Samantha Lowry treatment to new born Sebastian Pavon Cuellar
Presented by Oath.Tv

Factual Events and grounds to P claims
(At the time of the events)

Evidence Exhibits:
When referred as (E xxx) refers to page number of location of the exhibits filed with the original claim.

When referred as (Exhibit xxx) refers to exhibits hereby attached.

Samantha Jennifer Lowry
was an illegal alien of Texas. She never worked or study in Texas or the US- Moved to Texas on September 22, 2007

Daniel Pavon Cuellar Texas resident and taxpayer since 1992- Purchase his homestead on 1997 - Known as artist DAPACU. Dapacu stands for the first two initials of the name.
This is a matter of great importance, since Defendants created several fake email accounts for their own malicious purpose. Such as Diapacu (fake email used for service) Dampacu (fake email given to constable) Dieapacu( Fake email used for dead threats).

Sebastian JR Pavon Cuellar-
Born in Texas on March 29, 2007 named after the last names of the  father only.

The couple never married and they did not lived together.

POLICE REPORT: Defendant lived in Thomas wood lane (E 142)

       Plaintiff lived in his homestead in Whispering creek (E 143)

A trip was planned to Mexico, P and his son left on May 25, 2007 (Memorial Day Weekend) (E 124)

Defendant was to arrive on May 28, 2007 but did not (E131), instead made impossible the return of P and the baby to Texas;

No proceedings existed before these dates.

Defendant had taken the travel documents of the Baby and P, as well as P money, Defendant trespassed into P homestead and moved in with 8 people. (E 192 and E 193)

The baby was two months old at the time.

Once P learn of these acts immediately started to try to return to Texas since June 1, 2007 (E 140). a meeting was held in the border of Laredo on June 3, 2007 (E 157) were Defendant was to send anyone with their travel documents and P money to enter the US, but once again Defendant did not attend such meeting and did not send anyone with their travel documents. (E 159)
Defendant malice can be further proven that made P and his two month old son travel 12 hours each way by bus to the border of Laredo, and defendant “disappeared” from June 2 to June 5, 2007. (These acts becomes by law the abandonment of the child by Defendant leaving him in a foreign country and without a home or money, and just when a few days before she claimed the child was allergic to all types of formula and could die and he was missing)

P filed his police reports, reported also the trespassing and requested help from police (E 192 and E 193), soon after, contacted the US Embassy and Central Authorities of Mexico requesting their help.

On May 28, 2007, In secret, her brother and her boyfriend Tristan Nind arrived to Mexico in secret (by their testimony)

Defendant called the police and started to attempt to make false charges, the police reports provide clear evidence, while knowing the father and child were in Mexico, Police and FBI agree there was no abduction and not even elements of interference of custody existed since no custody order or agreement existed at the time.

Defendant and her counsels started the frivolous proceedings in Texas  on May 30, 2007 (E 59) by fraud upon the court claimed the child was in Texas to obtain a child support without the child, and for malicious prosecution. And as to further prevent P return, claiming to the court, the child was in Texas with risk of international abduction and place restrictions against P to obtain any travel documents. These proceedings were held secret and without service, Defendant counsel claim to have served the proceedings to only an email that was <> (E 91 E 92) which is not an email from P and at the time the only email address P used was <>, as seen on all the emails at the time.

Furthermore, Defendant counsels claim such service before even requesting “alternative service” and such “alternative service”  and the emails they use as exhibits provide clear evidence P and his son were trying to return to Texas (E94, E 96, E 97) but P was responding to the email of Defendant (E 150  to E 153). The Alternative service was against treaties and laws of service in foreign countries and Mexican rules of service (See transcript of April 14, 2008)

Defendant and her counsels purposely and maliciously not only prevented P from Due Process and prevented him and his son return to their country, which itself is abandonment of the child, violation of human Rights, violation to constitutional rights and amongst other crimes, but by doing so Defendants and her counsels started another secret frivolous proceedings without foundation on or around July 6, 2007, purposely held secret, with extreme violence, including violence against the elderly parents of P in Mexico City at nearly 80 years old.

