Files or Flies?

Files or Flies?

A Connecticut mother says she saw court vendors in her child’s case using strange gestures to communicate with each other in court.

On September 9, 2015, during a public task force meeting, a government employee used gestures that weren’t American Sign Language. He clearly communicated something to someone on the other side of the room.

What do those strange gestures mean? Nodding seems to mean, “Yes.”

Taking off glasses seems to be in preparation for some super-secret code of some kind. Some could reasonably suggest that in the context of the task force’s fact-finding objectives, nodding in the affirmative with a sad expression, swiping his nose, rubbing his palms together and clasping one hand over the other could mean:

Yes. How sad. The fact-finding and data collection might finally reveal to the public where all those millions of dollars of state and federal funds went every year. That stinks. Get rid of the evidence. Thanks.”

It also could mean, “Yes. How sad. This fly on my nose bothers me. I’ll get rid of it now. I wipe my hands because flies carry germs. Thanks for listening. I hope the fly doesn’t fly over there.”

It’s tough to know what those gestures are when their meaning is a secret.

That’s why secret gestures and secret contracts don’t belong in any state where citizens need to be able to trust that judicial branch employees and vendors will spend taxpayer dollars wisely. And, after so many years of millions of state and federal dollars going to Connecticut family courts, a fairly decent family court system should be firmly in place by now.

block quote CT Chief Justice No Resources in abuse cases

Where is that fairly decent family court system?

On November 19, 2015, Connecticut’s Chief Family Court Judge told an advisory task force that Connecticut’s family courts don’t have the resources to protect vulnerable children in family court cases involving domestic violence and abuse. Here’s the video of that meeting:  CT-N: Task Force to Study the Statewide Response to Minors Exposed to Domestic Violence November 19, 2015 Meeting.  

So, who has all those millions of dollars if those millions of dollars weren’t used to build decent family court systems? 

One clue might be in the events leading up to a little boy being thrown off a bridge a few months ago in Middletown, Connecticut. Another clue might be in the meaning of those secret gestures used in the state capitol building and in family courtrooms during family court cases.

Needless to say, it will be most fortunate for the people of Connecticut if those gestures really are about flies.

Read More –>

NEW BOOK: The Worst Interests of the Child

NEW BOOK: The Worst Interests of the Child

The Worst Interests of the Child, new best seller on Amazon …

Click on image to read excerpts and to buy Keith Harmon Snow’s new book, The Worst Interests of the Child.

Read More –>

March for Family Court Reform in New Orleans, LA

March for Family Court Reform in New Orleans, LA

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

PARENTS GATHER TO PROTEST ENTRENCHED CORRUPTION IN THE FAMILY COURTS AND CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES. THEY SAY THE GOVERNMENT IS KIDNAPPING THEIR CHILDREN. STARVING FOR JUSTICE – A MARCH TO REFORM

NEW ORLEANS, LA – October 20, 2015 – On October 21, aggrieved parents from across Louisiana are gathering in New Orleans, at the corner of Chatres and St. Peter in the French Quarter, to express their frustration and anger at a justice system they say, is unjust, largely because of the failure of judges and other court professionals to afford due process or respect fundamental rights of parents in cases involving custody and the safety of children. The group will begin gathering at noon at the northwest corner of Jackson Square. At 1:00 PM, they will walk with signs 3.5 blocks to the steps of the Louisiana Supreme Court, where the group will briefly gather to hear speakers and personal accounts from some brave parents of what many often refer to as “family court abuse.”

“The family court is the gatekeeper of [children’s] safety,” says Richard Ducote, Esq., a nationally renowned attorney who has dedicated his 34 plus career to representing victims of domestic violence and abused children in contested custody cases. “[We must have] accountability and scrutiny for those judges, custody evaluators, guardians ad litem, and lawyers whose misguided and often misogynistic nonsense jeopardizes generations of children and compounds their misery.”

Richard Ducote will briefly address the group at the event. There will also be an open microphone for other parents who, among other abuses, claim that they were bullied and coerced by their own attorneys and judges into “agreements’ that were unfair and did not reflect the facts or evidence in the case, upon threat of being jailed, fined, or worst of all, losing all custody and contact with their children, simply because they were trying to protect them.

