Rachel Comes Home:
Commercial Process Combined with
Administrative Process Works!
In on of the most difficult cases - Child Protective Services - Marcel
prevailed!
From the desk of: Marcel Roy Bendshadler
Constitutional Counsellor
KC7AQK@worldnet.att.net
November 1, 2000
For Immediate Release: Rachel Comes Home to Happy Parents
On Sunday, September 17, 2000, Rachel Anne Bendshadler was in the kitchen with her parents who where busy preparing Sunday Dinner. Unfortunately Rachel did not hear or understand a warning to move as her father, Marcel, was "coming through" with a hot pot full of boiling water and cooked pasta. Marcel attempted to "push" Rachel out of the way with his forearm, but the pot was hot and starting to burn his hands through the potholders and he missed, instead "catching" Rachel's cheek with the pot itself. After dumping the hot water a quick inspection showed a slight redness, and ice was applied and dinner was finished and consumed. The next day there was a visible sign of what looked like a healing sunburn, smaller than a quarter, larger than a nickel and Rachel went to school and nothing was said or noted.
On Tuesday, September 19, 2000 Rachel Anne Bendshadler was removed from the Private School where she was enrolled in Kindergarten when the Principal agreed to turn Rachel over to Carolina Caballero, who was d.b.a. a S.O.S.C.F. Caseworker for unsubstantiated suspicions of child abuse. When the Principal was questioned by Marcel and his friend, Roger Olsen, on why the school had broken the contract that Marcel had with the school, she told Marcel and Roger that "State law required me to breach that contract." The Principal could not state what law this was and admitted, upon further questions, that indeed state "law" is subordinate to the Constitution, however, she still insisted that "state law requires me to breach the contract."
On Wednesday a "Shelter Hearing" took place before Referee Connie Isgro. It was obvious that Isgro was going to allow anything that Carolina Caballero, the D.D.A., Rachel's court-appointed "Attorney," and the court-appointed "Attorney" for Amanda wanted to say as if it was the "Gospel Truth" and the end of discussion. The one man in the room who knew what was going on and could actually shed some light on the situation, Marcel, was not allowed to speak, was not allowed to challenge or even examine, except for a doctored photograph, any of the "evidence" that was presented against him. No objections where allowed, no controversy was allowed, the only question for Marcel was whether he wanted a court-appointed liar, that's attorney for those of you who do not understand this term, to come in and lie about him.
The most inflammatory aspect of the whole proceeding was the second-hand verbal report from the C.A.R.E.S. NW unit. This "report" became incontrovertible because no one was allowed to challenge it. The "report" stated that it was a medical certainty that the only way this burn could have occurred was if the mother held Rachel down and the father applied a red-hot item to the face deliberately. It was "testilied" that when Rachel was asked how she was burned she answered, "My daddy burned me." What else would a 5-year-old say? Was she being honest? Of course she was, however, does that statement from a child bring a clear picture of what happened? These are rhetorical questions, for it is obvious that there is more to this drama than meets the eye!
The answers to these questions where not looked at rationally at this "Shelter Hearing," for Connie Isgro not only issued "temporary custody" of Rachel, but also for her older sister, Amanda. To further "rub salt" into this festering wound to the family, Isgro also issued a "restraining order" to "prevent" Marcel from having any contact whatsoever to either of his daughters. Ostensibly this was done because of Marcel's "Long history of extreme violence to his children," "His anti-government views," and "His tendency to challenge authority." Anyone who knows and has observed Marcel with his family knows that the first two statements are patently false, and as for the last, so what? What relevance does this have on the rearing of any child? Challenging "authority" is a long-standing American tradition that has its roots in the works of such "reactionaries" as John Adams, Benj. Franklin, and James Madison.
Later that day Marcel and his lovely bride Susan where subjected to nearly 5-hour siege upon their home by Portland Police Officers who where threatening to shoot their way into the home unless they "gave up" Amanda for the alleged "Custody Order" of Isgro. The Officers where constantly informed that unless they had a warrant, they were not going to come into this home unless they complied with the conditions listed on the "No Trespass" sign posted on the door. The "No Trespass" sign tells "Officers" of "the law" that if they want to come into the posted property without Due Process of Law that they will have to, among other things, submit to a complete body-cavity search. The will of Marcel & Susan to stand up for their Un-a-lien-able Rights "to be Secure in their Persons, houses, papers, and effects" as stated in the Fourth Article of the Bill of Rights must have annoyed these "Officers" for they harassed the neighbors and anyone else that came up to them to ask what was going on. That is, until people with camcorders started to show up and videotape them.
During this siege, Marcel and Susan constantly told these "Officers" that Amanda had apparently run away… not from her parents, but from them. This concept was lost on these "Officers." Despite threats, duress and coercion, the security of the Bendshadler home was never breached. This siege ended when a Sergeant handed to Marcel, through a friend, what he called a "warrant" that was nothing more than another "Custody Order" that someone had scribbled "Wyatt" in the place where the "Judge" is supposed to sign. Now this "Custody Order" had none of the things necessary for a Warrant, and the Sergeant must have understood. The Sergeant read the "Miranda" warning to Marcel then told Marcel that he was "under arrest for custodial interference." Marcel told the Sergeant that if he thought he had a valid warrant, come on up on the porch and "execute" it! The Sergeant could only waive Marcel down, inviting him to come onto the Public Sidewalk. Again, Marcel told them that if they had a valid warrant, then "execute" it. This happened three times, and after the third time, a camera news truck from KPTV-12 came rolling up the street. At this sight the Sergeant and his 4-5 "bodyguard" Officers decided to do what cockroaches do when the kitchen light is turned on. However, as they were leaving, the Sergeant turned to Marcel and said, "You watch your rearview mirror, Mr. Bendshadler, 'cause we are going to GET YOU!"
When the news truck came to a stop, the cameraman was asked if he had ever seen police officers afraid to arrest a man they claimed to have a warrant for and simply run away? He replied that he had never seen anything like it.
Fast-forwarding in the story, Marcel proceeded through an "Administrative Process" upon Carolina Caballero where he served a notice of Process with eight basic statements of Fact under a Verified Declaration. Marcel then went on to ask Caballero a few questions, such as "Do you have a claim against Rachel Anne Bendshadler?" "Do you have a warrant for the taking of Rachel Anne Bendshadler?" "If two or more cooperate in accomplishing an act, is that a conspiracy?" and "Do you or anyone else have authority to remove children from their parents?" These questions had default answers if Caballero decided not to answer except by tacit procuration. Caballero was granted ten days to answer or tell Marcel that she was exercising her privilege against self-incrimination and had turned the Administrative Claim over to a Grand Jury or other prosecuting authority for investigation into the claims made therein.
After the ten days had expired, Caballero was served a Notice of Fault which explained that she had an opportunity to cure the Fault, but that the default answers to the questions were now in effect by her tacit procuration. Caballero was given three days to cure the Fault and after the third day, was served a Notice of Default. Marcel then assembled an Administrative Tribunal with three Administrative Law Judges to review his Administrative Process. The Tribunal reviewed the Process, found everything to be in order, listened to witnesses and asked questions under direct testimony. The Administrative Law Judges then signed the Private International Administrative Judgment against Carolina Caballero. This Judgment was registered under a UCC-3, securing the Judgment as a Contract and assessing a value to it for the 16 separate Trespasses Carolina Caballero had executed against Marcel.
On Tuesday October 31 at 1:30 Marcel served a Mandatory Judicial Notice upon the Chief Clerk in Charge of this case, Jonathan Wexler at the Multnomah County Courthouse. About 2 o'clock while on the phone in the Court Administrators office Marcel observed Wexler come in with the Notice and its attached papers and ask the clerk to make two copies, one for Judge Kurshner and one for the Presiding Judge of the 4th Judicial District. About 3 o'clock supporters of the Bendshadler family started to show up at the Multnomah County Courthouse for the hearing that was supposed to start at 3:15. Marcel noticed Carolina Caballero's supervisor in the hallway and "served" him a copy of the Contract/Judgment with Caballero. The S.C.F. Supervisor was warned that if he acted in anyway contrary to the terms of the agreement, he would be interfering in the Obligation of Contracts and would be held liable for the entire amount of the Judgment. At the appointed hour, Wexler kicked everyone out of the courtroom, locked the door, then invited the D.D.A., the S.C.F. Supervisor, and court-appointed "attorney" for Rachel into Kurshner's Private Chambers where they met for nearly ½-hour. At this point Marcel knew something was afoot, as extensive experience with these crooks has shown this was highly irregular.
At about 3:40 the courtroom was opened and everyone moved in, including Lissa Kaufman, the court-appointed "attorney" for Amanda who was just arriving. Marcel made sure that those who did not yet have the Judgment/Contract were given complimentary copies and explained what it was to them. The D.D.A. was curious about it and pretended to not understand what it all meant, questioning where Marcel was able to get a Tribunal that would pass such a Judgment. Marcel informed her that it was the same place she goes for Administrative Judgments, before the panel of available Judges. Lissa Kaufman was busy handing out papers to everyone, including an "Amended Petition" when Judge Kurshner strolled into the room. Being Halloween, everyone could see that she was not quite in complete costume wearing a black-dress but was missing the pointed hat, but the fact did not seem to bother anyone greatly.
When the D.D.A. stood up the 35+ people that were packed into the courtroom to witness the proceedings witnessed the biggest cover-up since Watergate unfold right before their eyes. The D.D.A. proceeded to talk about how the "testimony" of a 5-year-old did not carry as much weight as that of 30-year-old, however the D.D.A. said she was inclined to believe Rachel when Rachel states that the burn was an accident! This D.D.A. went on to spin a tale of how little she had to use to "prosecute" this case and how the Doctor at C.A.R.E.S. NW in her written report, which she now waived around, showed that "the burn had the consistency of an accident by its size, location, intensity," etc. Yes, the same Doctor that had been referenced during the September 20 "Shelter Hearing" as saying "the burn could only have happened if Rachel had been held down while deliberately branded" was now quoted as saying the burn was accidental. It was at this moment that Marcel realized that "the fix" was in and it was in favor of the family. Everything the D.D.A. said would be, in any other case, turned and used against family in one way or another. The D.D.A. then "passed on" a message for the S.C.F. Supervisor from the State A.G. office, which the D.D.A. said should have been there… most unusual. The "message" was that it was the opinion of the State A.G. that S.C.F. had no case in this matter.
It was a most amazing sight, only topped when the S.C.F. Supervisor got up and basically capitulated to everything the D.D.A. said! Everyone in the room must have started to pinch themselves to make sure they were not sharing a common hallucination when court-appointed "attorney" for Rachel got up and said basically that everything that had been said she was in agreement. Then Lissa Kaufman got up. The reader is reminded that Ms. Kaufman was not part of the private meeting in Judge Kurshner's Chambers. Lissa Kaufman stated that she did not agree with what was happening. Lissa Kaufman wanted to "amend the petition" with two items. There began an exchange between Kurshner and Kaufman where the former "dressed down" the latter for "acting without consulting your client." While Kurshner said this to Kaufman, Kurshner was looking at Marcel Bendshadler and the fear in Kurshner's eyes was so obvious a blind man would have seen it. Kurshner was about ready to loose her temper with Kaufman for "not playing along" with "The Plan" that was now obviously cooked up during the afternoon since the Mandatory Judicial Notice was served. When Kaufman insisted that she wanted to proceed it took a thinly veiled threat against Kaufman's Bar License to get her to shut up.
Judge Kurshner then ordered that the Petition and all related actions be dismissed forthwith. Marcel Bendshadler was so shocked at this news he could hardly believe it, but it was true. Yes, the Judge and others, probably involving the Chief Justice of the Oregon Supreme Court and the State A.G.'s office along with the Presiding Judge of the 4th Judicial District cooked up a pretty good cover story that will convince some that they just decided to drop for lack of a case, but those who know how this monster of a system works have no doubt that something else entirely was going on, for petitions are never dismissed no matter how outrageous the allegations. In the twisted minds of those running the "Child Protection System" if a child denies an allegation it simply means that the child is "under coercion" or their favorite, is "in denial" of the "truth."
Judge Kurshner was asked when the Private Property was going to be released to Marcel. Kurshner simply pointed to the D.D.A. and the S.C.F. Supervisor stating that they had the property and she had no control over the property then she ran from the room to avoid further questions. Marcel immediately approached the S.C.F. Supervisor and asked him to return the Private Property he was holding. The S.C.F. Supervisor was reluctant to comply, stating that Marcel had to treat him "with respect" and stated such in a way that caused two Sheriff Deputies to move quickly behind Marcel and the sound of handcuffs coming out was clearly in the air. Marcel stood firm and again demanded his Private Property be returned. When the S.C.F. Supervisor hesitated one of the Sheriff Deputies asked the S.C.F. Supervisor if he wanted Marcel to communicate with him via correspondence. The S.C.F. Supervisor stated to Marcel "You can pickup your daughter at 6pm at my office." It was refreshing for the S.C.F. Supervisor to admit that Rachel is Marcel's daughter.
There was an immediate celebration by all present at this great news. Marcel and Susan proceeded home where the phone literally never stopped being used for sometime, so many people needed to be called to let them know the good news! At the appointed hour, a small group accompanied Marcel and Susan to the N/NE Branch Office of S.C.F. and shortly after 6pm Rachel came out and spotted Marcel and ran to jump in his arms. It was a very tearful and joyous occasion. Rachel wasn't even disappointed at not going out to "Trick or Treat" because of all the excitement at home.
For more information, contact Marcel by email at: KC7AQK@worldnet.att.net or attend the meetings of the Citizen's Rights Task Force