. . . . enacted by the World Council in Geneva, for the protection of children.
Name of judge respectfully withheld while awaiting the results of a review by the Commission on Judicial Conduct.
See also:
Courtney's Kidz. . . my life, my joy, my happiness. . . stolen.
Victim of Violence
As of today, Dec. 26, 2011, U.S. agencies and responsible judicial authorities have failed to correct international human rights violations against two small children who are citizens of the United States and a vulnerable part of human society. If the offending judge does not take appropriate steps to correct these violations, great grandmother will file a complaint with the World Court.
Contacted authorities who have failed to make corrections of international human rights violations:
1. Arizona Dept. of Economic Security/ CPS;
2. AZ State Attorney General;
3. Juvenile Court;
4. AZ Supreme Court;
5. AZ Court of Appeals, put this case on the calendar but refused to examine it;
6. U.S. Justice Court, sent this complaint to the Regional Office 1x in San Francisco who has oversight over AZ Dept. of Economic Security/CPS;
7. Regional Office kept the case on it's desk for 6 months without any action. Upon inquiry for a status report, the Regional Office of the Dept. of Human and Health Services used a flimsy excuse to avoid the responsibility of a complex investigation, closed the case, rejected a request for a review and returned the complaint package to complaintee
8. A Petition was filed with the Superior Court of AZ for grandparent rights and that petition was forwarded to the AZ Juvenile Court where the violated laws originated, thus completing a full circle of an ineffective judicial system that does not protect the Human Rights of Children as instituted by the Geneva World Council.
The AZ Juvenile Court judge violated a U.S. Supreme Court ruling when she removed maternal great grandmother as a party to the case. In addition this AZ Juvenile Court judge has violated international laws on the human rights of children formulated by the Geneva World Council for the protection of children who are vulnerable members of human society. The Juvenile Court judge cited, on court record, the loss of parental rights of the mother of the children as the reason for removing me the maternal great grandmother as, "party to the case". The U.S. Supreme Court gives the loss of parental rights as as reason to allow grand parents to intervene in a court case:
[The court emphasized the importance of preserving family “integrity,” and “obviat[ing] the need for a non-familial placement” of the child. Id. at 73, 722 P.2d at 241. Bechtel creates a presumption in favor of permissive intervention by grandparents in a case in which the children are otherwise “parentless,” absent a showing that intervention would be contrary to the child's best interests. Id. at 72-73,
A complaint was filed with the AZ Commission On Judicial Conduct this month, December 2011.
This complaint is against Judge ____ of the Juvenile Court, located at 3131 W. Durango, Phoenix Arizona 85009. Case number xxxxxx. I was an intervener in this case for two of my great grandchildren for whom I will only use initials, M. C. and E. C.
Judge____ , erred when she deliberately sought to make M. C. and E. C. “parentless”, by dismissing me as an intervener in the case, in order to make the children available for adoption by non relatives. With this complaint I am presenting courtroom transcripts and cited laws confirming the wrongful conduct of Judge____ . I will demonstrate that Judge____ has, denied human rights guaranteed by The Geneva World Council on Human Rights for children, to M. C. and E. C., the minor great grandchildren of, myself, Courtney B. Napieralski.
Judge____ has effectuated this miscarriage of justice under the disguise of calling it, “in the best interest of the children”, when the truth of the matter is, no reasonable effort was made to contact or notify the relatives of M. C. and E. C. to give priority of placement of the children with their biological family, as required by law. Although I, the maternal great grandmother of M. C. and E. C. met all the state requirements to have the children returned to me, Judge____ refused to sustain due process of law. (Copies of certificates for family foster care attached.) [Transcript. Feb. 8, 2010. pag. 4. Li. 2 to li. 10.)(Transcript. Feb. 8, 2010. pag. 4. Li. 14 to pag. 5. Li. 17.)(Transcript. Feb. 8, 2010. pag. 6. li. 2. To pag. 7 li. 19] The evidentiary hearing that has been referenced repeatedly by Judge____ and the Assistant Arizona State Attorney General, in and of itself, did not hold to the law in which all information identified must me current. [Id. at 73, 722 P.2d at 241. 42 U.S.C. § 671 (a) (15)] The evidentiary hearing, held September 21, 2009, allowed information as much as 10 years old to be entered into court record.
On November 9, 2011, I submitted an application for grand parent rights to the Superior Court of Arizona. This petition was forwarded to Judge____ . A just ruling in favor of grandparent rights, before Judge____ , is not possible until she acknowledge and reverse her error and misinterpretation of the law that governs grand parent intervention in a case in which the children are otherwise, “parentless”, due to the loss of parental rights by both parents or death.
1. On February 8, 2010 at the Report and Review Hearing with Judge____ presiding, Arizona Assistant State Attorney General _____ , Esq. , requested the removal of Courtney B. Napieralski, as a party to the case on the grounds that the parental rights of LaSasha Cherry, my grand daughter, had now been severed. Judge____ granted this motion. [Transcript Re: Report and Review Hearing. Pag. 5. li. 1 - pag. 9. Li. 20: 8 Feb.2010]
According to the U.S. Supreme Court severance of parental rights is a reason to allow grand parents to intervene into a case in which the children are otherwise, "parentless". [“Grandparents, who are invested with a natural and abiding love for their grandchildren, should be allowed to intervene in the dependency process unless a specific showing is made that the best interest of the child would not be served thereby.” Id. at 73, 722 P.2d at 241.]
2. On February 8, 2010 Judge____ denied physical change of custody of M. C. and E. C. to great grandmother Courtney B. Napieralski. Judge____ cited the evidentiary hearing held February 8, 2010 to support her, “no change in physical custody”, ruling. The evidentiary hearing also included a miscarriage of law in that it did not hold to the guideline of identifying current relevant factors . [Id. at 72-74, 722 P.2d at 240-42.]
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights - Geneva World Council on Human Rights for Children [GWC]
1. Cited law: [1. States Parties undertake to respect the right of the child to preserve his or her identity, including nationality, name and family relations as recognized by law
without unlawful interference. [2. Where a child is illegally deprived of some or all of the elements of his or her identity, States Parties shall provide appropriate assistance and protection with a view to re-establishing speedily his or her identity.] [Article 8 - GWC]
Violation of cited law: When M. C. or E. C. attempt to come to me for hugs and kisses, they are jerked, spanked and physically restrained by their foster/adopt parents and foster grand parents without regard for the human rights of the children. I have eyewitnesses to this violation of the children’s rights. Judge____ has not taken any action to stop or prevent further abuse.
2. Cited law: [1. States Parties shall ensure that a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will, except when competent authorities subject to judicial review determine, in accordance with applicable law and procedures, that such separation is necessary for the best interests of the child. Such determination may be necessary in a particular case such as one involving abuse or neglect of the child by the parents or one where the parents are living separately and a decision must be made as to the child’s place of residence. ] [Article 9 - GWC]
Violation of Cited law: I the great grandmother of M. C. and E. C.. met all requirements of the state of Arizona for a foster/adopt placement of the children. This included getting my home licensed for Family Foster Care. Personal opinion in the form of socio-economic, racial and gender based bias prevented the children from returning home.
a. My home was licensed by the state of Arizona as a Family Foster Home. All safety requirements have been met.
b. I have received a Nationally Recognized PS-MAPPS Certificate for Kinship Foster/Adopt.
c. Continuing education is current as required.
d. CPR and First Aid cards are current.
e. I am with the AASK agency for adoption facilitation.
f. I am a blood relative with inherent familial love for M. C. and E. C..
g. I am the link to biological ancestry, culture and heredity.
h. The children and I are bonded. Id. at 73, 722 P.2d at 241
3. Cited law: [2. In any proceedings pursuant to paragraph 1 of the present article, all interested parties shall be given an opportunity to participate in the proceedings and make their views known.] [Article 9 - GWC]
Violation of cited law: Adoption proceedings were held without notification to relatives.
4. Cited law [3. States Parties shall respect the right of the child who is separated from one or both parents to maintain personal relations and direct contact with both parents on a regular basis, except if it is contrary to the child’s best interest.] [Article 9 - GWC]
Violation of cited law: The foster / adopt parents are denying the children their human right to spend time with their biological family although the children have expressed their desire to be with their family. There has been no action on the part of Judge____ to correct this legal violation.
5. Cited law: 2. In any proceedings pursuant to paragraph 1 of the present article, all interested parties shall be given an opportunity to participate in the proceedings and make their views known.] [Article 9 - GWC]
Violation of cited law: Adoption procedures have been instituted without notification to the biological family of M. C. and E. C.
6. Cited law: [4. Where such separation results from any action initiated by a State Party, such as the detention, imprisonment, exile, deportation or death (including death arising from any cause while the person is in the custody of the State) of one or both parents or of the child, that State Party shall, upon request, provide the parents of the child or, if appropriate, another member of the family with the essential information concerning the whereabouts of the absent member(s) of the family unless the provision of the information would be detrimental to the well-being of the child. States Parties shall further ensure that the Submission of such a request shall of itself entail no adverse consequences for the person(s) concerned.] [Article 9 - GWC]
Violation of cited law: The foster/adopt parents and ADES/CPS are withholding essential information regarding the whereabouts of M. C. and E. C. and are treating them like hostages rather than children with human rights. [“Transcript. Feb 8, 2010. Re: Report and Review Hearing”. pag. 7 Li. 1 to pag. 8 li. 12]
United States Supreme Court
1. Cited law: [The court emphasized the importance of preserving family “integrity,” and “obviat[ing] the need for a non-familial placement” of the child. Id. at 73, 722 P.2d at 241. Bechtel creates a presumption in favor of permissive intervention by grandparents in a case in which the children are otherwise “parentless,” absent a showing that intervention would be contrary to the child's best interests. [Id. at 72-73, 722 P.2d at 240-41."]
[G]randparents should be allowed to intervene in their parentless grandchildren's dependency proceedings unless it would not be in the child's best interest. Before ruling on a motion to intervene, the juvenile court should consider and weigh the relevant factors identified today, and only if they show that intervention would not be in the best interest of the child should intervention be denied.
First, although Bechtel may be narrowly viewed as a case about grandparents' rights, it is fundamentally a case about the best interests of the child. [Id. at 72-74, 722 P.2d at 240-42.] The court harmonized this guiding principle with the notion of grandparents' rights and the inherent desirability of preserving family ties and concluded: “[Grandparents, who are invested with a natural and abiding love for their grandchildren, should be allowed to intervene in the dependency process unless a specific showing is made that the best interest of the child would not be served thereby.” Id. at 73, 722 P.2d at 241. 42 U.S.C. § 671 (a) (15)]
Violation of cited law: The Juvenile Court has permitted CPS and foster parents B. and M. to sever all interactions between M. C. and E. C. and their biological family. This permission does not harmonize with national or international laws, nor does it fit Judge ____’s stated conclusion. “The Court specifically finds that Ms. Napieralski clearly loves her great grandchildren, as well as her grandchildren . . .”.
[“Transcript. November 18, 2009. Re: Contested Severance”. pag. 4 Li. 21 to pag. 5 li. 5]
LaSasha the mother of M. C. and E. C.. killed herself after losing her parental rights. It is only right that I be allowed to raise the two children that she left behind that they may know and feel the familial love inherent in me. To know, feel and experience inherent grandparent love is in the best interest of the children. Almost without exception children who are separated from their biological family when allowed to choose, will return to their biological family.
Federal law requires children to be allowed to return home when conditions prove to be safe. A home study had been done and my home was determined to be a safe place for M. C. and E. C. Separating children from their biological family with whom they are bonded, when there is no safety issue, is cruel and unusual punishment. The Geneva World Counsel gives recognition to the fact that children are humans with rights that must be honored.
"Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution – Protection of rights not specifically enumerated in the Constitution. Children's rights are the human rights of children with particular attention to the rights of special protection and care afforded to the young,[1] including their right to association with both biological parents, including the right to be raised by their grandparents or other family members in the absence of parents".
Preventing the return of the children to their biological family is a violation of the children’s civil and human rights and is an illegal, unethical and unjust stripping of my great grandchildren’s identity just like the slaves of long ago who by the time they ended their journey to the United States, these African men and women could not tell you where they were from or who their parents were. They could not tell you about their history or wonderful culture. The first, essential step of the slaver was to cut off any connection with their culture and their ancestry. They were without a name, without a face, without a voice and without an advocate.
They had no advocate when children were torn away from their mothers as soon as they were able to walk, talk, and perform for themselves. They had no advocate as African American families were literally sold down the river, torn apart, and separated throughout this great land. They had no advocate even though they made millions of dollars for their masters, built the White House and the Congress buildings, as well as great homes throughout the South, and, as many, out of shame, like to forget, throughout the North.
The rights of M. C. and E. C. are protected under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in particular Social and Cultural Rights, statues and relevant instruments of specialized agencies and international agencies concerned with the welfare of children.
Judge____ and ADES/CPS have not taken into consideration the importance of traditions and culture of M. C. and E. C. and their “right” to remain connected. They have been up rooted and stripped of their heritage which is a violation of international law.
