Today’s oral arguments went very well for OUR REVOLUTION to end the terror of Parental Alienation and all the crimes commonly associated with this terror by exposing in great detail, without any rebuttal, the Criminal Conspiracy and Racketeering Enterprise carrying out this terror, their criminal and malicious behavior including refusing to end their terrorizing.

Below is my exhibit list which is the outline of my oral argument today which lasted for one hour. The three Justices will now review all the evidence and determine if I violated some invalid and criminally issued restraining order and stay-away order; whether Judge Silbar had a legal right to renew it for 15 years until 2032 and whether my evil, idiot still legal husband Mark Hassman had standing and a legal right to add his “wife Mikel Sanders-Persky” as a protected person; not to mention that it appears they have split up.

I am thrilled so much is being exposed on public records. This is all part of peacefully fighting for Love, Family, Equal Rights and Justice for All. I will keep you posted as to what the three Justices rule and in the meantime here is my exhibit list which is part of public records in the CA Court of Appeals cases for In re the Marriage of Sara and Mark Hassman.

Also attached are some photos I took today on my way home from the hearing. From beautiful Union Station I stopped in downtown Los Angeles on my way home. The new trains are just so convenient. 
Most of the photos are of Disney Hall. Notice the name on the astronaut’s backpack because they were making a music video today and if you want to see it; check out that name. 
Also, I love that yellow sofa since it is great for having many conversations and is comfortable too. I just love Los Angeles and all its resources. 

Here is my exhibit list which is part of public records. The chart did not copy exactly right but the meaning of all the documents is quite obvious.

EXHIBIT LIST; G054665 and G05512 Sara Hassman v. Mark Hassman; California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Three
Appeal from Superior Court of California 09D002792
Judges Claudia Silbar and Linda Miller Presiding
Commissioner/ Supervising Judge Lon F. Hurwitz also presiding
(RO means restraining order; OSC means order to show cause; RFO means request for order)

Number/ Exhibit Date
1 Declaration of Lisa Kista Doumar Regarding Application for Ex Parte Orders; Legal Assistant of Attorney Philip G. Seastrom of Seastrom & Seastrom June 5, 2009

2 Transcript page19 from Judge Silbar’s hearing of Petitioner’s sworn testimony confirming the 2012 RO for 5 yrs was actually a renewal of the one from 2011; Also page 21 where Petitioner swore there was a domestic violence RO which did include the children—which he thinks Judge Hurwitz granted. June 8, 2017

3 Petitioner’s Trial Brief listing many alleged valid protective orders and alleged contempt violations by Respondent who has never been arrested and is a loving, law-abiding Woman and Mother. 11/20/2017

4 Declaration of Petitioner in support of request for Permanent Extension of Domestic Violence RO & a request to Add my Wife, Mikel Sanders-Persky to the Protective Order with attached exhibit A:a RO Judge Silbar granted on 7/11/12 for 5 yrs; Minute Order where Supervising Judge Hurwitz transferred matters to Judge Miller but ordered case to remain with Judge Silbar and Judge Miller held Respondent in contempt ordering 3 yrs informal probation and community service but advised Respondent she could be sentenced to 5 days in jail for taking a photo to protect herself by proving the Truth; Page 2 of Petitioner’s OSC showing mere speculation “if a weapon had been pulled out of her bag.”
4/15/2017; 02/21/2017; 10/22/16

5 Temporary RO and Notice of Hearing with attached Child Custody and Visitation Orders granted by Commission Lon Hurwitz June 5, 2009

6 Respondent’s clean record from the Dept of Justice; 
Email from Respondent’s attorney stating “You had absolutely no bargaining power in the settlement negotiations. The judge (Silbar) did not like you.”
Respondent’s caption page of motion for Recusal and Disqualification of Judge Silbar; 
Judge Silbar’s Order Striking Statement of Disqualification & her Verified Answer 6/23/2015; 02/14/2011; 8/17/2016; 9/21/2016

7 Personal Declaration of attorney Philip G. Seastrom swearing that his family law firm had a “formulated litigation strategy” to reduce spousal support and request ROs against Respondent, all of which were granted despite proving any validity and legal basis. 8/4/2015

8 Declaration of Attorney Thomas Kenney and Points and Authorities in Opposition to Respondent’s Ex Parte Motion (for a new court-appointed reunification therapist who keeps the sessions confidential by practicing what is called Safe-Haven Therapy and will not disclose them to Petitioner so there will be no fear of reprisal by minor Son.) 9/24/2009