Counsels and defendant were fully aware were P parents were (even provided photos (E432 photo of Guadalupe outside the home of Paracaima)  and Defendant family members and Defendant boyfriend testimony claims to have been video monitoring P Parents home 24 hours a day)  and were P was (Defendant testified by tracing all his emails he was sending attempting to return to Texas, knew where he was) and defendant and her counsels were also fully aware P was in a different state of Mexico then his parents, furthermore, Defendant and her counsels provided a photo of the parents of P, that was the true last known address, but where Defendant and her counsels never attempted service.

P even made at least to attempts to return the baby, the first one on or around June 11, 2007 (E 173, first email ever sent from Joe Milner to P to the right email address, and making all types of threats and false claims and at the time P was in Mexico trying to return his son. Joe Milner does not mention anything in regards to their secret proceedings) , another attempt to return the baby by P to the British Embassy ( E176) on July 22, 2007 but not even the baby was accepted.

(E 195) is the email of P counsel who said “ Only an idiot would return the child to the British Embassy without more than a promise to drop all charges and assurance that she would not fly the child to England”

Jami Milner to further prevent P from returning to Texas, claimed falsely P had a warrant ( E 172 first email ever sent by the Milner firm  of Jami Milner dated June 8, 2007 and to the rightful email, also conceals their proceedings) to stop P from attempting to return to Texas, (Each of these emails filed by defendant are attempts of P to return to Texas E 157, E159, E161, E162, E163, E164, E 170 )

Malicious prosecution (Including claiming to Court  the child was In Texas)  began against P and on June 18, 2007 (E187) a warrant was issued against P for parental kidnapping, this warrant obtained through high influences and through fraud upon the court by claiming the child was in Texas. When even the FBI was fully aware they were not, and even the police report is very explicit when already knowing P and his son were in Mexico, the police wrote, there was no abduction and not even interference of custody.

Emphasis added: No crime was committed by P at the time and when Police and FBI were fully aware P and the child were Out of their jurisdiction and out of the USA .

The affair of Defendant with Police Detective Andrew Westbrook and proof of fabrication of records from the homestead of Westbrook with defendant  at 9:28 PM:

1)Exhibit filed by defendant in EXPARTE proceedings (E204) dated July 21, 2007 sent from to <> both emails from Defendant, but in such a way, alter the contents.

2)We follow the IP therein and we traced it (E206) to Nairn dr

3)We search the names of owners in the central appraisal district to such address and (E 207) shows as the owner Westbrook. 

Furthermore, unless the emails of P and the police reports he filed (May 30 (E192), May 31, (E193) June 7 2007 (recently obtained)) (“equal protection of the laws?”)  were concealed from the FBI, the FBI should have had knowledge  P and his son were attempting to return to their country since June 1, 2007 (Each of these emails filed by defendant are attempts of P to return to Texas E 157, E159, E161, E162, E163, E164, E 170 ) and even requesting help from Police and Defendant had the travel documents of P and the child (E197) and was trespassing into P homestead. And defendant even refused on June 8, 2007 to send a letter of immigration (E 170) P requested to return with his son immediately, since Defendant claimed she left their travel documents in immigration (E197) after P and the baby had just returned from Texas (E 164)  and defendant had failed deliver the travel documents to P, to enter the USA with his son.

Furthermore, FBI and Police should have been fully aware of P and his son trip to the Border on June 3, 2007 for the meeting at 6PM, (EXHIBIT B4 hereby attached  (E 157) which also describes the violence of Defedants) unless this email was concealed also from them were Defendant was to sent anyone with their travel documents to enter USA. But no one arrived. P continued to request their travel documents to return to the USA.

Counsels of Defendant provided fake email accounts (E 219, E 220 Diapacu ), false last known address (E 226) proven with (E 227 and the content E 228 to 230) received by (E 231), and incomplete addresses (E 234 No zip code, no neighborhood name), and even tampered with the mail of P and even of P parents in Mexico (by statement of Defendant) Even fake email accounts to constable “” ( E236) to keep secret auctions of properties.

Dapacu stands for the first two initials of Daniel Pavon Cuellar, and Dapacu is the artist name.

Not diapacu, not diepacu, not dampacu been several emails used by defendant and her counsels for several illegal acts for their own gains.

