Document: STATUS REPORT
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l/144.0 STATUS REPORT 2018-02-13 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2018-02-13
Summary (Justice Demanded)
The court documents seem to reflect a bias against Aaron Surina, the father involved in this case. A notable point of concern is the motion for an order to compel the production of sworn translations of declarations and replies, which was filed by the petitioner and then signed off. This action may suggest an inherent bias as the court is compelling Aaron to produce evidence that may be used against him.
Moreover, there’s an unfair emphasis on the respondent’s protection orders. The court documents included a District Court Temporary Anti-Harassment Order for Protection and Petition for Anti-Harassment Order for Protection, totaling 20 pages. This heavy focus on the respondent’s protection orders could be seen as a bias against Aaron, as it may imply he poses a threat, negatively influencing his standing in the case.
On the other hand, the petitioner’s declaration regarding Aaron’s motion to compel production was only five pages long, including the District Court’s Order Denying Anti-Harassment Petition after Hearing and Text Message Exhibits. This discrepancy in the volume of documents could be perceived as an injustice, as it does not provide a balanced portrayal of the situation. The court’s decision to deny Aaron’s anti-harassment petition after a hearing could also be seen as biased, potentially disregarding his right to protection.
Overall, these court documents may suggest that Aaron is being treated unfairly, with potential bias against him and decisions that may not fully consider his interests or rights.
About The Author
