Prosecutor Lied, Judge Complied:
Demanding the Disqualification of
a Lawless Judge and Prosecutor
Exposing blatant judicial and prosecutorial misconduct in a landmark parental rights case.
LAS VEGAS, NV — October 15, 2025
The Clark County courtroom in the case of Austin Sachs and his wife, Yuxia Zhang, has become a defiance of fundamental justice. As the October 20, 2025 hearing approaches, a pivotal session intended to finalize Mr. Sachs’s termination of court-appointed counsel and to rule on an emergency motion to vacate a sweeping, unlawful no-contact order, the stakes could not be higher. That order currently bars both parents from any form of contact with their own son, under the unlawful and draconian threat of immediate arrest and no-bail bench warrants. Against this backdrop of judicial overreach and prosecutorial aggression, the underlying question looms ever larger: Can the presiding judge and lead prosecutor possibly claim impartiality now?
This is not hyperbole. In his detailed 38‑page Joinder to his wife’s emergency motion to vacate the unlawful no contact order, Mr. Sachs laid bare a broad pattern of statutory violations, due process deprivations, ethical breaches, and prosecutorial fraud by Judge Jessica K. Peterson and Chief Deputy District Attorney Dena Rinetti.
At the core of this case lies a devastating truth: the parents were framed in early 2019 for three felony counts each of child neglect and abuse, charges that have since been scientifically disproven. Their son’s condition was not the result of parental wrongdoing but of iatrogenic gadolinium poisoning, a medical injury confirmed by world‑renowned MRI contrast expert Dr. Richard Semelka in his January 13, 2025, four‑page report. That report exonerates the parents completely, yet both the prosecutor and judge have willfully ignored it, acting in open defiance of law, science, and ethics.
Such a refusal to acknowledge exonerating medical evidence raises the gravest of questions about motive. The prosecutor’s malicious insistence on pursuing a debunked narrative, coupled with the judge’s apparent alignment with that agenda, suggests a disturbing intent: to shield the powerful children’s hospital, its doctors, and its business interests at all costs.
Legal expert Richard Cornforth, author of “Secrets of the Legal Industry”, reviewed the case and called it “one of the worst I’ve ever seen,” describing it as a landmark battle for parental rights and a test of whether Nevada’s justice system can still correct its own corruption.
At the heart of any fair judicial system lies one ironclad principle: no person may be punished under a law or order that has not been properly enacted, proven, and served. In this case, the record shows that Judge Peterson has repeatedly bypassed those safeguards, undermining everything from Nevada statutes to constitutional due process. Her transgressions are not isolated errors, they form a pattern of hypocrisy and procedural lawbreaking.
Judge Jessica K. Peterson: Repeated Violations and Hypocrisy
Judge Peterson’s March 5, 2025 affidavit is especially revealing. In it, she swears that she holds no bias or prejudice, that she has “maintained an open mind” for every issue, and that she handles each case “with diligence, integrity, and impartiality.” She even states she has “on numerous occasions corrected myself when I have made a mistake.” Yet her courtroom record stands in stark opposition to these assertions.
- On September 5, 2025, after denying the State’s motion to exclude Dr. Semelka’s testimony, she granted the oral stay motion put forth by the prosecutor, despite the fact that under NRS 177.015(2) such a stay must be tied to a timely notice of appeal, which was never filed. That stay was later memorialized in writing without acknowledging or remedying its lack of statutory basis.
- Just days later, on September 8, 2025, she signed bench warrants for both parents based on prosecutor’s Rinetti’s brazenly false claim that they violated a “no-contact order.” But the “order” cited was nothing more than the original 2019 summons for arraignment with a handwritten annotation stating “no contact with named victim.” Under NRS 178.4845, any no-contact order is time-limited to 120 days, meaning that whatever that note may have once represented was long expired and void. Judge Peterson failed to verify the validity of the order. Instead, she simply accepted the claim and acted as prosecutor, judge, and executioner in one fell swoop.
- Her public comments on the record have also exhibited bias. She has expressed skepticism of the parents’ motives, made speculative accusations about their intent, and dismissed legal arguments as though they were frivolous, even in the face of detailed legal documentation. This runs directly counter to her sworn promise of impartiality and judicial restraint.
In sum: Judge Peterson has violated multiple statutes, failed to afford due process, ignored invalid documents, silenced defendants, and repeatedly acted as though the rules apply only to others, all while claiming to be above bias or error.
Prosecutor Dena Rinetti: Misconduct, Falsehoods, and Abuse of Power
If Judge Peterson’s path is marked by overreach and hypocrisy, Prosecutor Rinetti’s is marked by deception and malice. The conduct she has engaged in is not mere prosecutorial zeal, it is a calculated attack on truth, fairness, and the law itself.
