11262010 - News Article - How far they've fallen - ROBERT CANTRELL

How far they've fallen
Decatur Daily Democrat (IN)
November 26, 2010
A federal appeals court recently unanimously rejected a Lake County political insider's appeal of his fraud conviction and a six-year sentence he is currrently serving.

Robert Cantrell's request for a rehearing among the three-judge panel and his request for a hearing before all the appellate judges was denied. The court rejected his earlier appeal in August.

Cantrell - a onetime Republican chairman in East Chicago - was convicted in 2008 on 11 counts of fraud and fraud-related charges alleging that he steered contracts to a third party in exchange for kickbacks. He was also convicted of filing false income tax returns and insurance fraud.

Longtime basketball fans may remember Bobby Cantrell as a member of East Chicago Washington High School's 1960 state champion basketball team, a Trester Award winner and starting guard on the University of Michigan's 1964 Final Four team, Surprise!

11242010 - Sale Of Marital Home - Sold For $135,000 - Divorce Case - CAUSE NO: 64D01-0708-DR-7804/Porter County Superior Court, Valparaiso IN

11242010 - Remax Realtor BruceAnn Singleton - Sale of marital home in violation of court order - Divorce Case - CAUSE NO: 64D01-0708-DR-7804/Porter County Superior Court, Valparaiso IN

This is the voicemail message that ReMax Realtor BruceAnn Singleton left, after she sold the marital home $30,000 below market value...and in violation of the September 2010 court order.

Note how upset that Singleton is that I contacted the ReMax Corporate office...How she claims she will sue me...And how she falsely claims that ReMax didn't receive a copy of the September court order [when I have a video of me serving ReMax Realtor / Portage City Official Carl Fisher, six days prior to the finalization of the sale of the marital home].


The "threatening phone call" I made, that Singleton is referring to? I had called ReMax Realtor / Portage City Official Carl Fisher and asked him why he had gone ahead with the sale of the house in violation of the September court order. I told him that he owed me $50,000.

11232010 - DIVORCE: SALE OF HOUSE, RE: ATTORNEY RHAME - Divorce Case - CAUSE NO: 64D01-0708-DR-7804/Porter County Superior Court, Valparaiso IN

The reason why Attorney Rhame did nothing when I contacted him regarding my ex selling the marital home in contempt of the September order?

Instead of stepping in and helping me....And putting a stop on the sale of the house that was in contempt of a court order....Attorney Rhame instead helped himself by obtaining a lien on my portion of the proceeds from the sale of the home for his attorney fees.

AND THAT IS WHY ATTORNEY RHAME DID A BILLING FOR MY ACCOUNT ON NOVEMBER 23RD....SO HE WOULD BE PAID.

11232010 - DIVORCE: SALE OF MARITAL HOME, RE: FEES I PAID - Divorce Case - CAUSE NO: 64D01-0708-DR-7804/Porter County Superior Court, Valparaiso IN

In the August 06, 2010 final property settlement order, I was to be granted 60% of the proceeds of the marital home [Paragraph #9]. The Court set the value of the marital home at $165,000 [Paragraph #6].

$165,000: Market Value of home
- $68,536: Mortgage payoff
$96,464
X 60%
$57,878: My interest in the marital home
+$3,860 = My interest in the Durango
$61,738
+$7,400 = Maintenance arrearages
$69,138 = Total settlement owed to me from my interest in the marital home, IF MY EX HAD REFINANCED THE HOME AS PER THE SEPTEMBER 2010 ORDER...OR PAID ME FROM THE FUNDS HE HAD ON HAND DURING THE OCTOBER POLICE ENTRY INTO THE HOME.



Instead, my ex was allowed to sell the marital home for $30,000 below market value [a cost of $18,000 to me]. But that's not all my ex and ReMax did to me....

MY EX AND REMAX HAD ME PAY FOR:

.....AND:

....AND:

...AND:

...AND:

....AND:

...AND:

...AND:

...AND:

...AND:

...AND:

...AND:

TOTAL FEES AND COMMISSIONS PAID: $12,657




Instead of receiving $57,878 from my interest in the marital home, I received $32,285....A loss of $25,593. But that wasn't the only financial loss. Under the September 2010 order, my ex was to pay me cash for my 60% interest in his 401K by refinancing the marital home. Wait till you see what Attorney Rhame and my ex's employer [Dunkin Donuts Midwest Distribution Center] did to keep that portion of the settlement from me....And which would cost me thousands of dollars.

11232010 - Sale of marital home below market value and in contempt of Sept. order - Divorce Case - CAUSE NO: 64D01-0708-DR-7804/Porter County Superior Court, Valparaiso IN

On November 24th, I received a phone call....Not from attorney Rhame...But from the title company, informing me that the sale of the house had gone through, for only $135,000.

I had contacted  JP Morgan Chase Mortgage Company, who held the mortgage on the marital home, to inform them that I had a 60% interest in the home [November 19th].....

I had contacted ReMax Headquarters, regarding the Portage ReMax office selling the marital home in violation of the September order [November 9th]...

I had contacted Attorney Rhame [my former divorce attorney] and informed him that my ex was not adhering to the September court order. I requested that Rhame force foreclosure on the marital home via a property settlement lien [November 15th]....

I had contacted Attorney Handlon to inform him that my ex was underselling the house and was in contempt of the September order [November 15th]....

I had served Remax /City Official Carl Fisher with the September court order that my ex was in contempt of with the sale of the house [November 17th]...

I had attempted to contacted Attorney Rhame [November 18th]....

I had contacted the Indianapolis Indiana ReMax office [November 23rd]....

