Follow by Email

Saturday, March 31, 2012

Child Switched at Hospital - Records disappear with DCYF

Below is a link to one of the many cases; I reviewed for State Legislators; the results of which show an encounter with the department of children youth and families and to no ones surprise the records that would collaborate and for which a grandparent is entitled to under NH RSA 169-C are refusing to release the records. 

Furthermore, during the course of the proceeding's against the mother, it should be abundantly clear to anyone reviewing the information that she could hardly have harm her child prior to taking her home from the hospital after her birth; consequently she was also refused records which would have proven the falsification's in taking her child away from her protective care.

Another, equally disturbing quality in this matter is the use of a Hitler like tactic to take the child away from the mother.  To the best of my recollection they didn't state that she hurt the child in any way.  They instead deemed and charge her with doing harm in the future. Some of your may recall Minority Report, with Tom Cruise where in the future a police unit is able to arrest murderers before they commit their crimes, it didn't play out well.  Now, DCYF's under the guise of being fortune tellers as well as social workers can guide the court into a the destruction of a family based purely on speculation of it happening in the future; seriously the mentality of some of these people is clearly unchecked for reality; much like Hitler.

Check here to see how this grandmother acquired evidence to show that the STATE OF NH wrongly took away her rights and those of her young daughter:

Friday, March 30, 2012

4. Due Process - Historical turnaround In NH Court System

Use "Snark" definition included (see #1.), in your motion, as in the example below; and you will receive the fastest turnaround possibly ever in the NH Court System!! This motion  full copy in sec. "3. Due Process" was submitted to the Nashua Superior Court on Friday the 23rd of March 2012 just after 2:00pm date stamp on first page; just before 4:00pm that same day on a regular and not expedited motion it was ruled on allegedly by Justice Ryan somewhere within that 2 hour period before they close for the day and a weekend no less: (see document in #2) as shown on the 2nd page by his signature; where it also states cc: 3/26/12; and then on 3/26/12 as shown on the date stamp of the item being mailed; the motion and Justice's note were simply copied without a clerks note and deposited into the envelope and mailed. Now, that is historical diligence in the NH Court System.

(1.) snark·y/ˈsnärkē/
      Adjective: (of a person, words, or a mood) Critical; cutting; testy. More info   
      » - - Merriam-Webster - The Free Dictionary
Now, we're off to see the ... the Supreme Court of NH and possibly the United States 1st District Court; because of course the Court denied it, possibly because the law and rules of the Court itself very clearly states a parent is entitled to records in their court case (see #3 here); whether it's open or closed and possibly for some other unknown disclosed reason, I have to wonder if he or someone else even read it.
(2.) Order on Motion to Reconsider click here:

(3.) Guidelines for Public Access to Court Records in New Hampshire:

In the end though history shows as stated by Antiphanes in or about about 408 to 334 BCE that in the course of things "Everything yields to diligence" so onward we go through the virtue of hard work; rather, than the sin of careless sloth.

Thursday, March 29, 2012

Future or Considering Attorney's and/or History Enthusiasts - FREE TUITION

I have to express that my experiences at ACHLS, have been extraordinary.  The courses, experiences and discussion method have greatly impacted my writing abilities, focus, ability to reason and present a compelling argument at the spur of the moment. 

While the Tuition may be free to those who pass the entrance exam; to succeed you have to be dedicated, organized and often sleep deprived.  Most importantly, everyones life has moments of varied chaos, it's your resolution in meeting the challenges life throws your way, your commitment to be diligent  and a certain disregard for the conventional rules that will help you become an independent thinker who is able to act and take advantage of opportunities such as FREE TUITION at ACHLS to pursue your worthwhile endeavor.

It may surprise even you ...   Questions for a student can email me at take the challenge you have nothing to lose and everything to gain.
The ACHLS Board of Trustees has announced the renewal of

The recent press release announcing this news is as follows:


SALEM, NH -- The American College of History and Legal Studies (ACHLS) has announced that it will grant free tuition to qualified persons who start their junior year at ACHLS in 2012-13. Those who thereafter choose to spend their senior year (of 2013-14) at ACHLS instead of going to MSL in 2013-14 (or who are ineligible to go to MSL then), will have to pay only half tuition (or $5,000) in their senior year.

