If you are anywhere near the California State Capitol City of Sacramento, show your support and help raise awareness to the most neglected social issues facing the human race – see below:

If you are anywhere near the California State Capitol City of Sacramento, show your support and help raise awareness to the most neglected social issues facing the human race – see below:
Who must give permission to record a telephone or in-person conversation?
Federal law permits recording telephone calls and in-person conversations with the consent of at least one of the parties. See 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d). This is called a “one-party consent” law. Under a one-party consent law, you can record a phone call or conversation so long as you are a party to the conversation. Furthermore, if you are not a party to the conversation, a “one-party consent” law will allow you to record the conversation or phone call so long as your source consents and has full knowledge that the communication will be recorded. Check your state’s law to see if they use the one-party consent law.
361.3. (a) In any case in which a child is removed from the physical custody of his or her parents pursuant to Section 361, preferential consideration shall be given to a request by a relative of the child for placement of the child with the relative, regardless of the relative's immigration status. In determining whether placement with a relative is appropriate, the county social worker and court shall consider, but shall not be limited to, consideration of all the following factors: (1) The best interest of the child, including special physical, psychological, educational, medical, or emotional needs. (2) The wishes of the parent, the relative, and child, if appropriate. (3) The provisions of Part 6 (commencing with Section 7950) of Division 12 of the Family Code regarding relative placement. (4) Placement of siblings and half siblings in the same home, unless that placement is found to be contrary to the safety and well-being of any of the siblings, as provided in Section 16002. (5) The good moral character of the relative and any other adult living in the home, including whether any individual residing in the home has a prior history of violent criminal acts or has been responsible for acts of child abuse or neglect. (6) The nature and duration of the relationship between the child and the relative, and the relative's desire to care for, and to provide legal permanency for, the child if reunification is unsuccessful. (7) The ability of the relative to do the following: (A) Provide a safe, secure, and stable environment for the child. (B) Exercise proper and effective care and control of the child. (C) Provide a home and the necessities of life for the child. (D) Protect the child from his or her parents. (E) Facilitate court-ordered reunification efforts with the parents. (F) Facilitate visitation with the child's other relatives. (G) Facilitate implementation of all elements of the case plan. (H) Provide legal permanence for the child if reunification fails. However, any finding made with respect to the factor considered pursuant to this subparagraph and pursuant to subparagraph (G) shall not be the sole basis for precluding preferential placement with a relative. (I) Arrange for appropriate and safe child care, as necessary. (8) The safety of the relative's home. For a relative to be considered appropriate to receive placement of a child under this section, the relative's home shall first be approved pursuant to the process and standards described in subdivision (d) of Section 309. In this regard, the Legislature declares that a physical disability, such as blindness or deafness, is no bar to the raising of children, and a county social worker's determination as to the ability of a disabled relative to exercise care and control should center upon whether the relative's disability prevents him or her from exercising care and control. The court shall order the parent to disclose to the county social worker the names, residences, and any other known identifying information of any maternal or paternal relatives of the child. This inquiry shall not be construed, however, to guarantee that the child will be placed with any person so identified. The county social worker shall initially contact the relatives given preferential consideration for placement to determine if they desire the child to be placed with them. Those desiring placement shall be assessed according to the factors enumerated in this subdivision. The county social worker shall document these efforts in the social study prepared pursuant to Section 358.1. The court shall authorize the county social worker, while assessing these relatives for the possibility of placement, to disclose to the relative, as appropriate, the fact that the child is in custody, the alleged reasons for the custody, and the projected likely date for the child's return home or placement for adoption or legal guardianship. However, this investigation shall not be construed as good cause for continuance of the dispositional hearing conducted pursuant to Section 358. (b) In any case in which more than one appropriate relative requests preferential consideration pursuant to this section, each relative shall be considered under the factors enumerated in subdivision (a). Consistent with the legislative intent for children to be placed immediately with a responsible relative, this section does not limit the county social worker's ability to place a child in the home of an appropriate relative or a nonrelative extended family member pending the consideration of other relatives who have requested preferential consideration. (c) For purposes of this section: (1) "Preferential consideration" means that the relative seeking placement shall be the first placement to be considered and investigated. (2) "Relative" means an adult who is related to the child by blood, adoption, or affinity within the fifth degree of kinship, including stepparents, stepsiblings, and all relatives whose status is preceded by the words "great," "great-great," or "grand," or the spouse of any of these persons even if the marriage was terminated by death or dissolution. However, only the following relatives shall be given preferential consideration for the placement of the child: an adult who is a grandparent, aunt, uncle, or sibling. (d) Subsequent to the hearing conducted pursuant to Section 358, whenever a new placement of the child must be made, consideration for placement shall again be given as described in this section to relatives who have not been found to be unsuitable and who will fulfill the child's reunification or permanent plan requirements. In addition to the factors described in subdivision (a), the county social worker shall consider whether the relative has established and maintained a relationship with the child. (e) If the court does not place the child with a relative who has been considered for placement pursuant to this section, the court shall state for the record the reasons placement with that relative was denied. (f) (1) With respect to a child who satisfies the criteria set forth in paragraph (2), the department and any licensed adoption agency may search for a relative and furnish identifying information relating to the child to that relative if it is believed the child's welfare will be promoted thereby. (2) Paragraph (1) shall apply if both of the following conditions are satisfied: (A) The child was previously a dependent of the court. (B) The child was previously adopted and the adoption has been disrupted, set aside pursuant to Section 9100 or 9102 of the Family Code, or the child has been released into the custody of the department or a licensed adoption agency by the adoptive parent or parents. (3) As used in this subdivision, "relative" includes a member of the child's birth family and nonrelated extended family members, regardless of whether the parental rights were terminated, provided that both of the following are true: (A) No appropriate potential caretaker is known to exist from the child's adoptive family, including nonrelated extended family members of the adoptive family. (B) The child was not the subject of a voluntary relinquishment by the birth parents pursuant to Section 8700 of the Family Code or Section 1255.7 of the Health and Safety Code.
[Latin, On the first appearance.] A fact presumed to be true unless it is disproved.
In common parlance the term prima facie is used to describe the apparent nature of something upon initial observation. In legal practice the term generally is used to describe two things: the presentation of sufficient evidence by a civil claimant to support the legal claim (a prima facie case), or a piece of evidence itself (prima facie evidence).
For most civil claims, a plaintiff must present a prima facie case to avoid dismissal ofthe case or an unfavorable directed verdict. The plaintiff must produce enough evidence on all elements of the claim to support the claim and shift the burden of evidence production to the respondent. If the plaintiff fails to make a prima facie case,the respondent may move for dismissal or a favorable directed verdict without presenting any evidence to rebut whatever evidence the plaintiff has presented. This is because the burden of persuading a judge or jury always rests with the plaintiff.
Assume that a plaintiff claims that an employer failed to promote her based on hersex. The plaintiff must produce affirmative evidence showing that the employer used illegitimate, discriminatory criteria in making employment decisions that concerned the plaintiff. The employer, as respondent, does not have a burden to produce evidence until the plaintiff has made a prima facie case of Sex Discrimination (TexasDepartment of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 101 S. Ct. 1089, 67 L. Ed.2d 207 [1981]). The precise amount of evidence that constitutes a prima facie case varies from claim to claim. If the plaintiff does not present a prima facie case with sufficient evidence, the judge may dismiss the case. Or, if the case is being heard by a jury, the judge may direct the jury to return a verdict for the respondent.
Prima facie also refers to specific evidence that, if believed, supports a case or anelement that needs to be proved in the case. The term prima facie evidence is used inboth civil and Criminal Law. For example, if the prosecution in a murder casepresents a videotape showing the defendant screaming death threats at the victim,such evidence may be prima facie evidence of intent to kill, an element that must beproved by the prosecution before the defendant may be convicted of murder. On itsface, the evidence indicates that the defendant intended to kill the victim.
