Friday, November 16, 2018

2011 - Had me again. Morgan Gell, Psychopath





To:  Morgan Gell

The POA was issued to Jay, not yourself. If Jay turned this over to you then he did so without consulting me, which was his fiduciary obligation.  I now know, as I did not before, that failure to provide reports to me was also a breech of that same fiduciary obligation.  While this was a legal matter I trusted both of you because you are my daughter and because of your many apologies for your past behavior and your assurances to me of your continuing love. 
The POA has been revoked. You will receive a copy by mail, tracked and expedited, sent today.  It would be wise not to wait for that moment.
  Any action taken by either yourself or Jay would clearly indicate further violations under taken in attempts to cover up your previous abuses.  It sorrows me to say this, but it is the bald truth. 
You are no longer acting for me and all your previous actions are now subject to examination for these causes.  Send the named materials to my appointed agent, who is well apprised of this background and the facts.  All the parties you told me were notified or with whom you have discussed this matter are now being contacted to verify their correspondence with the two of you. Since these actions were taken on my behalf I have an absolute right to obtain copies from those various sources.
Charles Lincoln, my agent to receive these materials, is being copied on this. The first thing I knew about Charles was his disbarment from his own words. We all make mistakes.  Some  people recognize this and change.  If you expected to surprise me, you failed. 
You are not entitled to any information about myself or my activities, now or in the future. This letter serves as your second notice to send the material to Charles Edward Lincoln, III, at the address already provided, repeated here, since your record of successful delivery of materials is well known, raising further questions on your veracity.   A copy of this letter goes to Sassoon Saleem Sassoon as your prevarication has been of concern to both of us.
Office of Charles Edward Lincoln, III
9595 Wilshire Blvd Suite 900
Beverly Hills, 90212

You are obligated to turn over to my named agent all materials related to the GHS settlement, including all tax related issues, either those entrusted to you or generated in relation to that matter by anyone, including you or Jay, officials or employees of the State of Delaware, Department of Defense, correspondence with Dr. Larry Gell, and all other agencies, governmental or otherwise, and individuals falling within these guidelines.  None of this is your property. 
The IRS will receive a copy of the now revoked POA and an explanation of what has transpired along with other materials and documents if I am not completely satisfied. 
All” includes any recordings you made of me without my knowledge and any correspondence, emails, records, or other material from such individuals as Anne Fisher, who is also being notified. 
A POA is not a license to use my documents and other materials for your own profit. Jay, you told me, was undertaking this action because of a sense of family obligation which he shared with yourself, not playing dialing for dollars.
As part of his fiduciary duties Jay was obligated to provide accurate reports on his progress. Instead, he refused to talk to me and you lied about such elemental points as having filed a law suit.  You have also slandered me to an undisclosed number of people, now including, but not limited to, Charles Lincoln.
According to Jay, this reported to Charles Lincoln, no law suit was ever filed or even planned, an astonishing deviation from your verbal reports and, by Lincoln's report, citing my cousin, Melinda Pillsbury Arnold, I am a psychopath. Melinda has already refuted this statement and would so testify.

Since Jay acted as a Trustee or Executor for the estate of Van Hughes, who he well knew, held a power of attorney from me on the same matter, you have a responsibility to send those papers and recordings as well.  Hughes also had a fiduciary responsibility in this regard and violated this, refusing to turn over those materials when I revoked his POA. If Lisa Hughes, the widow of Van Hughes, has been put in possession of these, I will so inform the court in South Carolina. We can involve the court in North Carolina with these questions as well.  Lisa Hughes is being contacted as well. 

Those materials are mine, not Hughes', and not yours as they were generated on my behalf while Hughes was acting under my POA for the purpose of the GHS settlement. If any of these materials are not received you will be reported to the requisite authorities, including your local court.

