corps of Engineers, whose investigators say they cannot find even a hint of a spillway.

Many of the people in the new Alliance are supporting one another, and that has helped tremendously, Bruce says. They have shared their concerns with one another, such as how the value of their property has plummeted, including property that was on the market to sell, yet their county property tax assessments that just arrived in the mail are record high and do not reflect that drop in value. Their privacy is gone, because many tall broad trees that grew along the Wailapa Stream are now vanished. There is a massive loss of soil and there are piles of rotting wood and debris everywhere. And they’ve lost their homes, but not their mortgage, and the crops they grew and sold to pay their mortgage and other living expenses are decimated.

An active real estate broker, Bruce says that there is a massive impact on the value of properties directly affected by increased noise, loss of soil and plantings and in his case, the stigma of a death scene.

In addition, there is tremendous impact to the environment all along the mountainside and down to the ocean, Alliance members say. "This is an unprecedented disaster for reef, estuary and environment," Bruce says, noting much of the property and ocean in the wall of water’s path, are under inches of silt and debris.

And there are many historical Hawaiian monuments, rare Hawaiian plants and even burial sites that also were taken out in the destruction, he says: "There is significant damage -- there is a total loss of evidence and archaeology of Hawaiian habitation in this valley."

The Alliance also plans to get active politically so the members can help ensure a tragedy like this never happens again. Part of the problem, members say, is the way dams are ranked as "high risk" or "low risk". The rating is not assigned by the condition of the dam after it is inspected, rather the national rating is set by how many people would die, or how many businesses would be swept away, if the dam breached. In Ka Loko’s case, it was rated "low risk" because there were few people living below, Bruce says, and the Department of Land and Natural Resources Director Peter Young, agrees with Bruce’s assessment.

The Alliance members also want to make sure the investigation into the dam tragedy is investigated thoroughly and properly. Members are concerned that the state attorney general’s office should not be involved in the investigation because the state Department of Land and Natural Resources is a state agency, and Peter Young, its director, admitted Ka Loko dam was never inspected even though state law requires inspections every 5 years.

Alliance members say they are concerned the state will not fairly and completely investigate its own failures, and Monday, the Alliance will hold a press conference at their "Ground Zero" and call for an independent investigation. Congressman Neil Abercrombie has requested a federal investigator take over, but U.S. Attorney Ed Kubo told Hawaii Reporter on Friday that this is unlikely to happen because the federal government has no jurisdiction. State Attorney General Mark Bennett says he will cooperate if the federal investigators take over, but says his office is able to objectively handle the case and "let the chips fall where they may."

Through the last three weeks, Bruce learned how fleeting life can be -- and how in a moment, the most precious gifts in life -- much-loved family -- can be ripped away.

Besides dealing with tremendous overpowering grief, and helping his family, including four other children, ages 12 to 22, deal with the death and destruction of family they so loved, Bruce also is facing serious financial troubles. The insurance company says it will not cover the damage to the Fehring property and homes, because it is classifying the dam breach as a "flood" rather than a dam breach. The Fehrings don’t have flood insurance because they do not live in a designated flood zone.

Unsettling is the fact that Bruce, who regularly attends grief counseling with his wife, Cindy, has never found the body of his grandson. His son-in-law was the first victim discovered, and his daughter Aurora, the last.

Several key legislators promise to use the conclusions of
a special report to reform state laws on dam safety

Several key lawmakers who received Godbey's two-volume report yesterday agreed and pledged to use his work to change state laws on dam safety.

Rep. Mina Morita, a Kauai Democrat whose district includes the disaster site, said she will use Godbey's work to introduce legislation.

"I think it's really important," Morita said. "The report was really clear in pointing out shortcomings of the (current) statute," which was written in 1987.

Kokubun said he expects to hold an informational briefing about the report by the end of the month, where lawmakers can ask questions about it.

"I think he did a very good job, a commendable job in laying out the history" of the Ka Loko incident, Morita said.

"He was walking a fine line because of the numerous civil lawsuits that are out there right now, in presenting the facts as he saw them," Morita said.

Morita also complimented Godbey for giving some context on Hawaii's aging agricultural water systems. The sugar industry used to fund upkeep of complicated upcountry water systems, but with that industry almost gone, the systems are falling into disrepair and neglect, she said.

