Federal Representatives to State Courts: Improve Adjudications

From The Center for Judicial Excellence:

Guess what?

It’s August Recess — and federal lawmakers are home in their Districts until Labor Day!

Now is your chance to get your House Rep signed on
as a co-sponsor of H Con Res 72 to prioritize child safety in family courts!

Join us for a one-hour advocacy training with Kathleen Russell, Executive Director of the Center for Judicial Excellence, and Connie Valentine, the Founder of the California Protective Parents Association to learn:

  • What does H Con Res 72 say?
  • What happens when it passes the House of Representatives?
  • How do I schedule a meeting, and with whom? house concurrent res 72 8 2018
  • Who and what should I bring to the meeting?
  • What should I say there?
  • How should I follow up?
  • What is most effective? (hint: good legislators supporting good laws!)

To RSVP for the ZOOM call, send your: name, county, state, phone number and email address to: gettraining@yahoo.com

You will receive a personal invitation via email after speaking with us to ensure that this call is a good fit for you! Together, we will do this!!

child safety days dc september 9 to 12 2018

Also, join us this September 9, 10, 11 and 12 in Washington DC! We will train protective parents on Sunday afternoon to lobby for child safety in family courts and then fan out for three days of meetings to seek even more H Con Res 72 co-sponsors and supporters.

If you can get yourselves to DC, we can put you to work for child safety!

Let’s Do This!

 

Current list: Cosponsors: H.Con.Res.72 — 115th Congress (2017-2018)

 

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

BEFORE YOU STEP ONE FOOT INTO FAMILY COURT …

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

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

From Wendy Murphy, JD :

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Attention: Protective Parents in Family Courts

photo: dwinslow

photo: dwinslow

December 20, 2013

by Diana Winslow 

Concerned parents were elated this week when a much awaited segue for them to speak came forward as an invitation from the federal government, asking for clarifications on identified problems with child human rights in court, family rights in court and the lack of a uniform structure to respond to child sex abuse investigations, child abuse investigations and placement of children with a parent who is not known to them, has committed crimes against the other parent or is convicted of crimes that put the child at risk in their care.

Following a march on Washington DC and a Congressional Briefing this Summer members of Congress heard and were concerned about the severity and frequency with which child custody issues are mishandled, to the point of injury to the child or protesting parent.  It is remarkable that BOTH events happened despite the sequester, AND that these actions generated interest and an invitation.

Some cases are so problematic, as with the classic case illustrated in the October 2012 Documentary of Holly Collins, called “No Way Out But One“, that the parent is forced to flee the situation, due to deafness in authorities, investigators, systems system law and policy, court law and policy, and court systems. Succinctly, the definition of being run into the ground by such system based problems is called “Systems Induced Trauma.” Beyond victimization in a specific social or family situation, the family, one or all members are further agitated, abused or traumatized by the applied services and policies of systems that interlock without oversight, basically trapping the persons perpetuating a complaint without safety and resolutions.

The US Department of Justice is ready now to consider cases of chaos caused by State child and family courts. USDOJ is calling for child custody outlines in a format. The purpose of providing the outline is for the writer to simply and systematically give structured information regarding the problem case in question.

The US Department of Justice wants timelines of these outrageous cases.

Just complete and send your case in this format to: Mary Seguin atricourtcon@gmail.com by January 15, 2014 so she can provide them to the DOJ. The USDOJ invitation was issued to the representing group at the Summer March and Congressional Briefing: The California Protective Parents Association.

(Update 1/6/14: The original notice regarding requested timelines is from the California Protective Parents Association November 2013 Newsletter  which says: “Please send the timeline to cppa001@aol.com so we can forward them in a group to DOJ.” Some parents are sending copies of the case timelines – first received and time stamped at local DOJ offices – via certified mail to: U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530-0001.

The email address “atricourtcon@gmail.com” noted in the Examiner article above is for those interested in joining a complaint filed in United States District Court, District of Massachusetts. Please see the CPPA November 2013 newsletter for more information. –  Julia )

___________________________________________________________________________

Format for the Letter to the USDOJ

Who you are

 1. Contact information:

 2. Background:

3. Education:

4. Former employment:

5. Criminal record (arrests and convictions):

 

Who your former partner/husband/wife is

1. Background:

2. Education:

3. Former employment:

4. Criminal record (arrests and convictions):

 

Reports of physical or sexual assault/battery and/or incest

1.  Law enforcement (give name of office and address):

Date, Name and title of officer, Outcome of investigation and report:Child Protective Services (give name of office and address):

2. Social worker/Counselor/Other:

Date, Name and title of worker, Outcome (including not reporting to criminal authorities to investigate):

 3. Court personnel (give title and address):

Date, Name and title of professional, Outcome(including not reporting to criminal authorities to investigate):

4. Other offices/individuals:

Date, Name and title of professional, Outcome (including not reporting to criminal authorities to investigate):

 

Intimidation against you that deterred you from reporting

1. Who intimidated you:

2. How were you intimidated:

 

Gag orders

1. Who gave you a gag order (name, title, date, place):

2. Rationale given for gag order to not talk about these recurring crimes of incest and assault and battery:

3. Removal of child(ren) from you after you reported criminal physical or sexual assault/battery and/or incest:

 

