CORRUPT JUDGES


 

Revolting Judges

by Dr. Carl Bernofsky

Fearful of a growing backlash from the public against arbitrary, prejudiced, and even malicious judgments that are protected by judicial immunity, judges have banded together under government sponsorship to devise means of defending themselves from aggrieved and increasingly militant pro-se litigants.

 
Continuing Education Credit Prejudices Judges
JUNE WISNIEWSKI
     My name is June Wisniewski. I live in Reno, Nevada, about two miles from the National Judicial College, the non-profit organization that trains judges, and grew up in Linden, New Jersey.
     Here is John Boyle, the judge who went on Fox News twice and talked about my case,In the Matter of Joseph Wisniewski, Sr., Docket No. J-1733. Judge John Boyle called me a quack, a loser, and a mental case, but admitted that I had money due and owning me in a civil case.
     On another videotape, Boyle stated that his father introduced him to the Mafia when he was twelve years old, and made sure that he did not have his picture taken with any Mafia leader. Boyle went into detail on how money was confiscated from poor persons, and stated that the Mafia was all about the money, and not about the fellowship.
     Judge John M. Boyle accepted a bribe in the case, In the Matter of the Estate of Joseph Wisniewski, Sr., and fradulently concealed over $140,000 improperly paid to the attorney, Walter A. Kipp, of Rutherford, NJ. Boyle arranged with the Administrator of the estate, Joe Wisniewski, Jr., of McLean, VA, and his attorney, Kipp, to substitute $250,000 worth of bogus, bankrupt, junk bonds that were not part of my father’s estate instead of cash or actual assets. The State of New Jersey supports the fradulent concealment of estate assets in selected cases.http://judicialterrorism.blogspot.com/2009/07/here-is-judge-who-went-on-fox-news.html
      This book, along with Dealing With Common Law Courts: A Model Curriculum for Judges and Court Staff, published in 1997 by NCSC, was developed from an Institute for Course Management (ICM) course on dealing with common law courts, held in Scottsdale, Arizona, February 5-7, 1997.

     The curriculum and manuals for this course were prepared with a grant from the State Justice Institute: Award No. SJI-96-02B-B-159, “The Rise of Common Law Courts in the United States: An Examination of the Movement, the Potential Impact on the Judiciary, and How the States Could Respond.

     The State Justice Institute (SJI) is a non-profit, 501C(3) corporation that was started in 1986 and funded by Congress to develop courses and training manuals for state courts and judicial training organizations.This course and training manuals were developed by a group of 27 judges, court clerks, court administrators, and prosecutors in Arizona who examined the history and procedures of the Common Law Court Movement (CLC) and created the training curriculum and responses that courts, judges, and court administrators can use when dealing with common law courts in their own jurisdictions.

     My contact at the conference said that one of its goals was to identify ways the courts can make preemptive strikes against the CLC movement.Some of the keynote speakers who helped produce the CLC course in Arizona were Chief Justice Thomas Moyer of Columbus, Ohio, T.C. Brown of Columbus, Ohio (a reporter for theCleveland Plain Dealer), and Jonathan Mozzochi, Executive Director of the Coalition for Human Dignity in Seattle, Washington. Mozzochi, who distributed Guns and Gavels, a publication of the Coalition, was listed as “a nationally recognized expert on militias and hate group activity.”

     The Coalition is like a west coast version of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).I originally found out about this course by watching a videotaped session of the 1996 combined conference of the Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ) and the Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA), held in Nashville, Tennessee in the summer of 1996 and called “Impact of the Common Law Court Movement on the Courts.”

     More than 50 state supreme court justices and state court administrators attended the Tennessee conference. The CLC session was taped with a grant from SJI. Keynote speakers were Michael Reynolds, senior intelligence analyst for the SPLC, and James Reynolds, chief of the Terrorism and Violent Crime Section, U.S. Department of Justice.

     The panel discussion included Susan Hansen, senior reporter with American Lawyer, Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas Moyer (past president of CCJ), Utah Supreme Court Justice Michael Zimmerman, and Judges Jeffrey Langton and Gregory Mohr from Montana.

     The taped session was more than three hours long. At the end of the session, one of the speakers mentioned that there was funding for additional CLC conferences. I immediately called ICM, located at NCSC in Virginia, and asked about the additional CLC conferences. My contact told me that a Scottsdale conference was going to take place in about three days. Since those two conferences, there have been additional conferences sponsored by SJI with other organizations.

     SJI sponsored a conference with the American Judicature Society in Scottsdale, Arizona in November, 1999 that was closed to the public and the press. There will also be an ICM course in Orlando, Florida on February 5-7, 2001 called “Increasing Access to Justice for pro-se Litigants,” with that organization’s perception of what “access” means.

     “Constitutionalists in Court” was held in the St. Paul-Minneapolis, Minnesota area in the summer of 2000 by the National Judicial College (NJC) of Reno, Nevada, and the same course was held again November 13-14, 2000, also at NJC in Reno. This course discusses the history of protest movements affecting the judiciary, identifies typical challenges and ways to handle them, anticipates courtroom security needs, and plans solutions and strategies.

     NJC, together with the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR), conducted a survey, developed material for their courses from SJI materials and grants, and published a brief report called “Right-Wing Extremist Challenges to the Authority and Jurisdiction of the Court” in 1998.

     This course and report contains a preemptive plan against pro-se litigants and others who may disagree with the court, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Native American protest groups, religious organizations, and anyone else who may take issue with a court decision. The information from NJC is so controversial that NJC has banned its course and conference materials from the public, but their library and the SJI repository is open to the public.

     I originally started researching judicial training organizations in 1996 after I was denied an inheritance by the New Jersey court system when my parents died and was also denied entrance to a conference and course materials at NJC in May, 1996, called “The National Conference on the Media and the Courts: Working Together to Serve the American People.”

     The media conference was closed to the public. Only one New Jersey judge, Martin Kravarick, attended that conference. Judge Kravarick was elected president of the American Judges Association (AJA), a judge’s organization under NCSC. AJA publishes a quarterly journal called Court Review, available in your local law library, by subscription, or through interlibrary loan.

     I first found out about the judicial movement against pro-se litigants and the CLC movement by reading Kravarick’s “President’s Message” in the Fall, 1996 issue of Court Review. I called Judge Kravarick for more information on what the CLC movement was all about, and he gave me some additional contact information. I called Mike Reynolds of SPLC, and he told me there were four conference proceedings and that the conference was taped.

      I waited over three months to get a copy of the tape, “Impact of the Common Law Movement on the Courts.” That tape is available through interlibrary loan from NCSC along with the training manuals mentioned above.Each state has an SJI repository for all publications put out by the organizations they have funded. For example, the repository in Nevada is at NJC in Reno.

     In New Jersey, the SJI repository is at the New Jersey State Library in Trenton. You can check out these training manuals with a New Jersey library card. You can also find out where your SJI repository is by looking it up on the Internet at http://www.statejustice.org, by calling SJI at 703-684-6100, or by writing to the State Justice Institute, 1650 King street, Alexandria, VA 22314.SJI is funded by Congress with your tax dollars.

     If you don’t like the courses and materials they are funding, you can write to your senator or congressman, or directly to SJI and ask them to stop funding these materials. SJI gets very few letters from the public, and I’m sure they would love to hear from you. When you get to their Web site, read and download the newsletters. Most of their new grants are in their newsletters.The National Center for State Courts is an umbrella organization for several judges’ organizations such as the National College of Probate judges (NCPJ), AJA, CCJ, COSCA, ICM and others.

      I have been a member of NCPJ since 1996 and have attended four judges’ conferences. The most controversial and harmful material against the public is coming from NJC and NCSC materials, two agencies that compete with each other for SJI and federal government funding.In the training manuals mentioned above, there are two sections in each book where the writers advise judges and court personnel such as court clerks and guards on how to handle pro-se litigants using a step-by-step process. The writers of these manuals reveal a court that is biased and has a dangerous point of view about justice and equal access in the court system.

Copyright © 2001 June Wisniewski

The Author:  June Wisniewski is a legal researcher and journalist in Reno, Nevada, and can be reached at renojune@judicialterrorism.com.  She has written a number of articles on judicial subjects and is author of the book, The Coffin Chasers: An Aggrieved Litigant’s Journey Through the Corrupt World of Probate The source of this article is the January 5, 2001 issue of the Idaho Observer (http://proliberty.com/observer/20010105.htm)

The text has been modified by reformating and other nonconsequential editing and is noted as such at the request of the author.  The subject matter is the basis of another book by Wisniewski, Unequal Justice: The Inside Story of the National Judicial College.Note 1:  The vulnerability of pro se’s to the hostility of judges is exemplified by the fate of Elena Sassower in 2004.  See also: Sherman Skolnick’s Big Court Fix.

Note 2:  In 2006, the American Bar Association issued a manual, Countering the Critics; Q&E Guide [PDF], that instructs judges on how to respond to complaints about the lack of accountability and other “hot-button” issues they are likely encounter from critics of the American court system.

Note 3:  On March 11, 2008 the Judicial Conference of the United States adopted a new set of rules for processing misconduct complaints against federal judges [PDF].  This document also contains instructions for filing complaints against judges.

Hellman, Arthur D., Proposed Amendments to the Federal Judicial Misconduct Rules: Comments and Suggestions (January 23, 2015).

Hearing Before the Judicial Conference of the United States — Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability, October 30, 2014; U. of Pittsburgh Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2015-10. Available at SSRN:http://ssrn.com/abstract=2554596

Proposed Amendments to the Federal Judicial Misconduct Rules: Comments and Suggestions


Arthur D. Hell man


University of Pittsburgh

January 23, 2015

Hearing Before the Judicial Conference of the United States — Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability, October 30, 2014
U. of Pittsburgh Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2015-10
Abstract:     

     In 2008, the Judicial Conference of the United States – the administrative policy-making body of the federal judiciary – approved a revised set of rules for handling complaints of misconduct or disability on the part of federal judges. Moving away from the decentralizing approach of the pre-2008 Illustrative Rules, the new rules were made binding on all of the federal judicial circuits.
     On September 2, 2014, the Conference’s Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability (Conduct Committee) issued a set of draft amendments to the Rules. The announcement invited comments on the proposed amendments. This statement was submitted in response to that invitation. The statement is in four parts. Part I provides some background. Part II discusses the policy changes proposed by the Committee. Part III addresses the special problems raised by “high-visibility” complaints. Part IV suggests some additional modest revisions in the Rules and flags issues that warrant the Committee’s attention in the future.

     Most of the amendments in the published draft involve clarification or emphasis. But I have identified six revisions that do reflect changes of policy from the 2008 Rules. Five of the six reflect sound policy; they will serve to enhance transparency and strengthen procedural regularity. However, one proposed revision – an amendment that would allow tie votes in the Conduct Committee on petitions for review – is unwise. I urge the Committee to reconsider it.

     Part IV addresses a variety of issues raised by the proposed draft and the Rules as originally adopted. These include: the chief judge’s obligation to “identify” a complaint based on public reports suggesting that a judge may have engaged in misconduct; judicial council authority to impose sanctions on complainants who abuse the process; disqualification of judges from proceedings under the 1980 Act; and making the Rules more user-friendly. The most detailed discussion involves two issues raised by the misconduct complaint against former District Judge Richard Cebull of Montana: judicial-council authority to conclude a proceeding and disclosure of judicial-council orders that have been vacated or modified.

Click on   http://ssrn.com/abstract=2554596

Keywords: Federal Judicial Misconduct Statutes, Breyer Committee Report, Judicial Conduct, Judicial Misconduct, Federal Judges, Judicial Ethics, National Commission on Judicial Discipline and Removal, Rulemaking, United States Code Chapter 16, Reform, Judicial System, Federal Courts, Judicial Discipline

 

Code of Conduct for United States Judges

http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges

The Code of Conduct for United States Judges includes the ethical canons that apply to federal judges and provides guidance on their performance of official duties and engagement in a variety of outside activities.

Introduction
Canon 1: A Judge Should Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary
Canon 2: A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All Activities
Canon 3: A Judge Should Perform the Duties of the Office Fairly, Impartially and Diligently
Canon 4: A Judge May Engage in Extrajudicial Activities That are Consistent With the Obligations of Judicial Office
Canon 5: A Judge Should Refrain From Political Activity
Compliance with the Code of Conduct
Applicable Date of Compliance

Introduction

The Code of Conduct for United States Judges was initially adopted by the Judicial Conference on April 5, 1973, and was known as the “Code of Judicial Conduct for United States Judges.”

See: JCUS-APR 73, pp. 9-11. Since then, the Judicial Conference has made the following changes to the Code:

  • March 1987: deleted the word “Judicial” from the name of the Code;
  • September 1992: adopted substantial revisions to the Code;
  • March 1996: revised part C of the Compliance section, immediately following the Code;
  • September 1996: revised Canons 3C(3)(a) and 5C(4);
  • September 1999: revised Canon 3C(1)(c);
  • September 2000: clarified the Compliance section;
  • March 2009: adopted substantial revisions to the Code.
  • March 2014: revised part C of the Compliance section, which appears below, immediately following the Code. 

     This Code applies to United States circuit judges, district judges, Court of International Trade judges, Court of      Federal Claims judges, bankruptcy judges, and magistrate judges.

     Certain provisions of this Code apply to special masters and commissioners as indicated in the “Compliance” section.

     The Tax Court, Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces have adopted this Code.

The Judicial Conference has authorized its Committee on Codes of Conduct to render advisory opinions about this Code only when requested by a judge to whom this Code applies.

     Requests for opinions and other questions concerning this Code and its applicability should be addressed to the Chair of the Committee on Codes of Conduct by email or as follows:

Chair, Committee on Codes of Conduct
c/o General Counsel
Administrative Office of the United States Courts
Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building
One Columbus Circle, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20544
202-502-1100

Procedural questions may be addressed to:

Office of the General Counsel
Administrative Office of the United States Courts
Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building
One Columbus Circle, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20544
202-502-1100

Canon 1: A Judge Should Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary

     An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A judge should maintain and enforce high standards of conduct and should personally observe those standards, so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved. The provisions of this Code should be construed and applied to further that objective.

COMMENTARY

     Deference to the judgments and rulings of courts depends on public confidence in the integrity and independence of judges.

     The integrity and independence of judges depend in turn on their acting without fear or favor. Although judges should be independent, they must comply with the law and should comply with this Code. Adherence to this responsibility helps to maintain public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary. Conversely, violation of this Code diminishes public confidence in the judiciary and injures our system of government under law.

The Canons are rules of reason. They should be applied consistently with constitutional requirements, statutes, other court rules and decisional law, and in the context of all relevant circumstances.

     The Code is to be construed so it does not impinge on the essential independence of judges in making judicial decisions.

     The Code is designed to provide guidance to judges and nominees for judicial office.

     It may also provide standards of conduct for application in proceedings under the Judicial Councils Reform and Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 (28 U.S.C. §§ 332(d)(1), 351-364).

     Not every violation of the Code should lead to disciplinary action. Whether disciplinary action is appropriate, and the degree of discipline, should be determined through a reasonable application of the text and should depend on such factors as the seriousness of the improper activity, the intent of the judge, whether there is a pattern of improper activity, and the effect of the improper activity on others or on the judicial system.

      Many of the restrictions in the Code are necessarily cast in general terms, and judges may reasonably differ in their interpretation. Furthermore, the Code is not designed or intended as a basis for civil liability or criminal prosecution. Finally, the Code is not intended to be used for tactical advantage.

Canon 2: A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all Activities

(A)      Respect for Law. A judge should respect and comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

(B)      Outside Influence.

     A judge should not allow family, social, political, financial, or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgment.

     A judge should neither lend the prestige of the judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge or others nor convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge.

     A judge should not testify voluntarily as a character witness.

(C)      Nondiscriminatory Membership.

     A judge should not hold membership in any organization that practices invidious discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, or national origin.

COMMENTARY

Canon 2A.

     An appearance of impropriety occurs when reasonable minds, with knowledge of all the relevant circumstances disclosed by a reasonable inquiry, would conclude that the judge’s honesty, integrity, impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge is impaired. Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. This prohibition applies to both professional and personal conduct.

     A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen.

     Because it is not practicable to list all prohibited acts, the prohibition is necessarily cast in general terms that extend to conduct by judges that is harmful although not specifically mentioned in the Code.

     Actual improprieties under this standard include violations of law, court rules, or other specific provisions of this Code.

Canon 2B.  Testimony as a character witness injects the prestige of the judicial office into the proceeding in which the judge testifies and may be perceived as an official testimonial.

     A judge should discourage a party from requiring the judge to testify as a character witness except in unusual circumstances when the demands of justice require.

     This Canon does not create a privilege against testifying in response to an official summons.

     A judge should avoid lending the prestige of judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge or others.

      For example, a judge should not use the judge’s judicial position or title to gain advantage in litigation involving a friend or a member of the judge’s family.

     In contracts for publication of a judge’s writings, a judge should retain control over the advertising to avoid exploitation of the judge’s office.

     A judge should be sensitive to possible abuse of the prestige of office.

     A judge should not initiate communications to a sentencing judge or a probation or corrections officer but may provide information to such persons in response to a formal request.

      Judges may participate in the process of judicial selection by cooperating with appointing authorities and screening committees seeking names for consideration and by responding to official inquiries concerning a person being considered for a judgeship.

Canon 2C. Membership of a judge in an organization that practices invidious discrimination gives rise to perceptions that the judge’s impartiality is impaired.

      Canon 2C refers to the current practices of the organization. Whether an organization practices invidious discrimination is often a complex question to which judges should be sensitive.

     The answer cannot be determined from a mere examination of an organization’s current membership rolls but rather depends on how the organization selects members and other relevant factors, such as that the organization is dedicated to the preservation of religious, ethnic or cultural values of legitimate common interest to its members, or that it is in fact and effect an intimate, purely private organization whose membership limitations could not be constitutionally prohibited. See New York State Club Ass’n. Inc. v. City of New York, 487 U.S. 1, 108 S. Ct. 2225, 101 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1988); Board of Directors of Rotary International v. Rotary Club of Duarte, 481 U.S. 537, 107 S. Ct. 1940, 95 L. Ed. 2d 474 (1987); Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609, 104 S. Ct. 3244, 82 L. Ed. 2d 462 (1984).

     Other relevant factors include the size and nature of the organization and the diversity of persons in the locale who might reasonably be considered potential members.

      Thus the mere absence of diverse membership does not by itself demonstrate a violation unless reasonable persons with knowledge of all the relevant circumstances would expect that the membership would be diverse in the absence of invidious discrimination.

     Absent such factors, an organization is generally said to discriminate invidiously if it arbitrarily excludes from membership on the basis of race, religion, sex, or national origin persons who would otherwise be admitted to membership.

     Although Canon 2C relates only to membership in organizations that invidiously discriminate on the basis of race, sex, religion or national origin, a judge’s membership in an organization that engages in any invidiously discriminatory membership practices prohibited by applicable law violates Canons 2 and 2A and gives the appearance of impropriety.

     In addition, it would be a violation of Canons 2 and 2A for a judge to arrange a meeting at a club that the judge knows practices invidious discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, or national origin in its membership or other policies, or for the judge to use such a club regularly.

      Moreover, public manifestation by a judge of the judge’s knowing approval of invidious discrimination on any basis gives the appearance of impropriety under Canon 2 and diminishes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, in violation of Canon 2A.

      When a judge determines that an organization to which the judge belongs engages in invidious discrimination that would preclude membership under Canon 2C or under Canons 2 and 2A, the judge is permitted, in lieu of resigning, to make immediate and continuous efforts to have the organization discontinue its invidiously discriminatory practices.

     If the organization fails to discontinue its invidiously discriminatory practices as promptly as possible (and in all events within two years of the judge’s first learning of the practices), the judge should resign immediately from the organization.

Canon 3:      A Judge Should Perform the Duties of the Office Fairly, Impartially and Diligently

     The duties of judicial office take precedence over all other activities. In performing the duties prescribed by law, the judge should adhere to the following standards:

(A)      Adjudicative Responsibilities.

(1)      A judge should be faithful to, and maintain professional competence in, the law and should not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism.

(2)      A judge should hear and decide matters assigned, unless disqualified, and should maintain order and decorum in all judicial proceedings.

(3)      A judge should be patient, dignified, respectful, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity.

     A judge should require similar conduct of those subject to the judge’s control, including lawyers to the extent consistent with their role in the adversary process.

(4)     A judge should accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, and that person’s lawyer, the full right to be heard according to law.

     Except as set out below, a judge should not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications or consider other communications concerning a pending or impending matter that are made outside the presence of the parties or their lawyers.

     If a judge receives an unauthorized ex parte communication bearing on the substance of a matter, the judge should promptly notify the parties of the subject matter of the communication and allow the parties an opportunity to respond, if requested.

A judge may:

     (a)      initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications as authorized by law;

     (b)      when circumstances require it, permit ex parte communication for scheduling, administrative, or emergency purposes, but only if the ex parte communication does not address substantive matters and the judge reasonably believes that no party will gain a procedural, substantive, or tactical advantage as a result of the ex parte communication;

     (c)       obtain the written advice of a disinterested expert on the law, but only after giving advance notice to the parties of the person to be consulted and the subject matter of the advice and affording the parties reasonable opportunity to object and respond to the notice and to the advice received; or

     (d)      with the consent of the parties, confer separately with the parties and their counsel in an effort to mediate or settle pending matters.

(5)       A judge should dispose promptly of the business of the court.

(6)      A judge should not make public comment on the merits of a matter pending or impending in any court.

     A judge should require similar restraint by court personnel subject to the judge’s direction and control.

      The prohibition on public comment on the merits does not extend to public statements made in the course of the judge’s official duties, to explanations of court procedures, or to scholarly presentations made for purposes of legal education.

(B)      Administrative Responsibilities.

(1)      A judge should diligently discharge administrative responsibilities, maintain professional competence in judicial administration, and facilitate the performance of the administrative responsibilities of other judges and court personnel.

(2)      A judge should not direct court personnel to engage in conduct on the judge’s behalf or as the judge’s representative when that conduct would contravene the Code if undertaken by the judge.

(3)      A judge should exercise the power of appointment fairly and only on the basis of merit, avoiding unnecessary appointments, nepotism, and favoritism. A judge should not approve compensation of appointees beyond the fair value of services rendered.

(4)      A judge with supervisory authority over other judges should take reasonable measures to ensure that they perform their duties timely and effectively.

(5)      A judge should take appropriate action upon learning of reliable evidence indicating the likelihood that a judge’s conduct contravened this Code or a lawyer violated applicable rules of professional conduct.

(C)      Disqualification.

(1)      A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances in which:

     (a)      the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;

     (b)      the judge served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom the judge previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or lawyer has been a material witness;

     (c)      the judge knows that the judge, individually or as a fiduciary, or the judge’s spouse or minor child residing in the judge’s household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be affected substantially by the outcome of the proceeding;

     (d)      the judge or the judge’s spouse, or a person related to either within the third degree of relationship, or the spouse of such a person is:

           (i)      a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or trustee of a party;

           (ii)      acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;

          (iii)      known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding; or

          (iv)      to the judge’s knowledge likely to be a material witness in the proceeding;

     (e)     the judge has served in governmental employment and in that capacity participated as a judge (in a previous judicial position), counsel, advisor, or material witness concerning the proceeding or has expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy.

(2)      A judge should keep informed about the judge’s personal and fiduciary financial interests and make a reasonable effort to keep informed about the personal financial interests of the judge’s spouse and minor children residing in the judge’s household.

(3)      For the purposes of this section:

     (a)       the degree of relationship is calculated according to the civil law system; the following relatives are within the third degree of relationship: parent, child, grandparent, grandchild, great grandparent, great grandchild, sister, brother, aunt, uncle, niece, and nephew; the listed relatives include whole and half blood relatives and most step relatives;

     (b) “fiduciary” includes such relationships as executor, administrator, trustee, and guardian;

(c) “financial interest” means ownership of a legal or equitable interest, however small, or a relationship as director, advisor, or other active participant in the affairs of a party, except that:

          ( i)      ownership in a mutual or common investment fund that holds securities is not a “financial interest” in such securities unless the judge participates in the management of the fund;

           (ii)      an office in an educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organization is not a “financial interest” in securities held by the organization;

          (iii)      the proprietary interest of a policyholder in a mutual insurance company, or a depositor in a mutual savings association, or a similar proprietary interest, is a “financial interest” in the organization only if the outcome of the proceeding could substantially affect the value of the interest;

          (iv)      ownership of government securities is a “financial interest” in the issuer only if the outcome of the proceeding could substantially affect the value of the securities;

     (d)      “proceeding” includes pretrial, trial, appellate review, or other stages of litigation.

(4)      Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this Canon, if a judge would be disqualified because of a financial interest in a party (other than an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome), disqualification is not required if the judge (or the judge’s spouse or minor child) divests the interest that provides the grounds for disqualification.

(D) Remittal of Disqualification.

     Instead of withdrawing from the proceeding, a judge disqualified by Canon 3C(1) may, except in the circumstances specifically set out in subsections (a) through (e), disclose on the record the basis of disqualification.

     The judge may participate in the proceeding if, after that disclosure, the parties and their lawyers have an opportunity to confer outside the presence of the judge, all agree in writing or on the record that the judge should not be disqualified, and the judge is then willing to participate.

The agreement should be incorporated in the record of the proceeding.

COMMENTARY

Canon 3A(3).

     The duty to hear all proceedings fairly and with patience is not inconsistent with the duty to dispose promptly of the business of the court.

      Courts can be efficient and businesslike while being patient and deliberate.

     The duty under Canon 2 to act in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary applies to all the judge’s activities, including the discharge of the judge’s adjudicative and administrative responsibilities.

     The duty to be respectful includes the responsibility to avoid comment or behavior that could reasonably be interpreted as harassment, prejudice or bias.

Canon 3A(4).

     The restriction on ex parte communications concerning a proceeding includes communications from lawyers, law teachers, and others who are not participants in the proceeding.

     A judge may consult with other judges or with court personnel whose function is to aid the judge in carrying out adjudicative responsibilities.

      A judge should make reasonable efforts to ensure that law clerks and other court personnel comply with this provision.

     A judge may encourage and seek to facilitate settlement but should not act in a manner that coerces any party into surrendering the right to have the controversy resolved by the courts.

Canon 3A(5).    

      In disposing of matters promptly, efficiently, and fairly, a judge must demonstrate due regard for the rights of the parties to be heard and to have issues resolved without unnecessary cost or delay.

     A judge should monitor and supervise cases to reduce or eliminate dilatory practices, avoidable delays, and unnecessary costs.

     Prompt disposition of the court’s business requires a judge to devote adequate time to judicial duties, to be punctual in attending court and expeditious in determining matters under submission, and to take reasonable measures to ensure that court personnel, litigants, and their lawyers cooperate with the judge to that end.

Canon 3A(6).      

     The admonition against public comment about the merits of a pending or impending matter continues until the appellate process is complete.

     If the public comment involves a case from the judge’s own court, the judge should take particular care so that the comment does not denigrate public confidence in the judiciary’s integrity and impartiality, which would violate Canon 2A.

     A judge may comment publicly on proceedings in which the judge is a litigant in a personal capacity, but not on mandamus proceedings when the judge is a litigant in an official capacity (but the judge may respond in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 21(b)).https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rule_21 (Rule 21 (b))

Canon 3B(3).      

     A judge’s appointees include assigned counsel, officials such as referees, commissioners, special masters, receivers, guardians, and personnel such as law clerks, secretaries, and judicial assistants. Consent by the parties to an appointment or an award of compensation does not relieve the judge of the obligation prescribed by this subsection.

Canon 3B(5).   

      Appropriate action may include direct communication with the judge or lawyer, other direct action if available, reporting the conduct to the appropriate authorities, or, when the judge believes that a judge’s or lawyer’s conduct is caused by drugs, alcohol, or a medical condition, making a confidential referral to an assistance program.

     Appropriate action may also include responding to a subpoena to testify or otherwise participating in judicial or lawyer disciplinary proceedings; a judge should be candid and honest with disciplinary authorities.

Canon 3C.

     Recusal considerations applicable to a judge’s spouse should also be considered with respect to a person other than a spouse with whom the judge maintains both a household and an intimate relationship.

Canon 3C(1)(c).

      In a criminal proceeding, a victim entitled to restitution is not, within the meaning of this Canon, a party to the proceeding or the subject matter in controversy.

      A judge who has a financial interest in the victim of a crime is not required by Canon 3C(1)(c) to disqualify from the criminal proceeding, but the judge must do so if the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned under Canon 3C(1) or if the judge has an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding under Canon 3C(1)(d)(iii).

Canon 3C(1)(d)(ii).

     The fact that a lawyer in a proceeding is affiliated with a law firm with which a relative of the judge is affiliated does not of itself disqualify the judge.

     However, if “the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned” under Canon 3C(1), or the relative is known by the judge to have an interest in the law firm that could be “substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding” under Canon 3C(1)(d)(iii), the judge’s disqualification is required.

Canon 4:      A Judge May Engage in Extrajudicial Activities that are Consistent with the Obligations of Judicial Office 

     A judge may engage in extrajudicial activities, including law-related pursuits and civic, charitable, educational, religious, social, financial, fiduciary, and governmental activities, and may speak, write, lecture, and teach on both law-related and nonlegal subjects.

      However, a judge should not participate in extrajudicial activities that detract from the dignity of the judge’s office, interfere with the performance of the judge’s official duties, reflect adversely on the judge’s impartiality, lead to frequent disqualification, or violate the limitations set forth below.

(A)      Law-related Activities.

(1)      Speaking, Writing, and Teaching.

     A judge may speak, write, lecture, teach, and participate in other activities concerning the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice

(2)      Consultation.   

       A judge may consult with or appear at a public hearing before an executive or legislative body or official:

     (a)     on matters concerning the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice;

     (b)     to the extent that it would generally be perceived that a judge’s judicial experience provides special expertise in the area; or

     (c)     when the judge is acting pro se in a matter involving the judge or the judge’s interest.

(3)      Organizations.

     A judge may participate in and serve as a member, officer, director, trustee, or nonlegal advisor of a nonprofit organization devoted to the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice and may assist such an organization in the management and investment of funds.

      A judge may make recommendations to public and private fund-granting agencies about projects and programs concerning the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice.

(4)      Arbitration and Mediation.

      A judge should not act as an arbitrator or mediator or otherwise perform judicial functions apart from the judge’s official duties unless expressly authorized by law.

(5)      Practice of Law.

     A judge should not practice law and should not serve as a family member’s lawyer in any forum.

     A judge may, however, act pro se and may, without compensation, give legal advice to and draft or review documents for a member of the judge’s family.

(B)      Civic and Charitable ActivitiesA judge may participate in and serve as an officer, director, trustee, or nonlegal advisor of a nonprofit civic, charitable, educational, religious, or social organization, subject to the following limitations:

(1)     A judge should not serve if it is likely that the organization will either be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come before the judge or be regularly engaged in adversary proceedings in any court.

(2)     A judge should not give investment advice to such an organization but may serve on its board of directors or trustees even though it has the responsibility for approving investment decisions.

(C)      Fund Raising. A judge may assist nonprofit law-related, civic, charitable, educational, religious, or social organizations in planning fund-raising activities and may be listed as an officer, director, or trustee. A judge may solicit funds for such an organization from judges over whom the judge does not exercise supervisory or appellate authority and from members of the judge’s family. Otherwise, a judge should not personally participate in fund-raising activities, solicit funds for any organization, or use or permit the use of the prestige of judicial office for that purpose. A judge should not personally participate in membership solicitation if the solicitation might reasonably be perceived as coercive or is essentially a fund-raising mechanism.

