DCFS DIRECTOR PHILLIP L. BROWNING IS KILLING LOS ANGELES CHILDREN

WHY DID PHILLIP L. BROWNING FAILED TO INVESTIGATE THE FOLOWING CASE?


SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

STEPHANIE M. WILSON No. VD065587

Petitioner

HASHIM M. BOMANI

Respondent

________________________________________

I, HASHIM M. BOMANI, declare:

  1. I am the Respondent in the case entitled, Stephanie M. Wilson vs. Hashim M. Bomani, pending in this Court as case number VD065587.

  2. Documents attached as Exhibits provide relevant evidence that shows, with certainty that the Petitioner intentionally and blatantly disrespected and disobeyed Court Visitation Orders issued by this Court.

  3. Documents attached as Exhibits provide relevant evidence that shows, with certainty that the Petitioner has intentionally kept and withheld children from Non-Custodial Parent.

  4. Documents attached as Exhibits provide relevant evidence that shows, with certainty that the Petitioner has used the children as pawns in order to cause pain, suffering and alienation to Non-Custodial Parent.

I. THE COURT IS REQUESTED TO AWARD 50% LEGAL AND 50% PHYSICAL CUSTODY WITH REASONABLE VISITATION OF THE MINOR CHILDREN TO RESPONDENT

  1. Respondents rights in the companionship, care, custody, and management of Respondent’s children is a cognizable and substantial right that is extended to Respondent, and is within the protection of the federal due-process and equal-protection clause. Thus, absent a powerful, countervailing state interest, the Respondent’s relationship with his children must be protected (Stanley v. Illinois (1972) 405 U.S. 645, 649-659, 92 S. Ct. 1208, 31L. Ed. 2d 551; U.S. Const. amend. XIV; In re Keisha E. (1993) 6 Cal. 4th 68, 76, 23 Cal. Rptr. 2d 775, 859 P. 2d 1290). Furthermore, minimal due process requires that the state establish parental unfitness by clear and convincing evidence before terminating parental rights. (Santosky v. Kramer (1982) 455 U.S. 745, 747-748, 102 S. Ct. 1388, 71 L. Ed 2d 599). Moreover, direct evidence located in declaration filed, May 19, 2010, which documents Respondent’s character as a caring and loving father, a Credentialed Teacher authorized by the State of California to teach children in grades K-12, as well as his community role model status and honorably serving in The United States Military bares as conclusive and compelling evidence and testimony to Respondent’s outstanding character, and warrants this Court to consider granting all relief sought by Respondent.

  2. Respondent prays that this Court considers FAMILY CODE SECTION 3040-3048, which specifically states in FAMILY CODE SECTION 3049(a), Custody should be granted in the following order of preference according to the best interest of the child as provided on Sections 3011 and 3020: (1) To both parents jointly pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 3080) or to either parent. In making an order granting custody to either parent, the court shall consider, among other factors, which parent is more likely to allow the child frequent and continuing contact with the noncustodial parent, consistent with Section 3011 and 3020, and shall not prefer a parent as custodian because of that parent’s sex. The court, in its discretion, may require the parent to submit to court a plan for the implementation of the custody order.

II. PETITIONER IS A MEMBER OF A CULT RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION WHICH ENGAGES IN PEDOPHILIA AND CHILD SEX ABUSE CRIMES

Respondent respects the right of the Petitioner to practice Petitioner’s religion. However, the fact of the matter is that the health, safety and welfare of the children are of paramount concern. Hence, Petitioner’s religious affiliations/membership is detrimental to the minor children in these matters. Direct Evidence in declaration filed May 19, 2010, conclusively establishes Petitioner’s religion as a clear affirmative showing harm, or being detrimental to the minor children. (In re Marriage of Urband (1977) 68 Cal. App. 3d 796, 797-798[FAMILY CODE SECTION 3003 mandates that the child’s religion may be dealt with as an aspect of granting either joint or sole legal custody.] Furthermore, pursuant to FAMILY CODE SECTION 3041(b) Subject to subdivision (d), a finding that parental custody would be detrimental to the children shall be supported

