1

2 3
4

Samuel H. Sloan Administrator with Will Annexed of Estate of K. Michael Goodall 46t Peachstone Terrace San Rafae]. CA 94903 415-419-5980
4115-349-6116 samhsloan0grmail. com

IFUtllgl!)
FEB 2

\ 2012

5 6
1

ltARnr Coti\Ty suPrruon Co-unr 4,:5. Bon4 Deputy

Kn4-rutrI.IEiR, Court Executive Of,Ecer

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF I'IARIN

10
1t-

Estate of K. Michael Goodall -against'James Raymond

Case No. PR 1100596

MOTION FOR EttsPARlEEr ORDER TO RELEASE LODGED DOCUMENTS PURPORTED TO BE THE ORIGINAL WILLS DECEDENTS KENNEFT F. COODALL A!{D RACHEL A. GOODALL rOR FORENSIC DOCUMENT
EXAMINATTON

t2
13 14 15

Hastings

and

Bank of America, N.A.

16 77 18 19

Hearing Date: l,lAR'l 9 Time, Y,3O q-Department: d

2012

Sam

Sloan declares:

20

1. I

am

the Administrator with Wil-l Annexed of the Estate of

knowled.ge

2t
22

K. Michael Goodall. I have personal

competently testify thereto.

of the matters set

forth herein and, if called upon to testify,

could and would

23
24 25

2. This estate is concerned with the authentici-tY of three

documents

26
27 28

all purportedl-y signed on the

same

date of August 24,

1994. These three documents consist of \\Pour O\rerz wills

Motion for Forensic Document Exannination

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

purportedly signed by Kenneth and Rachel Goodall on August 24, 1994 and a trust document purportedly signed by both of them also bearing the same date. 3. I believe that these documents are all forgeries or are otherwise not authentic. The basis of my belief is that it was virtually impossible for Kenneth F. Goodall to have signed these documents on that date of August 24, 1994. He was extremely ill. He had been ill for at least two years but his condition had gotten much worse. He had just survived an operation for esophageal cancer. He had a feeding tube inserted in his abdomen. A witness who visited him in the hospital with his son Mike and wife Rachel is prepared to testify that he was on life support, was unconscious and it was recommended that he not be awaken. The forger has changed his testimony several times as to where these documents were signed, first starting that it was in his office, then in his home, then in San Anselmo. We are prepared to prove that he was in none of those places. Most importantly, the witness to both of these wills states vehemently that she never signed these documents and would never have signed these documents. Her husband and daughter agree with her that they would have been involved and that she absolutely would not have signed these documents. Finally, it is just inconceivable that Col. Kenneth Goodall would have written his only son out of his will just 17 days before he died,

Motion for Forensic Document Examination

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

considering how devoted the father was to his son and how devoted his son was to his father. There is a handwritten statement in the ring binder left by Kenneth F. Goodall that states, I have never encountered a lawyer who did not leave me feeling poluted afterwards. I despise them as a class and as individuals. It is thus inconceivable that on his death bed he would knowingly sign a document that virtually took all rights away from his only child and gave them to a lawyer.

4. As to the motivation of the forger, he was at that time an employee of Bank of America. These documents took the role of backup trustee away from Security Pacific Bank and gave it to Bank of America, of which he was the manager. This has enabled him to earn administration and legal fees in the amount of several hundred thousand dollars since that time. Needless to say, all of these funds will have to be paid back if these documents are determined to be forged. 5. In order to determine whether these documents are forged or altered or that they are mere copies, I have agreed to retain a Forensic Document Examiner who is vastly and eminently qualified in this field, having worked with the FBI and other governmental agencies to determine forgeries. He is David S. Moore. He has a laboratory located at 9010 Barrhill Way, Fair Oaks, California

