Dedicated to Julie Witherspoon

Pattern and a practice in two states:

Julie A Witherspoon, of California state, Orange County, Thomas Firello, and others,
Marilyn LeBaron, of Oregon state, Polk County, Charled E Luukinen, and others,

Based on: A Restraining order is not used to keep parent from child even if the father is actually restrained the mother proving she believed eminent thereat existed.
 
Is is equal protection of the law when a parent is restrained from a child and a bureaucrat gets a MOTION FOR TELEPHONIC TESTIMONY for something that has not happened yet?

Is it Equal Protection of the law when; a parent is restrained from her child and the trespass notice against her does not amount to and 'eminent threat' to a bureaucrat, the parent not restrained from the bureaucrat, just the building, as the intended relief, gained by a trespass notice? Is it equal protection of the law when; the CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD are not notified the 'child is the target' for protection, DHS failing to send notice to exclude the parent from all meetings as provided they do when a parent will 'cause the child damages' at those meetings.. having a bureaucrat object to her presence at the CITIZEN REVIEW BOARD, that complaint not directed as if intended to protect a child but again the bureaucrat?

Is it ok to deny Julie A Witherspoon visits with her children to protect the 'right to privacy' of a bureaucrat? Is it ok to say, "She is threatening the foster mother", and then fail to prove your case but still punish the mother and deny the reunification of her family?
 
Is is ok to 'restrain parent from child while intending to 'protect the bureaucrat instead', well that is what is going on in both these cases.

Regading Melanie LeBaron 'a Child' and O5P2176 Polk County Circuit Court,
Judges Michael C. Sullivan, William M. Horner, and Fred E. Avera presiding.
 
Is this e-mail address or the e-mail address I sent e-mail to, like the FBI, grounds to keep my daughter from me, or forbid my daughter from allowing contact between my grand baby and me? Is it also OK to tell the child, "Your mother is (threatening public officials)" after denying visits because a bureaucrat was a target for protective services, but not until after the first set of double continuances, while another also said, "She physically confronted me" as a reason to veto visits authorized by Nicole K Hall?
 
Is is ok to say, "She wrote on the back of the envelope and returned it to me", grounds to keep my daughter and grand daughter from me when that writing is described as, "Various markings", after the person that made that comment also said, "I don't thing your mother will hurt you or the baby?"

Is it ok for a Marry Anne E Miller to attend the intake meeting at the Juvenile Department and no longer have jurisdiction over the 01-10-2005 assigned call, regarding my son, while also, regarding my daughter, not having an assignment to the intake with Matt L. Hawkins while setting an appointment to attend. Also, while the ORS forbids a release of information to an unrelated adult, Zack, Bleu's father, the issues could not be consolidated any how because my daughter was no longer in their jurisdiction, leaving to go to to another county, but that meeting was used to get information about my son after being late for a face-to-face? I called this a 'lasso with a slip knot trick' and the first petition was not enough, though based on the meeting at the Juvenile Department, and two sets of double continuances were granted - then the second petition did not get the adjudication. Also, the defective first draft did not get the box checked leaving out my son's matters (which were included in the Protective Custody Report written by Heather Brown based on the link at my daughter's intatake)  proving they were not consolidated by Judge Avera thought 'consolidated by CPS by using the Juvenile Department as my prop mock trial date I never got a proper SUMMON to. (See: Horner's recuse on all my objections to his crimes against my right to go second, which were ignored until the Public Defender voiced the same things I had been screaming for almost a whole year.) Matt L. Hawkins is the one who's SUMMON got me to attend and then was later revealed DHS, Child Protection Agents, were invited to join and I was not informed nor was I given proof of Supervisory Extensions and the reason has to be documented but the box for that was not checked on the Completed Assessment where the record also shows there was not cause logged as to indicate an eminent threat existed against my son related to the to 01-10-2005 call.

Is it ok to use the Juvenile Department to violate your due process rights (while acting as judge) and also say, "No police needed?" Is it OK to know the meeting or matter you attended at the Juvenile Department was not under you jurisdiction while using that issue as a door to the initial allegation while not technically having jurisdiction over the other actually assigned -having dropped the ball and not even attempting to pick it up again. 
 
Is it ok to send out damaging faxes when a sound police investigation was not requested?


