By Malinda Sherwyn

Have sexually abused kids become proven assets for the family courts to traffic into sexual slavery in foreign lands? Why do courts give sexually assaulted children to their abusers in 85% of the cases while placing parents who dare to report abuse on monitored visitations with their own children?   Concerned parents want to know.

According to a conservative estimate by experts at the Leadership Council on Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence (LC), more than 58,000 children a year are ordered into unsupervised contact with physically or sexually abusive parents following divorce in the United States. This is over twice the yearly rate of new cases of childhood cancer. http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/med/PR3.html

Lexi Dillon

In the case of Ruby Dillon, her daughter Lexi complained of a tummy ache. Ruby took her daughter to a doctor.  On the doctor's recommendation, Ruby took her daughter to the Tustin Police Department.  What the doctors, psychologist, and police found was massive evidence indicating her father had repeatedly sexually abused Lexi.  It wasn't just a problem with his wayward penis in the girl's private orifices.  The girl also reported being beaten by the father and persons associated with the father.  She and other children reported having been forced to fondle the breasts of a woman, a possible "Madam," / associated with the father.   Lexi reported was often made to strip naked and perform poses while being photographed up-close by the dad.  Lexi reported to the police that the dad uploaded the pictures to his computer.   District Attorney Tony Rackauckas reportedly blocked the search warrant for the nude child photographs.  It is believed that the District Attorney has a special relationship with the father.

Things changed on June 28, 2013, the day the Tustin Police brought the case to the District Attorney.  It contained recommendations that the District Attorney prosecute the father on multiple instances of the following felonies.

California Penal Code Section 288 (a) – Lewd Act
California Penal Code Section 173 (a) (b) – Child Abuse
California Penal Code Section 188.5 – Continual Sexual Abuse of a Child
California Penal Code Section 289 (a) (1) (A) – Anal Penetration
California Penal Code Section 188 (a) (a) – Oral Copulation
California Penal Code Section 188.7 (b)- Oral Copulation with a Victim under 10 Years Old

Though the D.A. did not accept the Tustin Police Department's file until July 2nd, somehow the father appears to have received notice that an arrest might be upcoming. On June 29, 2013 (the day after the police attempted delivery of the file to Tony Rackauckas's office), the father fled the country.   Instead of the Court returning Lexi to her mother, Lexi has been forced to live against her will with various people hired by the alleged sex offender. This begs the question: why did the court continue custody with handlers hired by an alleged sexual predator against whom the police had filed a request for prosecution?

The father's only citizenship is in Thailand and he is not allowed to re-enter the United States.  The U.S. citizens are protected from his re-entry but his American daughter may soon be exported for him to rape and traffic her at will.  If it is not safe for the man to be in the country, why is it safe for him to be around a little American child?

Lexi's handlers have never been officially checked.  At the June 19, 2014, deposition of the primary baby-sitter hired by the alleged child molester, the sitter refused to answer questions about whether she had been involved in previous domestic violence or criminal activity.  There is documentation appearing to indicate that the baby-sitter has had prior run-ins with the law.  The Madam (?) whose breasts Lexi and other children were reportedly ordered to touch, is apparently back in the picture with access to the child.

Under Judge Glenn Salter's June 6th, 2014, ruling, Lexi might not be in the U.S. for long.  Is she still here?  Is she still alive? Though previously saying, on the record, that lifting the travel ban would be tantamount to sending Lexi off to Thailand, a country Salter acknowledged had problems with child sex slavery and trafficking, he later apparently decided sex trafficking the child was OK.   On June 6, 2014, Salter lifted the travel ban.  In other words, under Salter's own reasoning and prior statements, Glenn Salter has sentenced Lexi Dillon to sexual slavery in Thailand.

Under the law, the child should be with a parent – especially where the other parent abandons the child.  But Salter was not about to allow the law to run its course. On May 6, 2014, when Ruby asked for the return of her daughter in view of the father's abandonment of the child for over ten months, Salter had the bailiff check the identifications of everyone in the courtroom and ordered the audience out.  Then Salter had Ruby arrested on a six year old defunct traffic infraction and set bail at $15,000.  The filing was done in triplicate with Ruby's names reversed, making it harder to bail her out, but Ruby was released and the bogus charges were dropped.  Now on June 27, 2014, Ruby, again, will attempt to regain her daughter.  But will more bogus charges be filed or more road blocks thrown up to ensure the girl disappears into a foreign brothel?  People from across the country are watching and citizens plan to converge on the courthouse on June 27, 2014, to demand justice for Ruby and Lexi.  The  hearing will be on the 6th floor (Courtroom L60) of the Lamoreaux (In)Justice Center, 341 The City Drive South, Orange, CA, 92628-3205 at 1:30 P.M.

Ruby's case is not isolated.  As shown above by the quote from the Leadership Council on Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence, more than 58,000 children are given to physical or sexual abusers annually.  This has become a national standard.  Tammy Rief's son Jonah was given to a man who has avoided taking an official DNA test and who has admitted on multiple occasions that he is not the father.   In the Rief case, the man reportedly took the boy to Satanic blood and sex rituals where the boy was hung upside down, beaten and was otherwise abused. Tammy and her son were Alabama residents.  The man was a Colorado resident.  Tammy was rendited (interstate extradition) to California where she stood trial for failing to turn over her son to the man after the abuse was documented by police and medical professionals.  50 witnesses were ready to testify to the abuse of the boy by the man.   Reportedly among those involved in these rituals was a judge who presided over one phase of the case.   Government personnel (former CIA, NSA and NCIS agents) were on the jury in Tammy's trial, put on the jury in a secret voir dire  ceremony conducted in violation of established Supreme Court case law.  What was the purpose of that? Tammy was given three years in prison.  Her son Jonah, whose whereabouts are now unknown, may well be out of the country with a sexual predator who may not be related to him in any way.  Think California attorney's care about justice?  Friends are continuing to look for representation for Tammy so she can get back her son and regain her freedom and rights.

More and more courts are giving children to foreigners. On the East Coast, Kelly Rutherford (The Adventures of Briscoe County, Glamour Girls) went broke trying to keep her children in the country but they are still out of the country.  At the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors meetings in recent weeks, there has been extensive testimony from parents who have lost their children because of daring to report abuse.  When kids wind up in Foster homes, abuse is a plus by CPS standards.  After extreme abuse by foster parents is reported, CPS sometimes goes out of its way to adopt the kids out to abusive parents who have engaged in acts for which real parents would be arrested.    What is being punished is the love protective parents feel for their children.  CPS and the courts are destroying the family structure by stealing children from loving parents.  Why is abuse better than caring and warmth in the eyes of CPS and the courts?

What motivates judges to knowingly give children to documented sexual predators and to remove the rights of protective parents?  Is it money?  Power?  Ties to the traffickers?  Or some other factor?  What motivates judges to allow children to be trafficked to foreign countries?  Is it money, power or pressure from someone who is not allowed to legally have influence on judicial decisions?

Lexi Dillon has become the poster child for innocent children being sent by the courts into the foreign human sex trafficking slave trade.  Kamala Harris and Jerry Brown have been contacted but have done nothing to save Lexi so far. Too bad for Lexi, she couldn't contribute big bucks to the re-election campaign for these two leaders, who may need to re-read their job descriptions.  Going into Friday's hearing, people watch with hope and fear. Will human trafficking rule the day or will Judge Salter finally develop a conscience, let Ruby have back her daughter and let Lexi have a break from sexual exploitation?