Posts

Same Sex Marriage: Can a judge stop you from getting a divorce in Texas?

Same Sex Marriage: Can a judge stop you from getting a divorce in Texas?

Originally published by The Law Office of Bryan Fagan, PLLC Blog.

Despite the decision out of our federal Supreme Court a few years ago that legalized same sex marriage across our country there are still some misunderstandings and questions regarding that subject. This is understandable to a degree. The change in laws dramatically altered the landscape of family law in terms of who is and is not able to participate in the family law courts. In addition, some folks I have spoken with in my capacity as a consultative attorney with the Law Office of Bryan Fagan still have questions if marriage and divorce work the same for opposite sex and same sex persons. Today’s blog post will discuss marriage and divorce for same sex couples.

Expected length of time for a same sex divorce in Texas?

There are two roads that your divorce could go down. The first is the path of least resistance- an uncontested divorce. To be considered truly uncontested you and your spouse would need to be in agreement on getting a divorce, have a plan in place for diving up any marital property and if you have children would need to have every aspect of a parenting plan agreed upon as well. This means conservatorship, visitation, support, etc. all need to be decided prior to hiring an attorney. If even one piece of this pie is missing, then your divorce is not uncontested and will therefore require some degree of negotiation.

The second path is unfortunately the more common road that most divorces go down- a contested divorce. All of the above issues that I laid out are in play in a contested divorce. The more substantial your martial property or the more detailed your parenting objectives and plans are the more complicated and longer your divorce will likely take. There is not anything wrong with this as a general rule, but it can get tedious and tiresome for most people who are eager to complete their divorce and move on with the rest of their lives.

Generally speaking, a divorce in Texas must take at least sixty days from the date on which the Original Petition for Divorce is filed with the court. Ostensibly the sixty first date is the earliest date on which you and your spouse can have a judge sign a final decree of divorce. A final decree could be signed and ready the day after your petition is filed but absent extreme circumstances (like family violence being an issue) it is unlikely that a judge would waive the sixty-day waiting period. For those of you wondering, the waiting period exists in order for you and your spouse to make absolutely sure that you want to get a divorce rather than remain married and try to work it out together.

How can you avoid a long and protracted divorce?

The key to a fast-moving divorce is to understand early on that you are not going to get 100% of what you want. I wish there were some way to ensure that all of our clients always got just what they wanted out of a divorce but to this point I have not been able to do the math on how to get there. If any attorney ever does get to that point, then the rest of us may as well give it up and start looking for work elsewhere.

The reason that divorces end up being situations where you and your spouse both give up (and therefore gain) things in order to settle the case is that most family courts in Texas require that you attend mediation at least once throughout your case’s life. Typically, you will attend mediation once before any temporary orders hearings and then again before your trial.

Temporary Orders hearings have everything to do with how you and your spouse will be situated during your divorce from the perspective of making sure bills are paid, the kids are cared for and one another are treated with respect. Mediation involves attending a formal negotiation session with your attorneys in the office of a third-party mediator. The mediator is also very likely a practicing family law attorney him or herself so you will be able to gauge the relative strength or weakness of your arguments with the mediator as well.

In mediating for final orders you will likely be extending much of the temporary orders out into your post-divorce life as well as deciding what will happen with any marital property accumulated by you and your spouse. Texas is a community property state. This means that any property that you acquired during the course of your marriage is considered to be jointly owned by both of you and is therefore subject to being divided up in your divorce case. If it is your contention that something acquired during your marriage is your property separate from your spouse- like a gift of some sort- then the burden is on your to prove by clear and convincing evidence that this is the case.

Tips for preparing for mediation in your same sex divorce case

Attending mediation will be the same for you as it would be for persons going through any other divorce. You and your attorney should come prepared with settlement offers, a list of property that may be in play as far as negotiation is concerned as well as plans and ideas on how to divide up parenting time with your children. The more prepared you are and the more variations you have available to you of the different parenting plans the more likely you will be to reach a relatively pain free settlement.

For instance, it is commonly thought in opposite sex divorces that mothers have the advantage when it comes to being named the primary conservator of your child. Primary conservator means the parent who has the right to determine the primary residence of your child- among other rights. This allows your child to live with you throughout the school year and provides visitation time (mostly on weekends) to your spouse once the divorce has been completed.

In same sex divorces there would not be an apples to apples comparison due to there not being a male and female parent from which to choose from. You and your spouse should have had discussions heading into mediation regarding which of you is better suited to be named as the primary conservator of your children. Having an honest conversation with your attorney about which parent has been more active, more involved, and better acquainted with your children’s day to day needs is a good place to start. My admitting to yourself that your spouse has taken the lead in these areas throughout your marriage or has a work schedule that is more conducive to providing the level of care that is needed to raise a child on a daily basis is not admitting that you are not a good parent. It can, however, help you to eliminate contentious delays in your case and lead to a more developed settlement agreement.

Another aspect of divorce mediation that you need to be prepared for is determining how to divide up your bigger financial assets. Retirement plans, bank accounts, home equity and the like are probably the type of assets that you will have in play for your case. If you have not considered these subjects prior to entering into mediation you will find out that you will need to work through them in mediation. Seeing as how most mediation sessions are only four hours long you will not be optimizing your time by spending an undue amount of time on these sort of brain storming sessions while in mediation. Rather, spend a few weeks prior to mediation using your attorney as a go-between to communicate settlement offers to your spouse.

