ABOUT THE MARRIAGE
Hello,
My name is Eloisa, Ellie is my nickname. I am a 67 year old, Filipino /American; born,raised
and educated in the Philippines. I migrated to the United States in 1974 after living in
Europe, England,Switzerland and Africa (Ethiopia) where I worked in management for an
international hotel chain.
I met my Husband, Andrew Earl Furer, in late 1979 in California while I was working in a
hospital as a department manager. He was an associate at a tax law firm in Century City.
We got married in June 21, 1981 in Beverly Hills California, in a non denomination
ceremony. I am a devout Roman catholic. He was born into the Jewish faith, but does not
practise Judaism nor any other religion. Money is what he worships and is his God.
Andrew went to Harvard University for his under graduate studies in Economics and
Harvard Law School, graduating Cum Laude and Magna Cum Laude respectively. He was
also Editor of the Harvard Law Review. He passed the California Bar in one try, then
clerked for the well respected Judge Raum at the tax court in Washington, D.C.
Shortly after our marriage in 1981, Andrew accepted a job at the U.S. Department of
Treasury in Washington D. C. as Associate tax legislative counsel. He was later on
promoted to another position at the Department of Treasury.
While Andrew was at the Treasury department, he became a member of the Presidential
Commission where he met Louie Reneiri, then Head of Salomon Brothers.
After the Treasury department, Andrew became a Vice President at Salomon Brothers,
dealing with Mortgage Backed Securities, a position opened for him and another member
of the Presidential Committee who was a friend of Mr Reneiri.
After plaintiff's employment with Salomon, he became a Managing Partner at one of Robert
Bass group of companies. Here, Andrew became one of the active negotiators as their
company acquired one of the largest Savings and Loan in the United States, after it went
bankrupt.
After acquiring the bankrupt savings and loan, it became the American Savings Bank,
headquartered in Irvine,California. Andrew became the head of the Audit committee. He
also sat in the Board of various companies.
Andrew paid for the shares of stock in American Savings Bank from our savings account
and took a loan from Robert Bass. American Saving Bank became a successful bank
before it was sold to Washington Mutual
While we were in Washington, D.C., I worked as the Director of Housekeeping Services at
the Madison and the Dolly Madison Hotel. I was in charge of the large housekeeping
staff and services of the two five stars hotels across from each other. My husband and
I went to and from work together everyday. I was provided a parking space at the hotel. I
dropped him off at the treasury in the morning and picked him up at night on regular days.
We did not have a 9:00 to 5:0 work schedule. When there were State visits I was lucky to
get out of my office before midnight. When both of us worked late which was often or
when the weather was too harsh in winter to go home, we would stay for a night or two in
the hotel. It was a very happy time for us.
We bought a house in Mclean, Virginia, below the hill of the house of Secretary Brezenski
. Later, U.S. Attorney General Edwin Mess family moved in nearby. We did not know them
personally, but our beloved dog "social climbed " with them. I am mentioning this here as a
happy and sad (I am crying now) memory I have of our first beloved dog, Chiqui, a two
year old mott golden retriever we had adopted from the Mclean Library dog adoption
event.
One early Saturday morning while we were still in bed, we had a telephone call. It was Mrs
Brezensky. She told us that our dog was in their yard and had caught one of their roosters
Chiqui was holding in between her legs. Chiqui wouldn't let go of the rooster, but was
making sure she was very gentle, staring at the rooster and looking at Mrs,Brezenski, as if
asking her what to do with it. I can vividly picture the event in my head. Chiqui was a
sweet and gentle creature. The other incident was when Chiqui escaped again. She
dashed out in front of me while I was working in the garden. I ran after her, going towards
the Mess residence, crossing slightly sloping ground and she disappeared among the
crowd of media and secret service in front of the Mess's residence. There was
something in the news that day about President Reagan. I was searching for Chiqui
among the crowd but she was not there. I went back home and waited outside. I was sure
someone from the crowd would bring her home. I was getting worried Chiqui might go
towards Old Dominion Drive and get hit by a car. She was brought home in a leash by a
young girl who told me she was the daughter of Mr. Mess, and that Chiqui had gone inside
their home.
Our beloved Chiqui was put to sleep in Switzerland in 1997, a month before we came back
to the US. She was loved and lived a good life with us for fourteen years. I intended to
bring her back with us to the United States. It took a long time for the vet to convince me
that she will not make it through the flight home. The last two months of her life, she could
not get up by herself. The day before she was put to sleep, I cooked her favorite food and
bought her favorite cheese cake. She always went wild when she smelled cheese cake in
the house.
My husband and I held her when she was put to sleep. The vet in Switzerland was very
kind to lay a mat on the floor of his clinic so we could hold Chiqui next to us before he
pushed that fatal syringe on her. I had my hands on either side of her face close to my
face, while she stared at me lovingly. The vet had the syringe in his hand and kept asking
us if we were ready. My husband and I were both crying. We were never ready for this, so
the vet did not get any reply from either if us. Then within seconds of Chiqui's last blink ,
her stare became frozen. I knew she was gone. We hugged her for the last time. The vet
told me to close Chiqui's eyelids. When my husband got up from the floor, his pants were
wet from Chiqui's body fluid. We had her cremated and had kept her ashes in an antique
porcelain jar.
While I was working at the Madison hotel, I got a call from the Manager of the Jefferson
Hotel in front of the White House. She told me she was looking for a Director of
housekeeping and that I was recommended, I think, by the Food and Beverage Manager of
the Madison hotel that she had just hired to work for the Jefferson hotel. I had the
interview. The salary offered was double of what I was currently making. But the week
after the interview, I found out I was already pregnant with our son. My husband and I
decided that I had to stop working. I had been through previous miscarriage of twins
three months into the pregnancy.
This second pregnancy after the miscarriage was a difficult one. I was in complete bed
rest for the first three months as there was another threat of a miscarriage. I was 44 years
old and my pregnancy was considered a high risk one.
I took charge in getting the Mclain Virginia home ready to be sold. I tackled the packing
while looking for a home in New Jersey, getting both homes ready for occupancy and the
actual move to New Jersey. All of these while I was between my fourth to the ninth
month of pregnancy. I did not demand help from my husband as he was in a new job. I
catered to his every need, making sure he had a comfortable home life. I took care of the
everyday chores and mundane things, as good wife and mother does.
Due to the stress of my role from my four month of my pregnancy, our son was born on
November 14, three weeks premature. I was taken to the hospital on the first day in the
middle of our move to New Jersey. My son was delivered by the doctor I had seen for the
first time the day before.
I tackled the total renovation of the New Jersey home two months after giving birth to our
son. This home was built in 1902, with eleven bedrooms, seven fireplaces on over an
acre land. The project involved stripping and repairing the walls of the whole house. The
walls were covered with dated wallpaper. The renovation involved restoring the whole
kitchen and turning the basement into a comfortable game room and adding another
separate maid's room in the basement. I restored most of the seven fireplaces with
granite facing, sanded the wood flooring of the entire house and stripped the beautiful
wood moldings that were painted over. I tackled the over an acre land with its hundred
year old specimen trees, pruning all the overgrown branches to decent shapes and
restoring them back to perfect shape and good health. Landscaping was finally done and
the complete redecoration and repainting the whole house, inside and outside was
completed. This project had taken three years for me to finish with the help of various
contractors.
Andrew never lifted a hand on this project, not even to talk to a single contractor,
leaving all the tough work for me to handle. I was the stay at home mother, “the woman
behind the successful husband” who had catered to his every need while our son was
growing up.
I was the mom who did not leave our son to nannies. I volunteered at every school trip
and every school function when our son was in nursery to pre k to 3rd grade. I was the
mom who would invited my son's whole class to hold their occasional whole day school in
our back yard that I had turned into a playground. I participated in the days activities, and
prepared lunch and snacks for everyone.
I was the mom who attended our son’s soccer games while Andrew slept late on
weekends. I was the mom who took our son to and from school everyday. I was the mom
who created a play group of kids after school often times taking all the kids to our home
to play.
I was the mom who took care of our son’s spiritual needs. I had asked my husband if he
wanted to raise our son in his Jewish faith at least for tradition. Andrew had never once
gone to the synagogue while we were married. Although I am a devout roman catholic, I
did not mind foregoing my own religious preference as far as raising our son. I thought it
would make my husband happy.
There was, however, one big problem. Plaintiff wanted me to take our son to the
synagogue every Saturday. I did not agree. It would make me uncomfortable being the
only catholic among Jewish parents. My husband’s reason why he could not take our son
to the synagogue on Saturdays was so he could sleep late, and he did not know anyone in
town.
Feeling guilty that my son was growing up with no religion at four years old, I hired a nun
from a nearby catholic school to give our son lessons in catechism two hours per week
with the approval of my husband. The lessons in catechism prepared my son to serve the
Sunday masses in French at his boarding school in Switzerland during the duration of his
studies there. Our son had his first communion at his school in Switzerland and his
confirmation at Groton School in Massachusetts when he was in high school.
