VIRGINIA: Mother falsely accused of abuse after her son is injured at babysitters
I AM THIS LITTLE GUY’S MOTHER (~ MY STORY
I start with an incident where I have been falsely accused of child abuse.
I detail what I did and how I discovered my son’s assault, meaning something happened to his bottom while in the care of his grandmother /and his babysitter. I expose how he was on an adult size quad that day. The 12 year old was never cross examined.
I do expose in several text messages that my son’s grandma tried to cover up her tracks and was angry .
I have a timeline of events
I also share photos of the quad at the time the injury occurred.
I’ve included many letters I have sent trying to communicate I need to see my son.
241 242 color of law
neglect and abuse kidnapping and parent alienation
No due process
THIS IS A FULL ACCOUNT OF THE INCIDENT FROM 2016 WHERE I HAVE BEEN FALSELY ACCUSED
It was @ that time I did not have custody of my son, his dad’s mother BRENDA did. Even though I kept my son a majority of the time, because she drove a log truck.
~April the 8th, 2016
I call BRENDA to ask if I can stay the night with her to be able to spend time with my son. She’s telling me about a new BABYSITTER for my son & will take me to meet with her tomorrow. That night my son and I are alone because his grandmother has gone out drinking.
~April the 9th of 2016
I’ve met with BETH SCOTT the daycare/babysitter. (the interaction between her and my son and her children went well.
THE ONE DAY I DO NOT HAVE MY SON,
HE GETS HURT & I AM FALSELY ACCUSED OF A LEVEL TWO PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE. .
On April 10th 2016 I have to go to Boars Head (in Jarratt Virginia) for my interview.
@ about 10 am, I drop my son off @ BETHS, his daycare.
After my interview, I TEXT BRENDA (my son’s grandmother while she’s at work to tell her I was done and that I wanted to pick up my son. I’m told to leave him with the babysitter so that the both can get more acquainted. So I agree.
Later that afternoon I have two classes. (NA/AA The classes are MANDATORY. (So I go) My Son’s Grandma BRENDA has picked him up from BETH SCOT/ his daycare.. After my meetings I rush over (it’s approximately 7 to 7:30, I pick up my son . BRENDA and I speak briefly concerning my son. I’m told my son never used the restroom. And that my son hadn’t gone pee the whole 3 to 4 hours she’d had him.
MY SONS GRANDMOTHER BRENDA
HOW DID MY SON GET HURT While SPENDING NEAR TEN HOURS IN BETWEEN THREE DIFFERENT PEOPLE ~ AND WHY WAS MY SON GIVEN A BATH. WHILE AT HIS BABYSITTERS/DAYCARE SHE BATHED HIM AND ITS NEVER BEEN MENTIONED. ITS WRONG HAVING NO EXPLANATIONS, LIKE WAS HE DROPPED?
MY SONS GRANDMA(BRENDA HAD ALREADY ASKED ABOUT MAKING SURE THE STORIES WERE ALIKE WHEN BEING QUESTIONED BY THE NURSE SHE WANTED TO AVOID ANY CONFRONTATION WITH ANYONE IS WHY SHE MAY BE PROTECTING HER 12 YEARS OLD SON WHOM HAD MY SON ON AN ADULT SIZE QUAD.
~ I LIVE WITH MY NANA( MY DAD’S MOM
I (Elani Wells take my son into the house and I lay him down on the couch. (In the living room, there’s two chairs and a couch. My son is grouchy and very tired. I go back out to my truck to grab the stuff he will need for the night. I hurry back inside. I put everything down and I check to see if my son is wet from the front to the back, trying not to bother him. After my son falls asleep from watching television, I unpack his bags and I lay down in the recliner next to him. *I’m only four or five inches away from where he is sleeping.
@1:00 AM: MY SON WAKES UP SCREAMING! HE WON’T.STOP CRYING. WHILE I’M IN A STATE OF PANIC, I’M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT COULD BE WRONG WITH MY SON.
He is wet and the couch is soaked! I ask him what’s wrong? He says,“hurt mama I hurt.” My first instinct is to put him in the bathtub and rinse him off. When I do he starts screaming, louder and louder & I still have no idea what’s wrong with him. MY GRANDMA from around the corner BARGES IN TOWARDS ME TO ASK ME WHAT’S WRONG? MY ANSWER IS GRANDMA I DON’T KNOW. WHEN I TAKE MY SON OUT FROM THE BATHTUB AND FROM BEHIND MY GRANDMA SAYS WHAT’S THAT? I TURN MY SON AROUND TO LOOK AND HE HAS A HUGE BLISTERY RED MARK ON HIS BUTT. I then ask my grandmother to hold my son so I can call and find out what happened.
IM TOLD ITS A DIAPER RASH OR AN ALLERGIC REACTION TO THE SOAP THAT WAS USED ON HIM WHEN HE WAS WITH HIS BABYSITTER
BRENDA SAYS, VIA PHONE THAT MY SON HAS HAD A LOT OF DIARRHEA. I’M TOLD TO KEEP AN EYE ON IT. AND TO PUT SOME OINTMENT ON IT & WE HANG UP. MY SON CALMS DOWN I’VE PUT HIM TO SLEEP. THE NEXT DAY MY SON IS DOING ALOT BETTER, EXCEPT WHEN HE WOULD GO POTTY OR PEE THEN HE WOULD SCREAM FROM THE TOP OF HIS LUNGS. BRENDA’S ADVICE FOR ME IS TO GIVE MY SON SOME SOY MILK AND SO I DO. At 9:30 I text BRENDA that I need to go to E.R. because I was in a lot of pain from my kidney stones. She asks me where’s your NANA? I say, She’s in bed. I’m then told to go ahead and do what I need to do then, but to not leave my son with my mom.
I HAVE TO WORK AND I NEED YOUR HELP. I CAN’T TAKE CARE OF YOUR SON BY MYSELF..
The next morning, I still don’t feel good so I text my son’s grandma (who is at work) to ask if it would be ok for my grandma to watch my son for a couple of days, because I was needing to get some rest. She says ok. I have called my mom for a ride. I called my grandma and explained I felt weak and that I was prescribed a narcotic. I ask her if she will keep my son for the night. She says yes. I also tell her about the rash and that she needs to keep ointment on it.
LATER THAT SAME AFTERNOON I GET A TEXT FROM BRENDA TO CALL HER AS SOON AS I AM ALONE. I THINK ITS THE VERY SAME DAY MY AUNT( WHOSE A NURSE) STOPS BY MY GRANDMAS TO SEE MY SON.
A FEW DAYS LATER I GET A TEXT FROM BRENDA, TELLING ME I NEED TO BE CAREFUL BECAUSE MY MOMS SISTER IS ASKING QUESTIONS AND IS TRYING TO SEE IF WE HAVE THE SAME ANSWERS. I’M TOLD SHE IS WORKING WITH CPS TO TRY TO GET BRENDA AND I BACK IN COURT.
