Background:

In January 2023, while seven months pregnant, I fled an abusive relationship to seek safety. Despite my efforts to protect myself and my child, my ex-fiancé has manipulated the legal system using aggressive and questionable tactics across multiple states. Despite evidence of domestic violence and harassment, judicial responses have not only ignored my reports but have actively undermined my rights as a mother and survivor.

Key Points:

    • Initial Filing and Jurisdiction Issues: My application for a domestic violence restraining order in Santa Clara County led to a temporary order being granted. However, when the case was assigned to Judge Cindy Seeley Hendrickson after a recusal, she dismissed the case due to “wrong jurisdiction,” advising me to file in New Jersey despite my residence in California.

    • Custody Case in the Wrong Venue: My attorney filed for custody in Santa Clara County under emergency circumstances. However, neither I nor my child has significant ties to Santa Clara County. We have resided in Sacramento County since early 2023, and all related proceedings and visitations have occurred there.

    • Bias and Fair Trial Violations: Since July 2023, Judge Hendrickson’s actions have shown bias:

           •   Refusing to consider evidence and witness testimony regarding domestic violence.

           •   Issuing orders that disregarded medical and child development guidelines.

           •   Conducting hearings without essential procedural elements, including witnesses, sworn testimonies, or court reporters.

    • Extreme Orders and Emotional Harm: Despite my reports and evidence of the father’s abusive behavior—including an active no-contact restraining order for battery and child endangerment—visitation orders have been aggressive and disruptive, contributing to signs of trauma in my child.

    • Refusal to Change Venue: Despite requests for a change of venue to Sacramento County, where my child and I reside, Judge Hendrickson has not taken steps to correct the jurisdiction.

Grounds for Dismissal of the Case:

    • Lack of Jurisdiction: Evidence shows that the custody case was filed in Santa Clara County, which lacks jurisdiction as neither party has significant connections to that county. The mother and child have resided in Sacramento County since early 2023, and all related proceedings and visitations have taken place there.

    • Improper Venue: The case should be dismissed based on improper venue, as there is no legitimate basis for it to be heard in Santa Clara County. A change of venue is warranted to Sacramento County, where the mother and child have consistently resided and where the case should be heard.

    • Withdrawal by the Petitioner: As a petitioner, there are rights to request withdrawal of a case under specific circumstances, including procedural errors and improper filings.

    • Violation of Court Procedures or Rules: Procedural violations, such as the refusal to allow witness testimonies, failure to conduct hearings with a court reporter, and bias during proceedings, demonstrate a violation of the litigant’s right to a fair trial.

Call to Action:

We demand:

     1.    A full review and dismissal of the custody case due to judicial bias and the violation of the right to a fair trial.

     2.    Immediate transfer of the case to the appropriate jurisdiction—Sacramento County.

     3.    An investigation into Judge Hendrickson’s handling of the case to ensure accountability and prevent future miscarriages of justice.

Conclusion:

The well-being of a young child and the rights of a domestic violence survivor are at stake. Please sign and share this petition to help bring justice and ensure the safety and fairness that all litigants deserve.