.BEFORE THE MISSOURI COURT OF APPEALS -- SOUTHERN DISTRICT, in Springfield, Missouri. In the Interest of H.D., ) Roxie Fausnaught, ) Pro Se Appellant ) ) vs. ) S.D. Case #26446 ) The Newton County Juvenile Office, ) Respondent. )
MOTION SHOWING GOOD CAUSE FOR LACK OF RECORD ON APPEAL
COMES NOW the Appellant, Roxie Fausnaught, and in support of this Motion for a Continuance of Appeal states the following facts and points of law as to why Appellant has been unable to provide the Rule 81.12, Missouri Rules of Court, Record on Appeal. The fact of the matter is that it is not Appellant's fault that no Record has been made available, but rather due to a policy of terrorism and collusion on the part of the Division III Juvenile Judge Kevin Lee Selby, the Division III court clerks Dana Jo Wallace and Carmen Jamison, and the Newton County Juvenile Office, Pat Stuart in particular, and Newton County Prosecuting Attorney Bill Dobbs that a number of arrests and threats of contempt of court to hide these false arrests have made it so that Appellant is terrorized from getting these records for the appeal, from even getting a final judgment. This Appellate Court must insist that Appellant receives the full contents of the Record on Appeal. Until the Division III Juvenile Court judge and clerks have this Appellate Court force them to provide Appellant with the record, this Appellant has no papers other than page two of the docket sheet up to July 15, 2004, which was all that Judge Selby and his court clerks would allow Appellant's attorney, Thomas Mann, to receive. Therefore it would be unjust and unlawful for this Appellate Court to dismiss Appellant's suit(s) on behalf of her grandchildren under a dismissal docket according to Supreme Court Rule 84.08, when the fault is because Newton County Circuit Court Judge Kevin Lee Selby, his clerks, and the Newton County Juvenile authorities wish to forestall appellate review of their legalized kidnapping of the grandchildren of their political and personal enemies. Therefore, Appellant asks that this Appellate Court make the Newton County Circuit Court release any and all of the court record necessary for an honest appeal, and that this Appellate Court does not dismiss this case unjustly because of no fault of the Appellant because of the dishonor and lawlessness of the Newton County Circuit Court and Juvenile Office.
Suggestions as to Why Appellant Should Be Granted Necessary Time for His Appeal
1. On April 9, 2004, Appellant's four grandchildren were removed by the Newton County Division of Family Services, the Juvenile Office, and the Newton County Sheriff's Department from their home at 337 Rabbit Track Road across from Appellant's home at 338 Rabbit Track Road in Granby Missouri. They were removed under color of 'emergency' from an anonymous hotline call. The Missouri Supreme Court had recently ruled on March 30, 2004 in In the Interest of: P.L.O. and S.K.O., minor children, Case # SC85120, that removal under 'emergency' conditions without court order was permissible. This case involved termination of a mother's rights by the juvenile authorities of Newton County. My long- term companion, Martin Lindstedt, regarded by the grandchildren as their grandfather, went over and had it insinuated to him that he was suspected, on the basis of a hotline call, of child molestation. The Newton County Juvenile Officer David Jones had Granby Police Officer Chris Moreland issue a summons for 'trespassing' and confiscation of a videocassette tape of the seizure of the grandchildren. (This videotape was returned by Scott Watson, Newton County Prosecuting Attorney two weeks later after the Granby Police Chief Officer Moreland gave it over, unlawfully, to the County Prosecutor.) Later that night, when the children were at this 'Children's Abuse Center' in Joplin, Appellant was informed repeatedly, that "We are not after you, we are after Martin Lindstedt. He is running for Governor of Missouri."
2. Martin Lindstedt helped Shawn Deines, the father of H.D. and M.A.D., to file legal papers asking for a continuance and assistance of counsel on April 14 and April 15, 2004. When serving some papers to the Newton County Juvenile Office, Chief Juvenile Deputy Pat Stuart the afternoon of April 14th, after ascertaining who Martin Lindstedt was, asked if Martin Lindstedt knew that he wasn't allowed to appear before the Division III Juvenile Court on April 15, 2004. Martin Lindstedt then asked if this was a criminal conspiracy between the Newton County Juvenile Office and Judge Kevin Selby of the Newton County Juvenile Court. Deputy Stuart refused to answer that question, but identified himself and said that Martin Lindstedt could put it all over his web page if he wanted.
3. On April 15, 2004, Martin Lindstedt was on the ground floor of the Newton County Courthouse videotaping Division of Family Services (DFS hereafter) personnel and police and juvenile officers, when Chief Juvenile Deputy Pat Stuart charged in, demanded to confiscate the video camera, and then had Martin Lindstedt arrested under color of Revised Missouri Statutes (RSMo) 575.145, Willfully Resisting or Oppose A Deputy Sheriff (Exhibit provided at back of this Motion). This was a false arrest because RSMo 575.145 concerns -- Signal or direction of sheriff or deputy sheriff, duty to stop, motor vehicle operators and riders of animals -- violation, penalty -- regulation of motor or animal traffic on a public highway.
Yet, after nearly two hours in the Newton County Jail, Martin Lindstedt was ordered released by Judge Kevin Lee Selby, but only after Judge Selby covered up for the false arrest by his accomplice Chief Juvenile Deputy Pat Stuart by claiming that Martin Lindstedt had conducted an act of contempt of court by videotaping juveniles. Martin Lindstedt made an oral motion that the videotape in question be evaluated for any sign that the accusations of a police officer who had just committed an act of false arrest were true. If there were any 'protected juveniles' on that videotape that the original copy be kept as a baseline reference and that a copy of the rest be returned to Martin Lindstedt. Judge Selby then assigned Bill Dobbs, the Newton County Prosecutor for juvenile cases, present in the court room the task of evaluating the videotape. (The videotape was returned by Scott Watson intact insofar as can be seen, with no erasures. The videotape of April 9, 2004 illegally confiscated by the Granby police was also returned by Scott Watson a week or so later.) The return of the videocassette camera was also demanded by Martin Lindstedt, over the objections of Pat Stuart. Judge Selby, perhaps not wanting to cover up a theft as well as a false arrest, made Stuart return the video camera.
