In June 2010, native Dallas resident, Robert Kam, age 60, was diagnosed with Stage IV Pancreatic Cancer. In Feb of 2011, Robert Kam completed an irrevocable trust with the benefits made known to all heirs. At that time all the assets, except for a small house keeping bank account, were signed over to the Trust and under the full control of the Trustee. All parties agreed that Robert had “mental capacity” at this time and the Trust reflected Robert's wishes.
By early March, 2011, Robert Kam's health significantly deteriorated. He had lost complete use of his Kidneys 4 months earlier and required frequent dialysis to remain alive. He was totally blind from Glaucoma in one Eye and had limited vision in his second eye with the use of a coke bottle thick lens. He had a valve inserted into his stomach 2 months earlier to periodically remove fluid build up, his liver had limited function, and he was on an “unlimited prescription of narcotics” for pain control. During the entire month of March 2011, Robert Kam had no idea which planet he was on from the narcotic intake. He was unable to walk without assistance and continually wore diapers. He required 24 hour care and had an attention span of 2 minuites. The M.D. Anderson Pancreatic doctor who reviewed the Baylor medical reports for an upcoming trial confirmed that Robert Kam lost mental capacity the first week in March 2011.
Page 1
In early March 2011, sensing Robert Kam had lost mental capacity, Robert Kam's girlfriend at the time contacted her attorney David Pyke and initiated changes to the active, fully funded, fully agreed to, irrevocable trust that added her adult chidren as beneficiaries and significantly increased her 6 figure benefit.
At the first meeting between Pyke and Robert Kam on March 11, 2011, Pyke admitted that Robert Kam was too ill to work with and sent him home.
Pyke completed the first Amended Trust on March 17, 2011 with the sole assistance of his client thru email and phone calls..
At the alleged signing of the “Amended Trust”, Robert Kam did not have mental capacity as he did not recognize that Pyke had omitted Robert's sister, Carol Kam, as beneficiary. A subsequent handwriting investigation confirmed that the signatures of Robert Kam were forged. There was no video recording of the alleged signing in Pyke's office. 7 hours later, the Trustee's wife caught the omission of Robert's sister as a designated Heir. The Trustee contacted the girfriend that night by phone and she confirmed that she would have her attorney, Pyke, correct the error.
Robert Kam's measured blood pressure reading at Baylor Hopsital on March 18, 2011 was 60/44 when he passed out in his wheelchair.
Five days later, Pyke created the second amendment to the Trust by adding Carol Kam back in as a beneficiary for $ 10K , exactly identical to the original, active, full funded, fully revealed, irrevocable trust created by Robert Kam at a time when all agreed that Robert had capacity.
Robert Kam passed while being loaded into a car for Dialysis on March 28, 2011. The heirs were not notified of Pyke's Amended Trust until the funeral 4 days later.
Page 2
Robert's youngest sister, Carol Kam, lived within a few miles of Robert Kam in East Dallas and they visited frequently. She was well aware of the creation of the original, full funded, active, irrevocable trust created by Robert Kam at the time he had capacity and knew that this was his wish for his estate.
After the funeral, she researched the conduct by Pyke, confirmed that the Trust Amendments were improper and notified the other heirs and all Family members of Pyke's misconduct.
In retaliation, Pyke then instructed the Trustee not to pay her $10,000 inheritance.
One of Robert's sons was concerned that Pyke's Amended Trust severely reduced the inheritance his father promised him and initiated a suit in July 2011 after negotiations with Pyke failed to reach a settlement. As Carol remained unpaid, she joined her nephew's suit to demand payment for her $10,000 inheritance.
A rational professional Attorney would review this situation and immediately pay off Carol as her benefit was undisputed in either scenario and had no effect on the Estate and then focus on a mediated settlement with the Nephew. Pyke however, is devoid of good professional judgement, denied to pay Carol, and intentionally chose to keep the keep the conflict inflamed.
The Nephew's suit had a simple focused request to the Court: Select the original, fully funded, active, fully disclosed, irrevocable trust, created by Robert Kam when all parties agreed he had capacity and disallow the two Amendments to the Trust, created by Pyke and the girlfriend, with no notification to any other heir, just prior to Robert's passing, after he had lost capacity.
