Donnelly is 9 Years Old Today


balloons2

HAPPY BIRTHDAY DONNELLY!!! FROM YOUR REAL MOMMY AND DADDY!!!!

We are not REALLY OLD nor are we DEAD. This is what you believe. I wonder how you will feel when you find out that your adoptive parents have KNOWN FOR YEARS EXACTLY WHERE YOUR REAL MOMMY AND DADDY ARE but they simply lie to you either directly or by omission of the truth. They will tell you that they are “protecting” you but from WHAT EXACTLY?

balloons

They will try to tell you that we were drug addicts and criminals, this iS NOT true!!! We are for the most part RESPONSIBLE people. I say this because losing you has taken its toll on us emotionally and that also affects us physically. There is a lack of motivation sometimes when this loss overwhelms us, we do fight with each other a great deal, but not about you, you are the one thing we agree about. Donnelly, you unite your father and I because you were made with all the love in the world that two people could have for each other. We want you to know this on this special day, the day you were born.

balloons4

I wish people weren’t so jealous and insecure with themselves so that they go out of their way to hurt other people. This is the main reason our family was ripped apart and why it continues to be ripped apart. People do not understand, they do not sympathize, they harshly judge, and hypocritically I might add! I want the BEST for you and I believe, as well as NORMAL person would, that the BEST thing you could have in your life are your REAL parents, even if only occasionally. I know my brothers went out of their way to ensure that we don’t get to see you any time soon and that they only strengthened the hatred your adoptive mother has for us but I have this hope, still, in my heart and soul that your adoptive parents will come around sooner than later but REALITY is that they are closed-minded and refuse to make their OWN ASSESSMENT. This is very sad for me to think about.

 

balloons3

I hope you are having a birthday party, or already had one, like I would do for your birthday. I hope you went somewhere fun, like we would take you for your birthday. I hope you got presents and the one thing you wanted more than anything. Maybe someday that wish will be to meet your real parents.

 

balloons5

We love you and miss you with all our hearts and souls. Happy Birthday baby boy! (I’m sobbing now.) xxooxoxoxoxoxoxox Love, Mommy and Daddy

happy

 

Our Family Torn and Terrorized by CPS (Part 6)


I finally completed Part 6 of our story including getting arrested for a possession of stolen property that was not stolen and more falsified hair follicle tests.

Part 7 should be much more exciting as I will explain what happened in Arizona and show how we “stole” our son back from CPS who never has legal custody of our children because they never had any SIGNED COURT ORDERS!

 

If I Said I Was Sorry Would I Be Forgiven?


If I dedicated my life to Christ and converted to an acceptable religion, would anyone’s views and opinions of me change? Would I then be “accepted”? I doubt it. You know why? Because I don’t need to do those things to be a good or better person. I am a good decent person who made some poor decisions because I MADE THOSE DECISIONS WITH MY HEART. I am trying to change that but it is hard. To become cold and heartless is not in my nature. To look out for only myself is very difficult. But if I promise to try, will I be given a reprieve? Can I pass go and collect the love from people who now despise me based on lies they were told about me? 951-295-6854 If anyone has anything to say to me please call, ask me anything you want. I am an open book. Oops, that is not a good way to “cover my butt” is it? I am thinking with my heart again.

Oh My FREAKING GOD!!!!! Evil SOCIAL WORKERS!!! This is total B.S.


http://medicalkidnap.com/2015/03/20/medical-kidnap-mother-loses-3-children-because-daughter-is-too-short/medicalkidnap

Please Help Save Kendall


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

Harassment by Cops and CPS Simply for Speaking Out and Posting Abuse of Power


Fight CPS and WIN Seminar


LOCATED IN PASADENA, CALIFORNIA


seminar

CLICK ON THE PICTURE TO FIND OUT MORE AND TO REGISTER!

DonnellyJustice Research asks you to please take this survey if it applies to you or someone you know.


Loading…” target=”_blank”>

HIGHEST PAID “JUDGE” IN CA WORKS FOR SOCIAL SERVICES!!!


CORRECTION: TRANSPARENT CALIFORNIA DOES NOT LIST ANY OTHER JUDGES IN THE STATE AS OF YET. BUT THIS JUDGE IS THE HIGHEST PAID ADMINISTRATIVE/SOCIAL SERVICES JUDGE WITH REGARDS TO THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THIS SITE. SOME STATE EMPLOYEES/AGENCIES DID NOT PROVIDE TRANSPARENT CALIFORNIA WITH THEIR INFORMATION.

First, take their regular bench pay, add overtime, “other” pay and benefits and you get $230,000 to always rule in favor of CPS. That means: sustain every petition, order the care, custody and control (of every child named in every petition), to the DIRECTOR of Public Social Services by declaring that each and every child named in a petition comes within the court’s jurisdiction, to OVERRULE any and all objections from the parents’ attorney (only the private pay attorneys EVER OBJECT since the “Defense Panel attorneys NEVER OBJECT), and to adopt all findings and orders that the Department includes in their attachment to the report (and rather than adhering to Welfare & Institutions Code regarding the conduct of the “Judge” he/she gets away with simply stating, “I adopt the findings and orders contained on Page [blah blah] of the Detention Report.”  follow the law and regulations that say you SHALL examine the parents and/or any other person with relative information, you SHALL make paternity findings, you SHALL inquire as to the reasonable efforts put forth by the Department), This “Judge” is paid to make sure every child that comes before the court is denied the right to GO HOME.

355.  (a) At the jurisdictional hearing, the court shall first
consider only the question whether the minor is a person described by
Section 300. Any legally admissible evidence that is relevant to the
circumstances or acts that are alleged to bring the minor within the
jurisdiction of the juvenile court is admissible and may be received
in evidence. Proof by a preponderance of evidence must be adduced to
support a finding that the minor is a person described by Section
300. Objections that could have been made to evidence introduced
shall be deemed to have been made by a parent or guardian who is
present at the hearing and unrepresented by counsel, unless the court
finds that the parent or guardian has made a knowing and intelligent
waiver of the right to counsel. Objections that could have been made
to evidence introduced shall be deemed to have been made by an
unrepresented child.
   (b) A social study prepared by the petitioning agency, and hearsay
evidence contained in it, is admissible and constitutes competent
evidence upon which a finding of jurisdiction pursuant to Section 300
may be based, to the extent allowed by subdivisions (c) and (d).
   (1) For purposes of this section, "social study" means any written
report furnished to the juvenile court and to all parties or their
counsel by the county probation or welfare department in any matter
involving the custody, status, or welfare of a minor in a dependency
proceeding pursuant to Article 6 (commencing with Section 300) to
Article 12 (commencing with Section 385), inclusive.
   (2) The preparer of the social study shall be made available for
cross-examination upon a timely request by a party. The court may
deem the preparer available for cross-examination if it determines
that the preparer is on telephone standby and can be present in court
within a reasonable time of the request.
   (3) The court may grant a reasonable continuance not to exceed 10
days upon request by any party if the social study is not provided to
the parties or their counsel within a reasonable time before the
hearing.
   (c) (1) If a party to the jurisdictional hearing raises a timely
objection to the admission of specific hearsay evidence contained in
a social study, the specific hearsay evidence shall not be sufficient
by itself to support a jurisdictional finding or any ultimate fact
upon which a jurisdictional finding is based, unless the petitioner
establishes one or more of the following exceptions:
   (A) The hearsay evidence would be admissible in any civil or
criminal proceeding under any statutory or decisional exception to
the prohibition against hearsay.
   (B) The hearsay declarant is a minor under 12 years of age who is
the subject of the jurisdictional hearing. However, the hearsay
statement of a minor under 12 years of age shall not be admissible if
the objecting party establishes that the statement is unreliable
because it was the product of fraud, deceit, or undue influence.
   (C) The hearsay declarant is a peace officer as defined by Chapter
4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2 of the Penal
Code, a health practitioner described in paragraphs (21) to (28),
inclusive, of subdivision (a) of Section 11165.7 of the Penal Code, a
social worker licensed pursuant to Chapter 14 (commencing with
Section 4991) of Division 2 of the Business and Professions Code, or
a teacher who holds a credential pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing
with Section 44200) of Part 25 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the
Education Code. For the purpose of this subdivision, evidence in a
declaration is admissible only to the extent that it would otherwise
be admissible under this section or if the declarant were present and
testifying in court.
   (D) The hearsay declarant is available for cross-examination. For
purposes of this section, the court may deem a witness available for
cross-examination if it determines that the witness is on telephone
standby and can be present in court within a reasonable time of a
request to examine the witness.
   (2) For purposes of this subdivision, an objection is timely if it
identifies with reasonable specificity the disputed hearsay evidence
and it gives the petitioner a reasonable period of time to meet the
objection prior to a contested hearing.
   (d) This section shall not be construed to limit the right of a
party to the jurisdictional hearing to subpoena a witness whose
statement is contained in the social study or to introduce admissible
evidence relevant to the weight of the hearsay evidence or the
credibility of the hearsay declarant.



