1. Create affidavit with facts of what was done wrong to you...... no feelings, just facts.....we will get a format or example of what others have done.. we can also tell about these title IV-E courts making money on the number of dependency cases which removes any judicial power. Its all a group of people with contracts as independent contractors acting like law
2. Send affidavit to man or woman who did you wrong (threatened you to take children if you didnt sign something, told you your kids were wards wothout a trial, brought you into a private court without criminal conviction in a criminal court, forced you tp pick one child to give up to get the others, etc....). All affidavits must be done under penalty of perjury and have the seal of a notary...then go get the notarial certificate to prove notary did what was necessary to have the power to notarize and give the oath.
3. You will be likely ignored, in 30 days whatever you say that is unrebutted because truth and law.
4. File a claim in your local court against the man or woman who is a cps actor.....judge will want to kick it out but cant because the affidavit was ignored.
5. We will want to forward these affidavits to Trump, FBI and DOJ and others....its hard to ignore clean evidence from thousands of people.
AFFIDAVIT
Here comes now Affiant,
Lisa Floyd, presenting as evidence the following facts.
“Children have a Constitutional right to live with their parent's without government
interference.” -Brokaw v. Mercer County, 7th Cir. (2000).
1. I affirm, sworn under penalty of perjury that all of the foregoing is true and correct.
2. I affirm that I am of lawful age and competent to make this Affidavit.
3. I hereby affix my own signature to all of the affirmations in this entire document with
explicit reservation of all my unalienable rights and my specific common law right not to
be bound by any contract or obligation which I have not entered into knowingly, willingly,
voluntarily, and without misrepresentation, duress, or coercion. (Pursuant to U.C.C.
1-308/1-103)..
4. I am the mother of .
5. On or about February 9th, I met with David Smith to discuss the false claims made
against me by my sister-in-law Maria . My children showed no signs of abuse,
were healthy and were not in imminent danger.
6. I showed David Smith text messages which verified the claims made against me by
Maria were untrue. Maria claimed I abandoned my children for 7 months prior and she
did not know how to contact me. I was David confirmed the following day, on recording
and in the presence of myself, my mother, Maria and 2 women working as DCS
Supervisors that the report made by Maria was not true.
7. I showed David Smith my financial statement’s from Grand Canyon University and
my W2 which I had just filed. These statements verified my sources of income but David
Smith failed to enter this as evidence when filing petition with court. The report claimed I
had no income and was unemployed
8. I presented to David Smith a copy of my children's withdrawal forms from school
verifying my children were not out of school for 3 months. David did not acknowledge
this in court when filing the petition.
9. David Smith visited my home immediately after our meeting to take custody of my
youngest daughter, because she never went to Maria's home with her sisters and was
with me the entire time. He did not wait long enough for me to arrive but he did see I
had a house but still entered in the petition that I did not have stable housing.
10. David Smith did not give me notice of the court date for the first hearing to file the
petition to remove my children from my care. My sister-in-law Maria was notified and
attended the hearing despite the fact David Smith and his Supervisors had verified she
was lying in every claim she had made against me for abandonment and neglect.
Without receiving notice, the hearing was held in my absence and it was entered in the
report that I had disappeared and had not attempted to contact them which was also a
lie.
11. David Smith did not acknowledge any of my evidence proving the initial report was
false. He withheld all my documentations and all of his knowledge of all the lies. He
allowed Maria to attend the court hearing to further continue the lies before the judge
despite everyone knowing they were not true. I was denied due process of law from the
very start and every paper after that was filled with all of this lies as if truth. .
12. The first court report received was signed by David Smith and not by a Judge. This
is fraud against me. My lack of knowledge of the private association which in fact led me
to believe they carried competent jurisdiction when in fact they never had jurisdiction
from the start and that is a crime of theft of my most valued property, my children.
Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828): * Under Federal law which is
applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that if a court is “without
authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities.
They are not “voidable”, but simply “void”; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even
prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons
concerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, as
trespassers. ” Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828)
When rule providing for relief from void judgement is applicable, relief is not
discretionary matter, but is mandatory, Estate of Page v. Litzenburg, 825 P.2d. 128,
review denied (Ariz.App.Div. 1, 1998).
Judgments entered where court lacked either subject matter or personal jurisdiction, or
that were otherwise entered in violation of due process of law, must be set aside, Orner.
