Why I WANT to See a Family in an Appeals Situation

General chat area for anything that doesn't fit in elsewhere.

Moderators: family_man, LindaJM

Bob_Lynn
Posts: 1276
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 3:56 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Postby Bob_Lynn » Wed May 24, 2006 8:31 am

dasuberding wrote:Sullivan, just thought that you should know that we got are son back AFTER we threatened to take the goons to FEDERAL COURT for violations of our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS! Returned to us in 24 hours with no strings attached. No "probationary" period (which is illegal), no nothing, just "go pick him up" and we haven't seen them since except when they started issuing threats again after they were served with federal lawsuit paperwork. We didn't agree to anything and completely became a pain in their asses. It got to the point that they were asking us not to "rock the boat".


Thanks for proving my point but more importantly for doing what's best for your family. I'm proud of you and I wish we had done the same but we were just as ignorant as most people are in the beginning. The difference is that I crammed up and learned quickly and we got our children back 105 days after they were kidnapped, which is relatively very fast since even CPS admitted to us 6 months was the average (if they're "kind enough" to give children back). I gave them a good taste that I wasn't completely ignorant when I confronted them, asserting my rights, about 2 months into this atrocity, they even felt it necessary to call the police due to the confrontation. I also asserted my rights once again in a letter to the County Commissioner just before my wife and I met with her. So the heat was turned on for the same reasons, and I believe they felt it.
We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. Edward R. Murrow

gideonmacleish
Posts: 460
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 9:50 am
Contact:

Postby gideonmacleish » Wed May 24, 2006 8:36 am

Dazeemay and Bob,

I HIGHLY recommend BOTH of you see if you can get your hands on a copy of Michael Badnarik's book "Good to be King" (best to buy, you'll probably want to highlight several sections). It will change your perspective on the Constitution entirely. As a historian, who is generally well informed historically, I found myself quitre surprised at what I did NOT know.

dasuberding
Posts: 378
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:26 pm

Postby dasuberding » Wed May 24, 2006 10:53 am

To answer Sullivan's questions:

"Which rights did you claim were violated?"

Well, which ones rights do they always violate? You can answer the question yourself, you know the system, you love to work with the system. We don't. Just because the system is in place and the machine is broken doesn't mean we have to play by their rules. I can't go deeply into our federal case because we are in the middle of it but as soon as we are done, we will release everything. What works, what doesn't work. One thing that doesn't work is playing along with the CPS system. Their attitude, at least with us, is "how long are you going to let us screw you" and after we had exposed them, they were "don't rock the boat". Screw that, screw CPS, and screw anybody who says it's a good idea to put your principles to the side and work with CPS.

"And how long was the boy in CPS' physical and then legal custody?"

Our son was in the gestapo's custody physicaly for 3 months, legally for two.

Bob, like you, we had to take a crash course on how the system is out to screw you. We also had lawyers that said working with the system was a good idea, even though we hadn't done anything wrong and the case was 100% BS. We ended up educating, and then firing, the lawyers. I also downloaded the juvenile court judical bench guide and it looks like I'm going to have to educate another "lawyer" by sending him in front of the judical review board. Of all the govt. employees, judges, lawyers involved with our case, only one (besides ourselves) knows their policies as well as we do now. These people are frauds and we will be exposing them (all of them) publicly when we are done with federal court. I'm even debating on sending out flyers to every citizen in the county, with names, phone #, housing addresses (we ran background checks).

The bottom line, we became to much for these imbeciles to handle and they wanted us to dissappear. Well, shouldn't of kidnapped my son, you cowards.

Bob_Lynn
Posts: 1276
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 3:56 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Postby Bob_Lynn » Wed May 24, 2006 11:08 am

I don't know what state you're in but I just want to inform you the Judicial Review Board in Pa. is totally worthless. There is no way they will do anything about corrupt judges in Pa., it's been tried countless times and I believe only one judge has been impeached in Pa. in the last 5 years and that was by the legislature.