- After being denied her motion to strike Dr. Semelka’s expert evidence on September 5, she made the unlawful oral motion for a stay, asserting authority she does not have, and then failed to file any notice of appeal within the mandatory timeframe. She then sat on that illegal stay, refusing to correct it even after formal demands from Mr. Sachs in writing.
- She misrepresented a 2019 summons annotation as a valid no-contact order to justify bench warrants and arrests. That is not a mistake, in Nevada law it is demonstrably false, and as an experienced prosecutor she had a duty not to mislead the court. Her malicious actions directly led to nine days of fugitive status for an innocent family.
- She has refused to acknowledge or remediate these errors even after being put on formal notice, a silence that speaks volumes about her belief that the rules don’t apply to her. Her inaction, despite clear legal mandates and repeated demands, violates duties of candor, fairness, and prosecutorial ethics.
- Because her misconduct lies outside the legitimate bounds of prosecutorial advocacy, her acts may not be shielded by qualified immunity. That opens the door for civil rights claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as well as accountability for abuse of process, malicious prosecution, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Note: Mr. Sachs is now actively seeking a civil rights attorney to bring immediate action against Chief Deputy DA Dena Rinetti. His contact information is included in the full Joinder linked at the end of this article.
The Path Forward: Demand for Disqualification and a Return to Lawful Process
With this long and well-documented record of statutory violations, factual misrepresentations, and ethical breaches, it is no longer tenable for either Judge Jessica K. Peterson or Chief Deputy District Attorney Dena Rinetti to remain involved in this case. Their continued participation compromises every proceeding and directly undermines the integrity of the judicial system.
For Mr. Sachs, the October 20, 2025 hearing is intended to finalize the termination of his court-appointed counsel, Mr. Marchese, who, despite receiving two formal demand letters, refused in writing to file a simple joinder, made no effort to expedite his withdrawal, and failed to request a waiver of appearance. This wasn’t mere neglect; it was willful sabotage that forced Mr. Sachs to conduct his own legal research just to justify filing pro se. The Nevada Supreme Court’s ADKT 411 Order spells out the binding obligations of appointed counsel, obligations Mr. Marchese blatantly ignored. In his October 14 filing, Mr. Sachs cited controlling U.S. Supreme Court precedent to lawfully assert his right to file on his own behalf after Marchese’s refusal to perform even this basic legal task.
Meanwhile, Mr Sachs’s, wife, Yuxia Zhang, is giving her own appointed counsel, Travis Shetler, one final opportunity to act as a real advocate, after he failed to object to the fraudulent arrest maneuver by Rinetti on September 8. That hearing, based on an expired, handwritten note never signed into law, was not just improper, it was illegal.
At stake on October 20 is far more than procedural housekeeping. Also pending is a motion filed by Ms Zhang’s court appointed attorney to vacate the unlawful no-contact order, an emergency request that would finally restore their right to speak with and support their son, who has been the silent victim of this multi-year legal charade. It was only after the September 8th “shotgun” hearing that the Sachs family made the heart-wrenching decision to send their son on a one-way flight to China to protect him from being seized by Arkansas CPS, a chilling reminder of the stakes involved when lawlessness runs unchecked in the courtroom.
This is not simply a case of courtroom misconduct. This is a frame-up of innocent parents who had the courage to seek proper medical care for their child, only to be punished for it by a system that appears more interested in protecting a powerful children’s hospital than in protecting the truth. Again, their son’s gadolinium poisoning was real, confirmed by one of the world’s leading authorities, Dr. Richard Semelka, who issued a four-page expert report on January 13, 2025 exonerating the Sachs family’s actions and confirming the source of harm as iatrogenic, caused by the medical system itself.
The prosecutor and judge have no legal authority to ignore that medical truth. And yet, that’s exactly what they’ve done.
A Call to the Public: Read the Full Evidence
For those who want to see the truth firsthand, Mr. Sachs has made his full 38-page Joinder, filed October 14, 2025, available online, complete with supporting exhibits and legal references. This detailed filing lays out, with precision, every law violated, every due process right denied, and every lawful step the parents have taken in pursuit of accountability. Any reasonable observer who reads this monumental document will come to the same conclusion: Judge Jessica Peterson and Prosecutor Dena Rinetti must recuse themselves immediately, or, failing that, the parents will be left with no choice but to move once again for their disqualification. They are not holding their breath for the former.
Final Word
This case is no longer just about the Sachs family. It is now a landmark battle over whether ordinary citizens, even when fully vindicated by science and expert testimony, can receive justice in a courtroom where the rules are bent to serve political or institutional interests.
Prosecutor Lied, Judge Complied — but the people are watching now, and the truth is out.
FULL MEDIA COVERAGE
Alex Falconi, of our Our Nevada Judges media company is graciously providing full media coverage of this criminal frame-up to include full coverage of the upcoming trial (date to be determined soon).
The YouTube link to his channel for this case is here:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLsKMpjAPcB2vENMuRhH_nSceRUWIZaLoI