355.1.  (a) Where the court finds, based upon competent professional
evidence, that an injury, injuries, or detrimental condition
sustained by a minor is of a nature as would ordinarily not be
sustained except as the result of the unreasonable or neglectful acts
or omissions of either parent, the guardian, or other person who has
the care or custody of the minor, that finding shall be prima facie
evidence that the minor is a person described by subdivision (a),
(b), or (d) of Section 300.
   (b) Proof that either parent, the guardian, or other person who
has the care or custody of a minor who is the subject of a petition
filed under Section 300 has physically abused, neglected, or cruelly
treated another minor shall be admissible in evidence.
   (c) The presumption created by subdivision (a) constitutes a
presumption affecting the burden of producing evidence.
56.  After hearing the evidence, the court shall make a finding,
noted in the minutes of the court, whether or not the minor is a
person described by Section 300 and the specific subdivisions of
Section 300 under which the petition is sustained. If it finds that
the minor is not such a person, it shall order that the petition be
dismissed and the minor be discharged from any detention or
restriction theretofore ordered. If the court finds that the minor is
such a person, it shall make and enter its findings and order
accordingly.
358.  (a) After finding that a child is a person described in
Section 300, the court shall hear evidence on the question of the
proper disposition to be made of the child. Prior to making a finding
required by this section, the court may continue the hearing on its
own motion, the motion of the parent or guardian, or the motion of
the child, as follows:
   (1) If the child is detained during the continuance, and the
social worker is not alleging that subdivision (b) of Section 361.5
is applicable, the continuance shall not exceed 10 judicial days. The
court may make an order for detention of the child or for the child'
s release from detention, during the period of continuance, as is
appropriate.
   (2) If the child is not detained during the continuance, the
continuance shall not exceed 30 days after the date of the finding
pursuant to Section 356. However, the court may, for cause, continue
the hearing for an additional 15 days.
   (3) If the social worker is alleging that subdivision (b) of
Section 361.5 is applicable, the court shall continue the proceedings
for a period not to exceed 30 days. The social worker shall notify
each parent of the content of subdivision (b) of Section 361.5 and
shall inform each parent that if the court does not order
reunification a permanency planning hearing will be held, and that
his or her parental rights may be terminated within the timeframes
specified by law.
   (b) Before determining the appropriate disposition, the court
shall receive in evidence the social study of the child made by the
social worker, any study or evaluation made by a child advocate
appointed by the court, and other relevant and material evidence as
may be offered, including, but not limited to, the willingness of the
caregiver to provide legal permanency for the child if reunification
is unsuccessful. In any judgment and order of disposition, the court
shall specifically state that the social study made by the social
worker and the study or evaluation made by the child advocate
appointed by the court, if there be any, has been read and considered
by the court in arriving at its judgment and order of disposition.
Any social study or report submitted to the court by the social
worker shall include the individual child's case plan developed
pursuant to Section 16501.1.
   (c) If the court finds that a child is described by subdivision
(h) of Section 300 or that subdivision (b) of Section 361.5 may be
applicable, the court shall conduct the dispositional proceeding
pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 361.5.


For the complete W&I Codes (California) go to: CA W&I Codes

THIS COURT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, IT IS NOT EVEN LEGAL (LIKE THEY TRY TO MAKE CRIMINAL COURT TO BE). IT IS ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, or Civil Law, AS IF FAMILIES ARE A COMMODITY. Here: 

48.  The provisions of Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 469) of
Title 6 of Part 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure relating to variance
and amendment of pleadings in civil actions shall apply to petitions
and proceedings under this chapter, to the same extent and with the
same effect as if proceedings under this chapter were civil actions.

This court is not even like FAMILY COURT and orders are NOT SIGNED (at least not back when our case was active in 2007-2012) therefore, actual custody by the Department is NOT LEGAL. For example, in Family Court you get a signed and sealed Order granting or outlining custody and control of the children. Let’s say you file for divorce and custody of the children and after a long or short battle, you are awarded full custody of the children with your ex getting supervised visits every other weekend. So then one day your ex goes to the children’s school and signs them out and takes them home and when you go to pick them up from school they are not there and the office tells you that your ex picked them up (of course you should have provided the school with a copy of the order but let’s say you forgot). Now, you call your ex and say you are coming to get the children and they say, “No, I’m not letting them go.” But you have legal rights to call the police, show them a copy of the signed and court-stamped order and they will assist you in getting your kids back from your ex. But if you don’t have a copy of the order, they will not assist you. Luckily, if the courthouse is open, you can easily go there and get a copy and show it to the police and then they will help you. In Juvenile Court, CPS never gets SIGNED ORDERS but the police will still assist them! To compare further, let’s say that your ex files for divorce and custody of the children. Let’s say he is allowed to rent a courtroom and pay a “Judge” and a bailiff and pay the attorneys including the one that represents YOU (and then frown and be harder on you if you pay for your own attorney). How fair would that be? THIS IS THE WAY JUVENILE DEPENDENCY COURT OPERATES!

IN FACT, ALL STATE COURTS ARE SET UP THIS WAY. THE STATE, I.E. “THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS. JOE AUTOMATICALLY GUILTY”. THE STATE PAYS THE JUDGE’S SALARY AND THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S SALARY AND THE PUBLIC DEFENDER’S SALARY. NO WONDER THE CONVICTION RATE IS SO HIGH! This was the single biggest mistake in our “justice system”, providing an attorney if you cannot afford one. Private attorneys would have to charge a great deal less for representation but would that be a BAD thing? 

Here is a clip showing the highest paid CA Judge is also a CPS Judge.

highestpaidJudgeCA

Confidential Report About Fatalities In LA County


Click on the picture to read the report. NOTE** ON THE FIRST PAGE, SECOND PARAGRAPH OF THIS DOCUMENT IT STATES, “This fact-based analysis presents a unique opportunity to examine the need and possibly for wholesale changes in the way DCFS and the County of Los Angeles carry out the charge of providing services for families and children in crisis. Accordingly, in addition to identifying the RSI (Reoccurring Systemic Issues), this report suggests opportunities for improvement that, if capitalized upon effectively, can lead to positive changes and outcomes for the children and families DCFS serves.” ITS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY! 

 

http://documents.latimes.com/report-severe-problems-los-angeles-county-department-children-and-family-services/confidential

Support US!


We are trying to raise money to help families. A few of my goals are:

1.  Print and distribute information to parents caught in the judicial system as well as valuable information about Child Protective Services.

2.  Coordinate and conduct workshops for parents to learn everything about the California Juvenile Dependency Court.

3.  Outline a protocol of the workshop for others in other States to conduct workshops in their area.

4.  Record the workshops on video and make them available on YouTube.

5.  Complete writing a Bill, and submit it to our legislators, that would change the requirements for proof of neglect, evidence of hearings that are conducted according to Law, the hiring and administration of Hearing Officers and attorneys so they are not paid for by the County, to provide for “secret shoppers” who are allowed in any courtroom at any time to audit the hearings and that would provide for the auditing of every single case file terminating parental rights that includes interviewing the parents and every audit’s findings can be submitted to the Appellate Courts for review and determination of whether or not the parent’s rights be restored.

