Every person who forcibly ... is guilty of kidnapping

Please Complete the Fatherhood Survey


bulletNote that this reads "every person", and not "every person except public servants".
bulletNote that "they are by law his children".
bulletNote that a public servant who kidnaps a child, regardless of the excuse, is GUILTY.
bulletNote that if the kidnap victim is 5 years old, the PENALTY is up to 11 years in the state prison.
bulletNote that there is NO statute of limitations for kidnapping!
bulletSouth Dakota close to bringing judges to justice.


The American divorce industry is powered by the revenue stream created by the state-sponsored "license", and then "divorce", of more than 56 million American fathers in the last four decades alone.  It created the world's highest divorce rate, bar none, and left more than 25 million American children living with neither biological parent.

It is the thesis of this analysis that not a single one of almost 100 million children forcibly removed from their biological father by the state was justified, and in fact that EACH is a violation of God's most fundamental law.  It is also the thesis of this analysis that EACH public servant who played even the remotest role in removing 100 million children from their biological fathers is guilty of kidnapping, that there is no statute of limitations for this kidnapping, and that a suitable penalty would be death.

Why the death penalty?  Plenty of Americans know and understand why God commanded us to put to death murderers.  It doesn't require a psychologist or mathematician to know why murder must be prevented in order to maintain social order.  But what many Americans don't understand is the role played by divorce in our record high murder rate.   Divorce causes the mental stress in all involved, including parents, children, and interested parties, which tends to increase murder.  Increasing murder rates then lead to higher divorce rates, which then lead to higher murder rates.  Once this delicate balance between murder and divorce is upset, both tend to skyrocket out of control, as both have in the US.

There is no other way, other than to inflict the severest penalty on the perpetrators, to reverse this out of control trend:

phyllis harris [email protected]

"this sounds like a great idea. i am a mom whose children were taken by DHR of alabama while visiting here due to a falseified report by a paternal aunt who was trying to gain custody for social security benefits. i brought in proof of it but the judge refused to hear it told my husband(my childrens's step father) to get out before he opened his mouth even and told him that he ONLY a step father so he had no right to be there and started answering his own questions stood up slapped his hands together while walking away and said no contact with the mother. i was devastated and the state has them in foster homes,delinquents homes,and now an orphanage in selma. this has been for 17 months now. i have done everything asked but yet nothing about when they can be returned home", phyllis harris

The court knows that mothers are moral minors who are incapable of raising children, so once the children are removed from the father with the excuse that they will be placed with the mother, the next step, removing them from the mother, is easy:

Then, there's also a 1974 ruling from the USSC, Scheuer v. Rhodes, that helps:

"When a judge acts as a trespasser of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, the judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judges' orders are void, of no legal force or effect. The United States Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he "comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States."

Since this is a two-phase process, first removing children from the father because the mother thinks she will profit by accusing him in court of being "abusive", and then removing them from the mother because the court views mothers as moral minors--the public servants involved in this kidnapping can pretend that they think they're acting "in the best interests of the children".

What a super tanker of delusion!



No statute of limitations in California

The State Assembly has approved a measure that would eliminate the statue of limitations in sex crimes cases where law enforcement authorities can successfully match DNA evidence with a suspect's DNA. Assembly Bill 1742 by Assemblyman Lou Correa (D-Anaheim) would extend the statute of limitations indefinitely in cases where a DNA match is made, but would give a one year window from the time of the match for district attorneys to file charges against the suspect. Currently, charges in most criminal cases must be filed within six years -- with no statute of limitations applying on cases involving murder and kidnapping. However, with advances in technology, older cases in which forensic evidence yielding DNA samples can now help identify criminal suspects involved in the cases.

horizontal rule

No statute of limitations in the Patriot Act

The PATRIOT Act adjusts the meaning of domestic and international terrorism under the Anti-Terrorism Act, 18 U.S.C. � 2331 (2005), and augments various definitions of terrorist-related crimes used throughout the United States Code. Previously, “mass destruction” was not one of the predicate crimes that characterized activities as international terrorism.  Previously, assassination and kidnapping that appeared to be intended to affect the conduct of a government were the only two identified crimes.   Section 802 changes the activities that are international terrorism under the Anti-Terrorism Act, 18 U.S.C. � 2331 to include activities appearing “intended to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping.”