I was the mom who arranged with a high school kid to teach my son how to ride a bicycle in
the afternoon when our son did not have a play group. Andrew had refused to teach our
son to ride a bicycle. His reasoning, “I do not want to have a heart attack”..
I was the mom who hired high school kids to teach my son to catch and throw balls some
afternoons. Andrew did it once, and complained, “I might have a heart attack”.
I was the mom who arranged for our son to have his violin lessons at home when he was
five years old. Andrew played the violin with the Harvard Orchestra, I believe as first
seat, but refused to practice with our son or to encourage him to practice. He constantly
criticized our son by saying " you cannot read notes." When I was urging they practice on
weekends, the reply was “I have not played the violin in years, I am rusty, or it is my rest
day”.
.
In 1991, Andrew had decided that he was going to retire at age 40. We had planned to
move to the Philippines then. Our son was accepted at the Ateneo de Manila, the oldest
Jesuit school that used to be an all boys exclusive school. My mother's older brother was
sent to this school by my grandfather for his studies. It was planned that while we were in
the Philippines, Andrew was going to teach a few hours a week at a University, donating
his time. This plan did not materialize due to the political situation in the Philippines at the
time.
It was agreed that we would only move to a country where our son will be in a good
school. We settled with Switzerland. We first enrolled our son in the summer program at
the Institute L"Rosey to see if would like the school. Our son loved the school. We
enrolled him in the regular curriculum after the summer program ended.
We moved to Switzerland temporarily in 1992, staying in hotels. My husband then secured
a residents visa by paying a Swiss attorney to look for a company that will employ him in
name only. Andrew paid the company 150,000.00 Swiss Francs a year the minimum
requirement to get a resident's visa. The company in turn paid him his monthly salary from
the money paid to them except that he was taxed income taxes out of the money he paid
the company for his own salary.
We then rented two apartments in Switzerland. We rented a lake front pent house
apartment in Geneva across from the Jet D'eau in Que Gustave Ador, about 14 miles from
our son,s school, and a small apartment in Gstaad, Switzerland. We spent our winters in
Gstaad, Switzerland as our son,s school, Institute L'Rosey, moves the whole school to
their Gstaad campus during the winter. Skiing was part of the school's curriculum.
Sometime in 1995, I was delegated to go back to New Jersey to take care of selling our
home. I had to deal with real estate brokers, keeping the house in tip top shape all the
time for showing, eventually selling the house without an agent, saving the whole broker’
s commission. Andrew only followed me to New Jersey after the house was sold to take
care of legal details on the sale of the home.
The first sixteen years of our marriage was, I considered a normal and almost a happy
marriage. There were disagreements, as all married couples have, but nothing serious.
Most of the disagreement were about the inability of Andrew to be an active participant in
the raising of our son, and the inability of Andrew to understand that I was uncomfortable
when we travel together in the same airplane without our son. I was always thinking that if
something happens to us no one to take care of our son. While we were living in
Switzerland and Incline Village, when we go to the Philippines or Europe, one of us takes
the flight from San Francisco and one from Los Angeles to arrive where we were going
within the hour. This was the way I wanted to travel while our son was still a minor. My
husband was very unhappy about this arrangement mainly because it takes effort to make
the reservation. I had explained to my husband that it takes only a few hours that we are
not together during the flight but the
consequence if something happens to both of us will be devastating to our son. He would
probably not forgive us for not having an alternative in case.
Andrew is an only child with One first cousin (male) in the world who we met once during
our marriage. He has no uncles or aunts alive, only his parents in their 70's. I have two
half sisters I did not grow up with. I grew up with my grandfather. I only lived with my
mother from as far as I can remember half of 4th grade to to 6th grade then back to my
grandfather in high school and went off to college.
After Andrew retired in 1993 to 1997 living in Switzerland I was expecting I would get some
help from him with the sale of the New Jersey home and the move to Switzerland. Instead
Andrew stayed in Switzerland leaving me with all the chores of the preparation of selling
the home in New Jersey packing , and the move to a new country. At that time, I had just
gone thru the move to the two apartments in Switzerland. I had personally packed all the
antique collection, except the 25 Sung and Ming dynasty jars as they are tall, they had to
be put in individual crates or in tall padded boxes to be moved to Switzerland in 1994.
My friends could not believe that I was able to complete the whole process of the sale, and
the emptying of the eleven bedroom house to the complete move to Switzerland. They
told me that it was my fault for letting my husband get away with this kind of things, and that
I had spoiled him.
THE ILLEGAL TRANSFERS AND HIDING OF EVEN THE MINOR ACCOUNTS OF PARTIES BY
PLAINTIFF. THE INSATIABLE GREED OF PLAINTIFF IS SHAMEFUL AND EMBARRASSING.
As I took care of the dirty job, Andrew always took care of the money coming in. I never
knew how our money were invested. Andrew was the one who opened all of our bank
accounts at Credit Suisse USA, Bank of America, USA, in the Philippines, Switzerland and
Paris telling me to sign in a line for my signature.
I had found out only after we separated that plaintiff made it appear that I had equal rights
when he asked me to sign in my portion of the application when opening a joint account. I
now know that this is not so. I have learned Andrew's tactics in 2006 (after 26 years of
marriage) with what he did to me with our joint accounts at the Bank of America in Incline,
UBS bank in Switzerland, and accounts at Credit Suisse in San Francisco and the accounts
in Paris.
Plaintiff had the authority to transfer funds without my signature and the banks were not
allowed to even send a copy of the statements of the account anywhere else except as
specified by the main account holder, which was not me. I have found out that although I
had signed my name in all our joint accounts opened under both our names when we were
married, I did not have the equal authority Andrew had.
I was told by UBS bank that they could not send me a copy of the monthly statements as I
am only a "power of attorney Account holder" and needed an authorization or a power of
attorney from Andrew. Andrew had refused to write a letter to authorize the banks.
Meanwhile, Andrew was transferring money from this accounts (awarded to me in the PNA
and MSA ) to another account. (See statements of accounts ,exhibits of withdrawals ).
Except for personal withdrawal of money for our daily expenses, charging to credit cards,
while we were married. Plaintiff had controlled both the foreign bank accounts in
Switzerland and Paris which were to take care of the apartment expenses in these
countrys. Plaintiff had the full control as well of our accounts at Credit Suisse of over $ 80
Million during the over four (4) years litigation until now.
After I had difficulty to get the Foreign banks to send me a statement of accounts to my
current address, I dug the opening an account form Credit Suisse had sent to me for
signing in August 10,2004 I had scrutinized this form marked by indicators where to sign
my name. The form was for me for sign to open an account for the WaMu dividends I had
not accepted from August, 2004 and subsequent dividends we were not going to accept
under the fraudulent PNA agreement until a final decree of divorce.
Somewhere in the fine prints it stated that statements can only be sent to address
specified by main account holders and other legal term.
According to the agreements whatever was left in the foreign bank accounts were for me
to keep. There were three accounts at the Paris Bank in December,2003, BEFORE I HAD
ASKED FOR A DIVORCE IN JANUARY,2004. A U.S. dollar savings account, a Euro savings
and a Euro checking account. Plaintiff had closed one of the accounts just before the PNA
agreement, and had lied to the court in April 12,2006, that he had sent $ 10,000.00 to the
checking account as an advance to me to take care of the apartment expenses and had
asked the court that I be required to reimburse plaintiff.
Judge Weller did order I reimburse plaintiff in the Divorce decree. But the fact of the
matter was that plaintiff had only transferred $ 10,000.00 from the Paris dollar savings
account to the Euro Checking account that was given to me in the PNA and MSA. ( See
exhibits of transfer of money at Pariba Bank in Paris in February 7, 2006 and side
agreement of my own attorney and plaintiff's attorney January 25, 2006, email s between
the two counsels to defraud me of my money and my photographs, the extortionist
demands AND THE ADMITTING OF PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL THAT HE CAN NO LONGER BE THE
PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL AFTER HE WAS DISQUALIFIED IN THE JANUARY 6,2006 ORDER. THE
CRIMINAL WELLER HOWEVER ADMITTED MEADOR BACK TO BE PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL
DURING THE PHASE III TRIAL, WELLER VIOLATING HIS OWN ORDER, AGAIN).
There were two accounts at the UBS bank in Switzerland. One Dollar Savings account, one
Swiss Francs checking account. Plaintiff had closed the dollar savings account, and
changed it to Swiss Francs between the 2002 fraudulent Trust agreement and the PNA.
PLAINTIFF CLOSED, TRANSFERRED MONEY FROM THESE ACCOUNTS TO HIS OWN
ACCOUNTS TO EMPTY THE ACCOUNTS BEFORE THE DIVORCE DECREE IN A TOTAL AMOUNT
OF OVER 50,000.00 SWISS FRANCS. ( See UBS letter from Halima Bakari of UBS).
