Habeous Corpus Obstruction for Torture & Kidnapping of Oliver

Dear U.S. Department of State:

Today I was tortured in the law library. I didn't go for a couple of days because I wasn't feeling well enough to even leave the house. I tried today and had taken my laptop and someone tapped into that to torture and laser me basically. It made it impossible to focus. I turned off the laptop and it stopped.

If this was happening to me when I was a child when I tried to take piano, it makes a lot more sense. I don't think they had this technology then but if they did, it makes more sense to me. I remember having no problem focusing on anything I put my mind to, and I could compose music even, but when I tried to practice according to music theory, something was seriously keeping me from being able to focus. I wasn't distractable either. Like I said, if I focus on something, you can't hardly tear me away from it. I won't eat even, I get so absorbed. So that is one thing I always wondered about. I later took classical piano in college in a studio where nothing was going on and had zero problems picking it up, without hardly practicing.

So honestly, it's possible some group in the U.S. was trying to manipulate things since I was a kid.

As for today, I was definitely tortured in the law library.

I went in and sat down and no problems at first, and was at their desktop. Then a couple of things to metal in my neck and to my ear but brief and then to my entire head if I stood up in one place there. I was next to windows. If I sat down, it went away. Stood up, it was there. It was like a field was going from one end to the other, cutting through the middle of the room. So if I was under it, no problem. All around are police offices.

A couple of times something small when I just sat there, but not enough to prevent my attempt to look some things up. I didn't stand too quickly and it wasn't blood pressure either, it was like going in and out of a torture energy field zone, at least in that situation.

And then I got out this laptop I'm trying out since my mine broke down, and turned it on and right away, burning and the complete inability to read anything or understand what I was reading. My entire body was being burned. It was bad enough that when I shut the laptop off, it quit and I immediately cooled down and awhile later, was able to focus. So I was 100% tortured and it obstructed my ability to do any legal research for my son.

After I turned it off, I had a few more random things happen but I was then able to work and skim through a lot of material. I didn't have time to really read any of it, but to only notice terminology and have a few ideas.

When I was being lasered or whatever with the laptop on, it was definitey the laptop, or someone using the laptop to facilitate it. There were two individuals around and I knew it wasn't either of them. However, the fact that I was being tortured as they were moving about helped me to realize they knew what was happening to me or wouldn't have been acting as herrings. Red herrings. I am not psychic at all, maybe 1% out of 99% ability, but I knew they knew what was happening to me.

This never happened to me at Lewis & Clark law library. It never happened to me in the courthouses, and it never happened in college.

I had migraines triggered occasionally, but there was no torture until I was blocked out of two massive lawsuits. Then there was motive to make me sound crazy. I was criminally colluded against, and I made a report about FBI and suggested to the woman there was collusion between certain FBI members and the Catholic church at interest in the lawsuits, and I had documentation I kept trying to file which I was prevented from filing.

Now I'm being asked to do the same things, under circumstances of torture. And right now, at 8:07, someone decided to really start torturing me worse, by causing the metal in my neck and teeth to throb and vibrate.

Then I had other odd problems with the Lexis Nexus and I would have tried Westlaw instead but they don't have it anymore. So I used the other one and it was like seeing harassment through a computer search. I know how these systems are supposed to operate bc I used them extensively in the past. I knew even back then that there are some things you just go to the books for bc not everything that is generated in a search is going to be what you need. It's like asking someone you don't know at all, to do your legal research for you and give you some things to read. Do you want someone else choosing all your reading material?

How about Presidents? how much of what they see is what is going on. They have a bunch of aides and officials who they rely on to give them information for basing decisions off of. If they base their decisions on just the information presented to them, it's a little like Lucretia Krebs and CPS trying to tell the world "what really went down." Lucretia was the psychologist she sent me to. In talking to me for an hour and doing the testing, I was fully normal and it was a crime and error of the court to remove my child. However, after I left and CPS and the AG decided to put together a smear story on me, in a bunch of edited and select documents, she formulated a different opinion, based on "documentation" that I was given zero opportunity to rebut because it was never shared with me.

So when I insulted some of the lawyers and legal aides at powerful law firms, for regurgitating one form lawsuit into another, they hated me. They didn't do their own research and yet who knows how much money they were being paid. I found motion after motion that was poorly edited and a result of "cut-and-paste" from one lawsuit to another. That is not a figure of speech either, I found the exact same paragraphs in their responses to me as in responses to other lawsuits. They generated a bunch of stock motions and just substituted names, dates and places. There was almost zero original legal analysis or attempt to distinguish points. So I think they really, really, hated me because I had a better product than they did and I wasn't even a licensed lawyer.