  1. DIRECT EVIDENCE in declaration filed, May 19, 2010, warrants the courts attention to heed the health, safety and welfare of the minors in these matters. The court has the authority to investigate the direct evidence concerning Petitioner’s religious affiliation with the Jehovah’s Witnesses Congregation located at 7439 Florence Ave., Downey, CA. 90240. Furthermore, the court has before it, direct evidence that the Jehovah’s Witness Organization engages in acts of pedophilia and child sex abuse. Specifically, direct evidence states, “Watchtower Society, is covering up cases of child molestation, protecting molesters and keeping secrets that put children at risk.” Direct evidence states, “From the time she was 10, until she turned 13, Heidi, a Jehovah’s Witness, says she was molested by a member of her congregation.” Direct evidence states, “The Jehovah’s Witnesses recently agree to pay to settle that lawsuit and eight other similar cases, without admitting wrongdoing. The cases all involve men the church allegedly knew had sexually abused children.” Direct evidence states, “The Jehovah’s Witnesses have settled nine lawsuits alleging church policies protected men who sexually abused children for many years.” Direct evidence states, “Clifton Reed Jr. and the 14-year-old girl met at a Jehovah’s Witness social gathering…Reed was charged. Police say he was soliciting sex from a 14-year-old, both online and over the phone.” Direct evidence states, “Found guilty in Dec. 2006 of acts of sexual abuse of a minor – acts which took place between 1985 and 1992- Marcel Simonin, 67 year old, formerly an Elder among the Jehovah’s Witnesses of Chateauguay, at the time of the crime” (SEE EXHIBIT 1)

III. THE COURT IS ENCOURAGED TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND CONSIDER THE BEST INTEREST OF THE MINOR CHILDREN IN THESE MATTERS

  1. Direct Evidence concerning Petitioner’s religious affiliation is conclusively detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the minors in these matters.

  2. Declaration filed, May 19, 2010, provides direct evidence of physical, mental and verbal abuse perpetrated by Petitioner, and therefore, making Petitioner UNFIT to have custody.

[FAMILY.CODE SECTION 3020-3032 APPLIES: 3020(a) The Legislature finds and declares that it is the public policy of this state to assure that the health, safety, and welfare of children shall be the court’s primary concern in determining the best interest of children when making any orders regarding the physical or legal custody or visitation of children. The Legislature further finds and declares that the perpetration of child abuse or domestic violence in a household where a child resides is detrimental to the child. (b) The Legislature finds and declares that it is the public policy of this state to assure that children have frequent and continuing contact with both parents after the parents have separated or dissolved their marriage, or ended their relationship, and to encourage parents to share the rights and responsibilities of child rearing in order to effect this policy, except where the contact would not be in the best interest of the child, as provided in Section 3011. (c) Where the policies set forth in subdivisions (a) and (b) of this section are in conflict, any court’s order regarding physical or legal custody or visitation shall be made in a manner that ensures the health, safety, and welfare of the child and the safety of all family members.]

IV. PETITIONER HAS INTENTIONALLY VIOLATED COURT VISITATION ORDERS AND HAS USED CHILDREN AS PAWNS. PETITIONER CONTINUES TO KEEP AND WITHHOLD CHILDREN FROM COURT ORDERED VISITATIONS WITH RESPONDENT

  1. Direct evidence in Declaration filed, May 19, 2010, reveal that on June 1, 2008 at 10:20:19AM, Petitioner refused to let Respondent visit with children. [FAMILY CODE SECTION 3048(a) (1) (A) applies: Not withstanding any other provision of law, in any proceeding to determine child custody or visitation with a child, every custody or visitation order shall contain the following: (1) The basis for the court’s exercise of jurisdiction, (A) Whether a party has previously taken, enticed away, kept, withheld or concealed a child in violation of the right of custody or of visitation of a person] [CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 1209(a)(5)applies: The following acts or omissions in respect to a court of justice, or proceedings therein, are contempt of the authority of the court (5) Disobedience of any lawful judgment, order, or process of the court](SEE EXHIBITS 1-7.)