Finally, it is important to note that what you settle upon in mediation cannot (in most circumstances) be changed. That means that you cannot wake up the morning after mediation and call your attorney in a panic because you think you made a huge mistake in deciding to agree to a geographic restriction for your child when you really want to move back home to Colorado to be closer to family once the divorce is over with.

You can avoid problems like this by asking questions of your attorney about anything that you are agreeing or not agreeing to. If any settlements are reached (either in part or in full) then the mediator will present rough draft copies of what is known as a mediated settlement agreement to you and your spouse. You can and should go over them with your attorney to make sure that you understand everything that is being agreed to. If something doesn’t make sense, or if the wording of what the mediator included does not comport to the agreement as you understood it please raise that issue before mediation is over with.

Will you ever have to go to court in your divorce?

Thankfully you will likely only have one court date that you will have to attend during your divorce. That court appearance will be an uncontested appearance in what is known as a Prove Up hearing. The petitioner (party who filed the Petition for Divorce) will attend a quick hearing with their attorney in court. At the prove up hearing your attorney will be presenting you and your Final Decree of Divorce to the judge for his or her approval. The attorney will ask you questions regarding the divorce decree as a means to show the judge that you and your spouse have come to an agreement and are ready to move forward to close out your case.

In all likelihood your judge will not ask any questions and will send you off on your way. The divorce decree will be signed by the judge later that day and will likely be posted online in the day following. You can pay for certified copies at the clerk’s office shortly thereafter.

One question that I am sometimes asked by clients is how much of your prove up hearing will be heard by the public. It is true that anyone can walk into your courtroom during your prove up hearing and hear some details about your case. If you are at all trying to keep the divorce from becoming an “event” or something like that I understand why you may not be too excited to set foot in court and put your life on display in front of a handful of people.

I cannot emphasize, however, that it is unlikely that anyone in court other than the court report, judge, your attorney and you will be paying attention to a word of what is said. In Harris County, for example, you and your attorney will approach the bench and speak to the judge in a conversational tone. Therefore, a person in the first row of courtroom seats will have problems hearing what is happening in your case. The bottom line is that if you are worried about airing your business for all the world to hear then you should be at ease because a Prove Up hearing is not that kind of court appearance.

Closing thoughts on same sex divorce cases

It could be that you never imagined that you would ever get married in your life. Now you are having to contend with the thought of getting a divorce. This cannot be an easy time for you and your family. However, the attorneys and staff with the Law Office of Bryan Fagan are here to tell you that our office will stand with you throughout your case until your process is complete.

If you have any questions about the material that we have covered please consider contacting the Law Office of Bryan Fagan. We offer free of charge consultations six days a week with our licensed family law attorneys. It would be our pleasure to talk with you and to answer your questions and concerns in a comfortable, pressure-free environment.

Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.



Read More –>

Picture

Timeline Indicates: Stanford University Professor Michele Dauber Set Up Judge Persky for Recall as Chanel Miller (Emily Doe) Gets 60- Minute Interview and Book Deal

Cindy Hendrickson  Email – dated December 2, 2016

Timeline Links  Sex Trafficking & Election Rigging to Family Court 

2015: Court Clerk David Yamasaki reportedly met with Orange County DA Tony Rackauckas to study the county’s snitch program  in an effort to mirror that  program for the benefit of Santa Clara County DA Jeff Rosen. 
Jeff Rosen then went to work with his inner circle to move Victim Witness Services under his management and control  with an eye to earning funds from state and federal grant money earmarked for crime victims. 

It is believed that Rosen then designed a scheme with the help of prosecutors in his office to  and to rigging local elections in a manner that would place more prosecutors in family courts where domestic violence cases could feed money to private divorce lawyers and criminal defense attorneys who regularly donate to Rosen’s political campaigns. 

   Jeff Rosen Eyes Two High Profile Cases for Scheme

        2016- SCHEME TO RIG LOCAL ELECTIONS 

Parents involved in domestic violence cases connected to divorce and custody knew something was amiss. Many women reached out to Michele Dauber, who was gaining fame for her advocacy for a sexual assault victim known as Emily Doe and now known to be Chanel Miller, the woman now known for her 60- Minute interview and a book deal, but before that interview, there were thousands of emails that show Dauber worked with prosecutors in the Orange County and Santa Clara County DA’s office as her effort to see the recall of Judge Aaron Persky that would assure DDA Cindy Hendrickson a spot on the Santa Clara Family Court bench.  

Dauber’s access to the DA’s office and DA Jeff Rosen was unpresented. The DA’s own Public Information Officer Sean Webby even assisted Dauber in attacking protestors who attempted to reveal improper governmental activity surrounding the recall’s press conference that were stacked with Dauber supporters. 

Dauber Schemes with DA Jeff Rosen to Beat Persky

DA Employees Saher Stephan and Nida Rehman Involved Richmond Police Department Sex Scandal – August 2016 

Whistleblower: David Yamasaki Steals Public Funds and Moves to Orange County to Launch Private Judge Scheme In Family Courts 

Walter Hammon’s Family Law Cases Expose Court and Cop Corruption

 2016 Michele Dauber Worked  with DDA Alaleh Kianerci Draft the Famed Emily Doe Letters 

As mainstream media insisted the Emily Doe letter was written by the victim in the Brock Turner case, emails produced to local reporters in March of 2019 show a different story. Those emails have been provided to academics and journalists and are now being reviewed by the Attorney General and the Department of Justice after it appeared Michele Dauber used her position  as a law professor at Stanford University and her connections to Google and other Silicon Valley Titans to rig views  on You Tube, Twitter and Change.org and create the perfect victim that would result in the recall of Judge Aaron Persky and the placement of Cindy Hendrickson in Silicon Valley Family Courts. 

Following the recall, it is believed that Santa Clara County District Attorney worked with connections in Alabama to perpetuate a human trafficking network across the country  and operating in Santa Clara and Orange County family courts where domestic violence cases involving high profile Silicon Valley tech executives are involved. 

Rosen is rumored  to be working with snitches, moles and family law attorneys to chill speech and discredit journalists willing to report on the county’s family courts. 

Rosen Using Chanel Miller for His Scheme

As Chanel Miller , AKA Emily Doe Appeared on 60 Minuets, Rosen reportedly told his wife, a family court judge, that his plan was almost complete. DDA Alaleh Kianerci is now posed to overtake the AG position  in the next election and Rosen’s snitches and moles are moving in to take out Sheriff Laurie Smith, the only other woman who poses a threat to Rosen’s future political career. 

Court Watchers Learn County Counsel Ward Penfold, James Williams and Michael Rossi Involved in Sex Trafficking Cases Connected with  Family Courts 

Court Watchers in the Santa Clara County Superior Courthouse on September 24, 2019 overheard mediation discussions involving lawyers Ward Penfold, James Williams and Michael  Rossi who represent Supervisors Cindy Chavez, Dave Cortese and DA Employee Kasey Halcon as well as private divorce attorney Nicole Ford alleged to be involved in a criminal conspiracy that is connected to Orange County domestic violence and family law cases where private judges act under the management and supervision of court clerk David Yamasaki who moved to Orange County in 2016 as part of the state’s private judging scam that has resulted in the taking of thousands of children and the transfer of billions of dollars of private funds to the political campaigns of Democratic candidates including District Attorney Jeff Rosen and 80% of the judges serving in Silicon Valley’s family law and domestic violence cases. 

Read More –>

best interest of the child

What Does a Judge Taking Into Consideration When Deciding “The Best Interest Of The Child?”

best interest of the child

 

The judge considers many factors in determining child custody during divorce. Most important is “the best interests of the child.” To determine best interests, the judge may look at the following factors:

When Deciding The “Best Interest Of The Child?”

Home Environments. This refers to the respective environments offered by you and your spouse. The court may consider factors such as the safety, stability, and nurturing found in each home.

Emotional Ties. The emotional relationship between the child and each parent may include the nature of the bond between the parent and child and the feelings shared between the child and each parent.

Age, Sex, and Health of the Child and Parents. Louisiana no longer ascribes to the “tender years” doctrine, which formerly gave a preference for custody of very young children to the mother. If one of the parents has an illness that may impair the ability to parent, it may be considered by the court. Similarly, the judge may look at special health needs of a child.

Effect on the Child of Continuing or Disrupting an Existing Relationship. This factor might be applied in your case if you stayed at home for a period of years to care for your child, and awarding custody to the other parent would disrupt your relationship with your child.

Attitude and Stability of Each Parent’s Character. The court may consider your ability and willingness to be cooperative with the other parent in deciding who should be awarded custody. The court may also consider each parent’s history, which reflects the stability of his or her character.

Moral Fitness of Each Parent, Including Sexual Conduct. The extent to which a judge assesses the morals of a parent can vary greatly from judge to judge. Sexual conduct will ordinarily not be considered unless it has harmed your child or your child was exposed to sexual conduct.

Capacity to Provide Physical Care and Satisfy Educational Needs. Here the court may examine whether you or the other parent is better able to provide for your child’s daily needs such as nutrition, health care, hygiene, social activities, and education. The court may also look to see whether you or your spouse has been attending to these needs in the past.

Preferences of the Child. The child’s preference regarding custody will be considered if the child is of sufficient age of comprehension, regardless of chronological age, and the child’s preference is based on sound reasoning. Louisiana, unlike some other states, does not allow a child to choose the parent he or she wishes to live with. Rather, the court may consider the well-reasoned preferences of a child, at any age. Typically, the older the child, the greater the weight given to the preference. However, the child’s reasoning is also important.

Health, Welfare, and Social Behavior of the Child. Every child is unique. Your child’s needs must be considered when it comes to deciding custody and parenting time. The custody of a child with special needs, for example, may be awarded to the parent who is better able to meet those needs.

The judge may also consider whether you or your spouse has fulfilled the role of primary care provider for meeting the day-to-day needs of your child.

One tool to assist you and your attorney in establishing your case as a primary care provider is a chart indicating the care you and the other parent have each provided for your child. The clearer you are about the history of parenting, the better job your attorney can do in presenting your case to the judge.

Look at the activities below to help you review the role of you and your spouse as care providers for your child.