At any rate, I remember not everything in the computer searches could be fully relied upon, but today, it was nothing like what I was used to seeing. Today it was a token nod to Dick Whittemore, who padded his response to the OSB with multiple copies of the same thing to make his stack of 1 inch of email from me look like 8 inches. No one from Lexus would know I was there, using that computer, unless someone told them. I entered for a search and it had doubles and triples of cases, through 1,700 search results. And almost all of the cases being pulled up were from Catholic states of Ohio or Illinois. There was about zero cases from the midwest, or other circuit courts, and just a lot of cases from Catholic majority states and only a few states at that really. I had entered source search for federal circuit courts and state and supreme, and that's what was generated.

So, for example, I would be on the first page and the top 3 cases were all the same thing. Then the next page normal and the 3rd, normal until then 2 of the same and then 2 more of the same and next page, 3 of the same and then 2 of the same, right next to eachother (I mean, in order from search result numbers 1, 2, 3, etc). And then cases that had nothing to do with what I asked for came up as well.

When I got back to my house, my parent's looked like they'd been tortured. Their eyes looked different and their faces were red and they didn't look happy. Today there was a bunch of out-of-town Catholic hispanic mafia around too.

I can tell things are going the way Bill O'Reilly wants them to go bc he and his people always look relaxed and happy when they are and if anything might be going my way that day, he looks like he's worried and uncomfortable. They certaintly relaxed when they thought my OIG complaint was disheveled I guess, or when (especially), the complaint against their Irish Catholic friend Judge Warren was thrown out. Judge Gerald Warren is Irish. He's the one who put an illegal citation on my car to block me from college and lawsuits and then jailed me and refused to file things and told his clerks to refuse any filings from me. He did a lot of things and some I didn't mention in my report to the WA Judicial Commission. They told me they wanted to talk to me and then never did and gave me no deadline for submitting additional information and evidence I had and then closed it, without warning, the same week their Catholic Judge friend in Spokane closed my case, knowing I was submitting documentation of medical records and need to have continuance or extension for my injunction. They shut everything down and then after that, I was tortured worse and the Catholic librarian Elizabeth was acting as happy and triumphant as punch. They did all of this right after I filed my UN complaint because I was into deadlines for court and the Judicial complaint and their buddies were torturing me so badly I was unable to get anything done.

Ever since, they've all acted very happy and relaxed again.

That Judge and the others all knew what they were doing. They knew what things had to happen to kill me out of making any kind of collateral defense. And I was prevented from using the law library until they got what they wanted and then they were ahead so they didn't care if I went to the law library or not.

The one time I tried going to the law library before these last two weeks, I was tortured so badly, it was impossible to go back. I then forced myself to try later but it wasn't as bad (torture) and they already gained ground.

I found out why they were torturing me and what they were afraid of today. First of all, at the very beginning, I said I think you haven't offered me services before taking the extreme measure of mother-infant separation and after that, CPS knew it was true and said what if they dropped the whole thing. I had also brought up something about jurisdiction, but I was too traumatized to do any legal research on it. Then, after I said I was suing for damages and emotional trauma to my son and cried, they didn't drop it. They committed further crimes instead.

Then, after Judge Hotchkiss hung up on me, I knew I was in serious danger. So I left to try to find help in another part of the country. I stayed in contact and I asked for my case file bc they told me no one was representing me. They refused to give me my case file, court orders, or discovery. Later they gave me a few things, but they never gave me everything and that's not including the withheld evidence

When I got back, they treated me differently but then called me crazy and assaulted me after I broke up with the fiance. They began eliminating visitation time as punishment. A year later I realized they had literally kidnapped my son. Right after I made the kidnapping assertion, which I hadn't fully understood how true it was, I was then having my rights terminated.

My appeal lawyers all lied and claimed they could do nothing about the termination and it was a lie. I had every right to have that termination order appealed and overturned immediately, and vacated. I had already attempted to file an injunction, EMERGENCY preliminary injunction, in Spokane, prior to the termination and the Catholic Judge Cynthia Imbrognio, quashed and altered my request. She tried to say my injunction was a restraining order, which it was not. And that entire courthouse, this U.S. Federal Courthouse, illegally blocked my legal filing for injunction to deliberately obstruct justice. By all prior record, they had allowed me to efile and then on the day I efiled my injunction they told me, snottily, they'd "changed their mind" which was a snotty and illegal allusion to my changing my mind about marrying their Catholic friend.

