Children and Family Court Legislation proposed to U.S. Congress and State Legislatures
Lawless America
is a non-partisan coalition of organizations and individuals attempting to
correct problems with our legal and judicial system and the problem of
dishonest and/or corrupt government officials.
Led by William M. Windsor, LawlessAmerica.com, is a wide variety of
people that have combined forces to draft proposed state legislation that will
fix many of the problems.
1. All
court proceedings shall be recorded, and all parties shall have the right to do
their own recording of all proceedings.
[Judges and attorneys get away
with lies, concealing the tone of their comments, and falsifying court
transcripts; this will be a tool to make them more accountable while protecting
the fundamental rights of the parties.]
2. Each
elected official and every government employee in the state, including all
federal elected officials and federal employees operating in the state, shall
be required to sign a Contract with the Citizens of the State and the United
States that requires them to be honest at all times and defend the fundamental
rights protected by the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
[This Contract makes all elected
officials accountable to the people; they are essentially accountable to no one
at this time.] Violation of the Contract
will be presented to a Special Grand Jury.]
3. Judges
must address all points raised by all parties in every court decision with a
clear explanation with citation to determining facts, statutes, and case law.
[One of the dishonest/corrupt
techniques used by judges is to ignore the issues, facts, and law. By forcing judges to address the issues,
facts, statutes, and case law on each issue in their orders, judges will either
treat the parties fairly or expose their corruption for all to see. When judges violate this provision, an aggrieved
party will now have the ability to take the matter to a Special Grand Jury.]
4. Appellate
judges must address all points of error in every appellate decision with a
clear explanation with citation to determining facts, statutes, and case law.
[Appellate judges are even more
dishonest that lower court judges when it comes to ignoring the issues, facts,
statutes, and case law. By forcing
judges to address the issues, facts, statutes, and case law, judges will either
treat the parties fairly or expose their corruption for all to see. When judges violate this provision, an
aggrieved party will now have the ability to take the matter to a Special Grand
Jury.
5. Judges
must insist that people tell the truth in court with extreme consequences for
those who don't.
[There are rules that will make
the legal process infinitely more fair and less expensive. Judges must honor and enforce the rules. It is one of the only ways to get witnesses and
attorneys to be more honest.]
6. Perjury
is a cause of action that will be allowed in a civil suit with an automatic
jury trial.
[Currently, people can lie
repeatedly in court, and those damaged by the perjury have no recourse, and
judges do nothing. Citizens need the
ability to seek damages against witnesses in court who commit perjury.]
7. Attorneys
must go by the letter of every law and every professional rule. Judges must subject attorneys to onerous
consequences for violations.
[There are rules that will make
the legal process infinitely more fair and less expensive. Judges must honor and enforce the rules. It is one of the only ways to get attorneys
and judges to be honest.]
8. Attorneys
who violate their Code of Professional Conduct shall be referred to a Special
Grand Jury.
[Attorneys are a big part of the
problem with the legal system. If they
followed their Code of Professional Conduct, the legal system would be much
fairer, and the expense of litigation would be dramatically reduced. Accountability by an independent Special
Grand Jury should have amazing impact.]
9. "Motion
practice" must be minimized. Judges
must hold conferences and allow attorneys and pro se parties to communicate
important issues directly to judges.
[In federal courts especially,
judges avoid all contact with the attorneys and parties. They force the parties to file motions,
responses, and replies to motion after motion.
This runs up massive legal fees and provides infinite opportunities for
misconduct and mistreatment of the parties.]
10. Judges may
not dismiss a case or enter summary judgments when a jury trial has been
requested.
[Judges corrupt the judicial
process by depriving parties of a jury trial.
Juries must make the decisions in legal matters -- not judges.]
11. All family
court trials shall be by jury.
[Family court abuse and corruption
is one of the most widely-criticized.
Judges and their friends involved in the family court process create a
situation ripe for injustice and corruption.
We must remove the judges from this life-altering process for so many
people. Let a jury of local citizens
with their own families make these serious decisions.]