Parental Roles Chart

Activity Mother  Father
Attended prenatal medical visits
Attended prenatal class
Took time off work after child born
Got up with child for feedings
Got up with child when sick at night
Bathed child
Put child to sleep
Potty-trained child
Prepared and fed meals to child
Helped child learn numbers, letters, colors, etc.
Helped child with practice for music, dance lessons, sports
Took time off work for child’s appointments
Stayed home from work with sick child
Took child to doctor visits
Went to pharmacy for child’s medication
Administered child’s medication
Took child to therapy
Took child to optometrist
Took child to dentist
Took child to get haircuts
Bought clothing for child
Bought school supplies for child
Transported child to school
Picked child up after school
Drove car pool for child’s school
Went to child’s school activities
Helped child with homework and projects
Attended parent-teacher conferences
Helped in child’s classroom
Chaperoned child’s school trips and activities
Transported child to daycare
Communicated with daycare providers
Transported child from daycare
Attended daycare activities
Signed child up for sports, dance, music
Bought equipment for sports, music, dance
Transported child to sports, music, dance
Attended sports, music, dance practices
Attended sports games, music, dance recitals
Coached child’s sports
Transported child from sports, music, dance
Know child’s friends and friends’ families
Took child to religious education
Participated in child’s religious education
Obtained information and training about special needs of child.
Comforted child during times of emotional upset

Domestic Violence. Domestic violence is an important factor in determining custody, as well as parenting time and protection from abuse during the transfer of your child to the other parent. If domestic violence is a concern in your case, be sure to discuss it in detail with your attorney during the initial consultation so that every measure can be taken to protect the safety of you and your children.

The post What Does a Judge Taking Into Consideration When Deciding “The Best Interest Of The Child?” appeared first on Divorced Moms.

Read More –>

Demand to AOC for removal of corrupt Head of Bergen Family Court, Judge Peter J. Melchionne

Demand to AOC for removal of corrupt Head of Bergen Family Court, Judge Peter J. Melchionne

“The Godfather”
played by pedophile-lovin Judge Peter J. Melchionne, Head of the Bergen Family Court

In a complaint letter and addendum filed this past week with Glenn Grant, J.A.D., Acting Administrative Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) in New Jersey, New York mother Karin Wolf is demanding the removal of Judge Peter J. Melchionne, the Presiding Judge of the Bergen County Family Court in the State of New Jersey, and calls for an investigation into the matter.

According to Wolf, “What New Jersey needs is a public task force hearing like the one they did in Connecticut in 2014, where parents testified over the course of 14 hours about the perversions of family court.”

Ratings on Judge Peter J. Melchionne from The Robing Room:

Ms. Wolf posits that the State of New Jersey had no compelling state interest to prevent her kids from leaving the State and returning to her, as the children became domiciled by operation of law with her in the State of New York upon her ex-husband’s death in April 2018. Ms. Wolf says the State of New Jersey has once again, violated her fundamental rights embedded in the United States Constitution and that this case is ripe for a 5.1 constitutional challenge in the federal court.

Some background of the case – In 2013, Karin lost her kids after years of being denied legal representation by the State of New Jersey, including the Bergen Family Court dismissing her attorney 15 minutes prior to trial, forcing her to proceed unrepresented, violating her Due Process rights; and the Appellate Division blocking her from perfecting an appeal by allowing the Office of the County Counsel to deny her free transcripts, which they were required to do pursuant to a U.S. Supreme Court precedent. In 2014, Judge Gerald C. Escala, known for taking a bribe in the Denike v. Cupo case, retaliated against Karin for filing a grievance against him and trying to protect her kids, barring Karin from contact with her kids.

In 2014, Karin sued the Office of the County Counsel in federal court and it was reprimanded by a federal judge. In that case, James X. Sattely, Esq. represented the Office of the County Counsel as a defendant; and Judge Bonnie J. Mizdol, now Head of the Bergen Court, was also a defendant.

James X. Sattely is now a judge in the Bergen County Criminal Court, who has, in a major conflict of interest, presided over Karin’s recent criminal case, where she’s being vilified (as the only living parent) for picking up her 14-year-old daughter during the summer of 2018 in North Carolina, for safety reasons, when the girl ran away from her stepmother Luciana Coutinho-Crane, whom the child alleges physically abused, sexually harassed, and medically neglected her.

In the fall of 2017, Karin’s young teenage daughter disclosed that her stepmother Luciana Coutinho-Crane was physically abusing her, leaving bruises on the child and spitting in her food; and that Coutinho-Crane’s father, Plinio Coutinho, kicked her and was exposing Karin’s kids to pornography; and that the child’s father, Edward Crane, was ignoring the problem and coercing the child to keep quiet, threatening her with foster care. As we’ve seen as customary for child protective services agencies throughout the U.S. in promoting abuse and pedophilia, the New Jersey Department of Child Protection and Permanency (DCPP, formerly known as DYFS) covered it up and let it fester.

“Cunt-ho the Wicked”
played by Luciana Coutinho-Crane
(Sadistic Stepmother whom child says abused her and exposed her to pornography)

Concerned for her children’s safety and morality, and placed in an untenable predicament, Ms. Wolf began checking up on the kids and seeking alternatives to Bergen County Family Court’s corruption.

In October 2017, Edward Crane (who had threatened to shoot his ex-wife Karin in the past) chased Karin in the car through the streets and highway spanning five towns in Bergen and Passaic counties, toting what is believed to be a gun. Karin called 911, and a police pursuit ensued.

Karin got a restraining order in her home state of New York and filed domestic violence criminal complaints against Edward in both Bergen and Passaic. Judge Meola in Passaic County found probable cause on four counts and scheduled an arraignment. On the other hand, Kimberly McWilliams of the Glen Rock Municipal Court (Bergen), either ill-trained or without smarts to know the difference between a civil complaint and a criminal one, refused to file the domestic violence criminal complaint, insisting Karin go to the Bergen Courthouse to file for a civil restraining order (despite Karin reiterating she already had one from New York – this did not compute).

Det. Sgt. James Calaski of the Glen Rock Police threatened Karin, saying that the State of New Jersey would not enforce her restraining order, despite federal law saying it must. Audio of the 911 call she placed on the day of the incident also revealed Chief Dean Ackerman of the Glen Rock Police victim-shaming her on the tape. Karin then filed criminal complaints against Calaski and Ackerman, as well as misconduct complaints with Internal Affairs.

