UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEANNE ROSE UPSON, pro se 1606 44th St.

, NW WASHINGTON, DC 20007 CELL PHONE: 202-373-9224 HOME PHONE: 202-370-7756 VS. CASE ACTION NO.

THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Itself and including specifically: OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL Attn: Tonje Robinson, Darlene Fields, and Gayle Rivers 441 4th St., NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20001 ASSOCIATE JUDGE JULIET MCKENNA 500 Indiana Ave., NW, Room JM-640, Washington, DC 20001 MAGISTRATE JUDGE J. DENNIS DOYLE 500 Indiana Ave., NW, Room 4450, Washington, DC 20001 FORMER MAGISTRATE JUDGE PAMELA YOUNG-DIAZ 500 Indiana Ave., NW, Room 4450, Washington, DC 20001 ASSOCIATE JUDGE LINDA TURNER 500 Indiana Ave., NW, Room 5520, Washington, DC 20001 ASSOCIATE JUDGE JUDITH BARTNOFF 4-, .6) 500 Indiana Ave., NW, Room 1540, Washington, DC 20601 ASSOCIATE JUDGE ODESSA VINCENT 86 ikrz, 4. 11in , 500 Indiana Ave., NW, Room 1430, Washington, DC 200 v' Pte Ter ASSOCIATE JUDGE JERRY BYRD c'Oftrice 500 Indiana Ave., NW, Room 2630, Washington, DC 20001 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT Chief of Police, Office of General Counsel, 300 Indiana Ave., NW, Room 4125, Washington, DC 20001 OFFICER DELOSIER 400 Indiana Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20001 OFFICER TILLAMOOK* (name as stated by Officer to Ms. Upson) 400 Indiana Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20001 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES 441 4th St., NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20024 THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA Itself and including specifically: OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL 900 East Main Street, Richmond, VA 23219 CITY OF ALEXANDRIA OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL, CITY OF ALEXANDRIA POLICE

e?

c4e)

301 King St., Room 1300, Alexandria, VA 22314 JUDGE DONALD HADDOCK 550 King Street, Alexandria, VA 22314 RETIRED JUDGE RICHARD JAMBORSKY 550 King Street, Alexandria, VA 22314 JUDGE NOLAN DAWKINS 550 King Street, Alexandria, VA 22314 THE STATE OF MARYLAND Itself and including specifically: OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL 200 St. Paul Place, Baltimore, MD 21202 JUDGE DENNIS M. McHUGH 50 Maryland Avenue, Room 321, Rockville, Maryland 20850 MONTGOMERY COUNTY CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES 1301 Piccard Drive, 4th Floor, Rockville, Maryland 20850-2368 THE STATE OF FLORIDA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PLO1 The Capitol, Attn: Carolyn Howell, Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050

RE: MINOR CHILD, GEORGIANA ROSE UPSON, DATE OF BIRTH 05/30/04

VERIFIED EMERGENCY MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE RELIEF

Comes now, your Plaintiff, Deanne Rose Upson (Mother), pro se, and makes her Complaint for Relief to this Honorable Court for violations of Constitutional Law and Federal Code by the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Virginia, the State of Maryland, and the State of Florida each state and the named officials and agencies therein identified above as Defendants; and respectfully states the following. TABLE OF CONTENTS
VERIFIED EMERGENCY MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE RELIEF RELIEF REQUESTED: IMMEDIATE FEDERAL ACTION TO END 3+ YEAR KIDNAPPING AND CONCEALMENT OF CHILD FROM MOTHER NOT A FRIVOLOUS COMPLAINT
CHILD IS SAFE WITH MOTHER RISK OF IMMINENT HARM WITH FATHER FATHER ABUSES HIS POSITION AS AN AGENT OF THE COURT