I have created an account with Ebay where I am selling random stuff. Every penny profit will go towards achieving these goals. Please support our cause simply by purchasing everyday items. I am working on another blog (it is updated daily) which highlight some of these items for sale. Once you are directed to my Ebay site, at the bottom you will see boxes which showcase all the items I have for sale. (I purchase these items from the clearance racks and re-sell them for a lot less than retail price.) Here is the link to my blog: http://radomestuff4sale.wordpress.com/

International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State


Convened as a lawfully recognized Tribunal of Conscience in Brussels in the fall of 2012, and issuing its final verdict on February 25, 2013, the Common Law Court named and indicted thirty defendants for perpetrating or concealing Genocide in Canada against indigenous people. These defendants included then-Pope Benedict, Joseph Ratzinger, former Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Elizabeth Windsor “Queen of England”, and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

After an exhaustive presentation of the evidence of crimes by church and state in Canada, and a refusal by the defendants to respond or refute the evidence, all of the defendants were found guilty of criminal conspiracy and Genocide, and were sentenced in absentia to 25 years in prison and the forfeit of all the wealth and property of their estates and institutions. Citizen arrest warrants were issued, and on August 4, 2013, the Vatican and Crown of England were declared to be transnational criminal bodies under international law, and were lawfully disestablished.

Please watch this video and visit: http://www.itccs.org for more information.

Our Readers Write….


Dear Donnellyjustice,

I lost my son to CPS last year. I am not allowed to write to the adoptive parents but if I were allowed, this is what it would say:

Dear Mr. & Mrs. Jones,

Thank you for taking good care of my son. You never will love him as much as I do but I do appreciate the effort. It was unfortunate that you refused to believe our sad AND TRUE HEARTBREAKING STORY because David would like to see his real Mommy and Daddy. Did you ever ask him what HE WANTED?

I hope you have been paying attention to the news lately and the outcry of the people in protest to several horror stories that the news is finally reporting. Now you should doubt me less and consider that it is MORE PROBABLE THAN NOT THAT my son was taken purely for funding of CPS. Just the fact that he is a wonderful, caring, polite and loving little  boy should show you all by itself how his mother and I treated him and the kind of parents we are.

Many people have been unaware of the injustices that countless parents experience, unaware of how CPS workers lie and fabricate evidence, unaware that CPS workers disobey court orders, manipulate the Judge, and NEVER EVER LOSE IN COURT. CPS is a criminal organization that must increase it’s child intake every single year to be eligible for funding. I know this because of all of the research my wife and I have done on this agency and because my ex mother-in-law worked for CPS for 35 years, 22 of those years were during my marriage to her daughter, the one who called CPS out of revenge to my second wife who has been able to love me without cheating on me.

I have raised 5 children to adulthood and I am so very grateful that my wife has been by my side faithfully for the 11 years. Dave’s brothers and sisters know that he was never in any danger and that he was even more spoiled than they were. We are so very proud of our kids no matter what they do, we know that life is full of learning by mistakes and that forgiveness is one of keys to a peaceful life. Our children are healthy, productive members of society. They all have made only ONE semi-serious mistake in their young lives yet we are so proud that these mistakes proved to have made a life-changing impact on each one of them. We raised intelligent, law abiding citizens. CPS and the court cohorts claim that the reason they remove children from their parents is to keep them “safe” from “dangerous” people (parents) which is what they made us out to be. But how could we have possibly raised these children to be the people they have become (intelligent, respectful, and productive members of society) without injuries or mental health issues if we were who CPS made us out to be? They didn’t take him because we are bad parents or because they say we are on drugs, there is a very disturbing explanation for it. There is a specific agenda that the government has been following for several years and it seems to fit that they stole our youngest blond haired-blue eyed, adorable little boy. Our adult children do not harbor resentments toward my wife and I but they do resent my first wife and feel that they can’t ever have a normal, drama-free relationship without her trying to ruin it out of jealously. My ex-wife feels that she should always be the center of their attention and goes absolutely nuts when they pay attention to anyone or anything else. All of our children have become or are becoming, productive members of society. Due to the bias created by my ex-wife and her mother, CPS only took my second wife’s children even though we still had one older child who was under 18 at the time. That was the ex-mother-in-law’s grandchild.We loved him so much that my wife and I risked our life and freedom to prevent him from getting hurt in foster care.

Mr. Jones, are you a reasonable man? Can I speak to you, man to man?  I am a good dad and all my children have been raised with patience and a kind heart. Don’t you have a good and decent heart? Would you let anyone separate you from your child when you love your child more than life itself? This is where I stand.  All his siblings know how much love and support I gave to each of them and I would do it again and again. I will see my son again someday and he will know how hard we tried to save him from CPS, how much we love him and miss him and he will know that we contacted you and you refused to allow him to see us. He won’t be happy with that, who would?

If your heart was truly into raising my son, David, to be healthy and happy then he should never be cut off from his siblings. They all miss him and love him so very much. He is their little brother and I know from the tapes we sent you that you also know how much we cherish him. The youngest always always gets the most spoiled. So he is slightly a drama king but he is great just the way he is. That is because of being loved and encouraged to learn.  Do not be mean or foul spirited or quick tempered I beg you. He will be curious about his family and I will not turn away no matter what. We accept you into our lives because of what has happened. You should accept us into yours simply because we are the reason you have been blessed with him. We truly want only what is best for David. You can’t ignore his past so embrace it. He will be much better adjusted for life.  If you really feel we are so bad with out getting to know us that is not a good way to be. I know you have seen just from David’s loving ways that we are good parents. Good parents are always striving to be great parents.

David will get to know his family later in life so if you do not want resentments then you should get to know all of us. You never know, you might like us. We do have friends you know. Normal friends who don’t judge us. I love all my children and I, like most parents, would give my life to help my child. If you could just open your eyes and find out what CPS does to families and children you may figure it out that we are not bad people. We have just been in bad situations making decisions out of fear. I pray you are never involved with CPS, you will get very angry with CPS and that judge who clearly is corrupt.  

My son is my life and I pray you treat him kindly and lovingly as I would.  David is a big part of my life and I did not give him up he was kidnapped just to fill some kind of angry hole my ex wife has in her heart.  I would never take David from you, I hope you know that, not because of the police but because  I want David to have a calm happy childhood, all children deserve that.  If our intentions were to “kidnap” him from you and your wife we wouldn’t have sent you that letter. Our intentions were always to keep David safe from the kidnappers. Not allowing him to see us just because we asked alone, I can understand. But we sent you proof, you’ve  been on our website, you saw videos, you looked up corrupt CPS and I know you found out that a lot of parents are crying out for help against these monsters. We offered for you to meet us first, without David, so you wouldn’t put him in “danger”. But all you did was call CPS and file a restraining order. Thanks a lot for being such a good human being.

Soon enough he will be an adult and stress is a battle then. CPS puts good families through this kind of stress and it must have a long lasting effect on children.  CPS will have to answer to God for that.

I love my son and if you look around here you might learn a little more about how CPS works.  You can not ignore these things or say they are not true because every one of these stories are real. Any parent who fights for their child and never gives up should have never have lost that child. CPS pushes that information aside because family means nothing but a pay check to these people. 

Please tell David that we love him so very much, give him hugs and kisses please, our hearts ache for him..

That is what I would say to the adoptive parents of my son if I were allowed to.

–Anonymous

A Cannon A Day For Judges Astray – DAY2


etics2

List of OIG Investigations 2011-2012


OIG investigationsList of OIG Investigations 2011-2012

(You can click on the picture or the caption.) This link is to view a document I found from the Office of Inspector General listing the investigations conducted from 1/1/2011-8/23/2012. It does not state which agency or person that was investigated however, it shows how much corruption is being reported and investigated. The cases on this list were probably a small portion of the actual reports/complaints received. I am posting it because it shows what they investigate. The OIG investigates government and private agencies receiving federal funding. Please share this post with everyone you know who has a complaint about CPS and the courts when they fabricate evidence and commit perjury. We must complain, complain, and complain some more. I recently heard that the OIG said that they hear the worst horror stories from Riverside County.

