In the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for the County of Clackamas
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
mber: 0604 0456;
In the matter of the Marriage of: Charleen E. Ellis Petitioner and Graham Howard, Ellis Respondent ))))))))))))
C a s e N u
Affidavit
in Support of Motions to Quash Subpoena and to Un-Freeze Accounts.
I, Graham H., Ellis; Respondent here-in, and being fully aware of the civil and divine penalties for perjury, do solemnly Affirm, declare, & make known through this Affidavit; the following: I, Graham H. Ellis; am a mature 60 year-old man, of sound mind, and of significant knowledge of worldly and spiritual affairs. This Affidavit document is composed with special reference to the above numbered Divorce Case between myself, as Respondent in this case, and my wife, Charleen Ellis, the Petitioner in this case. I have been in this marital relationship with the Petitioner in this case, for 39 years, since the 4 th of February, 1968. This Respondent joins with the Petitioner, Charleen, in seeking the dissolution of this marriage. Our only points of disagreement seem to be over possession and ownership of our house, and a number of financial concerns. As indicated in the title of this document, this Affidavit is composed in efforts to Support accompanying Motions to Un-Freeze All of my personal bank accounts, and to Quash a Subpoena of my accounts with the A. G. Edwards company. The Frozen bank accounts and Subpoena of my financial records seem to have been authorized by way of a “Mutual Temporary Restraining Order” (here-in-after “TRO”), which was sought by Petitioner Charleen and her attorney Simes. Due to this Respondent's “Distressed Living Conditions”, I was not informed of the first TRO hearing, and so i was not able to present my side of the controversy, or defend against accusations made against me there-in. This affidavit and accompanying motions and orders are here-by attempting to cure that injustice. A large part of the reason why the two accompanying Motions are necessary for this court to approve, if justice is to be served here-in, is because the Petitioner in this case, Charleen, has submitted Multiple Instances of "False Testimony" before this court, in her Sworn document entitled "Affidavit in Support of Motion for Mutual Temporary Restraining Order". That "Affidavit" document of hers was signed by her on the 27th day of December, 2006; and File-Stamped in this case twice, on the on the 2nd and 5th days of January, 2007. This Respondent here-by responds to the "False Sworn Testimony" presented by that Petitioner in her “Affidavit” document, as follows:
Response to Petitioner's Affidavit:
Page 2, Item 4: Petitioner Charleen asserts that her affidavit's attached “Exhibit 1” document, which begins at its top with the words “George Lebsack Info”, is “Indicating his (this Respondent's) intention to transfer and secrete marital funds ...”. The notes in this “Exhibit 1” document do contain this Respondent's own personal hand-written notes. These notes were taken by my-self from my own personal conversation with one “George Lebsack”, who is an accountant who was helping me to structure my personal financial Page 1 of 4; Second Affidavit in Support of Motions to Quash & Un-Freeze
affairs so-as-to avoid incurring additional financial liabilities from the Federal Internal Revenue Service (here-in-after “IRS”). This Respondent absolutely did Not compose this document in any effort to “Secrete” any “Funds” what-so-ever, as the Petitioner Falsely Claims in her Sworn “Affidavit” document. The full purpose of this “Exhibit 1” document was for assisting me in remembering the details of how Mr Lebsack was informing me of details of how best to structure my financial affairs so-as-to avoid the IRS taking money from my personal IRA account. Please note the opening sentence “New Law 20% roll-back withholding ...”, and the ending sentence which reads in part: “Otherwise IRS Keep the money for two years ...”. These sentences obviously indicate that the “Intent” of the full body of this text is Designed to assist this Respondent in his concerns about a “New Law”, which this Respondent believed was threatening to enable the IRS (to) Keep the money” of this Respondent, should this Respondent's personal financial posture be structured un-wisely, and should there be a “roll-over”. There is No Logical Way that these sentences can be construed as evidencing any scheming by this Respondent to hide funds from the Petitioner or this court. Petitioner Charleen submitted Sworn Testimony that this document was “Indicating his intention to transfer and secrete marital funds”. That is “False Sworn Testimony”. It is indicative of the Petitioner's arrogant disregard for serious proceedings before this court, and her sloppy disregard of Standards for submitting Sworn Testimony before here-in. Another technically False Statement contained in Petitioner's Affidavit's Item 4, is her wording which indicates that Petitioner's “Exhibit 1” document was related to “Marital Funds”. This document was focusing on this Respondents