FROZEN FIEFDOM 

BAAAAAHHHHRRROOOOOOO!! More Braying Echos from the Big Berg

Read below the "Reply Memorandum", dated November 14 2008, which is a compounding and reiteration of the same old tired Yips, Yaps, and Yammerings which Mr. Paul H. Grant, Attorney At Law, continues to spew onto the desks of Alaska Court System staff.  

Is it a crime to waste valuable court time?  If not, perhaps some legislation can be introduced to make it so. 

Whatever Mr. Grant and party want to claim as "facts", or the Affidavits they have provided and claim to be truthful; the fact remains: 

He has no case.   

 I'm awestruck as to how his approach to slamming me as a person and as a Mother can be allowed; where no supporting evidence exists for the Main Theme of his case:  Paula Marie Rose was an MP in 2007 because some people say it's true, and she became a Nutter during this still unspecified time frame, and now can't be near her own child.  

Wooooooeeeeee!   That's quite a mouthful of false words, and certainly can't be used as justification for the own bad behavior of himself and his client, Eric William Swanson, to knowingly withhold my Summer 2008 Visitation of my daughter Claire.  According to Eric, Mr. Grant knew of his actions and was in full agreement of Eric's withholding visitation; prior to my filing the original motion on October 2, 2008.  (See "In The Beginning..." section)

That sounds like Collusion to me, and both of them had full knowledge that such behavior was in violation of a standing and unmodified 2006 Child Custody Agreement.   Making up situations and scenarios against another, to justify one's own bad behavior and law breaking probably isn't allowed by most Courts, and shouldn't be.  

Or if such unfounded statements Can be used, then our Alaska Legal System has some very serious flaws, which should be reviewed.  I think the flaws are most likely in Mr. Grant's paperwork.  I'd like to believe that most Judges are sensible, and have their full spectrum of criminal and civil cases to pull from.  If they've seen something like this before, they'll recognize it; if not, welcome to uncharted territory.  It certainly is for me.  

I suppose that he and others can claim that I was a Missing Person sometime during 2007, until the froth and foam falling from their lips chokes them silent, but the Facts prove:

 No "last seen, first gone missing" and "found" dates have been given, no Official LAPD Missing Person Report with my name and photo on it have been produced from the LAPD, his own witness statements are conflicting, and my emails with many of them prove I was never "Missing."   The fact that I have stated that I was never missing from anywhere in 2007 should be taken into account, to give balance to the "they said / I said" statements.  And Gail Margaret Sanders, my younger sister, has already stated, in writing, that she knew that I was never "missing."  

Now, the real question to pose to those whose words do flow:  What goal and purpose was behind the actions of  some former friends and family members of Paula Marie Rose by wanting her to be, yes insisting!, that she be listed by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) as a Missing Person on any date during 2007?  

What's that?  Silence again?  Exactly as I thought. 

And on the off chance that some Official looking MP report with my name listed as the MP does mysteriously appear through the Ether, or the USPS, or in the Courtroom; I'll lay big money down that the LAPD Forensics Team will be pleased to be the first to examine it.  

Under "Disclaimer and Mission Statement"   I posted a note that Gail Sanders gave to me during her August 2007 visit, a.k.a. "Trip to Tarzana"

  "Especially interesting is her line of:  "You were silent about the Police looking for you and finding you." "   Silent?  I was Speechless!   Which for me, is saying much."

Gail changes her story many times between August 2007 and August of 2008; see many emails relating to this alleged MP event under "Emails T / F Gail" section.   

During an email exchange a full year later, in August of 2008, Gail states in writing that she knew that I "was never Missing."  That's further evidence of a preplanned charade by my family members and others, Mr. Grant.  

The real issue at hand isn't whether or not I'm a fit parent or a loving Mother; the larger looming question is who's behind and directing the scene to make me appear to be less than capable of doing so?  

All this hot air and an imaginary MP scenario, which functioned as a collective Mirage over several folks I know, does prove they were up to something, for some reason. 

It isn't my job to prove why people would lie, but as my Mom always said, "People will lie about anything."  Wow! That's the second time one of Mom's lines came in handy. 

Contrary to Mr. Grant's statements below, I did provide more than adequate evidence that people have made false statements, refused to answer my detailed questions about a variety of events, including the alleged MP event which he is now referring to as the basis for his case; even if he didn't like reading it. 