Defendant  and her counsels fraud upon the court, intrinsic and extrinsic fraud is proven,  with their own evidence and pleadings they filed during these EXPARTE secret proceedings.


The following exhibits filed by Defendant in EXPARTE proceedings are hereby attached.

P and the child left to Mexico on May 25, 2007 by bus and P left his car in Texas parking lot (E125) Defendant was to arrive on May 28, 2007

EXHIBIT B1Dated May 23, 2007 shows Daniel  leaving and will leave his home very well locked (Planned Trip) Memorial day weekend
EXHIBIT B2Dated May 26, 2007 (bottom) Samantha writes “love Sam”  May 29, 2007 (top) “Daniel writes: “You were suppose to arrive yesterday
EXHIBIT B3Dated June 1, 2007 : Daniel and the baby trying to return to Texas, requesting their travel documents from Samantha and his money. Explains all.
EXHIBIT B4Last page of exhibit 87 filed by Samantha on August 22, 2007: Daniel and Sebastian go to Laredo, Meeting on the border on June 3, 2007 at 6 Pm were Samantha is to deliver their travel documents for Daniel and Seb to enter the USA. Daniel requesting to stop violence.
EXHIBIT B5Shows Samantha having the travel documents of Daniel and Sebastian, (Not filed by her )
EXHIBIT B6After Daniel and Sebastian return from Laredo and Samantha did not send anyone with their travel documents and money

CASE A: Cause number D-1-FM-07-002752 

Starts on May 30, 2007, final trial on August 13, 2007:

NO service:  (E 232 and E 233)

75 days Total = 53 working days (Excluding Saturdays and Sundays) = $ 3679 Attorneys fees and expenses a DAY

The amounts obtained are illegal in Texas such as the child support of $4117 a mo (E32), plus giving the homestead (E261 Exhibit filed by Defendant and her counsel with P Name and homestead exempt also hereby attached as Exhibit C2)  (exempt property with all contents to the illegal alien defendant who was trespassing)

Furthermore with a lien to P father: (E 264) including the 1732 Paintings as a guaranteed for payment and whom had made the payments (E 263)
Further confirmed by Defendant affidavit on English Proceedings on (E266 #7)

Fraud Upon the court by claiming the child was in Texas to obtain such child support, but without the child

Emphasis added: child support of $4117 for a  4 month old baby, without the child, and also the homestead is granted to defendant (who gain access to such property by trespassing)  and  attempting to sale P homestead and all contents after only two months of claiming P did not paid the child support and when P only made $18000 gross income for 2006 (E49) and was his homestead under his name (E261 Homestead exemption filed by defendant on August 13, 2007 and August 22, 2007  and such record obtained the same date they obtained the false warrant, June 18, 2007).

Defendants and her counsels did not follow child support guidelines, did not prove income, and did not prove any of their claims. But they filed the evidence that proves their illegal acts and frivolous suits.

Besides this illegal child support also obtains; over 500 paintings. Plus around 200000 in attorney’s fees and expenses, plus requiring 300000 cash bond for P to see his son. (P had his son)

In fact, only 18 exhibits were used  (E 123) in this EXPARTE final trial also hereby attached as Exhibit C1, amongst those exhibits prove the basic facts. Defendant had the travel documents of the child, defendant and her counsels presented the homestead exemption of P. And P email trying to return to Texas.

In violation to US Constitution, legal service laws and treaties, also in Violation of Family code 152.205 and

CASE B: CAUSE NO. D-1-GN-07002030.
Starts on July 6, 2007 ends on August 22, 2007 .

NON SERVICE: (E 235) Affidavit of process server of NON service, no judgment could have been granted. Also hereby attached as Exhibit F

46 days total = 33 working days (excluding Saturdays and Sundays) = $ 8939 attorneys fees a DAY

Defendant mother Susan Lowry described on Exhibit 102 filed in August 22, 2007  as
Aug 21 “ a new court case hearing tomorrow which was the final trial.”

No receipts were provided for such amounts, in fact duplicate receipts from Case A and only of approximately 65000 total.

