Violet Faye’s Law: Preventing Family Court Injustice

Join us in championing Laurel's fight for justice in family court. Denied her parenting rights without due process, Laurel's story highlights the urgent need for reform. This petition for Violet Faye's Law seeks to prevent unjust separations and ensure fairness, advocating for due process, equal protection, and the right to counsel. Stand with us to protect families from unaccountable power abuses and support our call for change. Your signature can make a difference in the lives of countless families facing similar battles.

For the complete text of Laurel's story, see Addendum A.

The Need for Reform

Laurel’s story contradicts core American ideals of impartial justice, due process and equality under the law. Her parenting rights were denied without fair proceedings or representation. Presumption of innocence was discarded based solely on accusations absent supporting evidence.

Constitutional Values

Such injustice violates founding Constitutional principles enshrined to protect individuals from unaccountable abuses of power:

• 5th Amendment due process rights
• 14th Amendment equal protection
• 1st Amendment petitions for redress
• 9th Amendment broader conception of liberty

The Solution: Violet Faye’s Law.

This legislation rights these wrongs by:

• Establishing processes upholding presumption of innocence
• Guaranteeing right to counsel
• Instituting impartial oversight
• Limiting use of mere allegations absent evidence

Allowing individuals meaningful opportunity to defend themselves, ensuring going forward that no loving parent endures the hardships Laurel faced simply because justice failed when it mattered most.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Lies and Bribes and Snares--Oh My!  

 

 

Two government employees with pull assigned to Laurel's case were promoted shortly after playing their part ensuring the evil outcome:

Judge Ryan Wells - promoted to Criminal court
Lindsay Kitchens - promoted from Fresno Sheriff's Detective to Sergeant

When Judge Pahua Lor presided over Laurel's trial after Ryan Wells illegally declared a mistrial, it was one of her first days as a judge.

She had just been promoted to the superior court bench...perhaps on one condition?

Just agree to use whatever unjust, illegal means necessary to ensure the restraining order remain and ensure no visitation.

Just destroy one little family, for prestige, money, and power.

Violet's grandpa, Rich Nemmer, is CEO of Lyle's Construction Group.

He is good friends with billionaire boss, Gerald V, Lyles.

Gerald V. Lyles is CEO of The Lyles Foundation.

The Lyles Foundation focuses on supporting the activities of the Central Valley Community Foundation. 

The Central Valley Community Foundation partners on several impactful projects, such as:

1. PRO Neighborhoods, who financially support BIPOC-owned businesses (BIPOC: Black, Indigenous, and People of Color)
   • Judge Lor is California's first Hmong American female judge to sit on the Superior Court bench.
   • Judge Wells is black.
     • Surprisingly, those experienced with injustice do not always oppose it.
2. Central Valley Legislative Roundtable
   •  Involves community foundations and legislative staff in networking and leveraging resources for the region.

This initiative includes representatives from regional community foundations, State and Federal legislative staff, and other key stakeholders involved in public policy and community development efforts in the Central Valley.

A bit curious, don't you think?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Table of Contents

Preamble

Article I – Definitions

Article II – Legal Framework

Article III – Implementation & Support

Addendum A: Laurel's Story

Addendum B: Esquire Evaluation Index Details

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

VIOLET FAYE'S LAW

PREAMBLE

WHEREAS the welfare and best interests of children are of paramount concern in all legal proceedings related to custody within the United States;

WHEREAS, the Constitution of the United States guarantees every individual the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty and the right to legal representation;

WHEREAS, these principles should extend to all legal proceedings, including those in family and child custody law;

WHEREAS, in child custody cases, accusations of abuse are sometimes made without conclusive evidence, leading to unjust consequences for the accused parent;

WHEREAS, an ongoing investigation without a conviction should not be grounds for penalizing a parent in custody disputes;

WHEREAS, this bill is named in honor of Violet Faye, a child caught in the midst of a complex custody battle where her mother, a dedicated parent, faced false accusations, leading to a heartbreaking separation. This legislation, "Violet Faye's Law," seeks to prevent such unjust separations and ensure that no child or parent endures similar suffering.

Article I – DEFINITIONS

I.01 Parent – As defined under relevant state and federal law, a parent is a biological or legally recognized caregiver of a child, with duties and rights concerning the child’s care, custody, and welfare.

I.02 False Accusation – An allegation made against a parent in a child custody proceeding, known to be false or made with reckless disregard for the truth, intended to mislead or deceive the court for advantage.

I.03 Child Custody Proceeding – Any judicial process determining, modifying, or enforcing custody or visitation rights regarding a minor child. This includes but is not limited to divorce, paternity suits, and child welfare cases.

I.04 Accused – A parent facing allegations or accusations made against them in a child custody proceeding, indicating their status in the proceedings rather than any determination of guilt.

I.05 Petitioner – The parent or guardian who initiates a child custody legal case by filing an official petition or motion with the court requesting specific rulings or actions.

I.06 Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) – A short-term, emergency court order issued to prevent immediate danger or distress to a minor child in a custody case.  TROs under Violet Faye’s Law are subject to defined review processes.

I.07 Psychological Abuse – A pattern of malicious conduct causing mental or emotional harm to a child’s psychological well-being and development, including intimidation, manipulation, verbal assaults or isolation.

I.08 Physical Abuse – Any deliberate, non-accidental act by a parent or caregiver resulting in physical harm or injury to a child.

I.09 Emotional Abuse – Intentional verbal attacks, humiliation, rejection, isolation, terrorizing or corrupting a child by a parent or caregiver severely damaging their emotional health, dignity, growth and development.

I.10 Violet Faye Charitable Fund – A charitable fund established under this legislation to provide legal, counseling, supervised visitation and other resources associated with child custody disputes to parents lacking financial means.

Article II – LEGAL FRAMEWORK

Presumption of Innocence

II.01 Parents accused in child custody cases shall be presumed innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof rests wholly with the accusing party.

Right to Counsel

II.02 Every parent has the right to experienced legal representation during custody proceedings. Attorneys shall be appointed at the government’s expense for parents unable to independently afford counsel, supported by the Violet Faye Charitable Fund.

II.03 Appointed counsel must meet exacting qualification standards under the Esquire Evaluation Index (EEI) rating factors including expertise, client ratings, ethical standing and successful case record. States shall use these ratings in selection to ensure legal representation equivalent to or exceeding the petitioner's council.

Investigation & Enforcement Oversight

II.04 Law enforcement child abuse investigations related to custody proceedings must be completed within 60 days of the initial report absent documented justification.

II.05 An independent Citizen Review Board will track all such investigations to prevent delays and ensure impartial adherence to procedural justice standards.

II.06 Credible grievances regarding investigatory misconduct shall be reported to appropriate legal/disciplinary authorities for review and redress including possible sanctions against responsible individuals.

Limitations on Use of Ongoing Investigations

II.07 Evidence or allegations arising from an ongoing abuse investigation shall not be admissible in concurrent custody proceedings before the investigation’s completion and formal charges being filed.

II.08 Nor shall child social services utilize any pending investigation as proof warranting foster placement or adoption restrictions pre-emptively before the investigation has concluded.

Exceptions for Immediate Danger

II.09 If however verified documentation, photographic evidence, police reports or other concrete sources present reasonable indication of immediate threat to the child's safety, such urgent information may justify a narrow exception to these evidentiary exclusions, provided the danger is both bona fide and imminent.

II.10 Mere hearsay alone shall not qualify under this exception; independent, impartial corroboration shall be required indicating danger too severe to postpone responsive measures. The short-term emergency removal of the subject parent may be permitted if this evidentiary bar is met.

Rights Concerning Evidence/Materials

II.11 The accused parent has a right to review all evidence considered throughout these proceedings including notes, recordings and documents as well as police interrogation tapes involving the parent or child.

II.12 Opinions, evaluations, recommendations or session notes originating from any non-court appointed third party expert or professional are barred and shall not constitute admissible evidence unless verified by a court designated child psychologist or corroborated conclusively
by other certified evidence.

Sanctions for False Allegations

II.13 Those found guilty of intentional fabrication of abuse allegations or false sworn testimony face prosecution, fines, counseling programs focused on ethics and honesty, community service, reimbursement of inflicted legal costs to the wrongly accused, and possible incarceration.

Temporary Restraining Orders (TROs)

II.14 TROs shall expire automatically within 7 days after which a renewal hearing is required before the presiding judge accompanied by a child psychologist who will facilitate interaction between the accused parent and child under controlled conditions to directly assess any sustained risk.

II.15 The judge and psychologist shall determine based on these observations and any other relevant risk factors whether reasonable cause remains to extend the restrictive order considering the presumption of innocence and the extraordinary nature of such interim measures abridging parental rights.

Article III - IMPLEMENTATION & SUPPORT

Counseling Support for Affected Children

III.01 In all cases involving custody disputes or issuance of restraining orders impacting a child’s access to their parent(s), age-appropriate therapeutic counseling and support resources shall be provided including explanations ensuring the child understands these adult conflicts do not reflect deficits in the child’s worth or parental love.

Minimum Visitation Rights

III.02 Visitation rights shall guarantee each legally established parent a minimum one weekly visitation session of at least 2 hours duration even amidst accusations or custody disputes (supervised if necessary), with higher frequency contact favored absent definitive contrary evidence.

Supervised Visitation Requirements

III.03 Under court-mandated supervision, visitation venues must provide secure, child-friendly environments keeping the child’s welfare paramount while respecting parental relationships. Required security measures shall be funded under the Violet Faye Charitable Fund if family resources are lacking.

Virtual Parenting Time

III.04 Visitation Rights: Parents are entitled to two (2) virtual visitations weekly, each not less than fifteen (15) minutes, via video conferencing or equivalent technologies.
 
III.05 Technology Provision: Should a parent lack necessary technology, the court shall provide access to ensure equitable virtual visitation opportunities.

Violet Faye Charitable Fund to Defray Costs

III.06 The Violet Faye Charitable Fund, supported through public and private charitable contributions, shall cover court-ordered costs for financially struggling families including legal fees, counseling services, supervised visitation security expenses or other required resources helping parents navigate custody disputes in a fair justice system protecting children's best interests.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Addendum A

 

Laurel's Story

5-year-old Violet Faye was her mother's entire world--and she was banned from all communication because of a lie fabricated by Violet's grandmother, Kathleen (Kat) Nemmer, backed by her husband Richard, an Violet's own father, Storm Davis.

 

Violet's grandparents used their status and wealth to their advantage. A restraining order was enacted--without anyone explaining the situation to Violet--who heartbreakingly still thinks her mother abandoned her.

The story Kat gave the Sheriff's was this: she said Violet was touching her private area in the bathtub and said Violet told her almost an entire year prior, she was made to watch a demonstration of masturbation given by Laurel's then female friend Tamara while Laurel was in the corner of the room, chanting "learn it, learn it, learn it." The detective said Violet corroborated Kat's telling but refused to let Laurel see the video recordings or even hear the audio from the interview. Laurel was denied access to evidence after the investigation had ended. Violet said she was never touched by anyone.

During cross examination of the initial trial, Laurel caught Kat in lies. There was a date discrepancy in their evidence involving psychologist Madeleine Lorelei Spitz. Kat met her at the women's bible study group at Cavalry Visalia, but lied, claiming no personal relationship. Kat hired her to fabricate and falsify session notes from therapy sessions that never occurred. These documents claim that Violet spoke language that was way beyond a 5-year-olds comprehension, using a metaphor to compare Laurel to the evil stepmother in Cinderella. The documents were full of horrible lies of abuse that never occurred, and since Kat was caught in lies, she had to take action.

When she came back to court to continue the trial, there was a new judge (Pahoua Lor), who interestingly enough was newly appointed to the bench. Perhaps with the caveat she had to uphold the restraining order no matter what and appoint Violet's father, Storm Davis, as guardian ad litem--a MAJOR conflict of interest, as GAL are supposed to be neutral  third parties and are usually attorneys for the child.

Lor claimed the previous judge, Ryan Wells, was moved to a different department, and therefore declared a mistrial because of this move. Judge Wells declared a mistrial for no reason, yet finished other trials in the same department as Laurel's before he eventually moved to the new department he was promoted to in criminal.

The judicial officer wasn't the only one to get a promotion.

Sergeant Lindsay Kitchens, formerly Fresno Sheriff's Department Detective Kitchens and the one in charge of the investigation for my case, interestingly received a promotion as well.

Kitchen's had been leaning toward Laurel's side, questioning why Violet would abruptly start a behavior she supposedly saw demonstrated in front of her almost an entire year prior. That, coupled with evidence of multiple previous false accusations made by Kat in the past, and other discrepancies, had Kitchen's seriously doubting Kat. However, when she came to trial to testify as a witness--after her promotion-- her doubts about Kat had magically disappeared and she even lied on the stand and tried to make Laurel look bad, saying she didn't have answers to certain questions and acted "erratic."

Given the situation and being barred from all communication with her only child, I think "understandably distraught" is more fitting. The interrogation room footage can prove the invalidity of Sergeant Kitchen's claims.

 Laurel's request to access this evidence was denied.

Lack of an attorney allowed for extreme misjustice, causing immense unnecessary suffering to Laurel. Most important of all, it caused and continues to cause unfathomable suffering to Violet.

Kitchens also ignored concerns over Violet's grandfather Richard Nemmer. Violet told someone close that "Papa" Rich "lays on top of me when he prays." Kitchens was made aware of Violet's statement, yet took no action and later denied she was ever informed of anything at all.

The new detective who took over made indirect threats warning against pushing the issue.

During the new trial for the DVRO, the judge required Laurel furnish additional printed copies of evidence already provided electronically. Laurel set out to comply during the court break. However, as she exited the courthouse to print the documents, the power suspiciously went out at that exact moment despite clear skies. When Laurel returned without the copies due to the oddly timed outage, the power had conveniently resumed inside the building. This highly irregular turn of events barred Laurel from complying with the courts unnecessary evidentiary duplicates request. In context, it suggests an impropriety aimed at obstructing submission of substantiating materials. Unable to afford counsel, substantial barriers prevented her presenting a vigorous defense. Despite no charges or conviction after a lengthy investigation, the restraining order still remains to this day.

 Judge Lor denied Laurel any and all visitation.

Laurel needs a great lawyer to help her dissolve the restraining order, as well as get compensated for all her belonging that Rich and Kat threw away. Laurel lost everything, from clothes and shoes to priceless photos of Violet to her furniture, appliances, Macbook, and more.

 You can find videos of Madeleine Lorelei and Richard Nemmer giving sermons for their church on Calvary Visalia's Youtube.

 It's time for justice to be served.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ADDENDUM B

Esquire Evaluation Index (EEI)

