<!--#include virtual="/includes/archive.shtml"-->
 <div id="main"> 
    <h3 class="title">Part 1.  Attorney Scott S. Sinrich</h3>
    <h4 class="titlesmall">UPDATE: August 26, 2009 </h4>
    <div id="print" style="border: 1px dashed #BBBBBB; padding: 0 0 0 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em;"> 
      <p><a href="#" onclick="window.print();return false;"><img src="/images/print.gif" width="19" height="17" border="0" align="bottom"> 
        Print this page&#187;</a></p>
    </div>
    <p>I shall now present Part 1. of the questions, comments, and observations posed to me by folks alluded to in early discussions concerning the statements and actions of Attorney Scott S. Sinrich, Corporate Counsel for Nordgren Memorial Chapel and Kurt and Katherine Mangsen, and his assistant counsel, Jessica Godfrey (Law Firm of Phillips, Silver, Talman, Aframe, & Sinrich, P.C. in Worcester, Massachusetts).</p>
    <p>"Mr. Haddad, we have reviewed much of the public record concerning statements and actions made by the attorneys referenced above. Not only are you correct in unveiling their "demonic activity"; but have you noticed how their last names give them away?"</p>
   	<p><u>My response</u> - "I'm not sure what you mean!"</p>
	<p>Observation - Attorney <strong>"SIN" - RICH</strong> and Attorney <strong>"GOD" - FREE (Y)</strong> !  <u>My response</u> - "Oh my God!"</p>
	<p>(Although the individuals asking the questions about to be presented below were mindful to refer to Atty. Sinrich as Atty. "SIN-RICH, I have elected, for the purposes of this Update, to refer to Nordgren Memorial Chapel's corporate counsel as Atty. Sinrich).</p>
	<p>"Mr. Haddad, it is apparent to me and others after reviewing the public record that Attorney Sinrich is very rich in Sin before God, and Attorney Godfrey has certainly <em>freed</em> herself from any relationship with God - truly a tragic scenario for the both of them!"</p>
	<p>"Continuing on, it is my understanding, and correct me if I am wrong, Atty. Sinrich was corporate counsel for Nordgren Memorial Chapel at the time of the inspection of pre-need funeral files at Nordgren Funeral Home on November 19, 2003; and that at that time and to this very day, you were a minority owner of the funeral home, am I correct?" <u>My response</u> - "Yes, that is correct!"</p>
	<p>"Before going on, how long had you been employed at and an owner of Nordgren Memorial Chapel at the time of this inspection by Mr. Bresnahan?" <u>My response</u> - "approximately 9 years."</p>
	<p>"Mr. Haddad, in that time, had there ever been an issue of pre-need funeral arrangements made by you or anyone else at Nordgren Memorial Chapel being in question for missing documents prior to or at the time of the passing of an individual for which pre-arrangements had been made." <u>My response</u> - "Never!"</p>
	<p>"Putting aside for a moment, the fact that Mrs. Wiles (Nordgren's receptionist and bookkeeper) gave Mr. Bresnahan a completed funeral file (even though Bresnahan asked for only pre-need files -and the completed funeral file was suspiciously missing the cost of Goods and Services form - and that the Mangsen's and Nordgren Memorial Chapel were attempting to keep $800+ that was an overpayment by the family after Nordgren Memorial Chapel had been compensated for the full service funeral of the deceased- funds that the family had returned to them only after contacting the Attorney General's Office of Consumer Affairs and the Better Business Bureau), did Kurt Mangsen, Nordgren's president or Atty. Sinrich contact you and ask for you to address any of the concerns of Inspector Bresnahan?" <u>My response</u> - "Neither Atty. Sinrich nor Kurt Mangsen made any attempt to contact me prior to my being served with a Letter of Termination by a constable - approximately 5 hours after the November 19, 2003 inspection."</p>
	<p>"Did I hear on the audio tape of the December 9, 2003 Meeting of the State Board, prior to your appearance before the Board that Inspector Bresnahan stated , "Nordgren's was in the process of terminating Haddad prior to my inspection?" "And didn't I read in testimony by Mrs. Katherine Mangsen, wife of Kurt Mangsen and author of all complaints against you with the State Board, that Atty Sinrich stated to Mrs. Mangsen that she needed to be extremely careful in attempting to terminate you and that it had to be for cause, am I correct?" <u>My response</u> - "Yes, exactly!"</p>
	<p>"So Atty. Sinrich within approximately 5 hours of Bresnahan's inspection prepared a Letter of Termination for Kurt Mangsen to sign, delivered it to Nordgren Memorial Chapel, had Kurt Mangsen sign it, and presented it to a constable, who delivered it to you upon your return home - all within just a few hours and at no time were you asked by Atty. Sinrich to respond or given the opportunity to address any concerns, is this correct?" <u>My response</u> - "Yes! That is correct!"</p>
	<p>"Mr. Haddad, Atty. Sinrich is one disgraceful human being!"  (<u>I had no response to this comment, and could certainly not refute the statement</u>).</p>
	<p>"Before giving others the opportunity to ask their questions, allow me to ask just one more! While listening to the audio tape of the December 9, 2003 Meeting of the State Funeral Board - in what you claim was an outright conspiracy against you by the Mangsen's, the State Board chairperson (Kazlauskas), Atty. Sinrich, and Inspector Bresnahan (and quite frankly after listening to the audio tape of their own voice statements - one can only agree with you, Mr. Haddad), I heard Atty. Sinrich state clearly and emphatically, "the files reviewed by Bresnahan are Nordgren Memorial Chapel files for which Kurt Mangsen, president of Nordgren Memorial Chapel is responsible". Atty. SIN-RICH also stated in reference to Columbian Life Insurance Company that he and his clients (Kurt and Katherine Mangsen) had never heard of Columbian Life Insurance Company, is this correct?"  <u>My response</u> - "Exactly correct!"</p>
