Legislators & One County Attorney Validate Complaints by Citizens in NH

Redress of Grievance Committee: Most complaints valid

The above article try's to convey that the Redress Committee is a waste of tax-payers dollars; really? Consider that these Representative make  a $100-$200 a year and put in time like this: "The Panel held hours-long hearings during the legislative session on the complaints - most involving the family court system. Committee members determined that 20 of the 27 complaints  were legitimate and pronounced seven unfounded."  

The Family & Court System in general and DCYF are out of control and out of touch.  Starting with the NH Family Court; parents are getting stuck with outrageous bills for Guadian Ad litem (GAL), even when the law states:

A GAL/Attorney in good standing with the NH Bar/GAL boards should be aware of the rules, laws and Admin. order of Judge Edwin Kelley (2005-03) clearly defining “the maximum fee (including costs) as not exceeding $1,000.00 for any case.  This is further ordered by the Courts with their standard appointment of said GAL, approximately 85% of litigants are pro se and finding the corresponding Administrative Orders to protect their rights is almost impossible since they do not link up with any of the laws. Moreover, this administrative order shows the fee for a GAL is suppose to be $60.00 per hour, yet many family's have been paying more. 

This order further states: “No GAL may be appointed  in any new or reopened marital matter in which one parent is indigent and the other is able to pay for the services of the GAL due to legislation that eliminated funding for GALs,” yet this happens all the time and indigent parents face bankruptcy because of it and/or lose their children, because of unwarranted harsh criticism by GAL's that can be paid up front and not because they are a bad parent.

Consequently, the Office of Cost Containment in NH RSA 461-A: 18, is no longer providing funds for GAL cases; confirmed by phone at 603-271-1416 on 7/5/12; contradicting NH RSA 461-A:17 Guardians Ad Litem and Mediators; Liability for Expenses. "The judicial council shall have no responsibility for the payment of the costs of a mediator or guardian ad litem for any party under this chapter." Thus, creating confusion and hardship for an indigent pro se litigant;

Florida recognized that  “It is difficult to grasp how it is in the best interest of the child to deplete the resources of the family” Higgenbotham v. Higgenbotham 857 So. 2^nd 341,342 (Fla. App.2003); New Hampshire claims to have realized it, yet only on paper by legislators not in practice by the Judicial Branch. 

With DCYF the Department of Children Youth and Families - Social Workers are routinely conducting improper investigations, failing to obtain even doctors reports to support their disclosures and acting on hearsay because NH RSA 169:C states thats ok.   Judge Bamberger and Judge Leary sit on the mental health, criminal, and DCYF cases all which often present a conflict of interest when the defendants are in one court or another and the DCYF hearing is behind closed doors. Furthermore, they threaten people not to talk about their cases to legislators or anyone else, in fact denying them of their 1st amendment right to free speech whether or not it's in court records.  FYI, not one person that came before the Redress was arrested. 

Parents are not being informed of their rights at first contact by DCYF, initially because it was just a protocol, now apparently, because it is actually part of the law. They consistently refuse to give parents paperwork contact logs, 3rd party information etc in their case, it's a simple thing when requested by a parent, it's called due process and now they they DENY them a Lawyer, the only State to do so, and the Family is at risk of losing custody of their child.  A fate most would consider worst than death, and it's all done on hearsay evidence NH RSA 169-C:12 .  Furthermore this department failed both Federal And State Audits consistently for the last 2 rounds over 20 years. And Family's in NH experience the torture depicted in this video:

Family's in NH and across the United States are facing challenges that no one in America should face and at least these legislators, getting paid a mere $100 -$200 a year, are attempting to correct it, they do not get paid extra to sit on committees. The Judicial System, NH Bar Association and Attorney General's Office do not hold these Attorney's and/or Judges accountable; look at what Robert Walsh former county attorney got away with letting the attacker of 2 EMT's badly injured go. with no accountability for not involving the EMT victims in his plea bargain, even when their injuries amounted to a few Felony's. Yet Robert Walsh, simply let this attacker go to a mental health court, and her father who was at the scene merely stood back and let his daughter attack these EMT's, he also appears to have called in a false 911 call because he was afraid to drive her to the hospital, why should this concern us? Because the Father is a well known doctor/ psychologist  who you should click on to find out who it is and stay away from, he also one who the courts call on to access the mental capacity of individuals before the court; why should we or the Courts believe him when he lies about his own daughter, in fact telling the EMT's she wasn't on meds and/or the real reason for his 911 call. Ann Rice at the Attorney Generals office supposedly conducted an investigation and simply scolded Attorney Walsh;  a strongly worded letter at the conclusion of her investigation way to go Rice, it you click on that last piece it's because he apologized in the paper, but never to the victims, nor did he or anyone else help from the State help with their mounting medical bills or 40% reduction in pay because they are still out of work, and no one from the town of Amherst, NH so much as sent them a card.  Furthermore,  the EMT's were rebuffed by Judge Cocker and then denied a restraining order see The two EMT's in this video   who were  denied their rights and their attacker was allowed to walk free until County Attorney Hogan stepped in and had his office reopen the case. 

Fairy Tale Access airing 10/5/12 for the full story, and then Speak Up the week after for the very gruesome details.  These are women in our community who provide a service for their community when YOU need them.  Yet they are still now out of work receiving 60% of their pay, for an incident that happened in May of 2010 and dealing with a corrupt Workman's comp policy that is not covering all of their injuries and who are not receiving victims assistance to get them back to where they were.  Really, that's justice? 

If Lafrance was willing to put her neck out as describe in a recent article in the Nashua Patch, for anything including protecting victims of crimes, ethically as assistant county attorney to Robert Walsh, she failed. 

The Federal Government and states like Wisconsin are actually allowing and/or using funding to help reunite families. Yet, NH goes out of its way to destroy them, with Judges who divorce and marry each others wives  2-3 times and/or have children with other women and fail to tell their current families, and then wonder why their children are upset with them when they do find out. These are the people deciding whats right in other family's matters... and who are also denying victims of crimes their rights and it goes right up to the Supreme Ct.. The Criminal in NH has more rights than you, if your not a criminal. Kentucky is investigating DCYF as seen in this video   adoption for $$$


Vote for the people trying to protect your rights, people like Dennis Hogan the new County prosecutor whom we voted for over Walsh.  Also consider that LaFrance, worked under Walsh as his assistant and did nothing for these victims and several others. Vote for O'Brien and others like Kevin Avard on the redress of grievance panel who went out of their way to listen to complaints and who are trying to enforce accountability. The next time a family or someone else is injured in anyway due to the Judicial System and/or NH Bar Association's failure to hold Attorney's and Judges accountable to the public they are suppose to serve, it could be just someone else you don't know or it could be YOU. 