Statutes may specify that certain evidence is prima facie evidence of a certain fact.For example, a duly authenticated copy of a defendant’s criminal record may beconsidered prima facie evidence of the defendant’s prior convictions and may be usedagainst the defendant in court (Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 18-3-412 [West 1996]). A Civil Law example is a statute that makes a duly certified copy or duplicate of a certificateof authority for a fraternal benefit society to transact business prima facie evidencethat the society is legal and legitimate (Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 10-14-603 [West1996]).
Herlitz, Georg Nils. 1994. “The Meaning of the Term ‘Prima Facie.'” Louisiana LawReview 55.
(pry-mah fay-shah) adj. Latin for “at first look,” or “on its face,” referring to a lawsuit or criminal prosecution in which the evidence before trial is sufficient to prove the case unless there is substantial contradictory evidence presented at trial. A prima facie case presented to a grand jury by the prosecution will result in an indictment. Example: in a charge of bad check writing, evidence of a half dozen checks written on a non-existent bank account, makes it a prima facie case. However, proof that the bank had misprinted the account number on the checks might disprove the prosecution’s apparent “open and shut” case. (See: prima facie case)
I HIGHLY RECOMMEND THAT YOU DO THE FOLLOWING AT THIS POINT:
No matter how absurd or unbelievable the CPS/DCFS social worker’s claim(s) may seem, please understand that the social worker is dead serious, and most likely presumes – no… most likely BELIEVES that you are guilty as accused. Even if the social worker doesn’t admit that s/he is at your home to take your children, often times that IS EXACTLY why they are there. It is our experience, over 20+ years, that the majority of CPS social workers develop a cynical view of life and assume that you are UTTERLY GUILTY until YOU PROVE that you are not: the opposite of the way the “justice system” is supposed to operate.
Most typically, the CPS/DCFS social worker wants to keep you from knowing exactly what you have been accused of — sort of keeping themselves on a “general fishing expedition” — but it is required by state and federal law to tell you the exact details of the accusations at first contact with you. Be wary! Do not settle for the vague and general charges called “neglect” or “abuse.” Neglect and abuse are broad categories – not the legally-required “details” of the accusations or charges! You are entitled to know the “details & specifics” of what you are accused of committing.
In criminal law it is ALWAYS strongly suggested that you talk to NO ONE but your attorney. Think about it. Virtually ALL CHARGES that CPS or DCFS levels against you are CRIMINAL CHARGES. And while CPS or DCFS is there ONLY to take your kids, the police can and often will show up later for the parents! In fact, open your mouth and tell the CPS investigator just enough to “make their case” and you can start packing an overnight case as the police will be called by CPS who will be at your door to take you away.
Sure, it is totally natural that innocent parents who have nothing to hide will want to explain everything to a CPS social worker because such parents would assume that ANY reasonable person would see that there is nothing wrong going on. But CPS and DCFS social workers are commonly ANYTHING BUT reasonable. They become entrenched in a culture that is uniformly cynical about ALL PARENTS. Frankly, you are presumed guilty by the majority of CPS and DCFS agents. The exhausted, over-worked social worker who just fought the crowded freeways to make it to your home is there on a mission. That mission is most often to find evidence to support what the social worker already believes to be true – that you abused your child just as the neighbor, relative or anonymous tipster claimed.
If you don’t talk to them –just as you are always told to never voluntarily talk with the police if they are accusing you of a crime– you take their power away. They will not be able to use your own admissions, statements, and your very words against you. For example” “Have you ever spanked your toddler?” Do you really think there is a good answer to that question? The majority of CPS and DCFS social workers abhor most any form of parental punishment.
