|
LAWSUIT IN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
CIVIL ACTION NO. 03-RB-1743 (MJW)
If ever it was possible for a woman with no money, no attorney and an I.Q of 85 to win a lawsuit against 5 attorneys and a corrupt and abusive government agency because she has been wronged and the law is on her side, this great country is the place where that is supposed to happen. The question to be resolved is, does the rule of law really apply in our courts or will politics decide the outcome?
Last Updated July 25, 2005 - Purchase a printable copy of this page*
Article by eyewitness about Fremont County
ATTENTION: RETALIATION AGAINST POLITICAL SPEECH AND OTHER FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS - Ashley Fields seized again by Fremont County on the same day Grandmother Christine Korn mobilizes the community to dethrone Judge Julie Marshall. As of June, 2005, Ashley is kept in foster care for 8 MONTHS with NO TREATMENT PLAN, NO ADJUDICATION, AND NO SAFETY ISSUES IN THE FAMILY HOME. Read the story.
Meconi files ANOTHER UPL complaint against our director. Read the story.
BACKGROUND - First case
On April, 15, 2003, a series of events was set into motion by state actors and their cohorts who oppose the activities of the American Family Advocacy Center’s (AFAC) scrutiny into child protection practices. Their actions were designed to prevent our director, Suzanne Shell, from having any contact with a parent whose child was taken by Fremont County, Colorado Department of Humans Services (DHS) for allegedly having untreated head lice. Ashley has contracted lice once or twice at school, which April and Christine promptly treated. April Fields has been subjected to constant harassment by the school nurse (making multiple documented false reports of head lice) and by DHS because they believe she should not have care of her daughter. April and Ashley live safely with April’s mom, Christine Korn and her two younger brothers, Bill and Cody. April refused their efforts to make her get her own place, believing she was better able to care for her child in her extended family home. The living arrangement is beneficial to all household members who have the right to live together as a family without any state agency interfering.
PLAYERS
Suzanne Shell - Director, American Family Advocacy Center
April Fields - A parent who requested help from AFAC. She is 32 and a high school graduate. She is a remarkable woman who has exhibited an extraordinary courage in the face of her oppressors.
Ashley - April’s daughter (8). She has suffered the most, to the great despair of her mother. Ashley is terrified of DHS and her GAL because of her fear that they will take her away from her mom again.
Christine Korn - April’s mom, who is helping her daughter due to April’s disability which includes epilepsy and developmental delay with I.Q. of 85. April lives with Christine, is the primary caregiver for Ashley and maintains the house while Christine works.
Rocco Meconi - Fremont County Attorney representing Fremont County DHS
Dawn Rivas - DHS caseworker assigned to Fields’ case. She appears to be the front line puppet who is being used to forward the agendas of the other defendants. She has made it clear that her paycheck is more important to her than any issue of right or wrong or Ashley’s well being. She has also made it clear that if April dropped the lawsuit, DHS would not be a threat to Ashley. She, along with her watchdog-in-attendance, Wanda Duvall, has been a valuable source of inside information.
Todd Hannenberg - Rivas immediate supervisor, allowing his and his caseworker’s professional discretion to be overridden by the agenda of the county attorney. Another apparent puppet who has sold his professional integrity for his paycheck.
Steve Clifton - Director of Fremont County DHS. Suzanne has had dealings with him as far back as 1997. He reportedly left his previous post in Teller County, at the request of the County Commissioners due to an alleged shortfall of funds reported by one of the former county commissioners to be in the neighborhood of $400,000.00.
Judge Julie Marshall - Judge hearing the Fields’ D&N case. Suzanne and her clients have been consistently subjected to retaliation from the bench since 1997 with this judge. Background on Julie Marshall MORE BACKGROUND ON “Her Honor”: Judge orders sex offender to be permitted contact with victims and unsupervised contact with community children When the child victim cries and pleads with the judge to not force her to have contact the perp, Her Honor reportedly tells the child victim that she needs to learn to deal with it. We learned that “Her Honor” called the paper that published this article and demanded a retraction upon pain of . . .? Who does she think she is that she can practice official censorship in spite of the right to freedom of the press?
