Saturday, May 7, 2011

Legal...Getting Oliver Back & Failure To Provide Reasonable Representation

I switched my music to Hillsong worship after listening to "03 Bonnie & Clyde" and the song that came on was "Come To My Rescue."

How can I have any confidence, at ALL, that I am getting my son back if the United States refuses to INVESTIGATE crimes that I have reported?

The FBI should be investigating public corruption over the kidnapping of my son. They fact that they are not doing this, is cause for concern. It means everything else is a sham.

To pretend this is about some CPS case is the totally wrong approach. There wouldn't be a fraudulent CPS case, where my every effort was blocked and the motive was to lie about me and smear me while torturing me, if people hadn't colluded to kidnap my son in the first place.

I have had to go through one charade after the other. Every lawyer I've been given has stalled and delayed, or refused to put things into the record that needed to be there. Then for most of the time I was refused legal counsel.

My latest legal counsel is smart and qualified but how do I have any confidence they are not also working in tandem with the State and U.S. government or some other interest?

1. They made no attempt to talk to me before filing a brief.

If this is a firm that is interested in working with me and representing my best interests and the interests of my son, why didn't they make any attempt to contact me first, to talk to me?

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with them because so far, what I've read looks very good, and I want to know more about their approach.

But I am sort of wondering why they didn't call me or email me first to see if I wanted to add anything to fill in the gaps. Maybe they felt they had to move quickly.

From what I read, it sounds good, but there a couple of things I might add. I am more sensitive and concerned now than I would be normally, simply because I've already had so many problems. I read the brief and it argues that Appeal is necessary because I wasn't represented in Termination Trial. It is actually very well-written and concise but I am always looking at loops and gaps that the State will take ahold of.

The State will have to argue back that I forfeited my right to representation in some way by "bad behavior" or argue that there is no "absolute right". Where they acknowledge I had fired some lawyers and some withdrew, I might have included the State law that does not only provide for "representation" but "REASONABLE representation".

None of these lawyers want to even touch, with a 10 ft. pole, what the responsibility of a public defender is, with regard to providing their client with reasonable representation. This law outlines exactly what reasonable representation consists of.

Instead of focusing on whether MY conduct was a forfeiture of the right to counsel, I believe the emphasis should be on whether my counsel was "reasonable" to begin with. It was NOT. There are specific guidelines that explain exactly what "reasonable representation" is with regard to public defense, and it is an absolute right. If one has the right to public defense, it is a right to have reasonable representation within this defense.

I did NOT have, at any time, "reasonable counsel" and I laid my hands on this brief and Justin Titus came to mind. Justin Titus is connected, in some way, to the people at this firm, and I don't know if it's through Koch or some other lawyer. I then read bios and saw one lawyer is from Pacific Lutheran and Justin now goes to a lutheran church but I don't know that this is it.

I don't need anymore covers for people.

The argument is good and right, that I should have Appeal because I needed representation. All the State of Washington will do, is to counterfeit.

I guess I'm liking this word. Counterfeit.

I read Judge Hotchkiss' brief on how he ruled and the CPS notes, and they are truly stunning. Everything is a lie. I am not just saying "everything is a lie" because that's what most people would say if they are being accused of something...I am serious...everything is a lie.

Judge Hotchkiss and the CPS workers are some of the most corrupt people I have ever met. How could anyone trust a Judge/man who hung up on me in the first important hearing? He blocked audio recording of my visits which would have enabled me to counter the claims of visitation monitors. He is absolutely corrupt. To even think of having a Termination Trial in front of him again is an incredible idea. And there are no good Judges in that entire area.

The whole thing comes down to this:

1. Did the U.S. have a right to collude with Canada to kidnap my son?
2. If it is true there was public corruption and collusion, it is true that the motive of CPS was to discredit my claims?
3. If it is true the motive of CPS was to present a dishonest case to cover for corruption, fraud, and my defamation by public officials, is it true that my every right was denied and is it true that trusting any of the actions and statements by these workers are suspect and to be called into question?

It is impossible to make any kind of resolution or peace or compromise with CPS.

