The authors are NOT acting as attorneys by giving this advice. Go find an honest attorney that you picked based on someone's experience, their court record, and on what they fought. Anything sounding accusatory in this writing is still an allegation, but I do not write anything which for which I do not have proof.)
Roberta "Bobbie" Asplund
Meet Bobbie Asplund, a loving mother, grandmother, and a nurse since WWII. She worked as a visiting nurse, in hospitals and clinics including in supervisory roles, was involved in establishing St. Joseph Mercy in Ypsilanti, and getting the An Arbor VA straightened out. She taught at Madonna University and Hartwick college. She was very active in local and national politics as a Health promoter, serving on the League of Women Voters, and she pushed for, designed and coordinated a lansdscaping project for the First United Methodist Church of Ann Arbor which allowed disabled persons to access the
Sanctuary from the ground level. She also fought to preserve neighborhood wetlands and to bring awareness to the dangers of smoking. These are just a few of her many accomplishments in a life spent focused on helping everyone else -except herself.
Bobbie lived alone, in a big house
that she loved dearly. She built it with her husband Dell, and her
dreams and memories were all there. It was a home that she wanted to
be passed down through generations of the family, a place where every
family member was always welcome.
And then "It" happened. One day she was driving around and managing all of her affairs, and the next she was found on the floor, having suffered a brain aneurysm. Fortunately, this aneurysm happened in a spot where people recover fully, if not near-fully. Her surgeon felt her prognosis was in the top 10% for her age. She was treated with surgery and sent to a Rehabilitation center. But while she was there, fluid started building inside her cranium. It made her consciousness become weak and lethargic. She couldn't eat very well, and she languished for several weeks, becoming malnourished, which led to hallucinations.
Finally, she was sent to the hospital, diagnosed, and had a successful surgery to place a shunt. Unfortunately, there was conflict between her children. Two tried to put her in a nursing home on Medicaid and seize her estate for themselves, and the third tried to defend her. The family were told that meant a 3rd party guardian and a conservator must be appointed by the court to "protect" Bobbie. That was actually not the law- but the way probate courts are run without following the law, it was effectively true.
Bobbie was not brought to court, or informed of her rights when she was awake enough to know it. She was not appointed her own attorney, so all she had was the report of a GAL (the Guardian Ad Litem is an officer of the court who reports to the judge). With no testimony from a doctor saying Bobbie was not going to recover, and no testimony saying she needed permanent guardianship (only the eldest son appeared in court, and he testified that she was recovering rapidly), judge Julia Owdziej of the Washtenaw Michigan Pobate Court declared her Mentally Incapacitated and appointed local attorneys of her court Georgette David as guardian, and Joelle Gurnoe-Adams as conservator, both with Full Rights of control. At that point, Bobbie no longer had her basic civil rights. By law, she should have, but now those rights were “legally” transferred to others.
Right after being appointed conservator, Gurnoe-Adams stated that she wanted to sell Bobbie's residence and move her to a small second house she owned. When the eldest son said he had balanced the books, and he knew she could live in her home if family took care of her, which he volunteered to do, Ms. Gurnoe-Adams informed him that his two siblings (the ones who wanted to take her big house and sell it) would fight the eldest son in court, and the estate (Gurnoe-Adams) would fund them.
Crooked guardians and conservators try
to create more conflict between family in order to improve their
excuse for being necessary to protect the vulnerable person. This was
the first “red flag.”
Three weeks after being put into guardianship, Bobbie had been healing very well, had a great prognosis, she was walking, going up and down stairs unassisted, transferring to a car, and eating solid food. Nevertheless, with the option of sending Bobbie home to be cared for by family available, the guardian Ms. David, put her into a Long Term Care! No doctor said she needed LTC, and in fact, the doctor, the Physical Therapist, and the Occupational Therapist all agreed that she could go home. So why would Ms. David put her in the LTC? This was a lot more than just a “Red Flag.”