Many of those parents point to the popular theory sometimes referred to as “Parental Alienation Syndrome” or simply “Parental Alienation” as the excuse judges and psychologists rely upon to discount a parent’s claims that the child is being abused by the other parent or step-parent. The theory, they say, is “junk science” and reflects the teachings of discredited Richard Gardner, M.D., who wrote in support of pedophilia, which he characterized as “a natural phenomenon that likely enhanced the survival of the species.” To diagnose a parent with “parental alienation” or “parental alienation syndrome” requires that first the possibility that the child is actually being abused be ruled out. Once that is done, all of the evidence that would otherwise support a finding of abuse is used as evidence that the protective parent – usually the mother – is lying about the abuse in order to gain an advantage in custody proceedings.

Parents and other experts point to the fact that the first step in the diagnostic process is flawed – and many parents say – rigged. According to many experts there is no definitive way to “rule out” sexual or physical abuse without a confession, something that is unlikely to occur in a custody proceeding. At best, trained professionals can look for different behavioral and emotional clues that may or may not support a finding of abuse, but there is no way to say for certain. However, once alienation is diagnosed in a custody proceeding, all the evidence a parent has that the child is being abused becomes evidence that the parent is “alienating” the child.

The march is being sponsored by Bridge to Justice Foundation, a not-for-profit organization formed in 2014 by recently disbarred Nanine McCool. The LA Supreme Court disbarred Ms. McCool on June 30, 2015, finding that she had engaged in ex parte communications and made false misleading statements about two judges. Ms. McCool says that she exercised her 1st Amendment Rights to expose corruption and abuse of power in the judiciary and merely publicly charged the judges to “look at the evidence and apply the law before they made a decision.” She says her disbarment was retaliation for being critical of the judiciary and refusing to apologize for it. “I naively thought when I first spoke out that my fellow attorneys and other judges would be horrified by the abuse of power and denial of due process that these two judges were engaging in. But instead of being concerned about the judges’ transgressions, the Judiciary and the State Bar came after my license.”

Ms. McCool has been on a hunger strike during the month of October, Domestic Violence Awareness month, to raise awareness about the trap domestic violence coalitions are setting for mothers who are victims of abuse. “The set up this big expensive campaigns and assure battered moms that there is help out there, but the reality is, that’s a lie. The courts might let the mom get away, but she isn’t going to get away with her kids. “

End DV

For more information, contact Nanine McCool at Bridge to Justice Foundation, 985-231-0036, or email her at bridge2justice@gmail.com

Read More –>

Family Law Attorney and Whistleblower:  On Hunger Strike for Justice

Family Law Attorney and Whistleblower: On Hunger Strike for Justice

October 1 -31, 2015  Louisiana family law Attorney Nanine McCool is on a hunger strike. Click on the photo of the Starving for Justice t-shirt above, read the letter to the US Attorney General, and SIGN the petition to vote NO CONFIDENCE in the family and juvenile court systems.

October 2015

Petition to:

U.S. Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch

“We are submitting our vote of NO CONFIDENCE in the Family and Juvenile Court Systems, and the judiciary that rules them like tyrants from a throne.

Our family and juvenile courts are completely broken. Every day, judges abuse their immense power to bully, intimidate, and coerce absolute submission from parents and children under the guise of the “best interest of the child” doctrine, but in truth, simply because they can. There is no justice in these courts – only tyranny. And the lives of  thousands of parents and children are being ruined at the pleasure of judicial discretion, protected by judicial immunity. We the people are STARVED for justice and we look to you, the chief law enforcement officer, and the chief lawyer of the United States, to shine a bright light on these broken courts; to investigate the many cases of overreaching and violations of fundamental principles of justice, like due process and the 1st Amendment, that are committed by officers of the court, sworn by oath to serve the people and submit to the Rule of Law.

We look to you to initiate congressional hearings and other scrutiny on and of this devastating cancer of judicial tyranny that is eating away at our republic, and subjecting parents and children to nothing short of torture through the arbitrary, vindictive and senseless use of children as income streams and trophies.

We’re starved for justice and we look to you to serve your oath and fulfill the promise that defines the U.S.A: Liberty and Justice for ALL. “

Read More –>

Federal Court issues summons to defendants in Wolf v. New Jersey

The Web of Family Court: What You Should Know Before You’re Eaten Alive

Woman caught in spider web

 

A custody battle is a form of domestic violence. It’s harassment….period.

In many states, a rapist can sue the victim for custody or parenting time and win, forcing the victim and child to a lifetime of trauma.

Perpetrators of domestic violence often take revenge on their former partners for leaving the relationship and use custody battles to seek revenge and maintain control over their victims. (Stark, Coercive Control; Bancroft, Why Does He Do That? and The Batterer As Parent)

After leaving, a domestic violence victim is most at risk for the two years immediately following the end of the relationship, however a campaign of harassment can last for years, culminating in an abusive custody battle.

Even though there may be a property settlement agreement or consent order defining child custody, courts can and do eradicate the bargained-for terms of these agreements, which abrogates contract law. A family court judge will think nothing of violating a mother’s due process rights – disallowing evidence and witnesses, dismissing attorneys directly before trial, and completely ignoring the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) and the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), inter alia. Motives are often political, involving bribery, racketeering, human trafficking, child prostitution, and child pornography, the latter of which 60% comes from the United States. Child Protective Services (CPS) is part of this racket, as Nancy Schaefer would have been able to tell you, were she not murdered for exposing them.

Bribery is not just the classic slipping of money under the table – it can be anything from business deals, to offering a retiring judge a post-retirement job, to paying off a judge’s real estate properties.

Contrary to de jure law and public policy, there is a de facto policy of discrimination against women and children, especially domestic violence and child abuse/neglect victims, in the family courts. Family courts often engage in domestic violence by proxy, flying in the face of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and the Model Code on Domestic and Family Violence (National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, 1994) .

The segregation of mothers and their children has been achieved via Richard Gardner’s highly-controversial, pseudoscientific theory Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), which has been rejected repeatedly by the American Psychological Association (APA); and fails Daubert and Frye standards.

Gardner was a misogynist who claimed that when the child(ren) do not want to spend time with the father, it is because the mother is alienating him from the child(ren). This is bogus, a bill of attainder against women. It is natural for a child to prefer the mother, it is simply nature. Look at everything from puppies and kittens to cubs and ducklings.

Moreover, if a child is being abused, that child would naturally not want to be around their abuser. This is simple human nature and a basic human right. It is common sense.

Legitimate scientific studies such as the ACE Study by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the Saunders Report commissioned by the United States Department of Justice (USDOJ) have proved that removing a child from the mother and primary attachment figure is a health risk and that the problem is most often a male perpetrator of domestic violence.

The term “high conflict’ is a misnomer and redirect for what is really domestic violence (Stark). The first thing a court will do is gaslight a domestic violence victim by claiming no domestic violence exists. Father’s rights groups, a.k.a. men’s rights groups, love this concept, as it is a nexus sprung from Parental Alienation Syndrome, because it is way to blame the victim and seek custody to maintain control and dodge paying child support, as well as subjugate women in the larger scope of things.

What is happening in actuality is not Parental Alienation Syndrome targeted at the father, but Tangential Spouse Abuse (Stark and Lischick) and Legal Abuse Syndrome (Huffer) targeted at the mother. The objective is clear.

Father’s rights groups will often pose as families rights groups, but this is simply a ruse. Rest assured, these groups are more intent upon idolizing football players and rap artists for “keeping her in line” and employing Screw the Bitch tactics than anything else.

The two most common accusations a mother will face in a custody battle are 1) Parental Alienation or PAS claims in order to subvert domestic violence, child abuse and neglect, and 2) False accusations that the woman is mentally ill, in order to destroy her credibility.

Both fall under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), not because the mother is actually mentally ill, but rather because giving the impression that someone is mentally ill garners protection for that person under the ADA. Under Title II of the ADA, judges are not immune from suit. This is important because family court racketeers often hide behind the cloak of judicial immunity.

Richard Gardner is the champion of the pedophile. He testified in over 400 custody cases. Gardner (1991, p. 118) suggests that Western society’s is “excessively moralistic and punitive” toward pedophiles. Gardner maintains that “the Draconian punishments meted out to pedophiles go far beyond what I consider to be the gravity of the crime.” The current prohibition of sex between adults and children is an “overreaction” which Gardner traces to the Jews.

Organizations such as the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) spread Gardner’s theory like wildfire, training judges, custody evaluators and social workers to disbelieve mothers and children when they report abuse, and worse – separate them as punishment. And what better way to enable pedophilia and other human rights violations than remove the mother as the child’s most natural and fervent protector?

One need only look at a mama bear with her cubs as a prime example of the nature of mothers (and what happens when you mess with them).

PAS opened up a Pandora’s box of corruption – What better way to torture a mother than take away her child? To run a Kids for Cash racket? To distract and control women?

Men’s rights groups are intent upon resurrecting Lord Hale’s Law and the Rule of Thumb, which resonates with the antiquated notion of women and children as chattel.

