Our Justice System Must Become More Victim-Centric – Opinion by Retired Judge Eugene M. Hyman

If the pandemic has had any kind of benefit, it’s that it has raised awareness of the functions and dysfunctions of our courts and our prisons. But if the actions we’re taking to correct these problems aren’t considered thoroughly and acted on properly, the cost will likely come at the expense of children and victims of domestic violence and other violent crimes.

Read more here.

Judge Eugene M. Hyman retired from the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara (San Jose) where, for 20 years, he presided over cases in the criminal, civil, probate, family, and delinquency divisions of the court. He has presided over an adult domestic violence court and in 1999 presided over the first juvenile domestic violence and family violence court in the United States.

Judge Hyman has spoken to both national and international audiences and has published articles on issues surrounding domestic violence in the criminal and family courts-especially with co-occurring issues of substance abuse and mental health. He has a special interest in domestic violence as it affects children in the home and in the family court setting. He has special understanding of sexual abuse, stalking, and strangulation, as they intersect with domestic violence.


CJE Research Partner Awarded Center for Institutional Courage Grant for “The Deadly Consequences of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender) Tactics in Family Court”

The Center for Judicial Excellence is thrilled to announce that our U.S. Divorce Child Homicide research partner, Elizabeth Tomsich, Ph.D. from the UC Davis Violence Prevention Research Program, was recently awarded a grant for our collaborative project “The Deadly Consequences of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender) Tactics in Family Court.”

Center for Institutional Courage’s inaugural research grant program focuses on institutional courage and institutional betrayal, with emphasis on unstudied institutions and marginalized populations.

The Deadly Consequences of DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender) Tactics in Family Court study seeks to identify themes in California family court custodial/visitation practices that resulted in institutional failure by the state to protect the best interests and safety of a child in the context of custody litigation. The study will review family court custodial cases in California between 2008-2021 where a child was killed by a parent or caretaker with a history of family or intimate partner violence (IPV) who was permitted contact with the child over the objection of a non-abusive, protective parent. In addition, we will conduct interviews with surviving protective parents and family members.


Unveiling the “Snakes” of the Clark County Family Court!

Unveiling the “Snakes” of the Clark County Family Court!

Clark County Nevada

October 13, 2021


Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Jesus Arevalo former Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD) Officer.

Arevalo has been in the family court system for 24 years.

The corruption is huge, with Judges and Attorneys sitting on the same boards together and attorneys appearing before the same judge.

Judges that worked for the same law firm when they were an attorney and never recused the firm once they are a judge.

Taking disability payments from Veterans and First Responders. That is protected under federal law.

Judges signing false court documents under penalty of perjury.

Attorneys hired by a judge to help out a family member, but still, have the same attorney appear before the court and not recusing them.

Arevalo spoke about Marshal Willick’s disability. Arevalo continued by saying that Willick over charges litigants, bills them for an active attorney who is actually a suspended attorney, having a convicted sex offender working in his law firm, and his misdeeds in Carson City as a law clerk. Arevalo stated that Willick encourages his clients to lie because it’s family court.

We are not criticizing the entire family court system, but there is much more work to do in an effort to rid ourselves of the remaining snakes within the system.

We need a Deputy Attorney General to oversee the family court Cabal!

We don’t want to say anything more because we would like you to watch the video.

Please click on the link below:

Jesus Arevalo former LVMPD Officer will give you an explosive look at Family Court on VIP TALKSHOW




Clark Bossert runs for Congress for the “sake-of-freedom”!

Clark Bossert runs for Congress for the “sake-of-freedom”!

Clark County Nevada

October 5, 2021


Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Clark Bossert candidate for Nevada’s 3rd Congressional District.

Bossert is a Christian man, educated, knowledgeable, rational thinker, and extremely passionate about our country.

The host asked Bossert what is the role of government. Bossert responded it’s life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

When asked about foreign policy Bossert said that we should stand with our allies.

Bossert believes the Afghanistan disaster was orchestrated and he believed that the President should be charged with dereliction of duty.

Bossert said that our government has no tools to combat inflation.

Bossert believes that the family court system is deliberately suffocating litigants by sucking money out of the parties. Bossert continued by saying that the system is set up to give children to the worse parent known that the better parent would continue to fight for their children in turn keeping the case active for years and drum up cost.

