Proceedure

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?California
I was arrested by the Orange County District Attorney's office for failure to comply with a custody decree issued in Alaska. An investigator for the DA's office submitted a sworn declaration to Commssioner Walter Posey requesting a Protective Custody Warrant on 12-4-07 and it was issued. Besides failing to verify the truth of the statements he swore to be true and correct the Investigator then sat on the documents for almost four months without ever serving a copy to me dispite knowing where I could be reached. On March 10,2008 the Investigator decided to call the Anaheim police department who came out in force with guns drawn to arrest my daughter and I for not complying with the Order that we were never served. The results were that I was charged with felony kidnapping charges and the two granddaughters that I had supported and raised since their birth were given to a man who is a registered sex offender in Alaska for crimes he commited in Calif. No proof of paternity was provided and he isn't even listed on the birth certificate of one of the girls. Then he was allowed to take them out of state against the order of the same court that issued the protective custody warrant. There is a lot more wrong with this case but these are the most distirbing issues. What can I do, its been 8 months and I just got out of jail and lost everything I owned besides my granddaughtersWhat is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

There's obviously a lot more going on here than you were arrested for kidnapping your grandaughters from someone who has not been proven to be their father.

You, or should I say your daughter needs an attorney if she wishes to see her children again. If she left the state of Alaska with her children and doing so was against a court order, which was issued in a custody battle between your daughter and this sex offender, she made a big mistake.

If you encouraged and/or assisated her in doing so, you also made a big mistake.

If this guy is a sex offender, she should have remained in Alaska and fought for custody and she would still have her children. Courts rarely seperate a mother from her children. Unless she ignores their orders and decides on her own that she is going to remove the father from his children's lives.

The position you now find yourself in, should give you a good idea of how the father must have felt when your daughter ran from him with the children.

The sad part is that this selfish custody battle between your daughter and the sex offender she chose to be the father of her children, is a horrible thing for the children to be drug through.

I suggest everyone involved start thinking about what's best for the children rather than what they want or how much they want to hurt each other.

outonbail said:

There's obviously a lot more going on here than you were arrested for kidnapping your grandaughters from someone who has not been proven to be their father.

You, or should I say your daughter needs an attorney if she wishes to see her children again. If she left the state of Alaska with her children and doing so was against a court order, which was issued in a custody battle between your daughter and this sex offender, she made a big mistake.

If you encouraged and/or assisated her in doing so, you also made a big mistake.

If this guy is a sex offender, she should have remained in Alaska and fought for custody and she would still have her children. Courts rarely seperate a mother from her children. Unless she ignores their orders and decides on her own that she is going to remove the father from his children's lives.

The position you now find yourself in, should give you a good idea of how the father must have felt when your daughter ran from him with the children.

The sad part is that this selfish custody battle between your daughter and the sex offender she chose to be the father of her children, is a horrible thing for the children to be drug through.

I suggest everyone involved start thinking about what's best for the children rather than what they want or how much they want to hurt each other.

Click to expand...

The bolded is NOT correct. At least not what it implies. Courts do NOT make decisions based on the gender of the parent. The "tender years" philosophy has been discarded in favor of best interests.

Ohiogal said:

The bolded is NOT correct. At least not what it implies. Courts do NOT make decisions based on the gender of the parent. The "tender years" philosophy has been discarded in favor of best interests.

Click to expand...

Maybe where you are, but there is still a serious pro-maternity bias in many places.

FlyingRon said:

Maybe where you are, but there is still a serious pro-maternity bias in many places.

Click to expand...

Usually because of the fact that the primary caretaker is usually seen as being appropriate and MOTHERS are NORMALLY the primary caretaker.

Ohiogal said:

Usually because of the fact that the primary caretaker is usually seen as being appropriate and MOTHERS are NORMALLY the primary caretaker.

Click to expand...

Which is frequently interpreted as a gender bias. When the numbers are skewed heavily to the side of the mother it is easy to interpret the system as having such a bias even if that is not the case.

However, in my county, the court mediator DOES have a pro-woman bias, and she regularly berates every male that walks into her office. So much so that most every male that goes to mediation leaves in an angry huff and this results in the women (even alcoholic or drug addicted mothers) getting custody on her recommendation. Yes, it's an anomaly in the grand scheme, but it's one that has a serious impact locally and also demonstrates how the bias can creep in to the court system from these outside sources who may not be as benign as the judge. Since the judge tends to go on the mediator-conciliator's report (at least in my state), the bias of that individual weighs heavily.

- Carl

CdwJava said:

Which is frequently interpreted as a gender bias. When the numbers are skewed heavily to the side of the mother it is easy to interpret the system as having such a bias even if that is not the case.

However, in my county, the court mediator DOES have a pro-woman bias, and she regularly berates every male that walks into her office. So much so that most every male that goes to mediation leaves in an angry huff and this results in the women (even alcoholic or drug addicted mothers) getting custody on her recommendation. Yes, it's an anomaly in the grand scheme, but it's one that has a serious impact locally and also demonstrates how the bias can creep in to the court system from these outside sources who may not be as benign as the judge. Since the judge tends to go on the mediator-conciliator's report (at least in my state), the bias of that individual weighs heavily.

- Carl

Click to expand...

Then people need to report the mediator quite frankly for her unprofessionalism.

Ohiogal said:

Then people need to report the mediator quite frankly for her unprofessionalism.

Click to expand...

They have ... she's still working.

We also have a court clerk who has shacked up with a parolee and has been arrested for dope, yet she's still working. Because of her, the DA has to seal all records sent to the courts and the narcotics task force hand carries all affidavits for search warrants through the court system. Apparently the personnel rules don't allow her to be fired or transferred for a misdemeanor or for living with a parolee so the rest of the county has to change the things they do and HOPE she averts her eyes at the records that cross her desk and the computer screen!

In my state it takes an act of God or a non-drug felony to fire a government employee when there is no will or capability to adequately supervise and document the activities of that employee.

- Carl