The World Summit Declaration made it clear that all children must be given the chance to find their identity and realize their worth in a safe and supportive environment. It further recognized that children should, from their early years, be encouraged to participate in the cultural life of their societies, and it appealed to children to act as special partners in meeting the challenge of the Summit goals. Never- the-less despite my complaints M. C. and E. C.. has through CPS and the Juvenile Court, remained in an environment that has stripped them of these rights. Judge____ gave M. the authority to sever contact with the biological family if she chose to do so. On August 29, 2010, without explanation, B. and M. severed all contact between M. C. and E. C. and their biological family. [Article 8].”] [Transcript. February 8, 2010. "Report and Review". Pag. 10. li. 24 to pag. 11., li 11]
Socio-economic racial prejudice in favor of a Caucasian couple has prevented the return of minor children M. C. and E. C. to their maternal great grandmother. There is no doubt in my mind that M. C. and E. C would have been returned to me long ago had the foster parents been of the African decent. A demonstration of partiality was displayed when Judge____ refused initially to process my appeal of her, “no change in physical custody,” ruling. To quote Jacob Schmitt, MPA, Department of Economic Security, Child Welfare Program Administrator, Division of Children, Youth and Families, was, “The Court found that the written request did not meet the statutory requirements nor did it comply with the Rules of Procedure for Juvenile Court or the Arizona Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure. On February 8, 2010, the Court released you as a party to the case.” (Schmitt, Jacob. 18 Feb. 2010. Letter) This highlights the Court’s propensity to by rote, repeat legal rhetoric and ultimately call it, “in the best interest of the children“.
The fact is, an appeal can be submitted on a blank sheet of paper as long as all required information is included; there is no special form for submitting an appeal.
In addition, to emphasize the socio economic, racial prejudice that has permeated this case and held M. C. and E. C. hostage, please note the words of Judge____ as she addresses foster mom M. in reference to Courtney B. Napieralski (after Courtney has exited the courtroom): [“Well she is a very difficult person to work with. And what was clear during the contested change in physical custody to the maternal great grandmother is that she’s very controlling and that was litigated extensively that everything had to be under her terms and her conditions and if it wasn’t there was going to be a consequence. (This is an erroneous remark against a relative, fighting desperately for the rights of her family, without legal representation, in a court of law.) And so if this adoption goes through and the children are legally free, completely legally free, that’s a call that you as the prospective adoptive parents make. That is wonderful that you are that willing and open to see down the line for these kids and that issues may come up and be willing to open your heart to that. But that will definitely be in your sole discretion as to how that would play out.”] [Transcript.February 8, 2010. "Report and Review". pag 10. li. 24 to pag. 11., li 11]
With those words Judge____ took all power and authority away from, national and international law, including The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights - Geneva World Council on Human Rights for Children and invested it in foster mom, M.. In addition, with those words Judge____ demonstrated her intent to deliberately make M. C. and E. C. orphans so the foster parents could adopt them.
Removing me as party to the case, to deliberately make the children available for adoption by B. and M. is unethical as well as discriminatory. The law dictates that relatives must be given priority above non relatives. In my case, a blood relative whose home has been approved as a Arizona state licensed family foster home. Prior to M. (a Caucasian woman) foster parent arrival into the picture, ADES/CPS thought I was wonderful. “The children are happy and thriving”, were the reports of guardian ad litem Kate Rich and CPS Tanya to the Juvenile court, while M. C., and E. C., were in my custody. This situation is nothing more than socio, economic, racial prejudice. Services to Families in Crisis - AS MANDATED BY U.S. STATUE 42 671“The family courts, almost without fail - accepts preprinted ‘reasonable efforts’ forms from caseworkers. . . without question.
I, the maternal great grand mother was made a party to the case prior to the termination of the mother’s rights. It is therefore morally, ethically, and judicially inappropriate on the part of ADES/CPS to request the court to remove me as an intervener in the case on the basis of my grand daughter’s loss of parental rights. . This action is not in the best interest of the children and was clearly for the purpose of making the children available for adoption to the non relative foster parents. This action in itself is an illegal, unethical violation of the civil rights of the children and myself. Judge____ erred by granting such a request.
Please note, although it is my application for, “Grandparent Rights”, (Dated Nov. 9, 2011) that has been forwarded to Judge____ , via The Superior Family Court of Arizona, it continues to be my desire to have full custody of M. C. and E. C. I can only hope that under the scrutiny of the Commission for Judicial Conduct, Judge____ will put aside her own bias and enforce, national and international laws enacted by The Geneva World Council on Human Rights for children.
May government, in its finality, prove to be “By the people and for the people” that there may be justice for all.
I have also requested that the Court not require an additional grandparent’s rights fee since I paid the filing fee on March 19, 2009; case #(xxxxxx) closed without grandparent rights being established due to the open case xxxxx.
It was in fact, Judge____ who told me to go to the Family Court to file for grandparent rights. After doing so, I was told by the Superior Family Court that I had been misinformed.
Finally, if human rights are not achieved for M. C., E. C. and their biological family, through the United States government and Judge____ , I will present my complaint to specialized international agencies concerned with the welfare and human rights of children, who have the power and authority to effect a reversal of rulings in any country of the world and enforce laws enacted by The International World Council for Human Rights of Children.
See also:
Courtney's Kidz. . . my life, my joy, my happiness. . . stolen.
Victim of Violence