2 3 6 6 6 7 9

NEED FOR IMMEDIATE RELIEF

OVER THREE YEAR KIDNAPPING AND CONCEALMENT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS MOTHER HAS EXHAUSTED OPTIONS IN STATE COURTS FATHER HASA LONG HISTORY OF INTERNET SEXUAL PREDATION FATHER HASA LONG HISTORY OF ABUSE OF HIS CHILDREN FATHER HASA LONG HISTORY OF POLICE ANTAGONISM FATHER VICTIMIZED MOTHER THROUGH INTERNET SEXUAL PREDATION MOTHER AND CHILD ARE VICTIMS OF CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT MOTHER AND CHILD ARE VICTIMS OF STATE JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT THE CASE OF DAVID AND SEAN GOLDMAN: INTERNATIONAL CHILD KIDNAPPING & CONCEALMENT REQUEST FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING GUIDANCE AND APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL

9
10

12 12 13 13 14 14 15 16

FACTS OF THE CASE

FATHER'S MOTIVATIONS AND ABUSE OF POSITION AS AGENT OF THE COURT

19
19

EMERGENCY RELIEF REQUESTED

1. IMMEDIATE REUNIFICATION BETWEEN MOTHER AND CHILD AND PROTECTION FROM FATHER 2. ASSIGNMENT OF SPECIFIC STATE TO ADJUDICATE CHILD CUSTODY, VISITATION, AND CHILD SUPPORT FOR GEORGIANA ROSE UPSON

20
20 20

INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE ALL ATTACHMENTS TO ORIGINAL VERIFIED COMPLAINT. 21

RELIEF REQUESTED: IMMEDIATE FEDERAL ACTION TO END 3+ YEAR KIDNAPPING AND CONCEALMENT OF CHILD FROM MOTHER Mother's daughter, Georgiana Rose Upson DOB 05/30/2004, has been kidnapped and completely concealed from Mother by the child's biological father, William Earl Wallace III, since December 22, 2006 under color of law of an improperly issued and fraudulently based ex parte custody order from the Commonwealth of Virginia that lacks Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) jurisdiction. Mother requests immediate relief to be reunited with her. Time is of the essence. Mother requests a Judge adjudicate at the earliest possible date on the calendar her request for immediate relief to be reunited with her Child and that this Honorable Court determines what immediate pendente lite reunification is in this Child's best interests and in this Mother's best interests, as this is the current legal standard: "best interests." It should be noted that Mother is asking this Honorable Court to review this legal standard in this Case given the specific circumstances of this Case, to determine if the legal standard is Constitutional under the

U.S. Constitution in this instance. Therefore, Mother is requesting that a jury address the issue in the final disposition of this case given the specific circumstances of this case. Mother asserts that this Honorable Court consider ordering Father to return this Child to Mother's possession and sole custody immediately and order supervised visitation with Father at the DC Superior Court supervised visitation center. This is because no formal leave of court has ever been issued by the District of Columbia to recognize jurisdiction of any type in the Commonwealth of Virginia where this Father improperly forum shopped to gain a fraudulently obtained ex parte custody order that the VA court refused to ever hold hearing on with Mother or her then counsel present. In direct conflict with the intents and purposes of Intrafamily Offense law, the federal Violence Against Women (VAW) law, and the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) law; Mother has not been given her statutory right nor given it in the mandated or timely manner in the District of Columbia to contest any jurisdiction asserted by the Commonwealth of Virginia or the State of Maryland. Moreover, Mother's Child has been kidnapped from her District of Columbia home with the assistance of the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department to Father and Father has stated he holds this Child in the State of Maryland thereby crossing state lines. Mother asserts that the proper controlling custody order is in D.C. Superior Court Case 2004-PCS-1375 ordering Father to pay Mother $4,000 per month in pendente lite child support in recognition that Mother is the legal custodian of her child. Father had abandoned Mother and Child upon pregnancy, hadn't even come to the birth or hospital, refused to voluntarily provide any child support, and Mother was this Child's sole caretaker. See attached Order in Verified Complaint.

