goodall motion for forensic document examiner
Post on 14-Apr-2018
218 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/29/2019 Goodall Motion for Forensic Document Examiner
1/12
123
4561
B
9101t-t213141516771819202t22232425262728
Samuel H. SloanAdministrator with Will Annexed ofEstate of K. Michael Goodall46t Peachstone TerraceSan Rafae]. CA 94903415-419-59804115-349-6116samhsloan0grmail. com
Estate of K. Michael Goodall-against-
'James Raymond Hastingsand
Bank of America, N.A.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIAFOR THE COUNTY OF I'IARIN
EXAMINATTONHearing Date:Time, Y,3O q--Department: d
l,lAR'l 9 2012
IFUtllgl!)FEB 2 \ 2012
- Kn4-rutrI.IEiR, Court Executive Of,EcerltARnr Coti\Ty suPrruon Co-unr4,:5. Bon4 Deputy
Case No. PR 1100596MOTION FOR EttsPARlEEr ORDER TORELEASE LODGED DOCUMENTSPURPORTED TO BE THE ORIGINALWILLS DECEDENTS KENNEFT F.COODALL A!{D RACHEL A. GOODALLrOR FORENSIC DOCUMENT
Sam Sloan declares:1. I am the Administrator with Wil-l Annexed of the Estate of
K. Michael Goodall. I have personal knowled.ge of the matters setforth herein and, if called upon to testify, could and wouldcompetently testify thereto.
2. This estate is concerned with the authentici-tY of threedocuments all purportedl-y signed on the same date of August 24,1994. These three documents consist of \\Pour O\rerz wills
Motion for Forensic Document Exannination
-
7/29/2019 Goodall Motion for Forensic Document Examiner
2/12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
purportedly signed by Kenneth and Rachel Goodall on August 24,
1994 and a trust document purportedly signed by both of them also
bearing the same date.
3. I believe that these documents are all forgeries or are
otherwise not authentic. The basis of my belief is that it was
virtually impossible for Kenneth F. Goodall to have signed these
documents on that date of August 24, 1994. He was extremely ill. He
had been ill for at least two years but his condition had gotten
much worse. He had just survived an operation for esophageal
cancer. He had a feeding tube inserted in his abdomen. A witness
who visited him in the hospital with his son Mike and wife Rachel
is prepared to testify that he was on life support, was unconscious
and it was recommended that he not be awaken. The forger has
changed his testimony several times as to where these documents
were signed, first starting that it was in his office, then in his
home, then in San Anselmo. We are prepared to prove that he was in
none of those places. Most importantly, the witness to both of
these wills states vehemently that she never signed these documents
and would never have signed these documents. Her husband and
daughter agree with her that they would have been involved and that
she absolutely would not have signed these documents. Finally, it
is just inconceivable that Col. Kenneth Goodall would have written
his only son out of his will just 17 days before he died,
Motion for Forensic Document Examination
-
7/29/2019 Goodall Motion for Forensic Document Examiner
3/12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
considering how devoted the father was to his son and how devoted
his son was to his father. There is a handwritten statement in the
ring binder left by Kenneth F. Goodall that states, I have never
encountered a lawyer who did not leave me feeling poluted
afterwards. I despise them as a class and as individuals. It is
thus inconceivable that on his death bed he would knowingly sign a
document that virtually took all rights away from his only child
and gave them to a lawyer.
4. As to the motivation of the forger, he was at that time an
employee of Bank of America. These documents took the role of back-
up trustee away from Security Pacific Bank and gave it to Bank of
America, of which he was the manager. This has enabled him to earn
administration and legal fees in the amount of several hundred
thousand dollars since that time. Needless to say, all of these
funds will have to be paid back if these documents are determined
to be forged.
5. In order to determine whether these documents are forged
or altered or that they are mere copies, I have agreed to retain a
Forensic Document Examiner who is vastly and eminently qualified in
this field, having worked with the FBI and other governmental
agencies to determine forgeries. He is David S. Moore. He has a
laboratory located at 9010 Barrhill Way, Fair Oaks, California
Motion for Forensic Document Examination
-
7/29/2019 Goodall Motion for Forensic Document Examiner
4/12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
95628. This laboratory contains highly sophisticated devices such
as microscopes that easily enable him to determine if a document is
forged or not. These devices cannot be effectively transported out
of the laboratory environment. Therefore, I am asking this court to
order the release of these documents directly to him as the
Forensic Document Examiner. I will of course not handle the
documents myself.