What are you asserting you 'own?'  Be specific. I am curious to hear. You certainly do not own the photos which I trusted you to receive and send on to me and which you stole, to speak plainly.  The photos are not mine, but a trust, necessary to carry out the work Father laid on my shoulders.  If Father knew what you have done he would disown you.  You well know he asked me to act for him because he could not do so himself.  He told me I was his only hope of justice for his father.  I take this very seriously. 
Send the photos now or I will file complaints with the appropriate agencies.
Using the trust relationship documented by the POA, for extortionate purposes, for instance your attempts to get me to testify under penalty of perjury, to issues I told you I had not myself, witnessed, are documented.
I have no interest in continuing a relationship with you. Your constant lies to me, your abusive, deceitful behavior,  and your calloused attempts to manipulate your disabled brother,  are reason enough.  Every other one of my children, your siblings, warned me never to trust you again.  They were all right. I was wrong. 
These causes, and your slanders and libels, make any relationship impossible.

Sincerely, 

Melinda Pillsbury-Foster

P.S.  I kept all of the notes and cards we have exchanged since we started talking again.  This is one example, included in the time line to explain why I forgave your past transgressions and again, wrongly, trusted you.  I have every right to publish on these issues.

Monday, November 12, 2018

September 26, 2007 - Jay trying to get Melinda to start talking to them.

Why Don't you Give Morgan a Call Friday Morning?

  • Jay Gell <jayegell_01@yahoo.com>
    To:the.melinda@yahoo.com
    Sep 26, 2007 at 9:32 PM
    Morgan may like to hear from you.

    We have moved web photos to http://www.flickr.com/photos/jay-gell/ and will be uploading newest ones over this weekend.

    Jay.

    704-259-5408

Wednesday, November 7, 2018

September 26, 2007 - Email from Jay Gell to Melinda

[Flickr] Jay Gell has invited you to join!
Yahoo/Family Justice
  • Jay Gell (via Flickr) <jayegell_01@hotmail.com>
    To:the.melinda@yahoo.com
    Sep 26, 2007 at 9:30 PM
    Hi Melinda,

    Jay Gell would like to share some photos with you!

    I want to share my photos with you since you may be
    interested in at very least seeing the your grandchildren
    my "stypid" EX-sister threatened. see other email
    seperately.

    Signing up for Flickr is free, and takes less than a
    minute. Just click here:


    See you there!

    Jay Gell


    p.s. If you are not interested, just ignore this email.
    Flickr won't bug you again and there's nothing special you
    have to do.

March 6, 2005 - Correspondence Jay Gell - Melinda Pillsbury-Foster

M. P.F. <justice42freedom@yahoo.com>
To:jayegell01@netzero.net
Mar 6, 2005 at 10:30 AM
Hello Jay,



I have spoken with my attorney friend in California,
who advises me to write you this letter so as to make
it perfectly clear to you, that you are to immediately
cease and desist all and any further communications
with any third parties, or toward any third parties
about me or my personal or business matters.  This
means anyone and everyone, with whom you have come
into contact with, arising from our coincidental
meeting.



If you should choose to continue our relationship on a
mother-in-law and son-in-law basis then fine.  I will
accept your apology - you accept mine. We can let
bygones be bygones!  All other offers, plans,
involvement or relationships income opportunities or
dealings are off!



You have forced me to consider taking measures to
protect myself, and my financial interests, and you
have already been notified that you are not, and have
never been actually appointed as my power of attorney.
Your friend was given that role, and I am considering
the possibility of replacing him with someone else as
well.  Any further or continued representations of
such will be dealt with as a criminal matter,
whereupon I will file criminal charges for fraud,
misrepresentation, extortion , engaging in the
practice of law without a license in California and
North Carolina, and spousal abuse.



Put your emotions aside and way the consequences, if
you think you will have a family life interjecting
yourself between me and my daughter you are wrong!  If
you think you will prevail by maliciously using
extortion, threats and retaliation against me posing
as my personal representative you will pay a price
beyond what you might imagine.



