You know what, I have only learned about this movement last Aug. and I can only go by where other people point me and what makes sense to me. Everything else that we have done has gotten us nowhere only more time apart from my kids. It was suggested to do a notice of mistake and then a petition, and that is what I'm doing. I am determined to try things that make sense, and i DON'T care if that may cause me to go to jail or whatever. Being without our kids, kinda makes you that way. I was already threatened with contempt of court. I could care less. The judge said a year ago that he felt there were issues with the integrity of the investigation and that one of the charges that they accused us of had no basis. But here we are still in the mess of things. Even though the judge states this in court according to the CPS lawyer - This is argument and not relevant to whether the children remain in need of protective services and is otherwise contrary to family court rule.
There is a guy named Karl Lentz here on one of the states of the union who had his child taken away and got him back six years ago. He has recorded calls on myprivateaudio.com under the tab, guest speakers. Not sure if he can help but just thought I would let you know.
Originally there was the Protection Application, then there was Protection Order, then there was Disposition Order leading to Temporary Care and Custody Order. This is where we are now. The original Protection Application has the CPS lawyer signature on it for the Applicant Minister of Community Services. They never applied for the kids birth certificates till 5 months into this mess.
Protection Application And Notice of Hearing - Take notice that the Applicant makes application to the Family Court for the Province of NS for a finding that the children: - - - Are in need of protective services under the Children and Family Services Act Sections a, b, c, g, j, ja And take Noice that an Interim Hearing will take place at the Family Court time and place or so soon thereafter as the application can be heard for an order on the terms and conditions set out in the Affidavit - filed herewith. At this interim hearing, the court may make an order affecting the custody fo the children noted above and, should you fail to appear, an order may be made in your absence without further notice to you
The social worker but the first line is always I am a child protection worker with the applicant's District Office and an "agent" within the meaning of the children and family service act
The claim would be the Temporary Care and Custody Order It goes out and I get a letter that states If you object to any of the terms and conditions noted therein, you should advise the Court immediately in writing
I have sent in affidavits stating that we don't consent and those were ingnored, and I even bruoght it up in court asking why they are not acknowledging the fact that we are not consenting to the order, Judge told me that, Oh we understand that you are not consenting that is why we are having a hearing, because you requested it. Judge is the one that decided to have hearing, he stated that because we were not agreeing to anything, that we were looking to get the kids back home and the Agency out of our lives, I said yes. So apparently that is what started the hearing, which now isn't going to happen.
There is no injury or damage all the accusations that have been lodged against us are all B) there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer physical harm inflicted or caused as described in clause A).
g) there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer emotional harm of the kind described in clause f) and the parent or guardian does not provide or refuses or is unavailable or unable to consent to services or treatment to remedy or alleviate the harm. JA) there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer physical harm inflicted or casued as described in clause J). This Ja is the one that the judge already found that there was no basis for it. and the judge found that there were issues with the integrity of the investigation
i think you should find out what a Court of Equity(the old Court of Chancery is) where you are, i think you're in South Carolina?.. maybe Scott would know what they are called down there
Please provide evidence that my daughter, CD and son, CD are property of the Government. It is my understanding they are only beneficiaries of those respective names. Please provide a proof of claim as I have not seen any evidence of damage or injury to any party.
That sounds perfect I will do that, You will get a kick out of this. I told them that their mandate is to take the kids with in 30 days to the dr to get checked out. They waited 42 days. I told them that obviously there was no physical abuse cause you didn't bother to take them till 42 days. They came back with that the 30 days are not calendar days they are business days.
I did up a notice of mistake with that info on there, I will do up the affidvait next and give them 10 days to respond. Which they wont cause they have n't responded to any other affidavits that I have sent to them. I keep getting that this is not proper proceedure.
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
3 The Supreme Court of Nova Scotia as constituted before this Act, a court of common law and equity possessing original and appellate jurisdiction in both civil and criminal cases, shall continue as the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia with original jurisdiction and as the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal with appellate jurisdiction for the Province. R.S., c. 240, s. 3; 1992, c. 16, s. 32.
http://nslegislature.ca/legc/statutes/judicatr.htm
Derek Moran the other day somebody got in a lot of trouble about in Ontario it being Superior Court and not Supreme Court. I figured it was Supreme Court in NS but just in case I was wrong I didn't want the wrath of Scott Duncan coming down on me. LOL
I saw that a motion is between the parties and the court, a petition is between the court and the party that brings the petition? And can a lawyer do a motion to supress the petition, like they can an affidavit?
And DON�T forget to let them know that these kids are connected to you, no matter what they THINK or what their JUSTICE SYSTEM says�.YOU are the MOTHER of those children�they CAN�T take this from you�.they will NEVER be able to take this from you�I know it has NOTHING to do with LAW and/or procedures, but at one point, you have to let them know, these people are people, like me and you�If they don�t care about it, well its their problems, not yours�..thats my 2 cents on this, as I have NOTHING else to help with�Bravo for your courage Madame�Bravo..!!!