Anna Hall Owen - GAL for Ashley. Has privately divulged some ‘dirt’ on certain other defendants in an effort to insinuate herself into the good graces of Christine and April. Despite her efforts to ‘be friends’ her true nature is revealed in court.
Jolene Devries - Owen’s attorney, also witness to and/or participant in prior violations of Suzanne’s constitutionally protected rights in Fremont County.
Dan Kender - April’s first court appointed attorney. Kender cannot claim any immunity, he appears to be the most vulnerable to lose this suit. Given the predatory nature of his codefendants and his tendency to appear a dolt, it wouldn’t surprise us if he becomes the sacrificial lamb.
Dan Slater - GAL appointed for April
Roger Larsen - April’s second court appointed attorney. Refused to call any witnesses or submit any evidence for April’s D&N trial.
LOCATION: Fremont County, Colorado
TIMELINE
February 2, 2003 - AFAC was contacted by Christine Korn, who requested assistance with April Fields’ Dependency & Neglect (D&N) case. Suzanne advised Christine that she could not give any case specific legal advise nor draft legal documents, but she could provide that information to April’s attorney. However, Suzanne also told Christine that if April’s attorney did not want her services, there was nothing she could do to help with the case. As an alternative, Suzanne asked if April would be interested in have her story included in the documentary video project Suzanne was working on. April agreed to allow Suzanne to have access to all information and to be video taped for inclusion in the documentary. Suzanne requested that Christine provide her with whatever documentation was available for use in the documentary video project.
February 3, 2003 - April Fields, through Christine, hired Suzanne Shell as an expert consultant and provided her with a limited power of attorney (pursuant to C.R.S. 15-1-1300 et. seq.) so that Suzanne could speak with Dan Kender, and get access to April’s case file, which is permitted under the Colorado Children’s Code, C.R.S. 19-1-307(2)(e).
February 25, 2003 - Suzanne sent a letter to Dan Kender, April’s attorney, advising him that she had been hired by April, along with a copy of the power of attorney. Suzanne also advised him in a separate fax to instruct the Guardian ad litem (GAL) and caseworkers not to attempt to speak to April unless Kender was present. Suzanne advised Kender not to reveal her association with April because of the very real fear of retaliation against April by DHS and the court (Judge Julie Marshall). Kender never responded.
Sometime between these dates, April files several documents with the court because her efforts to get her attorney to provide effective assistance of counsel were going unanswered. Kender not only refused to return April’s calls, he blocked her from sending E-mails to him. Suzanne continued to receive updates on the case but was not aware of what documents April filed or that she was filing them.
March 13, 2003 - April files a grievance with the Attorney Regulation Counsel against Kender.
April 14, 2003 - April notifies Rivas and Owen about their acts which violate her rights and demands them to correct or prevent said violations.
April 15, 2003 - Owen calls April, furious about being ‘threatened.” She stated her intent to engage in ex-parte communication with the judge regarding this, and advising the judge that April was being uncooperative and difficult. Owen advised April that making all this noise about rights violations and making all these demands was “just making things worse” and stated that Christine should “Butt out” and let April handle her own case. Owen implied that April’s attitude would delay reunification.
April 15, 2003 - A hearing is held without the knowledge or consent of April, at the request of Dan Kender. The purpose of this hearing was to advise the court that Suzanne was associating with April and to seek some remedy for the problems that association posed for Kender and DHS. Judge Marshall appoints a GAL for April. April is never advised of this and finds out only by checking the court file. Transcript of hearing HTML and resultant Status Conference Order
April 16, 2003 - Motion filed by DHS to add Suzanne Shell to April’s D&N case as a special respondent for the purposes of restricting her contact with April. C.R.S. 19-3-503 Special Respondent limitations.
April 16, 2003 - Meconi filed a complaint with the Attorney Regulation Counsel Unauthorized Practice of Law (UPL) Committee against Suzanne, stating that Suzanne was giving legal advice and drafting documents for April and another client. He based his complaint on the fact that Suzanne had attended and observed court hearings on both cases and enclosed ‘proof’ which consisted solely of documents that are freely available from this and other web sites. UPL trial information - membership pages only.