Motion for Forensic Document Examination

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

95628. This laboratory contains highly sophisticated devices such as microscopes that easily enable him to determine if a document is forged or not. These devices cannot be effectively transported out of the laboratory environment. Therefore, I am asking this court to order the release of these documents directly to him as the Forensic Document Examiner. I will of course not handle the documents myself. 6. David S. Moore is a forensic document examiner, with offices located in Fair Oaks, California. He has more than thirty years of document and investigative experience, including assignments with the Crime Laboratories of the United States Army, the United States Postal Inspection Service, the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police, and the California Department of Justice. He has received extensive training regarding handwriting identification, ink and document analysis, and examination, reflected in courses from the United States Army, the United States Secret Service, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, and the California Criminalistics Institute. He has been certified as a "Diplomate" of the American Board of Forensic Document Examiners since 1978. From 1999 to 2002, He served as one of the Directors on that Board. He has published numerous articles in the field of forensic document examination in the Journal of Forensic Sciences, including lie Electrostatic

Motion for Forensic Document Examination

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Detection Apparatus (ESDA) and its Effect on Latent Prints on Paper", March 1988; "The Importance of Shading Habits in Handwriting Identification: A Case Study", January 1983; the "Evaluation of a Method to Detect the Site of Rubber Erasures by Powder", October 1981. In addition, he has presented numerous papers at meetings and conferences of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners, the International Association of Identification, the Southwestern Association of Forensic Document Examiners, and the Southeastern Association of Forensic Scientists.

7. He has presented numerous classes on questioned document subjects to federal, state and local law enforcement officials, both government and private attorneys, as well as to bank and insurance personnel.

8. He has testified as an expert in the field of questioned documents in justice, municipal, and superior, federal and military courts and administrative hearings in excess of 700 times in more than 20 states throughout the United States, including California.

9. In order to conduct a proper forensic document examination of the original questioned wills and trusts in this instant case,

Motion for Forensic Document Examination

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

it is his professional opinion that the following tests may be necessary. a. Visual examination; b. Microscopic examination; c. Photographic examination; d. Ink examination; e. Handwriting examination; f. Indentation examination; and g. Any other non-destructive examination necessary to determine the authenticity of the questioned document. 10. All proposed examination will be entirely nondestructive to the document and will be conducted in a manner so as not to compromise future additional or confirmatory examinations or testing. Additionally, the original document will not be altered or changed by any of the proposed examinations. 11. These types of examinations are necessary to evaluate the genuineness of questioned documents. An ink examination allows him to analyze the inks used in the documents and draw conclusions about the use of different inks and to detect whether alternations and/or interlineations have been made. Indentation examination permits him to draw conclusions about whether certain documents were together when they were originally created and also to ascertain whether there is other information contained on the

Motion for Forensic Document Examination

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

documents in the form of indentations that may provide insight into when the document was created and under what conditions. The other examinations requested may enable him to draw conclusions about the timeframe in which the document was created and about the genuineness of the document. 12. It is important that he conduct the examination of the questioned documents at his laboratory using specialized equipment. The indentation examination, the ink examination, the fluorescence and luminescence examinations require the use of laboratory equipment. For example, the microscope that he uses is a stereoscopic trinocular microscope that is not readily portable. The video spectral comparator (VSC) that he uses for ink evaluation is also not readily portable. Furthermore, it is often imperative to strictly control lighting conditions during an examination; this can be done in a laboratory setting, but often cannot be done elsewhere. 13. The various examinations that I have listed and the equipment that he proposes to employ during the examination of the questioned documents are routine in cases of this nature. Failure to examine the questioned document in a laboratory setting, with proper instrumentation, may result in loss of valuable evidence that would directly address the issue of the document's authenticity.

Motion for Forensic Document Examination

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

14. The wills are on file at the Marin County Superior Court. Kenneth Goodalls will is number W001916 and Rachel Goodalls will is number W001919.

15. We are also seeking forensic examination of the trust documents. There are three known trust documents. They are: A document entitled The Goodall Trust and dated September 12, 1990.

