Category Archives: Court

Miske’s daughter-in-law will not benefit

1 Reply

I just want to take a minute to correct a statement in a comment on my story that appeared in Civil Beat on Wednesday about an agreement between the government and the attorney representing the Michael J. Miske, Jr. Living Trust.

The comment said, in part:

Looks like the grand daughter’s mother will be sitting pretty after she’s released from prison and resumes caring for the girl. Yes crime does pay.

Actually, that won’t happen. The granddaughter’s mother, Delia-Anne Fabro-Miske, is the widow of Mike Miske’s son, Caleb, but Miske rewrote the terms of his trust to make Fabro-Miske ineligible to benefit from it, directly or indirectly.

Here’s the situation.

Miske set up a living trust back in 2008 which would take title to his business and personal assets if he were to become incapacitated or died. Until one of things were to happen, the trust remained just a formal plan for what would happen at some point in the future.

The terms of the trust were amended several times. The last changes were made in September 2024, less than three months before Miske died.

If the government’s lawsuit seeking the forfeiture of Miske’s millions in cash and property is settled out of court, any property released by the government would go to the Miske trust, and would be required to be used and distributed according to the trust’s most recently updated terms.

The final changes Miske made to his trust confirmed that his granddaughter, Fabro-Miske’s daughter, was to be the sole beneficiary of the trust. Miske ordered that Fabro-Miske be entirely removed from his trust, along with Miske’s longtime live-in partner, Andrea Kaneakua. Miske explicitly instructed that neither woman was to be allowed to benefit from the trust in any way.

“There shall be no distribution or benefit from my trust to Delia Anne Miske or Andy Miske (Andrea Kaneakua) by way of guardianship of [my granddaughter]…I request Delia Anne Miske and Andrea Kaneakua are removed from every section from my trust.”

The three trustees of the trust–two of Miske’s longtime friends, Russel Mascoto and Jon Dahl, along with Honolulu attorney Alen Kaneshiro, who handled numerous cases for Miske and his associates–are legally bound by these terms and do not have the power to override them.

A deal is brewing for Miske’s millions

Leave a reply

The process of divvying up the millions in cash and property left behind after the death of former Honolulu business owner and racketeering boss, Micheal J. Miske, Jr, will likely be the result of a negotiated settlement of the pending civil forfeiture lawsuit rather than the verdict of a judge or jury.

A document filed in federal court this week discloses that federal prosecutors have agreed to pursue a settlement with the attorney representing the Michael J. Miske, Jr. Living Trust, which is the primary claimant opposing forfeiture of Miske’s assets to the government. Three lenders holding recorded mortgages secured by Miske’s properties joined the two primary parties in requesting a 5-month continuance or delay in forfeiture proceedings in order for adequately prepare for negotiations between the government and the trust.

My story on the situation is posted on Civil Beat this morning (“Miske Case: Prosecutors Agree To Negotiate Settlement Over Asset Forfeiture“).

The deal between prosecutors and the San Francisco-based attorney representing the trust Miske established to hold title to his assets in the event of his disability or death is the first explicit indication the government is willing to cut a deal to avoid another long, complex and expensive trial in the case.

The disclosure came in a joint six-page stipulation asking for a five-month delay in the forfeiture proceedings to allow time necessary to prepare for and initiate settlement talks. The stipulation was filed in Honolulu’s U.S. District Court on Monday, and quickly approved by Magistrate Judge Kenneth Mansfield the same day.

The stipulation filed in court appears in full below.

Stipulation and order to continue proceedings in civil forfeiture against Michael Miske by Ian Lind on Scribd

You may be thinking, “Oh, no, not more about Miske’s trust!” I understand.

I honestly don’t know whether the twists and turns in the evolution of Mike Miske’s trust mean much of anything, as the future of Miske’s fortune will be decided in federal court where the government appears to be in a strong position. If the government takes all of his property, then the trust will be left just a meaningless shell that will just fade away.

However, when new documents become public in a matter I’ve been following, and I’ve been following the Miske case for way too long, I insist on reading them at least once in the hope there will be a nugget or two of information that, at some future point, will prove relevant and perhaps even fill in a missing piece of the overall puzzle.