Mother notes for this Court that the D.C. Court of Appeals is currently considering her

appeal of Case 2004-PCS-1375 and has twice refused her plea to reunite Mother and Child and
has taken years to adjudicate the matters while providing no pendente lite relief. The VA court also refuses to consider any further issues regarding visitation or custody. Mother asserts this is a severe due process error in violation of the US Constitution, Federal Code and Case Law. Mother has made statement to the D.C. Court of Appeals asserting that the Federal Court is a more appropriate forum due to the extremely long due process delays and refusal of that court to reunite Mother and Child through the assertion of UCCJEA jurisdiction that it retains and/or has the legal grounds to assert. Moreover, Mother strenuously asserts that the District of Columbia has the authority under the UCCJEA to exercise UCCJEA jurisdiction in any event as D.C. Superior Court ruled in May 2006 that none of the parties resided in VA anymore and under UCCJEA VA could no longer legally assert jurisdiction over this Child. It simply refuses. The Federal Case Law cases vary on what they say is prompt regarding post-deprivation court hearing due process after the state removes a child from a parent. The Fourth Circuit stated that a delay of 72 hours is on the outer limits. (See Campbell, 949 F.Supp. at 1467 (citing a Fourth Circuit case Jordan v. Jackson, 15 F.3d 333).) The Campbell court held that a one-week delay violated procedural due process. (See Campbell, 949 F.Supp. at 1468; see also Hebein ex

re Berman v. Young, 37 F.Supp.2d 1035 (N.D. ILL.)) The Supreme Court standard requires the
Court to weigh "'the importance of the private interest and the harm to this interest occasioned by delay; the justification offered by the Government for delay and its relation to the underlying governmental interest; and the likelihood that the interim decision may have been mistaken." (See Campbell, 949 F.Supp. at 1468 (quoting FDIC v. Mallen, 486 U.S. 230, 108 S. Ct. 1780, 100 L.Ed.2d 265 (1988)).) In weighing these interests "[i]t is clear that the private, fundamental

liberty interest involved in retaining the custody of one's child and the integrity of one's family is of the greatest importance." (See Duchesne v. Sugarman, 566 F.2d 817, 826 (2nd Cir. 1977) (a 36 month delay violated due process).) NOT A FRIVOLOUS COMPLAINT

Child is Safe with Mother

Mother is fit, an excellent mother, determined by all courts to be an excellent and fit mother, and legally deserves sole custody given the circumstances of this case. Not only is it in the "best interests" of this Child, but also in the best interests of Mother and Father and society given the specific circumstances of this Case. Mother asserts that her request for immediate relief is also in the Father's best interests as he is severely mentally disturbed as evidenced by scientific evidence meeting the Daubertl standard, has a long history of severe domestic violence and assaults on the public, has many threatening resources available to him due to his extreme wealth, and poses a risk to himself as well due to his criminal conduct to date. See attached blind psychological testing done by F. Barton Evans.

Risk of Imminent Harm with Father

God forbid that Father should react to the continuing proceedings with further violence. He is a documented "combative" "police fighter." There is a high risk of further violence by Father against this Mother and Child, as well as potentially against the other mothers and children and the public that requires court care and action. See attached information from Montgomery County Police.

See Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed. 2d 469, (U.S. Jun 28, 1993) (NO. 92-102).

Mother reminds this Honorable Court, with all due respect, that an underlying cause of other public violence in the past has been fathers who are angry over child custody disputes particularly fathers who are angry over paying child support. Mother prays this Honorable Court use the utmost care in its handling and disposition of this Complaint. Mother particularly prays that this Court recognize that an extremely wealthy father should not be given an informal rebuttable presumption by any court that he is more truthful than Mother or has more fitness simply because he is wealthy, is a lawyer himself, and has more resources to access even in the case where the father is a senior litigation partner at an elite law firm. 2 The states have given him this informal presumption and have not even allowed Mother to rebut it. Moreover there is no evidentiary basis for a court to fail to heavily weigh Mother's truthfulness. Mother is truthful, honest, and has a high degree of integrity as evidenced by her years of distinguished public service at the US EPA. Giving Father a non-rubuttable presumption of truthfulness simply because he is an Agent of the Court and is well-connected in the legal community is a grave due process error. Father Abuses His Position as an Agent of the Court In reality, in this very Case, it evident that the underlying reason that an over three year kidnapping and concealment has been accomplished by this Father is because he is using his power position in society to the detriment of this Child and this Mother. However, Mother asserts most strenuously that it is the courts' responsibility to provide fairness. Because the states have demonstrated an inherent unfairness the federal court should step in immediately to prevent further harm to this innocent Mother and Child and prevent harm to society.

Father is William Earl Wallace III who is a Senior Litigation Partner at Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy. Father works in the Washington, DC office.