Defendant and her counsels brought this frivolous claim without foundation also against  the elderly parents of P out of jurisdiction (who lived in Mexico City and were at all given times in Mexico. Whilst Defendant family and boyfriend Tristan Nind violently harassing and physically attacked P elderly parents.) OUT OF JURISDICTION FRIVOLOUS SUIT WITHOUT NOTICE

Without hearing and without notice, Defendant counsels obtained illegal liens and writs against properties of the elderly parents of P in Texas, been over 140 acres of prime real estate in Area West of Austin.

Defendant Counsels working on recovery basis at 60/40 gain split (E329), obtained false jurisdiction on these frivolous claims, by claiming all events happened in Travis County Texas.

Within 46 days total and 33 working days (excluding Saturdays and SundaysFrom start to end of proceedings, EMPHASIS ADDED:  the Defendant mother by testimony described as “ a new court case hearing tomorrow” was the final trial and without proving any of their claims, but filing the evidence that proved their frivolous proceedings and fraud:

Defendant and their counsels obtained a 35 million dollar judgment, over 160 acres of land, Plus another 600 plus fine art paintings, plus nearly another 300000 in attorney’s fees and expenses and more.

102 Exhibits were used, out of which several removed, none of them prove any of their claims, but in fact prove their illegal acts, including presenting records stolen from the homestead of P Parents in Mexico ( E 237 bank statements amongst others E251 (a property illegally sold by Defendant and her counsels with deed to P elderly Parents E253 paid by them E252 and further proven with the exhibit (stolen record)  filed by Defendant on( E251))   and knowingly and maliciously such records used for fraud by Defendant counsels, (example see how Defendant counsel used this 8 month old stolen bank statement (E237)  record from P elderly parents homestead in Mexico, when such account had only $1757 balance, addressed only to P Parents homestead (E238).  See how Joe Milner used this stolen 8 month old records starting at (E 241) and claiming even P was defendant husband (never married). And claiming they did not know what is P.O.D (Pay on Dead) All records referred there in, were stolen records and confidential.

Defendant and her counsels even filed the P reports to FBI of the murder attempts against his elderly parents by Defendant, as well as P police report made of trespassing on their Exparte final trial to make a bulk of evidence to “Impress” Judge Gus Strauss, but filed in bulk without using them.

The amounts obtained, required the jury to be unanimous, yet, NO JURY.


Both cases, decree and judgment, were also withheld secret, WITHOUT NOTICE OR SERVICE. While the defendant counsels emptied without notice the bank accounts of P elderly parents and were auctioning their properties (over 160 acres of prime land) also without notice.

Over 1700 fine art paintings been 26 years of P works, the Homestead of P with extensive murals throughout and with lien to P father. And all contents obtained by fraud through these illegal proceedings and trespassing. Clothes, titles, letters, work tools, taxes, absolutely all.

Defendant and her counsels went to a greater degree of intentional malice and fraud as to provide the court with a false last known address, a false email address even to constable “” who will auction the properties. (E 236)

The defendants became extremely aggressive and violent against P and his parents, and began to send hundreds of pages of dead threats, beating threats, rape threats through her email account <>  (Example E 178-186) were by written testimony of her brother Joseph Lowry, these emails were made in conspiracy with him, Tristan Nind and Samantha Lowry. (see also E 435 and E 440)

Furthermore, Joseph Lowry was apparently previously accused of child abuse.
Soon after the defendants started with international fund raisers (E 456)

The elderly parents  of P while trying to locate their son through internet, (E 51) time when they found their properties been auctioned,  they immediately hired an attorney and soon all of these illegal acts out of jurisdiction started to be known.

Shortly after and once P parents hired an attorney, a settlement agreement was reached, followed from a mediation of nearly three months  UNDER  Hague Convention proceedings that were taking place.

The Rule 11 agreement (E 42) hereby also referred as International settlement agreement under Hague proceedings (E267 to E307), reached and agreed, by all counsels of the parties and the parties (E339) and others involved (E339A) (also hereby attached as Exhibit G4) was hammered out in a meeting In Austin Texas with all the counsels of the parties, Defendant and her family (Exhibit G2). Such meeting lasted 10 hours and was made on November 28, 2007. (Also hereby attached as Exhibit G4, also important G, G1, G2, and G3)

This example shows the behavior of Defendant (E334) through mediation.