For more on the sins of the Glen Rock Police Department, see heading below, “A Culture of Troglodytes in Glen Rock.”

On April 12, 2018, Karin brought Coutinho-Crane’s alleged abuse to the attention of Judge Melchionne of Bergen County Family Court and filed for a change of venue. Four days later on April 16th, Karin Wolf’s ex-husband Edward Crane died, and Karin Wolf became the sole surviving custodial parent.

Mr. Crane’s short-term wife, Luciana Coutinho-Crane hid the death from Karin for nearly a week. Officers at GRPD (buddies of Edward Crane) refused to assist Karin get her kids back peacefully, also revealing they’re without smarts to understand what a restraining order looks like.

In an effort to swindle the kids’ 2 million dollar inheritance, Coutinho-Crane then ran down to the courthouse to file for custody of Karin’s kids claiming to be the their “psychological mother” (whatever that is), employing Meyerson, Fox, Mancinelli, & Conte, P.C., a law firm Karin had used in the past in her custody case with her ex-husband Edward Crane. Meyerson, Fox, Mancinelli, & Conte, P.C. failed to properly notify Karin, serve her with the petition, or the Order.

Brazilian native Coutinho-Crane claims Karin is unfit for exercising her First Amendment Rights blogging about political corruption (particularly in Bergen Court), posting on social media, and founding a non-profit called Women’s Civil Liberties Union. Of course, this was too luscious to resist, as the Bergen Court was given a self-serving opportunity to further retaliate against Karin, and did so by granting Coutinho-Crane, a Brazilian citizen, full custody of Karin’s two biological children; as well as a convenient politically-motivated Gag Order on Karin.

Meyerson, Fox, Mancinelli, & Conte, P.C. also represented Edward Crane in the criminal proceedings at the beginning of 2018 and have not been forthcoming about their involvement with the Cranes and their previous involvement with Ms. Wolf.

On the record, Karin asked Judge Melchionne why her dead ex-husband’s name was handwritten onto the initial April 24, 2018 order as a co-defendant. Judge Melchionne stated he didn’t know – didn’t know what he was signing, if he did indeed sign it. Several orders in the case show inconsistency of the signatures. Also, Melchionne was at a judicial conference out of state that day, not sitting on the bench.

Meyerson, Fox, Mancinelli & Conte, P.A. was, at that point, illegally representing both the Plaintiff and a defendant in the case.

Brian Shea, Esq. of Meyerson, Fox, Mancinelli & Conte, P.A. disqualified himself, but is MFMC is still representing the decedent Edward Crane in the case.

As Karin states in the Addendum letter:

“…in the process of my deceased former husband becoming a co-defendant on April 24, 2018, Meyerson, Fox, Mancinelli & Conte, P.A. was immediately required to disclose their representation of my former husband Edward Crane earlier in the year, withdraw as counsel, and withdraw the pleadings. This business of ‘file now, get orders signed, and ask questions later (IF anyone finds out)’ is not only unethical, but downright illegal.”

The case is ripe with Due Process violations and conflicts of interest.

“In essence, this is a de facto adoption without procedural protections in place, which I have repeatedly documented and stated on the record.” – Karin Wolf, Letter to AOC

As usual, Judge Melchionne appointed his mistress Valerie Solimano, Esq. as Guardian ad Litem (GAL). This appearance of impropriety has sent tongues wagging in Bergen – because you know, there’s only so many times you can hear that story about Richard Gere and the gerbil…

“The Favourite Court-esan”
played by Valerie Solimano, Esq.
(Melchionne’s Mistress, appointed GAL on every case)

On May 7, 2018, Karin filed a civilian criminal complaint against Melchionne, Solimano, Coutinho-Crane, and several officers at the GRPD, for kidnapping, extortion, and official misconduct. At that point, Melchionne was required to recuse himself.

According to Karin’s daughter, Coutinho-Crane and her dirty-old-man-of-a-father were still abusing her. This led to the child running away while on vacation in North Carolina and asking her mother to rescue her. Again, Karin was placed in an untenable predicament. Mother and child checked in with the police in Virginia and all was ok. Then, Ms. Coutinho called her buddies at Glen Rock Police Department to do her bidding in issuing a fake arrest warrant for the incident, which didn’t happen in New Jersey. No jurisdiction, but as we’ve seen, Bergen County just does what it wants, in martial law fashion.

At the time of her arrest, Karin’s criminal complaint was still pending against Judge Melchionne, Coutinho-Crane, and several officers at the GRPD. Certainly Ms. Wolf’s arrest and incarceration conveniently prevented her from testifying against them.

Within five days of the child running away, Coutinho-Crane stated she didn’t even want Karin’s daughter back. So much for her claim as the “psychological mother.” Apparently, having custody of the boy is enough to milk the trust fund, which together with the Bergen Court players in the case, have raided and plundered the children’s trust fund upwards of 300K. The case has employed about a dozen lawyers, GAL’s, doctors, and other family court leeches.

“The Troll” or “Jayba the Hutt”
played by family court leech Jay Atkins, Esq.
(attorney for Wicked Stepmother)

Despite no finding of unfitness, abuse or neglect against Karin, the Bergen Court placed her daughter in foster care, on a case stemming from a case opened by the State of Connecticut against Coutinho-Crane for abuse and neglect, which New Jersey is gaslighting.