NO MALTREATMENT IN FOSTER CARE: CALIFORNIA COUNTIES ARE NOT REPORTING ABUSE


If your child is hurt while in foster care or you believe there is a “substantial risk” that your child will be hurt in foster care (AS THEY HAVE APPLIED IT TO YOU being a PREPONDERANCE of evidence) MAKE A REPORT TO THE HOTLINE, REPORT TO LOCAL POLICE, REPORT TO THE DA’S OFFICE and to the Foster Family Agency. IF THEY DO NOTHING make ABSOLUTELY SURE YOU FILE COMPLAINTS WITH SECRETARY OF STATE,  ATTORNEY GENERAL, AND TO HHS (Health and Human Services). After researching the number of children maltreated in foster care, it is obvious that the injuries and maltreatment in foster care ARE NOT being reported anymore and swept under the rug as a part of their “Improvement Plan”. We parents and family members know that our kids are being hurt and mistreated in foster care so we also know that their reported “No maltreatment in foster care” numbers are bullshit. We all need to report the abuses so they stop lying, making themselves out to be better than us. If, during a visit, your child has a bruise, a cut, a lump, lock of hair missing, is dirty, is wearing the same clothes to every visit, has lost weight, acts differently, winches at sudden movements, tells you about being hit or yelled at all the time, or screams when it is time for them to leave with the foster person, MAKE A REPORT. Remember, FOSTER HOMES ARE SUPPOSEDLY PERFECT AND BETTER THAN YOU. We all know that no one is perfect but they are claiming to be, DO NOT MAKE EXCUSES FOR THE FOSTER PARENTS BECAUSE YOU MAY UNDERSTAND BEING A PARENT MEANS THAT CHILDREN FALL OR GET PICKED ON BY OTHER CHILDREN, do not believe anything they say as the reason your child has that bruise or cut or chunk of hair missing, assume that they are being abused. That’s how parents are treated right?

File these reports with anyone who will listen.  This county has been falsifying reports of treatment in foster care basically glorifying foster care and anyone of us can tell you nightmares about foster care by people who just get paid to be a babysitter.  The last person these courts would ever consider listening to is the victims of CPS and these CPS workers know it and abuse it to get as much federal funding to the county as possible.

If anyone is truly representing children and FAMILIES you can’t tell by the wealth of information which is given out for foster parents and people looking to adopt children from the system. If you read all the appellate decisions you will find that 98% of the appeals in California do not rule in favor of the parents. Dependency cases are so class bias with evidence in support of parent completely ignored.

 For those parents and original caregivers who have recently been intimidated by CPS and they removed your child(ren), and if I were to experience that again knowing what I know now, I would object to everything untrue said in the reports, provide evidence to the contrary and file it with the clerk. When doing so, you must serve all parties with it and then file a Proof of Service with the clerk.  Nothing you have to say will ever get on record unless you do this AND YOUR ATTORNEY WILL NOT DO IT EITHER. If I could do it all over again, I will drill this into my head and NEVER UNDERESTIMATE DPSS’s creativity when it comes to making shit up about you. They are very sick people out to get you so don’t let them get away with ruining your reputation along with ruining your family. PARENTS DO NOT RECEIVE PROPER REPRESENTATION. EVER. It is up to you to be put on record to have any chance at beating them. BUT UNDERSTAND THAT they will coerce you into ‘submitting’ to the allegations and cooperating with the ‘case plan’. If you are fighting them tooth and nail they will ‘amend’ the petition but only slightly. Then they will bring up all the issues that were stricken from it and use it against you again. Appealable issues must be raised at each hearing. We will post more about that soon. Even if you lose getting your self on record with a good argument has a much higher chance of ruining their self-esteem which comes from in part by the arrogance they get from railroading the parents on the record without a fight. Look for our article, “Hit ‘Em Where it Hurts” which explains how to remove the funding they receive in your case. This will weaken them and end the tyranny of the JV court.


We Miss You Baby Boy

Constitutional Law Summary for Parents (MAKE CPS COURTS FOLLOW THE LAW)


Donnelly Justice writes

These are the laws they don’t want you to know   The dog book is refereed to as The dependency quick guide and is a wonderful tool to have. There is an extension in the side box for the dependency quick guide as well as the material below to help you win.

Every parent must read this before going into CPS court, do not back down.  I have personally had the minute orders include things that were never said and the transcripts proved it. There have been many cases of transcripts getting changed as well. DO NOT go into this courtroom with the idea that they are ignorant to the constitutionality of CPS because they are the leaders. I can’t tell you to turn your phone on record during these proceedings but I would and I would hang on to it. You have to do what is best for you.

CPS is a,Juvenile court law under ( California rules of civil procedure ), Natural laws do apply.  If your lawyer does not follow the law you must file a complaint with the board if your lawyer doesn’t follow your rights. Complain for ineffective counsel  Object if he doesn’t object to incorrect statements or allegations.   If you do not object you can not file an appeal on those issues and are considered true.  Do not let your lawyer run you, he doesn’t care about you or your child the way you do,  he does this everyday.  Know everything you can in these courts. You are your child’s best interest.  Take your time and read through our website if we haven’t written about it then you will find link for it. The dog book is refereed to as The dependency quick guide is a very important guide for these JV courts.

I am mot a lawyer but I would do what ever it takes to protect my child.  You do what you feel is best.  I am here just to share my experience and find a way for good parents to have fighting chance.

God Bless and may the lord watch and guard you by pacing a hedge of protection around you.  The parent is always in the child’s best interest.

created by Daniel Lee,  ACFC Associate Director

Family Law Reference for Parents

This is the first update to a paper written as a guide for parents and legal professionals on family law. Primarily it is the words of the judges themselves, with some commentary to help explain concepts. Upon updating it became so complicated that it needed to be divided into two parts, and this is now the introductory one. If you wish to learn in more depth, this documents big brother (with full case citations) is available to officers of Childs Best Interest, or to judges and state attorney generals when they send a request on their letterhead to: 357 Dove Valley Collierville, TN 38017.

The relation between family and constitutional law needs to be clearly understood. Constitutional law has “bright lines” that identify areas where the state cannot tread. As of today all states’ family law consists of a jumble of rules and practices, many of which have little to no relation to these bright lines. The ensuing disorder allows judges great and improper discretion.

As I update the original paper, and so to with writing the original, no help was provided from legal professionals. We told hundreds of lawyers, judges, appellate justices, law school professors, state representatives and senators, and attorney generals about the problems in family law. None attempted to refute or add to the information. On a better note, many good rulings have recently been released by the Tennessee Middle and Eastern Section Appellate Courts. Nevertheless, it is clear today there is total failure in family law, and the legal profession in general.

Most of the research and development fell to me, with others providing real and useful input. Don, Chuck, and Dennis, of Ohio PACE, Mike “MD/JD” in California, Murray in Virginia, Karen in Alabama, members of Childs Best Interest across the U.S., and shared parenting advocates who acted as sounding boards and provided assistance in other small or large ways. Also help from the kind student librarians at the University of Memphis Law School Library was very useful and appreciated.

Today in most family law cases attorneys are not raising a constitutional shield to protect their clients. And when they fail to do that, a very cruel thing happens. Not only are one or both parent’s ability to parent their child indefinitely suspended with the state taking permanent jurisdiction of their child, but in legal terminology they will be considered to have voluntarily waived their right to parent their child! That’s pretty harsh to say a parent has voluntarily given this up, when it was only the attorney who failed to raise the constitutional arguments, but that’s the legal standard. If you are a parent not in an intact married relationship, or out of one and haven’t been designated the primary caregiver, somewhere along the line you surrendered your right to parent your child.

The following pages are to help all parents understand their rights in relation to raising their children. Having this knowledge will allow you to defend yourself and your child if ever required.

This document may be freely reproduced, and if doing so please credit the author. If you are in an actual case, please remember this information is not legal advice. Every case is unique and must be tailored accordingly by a litigant acting as their own attorney, or an actual one.