On September 23,2008 and October 26,2008, THE CRIMINAL JUDGE WELLER, HAD AGAIN
ORDERED THAT I GIVE THE NECESSARY PAPERS TO PLAINTIFF TO TRANSFER WHATEVER
MINISCULE ASSETS THIS CRIMINAL JUDGE HAD GIVEN TO ME otherwise he would appoint a
Court guardian at my expense, WHEN THIS CRIMIMAL JUDGE KNEW THAT PLAINTIFF HAS
THE BANK DOCUMENTATIONS, and only plaintiff has the power to transfer the bank
miniscule assets to me (except the Philippine condo documents that I have and had been
asking the attorney forced on me by Criminal Weller, Eric Fitting, to transfer this assets to
my name since July to October,2008( See emails betwen Eric Fitting and myself from August
2008 to October,2008).
The assets that this Criminal Judge Weller is ordering to transfer to my name otherwise a
guardian will be appointed at my expense are the following.
1) the Paris apartment which is a 90sq. meters with a loft for a bedroom for exactly
482,137,25 EUROS, we paid in 2002, equivalent to the same dollar amount. This inhabitable
apartment is totally inhabitable. It has no sink, a cooking stove or a refrigerator, nor
counter tops. You have to buy cooked food to take home and wash your dishes in the
toilet sink which is smaller than a regular pasta bowl. ( See photos exibited here)
According to my calculation the yearly expenses for this apartment including utilities,
property tax and home insurance plus any common renovation and association fees was
approximately around the equivalent in US $5,000 in 2007. I have not been given all the
communications to plaintiff from the Syndic, the apartment manager, including what taxes
have been paid since 2005.
Plaintiff receives all the communication from the foreign Banks, the Gstaad apartment and
the Paris apartment in his Reno address and had refused to authorize the above to send
me a copy of the communication that he receives monthly. Plaintiff took the time to change
the address to his new Reno address from the Incline Village address but did not provide
all the above with my address. Plaintiff forwarded random communications and bank
statements to me through my attorneys for the past four years, but I have not received any
for the year 2008.
I believe the only reason why Plaintiff had given to me the Paris apartment is that when you
sell a real estate property in France before owning it for a certain amount of years, I think
20 years, you pay at least 40% of property tax.
2) the money that is left over from the UBS account about 35,000.00 Swiss Francs instead
of approximate 70,000.00 Swiss Francs (as the apartment is self paying and makes more
than we pay monthly from sublet rentals,) The last deposit of the apartment rental to the
UBS Bank was in July,2008 for 6,800 euros.
The apartment was given to me for no reason but to take care of the hazzle to turn it over
to the owners after 15 years of renting it. Out of the 35,000.00 Swiss Francs left at UBS in
November 2008, I have to pay for my trip to Switzerland and a friend to help me from the
USA, rented a car to take some personal property from the Gstaad apartment to Paris,
Euros 1,488,00,gas and toal expenses from Gstaad to Paris, about $1,500.00, food for my
friend and I for 15 days at $100.00 a day, a half decent meal in Paris with drinks is about
$25.00 for one.
3) the Pariba Bank Euro checking account has 101.00 EUROS IN IT AND LESS THAN
$2,000.00 IN THE SAVINGS ACCOUNT. Plaintiff had closed one bank account before the PNA
as is evident in his 2003 letter of inquiry about the balance in the three bank accounts at
the Paris Bank and had changed the dollar savings account at the Swiss Bank into a Swiss
checking account before and after the trust agreement and the PNA.
4) the Philippines Condo that is now only worth about $280,000 from the $400,000.00 we
paid in 2002 due to the exchange rate and bad economy.
THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF ASSETS THAT THIS CRIMINAL JUDGE HAD FORCED ME TO TAKE
CARE OF TO TRANSFER TO MY NAME EVEN IF PLAINTIFF HAD THE NECESSARY
DOCUMENTS IS AN APPROXIMATE AMOUNT OF ABOUT $800.000, THAT HAD CAUSED ME TO
SPEND AT LEAST $7,000.00 FROM THE 35,000.00 SWISS FRANCS THAT WAS LEFT AT THE UBS
BANK INSTEAD OF 85,000.00 SWISS FRANCS
IT HAS COME TO MY ATTENTION FROM A RUMOR THAT PLAINTIFF IS LOOKING FOR A
PROPERTY TO BUY IN THAILAND IF HE HAS NOT BOUGHT IT YET, AND OR MEXICO.
THIS CRIMINAL JUDGE DID NOT EVEN REQUIRE PLAINTIFF TO RETURN THE MONEY
WITHDRAWN FROM THE FOREIGN ACCOUNTS IN SPITE OF MY ASKING FOR THEM TO BE
REIMBURSED. AMOUNT TO BE RETURNED FROM UBS BANK TO MRS. FURER IS 50.000
SWISS FRANCS INCLUDING THE FEBRUARY AND JULY, 2008 RENT DEPOSITED BY GERAX TO
THE CHECKING, THE DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT PLAINTIFF HAD CLOSED AT THE USB IN 2002,
AFTER THE TRUST AGREEMENT.
Andrew did not send his own money to Bank Pariba. He had transferred $10,000.00 from
our dollar savings account, awarded to me, to my Euro checking account to pay for the
Paris expenses. ( see Bank Pariba statement of the transfer) Andrew blatantly lied to the
court and should be in contempt. This must have been Andrew's usual practice during the
25 years of our marriage, confident that I trusted him unconditionally with all of our
finances and never questioned him once when I was asked to sign a document. All of
Andrew's deception are now coming to light which all of my attorney's have purposely
ignored during the litigation.
THIS CRIMINAL JUDGE HAD GIVEN PLAINTIFF $500,000.00 TO REDECORATE THE HOME
PLAINTIFF BOUGHT FOR $2,338,000.00 IN 2006, IN SPITE OF OF A MUTUAL FINANCIAL
RESTRAINING ORDER IN EXISTENCE SINCE 2004, IMPOSED BY THE EQUALLY UNETHICAL
AND EQUALLY CORRUPT SCHUMACHER TARGETTING ME FOR SANCTIONS NOT KNOWING IT
WAS PLAINTIFF WHO HAD WITHDRAWN 0VER $172,000.00 FROM THE $3 mILLION OF THE PNA
( See exhibits of withdrawal of plaintiff from the joint account May 2004 to july 24,2004 and
SCHUMACHER ORDER TO HOLD ME IN CONTEMPT BASED ON PLAINTIFF'S LIES TO THE
COURT.
I WOULD LIKE PLAINTIFF AND HIS COUNSELS, MEADOR, ROSS,OUR TRUST ATTORNEY AND
ROBISON TO GO tO JAIL FOR THEIR LIES TO THE COURT.
IF MARTHA STEWART HAD GONE TO JAIL FOR LYING TO THE GRAND JURY , PLAINTIFF AND
HIS COUNSELS MUST GO TO JAIL FOR THEIR NUMEROUS LIES AND MADE UP STORIES TO
THE COURT THAT I CAN SUPPORT WITH DOCUMENTATIONS. THERE SHOULDN'T BE TWO
LAWS FOR PERJURY, ONE FOR A WOMAN AND ONE FOR MEN WHO ARE ATTORNEYS. THE
LAW MUST STRICTLY BE FOLLOWED ESPECIALLY FOR ATTORNEYS EHO HAD COMMITTED
FRAUD AND PERJURY.
My husband had nagged me for years that I should open a business buying and selling
antique furniture as " you have the eyes for them so our travels will be free ". He told me I
was good in doing the dirty jobs, he was good at making money.
When the New Jersey home was sold we made at least $ 60,000 on the furniture I did not
want to keep I bought from estate sales and rogue antique shops. We also made a good
profits on the sale of the homes in Mclean, Virginia, Montclair, New Jersey and the Incline,
Nevada home bought in 1997 for $ 5Million, sold in 2007 for $11 Million.
I bought some Asian porcelain and ceramics, Ming and Sung Dynasty antique collection of
a friend in the Philippines who needed money. Andrew had asked me if we could donate
some pieces to a museum for tax deduction. I told him it was up to him. We had the
collection appraised as was required by the museum and donated 70 pieces out of the
150 pieces to the Newark Museum for tax deduction. He was able to get a tax deduction of
over $200,000 for one half of the whole collection that I had paid my friend about
$15,000.00.
It is normal in the U.S. that couples share with daily chores. In our family while our son
was growing up, this was not the case. Coming from a matriarchal culture and society we
take our role in the family seriously. We treat our husbands with respect and they are put
in a pedestal. We make sure that he is given a peaceful environment when he comes
home from work, and food is always ready to be served. It is common in the Philippines to
have household staff but the wife makes sure that all the husband’s needs are at his
finger tips. Husbands are not expected to help in any household chores, nor to be
bothered with daily minor problems in the household. The household and the children are
the domain of the wife like it was mine during the 25 years of marriage. I tried my very best
not to give my husband any pressure at home when he comes home from work.
Andrew never changed a single diaper of our son, ever! He admits to this. He tried to
once, but he was gaging wanting to throw up. I now realize that it was an act. Eating his
own snott, as Andrew does, is certainly more revolting than changing his son's diaper.