12. All court
cases involving the government or a government employee must be trials by jury,
and summary judgments will not be allowed in such cases to avoid the prejudice
of a government employee judge having bias for another government employee.
[Bias must be protected against at
all costs. It is only human nature for
us to "protect our own." This
must no longer be allowed.]
13. Judges may
not ignore or change the rules of civil procedure.
[Judges may favor one attorney or
party over another by selectively ignoring the rules or independently making
their own after-the-fact rules. There
are rules, and everyone must adhere to them.
Judges must not be given the power to deprive a party or attorney of the
protections and requirements of published rules.]
14. All orders
must be signed by the judges involved.
[In many cases, the judges do not
sign the orders. There is no way to know
if the judges actually participated in the decision. Every order must be signed by the judges
involved to prove that they participated in the decision and to make the orders
valid.]
15. All court
decisions shall be published.
[Courts do not publish many of
their orders. This keeps others from
seeing their wrongdoing and mistakes. By
publishing every decision, judges will have to do a better job, and they will
be exposed to criticism by other judges and attorneys who identify their
mistakes.]
16. The votes
of each judge involved in a decision shall be made part of the public record.
[When multiple judges are
involved, the parties and the public deserve to know how each voted.]
17. Judges must
adhere to sentencing guidelines.
[There must be rules, and the
place for a judge in the process is to go by the rules. We must minimize interpretation and freedom
for judges to do whatever they want, because that is what has made our judicial
system so unfair and corrupt.]
18. Campaign
contributions are not allowed for funding judicial campaigns.
[Campaign contributions create the
perfect opportunity for corrupting the judicial system. Elections for judges should be done with no
contributions of any type allowed.]
19. There shall
be no requirement of a legal degree and legal experience for judicial positions
in cities, counties, and states.
[Lawyers are a big part of the
problem with the legal system. Lawyers
as judges come to the position with a built-in prejudice for their friend
attorneys and may have a bias against attorneys they faced. If the participants in a case go by the rules
and the law, any intelligent person can serve as judge. It is unfair to limit judge positions to
attorneys.]
20. Parties may
represent themselves in all legal proceedings in the State. Corporations, Limited Liability Companies,
Partnerships, and other legal entities may also be represented by an officer of
the corporation in legal proceedings, and representation by an attorney shall
not be required.
[Statutes say that parties may
represent themselves, but all of the attorneys involved in the law-making and
judicial processes have twisted the intent of the law to force legal entities
to spend zillions of dollars on attorneys.
Pro se parties (those individuals who represent themselves) are
generally discriminated against by judges, and this must not be allowed. Allowing legal entities to represent
themselves will save billions of dollars in legal fees and will dramatically
reduce the costs of operating the judicial system.]
21. A spouse
may represent his or her spouse in legal proceedings if there is a properly
executed power of attorney granting such right.
[Once again, judges ignore the law
and refuse to allow an individual to be represented in court by someone
pursuant to a power of attorney. This
must be stopped. When a power of
attorney grants a person to handle legal matters, it must apply to anyone in
any legal matter, especially litigation.]
22. All pro se
parties shall be given the ability to make electronic filings, if they choose.
[In most courts, only attorneys
are allowed to file electronically. This
also enables them to file just before midnight on a due date. Pro se parties are forced to print
everything, and they have to file by the time the clerk's office closes
(usually 5 pm or earlier). This inflates
the cost for pro se parties, increases the costs of judicial personnel, and
gives an unfair advantage to the attorneys.
Pro se parties should take online training on how to use the electronic
filing system, and they should have the option to save money and time by filing
electronically.]
23. Pro se
parties now represent approximately one-third of all parties in lawsuits. Each
county in the State will establish an office with at least one staff attorney
to assist pro se parties at no charge.
[Pro se parties usually cannot
afford attorneys. Some courts provide
assistance, but most don't. One-third of
the citizens involved in the legal process must be helped.]
24. Each county
shall have grand juries, and citizens will be able to directly present charges
of government misconduct and corruption to a Special Grand Jury.