Section 1 Controlling Law

Sections of the Constitutions where parental rights derive

The fundamental liberty interest of natural parents in the care, custody, and management of their child is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. Santosky v. Kramer United States Supreme Court (1982)

The rights of parents to the care, custody and nurture of their children is of such character that it cannot be denied without violating those fundamental principles of liberty and justice which lie at the base of all our civil and political institutions, and such right is a fundamental right protected by First, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. Doe v. Irwin United States District Court of Michigan (1977)

Tennessee’s historically strong protection of parental rights and the reasoning of federal constitutional cases convince us that parental rights constitute a fundamental liberty interest under Article I, Section 8 of the Tennessee Constitution Hawk v. Hawk Tennessee Supreme Court (1993)

Parents have comparable interests under our state constitutional protections of liberty and privacy rights. “The right to the custody and control of one’s child is a fiercely guarded right in our society and in our law. It is a right that should be infringed upon only under the most compelling circumstances.” Brooks v. Parkerson Georgia Supreme Court (1995)

A parent’s constitutionally protected right to rear his or her children without state interference, has been recognized as a fundamental “liberty” interest protect by the Fourteenth Amendment and also as a fundamental right derived from the privacy rights inherent in the constitution. In re Smith Washington Supreme Court (1998)

[A] parent’s right to the care, custody, and control of his or her children is a fundamental right protected by article I, section 8 of the Iowa Constitution. Santi v. Santi Iowa Supreme Court (2001)

Parental Autonomy is the condition that exists when a child is not subject to a judge’s jurisdiction

Parental autonomy is grounded in the assumption that natural parents raise their own children in nuclear families, consisting of a married couple and their children. The family has been seen as the “basic building block” of society. Parental autonomy strengthens the family and the entire social fabric “by encouraging parents to raise their children in the best way they can by making them secure in the knowledge that neither the state nor outside individuals may ordinarily intervene.” In re Smith Washington Supreme Court (1998) Note 1: We are aware of 1 parent outside of an intact married family receiving parental autonomy via a consent order. Wickman v. Dixon No.DR-96-1360.01C p.489. Note 2: Presumably parental autonomy exists in adoptive families with either one or two parents, and in natural parents who have sole custody with the other parent’s rights terminated, so it is not tied to married parents.

Parental Rights are Fundamental Liberty Interests

The liberty interest at issue in this case – – the interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children — is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this Court Troxel v. Granville United States Supreme Court (2000)

It is well-settled that parents have a liberty interest in the custody of their children. Hence, any deprivation of that interest by the state must be accomplished by procedures meeting the requirements of due process.” Hooks v. Hooks United States Court of Appeals (1985)

Indeed, the right to rear one’s children is so firmly rooted in our culture that the United States Supreme Court has held it to be a fundamental liberty interest protected by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Hawk v. Hawk Tennessee Supreme Court (1993)

Parental Rights also contain Fundamental Privacy Interests

“[p]rivate realm of family life which the state cannot enter” Prince v. Massachusetts United States Supreme Court (1944)

Throughout this century, this Court also has held that the fundamental right to privacy protects citizens against governmental intrusion in such intimate family matters as procreation, child-rearing, marriage, and contraceptive choice. Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey United States Supreme Court (1992)

Statutes and rulings that infringe upon fundamental rights are presumptively unconstitutional, and a substantial burden rests on the state, not citizen, to prove its case

It is well settled that, quite apart from the guarantee of equal protection, if a law “impinges upon a fundamental right explicitly or implicitly secured by the Constitution it is presumptively unconstitutional.” Harris v. McRae United States Supreme Court (1980)

The application of strict scrutiny is not flexible at all, and I can find no case in this state where application of this standard has resulted in upholding the challenged law. With the adoption of strict scrutiny, this Court has forced the State of Tennessee into an “all-or-nothing” scenario, where only the most impeccably drafted legislation withstands the slightest possibility of darkening the constitutional doorway. Planned Parenthood of Middle Tennessee v. Sundquist Tennessee Supreme Court (2000) Note: This citation goes beyond saying infringements on fundamental parental rights are presumptively unconstitutional, and clearly states essentially no legislative restrictions on parents will be upheld.

If the classification affects fundamental rights however, there is no presumption of constitutionality, and the classification will be sustained only if justified by a compelling state interest. Coles v. Ryan Illinois Appeals Court (1980)

==============================

The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees Due Process and Equal Protection to all

“[n]o state shall.deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” U.S. Const. Amend. XIV, § 1

==============================

The state must meet a threshold prior to infringing upon fundamental rights

First, according to the Washington Supreme Court, the Constitution permits a State to interfere with the right of parents to rear their children only to prevent harm or potential harm to a child. Section 26.10.160(3) fails that standard because it requires no threshold showing of harm. Troxel v. Granville United States Supreme Court (2000)

The right of a parent not to be deprived of parental rights without a showing of fitness, abandonment or substantial neglect is so fundamental and basic as to rank among the rights contained in the State and Federal Constitutions” In re J.P. Utah Supreme Court (1982)

Likewise, following the analysis of the Tennessee Supreme Court in interpreting its state statutes and constitutions, we find that implicit in Georgia cases, statutory and constitutional law is that state interference with parental rights to custody and control of children is permissible only where the health or welfare of a child is threatened. Brooks v. Parkerson Georgia Supreme Court (1995)

For the constitutional requirement to be satisfied, before visitation can be ordered over the objection of the child’s parents, a court must find an actual harm to the child’s health or welfare without such visitation. Williams v. Williams Virginia Supreme Court (1998)

Examples of Tennessee’s threshold standard

In 1993 in a grandparent visitation case the Tennessee Supreme Court held, “we believe that when no substantial harm threatens a child’s welfare, the state lacks a sufficiently compelling justification for the infringement on the fundamental right of parents to raise their children as they see fit.” Hawk v. Hawk Tennessee Supreme Court (1993)

In a 1995 parent vs. third party custody case, “Therefore, in a contest between a parent and a non-parent, a parent cannot be deprived of the custody of a child unless there has been a finding, after notice required by due process, of substantial harm to the child. Only then may a court engage in a “best interest of the child” evaluation in making a determination of custody.” In re Adoption of a Female Child Tennessee Supreme Court (1995)

In a 1999 parental rights termination case, “Therefore Bond stands for the proposition that a natural parent may only be deprived of custody of a child upon a showing of substantial harm to the child.” In re Askew Tennessee (1999)

A July 2001 parental abuse case, “In furtherance of that goal, and in the best interests of Pamela due to a threat of substantial harm, the juvenile court ordered a termination of visitation.” “Although parents’ have a right to raise, care for and have the companionship of their child under both Tennessee and U.S. Constitutions, these rights can be infringed upon if the court finds substantial harm threatens a child’s welfare.” “The court made clear that there must be a threshold finding of harm before the state can intervene in a parent-child relationship; however, once this finding of harm to the child is made, a determination of custody is made based on the “best interest of the child”. This threshold finding of substantial harm was made when Pamela was found by the juvenile court to be abused, dependent, and neglected and removed form the custody of her parents and placed in foster care.” DCS v. Cox Tennessee Appeals Court (2001)

An August 2001 divorced parent v. parent case, “We believe the parents’ constitutional right of privacy as found by our Supreme Court in Hawk is applicable here where we have two fit parents, even if those parents are now divorced. Additionally, we believe the constitutional rights under the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution as well as Article I, Section 26 of the Tennessee Constitution are worthy of the same protection as is the constitutional right to privacy discussed in Hawk. Accordingly, the Trial Court could not restrict Father’s otherwise lawful possession of a firearm absent a showing of risk of substantial harm to the child. The Trial Court made no such finding.” Stillwell v. Stillwell Tennessee Appeals Court (2001) Note: This may be the first and only U.S. case where a harm standard was applied to divorced parents.

A standardized threshold (bright-line rule) is needed

Many threshold terms are in use, and the best seems to be “severe harm”. It has a proper sense of urgency which strikes a balance between too low of threshold terms such as “harm” which implies virtually no barrier, and too high of ones like “serious danger” implying an impossible hurdle. When combined with the designation as a “bright line rule” that cuts cleanly and clearly between the state and parents in all circumstances, a trial judge will have no problem properly applying family law to any circumstance that he or she faces.

The state may not apply the best interest of the child standard nor infringe in the parent-child relationship prior to proving that a child is in severe harm

We too, agree that neither the legislature nor a court may properly intervene in parenting decisions absent significant harm to the child from those decisions. In so holding, we approve the logic of Santosky v. Kramer which applied a two-step process to child neglect cases leading to foster family placement. In Santosky, the Supreme Court approved New York’s bifurcated proceeding requiring the state first to establish paternal unfitness before placing a child in foster care. This procedure assures parents that a “best interest of the child” analysis will not pit them against potential foster parents; rather, the state consider a child’s “best interests” until the natural parents have been declared unfit. Hawk v Hawk Tennessee Supreme Court (1993) Note: In a case where parental rights are infringed to a much lesser degree than in a parent v. parent custody case, the Tennessee Supreme Court clearly states parents must be declared “unfit” prior to “best interests” being applied.