(D)     Financial Activities.

(1)       A judge may hold and manage investments, including real estate, and engage in other remunerative activity, but should refrain from financial and business dealings that exploit the judicial position or involve the judge in frequent transactions or continuing business relationships with lawyers or other persons likely to come before the court on which the judge serves.

(2)      A judge may serve as an officer, director, active partner, manager, advisor, or employee of a business only if the business is closely held and controlled by members of the judge’s family. For this purpose, “members of the judge’s family” means persons related to the judge or the judge’s spouse within the third degree of relationship as defined in Canon 3C(3)(a), any other relative with whom the judge or the judge’s spouse maintains a close familial relationship, and the spouse of any of the foregoing.

(3)      As soon as the judge can do so without serious financial detriment, the judge should divest investments and other financial interests that might require frequent disqualification.

(4)      A judge should comply with the restrictions on acceptance of gifts and the prohibition on solicitation of gifts set forth in the Judicial Conference Gift Regulations.

     A judge should endeavor to prevent any member of the judge’s family residing in the household from soliciting or accepting a gift except to the extent that a judge would be permitted to do so by the Judicial Conference Gift Regulations.

     A “member of the judge’s family” means any relative of a judge by blood, adoption, or marriage, or any person treated by a judge as a member of the judge’s family.

(5)      A judge should not disclose or use nonpublic information acquired in a judicial capacity for any purpose unrelated to the judge’s official duties.

(E)      Fiduciary Activities.

      A judge may serve as the executor, administrator, trustee, guardian, or other fiduciary only for the estate, trust, or person of a member of the judge’s family as defined in Canon 4D(4).

As a family fiduciary a judge is subject to the following restrictions:

(1)      The judge should not serve if it is likely that as a fiduciary the judge would be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come before the judge or if the estate, trust, or ward becomes involved in adversary proceedings in the court on which the judge serves or one under its appellate jurisdiction.

(2)      While acting as a fiduciary, a judge is subject to the same restrictions on financial activities that apply to the judge in a personal capacity.

(F)      Governmental Appointments.

      A judge may accept appointment to a governmental committee, commission, or other position only if it is one that concerns the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice, or if appointment of a judge is required by federal statute.

     A judge should not, in any event, accept such an appointment if the judge’s governmental duties would tend to undermine the public confidence in the integrity, impartiality, or independence of the judiciary. A judge may represent the judge’s country, state, or locality on ceremonial occasions or in connection with historical, educational, and cultural activities.

(G)      Chambers, Resources, and Staff.     

     A judge should not to any substantial degree use judicial chambers, resources, or staff to engage in extrajudicial activities permitted by this Canon.

(H)      Compensation, Reimbursement, and Financial Reporting.

 A judge may accept compensation and reimbursement of expenses for the law-related and extrajudicial activities permitted by this Code if the source of the payments does not give the appearance of influencing the judge in the judge’s judicial duties or otherwise give the appearance of impropriety, subject to the following restrictions:

(1)      Compensation should not exceed a reasonable amount nor should it exceed what a person who is not a judge would receive for the same activity.

(2)      Expense reimbursement should be limited to the actual costs of travel, food, and lodging reasonably incurred by the judge and, where appropriate to the occasion, by the judge’s spouse or relative. Any additional payment is compensation.

(3)      A judge should make required financial disclosures, including disclosures of gifts and other things of value, in compliance with applicable statutes and Judicial Conference regulations and directives.

COMMENTARY

Canon 4.

     Complete separation of a judge from extrajudicial activities is neither possible nor wise; a judge should not become isolated from the society in which the judge lives. As a judicial officer and a person specially learned in the law, a judge is in a unique position to contribute to the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice, including revising substantive and procedural law and improving criminal and juvenile justice.

      To the extent that the judge’s time permits and impartiality is not compromised, the judge is encouraged to do so, either independently or through a bar association, judicial conference, or other organization dedicated to the law. Subject to the same limitations, judges may also engage in a wide range of non-law-related activities.

     Within the boundaries of applicable law (see, e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 953) a judge may express opposition to the persecution of lawyers and judges anywhere in the world if the judge has ascertained, after reasonable inquiry, that the persecution is occasioned by conflict between the professional responsibilities of the persecuted judge or lawyer and the policies or practices of the relevant government.

     A person other than a spouse with whom the judge maintains both a household and an intimate relationship should be considered a member of the judge’s family for purposes of legal assistance under Canon 4A(5), fund raising under Canon 4C, and family business activities under Canon 4D(2).

Canon 4A.    

      Teaching and serving on the board of a law school are permissible, but in the case of a for-profit law school, board service is limited to a non-governing advisory board.

     Consistent with this Canon, a judge may encourage lawyers to provide pro bono legal services.

Canon 4A(4)

     This Canon generally prohibits a judge from mediating a state court matter, except in unusual circumstances (e.g., when a judge is mediating a federal matter that cannot be resolved effectively without addressing the related state court matter).

Canon 4A(5).

      A judge may act pro se in all legal matters, including matters involving litigation and matters involving appearances before or other dealings with governmental bodies.

      In so doing, a judge must not abuse the prestige of office to advance the interests of the judge or the judge’s family.

Canon 4B.

      The changing nature of some organizations and their exposure to litigation make it necessary for a judge regularly to reexamine the activities of each organization with which the judge is affiliated to determine if the judge’s continued association is appropriate.

For example, in many jurisdictions, charitable hospitals are in court more often now than in the past.

Canon 4C

     A judge may attend fund-raising events of law-related and other organizations although the judge may not be a speaker, a guest of honor, or featured on the program of such an event. Use of a judge’s name, position in the organization, and judicial designation on an organization’s letterhead, including when used for fund raising or soliciting members, does not violate Canon 4C if comparable information and designations are listed for others.

Canon 4D(1), (2), and (3)

     Canon 3 requires disqualification of a judge in any proceeding in which the judge has a financial interest, however small. Canon 4D requires a judge to refrain from engaging in business and from financial activities that might interfere with the impartial performance of the judge’s judicial duties. Canon 4H requires a judge to report compensation received for activities outside the judicial office.

     A judge has the rights of an ordinary citizen with respect to financial affairs, except for limitations required to safeguard the proper performance of the judge’s duties. A judge’s participation in a closely held family business, while generally permissible, may be prohibited if it takes too much time or involves misuse of judicial prestige or if the business is likely to come before the court on which the judge serves. Owning and receiving income from investments do not as such affect the performance of a judge’s duties.

Canon 4D(5)

     The restriction on using nonpublic information is not intended to affect a judge’s ability to act on information as necessary to protect the health or safety of the judge or a member of a judge’s family, court personnel, or other judicial officers if consistent with other provisions of this Code.

Canon 4E

     Mere residence in the judge’s household does not by itself make a person a member of the judge’s family for purposes of this Canon.

The person must be treated by the judge as a member of the judge’s family.

     The Applicable Date of Compliance provision of this Code addresses continued service as a fiduciary.

     A judge’s obligation under this Code and the judge’s obligation as a fiduciary may come into conflict.

      For example, a judge should resign as a trustee if it would result in detriment to the trust to divest holdings whose retention would require frequent disqualification of the judge in violation of Canon 4D(3).

Canon 4F

     The appropriateness of accepting extrajudicial assignments must be assessed in light of the demands on judicial resources and the need to protect the courts from involvement in matters that may prove to be controversial.

     Judges should not accept governmental appointments that could interfere with the effectiveness and independence of the judiciary, interfere with the performance of the judge’s judicial responsibilities, or tend to undermine public confidence in the judiciary.

Canon 4H.

      A judge is not required by this Code to disclose income, debts, or investments, except as provided in this Canon. The Ethics Reform Act of 1989 and implementing regulations promulgated by the Judicial Conference impose additional restrictions on judges’ receipt of compensation.

     That Act and those regulations should be consulted before a judge enters into any arrangement involving the receipt of compensation.

     The restrictions so imposed include but are not limited to:

(1)      a prohibition against receiving “honoraria” (defined as anything of value received for a speech, appearance, or article),

(2)      a prohibition against receiving compensation for service as a director, trustee, or officer of a profit or nonprofit organization, (3) a requirement that compensated teaching activities receive prior approval, and (4) a limitation on the receipt of “outside earned income.”

Canon 5: A Judge Should Refrain from Political Activity

(A) General Prohibitions. A judge should not:

(1) act as a leader or hold any office in a political organization;

(2) make speeches for a political organization or candidate, or publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office; or

(3) solicit funds for, pay an assessment to, or make a contribution to a political organization or candidate, or attend or purchase a ticket for a dinner or other event sponsored by a political organization or candidate.

(B) Resignation upon Candidacy. A judge should resign the judicial office if the judge becomes a candidate in a primary or general election for any office.

(C) Other Political Activity. A judge should not engage in any other political activity. This provision does not prevent a judge from engaging in activities described in Canon 4.

COMMENTARY

The term “political organization” refers to a political party, a group affiliated with a political party or candidate for public office, or an entity whose principal purpose is to advocate for or against political candidates or parties in connection with elections for public office.

Compliance with the Code of Conduct

Anyone who is an officer of the federal judicial system authorized to perform judicial functions is a judge for the purpose of this Code.

All judges should comply with this Code except as provided below.

(A)      Part-time Judge

     A part-time judge is a judge who serves part-time, whether continuously or periodically, but is permitted by law to devote time to some other profession or occupation and whose compensation for that reason is less than that of a full-time judge.

A part-time judge:

(1)      is not required to comply with Canons 4A(4), 4A(5), 4D(2), 4E, 4F, or 4H(3);
(2)      except as provided in the Conflict-of-Interest Rules for Part-time Magistrate Judges, should not practice law in the court on which the judge serves or in any court subject to that court’s appellate jurisdiction, or act as a lawyer in a proceeding in which the judge has served as a judge or in any related proceeding.

(B)      Judge Pro Tempore

     A judge pro tempore is a person who is appointed to act temporarily as a judge or as a special master.

(1) While acting in this capacity, a judge pro tempore is not required to comply with Canons 4A(4), 4A(5), 4D(2), 4D(3), 4E, 4F, or 4H(3); further, one who acts solely as a special master is not required to comply with Canons 4A(3), 4B, 4C, 4D(4), or 5.

(2)      A person who has been a judge pro tempore should not act as a lawyer in a proceeding in which the judge has served as a judge or in any related proceeding.

(C)      Retired Judge

     A judge who is retired under 28 U.S.C. § 371(b) or § 372(a) (applicable to Article III judges), or who is subject to recall under § 178(d) (applicable to judges on the Court of Federal Claims), or who is recalled to judicial service, should comply with all the provisions of this Code except Canon 4F, but the judge should refrain from judicial service during the period of extrajudicial appointment not sanctioned by Canon 4F.

     All other retired judges who are eligible for recall to judicial service (except those in U.S. territories and possessions) should comply with the provisions of this Code governing part-time judges.

     However, bankruptcy judges and magistrate judges who are eligible for recall but who have notified the Administrative Office of the United States Courts that they will not consent to recall are not obligated to comply with the provisions of this Code governing part-time judges.

     Such notification may be made at any time after retirement, and is irrevocable. A senior judge in the territories and possessions must comply with this Code as prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 373(c)(5) and (d).

COMMENTARY

     The 2014 amendment to the Compliance section, regarding retired bankruptcy judges and magistrate judges and exempting those judges from compliance with the Code as part-time judges if they notify the Administrative Office of the United States Courts that they will not consent to recall, was not intended to alter those judges’ statutory entitlements to annuities, cost-of-living adjustments, or any other retirement benefits.

Applicable Date of Compliance

     Persons to whom this Code applies should arrange their financial and fiduciary affairs as soon as reasonably possible to comply with it and should do so in any event within one year after appointment.

     If, however, the demands on the person’s time and the possibility of conflicts of interest are not substantial, such a person may continue to act, without compensation, as an executor, administrator, trustee, or other fiduciary for the estate or person of one who is not a member of the person’s family if terminating the relationship would unnecessarily jeopardize any substantial interest of the estate or person and if the judicial council of the circuit approves.

Last revised (Transmittal 02-016) March 20, 2014

http://www.tulanelink.com/tulanelink/revoltingjudges_03a.htm

 

Interviews with Dr. Bernofsky on…

Inns of Court

attorneyhttp://www.tulanelink.com/tulanelink/innsofcourt_box.htm

Conservative talk show host of The Justice Hour, Florida attorneyLisa Macci, spoke with Dr. Bernofsky about the Inns of Court, his case against Tulane University, and his experience with the civil justice system. 

The program, which also featured her fellow attorney Elizabeth Case, was broadcast live over WPBR 1340 AM radio at 9:00 a.m., eastern standard time, on June 26, 2006.  The audio clip presented here runs about 38 minutes and has no commercial breaks.Carl Bernofsky, 2006

Carl Bernofsky

http://www.tulanelink.com/audio/macci_06a.swf

Lisa Macci may be contacted by email at: lisamacci@msn.com.

Her Web site is at:  http://www.lisamacci.com.


 

Judicial Conflict of Interest

Social activist and talk show host of Late Night with D’Anne, Illinois investigative reporter D’Anne Burley spoke with Dr. Bernofsky about judicial conflict of interest, his case against Tulane University, and his experience with the civil justice system.  The program was broadcast live over the Internet by the Republic Broadcasting Network (http://www.rbnlive.com) at 10:00 p.m., central standard time, on July 29, 2006.  The audio clip presented here runs about 41 minutes and has no commercial breaks.

http://www.tulanelink.com/audio/burley_06A.swf
D’Anne Burley may be contacted at: (630) 477-0860 or (630) 441-0548. 

Her Web site is at: http://danneburley.blogspot.com.  Broadcast archives are available at:http://www.rbnlive.com/archiveindex.html.


 

No Justice Here

Watch video, Carl Bernofsky, 2008

See video about Dr. Bernofsky’s case against Tulane University.  Click on image.

 

Special Rules for Special Cases,

for Example, in  Rule 26A.015

     Disqualification of justice or judge of the Court of Justice, or master commissioner.

(1)      For the purposes of this section the following words or phrases shall have the meaning indicated: (a) “Proceeding” includes pretrial, trial, appellate review, or other stages of litigation; (b) “Fiduciary” includes such relationships as executor, administrator, conservator, trustee, and guardian; (c) “Financial interest” means ownership of a legal or equitable interest, however small, or a relationship as director, adviser, or other active participant in the affairs of a party, except that:

1.      Ownership in a mutual or common investment fund that holds securities, or a proprietary interest of a policyholder in a mutual insurance company, of a depositor in a mutual savings association, or a similar proprietary interest, or ownership of government securities is a “financial interest” only if the outcome of the proceeding could substantially affect the value of the interest;

2.      An office in an educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organization is not a “financial interest” in securities held by the organization.

(2)      Any justice or judge of the Court of Justice or master commissioner shall disqualify himself in any proceeding:

     (a)      Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceedings, or has expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the proceeding;

     (b)      Where in private practice or government service he served as a lawyer or rendered a legal opinion in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom he previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter in controversy, or the judge, master commissioner or such lawyer has been a material witness concerning the matter in controversy;

     (c)      Where he knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a pecuniary or proprietary interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding;

     (d)      Where he or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:

1. Is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or trustee of a party;

2.      Is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding and the disqualification is not waived by stipulation of counsel in the proceeding filed therein;

3.      Is known by the judge or master commissioner to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;

4.      Is to the knowledge of the judge or master commissioner likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.

      (e)      Where he has knowledge of any other circumstances in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

(3) (a)      Any justice or judge of the Court of Justice disqualified under the provisions of this section shall be replaced by the Chief Justice.

     (b)      Any master commissioner disqualified under the provisions of this section or unable to discharge the duties of his office for any other reason shall be replaced by a special commissioner who shall be appointed by the judge of the court before whom the action is pending.

     The special commissioner shall meet the same qualifications as a master commissioner and shall take an oath and execute a bond as the regular commissioner is required to do.

Effective:     July 1, 1982 History: Amended 1982 Ky. Acts ch. 141, sec. 41, effective July 1, 1982. — Created 1976 (1st Extra. Sess.) Ky. Acts ch. 22, sec. 4. Note: 1980 Ky. Acts ch. 396, sec. 44 would have amended this section effective July 1, 1982. However, 1980 Ky. Acts ch. 396 was repealed by 1982 Ky. Acts ch. 141, sec. 146, also effective July 1, 1982.

 

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

Author of this blog, Dedicated to the Real Mommies and Daddies of the Real America, and our Children Who Want to Come Home, and Especially to My Little Julian, is not a lawyer, attorney, or legal practitioner, therefore, no information contained herein this post and/or blog could be (mis)construed as “legal advice.”  Anyone who exercises he/r rights, and private property sometimes called “child” for deceptive, possibly malicious or retaliatory, and profiteering/privateering and in the “best interests” . . . of the “state” Texas General and other Funds at one’s own peril, risk, and/ or self-fulfillment.  The choice is yours.

  • CENSORSHIP WILL BE PROSECUTED AS IT IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE IN THE THIS REPUBLIC USA, THE LAWS TO WHICH YOU WILL BE HELD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the uS Constitution and  Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, uS Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.
  • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.
  • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and/or requirement/demand, then contact Author of this blog immediately as fair notice and due diligence requires so that Author shall act lawfully and reasonably with expedience pursuant to any supplemental knowledge.

 


 

Cook Family vs. CPS (short video)


Cook Family vs. CPS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=s5xb7wEAoVk

Published on Dec 12, 2014

Texas CPS accused Angel and David Cook of child abuse and murder in the death of adopted son Buddy. Their children were put in foster care. They were cleared of the charges but they are still trying to pick up the pieces. Here is their story. Fort Worth Star-Telegram/Rodger Mallison

A CALL TO HOLD DFPS/CPS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR CRIMES BY TEXAS’ OWN “PENAL” CODE


A CALL TO HOLD DFPS/CPS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR CRIMES BY TEXAS’ OWN “PENAL” CODE

 

BUT FIRST, A FEW WORDS OF CAUTION:  GOOD LUCK GETTING A HARRIS COUNTY (HOUSTON), TEXAS D.A. OR SURROUNDING AREAS OR “TEST/DEMONSTRATION SITES”–PROFIT CENTERS– AND LOCAL POLICE DEPARTMENTS FOR THE MUNICIPALITIES, CITIES, AND COUNTIES TO TAKE A POLICE REPORT AS IT IS THEIR POLICY NOT TO ACCEPT THEM FROM (WO)MAN WITH SMALL, CUTE, HEALTHY, ADOPTABLE, CHILDREN WHO HAPPEN TO BE UNMARRIED WHERE PREVIOUSLY ABSENTEE FATHERS RECENTLY MARRIED, OR NOT, TERRORIZE MOTHER AND CHILD, EVEN IF FROM AFAR.  If a police officer does respond, who is at the command of a completely unqualified dispatcher most likely without a college degree and no children of her own who is most likely, pursuant to C.I.T./CAT grants from the government, trained by Nazi Socialist government pro-father’s rights sadists and their BAR member attorneys and judges needing to fill new Kids-for-Cash jails, kiddie prisons, over which the family court judges in Harris County preside as Board members (and the Harris County Commissioner’s Court for the Texas Supreme Court’s Children’s Commission), and the new “mental health ward” in the prison (experimentation tank) on the second floor, state-of-the-art, with a retina scanner, they will most likely call CPS and an on-duty “mental healthy deputy” and come out with a paddy wagon for those “delusional,” “borderline,” “protective,” hysterical, “lying” mothers and their private property–“children.”  So, for all those who propose that the “solution” to CPS abuse is to avoid them by calling police–Californians–you are wrong as the police are told they cannot make a report, but must instead call CPS pursuant to “Collaborative,” Memorandum of Understanding whereby everybody, police officer “vendors,” city, “mental health deputies,” CPS, county commissioners, judges, sheriffs, local children’s assessment centers who do the cover-up job that no sexual abuse or child abuse occurred, or even investigation to clear mother and child even where these allegations are not made, share in the “commission”–“stakeholders,” “community partners.”  Just find your city plan on line, compliments of I.C.L.E.I. an Agenda 21 and “Model” Cities and “unified” court and “holistic” systems–inherently, conspiratorial or collusive in nature and spirit of the word, and actually in effect.

For those of you who are of the action-oriented, “social activist” ilk who gets angry, rather strangely in my opinion, at others assuming that this is somehow their responsibility, pick up a book, start reading, do your homework, and demand that your alleged lawmakers (ha-ha-ha, as if we even have any as they aren’t even allowed to read the bills that “pass” without being read, signed, or voted on) decline to sign these inter-agency, coerced, incentiviezed Memorandum of Understanding that give police, “mental health deputies,” and state CPS licensed counselors and courts and judges and CPS scoundrel “throwaways,” themselves being the “inferior” beings (as that’s why they were chosen for their jobs) money and pensions and bonuses to STEAL OUR PRIVATE PROPERTY, AND MOST LIKELY YOURS SOMEDAY.

Sec. 25.031. AGREEMENT TO ABDUCT FROM CUSTODY.

(a) A person commits an offense if the person agrees, for remuneration or the promise of remuneration, to abduct a child younger than 18 years of age by force, threat of force, misrepresentation, stealth, or unlawful entry, knowing that the child is under the care and control of a person having custody or physical possession of the child under a court order, including a temporary order, or under the care and control of another person who is exercising care and control with the consent of a person having custody or physical possession under a court order, including a temporary order.

(b) An offense under this section is a state jail felony.
Added by Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 444, Sec. 3, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.  Amended by: Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 272 (H.B. 95), Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2007.

 

Sec. 25.03. INTERFERENCE WITH CHILD CUSTODY.

(a) A person commits an offense if the person takes or retains a child younger than 18 years of age:

(1) when the person knows that the person’s taking or retention violates the express terms of a judgment or order, including a temporary order, of a court disposing of the child’s custody;
(2) when the person has not been awarded custody of the child by a court of competent jurisdiction, knows that a suit for divorce or a civil suit or application for habeas corpus to dispose of the child’s custody has been filed, and takes the child out of the geographic area of the counties composing the judicial district if the court is a district court or the county if the court is a statutory county court, without the permission of the court and with the intent to deprive the court of authority over the child; or

(3) outside of the United States with the intent to deprive a person entitled to possession of or access to the child of that possession or access and without the permission of that person.

(b) A noncustodial parent commits an offense if, with the intent to interfere with the lawful custody of a child younger than 18 years, the noncustodial parent knowingly entices or persuades the child to leave the custody of the custodial parent, guardian, or person standing in the stead of the custodial parent or guardian of the child.

(c) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(2) that the actor returned the child to the geographic area of the counties composing the judicial district if the court is a district court or the county if the court is a statutory county court, within three days after the date of the commission of the offense.

(c-1) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(3) that:

(1) the taking or retention of the child was pursuant to a valid order providing for possession of or access to the child; or

(2) notwithstanding any violation of a valid order providing for possession of or access to the child, the actor’s retention of the child was due only to circumstances beyond the actor’s control and the actor promptly provided notice or made reasonable attempts to provide notice of those circumstances to the other person entitled to possession of or access to the child.
(c-2) Subsection (a)(3) does not apply if, at the time of the offense, the person taking or retaining the child:
(1) was entitled to possession of or access to the child; and

(2) was fleeing the commission or attempted commission of family violence, as defined by Section 71.004, Family Code, against the child or the person.

(d) An offense under this section is a state jail felony.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1979, 66th Leg., p. 1111, ch. 527, Sec. 1, eff. Aug. 27, 1979; Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 444, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987; Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 830, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1989; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994; Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 332, Sec. 1, eff. May 24, 2001. Amended by: Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 272 (H.B. 95), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2007.Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 840 (H.B. 3439), Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2011. Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 1100 (S.B. 1551), Sec. 3, eff. September 1, 2011.

Sec. 25.04. ENTICING A CHILD.

(a) A person commits an offense if, with the intent to interfere with the lawful custody of a child younger than 18 years, he knowingly entices, persuades, or takes the child from the custody of the parent or guardian or person standing in the stead of the parent or guardian of such child.

(b) An offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor, unless it is shown on the trial of the offense that the actor intended to commit a felony against the child, in which event an offense under this section is a felony of the third degree.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994; Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 685, Sec. 7, eff. Sept. 1, 1999.

Sec. 25.10. INTERFERENCE WITH RIGHTS OF GUARDIAN OF THE PERSON.
(a) In this section:
(1) “Possessory right” means the right of a guardian of the person to have physical possession of a ward and to establish the ward’s legal domicile, as provided by Section 767(1), Texas Probate Code.
(2) “Ward” has the meaning assigned by Section 601, Texas Probate Code.
(b) A person commits an offense if the person takes, retains, or conceals a ward when the person knows that the person’s taking, retention, or concealment interferes with a possessory right with respect to the ward.
(c) An offense under this section is a state jail felony.
(d) This section does not apply to a governmental entity where the taking, retention, or concealment of the ward was authorized by Subtitle E, Title 5, Family Code, or Chapter 48, Human Resources Code.
Added by Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 549, Sec. 32, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.

 

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

     Nothing contained in this post or on this blog, Dedicated to the Real Mommies and Daddies of the Real America, and our Children Who Want to Come Home, and and especially for my little Julian, could be (mis)construed as “legal advice” of any kind as author of this post is expressly NOT a lawyer, attorney, or legal practitioner.

  • CENSORSHIP and censorship shall be challenged strongly as censorship, being in breach of, among so many other unlawful acts and omissions, is a violation of sometimes described as “Julian’s Real Mummy’s” First Amendment u.S Constitutional right to the free exercise of speech, and also to peaceably assemble herein and also to freely exercise whatever religion, if any, that said natural, American u.S “citizen,” “citizen” meaning fo the purposes of this post. conditionally as i, being natural (wo)man, individual, living and corporeal body,  exclusively reserve the right to revoke or rescind the offer at any and all times, inherently “sovereign” and “elect” in nature, spirit, and essence because imbued with the spirit of our divine Creator ALMIGHTY GOD. ;
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.;
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by “Julian’s Real Mummy’s” First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the Federa, u.S. Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal,u.S Constitution and its  Bill of Rights, pursuant to the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.;
  • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.;
  • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and Author will be happy to follow the law and respect your wishes.

LAWLESS MODERN AMERICA and MY HORROR DEALING WITH CORRUPTED TEXAS


amyandmarkelcharron

Please, first thing to ask yourself how is it legal or even Constitutional FOR T…EXAS and our corrupted Government to take a innocent mothers child (at 41 yrs old) with no criminal background at all with Native American Rights. My only child was viciously taken so scared at 2 yr old with no investigation right away for only making a evidence based criminal report on my wealthy powerful step dad who… was appointed by Governor Rick Perry! Despite my case was ruled out and dropped it was illegally reopened due to CPS worker Debra Reyna saying the document was not official yet it was and the judge allowed this! The CPS investigator who signed it is DEBRA MAYO who never came to court once to clear up their lies! She also returned no phone calls in over 2 yrs! The 2 CPS workers that illegally set me up to lose…

View original post 7,461 more words

AMY AND MARKEL CHARRON, THE SAME OLE’ SONG IN HOUSTON[ , .


AMY AND MARKEL CHARRON.2

Amy Charron with Daughter, Markel Charron

HTTPS://YOUTU.BE/Y9R3CE7E9ZI

Amy Charron’s Fight Back Againt CPS Corruption And Fixed Crimes

Uploaded on Sep 21, 2011

Amy Charron’s Fight Back Againt CPS Corruption And Fixed Crimes,Learn the truth about Child Protective Services aka CPS/DCF. Read more at http://www.floridadcf.org

License

Standard YouTube License

i, being individual (wo)man sometimes described as julian’s real mummy, found the story they wanted me to have on the Inter/net,only the names of the parties were amy and markel instead of joni and julian. 

The “players” might as well be the same,and so is “the game” in Harris County,Texas in Houston. 

My son is gone, as markel to amy, but our stories are still here, live.

RE-BLOGGED from

LAWLESS AMERICA AND MY HORROR 

Dealing with CORRUPTED TEXAS

Just another WordPress.com site

LAWLESS MODERN AMERICA and MY HORROR DEALING WITH CORRUPTED TEXAS

Please, the  first thing to ask yourself is how is it legal. or even Constitutional,  FOR T…EXAS and our corrupted Government to take a innocent mothers child (at 41 yrs old, with no criminal background at all, and who claims  Native American Rights. My only child was viciously taken so scared at 2 yr old with no investigation right away for only making a evidence based criminal report on my wealthy powerful step dad who… was appointed by Governor Rick Perry!
In spite of the fact that my case was ruled out and dropped, it was illegally reopened due to CPS worker Debra Reyna saying the document was not official ( though it was).  The judge allowed this! The CPS investigator who signed it is DEBRA MAYO  who never came to court once to clear up their lies!  She also returned no phone calls in over 2 yrs!
The two (2) CPS workers that illegally set me up to lose again were clearly on a mission to destroy my life to side with money, and to and make money.

CPS provides regional liaisons to the Texas Juvenile Justice Department (TJJD) and to local/count juvenile probation departments (JPDs). TJJD is an agency created in 2011 by merging the Texas Youth Commission (TYC) and Texas Juvenile Probabtion Commission (TJPC). The liaisons are responsible for:

  • Working with DFPS state headquarters to address questions, issues, and concerns raised in the regions by CPS, TJJD, or local / county JPDs.
  • Reviewing monthly TYC and JPC reports in IMPACT (the DFPS case management system) and forwarding information from those reports to caseworkers.
  • Ensuring that caseworkers maintain accurate information in IMPACT about CPS children adjudicated to TJJD or county juvenile probation departments.
Region Name/Email Telephone
1, 9 Kimberly Pendelton (806) 472-9188
2 Betty Moore (325) 641-7146
3 Pat Sneed (214) 267-5351
4 and 5 Tracy Redeaux (409) 730 4126
6A Debra Reyna / Wyndi McPeters-Grant (713) 553-1102 / (713) 394-4050
6B Leshia Fisher (936) 525-2170
7 Holly Vinella (512) 834-4723
8 Sandra White (210) 337-3437
10 Lori Maldonado (915) 521-3969
11 Diana Mata-Gonzalez (956) 316-8163
12/State Office Larry Burgess (512) 438-5320
See, also

Harris County Infant Toddler Court

Hon. Bonnie C. Hellums, Presiding Judge Hon. Meca Walker, Associate Judge 247th District Court 201 Caroline, 15th Floor

Program Brochure K

Mission Statement:

The mission of the Infant Toddler Court & Family Intervention Court is to protect abused and neglected children in Harris County through a judicial process involving treatment, recovery, and reunification of families where possible.

