IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA
EMERGENCY REQUEST FOR CHANGE TO A VENUE AND JUDGE OUTSIDE NORTHERN INDIANA
)
ALISON SANJARI, )
Petitioner )
)
V. )
)
AMIR H. SANJARI, ) Case No. 20D050010DR640
Respondent ) In the Elkhart Superior Court No. 5
August 14, 2003
Your Honors: This an appeal to you to move the venue of this long-drawn out and damaging (to the minor children involved) to a new venue outside Northern Indiana so that it may be heard in an impartial and speedy manner. In this, I pray that you consider
1- That this case has been fraught with prejudice, nepotism, unethical and / or illegal behavior by the judges, the opposing attorney (a former Elkhart County Deputy Prosecutor!) and the Court (please see the enclosed supporting documents. The case history and the role of various characters in this case are published on the internet at http://webpages.charter.net/lah1321/ .),
2- That, the above conduct (1) has prolonged the endangerment of the minor children’s physical and psychological safety and well-being while in the custody of the Petitioner/Mother. Indeed, the elder minor child continued self-mutilation while in the Petitioner/Mother’s custody over a year after the presiding judge, Michael D. Cook had been repeatedly informed of it by the Respondent/Father (living in Pittsburgh, PA)! The latest episode of minor child’s self-mutilation (all while in the Petitioner/Mother’s custody) that the Respondent/Father is aware of (in view of Petitioner/Mother’s cover up) took place as recently as late March 2003 while Respondent/Father had informed the Court of it as early as in February/March 2002,
3- That, even Judge Cook, in his recusal letter of 06.06.2003 to the IN Supreme Court, requested that the latter “… appoint someone who is not and has not been a member of the judiciary from my district which includes Kosiusko, St. Joseph, Elkhart and Marshall counties.”. This is in agreement with the Respondent/Father’s multiple requests to change the venue from Northern Indiana,
4- That, the acting Chief Justice of Indiana, IN Supreme Court, on 07.08.2003, appointed Judge Rex L. Reed of Kosiusko Circuit Court (!) to preside over this case,
5- That, there have been negligence and irregularities in the way this case has been dealt with by the Courts, not least the most recent episode in which they had withheld the Respondent/Father’s latest filing (an interlocutory Motion, 06.28.2003, filed after Judge Cook’s last Order of 06.06.2003) and not sent it forthwith to Judge Reed after his appointment. The Respondent/Father had to make several calls to get Elkhart to send the documents to Judge Reed,
6- That, previously, precedence had been set whereby the Respondent/Father’s (pro se) direct filings to Judge Cook of Marshall County (with copies to Elkhart Superior 5 and the opposing attorney) had been accepted without waiting for the delayed (if at all) copy to be forwarded to Judge Cook by Elkhart Superior 5,
7- That, although Judge Reed received the Respondent/Father’s properly filed Motions of 08.06.2003 and 08.08.2003 (enclosed here), and earlier Motion of 06.28.2003 (sent to him by Elkhart Superior 5), he chose to unduly ignore them until he, ostensibly, received the copies through Elkhart Superior Court 5 (whose normal procedure is not to forward such filings, and rely, instead, upon the direct filings by attorneys, as Respondent/Father had properly done).
Hence, Judge Reed improperly failed to rule upon the Respondent/Father’s Motions in a timely manner before he left, according to his office, for vacation (almost a three -3- week period!).
The refusal to consider the Respondent/Father’s direct filings is in contravention of the IN Rules of Trial Procedure whereby the Pro Se party is, at the very least, entitled to the same considerations as an attorney.
Furthermore, Judge Reed’s refusal / failure to render a decision on the said Motions in a timely manner violates IN Judicial Conduct Canon 3, especially in view of the urgency of this case and the risks to the minor children while in the Petitioner/Mother’s custody,
8- That, the above are but just a small indication of the conduct that has pervaded throughout this case, supporting the Respondent/Father’s request that not only the presiding judge, but also the whole case and venue be moved from Northern Indiana,
9- That, the Respondent/Father’s prime responsibility and priority is to ensure his children’s safety and well-being, which have been continuously and negligently ignored by the prejudiced, unethical, negligent and illegal actions and conducts of various Court officials and other agencies in Northern Indiana. In doing so, the Respondent/Father continues his ongoing efforts through any and all judicial (State and US District Courts) and constitutional means to secure a safe environment for the minor children away from their current custody with the Petitioner/Mother in Northern Indiana. By perpetuating the current regime in this custody case (ongoing since August 2002 through contrived and illegal delays with detrimental effects upon the minor children!), the Court has, and is perpetuating the anguish and suffering of the minor children.
Therefore, for the sake of physical and psychological safety and well-being of the minor children, and an impartial hearing, and in view of the continued irregularities in, and tainting of this case, the Respondent/Father prays and respectfully requests that the Indiana Supreme Court give prompt and urgent consideration to completely moving the venue of this case from Northern Indiana.
The Respondent/Father remains ready to provide further evidence in support of his statements and assertions.
Yours Respectfully,
Amir H. Sanjari (father)
Respondent (Pro Se)
CC: Judge Rex L. Reed (Kosiusko Circuit Court)
Mr. Max Walker (Counsel for the Petitioner/Mother)
Elkhart Superior Court No. 5
______
Amir H. Sanjari (Dr), Member: American Nuclear Society, American Association of Physicists in Medicine
206 Berkley Manor Drive, Cranberry, PA 16066, USA
Tel: +1 (724) 741 0678