Docket Nos. W10-CP03-009076-D

W10-CP02-008469-D

W10-CP03-009077-D

W10-CP03-009078-D

W10-CP03-009079-D

W10-CP05-014749-A

: SUPERIOR COURT FOR

JUVENILE MATTERS CHILD

PROTECTION SESSION

AT MIDDLETOWN

JUNE 21, 2006

In re: BAKER, ABIGAIL

BAKER, AARON

INKEL, ALEXANDER

INKEL, ANDREW

INKEL, ANASTASIA

INKEL, ORION

MOTION TO ENTER THE APPEARANCE OF PHILIP INKEL ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF, MEREDITH INKEL, PHILLIP INKEL II, NICHOLAS INKEL, JESSICA INKEL, AARON BAKER (STEPCHILD), ABIGAIL BAKER (STEPCHILD), ALEXANDER INKEL, ANDREW INKEL, ANASTASIA INKEL, AND ORION INKEL

AND

MOTIONS FOR CONTEMPT

Complainant Phillip Inkel requests representation of his minor children to 1) give testimony as a witness, 2) refute the perjury and frauds upon the courts committed by DCF staff, their witnesses, and foster carers, 3) to establish visitation with all the children, 4) defend himself against the testimony of James Connolly, MD, (Vauxhall Street, Waterford) per the statement of Judge Stuart Bear (to wit, Judge Bear stated that Phillip Inkel should testify on Meredith Inkel’s and his own behalf), 5) to establish the severe sexual and physical abuse of his children while in the DCF foster care of Annette Anderson, not reported by DCF staff to the proper authorities despite their awareness of the sexually traumatic injuries sustained.

It is established that after DCF’s removal of the 2 Inkel boys (now aged 4 and 5) and placement in the care of Annette Anderson, both suffered meatitis or inflammation of the penis. [Exhibit 1, 2- medical reports of Dr. Dennis Long]

It is established that one of the Inkel boys visited Dr. Dennis Long for meatitis on October 31 2004, and on April 1, 2005 for meatitis. The records of Alexander Inkel state “DOUBT UTI,” which implies topic injury, and which is consistent with the boys’ accounts of deliberate genital injury.

It is established that the now 5 year old Inkel boy stated that the foster carer Annette Anderson “bit my pee-pee.” [Exhibit 3- videotaped; this evidence is in another state being duplicated]

It is established that the now 4 year old Inkel boy stated that the foster carer Annette Anderson, “she pinched it and it hurt,” meaning his penis was pinched by Annette Anderson. [Exhibit 3- videotaped and in another state being duplicated]

It is established that the Inkel newborn girl (DOB Oct 31, 2003), who was fraudulently removed from her mother and from the hospital under a fraudulent Order of Custody, Nov 3, 2003, suffered multiple urinary infections and “capillary hemangioma of the R buttocks.” The child was 7 months old at the time of the severe bruise to her buttocks, in diapers. [Exhibit 4A,B]

Dr. Dennis Long also notes café au lait spots on her right leg. The child has no café au lait spots, so this is suspected to be an old injury.

It is established that in the care of Annette Anderson, the children were physically assaulted. The now 4 year old Inkel child states that he was hit in the face. [Exhibit 5] The photograph of the black eye suffered by this child was entered as evidence in the civil suit 3:04 –CV-69 (Second Circuit Court of Appeals).

The children state that in the care of Annette Anderson, they were physically beaten on their bottoms, were slapped in the face, and subjected to “Mr. Maris Time Outs.” “Mr. Maris Time Outs” were demonstrated to DCF’s Jo-El Suroviak as isometric exercises of the military type, frozen in a squat position with their arms outstretched. Demanding the children perform these “Mr. Maris Time Outs” is tantamount to torture.

It is established that Annette Anderson brought a child to Dr. Dennis Long’s office on August 30, 2004 for vulvitis and a urinary tract infection and alleged the child was the Inkel’s baby girl. The Inkel’s baby girl had been returned to the Inkels, so this was not their child. It should be determined who this child was, who apparently suffered the same abuse as the Inkel girl. The doctor’s notes say that the child was returned to the Inkels on August 18, 2004 but then went back to the foster carer. This statement was untrue. On August 30, 2004, the child was on the care of the Inkels. [Exhibit 6]

Exhibit 7 is a record regarding the abuse of yet another child in the care of Annette Anderson with the Inkel girl. This child was smacked in the head by Annette Anderson, spanked on the bottom, is afraid of Annette Anderson, and “has some fears about returning to the foster home.”

REGARDING THE “CONTEMPT OF COURT” FOR DISCUSSING MEREDITH INKEL’S AND THE INKEL CHILDRENS’ ABUSE BY DCF AND DCF CARERS

The Contempt of Court charge by William Wholean and the gag order by Judge Carl Taylor are themselves contempts of the courts, since the statute 17a-28 says that the “person” may discuss their case with whomever they want. Meredith Inkel, the “person,” is not allowed legal representation nor is she allowed to subpoena witnesses, which is illegal. The case regarding the removal Aaron Baker by DCF is nearly 4 years old, and is therefore only illegally being heard now. Meredith is not allowed legal representation, per Judge Carl Taylor’s order, but the judge cannot also order that Meredith Inkel to not have the counsel of friends. Meredith Inkel has no control over what her friends post to the internet or complaints that they make elsewhere on behalf of the Inkels. Meredith Inkel has asked that the records which were on the internet to be removed, but the activists refuse to obey illegal gag orders, as they themselves claim.

“Such records, of any person may only be disclosed, in whole or in part, to any individual, agency, corporation, or organization or as provided with the consent of the person or as provided in this section." -- CT Statute 17a-28

THE ISSUE OF PSYCHOTROPICS AND THE VALIDITY OF PSYCHIATRIC TESTIMONY

In the case of Kathleen Dickson, Ms. Dickson gave the DCF several scientific journal articles which showed that all psychotropics are brain damaging and she demonstrated the mechanism of this brain damage to the DCF court, in a racketeering complaint to the US Department of Justice against the American Psychiatric Association, and in a video she made and placed on her website, citing the references she gave Laura Lustig, 1200 Boston Post Road, Westport, Connecticut, on November 20, 2003, 6 days before the fraudulent removal of her children.

When Ms. Dickson filed a motion on March 25,. 2004, for an Administrative Review requesting law enforcement to be present to arrest AAG Jessica Gauvin, AAG Jessica Gauvin ordered Ms. Dickson’s false arrest falsely criminally charging her with being a terrorist; falsely criminally charging Ms. Dickson with the very insanity which originated in the mind of AAG Jessica Gauvin (being a Unibomber terrorist, etc). Ms. Dickson filed a scientific fraud and racketeering complaint against Yale University as regards Lyme disease – a permanent brain infection - and Yale’s patented Lyme vaccine, LYMErix, yet the DCF and DMHAS allowed the perjury of Yale staff, who stated that Lyme is not a brain disease. Kathleen Dickson is a former analytical chemist for Pfizer. Yale performed the autopsy on the congenitally infected newborn who died of the Lyme brain damage.

The scientific journal articles which demonstrate that all psychotropics are brain damaging are relevant to the Inkel case as regards Aaron Baker because not only did the DCF defraud the court over the removal of Aaron Baker nearly 4 years ago, the scientific data shows that Meredith Inkel made the right decision not so psychotropic drug her son Aaron Baker. Aaron Baker states repeatedly that he does not want these drugs because they make him feel terrible. The scientific journal articles submitted by Kathleen Dickson to the DCF court in Middletown in 2004 and that are still on her website are:

1) Genetic animal models: focus on schizophrenia, Gainetdinov, RR., et al. TRENDS in Neuroscience, Vol 24., No. 9, September, 2001 (They have no clue what the drugs targets are, because the drugs' mechanisms are all wrong. And that's the state of the "art".-- KMD)

Brain cell loss, well described in this seminal research article from 1993 about how of all these drugs are brain damaging. What these articles show, is that not only do "depressants" cause brain damage, brain cell death, and total brain volume loss, they make a person more demented and more unconfortable in all ways.

What Psychiatry does in response to the brain damage they cause, is say the drugs' brain damage "unmasked" an underlying psychiatric disorder. (Blame the Victim)

2) "Loss of striatal cholinergic neurons as a basis for tardive and L-dopa-induced dyskinesias, neuroleptic-induced supersensitivity psychosis and refractory schizophrenia."
Miller R, Chouinard G., Biol Psychiatry. 1993 Nov 15;34(10):713-

3) Psychiatric research in the 21st Century; Opportunities and Limitations, GR, Heninger, Millenium Article, Molecular Psychiatry (1999) 4, 429-436 (Psychiatry is beginning to consider thinking like scientists--KMD)

4) "The Pathophysiology of Agitation", Jearn-Pierre Lindenmayer, J Clin Psychaitry 2002;61 (suppl 14)

5) "Akathisia and Exacerbation of Psychopathology; A Preliminary Report", Dunca, et al. Clinical Neuropharmacology, Vol 23, No. 3, pp. 169-173

6) "Subjective Emotional Experience and Cognitive Impairment in Drug-Induced Akathisia", Jong-Hoon Kim, et al, Comprehensive Psychiatry, Vol.43, No. 6 (November/DEcember), 2002: pp 456-462

7) "Correlations Between Akathisia and Residual Psychopathology: A By-product of Neuroleptic-Induced Dysphoria", Newcomer, et al. Br J Psychiatry. 1994 Jun;164(6):834-8.

8) "Cardiovascular Effects of Antipsychotics Used in Bipolar Illness", Piepho, Robert W., J Clin Psychiatry 2002;63 [suppl 4]:20-23

9) Movement Disorders Associated With Atypical Antipsychotic Drugs, Caroff, SN, et al, J Clin Psychiatry 2002;63[suppl 4] 12-19

The following abstract is about a treatment for the brain damage. This means "tranquilizers" cause agitation (which is clearly the opposite effect of what is intended), and that this is so well known, that so, too, is it well known, that it must be treated. They therefore have created brain damage, this is standard operative procedure and common knowledge. Among Psychiatrists and BigPharma.

ABSTRACT: "Gamma-aminoburytic acid agonists for neuroleptic-induced dyskensia", Soares, et al, Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001; (2);CD000203

10) Van Der Kolk Assessment and Treatment of Complex PTSD, Rachel Yehuda, 2001 "Traumatic Stress"

The highest correlate in development of severe Complex PTSD is "Separation from Parents," for ages 7-12.

http://www.traumacenter.org/van_der_Kolk_Complex_PTSD.pdf

On the website of the Chairman of the Yale Department of Psychiatry is the statement that Benjamin Bunney’s specialty is the brain damage or movement disorders associated with psychotropics use.

In the New York Times on May 23, 2006, there was a follow up report on Yale’s Thomas McGlashan who performs psychotropics experiments on DCF’s “no-nexus” children. McGlashan reveals that Psychiatry still has no idea what they are doing.

Excerpts from that report:

A Career That Has Mirrored Psychiatry's Twisting Path

“In a career that has spanned four decades, Dr. McGlashan, now 64 and a professor of psychiatry at Yale, has with grim delight extinguished some of psychiatry's grandest notions, none more ruthlessly than his own. He strived for years to master psychoanalysis, only to reject it outright after demonstrating, in a landmark 1984 study, that the treatment did not help much at all in people, like Keith, with schizophrenia. Once placed on antipsychotic medication, Keith became less paranoid and more expressive. Without it, he quickly deteriorated.

Dr. McGlashan turned to medication and biology for answers and in the 1990's embarked on a highly controversial study of antipsychotic medication to prevent psychosis in high-risk adolescents. But doctors' hopes for that experiment, too, withered under the cold eye of its lead author. ..”

If Psychiatry has a twisted history and they admit they have no idea what they are doing, there cannot be declared to be any expertise on brain matters in any Connecticut courts, and therefore any evaluations or declarative statements in the courts cannot be considered as valid evidence and/or testimony.

MOTION FOR COMTEMPT- ANNETTE ANDERSON’S FRAUDS UPON THE COURT

Anderson should be held in contempt for defrauding the court and perjuring herself in statements per the sequence of events regarding the diaper rash of Anastasia Inkel. Anderson stated that Anastasia Inkel had a severe diaper rash upon arrival into Anderson’s care, however the medical records show Anderson sought care 9 days after she receive Anastasia into her care, on October 16, 2004

MOTION FOR CONTEMPT re MARY FALVY, Court clerk

Mary Falvy gave false testimony as to Judge Shimelman’s ordering a “show cause” November 3, 2003. Falvy stated that Judge Schimelman instructed her to change the order of “show cause” to an Order of Temporary Custody. In fact Schimelman did not order Temporary Custody. This is supported through DCF documentation, hospital documentation, and court records.

MOTION FOR CONTEMPT- VALERIE ALEXANDER

Attorney Valerie Alexander concealed the unlawful abduction of Anastasia Inkel by DCF. Valerie Alexander concealed the sexual assaults of Alexander and Andrew Inkel. Valerie Alexander was present when the sexual abuse of the boys was disclosed to Jo-El Suroviak of the DCF. There are other examples of misconduct which can be addressed.

MOTION FOR CONTEMPT – JEAN CORSINI

DCF worker Jean Corsini submitted false affidavits regarding the removal of Anastasia Inkel in November 2003.

MOTION FOR CONTEMPT- COLLEEN LENNEY

DCF social worker Colleen Lenney made multiple false declarations in verbal testimony, under oath, and in affidavits, and specifically but not limited to “family’s whereabouts were unknown,” falsely declaring that several children were abandoned by the Inkel parents. Lenney also provided false medical evidence to medical care providers. Lenney falsely stated that reasonable efforts were made to prevent the removal of the children on but not limited to April 1, 2002 and November 7, 2003, and made other false declarations and conduct.

MOTION FOR CONTEMPT- JO-EL SUROVIAK

Jo-El Suroviak made numerous false declarations in verbal and written testimony. One example was the false testimony over the sequence of events regarding Anastasia’s diaper rash and as regard ear infections which had not occurred. Jo-El Suroviak present false testimony as regards the home invasion of the Inkel family at 107 Warner Road, East Haddam. On October 5, 2004.

Complainant Philip Inkel motions to be heard in the courts as regards the fraudulent testimony given thusfar, the fraudulent removals of his children, the illegal gag order, and most particularly, the undeniable criminal sexual abuse of the Inkel children in DCF’s care and the DCF’s cover-up of this severe sexual abuse, for the purpose of identifying those responsible for these abuses and frauds upon the courts, for the court to make a finding of contempt.

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that a copy of the above was mailed or faxed on _________________

2006, to the following parties:

Meredith Inkel

30 Bogel Rd.

East Haddam, CT 06423

Assistant Attorney General William Wholean

978 Hartford Tpke

Waterford, CT 06385

Fax 860-440-5845

Valerie Alexander

212B Thomas Street