Let's talk about what prejudice motivated the CPS when it was stated the LeBaron family are well known by the Independence Police Department instead of the Independence Police Department investigated and substantiated that child abuse and neglect had occurred.
 
Judge Zaryanoff agreed she was unfair with me on this matter so why do I get my credit score destroyed _I did not trust the judiciary of Polk County to try an appeal process and was oppressed by the apparent lack of integrity.
 
There was no physical evidence to sustain there was any kind of damages, physical, emotional, or property, by way of a doctor report, photographs, or verbal complaint, etc, hence there was no witness that stated he was damaged or alarmed. There was not statement that the intended victim was or thought he would be aroused to violence, and actually stated the opposite was true, that he did not know the topic of his testimony was directed at him. The location to which the allegation was connected was never established as a public place, and that topic was not covered in the questioning process by either side of the case, because the judge interrupted when I tried to bring the topic up. The timeline of events was not discovered, nor was the details regarding why the plaintiff thought though he was a victim. (Goes directly to the lack of questioning process by the police officer, which was under the supervision of Officer Barlow, a detective, who did not ask any questions either. The only question asked of me by the officer in training was regarding a hanger, which was a faded memory by the time we got to trial and he had no recollection of any comments adjacent to the question asked me at the time the 'SUMMONS' was issued. Officer Lloyd, who informed me I was going to be cited, detained me until Officer Barlow arrived with the officer who issued the 'SUMMON', who I assume was in training and under his supervision. That I have a complaint about since: He was also the officer that has an Oath of Affirmation regarding a barricade on another issue. Is reported to be "glad" that I was having my son removed from me by his father and did not deny it when I asked him if it was true. Wrote a report about the seizure of an item that is not in evidence or relevant to my daughters removal, which should have come up much sooner if there was really an inference regarding that topic. While that topic is 'a noticeable mention' in his Oath of Affirmation but not directly tied to relevancy, but is still admitted into his Oath.  Too arbitrary, and was not the topic of menacing charges and when the charges was dropped the item was not returned to me, which is a clear sign to me that prejudice is what motivates his detective work, as my rights are violated, which is another assault on the Constitution of the United States of America, and his Oath of Office. Which goes prejudice. 40.180 Rule 406. Habit; routine practice. (1), (2)...  40.185 Rule 408.

Since there was no subsequent remedial measures taken which should have been addressed sooner to validate the seizure and the failure to return my belonging after the charges were dropped, so prejudice is all that is left. Directly being that there were no precautionary measures taken sooner than 11-22-05 that issue is mute and I will be asking Officer Barlow be impeached due to his lack of attendance to maters that affect my life, where Due Care is neglected. The mere mention of its existence does not establish relevance to anything but prejudice and could have been addressed by another Public Official, who had more details on that topic than the Independence Police Department, to whom I correspond regularly. Since said correspondence did not result in the seizure of my belongings, at an earlier date and there was no warrant for that item upon arrival to my home, as to include it into evidence for any reason, so there is no foundation for its continued detainment, unless it is intended a social pressure, or intended as evidence of belated earnestness, (and attempt to provide colorable cause for such a prejudice act against your Oath of Office) which does not replace that which is a valuable consideration.

I will add there was no evidence, prior to 11-22-05, that any consideration regarding that item had been raised, at any time since it is not included in any police reports up to the point of its seizure, which is the most valuable point here, other than the fact that no move in that direction was made by another person I corresponded with regarding that issue, who did nothing. Which I presume from that fact there is no communication between those parties.

40.160 Rule 403. Exclusion of relevant evidence on grounds of prejudice, confusion or undue delay. If the seizure of my belongings is intended as evidence it should be excluded, since the mention of its late confiscation causes prejudice confusion. In effect may cause the mind to wander in the direction of substantially irrelevant issues, which were never addressed in a timely manner.

Please make a check list of those 'Major Safety Issues' and see if they were represented in the line of questioning presented by Max R. Wall, or Judge Avera, who could not be authorized to be my Defense Attorney, and can only be seen as a second prosecutor, because he can not also represent my daughter, she already has CASA, 'DHS' & 'DHS' and some one else at a different time from 'DHS', who switch hats too much.  Directly the argument against the mention of it should outweigh the necessity of its mention because of the danger of unfair prejudice, which would mislead the jury to think something other that that which has not been documented in police reports otherwise.