Despite all the people that I contacted, not one of them stopped the sale of the home / upheld the September 2010 court order. Although my ex was in contempt of the September order, nothing was done to him. He didn't have the police illegally entering his home to criminally enforce the September order.
It was as if the September order [that Johnson had at first refused to sign], never existed....

Everyone knew this sale of the house was wrong....And in contempt of the September 2010 court order....But not one of them stopped the sale...Not even my own attorney....

**********

Case Closed - Do Not Respond

It has been a long hard battle in my fight for justice for myself and for other victims in Porter County.  But, I cannot make officials do the right thing and I cannot make them care.

Instead, what I can do is take pride in the fact  that I did not waiver in my convictions; for standing up for what is right; and my endless efforts to correct a wrong.


It was Portage Police Chief Mark Becker who said, "Case closed", and Portage Mayor James Snyder who said, "Do not respond"...Not me.

Portage Mayor James Snyder investigated by FBI http://abbiandbaileyfromtheheart.blogspot.com/2014/07/portage-mayor-james-snyder-fbi.html

11232010 - DIVORCE: ATTORNEY BILL FROM RHAME - Divorce Case - CAUSE NO: 64D01-0708-DR-7804/Porter County Superior Court, Valparaiso IN

That's odd, Attorney Rhame doing his monthly billings in the middle of the month? I wonder what is up with that, eh....

11192010 - News Article - Cantrell request for rehearing of appeallate case denied, conviction upheld - ROBERT CANTRELL

Cantrell request for rehearing of appeallate case denied, conviction upheld
NWI Times
Nov 19, 2010
nwitimes.com/news/local/lake/cantrell-request-for-rehearing-of-appeallate-case-denied-conviction-upheld/article_06909f65-e750-5778-8463-673389c1b2f6.html

Appellate judges denied a motion for rehearing in the appeal of a longtime region politician Robert Cantrell, who was sentenced to more than six years in prison for fraud, according to federal court filings Thursday.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago denied both the request for a rehearing among the three-judge panel who rejected Cantrell's appeal in August, and the request for an en banc hearing before all the appellate judges. According to court records, it was a unanimous decision among the judges.

Cantrell's Chicago-based attorney, Daniel Rubinstein, filed a request for rehearing within weeks of the judges denying the appeal, asking them to vacate Cantrell's convictions of honest services fraud. In the filing, Rubinstein claimed the appellate panel opinion conflicted with the Supreme Court's recent ruling that limited the scope of honest services fraud to cases involving bribery and kickbacks.

In Cantrell's case, the appeals court ruled his actions met the qualifications.

"By failing to fairly, honestly and candidly award contracts, Cantrell defrauded North Township and its citizens of their right to his honest services," Evans wrote in the appellate decision. "This was clearly a kickback scheme."

Rubinstein declined comment Thursday.

Cantrell, who is now close to 70 years old, had been active in local politics. In addition to his work as a teacher and politician, Cantrell had been a basketball star at the University of Michigan and a decorated war veteran.

"Unfortunately, during the past decade Cantrell also got into some serious trouble," wrote Circuit Judge Terence T. Evans in the appellate decision.

A jury found Cantrell guilty on 11 counts of fraud and fraud-related charges in 2008.

He was convicted of using his position as a public official to steer contracts to a third party in exchange for kickbacks. The jury also found him guilty of filing false income tax returns and insurance fraud, where he "deceptively" obtained coverage for two of his children. Cantrell was ordered to repay the $68,000 he took from North Township through contract fraud, according to court records.

Cantrell's son and local attorney, John Cantrell, did not respond to requests for comment.

Bryan Truitt, a Valparaiso-based attorney who had represented Cantrell in the original case and appeal, said he thought a new trial was in order because jurors could not be instructed on the Supreme Court honest services ruling that came out years after the trial.

"I feel bad for Bob, Barbara and the children because I firmly believe this is injust," Truitt said. "These are too good of people with too many good works on their behalf to have this result."

11192010 - News Article - Cantrell's appeals apparently run out - ROBERT CANTRELL

Cantrell's appeals apparently run out
Post-Tribune (IN)
November 19, 2010
Former North Calumet Township Trustee Robert Cantrell will not get another chance to argue his case before the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The appeals court had already turned down his appeal in August, siding with a federal jury who found him guilty of receiving kickbacks from an addictions program in exchange for giving the program one of the township's contracts.

Cantrell, 69, then filed to have another hearing, arguing that the appeals court decision went against a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling. That decision said honest services charges could only be pressed when someone had received a kickback or a bribe.

U.S. prosecutors argued that evidence showed Cantrell had indeed received a kickback. 

However, Cantrell argued the conviction was based on undisclosed self-dealing and conflict of interest, both of which the U.S. Supreme Court said could 

no longer be part of honest service fraud charges.The motion says the federal government argued Cantrell didn't publicize he had made a profit from a government contract, which is allowed, and that U.S. District Judge Rudy Lozano did not tell the jury the government had to prove Cantrell had received a kickback or bribe.

The appeals court ruled against a new hearing, though, according to an order filed last week. It did not offer an explanation of the finding.

Cantrell is serving a six-year prison sentence for his conviction and is scheduled to be released January 2015.

His attorney Daniel Rubinstein said he had no comment and would not say if he planned on filing any other motion in the case.

11192010 - LETTER FROM ATTORNEY HANDLON - Divorce Case - CAUSE NO: 64D01-0708-DR-7804/Porter County Superior Court, Valparaiso IN

Attorney Handlon's response to my letter regarding my ex being in contempt of the September order [sale of house] and requesting forcing foreclosure of the home via a property settlement lien.

At least Handlon had responded. For some reason Attorney Rhame was acting as if the November 15th letter didn't exist...Or that I had made a desperate attempt to reach out to him for help.