Pro Se Organization - Family Law - It Matters

"The law should be a shield for the weak and powerless, not a club for the powerful."  

                                                             -Gov. Roy Barnes, 2004 Equal Justice Conference

STANDARD CASE CONSTRUCTION

Whether you are coordinating a pro se case for an upcoming hearing or for issues to bring to the NH Redress of Grievance Committee/Legislators and/or a new Attorney you need to coordinate your paperwork. The following is an example of a frequent complaint in the NH system and a suggestion for coordination of paperwork to bring issues with supporting documentation to a fact finders attention the initial layout which is standard for most coordinating most cases; this is not intended as or to be construed as legal advice but may add in organizational and research technique's.

Start by making the following piles with the most recent date on top:

1. All Motions starting with the initiating motion
    and then the Response

2. ALL Orders

3. Correspondence/Assessments to a court by a GAL Guardian Ad 
    Litem NH RSA 461 -A

4. Correspondence between DCYF NH RSA 169-C for division 
    protocols whether for abuse and neglect and/or domestic 
    violence see the Attorney Generals website
    http://www.doj.nh.gov/criminal/victim-assistance/protocols.htm
    Obtain all contact logs and 3rd party documentation

5. Evidence what was accepted and what was not accepted

6. Correspondence between you and your attorney

7. Outline the facts, orders and how it effected and/or affected your 
    case

THE CHILD PROTECTION ACT
These piles especially the first 5 allow a fact finder to easily cross reference the information in your file.  And for you to pull and copy information to explain where in your case you feel your rights were abridged; with supporting rules, and/or protocol's which are part of the law under NH RSA 169-C:34 &/or 169-C:38- a. which can only  be changed before a legislative committee and/or laws that were not applied.

Review your information and determine how you think your rights may have been abridged.  Now set out to prove the how, when, why, where or what caused the injury, how your rights have been abridged by DCYF or someone else and/or what is a fair conclusion to an abnormal situation.

THE GAL
For example a noted complaint to legislators is about GAL's (Guardian Ad Litem's) -the GAL in NH exceeded the $1000.00 standing order without a motion prior to exceeding to exceed.  Where would a standing order be: http://www.courts.state.nh.us/fdpp/adminorders/index.htm
then click on the GAL http://www.courts.state.nh.us/fdpp/adminorders/2011-03-AdministrativeOrder.pdf this shows that the cap is $1000.00 based on the Parties ability to pay and court order split of payments.

For any other administrative court orders that may pertain to your case it would be http://www.courts.state.nh.us/fdpp/adminorders/2011-03-AdministrativeOrder.pdf which clearly states if one party is indigent a court can not appoint an GAL due to some of the following: 

1st. what does the law say? Check the statute on the GAL in your state in NH it is http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XLIII/461-A/461-A-16.htm cross reference with the OCC "office of cost containment" see http://admin.state.nh.us/occ/gal.asp

If you are unable to pay the court ordered amount you could have contacted the OCC at http://admin.state.nh.us/contactus2.asp?division=Office of Cost Containment; in the past or call them at 603-271-1416 as of 7/5/12 a Chris at that office has confirmed that are no funds available due to the changes in the law.  Unconfirmed; however, it appears that because the Judicial Branch received a cut in their funding they decided to retaliate by cutting funding to the publics most vulnerable - those who are indigent.

After receiving an order to pay for a GAL because one has been arbitrarily appointed; you may also need to file a motion indicating that you have an inability to pay and/or reiterating it as describe in the NH RSA 461-A:18 at this link http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XLIII/461-A/461-A-18.htm check  461-A:17 Guardians Ad Litem and Mediators; Liability for Expenses. "The judicial council shall have no responsibility for the payment of the costs of a mediator or guardian ad litem for any party under this chapter."

RESEARCHING THE LAW IN NEW HAMPSHIRE

For full text of the Law your researching go to http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/indexes/search.html
1. type in the RSA main number like 461-A
2. a series of RSA's will appear
3. click on your title and read the law as it pertains to your case

OUTLINING THE CASE
Document the complaint for an attorney or yourself (Pro Se) where the law was not applied or considered not relevant in your case show where in the motions and/or orders it was brought up. The order against and the Law and Rules that are suppose to apply.  As you will find here, the Law controls, Rules and orders are second (case law), your federal constitutional rights are the controlling factor found here http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html amendments are in the upper right hand corner a click away see notes at the bottom of the page to see if a later amendment may have affected your rights, in the amendment that most closely resembles your case. States can only enhance your federal rights they can not take away from them so then you need to check your state constitution in NH it can be found at: http://www.nh.gov/constitution/constitution.html

However, under 461-A:18 Repayment. – it connects to the OCC office ... the fees and expenses paid on the party's behalf as the court may order consistent with the party's ability to pay, such ability to be determined by the unit of cost containment.

The above areas that cover the payment and assignment of GAL's appear to contradict themselves and it is best to get the advice of an attorney.  If you can not afford one you should attempt by "Motion for Clarification" to a Court to the full picture.  Ask and/or bring to its attention that you have an inability to pay, do not understand your rights because of conflicting and overlapping laws and administrate court orders and/or bring to the attention of the legislators with all of the documentation to support your claim in as brief and direct a matter as possible.

For instance the past redress of grievance/legislators have reported receiving numerous complaints that mimic the following:

I was assigned a GAL with out the court determining the parties ability to pay based on submitted financial affidavits;
I was assigned a GAL that exceeded the $1000 cap per case;
The GAL prior to submitting a Motion to Exceed - Exceeded and when I objected the Court ordered it anyway and/or did not assess my ability to pay.  DCYF did not advise me of my rights. DCYF went out of their jurisdictional area to get a Judge to sign an order to grant them emergency custody of my child.  DCYF fabricated evidence and/or did not look at all evidence. Players to be aware of.