DCPP has been up to its old tricks again, taking people’s kids without basis, attempting to make a case when none exists, calling it “permanency” under the controversial Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (ASFA). CPS’ diabolical tactics are described in the book Legally Kidnapped: The Case Against Child Protective Services by Carlos Morales, a former CPS worker and whistleblower.

The UK equivalent of the ASFA is The Child Act of 1989, the subject of the documentary, England’s Stolen Children, originally aired in France as Les enfants volés d’Angleterre.

The Adoption and Safe Families Act is one of the biggest frauds perpetrated on taxpayers and families in America. The ASFA was part of welfare reform, but instead redirected the monies going to single mothers, to incentivizing government agencies like DCPP and family courts to use Orwellian methods to steal kids, including putting hospital holds on babies for predictive neglect. In the UK, The Child Act has prompted pregnant women into running to Ireland and France to give birth.

Passage of the Act was pushed by Republican Newt Gingrich in collaboration with Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution, as well as Democrat Hilary Clinton.

Along with the ASFA, the Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood Act enables the State to steal children from their mothers in progressive Handmaid’s Tale fashion. First, remove the child(ren) from their mother, incentivized by federal money given to family court through the Fatherhood Initiative, then if the father dies, take the kids again via the ASFA. This is exactly what is happening to Karin Wolf and her children.

The number of states now enacting anti-abortion laws is not surprising, as the business of misogyny via the Fatherhood Initiative and the ASFA are the pre-cursors. When Sarah Ragle Weddington, the attorney representing Roe in Roe v Wade was arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court, she argued that pregnancy impacts a woman’s ability to attend school, work certain jobs and ultimately, succeed.

In an American climate of mass incarceration issues and criminalizing motherhood, white male privilege lawmakers aim at using these new anti-abortion laws as a means to control and incarcerate women.

The Sarah Ragle Weddington’s of today might argue the custody and adoption issues women have been facing in recent years are a reason why women should not be forced to carry a pregnancy that could have serious implications and circumstances down the road, like being jailed for protecting their child(ren) from abuse (as in Karin’s case), or facing a custody battle initiated by their rapist.

The State of New Jersey has subjected Karin and her kids to a rigamarole of absurd processes that violate their fundamentally and constitutionally protected right to be a family. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly stated the State can’t take people’s kids away absent a finding of abuse or neglect.

Karin states that DCPP has violated her and her children’s ADA and HIPAA rights. She states that DCPP is threatening to terminate her parental rights, yet has purposely failed to schedule many of the unnecessary reunification services it is requiring for her daughter to be returned to her.

“What this really is, is punishment for suing the State of New Jersey and exposing corruption in Bergen County. Donald Trump and David Duke can raise their children, but not me?”

In The Corrupt Business of Child Protective Services, former Georgia congresswoman Nancy Schaefer, who was curiously murdered (along with her husband and her documentary filmmaker, believed to be for exposing CPS corruption), stated:

“…that parenting classes, anger management classes, counseling referrals, therapy classes and on and on are demanded of parents with no compassion by the system even while they are at work and while their children are separated from them. This can take months or even years and it emotionally devastates both children and parents. Parents are victimized by “the system” that makes a profit for holding children longer and “bonuses” for not returning children…”

Schaefer also stated:

“State Departments of Human Resources (DHR) and affiliates are given a baseline number of expected adoptions based on population. For every child DHR and CPS can get adopted, there is the bonus of $4,000 or $6,000. But that is only the beginning figure in the formula in which each bonus is multiplied by the percentage that the State has managed to exceed its baseline adoption number. Therefore States and local communities work hard to reach their goals for increased numbers of adoptions for children in foster care . . . [and] there is double dipping.”

“The funding continues as long as the child is out of the home. There is funding for foster care, then when a child is placed with a new family, then “adoption bonus funds” are available. When a child is placed in a mental health facility and is on 16 drugs per day, like two children of a constituent of mine, more funds are involved and so is Medicaid; as you can see this program is ordered from the very top and run by Health and Human Resources. This is why victims of CPS get no help from their legislators.”

DCPP and the Bergen Court also purposefully excluded Karin from the Child Placement Review Board hearing at the beginning of the case, and attempted to exclude her from an Internal Placement Review (IPR).

Karin also states that DCPP had a psychologist, Dr. Marc Singer, who is an ex-cop, violate her rights under the ADA/ADAAA and interrogate her about the underlying criminal matter, without a lawyer present, causing her to invoke her Fifth Amendment right and abruptly leave the evaluation.

DCPP and the Bergen Court are pushing a report from pen-for-hire Dr. Allywyn Levine, an evaluator who attempted to diagnose her under the DSM-V, without meeting or speaking to Karin even once. That report was commissioned by Valerie Solimano, who is aligned with the stepmother, because hey, when you are a litigant who has brought 2 million dollars to the table, why not be rewarded? No surprise, that report says Karin’s daughter should go to foster care (why DCPP loves it) or be shipped off to boarding school, with, wait for it….Coutinho-Crane in charge of all the money.

“The Hired Handjob”
played by pen-for-hire Dr. Allwyn Levine
(Psychologist who fraudulently diagnosed Ms. Wolf without ever meeting or speaking with her)

A significant portion of that money and the children’s status was subject to a divorce agreement between Karin and Edward, which he violated.