[Article of Amendment V of the
Bill of Rights gives grand juries the power to deal with judicial and
government wrongdoing through the power of Presentment. Not all states have county grand juries, but
they are needed in every state in every county.
Where grand juries do exist, government officials may block a citizen's
access to the grand jury, and this will be fixed through this clause.]
A complaint for criminal conduct
of a judge may be brought directly to the Special Grand Jury upon all the
following prerequisites: (1) an affidavit of criminal conduct has been lodged
with the appropriate prosecutorial entity within ninety (90) days of the
commission of the alleged conduct; (2) the prosecutor declines to prosecute, or
one hundred twenty (120) days has passed following the lodging of such
affidavit and prosecution has not commenced; (3) an indictment, if sought, has
not been specifically declined on the merits by a county Grand Jury
[This provides terms for the implementation
of this clause.]
25. Special
Grand Juries shall be responsible to ensure that government officials are
honest above all else. The Special
Grand Jury shall require active investigation of politicians for corrupt
behavior.
[This is essential if we are to
minimize corruption. The power must be
in the hands of the citizens.]
26. All
judicial misconduct complaints will be handled by a Special Grand Jury. The judicial system will cease “policing”
itself. All judicial complaints will be
made public.
[Expecting judges to discipline
their friends (fellow judges) is not at all right. Complaints are also kept confidential. A Grand Jury composed of citizens from the
county will ensure fair consideration of the issues. Making the complaints public will allow
others to see the complaints that have been made, and it should serve as a
deterrent to those who might commit misconduct.]
27. All
attorney misconduct complaints will be handled by a Special Grand Jury. The
association of attorneys (Bar Association) will cease being the sole means of
“policing” attorneys. All attorney complaints will be made public.
[Just as with judges as discussed
immediately above, expecting the association of attorneys to discipline their
members isn't the independent way that complaints should be handled. Citizens probably are not aware that the Bar
Association is nothing but an association; it isn't a government entity. Attorneys do massive damage to people, and
the way to minimize this is to make attorneys accountable to a jury of citizens
from the county.]
28. Judges may
be removed from office for cause. Cause
shall include deliberate violation of law, fraud, conspiracy, intentional
violation of due process of law, deliberate disregard of material facts, using
erroneous law, ignoring valid precedents, judicial acts without jurisdiction,
blocking of a lawful conclusion of a case, or any deliberate violation of the
Constitutions of the State or the United States and the Bill of Rights as well
as dishonesty.
[The reports of proven judicial
corruption nationwide are staggering; the scary part is all the corruption that
the judges are able to hide. The only
way to keep judges honest is to have a Grand Jury and the power to remove
judges for cause.]
29. Complaints
about foreclosure fraud may be presented to a Special Grand Jury.
[Foreclosure fraud is a form of
government-assisted corruption. Those in
danger of losing their biggest asset need help and fast. We the people need to protect them.]
30. Parties may
present claims of attorney misconduct, judicial misconduct, clerk's office
misconduct, and law enforcement misconduct to a Special Grand Jury.
[Attorneys, judges, judicial
staff, clerks of court, and law enforcement all commit misconduct, and a
Special Grand Jury provides the independent tribunal that the citizens need.]
31. Complaints
about Child Protective Services (CPS) and other state agencies may be presented
to a Special Grand Jury.
[Government corruption may take
place in any agency. CPS is an area
where abuse is often alleged.]
32. It shall be
a child's right to be raised by his parent(s), free from government intrusion;
have an attorney of his choice; be heard in court personally; be allowed to
report abuse and know that the system will protect them; be protected from
mental and physical abuse by guardians as well as the judicial system; and
receive justice.
[Currently, the way children and
their families are treated by the judicial system is a crime in and of
itself. We the people must protect
families and the children. These rights
must be mandated because the existing system is hopelessly broken.]
33. No child
may be taken from family without evidence and a hearing.
[Children are being removed from
their homes at the whim of people. This
life-altering decision must first be made in court and decided by a jury. We cannot allow families to be torn apart by
people who should have no authority to take such serious action.]
34. All
children deserve to live a childhood free from abuse, exploitation, and
government interference during custody litigation.
