I just did a little research, trying to find the assault charge on John Irish, the elder (no joy). I did find an article the has some of the official documents in the case.
It seems that paragraphs 1 through 6 in the attachment above are from one document (the change of venue request) and
paragraph 7 is from another, the affidavit laying out the reasons for the request to remove the baby pending a full hearing into the matter.
We don't get to see the real paragraphs 1-6 nor 8-11, since they have been "redacted." Check out this bit of idiocy:
To clear that up, below you will find an embedded PDF which contains the full (though redacted) versions of the following documents: the two Petitions (one pertaining to each parent), the Court’s Ex Parte Order, the Affidavit of Dana Bickford which was attached, the Motion for Change of Venue, and lastly, the Notice to Accused Parent, explaining the legal process.
"full (though redacted);" what a hoot!
Those who are jumping to the conclusion that the State is totally unjustified in taking the child are trying to hide the vast majority of the reasoning behind the action. While they are dead right that membership in the Oath Keepers (not a militia) should not have even been mentioned in the affidavit and should, if anything, be considered a plus in Irish's favor, the deceptiveness in hiding ALL the other reasons calls into question the legitimacy of their outrage and whether ours should be due.
Of important note:
The document attached earlier in the thread is a total fraud. It is an improper combination of two documents that served distinct purposes, giving the inexcusably false impression that it presents the case against Cheyenne's parents. It does not. Can anyone attach the full (and unredacted) document containing this infamous paragraph 7?
The "full (though redacted)" documents can be found here:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/confirmed-court-did-rely-on-oath-keeper-association-to-take-baby.html