horizontal rule

No statute of limitations in Vermont


� 13.01

The Limitations Periods

Vermont's statute of limitations, 13 V.S.A. � 4501, sets up

four classes of crime:

(a) Those for which prosecution may be commenced "any time

after commission of the offense[,]" namely "aggravated

assault, murder, arson causing death, and kidnapping[.]"

horizontal rule

No statute of limitations in New York

Statute of Limitations

New York State already exempts class A violent felonies, such as murder, first degree arson, and first degree kidnapping from the statute of limitations. These crimes were deemed so serious and damaging to the fabric of ordered society that no statute of limitations should apply. This bill will extend that exemption to class B violent felonies which includes crimes such as first degree attempted murder, first degree manslaughter, first degree rape and sodomy, first degree assault, second degree kidnapping, first degree aggravated sexual abuse, and course of sexual contact against a child in the first degree. Presently, these felonies are subject to a five year statute of limitations.

horizontal rule


No statute of limitations according to Congress

Sec. 202. No statute of limitations for child abduction and sex crimes

Section 202 of the conference report contains similar language to section 202 of the House amendment. The Senate bill did not have comparable language. The House amendment created a new section in the criminal code that provided that child abductions and felony sex offenses are not subject to a statute of limitations. The conference report amends the current law that covers the statute of limitations for offenses involving the sexual or physical abuse of a child. This section adds crimes of kidnapping and extends the statute of limitations to the life of the child victim. Under current law, the limitation period applicable to most Federal crimes is five years. 3


horizontal rule


bulletPENAL CODE SECTION 207-210

207.  (a) Every person who forcibly, or by any other means of
instilling fear, steals or takes, or holds, detains, or arrests any
person in this state, and carries the person into another country,
state, or county, or into another part of the same county, is guilty
of kidnapping.
   (b) Every person, who for the purpose of committing any act
defined in Section 288, hires, persuades, entices, decoys, or seduces
by false promises, misrepresentations, or the like, any child under
the age of 14 years to go out of this country, state, or county, or
into another part of the same county, is guilty of kidnapping.
   (c) Every person who forcibly, or by any other means of instilling
fear, takes or holds, detains, or arrests any person, with a design
to take the person out of this state, without having established a
claim, according to the laws of the United States, or of this state,
or who hires, persuades, entices, decoys, or seduces by false
promises, misrepresentations, or the like, any person to go out of
this state, or to be taken or removed therefrom, for the purpose and
with the intent to sell that person into slavery or involuntary
servitude, or otherwise to employ that person for his or her own use,
or to the use of another, without the free will and consent of that
persuaded person, is guilty of kidnapping.
   (d) Every person who, being out of this state, abducts or takes by
force or fraud any person contrary to the law of the place where
that act is committed, and brings, sends, or conveys that person
within the limits of this state, and is afterwards found within the
limits thereof, is guilty of kidnapping.
   (e) For purposes of those types of kidnapping requiring force, the
amount of force required to kidnap an unresisting infant or child is
the amount of physical force required to take and carry the child
away a substantial distance for an illegal purpose or with an illegal
   (f) Subdivisions (a) to (d), inclusive, do not apply to any of the
   (1) To any person who steals, takes, entices away, detains,
conceals, or harbors any child under the age of 14 years, if that act
is taken to protect the child from danger of imminent harm.
   (2) To any person acting under Section 834 or 837.

208.  (a) Kidnapping is punishable by imprisonment in the state
prison for three, five, or eight years.
   (b) If the person kidnapped is under 14 years of age at the time
of the commission of the crime, the kidnapping is punishable by
imprisonment in the state prison for 5, 8, or 11 years.  This
subdivision is not applicable to the taking, detaining, or
concealing, of a minor child by a biological parent, a natural
father, as specified in Section 7611 of the Family Code, an adoptive
parent, or a person who has been granted access to the minor child by
a court order.      
Kidnapping affidavit