She said it was because Bobbie's two youngest would not care for her, and they objected to the eldest son doing so. The eldest son and his wife were qualified, responsible, and self-employed, working from home. They were willing to give Bobbie mental and physical exercises designed to increase healing. But the guardian put her in a facility where she got no mental exercise and only maintenance level physical work. The facility made her use a wheelchair most of the time so they wouldn't be liable of she had a mishap. With this impediment to healing, she improved only by the grace of time.
Bobbie was miserable at the LTC. All she wanted was to go home. Her private papers were taken and copied to be used against her in court later by her guardian and conservator. She had a very small space in a hospital room, shared with a roommate who constantly screamed about wanting to die. Bobbie had zero privacy, and the head of her bed was next to the door to the main hallway. Abuses by the negligence happened, including loss of her hearing aids by staff without replacement, and a tooth broken off at the gumline not being fixed for a month and a half. In fact, Bobbie got so fed-up she went to the nurse station and called her private dentist. The guardian never helped her. Meanwhile, according to staff, the guardian had refused to allow Bobbie to know her medical condition. Bobbie feared that she had some fatal illness, but it was allegedly just to prevent family from knowing she did not need to be in LTC. Can you imagine this quality of life being YOURS?
Bobbie got so much better that she
wanted a legal option to get rid of Ms. David and Ms. Gurnoe-Adams.
She filed to change the guardianship and conservatorship to her
eldest son, whom she trusted. The court appointed her an attorney.
When the hearing happened, that attorney, Samuel Bernstein of
Ypsilanti, “threw” her case. He actually supported the other side
against his client and complimented the opposition on what good
guardian and conservator they were. (violation of MI court rules
which say he HAD to advocate for his client's preferred
This was Bobbie's pride & joy. The home she built to live out her life in.
It became clear that Bobbie was healing so much
that she had to go home, so Ms. David & Ms. Gurnoe-Adams
reconfigured the structure of the house to add a shower downstairs
rather than install a stairlift chair which the eldest son had
waiting. This was so Bobbie's two younger children (both losing their
own homes) would move to the house as paid caregivers. You see, the
two younger children were their allies, so they were getting the
whole upstairs for their own privacy, while poor Bobbie was put in
the dining room. All of the drapes were removed on the ground floor
so she had no privacy, and you could see through the house from the
street to the backyard! They were never put back. Instead of free
care from the eldest son, the other two children charged a
professional rate by the hour. They would continue their previous
exploitation of their mother. Payment went through a company, and the
guardian and conservator got to charge all kinds of fees dealing with
In the meantime, Ms. Gurnoe-Adams sold the house the second son lived in. It was supposed to pay for the $53,690 bill to the Long Term Care facility, but Ms. Gurnoe-Adams got paid instead. The $53,690 bill to the LTC was never paid.
Upon her discharge from four hellish months in the LTC, the eldest son took Bobbie to her own doctor, and she was given a physical and cognition exam. Both differed with the assessments of the LTC. The LTC even claimed Bobbie was “wheelchair bound” yet she had been walking since January, and she walked all the way in to the doctor's office that day.
To be officially Mentally Incapacitated in Michigan, it must be proved to the court with “clear and convincing evidence.” To have it reversed, the same standard applies. Any interested party, including the ward or her eldest son had the right to request that hearing.
The cognition test given by the doctor said she showed no sign of being mentally incapacitated. That doubt, by law, means there was no longer “clear and convincing evidence.” The son presented the doctor's findings to the court, but judge Owdziej would not even look at them. The conservator resigned and appointed her own replacement, which is against the ward's right by statute to nominate the replacement. A new attorney was appointed by the court, Patrick Carmody.
The son then took Bobbie to PT and OT,
who assessed her as needing some help around the house and with
walking over rough ground outside, but she was otherwise OK. The new
attorney on the case had everything he needed to advocate for
Bobbie's wish that he get her out of the guardianship. He wouldn't do
Bobbie completely favored all of the actions her eldest son brought to free her and to save her home and possessions. But her attorney acted for the opposite of his client's wishes. Carmody acted almost exclusively for the benefit of the guardian and conservator, in direct violation of Michigan Court Rules and his client's rights.