April 18, 2003 - GAL Anna Owen filed motion in support of DHS motion to add Suzanne as Special respondent.
April 23, 2003 - Suzanne is served with a copy of the motion (NOT a summons) to add her as Special Respondent to April’s case.
April 25, 2003 - In an effort to prevent DHS and the rest from violating Suzanne’s and April’s rights, Suzanne filed a complaint (03 CV 743) and a request for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) in the U.S. District Court in Denver. The TRO is denied. The complaint alleges violations of freedom of the press, freedom of association, freedom of speech, viewpoint discrimination and denial of due process.
April 26, 2003 - Suzanne meets and speaks with April for the first time. All prior communication has been with Christine.
April 29, 2003 - Hearing to add Suzanne as Special Respondent Suzanne is not permitted an opportunity to be heard, however she attempts to submit a Motion and Affidavit for Change of Judge which the judge refuses to hear because she is ‘not a party’ to the case. April and Christine are called as witnesses. The hearing is continued to May 5, 2003. NOTE - the transcript on this case is inaccurate and has been tampered with. We had the gallery packed with witnesses who took notes. Items missing from this ‘official’ record include: omitting critical testimony by Christine Korn including but not limited to her testimony that Suzanne advised her during their first conversation that Suzanne could not provide case specific legal advice or draft legal documents but that she could work with Fields attorney as a consultant; and omitting Judge Marshall’s verbatim comments to Suzanne including but not limited to “Sit down and shut up” in response to Suzanne’s objections to the hearing; and order Suzanne to ‘Shut up’ when she whispered to Christine but allowed other persons in the gallery to whisper, and regarding the content of Suzanne’s actual objections which included but is not limited to being joined to the case as a special respondent and not being allowed to be represented by counsel and not being permitted to cross examine witnesses and evidence or to present evidence. Suzanne was so afraid of being arrested on some trumped-up contempt charge that she removed her jewelry and gave it to her associate to hold in case she was arrested. Additionally, Suzanne and her associate were subjected to intensified search upon entry to the courthouse. Suzanne had already obtained the rules regarding use of recorders and cameras in the public areas of the courthouse and she had her tape recorder with her to document reactions for the documentary. Her associate had his still camera. Judge Marshall sent her bailiff to harass Suzanne and her associate, demanding they return the tools of their trade to the car before entering the courtroom. Suzanne has never attempted to record in a courtroom without first filing a formal request for Expanded Media Coverage, and has never been subjected to individualized public harassment about the tools of her trade by any other court. She has appeared in many courts around the country without being forced to return her tape recorder to her car before entering a courtroom. Neither has she ever seen another media representative being similarly harassed by this or any other court. Another report on this hearing.
May 5, 2003 - Suzanne does not appear at this hearing. (transcript of both days PDF ) She was not instructed that her appearance was required at the prior hearing, and she has not been served a summons to appear. No more witnesses are examined. The judge orders Suzanne added to the case as a special respondent, orders her to have no contact with April and invalidates the Power of attorney between Suzanne and April. Order. This order effectively imposes a prior restraint on Suzanne’s news gathering, and denies April and Suzanne their right to associate. Suzanne’s plans to interview April after this hearing are forbidden, which compromises her documentary.
May 21, 2003 - U.S. District Court orders Suzanne not to act as April’s agent under the power of attorney for this case.
May 21, 2003 - Suzanne filed objection to order and motion to reconsider. Court denies.
The usual flurry of motions and responses are filed, which are ultimately all dismissed pending Suzanne’s and April’s filings of Supplemental Pleadings.
May 29, 2003 - April files motion to add Christine as Next Friend.
