*Paragraph 1-6 not relevant due to time passed, change in circumstances shown in affidavit, and incident had been part of a closed investigation because mother had already corrected the conditions leading to intervention.
*Intake 571834 alleging neglect of Kiyah by Cindi for daily meth use on 1-10-15 made by the father of minor. Clear motif exists, his name was released to parties in the case (Neb. Rev. Stat. 28-710) and he was also named as a defendant with child removal from him as well. (immunity of caller violated)
* Carol reported that Cindi took Kiyah from Carol’s home then states that she picks kiyah up for school and after and feeds kiyah dinner. Conflicting statements from Carol.
*Carol falsely reported that Cindi was back in a relationship with RJ. He was released from jail and that was an assumption made due to his release.
*Kiyah reported other household members involved in an altercation that never happened, nor were there other members of the house besides her father and me.
*Kiyah being only six does not have an accurate perception of things that occur between adults or the time period that passed between events. Evidence of this is stating Corey visits family home regularly, as he was in jail from the day the D.V. incident occurred and remained there at the time of this report
*Kiyah recent move with mother to California is the cause of her knowledge of marijuana pipes, some of which were shaped like “Bubbles”
*Carol and Cindi had mutually agreed upon the arrangement to ensure that Kiyah was adequately cared for while Cindi worked to regain stability after being the victim of D.V. and leaving the perpetrator, which she had done directly after incident as reported in the affidavit as well by Carol who was not present for anything except helping Cindi move her belongings out of the home of Richard Coats
* The things described regarding RJ stem from Kiyah being shown RJ facebook page with those images by Carol. Kiyah was not present during accidental air shot rifle shooting, nor was she present at any time that RJ had facepaint(Halloween 5 years prior) or throwing up gang signs which was actually a picture of him holding a hatchet with a friend.
*The last paragraphs relating to Juggalo, knives, and clothing worn by RJ are completely irrelevant to neglect or abuse. None of those things are evidence of such.
*Also, as reported, these things were not an issue even if relevant because the mother had taken necessary steps months prior to removal to remedy the issue that brought the adjudication making it not relevant from the start of this case.
* Drug use was the only allegation in the original call and was unfounded at trial.
*Although not reported or included in the petition, mothers mental health has been listed in the judicially noticed court report dated 6-2-15 as if it had been part of the original allegations which it had not.
*Mother has never been ordered to participate in any services other than supervised visits and a psych evaluation which has no relevance to what she was adjudicated on nor was it an issue when the petition was filed. * According to Nicholson 2000 NY, removing a child based solely on that child witnessing her mother being the victim of domestic violence is unconstitutional
*Continued detention pending adjudication not allowed yet ordered in this case.
*Emergency removal occurred on 1-15-2015 and the mothers protective custody hearing was continued and set to occur on Feb 25, 2015, over a month after initial removal, and after the pretrial hearing occurred on Feb 9, 2015, that the mother nor the father was in attendance for, and the court waived the record of it, violating due process *******
The Court report dated 6-2-15 has a false incorrect history of previous interventions contained within, as well as numerous other discrepancies and misrepresentations yet was judicially noticed.
The affidavit for removal also contains provable lies and most of the things reported are simply heresy as neither Carol nor Kiyah was a witness to the things they are reporting. They are both relying on what they overheard or assumed was true without any cause.
This court lacks a factual basis for jurisdiction and has since the outset of this case almost three years ago.
***Mother challenged the jurisdiction of this court numerous times orally, during more than one hearing which was almost completely ignored at the time it was challenged. It was not until months later that a hearing to decide such was scheduled, on the same day as fathers hearing on visits was set to occur. Mother was not aware of this and did not show up because the hearing was not for her but for the father. Due to the mother not being present the oral motion was dismissed.
Wherefore, due to the facts listed, the mother moves this court to dismiss with prejudice this case, issue an order preventing further harassment from the state or agency, and return the minor back to the home of her mother where she has expressed a desire to be as it was before the intervention, and any other relief the court deems appropriate under the circumstances due to the mental and psychological injury caused by this courts lack of jurisdiction and abuse of discretion in allowing the prolonged trauma to both mother and child.
Neb Rules of Evidence 27-801 heresy definition
Neb Rev Stat 43-254 Plain error, Due process
Juvenile court is reminded that all proceedings require a verbatim recording (DMB 240 Neb 349, 481 NW 2d 905 (1992)
Nothing showing adequate communication or assessment of the mother or her living conditions though she was available. No reasonable efforts or specific cause for belief minor was in danger of life or limb which would excuse the reasonable efforts that were not made. (Mainor T. 674 NW 2 d 442)
Plan not material to correct conditions leading to adjudication (JS AC CS Supra)
*Unsupported assertion of attorneys during court proceedings do not establish facts asserted unless other appropriate parties stipulate to such facts (in re interest of Amanda H 4 Neb App 293, 300 (1996)
*Statements in affidavits as to opinion, belief, or conclusions of law are of no effect. (in re Estate of Villwok, 226 Neb 693, 413 NW 2d 921 (1987)
*Affidavits offered for truth of a fact – made on personal knowledge – Only facts that would be admissible into evidence – Show that affiant is competent to testify (Richards v Meeske, 12 Neb App 406, 675 NW 2d 707 (2004)
*If the complaint contains false statements knowingly then dismissal with prejudice is proper.
Counsel cannot waive rights which are personal to their clients. Must be waived by the parents themselves (DMB 240 Neb 349, 360, 481 NW 2d 905, 913 (1992)
By ordering the mother out of court respondent wrongfully denied her full right to be present and be heard as was done in the chambers prior to hearing which all counsel and judge held “secret” meeting discussing case while mother waited in courtroom(Canon 3A (3) and (4) Judicial Code of Conduct)
Recitation of this case has caused reasonable citizens shock. It requires by law immediate dismissal due to it being void ab into.
The judge has no discretion to decide jurisdiction and after challenge judge required to prove that he has it. Failure to do so also renders it void.
Juvenile Injustice 
Leave a comment