This is a federal courthouse. We are talking about U.S. Marshalls, FBI, U.S. Attorneys and Judges, and clerks, on a U.S. federal payroll, who blocked me from efiling for injunction when they knew my injunction would hold and prevent the Order for Termination of Parental Rights from taking any effect.

I was told I had to "re-file". Then they snuck in the Order, and knew it was too late for me to block it.

The entire purpose of preliminary injunction is to prevent an Order from taking effect. And this is the United States federal government courthouse in Spokane, obstructing a fundamental right.

How am I supposed to take my case to federal court in Washington when they are a real party of interest to crime? They are a courthouse that can be sued and proven to have demonstrated strong conflict of interest and bias in favor of the State of Washington so how would any citizen believe they, after pulling this kind of thing, are an appropriate venue?

I would like to recuse the Eastern District Federal Court of Washington. How does one recuse an entire courthouse? I've had 3 Catholic Judges there, interfere with the processing of filing and administration of my case, in addition to trying to change the nature of my request from "injunction" to "restraining order" to try to make it look like there was no plot and no instant effect of their action. If I filed for RO, I could not claim there were damages from their illegally blocking my injunction. They knew.

Not only that, I had an interested librarian at work that day, which is even more bizarre, because she tried very hard to keep me from getting my complaint out that day and told me to leave the library. Courtney.

So why did it matter?

It mattered because since they realized I knew what had happened was as serious as kidnapping, any argument I made in federal court to this point, would only be good if my parental rights had not been terminated.

I didn't know this at the time, but they did. They knew. I was filing an emergency injunction to protect my right to visit my son. They blocked my injunction to obstruct justice for purposes of keeping a federal argument out of court that would overturn everything.

They were federal Judges. Of course they knew about court jurisdiction and what kinds of federal arguments they could hear. Of course the State of Washington knew. Of course the FBI knew, and the lawyers knew.

They knew that I could have the entire case thrown out.

They knew that the ONLY way I could have the entire thing thrown out, would be if my parental rights were not terminated. They knew the history and case law, and I didn't, but they knew that if I had figured out my son had been kidnapped, or that there was a jurisdiction problem, IF I still had parental rights, according to all case law, I stood an excellent chance of dumping them on their heads.

I didn't fully know what they were so paranoid about until today. Which is the first day I was even able to read a few cases. I knew they acted illegally but I assumed it was being vindictive and trying to keep me from visiting my son. But oh no, no, no...

They had their claws and talons in the skin of my son's back. They hated me. And while it was great to hate me and keep me and my son from seeing eachother, it was even better to attempt to forever ruin my family and adopt him out and torture whoever they wanted with no questions asked.

So I can talk all I like, but where's the evidence? What is the evidence that the Eastern federal court Judges and clerks colluded with the State officials to block my injunction to an order for parental termination of rights?

I will give you the evidence.

First of all, I could have sued the U.S. within one year of my son's kidnapping through a law called ICARA (42 USCS 11601). Cara cara lina. Um, I didn't know it then, but they did, and they knew I could have sued them. So they got worried, put on a show of friendliness, and waited for Hague and ICARA statutes to expire. (March v. Levine, 136 F. Supp 2d 831). According to the Hague treaty, my son's circumstances met all conditions and under section 3, we could have reversed and vacated everything if I had known to commence proceedings within 1 year. So when I left the NW for D.C., they knew. They knew I had a year. It really doesn't matter that I was jailed and they tried to use this as an excuse for taking my son, because I would have been able to prove I was jailed as an attempt to prevent my son and I from securing rights we had applied for in Canada. So, for example, when a court is deciding on matters of "habitual residence" vs commonplace domicile, there are certain standards to be met that throw "child's citizenship" out the window.

BAM.