Page 3
Between July 2011 and March 2013 multiple hearing were held in Dallas Probate Court #3 [ Judge Michael Miller]. Miller was intimately aware of all the issues and in March 2013, the trial was set for July 2013 in Dallas Probate Court #3 with Miller presiding.
A pre trial meeting, 7 days prior to the start of the trial, as scheduled by Miller, was held in Miller's office between James Fisher, Attorney for Pyke and the Trustee and Mr Alfonso, attorney for the Nephew and Carol Kam.
At this time, James Fisher introduced his medical expert, a 79 year old geriatic psychiatrist whose clientele was limited to individuals over 65 with Alzheimers. Fisher was unable to obtain testimony from any Pancreatic Oncologist to confirm Robert Kam's capacity in March 2011 at the time Pyke Amendments were created. Even though this submittal was late per court rules, Mr Alfonso did not object as Fisher's Expert was of no value to the Case.
Upon completion of the meeting by Miller, Mr Alfonso was dismissed. Unknown to Afonso, Miller and Associate Judge John Peyton* immediately held a conference to discuss the case and the recognized that Pyke was in “deep shit” for his conduct. Miller instructed Peyton* to take over the trial and “do what it took” to protect Pyke. Fisher was notifed of the change and both Fisher and Peyton* were clearly instructed not to have Miller's “footprint” on any document. Miller was running for re election the next year and he wanted “plausible deniability” for the upcoming judicial fraud in this case.
Carol's attorney was never notified in any format of this change by the court and Peyton* showed up as jurist 7 days later in Miller's Court.
The 3 day trial went as expected:
1]The M.D. Anderson Pancreatic Oncologist flew in from Houston and *
Certified as incompetent and removed as a Jurist by the State of Texas
Page 4
confirmed Robert's loss of Mental Capacity the first week in March and confirmed the rapidly decreasing health of Robert through out March to his passing on March 28, 2011. She confirmed that Robert Kam did not have mental Capacity on March 17, 2011, the date of the first Amendment.
2] When presented a state promulgated DNR [Do not Resuscitate] Form allegedly produced in Pyke's Office on the same day that the first Trust Amendment was originally signed, the M.D. Anderson Oncologist confirmed that the signatory was not Robert's attending physician and the signatory was not on any Medical Record. We later confirmd that the signator on the DNR was by a Dr Robert Beard, who was licensed as a Pediatrician and was an aquaintance of the girlfriend.
3] Robert Kam's older brother, who was sole catetaker for Robert Kam from March 19 to March 21, 2011, confirmed that Robert Kam had an attention span never exceeding two minutes during this entire period.
4] All parties confirmed that Carol Kam was an undisputed heir for $10,000 from Robert's Trust and the Second Amendment by Pyke. This was Robert's wishes and that she had not received a penny of her inheritance even though over two years had passed.
5] As expected, the 79 year old Psychiatrist whose sole practice was Alzheimer's patients over 65 year old, was of no value. He had never treated any patient for any type of cancer and admitted that he did not review all the medical records.
6] Pyke's two paralegals testified that although they signed as witnesses to Beard's signature on the DNR per Pyke's instruction, they admitted that Beard was not in Pyke's office on March 17, 2011 and that they had never seen Beard in Pyke's office.
7] The defintions of capacity for a will is recognition of one's heirs and the related benefits. The definition of capacity for a Trust is more stringent as
Page 5
Page 5 one has to recognize the heirs, the benefits, and also all the assets of the Trust. Robert Kam confirmed to all that he did not have mental capacity on March 17, 2011 as he did not recognize the omission of Carol Kam, his sibling, as an heir. This is an UNDISPUTABLE FACT that Robert Kam did not have capacity on March 17, 2011.
8] The Defense had no video, no proof of capacity, and no proof that Robert negotiated any revision to the original Irrevocable, Fully Funded, Fully activated Trust he created with full knowledge of all beneficiaries on Feb 15 2011 at a time when all parties agreed that he had “capacity”.