Harris County Infant Toddler Court

Hon. Bonnie C. Hellums, Presiding
Judge Hon. Meca Walker, Associate Judge
247th District Court 201 Caroline, 15th Floor Program Brochure

Key Program Benefits:

 A program that focuses on the family as a whole and strives to heal the damage done from addiction  More comprehensive and individualized services for you and your children, including parent-child relationship assessment, and visit coaching
 More personalized relationships with the judge and other members of the team which provides an increased level of support and accountability
 Increased opportunity for visitation
 Faster entry into treatment programs and more opportunities for transitional living after completion of treatment
 Court sponsored 12-step study group with fellow clients
Infant Toddler Court Co-Administered with the Family Intervention Court
This project was supported by Award No. 2010-DC-BX-0090 awarded by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs.
The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication/program/exhibition are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Justice.
 IF YOU HAVE A CASE/CLIENT THAT MAY QUALIFY FOR OUR PROGRAM, PLEASE CONTACT THE LIAISON ASSIGNED TO THAT COURT
Regina Jones, LCDC, Coordinator 201 Caroline, Suite 1549 (713) 368-6594 regina_jones@justex.net
Sarah Bogard, MA, LPA, Assistant Coordinator 201 Caroline, Suite 1549 (713) 368-6595
sarah_bogard@justex.net
Tonya Clay, CPS Program Director (713) 394-4418 tonya.clay@dfps.state.tx.us
Debra Reyna, CPS Legal Liaison Supervisor (713) 553-1102 debra.reyna@dfps.state.tx.us
Jennifer Clark, CPS Legal Liaison 313th Court (713) 394-4133 jennifer.clark@dfps.state.tx.us
Heather Brummett, CPS Legal Liaison 314th Court (713) 394-4038 heather.brummett@dfps.state.tx.us
Denise Daley, CPS Legal Liaison 315th Court (713) 847-7084 denise.daley@dfps.state.tx.us
Laura Blaha, CPS Legal Liaison 246th, 247th, 308th 311th, 312th Court (713) 394-4136 laura.blaha@dfps.state.tx.us
Jessica Payton, CPS Legal Liaison 245th, 310th, 257th, 309th 713-319-5946 jessica.payton@dfps.state.tx.us
The mission of the Infant Toddler Court & Family Intervention Court is to protect abused and neglected children in Harris County through a judicial process involving treatment, recovery, and reunification of families where possible.

Success Through Addiction Recovery

The Infant Toddler Court in Harris County is a unique problem-solving court docket specializing in Child Protective Service (CPS) referred abuse and neglect cases involving infants and toddlers birth to three. The Infant and Toddler court docket establishes a coordinated approach that brings together parents, their children, legal representatives, and community services providers whenever possible in an effort to provide safety, permanency, and wellbeing for our most vulnerable children. This initiative is based on the premise that:  Early interventions can heal the trauma experienced by young children and support healthy parent-child bonding when possible  Stability in placement supports a child’s wellbeing  Early assessment and interventions matter  Families experience multiple complex needs that require integrated specialized services The systems and problems we work with are complex but our goals are simple:

Success Through Addiction Recovery

The Infants and Toddlers Court team consists of:

 Judge
 Prosecutors representing the county
 Defense Attorney for parent  Attorney Ad Litem
 Guardian Ad Litem for Child
 Infants and Toddlers Court Community Outreach Coordinator
 Administrative assistant/case manager
 Child Protective Services Staff
 Treatment/Service Representatives Family Focused Services
Early Childhood Evaluation/Early Childhood Intervention  [as in, a Petition or Motion for Intervention to Terminate Parental Rights in a Suit Affecting the Parent-Child Relationship]Research shows that growth and development [ fiscal] are most rapid in the early years of life [ infants and toddlers are a more marketable product than older children or adolescents and teens] .
The sooner problems are identified, the greater the chance of eliminating them.
Early intervention responds to the critical needs of children and families by:
 promoting development, learning and emotional well-being
 providing support to families
 coordinating services
 decreasing the need for costly special programs Parent-Child Relationship Assessment Because children experience the world from within the context of their relationship with their primary caregiver, the best way to assess their social-emotional functioning and well-being is to assess them in the context of their primary relationships.

Relationship assessments include two procedures:

i.     An Overview

What is my child………telling me? What is my child………feeling? What is my child………seeing? What is my child………experiencing?
 Observation of the primary caregivers interacting with the child.
 Interview regarding themes/ information regarding the caregiver and child’s history

II.     Increased Visitation/Visit Coaching

One of the primary goals of the Harris County ITC [Infant Toddler Court] is to increase opportunities for children to interact with their parents and for parents to learn how to respond to their child’s needs. Frequent and consistent contact is essential to maintaining a strong and secure relationship. Visit coaching is a specialized service provided to families involved in the ITC.

The primary goal of visit coaching is to make each visit a good experience and enjoyable for both the parent and your child. A visit coach does this by:

 Playing an active support role before, during, and after the visits
 Helping parents prepare activities for visits that will meet their children’s needs  Giving suggestions as the parents respond to events and emotions in the visit
 Helping parents give their children their full attention at each visit
 Helping parents recognize and cope with the emotions they are experiencing
 Keep infants and toddlers safe
 Build and support appropriate care-giving relationships
 Divert children from further involvement in the child welfare or justice systems
 Improve permanency, safety, and well-being for infants and toddlers
 Preserve and support families where possible, provide links to needed services, increase parentchild visitation
 Increase Judicial outreach, develop communitybased team network, provide training and increase awareness
The other Cps worker, JENNIFER CLARK, was ordering a quick termination of my rights not investigating at all my witnesses my home incredible home. MY girl lived a life that many children dream about. According to routine, ratified practice, pattern, and protocol, Cps hid all the proof of this as Clearly proves in all the evidence links included herein.
JENNIFER CLARK, CPS TORTURER IN AMY AND MARKEL CHARRON'S CASE
Jennifer Clark, Cps worker in Amy and Markel Charron Case, Harris County, Houston, TX; Kingwood, TX
pictures and video’s I posted no one could deny my girls happiness and safety. Yet after she was taken she admitted to being abused and covered in marks and bruises. On many visits she slurred and even appeared drugged which I secretly taped proof of. When CPS found out they had it where I could never see my child again just out of anger that I proved them wrong! This document clearly stating my case was ruled out was put public where almost 10,000 people viewed my evidence.
It was an official Governmental document signed by my only investigator of my case. Despite Rick Perry having proof I gave to him in person proving my evidence, he lied and said he’d take action and of course never did! Perry was out to protect my step dad, Dr. Gary W. McDonald very illegally, too.
Surprisingly, an officer provoked me aggressively to make my criminal report and little did I know it would completely destroy my life as a once happy, devoted and loving mother. Logically, think about it.
 
If l I never did anything to deserve this with as public as I went, then why is still nothing posted to prove they were not right?
Why have I not been sued or locked up for my claims yet?
I mean, after all, my story is very public on the internet, and my claims have never changed in almost  three yrs (3 years) after being caught up in this vicious lawless system. I lost my child forever for only doing my duty to protect!
Please complain after reviewing my evidence to the Governor’s office and share my information with anyone who many be able to help. The state illegally set me up claiming I imagined crimes therefor a unfit mom but the more I proved my sanity the more they attacked me almost as if they were trying to drive me crazy!
The unlawful scare tactics and set ups would of driven the sanest person over the edge but the more I proved Texas set me up to cover up crimes the more horrible unlawful things took place in my life scaring off many of my witnesses and even dear friends. Those who stayed loyal to my cause were messed with as well. THIS “GOOD OLE’ BOY STATE” is full of corruption such as crooked judges, lawyers, police enforcement with and a evil Governor to help make it all happen! Judicial fraud is out of control in Harris county and countless never get heard. The secrets behind TEXAS that I have educated myself about are beyond shocking.
One cannot even imagine the adoption scams going on here where countless children are used as bait for a money making… SCAM! No offense to Hillary Adams, but I know about so many legal abuse cases  as bad as that which herein testifies and gives credible, non-hearsay, non-fraudulent evidence that would blow your mind in just in Texas alone where there was never any justice or closure.
For example, I knew a beautiful girl Felicia Minix who I tried frantically to get help, yet who was routinely, maliciously, negligently, incompetently, viciously and sadistically ignored by those who get paid for honest services (absent semantic art or deception) who died while trying to escape the horrific, abusive shelters in and around the Houston, Texas area forced by CPS illegal system of organized crimes! Tragically, he/r story didn’t have any attention at all. This is just one small cell involved in a world- wide epidemic of for profit, “non-for-profit, “joint public-private” private property described as “child” stealing.  This patterned, well-organized, purely evil based on the root of it all MUST BE EXPOSED at all costs.
I posted proof of my Judge Pat Shelton being investigated and behind this illegal adoption process and judicial fraud involving vicious racketeering but the Governor here too helping these actions?

Ever wonder where the saying Don’t mess with Texas comes from?

“Yes– “Houston, where I regretfully livE,  there is a PROBLEM!”

If one tries to expose these things publicly on radio and tv as I did you will be a target and trust me you will be illegally messed with and black balled from getting help. TEXAS will destroy you only for proving them wrong…….trust me. Texas will illegally label you by entrapment or other types of illegal and u.S unconstitutional, thus, unlawful or induced set- ups, as “mentally ill ” just for fighting against fraud and corruption. The Hillary Adams TEXAS story of abuse and a judge still on the bench is no surprise to me. In no way am I downplaying the abuse she caught on tape but I can assure you my abuse growing up was far more shocking as many cases are.
I am a supporter of the defenseless that have no voice like helpless children. I was in another home senior yr over it. I was strangled, wiped, bitten, starved, and much more. The emotional abuse is beyond explainable that my mom and step dad conducted in. My mom for example once told me she would let me drown if my step dad and I wearing drowning at once and she could only save one. I was about 14 at this time. He was her creepy boyfriend until I was out of high school then they got married. I was called so many names and made fun of so much I became immune to it.
Growing up in high school was brutal. Many nights I spent in dark woods called greenbelts or friends homes to escape my moms abuse which later involved my evil perverted step dad. I had many witnesses including a witness I lived with senior yr 8 months over abuse. I have the scars to prove it too and I offered to do a polygraph test too because the state of TEXAS claimed I was lying!
Later in life I found out they had been dangerously secretly drugging me to make me appear crazy to have my child taken! When I reported this fact totally evidence based Texas quickly took my child saying it was a “delusion”http://youtu.be/BMQ-m9mf4Ro. Clearly after seeing this video she was in no need of a rescue! I was denied my Constitutional Rights, my due process of law among many other rights. How dare any state or Government tell me what is true just to side with their money and power and knowingly put my child in harms way just to cover up truths.
My only child was stolen unlawfully on the claims I made up very things the state had proof of! Cps was used as a tool to take me down unlawfully http://youtu.be/NcLyyzN4iXo Please, first thing to ask yourself how is it legal or even Constitutional FOR TEXAS and our corrupted Government to take a innocent mothers child (at 41 yrs old) with no criminal background at all with Native American Rights. My only child was viciously taken so scared at 2 yr old with no investigation right away for only making a evidence based criminal report on my wealthy powerful step dad who was appointed by Governor Rick Perry! Surprisingly, an officer provoked me aggressively to make my criminal report and little did I know it would completely destroy my life as a once happy, devoted and loving mother. Logically, think about it. If l I never did anything to deserve this with as public as I wen, thent why is there nothing still up to prove they we re right. Why have I not been sued or locked up for my claims, yet? I mean, after all, my story is very public on the Internet, and my claims have never changed in almost 3 yrs after being caught up in this vicious, lawless system.
I lost my child forever for only doing my duty to protect! Please complain after reviewing my evidence to the Governor’s office and share my information with anyone who many be able to help. The state illegally set me up claiming I imagined crimes therefor a unfit mom but the more I proved my sanity the more they attacked me almost as if they were trying to drive me crazy!
The unlawful scare tactics and commonly practiced to conceal–the  set-ups –would of driven the most rational, calm, and “sane” individual over- the -edge! Regardless, the more i proved Texas set me up to cover up crimes the more horrible unlawful things took place in my life, the more witnesses the scared off, including scaring off many of my witnesses and even dear friends. Those who stayed loyal to my cause then also became targeted individuals, or, “TI’s.”
THIS “GOOD OLE’ BOY” STATE is full of corruption such as crooked judges, lawyers, police enforcement with and a evil Governor to help make it all happen! Judicial fraud is out of control in Harris county and countless never get heard.
Felicia Minix.1.pop art
Birth: Apr. 26, 1994 Albion Calhoun County Michigan, USA Death: Jul. 15, 2010 Cut and Shoot Montgomery County Texas, USA Obituary: Felicia Michell(E) Minix Published: The Conroe Courier July 19, 2010

The secrets behind TEXAS that I have educated myself about are beyond shocking. You can’t even imagine the adoption scams going on here where countless children are used as bait for a money making… scam. No offense to Hillary Adams, but I know abuse cases that would blow your mind in Texas alone that never got justice! I knew a beautiful girl, Felicia Minix , who I tried to frantically help being ignored who died only trying to escape the horrific abusive shelters here forced by CPS illegal system of organized crimes!

Felicia Michelle Minix.2
Felicia Michelle Minix

HER story didn’t have any attention at all tragically, at least not until the hit-and-run style assassination in the Donna Ringoringo case on he/r family court march agaisnt Harris County, Texas Family Court Fraud, Corruption, Abuse, and Child-Trafficking/Judicial Prostitution, run over while crossing the street a block away from he/r goal to make it to Austin, the state capitol, after walking all the way from the Harris County “family” courthouse in Houston with plans to further march on foot all the way to Washington, D.C.if the Texas Legislature or “Consensus” Committee refused to stop acting http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/courier/news/auto-ped-victim-id-d-as-conroe-teenager/article_c09e8886-2552-5745-86b1-7c2d91557da9.html.; possibly related, http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=55173704

This is a world wide epidemic of stealing children for profit– unlawfully, u.S unconstitutionally, thus, illegally— that deserves GREATER ATTENTION! I posted proof of my JUDGE PAT SHELTON  being investigated and  being heavily involved, on knowledge,  behind this illegal adoption process and judicial fraud involving malicious, retaliatory, “vicious,” racketeering.  

The  governor also helps  these actions, too.?

Ever wonder where the saying Don’t mess with Texas comes from? And yes Houston, where I regretfully live, there is a PROBLEM! If you try to expose these things publicly on radio and tv as I did, you will be a target.  Trust me as someone who knows– you will be unlawfully, u.S constitutionally, and legally messed with.  You shall be “black- balled” from getting “hel/p.” TEXAS will destroy you for proving them wrong…….trust me.
Texas will illegally label you, in a well-organized, sophisticated violation of the Federal R.I.C.O. Act of 1970 perpetrated with the mandatory (see Memoranda of Understaning/ “MOU’s” which mandate all state employees, workers, agencies, and contractors and joint public-private ventures such as the sixty-four Child Advocacy Center/Children’s Assessment Centers (“CAC’s/CCCC’s), Children’s Commissioner’s Court, Harris County Commissioner’s Court headed by Judge of Judges, Ed Emmett and elected Harris County attorney, Vince Ryan and his special prosecutors planted every Tuesday in each CPS Cluster or “family ‘civil'” court in the county))  as “mentally ill” just for fighting against fraud and corruption.
Along those lines, The Hillary Adams TEXAS story of abuse and a judge still on the bench is no surprise to me. In no way am I downplaying the abuse she caught on tape but I can assure you my abuse growing up was far more shocking as many cases are. I am a supporter of the defenseless that have no voice like helpless children. I was in another home senior yr over it. I was strangled, wiped, bitten, starved, and much more. The emotional abuse is beyond explainable that my mom and step dad conducted in.
My mom for example once told me she would let me drown if my step dad and I wearing drowning at once and she could only save one. I was about 14 at this time. He was her creepy boyfriend until I was out of high school then they got married. I was called so many names and made fun of so much I became immune to it. Growing up in high school was brutal. Many nights I spent in dark woods called greenbelts or friends homes to escape my moms abuse which later involved my evil perverted step dad.
I had many witnesses including a witness I lived with senior yr 8 months over abuse. I have the scars to prove it too and I offered to do a polygraph test too because the state of TEXAS claimed I was lying! Later in life I found out they had been dangerously secretly drugging me to make me appear crazy to have my child taken!
When I reported this fact totally evidence based Texas quickly took my child saying it was a delusion http://youtu.be/BMQ-m9mf4Ro. Clearly after seeing this video she was in no need of a rescue! I was denied my Constitutional Rights, my due process of law among many other rights. How dare any state or Government tell me what is true just to side with their money and power and knowingly put my child in harms way just to cover up truths. My only child was stolen unlawfully on the claims I made up very things the state had proof of!

Cps was used as a tool to take me down,  unlawfully.

Click,  http://youtu.be/NcLyyzN4iXo .

Ironically since my helpless girl was taken so savagely she quickly started admitting her abuse after forced into a home I grew up in at 2 yrs old torn from me so brutally covered in bruises that I secretly got proof of. After all I had proof of my 2 yr old public being abused and tons of evidence and it made no difference to any authority here, including the FBI!
These secret tapings and pic I went public with had my rights terminated faster than any case anyone has ever heard of.

How in America can this be allowed.?

HAS America become a lawless place to live for countless of us?

PLEASE Fight back against Judicial ABUSE and FRAUD. What kind of monster of a state is this to treat women and children this way!

My judge, Pat Shelton, should be criminally investigated as well. On a link here you will see proof he has been in the paper for basically scams to terminate parents rights and shockingly Rick Perry is involved with illegal adoptions and removal of children as well! As shown here, I did meet with with Governor Rick Perry who had proof of crimes and promised to take action. HE illegally with held my evidence and helped put my girl knowingly in danger. His name was shockingly mentioned under oath by a CPS wicked supervisor in a way that won the case for the enemies with the help of their felony set up witness I will mention later.
He has refused to answer if he really said such things and if it was perjury he refused to take any action even though it involved his name! You can see him hugging me here ye,t under oath, Lisa McCartney said he had heightened security and feared for his life basically. The jurors about hit the floor and of course it was lies. I didn’t even know him. Nor had I ever had any words with him or his staff that would make me appear dangerous! I was in my 40’s and had nothing on me at all like what TEXAS was trying to pull illegally. I had never even been to jail, never did drugs or anything to deserve being treated in such this outrageous manner.
I went to church every Sunday with my girl and even bible study. I lived a solid Christian life that even now as public as I went no one could prove me wrong! I even had a public cash reward of almost 1,000 if anyone could prove me wrong. Don’t you think if I were so crazy that I can’t be a mom, someone would have really noticed–someone other than set up witnesses! I have always been a very social person and no one ever accused me of what this state did! I even was married to a PHD and PATENT lawyer for yrs who I still am friends with that knew I was innocent and a very good person. I was so bullied illegally for only speaking out.
My girl and I were so happy before I was illegally set up to lose! I endured many scare tactics as well but the more they couldn’t scare me off the more I was targeted! Still after risking it all and losing about everything I fight back working constantly. If I were what they claimed I would of surely lost my mind by now! I take no meds under extreme stress daily! No justice at all despite all my evidence was seen by countless worldwide! Texas Governor Rick Perry helped an illegal kidnapping and allowed myself an innocent mom to set up for only reporting a possible crime on my step dad dangerous , Gary W. McDonald, he appointed. The crime was actually evidence based and a report with a time line was even made by a lawyer, Lori Gabowki.
Yet, my child was taken with no warrant on the ground I was imagining it, therefore, delusional! Since when do they take happy children with no hearing while someone is forced locked up in a mental institution so heavily drugged  that I almost died! I have medical proof of the STATE drugging so heavily I was shutting down basically and even couldn’t see. I had twitches that at one time a doctor thought may be permanent damage.
Even though a judge ruled out their claims right at the start, the STATE illegally started vicious set-ups, but even so it was ruled out.  However, the more that I beat them,  the  more vicious they became and proportionally pursued me.  This story should havef made national news.  I am told now by an officer that I have been black- balled from ever getting help.

Can you imagine we live in a world where an abusive family that harmed you and your child (evidence based, “pre-determined,” “trauma” informed  outcomes research) can buy your child and steal your life?  

I must file something again,  but remember despite proof that I was set up by their lies and evil and that they got away with felonies the courts ignored me even The Supreme Court. What should I file?
I want to sue Governor Perry as well for helping them win illegally! He is directly involved more than you know yet! Remember he appointed my wicked step dad to head of the Dental board and knew he’s crimes later and did nothing!

How, or Why is it that TEXAS would not let me file a criminal report or write a sworn statement?

That is highly illegal and even when I traveled to do so I was told the report must be done here. It is clear I am black- balled to cover up a huge political scandal.  Still, no one has jumped on this story.  My evidence site alone was at almost $10,000, a cash reward to prove me wrong.  But still,no one could!
There were so many unlawful and illegal tactics applied to this rigged case beginning before it began. I had no chance of winning only because it angered those involved that I proved them wrong! Of course, this is extremely unlawful. I have lost everything fighting back.
My girl changed so much after taken! This is a parents worse nightmare! I didn’t even recognize her this way. CPS, Governor Rick Perry and many …others hid felonies and set ups on me! They covered up proof of being my girl clearly abused as well! Since I taped proof of my girls abuse and took secret pics my rights were unlawfully terminated quicker than any case ever heard of where I could never speak to her again.  Now, it has been two 2 yrs!
Gary W. McDonald.Amy Charron's stepdad.Kingwood TX oral surgeon
Gary McDonald, Amy Charron’s stepfather, married to Amy’s mother, Anita McDonald

So I just started posting the evil faces behind this case, and, already, three (3) of the faces are deleted without me doing it! Anita and Gary McDonald, my mother and step-father (step-father Gary McDonald of Kingwoood, Texas, having been appointed as head of the TEXAS DENTAL BOARD criminally protected by Governor Rick Perry) bully me all you want you won’t shut me up illegally again!

Your buddy, Rowena McGowan Freeman, shown in this public picture on the Internet, is FROM MAINE, and who is also a frequently  secretly–ex parte–appointed suborned witness who has a felony record and FBI number!

I had called the police on her for theft in FEB 2008.  The same time the following year in 2009, described or disguised sometimes as ” Rowena McGowan Freeman,” had me illegally arrested and thrown in jail for the first time in my life in my life even though I was in my 40′s–statistically significant proof of what i am not!

Since I had called the police on one described as “Rowena McGowan Freeman” about a year before, Freeman had motive to get me. And that she did– but totally unlawfully!

Harris County CPS and solicited, alleged enemies, used Rowena McGowan Freeman as their number one witness illegally/  It is interesting that individual describes, “Rowena McGowan Freeman, did not raise her own kids and is on MARRIAGE  No. 5!

Rowena-Freeman
“Rowena McGowen ‘Freeman'”

. . . and the “enemies”  fraudulently concealed/ illegally covered- up the real, unambigous truth about he/r very disturbing background.  Further, said perpetrators not only permitted, but also suborned perjury (see malfeasance, malpractice, therapeutic deception, false imprisonment, fraudulent concealment, assault, theft, abuse of public office, acts unbecoming of a public-private officer and also of the court, malicious prosecution, a “state” law claim as opposed to federal law claims for damages, abuse of “authority,” abuse of process, abuse of procedure with malice rising to the level of gross negligence, intolerable acts, failing to report child abuse or neglect, collusion, entrapment, federal statute on fraud and false statements, though pursuant to “Title” 18 U.S.C. instead of “Title” 42 U.S.C., grand theft or larceny, tampering with government documents, a felony in “‘state’ of Texas,” harassment, intimidation, retaliation, entrapment by estoppel, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty (to disclose), invasion of privacy, knowing and intentional suppression of exculpatory evidence, racketeering, interference with child custody (Texas Penal Code), child enticement, agreement to abduct from custody, interference with (“child”) “access and visitation,” (Texas Penal Code) misprision of felony of a judge, bribery, perjury, violation of the right to bodily integrity and freedom of movement, unlawful, “unreasonable” search and unlawful, “unreasonable, seizure without probable cause, reasonable suspicion, and without reliability, intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraudulent misrepresentation, negligent infliction of emotional distress, gross negligence, conversion, fraud, simple conspiracy, federal, u.S Constitutional conspiracy against rights committed by color (and color of process) of law (42 U.S.C., section 1985(3), and violations of federal, u.S. Constitutional and its Bill of Rights and natural, guaranteed, God-Given and “unalienable” and “inalienable” and implied rights, Amendment IX (Ninth Amendment) to the federal u.S Constitution and its Bill of Rights, (42 U.S.C., section 1983, and see also section 1988, the Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Award Act of 1976), and the federal Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act)allowed total perjury despite having reliable, verifiable, authentic proof and evidence that s/he was lying! Everything “Regina McGowan Freeman,” CPS, and solicited “enemies” uttered and testified, bearing false witness against an innocent individual in a court, thus “orders” void ab initio without special or appearance, null and void as a matter of law and fact, and also substantive, truthful fact was nothing but multiple-party, suborned, boiler plate hearsay.  This violation of  Rule 807, Rules of Evidence, was not only ratified, but first suborned with  no witnesses to back up any of “Rowena McGowen Freeman’s” outrageous claims peretrated against Oath and section 1986 of “Title” 42, U.S.C., the neglect to protect/”Good Samaritan” law! Freeman, like so many other social workers without the degree, was on a mission to destroy my little girl, markel charron, and i, being natural (wo)man described “amy charron.”  That this experience was beyond scary is the understatement of the year.

I will expose “Regina McGowan Freeman” as well as it has now been almost 3 yrs forced to endure  being harassed to not! If I get arrested over it you all will get caught! Anyone can pull “Regina McGowan Freeman’s” and other aliases the real record off the internet to corroborate this fact.

Rowena McGowan Freeman also lied about being a nurse to give bogus very damaging medical claims not true about me! Since when can a teacher say under oath she has a nursing degree and call me basically crazy and mentally ill? What kind of outrageous witness was this? That isn’t even legal! She should be in prison for all that she got away with! She also said, under oath, that I was a “call girl” in spite of the fact that there was no proof of this– in almost  three (3) years! How very odd it is that there is no proof of her lies, not even as public as I went. Where were the utter lack of witnesses to prove  Rowena’s malicious and retaliatory perjury against me in court?

What they did was so unlawful. S/he provoked me clearly and then they set me up for a crime just for calling her and questioning why she was doing this to my child and I. She even said my bed was broken from”wild sex”– under oath! Of course I was mad….I was fighting for my child! What a joke and if it were true men would of came forward by now. It has never ever happened! This crazy witness must have been paid-off.  Rowena Freeman got more time than any of my witnesses, yet she knew me less than all the others.

How would someone I barely knew have had more ‘say-so’ than my Grandma and life long friends in my trial or hearing? Rowena McGowan ‘Freeman’ walked up to my Grandma and I, and begged to be my friend.  Next, Rowena Freeman was their star witness? Maybe this was to help the wealthy enemies win, though unconstitutionally, unlawfully, thus, illegally--presumably unreasonable, even subjectively.

She even said I didn’t graduate from UT and my evil mom just sat there smiling knowing she was lying! My diploma was public and almost 10,000 saw it!

So, Rowena set me up and the judge so allowed it! I was arrested and thrown like a unwanted dog in jail for the first time of my life scared to death during the trial for only questioning her on why she she was lying! I was forced to tell the jurors I spent the night in jail and I came from jail on the day of the verdict!

The case didn’t get heard until a yr later where is was dropped yet I never got another trial! Yet the jurors thought I was going to jail for yrs so how would I of won?

Texas you PLAY ‘DANG’ ‘DIRTY’!

These public servants–non-disclosed slave-owners, well-known, literal, federally investigated by foreign service agents as those who run judicial prostitution rings in Florida, Georgia, Texas, California, Nevada, and New York City–child sex traffickers–made my life HE _ _!

These child traffickers, judicial prostitutes, deal-cutting double agents, child “protective” service or “social” workers–“free man”–unlawfully “ordered”a  6:00pm curfew against me when they knew that I worked at night at a modeling agency, and had started my own fashion shows.   The judge wouldn’t let me work–in Texas! I lost tons of money over this!

I have been threaten to not expose this, but enough is enough!Rowena McGowan Freeman” and my step- dad, appointed to the Dental Board of Texas by Governor Rick Perry, dentist, Dr. Gary Armstrong, sat in court closely together trying to put me in jail 10 yrs when I had never been in jail until their set ups! It was so scary….you have idea!

How could someone with a felony record take down someone with no record?

Proof of one lie for starts read her public article she claimed under oath she was or had been a nurse….. FEATURE STORIES www.markelcharron.justicesite.org …..hurry and take a peek before it all illegally gets shut down again.Changing Lives: Rowena Freeman

Leap of faith Standing at the front of the classroom, seventh-grade teacher Rowena Freeman observes the dark-haired girl to her left. The once-vivacious student has become withdrawn, sometimes hostile. Something is going on, but what—problems with parents, a romance gone awry? Freeman doesn’t know. Not yet. But she has walked these roads, and she knows the best way out of a crumbling life situation—education.
Rowena FreemanFreeman, who’s working on her doctoral degree, comes from a family that was convinced she would never attend college.“I always wanted to go to nursing school, but I grew up in a really poor family,” she said. “Only boys and rich people went to college. My mom was the last of 23 children in her family. She said, ‘You will take business classes, be a secretary and get married.’ I actually got in trouble for taking college-prep classes in high school. But I didn’t want to be a secretary. I planned to have a secretary.”

After graduation, Freeman enrolled in nursing school but soon realized that medicine was not for her. Instead, she followed her mother’s life prescription. She got married, left her childhood home in Portland, Maine, and accompanied her husband to Texas, where he began graduate school at UTA. It wasn’t a happy life. Her husband was brutally abusive, both physically and emotionally.

“He was so controlling,” she said. “He wanted to keep his eye on me all the time.”

For more than four years, she never had access to more than a few cents in pocket change. But since her husband was in school and spent most of his time on campus, he allowed Rowena to return to classes as well. He saw her education as a positive, she says, because it kept her within his circle of control. In reality, UTA gave Freeman the knowledge and help she needed to escape.

One professor noted her gift for writing and encouraged her to study English. Another friend, a retired teacher, insisted: “Your heart is in being a teacher. That’s what you must do.” All the while, compassionate staff at the UTA Health Center patched her up after every beating and helped her make the contacts she would need to leave a man who repeatedly threatened to kill her.

But leaving was complicated. Freeman had a young son to think about. She had no money. Her family lived thousands of miles away. Still, she planned, saved her pennies and prayed for the strength to make the toughest decision of her life.

“I walked out on faith,” she said. “I didn’t know anybody, really, but I knew I had to leave.”

In 1999, Freeman graduated magna cum laude from the UTA Honors College with a bachelor’s degree in English. She followed that in 2003 with a master’s in education. Her Ph.D. will be in educational leadership from Andrews University in Michigan. Retired UTA Honors College Dean Carolyn Barros praised Freeman as someone who “tenaciously stuck to the high goals she set for herself. She kept on through all the challenges. She never gave up, never quit.”

The 37-year-old Freeman, who teaches English at Arnold Middle School in Grand Prairie, firmly believes that the bad times happen for a reason.

“I have many things in common with my students,” she said. “They’re poor. They come from difficult family situations. I know what it’s like to be hungry, to be cold. All five of my siblings dropped out of high school. My family still can’t understand why I’m still in school. Not a lot was expected of me, but I wanted more.

“I tell them [the students] what my 10th-grade English teacher shared with me: ‘You can become just a product of your environment, or you can go up the ladder of life. Even if your parents don’t believe in you, you can do it.’ ”

As a child, Freeman traveled the world in books.

“I wanted to live in one of two places, either in Venezuela or in Texas,” she said. “My ex-husband left Texas and I stayed. UTA and the people I met there made it possible.

“All of my experiences have made me what I am today. Now I think back about it, and I wouldn’t change it at all.”

— Sherry W. Neaves

Archives | Alumni Association | Giving to UTA | UTA Home
Copyright © 2005 UTA Magazine. All rights reserved.

Other Stories

Center of attention
Initial plans show off special events building while other projects near completion

Tracing the shape of Texas
Thousands view maps from UTA collection at Bullock museum exhibit

At Play: Nataleigh Vann
Student sails to national championship

Narrow miss
Movin’ Mavs fall one point short in national championship game

Historical performances
Texas Hall once regularly hosted big names like Louis Armstrong and Willie Nelson

Contact Us

About UTA Magazine

Letters to the Editor
Office of University Publications
502 S. Cooper St.
279 Fine Arts Building
Box 19647
Arlington, TX 76019-0647

utamagazine@uta.edu

www.markelcharron.justicesite.org …. and please hurry and take a peek before Ramona Mayon shuts it all down criminal evidence again illegally after getting so much money out of me!My own always wicked of a mother has not let me even talk to my girl in two (2) years, now even though she only lives forty (40) minutes away! How anyone could doubt my story is beyond me! That is severe child and adult abuse,  and it fits her evil patterns of abuse throughout the course of my whole life. She even abused my real dad,  who died at the age of fifty (50) years old.

