22 February 2021 USPS Certified Mail # 7020 1290 0000 4079 5042
QR Code Link to This Post
California Department of Justice
Bureau of Criminal Information and Analysis
Child Abuse Central Index (CACI)
P.O. Box 903387
Sacramento, CA 94203-3870
California State Bar, Attorney Complaints USPS Certified Mail # 7020 1290 0000 4079 5059
California Board of Behavioral Sciences USPS Certified Mail # 7020 1290 0000 4079 5066
Humboldt County District Attorney Fleming USPS Certified Mail # 7020 1290 0000 4080 6199
(Continued from Part 1)
Employment in Humboldt County is problematic for those not connected to the local community by ties of blood.
Due to unemployment in the Bay Area, my family was cruelly evicted, on the 24th of December, from a house we had rented for several years, because the owner wanted to rent it out to someone else, for more - even though our rent was paid up.
There's a name for that - it's called an Ellis Act eviction, because the Ellis Act specifically prevents it. Humboldt County Superior Court did not see it that way, and told us to get out.
We ended up renting an apartment - at 137 12th Street, in Fortuna, which, coincidentally, was owned by a family that loudly described themselves as Southern California Jews with some sort of connection to someone in the Fortuna government - and discovered that the apartment we had been rented, was infested, with bedbugs, and black mold crawling up the walls, and a foot of sewer water in the foundation.
We were just about to file a lawsuit against the owners of 137 12th Street, in Fortuna, for renting us the apartment that was infested with bedbugs, and mold, and had a foot of sewage underneath, when, suddenly, BAM!, Humboldt County Child Welfare Services kidnapped my [snip], at Academy of the Redwoods, accused me of driving [snip] to attempt suicide, and derailed the lawsuit.
Our lawyer - Andrew Stunich, to whom we had delivered three copies of a CDROM (included) containing ~800 megabytes of photographs, text messages and electronic mails between ourselves, PPM's property managers, and Fortuna PD - bailed on us, and we never heard another word from him.
Was that a coincidence? I think not.
Humboldt County Child Welfare Services then tried to kidnap all four of my [snip] - I refer, specifically, to Humboldt County Superior Court cases JV160250 and JV160275.
When contemplating the role of the article I published (see URL, above) on Oracle Corporation, the Jewish Defense League, the Anti-Defamation League, AIPAC, and Hadassah, in all of this ... was it a coincidence that Christopher Wilson, Sarah Kaber, Debra Avenmarg, Charles Blanck, Therese Vodden, Jacob Rosen, Debra Patton-Hagen, and her supervisor, Ellen Rosebaugh-Petitjean, whose daughter went to school with my [snip] and was in competition for the same scholarships, were, in all probability, all Jewish? I think not. These are not coincidences.
Mind you, I do not think that the above eight individuals comprise a complete list of all of the participants in this charade.
If we assume that my [snip]'s being taken into custody was fraudulent, then, by my analysis, there was at least one other person in the upper management of Humboldt County Child Welfare Services, actively participating - that would probably have been the person with authority for assigning personnel to transport my [snip] to and from San Francisco.
There was also at least one person at the Academy of the Redwoods - by my estimate, female, and probably a teacher, possibly a student. These person(s) would have also been involved in the trip to Southern California, the year before.
There may have been someone inside HCSO's management, as well, facilitating - that would have been the person dispatching an officer to take my allegedly suicidal child into custody and transport [snip] to Semper Virens, like a common criminal, neatly bypassing all those annoying medical professionals.
There were, obviously, a few useful idiots, manipulated into calling CWS repeatedly, and complaining that I was abusing my [snip], to act as fall guys if anything went wrong. The most likely candidates for this role would be the former manager of the apartment complex, [snip] - responsible for the bedbugs and the mold and several other problems - as well as his inlaws, the [snip] clan, who lived right next door to us.
And there was almost surely some sort of person coordinating this entire sequence of events - the Yiddish term for such a person is 'macher', usually translated as 'fixer' ... but I would suggest that a small-g 'godfather', in the organized crime sense, is a better translation.
It's likely that the word 'Jewish' means different things to each of these people. But looking at it from the outside, what's clear is that they don't care about their differences so much as they care about the weight they can pull if they act as a gang, or mob - that is, work together, towards a common goal. In other words, a mafia.
Above, I described myself as 'Jewish'. But I could have just as easily described myself as having some distant Ashkenazi ancestors on my mother's side of the family, and a fondness for toasted poppy seed bagels, with cream cheese. It would be more honest. And more useful.