So I’m taking you, the reader, along on continued review of these trust documents. And if you’re not interested, no worries.

Miske crearted his revocable living trust in August 2008. It recently became public for the first time when it was filed in federal court along with a motion in opposition to the government’s pending lawsuit aimed at seizing all Miske’s personal and business assets.

A matter of timing

When Miske established his living trust in 2008, he likely already knew he was the target of a federal criminal investigation lauched just a few months earlier by a joint task force involving the FBI, IRS, and the Honolulu Police Department. Miske appears to have had sources in local law enforcement and likely the prosecutor’s office, and perhaps even in the FBI itself, according to trial testimony and evidence made public in the case.

The FBI gave the new investigation the title, “Waimanalo Blues,” referencing the community where Miske grew up and where his family still lived.

Was the new investigation an inflection point in Miske’s life that raised questions about the future, prompting the creation of his living trust? There’s no indication in the trust itself, and the timing might be a total coincidence, except that the next amendment of the trust came in September 2014, again about six months after the FBI launched a follow-up investigation that doubled down with a more intensive focus on Miske. They called this one “Operation EM-EM.”

The original

The original 27-page trust document is a relatively staightforward, plain-vanilla living trust and very much a family affair.

As long as he was alive and not incapacitated, Miske himself was both the trustee in control of the trust, and the trust’s beneficiary. He named successor trustees authorized to take over if he were incapacitated or in the event of his death.

Miske stayed close to home with his initial choices for successor co-trustees, appointing his mother, Maydeen Stancil, and Edward “Denny” Freitas, who was married to one of Miske’s cousins. Freitas had been operating Kamaaina Plumbing and Renovations since 2005 under Miske’s “Kamaaina” umbrella.

Freitas left Kamaaina Plumbing and cut his ties with Miske around 2014. However, his son, Kaulana Freitas, went to work doing odd jobs and running errands for Miske.

Kaulana Freitas was one of Miske’s ten original co-defendants in the racketeering case, and pleaded guilty in March 2022 to participating in Miske’s racketeering conspiracy and releasing the chemical chloropicrin on the dance floor of a nightclub that competed with Miske’s M Nightclub and its successor, Encore.

Freitas, 37, was sentenced to three years in federal prison, and is presently serving his time in the minimum security federal correctional instiutution in Lompoc, California.

The original trust provided that it would terminate in the event of Miske’s death, with a single $100,000 payment to be distributed to a daughter, not previously publicly acknowledged, while the rest of his assets were to be rolled over into a separate trust to benefit Miske’s son, Caleb.

The trust then provided that Caleb would be entitled to partial distributions “outright and free of trust” on his 21st birthday (5% of the value), 25th birthday (25% of the value), and the remainder on his 30th birthday, indicating Miske did not trust Caleb to simply inherit his property without strings.

The trust included no special provisions spelling out what would happen to Miske’s businesses if he were no longer in the picture. Presumably, his interests in the businesses would have passed to Caleb.

Coming soon: Revisions in 2014 and 2016 [Note: I’m traveling this week, but hope to follow-up soon]

A sign of the times

1 Reply

Recently posted on the website of Hawaii’s U.S. District Court.

SMART GLASSES PROHIBITED IN THE COURTHOUSE

In accordance with federal court policy prohibiting the use of cameras, video recording, and audio recording devices within the courthouse, smart glasses and other wearable technology capable of recording or transmitting data are not permitted.

Smart glasses (such as those with built-in cameras or microphones) are considered recording devices and are therefore prohibited in all areas of the courthouse, including public spaces, courtrooms, and jury areas.

This prohibition includes prescription smart glasses. Failure to comply may result in denied entry or removal from the courthouse.

Thank you for helping us maintain the integrity and security of court proceedings.

There doesn’t appear to be a national policy applicable across the country, but Hawaii appears to be among a small but growing set of courts prohibiting smart glasses.

I wonder if Hawaii’s policy is in reaction to an actual prior issue, or simply anticipating what might occur in the future?