I know that you have been listening in on phone
conversations with Morgan, and I am placing you on
notice that any continued interference manipulation or
control with my open communications with my daughter,
and any continued unhealthy or abusive practices with
my daughter will result in my direct intervention with
the appropriate legal authorities which will unlease
all kinds of unwanted controversy for you and your
cause.



My offer will be open until the noon tomorrow March 7,
2005, where you are to respond to me with your
decision of acceptance or rejection, of my peace
offering, and we continue our relationship as mother
and son-in-law, otherwise you will leave me no
alternative but to take steps to protect myself, and
the interest and long-term wellbeing of my daughter!



I trust that you clearly understand my point, as well
as my position of power in this matter!



Regards,


Melinda Pillsbury-Foster


Fwd: sorry about drug dealing pee stealing dyke's threats2
Yahoo/Sent
  • jayegell_01@yahoo.com
    To:themelinda@pillsbury-foster.us
    Sep 3, 2006 at 5:12 PM
    Note: this email is in response to an article called
      John Fund and the Truth:  On Trial in New York
      published at
      
      Melinda,
    The hate email and threats to your life or mine, Morgan's, Jacob's, or Gabriel's lives are not to be taken lightly. Bonita Gell is the one. We have been advised you need to file a complaint wherever you are. Bonnie has already threatend Morgan twice here. She is a pyscotic drug dealer who has many connections of the worst kind. It would appear she is a huge John Fund fan and may be involved in a conspiracey with him to continue harassing, threatening, slandering Morgan. Bonnie is "working (a cover job)" as craft services in the film (comercials) industry locally. I need your info on the IP where the post was made from. email Morgan at morgangell@yahoo.com for recent pictures of the boys.

    Jay E. Gell.

October 7, 2002 - Morgan Moves in on Fred


Fred was a Libertarian acquaintance of mine who offered to let Morgan stay with him when we told him about the attempt on her life in New York.  I apologize, Fred, for inflicting Morgan on you.  If I had known I would never have done so.  If I had known I also would have had the abortion my doctor urged on me.  You see, he knew the Barteaux family and was the physician who had the care of Richard, Morgan's father.  Richard Lee Barteaux

Subj:
Fwd: MORGAN 
Date:
10/7/2002 12:15:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From:
To:
Sent from the Internet



>From: "badalli fred"
>To: fredbadalli@hotmail.com
>Subject: MORGAN
>Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 18:54:59 +0000
>


Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: Click Here


Received: from 63.164.145.33 by lw4fd.law4.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
    Mon, 07 Oct 2002 18:54:59 GMT
X-Originating-IP: [63.164.145.33]
From: "badalli fred" <fredbadalli@hotmail.com>
To: fredbadalli@hotmail.com
Subject: MORGAN
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 18:54:59 +0000
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html
X-Stn-Info: 


 Sorry, but I want her out and gone as soon as possible!!! November will not wait! I am also tired of the past somewhat insulting, paranoid e-mails that exaggerate and distort what I am about. She is no longer welcome in my house. I'm tired of this soap opera, I don't trust her, she's a loose cannon and I am soon evicting her. I do not need any tax write-offs! etc. I do not need any money! I did not ask her to move in. I do not need her help to keep my place functioning. I only need her to leave!
   I want my privacy back. I am very uncomfortable having her around. I am having a very dear female visitor over tomorrow for a week and I don't need any stress or aggravation from her. You should also know that I was so pissed off with her while I was gone that I almost flew back to kick her out. Whatever problems she has is her/your problem. I'm sick and tired of the whole situation. If she has emotional problems, than you can get her some therapy. If she fears for her life than she can buy a gun.
   My mind is made up. I want her out. We can do this peacefully or I will involve the local authorities. 
    Fred

Monday, November 5, 2018

Note to my then attorney Alison February 11, 1998


Note to Alison written by Melinda Pillsbury-Foster

            As you requested, here are the details, as I can remember them, regarding the incident witty the UN-invitation to the Libertarian Convention issued this morning by Laura McFadden.  Her telephone number is (562) 428-8113.  The P.O. Box used on the flyer was, 17121, Long Beach, CA 90807.