June 25, 2003 - Status Conference at U.S. District Court @ 3:30 PM. During this hearing, Magistrate Judge Wantanabe accuses Suzanne of preparing April’s documents. Suzanne has been meticulously avoiding April due to the Fremont County court order and has also not had much contact with Christine for fear of these very allegations resurfacing. Suzanne attempts to impress this upon the judge, who has chosen to interpret her written objection as proof that she is drafting legal documents for April in violation of the prior court order that she does not draft anything for April. Suzanne insists that she is not drafting documents for April or even speaking to April. She assures the court that she has not violated its order. The court then turns his attention to Christine, who is sitting in the gallery. She was called to the podium and interrogated and ultimately threatened with UPL. Christine asks the court to clarify that if April is unable to represent herself, and if she cannot obtain a lawyer, does that mean she cannot protect herself when her rights are violated.
The court then declared a settlement conference and had Suzanne and April taken to a conference room while the defendants remained in the courtroom. After some delay, His Honor Magistrate Judge Wantanabe finally arrived and demanded to know what remedies they were seeking. Instead of listening to their reply, he began to badger them about what could happen if they didn’t withdraw this suit. He displayed complete ignorance of the Special Respondent provision in the Colorado Children’s Code despite the fact that he professed to have been Juvenile Court judge. He demanded to know why Suzanne had to cover this issue, that Channel 9 had already done a piece on this. Suzanne advised His Honor that she did not need state approval or permission to engage in news gathering, and that the state had no say in what is considered newsworthy and what is not.
His Honor also stated that pro-se plaintiffs never win in Federal Court. His next suggestion was that Suzanne’s remedy would have been to violate Judge Julie Marshall’s order and be arrested! Suzanne was appalled that she should be advised to violate a court order! This is exactly the type of conduct her detractors love to accuse her of! She has had to be extremely circumspect in her conduct so as to give nobody any reason to arrest her or prevent her from engaging in her lawful activities or give them any reason to make any potentially valid derogatory statements about her.
His Honor then advised them that he had trained Judge Julie Marshall and really didn’t believe she would do what they were accusing her of. He ended by stating that if this case was dismissed, that he could impose court costs and attorney fees on April and Suzanne and they should seriously consider withdrawing their complaint. Suzanne realized this was not a status conference, it was an intimidation session.
As they left the courthouse, they overheard DHS’s attorney claim that he had been advised by the court that this case was on a ‘fast track.’
June 26, 2003 - Court denies Christine Korn’s Next Friend Motion.
July 10, 2003 - April files supplemental pleading. Suzanne files supplemental pleading.
November 7, 2003 - Suzanne and April file Requests for Admissions, Interrogatories and Production of Documents. Deadline for this discovery passes without the defendants making any discovery requests of Suzanne or April. See below for content of these documents
November 25, 2003 - Defendant Kender submits his responses to Suzanne. He has denied or objected to nearly everything, without explanation. Kender’s responses to April’s requests are all objected to. In effect, Kender’s replies are non-responsive.
December 1, 2003 - Defendant Owen files Motion for Protective Orders seeking the court to order that she not be required to comply with discovery requests from Suzanne and April. She fails to conform to D.C.Colo.L.Civ.R (local rule) 7.1(A) Duty to Confer before filing a motion. In this motion, she attaches the requests for Admissions, Interrogatories and Production of Documents for inclusion in the court file.
December 2, 2003 - Pursuant to D.C.Colo.L.Civ.R 7.1(A) Counsel for DHS, Meconi, etc. confers with the plaintiffs and requests additional time to respond to discovery. Suzanne does not oppose his request to seek additional time. April does not respond.
December 5, 2003 - Defendant DHS, etc. Counsel files motion for Protective Orders (this is a pretty large file). He also attaches all discovery requests to his motion.
This attorney withdrew his request for additional time and decided to also seek protective orders AFTER receiving Owen’s Motion for Protective Orders. Prior to this, he expressed no problem with the requests as they were submitted.
December 16, 2003 - After attempting to confer with Defendants regarding her intention to seek sanctions and offering to resolve the dispute regarding discovery requests, Suzanne files Responses to Strike Owen’s motion for Protective Order and DHS’s etc. similar motion.. She also files Motion for Order Compelling Discovery and Motion for Sanctions. The defendants do not respond to her attempts to confer.