These tuition plans carry forward the plan begun in 2011-12: i.e., free tuition in the junior year and half tuition in the senior year for those who do not transfer to MSL after their junior year.

Michael Chesson, the Founding Professor and Dean of ACHLS, said that "The elimination of tuition during the junior year will tremendously assist students pursuing their undergraduate education. With the rising cost of tuition at other colleges, the ACHLS offers the alternative of a rigorous education, a convenient class schedule, and no cost to students in their junior year."

ACHLS is located in Salem, New Hampshire. For information about ACHLS, to schedule a visit, request further information, or to apply, visit -- email -- or call 603.458.5145.

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

NH Criminalization in relation to Sex Trafficking of minor's FAILS

Shared Hope. org (sho)
"New Hampshire’s trafficking in persons law criminalizes the sex trafficking of minors but requires an element of force even for children exploited through commercial sex acts." (sho) 

This crime is coercive in nature but the element of force is not described; children are manipulated and threatened into these rings and the language of the statute does not protect our children; and then it goes further and continues to victimize children through this language in the statute:
"Although the prostitution statute provides an affirmative defense for trafficking victims, juveniles may be subject to arrest and punishment for prostitution. " (sho)

The Department of Health and Human Services in New Hampshire is not doing enough to further laws to protect our children or those of our neighbors; as parents we need to get involved and push for laws that protect and and do not further victimize the victims of this heinous crimes.

Please get invovled no matter where you are nationally or internationally you can contact this program to get involved in a manner that you feel comfortable and get material to make changes in your community.

We worry about what a child will become tomorrow, yet we forget that he is someone today. ~Stacia Tauscher

Today we need to worry about our children so they can face tomorrow and be children for as long as possible. In "American" children only began to realize childhood with FDR's new deal "The Fair Labor Standards Act" of 1938.

This Act finally mandated that Children under the age of 18 cannot do certain dangerous jobs, like work 12-16 hours a day in a factory and it furthered that children under the age of 16 cannot work.  It took the deepest depression of the 20th century a depression which affected the entire world to obtain these rights for children; sadly they were not given these rights because it was the right thing to do, the extentsion of the school age for children to receive more education wasn't to enlighten and broaden our childrens minds it was simply done by legislators to preserve jobs for adults.

In this Country and around the world women and children still do not have equal protection under the law.  We need to change that.

A Victim Receives Justice - the media focuses on ...

Wednesday, March 28, 2012 Man sobs, protests innocence as he’s sentenced for raping 13-year-old niece By PATRICK MEIGHAN Staff Writer John Parker covers his face in court during his appearance for a sentencing Wednesday, March 28, 2012.

We can be thankful that Judge Colburn and the Jury focused on the victim.

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

3. Due Process - Parent's Rights to records

In reference to my recent filing see post 3/22/12; It appears that the Rules of the Court of New Hampshire add further weight to the argument of obtaining records.

VIII. Denial of Access. The clerk, after consultation with the presiding justice and Administrative Justice, may, for good cause shown, deny access to court records to any individual. Good cause shall include, but not be limited to, previous theft, destruction, defacement or tampering of records and refusal to comply with administrative regulations established in accordance with these guidelines.

IX. Access by Litigants.
Subject to paragraph II, and unless otherwise ordered by the Presiding Justice for good cause shown, parties to any litigation and their attorneys shall have complete access to their case records at all reasonable times and under the conditions set forth in these guidelines.

It will be interesting to see how the motion for reconsideration is ruled on; mostly likely it will have to pushed through the NH Supreme Ct. and 1st District Ct.  an expense that deters most litigants, not to mention the rules for filing.  Well bring it on, the worst that can happen is that I will obtain more experience and be a better advocate in the future without practicing on anyone other than myself; with that said, I do believe I am right in this matter parents should have the same rights as murderers and be entitled to their records. 