The proof in this case supports the trial court’s finding that the father is not unfit to have custody, and that he has developed a substantial relationship with the child. It shows that the child is in no danger of substantial harm. The father, therefore, has a fundamental interest in parenting the child which precludes a “best interest” determination of custody. Petrosky v. Keene Tennessee Supreme Court (1995)

If the threshold of severe harm is found, any orders issued must be so as no less restrictive remedies can be contemplated

To satisfy strict scrutiny, the State must show that a statute furthers a compelling state interest by the least restrictive means practically available. Bernal v. Fainter United States Supreme Court (1984)

Requiring a State to demonstrate a compelling interest and show that it has adopted the least restrictive means of achieving that interest is the most demanding test known to constitutional law. City of Boerne v. Flores United States Supreme Court (1997)

T.C.A. § 36-6-101(a)(1) “In a suit for annulment, divorce or separate maintenance, where the custody of a minor child or minor children is a question, the court may,.award the care, custody and control of such child or children.as the welfare and interest of the child or children may demand” Note: This is Tennessee’s custody statute for divorcing parents. No harm threshold is present, nor any requirement for narrow tailoring. This statute is facially unconstitutional on two grounds.

A statute must be followed as written

When “the language contained within the four corners of a statute is plain, clear and unambiguous, the duty of the courts is simple and obvious, ‘to say sic lex scripta, and obey it.” Hawks v. City of Westmoreland Tennessee Supreme Court (1997)

Thus, a court must “presume that the legislature says in a statute what it means and means in a statute what it says there.” A statute, therefore, must be construed as it is written. Berryhill v. Rhodes Tennessee Supreme Court (2000)

T.C.A. § 36-6-301 After making an award of custody, the court shall, upon request of the non-custodial parent, grant such rights of visitation as will enable the child and the non-custodial parent to maintain a parent-child relationship. Note: A reasonable definition of the clause “enable the child and the non-custodial parent to maintain a parent-child relationship” is two to three overnights per week. Tennessee courts routinely allow moveaways, long stretches (weeks/months/years) where no parenting occurs, and other restrictions such as every other weekend visitation. All of these circumstances violate their own case law, “the language contained within the four corners of a statute is plain, clear and unambiguous, the duty of the courts is simple and obvious, ‘to say sic lex scripta, and obey it.”, and can be challenged on this basis.

Parental rights are identical between natural parents, without regard to gender or marital status

The Constitution protects “the interest of a parent in the companionship, care, custody, and management of his or her children.” Stanley v. Illinois United States Supreme Court (1972)

“The parent and child relationship extends equally to every child and to every parent, regardless of the marital status of the parents.” Johnson v. Calvert California Supreme Court (1993)

The Nales’ position that this Court in Hawk limited the protection of parental rights to an “intact, nuclear family with fit parents” is untenable. Nale v. Robertson Tennessee Supreme Court (1994)

Parental Alienation

It is clear to this Court that both parents love their children. What concerns this Court most, however, and was apparently a concern to the trial court, is Wife’s blatant attempt to alienate the affections of the children from their father. When loved by both parents, children should be taught to love and respect each parent equally. The reciprocation, in turn, will garner self-respect and a positive self image in the children. The record in this case lends absolutely no reason as to why the children should not be encouraged to respect and love their father. We do not find the record to show that Wife has supported such a healthy relationship between parent and child. Although Wife testified otherwise, her actions speak loud and clear. Varley v. Varley Tennessee Appeals Court (1996)

Effect on the parent-child relationship by being apart

Between parent and child, there is no monster like separateness. It can grow even faster than children, shutting first the heart, then the home, then history. Brooks v. Parkerson Georgia Supreme Court (1995)

Friendly Parent Doctrine

The Court stressed, the parent-child relationship “undeniably warrants deference and, absent a powerful countervailing interest, protection.” Stanley v. Illinois United States Supreme Court (1972)

Custody and visitation arrangements should promote the development of a healthy relationship between children and both their parents. Solima v. Solima Tennessee Appeals Court (1998)

Parent vs. Third Party Custody

Therefore, in a contest between a parent and a non-parent, a parent cannot be deprived of the custody of a child unless there has been a finding, after notice required by due process, of substantial harm to the child. Only then may a court engage in a “best interest of the child” evaluation in making a determination of custody.” In re Adoption of a Female Child Tennessee Supreme Court (1995)

Biological parents have a fundamental liberty interest in the care and custody of their children under both the United States and Tennessee Constitutions. These parental rights are superior to the rights of others and continue without interruption unless a biological parent consents to relinquish them, abandons his or her child, or forfeits his or her parental rights by some conduct that substantially harms the child. O’ Daniel v. Messier Tennessee Appeals Court (1995)

Grandparent/third party visitation

This appeal presents the issue of the constitutionality of Georgia’s “Grandparent Visitation Statute”, OCGA § 19-7-3. We hold that the statute is unconstitutional under both our state and federal constitutions, and reverse the trial court’s order to the contrary. Brooks v. Parkerson Georgia Supreme Court (1995)

Children in state care

Judge Quinones, a Family Court Judge with eight years of experience, described the conditions of detention as follows:

“Then again, Juvenile Center, as much as we might try, is not the most pleasant place in the world. If you put them in detention, you are liable to be exposing these youngsters to all sorts of things. They are liable to be exposed to assault, they are liable to be exposed to sexual assaults. You are taking the risk of putting them together with a youngster that might be much worse than they, possibly might be, and it might have a bad effect in that respect.”

Many other observers of the circumstances of juvenile detention in New York have come to similar conclusions. Schall v. Martin United States Supreme Court (1984)

1st Amendment Protest Guarantees

We have recognized that the First Amendment reflects a “profound national commitment” to the principle that “debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open,” This has led us to scrutinize carefully any restrictions on public issue picketing. Boos v. Barry United States Supreme Court (1988)

The traditional approach sets forth a bright-line rule: any restriction on speech, the application of which turns on the content of the speech, is a content-based restriction regardless of the motivation that lies behind it. Boos v. Barry United States Supreme Court (1988)

Pro-Se litigant’s pleadings

Pro se litigant’s pleadings should not be held to the same high standards of perfection as lawyers. “Significantly, the Haines case involved a pro se complaint – as does the present case – which requires a less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer. Puckett v. Cox United States Court of Appeals (1972)

Section 2 Persuasive Arguments

Thus, apart from constitutional problems of using the best interest of the child standard without a prerequisite showing of harm, the vagueness and subjectivity of such a standard lends itself to an invasion of family privacy which is abhorrent to our current society. Kathleen Bean (1985-86) Grandparent Visitation: Can the Parent Refuse? Note: This statement is equally applicable to all invasions of the parent-child relationship.

The bible advises input from both parents; “Hear, my son, your father’s instruction, and reject not your mother’s teaching;” Proverbs 1:8 Revised Standard Version

Hubin, Donald (1999). Parental Rights and Due Process. University of Utah Journal of Law & Family Studies Volume 1 Number 2, 123-150. Note: The best article on unconstitutionality of family law.

See at: http://www.cohums.ohio-state.edu/philo/people/faculty/hubin.1/Research/P RDP.PDF

See Childs Best Interest website generally for useful information: http://childsbestinterest.org

Section 3 Traps

When a legal action is initiated which involves a child, if a parent is not residing in the same home as the child, he or she will presumptively be considered as the non-custodial parent. The only way to avoid this trap is to not leave the home, or allow your child to be taken out of it.

When hiring an attorney, one of the first things they do is request financial information. This is because they are mentally figuring how much wealth they will be able to transfer to themselves.

At the filing of a legal action involving a child, if a temporary injunction is issued to maintain the status quo (keep the child under the care of one parent), the excluded parent will presumptively be considered as non-custodial. Any pre-trial orders which impede your ability to parent your child can be immediately appealed. If you wait for trial, you will waive your right to later raise these issues.

Pre-trial if a parent consents to pay child support, the judge and both attorneys will take this as a signal that he or she agrees to be the non-custodial parent.

