Document: MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Link: [Open PDF](https://42o.org/l3g4l/458.0 MOTION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 2021-02-16 .pdf)
Filing Date: 2021-02-16
Summary (Justice Demanded)
The court documents reveal a series of violations against Aaron Surina’s court-ordered parenting rights, suggesting a clear pattern of injustice and misconduct, primarily enacted by Sirinya Polarj, Keith Landrus, and Benjamas Srirattanakun. Despite having lawful custody of his children on his scheduled days, Mr. Surina was intentionally obstructed from his children on numerous occasions. This clear act of custodial interference, which is illegal under RCW 9A.40.060, not only violated the court’s orders but also severely impacted the emotional well-being of the children involved.
The court’s parenting plan, established on December 20, 2019, explicitly outlined Mr. Surina’s rights and responsibilities, including his ability to pick up his children on his designated Thursdays. However, these clear instructions were blatantly disregarded, with Mr. Surina even being denied contact with his children on his scheduled pick-up day of December 17, 2020.
Beyond these infractions, there are several concerning instances of potential psychological manipulation of the children against Mr. Surina. Claims were made that their father did not want to wait for them, and there were instances where the children were physically prevented from meeting their father. In a particularly worrying event, Sirinya blocked their visibly upset son from seeing Mr. Surina during a scheduled pick-up, representing a clear violation of Mr. Surina’s rights and the children’s emotional well-being.
Adding to systemic misconduct, Sirinya and her associate, Mr. Landrus, were reported to disparage and threaten Mr. Surina in the children’s presence. Landrus even went so far as to claim that they could interpret the parenting plan any way they wished, undermining the legal authority of the court’s orders.
Mr. Surina also alleges that Sirinya dishonestly obtained a writ of habeus corpus, asserting that he had kidnapped their children, a claim that was later rectified by Judge Dixon. This act can be seen as a clear example of unethical conduct and an attempt to unfairly manipulate the legal system.
In response to these injustices, Mr. Surina has filed a motion for a contempt hearing, seeking both financial compensation and a finding of contempt against the other parties. This action aims to enforce the court-ordered parenting plan and penalize the other parties for their alleged misconduct.
The documented accounts reveal a pattern of disregard for the court’s orders, potential psychological manipulation, and a clear intent to deny Mr. Surina his legally mandated visitation rights. This can be viewed as a series of injustices against him, potentially indicating a biased and unethical handling of his case by the other parties involved.
About The Author