The Sole ruling that Peyton* was charged to make in the case was to determine which documents the Trustee was to follow in the dispersement of the Estate;
A] The original Irrevocable fully funded, active, fully acknowledged trust, created by Robert Kam which all parties agreed he had capacity at the time it was created.
Or
B] The two Amendments to the Trust created solely by Pyke and his client without the knowledge of the other heirs at a time, when Robert failed to have capacity per Robert's conduct, the Medical records, and the M.D. Anderson Expert's testimony.
After the three day trial Peyton* ruled that the Amendments to the Trust created by Pyke and the girlfriend, in secret, were valid. He then went beyond the original charge to the court and totally removed the Nephew and Carol Kam as heirs and also burdened them with $226,000 of court Fees. All of these decisions were in line with the earlier instruction from Miller to Peyton* to “crush” the Plaintiffs [the Nephew and Carol Kam] and provide
* Certified as incompetent and removed as a Jurist by the State of Texas
Page 6
“judicial cover” for Pyke.
Per Miller's instruction to provide Miller with plausible deniability, Peyton and Fisher did not include a signature line on Peyton's Order for Miller. Miller and Peyton were in their mid 60's and each had over 40 years of Legal experience and knew that the Associate Judge's orders had to be signed by Miller to make Valid. Miller did not “forget” to sign them. Miller REFUSED to sign them, as he knew they were a fraud.
Carol's Attorney immediately asked for a rehearing and the deposition of the Pediatrician, Beard, who reportedly signed the DNR for Robert Kam. This was set by Miller for Ocober 2013 with Miller listed on the Court register to be the presiding Judge. Miller was a no show and with no prior annoncement, Peyton showed up and denied the deposition and denied the rehearing.
Again as per Miller's instruction of plausible deniability, Peyton* did notinclude a signatory line for Miller on this second Order.
Further research into the court records showed that a post dated technically flawed, signatory unknown, Order of Referral was created and placed in the court record in late August 2013 for the July hearing and no Order of Referral was ever produced for the October 2013 hearing. Authority to enter a courtoom is like pregnancy. You have it or not. “Good enough for government work” is not a valid argument.
Miller lost his re election bid the next year and “died” in a “scooter” incident on Abrams Road a year later in what appears more like a “hit” than an accident.
Peyton was removed as a Judge in 2015 as the State of Texas deemed him to be incompetent due to his affair with a female attorney during the
* Certified as incompetent and removed as a Jurist by the State of Texas
Page 7
course of a trial involving an attorney on the Thomas Case while he was still married.
Charles Kam, Robert and Carol's Father passed in 2012. He had a very modest estate of approximately $ 100 K at the time of this passing. Pyke inserted himself into this case with the admitted intent of wiping it out and harrassing Carol Kam as retribution for Carol's flagging Pyke's gross mishandling of the Robert Kam Trust. This Case was tried in September 2013 and in Dallas Probate Court number 2. Carol Kam provided a witnessed, notarized, written Will AND an almost identical, notarized, Will solely in the Charles Kam's handwriting. She also provided 7 witnesses confirming the wishes and capacity of Charles Kam at the time both identical Wills were created. Pyke showed up with no witnesses and no supporting documents and yet the Judge of this crooked Dallas Probate Court, Chris Wilmoth, sided with Pyke and ruled against Carol. This was submitted for Appeal and fortunately, was sent to the Appeal Court in El Paso, instead of the Dallas Court [Official “cover” court for Dallas Probate Court ]. The El Paso Court recognized the Fraud by the Dallas Probate Court and reversed the Ruling into Carol's favor.
Unfortunately, as you will see below, the Robert Kam Appeal went through the Dallas Appeal Court, which is a court “two fries short” of integrity, logic, and consistency.