(E336 Dated November 26, 2007 were Joe Milner had written up/modified the Agreement) including adding “ in exchange of Sebastian” which P did not complain since talks about the process of exchange, including Defendant delivering P travel documents and the child documents and other matters further described therein)
(E 337  November 27, 2007 Joe Milner Defendant attorney and Roy Barrera P attorney speaking on the agreement)
(E 338 November 28, 2007 Defendant charging Joe Milner expenses to P in regards to the mediation to reach the agreement)
(E 339 November 28, 2007 Receipt of Mac Ray Hernandez MRH attorney for P parents which fully describes the meeting :  “Guadalupe Cuellar Pavon . All-day conference to hammer ou a settlement agreemt. Present were 5 attorneys, John Foster and Joe Milner, acting for Samantha , and Roy Barrera for Daniel, and Foster with MRH, for Mr. and Mrs. Pavon” 10 hours $3000)

(Exhibit hereby attached as Exhibit G1 DATED November 28, 2007 from Mac ray Hernandez email, on behalf of Roy Barrera, and states “Milner represents to me that this version of the agreement Reflects the latest draft you have prepared. Please read the agreement and make sure is to your satisfaction and sign it “ ) also see Exhibit G hereby attached dated November 26, 2007 “
“ we went to Joe Milner’s today to get agreement written up and he very kindly did it straight away”

This further proves that was an agreement between attorneys, and Milner did most of it, furthermore, MRH and Forest were acting on behalf of P elderly parents.

The instrument was executed on December 3, 2007 (E 267 to E307) under Hague Proceedings with the US and British Embassy consuls and vice consuls (E279 their ID’s at E298 to E302) as well as the director of foreign affairs in Mexico (E302) as representative for the HAGUE CONVENTION TREATY. Further notarized in each of the countries involved on oath, filed into public deed records in Mexico, and filed as rule 11 agreement in Texas.

In this instrument, Defendant and her counsels by agreement with P and his parents counsels, renounce to all they obtained (E267 to E271) after they maliciously made impossible P return to Texas. (June 1, 2007) They further agree to deliver all property obtained by fraud and deception, including the homestead of P. There in also show Defendant finally delivered the travel documents she withheld illegally to prevent P and the child return to their Country of USA.

But, defendant aided by her counsels, kidnapped the child and have concealed the whereabouts of the child since then.

After a recent discovery investigations, evidence provides the kidnapping was possible by the forgery of the US embassy documents ( records provided by the Milner firm on or around December 7, 2007 which is a SEALED  record without signatures of the US Embassy hereby attached as Exhibit I  )  and three signatures of the Consul Cecil K Scott made on the same date but totally different hereby attached as Exhibit J) .

As part of the Settlement agreement the US consul had taken the duty to safeguard the baby travel documents to prevents his abduction.(E 272) (Hereby attached as Exhibit H6)

After the breach, Plaintiff P parents continued their claims, and once they deliver the evidence against Defendant and her counsels on or around January 26, 2008, including but not limited to the trespassing to the parents P homestead in Mexico and grand theft of property including records used by the Milner Firm for fraud in the secret Texas proceedings,  P Father was murdered at 79 years old on February 8, 2007, (day of his scheduled deposition)  followed with deadly threats against P and his mother on February 26, 2008 (E426)  if they would go to the “states” when the final trial was scheduled on or around  March 3, 2007

That caused fear even through the counsels of P who immediately pull out of the case, including Roy Barrera, even against P will.

The amount of conspiracy to this case is so extensive, and fully recorded with evidence records, videos, recordings, reports, and more. Such as Case B were the process server claim the NON service nearly three months after the Judgment was granted. (E235)

P father reported the murder attempts to police before the murder and place Defendants family members as the ones responsible in such police reports

On or around March 18, 2008 and around a month from the murder of P father, defendant counsels ordered the deposition of P mother in Texas knowing of her heart condition, and even against the doctor advice on travel and stress. The Milner firm does this deposition for over 5 hours and fully out of the scope of discovery, with a very special interest and attempting to obtain even the records of investigations on the murder.