Fed-up by his ineffectiveness and not
advocating for her wishes, Bobbie wrote to the court to fire Carmody
and let her hire her own attorney, she was refused. After that,
Carmody acted even more obviously to work against his client's
preferences for legal outcome. Carmody was caught on court camera
planning strategy with the guardian while she was on trial for
Removal for Cause. He facilitated Bobbie's opponent/oppressors to do
everything they wanted. As the eldest son tried to help Bobbie,
Carmody made many false statements against him, even trying to have
the court hold him in contempt when he knew his client wanted the
son's legal case to remove the Guardian and Conservator to succeed
(conservator now Kathleen Carter). Carmody did everything possible to
assist the guardian and conservator in defending themselves.
guardian ordered 24/7 caregivers to be hired for Bobbie at
double her income. This was financially untenable on purpose, because
they had copies of doctor's letters explaining that such a level of
care was unnecessary, and they could have had the eldest son and his
wife do it for free. Ms. David even conducted herself as if she was
the second son's attorney in a hearing to limit contact between
Bobbie and her first son which would make him less able to help his
mom. The isolation got to the point where the guardian ordered there
be no phone contact between Bobbie and her son. Meanwhile, the
conservator, who wanted to sell the house for her own enrichment
tried to use a minor flooding from a backed-up drain as an excuse to
start clearing Bobbie's home. Ms. Carter refused to allow inspection
of anything being put in the dumpster (it would have been discovered
that the damage did not exist to the degree she was implying). Bobbie
nearly had a heart attack, she was so upset by the conservator.
In court, they continued to slander the eldest son by making false statements in court and on court documents, about his character, all under oath. This is a very common tactic in this kind of scam. If you can discredit the family who are trying to save the ward, the Court of Appeals won't know which story is true, and will defer to the original judge who heard the case because that judge is in the moment to get subtle tells.
Understand, at this point the fiduciaries HAD to sell the house in order to get paid because they had spent Bobbie down to nothing. And nothing would stop them if the court was defending them to do it. So the conservator Ms. Carter was trying to sell Bobbie's house out from under her, the home Bobbie would rather die in than leave. The guardian tried to get her out with the second son by tricking her. She wouldn't budge. Bobbie says she screamed that she was being kidnapped! The guardian then tried to get the court to give her permission to sell the house, but the eldest son wrote a huge expose of the “alleged” corruption and she withdrew. She couldn't get permission anyway, because she wasn't the conservator, but it proves they had a common goal. A house to pay themselves with. The house was listed without court approval a month later. After all, eventual court approval was guaranteed in this court.
Bobbie still wanted her life back, and asked her Niece to try to replace the guardian and conservator. The day after her Niece Alexis filed, the guardian went to the judge with an emergency ex parte petition to remove Bobbie from her beloved home by force, and have her assessed and treated for Mental Illness. The guardian, Ms. David, later admitted to acts which showed she falsified the petition. Bobbie was cleared by the doctors, but the guardian refused to discharge her home, claiming she had no caregivers. Of course, the eldest son and his wife were still asking to be that, at no cost.
Both the eldest son and the niece were denied lawful rights to examine the conservator's records of administration, and the judge refused to allow them their right by law to interview Bobbie for the case. The judge denied the son subpoenas for documentation to prepare for the case, for key witnesses such as the two police officers on the scene when Bobbie was taken. And on the first day of hearings, the judge gave a very long history of the case which focused on her claims that discredited the son, made false statements about the niece, she failed to mention the significant allegations against the fiduciaries, and failed to mention proofs which conclusively showed false defamatory testimony against the son. Clearly, she didn't want THAT in the transcript.
The son and niece became convinced that judge Julia Owdziej was so corrupt, and ran such a corrupt racket abusing vulnerable persons, that they could never win in her court, no matter how powerful their evidence.
*The judge refused to appoint temporary fiduciaries during the trial to Remove for Cause.
*The judge actually asked the guardian not to resign.