My husband never ever had the responsibility to take our son to and from school. I do not
remember my husband taking our son to and from school once, from Nursery, pre-k,
kinder, to third grade. He never had to worry about our son's daily activities, he never
had to worry about our sons daily needs the first seven years of his life, he never
bothered to help our son with home work. He never had to worry about the garden, never
had to worry about contractors. He never had to worry about packing and moving and
movers. He ever had to worry about entertaining. He never had to worry about his
clothes, about making doctors appointments. He never had to worry about presents for
people on any occasion, about writing thank you notes or accepting or declining an
invitation.
Isn't it amazing that Andrew had written Don Ross our trust attorney in May 21,2002, to
thank him in Ross' supposed meeting me in May 20,2002, where I was supposed to have
been present in the discussion before the fraudulent trust agreement was drafte. Andrew
did not know that I have documentation that he had met with Don Ross on May 19,2002,
alone, when he had filled out particulars about the trust agreement. ( See form dated, May
19,2002 filled out by Plaintiff and a notation on direction to Don Ross' office). This letter to
our trust attorney was supposed to validate his lie that I was present during the discussion
of the"$15 Million PNA" that I was supposed to have suggested, and my supposed
knowledge and approval of his instructing the trust attorney to create his own trust,funded
by the over $50Million community property asset the day before the trust agreement was
signed. ( See hearing tape of January 6,2006 ,disqualification of Shawn Meador and
testimony of trust attorney).
Plaintiff never had to worry about grocery shopping unless he wants to accompany me.
He never had to worry putting our son to bed, nor read to him unless he wanted to. He
never had to worry about minor home repairs ( much more major like the major renovation
of the Montclair home). I felt that I was the man of the house doing all the dirty and the
hands on chores that had to be taken care of and a full mothering duties to my husband
and son. I did not complain at all. Quite the contrary. I was proud of the role that my
husband had kind of automatically dumped on me maybe out of trust that I have the ability
to have things done. I attribute my knack of getting things done from my hotel
experience, as the Director of Housekeeping Services for over a decade.
I tried to instill manners and a little bit of class in my husband, to no avail.
I had nagged my husband for 23 years about eating his own snot several times a day
in front of me. The bigger they were from his nose after viewing it, the more
enthusiastic Andrew would be in putting it in his mouth and chewing it with gusto.
Andrew would rub in between his toes and sole and smell it, Andrew would put his index
finger in his ears to dig something and leak his fingers. He would pull hair from his nose
and put it in his mouth.
I tried to teach Andrew some manners like chewing his food before swallowing as there
were some scary moments when Andrew had almost choked from a piece of food and
making noise when swallowing. I made it my mission to teach my husband to be civilized
and learn to have a little finesse. These bizarre traits of my husband would have been a
cause for divorce for many women. I stuck it with the him for 23 years of watching his
bizarre traits. I had kept quiet during the litigation of being blamed for a “sexless marriage
during at least the last decade of the couples marriage” to quote Shawn Meador.
I loved my husband and wanted to help him overcome his inadequacies hoping I would be
able to give him a stable family life which he never had. Being a catholic, I wanted the
marriage to last not just for the sake of our son but for my love and trust for him. I only
asked for a serious divorce in 2004 after Andrew had threatened to embarrass me in the
Philippines, that he would tell my friends and relatives that the money I am spending for
the celebration was "money you are stealing from me as you do not have money of your
own"
THE AQUISITION OF WASHINGTON MUTUAL STOCK
Around 1997, the American Savings Bank was being sold or merged with Washington
Mutual. Andrew advised me while were in our Gstaad apartment, that there was going to
be a telephone call from the investment banking firm in charge of the sale. Andrew
wanted me to listen to the telephone conversation. The telephone call came with two
male voices on the other line from the investment firm.
As the conversation progressed, Andrew was demanding a cent or two more for his
shares of stocks from the American Savings Bank. He was told that all shares were priced
equally but Andrew was insisting on more money for his shares. I was getting
embarrassed at my husband's hazzling with the people he was talking to. I walked to the
living room, whispered to my husband if he would ask the parties on the other line to call
back. Andrew did as I had asked.
I asked him how much money we have in our joint account. Plaintiff told me we have at
least between $17 to 18 Million deposited with Credit Suisse.
I asked Plaintiff that if we have that much liquid cash why are we selling our shares of
stocks. Plaintiff’s reply was " because I do not want to be associated with those greedy
bastards, who had embarrassed me constantly in every meeting we have. I do not want to
be associated with David Bonderman, who has fu-----up this deal by agreeing on certain
issues with WAMU to put certain amount of shares of each shareholders in escrow.
WAMU did not want to take over the litigation between American Savings Bank and the
Government who was sued by American Savings Bank for requiring ASB to put up more
Capitalization" after the bank became successful.
"Bonderman has an attention span of a two year old” Bob Bass is a filthy rich idiot
whose brain is in his butt." I do not want to be dealing with Jay Crandall , who is a son -
of a______, { Crandall is the right hand man of Robert Bass). I hate Bernie, ( Carl ) for not
speaking up for me for more stocks which I deserve more than the “ bakla” referring to
David Schwartz, (“ bakla” is the word for gay in Filipino that plaintiff had learned from
me ) the architect of Robert s Bass who acquired some ASB shares of stocks with
Bernie Carl aside from the individual stocks given to Bernie under his individual name). "
That bakla has nothing to do with the bank, why did he get some shares of American
Saving."
Andrew started yelling at me that “ you know nothing about stocks and now you are the
genius telling me about investments" when I had told him not to sell our shares of stock if
we have over 18 million of cash.
As I knew Andrew's reason for wanting to sell American Savings Stock was not
reasonable, I had to threatened to leave him if he sold those stocks. I left Andrew in the
living room without saying another word. The investment bankers called with in a minute
of our conversation. I went back to the bedroom to listen as I was asked to.
To my surprise, the first words of Andrew was “ I am not selling my stock shares”. One
person on the other line told him he could not do that as his shares were already called
for, I think were the words. Andrew then told them that there was nothing they could do if
he did not want sell his ASB shares.
When Plaintiff hung up from the conversation, he told me in anger, "if the stocks of
Wamu go belly up it is your fault, I will not forgive you ". Plaintiff had explained to me that
the CEO of WAMU, Killinger, " is crazy in non stop opening of more branches and buying
more banks ".
Plaintiff had told me later on that if we had sold the stocks in 1997, we would have only
gotten about $ 15 to 20 Million. We were in a hotel near Monaco watching the stock
market a few months after WAMU had completed the transaction . Wamu stock had
soared that day. Plaintiff told me that so far I was right in forcing him not selling the stock
BUT I could see that there was some reservation in Plaintiff's voice giving me the
credit.
From 1997 to 2006, the WaMu stock had quadrupled, and instead of having an
approximate $15 to $20 Million, we had over $50 Million before the start of slump in late
2007. Plaintiff should have thanked me for my stopping him from selling our shares due to
the wrong reasons why he had wanted to sell the ASB shares to WAMU in 1997.
THE MOVE BACK TO THE USA AFTER FIVE YEARS IN SWITZERLAND.
In 1996, we decided that it was time for our son to continue with his studies in the United
States to prepare him for college. We visited several schools in the West Coast and
decided to enroll our son at a boarding school, Groton School, in Groton Massachusetts, in
1997.
My husband had also decided that it was time for us return to the United States because of
double taxation. We were paying taxes in Switzerland because of the nature of our
residence statue. Andrew was paying a company in Switzerland about 150,000 Swiss
Francs yearly. The company in turn was paying him his monthly salary out of his own
money, but was paying Swiss income taxes. We were also paying taxes in the United
States.
My husband only wanted to live is a state that did not have state taxes. He narrowed the
selection between Florida and Nevada. After looking at several houses in Boca Raton and
Palm Beach, he decided not to live in Florida after he found out that there is a 2% hidden
taxes on assets.
We then started looking for a house in Las Vegas, Nevada. He made an offer on a house in
Las Vegas. He was told by the CEO of American Savings Bank, Mario Antoci, to look at
Incline Villlage Nevada first before deciding on Las Vegas. My husband liked Incline
Village because he would continue to ski and will take on boating, after he saw the lake
and the ski facilities. We bought a lakefront home in Incline Village with a private beach
and a private pier for $5 Million in 1997. We moved to Incline Village in November1997, but
we had kept the rented Gstaad, Apartment.
After we were settled in Incline Village, Andrew bought a 33ft formula boat complete with a
queen bed, bathroom, kitchen and all the conveniences. This was our summer
entertainment. Andrew,s hobby during the winter was skiing every day five to six days a
week the first two years, in lake Tahoe then tapered it down to three to four days a week.
As in Switzerland, Andrew never ski without a teacher in tow. He paid the ski teacher,
Wade Holiday, cash weekly at $300.00 a day with free lunch and 20% tip from 1997 to the
present. Andrew and I used to ski together in Switzerland. I tried to ski in Lake Tahoe
twice, but stopped for fear of ending with a broken bone or crippled where I won't be of no
use for my family. I was not comfortable with the way people ski here. In Switzerland
people ski in a very graceful and refined way, in their own path, not all over the slope..
