fightcps.com

Hello,

I have been given notice that I've been granted permission to post by Good Dad, with Linda's approval.

I urge everyone to review the information on the LIFE site, especially the sections listed below.

LIFE: http://www.life-vs-cps.com/

The Family Court Hearing - A Constitutional Defense: http://www.life-vs-cps.com/index_files/Page357.htm

Writ of Habeas Corpus: http://www.life-vs-cps.com/index_files/Page425.htm

Termination of Parental Rights: http://www.life-vs-cps.com/index_files/Page353.htm

I am currently working with someone on an Appeal using the Constitutional Defense. This person has already thwarted an attempt by CPS criminals and the colluding court, using the Constitutional Defense, so they are trying to circumvent their initial failure with a new bogus procedure in the form of an illegal court order. They will find they are only sinking deeper into their own quicksand of fraud and corruption. They are being exposed for all to see, on the court record. To preserve privacy, I cannot give any other details until this is resolved.

Bob,

I use firefox and none of the links (on homepage) work. Seems none of the panel links work (all pages) - some imbedded links work.

Okay - now i c your site can be navigated with IE (yuck)

IMO, the substance of your message - raise/preserve constitutional issues is important. Your METHOD may need a little 'tweaking'

Also - my reading of PA's new rules for dependency court seem to make it difficult for parents to file motions.

-------------------------------------
http://www.aopc.org/Index/supctcmtes/ju ... ctrule.pdf

PART D(1)
MOTION PROCEDURES

RULE 1344. MOTIONS AND ANSWERS

B. Filings by attorneys. If a party is represented by an attorney, the attorney shall make or file all motions and answers.

------------------------------------

Firefox does not work with certain sites, you have to use Internet Explorer with the LIFE website, sorry.

Please re-read the rule, I'll emphasize the key words for you:

Filings by attorneys. If a party is represented by an attorney, the attorney shall make or file all motions and answers.

You can file anything you want to your heart's content in any court in America if you act sui juris (preferable) or pro se. This is a right protected by the Constitution of the United States and every state constitution.

Please suggest what may need "tweaking" as I'm open to anything and everything that makes sense. Note that what's posted on the LIFE website is a sample for people to use as a template to defend themselves against these criminals. Every case is different and you must customize any defense to your specific case. It is also just the basics of a Constitutional Defense, there is a lot more to it.

Bob_Lynn wrote:You can file anything you want to your heart's content in any court in America if you act sui juris (preferable) or pro se. This is a right protected by the Constitution of the United States and every state constitution.

Sure - this is America. You could dress up in a diaper made out of the American flag ala Larry Flint (one of my favorite people) - but it's not advised unless you are fearless and prepared, as Larry was, to devote your life to your cause.

Most folk just want CPS out of their life and/or their kids back.

Bob_Lynn wrote:Please suggest what may need "tweaking" as I'm open to anything and everything that makes sense. Note that what's posted on the LIFE website is a sample for people to use as a template to defend themselves against these criminals. Every case is different and you must customize any defense to your specific case. It is also just the basics of a Constitutional Defense, there is a lot more to it.

Yes, a lot more to it.

Bob, IMHO, this 'constitutional defense' doesn't work. It never has worked, and chances are, it never will work. It's 10% substance and 90% rant. Pamala Gaston died proving it don't work. It sounds good - it's got emotional appeal, but mostly it just gets you removed in restraints!

Average joe's looking for CPS help need just that - help - all the help they can get - IMHO, this 'constitutional defense' just pisses off a bunch of folks who might have proved assets.

It's not that the constitution has no place in family court, etc., etc., It's just this defense will hurt many more innocent, confused parents than it will help. It requires YEARS of studying, filing, fighting, just to get a decision.

Pennsylvania has hard coded home assessments into CPS law - now there's a constitutional project!!

You certainly have a right to your opinion but I completely disagree that the Constitutional Defense doesn't work. In fact it's been proven to work by those who pioneered this form of defense in New Mexico (over 300 cases won and only 2 losses that are being appealed). It doesn't take years of learning, just a basic understand of Constitutional issues and people's rights vs limited government powers. To say it hurts people is totally false and misleading (in my opinion), they have already been hurt by CPS and the unconstitutional courts, not by a defense that is backed by the Supreme Law of the land and the Supreme Law of their respective state.

I know about Will and Pamela Gaston and a few others and there will always victims of criminal government corruption. That doesn't mean it will fail for others and in fact has already worked in the only CPS Constitutional Defense case I helped someone with.

The other choice is a poor one. Accept jurisdiction, fight hearsay with hearsay and hope for the best. This is nonsense and plays right into the administrative profit making courts' game. That's what they want you to do.

Pennsylvania laws are mostly unconstitutional as over 90% of all laws are and you either accept that they're legal or you challenge them. That's up to you.

The best defense is a good aggressive offense, not silence or hearsay as most CPS victims use, either by design (set up) or by ignorance.

So I take it, your opinion now has changed from it needs to be "tweaked" to "it doesn't work and actually hurts people"?

