Please support a local business in Wendell North Carolina that feeds our elderly.
This is a redirect to their Menu Page
ReyOAdvocacy.org This is a special dedicated Website part of the Universal House of Prayer of NC. Breaking Down The Barriers; Advocating Inclusion. List of Website http://www.carolinajesus.com/ Elder Reinaldo Olavarria
Tuesday, April 25, 2017
Friday, April 14, 2017
Dedicated to Judge Lori Christian and Judge Michael Denning Re A Lost Child Divorce Court Blues
Dedicated to Judge Lori Christian and Judge Michael Denning
Re A Lost Child
It was at the age of 12/13 years old, that I went down to
the court house to seek a Juvenile Petition against my step-daughter.
Why? It was after
being told I want to go to the kitchen, get a knife and stab you in your sleep.
It was after taking steps like make false allegations
against me.
It was after refusing to be in mental health therapy.
It was for her best interest.
For years, I saw directly her mom turn her against her
step-mom, on the paternal side.
He mom’s directed her to do certain things, and, my
step-daughter did them, but, she also always went one step further than what
her mother instructed her to do. Those
additional steps often got her, my step-daughter, into further trouble.
It all worked, she was banned from her own dad’s home. The visitations there dwindled. Also, her father just stepped back not
willing to fight for his daughter. Too
many other things were his priority. So,
I raised and cared for his daughter. She
was my daughter, and, I was determined to get help for my daughter.
So, when my Ex-wife took steps to “set me up” and destroy my
relationship with my step-daughter, I sought to legally step in by involving
the courts as a third person to get the help that was needed. The end result was my ex-wife used that
action as a catalyst to leave the home.
She said, “You see, he does not care for you, he just wants you to go to
jail”. Not so, the purpose was to help
my daughter get the help she needed.
Forced/involuntary therapy and services.
My ex-wife refused mental health services for herself. She refused to get help continuously from the
church. She was set in her ways. But it was scary. The mental health problems came with attempts
at self injury, and, in retro-spec, I should have sought involuntary commitment
during certain incidents. So, I was at
peace when she said she wanted to leave.
I did not want blood on my hands, although the leaving was under false
pretenses because she was having sex with the church drummer/star praise and
worship leader.
What I sought through the courts was orders to stop my
daughter from being placed in injurious environments. Something my mom had done. She basically had divorced her brothers and
sisters and aunts and uncles because of substance abuse and lengthy illegal
activities and records. That was my
heritage. It was a protectionist
purpose, although it was a feeble attempt, it basically worked; that was what
my mom did and I wanted to follow. It
basically worked because it instilled within us a an opportunity to choose a
better path. And we did. That is why my mom has children with
educational degrees and careers versus criminal records.
I did not want her, My step-daughter, to be at “their houses”
because of the drug activity there.
Do not use my cars and drive my children without a license.
The response from my ex-wife was they are my family.
You are not fun, she said.
You do not drink, she said.
You do not dance, she said.
You do not go to clubs, she said.
You do not smoke weed or use drugs, she said.
All you do is go to church.
You do not want to be a swinging couple, she said.
I wanted to protect and nurture.
I was all those things before we got married, and, I guess
with marriage her purpose was to change me.
Well, and then came divorce and court action.
She moved in with her boyfriend, “from one bedroom to
another”.
And the court ordered that she not reside there, or anywhere
where those activities I discussed happened [drugs, driving without a license,
etc, all types of injurious environments].
So, she did not move out of the Boyfriend’s residence, so, I
filed show causes.
Show causes that were subsequently removed from the files
without rulings.
Contempt motions and other motions were filed and scheduled,
and, under Judge Lori Christian, they were not responded to. Under Judge
Michael Dennings, they disappeared altogether from the file. Multiple inquiries were made with the custodians
of court. The ending file was closed out
with outstanding matters, an administrative close out, while knowing all matters
were not resolved.
When a new judge is assigned to a case, and the old one was
removed for cause, and that being due process denials and civil rights
violations, Then, the new judge is
charged with reviewing the case a new and making sure he hears the matters at
the bar. Not so, the new judge just
continued the previous orders and findings of fact. A clear violation of the judicial charge, and
due process and civil rights. The
Welcome sign is “Welcome to the North Carolina 10 District Court, Family Court
Division.”
The purpose and hopes were the court would protect my
children and step-daughter. Instead, the
courts allowed or caused to be allowed for the children to stay in an injurious
environment. Perjury is an ancient
relic. Due Process is something left at
the doors of the court house.
So, with knowledge, the courts knew the children were in an
injurious environment and knew that my ex-wife was not taking proper care for
the children. But, was primary custody
changed to the protector. No.
In those injurious environments, my step-daughter continued
to learn the ways of criminals. The very
thing I sought to avoid, the very thing she advocated for [my ex-wife], was
that my step-daughter got charged with a felony last year. Now I can say, Thank you Judge Lori Christian
and Judge Michael Dennings for contributing to making a criminal. I wanted the best for my children, and that
was for them not to be in those environments.
But, after bringing the matter to your attention, your responses were
not to protect, but, to condone children staying in that environment. A Blind Eye of the Law? The Inappropriate Use of “Judicial Discretion”. A
license to injure you all did issue and use.
This is an open letter to those Esteemed and Honorable
Judges, Judge Michael Denning, Judge Lori Christian, and, Family Court
Coordinator Pamela Reese, whom contributed to the making of a criminal.
The purpose in my heart was to protect my children while
they reside in North Carolina. Your
purpose is to “get paid” and be a public servant, while doing a disservice to
the public.
I am so saddened and disappointed. I pray for my children. A hedge of protection.
Yes, in part it was the choice of the A/B Honor student to
engage in criminal activities. That
shows she is knowledgeable. But, it does not negate the contributory aspects of
your actions. That was my ex-wife’s
claim to fame; “My daughter is an A/B Honor Student,” and, I kept saying “Stop,
she looks at porn and is taking on criminal aspects [by being in those
environments]”. No one heeded my calls
for help.
Justice Denied.
The purpose of this open letter is to cry out and speak up
with those and let it be known what
happened. I just am hoping and praying
my Step-daughter makes it out alive and Straightens Up. I love all my children but do not want to
attend funerals for them because of continuing to be in injurious environment
like Gang run tattoo parlors and hair salons.
Here to help and pray. Could you
not see where the desires to be a stripper come if they were instilled by high
ranking strippers in your family. Hum.
That is why I try to help and pray.
Wednesday, April 5, 2017
WCPSS Safety Issues at Zebulon GT Magnet Middle School
D. PROCESS FOR ADDRESSING COMPLAINTS OF ALLEGED INCIDENTS OF DISCRIMINATION, HARASSMENT, OR BULLYING
a. 1. Initiating the Investigation a. Whoever receives a complaint of discrimination, harassment, or bullying pursuant to subsection C.1. shall immediately notify the appropriate investigator who shall respond to the complaint and investigate. Where the complaint is received by school staff and involves allegations made against a staff member, the principal shall promptly consult with Human Resources to provide notice of the complaint and determine the appropriate investigator. The investigator of a complaint is determined as follows.
1) If the alleged perpetrator is a student, the investigator is the school principal.
1. [okay, it does not say the AP, it says principal, and, I guess it is to avoid claims, as in this case, by the principal that she did not know or was a part of the investigation].
2. If the alleged perpetrator is an employee other than the assistant superintendent of human resources or the Superintendent, the investigator is the assistant superintendent of human resources or designee, who may enlist the assistance of the alleged perpetrator’s supervisor in conducting the review. [not applicable]
3. If the alleged perpetrator is the assistant superintendent of human resources, the Superintendent or designee is the investigator. [not applicable]
4. If the alleged perpetrator is the Superintendent, the Board attorney is the investigator. (In such cases, whoever receives a complaint of discrimination, harassment, or bullying shall immediately notify the assistant superintendent of human resources who shall immediately notify the Board chair. The Board chair shall direct the Board attorney to respond to the complaint and investigate.) [not applicable]
5. If the alleged perpetrator is a member of the Board, the Board attorney is the investigator. (In such cases, whoever receives a complaint of discrimination, harassment, or bullying shall immediately notify the Superintendent who shall direct the Board attorney to respond to the complaint and investigate. Unless the Board chair is the alleged perpetrator, the Superintendent shall also notify the Board chair of the complaint.) [not applicable]
b. As applicable, the investigator shall immediately notify the Title IX, Section 504, ADA, or other relevant coordinator of the complaint, and, as appropriate, may designate the coordinator to conduct the investigation. [This complaint did involve a disability in all respects; AND TO OUR KNOWLEDGE WAS NOT REPORTED TO ANY COORDINATORS.]
c. The investigator shall explain the process of the investigation to the complainant and the alleged perpetrator. [THIS NEVER HAPPENS; BOTH IN THE FEBRUARY COMPLAINT, AND, AGAIN IN THE MARCH COMPLAINT. REALLY. A PATTERN HERE FOR SURE.]
d. Written documentation of all formal reports and complaints, as well as the school system's response, must be maintained in accordance with policy 1710/4021/7230. [FOR THE FIRST TIME, IN MARCH, WAS A WRITEN COMPLAINT REQUESTED, AND, IT WAS OBTAINED AGAINST EXPRESSED PARENTAL WISHES; REQUEST FOR REPORTS WERE MADE FROM THE FEBRUARY INCIDENT AND NOTHING BUT AN INCORRECT SUMMATION OF THE INCIDENT WAS RECEIVED. AND, THAT SUMMATION WAS WAY OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTY ALLOWED PERIORD FOR RESPONSE AND PROCESSING. ALL FORMAL REPORTS NEED TO BE DOCUMENTED AND RIGHTS EXPLAINED. DURING A MEETING IN MARCH AFTER THE MARCH INCIDENT, WITH MR. LIGHT, HE SAID NO FORMAL REPORTS ARE MADE OR KEPT “NO INCIDENT REPORTS ARE AVAILABLE AND THAT IS AGAINST SCHOOL POLICY ……… BUT YOU CAN GET A COPY OF ADRIANA’S STATEMENT …….. we just do not do that here”.]
e. Failure to report, investigate, and/or address claims of discrimination, harassment, or bullying may result in disciplinary action. [TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, NO DISCIPLINARY ACTION WAS TAKEN AGAINST PRINCIPAL SMITH AND AP LIGHT.]
2. Conducting the Investigation
a. The investigator is responsible for determining whether the alleged act(s) constitutes a violation of policy 1710/4021/7230 or policy 1730/4022/7231. In so doing, the investigator shall impartially, promptly, and thoroughly investigate the complaint. The investigator shall interview (1) the complainant; (2) the alleged perpetrator(s); (3) individuals identified as witnesses by the complainant or alleged perpetrator(s); and (4) any other individuals, including other possible victims, deemed likely to have relevant information. The alleged perpetrator shall be notified of the general nature of the allegations. The investigation will include a review of all evidence presented by the complainant or alleged perpetrator. [IN MARCH, THIS DID NOT OCCUR. THE INVESTIGATOR IN BOTH SCENARIOS WAS MR. LIGHT, NOT THE PRINCIPAL; AND, FOR EXAMPLE, IN MARCH, HE DID NOT ASK OR ASCERTAIN ANY INFORMATION ABOUT PRIOR ACTS, AND INQUIRY ABOUT A REOCCURRENCE POSSIBILITY (principal smith took the written statement but light was in and out and a part of everything). ALSO, IN THE FEBRUARY INCIDENT, IT WAS NOT THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED, AS EVIDENCED BY THE INCORRECT SUMMATION. TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, NO WITNESSES WERE INTERVIEWED AND/OR OTHER POSSIBLE WITNESSES. THE MOST CRUCIAL PIECE OF INFORMATION WAS THE FEBRUARY INCIDENT OCCURRED IN THE CAFETERIA, AND, THE KIDS WERE THERE WITHOUT STAFF SUPERVISION. ADRIANA HAD TO GO FIND AN ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF MEMBER. DESPITE BEING WARNED OF ACTIVITIES OCCURRING DURING INSTRUCTIONAL TIME, THE SECOND INCIDENT OCCURRED DURING THAT TIME, AND NO STAFF WAS MONITORING HALLWAYS. LASTLY, POST FEBRUARY INCIDENT NO ONE FOLLOWED UP AND ASKED ADRIANA IF HE BEHAVIOR HAD CONTINUED. HUM. IN MARCH, THE INVESTIGATOR DID NOT ASK ABOUT PAST OR FUTURE HARM.]
If the investigator, after receipt of the complaint, an interview with the complainant, and consultation with the board attorney, determines that the allegations submitted, even if factual, do not constitute discrimination, harassment, or bullying as defined in policy 1710/4021/7230, the matter will be treated outside the scope of this policy. Information regarding the investigator’s determination and the process for addressing the complaint will be provided to the complainant. [NOT ONLY WAS THIS NOT PROVIDED, AS STATED BEFORE, INFORMATION AND DETAILS WERE FALSIFIED, WITH THE SIGNATURE OF THE PRINCIPAL, AND, NOT SUMMATION WITH A SIGNATURE OF AP LIGHT WAS EVER PROVIDED. WORKING IN TANDUM, BOTH THE PRINCIPAL AND AP FAILED TO THOROUGHLY PROVIDE INFORMATION AND INVESTIGATE THE MATTER, AND WENT STEPS FURTHER IN VIOLATION OF COUNTY POLICIES.]
b. The complaint and investigation will be kept confidential to the extent possible. Information may be shared only with individuals who need the information in order to investigate and address the complaint appropriately and those with a legal right to access the information. Any requests by the complainant for further confidentiality will be evaluated within the context of the legal responsibilities of the school system. [NOT SO AS EVIDENCED BY THE BREACH OF CONFIDENTIALITY THAT OCCURRED.]
c. The investigator shall review the factual information gathered through the investigation to determine whether, based on a preponderance of the evidence, the alleged conduct constitutes discrimination, harassment, or bullying, giving consideration to all factual information, the context in which the alleged incidents occurred, the age, and maturity of the complainant and alleged perpetrator(s), and any other relevant circumstances. [AS DISCUSSED SUPRA, THIS DID NOT OCCUR. FACTS WERE MISREPRESENTED. I AM NOT SURE AS TO HOW THE COUNTY CAN SANCTION LIES BY HIGH LEVEL ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF. THE HIGHEST LEVEL AT THE SCHOOL IS THE PRINCIPAL.]
3. Notice to Complainant and Alleged Perpetrator
a. The investigator shall provide written notification to the complainant of the results of the investigation within 15 days of receiving the complaint, unless additional time is necessary to conduct an impartial, thorough investigation. The investigator shall specify whether the complaint was substantiated and, if so, shall also specify: [THESE ELEMENTS AND ACTS NEVER OCCURRED. AN UNDATED RESPONSE WAS SENT WEEKS LATER, AND, IT WAS NOT THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED. AND, THE PERPETRATOR FROM THE FEBRUARY CONTINUES TO BE DISRUPTIVE AT SCHOOL. THE RESPONSE WAS SENT BY PRINCIPAL SMITH ALONG WITH THREATS AND HARRASSMENT. HUM.]
1) reasonable, timely, age-appropriate, corrective action intended to end the discrimination, harassment, or bullying, and prevent it from recurring; [NOT SO, THE ACTS CONTINUED.]
2) as needed, reasonable steps to address the effects of the discrimination, harassment, or bullying on the complainant; and [NOT SO, MYSELF WAS LABELED A HARRASSER, AND MY DAUGHTER WAS LABELED AN ATTENTION SEEKER.]
3) as needed, reasonable steps to protect the complainant from retaliation as a result of communicating the complaint. [NOT SO, WITH THE MARCH INCIDENT SHE WAS FURTHER VICTIMIZED BY ADMINSTRATIVE STAFF, DR. SMITH IN PARTICULAR WHOM TOOK THE STATEMENT/REPORT WAS IMMEDIATELY INVOLVED.]
b. Information regarding specific disciplinary action imposed on the alleged perpetrator(s) will not be given to the complainant unless the information relates directly to the complainant (e.g., an order requiring the perpetrator not to have contact with the complainant). [TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, IN BOTH INCIDENTS, NOTHING HAPPENED AND/OR WILL HAPPEN; AND, IT DIRECTLY RELATED TO COMPLAINANT.]
c. If the investigator determines that the complaint was substantiated, the perpetrator(s) shall be subject to discipline or other corrective steps, as described in policy 1710/4021/7230. If the corrective steps involve actions outside the scope of the investigator's authority, the Superintendent or designee will be notified so that responsibility for taking the corrective steps may be delegated to the appropriate individual. [TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, NOTHING HAPPENED PROPERLY. IMPROPER RESPONSES WERE RECEIVED. AND A COMPLAINT WAS MADE AGAINST THE PRINCIPAL.]
d. Each alleged perpetrator will be provided with a written summary of the results of the investigation in regard to whether the complaint was substantiated, whether the alleged perpetrator violated relevant law or Board policies by his or her actions, and what, if any, disciplinary actions or consequences may be imposed upon the perpetrator in accordance with Board policy. The perpetrator may appeal any disciplinary action or consequence in accordance with Board policy and law. However, an appeal by the perpetrator of disciplinary action does not preclude school officials from taking appropriate action to address the discrimination, harassment, or bullying. [AGAIN, IN BOTH INCIDENTS, NOTHING HAPPENED, SO FAR, TO OUR KNOWLEDGE.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)