Q: How many total days did I spend in jail?
A: Twenty-seven days: February 14, 1989 to March 11, 1989. On February 26, 1989 I was extradited from Arizona to the King County Jail in Washington State. After incarceration in two states for crimes that the King County Prosecutor’s Office and FLC DuBuque had no lawful basis to initiate, I was released because of friends who had posted $11,000 cash as bail, without requiring any collateral.
A: Twenty-seven days: February 14, 1989 to March 11, 1989. On February 26, 1989 I was extradited from Arizona to the King County Jail in Washington State. After incarceration in two states for crimes that the King County Prosecutor’s Office and FLC DuBuque had no lawful basis to initiate, I was released because of friends who had posted $11,000 cash as bail, without requiring any collateral.
When extradited to Washington State, I was handcuffed from the time I left the Maricopa County jail to the time I arrived at the King County jail in Seattle. In my book, “Good Heavens! My Journey with Spirit Guides,” I discuss some of the incidents that occurred while I was in jail.
While handcuffed I was flown, on Alaska Airlines, to Seattle. The detectives who escorted me to Seattle arrived in Arizona a few days prior to my being extradited in order to play some golf. The flight attendants on Alaska Airlines gave the detectives several complementary bottles of wine to take home with them.
Q: After my release, did the King County Prosecutor’s Office, DiJulio, Det. Chapin and Ms. Sue B., object to my returning to Arizona while awaiting trial on the Custodial Interference matter?
A: Yes. Because the court had denied me the right to have any access—in person, by phone or written—with my children, there was no reason for me to remain in Washington State while awaiting trial. Even though I was out of jail, permission was required to leave Washington State and return to Arizona. The Custodial Interference charge had been assigned to King County Superior Court Judge Robert Dixon. At an afternoon court hearing before Judge Dixon, the King County Prosecutor, Det. Chapin and Ms. Sue B. appeared and voiced their objections to my returning to Arizona, re-asserting their claims that I was a danger to society and now a potential flight risk. As during the bail hearings, these parties submitted no evidence to support their malicious allegations. Judge Dixon gave the King County Prosecutor until 10:00 a.m. the following morning to submit evidence in support of their claims. Upon appearing before Judge Dixon the following morning, the King County Prosecutor admitted that they had no evidence to support their claims, though they repeated their claims.
A: Yes. Because the court had denied me the right to have any access—in person, by phone or written—with my children, there was no reason for me to remain in Washington State while awaiting trial. Even though I was out of jail, permission was required to leave Washington State and return to Arizona. The Custodial Interference charge had been assigned to King County Superior Court Judge Robert Dixon. At an afternoon court hearing before Judge Dixon, the King County Prosecutor, Det. Chapin and Ms. Sue B. appeared and voiced their objections to my returning to Arizona, re-asserting their claims that I was a danger to society and now a potential flight risk. As during the bail hearings, these parties submitted no evidence to support their malicious allegations. Judge Dixon gave the King County Prosecutor until 10:00 a.m. the following morning to submit evidence in support of their claims. Upon appearing before Judge Dixon the following morning, the King County Prosecutor admitted that they had no evidence to support their claims, though they repeated their claims.
Judge Dixon allowed me to return to Arizona while awaiting trial on the Custodial Interference charge.
Q: Did FLC DuBuque order Don and me to submit parenting plans after her entry of the December 30, 1988 Order or Default and after my arrest?
A: Yes.
A: Yes.
Q: What is a parenting plan?
A: A plan, set out in writing, evidencing the agreement between the parents with respect to where the child(ren) shall live, visitation, schooling, support, and all other issues involved with parenting. The court provides the form.
A: A plan, set out in writing, evidencing the agreement between the parents with respect to where the child(ren) shall live, visitation, schooling, support, and all other issues involved with parenting. The court provides the form.
