JUDICIAL  Jackasses

 

IN THE MATTER OF HALEY ATHENA WHEELER

 

JD 08 13

 

MOTION TO RECONSIDER

 

October 13, 2009

 

 

The Honourable Jefferson Sellers:

 

We agreed on one statement this Petitioner made at the hearing of Friday, last:  That children are not taken from their parents because of a single isolated unanticipateable accident.  That is exactly what has happened in the case of Elan and the basis of that pending action is the sole foundation for DHS implementing impediments of irrelevance as requirements designed for failure as excuses for the taking of children.

 

We touched on the subject of the psychological evaluation.  I would not like to be a soldier when I grow up and I would rather raise flowers [especially cross breeding and propagation of the Amaryllidaceae family of Hippeastrum] than watch football games as my most consuming ‘past-time’ is horticulture. Answer honestly and that is two marks on the pacifistic homosexual scale.  The one statement I did not answer directly T or F is “I like Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll.”  Not only had I not read the book, I did not even know one by that title existed.  One doesn’t. However, I have since purchased, and read, Alice’s Adventures In Wonderland [as well as Through The Looking Glass] and definitely will not offer my honest opinion on the MMPI as to whether or not I like it as it is one of the statements with a “damned if do, damned if don’t” confession.  The interpretation of the answer is selective and can be so ambiguous to mean one either likes stories about a corrupt judicial system where “sentence first, evidence later; Off with his head” and opium smoking caterpillars blowing second hand dope smoke into little girls faces or one does not like the most popular and famous of children’s books.  Worse than T or F to the statement “I throw things when I drink too much.”  A ‘tee-totaller’ response either way to that statement is the confession of being, violent or docile, an alcoholic!

 

There are 566 statements, not ‘questions’ as Mr. Stuart referred to them at the trial, one must answer.  I could take it and pass with flying colours even answering an opinion [though not necessarily true] as to the Alice/Wonderland book as the manual states the correct answer for a male is F.  F to throwing things, also. 

 

 

1

 

The test authors themselves write in their instruction manuals: “It should be continually kept in mind that the great majority of persons having deviant profiles are not, in the usual sense of the word, mentally ill, nor are they in need of psychological treatment.  Having no more information about a person than that he has a deviant profile, one should always start with the assumption that the subject is operating within the normal range.”   This would not be possible with the “priming of the pump” by Donna Pace to prejudice any contracted psychologist. 

 

A final word on the MMPI:  It is religiously prejudicially contemporary Christian and specifically religiously Anti-Semitic.  A single point, from many, to show that, is the T F statement, “I believe in the second coming of Christ,” answered F brings a negative point in the clinical depression area.  No latitude or tolerance for the Buddhists, of which a third of the world consists of, and especially the Jewish community who are still waiting for the first coming of the Deity.  Trivially speaking, the majority of professing Christians fail to comprehend that the word “Christ” is a title, not a name.  Buddhists believe in the title.

 

Going to a Department of Veteran’s psychologist and stating I wanted the evaluation to determine if they think I am qualified and capable medically, physically, and psychologically, I would pass with flying colours.  However, when I answer that I get along well with others, and then am blindsided by something out of the blue that is totally irrelevant, such as Donna Pace, and did Mikah McCray before her, send a two inch thick report including the fact that there were at least three “protective/restraining orders . . .”  I am an instant liar.  How can one “get along with others” when they have a history of multiple Protective/Restraining Orders? 

 

#1.  My divorce lawyer had me fill one out to keep Patty off the premises.  Her divorce lawyer had her counter with hers.

 

#2.  A drunken Mayes County deputy sheriff was beating up my wife on our property and I fired two rapid shots to stop the assault.  It worked.  He was charged [by the State; I did not press charges] with assault, pleaded guilty, was given a year probation and fired, and I filled out a protective order to restrain him from coming around. 

 

#3.  The last one, filed against me by Judy Girdner, of Claremore, made the Tulsa World.  I appeared at the hearing, prepared, for naught as after Judy Girdner voiced her ‘charges’ Judge Erin O’Quin lectured Ms. Girdner and dismissed the case with prejudice.  Without me saying a word.  I did not counter-sue for slander.