4. Also present in the courtroom on April 15, 2004 was Anne Wells, who Judge Selby appointed to be guardian ad litem. This particular attorney, appointed to the Granby municipal court when the regular elected judge was sent to Iraq with the National Guard, didn't like Martin Lindstedt informing her that she ran an illegal court absent a special election under provision of RSMo § 479.230. Municipal Courts and Traffic Courts, Section 479.230, Absence of judge, procedure. 479.230. This appointed lawyer was upset so much that she threatened to have Martin Lindstedt arrested merely for sitting in her city-hall court room. Lindstedt made a complaint about this to the Joplin FBI, but they did nothing about the matter. A different lawyer was later appointed by Newton County Presiding Judge Tim Perigo because Attorney Wells had to resign because she became a law partner for the City of Granby Prosecuting Attorney. The City of Granby not only refused to hold the RSMo § 479.230 special election, it refused to hold a general election in April 2004, because Martin Lindstedt announced that he wanted to be a candidate for municipal judge, just as he had ran for municipal judge every odd year in four out of five April elections from 1995, 1997, 1999, and 2003 and was the only candidate living within the city limits of Granby.
In January 2004, Martin Lindstedt was jailed for 20 hours on four bogus traffic tickets given by the Diamond municipal police. Appellant, along with the two oldest grandchildren and their father Shawn Deines, watched as Martin Lindstedt demanded to see identification from the Diamond police, and was arrested even though Martin Lindstedt's driver's license was produced. Then at the Diamond municipal court session in February, Martin Lindstedt made a Motion for Jury Trial and to take the matter up to Newton County before Anne Wells acting as Diamond municipal court judge. An argument took place as to whether this judge was acting lawfully, and Anne Wells insisted that Martin Lindstedt answer a question posed by her in the way she demanded. When Martin Lindstedt refused, she had him arrested for 'contempt of court' and sent again to the Newton County jail, this time for two hours. The matter of contempt was dismissed and the four traffic tickets were sent up to Newton County Circuit Court, where they have not been heard of since.
It is a conflict of interest for a judge, with a history of conflict, enmity, bias and prejudice against an 'alleged perpetrator' accused by an anonymous hotline call to assign as guardian ad litem an attorney with another history of conflict, enmity, bias and prejudice against Martin Lindstedt. This conduct smacks far more of punishing and getting back at a political and personal enemy and using their positions of power and trust to confiscate that political enemy's grandchildren in secret 'star-chamber' proceedings in which juvenile officers and DFS social workers collude with the judge and all attorneys to destroy the families of not only the poor and weak, but of their political enemies. This behavior ensures social conflict and gives rise to the judicial system as a whole being held in contempt for corruption and self-serving behavior above any real law. This behavior also leads to civil warfare and a call for intervention from other governments to remove the corrupt political establishment. This Anne Wells was appointed guardian ad litem on or about April 15, 2004, well before any major hearing was to be held. No questions seem to have been asked or answered concerning any potential conflicts of interest. If such questions would have been brought up, then both Judge Selby and Attorney Wells would have had to recuse themselves as being unable to judge this matter without bias or prejudice. They certainly have left themselves open to charges of bias and prejudice by their past activities against someone accused, anonymously, of being an 'alleged perpetrator,' their past enemy Martin Lindstedt, the grandfather of four grandchildren, two of whose interests is to be heard by this Appellate Court.
5. Shawn Deines had Martin Lindstedt draft up some motions, one of them asking for a continuance because he had not had at least 24 hours notice, so the fate of his two children was delayed until April 22, 2004. Shawn Deines is the father of the oldest two grandchildren, the daughter H.D. whose case is now before this Appellate Court. These two children were placed into 'protective custody' of DFS, and supervised visitation was allowed under the supervision of all the other, mainly absent grandparents of the fathers. Appellant, as the maternal grandmother, was not allowed visitation.
At around 4:00 p.m., Martin Lindstedt went with Shawn Deines to get a copy of the record on his two children. There had been persistent friction with the Division III court clerks because Shawn Deines is rather slow and Martin Lindstedt insists that all of the court record be given to Shawn Deines. The court clerks, Judge Selby, juvenile officers, police and prosecuting attorney were scared that these records of secret court sessions would be placed over the Internet for everyone to read. So when Martin Lindstedt seen what Carmen Jamison, a court clerk had on one of the children's files, as being 'clerk's notes,' i.e. the typewritten docket sheet cleaning up the judge's scrawl, Martin Lindstedt asked for the clerk's notes as well. Dana Jo Wallace, the chief clerk, rioted. She demanded that only Shawn Deines could ask for the full file. Martin Lindstedt said, "Simon says, Shawn ask for the clerk's notes too." Shawn then said, "I'd like the clerk's notes too." Dana Jo Wallace then demanded that Martin Lindstedt leave. Martin Lindstedt then asked under what law? Then a bearded policeman or juvenile officer in the Division III courtroom lobby said that he would arrest Martin Lindstedt if Martin Lindstedt didn't leave. Some papers, including the clerk's notes, were given to Shawn Deines while Martin Lindstedt looked in outside the glass door. Then a bailiff named Mike Miller told Martin Lindstedt outside the door that the judge wanted to see him. Judge Selby, as during the past week, then screamed and hollered about Martin Lindstedt being rude to his court clerks and how he would be held in contempt and taken to jail if there was a next time and how much Martin Lindstedt liked to go to jail seeing how much he was taken to jail and not to say a word. Martin Lindstedt said that it was a matter not of 'politeness' but of law, and under what law was he being threatened with contempt? As on the previous week (April 15th) there was no record being kept of this conversation. If Martin Lindstedt were to be jailed for contempt, then there would be a record of it, and that it would not look good for the judge. Judge Selby was covering up for the misconduct and conspiracy to steal our grandkids and to railroad Martin Lindstedt into prison, and not obeying any real law. Judge Selby then told Bailiff Mike Miller to 'take him away,' and Mike Miller grabbed Martin Lindstedt's arm and escorted him outside onto the courthouse floor. Martin Lindstedt then told Appellant and Shawn Deines what had happened, and looked over the papers that Shawn had gotten because of Martin's insistence.
