FACT(S)

At sohAUDIT, a common law compliance resource, our mission is to provide an educational and productive platform dedicated to exposing corrupt corporate agencies and individuals who undermine the rights of "We the People." We highlight how certain bad actors and private entities exploit the legal system, resulting in practices such as the creation of so-called "debt prisons" and the operation of private prisons that profit from maintaining full capacity.

Federal law prohibits the deprivation of rights under color of law, including actions by officials or agencies that violate constitutional protections (see 42 U.S.C. § 1983). Additionally, the operation and oversight of correctional institutions are governed by statutes designed to prevent abuse and ensure due process (see 18 U.S.C. §§ 3621–3626). State codes, such as the Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS), also set standards for agency conduct and correctional facility management (see HRS §§ 353-1 et seq.).

In summary:

• 42 U.S.C. § 1983 prohibits deprivation of civil rights by individuals acting under color of law.
• 18 U.S.C. §§ 3621–3626 govern the administration and standards of federal correctional institutions.
• HRS §§ 353-1 et seq. outline requirements for the operation and oversight of correctional facilities in Hawaii.

Our goal is to inform the public about these issues and advocate for accountability and compliance with both federal and state legal standards.

Florence A. Calderon has administered investigations related to child welfare for over 25 years. Concerns have been raised regarding her use of coercive investigative methods toward parents who disagree with, or are unfavorable to, the court. These concerns include allegations that she asserts claims of neglect or abuse—potentially serious and damaging accusations—without possessing the medical credentials or statutory authority required to make such determinations.

Federal and state laws require that investigations into child abuse or neglect be conducted according to established procedures that protect the rights of all parties and ensure due process. For example:

• Texas Family Code § 261.301 requires that investigations be prompt and thorough, and that any necessary medical, psychological, or psychiatric examinations be performed by qualified professionals.
• Maryland Family Law § 5-706 specifies that assessments of suspected mental injury must be conducted by licensed physicians, psychologists, social workers, or counselors, and that investigations must follow established protocols.
• New York Family Court Act §§ 1012 and 1031 state that family courts have the authority to oversee abuse and neglect petitions, and only authorized persons may initiate such actions or conduct official investigations.

Hawaii Law and Regulations

In Hawaii, investigations and assessments of child abuse or neglect are governed by several statutes and administrative rules:

• Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) § 587A-11: Upon receiving a report that a child is subject to imminent harm, has been harmed, or is subject to threatened harm, the Department of Human Services (DHS) is required to conduct an investigation. The department must enlist law enforcement when appropriate, conduct criminal history checks, and may interview the child without the family’s prior approval. The department also has the authority to resolve matters informally or close cases if the child is found to be in a safe home15.
• HRS § 350-2: The department must inform the police of all reports of child abuse or neglect, and maintain a central registry of such cases. Reports that are not confirmed or are dismissed by the family court must be expunged from the registry2.
• Hawaii Administrative Rules § 17-1610-23: The department must assess each report according to departmental procedures, which may include multidisciplinary consultation and, when necessary, psychological, psychiatric, or medical evaluations. A written medical assessment is required when sexual abuse is suspected or in cases of severe abuse or neglect, and must be performed with the consent of the legal custodian or by court order45.
• Timeframes: Investigations must be completed and documented within 60 working days of accepting a report5.

Legal Precedents and Requirements

• Only authorized personnel from the Department of Human Services, or law enforcement when appropriate, may conduct official investigations into child abuse or neglect in Hawaii15.
• Medical and psychological assessments required during investigations must be performed by licensed professionals, and written medical assessments are mandatory in cases of suspected severe abuse or neglect45.
• The use of coercive tactics or intimidation during investigations may violate statutory requirements and could be subject to legal challenge. Hawaii law requires that investigations be conducted according to established procedures, and unauthorized or coercive methods may be grounds for dismissal of findings or expungement of records25.

Summary of Legal Requirements (Including Hawaii):

• Investigations must be conducted promptly and thoroughly by qualified professionals (Texas Family Code § 261.301; HRS § 587A-11)15.
• Mental health or injury assessments must be performed by licensed professionals following proper protocol (Maryland Family Law § 5-706; Haw. Admin. Rules § 17-1610-23)45.
• Only authorized persons may initiate or conduct investigations, and family courts oversee abuse and neglect cases (New York Family Court Act §§ 1012, 1031; HRS § 587A-11)15.
• Coercive or unauthorized investigative methods may violate both state and federal law, and in Hawaii, may result in the expungement of unsubstantiated or dismissed reports (HRS § 350-2)2.