Miller was replaced by Margaret Jones Johnson in 2014 and she denied
Page 8
Carol's Bill of Review in the Dallas Probate Court. Jones Johnson was made aware that the Orders were unsigned in 2015 while the Bill of Review was submitted to her and she ignored the deficiency. An argument can be made that Jones Johnson has no competency and / or no integrity. This ruling by Jones Johnson denying Carol's Bill, of Review was submitted to the Dallas Appeal Court and they ruled against Carol in 2016. The panel of three Judges was headed by Robert “Fruit of the Loom” Fillmore who was notorius for “Covering the Ass” of the Dallas Probate Court system. Fruit of the Loom” Fillmore and the Dallas Appeal Court upheld the Dallas Probate Court rulings by ignoring the facts and the Law. “Fruit of the Loom” Fillmore ignored the M.D Anderson Oncologist expert testimony, ignored the older brother's testimony amd ignored Robert Kam's own action of not recognizing an heir at signing. “Fruit of the Loom” Fillmore claimed that the technically flawed post dated, author unknown, Order of Referral specific only to the first hearing was good enough for government work and that no Order was required for a second hearing, contrary to statutory law. “ Fruit of the Loom” Fillmore claimed that the Judge of Record did not have to sign the orders of the Associate Judge Peyton* despite 4 state statutes, written at the level of the fifth grader, requiring sign off.
This case was submitted as a Petition to the Texas Supreme Court noting all the facts of the case and the State Laws that were ignored by the Dallas Appeal Court and the Petition was denied. The Texas Supreme Court showed no interest in addressing the Facts and State Laws in the case.
Concurrently with this Appeal, “Fruit of the Loom” Fillmore was also heading the Panel on the Thomas Case Bill of Review which directly addressed Peyton's* Affair during the Probate Trial for the Thomas Family. The sole question to the Dallas Appeal Court was very simple and single dimensional;
* Certified as incompetent and removed as a Jurist by the State of Texas
Page 9
“Was the Affair between the Married Peyton* and the Female Attorney, representing one party during the trial, which involved as many as 20 ex parte phone calls a day, represent the “Appearance” of partiality in the Case. After 95 weeks with no decision, Thomas Kam sent a flyer to each representative in the State Capital, at the time, flagging the continued Cover that “Fruit of the Loom Fillmore” was providing for Dallas Probate Associate Judge John Peyton*. One week after this flyer was sent to the legislature, the Dallas Appeal Court issued a very short brief that confirmed that Peyton's conduct with the attorney during the trial did provide the “Appearance” that the Corut was partial to a party. Duh? What took “ Fruit of the Loom” Fillmore almost two years to decide, would have been resolved in 20 minutes over the Dinner Table of any Texas Family. The Waste, Fraud and Incompetence of the Dallas Appeal Court is extraordinary.
In 2019, Carol Kam was able to take the unsigned Peyton's* Orders back to the Dallas Probate Court on a single issue, that the orders, intentionally unsigned by Miller, were not in accordance with 4 provisions of state law written at the level of a fifth grader which required Miller, the Judge of Record to sign off on the Associate Judge [Peyton's *] Orders. In April of 2020 the Dallas Appeal Court correctly ruled that the Peyton* Orders were in fact, unsigned and not valid final state orders and were “unappealable” as Miller, the Judge of Record, had not signed off on them.
When the Margaret Jones Johnson found out about the Dallas Appeal Court Ruling through
the “Dallas Court system grapevine” she, without the request of any party, tried to cover her Ass, and quickly issued an Order in May 2020 signing off on the unsigned Peyton* Orders as the subsequent Judge of Record for the Dallas Probate Court.
State Law required the Judge of Record to sign off on the Associate Judge's order within 30 days. Jones Johnson was not THE Judge of Record at the
* Certified as incompetent and removed as a Jurist by the State of Texas
Page 10
time the orders were created, was not A Judge at the time the orders were created and had no understanding or knowledge of the case and provided no legal basis for signing an order 7 years after its creation in an attempt to make it valid.
Carol promptly submitted this Jones Johnson May 2020 Order to the Dallas Appeal Court and the Dallas Appeal Court quickly and appropriately claimed that his new effort by the Dallas Probate Court was not acceptable to validate the orders or make them appealable.
The Defendant then submitted a 500 page packet to the Texas Supreme Court in a Petition claiming that the unsigned orders and / or the May 2020 Order was valid. The Supreme Court denied the Petition apparently “annoyed” .