A couple days go by, when early one morning I get a text from BRENDA saying she just has two hours to decide what to say. I need to pick up the phone if I still want to see my son. She says I have allowed you to be in your son’s life. Pick up the phone or I will do what I have to do.
I get another text to stop telling people our business or she will get in trouble for not doing what she was supposed to be doing. THE NEXT DAY MY SON IS AT MCV WITH AN EAR INFECTION. (THE SAME NIGHT MY SON STAYS WITH MY AUNT .
The day I drop my son off and I go to the E.R. with my mom is the day that CPS is called to my grandparents, even though I’d told both my grandma and grandpa, when I dropped my son off about the mark on his butt because I wanted them to know, I did not hurt him. They call my aunt. And my aunt calls CPS.
THIS IS SUSAN MITCHLL /SHE IS THE SOCIAL WORKER
SUSAN MITCHELL INTERVIEWS MY SON. And she puts in her report that my son said three things. “Mommy spanked me”. “Mommy did it” & Mommy hurt me.
IT WAS ONE IN THE MORNING WHEN I PUT MY SON IN THE BATH & HE SCREAMS FROM THE TOP OF HIS LUNGS NOT KNOWING HIS BUTT WAS RAW BLISTERY LOOKING AND BRUISED. I KNOW HAD I SEEN IT FIRST I WOULD OF THOUGHT TWICE BEFORE TAKING MY BABY FROM THE SOILED COUCH AND STICKING HIM INTO THE BATHTUB ~.
A doctor documents my son has sensitive skin and is allergic to red dye in food..
THE FOLLOWING ARE THE TEXT BETWEEN MY SONS GRANDMA BRENDA AND MYSELF
I WANT ALL THE PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR MY SON ON THE DAY(EVE HE GOT HURT TO ALL BE QUESTIONED & CROSSED EXAMINED.
I AM ASKING FOR THE ADOPTION TO BE REVERSED BECAUSE OF MY SON BEING WRONGFULLY ADOPTED ~ FIVE DAYS PRIOR TO CHRISTMAS
SUSAN MITCHELL SAYS IT IS NOT RELEVANT AND DENIES ME MY RIGHT TO MY SIXTH AMENDMENT
THE SOCIAL WORKER SUSAN MITCHELL FAILS TO MENTION THAT MY SONS 12 YEAR OLD UNCLE HAD MY SON ON AN ADULT SIZE QUAD!
I WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO MY SON? I WANT MY SONS GRANDMA BRENDA FOR MY SONS MEDICAL RECORDS
I ALSO WANT TO KNOW WHY DID SHE ALLOW MY SON TO GO WITH HER SON TYLER ON HIS QUAD AND EXPECT HER 12 YEAR OLD TO BE ABLE TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MY SONS SAFETY???
WHY WAS MY SON ON AN ADULT SIZE FOUR WHEELER ?
MOMMY HIT* ME
OR DID MY 2 YEAR OLD SAY MOMMY HURT ME? & I DID UNKNOWINGLY HURT MY SON BY PUTTING HIS INJURED BEHIND IN THE BATH WATER.
WHY DID MY SONS DAYCARE GIVE MY SON A BATH??
WAS SHE ABLE TO LIFT HIM INTO AND OUT FROM THE BATHTUB SAFELY?
DID SOMETHING HAPPEN?
I DESERVE AN APPEAL BECAUSE NO ONE HAS A RIGHT TO ACCUSE ME OF HURTING MY SON WITHOUT THEM HAVING NOTHING FOR EVIDENCE(Mommy hurt me-I did/I PUT HIS BRUISED* & RAW BUTT IN THE BATHTUB
The babysitter and the grandmother were not questioned or rightfully investigated. Somebody needs to ask these woman questions.
ASK MY SONS 12 YEAR OLD UNCLE, DID MY SON FALL OFF THE FOUR WHEELER ?
DID HE HAVE MY SON ON THE SMALL SERVICE ROAD ALONG HIS YARD AND ALSO WHERE WERE HIS HELMETS ?
Or DID-the babysitter NOT CHANGE MY SON’S DIAPER CAUSING HIM TO BLISTER . SHE GAVE HIM A BATH, WHY THOUGH? DID SHE DROP HIM .
I WANT SOCIAL SERVICES TO PAY FOR WHAT THEY DONE TO MY SON AND I.
AND WHY?!?! IS BECAUSE CPS HAVE FAILED NOT ONLY MY SON BUT SO MANY OTHER CHILDREN.
ON * 6/15/16 THERES A Letter to Elani from Susan Mitchell – “the Department finds that a preponderance of evidence established that this is a founded case of physical abuse, level 2”
ON * 6/22/16 THERES A Letter from Elani to Susan Mitchell, social worker asking if the babysitter had been investigated. Elani requests a local conference with the agency – the also states she did not abuse or neglect her son
ON * 6/24/16I AM LIKE “Show me the proof where I abused or neglected by son. I would like to see it, it does not exist. Sincerely, Elani”
ON * 6/24/16 THERE’S ANOTHER LETTER “To whom it may concern, Did you all happen to investigate the babysitter in this case, I repeat, I did not abuse or neglect my son. I have changed for the better; I want to be a mother to MY SON, he is my flesh and blood” ~
ON * 6/22/16 THERES A TO Susan Mitchell, Social Worker from Elani ~ I am writing to appeal all records
IT’S SAID THAT MY SON HAS ANXIETY AND ITS BEING BLAMED ON DRUG USE WHO SAYS? WHEN I WAS PREGNANT I NEVER DID DRUGS .
THE COMPELLING REASON FOR MY FILING AGAINST THE WRONG-FULL AFFIDAVIT TO ADOPT MY SON OUT IS BASED ON FRAUD
WHEN STACEY’ MY MOM HAS A MENTAL BREAK DOWN SHE WAS HURRIED TO E.R, WITH A KIDNEY INFECTION? , HER SISTER WHO IS A NURSE TAKES MY SON FROM MY MOM.
THEN AFTER JUDGE CARSON SAUNDERS ORDER IS FOR JOINT CUSTODY BETWEEN MY SONS GRANDMOTHER AND MY AUNT, SHE INSTEAD RELINQUISHES HER RIGHTS AND MY SON IS PLACED WITH BRENDA R. WHO IS AEDANS DADS MOM.
~ WHEN BRENDA DOES NOT WANT MY SON ANYMORE AND I SUSPECT IT’S SO SHE DOES NOT HAVE TO ANSWER TO THE DOCTOR OR CPS BEING SHED ALREADY HAD 3 CPS CASES PRIOR* IS THIS WHY SHE DOESN’T WANT ,MY SON ?
