Do you think MARJI KNITTER, President of Moote Companies and her husband MJ KNITTER, President and Chief Executive Officer of Knitter Partners International, Inc. are Dishonest and Corrupt executives and people?

Do you think MARJI KNITTER, President of Moote Companies and her husband MJ KNITTER, President and Chief Executive Officer of Knitter Partners International, Inc. are Dishonest and Corrupt executives and people?

The Moote Company website states MARJI KNITTER “is well known in the Southern California building industry, with more than 29 years of experience” and “is engaged in numerous related industry associations and holds leadership roles in most.”

The Knitter Partners International, Inc. website states the company conducts business in the US and in foreign countries and “prides itself on being a team player.”

Thus, MARJI KNITTER and her husband MJ KNITTER are both clearly sophisticated and experienced company Presidents and business executives.
BUT, BOTH OF THEM have repeatedly refused for several years to disclose information relating to a personal LLC (Limited Liability Corporation) Guaranty of approximately $225,000 (yes, a quarter of a million dollars) which they gave MARK F. HASSMAN, who controlled the marital finances and is also a sophisticated and experienced business executive who received his MBA from Harvard, is a certified public accountant; was employed by one of the companies where MARJI KNITTER was President and has been involved in joint ventures with MARJI KNITTER and I also believe her husband MJ KNITTER too.

Further, MARK F. HASSMAN, who controlled the marital finances and is a sophisticated and experienced business executive who received his MBA from Harvard and is also a certified public accountant AND was represented by the experienced law firm SEASTROM & SEASTROM in Newport Beach, California; omitted this $225,000 LLC guaranty from the divorce proceedings from his marriage of over 20 years as well as the LLC this guaranty relates to. 
This is the divorce proceeding where the value (net worth) of the community estate was never established even though all of these successful and experienced executives and the law firm should know that at the time of the divorce California and compatible and consistent Federal laws require that the net value of the net worth of the community estate be divided and distributed 50/50 between the spouses.

To make matters worse… even when MARJI KNITTER and her husband MJ KNITTER were notified that AFTER the divorce judgment was reviewed, signed and filed by JUDGE CLAUDIA SILBAR even though the value of the community estate was never established; MARK F. HASSMAN listed repeatedly on documents which were prepared by the experienced law firm SEASTROM & SEASTROM and he signed under the penalty of perjury that he needed to request to LOWER his alimony obligation and even have it ELIMINATED because he swore he is “insolvent” and “unable” to pay it but somehow he could afford many other expenses like two Lexus vehicles and the legal services of SEASTROM & SEASTROM in Newport Beach, California which do you think are inexpensive?
However JUDGE CLAUDIA SILBAR quashed or rejected the subpoena to disclose some of these expenses. 
***Do they all think the law-abiding ex-wife HAS NO LEGAL RIGHTS? These professionals sure act this way, don’t you agree?

***MARJI KNITTER and her husband MJ KNITTER refused and still refuse to provide information regarding this personal LLC guaranty for $225,000; they made to MARK F. HASSMAN including what Corporation this guaranty relates to. 
HONEST OR CORRUPT?

At the time of the divorce and EACH TIME a change in alimony is requested, California and compatible and consistent Federal laws require that income, expenses and assets be accurately and completely disclosed which is reasonable and objective.

To continue to make matters worse…MARJI KNITTER is also the Plan Administrator of Paul A. Moote and Associates, Inc. Defined Contribution 401k Profit Sharing Plan with Federal ID#953180149 which the joint tax returns and other documents show that MARK F. HASSMAN and his ex-wife made contributions during their marriage and also received distributions.

However, MARJI KNITTER made disbursements to MARK F. HASSMAN from this plan WITHOUT the law-abiding ex-wife’s knowledge, consent and signature on required Federal forms which also must be notarized.

Still worse…MARK F. HASSMAN testified under oath in JUDGE CLAUDIA SILBAR’S courtroom that he took ALL the money out of this Defined Contribution 401k Profit Sharing Plan with Federal ID#953180149.

So, do you think this is what MARJI KNITTER and her husband 
MJ KNITTER who are both sophisticated and experienced company Presidents and business executives believe?