These complaints/Motions can be answered by what should have happened based on the law, court rules and or standing court administrative orders.  Administrative orders in the Family Division are put out by the Administrative Judge of each court; in Family Matters in New Hampshire that is Judge Kelley and these orders are directed at the Judges who work under him to protect your rights because of changes in funding, administration and/or changes in the law.

461-A:6 Determination of Parental Rights and Responsibilities; Best Interest. –
III. In determining parental rights and responsibilities under this section, including residential responsibility, the court shall not apply a preference for one parent over the other because of the sex of the child, the sex of a parent, or the financial resources of a parent.

If you feel your rights were abridged due to any of the above bring it to the attention of the court your in and read your Motion to the Judge and answer clarifying questions and then bring it to your legislators to get the laws strengthen, the Court's can only interpret the law as well as the law is written. It is a bit of work but you can't correct a problem unless you make people aware there is one.

The inconsistency's between the courts and how they operate in New Hampshire is the main complaint.  Coordinating evidence, protocols and your rights is necessary to protecting and asserting your rights. 

If there is any way I can make this article better and/or easier to follow please do not hesitate to leave a comment or email me at dmvc@live.com.  I often seek to update, modify and or simplify my work so that others may benefit from my experiences in the legal field.

"It is one of the most beautiful compensations of this life that no man can sincerely try to help another without helping himself."     

Ralph Waldo Emerson

The Realities of Domestic Violence Proceedings

- Continuing Legal Education Publication Released to Public for FREE based on NH and Federal Laws

"There comes a time when the mind takes a higher plane of knowledge but can never prove how it got there." Albert Einstein

Over the years survival of unspeakable crimes dims, but it is never fully eradicated. Domestic Violence is an Oppressive and Continuing Crime in this country; I am releasing my research and creation of a Continuing Legal Education Course, I created while attending Nashua Community College under the watchful eye of Professor Robert A. Lubitz Esq. director of their Paralegal Program.  NCC hosted this event on 10/23/10 with the assistance of my panel member's listed on page 6. and together we received a 95% approval rating. 

In an effort to help all of the player's who can make a difference in the life of a domestic violence victim and their family this course originally approved by the NH Bar Association and NH Supreme Court Rules and the National Federation of Paralegals for 6 credits and a full credit in ethics, highlights the roles of the victim, the lawyer, the police, the paralegal, the therapist, the Gal, the Advocate and Ethics that bind these roles.

This was written and produced in 2010 as The Realities of Domestic Violence Proceedings (027293) approved for 5.0 general credits and 1.0 ethics credit for a total of 6 live credits; it should of course be cross referenced to be sure the laws are up to date.  Any material included in this Manuel can only be reproduced with the specific author's permission as found in each section.

Albert Einstein  once said "Knowledge of what is does not open the door directly to what should be."  However, with a bit of effort we can all make dam sure we use our knowledge to make it what it should be.

Email dmvc@comcast.net to receive your free copy, increase your knowledge and make a difference.

OPEN COURT'S ARE A SUCCESS - EXPOSING CPS CORRUPTION

http://articles.boston.com/2012-05-28/news/31878518_1_child-welfare-open-hearings-dependency-hearings

Are foster kids helped, harmed by open hearings May 28, 2012|Kelli Kennedy, Associated Press

Excerpts from the original article my quotes are italicized in response to what was not specified.

"A California judge’s decision to open a county’s child welfare hearings earlier this year has energized a debate among advocates in other states about whether greater transparency helps or harms the young victims appearing in family court." ... nearly 20 states, including Texas, New York, Florida and Illinois, those hearings are usually open to the public"

Usually, and open are two different things; if you want accountability usually needs to be ALWAYS because:

"Proponents say transparency leads to better decisions by putting a spotlight on judges, exposes the blunders of child welfare workers and gives the public a better understanding of how the system works. ... “Confidentiality has done more to protect the system than to protect the children in the system,’’ said Michael Nash, chief presiding judge of Los Angeles County’s children’s court. He ruled in January that dependency hearings in his county will be open to the public unless there is proof the child will be harmed."

Children rarely testify in these hearings and if they were allowed to the court room could be sequestered. Its a thing we do with wittiness's in every other court; so they do not feed off of each others testimony.

"But critics say children will be further traumatized by testifying about abuse in a courtroom full of strangers. The Children’s Law Center of California, which represents most children in the Los Angeles County system, asked the state appeals court to overturn Nash’s decision, but that move was rejected."

Good because again sequestered means isolated from whats going on in court and it even flys for rape trials. But there is no reason for the entire proceeding to be behind closed doors.

"Executive Director Leslie Starr Heimov says it’s unfair to compare states that have open hearings with California because children don’t have a legal right to attend hearings in many states. More than 200 children attend hearings every day at the Los Angeles courthouse."

In New Hampshire under NH RSA 169 “‘[P]arty having an interest’ means the child” (RSA 169-C:3 (XXI-a)); yet these children who ARE recognized as having rights; are not appointed an attorney to represent those rights; and in the entire system statewide in NH there are only "two Judges" and only one who consistently takes the time to talk with children privately without it recorded about what is going on in their case; my guess is he better understands what the two sides are trying to bring to his attention and better act in the Child's best interests.

“It’s difficult and it’s painful and they’re in the system through no fault of their own and to create a system where there’s forced to endure more pain, that’s harmful,’’ Heimov said."

This women works for the Children's law center in California; http://www.clcla.org/about_message.htm  you really have to wonder from reviewing the site whose side she is really on; open courts provide oversite and accountability for her team as well; possibly the problem they fear most - when like NH with Guardian's Ad Liteum's who meet the child once and write reports based on fiction; parents beware look at their reports and for those alleged statements of fact; ask them did you witness this? No? where did you get your information? and then slam them with the real facts and bring in rebuttal wittiness's.

"Family courts have opened gradually since the early 1980s, beginning with Oregon. An advocate for child welfare reform says that among the states that have followed suit, New York and Missouri’s moves in the late 1990s were particularly significant. The change is usually spurred by a horrific child abuse case or a push from local media to gain access. The beating death of 6-year-old Elisa Izquierdo by her mother prompted the opening of New York family courts in 1997 and the passage of a state open-records law referred to as “Elisa’s Law.’’