By 1997 to 2002 we had accumulated assets of over $ 80 Million. Having too much time in
our hands, our son going to college, we planned to travel more extensively. We have an
apartment in Paris, Gstaad, Switzerland a condominium in the Philippines, and a lake front
home in Incline Village, Nevada. We planned to divide our time between these places.
Andrew however, was secretly planning something else contrary to our plan. After
plaintiff had found stability in life, something he never had with his parents, free from the
hassles of the competitive work force which he dreaded the most, and with too much
time in his hand, plaintiff started his own devious plan. (The elaborate plan not only to
defraud and strip me of my legal rights to the marital assets, but also to have me put in jail as
the culmination of the plan laid out in My Judicial Complaint supported by court documents
and hearing tapes of the four years proceedings)
Andrew only worked Twelve Years (12 ) during our 25 years of marriage. This was the
time when we had acquired our wealth for our retirement and security to enjoy in our old
age. I was in the prime of my life during this time and had an enormous contribution in
holding the family together with moral values, integrity, decency and hard work.
THE ELABORATE SCHEME AND PLAN TO DIVORCE BY PLAINTIFF.
STEP 1 OF THE PLANNED SCHEME AND DECEIT OF MY HUSBAND TO DEFRAUD ME OF THE ACCUMULATED OVER
$80 MILLION ASSETS DURING THE 25 YEARS OF MARRIAGE.
In 1999, I insisted that we needed a estate planning for the family. I was concerned about the future of our only
child who was 15 years old in 1999, a minor. My concern was that due to our plan of extensive traveling all over
the world, a estate planning was necessary to protect our son... After my insistence with the estate planning in
1999 plaintiff told me he was going to see who could do it. I did not hear about it again until May, 2002.
In May,2002, my husband told me that we were finally going to do our estate planning with an attorney that he had
contacted in Reno, and that we were going to sign the estate planning before we left for our cross driving trip to
Boston, Massachusetts to attend our son's graduation. My husband asked me to think of two trustee, and write
them down with their complete address and telephone numbers.
Before May 24, 2002, my husband showed me a draft of the estate planning stating in general that if he dies
before me, the assets go to me, if I die before him all the assets go to him, if we both die it goes to our son. If our
son was still a minor when we die, the trustee, my niece and best friend, will be our son's representative and a
bank. I thought there was nothing wrong with it since our purpose for the estate planning was to protect the
interest of my son in case something happens to both of us.
On May 24, 2002, we went to the office of Don Ross to signed the estate planning. Mr. Ross gave me the
documents, to review the addresses and telephone numbers of the trustees, asking me if they were my
relatives. He then asked me to sign the documents, flipping the pages for me indicating where to sign. My
husband was signing another set by himself. Then three women came in to the office of Mr. Ross. Two of the
women witnessed the document signed, the other notarized it. Mr. Ross told us that he was going to have them in
a nice binder and send us our copies. The meeting and signing of thr trust as in Mr. Ross's office as opposed to
the statement of Mr. Ross and Meador that it occured in their conference room,where I have been during
depostions.
In May 24, I was also given the waiver that generally stated that we agreed that Don Ross was both our trust
attorney, prepared and also signed May 24, 2002, contrary to all the false allegations speech of Mr. Robison on
January 6, 2006. (See hearing tape and May 24 memo to Ross secretary
from Ross to prepare a waiver as the Furer's are coming this afternoon to sign the trust)
After the signing of the estate planning, we left for Boston, then we went to the
Philippines, then Paris. I never saw the signed estate planning again until 2004 after we
had separated.
What I did not know in May 23,2002,( until 2005 )a day before we signed the Trust
agreement, is the fact that Andrew had called our trust attorney to create his own trust in "
an extensive telephone call to Mr
We spent our summers in 2001 and part of 2002 and 2003 in the Philippines . While
there our son had volunteered for two months at the office of our Senate President. He
also volunteered in the offices of Reuters, ABS-CBN and Radio Veritas, and took tennis
lessons at the exclusive Manila Polo Club, as a guest of a friend. In 2003, while in the
Philippines for my celebration, he took golf lessons for one month, before starting college
at Harvard University.
After our son graduated from high school, he was accepted to Harvard College. We were however advised that it
would be good for our son to take a year off before starting his college studies. After our son's graduation in
high school, we spent time in the Philippines to start renovation of our condominium. Then we took our son to
Paris later that summer to enrolled him at the Sorbonne University for the whole year to brush up with his
French, and just to wind up and have a good time before starting college. We bought an apartment in Paris for
him during his one year study at Sorbonne. While our son was in school, Andrew and I traveled in Europe
including Portugal to visit the Groto of Fatima; and to buy religious articles to be used in the Philippines for the
Centennial celebration of Our Lady of the Assumption in Manila, where I was the "Hermana Mayor". We came
back to Incline in June from Paris and planned to leave for the Philippines in July for the August,2003 celebration.
STEP 2 OF THE PLANNED SCHEME AND DECEIT
A week after we came back from Paris,I was getting ready to leave for the Philippines for the August celebration.
I called my organizer of the event in the Philippines. While I was talking in the telephone, Plaintiff started yelling
from behind me, wanted to be heard
by the other party on line. " Why don't you also tell them that the money you are spending for the celebration is
money you are stealing from me as you do not have money of your own " I hung up the phone. I asked plaintiff
what exactly he meant . He told me it was true, why should I be angry.
These words of the plaintiff had penetrated my heart. I could not believe he had uttered these words. uring our
over two decades of marriage, plaintiff never ever stopped me from spending on anything nor have questioned
me about my spending. I would come home with purchased jewelry, fur coats, expensive clothing with out any
sign of disapproval or criticism, except comments like, knowing you, it must have been a good buy. Some times
it would be the plaintiff who would force me to buy things for myself. When we are in Paris I always want to visit
the Chanel main store mostly for window shopping or sale items. On one ocassion, I tried a summer dress that I
liked. Plaintiff told me it looked good why don't I get it. I told him because of the price of $3,000.00. He told me that
sometimes it bothers him because of my being frugal when I could afford to buy it.
I was deeply hurt but I also did not want to be alone during the celebration in the Philippines. I tried to analyze why
he said such a cruel thing to me. We were not fighting or arguing at that time. I could not come up with any
explanation at all. I left for the Philippines July 4, plaintiff and my son followed a week later. During the
celebration, it looked plaintiff had a good time meeting my friends and relatives hopping from one table to
another.
AFTER ALL OF MY SACRIFICES Of 24 YEARS, PLAINTIFF WANTED TO DEPRIVE ME THE ENJOYMENT OF
REAPING THE FRUIT OF OUR SUCCESS AFTER RUBBING ME OF THE PRIME OF MY LIFE. PLAINTIFF MAY HAVE
FELT IN 2002 THAT OUR SON IS GROWN AND DID NOT NEED A WIFE TO RAISE HIM. I AM VERY PROUD OF THE
WAY OUR SON WAS RAISED. OUR SON GRADUATED FROM HARVARD UNIVERSITY IN 2007. HE HAD TURNED OUT
TO BE A WELL MANNERED AND A FINE YOUNG MAN. I JUST HOPE THAT WHAT HIS FATHER HAD DONE TO ME AT
MY LATE AGE OF 67, WILL NOT AFFECT HIM LATER IN HIS LIFE. FOR NOW, HE IS TRYING NOT TO GET INVOLVED
BUT I CAN DETECT DURING OUR CONVERSATIONS THAT HE IS HURTING INSIDE.
Before the Trust Agreement and Estate planning we had a total shares of 1,149,000 after
the last donation to Harvard University for a research professor for the Economics
department. We have donated over $5 Million worth of WAMU stocks from 1997 for the
Andrew E. Furer Chair of Economics and The Furer Family Scholarship for Filipino
deserving students, and the additional donation in 2004 for the Department of Economic
research professor.
I have no idea how much shares of WAMU was donated to Harvard University.
As I had testified and submitted to the court I am asking for the reimbursement of one half
of the amount donated to Harvard if my name is not memorialized in the publication. If
plaintiff gets married, I wanted the Harvard donation in both to our names having
acquired the amount donated during our marriage.
I did not work in Wall Street nor I know how to read long statements of accounts. During
the duration of our marriage I never once sat down with Plaintiff to discuss what we had
acquired, nor had called our investment banker to inquire before the separation..
The first time we sat down to discuss our assets was in March 2004 when Plaintiff had
dictated to me to write down what we have, how much taxes was due if assets are sold,
how much commission to be paid etc. while he was reading from his computer what was
supposed to be the total assets that we had. As I had testified in court I thought it was odd
for me to be writing what was being read to me from the computer when he could have
just printed it . ( See hand written disclosure of assets ). I now realized that his insistence
for me to write as he dictated was part of the scheme. He had wanted to show the court
that I knew or was fully aware of what assets we have.
I was naive, to say the least or maybe stupid, but this was always normal that I would do
what the plaintiff would ask me to do. The only exception was when it came to the
disciplining our son, or things that have something to do with manners and being
ostentatious.