With sugar's "huge economic engine" no longer paying for many of Hawaii's rural water systems, "I really do think we (in Hawaii) have reason to be concerned," Godbey said. Another factor to consider is how earthen dams are susceptible to earthquakes, he said.

An estimated 1.6 million tons of water rushing from the Ka Loko Reservoir before dawn on March 14 killed seven people, destroyed two homes, damaged a state highway, and left debris and wrecked lands behind.

Godbey was chosen by state Attorney General Mark Bennett from a field of five attorneys picked by state lawmakers. Some had not wanted Bennett in charge of the investigation because he was formerly a law partner with an attorney representing James Pflueger, owner of Ka Loko Dam.

"The Legislature wanted someone who would do a thorough and diligent and thoroughly independent job," Bennett said yesterday, adding that Godbey's work was "completely independent; I had no input into the contents at all."

Bennett said yesterday that his separate criminal investigation of the Ka Loko Dam incident is ongoing.

Nearly a year after the fatal breach of Ka Loko dam, there is a clear indication no state employee will be criminally prosecuted in connection with the deadly disaster.

Mark Bennett, the Attorney General of Hawaii, told KHON2 News, “There is no evidence of any kind that I have seen that any employee of the state of Hawaii is criminally responsible for the deaths of anyone."

State attorney general investigators and hired experts have poured over Jimmy Pflueger's land to learn whether un-permitted construction triggered the collapse.

Pflueger's lawyer, William McCorriston, took the mic at a senate hearing and took a shot at the state land director, sitting just feet away.

“Why do we provide the Director of Land and Natural Resources,” William McCorriston asked, “who some might say is criminally responsible for nonfeasance, not doing his job with regard to dam inspections, with absolute immunity?”

Dam inspections fall under the land department, and McCorriston says like the leader of FEMA after Hurricane Katrina, DLNR Chief Peter Young should go.

KHON2 News asked Peter Young about that.

“Mr. McCorriston is trying to deflect attention away from his client,” Young said. “We trust the judicial system.”

The attorney general, also watching while McCorriston testified, went farther in defense of Young and his land department.

"There's no evidence that any state employees are guilty in the homicide of these individuals," Bennett told KHON2 News.

Yet Bennett says the decision whether to prosecute Pflueger or others is still pending.

“I believe when we get to the middle of this year,” Bennett said, “we will be very close to a final decision of whether to take this case to a grand jury or not.”

The legislature must fund the continuing criminal and civil liability investigations. McCorriston was making his case to those lawmakers.

“Why do these few people have a special pass,” he asked. “Why do they get a whitewash of their responsibility?”

Although they allowed McCorriston to vent, there's no indication lawmakers will turn down the attorney general request for $2 million to continue his investigation.

However, Judiciary Chairman Clayton Hee told KHON2 News his committee might examine whether the immunity from certain liability afforded to the state land director and dam inspectors, should be withdrawn.

The Hawaii Department of Education is suing a California financial services company over the disappearance of nearly $2.3 million of contributions by department employees into their retirement funds.

The lawsuit, filed in California against Plan Compliance Group, accuses the company of fraud, negligence and breach of contract.

It alleges that Walnut Creek, Calif.-based PCG, and in particularly company President Francis W. Reimers, “took approximately $2,280,194.60 and converted the same to their own use.”

PCG had been handling the transferal of employee contributions into tax-deferred annuity funds for the department since 2002 until October. The funds are just one type of investment option available to department employees, and not all employees are affected....

The University of Hawaii, PCG’s other Hawaii client, has reported similar problems. Officials there have estimated that $420,000 of university employee funds remain unaccounted for.

The office of state Attorney General Mark Bennett, which has been investigating PCG’s conduct since the allegations came to light, refused comment on the matter. UH officials did not return calls....

“We are deeply concerned at this apparent breach of trust and will work with the attorney general to do everything possible to recover the missing money,” schools Superintendent Pat Hamamoto said in a press release. She declined further comment.

Both university and education department officials say they have stepped in to make the payments missed by PCG and that employees will suffer no losses.

When it first bid for the Education Department contract in 2001, PCG touted itself as a nationally recognized leader in tax-sheltered annuity administration, the lawsuit said.

Yet department officials no believe that PCG was merely a “shell, instrument and conduit through which Reimers conducted business,” often mingling PCG funds with his own personal assets, the lawsuit stated.