Mothers are persecuted and marginalized without a legitimate basis, trying to protect their children. Victims may flee to another state with their child(ren) for protection, then face kidnapping charges of whom she bore and nurtured. In actuality, what the mother is doing is self-defense, as self defense includes the defense of others. Public policy on domestic violence states that the mother should not face repercussion, however despite this being the 21st century, mothers are vilified by the court for running off with “his property.” Family court proceedings, though considered civil, are in actuality, quasi-criminal where the mother is selectively prosecuted. This also speaks to Miranda rights.

Child Support and Financial Gaslighting

It is a truth universal, that men do not want to pay child support. It is not uncommon for mother and child(ren) to be denied proper child support in order to bring about bankruptcy of the mother, thus placing them in an untenable financial predicament, then claim she is financially unstable, and give custody to the monied spouse or partner.

It is not uncommon for the judge and father’s attorney to collude in hiding financial information or tweak a financial picture to benefit the male, even when tax returns clearly show otherwise. This is financial gaslighting and is absolutely illegal. In some cases, judges go so far as to order the mother or wife to unwittingly commit insurance fraud by ordering her to amend tax returns and lie to health and car insurance companies, placing her in an untenable predicament.

There are father’s rights organizations, backed by Fatherhood.gov, where men can “donate” items such as cars and boats bought with marital funds, which sets up the bribe. These financial manipulation networks help men evade taxes, circumvent paying money to a soon-to-be ex, and predetermine the outcome of the case.

Wall Streeters are most apt to engage in this racket, employing methodologies concurrent with the 1991 book Screw the Bitch: Divorce Tactics for Men by Dick Hart and Sun Tzu’s The Art of War as popularized by Gordon Gecko’s “Greed is good” phraseology in the 1987 film Wall Street.

This idolization mixed with the greed of the family court system, has resulted in the degradation of human decency and phenomenal financial losses of those affected by Ponzi schemes, foreclosure fraud, and family court fraud and racketeering in violation of the RICO Act of 1972.

Corruption and Social Engineering are nothing new

Don’t assume everyone knows the truth or rather, wants to know it. One of the most common misconceptions is that courts don’t take children away from the mother unless she’s unfit. This is an absolute myth. The reason for this is that the family court crisis is largely absent from the media. Why? Because every media outlet has a legal department acting on behalf of the legal community, not the public interest, advising reporters not to cover family court corruption, and instilling the fear of being sued, despite First Amendment protection of the freedom of the press.

Hitler wrote, “The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.” – Mein Kampf

Juvenal wrote, “Who will guard the guards themselves?” – Satires (Satire VI, lines 347–8)

Corruption and moral turpitude are running rampant in the family courts. The interests of children should be of paramount importance, but have given way to an abomination of a cottage industry exploiting children for profit and bankrupting the American public. You may wonder how this affects you if you don’t have children, however as you will see, it affects all of us because our civil and constitutional rights as a whole are being destroyed. It is happening in family courts across America, the implications of which are pivotal to the future of this country.

Read More –>

More Than a Grade

More Than a Grade

Read More –>

March 20, 2014 . . .

March 20, 2014 . . .

From The League of Women Voters, Boston Chapter:

You are cordially invited to meet and listen to Pulitzer Prize contender author and Huffington Post columnist Anne Stevenson. The League of Women Voters Boston Chapter Hosts: Spring Speaker Anne Stevenson on March 20 2014, Thursday evening 6:30-7:30pm, Brighton Public Library, MA

Anne Stevenson is a Boston based political analyst and freelance journalist whose Washington Times series on the Connecticut courts is an accepted contender for the 2014 Pulitzer Prize. Stevenson is a graduate of Tufts University who attended Suffolk University School of Law. For over a decade, Stevenson has worked on various social justice initiatives, helping to facilitate constructive and productive communication between government and everyday families using media and policy directives. This work has been featured in the Huffington Post, Washington Times, Boston Globe, Community News, NECN and other media outlets.

Read Anne’s Articles: 

Connecticut Courts Impose Outrageous Costs on Disabled Families.  Communities Digital News,  March 11, 2014.

Connecticut Task Force Hears Accounts of Victimization by Family Court.  Communities Digital News, March 1, 2014.

Connecticut Court failure: The deadly rebranding of Joshua Komisarjevsky.  Communities Digital News,  February 25, 2014.

CT Task Force Spars with Parents Over Billing Fraud in Family Court. The Washington Times, December 26, 2013.

