Breaking the Law
San Diego ➝ Vista Child Trafficking Network
URGENT UPDATE: 12/18/2025
International Child Removal Alert
Judge Alexander Calero greenlit the international removal of Malaika and Xayah to the Dominican Republic with non-blood intruders — Norma Olivares and Ronald Rivas Silverio — separating them from family during the holidays
No One’s Above the Law
Based on everything we’ve witnessed, Judge Alejandro Morales has become part of the machinery that tears children from good families and funnels them into dangerous placements. Whether he admits it or not, his rulings make him complicit in what many of us recognize as a state-run child trafficking pipeline.
Bad Actor
Judge Alejandro Morales
When it comes to blood, paper orders do not erase loyalty.
The Collective for Family Justice & Human Rights speaks on behalf of a family in Vista dependency court, fighting for two little girls who never should have been torn from their bonded family.
This message is directed to Judge Morales and to every actor who chooses to stand with him. From our side of the courtroom, what is happening does not feel like justice. It feels like fear, control, and deep injustice.
“Vista Terror” — how Vista dependency court feels to families like ours.
What We Have Experienced
Children kept away from their blood family even when relatives are ready, willing, and approved to care for them;
Medical and behavioral red flags that seem minimized or brushed aside;
Sexual-abuse concerns and trauma that, from our view, are treated as something to contain, not confront;
Restraining orders and threats that feel less about safety and more about punishing speech.
The Girls at the Center
At the heart of this case are two little girls: Malaika and Xayah. We believe they have been harmed emotionally and psychologically by being kept in a non-relative placement with Norma Olivares, while their entire blood family feels they are being deliberately pushed out of their lives.
We see a pattern of decisions that weaken their bond with their mother, father, and grandparents instead of strengthening it;
We see trauma and distress in these children that cannot be ignored;
We see a system that looks more interested in control than in genuine healing.
Retaliation as We See It
When family members speak out, build websites, share their story, and refuse to be silent, we have seen responses that feel like punishment: cold court calls, being cut off, and the message that if we do not comply on their terms, they will simply move forward without us.
We reject this. We answer first to the safety and well-being of these children and to the truth of what we have lived.
- Due Process (14th Amendment): Court did not ensure basic procedural protections were followed.
- No meaningful opportunity to present witnesses: Witnesses were not heard and/or testimony was effectively blocked.
- No evidentiary foundation: Decisions appeared based on assertions rather than admissible evidence.
- Unsworn statements relied upon: Heavy reliance on reports/argument without sworn testimony.
- Cross-examination limited or denied: Insufficient ability to test claims through questioning.
- Witness exclusion rule not invoked/enforced: No clear handling of witness separation (if applicable to the hearing type).
- Findings not stated on the record: No clear, specific factual findings supporting the orders made.
- No detriment findings for denying relative placement: Relative placement was not addressed with required findings (where applicable).
- Agency recommendations adopted without independent analysis: Orders appeared to track agency requests without stated judicial reasoning.
- Conditions imposed without hearing: Restrictions/conditions were imposed without a full evidentiary hearing.
- Association restrictions without clear written authority: Limits on lawful association were imposed or pressured without a specific court order.
- Protected speech implications (1st Amendment): Speech/blog activity was treated as a case factor in ways that appear punitive.
- Abuse of discretion concerns: Lack of evidence, lack of findings, and lack of independent review undermined fairness.
— The Collective for Family Justice & Human Rights
San Diego’s Child Welfare system is defrauding the federal government through abusive misuse of Title IV-E funds — rewarding removals, punishing reunification, and financially incentivizing the very retaliation the Robinson-Lopez, Jay & Jennifer Roydson, and Julius & Lee Ann families are living through.
Title IV-E funds — rewarding removals, punishing reunification, and financially incentivizing
Freekeenan's Blog 
Leave a comment