Do we really need another child to die; to realize that the courts need to be open to be accountable?

“Social workers were identified as falsifying records and lying in court, and I heard horror stories from family court judges. The lack of transparency has harmed far too many families and children in Kentucky,’’ Westrom said.

Across the country and in New Hampshire we have been fighting for open courts; law makers are suppose to enact laws that their voters want.

"Activist Gail Helms has fought for open courts in California since her 2-year-old grandson Lance was beaten to death by his father in 1995, shortly after the man was awarded custody despite a history of drug use. The boy’s father was sentenced to 25 years in prison for second-degree murder."

Again, how many Children have to die before legislators understand the realities of closed court rooms in America!

“They need to have someone in there to monitor and see what goes on in those courtrooms,’’ said Helms, whose efforts have included protests and remarks at public forums.

"Wexler said that despite some initial protest when hearings are opened, no state has reclosed them." “In every state there are lots of people worried and upset that courts are going to be opened and then a few years later everybody forgets the courts were ever closed. The disasters that everybody worried about never happened and there is a modest uptick in attention. It’s constructive,’’ said Matt Fraidin, a law professor at the University of the District of Columbia. Lawyers in Michigan, Missouri, Kansas, Oregon, and Utah told Fraidin no problems have been reported since opening courtrooms there."

In every state the only people worried about open courts are the ones abusing the system. Children lives taken to soon should not be martyrs. John B.S. Haldane once said: "While I do not suggest that humanity will ever be able to dispense with its martyrs, I cannot avoid the suspicion that with a little more thought and a little less belief their number may be substantially reduced."

Let's add a little more thought to the discussion of Open court rooms in the foster care system and a little less belief that Child Protection Service's is there for the greater good; my guess is with open courts we will prevent more deaths, it will prevent children who become wards of the State from being abused in foster care and needlessly drugged because it will require accountability.

N.H. Publicly caught in Child Protection Services scheme that deprived Children

Here we go again, this time I reminded of a quote by Steve Jobs you know that superstar of Apple; He once said "you can't connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something - your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever. This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life." 

Well as one Mom, it looks like  the dots are starting to connect against New Hampshire's Child Protection Services; and those dots corroborate what I have disclosed not only in my blog; but, for which I have investigated relentlessly and brought to the attention of several legislators and legislative committees as well as NH Governor Lynch; and I am not the only one "unhappygrammy" has asserted her grievances as well and numerous others some who have spoken out and others who only let me view their files if I promised only to disclose their names off the record if needed to State Legislators, and to all those who are seeking the truth it is starting to unravel... 
http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/330817/new-hampshire-scores-f?SESS9482bdb3cd2a8e91e34f157844e8e08c=google  

The above Reported by Annmarie Timmins of the Concord Monitor staff on May 20, 2012 the above article that confirms my findings on Maggie Bishop and DHHS Toumpas on May 15, 2012.

Two national child advocacy groups the "First Start and the Children's Advocacy Institute at the University of San Diego Law School", http://www.firststar.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=y5NGNY0iBqk%3D&tabid=74 (if this link does not attach simply google "a national report card on abuse and neglected children" and you will get all additions and find that New Hampshire is consistent at getting worst) they rated each state's legal protections for children and New Hampshire Failed at 58% as they did in their Federal Audits both rounds; which were based on random cases pulled in each district they scored 66% in most areas some less.  The pattern is simply that Bishop and Toumpas continue to lie and cover up their departments inadequate services and mislead legislators with deceptive visual aids in graphs and stats.

Factors that legislators should be aware of and work on to correct are as follows:

• "New Hampshire law does not mandate that a child get an attorney in abuse and neglect cases"; CASA is merely a volunteer, with their own bias and not an attorney by any stretch of the imagination.

• "While the state requires guardians ad litem to have specialized training, it does not require abuse and neglect attorneys who are not guardians ad litem to be similarly trained." Furthermore, unrecognized is that CASA non-educated volunteers receive more training than guardians ad litem's; and to file a complaint on a GAL their board will charge you $100.00; furthermore, none of the combined players receives education on how to conduct a full investigation and cross reference records; something, I learned at Nashua Community College under the direction of Professor Lubitz's program that required the knowledge of how to do a full investigation and the connection of all the dots.

• "The state does not limit the caseload for attorneys handling abuse and neglect cases." The state limits attorneys handling these cases to those that are incompetent, new and not busy; all attorneys should be required to be educated in this role and take on at least one case a year. Something the monopoly of the New Hampshire Bar could work on simply because they require each Attorney to be licensed in order to practice; coincidentally not a mandated requirement in most States.

• The article relays that the State earned a perfect score for having a "State law that
grants a child in these cases legal status and assures they have rights." However, that does not mean they are strictly giving children their rights, without a lawyer to push for those rights it is inconceivable to believe that a child or pro se parent would know how to assure that their alleged legal status and rights were upheld; as shown in the Federal Audits new Hampshire Failed in this area.  Check the Government site under Child and Family Reports. I would provide the link but it appears DHHS has instructed a programmer to misdirect links as contained in MY previous article.

• "Ostrowski" president of Child and Family Services (a group that requires their workers to be trained in assisting families with a related background) is quoted as stating ... "the state's decision to cease giving parents attorneys in abuse and neglect cases hurts the kids as well as the parents." "It's in everyone's best interest," he said. " Everyone's best interest would be served with an appointed attorney for the Parent and the Child, each; Children's right to an Attorney is something I fought for over 20 years ago in Massachusetts, as a teenager growing up with foster brothers and sisters who were not getting the representation that they needed in court! In the above report it shows Massachusetts earned an A+.  major changes just over the border.

James Welch once stated "Before, Indian people had been so defeated, they were always looking for outsiders, for the government, to somehow come in and fix things. But now, they seem to realize that they're the only ones who can save themselves."

Maybe it's simply that FDR's New Deal in protecting children was overreached or never modeled to prevent the abuse's that occur in this country because of it. Yes, he did some great things he broke up monopolies, made better labor laws, and food and drug acts, he even had 6 children of his own.  However, he also created the bomb that ended World War II and destroyed an entire city of live people, men, women and children not involved in the war any more than other men, women and children in America. Truman dropped it; but FDR created it and would have used it ruthlessly; he also advocated testing the affects of the bomb on the children he trapped in the Child Protection Program; children who were suppose to be protected by the Government not used as pawns in experimental medicine's, vaccines and money making schemes for each State.