In this Case herein, the Father is using the weapons he thinks he has at hand: his legal training and position as a Senior Litigation Partner at an elite law firm. Father has even sued the Montgomery County Police in Federal District Court in Greenbelt, MD over Father's refusal to abide by a temporary protection order. It should be recognized that Father reacted to a temporary protection order issued when Mother told the D.C. Court about his violent assaults by assaulting the police too. Father attempts to justify in that federal case his assaults on the police. How can anyone justify assaulting the police? That case is still pending. In this custody situation, Father has perjured himself and it can already be proven that he and new wife, Rose Serino, have committed federal voter fraud and tax evasion in order to attempt to justify their forum shopping out of the District of Columbia into the Commonwealth of Virginia in order to find a more favorable forum. It can already be proven that VA Judge Nolan Dawkins acknowledged on transcript that he would cut Father's child support "in half if not more" if he heard that issue and the D.C. court hadn't ruled that it retained Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA) jurisdiction. As Father's motivations for forum shopping were clearly related to his angry exit from the D.C. Superior Court hearing on November 22, 2004 where he in a red faced rage stated that he would "never pay child support," it is not a stretch at all for a reasonable person to conclude that this Father indeed illegally forum shopped with malintent and that he will go to great lengths to achieve his goals, including risking federal felony offenses on his own and in conjunction with gaining the assistance of others in the pursuit of his criminal goals. Such improper forum shopping alone is clearly stated as a "prohibited act" under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA). Also, given Father's abandonment of Mother upon pregnancy, extreme hostility and his written accusation that child support is "extortion," and subsequent refusal to even meet this

Child until under court order at age 1 1/4, it is not a stretch at all for a reasonable person to conclude that this Father is more interested in his pocketbook than in raising Mother's Child. In

fact, Father admits in court hearings numerous times that his new wife raises Mother's Child. The stakes are very high for this Father due to his position as an Agent of the court, and Mother prays dearly and constantly that this Honorable Court will protect her and her Child given the high probability that this situation has the potential to turn very violent very quickly. Mother asserts that it is only fair, given the legal standard in current use and law, to not only consider the "best interests of the Child" in this Case, but also the best interests of Mother, Father, and society. These circumstances require a fair federal court, not the demonstrably unfair state courts of DC, VA, and MD. NEED FOR IMMEDIATE RELIEF

Over Three Year Kidnapping and Concealment Without Due Process

Mother's daughter, Georgiana Rose Upson DOB 05/30/2004, has been kidnapped and completely concealed from Mother by the Child's biological father, William Earl Wallace III, since December 22, 2006 under color of law of an improperly issued and fraudulently based ex

parte custody order from the Commonwealth of Virginia that lacks Uniform Child Custody
Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) jurisdiction. This situation is completely contrary to the laws and the intents and purposes of law as formally stated of the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the State of Maryland; yet all three jurisdictions refuse to provide relief to Mother and Child and refuse to assert Emergency UCCJEA Jurisdiction to reunify this fit Mother and Child. The courts have ruled that Mother is a fit mother and that she is in fact an excellent mother. Yet, in order to justify their rulings that call Mother names such as "obstinate," set impossible hurdles for Mother to overcome including demanding she pay tens of

thousands of dollars in order to even consider allowing her to have any contact with her Child, and refuse to allow her to file to seek relief unless getting leave of the state courts of appeal. Mother asserts that the very fact that these rulings are taking place is strongly indicative that the state court judges are abusing their positions of power in conjunction with giving a fellow legal professional this Father an unfair advantage in their courts. Both Constitutional Civil Rights and Basic Human Rights are being violated by the states against this Mother, Child, and Society.
Mother has Exhausted Options in State Courts

