Too Much Blood In Human Body

Critical comments on the decision of the District Council Bülach

I have on Google an interesting communication from the municipal office of the Canton of Zurich found ( http://www.gaz.zh.ch/internet/ji/gz/de/Vormundschaf/VC5.html ):

It is in this Communication, as we have experienced it: the bias of the District Council where he is Bülach supervisory and appeal body.

The decision of the District Council Bülach 29 April 2002:

The decision is yes, the wife of Dr. Simon Child and adolescent psychiatric services to join the opinion of the guardianship authority Bülach that a "temporary" withdrawal of care was appropriate. is not a word on this point or in the decision, as we are denied the report, on which accesses the KJPD for this decision. Also, did the District Council that a prosecutor has said that you can not force an opinion. Learn more about this see see My refusal to transfer a file unknown to me, advice without some knowledge of and pretending to change the name (last scan).

I want to mention again that I was only in 2003 after a long struggle by the county council still Bülach files.


also the District Council Bülach wrote in his decision as well (see scan above, paragraph 9) that we constantly an arrest in order to describe what it is not negotiated. My children and I have not invented out of whim that it is quite clear on the documents we received, "arrest-report" (see). Orally had explained to us that the police have only a single form (!) And they therefore used this form. More arrests report and its effects to see Abgestrittene presence of Mrs Evelyne Pente in the arrest , links between the guardianship authority Bulach, Evelyne Pente and the clinic Hard and extract from the FFE report and the reasons given by the guardianship authority Bülach .

On 29 December 2002 I have yet to Mr. Markus Notter, Directorate of Justice and the Interior of the Canton of Zurich, wrote concerning the arrests repeat. The answer from Dr. Meili on this point:

can be derived from its letter that it is probably not a problem for them that "arrests Rapport" is, but something else is meant. How do you want to know but an ordinary citizen? If a citizen of a document with the word "arrest-Rapport", then he must accept it in good faith that a public agency really means it took place in an arrest. Moreover, if the document any further use, was who said that other public offices also have the savvy and not just guess at an arrest?



In addition, as in the decision (not scanned) that neighbors have reported Bülach the guardianship authority and the police are passed on to us. If you read but the internal memorandum (see spoofing name change), it is quite clear that Mrs Esther Zinn, then superintendent in the passage Florhof home, visiting the police asked us! And when the police with us, the police said that they were passed because of the name change (see simulating a change of name )!


further in this order of 29 April 2002 (see last scan on Just as children are found by a court process on their own ) that the District Council Bülach complained that my children have taken remedies, and he simply ignored that this has to approve the High Court (see also handling legal right of children and data chaos of civil servants and contradictions Mrs Evelyne Pente and Co.).