The time to act is now; these courts need to be open to the public they serve, records and accountability across the board need to be demanded; otherwise 40 years from now your children will wonder why you simply choose to step-aside and ignore the pleas of millions of families and children in the United States; as history continues to repeat itself, simply because you refused to learn from the past. 

Parent's Pro Se, How, What, Discovery, Due Process, Legal Research Help?

"Defeat is not the worst of failures. Not to have tried is the true failure." George Edward Woodberry  

When dealing with Child Protection Services in any State - Parent's may need to request the following information to fight their case; Below is a letter formatted to request discovery; the body can also be used in  a MOTION FOR DISCOVERY PRIOR TO THE HEARING THE COURT WILL BASE IT'S FINDINGS ON. Request as soon as you have notice of a hearing.

Under Crawford vs. Washington you are entitled to know your accuser and/or in NH Ross vs. Gadwah and your 5th and/or 14th Constitutional Amend. Rights and/or other case, state, and constitutional rights - parent's are entitled to information a fact finder will use in determining the fate of their child; this is just an example of what a parent in this situation may need to understand and obtain to see what they are up against and to disprove the States assertions. 

It is not meant as legal advice and the writer/dmvc takes no responsibility for any flaws it may have; others are welcome to insert their thoughts and opinion's to further the argument that parents without court appointed attorneys and/or the resources to get a good or any attorney, are in fact in need of resources that an attorney would have access and training to do. Note DCYF can be replaced by CPS or whatever your state titles their department of Child Protection Services as.

Page 1.

Name

Address

Phone

Email

 Court COUNTY,                                              MOTION and/or NOTICE FOR PRODUCTION

 Name  of Court                                                        

                                                                                     OF DOCUMENTS AND THINGS             

  Docket No.

Parent's Name, Pro Se, Plaintiff v. State of Whatever State, Department of Health and Human Services, Division of Children Youth and Families or State Name NH = Department of Children Youth and families; court case name is on paperwork received from court or division that a case is open in. 

TO:      Child Protection Department or Attorney General Office if a Civil Suit or edit for a specific

             Doctor or party; such as police, CASA, Guardians etc. their Address or use the court title

             format on any sample motions they have online;          

 DATE: May 19, 2011

            PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Parent, acting pro se, pursuant to the Rules of the Court,  hereby requests that the State make available to the Parent, for the purposes of copying and inspecting the following documents and items in the possession, custody or control of the State, its officers, employees, agents, attorneys, insurance and/or representatives: All Items set forth on the attached schedule “A”.

Page 2.

SCHEDULE “A” NOTICE FOR PRODUCTION by June 01, 2012 (put in a due date; check state child protection statute or give at least 10 days some states only require 5 days)

1.      A copy of any and all written statements obtained from Parent, Child and/or 3rd parties, DCYF Employees as it relates to this case including but Not limited to: letters, notes, memoranda, and emails from all parties not limited to the Parents, CASA, and 3^rd party providers.

2.      A copy of any and all written documents containing oral statements by the parent, child, 3rd parties and/or DCYF Employees including all file memos, notes, dictation, memoranda or such documents’ taken by Social workers or any other agents, representatives or any police officers assisting in the investigation of the original matter that would contain such oral statements.   

3.      Copies of the entire file of DCYF (excluding any attorney/client privileged information) including but not limited to: any and all 3^rd party information, all referral forms and all dictation of the child assessment worker(s) and ongoing social worker(s) assigned to this case.

4.      Copies of all reports made by police officers, other law enforcement officers or any other person concerning this matter to the extent that said reports are in the possession, custody or control of DCYF including those made by the Nashua Visitation Center and/or any other visitation sources. 

5.      Copies of any photographs depicting any injury to the child involved in this matter.

 

6.      Copies of any photographs or video tapes or audio tapes that DCYF has in their possession, custody or control regarding this matter.

7.      Copies of any and all reports, records, evaluations or the like, of any treating physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists, counselors, evaluators or hospitals pertaining to the child, that DCYF has in their possession, custody or control.

8.      Copies of any tangible evidence that DCYF used at trial and/or will seek to introduce at the review of this matter.

9.      Copies of any and all written documents of any sort that DCYF has introduced to the court and those they will seek to introduce.  

10.  Copies of any video tapes, audio tapes or recordings made of the child and/or parent[s], pertaining to the investigation and any petition(s) in this matter.

11.  Copies of any written statements of all potential witnesses and copies of reports containing the oral statements of all potential witnesses, whether or not the State intends to call or subpoena said witnesses in this matter.

 

12.  Any written and/or audio, video statements, of or by the Minor Child;  

13.  Any written, audiotaped or videotaped statements of witnesses and/or Parents to the alleged occurrence.

The request is due within 10 days of receipt; it is not grounds for objection that the information sought may be inadmissible at the trial if the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.

 Wherefore, the accused respectfully requests that this Honorable Court:

A. Grant this Motion for Discovery;

B. Grant Such further relief as may be deemed just and equitable.

and/or skip wherefore it not a motion

Respectfully,

x

xSign name here

x

Parents Name

Address

Phone Number

email

The Research skills of paralegals are typically deemed denied in every state to Pro Se litigants for the fear of being accused of the unauthorized practice of law by lawyers and bar associations that do not want the public to have access to these individuals ; however, if a paralegal is simply asked to build a Motion or research case law and statutory law surrounding a specific fact pattern  and or lay out a fact pattern in a manner that gives a reader a clear picture of what did and didn't occur - that is not legal advice that's research and legal writing everything done for an attorney should be available to the Pro Se litigant, it is always wise for the Pro Se litigant then to take their case build up to an attorney for review "called bundled services in most states" where you only need the attorney to perform part of the services not handle the whole case and charge you $75 + for a paralegal that maybe an intern earning $ 0 or less than $20. 

Once an attorney receives the information he will determine and rework what is usable and give the client a status; for the Pro Se parent using this resource, they must decide on their own what they will use as well.