	<p>"And wasn't it proven during the Administrative Proceedings that not only did the Mangsen's and Nordgren Memorial Chapel know about Columbian Life Insurance Company prior to December 9, 2003, contradicting Atty. Sinrich's every word; but that Nordgren Memorial Chapel had been paid in excess of $114,000.00 directly by Columbian Life Insurance Company for funerals directed by Mr. Mangsen and others at Nordgren Memorial Chapel prior to Atty. Sinrich's declaration on December 9, 2003 that they had never heard of Columbian Life Insurance Company?" <u>My response</u> - "Yes! Not only was this proven, but the Administrative Hearings Counsel for the Division of Professional Licensure (Anne Colleton) finally admonished Mr. Mangsen while he was under oath that his statements and positions were suspect."</p>
	<p>"Mr. Haddad, to tell a lie, we can all agree is bad! To perpetuate a lie is worse! But to live a lie is to <em>live in hell on earth</em> in preparation for hell thereafter. People like this, according to the Bible, are characterized as <em>"the walking dead"</em>. <u>My response</u> - "Whoa!"
</p>
	<p>"Mr. Haddad, I haven't asked you any questions to this point, but I am deeply troubled by what I read in your testimony under oath as it relates to what you witnessed upon entering the reception area at the Division of Professional Licensure for the State Funeral Board meeting on December 9, 2003. Could you re-state what you witnessed at that time?" <u>My response</u> -  "I received a request (not demand) in writing from Inspector Bresnahan by mail asking if I would attend the State Funeral Board Meeting on December 9, 2003 at 2:00 PM - the letter arriving on November 30, 2003. On December 9, 2003 there was a good deal of snow on the ground, travel was difficult at best, and I left Worcester mid morning in order to assure I would be able to get to Boston without difficulty. I arrived at the reception area where the meeting was to be held at 2:00 PM- at approximately 12:45PM. Upon entering the reception area I was shocked to see Attorney Sinrich, his clients, and the State Board Chairperson (Kazlauskas - a competitor funeral director from Worcester), all huddled around the water cooler off to the right as I entered the reception area. As they saw me enter the reception area, panic set in (I wish only I had a camera for you to see the look on not only Chairman Kazlauskas's face, but on the face of Atty. Sinrich). I can see it now and will never lose sight of the expression of surprise, shock, and panic they expressed). Chairman Kazlauskas immediately turned scarlet red - a major contrast from his fair skin and white head of hair - as he rushed past me without saying a word. At that point, I suspected foul play was in the making."</p>
	<p>"Attorney Sinrich, as a lawyer in Massachusetts, knew that it was against the rules of Massachusetts Practice for a State Board Member (Chairperson or otherwise) to be contacted either directly or indirectly and to discuss specifics of allegations or accusations without a formal complaint before them and only in the proper forum. Yet, Atty. Sinrich and his clients, with the obvious cooperation of the State Funeral Board chairperson (Kazlauskas), violated not only the rules of fairness and impartiality, but crossed the lines of ethical and moral obligations of the positions they held - Atty. Sinrich as an officer of the Court, and Kazlauskas as Chairman of the State Funeral Board. Mr. Haddad, what is your reaction to this?" <u>My response</u> - "At the time, I was not aware of what constituted a violation of ethics and standards, although I obviously "smelled a rat", as I witnessed what was transpiring as I entered the reception area at the Division of Professional Licensure on December 9, 2003. What transpired prior to my being invited into the State Funeral Board meeting and what transpired thereafter is now a matter of record, a clear violation of my civil and constitutional rights, a violation of Massachusetts ethical standards, - all as a result of an Attorney (Sinrich) knowingly compromising a system of fairness and impartiality to achieve his devious goals."</p>
	<p>"Mr. Haddad, if I am correct from listening to the audio tape of the December 9, 2003 Meeting of the State funeral Board, upon being invited into the Meeting on December 9, 2003, you asked if the proceedings were being recorded, is that correct?" <u>My response</u> - "Yes, before any comments were made or questions presented, I asked Ms. Cartmell-Sirrico, who was presiding at the moment, if the proceedings were being recorded to which she answered, "Yes!" I asked Ms. Cartmell-Sirrico if I could have a copy of the audio proceedings, to which she responded, "Yes you can."</p>
	<p>"So that it is clear to others here, when did you receive the audio copy of the meeting you requested on December 9, 2003?" <u>My response</u> - "It was more than 11 months later,  during which time Mrs. Mangsen (wife of Kurt Mangsen) filed 3 complaints against me, during which time I responded to the inaccuracy and lies in the complaints, during which time my attorneys at the time contacted the State Funeral Board on no less than 3 occasions in writing seeking the audio tape, and during which time the State Funeral Board responded that they did not have the audio tape of the December 9, 2003 Meeting. When it became apparent that the audio tape describing the conspiracy in the actual voices of the conspirators had to finally be released to my attorneys, that is when Attorney Sinrich took it upon himself to secretly speak with a Funeral Industry Publication Editor".</p>
