Network Lattice Timeline Verify

For Attorneys — RICO Pattern Analysis

On this page

Enterprise Structure

The documented pattern meets the structural requirements of 18 U.S.C. § 1961–1968 (RICO):

ElementEvidence
EnterpriseThe Purpose Group LLC (CMO) + Purpose Foundation (501c3) + Banks Strategy LLC (campaign) + PCA + MacDowell — single beneficial owner
Pattern6 predicate act categories, 14+ years (2010–2026), ongoing
ContinuityContinuous operation across multiple corporate forms, school authorizations, and election cycles
RelatednessAll acts serve the common purpose of extracting public education funding through captured institutions

→ Full RICO pattern analysis — predicate acts, timeline, enterprise mapping


Predicate Acts

  1. Mail/Wire Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1341/1343) — false credential representations in charter applications
  2. Money Laundering (18 U.S.C. § 1956) — 72.67% extraction through single-member LLC
  3. Bribery/Kickback (18 U.S.C. § 666) — campaign payments to sitting judges via Banks Strategy LLC
  4. Obstruction — Nicole Wells-Stallworth killed MDE investigation; board attorney retained for 14 minutes
  5. Identity Fraud — unverified J.D. credential used in official school filings
  6. Tax Fraud — Purpose Foundation 990 discrepancies, dual-felon board compliance

→ Detailed predicate act analysis · Funding flow


Judicial Disqualification Issues

9 judges with documented connections to enterprise principals or entities:

JudgeCourtConnectionDisqualification Basis
Miller3rd Circuit CivilBoard Chair of Banks entityMCR 2.003(C)(1)(b) — personal interest
Yancey36th DistrictBoard Chair of MacDowellMCR 2.003(C)(1)(b)
Al. Sabree3rd Circuit FamilyMSU Law classmate, BLSA boardMCR 2.003(C)(1)(a) — bias
Adam Sabree36th DistrictSon of Eric Sabree (co-defendant)MCR 2.003(C)(1)(a)
Sean Perkins36th DistrictBrother of Banks’ attorneyMCR 2.003(C)(1)(a)
Ramsey3rd Circuit CriminalFamily on MacDowell payrollMCR 2.003(C)(1)(b)
D. PerkinsProbateChief Pro Tem, Serenity jurisdictionMCR 2.003(C)(1)(b)
Evans3rd Circuit (ret.)21-year mentor, JTC suspensionHistorical
Langford MorrisOakland (ret.)Book foreword using fake credentialHistorical

→ Full judicial profiles · Anderson localization analysis


Active and Allied Cases

Three independent litigants have identified elements of the same pattern:

CaseCourtStatusKey Claim
Bryant v. Miller3rd CircuitActiveJudicial bias — Miller’s connections to Banks
Bradley-Baskin36th DistrictActiveFinancial exploitation through charter structure
Bowles v. SabreeCircuit CourtClass actionSystemic capture — Sabree family on both sides

→ Allied cases analysis — how three independent cases corroborate one pattern


Network Data (Machine-Readable)

For network analysis, expert witness preparation, or computational investigation:

FormatURLContents
JSON graphgraph.json87 nodes, 140 typed edges with metadata
CSV edge listgraph.csvsource, target, type, weight, evidence
Interactive graphNetwork MapForce-directed visualization with filters
Lattice modelCourt LatticeCapture ratio by bench, localization length
Full TOML data[Git repository]({{ config.extra.repo_url }}/src/branch/main/data/)config.toml, edges.toml, benches.toml

Agency Submissions

This evidence has been submitted to:

  • FBI Detroit Field Office (IC3 complaint filed)
  • U.S. Department of Education — Office of Inspector General
  • Michigan Department of Education
  • Michigan Attorney General
  • Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office
  • Internal Revenue Service (Form 13909)
  • Federal Election Commission
  • Michigan State Police

→ Open letters to agencies · Legal protections framework


Citation

This research is formally citable via [CITATION.cff]({{ config.extra.repo_url }}/src/branch/main/CITATION.cff) (CFF v1.2.0), recognized by GitHub, Zenodo, and legal citation managers.

The evidence repository is maintained at three independent locations:

Every page is BLAKE3-hashed in [content-manifest.toml]({{ config.extra.repo_url }}/src/branch/main/content-manifest.toml).

→ Verify Everything · Evidence Library


Analysis submitted for agency determination. Not legal advice. Not legal findings. See Legal Protections for the framework.