UTAH SUPREME COURT RULING - PART 3

            The District Court denied Hill punitive damages because the Judge ruled that she “came to court with unclean hands.”  Although Putvin tried his best to malign Hill’s reputation – painting her as a wicked lady of the night (demimonde) - the Judge’s reason for denying her punitive damages was because she could not produce income tax returns that were ten years old. Could you?

            The Utah Supreme Court reversed the District court saying that (paraphrased) “unclean hands” was immaterial and had nothing to do with the culpability of the Defendants.  Besides, the IRS was well aware of Virginia and her money.  If her money was ill-gotten they would certainly have taken action, but they didn’t.  IRS criminal investigator, Ken Crittenden testified in Virginia’s behalf.  It is very rare for an IRS agent to testify in a civil case.

            In the original complaint Hill accused the Defendants of racketeering but the District Judge ruled that she didn’t meet the burden of proof.  According to law the Defendants are then entitled to be reimbursed for the cost of defending against racketeering but the Judge neglected to make that ruling.  So in the cross appeal, the Defendants asked the Supreme Court to order Hill to reimburse them.  But the Supreme Court reversed the District Court and ruled that Hill did meet the burden.  By law, when racketeering is proved, the Plaintiff is entitled to double damages.

            The Utah Supreme Court, more than once, used the phrase “pattern of criminal activity,” which is synonymous with the RICO Act.  The RICO Act was enacted to combat organized crime.  So what the AUB priesthood did was engage, albeit amateurishly, in a criminal enterprise. 

            The Defendants “Petitioned the Supreme Court for a Rehearing, arguing that the Trial Judge in denying Hill punitive damages actually awarded her punitive damages when the Judge didn’t take into consideration that AUB only received a fraction of the $250,000.00 specified in the Assignment of Trust Deeds.  The fraction spoken of amounted to six payment of $2500.00 or a total of $15,000.00.  The Defendants argued that $15,000.00 should be the actual damages and that the balance, $235,000.00 should be counted as punitive damages.

            This argument is seriously flawed.  Putvin was able to convince the Trial Judge there was only one Assignment of Trust Deed when actually there were two.  The two submitted as evidence were identical in amounts and names but had separate docket numbers.  The Utah Supreme Court recognized this and overturned the District Court making the actual damages of the two Assignment of Trust Deeds $500,000.00, which is the amount Jeff and Sarah Norman had laundered.

            The second major flaw is that AUB was in possession of the million plus dollars at the time the Assignment of Trust Deeds were drawn up and being laundered into AUB via LaMoine Jenson, the sole trustee of AUB.   The money was sitting in Owen Allred’s home.  The Assignment of Trust Deeds were nothing more than schemes to “clean up” the money making it look like legitimate donations.  The Actual damages then were 1.5 million dollars.

            On page three of the Ruling the Defendants argue again and again that AUB did not have control of the money which is false.  There is clear and convincing evidence that AUB had control of the money from the time Owen Allred said they would not give it back.  AUB lost control when the Salt Lake County Sheriff’s Office and IRS began an investigation into the money laundering.  Owen and Dennis panicked.  Owen told me he said, “get it out, get it out” (of my house).  He and Matthews gave what was left of the money to John Putvin.  LaMoine Jenson also panicked and stopped the $2500.00 payments, so John Putvin kept the $235,000.00 balance.  When the heat was lifted, that is Jeff Norman went to prison and law enforcement lost interest, Dennis and Owen asked John Putvin to give the money back.  Putvin told them no, he had taken all the risks and was keeping the money.  Putvin and Jim Sandmire, under Sandmire’s able administration, made a successful business of selling used cars and repairing wrecked cars.  But that enterprise eventually went belly-up, which is another story involving stolen cars.

            In a footnote of page three of the Petition for Rehearing there is an attempt to create an illusion of innocence on the part of LaMoine Jenson.  To wit:

            As a courtesy refresher on the detail, the finding of AUB’s “complicity” are here summarized:

            Hill’s witness testified that Jenson (the signator for AUB and the only contact involved in this transaction) never gave any indication whatsoever that the assignment of trust deeds was solicited by or requested by AUB and that Jenson showed a great degree of disinterest in enforcing payments under the assignment of trust deeds after payments stopped. (“R.3690:22-24).  Jenson testified only that Sandmire appeared at Jenson’s office and asked him if AUB could accept a donation from his business in the form of an assignment of trust deeds.  Responding affirmatively, Jenson signed the documents without reading them and never spoke to Sandmire about the trust deeds again. (R. 3692:131-132, 137, 147-49).  He viewed the transaction as a routine donation.  (R. 3692:139 ?7-10).  Further, Putvin testified that he and Matthews voluntarily decided to donate these monies to AUB without consulting Jenson. (. 3688:53, 65).  Putvin’s unsolicited purpose was to establish good will between Shugart’s community and AUB.  (R. 3688:172 ?7-12).  Thus AUB’s “complicity” amounted to affixing its officer’s signature on the assignment of trust deeds and failing to enforce that assignment once payments ended.

            This is an attempt to save Jenson’s reputation.  Implying that he would sign his name to documents involving $500,000.00 without reading them is ludicrous.  He is the owner and manager of Jenson Lumber.  I doubt that he runs his business as slipshod as he would like the court to believe he affixed his name to those documents.  Notice that the author of this Petition argues that only one Assignment of Trust Deed existed, but he keeps using the plural – deeds. 

            Jenson knew what was going on as he was brought into the machination soon after it was hatched.  He went with a group of men in Owen Allred‘s suburban to inspect the DI Ranch to see if they really wanted to purchase it.  When Putvin organized Diamond Automotive Specialties, Inc., J. LaMoine Jenson was named as a director on the corporate papers filed with the State.  That meant that AUB had a fiduciary interest in Diamond Automotive Specialties, Inc. because the money to purchase the property and establish the used car business came from the loot in Owen Allred’s closet. When law enforcement entered the picture, LaMoine had his name removed from the corporate papers and the payments stopped.

            I asked LaMoine, “Why didn’t you enforce the deeds, you had a legal document.”  He said “It was just one of those things that fell between the cracks.” Sure!  A half million dollars slipped between the cracks.

            Furthermore, during that same time frame, he told me Dennis Matthews and John Putvin came to him and wanted to prepay for improvements to the DI Ranch.  They gave him $30,000.00 in cash which he deposited in Jenson Lumber.  When he found out the money came from Virginia, he said he gave the money back, making out a check to John Galt and giving it to John Putvin.  He then said he met Putvin at the Copperton Town Park and told Putvin he should give the money back.  Putvin reportedly replied, “No, I earned it.”

            While LaMoine Jenson was laundering $30,000.00 through Jenson Lumber, Owen Allred was laundering $30,000.00 through AUB.  Whenever someone deposits a cash amount over $10,000.00 they are suppose to fill out an IRS form.  Because Owen was a dignified religious leader he convinced the bank it was tithing and they did not require him to fill out the IRS form, but Owen told me it scared hell out of him and he wouldn’t do it again.  He gave John Putvin a check for $30,000.00 making it out to John Galt, Putvin’s alias, which is another fascinating story.  Putvin had created a phony bank account in which all of Virginia’s laundered money was directed to be cleaned up and laundered back into AUB.