Paralegals assisting in this area produce results such as the above and know where to look to obtain information for fact gathering, evidence and the law; however, they can not give legal advice such as: "I think this is the best way to go, they can only give out the research they were ask to retrieve on a specific case, matter, person, or subject of law and they can not represent you in court and argue your case in front of a Judge."

"Always bear in mind that your own resolution to succeed is more important than any other."  Abraham Lincoln 

Legislators VS. Judicial VS. Common sense not so much ...

House, courts at odds | Concord Monitor: Rather common sense seems to be not so common as this debate lingers on; and the bull coming out from both sides egos now, really read between the lines...

"Last-minute legislation co-authored by House Speaker Bill O'Brien has court officials predicting that, if passed, the state's district, probate and family courts will revert to costly, inconsistent "fiefdoms." Really, well as a citizen who has tried to get contempt charges into a NH Court since filing in October 2011; under NH RSA 461:A it should have been heard in 30 days; and yet it has been "rescheduled" now for the 4th time due to the Judicial Branch to be heard on May 25th. I would have to say that the Court's are already inconsistent.

If the amendment returns control and management of the lower courts to the judges sitting in them and no longer leave it's to the central office in Concord which actually has been around for a while providing extra jobs; albeit not accountability across the board; that sounds worst than where we are now. Speaking without looking at the proposal because the Concord Monitor does not provide a link to it; typical; but they do bring out the horrendous logic contained in it. What legislator's should be doing is working to make that office accountable and make the Judicial Branch ACCOUNTABLE AND CONSISTENT across the board! 

"Court officials told an unsympathetic House Judiciary Committee last week that the move would reverse decades of improvements that have made the lower courts more uniform and efficient." Sorry, I am pretty sure they are not talking about New Hampshire.  If Chief Justice Linda Dalianis testified that there was $2.3 million in savings over the last 10 months due to greater central control; why are the courts not open a FULL WEEK; why are they not hearing cases in a consistent manner?

"Amherst Rep. Robert Rowe, is a retired Judge who chairs the committee and co-authored the amendment, and he more than most would be pretty aware of the Judicial Branch's inability to be a uniform and consistent operation; however, his reasoning as this article moves along shows can only be from days gone by when the courts were not as large as they are today.

 "A call center  that takes nearly 1,500 calls a day," is indicative of courts that are not processing cases in a timely manner even in light of being closed two or more at least half days a week; and that the inconsistency in the system requires users must ask a lot of questions.

OUCH, HERE Delanis may be right.....Rowe said the lower court "judges especially fear retaliation from supervisors if identified. Their gripe, Rowe said, is that they no longer have any authority in their courthouses beyond adjudicating cases. That is of course their only role. "(A judge) can't supervise or discipline court personnel that are not performing his or her job,"  Nor should they be able to, that is not their job; it is the Clerk of Court's job and Judges should be forwarding their complaints to them; for example the inconsistencies in the Nashua, NH Superior Court; comes under the Clerk of Court and Judges should be especially concerned over their new "court coordinators" that are holding back divorce cases; a recent example shows a couple who filed a joint petition for divorce with no outstanding issues to be decided by a Judge; it just needs to be signed. However, now before the Judge even sees the case; a court coordinator halted the progress by demanding financials in a case that didn't call for them; all assets and child support had been divided agreed upon and neither party wanted to share their financials. Judges should be reporting to the Clerks of Court that the unauthorized practice of law will not be tolerated and together should be putting a stop to overzealous "clerks" who have no authority to make such decisions; the idea was to help streamline cases not entertain busybody "clerks" whose only agenda is to be nosey.

Furthermore, Judges should not be playing a micromanagement role; they are there to hear cases decide on them and keep the flow of traffic moving; Clerks of Courts (Whether it is a Judge or Lawyer) need to fire lazy meddlesome employees and run their offices with efficiency, something covered in their business management classes; and if they haven't had a background in business and law we should be very concerned.
Procedures and Administration should be consistently controlled from Concord in conjunction with and under the leadership of the Chief Justice and the legislative committee to be sure they are actually understandable since the National Center on State Courts reports that in 85% of civil cases in New Hampshire one party is a pro se litigant.

Dealing with individuals bad behavior should be handled by the "Clerk of the Court" as heard about by the Judge, other Attorneys and the public's complaints.  The Judge is there to hear cases period; no where does it say he/she is the end all; of how the courts operate and that would be bad. Rowe is wrong. If Rowe said "Judge Ed Kelly, who heads the court, and Judge David King, who serves as his deputy, would strictly hear cases." Well, it should be an either or thing they are administrators or they are Judge's obviously Kelly is failing or there wouldn't be this much controversy surrounding the issue.  

The Court's need accountability and consistency; Judge Kelly has failed because he does not know how to provide that or how to keep his Clerk's of Court and/or Judges accountable with appropriate sanctions and discipline standards across the board, or any type of consistency; the Judicial Conduct Committee made up of mostly Judges, Lawyers and appointed linked professionals has no stats, no public sensor and provides no leadership in controlling the professionals under their watch; they do consistently hide their misdeeds under the rug though. Rowe actually told a group of students in the last couple of years that the Court System is very much the "the old boys network". Hopefully, Delanis can break through the barriers by actually demanding consistency in administration and following the laws set out by legislators; and reining her employees in across the board with meaningful reprimands.

Now the article states that "The administration would be left to the chief justice, who would be allowed to appoint a non-judge administrator. But the courthouses would be managed by a presiding judge assigned there"  Hello, Legislators that is exactly the problem, Judges need to adjudicate cases not micro manage.

"Rowe said there is no way Kelly or King, sitting centrally, can know what sorts of problems the circuit court in Colebrook or Nashua are facing. He said judges have told him that when clerks in the courthouse fail to do their work or are rude to the public, they can do nothing about it."  The problem is with the Clerks of those courts the Judges have enough to do and they are more often than not part of the same complaints; if Kelly actually acted on any of the complaints coming across his desk and got off his derrière to see what is happening in the state and have training's for consistency across the board he would be an affective manager.  Perhaps what Dalanis should be doing is looking for someone new.

"Rowe said. "It won't cost any money. All it does is give the local judge a little more say in managing the staff. That is all it does."  Really, what does the Clerk of Court do then? Judges should only be managing their direct staff and when an issue arises forwarding it to the clerk to take care of.  And the Clerks should be consistent in their demerit system and get rid of employees who do not act in a manner that serves the Judge or the Public. Its called Human Resources.