Petition can also be the title of a legal pleading that initiates a legal case. An initial pleading in a lawsuit that seeks non-monetary or "equitable" relief, such as a request for a writ of mandamus or habeas corpus, custody of a child, or probate of a will, is instead called a petition.
Mandamus is a judicial remedy � in the form of an order from a superior court, to any government subordinate court, corporation, or public authority � to do (or forbear from doing) some specific act which that body is obliged under law to do (or refrain from doing) � and which is in the nature of public duty, and in certain cases one of a statutory duty. It cannot be issued to compel an authority to do something against statutory provision. For example, it cannot be used to force a lower court to reject or authorize applications that have been made, but if the court refuses to rule one way or the other then a mandamus can be used to order the court to rule on the applications.
Mandamus may be a command to do an administrative action or not to take a particular action, and it is supplemented by legal rights. In the American legal system it must be a judicially enforceable and legally protected right before one suffering a grievance can ask for a mandamus. A person can be said to be aggrieved only when he is denied a legal right by someone who has a legal duty to do something and abstains from doing it.
Brenda, respectfully, do you understand the meaning of each and every word you have written and their source of authority? If not, I strongly suggest you never proceed in court with it.
Yes - the source of their authority - the term "Petition" for example - where is authority granted for a petition of any type - statute? common law? Equity? And how about the term Grantor? Grantor of what and by what authority? Some sort of trust? What trust exactly? What is the source of that term (Grantor) as being employed in Brenda's "petition". You have to know of what you write.
Brenda, I am in no way giving you grief for your efforts. I admire and respect people who will take this path. But I am throwing out food for thought which you may, or course, take or leave. :)
no grief taken, cause there was the solutions to all you prolems about claiming to be a human being and not a person, and I wasn't willing to do it till I understood it, and luckily I didn't proceed wiht it.
like i said i appreciate every ones help and I don't just take what any one says and run with it, I look and research. sometimes it is hard to find info, but sometimes it is using the right wording and then things are available to you on the internet.
There is merit to claiming to be a human being and not a person. Unfortunately too many don't understand that you cant be in hockey gear, wearing skates and on the ice with other hockey players then try to convince someone you are not a hockey play (person) but a football player (human being).
NON-NEGOCIABLE
I'm Pete and/or Peter and/or Pierre and/or Babe (I reserve this one for my wife) I'm also Dad (I reserve this one for my children) and/or BELLIGERENT and I'm the LAWFUL HOLDER IN DUE COURSE OF PIERRE DAOUST Inscription No.119XXXXXXXX
I�m the SOLE beneficiary of PIERRE DAOUST
I make ALL business decisions for PIERRE DAOUST
At least 51% of my blood is ORIGINAL blood
I LOVE THE MONTREAL CANADIANS
I�m a very NICE guy
I am the MASTER or my PERSON Named PIERRE DAOUST
And I reserve ALL RIGHTS�.all of them�
Is ANYONE have any objections ?????
why would you claim or expose your social insurance no. when that just opens it up to have to defend or to disprove your not government agent or employee
You cannot walk into the hockey arena and claim it to be a football field. Brenda, You don't claim the jurisdiction in a court which only has authority to hear statutory matters.
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia/ family division apparently can hear some common law (arguemnts??) but for the most part the lower family courts are statutory
In Ontario the Courts of Justice Act states what jurisdiction each court has. Each place will have something similar. Family Courts and most lower level courts where criminal matters and provincial offences are heard are also strictly statutory. Brenda, there would be absolutely no point claiming you are a human being when you are in the family court. You are that hockey player I mentioned earlier trying to claim your a football player. They have NO authority/ jurisdiction to hear human rights matters or grant remedy for same.
Does this mean she will have to play the hockey game ???.....can she ask to deffer the cause in another court..???....are you the PLAINTIFF or DEFEDANT Brenda Larson ????
If its like Ontario, the family division of the Supreme Court of NS can hear some minimal matters concerning PERSONS who have cohabited respecting unjust enrichment
Launch an action in the Supreme Court of NS pursuant to its authority as the court of inherent jurisdiciton possessing all the power and authorities tradtionally exercised by the courts of common law and equity in england and NS. DO NOT ASK FOR ANYTHING STATUTORILY BASED. i.e custody, access, support payment.
Would it be better if I did an affidvait getting DCS to respond or not respond to whether the kids are gov. property, understanding that they are only beneficiaries, and where is there proof claim? And by them defaulting by not rebutting, take that to the supreme court and get the kids back that way?
Research your human rights which are grounded in the common law. Claim and assert them in the proper court (not the family law division) which can hear common law matters and grant remedy respecting same.
