As a result of multiple damaging and highly unusual events with eerily parallel timing to GM’s stated desire for my exit, an obvious question is raised as to whether or not the events were merely coincidental, or if they were harassing acts of intentional harm initiated by GM to support achievement of its stated goal.  The unprecedented, parallel-timed damaging events are the following:

  • 1998:  Eight months of pickets
  • 2005:  Warranty audit
  • 2005:  IRS audit (corporation)
  • 2006:  GMAC auction call status and audit item request
  • 2007-2008:  IRS audit (personal)

Since GM’s desire for my franchises over many years necessitated the ending of my business, and in fact ultimately killed my business and real estate value, the search for truth could be approached like a murder case that lacks a confessed killer or an eye­witness.  First, a motive must be established.  Then, based on various pieces of evidence and the credibility of the parties, the truth is sought. 

GM’s motive for my demise has been crystal clear since it first attempted to get me to sell in early 1998, immediately after it abruptly removed the Pontiac-Olds-GMC dealer.  Its openly stated desire for my franchises continued with varying intensity throughout the remainder of my career, which GM ended in 2009.  As GM employees have all denied any connection with any of the damaging events, the many unusual occurrences sur­rounding the various damaging events must be viewed from a probability point of view.  To determine the truth, these occurrences should be viewed as pieces of evidence, first individually, and then collectively.

A simple illustration of individual and collective probability would be the odds of drawing a certain card from a deck of playing cards.  The odds of drawing, for example, the ace of spades from a 52-card deck are one in 52.  If the card were returned to the deck and the deck reshuffled, the same odds would again apply to drawing the ace of spades.  But, the odds of drawing the ace of spades twice in a row from a reshuffled deck would be one in 52 times 52, or one in 2,704, and so on.  Following is a table of odds of drawing the ace of spades successive times:

1 52
2 2,704
3 140,608
4 7,311,616
5 380,204,032
6 19,770,609,664
7 1,028,071,702,528

On each individual draw, the odds of drawing the ace of spades are extremely low.  As the number of draws increases, the odds of drawing that card drop drastically.  To put this probability in perspective, at five draws the chances of drawing the ace of spades each time would be less than the chance of drawing one’s own social security number out of a drum containing the social security number of every person in the United States.  The number at six draws represents more than three times the number of people on the planet, and at seven draws approaches the number of stars in the universe.

Each of the five eerily timed damaging events contained a number of highly unusual occurrences and “eerie coincidences,” enough of them in each case to make the proba­bility of GM’s instigation nearly indisputable.  Furthermore, each of the damaging events was, in itself, a very rare occurrence.  Taken collectively, and considering they happened to a dealer that GM openly wished to take over, there can be no credible challenge to the fact that GM instituted them as harassment solely to damage me.

To anybody who may still feel that the events may have been innocent coincidences I ask, do you know any non-target dealer who has been subjected to any of the events listed, let alone all five?