I know there was something in the wine I had the other day. It hit me different after only a sip or two and I felt it was that. I guess I can't prove it right now but sometime today when I was either ordering or accepting, I had something given to me again (I believe) which I still know is happening and the crazy thing is that this is being done covertly.
I'm not crazy to say that I am treated like a guinea pig after today and after seeing the map already drawn out on the board when I went in to the National Guard.
I feel it's time to quit using me and my son, and playing games that don't profit either of us in ANY way, and to start compensating me and return my son or just leave us alone.
I also believe it's time to hold State workers accountable for defaming me to others, in Washington and Canada as being paranoid schitzophrenic, which I'm not. They have done very serious harm with this and why are my son and I still waiting for a decision on injunction from the federal court?
I filed for Emergency Injunction months ago. That was an urgent and emergent injunction, to prevent HARM and it was spelled out clear enough. I had stated a claim enough when I stated I was being refused a lawyer and I checked the box for "federal question" to prevent harm from ignoring my and my son's civil rights.
I then tried to file other supporting materials and I wasn't told ahead of time that they were going to strike things I emailed.
In a case where there was not even correct or ANY jurisdiction for the state to ever TAKE my child, and where I am trying to prevent harm to our bond, with this continued injunction, I am strongly questioning why someone else is not even looking into this.
The fact that I filed for emergency injunction to just have a lawyer, so I could have a New Trial and restore rights to visit my son...that is ENOUGH, for a pro se person to file, where the Judges are, as a rule, according to all current case law, required and encouraged to allow for "leniency" in pleadings by persons Pro Se.
Right now, I feel there is just further collusion to drag out even an injunction. This was an EMERGENCY injunction, not a ho-hum-I-guess-I-might-like-to-protect-my-visitation-with-my-son injunction.
In Oregon, all the courts followed this injunction rule with expedience. In fact, they IMMEDIATELY brought everything to an instant HALT in the State courts. It was never some kind of 3 month ongoing deliberation and request for more and more pleadings or better pleadings.
My pleadings were good enough, and filed timely, to try to prevent harm. The fact that I have no public defense is exactly why I needed a lawyer for this.
Instead, now my son is FOUR years old. I have missed out on 2 1/2 years of my son's life because of what the State and courts have done. It's wrong, and it's all illegal and maybe that's what people just don't want to even address--the fact that something like "Collusion to premeditate and encourage a false arrest and entrap someone, FOR THE PURPOSE OF kidnapping a child," is not just civil, it's criminal. And the threats I've had made throughout, about my writing and blog, is exactly Anti-SLAPP.
My son and I have the right to have this heard and immediately overturned for lack of jurisdiction. It was Canada's jurisdiction to have my son, even if I were arrested, not the U.S.'s jurisdiction.
And there is not ANY kind of jurisdiction for collusion to set someone up for a false arrest as a MEANS of taking a child--the definition of THIS, proper, is:
Kidnapping.
I want these people charged with Kidnapping. This is exactly what was done.
Then, my son and I were held hostage by being refused any kind of normal and reasonable defense, MEDICATED, and I never got to see any discovery. NOW I know why.
There is even MORE discovery to be obtained, which has not been obtained, and all that's happening, is stalling.
So it makes me wonder if Judge Shea is Catholic and part of the Columbus group that laughs in my face about "15 minutes".
If this is being taken under advisement, whoever is doing the advising is a DOLT. It does NOT take months, to decide whether or not it is a claim that meets federal jurisdiction when one of the most basic complaints I made was "refusal of the right to an attorney."
The rule is: "Leniency with regard to pro se pleadings" and even MORESO in federal court!
A Pro Se person has NEVER been expected to have the same knowledge or standards as a regular lawyer and making a request for emergency injunction on termination of parental rights, to prevent HARM, is a DAMN good claim.
The rest of it, that I added later, about how there is no jurisdiction, is also relevant in the courts.
I mean, people can keep screwing with me and my son, and dragging all of this out forever, and trying to get ME for things when I've been innocent and just trying to get my son back, and have a HUGE RICO case down the road, when I am finally established enough to keep all the law firms so happy to be taking money to fend off my RICO case, the lawyers won't give a SHIT about staying employed while everyone else is paying through the nose.
How else do you think lawyers are even getting by in this market, in these depressed times? They have certaintly not been harmed any, by getting paid to work and overwork and rework and screw up this case.
Are they really advising in the best interests of others who are now liable?
When are you people going to WAKE UP and look at these lawyers squarely and say, "We've had enough?"
I guess some firms have instilled such dire fear or bad strategic ideas, that they think continuing to screw me and my son over, is something their clients should pay for.
Guess who gets rich when lawsuits are extended and delayed and dragged out and damages acrue?
Lawyers.
And what damages have been allowed already to acrue to my name, are bad enough. I have no idea why anyone would want to continue to add to those damages.
RICO is treble damages.
TREBLE punitive damages.
Do you REALIZE what this fucking means?
It means you need to talk to your lawyer and start asking if there is any chance at all, that you could be sued under RICO and what the hell is treble damages, and should we continue to screw with a mother and her child or figure a way to get out of it?
If the federal government won't investigate, and if my son is not returned to me, I WILL SUE.
And I will sue individuals under RICO as well as the State. That means you will be lumped into a lawsuit you will wish to God, would just please go away. Your lawyers will find it very exciting and thrilling. You, on the other hand, will not.
And I am not suing for anything prematurely. This means I am taking my time to do it right. Which means, when I come to get you through service, you will wish YOU had moved out of the country. And if you fucking DO go out of the country, I will fucking PROPERLY move to extradite your ass.
If I were you, I would take a long hard look at RICO, at the statute of limitations, and at how what you've done could possibly FIT the requirements. I would also take a look at what kind of damages you could be responsible for. Not only can you be sued for general damages, one can be sued for almost PUNITIVE damages alone. That means, I don't have to prove I "lost money"--all I have to prove, is that the behavior was so aggregious, someone should PAY for what they did, just as a form of punishment, for a reminder to others to never try to pull that shit again, to anyone else. In that case, it doesn't matter if I don't have receipt books full of how I lost money here or there, even though I am able to prove lost income and wages because of what has happened, and interruption to my studies at college.
RICO is in your future.
Instead of digging yourselves into a bigger hole, I would think what might be wise, is to return a child to his mother so that she is more occupied with caring for HIM than suing the living SHIT out of you and putting you onto the foreclosure and unemployment payroll indefinitely.
RICO address not one-shot stuff, but long-term "pattern" of crime and corruption. There are very direct and then indirect ways to support a pattern of collusion.
There is a 4 year statute from the time of discovery. However, this is easily extended through a variety of things, such as inability to obtain all discovery. That's one.
So as long as you hold out on allowing evidence and discovery to come to me or go into a record, you are delaying your own inevitable demise and allowing the statute of limitations to continue to extend. Continuing in any kind of undiscovered crime is another reason to extend statute. And being under duress, because of threats of death, are another reason a plaintiff (ME) could sue with an extended statute of limitations, because the duress is considered to be a form of harassment and provoking distress which would make it impossible for a plaintiff to reasonably bring forth their claim.
Again, you can sit down with the lawyers, and the lawyers also think long and hard for themselves, about how long they want to drag this out, or decide to return the child so that the mother is hopefully otherwise fully occupied and engaged in raising her child.
With regard to being given medications, I know this but at some point, through hair analysis or other documentation, I will be able to prove it. When I get this, it will start RICO statutes all over again. So as long as this is concealed from me, my ability to later file and add this to the rest of the "pattern" will only work to my advantage. It would be, actually, to my disadvantage to get better discovery of what happened, now because I would not have as much time to go in and add this to my complaint.
The only thing that is ever likely to prevent me from filing a RICO claim, is the return of my son. Without my son, you are asking to go to either jail when prosecutors catch up to you and sue under criminal elements of RICO, or to be sued personally by me, as either a Pro Se person or lawyer with her license and still Pro Se, and I will not let it go if it is allowed to go that far. I won't jump the gun on anything but I know I am well within a fair range for 4 years from the time I heard Michelle Erickson admit the State was waiting to coordinate things with Canada, and then later finding out what the jurisdiction laws are, or at the time I read about how there is no inter-country provision to just take a kid from the mother or set up a false arrest to do so.
This is not counting the duress claims I could make, or the fact that I am threatened and tortured and prevented from even getting my report out to the AG and President. This is also not counting new crimes and evidence I could uncover.
Your best option is one which actually benefits both sides, and with no slack on equal better outcomes. This option is the return of my son.
If you allow my son's medical statutes to expire and hope his primary teeth fall out first, and that new teeth come in, so no other pediatric dentist can assess and diagnosis his enamel dysplasia, which helps to prove HIS damages, of traumatic birth, this will be dragged in against you as further evidence of collusion.
You fucking STOP threatening family not to sue, or my son, as well. The only person you have to worry about is ME, and things will be much, much, worse for you if you continue on this course, than if you quit now.
If my son's statute of limitations run out before I get him back, for medical, you can imagine this, heaped onto your RICO case you will fight with everything you fucking own.
And if you try to kill me, you add solid jail time to you, and your entire connected group.
So, like I said, I would start asking your fucking lawyers and advisors, about how to make an expedient transition into a better deal for my son and I and your own interests. The only one which makes any sense and is any benefit to you, in any way, is to return my son to me, by whatever means necessary.
And if someone is extorting someone else or some group, guess what? Those who are doing the extortion already fit into the RICO act.
As it stands, I have a RICO case against CPS and The State of Washington. If you think it's a joke, read up on it. And I can throw in a lot of other people too.
If I sue you, under civil application of RICO, it doesn't mean I am suing you for civil stuff. It means I can literally sue you for crime, and prosecute you, like a U.S. attorney would, for crime, and you would end up paying me treble damages if I win. The only thing that I cannot do, is prosecute you for crime under the criminal application, which would be not just loss of a ton of money, but liberty. Only a U.S. attorney can sue to put someone in jail and remove their liberty. However, even U.S. attorney's can be sued under RICO. Anyone can be sued under RICO.
Here's an explanation from a wiki site about what kind of contact or interaction is needed for someone to be prosecuted as a defendent. From http://www.ricoact.com/ricoact/faq.asp#remedies.
"Is it true that you can be convicted of a RICO violation if you just have a drink or other incidental social contact with a criminal?
No, that's not true. If, in fact, two people were simply having a drink, and one of the persons was a racketeer and the other was a wholly innocent individual without knowledge of or participation in the criminal acts of the racketeer, the innocent person cannot be convicted of a RICO violation. An innocent meeting, by itself, should not give rise to an inference that the innocent person is conspiring with the racketeer to engage in a pattern of racketeering. To be convicted of conspiring to violate the RICO Act, the government must generally prove that the conspirator had knowledge of the racketeer's criminal endeavor and agreed to do something, or did something, that furthered, advanced or concealed that endeavor. In this regard, the Supreme Court has commented on the level of participation necessary to support a conviction: "If conspirators have a plan which calls for some conspirators to perpetrate the crime and others to provide support, the supporters are as guilty as the perpetrators."
This definition, explained very simply, is exactly what occured with trying to set me up for an arrest in order to illegally get hands on, and kidnap, my son. What happened--the coordination or collusion between some Canadian govt. persons and some Washington state persons, was that in this case, Washington State Attorney Generals encouraged this, along with CPS and other groups, of Canada. It required a plan and agreement to work together and support the enaction of a crime.
The CPS case was never, as Michelle Erickson, "airtight". However, because the Attorney General's soon understood the magnitude of what they'd done, instead of dismissing things as they should have, when they first called about this, they allowed it to continue, knowingly and willful of the harm and illegality, and with full knowledge of the trauma it caused both me and my son. In this case, extraodrdinary amounts of money were used and extraordinary measures taken, to cover up a very serious crime which required collusion and cooperation of many individuals.
Which is, like I've said, a likely reason I've been so harassed and my son and I threatened, even with, in the past, death threats, which others who are connected, have tried to conceal. It shows how high and great the motive has been to conceal the crime and try to have me arrested again, repeatedly, for other false charges and kept out of money which anyone knew I would give directly to a private attorney who could have uncovered this right away.
Some of the most basic things I could list as a plan of collusion between parties with CPS and Canada, are kidnapping, obstruction of justice, and maybe something else, I would have to look more closely. Nothing to mind right now. But these are a few things. Obstruction of justice might mean interfering with my lawful right to move and travel freely with my son. It also might mean refusing discovery and stealing evidence and keeping it from me, and preventing me from obtaining evidence, in order to conceal the illegitimacy of the case. It would also include false arrests, or orders associated directly with an attempt to obstruct or hinder a normal course of justice and use authority improperly.
Even if I were unable to get Canadians over here, who were involved, I can still prosecute the U.S. ones, which, I state again, is why the Attorney General for Washington state wanted to reinstate immunity for state employees again. He knew that the minute I connected enough dots to allege kidnapping, they (his AG offices), were done for. Being a lead Attorney General lawyer, he probably made the connection between my allegation of "kidnapping" and how RICO effectively prosecutes for this kind of crime. He made the connection long before I did. Hurry! Let's make a law that protects all state employees (come ON GUYS!) from being sued by anyone.
From now on, when I get harassed on the street, or have people treating me with disrespect, I am holding my head up high and shrugging it off. I know where it stems from and what it's about, and I don't have to buy into it or be upset by it. This is only a part of what's going on because things feed into other motives other groups have, but this is one major thing for some people.
I'm not wearing down, I only build up. So, I think, once again, that it is best for everyone to figure out a way to keep me occupied in other ways. Trying to falsely arrest me or punish me for something I'm innocent over, all the time, just adds to my damages.
I am best occupied caring for my son. The State is best occupied taking care of other business.
If AG and CPS and State attorneys start getting sued private firms will become rich as the taxpayers monies are drained and insurance rates go up.
What Washington State did to my son, they did to Washington State Citizens, who footed the bill for their crime and cover up. Not only does the State of Washington owe me and my son an apology, they owe other parents whose rights they've trampled over, an apology. They also owe the STATE an apology because they would not BE in such a deficit, if they had not deliberately chosen to spend hundreds of thousands, and closer to millions of dollars, of taxpayer money, on this case alone, when they never had a right to take my son to begin with.
Ask them for an audit of all the expenses (that were not under the table) for this case.
They paid extra and sealed this entire case shut from anyone looking in from the outside and keeping it in a tight little group. Why? It wasn't because I caused the problem. They screwed up so bad in the very beginning that they have been playing cover up and catch up ever since and have had to spend ludicrous amounts of money to do it.
There were others who went along because they liked how it was degrading to me for other reasons.
I think I'm rambling now, same thing over. But I guess it's pointless because I was saying they should find a way to increase visits and return my son a long time ago. NOW? I don't know...would they they do that NOW? I think to myself that it seems unlikely, when I gave them a chance before and even agreed to go ahead and make me sound crazy if you want, just give my son back.
They didn't take my offer, which was self sacrificial. They wanted to degrade me AND take my son too. In the meantime I've discovered more about what really happened and now I understand WHY they have done some of the things they've done. Why they wanted to spend taxpayer money on this case.
Imagine.
Cameo Garrett vs The State bankrupts the State. They first overspend on my case to cover up for themselves, and then they want to protect themselves from being sued.
Thank The State of Washington employees for putting the State in the red and putting people out of jobs. Some people never lose their jobs though, do they? Some have gotten by very well in fact, in this depressed-economy state.
The State wanted every citizen to hate and blame me. I say, if you want to hate, hate and blame the persons who were responsible for all of this to begin with. They are supported by persons who are NOT government workers, but who used their connections to persuade their friends and allies to abuse their authority and position to do the will of others who stand in the sometime-shadow.
I wonder if any Human Trafficking laws could apply to my case, aside from RICO.
Here is a brief definition of human trafficking:
"Background on Human Trafficking
Modern day human trafficking takes many forms. Individuals may be held against their will as domestic workers, working for little or no pay, and with no way to find other employment. Others may be forced into prostitution and isolated from people who could provide a means of escape. Victims of human trafficking have few resources and most often go unrecognized by law enforcement, social services representatives and other service providers. Their hidden victimization allows perpetrators to offend under the radar of law enforcement, making the significance of this crime more important to understand.
The United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children, Article 3, defines human trafficking as:
The recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of persons, by means of threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs.
U.S. Anti-Human Trafficking Legislation
In the United States, the Trafficking Victims Violence Prevention Act of 2000 (TVPA) defined and classified human trafficking into two main categories: sex trafficking and labor trafficking.
•Sex trafficking involves the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person forced to perform such an act is under the age of eighteen years old.
•Labor trafficking is defined as the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor services, through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage or slavery. Such violations might include domestic services, manufacturing, construction, migrant laboring and other services obtained through subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage or slavery."
**************
Aside from looking at any of the more exceptional or outstanding features, it appears that I and my son fit the definition of being trafficked by the State of Washington. And then penalized when my son and I wanted to be together and there was no just cause for our removal, transportation and trafficking, and separation and then, basically, bondage and servitude or slavery to the State and persons which (or who) already had severe conflicts of interest.
I can also prove examples of forced servitude or slavery by the fact that I have been forced out of all legal programs for housing, illegally and by discrimination, and my son forced to stay with a family he never wanted to stay with originally.
We have been slaves, I would say, under color of law.
I still think RICO fits better. RICO and Anti-SLAPP. Human trafficking in some elements as well but would have to look at whether or not it would be that the State of Washington actually kidnapped or colluded for the kidnapping (which was made to appear legal) or if it was more human trafficking and abuse of position.
I think it's still kidnapping. Because if a person does not have legal guardianship of a child, if they purpose to take that child, this is kidnapping. Using state workers just makes it under color of law and collusion to create a situation that gives an appearance of legality.
I guess I'll write more later, and think about it more later.
***************************
I am pissed all over again, because I specifically have had "social workers" following me around and always acting in a way contrary to good law, and there is no reason for anyone to be following me or checking in on me for any reason. Ever.
And this social worker came into the restroom after I posted this, and yes, I did ask her what she did, and she responded that she was a social worker who assisted foster parents with services. And she said she lived in Idaho, and worked in Wenatchee and Walla Walla as well. She left saying, "Have a good one!" She didn't have a noticeable attitude of any kind but she was still observing me.
I know for a fact that it was not coincidence she came into the place where I am on the computer.
I know too, that there are a few good social workers out there, but all of them can stay the hell away from me. I had a social worker who knew some old friend I had, position herself at a wedding shower for my friend in Seattle.
That bitch sat there, watching what I ate and drank and what my interactions were with my son (who was with me). There was nothing wrong, but already it was no longer a normal thing where I am just meeting someone who has a job and it's social services and we're on the same level. I am a superior parent and that other social worker, and I don't care if she was formerly a co-waitress with my friend, she was a BITCH and she worked in Seattle.
Then, I had some guy even saying when I came into town, why don't I go to social services and get set up...well meaning I think, but I said, "NO WAY."
When I went to fucking D.C. I did not go to Social Services. I got a job like a normal person because apparently, I am only normal in some states, depending on my relationship status with people in the area.
So I told him there was no way I wanted to make any kind of contact with anyone from Social Services and instead this woman comes in where I am and I knew she knew who I was, and then announces she works in Idaho, Wenatchee, and Walla Walla.
I guess she wanted to know what I looked like in case I went to Idaho sometime in my life.
Social Workers should have as many bad lawyer jokes made about them as lawyers. Or more. At least lawyers sometimes defend rights. Social workers are like a bunch of cats sitting on pin cushions. You know, it does not even surprise me that the system is so out of whack because you have state public defenders and then you have social workers and they're all their own breed. You have public defenders who (not all but many) just take the work because they don't want the work of a separate office and firm, and they get their little daily bread in a salary from the State and then you have all these catty social workers who have unresolved traumas and issues from their own childhoods and families and they bring all of that into everything they do and it's the perfect breeding ground for extramarital affairs. Oh, and throw in a few Judges here and there.
Then all these people are sleeping together (half of them) and they are NOT thinking about kids.
Again, that woman did not seem bad in any way. She seemed fine. But how do I know, when all of the ones I've met are nosy, lousy, insecure and self-absorbed widgets.
widget.
unnamed device: a little device or mechanism, especially one whose name is unknown or forgotten
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment