This is one of 37 bills that Social Services it appears, had Lyngstad use an out of network provider so the father would not learn of all the visit. Note provider Social Services,notations out of network provider and 10 of 37 in corner of page.Taxpayers share was  over $1600 dollars. Standing Friday appointments for children she swore were rarely sick?

Another lie by Lyngstad. The children are constantly at the doctor. Note in corner 37 visits hidden.

Political persecution for his support of amendment E link to his editorial. Reporting it to the Judicial Qualifications Commission would be a waste of paper as Miller is already retired.

South Dakota - § 9. Qualifications commission. The Legislature shall provide by law for the establishment of a judicial qualifications commission which have such powers as the Legislature may provide, including the power to investigate complaints against any justice or judge and to conduct confidential hearings concerning the removal or involuntary retirement of a justice or judge. The Supreme Court shall prescribe by rule the means to implement and enforce the powers of the commission. On recommendation of the judicial qualifications commission the Supreme Court, after hearing, may censure, remove or retire a justice or judge for action which constitutes willful misconduct in office, willful and persistent failure to perform his duties, habitual intemperance, disability that seriously interferes with the performance of the duties or conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice which brings a judicial office into disrepute.No justice or judge shall sit in judgment in any hearing involving his own removal or retirement. http://legis.state.sd.us/statutes/DisplayStatute.aspx?Type=Statute&Statute=0N-5-9

Comes now, Michael Wagner, having and after been duly sworn upon states and alleges as follows. I make this affidavit upon personal knowledge except where made upon information and belief. I believe these things to be true and correct.

(1)Judge Robert Miller, retired Supreme Court Justice, has issued 2 Orders in this matter, one July 2nd, and the other July 22nd, 2008. The first Order and letter sealed a child abuse report done by Social Services that was entered into the court record. The second Order confirmed denying the Defendant access to the report.

(2) SDCL26-7A-37. Persons authorized to inspect records of court proceedings. Records of court proceedings, including reports of the Department of Social Services, records and reports of court services officers, clinical studies, and evaluation reports, under this chapter and chapters 26-8A, 26- 8B, and 26-8C shall be open to inspection by the child's parents, guardian, or custodian and by other respondent parties involved in the proceedings, their attorneys, the child's attorney and by any department or agency having custody of the child.

(3) Judge Miller’s Order is the exact opposite of written law.

(4) August 11th, 2008, Judge Miller issued a new Order that the Defendant and Plaintiff’s attorney can view the record once, No publicly discussing or disseminating the case. “Violation of this clause will subject the violator for contempt of Court”

The first is that a State cannot foreclose the exercise of constitutional rights by mere labels. The second is that abstract discussion is not the only species of communication which the Constitution protects; the First Amendment also protects vigorous advocacy, certainly of lawful ends, against governmental intrusion. Thomas v. Collins, 323 U.S. 516, 537, 65 S.Ct. 315, 325, 89 L.Ed. 430; Herndon v. Lowry, 301 U.S. 242, 259—264, 57 S.Ct. 732, 739—742, 81 L.Ed. 1066. Cf. Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, 60 S.Ct. 900, 84 L.Ed. 1213; Stromberg v. California, 283 U.S. 359, 369, 51 S.Ct. 532, 535, 75 L.Ed. 1117; Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1, 4, 69 S.Ct. 894, 895, 93 L.Ed. 1131.
SDCL 26-8A-13. Confidentiality of abuse or neglect information--Violation as misdemeanor under law but Judge Miller made new law.

SDCL 15-15A-5. General access rule.. (3) An individual circuit or a local court may not adopt a more restrictive access policy or otherwise restrict access beyond that provided by statute or in this rule, nor provide greater access than that provided for by statute or in this rule.

A Judge does not have authority to modify or ignore the law under the Canons and law.