Any consent order a parent agrees to (even if it comes after a contested hearing) cannot be appealed. You do not have to “consent” to anything, even if your attorney says otherwise. Remember, attorneys are officers of the court, and quite possibly friends with the judge and opposing attorney. They are required to zealously represent you, and to uphold the constitution. Expect neither.

Normally an investigation of the parents will be done. This can be anything from a college volunteer working for CASA, an attorney called a Guardian Ad Litem, a private investigator, up to a pediatric psychologist. The job of all these folks is to invade the privacy of your relationship with your child, and transfer as much wealth as possible to themselves. Also you will either be encouraged or mandated to attend counseling, to achieve the same goals. Using the above constitutional citations you can object to any invasion of your privacy and your child’s. If you fail to object, you waive your rights.

At trial your attorney can have a pre-trial brief prepared which carefully identifies the applicable laws and how your case applies to those laws (including of course constitutional law). Very few attorneys will do this. Most will present your case with no reference to any laws whatsoever, and simply allow the judge to rule as he or she wishes.

Also at trial both parents are considered to be voluntarily submitting the question of child custody to the court. Your attorney can assert that you do not want custody of your child decided by the state. If you don’t do this, it will be considered waived for appeal purposes, as will any applicable state and constitutional laws not raised by your attorney in his or her oral arguments.

If you ask that the law be followed in your case, expect intimidation tactics such as your attorney threatening to resign, or being told visitation with your child will be reduced. If any of this happens, request a brochure or other method whereby you can file a complaint with your state board of responsibility against the unlawful attorney. To make a complaint call: 1-800-486-5714

If you receive an unfavorable decision at trial, your attorney can file a motion to reconsider, or a notice of appeal. If you are appealing there are strict time limits on this, which if not followed will cause your case to be thrown out. If you consent to anything at trial, it will not be appeallable.

Appeals are usually taken to a state appellate court, then if needed an application is filed to your state supreme court (they may be called another name). The state supreme court has discretion whether to take your case or not, and they probably won’t take it. If your state supreme court does not give you a favorable ruling, you can appeal properly preserved constitutional questions to the United State Supreme Court, which virtually never takes a family law case. Wherever your case finally stops, it will be considered final.

Section 4 Legal Primer

There are three types of law, constitutional, statutory, and case. Constitutional law is primarily what this paper consists of, it is written by the people, and everyone must follow it. Statutory law is created by your state legislature, and the judges and all citizens must follow it as written. Case law is the judge’s interpretation of how constitutional and statutory law apply to individual cases. Most libraries will have copies of your state constitution, and statutory laws.

Solima v. Solima 7 S.W.3d 30, at 33 (Tenn.App.1998)

Being able to read case citations is very important as this enables you to look up and verify the original. In the above example the “style” of the case is Solima v. Solima, and these of course are the two parties at odds.

The next part 7 S.W.3d 30 tells you the original decision is contained in the “SouthWest” reporters. If you are unable to find them yourself, the law school librarian can show you where they are at. 7 is the volume number, 3d means third edition, and 30 is the page the case begins on. The at 33 is the specific page where the quote you are referring to is at, and (Tenn.App.1998) tells you the court that issued the decision and year it did so. If you see a case citation that has only the year listed without any court, such as (2000), that is a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court. NY or Utah would be a state supreme court, U.S.D.C. is a federal court, and U.S.C.A. is a federal appeals court.

If you are starting from scratch and don’t have a case citation, ask the librarian where the “digests” for your state, or the “Corpus Secundum” are. These allow you to start with a subject, such as “constitutional law”, and look up all of the cases cited in that area.

Summary

Parental rights consist of fundamental liberty and privacy interest, which the state can only infringe upon after finding a child is in severe harm, or severe danger of being harmed. You must properly assert your rights at every stage of litigation, or forever waive them, and your ability to parent your child.

As a final note constitutional rights in general, and parental rights in particular, are being regularly eroded. Amendments to the U.S. and state Constitutions must be enacted to reverse this.

Daniel Lee ACFC Associate Director

© Copyright Daniel Lee 2001 CBI Home: http://childsbestinterest.org ACFC Home: http://www.acfc.org/

 Children Need BOTH Parents!

The American Coalition for Fathers and Children

For Membership information call 1-800-978-DADS or see ACFC’s homepages at: http://www.acfc.org

To subscribe send a message to: acfclist@usa.net Message in subject line: subscribe acfc

To unsubscribe send a message to: acfclist@usa.net Message in subject line: unsubscribe acfc

The ACFC List Serve provides timely information to fathers, second wives, and others seeking restoration of fatherhood in America and the world. ACFC does not endorse or approve the views or opinions expressed by contributors, which have been provided only as a service to our list serve subscribers.

YOUR RIGHTS – Know ‘Em or Lose “Em!


No one knows anything about Juvenile Dependency Court, not even those attorneys who handle these cases! I am not joking either.  I have found hundreds of instances of malfeasance, nonfeasance, errors, omissions, violations of court rules and procedures, violations of W & I Statutes & Codes, violations of CPS’s own policies and procedures as well as violations of the statutory requirements set forth by the funding sources (listed below). This is why I know that for any of the attorneys to have missed is cause to determine that they are really really stupid or really really corrupt.  

So, while you anticipate my posting of all those violations, here’s a site that is very informative so check it out:

AFR

http://familyrights.us/info/law/

FROM ABOVE REFERENCE: Violations of Federal and State Statutes, violations of the California Rules of Civil Procedure, Cal. Rules of Juvenile Court, Superior Court of California, County of Riverside Local Rules, violations of the statutes and regulations required by CAPTA, AFSA,  Youkim, SAPT Block Grant, Child Welfare Services Grant (Title IV-B, Subpart 1), PSSF Grant (Title IV-B, Subpart2), Title IV-E, and the SSBG Block Grant.

Blatant disregard for the fundamental rights, privileges and constitutional rights of parents and children. Don’t wait until your children or your friend’s children to be kidnapped by the state, educate yourself and make them do it right!

CPS, STOP and listen to the children.


I have always loved raising children, I love their smiles in the morning and their excitement when I take them to the park or just spend time listening to their curiosity of  the world, being a parent has always just been what I wanted to be. When I finally divorced my ex-wife it was after many years of infidelity.  The only reason I stayed so long was for the children, I never wanted to be without them,  always knowing in the back of my mind that her mother was a CPS Supervisor/social worker and it was always very obvious what her powers were. My ex-wife would always threaten that single fathers don’t get custody. She always knew the worst way to hurt me was through my kids. Even after 9 years and the 3 of 4 of our children being grown, she continues to not only hurt me but she hurt her own children by calling CPS so much that they ended up taking their baby brother.  A social worker told me that she called the hotline 18 times in one month. I have documentation of her calls to she made directly to our social workers and even leaving voice mail messages. Social Services knew she was making these reports up because they would tell me so when they came out.

CPS has, without a doubt, become the biggest disappointment in my life,  basically ending all faith and belief in the system. I, like many people, believed that they were there to protect children and do what is right.  The day they took my child was the day I started to understand what CPS really does to families. My ex-wife has been on a mission to destroy my life and my new wife’s life.  She got her wish,  I will never feel like a whole person again. I am so ashamed  I ever spent any time in my life believing in her when she could be capable of such destruction.  To hate a person so much that you hurt their child is sick beyond belief.

The day CPS showed up at the hospital and came into my life and took my baby boy with out any real evidence, only lies.  CPS told my wife and I if we did not admit to using drugs that we would never see our son again. They crammed their “case plan” down my throat and we did what they wanted so we could get our kids back but I thought they just didn’t have all the pieces of the case together yet and I thought it will come out later on as they do some investigating. As time went on and and nothing that we said or did was playing any part in ending this false report of abuse.

I started to get so confused in my head about how people could be like this.  These Social Workers knew my wife was sober and it did not  make any difference, this woman was still telling me that we were going to lose our son and never see him again.  I asked her what gives you the authority to go around destroying peoples lives this way? Her answer was almost impossible to understand because of the painful way it was said.  She told me, “because I can and I am not leaving here without our baby”.

