OBJECTION TO HEARING
(Note: this document may not be a true and accurate copy of the filed document)
I, Cindy Dumas, Petitioner, hereby object to the short set hearing on Sept. 29th, the companion matter being added by Respondent at an illegal ex parte and testimony by his witnesses being taken.
The hearing on Sept. 29th was short set unilaterally by the court at an ex parte on September 14, 2011 which I had called for an emergency/temporary change of custody. Neither I nor Respondent asked for a short set hearing, therefore, the Court was acting in excess of its jurisdiction when it forced one on us at my ex parte.
The purpose of my ex parte was solely for an emergency change of custody to me in order that Damon could be able to come out of hiding from Respondent so he could get back to school, while in the meantime we could adjudicate the relevant issues in time, specifically with enough time for a fair evidentiary hearing and due process.
Additional to the hearing having been illegally short set by the court, I have just today been served with Respondent’s paperwork from his illegal ex parte on Sept. 22nd, where he appeared and was granted relief requested without having given me proper notice and without me being there. I informed the clerk, Michelle, who informed Alksne that there had not been proper notice given as per CRC 3.1204 (a) (1) and (2) and that the hearing should be postponed until I got proper notice and could know the specifics of the companion matter requested. Judge Alksne held the hearing and granted whatever relief Respondent asked for. Since I just received the papers today, there is no time to respond or prepare to argue his motion. Again a violation of due process.
Because the hearing should not have been short set, there is no time for me to respond to Respondent’s ex parte motion, no time to prepare a case, no time for Damon to find someone to represent him, and because there is a Statement of Disqualification pending, has led to a Statement of Disqualification, the hearing cannot and should not take place. [Note: Damon will not accept or speak with a court appointed minor’s counsel due to a conflict of interest and the past ones not advocating for him and instead working with the court to force him back to Respondent. [See youtube video from 2010.])
Further, the court stated at the ex parte that Damon would not be allowed to testify at the Sept. 29th hearing about the abuse, which shows extreme bias towards Damon and me. Respondent is continuing to accuse me of versions of parental alienation (this time “revenge” and “influence”). The justifiable reasons for any statements and actions Damon or I may have taken is that he was sexually assaulted by Respondent. That is our case and our defense against the accusations of alienation. If that testimony is excluded, the same thing will happen as in the last three years—I will be found to be alienating, my children will be removed from me and this time I will likely be placed in contempt and put in jail. Damon will be put in a camp or severely punished for taking action to protect himself.
In order for due process, Damon and I must have time to prepare and present our cases.
Further, I have challenged Judge Alksne for cause as per CCP 170 in a Statement of Disqualification filed today, September 28, 2011, therefore there can be no further hearings at this point.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
September 28, 2011 ____________________________
Cindy Dumas, Petitioner