The delay in mentioning the item seized form my home, till after the Oath of Affirmation became necessary to validate my arrest, and is a good inference to rebut DHS perjury that a 'Major Safety Issue' had indeed been spotted way back in the caller on the 01-10-05's own words, describing an ongoing emergency. Which was never documented by the DHS, which proves there was no reason to enlist the IPD and Miller was after something other that what is eliminated by a good detective process from her only report since the OAR sate the Police Department are to give the DHS the relevant police reports, and she did not need their help. So by a process of reasoning and looking at her questions to my son, you will see she did not go into any detail about the allegation in the report that got her an assignment to the case on 01-10-2005, and was indeed the premise of the arrival and the escort of the DHS to my home on 11-22-2005. See: Marilyn LeBaron was found an unfit parent in January of 2005, in the last judicial report, which is signed by Chandra Snyder.

Also, See: The 'Protective Service Report' by Heather Brown, who before coming to my house told me she was going to have a pow-wow with Chandra Snyder and Mike William's and Jane Ammon refusing to give me the 'New Information' and excusing herself from a phone conversation I kept her involved in after many tonal inflexions in her tone that she was through with the idea of talking with me, and did not call me back like I told her I would be waiting for her to do, but instead show up with a miss guided Police Department who are told that there is a "No Contact Order" in place, which my daughter did not know about either, and was in shock when she was arrested, and yelled at me, "This is all your fault", "Why don't you just send them a Doctor's" note in representation of what I conclude is her Fully Advised state as to the Nature of Chandra Snyder's Representation of her, See: Hearsay Excepsion rule for admissibility, even if my pen has been impeached by the confiscation of my daughter's right to an affidavit written by her mothers pen, up to that point, who later replaced Nicole K. Hall and must not have been in collaboration with her about the facts that pertain to my daughter because it is evident she did not know about twenty or so hours a week on the city bus, and said my daughters passion is church but spends more time on the bus that she does in church. 40.180 Rule 406. Habit; routine practice. (1), (2)...  40.185 Rule 408. How often does Chandra Snyder adlib to get what her Supervisory addenda allows a privilege to impose in lieu actual knowledge of the facts in any given situation?

If it is found that Nicole K. Hall had not put in her reports that topic and left it out of the details of her conversations with her supervisor and the CRB was not corrected on that topic, of hours on the bus, how would one determine what the CRB would think about my daughter's placement, Motion to KWASH, Chandra Snyder's pen from my matter's, and let the avalanche begin over a MOTION TO IMPEACH CHANDRA SNYDER, from her job description as well as in other places. 



All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice
              UCC 1-308
          Marilyn LeBaron  
                  &
          LeBaron Family 

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:31:56 -0700
From: blawg_war@yahoo.com

Subject: I have things registered in sealed envelopes to keep a timeline on things, too.
Just in case they do not document, which they do not. But what they did document only
proves they violated me all over the place... their own words in EXHIBIT against me is
their own confession....
To: bench-the-judge@googlegroups.com

 

Roger Weidner
http://www.myspace.com/rogerweidner
Date:  May 9, 2008 12:46 AM

 Subject:  Request to Approve Blog Comment

Body: Roger Weidner has posted a new Blog comment on MySpace!

Original Post: (Parental Rights Terminated without a Trial)...

You Need The CPS (free) HANDBOOK before the Child 'Protective' Agent Knocks.  Contact (madatcps@aol.com)

If you can not do any better than me without it you will get the equivalent of the 'Death Penalty'.

Judge Horner of Polk County Circuit Court, "You can have no visits with Thomas Alexander Bleu LeBaron, your son, until I hear from the DHS". 
          
           The case was closed. He knew it!

So now it became a waiting game because the judge cannot force me to go talk to them against his Judicial Code of Conduct and expect to preside when he is the official complainant. 

 See:  DHS never present a case and Judge Horner use the lack thereof as 'Probable Cause' to allow another case be brought against my family. Judge Horner recuse and the DHS get a Double Continuance anyway after the Public Defender objected to Petition III signed by Chandra Snyder.   See: The seer of Polk County Circuit Court lie while Luukinen boosts Judge Horner up into Judge Avera's lap and the seer, Max R. Wall, gain another set of Double Continuances, his own prophecy the new allegation.