To prove kidnapping from a legal guardian, the parent has to show where the habitual residence was immediately prior to the kidnapping, and it is a show from the child's perspective and point of view. Courts have decided as little as 6 months in a location, for a child of 4, is long enough to establish habitual residence. They have also agreed that an infant of 6 weeks is too young to understand "habitual residence". (Friedrich I, 983 F 2d @ 1401-02; In re. Bates N. CA 122/89 High Court of Justice, Family Divisional Ct. Royal Courts of Justice, UK 1989; Feder v. Evans-Feder, 63 F3d @224; In re. Ponath, 829 F Supp. 363 @ 367-68 D. Utah 1993; Rydder, 49 F 3d @373; Nunez-Escudero v. Tice-Menley, 58 F. 3d 374, 378, 1995).

So in this case, it is the mother's habitual residence and stated residence that suffices, rather than the child's because where the law follows the child and not the parent, it does not apply to infants who are under their mother's wing. My son was 1 1/2 or less, an infant, and could not have an idea of "habitual residence" or care other than to be with the mother he loved. So Hague would have followed my habitual residence and given the fact I was very clear about leaving the U.S., and asking for political asylum, it was clear that there was ZERO "habitual residence" in the U.S as the habitual residence was in Canada prior to his kidnapping. Furthermore, any attempt to USE U.S. courts and Juvenile courts, to "construct" a theory for residence or jurisdiction, is invalid. So, for example, if a kid is kidnapped from Mexico, and the U.S. puts a protective order out and tries to claim jurisdiction for terminating parental rights to the father who is in Mexico, it's unlawful. So parents have challenged the idea of U.S. states claiming jurisdiction simply because they have the "stamp" from a State or something has been filed in juvenile court. (Feder v. Feder-Evans, 63 F3d, docket N. 54, ex 9, reversed in TN Docket N. 84 @ 17). They have decided this is a ruse to conceal the actual jurisdiction and crime of kidnapping. So it is true that a case can be brought through CPS in the U.S. and deemed a fraud. You can it's official all you want and it's still kidnapping. (Hague Convention article 19, article 3).

It is the same for imprisonment on false arrest in order to "construct" a claim that the child could be legally taken from the mother.

If I have recourse through Hague still, I'm not aware of it or maybe I don't read the 1 year commencement correctly yet. I don't know. But that's what the U.S. & Co. was trying to cover for in the first year they stole my son from me. They were pretty nice back then, by the time I fled to D.C. I didn't know about ICARA but probably, some AG attorney panicked the moment I wrote the "cara cara lina" line from a poem I wrote and thought I knew about ICARA and figured: "We are SO SCREWED". I had already told them I didn't think they had jurisdiction and then I'm writing about cara cara.

After this, I was pampered. The U.S. decided to pamper me a little and control me at the same time. Well, I wasn't pampered. I was treated "with caution". The kid gloves treatment of "how much does she know?" They refused a psych eval the entire time just buying time for themselves. It might be fun to find out the exact date my statute for Hague expired, I mean, I wonder what happened after that year from the time of kidnapping expired. I think maybe that was around the time my fiance tried to set me up to take a bribe from a Maryland officer to get married for money. Not marry him and be set up instead, and then go to jail maybe. Let's see, if they kidnapped Oliver from me sometime in January (end of Jan?), 1 yr. later would have been after I was fired from work while pregnant in November, miscarried in December, and then January people wanted me to bleed to death. I think it was January that I was approached by the fed, bc I was trying to dispute a restraining order put on me in December from this woman whose kids worked at the CIA near Falls Church, VA. So that was maybe January. I didn't take the bait and by February 14th I was being two-timed on Valentine's Day. So let's say medical complications came up. I wanted a month past the time to file through Hague...maybe there is a little room--by the time I had my surgery my Ex was trying to dump me in the hospital, for a second time, if he hadn't been trying to get rid of me the first time after I didn't take bait to get entrapped into a marriage fraud scheme. Maybe I'm "LEAPing" to conclusions, but I'd want to look at those dates a little closer first.

After I broke up with him, they rammed me and my son knowing I no longer had recourse through ICARA or Hague. (Ostevolle v. Ostevolle, case C-1-99-961). It's been soooo...emm..."difficult". In fact, in my case it's been so difficult, my fiance loved to throw that language around rather than let me in on what was really going on--just imagine, he could have had a right to my own son if I'd married him. He loved me so much he called me ALL the time! on the Dept. of State's private line even! or what. The FBIs line bc he could only do contract work for them unless he married away their worries?) By the time I split from Alvaro, they felt safer and I had forgotten about the jurisdictional stuff with all my medical problems. So I dropped it and they just went for the jugular.