An attorney EXPERIENCED in CPS and DCFS cases and courts is mandatory! Juvenile Dependency courts are worlds unto themselves. Your most seasoned and experienced lawyers when first stepping foot into a Juvenile Dependency courtroom are totally dumb struct as if they stepped into It’s a Small World at Disneyland. Most lawyers –even experienced Family Law attorneys– who are not experienced with CPS/DCFS mistakenly think that it is their job (as it would be in any other court setting) to find out what CPS or DCFS wants and then communicate all the details to their clients. Shockingly, doing exactly that often leads to total disaster and the loss of your children.
Let’s face it, when a “government investigator” –without any advanced notice– knocks insistently on your door, well-dressed, looking all official with a county badge; exuding the authority of the government; is well-prepared, PRIMED and READY to level accusations of child abuse or neglect against you: most people would be SHOCKED! If you’re human you’d also be scared too. As government is getting bigger and bigger every year they are getting more and more powerful and intrusive in the lives of ordinary citizens. We are all a bit nervous and threatened by the power of the state as we witness weekly examples of government power wielded unfairly on Investigative TV News programs and in the lives of our own families and friends.
What could your reaction possibly be to a surprise home-visit from a government agent? No one appreciates surprise visits by any one! Perhaps the dishes are unwashed; maybe you haven’t cleaned house for a day or two; say that there are a collection of beer bottles on the coffee table from the football game the day before; could be that you’re not dressed in appropriate attire as you would be IF EXPECTING guests… So when you are surprised and ACCUSED TO YOUR FACE of child neglect or child abuse it might be natural that you are shocked, defensive, upset, angry and a little hostile. As Homer Simpson would say: “Do’ah!”
Guess what? An angry demeanor toward the CPS social worker or DCFS investigator is considered evidence of your guilt. Your perfectly natural, upset and angry reaction to being accused of harming your child will very OFTEN BE USED as evidence of your violent and abusive personality.
If a County CPS/DCFS social worker requests that you invite them into your home politely refuse. If he or she insists or suggests that not allowing entry will work against you or will ensure that your children are taken away from you HOLD YOUR GROUND. Politely ask to see their warrant or court order to come into your home. It the CPS social worker or investigator claims to have a warrant, insist on seeing it: in fact they owe you a copy! Why? Would a Social worker lie? YES. Police and government agents often suggest they have a warrant or outright lie and claim to have a warrant when they do not. It makes their task of finding needed evidence against you so much easier! If the CPS/DCFS government agent cannot produce a warrant, firmly but politely tell them that they will have to remain outside until a warrant is presented. They will be annoyed. But you will be far better off – legally. If the agent says it is an EMERGENCY call their bluff. Insist that they explain how it is an emergency and what constitutes an emergency. Typically, in so-called “emergency situations,” the police and the CPS social workers come together and even then it is not necessarily an emergency but a working relationship that some CPS agents have with associates on the police force.
Do not even open the door to allow the CPS agent look into your home to see your children: they can see something that creates an “emergency situation” even if it is not true.
Be FIRM. You should not waiver nor give in to thinking: “What’s the harm?” There is no compromise here: no exception. If you invite a County CPS investigator or a Los Angeles DCFS social worker into your home, you have just waived your Federally-protected fourth amendment constitutional protection. Just like a police detective intent on hauling you to the police station for questioning would love for you to willingly invite them into your home, a CPS social worker who is openly or secretly intent on taking your children from you WILL FIND SOMETHING IN YOUR HOME TO JUSTIFY THE REMOVAL OF YOUR KIDS.
This happens every day all over America and even more often in Southern California where CPS and DCFS agents are the most ruthless social workers anywhere. The bar for removal is “whatever it needs to be” as far as the social worker is concerned. A legal prescription in your bathroom cabinet, a beer bottle on the coffee table, a kitchen knife not in the drawer, a broken window, a back door without a deadbolt, a missing smoke detector, a swimming pool without its own secondary safety fence: whatever might be necessary to fill out the paperwork to justify removal. If this particular social worker set out to take your child, allowing them innocently into your house will ensure that your child is taken from you. You now have a year or a lifetime of HELL before you.