ITS RIGHT AT THE TIME I’M TRYING TO GET HER CROSS EXAMINED WHY WOULD SHE REFUSE TO GIVE MY MOMS SISTER MY SONS MEDiCAL CARD SHE OVER & OVER HAD ASKED FOR IT . HE’S NOW WENT FROM HIS GRANDMA TO LIVE WITH MY MOMS SISTER WHO ENDS UP HAVING TO PAY FOR THE VISITS TO THE HOSPITAL. BEFORE GRANDMA GIVES UP MY SON SHE WAS TOLD MY SON HAD SOME APPOINTMENTS AND SHE WOULD NOT TAKE MY SON TO ANY OF THEM!
THE ATTORNEY AMANDA JONES IS WHO IS REPRESENTING THE COUPLE WHO HAVE MY SON AEDEN * AMANDA IS MY SONS AUNT.
WHY WAS MY 2 YEAR OLD SON ON AN ADULT SIZED QUAD?
* THE DAY I PICK HIM UP FROM HIS GRANDMA BRENDA .
THIS IS * CHILD ENDANGERMENT
I WANT JUSTICE. AND I FEEL THAT JUDGE CARSON SAUNDERS NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED FOR BEING APART OF KEEPING MY SON AGAINST HIS WILL. * HE HAS BEEN STOLEN!
MY SON HAS BEEN KIDNAPPED*
AND THE REASON I SAY THIS IS I HAVE NOT SEEN HIM IN FOUR LONG YEARS
WHY IS IT THAT JUDGE CARSON SAUNDERS KEEPS THROWING OUT MY PETITION. ?
*JUDGE CARSON SAUNDERS REASON WAS IT WAS BECAUSE HE DOES NOT HAVE THE JURISDICTION.
DREW PAIGE/MY SONS GAL. HAS FAILED IN SPEAKING UP FOR MY SONS BEST INTEREST (* DREW PAIGE DID NOT CARE ABOUT MY SONS FEELINGS NOR DID HE CARE ABOUT MY FEELINGS FOR MY SON.
~ IN 2016 I ASK THE SOCIAL WORKER ‘ SUSAN MITCHELL
(FROM CPS) FOR HER HELP BECAUSE I EXPECTED THAT EVERYONE WHO HAD MY SON ON THE DAY HE WAS INJURED TO BE CROSS EXAMINED AND SHE IGNORES ME. ~ I ALSO ASK THE SUPERVISOR *LABRINA MOSLEY AND SHE IGNORES ME . I THEN ASK MR. HOLTKAMP AND HE ALSO IGNORES ME.
WHY SHOULD IT BE OK THAT I NOT HAVE A GAL FOR A WHOLE YEAR ??
MR. CARSON SAUNDERS IS A JUDGE WITH THE JDRC COURT. HE IS THE JUDGE WHO FIRST HEARS MY CASE.
JUDGE SHARRETT IS THE JUDGE WHO HEARS MY APPEAL ON THE CHILD ABUSE CASE. THE JUDGE THAT HEARS THE ADOPTION IS ALLEN SHARRETT
TODAY JUDGE CARSON SAUNDERS OFFICE SITS UPSTAIRS FROM JUDGE ALLEN SHARRETTS OFFICE WHOM HE IS FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT
MR. JOHN HOLTKAMP IS THE DIRECTOR OF SOCIAL SERVICES
IN THE J&DR DISTRICT COURT OF GREENSVILLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
ELANI BROOK WELLS PLAINTIFF
PHILIP T. AND ELIZABETH P. JUSTICE ____________________________________________________________
MODIFICATION OF CUSTODY PETITION FOR FULL CUSTODY
Whereby, Elani Wells, Plaintiff, does hereby request sole legal and physical custody of her son Aedan Liam Williams. The “Final Order” for Adoption signed on January 15, 2020 in the Greensville County Circuit Court is void under the law and is therefore not valid.
1. On March 5, 2018 Elizabeth and Philip Justice were awarded sole physical and legal custody of Aedan Williams, son of Elani Wells with visitation by Elani to be determined by Elizabeth and Philip Justice, the Guardian Ad Litem, and Aedan’s counselor. See Exhibit 1.
2. Directly thereafter the Guardian Ad Litem withdrew and despite continual letters and petitions by Elani Wells, Philip and Elizabeth Justice would not allow Elani visitation with her son. See Exhibit 2.
3. A Final Order for Adoption was signed on January 15, 2020 riddled with errors, false and unproven allegations, and without the consent of Elani Wells. Exhibit 3.
4. The Virginia Code 63.2-1201 states children may only be adopted to third parties with the consent of a parent (birth mother), which at no point was consent given. See Exhibit 4.
5. The Court did not follow the law and therefore the “Final Order” is void.
a. “Courts are constituted by authority and they cannot go beyond that power delegated to them. If they act beyond that authority, and certainly in contravention of it, their judgements and orders are regarded as nullities; they are not voidable, but simply void, and this even prior to reversal”. Williamson v. Berry, 8 HOW. 945, 540 12 L.Ed. 1170, 1189 (1850).
b. “The law is well settled that a void order or judgement is void even before reversal”. Valley v. Northern Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 254 U.S. 348, 41 S.Ct. 116 (1920).
5. There was no burden of proof of allegations made in the petition for adoption and “Final Order”:
“Where there are no depositions, admissions, or affidavits the court has no facts to rely on for a summary of determination” Trinsey v. Pagliaro, D.C. Pa 1964, 229 F. Supp. 647
6. There is no time limit because a void judgement never acquires validity:
a. Although Rule 60(b)(4) is ostensibly subject to the “reasonable” time limit of the rule, at least one court has held no time limit applies to a motion under the rule because a void judgement can never acquire validity through laches. See Crosby v. Bradstreet Col, 312 F. 2d 483 (2nd Cir.) cert. denied, 373 U.S. 911, 83 S. Ct. 1300, 10 L. Ed. 2d 412 (1963) where the court vacated a judgement as void 30 years after entry. See also Marquette Corp v. Priester, 234 F.Supp 799 (E.D.S.C. 1964) where the court expressly held that FRCP Rule 60(b) (4) carries no real time limit.
