No Good Headline to Lead with Here
Summary
Federal prosecutors have charged a 36th District Court judge and three associates with orchestrating a long‑running financial scheme that diverted funds from incapacitated adults under court‑appointed guardianship. The indictment alleges that the group exploited gaps in Michigan’s guardianship system to siphon off more than $270,000 from individuals who lacked the capacity to manage their own affairs.
What Happened?
According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the defendants used their professional positions — including judicial authority, guardianship appointments, and legal representation — to gain access to the finances of vulnerable adults. Once in control of those accounts, they allegedly transferred money into personal or business accounts and concealed the transactions through falsified filings and misleading statements.
The federal investigation culminated in a multi‑count indictment alleging wire fraud, money laundering, and false statements.
Who Is Involved
-
Judge Andrea Bradley‑Baskin, 46 Sitting judge of the 36th District Court in Detroit. Charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, multiple counts of money laundering, and lying to federal investigators.
-
Nancy Williams, 59 Operator of Guardian and Associates, a private guardianship company appointed in more than 1,000 cases involving incapacitated adults.
-
Avery Bradley, 72 Longtime attorney facing conspiracy and wire‑fraud charges.
-
Dwight Rashad, 69 Detroit resident charged with conspiracy and money laundering.
When
The indictment was announced January 30, 2026, following a multi‑year federal investigation into irregularities in guardianship‑related financial transactions.
Where
The alleged conduct occurred in Detroit and involved guardianship cases within the Eastern District of Michigan.
How the Scheme Allegedly Worked
Federal prosecutors allege the defendants:
-
Obtained control of wards’ bank accounts through guardianship appointments and legal authority.
-
Redirected funds into personal accounts or business ventures.
-
Used stolen money for private investments, including a $70,000 stake in a local bar, and for personal expenses such as a Ford Expedition lease.
-
Filed misleading or incomplete probate documents to hide missing funds.
-
Provided false information when questioned by federal agents.
The victims were adults legally determined to be unable to manage their own finances — making oversight and accountability especially critical.
Statements From Prosecutors
U.S. Attorney Jerome Gorgon condemned the alleged conduct, stating that individuals entrusted with protecting vulnerable adults instead “abused that high honor for personal gain.” He emphasized that the justice system depends on integrity from those who hold judicial and fiduciary authority.
Why This Case Matters
1. Breach of Judicial and Fiduciary Duty
The allegations involve a sitting judge and court‑appointed guardians — individuals expected to uphold the highest ethical standards.
2. Systemic Weaknesses in Guardianship Oversight
Michigan’s guardianship system has long faced criticism for limited monitoring and inconsistent financial reporting requirements.
3. Harm to Vulnerable Adults
Victims were individuals legally deemed unable to protect themselves, amplifying the seriousness of the alleged misconduct.
4. Public Trust in the Courts
Charges against a sitting judge raise significant concerns about internal safeguards and accountability within Michigan’s judicial system.
Potential Legal Consequences
If convicted, the defendants face:
-
Federal prison sentences for wire fraud and conspiracy
-
Additional penalties for money laundering
-
Permanent removal from judicial or legal positions
-
Restitution orders to repay misappropriated funds
-
Possible state‑level disciplinary actions
2025-2026
What a year – What a Future
- 24% tax on weed
- 52 cents per gallon tax
- fraud
- more fraud
- more fraud
- more fraud
- more fraud
- Detroit judge, 3 others charged in alleged scheme to steal thousands from vulnerable and incapacitated people
- Ex-(Who cares Red or Blue) Party treasurer charged with embezzling from vulnerable adult
- and more fraud
How about taxing us less and fighting fraud a lot more. We the people are tired of the political, citizen and NON CITIZEN grifting.
FAQs
1. How much money was allegedly taken?
Federal prosecutors estimate more than $270,000 was diverted from incapacitated adults.
2. What role did the judge play?
Judge Bradley‑Baskin is accused of participating in the conspiracy, laundering funds, and lying to investigators.
3. How did the defendants access victims’ finances?
Through court‑appointed guardianship authority, which granted them control over wards’ bank accounts and assets.
4. What were the funds allegedly used for?
Personal expenses, business investments, and other non‑authorized uses unrelated to the wards’ care.
5. What happens next?
The case will proceed through federal court, where the defendants will have the opportunity to contest the charges. Additional investigations or related charges are possible.
Komorn Law, founded in 1993, brings decades of seasoned experience to Michigan’s most complex criminal and regulatory matters, including the evolving cannabis framework from the MMMA to today’s MRTMA landscape. The firm represents clients facing controlled‑substance offenses, DUI and drug‑related driving charges, firearm violations, property crimes, resisting or obstructing, and the most serious allegations such as manslaughter and homicide. With a proven record in courts across Michigan and the federal system, Komorn Law delivers relentless advocacy when the stakes are highest. Call our office when you are ready to hire an attorney experienced and seasoned fighting the system of “Justice” 248-357-2550.
More
A Motion in Limine – What does it Mean?
Defininition and Explaination - Motion in LimineA motion in limine is a pretrial request asking the judge to exclude (or sometimes allow) specific evidence before the jury ever hears it. It’s one of the most important evidentiary tools in both criminal and civil...
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Threat of Terrorism
Case Summary In People v Kvasnicka, the defendant sent a message to a young girl stating she “would not be laughing” when he came to her school to “shoot it up or blow it up like Columbine.” Charged under Michigan’s threat‑of‑terrorism statute, he argued the law was...
What is a Franks Hearing?
What is a Frank's Hearing?A Franks hearing is a critical legal tool used when a defendant claims that police lied, exaggerated, or recklessly disregarded the truth in a search warrant affidavit. When law enforcement places its hand on the Constitution, the law...
Michigan House Bill Proposes 32% Tax on Internet Devices for Kids
Taxed Again..? They're working on it.A newly introduced Michigan House bill would impose a 32% excise tax on smartphones, tablets, gaming systems, and other internet‑connected devices marketed to or primarily used by minors. Lawmakers backing the proposal argue the...
Shadow cash is corrupting Michigan courtrooms
The Shadow Cash Threat: Protecting the Integrity of Michigan Courtrooms In recent months, a spotlight has been cast on a hidden influence within the Michigan legal system: "shadow cash." This term refers to third-party litigation funding (TPLF), where outside...
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Prisoner in Possession
Prisoner in Possession of a Controlled SubstanceCase Summary In People v Tadgerson, the Michigan Supreme Court addressed a critical question: does the crime of a prisoner possessing a controlled substance under MCL 800.281(4) require proof of intent, or is it a...
What is Inference Stacking?
What Is Inference Stacking? A Legal ExplanationInference stacking—also called pyramiding of inferences—is a rule of evidence that prohibits courts or juries from building one inference on top of another when the first inference is not supported by direct evidence....
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Murder
Case Summary In People v Jones, the Michigan Court of Appeals addressed whether a single act of abuse can support convictions for both first‑degree child abuse and felony murder. The defendant argued that using the same conduct to support both charges violated...
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Neglect of Duty
Case Summary In People v Harper, a Wayne County Sheriff’s deputy was charged with neglect of duty after witnessing an inmate escape during his smoke break and taking no action to stop or pursue the prisoner. The prosecution relied on the Sheriff’s Department policy...
Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Metallic Knuckles
Case Summary In People v Dummer, the defendant challenged Michigan’s metallic‑knuckles statute, arguing that simply possessing the weapon was protected by the Second Amendment. The Michigan Court of Appeals acknowledged that possession of metallic knuckles is...


















