🛡️ Project THOR: Grand Jury Portal
🧾 Statutes Violated
Review each law broken under federal and California code. Wire fraud, mail fraud, forgery, elder abuse, and more.
View Statutes →
👤 Actor Dossiers
Each individual profiting from or complicit in the scheme. Includes Tran, Hanson, Silverstein, Ly, and affiliates.
Open Dossiers →
📅 Timeline of Fraud
Chronological sequence from first payment to forced eviction. Triggers, concealment, and predicate acts mapped.
View Timeline →
📬 Mailroom Chain
Certified letters, email receipts, ignored notices. Evidence of systemic evasion and obstruction of justice.
Launch Mailroom →
🃏 Jury Cards
Backs and fronts for each actor, event, fraud tactic, or statutory element. Legal training tools for jurors.
Browse Jury Cards →
🧠 Core Narrative
Condensed story of what happened, who did what, and why. Framed for courtroom understanding.
Read Narrative →
📁 Evidence Exhibits
Screenshots, letters, receipts, floorplans, check images — organized and labeled for legal admissibility.
View Exhibits →
📤 Case Downloads
Download complete filing packages, PDF printouts, scanned check logs, and witness logs.
Access PDF Folder →
This is not poetry. This is not fiction. This is the record of a lease, a check, and a courtroom where men in suits pretended facts did not exist.
We live in a society where a text message reads, “Hanson has the check” — and yet a judge is asked to pretend no payment was made…
The Cast of Characters
- Dr. Phat Tran — landlord, medical professional, owner. “What we’re doing to you is business.”
- Hanson Le — agent, signed contracts, received checks, resigned May 13, 2024, later invoked Fifth Amendment.
- Richard Rosiak — retained attorney, accepted $8,000, ignored filings, withdrew before trial.
- Steven D. Silverstein — eviction counsel, argued eviction despite admissions, fabricated $20,980 “damage” claims.
The Evidence They Could Not Erase
Exhibit A1 – Cashier’s Check: Marked “First payment, new contract, third year lease.”
Predicate: Mail Fraud (§1341), Wire Fraud (§1343), RICO (§1962).
Exhibit A3 – Text Message: “Hanson has the check.”
Predicate: Wire Fraud (§1343), RICO (§1962).
Exhibit A4 – Lease Extension Email: Confirming tenancy continuity.
Predicate: Forgery/Fraud (PC §470), Tenant Protections (CC §1942.5).
Exhibit A8 – Certified Mail Receipts: Proof of delivery. Predicate: Mail Fraud (§1341), RICO (§1962).
Exhibit A10 – Mold Inspection Report: Habitability violations. Supports fraud claim.
Exhibit A7 – Dishwasher Receipt: Installed by tenant. Supports habitability breach.
Exhibit A11 – FedEx Packet of 18 PDFs: Pre-litigation notice. Predicate: Mail Fraud (§1341), RICO (§1962).
Exhibit EX-04 – Agent Resignation Letter: Hanson Le quit mid-contract. Predicate: Fraud/PC §470.
Exhibit EX-13 – Drone Complaint: Unlawful surveillance. Predicate: Extortion (PC §518).
The Farce
How do you put three people on a contract, two people on a bill, and take just one to court…?
How does a judge allow testimony that a check was “returned late” after admission it was received?
If this were fiction, no publisher would print it. Too implausible. Yet in Orange County, it was performed as law.
Why It Matters
- Mail Fraud (18 U.S.C. §1341) — misuse of USPS to conceal rent payments.
- Wire Fraud (18 U.S.C. §1343) — texts and emails to further scheme.
- RICO (18 U.S.C. §1962) — repeated pattern of fraud and concealment.
- Forgery (PC §470) — falsified contracts, court misrepresentations.
- Extortion (PC §518) — threats of eviction, off-contract payments.
- Tenant Protections (CC §1942.5, §1947.12) — retaliatory eviction, illegal increases.
The Question for a Grand Jury
How is it acceptable that a man can be evicted while his rent sits in a Berkshire Hathaway office?
The evidence is ready. The embarrassment is not mine—it belongs to those who thought this scheme could remain hidden.
Prepared by:
Michael Gasio
k