7. Elani Wells is Aedan William’s birth mother:
a. No “statute, code, ordinance” can violate a right. No contract is lawful if it violates a right in all forms of law. Norton v. Shelby County 188 US 425.
b. Being the birth parent is a God given right and not one to be determined by the State.
c. Right to free association and right to exercise under the First Amendment supersede a court from depriving either parent’s or the child’s rights without due process measured by a scrutinized standard.
d. In 2013, the Virginia Supreme Court found that parents have Fundamental Liberty interests in the care, custody, and control
of their child. They also found that a child has liberty interests in establishing relationships with their parents, as stated in 2013
LF v. Breit, Virginia State Supreme Court such that “Although
our analysis in this case rests on Breit’s constitutionally
protected rights as a parent, we recognize that children also
have a liberty interest in establishing relationships with their parents”.
e. There is a presumption that parents act in their children’s best interests, Parham v. J.R., 442 U.S. 584, 602
f. The state may not interfere in child rearing decisions when a parent is available. Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000).
g. The 14th Amendment protects the fundamental right of parents
to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and
control of their children
h. The 5th Amendment states “Nor shall any person be….deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law and the 4th Amendment includes the same words and applies them for the first time to individual States such that “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”.
i. Stanley v. Illinois (1972) – Parental rights are “private interests”,
and in this Court case, the Court made it clear that the State may NOT define the term parent in a way to arbitrarily deny parental rights to a biological parent
j. Meyer v. Nebraska (1923) – right attaches to the individual such that “While this Court has not attempted to define with exactness the liberty thus guaranteed, there term has received much consideration
and some of the included things have been definitely stated. Without doubt, it denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint, but also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to marry, establish a home and bring up children, to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and generally to enjoy those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men”.
k. Casey v. Planned Parenthood South Eastern Pennsylvania –
ruled the State may NOT introduce legislation or administrative procedures that unduly interfere with the exercise of Fundamental Liberty, in other words the State may not use backhanded or “sneaky” tactics to undermine a person’s ability to exercise a fundamental right.
l. Children as individuals have rights that deserve protection such that they have a right to free association with their natural family, and a right to know and incorporate into themselves the religious, cultural, and social traditions of their family, and when the State intervenes in
the custody rights of a parent, it also intervenes in the natural rights of the child.
m. Smith v Organization of Foster Families (1977) – the importance of the familial relationship, to the individuals involved and to the society, stems from the emotional attachments that derive from the intimacy of daily association, and from the role it plays in “promoting a way of life” through the instruction of children, as well as from the fact of blood relationship. (1st amendment, freedom of association).
n. Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) – (1st amendment – freedom of religion, expression, and association) – The duty to prepare the child for “additional obligations”, referred to by the Court, must be read to include the inculcation of moral standards, religious beliefs, and elements of good citizenship. This case involves the fundamental interest of parents, as contrasted with that of the State, to guide the religious future and education of children. Thus forced associations and forced counseling or testing is purely unconstitutional.
o. Rotary International v. Rotary Club of Duarte (1987) – The first amendment protects those relationships, including family relationships, that presuppose “deep attachments and commitments
to the necessarily few other individuals whom one shares not only a special community of thoughts, experiences, and beliefs, but also distinctively personal aspect’s of one’s life”.
The “Final Order” for adoption is therefore void such that, “The law is well settled that a void order or judgement is void even before reversal”. Valley v. Northern Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 254 U.S. 348, 41 S.Ct. 116 (1920). Therefore Elani Wells hereby requests full sole physical and legal custody of HER son Aedan Williams, for whom she has fought a battle for, for so many years. The law has already been decided by the Virginia Supreme Court: In 2013, the Virginia Supreme Court found that parents have Fundamental Liberty interests in the care, custody, and control of their child. They also found that a child has liberty interests in establishing relationships with their parents, as stated in 2013 LF v. Breit, Virginia State Supreme Court such that “Although our analysis in this case rests on Breit’s constitutionally protected rights as a parent, we recognize that children also have a liberty interest in establishing relationships with their parents”.
It is therefore, that Elani Wells, hereby demands custody of HER son Aedan Williams immediately.
Elani Brook Wells
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that this was hand delivered the the Greenville County Circuit Clerk’s office on this ________day of __________, and mailed to Amanda Jones, Opposing Counsel.
Amanda Jones, Esquire Opposing Counsel
202 Hicksford Avenue
Emporia, VA 23847
(434) 637-8252 firstname.lastname@example.org
9/17/14 Agreement that Jason, Elani, and Corey agree that custody and visitation petitions shall be withdrawn (JJ006399-03-00 and JJ006399-04-00)
11/03/14 hearing, visitation to be determined, filed 10/8/14 by Elani 11/3/14 hearing, Corey Williams, petitioner, filed 10/2/14, regarding visitation
11/3/14 hearing, filed 10/8/14 Elani files regarding visitation
2/13/15 Order for custody visitation (signed 2/23/15) joint legal custody granted to Elani and Jason Backing. Physical custody granted to Elani. Corey Williams granted liberal visitation.
6/17/15 CPS Safety Plan – states Elani and Aeden do not have a stable home – states Elani needs mental health needs met – states Elani will take a drug screen on that date, she will have supervised visits with Aeden, begin retaking her medication, and Aeden will stay with her maternal grandparents (where are the medical records? drug test results?)
8/31/15 (judge signed 9/5/15) joint legal custody between Stacey and Jason Bicking, physical custody to Stacey
10/28/15 Department of Social Services letter states the case involving the family was closed. She had Child Protective Services Case Management Services.
10/26/15 (judge signed 11/9/15) Elani granted supervised visitation from Stacey, hearing set for 12/11/15 for a temporary and final hearing on the matter
10/26/15 GAL report Barbara Mason
hearing 11/30/15, filed 11/16/15 Elani (plaintiff) v. Stacey – visitation to be set for Elani to see her son, Stacey is not allowing
12/14/15 CPS Complaint received, written to Elani, (complaint must have been filed by Elani?), letter states Aeden and Stacey will benefit from continued services
12/28/15 vacated. Elani granted visitation when Aeden is with Brenda as long as Brenda or Cathy Bicking is present. Exchanges take place in Emporia. 2/13/15 hearing Joint legal custody granted to Elani and Jason – physical custody to Elani, liberal visitation to Corey
2016 legal custody Brenda Ransom 11/25/15 Elani requests custody from Stacey Hobbs (court date 12/11/15)
hearing 12/11/15, filed 11/16/15 Elani requesting custody v. Stacey
1/18/16 GAL report Barbara Mason – recommends custody remain with Stacey, temporarily, that Elani be ordered to return to counseling at District 19 and consideration be given to placing the child with Christina Pope, and parents have supervised visitation
1/8/16 hearing (signed 1/11/16) Brenda Ransom is granted visitation every Saturday from 10AM to 6PM beginning 1/9/16. Order of visitation dated 2/12/2016 Ms. Mason ordered to continue as GAL for 6 months
2/12/16 Full Legal and physical custody granted to Brenda Ransom, Aeden have a full physical and recommendations for counseling
2/12/16 hearing – legal and physical custody granted to Brenda Ransom. Ordered Aeden have a full physical with a pediatrician. Ms. Mason continue as GAL.
3/2/16 letter from Department of Social Services saying the case is closed because Aeden is no longer in the care of Stacey
4/14/16 Christina Pope (Stacey’s sister) files a complaint with CPS
4/15/16 CPS report – states “no physical disciplines, child needs to be addressed by a doctor, not contact by Elani” Safety plan states “refrain from physical discipline. Child not to be in care of Elani. Christina Pope will now assume care of Aeden on a temporary basis until further notice”
4/22/16 South Hill Family Medicine Doctor’s report Aeden – allergies to cephalosporins and amoxicillin causing hives; general exam = well developed, well nourished, clean, no apparent distress; neurological: “Aeden seems happy today; he is playing with a game board-type toy. At times he gets up and walks around the room – he approaches me and initiates showing me what he’s holding”
6/10/16 Brenda Ransom requested to be relinquished of custody —————abuse allegations
6/15/16 letter from Social Services “The Dept finds that a preponderance of evidence established that this is a Founded Case of Physical Abuse, Level 2”. “Your name and the name of the victim child will be registered with the Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Social Services, Child Abuse and Neglect Central Registry”
6/15/16 Letter to Elani from Susan Mitchell – “the Department finds that a preponderance of evidence established that this is a founded case of physical abuse, level 2”
6/22/16 Letter from Elani to Susan Mitchell, social worker asking if the babysitter had been investigated. Elani requests a local conference with the agency – the also states she did not abuse or neglect her son
6/24/16 “Show me the proof where I abused or neglected by son. I would like to see it, it does not exist. Sincerely, Elani”
6/24/16 “To whom it may concern, Did you all happen to investigate the baby sitter in this case, Beth Scott…and Brenda Ransom. I repeat, I did not abuse or neglect by son Aedan. I have changed for the better; I want to be a mother to Aedan, he is my flesh and blood” 6/22/16 letter to Susan Mitchell, Social Worker from Elani – “I am writing to appeal all records of child abuse/neglect that may exist against me. I request that you skip the administrative review process and schedule me directly for a hearing. I am unaware of any proof of the neglect or child abuse”.
7/15/16 letter to Ms. Mitchell from Elani requesting “all the information used in making your determination….includes any medical documentation and pictures”
7/22/16 South Hill Family Medicine – came out well on developmental milestones but scored high on emotion/psych (this is when he was living with Christina)
7/28/16 local conference to hear the appeal
7/29/16 local CPS conference decision – letter from CPS to Elani – basically they still kept the finding of a “founded disposition of physical abuse – level 2”
10/14/16 hearing – Stacey granted visitation as agreed to by Christina 10/14/16 Christina Pope given full custody and was to determine visitation 10/14/16 GAL report Andrew Page (hearing was regarding abuse/neglect allegations), recommends stay under the care of Christina Pope and “if there is a visitation order giving specific dates and times, it will significantly and, I believe, negatively impact the schedule and structure of Aeden”. 11/28/16 Papa’s statements “Papa saw Mitchell kept asking Aeden several times about who hurt you? Papa stated he will say, he believes I didn’t do this to my son, (no proof).
12/8/16 administrative hearing in CPS appeal
6/26/17 hearing Christina Pope vs. Stacey, Christina wants to be relieved of custody
11/22/17 Andrew Page appointed GAL
11/29/16 (Elani wrote received 9/1/16 in mail) letter to Elani regarding local CPS decision – signed by Director John Holtkamp – says the case finding of a founded disposition of Physical Abuse – Level 2 shall stand
11/30/17 Elani requests visitation vs. Christina (motion to amend)
12/8/17 hearing, filed 11/13/17 Christina Pope (plaintiff) vs. Stacy, Elani, Corey, to be released of custody as soon as possible for personal reasons 12/18/17 hearing It is ordered that Elani and Stacey have no contact with Aeden
12/18/17 Elani requests visitation v. Christina “visitation of Eden Williams if custody isn’t acceptable
3/5/18 sole legal and physical custody given to Philip and Elizabeth Justice, Elani is granted visitation with consent of GAL,therapist, and Philip and Elizabeth Justice (final order – J&D court)
12/3/18 Elani submits petition for custody of son v. Elizabeth and Philip Justice (hearing date??), states “I want my son and belongs with his mother and love him”, “wants custody of son” ——————————————————————————————— 12/7/18 Petition for Adoption Filed at the CIRCUIT COURT (not J&D and before parental rights had been terminated), filed by the Justices with Amanda Jones as attorney – Amanda Jones writes “9. The mother did not attempt any of these parties to attempt to try to gain such consent, nor did she make ay filings with the Court seeking to be given contact with the child without such permission”. ———————————————————————————————- 12/12/18 Order of Reference filed by Amanda Jones on behalf of Justice’s
– request to adopt Aeden and change his name, ordered the petition be sent to Social Services, that Social Services do a thorough investigation and report back in 60 days to both the court and opposing counsel
12/25/18 Elani submits a handwritten petition stating she objects to the adoption of her son and requests a court appointed attorney (filed 12/27/18)
1/7/19 hearing – motion to amend (date issued 12/7/18)
1/20/19 Jack Randall (Elani’s attorney) writes a letter to Amanda Jones (opposing counsel) requesting Elani have supervised visitation – “She would like to be a part of her son’s life”
1/22/19 Notice of hearing for 2/5/19 in the matter of adoption of Aeden, sent by Amanda Jones (attorney to Philip and Elizabeth Justice)
2/5/19 motion to withdraw attorney Sarah Catherman, attorney released 2/5/19 hearing to appoint counsel for Elani at Greenville Circuit Court 2/7/19 (wth?) a letter is sent to Elani stating Sarah Catherman was appointed by the court to hear the matter of adoption of her son
2/27/19 Jack Randall letter to Catherman stating he was taking the case – Order to Substitute Counsel (March ?, 2019)
2/27/19 Elani Wells v. Phillip Justice (Affadavit Default Judgement) – basically said Elani is not in the military
2/26/19 Petition – Stacey has a interest in visitation
3/5/19 Jack Randall retained – letter sent to court
3/5/19 Motions to Amend filed by Jack Randall for Elani – request Elani have visitation with son (signed 2/27/19), Stacey petitioner for visitation
3/19/19 Substitute Order of Counsel – Jack Randall, in place of Connie Edwards (withdraw of Connie Edwards)
3/21/19 Angela Allen-Baine (Southside Physicians Network) requested treatment records and a status report for Elani Wells from Randall Page, attorney
3/21/19 Affidavit – Default Judgement – Elani and Stacey not in the service 3/25/19 Elani requests visitation and custody (petition filed)
3/25/19 Elani seeks sole legal and physical custody of her son
3/5/19 Attorney Jack Randall hired
4/2/19 letter from Donnell Harper to the judge requesting Elani get visitation/custody of her son
4/8/19 Elani writes the Justice’s and requests visitation
4/16/19 Jack Randall requests progress Elani is making in therapy at Southside Physicians Network
4/24/19 Elani asks “Can I please see him” in her letter to the Justice’s 5/29/19 Jack Randall files motion to dismiss case on adoption because termination of parental rights had to occur at J&D court before Civil Court could adopt
7/16/19 M. Brown appointed as GAL
8/9/19 Amanda Jones (opposing counsel attorney) requests a continuance of a August 12, 2019 hearing for October 24, 2019.
notice of hearing – did a hearing occur on this date? (letter from Amanda Jones dated 9/11/19) ————————————————————————————————— 11/15/19 Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss – by Jack Randall for Elani – “moves to dismiss this case on the grounds that Defendant had no contact with the child for just cause under Virginia Code Section 63.2-1202(H). For defendant to have visitation required the approval of the GAL, the custodians, and the therapist of Aeden Williams. Shortly after entry of the order the GAL withdrew making visitation impossible. Furthermore, the defendant was thwarted from contact with her son by Plaintiffs repeatedly, as listed in Code Section 63.2-1205 determining the best interests of the child. Wherefore, your Defendant respectfully requests this Court to enter an Order dismissing this adoption petition”. ____________________________________________________________
12/17/19 letter to Elani from Sandy Here – counseling service states “As a summary, besides your own insight work, you also worked on professional, relational, and parental development. Your attention to your personal work in session has been phenomenal and it is evident with your current accomplishment in school, balancing your duties as mother and member in our community, and other areas of your life”.
12/18/19 Improvement Association – Elani been a member of the Parents as Teachers program since 10/12/18 and “and has been documenting milestones for her children”.
9/6/19 – hearing to hear motion to dismiss petition to adopt Aeden 2/24/2020 hearing
1/15/2020 – Civil Court Final Order – on 12/20/19 The Justice’s petitioned to adopt Aeden – Final Order for Adoption
1. No Termination of Parental Rights
2. No hearing for adoption at J&D Court – did Civil even hold jurisdiction?
3. May be autistic
4. Amanda (opposing counsel in adoption papers) said Elani did not try to
see him (not true)
5. Immunologically shown to get rashes from sulfa drugs and anything
act of omission
preliminary injunctive relief at federal court to stop adoptive process
unreasonable search and seizure – did they have court order? sue for due process violation, ask for relief, stop violating constitutional rights, restrain adoptive parents
can adjoin everyone –
Social Services has no Standing by Which the Court Can Assert Jurisdiction
Greensville Emporia Social Services, brought this suit, and alleged the child had been abused and neglected, asking the Juvenile Court, (JD) to assert its jurisdiction. DSS alleged that this court had jurisdiction because the child had been the victim of abuse and neglect DSS alleged it had standing to prosecute this claim.
A Court must have jurisdiction to enter a valid, enforceable judgment on a claim. Where jurisdiction is lacking the orders and judgments, including the adoption of this case are void, a nullity and subject to collateral attack. Litigants through various procedural mechanisms nay retroactively challenge the validity of a void judgment at any time.
This controversy, between Movant Ebony the biological mother and the Greensville Emporia Social Services, originated as Parental Rights termination case initiated by the Greensville Social Services Department abbreviated (DFS) hereinafter (DSS).
Social Worker Susan Mitchell by and through her attorney Joan O’Donnell never invoked jurisdiction of the Court and this case in JJ Cause No. JJ006399 and Cause No. JJ006399 In the interest of a child A.L. W., this case is void. Child protective Services never had standing to bring a suit; there should have been an Emergency Removal Order a Petition supported by an affidavit or by sworn testionmony in person before the judge or intake officer filed under this case that termination was sought. Greenville Social Services and Department of Family Social Services abbreviated as DFS, can’t start a Suit Affecting the Parent child Relationship without an Emergency removal Order and or a Petition In the Interest of a child A.L.W., to the Juvenile court
of the then Honorable Juvenile Judge Carson Saunders. The case was void from inception, are nullities and subject to collateral attack.
Standing is a prerequisite to subject-matter jurisdiction, which is essential to the court’s power to decide this case. Because Greensville Social Services, hereinafter CPS, lacks standing to bring this action, the Juvenile court of Greensville VA, has no jurisdiction over the merits of this case, and Circuit Court must dismiss it with a Reverse decision of the Juvenile Court and vacate its order termination mother’s parental rights to D.S. and its order approving the change of goal for the foster care plan from “return home” to adoption.”
2006 Code of Virginia § 16.1-251 – Emergency removal order
16.1-251. Emergency removal order.
A. A child may be taken into immediate custody and placed in shelter care pursuant to an emergency removal order in cases in which the child is alleged to have been abused or neglected. Such order may be issued ex parte by the court upon a petition supported by an affidavit or by sworn testimony in person before the judge or intake officer which establishes that:
1. The child would be subjected to an imminent threat to life or health to the extent that severe or irremediable injury would be likely to result if the child were returned to or left in the custody of his parents, guardian, legal custodian or other person standing in loco parentis pending a final hearing on the petition.
Virginia Judicial Proceedings in Abuse and Neglect Cases
I. Initiating Court Involvement – Child Protective Services
A. Emergency Removal Order (§ 16.1-251). A child may be taken into immediate custody and placed in shelter care pursuant to an emergency removal order in cases in which the child is alleged to have been abused or neglected.
1.0 Ex Parte Emergency Removal Order (§16.1-251(A)). Essentially, an ex parte hearing allows the court to conduct a hearing without the presence of one of the parties because the situation demands immediate action or irreparable harm will likely occur.
2.0 Affidavit or Sworn Testimony Must Accompany Petition. The worker will be required to submit an affidavit or to present sworn testimony to prove that the case meets the criteria for removing a child from the home.
3.0 The Petition, Affidavit or Sworn Statement in Support of Emergency Removal Order Must Specify the Factual Circumstances Warranting Removal.
An Emergency removal order and a Petition supported by an affidavit or by sworn testionmony in person before the judge or intake officer pursuant to Virginia Code § 16.1-251. See also Virginia Judicial Proceedings in Abuse and Neglect Cases. Marked as Exhibit A. The Greensville Social Services, abbreviated as (DFS), hereinafter (CPS) would have known that to commence an Emergency removal order and execute the Petition supported by an affidavit sworn to by a person with personal knowledge before a judge or intake officer would have had to be filed by.
The Fourth Circuit in Wellar v. Department of Social Services rejected the contention that the State’s emergency intervention into custody of the plaintiff’s son violated his substantive due process rights. The court stated, “[i]t does not shock the conscience to hear that defendants removed a child in emergency action from the custody of a parent suspected of abusing him, based upon some evidence of child abuse,” and upheld the emergency circumstances exception. As for the plaintiff’s claim that the State violated his procedural due process rights by twice
transferring custody of his son without a prior hearing, the court swiftly stated that “Due process does not mandate a prior hearing in cases where emergency action may be needed to protect a child.” Just as in this case, The Department of Social Services violated this Mother’s constitutional rights because the State failed to file an Emergency Removal order when they initially removed the child, and failure to properly investigate this case, and failure to afford this Mother with a Trial by an Jury or an Judge by an impartial tribunal, this violated mother’s procedural due process rights.”