My father, Mark R. Charron, kept so much to himself but I will speak out for him as well! When my dangerous evil mom, Anita McDonald, married him, she was pregnant.  So, then she dropped out of high school . She called me so many names while she blamed me for anything and everything!

She always hated me for things that were her own fault! She thought that because my dad wrote hit music for the famous country music artist, BJ Thomas, and others, that she would land big money.  But later, when my dad became sick, much like I did in a similar suspicious manner, she had an affair with the man to whom she is now married–Dr. Gary McDonald, D.D.S., Kingwood, Texas, appointed to the Texas Dental Board by Governor Rick Perry.

Any real investigator should have put these puzzle pieces together. I had a very disturbing secret tape of my dad questioning why he felt so sick from 1983 and my mom laughing. I had a jerk of a crooked high profile lawyer named George Parnham, and YES– he was Andrea Yates‘ lawyer.

George Parnham
Attorney George Parnham, Amy Charron’s lawyer, and also Andrea Yates’ lawyer

HE (crooked Houston, Texas lawyer described as “George Parnham”) asked for the tape, but never gave it back, at least not to me.

When I showed up for the tape with a witness, corrupt Houston, Texas attorney described as “George Parnham,” threatened me.  Parnham  was involved in the unlawful, unreasonable, illegal, “objectively reasonable” entrapment in whichI was intentionally, knowingly, and with reasonably foreseeable knowledge of future harm and consequences with all known information given to him at the time, based on knowledge, belief, direct, damning proof and evidence, complicit in the entrapment-based,  federal R.I.C.O. Act of 1970,  court con perpetrated illegally, under the color of authority of law in which I was set up after getting a almost $20,000 retainer.

My story is so far worse than you know yet. How am I still standing is beyond me. It’s like no matter how much I tried to win righteously, they would illegally make me step back.   My evidence was stolen out of my house with witnesses.  The police did nothing. Luckily, much was with a trusted friend, or so one may [ or may not] say.

The threats, harassment, scare tactics, inter alia(generally and actually, federal R.I.C.O Act of 1970 predicate crimes and abuses of power, ) were not not something I ever dealt with until this case so think about it. Sadly everyone in Houston seem to protect their shocking crimes and not even let me legally defend myself. I lost everything unlawfully fighting back even my beautiful home and belongings and they counted on that to win! In this pic with the Governor I was promised he would take action and I gave him my evidence card and showed his people my evidence! He lied and never did anything but hid felony crimes.http://www.change.org/petitions/stolen-only-a-few-months-later-fronm-this-picture-unlawfully My girl changed so much after taken!

This is a parents ‘worse’ nightmare! I didn’t even recognize her this way. Cps, Governor Rick Perry and many others hid felonies and set ups on me! They covered up proof of being my girl clearly abused as well! Since I taped proof of my girls abuse and took secret pictures my rights were unlawfully terminated quicker than any case ever heard of where I could never speak to her again now in 2 yrs!
By: Amy Charron My child was knowingly forced into danger

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Written by a lawyer in Dallas, Robert Guest. Governor Rick Perry has opined on the CPS YFZ disaster.

What would Mr. Perry have to say to the hundreds of children who were wrongfully taken from their parents?If responsibility needs to be taken for […court edicts] saying that we stepped across some legal line, I’ll certainly take that responsibility,” Mr. Perry said.

“I am substantially less interested in these fine legal lines that we’re discussing than ……I am about these children’s welfare, that’s where my focus is. That’s where CPS’ focus is.”

How could someone call the law that protects parents from having their children arbitrarily stolen by CPS a “fine legal line”?

Statist apologetics are built upon the tyranny of good intentions. Mr. Perry readily endorses this illegal compound raid based on phony evidence, sloppy police work, and religious profiling because CPS meant well.

Rick has also taken it upon himself to accept responsibility for one of the worst bureaucratic disasters in Texas history. If I was responsible for the YFZ disaster, I would have the decency to resign. Unfortunately, Rick won’t step aside and let someone with less incompetence, hubris, and disdain for freedom run our state, or CPS.
http://youtu.be/4x8iVT0nkFwhttp://youtu.be/ufne42PmnJY““““““““““““““““““““““““`

WHEN did it become OK that the innocent are guilty over conspired actions to predestine there fate? When did it become okay …..that often those who don’t get justice is due to matters of revenge and motives than really justice? Who anymore holds our Constitution sacred? Immoral and injustice results should never be the final measure to credibility. So many as myself are treated by this flawed agonizing system …with ‘savagery.’  When did …it become okay to watch so many devoted victims forced into being a prisoner of pain and isolation only because  “ WE THE PEOPLE” rather see them as outcast clearly misunderstood or simply crazy.

When did it become okay to watch our stolen, visible children vanish into misery, and sometimes death?

Does anyone believe in fighting for something bigger than oneself?

Why is it that many are never held accountable for such injustice and crimes on humanity?

Since when is judicial immunity tolerated and countless violating their oath to office? Since when is okay to be Guilty of Willful blindness? Our Founding fathers created a Constitution to protect the innocent from such tyranny. If FREEDOM AND JUSTICE isn’t worth fighting for, then what is?

Often the persecution is without limits when attacking the falsely accused. I am livid to see what really is happening in America now. I was personally tortured for fighting against this corrupted system. Truths embrace me now that I never would of believed 3 yrs ago. I am Amy Charron who has earned my opinion. I will never be okay with any of this and I will not quit fightback against this corrupted system.

Now, regarding all my criminal evidence being shut down by

Ramona Mayon–? . . .

I have spoken to a sheriff, and Ramona Mayon is being investigated for crimes, now.

She even took down proof of my little girl being abused on secret audio and secret pics I took! Who the ‘H_ _ _ _ ‘shuts that down?

I gave her enough chances and she continued to try to bribe me for a lot of money to keep felony crimes on my girl and I public! She is so ignorant to think with over 10,000 seeing all the evidence all over google and all that she would get away with hiding crimes. I am gathering all the proof now and a witness and the sheriff will be making a criminal report for extortion and stealing my evidence and property over a money scam. I also taped our conversations.

She will be held accountable for clearly allowing me to lose this case by hiding the truth. That is criminal. She knew that evidence was everywhere and now it is all suspended even she trashed me on the internet lying about why it is shut down.

I will also do a you tube today that my officer friend is filming. It is funny that all my shocking you tubes videos went down at the same time she shut me down. Such a darn thing but very stressful! Luckily I still have some proof of these things. Pictures are public still of my girls back last seen that Ramona has shut down over fraud. This is a crime to hide crimes.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Word is that the infamous Pat Shelton told the juvenile court administrative judge last week that he’d stop hearing cases as a substitute judge. That’s what state Sen. John Whitmire relayed to me for last Thursday’s column.

Good choice on Shelton’s part, especially since the judges who had been appointing him don’t seem to have the authority to do so.

Shelton is the divisive former judge widely criticized through the years for stepping on parental rights and running a kind of adoption express out of his courtroom. Last year, after sixteen years of serving the bench, Judge Pat Shelton decided not to run for re-election.  Shelton  was succeeded by one of his favorite, oft-appointed lawyers and political donors, Glenn Devlin.   Last year, Devlin raked in nearly $111,000 on appointments in Shelton’s court.

Coincidentally, or perhaps not, it was Judge Glenn Devlin who appointed Judge Pat Shelton to fill- in [the papers and to sit as a substitute judge for him much like the corrupt judges directly responsible for Robin Carr near Rockwall, Texas (Dallas and Tyler, Texas and Smith and Dallas Counties) having not seen he/r private property described by the “State” as “children” in SIXTEEN YEARS AND COUNTING] for him [Devlin] in a parental rights termination case that I wrote about a couple of weeks ago. Attorneys for the mother and grandmother faced apparent retaliation from other lawyers in the case after they accused Shelton of bias and asked for a mistrial.

Glenn Devlin.family.juvenile court judge.Harris County,TX.Houston.Amy and Markel Charron horror story
Judge Glenn Develin, Amy Charron‘s case; Devlin also happens to be the presiding judge in the 313th juvenile court of harris County, Texas in Houston–the 313th Court is run by associate judge, Stephen newhouse, former appointed amicus attorney for Julian’s Real Mommy’s son, Julian in 2007 PROCEEDINGS

The circumstances of the case, and also the names of those involved, were familiar enough to get the attention of [Senator Whitmire, D-Houston [but of course, it would be human nature to want to know what the innocent, oppressed mothers and children other Comm ittee members have on those like it] who has long been concerned about visiting, substituting, and special appointment sincecure, Judge Pat Shelton’s antics on the bench, and also for his preference of adopting kids out rather than first considering whether there are appropriate relatives who can take them, as the CPS policy requires.

Senator John Whitmire.TX

Whitmire began poking around to see why Judge Pat Shelton was still presiding over cases. He found out Shelton wasn’t on the official list of “visiting judges,” maintained by regional administrative Judge Olen Underwood.Naturally, Whitmire wanted not to know on what authority Shelton was appointed to hear cases. The senator and I were referred to a mysterious “local rule” that makes the claim that  juvenile court judicial discretion in appointing a substitute judge in the event of their absence.

But, the rules, provided by district court administrator Clay Bowman – entitled, Rules of the Judicial District Courts of Harris County Juvenile Trial Division – don’t appear to give any judge the authority to appoint a “substitute.”

The rules do talk about what to do if a judge is absent: The local administrative judge is supposed to notify Judge Olen Underwood (the presiding judge of the 2nd Administrative Office of the district courts) and ask for a “visiting” judge to fill in. Alternatively, cases could be distributed to one of the other juvenile courts.

Olen Underwood.Judge Administrative District of Courts.2.Montgomery County

Judge Olen Underwood, 2nd Judicial Administrative Region for the Courts

There’s no mention of a rule that lets juvenile judges call up one of their former judge buddies to baby-sit the bench for a day.

The model “local rule” appears to be nothing more than a good ol’ boy understanding that lets judges line their friends’ pockets on the taxpayers’ dime.

So far, Shelton has been paid about $13,600 for working 274 hours as a substitute judge in juvenile courts, according to records provided by Clay Bowman.

The county spends tens of thousands of dollars on these substitutes each fiscal year, including more than $59,500 spent in 2010, $55,300 in 2011 and $41,300 so far in fiscal 2012, according to records. Before Glenn Devlin’ even became a judge, he was a part of the substitute judge club, albeit a minor one, earning $5,000 since fiscal 2010.

So, on what authority is the county writing these checks?

Clay Bowman wouldn’t return my call Wednesday and didn’t answer my questions through email. Nor did I get a response from Shelton, Devlin or juvenile court administrative Judge John Phillips.

The level of incest, conflicts of interest and pay-to-play politics in two of the three juvenile courts has long been a scourge on Harris County’s justice system. Sadly, this is just the latest example.

And even if Shelton has sworn off the bench for now, as Sen. John Whitmire heard from Phillips, he’s still a player in the juvenile courts.

Shelton this year has received appointments to represent children in 23 cases, according to documents provided by the Harris County Auditor’s Office in response to an open records request. He’s been paid $9,200, and counting, for his work as an attorney or guardian ad litem, or co-ad litem representing the interests and/or wishes of children in CPS cases.

Those of us who breathed a sigh of relief last year were wrong. Shelton never left. He just changed seats.

lisa.falkenberg@chron.com ***************************************** This is my most detailed interview on how far they went to break me and win illegally just for being right and proving them wrong http://youtu.be/VnV__g22NaMhttp://youtu.be/s_9PxMTAC8sFamily Court Crisis: Surviving A Broken System. Center For Judicial Excellence h…ttp://www.centerforjudicialexcellence.org/ Family Court Crisis: WE are countless women who had our children forever taken only for reporting abuse where then with no chance to win our children were given to the abusers! This is a growing epidemic and still many just watch us lose everything caught up fighting a losing battle! WE are denied protection as well when we are threatened to keep quite. My life was very normal until the second I made a evidenced based criminal report and with no investigation or calling my witnesses the STATE of Texas grabbed my 2 yr old with no warrant and put her in harms way!

Despite my girl admitting she was being abused and secretly taping it, Texas terminated my rights quicker than any case people have heard of!

Crack heads with records had more rights than many of us! I have been severely abused where Texas put my helpless child and on top of it they were suspects for attempted murder by a lawyer making a police report that was covered up after I did as well! Stories like mine are more common than you think. Many of our children die or we do just from a broken heart not being able to survive with all the illegal tactics they pull. The media does not cover our stories but they are beyond REAL!

IS AMY CHARRON MISSING?

http://www.angelfire.com/cruci34/amycharronismissing.html

See the Amy Charron CPS Reality Show at https://fightcorruptedfamilycourtsandcps.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/amy-charron-cps-reality-show.pdf

Read also,

The Amy Charron Archive

https://houstonhelium.wordpress.com/category/amy-charron/.

Read More
Center for Judicial Excellence

www.centerforjudicialexcellence.org
The Center for Judicial Excellence, or “CJE,” is a community-based organization established to improve the judiciary’s public accountability and strengthen and maintain the integrity of the courts.

http://youtu.be/u8UIralz3ao
Faces of Family Court, Judicial Corruption Victims
www.youtube.com
Family Court Crisis: Surviving A Broken System. Center For Judicial Excellence h…ttp://www.centerforjudicialexcellence.org/ “Family Court Crisis: Surviving A B”…See More

**********************************************CONCLUSION****************************************************************

Everyday, every single second, every single minute, every single hour, we are non-disclosed, non-informed, non-consenters perceived and treated by the government as prisoners of a corrupted lawless system!
You can’t even believe it happens until IT IS YOU and your family is destroyed over Judicial and CPS and crooked judges!Family Court Crisis: Surviving A Broken System. Center For Judicial Excellence http://www.centerforjudicialexcellence.org/

Family Court Crisis: 

We, being individual, numerous, countless women who had our children forever taken only for reporting abuse where then with no chance to win our children were given to the abusers! This is a growing epidemic and still many just watch us lose everything caught up fighting a losing battle! WE are denied protection as well when we are threatened to keep quite.

My life was very normal until the second I made a evidenced based criminal report and with no investigation or calling my witnesses the STATE of Texas grabbed my 2 yr old with no warrant and put her in harms way! Despite my girl admitting she was being abused, secretly taping it, Texas terminated my parental rights quicker than in any case most Americans, and Texans, could not under/ stand.

Drug addicts and alcoholics with felonious and violent public criminal records have more rights than many of us!

I have been severely abused where Texas put my helpless child and on top of it they were suspects for attempted murder by a lawyer making a police report that was covered up after I did as well! Stories like mine are more common than you think. Many of our children die, or we do just from a broken heart because some are intentionlly,  knowingly, foreseeably, maliciously, with invidiously discriminatory animus and cruel and unusual abuse, systematic re-victimization, and torture for profit  perceived as not being able to survive with all the illegal tactics they pull. The media does not cover our stories but they are beyond REAL!

www.centerforjudicialexcellence.org
The Center for Judicial Excellence, or CJE, is a community-based organization established to improve the judiciary’s public accountability and strengthen and maintain the integrity of the courts.

http://youtu.be/u8UIralz3ao
Faces of Family Court, Judicial Corruption Victims
www.youtube.com
Family Court Crisis: Surviving A Broken System. Center For Judicial Excellence h…ttp://www.centerforjudicialexcellence.org/ Family Court Crisis: Surviving A B…See More

********************************************************************************************************************************Everyday, every single second, we are prisoners of a corrupted lawless system!
You can’t even believe it happens until IT IS YOU and your family is destroyed over Judicial fraud and crooked judges! http://youtu.be/ePt1P8-d0HMSee More

UPDATE:

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer

(PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

Author of this blog, Dedicated to the Real Mommies and Daddies of the Real America, and our Children Who Want to Come Home, and Especially to My Little Julian, is not a lawyer, attorney, or legal practitioner, therefore, no information contained herein this post and/or blog could be (mis)construed as “legal advice.”  Anyone who exercises he/r rights, and private property sometimes called “child” for deceptive, possibly malicious or retaliatory, and profiteering/privateering and in the “best interests” . . . of the “state” Texas General and other Funds at one’s own peril, risk, and/ or self-fulfillment.  The choice is yours.

  • CENSORSHIP is unlawful in America, and THE LAWS TO WHICH YOU SHALL BE HELD, ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the uS Constitution and  Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, uS Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.
  • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.
  • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and/or requirement/demand, then contact Author of this blog immediately as fair notice and due diligence requires so that Author shall act lawfully and reasonably with expedience pursuant to any supplemental knowledge.

SPECIAL COURT APPOINTMENTS, JUDGES REPORTS|HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS (HOUSTON)


SPECIAL COURT APPOINTMENTS, JUDGES REPORTS

HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

(HOUSTON)

aLL cOURTS, CLICK ON THE LINK BELOW TO access harris county, texas family “civil” court appointment reports, finally they were forced to comply with the greater houston-area attorney, greg b. enos, or, in the alternative, the public integrity unit in austin, texas.

310thapts

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

  • CENSORSHIP WILL BE PROSECUTED AS IT IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE IN THE THIS REPUBLIC USA, THE LAWS TO WHICH YOU WILL BE HELD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.
  • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.
  • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand,

Mother Confronts Convicted KIDS-FOR-CASH Judge, Mark Ciavarella


Mother Sandy Fonzo Confronting Convicted Kids-for-Cash Judge Mark Ciavarella in Luzerne County, Pennsylania after Son Committed Suicide after False Commitment to Juvenile Detention Center like 4,000 other Juveniles Wrongfully Ripped Away from Parents, Families, Friends, and Schools for a Corrupt Judge’s $1,000,000 Kickback–None of the “Players” in Court Spoke Up, but rather, they all “played along.”

Mother Confronts Convicted

KIDS-FOR-CASH Judge, Mark Ciavarella

Luzerne County, PA 

“My son was my life, that’s all I had, and now it’s gone. I don’t have that same life. I don’t exist right now,” Fonzo told CNN.– We hear you, Sandy, and our hearts go out to you and your loss, the world’s loss.  I am so sorry.  This MUST STOP!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=wLahyYcu5BE

Uploaded on Feb 21, 2011    

Mother blames Pa. judge for her son’s death, yells at him as he exits court.For more, click here: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id…

 ABC News

Sandy Fonzo’s Beloved Son, Now Deceased, Committed Suicide after being Sentenced by Kids-for-Cash Judge Mark Ciavarella to Juvenile Jail

 

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

  • CENSORSHIP WILL BE PROSECUTED AS IT IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE IN THE THIS REPUBLIC USA, THE LAWS TO WHICH YOU WILL BE HELD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.
  • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.
  • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand,



“I’ve decided to continue speaking…”


Family Court in America

From theCongressional Testimony of Stacy Lynne to Bill Windsor ofLawless America:

“… This morning I spoke for two hours at a meeting in Jefferson County for the first time since my son was taken nearly a year ago and I have nothing left to lose. They’ve taken everything from me. And I’ve decided to continue speaking as I have done before to help people learn about how to protect their children and their families from the corruption in the United States of America…

Lawless America…The Movie is all about exposing the fact that we now live in Lawless America. We no longer have laws that are enforced because judges do whatever they want to do. America has also become lawless because government officials are dishonest and/or corrupt.

The movie will expose corruption in every state. The Movie will focus on victims. Corrupt judges and corrupt government officials…

View original post 140 more words

BEWARE SAN ANTONIO: CORRUPT JUDGE SOL CASSEB III IS AT IT AGAIN, SAYS “BATTERED MOTHERS” BLOG


JUDGE SOL CASSEB, III, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS (BEXAR COUNTY) SON OF A JUDGE IN THE SAME COUNTY, SAME NAME, SECOND GENERATION, BUT THEN AGAIN ISN’T THAT THE CASE WITH EVERY JUDGE IN TEXAS YOU EVER KNEW? YA’ KNOW HOW THE SONG PLAYS, FOLKS, “BECAUSE IT’S JUST A FAMILY TRADITION!”

I find that, beyond clear and convincing evidence, the FBI’s most wanted posters with big red X’s splattered as if in blood across the faces of loving mothers who did everything they could to protect the only “possession” that mattered to them, private property sometimes called “child” for deceptive and unnoticed “state” purposes, and worse, with the words “Captured” and dates and locations violently confessing their own sins who marketed this scheme and NCMEC/Silver Care/Amber Alerts–I am told by one in family court that these are nothing more than a way for the govt. to keep track of certain. . . contraband to leverage where someone didn’t get paid, by the way, that no men grace the same posters yet, without a doubt, based on individual observation and experience, threaten to and do actually parentally kidnap their little hostages and flee the country and “state” without every being reported, though the mother was most likely falsely imprisoned and the reports rejected as a “false allegation” from a certain stereotype, pernicious and damning–you know the one–the “hysterical,” “borderline,” “schizophrenic,” or “bi-polar” fit parent who obeyed the law and the court orders to begin with, all to he/r virtue, and downfall.

Battered Mothers - A Human Rights Issue

RightsForMothers

FILED IN: BAD JUDGES, BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD, CHILD ABUSE, CHILD CUSTODY, CHILD CUSTODY BATTLE, CHILDREN’S RIGHTS, COERCIVE CONTROL, CORRUPT JUDGES, CORRUPT BASTARDS, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, FATHERS RIGHTS, GETTING SCREWED BY THE FAMILY COURTS, JEAN PAUL LACOMBE DIAZ,JUDGE SOL CASSEB, LAZY JUDGES, LEGAL ABUSE, NONCUSTODIAL MOTHERS, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

Remember little Jean Paul Lacombe Diaz? You may not, because there is not a lot of Congressmen or other government officials running around screaming to get this child back. Like they so willing do for fathers. Refresh your memory:

Eight months later, Jean Paul is still missing, thanks to Judge Sol Casseb III and his father-loving/mother-hating rulings.

Another dear mother now is facing the wrath of Judge Casseb today. Here are the details:

1. Judge Sol Casseb III, 288 District…

View original post 890 more words

TEXAS JUDGES ON THE TAKE GIVE AWAY|CORRUPT TX


http://www.ppcforchange.com/conspiracy-360th-district-court/

Vaughn Bailey copy

 

Vaughn Bailey, Tarrant County, Texas Attorney near Fort Worth

 

360th-offers-victim-a-deal

http://www.ppcforchange.com/conspiracy-360th-district-court/

Vaughn Bailey copy

Vaughn Bailey, Tarrant County, Texas Attorney near Fort Worth

 

360th-offers-victim-a-deal

For another tragic survival story that began in a Texas family court and a clique of collaborative pseudo-scienters . . . minues the qualifications, , click on the link below to read:

http://www.ppcforchange.com/mothers-quest-lost-infant/

For another tragic survival story that began in a Texas family court and a clique of collaborative pseudo-scienters . . . minues the qualifications, , click on the link below to read:

http://www.ppcforchange.com/mothers-quest-lost-infant/

Teachers to Diagnose Psychological Issues in Children then Report to Police| CORRUPT TX BILL


IF No Fault Divorce, then No Fault Childhood, Right.  WRONG!

Teachers to Diagnose Psychological Issues in Children then Report to Police

CORRUPT TEXAS

BILL SPONSORED BY TEXAS REPRESENTATIVE, JASON VILLALBAS (R-DALLAS)

Image result for PICS OF KIDS GOING TO JAIL

SEPARATE BUT EQUAL LAWS AGAIN? 

SO MUCH FOR UNITED COLORS OF BENETTON GETTING THE NEW SCHOOL UNIFORM CONTRACTS

NEW RULERS SAY NO MORE SPANKINGS IN SCHOOL . . .  NO MORE CHOICE OF POPS BY THE PRINCIPAL IN LIEU OF AFTER-SCHOOL DETENTION . . . THAT THE STUDENTS SHOULD BE TELLING PARENTS AND TEACHERS WHAT TO DO AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND, . . . TO “CATCH(MENT ZONE”) THEM WHEN THEIR GUARD IS DOWN???   I CALL THIS THE NEW TWILIGHT ZONE FOR THE NEW NAZIS! 

Teachers to Diagnose Psychological Issues in Children then Report to Police

CORRUPT TEXAS

BILL SPONSORED BY TEXAS REPRESENTATIVE, JASON VILLALBAS (R-DALLAS)

On the bright side, THOUGH, maybe it will actually get them reading, so they better learn it while they still can! 

Click on the link below, or otherwise cut and paste or enter manually into the browser to read more about the surreal life, from Texas below:

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/bill-teachers-diagnose-psychological-issues-children-report-police/

From the reporters who were actually allowed to inform the “public trust” about the public servant in Pharr, Texas (Hidalgo County) who allegedly raped a teenage girl multiple times while three police officer co-workers watched and “protected,”

Source:  The Free Thought Project, New Bill Would Have Teachers Diagnose Psychological Issues in Children and Report them to Police, Jay Syrmopoulos March 24, 2015

WHEN IN DOUBT, SOUND IT OUT; WHEN IN DOUBT, READ (T/READ)!

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/bill-teachers-diagnose-psychological-issues-children-report-police/#88vuAAYXTFSiWlku.99 (where “diagnosis” sounds like dia/g/og/gnossus/gnostic + “dia”/day/dei/deity/god/goddess/de/di/of)

AGE- END- A  21–SUSTAIN ABLE (JOB) GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PROFESSIONS–LAW, SOCIAL WORKERS, GOVERNMENT AND CONTRACTED SERVICES, POLICE OFFICERS, AGE- N -CIES, “TEAC HER (HE/R PLACE WITH CHILD)” WARDENS, GRANT WRITERS GALORE–THE RIDDLE OF THE SPHINX IS FINALLY SOLVED! 

PROTECTIVE MOTHERS AND FATHERS, THIS IS WHY THEY CAN’T PULL CRIMINAL “RESPONSIBLE” FATHERS, FOSTER CARERS, AND CPS WORKERS OUT OF JAIL FAST ENOUGH TO CONVERT CUSTODY TO THE “RESPONSIBLE” PARENT, WITHOUT FAIL, AS A MATTER OF LAW AND POLICY, AND TO GET THEM HITCHED TO A WICKED STEPMOMMY OR STEPFATHER WHO COULD NEVER REALLY LOVE YOUR CHILD THE WAY YOU DO, THUS, RESULTING IN THE MAJORITY OF CHILD FATALITIES BEING FROM STEPPARENTS WHO WILL SURELY KEEP THESE KIDS IN THE SYSTEM–CHAIN/GENERATIONAL STYLE-GANG UNTIL THE AGE OF MAJORITY (21, AS IN, AGENDA 21) FOREVER CONFINED AND MADE TO BE “SUBJECTED” TO THE “DIGITAL PLANTATION,” AN ENDLESS CYCLE TO KEEP THE PROFESSIONS IN BUSINESS (AND THEIR TWO MILLION DOLLAR ANNUAL SUMMER DEPOSIT BRIBES FROM THE FARMER’S CLAIMS IN THE 1980’S THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO GO TO  HE THREE HUNDRED THIRTY-THREE (33) PLUS THOUSAND CLAIMS FOR FRAUDULENT FORECLOSURE IN THE MIDWEST THAT ALLEGEDLY, AS REPORTED ANYHOW, IN AS MUCH AS IT MAY OR MAY NOT BE TRUE (OR FALSE)!

THIS IS WHY INSIDERS AND AGENTS HAVE TRIED TO REASSURE SOME OF US, MUCH TO OUR BEWILDERMENT OF COURSE, THAT IF WE LOST CUSTODY IN THESE VERY SIMILAR, PATTERNED MIRROR CASES BEING ALL THE SAME IN ALL DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE US AND OTHER ENGLISH-SPEAKING COUNTRIES NOTORIOUS FOR THE SS, WE WERE DEFINITELY TARGETED AS THE GOOD PARENT WHO THE BAR AND PROFESSIONS HAVE THEORIZED WOULD, AND THOSE WHO HAD IT CERTAINLY DID,  SPEND EVERY LAST DIME THEY BEGGED, BORROWED, AND EARNED, GOING INTO DEBT TO THE ATTORNERS (ATTORNEY MEANS ONE WHO “TURNS OVER PROPERTY,” I BELIEVE WHICH DERIVES FROM THE MIDDLE ENGLISH FORM OF THE WORD) TRYING TO RESCUE THEIR MATERNALLY  DE-PRIVED/FUTURE DE-PRAVED) PRIVATE PROPERTY SOMETIMES REFERRED TO BY THE “STATE” AS “CHILD” FROM THE ALLEGED ABUSER OR ALLEGED SEXUAL ABUSER (AS THE “PLAY THERAPISTS” LI-CENSED BY CPS FOR “STATE OF TEXAS,” MARCIA KLEINMAN STYLE, BUT NOT THE MOTHER THEY TRAIN JUDGES, POLICE, AND COURT-APPOINTED/”PONTIFICATED”/ROMAN PONTIFF TO THE POPE,  ATTORNEYS AND GUARD-IANS AND “MENTAL HEAL-TH/E/VALUATORS-UNQUALI-FIED(FEED/FIEFDOM/SERFDOM) TO THE (WO)MAN, JAN SMITH, WHOREPORTS/PURPORTS TO HAVE BEEN THE INVENTOR OF WHAT WE HAVE COME TO KNOW AS THE MODERN CPS “RISK ASSESSMENT” “LEVELS” TREATMENT INDICATORS FOR SIX INSTEAD OF THREE MONTH DI-VERS-ION/ARY TREATMENT PRO-G-RAMS (THINK PROGESTERONE AND MYTHOLOGICAL EGYPTIAN GOD “RAM/SES” OR ARIES IN THE ZODIAC SYSTEM) THOUGH JAN SMITH LOST HE/R GRAND(LODGE)CHILD(PRONOUN-CED CELTIC LIKE KILLED/CHI/CHE/LIFE FORCE)TO T/HE SAM (I AM) SY-STEM DE-SIGN UNDER  PRESSURE F-OM HE/R CPS SUPERVISER TO KEEP T/E PA-RENTS INT/HE MOSTLY SUB-STANCE/STANDING UNDER THE BAR ABUSE SE-R/VICESOR CRIM-IN-AL CON/VICT/IONS NOT NE-CESS-ARILY DE-NOTING THAT ONE IS NOT NECESSARILY A CRIMINAL, BUT IS ONE RATHER WHO INDICATORS FOR LEVELS FUNDING INDICATES CAN BE LEGALLY LEVERAGED FOR FEDERAL STATE BLOCK GRANT “HELPING”/”PROTECTING”/RE-HABBING/RE-INTEGRATING INTO THE WORKFORCE AND FATHER HOOD AND MARRIAGE  (MAKING THEM SUBJECT FOREVER TO THE STATE FAMILY COURTS AND STATE BAR CON THROUGH LICENSE, OR, “LICENTIOUSNESS”/MORAL, CRIMINAL, AND SEXUAL DEPRAVITY OF ORIGINAL SIN, IF NOT N-TO-P” IN S O(W)MAN-Y  O F/OUR CA-SES THAT T/HE $20,000 DE-RIV/ATIVE  ANN-U(ANUS OF THE OTHER HEART) THE $2,000,000,000 F-ARME/RS’ (ARME MEANS FREE/ARMY/LIBERATORS) CLAIMS FROM THE 80’S THAT FRAUDULENT FORECLOSURES ON 330,000  FARM CLAIMS WE-RE/WON BACK BY A GROUP OF ARMY GENERALS AND THE SON OF A FORT COLLINS, COLORADO FARMER WHO STARTED THIS ENTIRE CLAIM WORTH OVER EIGHT TRILLION DOLLARS THAT THE FEDERAL US GOVERNMENT SAID THEY WOULD PAY OUT, BUT FOR THE THREE US CHIEF JUSTICES IN CHARGE OF THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE ON BANKING, AS ALLEGED IN WELL-DOCUMENTED SEVEN YEARS WORTH OF RESEARCH BY A (WO)MAN WHOSE WORK I, Julian’s real mommy, took the liberty of posting on this b-log–“NESARA Law” hid away in Switzerland, the UK, and the Netherlands, I believe so that they could use it to bribe 533 of 535 members of the then Senate, as reported with a $200,000,000 bribe to usher in the agenda of the United Nations, “New World Order,” and overthrow the Federal, US Constitution and Bill of Rights who some  Benevolent “FOUR OR FIVE ‘VISIONARIES'” HAVE , AS REPORTED, BEEN TRYING TO RE-STORE SINCE the 1950’s.  Otherwise I think there is more truth than not, at least at first glance, though author trusts no one truly of this physical versus spiritual, heavenly  whorld/would/horus/the all-seeing eye or inner wisdom derived from the awakening physical, but not spiritual “death” when one experiences the descent of the pineal and pituitary glands from the back of the brain near the cerebellum, perhaps (I have to double-check on that one).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=N2c_UOIsLMQ

IF No Fault Divorce, then No Fault Childhood, Right.  WRONG!

