DVI- The Inside Story from Tom Lemons on Vimeo.
Finally I am releasing my documentary DVI The Inside Story for public viewing. I hope all of you enjoy the film. I will begin production of my next film (untitled) in September, which will contain shocking footage from inside a County Clerk's Office and Batterer's Intervention Programs. I'll keep you posted.
VAWA is unconstitutional - VAWA is in violation of human rights - VAWA is destructive to families
VAWA puts government funds and other (dangerous) resources in the hands of private (non-profit) organizations staffed with very sick individuals.
VAWA does not address the issue it was meant to address, i.e. to reduce domestic violence, it does not offer a solution, it does not resolve or improve anything and it only aggravates the problem (e.g. after visiting a shelter and accusing her husband, the woman must hide for the rest of her life).
VAWA causes innocent citizens to lose respect for the federal government and the legal system. 1. The law (VAWA), the courts and police in domestic situations only help women and assume that men are always the perpetrators. 2. The government is funding the propaganda that women are victims and men are perpetrators, as well as false accusations against men and prosecutions (persecution) of innocent men. 3. In no time is there an investigation, an interrogation or diagnosis to determine who the real victim is and who the abuser is.
The woman gets a shelter, pro-bono legal help to get her a protective order and to accuse (falsely in many cases) the man, and if she is an immigrant also legal help to file a VAWA self-petition for a Green-Card. 4. The man is removed from his home, gets arrested, accused (falsely), prosecuted, jailed and as a consequence he loses his job, becomes unemployable and his life is totally ruined. All the above happens without any legal due process, without investigation, interrogation, questioning or verification.
Can you imagine anything more destructive to society than the Government funding false accusations and incrimination of innocent citizens!
Alarming Rise Of False Allegations of Abuse from drmdk on Vimeo.
Discussion with Steven Sussman, Ph.D - Child & Adolescent Psychologist Co-Founder of the Child & Teen Success Centers in NY & NJ
Repeal the Violence Against Women Act, VAWA because of its Destructive Nature "INCITING" False Accusations of Domestic Violence!
Women are the victim of false allegations of domestic violence as well.
Women are the victim of false allegations of domestic violence as well.
My attorney (sound familiar?) husband threw me out of my home and away from my children with a TRO filed, a premeditated action which he planned when I began to request a divorce because of his abuse and neglect.
It has been over a year since I have had physical and legal custody of my four children, ages 6, 8, 8, and 10. I went to a 30 day inpatient rehabilitation center for treatment to cooperate with recommendations issued by a custody evaluator. I was released from the facility after 30 days and moved into a beautiful home where I had rooms ready for my children. I am still waiting on the custody evaluator to issue recommendations, but in the meantime I am subject to reading emails to the evaluator where my ex-husband continues to make allegations built upon half truths and outright lies.
I am shocked that this process has taken so long. I do not have a criminal record and have never been arrested. No civil cases have ever been brought against me. I am shocked that thus far, his is the only voice that has been loudly heard and it seems the actual truth means nothing.
We have a court system where abusers can easily attack the abused and further abuse them when they are trying to leave the marriage. This must stop. Read more
FAMILY COURT IS TOXIC WASTE Rally at the William R. Ridgeway Courthouse. We have rallied at the attorney and judges offices, we have rallied at the courthouse, we we will be rallying at their homes next!
Become a part of the solution, join us in our campaign for a change. We are our children's voices, they are depending on us to speak up on their behalf.