And so we see that most people who describe themselves as 'Jewish' are deploying the word because it gives them leverage. This is wrong. They should be challenged. 'Oh, really? Which synagogue do you go to? Oh, you DON'T go to a synagogue? Oh, you AREN'T religious - but you still consider yourself Jewish? How interesting! Please, tell me more!'
While we are on the topic of ancient Jewish cultural roles, I would also call your attention to the term 'moser', which is Yiddish for 'informer'. What I want to call to your attention is that the existence of such a word, so deeply embedded in Jewish values, is just more evidence that there is a culture of well-organized criminality deeply and historically embedded in what calls itself a Jewish culture, and that it goes back, linguistically, for thousands of years.
But this is not the behavior of Mediterranean Jews.
This is the behavior of Ashkenazi Jews. My own people, if you will.
I bring this to your attention because when people accuse you or your organization of being anti-Semitic, you must be prepared with an answer to that unanswerable accusation, and the answer is this: you are not concerned about traditional Jewish culture or faith-based activities, but you are concerned about a well-embedded cultural tendency towards organized crime in the Ashkenazi (and perhaps other) communities, as is reflected by the very language used by the community in the enforcement of its internal community values.
So, let's circle back to my oldest [snip]'s forced removal from my family.
When we review the facts of the case with the clarity brought by perspective, it is clear that there was and is no evidence that my [snip] attempted to hurt [snip].
No testimony from anyone.
A belt that was supposedly used, was 'lost'.
The Honorable Christopher Wilson threatened me for bringing up the missing evidence - the belt.
No medical personnel were involved in my [snip]'s transfer to Semper Virens.
Obviously a great deal of effort was undertaken to keep my [snip] AWAY from ambulance personnel, whom would have insisted on taking [snip] to the St Josephs emergency ward, where, I suspect, someone might have noticed that my [snip] had been drugged.
Neither my wife nor myself were allowed to be present when our [snip] were questioned and cross-examined by the court; we have no idea what happened after we were forcibly removed from the Department 7 courtroom.
There was no jury present - there was no jury, period.
The public is barred from observing juvenile hearings, as well.
It was a Star Chamber, by design.
None of this was coincidental, in my opinion.
It wasn't an accident.
There are no accidents. That is Malice, pretending to be Stupidity.
If there is no evidence that my [snip] attempted to harm [snip], then we need to look seriously at the other possibility: that my [snip] was kidnapped, under color of false authority, by Humboldt County Child Welfare Services - as an act of retaliation, and to conceal a crime from discovery.
So far, I've made a strong case that there's something rotten inside Humboldt County Child Welfare Services - and then I went off, batshit crazy, with all this Jewish conspiracy nonsense.
I keep talking about evidence-based this, evidence-based that. Where's the evidence?
I think it was just after my [snip] turned 18 that someone gave [snip] a DNA test, in early December.
Now, I'm not SURE, but I think the DNA test was SPECIFICALLY for people who wanted to know if they were Jewish - that is, the DNA company makes more money by charging for testing for markers for specific ethnicities. Regardless, it showed that my [snip] had Ashkenazi heritage.
My sense is that right about then, Humboldt County Child Welfare Services switched tactics and started to treat our [snip] very well indeed.
I had myself brought the grinding wheels of justice in the county's persecution of me to a near-halt, by asking for a new lawyer, and then filing a monster declaration that included the content of both of those above URLs printed out in their entirety as well as asserting that I, too, was Jewish.
My sense is that if there was a Jewish community behind this, their discovering that the evil anti-Semite they had been conspiring to destroy was actually just as Jewish as they were, maybe more so, has kind of put a halt to their plans for destroying me.
That's not in their playbook, you see.
It's also possible that I am batshit crazy.
There is an alternative explanation.
This entire sequence of events was all brought about by a sub-literate apartment manager who dropped out of school in the 7th grade, and his abusive inlaws, prank-calling Humboldt County Child Welfare Services and reporting their neighbor was beating his child, to stop their neighbor from complaining about the bedbugs and the mold.
No giant, complicated conspiracy required, just stupid Humboldt County Child Welfare Service social workers and stupid court officials.
But then I remember the way my [snip] was concealed from me, at Semper Virens. And the missing belt. And the pepper spray. And the DNA test.
And I sense, again, that there's more here than meets the eye.
We're pretty close to the end of this letter. But there are two more topics I need to address, while I have your attention.
• Charity Ann Gregory
• Rules of Evidence & Engagement
Charity Ann Gregory was a woman I met as a result of posting articles about Humboldt County Child Welfare Services, on Craigslist. Charity had lost two children to CWS. She had raised three more to adulthood.
After posting photographs of her two children on Facebook, Judge Christopher Wilson ordered Charity taken into custody and imprisoned for six months for contempt of court - the same thing he had threatened me with, for writing articles about Humboldt County Child Welfare Services' abuses, on Craigslist, a few years before.
I visited Charity while she was in custody and she told me that the womens' quarters were overcrowded; later, she told me that, due to COVID, the womens' quarters were almost empty. Others had been given an early release. But not her. Her lawyer did not seem to have her best interests at heart. It seems possible that he was trying to curry favor with Judge Wilson by trying to NOT help his client.
The state of California offers a service that notifies interested parties when people who are in prison, are released, via electronic mail. A week before Charity was due to be released, I saw an email saying that Charity had just been released.
However, attempts to contact Charity have been unsuccessful. She has not attempted to contact me.
And so I wonder if she died in Humboldt County's custody.
I bring this up because now Charity Ann Gregory's two young children would be motherless orphans, and, while, no doubt, a great deal of effort will be made to conceal this fact from the children, they are sure to eventually find out.
Charity Ann Gregory had a mother; I know, because I met her. And so I infer that those two children had (and have) a grandmother. It is not clear what Grandma did or did not do that made her an unfit parent in the eyes of the Court but according to what Charity's mother told me, they rebuffed her efforts to take her children into her household.
Because I myself have been a court-appointed foster parent, for the City & County of San Francisco - I refer to the case of [snip] - I can say, with authority, that I do not understand Humboldt County's approach to separating parents from their children. Everything that they do is counter to everything I have been taught or have learned through experience. Some of the decisions appear to be made using reasoning that predates World War II.
Charity is not the only woman I have spoken to who has lost her children. I have spoken to several others.
All of these women tell me the same tale - that their young children are now in the custody of a pair of gay men, who are foster parents for Humboldt County Child Welfare Services.
Because each of the individuals who told me this story was well separated from the others by space and time there does not seem to be any possibility that this narrative is a fabricated one. Somewhere in Humboldt County there is a pair of gay men who are the preferred vendors when the county has one or two very small children or even infants that need care.
This does not seem right. Small children prefer the company of women, to men. Forcing them to seek nurture from a gay man pretending to be a heterosexual woman just doesn't make sense. Or, if it DOES make sense, it is from the point of a gay man's therapist, who might advise his patient to seek out some sort of work that gives him an opportunity to be nurturing - but, I would hope, not at the expense of the long term psychological development of children.
Let us think about this for a moment.
A hypothetical man identifies as homosexual. He is seeing a therapist because he knows fundamentally that something is not right and he seeks to understand himself. So far, so good.
This search for self-understanding leads to the realization that part of why he is homosexual is because he grew up without a heterosexual framework and lacked 'normal' (IE, conventional) reference models for what constituted masculinity and masculine interaction. So far, so good.
But, now, our hypothetical gay man take a wrong turn, and vows to become a foster parent, and protect fatherless children from being fatherless. I say, bad decision.
To me, it seems as if this places the psychological development of the already-damaged homosexual man ahead of the psychological development of the just-starting-to-be-damaged two- to five-year-old not-homosexual boy (or girl).
And this all assumes that the homosexual man in question, and his homosexual partner, are sane people, and not, themselves, child molesters, acting out narratives learned through direct experience, as infants, perhaps while being babysat by men.
It's fun to sit around and theorize about where this all started, but the real question is, is this what's happening, and, if so, where and how does this stop?
It would be easy to call me some sort of hater but you need to understand that I GREW UP in San Francisco, being hit on by gay men as a young man, myself; and I am pretty sure my younger brother was molested by a teacher, in San Francisco, as well - note the total absence of girlfriends in my younger brother's life, in over forty years of adulthood.
Above, I mentioned child kidnapping. Split egos. Behavioral modification.
If we were to encounter such a situation in real life, what would it look like?
I argue that it would look very much like what we see here:
• Children being removed from their homes
• Contact with family members and parents being interfered with.
• Child Welfare Services being accused of acting like kidnappers.
• Evasive foster parents.
• Avoidance of evidence-based medicine.
• Sabotage of evidence-based law.
• Crooked backwoods lawyers.
• Contrived situations.
In an article I recently posted on Craigslist I discussed my experience working for Friendfinder.com and discovering that it was a front for over 300 pornography websites, run by a Jewish man and a few Jewish subordinates, right in downtown Palo Alto, California.
One of the features of these porn websites was their reliance upon a steady feed of live porn from just across the border, in Nevada.
It's not clear where Nevada gets a steady supply of damaged, but nubile, young girls and women, for their porn industry; but I would call to your attention that Northern California is not far away from Nevada, and that it is entirely possible that almost everyone in this sequence of events is involved - knowingly, or not - in something much larger than just persecuting my family.
Eventually, I will find out what happened to Charity Ann Gregory. But learning what happened to her children may be much harder.
One of the most troubling aspects of my own case is trying to understand the legal nature of this case.
Is the juvenile court that found me guilty of child abuse, for telling my [snip] to clean up [snip] room, a criminal court ? Or a civil court?
If it's a criminal court, then there should have been a jury, and the public should have been allowed to witness it. Correct?
If it's a civil court, then, STILL, there should have been a jury, and the public should have been allowed to witness it. Correct?
Which was it? Criminal, or civil?
If it was a criminal court, I should have been allowed to hear the accusations against me. Instead, I was removed from the room. Why was that?
If it was a criminal court, I should have been assumed innocent, and the burden of proof should have rested upon the State. Correct?
Instead, I was forced to prove that I was innocent of charges that were never even concretely matched to a specific place, time, or sequence of events. Correct?
That is known in legal circles as the Napoleonic Code. Why was I required to submit to the Napoleonic Code, in Northern California, in the 21st century?
The court cited civil evidence that was based upon hearsay from a mental outpatient, from, like, 30 years ago. Is that normal in criminal cases?
The court misrepresented hearsay as proven fact, over and over and over. Is that normal in criminal cases?
The court suppressed evidence and testimony relating specifically to evidence which had been concealed. Is this normal in criminal cases?
How can these things happen in a room full of mature adults with advanced college degrees?
I'm also curious about the restrictions against my showing anyone any juvenile court materials. Is that intended to protect the reputation of the child? Or is it intended to protect the reputation of the lawyer?
Let's say I discover that Judge Christopher Wilson has invited all the lawyers he likes to hang out in his courtroom, in the public area where the public would sit if they were allowed into the courtroom, so that the lawyers don't have to be bothered by their clients, in the hall, outside, and that Judge Wilson is using his courtroom's unused space like it was coffeehouse for barristers. Is that a public topic?
Let's say I write a letter to the California Commission on Judicial Performance. Is that a public document?
Let's say I include evidence - say, a declaration I composed on the matter, and filed, with Humboldt County Superior Court. Is that a juvenile court document? Apparently, it is.
But now the juvenile court document is attached to a letter to the California Commission on Judicial Performance. Is that now a public document?
Is the letter to the California Commission on Judicial Performance, a public document, but the evidence attached to it, confidential?
Are there any mechanisms in place to enforce this?
Does every commission in the state now have to scrutinize its files and separate the public material from the material that must be concealed from the public - essentially, maintaining two files for every subject?
Obviously the California Legislature did not think this through; or they did, and, as lawyers, elected to create a situation that would require more lawyers to litigate, thus insuring that their species would propagate, at the expense of the State of California.
If we straightened out those rules of evidence and enforced them, and then straightened out those rules of engagement that make it impossible to complain about crooked lawyers and crooked judges and crooked social workers ? why, we might not have any problems left, and could go home, and raise kids, and be happy, and not need lawyers.
In the meantime ...
Clearly there was and is something very wrong in Humboldt County.
My own younger brother died under mysterious circumstances recently. Fortuna Police Department could not even be bothered to notify me of my own brother's death. Nor could they be bothered to reply to a well-reasoned letter I sent them, via electronic mail, suggesting that someone had been stealing from my brother's ATM account. My sense is that they find it convenient to pretend that an electronic mail is not a REAL complaint.
(Editor's note: HCSO did the exact same thing. This is why I communicate via email - so there is a paper trail, and so I can prove that I did what I say I did, said what I say I said, when I say I said it. The county should try it.)
There is simply no excuse for this - my brother had a California-issued identification that listed a Fortuna address, the very address I am at as I write this, now. Fortuna's excuse: they say they didn't know my telephone number.
That's the same excuse the county uttered when they took my oldest [snip] into custody instead of adhering to the very safety plan that they, themselves, had helped to draft: we couldn't reach you by phone.
My conclusion remains that my [snip] was kidnapped, unlawfully, and that there is no evidence to indicate otherwise.
My conclusion remains that Humboldt County Child Welfare Services has been the subject of regulatory capture by a sociopolitical minority, bound together by ethnic myths into an ongoing criminal enterprise, and that the agency has been and continues to be used as a weapon of political retaliation against opponents.
My request is that Humboldt County, and the State of California, seriously consider prosecuting Charles Blanck, former County Counsel, for child kidnapping.
(In a nutshell ... there is actually more evidence to support the theory of child kidnapping, than there is, evidence to support the County's allegations of 'child abuse' - that is, none at all.
Prove me wrong, citizens. Please!)