I'm OK!

Elani Wells
Jan 31, 2021
38 min read

Updated: Feb 13, 2021

I Elani Wells have prepared a full account of how I first learned about my son's assault/INJURY wanting to expose how in 2016 I was falsely accused of child abuse.*meaning something happened to my son's bottom while in the care of his grandmother/and his babysitter.

I DESERVE AN APPEAL BECAUSE NO ONE HAS A RIGHT TO ACCUSE ME OF HURTING MY SON WITHOUT HAVING ANY EVIDENCE (Mommy hurt me & I did WHEN I PUT HIS BRUISED* & RAW BUTT IN THE BATHTUB, NOT KNOWING WHAT HAPPENED TO MY SON! I have never been allowed to cross-examine Tyler, Brenda, or Beth as to why my 2-year-old son was on an adult quad with a 12-year-old the day Aedan was hurt. I want to know WHY HAVE I BEEN DENIED DUE PROCESS?

HOW DID MY SON GET HURT? HE SPENT NEARLY TEN HOURS WITH THREE DIFFERENT PEOPLE.

WHY WAS HE BATHED, WHILE AT HIS BABYSITTERS/DAYCARE

DID BETH SCOTT DROP HIM?
BRENDA WANTED TO MAKE SURE OUR STORIES WERE BOTH THE SAME WHEN SHE TALKED TO THE NURSE BECAUSE SHE WANTS TO AVOID CONFRONTATION OR GETTING IN TROUBLE. I suspect with CPS * after all, they had just closed the case with BRENDA the month before.
Why was a 12 YEAR OLD on AN ADULT SIZE QUAD with my son? AND WHY IS IT THIS was never mentioned in court

It is stated I was the caregiver full time for Aedan, this is not true. I did not have custody of my son, BRENDA did. Even though I would keep my son a majority of the time because she drove a log truck. LOOK AT BRENDA'S TEXT MESSAGES SHE SENT TO ME. BRENDA wanted her tracts covered up and she's angry*

~ April the 8th, 2016

I stay the night with Brenda and I am able to spend time with Aedan. Brenda goes out drinking with her husband. Aedan and I stay home.

~ April the 9th of 2016

Brenda, Aedan, and I sat around all day. Brenda mentions a friend of hers that will be watching Aedan. Brenda says she will take me to meet her the next day.

~ April 10th of 2016

Brenda, Aedan, Tyler (Brenda's younger son), and I have met with Beth. (who will be watching Aedan) We all visit and It seems that the interaction between her children and Aedan is ok.

~ April 11th, 2016

I have to go to Boars Head (in Jarratt Virginia) for my interview that morning, at about 10 a.m. I drop my son off at BETHS (his daycare.)

After my interview, I TEXT BRENDA (my son's grandmother) she’s at work. I tell her I’m done and that I want to pick up my son. I’m told to leave him with the babysitter so that they both can get more acquainted. So I agree.

Later that afternoon I have classes at D-19. The classes are MANDATORY. (So I go) My Son's Grandma BRENDA has picked him up from BETH SCOTT/ his daycare and after both of my meetings are over I rush over (it’s approximately 7:30-7:45 pm I pick up my son. BRENDA and I speak briefly concerning my son. I’m told my son never was changed and that he wasn't feeling well. Brenda reports that my son hadn’t gone pee in the whole 3 to 4 hours she had him.

My comments in regards to the Applicable Statutory and Regulatory provisions done by Child protective services

On April 14th, 2016, Susan Mitchell interviews Aedan and claims he said three things ''mommy hit me'', ''mommy hurt Aedan'', and ''mommy did it'' I’m speculating he said mommy Hurt me. And I did when I unknowingly put him in a bathtub while he was raw/injured after he had woken up at around one a.m in a WET diaper.

The CPS agency supports Susan of accusing me of abuse. Stating the timeline and all the facts point to me hurting him. The agency reports I was his sole caregiver from March to April. Susan states Brenda did not notice anything on Aedan. Brenda reports she did not change his diaper because he did not need it. (from 4:00 to 7:30)

On the twentieth of April (2016) Aedan is seen by a doctor who reports the injury is not consistent with a rash caused by diarrhea.

A follow-up doctor documents that my son Aedan has sensitive skin and is allergic to red dye in food.

My time is accounted for from the time I picked up my baby until I got home and only took me twenty minutes.

My son was fussy. He fell asleep and did not cry until he woke up. I’m sure it’s the urine on his raw behind that caused him to scream "MOMMY I HURT". MOMMY, I HURT!

It’s also stated by the department that when I picked up Aedan that nothing seemed wrong. What I said was he was CRANKY and seemed happy to see me and leave ready to leave Brenda's

CPS Council argued that the case was a circumstantial case, but rather a very strong one.

ARGUMENT

Evidence was largely circumstantial and based on hearsay. statements made by persons who also had custody of Aedan on April 14th, 2016

I WANT THE TRUTH.

WHAT HAPPENED TO MY SON?

And I WANT MY SONS GRANDMA BRENDA TO GIVE ME MY SONS MEDICAL RECORDS including most importantly the doctor's note from Dr. Bashai she took Aedan too for the so-called diaper rash.

I ALSO WANT TO KNOW WHY DID SHE ALLOW MY SON TO GO WITH HER SON TYLER ON HIS QUAD AND EXPECT HER 12 YEAR OLD TO BE ABLE TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MY SONS SAFETY???

On the MCV report, it’s stated Aedan claims to be hit by mommy. ?

It’s stated a review of the facts shows abuse and neglect occurred. Nowhere is it mentioned where Aedan spent the entire day. And he was not with me. My son was on an adult size quad with his 12-year-old uncle Tyler. This is where he more than likely got hurt. And also it’s not legal for a 12-year-old to be on a quad without adult supervision let alone have a two-year-old passenger.

The agency concluded the evidence is greater than the evidence offered in opposition. How so, when all three people who were with my son all day were not questioned in court.

It’s stated Aedan pointed to his mother and said she hurt me. When did he do this, he didn't. SO Why is it in the report?

If Brenda did not change him. Yet knew he was dry. How did she check his diaper? Did she pull it off? There was no way she could have seen the injury unless she had.

It’s stated the injury was inconsistent with diaper rash or diarrhea. I agree my son has been injured. I suspect either he fell off the quad or something happened while he was given a bath. The babysitter reported Aedan had diarrhea and there’s a doctor statement explaining that Aedan is allergic to red dye.

Assignment of errors ‘ there was insufficient errors to prove I abused Aedan, as defined under Virginia code 16.1-288

In response to questions from the appellate, Mrs. Mitchell testified the record states Aedan during his interview stated that his mother "spanked", "popped", and "did it". Mrs. Mitchell testified that Aedan's exact statement was mommy "spanked me". Mrs. Mitchell testified that Aedan Used Different Forms Of It.

Kathryn Bicking, My Maternal Grandma testified she’s never seen me the Appellate mistreat Aedan. Kathryn then testified she received a phone call the following morning from Brenda and was told she had talked to Aedan's babysitter and that Aedan had been stated to have diarrhea and had been bathed by the babysitter.

Afterward, Brenda saw Aedan scratching his buttocks. And Brenda says she put lotion or salve on the mark. Kathryn testified that this made sense to her as a logical explanation, as to when she first saw the injury, it appeared healing and not fresh. The picture used as evidence of Aedan's injury was taken several days afterward and therefore making it where the bruising would be more obvious.

Mrs. Mitchell stated when asked Aedan he said momma spanked me. During cross-examining Mrs. Mitchell's statement changes.

Mrs. Mitchell states Aedan said "mommy popped me" and then "mommy hurt Aedan."

Which was the actual statement made by Aedan?

Mrs. Mitchell stated that she used different forms of his statement on page nine.

Sec.4,5,6,1.1 in the CPS Manuel States

When Mrs. Mitchell is asked why she didn’t record the interview she "shrugged her shoulders."

The interview between her and my two-year-old was supposed to be electronically recorded and it wasn’t. And because it wasn’t it is a violation of the Regulatory procedure 22vac.40-705-80.

Where is the recording? If there is not one, I ask to be found not guilty of the violation of Section 16.1-228 of the code of Virginia

The agency failed to produce such a recording also to clearly document the specific and detailed reasons for not recording Mrs. Mitchell's interview with Aedan. And to document that the decision not to record the interview was made in consultation with a supervisor

I believe that hearsay statements allegedly made by the two-year-old Aedan as recounted by Mrs. Mitchell shout possess particularized guarantees of trustworthiness and reliability as stated in codes §63.2-1522

Social Services has no Standing by Which the Court Can Assert Jurisdiction Greensville Emporia Social Services, brought this suit and alleged the child had been abused and neglected, asking the Juvenile Court, (JD) to assert its jurisdiction. DSS alleged that this court had jurisdiction because the child had been the victim of abuse and neglect DSS alleged it had the standing to prosecute this claim.

A court must have jurisdiction to enter a valid, enforceable judgment on a claim. Where jurisdiction is lacking the orders and judgments, including the adoption of this case are void, a nullity, and subject to collateral attack. Litigants through various procedural mechanisms may retroactively challenge the validity of a void judgment at any time.

SUSAN MITCHELL INTERVIEWS MY SON. And she puts in her report that my son said three things. “Mommy spanked me”. “Mommy did it” & "Mommy hurt me."

Between 18 and 24 months your toddler will start using simple two-word sentences. Whether it’s “Me play” or “No sleep,” you’ll probably find that there’s one two-word combo that she says over and over again. That’s because toddlers often don’t fully understand the meaning of their words during this stage, so they get stuck on the same ones. And since crying is still easier than using words in sentences, especially when you're tired, cranky, or overwhelmed, she’ll still use tears to attempt to get her message across as she’s getting the hang of speaking in sentences.

By age two, your toddler will start turning her two-word sentences into questions (“Go home?”) and using new words in short sentences. A year later, she’ll likely know a word for almost everything she wants to say and will be constructing both sentences and questions well enough for everyone to understand (most of the time, anyway). Even if that’s not entirely the case, as long as she’s saying new words and using her old standbys in different ways, she’s making important progress.

IT WAS ONE IN THE MORNING WHEN I PUT MY SON IN THE BATH & HE SCREAMS FROM THE TOP OF HIS LUNGS NOT KNOWING HIS BUTT WAS RAW BLISTERY LOOKING AND BRUISED. I KNOW HAD I SEEN IT FIRST I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT TWICE BEFORE TAKING MY BABY FROM THE SOILED COUCH AND STICKING HIM INTO THE BATHTUB.
SUSAN MITCHELL SAYS IT IS NOT RELEVANT AND HAS DENIED ME MY RIGHT TO MY SIXTH AMENDMENT. AND THE SOCIAL WORKER (SUSAN MITCHELL) FAILS TO MENTION THAT MY SONS 12-YEAR-OLD UNCLE HAD MY BABY ON A ADULT SIZE QUAD!

I lived with my Grandma

Who IS MY EXPERT WITNESS and who has Retired From Being A Paralegal

~ April 11th, 2016

My grandma Kathryn Bicking made a statement - regarding Aedan Williams

I (Elani Wells) take my son into my Grandma Kathy’s house and I lay him down on the couch. (In the living room, there are two chairs and a couch.) My son is grouchy and very tired. I lay him down gently and I have put the t.v on for him. I go out to my truck to grab his stuff for the night. I hurry back in and put everything down and I check my son to see if he is wet from the front to the back, trying not to bother him. My son falls asleep from watching television, I unpack his bags and I lay in the recliner next to him. *I’m just four or five inches away from where he is sleeping. @1:00 AM: MY SON WAKES UP SCREAMING! HE WON'T. STOP CRYING. WHILE I’M IN A STATE OF PANIC, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT COULD BE WRONG WITH MY SON. He is wet and the couch is soaked! I ask him what’s wrong? He says, “HURT MAMA, I HURT!” My first instinct is to take his clothes off, and put him in the bathtub, and rinse him off. When I do he starts screaming, louder and louder & I still have no idea what’s wrong with him. MY GRANDMA from around the corner BARGES IN TOWARDS ME TO ASK ME "WHAT'S WRONG?" MY ANSWER IS: "GRANDMA I DON'T KNOW." WHEN I TAKE MY SON OUT FROM THE BATHTUB AND FROM BEHIND MY GRANDMA SAYS: "WHAT'S THAT"? I TURN MY SON AROUND TO LOOK AND HE HAS A HUGE BLISTERY RED MARK ON HIS BUTT. I then ask my grandmother to hold my son so I can call and find out what happened. I CALL BRENDA AND SHE SAYS ITS A DIAPER RASH (FROM THE DIARRHEA OR AN ALLERGIC REACTION TO THE DIAL SOAP THAT WAS USED ON HIM WHEN HIS BABYSITTER BETH GAVE AEDAN A BATH. WAIT! WHY? MY SON HAS HAD A LOT OF DIARRHEA. I'M TOLD TO KEEP AN EYE ON IT. AND TO PUT SOME OINTMENT ON IT & WE HANG UP.

Aedan calms down

I PUT HIM TO SLEEP.

THE NEXT DAY MY SON IS DOING BETTER. WHEN HE WOULD GO POTTY OR PEE THOUGH HE WOULD SCREAM FROM THE TOP OF HIS LUNGS. BRENDA ADVISES FOR ME IS TO GIVE MY SON SOY MILK, SO I DO.

On April 12th

It's 9:30 at night I text BRENDA that I need to go to E.R. because I was in a lot of pain from my kidney stones. She asks me where’s your Grandma Kathy? I say she’s in bed. Brenda says go ahead and do what you need to do then, but to not leave your son with your mom. Brenda says* I HAVE TO WORK AND I NEED YOUR HELP. I CAN'T TAKE CARE OF YOUR SON BY MYSELF. Aedan stays the night with KATHY his Grandma Bicking.

On April 13th

At 9:12 am I text Brenda to let her know, I still don’t feel good. I text/call to ask if it would be ok for my NANA * (MY MOMS, MOM) to watch my son for a couple of days because I need some rest. She says ok, make sure they give him the soy milk. I call my mom for a ride. I explain I feel very weak and that I had been prescribed a narcotic. I tell her I need Nana to keep Aedan for the night. My mom agreed. We drop off Aedan with my nana and papa and I explain the rash. I ask her to keep a close eye on it and to apply the ointment. LATER THAT SAME AFTERNOON, I GET A TEXT FROM BRENDA TO CALL HER AS SOON AS I AM ALONE. IT'S THE SAME DAY MY AUNT (WHO IS A NURSE) HAS STOPPED BY MY GRANDMAS TO CHECK ON AEDAN.

A FEW DAYS LATER I GET A TEXT. BRENDA IS TELLING ME I NEED TO BE CAREFUL BECAUSE MY MOMS SISTER THE NURSE IS ASKING QUESTIONS TO SEE IF WE HAVE THE SAME ANSWERS. AND SHE IS WORKING WITH CPS TRYING TO GET BRENDA AND I BACK IN COURT.

My aunt did not know Aedan May have fallen off the quad or possibly the babysitter dropped him getting him in or out of the bathtub

A couple of days go by. It’s early in the morning I get a text from BRENDA stating she only has two hours to decide what to say. SO for me to pick up the phone if I still want to see my son. I have allowed you to be in your son's life. Pick up the phone or I will do what I have to do. Brenda then sends a text that says for me to stop telling people our business or she will get in trouble for not doing what she is supposed to be doing.

(THE NEXT DAY MY SON IS AT MCV WITH AN EAR INFECTION. THE SAME NIGHT MY SON STAYS WITH MY AUNT THE NURSE .)

Updated *statement /witness testimony from my grandma

My aunt called CPS to my grandparents and this is after I have explained to both my grandma and grandpa about Aedan when I dropped him off not only so they could keep the ointment on it but because I wanted them to know, I did not hurt him. I know that when my grandma called my aunt for help she didn't expect that the call to CPS would be* to accuse me of being the one who caused the injury/abuse. Tina knew Brenda had custody. What Tina didn’t know is that he was on Tyler’s quad and was given a bath by a stranger at daycare who had three CPS calls? Did she drop him?

~ ON * 6/15/16 THERES A Letter to Elani from Susan Mitchell - “the Department finds that a preponderance of the evidence established that this is a founded case of physical abuse, level 2”

~ ON * 6/22/16 THERES A Letter from Elani to Susan Mitchell, social worker asking if the babysitter had been investigated. Elani requests a local conference with the agency - that also states she did not abuse or neglect her son

~ ON * 6/24/16 I AM LIKE “Show me the proof where I abused or neglected my son. I would like to see it, it does not exist. Sincerely, Elani”

~ ON * 6/24/16 THERE'S ANOTHER LETTER “To whom it may concern, Did you all happen to investigate the babysitter in this case, I repeat, I did not abuse or neglect my son. I have changed for the better; I want to be a mother to MY SON, he is my flesh and blood”

IT'S SAID THAT MY SON HAS ANXIETY AND ITS BEING BLAMED ON DRUG USE. WHO SAYS THIS? BECAUSE WHEN I WAS PREGNANT I NEVER DID DRUGS.

~ THE COMPELLING REASON FOR FILING AGAINST THE WRONG-FULL AFFIDAVIT TO ADOPT MY SON OUT IS BASED ON FRAUD.

AFTER JUDGE CARSON SAUNDERS ORDER IS FOR JOINT CUSTODY BETWEEN MY SONS GRANDMOTHER AND MY AUNT, SHE INSTEAD RELINQUISHES HER RIGHTS AND MY SON IS PLACED WITH BRENDA R. WHO IS AEDAN'S DADS MOM.

~ WHEN BRENDA DOES NOT WANT MY SON ANYMORE AND I SUSPECT IT'S SO SHE DOES NOT HAVE TO ANSWER TO THE DOCTOR OR CPS?

It's AT THE TIME I'M TRYING TO GET HER CROSS EXAMINED. BRENDA REFUSES TO GIVE MY AUNT TINA’ MY SONS MEDICAL CARDS. SHE HAS ASKED FOR IT OVER AND OVER. MY SON HAS WENT FROM HIS GRANDMA TO LIVE WITH MY MOMS SISTER WHO ENDS UP HAVING TO PAY FOR THE VISITS TO THE HOSPITAL. BEFORE MY SONS GRANDMA (BRENDA) GAVE UP MY SON SHE WAS TOLD MY SON HAD SOME APPOINTMENTS AND SHE WOULD NOT TAKE MY SON TO ANY OF THEM!

THE ATTORNEY AMANDA JONES IS WHO IS REPRESENTING THE COUPLE WHO HAVE MY SON AEDEN.

WHY IS IT MY 2 YEAR OLD WAS ALLOWED TO BE ON AN ADULT SIZED QUAD THE VERY SAME DAY I PICK HIM UP FROM HIS GRANDMA BRENDA.

CLEARLY, THIS IS * CHILD ENDANGERMENT

I WANT JUSTICE. AND I FEEL THAT JUDGE CARSON SAUNDERS NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED FOR BEING APART OF KEEPING MY SON AGAINST HIS WILL. * HE HAS BEEN STOLEN! BY THIS I MEAN MY HEART IS SHATTERED MY (NANA) WHO CALLED MY MOMS SISTER (A NURSE) FOR HELP, AND TODAY IS SUFFERING FROM HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE, HAS NOT SEEN OR HEARD HER GRANDSONS VOICE SINCE. MY GRANDPA IS CRUSHED. NOT BEING TREATED FAIRLY BY THE SOCIAL SERVICES. HE AND BOTH MY GRANDMOTHERS ALL ARE SUFFERING FROM THE CRUELTY.

1. On March 5, 2018, Elizabeth and Philip Justice were awarded sole physical and legal custody of Aedan Williams, son of Elani Wells with visitation by Elani to be determined by Elizabeth and Philip Justice, the Guardian Ad Litem, and Aedan’s counselor. See Exhibit 1.

2. Directly thereafter the Guardian Ad Litem withdrew and despite continual letters and petitions by Elani Wells, Philip and Elizabeth Justice would not allow Elani visitation with her son. See Exhibit 2.

3. A Final Order for Adoption was signed on January 15, 2020, riddled with errors, false and unproven allegations, and without the consent of Elani Wells. Exhibit 3.

4. The Virginia Code 63.2-1201 states children may only be adopted by third parties with the consent of a parent (birth mother), which at no point was consent given. See Exhibit 4.

5. The Court did not follow the law and therefore the “Final Order” is void.

a. “Courts are constituted by authority and they cannot go beyond that power delegated to them. If they act beyond that authority, and certainly in contravention of it, their judgments and orders are regarded as nullities; they are not voidable, but simply void, and this even prior to reversal”. Williamson v. Berry, 8 HOW. 945, 540 12 L.Ed. 1170, 1189 (1850).
b. “The law is well settled that a void order or judgment is void even before reversal”. Valley v. Northern Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 254 U.S. 348, 41 S.Ct. 116 (1920).

6. There was no burden of proof of allegations made in the petition for adoption and “Final Order”:

“Where there are no depositions, admissions, or affidavits the court has no facts to rely on for a summary of determination” Trinsey v. Pagliaro, D.C. Pa 1964, 229 F. Supp. 647

7. There is no time limit because a void judgment never acquires validity:

a. Although Rule 60(b)(4) is ostensibly subject to the “reasonable” time limit of the rule, at least one court has held no time limit applies to a motion under the rule because a void judgment can never acquire validity through laches. See Crosby v. Bradstreet Col, 312 F. 2d 483 (2nd Cir.) cert. denied, 373 U.S. 911, 83 S. Ct. 1300, 10 L. Ed. 2d 412 (1963) where the court vacated a judgment as void 30 years after entry. See also Marquette Corp v. Priester, 234 F.Supp 799 (E.D.S.C. 1964) where the court expressly held that FRCP Rule 60(b) (4) carries no real-time limit.

8. Elani Wells is Aedan William’s birth mother:

a. No “statute, code, ordinance” can violate a right. No contract is lawful if it violates a right in all forms of law. Norton v. Shelby County 188 US 425.
b. Being the birth parent is a God-given right and not one to be determined by the State.
c. Right to free association and right to exercise under the First Amendment supersede a court from depriving either parent’s or the child’s rights without due process measured by a scrutinized standard.
d. In 2013, the Virginia Supreme Court found that parents have Fundamental Liberty interests in the care, custody, and control of their child. They also found that a child has liberty interests in establishing relationships with their parents, as stated in 2013

LF v. Breit, Virginia State Supreme Court such that “Although

our analysis, in this case, rests on Breit’s constitutionally

protected rights as a parent, we recognize that children also

have a liberty interest in establishing relationships with their parents”.

e. There is a presumption that parents act in their children’s best interests, Parham v. J.R., 442 U.S. 584, 602
f. The state may not interfere in child-rearing decisions when a parent is available. Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000).
g. The 14th Amendment protects the fundamental right of parents

to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and

control of their children

h. The 5th Amendment states “Nor shall any person be....deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law and the 4th Amendment includes the same words and applies them for the first time to individual States such that “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”.
i. Stanley v. Illinois (1972) - Parental rights are “private interests”,

and in this Court case, the Court made it clear that the State may NOT define the term parent in a way to arbitrarily deny parental rights to a biological parent

j. Meyer v. Nebraska (1923) - right attaches to the individual such that “While this Court has not attempted to define with exactness the liberty thus guaranteed, their term has received much consideration

and some of the included things have been definitely stated. Without doubt, it denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint, but also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to marry, establish a home and bring up children, to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and generally to enjoy those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men”.

k. Casey v. Planned Parenthood South Eastern Pennsylvania -

ruled the State may NOT introduce legislation or administrative procedures that unduly interfere with the exercise of Fundamental Liberty, in other words, the State may not use backhanded or “sneaky” tactics to undermine a person’s ability to exercise a fundamental right.

l. Children as individuals have rights that deserve protection such that they have a right to free association with their natural family, and a right to know and incorporate into themselves the religious, cultural, and social traditions of their family, and when the State intervenes in the custody rights of a parent, it also intervenes in the natural rights of the child.
m. Smith v Organization of Foster Families (1977) - the importance of the familial relationship, to the individuals involved and to the society, stems from the emotional attachments that derive from the intimacy of daily association, and from the role it plays in “promoting a way of life” through the instruction of children, as well as from the fact of blood relationship. (1st amendment, freedom of association).
n. Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) - (1st amendment - freedom of religion, expression, and association) - The duty to prepare the child for “additional obligations”, referred to by the Court, must be read to include the inculcation of moral standards, religious beliefs, and elements of good citizenship. This case involves the fundamental interest of parents, as contrasted with that of the State, to guide the religious future and education of children. Thus forced associations and forced counseling or testing is purely unconstitutional.
o. Rotary International v. Rotary Club of Duarte (1987) - The first amendment protects those relationships, including family relationships, that presuppose “deep attachments and commitments to the necessarily few other individuals whom one share not only a special community of thoughts, experiences, and beliefs but also distinctively personal aspects of one’s life”.

The “Final Order” for adoption is therefore void such that, “The law is well settled that a void order or judgment is void even before reversal”. Valley v. Northern Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 254 U.S. 348, 41 S.Ct. 116 (1920). Therefore Elani Wells hereby requests full sole physical and legal custody of HER son Aedan Williams, for whom she has fought a battle, for so many years. The law has already been decided by the Virginia Supreme Court: In 2013, the Virginia Supreme Court found that parents have Fundamental Liberty interests in the care, custody, and control of their child. They also found that a child has liberty interests in establishing relationships with their parents, as stated in 2013 LF v. Breit, Virginia State Supreme Court such that “Although our analysis, in this case, rests on Breit’s constitutionally protected rights as a parent, we recognize that children also have a liberty interest in establishing relationships with their parents”.

It is, therefore, that Elani Wells, hereby demands custody of HER son Aedan Williams immediately.

Respectfully,

Elani Brook Wells

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that this was hand-delivered by the Greenville County Circuit Clerk’s office on this ________day of __________, and mailed to Amanda Jones, Opposing

Counsel.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

I. Elani Wells was falsely accused of child abuse 3
A. Fraudulent accounts were made against Elani Wells 3
II. Alleged injury of a child, Aedan Williams, led to CPS complaint of abuse 3
A. Adoption of Aedan was granted to Elizabeth and Phillips Justice 3

ARGUMENT

I. Fraudulent case is based on allegations that have no merit 4
A. Elani has been falsely accused of a level two preponderance of evidence 4
B. While under the care of the babysitter, Aedan gets injured 4
II. Aedan is later inspected at grandmother's house and reported to CPS.
A. CPS places him in the care of Christina Pope
Adoption of Aedan was granted to Elizabeth and Phillips Justice

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The final order is void

A. No proof of allegations 7

B. Children’s liberties with relationships to parents 8

C. Children’s rights 9

CONCLUSION

I. Elani Wells has been falsely accused of child abuse 11

A finding that a lack of proper evidence resulted in the adoption of Elani’s child 11

II. Elani Wells asks the court to reverse the decision and vacate the adoption 11

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

April 11, 2016

An incident occurred and Elani Bicking Wells was falsely accused of child abuse. These claims were based on fraudulent accounts and later used against her court. As a result, sole legal and physical custody of her son, Aedan Liam Williams, was granted to Elizabeth and Phillip Justice on March 5, 2018.

The complaint alleged that Aedan Williams suffered from a large blister type injury to his right buttocks that was later diagnosed as a burn. This injury led to a founded CPS complaint of abuse.

On June 24, 2016, the result of the Child Protective Services investigation was received. The department found there was evidence that abuse occurred, and Elani Wells was held accountable. “Physical abuse occurs when a caretaker creates or inflicts, threatens to create or inflict, or allows to be created or inflicted upon a child a physical injury by other than accidental means or creates a substantial risk of death, disfigurement, or impairment of bodily fluids.” Such evidence does not exist because these assumptions were based on false statements and at no point did physical abuse occur while the child, Aedan Williams, was in the care of his mother, Elani Wells.

ARGUMENT

An adoption was granted fraudulently. False statements have been made and shared. This has been going on for four years. This fraudulent case is based on allegations that have no merit. On April 11, 2016, Elani Wells did not have her son, Aedan Williams, with her. While at the babysitter Aedan gets hurt and Elani has been falsely accused of a level two preponderance of the evidence. On this day, Elani Wells was attending mandatory meetings. While her son, Aedan, was placed under the care of a babysitter, Beth Scott, and later sent to the paternal grandmother, Brenda Ransom. It was in the care of the paternal grandmother that Aedan was said to have been placed on a four-wheeler with another boy. Shortly after going home, Elani falls asleep next to Aedan.

In the middle of the night, he wakes up screaming and tells his mother that he is hurt. Elani’s initial instinct was to put her son in the bathtub to rinse him off, but this only resulted in him screaming louder. It was at that moment she discovered a huge red mark blistering the right side of her son’s butt. Right away Elani calls the paternal grandmother and asks her what happened. She is told that it is probably a diaper rash or an allergic reaction to the bath soap that was used on him previously while in the care of the babysitter. This came as a surprise to Elani, seeming that she had no knowledge he was ever given a bath. As the case continued, these people were never questioned, and instead, Elani is one who is blamed for hurting her son, Aedan.

The following day, Elani notices Aedan is doing better with the exception of feeling discomfort when wetting his diaper. Later that day, Elani is in severe pain from kidney stones and is checked into the emergency room. Her pain is so severe that she asks Aedan’s “Nana”, Betty Hobbs, to watch him for a few days until she recovers. It was during this time that Elani’s Aunt, Christina Pope, stopped by to check on the child, Aedan Williams, and shortly after began working with Child Protective Services. Aedan Williams was placed in the care of Elani's Aunt, Christina Pope, while CPS started an investigation.

During the investigation, Elani asked CPS worker Susan Mitchell questions regarding the investigation and Susan Mitchell refused to answer them. This would later result in the court granting sole legal and physical custody of Elani Well's son, Aedan Liam Williams, to Elizabeth and Phillip Justice. The final order of adoption was signed on January 15, 2020.

This adoption was based on false allegations and without the consent of Elani Wells.
There has been a violation of fair judgment, a system that appeared determined to separate Elani from her child, despite her caring for her two other children. She is successfully mothering the two that are in her custody.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Whereby, Elani Wells, Plaintiff, does hereby request sole legal and physical custody of her son Aedan Liam Williams. The “Final Order” for Adoption signed on January 15, 2020, in the Greensville County Circuit Court is void under the law and is therefore not valid.
1. On March 5, 2018, Elizabeth and Philip Justice were awarded sole physical and legal custody of Aedan Williams, son of Elani Wells with visitation by Elani to be determined by Elizabeth and Philip Justice, the Guardian Ad Litem, and Aedan’s counselor. See Exhibit 1.
2. Directly thereafter the Guardian Ad Litem withdrew and despite continual letters and petitions by Elani Wells, Philip and Elizabeth Justice would not allow Elani visitation with her son.
3. A Final Order for Adoption was signed on January 15, 2020, riddled with errors, false and unproven allegations, and without the consent of Elani Wells. Exhibit 3.
4. The Virginia Code 63.2-1201 states children may only be adopted by third parties with the consent of a parent (birth mother), which at no point was consent given.
5. The Court did not follow the law and therefore the “Final Order” is void.

a. “Courts are constituted by authority and they cannot go beyond that power delegated to them. If they act beyond that authority, and certainly in contravention of it, their judgments and orders are regarded as nullities; they are not voidable, but simply void, and this even prior to reversal”. Williamson v. Berry, 8 HOW. 945, 540 12 L.Ed. 1170, 1189 (1850).

b. “The law is well settled that a void order or judgment is void even before reversal”. Valley v. Northern Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 254 U.S. 348, 41 S.Ct. 116 (1920).

5. There was no burden of proof of allegations made in the petition for adoption and “Final Order”: “Where there are no depositions, admissions, or affidavits the court has no facts to rely on for a summary of determination” Trinsey v. Pagliaro, D.C. Pa 1964, 229 F. Supp. 647
6. There is no time limit because a void judgment never acquires validity:
a. Although Rule 60(b)(4) is ostensibly subject to the “reasonable” time limit of the rule, at least one court has held no time limit applies to a motion under the rule because a void judgment can never acquire validity through laches. See Crosby v. Bradstreet Col, 312 F. 2d 483 (2nd Cir.) cert. denied, 373 U.S. 911, 83 S. Ct. 1300, 10 L. Ed. 2d 412 (1963) where the court vacated a judgment as void 30 years after entry. See also Marquette Corp v. Priester, 234 F.Supp 799 (E.D.S.C. 1964) where the court expressly held that FRCP Rule 60(b) (4) carries no real-time limit.

7. Elani Wells is Aedan William’s birth mother:

a. No “statute, code, an ordinance” can violate a right. No contract is lawful if it violates a right in all forms of law. Norton v. Shelby County 188 US 425.

b. Being the birth parent is a God-given right and not one to be determined by the State.

c. Right to free association and right to exercise under the First Amendment supersede a court from depriving either parent’s or the child’s rights without due process measured by a scrutinized standard.

d. In 2013, the Virginia Supreme Court found that parents have Fundamental Liberty interests in the care, custody, and control of their child. They also found that a child has liberty interests in establishing relationships with their parents, as stated in 2013 LF v. Breit, Virginia State Supreme Court such that “Although our analysis, in this case, rests on Breit’s constitutionally protected rights as a parent, we recognize that children also have a liberty interest in establishing relationships with their parents”.

e. There is a presumption that parents act in their children’s best interests, Parham v. J.R., 442 U.S. 584, 602

f. The state may not interfere in child-rearing decisions when a parent is available. Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000).

g. The 14th Amendment protects the fundamental right of parents

to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and

control of their children

h. The 5th Amendment states “Nor shall any person be....deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law and the 4th Amendment includes the same words and applies them for the first time to individual States such that “nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”.

i. Stanley v. Illinois (1972) - Parental rights are “private interests”,

and in this Court case, the Court made it clear that the State may NOT define the term parent in a way to arbitrarily deny parental rights to a biological parent

j. Meyer v. Nebraska (1923) - right attaches to the individual such that “While this Court has not attempted to define with exactness the liberty thus was guaranteed, their term has received much consideration and some of the included things have been definitely stated. Without doubt, it denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint, but also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to marry, establish a home and bring up children, to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and generally to enjoy those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men”.

k. Casey v. Planned Parenthood South Eastern Pennsylvania -

l. Children as individuals have rights that deserve protection such that they have a right to free association with their natural family, and a right to know and incorporate into themselves the religious, cultural, and social traditions of their family, and when the State intervenes in the custody rights of a parent, it also intervenes in the natural rights of the child.

m. Smith v Organization of Foster Families (1977) - the importance of the familial relationship, to the individuals involved and to the society, stems from the emotional attachments that derive from the intimacy of daily association, and from the role it plays in “promoting a way of life” through the instruction of children, as well as from the fact of blood relationship. (1st amendment, freedom of association).

n. Wisconsin v. Yoder (1972) - (1st amendment - freedom of religion, expression, and association) - The duty to prepare the child for “additional obligations”, referred to by the Court, must be read to include the inculcation of moral standards, religious beliefs, and elements of good citizenship. This case involves the fundamental interest of parents, as contrasted with that of the State, to guide the religious future and education of children. Thus forced associations and forced counseling or testing is purely unconstitutional.

o. Rotary International v. Rotary Club of Duarte (1987) - The first amendment protects those relationships, including family relationships, that presuppose “deep attachments and commitments to the necessarily few other individuals whom one share not only a special community of thoughts, experiences, and beliefs but also distinctively personal aspects of one’s life”.

The “Final Order” for adoption is therefore void such that, “The law is well settled that a void order or judgment is void even before reversal”. Valley v. Northern Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 254 U.S. 348, 41 S.Ct. 116 (1920). Elani Wells hereby requests full sole physical and legal custody of HER son Aedan Williams, for whom she has fought a battle, for so many years.
The law has already been decided by the Virginia Supreme Court: In 2013, the Virginia Supreme Court found that parents have Fundamental Liberty interests in the care, custody, and control of their child. They also found that a child has liberty interests in establishing relationships with their parents, as stated in 2013 LF v. Breit, Virginia State Supreme Court such that “Although our analysis, in this case, rests on Breit’s constitutionally protected rights as a parent, we recognize that children also have a liberty interest in establishing relationships with their parents”.
It is, therefore, that Elani Wells, hereby requests custody of HER son Aedan Williams.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, Elani Wells has been falsely accused of child abuse. The claims used against her in court were based on fraudulent accounts and later resulted in the adoption of her child, Aedan Williams, to Elizabeth and Phillips Justice on January 15, 2020.

There has not been evidence that supports these findings because said evidence simply does not exist.

Elani Wells respectfully asks that this Court reverse the decision of the trial court and vacate the adoption.

DATED:Respectfully Submitted,

By Elani Wells (Signature)

Elani Wells

Your name-printed or typed)

Appeal From a Judgment [or Order]

Of The Circuit Court, County of Greensville

Hon. Alan Sharrett, Judge

TABLE OF CONTENTS

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

I. Elani Wells was falsely accused of child abuse 3

A. Fraudulent accounts were made against Elani Wells
B. Assumptions were based on false statements

II. Alleged injury of a child, Aedan Williams, led to CPS complaint of abuse 3

A. Adoption of Aedan was granted to Elizabeth and Phillips Justice

ARGUMENT 4

I. Fraudulent case is based on allegations that have no merit 4

A. Elani has been falsely accused of a level two preponderance of the evidence
B. While under the care of the babysitter, Aedan gets injured

II. Aedan is later inspected at grandmother's house and reported to CPS

Argument 5

A. CPS places him in the care of Christina Pope
B. Adoption of Aedan was granted to Elizabeth and Phillips Justice

CONCLUSION 6

I. )Elani Wells has been falsely accused of child abuse.

A. Claims used against Elani in court were based on fraudulent accounts
B. Findings that lack proper evidence, resulted in the adoption of Elani’s child

II.) Elani Wells asks the court to reverse the decision and vacate the adoption 6

On April 11, 2016, an incident occurred, and Elani Bicking Wells was falsely accused of child abuse. These claims were based on fraudulent accounts and later used against her court. As a result, sole legal and physical custody of her son, Aedan Liam Williams, was granted to Elizabeth and Phillip Justice on March 5, 2018. The complaint alleged that Aedan Williams suffered from a large blister type injury to his right buttocks that was later diagnosed as a burn. This injury led to a founded CPS complaint of abuse.
On June 24, 2016, the result of the Child Protective Services investigation was received. The department found there was evidence that abuse occurred, and Elani Wells was held accountable. 18 U.S. Code § 1028. Per 22 VAC 40-705-30, A “Physical abuse occurs when a caretaker creates or inflicts, threatens to create or inflict, or allows to be created or inflicted upon a child a physical injury by other than accidental means or creates a substantial risk of death, disfigurement, or impairment of bodily fluids.” Such evidence does not exist because these assumptions were based on false statements and at no point did physical abuse occur while her child Aedan Williams was in the care of his mother Elani Wells.

ARGUMENT

An adoption was granted fraudulently. False statements have been made and shared. 18 U.S. Code § 1028. This has been going on for four years. This fraudulent case is based on allegations that have no merit. On April 11, 2016, Elani Wells did not have her son, Aedan Williams, with her. While at the babysitter Aedan gets hurt and Elani is falsely accused of a level two preponderance of the evidence. 18 U.S. Code § 1028. On this day, Elani Wells was attending mandatory meetings. While her son, Aedan, was placed under the care of a babysitter, Beth Scott, and later sent to the paternal grandmother, Brenda Ransom. 42 U.S. Code § 510.

He was in the care of the paternal grandmother that Aedan was said to have been placed on a four-wheeler with another boy. Shortly after going home, Elani falls asleep next to Aedan.

Right away Elani calls the paternal grandmother and asks her what happened. She is told that it is probably a diaper rash or an allergic reaction to the bath soap that was used on him previously while in the care of the babysitter. 18 U.S. Code § 1028. This came as a surprise to Elani, seeming that she had no knowledge he was ever given a bath.
As the case continued, these people were never questioned. The following day, Elani notices Aedan is doing better with the exception of feeling discomfort when wetting his diaper. Later that day, Elani is in severe pain from kidney stones and is checked into the emergency room. Her pain is so severe that she asks Aedan’s “Nana”, Betty Hobbs, to watch him for a few days until she recovers.
It was during this time that Elani’s Aunt, Christina Pope, stopped by to check on the child, Aedan Williams, and shortly after began working with Child Protective Services. Aedan Williams was placed in the care of Elani's Aunt, Christina Pope, while CPS started an investigation.
This would later result in the court granting sole legal and physical custody of Elani Well's son, Aedan Liam Williams, to Elizabeth and Phillip Justice.
The final order of adoption was signed on January 15, 2020. Based on false allegations and without the consent of Elani Wells. 18 U.S. Code § 1028.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, Elani Wells has been falsely accused of child abuse. The claims used against her in court were based on fraudulent accounts and later resulted in the adoption of her child, Aedan Williams, to Elizabeth and Phillips Justice on January 15, 2020.

There has not been evidence that supports these findings because said evidence simply does not exist. Elani Wells respectfully asks that this Court reverse the decision of the trial court and vacate the adoption.

DATED:Respectfully Submitted,

By (Signature)

Elani Wells

Your name-printed or typed)

MOTION TO VACATE

VIRGINIA IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF GREENSVILLE

ELANI WELLS

Plaintiff

v.CASE NO: CL 1800005-00

ELIZABETH AND PHILLIP JUSTICE

Defendant

It is hereby respectfully and in the interest of justice requested that this Court vacate the “Final Adoption” signed by Judge Allen Sharett on January 15, 2020, along with requested relief, based on extrinsic and intrinsic fraud, Fraud to the Court, a lack of jurisdiction, and working outside of the power delegated to the Court and outside of the Constitution, and as such, the final order is not only void but also voidable according to both Virginia and Federal Supreme Court Rulings, and therefore open to collateral attack at any time, and can be vacated at any time without a direct appeal. Furthermore, in the absence of pleadings, dispositions, admissions, or affidavits, the Court has no facts to rely on a summary of determination. In addition, this states that relief is MANDATORY.

I. VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT RULING. 1. Virginia Supreme Court Rulings show that judgments obtained by extrinsic fraud are void. Extrinsic fraud is that which prevents fair submission of the controversy to the court, and therefore a collateral attack is allowed at any time rather than an appeal:
a. “A judgment obtained by extrinsic fraud is void and subject to direct or collateral attack. Extrinsic fraud consists of conduct that prevents a fair submission of the controversy to the court. A collateral challenge to such a judgment is allowed because such a fraud perverts the judicial processes and prevents the court or non-defrauding party from discovering fraud through regular adversarial processes'' (1993-Peet v. Peet, 16 Va. App. 323). Further, “[a] judgment obtained by intrinsic fraud is merely voidable and can be challenged only by a direct appeal or by a direct attack in an independent proceeding. ‘Intrinsic’ fraud includes perjury, use of forged documents, or other means of obscuring facts presented before the court and whose truth or falsity as to the issues being litigated are passed upon by the trier of fact. (Citing Peet v. Peet, 16 Va. App 323 (1993)).”
b. There is clear evidence of extrinsic and intrinsic fraud and that fraud was documented and pointed out in court continually through submitted motions and verbally in court.
c. No motions to the court were accepted by Elani Wells. The court accepted false assets, which Elani Wells had no chance to respond, in further hearings the judge would not accept signed and notarized affidavits to dispute the false assets, and would not accept any investigations or any proof subpoenaed by Elani Wells to prove actual truths. The court would not allow expert witnesses to speak. The court threatened Elani Wells with the illegal adoption of her son.
d. There is clear perjury, fraud, and misrepresentations, with massive detail in the attached Appendix.

2. Void judgments can be attacked and vacated in any court at any time:

a. “It is firmly established that a void judgment may be attacked and vacated in any court at any time, directly or collaterally” (1994- Kelley v. Kelley, 248 Va. 295).
b. “A party may assail a void judgment at any time, by direct or collateral attack” (1997- Steinberg v. Steinberg. Va. Ct. of Appeals, Unpublished, No. 2557-96-2).
c. “An order which is void ab initio is a complete nullity, and it may be impeached directly or collaterally by all persons, anywhere, at any time, or in any manner. An order that is merely voidable is subject to direct attack at any time before the judgment becomes final” (2012-Amin v. County of Henrico, 61 Va. App. 67).

3. In the absence of pleadings, an order is void:

a. “A decree cannot be entered in the absence of pleadings upon which to found the same, and if entered, is void” (1935-Potts v. Mathieson Alkali Wors, 165 Va. 196)
b. “Where there are no dispositions, admissions, or affidavits the court has no facts to rely on for a summary of determination” Trinsey v. Pagliaro, D.C. Pa 1964, 229 F. Supp. 647

II. FEDERAL SUPREME COURT RULINGS

1. Regarding Void Judgements:

a. “A void judgment is to be distinguished from an erroneous one, in that, the latter is subject only to direct attack. Avoid judgment is one which, from its inception, was a complete nullity and without legal effect”. Lubben v. Selective Service System, 453 F. 2d 645, 649 (1st Cir. 1972).
b. The law is well settled that a void order or judgment is void even before reversal”. Valley v. Northern Fire and Marine Ins. CO., 254 U.S. 348, 41 S. CT.116 (1920).
c. Avoid judgment is a nullity from the beginning and is attended by none of the consequences of a valid judgment. It is entitled to no respect whatsoever because it does not affect, impair, or create legal rights.” Ex parte Seidel, 39 S.W.3d 221, 225 (Tex. Trim App. 2001), Ex parte Spaulding, 687 S.W.2d at 745 (Teague, J., concurring)
d. It has also been held that “It is not necessary to have to take steps to have a void judgment reversed, vacated, or set aside. It may be impeached in any action direct, or collateral.” Holder v. Scott, 396 S.W. 2d 906, (Tex. Civ. App., Texarkana, 1965, writ ref., n.r.e.).
e. It is a clear and well-established law that a void order can be challenged in any court” (Old Wayne Mut. L. Assoc. v. McDonough, 204 U.S. 8, 27 S. Ct. 236 (1907).
f. A void judgment may be attacked at any time by a person whose rights are affected (El-Kareh v. Texas Alcoholic Beverage Comm’n, 874 S.W.2d, 192, 194; Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1994, no writ).
g. Judgement is a void judgment is a court that rendered judgment lacking jurisdiction of the subject matter, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process, Fed. Rules Civ. Proc., Rule 60(b)(4), 28 U.S.C.A Const. Amend. 5-Klugh v. U.S., 620 F. Supp. 892 (D.S.C. 1985). Courts are constituted by authority and they cannot go beyond that power delegated to them. If they act beyond that authority, and certainly in contradiction of it, their judgments and orders are regarded as nullities; they are not voidable, but simply void, and this even prior to reversal” (Williamson v. Berry, 8 HOW. 945, 540 12 L. Ed. 1170, 1189 (1850).

2. One need not APPEAL:

a. A party affected by a void judgment need not Appeal (State ex. Rel. Latty, 907 S.W.2d at 746). If an appeal is taken, however, the appellate court may declare void any orders the trial court signed after it lost plenary power over the case, because a void judgment is a nullity from the beginning and is attended by none of the consequences of a valid judgment” (State ex rel. Latty, 907 S.W.2d at 486). The appeal is taken from a void judgment, the appellate court must declare the judgment void, because the appellate court may not address the merits, it must set aside the trial court’s judgment and dismiss the appeal (Ex parte Spaulding, 687 S.W. at 745, Teague, J., concurring).
b. When providing for relief from void judgments is applicable, relief is not discretionary, but is MANDATORY. (Omer. V. Shalala, 30 F. 3d 1307 [Colo. 1994]).

At the Beginning (My first interaction with CPS)

I did not have an attorney
I never had a trial
I had an administrative hearing

And I never had a council

The hearing officer lies called it an administrative hearing and a trial and an appeal

I’m at court I’ve got 150 pages of material to expose the adoption was a fraudulent one

& I’m feeling positive

The judge explains he does not have jurisdiction to hear my case

It’s a matter for upstairs

Amanda says no the adoption is closed there is no reason to harass her clients.

I speak out. I am fighting for my son and I am not going to stop.

The judge says

I better not file anything or he will get me for harassing the Justices

the Judge then dismisses the case

I have been warned/told I can’t defend myself or I will be sued

I take this is a threat

This is

A fraudulent adoption
I have been falsely accused of abusing my son and with me not being allowed to cross-examine the people who did have my son is a violation of my civil rights
No trail
Can I accuse the court with essentially the intent to kidnap?

The attorney Amanda lied on the adoption papers when said I did not try to see my son

She said I did drugs while I was pregnant when I did not

And

She LIES WHEN SHE SAYS the Justice’s have had my son longer than they have.

Discovery Laws in Virginia

The following is information on the discovery rule in VA and how it impacts the defense side investigation for your criminal case.

Discovery in Virginia

The discovery rule in Virginia is very limited, especially compared with other neighboring states. In Virginia, discovery rules are governed by the statute and constitutional laws. The most on-point constitutional law or constitutional case regarding discovery is Brady vs. Maryland. The Rules of the Virginia Supreme Court (pdf) are compliant with Brady, but they only require that the Commonwealth shares certain information. As for this information, it includes anything that is exculpatory and tends to disprove guilt and improve innocence, statements, recordings, or videos of the accused, as well as the accused’s criminal history.

Other states, notably Maryland, make defendants entitled to a lot bigger piece of information, including certain police reports and certain other writings. Virginia is more limited. The reason is, in Virginia, studies have suggested that standard discovery rules are appropriate but at this point, the Virginia Supreme Court has resisted expanding the Virginia discovery rule. However, it is important for an experienced criminal defense attorney to know how the Virginia discovery rules impact their case and how the Virginia discovery rules are interpreted by the local jurisdiction.

Each local Commonwealth Attorney’s office has a little bit different understanding of how they apply discovery in misdemeanor cases, in felony cases, and in certain serious felony cases. These rules may differ from case to case and sometimes even from prosecutor to prosecutor. It is important to know who you are dealing with and where you are dealing with them in order to come to grips with what discovery will mean for your client in their case.

Brady Information in Virginia Criminal Cases

Brady Information is also known as exculpatory information. This is information that tends to disprove guilt and improve innocence. Brady Information is a tough concept for both prosecutors and defense attorneys alike. The reason it is a tough concept is that it is the role of the prosecutor to identify what information is subject to Brady and provide that to the defense attorneys. However, prosecutors are often limited in identifying Brady materials because it may be information that is simply not known to them. This may not be known to them simply because they didn’t adequately research the file or, in many cases, because it wasn’t in the police reports.

Prosecutors must be vigilant about going through police reports, talking with witnesses, and following up on their own investigations in order to figure out what information they must turn over to the defense counsel. Likewise, defense counsel must be vigilant and not necessarily trust the information they get from the prosecutors, but rather do their own independent investigations of the facts to find out what information is out there and how it may result in Brady material.

RECENT CASE RESULTS

Practice Areas

ASSAULT

APPEALS

ROBBERY

GREENSVILLE COUNTY

If you have been charged with a crime, you have the right to certain kinds of evidence and other information before your scheduled trial. These materials are known as discovery. Each state has its own rules on what discovery must be provided by the prosecution and the defense. Unfortunately, Virginia’s rules on disclosing evidence favor the prosecutor. However, even with the limitations on what you can obtain through the discovery process, receiving and reviewing any information that you can obtain from the prosecutor is essential to building a strong defense.

What Are Your Rights to Discovery in Virginia?

Discovery is the process by which defendants find out about the prosecutor’s case against them. This information can be crucial for a criminal defense attorney to build a strong defense to the charges and to help the person charged with the crime decide whether entering into a plea agreement is in his interests. Discovery is an ongoing obligation. If you are a defendant in a criminal proceeding, the prosecution has a duty to provide you with the following:

Any statement made by you

Your prior criminal history

Information on any expert witnesses the prosecution intends to use at trial

The results of any scientific tests performed

Books, papers, documents, photographs, and other tangible evidence that the prosecutor has and that is material to your case

Exculpatory evidence

The prosecutor has no duty to disclose his strategies, legal theories, and notes regarding your criminal case. This is known as his work product and is not required to be provided to you. Discovery is now reciprocal, which means that you as a criminal defendant have obligations to disclose certain information to the prosecutor. In general, the information that you are required to share is similar to what the prosecutor must provide to you.

What Is Exculpatory Evidence?

Under the U.S. Constitution, the prosecutor is required to provide the defendant’s attorney with any exculpatory evidence in his possession or control. This is known as Brady information and is named after a famous U.S. Supreme Court case that established the requirement that the prosecution turn over exculpatory evidence. It is usually defined as evidence that tends to dispute the defendant’s guilt or would suggest a lesser punishment. In addition, the evidence does not have to strongly suggest innocence. It must be provided if it provides significant aid to the defendant’s case, including providing any doubt as to the defendant’s guilt.

In order to ensure that they receive this required information, criminal defense attorneys often formally request this evidence in a written request or motion early on in the criminal proceeding. In addition, the attorney may interview other parties that could be aware of other exculpatory evidence.

If there are Brady violations by the prosecutor, the court could overturn a conviction and set a new trial date. The judge is more likely to find a violation of the defense counsel made a written request for the information. This is one reason a thorough discovery is so important to a defendant’s defense.

In the Commonwealth of Virginia, the discovery process can be slightly different depending on the jurisdiction where a criminal case is being heard. Different prosecutors can have a different interpretation of what they are required to disclose. In addition, having an experienced criminal defense attorney who has experience working with the prosecutor can make the discovery process in your case go more smoothly.

Letters I’ve sent to the Justices hoping to see my son’ AedanWilliams

Click to View all!