[Custody litigation is devastating
to many. The children must be protected
not damaged by the system.]
35. The statute
of limitations shall be eliminated in cases of sexual assault against
children. The statute of limitations
shall be eliminated in cases of perjury and fraud upon the courts.
[Laws must not be used to deprive
citizens of recourse for wrongdoing.]
36. Judges must
recuse themselves in specific circumstances, including if they are party to a
lawsuit with a litigant. Bias can be
demonstrated by actions in a lawsuit. All complaints of judicial bias will be
resolved by a Special Grand Jury if a party chooses to pursue the matter after
a judge refuses to recuse himself/herself.
[One of the areas of great abuse
by judges is their refusal to recuse themselves. Once again, if judges went by the rules, the
system would be fair...but they don't.
Judges rarely recuse themselves when outsiders would feel the judge has
bias that should require them to recuse themselves. Judges must be encouraged to abide by the
rules and the intent of the recusal process, and if they fail to recuse
themself three times when a Special Grand Jury says they should have, they
should be removed from office.]
37. No
immunities shall be extended to any judge in this State except as is
specifically set forth in this Law. The
theory of judicial immunity is to protect judges from frivolous and harassing
actions. However, deliberate violation
of law, fraud, conspiracy, intentional violation of due process of law,
deliberate disregard of material facts, judicial acts without jurisdiction,
blocking of a lawful conclusion of a case, or any deliberate violation of the
Constitutions of Florida or the United States and the Bill of Rights and
dishonesty are violations by judges that are not frivolous or harassing. A
Special Grand Jury's responsibility shall include determining, on an objective
standard, whether a civil suit against a judge would be frivolous and
harassing, or fall within the exclusions of immunity as set forth herein, and
whether there is probable cause of criminal conduct by the judge complained
of. Special Grand Juries shall also have
the power to independently pursue charges against any government officials
through the power of Presentment.
[Judges have manufactured claims
of immunity for themselves using a case from the 1800's that is archaic and not
really even applicable. Judges must not
be allowed to corruptly, maliciously break laws, ignore laws and the facts,
andf abuse parties. They must be held
accountable for their wrongs just as each of us is held accountable. If judges don't like this risk, then they
should get real jobs like we all do.]
38. Should the
Special Grand Jury find probable cause of criminal conduct on the part of any
judge against whom a complaint is docketed, it shall have the power to indict
such judge except where double jeopardy attaches. The Special Grand Jury shall,
without voir dire beyond personal relationship, cause to be impaneled twelve
special trial jurors, plus alternates, which trial jurors shall be instructed
that they have power to judge both law and fact. The Special Grand Jury shall
also select a non-governmental special prosecutor and a judge with no more than
four years on the bench from a county other than that of the defendant judge.
The trial jury shall be selected from the same pool of jury candidates as any
regular jury. The special prosecutor
shall thereafter prosecute the cause to a conclusion, having all the powers of
any other prosecutor within this State. Upon conviction, the special trial jury
shall have exclusive power of sentencing (limited to incarceration, fines
and/or community service), which shall be derived by an average of the
sentences of the trial jurors.
[This procedure is essential for
the effective implementation of this Law.]
39. No judge
complained of or sued civilly shall be defended at public expense or by any
elected or appointed public counsel, nor shall any judge be reimbursed from
public funds for any losses sustained under this Law.
[Currently, the government office
responsible for taking action against a judge is also the office that provides
counsel to represent judges at the taxpayer's expense. Judges should have to pay for their own legal
counsel, or represent themselves, just as we the people have to do.]
40. Any judge
or government official removed from office shall not thereafter serve in any
government or judicial position.
Retirement for such removed officials shall not exceed one-half of the
benefits to which such person would have otherwise been entitled.
[We must cease giving outrageous benefits
to those who commit wrongdoing.]
41. Attorneys
and government employees will not be eligible to serve on a Special Grand Jury.
[Attorneys and government
officials have an automatic conflict of interest and a natural bias for one of
their own. Attorneys may also be risking
their careers due to reprisals from a judge or government official that they
take action against.]