JOIN FATHERS4JUSTICE @ http://fathers4justice.org
We are non-profit 501(c)(3) Donate http://fathers4justice.org/donate
Show you care, UNITE! Get the Gear http://fathers4justice.org/catalog
Join our CAUSE http://www.causes.com/causes/370091-fathers-4-justice
FOLLOW us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/Fathers4Justice.USA
TWEETS from around the world https://twitter.com/#!/Fathers4Justice
LIKE our Facebook FAN PAGEhttp://www.facebook.com/f4jusa
Converse with attorneys and judges from around the globe! http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FATHERS-4-JUSTICE-2507726/about
LIVE STREAMING ACTION http://www.ustream.tv/channel/fathers4justice
LIVE STREAMING ACTION http://bambuser.com/channel/Fathers4Justice
LIVE STREAMING ACTION http://www.livestream.com/fathers4justice
Fathers4Justice YOUTUBE http://www.youtube.com/user/f4jcamera
We are all over YOUTUBE http://www.youtube.com/user/fathersforjustice
DIGG US HERE http://digg.com/fathers4justice
STUMBLEUPON us here https://www.stumbleupon.com/stumbler/Father4Justice
FOLLOW us on REDDIT http://www.reddit.com/user/Fathers4Justice/
ACTION Photos here http://s1058.photobucket.com/albums/t415/Fathers4Justice/
Is the Horror of False Accusation More Urgent and Credible when Harvard Law Prof Alan Dershowitz Describes It?
Investigative reporter Tom Lemons reveals the truth behind orders of protection and batterer’s intervention programs.
You’ll be shocked to hear what really happens behind the scenes and how current domestic violence laws seem to cause more harm that good.
From “A Nightmare of False Accusation That Could Happen to You” by Alan M. Dershowitz
(The Wall Street Journal, Jan. 14, 2015):
Alan M. Dershowitz, arguably “the best-known criminal lawyer in the world,” is a Harvard Law School professor emeritus and a distinguished and prolific writer.
Imagine the following situation: You’re a 76-year-old man, happily married for nearly 30 years, with three children and two grandchildren. You’ve recently retired after 50 years of teaching at Harvard Law School. You have an unblemished personal record, though your legal and political views are controversial. You wake up on the day before New Year’s Eve to learn that two lawyers have filed a legal document that, in passing, asserts that 15 years ago you had sex on numerous occasions and in numerous locations with an underage female.The accusation doesn’t mention the alleged victim’s name—she’s referred to as Jane Doe #3, and the court document includes no affidavit by her. But her name doesn’t really matter, because you have never had sex with anyone other than your wife during the relevant time period. The accusations against you are totally false, and you can prove it.Well, that is my situation: I’m the one who has been falsely accused. But let’s continue to imagine it was you:Your first instinct is to call your lawyer and have him file a denial to the court in which the accusation was made. But your lawyer informs you that you can’t do that because you’re not a party to the lawsuit (against the United States government seeking to vacate the plea bargain your client struck seven years earlier) and have no standing to file any papers.Not to worry, you imagine, because the lawyers who accused you of these heinous crimes will certainly have to prove them in court, which they will be unable to do, because they’re not true.No, your lawyer tells you. They didn’t ask for a hearing or any other opportunity to prove the truth of what they alleged. So the accusation will remain on the public record without anyone having to prove it or you having any opportunity to disprove it.Well, at least you can sue for defamation the two lawyers and the woman who made the false charges. No, you can’t, your lawyer tells you. They leveled the accusation in a court document, which protects them against the defamation lawsuit as a result of the so-called litigation privilege.[…]
Welcome to the Kafkaesque world of American Justice.
That pretty much says it all!!!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_219869618026373
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_167081856679489
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_223511224329394
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Feminism-Lies-Destructive-Feminists-Feminazis-Femofascists-Destroy-Society/109689035781629?sk=wall
http://www.facebook.com/pages/False-Accusations-Allegations-Domestic-Abuse-Violence-VAWA-Fraud/205165202836704?sk=wall
Thank you
DeleteThe Violence Against Women Act Ignores Half the Problem ~ By Anna Rittgers
DeleteThe 2011 Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act (VAWA), if passed, will provide funding for programs to address domestic violence and will expand the act’s provisions to include services for gays and lesbians. Theoretically, male victims of violence are eligible for help, too. But did you know that? I thought not.
The problem with reauthorizing VAWA is that doing so would perpetuate the notion that domestic violence is something that happens only to women. While it is true that VAWA has evolved over time and now ensures that male victims of partner violence can avail themselves of VAWA benefits and services, the very name of the act implies otherwise. It is quite likely that a male victim would not know he can seek help, given the name of the act.