Over two years later, in late 2022, the Defendant went back to Jones Johnson in the Dallas Probate Court and asked her to sign ANOTHER order approving the unsigned orders from 2013 even though Jones Johnson already created an order in May 2020 which the Dallas Appeal Court refused to accept. Solely as a favor to the Defendant's attorney she created another order in 2022 signing off on the previously unsigned orders by Peyton* from 2013 that the Judge of Record at the time, Miller refused to sign as he knew they were a fraud.
Jones Johnson provided no proof of an understanding of the case, no basis for providing a second order after the Appeal rejected her prior order and no legal basis on why she can validate orders 9 years after a 30 day statutory due date at a time she was not a Judge. Every Day is a new day in a Dallas Probate Court and a Judge can just simply “MAKE UP SHIT” with no liability as the day goes knowing they have ultimate cover at the Dallas Appeal Court.
This was submitted to the Dallas Appeal Court and was surprisingly accepted
* Certified as incompetent and removed as a Jurist by the State of Texas
Page 11
as a valid order for Appeal and the Dallas Appeal Court used this new Order to rule against Carol.
The Dallas Appeal Court now has reversed their earlier opinion from 2020 that a Judge with no knowledge or attachment to a case could not sign and validate a seven year old order. In 2023 the Dallas Appeal Court now ruled that a Judge with no knowledge or attachment to a case can in fact validate a 9 year old unsigned order, with no Statutory or Case Law support.
The Brief created by the Fifth Court of Appeals to support their rejection of Carol's Appeal is based solely on what should have happened not what actually happened.
When a court, whose goal it is to reach a certain ruling, is unable to reach the desired ruling with Facts and Statutory Law reaches into the huge basket of case law and cherry picks what is “close enough for government work”. When even this is not enough, the Courts fall back on two commonly acceptable curses of action. The Fifth Court chose to employ both in their brief:
A petition of this 2023 Ruling was submitted to the Texas Supreme Court and it was denied. Supreme Court's ridiculous refusal to accept this has now created case law that can now be legimately used to overide statutory law at the whim of any court to grant a favor to any party.:
A] Even if Statutory Law provides a time limit for sign off, this can be
Page 12
ignored by the court sytem. Signing an order 9 years after a statutory due date of 30 days is now legally arguable in the Texas Court system
B] Statutory law clearly requires the Judge of Record at the time the order was created as to sign off on an Associate Judge's Order as a logical back check in the system. Now it can be argued that any Judge, with no attachment, to a case can validate an Associate Judge's Order.
C] Now it can be argued that Mental Capacity and knowing one's heirs is no longer a requirement for the creation of a Trust.
D] An M.D. Anderson Pancreatic Oncologist and Medical Records may not be relied on to evaluate the Capacity of a Pancreatic Cancer patient 10 days prior to passing.
E] Now it can be argued that a Pediatrician who has never seen a 60 year old Pancreatic Cancer patient can sign off on a State Promulgated D.N.R. Form.
F] Now it can be argued that an irrevocable, fully funded, fully activated, fully acknowledged by all beneficiaries, trust created at a time when all parties agreed that the creator had full mental capacity can be changed by a single heir in secret to his / her benefit.
G] Now it can be argued that the State requirement than an Associate Judge must have written approval from the Judge of Record or the State Probate Judge “prior” to entering a courtroom for a hearing is no longer valid
The Brief by the Dallas Appeal
Page 13
Court would get an “F” in any Law School in this state. In fact the Brief will be used as guide text for all upcoming legal courses in Texas Law Schools teaching “MAKING SHIT UP” AND “B.S”.
