1. Whether the incommunicado detention of my natural Custodial children for over four months at the behest of Bothell Police Department because I was a person of interest in its criminal investigation and without evidence to support a clain of unfit parenting or other just cause, shocks the Court's conscienceConstituting substantive due process coereion under the standard elaberated in Yuan v. Rivera 48 F. supp. 2d 335, 344, 347 (SDN4 1999) and Chavezv. Martihez, 538 797 (concurrence by Justices Kennedy, Stevens & Ginsberg) 155 L Ed 2d 984, 123 S Ct 1994 (2003); Where Detective Chissus urged "Helpus clear your name, Dou't you care about your Kids? Amends 6, 14; WA Const. Art. 1$53,22, WARCW 7.36.010,020,.140

2. Whether I am entithed pursuant to 18 usc 83143(b), pendng disposition on certiorari and WA ReW7.36,250, in consideration of extraordinary circunstances under 83145 () to release on my own recognizance; where the State conceded denial of counsel of choice, implemientation of demand-waiver doctrine, insufficiency of evidence to convict, that I was not actually involved in the violent Crime for which I was convictedlin light ofexeulpatory forensicevidence and that police failed testablish reasonable probable cause for my arrestand arraignment? Amend 4, 5,6,14; WA ConST Ar1$3,7,22: WACR8.3() WAX REW 7.36.220; WA ER8S RAP 8.3, 16.15(b) substantive due process controls

3. whether I am entitted to expedited reliet frovi ongoing deprivations of my custodial rights pursuant to wA RCW Lm202 20s h 2ym(716. )87+.1t0't7 children is through letters restricted to monthly, and I am not permitted to know their actnal address where the State conceded that its officials wronfully renoved and retained my children in violation of my ne exeat right of custody, const,tuting wrongful renoval and retention in violation of the ltague Child Abduction Freaty Convention? Amend 14, 1996 Hague Convention; UCCJEA (WA RCW ch 26.27 (substantive due provess controls) concurrent to release

4. whether I ar entithed to equitable restitution' according to Yuan v Rivera 48 F. Supp.2dat 346 for abuse of process, for which I applied purshant to Davis v. Cox 183 wn.2d 289, 292-93, 351 P.3d 862(2015) and WA RCW 26.27,491/2)? Amend 14-substantive due process

Whether the incommunicado detention of natural custodial children