Then all of a sudden, through the trauma and torture, it occured to me for the first time that it wasn't just a jurisdictional problem but frank kidnapping. (After reading Ostevolle, I am thinking of filing under Hague still, with basis of delayed discovery claim and conspiracy to fabricate "grave harm or risk of danger"). When I realized this, it revived the fears of the legal class that I would assert a federal claim against them and they knew what elements were required. In order for me to be a real party of interest, or "proper party", to overturn a State fiasco, it was okay, for purposes of filing a claim, that I was a defendant for CPS action and okay that the State had "guardianship". (Lehman v Lycoming County Children's Services Agency, 458 U.S. 502 (1982, but reference to 1974) Blackmun dissenting, Judge Rosenn Id @ 163, Court of Appeal for 3rd cir., 648 F. 2d 135 (1981), Hensley v. Municipal Ct., 411 U.S. 345, 1973).

This didn't block me from alleging illegal custody of my child. I still retained parental rights. So even if guardianship was with another group, my rights remained, and that was the footing and leverage I needed to kick over their shit bucket. As long as I had parental rights, I had a legal recourse to overturn the entire case. If they took my parental rights, all I could do was ask to have other proceedings stayed for federal question.

I could have filed for habeous corpus for my son. (Habeus Corpus, 28 USCS 2254 and 2241). An extraordinary exception to res judicata. I.e, a child in state custody is sufficiently 'restrained' as to meet conditions for habeus, esp. where mother (me) left the country and U.S./state pursued which is harassment, unlawful interference in freedom of movement, and then they negotiated to kidnap my son; where treatment has been to restrain mother and child and separate them from eachother. Where we have been held hostage after I applied for political asylum in another country and where state applied for Social Security number knowing mother had legally revoked this number for the child. (Hey, Oliver, here's your number to go with your jumpsuit. Now stop crying you baby.)

They terminated my parental rights at my mention of kidnapping and jurisdiction again and I still had an injunction filed, even if it was late. They let it expire while they tortured me and falsely jailed me and detained me in Tennessee. They hired lawyers to keep my request to vacate termination out of the courts and law firms from Seattle that didn't even let me know what they were filing or that they were my lawyers first.

I then filed for another injunction in Spokane and got yet another Catholic Judge. Then it was dismissed RIGHT after I mentioned habeous corpus in my blog. All of a sudden, I had brought up jurisdiction and habeous corpus and though I meant it for being tortured, they knew that I could file it for the entire action of taking my child. As long as I had an injunction in place, it kept the adoption at bay at least. The State started trying to add one more after another nail, to the cross they made, while they tortured my Dad and put their mark on his back. So the more they made it look like I didn't have parental rights, the better it was for them.

The Judge closed the case to my injunction before I could enter in medical records that showed a new emergency medical problem, just to close the chance of my filing for habeous corpus or using the second injunction which refered to the first one. They knew I had a chance to even have it go back to the first injunction, prior to the order of termination, because of loopholes. They closed those loopholes and at the same time, the WA Judicial Commission set a criminal free to think all his friends had great liberty to act as terrorists. Maybe it was a favor to the FBI since I had alleged to the OIG it was the FBI I told about this man, and they refused to investigate.

So the motive for rushing to close my request for injunction was to prevent me from filing for habeous corpus for my son and getting him back instantly. I could try to overturn the decision to terminate my parental rights at WA Supreme Court to what avail? With a Catholic majority of Judges? No chance. They have already decided what they are doing and they would not, will not reverse any decision and vacate termination of parental rights simply because they know it is the only door I have to go through to free my son.

So the federal court illegally obstructed my injunction...Can I sue them over it? No, because they have immunity. They literally blocked me from filing something, that was already in their hands, and know I cannot sue them.

So. Proving Motive.

1. Catholic Judge Imbrognio (covering for Catholic Judge Edward Shea): The motive for Judge Cynthia Imbrognio trying to change my injunction to call it a restraining order was to avoid liability or called suspect. If there are no damages from their action, there is no motive for them to take that action. If, however, they foreknew or reasonably knew their actions would have an immediate detrimental effect and cause damages, they know I can point to that as motive for the cover up or illegal action. My damages through their refusal to efile my injunction was that the very Order I tried to block, went through anyway. If it had been a restraining order, I couldn't make that claim bc it was possible this could have still happened. Not with injunction. With injunction, it was an instant firewall to an order of termination of parental rights. So there was a motive to block it, and it caused damages they later didn't want to have discovered.