42. All Bar
documents must be public record.
[Nothing in the legal world should
be secret, especially complaints about participants in the legal process.]
43. The Model
Code of Professional Conduct for attorneys shall become law, and the Bar
Association will cease to have the authority to discipline attorneys except as
members of their club.
[There is a conflict of interest
to have the association of attorneys disciplining their members for actions
that affect citizens of the state. The
vast majority of problems with the legal system and dishonest and corrupt
government officials are with attorneys.
Many attorneys ignore their so-called rules of conduct, and nothing is
done about it. By making law out of the
rules they are supposed to operate by, the citizens will have a much better
chance of a fairer legal system.]
44. The Code of
Judicial Conduct shall become law, and fellow judges shall cease to have authority
to discipline judges.
[There is a conflict of interest
to have judges in charge of reviewing complaints against their fellow judges
for actions that affect citizens of the state.
Many of the problems with the legal system and dishonest and corrupt
government officials are with judges who are attorneys. Many judges ignore their so-called code of
conduct, and nothing is done about it.
By making law out of the Code they are supposed to operate by, the
citizens will have a much better chance of a fairer legal system.]
45. All
attorneys and judges must pass a competency exam on constitutional principles,
particularly rights.
[States must ensure that qualified
people are in place.]
46. Impose
requirements for bonds on all attorneys and judges, which they pay for out of
their own pockets, and make it easy for their victims to file complaints
reviewed only by the Special Grand Jury.
[This will clean up a lot of
corruption and dishonesty.]
47. This Law
applies to federal courts as well as state, county, and local courts, because
federal courts and federal judges are allowed to operate in the state as a
guest of the state.
[Federal courts must not be
allowed to operate in a dishonest or corrupt manner. Federal employees functioning in our state
must abide by our state's laws.]
48. Corruption
must be minimized in government. [The government has not been able to
effectively deal with corruption in government.
We must put the power to deal with corruption into the hands of the
people. The provisions of this law are
designed to do just that.]
49. Whenever a
criminal matter is raised in family court, that matter must pass to a criminal
court where all normal criminal due process procedures, etc. apply.
50. Hearsay
shall not be allowed in family courts.
51. Custody
should be automatically 50/50 unless there is proven abuse or neglect.
52. Grandparents
shall be listed on all birth certificates, and grandparents shall have
automatic custody rights if their child is unable and they are willing and
able. Grandparents are not always a good
answer, but the should be looked at FIRST, and not as a second thought.
53. There shall
be no statute of limitations for child abuse.
54. There shall
be no statute of limitations for fraud.
55. There shall
be no statute of limitations for new evidence in a criminal matter.
56. A Citizens
Review Panel shall be established to monitor all children and family matters.
57. No child,
teen, or young adult may be forced into residential treatment facilities and
forced to take drugs without parental authorization.
58. Child support,
custody, and visitation shall be treated as one issue in family court.
59. Child
support shall be based upon an ability to pay.
There shall be no child support in a 50/50 custody arrangement.
60. If a parent
cannot pay child support, that parent shall not be jailed. Parents who do not pay child support may be
sued for fraud, and if a jury determines that fraud was committed, a judgment
may be entered against the parent, and the court may revoke the driving privileges
of the parent.
61. No one
shall be jailed for non-payment of anything.
62. All
children and family court proceedings should be public. The only ones they are protecting are the
criminals.
63. Children
shall be taken from parents only in extreme situations of abuse or neglect, and
those decisions shall be made only by a jury after a full evidentiary trial.
64. Civil court
requirement of a preponderance of probability shall be required in family
court.
65. Where
accusations of abuse are falsely made, there should be sanctions and criminal
charges filed.
66. There shall
be no custody rights granted to convicted domestic abusers. This is how they gain ground to further
manipulate their victims.
67. Anyone who
feels their court experience was improper may have their case reviewed by a
Special Regulatory Grand Jury.
68. So-called
“parental alienation” shall not be considered child abuse.
