Whether the injunctive rulings manifest improper purpose to tamper with the petitioner presenting as a witness, diminish the petitioner's secured rights and privileges, and conceal misconduct of the court and related officers, constituting an egregious abuse of discretion and office

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Rule 14,1(a) If the system does not provide adequate measures to address culpability, the injunctive rulings as to why; how; ‘when entered’ manifest improper purpose to tamper with me presenting as witness to legal system to diminish by trickery my secured rights and privileges guarded by this court, in an act of retaliation meant to conceal misconduct of court and related officers ONLY by taking shield of 9+ million population to make them act against their own welfare [like my son by CNN, Arlington DHS, KIF, & UMFS, by Tort of Conversion an act of fraud by misusing to make legal statements on behalf of 9+ million population involving minors without justification, consent, publication or notice affecting their secured rights, privileges, then the actions not to provide adequate measures constitute egregious abuse of discretion and office. Arlington’s GDC judge Karen Hanenberg’s illegal 2/6/12 injunctive order moots itself mune pro tunc in