*Three months after the Review of the guardianship was due, in the early part of the trial, but after the guardian had admitted to false statements on a petition to put Bobbie in a Mental hospital, Judge Owdziej approved the guardianship.
*The judge refused several petitions by Bobbie's son, niece, and brother (a retired judge) to release Bobbie from the hospital and to protect her personal possessions and home. The judge would say “I'm not making any orders today.” But at the end of court, when the conservator asked for permission to clear the house to sell it, the judge gave her the ok to do that.
Conversion by Larceny is a fancy term for “theft.”. The conservator got a shredder and destroyed the financial and business records of the family. She gave the two younger children who supported her scheme time to take what they wanted, but she would not let Bobbie decide what she wanted herself, or what was to go to whom, or to even come to the house herself! The eldest son was given only 2 hours on a weekday where the conservator was limiting him to only have his wife help locate, pack and remove personal items. But she also said he could have what he wanted. The son responded that he wanted all of it so it could be saved for Bobbie pending outcome of the trial. Even though the conservator still had no petition in to sell the house, she acted as if it was a given that judge Owdziej would allow it.
The eldest son took every photo album, every personal nick-nack his mother loved, her favorite clothes, etc. and stored them for his mother in hopes that he could save at least that. Despite having technically given the house contents to the eldest son, the conservator had an Estate sale. When the son tried to object via law to the sale, Ms. Carter petitioned for a restraining order against him and his attorney from interfering with the sale -including posting about it online! Judge Owdziej allowed the sale. She gave permission, full well knowing the litigation was ongoing, that there were claims that the sale was not necessary and was harmful, that personal items of the son and the ex-husband were still in the home and the conservator had obstructed their recovery, and full well knowing that Bobbie was grievously upset by these actions.
Upset. A key word that was weaponized by the bad guys. Bobbie desperately wanted to know what was going on. Her court appointed attorney was no help, the guardian, conservator, and her two younger children wouldn't tell her. So she would ask, and ask, and ask. The guardian claimed that discussing it “upset” Bobbie, and that's why she could never know. But Bobbie heard it all in court. I would characterize her reaction as feeling upset, sold-out, and very angry at what the judge, the fiduciaries, and her two traitorous children were doing to her. But the guardian used the word “upset” to claim a reason why she should be isolated from the rest of the world, especially her remaining son, who should not talk to her.
The judge also participated in this ruse. At the end of court sessions she would make a statement that the son, or the niece were “upsetting” Bobbie, so they must leave first, including their attorney. It is clear from the court videos that the judge is intentionally making false statements. Consider that while video of the hearings exists, the Court of Appeals uses written transcripts to assess a case. Nobody would likely know that the statements blaming Bobbie's alleged upset on the petitioners was the opposite of the truth.
The conservator had zero intention of allowing Bobbie's eldest son to save his family's records, possessions or anything else from loss, and gave no heed to the estate plan in Bobbie's Will. It seemed to be out of pure spite. She broke and trashed furniture, destroyed Bobbies professional legacy, and donated items to re-use places rather than allow family to have them. But she favored the younger children who helped her. She gave expensive, prized furniture to the second son for him to sell as he pleased. And he tried.
The conservator found a buyer for the house. It was a company that flips homes. That buyer, Darren Millman, drew up plans for major modifications to the home, then submitted them to the city and signed a permit application as the owner before the conservator had it heard in court to sell the house. Bobbie's defenders fought hard to save the house, but the judge worked with the conservator to ensure the house was sold. The judge made false statements of law, and between September 23, 2019 and February 18, 2020 made TEN ex parte Orders based on the requests of the conservator and/or guardian, some without petitions, canceled required hearings and just made orders supporting the conservator. It was all against the law, but the judge has authority.