I couldn’t believe what I was hearing was real. She began to tell me that she knows we are on because they got a phone call from my ex-wife stating we had been doing drugs and they should go to the hospital and take our baby from us.  I tried to tell them that my ex-wife was a very mean person and only wants to hurt my new family.    I told her that I have already filed  a restraining order on her because she will not stop trying to hurt me.  I also told her that my ex-wife is always  trying to get money out of me and threatening to call CPS if I didn’t give her money. CPS took her word that I am a bad father but she was jealous and resentful because I was granted custody of my children in the divorce.

CPS presents a mask for the public and the media and the public that they are saving children from some sort of horrific child abuse or neglect. But that’s not a lot of cases as far as I can see. There has never been any debate among national policy makers, researchers, and federal agencies that the vast majority of CPS cases are due to poverty or frivolous/social reasons and do not contain elements of real child abuse. If the cases did actually involve acts of abuse they would be criminal, identified and investigated by law enforcement, rather than social workers, and would be prosecuted as such. P.L. 96-272 came into effect partly because Congress determined that a large number of children were being unnecessarily removed from their homes, and, once removed, they were lost in the limbo of foster care for years, many until they just grew too old, when they were then put on the streets at the age of 18.

My life has become a mission of fighting this enormous abuse on the family by people not trained to help anyone while  pretending to be doing the right thing for children but their actions speak so differently .  To quote the Bible, you will know those by the gifts they bear.  CPS blames everything on the parents even if the child gets hurt while in foster care because somehow its parents fault.  I have been lied to so many times by social services for example,  after the judge gave orders to return our children, the social worker,  Kristine Vernier told me she did not have to follow the courts orders, because they are just “recommendations”. But when the Judge orders the parents to do something, its a requirement. If this was true there would be no judge.

It is so obvious CPS doesn’t care about children, the only thing CPS is in the best interest of is the title IV-E Funding and the CAPTA  funding.   There are so many abuses on children by Social Workers, if they really cared about children then CPS would actually interview children and give them a voice like real people. The only time CPS lets children speak on their own behalf is to testify against the parents.  With such obvious prejudice, they can’t say they are really looking out for the child best interest.  One of CPS’s offenses is children have no voice in their own safety and are many times forced placement against their will. I can only speak for me currently, but when I was a child I defiantly knew what was in my best interest.

I wish I could convey to you the heartache that my wife and I are going through because of the lies my ex-wife told. My sons life will be forever damaged by CPS.  How can this happen today in this country?  I have raised 3 children to become great caring adults and my daughter who was 14 wasn’t ever included in the case because she is a social workers granddaughter but the children belonging to my new wife and I were taken into foster care and our youngest son was put up for adoption, There is so much prejudice in this case how come I can’t get it heard in a real court.  If I was a real danger to the kids of my new marriage, then we could presume I was bad for the children of my past marriage as well.  Can anyone see the injustice here?

Our son is a gift from god to raise as a decent, loving, caring human being by people who truly care about his needs as a good worth wile individual. This was stolen from him. Now  he is with CPS foster care and they have the worst record  raising children. Children raised in foster care are 70% more likely to commit a crime landing them in prison for the rest of their lives. The answer for this is obvious, foster care children are treated by CPS as if they do not matter like throw away children. Here is a  fact that CPS tells children to break the bond from the parents,  YOUR PARENTS DO NOT WANT YOU. I have been told this over and over by so many people going through this same type of abuse.  Doesn’t anyone ever stop to think these are the people we are leaving this planet to and they are mistreated during the most important time in life? OMG  CPS is only a job people how can you abuse families and bring such unhappiness to so many for a paycheck?

For the child’s best interest is what CPS claims,  if this was true then CPS would listen to these children who are begging to go back home.   When there has been no abuse and the child says over and over, my parents love me and treat me great. CPS doesn’t  listen to children when they say they were not abused.  Our child was put up for adoption and it states in the report that we treated our child very well. These judges will take your rights as a parent with out any proof of wrong doing even when the child says there was no abuse.  How can anyone say, this is in the child’s best interest?

We will never stop fighting for our child,  there is only one agenda for these CPS courts, taking children for money. There is only one answer, CPS is wrong and it shows in all there actions. We are right and will not stop fighting for our child ever. Doesn’t matter what the judge ever tells me, my child’s life and happiness are much more important  period.  This is outrageous  that this doesn’t matter to you Judge Monterosso / CPS ring leader.  This Judge knows CPS hurts children and destroys families to the inner most core.   These are the people protecting our children.  You should be ashamed of yourselves.  I guess you have no god to answer to.

I was asked to share my opinion of Riverside County Judges and CPS with other families.


My response

I would absolutely love to share my opinion of RIVERSIDE COUNTY CPS JUDGES WITH YOU. But this would take so long to go over all the overwhelming evidence of false evidence being allowed into the courtroom, and not allowing parents on record to defend themselves.  Parents and children are being blatantly taken advantage of.

It should be required to disclose Dependency policies and procedures, such as a copy of the Dependency Quick Guide, A Dogbook for Attorneys Representing Children and Parents published by the state’s Administrative Office of the Courts. I personally have seen how the court accepts everything CPS says to be considered clear and convincing without CPS actually presenting any real evidence. Instead,  CPS just writes a scathing report stating that they have seen evidence.  This is completely bias on the side of CPS to not actually see the real evidence.  In my case, CPS presented another mans criminal record as if it was mine and NO ONE noticed and would not listen to me when I said something about it. This is clearly criminal.

 

Anyone who wants proof all you need do is write me and I will show you overwhelming evidence of fraud through out the CPS, county counsel and the Riverside County CPS court proceedings. Everything I am saying here is completely true so help me god . My law suit when it gets heard and it will is so damaging to all these people.

 

CPS falsified so many records to steal my child and had the assistance of every single person down the line including CPS attorneys, Judges, and Social Workers licensed and unlicensed. These people all think they are immune, I got news for them, NO ONE is immune from corruption and criminal activities.

 

Even my appellant attorney did not review the case or he would have seen the obvious, contradictions of their statements miss reporting and false reporting, substitution of reports, cut and pasting of certified documents by a state testing facility. The Attorneys’ unethical and intentional gross misconduct lead to the legal kidnapping of my child.

 

None of these people have any concern of the child’s real welfare. Every bit of evidence is already being sent to every single congressman, senators, and anyone else who needs to know what is going on here.  Please write me, this can not happen to anymore children.

 

OMG what is going on in this country allowing our most precious gifts given to us by God to take care of and guide into adulthood as a decent person. Children stolen from their home will never understand why this happened to them.  There is no medication CPS can force a child to take that will ever take this damage away except returning these children home to their loving parents. Be aware that CPS social workers tell the children that their parents do not care about them. Talk about emotional abuse!

 

In May 2011 I reported this corruption and legal kidnapping scheme to the FBI. When I informed the Social Worker, AntoineColey, he laughed and said, “The FBI is not going to do anything.”  Well, the FBI’s response was, “We are not in the position to challenge CPS.”  The FBI is in charge of investigating corruption AND kidnappings. So WHO is in charge of protecting our children besides the parent who gets arrested if they take possession back of their child?

 

Please share this story and information. The more people who know about this illegal kidnapping ring the less power they will have and could make all the difference in the world to all our American families.

 

People please pay attention to my words and read them very clearly, it is with the utmost respect for children and to end this abuse of our children and the never ending pain for parents. If people only had the information provided in the Dependency policies and procedures,  (Dependency Quick Guide, A Dogbook for Attorneys Representing Children and Parents) published by the state’s Administrative Office of the Courts  these  kidnappings would not be happening.

 

In closing. What does this tell you?  This is intentional.

What is the reason? Money funding from CAPTA and Title IV-E of the social security act, and Youakim funding.

Far more money and incentives is given for out of home placement placing the child up for adoption then to try to help the family.

 

Please tell everyone you know to read this. Do not just let anymore children be taken from loving homes. Even if you don’t think this will happen to you.

 

 No one will help you after your child gets taken accept knowledge and preparation for the kind of people you are dealing with. Then you may have a fighting chance.

 

My motives,   I want to finish raising my beautiful baby boy who I love absolutely and completely so very much.

And to stop this from happening to any other children and parents,   from going through the heart ace that never ends.

 

Thank You

William Ronald Burns

ProjectManagerBill@gmail.com