Central management can provide consistency when it is issued from a strong central manager - obviously not found in Judge Kelly. A presiding Judge is there to make sure the Judges and Marital Masters that are not suppose to be there but are under him/her are doing their jobs consistently and in line with ethics and wow the law not a wholly new concept.

The administration is rightly left with the Clerk of Court under Central Management to provided fluid uninterrupted consistency across the State and they should set up a line of discplinary action with their employees unions to get rid of the ones who think they are in someway owed a job. 

This amendment by Rowe WILL result in adverse changes in the circuit court, "Rowe said. "It won't cost any money. All it does is give the local judge a little more say in managing the staff. That is all it does." What it really does is feeds some already over inflated ego's; times have changed and while I do respect and have deep appreciation and respect for Rowe this time, I respectfully disagree and welcome him to discover a new age.

Dalianis appears to have a better picture and the ability to realize that Rowe's proposal will result in the same old "individual judges causing the processing of cases to fall behind; not recognizing standardized forms, procedures, court rules and the law; not working to make court records available online; a hole in the records due to their private biases.

Dalianis actions and ability to listen and attempt to compromise with the Legislators reminds me of this ...“The key is to just get on the bike, and the key to getting on the bike… is to stop thinking about ‘there are a bunch of reasons I might fall off’ and just hop on and peddle the damned thing. You can pick up a map, a tire pump, and better footwear along the way.”  -Dick Costolo, founder of Feedburner.com

To the Legislators and Judicial Branch - Winston Churchill once said "An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile -- hoping it will eat him last"; he should know Neville Chamberlain appeased Hitler and look where that left us. It's time both sides look at the big picture you can't place missile's in Turkey directed at the Soviet Union and not expect a tit for tat when they place missiles in Cuba. 

Demand accountability and make the changes necessary to achieve it; learn from the past and listen to both sides; right now your both reacting without accepting responsibility and making meaningful changes to a Judicial System is that is quickly sinking its not that hard to root out the real problem's and fix them.

The amendment will go to the full House on Tuesday. Contact your legislators before Tuesday and tell them to work it out.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/members/wml.aspx

 

Concurrent Legislative & Judicial Power News » Vote for this!!

http://www.unionleader.com/article/20120503/NEWS06/120509947  

The above article appeared in the unionleader 5/3/12; "quotes from article appear in italics"

"Democracy is the only system that persists in asking the powers that be whether they are the powers that ought to be." Sydney J. Harris

After heated debates and angry constituents brought numerous complaints to legislators about items ruled on in and similar to cases like this one http://openjurist.org/831/f2d/362/witte-v-justices-of-new-hampshire-superior-court where the supreme court ruled in its own favor; and the lack of regulatory rule-making applied across the board in all New Hampshire Courts, the courts appear to have finally backed down a bit and have offer a reasonable solution "concurrent Legislative and Judicial Powers" to "regulate court administrative and procedural matters by statute."

The statute/law unless it violated the U.S. or N.H. Constitution; should of course win because the Court's do NOT make laws in this country the legislators do. Pro Se litigants (meaning they represent themselves because for most people lawyers are to expensive) can hardly make sense of the rules in most of these courts, moreover, they are not consistent from court to court and that is NOT EQUAL ACCESS TO THE LAW.

VOTERS: The "1978 constitutional amendment giving the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court unilateral authority to make rules governing the administration of all state courts and the “practice and procedure” to be followed in the courts." Is not working, they are more often incomprehensible and I am now a law student; the average person is not getting a fair hearing; because, the Chief Justice has failed to discharge his/her duty faithfully ensuring that all courts are run the same and consistently; and these duties/complaints have extended past merely processing cases.

The extent that our Courts are corrupt can seen by the number of people complaining; the lack of accessibility for instance compare the NH site http://www.courts.state.nh.us/ to say GA's http://www.gwinnettcourts.com/home.asp#home/ , you can find cases more easily and obtain records in similar matter to better research just for starters in GA who of course has its own problems; but, it gives litigants specifically Pro Se litigants better resources to work with.  Furthermore, in 2004, "the Court blocked the Attorney General's Office from issuing a voters' guide explaining the constitutional question." Again, not providing the citizens with information to make a reasonable choice.

The separation-of-powers doctrine was designed to limit the 3 branches of the government; each branches has defined powers to "check" the powers of the other branches. This idea was simply called "separation of powers" designed to prevent abuses endured under the crown of England; Britain still does not have strict separation of powers.

In America, the public has a right to accountability over their legislators, courts and the executive branches of its government, their dealings and their accounting of how they receive and spend our money.

I can not agree with Justice Lynn's statement that the Judicial branch would not have a leader or it would in some way separate the court system; the court system is not "unified" now, because, as he stated "each level of court made its own rules" clearly relaying there is no leader except possibly over the interpretation of the laws made by legislators; but, even that can be questioned when parents are not receiving information that a fact finder is relying on in determining the fate of their child; a decision make by the Supreme Court in Ross vs. Gadwah, one that the lower courts more often than not fail to recognize. And that litigants can hardly afford to have their cases appealed or understand the rules; and lawyers can not expect consistency in filing or application of the law across the board, and not because its misinterpreted as above it is often overlooked or blatantly ignored.

The COMPROMISE “concurrent power” with the legislative branch to regulate court issues by statute" if it clarifies: "In the event of a conflict between a statute and a court rule, the statute, if not otherwise contrary to this constitution, shall prevail over the rule."  My fellow constituents “The majority practice around the country is in essence what the court has proposed,” and Justice Lynn concurs because the Justice department knows their reign of absolute control without oversight is over.

“There may have been misunderstanding historically” about the limits of judicial rule-making, said Hicks, “but it was before his time; here we should be very concerned, it is the judicial branch if not every branch that is suppose to understand the history behind how our laws developed in this country.

The U.S. constitution does obligated that the branches work together to balance each other out and avoid fraud; that's their job and the Judicial branch has finally had the conscience to do the right thing and represent the people, instead of their self-center control issues, as seen in thankfully retired Justice John Broderick and Justice Joseph Nadeau, who, of course oppose it.