Subjective reports of what a child said or did not say is hardly ever adequate. Ask that any interrogation be recorded. You could produce your own recorder (as a back-up) just in case the CPS or DCFS investigator “loses” their tape between the interrogation and a subsequent court hearing where you might have “wished” that you had such a tape.
Ask your doctor to write a letter stating that there are no bruises or injuries observed, nor any other health-related issues that would raise any concern or suspicion of child abuse or neglect. Obviously go to a doctor whom you trust. If a CPS or DCFS social worker suggests a doctor for you, or suggests that they know where you can see a doctor at NO CHARGE (as attractive as that may be), NEVER visit with a doctor recommended by CPS. What you may not know is that these doctors are a regular part of the CPS system and they are commonly called as expert-testimony witnesses by CPS as a witness against the parents. They are paid handsomely for their testimony.
If your children are removed from your home, or the court is demanding that your children must soon leave your home for some period of time it is always better that your children are taken in by relatives or friends. Are you aware that children placed in foster care are sometimes abused or mistreated by people working the foster care system for a “pay check?” There is the flip side to that where some truly loving foster parents sometimes become smitten with your kids and start their own campaign with the court and petition for adoption! Having your kids in foster care is simply adding one more level of stress and complexity to your plate.
If you are innocent of neglect or abuse why would you buckle to the pressure of a CPS agent’s demands to have you admit to false accusations? If you are accused or charged with neglect because someone has informed the county CPS system that you are addicted to drugs or alcohol, the social worker who is investigating those accusations may have good-reason to be concerned for your kids’ safety.
Even if you privately agree that maybe you drink too often or too much that does not mean that you have to incriminate yourself in this investigation. Bite your tongue. Admit NOTHING! Even if you recognize that you have a problem that needs to be addressed this is not your DOCTOR; this is not your PRIEST; this is not your LAWYER. Wrong person! Wrong time! This person is not here to HEP YOU. This person is here to collect evidence to support the accusations made against you and to TAKE YOUR KIDS. Period.
Do not admit guilt. Instead, work with your doctor, pastor or even your private CPS defense attorney to find the professional help you might need need (and professional help that the courts will recognize – no sense paying twice because a treatment program is not court-approved). By NOT ADMITTING GUILT, you can then honestly work on any issues you have and work with the court to keep your kids under your roof or to get your kids returned to you when appropriate.
By mistakenly thinking that admitting guilt to a social worker is justified is often a fast trip to jail – removing many of the options that you need right now to get your life in order. In any potentially-criminal situation NEVER voluntarily do anything until you contact an attorney: preferably a compassionate and understanding attorney who works with parents, kids and the Juvenile Dependency Courts on a daily basis. They will offer you frank advice that will be better than unnecessarily sitting locked behind bars. CPS social workers and investigators are not above lying to you to encourage you to confess or admit to something that you might not even be guilty of – just to get you arrested and your kids in their control.
Re-posting or re-blogging this post is prohibited without express permission from its author, Vincent W. Davis. For permission requests, please contact Sharon Joyce-Burns at: selfhelp_donnellyjustice@live.com and I will forward your request. In the meantime, if you would like to share this post kindly use a direct link to this address. .
THIS POSTING MAY NOT BE COPIED OR REBLOGGED WITHOUT EXPRESS PERMISSION FROM ATTORNEY DAVIS, PLEASE CONTACT SHARON JOYCE-BURNS AT: selfhelp_donnellyjustice@live.com and I will ask Attorney Davis if you can repost or reblog. For now, just use the link to this post if you want to put it on your site. THANK YOU FOR YOUR KIND COOPERATION AND COURTESIES IN THIS MATTER.
http://documents.latimes.com/report-severe-problems-los-angeles-county-department-children-and-family-services/
Ha ha ha ha Temecula doesn’t get any guards!!!!!