	<p>"Mr. Haddad, I read some of the attacks made by this publication after speaking with Atty. Sinrich, and to be quite frank, it bothers me that there are people in this world like this; but did the Funeral Publication contact you as a result of what Atty. Sinrich told them and forwarded to them. <u>My response</u> - "No. I was not contacted by the Industry Funeral Publication as a result of Atty. Sinrich's conversation and information he faxed to them during the Administrative Proceedings."</p>
	<p>"Mr. Haddad, Atty. Sinrich has stated he was asked to assist the Division of Professional Licensure during the proceedings, is this correct?" <u>My response</u> - "Yes, this is what he has stated in documents before the proceedings."</p>
	<p>"So if I understand the situation correctly, Atty. Sinrich is (was - is he still) corporate counsel for Nordgren Memorial Chapel? <u>My response</u> - "I believe he is still corporate counsel for Nordgren Memorial Chapel. As a minority owner of the funeral home to this very day, I believe I would have been notified otherwise had there been a change in corporate counsel."</p>
	<p>"Again so that it is clear to all of us, Atty. Sinrich is corporate counsel for the funeral home. You are a minority owner of the funeral home. Atty. Sinrich is assisting the Division of Licensure's prosecution against you. Atty. Sinrich speaks with and provides the Funeral Industry Publication with information and documents relevant to allegations made by his client's (your business partners) during on-going Administrative Proceedings just days prior to the release of the audio recording of the December 9, 2003 Meeting of the Massachusetts Funeral Board; wherein in your absence and before you even appeared before the State Funeral Board, you were viciously and unjustly attacked by the Chairman of the Massachusetts Funeral Board (Kazlauskas - a competitor funeral director in Worcester) and the State Board Investigator. Am I correct? <u>My response</u> - "Yes, exactly!" 
</p>
	<p>"Continuing on, I read in the public record the cover letter from Atty. Sinrich to the Editor of the Funeral Industry Publication wherein Atty. Sinrich included 20 or 30 pages of documents, and at the bottom of the correspondence stated "Our telephone conversation of November 2, 2004 is <u>Off-the-Record</u>".  What do you think motivated Atty. Sinrich to attempt to hide his actions by signing such a letter?" <u>My response</u> - "Atty. Sinrich, in his capacity as assisting the Division of Professional Licensure in their prosecution of false and distorted allegations and accusations made by his clients - the Mangsen's, apparently realized his statements and those of his clients made on the public record to the Massachusetts Funeral Board in audio proceedings were about to become public. Fearful of the consequences, he saw the need to attack me personally and professionally with an industry publication in an attempt to compromise my defense of the lies and distortions he and his clients made. Further disregarding his professional ethics and his responsibilities as an officer of the court, in the middle of an on-going Massachusetts Administrative Proceeding, Atty. Sinrich deemed it necessary to focus attention away from himself, his statements and actions and those of his clients by seeing to it that I was viciously attacked personally and professionally once again - this time by a funeral industry publication.</p>
		<p>In consideration of time, I shall conclude this <strong>Part 1. (of a 3 part series)</strong> update concerning the statements and actions of Atty. Sinrich - all clearly part of the public record for now. <strong>Part 2.</strong> will include questions posed to me and my responses thereto as in previous updates. Included will be statements and actions of Atty. Sinrich and the introduction of a  Criminal Complaint filed against me by Atty. Sinrich and forwarded by Atty. Sinrich directly to the Massachusetts District Attorney (Joseph Early's) Office in Worcester. A copy of the Criminal Complaint, its investigation, and its disposition will be included for your information. <u>Please note</u> - the Criminal Complaint was filed by Attorney Sinrich while proceedings were still under way in this matter. You won't want to miss the next update.</p>
		<p>I leave you with a few statements presented to me during these conversations - statements in reaction to what has been witnessed in reading the "Official Public Record" - from which erroneous and baseless decisions were rendered.</p>
		<ul><strong><em>
		<li>"He that is evil looks at his face in the mirror, and looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like!"</li>

		<li>"Satan will never allow a truth told - to be heard - or reach earth - if he can enlist the weak - and if it runs counter to his demonic goals and ambitions!"</li>
		<li>"Each man stands convicted at the <u>bar</u> of his own conscience!"</li>
		</em></strong></ul>

	<p>Till next time, I sincerely and humbly ask that you pray long and hard for the souls of those who became <strong>"willing captives of Satan!"</strong>
</p>
</div>
<!--#include virtual="/includes/footr.shtml"-->