Bossert believes in term limits for US Congress and Senate to avoid corruption. Bossert continues by saying if you cant get the job done in 12 years, you are not fit to lead.

Bossert said the three ways you can be a “swamp creature” are first if you care too much about money, secondly, if you are worried about the next election, last but not least if you have skeletons in your closet. This is how you get leveraged by people pulling on your strings to do their bidding.

The host brought up racism in our country and Bossert responded that the “silver bullet solution” to end racism in our country is radical humility, radical repentance, and radical forgiveness that’s how we can move forward, that’s the answer. It breaks my heart to see minority communities, not thriving…

Clark Bossert is a very impressive candidate, he is worthy of consideration.

To learn more about Clark Bossert:


Please click on the link below:

Clark Bossert candidate for Nevada’s Congressional District 3 on the Veterans In Politics Talk-show



Vietnam 5 tour combat veteran gets screwed-over by a Family Court Judge tells his story

Vietnam 5 tour combat veteran gets screwed-over by a Family Court Judge tells his story

Clark County Nevada

September 28, 2021


Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Wayne Conte Army Combat Veteran who did five tours in the country of Vietnam with special guest Cathie France and advocate for Conte.

When Veterans In Politics first started to take a hard look at family court in 2016, many asked us why.

Our response is the Clark County family court has constantly ignored the federal law that protects Veterans Service Connected Disability Benefits which cannot be counted as income and levy in any way. But civilians who never served will never understand that concept. Our veterans are not above the law, but they never asked to be disabled while serving in our country’s military.

We as a nation owe this debt to our veterans who put themselves in harm’s way to protect our freedoms and way of life.

Conte was given one of the worse family court judges Sandra Pomrenze and he paid the price.

A little history on Pomrenze she was caught telling a Black American litigant that she needs to cut her daughter’s “nappy hair”. Below is the link:

Judge Sandra Pomrenze’s comment about girl’s hair


Pomrenze is a biased and rude judge who loves to hear herself talk. Pomrenze denied Dr. Robert Medoff and his wife visitation of their granddaughter who they have raised for 8 years. This would be considered a “civil death”.

Judge Pomrenze knew that she wouldn’t survive reelection so she graciously decided not to run for reelection. Instead to our surprise, she was added to the Senior Judge List as a reward for doing such a great job on the bench. I think  NOT!

Senior judges handle about 20 percent of the total district and appellate caseload. By taking senior status, even if maintaining a full caseload, a judge creates a vacancy on the court, to be filled by the nomination and confirmation process of Senior Judges.

Now back to Conte:

Conte served over 20 years in the military and suffered from Agent Orange which gave him life-threatening cancer. Conte is now 100 service-connected disabled veterans.

Conte tells his story on how he was currently married to a Japanese woman and a Philippine woman fraudulently made a marriage certificate including him as her husband while he was stationed in the far east.

Conte finally divorced the Japanese woman and the Philippine woman shows up with a marriage certificate that was registered 9 days before the actual marriage date.

Conte said that Pomrenze discussed his case off the record in a closed-door meeting in the judge’s Chambers without his presence.

Conte said that he had no documentation to prove that he wasn’t married to the Phillippine woman and Judge Pomrenze accepted the fraud marriage document. Conte argued that the marriage certificate was registered 9 days before the marriage date and his military orders didn’t put him in the Philippines on the date of marriage.

The host asked if the case was sealed and France said that it is sealed but it’s completely deleted from the Clark County District Court website as if it never existed.

Completely removing a case is against the Nevada Revised Statute, Justice Court Rules of Civil Procedures, and Nevada Rules of Civil Procedures all states the following:

(c) Sealing of entire court file prohibited.  Under no circumstances shall the court seal an entire court file. An order entered under these rules must, at a minimum, require that the following information is available for public viewing on-court indices: (i) the case number(s) or docket code(s) or number(s); (ii) the date that the action was commenced; (iii) the names of the parties, the counsel of record, and the assigned judge; (iv) the notation “case sealed”; (v) the case type and cause(s) of action, which may be obtained from the Civil Cover Sheet; (vi) the order to seal and written findings supporting the order; and (vii) the identity of the party or other person who filed the motion to seal.

But judges and attorneys do it every day, Just asked Attorneys Marshal Willick and Jennifer Abrams it’s a normal practice to violate this rule without any consequences.