This episode scared Appellant because it seemed that if Martin Lindstedt insisted upon getting the papers and files necessary to appeal or undo what the Newton County Juvenile Court and juvenile officers wanted in taking away our grandchildren and destroying our family, that he would go to jail every time. However, neither Appellant nor Shawn Deines nor anyone else had the intelligence or will to confront the Newton County judges, prosecutors, DFS workers for undoing their evil deeds in stealing our grandchildren. Nor would Martin Lindstedt back down from any confrontation, saying that his false arrest by Pat Stuart and its cover-up under color of law by Judge Selby was the best thing that had happened so far because it was a public record, not a secret tribunal, and that this meant that anything done in Selby's court would someday be rendered null and void by another tribunal or public opinion.
Martin Lindstedt also made a complaint to Scott Watson, Newton County Prosecuting Attorney that court clerks Carmen Jamison and Dana Jo Wallace and Judge Selby had violated Revised Missouri Statutes, (RSMo) § 483.165:
Nonfeasance or misfeasance, misdemeanor. 483.165. If any clerk shall knowingly and willfully do any act contrary to the duties of his office, or shall knowingly and willfully fail to perform any act or duty required of him by law, he shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor in office.
Martin Lindstedt also complained that Prosecuting Attorney Scott Watson had a duty to investigate this matter under RSMo § 483.170:
Duty of court when clerk is charged with misdemeanor in office--notice --temporary clerk during suspension. 483.170. 1. When any court shall believe from its own knowledge or from information secured from others given to the court under oath or affirmation, that the clerk of the court has committed some act or acts constituting a misdemeanor in office, the court shall give notice thereof, stating the charge or charges against such clerk, to the attorney general of the state or the prosecuting attorney of the county, requiring him to prosecute the same; and such court may by order of record suspend such clerk from office until a trial upon such charge or charges can be had.
Of course, neither Prosecutor Scott Watson nor Judge Selby would act upon these crimes and criminal activity done by court clerks acting to maintain the secrecy of their juvenile courts buying and selling the children of the poor.
6. In addition, Scott Watson has allowed his prosecutor in these juvenile cases, Bill Dobbs, to violate RSMo § 575.110, Offenses Against The Administration of Justice, 575.110.1(2):
(2) Knowing that he lacks authority to do so, he destroys, suppresses or conceals any public record.RSMo § 575.110.2 says that 'Tampering with a public record is a Class A misdemeanor.
Appellant's oldest grandchild and only granddaughter, H.D., one of two children whose cases are before this Appellate Court, was molested by Luper Baldwin, James Baldwin's natural father, when my daughter and her husband foolishly allowed him to stay across the street and sleep in the same bed as another woman guest and the oldest two grandchildren. Luper Baldwin admitted to molesting my granddaughter H.D., but his public defender Kathleen Byrnes- Ales filed a Motion to Strike Trial Setting, claiming that Luper Baldwin, while able to plot to molest a child and run for his life before detection, was too crazy and stupid to stand trial. This motion passed and Luper Baldwin, admission and all, was turned loose without paying for his crime. This case, .State vs. Luper M. Baldwin, CR400- 2353FX, is a public record, yet Bill Dobbs and Scott Watson suppressed this public record where their public defender rolling over and selling out her indigent clients via plea bargains gets away with being deemed 'soft' on child molestation cases when they do have an admission of guilt and physical evidence. As do they, for letting Luper Baldwin go. They have committed Class A misdemeanors tampering with a public record, something which should have them disbarred and never able to prosecute a case again, yet they choose to allow this case to continue against Appellant and Martin Lindstedt, accusing Appellant of living with an 'alleged perpetrator' when there is no admission of guilt nor signs of physical abuse, only hotline calls and DFS 'therapists' claiming that they have played with dolls and one child claimed that 'Papa (Martin Lindstedt) kissed him all over' using a paper doll. Contrast that with letting an admitted child molester go free. Therefore this entire case is not about actual child molestation but rather one time the Newton County court system and prosecutor's office allowing a favored pedophile to molest the children of one of their political enemies and tampering with a public record to conceal their crime of not prosecuting on the one hand, and then years later, taking children screaming away from their home, putting them in the custody of the DFS, all upon an anonymous complaint of a hotline caller and then, after months of 'therapy' inducing a claim absent all physical evidence or admission of guilt that their political enemy kissed his six-year-old grandson 'all over' using a paper doll and giving him a marker to perform what these 'children's advocates' have rehearsed in private, contrary to all common decency and rule of law.
7. Judge Selby at the very first April 15, 2004 court hearing ordered my daughter, Amalie Baldwin, her husband James Baldwin, and ex-son-in-law Shawn Deines to move away from their homes in Granby. To facilitate Shawn Deines being able to move, Judge Selby cut his child support payments from $429 per month to zero, so all Shawn had to do was pay back child support owed. Shawn Deines then moved out of the trailer house at the foot of the hill half owned by Martin Lindstedt at the end of April. Shawn was supposed to file a Notice of Appeal from Selby's judgment of April 22, 2004, but instead chose to hide out at his father's place in Pineville, Missouri and pretend that he was in Kansas. Thus there was no Notice of Appeal able to be filed on Judge Selby's judgment of April 22, 2004, placing the two oldest grandchildren into DFS custody. This 'order' -- no record in the trial files of it being made, was made long before any adjudication or decision was to be made on May 20, 2004. This May 20, 2004 adjudication was postponed in any case by a continuance filed by Bill Dobbs to July 15, 2004.
By the end of May, Amalie Baldwin's second husband, James Baldwin, cracked under pressure and moved to Neosho away from his home at 337 Rabbit Track Road, Granby Missouri across the street from my home at 338 Rabbit Track Road. There was a yellow crosswalk for the grandchildren to come across to my home to be fed and taught and loved. My daughter is lazy and a slut. My second son-in-law, James Baldwin is a third-generation child molester on his father Luper's side and his mother Inez was convicted of child neglect for letting her husbands' and boyfriends abuse her son James and her daughter, who changed her name after growing out of foster care and will have nothing to do with her mother and brother. Shawn Deines was forced to move away by promises of getting back his children, although he doesn't have a license to drive because of being convicted of not having insurance three or four times in Kansas. None of these people are able to take care of themselves, much less their children. Yet before April 9, 2004, when these children were taken away by the Newton County Juvenile Office, the mother and both husbands and fathers had jobs, were supporting their children, could see them any time they pleased, and Appellant's grandchildren were in school, coming over to be fed and bathed, to play on the computer allotted for them, and the oldest two spent the weekends on Appellant's living-room couch, along with one of the youngest Baldwin grandsons, depending upon whose turn it was that time. Appellant is not as close to the younger grandsons as she is the older two that she and Martin Lindstedt raised. This was a happy, functioning family until April 9, 2004, when Appellant's grandchildren were taken away and put into foster care on the basis of a bogus 'emergency' made up by the Newton County juvenile authorities on the basis of an anonymous hotline call.
Today my daughter Amalie Baldwin is enjoying her weekly visits to see her children. She got a job which lasted for a week. She has been having sex with anyone who will have her, including a negro when available. James Baldwin, still on probation for kicking his stepson, M.A.D. in the face, which was the reason for taking the children away the first time in September 2002, is now running with a pregnant felon who has had one child taken away by DFS and probably going to jail when a bunch of hot checks bounce. His life was ruined by the juvenile justice system. My first son-in-law Shawn Deines still has his job, but is unable to save the $1000 necessary to get his license back. My four grandchildren are being raised like puppies in a puppy mill by a foster mother. Appellant is not allowed to see them. The one time Appellant drove her daughter over to see the kids at the end of May, Doug Baugh the DFS case worker got wind of it, made the foster mother perjure herself, and threatened to never let my daughter see her children again. Martin Lindstedt has taken great care to not see his grandchildren while this matter is up in the air because it would be used against him and his grandchildren never being able to come on home. Yet he has never been charged with any crime.
Essentially our family has been deliberately destroyed by the Newton County Division of Family Services, the Newton County Sheriff's Office and Juvenile Office, the Newton County Prosecutor's Office, and Judges Timothy Perigo and Kevin Lee Selby and court clerks Carmen Jamison and Dana Jo Wallace, all tampering with the official records, making false arrests, holding secret proceedings in a secret court. The purpose of any human society is to prepare a younger generation for their lives in that society. This Missouri court system and juvenile system has used their power to destroy the lives and families of their political enemies, as well as the poor and weak who have children to steal, buy and sell. Martin Lindstedt posts these papers onto the Internet so that both foreign and domestic enemies of this regime will know better than to have any mercy upon the families of regime criminals when they come to power.
8. Since Appellant had no reliable source of information as to what was going on in the secret juvenile court now that her own daughter was unreliable and the sons-in-law had moved away, Martin Lindstedt started looking for a lawyer to represent our interests. None of the lawyers in Neosho could be trusted, so Martin Lindstedt chose a lawyer that he had observed in court for his aggressiveness and ability to work the system, Tom Mann. The retainer was $1500, well beyond Appellant's ability to pay. Appellant receives a VA widow's pension of $967 per month, which would be lost if she married Martin Lindstedt. Martin Lindstedt receives a net income from an inheritance of $7500 per year after having to pay property taxes in South Dakota. Martin Lindstedt decided to pay the $1500 retainer even though it meant not being able to have anything to put away in savings this year because he said that he couldn't look his grandchildren in the face if he didn't expend that amount for even a slim chance at saving them from an evil criminal regime, Under Satan's Administration. The lawyer was hired on Monday, May 17, 2004 to make an appearance in court Thursday, May 20, 2004. Tom Mann filed an entry of appearance and a motion for discovery on behalf of Appellant, Roxie Fausnaught, maternal grandmother. On May 19, 2004, Bill Dobbs filed a Motion for Continuance. Bill Dobbs wanted to go on a vacation to the Bahamas, according to Tom Mann. On May 20, 2004 the continuance was granted, the adjudication hearing was reset to July 15, 2004, and Tom Mann, Appellant's lawyer, was denied getting any discovery at all, at least until July 15, 2004, so that he would be unable to find out exactly what was going on now that Appellant was a party to these secret court juvenile proceedings. Attorney Mann lectured Martin Lindstedt about the content of his web page, and how it was scaring and infuriating the judge and court clerks and DFS and sheriff's department. Martin Lindstedt informed Mann that the above regime criminals' doings was a plot to destroy his family and railroad him to prison on manufactured child molestation charges. After all, neither the juvenile court, nor prosecuting attorney Scott Watson and Bill Dobbs had any problem with admitted and caught child molesters like Luper Baldwin, provided that they molested Martin Lindstedt's granddaughter, in which case they were immune from prosecution and conviction. There was no sense in 'playing by the rules' when those making up the rules in power were corrupt and insisted on a foregone conclusion. Lawyer Mann's job was to 'work the system' and find an 'out' so that the System could return the children to their home across the street without any admission of guilt or corruption while Martin Lindstedt worked on hammering them in public and working on a future revenge. This denial of discovery was unprecedented. Couldn't Attorney Mann make a complaint that without discovery that it was impossible for his client, Roxie Fausnaught, to find out what was going on so she could make a case for getting the children? After all, the DFS people, and Candi Butts, the juvenile officer, claimed over the phone that if Martin Lindstedt was driven from his home, that Roxie Fausnaught would receive the grandchildren in a second. Attorney Mann claimed that he couldn't do anything until he got discovery on July 15, 2004, if he got discovery, for the adjudication hearing already in process then. Mann would have no opportunity to study the material and represent Appellant effectively on July 15, 2004, while the fate of her grandchildren was being decided by the very judge (Selby) who had denied discovery for nearly two month's time, from May 20 to July 15, 2004. This decision by Judge Kevin Lee Selby was a calculated act of judicial viciousness to make it impossible for Appellant to have much, if any chance to get her grandchildren back. This juvenile court judge would use full advantage of having secret court proceedings in order to destroy the family of an old political enemy. This also goes to show why Appellant can't expect to receive an adequate, if any, record on appeal to show to this Appellate Court, unless this Court forces the Newton County juvenile circuit court to produce this file, complete and uncut. This is why this Motion to Show Cause as to why Appellant, Pro Se, cannot provide even a final judgment or much of a Record on Appeal, is because of the corruption and viciousness of the juvenile 'trial court' run by Judge Kevin Lee Selby.
9. On July 14, 2004, Martin Lindstedt spoke to Tom Mann concerning what they would do on July 15, 2004. Tom Mann wanted Martin Lindstedt to move out of our home so that Appellant could claim that the 'alleged perpetrator' was no longer present. Martin Lindstedt said that this was a standard DFS trick to separate poor females from their menfolks, and that upon destroying these womens' personal ties of support, that the Division of Family Services would use the new weaknesses to make additional demands, refusing to acknowledge their previous lawless promises never kept. That is how families are destroyed is by removing the masculine presence from a family so that feminist-oriented social workers could gain even more power and control. Martin Lindstedt said that there was no reason to allow DFS and the Newton County lawyers and courts and police to destroy by further separation what little remained of our intact family. However, Martin Lindstedt would have Appellant, who was eating at a restaurant with other friends, call up Thomas Mann and give him her decision.
Attorney Mann then said that he simply couldn't work with that "evil little power-mad bastard of a judge," corrected to "I can't work with you and Roxie's case before that judge. What did you do to him that he is so mad?" Martin Lindstedt allowed that he and Selby had been at each other's throats since 1995. Martin Lindstedt would go down to the Granby municipal court and tell the people waiting for cash- register due process what a crook and fool Selby was. When Martin Lindstedt tried to defend Shawn Deines from a bogus ticket, Martin Lindstedt would write up legal papers and humiliate Selby as Granby City Prosecutor at the time publicly. Selby tried to have Ron Doerge, the Newton County Sheriff arrest Martin Lindstedt for 'unauthorized practice of law.' Martin Lindstedt told Doerge that he was helping out his son-in-law, father of his oldest grandchild at the time, and in any case not charging money so that at most he was acting as a paralegal, not 'practicing law.' Selby then dragged up a previous jury trial in which Martin Lindstedt had been convicted of driving an 18-wheeler truck with a burnt-out headlight on the dim side which had been sent back to Granby municipal court to collect for the fine and court costs by trial judge Joseph Schoeberl in Jasper County. Schoeberl was unnerved by Lindstedt's sending the matter on appeal to this Appellate Court and the Missouri Supreme Court, asking for an appeal in forma pauperis. These appellate courts would acknowledge pauper status, but would not grant writs for mandamus or prohibition for not collecting the fine and court costs. So Selby brought the matter up again before Judge Joseph Schoeberl asking for a finding of contempt of court and on April 2, 1996, Lindstedt was sentenced to 30 days in the Jasper County jail for contempt of court.
Since then, as Martin Lindstedt admitted to Tom Mann, Lindstedt had, every single chance available, "rubbed Selby's asshole raw with a corncob and then poured on the turpentine of public ridicule" to members of the general public and on his web pages and e-mail listservers. Any appearance before Selby would likely fail because Selby was vindictive when he was a lawyer, and now that he had power the vindictiveness would continue. Hence the denial of discovery on May 20, 2004.
Martin Lindstedt then showed a copy of an e-mail received from Gary Nodler, state senator for the 32d state senatorial district telling about the new laws in place governing the Division of Family Services and family courts. Provisions of these laws would go into effect on July 1, August 1, and the rest on August 28, 2004. One of the provisions was allowing a child or parent to ask, and receive, a change of judge, without cause being needed. Shawn Deines had claimed that he had asked several times for Selby to step down, but Selby ignored him and wouldn't let the request be in the record. If it was on the record, then that is probably why Selby was so determined to not allow discovery. With the new laws in effect, the best option was to get both Amalie Baldwin and Shawn Deines to again formally request a change in judge. Anybody except Selby. Get rid of Selby and have someone rational taking over the case, and discovery could be obtained and Appellant could get the grandchildren given that there was no real proof that Martin Lindstedt molested any grandchildren.
Martin Lindstedt then went over to make a plea bargain for failure to wear a seat belt, jury trial to be also on July 15, 2004 before Judge David Dally. Shawn Deines was a witness but wouldn't be available to testify, so rather than have a jury trial to cost the City of Joplin several thousand dollars in return for a $10 fine with no court costs, Martin Lindstedt decided to defer that 'pleasure' with the court system.
Appellant listened to what Martin Lindstedt had to say, then called Tom Mann's office from the restaurant. Appellant refused out of hand to promise that she would make Martin Lindstedt move out of the shared home. However, in an attempt to keep matters under control, Martin Lindstedt would stay out of the courthouse the next morning on July 15, 2004. Martin Lindstedt would ask Shawn Deines to firmly request a change in judge and Appellant would ask her daughter, Amalie Baldwin, to request a change in judge. Amalie Baldwin agreed to make that request the next day.
10. On July 15, 2004, Appellant appeared at the Newton County Courthouse and Martin Lindstedt stayed home. Appellant's attorney, Tom Mann, went into the Division III courtroom and pleaded Appellant's case while Appellant waited out in the hallway. The decision was that Appellant's attorney wasn't allowed to represent Appellant whatsoever. The docket entry for that day reads:MOTION TO INTERVENE HEARD. DENIED. INTERVENOR RESIDES WITH ALLEGED PERPETRATOR AND STATES PURPOSE IS FOR DISCOVERY. MOTION FOR CHANGE OF JUDGE DENIED, UNTIMELY FILED. PREVIOUSE [sic] WAIVER OF ANY CONFLICT. KS/djwAttorney Mann said that he would seek to get a final judgment. Afterwards, he said that he simply couldn't get into the case because he wasn't allowed in, and because he wasn't allowed in, he wouldn't be able to get discovery. After saying this out in the hallway, Attorney Mann left.
JUDGMENT ENTERED. SEE FILE. DISPOSITIONAL HEARING SET FOR 8- 26-04 @ 8:30 A.M. KS/djw
The hearing went on, and Appellant's daughter Amalie Baldwin, said that the hearing consisted of a social worker, probably Stephanie Thesis, saying that she had gotten M.A.D., the second grandchild and son of Shawn Deines, to mark on a gingerbread paper doll with a marker where 'Papa (Martin Lindstedt) had kissed him all over.' This area covered the genitals and anus. Also, this child claimed that he had watched while 'PaPa kissed Momma (Amalie Baldwin) on her vagina. Amalie Baldwin had to get a recess while listening to this incredible tale. The child in question is not one of the two children whom the anonymous hotline call to DFS claimed that Martin Lindstedt was molesting with the 'emergency' on April 9, 2004, with the order for 'emergency placement' signed by Presiding Judge Timothy Perigo on April 12, 2004. Nor is this child one of the children claimed in this appeal. This particular child was responsible for saying something that had all four children removed by DFS the first time in September 2002. Martin Lindstedt had Amalie Baldwin file a Notice of Appeal to this Appellate Court on Oct. 7, 2002 and the children were returned within 29 days of when they were removed to avoid a court hearing. Amalie Baldwin then filed for a dismissal before this Appellate Court since the children were returned to her.
11. Afterwards, Appellant and Martin Lindstedt talked to Attorney Tom Mann. He didn't get in touch back with us, so Martin Lindstedt wrote him a letter asking that since he was shut out and only made two appearances and didn't do appellate work, to write up the Notice of Appeal and get the final judgment because he was a lawyer and not likely to get arrested trying to get what little paperwork was available. Also asked for was a return of at least one-third of the retainer of $1500, which would be $500. Attorney Mann didn't like the letter and feared its publication on the Internet and called back on Monday, July 19, 2004. Attorney Mann was not a happy camper. After yelling at Martin Lindstedt, he agreed to work on the Notice of Appeal but not to return any of the retainer. He could give us the names of two different appellate attorneys who would do the job for $3000. We said that we didn't have $3000. Martin Lindstedt had quite a bit of appellate experience and would write the brief. Martin Lindstedt would also bring up from his computer the in forma pauperis affidavit used for Amalie Baldwin before this Appellate Court in Oct. 2002, change the name, and Appellant would sign it asking for an appeal in forma pauperis.
Attorney Mann got a form for the Notice of Appeal from the Jasper County Court in Joplin, a block from his law office. Martin Lindstedt made a complaint that it wasn't the same as the Newton County circuit court form, and was told that it would have to do. Martin Lindstedt also asked why Attorney Mann didn't get a copy of the final judgment instead of faxes of the second page of the clerk-typed docket sheet. (The docket sheet received by way of Amalie Baldwin for J.J.B and given to Attorney Mann had both pages and was crystal clear compared to the page two faxes for the other three children). Attorney Mann said that this was the best that he could get from the Newton County juvenile court and that if Martin Lindstedt were to try to get the right paperwork, he would be arrested once he stepped into the Division III clerk's office. The Missouri Court of appeals would have to settle for all we could get. Attorney Mann notarized the four in forma pauperis affidavits and then had his secretary make sufficient copies to file before the Newton County juvenile court that very day. We initially shouldn't go down to file them in the Division III court, but rather go to the third floor where the Division I and II courts business is filed if at all possible. Then Attorney Mann handed Martin Lindstedt a bill for which 16 hours at $100 per hour was charged and said that we were all even, that there would be no refund of any of the retainer.
Appellant and Martin Lindstedt then drove down to Neosho and Appellant filed the four Notices of Appeal and in forma pauperises before in Division III, as the Division I and II clerk said that matters had changed to where Division III juvenile material had to be filed in the Division III clerk's office. Appellant didn't want Martin Lindstedt to even go into the courthouse, but Martin Lindstedt said that he had earlier that day given Prosecutor Scott Watson's office a letter advising that we were going to file an appeal and that a repeat of the 'piglice & clerk & judge kangaroo-kort riot' of April 22, 2004 was not in anyone's best interest other than perhaps Martin Lindstedt's. So Appellant filed her Notices of Appeal in peace while one of the bailiffs designated by Judge Timothy Perigo since before July 7, 2004 to specifically keep an eye on Martin Lindstedt sitting on the bench on the courthouse floor outside the Division III clerk's office made sure that some unspecified act of domestic terrorism didn't take place, at least not one committed by Martin Lindstedt, that afternoon of July 21, 2004.
12. On July 27, 2004, Division III court clerk Dana Jo Wallace sent a certified letter which Appellant signed for on July 28, 2004. In it Judge Selby denied Appellant's being able to file in forma pauperis without bothering to ask for confirmation of Appellant's financial status. Clerk Wallace said that if Appellant wanted to file an appeal she would have to pay $70 for each grandchild's case. Once Clerk Wallace received adequate money for our attempted appellate rescue of our four little hostages to fortune, she would forward it to this Appellate Court.
Appellant replied in a letter that with a fixed income of $967 a month having to pay her bills and some of her daughter's now that her children have been taken away and her daughter lives on $90 per month back child support that she simply could not afford to pay $70 each for four children to game the system trying to get her children back against the odds. That it was Martin Lindstedt who had paid the $1500 for the lawyer to try to get to see her grandchildren and get them back, not Appellant. That at $70 each, that she would get that money from Martin Lindstedt to pay for the oldest granddaughter, H.D. and the youngest grandson H.B., each from a different father, as the most intelligent and promising of the four grandchildren. Saving directly the middle two, especially M.A.D., who has been used as a weakest link by the DFS many times to make the false statements justifying removal of his sister and two brothers, would be a task for the fathers to pay for the sons most like themselves. Also, if the oldest and youngest children must be returned, it would be likely that the ruling of this Appellate Court would be made to apply to the middle children. This Appellate Court has numbered the two cases #26446 and #26449, leaving case #s 26447 and 26448, which implies that these two children whose salvation had to be deferred for lack of money might receive their share of any mercy and discretion of this Appellate Court.
On August 3, 2004, Appellant was given a check for $140 by Martin Lindstedt, and using his bank's services, bought two bank money orders to pay for the appeals of H.D. and H.B. Luckily the most extremely vicious of Selby's court clerks, Dana Jo Wallace, was on vacation, so Martin Lindstedt went with Appellant into the Division III clerk's office and directed Carmen Jamison as to which children would gain an appeal, and how to get it filed, without a repeat of the clerks' riot and misprision of April 22, 2004.
In the judge's docket sheet certified on Sept. 7, 2004 that Appellant's daughter Amalie Baldwin got for this appeal for children H.D., Case # 26446 and H.B., Case # 26449 (Exhibit for each child enclosed back of motion), Judge Selby on August 4, 2004 justified his behavior in refusing to allow Appellant to file in forma pauperis as follows:Court reviews letter dated 8/3/04. Confirms previous decision that intervenor has ability to hire private counsel as evidenced by retainer paid to Tom Mann. Previous ruling remains -- intervenor not indigent. KLS/cj
All this shows is that Judge Selby is determined to not allow Appellant to have her appeal if he can help it. Appellant could have 'proven' that she was indigent by not being able to make an appeal at all. The same realities apply that Appellant didn't pay for the retainer of Tom Mann but that Selby's enemy Martin Lindstedt did. Appellant didn't pay $70 each to try to save her grandchildren via appeal, Martin Lindstedt did. The reality is that Appellant is on a fixed income of $967 a month, has to pay her bills, and some of those of her daughter Amalie Baldwin, who has no money now that her children have been taken away. Appellant's daughter makes little effort to change her ways which led to her children being taken away the second time, and refuses to move away from across the street and into her first husband's rental house so that she can get her children back.
Judge Selby, in collusion with the Newton County juvenile authorities, have been able to have secret court proceedings in which anonymous witnesses can pretty much claim whatever they please without Appellant being able to do anything about it, or find out what is going on. If Appellant isn't able to afford an appeal, then Judge Selby gets away with his refusal to recuse himself and determine the fate of the grandchildren of one of his enemies. If Appellant is able to get the money from Judge Selby's enemy and file an appeal, then that 'proves' that Appellant is not indigent. Same decision as was determined in the first place -- previous ruling remains. Judge Selby has the same vindictive, smarmy self-righteous attitude as those medieval judges who sentenced thousands of poor innocent defenseless women to death for witchcraft. If the accused witch drowned under the weights imposed when thrown into the pool, then she was innocent. If the accused witch kept her head and managed to float, then she was guilty of being a witch. Secret proceedings before a corrupt judge with an interest in the outcome. Judge Selby is no different than any other corrupt self-serving parasitic treasonous animal seeking absolute power over others with minimal accountability throughout history. Make the accusation, 'prove' it to his own satisfaction in secret session from which the accused has been rendered unable to face the accusers, and make sure that the crimes committed under color of law cannot be overturned if at all possible. If this Appellate Court supports this process by which one of its circuit judges can avoid appellate scrutiny so that Appellant has in effect lost any right to an appeal due to refusal to allow discovery even to a fellow brother of the bar, then for all practical purposes, American jurisprudence has declined and degenerated from its high point during the Salem witchcraft trials.
13. On August 18, 2004, Appellate Court Clerk Sandra Skinner acknowledged receipt of a Notice of Appeal filed before this Court on August 16, 2004. Appellant had been wondering what was going on, because Appellant signed for a certified letter dated August 11, 2004 on August 12, 2004. Appellant called and received Clerk Skinner's letter on August 19 or August 20th. At the bottom of Clerk Skinner's letter of August 18, there was a P.S. directed to Appellant:
P.S. to Ms. Fausnaught: Please provide this Court with a copy of the judgment or order being appealed. Thank you.
Appellant had to laugh at the irony. Appellant's lawyer, Tom Mann wasn't able to get from his brother at the bar, Judge Selby, to provide a copy of Selby's judgment or order being appealed. Only a faxed copy of page two of Selby's court clerks' typed docket sheet. Appellant wasn't able to get a copy of the judgment, but had to file a Notice of Appeal with these faxed page two docket sheets. It was a miracle that Martin Lindstedt wasn't jailed again for contempt for helping Appellant. Judge Selby used all of his power to try to keep Appellant from having any appeal at all for even two children out of four. And this Appellate Court clerk Sandra Skinner acts or thinks as if there isn't a single corrupt judge within the entire Southern Appellate District of Missouri so that a 'final judgment' is something like docket fees, just growing on trees, or easily and honestly given in accordance with due process of law!
Instead Martin Lindstedt wrote a letter to the Presiding Judge of the 40th Circuit, Timothy Perigo, asking that Judge Selby be removed for cause and according to law from further activity regarding her grandchildren's case, and that this entire case be transferred to a different venue well outside Newton County. Judge Perigo is no friend of Martin Lindstedt. Martin Lindstedt ran a non-lawyer for associate circuit court judge in 1998 as a Libertarian Party candidate, and has had many run-ins with Perigo. Judge Perigo has ordered bailiffs to follow Martin Lindstedt around the courthouse since early July 2004. Martin Lindstedt has ridiculed and publicly criticized and humiliated Judge Perigo on his web page. However, it was thought that Judge Perigo might want this embarrassment concerning the corruption of Newton County prosecutors, public defenders, judges, juvenile officers, DFS caseworkers, court clerks, and others sent outside the county. However, since then Judge Perigo has been 'extremely busy' and hasn't seen it yet according to Judge Perigo's secretary.
When Appellant received Clerk Skinner's Sept. 3 Notice of Intention to Dismiss on Sept. 4, 2004, Appellant decided that she had no choice but to loudly make it clear that it was not her fault that she cannot receive or give a final judgment or record on appeal. Rather it is the policy of the Division III juvenile Judge Kevin Lee Selby that he will abuse his power by 'white slaving' the grandchildren of one of his enemies, hold secret proceedings in a secret tribunal, and keep his lawless misconduct from being overturned by means of denying appeal by means of not allowing Appellant to appeal as a poor person and by denying the trial record and issuing a final judgment. Hence this Motion to Show Cause that this is not Appellant's fault, but rather the deliberate misconduct of the juvenile court.
14. On September 5, 2004, Appellant asked her daughter, Amalie Baldwin, to get a 'certified copy' of the record on appeal for H.D., Case # 26446 and H.B, Case # 26449, from the Division III juvenile court. That would include the docket sheets, the final judgment, and everything on the record. Amalie came back with two one-page certified copies of Judge Selby's docket sheet, one for each child, with the last date being August 4, 2004. (Exhibit pertaining to the relevant child attached to back.) These sheets show that the entry for the proceedings of Thursday July 15, 2004 were misdated July 16, 2004, implying that perhaps these court proceedings are not timely entered by Judge Selby, but rather that falsification of the official record occurs whenever convenient for Judge Selby.
When Amalie Baldwin went to get whatever she could get for free, she took a friend with her. Clerk Carmen Jamison certified both these judge's docket sheets. Both herself and Head Clerk Dana Jo Wallace, the rioters of April 22, 2004, sneered at Amalie Baldwin, saying that her mother (Appellant) would never be able to complete her appeal because Judge Kevin Lee Selby had taken care to not make a 'final judgment.' Final judgment didn't happen until the case was finished for Amalie Baldwin. Amalie Baldwin didn't understand the reason for the malicious glee of these two clerks, but instead just simply took her two one-page papers and her and her friend left. Later on the afternoon of September 5, 2004, she told Appellant and Martin Lindstedt what had happened when she delivered these papers.
This goes again to show that Judge Selby and two of his clerks, Dana Jo Wallace and Carmen Jamison, routinely plot to destroy the families and the lawful rights of the poor and weak parents of the children entrusted to the Division III juvenile court. These two clerks knew that the vast majority of the poor and weak, whose children they steal and buy and sell under color of law are unable to hire attorneys and unversed in the law, would know nothing than what they already sense -- that 'The Law' and its minions supposedly are not to help, but rather to destroy they and their families. Clerks Wallace and Jamison couldn't resist a giggle before what they thought was a stupid cow, unable to understand the consequences of their malice, unable to do anything other than squeeze out four healthy white children available for sale to selfish yuppies and rich perverts. This sort of puts the big lie to the comment made by Clerk Dana Jo Wallace in April, 2002 -- "Whatever we do, it is always in the best interests of the children." Yes, they are here from the government and are here to help us -- right out of that which is to us of most value -- our children.
They might well have tried this same big joke on Appellant. But not before Martin Lindstedt. Whenever Dana Jo Wallace and Carmen Jamison have gotten together, their fear of Martin Lindstedt causes them to commit crimes and riot, with the collusion of Judge Kevin Lee Selby. Appellant will be more than happy to have these two witnesses testify against these court clerks if there ever is a prosecution of these regime criminals, as opposed to the standard cover-up by Newton County Prosecuting Attorney Scott Watson or Bill Dobbs.
15. Appellant will place an order, in writing, for a complete, correct and true copy of the entire Record on Appeal under Missouri Rule of Court 81.12(c). The Division III court of Judge Selby has refused to do so, when asked by Attorney Tom Mann, by Appellant, by Appellant's daughter so far. However, it is to be hoped, when these smirking officers of the court see this Motion, available for all to see, across the entire world, what crimes they thought were secret revealed publicly, including this Appellate Court, that they shall realize that they no longer can pick and choose what little shall be revealed of their secret proceedings in a secret court.
The names of Judges Kevin Lee Selby and Tim Perigo, Clerks Dana Jo Wallace and Carmen Jamison, Prosecuting Attorneys Scott Watson and Bill Dobbs, Juvenile Officers Pat Stuart and Candi Butts (yes, that is actually the real name of the Juvenile Officer handling this case), DFS caseworker Doug Baugh, among others, will become synonymous with treason, tyranny, corruption, white slavery and all manner of evil for the sake of evil. These people are the true faces of evil with the broken 'child welfare' system. This sort of thing, taking screaming children away from their homes, breaking up and destroying the families of the poor and weak and defiant under color of law for no other reason other than it suits the ends of power for the sake of power for government officials unaccountable for their crimes to benefit themselves at the public expense must be exposed for what it is -- the work of a mighty Evil Empire, rotting from the inside, out to destroy anyone who will not bow down to it. The cause of freedom is in destroying this imperial regime, root and branch, wherever and whenever it oppresses those it would rule and loot, under color of law and pretense of freedom and democracy. As the 15th Century Habsburg motto said, "Let Justice prevail, though the whole world be destroyed." Appellant is petitioning this Appellate Court that her small world, of grandchildren and family, be restored even though corrupt elements of this world need to be destroyed.
Request for Relief
WHEREFORE, Appellant requests that this Missouri Appellate Court accept Appellant's reasons for not having a complete record on appeal or even a final judgment because of no fault of Appellant's but because of the deliberate corruption of the circuit court in wanting to hold secret proceedings in a secret court away from public scrutiny and the oversight of this Appeals Court. If the Newton County Division III court refuses to provide adequate record on appeal or a final judgment, Appellant requests that dismissal be postponed until such time as this Appeals Court can force the Newton County circuit court to provide what this Appellate Court deems to be an adequate record upon appeal.
Appellant would prefer for this Court to remove Judge Kevin Lee Selby from this case, since this judge should have recused himself in any case. Furthermore, Appellant requests that this case be removed from Newton County and placed for totally new proceedings in Lawrence or Barry County. That the conduct of the Newton County court system be investigated by an outside agency and any illegalities on the part of the Newton County juvenile and court system be punished to the full extent of the law, including loss of licenses to practice law or be law enforcement officers. However in that case, Appellant would still be out of luck because neither Appellant nor Martin Lindstedt have any more money to hire an attorney. Perhaps this Court can provide representation. Appellant also asks that the two middle grandsons who had to be abandoned during this appellate process be included for free in this appellate process.
Appellant would much prefer that this entire nightmare be over, and that this Court simply place her four grandchildren in her custody and dismiss the secret allegations of child molestation manufactured by the Division of Family Services. Appellant pledges that the parents of these children will be allowed as much visitation as they please. Appellant also requests any other relief this Missouri Appellate Court deems necessary in the pursuit of justice.
Roxie Fausnaught, Appellant Pro Se
338 Rabbit Track Road,
Granby, Missouri 64844
Certificate of Service
A copy of the foregoing were mailed September 8, 2004 to the Newton County Circuit Clerk, Division III, Juvenile & Probate, Newton County Courthouse, 101 South Wood, Suite 204, Neosho, Missouri 64850. Perhaps the Newton County Circuit Court Clerk will file-stamp a copy handed in tomorrow.
A copy of the foregoing was mailed September 8, 2004 to the Newton County Juvenile Office, 107 North Jefferson, Neosho Missouri 64850.
. . . .
Back to Naboth's Complaint -- How the Government Destroyed My Family
Over to My Struggle -- The Rants of a Resistance Political Operative
Over to Thought for the Day
Over to Martin Lindstedt's CI Church & State WWW Page
Back to www.martinlindstedt.org or Patrick Henry On-Line