 

2

 

This is what shot down my claim, and the psychologist’s original assessment, that I did not need “Anger Management.”  I was not aware that Mikah McCray, and later Donna Pace, was going to plant erroneous and misleading irrelevant ‘information’ before the psychologists to pre-prejudice them.  No honest assessment can be obtained and for this reason the programs are designed to fail. 

 

“Child Parenting.”  Nancy Brook will testify that she heard the voice-mail from Francy Bates stating that I did complete the course; I just did not comprehend what she was trying to teach..  She will also testify that we did in fact go to Francy Bates and request the course be re-taken and Francy Bates when Francey Bates mentioned money Nancy Brook offered, twice, to pay in full for the entire course and Francy Bates still refused. 

 

That course required a “confession” that I broke my son’s arm. 

 

Quoting Larry Stuart, TR. 254 lines 22-24:

 

“They started with compassion work shop because that’s the one that deals with parents who are guilty of abuse either through, you know, neglect or through direct abuse.”  No evidence has ever been presented to show child abuse but that is an accusation phrase with no foundation, that is well worn out!

 

Quoting Larry Stuart, TR. 252 lines 15-21:

 

 “He did agree that he failed to place the child in a safe place when he left the child unattended and which allowed the child to fall.  It’s neglect.  It causes serious injury.  It caused a spiral fracture to his arm.  It caused a fracture which, you know, you heard some opinion from, that were cited by doctors that it’s a fracture that’s not normally associated by a fall by a child.”

 

This alone is an issue warranting reversal as there was no opinion or physicians offering any opinions; no physicians testified at all.  Mr. Stuart reminded the jury that “you heard some opinion from…” that is in the testimony no where.  I need not site the case-law that supports that misquote alone as cause for reversal.  Mr. Stuart fabricated what he wanted the jury to believe and he had to secrete the exculpatory X-rays in an attempt to keep me from learning the truth.  It almost worked.

 

Quoting Larry Stuart, TR. 273 lines 23-25:

 

“Correct the conditions.  Okay.  Hey, you know, I learned, he fell off and broke his arm.  I won’t put him on the bed any more.”

 

3

That is exactly what I believed before I obtained the exculpatory X-rays from Larry Stuart’s office [thanks to David Robertson] September 10, 2008.  Even if it had been true, the purchase of a new railed baby bed in no uncertain terms, “Corrected The Condition” that caused him pain warranting the only Rx as “Children’s Tylenol, as needed.”

 

It can not be denied that the foundation of this case is a “broken arm” that X-rays hidden in the District Attorney’s office prove was not broken.

 

If I don’t confess to breaking my son’s arm I can not pass the courses.  If I don’t confess to having an anger problem I can not pass the course.  And, of course, if I don’t confess to being an alcoholic, reject common Jewish philosophies and having mental problems I can’t pass the course.

 

At every hearing Mr. Larry Stuart manages to claim that this Defendant “Stipulated” to the ISP.  “Stipulated” to the cause for the claim of deprived child.  “Stipulated” to the entire document ISP dated 9/18/2008 and filed 9/19/2008 and Petition dated and filed June 24 2008. 

 

Mr. Stuart fails to comprehend the meaning of the word.  It does not mean the entire document as there are obvious fallacies within the documents that this Petitioner does not now nor ever has “stipulated” to as true or fact.  He does stipulate to a portion of the document[s] but not that which is un-true and certainly not that about the thoughts, actions, or second-hand hearsay about another person.  He “Stipulates” to knowledge of the content of the documents but not to the validity.  For example:  “John Schoonover has pending criminal charges in

Pawnee County

for injury to a minor child.  Pamela Brook is aware of the pending criminal charge against John Schoonover, and planned to reside in the home with him with her new baby.”  Not a possibility as I, 1: could not “stipulate” to the alleged plans of another, 2: that was not in my plans as Pamela Brook has not lived at this residence in over two years and I would not, could not, and did not, allow her on the premises when she sent a third party to come and get her things.  DHS continues to pretend that her address is RR 1 Box 67, which it is not. 

 

 

What is the Information in this criminal charge?  “wilfully and maliciously breaking the childs arm.”  An injury that this Defendant believed could have happened; but not by the method accused.  That is, this Father believed Elan’s arm could have actually received a subtle lucent line, or hair-line non-displaced fracture from his accidental roll off the bed.  After all, as Larry Stuart condoned her methamphetamine habit unabated while pregnant he could have allowed Elan’s bone structure to be slightly less than normal; a common symptom of one in the situation sanctioned by Larry Stuart.  Larry Stuart failed to protect my fetus son.

 

4

 

“Believed” up to September 10, 2008, when David K. Robertson handed Nancy Brook and John Schoonover the exculpatory X-rays from OSU dated and interpreted November 15, 2006. 

 

Could Mr. Larry Stuart have forgotten he had kept these exculpatory X-rays secreted in his office for about 18 months?  Why?  And when this Father took them to Radiology at

St. Francis Hospital

for confirmation that there was no fracture, he no longer believed he was responsible for allowing an accident to occur that broke his son’s arm. 

 

Further, the signature line has two “NO” boxes checked and an ‘explanation’ is required with space given no explanations are present.  Another document states that “Both parties agree to the ISP” and that is not true.  Ms. Pamela Brook may agree; this Father does not.

 

“John Schoonover testified that there was no possibility that he was the father to Haley Wheeler…”  This is absolutely not true.  John Schoonover, knowing Pamela Brook was spending time with her husband, Richard Brook, and being told by Pamela Brook that the little girl belonged to Richard Brook, had no reason not to believe what he was told and testified to what he believed to be true.  As to “absolute knowledge” to the contrary, that is impossible.  As: “Albert Einstein stated in 1901 the only absolute is that there are no absolutes.” That quote is from my testimony.  I told what I was led to believe.  

 

At that point John Schoonover believed he had no ‘say’ in the matter of Haley Wheeler.  The ISPs state that Pamela Brook still contends that little Haley is not my child.  That is in black and white.  Thanks to Patrick Pickerill DHS contends that little Haley IS my child.  Since learning that “truth” according to DHS and the Courts etc, John Schoonover does have a ‘say’  as Haley being declared to be his, changes the fact that he does not have to ‘stand aside’ and let Pamela or anyone else raise his proclaimed daughter.  No crime has been committed; Haley was never in any kind of danger nor was she abandoned or destitute nor was she homeless or deprived, no arm had been broken, the alleged “evidence” is simply down the drain.  Except for the original untampered exculpatory X-rays from OSU.  That evidence exonerates Mr. Schoonover.  There simply was no “serious physical injury” as a foundation for an “adjudication of that child as a deprived child”

 

The chronological order of pertinent events are:

 

1.        Late November 14 2006 Elan rolled out of bed, cried instantly for a few short seconds only, took his bottle and went to sleep for the night.

 

 

5

 

2.       In the AM Elan woke with normal smile; favoured his right arm; as a precaution took him to

Cleveland

for check-up of his arm as it was tender.

 

3.       Cursory examination reveals “No signs of abuse.”

 

4.        In steps Mikah McCray stating she has an “Emergency Protective Order.”

 

4.        Visual diagnosis no signs of abuse but FX for possible non-displaced fracture.

 

5.        FX reveals non-displaced fracture not visible. An oxymoron.

 

6.       Under Mikah McCray’s jurisdiction Elan transported to OSU to confirm/deny fracture.

 

7.        Records [not made available to Father at this time] clear: Carried in alert and smiling.  Records falsified to reflect Elan has no next of kin; examining physicians told caregiver not available for explanation [when I was waiting to see Elan and the physicians] and reason given for X-ray requests ordered by DHS [Mikah McCray]: Abuse. 

 

8.       X-rays made, November 15, 2006 at

OSU Medical Center

, three of which show three different views of right arm, radiologist report, November 15, 2006 with six physicians signatures: “No Fractures.”  No Bruising” etc.  Kept hidden from Larry Stuart by Mikah McCray?

 

9.       Hearing to declare Elan “Deprived,” Testimony of Mikah McCray: is asked and confirms no examining physician would say Elan “Abused” and when asked about the X-rays showing no break she stutters that “We haven’t, They haven’t been reviewed yet.” [see No. 8]

 

10.     Am charged with willfully and maliciously breaking Elan’s arm.

 

11.     Pondering why the physician witnesses for the charge stating not a simple fracture but broken in fragments are not the same physicians that examined Elan November 15, early 2007 this father goes to OSU to find that Elan Wheeler has no father       and mother in jail; hospital records indicate he was an abandoned unwanted waif and the radiologist report delivered to this parent clearly spelling out item 8 above and this father scans and posts this report on justice4families.com.  The actual X-rays were unavailable as they had ‘disappeared.’

 

 

 

6

 

12.     The District Attorney sends Tari Hughes to OSU to…? And the document [item 8] is “amended” by a new entry physician who hypothesizes in an ambiguous manner with ‘ifs’ and ‘coulds.’

 

13.     September 10, 2008, David K. Robertson hands over a packet of a dozen X-rays, generated at OSU November 15, 2006, three of which are different views of Elan’s  un-broken right arm.  He also advises “There are more at St. Francis.”  And then hands me a copy of the letter from Iris Ballou stating Tari Hughes had tampered with and ruined X-rays. 

 

14.     The records at St. Francis, like those at OSU, reflected that Elan Wheeler was a fatherless abused and abandoned waif.  There were no films at St. Francis.  All had been taken the day they were generated, November 21, 2006, by Tari Hughes.  However, the disc on which they had been stored was copied and given to this Father as well as one film that clearly shows a right arm broken in separate fragments.  DHS had not allowed St. Francis to compare their X-ray with those at OSU taken 8 days earlier so it would be impossible to determine exactly when this fragmented fracture occurred or how.  Why were these X-rays even made and why were they kept secret from the Defendant? 

 

This ‘fracture’ is not going to ‘go away’ as it is the foundation for taking and keeping Elan and that is the only foundation for the taking of Haley.

 

That case is, as we all know, pending in the Oklahoma Supreme Court.  It might be noted that the nineteenth day after submission of Brief in Chief and Appeal, [August 10, 2009] Chief Justice Jim Edmondson sent a memo to Attorney General Drew Edmondson that the State, Attorney General Drew Edmondson, was given notice of an ten day extension of time:  “Unless appellee answer brief is filed by August 20, 2009 cause will stand submitted on appellant filings only.”  Mr. Edmondson chose not to respond.

 

However, as Mr. Stuart stated in court Friday, He filed an answer brief [August 20, 2009] and this Plaintiff felt compelled to respond, though suspicioning  that Mr. Stuart’s filing anything was contrary to the Rules Of The Court.  It was filed as though it came from Drew Edmondson as that was the impression Michael Richie told me who it was from before I showed him the signature line.  He asked his assistants if any of them knew who this ‘Larry Stuart’ was and one of them told him.  Nancy Brook was with me at this time.  I have never received any kind of notice that Larry Stuart filed any “Entry Of Appearance.” 

 

 

 

 

7

 

Legal or not, if the three Justices read Larry Stuart’s document before they read the signature line and note that Drew Edmondson was not the author and had not even been notified, the bell had been rung and I was compelled by that fact to rebut.  That rebuttal was filed August 27, 2009.

 

The case was assigned September 23, 2009. 

 

Finally, from this victim’s memory, every hearing from the genesis in this matter and that of Elan Lee Schoonover, like being led to the slaughter, the Prosecutor has pre-delivered their Propositions from DHS, Patrick Pickerill, to all . . . but John Schoonover and have, either during the proceedings or at the very earliest, in the courtroom just prior to “All rise” and that is, in language virtually anyone can understand, Not Kosher.  The Hearing of the 9^th, however, was different:  Everyone had a copy of the documents, [the four amended petitions and other “changing of horses in the middle of the stream”; what was planned by the Prosecutor], but this Defendant.  Why was this?  The Prosecutor had MAILED this Defendant’s copy [legal, but for the timing] so that it would arrive and be delivered to this Defendant AFTER the hearing would be concluded.  Everyone knew what was going on but this Defendant.  Great strategy.  Not exactly Kosher.  It is this type of fairness that has prevailed throughout these proceedings the past three years and it would be a surprise if it did not gall those who are truly seeking truth and justice. 

 

Premises considered, even if, arguendo, there was a serious injury to Elan, requiring the only Rx to be Children’s Tylenol, as there were no third and second degree burns, not even a single bruise, to an accident, far less than that of Hudson Hendrick July 4, 2007, there is no justification to the taking of a child due to a single isolated minor accident.  Unless this Judicial System has two different sets of rules; one for the elite and one for the proletariat.  The “reasons for the adjudication of being deprived” are without foundation and our Oklahoma Supreme Court has ruled that completion of an ISP is not mandatory but “Correcting the Condition” is and that was done with the immediate purchase of a new railed baby bed.  The ISP is nothing but a smokescreen as this Father has asked all; even this Court, how can spending thousands of dollars [and by Black’s definition it is] blackmail/extortion “Correct” the minor accident of rolling out of a bed?

 

I have yet to get a straight answer. 

 

I did not bring Elan into this world for DHS the Courts and attorneys to play with and make money off of.  Even if Haley Wheeler was not of my blood as Pamela Brook claims she is not it would not make any difference to me as Haley is still Elan’s Sister and they deserve to be together.

 

8

The fact that DHS claims Haley is my blood and the court accepts this as fact I acquiesced at the opportunity to take full advantage of that and staked my claim [Thank you, Patrick Pickerill for opening that door for me].  Pamela Brook knows I “fell in love” with the little grub worm as soon as I saw her and would have claimed her in a heartbeat then and there had I not been told, convinced and believed she belonged to Richard Brook.

 

Kidnapping is the cruelest of cruel victimization of a family.  This family consists of a father and his two children.  Pamela Brook abandoned Elan for a cocaine fling in a motel with a drug addict.  I tried while she was pregnant with Elan to get Larry Stuart to “take her off the street” when I learned her habits.  He could have done it but by his failure to act in the best interest of the fetus he condoned the criminal act and this Court may remember when in his ‘defense’ he told this Court that she was acting in the best interests of the Sheriff’s department in pointing out drug houses in Sand Springs, Buford Colony and Tulsa.   His priority was not in protecting a single fetus named Elan Schoonover but catching multiple drug dealers.

 

Drew Edmondson stated publicly in the Hudson Hendricks case that the State does not take a child from their parents because of an accident.

 

My children will know this and one day, if the State is successful in this atrocity know that the “parents” they are living with had put their bid in to buy a couple babies and Elan and Haley just happened to be on the auction block at the right time for the right price for their prospective owners.  They can afford Patrick Pickerill’s fee and what easier money than in the trafficking of children?  Except when parents like me who love their children so much to fight like a dog to get them back to nurture them with his wisdom as God intended! 

 

They will know that they were taken from their father and some day read my website and learn the anguish he went through trying to get them back.  If the State succeeds this can not be a happy ending.

 

Tender Loving Care is all that Elan ever received from me that would reflect what Haley would receive from me.

 

Elan has had multiple bruisings and at least two head injuries, one from a potentially lethal fall on concrete illegally juxtaposed with a play area, plus a fall on broken glass in the home requiring suturing while in the custody of his paid artificial parents.  The galling response from A. J. Campbell, DHS supervisor, is simply: “We’ve had him longer than you and accidents happen.”  Am I not allowed a single unanticipated minor accident requiring nothing more than an Rx for Children’s Tylenol without DHS intervention? 

9

 

In the unlikely event of an adverse ruling from our Oklahoma Supreme Court this father of his two natural children will proceed with this DHS created atrocity to the Federal Courts to protect his two children’s Constitutional Rights to be with their natural parent.

 

 

 

 

OklahomaStatutes Citationized :

  Title 10. Children
     Chapter 70 –

Oklahoma Children’s Code
         Section 7003-4.4 – Allegations of Petition not Supported by Evidence
Cite as: O.S. §, __ __

WHEN “the court finds that the allegations of the petition are not supported by the evidence, the court shall order the petition dismissed and shall order the child discharged from any custody. The child’s parents, guardian or other legal custodian shall also be discharged from any restriction or other previous temporary order.”

 

 

The filing of this document constitutes it as an attachment to the original Motion for Haley to be ordered by this Court to the immediate custody of her natural Father,

 

 

It is respectfully requested of this Honourable Court to reconsider this matter as there is no evidence to support any justification for Haley Athena Wheeler to be kept from the wisdom and care and genuine love and natural bonding that she deserves from her Natural Father,

 

 

 

 

                                                     John Schoonover

                                      RR 1 Box 67 Cleveland Oklahoma 74020

 

      Copies hand delivered to Pawnee D.A.    Patrick Pickerill    Pawnee DHS

 

 

 

 

www

 

10