I reported one judge to them and they just sent me back a form to fill out. I spoke to my current attorney about this agency and he agreed they're worthless, so I didn't bother to send back the form but I got my point across to the right people in my County about this incompetent and/or corrupt judge.

Your case sounds similar to ours just on the surface. We'll trade information when our 2 cases are decided. I intend to publish the results if we win and I'm confident we will win and establish much needed case law in the process.
We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. Edward R. Murrow

dasuberding
Posts: 378
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:26 pm

Postby dasuberding » Wed May 24, 2006 1:26 pm

"I don't know what state you're in but I just want to inform you the Judicial Review Board in Pa. is totally worthless."
The socialist police state of California and I have pretty much assumed that any type of checks and balances involving the state government is useless at best but if I refer the judge to the judical review board, the judge will get notice of the referral and maybe start playing straight instead of just sitting there, rubber stamping, and acting like a useless lump. Well, not useless to CPS though. Best case scenario will be if the judge is removed from the bench and disbarred from practicing law in CA. In the past year, the judical review board has removed six judges so far, so all hope is not lost. What irks me the most is that I voted for this moron.

Bob_Lynn
Posts: 1276
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 3:56 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Postby Bob_Lynn » Wed May 24, 2006 2:21 pm

Absolutely. I'm not telling you not to expose the rats, even to other rats, just what you might expect when you try. In Pa. it's called the Judicial Conduct Board.
We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. Edward R. Murrow

Dan Sullivan
Posts: 1538
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:42 am
Location: Long Island, New York

Postby Dan Sullivan » Wed May 24, 2006 3:35 pm

dasuberding wrote:To answer Sullivan's questions:

"Which rights did you claim were violated?"

Well, which ones rights do they always violate? You can answer the question yourself, you know the system, you love to work with the system. We don't. Just because the system is in place and the machine is broken doesn't mean we have to play by their rules. I can't go deeply into our federal case because we are in the middle of it but as soon as we are done, we will release everything.


Now there's a non-answer if I ever saw one.

What's the problem?

Are the violations you cited a secret?


dasuberding wrote: "And how long was the boy in CPS' physical and then legal custody?"

Our son was in the gestapo's custody physicaly for 3 months, legally for two.


Legally for two what?

Explain your answer.

Why was your son removed to begin with?

User avatar
Greegor
Posts: 746
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 10:20 am
Location: Cedar Rapids Iowa

Postby Greegor » Wed May 24, 2006 6:06 pm

How does Dan claim to KNOW the pain
of a child removal?

He was never in that situation
because he was never CUSTODIAL
in the first place!

Dan has mocked preservation of appealable
issues and mocked me for many
constitutional complaints.

Dan days to prove them wrong point by
point, but yet his attempted mockery of
me last September here was not
specific, his complaint about our letter
to Congressional Ways and Means and his
recent complaint about Bob's listing of
Bill Of Rights violations, in all 3 cases
Dan gave no specific complaints.

How come the "point by point" guy
isn't doing that with those 3 documents?

His attempts to ridicule seem to be
like something you'd expect from some
teenager with arrested development.

Like the "Nelson" kid on the Simpsons.

"Ha Haa!"

Dan urged me to do services
that have absolutely NO BASIS in fact.

He contradicts himself when he says
he doesn't urge parents to do services
that have no basis.

This IS directly related to the ideas
of preserving appealable issues.

The agencies almost NEVER have a basis
for directing parents to a Psych Eval for example.
Usually there is no "probable cause" to
direct parents to a Psych Eval and the court
is very careful to ask for VOLUNTARY
compliance with a Psych Eval while actually
threatening adverse rulings.

Dan Sullivan
Posts: 1538
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:42 am
Location: Long Island, New York

Postby Dan Sullivan » Wed May 24, 2006 6:44 pm

I'm going to respond to each of your claims, Greegor.