A document entitled Declaration of the Goodall Trust and dated August 24, 1994.

A document entitled Second Amendment to Goodall Trust and dated January 19, 1999.

16. We believe that the documents dated September 12, 1990 and January 19, 1999 are genuine but that the document dated August 24, 1994 is a forgery. We want all three documents examined by the Forensic Document Examiner, David S. Moore. The problem is that these documents are not in the files of the court. They are in the possession of James R. Hastings and/or Bank of America and/or Guide Dogs for the Blind, Inc. who refuse to let us see them. We want

Motion for Forensic Document Examination

this court to order.these three documents to be turned over to,the

sarne

2 3
4

Forensic Document Examiner.

IilHEREFORE,
5

for all of the reasons set forth aLove, this court

number }IOO1915 and

6
1

should order that the Wills of Kenneth and Rachel Goodall filed in

this court as will

will number I[OO1919 be turned

and

over Lo David S. Moore, Forensic Document examiner

Documents dated September

it should order that the originals of Goodall Family Trust L2, 1990, August 24, 1994 and.]anuary
19,

10 11 L2 13

1999 be handed ower

to Dawid S. Moore for Forensic Examination.

I4
15 16
1"7

I declare under penalty of perjurl, under the laws of the

State of California and the contents thereof are true and correct

to the best of my knowledge and belief.

DATED: Februaxy 24

18 19

2OL2

20 27
22 23 24

25 26
27
2B

Motion for Forensic Document Examination

1 2 3
4

Verification:
Sam

Sloan declares:

hawe read

the Motion for

an

order to turn over documents to

a Forensic Document Examiner fi].ed in this matter, and I declare

under trrenalty of perriury under the laws of the State of California and the contents thereof are true and comect to the best, of
mY

I
9

knowledge and belief.

10 11 L2 13
L4

DATED:

February 24,

2OL2

15 L6 17 18

t9
20

2t
22 23 24 25

26
27

28

Motion for Forensic Document Examination

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
I hereby state that I am not a party, I am over 18 years of age and I served a copy of this motion and the exhibits attached thereto to the following:

James R. Hastings 1003 3rd Street San Rafael, CA 94901 Bank of America 1000 4th St. San Rafael, CA 94901 Gary D. Rothstein Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP One Embarcadero Center, 30th Floor San Francisco CA 94111 Roy Hoppe 461 Peachstone Terrace San Rafael CA 94903 Frank Thornally 461 Peachstone Terrace San Rafael CA 94903 Julia Bentley Lemons Apt. 308 12800 Marion Lane W Minnetonka, MN 55305-1368 Surviving Sibling of Rachel Goodall Robert Bentley Bradford Village #504 906 N Boulevard Street Edmond, OK 73030 Surviving Sibling of Rachel Goodall Helen Beth Bentley Perry 7926 Praver Drive W Jacksonville,FL 32217 Surviving Sibling of Rachel Goodall
Motion for Forensic Document Examination

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Clenda Fern Bentley Zinar 4536 Chatman Street The Colony, TX 75056 Beverly Gale Bentley Young 2316 Trenton McKinney, TX 75070 Vickie Bentley Hankins 14580 NE 6th Choctaw, OK 73020 Jeffrey Bentley 4701 N Douglas Boulevard Spencer, OK 73084 Chad Everett Bentley 1609 Teepee Trail Kingsland, TX 78639 Jeanette Goodall Phillips 152 S llth Street Salina, Kansas 67401 Kristin Kane University of California Berkeley College of Engineering College Relations 208 Mclaughlin Hall #1722 Berkeley, CA 9472A-1722 Guide Dogs for the Blind Mr. Thomas Horton Planned Potential Beneficiary Giving Director Guide Dogs for the Blind, Inc. 350 Los Ranchitos Road San Rafael, CA 94903

Motion for Forensic Document Examination