69. Any citizen
may file criminal charges by submitting a Criminal Warrant Application to a
magistrate court. The Accuser shall
serve as the “prosecutor” at a hearing before a magistrate court with a
jury. If the magistrate court finds
probable cause, the matter shall be referred to the prosecuting attorney for
prosecution.
70. Officer
Involved Domestic Violence matters shall be addressed with detailed procedures
established by each police department.
71. No one
shall be placed on any child abuse registry without a jury trial and a
conviction for child abuse.
72. A “Safe at
Home” program shall be established to protect citizens by having their
addresses and contact information suppressed.
73. There shall
never be a gag order issued by any judge.
74. All courts
shall always be open.
75. No person
may be named a vexatious litigant without a finding by a jury.
For more information, contact William M. Windsor. Bill Windsor and GRIP will edit your state’s
statutes upon request to incorporate these changes in a state’s existing laws.
VIDEO
Published on Feb 21, 2013 Children and Family Court Legislation proposed to U.S. Congress and State Legislatures by Lawless America. Lawless America...The Movie is all about exposing the fact that we now live in Lawless America. We no longer have laws that …
YouTube Video Published on Feb 21, 2013
Children and Family Court Legislation proposed to U.S. Congress and State Legislatures by Lawless America.
Lawless America...The Movie is all about exposing the fact that we now live in Lawless America. We no longer have laws that are enforced because judges do whatever they want to do. America has also become lawless because government officials are dishonest and/or corrupt. The movie will expose corruption in every state. The Movie will focus on victims. Corrupt judges and corrupt government officials will be exposed, and we will confront a number of the crooks.
If anyone has ever questioned the story of a person who has expressed the view that they were a victim of the government or of judges, this movie will prove that the odds are that the corruption report was true. In fact, there are probably tens of millions of victims in the United States who never realized what happened to them.
One feature length documentary movie is being produced. It will be shown in theaters, on Netflix, Blockbuster, and other such video places, and the movie will be presented at the Sundance Film Festival and other film festivals. In addition, videos will be produced for each state and for each type of corruption. Everyone interviewed for the film recorded a three-minute segment that will be done as testimony before Congress as well as a 30-60 minute on-camera interview with Bill Windsor, founder of LawlessAmerica.com and the revolutionary Party. The legislators in each state are receiving the testimony from those in their state, and the members of the U.S. House and Senate will receive all of the testimony nationwide.
Over 750 people were interviewed for the movie.
For more information, see www.LawlessAmerica.com -- www.YouTube.com/lawlessamerica -- www.facebook.com/lawlessamerica -- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2337260/
Email Nobodies@att.net to reach +Bill Windsor
How to file complaints against Florida Judges and Florida Lawyers?
ReplyDeleteFlorida Judge Complaints
Contact the Florida Judicial Qualifications Committee. To file a complaint about a judge in Florida: http://www.floridasupremecourt.org
Write to the Florida Judicial Qualifications Committee.
Florida Judicial Complaint Mailing Address
Judicial Qualifications Committee
1110 Thomasville Road
Tallahassee, FL 32303
Telephone
850-488-1581
Florida Lawyer Complaints
Florida Bar handles complaints about lawyers in Florida. To file a complaint about a lawyer in Florida: http://www.floridabar.org
Lawyer Complaint Mailing Address
Florida Bar
651 E. Jefferson Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2300
Telephone
850/561-5600
Complaints about Florida Judges and Florida Lawyers
Each State has its own procedures for filing complaints against judges. All states require a written and signed complaint. Some states have a form for you to fill out. Other States request a letter. Grievances of misconduct usually concern issues of conflict of interest or impartiality. Adverse rulings or judgments are not considered legitimate grievances. You must support the complaint about the Florida Judge with sufficient documentation. Contact the Florida Judicial Qualifications Committee.
All states maintain an agency to process lawyer complaints. These disciplinary counsels can usually be found as a department of the state bar association or as a branch of the state supreme court. Complaints can be filed by filling out a form supplied by the disciplinary counsel or by writing a letter to Florida Bar.