            I called Laura on Monday night to make reservations for myself and my daughter, Dawn Pillsbury, to attend the banquet for the Libertarian Party of California.  Gene Burns, someone I have known for fifteen years, on and off, is the speaker and I thought it would be fun to go.  I did not know when I decided to attend that my estranged husband, Craig Franklin, would also be attending.
            I had made arrangements to see an old friend, Dolores White, on Sunday morning for brunch at the hotel.  I had called other friends to see if we could get together. 
            I gave Laura my credit card information, asked about the program and rang off.  Then I forgot the matter. 
            This morning I received a call on my answering machine informing me that my reservations would not be honored and that I was ‘requested’ not to attend the four day event.  I was shocked.  I had been a state officer in the LPC for six years, served as County Chairman in Los Angeles for two terms, managed many campaigns and opened and funded two different officers over the years I was active.  I had also been a candidate for 20th State Senate, receiving nearly 5% of the vote in a four way race in 1982. 
            I have many friends in the LPC and wanted to renew old friendships.  I also wanted to promote the non-profit foundation which I founded, The Women’s Institute for Individual and Political Justice.  I am presently working on a book outlining the philosophy of the organization. 
            I called an old friend, Jack Dean, who does fundraising for the National LP.  He also has done work for the Women’s Institute and is presently putting up a web page for us, domain name, Salem’s voice.  Jack said he would call around and find out what was going on. 
            A few minutes later I received a call from Mark Hinkle, presently serving as state chairman of the LPC.  He had talked to Jack.  He told me that he had been told, on good authority, that if I came I would, “disrupt the banquet.”  I would, “pass out literature,” and, “have a violent confrontation with my estranged husband.”   
            I asked him who had said this.  I pointed out that he had known me for many years and that I had never acted violently or inappropriately at any event.  In fact, I hadn’t even been rude when I had been provoked.  I asked who had made these remarks.  I said that I knew it was Michael Emerling Cloud.  He did not disagree.
            Mark and I talked.  I explained why I was coming to the convention.  He was obviously nervous.  He had been badly alarmed by someone.  I am sure that this person is Michael because Michael made some of the same remarks to my step-son, Scott, who was shocked at the suggestion of something so out of character in me. 
            Mark re-invited me.  I told him that I had no desire to talk to Craig.  That I would simply ignore his existence. 
            We said our good bys and I hung up. 
            The conversation occurred on February 11, 1998 between 11 and noon. 

Wednesday, October 31, 2018

November 20, 2001 - Email from John Fund to Teranto, James, Miniter, Brendan


The Accusation Morgan Made Up Phony Email Addresses as John

Fund in his deposition claimed the email account, johnfund2001@yahoo.com, was never his.  He accused Morgan of making up and using the account.  The fact is Morgan started the account for him in August 2001, at his request, leaving the password unfilled on the computer in their home.  John then put in the password and started the account. Morgan never had access.  

Here below you see Fund refer to the account in an email exchange with James Taranto, asking him to send the copy to him after it is edited at two addresses, his "wjs  address" and this one: johnfund2001@yahoo.com.  

Here is the article as it appeared the next day. 

From the WSJ Opinion Archives:

-----Original Message-----
 From: Fund, John
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 9:21 PM
To: Taranto, James; Miniter, Brendan
 Subject: Political Diary

 Can you e-mail final copy to
 johnfund2001@yahoo.com as well as my wsj
 address? Thanks.

 Prince of Darkness Sheds Some Light

Bob Novak, a syndicated columnist for 38 years and a fixture on CNN for two decades, looked just a tad uncomfortable receiving the National Press Club's award for lifetime achievement last week.
Bob has seen enough Beltway awards dinners filled with flattery in his time to be leery about being the subject of one. But then the roasting of the man Washington
journalists have dubbed "The Prince of Darkness" began and Bob began to enjoy himself. There's nothing like creating a role for yourself and then having your peers recognize you for being good at it.