Teachers to Diagnose Psychological Issues in Children then Report to Police

CORRUPT TEXAS

BILL SPONSORED BY TEXAS REPRESENTATIVE, JASON VILLALBAS (R-DALLAS)

Image result for PICS OF KIDS GOING TO JAIL

SEPARATE BUT EQUAL LAWS AGAIN? 

SO MUCH FOR UNITED COLORS OF BENETTON GETTING THE NEW SCHOOL UNIFORM CONTRACTS

NEW RULERS SAY NO MORE SPANKINGS IN SCHOOL . . .  NO MORE CHOICE OF POPS BY THE PRINCIPAL IN LIEU OF AFTER-SCHOOL DETENTION . . . THAT THE STUDENTS SHOULD BE TELLING PARENTS AND TEACHERS WHAT TO DO AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND, . . . TO “CATCH(MENT ZONE”) THEM WHEN THEIR GUARD IS DOWN???   I CALL THIS THE NEW TWILIGHT ZONE FOR THE NEW NAZIS! 

Teachers to Diagnose Psychological Issues in Children then Report to Police

CORRUPT TEXAS

BILL SPONSORED BY TEXAS REPRESENTATIVE, JASON VILLALBAS (R-DALLAS)

On the bright side, THOUGH, maybe it will actually get them reading, so they better learn it while they still can! 

Click on the link below, or otherwise cut and paste or enter manually into the browser to read more about the surreal life, from Texas below:

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/bill-teachers-diagnose-psychological-issues-children-report-police/

From the reporters who were actually allowed to inform the “public trust” about the public servant in Pharr, Texas (Hidalgo County/South Texas region close to the border) who allegedly raped a teenage girl multiple times while three police officer co-workers watched and “protected,”

Source:  The Free Thought Project, New Bill Would Have Teachers Diagnose Psychological Issues in Children and Report them to Police, Jay Syrmopoulos March 24, 2015

Read more at:

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

  • CENSORSHIP WILL BE PROSECUTED AS IT IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE IN THE THIS REPUBLIC USA, THE LAWS TO WHICH YOU WILL BE HELD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.
  • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.
  • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand,

Forced Adoption: Cameron, It’s Time To Say Sorry


 

 

Hopefully, US follows suit to inquire, conduct due diligence, and return children, . . . but not “to take” more or ask for more money other than to compensate the survivors.

 

Researching Reform

Stemming from a former Australian Prime Minister’s heartfelt apology to Australian women who lost their children in the 50’s and 60’s to forced adoption (all for the crime of being unmarried), a movement in the UK to see our government does the same is now underway.

After hearing Julian Gillard’s now famous apology to the nation for taking babies away from mothers in Australia solely because they were single, Veronica Smith, a retired nurse who also lost her child to forced adoption in the 60’s in Britain decided to set up the MAA, or Movement for an Adoption Apology. There is a movement already in Australia, called the National Apology for Forced Adoptions (which celebrated its two-year anniversary last week), but none at present for women who lost their children at the hands of British forced adoption policy during that period.

For the 500,000 women in Britain who lost their…

View original post 76 more words

RESEARCH SURVEY COLLECTION|California Protective Parent Association


 

 

RESEARCH SURVEY COLLECTION

California Protective Parent Association and Our Future Charitable Foundation are conducting an ongoing collection of data for a national research project. The project involves cases of children placed by family law courts into the custody of, or unsupervised visitation with their identified abusing parent.
The collection and compilation of this data is a very important step in promoting awareness, providing actual statistics, increasing funding possibilities, and bringing about family court reform and legislative change. Your input is greatly appreciated.
You can see the results of our preliminary survey after 22 participants on our Research Data page, and an updated May 2003 statistical report after 67 participants by visiting the California Protective Parents site by clicking here.

PROTECTIVE PARENT SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE Re: Custody Outcomes of Children Reporting Incest/Battery

NOTE: If you are concerned about secure confidentiality, we suggest you PRINT this survey (from pdf format) and mail it to us by US mail at our CPPA/OCOF address. If you prefer and are not concerned with confidentiality, you may send it online, but be aware it is not on a secured server at this time.
Identifying information is for contact information purposes only, and will not be included in our data.

CONTACT INFORMATION
 Your Name:
 Mailing Address:
 City:
 State:

Please answer all questions appropriate to your case.You may use the space below for comments or questions: Thank you for contributing to this survey.
Please print and mail this survey to: CPPA/OCOF 1731 Howe Ave. #168, Sacramento, CA 95825-9785
Or fax it to: (530) 758-9785 (phone: 800 441-7886)
Or submit it electronically by clicking the “send Request” button below. (Confidentiality respected, but not guaranteed, due to Internet security.)

 Zip Code:
 Phone Number:
 Alternate Phone:
 E-mail Address:
CASE INFORMATION
     Case Name:
1.) Jurisdiction State:
2.) Jurisdiction County:
3.) Case Number:
4.) Year documents 1st filed:
5.) Case still in progress? Yes No
FINANCIAL COST
6.) Approximate sum of money paid related to case?
      (Include attorney fees, court filings, mediation, evaluations, supervised       visitation, court ordered classes, therapy, etc.)
7.) Have you ever had to file bankruptcy as a result of litigation costs?       Yes No
ATTORNEY HISTORY
8.) Have you ever been represented by an attorney in this case?       Yes No
9.) If so, how many attorneys represented you in this case?
10.) Has your ex-spouse/partner ever had legal representation when        you did not? Yes No
CHILDREN
11.) What were the ages of the child(ren) of this relationship at the time        of the separation?        Girl’s ages:      Boy’s ages:
12.) What is the approximate percentage of time each caretaker spent        caring for the child(ren) before the separation?         Mother:   %         Father:    %         Relative:      %         Other:          %
13.) At the time of separation, did the primary caretaker maintain primary        physical custody? Yes No
PRIMARY ISSUES
14.) Over which of the following issues were there disputes in your court        case? (mark all that apply)         Property settlement         Spousal support         Child support         Move away         Child custody/visitation         Alcoholism         Drug abuse/type of drugs:         Other:
15.) Who initiated the litigation?         Mother         Father
16.) Were you the victim of domestic violence perpetrated upon you by        the other parent? Yes No
17.) If so, did your children witness the violence?        Yes No
18.) Did the violence begin or escalate after separation?        Yes No
19.) Did your ex-spouse/partner ever threaten to take the child(ren) if        you left the relationship? Yes No
20.) Were there allegations of child abuse made during your family        court litigation? Yes No
ABUSE ALLEGATIONS
Complete the information below regarding allegations made during litigation, including who is the identified perpetrator and who first made the allegation (mark all that apply):
21.) Physical abuse allegation? Yes No        Identified as perpetrator:FatherMotherOther:        First allegated by:ChildFatherMotherOther:
22.) Sexual abuse allegation? Yes No        Identified as perpetrator:FatherMotherOther:        First allegated by:ChildFatherMotherOther:
23.) Verbal/emotional abuse allegation? Yes No        Identified as perpetrator:FatherMotherOther:        First allegated by:ChildFatherMotherOther:
24.) Neglect allegation? Yes No        Identified as perpetrator:FatherMotherOther:        First allegated by:ChildFatherMotherOther:
25.) Other allegation? Yes No        Identified as perpetrator:FatherMotherOther:        First allegated by:ChildFatherMotherOther:
26.) What was the age and gender of the first child at the onset of        his/her abuse?   Boy Girl
27.) What was the age and gender of the second child at the onset of        his/her abuse?   Boy Girl
28.) Did the child positively identify the other parent as the perpetrator?        Yes No
29.) Was there medical/physical evidence of the abuse?        Yes No
30.) Was there other corroborative evidence of the abuse?        Yes No
31.) What were the child(ren)’s symptoms? (check all that apply)         Sexual acting out         Depression         Stomach/head/other pain         Dissociation         Overwhelming anger/rage         Nightmares/insomnia/sleep disorders         Fears/phobias:         Eating disorders         Regression (bedwetting/leak feces/thumb sucking)         Constipation/diarrhea         Learning disability         Attention deficit         Suicide attempt         Other:
32.) Did the child(ren) receive Victim of Crime funding for therapy       related to the crime? Yes No
EX-SPOUSE/PARTNER HISTORY
33.) Prior to the separation, did your ex-spouse/partner receive any of the         following labels by mental health professionals? (mark all that apply)         Schizophrenia         Bi-polar disorder         Borderline personality         Depression         Anxiety         Post Traumatic Stress Disorder         Other:
34.) Does s/he have a history of alcohol and/or drug use?         Yes No
35.) If so, is s/he clean and sober?        Yes No     36.) Length of time clean and sober:
37.) Does s/he have a criminal history?        Yes No
38.) If so, what was s/he…        Arrested for?: 39.) Convicted of?:        Description:
PROTECTIVE PARENT HISTORY
40.) Prior to the separation, did you receive any of the         following labels by mental health professionals? (mark all that apply)         Schizophrenia         Bi-polar disorder         Borderline personality         Depression         Anxiety         Post Traumatic Stress Disorder         Other:
41.) Do you have a history of alcohol and/or drug use?         Yes No
42.) If so, are you clean and sober?        Yes No     43.) Length of time clean and sober:
44.) Do you have a criminal history?        Yes No
45.) If so, what were you…        Arrested for? 46.) Convicted of?        Description:
ADVISE
47.) Did anyone ever advise or insist that you not mention domestic         violence or child abuse in family law court?        Yes No
48.) If so, who advised you?         Attorney         Mediator         Advocate         Court personnel         Other:
49.) Did your attorney ever tell you that pursuing court action against        your ex-spouse/partner could negatively affect your case?        Yes No
CHILD CUSTODY
50.) Was custody changed to the other parent over your objection, by        an emergency court order, or without your court presence?        Yes No
51.) Was unsupervised contact given to the identified offender despite        evidence of violence or abuse?        Yes No
52.) Was unsupervised contact given to the identified alcoholic/drug         abuser without drug testing?        Yes No N/A
53.) Was custody changed after you raised any of the following issues?        (Mark all that apply)         Violence         Child abuse         Substance abuse         Criminal conduct         Violations of court order         Move-away         Spousal support         Child support
54.) Were judicial findings made stating that you were a danger to your        child(ren) or that you were an unfit parent?        Yes No
55.) Were you ever placed on supervised visitation?        Yes No     56.) If so, length of time:
57.) Were you restricted from having any contact with your child(ren)?        Yes No     58.) If so, length of time:
59.) Do you believe the other parent attempted to gain increased custody        to avoid paying child support?        Yes No
60.) Was financial discovery conducted in your case?        Yes No
61.) Did you give up assets to keep custody?        Yes No
COURT MEDIATION
62.) Did you participate in court-connected mediation regarding custody?        Yes No
63.) If so, was mediation:         Voluntary         Court ordered         Coerced by threats
64.) Were you required to meet face-to-face with an ex-spouse/partner        who perpetrated violence and/or threats of harm?        Yes No
65.) Did you lose any custody rights or contact with your children as a        result of recommendations by a mediator?        Yes No
EVALUATIONS
66.) Did you participate in court connected evaluations regarding        custody?        Yes No
67.) If so, who was evaluated?:         Mother         Father         Child(ren)         Others:
68.) Who selected the evaluator?:         Mother         Father         Court         Others:
69.) Who paid for the evaluator?:         Mother         Father         Court         Others:         
70.) Total amount paid for custody evaluation:
71.) Did you lose any custody rights or contact with your children as a         result of recommendations by the evaluator?        Yes No
CHILD’S ATTORNEY
72.) Did your child(ren) have an attorney/guardian?        Yes No
73.) If so, was he/she court appointed?:        Yes No
74.) Who selected the child(ren)’s attorney?:         Mother         Father         Court         Others:
75.) Who paid for the child(ren)’s attorney?:         Mother         Father         Court         Others:
76.) Total amount paid for child attorney:
77.) Did this attorney aggressively advocate for the safety of your         child(ren)?        Yes No
SYSTEM SUPPORT
78.) Was the other parent ever Arrested and/or Prosecuted        for spousal or child abuse?        Yes No
79.) Was Child Protective Services ever contacted to intervene in your        case?        Yes No
80.) If so, did they protect your child?        Yes No
EVIDENCE
81.) Did any court related professional ignore, minimize, or refute        evidence of abuse in your case?        Yes No
82.) If so, who?         Mediator         Evaluator         Attorney for minor         Judge         Other:
83.) Did any court related professional label you with any of the        following?         Parent Alienation Syndrome         Alienator         Folie a duex         Munchhausen’s Syndrome by Proxy         Delusional         Schizophrenia         Bi-polar disorder         Borderline personality         Depression         Anxiety         Post traumatic stress disorder         Other rare/unscientific label:
84.) In your case, was Richard Gardener, MD.:         An expert witness         A consultant         Quoted         Other:
PROCESS
85.) Do you believe you were discriminated against for your        attempts to protect yourself and/or your child(ren)?        Yes No
86.) If so, do you believe this occurred due to:         Unethics among court-related professionals         Unethics between ex-spouse/partner & court-related professionals         Financial/social status of your ex-spouse/partner         Gender bias         Other:
87.) Were evaluator or mediator recommendations ever provided to the        court less than 10 days before a hearing?        Yes No
88.) Were you prevented from seeing evaluations or reports that resulted        in custody decisions?:        Yes No
89.) Were you ever denied the ability to adequately present your case        (unable to present/examine witnesses, etc.)?:        Yes No
90.) Were hearings resulting in custody decisions held without your        knowledge or ability to be present (ex parte)?:        Yes No
91.) Were hearings regarding custody and visitation ever conducted        without a court reporter present?:        Yes No
92.) Were you ever threatened that talking publicly could result in        damage to your case?:        Yes No
93.) Were court transcripts complete and accurate?:        Yes No
94.) Were court transcripts denied or delayed?        Yes No
95.) If so, how long were the transcripts denied?
96.) Have you ever been incarcerated in a jail or mental health        facility due to the family law case?:        Yes No
CURRENT CUSTODY ARRANGEMENT
97.) What best describes your children’s current custody         arrangement? (mark all that apply)         Primary with protective parent, supervised with perpetrator         Primary with protective parent, UNsupervised with perpetrator         Joint custody         Full custody with perpetrator parent         Supervised visitation with protective parent         No contact with protective parent         Other:
98.) Are you able to protect your child(ren)?         Yes No
99.) Do you believe your child(ren) are still being abused?         Yes No
100.) Did your child(ren) continue to report abuse after custody was        changed to the identified abuser?:        Yes No
101.) Did you stop reporting suspected child abuse for fear your contact        with your child(ren) will be terminated?:        Yes No
Do you give us permission to contact you for further information?        Yes No
Original web site & graphic design by: (Please visit web designer’s site by clicking text above)
Home | Welcome | Mission | Intro | Warning | Advice | Info | Research Data | Overview | Stories History | Events | Conference | Protests | Donations | Membership | Messages | Links | Survey | Contact

Corrupt Multnomah County Judge Paula J. Kurshner


Corrupt Multnomah County Judge Paula J. Kurshner

Judge Paula J. Kurshner

Judge Paula J. Kurshner, Multnomah County Family Court in Oregon

 

Thursday, May 30, 2013

Corruption in the Courtroom

I am going to tell you a story of arrogance, bullying, bias and self-serving agendas. And for a change it is not about big business, banks or political candidates.   It is far worse than any of those things. And the saddest part is that it involves people charged with protecting the best interests of children. I am talking about judges and custody evaluators in the family court system. Now many people tell a story “changing names to protect the innocent”. Well there is no innocence in this story. That is except for the belief in justice and its ability to prevail in spite of socio economic status.

 

Maybe I am naïve but I want to believe in the idea that in our self-proclaimed “greatest country in the world” we wouldn’t have to worry about the “haves” getting the benefit of the doubt and the “have-nots” being bullied into submission in our court system. Unfortunately that is exactly what is going on in Multnomah County and I will not protect the names of anyone who believes that they have the right to destroy families based on a personal whim, vendetta or personality conflict with the people involved.

 

This isn’t the Wild West and it surely isn’t some third world country with an evil dictator, yet no one is held accountable anymore. Have we become so complacent that we believe that we do not have the right or duty to hold people accountable for the decisions they make, especially those that are in “public service”? Interesting that as an educator no one seems to hesitate to tell me what I need to do better. Last time I checked the duty of the judicial system is to remain impartial and avoid becoming self-serving. Someone needs to let Multnomah County Judge Paula J. Kurshner and custody evaluator Lori A. Bonnevier know that they are not above accountability. The way these two conduct themselves is a travesty.

 

Why are we so quick as a society to reach out to places around the globe in need and yet turn a blind eye to the injustice right here in our own backyards? In a country that preaches about rights for all, those who question these two are met with hostility and threats. Bonnevier is blatant about choosing sides before completing an evaluation and from my understanding that is usually whichever side is paying her fee. Little hint Ms. Bonnevier- usually the person who needs to enlist you and pay you doesn’t have custody for a reason. This isn’t the “good ole boy’s club” and yet scratching each other’s back seems common place for these people.

 

That fact that I personally know two people who have had negative experiences with Bonnevier and neither of which have any knowledge of each other is a red flag. When both have told me independently that she has accused them of being angry and difficult to work with (among more appalling things) and both happen to be strong mothers who will not cower to pressure, I have to wonder what self inadequacies are haunting her.

 

In a recent case that was tried by Kurshner, one side was allowed to introduce evidence based on hearsay of a five year old. Yet when the mother intended to call the twelve year-old brother of the child to refute accusations Judge Kurshner told her that if she insisted on putting her child on the stand that it would reflect negatively on her. Yet Kurshner who was opposed to putting a child in the witness chair would not talk to the child in chambers one on one. What is her agenda? How is it just to allow one child’s words to be used and another’s not even to be heard? I am appalled that this woman would even be allowed to rule on a traffic ticket, let alone decide the fate of a family. She shouldn’t be judging a chili competition and she is appointed to sit in family court. I wish that was the worst thing she had done and sadly it might not make the top five idiocies of this story.

 

The custody evaluator on this case was none other than Lori Bonnevier. When the mother asked for a new evaluator to be assigned the judge refused. After the mother filed a complaint with board for bias on her part Bonnevier actually recused herself for in her own words a “conflict of interest” and somehow still managed to testify in the trial. Bonnevier was even so arrogant as to state that mother had a mental illness. A statement which had no foundation and for which she had about as much authority to make as I have to perform a heart surgery. When questioned about the credential of Bonnevier to make such a statement, Kurshner replied that she was quite aware of Bonnevier’s credentials and allowed her to continue. She went on to say that the mother lived in a home of chaotic disorganization. Which by the way she had never set foot in. The arrogance of both these women to not even try to hide their inability to remain impartial is one of the most sickening things I have ever seen.

 

In the end a good person and great mother had her kids removed from her custody without one shred of evidence that the children were in danger from anything. As I watched a ten-year old boy and his twelve-year old brother forced in tears to leave with a father they didn’t want to be with, searching for answers to the question “why”, I couldn’t help but wonder where was Judge Kurshner? Why wasn’t she required to watch the result of her decision? Why wasn’t she being held accountable?

 

As I search for my own answers to these questions I can’t help but wonder what Kurshner’s agenda is. Is she out to prove that she will not rule in favor of mothers? Does she just hate them? I can’t help but think of the children who are left in situations they shouldn’t be in for lack of evidence, yet this Judge based on no substantial evidence of any kind removes children from the care of a loving and compassionate mother who puts nothing before the welfare of her children.

 

Webster’s defines corruption as…

  1. impairment of integrity, virtue, or moral principle
  2. a departure from the original or from what is pure or correct

 

Take your pick of either, but both describe Judge Paula J. Kurshner and custody evaluator Lori A. Bonnevier. It is time to take a stand against abuse of power by those we trust with protecting us.

Posted by Justice for our children at 8:47 PM

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

12 comments:

    1. b06b5234-dd5f-11e2-990a-000bcdcb2996June 24, 2013 at 11:23 PMReply
    2. I’ve had a similar experience, can you please e-mail me at kcampbell12k@excite.com and we can talk further
    3. Kim MosesJuly 24, 2013 at 1:37 AMReply
    4. Oh my she was the judge that gave my children over to there father that was abusive to me in front of my children and while I was pregnant they have been gone since October 31st my five and 8 year old . She said the father had to repair my children from damage that I have caused them . Mind you I have never been to jail nore been on drugs hold a job and a home .I see my children once a week and every other weekend and 4 weeks out of the summer no phone calls and my children plead to me to that they want to come home . He has no job has not worked in 6 years almost lives in his moms basement criminal background and so much more he was acquitted for domestic violence please email me kimmietyrrell@gmail.com I can tell u my story . Something has got to be done
    5. VikingGailMarch 8, 2014 at 2:22 PMReply
    6. Most of the judges are bullies and so are the lawyers and evaluators. They always rule against the good guys. They use the guardianship program to steal property from the elderly and won’t let their families visit. Funny she said that about mental illness-she’s talking about herself. See bullyonline. You might be able to get her removed for that.
    7. angkillamMarch 8, 2014 at 5:59 PMReply
    8. I know exactly what you are talking about, my life was destroyed by Judge Kurshner. I cant even began to express the pain, heart ache and loss she put my family and I through. She took all faith I once had in our family court system away from me. She denied me of my constitutional right among plenty of other things

Replies

  • HeatherRSeptember 4, 2014 at 1:13 PM
  • Did you use any resources to bring this to light? I have a similar story and am desperate to shed light on her and expose the corruption and unjust rulings she imposes on innocent people

Reply

    1. angkillamMarch 8, 2014 at 6:02 PMReply
    2. http://www.thelaw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14225
    3. Mothers Against Biased Custody EvaluatorsMarch 25, 2014 at 2:32 PMReply
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.
    5. YouknowbetterApril 13, 2014 at 12:09 PMReply
    6. I have been in Kurshner’s courtroom. All she wants are quick, easy dockets. She doesn’t care if the kid is going to a home where there is no violence or abuse. She wants to slam the gavel down and compliment both parties for not fighting in court. My grandchild was given to the wrong parent, and suffered horrible abuse. Janice Garceau, head of the custody evaluators, is a huge mistake. She doesn’t care about the safety of children. The system is broken. My grandchild suffered abuse after abuse with a drug addict parent until finally set free. But it took years, and none of us know if the counseling will ever be fully freeing from the pain inflicted. Kurshner, the attorney’s who care more about billable hours than a child’s safety, it’s a joke. I used to believe the truth would set a person free…..but not in front of Kurshner, not in front of Janice Garceau, and certainly not in Multnomah County court system.

Replies

  • HeatherRSeptember 4, 2014 at 1:11 PM
  • I understand exactly what your saying. She just made an unfair judgement against me yesterday it which appeared she was having a bad day and didn’t even care that there’s an open investigation on abuse allegations against my ex husband from my son she sent him back to live with him. I’m desperate I need help. My son is in danger and I’m stuck with this judge. Do have any insight for me?

Reply

    1. Mikee BridgesMay 5, 2014 at 12:42 PMReply
    2. I also have had Kurshner. Absolutely awful experience. I am a full custody father of two but that was only because I figured out how to do it out of court. Kurshner was horrible. Didnt listen, cut me off, etc, etc etc. Just a nightmare.

Replies

 

THE PARENT THAT ABUSES THE OTHER PARENT WITH CHILD


Motherless Child Project


Battered Mothers - A Human Rights Issue

Fathers? Rights Movement successful using the courts custody issues exact revenge on mothers not only depriving children of their mother but using them as a weapon against her

Source: americanmotherspoliticalparty.org

View original post

Please Help Save Kendall (Short Video)


donnellyjustice

When you are finished watching this video, please visit: www.savekendall.com

View original post

CALIFORNIA COALITION EXPANDS FAMILY COURT ATTACK TO EIGHTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS


California Coalition Expands Family Court Attack to Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in Briefing Filed Today

by ccfceditor

March 6, 2015–San Diego, CA and St. Paul, MN–California Coalition for Families and Children, PBC today announces strategic legal partnership with  attorney Michelle MacDonald, MacDonald Law Firm, LLC, www.FamilyCourt.com, www.Facebook.com\FamilyCourt to strengthen the family law reform movement within federal courts in the Eighth Circuit and Minnesota family courts.  In a brief filed today with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, Ms. MacDonald—co-founder of Family Innocence, a nonprofit dedicated to keeping families out of court: resolving conflicts and injustices peacefully  (www.FamilyInnocence.com)—advances groundbreaking arguments with assistance of California Coalition.

“We’re honored to stand with Ms. MacDonald and FamilyCourt.com to engage the beast of Family Courts, and look forward to collaborating further in advancing the Grazzini-Rucki case through the federal courts” says Colbern Stuart, President of California Coalition.

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/257912195/content?start_page=1&view_mode=scroll&show_recommendations=true

The Grazzini-Rucki brief expands on the approach taken by California Coalition in its ongoing appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.  Excerpts from the brief prepared jointly by MacDonald Law Firm, LLC, Michelle MacDonald, California Coalition, and Colbern Stuart:

 

INTRODUCTION

If aura there be, it is hardly protected by exonerating from
liability such lawless conduct as took place here
[1]
Nineteenth and twentieth century American judges have overstepped constitutional restriction to usurp powers reserved to the legislature and written for themselves an immunity far greater even than that of an English judge, or even a King, at common law.[2]  No court has ever denied that absolute immunity inflicts a “monstrous” injustice on wronged litigants, and taxes the credibility and integrity of judicial institutions.  Gregoire v. Biddle, 177 F. 2d 579, 581 (2nd Cir. 1949); Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478, 521 (1978).  It has been justified as a necessary evil to protect the “ardor” of judges and prosecutors.  Id.  While one might reasonably have concluded that our efforts to assure “justice is done”[3] would have been better-directed toward inculcating ardor through discipline and integrity than by “expanding” immunity, the issue is moot.
Unlike the 1871 era of federal procedure in which a judge could be forced to stand trial on mere “ascription” of culpable intent to an accused act,[4] the reasonable concern is today resolved at the pleading stage.  Modernly, like all litigants a judge is protected by procedural barriers provided in Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982) and Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) which protect against a mere “ascription” of malice.  These are bolstered by the plausibility test provided in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 thereafter.  The purposes of immunity—to protect efficient process—is today accomplished at the pleading stage.
A Judge’s invocation of the doctrine of judicial immunity to preserve judicial efficiency has effectively denied citizens remedy—a fundamentalright—for judicial injury.
Fundamental  rights such as of familial association are destroyed by the nod of a head. In error, Pierson and Sparkman have deprived scores of Americans remedy for criminalwrongdoingPierson and Sparkman’s despotism must end today.

 

The Outrages Committed Against the Grazzini-Rucki Family and Their Attorney

Ms. MacDonald represents Ms. Sandra Grazzini-Rucki and her children, who have been devastated by Minnesota family courts.  The lawsuit describes the outrages committed by Minnesota Family Court Judge David Knutson against the Grazzini-Rucki family and their attorney Ms. MacDonald.  Ms. Grazzini-Rucki’s encounters with family courts began in 2011 when she sought and obtained a divorce, seeking orders of protection for her and her children.  Over the ensuing years, successive abusive rulings by the Minnesota Family Court rendered Grazzini-Rucki and her family homeless and bankrupt.

Judge Knutson’s illegal rulings included kicking the entire family out of their own home and separating the children from both parents, with no contact orders.  Last September, after a “listening session” conducted by Judge Knutson involving the Grazzini-Rucki children, two of Grazzini-Rucki’s children became so distressed that they fled from the homes into which they had been placed.  Teenagers Gianna and Samantha Rucki  have been missing since April 19, 2013. www.Missingkids.com.   In what can only be described as a bizarre absurdity, Judge Knutson insisted on conducting a “child custody “ trial after the children went missing.

Even more outrageous, after Ms. MacDonald advised Judge Knutson that the trial was improper, Judge Knutson caused Ms. MacDonald to be placed  in handcuffs shackled to a belt around her waist, sat in a wheel chair, and forced to finish trial to finish the “custody” trial without eyeglasses, pen, paper, or files.  While Ms. MacDonald was being arrested, courtroom bailiffs told Ms. Grazzini-Rucki that MacDonald would be retained in custody and would not be returning to the courtroom.  Ms. Grazzini-Rucki therefore left the courthouse.  When MacDonald was returned to the courtroom in shackles, Grazzini-Rucki had already left—yet Judge Knutson insisted on completing the trial without Ms. Grazzini-Rucki.  The events were captures on security video.  From the brief:

Judge Knutson sought, and the district court granted, dismissal of all claims as barred by absolute judicial immunity, finding every act accused in the Amended Complaint to be a judicial act within Judge Knutson’s jurisdiction.  Order at 21.  The many non-judicial acts of which Judge Knutson was accused in the Amended Complaint—but not analyzed in the district court’s sweeping immunity holding—include:
  • Searching and seizing person and property of Grazzini-Rucki and her children without probable cause or a warrant, including that she abandon her children;
  • Circumventing the Minnesota Court Information system regarding various Dakota County matters involving the litigants;
  • Causing state court administrators to assign “all future hearings” in various matters involving Grazzini-Rucki to Judge Knutson;
  • Illegally usurping jurisdiction over several existing matters involving Grazzini-Rucki, including the State of Minnesota against David Rucki, and third parties, and making rulings in those matters without notice to Grazzini-Rucki;
  • Illegally ordering Ms. Grazzini-Rucki’s children into “therapy”;
  • Illegally intercepting and sealing a recorded transcript Ms. Grazzini-Rucki was entitled to receive and view;
  • Ordering both parents to have no contact with their own children whatsoever;
  • Ordering Grazzini-Rucki to refrain from participation in her own family’s association activities;
  • Ordering Grazzini-Rucki to be separated from her children and have no contact with them at their schools, or through third parties;
  • Conducting a “listening” psychotherapy session between Judge Knutson, Dr. Gilbertson, and the Grazzini-Rucki’s children at which Judge Knutson was alleged to have coerced, intimidated, and threatened the Grazzini-Rucki children, contributing the children’s decision to run away from their home just days later;
  • Insisting that Grazzini-Rucki’s counsel try Grazzini-Rucki’s case while in handcuffs shackled to a waist belt, unable to rise from a wheelchair, without Grazzini-Rucki present, without Ms. MacDonald’s files, and without glasses, pen, or papers, seized by courtroom deputies;
  • Retaliating against Grazzini-Rucki’s counsel by the foregoing after Grazzini-Rucki’s counsel informed Judge Knutson that this action was pending against him, and ignoring the glaring conflict of interest.
Though this brief focuses primarily on the administrative assignment and “listening” therapy session, Appellant does not waive her assertion that none of the above functions, and those listed in the Amended Complaint warrant immunity.  The district court’s analysis of these many claims was skeletal yet sweeping, finding Judge Knutson immune for “actions taken in his capacity as a state court judge”, relying primarily on Stump v. Sparkman and Pierson v. Ray.  Order p. 32.  In response to Appellee Knutson’s Brief, and analyzed below, this broad “judicial capacity” scope and sweeping “analysis” was error.