Nixon's assertion that "Part 1 Article 35 of the constitution, being designed specifically to provide that the judges of the Supreme Court do not have to be and should not be unduly influenced by any outside forces, political, legislative or executive.” Is true only to the extent in the way the bill was originally introduced; the compromised bill proposal does not interfere with the Court's "decision" making power's; it in facts deals with "just" how they are run, when they are open, and consistent understandable and applicable rules across the board; something that if the Court and Legislators not all of whom are former Judges or Lawyers will be able to make plain so people can have equal access in obtaining justice from a Judicial System with only two-tiers and not three as in most other states.

To get this on the ballot in November, it has to pass the Senate by 3/5 majority so contact them now and tell them to pass it, as compromised!http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm  And in November be sure to read the wording carefully and repeal it if the compromise makes the ballot.

To hear other opinions from consitutents see: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/Senate/committees/committee_details.aspx?cc=S10 
"For in reason, all government without the consent of the governed is the very definition of slavery." Jonathan Swift

THE ULTIMATE BLUNDER

Psychologists, Courts, Child protection workers, Guardians

Aristotle once said: All human actions have one or more of these seven causes: chance, nature, compulsions, habit, reason, passion, desire. 

Understanding the individual is in recognizing every soul has a purpose, a reason for being, finding the nerve to recognize and act on the obstacles in your path, doesn't require a psychologist, it requires finding one person and it only takes one who believes in you; who pushes you to take chances; “Everyone’s a prisoner until they ask questions and find the answers.” "Socrates"

Finding the answers your looking for in a person that has the same causes for existence as you do? Psychology/Psychiatry is the only medical profession that allows their members to treat ailments that their very boards do not recognize and provide drugs to treat these ailments, be very wary of the drugs it offers your children.    

Fraud, oh I mean, Freud once said "Analysis does not set out to make pathological reactions impossible, but to give the patients ego freedom to decide one way or another.

Meaning all psychologist's react and act within a realm of undefined measures against what is reality as their ego dictates; where analysis does not make pathological reactions "impossible"; analysis by the Psychologist/Psychiatrist "does make reactions pathological" - because Freud also once said "Every normal person, in fact, is only normal on the average. His ego approximates to that of the psychotic in some part or other and to a greater or lesser extent."

That being said or analyzed; whenever a social worker pushes a Court to get a psychological assessment on any one to submit to a court, be prepared because, the father of modern psychology Freud said "every" normal person, even the most rounded upstanding citizen is psychotic in some part or other that would include; the person testing, the social worker, and the Judge, ALL of whom will have a number of "pathology's"; because not to have them would in fact be deemed abnormal; the problem comes in when a social worker and/or a Judge tries to interpret test results behind closed doors - an area where only gray can exist, that becomes twisted and obscene upon the observer, over the dissection, because the Father of modern psychology says so.

What the courts do not ascertain and cross exam is that All human actions have one or more causes and they do not bother to acknowledge which one it was chance, nature, compulsions, habit, reason, passion, desire? What triggered it? What feeds into the formula in a forum that accepts heresay without factual evidence?  How do you determine the fitness of parent, when a report done by some person who has viewed/interviewed the person for a few short hours against a standardized test with results tested and formulated around inmates; really the average person may have run into a chance exception, or wasn't truly in their nature, a compulsion caused by trauma, a habit, inability to reason at precise moment, driven by blinded passion or desire, lack of education, and then for what purpose what is the why? Perhaps it was for none of the above because not enough question's were asked on ALL sides; what if it never existed - they are innocent and in a state of turmoil due to separation from their child is that exam still valid?  What if a Child is separated from their parent should their outward behavior be ruled as unacceptable and should they be drugged to prevent them from asking about their parents, family, siblings and friends? That would be expecting and accepting the improbability that the child's behavior doesn't stem from grief, depression, anguish and loss.

Now what about that truly evil person who should not be a parent - the one who knows how to take the standardized test and it shows that their nature, compulsion, habit, ability to reason, passions and/or desires, as well as their education does NOT support the findings and real facts we all come to associate with the American Justice system; because they are completely disregarded by the Judge? What if the child shows no sign of friends ever visiting that parents home, that they are not allowed to talk about what goes on in that home, that they are unable to call friends or meet with them outside of school? Is that not a sign of a bigger issue? What if they are told that they can't not participate in sports or other events because they have to see the other parent? Is that not a form of control?

Behind closed doors the truth is buried and when they realize their mistake it gets buried deeper until they Child protection workers like the vulture/abusive parent start to believe their own fabrications.

The fact is everyday in the United States and other countries children are taken away from their parents or not being kept safe because a standardized test, that the testers, Child protection workers and the Judge who ordered them would show at least multiple pathology's on or be deemed abnormal if they took it - is being used and reasoned as a tool to say they will do harm in the future; or sadly to ignore the facts the real undisputed facts and say a child and eyewitness's are lying. Or that the child's disclosure against the innocent parent while living with the abusive parent is true without any facts to support it; unless they obtain the real facts found in therapists records never checked that show the child never said any of the things relayed to the Court, because the therapist started to believe one parent or favor one parent over another and disregarded their daily notes that documented what the child really said. Notes that the Courts and DCYF workers seek to surpress.

Oscar Wilder once said: "In all matter's of opinion, our adversaries are insane"

Children's worst adversaries are the Child Protection Service Worker, uneducated Guardian's acting on their behalf and Judges ALL purporting to be acting for the greater good; when children become wards of the State their Warden is the State as their guardian, subjecting them to unspeakable conscience shocking realities, being drugged, put in homes with no where to go when they turn 18, without resources, without direction and all because up to the age of 18, the State received Federal Funding up to 75% to employ the CPSW, GAL and Judge who took them away from their natural families and it needs to be stopped; because the child who needed help is not getting it and living in waste.

“We must always think about things, and we must think about things as they are, not as they are said to be.” George Bernard Shaw

Looking at things as they are, if the government practice is right and just for these children why do we need laws to reinstate parental rights? http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/22/title22sec4059.html 

Push your legislators to adopt open courts for accountability and laws such as Maine's to correct the injustices that are occurring around the United States and your very neighborhood now. http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml 

For more information see the Citizens Commission on Human Rights report http://www.cchr.org/ it is not good.

Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. C. S. Lewis