GREENSVILLE EMPORIA SOCIAL SERVICES NEVER FILEDA PETITION TO TERMINATE THE PARENTAL RIGHTS OF THE MOVANT
The Greensville Emporia Social Services, (DSS) never filed Petitions to the Circuit Court or in any proceeding of Presiding Judge Carson Saunders to terminate the Parental Rights of the biological Mother to her son A.L.W made the subject of this suit. The Circuit Court executed an Order granting the adoption of A.L.W., but there is no valid Petition to terminate residual parental rights of Ebony. See Virginia Family Code § 16.1-283.
Code of Virginia § 16.1-283. Termination of residual parental rights
A. The residual parental rights of a parent or parents may be terminated by the court as hereinafter provided in a separate proceeding if the petition specifically requests such relief. No petition seeking termination of residual parental rights shall be accepted by the court prior to the filing of a foster care plan, pursuant to § 16.1-281, which documents termination of residual parental rights as being in the best interests of the child. The court may hear and adjudicate a petition for termination of parental rights in the same proceeding in which the court has
approved a foster care plan which documents that termination is in the best interests of the child. The court may terminate the residual parental rights of one parent without affecting the rights of the other parent. The local board of social services or a licensed child-placing agency need not have identified an available and eligible family to adopt a child for whom termination of parental rights is being sought prior to the entry of an order terminating parental rights.
Any order terminating residual parental rights shall be accompanied by an order continuing or granting custody to a local board of social services or to a licensed child-placing agency or granting custody or guardianship to a person with a legitimate interest, subject to the provisions of subsection A1. However, in such cases the court shall give a consideration to granting custody to a person with a legitimate interest. An order continuing or granting custody to a local board of social services or to a licensed child-placing agency shall indicate whether that board or agency shall have the authority to place the child for adoption and consent thereto.
The Greensville Emporia Social Services, (DSS) never filed a Petition nor had a foster care plan completed in any proceeding in the Juvenile Court of Presiding Judge Carson Saunders to terminate the Parental Rights of the biological Mother to her son A.L.W. The Circuit Court cannot grant a Petition to adopt this child without the mother’s parental rights being terminated in a proceeding. There must be a Petition to terminate the parental rights in a separate proceeding or in the JD Court.
DSS must have an order terminating residual parental rights of Ebony to her biological son A.L.W and shall be accompanied by an order continuing or granting custody to a local board
of social services or to a licensed child-placing agency or granting custody or guardianship to a person with a legitimate interest, subject to the provisions of subsection A1.
DSS embarked upon an hell-bent effort to terminate the parental rights of this Mother and to forcefully Adopt her biological son A.L.W out to the adoptees when the department new that they had not executed a Petition Terminating the Parental Rights of Ebony early in the Proceeding followed by a Foster care Plan to place the said child A.L.W. There is no order granting a petition of Termination of the parental rights of this Mother and the circuit court should vacate any and all Orders and Judgments that pertains to the adoption of A.L.W because it is fraud, and void on the face of this pleading.
We ask that this Circuit Court urgently with no hesitation remand this case back to the Juvenile Court with an order of dismissal the Circuit Court has no jurisdiction over the merits of this case, and Circuit Court must dismiss it with a Reverse decision of the Juvenile Court and vacate its order termination mother’s parental rights to D.S. and its order approving the change of goal for the foster care plan from “return home” to adoption.”
THE JUVENILE COURT ERRED AT FAILING TO NOT PROVIDE
THE MOTHER WITH A FAIR TRIAL BY AN IMPARTIAL TRIBUNAL OR A JURY
The Trial Court erred in depriving this Mother’s of a fair trial by an impartial tribunal before Honorable Juvenile Judge Carson Saunders. There was no trial; therefore the Mother had no reason to file a Notice of an Appeal in the Circuit Court to Appeal to the Circuit Court. Moreover the JD court has no final orders entered by a juvenile court, a final order terminating residual parental rights. In terminating Mothers parental rights without orders to Terminate
Mothers parental rights, because there was no trial on the merits, there was no evidence presented at any such trial sufficient to terminate her parental rights. The Juvenile Court must have a trial where the Mother can present evidence and proof; DSS must present evidence proving guilt beyond all possible doubt. DSS falsely accused this Mother of Physical abuse to her son, A.L.W., but failed to have a trial on the merits by a Judge before an impartial tribunal and or a Jury to prove beyond a reasonable doubt with sufficient evidence proving beyond all possible doubt that this Mother physically abused her son, A.L.W.
16. -283. Termination of residual parental rights. The residual parent rights of a parent or parents may be terminated by the court as hereinafter provided in a separate proceeding if the petition specifically requests such relief.
The department of Social Services Never filed a foster care plan with the juvenile court, which would have subsequently entered orders approving the plan and terminating the Mother’s parental rights, but this never happened. The Circuit failed at granting the Petition to adopt A.L.W. and no Petition was filed in a separate proceeding to terminate the parental rights of this Mother.
Moreover the Juvenile Court erred at not providing the mother with a Fair Trial by a Judge or Jury, no final orders and no foster care plan for this Mother to comply with. The department never filed a foster care plan to the juvenile court, therefore the circuit Court erred at granting the Petition to adopt A.L.W, and order granting the adoption of A.L.W., is void on the face of this pleading.
Said the Juvenile court deprived this Mother of a fair trial before his tribunal and or a jury trial. The Juvenile court of Greensville VA has no jurisdiction over the merits of this case, and Circuit Court must dismiss it with a Reverse decision of the Juvenile Court and vacate its order at granting the adoption of A.L.W., and its order approving the change of goal for the foster care plan from “return home” to adoption.”
A Court must have jurisdiction to enter a valid, enforceable judgment on a claim. Where jurisdiction is lacking the orders and judgments, including the adoption of this case are void, a nullity and subject to collateral attack. Litigants through various procedural mechanisms nay retroactively challenge the validity of a void judgment at any time.
DSS COMMITTED FRAUD AS A MISREPRESENTATION OF FACT
DSS committed fraud as a misrepresentation of material fact, Ebony alleges that DSS knowingly and intentionally, with the intent to mislead Ebony the biological mother into thinking that her child would be returned to her care after completetion of her Services. DSS never returned A.L.W to Ebony, but sought for adoption of the child and defrauded Ebony and mislead Ebony into believing that the child would be returned to her. DSS misleading Ebony into believing that her child would be returned to her upon completetion of her service plan that was untrue. Because DSS intentionally mislead Ebony that A.L.W would be returned to her upon completion of services and asked Ebony to complete the service plan knowing that A.L.W would not be returned to her and that constitutes fraud and induced Ebony to take action on the service plan.
