Document: DECLARATION AFFIDAVIT
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l/250.0 DECLARATION AFFIDAVIT 2019-04-23 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2019-04-23
Summary (Justice Demanded)
Comprehensive Summary:
The court documents reveal a series of potential injustices and bias against Aaron Surina, who has been facing numerous challenges in his efforts to protect his children and his rights to his property. Aaron’s ex-wife, Sirinya, appears to obstruct his communication with their children by controlling their phone access, a controlling behavior that might be viewed as unethical. Moreover, it seems that Aaron is being subjected to a court order that favors Sirinya, limiting his communication with his children, a fundamental right of a parent.
Financial disputes between Aaron and Sirinya are also implied in the court documents. However, the circumstances surrounding the sale of a property titled “Rocky Ridge,” which Aaron claims ownership of, raise questions of potential legal disputes and unethical conduct. Aaron is being denied the right to show his property to potential buyers, an action that infringes on his rights and violates RCW 49.60.2235.
The court’s decision to appoint Sirinya as the sole decision maker in the sale of the family residence, along with the uncritical acceptance of her motion to classify the family residence as community property, is a clear indication of bias. This decision neglects Aaron’s input or consent and could negatively impact Aaron’s financial situation. Furthermore, the court mandates Aaron to provide all documentation regarding the mortgage lender to Sirinya, thereby infringing on his privacy rights.
Aaron is also being subjected to several financial penalties, including a civil penalty, an auto payment, a mortgage payment, and lawyer fees, totaling $9,320, which appears to be a financial burden imposed on him.
The court documents also portray Aaron in a negative light, making negative inferences about his character, including a history of alcohol, drug use, and domestic violence, despite no criminal record or Department of Licensing issues. Furthermore, Aaron was served with a restraining order and divorce summons and was accused of intending to take the children, all in his absence, raising concerns about the fairness of the process.
These proceedings, facilitated by Keith Glanzer, the petitioner’s attorney, contain unsubstantiated allegations against Aaron, which further contributes to the portrayal of Aaron in an unjust and unfair manner.
The court’s decision to “shorten time to August 23rd” may also be seen as rushing the proceedings, which may not be fair to Aaron if he isn’t given sufficient time to prepare.
Overall, the court documents suggest a troubling bias against Aaron Surina, with potential judicial bias and unethical conduct by those representing Sirinya Surina, including Stanley Kempner or Keith Glanzer. These factors raise concerns about the court’s impartiality and the ethical conduct of the proceedings, emphasizing the need for further examination and consideration of Aaron’s rights and the challenges he has been facing.
About The Author
