Brown Creamy Cm Before Af

addendum and the only admission of error

Addendum to last entry

As the last entry is clear, we were denied a copy of "file-report" of the KJPD (Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Service). Without knowing the contents of which I should allow the District Council Bülach any of these and other documents passes the guardianship authority Opfikon (see last entry, letter of 23 February 2001 ).
course I have not allowed the transfer of an unknown to me, Act of my children.
was later I repeated this as "uncooperative" and accused the order of 23 March 2001 (see scans ( a + b) in the last entry), this has indicated the District Council also Bülach.

According to the order of 23 March 2001 Bulach District Council would have had inquiries in the guardianship authority
Opfikon an "unencumbered new beginning" for the episode. However, this can be impossible if the guardianship authority in Bülach FFE order of 23 April 2001 (see scan below) wrote that the further processing of our case for the purpose of child protection measures to the guardianship authority Opfikon is passed (see also entry of 24 May 2009, above the first scan).

The guardianship authority Bülach had the "File Report" as long retained until they had zubefürchten nothing more. You have the "File Report" only with the letter of 26 April 2001 data protection as a copy sent to us (see feigning a name change, 19 October 2007 ). This, 3 days after the FFE decision was decided!

If I had the file's report of KJPD get the right time, I could defend myself.


The only admission of error

The only time ever was admitted that mistakes were made was in the letter by Ms Karin Wider and Peter Max by the Youth Secretariat Bülach of 19 November 1997.
came to this insight, she soon after the divorce (23 October 1997, see journal refutation of the testimony of Werner Scherrer, 23 September 2007 ). Is much more interesting that Peter Max massively during the divorce was going against me. During the divorce was always heard that the authorities everything went fine, was already after 1 month of this letter, the guardianship authority Bülach had continued to make the same style, and apparently this letter was not noted, although the Letter to the addressees. Even with the supervisory complaint to the District Council Bülach this letter was ignored.

is now only said that not a single mistake was made.