But in addition to poking fun at Bob's tough-guy image, the dinner speakers also recognized the talents that have made Bob's "Inside Report" the best shoe-leather "reported" column in America. Bob may have passed his 70th birthday, but he outworks most journalists two generations younger than he is. I should know. I became the first reporter that Bob and his late partner Rowland Evans ever hired back in 1982, and both of them always outdid me both in savvy AND stamina.
 The roasters -- Jack Germond of the Baltimore Sun, Fred Barnes of the New Republic and Mark Shields of PBS -- poked gentle fun at Novakian foibles, especially his passion for following basketball teams on the road and then finding a convenient political story in whatever city he was in. They also
effectively lampooned the writing style he and Rowly Evans perfected -- an insider argot that constantly referred to "secret memos" and "little-noticed meetings" took on major policy and political significance.
 An hilarious sendup of a "lost" Bob Novak column prepared for the Press
Club dinner can be found at the Weekly Standard's website (subscription required)
Mark Shields joked that Novak really wasn't as important as he thought he
was in Washington: "After all tonight's Press Club banquet room is the only one in town without a metal detector." As he said that, I looked around and noted that while the room was filled with interesting people, no elected officials or cabinet officers were in evidence. In part that was because Congress had already cleared out of town for the weekend and the war was no doubt occupying Bush officials, but the observation nonetheless held. Bob is a fine journalist, but
not one to cozy up too close to politicans, the stray exception such as Jack Kemp not withstanding. Bob isn't a Republican, he's a tough reporter who does his
own roasting of people on both sides of the aisle.

 But he's also of an old school that recognizes how blessed he has been to
have had a chance to have a career in which he can tell people what he thinks. When Bob stood up to give his response to the "roasters," he thanked his family and the people who took a chance on him during his career. He also took time to recognize the print and TV outlets that paid his bills -- "I know who I work for, and it isn't the government."

Bob finished up by having some fun at the expense of the many sources for his column who were in the audience. He noted that he had learned one important thing in his 43 years in Washington: "There are two kinds of people in this town. Sources...and targets, and you better make up your mind which you are." But in reality there is a third kind of person: readers and viewers. There remain more than enough of those, both in Washington and all over the country, who appreciate Bob Novak to keep him a valuable political tip-sheet and provocative influence on American journalism for years to come.







Thursday, October 18, 2018

Notes of Interest on Craig (Child Porn) Franklin


2000 - January 24th – Petition to Court in Santa Barbara
From Dewey and Todd to Judge Anderle Case No. 233136 transferred to Case No. 222675
Charges of conspiracy

2000 – July – Letter to Creditors sent because of nonpayment of support by Franklin.
(see letter)

2000 - August 4 – Tried to exercise 100 of my shares. Was told I could not do so.
(see letter)