----- Original Message -----
From: Marilyn leBaron

To: lorelei@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 5:41 PM
Subject: FW: Help. Estoppels Needed by 10-09-06

From: jesushealedmetoo@hotmail.com
To: rod@rodborlase.com
Subject: FW: Help. Estoppels Needed by 10-09-06
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2006 20:14:33 -0500

Marilyn leBaron (jesushealedmetoo@hotmail.com)
To: Thomas A. B. LeBaron (madcowgomoo@hotmail.com)
Subject: FW: Help. Estoppels Needed by 10-09-06
From: jesushealedmetoo@hotmail.com
To: rabekaf@yahoo.com; jesushealedmetoo@hotmail.com
Subject: Help. Estoppels Needed by 10-09-06
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 23:40:11 -0500   

Ooops!  I signed the petition two times by mistake. Please be advised. Sorry. See;  665 & 666

	Name	Comments	Zip Code	Name
666.	Marilyn LeBaron	Injustice in the name of Law & Order Under the Color of Law is Collusion. This petition has been served upon Polk County Circuit Court, 850 Main, Dallas, Oregon 97338, by CERTIFIED MAIL 70051820000472619325 & TMSFMS by Registered Mail RA374647815US Re: 7163J-(DHS adlib at CRB) & O5P2176. Autocrat perjury is worth more to DA than justice. They have committed these enumerated violations to my family. Perjury is resultant in loss of 'Life' and 'Liberty' (x3+): I called 911, 'State Police', to report DHS circumvention of OAR as DHS came & took my teen by surprise. DHS said, "No Contact Order"(lie): IPD ignore the falsity. DHS, in 01-05, took a Release of Info from me, tell lies in report: "She won't let us talk to her doctor". Complaints thereto used to gain 'second set' of double continuances, one criminal/911 call: is dropped: No 'ORDER' of dismiss mailed: No bearing on Relief or 'Life'? DA's false Oath: "Mother will attack PG woman at trial to Subpoena my Dr: Re: 'ILSUP/Colombo'. I approve this petition! AO	97351	Marilyn LeBaron

 

Marilyn LeBaron, [Unrepresented] said 'Pro-se' not knowing what it was,  Power of Attorney in Fact 1465 E Street, Independence, Oregon .97351.    In The Circuit Court of Heaven and Earth Attorneys for Plaintiff,  Zachariah B. Singleton, Was [Unrepresented] said 'Pro-se' not knowing what it was, Power of Attorney in Fact, too. 'JUDGE HORNER'
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE STATE OF OREGON  FOR THE COUNTY OF POLK In the Matter of: Zachariah B. Singleton,             Petitioner,       and Marilyn LeBaron,             Respondent, Pursuant to countersuit in the best interests of justice: Thomas Alexander Bleu LeBaron,                 vs DHS, the State of Oregon, who never represented him, which has bearding on Melanie LeBaron's false arrest due to Nature of Representation & Fully Advised 'incorrectness issues' for both my children, but not limited to that.	)   )   )   )   )   )   )	Case No: O5P2176  MOTION TO VACATE OR RECUSE & ALLOW A CHANGE OF VENUE PURSUANT TO ESTOPPELS /(and entitled countersuit)