Karin also states that the public defender the Office of Parental Representation of the State of New Jersey appointed for her is useless, an ornament placed there by the State. Karin’s attorney, Michael Lamolino, Esq. refuses to assert her rights, including Karin’s demands that he prepare and file a written answer to the initial Order to Show Cause filed by Attorney General, and his refusal to make a Motion to Recuse Judge Melchionne when Melchionne has violated the ADA and has remained on Karin’s cases, despite her criminal complaint against him. In fact, the New Jersey handbook for public defenders specifically bars public defenders from zealous representation of the parents they are representing.

Judge Melchionne’s tyranny is such that Karin’s private attorney in the custody case, Louis Lamatina, Esq., also refused to make a Motion to Recuse Judge Melchionne, so as not to provoke, “Judge Melchionne’s ire.” This is common for family law attorneys who don’t want to “upset the apple cart” so as not to encounter problems in their careers down the road.

Karin said she had to write Judge Melchionne directly on February 13, 2019, demanding his recusal and refusing to sign a coerced financial settlement at that point. This incensed Melchionne, who retaliated by appointing a GAL for Karin, so that she could no longer make decisions in her case, including firing her attorney Lou Lamatina, Esq.

“Accordingly, I refused to solidify a financial settlement in the case. In retaliation, Judge Melchionne appointed a GAL for me without a finding of mental unfitness. Moreover, I have not been supplied with any handbook or set of State guidelines as to what GAL’s can and cannot do. Therefore, the appointment of all GAL’s for my children and me is void for vagueness.”

Lydia Tatekawa and Lavar Parker, two social workers at DCPP, have been illegally tampering with a witness, relentlessly trying to convince Karin’s daughter she was “kidnapped” by her only parent. Enlisted by the Bergen Prosecutor’s Office to manipulate the case for the State, and harboring a Napoleon complex, Tatekawa’s shady tactics are obsessive, akin to Inspector Javert of Les Misérables or the Spanish Inquisition. The daughter, now 15-years-old (almost 16), has maintained throughout that she ran away to escape the stepmother’s abuse, asked her mother to pick her up, and checked in with the police in Virginia. Karin’s daughter has gotten feisty with Tatekawa and told her off, along with Karin’s brother telling Tatekawa to f–k off. This sent Tatekawa’s knickers in a twist, and further lodged the bug up her ass. Mon dieu!…Confess! Confess! Karin has not, in fact, been charged with kidnapping.

“Inspector Javert”
played by Lydia Tatekawa, Adoption Supervisor and Gaslighter

Tatekawa and Parker are also relentless in attempting to convince Karin’s daughter that Karin is mentally ill, despite a psych eval that says she’s not.

Recently, Judge Melchionne has jumped on that bandwagon, gaslighting Karin’s daughter and lying to her. As Godfather of the Bergen County Family Court, he must maintain the RICO enterprise.

As Schaefer stated:

“…caseworkers and social workers are oftentimes guilty of fraud. They withhold evidence. They fabricate evidence and they seek to terminate parental rights. However, when charges are made against them, the charges are ignored…”

“…the separation of families is growing as a business because local governments have grown accustomed to having taxpayer dollars to balance their ever-expanding budgets…”

DCF/DCPP is required to place the child(ren) with relatives first, yet in the case of Karin’s daughter, DCPP refuses to place the child with her only living biological and beloved grandmother, Karin’s mom, who helped raise Karin’s kids for many years while Karin worked.

As Schaefer stated:

“…relatives are contacted, but there are cases that prove differently. Grandparents who lose their grandchildren to strangers have lost their own flesh and blood. The children lose their family heritage and grandparents, and parents too, lose all connections to their heirs.”

Schaefer stated:

“…the incentive for social workers to return children to their parents quickly after taking them has disappeared and who in protective services will step up to the plate and say, “This must end! No one, because they are all in the system together and a system with no leader and no clear policies will always fail the children. Look at the waste in government that is forced upon the tax payer…”

Despite the Gag Order, Karin Wolf has gone public with her story, as is her First Amendment right. Several years ago, the U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey, struck down a family court Gag Order as unconstitutional.

As Schaefer stated:

“…Child Protective Service and Juvenile Court can always hide behind a
confidentiality clause in order to protect their decisions and keep the funds flowing. There should be open records and “court watches”! Look who is being paid!”

A Culture of Troglodytes in Glen Rock

Glen Rock is an affluent suburban town fostering the Future Brock Turners of America movement and breeding future Handmaids. It’s a town that would rather not acknowledge domestic violence happens there nor have any “incidents” on their records, especially when the perpetrator is a white male.  According to the teenage male population there, girls are “bitches and ho’s” and “feminist pieces of shit.”  According to teenage female population at the school, Principal John Arlotta of Glen Rock High School (who has repeatedly covered up child abuse at his school) completely misses the mark on the #MeToo incidents happening or otherwise brewing at the school.

“The Brock Turner”
played by Dean Ackerman, Glen Rock Chief of Police
(promoted to position AFTER sexually assaulting his co-worker)

In Brock Turner fashion, the Borough of Glen Rock promoted Chief Dean Ackerman to his current position after sexually assaulting his female co-worker, who sued the Borough.  Officer Matthew Stanislao also sued the borough in October 2014, after being sexually harassed by several officers at the Glen Rock Police Department for being gay, then was fired.  #MeToo

Then there is the 2015 incident where the Head of the Juvenile Division, Det. Sgt. Eric Reamy (then 51) was convicted of child endangerment for sexting a 14-year-old girl and a 17-year-old girl he’d been assigned to supervise.  Those girls have now sued the Borough.  #MeToo

Read More –>

Divorce Attorney Elise Mitchell's Private Files Document Blow Jobs to Judges

Judge Zayner Links Court to College Cheating Scandal

Stanford University Law School was hoping this video would not be found. It was.