 

 

Judges Bear the Burden of Proof on Immunity

Grazzini-Rucki asserted many of the challenges to judicial immunity as did California Coalition in its briefing before the Ninth Circuit.  California Coalition was pleased to join Grazzin-Rucki family in asserting those challenges in the Eight Circuit.  From the brief:

Judge Knutson Bears the Burden of Proving Immunity
Judge Knutson repeatedly asserts that Grazzini-Rucki “failed to raise” immunity issues in the district court.  See, e.g., Knutson Brf. p. 31, 34.  This is an improper attempt to shift onto plaintiff-appellant the burden of proving the affirmative defense of immunity, which rests solely with the party asserting it.  Fed.R. Civ.P. 8(c)(1);  Burns v. Reed, 500 U.S. 478, 498 (1991) (“An official seeking such immunity, however, must at the outset show that a “counterpart to the privilege he asserts” was recognized at common law in 1871, for “[w]here we have found that a tradition of absolute immunity did not exist as of 1871, we have refused to grant such immunity under § 1983.”).
The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that an official claiming an affirmative defense of immunity bears the burden to prove that 1871 common law immunized the function of each act accused in the complaint.  See, e.g., Malley v. Briggs, 475 U.S. 335, 339-340 (1986) (“Our initial inquiry is whether an official claiming immunity under § 1983 can point to a common-law counterpart to the privilege he asserts.”); The Court “has for that reason been quite sparing in recognizing absolute immunity for state actors.”  Buckley v. Fitzsimmons, 509 U.S. 259, 269 (1993).
 The “function” analysis considers only historical fact.  Malley at 342 (“We emphasize that our role is to interpret the intent of Congress in enacting § 1983, not to make a freewheeling policy choice, and that we are guided in interpreting Congress’ intent by the common-law tradition.”); Tower v. Glover, 467 U.S. 914, 920 (1984) (“Section 1983 immunities are ‘predicated upon a considered inquiry into the immunity historically accorded the relevant official at common law and the interests behind it.’”).
Courts investigating the intent of the 1871 42nd Congress have examined accounts of 1871 social and legal systems from Nineteenth Century case law, legal treatises, and the congressional record.  The Supreme Court undertook this historical analysis most recently in Rehberg v. Paulk,, 132 S.Ct. 1497 (2012), examining nineteenth century cases to determine that the function accused—testimony of a grand jury witness—enjoyed immunity at common law.  Id. at 1503-07.[5]
An officer’s failure to prove up a common law analog is dispositive of the issue regardless of countervailing policy considerations. Rehberg at 1502-03 (“We do not simply make our own judgment about the need for immunity. We have made it clear that it is not our role ‘to make a freewheeling policy choice,’ and that we do not have a license to create immunities based solely on our view of sound policy.”).  Granting an immunity absent this historical analysis is error.  Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 249-50 (1974) (“These cases, in their present posture, present no occasion for a definitive exploration of the scope of immunity available to state executive officials.”). 
Neither the District Court Nor Judge Knutson Have Analyzed Historical Foundations for an Immunity of Accused Function
Judge Knutson proffered, and the district court undertook, no historical analysis of whether any of the two dozen functions accused in the Amended Complaint were functions that enjoyed judicial immunity at common law in 1871.  The district court’s sweeping Order proclaimed that Judge Knutson’s “case management, his signing of orders, the substance of his orders, and the trial proceeding” were all taken in a “judicial capacity.”  Order p 33.  The district court reached this conclusion finding only that (1) “Judge Knutson has not interacted with Plaintiff outside of his courtroom or his judicial chambers” and (2) “the underlying family law case was within [his] jurisdictional authority.  Order p. 33.  On these purported findings, the district court found Judge Knutson acted in a “judicial capacity” and was thus immune.  Id.
Analyzed below, this broad-brush “judicial capacity” scope and summary analysis fails to “affirmatively state” the defense, which was exclusively Judge Knutson’s burden.  Fed.R. Civ.P. 8(c); Rehberg, supra.
The District Court Extended Immunity Based On Factors Not Relevant to Judicial Immunity
The district judge applied a “judicial capacity” scope of immunity that was far broader than that provided in controlling Supreme Court authority.  Immunity does not depend on the act or actor, but on the nature of the accused act.  Sparkman at 362.  Immunity may exist only if the accused act is both (1) “judicial in nature” and (2) within statutory subject matter jurisdiction.  Id.  The first “Judicial in nature” factor in turn depends on (a) “the nature of the act itself, i.e., whether it is a function normally performed by a judge,” and (b) “the expectations of the parties, i.e., whether they dealt with the judge in his judicial capacity.”  Id.  Not all official or authorized acts of a judge are “judicial acts”—judges also perform administrative, ministerial, or other types of acts that are not entitled to judicial immunity.  See, e.g., Forrester v. White, 484 U.S. 219, 229 (1988) (firing court employees could be performed by administrator and thus not “judicial”).
The test to distinguish between “judicial” and other types of acts is to analyze whether the act can only be performed by a judge.  See Ex parte Virginia, 100 U.S. 339, 340 (1879) (selection of jurors could be performed by administrator, thus not “judicial”); Forrester, supra; Antoine v. Byers & Anderson, Inc., 508 U.S. 429, 435 (1993) (court reporters “part of judicial function” yet not absolutely immune).  Absolute immunity is justified because judicial acts—and only judicial acts—are subject to standardized, scrutinized proceedings, restrained by principles of law, and are subject to appellate review.  Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478, 516 (1978); Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 564 n. 4 (1967).  Because judicial acts are subject to such safeguards, the Supreme Court has justified relieving the actors from liability for civil money damages.  Id.

 

Administrative Behaviors of a Judge in Assigning Cases Are Not Immune

Judge Knutson also asserted that his administrative or ministerial behaviors in Family Court case assignments was an immune “judicial act” simply because he was a judge.  Grazzini-Rucki and California Coalition analyzed abundant law demonstrating that even though an administrative act is authorized or performed by a judge, the administrative act is not converted into a judicial act.  From the brief:

Judge Knutson’s Administrative Behavior in Assigning Himself to Certain Cases is Not Immune

The district court’s high-level “analysis” that Judge Knutson’s “case management” and “trial proceedings” extended immunity far beyond Sparkman’s scope of immunity to include behaviors which are clearly not judicial acts.  As one example, Judge Knutson’s “case management” behaviors in assigning all Grazzini-Rucki cases, including all future cases with third parties, and those with the State of Minnesota,  to himself is clearly an administrative act because it cannot be reviewed on appeal, is not subject to law, is conducted in private before parties are even aware of a judge, and may be performed by administrators as well as judges.
     The cases cited by Judge Knutson support Appellant’s conclusion.  Martinez v. Winner, 800 F.2d 230, 231 (10th Cir. 1986)[6] relied on Rheuark v. Shaw, 628 F.2d 297, 305 (5th Cir. 1980) (extending absolute immunity for “jurisdictional authority to appoint and supervise court reporters.”).  In both cases the “jurisdictional authority” was a statutory grant of administrative authority—not jurisdiction.[7]  Parent v. New York, 786 F. Supp. 2d 516, 532 (N.D.N.Y. 2011) also drew authority from Matinez’s (moot) holding.  “The assignment of cases and issuance of consolidation orders are judicial functions normally performed by, and statutorily reserved to, Judge Lippman. See [statute] giving Chief Judge and Chief Administrator the authority to assign judges to judicial terms and parts. . . .”  Parent at 532 (citation omitted) (emphasis added).
Parent’s holding is inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s judicial act jurisprudence.  The fact that the “Chief Administrator” function happened to be performed by a judge does not convert the “administrator” function to a judicial one—nothing in the New York statute prohibits a non-judge from undertaking the role of “chief administrator”, meaning that, like juror selection, it is an act that may be performed by a non-judge, and thus not a judicial act.  See Ex Parte Virginia, supra.  A “Chief Administrator’s” assignment process is ministerial—the only “function” is to follow the assignment procedure.  Failure to abide the ministerial process is not an appealable event.  A judge or administrator is not applying law to facts.  The process is not highly scrutinized.  As such, Parent reached its holding on analysis inconstant with controlling Supreme Court authority, and is error.
Similarly, in Zahl v. Kosovsky, No. 08 CIV. 8308 LTS THK, 2011 WL 779784 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 3, 2011) the district court considered a claim for immunity of a judge who allegedly “manipulated the assignment system to take control of Plaintiff’s case . . . .”   According to the district court in Zahl, the plaintiff “cite[ed] no relevant authority in support of his conclusory assertions that such actions vitiated Justice Diamond’s jurisdiction to handle his case, and the Court has found none.”  Id. at *9.  The Zahl plaintiff apparently failed to identify any of the abundant relevant authorities including Ex Parte Virginia, Forrester, and Antoine, supra, which provide means to distinguish non-appealable acts of administrators from appealable acts only judges may perform.  Moreover, like the district court and Judge Knutson, the Zahl court improperly placed the burden of proving immunity on the Plaintiff rather than the official.  Malley at 339.
Zahl also erroneously relied on language in Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978) instructing courts to construe subject matter jurisdiction (the second element of Sparkman’s two-element immunity test) broadly.  Zahl at *9. Sparkman’s instruction does not apply to the first “judicial act” element.  Sparkman at 362.  As above, the Supreme Court has been “quite sparing” in extending immunity under the judicial act element of the test.  Buckley at 269.  Zahl also focused analysis on failure to recuse when faced with motion identifying conflict of interest.  Id.  Ruling on a motion is an act which only a judge “normally” performs, and thus falls within Sparkman’s “judicial act” scope.
Bracci v. Becker, No. 1:11-CV-1473 MAD/RFT, 2013 WL 123810, at *6 (N.D.N.Y. Jan. 9, 2013) aff’d, 568 F. App’x 13 (2d Cir. 2014) is derived from Martinez, Parent, and Zahl and is error for the same reasons.  Further, in Bracci the plaintiff’s accused Judge Mulvey’s (a “chief administrative judge”) failure to remove Judge Becker (the trial judge) form the case, making Bracci more of a recusal case.  Like Zahl, recusal requires ruling on a motion—a judicial act.
In both cases the courts found what they (incorrectly) identified as “jurisdiction” based on statutes authorizing judges—as well as non-judge administrators—to assign cases.  Statutory empowerment goes to Sparkman’s second “within the jurisdiction” element of the immunity test—but is insufficient to satisfy the first, “judicial act” element.  Sparkman, supra.[8]  Judge Knutson repeats the error.  Knutson Brf. at 29-30 (citations to Billingsley and Duty).
Judge Knutson’s reliance on Hardy v. Nw. Mem’l Hosp., No. 93 C 1348, 1993 WL 85750, at *2 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 22, 1993) is misplaced.  Hardy erroneously analyzed judicial acts under the test for prosecutorial immunity.  Hardy cited Imbler v. Pachtman, applying the “intimately related with the judicial phase of the criminal process” standard.  Id. at *2.  Hardy failed to cite or analyze under judicial immunity precedents including Sparkman, Pierson, Bradley, or Randall.  Judges do not perform prosecutorial function, and thus the immunity of a judge is lost if she performs such functions.   Lopez v. Vanderwater, 620 F.2d 1229, 1236 (7th Cir. 1980) (finding judge performing functions of a prosecutor not entitled to either judicial or prosecutorial immunity).
Finally, none of the authority relied on by Judge Knutson analyzed the critical test—whether the function of assigning cases was a judicial act at 1871 common law.  Absent such analysis, the authority is error.  Rehberg, supra.

 

A Judge Working with a Psychologist in Child Custody Proceedings Is Not Performing a “Judicial Act” and is Thus Not Immune

Judge Knutson followed the modern trend of Family Court judges to wander far afield from traditional judicial functions—in his case performing what he called a “listening session” to “further” the children’s psychotherapy.  It was because of Judge Knutson’s harsh commands at the “listening session” that the Grazzini-Rucki children ran away.  California Coalition assisted Ms. MacDonald in formulating arguments that disproved Judge Knutson’s claim to immunity for working with a psychologist in the custody setting.  From the brief:

Judge Knutson’s “Listening” Psychotherapy Session with the Grazzini-Rucki Children is Not a Judicial Act

 Judge Knutson concedes he conducted a “listening session” with the five Grazzini-Rucki children “for the sole purpose” of facilitating psychotherapy of the children —complying with a “request from a court-appointed therapist for a structured family meeting.”[9]  During this psychotherapy session Judge Knutson harshly reprimanded and the children.  Days later two of them ran away from their home and have not been seen since.[10]
Following Rehberg, the district court should have analyzed whether the function of psychotherapy performed at the “listening session” was an immune function at 1871 common law.  Rehberg at 1503. The district court’s failure conduct this historical inquiry is error sufficient to reverse.  Scheuer at 249-50 (1974).
If the district court had conducted appropriate inquiry, it would find no tradition for psychotherapy function at 1871 common law.  Given that psychotherapy is a function developed in the twentieth century, and is only legally performed by licensed psychologists,[11] it would seem unlikely that Judge Knutson could identify an 1871 common law immunity for his psychotherapy behavior.
Other courts considering the question have found no immunity for psychologists (Jensen v. Lane Cnty., 222 F.3d 570, 577 (9th Cir. 2000) (finding no “firmly rooted tradition” of immunity for functions performed by private psychiatrists employed by prison)).  See also Hoffman v. Harris, 511 U.S. 1060 (1994) (Thomas, J., dissenting from denial of cert.) (“The courts that have accorded absolute immunity to social workers appear to have overlooked the necessary historical inquiry; none has seriously considered whether social workers enjoyed absolute immunity for their official duties in 1871. If they did not, absolute immunity is unavailable to social workers under § 1983.  This all assumes, of course, that “social workers” (at least as we now understand the term) even existed in 1871. If that assumption is false, the argument for granting absolute immunity becomes (at least) more difficult to maintain.”).
Further, the history of psychologists in the divorce industry demonstrates such functions are late twentieth century innovations.  “Family Courts” are a creation of the 1970s after the 1966 California Report on the Governor’s Commission on the Family.  L. Friedman, Rights of Passage: Divorce Law in Historical Perspective 63 Or. L. Rev. 649, 667 (1984).  The function of “psychologist-as-judge” custody evaluator was unknown to a divorce courtroom until the mid-1990s “as the supply of psychologists continued to increase and stricter third-party payer regimens were imposed for mental health treatment (Gould, 2006). [C]ustody evaluation services generally are neither highly regulated nor institutionalized, but rather may be characterized as a cottage industry (Schepard, 2005).” Robert F. Kelly, Sarah H. Ramsey, Child Custody Evaluations: The Need for Systems-Level Outcome Assessments, 47 Fam. Ct. Rev. 286, 291 (2009).
Finally, it is unlikely that the district court could have identified any function of a family court—including “listening sessions,” “therapy”, “reconciliation,” custody evaluations, or otherwise—existed at 1871 common law because in 1871 no civil judicial tribunal possessed jurisdiction over marriage, divorce, or child custody.  “It is elementary that in the early history of jurisprudence in England the common law courts exercised no jurisdiction over divorce cases, jurisdiction in such matters resting entirely with the ecclesiastical courts of the realm.” Peterson v. Peterson, 24 Haw. 239, 246 (1918).  See also Robert H. Mnookin, Child-Custody Adjudication: Judicial Functions in the Face of Indeterminacy, 39 Law and Contemp. Prob. 226, 234 (1975).

 

 Modern Family Court Jurisdiction Is Inferior; If It Has Immunity It is Extremely Narrow

 Knutson’s Brief speciously asserts that general jurisdiction includes jurisdiction over “family law matters.” [12]Family court jurisdiction is incontrovertibly inferior because it is specific.  Minn. Stat. 518.  Many courts recognize family courts as inferior tribunals.  Family Court “in a dissolution proceeding is a court of limited jurisdiction.”  King v. State Educ. Dep’t, 182 F.3d 162 (2d Cir.1999); People United for Children, Inc. v. City of New York, 108 F. Supp. 2d 275, 286 (S.D.N.Y. 2000) (Family Court not a “court of competent jurisdiction” for Rooker-Feldman analysis).
Randall v. Brigham, 74 U.S. 523 (1868) describes the limited scope of immunity for “inferior courts”: Judges exercising limited jurisdiction were immune for acts within the limited jurisdiction, and could be liable for civil damages for acts in excess of their jurisdiction, and for acts done “maliciously or corruptly.”  Randall at 531. [13]  While Judge Knuston bears the burden of demonstrating modern family court functions enjoyed any immunity at 1871 common law, in no case will he achieve an immunity scope greater than an 1871 inferior court; for judicial acts within their jurisdiction not done “maliciously or corruptly.”  Id.
Judge Knutson’s Assertion of Broad Immunity Lacks Authority
Judge Knutson asserts: “Acts and orders related to overseeing a family law case, including orders requiring therapy and efforts to facilitate it, are acts inherently judicial in nature.”  Knutson Brf. p. 35.  His authority does not support this proposition.
Judge Knutson cites Myers v. Morris, 810 F.2d 1437, 1448 (8th Cir. 1987), abrogated by Burns v. Reed, 500 U.S. 478 (1991).  Myers was the first case in this Circuit to consider the 1976 decision of Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976).  Imbler was the seminal Supreme Court case extending prosecutorial immunity under Section 1983 to acts of “the prosecutor in his role as advocate for the State.”  Id. at 431 n. 33.  The Court recognized that its general description was broad, and could potentially encompass administrative acts as well as prosecutorial acts, yet declined to provide a more precise definition:  “At some point, and with respect to some decisions, the prosecutor no doubt functions as an administrator rather than as an officer of the court. Drawing a proper line between these functions may present difficult questions, but this case does not require us to anticipate them.”  Id.
Myers picked up where Imbler left off, analyzing several acts by Scott County Prosecuting Attorney R. Kathleen Morris which fell within Imbler’s broad range of potentially-immune acts.  Meyers at 1449.  Myers extended a generous scope of immunity to every function of Ms. Morris that plaintiffs accused, including “her role in the initiation of criminal proceedings against them and her handling of evidentiary material.”  Id.  These several functions included investigation, advising police, interviewing children, and advocacy for the state during the criminal proceeding.  Id. at 1446-1452.
Meyers’ limited immunity incorrectly, drawing a line between pre-charging and post-charging phases.  Today post-charging investigative, administrative, administrative, and enforcement functions are not immune.  See, e.g, Kalina v. Fletcher, 522 U.S. 118 (1997).  Myers correctly limited prosecutorial immunity to criminal proceedings.  Meyers at 1452.  Myers also recognized that absolute immunity would not extend to enforcement or investigative functions in “approv[ing] or direct[ing] the removal of children from their homes upon the arrest of one or both parents.”  Id. at n. 11.[14]
Judge Knutson claim Myers immunizes “family law judges to work with experts to determine the care provided to children in custody and applying judicial immunity to that work.”  Knutson Brf. at 35.  This is incorrect.  Myers involved a criminal prosecution, not “family law judges.”  Myers at 1452 .  Myers did not involve Minnesota laws regarding “best interests,” nor a judge or psychologist determining “best interests”—but criminal prosecution.  Moreover, Myers expressly recognized that investigative functions such as the “listening session” in which Dr. Gilbertson and Judge Knutson “the session was held for the sole purpose of facilitating therapy…” are not prosecutorial. [15] Myers did not extend immunity to psychotherapy.
Judge Knutson finally claims—citing no authority—that “sealing the transcript of the session” was a judicial act.  The record indicates the opposite—that Judge Knutson was not undertaking the listening session pursuant to any order.  Having no relationship to any judicial act, the transcript—and its sealing—cannot be converted into one.

 

 The District Court’s “Judicial Capacity” Scope Relied on Elements Not Relevant To Judicial Immunity

The district judge’s sweeping analysis of the dozens of acts accused focused on a single fact that Judge Knutsen interacted with Grazinni-Rucki inside of his courtroom.  Order at 33.  Judge Knutson repeats the error.  Knutson Brf. p. 31.
The location of an accused act is not relevant to Sparkman’s two-factor test, which focusses on function regardless of location.  For example, Sparkman favorably cited Gregory v. Thompson, 500 F.2d 59 (9th Cir. 1974), which held that physically evicting a litigant from a courtroom is not an act “of a judicial nature.”  Sparkman at 370, fn. 10.  Justice White also cited a Sixth Circuit decision, Lynch v. Johnson, 420 F.2d 818 (6th Cir. 1970), holding that a county judge who had a plaintiff “forcibly removed” from a “fiscal court” and jailed was not immune.  Id.  See also Harper v. Merckle, 638 F.2d 848, 857 (5th Cir. 1981) (child support enforcement proceeding inside of courtroom and chambers not immune); Mireless v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 13 (1991) (physical assault outside of courtroom held immune).  Location of the act was one of the four-factor “debris” elements from McAlester v. Brown, 469 F.2d 1280 (5th Cir. 1972) which Justice White “cast aside” in distilling Sparkman’s “cogent two-part test.”  Harper at 857.[16]

 

 The District Court’s Reliance on Pierson v. Ray and Stump v. Sparkman Was Error

 Section 1983 Does Not Require Proof of Malicious or Corrupt Intent
The district court cited the seminal judicial immunity case, Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547 (1967), in connection with its holding that Judge Knutson is immune even if he acted “maliciously or corruptly.”  Order at 33.  Appellant did not—and need not—assert that Judge Knutson acted “maliciously or corruptly.”  Appellant asserts merely that he acted to deprive of constitutional rights.   Section 1983 does not require an allegation of specific intent, including malice or corruption, but only general intent to perform the act causing the deprivation of a constitutional right.  Monell at 685; Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 232 (1970).  Malice and corruption were relevant in defeating common law immunities for common law torts.  Section 1983 was enacted to supplement common law tort liability—it turns on a “strict liability” standard, requiring no proof of intent.  IdSee also n. 22, infra (comment of Representative David A. Clark).
Pierson and Sparkman Erroneously Extended Common Law Immunity to Civil Rights Liability
 Pierson and Sparkman stand in error for exceeding the judicial power vested in United States courts under Article III of the United States Constitution.  In deciding Pierson and Sparkman, the Supreme Court construed Section 1983 to find an immunity which is not present on—and entirely inconsistent with—the face of the strict liability statute.   Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 665-94 (1978)  Yet Section 1983 is not a subject for statutory interpretation; clearer language has likely never emerged from Congress.  Id.; see also Monroe at 185-191.
Instead of examining the unambiguous statute, Chief Justice Warren in Pierson instructs us to examine congressional intent, which Chief Justice Warren claims does not indicate an intent to abrogate the common law immunities of a judge.  “The legislative record gives no clear indication that Congress meant to abolish wholesale all common-law immunities . . . .  The immunity of judges for acts within the judicial role is equally well established [as the speech and debate privilege], and we presume that Congress would have specifically so provided had it wished to abolish the doctrine.”  Pierson at 554-555 (1967).
The “presumption” is as worthy as any speculation.  It overlooks the most obvious evidence of congressional intent—the unambiguous language of the statute itself.  Moreover, actual analysis of the congressional record, and history of judicial immunity reveals Chief Justice Warren’s presumption is simply wrong.
Pierson Incorrectly Analyzed Legislative Privilege Rather Than Judicial Immunity
In Pierson Chief Justice Warren “presumed” that “the immunity of judges” was “equally well established” as the legislative privilege.  Remarkably, in presuming, he failed to conduct analysis of the common law of judicial immunity—citing only to Bradley’s (post-Civil Rights Act) holding and Scott v. Stansfield, 3 Law Reports, Exchequer, 220.[17]   Pierson at 554.  Despite having on hand the meticulous historical analysis of nineteenth century common law and the 42nd Congress’ legislative intent provided by Justice Douglas in 1961’s Monroe v. Pape decision, Chief Justice Warren’s 1967 opinion ignored it.
Dissenting, Justice Douglas—the author of Monroe—did draw from his prior historical analysis of common law and the congressional record to the Civil Rights Act, reaching a forceful conclusion: “The Court’s ruling is not justified by the admitted need for a vigorous and independent judiciary, is not commanded by the common-law doctrine of judicial immunity, and does not follow inexorably from our prior decisions.”  Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 559 (1967) (Douglas, J., dissenting).  Similar rich analyses and enlivened opinions are evident in Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 665-94 (1978); Pulliam at 529-544; Sparkman at 368 (Stewart, J., Powell, J., dissenting), Dykes v. Hoseman, 776 F.2d 942, 954 (11th Cir.  1985) (Hatchett, J, dissenting) (“[T]he en banc court holds that judicial immunity is complete, unqualified, and without exception . . .  As the majority concedes, no precedent, Supreme Court or otherwise, requires such a broad definition and application of the judicial immunity doctrine.  [N]o policy considerations justify such a result. . . .  Judges . . . will be able to deal willy nilly with the rights of citizens without having to account for willful unconstitutional actions.”).
Instead of analyzing judicial immunity, Justice Warren adopted analysis of legislative privilege from Tenney v. Brandhove, 341 U.S. 367 (1951).  In Tenney Justice Frankfurter considered whether a California legislative committee conducting a contempt proceeding against a man circulating a flyer protesting the committee was immune from an action under Section 1983.  Id. at 377.   The question was whether a common law “speech or debate” privilege protecting lawmaking activity could be extended to a lawmaker’s behavior in conducting the contempt hearing.  Id.
Justice Frankfurter traced the history of English common law preserving legislative speech or debate privilege as derivative of liberty—an extension of the voters’ freedom of speech and conscience.  Id. at 372-73.  Protection of “speech or debate” was necessary to prohibit the English King and his aristocracy from persecuting members of Parliament making laws unfavorable to the then-ruling class.  Justice Frankfurter aligned the English speech liberty with the federal “speech or debate” analog in the United States Constitution at Article I, Sec. 6, cl. 1.[18] Like Chief Justice Warren, Justice Frankfurter presumed—analyzing no legislative history—that the 42nd Congress would not have intended to limit any state’s legislative activity in enacting the 1871 Civil Rights Act because Congress was itself a “staunch advocate of legislative freedom.”  Id. at 376 (emphasis added).
Tenney justified extending the speech or debate liberty to the committee hearing function because legislators are directly-elected and immediately accountable to voters.  Id. at 378.  Tenney also held the narrow immunity was lost if “there was a usurpation of functions exclusively vested in the Judiciary or the Executive.”  Id.
Judicial Immunity is the Opposite of Legislative Privilege—Judges Are Sovereigns Possessing Not “Rights” but Delegated Authority
 Judicial authority and legislative freedom are night and day.  Judges exercise jurisdiction as sovereigns—not liberties from sovereigns.  While judges have all the rights of any citizen qua a citizen, a judge qua judge possesses no rights.  “First and Fourteenth Amendments restrain “only such action as may fairly be said to be that of the States.”  United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598, 621 (2000).  “[T]he censorial power is in the people over the Government, and not in the Government over the people.”  New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 282-83 (1964). There is no need for a judge to express opinions, experiences, or desires of her own or those she represents to create law—he/she is given law.  [19]Other than necessary for faithful adjudication, a judge’s “freedom of conscience” is irrelevant to judicial function—relevant “conscience” is given in the form of law that has matured through free debate elsewhere. County Judges do not function as a body, and (should) have no one to “debate.”  The United States and State of Minnesota constitutions do not extend a speech or debate privilege to the judiciary because courts are not empowered to speak or debate.  The function of a judge is to adjudicate—apply the given law to properly-admitted facts.  Judges are not representatives of voters, but independent of electoral will, passion, and accountability. There is no need to protect a judge’s “speech” other than to preserve the judge’s ability to pronounce adjudication—merely a “substantial state interest”[20] that must yield to Minnesota’s “fundamental law”—citizen rights such as remedy,[21] due process, equal protection, speech, and association.  See Theide v. Town of Scandia Valley, 217 Minn. 218, 226-27, 14 NW 2d 400, 406 (1944) (forcibly removing woman and children from their home in sub-zero weather by the town sheriff and forced to return to their “legal settlement” in another town for the purpose of obtaining poor relief violated “fundamental law”[22] despite consistency with state law.).  Minnesota courts may not construe statutes contrary to citizen rights under the “fundamental law.”  See T. Flemming, J. Norby, The Minnesota Bill of Rights: Wrapt in the Old Miasmal Mist, 7 Hamline L.Rev. 194 (1984).
 The long history of preservation of legislative speech and debate—a fundamental liberty—is entirely absent from the history of judicial immunity.  See Monell at 665-94; Pierson (Douglas, J. dissenting); Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 243 (1974) (“Indeed, as the Court also indicated in Monroe v. Pape, supra, the legislative history indicates that there is no absolute immunity”); Pulliam at 540 (1984) (“every Member of Congress who spoke to the issue assumed that judges would be liable under § 1983”).  There being no “judicial speech” liberty in 1871, there is no reason to “presume” that the 1871 Congress would have seen need to expressly abrogate a tradition that has never existed.
Far from tradition, the “hoary doctrine of judicial immunity”[23] is expropriation.  Tenney’s “presumption” was a modest stretch of liberty over the border with sovereignty to protect the functions of elected representatives of the people.  Pierson’s adoption of Tenney’s stretch to protect sovereigns of the people was a full-force embezzlement of liberty.  Deployed today to exonerate sovereign county judges in their oppression of those in whom liberty is vested by the fundamental law, Pierson’s manufacture of judicial immunity is—in perspective—nothing short of a third American revolution.
Congress Expressly Intended to Abrogate Judicial Immunity
            Nor can Chief Justice Warren’s “presumption” withstand the incontrovertible record—The 1871 Congress repeatedly expressed intent that the Civil Rights Act would abrogate judicial immunity.  Congress adopted the language of Section 1983 from its criminal analog—the 1866 Civil Rights Act, today codified at 18 U.S.C. § 242.  Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167 (1961).[24]  Section 1983 was introduced by Ohio Representative Shellabarger, who explained his bill on the House floor by referencing Section 2 of the 1866 Act: “that section provides a criminal proceeding in identically the same case as this one provides a civil remedy for . . . ”[25]  The Acts thus “must be construed as in pari materia”—any construction of the 1871 Act must admit congressional intent in enacting the 1866 Act.  Picking v. Pennsylvania R.R., 151 F.2d 240 (3rd Cir. 1945).
On that record it is incontrovertible that the 42nd Congress affirmatively rejected common law judicial immunity.
I answer it is better to invade the judicial power of the States than permit it to invade, strike down, and destroy the civil rights of citizens. A judicial power perverted to such uses should be speedily invaded.
 Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess. 1837 (1866) (remarks of Representative Lawrence).  The 1866 Act was vetoed by President Johnson because it abrogated common law judicial immunity.[26]  In the fight to defeat the veto, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Trumbull expressed revulsion at the entire concept of judicial immunity: “It is the very doctrine out of which the rebellion was hatched.”[27]
            Section 1 of the 1871 Act (now Section 1983) passed rapidly through Congress because debate wasn’t necessary—Congress recognized Section 1 as merely “adding” a civil remedy to the 1866 Act.  Debate instead focused on section 2 of the bill (modernly Section 1985) because of concerns over federalism and regulation of private behavior.  Griffin v. Breckenridge, 403 U.S. 88, 99 (1971).
            The recorded debate demonstrates unequivocally that Congress intended to abrogate common law judicial immunity:
[T]he decisions of the county judges, who are made little kings, with almost despotic powers to carry out the demands of the legislature which elected them-powers which, almost without exception, have been exercised against Republicans without regard to law or justice, make up a catalogue of wrongs, outrageous violations, and evasions of the spirit of the new constitution, unscrupulous malignity and partisan hate never paralleled in the history of parties in this country or any other.
 Cong. Globe, 42nd Cong., 1st Sess. 186 (1871) (remarks of Representative Platt).
What is to be the case of a judge? . . . Is that State judge to be taken from his bench? Is he to be liable in an action?  … It is the language of the bill: for there is no limitation whatsoever on the terms that are employed, and they are as comprehensive as can be used.
Id. (remarks of Senator Thurman).
“[T]he judge of a State court, though acting under oath of office, is made liable to a suit in the Federal Court and subject to damages for his decision against a suitor, however honest and conscientious that decision may be . . .”
Id. (remarks of Representative Lewis).  Representative Arthur recognized the law would be a drastic reversal of common law immunity:
Hitherto, in all the history of this country and of England, no judge or court has been held liable, civilly or criminally, for judicial acts …. Willfulness and corruption in error alone created a liability . . . .  Under the provisions of this section every judge in the State court. . . will enter upon and pursue the call of official duty with the sword of Damocles suspended over him . . .”
Cong. Globe, 42nd Cong., 1st Sess. (1871) 365-366.[28]
Courts considering parallel questions have deferred to this vivid record.  See, e.g., Picking v. Pennsylvania R.R., 151 F.2d 240 (3rd Cir. 1945) (“But the privilege as we have stated was a rule of the common law. Congress possessed the power to wipe it out. We think that the conclusion is irresistible that Congress by enacting the Civil Rights Act sub judice intended to abrogate the privilege to the extent indicated by that act and in fact did so . . . .  The statute must be deemed to include members of the state judiciary acting in official capacity.”); Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 665 (1978); Owen v. City of Independence, Mo., 445 U.S. 622, 643 (1980) (“Nowhere in the debates, however, is there a suggestion that the common law excused a city from liability on account of the good faith of its authorized agents, much less an indication of a congressional intent to incorporate such an immunity into the Civil Rights Act”); Pulliam v. Allen, 466 U.S. 522, 543 (1984).
Far from an intent to incorporate common law judicial immunity, Congress in passing both Acts specifically intended to eliminate it as the source of the monumental evil of state-sponsored oppression jeopardizing our nation’s existence by precipitating civil warfare.[29]

 

“The devastation caused by Minnesota Family Courts may be even more abominable than what we have  seen in California, Florida, Connecticut, and throughout the nation” says Colbern Stuart, President of California Coalition.  “Ms. Grazzin-Rucki’s family was so severely abused by Minnesota Family Courts that the children simply couldn’t withstand the turmoil.  Ms. Grazzini-Rucki’s and her children’s tragedy shows how atrociously incompetent and downright criminal American Family Courts have become despite handling delicate family matters, and why Family Court must immediately cease its disastrous experiment with family well-being” says Stuart.