There is NO compromise. They have committed illegal acts against me and my son and they are the party that needs to be investigated.

Even if I have a new Termination Trial, that would only be a trial to decide if my rights are terminated or not. So if I proved my rights should NOT be terminated, with the assistance of counsel, by getting testimony and supeonas of witnesses, this may or may not happen.

For one thing, some party has tried to be active even in Nashville, to torture and harass me while I am even at work, and to discredit me by sending me to a nuthouse to be shot up with drugs. The State will argue that in the time that's passed, there has "been no improvement" because I was sent to a nuthouse and also had a job that ended, which they will blame me for.

The root of evil and the cause of these incredible things, will NOT be uncovered unless there is an INVESTIGATION into what happened to me and my son and the motives that then followed this.

They could very easily terminate my rights still, with even a new Termination Trial. If they did, I have no means for contesting this and my son gets adopted out from under me ASAP.

Which may be what the Jewish-Americans who hate me would like to see. And Catholics too, for that matter.

If I WON the right to NOT have my rights terminated...

"Oh, by the way Your Honor, Ms. Garrett was being assaulted and also followed around as a suspect because of her contact with Pakistan in D.C. and then Colombia--oh, and by the way, she is not nuts, she has a gift of vision and here is the evidence to support it and she has been tortured for this which is not her fault...."

If I won, this puts me back into CPS camp, under their control and the control of Washington State, where they tell me to do whatever they want and will claim I have to follow their rules for services.

When really, the entire CPS case is FRAUDULENT.

I would then do what? Agree to take medications that I don't need? Be given 2 hours of visitation a week with my son back in a town where they harassed me, tortured me, and have criminals running the entire place? I am to go back to Vladdie Laddie with my daily event being to walk to town and buying french fries to then go to the liquor store now and then to have a drink because that STATE is a FRICKING MESS.

Washington State is a State that would drive the Mother Mary to drink. And not just pints either.

These people tried to ruin my life and I am to go back THERE?

How about THEY come over here for an a__-whooping. I would love to see them--IN JAIL. Or standing before a UN tribunal.

I switched from Hillsong & Delirious worship to Skillet and got "Hero". I had to balance the worship to an anthem for doing the right thing despite massive corruption.

I don't even have a place to live in Washington state.

I would have no place to even live.

Here, it's a women's shelter, but you know what? I'm not tortured at night there. For all of my "mental illness", for some odd reason, my "mental illness" stops at about 6:30 p.m. or sometime after chapel (if someone doesn't assault me in chapel first). At least lately, pretty consistently, I am not being tortured there. I must have the most interesting kind of "mental illness" ever. It's like this really cool illness that I have absolute control over and I turn a switch to "off" every time I move to a new location or go to shelter or some place where I can't be assaulted or it's harder to get to me.

The FBI in Seattle is absolutely corrupt (look at how well they protected me and my son over there--they BLOCKED reports from me) and I am afraid of their law enforcement there. There is a much higher percentage of Catholics there too. They moved in on me over here, when the state is only at about 3% population, but over there it's 30%. Those are high stakes. I could move right next door to Bullivant Houser territory again and next to the Vatican. I looked up Catholic statistics and one of the most populated towns, dense with Catholics, is Spokane. The other one is Seattle and then there is Yakima. I am right inbetween those towns if I live in Wenatchee. There is also a very high percentage of atheists and then Jewish too. Not a lot of serious and sincere Christians or people who could help me even if they wanted to.

The Judge Hotchkiss lied in his own report, claiming I had not taken advantage of services and he wrote the State didn't have to offer them if I was out of the area (in D.C.). HE was the one who gave THEM an Order to provide services to me in D.C. and they have contracts there and then later he lies in his brief claiming I didn't participate (just one of many lies). And then after I tried, over and over and over, to get these services while I was in D.C., the Catholic lawyer at the head of CPS in D.C. blocked me. But Judge Hotchkiss lies in his brief and claimed that my statement that I hadn't been provided with "services" wasn't true. I asked them for counseling even, and not once did they offer or provide counseling. Never. I tried, even over here, to do this and people were blocking me. They don't want me to have counseling and never did, because it would support damages if I should come back to sue a party later. So no one wanted me to have records of damages or of my sanity either. Judge Hotchkiss and the Judges in Wenatchee can all hang up their hats for good.

They are all corrupt, all Catholic except for 1 or 2, and bad all the way through. I'm sorry, but even the Catholics know this is true. Everyone knows. From one side up the mountain to the other side. Everyone knows they SUCK. If there was a real FBI, in Seattle, these Judges would have been replaced a long time ago. The people in charge of the FBI in Seattle are CORRUPT and INCOMPETENT. This is how I make my judgment: if you have receptionists and people at the front desk who are so bold as to block people from making reports when they are poisoned and followed all over the place, those lower level workers are acting out of a confidence that is assumed they will get their cover from the senior employees. Low level workers do not do things like this unless they feel sure their backs are covered.

(I put on Skillet and got some songs I liked in that genre and then some I didn't like. So I then went to "Christian heavy metal" and did a search online to find out about groups and I'm trying to play from a group I haven't heard called "Underoath.") I might listen for a little bit but I can only take so much of this kind of music and then I'll have to switch to christian punk and then something else. The first song playing is from "Define The Great Line" with the song "There Could Be Nothing After This". Saosin's "It's Far Better To Learn"...uggh. now I'm on some very dark song. I can only handle so much. I am switching to christian punk. I tried to click on "One Bad Pig" but it won't come up. I went to youtube and found One Bad Pig's "Judas Kiss" and then I switched back to Delirious and harmonies. I was going to play more Jay Z but maybe later).

So this is to say, I want to know if we can still make for a Change of Venue first of all.

Secondly, I am positive that the direction this needs to go is through an investigation by FBI that is not worried about covering up for their buddies. That means, a Protestant for once.

I don't want to ever talk to another Catholic FBI worker again. Or any other kind except for a Protestant one. Do they have them over there? I don't want to talk to some atheist FBI person, or an agnostic FBI person, or a Catholic FBI person, or an FBI person that is married to someone from a politically interested country or religion, or anything other than a NORMAL (excluding all abnormals) protestant Christian FBI person who is from a Protestant family to see if it makes a difference for ONCE. I'm tired of being lined up with all of the others who hate me to begin with. I'm tired of it and hate on, because after you allowed people to torture me and my son, if you think I'm not going to talk about it, you're wrong.

YOU allowed your people to torture me and my son. YOU colluded with Jewish gangsters and others, against me, for personal and political gain.

I am TALKING about it.

This is a song I like, by Delirious? "Did You Hear The Mountains Tremble"

About dancers who dance upon injustice, and singers who sing out against corruption.

Being a Christian does not mean lying down while Catholic and Jewish and other gangsters, kick and kick and kick and KICK and ROB and STEAL and TORTURE and work out plots behind closed doors and PLOT to ruin lives and imprison people. If there are Protestants doing that, they are just as bad. And if I sound "extreme" it's because this is the very reaction that the Catholic CIA and FBI wanted to create, by repeatedly torturing me and my son.

These people purposefully provoke extremism to support their own agendas. Which is most likely what they even did with Osama bin ladin, because one minute they are helping him and working alongside him and the next minute they are using him for mind control research and turning him into "the big bad enemy".

Maybe we could start looking at what religious groups armed Osama bin ladin to begin with. Let's have a look, shall we?

I looked up the CIA article and then posted the next post but want to continue with this one, because it's about MY SON.
I am going to the legal brief from this new law firm and it says a lot about Justin Titus. Why? What I don't agree with is this entire paragraph idea that he withdrew based on my "behavior' towards staff and this is stated as fact.

This is not why he withdrew. And I have plenty of documentation to support this.

Then a whole page is dedicated to how I fired attorneys or they withdrew and not one mention is made of the fact that I have grounds for Appeal based on

NEGLIGENT and irresponsible representation.