Monday, March 26, 2012

Remembering Nancy Schaefer's Fight against corruption

Oppression is still strong in America - Ghandhi once said "What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans, and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?"

The destruction of families by Child Protections Services in any given state matters; families are being torn apart and children who really need help are not receiving it.  Two years after Senator Schaefer's Death the problems and disclosures she fought against are still here and there are still unanswered questions about her death. 

Remembering Nancy Schaefer's resolve and not backingdown:

click for more on Nancy Schaefer's disclosures...

Sunday, March 25, 2012

2. Due Process - Fair Trials for Parents?

While I can hardly be on the same level as a practicing attorney; it would seem to be that the language enclosed in this document, number 5., in this series ref: 3/22/12 post. Means that the legislators choose specific wording to ensure parents rights; wording the the Judicial Branch in New Hampshire is refusing to acknowledge.

Motion to Reconsider:

Thursday, March 22, 2012

1. Due Process - Lawlessness or substantiated Reasoning in New Hampshire ref post of 3/14/12

The Reason I have decided to post this type of information is so that others may benefit from unfortunate experiences as a pro se litigant in divorce and other proceedings. I was compelled to attend school as a paralegal solely to understand what had and continues to happen in cases involving Child Protection Services, and find out how fit mothers/parents could lose custody of their child(ren) based on false allegations. The evidence to prove this was and is in the possession of Child Services who as shown below in this case has refused to release it, until a court granted it in 2010.

Now that same court is denying access to evidence it ordered to be handed over; evidence that under NH RSA 169-C:25 I a. specifically gives a parent a right to. It appears to be because, I filed a Civil Suit against the State of New Hampshire Department of Children Youth and Families and Judge Bamberger and Marital Master Alice Love, the later who thankfully retired to one day a week, and others for falsifications in an official matter, intentional infliction of emotional distress, intentional interference in a parent/child relationship and a disregard towards allowing access to real evidence under Ross v. Gadwah, that a fact finder would rely in determining their child’s fate. It appears that the law says parents are entitled to due process, whether or not they get it, well that answer is behind closed doors and silenced by a Confidentiality clause - which opposes one's right to Free Speech; on this it appears the 2nd district agrees with me .

first amendment right to free speech, whether or not the information is contained in court records.   Stanfield v Florida Dep’t Children & Families, 680 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 3d Dist. Ct. App. 1997). 

I am continuing to attend school for legal studies to better understand the court system as I move forward in a Civil Suit against the State. I hope that with effective lobbying and case management that what happened in this case never happens to another family. I am hopeful that this journey will help others or at least bring attention to the injustices and lack of accountability that have occurred in closed door proceedings such as this one and many others. The more I work with the public and review materials in other cases, the more I am sickened by the Child Protective System and their blatant disrespectful attitudes towards ALL people as things to be controlled, rather than people to be helped.

Parents should not have to go to law school to find out years or even months later how severely their rights were abridged by any State Court System. In the matter below the mother requested discovery which Judge Bamberger ordered but when it was brought to his attention at a hearing in November 2007 by the Assigned Attorney, that they never paid, not only did he not enforce it, instead of a review hearing, it became a final hearing which Judge Bamberger dated to take effect a month later in December 2007, to give the father time to go to the Superior Court in order to block the mother from visitation with her child. Really, I was under the impression that:
                                                                                            click for further information

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

NH House Committees will have Subpoena Power - Update on Rule Change & Meaning

annmarietimmins of the concord monitor tweeted at 10:48 am today the following:

#NHHouse votes 241-114 to let cmttes or Speaker alone - not full House - to issue subpoenas to compel witnesses to testify. #nhpolitics

Thank you New Hampshire Legislator's

What this means is:

A rule change was made to establish a procedure for considering and issuing subpoenas. No subpoenas have issued and no request to issue a subpoena is before the Rules Committee, which now must authorize the issuance of a subpoena and can only do so following a public hearing.