Alma Mater/Education (10 Points Total)
1-3 Points: Attended regional colleges and newer institutions with limited national recognition.
4-6 Points: Graduated from state universities and colleges with good regional influence and some national recognition.
7-8 Points: Comes from prestigious institutions with significant national recognition, strong alumni networks, and high academic standards.
9-10 Points: Holds degrees from Ivy League schools and top-tier institutions with international recognition and outstanding academic and professional achievement records.
 Years of Experience (10 Points Total)
1-2 Points: Less than 2 years of experience.
3-4 Points: 2-5 years of experience.
5-6 Points: 6-10 years of experience.
7-8 Points: 11-20 years of experience.
9-10 Points: More than 20 years of experience.
Client Ratings (10 Points Total) - Converted from a 5-star system
1-2 Points: Average rating below 3.
3-4 Points: Average rating between 3-3.9.
5-6 Points: Average rating between 4-4.4.
7-8 Points: Average rating above 4.5 with moderate reviews.
9-10 Points: Average rating above 4.5 with a high volume of reviews.
 Career Achievements/Awards (10 Points Total)
1-3 Points: Few local or minor professional recognitions.
4-6 Points: Several state-level awards or recognitions in their field.
7-8 Points: National awards or recognitions, including specialized legal societies.
9-10 Points: International recognition or prestigious national awards.
 Ratio of Cases Won to Lost (10 Points Total)
1-2 Points: Less than 50% win rate.
3-4 Points: 50-59% win rate.
5-6 Points: 60-69% win rate.
7-8 Points: 70-79% win rate.
9-10 Points: More than 80% win rate.
Retainer Fees and Hourly Pay (10 Points Total)
1-3 Points: Below average for their geographic location and specialty.
4-6 Points: Average for their geographic location and specialty.
7-8 Points: Above average for their geographic location and specialty.
9-10 Points: Top 10% in their geographic location and specialty.
Fame/Social Media Presence (10 Points Total)
1-3 Points: Little to no presence or following.
4-6 Points: Moderate presence with a local or specialized following.
7-8 Points: High engagement and broader recognition.
9-10 Points: Very high engagement, national/international recognition.
Ethical Record (10 Points Total)
1-3 Points: Multiple disciplinary actions or complaints.
4-6 Points: One or few minor issues, resolved.
7-10 Points: Clean record.
Specialization and Expertise (10 Points Total)
1-3 Points: Generalist, with broad but shallow expertise.
4-6 Points: Specialized in one area, with some recognition.
7-8 Points: Highly specialized with significant recognition and contributions.
9-10 Points: Recognized leader in their field of specialization.
 

Outcome Rankings

81-90 Points: Elite Advocate

Attorneys in this tier represent the pinnacle of legal excellence. They have outstanding educational backgrounds, extensive experience, exceptional client satisfaction, and significant professional achievements. Their ethical standards are impeccable, and they are recognized leaders in their areas of expertise.

71-80 Points: Distinguished Counselor

Lawyers in this category are highly respected professionals with strong educational credentials, considerable experience, and high client ratings. They have received notable awards and recognitions and are known for their ethical practice and specialization.

61-70 Points: Premier Practitioner

This tier includes attorneys who demonstrate a high level of professional competency and success. They have good educational backgrounds, solid experience, positive client feedback, and have been recognized for their contributions to the legal field.

51-60 Points: Accomplished Associate

Attorneys within this range have proven themselves as competent and reliable practitioners. They possess a good mix of education, experience, and client satisfaction, along with a clean ethical record and some degree of specialization.

41-50 Points: Skilled Solicitor

These lawyers are recognized for their practical skills and dedication. While they may not have the accolades of higher tiers, they show promise through their work ethic, client service, and growing expertise.

31-40 Points: Rising Representative

Attorneys in this category are in the earlier stages of demonstrating their potential. They have foundational education and are beginning to build their experience, client base, and professional identity.

21-30 Points: Emerging Advocate

This tier represents lawyers who are still early in their careers but show potential for growth. They are working on establishing their reputation, gaining experience, and increasing their knowledge and skills.

11-20 Points: Novice Counselor

Lawyers at this level are at the beginning of their professional journey. They have the necessary education but are still gaining experience and working to develop their specialization and client relations.

0-10 Points: Aspirant Attorney

Attorneys in this lowest tier are just starting out. They may lack extensive experience or achievements but are on the path to developing their legal careers.