California Coalition is passing along Ms. Grazzini-Rucki’s and Ms. MacDonald’s request to assist in locating the Grazzini-Rucki children–if you have any information about their whereabouts, please visit www.Missingkids.com to learn how to help.

With briefing on these critical family court immunity issues now ongoing in the Eighth and Ninth Circuits, Family Courts are facing more pressure than they’ve ever before experienced.  WeightierMatter will be posting regular updates of both cases.

 

Footnotes:

[1] Sparkman at 368 (Stewart, J. dissenting).

[2]  “[T]o no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice.”  Magna Carta (1215); “[W]here there is a legal right, there is also a legal remedy by suit or action at law, whenever that right is invaded.” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 163 (1803) (quoting William M. Blackstone, 3 Commentaries *23).

[3] Connick v. Thompson, 131 S. Ct. 1350, 1365 (2011)

[4] “Few persons sufficiently irritated to institute an action against a judge for his judicial acts would hesitate to ascribe any character to the acts which would be essential to the maintenance of the action.” Bradley at 348.

[5] Similar historical analyses are apparent in Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S. 167, 172-85 (1961); Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 703 (1978); Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 559-62 (1967) (Douglas, J., dissenting); Hoffman v. Harris, 511 U.S. 1060 (1994) (Thomas, J., dissenting from denial of cert.) (“The courts that have accorded absolute immunity to social workers appear to have overlooked the necessary historical inquiry; none has seriously considered whether social workers enjoyed absolute immunity for their official duties in 1871. If they did not, absolute immunity is unavailable to social workers under § 1983; Kalina v. Fletcher, 522 U.S. 118, 132 (1997) (Scalia, J., concurring).  See also Jensen v. Lane Cnty., 222 F.3d 570, 577 (9th Cir. 2000) (finding no “firmly rooted tradition” of immunity for function of a private psychiatrist employed by prison).

[6] Martinez is abrogated law “mooted” by abandonment of the appeal.  Martinez v. Winner, 800 F.2d 230, 231 (10th Cir. 1986).

[7]  Rheuark relied on Slavin v. Curry, 574 F.2d 1256, 1263-64 (5th Cir.) opinion modified on denial of reh’g, 583 F.2d 779 (5th Cir. 1978), overruled by Sparks v. Duval Cnty. Ranch Co., 604 F.2d 976 (5th Cir. 1979) (“Under Texas [statutory] law trial judges select their court reporters, who thereafter serve during the pleasure of the judge.”  Sparks affirmed the Fifth Circuit’s en banc decision denying immunity to co-conspirators.  Dissenters in the Sparks en banc decision relied heavily on Slavin.  The Supreme Court’s affirmation in Sparks abrogates Slavin.

[8] A simple example is that the Chief Justice of the United States is authorized by law to serve as the Chancellor of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution.  20 U.S.C. § 76cc. Such authorization does not convert such service to a judicial act.  See, e.g., Lynch v. Johnson, 420 F.2d 818 (1970) (“A judge does not cease to be a judge when he undertakes to chair a PTA meeting, but, of course, he does not bring judicial immunity to that forum, either.”)  Id. at 820 (cited favorably in Sparkman at 370 n. 10).

[9] Opening Brief of Appellant’s, APP 124

[10] APP COA -291

[11] Minn. Stat 148.88, Psychology Practice Act. Also see Minn. Admin. Rules 7200

[12] Knutson’s Brief page 21

[13] This distinction was recognized in Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 356 (1978), fn. 7.  See also Randall v. Brigham, 74 U.S. 523, 535-36 (1868) (“In reference to judges of limited and inferior authority, it has been held that they are protected only when they act within their jurisdiction.”); Yates v. Lansing, 5 Johnson 282, 291 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1810) 1810 WL 1044, aff’d, 1811 WL 1445 (1811) (“[T]he judges of the king’s superior courts of general jurisdiction were not liable to answer personally for their errors in judgment. . . .  [W]ith respect to the inferior courts, it was only while they act within their jurisdiction.”); Phelps v. Sill, 1 Day 315, 327 (1804).  See also 1871 comments of Representative Arthur, infra, describing common law immunity: “Hitherto, in all the history of this country and of England, no judge or court has been held liable, civilly or criminally, for judicial acts …. Willfulness and corruption in error alone created a liability . . . .  “

[14] Specific to family issues, the Meyers plaintiffs accused “us[ing] the interviews [of children] to coerce perjured statements from young and vulnerable witnesses” in a criminal investigation and “initiat[ing] neglect proceedings in the family court on behalf of the Scott County Human Services Department [and] sign[ing] and approv[ing] the neglect petitions.”  Id. at 1450.  Because these functions are “functionally comparable to prosecutor’s initiation of the judicial process,” this Court extended absolute immunity.  Id. at 1452.

[15] Appellants’ Brf, APP 125

[16] All of the Fifth, Eleventh, and Ninth Circuit authority derived from McAlester’s four-part test is error after Sparkman.  See, e.g., Dykes v. Hosemann, 776 F.2d 942, 946 (11th Cir.  1985); Adams v. McIlhany, 764 F.2d 294 (5th Cir. 1985); Holloway v. Walker, 765 F.2d 517, 522 (5th Cir. 1985); Ashelman v. Pope, 793 F.2d 1072 (9th Cir. 1986), and dozens of authority-in-error relying thereon.

[17] Analyzed in Bradley at n. 16.  “[A] judge of a county court was sued for slander, and he put in a plea that the words complained of were spoken by him in his capacity as such judge, while sitting in his court, and trying a cause in which the plaintiff was defendant.”

[18] That privilege is narrow: “The Senators and Representatives . . . shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.”  The privilege is against arrest—not civil liability—does not extend to felonies or treason, or “breach of the peace”— a misdemeanor.  Arrest outside of “Session” is permitted, and members maybe “questioned” for activity other than “speech or debate.”  Tenney at 377 (citing Kilbourn v. Thompson, 103 U.S. 168 (1880) (false imprisonment not privileged); Marshall v. Gordon, 243 U.S. 521 (1917).  Even so limited Jefferson was fearful of the power it gave legislators.  Tenney at 375.  Hamilton was not so fearful of “the least dangerous branch”—because it exercised no similar liberty. The Federalist No. 78 (A. Hamilton) (1788).

[19] See Separation of powers Minn. Const. Art 3, sec 1.

[20] Gentile v. State Bar of Nevada, 501 U.S. 1030, 1074 (1991).

[21] Minnesota Constitution, Article 1. sec. 8 provides:

Redress of injuries or wrongs.

Every person is entitled to a certain remedy in the laws for all injuries or wrongs which he may receive to his person, property or character, and to obtain justice freely and without purchase, completely and without denial, promptly and without delay, conformable to the laws.

[22] “The entire social and political structure of America rests upon the cornerstone that all men have certain rights which are inherent and inalienable.  Among these are the right to be protected in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; the right to acquire, possess and enjoy property; and the right to establish a home and family relations—all under equal and impartial laws which govern the whole community and each member thereof… The rights, privileges, and immunities of citizens exist notwithstanding there is no specific enumeration thereof in State Constitutions.”  Theide at 226-27, 14 NW 2d at 406.

[23] See Note, Liability of Judicial Officers Under Section 1983, 79 YALE L.J. 322, 337 (1969) (“Yale Note”).

[24] See also Yale Note at 327-328.

[25] Cong. Globe, 42nd Cong., 1st Sess. 60 (App.) (1871); Yale Note at 327.

[26] Yale Note at 327.

[27] Cong. Globe, 39th Cong., 1st Sess. 1758 (1866) (remarks of Senator Trumbull); Yale Note at 328.

[28] See also Yale Note at 328 and references to additional consistent comments in n. 38.  “On three occasions during the debates, legislators explicitly stated that judges would be liable under the [1871] Act.  No one denied the statements.”  “In sum, the question of congressional intent seems relatively clear: there was no universal acceptance of the broad English immunity rule in 1871, and the only legislative history available supports the proposition that Congress intended Section 1983 to cover judges.”  Yale Note at 328. Yale Note’s 1969 author left open the door that “the legislative history does not preclude entirely the Court’s construction of the statute if the policy reasons for judicial immunity are sufficiently persuasive.”  That “policy reasons” door was closed eleven years later in Malley.

[29] Congress’ intent to hold judges accountable is recorded as recently as 1979 by the 96th Congress:

[Section 1983] is an essential element of an extraordinary series of congressional enactments that transformed the relationship between the Federal Government and its constituent parts.  [T]he very purpose of the 1983 was to interpose the Federal courts between the States and the people, as guardians of the people’s Federal rights—to protect the people from unconstitutional action under color of State law, whether that action be executive, legislative, or judicial.

Statement of Representative David A. Clarke, Chairperson, Committee on Judiciary, Government of the District of Columbia on the  Act of Dec. 29, 1979, 93 Stat. 1284, PL 170 LH, 1st Sess. (Dec. 29, 1979) (emphasis added).

FAIR USE AND LEGAL DISCLAIMER AND WARNING (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

CENSORSHIP IS A CRIME, AND SO IS THE “AS IS PHILOSOPHY” THAT ANYONE WOULD USE TO JUSTIFY IT IN COMMITTING SUCH A CRIME AND HIGH TREASON, AMONG OTHER THINGS.

1) CONTRIBUTOR TO THIS BLOG AND AUTHOR IS NOT A LAWYER, ATTORNEY, PARALEGAL, LEGAL PRACTITIONER, OR ADVOCATE, THUS, NONE OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS POST COULD POSSIBLY BE USED AS LEGAL ADVICE.  IT IS EXPLICITLY NOT THE INTENT.  ONE WOULD, HYPOTHETICALLY, USE AT ONE’S OWN RISK AND PERIL IN REALITY.

2)  THIS POST IS MADE IN GOOD FAITH.

3)  THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS POST AND ON THIS BLOG IS SOLELY FOR ACADEMIC RESEARCH PURPOSES AND/OR ENTERTAINMENT AND SHOULD EXPRESSLY NOT BE USED FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES.  IT IS PROTECTED BY 17 USC, SECTION 107 (“FAIR USE”).

4)  THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR OF THIS POST IS the EDITOR FOR CCFC, CALIFORNIA COALITION FOR FAMILIES AND CHILDREN, A PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION.

HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF, SO MATERNALLY DEPRIVED CHILDREN AND MOTHERS WATCH AND WAIT


Nuremberg Judges’ Trial

Indictment

  1. Participating in a common plan or conspiracy to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity;

  2. War crimes through the abuse of the judicial and penal process, resulting in mass murder, torture, plunder of private property.

  3. Crimes against humanity on the same grounds, including slave labor charges.

  4. Membership in a criminal organization, the NSDAP or SS leadership corps.

Count 4 applied only to Altstötter, Cuhorst, Engert, Joel (with respect to the SS) and to Cuhorst, Oeschy, Nebelung, and Rothaug concerning the NSDAP leadership. Both organizations had been found criminal previously by the IMT.

Count 1 was dropped: the court declared the charge to be outside its jurisdiction. Judge Blair filed a dissenting opinion that stated that the court should have made a statement that the Military Tribunals of the NMT in fact did have jurisdiction over charges of “conspiracy to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity”.All defendants pleaded “not guilty”.

Defendants

  • Karl Engert

  • Oswald Rothaug

  • Paul Barnickel

  • Rudolf Oeschey

  • Wilhelm von Ammon

  • Wolfgang Mettgenberg

A witness testifies in the Judges’ Trial

Coordinates: 49°27.2603′N 11°02.9103′E

The Judges’ Trial (or the Justice Trial, or, officially, The United States of America vs. Josef Altstötter, et al.) was the third of the 12 trials for war crimes the U.S. authorities held in their occupation zone in Germany in Nuremberg after the end of World War II. These twelve trials were all held before U.S. military courts, not before the International Military Tribunal, but took place in the same rooms at the Palace of Justice. The twelve U.S. trials are collectively known as the “Subsequent Nuremberg Trials” or, more formally, as the “Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals” (NMT).

The defendants in this case were 16 German jurists and lawyers. Nine had been officials of the Reich Ministry of Justice, the others were prosecutors and judges of the Special Courts and People’s Courts of Nazi Germany. They were—amongst other charges—held responsible for implementing and furthering the Nazi “racial purity” program through the eugenic and racial laws.

The judges in this case, heard before Military Tribunal III, were Carrington T. Marshall (presiding judge), former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Ohio; James T. Brand, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of Oregon; Mallory B. Blair, formerly judge of the Third Court of Appeals of Texas; and Justin Woodward Harding of the Bar of the State of Ohio as an alternate judge. Marshall had to retire due to illness on June 19, 1947, at which point Brand became president and Harding a full member of the tribunal. The Chief of Counsel for the Prosecution was Telford Taylor; his deputy was Charles M. LaFollette. The indictment was presented on January 4, 1947; the trial lasted from March 5 to December 4, 1947. Ten of the defendants were found guilty; four received sentences for lifetime imprisonment, the rest received prison sentences of varying lengths. Four persons were acquitted of all charges.

Name Sentence
Josef Altstötter 5 years, incl. time already served; released 1950; died 1979 in Nuremberg
Wilhelm von Ammon(de) 10 years, incl. time already served; released January 31 1951 by John J. McCloy; died 1992
Paul Barnickel(de) acquitted; died 1966 in Munich
Hermann Cuhorst(de) acquitted; died 1991 in Kressbronn am Bodensee
Karl Engert(de) mistrial declared due to illness; died 8 September 1951
Günther Joël(de) 10 years, incl. time already served, released January 31, 1951; died May 12, 1978
Herbert Klemm(de) lifetime imprisonment; commuted to 20 years released 1956. time of death unknown
Ernst Lautz(de) 10 years, incl. time already served-released January 1951; died 1979 in Lübeck
Wolfgang Mettgenberg(de) 10 years, incl. time already served; died 1950 in Landsberg Prison
Günther Nebelung(de) acquitted; died 1970 in Seesen
Rudolf Oeschey(de) lifetime imprisonment; commuted to 20 years released 1956; died September 12, 1980 in Neuss
Hans Petersen(de) acquitted; died in 1963
Oswald Rothaug lifetime imprisonment; commuted to 20 years and released 22 December 1956; died 1967 in Cologne
Curt Rothenberger 7 years, incl. time already served; released 1950. died 1959 in Hamburg
Franz Schlegelberger lifetime imprisonment; released 1950 for “Health reasons”; died 1970 in Flensburg
Carl We

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

  • CENSORSHIP WILL BE PROSECUTED AS IT IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE IN THE THIS REPUBLIC USA, THE LAWS TO WHICH YOU WILL BE HELD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.
  • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.
  • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand,

stphal(de)

committed suicide 1946 after the indictment, but before the beginning of the trial. 

 

ENHANCING THE QUALITY OF PARENTAL LEGAL REPRESENTATION ACT OF 2011 . . . FOR FATHER’S ONLY?


H.R.3873 — Enhancing the Quality of Parental Legal Representation Act of 2011 (Introduced in House – IH) 

HR 3873 IH

112th CONGRESS2d Session H. R. 3873To provide funds to State courts for the provision of legal representation to parents and legal guardians with respect to child welfare cases.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESFebruary 1, 2012Ms. MOORE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means


A BILLTo provide funds to State courts for the provision of legal representation to parents and legal guardians with respect to child welfare cases.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the `Enhancing the Quality of Parental Legal Representation Act of 2011′.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds the following:
      (1) In the Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Courts Act of 2000, the Congress found that `under both Federal and State law, the courts play a crucial and essential role in the Nation’s child welfare system and in ensuring safety, stability, and permanence for abused and neglected children under the supervision of that system’.
      (2) Child outcomes are improved and courts function more effectively when all parties have quality legal representation. Analysis of data from programs in New York and Michigan revealed that more than 50 percent of children avoided unnecessary foster care placement when all parties received high quality representation. According to the American Bar Association, a pilot program in the State of Washington to improve representation for parents resulted in `a 53.3 percent increase in the rate of reunification’.
      (3) In New York, children placed in foster care whose parents receive high quality legal representation spent on average 4.5 months in placement compared to a statewide average of 2 1/2 years and re-entry rates of 1 percent compared to 15 percent statewide.
      (4) According to the American Bar Association, the cost per family for high quality legal services in New York was approximately $6,000 over the life of a case as compared to anywhere from $29,000 to $66,000 for 1 year of foster care for a child in New York City in 2010.
      (5) Training and standards of representation are necessary to ensure qualified representation. According to the American Bar Association Center on Children and the Law, parental representation is `often substandard, resulting in the failure of due process in these cases. As a result, numerous children are needlessly separated from their parents for extended periods of time and in many cases families are permanently severed through termination of parental rights orders’ and most states have no standard training requirements for attorneys representing parents in their state.

SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO THE COURT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

    (a) Provision of Legal Representation for Parents and Legal Guardians With Respect to Child Welfare Cases- Section 438(a) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 629h(a)) is amended–
      (1) in paragraph (3), by striking `and’ at the end;
      (2) in paragraph (4)(B), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; and’; and
      (3) by adding at the end the following:
      `(5) to provide legal representation for parents and legal guardians with respect to proceedings described in paragraph (1).’.
    (b) Application- Section 438(b) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 629h(b)) is amended–
      (1) in paragraph (1)–
        (A) by striking `and’ at the end of subparagraph (B);
        (B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (C) and inserting `; and’; and
        (C) by adding at the end the following:
        `(D) in the case of a grant for any purpose described in subsection (a)(5)–
          `(i) a description of how the grant will be used to provide legal representation to parents and legal guardians;
          `(ii) a description of how the court will prioritize the provision of legal representation, including how and when attorneys will be assigned to represent a parent or legal guardian; and
          `(iii) a description of how courts and child welfare agencies on the local and State levels will collaborate and jointly plan for the collection and sharing of all relevant data and information to demonstrate how increased quality representation of parents and legal guardians with respect to child welfare cases will improve child and family outcomes.’; and
      (2) in paragraph (2)–
        (A) in subparagraph (C), by striking `or’;
        (B) in subparagraph (D), by striking `and (C)’ and inserting `(C), and (D)’; and
        (C) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (E); and
        (D) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the following:
        `(D) the purpose described in subsection (a)(5); or’.
    (c) Amount of Grant- Section 438(c)(1) is amended by striking `and (C)’ and inserting `(C), and (D)’.
    (d) Allocation of Funds- Section 438(c)(3)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 629h(c)(3)(A)) is amended–
      (1) by striking `and’ at the end of clause (iii);
      (2) by redesignating clause (iv) as clause (v); and
      (3) by inserting after clause (iii) the following:
          `(iv) $10,000,000 for grants for the purpose described in subsection (a)(5); and’.
    (e) Funding- Section 436 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 629g) is amended–
      (1) in subsection (a), by striking `$345,000,000′ and inserting `$355,000,000′; and
      (2) in subsection (b)(2), by striking `$30,000,000′ and inserting `$40,000,000′.

 

Prohibition From Identifying Children


Parents Rights Blog

Prohibition From Identifying Children

Increase Transparency In The Family Courts

The Court of Appeal has decided that the prohibition from identifying children which section 97 of the Children Act 1989provides only applies whilst the proceedings relating to the child in question are in progress. Once the proceedings have concluded, the protection given by the Act comes to an end, the entitlement to anonymity thereafter being dependent upon an exercise in balancing the Convention rights of those involved.

Although statistics are published about cases that pass through the courts, these in their nature cannot answer claims that abuses of the system are not identified and that there are effectively no quality controls.

GoPetition        

SIR JAMES MUNBY : Hearing date : 27 June 2013 On an Application by : local authority (Staffordshire County Council)

This case raises…

View original post 842 more words

Freemasonry, Kidnapping and Murder


Freemasonry, Kidnapping and Murder

From all accounts Maureen Spalek was the model mother, caring for her three children in the best way she possibly could. Life was pretty routine for Maurine, until she had a falling out with her high-level Freemason Husband:
 
“once married to an individual who told her openly that he was an untouchable high level Freemason. After a major disagreement and subsequent divorce her children were illegally taken after a visit to hospital for one of her children who was knocked over by a motor cycle in suspicious circumstances. The nurse involved wrote a report saying that Maureen was unstable and an unfit mother. The children were immediately taken in to care and very soon after adopted. Maureen has had independent reports stating that she is perfectly fit.” (Source)
 
When Maureen took her 4 year old with a broken leg to the hospital, she was forced to wait for over 24 hours before they would even treat him. Long enough to make any mother worth her salt angry enough to spit nails. When Maureen complained about this gross neglect, she was written up by the nurse in charge as being “defiant towards authority”.
 
The Nurse also wrote other derogatory comments about Maureen and filed her report with Social Services. As a result, all 3 of Maureen’s children were taken into custody by Social Services and placed in Foster homes. Maureen’s children were kidnapped and placed with other families without so much as a hearing to validate the seriousness of the Nurse’s report.
 
This ties into the recent events that involve Hollie and Anne Greig, whose home was broken into by police, ransacked as if by vandals, computers stolen and her locks changed. All because one lone and certified “nut-job”, who has befriended the pedophile gang that raped Hollie, and is still at large, wrote a letter to Social Services.
 
So, if you are a high ranking Freemason or close friends with a pedophile rape gang, UK Social Services is on your side. However, if you are a poor defenseless woman divorced from a high-level Freemason, or a little girl that was gang-raped repeatedly for years by a Pedophile gang, don’t bother complaining to the “authorities”. Unless you want more of the same.
 
After her children were taken by police, Maureen Spalek went to the Foster home to make sure they were not being mistreated. She rang the bell, no-one answered, she went away. The Foster parents called police and 7 police cars showed up on Maureen’s doorstep, kicked in her door, and hauled her off to jail.
 
As of this writing, no police cars have showed up or kicked the doors down of any of the alleged pedophiles in the Hollie Greig case. Not one. Maureen was denied legal representation and wasn’t charged until after she had spent some time in a cold dank prison cell reserved for loving mothers concerned about their children’s welfare.
 
The children of Maureen Spalek were put up for adoption. It appears that Nurse who wrote the report had a guilty conscience over the whole affair and was getting ready to “spill the beans” to Maureen.
 
“However, the nurse was murdered before she could speak to her. An individual was convicted of the murder and sentenced. Maureen attempted to get a visiting pass to the prison in an attempt to find out if this person did murder the nurse and why. Before she could make the visit the prisoner was killed in prison. Maureen is receiving daily harassment from Cheshire and Mersyside police organized through the untouchable masonic connections, she has also been the victim of corrupt judges and medical staff.” (Ibid)
 
 
The man who murdered the Nurse was identified as a “Contract Killer”. In other words, it is believed he was paid to kill the Nurse by someone who was very threatened by the direction things were going. He to had a twinge of remorse and was preparing to “name names” to Maureen. It looks like he was murdered as well. The prison stated he died “under suspicious circumstances”.
 
Yes, there are many ways to die, in “Merry Old Free-masonic England”. One could get hit by a car, or contract a terminal illness. It appears that quickest route to the funeral home involves the refusal to cover-up for the crimes of those that are connected to people in power.
 
To get arrested and thrown in “the clink” all you need to do is expose powerful Pedophiles, like Robert Green, or send your child a birthday card, like Maureen Spalek. Yes, Maureen Spalek was arrested once more for the horrific crime of sending a birthday card to her son. The son she painfully brought into this world. The son whose diapers she changed. The son who she fed and taught to walk. The son who was unlawfully kidnapped by the State.
 
Undoubtedly, as we speak, the police have placed surveillance on Maureen’s home (probably similar to the surveillance that tipped them off to the change of heart experienced by the now dead Nurse and her dead killer) where they monitor her night-time prayers for any mention of the names of her kidnapped children.
 
Still a third case has come to my attention. This one involves a Joseph Wallace, who demanded that the City of Glasgow explain to him why his son was permitted to be supervised by a State employee with a record of child molestation. It appears that Joseph’s son was also victimized by this animal. The Glasgow city attorney responded that the matter really wasn’t their concern and implied that somehow, if this employee they apparently hired to work around children, had child molestation in his past, it was Joseph’s duty and not theirs to discover it.
 
We can see now the genuine concern that our politicians have for our children. They are hard at work throwing journalists like Robert Green, or birthday card senders, like Maureen Spalek, in jail. Apparently they cannot afford to provide either Robert or Maureen with legal counsel because their lawyers are to busy helping to orchestrate a cover-up so horrific it defies imagination.
 
The only weapon we the people have is exposure. Please donate and help make this happen. Every penny will go towards helping publicize the Hollie Greig and Maureen Spalek case all across the internet.  

Grazzini-Rucki v. JUDGE David Knutson, US Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals Reply Brief


Grazzini-Rucki v. Judge David L. Knutson

US Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

Reply Brief

 GRAZZINI-RUCKI REPLY BRIEF IN THE US EIGTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS AGAINST JUDGE DAVID L. KNUTSON, MN FAMILY COURT JUDGE BELOW (FIRST LINK)

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/257912195/content?start_page=1&view_mode=scroll&show_recommendations=true

CORRUPT LINKS TO VIDEOS PERTAINING TO THE GRAZZINI-RUCKI CASE AND LAWYER MICHELLE MACDONALD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyCfGMoXX4Y

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQC_dNJRJmc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AHZzHy9qFs

 

Click on the link above to read the reply brief filed by Attorney Michelle MacDonald in the US Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals for Minnesota mother Sandra Grazzini-Rucki.  “Sam” hasn’t seen he/r children in over two years pursuant to Federally and (US) Constitutionally impermissible post-judgment court “orders,” though Grazzini-Rucki was not noticed of any such “orders” until s/he received a call one morning telling he/r that s/he had to vacate he/r home in which s/he raised five children with only the clothes she could carry by Noon, or to otherwise be arrested.  Sandra, or, “Sam,” the epitome of a church-going “soccer mom” with no criminal history, no mental health issues, and no alcohol or substance abuse problems was as stunned as all Real Americans reading this post should be. 

Sandra was informed that s/he could no longer be a part of he/r children’s life, he/r ex-husband, the children’s father, David Rucki, reportedly a character with a shady livelihood, as per Sandra, was given sole custody of the five children, one of whom, last Author read on Carver County Corruption website (founded by another similarly deprived and violated mother, Lea Banken-Dannewitz, also of Minnesota), one of Sandra’s teenage daughters had allegedly run away from he/r father’s home.  To make matters more complex, David Rucki’s sister and he/r daughter moved into Sandra’s home where s/he had raised a happy family and lived for almost two decades without incident or injury to the children.  Apparently, though Author has not read any court papers as they are most likely confidential (naturally)with regard to the matter to confirm, and not that Author would want to invade the privacy of a another most likely shell-shocked mother also like  the  Author of this post and website who has not been “permitted’ any meaningful contact with he/r only child, a little boy who is now eight years old, in almost three years pursuant to similarly perplexing “orders” issued by a similarly situated family court of fraud in Harris County, Texas in Houston by Judge Lisa A. Millard and Associate Judge Conrad Moren, David Rucki’s sister not only took over Sandra’s home and moved in with he/r own family, but was reportedly given custody of Sandra’s children because father David Rucki , as reported, did not want it.  Real Responsible!

 

Thank your Creator today for Real lawyers and family advocates like Michelle MacDonald, who is working on various projects such as the Family Innocence Project and has a website called Family Court.com who happened upon Sandra and decided to take he/r case pro bono.  Together, they have been through quite the ride and even submitted multiple briefs to the Highest Court in all the Land, the US Supreme Court, on writ of certiorari which can be found on the blog . 

 

Author of  (DEDICATED TO) The Real Mommies and Daddies of the Real America, and Our Children Who Want to Come Home , was excited to learn today that Ms. MacDonald has joined forces with California Coalition for Families and Children, which is also trying to eradicate the judicially created, thus, judicially legislated doctrine of “judicial ‘immunity.'”  Michelle is fighting in the US Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals federal district while Mr. Colbern Stuart, president of California Coalition (“CCFC”) has been fighting the Good fight for families and freedom in the Federal US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals District following the US Third Circuit Court’s landmark decision against Kids for Cash Judge Mark Ciavarella and Mike Conahan in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania that set precedent which is binding and persuasive within the Third Circuit Court region that encompasses Pennsylvania and New Jersey.    Good luck!

 

Go  to www.weightiermatters.com for the latest on California Coalition for Families and Children 9th Circuit Court Action, or Check out Michelle’s website http://www.macdonaldlawfirm.com/.

MAP OF THE US FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT REGIONS WHICH MAKE THE LAWS FOR THEIR TERRITORIES

Jennie’s Story (VIDEO) and Mine in CORRUPT TX


Jennie’s Story (VIDEO), the Same as  Mine in CORRUPT TX

JUSTICE.COP WITH BOBBY CLUB AND SMILE

It would appear from reading some of the hate mail on the Internet that there are those who would prefer to re-victimize those who cannot “protect” themselves from the wickedness of the courts and family and juvenile justice system in the state of Texas.  Such individual is misguided, lacking in direct knowledge and experience, and/or is otherwise equally culpable to the degree she participates in wickedness and harassment that could only be motivated by less weightier matters than justice, mercy, and faith being lit from below.  If there is something missing to the story here, author of this post is happy to listen and try to help.