1. A court of law in the United States should NOT require MARJI KNITTER or MJ KNITTER to completely and accurately disclose the information relating to a personal LLC Guaranty of $225,000 which MARK F. HASSMAN listed repeatedly on documents he signed under the penalty of perjury when he was requesting alimony changes because his law-abiding ex-wife, who has been law-abiding her entire life of over 50 years has NO LEGAL RIGHT to know this information. 
Even though the law requires that all income, expenses and assets must be disclosed each time an alimony change is requested; the law does not apply to the law-abiding ex-wife because she DOES NOT HAVE ANY LEGAL RIGHTS.

2. MARJI AND MJ KNITTER have no duty to respond to requests made by the law-abiding ex-wife regarding information about their personal LLC guaranty of $225,000 they made to MARK F. HASSMAN so that she is legally able to establish the value (net worth) of the community estate and have her alimony lawfully calculated because SHE DOES NOT HAVE ANY LEGAL RIGHTS.
The law-abiding ex-wife has NO LEGAL RIGHT to receive her 50 percent interest in the community estate from her marriage of over 20 years and has NO LEGAL RIGHT to receive lawfully calculated alimony either.

3. It is NOT unusual and shows sound business judgment for MARJI KNITTER and her husband MJ KNITTER, both experienced company Presidents and business executives, to NOT call the $225,000 LLC Guaranty AFTER they were informed that MARK F. HASSMAN swore under oath under the penalty of perjury that he is “insolvent” and “unable” to pay alimony which was reduced to zero.

4. To intentionally deprive a law-abiding ex-wife of receiving her 50 percent community property interest in the community estate from her marriage of over 20 years should NOT be expected to intentionally inflict severe emotional distress her.

5. Even though MARK F. HASSMAN and his law-abiding ex-wife had made contributions to the Paul A. Moote and Associates, Inc. Defined Contribution 401k Profit Sharing Plan with Federal ID#953180149, established 01/01/1985 during their marriage; only MARK F. HASSMAN is entitled to receive distributions. The law-abiding ex-wife has NO LEGAL RIGHT to receive any retirement or savings which she contributed to during her marriage of over 20 years.

6. Even though Plaintiff never consented and never signed any federal forms permitting MARK F. HASSMAN to receive distributions from the Paul A. Moote and Associates, Inc. Defined Contribution 401k Profit Sharing Plan with Federal ID#953180149, established 01/01/1985; MARJI KNITTER, the Plan Administrator was lawfully permitted to distribute to MARK F. HASSMAN funds from this federal defined contribution plan.

7. Intentionally depriving the law-abiding ex-wife of receiving her savings and retirement from a federal defined contribution plan from her marriage of over 20 years would NOT be expected to intentionally inflict upon her severe emotional distress and financial harms.

8. The loving law-abiding ex-wife should just ACCEPT the fact that the value (net worth) of her community estate from her marriage of over twenty (20) years was never established during the divorce proceedings and thereafter because SHE HAS NO LEGAL RIGHT to know the value of the community estate from her marriage of over 20 years. Only her ex-husband has a legal right to know this information.

9. The loving law-abiding ex-wife should just ACCEPT the fact that the disposal of community assets from her marriage of over twenty (20) years was never accurately and completely disclosed during the divorce proceeding and thereafter because SHE HAS NO LEGAL RIGHT to know this information. Only her ex-husband has a legal right to know this information.

10. The law-abiding ex-wife should just IGNORE that California and compatible and consistent Federal laws, codes and cases require that in order for a marriage contract to be lawfully dissolved and a divorce to be valid, lawful and completed and for alimony changes to be valid and lawful; financial statements and other documents must be provided DURING the divorce and EACH TIME an alimony change is requested.

11. The law-abiding ex-wife should just IGNORE that California and compatible and consistent Federal laws, codes and cases require that in order for a divorce to be valid and lawfully completed, and for alimony changes to be valid and lawful; the net value of the net worth of the community estate must be divided and distributed 50/50 between the spouses at the time of the divorce or there must be a legal agreement to distribute the community property 50/50 between the spouses at a later time where there is informed consent by both spouses.

12. The law-abiding ex-wife HAS NO LEGAL RIGHT to receive her 50 percent community property interest in the community estate at the time of divorce or thereafter.