What WONDERFUL People Social Workers Are! I sure do trust all of them to be PROTECTING CHIILDREN!!! NOT!!This makes me sick to my stomach. Watch this and ask yourself, “Do you still think social services cares about the CHILDREN”S SAFETY AND HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT?”
This will stop the judges from volunteering to work for CPS and paid to remove children. Open up the courts to public oversight. This will happen in Riverside county even if these Judges don’t like the pay cut
DEMANDING AN AUDIT OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES AND COUNTY COUNSEL.
I WILL STOP AT NOTHING UNTIL THESE CRIMINALS ARE IN JAIL LIKE JUDGE MONTEROSSO AND THE COUNTY COUNSEL WHO COLLUDED WITH HIM TO TAKE CHILDREN FROM GOOD PARENTS. THESE PEOPLE DON’T CARE ABOUT CHILDREN.
ANYONE WHO GOES INTO A RIVERSIDE COUNTY COURT HOUSE MUST HAVE A RECORDING DEVICE ON YOU BECAUSE THE TRANSCRIPT WILL BE DOCTORED AS WITH MY CASE BUT I HAVE THE PROOF AND ATTORNEYS WILL NOT TAKE THE CASE BECAUSE CPS WILL TARGET THEIR FAMILY OR THE JUDGE WILL HAVE THE ATTORNEY DISBARRED IF THE ATTORNEY WINS OR DOESN’T FOLLOW THE CORRUPT WAYS OF THE COURT. I HAVE THIS STATEMENT FROM AN ATTORNEY WHO HAS BEEN TOLD THIS VERY THREAT. WITH THAT HELD OVER YOUR HEAD AS AN ATTORNEY WHAT WOULD YOU DO? QUITE OR BE CORRUPT? THIS IS THE KIND OF COURT SYSTEM WE DEAL WITH TODAY. JUDGES WHO HAVE NO FAMILY VALUES AND PUT THEMSELVES OVER TOP OF THE AVERAGE MAN, WHEN THEY ARE LESS OF A MAN FOR NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING FOR A DEFENCELESS FAMILY.
THIS COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE MUST BE INVESTIGATED. THE REPORTING AGENCY CDT IS CORRUPT AS WELL I HAVE HAD CDT GIVE DIFFERENT TEAT RESULTS THAN LAB TEST WITHIN MIN, OF EACH OTHER. ONE I PAID FOR AND THE OTHER CPS PAID FOR. I DID THIS TO EVERY TEST CPS HAD ME TAKE AND THE TEST HAVE SUCH DAMAGING INFORMATION ABOUT CPS AND THE REPORTING AGENCY THEY USE.
WE HAVE SO MUCH EVIDENCE AGAINST CPS STEALING CHILDREN.
PLEASE PLEASE CALL US INTO THIS AUDIT. I WILL SEND MY EVIDENCE. ALSO AUDIT CDT THE TEST COMPANY REPORTING AGENCY.
PLEASE CALL US TO TAKE PART IN THE AUDIT OF CPS WE HAVE COLLECTED EVIDENCE FROM THE DAY OUR CHILD WAS TAKEN BY CPS.
CPS SETS THE POLICIES FOR THE HOSPITALS, AND CPS TELLS THE HOSPITALS NOT TO REPORT FOSTER FAMILY ABUSE SO CPS DOESN’T GET CAUGHT.
Someone googled, “Does anyone know where Sharon Burns is?”. Well, if you are looking for me, you can email me at billandsharon9@msn.com and leave your phone number, I will be more than happy to call you, whoever you are.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_PlDs4d_B_lTWRydmRQaThWcU0/edit?usp=sharing
125. An unqualified statement of that which one does not know to be
true is equivalent to a statement of that which one knows to be
false.