And you, as usual, will fail to answer, but for a very few, if that.


Greegor wrote: How does Dan claim to KNOW the pain
of a child removal?


That's not what I said, Greegor.

Greegor wrote: He was never in that situation
because he was never CUSTODIAL
in the first place!


That's not true.

Greegor wrote: Dan has mocked preservation of appealable
issues and mocked me for many
constitutional complaints.


Evidence, Greegor?

Greegor wrote: Dan days to prove them wrong point by
point, but yet his attempted mockery of
me last September here was not
specific,


Sure it was.

Greegor wrote: his complaint about our letter
to Congressional Ways and Means and his
recent complaint about Bob's listing of
Bill Of Rights violations, in all 3 cases
Dan gave no specific complaints.


That's not true.

Greegor wrote: How come the "point by point" guy
isn't doing that with those 3 documents?


Why should I?

Greegor wrote: His attempts to ridicule seem to be
like something you'd expect from some
teenager with arrested development.

Like the "Nelson" kid on the Simpsons.

"Ha Haa!"


As difficult as it is for you to believe, Greegor, the Simpsons isn't a documentary.

Greegor wrote: Dan urged me to do services
that have absolutely NO BASIS in fact.


Which ones would they be, Greegor?

With links, please.


Greegor wrote: He contradicts himself when he says
he doesn't urge parents to do services
that have no basis.


Evidence, Greegor?

Greegor wrote: This IS directly related to the ideas
of preserving appealable issues.


How?

Greegor wrote: The agencies almost NEVER have a basis
for directing parents to a Psych Eval for example.


They certainly did with you, Greegor.

Greegor wrote: Usually there is no "probable cause" to
direct parents to a Psych Eval and the court
is very careful to ask for VOLUNTARY
compliance with a Psych Eval while actually
threatening adverse rulings.


Can you provide proof for that claim, Greegor?

dasuberding
Posts: 378
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:26 pm

Postby dasuberding » Thu May 25, 2006 6:17 am

I think it's time for you to walk, Sullivan. You need to start reading the responses to your asinine questions. You work in collusion with CPS and the ideals of CPS. Get them into programs! Everybody is guilty no matter what! Answer my original question WHAT IS YOUR PROFESSION? WHAT DO YOU DO BESIDES SPOUT BAD ADVICE? ARE YOU TRYING TO BECOME A PROFESSIONAL ADVOCATE?

Dan Sullivan
Posts: 1538
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:42 am
Location: Long Island, New York

Postby Dan Sullivan » Thu May 25, 2006 7:25 am

dasuberding wrote: I think it's time for you to walk, Sullivan.


You think I need excersise?

dasuberding wrote:You need to start reading the responses to your asinine questions.


Greegor didn't answer my questions.

dasuberding wrote:You work in collusion with CPS and the ideals of CPS.


No I don't.

dasuberding wrote: Get them into programs! Everybody is guilty no matter what!


What a terrible attitude.

dasuberding wrote:Answer my original question WHAT IS YOUR PROFESSION?


NOYB

dasuberding wrote: WHAT DO YOU DO BESIDES SPOUT BAD ADVICE?


I don't spout bad advise.

I offer great advice.


dasuberding wrote:ARE YOU TRYING TO BECOME A PROFESSIONAL ADVOCATE?


I was advised years ago to start charging for the help I provide.

I haven't done that yet.

dasuberding
Posts: 378
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:26 pm

Postby dasuberding » Thu May 25, 2006 9:10 am

Sullivan, your a child. I will not respond to any of your drivel anymore but I am warning everybody else, unless you enjoy playing with the CPS system, take all advice from Dan Sullivan with a grain of salt. This guy has been investigated multiple times and instead of fighting the system by taking them to federal court and being done with it, he has chosen to play into the system. Any civil rights/juvenile law/anti-CPS lawyer worth their weight will tell you stipulation is BAD, BAD advice. I'm done with you. Hope you are succesful in building your client base.