Not only was I refused representation for Termination Trial, I was forced to go 1 1/2 years without any public defender and then the ones I had did NOT meet the legal requirements for "reasonable representation". I have grounds for Appeal based on the failure of the State to even ONCE provide me with reasonable representation, out of the few months they appointed anyone at all.

On the legal representation matter alone, there are 2 facets:

1. I was refused representation for Termination Trial.
2. I was refused reasonable representation for Dependency Proceedings which then led to the cover up and claim I shouldn't be given representation for Termination.

If anyone had ever bothered to contact me, and discuss this matter with me, I'm sure I could have provided some evidence to back this claim.

Quoting from this brief, on page 5, "...When the state moves to destroy weakened familial bonds, it must provide the parent with fundamentally fair procedures." santosky, 455 U.S. at 753-54.

My bond wasn't weakened with my son, but for the state to move to destroy my right to guardianship, it is true that it must provide the parent with fundamentally fair procedures, which would include providing REASONABLE representation when public defense is requested.

The bare minimum must be offered by legal counsel and my public defenders NEVER gave me even this much.

Rather than give Justin Titus a little 2-step dance and applause and justification for why he withdrew from his client and then how I still should have been given a lawyer for Termination proceedings, they should have focused on how I did not receive a lawyer for Termination and it is not my fault if this judgement was based on past matters where I was being jerked around and they thought they could continue.

What they are going to go back with, in response to whether I forfeited a right to counsel, is a counter. Forefeit means you surrender or are subject to surrender.

They also write, on p. 11, "Garrett apparently had serious conflicts with appointed attorneys in the dependency action. But making representation difficult is not necessarily a reason to deprive a client of counsel."...

Here, my own newly appointed law firm writes an assumption as fact, that I was reponsible for making representation "difficult".

If this law firm was interested in giving me the best defense, they would be calling me before filing a brief, to ask whether or not they should lay blame upon me or upon my counsel for the 'difficult' representation.

It could have been reworded to, "Ms. Garrett's inability to secure reasonable representation is not, in itself, cause to believe that reasonable representation was impossible, nor is it a fault of the defendant but an error that lies with the State."

I don't care how sophisticated you seem to be, if you are not calling your client first, and are hastily putting forth an argument that supports an assumption that I was EVER difficult or at fault in any way, you might not be working for me but setting up a counter to forefeiture for the State to seize. And I don't appreciate having my reputation constantly maligned and being defamed as "difficult" when I have plenty of evidence to the contrary that could be filed in my support as attachments.

It looks good, but someone who doesn't know all of the facts in my case could be easily misled into thinking this is as strong as it gets, when I can see clearly what some of the weaknesses are and how the State will attack.

I am also hoping there is no connection between my attorneys name and the same name I'm finding online that is in connection with working for The City of Seattle. I'm finding the exact same first and last name, and it might not be the same person, but this woman with the same name was working for The City Of Seattle in 2005.

(I just looked out the window of the library and saw this enormous great white horned owl fly by. I didn't think owls were in Nashville and not huge ones in the middle of the day either. It had the wing span of a small bald eagle. It was huge! It flew straight at the window I am by, above this large American flag that is posted below, and then sort of moved up and cleared the roof. That is the weirdest sighting of a big bird that I've seen in a long time.)

Anyway, I think this new firm is a very competent one. They have enough money and resources and brainpower to do a good job, but I am looking at everything from the start. I feel like they are doing an excellent job for someone who maybe cares about me, but sort of two-siding it. Like there is one side and then you flip it over and the other side is foil. Sort of like the lining to an envelope on stationary. To me, the fact they didn't call me or contact me first is odd. Or even write an introductory letter stating they wanted to meet with me or teleconference. But then I got the brief and it was so nicely put together I thought, "For once someone is doing a good job" and then I looked at it again and noticed how some significant things were left out which enables the State to have wiggle room and to justify their own position. But it might not be her at all and rather the guidance of someone else and she just didn't know a few things about the case. I am sure I will be able to fill her in on Monday.

(I am staring at my nails now and noticing how bad they are and thinking I need to photograph them for proof of some of the things that have been happening to me over here.)

No comments: