Follow by Email

Tuesday, August 2, 2011

Notes On Violation Of Amber's Rights

The following will be actual events with no distortion of the facts as they are known.

Our 16 year old daughter was denied many of her rights, thus leading to a murder conviction for which she will be sentenced soon .
According to due process of law. Regardless of
the charge,juveniles do have rights that differ from adults,
and MUST BE APPLIED when taken into custody,and through of the judicial process,otherwise the system will fail( which it has) and democracy will inevitably cease to exist.
When She was first picked up by police,and taken into custody, she was not allowed 2 completed phone calls within one hour.(Welfare & Institutions Code 627).Her father went to the police station and was told he could not see her
(Penal Code 120.6).
Her 14th Amendment Rights were violated because she was denied counsel (her Father) during questioning. She had very little knowledge of the criminal justice system (Wel.& Institutions Code 30.23).
Mental condition is a very important issue according to Evidence Code 1016a. A 16 year old girl should not be alone with adult male police detectives for questioning because it infringes on the 5th ,6th,& 14th Amendments of the Constitution concerning due process.
Failure of telling her that her father
was there is a direct violation of Wel. & Inst. Code30.11. It is still unclear what probable cause initiated her to be taken into custody(Penal Code 995). Her deprivation of rights and privileges is a violation of U.S. Code 14141a. All of these violations occurred
during her 1st hours of custody.
(Wel.&Inst. Code 627.5)The minor AND parent to be immediately advised that any thing the minor says will be used against him or her, and to be advised of the presence of counsel during interrogation.
(Title 28 United States Code 1343 Provided A Federal court Forum In Which Citizens Can Seek Redress From The Deprivation Of Rights.



When her Father Arrived home after being told to leave the police station, Local police were waiting for him.
Both parents were detained in their own living room not allowed to place or receive phone calls therefore keeping them separated from their daughter while she was being interrogated.
On page 5 of the police report ( Which has been kept from us, only through Amber's property mail this year 2009 we were able to view any paper work) the interrogating officer states "That at 6:08 PM she said she felt like killing herself ,
He states that "she is a danger to herself and others, and is a gravely disabled minor".
Knowing this, he has her sign a Miranda waiver at 7:10 pm, one hour later.
She was admitted to Ward B at Arrowhead Medical Center where she was handcuffed to a chair in a hallway left all night again denied the use of the phone to call us her parents.( After 8 hours of interrogation) She was placed in San Bernardino Juvenile Hall at 9:00 AM in 5/24/03 We were not informed of her whereabouts whatsoever. The way we found out where she was being held her dad went searching for her found her 3 days later in Juvenile hall.
We only came to know her being placed in arrowhead hospital when a bill arrived in our mail afterwards. It states she was admitted at 2:30 AM on 5/24/03. She arrived at juvenile hall at 9:00 AM on 5/24/03, where she was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and in Shock. Intake personnel told us "She entered juvenile hall in the worse shape of any kid they had ever seen. One of the counselor s later told me her mom that she thought Amber should of had a Fit And Proper hearing which she submitted in a report to her public defender. And never took place.
When she felt her public defender was not representing her well enough, due to lack of communication between her and him & he and us (violation of Rule #1.14 in the rules of professional conduct ), The Judge would not allow her to replace him (Marsdem motion) . She Did find out in that hearing when the Judge had them in chambers( The DA her attorney and Amber) that he actually he was doing a very good job). One month later the DA asked to have him off the case due to a conflict of interest that was never explained. He was taken off her case.
There was a Miranda hearing held a few months later with a conflict panel attorney( MIss Torrez) that was suppose to have her statements to police excluded during the trial and her new attorney made a motion to exclude witnesses that were subpoenaed by the public defender. The out come of the Miranda hearing was to be binding at trial. At trial, no defense witnesses were called. No Juvenile Hall Counselors, no original expert Psychology witnesses, (Which did exist) and no character witnesses.She was tried as an adult without psychological evaluation.
She was also told by the public defender to sign documents she did not understand, and we never saw.

1 comment:

  1. We later found that one of the papers the Public Defender had Amber sign hat we were not allowed to see, The Right To A Speedy Trial.
    To This day the other 4 papers she signed we do not know what they were?

    ReplyDelete