France said that Conte’s attorney received a document from the Philippine government indicating that the marriage between Conte and the Phillippine woman never existed and presented the document to the court.

France continued by saying that Pomrenze dismissed the document because the spelling of Wayne Conte’s first name was misspelled with an (i) instead of a (y).

France continued by stating that Conte’s attorney removed himself from the case 3 weeks before trial and Pomrenze never allowed Conte to find new counsel. Instead forced him into representing himself. Which is against our US Constitution’s 6th and 14th Amendments.

Conte had no idea how to represent himself. Pomrenze sets up Conte to fail and award his fraudulent wife $1,000 per month in alimony for 15 years. There were no children involved in this court case.

Conte’s new attorney never did an Appellee to the Nevada Supreme Court because he recently was disbarred. So the 30 days statute of limitations lapsed.

In September 2020 Conte filed a lawsuit in Federal Court against Pomrenze and the State of Nevada. The case is currently in discovery. Conte is suing for $100 million.

Conte refuses to pay the alimony because they weren’t married.

Conte first filed suit against Pomrenze in the Eighth Judicial District Court and was denied by Senior Judge James Bixler instead Bixler awarded the opposing attorney Richard Crane with the Willick Law Group $4900 in attorneys fees.

Crane was temporarily suspended from practicing law by the Nevada Supreme Court after he pleaded guilty to one count of sexually motivated coercion with a minor. Richard L. Crane a member of the Willick Law Group, which focuses on family law was sentenced to five years probation by District Judge David Barker.

Conte speaks about how Richard Crane became involved with his case on the opposing side. Conte indicated that all of his money is protected by federal law.

In 2019 Crane files a Writ of Execution to take $16,414.32 against Cont’s bank account which had Conte’s disability payment.

A Veterans Disability payment cannot be garnished unless it’s instead of military retirement. In addition, NRS 125.165 indicates that alimony can not be used from a veteran’s service-connected disability benefits. A veteran’s service-connected disability payment is the veteran’s sole property.

Conte filed a motion to stop the garnishment on his bank account. Pomrenze told Crane not to file the Writ of Execution against Conte’s bank account but Richard Crane violated the judge’s orders and did it anyway and never returned the money to Conte. No consequences were ordered on Crane.

Now the family court is attempting to put Wayne Conte on the vexatious litigant list. This will stifle his rights to defend himself and chill his free speech. A violation of his Sixth Amendment. How unconstitutional is this?

Conte said since the Willick Law Group has taken over the case as opposing counsel he had his apartment and vehicle broken into with documents scattered.

Conte said Crane has a restraining order against him because he wrote a letter to Crane saying that he will get fucked!

Conte is now looking for a reduction in alimony because the Phillippine woman is making 20% more than his disability payments.

Now Judge Mary Perry is on the case. Whoopee!

Please click on the link below:

Vietnam 5 tour combat veteran gets screwed-over by a Family Court Judge tells his story on VIPI talk


Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Crissy Peña on Day Trading and cryptocurrency.

Crissy Peña discuss financial investments on the Veterans In Politics Video Internet talk-show



Stan Hyt 30 years with the LVMPD entered the race for Clark County Sheriff!

Stan Hyt 30 years with the LVMPD entered the race for Clark County Sheriff!

Clark County Nevada

September 19, 2021


Veterans In Politics video internet talk show interviewed Stan Hyt candidate for Clark County Sheriff.

Hyt a graduate of San Diego State University with a Bachelor of Science Degree in Criminal Justice Administration. Soon after in January of 1978 he was hired by the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD) and served 30 years with this department.

Hyt said he will protect the resident’s rights not to wear a mask and get Covid vaccines. Hyt said his wife and he already had Covid and he took NyQuil. Hyt said that he would stand up for our civil liberties.

Hyt said the new mandate to become a Las Vegas Police Officer, you have to take the Covid vaccine. Hyt doesn’t understand how the current sheriff who is a candidate for Republican Governor can mandate the Covid vaccines and endorses sanctuary cities be a candidate for Republican Governor. Hyt added that Joseph Lombardo current Clark County Sheriff has broken off relations with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Hyt said that he would like to meet with the leadership of all the law enforcement agencies, county, state, and federal.

Hyt said the mandates for the vaccines are unconstitutional.