2. Catholic Judge Quackenbush: Same thing with with closing a case for injunction of adoption (and going back to termination of parental rights as well). I had brought up habeous corpus for my son and they knew that while it was not possible for a federal court to entertain habeous when a state was involved, the condition and sole element at question was real party. They undoubtedly looked up whether habeous corpus had been done before, after I brought it up. I'm quite sure they found the same U.S. Supreme Court decision and federal decision I did today. A mother tried to file for habeous corpus for her kids and the main reason she was blocked was because her "parental rights" had been terminated. However, they would have also known about and seen the same case I did, about persons who had no parental rights petitioning as "next friends" (a court term) for a child and prevailing, where there was "weak family bond" in the guardian placement. (Sam M. v Carciori, N. 09-1759, U.S. Court 1st circuit, 608 F. 3d 77).

Therefore, CPS rushing to push adoption of my son after I blogged about habeus corpus was an attempt to suggest there was a "strong family bond" by adoption. This wasn't for my son's best interests, but their own defense in the event of habeus corpus.

The case was decided on grounds that "custody" of State of children is not the same as "custody" of State of prisoners and therefore habeous corpus couldn't be used, but since this decision, there has been new case law, disputing this--(Flood v Bratten, 727 F. 2d 303, 1989 U.S. app @ 308; Artist M. v Johnson, 726 F Supp 690, 1989 (N.D.Ill 1989) 726 F Supp. @ 699; Zamora-Trevino v Burton, 727 F. Supp 589, 1989 @ 591; In re. Darice C., 105 , Cal. app 4th 159, 129 Cal. Rptr. 2d 472, 2003)-- Which paves the way for a valid habeous corpus case.

Q: So why have my son adopted so fast? Why did CPS and the AG want to push an adoption after I blogged "habeous corpus"?

A: Because knowing this case and other case law, and how the court looked at parental rights, they figured adopting my son out made their own arguments stronger.

(Just in case)

The fact that no one has won habeous corpus for a state action regarding a child before is because of fine points. Should a case come before the court that is not hanged on those fine points, it is very possible to prevail.

Especially in the unique circumstances where my son and I had already left this country, it can be reasonably argued we have been unlawfully detained by the State, against the law, in an unlawful custody case that amounts to imprisonment or hostage situation. There was no state case preceding our departure and therefore, it was federal law that created the damages and injury before the State, which means the State does not take precedent for claiming jurisdiction.

This is the motive for obstruction of justice by federal Judges in collusion with their friends who organized a kidnapping and prior and subsequent torture of me and my son (and my family).

The fact that feds were involved before the State, is why the FBI is not releasing information. This liability to answer to our damages gives the FBI motive for supporting torture, false arrest, slander, and my detention in a psychiatric hospital.

The feds were before the State because in an international matter involving a child, it is the Department of State and the FBI that are brought in. The State of Washington had no pending investigation or case against me before we left. So my having said I knew this to be true, on my blog, added to federal fears that I could assert the claim that there was no State interest.

Frankly, on that basis alone there may be lack of subject matter. Where CPS would argue they have subject matter because they filed documents in State courts, I read about cases where the State court documents were thrown out entirely because the real subject matter was the illegal kidnapping that took place first, which is the jurisdiction of the federal courts, not state.

The only problem at all is the fact that I was arrested in Canada. Good luck getting the FBI to investigate that one when they were "IN" on that one. I could still argue though, the removal of my child to the U.S. was unlawful because he should have stayed with his legal guardian, where his habitual residence was, regardless of citizenship claim (which wasn't even fully there because we'd left and I revoked his SS#). The citizenship follows the mother where the child cannot determine "habitual residence" as an infant. And if the mother took herself and her child to another country to revoke citizenship, or get political asylum, this is even more decided on habitual residence and parents rights and guardianship at that time.

My guardianship was not removed nor were my rights removed when I was arrested and my son should have remained in Canada.

That's aside from the fact that it was an illegal arrest and baseless. I could easily argue Canada is guilty for not upholding their international obligation to provide fair hearing for political asylum and colluding with the U.S. to arrest me to create grounds for separating me from my son.

So in a way, my son was a no-man's land kid. U.S. officials betrayed him and Canadian officials betrayed him.

I can talk all I like but where's the evidence? I'll add some legal citations now, which confirm what I'm saying.