Am I a Criminal?

nechonahmitrosycheeksNechonah…

With rosy cheeks and hopeful face she waits for a positive decision by the Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgerichte — OLG).

 

On Tuesday, February 18, 2014, she appeals once again to the presiding judge of the 30th Senate.

In it she has a point to make that no one seems capable of hearing. Why can they not hear?

It is the Jugendamt who seeks to Break my Will, Not my Parents!

Dear Mr. Judge Prexl,

I WANT TO STAY HOME!

Hereby I want to confirm that I have my own will, which my parents respect and do NOT break.

The Jugendamt (youth welfare office) are the ones who break my personal will. They even send the criminal police out here to pick up me up and take me where I do not want to go.

HAVE I BECOME a criminal? If not, then why do the Jugendamt and the police treat me so?

I am a simple 12-year-old child who has an opinion and it shows. Namely, that I WANT TO STAY HOME!

What more do I have to do to be heard?

I HAVE AN OPINION OF MY OWN,  which has not been heard until now. Do I not have the right to be heard and to have a safe home with my parents?

Greetings,

Nechonah Pfeiffer

 

OLG Sign_MunichWednesday morning, the negative decision does arrive – custody of Nechonah remains with the State. Here are excerpts from the decision of the Higher Regional Court (OLG) of Munich Marital Senate, February 17, 2014:

…”The physical, spiritual, and soul welfare of the child is at risk…Both the provisions of § 1666 of the Civil Code and Article 6 paragraph 2 GG safeguard the fundamental rights of children. If they are threatened, there is not only a right to intervene, but – towards the child – an engagement required.

“Since the separation from their child for the parents is the strongest imaginable interference with the rights of parents, it is compatible with the Basic Law only in respect of the principle of proportionality, but the primary consideration is the welfare of the child…

“In accordance with § 1631 para 2 BGB has since the entry into force of the law to outlaw violent upbringing on 02.11.2000 every child has a right to a fully non-violent upbringing.”

 

The judges have therefore decided that Nechonah must be separated against her own will from her parents now to make sure that her “non-violent education” is guaranteed!

 

The Court considers that this decision is “compatible with the Basic Law in respect of the principle of proportionality.” So let us consider the “Basic Law,” the Constitution of modern Germany.

Article 6 of the Basic Law:

(1) Marriage and family enjoy the special protection of the state.

(2) Care and upbringing of children are the natural right of the parents and a duty primarily incumbent on them. The state watches over the performance of this duty.

(3) Separation of children from the family against the will of the persons entitled to bring them up may take place only pursuant to a law, if those so entitled fail in their duty or if the children are otherwise threatened with neglect.

(4) Every mother is entitled to the protection and care of the community.

(5) Illegitimate children shall be provided by legislation with the same opportunities for their physical and spiritual development and their position in society as are enjoyed by legitimate children.

Das Grundgesetz wird 50

Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany

 The Constitution is the ornament of a righteous people, but if the constitution is only for ornamental use, then justice has been lost.

Historically important for us is to shed light on this fact, that this Constitution, this basic or fundamental law, originated with the help of allied victorious powers (United States, Great Britain and France) — after the most terrible tyranny that our people have ever known. On 23 May 1949 the Basic Law came into force. It was given to the German people, that they should never again experience such a bad time.

The original intent of our Basic Law was to protect the rights of German citizens and to protect them from the arbitrary and excessive power of the state.

So who watches over the “constitutional state” (Rechtsstaat), which always has “right”? Or should we just say today, that it always has might?

Therefore we see it today as critical, even threatening, as the rights of German citizens are increasingly limited in favor of the state.

So what happens now with the tender girl, Nechonah? Should she be seized again by state power?

Why does the government come with solid force against a twelve-year-old?

Is the child’s welfare really still the primary consideration of this decision? Surely not! But the courts must keep saying that it is, or admit to wrongdoing.

Hasn’t everything now become a political power struggle?

Is it not just a matter of a politically unpleasant “sect” to get rid of?

Why does one not ask the child?

Why does one not hear what Nechonah says and wants?

That would actually be the most obvious and easiest way to proceed. Yes, instead of judges, lawyers, educators, and psychologists and all their complex reasons why the children are not allowed to stay with their parents, “ASK THE CHILDREN!”

Are you not afraid to? You must be, because you do not listen to them.

The rights of the child are therefore only guaranteed when they have politically pleasant opinions.

Which is to say, dear citizens, that they have no rights at all.

Yes, protect the children from parents, but who will protect them from the state violence? Only someone who actually cared for the children would do such a thing. The welfare of the children has not ever been the issue here.

 

The impression can not be denied that here is taking place a mistreatment by state power of people who belong to a religious minority. This is to be raped of our rights, our dignity, and our families….all very legally.

Read more about the Pfeiffer family.

 

The face of the Jugendamt:

KLZConfrontation

Quote of the day:

If a ruler pays attention to lies, all his officials become rogues. (Proverbs 29:12 )