The following is an executive summary of just one issue in the Dallas Appeal court Rulings from 2016 to 2023 on the Carol Kam Case. Note that the Facts never changed:
2016: The Peyton* Associate Judge Orders do not need a court sign off to make them valid or Appealable [No legal support provided for this opinion]
2020 The Peyton* Orders are in fact unsigned as required by State Law and are not valid and are not Appealable.
2020 An order by a Judge with no attachment to a case, created 7 years after the 30 day statutory due date for court signing the Associate Judge orders, can not validate the orders,
2023 An order by a Judge, with no attachment to a case, can now validate an Associate Judge's Order 9 years after the 30 day statutory due date without any Statuory or Case law support. [No legal support for this opinion]
Based on this history, one has a 50-50 shot of getting a ruling in accordance with Law at the Fifth Court of Appeals in Dallas. Dallas County would be equally served and all parties would save millions of Dollar by having the Court Clerk simply flip a coin. The end result would provide equivalent results [This is a brilliant Idea and look for Fifth Court of Appeals Silver dollars to be marketed in the TexasProbateCommission Website Store in the near Future.]
From a review of above historical rulings on this one issue, any fifth grader in this state will confirm that the Dallas Appeal Court is completely unencumbered by the thought process, disconnected from reality, has no respect for Law and has mastered the art of “MAKING UP SHIT”..
We shut down Government schools in this state when they fail and yet we allow failing Courts to remain. The citizens of this State would be best served by suspending all Appeals to the Fifth Court of Appeals and
* Certified as incompetent and removed as a Jurist by the State of Texas
Page 14
immediately Audit it for integrity and competency.
Per Gov Code 402.042 to The chair of the House committee on Jurisprudence, Representative Jeff Leach is allowed to request an Attorney
General Opinion Over 4 years ago Thomas Kam asked Leach to request the Attorney General to provide an opinion on one aspect of th Carol Kam case. Leach, by documented correspondence, agreed to provide this request to the Attorney General if Thomas Kam provided a formal letter from his representative, Donna Howard, which she graciously provided. After providing the Letter, Leach and his staff became non responsive. Leach and Ken Paxton discovered that the Opinion would expose the Fraud within the Texas Court system and the opinion has never been produced. More disturbing is the fact that Both Leach and Paxton do not appear to be man enough to make any response to the request, even though I have provided all that they have asked for. As a native Texan organization, the TEXASPROBATECOMMISSION website has removed each of their Man cards.
During this past legislative session, Thomas Kam explained the case to the entire House Committee on Jurisprudence and all he saw was “deer in the headlights” with complete silence from the committee and not a single word of apology or interest to investigate the fraud and misconduct by the state court system. This Committee is an integral part of the Culture of Cover in a system that is not self correcting.
Page 15
This case was also presented to the Federal Court system on two occasions. While a discussion of the Federal case is beyond the scope of this report, it is significant to note that the Texas Attorney General and Dallas County Attorneys intentionally and maliciously lied to a Federal court on the validity of the unsigned Peyton* Orders to the detriment of a native Texas Citizen.
This is an interesting observations that government would use resources and actually lie to inflict further damage on an innocent citizen who had been intentionally damaged by fraud from the same government system.
We had approximately 40 hearings and briefs and over 50 Judges reviewed the cases. We found that 1/3 of the Judge's Ruling were based on Fact and Law and these Judges were worthy of a title of Honorable
Based on our real world experience, 2/3 of the Judges in this State will ignore, cherry pick and or distort Law and/or Facts, “MAKE UP SHIT” , and even go “B.S” [Beyond Stupid] to create a desired ruling independent of Facts and Law.
Our family went through the system several times so we feel this assessment of the overall low quality in the Texas legal system is on Target.
On a bright note, one District Judge in Dallas, Tonya Parker, allowed us three hearings to present our case to seek relief. While she stated that she did not feel that she had the jurisdiction to rule on our case, she did take the time to understand it and at the end, she actually apologized to our family on behalf of the State of Texas for the mistreatment we had endured to date.
* Certified as incompetent and removed as a Jurist by the State of Texas
Page 16
Parker did not realize that God has blessed by intentionally keeping her out of the Fifth Court of Appeals Rat Hole so her reputation would not be tarnished and she would be saved to serve Texans at the Supreme Court.