The image of the abuser is almost always a guy. But this simply isn’t the case. One of the pioneers of the study of family violence was sociologist Richard J. Gelles. Gelles wrote a seminal 1999 article for the old Women’s Quarterly, then a publication of the Independent Women’s Forum, on the “hidden victims” of violence.[i] Gelles admitted that 25 years earlier he had overlooked something important when, in the course of doing research, he meet a couple he called Faith and Alan. Faith had been beaten by boyfriends, her ex-husband, and her husband. Faith’s troubles became the focus of Gelles’s article. Gelles barely noted Faith’s violence towards men, which included breaking Alan’s bones and stabbing a man while he read the newspaper. Faith’s violence merited a mere footnote.
We know more about intimate violence directed at men than we did when Gelles wrote his article. But for cultural reasons, it is very difficult for male victims of domestic violence to seek help. Men are seen to be physically stronger than women, and so he should be able to just “take it.” Furthermore, domestic violence awareness campaigns are horribly one-sided, and almost always portray males as the aggressor and females as victim. Police are often hardwired to view men as the perpetrator. If a man calls 911 for help when he’s being attacked by his spouse or partner, he is often subject to arrest, even if he is the only one with physical injuries.
For seventeen years, there has been unequal treatment before the law. Female aggressors are keenly aware of this unequal justice, and a 2010 study on men who sustain abuse at the hands of their female partners discovered that 67.2% reported their female aggressors made false allegations of spousal abuse. [ii] Of those with children, 48.9% of the men reported that their partners made false allegations of child abuse.[iii] In other words, VAWA’s myopic view of who perpetrates domestic violence gives female abusers an additional avenue to torment their spouses.
The name of the Act itself makes it clear that the law’s focus is to address violence against women in particular, not the general problem of domestic violence. The specialized training that judges and law enforcement officers receive ignores the reality that women are as likely as men to be perpetrators of violence. This creates a justice system that treats male aggressors more harshly than female aggressors of the same crime.
It's human nature to seek out a partner in life, and to possibly marry and have children. Unfortunately the matrimonial establishment, as we are all aware, is being methodically torn down by a demoralized society. Sadly the divorce rate is still on the rise and the foundation of marriage is being devalued and is crumbling. As adults we learn to adapt and move on when divorce attacks our lives but for children this is another story. They are the real victims of divorce and unfortunately they will suffer dearly from our selfishness and in most cases follow the same path of destruction if not worse.
ReplyDeleteAs a nation we have been granted certain civil rights by our constitution. Through the years it has been amended to better the lives of many Americans. The two most notable changes have come to Women in the 1920s and with African Americans in the 1960s. These rights were long overdue for both segments of our nation but thankfully we realized our mistakes and corrected them. This was not an easy journey for either of these crusades but through dedication and perseverance the bells of liberty rang loudly and victory was achieved.
Unfortunately we have reached yet another fork in the road and with that comes another challenge to the American people. "We've worked hard for women's rights, but we have to watch out that the pendulum doesn't swing the other way" says Ruthie J. of the Reach FM. Ironically the pendulum has already swung far to one side and this time the male gender is being demonized by erroneous and fraudulent information. Males are being portrayed as callus, uncaring, and without emotion. We are being taught that men represent 95% of abuse in this nation against women. These and many other false statistics are being recklessly strewn throughout society and none of it is true. Yes, women are being abused by men that is a fact. striking a woman is abhorrent to the highest degree and should be dealt with appropriately but men are abused at an equal rate and they are being ignored. According to a study by the Center for Disease Control men represent 38% of domestic violence related injuries. Compound that with the fact that only 0.9% of men report abuse verses 8.5% of women and I think we have a pretty equal degree of violence between partners.
The cornerstone of this "abuse" is VAWA the Violence Against Women Act. It was passed into law by Bill Clinton in 1994 and has been extended by every subsequent President. This law funnels Billions of dollars into discriminatory education and propaganda that violates men's civil rights. Many times DVIs or Domestic Violence Injunctions are used as a tool in divorce, child custody or just vengeance against a partner, most often against males. This is because the system of acquiring a DVI is simple and requires no evidence, witnesses or prior police reports. Just the word of an alleged victim making a claim of abuse. The repercussions of these orders are devastating and many times result in a violation, arrest and complete destruction of one's life. Even in cases when they are dismissed, a serious blemish remains on the falsely accused forever; how does that look to potential employers who almost always perform background checks prior to employment? This must be stopped and a better system of protecting all victims of domestic violence should be put in place.