Mother has exhausted all options seeking relief in each state for immediate relief and a recent District of Columbia Court of Appeals Ruling again denied her Emergency Motion for reunification with her daughter. An oral hearing was held January 26, 2010 in the District of Columbia Court of Appeals but the Court provided Mother and Child no relief and the Court has not to date ruled on the matters. There is no timeline for a ruling either. Mother admits to this Honorable Court that she is pessimistic that she will find justice in the D.C. Court of Appeals and for sound reason: the D.C. Court of Appeals has twice refused to reunite her with her Child. Mother asserts that even waiting another 72 hours to be reunited is too long to wait as has been ruled in other federal case law in situations where children have been taken from parents by the state. Mother files this Case stating that their failure to assert Emergency UCCJEA jurisdiction is a legal liability and Mother files this Case seeking redress for this grievance. Mother notes that VA has refused to assert Emergency UCCJEA jurisdiction and that court is inappropriate given that the two judges Judge Nolan Dawkins and Judge Donald Haddock are part of the illegal conspiracy with Father. In order to attempt to silence Mother, Judge Haddock has even sealed that case and issued a capias for Mother's arrest in VA. This is clear abuse of power!

10

Mother spoke on January 21, 2010 with Ms. Lucy Skalsky of the Alexandria Circuit Court again seeking feedback in response to Mother's letter that was requested by Judges Dawkins and Haddock of that court as Mother has diligently responded repeatedly throughout the years as to what Mother must do to get the Alexandria Circuit Court to take action to grant her relief. They had asked for a letter because they refused to verbally give any feedback to Mother through chambers and their law clerk. Ms. Skalsky stated and stated in aggressive tone that Mother must go to jail first in order to present any request for relief to that court. Ms. Skalsky also hung up on Mother on the telephone when Mother requested feedback. Mother requested feedback in a calm even tone of voice. The impression given by Ms. Skalsky is that the judges in Alexandria Circuit Court are so angry that Ms. Skalsky is in turn expressing that anger in her response to Mother. Mother asserts that the judges of the Alexandria Circuit Court have severely violated the VA Code of Judicial Conduct. Mother has made official Complaint previously many times to the VA Inquiry and Review Commission, the VA Court of Appeals, and the VA Office of the Governor. These officials have refused to properly handle Mother's Complaint. The Commission arbitrarily and capriciously dismissed Mother's Complaint without investigation, the Court of Appeals arbitrarily and capriciously dismissed Mother appeal based on Father's demand claiming it was not filed timely, and the Governor's Office referred Mother back to the Commission. According to comment by the Uniform Commissioners in their UCCJEA official document, it is the intent of the UCCJEA that no judge may simply dismiss a case when there is a question regarding the existence or exercise of UCCJEA jurisdiction. Mother reiterates her assertion that the Alexandria Circuit Court has no basis whatsoever for asserting any type of jurisdiction over her or the issues and the only issue before it is due to Father's request to that court to put Mother in jail as retaliation against her for seeking a very

11

badly needed temporary and civil protection order against Father in the District of Columbia, as was her statutory right to do so because she is a resident and domicile of DC. Father was able to do this because the State of Maryland violated federal Violence Against Women (VAW) law and released Father from his arrest without input from Mother and without any involvement from Mother as to the risks of retaliatory harm to Mother and Child. Instead, Father has a long history with the Alexandria Circuit Court, personal connections to the judges, and knows that he will get anything he asks for from the court, and he is not shy about threatening to go to that court. Despite not being able to legally assert jurisdiction of any type, the Alexandria Circuit Court allows Father to file any request and grants any of his requests with cursory, arbitrary, and capricious scrutiny. This will be demonstrated by the strong record.

Father is an Imminent Threat

Mother fears for her and her daughter's imminent safety and life. This biological father is severely abusive and has a long well-documented history of domestic violence against the known three mothers and his five known children. Also, Mother has provided evidence of validated statements from the other two mothers of Father's child abuse, perjury, tortuous legal tactics, and internet sexual predation that are so similar to the Father's actions against Mother

and her daughter.

Father has a Long History of Internet Sexual Predation This father's internet sexual predation includes according to verified statement by a former wife of Father "a long history of arranging sadist-masochistic sex on the internet."

Father has a Long History of Abuse of his Children

Her verified statement also provided proof that this Father beats his young son in the head such that the son is afraid of Father and that Father has threatened to kidnap his severely

12

emotionally disturbed daughter from the psychiatric care facility that the daughter had to be placed in on an emergency basis. All his children by his ex-wife have been through extensive psychological treatment, yet Father perjured himself in VA trial by claiming that none of his children have undergone treatment or have any emotional problems whatsoever. Mother has provided this evidence and the courts in DC, VA, and MD have ignored the evidence to instead rely on social prejudice against Mother in their rulings to refuse her pleas for reunification. Father threatens and follows throw with litigation abuse in order to control and abuse the mothers and children. It should be noted that in VA the custody evaluator never even interviewed or investigated Father's other children, and that evaluator testified that he simply took Father at his word that the children never had any psychological issues related to Father. Father has a Long History of Police Antagonism Mother has provided the states and state courts with evidence of Father's assaults on the public, on herself and this child, and on the Montgomery County Police who have characterized him as a "police fighter" and "combative." He has also followed through on litigation abuse against the Montgomery County Police in Federal District Court in Greenbelt, MD. Father is a Senior Litigation Partner at Milbank Tweed Hadley and McCloy and practices in both state and federal courts across the country. Father Victimized Mother Through Internet Sexual Predation Father pursued Mother on the interne site match. corn and Mother asserts that Father misrepresented his intentions so egregiously, so dishonestly, and with such malintent that he should be prosecuted for predation and sexual abuse: felony crimes. As these circumstances cross state lines, Mother asserts that Father has committed federal felony crimes. Mother and this Father have never been married, thankfully.

13

Mother and Child are Victims of Cruel and Unusual Punishment

Mother asserts that the states' mistreatment of her is extreme cruel and unusual punishment that is directly harmful to the basic social fabric and the moral values of the United States of America and its citizens, is directly contrary to the law and the intents and purposes of law, and is indicative that the state courts have demonstrated an inability to fairly adjudicate this situation. Simply put, Mother and Child have been tortured by the states with impunity to date. As such, Mother requests immediate relief in federal court to be reunited with her daughter and protected from this biological Father according to their Rights under the U.S. Constitution. Mother begs this Federal Court to put an end to her and her daughter's torture by the states. Mother requests the Federal Court to oversee the states handling of these matters and to provide Mother with Restitution.

Mother and Child are Victims of State Judicial Misconduct

Mother also asserts that the individual judges named in this suit have conspired with Father and others in violation of federal civil rights laws and in violation of other federal laws. Mother has made complaint to the Federal Bureau of Investigation Washington DC Field Office; the United States Department of Justice; the United States Department of State; and the states of DC, VA, MD, and FL: Mother has provided extensive evidence and documentation of her assertions. Mother has been advised by federal officials that there is an active federal case and to "be patient, be positive, and try to relax." Officials have expressed concern to Mother that she may commit suicide. Mother has told them she will not. Mother has no further knowledge of the status of her case with these officials. For these basic reasons and to provide immediate relief needed, Mother files this Complaint and requests timely response from this Honorable Court to reunite her and her

14

daughter and immediate relief as this court determines is mete and just under federal law and according to her and her daughter's rights under the United States Constitution and International Human Rights law. Time is of the essence.
The Case of David and Sean Goldman: International Child Kidnapping & Concealment

Mother has seen the recent case of David Goldman and his son Sean where it took 6 years of exhaustive multi jurisdictional litigation and the action of the Brazilian Supreme Court to get an order to immediately reunite Mr. Goldman and his son, as this is according to law. As there is extensive documentation of this case by the national press, Mother assumes that this Honorable Court is knowledgeable about Mr. Goldman and his son, and that this Honorable Court is no less knowledgeable than Mother or the public. United States Officials, including the President of the United States Barack Obama, made comment in the news on the need to immediately reunite parent and child and some officials and lawyers made statement that a situation such as Mr. Goldman's and his son's situation would never happen in the United States of America. Mother saw the NBC interview of Mr. Goldman, listened to his words, and is struck by the similarity of his situation to hers. Just as in Mr. Goldman's case, no evidence has ever been
produced to support Father's claims in this Case that Mother is "unfit" parent in any way or that

she is not worthy of being reunified, yet the courts in DC, VA, and MD (just as the Brazilian
courts did) have allowed a lengthy kidnapping and concealment without relief to Child and Mother.
Need for Federal Court Intervention and Oversight

Mother asserts that the length of time that has elapsed in this Case over three years of kidnapping and concealment and nearly 6 years of litigation are in and of itself a Constitutional

15

due process violation and a cruel and unusual punishment violation. Worse, they are a failure of the states to protect Mother and Child. As the family court system in the U.S. is widely acknowledged to be plagued with severe justice problems, Mother asserts that finally federal intervention is essential to provide guidance to the states and to ensure a positive influence on the civil rights in society related to society's most sensitive and vulnerable citizens: abused parents and children. This Case presents the federal court system the appropriate circumstances to intervene fairly and justly. The state courts are not and have demonstrated through their rulings that they are not fair, and have demonstrated they refuse to provide a fair judge and fair court. This will be proven in this Case. This Case involves interstate violations of the plainly stated intents and purposes of UCCJEA and UIFSA and VAW law. Mother asserts that the federal court is the court with expertise and experience regarding interstate and international issues and law; and as such should hear this Case. Mother asserts that her case is similar to Mr. Goldman's and his son's case but that her case demonstrates that federal court intervention is immediately needed because her case is happening in the United States of America in direct violation of law and the states have demonstrated an inability to adjudicate the matters according to law and in protection of
Mother's and her daughter's Constitutional Rights. It can happen here. It is happening here in

this very case. Request for Evidentiary Hearing Guidance and Appointment of Counsel As the evidence is so voluminous, Mother requests this Honorable Court to identify for her what additional evidence it requires to provide immediate relief. Alternatively, Mother requests that this Honorable Court provide an immediate forum for Mother to provide in hearing

16

any evidence that is required for this Court to take immediate action. Mother also requests this Court immediately rule to provide her with counsel.
The circumstances of this Case involve extreme stress and emotional torture on Mother

and Child.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT OF NEED FOR RELIEF

Mother's minor daughter has been kidnapped and concealed as of December 22, 2006, by Father "under color of law" of an illegally obtained custody Order issued by the City of Alexandria Circuit Court in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Father obtained "under color of law" a name change in the Montgomery County Circuit Court in the State of Maryland, changing Mother's daughter's name from "Upson" to "Wallace" his last name. Father has done this Reprehensible Conduct under the excuse of his fraudulent claims that he is a Domicile of the State of Florida and a Resident of Maryland. In fact, it can be proven that all parties are Residents and true Domiciles of the District of Columbia. Father has never been a resident or
domicile of VA, and therefore never should have been allowed to file in VA and improperly

forum shop there. Although Mother was a resident and domicile of VA at the time of Father's filing, no formal leave of court was issued for Father to file in VA. Also, Mother was imminently moving to DC and has remained in DC ever since. Father had previously demanded Mother file in DC and Responded and Counter-Claimed in the original case in DC 2004-PCS1375 filed August 16, 2004. Neither party could forum shop without formal leave of DC court
according to DC Code and court Rule. Father has avoided paying taxes in the District of Columbia and has committed Federal Voter Fraud, along with his wife Rose Serino. Mother has presented clear evidence to

authorities in Florida, the District of Columbia, and the State of Maryland. Mother is aware that

17

the United States Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have ongoing cases relating to these events. Mother alleges, based on factual evidence submitted to the FBI and DOJ, that judicial misconduct occurred that allowed the VA and MD courts to issue their orders "under color of law" Federal Civil Rights violations. None of the Courts District of Columbia Superior Court, City of Alexandria Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court, City of Alexandria Circuit Court, Montgomery County Circuit Court have asserted any form of Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) jurisdiction to end this over three year severing of all ties between Child and Mother caused by this deeply mentally disturbed Father and his manipulation of the courts and authorities due to his use of his position as an agent of the court. Such a severing of ties between Child and Mother is severely harmful to Child, Mother, and society and directly contradicts the best interests of Child and Mother. Mother asserts that the most convenient forum to assert UCCJEA jurisdiction is the District of Columbia, as the initial commencement of proceedings was in DCSC and all parties including the Child are Residents and true Domiciles of the District of Columbia. Also, DCSC has formally by Court Order asserted Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA) jurisdiction and has so since 2004. The DCFDC can most efficiently require either a UCCJEA formal interstate proceedings process between these states and/or appoint a specific state to protect the Constitutional Rights of this Child and Mother. If that appointed state does not adequately protect the Constitutional Rights of Child and Mother, then Child and Mother may plead for further relief before the federal court as the federal court has ensured that there is a specific state court forum and thereupon takes responsibility for oversight of the ends of justice in that instance. Mother emphasizes that time is of the essence when the circumstances involve the kidnapping and