The immediate Appointment of Tonya Parker to the Texas Supreme Court would instantly double the integrity and competence of the Texas Supreme Court. Let's hope the Governor accepts this recommendation from a Family fully aware of the entire Texas legal system
Carol Kam is an undisputed heir for a fixed amount of $10,000 in both the original, irrevocable, fully funded, fully disclosed, Trust Created by Robert Kam when all parties agreed he had capacity in Feb 2011 and the second Amendment to the Trust created by Pyke, 5 days prior to Robert's passing
.She should have been paid her inheritance shortly after Robert Kam's Passing. Instead of receiving her rightful inheritance, David Pyke, with full support of the completely inept Dallas Bar Association, sucked this totally unnecessary dispute into the Rat Hole known as the corrupt Texas State Legal System.
This liability has now grown to $ 400,000 and the Defendants are now attempting to collect. Carol Kam is a 65 year old, single, retired Airline Attendant living solely on limited savings and limited retirement income.
The Judgement attempting to be collected is based on the following:
1] An Order created by an Associate Judge, Peyton, who failed to have permission to be in the courtroom and whom the State of Texas has deemed to be incompetent.
Page 17
2] An Order which the Judge of Record refused to sign at the time it was created as he knew it was a Fraud.
3] An Order which was not signed within the 30 day Statutory limit, by the Judge of Record, as required by State Law.
4] A completely illegal “MAKE UP SHIT” Order denying Carol as an heir which was not requested and is totally unsupported . The Court was only charged with determining which of two sets of Document the Trustee was to follow in dispersing the estate;
A] The Active, fully funded, fully acknowledged, irrevocable Trust created by Robert Kam when all agreed he had capacity.
or
B] The two illegal Amendments to this Trust created by Pyke with the Girlfriend, in secret, without the knowledge of the remaining beneficiaries, 10 days prior to Robert's passing, when logic and the preponderence of the testimony and evidence clearly showed Robert failed to have capacity.
All parties testified and confirmed that Carol Kam was an undisputed heir in the Robert's Trust AND Pyke's Second Amendment for the exact same benefit and all parties agreed that she had not been paid and that she should have been paid. Peyton* was never asked by any party to assess Carol's right to inheritance as it was undisputed. Peyton's* Ruling to remove Carol as an heir was simply “MADE UP SHIT” completely out of line, totally unsupported by any testimony or documents and was based solely on Peyton's* original charge from Miller to use the sanctity of the Court to punish Carol for exposing David Pyke's mishandling of the Robert Kam Trust.
5] An Order that was signed over nine years after the original Order by a individudal who was not a Judge at the time the Peyton* order was created
* Certified as incompetent and removed as a Jurist by the State of Texas
Page 18
and who had no attachment to and no understanding of the Order. None of this conduct is supported by Law. Its is just “MADE OF SHIT”.
One would think that the system [club] would have one adult in the room who would instantly recognize “BAT SHIT CRAZY” and quickly force full exposure and quick / fair resolution. With the Exception of the El Paso Appeal court and Dallas District Judge Tonya Parker, the club is woefully short of good people.
There is an embedded herd mentality in the Texas Legal system that is promoted and maintained by the State Bar. The Legal system is a cash cow for many and no one is permitted to upset the “Apple Cart” if they wish to reap the benefits of the “Club”. The “Appearance” of professionalism is paramount regardless of conduct or decision. If a Judge is out of line and the conduct is posted in the media, the Judge is disciplined. If the exact same conduct is fully documented and does not receive press, it is not an issue.
Most families who have been unfairly treated in a Courtroom simply give up as the system insulates itself by being too expensive and time consuming to pursue justice and proper relief. Most honest attorneys will actual advise a client to “take their poison” as they know that higher courts are notorius for ignoring Facts, Law, and common sense in order to cover for misconduct in lower courts.
As the Kam Case progressed through the system and the Courts could not find a legal basis to derail Carol's pursuit of Fairness and Justice based on Facts and Law, the Courts would simply “MAKE SHIT UP”. Appeal Courts and obviously the Texas Supreme Court will accept “MAKE SHIT UP” to keep control over desired outcomes. Unlike the rest of society, Judges have immunity so they can never be flagged for “MAKING SHIT UP”
When a bogus ruling is made and people complain, the Bar and Judicial system's lock step response is “You are a little person and you do not
Page 19
understand the complexity of the Law and you need to Trust the Legal system to interpret law without questioning it”. The legal system is “infallible”.