This principle of law was stated by the U.S. Supreme Court as "Courts are constituted by authority and they cannot go beyond that power delegated to them. If they act beyond that authority, and certainly in contravention of it, their judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply VOID, AND THIS EVEN PRIOR TO REVERSAL." [Emphasis added]. Vallely v. Northern Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 254 U.S. 348, 41 S.Ct. 116 (1920). See also Old Wayne Mut. I. Assoc. v. McDonough, 204 U.S. 8, 27 S.Ct. 236 (1907); Williamson v. Berry, 8 How. 495, 540, 12 L.Ed. 1170, 1189 (1850); Rose v. Himely, 4 Cranch 241, 269, 2 L.Ed. 608, 617 (1808)

CANON 2 A Judge Shall Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All of the Judge's Activities A. A judge shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary
CANON 3 A Judge Shall Perform the Duties of Judicial Office Impartially and Diligently
B. Adjudicative Responsibilities. (2) A judge shall be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence in it

Amy Lyngstad was incarcerated in April, 2008 with a pending motion for change of custody which Judge Miller ignored. Judge Miller has Lyngstad’s conviction record.
(5) The viewing of the records is to be supervised by Chief Officer McCabe of Court Services or Court officials, the very offices that supervised Amy Lyngstad’s many conditions of the court imposed when convicted of various crimes. His office was made aware of her probation violations as the letters in the file prove. Clerk of Courts also was aware of violations.
(a) 5/18/98 conviction for insufficient funds checks. Conditions of the court were that defendant not have a similar offense for one year, 30 days suspended. (b)Filed 2/26th/99 as charge of insufficient funds checks with conviction on 6/24/99. Conditions were that defendant not have a similar offense for one year. (c)Filed 11/02/99 3 counts of passing checks against a non-existent account. Convicted on 2/24/00 and placed on probation for 3 years. (d)Filed 07/18/200 a charge of disorderly conduct with conviction 08/07/2000. 30 days jail time suspended on condition defendant not have a similar offense. (e)Arrested 08/10/2000 for disorderly conduct. Conviction 09/06/2000. (f)Conviction for driving with no drivers license 06/15/2001. It would appear the defendant had been driving since 02/22/1999 with no driver’s license. (g) 11/01/2004 pled guilty to identity theft. Lyngstad’s factual statement, “wrote no account check using fake social security numbers on March 18th, 2002, while she was on State probation for passing no account checks. (h) 4/10/08 was jailed for 2nd driving while intoxicated

IT IS A SECRET, the report on child abuse. Hypocrites at Argus Leader ran a story how South Dakota laws hinder child abuse.This is why South Dakota got a F on child abuse report here (State Secrecy). Only took them 2 months and they did not do an investigation in January when the child was taken to the emergency room. Remember Gian Score and the State said they never did anything wrong? Will it take another death for child protection tYankton Press and Dakotan removes blogs on that conform to their policy but reveals the truth about the corruption in Yankton,

 Lyngstad through her attorney, Linda Kogel, swears there was no surgery. Paragraph 16 of insurance billing says there was for$119 and $418. The child should have been wearing shoes and socks so had did she get abrasions on her foot???                             

Read it and see the glaring discrepancies. 1. Wash wound or stitches. From falling down 6 to 10 stairs?? 2. Cover abrasions with antibiotic. Again from falling down 6 to 10 stairs? 3.The medical clinic sent them to the ER.  But Lyngstad gets way with her perjury with the Supreme Court covering for her. Kogel never sent any reports.

Most of these these referenced agencies have been contacted. The State agencies don't bother responding, so the State looses federal funding. What is going on is not right, why does Child protection protect female child abusers. South Dakota bar, there is an old boys club with their own rules and procedures.

Child Protection never sent a report.

Child protection never investigated domestic abuse since Amy Lyngstad was involved. Both adults were convicted of domestic violence and did it again a couple of week. Her record.

She had an older sister named Penny which was never revealed why she passed on.

,,

Gets email while not having a computer another trumped up charge by the State. She never even filed a complaint State made up a charge on its own to persecute Mr. Wagner. Charge was dismissed on States Motion for lack of evidence. Just trying to intimidate and run up an attorney bill but Wagner did not need an attorney.

w