Hyt said we need to stop the endorsement of Sheriff from the current Sheriff and let the people decide without any influence.

Hyt said weapons are legal to have, there is no reason why an officer should pull a resident out of their vehicle for a traffic stop when the resident informs the officer that there are weapons in the vehicle. Officers are not allowed to “fish” they need “probable cause”. Hyt said that this is an abuse of authority. Hyt supports constitutional carry.

Some of Hyts focus is to improve police morale, use nonlethal force, smaller taxes, and have less government.

The Host indicated that Metro’s Internal Affairs, The Citizen Review Board, and the Use Of Force Review Board are all a “joke” set up to pacify the public and to protect bad officers.

Hyt took pop shots at the two current challengers in the race for sheriff indicating that Assemblyman Tom Roberts’s votes like a democrat and many questions came about during the October 1st shooting at Mandalay Bay that caused his exit from LVMPD.  Hyt also commented on former Undersheriff Kevin McMahill as another Lombardo and stated that McMahill stands by the mandates to vaccinate all police officers including new hires. Both are former officers retired from the LVMPD.

The Host asked about Las Vegas City Councilman and Mayor Pro Tem Stavros Anthony as a possible candidate for Sheriff. Hyt said that he met with Anthony and he indicated that he would not run for Sheriff.

Hyt said that we need to bring the Gang Unit back to the LVMPD indicating that they are a valuable asset adding that LVMPD has a budget of $630 million dollars annually. With 5 thousand employees and many ranks and files leaving the force.

The Host asked about an annual physical fitness test requirement for LVMPD officers and Hyt stated that he didn’t want to take away an officer’s livelihood because they can’t pass a physical requirement. The Host indicated that physical fitness should be part of an officer’s requirement no different than the military especially when you are dealing with a potential adversary on the streets.

The Host asked what type of programs are in place for police officers that are going through the Clark County Family Court System when you have officers losing their children, losing their assets, and struggling to put food on the table for themselves. Hyt said that he would not oppose a program that would help officers that are going through these crises including alcohol addictions.

The shooting of Stanly Gibson, Erik Scott, and Trevon Cole was also mentioned in this interview.

The Host also brought up the safety of inmates within the Clark County Detention Center.

Please click on the link below to view this very informative interview in the mind of Stan Hyt.

Please click on Stan Hyt website:


Stan Hyt candidate for Clark County Sheriff on the Veterans in Politics Video Internet talk-show





DATELINE: LAS VEGAS, NEV., (Sept. 18, 2021).  Once upon a time, divorce laws required parties to prove “fault.”  Couples had to prove their spouses committed infidelities so horrific—that the court should dissolve the marriage.


In 1931, hoping to attract residents, Nevada enacted new divorce laws.  Nevada changed its residency requirements to six weeks and adopted a “no-fault” divorce.  Couples wishing to divorce could get un-hitched in just six weeks!—and they didn’t have to prove who cheated on whom!


With the advent of new divorce laws, divorce mills sprung up throughout Nevada.  Reno became the Divorce Capital of America.  Nevada ranchers cashed in on the divorce gold rush—they offered accommodations at “divorce ranches” where folks would stay for six weeks to establish residency.  In 1951, Rita Hayworth took up residency in Tahoe before filing for divorce.


“No-fault” divorce demonstrated the popular belief that unhappy spouses should be able to quickly end a soured marriage—and move on with their lives.  In 1969, California followed Nevada.  Then-Governor Reagan signed the Family Law Act, which created “no-fault” divorce for California couples with “irreconcilable differences.”


Sadly, Nevada has reverted back to a “fault” based system.  Nowadays, attorneys fight to show the ex is “at fault,” and if successful, their clients are eligible to be the “prevailing party,” which triggers an attorney’s fees award.


But there are no winners or losers in family court; after all, when parties go to family court, they seek no redress for wrongdoings.  Rather, they seek only to divide marital assets and/or possession time of children.  And, because nobody wins in family court, the notion of “prevailing party” makes no sense.


Where cunning attorneys can show the ex is “at-fault,” the attorneys’ clients are adjudged the “prevailing party”—which results in attorney’s fees.  This is the precise point where the corruption pathogen takes hold and begins to fester.  Next thing you know, attorneys from the Legal Aid Center of Southern Nevada, (“LACSN”), pretend to be “pro bono”—with an underlying expectation they’re gonna get paid—but only if they show the other party is “at-fault!”


