State of Indiana s5

STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE ELKHART SUPERIOR COURT NO. 5 ) SS: ELKHART COUNTY ) CAUSE NO. 20D050010DR640

IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF: ) ) ALISON GRATZOL, ) PETITIONER ) ) V. ) ) AMIR H. SANJARI, ) RESPONDENT )

APPLICATION: TO MAINTAIN THE (ALREADY CONTINUED) HEARING DATE OF FEBRUARY 12 TH - 13 TH , 2003, FOR EMERGENCY PERMANENT INJUNCTION TO PREVENT FURTHER VISITS AND CONTACTS BETWEEN THE MINOR CHILDREN AND THE SOCIAL WORKER LOU ANN TODD, FOR TEMPORARY EMERGENCY REMOVAL OF THE MINOR CHILDREN, FOR AMENDMENT OF WITNESS LIST, FOR TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF CHILD SUPPORT, EXERCISE OF RIGHT TO HAVE ALL (WITHOUT EXCEPTION) WITNESSES TESTIFY IN OPEN COURT (NO IN-CAMERA TESTIMONY), AND RULE TO SHOW CAUSE

COMES NOW, the Respondent/Father, Amir H. Sanjari, and being duly sworn upon his oath say:

1. That, he is respondent in the above-entitled cause of action.

2. That, on August 27, 2001, this Court awarded the Petitioner/Mother, Alison Gratzol, sole legal and physical custody of the parties’ minor children, A, and M.

A. Application to maintain the already continued hearing at February 12th & 13th, 2003 COMES NOW, the Respondent/Father, Amir H. Sanjari, and being duly sworn upon his oath say

1. That, on September 10, 2002, the Respondent/father filed for Verified Emergency Petition for Modification of Custody, Support, and Visitation.

2. That, the hearing has been repeatedly postponed primarily at the behest of, and due to manipulation by the Petitioner/Mother and her attorney.

3. That, as a result of a request by Dr. Berardi to have time to complete his psychological evaluation, the hearing was continued to February 12th and 13th, dates which the Court, the Petitioner/Mother’s attorney and the Respondent/Father agreed upon in the morning of December 12, 2002.

4. That, the Petitioner’s attorney, hardly an hour after the agreement (3 above), in the morning of the same day (December 12, 2002) reneges upon the agreement, proposing the next available dates in April 2003.

5. That, the Respondent/Father believes that this is a continuation of the dirty trick tactic by the Petitioner/Mother and her attorney to further manipulate the Court proceedings and create delays in order to psychologically manipulate and unduly influence the minor children and turning them, in particular the younger minor child, M R. Sanjari, against the Respondent/Father. This is the minor child who expressed her wish to live with the Respondent/Father. (Please also see B below.)

6. That, the Respondent /Father requests that the hearing not be continued beyond these February dates. As additional delay will cause further psychological damage to the minor children.

B. Application For Emergency Permanent Injunction To Prevent Further Visits And Contacts Between The Minor Children And The Social Worker Lou Ann Todd

COMES NOW, the Respondent/Father, Amir H. Sanjari, and being duly sworn upon his oath say

1. That, since the minor child, A F. Sanjari’s self-mutilation, while residing under the Petitioner/Mother’s supposed care, was discovered by the Respondent/Father in the Spring of 2002, A has been coerced and manipulated by the Petitioner/Mother into visiting Ms. Lou Ann Todd. Since A started visiting Ms. Todd some months ago, her anger has been directed at the Respondent/Father.

2. That, on December 12, 2002, hardly a few hours after the Petitioner/Mother’s attorney reneged on the agreed hearing date of February 12th and 13th, 2003, (please see A, above), the Respondent/Father received an email (attached here) from the Petitioner/Mother as follows: “AMIR: SINCE M MEET WITH DR. BERARDI, SHE HAS ASKED TO SEE LOU ANN TODD. THIS IS TO INFORM YOU THAT M HAS A MEETING WITH LOU ANN, TODAY DECEMBER 12, 2002. ALISON “.

It was apparently M’s first visit to Ms. Todd. It is clear from this communication that the minor child, M, has obviously been manipulated and coerced into visiting Ms. Todd. This was the first time the Respondent/Father had been informed of such a visit, only one hour before it was to take place!

3. That, Ms. Todd's involvement would be counterproductive to Dr. Berardi’s efforts and skew the findings and complicate his efforts.

4. That, it is somewhat perplexing as to why M is being made to see Ms. Todd now (!) in the middle of a forensic evaluation ordered by the Court ?

5. That, Respondent/Father believes that the minor children are coerced to undergo manipulation by Ms. Todd which would result in psychological trauma upon them. The timing of this and the request to delay hearing to April 2003 by the Petitioner’s attorney give further credence to the charge of dirty trick tactics and psychological abuse of the children employed by the Petitioner/Mother and her attorney.

6. That, the Respondent/Father requests that the Court order any and all such visits and contacts between Ms. Todd and the minor children be stopped. And that, both the Petitioner/Mother and Ms. Todd be held responsible for compliance with this Order.

C. Application For Temporary Emergency Removal Of The Minor Children

1. That, as a result of undue manipulation of the legal process (please see above) and the resulting additional trauma and/or physical suffering of the minor children by the Petitioner/Mother, the psychological well-being of the children is deteriorating.

2. That, the Respondent/Petitioner requests that the minor children be removed from their current residence and be placed in the temporary care of the Respondent/Father until such time that the hearing is held. D. Application For Amendment of Witness List

1. That, the hearing has been continued from December 18, 2002.

2. That, due to the ample time available before the hearing, the Respondent/Father requests the opportunity to modify/amend the witness list submitted for the purposes of the hearing.

E. Application For Temporary Suspension Of Child Support

1. That, according to the IN Parenting Guidelines, the minor children will be spending at least 7 consecutive days during the Christmas/New Year holidays with the Respondent/Father.

2. That, as a result of the undue financial burden imposed by the Court upon the Respondent/Father, the latter requests that the child support payment be suspended for one week while the minor children stay with the Respondent/Father during the holidays.

F. Exercise Of Right To Have All (Without Exception) Witnesses Testify In Open Court (No In-Camera Testimony) COMES NOW, the Respondent/Father, Amir H. Sanjari, and being duly sworn upon his oath say

1. That, the Respondent/Father believes that the Petitioner/Mother and her husband have been causing, and continue to cause, alienation of the minor children against the Respondent/Father.

2. That, as a result of such alienation, the minor children’s statements are not their true wishes and feelings.

3. That, the Respondent/Father requests that all testimonies be conducted in open court.

G. Rule To Show Cause

COMES NOW, the Respondent/Father, Amir H. Sanjari, and being duly sworn upon his oath say 1. That, Petitioner/Mother manipulates and uses the elder minor child to control the younger minor child specifically during telephonic and personal visitations. Hence, interfering in the Respondent/Father’s parenting time with the children. This has the additional effect of alienating the younger minor child by creating unhappy times during visitation.

2. That, the Petitioner/Mother interferes with the telephonic visitation of the children and the Respondent/Father by frequently with-holding evening meals from the minor children until just at or about the Court appointed 07:00 p.m. (Indiana time) telephonic visitation time. Hence adversely affecting and interfering with the visitation.

3. That, the Court’s continued inaction on many of the issues brought to its attention by the Respondent/Father, and manipulation of the hearing dates by the Petitioner/Mother, has further emboldened the Petitioner/Mother in her continued defiance of the Court Orders and agreements, hence challenging the effectiveness of the same. This has had the effect of reducing the Respondent/Father’s parenting time under one guise or another. Even to the point that the Petitioner/Mother has actually petitioned the Court to reduce the Respondent/Father’s parenting time.

4. That, unenforceability of the Respondent/Father’s parenting rights under the IN Guidelines, and/or lack of willingness on the part of law enforcement agencies, render any such Court Orders ineffective and has further emboldened the Petitioner/Mother to manipulate the events, violate Orders and agreements, hence causing further psychological damage to the minor children.

WHEREFORE, the Respondent/Father, Amir H. Sanjari, prays that, this Court,

- in order to limit further psychological and physical damage to the minor children, maintain the February 12th-13th dates for the hearing, and stop further undue and repeated manipulation of the legal process by the Petitioner/Mother and her attorney.

- for the psychological well-being of the minor children, order the Petitioner/Mother and Ms. Lou Ann Todd to stop visits and contacts between Ms. Todd and the minor children.

- consider the well-being of the minor children first and foremost, and grant the Respondent/Father emergency temporary custody of the minor children until such time that the hearing is held. - grant permission to the Respondent/Father to amend / modify the witness list for the hearing in view of the continuance to February 2003.

- grant the Respondent/Father relief from child support payment for one week while the minor children spend seven (7) or more consecutive days with the Father during the Christmas / New Year holidays.

- facilitate open court testimony by all witnesses including the minor children.

- restrain the Petitioner/Mother from provoking and manipulating events which would only serve to alienate the minor children and deteriorate further their psychological well- being.

I affirm under the pains and penalties for perjury that the above and foregoing representations are true.

______Amir H. Sanjari, Respondent (Pro Se) 206 Berkley Manor Drive Cranberry Pennsylvania 16066 Ph: (724) 741 0678

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document was served upon the following:

Max K. Walker, Jr. Attorney at Law 131 East Franklin Street, Suite 12 Elkhart, IN 46516

By United States Mail postage prepaid on this _13th_day of _December_, 2002