V. RESPONDENT REQUESTS THAT THE COURT CONSIDER TERMINATING THE RESTRAINING ORDER ISSUED OCTOBER 12, 2011 ON THE GROUNDS THAT RESPONDENT HAS NEVER POSED A THREAT TO PETITIONER OR HIS CHILDREN

  1. There is no record and/or evidence of Assaultive, Abusive and/or Domestic Violence by Respondent towards Petitioner or their children. Therefore, it is in the interest of the children that Petitioner and Respondent engage in amicable and cordial communications. Respondent has maintained vigilant compliance with all restraining orders issued by this Court. However, as documented in incident reports by Downey Police Department on two occasions, Petitioner has left messages on Respondents phone, and written derogatory letters to respondent in an attempt to coerce Respondent into violating Restraining Order (SEE EXHIBIT 2.)

CONCLUSION/PRAYER

Respondent, respectfully, requests and/or prays that this court encourages Petitioner to comply with California Rule 5.9, and recalculate The Guideline Calculation Result Summery based on all direct evidence provided in this motion (SEE EXHIBITS 8 AND 9.) If it so pleases this Court, Respondent has experience enormous pain and suffer. In that, Petitioner keeping and withholding children from Respndent, and Petitioner’s blatant violations of court visitation orders, has exacerbated and contributed to Respondent’s disabilities (i.e. Insomnia, Depression, Stress, and Anxiety) Petitioner’s concealment of Community Assets and Income and file false financial declarations in the Court of Law has placed extreme financial hardships upon Respondent. In that, Respondent was forced to file for bankruptcy and is now destitute. Based on the evidence in these pleadings Respondent prays that this Court DOES NOTexercise a MISCAURAGE OF JUSTICE by over-looking direct evidence which conclusively encourages this Court to act on behalf of the health, safety, and welfare of the children in these matters. Primary consideration should be given to the welfare of the children, and what is in the best interest of the children. The Court is given wide discretion in custody matters, and its determinations of the manifest evidence showing detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the children. Therefore, Respondent requests and prays that this Court considers ruling on behalf of the Respondent for the following relief: Respondent Parental Rights be established and enforce to the degree of 50% Legal and 50% Physical Custody granting reasonable visitation to Respondent, and that all visitation exchanges take place at Downey Police Department. Furthermore, Respondent prays in the interest of the children in these matters, that this Court terminates the Restraining Order currently against Respondent’s person, so that, both Respondent and Petitioner can engage in amicable and cordial two-way communications.

Dated: DECEMBER 1, 2011

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

HASHIM M. BOMANI, RESPONDENT

CLICK TO VIEW VIDEO

THE DIRECTOR (STEVEN J. GOLIGHTLY) OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ADMITS TO FRAUD

Dr. Steven J. Golightly: Los Angeles County Annual Report 2011 from Los Angeles County Annual Report on Vimeo.

FUNNY, HOW THIS BITCH STEVEN J. GOLIGHTLY OVER-LOOKED THE FOLLOWING CASE:

SAME SHIT

Probation Chief Jerry E. Powers has clear and convincing evidence that Deputy Probation Officer II Stephanie M. Wilson has committed the following crimes: Disorderly Conduct/Failure to Follow a Lawful Order [California Penal Code 166(a)(4)], Kidnapping [California Penal Code 207], Conspiracy to Defraud [California Penal Code 182], Child Endangerment [California Penal Code 273(a)], Child Abuse [California Penal Code – Sections 11164-11174.3] Breach of Contract [California Civil Code – Sections 3300-3322.]

Deputy Probation Officer II Stephanie M. Wilson has truly disgraced The Los Angeles County Probation Department. In that, she has blatantly and intentionally violating Lawful Court Orders and Probation Chief Jerry Powers looks the other way. Therefore, the Publics smells more of the same, in that…

  • On September 4, 2011 Deputy Probation Officer II Stephanie M. Wilson blatantly and intentionally violated and/or disobeyed Court Visitation Order (SEE DOWNEY POLICE REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 4, 2011)

  • Deputy Probation Officer II Stephanie M. Wilson and DPOII Carmaine McNeel engaged in extortion, and left coercive messages on Restrained Person cell phone in an attempt to entice and/or coerce Restrained Person into criminally violating the “Bogus” Restraining Order against his person (SEE EVIDENCE)

  • On June 17, 2010 Deputy Probation Officer II Stephanie M. Wilson sent a derogatory and harassing letter to United States Soldier in which she maliciously maligns and defames the Soldier’s character. Deputy Probation Officer II Stephanie M. Wilson ends the letter with harsh and inconsiderate words like “Chelsea (The Soldier’s 4 year old daughter) does not even know you”. NOTE: How can the Los Angeles County Probation Department employ such cruel and insensitive human beings like Deputy Probation Officer II Stephanie M. Wilson (SEE EVIDENCE)

  • On June 1, 2008 Deputy Probation Officer II Stephanie M. Wilson violated Court Visitation Orders and refused to allow United States Soldier to visit and say good-bye to his children before leaving for active duty (SEE COURT ORDER ISSUED MAY 5, 2008, AND DOWNEY POLICE REPORT DATED JUNE 1, 2008)

  • On August 4, 2008 Deputy Probation Officer II Stephanie M. Wilson violated Court Visitation Orders (SEE COURT ORDER ISSUED JULY 7, 2008, AND LETTER FROM MR. SAM BROWN DATED AUGUST 4, 2008, AND LETTER FROM MS. PATRICIA A. NASH DATED JUNE 15, 2010)

Dispite the over-whelming evidence of DPOII Wilson’s criminal mis-conduct and blatant violations of the law, Ms. Jennifer Donnell, LA County Director of the Professional Standards Division, say’s “NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN”.

Surely such blatant disrespect for the law is unacceptable and not tolerated by the Los Angeles County Probation Department. Clearly Deputy Probation Officer II Stephanie M. Wilson has engaged in rogue, reckless and lawless behavior which is a reflection on the entire Probation Department, not to mention the violation of the Public’s Trust and waste of taxpayer dollars. Make no mistake, if Deputy Probation Officer II Stephanie M. Wilson will alienate and deprive her own biological children from visiting with their father, who is to say what sadistic and/or cringe worthy acts Deputy Probation Officer II Stephanie M. Wilson is perpetrating upon Probationers under her supervision. These crimes should not go without punishment and/or reprimand. Therefore, “CONCERNED TAXPAYERS UNITED” recommend that Probation Chief Jerry E. Powers think long and hard about the image the Los Angeles County Probation Department wants to portray. The over-arching question the Public wants to know is, Does Probation Chief Jerry E. Powers represent change, or more of the same and/or more bureaucratic status quo Bull Shit? The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors sure pick a winner this time (Pun Intended.) Face it, Jerry E. Powers represents “Widow Dressing” over the cronic and systemic vermon like, fraud and corruption coagulating and oozing throughout the County of Los Angeles.

Recently Mayor Antonio R. Villaraigosa served the Public a plate of Fabricated Crime Statistics. Villaraigosa said crime is down in the Public Arena, but offered no statistical analysis/data on the criminal behaviors from within the County of Los Angeles.

Hell, the City of Bell alone will account for 20% of criminal behaviors in Los Angeles County, the other 80% can be divided up between The Los Angeles County Probation Department, the Los Angeles County Child Support Services Department and the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services.

Fret not, ole ye weary Public, for the Laws of Pantheism are at hand, swift and uncompromising justice will be served. F%CK YOU STEVEN J. GOLIGHTLY AND YOUR CORRUPT CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES DEPARTMENT.

CHRISTOPHER DORNERDEVIL

Very truly yours,

CONCERNED PRECATORY TAXPAYERS UNITED

HOW SAMBO ACTING IS YOUR MAYOR? LOS ANGELES MAYOR ANTONIO VILLARAIGOSA SPEAKS SAMBO-COON DIALECT

ALL PENN STATE BOARD OF TRUSTEE’S SHOULD GET THE DEATH PENALTY

ALL PENN STATE BOARD OF TRUSTEE’S SHOULD BE CONDEMNED TO DEATH BY LEATHAL INJECTION FOR ALLOWING JERRY SANDUSKY AND JOE PATERNO TO SODOMIZE CHILDREN. NACNY GRACE SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF HERSELF FOR BEING SILENT ABOUT THE CRIMINAL CULPABILITY BY THE FOLLOWING PENN STATE BOARD OF CRIMINAL TRUSTEE’S.

CHIEF ATTORNEY FESIA ANTOINETTE DAVENPORT- #181775

Dr. Steven J. Golightly: Los Angeles County Annual Report 2011 from Los Angeles County Annual Report on Vimeo.

PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IS CORRUPT

VOTE ROMNEY IN 2012