Enter the notorious “faux Bono” lawyers—pretending to be do-gooders, supposedly donating time to charity cases—when in fact—they are money-grubbing, contingency fee lawyers—willing to wager they can show the ex is “at-fault”—and totally confident that crooked-ass judges will ensure the ex is “at-fault.”  (Get it?)


Take, for example, Vince Ochoa.  Once a LACSN team member, Ochoa is now a LACSN lackey.  Nowadays, Ochoa’s job is to ensure that LACSN attorneys get paid!—by hook or by crook!  Ochoa knows the scam.  Ochoa understands that attorneys cannot donate campaign funds to the bench unless they have disposable income; and so, Ochoa ensures the LACSN attorneys get paid!


Do LACSN lawyers ever represent BOTH spouses in family court?  No, of course, not!  Why?—because one LACSN lawyer would have to lose!—and go home empty-handed!  And no gold-digging LACSN lawyer will take a “pro bono” gig if there’s a possibility they might have to work for free!


If your ex is represented by LACSN, your crooked-ass judge will find YOU “at fault,” and your ex will be the “prevailing party”—because the LACSN lawyer must get paid.  Let’s say your ex LIES in open court and falsely accuses YOU of behaving badly.  Bamm!  The crooked-ass judge will believe your ex—guaranteed!  Family courts reward perjury.  Judges embrace the lies—because lies provide the necessary pretext to declare YOU “at fault.”  This means your ex is the “prevailing party,” and their LACSN attorney gets a handsome attorney’s fees award.


“Pro bono” is a Latin term meaning “for good” or “for charity.”  In contrast, “pro pecunia” is the Latin term meaning “for money.”  The “faux Bono” lawyer is NOT in the game for charitable reasons.  Getting paid is the sole objective.  The “faux Bono” lawyer is basically a contingency fee lawyer—a bus bench lawyer—like Saul Goodman—but with lower ethical standards.


Greedy attorneys and crooked-ass judges have effectively re-transformed Nevada law—from “no-fault”—back to “fault-based” divorce.  Just think—only sixteen (16) civil judges for the entire civil docket, but twenty-six (26) for family court.  Why?—because they need TEN extra judges to manage the bustling child kidnapping industry—which generates gazillions of dollars—and causes widespread misery more dismal, more costly, and more destructive than any blight, pestilence, or plague imaginable.  Sit down, Covid—the family court is the real scourge!


Back in the day, enlightened Nevada lawmakers had a vision—to un-hitch couples after only six weeks’ residency.  But those days are gone forever.  Today, divorce is big business.  Nobody gets out in six weeks.  If your kid is five, and your spouse files for divorce, the custody battle will last 13 years—until the kid turns 18—guaranteed.


Regular civil courts have fast-track procedures—to quickly dispo cases, but not so family court.  It’s a criminal cabal—where lawless and psychopathic judges choke the life out of couples, stranding them in family court quicksand—opening their veins and bleeding them dry—draining the family’s assets and stealing the children’s futures.


If you can’t afford a lawyer, and if your ex has a really good job, LACSN will represent YOU in family court—for FREE!  On the other hand, if you can’t afford a lawyer—and your ex is on disability or welfare, then forget it—LACSN won’t touch your case with a 39-and-a-half-foot-pole.  LACSN discriminates against the poor, (i.e., “intra-class” discrimination).  LACSN treats poor people differently from one another—based only on whether the ex has a paycheck that LACSN can garnish.


Where lawyers have the expectation of a payday—and they call themselves “pro bono,”—it’s inherently deceitful—a deceptive trade practice, [see NRS 598].  The venerable term “pro bono” must be reserved for attorneys with no expectation of pecuniary gain.  The moniker ”pro bono” must be unavailable to money-grubbing shysters.


We call for mandatory 50-50 custody legislation in Nevada!—and not just a rebuttable presumption of joint custody—but full, equal, and undivided joint custody—as Equal Protection demands.


It’s been said that equal parenting is integral for a child’s well-being.  If this is true, then the current system detriments children.  The system generates the most revenue by making parenting “unequal.”  Nevada is at a crossroads; we must decide—what’s more important?—the future of our children?—or Jennifer Abrams’ ability to buy another Porsche?