13. The law-abiding ex-wife should just IGNORE that California and compatible and consistent Federal laws, codes and cases require that in order for a marriage contract to be lawfully dissolved and a divorce to be valid, lawful and completed; the entire community estate must be disposed of and said disposal must be clearly and accurately disclosed because SHE HAS NO LEGAL RIGHTS.

14. The law-abiding ex-wife should just IGNORE that California and compatible and consistent Federal laws, codes and cases require that in order for alimony changes to be valid and lawful, they must be based upon a lawful stipulated judgment and current financial statements and financial information because SHE HAS NO LEGAL RIGHT to receive a lawful alimony award.

15. It is JUSTICE to deprive a wife of receiving her 50 percent interest in the net value of the net worth of the community estate at the time of divorce and thereafter.

16. It is JUSTICE to deprive a wife of knowing the complete and accurate disposal of the community estate at the time of divorce and thereafter.

17. The law-abiding ex-wife should just EXPECT that only her ex-husband who controlled the marital finances will be THE ONLY PARENT to be able to afford to provide for the financial needs of their children and for himself.

18. MARJI KNITTER and her husband MJ KNITTER should NOT be responsible for the harms and damages they knowingly, deliberately, voluntarily, intentionally, outrageously and maliciously inflicted and continues to inflict upon the law-abiding ex-wife because SHE HAS NO LEGAL RIGHTS.

So what do you think?

Do you think these are the beliefs of MARJI KNITTER and her husband MJ KNITTER?

If not, then why won’t MARJI KNITTER and her husband MJ KNITTER reasonably try to resolve an unlawful, incomplete and fraudulent divorce and alimony changes and provide the necessary financial information to legally and REASONABLY resolve this matter?

***Aren’t leaders in our society like experienced and accomplished company Presidents and business executives supposed to help a law-abiding ex-wife make our world a BETTER PLACE FOR ALL OR are they supposed to help the wealthy ex-husband PROFIT FROM DIVORCE at the EXPENSE of the law-abiding ex-wife and her Children from her marriage?

Bestselling author Stephen Fried explains in his book “The New Rabbi” how religious organizations and religious leaders have been helping wealthy husbands/fathers at the EXPENSE of the loving law-abiding Wife and Mother and their Children.[http://www.palienation.org/the-new-rabbi-by-s-friedchpt-2-…/]

Do you think MARJI KNITTER and her husband MJ KNITTER are working with the wealthy ex-husband and religious organizations so all of them can PROFIT FROM DIVORCE at the expense of the loving law-abiding Mother and her Children?

Isn’t an IMMEDIATE CHANGE of a very destructive policy and practice is what a caring, compassionate person WITH A SOUND MIND would diligently enforce so these very severe harms suffered by thousands of Children of all ages and their loving law-abiding Mother will end and others in our society will NOT be harmed by their behaviors, policy and practice?

Do you think MARJI KNITTER and her husband MJ KNITTER are more concerned with PROFITING FROM DIVORCE at the EXPENSE of a loving law-abiding Mother and her Children of all ages than enforcing legal divorce agreements? As always, their actions will continue to show us.

***Is it reasonable that a COMPASSIONATE, CARING PERSON WITH A SOUND MIND would ignore the problem of an invalid, incomplete and fraudulent divorce especially when they have a responsibility to HELP SOCIETY and make it a BETTER PLACE FOR ALL?

***Is a loving, law-abiding Mother and her Children of all ages NOT considered part of society in the eyes of MARJI KNITTER and her husband MJ KNITTER?
Does a loving, law-abiding Mother and her Children NOT HAVE LEGAL RIGHTS?

As always none of this information is legal or any other advice, just based on my knowledge and experience.

As I continue to bring forth more and more of the truth to help ENFORCE the rights of loving law abiding Mothers and their Children so we can end the conspiracy of a judge, law firms religious organizations, executives, therapists, joint venture partners, relatives and others PROFITING FROM DIVORCE at the EXPENSE of Mothers and their Children.
If not I, then who?

I stand for EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL. As my wise, compassionate and wonderful Grandfather Ben taught me; if you give up your moral and honest values and character, you have NOTHING. 
I will never give them up even if I die fighting. This is a very worthy and important cause. It is fighting for FREEDOM and EQUAL RIGHTS.

-By Sara Hassman, Parental Alienation Solutions, Founder;www.PAlienation.org

Comments

 

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.