6. David S. Moore is a forensic document examiner, with
offices located in Fair Oaks, California. He has more than thirty
years of document and investigative experience, including
assignments with the Crime Laboratories of the United States Army,
the United States Postal Inspection Service, the Las Vegas
Metropolitan Police, and the California Department of Justice. He
has received extensive training regarding handwriting
identification, ink and document analysis, and examination,
reflected in courses from the United States Army, the United States
Secret Service, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the American
Academy of Forensic Sciences, and the California Criminalistics
Institute. He has been certified as a "Diplomate" of the American
Board of Forensic Document Examiners since 1978. From 1999 to 2002,
He served as one of the Directors on that Board. He has published
numerous articles in the field of forensic document examination in
the Journal of Forensic Sciences, including lie Electrostatic
Motion for Forensic Document Examination
-
7/29/2019 Goodall Motion for Forensic Document Examiner
5/12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Detection Apparatus (ESDA) and its Effect on Latent Prints on
Paper", March 1988; "The Importance of Shading Habits in
Handwriting Identification: A Case Study", January 1983; the
"Evaluation of a Method to Detect the Site of Rubber Erasures by
Powder", October 1981. In addition, he has presented numerous
papers at meetings and conferences of the American Academy of
Forensic Sciences, the American Society of Questioned Document
Examiners, the International Association of Identification, the
Southwestern Association of Forensic Document Examiners, and the
Southeastern Association of Forensic Scientists.
7. He has presented numerous classes on questioned document
subjects to federal, state and local law enforcement officials,
both government and private attorneys, as well as to bank and
insurance personnel.
8. He has testified as an expert in the field of questioned
documents in justice, municipal, and superior, federal and military
courts and administrative hearings in excess of 700 times in more
than 20 states throughout the United States, including California.
9. In order to conduct a proper forensic document examination
of the original questioned wills and trusts in this instant case,
Motion for Forensic Document Examination
-
7/29/2019 Goodall Motion for Forensic Document Examiner
6/12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
it is his professional opinion that the following tests may be
necessary.
a. Visual examination;
b. Microscopic examination;
c. Photographic examination;
d. Ink examination;
e. Handwriting examination;
f. Indentation examination; and
g. Any other non-destructive examination necessary to
determine the authenticity of the questioned document.
10. All proposed examination will be entirely non-
destructive to the document and will be conducted in a manner so as
not to compromise future additional or confirmatory examinations or
testing. Additionally, the original document will not be altered or
changed by any of the proposed examinations.
11. These types of examinations are necessary to evaluate
the genuineness of questioned documents. An ink examination allows
him to analyze the inks used in the documents and draw conclusions
about the use of different inks and to detect whether alternations
and/or interlineations have been made. Indentation examination
permits him to draw conclusions about whether certain documents
were together when they were originally created and also to
ascertain whether there is other information contained on the
Motion for Forensic Document Examination
-
7/29/2019 Goodall Motion for Forensic Document Examiner
7/12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
documents in the form of indentations that may provide insight into
when the document was created and under what conditions. The other
examinations requested may enable him to draw conclusions about the
timeframe in which the document was created and about the
genuineness of the document.
12. It is important that he conduct the examination of the
questioned documents at his laboratory using specialized equipment.
The indentation examination, the ink examination, the fluorescence
and luminescence examinations require the use of laboratory
equipment. For example, the microscope that he uses is a
stereoscopic trinocular microscope that is not readily portable.
The video spectral comparator (VSC) that he uses for ink evaluation
is also not readily portable. Furthermore, it is often imperative
to strictly control lighting conditions during an examination; this
can be done in a laboratory setting, but often cannot be done
elsewhere.
13. The various examinations that I have listed and the
equipment that he proposes to employ during the examination of the
questioned documents are routine in cases of this nature. Failure
to examine the questioned document in a laboratory setting, with
proper instrumentation, may result in loss of valuable evidence
that would directly address the issue of the document's
authenticity.
Motion for Forensic Document Examination
-
7/29/2019 Goodall Motion for Forensic Document Examiner
8/12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
14. The wills are on file at the Marin County Superior
Court. Kenneth Goodalls will is number W001916 and Rachel
Goodalls will is number W001919.
15. We are also seeking forensic examination of the trust
documents. There are three known trust documents. They are:
A document entitled The Goodall Trust and dated September
12, 1990.
A document entitled Declaration of the Goodall Trust and
dated August 24, 1994.
A document entitled Second Amendment to Goodall Trust and
dated January 19, 1999.
16. We believe that the documents dated September 12, 1990 and
January 19, 1999 are genuine but that the document dated August 24,
1994 is a forgery. We want all three documents examined by the
Forensic Document Examiner, David S. Moore. The problem is that
these documents are not in the files of the court. They are in the
possession of James R. Hastings and/or Bank of America and/or Guide
Dogs for the Blind, Inc. who refuse to let us see them. We want
Motion for Forensic Document Examination
-
7/29/2019 Goodall Motion for Forensic Document Examiner
9/12
1234561
o
91011L213I415161"7
181920272223242526272B
this court to order.these three documents to be turned over to,thesarne Forensic Document Examiner.
IilHEREFORE, for all of the reasons set forth aLove, this courtshould order that the Wills of Kenneth and Rachel Goodall filed inthis court as will number }IOO1915 and will number I[OO1919 be turnedover Lo David S. Moore, Forensic Document examiner andit should order that the originals of Goodall Family TrustDocuments dated September L2, 1990, August 24, 1994 and.]anuary 19,1999 be handed ower to Dawid S. Moore for Forensic Examination.
I declare under penalty of perjurl, under the laws of theState of California and the contents thereof are true and correctto the best of my knowledge and belief.
DATED: Februaxy 24 , 2OL2
Motion for Forensic Document Examination
-
7/29/2019 Goodall Motion for Forensic Document Examiner
10/12
123
456
I9
1011L213L415L61718t9202t22232425262728
Sam Sloan declares:I hawe read the Motion for an
a Forensic Document Examiner fi].edunder trrenalty of perriury under theand the contents thereof are trueknowledge and belief.
DATED: February 24, 2OL2
Verification:order to turn over documents toin this matter, and I declarelaws of the State of California
and comect to the best, of mY
Motion for Forensic Document Examination
-
7/29/2019 Goodall Motion for Forensic Document Examiner
11/12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICEI hereby state that I am not a party, I am over 18 years of age andI served a copy of this motion and the exhibits attached thereto tothe following:
James R. Hastings1003 3rd Street
San Rafael, CA 94901
Bank of America
1000 4th St.
San Rafael, CA 94901
Gary D. Rothstein
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP
One Embarcadero Center, 30th Floor
San Francisco CA 94111
Roy Hoppe
461 Peachstone Terrace
San Rafael CA 94903
Frank Thornally
461 Peachstone Terrace
San Rafael CA 94903
Julia Bentley LemonsApt. 308
12800 Marion Lane W
Minnetonka, MN 55305-1368
Surviving Sibling of Rachel Goodall
Robert Bentley
Bradford Village #504
906 N Boulevard Street
Edmond, OK 73030
Surviving Sibling of Rachel Goodall
Helen Beth Bentley Perry
7926 Praver Drive W
Jacksonville,FL 32217
Surviving Sibling of Rachel Goodall
Motion for Forensic Document Examination
-
7/29/2019 Goodall Motion for Forensic Document Examiner
12/12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Clenda Fern Bentley Zinar
4536 Chatman Street
The Colony, TX 75056
Beverly Gale Bentley Young2316 Trenton
McKinney, TX 75070
Vickie Bentley Hankins
14580 NE 6th
Choctaw, OK 73020
Jeffrey Bentley
4701 N Douglas Boulevard
Spencer, OK 73084
Chad Everett Bentley
1609 Teepee Trail
Kingsland, TX 78639
Jeanette Goodall Phillips
152 S llth Street
Salina, Kansas 67401
Kristin KaneUniversity of California
Berkeley College of Engineering
College Relations
208 Mclaughlin Hall #1722
Berkeley, CA 9472A-1722
Guide Dogs for the Blind
Mr. Thomas Horton
Planned Potential Beneficiary
Giving Director
Guide Dogs for the Blind, Inc.
350 Los Ranchitos Road
San Rafael, CA 94903
Motion for Forensic Document Examination
top related