      The morals of the Declaration of Independence declare my right to have an independent judiciary with all ten Judicial Canon, one that is not bias or prejudice who can maintain fairness in the court process and be neutral giving me Equal Protection of the Law, which has been degraded to an 'ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE' with a sanctioned pre-set disposition, which treats the right to 'Life' as if it were subject to adhesion contract settlement attempts pursuant to a default judgment, prior to a petition upon the court, which cannot be claimed in my son's purported 'Safety Threat'. The DHS did not respond and had no authority to either and the REASONABLE ACTIVE EFFORTS clauses leveraged by way of my possessing an ODL, where my children have no assignment, who are not party to that agreement due to the fact that they were both born out of wedlock and never assigned to the State of Oregon as a product of a marriage union subject to the Marriage License practices assigning them the term property. Order of the court would maintain that I have a right to go second, and the history of this non-accusatory process has abrogated me form a plea, my right to be informed at the earliest stage of an 'assessment' that I am under 'assesstigation', which would have allowed for a rebuttal after a proper discovery. Why did Judge Horner not inquire further into the growing pains thing regarding why my son wanted to come home instead of just asking about the DHS. Zachariah B. Singleton did declare that he was going to send his son home and that is supported in the court record, the history of this case would show that Bleu was in fact living with me at all times irregardless of all the allegation in the FAX, which cannot be supported by a sound police investigation or any material fact, but it would have bee easy to see from the facts the I mailed out the motion just a little while before the decision to send my son home was made. Zachariah B. Singleton said there was growing pangs months after his taking my son there, which is not a sign my son was going to be any happier at a later date. Such inferences were not even touched on. That which is supported by my son's attestation to his state of mind by his father should be admitted by the following rule because a material fact is in evidence an agreement to go back to the old visitation schedule, which represents a verbal settlement. Zachariah B. Singleton was in a settled state and must have been feeling a little bit uneasy due to the MOTION TO SHOW GOOD CAUSE NOT TO CONSOLIDATE IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER, so he could comment about his own state of mind when he put his son on the phone to represent himself on the matter, of where he wanted to live and who negotiated his way home acting as his own pro-se advocate at age eleven, and that was not covered either. The letters in record were admitted prior to Judge Horner's guillotine over my "I want to go second" objection, which were not rebutted, by the judge or the opposing party and should be in both court records since they were consolidated my son's state of mind is also in a congruent testimony as a second motive to why the family meeting was held. STATE OF MIND AND PHYSICAL CONDITION -- There are times when emotions, feelings, hunches, and intuitions can be admitted as evidence, if the person offering them is competent and the testimony supports a material fact.  It is important to understand that this kind of evidence can ONLY be used to support a material fact, and it CANNOT be used to support other facts.  State of mind exceptions are only used to make a point, and should not be confused with establishing the elements of mens rea for an offense.  The two most common examples of this which occur in the legal system involve emotions of affection and states of drunkenness.  In divorce or domestic cases, it is often the case that a credible witness is needed to make the point that the defendant "loved" or "hated" the plaintiff or victim.  Normally, such testimony would be objected to as outright hearsay, but if backed up by corroborating facts (such as proof that the defendant did or did not buy them flowers), then it might be admissible hearsay under the state of mind exception.  The law assumes feelings and conduct go hand in hand, even in the absence of speech.  Sometimes, it treads over into what is often called "habit" or "character" evidence, as when it seems everyone in the community knows the defendant is the "town drunk" but there is little by way of any other proof to support this.  Doctors and medical personnel are likewise allowed great flexibility in what they can say about a person, if they are testifying as a hearsay witness on matters of physical condition rather than as expert witnesses, and such matters might include things like bad eyesight, lack of self-care, unwillingness to follow instructions, or bad memory.  Judges often have a difficult time explaining to the jury how to weigh such evidence, and the proper inferences that a jury can draw, but it is essential that jury instructions contain some guidelines when medical hearsay is involved.  The most controversial practice in this area is the Hillmon doctrine (Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Hillmon 145 U.S. 285 1892) which allows evidence of the state of mind of one defendant to be used in inferring the state of mind (or conduct) of another defendant...

	I have filed my complaint elsewhere: With Mr. GOD /s/ On behalf of Thomas Alexander Bleu LeBaron by Marilyn LeBaron Oct 2006
	In The Circuit Court of Heaven and Earth    X /?/
	Mr. G. O. D.   Do you see God's sugnature here or do you see God in the signature of the Judges?  /s/ Marilyn LeBaron Oct 2006 _______________­­__________  Marilyn LeBaron, [Unrepresented] said 'Pro-se' not knowing what it was, Power of Attorney in Fact  1465 E Street, Independence Oregon .97351. jesushealedmetoo@hotmail.com

 

 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this _______day of October, 2006 

________________________________________________________
Notary Public for Oregon

 

MY COMMISSION expires _______________.

 

Supplement to Horner's thoughts as he decides to Uphold and Defend or 'NOT!' 

 

Child Protection Services Fixer uper

 

View Current Signatures   -   Sign the Petition

 

To:  To change child protection services court process

 

"Emancipation Proclamation Petition"

For The Sanctity And The

Protection of Families

And Children

We the People of the United States of America hereby petition the Congress of the United States of America under article I of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the United States. This petition is to be construed as a formal Petition to the Government for Redress of Grievances and do here by Declare the following. http://www.PetitionOnline.com/families/petition.html

	© 1999-2002 Artifice, Inc. - All Rights eserved

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bench the Judge" group.
To post to this group, send email to bench-the-judge@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bench-the-judge-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bench-the-judge?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice
              UCC 1-308
          Marilyn LeBaron  
                  &
          LeBaron Family 

My journals.aol.com/ reformcps@aol.com /RULE-53-REFORM-BLAWG-LAW ...

