The most inflammatory aspect of the whole proceeding was the second-hand verbal report from the C.A.R.E.S. NW unit. This "report" became incontrovertible because no one was allowed to challenge it. The "report" stated that it was a medical certainty that the only way this burn could have occurred was if the mother held Rae down and the father applied a red-hot item to the face deliberately. It was "testilied" that when Rae was asked how she was burned she answered, "My daddy burned me." What else would a 5-year-old say? Was she being honest? Of course she was, however, does that statement from a child bring a clear picture of what happened? These are rhetorical questions, for it is obvious that there is more to this drama than meets the eye!
The answers to these questions where not looked at rationally at this "Shelter Hearing," for Connie Isgro not only issued "temporary custody" of Rae, but also for her older sister, Amanda. To further "rub salt" into this festering wound to the family, Isgro also issued a "restraining order" to "prevent" Marsson from having any contact whatsoever to either of his daughters. Ostensibly this was done because of Marsson's "Long history of extreme violence to his children," "His anti-government views," and "His tendency to challenge authority." Anyone who knows and has observed Marsson with his family knows that the first two statements are patently false, and as for the last, so what? What relevance does this have on the rearing of any child? Challenging "authority" is a long-standing American tradition that has its roots in the works of such "reactionaries" as John Adams, Benj. Franklin, and James Madison.
Later that day Marsson and his lovely bride Susan where subjected to nearly 5-hour siege upon their home by Oceana Police Officers who where threatening to shoot their way into the home unless they "gave up" Amanda for the alleged "Custody Order" of Isgro. The Officers where constantly informed that unless they had a warrant, they were not going to come into this home unless they complied with the conditions listed on the "No Trespass" sign posted on the door. The "No Trespass" sign tells "Officers" of "the law" that if they want to come into the posted property without Due Process of Law that they will have to, among other things, submit to a complete body-cavity search. The will of Marsson & Susan to stand up for their Un-a-lien-able Rights "to be Secure in their Persons, houses, papers, and effects" as stated in the Fourth Article of the Bill of Rights must have annoyed these "Officers" for they harassed the neighbors and anyone else that came up to them to ask what was going on. That is, until people with camcorders started to show up and videotape them.
During this siege, Marsson and Susan constantly told these "Officers" that Amanda had apparently run away--- not from her parents, but from them. This concept was lost on these "Officers." Despite threats, duress and coercion, the security of the home was never breached. This siege ended when a Sergeant handed to Marsson, through a friend, what he called a "warrant" that was nothing more than another "Custody Order" that someone had scribbled "Wyatt" in the place where the "Judge" is supposed to sign. Now this "Custody Order" had none of the things necessary for a Warrant, and the Sergeant must have understood. The Sergeant read the "Miranda" warning to Marsson then told Marsson that he was "under arrest for custodial interference." Marsson told the Sergeant that if he thought he had a valid warrant, come on up on the porch and "execute" it! The Sergeant could only waive Marsson down, inviting him to come onto the Public Sidewalk. Again, Marsson told them that if they had a valid warrant, then "execute" it. This happened three times, and after the third time, a camera news truck from KPTV-12 came rolling up the street. At this sight the Sergeant and his 4-5 "bodyguard" Officers decided to do what cockroaches do when the kitchen light is turned on. However, as they were leaving, the Sergeant turned to Marsson and said, "You watch your rearview mirror, Mister, 'cause we are going to GET YOU!"
When the news truck came to a stop, the cameraman was asked if he had ever seen police officers afraid to arrest a man they claimed to have a warrant for and simply run away? He replied that he had never seen anything like it.
Fast-forwarding in the story, Marsson proceeded through an "Administrative Process" upon Carolina Caballero where he served a notice of Process with eight basic statements of Fact under a Verified Declaration. Marsson then went on to ask Caballero a few questions, such as "Do you have a claim against Rae Anne ?" "Do you have a warrant for the taking of Rae Anne ?" "If two or more cooperate in accomplishing an act, is that a conspiracy?" and "Do you or anyone else have authority to remove children from their parents?" These questions had default answers if Caballero decided not to answer except by tacit procuration. Caballero was granted ten days to answer or tell Marsson that she was exercising her privilege against self-incrimination and had turned the Administrative Claim over to a Grand Jury or other prosecuting authority for investigation into the claims made therein.
pg 3