PS - I've heard about the "it takes years" criticism from certain others, this is very familiar to me. It could also take years or never when CPS has your children. And one more point, you believe you should worry about pissing off those who are trying to destroy your children and your family?

Bob_Lynn wrote:You certainly have a right to your opinion but I completely disagree that the Constitutional Defense doesn't work. In fact it's been proven to work by those who pioneered this form of defense in New Mexico (over 300 cases won and only 2 losses that are being appealed).

Who are these folks? Having the details of these 'wins' would certainly shine some light on things. But to be honest, I think someone is pulling your leg. Sounds like a claim the 'pay no taxes' folks make.

Bob_Lynn wrote:It doesn't take years of learning, just a basic understand of Constitutional issues and people's rights vs limited government powers.

That's where your mistaken - it takes a few minutes or hours to copy some motion and file it. It takes years to understand sufficently to follow it to it's conclusion. Like trying to cross the Alps because someone said 'go that way'

When you tell the judge his court is illegal and he is a puppet running an unconstitutional court - you'd better be Clarence Darrow, 'cause things are gonna get ugly.

Bob_Lynn wrote:To say it hurts people is totally false and misleading (in my opinion), they have already been hurt by CPS and the unconstitutional courts, not by a defense that is backed by the Supreme Law of the land and the Supreme Law of their respective state.

This defense doesn't work Bob. It causes parents to inflame the court with complicated issues they know nothing about. It causes them to run around looking for constitutional cases they can't understand instead of concentrating on getting the CASE CLOSED.

Bob_Lynn wrote:I know about Will and Pamela Gaston and a few others and there will always victims of criminal government corruption. That doesn't mean it will fail for others and in fact has already worked in the only CPS Constitutional Defense case I helped someone with.

Winning is always good. Let's discuss the case to see how we can replicate the victory.

Bob_Lynn wrote:The other choice is a poor one. Accept jurisdiction, fight hearsay with hearsay and hope for the best. This is nonsense and plays right into the administrative profit making courts' game. That's what they want you to do.

Bob - it's not one way or the other - there are many ways to skin a cat. Ranting about criminals and profit making courts only guarantees you won't be seein your kids for awhile.

Bob_Lynn wrote:Pennsylvania laws are mostly unconstitutional as over 90% of all laws are and you either accept that they're legal or you challenge them. That's up to you.

The best defense is a good aggressive offense, not silence or hearsay as most CPS victims use, either by design (set up) or by ignorance.

So I take it, your opinion now has changed from it needs to be "tweaked" to "it doesn't work and actually hurts people"?

The 'constitutional defense' itself is undefined - your site consists of a number of motions, etc. etc - the CD seems to be more of an 'strategy' - than a cut and dried list of motions to file. So I can't say 'it' won't work, because some of the motions and issues are quite on topic and need to be used.

The 'idea' that you can demand 'constitutional courts' or 'jury trial' or that 'all officers follow bla,bla, bla" That stuff is rant Bob. It is why they have the saying about folks who represent themselves. And it inflames the court and hurts the case.

Bob_Lynn wrote:PS - I've heard about the "it takes years" criticism from certain others, this is very familiar to me. It could also take years or never when CPS has your children. And one more point, you believe you should worry about pissing off those who are trying to destroy your children and your family?

The end at last

Bob - welcome back.

I just dawned on me that here I am on/in the announcement of your return - critisizing your work - and rather harshly at that -

Peace.

Other than this post, I'm not going to reply to this any further. I didn't return to this forum to argue and I'm highly suspicious of those who have only 8 posts here and criticize the Constitutional Defense. It's very reminiscent of the circumstances leading to why I was banned from this site in the first place and more accurately, is similar to the M.O. of someone else.

When someone (especially a purported newbie) spends a lot of energy trying to discredit a tactic to use against CPS all sorts of red flags go up.

I've gone through your posts and I don't see that you have a personal issue with CPS. I have a couple of questions for you. Who are you and why are you here?

No one "pulled my leg" and you are certainly not capable of pulling my leg either. I may not be the most intelligent person in the world and I do have my senior moments but I'm not that gullible. The Constitutional Defense is real and was pioneered by Jack and Margy Flynn. They have a website called Citizens of the American Constitution at http://www.citizensoftheamericanconstitution.org/ I studied their work and applied it to a CPS defense. I have no legal background but it didn't take me years to figure it out and come up with the notion that it makes all the sense in the world. There is another person who posts on this site who went through the typical defense most CPS victims go through and 2 years later (I think that's right), is facing a TPR hearing. This person is now working on a Constitutional Defense because there is no other realistic choice at this late stage.

In the end, everyone must use their best judgment and each person is responsible for the welfare of their children and their family. No one can tell anyone else how best to approach a system run by criminals acting under pretense of law. The Constitutional Defense is an approach based on law and it attacks the judicial fraud you will find in most family and juvenile courts. Assert all your Constitutionally protected rights or waive those you fail to assert, the choice is up to you.