can not believe this is legal
or constitutional in any way without
committing a crime.
what right could they steal your
time and money for this? To deny
you freedom (time) and property
(money) they must convict you of
some crime according to the constitution.
It is blackmail for visitation?
I would ask for a complete trial
by jury under the constitution as
denying you freedom, property etc.
requires you commit a crime of some
kind and is not appropriate in civil
If it comes down
to counseling and being ordered
to do so...
1. The divorce
or custody proceedings are civil in
2. Ordering one
party to counseling in no way "makes
whole" the moving party and therefore
should not be allowable relief for
the moving party.
3. It should only
be ordered if both parties are equally
forced into counseling on a finding
of need or upon agreement of both
The purpose of a
civil case is to make whole and having
one party go to counseling actually
harms the other person and does not
make either party whole in the civil
suit. If it is demanded for one, automatically
be prepared to fight it and disobey
the order or otherwise request it
Also if you are
ordered to something against your
will... then ask that the court/state
pay for the expense since they took
away your choice or argue that it
is an unfunded mandate and that you
will not pay for it.
Don't let them
call an apple anything but an apple
Very well put. A
civil suit does not carry a high enough
protection for the litigants to abridge
constitutionally protected rights.
Resist any coercive measures that
abridge your rights. You can only
surrender your protected liberties
in a civil suit they cannot be taken
away, because the suit is between
the parties. There is not sufficient
burden of proof to take/abridge the
rights. If more people understood
this, it would make these fights a
What did they
do to conclude you should have that
Were you interviewed
by a psychologist?
Did they have
a particular diagnosis? (just
a yes or no, personal info not being
What is the statutory
authority to order this?
Who was the Judge?
What happens if
you do not go?
Is there a probation
order of sort attached to this?
Is there a specific
person you must see, or is any one
of your choice allowed?
Outrageous rates. More leeching off
We hold these truths
to be self-evident, that all men are
created equal, that they are endowed
by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life,
Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That
to secure these rights, Governments
are instituted among Men, deriving
their just powers from the consent
of the governed, --That whenever any
Form of Government becomes destructive
of these ends, it is the Right of
the People to alter or to abolish
it, and to institute new Government,
laying its foundation on such principles
and organizing its powers in such
form, as to them shall seem most likely
to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that
Governments long established should
not be changed for light and transient
causes; and accordingly all experience
hath shewn, that mankind are more
disposed to suffer, while evils are
IS THIS EVIL SUFFERABLE OR INSUFFERABLE?
IF is sufferable, take it on the chin,
if it is not sufferable, then don't
STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS!
THE ORDERS ARE VOID AB INITIO, because
they where based on Perjury, Fraud,
Lack of Notice, Violation of Due Process,
Violation of Rights & Violations
under color of law!
Since this was questioned, as to why
a MANDAMUS was issued in this case:
A writ of mandate is appropriate for
challenging the constitutionality
or validity of official acts. Bramberg
v. Jones, 20 Cal. 4th 1045, 1055 (1999).
A writ of mandate is particularly
appropriate to compel a government
official to perform a ministerial
act. California Educational Facilities
Authority v. Priest, 12 Cal. 3d 593,
Do not declare that you are
not going to follow an order because
once it is ordered it is "lawful"
until properly challenged.
Make sure that you properly
object to anything that infringes
upon your right, do your best
to document that there is no real
authority behind the order,
remind them that it is a civil case
between the parties and that
the relief requested serves no purpose
to make whole the complainor.
Let them know you do not have
the money to do what they order. They
will attempt to contempt you,
let it be placed on the record that
you don't have the money but
if they pay for it, you would be happy
do this simultaneously while
challenging the authority through
motion for reconsideration and
on appeal. Think in syllagisms when