Response from Social Services

1. Name and title of person(s), recommendations for investigation/ removal/ supervision:

2. Date of recommendation and where recommendation was filed:

3. Name and title of person ordering removal of children (if removal was ordered) :

4. Date of order and where order was filed:

 

Supervised visitation

1. Name and title of person recommending supervised visits:

2. Reason given for recommendation:

3. Name and title of person who ordered supervised visits:

4. Date and place order was made:

5. Name of specific visitation center you were ordered to attend:

6. Amount of fees:

7. Dates and times you were ordered to attend:

8. If you were not ordered to a specific visitation center, name of visitation center you chose:

9. Was this center paid by the county:

 

Motions you filed for relief

1. Date and place filed:

2. Who filed the motion:

3. What lawyers were involved:

4. Outcome of the motion:

*At the end of the time line, please provide note: Supporting evidence is being compiled in exhibits.”

Parents in and out of CPS courts and family/divorce courts face a hamster wheel of demands, which beyond the direct trauma to the family, often exhaust financial and emotional resources, cost jobs and personal assets. Most everyone knows at least ONE case like this. Please pass this article along to others who might be affected.

Family Court in Denmark

From TV 2 | ØSTJYLLAND :

On Thursday transmitter TV 2 | ØSTJYLLAND documentary “The secret network”.

About 450 women in Denmark are fighting to protect their children from the children’s fathers. One of the key figures behind the network is Sidsel Lyster, the now former pastor of Tirstrup in Jutland.

The women are ready to go underground or move abroad and go to jail to avoid disclosure of their children to the fathers, they either suspect or have evidence of violent, pedophiles or abusers. For, according to women and more experts, the new Parental Responsibility laws have made it virtually impossible to stop socializing with parents who are either violent, drug addicts or sex offenders.

Instead, the Act requires that parents must cooperate and make sure that the child has the opportunity to see both parents. And if the anxious parent does not cooperate, he or she risks losing custody of the child. Conditions under sharp criticism from the EU.

TV 2 | ØSTJYLLAND the past year followed the struggle of women inside the secret network and followed with when they go underground.

Join us on Thursday on TV 2 | ØSTJYLLAND pm. 19.50.

A Very Strong and Clear Signal

Wonderful news of progress from Safe Kids International:

European Parliament Votes 20 to 1 to Approve Working Document with Recommendations to Help Stop Court Licensed Abuse!

“The Working Document indicates that the Danish Parental Responsibility Act . . . sometimes creates perverse effects . . . whereby mothers risk being imprisoned for protecting their child from abusive fathers and abusive fathers obtain contact and even full custody rights to the children they abuse.”

Angelika Werthmann (Chair of the delegation) commented: 

“The result of today’s vote is a very strong and clear signal . . . It can by no means be accepted that the youngest citizens’ fundamental rights are not being respected.”

 

This discussion is in English, body language is universal. . .

 

“… the leading country in the world …”

From Mothers of Lost Children:

Congressional Briefing October 2, 2013 (Part One)

Congressional Briefing October 2, 2013 (Part Two)  (Part Three)  (Part Four)

Kinsey’s Family Court #Shutdown

Morris Ernst ACLU Kinsey

by Julia Fletcher

What does the family court crisis have to do with our reputation in half the world as “Infidels!”?

Dr. Judith Reisman knows.

She’s been researching this and speaking up about it for years. Here she is speaking about it in January of this year at Liberty University. Fourteen years ago, in an article published in the World Net Daily she wrote:

“According to PAS theory, if a parent (usually mom) accuses the other (usually dad) of sexual abuse, this “turns the child against the father,” hence, mom’s “influence over the child should be halted.” That is, even when the accused is a convicted sex offender, mom has lost custody and visitation rights.

The theory, based on Gardner’s observations during child custody disputes, largely discredits incest charges.

PAS was invented by Richard A. Gardner. Gardner is a Columbia University clinical professor of child psychiatry and he defends his theory in his 749 pages of “True and False Accusations of Child Sex Abuse” (1992).

Inevitably, Gardner’s sole experimental authority for this PAS theory is Alfred C. Kinsey. In fact, Gardner largely plagiarizes Chapters 5 in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Female (1953) to show child molestation is normal.”

Now that it’s October 2013, we’ve come so far as to be in our current state of a “partial government shutdown”. Congress can’t agree on a budget or how much money to borrow or how much interest to pay. They can’t agree on healthcare and state parks are closed too.

People are tweeting things like: #Democratshutdown! and #Republicanshutdown! Each side calls the other “extremist” and both sides agree that “extremists” are the problem.

The same goes for family court reform advocates.  Insults and accusations fly among advocates as often as they fly in Congress. We all know who the “extremists” are and we know who to blame for the lack of investigations, zero oversight and and near zero family court reform. 

As long as everyone who watches this video agrees that extremists are the problem, the family court crisis will be appropriately addressed and we might not have to deal with “terror threats” from those who call us “Infidels!” anymore.

Real extremists who cause real problems are easy to spot – especially those who openly associate with Nazis and demons.