December 16, 2003 - April discovers a document in the Fremont County court file which exhibits that DHS is trying to find a way to keep April’s case open beyond the 90 days agreed upon.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST - DHS AND FREMONT COUNTY COURT ARE NAMED AS DEFENDANT IN LAWSUIT AND CONTINUES TO EXERCISE JURISDICTION AND CONTROL OVER APRIL’S CASE. We must remember, that although Dawn Rivas is named as a defendant in this lawsuit, she is still having contact with April in the capacity as her DHS caseworker. One wonders why the attorney representing her in this lawsuit has not advised her not to speak with the plaintiff, April Fields. Even though April is suing Dawn in Federal Court, Rivas is still exercising control over April’s D&N case. She literally confessed to April that she had no choice in what she was doing to April and Ashley with the DHS case, stating that her superiors were making her do it - she was instructed to follow Meconi’s instructions explicitly. It is worthy to note that Rivas signed the “Report to the Court” that April discovered, and as such, is personally accountable for that endorsement (remember, Rivas, like the other defendants, has been sued in her personal and professional capacity). While this may appear to be an egregious conflict of interest to most people, that obvious fact appears to have escaped the notice of Judge Marshall and the defendants, or perhaps, they simply attach little or no relevance to it.
Like many readers undoubtedly wonder, AFAC can only arrive at one conclusion to explain why the defendants named on this lawsuit are still exercising a position of authority and control over April’s D&N case - it’s pretty transparent to anyone who has a reasonably developed sense of right and wrong. FREMONT COUNTY PLAYERS ROCCO MECONI, JUDGE JULIE MARSHALL AND OTHERS ARE HOLDING an innocent child, ASHLEY HOSTAGE IN ORDER TO CONTROL ADULT POLITICAL BEHAVIOR that is PROTECTED BY THE STATE AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONS.
December 18, 2003 - The district court has NOT dismissed this lawsuit yet, and April refuses to drop her complaint. The defendants, who have absolute power and control over April and her daughter, have escalated their efforts against April, and threatened Ashley’s continued placement in her mother’s home in a D&N court hearing held today.
April was concerned that her attorney, Roger Larson, would not attempt to rebut the report, so she prepared her own rebuttal and statement to be submitted at this hearing. Judge Marshall appeared intently interested in who wrote that report, more interested in the author than in the facts which were contained in the report. She reportedly badgered poor April who kept insisting that her brother helped her write it. Her Honor stated that she did not believe April and continued to insist she could not have looked up the laws. April said she found them on the Internet. Her Honor, Owen and April’s GAL, Dan Slater, reportedly were vicious toward April. April was furious at Slater for jeopardizing her legal interests so severely in this court hearing.
While acknowledging on the record that April has successfully completed the treatment plan, and that Ashley has been well cared for, they raised an entirely new issue. Based on the reports which April had found 2 days earlier, Judge Marshall once again added a Special Respondent to April's case, April's friend Thad. Thad never received a summons as required by statute and did not appear in court. You see, Thad lives in another county, just like Suzanne does. Thad had no opportunity to hear the allegations against him, to hear the evidence against him, to challenge the evidence against him, and has no right of appeal. Evidently, Judge Marshall is a law unto herself. April's case has been extended to March.
Threats issued - AFAC has received a report that some of the defendants, and others associated with them, have threatened to ‘get’ Suzanne Shell, describing certain tactics explicitly.
Magistrate Judge Wantanabe’s Recommendation on Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss - recommending dismissal.
U.S. DISTRICT COURT CASE DISMISSED This case was dismissed based on Rooker-Feldman - in error. April and Suzanne appealed it. The dismissal was upheld. Less than two months later, the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated the reason for this dismissal in the Exxon Mobile case - deciding that Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not apply to cases like this one. This decision occurred too late for Suzanne and April.
Defendant Kender proved his legal incompetence and was not permitted to file a appeal brief because he:
- Filed untimely
- Did not file in the proper format and failed to do so when given a second chance
It seems that Suzanne’s and April’s legal reasoning was, again, superior to Rocco Meconi’s.
Rocco Meconi continues his abusive harassment of this family and Suzanne Shell. The entire account is published on our membership pages.
Courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear - not absence of fear. Mark Twain
|