Dan Sullivan
Posts: 1538
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:42 am
Location: Long Island, New York

Postby Dan Sullivan » Thu May 25, 2006 9:24 am

dasuberding wrote: Sullivan, your a child. I will not respond to any of your drivel anymore but I am warning everybody else, unless you enjoy playing with the CPS system, take all advice from Dan Sullivan with a grain of salt.


If your children have been removed by CPS and you enjoy playing with them... and you want them back before they graduate from high school... take all the salt I offer.

dasuberding wrote:This guy has been investigated multiple times and instead of fighting the system by taking them to federal court and being done with it, he has chosen to play into the system. Any civil rights/juvenile law/anti-CPS lawyer worth their weight will tell you stipulation is BAD, BAD advice. I'm done with you. Hope you are succesful in building your client base.


I never stipulated to anything.

User avatar
Greegor
Posts: 746
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 10:20 am
Location: Cedar Rapids Iowa

Postby Greegor » Thu May 25, 2006 9:44 am

Dan mistakenly behaves as if he is in an
environment that is hostile toward the
rights of Parents.

He posted that pleading in September
hoping that people here would join him
in ridiculing it. Sure, maybe if he had
done that in an arena populated by
CPS geeks and their contractors they
might have all had a good laugh!

But what kind of screw is loose that Dan
expected a parents pleading to be
ridiculed in an arena of Parents Rights people?

Among the people here I feel little need
to PROVE that CPS agencies hand out
directives to take psych evals like they
are handing out popcorn.

It's done as a SCREENING TOOL so the
bureaucrat can check off a little box on
a bureaucratic form.

If disagreeing with Dan makes me
psychologically unsound, serves as
"probable cause" for a psych eval,
then I will be happily nutty anyday!

Certainly knowing that we are interacting
in a Parents Rights forum I do not feel
as much urgency in proving what I suspect
most people here ALREADY KNOW!

Dan, the great expert, worthy of PAY for
his "expertise" (he thinks) doesn't even
KNOW that psych evals are directed
without any probable cause?

A court ordered psych eval would be the
ULTIMATE search warrant and so problematic
legally that the courts REALLY don't want to
order them.

Think about a court ordered psych eval
as a search warrant, and the need for specifics
about exactly what they are looking for.

But a VOLUNTARY psych eval can be a
"fishing expedition" very much like what
I reported about court ordered home inspections.

I am not a lawyer, and proud of that fact.

Dan Sullivan
Posts: 1538
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:42 am
Location: Long Island, New York

Postby Dan Sullivan » Thu May 25, 2006 10:03 am

Greegor wrote: Dan mistakenly behaves as if he is in an
environment that is hostile toward the
rights of Parents.


That's not true.

My environment is a comfortable chair in front of my computer.

A nice window on the other side of my desk.

I can look out and see the ospreys in their nest.

They come every year.


Greegor wrote:He posted that pleading in September
hoping that people here would join him
in ridiculing it.


That's not why I posted it.

Greegor wrote:Sure, maybe if he had
done that in an arena populated by
CPS geeks and their contractors they
might have all had a good laugh!


Come on, Greegor, this is the funniest statement I ever saw in a Motion,

"Greg was the oldest of four children and had about 20 cousins visit, so served as apprentice parent at a young age. Greg trained his cat Nosey to do "dog tricks" on command. Cats do not respond well to negative reinforcement. You can't force a cat to do anything."

If it is a real Motion I'll bet all anyone has to do to get a laugh in the Courthouse is say "Greg Hanson" and everyone bursts out laughing.

All I have to do to start laughing is think about it.


Greegor wrote: But what kind of screw is loose that Dan
expected a parents pleading to be
ridiculed in an arena of Parents Rights people?


Greegor, I doubt many people here believe that Motion is anything but a joke.


Return to “Round Table”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest