Judge Lloyd Van De Car


1. Judge Lloyd Van De Car, while presiding as a Family Court Judge of the 3rd Circuit,

knowingly and intentionally violated the Civil Rights of Mr. Allen Abdul and his four minor children,

A. A, age 16, A. A. age 13, A. A. age 10 and A. A. age 6.

2. Mr. Allen Abdul is not now, nor has he ever been a Criminal or Perpetrator of Family Violence

as alleged by both Judge Lloyd Van De Car and Attorney Mirtha Oliveros.

3. Attorney Mertha Oliveras Knowingly and Intentionally provided false statements to the court

verbally and on motions to the court which she deliberately signed under Penalty of Perjury.

Her first motion before Judge Anthony Bartholomew she stated her office Address was the

Hawaii residence of Anna Abdul and the 4 Abdul Children while they were in fact living as residents

of Sweden. Exhibit C

Her Closing Statement, before Judge Lloyd Van De Car, filed with the court December 15, 2014,

states that ” Mr. Abdul is a Perpetrator of Family Violence as defined under HRS 571-2” while

knowing full well that there has never been any evidence, arrest or trial about this allegation.

Perjury is not Justice. Exhibit A

4. Judge Lloyd Van De Car knowingly and intentionally allows false allegations by Attorney

Mertha Oliveras in his courtroom, while requiring no evidentiary support. Evidence provides Justice.

Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 586, 1993 and Supp. 1997 Exhibit B

5. When Judge Lloyd Van De Car Knowingly and Intentionally applies his signature on Court

Documents containing this obviously deliberate Perjury, he Willingly and Deliberately becomes an

accessory to the Perjury committed by Attorney Mertha Oliveras. This is not Justice.

6. Judge Lloyd Van De Car empowers this Perjury with credibility when he signs these documents

providing them with the illusion of becoming the “New Truth” according to his Official Court Records.
7. Clearly Mr. Abdul’s character has been defamed by Judge Lloyd Van De Car’s Court Orders.

Exhibit A

8. Deformation of a father’s Character by a Judge in a courtroom does not provide Justice in

the courtroom but succeeds only providing Judicial Abuse of defenseless children and their father.

9. Attorney Mertha Oliveras and Judge Lloyd Van De Car did in fact work in concert to effectively

employ an alleged “Threat Allegation” incident against Mr. Abdul, then, strip him of his Constitutional

Rights and Parental Rights while methodically laying the foundation and framework necessary to

deliberately and Illegally Defame Mr. Abdul’s character by Court Order. This is a conspiracy

to criminalize an innocent man a with good standing in the community for his entire lifetime.

Exhibits A & B

10. Mr. Abdul presented more than 25 documents as exhibits to the court as evidence in support of

his lifelong good character and good standing within the Law Enforcement community and multiple

security agencies across America. Ruled “Hearsay” by Judge Lloyd Van De Car.

Exhibit K

11. These documents included proof of Mr. Abdul’s criminal record consisting of No Crimes,

No Arrests, No Trials and No Convictions of any kind for any reason in his 63 years of life.

Ruled “Hearsay” by Judge Lloyd Van De Car.

12. Mr. Abdul presented among his exhibits, proof of his Security Clearance by the FBI, required

for his license as an Insurance Adjuster in 3 States and his 2013 Security Clearance with The Federal

Emergency Management Agency which identifies Mr. Allen Abdul as a Statistical Federal Agent for

the Department of Homeland Security’s National Flood Insurance Program.

Ruled “Hearsay” by Judge Lloyd Van De Car. Exhibits F & G & K

13. Mr. Abdul also presented proof of Security Clearance by America’s Entertainment Industry, The

NFL for the Super Bowl venues in New Orleans as well as Secret Service Security Clearance which

allowed him to work the Grand Opening Production for the George W. Bush Presidential Library in

2013, enabling Mr. Abdul to work among all 4 former American Presidents and President Obama.

Ruled “Hearsay” by Judge Lloyd Van De Car.

14. Also included among the exhibits presented to the court were Signed and Notarized Affidavits

from witnesses that have known Mr. Abdul for 20 to 60 years in support of his good character.

Exhibit K

Ruled “Hearsay” by Judge Lloyd Van De Car.

15. The alleged “Threat Allegation” incident being employed by Attorney Mertha Oliveras and

Judge Lloyd Van De Car to Defame the Character of Allen Abdul and shroud him with the appearance

of a criminal, was in fact a threat of violence against Mr. Abdul by Anna Abdul and her 2 Swedish

accomplices on July 4, 2013 in Linkoping Sweden, on the other side of our planet, and several

thousand miles outside the Jurisdiction of Judge Lloyd Van De Car and Hilo Family Court.

Exhibit H

16. These facts were presented to the Court in a Motion to Dismiss on grounds of Jurisdiction.

17. Judge Lloyd Van De Car ruled that he did have Jurisdiction over this incident in Sweden.

Exhibit H

18. Mr. Abdul continues to be Presumed Guilty for 2 Years by this Judge simply because he could

not produce the Swedish Police Report Judge Lloyd Van De Car asked him to produce in Court to

prove that he was innocent.

19. “Presumption of Innocence until Proven Guilty” is another “Fundamental Right” that has been

unjustly taken away from Mr. Allen Abdul by Judge Lloyd Van De Car.

See The United States Constitution and Bill of Rights

20. The Swedish Police had no time to generate a written Police Report on paper in the short time

that Mr. Abdul remained in Sweden waiting for his scheduled flight back home to the United States.

21 The incident in Sweden was investigated by Swedish Police Authorities who, after interviewing

all witnesses, including the minor Abdul children, as well as viewing the security video from the indoor

play facility, Completely Cleared Mr. Abdul of any wrong doing while suggesting that he remain in

Sweden to file assault charges against Mrs. Abdul and her 2 accomplices for the assault against him

that Police Officers witnessed on security video.

23. The Swedish Police Officers suggested that Mr. Abdul remain in Sweden for the several months

that were required to testify in court and bring the perpetrators to Justice.

23. Mr. Abdul could not afford to live in Sweden for the months required to press these charges.

24. This incident was also witnessed by all 4 Abdul Children according to testimony in court by

Anna (Abdul) Jacobsson.

25. The Swedish Police Report was never presented in court by Attorney Mertha Oliveras as

evidence against Mr. Abdul as she knew full well that this Police Report would serve only to prove

that Anna Abdul was the perpetrator of the assault and Mr. Abdul was not guilty of this false allegation.

26. Judge Lloyd Van De Car did not require Attorney Mertha Oliveras to produce this evidence, or any other evidence to support her false allegation and Mr. Abdul remains Presumed Guilty to this day.

27. The 4 Abdul Children were denied their right to testify as Eyewitnesses and they were denied

their right to be interviewed in chambers by Judge Lloyd Van De Car, as provided by Law.

Exhibit I

28. Mr. Abdul, in a desperate attempt to bring the truth of his innocence into the court record

provided all necessary court documents and subpoenas in a timely manner as required by State Law

and as he was verbally instructed to do by Judge Lloyd Van De Car, to enable the children to be

interviewed by the Judge in chambers or testify personally in court at the Judge’s discretion,

29. Judge Lloyd Van De Car quickly denied the very motion that he asked for, which took

Mr. Abdul 2 days to learn about and produce as he was instructed to do by this same Judge.

30. Judge Lloyd Van De Car is overtly bias against Mr. Allen Abdul as courtroom video will clearly

show to any oversight investigator. He aggressively employs his decades of legal experience, against

Mr. Abdul to waste his time and resources while deliberately denying Mr. Abdul and his 4 children any

possible chance of justice.

31. Judge Lloyd Van De Car Knowingly and Intentionally Obstructed Justice in his own courtroom

by deliberately suppressing the very evidence necessary to allow the truth entry into the Court Record.

32. Judge Lloyd Van De Car denied the 4 Abdul children representation by the Guardian ad Litem

Attorney program as provided by law and repeatedly requested verbally by Mr. Abdul on at least 3

occasions to protect the Civil Rights of his 4 minor children.

See Hawaii State Law regarding Minor Children’s Rights to Protection by the Guardian ad Litem Program

33. The actual physical evidence and witness testimony that Judge Lloyd Van De Car did not allow

into the Court Record for consideration, is clearly that Mr. Abdul is not guilty of any allegations and

does not participate in criminal or violent behavior as indicated by his multiple security clearances.

Exhibit K

34. “Suppressing Evidence” serves only to “Obstruct Justice”.

35. From September of 2013 to this present day, Judge Lloyd Van De Car claims to have “Probable

Cause” to believe that Mr. Abdul is a threat to Anna Jacobsson (Abdul) based only on this single,

unsupported allegation from Sweden, while suppressing the very evidence which would bring the truth

before him in the courtroom. Exhibit B

36. Judge Lloyd Van De Car has never produced any “Probable Cause” evidence that he claims to

have against Mr. Abdul while using this same “Probable Cause” False Statement to deny Mr. Abdul his

“Rights and Protections under The United States Constitution” for more than 2 years.

Exhibit B

37. Evidence would only serve to interfere with Judge Lloyd Van De Car’s unjust Predetermined

Judgment of Mr. Abdul’s Guilt, and The United States Constitution would serve to protect Mr. Abdul

from this very Judicial Abuse as it’s authors had Deliberately written to do for All Americans.

See… The United States Constitution and The Bill Of Rights

38. In April of 2014 Judge Lloyd Van De Car included the children in his unsupported and unjust

“Order for Protection” . Exhibit B

39. This decision deliberately prevents Mr. Abdul any contact with his own children, and places

him under the threat of Criminal Contempt of Court for “Crimes of Love and Parenting.

Exhibit B & U. S. Surpreme Court Decision Stanley vs. Illinois

40. Judge Lloyd Van De Car is in clear violation of Supreme Court Ruling, Stanley vs. Illinois.

41. This unfounded “Order for Protection” clearly Protects Nobody and yet while being employed

as a weapon by Anna (Abdul) Jacobsson, and orchestrated by Attorney Mertha Oliveras, clearly with

encouragement from Judge Lloyd Van De Car, has resulted only in Judicial and Police harassment of

Mr. Abdul and Court Ordered Child Abuse of the Abdul Children.

Exhibit B
42. Supreme Court Ruling, “Stanley vs. Illinois” clearly states that “A Father has a God given

Right to a relationship with his Children and Children have a God given Right to a relationship with

their Father”. Judge Lloyd Van De Car has empowered himself to overrule this Supreme Court

Ruling that was Legally Decided for the expressed purpose of preventing this very kind of Court

Ordered Child Abuse by State and County Family Courts.

43. Mr. Allen Abdul has been Arrested and Charged with Criminal Contempt of Court for such

Serious Crimes as “Speaking Words in English” and Signing “I Love You” to his 5 year old daughter

and 8 year old son with only his hand, in American Sign Language, only after the children expressed

their love for him first in the same way, while never leaving the seat of his car at Safeway gas station.

See… United States Constitution First Amendment… Freedom of Speach

44. A Police APB against a father saying “I Love You” to his own children, is clearly absurd and

should be considered as a Criminal Waste of Valuable Police Time and Resources.

45. When any Judge is empowered to legally misrepresent this act of Parental Love as a Criminal

Offense In the United States, the American people view this as an Absolute Disgrace and quickly loose

confidence in Their Judges, Courts, Police and Their Government as a whole at all levels.

Preamble of The United States Constitution… “Establish Justice to Ensure Domestic Tranquility”

46. The United States Supreme Court ruled in the landmark decision titled Stanley vs. Illinois, that

Parents have a a God given Right to a relationship with their Children and Children have a God given

Right to a relationship with their Parents.

47. These God given Rights have been taken away from Allen Abdul and all 4 of his minor children

deliberately, unjustly and without any cause by Judge Lloyd Van De Car without any regard for the

best interest of the children or The United States Constitution and the Supreme Court Rulings that

support it.

48. The evidence available to Oversight Investigators is viewable in the court recordings and shows

clearly that Judge Lloyd Van De Car conspired with Attorney Mertha Oliveras to effectively

Assassinate the Good Character of Mr. Allen Abdul by Court Order.

49. In August of 2012 Mrs. Anna Abdul abducted the 4 Abdul minor children to Sweden.

50. Mr. Abdul realized that this was in fact an International Parental Child Abduction when Mrs.

Abdul declined to return to Hawaii as planned in October of 2012 with her round trip tickets that she

purchased for herself and the 4 children before flying to Sweden but instead filed for divorce, custody

and Swedish Citizenship for the 4 children.

51. When Mr. Abdul learned of The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in

December of 2012, his case worker, Marcella Gossey (703) 801-8407 (work) and (703) 838-8373

(cell) worked together with his other case worker Federal Agent Darnell Posey (202) 485-6302 at The

United States Department of State who in turn enlisted the help of The United States Embassy staff in

Stockholm Sweden to petition the International Hague Convention to convene a hearing of behalf of

Mr. Abdul and his 4 American children.

52. After more than 6 months of work, by many Heroic and Dedicated Federal Officials and many

tens of thousands of dollars later, the 4 children were returned to Hawaii by Order of The International

Hague Convention, following the unanimous decision of the 5 Hague Court Judges from the Swedish

High Court in Stockholm Sweden on July 3, 2013.

Exhibit E

53. The Hague Court Order clearly ruled that the 4 minor Abdul children were in fact Abducted to

Sweden and Illegally Retained in that country, in clear violation of Swedish law and Sweden’s

agreement with The United States under the authority agreed to at the Hague Convention.

Exhibits D & E

54. The Hague Court clearly orders Anna (Abdul) Jacobsson to return the children to Mr. Abdul in

Hawaii and pay his legal expenses of $400.00 according to the Swedish laws of her own country.

Exhibit E

55. Anna Abdul, now in The United States, enjoys the assistance of Judge Lloyd Van De Car who

knowingly and intentionally enables her to refuse to comply with this Court Order as she remains in

Contempt of the Hague Court Order and The United States Federal Law that supports it, and America’s

commitment to it, to this day, more than 2 years later.

56. The Hague Court Order was overruled by Judge Lloyd Van De Car.

57. Mr. Abdul presented to the Court, the U. S. Federal Law which supports the United States

Government’s position and commitment to abide by International agreements with other countries, with

regard to International Parental Child Abduction and Illegal Retention as agreed to by participating

Governments including The United States and Sweden, and later ratified by the 100th Congress.

Exhibit D

58. This Federal Law and United States Government’s commitment to it was deliberately ignored

by Judge Lloyd Van De Car and carries no weight in his courtroom when presented by Allen Abdul.

59. The International Parental Child Abduction of the 4 Abdul children, and their Illegal Retention

in Sweden, while clearly a violation of U. S. Law, Swedish Law, International Law and Hawaii State

Law, remains completely ignored by Law Enforcement and has never even been investigated by any

Law Enforcement Agency following the children’s return to Hawaii Island despite Mr. Abdul’s many

requests to local police, FBI, Prosecuting Attorney’s office, the Attorney General’s office and Judge

Lloyd Van De Car.

Exhibit D

60. Attorney Mertha Oliveras knowingly and intentionally perjured herself on the first TRO

application, stating that her office address was the legal residence address of Mrs. Abdul and the 4

minor Abdul children while they were all still living as legal residents of Sweden.

61. Judge Anthony Bartholomew discovered this Deliberate Perjury and 3 days later he very

politely informed Attorney Mertha Oliveras that she was not allowed to Perjure herself with false

statements to the court on her TRO accusation, while making no attempt to hold her accountable for

her perjury on that court document even as her signature appeared under a warning stating that she was

signing this document as the truth under penalty of perjury.

Exhibit C

62. Judge Anthony Bartholomew threw out the first TRO which included the Abdul Children,

because of this Perjury by Attorney Mertha Oliveras and allowed Mr. Abdul temporary custody of his

children before issuing a second unsupported TRO for only Anna (Abdul) Jacobsson.

63. Judge Anthony Bartholomew retired soon after this court order and the case was placed in the

courtroom of Judge Lloyd Van De Car.

64. Mr. Abdul applied for divorce and custody of his children in September of 2013 in Hilo.

65. Mrs. Abdul had previously applied for divorce and custody of the 4 children in Sweden in

October of 2012.

66. The Hague Court concluded that Sweden did not have jurisdiction over the custody of the

children however the Swedish court did in fact rule that the divorce was final in October of 2013.

Exhibit E

67. Mr. Abdul attempted to moved the court to dismiss the divorce action on the grounds that the

parties were already divorced and that he had the right to withdraw his divorce action for any reason in

light of the fact he initiated the action.

68. This motion was denied by Judge Lloyd Van De Car, as were all of Mr. Abdul’s motions, and

the parties were forced to continue through a second divorce trial, in clear violation of the “Double

Jeopardy” Rule of Law, obviously because Judge Lloyd Van De Car insisted on having complete,

unwarranted control over every aspect of Mr. Abdul’s life, children and assets.

69. Clearly, Mr. Abdul, as an American Citizen, born of American Parents in Topeka Kansas on

June 19, 1952, is not entitled to enjoy the protection of The United States Constitution afforded to all

other Americans, while he remains under the total oppressive control of Judge Lloyd Van De Car.

70. At this time Mr. Abdul seeks to remind the court that The United States Constitution and

The Bill of Rights were written with the expressed purpose of protecting all innocent Americans from

Judaical Harassment and Court Ordered Civil Rights Violations.

See The United States Constitution and Bill of Rights

71. Judge Lloyd Van De Car obviously feels no obligation to The United States Constitution and

clearly does not conduct courtroom procedures within the legal parameters of The Constitution.

72. Judge Lloyd Van De Car ordered therapy for all parties. Anna (Abdul) Jacobsson hired her

friend Deborah Downing of Child and Family Services where she was formally employed, to be the

therapist for herself and the 3 youngest Abdul Children.

73. Mr. Abdul objected, citing an obvious Conflict of interest.

74. Judge Lloyd Van De Car overruled.

75. Mr. Abdul attempted to verbally move the court to allow an independent therapist for the

children who would be unconnected to either party in an effort to get an unbiased mental assessment of

the children for the Court. This motion was also denied by Judge Lloyd Van De Car.

76. Mr. Abdul attempted a second time to move the court to allow him to provide an additional

therapist for the children, who could then be in a position to contradict the accuracy of the

conclusions by Deborah Downing.

77. This Motion was also denied by judge Lloyd Van De Car.

78. Mr. Abdul then attempted to remind the court that a second professional opinion in any medical

or mental assessment of any patient is prudent and highly recommended by medical professionals.

79. Judge Lloyd Van De Car denied this effort also and in his obvious anger ordered the bailiff

to get the Sheriff to stand over Mr. Abdul in an apparent effort to intimidate and threaten Mr. Abdul

with additional charges of “Criminal Contempt of Court”. Courtroom video will clearly show any

oversight investigators that Judge Lloyd Van De Car employed this tactic of intimidation against

Mr. Abdul on several occasions in a deliberate effort to prevent him from effectively acting as “Pro Sa”

in his own defense against false allegations and shutting down all efforts to protect the Civil Rights of

his children.

Therapist Deborah Downing conspired with her friend, Anna (Abdul) Jacobsson and Attorney

Mertha Oliveras, often meeting in courthouse conference rooms just outside the courtroom to fabricate

her testimony about the children before her courtroom appearance.

81. Therapist Deborah Downing had never met or spoken to Mr. Abdul, nor had she ever witnessed

him with his children, before, after or during the time that he was granted temporary custody from

September, 2013 through April, 2014.

82. Attorney Mertha Oliveras instructed Therapist Deborah Downing to testify under oath that the

3 youngest Abdul children were experiencing some undefined form of stress when they were returned

to their father at the Kea’au Police station during visitation exchange.

83. Therapist Deborah Downing admitted under cross examination that she had not ever met Mr.

Abdul and she had never been in any location to witness Mr. Abdul and his children interacting or even

to see them in the same proximity.

84. When Mr. Abdul asked Therapist Deborah Downing to explain this alleged stress or to tell the

court what the children said to her to make her believe that they were in any way stressed or abused by

their father, she refused to answer, citing Therapist / Client Privilege.

85. When Mr. Abdul informed Therapist Deborah Downing that if she suspected that his children

were being abused in any way, by anyone, including by their own father, then she had a duty place the

safety of the children first, before Therapist / Client Privilege, and tell the court what it needs to know

to protect Mr. Abdul’s children.

86. Again, Therapist Deborah Downing refused to answer citing Therapist / Client Privilege.

87. Judge Lloyd Van De Car sustained this position and unjustly removed the children from the

custody of Mr. Abdul at the end of the session with absolutely no evidentiary support.