On or around April,1 2008 defendant counsels sale a property of 20 acres before the final trial and  the rightful owner was P Mother, but did not even provide notice to her, not even in the deposition.

On April 14, 2008 the final trial took place and Judge Yelenoski ruled in favor of P Mother and did not grant a duress claim of Defendant. Including for lack of service and in violation for International service1 treaties. Judge Yelenoski granted a new trial.

1 In direct violation of the rules of service including but not limited to the International treaty of the Hague convention Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters and in violation of the applicable international laws that the Milner firm is fully aware (April 14, 2008 trial).

The Defendant had used a fraudulent duress claim using an email dated November 3, 2007  that was not from the email account of P (, and once the IP was provided by the Milner firm (E343) on May 19, 2009, has been further proven that was not sent by P (E355), but by the defendants (E349) who were in Mexico at the time.

Furthermore, such duress provides clear evidence of the deceptive practices of Defendant counsels who maliciously planned and aided the kidnapping of the child and, Defendant claims by testimony to have signed both documents (rule 11 and duress claim) at the same time and,  through the same deposition, shows such records were prepared by her counsels.

It is doubtful a notary would accept this, but the apparent forgeries of the US embassy records may provide a clear explanation how the kidnapping took place.

Furthermore, such duress was not applicable under Mexican laws and Defendant could not have kidnapped the child until a Judge will make his ruling.

Furthermore, as seen on the International settlement agreement, defendant requested a DNA test of the child, but kidnapped the child before the DNA took place. (E282 faith of fact of notary (Spanish) nearly at bottom of page “ADN” is DNA.)

Defendant found to be pregnant in England and after the exploitation of the child and behavior of defendants. This caused P to be aware the child may in fact not be his.

P hereby request that the court could grant and facilitate the hearing through teleconference, phone link or video link:

Protocol for Hearings by Teleconference Hearings may be conducted by teleconference when deemed appropriate by the court. In approving a hearing by teleconference, consideration will be given to the nature and scope of the matter before the court, associated time and cost of travel and equity to all parties. Counsel may request a telephonic hearing by e-mail or by sending or faxing a letter to the courtroom deputy.

All these acts of intentional malice and fraud Alter the status quo
Preservation of these illegal acts to preclude P from obtaining the financing or preclude any possibility to prosecute their action against the defendants and that unless the defendant and their counsel are deterred from carrying and continue with such actions P s will be without an adequate remedy at law and with irreparable damages inter alia of irreplaceable property as is the artwork and homestead and  all property located therein. As the exact same property can never be obtained or replaced and by statute Texas civil practices and remedies codes there is no adequate remedy at law.

We apologize to the court to submit all records and evidence, but P have waited for justice and a hearing for now three years 5 months.

With the evidence hereby provided, we request the court will order the immediate compliance of the Rule 11 agreement (International settlement agreement under Hague Proceedings) without notice or hearing to defendant who has failed to respond to this claims and place a restraining order against Defendant to continue with any proceedings outside the Travis county Jurisdiction that opposes the Rule 11 agreement of counsels and the parties, including but not limited to the proceedings she is taking to conceal the whereabouts of the child, and attempting to change his name and identity in clear violation of P rights.

We beg the court to make this orders and restraining orders as a matter of urgency, for on or around November 20, 2010 in proceedings out of Jurisdiction and while keeping the child kidnapped and his whereabouts concealed, it is known she may be granted such illegal acts that will deprive the rights P and his family as well as escape from Justice without an adequate remedy at law and with increased irreparable damages inter alia of irreplaceable property as is the over 1700 Original fine art paintings, his homestead with murals that took over 7 years to paint (all other property located therein) and other property and equity. As the exact same property can never be obtained or replaced and by statute Texas civil practices and remedies codes there is no adequate remedy at law. 

Furthermore, leaving the child with abductors with a sexually deranged and  depraved minds (E178 -186) more of such email of Defendant (E 435, also E 440) and all s known of the child is his deplorable condition (Exhibit O hereby attached)

Respectfully submitted on October 26, 2010



CAUSE NO. D-1-GN 09002806
Et al.
Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated
Plaintiff ´s

§ § § § § § § § § §

                                  CAUSE NO. D-1-FM 09004457
Plaintiff ´s