FATHER DENIED RIGHT TO VISIT HIS DYING SON In yet another astounding case of family court injustice originating once again …
In this segment, Trevor Cross tells about how he was considered an unfit parent because he had to travel for work. This makes no …
FAMILY COURT UPDATE : JUDGE CARRINGER IMPEACHMENT PROCESS BEGINS.
They have been called “disgruntled”, “not credible”, “vexatious” and “not fit” to raise their own children, yet these parents have pressed against injustice and fought to protect their children as judges wrapped in immunity placed these parents on supervised visits, appointed unethical lawyers to represent their children and recommend denial of custody.
As these parents left abusive marriages and relationships, they faced more abuse than ever and nobody told the parents, they were entitled to help from California’s Victim’s Compensation Fund, a fund that considers parents deprived of the custody of their own children to be victims based on Child Abduction Act.
Years of facing judges entrenched with the belief they could take children away from good parents, and place them in the sole custody of parents who are more than likely abusers, these parents had enough.
The wrote to the Commission on Judicial Performance and they attended hearings to get that Commission to do their job.
They rented tradeshow space to warn others in their community and they bought t-shirts, business cards and websites to support a mission law makers refused to address.
They lodged Solano County Recall Petitions that got Judge Cynda Riggins-Unger and Judge Garry Ichikawa to ride off into government sponsored retirement, but when Judge Christine Carringer refused to go, they took to the option of impeachment themselves.
These parents are not backing down. They have the support of other victims, and a local press doing its job to present the facts. There is a novel idea, the press in our communities reflecting the people, and not the story the PR firms judges hire to create their own FAKE NEWS about our legal system. ( See email from PR firm hired by judges to shut these parents up).
Like the favorite children’s book, The Little Engine That Could, these parents are proving that love for their children, desire to protect all children from harm and passion to change the attitudes of a deeply biased and entitled California judiciary may prevail after all.
Click here to see Solano County Recall Petitions
Click here to see Impeachment of Judge Christine Carringer, the judge who can’t hide for long.
Following the grief over the loss of life in school shootings, I started researching and realized that others were doing the same thing, trying to find the root cause for the extreme rage and motivation to harm others. I knew from a couple of situations that what happens to children during escalated and prolonged family conflict had something to do with these rampages.
A few insights shared on Mic.com:
“A parent’s death or divorce also appears to be a commonality among some of the lone shooters — Adam Lanza (Newtown, 2012), Elliot Rodgers (Santa Barbara, 2014) and Nikolas Cruz (Parkland 2018). Research indicates boys appear to be more at risk than girls when their parents divorce, particularly when it comes to higher suicide rates.
“It’s one brick or thread that could set a child up to have more a vulnerability if someone doesn’t step in and raise a child, teaching them to respect the rights of others and that actions have consequences,” said Richard Warshak, a clinical psychologist at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, and author of Divorce Poison, which explores acrimonious divorce and the psychological effects on children of parental bad-mouthing.
“Divorce sets in motion a set of changes that put kids at risk for problems in behavior.”
Divorce is not “inherently bad” for every child, he says. But there are risks, especially if it changes the family’s financial situation or parents “bad-mouth” each other.
Several studies over three decades show that divorce — especially an acrimonious one — can increase a child’s risk for developing depression, anxiety and engaging in criminal acts.”
These issues aren’t things we discuss often enough, but we should.
I wish I didn’t have a personal experience to validate these findings, but I do. I witnessed it in my own step-sons, when I was too young and without the authority to help them overcome what had happened to them and their mother. And, I didn’t have the right information at the time. I just knew they were suffering, and it seemed like there had to be a way to help them through it. I wish I could have done more to help them avoid failures in those early years, and the loss of one’s life later on.
No, I can’t go back in time, but I can engage leadership, stakeholders and problem-solves across society to do more with what we know now.
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. “
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.
For the last two months, Connecticut has held open meetings to find better ways protect children in that state’s family courts.
Although the original plan was to have the study done by January, task force member Ms. Jennifer Verraneault says, “It might be a year-long thing.”
As Ms. Verraneault spoke those words, most task force members probably dreaded the thought of volunteering their time for an extended period. Yet every few weeks, the task force meets, and another can of worms opens – with reasons to continue the study for as long as it takes.
According to Connecticut Special Act No. 13-24, the task force is to study:
(1) the role of a guardian ad litem and the attorney for a minor child in any action involving parenting responsibilities and the custody and care of a child,
(2) the extent of noncompliance with the provisions of subdivision (6) of subsection (c) of section 46b-56 of the general statutes and the role of the court in enforcing compliance with said subdivision, and
(3) whether the state should adopt a presumption that shared custody is in the best interest of a minor child in any action involving the custody, care and upbringing of a child.
Such study shall include, but not be limited to, an examination of state statutes applicable to an action involving the custody, care and upbringing of a child, and the costs associated with contested divorce actions, including, but not limited to, expert witness fees and attorneys’ fees including the fees of guardians ad litem and attorneys for the minor children. Such study may include recommendations for legislation on matters studied by the task force.