Wednesday, March 14, 2012

NH Attorney General's Office covering for New Hamsphire DCYF: Speculation or Fact

Two recent motions indicate that Rebecca Woodard, attorney for the Civil Division of the New Hampshire Attorney Generals office is in fact covering for the Department of Children Youth and Families in New Hampshire by stating that they have now lost evidence, from an earlier case.

This is just another typical tool in their toolbox of not following court orders; one that must be mentioned here due to the threats made against the mother because she is pursuing not only custody, but a civil suit against the State of NH, DCYF.

These bullies (for lack of a better descriptive) expect the public to tolerate what they are doing; denying parent's rights and appeasement to the population by moderate expansion; as seen in the limitations of open courts New Hampshire.

The motions below contain just a brief overview of the discrepancies in an ever widening abuse ring call the Department of Children Youth and Families; they claim to be acting in the best interest of the child; when in fact they only act to preserve their own self serving interests.

1. The mother's motion for production of previously ordered court records which are held open for 7 years:

2. The State's Objection to the mother's motion: 

3. The mother's response and objection to the State:

If you have been denied evidence in a proceeding with the State; please write to to voice your concern and be heard or feel free to leave a comment. If you want to know what your rights are go here type in the type of case or an RSA # (RSA mean Revised Statue Annotated) this is the state site.

If you are involved in a DCYF case be sure to have a full motion ready such as in #1 to obtain all records in the matter to protect you and your family; moreover, use this case CRAWFORD v. WASHINGTON to push to be able to confront your anonymous accuser; you may find they are in fact imaginary.

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Due Process Clause / Bar Association Monopoly

Does the Due Process Clause of the New Hampshire Constitution (Part 1, Articles 2 and 15) require the appointment of counsel for an indigent parent-defendant from whom the State seeks to take custody of a minor child based on allegations of neglect or abuse?1.

This brief brought forward by the NEW HAMPSHIRE Bar Association (ABA) cover’s the vast amount of problems of Judicial Oppression against parents in NEW HAMPSHIRE (N.H.). It is one of the few briefs reviewed that is worth a full read amicus-brief.pdf.

In short, it covers the rights of individuals to Equal Access to Justice; something of which is currently being denied to litigants across the board by the N.H. Court system. and other court systems in the United States.  Furthermore, it fully describes the margin of error in not only abuse and neglect proceedings but in Child Custody proceedings in general; indicating that the risk of error inherent in the truth finding process is NOT the rare exception that the State would like the public to believe; Judges are NOT infallible, Social Workers certainly do not have that inner sense of what is right or wrong in their conduct or motives, that thing that impels one toward right action: action that dictates their conscience .

Furthermore, the ABA points out that even when the State did give counsel to indigent parent’s they were given incompetent Counsel as supported on page 7; the N.H. ABA in 2008 conducted a survey among the more than 8000 attorney’s in the State at the time for Court Improvement; the results show that this area of the law rank in the top 4 of legal areas that required high priority training topics.

Why was it ranked so high?

Speculation of the group consensus would have to included the facts: most attorney’s want to win for their client’s interests; closed door proceedings without access to case work of previous hearings gives Attorney’s no insight to the arsenal used against parents by the State; of further alarm in the State of N.H. is that this Bar Association requires all Attorney’s to be a member of the Bar at a minimal cost of $470.00 a year; not counting the fact that they have to take 12 hours of continuing legal education (CLE) a year at a minimal cost of $199.00 up per 6 credits depending on the content of the CLE. With this in mind you would think that the Bar would enhance their services by providing CLE’s that follow survey needs.

How many training course's in the Child Protection Act has the N.H. Bar conducted since the 2008 survey,directly relating to the needs of their clients, in this top 4 rated area of the law? NONE see NH Bar Catalog

What the brief does not describe and what trainings or lack of on the N.H. ABA site show, is that while they researched and documented the right to push and enforce people’s rights; the N.H. Bar has had NO substantial trainings to offset the closed door proceedings they advocate are in the best interests of the child.  Indicating that the ABA while requiring ALL Attorney’s to be a member to practice law; does not provide attorneys in these cases with the resources to be successful in this area of law, making it a monopoly; non unlike AT&T. 