Ok so how is it that the Province threatens me with fines and/or prison because my daughter has trouble getting to school on time. After NOTICING me of a hearing, I FAXED in a NOTICE of MISTAKE regarding her name, the fact that she is only SOLE BENEFICIARY of it, and for them to provide EVIDENCE that the province has authority of my daughter as well as their PROOF OF CLAIM regarding this CONTROVERSY.
I am not saying there is not more than one way to skin a cat. But was it the substance of your material or simply the fact that they saw you were going to be an expensive challenge to deal with. I don't know and take no position either way. Beverly, would you be okay sharing the Notice? I never discount anything.
NOTICE OF MISTAKE
To: Attendance Board
8 fl, 44 Capital Blvd
10044 - 108 Street
CC: Principal Sloan, McNally High School
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
TAKE NOTICE THAT:
In the matter of SURETY for the LEGAL NAME, I believe that there has been a MISTAKE as the sole beneficiary has been INCORRECTLY IDENTIFIED as the accused. If we have led you to believe by responding to �you� or �SAXON ASHLEY RAYNE JENKINSON�, that would be a MISTAKE and please forgive us.
It is my knowledge that the name SAXON ASHLEY RAYNE JENKINSON is that of a negotiable security TRUST from the Canada Corporation of which my daughter is only Beneficiary of and myself, the Grantor.
Should this be a controversy directed at my daughter, please provide EVIDENCE of my daughter being PROPERTY of The Government of Alberta Corporation and/or provide EVIDENCE of the INTEREST of the Government of Alberta Corporation has in my daughter.
It is my knowledge that education is a RIGHT, not a �benefit� of the living on the LAND MASS otherwise known as Canada.
Please provide PROOF OF CLAIM in this matter as I have not seen any evidence of Claim of Injury and/or any other damage claim.
As such, I am returning your OFFER, DECLINED, for immediate DISCHARGE AND CLOSURE.
DATED at Edmonton, Alberta, this 20th day of March, 2013
Authorised by:
I believe she needs to get into the Supreme Court (not the family division of it - thats one of their tricks) and make a claim based on title - plain and simple - whose property are those living offspring (not the fictions) - highest title/claim of right. I have just read some of the earlier posts Brenda, and my heart goes out to you and your children.
Pierre, I would say her offspring have been stolen from the one having the highest claim of right/title to them. The common law doesnt look kindly upon thieves.
I would love to see how a fiction (CPS) could in any way evidence having higher title (equitable and legal) to the living offspring than a human parent.
BRENDA- be sure to listen to these guys, the guy Jonathan is from New Brunswick i think and he is dealing currently with having his kids STOLEN from him by CAS:
Be sure to dial in from 7 - 9 pm EST - Tonight 04/13/2013 because
Peter & Jonathan
will be doing a great call that you will not want to miss!
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/iamfreewill/2013/04/13/in-the-spirit-of-things
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/iamfreewill/
Call in to speak with the host: 646-478-4075
164. Fair hearing
(4) Without limiting the generality of subsection (3), that subsection does not preserve the validity of the proceeding if the failure to comply with the agreement results in PREJUDICE to the DEFENDANT'S RIGHT to a FAIR HEARING.
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90p33_e.htm#BK207
Scott Duncan I sent in several notices of mistake including one of them being that I mistakenly did not consent to the Temporary Care and Custody Order, but rather declining it. Please forgive me for my mistake. That seems to have done something. Cause normally I would have gotten another TC & CO by now with the judges stamp on it. What am I missing, what is the next step? thank you.
No proceeding is invalidated by reason only of a person�s failure to comply with the agreement, if this is what you are trying to point out is there an agreement if I have declined the offer? I'm just trying to understand, so if I appear stupid that is because I am.
I was however I couldn't get a good reading from the posts as to whether it was suitable or not so I didn't go through with it. Everybody on here is way more advanced than where i am, I am trying to play catch up. I feel like a high school student in with the second year university students and professor.
Again, its just me. But i would abandon statutory altogether. Your remedy ideally lies in an Inheritance jurisdiction-court. Do you want monetary-damages? Thats common law. Do you just want fairness and get your kids back? Thats a Court of Equity, but, you HAVE to CLAIM it. They will just not blindly give that jurisdiction to you.
Oh Brenda, so much to learn in such little time... Funny how this stuff seems to not matter until it really matters! We'll help you as much as we can...
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
3 The Supreme Court of Nova Scotia as constituted before this Act, a court of COMMON LAW and EQUITY possessing original and appellate jurisdiction in both civil and criminal cases, shall continue as the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia with original jurisdiction and as the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal with appellate jurisdiction for the Province.
http://nslegislature.ca/legc/statutes/judicatr.htm
Brenda, the rights you may wish to claim and assert are those grounded in the common law. However, the remedy sought will be that available through equity. Equity follows law. Entertaining statutory law greatly limits your rights and remedies.
There are some interesting things in this interview that pertain I think something about not allowing them to covert your name as it is a criminal action in the first place. I think that might give them some idea of where you stand. B?