Personal “IRA” account, and it had nothing at all to do with co-mingled “Marital Funds”. This point is more fully explored in the following Item 5 discussion. Page 2, Item 5: Petitioner Charleen submitted Sworn Testimony in her Affidavit that this Respondent had “marital funds held at the following institutions: Washington Mutual ...” and others. This is a “False Sworn Statement” because There Are NO "Marital Funds" co-mingled under the control of Either this Respondent or of Petitioner Charleen. On the one hand, Petitioner Charleen has her own funds and accounts, including her own Peers account; and on the other hand, this Respondent has his own funds and accounts, including his own A. G. Edwards” accounts, which include his own “Brennan Trust” account, and “IRA” account. Ever since the “Brennan Trust” was created, it has Never been a “CoMingled Account” in this marriage. There have Never been any "Co-Mingled Funds" in this marital relationship. All Funds have Always been Kept "Separate", and under the Private Control of each of us. Petitioner has all-ways had her own Personal Funds in her Separate Accounts, and this Respondent has allways had his Personal Funds in his own Separate Accounts. There is absolutely No Legitimate Reason what-so-ever to recognize the funds of ether of these parties to be "Co-Mingled Funds" or as "Marital Funds".
The House:
We bought our home in 1975, through a low-income “FHA” loan. After many years, our contract was picked up by a private vendor, which was eventually sold to its present holder “Chase Manhattan”. Chase Manhattan used a system of “in-house escrow account scheduling”. This changed ownership of the contract and different account scheduling process was asserted by Chase Manhattan as legitimizing a change in the structure of the loan, so that they increased the monthly cost of our house payments to more than double what they had been previously. Over the years, I had created an escrow account for the taxes and property insurance, and small emergencies. For the approximately 31 years which we have lived in this house, this Respondent has allways assumed the full responsibility for the bill-paying process.
Hardships on Respondent:
This Respondent is Physically "Disabled", as recognized by the “Social Security Administration” of the Federal Government of this nation. I have a condition called “Fiber Mialga”. I also have had spinal surgery on two vertebreas in my thoracic and shoulder-blade area. This resulting spinal condition now prohibits me from sleeping on either side of my body, or these vertebreas will displace, and cause
esophagus and other problems. When I am forced from my accustomed environment, as occurred in this case, my health condition responds by increased levels of pain, sleeplessness, anxiety, and over-all health deterioration. I am 60 years old, disabled, and I simply not continue to survive under these kinds of hardship abuses. I believe these hardship conditions are seriously shortening my life span. Petitioner Charleen has had me ousted from my home of approximately 31 years. She has frozen my bank accounts, and obstructed my access to sufficient funds to carry on any resemblance of my normal living levels of comfort. I am presently sleeping on a couch of one friend, or on the living room floor of another friend, simply because i can not afford a motel or hotel room, or apartment. I can not afford to hire professional legal help with this divorce case. These are all un-reasonable and un-fair hardships which have been placed upon meas the direct result of the so-called “Mutual Restraining Order” which Petitioner Charleen and her attorney Simes have abusively moved this court to have placed against me, all through the here-in evidenced False Sworn Testimony of the Petitioner in this case, Charleen. This Respondent believes that Petitioner Charleen has not had any “Freezing” of her bank accounts, or of her “Peers” account. I certainly have not sought to obstruct her access to her private financial assets. Petitioner Charleen has purposefully removed me from her school-district family-plan health-insurance policy. It is grossly un-fair that her accounts remain “Un-Frozen”, while the accounts of this Respondent are “Frozen”. Petitioner Charleen is in fairly good health. She is able to hold down regular employment and income. Even if her accounts were “Frozen”, she would still have income from her job, and she would be able to cover here day to day expenses. This Respondent is not so fortunate, and similar burdens on both of us affect each of us differently. This is true because this Respondent has seriously poor health which makes him very physically sensitive to these physical hardship conditions. This Respondent has very little financial income to live off of, in comparison with the significant income which Petitioner Charleen has to live off of. The effects of this “Freezing” of this Respondent's bank accounts is a Grossly Un-Fair and dis-proportional burden to place on him. Petitioner Charleen earns approximately $14,000.00 per year through her job with the school-district.