Considering that my information and evidence has been on file and broadly available on www.FrozenFiefdom.com for months; it proves that I was ahead of the curve and knew that "Something's Up."  My proactive approach and investigations provided evidence that my family members and others have been doing wrong for some time. 

Mr. Grant  continues to lift selected statements from "Frozen Fiefdom" and drops them into the same trash bin of recycled words that he's used previously.  Apparently, I was correct in my assumption that he suffers from a learning disability, and is handicapped by limited reading comprehension skills.  

Let's Review:  My statement below in white, originally appeared under "Who Is, What Is?" section of my autobiography, "Frozen Fiefdom."     

At the risk of being viewed as self centered,

(a more accurate label than "paranoid")

             "It's all about me!"

and be relieved that I've left you out of this.  

Being as my Dad (that's TJ Sanders, and my brother Mark Sanders, had both used the term "paranoid" in reference to me; Dad verbally, Mark in writing, but didn't elaborate as to where they dredged that diagnosis from, or explain their reasons for label dropping; even when I had asked both Dad and Mark to clarify.  Patterns, Patterns, Patterns!  I ask questions, people refuse to answer them.   I chose to use their words to create my own sentence, in the context of my story. 

Mr. Grant wasn't originally included in the lineup of "Who Is, What Is?"  but now shall have his name, occupation, and my comments about him, right in there with the rest of us.  

Gotta love his line of "...the entire universe revolves around Paula Marie Rose."  Hah!  My Mom spent my childhood years bellowing the opposite, so I know that I'm not special.  

He again repeats himself when he refers to Dr. / Ms. Elaine Schroeder's Affidavit, and her alleged counseling sessions with Claire, and claims that I have posted details of said sessions.   False.  Only Elaine Schroeder's Affidavit and my memo to her are displayed.  No details other than Claire's full name were revealed.

But I have noted that Ms. / Dr. Elaine Schroeder has followed the pattern set forth by many in the Big Berg of Non Response to my written requests for details and information; nary a written nor spoken word about those sessions has been sent to me by Ms. Elaine Schroeder as of November 20, 2008.   HHHHmmmmmm.  That sounds grossly unprofessional, and might be some form of professional misconduct, as she is a Licensed professional who is actively practicing in the state of Alaska. 

As a parent, especially one who was deliberately not pre-informed of the alleged sessions between Ms. / Dr. Schroeder and my daughter, Claire; I'm amazed that she has failed to snap to on producing her written session notes, and either the audio tape or a fully detailed recount of the verbal exchanges that she claims to have had with my daughter.  It is my right as a parent to know who is picking the brain of my daughter, along with the what, where, when, and whys of those sessions.  

Of course, the possibility exists that Ms. / Dr. Schroeder might not have ever had any sessions with my daughter, Claire, prior to the date of her signature on the Affidavit.    I haven't asked my daughter Claire about those alleged sessions, as I have continued to shelter her from being actively involved in this incredible series of events. 

And I am not implying that Ms. / Dr. Schroeder is lying about seeing my daughter Claire professionally, as her signed Affidavit states that she had, just not when.  Of course, I disagree with much of the content of Ms. / Dr. Schroeder's Affidavit, and no written proof such as session notes, billing statements by the insurance company, or other materials have been sent to me. 

The facts are:  either Ms. / Dr. Elaine Schroeder did not see my daughter in a professional capacity prior to signing an Affidavit attesting that she had; or, she is deliberately withholding the session notes and information that I, Claire's Mother, have requested.  Why would a Licensed Professional behave in such an unusual manner?  

There's no need to go through this most recent submission below line by line; it's pretty much the same old song and dance, and lack of facts presented again as New and Essential Material deemed relevant by Mr. Paul H. Grant.   

Mr. Grant has upped his braying to the Court and has included the sentence:  "A court-ordered psychological evaluation should take place immediately."  while referring to me.  

I strongly suggest that a mandatory muzzle be placed on the Legal Beagle in kennel number 204, and a hearing on the true issue at hand be scheduled as soon as possible (see "In the Beginning..." section); with consideration that airfares are expensive and I'll need to scout round for a reasonably priced airline ticket.  

 Paula Marie Rose

November 19, 2008