Thus, Jennie Morton’s story from Montgomery County, Texas (just north of Houston).  I corroborate he/r truths and experience with local judges and terroristic and incestuous cabals that dwell in the hallowed halls of the Pharisees and  justice denied.

Interview: Jennie Morton with Bill Windsor of Lawless America

lawlessamericalawlessamerica

Click on the link below to watch and know that you are not alone out there if this is also your situation and/or others you know. 

Interview: Jennie Morton with Bill Windsor of Lawless America.

This is unedited video filmed for Lawless America…The Movie. The comments are those of the subject.

Lawless America is a documentary film that is exposing government corruption, judicial corruption, and law enforcement corruption. For more information, see http://www.LawlessAmerica.comwww.YouTube.com/lawlessamerica www.facebook.com/billwindsor1http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2337260/ — email Bill@LawlessAmerica.com

LEGAL NOTICE: LAWLESS AMERICA IS A TRADEMARK. THE NAME AND LOGO MAY NOT BE USED WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM BILL WINDSOR, 110 E CENTER STREET #1213, MADISON, SD 57042. LAWLESS AMERICA VIDEOS ARE SUBJECT TO COPYRIGHT, AND THE VIDEOS MAY NOT BE USED WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION. ALL CONTENTS POSTED HERE AND ON WWW.LAWLESSAMERICA.COM, WWW.LAWLESSAMERICA.ORG, WWW.FACEBOOK.COM/LAWLESSAMERICA, WWW.FACEBOOK.COM/LAWLESSAMERICA2, AND WWW.FACEBOOK.COM/BILLWINDSOR1 ARE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT.

Published on Jun 29, 2012

He went to jail a normal functional man. 12 days later went out in a body bag. Autopsy says Heart Disease and Hepatitis B and C. The second opinion from a different Pathologist tells a different story

License

    • Standard YouTube License

NEXT, Read Houston’s Helium page for specific details of Jennie’s torturers for more of the story.

https://houstonhelium.wordpress.com/category/the-jennie-morton-case/ . . .

Click on the link below to read about Jennie’s friend and judicial applicant to replace crooked, as alleged, Judge Tracy Gilbert (male pictured below under Wall of Shame in Jennie’s case, and her three children), Jessica Siegel, who was falsely imprisoned as a direct result, on knowledge, circumstantial evidence, and belief, because she dared to be friends with Jennie Morton, who was anathematized by an insanely jealous and psychopathic ex-husband and possible mason, Nick Morton, as alleged by Jennie in h/er interview for Lawless America in the video above).

http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/courier/news/judge-applicant-arrested-as-she-files-for-th/article_184b8d75-d0b5-5556-bf4d-6a6e908bf774.html 

BUT SEE Jennie’s book titled, Standing Strong, published January 2013, on Amazon.com by clicking on the following link.Go to "Standing Strong" page

http://www.amazon.com/Standing-Strong-Jennie-Morton/dp/0615730698

JUSTICE.WALL OF SHAME.NJCOURTCORRUPTION.DEREK SYPHRETT

 

lynn esposito.law-firm-the-law-office-of-lynn-e-esposito-pc-photo-1404740

Attorney Lynn Esposito, Spring, Texas (North Houston)

JENNIE MORTON CASE.JUDGE KATHLEEN HAMILTON.259TH.CONROE.images

JUDGE KATHY HAMILTON OF THE 259TH COURT IN CONROE, TEXAS (MONTGOMERY COUNTY)

JENNIE MORTON CASE.LAURA MARBURGER.PIC.random.mg

LAURA MARBURGER, ATTORNEY, CONROE, TEXAS (MONTGOMERY COUNTY)

Facebook © 2015

JENNIE MORTON, OLD FACEBOOK PICTURE

Jennie MortonState Bar of Texas

Standing Strong Go to "Standing Strong" page

TITLE OF JENNIE’S BOOK AVAILABLE AT

http://www.amazon.com/Standing-Strong-Jennie-Morton/dp/0615730698

My name is Jennie Morton and I have been through one of the most horrible atrocities that any Mother or Parent should ever have to experience. While in the last few years I have spent almost $200,000 in attorney fees, lost my job, been bullied from the town that I lived in for over 12 years, and suffered abuse by proxy in every facet possible that my ex could imagine. My life was similar to the movie “Sleeping with the Enemy.” As I went through the process I uncovered many unethical questionable practices by many of the people/officials that were supposed to protect me and my family. My ex’s family was highly political and used the system to protect their son. My ex was a narcissistic stalker who would stop at nothing to hurt/harm me and or anyone around me. I tried to get a protective order multiple times, had numerous 911 phone calls, pressed harassment charges, and even went to the D.A. only to be turned around and told that I needed to go through the court system. I was always turned away or the cops would not arrest nor ticket my ex with anything. I had never dealt with a system that would turn their backs on an abuse victim just because of whom my ex’s family was. My life was threatened and so were my friends. My husband had lost two jobs and also had been assaulted by my ex twice and the cops would do nothing. I spent more time documenting the things that were happening than any average adult should ever have to consider. My friends were being harassed on their jobs by him, I was being watched by the police, watched by my neighbors, and my phone was tapped. I could not depend on the cops for relief or any other Montgomery county official. I contacted the FBI, safe houses, wanted to invoke the Governor’s rule, and called the Texas Rangers all to no avail. I ended up in two courts by two different fathers both going at me when I left my ex and spent more days in court litigation activities than on my full-time job. After all my efforts to protect my family and my children I lost both of my children due to unethical legal actions.
I went through a mourning process that lasted a few months/a few moves and practically became a vagrant with my daughter of 13 still living with me. I have always been an overachiever and began to start thinking how could I possibly have ended up in this situation as just the prior year I was a busy mom, my children had everything they needed and more than most and I ranked top in the Nation within my pharmaceutical company. I sat out to come up with a plan and prayed that something would come my way. I realized that I needed to change the way I thought of myself and came up with a 21 day program to retrain my thought process. I began writing my book “Standing Strong” and became involved with a group of like parents who sought out for reform in the Montgomery County, Texas area. One of the ways to create change is through not only education but also through our very own electoral process. We found a candidate willing to run for the 418th family court, as no one else seemed to want to challenge the incumbent. That person was Jessica Siegel and as she filled and filed her candidacy form there was a slight mistake of a month answer was left unanswered. She was removed from the election however through a process was able to be eligible for another filing period in which she refilled and was arrested by a Texas Ranger. Jessica and I sat out to Washington as this was the catalyst for reform that I had waited for so long. I was a victim of abuse and am now turning it into an empowering premise for parents around the world.

 THE STORIES OF CORRUPTION IN TEXAS DO NOT END WITH JENNIE’S STORY.  CHECK THIS OUT BELOW!   SOME OF THE PARALLELS IN ALL OF OUR STORIES ARE UNCANNY.

Jail Death Montgomery County, Texas

 Published on Dec 31, 2015

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeVQRAwaRYo

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED): 

(1)  This post is made in good faith and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.

(2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.

(3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.

(4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and/or requirement for  a full or partial retraction in a timely manner so that Author of this blog may respond expediently and lawfully.

RICO Lawsuit Against County ; District Clerks Association of Texas


It's Almost Tuesday

FOTP Editor Files RICO Lawsuit Against County & District Clerks Association of Texas

federal Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) lawsuit in Sherman last week. Fussell is our editor for the six Collin County newspapers FOTP Group has planned. This lawsuit, filed in the Southern District of the federal district in Texas, includes several plaintiffs — including Fussell’s sister, who lives in Midlothian — who allege the County & District Clerks Association of Texas of committing fraud, racketeering, money laundering and a mountain-full of other crimes. The petition (see documents below) is intense reading material. It’s been redacted of plaintiffs names (seven in all) for publication, but it is public record in the court file system.
 Some excerpts:

 (emphasis added)

“…create a criminal enterprise under the misrepresentation of a Government Office, for the express intent to reclassify Plaintiffs as offenders, or abusers to meet a condition precedent for CDCAT…

View original post 1,092 more words

HOPE’S STORY


KILLED, KIDNAPPED, AND COURT-NAPPED

TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS NEAR CITY OF FORT WORTH

HOPE’S (MCLENDON’S)  STORY, AND ALSO FOR BABY MIRA

Watch NOW by Clicking on the link below

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=r9O2Yhm6Mw4&x-yt-cl=84503534&x-yt-ts=1421914688

Source: Bill Windsor of Lawless America reports on the story of Hope McClendon in Fort Worth Texas, published on Youtube.com by <a href="/channel/UChwpfgqEZnbFH28fia8byPQ" class=" yt-uix-sessionlink     spf-link  g-hovercard" data-name="" data-sessionlink="ei=qb7CVNaxMuK1-APj9IHgAQ" data-ytid="UChwpfgqEZnbFH28fia8byPQ">lawlessamerica</a> lawlessamerica on May 20, 2013; Youtube License.

Published on May 20, 2013

Bill Windsor of Lawless America reports on the story of Hope McClendon in Fort Worth, Texas (Tarrant County).  Real grandmother of Baby Mira, Hope McClendon’s, daughter, (Baby) Mira’s Real Mommy,  was tragically hit by a car in a fatal traffic incident.  This, prior to Department of Family and Protective Services, Child Protective Services (“CPS”) division and the Gladney family force adoption on Baby Mira pursuant to their forged signature which swears to perjury and subornation of perjury the lie that Every (sp?) Gladney Baby Mira’s biological “father.” — Another baby (girl) “kidjacked” kidnapping and court-napping in Texas– Watch Now by Clicking on the link above, or  by cut-and-pasting it into your browser.

http://www.gavelbangers.com/judges/texas/trial-level/hennigan/jerome (JUDGE JEROME S. HENNIGAN ON GAVELBANGERS, a website to rate a judge in any court in this Republic USA.

This is unedited video filmed for Lawless America…The Movie. The comments are those of the subject.

Lawless America is a documentary film that is exposing government corruption, judicial corruption, and corruption in law enforcement.  For more information, see www.LawlessAmerica.com www.YouTube.com/lawlessamericawww.facebook.com/billwindsor1http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2337260/ — email Bill@LawlessAmerica.com

LEGAL NOTICE: LAWLESS AMERICA IS A TRADEMARK. THE NAME AND LOGO MAY NOT BE USED WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM BILL WINDSOR, 110 E CENTER STREET #1213, MADISON, SD 57042. LAWLESS AMERICA VIDEOS ARE SUBJECT TO COPYRIGHT, AND THE VIDEOS MAY NOT BE USED WITHOUT WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION.   ALL CONTENTS POSTED HERE AND ON WWW.LAWLESSAMERICA.COM, WWW.LAWLESSAMERICA.ORG, WWW.FACEBOOK.COM/LAWLESSAMERICA, WWW.FACEBOOK.COM/LAWLESSAMERICA2, AND WWW.FACEBOOK.COM/BILLWINDSOR1 ARE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT.

 

See also, Bill Windsor’s short vignette here, WANTED, HUNTED by domestic terrorist SHAWN BOUSHIE in or near Montana, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P75Awx36T5I&x-yt-cl=84503534&x-yt-ts=1421914688&feature=player_detailpage
Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

(1)  This post is made in good faith and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.  This post is expressly not intended for commercial use or profit.  One must contact the copyright owner for express permission to use his information for any other intended purposes.

(2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights, freedoms, liberties, and natural and common law divine rights “sovereign” and “elect” in nature and essence as a natural-born American imbued with the Spirit of ALMIGHTY GOD, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, consistent with the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speak (freely).

(3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.

(4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and/or requirement for  a full or partial retraction in a timely manner so that Author of this blog may respond expediently and lawfully.

 

WHERE IS THE MILITIA ON THIS ONE?|FOSTER CARE FRAUD KILLS SIX YEAR OLD GIRL IN MINNESOTA


WHERE IS THE MILITIA ON THIS ONE?

FOSTER CARE FRAUD KILLS SIX YEAR OLD GIRL IN MINNESOTA

 IF YOU TURN YOUR HEAD AWAY AND REFUSE TO “CLICK ON THIS LINK”  BELOW (AS A MATTER FACT, ALL OF THEM) AND BEAR THE SUFFERING OF YOUR OWN SPIRIT AND REAL FAMILY, MAY GOD HELP YOU AND MAY HE FIND YOU (OUT) NOW!  GOD HAS HIS OWN LIST.   KNOW THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED INCIDENT, BUT Rather that  IMMINENT AND PRESENT DANGER YOUR KID’S FUTURE is at “Stake” as the “Community Partners” have certainly claimed it without your knowledge or consent.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/minnesota-girl-6-killed-jump-rope-article-1.2079134

SOURCE:  DAILY NEWS (NY), Minnesota girl, 6, found dead with jump rope as noose in possible suicide,Minn. RACHELLE BLIDNER, January 15, 2015 (Thurs.); See also  star tribune-west metro, Did 6-year-old Brooklyn Park girl kill herself? Police wonder, DAVID CHANEN and BRANDON STAHL , Star TribunUpdated: January 14, 2015 – 11:04 PM, http://www.startribune.com/

Kendrea Johnson was discovered in her Brooklyn Park foster home bedroom with a jump rope tied around her neck and a note in purple marker on the floor saying, ‘I’m sorry.'”

Even gangsters and cold-hearted killers know the rules about children!  Take a lesson below if ya’ didn’t know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaMvYtdRaNE&feature=player_detailpage

https://www.youtube.com/user/docssupportgroup (and while we’re on the subject, and since the censor criminals took this video down, too, here in its ENCORE feature presentation).  Burn the image into your skull and remember for the next time a cop or a judge or social worker tries to tell you what to do instead of the other way around.  RIP KENDREA AND LITTLE “LOOKIE-POOKIE!” IN THIS LIFE, YOU WERE LOVED AND YOU ARE MISSED! I CRY FOR YOUR MOMMY AND DADDY.

 

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Published: Thursday, January 15, 2015, 10:39 AM
Updated: Thursday, January 15, 2015, 11:31 AM
 

And the mainstream media, government, and the Highest Court in all the Land want Real, natural-born America citizens of this Republic USA, “sovereign” and “elect” to believe that sodomy, transgender sensitivity, “PTSD,” gay rights, rigged electronic elections, social media, text messages, skinny jeans, Alzheimer’s disease, racial tensions, animal rights, and recycling are more important than the life (and he/r real mommy and daddy’s and brother and uncles’ memory of such life) of this beautiful little six-year old child, Kendrea Johnson who lived in Minnesota in foster care who was without a doubt kidnapped, tortured, used and abused six ways to Sunday without any other cause but for he/r innocence, youth, and power of purity of heart the ESSENCE born of the HOLY SPIRIT [ DRAMATIC PAUSE HERE FOR SPEECHLESS SUSPENSION OF BELIEF] are more newsworthy, important, and “worthy of living” (citing to Eugenicist Social Darwinism pedophiliac experimental SS social services DEGENERATE CRIMINALS IN GOVERNMENT STEALING MY REAL PROPERTY LIKE THE DAY THEY STOLE MY LITTLE BOY FOR FUNDING, BRIBES, AND SPECIAL APPOINTMENTS AND THE NEW AGENDA ON MAY 08, 2012, AND FOR NO OTHER REASON, LET US BE REAL CLEAR ON THAT POINT, AND GAVE HIM TO AN ALLEGED PEDOPHILE ACTUALLY OR OF THEIR OWN CONSPIRATORIAL ART WHO WILL AS A MATTER OF FACT BE EIGHT YEARS OLD IN TWO DAYS                  PROPAGANDIZED NONSENSE (CONSTRUCTIVELY AND PERHAPS MORE WELL-SPOKEN–BULL SH_ T) ?

THIS REAL MUMMY, FOR LITTLE KENDREA AND HE/R FAMILY AND LITTLE BROTHER, AGE 1, STILL STUCK WITH THESE ALFRED KINSEY, PEDO-SADISTIC LOW-LIFE PIGS GETTING PAID TO RUIN THIS REPUBLIC USA (NOTICE THE WORD DEMOCRACY WAS SPECIFICALLY NOT HEREIN USED AS THIS WOULD PROVE INFILTRATION AND HIGH TREASON NECESSITATING THE NEW NUREMBERG TRIALS THAT WILL SET OUR CHILDREN FREE), BECKONS AND CRIES AND SCREAMS OUT WITH RIGHTEOUS ANGER TO THE REAL PATRIOTS OF THIS REAL AMERICA TO ACT IMMEDIATELY AND TO TAKE NO PRISONERS–DO NOT PASS GO, DO NOT COLLECT $100,000 OR THE $20,000 JUDICIAL RATE FOR LEGAL KIDNAPPING (OTHER GREASE MONEY EXCLUSIVE), GET ON THOSE HORSES FROM THE BUNDY RANCH, PUT ON YOUR HATS, BOOTS, AND SPURS, HIGH HEELS, SPIKED HEELS, RIDE UP TO THE SCENE OF THE CRIME, AND STAND-UP FOR WHAT EVERY OTHER INDIVIDUAL FAILED TO DO FOR KENDREA, HE/R BROTHER, AND HE/R MOTHER (IT DOESN’T SAY WHERE HE/R “RESPONSIBLE” FATHER WAS OR IF SHE EVER KNEW HIM AND LET THAT NOT BE THE CAUSE OF PROPAGANDA TO TAKE MORE CHILDREN FROM FIT UNMARRIED MOTHERS UNDER THE GUISE OF TRADITIONAL FAMILY RIGHTS LEST I HAVE TO HUNT YOU DOWN AND GIVE YOU A GET IT RIGHT WITH GOD MEETING MYSELF)!

CPS Arizona Used Foster Children in Perverted Sex Experiments; SS Medical Psych Abuse Network

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UW874zRAeC0&feature=player_detailpage

Dr. Judith Reisman and the Alfred Kinsey Problem (Video)|PEDOPHILIA AND NAZI AND US EXPERIMENTS ON SMALL CHILDREN

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3QOd7M0l9M

http://www.drjudithreisman.org/

Source: Uploaded to Youtube.com by Duke Kraza on June 13, 2013

P.S. THANK YOU TO MY OWN DAD FOR SENDING THIS ARTICLE TO ME YESTERDAY.  “TAKE HEART AND HAVE COURAGE” AND JUDGE NOT LEST YOU TOO SHALL BE SO JUDGED! (THE HOLY BIBLE, ALL REAL VERSIONS)

TO MY SON’S FATHER AND THEIR ENTIRE WORRELL (MATT/MATTHEW JAMES WORRELL, DIANE M. WORRELL, NANCY G./GRAY WORRELL AND FAMILY, BRIAN AND CAREY WORRELL, JOHN KENNETH WORRELL, SR., JR., DEE WORRELL, JAMIE WILKES, AND THEIR NEGLECT-TO-PROTECT REAL ESTATE FRAUD _______ (FILL-IN-THE-BLANK WITH EXPLETIVE OF CHOICE HERE, REAL MOMMIES AND DADDIES SO LIKE-MINDED AND WATCHING FROM AFAR RIGHT NOW, AND NOT ALL OF THEM SO “WEAK” AND VULNERABLE) FAMILY NEAR HOUSTON, TEXAS WHO PLANNED TO “SUBJECT” MY SON, STILL HELD HOSTAGE AFTER 2 1/2 YEARS BY THEM, TO THIS SAME FOSTER CARE CUSTODY-SWITCHING, OH, HE’LL ONLY BE THERE FOR A LITTLE WHILE SCAM, I SAY THIS: YOU ARE REALLY BANKING ON THE HOPE AND PRAYER THAT I’M NOT CRAZIER THAN THE LIKES OF ALL OF YOU.

 

 

US SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, HOUSTON DIVISION HAS Subject Matter Jurisdiction to Try Constitutional Parental Civil Rights Case, Unpublished|US Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals


Joni Faith Saloom v. Cheryl Harvick (sued in individual and official capacity, program supervisor, Brazoria County CPS), Paul Elton (sued in individual and official capacity, police officer, City of Pearland, Brazoria County), William Lilly (sued in individual and official capacity, police officers, Harris County Sheriff’s Office/Harris County/Harris County Office of Risk Management), Lesly Damian-Murray (sued in individual and official capacity, caseworker, Brazoria County CPS), Karen Coblentz (sued in individual and official capacity, program director, Brazoria County CPS), City of Pearland (sued in official capacity, a municipality), Brazoria County CPS, division of Department of Family and Protective Services/DFPS (sued in official capacity, county defendant)in this Monell Claim brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C., sections 1983, 1985(3) for violation, deprivation, and conspiracy against Federal (US) Constitutional rights of Joni Faith Saloom, being natural (wo)man, individually and also on behalf of Julian Jacob Worrell of Genealogy SaloomJ.J.W.,” being little  natural  man born of “Joni Faith Saloom’s” natural vessel, born on he/r waters, he/r property, living and corporeal body imbued with the Spirit of the Creator, ALMIGHTY GOD, both natural, American US “citizens,” beings “sovereign” and “elect” in nature, spirit, and essence

APPELLATE DECISION.5TH CIR.REVERSE AND REMAND.ISSUED.08.19.14.TUES.13-20605.0

APPELLATE DECISION.5TH CIR.REVERSE AND REMAND.ISSUED.08.19.14.TUES.13-20605.0

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

(1)  This post is made in good faith and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.

(2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.

(3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.

(4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and/or requirement for  a full or partial retraction in a timely manner so that Author of this blog may respond expediently and lawfully.

Halt the Adoption Drive – Forced Adoption Exposed Jan 2015 (VIDEO, 6 MIN.)


This is the exact same model in the U.S.A. right now. The court affiliates in Connecticut, for example as reported to me by another individual, just sent out memo informing that they would be “removing” sixty percent (60%) more children this year (2015).

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

  • CENSORSHIP WILL BE PROSECUTED AS IT IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE IN THE THIS REPUBLIC USA, THE LAWS TO WHICH YOU WILL BE HELD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.
  • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.
  • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and/or requirement for  a full or partial retraction in a timely manner so that Author of this blog may respond expediently and lawfully.

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO PAYS $225,000 TO MOTHER WHOSE NEWBORN CPS AND COPS KIDNAPPED


COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO PAYS $225,000

TO MOTHER WHOSE NEWBORN

CPS AND COPS KIDNAPPED

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Mother-Custody-Settle-San-Diego-Johnneisha-Kemper-Shawn-McMillan-278899941.html

P.S.   I APOLOGIZE TO MY E-MAIL FOLLOWERS FOR THE RE-POSTS, BUT SOMEONE OR SOME OUTSOURCED COMPANY FOR THE STATES THAT MARKET CPS, IN PARTICULAR, AND LARGE CORPORATION TO CENSOR BAD PUBLICITY AND POTENTIALLY DAMAGING EVIDENCE FOR LITIGATION (SUCH AS COMPANY CALLED UNSPAMMERS, SEE ALSO, “OPERATION HONEYPOT”) KEEPS TAKING DOWN MY POSTS.  NO MATTER HOW MUCH TIME IT TAKES ME TO KEEP RE-POSTING AND RE-ORGANIZING MY MENU, WHICH IS INCREDIBLY TIME CONSUMING AND TEDIOUS, I WILL STOP AT NOTHING ( SHORT OF UNLAWFULNESS) TO EXPOSE THESE CRIMINALS, WHO, BY THE WAY, ADD TO THEIR CRIMINAL GOVERNMENT RESUMES BY CENSORING MATERIAL IN CONTRAST TO THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL, GUARANTEED, NON-NEGOTIABLE RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF SPEECH, PEACEABLE ASSEMBLY, RIGHT TO BRING CLAMS FOR REDRESS TO THE GOVERNMENT AND ITS ATTENTION, FREEDOM TO ASSOCIATE, AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, WHICH I AM CURRENTLY ARGUING IN MY BRIEFS INCLUDES THE NON-“NEBULOUS” (AS OPPOSED TO “CLEARLY ESTABLISHED”) LAW OF PRECEDENT THE RIGHT TO PROCREATE WHICH IS CURRENTLY ANALYZED INSTEAD UNDER THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT, CONVENIENTLY OF COURSE (CASE LAW FOR GIVEN JUDICIAL CIRCUIT DISTRICTS–CURRENTLY 12 FOR ALL OF THE US WHICH MAKE THE LAWS FOR THAT JUDICIAL REGION, ALTHOUGH IT SHOULD ALWAYS BE COMPLIANT WITH FEDERAL, US SUPREME COURT LAW PURSUANT TO THE SUPREMACY CLAUSE OF THE US CONSTITUTION AND INCORPORATED BILL OF RIGHTS VIA RATIFICATION AND APPLICATION  BY AND TO THE “STATES”/”TERRITORIES” BY THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT TO THE FEDERAL, US CONSTITUTION AND INCORPORATED BILL OF RIGHTS FOR THIS REPUBLIC USA.

Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED):

  • CENSORSHIP WILL BE PROSECUTED AS IT IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE IN THE THIS REPUBLIC USA, THE LAWS TO WHICH YOU WILL BE HELD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.
  • (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.
  • (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.
  • (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and/or requirement for  a full or partial retraction in a timely manner so that Author of this blog may respond expediently and lawfully.

IS A DELAY BETTER THAN A DISASTER?| CORRUPT CT


re-blogged with permission and intent from

CORRUPT CT

Is a delay better than a disaster?

Is a delay better then a disaster?

Benjamin Franklin once said, “You may delay, but time will not, and lost time is never found again.”  Now take a minute to think about this.  “A delay is better than a disaster” is another famous quote from an unknown source.  While the two conflict in their meanings they both have the same outcome when it comes to the safety of your children, family and loved ones you need to make a decision.

When it comes down to it, there is no delay long enough for me to accept that a disaster is imminent.  This is my flesh and my blood and I will, at any cost, do what I need to do to prevent this disaster from happening.  That is why when I found out the danger my son was in I contacted the DCF, and after 45 long days, (“the CT DCF delaying, but time continuing on”), they finally responded to me saying that no danger was present.

I offered them many leads, who and where drugs were being sold, my sons medication non-the-less and other narcotics, that he was being left home alone 4 to 5 nights a week so that his father could sleep with his alcoholic girlfriend in her garage.  I even gave them the name of witnesses who have seen this first hand, the drugs, the prostitutes and the selling of controlled and prescribed drugs – the best time and method to contact them.
*Had my son’s blood level checked for proper medication levels? – FAIL
*Contacted the school and pulled his records to see he is failing every class due to lack of medications? – Fail
*Had the father of my son submit to a urinalysis or tox screen? – Fail
*Spoke to the police about the nights I had to pick my son up because it was 2 in the morning, he found drugs in the house and was upset? – Fail Fail Fail
*Took the 5 simple minutes to call the first hand witnesses that could attest to his behavior, soliciting prostitutes, using drugs and emotionally and physically neglecting our child – Fail

I was hoping to tell you a story of an epic battle of custody and the DCF doing their jobs but I am not able to, all I can do is supply you with the dates, the people I spoke to, the people that never got back to me, and the fact that the outcome was, and let this be a lesson, it is ok to use drugs, pick-up whores, neglect your children and sell illegal narcotics, you just need to ensure the case worker you get doesn’t actually give a shit about children or their safety, (average 90% of them) and you are in the clear.

So, lets get these details in writing and see how we can try to rectify this situation as soon as possible, because even now time is passing, and no one but the big man in the sky or whomever you believe to be your higher power knows when it will turn from a delay into a disaster, but once that happens it is far to late and that is beyond acceptable.  If it is the delay that brings the disaster in this case, I will be sure that the DCF pays, I will spend my last breath, dollar and everything I have to bring this to the highest court I can because someone needs to be responsible for these disasters that seem to happen all the time, in the news and online.  The father is certainly not in the right, but he is a sick man, and I warned DCF all about it, it ends up being their neglectful acts in the end that lead to tragedy (an event resulting in great loss and misfortune).
So it started with a call to the CT DCF hotline, after a disturbing call from my son at 1:30am
An investigation was started, let’s call the investigator… Kathy, yes her real name, I pay taxes which pays her salary. So she comes to speak with me at my home, and to ensure the words exchanged were not misunderstood I had a witness here. It is no secret that DCF likes to change their story, most likely to save time and paperwork, just my opinion.. Anyway, I informed her of the many, many dangers lurking in the home that my son is residing in. One being he found drugs, two he fills his oil tank with diesel, play’s Dr. on when he gets his meds and not, The drug use and the drinking, days without hot water. I could go on but I thought I would let the investigator do her job. I did though inform her that there were people that were also concerned about my son and that I highly suggested she at least call, as she said she would.
Tuesday 1-25-11 she came to my home, it was supposed to be on Monday 1-24-11 but she couldn’t make it. On 2-18-11 I called because I had not heard from her and wanted to know how things were coming along, she informed me that she had not gotten any releases back from school, the Dr, or his counselor. So she called back to discuss the major concerns of my son….oh wait that was my mother! There is much more to this story, so I have to say check back tomorrow for the rest, including the involvement of supervisors. Sleep well and don’t let the DCF bed bugs bite.

Safe Havens: Supervised Visitation and Safe Exchange Grant Program


Safe Havens:

Supervised Visitation and Safe Exchange Grant Program

2007

http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/ovw/legacy/2008/08/06/guiding-principles032608.pdf

  • Fair Use and Legal Disclaimer (PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED)

  • CENSORSHIP WILL BE PROSECUTED AS IT IS A FEDERAL OFFENSE IN THE THIS REPUBLIC USA, THE LAWS TO WHICH YOU WILL BE HELD ONE WAY OR ANOTHER!
  • (1)  This post is made in GOOD FAITH and for deterrent purposes against child abusers, alleged child abusers, and those who would maternally alienate fit, loving mothers and children from one another.

    (2) Content in this post is protected by Julian’s Real Mummy’s First Amendment herein claimed rights as a natural-born American, “sovereign,” “elect” citizen pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights made applicable to the states via ratification and application of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal, US Constitution and incorporated Bill of Rights, under the freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom to peaceably assemble, and freedom to speech.

    (3) All content in this post is also protected pursuant to the Federal statute 17 U.S.C., section 107 (“Fair Use”) as this content is solely intended for general knowledge, academic research, and/or entertainment purposes.

    (4)  If anyone should desire, require, or demand a retraction or modification in part or in full, you must contact the author of this blog for fair notice to correct, pursuant to reasonable and lawfully obtained evidence supported by all legal and factual bases for your desire, demand, and/or requirement for  a full or partial retraction in a timely manner so that Author of this blog may respond expediently and lawfully.

SAFE (DE-PROGRAMMING) VICTIM’S ASSISTANCE CENTRE, INC., HOUSTON, TEXAS (HARRIS COUNTY)| LETTERS TO MARINELLE TIMMONS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR


 LETTERS TO MARINELLE TIMMONS,

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF

“SAFE” VICTIM’S ASSISTANCE CENTRE, INC.

IN HOUSTON, TEXAS (HARRIS COUNTY)

JUSTICE.CUTE LITTLE KID BEHIND BARS

me

To

victimac@msn.com

 Oct 3, 2013

 
 

me

To

victimac@msn.com

 

Oct 4, 2013

me

To

victimac@msn.com
 
Oct 4, 2013
 meTo
 

victimac@msn.com
 

Nov 25, 2013

me

To

victimac@msn.com

 

Nov 25, 2013

me

To

victimac@msn.com
 
me

To

victimac@msn.com

 

Nov 25, 2013

 

Dec 9, 2013

 
 
me