127. Every person who willfully procures another person to commit
perjury is guilty of subornation of perjury, and is punishable in the
same manner as he would be if personally guilty of the perjury so
procured.
129. Every person who, being required by law to make any return,
statement, or report, under oath, willfully makes and delivers any
such return, statement, or report, purporting to be under oath,
knowing the same to be false in any particular, is guilty of perjury,
whether such oath was in fact taken or not.
132. Every person who upon any trial, proceeding, inquiry, or
investigation whatever, authorized or permitted by law, offers in
evidence, as genuine or true, any book, paper, document, record, or
other instrument in writing, knowing the same to have been forged or
fraudulently altered or ante-dated, is guilty of felony.
134. Every person guilty of preparing any false or ante-dated book,
paper, record, instrument in writing, or other matter or thing, with
intent to produce it, or allow it to be produced for any fraudulent
or deceitful purpose, as genuine or true, upon any trial, proceeding,
or inquiry whatever, authorized by law, is guilty of felony.
136. As used in this chapter:
(1) “Malice” means an intent to vex, annoy, harm, or injure in any
way another person, or to thwart or interfere in any manner with the
orderly administration of justice.
(2) “Witness” means any natural person, (i) having knowledge of
the existence or nonexistence of facts relating to any crime, or (ii)
whose declaration under oath is received or has been received as
evidence for any purpose, or (iii) who has reported any crime to any
peace officer, prosecutor, probation or parole officer, correctional
officer or judicial officer, or (iv) who has been served with a
subpoena issued under the authority of any court in the state, or of
any other state or of the United States, or (v) who would be believed
by any reasonable person to be an individual described in
subparagraphs (i) to (iv), inclusive.
(3) “Victim” means any natural person with respect to whom there
is reason to believe that any crime as defined under the laws of this
state or any other state or of the United States is being or has
been perpetrated or attempted to be perpetrated.
141. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), any person who
knowingly, willfully, and intentionally alters, modifies, plants,
places, manufactures, conceals, or moves any physical matter, with
specific intent that the action will result in a person being charged
with a crime or with the specific intent that the physical matter
will be wrongfully produced as genuine or true upon any trial,
proceeding, or inquiry whatever, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(b) Any peace officer who knowingly, willfully, and intentionally
alters, modifies, plants, places, manufactures, conceals, or moves
any physical matter, with specific intent that the action will result
in a person being charged with a crime or with the specific intent
that the physical matter will be wrongfully produced as genuine or
true upon any trial, proceeding, or inquiry whatever, is guilty of a
felony punishable by two, three, or five years in the state prison.
(c) Nothing in this section shall preclude prosecution under both
this section and any other provision of law.
153. Every person who, having knowledge of the actual commission of
a crime, takes money or property of another, or any gratuity or
reward, or any engagement, or promise thereof, upon any agreement or
understanding to compound or conceal that crime, or to abstain from
any prosecution thereof, or to withhold any evidence thereof, except
in the cases provided for by law, in which crimes may be compromised
by leave of court, is punishable as follows:
1. By imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or
pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170, where the crime was
punishable by death or imprisonment in the state prison for life;
2. By imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding six months, or
pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170, where the crime was
punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for any other term
than for life;
3. By imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding six months, or
by fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), where the crime
was a misdemeanor.
158. Common barratry is the practice of exciting groundless
judicial proceedings, and is punishable by imprisonment in the county
jail not exceeding six months and by fine not exceeding one thousand
dollars ($1,000).
159. No person can be convicted of common barratry except upon
proof that he has excited suits or proceedings at law in at least
three instances, and with a corrupt or malicious intent to vex and
annoy.
My CPS story.
Part 1 of 2.
Coming Soon: Part 2 – How and Why CPS stole our youngest child because of an “anonymous” caller who wouldn’t stop calling. She created such a bias with her lies about us that CPS was malicious and ruthless towards me and my husband. I’ll show you THE PROOF!