Background:
Prior to our marriage, during the 1960's, this Respondent worked for a subsidiary of “Suburban Water”, located in West-Covina, California; called “Pacific Coast Utilities”. The function of this subsidiary company was, among numerous other enterprises, to keep the accounts separate between the oldest and most defunct water systems if the “Suburban Water” company, from the newer ones. Thee operation of “Pacific Coast Utilities” was to be managed by its President, one “Roger Ellis”, who was this Respondent's father. “Pacific Coast Utilities” also had strategic government contracts which required top security clearance. This Respondent and the Petitioner were married in February of 1968. We settled in Santa Rosa, where this Respondent began working in the retail grocery industry. Our son was born in August of 1969, and our daughter was born in 1973 or 1974.
Conspiracy:
This respondent has been active in a “Core Group” of Political and Legal Activists who are actively seeking to address what we perceive to be significant problems of corruption in the legal court system of this state. Amongst this “Core Group” which this Respondent has become intimate with, are First: Roger Weidner, Second: Wayne Lott (aka: Jesse Lott), Third: Ed Snook, owner and editor of the newspaper “The U.S. Observer”. Other people who are (or recently have been) involved in this “Core Group” are Pamela Gaston (deceased) and Wilbur Gaston, Marvin Harper, Leroy Arnet, Carlos Lucarios, Mike Rinkus (deceased), and some others. In about the year 2000, this Respondent was told by one of the above-named members of this “Core Group”, the following words: “Your problems with your wife will never go away”. After many months of my observing the situation, it became clear to me, that, your wife, the Petitioner in this case, was having
an extra-marital affair with a prominent member of the above-named members of this “Core Group”. During the last few of the 8 years of my efforts in trying to heal this marriage, there have been multiple attempts on my life by that prominent member of this “Core Group”, who has become involved with my wife, the Petitioner in this case, in their extra-marital affair. Further, my wife, the Petitioner in this case, has actively worked with that prominent Core Group member, in their mutual attempts to instill fear in me, intimidating me, and to murder me. They have worked together in their conspiratorial efforts to obstruct my access to and ownership of my home, and to alienate me from my financial assets. The Petitioner, Charleen, is an adulterous individual who has schemed with her powerful adulterous partner to engage in murder not only of myself, but also of other individuals. I admit that I do not have the physical evidence to prove this assertion; but on a spiritual level, I know it is true. I have confronted her about this very issue, and by way of her smug smirk and evasive answer, I have become absolutely certain that she and her adulterous partner are intimately involved in these evil deeds. This evidence has lead me to the further firm belief that they both have engaged in attempts to murder, and probably that they have completed murders, probably on numerous occasions. I really do seek this divorce, because I am in serious fear of my life so long as I remain any where near this woman, and her adulterous partner. Yet I believe that it is not fair that I should be required to submit to their pillage and plunder of my home and my financial assets, merely in order to have the privilege to continue living on this planet free from the terrorizing influence of her and her adulterous partner. (This affidavit has been prepared in a slightly Rushed manner, and it may be re-submitted in an Amended and expanded form, in the near future.)
Conclusion:
Any person concerned with this matter; including Charleen or her attorney; may call me to talk to me in person at any reasonable hour of any day. My message phone number is given below. I will promptly place return-calls in response to any good-faith phone messages. I, Graham H. Ellis, here-by solemnly affirm up-on my own personal honor, that I am signing this Affidavit on my own free will, that I am a responsible adult, that I am competent to testify under oath, and that if called upon to Testify in any Court or Deposition Proceeding concerning the matters contained herein; that I will do so. I have personally read all elements of this Affidavit, and I completely know the full contents there-of. I Solemnly Affirm before Almighty God that All the Statements contained in this Affidavit are True and Correct, to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. _____________________________________________ Graham Howard, Ellis; Co: Charles B. Stewart; 19164 Barrington Avenue; Sandy Oregon [97055] 503-668-5091 (message) U.C.C. 1-207; Without Prejudice Date: 17-January-2007
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On this 17th day of January, 2007; the above signatory, "Graham H. Ellis"; did personally appear before me; and being duly Sworn on Oath did Affirm his written words contained here-in to be True and Correct, and immediately there-after he did Subscribe is Signature to this Affidavit document. ________________________________________ Charles Bruce, Stewart Notary Public in and for the State of Oregon, residing in: Sandy Oregon.