Who is Neil Keenan?

I’ve been sitting on the sidelines watching both the common law/sovereign movement and Neil Keenan.  Neil has bothered me every since he popped onto the scene but it seemed harmless enough in the beginning so I just let it go.

However, I’m beginning to see a side of Neil’s work that truly has the hairs on my neck standing on end.  With my gut telling me to get off the dime I did some checking.

Since I know Neil filed that global accounts case (I checked out the global accounts right away and we’ll get to that later) I started with the Federal Court system.  First thing I found was that Neil F. Keenan not only had been involved in the global accounts case in 2011 but he had also been involved in 6 other Federal civil lawsuits dating back to as early as 1986.  Of those six cases two were filed in Rhode Island and the other 4 in the Florida Southern District.

I’ll come back to those Federal cases momentarily.  The Florida/Rhode Island connection led me to search both of those states for Neil F. Keenan.  In Rhode Island I found Neil F. Keenan and Neil Keenan Associates in Newport, Rhode Island establishing Neil’s connection to Rhode Island which was confirmed by one of the Federal civil cases, more on that later.   Additionally, when I checked for Neil F. Keenan in Rhode Island I found numerous case of DUI, driving on suspended license, driving on revoked license, driving with no license, etc.   In and of itself is not all that damning except for the fact that it shows an attitude of disregard for the law.

When I did a check for Neil in Florida I got more of a surprise.  In 1983 Neil F. Keenan, date of birth 9/10/51, place of birth Rhode Island, was charged and sentenced to the Florida Department of Corrections for trafficing in cocaine, delivery of controlled substances, and cocaine possession with intent for sale or purchase.

In those Federal lawsuits, anything older than about 1996 the actual case materials is not available through the electronic access system so any information beyond filing date, closing date and what the nature of the filing is would have to be done in person at the actual court where they were filed.

The oldest Federal case was in 1986 and it was a motion to vacate sentence filing, filed in Florida Southern District-case #86-cv-00325, and may have been related to his 1983 drug conviction or it may not have been.  Either way it was an attempt to vacate or overturn a sentence that probably was issued by a Federal court.  The next newest case was in 1987, 87-cv-00922, and was a Habeas Corpus filing and can only be related to some issue whereby a court had control of Keenan.

Moving to the next newest, 93-cv-00785, the case was titled Keenan v. United States it also was a motion to vacate sentence.  What bothers me is that it is a filing against the United States for vacating a sentence implying that Keenan was sentenced at some point by the Federal system but I have not been able to locate any cases that would have resulted in him being Federally sentenced.  But because of the way the Federal Rules of Procedure are structured a motion to vacate can only be filed after you receive a sentence and for no other reason.

There were two cases in 1995, both filed in Rhode Island district. The first 95-cv-00511 was filed by Neil, plaintiff, against Carla Jo Wagenstein, Donald J. Blackburn, John R. Simpson, and the USA, defendants.   It was a civil rights violation filing.  What bothers me is that all of the defendants were all represented by someone from the US attorney’s office which means they were either all government employees or were witnesses that may have provided testimony that were being sued.  Results was a judgement in favor of the defendants in the case.

The other 1995 case, 95-cv-00557, Keenan v. U.S. Parole Commission, and was a motion to vacate sentence which was ultimately denied. Here again is a filing of a motion to vacate sentence.  Federal Rules of Procedure limits motions to vacate sentence to one attempt and placing a time limit on how long you have to file.  I think the limitation is 1 year but I’d have to check.  Since there is a single time limitation for any particular sentence, the multiple filings to vacate sentence implies that there should be multiple sentences given to Neil F. Keenan.

The last case is the interesting one.  It was filed in 1998 by Neil Keenan and Neil Keenan Associates against a slew of people and entities including Aer Lingus and British Airways.  The suit alleges that Neil got into business with some people who became greedy and decided to get Neil out of the picture so that could profit from his connections without having to give him any money.   Neil contended in the lawsuit, which was filed in Florida, that some of his partners got him arrested in the Dominican Republic by planting drugs in his hotel room.  When I read about what Neil F. Keenan got into with these guys it rings so much like basically an attempted quick money scheme in which the prime players turned on one another out of greed.

It would also seem that the people Neil F. Keenan got into business with were somewhat on the seedy side.  Doesn’t say much for business ethics unless of course the kind of business you were conducting would call for working with those types of individuals.

Last we have Neil’s filing on the global accounts in 2011.  As we all know it was filed with great fanfare in the New York Southern District.  The interesting thing is that less than a year later the suit quietly went away when Neil filed a letter of dismissal with the court.  Had Neil not filed the letter of dismissal he would have had to within days of the dismissal filing have to have been able to prove to the court that they had jurisdiction.  Problem is that the court wouldn’t have asked for that unless they were already pretty much convinced they didn’t have jurisdiction.  Considering the defendants that were named in the lawsuit, I agree, the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case so failing to prove to the court that they had jurisdiction it would have been dismissed with prejudice meaning that it would not ever be able to file again.

I find it strange that the matter of jurisdiction wasn’t addressed before the case was filed.   But seeing the work Neil F. Keenan did on the civil filings where he represented himself I can understand how it could have been ignored.

Now for the global accounts.  When I first heard about Neil F. Keenan and these accounts I did some digging on that supposed gold.  Here’s the problem I have.  The official records at the Treasury and Bureau of Engraving and Printing does not show that they ever printed sufficient notes or bonds to have been used for giving to the Chinese in exchange for their gold.  Since there is no official record either they were printed off record or were printed by some other agency (CIA?).   Either way with no record of them being legitimate notes and bonds the U.S. will never acquiesce to them being real and will always say they are fakes.   Therefore, there is no way to ever convince a reputable court of jurisdiction to order the U.S. to pay up or produce gold.

If the intent was to rip off the gold from the very beginning which is what is implied by Neil F. Keenan then don’t you think that the CIA would be smart enough to bury one or more “flaws” in the printing to always be able to declare any of them that were presented for payment as being fakes?   Who would have been sharp enough to notice that the certificates given in exchange for the gold was fakes?  Now you have fake certificates and no way to prove that the gold was ever taken by the U.S. government.  Give the bad guys credit, they have been around doing these kinds of things hundreds if not thousands of years.  Anyone doing what they have done this long is not stupid.

Additionally, I have found numerous cases where these notes, bonds, supporting documentation, and even the tins they were supposedly transported in are being truly certified as fakes.  I had to laugh I found one case where the box had a flag on it with 50 stars.  Hawaii didn’t become the 50th state until 1959.  Give me a break.

If you go here: http://www.rense.com/general41/lost.htm, you will find that Rense.com did a piece on these things back in 2003 which includes a couple of news stories on them.  Further searching for things like Chinese gold treasury notes turns up lots of interesting tidbits.

As for the off ledger account book and the blue book, until someone has them authenticated using paper, ink, and binding analysis I’m not accepting them as anything more than produced documentation to help sell the idea.   You will find that the ones that have been certified fakes usually comes complete with documentation and coins that seem to prove the authenticity of the notes and bonds.  Problem is that often the coins have flaws or errors or are of a denomination or design that has never been minted.  The documentation although made to look old and appropriate always fails the testing done by the independent experts.

As for the common law/sovereign problem I’ll address that in another post.