CT Court Employees Face Tough Questions Over Conflicts of Interest. The Washington Times,  May 20, 2013.

Top 5 HHS Programs Endangering Women and Children. The Huffington Post, May 14, 2012.

Is Judicial Activism the Panacea for Legislative Inaction?.  The Huffington Post, May 9, 2013.

The League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan political organization, has fought since 1920 to improve our systems of government and impact public policies through citizen education and advocacy. A grassroots organization, the League’s enduring vitality and resonance comes from its unique decentralized structure that works at the local, state, and national levels. LWV Boston is committed to opening the doors of government to all of Boston’s citizens. We strive for a representative system of government that is accountable, responsive, and supportive of citizen participation, with membership open to both men and women. Throughout each year, the League provides objective information on critical public policy issues and candidates seeking office, promotes voter service programs, and works to keep the public well-informed on government and social policy issues.

Read More –>

“Women need to know the strategies that are implemented by lawyers such as myself who represent alleged perpetrators." Attorney Herb Viergutz

Q: Do Family Courts Use a Controversial Theory? A: Yes.

by Julia Fletcher

This past January, Al Jazeera America published the article entitled,

Do Courts Use a Controversial Theory to Punish Mothers who Allege Abuse?” 

The answer is: “Yes!” And, here’s an even more important question:

“Where’s the United States of America’s

mainstream media’s investigation and coverage of the family court crisis?”

(Refresh the page if the video clip doesn’t load right away.)

Domestic Violence Continued: Contested Child Custody. Producer Dr. Sharon K. Araji, University of Colorado Denver, 2010, DVD.

Domestic Violence Continued Contested Child Custody 13 37 to 19 12 high definition

Read More –>

Wendy Murphy. (2007) And Justice For Some: An Expose of the Lawyers and Judges who Let Dangerous Criminals Go Free.

BEFORE YOU STEP ONE FOOT INTO FAMILY COURT …

Wendy Murphy. (2007) And Justice For Some: An Expose of the Lawyers and Judges who Let Dangerous Criminals Go Free.

Wendy Murphy, And Justice for Some. (2007).

From Wendy Murphy, JD :

 

“A colleague of mine, Anne Stevenson, recently testified before the Connecticut legislature on behalf of good parents and ethical court employees who feared retribution if they spoke up themselves against the corruption, fraud and shady deals in Connecticut’s family court system.

 

 The content of her testimony is critically important, and not widely understood, so I agreed to post it here to provide folks with a better understanding of how the “divorce industry” in Connecticut is ruining families financially, and subjecting children to dangerous custody arrangements.

 

 Her proposed changes for reform, set forth below, were provided to the Connecticut legislature but are applicable to other states as well because the problems in Connecticut are systemic in American family courts.”

 

Read More –>

To find an upcoming screening, visit: divorcecorp.com

Dr. Drew: Get This Conversation Going

“What bothers me more than anything as a physician,

if this sort of chummy relationship existed

between doctors

and any other providers of services, 

there would be outrage.”

                                                                                                                        – Dr. Drew Pinsky

And so, the public conversation begins.  . . . 

**********
@Sbuden1Buden Outrageous lack of accountability in the family court system, “the players” ie judges, appointees know it! #divorcecorpchat
— Kathleen Russell (@MarinKat) January 8, 2014 
**********
#divorcecorpchat#divorcecorpchat CT AFCC (Association of Family and Conciliation of Courts) chapter is headed by 3 Superior Court Judges
— Scott Buden (@Sbuden1Buden) January 8, 2014 
**********
@drdrew@DoctorKarin Fulton court is asked to consider the needs of a child making outcries #DivorceCorpChatpic.twitter.com/s77YR4ibI1
— My Advocate Center (@MyAdvocateCentr) January 8, 2014 
**********
#divorcecorpchat Fooling yourselves. Nothing can be done. Judges in league w/ guardians and lawyers, all about $. Ex parte de rigueur.
— stacey_hudson (@stacey_hudson) January 8, 2014 
**********
IN AMERICA!! “@drdrew: .@divorcecorp one father ended up in prison for 5 yrs for simply criticizing the judge on his blog. #divorcecorpchat
— Michael Brigante (@MichaelBrigante) January 8, 2014 
**********
@divorcecorp anyone thinking about marriage or divorce needs to educate themselves about the realities of family courts #divorcecorpchat
— Dr Drew (@drdrew) January 8, 2014 
 **********

#DivorceCorpChat on Twitter . . . 



Read More –>