Another can opened this past Tuesday, when Co-Chair Sharon Wicks Dornfeld spoke about her knowledge of the use of “Private Special Masters” to hide tax fraud in Connecticut family courts.
She told the group:
“There are some individuals — I can think of several retired judges — who are, make themselves available to serve as private Special Masters, but it is not a volunteer thing. It is a program in which the parties pay them and whatever their agreed upon hourly rate is.
Uh, there have also been circumstances in which I can recall that there are lawyers who will say that, for whatever reason — and I will give you a classic example of a reason — where it becomes apparent that one or both of the parties have been engaged in essentially tax fraud that would be very adverse to their clients’ interest if it were to come before a judge who would be required to make a referral to the state’s attorney or to the IRS for example. There are circumstances in which the attorneys will say, “Let’s try and get this out of the judicial system. Let’s hire a Special Master — not necessarily a retired judge, sometimes it’s very experienced family attorneys — and see if we can, you know, make it happen that way.”
Since the filmed meetings are available for public viewing online, there’s now public knowledge of a credible witness who knows about Connecticut’s attorneys and retired judges hiding tax fraud in child custody cases.
Judgments in those cases will need to be set aside, federal authorities will need to investigate, and Ms. Verraneault will have been proven right about how long all of this is going to take.
An AP article in the Wall Street Journal last May might explain why Ms. Wicks Dornfeld speaks so comfortably about her colleagues hiding tax fraud.
According to the author of the article, Connecticut lawyers:
“are shielded from fraud lawsuits under absolute immunity, a doctrine dating back to medieval England. The doctrine was intended to promote people speaking freely at judicial proceedings without fear of being sued and to avoid hindering an attorney’s advocacy for his or her client.”
The task force is obliged to take its time – and as many task forces and committees it takes – to protect Connecticut’s children and families from what looks like a lawless system. Considering the disclosure noted above, Connecticut legislators should form another task force or allow the current task force to form an ad hoc committee. The new task force or ad hoc committee can be called something like, “Committee to Study Types of Fraud Currently Allowed in Legal Disputes Involving the Care and Custody of Minor Children in Connecticut”.
Thousands of victims of various kinds of fraud in Connecticut’s family court system would appreciate the opportunity to participate in such a study.
- Alissa Sherry
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
- Blended Families
- Burnet County Court at Law Judge Bayless
- Child Abuse
- Child Custody
- Child Custody and Support
- Child Custody Evaluators
- Child support
- Children and Divorce
- Children's and Parenting Issues after Divorce
- civil rights
- Co-Parenting after Divorce
- Collaborative Divorce
- Considering Divorce
- Coping with Divorce
- Corrupt Family Court
- Court of Appeals
- Custody and Visitation
- custody evaluation
- Custody Evaluator Immunity
- Divorce Advice
- Divorce process
- divorce recovery
- Domestic Abuse
- Domestic Violence
- Dr Alissa Sherry
- Educate your Judge and Court Professionals
- emotional abuse
- Expert Witness
- Family Court
- Family Court Corruption
- Family Court Corruption
- Family Court Reform
- Family Law
- Financial Issues
- Guardian Ad Litem
- Handling the Holidays
- Healing From Narcissistic Abuse
- Joint Custody
- Judge Linda Bayless
- Judicial Complaints
- Judicial Immunity
- Legal Consensus
- Legal Documents
- Legal Forms
- Legal Issues
- Marital Problems
- Narcissism and Personality Disorders
- Narcissistic Personality Disorder
- Parental Alienation
- Parenting Plan
- Personality disorders
- Perversion of Justice
- psychological evaluation
- Relationships and Dating
- Sex & Relationships
- Single parenting
- Supreme Court
- Surviving Divorce
- TBHEC – Gloria Canseco
- Texas Cases
- Texas Counseling
- Texas Counselors
- Texas Court of Appeals
- Texas Courts
- Texas CPS
- Texas Divorce
- Texas House Rep Vikki Goodwin District 47
- Texas House Representative Terry M. Wilson District 20
- Texas Parental Alienation Counseling
- Texas Psychologists
- Texas Senate Charles Schwertner
- Texas Senate Donna Campbell
- Texas Senate Judith Zaffirini
- Texas Senate Kirk Watson
- Texas Senate Pete Flores
- Texas Senator Dawn Buckingham District 24
- The New You
- Travis County Texas
- TSBEP – Darrel Spinks
- Understanding Narcissism
- Child Custody
- Family Court Corruption
- Need to Communicate Privately?
- Parental Alienation
- Stop Parental Rights Termination
- TBHEC Darrel Spinks
- TBHEC Gloria Canseco
- Texas House Rep Vikki Goodwin District 47
- Texas House Representative Terry M. Wilson District 20
- Texas Senator Dawn Buckingham District 24
- TSBEP Darrel Spinks