Anthony Miner O'Connell, Trustee


1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97
(Plant confusion and conflict pattern)

The CPA Joanne L. Barnes and the Attorney Edward J. White did this accounting in 1992. They never have to explain it.

The accounting trail 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 is a very simple example of an accounting entanglement. It entangles the Estate accounting with the Trust accounting. It's uncanny how good this simple example is as a guide to recognizing the complicated dynamics. The patterns are the same. It even shows how the Commisioner of Accounts Office and the Court, are used to cover up the accounting, and virtually destroy someone trying to expose the accounting.

An accounting entanglement as the term is used here is the intentional planting of confusion and conflict in the accounting. Whoever controls the entanglement (the accountants) controls the people and assets that are entangled. Small numbers are used to make them appear unworthy of attention, as if the issue were the amount.  The issue is not the amount. The issue is that they entangle and coverup.

The accounting trails at bk467p191 are covered with entanglements using small numbers. If you can recognize the dynamics in the clear and simple example 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97, you can recognize the same dynamics in the complicated entanglements. The patterns are the same.

1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97

The Commisioner of Accounts approved these three items. That means he approved the accounting trail 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 three times. In the Estate accounting, the Commissioner approved the 816.00 and the 659.97 on March 20, 1993, at Book 467 page 192:

"Int fm Harold O'Connell Trust  .......................................... 816.00"
"Debt fm Harold O’Connell Trust  ...................................... 659.97"

In the Trust accounting, The Commissioner of Accounts approved the 1,475.97 on October 4, 1993, at Book 480 page 1768:

"Payable to the Estate of Jean M. O'Connell ...................$ 1,475.97" 

Below: The amount reported to the IRS on the K-1 should be the same as the amount reported to the Court. But the CPA Joanne L. Barnes, who did the accounting for the Trust and the Estate, reported $816.00 to the IRS and $1,475.97 to the Court. Because $1,475.97 was reported to the Court, I had to pay $1,475.97.

The Attorney Edward J. White, makes it appear that I, the CPA's client, is responsible for her accounting:

"2. The K-1 filed by the Trust showed a payment of $816.00 in interest to the estate. You sent a check in the amount of $1475.97 to the estate. What was the remaining $659.97? Do I have this confused with the tax debt/credit situation which ran from the Third Accounting?"
(Attorney Edward White to Trustee, Anthony O'Connell, May 19, 1992)

The public should know that the CPA and the Attorney are not held accountable for their accounting.

One indicator of the significance of 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 is the degree that the accountants who created it, reported it, approved it, framed me with it, don't recognize this accounting trail or any accounting trail for these numbers. History suggests that no one in the Commissioner of Accounts office, in the Court, in the Fairfax County establishment, or in the Virginia establishment, will ever, ever, ever, recognize the accounting trail 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97.

My trying to get the Commissioner of Accounts and the Court to expose 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 is used as a justification to remove me as Trustee.

"30. Anthony repeatedly and unsuccessfully challenged the Commissioner's determination and requested, inter alia, that the Court and the Commissioner of Accounts investigate a debt of $659.97 that he alleged was owed to the Harold Trust by Mrs. O'Connell's estate. In these proceedings, the Commissioner stated, and the court agreed, that there was no evidence to support Anthony's claims that a debt existed and, if so, that it was an asset of the Harold Trust."
(From the Complaint against me prepared by the B&K law firm, filed on on August 30, 2012.)

To get to the bottom of item 30 above, look at my actual 12th Trust account about this $659.97 before it dissappeared after it was received by the Commissioner of Accounts Office. Compare it to the false version the Commissioner prepared and sent to the Judges.

An accounting entanglement similar to 1,475.97 - 816.00 = 659.97 can be used as an invisible wedge. For example, if I accepted my sister's check to reimburse me for the real estate tax I paid on her behalf, it would create an accounting entanglement, because her advisers had her make out her check out, not to me, but to "County of Fairfax"

"14. For many years, Jean sent payment to Anthony for her share of the real estate taxes on the Property. Beginning in or about 1999, Anthony refused to accept her checks because they were made payable to "County of Fairfax." Anthony insisted that any checks for the real estate taxes be made payable to him individually, and he has returned or refused to forward Jean's checks to Fairfax County. Under the circumstances, Jean is unwilling to comply with Anthony's demands regarding the tax payments."
(From the Complaint against me prepared by the B&K law firm, filed on on August 30, 2012.)

It is the cruelest thing for the establishment to remain silent while innocent families are being torn apart to cover up for the accountants who victimize them. The only protection families have is to learn to recognize patterns like this before it is too late.

When I can't get my sister to make her reimbursement check to me made out to me; when I can't get her to go against what her advisers want, is it realistic to expect that I could get her to sign a sales contract or a deed against what her advisers want?

http://www.canweconnectthedots.com         (Best reference)
http://www.tucsonva.com                   (How big and protected are they?)