An example of my naivety and the unconditional trust I have on plaintiff, is when he told
me that since we acquired most of our assets in New Jersey, I was only entitled like what
Mrs. Wendt got according to the article I was shown about the Wendt and Wendt divorce
case. ( See What is equitable distribution an article about the Wendt case.
and November 14,2006 Order)
I believe plaintiff when he told me that the reason why the PNA was written the way it
was, is to conform with the Nevada Law, The division of assets have to be included, but
not to pay attention to it. Only pay attention to the stated purpose of the PNA, which is
to reconcile the marriage. ( See Post Nuptial Agreement ).
I did not recognize the enormous tax benefit that he had claimed for himself in the PNA and
MSA. ( See Marital Settlement Agreement ) I did not recognize the last sheet of paper
attached to the Individual trust of the Plaintiff after I first saw it for the first time in 2005.
The one sheet of paper that did not look like a a stock certificate, was the totality of the
$50 Million worth of the WAMU stock that the Plaintiff had claimed as his own and put it in
his own individual trust. The one sheet of paper on the last page of plaintiff's individual
trust had the name Credit Suisse, Donaldson,Lufkin & Jenrette Securities Corp. 219-846921.
THE WELL PLANNED SCHEME, FRAUD AND DECEPTION OF MR. FURER AGAINST MRS.
FURER ON THE DIVORCE.
1. I asked plaintiff for a divorce in January, 2004 after he threatened to embarrass me in
front of over 1,000 guests during a centennial celebration in the Philippines when I was
the the sponsor and the " Hermana Mayor ".
He threatened that he would announce to everyone from the stage during the celebration
or call all my friend that the money I was spending was money I was stealing from him as
“you do not have money of your own”. The threat was repeated several times before we
left for the Philippine and in the Philippines a few days before the celebration. I had
suffered extreme emotional distress from the threat of being embarrassed. I did nothing
wrong nor had I provoked the plaintiff in order for him to utter these hurtful words at that
time. I had kept the pain within me for about six months, before asking for a divorce when
I could no longer tolerate the thought of being insulted and the insult and disregard of
my role in our family for 25 years.
3. The threat of Andrew four months prior to my celebration in the Philippines was
obviously part of Andrew's scheme to anger me and induce me to ask for a divorce so he
could move on to the next chapter of his carefully planned scheme to defraud me. I fell
into the trap and plan of the Plaintiff.
4. . When I asked for a divorce in January, 2004, I immediately called a real estate agent
in Las Vegas in front of plaintiff, to look for a small house for me . Plaintiff started crying
, begging me not to divorce him as “ I loves you, I have no friends, I cannot trust anyone
with our money, why break our long marriage, why give our son the stigma of coming from
a broken home”.
5. The staged begging and crying as I know now, went on for days . He insisted to drive
with me to Las Vegas to look at the homes the real estate agents wanted me to see. By the
time we arrive Las Vegas , Thinking that he was sincere with his crying and begging I
decided not to pursue with the divorce.
6. Plaintiff told me that since I did not like living in Lake Tahoe because of the harsh
winter, we were going to move to Las Vegas to show me he truly loves me and he wants to
keep the family together.
7. That we will just buy a small house in lake Tahoe for skiing during the winter.
Plaintiff also told me that we will have a Post Nuptial Agreement, so that the threat that I
was put through will not happen again, and that so I will be free in spending for what I
wanted, without him looking over my shoulder. Plaintiff had told me that he will give me
“substantial amount of money at your disposal and you can use for your planned charity
work in the Philippines , every thing will be the same , we will not be divorced. I do not
want to lose you".
8. We looked at several houses while in Las Vegas from 8,000, sq ft. to 12,000 , the size of
home Plaintiff wanted. I prefer a smaller home as it is just for the two of us, our son being
in college. .We did not find the house that we agreed to buy during this trip.
9. . Plaintiff told the real estate agent to now look for a big house to be our main
residence , as we are not going to be divorced. Plaintiff told me we need to come back to
Las Vegas to continue looking so the Incline home can be sold.
10. . Before we went home to Incline, plaintiff had insisted in buying for me a
$114,000.00 Mercedes sports car “as a gift for agreeing not to divorce me”. I did not want
the car, but plaintiff insisted. I did not want to be ungrateful. I accepted the car, which
Plaintiff had paid for immediately. I was now convinced that my husband must truly love
me. I felt so guilty and embarrassed for even thinking of asking for a divorce. I truly
believed that my husband was repentant in his threat in the Philippines.
11. Within a week after we were home, we started looking at homes in the Lake Tahoe
area for our vacation home as it was now decided that we were going to move to Las
Vegas as our permanent residence
12. There was a house in the California side of Lake Tahoe that plaintiff was interested
in buying. This is the complex where the movie Godfather III was filmed. Knowing that
plaintiff did not like paying taxes more than he has to, I had asked him if he did not mind
buying a house in California. He told me that it did not matter as our main residence will
be Las Vegas, Nevada where there is no state tax. We did not pursue this house though,
as the boat slips were too small for our boat, and the location was far from everything.
13. After I had agreed not to divorce plaintiff he told me he that would ask a lawyer start
drafting the Post Nuptial Agreement.
14. I was told by plaintiff when we went back home that I have to hire my own lawyer for
the Post Nuptial Agreement. I asked why I have to have a lawyer if the purpose of the
PNA was only to give me money of my own, and we had agreed that there will be no
divorce or separation.
Plaintiff had insisted that the PNA will not be valid if I am not represented by a lawyer. ” It
is also a big amount that I am planning to transfer to your own name. Don’t you want to
have money in your own name so the incident in the Philippines will not be repeated “. I
told plaintiff that I did not know any lawyer. Plaintiff told me that it was important that I
have a lawyer. I started looking in the telephone directory. I found the name of Ms.
Mcdonald. I called for an appointment. After the appointment, I decided not to hire her.
I told plaintiff that I did not hire the lawyer, Ms. Mcdonald who I had an appointment with.
He suggested that I call the lawyer who represented the seller on the closing of our Incline
home and ask for a referral. I called this lawyer but the lawyer I was referred to was not
taking new cases.
Plaintiff told me that he was going to ask Shawn Meador for a referral of a lawyer to
represent me in the PNA. Shawn Meador, is the lawyer who was involved during the
creation of the Trust Agreement in 2002, He was already drafted the MSA before January
16, 2004 and had drafted some PNA in March, 2004 before plaintiff had forced me to sign
the Waiver of conflict. ( See testimony of Sandra Unsworth April 11,2006 hearing) .
15. What I did not know was before we left for Las Vegas plaintiff had already instructed
Shawn Meador to start drafting a marital settlement agreement on January 16, 2004, I had
found out about the several drafts of the MSA, then PNA later on, a year into the litigation
when he submitted documents as part of his 16.1 production of documents.
16. I felt compassion after the begging and crying of Plaintiff and thought that I was really
loved that I agreed not to divorce him. My honest to goodness compassion from his
begging not to divorce him, resulted in the fraudulent PNA . The Fraudulent Postnuptial
Agreement was the result of the Fraudulent and Devious Trust Agreement and Estate
Planning in 2002.
The scheme and the carefully orchestrated plan of the Plaintiff to divorce me, before I
asked for a divorce in 2004 are manifested in the following STEP BY STEP manipulation.
The document that I found among the pages of the seventh ( 7th) draft of the PostNuptial
Agreement will help tie in the ATROCIOUS scheme of Plaintiff.
STEP 1 in 2002 which was the Trust Agreement,
STEP II was the threat to embarrass me in the Philippines, to induce me to asked for a
divorce,
STEP III was the begging and crying not to divorce him , and the plaintiff's talking Women
in the internet, admitting to me that he had at least talked to fifty (50) women ,
STEP IV is the inducement to have a Post Nuptial Agreement and signing it after I had
agreed not to divorce him and gifting me with a Mercedes Sports Car worth $114,000 " as a
gift for your agreeing not to divorce me
STEp V, the pretense of looking for a home in Las Vegas, looking for homes in Lake
Tahoe so Incline home can be sold, and family will move to Las Vegas,
STEP VI, the inducement of letting me go back to Las Vegas THE DAY AFTER THE SIGNING
OF PNA to continue to look for home ,so Incline home can be sold, plaintiff declared that
he will not go with me to look for home in Vegas as "we just fight on which home to make
an offer, will follow me after I found home of my choice for approval,
STEP VII, the invitation of women to the marital home sixteen hours the PNA was signed,
thirty minutes after I left marital home to drive to Vegas, one reservation with a hotel a day
before PNA was signed,
STEP VIII, Plaintiff following me to Vegas with our son, to make me think that the planned
move to Vegas was real,
STEP IX, the family's return to marital home after approval of plaintiff of home I had chosen
for family, and my discovery of plaintiff's infidelity June 2,2004, lipstick on couple's bed
sheets, sanitary napkins and a woman's underwear on guest bedroom, STEP X, after I had
found and had confirmed infidelity of Plaintiff 16 hours after the PNA was signed ,it was
clear that plaintiff had no intention of being married to me, I demanded for the divorce
that I had asked in January,2004.