Exhibit L

88. Attorney Mertha Oliveras was quick capitalize on this injustice and with the enthusiastic

support from Judge Lloyd Van De Car, verbally moved the court to include the children in their

unsubstantiated TRO which was being methodically used as a weapon to accelerate Mr. Abdul’s newly

fabricated Criminal Record that was inconveniently nonexistent for his first 62 years of life.

89. Mr. Abdul called as an eyewitness, Dannette Godines who testified that she spends a lot of time

with Mr. Abdul and his children together with her 2 children.

90. Dannette Godines testified that Mr. Abdul is a good father and is always home with his children,

loves being with them and seems to live his whole life just for them. She also testified that the

children love being with their father and expressed their desire to just return home to live with Dad.

91. Dannette Godines also testified that she was present most of the times that exchanges were

made at the Kea’au Police Station and her observation was that the children would run to Dad as fast as

they could when dropped off by their Mom, often needing to return to Mom’s car to get their things and

by contrast the children were always saddened and upset when their Dad was forced to return them to

their Mom a few days later.

93. Judge Lloyd Van De Car knows that the Abdul children are simply homesick and miss their

Daddy as a result of their Abduction to Sweden and Illegal Retention in that country for an entire year

and yet in a cruel act of “Child Abuse” he continues to deny these children access to their father for

an additional year and a half. This “Court Ordered Child Abuse” continues to this day.

93. All 4 Abdul children enjoy time with and love both of their parents equally and are eager to

express it. Judge Lloyd Van De Car deliberately violates the Civil Rights of these 4 children by

denying them access to their father when he knows full well that they have a Civil Right to have a

relationship their father.

94. Since their Abduction to Sweden August 1, 2012, the Abdul children have been abusively and

traumatically prevented from contact with their Father, with the exception of the 3 – 4 day visits during

the 8 months that Mr. Abdul had custody from September, 2013 – April, 2014.

95. Judge Lloyd Van De Car does not wish to know the true relationship between Mr. Abdul and

his children as he has never met or spoken with the Abdul Children and deliberately blocked all efforts

to do so.

96. Obviously Judge Lloyd Van De Car is not interested in ruling in the best interest of these

children, but instead he has deliberately chosen to use his Judicial Authority to provoke Mr. Abdul into

some kind of behavior that would fit the “Frame” of Mr. Abdul’s newly Deformed Character.

97. Before the children were Abducted in August 2012, Mrs. Abdul, was trusted with handling the

the families finances from the beginning of the marriage, while Mr. Abdul only deposited his earnings

into their accounts for her to write the checks and pay the family debts.

98. When Mrs. Abdul put her plan in motion to Abduct the children, she methodically withheld

payments to their Mortgage Company, overdrew the family’s only credit card, sold both family cars,

stole all the money from the family’s 2011 Joint Income Tax return and transferred all the money from

the family’s bank accounts to her private account in Sweden prior to boarding the plane to Sweden with

all 4 children.

99. According to Marcella Gossey from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children

and Federal Agent Darnell Posey from the United States Department of State, this is a common method

of International Parental Child Abduction which they have seen many times before which effectively

prevents the parent left behind from having any funds available to retrieve children from other


100. These facts, along with Anna Abdul’s decision not to return on her scheduled flight were the

very reasons that the 5 Swedish Hague Court Judges concluded that their fellow Swedish Citizen,

Anna (Abdul) Jacobsson had in fact Abducted the children to Sweden and Illegally Retained them in

that country for 12 months.

Exhibit E

101. Judge Lloyd Van De Car decided without any trial or evidence that the 5 Swedish Hague Court

were all wrong and the Findings, Conclusions and Court Order of the International Hague Court

instantly became irrelevant in his courtroom.

102. After realizing that his children were Abducted, his finances were in total collapse and his home

was falling into foreclosure, Mr. Abdul desperately borrowed money for a plane ticket to Texas to train

for his FEMA License, work in event production and work Hurricane Sandy for FEMA.

103. Mr. Abdul, while living with the heartbreak of the surprise loss of his marriage and his children

and the stressful uncertainty of not knowing if he would ever see them again, earned the money to save

his home and repair his credit while working with his case workers for the return of his children.

104. Mr. Abdul continues to slip deeper in debt as a result of Judge Lloyd Van De Car’s relentless

Judicial Harassment and pressure for more than 2 years.