DSS caused irreparable injury and suffered damages as a result to her loss of A.L.W. The circuit court should vacate any and all Orders and Judgments that pertain to the adoption of A.L.W because it is fraud, and void on the face of this pleading. We ask that this circuit court urgently with no hesitation remand this case back to the Juvenile Court with an order of dismissal.
The State of Virginia defines fraud as it is written, (1) a false representation, (2) of a present, material fact, (3) made intentionally and knowingly, (4) with intent to mislead (5) reasonable reliance by the party mislead, and (6) resulting damage.
Said Fraud is a due process violation. Violation of the 14th Amendment Due process. Fraud vitiates everything. Due process requires a fair and impartial tribunal (Judge).
The Rights of Parents and Children are Aligned and Entitled to Due Process Protection.
The law presumes that fit parents act in the best interest of their children because they naturally love them. Troxel, 530 U.S. at 68; Parham v. J.R., 442 U.S. 584, 602, 99 S. Ct. 2493, 61 L. Ed. 2d 101 (1979). A fit parent is one who adequately who cares for his or her children. Troxel, 530 U.S. 57. “It is generally desirable for the child to remain with or be returned to the natural parent because the child’s need for a normal family life will usually best be met in the natural home”. Smith v. Org of foster for equal & Reform, 431 U.S. 816, 823, 97 S. Ct. 2094, 53 L. Ed. 2d 14 (1977). A child has a recognized and equally important interest in maintaining a relationship with his or her parents. Stanley, 405 U.S. 645. See Smith v. Org of Foster Families for Equal. & Reform, 431 U.S. 816, 844-45 (1977) (declaring the right of children to maintain
uninterrupted the “emotional attachments that derive from the intimacy of daily association” with the parent); See also Raymond C. O’Brien, An Analysis of Realistic Due Process of Children Verses Parents, 26 Conn. L. Rev. 1209, 1247-48 nn. 178-82 (1994)
See Planned Parenthood v. Danforth, 428 U.S. 52, 74 (1976) (“Constitutional rights do not mature and come into being magically only when one attains the state defined age of majority. Minors, as well as adults, are protected by the Constitution and posses constitutional rights.”) The Troxel Court based its ruling on a body of Supreme Court precedent that affirms parents’ fundamental right to make decisions regarding the care, and custody of their children. Id. at 65-66.
The Fourth Circuit in Wellar v. Department of Social Services rejected the contention that the State’s emergency intervention into custody of the plaintiff’s son violated his substantive due process rights. The court stated, “[i]t does not shock the conscience to hear that defendants removed a child in emergency action from the custody of a parent suspected of abusing him, based upon some evidence of child abuse,” and upheld the emergency circumstances exception. As for the plaintiff’s claim that the State violated his procedural due process rights by twice transferring custody of his son without a prior hearing, the court swiftly stated that “Due process does not mandate a prior hearing in cases where emergency action may be needed to protect a child.” Just as in this case, The Department of Social Services violated this Mother’s constitutional rights because the State failed to file an Emergency Removal order when they initially removed the child, and failure to properly investigate this case, and failure to afford this Mother with a Trial by an Jury or an Judge by an impartial tribunal, this violated mother’s procedural due process rights.”
In Puram, the chief Justice Burger stated: The law’s concept of the family rests on a presumption that parents posses what a child lacks in mutuality, experience, and capacity for judgment required for making life’s difficult decisions. More important, historically it has recognized that natural bonds of affection lead parents to act in the best interest of their children.
442 U.S. at 602. This presumption, which the parent acts in the best interest of the child, is immediately challenged in a situation involving child abuse. Id. Troxel’s holding is grounded in the historical model of legal analysis. 530 U.S. 57, 65-66. The Court in Troxel held that the care, concerns, and management of children is a fundamental right of parents protected by the Constitution. Id. at 66; cf. Joel R. Brandes & Carole L. Weidman, An Abused Child’s Emergency Removal from Home, N.Y. L.J., Feb. 27, 1996, at http://www.brandeslaw.com/ child_emergency_remova.htm. Brandes and Weidman argue,
While parents have a right to raise their children as they see fit, they must do so within a reason and with an eye toward the good of the child. Parents have an affirmative obligation to protect their children. If they fail to meet that obligation, the state can and will intervene.
The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Protects These Rights.
The Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees due process, protects not only procedural due process as well. U.S. Const. amend. XIV, 1; Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 720 (1997). “The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children.” Troxel, 530 U.S. 57. “So long as a parent adequately cares for his or her children (i.e., is fit) there will normally be no reason for the State to inject itself into the private realm of the family to further
question the ability to that parent to make the best decisions concerning the rearing of that parent’s children.” Id. at 68-69; Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292, 304, 113 S. Ct. 1439, 123 L. 2d 1 (1993).
“We have little doubt that the Due Process Clause would be offended [i]f a State were to attempt to force the breakup of a natural family, over the objections of the parents and their children, without some showing of unfitness and for the sole reason that to do so was thought to be in the children’s best interest.” Quilloin v. Walcott, 434 U.S. 246, 255, 98 S. Ct.
u Violation Warning—18 U.S.C. §242; 18 U.S.C. §245; 42 U.S.C. §1983
Name and address of Citizen
Name and address of Notice Recipient
I certify that the forgoing information stated here is true and correct.
Legal Notice and Warning
Federal law provides that it is a crime to violate the Rights of a citizen under the color-of-law. You can be arrested for this crime and you can also be held personally liable for civil damages.
Attempting to cause a person to do something by telling that person that such action is required by law, when it is not required by law, may be a felony.
18 USC §242 provides that whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
18 USC §245 provided that Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, intimidates or interferes with any person from participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States; [or] applying for or enjoying employment, or any perquisite thereof, by any agency of the United States; shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
42 USC §1983 provides that every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.
Warning , you may be in violation of Federal Law and persisting with your demand may lead to your arrest and/or civil damages! Also understand that the law provides that you can be held personally responsible and liable, as well as your company or agency.
You are advised to cease and desist with your demand and to seek personal legal counsel if you do not understand the law.
Notice of Service:
I certify that I personally delivered this notice to the above named recipient and address at .
Public Domain—Privacy Form COL(01)
~ This is a letter done by my Grandmother in my behalf
TAGS: #ALLAN SHARRETT #SUSAN MITCHELL #GREENSVILLE COUNTY #CARSONSAUNDERS #DREW PAIGE #LABRINAMOSELEY #JOHN HOLTKAMP #AMANDA JONES