This is a serious problem if the Bar Association's cannot and/or will not fully address the needs of the people/attorney's using their services should they be allowed to continue as a monopoly?

In the first instance the initial question was reviewed and decided without dissent by the House in 2006; affirming that legal counsel is a matter of right, at public expense to low income persons whose basic human needs are at stake. In America, States can only enhance not detract from the Federal Governments rights to the people. It is clear in reading this brief that, that is exactly what NEW HAMPSHIRE has and continues to do; with a Bar Association made up of Lawyers and Judges withour accountability; to the public they serve.

1.Consistent with the position set out in the parents' brief, the ABA addresses the question solely under New Hampshire law. See Brief of Larry M. and Sonia M. (Natural Parents of Christian M. and Alexander M.) (November 18, 2011) at 1 n. 1 ("Because the due process requirements of the State Constitution are at least as protective of individual liberties as those requirements of the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution, consideration of the latter is not necessary"). See also In re Father, 155 N.H. 93, 95 (2007) ("We first address this issue under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only."); In re Shelby R., 148 N.H. 237,239 (2002); In re Tracy M, 137 N.H. 119, 122 (1993). amicus-brief.pdf

Sunday, March 4, 2012

American Female Employees at Risk

This is America right? Women across the country should be concerned about how their rights are constantly being attacked by male legislators and/or like the Georgetown student not be given the opportunity to speak at a committee hearing on contraception! I do not side or advocate either side’s position Women vs. Men, Democrat vs. Republican, or even the right to choose abortion, but I do ask you to consider whether like men, women have the right to control their own minds and bodies on a case by case individual basis and not be deemed a “slut” by the likes of Russ Limbaugh

Recently the public debate has come to contraception again, nothing new:

President Obama’s #1truth bite for last week centered around: Whether or not WOMEN'S HEALTH CAN BE "MORALLY OBJECTIONABLE" it states the following:

“Thursday, the Senate voted down a bill that would have allowed employers to deny women coverage for birth control and any (unnamed) "objectionable" medical service,… Senators Roy Blunt and Marco Rubio's amendment would have allowed any employer -- not religious institutions, because they are already exempt -- to make this call on behalf of their female employees. That means a woman's boss at a restaurant; retail store, law firm or anywhere would have control over what health care she could receive. After an hour during which he was on the record opposed to it, Mitt Romney said … "Of course I support that amendment." … And we can thank him for paving the way -- ….”

Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Constitution protected a right to privacy, although this case has been deemed controversial, and there are accusations of "judicial activism" by many it is certainly not the standard we see today of judicial oppression.

The idea that a women has control over her body was furthered most notably in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), another controversial case where the Court ruled that a woman's choice to have an abortion was protected as a private decision between her and her doctor. Here lies the dilemma if you believe abortion is murder, the preventable measure is contraception, although there are others that claim this is also a form of murder; the murder in this country and in particular several State’s including but certainly not limited to that of the “Live Free or Die” is that full term abortion is not murder if the doctor snips the spinal cord before the head leaves the birth canal; monitors and nurses have seen the effects on the unborn and seriously describe and recognize that, that is murder.

No matter what advocates for either side state; abortion has lingering side effects on the women who have the procedure; “95% of these women were not at all satisfied with their choice today.” ( Simply making contraception available and resources to educate women and research women’s health could possibly aid in making abortion a thing of the past. However, until women’s rights are enforced, there are devastating life experiences that lead women to this extreme measure not the least of which is rape, incest, and the public mark of being a socially undesirable person as an unwed mother, still exist. This site has facts on contraception; ¼ receive care from a family planning clinic that is publicly funded. In light of the other care received at these facilities it is very small compared to their general health needs and deters abortion which can have a greater impact on public funds in the long run. As a community we need to keep up with the health of all our members; better health and insight can only lead to less public money on long term care of its members who can’t afford the rising insurance and medical costs going on in this country today.

There are fences that we must climb and there are fences that we must never cross; not empowering women with control of their own health and bodies is such a fence without women - men would cease to exist as well.