9 Petitioner’s RFO by attorney Philip Seastrom requesting Respondent be prohibited from seeing and communicating with her children and going to their school; Email from Petitioner to Respondent stating that she was “an integral part of the positive upbringing of our three children” and that he wants a “successful” divorce; 2nd draft of a Shared Parenting Agreement proving in detail that 50/50 distribution of time was intended by Respondent and Petitioner; Petitioner’s Notice of Termination from the Collaborative Law Process whereupon he hired the law firm Seastrom which had a “formulated litigation strategy” to request ROs against Respondent and reduce her spousal support as clearly stated in Exhibit 7; without having any legal or rational basis.
June 5, 2009; 02/27/2011;11/01/2008; 4/10/2009

10 Declaration of (son) Stephen Hassman; 
Declaration of (Petitioner) Mark Hassman;
Laguna Beach Police Report June 4, 2009; June 4, 2009;

11 Declaration of Petitioner by attorney Thomas Kenney in Response to Respondent’s OSC where he asserts that subjective, personal opinions of being upset; perceived of being harassed and; perceived of disturbing the peace and; the differences of opinion can cause a person to be held to have committed a violent act even when their act was non-violent. No reasonable person in a divorce matter would reasonably believe that there would not be negative feelings, as Petitioner and son Stephen said did exist in Exhibit 10 of their personal declarations.—- Any reasonable person knows that Negative Feelings do not constitute violent crimes of the person they have negative feelings towards. However; Petitioner’s and said son’s subjective declarations were used as support for said ex parte application dated June 5th 2009. 

12 Declaration of Petitioner in Response to Respondent’s OSC where he made many delusional and speculative assertions including but not limited to:
“In no way am I trying to obstruct the relationship between Respondent and our children.” 7/14/2009

13 Petitioner’s Form FL-412 entitled Affidavit of Facts Constituting Contempt-Domestic Violence/Custody and Visitation.
No date; appears about 01/17/17- Judge Miller’s hearing

14 Two cellphone photos Respondent took of Petitioner and his wife to protect herself by being able to prove the truth. She was held in contempt for allegedly willfully violating some valid stay-away-order by Judge Miller on February 21, 2017. The first photo shows Petitioner and his wife walking away from Respondent. The next photo shows Petitioner’s wife turned around; walked toward Respondent and posed for the photo. Petitioner was nowhere in sight even though he alleged that he and his wife were in fear; he was not protecting her and also neither of them looked like they were in fear. 
Plus, Petitioner did not call the police until 3 days later even though he alleges he was in fear of Respondent who has no history of violent or criminal activity and is petite and weighs less than 100 lbs. 9/30/2016

15 Minute Order proving Respondent’s court-appointed attorney, appointed by Judge Silbar, requested that the current new vexatious litigant conviction matter where Petitioner filed a motion to try to hold Respondent in contempt of violating her vexatious litigant conviction; be transferred to the criminal courts. 
Judge Silbar convicted Respondent as a vexatious litigant on Sept 30, 2016 without disclosing the 5 baseless and unmeritorious motions and without disclosing the law and facts used to convict her and still refused on May 9, 2018. Further, Judge Silbar on her own motion appointed a guardian ad litem for Respondent claiming Respondent is incompetent to understand the laws and the facts. 12/06/2017

16 Judge Silbar’s court-appointed Therapist’s Report which was requested and paid for by the law firm Seastrom & Seastrom on behalf of Petitioner where the Therapist made conclusions about Respondent’s mental state without any tests or any 2nd and 3rd professional opinions but based only on the subjective opinions of the minor son & Petitioner when neither have any credentials in psychology or therapy.
The conclusions of said Therapist, Petitioner, and Son greatly differ from those of Respondent’s Licensed Private Therapist who specializes in divorce matters and has many years of experience and education. 9/22/2009

17 Declaration of Petitioner in Response to Respondent’s OSC where Petitioner makes many delusional, subjective assertions including but not limited to: “I have done everything asked of me and more to facilitate reunification;” 9/25/2009

Go Truth, Love, Equal Rights and Justice for All!!!

As always, none of this is legal or any other advice; it is based upon my knowledge and experience.
-By Sara Hassman, Parental Alienation Solutions, Founder;
Parental Alienation is a form of abuse that destroys the sacred bond between a loving parent and their child at the time of a divorce. (Child includes teen and adult children).

Image may contain: sky, cloud and outdoor
Image may contain: one or more people
Image may contain: people sitting, table and indoor



Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.