STEP X of the plaintiff's scheme was accomplished, thru the Marital Settlement Agreement.
STEP X1, The exclusive possession of the marital home, to throw me out, STEP X11, the
stripping me of my assets, Realizing the promise to me of plaintiff in July,2004 that if I do
not sign the MSA, he will make sure to make me live a pauper, the move to put me in jail,
with the help of all my attorneys, Judge Weller, Judge Schumacker, the District Attorney's
office, retired Judge Manukian, Carol Cooke, Credit Suisse, Judge Steinheimer, the Reno
Sheriff Department,
.I HAD SIGNED THE PNA ALL BECAUSE I FELT SORRY FOR PLAINTIFF AFTER HE WAS BEGGING ME NOT TO DIVORCE
HIM, I FELT NEEDED MYSELF. AND THE CONVINCING GESTURES SHOWN BY THE PLAINTIFF'S LOVE FOR ME.
Plaintiff had violated the stated purpose of the PNA, WHICH IS AS STATED,…
"IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE THE ODDS OF RECONCILING ANY OTHER DIFFERENCES AND ALLOWING THE PARTIES TO
RESTORE MARITAL HARMONY AND REMAIN MARRIED" ….
." FROM AND AFTER THE DATE OF EXECUTION OF THIS AGREEMENT, THE PARTIES SHALL CONTINUE TO LIVE
TOGETHER AS MAN AND WIFE FOR SO LONG AS THEY MUTUALLY DESIRE TO DO SO"
PLAINTIFF WANTED BERNIE CARL to be " SALVAGED " after the distribution of
ASB shares of stock.
The stock distribution of American Savings Bank had bothered Andrew so deeply, the
reason for his early retirement. Years later, his pain is still reflected in his reason why he
wanted to sell the same shares of stock to WaMu, trying to squeeze a penny or two more
for his shares.
At the time of the stock distribution I happen to tell Andrew at dinner about an article I just
read that day of some people who disappeared or have been "salvaged" in the
Philippines but almost no one is charged for the crime. Salvage was a term used in the
Philippines for individuals who had disappeared ( killed ).
I was shocked when Andrew had asked me if there was a way that I could hire some one
from the Philippines to have Bernie Carl "SALVAGED". I could not believe what I just
heard, I told Andrew. I did not know how to react and had dismissed it as joke, although
the demeanor of Andrew at that time was far from joking. Andrew hardly ever jokes about
anything. He has no sense of humor.
Bernie Carl is the most generous, down to earth, gentleman, I have ever met in my life. It
was Bernie Carl who had helped Andrew with his job. Bernie had loaned us money at one
point I think for the down payment of our Montclair home or some amount to pay for the
ASB shares, as our savings was not sufficient to pay for the shares allotted to him.
Come to think of it now plaintiff was dead serious in his inquiry about having Bernie Carl
"salvaged " and if " you know of someone in the Philippines for hire to have Bernie
salvaged." I told him that even if I know of someone I was not going to do what he was
thinking just because he was unhappy of the amount of shares he was given from the
American Savings Bank.
Yes, I now believe that Andrew was serious in suggesting that he had wanted Bernie Carl
to be " salvaged " due to the less amount of shares he was given by the group. If plaintiff
could do what he did to me, his wife he lived with for over two decades, I sincerely
believed he wanted to have Mr Carl " salvaged ". Andrew had blamed Mr. Carl for it ,
being his partner in one of the Robert Bass group of companies. Bernie is close to Robert
Bass and David Bonderman, the principals of American Savings Bank and Andrew was
expecting Bernie to speak to them on his behalf.
The reason Andrew had asked me if I knew of someone who could "SALVAGE BERNIE" is
because Andrew knows I have political connections and friends in the Philippines. He had
met them and had been with them every time we were in the Philippines. My ex father-in-
law was a Mayor of Tacloban City and a Congressman of Leyte for 36 years. Andrew knows
that I was close to the family of my ex husband. They always came and visited us in the USA
when they were here, which was quiet often. we were always invited to their home or a
party was given for us when we were in the Philippines. We were given a car and a driver
and bodyguard whenever we were in Tacloban City, when the Brother of my ex father in
law was the Mayor of Tacloban City.
Plaintiff was very much impressed with my relationship with my ex husband's family and he
was very comfortable in their company, including the brother of my ex father-in Law who
also was the Mayor of Tacloban City when we were frequenting the Philippines. My
disagreement with my ex husband was just between the two of us and we remain good
friends until his death. He would also visit us here in the US when he was here. Andrew
also knows that my best friends in the Philippines is a couple who are both a
congressman and a congresswoman, whose cars and drivers we use when we were in
Manila.
Our son had volunteered in the office of our then Senate President for two(2) months
during the summer, he had also volunteered at ABS-CBN, Radio Veritas, with Maria Resso
at CNN, in the Philippines, and Reuters in the Philippines due to my connections.
We were invited to the openings of the Senate and Congress when we were in the
Philippines, and Andrew enjoyed attending them.
EVEN IN MY PERSONAL LIFE, PLAINTIFF HAD ALWAYS DOMINATED ME, TO DO AS HE HAD WANTED ME TO DO.
IN 2003, WHILE WE WERE IN THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff had forced me to attend the funeral of my ex husband in
2003 when we were in the Philippines.
I at first resisted being forced to do something out of my principle but Plaintiff had explained to me that " I do
not want your son to see and think that you are selfish and uncaring. He knows that you have a very good relation
with the whole family. If you won't attend as you were asked to by the family, your son will think you are a bad
person for not attending a funeral of someone you are close to. I do not want this impression of you in your son,s
mind ".
Come to think of this now, this was such a total hypocrisy on the plaintiff's part after all what he had done to me
after over two decades of marriage.
It just did not seem right for me to be there out of decency. I had already made excuses to everyone why I was
not going to attend the funeral when Plaintiff had practically Ordered me to attend by BUYING A ROUND TRIP
TICKET FOR ME FOR TACLOBAN CITY TO LEAVE THREE HOURS AFTER I CAME HOME FROM A MEETING. Plaintiff
was very upset I was not going to attend the funeral.
I did not want to attend the funeral due to an act of decency on my part that if I attended the funeral, I would be the
one welcomed and given attention to ( Which actually had happened when I showed up) I did not want to
embarrass the live in girlfriend of my ex husband (who is a friend, as well as her sisters) for 25 year who he did
not marry, although she herself had insisted I be present at the funeral knowing the family had asked me to
attend.
I gave my husband a wonderful son. I have enslaved for him to make his life easy. In exchange, instead of being
grateful, he planned and schemed to divorce me via his hurt full threat to embarrass me to my friends and
family in the Philippine that" the money you are spending is money you are stealing from me as you do not have
money of my own". Where that came from, I have no idea as we were not arguing that day.
All I can think of now is that Andrew had labored for two years since 2002, (after the fraudulent trust agreement
was signed, having created his own trust without my knowledge funded by over $50 Million of community
property ) on how to implement and put the fraudulent trust agreement into effect. I had suggested a simple
estate planning to protect the interest of our son in case something happen to us during our planned extensive
travels. I thought that a estate planning was the same as a trust agreement.
By threatening to embarrass me in the Philippines would cause me to ask for divorce. The threat to embarass
was plaintiff's means to now implement AFTER exactly TWO YEARS (since the fraudulent trust agreement was
signed in May 24,2002),of waiting and planning the almost perfect scheme to defraud his wife of over two
decades of what is rightfully hers thru the fraudulent trust agreement and the Individual Trust plaintiff had
created for himself instructing Don Ross the parties trust attorney ( see memo of Don Ross to his secretary
dated May 24, 2002 ) to transfer over $ 50 Million of assets hours before the scheduled signing on May 24,2002;
exactly two years when a scrupulous counsel would advise a client to prepare, hide, plan, and scheme against a
wife if HE is to come out getting most of the properties of the parties.
ANDREW FURER, SHAWN MEADOR MANIPULATED THE MARITAL HOME TO BE HIS WAS WHEN HE TOLD ME DO
NOT PAY ATTENTION TO THE DIVISION OF PROPERTY THIS IS THE BIGGEST PUZZLE OF ALL TO ME. HOW, WHEN
AND WHY?
The transfer of the WAMU stock on instruction of Andrew on the last minute before the signing without my
knowledge is understandable. Proof: When I saw for the first time plaintiff's Individual trust, in 2006 after the
testimony of Don Ross on the hearing to disqualify Shawn Meador
NO WOMAN EVEN THE DUMBEST WOULD SIGN ANY DOCUMENT UNLESS PRESENTED TO HER IN THE MOST
SCRUPULOUS WAY, THAT WOULD CAUSE HER GIVE UP THE ROOF OVER HER HEAD AND HER CHILDREN
UNLESS COMPENSATED OTHERWISE. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WAS DONE TO ME . THE DOCUMENTS I WAS ASKED
TO SIGN WAS DECEPTIVELY AND SCRUPULOUSLY PRESENTED TO ME.
THE MARITAL HOME AS WELL AS ALL THE ASSETS THAT I KNOW OF INCLUDING THE WAMU SHARES OF STOCK
WAS DICTATED TO ME BY PLAINTIFF TO WRITE IN MY HANDWRITING WHILE PLAINTIFF WAS READING THE
ASSETS FROM HIS COMPUTER, AROUND MARCH 15,2004 AS OUR TOTAL ASSETS THAT pLAINTIFF HAD
INSTRUCTED ME TO FAX TO MY THEN COUNSEL SANDRA UNSWORTH AS OUR DISCLOSURE OF ASSETS.
IT IS NOW OBVIOUS WHY PLAINTIFF DID NOT INCLUDE THE ACCOUNTS AT THE BANK PARIBA IN PARIS, AND THE
UBS ACCOUNTS IN SWITZERLAND. PLAINTIFF HAD TO FIRST CLOSE AN ACCOUNT IN PARIS AND TOOK THE
MONEY SOMEWHERE, CLOSED THE DOLLAR ACCOUNT AT THE UBS BANK, MADE BOTH ACCOUNTS IN SWISS
FRANC, AND TRANSFERRED SOME OF THE MONEY IN THE SAVINGS ACCOUNT TO HIS OWN ACCOUNT
( SEE WITHDRAWALS OF PLAINTIFF IN BOTH THSE UBS CHECKING AND SAVINGS ACCOUNT
DUE TO THE UNCONDITIONAL TRUST I HAD ON MY HUSBAND OF OVER TWO DECADES I TRUSTED HIS EVERY
WORD HAVING NOT GIVEN ME ANY REASON NOT TO TRUST HIM. JUDGE WELLER EVEN SAW THIS DURING MY
TESTIMONY IN THE 2006 HEARING, THAT RESULTED IN HIS ORDER DATED NOVEMBER 14,2006, INVALIDATING THE
PNA. "MRS. FURER WOULD NOT HAVE SIGNED THE PNA IF NOT FOR THE TRUST ON HER HUSBAND"
The hurtfull threat to embarrass me to my friends that" the money you are spending is stealing money you are
stealing from me as you do not have money of my own", was a plan to induce me to ask for a divorce in oder for
Plaintiff to implement the fraudulent trust agreement signed in 2002,funded by the $50 Million WAMU shares
without my knowledge,
It was just recently in November,2008 when I had the time to read the
CERTIFICATE OF THE TRUST mentioned in a letter from Don Ross dated May 21,2002 addressed to Andrew and
Eloisa Furer. This letter is dated on the same day Andrew had written to Don Ross thanking him in supposedly
meeting me in on MAY 20,2002, where the $15 Million PNA in the draft was discussed to be the amount I had
asked for in a divorce "for me to go away", and to discuss Plaintiff's creation of his Individual Trust that I had
supposedly approved. The testimony of plaintiff in court in April 2006 does not make sense, A divorce was not
discussed before, during and after the 2002 signing of the fraudulant trust. Eloisa asked for divorce in
January2004, two years after the Trust was signed.
Why would I agree for plaintiff to create his Individual trust in May 20,2002 if a divorce had been discussed. If a
divorce had been discussed during this supposed meeting, it would have been a" hostile" confrontation if inded I
had asked for "$15 million to go away", and then agreed for plaintiff to have his Own Individual Trust funded by
the entire 1,1149,000,000 WAMU shares of stock and give plaintiff at the same time the Marital home?
You be the JUDGE!
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
About the Marriage and Divorce Background
| (Editing is ongoing. I am trying my best to get the story in chronological order from beginning to end so you will be able to view court documents and hearing tapes properly.) Please pardon the errors you may notice throughout this website. I cannot type properly to start with. This is my first attempt, ever, to use and own a computer. As a matter of necessity with my "look and you shall find the letters" typing skills I think it is not too bad. I do not have a Journalism degree nor any literary experience at all. I am just trying to communicate to the world my undeserved predicament my husband of over two decades had put me through with the assistance of JUDGE" CHUCK"WELLER, Deborah Schumacher, the now recused judge, as well as the rest of other officers of the Wahoe Judicial System mentioned here, involved in my divorce case that has been ongoing since 2004. ALERT! WARNING! LATEST HARASSMENT AND INTIMIDATION OF WELLER ON ELOISA DECEMBER 3 AND DECEMBER 10,2008 ,ORDERS TO JAIL ELOISA FOR 20 DAYS After Judge Weller had given to my husband 95% of our acumulated assets during the marriage in his February 22,2008, Finding of Facts and Decree THAT HAS VIRTUALLY LEFT ELOISA WTH NO CASH ASSETS, THE LATEST HARASSMENT FROM JUDGE WELLER ARE TWO (2) ORDERS FROM WELLER TO INCARCERATE ELOISA 20 DAYS IN JAIL: FOR ELOISA TO SURRENDER TO THE WASHOE JAIL TO SERVE TWO 10 DAYS OF JAIL SENTENCES. 1) THE DECEMBER 3, 2008 ORDER WAS FOR FAILURE TO REPLY TO PLAINTIFF OPPOSITION TO COURT MASTER RECOMMENDATION AND ORDER OF AUGUST,2008 INVALIDATING HER FIRST ORDER TO JAIL ELOISA ON JULY24, 2008 BASED ON TRUMPED UP ALLEGATION AND A SET UP TO AN ORDINARY EPO AFTER COURT MASTER REALIZED THAT WHAT SHE WAS BEING DICTATED TO BY PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL TO COMMIT ELOISA 40 DAYS IN JAIL ON A CIVIL CONTEMPT WAS WRONG AND AGAINST THE LAW , AN ADMISSION OF ERROR. PLAINTIFF OPPOSED THE ORDER I N SEPTEMBER,2008. ELOISA WAS ORDERED TO REPLY TO THE OPPOSITION BY NOVEMBER 10,2008 WHILE REPRESENTED BY AN ATTORNEY. THE ELOISA WAS INFORMED BY HER ATTORNEY THAT A REPLY TO THE OPPOSITION WAS NOT NECESSARY TO BE SUBMITTED BY NOVEMBER 10,2008 AS A SETTING FOR HEARING ON THE OPPOSITION WAS SET ON NOVEMBER 3, BY THE JUDGE FOR A HEARING IN DECEMBER 16,2008. THE DECEMBER 3, 2008 ORDER FOR ELOISA TO SURRENDER TO SERVE THE 10 DAYS JAIL SENTENCE, INCLUDED THE ORDER TO DECLARE THE DECEMBER 16,2008 HEARING "MOOT". ANOTHER HARASSMENT ON ELOISA TO PREVENT HER FROM SUBMITTING TO THE SUPREME COURT THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FOR HER APPEAL THAT WERE DUE DURING THE TIME SHE WAS ORDERED TO SURRENDER AND SERVE JAIL SENTENCE. ELOISA IS ON PROPER REPRESENTING HERSELF IN HER APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT. 2) THE DECEMBER 10,2008 ORDER OF JUDGE WELLER, ORDER FINDING ELOISA FURER IN CONTEMPT; REQUIRING HER ARREST." ELOISA FURER IS REMANDED TO THE CUSTODY OF THE WASHOE COUNTY JAIL FOR A PERIOD OF 10 (TEN) DAYS. MS. FURER IS TO TURN HERSELF IN ON OR BEFORE JANUARY 6,2009. MRS. FURER SHALL BE RELEASED NO SOONER THAN 10(TEN) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF HER ORIGINAL ARREST". THIS ORDER TO COMMIT ELOISA TO JAIL IS DUE TO " MRS FURER HAS MADE CONTEMPTUOUS STATEMENTS IN DOCUMENT RECENTLY FILED WITH THE COURT" (SEE ORDERS HERE EXHIBITED) ELOISA WILL NOT SURRENDER TO THE WASHOE COUNTY JAIL. THESE ORDERS ARE INVALID AND ILLEGAL THAT DID NOT MET ANY OF THE AUTHORITY OF NRS 199.350,22.010 nd 22.030. THE CLOSEST THAT THE FINDINGS OF WELLER THE ORDER MAY APPLY TO, IS ARTICLE NO.7 ENNUMERATED BY WELLER UNDER NRS 199.350, ONLY IF THE STATEMENTS OF ELOISA WERE FALSE OR GROSSLY INACURATE REPORT OF ITS PROCEEDINGS. IT IS THE OPINION OF ELOISA THAT JUDGE WELLER HAD REPEATEDLY AND CONSCIOUSLY MADE BLATANTLY MALICIOUSLY WRONG, (ERRONEOUS) VINDICTIVE AND RACIALLY MOTIVATED ORDERS AGAINST ELOISA, THESE STATEMENT OF ELOISA ARE SUPPORTED BY DOCUMENTATIONS OF FACTS AND EVIDENCE THROUGHOUT THE TRIAL THAT ARE COMPREHENSIBLE BY ORDINARY INTELLIGENCE OF AN ODINARY HUMAN BEING. AS TO THE LOGIC OF TRUTH. |
Divorce Background