This video  connects Judge Zayner of the Santa Clara County Superior Court with the recent college cheating scandal and implicates him in a criminal medical fraud scam involving Stanford University hospitals. 

A criminal investigation is now underway to see if Zayner used his power and position as an elected judge to rig probate and divorce cases as well as civil cases involving Medicare Fraud and antitrust activity in the area’s medical industry. 

Zayner’s wife, Dawn Neisser,  was recently overheard talking about this 2012 video and how she and her husband used to skinny dip and do drugs with others on the campus in a manner that would be considered highly embarrassing to a sitting judge.  Zayner’s involvement in the pharmaceutical industry and Stanford Healthcare is also drawing attention following the exposure of the College Cheating  Scandal, where Zayner reportedly violated the law and refused to recuse himself in cases where he was trying to rig outcomes to benefit is almamater. 

A review of Zayner’s family law and probate cases show Zayner, through his associations with the Inns of Court,  Judge Zayner provided favors and favorable rulings to lawyers with a Stanford degree. In  the county’s divorce, probate and conservatorships, Zayner allowed court fiduciaries and private judges to take over money management of the elderly and disabled in a manner that resulted in the conversion of estates to Zayner’s closest Stanford University buddies. 

An investigative  report by the San Jose Mercury News, highlighted some of the worst cases, but what Zayner did in the county’s divorce cases may have been worse. 

Known for his stoic bench conduct, Zayner may have not been the legal mind he wanted the public to believe. A core group of local judges, lawyers, Stanford professors  tapped Zayner years ago. His political rise in the courts appears to directly correlate to family and probate cases where “winners” became big donors to Stanford’s hefty endowment., or Stanford Hospital. 

Former clerks and interns secretly kept  files of Zayner’s contacts. Those contacts are now being cross-referenced with others  indicted in the college cheating scandal, as Zayner’s family law and civil  cases are getting a new look.  

The investigation has also brought scrutiny to Judge Lori Pegg, the county’s family court presiding judge and former County Counsel for Santa Clara County. Pegg and Zayner have reportedly been working in concert to cover up scandalous child support abuses, and protect Stanford University professors  who were charged with child abuse and domestic violence in their divorce cases. Worse Lori Pegg and Theodore Zayner appear to have been working to toss out civil cases involving police misconduct, in order to save the county billons in embarrassing lawsuits. 

Zayner was also the subject of a recall effort in the summer of 2016, but a secret deal with Stanford Professor Michele Dauber and Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen saw that recall foiled and Persky recalled instead. 

All those dots are now being connected and Judge Zayner, known for favorable rulings for  Stanford lawyers, and in cases where Stanford alum will benefit, as Zayner remained  silent on judges engaging in misconduct may get a new look. 

The innocent video produced by a sitting Judge’s wife, may not be as innocent as Judge Zayner would like it to be as a core group of disgruntled parents and students set out to do the investigation the courts refuse to do. 

If you had judge Zayner in a probate, divorce or conservatorship case- email us at: CalJohnQPublic@gmail.com

Read More –>

Picture

Parents, Protestors & Picketing Activists Focus on Judge Recalls And Indictments

Picture

Contra Costa parents successfully gathered enough signatures to place three judges on a recall ballot, tripling the threat to the security of complicit judges who have been separating and bankrupting families in California’s family courts for the past two decades.. 

Joined by children who are the product of divorce in Silicon Valley, activists are turning their attention back to Santa Clara County to focus on Judge James Towery, Judge Joshua Weinstein, Judge Stuart Scott, Judge Cynthia Lie, Judge Lori Pegg and Judge Roberta Hayashi who have pandered to corrupt lawyers and loyalties over families they are elected to serve. 
Weinstein , who has returned to the family court after corrupting criminal cases is a new focus of social media hit pieces. 

Check out this link and guest Q post. 

www.blogger.com/u/1/blogger.g?blogID=4920646381212958787#editor/target=post;postID=6491986878894969875;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=0;src=postname
 
San Jose, February 28, 2019- 
Honesty, fair play, search for truth, unbiased application of enacted law, are among the “must have” qualities of a American Judge when they make binding, life-altering decisions on U.S. citizen’s life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Complaints against the California judges, and in particularly the Santa Clara County judges, supervised by the California Judicial Council, have grown in recent past.. Lack of transparency, for example;  no recording of court proceedings, judicial immunity, tampering of records, judicial misconduct tactics, cover ups, et al., renders judicial misconduct almost invisible.

However, public has grown increasingly frustrated and began documenting and sharing with the world the crisis of judicial corruption. For example, recent Santa Clara County public filings reveal uncontroverted facts supporting Judge Joshua Weinstein’s misconduct, corrupt acts, fraud on the court, creation of false record, et al.
 
It is such gross judicial misconduct that led to California State Auditor being asked to audit of the hollow California judicial oversight body, the state’s Commission on Judicial Performance

Ironically public had previously complained that Judge Joshua Weinstein routinely cozy up lawyers and “He is especially unfair to self-represented parties” see www.therobingroom.com/california/Judge.aspx?id=22514

Please direct your comments and queries to drainjudicialswamp@gmail.com– news source for collecting complaints on Judge Weinstein. 

Recall Judge Program  Contact : JohnQPublic@Gmail.com


Read More –>