Attorney General says Oregonians have no right to protect themselves or their children from State abuse.

LEGISLATORS, AGENCIES AND JUDGES IMMUNE FROM PROSECUTION FOR VIOLATING CIVIL RIGHTS OF CITIZENS.

On February 23, 1999, the office of Oregon Attorney General Hardy Meyers gave an opinion filed in federal court that Oregonians do not have the right to protect themselves if they are the victims of criminal abuse, fraud or abuse of authority by civil servants and authorities. Mr. Meyers, through assistant Attorney General Cynthia Botsois, also stated that parents have no legal right to stand in the court for the protection of their children when the children are being knowingly abused in State custody, even though their parental rights have not been terminated by the courts.

The State's motion was filed in a federal Civil Deprivation of Rights suit in which Attorney General Hardy Meyers, as well as Governor John Kitzhaber and Supreme Court Chief Justice Wallace Carson and a large number of judges and State authorities are named for crimes including racketeering and conspiracy for covering up criminal acts of State workers. This opinion comes at the same time a number of bills are before the legislature to further impede citizens access to due process and criminalize those who speak out about their abuse. Legislation such as SB7O makes a "crime" of intimidating, harassing, even by telephone, a State employee or judge, with penalties suggested of five years in jail and one-hundred thousand dollar fines. This is another example of the State making up "crimes," protecting themselves, and if anyone confronts a judge he will be convicted of intimidation. It is of interest that legislation is passed that increases liability and accountability for citizens actions, yet increasingly protects State employees' immunity.

Right now, judges are committing innocent people to mental hospitals for refusing the services of attorneys and representing themselves, declaring them "unfit to proceed" having "prosecutorial delusions" for saying a judge is corrupt when their rights have been blatantly violated in biased court proceedings. More than fifty people right now are in Salem mental hospitals and more are incarcerated in Marion County Correctional institutions awaiting transfer to the mental hospital for just such "crimes." This is but one example of how "criminals" are being "created" and incarcerated at the whim of the court, and the judiciary with confidentiality and immunity are making up their own policies, rules and procedures and acting as if they are law.

Mr. Meyers recently gave an opinion that the Government Standards and Practices Commission cannot fine State legislators for failing to disclose potential conflicts of interest, abolishing some of the powers of the ethics commission, stating that the Legislature will oversee its own ethics violations.

In a related case, federal judge Owen Panner on March 10, 1999, dismissed a case against legislators who stopped a protestor from hanging in effigy, in 1997, SOSCF Director Kay Toran. The judge stated that "legislators were not acting in their official capacity. But even if they were, Panner wrote, their actions were protected from legislative immunity." The State admits that the legislators forced a peaceful protestor to stop, yet refuses to hold anyone liable for violating the protesters rights. Years ago, the Citizens Review Board was created to replace the internal investigation unit of the SOSCF. Now, this board states its goal to be to implement the service agreements of the SOSCF, and there is no internal investigation or overseer.

It is established now that the government in the State of Oregon bas declared itself to be unaccountable in every capacity and those in charge believe themselves to be completely immune for violating citizens' rights. The Supreme Court, in the past year, has quietly dismissed repeated mandamus writs demanding a grievance process for the citizens in the State of Oregon, writs that plainly state there is no law if the courts refuse to intervene to protect innocent people. The writs state that the Constitution has been subverted and the people must take the government back, overthrowing those who would allow the Constitution to be destroyed. The Supreme Court refuses to allow hearings in these matters. In this federal opinion, the office of Mr. Meyers states that a case dismissed in State court has no right to be heard in federal court, "claims precluded because they were litigated in a prior State action." Oregonians have no right to redress in higher courts, according to the Attorney General's office. The Attorney General's opinion states that "claims against the State of Oregon and SOSCF are barred," because the "State of Oregon and the SOSCF have not consented to this suit. "

Mr Meyers' office states that "42USC 1983 Claims against employees acting in their official capacity are barred." With no investigation of undisputed criminal activities, and no investigation or review of conduct, the Attorney General's office states, "Whether a State official is immune from liability depends on the circumstances and motivations of his actions" .... "A review of the conduct of the State defendants clearly establishes that all of them enjoy immunity from this section 1983 suit." Mr. Meyers' office states that "claims against defendant judges, district attorneys and assistant attorneys general are barred by judicial and prosecutorial immunity," and another states that, "This immunity applies even when a judge is accused of acting maliciously and corruptly." The Attorney General never refutes the charges of criminal acts against many State officials, and reiterates some of the heinous claims, but states, "Claims arise from defendants' conduct as prosecutors. Defendant DA's Penn and Howell are absolutely immune from liability."

These are the same district attorneys responsible for countless mandatory sentencing victims, who without integrity or accountability destroy innocent people. The DA's only goal is to prevail in court. These are the same district attorneys, who say it "saves the courts money" to routinely scare innocent people into plea-bargaining and avoid jury trials.
Mr. Meyer's office states that, "because parents are not legal guardians, they have no standing to assert the child's rights," this even though parents rights have not been terminated. Mr. Meyers' office policies are in violation of federal laws that biological parents are to be notified and take part in medical decisions about their children in State custody. This opinion, in this case, is after repeated criminal abuse has taken place to a child in foster care that has been admitted by the agency and is fully public knowledge, yet the Attorney General's office is stating that even when a parent knows that their child is being abused by the State, they have no rights to intervene to protect them. This opinion, as well as the knowledge that it is common practice to alter birth certificates and remove children out of state before parental rights have been terminated, proves a serious problem whereby countless children can just disappear--2,500 a day nationally, and with no accountable record keeping or effective overseer.

It is evident from the Attorney General's opinions that if an innocent citizen has a grievance in the State of Oregon, that person has no rights to a fair hearing when the accused is a State employee. There is a SERIOUS accountability problem, starting with governor Kitzhaber and his appointed authorities to the judiciary, whom 90% have been appointed by the governor between elections, without senate confirmation and then run unopposed in "mock" elections. When asked, Governor's ombudsman, Gin Dennison, stated her "powers were limited" to act on the behalf of aggrieved citizens who are suffering abuse by the State. All administrators state their options are limited, that whatever problems someone is having, involve other agencies and ultimately the legislature is where the changes must be made.

A rising public awareness is calling for increased accountability from State officials, agencies and the legislature. Serious systemic problems are coming to light that reveal bureaucracies acting for self-profit and legislative intent being exploited with countless rules criminalizing innocent people. The way the courts are interpreting the rules are allowing serious rights violations and are being enforced even though unconstitutional.

Public opinion is the key that will bring about accountability. The methods and intent of our public officials must be scrutinized as to motive and integrity. It is unacceptable that the constitutional rights of due process have been stripped from our courts and the executive branch is stating the government is accountable to no one.

The government of the State of Oregon has forgotten that the people ARE the government, and in fact, the current regime has usurped the rights and liberties of the people. These individuals have taken over the government and are, with impunity, preventing We the People from monitoring the operations and stating themselves above the Law and immune from any accountability or liability for their actions.

In the answer to the State's Motion, the case is made for the innocent and vulnerable people who are being victimized with no constitutional protection of the law. Until it becomes a crime to make false reports and allegations; until mandatory reporting and mandatory sentencing are ended and only real crimes give the courts rights to intervene in peoples lives; until accountability is brought by prosecution of State employees violating the public trust, there can be no more laws passed to cover over the festering corruption that is profiting from exploiting vulnerable people

The legislature has to go back and address the horrendous assault that is being allowed against innocent people by legislation, often well intentioned, to protect everyone. By allowing State intervention to assess people and keep databases, (the latest database is being created on every infant horn in the State of Oregon, to connect nationally and easier facilitate fast track, interstate adoption of other people's children by the State for profit), the people have been absolutely stripped of their civil liberties. Unconstitutional rules are not laws at all and enforcement of these rules must not be allowed.

Legislators who pass unconstitutional rules that are then enforced as law are breaking the law themselves and violating the public trust. The Criminal Code covers real crimes and most of the rules that the agencies have written for themselves, administrative rules, are enforcing criminal penalties in civil courts without real crimes having been committed.

There is no presumption of innocence, and those writing the laws do not go into court to witness the extreme rendering and exploitation that the courts are routinely enacting against innocent people. IT MUST STOP NOW...

It is no less an emergency than every case of a child in foster care, and every person who is incarcerated at this time must have their cases re-examined to determine if due process has been afforded to them. The court files do not reflect anything but the States side of the case, and often people are not defended. There has to be full auditing and effective overseer put in place to clean up the oppression and correct the civil rights violations that are occurring.

The State is doing its best to silence the voice of the people. Often, the State's voice is the only one heard in legislative hearings for bills the agencies have written for themselves. The legislature must consider the rights of the people, not State agencies and special interests, in policy and decision making, and remove all immunity and confidentiality rules that are allowing criminals in offices of authority to be protected.

(Attached Motion in Opposition to State's Motion)
Wilbur and Pamela Gaston
A Voice For Children
PO Box 132
Mt. Angel, Oregon 97362
(503) 845-6734