The beauty of public information

Thanks for the early and informative comments. Two commentators made strong and absolutely proper assessments of the information offered in the first posting. Remember this is an exchange of information that has been distributed publicly. Readers should make their own assessments and check each source, claim or viewpoint for themselves. Don't take anything for granted. But let's get back to the two commentators....

First Anonymous said...

(Excerpt)Either make your case or not. The builder of this blog assumes that putting content on a page builds credibility. There is nothing on this site that tells me anything new or shady other then someone wants me to believe that by association guilt is proven. June 24, 2010 9:34 AM

Then Jayson P said...

(Excerpt) Just because the deal did not ultimately close under the terms you understood at the time you wrote the letter does not mean conditions you described for closing the deal did not change between the proffer of the letter and when you had thought is would close. NO fraud! June 24, 2010 9:57 AM

Again, absolutely proper and valid comments made by both Anonymous and Jayson P. The beauty about public information is that with a little research and knowledge of how to use a great search engine like Google you can find public information about people or their associates.

As Jayson P discovered, on the right side tool bar their are links to the Arizona Justice and Civil Court records. A sampling of cases were used to confirm that the identity of the Defendant was the same Richard G Minnick (Reverend Dic Minnick pictured to the right.

With the Plaintiffs in Case CC2006224405000
Minnick's signature was confirmed with one on a rental agreement on file. No payment was made against the judgment.

In Case 0711CV9801319 the Minnick's rented an apartment in a duplex from the Plaintiffs. An issue with his family trust was the reason rent payments were behind. No payment was made against the judgment.

Then in Case CC2006084359000 the Minnick's rented another apartment. The judgment hasn't been paid but management was hopeful.

In related Cases CV1998-022673 and CV1999-003757 reps for the Plaintiffs confirmed that Dic referred to himself as Reverend. Apparently his money was locked in a family trust while he was preparing for a major theme park project. Minnick made an offer to buy the Plaintiff's rental property and even handed over a check for the deposit. The check didn't clear because of the ongoing problem with the trust being locked up.

Since one of these cases goes back to the late 90's, how much time does a person need to get their funds freed from a family trust? Why would someone with a family trust worth tens of millions of dollars have so much trouble paying rent or lease payments; $800 here, $1000 there, $700 over there? Someone with a trust of that size wouldn't want the blemish on their record... it doesn't make sense. Most cases are terminated or dismissed because of time and inaction. Who spends money to chase someone who is representing themselves and refuses to pay. Why is someone with a family trust worth tens of millions even representing themselves anyway for these kinds of cases?? This is public information that you can search for yourself. Please do your own research.

Others have waited for payments that never arrived; it looks like some of them are commenting on this blog. So isn't it fair to ask if this history looks a little concerning.

Oh, and in reference to the comment left about Eaglebanque and InvestmentSuisse, please click on Eaglebanque Alert List and InvestmentSuisse Unauthorized. Apparently, regulators don't like these banks either.