I hope to help bring awareness to gender discrimination and help provide support for men who are abused. There are programs to help women of abuse but nothing for men. My website will provide more information on the facts, my personal experiences and the stories of those who have been victims of this heinous tactic of relationship vengeance. Men and women should truly have equal rights and currently the scales are unjustly tilted. Let's work together to end domestic violence and not vilify one gender as inherently abusive. "United we stand, divided we fall" A powerful statement that we must never forget.
Thank you,
Tom Lemons
Founder, www.falsedvireports.com
FLORIDA TODAY - OPINION
ReplyDeleteWritten by Gordon E. Finley, Ph.D., Miami
While I applaud columnist Paul Flemming for a sound review of the issues in Saturday’s “Alimony bill will be great — for lawyers,” his bottom-line conclusion is dead wrong.
The proposed state alimony reform bill will reduce litigation, not increase litigation. A bit of history: For years, the divorce vultures (a.k.a., the Family Law Section of the Florida Bar) have conned the Florida Legislature into writing divorce legislation that maximizes litigation and thus maximizes their income. In part, they have accomplished this by maximizing judicial discretion, which in practice means endless conflict and, of course, endless paid litigation.
No matter what they may say, the divorce vultures are interested only in one thing — maximizing their income.
I can irrefutably demonstrate this point with Flemming’s own words: “Thomas Duggar, an attorney in Tallahassee and a member of the Florida Bar’s Family Law Section, said last week at a Tallahassee Bar Association meeting that the section has a $100,000 war chest to sway public opinion against the legislation.”
Do your readers honestly believe they are spending all this money so they will lose income? The divorce vultures get the message in terms of what alimony reform will cost them — and save the children, fathers and mothers of divorce. I regret Mr. Flemming did not do the same.
Full Disclosure: I am an alimony-paying divorced father of two young adult daughters and retired university divorce researcher with multiple research and scholarly publications on this topic.
PRO SE RIGHTS:
ReplyDeleteBrotherhood of Trainmen v. Virginia ex rel. Virginia State Bar, 377 U.S. 1; v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335; Argersinger v. Hamlin, Sheriff 407 U.S. 425 ~ Litigants can be assisted by unlicensed laymen during judicial proceedings.
Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957) ~ "Following the simple guide of rule 8(f) that all pleadings shall be so construed as to do substantial justice"... "The federal rules reject the approach that pleading is a game of skill in which one misstep by counsel may be decisive to the outcome and accept the principle that the purpose of pleading is to facilitate a proper decision on the merits." The court also cited Rule 8(f) FRCP, which holds that all pleadings shall be construed to do substantial justice.
Davis v. Wechler, 263 U.S. 22, 24; Stromberb v. California, 283 U.S. 359; NAACP v. Alabama, 375 U.S. 449 ~ "The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, are not to be defeated under the name of local practice."
Elmore v. McCammon (1986) 640 F. Supp. 905 ~ "... the right to file a lawsuit pro se is one of the most important rights under the constitution and laws."
Federal Rules of Civil Procedures, Rule 17, 28 USCA "Next Friend" ~ A next friend is a person who represents someone who is unable to tend to his or her own interest.
Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972) ~ "Allegations such as those asserted by petitioner, however inartfully pleaded, are sufficient"... "which we hold to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers."
Jenkins v. McKeithen, 395 U.S. 411, 421 (1959); Picking v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 151 Fed 2nd 240; Pucket v. Cox, 456 2nd 233 ~ Pro se pleadings are to be considered without regard to technicality; pro se litigants' pleadings are not to be held to the same high standards of perfection as lawyers.
Maty v. Grasselli Chemical Co., 303 U.S. 197 (1938) ~ "Pleadings are intended to serve as a means of arriving at fair and just settlements of controversies between litigants. They should not raise barriers which prevent the achievement of that end. Proper pleading is important, but its importance consists in its effectiveness as a means to accomplish the end of a just judgment."
NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415); United Mineworkers of America v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715; and Johnson v. Avery, 89 S. Ct. 747 (1969) ~ Members of groups who are competent nonlawyers can assist other members of the group achieve the goals of the group in court without being charged with "unauthorized practice of law."
Picking v. Pennsylvania Railway, 151 F.2d. 240, Third Circuit Court of Appeals ~ The plaintiff's civil rights pleading was 150 pages and described by a federal judge as "inept". Nevertheless, it was held "Where a plaintiff pleads pro se in a suit for protection of civil rights, the Court should endeavor to construe Plaintiff's Pleadings without regard to technicalities."
Puckett v. Cox, 456 F. 2d 233 (1972) (6th Cir. USCA) ~ It was held that a pro se complaint requires a less stringent reading than one drafted by a lawyer per Justice Black in Conley v. Gibson (see case listed above, Pro Se Rights Section).
Roadway Express v. Pipe, 447 U.S. 752 at 757 (1982) ~ "Due to sloth, inattention or desire to seize tactical advantage, lawyers have long engaged in dilatory practices... the glacial pace of much litigation breeds frustration with the Federal Courts and ultimately, disrespect for the law."
Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 2d 946 (1973) ~ "There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of Constitutional Rights."
Schware v. Board of Examiners, United State Reports 353 U.S. pages 238, 239. ~ "The practice of law cannot be licensed by any state/State."
Sims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 (1925) ~ "The practice of law is an occupation of common right."
“Justice is a part of the human makeup. And if you deprive a person of Justice on a continuous basis, it’s really an attack (and not to get religious or anything) but it’s an attack on the human soul. We have, as societies, evolved ideas of Justice and we have done that because human nature needs Justice and it needs resolution. And if you deprive somebody of that long enough they’re going to have reactions…” ~ Juli T. Star-Alexander – Executive Director, Redress, Inc.
ReplyDeleteRedress, Inc. 501c3 nonprofit corporation, created to combat corruption. Our purpose is to provide real assistance and solutions for citizens suffering from injustices. We operate as a formal business, with a Board of Directors guiding us. We take the following actions to seek redress: Competently organize as citizens working for the enforcement of our legal rights. Form a coalition so large and so effective that the authorities can no longer ignore us. We support and align with other civil rights groups and get our collective voices heard. Work to pass laws that benefit us and give us the means to fight against corruption, as is our legal right, and we work to repeal laws that are in violation of our legal rights. Become proactive in the election process, by screening of political candidates. As individuals, we support those who are striving to achieve excellence, and show how to remove from office those who have failed to get the job done. Make our presence known through every legal means. We monitor our courts and judges. We petition our government representatives for the assistance they are bound to provide us. We publicize our cases and demand redress. Create a flow of income that enables us to fight back in court, and to assist our members impoverished by the abuses inflicted on us. Create the means to relieve the stresses on us, as we share information and support each other. We become legal advocates for each other; we become an emotional support network for each other; we problem solve for individuals on a group basis! Educate our judges, lawyers, court personnel, law enforcement personnel and elected leaders about our rights as citizens! Actively work to eliminate incompetence, bias/prejudice, special relationships and corruption at all levels of government! Work actively with all media sources, to shed light on our efforts. It is reasonable to expect that if the authorities know we are watching and documenting, that their behaviors will improve. IT'S A HUGE TASK! Accountability will not happen overnight. But we believe that through supporting each other, we support ourselves. This results in a voice for justice and redress that cannot be ignored. Please become familiar with our web site, and feel free to call. We need each other - help us to help you! Although we are beginning operations in Nevada, we intend to extend into each state in a competent fashion. We are NOT attorneys, unless individual attorneys join us as members. We are simply people helping people. For those interested, we do not engage in the practice of law. You might be interested in this article Unauthorized Practice of Law on the Net. Call Redress, Inc. at 702.597.2982 or e-mail us at Redress@redressinc.com. WORKING TOGETHER TO ATTAIN FAIRNESS