RULE 53 REFORM, BLAWG, LAW, OAR, ORS, LEGAL WAR, FAMILY, CPS, .... CPS REFORM is a MUST, MUST, MUST!!!!! RULE 53 REFORM is a MUST, MUST, MUST! ... journals.aol.com/.../2007/07/20/my-journals.aol.com-reformcpsaol.com-rule-53-reform-blawg-law-oar-ors/60 - 60k - Cached - Similar pages

RULE 53 REFORM, BLAWG, LAW, OAR, ORS, LEGAL WAR, FAMILY, CPS ...

RULE 53 REFORM. Judges should not have the automatic motion to consolidatde ' partially ' only in the direction that gives the prosecutor the advantage. ... journals.aol.com/reformcps/RULE-53-REFORM-BLAWG-LAW-OAR-ORS/ - 88k - Cached - Similar pages

RULE 53 REFORM, Blowing the whistle on Polk County 'Circuis' Court

RULE 53 REFORM, Blowing the whistle on Polk County 'Circuis' Court. journals.aol.com/.../entries/2007/10/08/rule-53-reform-blowing-the-whistle-on-polk-county-circuis-court/64 - 36k - Cached - Similar pages

RULE 53 REFORM with FOI - Do Your Own Investigation Into DHS Perjury

RULE 53 REFORM with FOI - Do Your Own Investigation Into DHS Perjury - Get your case file on record with this letter generator: ... journals.aol.com/madatcps/rule-53-reform-with-foi---do-you/archive/2007/10 - 23k - Cached - Similar pages

Undisclosed Accuser

Tags: infowar, blawg, law, ors, child protection services, sos, war, cps, avera, polk, sheriff, rule 53 reform, kids, sex slave, corruption, ... journals.aol.com/reformcps/RULE-53-REFORM-BLAWG-LAW-OAR-ORS/entries/2007/10/08/undisclosed-accuser/65 - 53k - Cached - Similar pages

RULE 53 REFORM

RULE 53 REFORM. ... Your leadership on RULE 53 Reform on a national level in support of the right to Privacy is needed. Reinforcing the right to Privileged ... journals.aol.com/madatcps/thomas-alexander-bleu-lebaron--m/entries/2007/10/13/rule-53-reform/2502 - 46k - Cached - Similar pages

RULE 53 REFORM, BLAWG, LAW, OAR, ORS, LEGAL WAR, FAMILY, CPS ...

RULE 53 REFORM pursuant to CPS REFORM because of Judges Horner, Luuk'in'en, and Avera, ['AK'bm'A'... 7/19/07, For CPS, it becomes just a commercial sales ... journals.aol.com/reformcps/RULE-53-REFORM-BLAWG-LAW-OAR-ORS/archive/2007/7 - 23k - Cached - Similar pages

RULE 53 REFORM, BLAWG, LAW, OAR, ORS, LEGAL WAR, FAMILY, CPS ...

10/8/07, RULE 53 REFORM, Blowing the whistle on Polk County 'Circuis' Court posted by reformcps (0 comments) From: Marilyn LeBaron To: RE-Polk Judge ... journals.aol.com/reformcps/RULE-53-REFORM-BLAWG-LAW-OAR-ORS/archive/2007/10 - 28k - Cached - Similar pages

RULE 53 REFORM, BLAWG, LAW, OAR, ORS, LEGAL WAR, FAMILY, CPS ...

RULE 53 REFORM essential to freedom and recovering the right to a Privileged Relationship with your Doctors, which are currently subject to Police State ... journals.aol.com/reformcps/RULE-53-REFORM-BLAWG-LAW-OAR-ORS/?page=2 - 149k - Cached - Similar pages

Thomas Alexander Bleu LeBaron & Melanie LeBaron & Me

Child Protective Services Reform, RULE 53 REFORM Reinforcing the right to Privileged relationships. Complaint about the use of Police Force to gain a ... journals.aol.com/madatcps/thomas-alexander-bleu-lebaron--m/ - Similar pages