This is an attitude straight out of the Wizard of Oz. !
Well Carol Kam, as Dorothy, has pulled the curtain back on the great and wonderful Wizard and exposed that a full 2/3's of Texas Legal system is a Fraud masquerading as a Profession.
Unless the Governor steps up, he will have a hard time explaining to Texas Families how a valid undisputed heir of $ 10,000 under any scenario gets sucked into a crooked court sytem by an completely inept attorney and ends up without her legitimate inheritance and a $ 400,000 illegitimate Judgement.
Page 20
Per Gov code 402.042 you have the ability to instruct the Texas Attorney General's office to provide an Opinion on Fact and Law of these cases. In order to remove the current cloud of Fraud overhanging the Texas Legal System and restore Trust, I am requesting that you immediately request the Texas Attorney General to review and provide a formal Opinion on the issues below:
1] The validity of Pyke's activity to “Amend” the active, irrevocable, fully funded, fully agreed to Trust Created by Robert Kam when all parties agreed he had capacity
2] The validity of State Promulgated DNR developed in Pyke's office.
3] The conduct and legality of Michael Miller, John Peyton* and James Fisher at the time the case was allegedly reassigned to John Peyton*.
* Certified as incompetent and removed as a Jurist by the State of Texas
Page X
4] The actual capacity of Robert Kam in March 2011 based on the medical reports, the M.D. Anderson Pancreatic Oncologist, and Robert's actual non recognition of an heir at the time of alleged signing.
5] The validity of orders by an Associate Judge, that a Texas Court has deemed to be invalid for 7 years and then valid after 9 years .
6] The validity of a sign off by a Judge who has no knowledge of the case who was not the Judge of Record or even a Judge at the time the orders were created.
7] The Logic and legality of a court unilaterally removing a valid Heir from an estate with no supporting testimony, and no supporting documents contesting the Benefit or validity of the heir, and no request to do so from either party.
This Carol Kam case has magnified the inconsistency in application of law, the repeated absence of logic, the aversion to implementing law, the perversion of the law, the “cherry picking of “facts and law”, the “flip flops” on rulings given identical facts, the dismissal of facts, outright fraud, and the DARK CLOUD OF AN EMBEDDED “CULTURE OF COVER” in the Texas Legal system. This includes the court system at all levels, the Attorney General, the State Bar, the House Committee of Jurisprudence The Texas Supreme Court and the State Commission on Judicial Conduct. There are some great individuals in this system outside of the organizations listed that need to be honored and appreciated however, the system is grossly flawed given the extraordinary expense of time and energy spent by the Texas Court system in producing absolutely no value to the Citizens of Texas as noted in this case. The current system is not self correcting, self improving and is extremrly inefficient. I encourage the Gov Greg Abbott to immediately instigate a D.O.G.E. type review of the entire state legal system and industry to restore integrity, efficiency, and much needed trust. Hopefully one of our newest Texans, Elon Musk and his amazing Federal
Page Y
D.O.G.E. Team will accept this challenge. Texas is also blessed with numerous High Tech companies that can quickly and efficiently implement technology to coordinate laws, remove conflicting laws, and provide A.I solutions to instantly analyze facts and laws in order to accelerate resolutions that are consistent and logical. If Judges knew that their rulings were subject to an A.I review and they did not have immunity for fraud, the quality of Rulings in accordance with Fact and Law would be rise exponentially.
CONCERNED CITIZEN_________________________________ CITY__________________________________________ DATE__________________________________________Please forward this to your local representative asking them to encourage the Gov to submit the request to the Attorney General and implement a D.O.G.E Audit of the Legal system. Please also ask your friends and family to do the same. The Texas Legal System , as it is currently constructed, is not self correcting. Any reform to the system will have to come from the Legislature and direct Texas Citizen involvement.
Please print pages X to Z, sign and mail to the Gov at:
Gov Greg Abbott
P.O. Box 12428
Austin, Texas 78711-2428
Note that this form will be available to download and print out on the new citizen created and supported website
TEXASPROBATECOMMISSION.COM
Page Z