V. Shalala, 30 F.3d 1307 (Colo. 1994).
Reynolds v. Volunteer State Life Ins. Co., Tex.Civ.App., 80 S.W.2d 1087, 1092. One
which from its inception is and forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal
efficacy, ineffectual to bind parties or support a right, of no legal force and effect
whatever, and incapable of confirmation, ratification, or enforcement in any manner or to
any degree. Judgment is a “void judgment” if court that rendered judgment lacked
jurisdiction of the subject matter, or of the parties, or acted in a manner inconsistent
with due process.
See Lubben v. Selective Service System Local Bd. No. 27, 453 F.2d 645, 14 A.L.R.
Fed. 298 (C.A. 1 Mass. 1972) A void judgment is one which from the beginning was
complete nullity and without any legal effect.
See Hobbs v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 485 F.Supp. 456 (M.D. Fla. 1980).
Void judgment is one that, from its inception, is complete nullity and without legal effect.
Holstein v. City of Chicago, 803 F.Supp. 205, reconsideration denied 149 F.R.D. 147,
affirmed 29 F.3d 1145 (N.D. Ill. 1992). Void judgment is one where court lacked
personal or subject matter jurisdiction or entry of order violated due process,
Eckel v. MacNeal, 628 N.E.2d 741 (Ill. App.Dist. 1993). Void judgment is one entered by
court without jurisdiction of parties or subject matter or that lacks inherent power to
make or enter particular order involved; such judgment may be attacked at any time,
either directly or collaterally
People v. Rolland, 581 N.E.2d 907 (Ill.APp. 4 Dist. 1991). Void judgment under federal
law is one in which rendering court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over dispute or
jurisdiction over parties or acted in manner inconsistent with due process of law or
otherwise acted unconstitutionally in entering judgment,
U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 5-Triad Energy Corp. v. McNell, 110 F.R.D. 382 (S.D.N.Y.
1986). Judgment is a void judgment if court that rendered judgment lacked jurisdiction
of the subject matter, or of the parties, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due
process, Fed Rules Civ. Proc., Rule 60(b)(4) , 28
U.S.C.A.; U.S.C.A. Const Amend. 5.
Klugh v. U.S., 620 F.Supp. 892 (D.S.C. 1985). A void judgment is one which, from its
inception, was a complete nullity and without legal effect, Rubin v. Johns, 109 F.R.D.
174 (D. Virgin Islands 1985). A void judgment is one which, from its inception, is and
forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal efficacy, ineffectual to bind the
parties or to support a right, of no legal force and effect whatever, and incapable of
enforcement in any manner or to any degree.
People v. Wade, 506 N.W.2d 954 (Ill. 1987). Void judgment may be defined as one in
which rendering court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, lacked personal jurisdiction, or
acted in manner inconsistent with due process of law.
Due process is obstructed when social workers commit fraud on the courts. Authority: N
Mariana Islands v. Bowie (9th Cir. 2001) 243 F.3d 1109, 1125.)
A parent has a clearly established right not to be subjected to deception in the
presentation of evidence perpetrated by a child services worker in Juvenile Dependency
proceedings. Authority: Marshal v. County of San Diego (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 1095,
1097.
The Constitution requires that government officials not misrepresent the facts in order to
obtain the removal of a child from his parent(s). Authority: Brokaw v. Mercer County (7th
Cir. 2000) 235 F.3d 1000, 1020.
A parent’s constitutional rights are violated when a social worker obtains a court order
through “distortion, misrepresentation and/ot omission.” Authority: Malik v. Arapahoe
Cnty. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. (10th Cir. 1999) 101 F.3d 13069 1316
Unrebutted affidavits are Prima Facie Evidence in the Case,- “United States vs. Kis, 658
F.2d, 526, 536-337 (7th Cir. 1983.).
“Silence can only be equated with fraud were there is a legal or moral duty to speak, or
were an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading. We cannot condone
this behavior. This sort of deception will not be tolerated and if this is routine it should be
corrected immediately.”--U.S. v. Tweet, 550 F.2d.297. See also U.S. v. Prudden, 424
F.2d.1022, 1032; Carmine v. Bowen, 64 A.932.
Verification
I hereby declare, certify and state, pursuant to the penalties of perjury under the laws of
the United States, and by the provisions of 28 USC section 1746 that all of the above
and foregoing representations are true and correct to the best of my knowledge,
information and belief. Executed in Phoenix, Arizona
this day of 20
. ,
Lisa Floyd
Notary
On this day of 20 ,, before me , the subscriber,
affiant, personally appeared to me known to be the living man described in and who
executed the foregoing instrument and sworn before me that he executed the same of
his free will act and deed.
. .
Notary
My Commission Expires: .
No comments:
Post a Comment