2000 – December 20th – Deposition of CRAIG FRANKLIN , taken at 9:10 a. m., Wednesday, 20 December 2000, at 1430 Chapala Street, Santa Barbara, California, before Mark McClure, C.S.R. 12203, Certified Shorthand Reporter in and for the State of California.
Present: Todd Porter, counsel for Melinda Pillsbury-Foster, Jacqueline Misho, counsel for Craig Franklin.
From page 10 of the document:
“THE WITNESS: Let me read the title of it, please.
I am producing a document entitled “Green Hills Software., 1996, Employment Agreement Stock-Option Plan, and Stockholders Agreement.” There are 15 pages to the agreement, and three pages appended to it, one page of which is the stock-option exercise form, and two pages of which are entitled, “Certificate.”
BY MR. PORTER:
Q. What you produced – does it include a copy of your signature which you just provided to me and I will have marked as Respondent's 5?
(Respondent's Exhibit No. 5 was marked for identification, a copy which is attached hereto.)
THE WITNESS: There is no signature on the document that I produced.
BY MR. PORTER:
Q. Did you produce a copy of the document which contains your signature?
A. No, I did not.
Q. Am I going to get a copy of that today?
MS. MISHO: We don't have that document. If you read the trial transcripts and the depo transcripts you would know that we are not in possession of that document. We never have been.
MR. PORTER: Have you made any attempts to retrieve that document?
MS. MISHO: Do you mean as in a thorough search and enquiry with respect to all of the things in his possession and in the possession of his attorneys, accountant, employees and agents?
MR. PORTER: Including Green Hills Software, the company that he is the vice president of.
MS. MISHO: That's not his employee, his attorney, his agent or his accountant.
BY MR. PORTER:
Q. Mr. Franklin, did you keep a copy of the document which you signed? In other words, the page that you signed? Did you keep a copy of that?
MR. PORTER: The page of this 9 –when he signed the stock-option agreement in 1996, the one referred to in Mr. Speich's memorandum, I'm asking whether or not he kept a copy of what he signed.
THE WITNESS: By “a copy,” do you mean a Xerox copy?
BY MR. PORTER:
Q. Yes, a Xerox copy or a photocopy.
Yes?
A. No.
Q. Who did you hand that agreement to?
A. My best recollection is that I handed it to Dan O'Dowd.
Q. Do you recall when you handed it to Dan O'Dowd, approximately?
A. Not at this moment.
Q. What is your best memory of what was contained – strike that.
You drafted the amendment?
A. I did.
Q. Did you draft it on a home computer?
A. I drafted it on a computer at Green Hills Software.
Q. Okay. Do you have a copy of that amendment?
A. I have just testified the answer to that question.
Q. No, I don't think that you did. I think I asked you whether or not you had kept a photocopy of your signature page.
My question to you now is whether or not you have a copy of the amendment that you prepared?
A. I don't know.
(There follows a long and tiresome attempt to avoid producing the draft revision of the Stock-Option Agreement written by Craig Franklin. Eventually Franklin says,)
THE WITNESS: The Amendment, to the best of my recollection, dealt with the issue of how to arrive – excuse me – of describing a process, or a formula, for computing a number of stock options that I would eventually be allowed to exercise. And the – this is as I understand it –other employees were going to be subject to a formula that said take your annual salary –let's say $70,000 a year. All right, you get 70,000 shares. They vest over a period of time, according to certain rules and so on, and the option exercise price is a dollar.
I thought my long years of service to the company should be taken into account, so the amendment had one section or paragraph or sentence that used the same formulas as other people's – take my annual salary, and so on – and then it has another section which said that my previous years of service would be taken into account somehow.
I mean, I don't remember the exact wording, but my intention there was that – that they be taken into the – into account. This is in effect a proposal from me to Green Hills. That's pretty much all I remember.”

2001 – February 22nd – Transcript from Deposition of MORGAN PILLSBURY, taken Santa Barbara, CA by Consolidated Reporters Network. 50 pages. (excerpt from page 30 of document.)
Text:
“A Well, when we started talking again I told her everything. I told her about what Craig had done, how he lied to protect stock during the divorce, how he changed the stock options around. And I don't think she believed me, so I made a recording of it.
Q And the reason you made a recording of it is because your mother would not believe you because of lies you told in the past?
A Uh-huh.
Q What lies had you told in the past?
A Too many to name.”

The law suit for (1)Battery, (2)Fraud (Active Concealment), (3) Conspiracy to commit Fraud, (4) Declaratory Relief, was filed in Santa Barbara by Todd A. Porter, SB # 48993 in

2001 – March 30th - Settlement Agreement signed between Pillsbury-Foster, Green Hills Software, Daniel O'Dowd, and Craig Franklin.

2003 - August 18th - 23 PM1:18:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time – Email from Todd Porter to Laura Dewey regarding falsification of income by Craig Franklin.