Clearing out: Smashing and trashing good stuff
Nine months after Darren Millman filed an illegal permit application, the new owners just “coincidentally” decided they wanted his exact plan for their dream home, and hired Millman to do the rebuilding. Bobbie's beloved home that she built no longer exists. All her work gone. They exceeded the permit by a great amount, and they took out over twenty trees from the lot, bulldozing the rock gardens Bobbie built, and the patio & retaining terrace her husband built. Everything on the house came down except for the outer shell of 2x4s. Even the interior walls were removed. If family manage to win in the CoA, the victim has already lost everything.
The isolation continued. The guardian continues to make documentable false statements, even to State Investigators from the Attorney General. Bobbie was finally moved from the mental facility when it was too much loss to the conservator's plan. She got put into an Adult Foster Care facility, where the isolation continued. As we made more and more complaints to local, State and Federal authorities it became clear that the guardian must allow some people to talk to Bobbie so she can slant the truth by saying only the son is not allowed to speak to her because he might upset her. So she randomly allows some people to talk to her, under strict censorship, as long as they don't discuss the taboo subjects of the guardian, the conservator, the case, her finances, her house, and now new additions. They can't talk about her legal rights or her civil rights either. Nobody can help her get an attorney who will represent what she wants.
In Georgette David's own words, these are the things Bobbie is not allowed to have conversation about:
Bobbie looks very ill now. Depression and hopelessness in isolation destroy a person. Medical studies show this leads to earlier than normal death. The guardian is actually causing Bobbie to die before she should. Her son and niece, and other persons are still fighting for her, but as they draw closer to winning, and the guardian and conservator, possibly the judge, draw closer to possible prison, the question becomes: “Will they try to murder her and make it look like an accident?” That is a pattern in this kind of scam. They try to disguise it, but it still gets found out. Too late for the victim.
Do you want to dig even DEEPER?
Bobbie's niece Alexis More, is a retired sheriff deputy and one hell of a good investigator. She personally uncovered a tremendous amount of evidence to add to what the other team members have uncovered, and to add to the already present evidence of the Court Transcripts and Cour Videos. On August 6, 2020, Alexis was featured on an hour long Facebook TV show where she exposed this corruption. This is a "wow" kind of moment. If you watch it, it will chok yo up and you'll have tears running before it is over.
These are actual quotes from my mom, the victim of the court of judge Julia Owdziej. At the time, she was housed in what she considers a prison (rather than her home, where she belongs). It's a lockdown mental facility so the guardian and the judge can keep her from getting proper legal representation. She has no medical or mental need for hospitalization, and was put there without diagnosis or a hearing. She is begging not to have her life ripped from her and everything she cared about destroyed-
THE CAST OF CHARACTERS
Judge: Julia Owdziej
Court appointed stooge: Patrick Carmody
Guardian: Georgette David
Conservator: Kathleen Carter
NOTE: At this time, the guardian and conservator are on trial to be removed for Cause based on allegations of Real Estate and Financial Fraud, Wrongful Imprisonment, and Falsifying a Metal Illness petition. The Conservator has not even filed for permission to sell the house -yet, but judge Owdziej is giving her permission to waste everything in Roberta's home just to get it empty for the sale she will approve regardless of the merits of the case. YES! That's right. The outcome of the trial was decided before it ever began. And that is one of many reasons how Owdziej's own acts prove that she is corrupt.
1/28/2019: MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “Well, my whole thing about this is I’ve felt like my doctor, my own private medical doctor who knew more about me than anybody of a guardian who just has not had that personal relationship with me, that she -- when she thought that I was doing all right and the other things were, that I felt like I was being discharged way last January, and I feel like I’ve been in jail for a whole year because I’ve not been allowed to see my family a lot of the time, and not had any -- I had all of my savings and everything taken away from my being in charge of it, and that was a big shock to me that I should have served this county, in this state, in this nation for so many years and had to put up with somebody taking over everything including my ability to see my older son, the one that was my first child. Even on my birthday I would only see him for what, three to four hours all together including the traffic. So, I have had very major decisions about how our relationship with our system with the jails and police have been really put down seniors so that I’ve been doing -- working on a researching project to help seniors with a number of health problems mainly, but other things that are included. That’s what I’ve been doing with my time for the last year.”
MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “They were terrible to me. They were hurting
me. She was putting her foot against the door. I’m talking about
MR. CARMODY: “You’re not supposed to talk at all.”
MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “It was a bad experience. I was there it was terrible. Caregivers are not supposed to treat anybody like that.”
2/4/2019: MS. ROBERTA
ASPLUND: “And, I’ve spent my whole last year in confinement
of all the worst thing that’s ever happened to me in my
THE COURT: “Okay. We can’t talk about that, but we can talk about your birthday and what you have planned for your birthday.”
MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “Yeah, I want to be home, not just for my birthday but -- “
THE COURT: “Okay. That’s -- that’s more than we can chat about when the other folks aren’t here.”
MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “What I’d like to know is am I going
to get to see my son today? It’s been a long, long time since
I’ve been able to talk with him.”
THE COURT: “Right now what I’m going to do is get you something to eat for lunch. So, we’re going to take a lunch break and we’ll come back at 12:45. Thank you, sir.”
MR. RANDALL ASPLUND: “Do I get to have lunch with her?”
MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “I have been incognito in all of this. I’ve not been able to express my opinions and have it make any difference.”
MR. RANDALL ASPLUND: “And, why am I being prevented from seeing her at all?”
MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “And, I feel like I have lost my citizenship in the United States.”
THE COURT: “We’re in the middle of a witness, ma’am, so we’re going to finish the witness before we get to other witnesses.”
MR. RANDALL ASPLUND: “Your Honor --”
MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “I can’t stand this. “
MR. RANDALL ASPLUND: “-- what reason is there that I can’t talk to my mother?”
(There was no answer)
2/19/2019: p.94,L.1: MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “This is making me sick. I can’t stand that. This is a year old, a year since I have lost my freedom to be a citizen of the United States. I can’t stand it. Are you being fair? I can’t stand it.”
2019-4-1: p.27, L23:
MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “Can I have a comment? I want to know
who’s going to pay for all this? I don’t think I should
have to pay for it. Do I not have a chance today even?”
MR. CARMODY: “No, no.”
MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “So I have to be in prison another month? I am without my rights. The law is not the answer, it’s public health.”
MR. CARMODY: “You don’t want to listen to what I have to say? Is that what you’re telling me?”
MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “You know, your opinion of the law and mine is different. I believe in the righteous and true representation.”
2019-4-1: p.28,L22: MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “If I had been murdering somebody or something I wouldn’t be treated like this. Why am I being treated like this, huh? Why don’t I have any rights? That’s what we’ve got to get after, the rights of individuals in this community who believe what doctors say, that I don’t need a guardian.”
p.100,L.12: MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “I have rights and I’m not
getting them, right here in this courtroom. Were those remarks of the
guardian? Guardian of what? She doesn’t have medical background
at all herself.”
THE COURT: “Anything else Ms. David?”
MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “In prison for over a year, can you imagine that?”
MS. DAVID: “I have no further questions, Your Honor.”
MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND (to CARMODY): “You’re not speaking up for me.”
5/20/2019: p.94,L16: (Regarding selling her house): MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “What about me? What about my thoughts and how I feel. I don’t want to sell it. We can't do it without it!”
5/20/2018: p.97,L7: MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “It can’t hurt, they’ve killed my life. They’ve already done that.”
5/20/2019: p.92,L18: MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “God, where’s your heart?”
5/20/2019: p.122,L22: Regarding Kathleen Carter emptying her home and throwing away her things: MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “What about me? That’s what I can’t understand. God is she a cruel, cruel, cruel, cruel person.”
5/20/2019: p.150,L.13: MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND:“Has she sold my property? My furniture?”
MR. RANDALL ASPLUND: “-- and there were several that were broken that were put into the dumpster.”
MS. ROBERTA ASPLUND: “Oh, how heartbreaking. How cruel. That’s what I’m hearing from these other people. They’re being taken advantage of all over the place.”
Videos of Bobbie Asplund telling it like it is. An inside look at guardpanship and conservatorship from the victim's perspective