18

concealment "under color of law" especially when those circumstances cross state boundaries as in this Case. No child or parent should be left without a court to turn to in reunited them, as has happened in this case. The state courts are more interested in pointing fingers at one another and sending Mother on a wild goose chase between courts without any court asserting UCCJEA jurisdiction to reunify Mother and Child, now for over 3 years! FACTS OF THE CASE Initial Commencement of Proceedings regarding Mother's minor child, Georgiana Rose Upson (Date of Birth May 30, 2004), was in the District of Columbia Superior Court (DCSC) on August 16, 2004 in Case 2004-PCS-1375 in Mother's Complaint for Paternity, Child Support, and Child Custody. Father (William Earl Wallace III, Esq.) was diagnosed twice by DNA testing once in utero and again after birth by DCSC Court Order given Father's protest of Paternity and abandonment of Mother and Child to be the biological Father. No formal Leave of Court has ever been issued by DCSC to move the matters to any other jurisdiction. Mother has and continues to formally contest UCCJEA and UIFSA jurisdiction of any other court than DC.

Father 's Motivations and Abuse of Position as Agent of the Court

Father is an internet sexual predator who fathered two children including this Child out of wedlock four months apart and abandoned both Mothers upon learning of the pregnancies and has misused his position as an agent of the court (Father is a Senior Litigation Partner at Milbank, Tweed, Hadley and McCloy) and used his extreme wealth estimated to be over $30 million USD to misuse the courts against the three known mothers of his five known children. Father has been physically, emotionally, financially, and institutionally abusive against all of his

19

children and their Mothers, including extensive litigation against all three Mothers. There is extensive documentation of all standard forms of domestic violence.

Mother has been judged to be an excellent and fit mother. No judges dispute this fact. EMERGENCY RELIEF REQUESTED Wherefore, for the reasons stated above and that will be presented to the Court in this Case, Mother (Ms. Upson), hereby respectfully requests of this Honorable Court 1. Immediate Reunification between Mother and Child and Protection from Father Immediate relief to reunify this Child with Mother and to protect Mother and Child from this abusive Father based on a determination by this Court on what pendente lite "reunification" and "protection" should constitute in this specific Case. 2. Assignment of Specific State to Adjudicate Child Custody, Visitation, and Child Support for Georgiana Rose Upson Rule that in this Case the District of Columbia Superior Court and District of Columbia Court of Appeals are the most convenient forums, retain both UCCJEA and UIFSA jurisdiction, are obliged to assert UCCJEA Emergency Jurisdiction immediately, shall reunify this Mother and child immediately, and shall fairly shepherd the Constitutional Civil and Human Rights of these matters in the future. Clarification of that an appointed s failure to follow federal

court order shall result in specific liabilities to be outlined this Honorable Court.
Respectfully Submitted,

DEANNE OSE UPSO

Deanne Ro Upson P.O. Box 1549 Washington, DC 20013-1549 Tel: (202) 370-7756

20

Cell: (202) 373-9224 deanne.upson(&,gmail.com

VERIFICATION

I do solemnly swear under the penalties of perju that the contents of the foregoing Response are true to the best of my knowledge, informat on, and belief.

Deanne Rose Upson

POINTS AND AUTHORITIES Cases

Campbell, 949 F.Supp. at 1467 (citing a Fourth Circuit case Jordan v. Jackson, 15 F.3d 333) Campbell, 949 F.Supp. at 1468 (quoting FDIC v. Mallen, 486 U.S. 230, 108 S.Ct. 1780, 100 L.Ed.2d 265 (1988)).) Campbell, 949 F.Supp. at 1468; see also Hebein ex re Berman v. Young, 37 F.Supp.2d 1035 (N.D. ILL.) Duchesne v. Sugarman, 566 F.2d 817, 826 (2nd Cir. 1977) (holding that a 36 month delay violated due process))
Incorporation by reference all attachments to original Verified Complaint.

7
6 7

21