Multiple parties, including family court judges, welfare social service agents, and attorneys, have allegedly engaged in a pattern of collusion and conflicts of interest, resulting in decisions that have caused mothers and fathers to lose custody of their children to private agencies operating under the guise of government authority. These actions may constitute violations under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961–1968, which prohibits coordinated racketeering activity—including predicate acts such as fraud, obstruction of justice, and kidnapping—by enterprises or individuals acting in concert1268.

The conduct described also raises concerns under federal kidnapping laws, 18 U.S.C. § 1201, and may represent obstruction of federal court orders, which is prohibited under 18 U.S.C. § 150347. Furthermore, the use of frivolous legal filings and red flag laws to drag parties into family court, despite the existence of an arbitration clause in the parental partnership agreement, may constitute abuse of process and breach of contract under both federal and Hawaii state law (see HRS §§ 658A-1 et seq. for arbitration, and HRS § 431:10-221 for contract law).

The "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine, a principle of U.S. constitutional law, holds that evidence obtained through illegal or improper means is inadmissible in court. This doctrine may apply if actions by officials or agencies resulted in unlawful deprivation of parental rights.

Additionally, the Deadbeat Parents Punishment Act of 1998 (18 U.S.C. § 228) criminalizes willful failure to pay child support obligations that exceed $10,000 or are overdue by more than two years. In this case, the father is reportedly over $30,000 in debt, exceeding the federal threshold.

In summary:

• RICO (18 U.S.C. §§ 1961–1968): Prohibits patterns of racketeering activity, including fraud, obstruction, and kidnapping, by enterprises or individuals acting in concert1268.
• Federal Kidnapping (18 U.S.C. § 1201): Criminalizes unlawful seizure or abduction, especially in connection with a criminal enterprise47.
• Obstruction of Justice (18 U.S.C. § 1503): Prohibits interference with federal court orders.
• Hawaii Arbitration (HRS §§ 658A-1 et seq.): Requires disputes subject to arbitration agreements to be resolved outside of court.
• Deadbeat Parents Punishment Act (18 U.S.C. § 228): Criminalizes failure to pay significant child support debts.
• Fruit of the Poisonous Tree Doctrine: Excludes evidence obtained through illegal means from court proceedings.

These coordinated actions by agency officials, purported judges, DHS Child Welfare Services, First Circuit Court, State of Hawaii Family Court, CSEA, CPS, and the father—who allegedly initiated this process through frivolous filings and improper service—raise significant legal and jurisdictional concerns. The matter should be addressed in accordance with the arbitration clause of the parental partnership agreement, not in family court, which lacks jurisdiction under these circumstances.

In a recent notable case, it is alleged that Takara leveraged connections within the Department of Human Services (DHS) to obtain custodial rights, despite the mother’s long-standing care of the children and her possession established by a prior court order. Under the well-known legal principle that “possession is nine-tenths of the law,” and pursuant to a parental partnership agreement signed in good faith by both parties, the mother’s custodial rights should have been recognized and upheld.

Furthermore, the beneficiaries of the estate and trust are the children (youth) and the mother, with the assets held in a foreign trust. Under trust law, as codified in both federal and Hawaii statutes, beneficiaries’ rights must be protected, and any unauthorized removal of a beneficiary—especially a minor—from the trust or estate may constitute a violation of fiduciary duty (see 26 U.S.C. § 4941 regarding self-dealing in trusts; Hawaii Revised Statutes HRS § 560:7-302 regarding remedies for breach of trust).

According to the terms of the trust, any transgression against the estate—including unauthorized removal of beneficiaries—triggers a transgression fee schedule, which is enforceable under contract law (see HRS § 431:10-221).

Summary of Relevant Legal Principles and Codes:

• Custodial Rights & Court Orders: Custody established by court order must be respected (HRS § 571-46).
• Parental Agreements: Good faith parental partnership agreements are enforceable under Hawaii contract law (HRS § 431:10-221).
• Trust & Estate Law: Beneficiaries’ rights are protected under federal (26 U.S.C. § 4941) and state law (HRS § 560:7-302).
• Foreign Trusts: Assets and beneficiaries under foreign trusts are subject to the terms of the trust and applicable law.
• Transgression Fee Schedule: Any violation of the trust or estate triggers contractual remedies as outlined in the trust agreement.

In summary, any actions taken to remove the youth from the trust or to override the mother’s custodial rights without proper legal authority may constitute a breach of fiduciary duty, violation of court orders, and breach of contract, subject to statutory penalties and contractual fee schedules.