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)

 

To find an upcoming screening, visit: divorcecorp.com

Dr. Drew: Get This Conversation Going

“What bothers me more than anything as a physician,

if this sort of chummy relationship existed

between doctors

and any other providers of services, 

there would be outrage.”

                                                                                                                        – Dr. Drew Pinsky

And so, the public conversation begins.  . . . 

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

#DivorceCorpChat on Twitter . . . 

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.

Task Force Member: Might be a Year-Long Thing

Connecticut Task Force 12 10 13

Click on above link for Connecticut Task Force December 10, 2013 video

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.   

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.

“… 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)

“I hope all Family Court judges listen.”

by Julia Fletcher

There are plenty of victims – more than in the Penn State scandal. There’s plenty of evidence – more than in the Catholic Church scandal. Plenty of studies have already been done and in place of hundreds of mainstream news reporters is deafening silence.

Except for the news reporters in one mainstream news station. The FOX 11 news team in Los Angeles, California is single-handedly investigating and reporting the national family court crisis. When children are finally protected in our family courts, it might be because FOX News LA reported the holocaust when no other mainstream news stations would.

From FOX News LA:

“A father just ax murdered his son.”

This email  appeared in my inbox last February. The email’s author had been warning me about judges in custody cases. She said they refused to listen to  parents and children – even when they had evidence they were in danger. Sometimes, she said, the judges were even taking kids away from moms – just for trying to protecting their kids.

Unbelievable?  I thought so , too. She said if I didn’t do something, more kids would die. Then 9-year-old Matthew Hernandez was murdered. Yes, with an axe. While he slept on the couch. His father is charged with the murder.

“I told you,” my email friend wrote. “Why don’t you believe me?”

By then, I did believe her. I had read the clippings she sent, particularly the ones about the murder of Baby Wyatt. That father had posted his death threats all over the internet. 

The mother warned judge, who did nothing. The father later shot Wyatt. Then himself. 

I read about case after case in Family Court: Judges warned. Mother’s desperate pleas – ignored. Children murdered. Two fathers are on trial right now for murdering their kids in these kind of cases.

So when I heard about the funeral for the ax-murdered boy – 9-year-old Matthew Hernandez — I got in my car and headed north. When I arrived, gospel music filled the large, empty Sacramento church. Matthew’s grandmother was draped over Matthew’s casket, sobbing right next to his Teddy bear. Soon hundreds of friends, relatives and community members filled the pews. It was standing room only. Matthew’s young mother, Jessica, looked shattered. She says  she warned the judge her ex was dangerous.  But he didn’t listen. The family says he didn’t even investigate. Matthew paid the price.

I was so moved by Matthew’s funeral, I wanted to find out how many other judges were warned before they handed over children to dangerous men. I talked to several moms. Many were too devastated to come on television. But not Andrea Gallegos. 

Andrea was brave enough to sit in front of our cameras and re-live the horror of having her 2-year-old son, Isaac, murdered. She pleaded with the judge, John M. Pacheco, to look at the photos of Isaac’s bruised body – proof that the father was abusing him.

The family says the Pacheco just tossed them aside. Then turned to her, according to court transcripts, and told her she was “over reacting.” Then they say,  he threatened to take her son away from her if she kept it up. It must be confusing to be a judge.  Especially in these emotional custody cases. But threatening to take away the son of  a 23-year-old mother who is begging for help?

“That’s what we do,” Judge Pacheco said, according to the court transcript.

In context, it seems he meant that courts give the child to the parent who is most willing to cooperate with the court. The next time little Isaac came home with bruises from his dad, the family told me they didn’t know what to do – or who to turn to for help.

That’s what this judge did.  Silenced a family.  And a child died. I hope Judge Pacheco listens to Andrea this time. I hope all Family Court judges listen.

Written by: Martin Burns, Investigative Producer