Tortuous Killing of Timothy Paul Stone

The motion invokes both federal and Arizona kidnapping statutes, emphasizing that kidnapping is a “continuing offense”—every moment the children remain unlawfully detained constitutes a new violation. The Stones cite Supreme Court precedent and the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA), arguing that the children’s ongoing detention is a grave civil rights violation and an urgent threat to their safety and well-being.

• Key legal authorities referenced include:
  • 18 U.S.C. § 1201 (Federal Kidnapping Statute)
  • A.R.S. § 13-1304 (Arizona Kidnapping Statute)
  • Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (setting the standard for preliminary injunctions)
  • Troxel v. Granville (recognizing the fundamental right of parents in child custody)
  • Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act (PKPA), 28 U.S.C. § 1738A
  • Arizona Revised Statutes § 25-1034 (Emergency Jurisdiction in child protection cases)

Allegations of Official Misconduct and Cover-Up

The Stones’ filing goes beyond the immediate abduction, alleging a coordinated cover-up and “state-created danger.” They claim that judges manipulated judicial proceedings to obstruct justice. A storage company (CubeSmart), and an insurance company (MetLife) were repeatedly notified of the ongoing kidnapping but failed to act.  The law officials purposely and intentionally failed to perform their prescribed duty.  Despite knowing the decedent’s vulnerable and protected class status, the First Responders Duties and Mandatory Statutes and Laws, A.R.S. §§ 8-901, 8-810, 13-3623, and 13-3620, the existence of protection orders and the danger the children were in, the police failed to locate or rescue the children they were compel by law to do. The motion argues that these actions and omissions amount to a conspiracy to deprive the children and their family of their constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985.

The Relief Requested

• The emergency motion asks the court to:
  • Order the immediate rescue and release of the three minor children from the custody of the defendants.
  • Prohibit further contact or interference by the defendants.
  • Direct law enforcement to enforce the order and ensure the children’s safety.
  • Appoint a guardian ad litem to represent the children’s interests.
  • Refer the matter for criminal investigation and prosecution.
  • Waive or reduce the bond requirement due to the urgent circumstances and the plaintiffs’ limited resources.

Why This Case Matters

This case highlights critical issues at the intersection of child protection, civil rights, and government accountability. The Stones’ filings underscore the devastating consequences when court orders are ignored, and officials fail to act. The outcome could set important precedents for emergency relief in child abduction cases and the responsibilities of law enforcement and the judiciary.  Click here to see The Legal Relationship