VETERAN in POLITICS INT’L (“Where Change Happens”)



He Beat Her Repeatedly. Family Court Tried to Give Him Joint Custody of Their Children.

Jennifer Moston was about seven months pregnant when, she said, her husband grabbed her by the arms, picked her up and threw her against the staircase. Each time she tried to get up, he pushed her down again. Such abusive episodes continued for several years, she said, until 2016, when he allegedly tried to strangle her. She went to the police and filed for divorce.

It seemed obvious to Jennifer that her husband, Ryan, shouldn’t get custody of their 3-year-old son, as Ryan now faced felony charges of domestic violence. How could someone with a violent history be trusted with a child? How could she stay out of harm’s way if she was interacting with him for drop-offs?

Jennifer assumed that the family court in her Wisconsin county would make her safety and that of her son a priority, and that the system would help her cut off contact with Ryan.

But it didn’t.

Wisconsin is considered a “leader” in the movement to give fathers equal rights as parents, with its percentage of shared custody cases among the highest in the nation. But a ProPublica investigation has found that the state’s family court system has been unable to adjust to protect domestic abuse survivors. ProPublica reporter Megan O’Matz explores how the complexities of domestic violence are often overlooked in the Wisconsin court system. Advocates and experts say the lack of reforms puts mothers and children at risk, often leaving women facing legal barriers and forced to co-parent with their abusers.

Read more here.


Senator Min’s Child Safety Bill Clears the CA Legislature

Senate Bill (SB) 654, backed by Angelina Jolie and Dylan Farrow, would require a judge to consider a parent’s history of domestic violence and substance abuse before allowing unsupervised visits with children.

SACRAMENTO, CA — Senator Dave Min (D-Irvine) announced today his bill to create and
extend protections for children in family court advanced from the State Legislature and will head
to Governor Newsom’s desk for his signature. SB 654 passed the Senate Floor with unanimous

SB 654 would require judges to make findings on the record when entering an order for
unsupervised visitation with a parent who has a history of domestic violence or substance abuse.
This bill would also ensure children who wish to testify in contested custody battles do not have
to do so in the presence of the parties seeking custody, unless it is deemed necessary by a judge.

“I am grateful to my colleagues for their overwhelming support of SB 654, which will save lives,” Min said. “Child safety must be our number one priority in the courts, and we must ensure that we don’t put children in situations of ongoing danger of domestic violence or substance abuse. I am proud that this measure brings us one step closer to guaranteeing our laws better protect children and prioritize their health, safety, and welfare.”

This bill has enjoyed prominent and widespread bipartisan support. It is sponsored by the
Legislative Coalition to Prevent Child Abuse. According to Melissa Knight-Fine, Director of this
organization, “SB 654 promotes risk assessment and consideration of information from law
enforcement and other child protection agencies, proven tools to help prevent abuse. The bill will protect children in high-risk cases where parents who have been on supervised visitation due to violence now are asking for unsupervised visits.”

SB 654 has also received notable support from actor and internationally renowned children’s rights advocate Angelina Jolie. In her letter of support, Jolie wrote, “Having courts make findings on the record will ensure that histories of domestic violence or substance abuse are addressed and treated, and such findings will protect children from unsupervised visitation when unsupervised parenting is unsafe. The modest measures in SB 654 are also expected to prevent the need for additional hearings due to unsafe visitation.”  Dylan Farrow, a prominent advocate for survivors of sexual abuse also encouraged public support for “this crucial legislation.”


Senator Dave Min – California Children Deserve to be Safe from Violence and Abuse. Here’s How We are Making it Happen.

This important Op Ed from California Senator Dave Min highlights his important bill SB 654 on child safety in family court. SB 654 passed out of the Assembly Appropriations Committee, and it will be taken up on the California Assembly floor next.

“An estimated one in every 19 children in California is abused, and the risk is even higher for children in families who separate and divorce. Every year, 58,500 children — including 6,000 here in California — are ordered into unsupervised visitation with abusive parents. More often than not, this leads to continued child abuse, with the long-lasting physical and mental harm that results. And far too often, we end up with tragically fatal outcomes, such as the case with the two Sacramento girls. According to the Center for Judicial Excellence, since 2008, 72 California kids were murdered during custody or visitation with an abusive parent. In 22 of these cases, the family court had been presented with evidence of some form of abuse.”

Read more here.