Check the Florida web site http://www.floridabar.org to find the requirements for a complaint about a Florida Lawyer.
“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.
DeleteRedress, 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
HOW DID CHILDREN OF DIVORCE GET STUCK WITH THE VISITATION PLAN THAT AFFORDS THEM ACCESS TO THEIR NON-RESIDENTIAL PARENT ONLY ONE NIGHT DURING THE WEEK AND EVERY OTHER WEEK-END?
ReplyDeleteWhat is the research that supports such a schedule? Where is the data that confirms that such a plan is in the best interest of the child?
Well, reader, you can spend your time from now until eternity researching the literature, and YOU WILL NOT DISCOVER ANY SUPPORTING DATA for the typical visitation arrangement with the non-residential parent! The reality is that this arrangement is based solely on custom. And just like the short story, "The Lottery," in which the prizewinner is stoned to death, the message is that deeds and judgments are frequently arrived at based on nothing more than habit, fantasy, prejudice, and yes, on "junk science."
This family therapist upholds the importance of both parents playing an active and substantial role in their children's lives----especially in situations when the parents are apart. In order to support the goal for each parent to provide a meaningfully and considerable involvement in the lives of their children, I affirm that the resolution to custody requires an arrangement for joint legal custody and physical custody that maximizes the time with the non-residential----with the optimal arrangement being 50-50, whenever practical. It is my professional opinion that the customary visitation arrangement for non-residential parents to visit every other weekend and one night during the week is not sufficient to maintain a consequential relationship with their children. Although I have heard matrimonial attorneys, children's attorneys, and judges assert that the child needs the consistency of the same residence, I deem this assumption to be nonsense. I cannot be convinced that the consistency with one's bed trumps consistency with a parent!
Should the reader question how such an arrangement can be judiciously implemented which maximizes the child's time---even in a 50-50 arrangement----with the non-residential parent, I direct the reader to the book, Mom's House, Dads House, by the Isolina Ricci, PhD.
Indeed, the research that we do have supports the serious consequences to children when the father, who is generally the non-residential parent, does not play a meaningful role in lives of his children. The book, Fatherneed, (2000) by Dr. Kyle Pruitt, summarizes the research at Yale University about the importance of fathers to their children. And another post on this page summarizes an extensive list of other research.
Children of divorce or separation of their parents previously had each parent 100% of the time and obviously cannot have the same arrangement subsequent to their parents' separation. But it makes no sense to this family therapist that the result of parental separation is that the child is accorded only 20% time with one parent and 80% with the other. What rational person could possibly justify this?
Thanks for your comments! In addition there are forms of abuse. This type Psychological Abuse or Family Legal Abuse can cause a parent(s) a traumatic “injury”. We’re talking about very serious, blatant civil and human rights violations allowed on the part of the Family Court. Sad…but true. Often times it is caused by the excessive tactics some family law lawyers will go to knowingly and intentionally make sure they physically and psychologically injure their opponent by trying to make there client looks like the victim, What this also does is to financial cripple good and FIT parents while they hope they will give up on the child/ren and go away. In South Florida we have a few of these types of lawyers in the upcoming expose on Garbage Lawyers.
ReplyDeleteIt'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
"CHILDREN OF DIVORCE DESERVE FULL ACCESS TO BOTH PARENTS, WHENEVER POSSIBLE."
ReplyDeletePersonally, I can’t find anyone willing to reject that statement publicly. It’s a fundamental truth. We now have a wealth of evidence demonstrating children are better off, in most situations, when they have something near equal time with each parent. So why are shared-parenting bills are being rejected throughout the country?
Do legislators believe mothers are more important to children than fathers? For the most part, I don’t think so. Politicians are, however, under quite a bit of pressure from some very powerful anti-shared parenting special interests. Recently, we’ve seen these opponents contribute to shared-parenting bills failing to pass in South Dakota and Minnesota.
Some would argue disappointments like those are clear signs that shared parenting legislation will not happen anytime soon. The opposite is true. The near victories in these states and others is an enormous indication politicians are beginning to understand the vast majority of American citizens believe children of divorce deserve equal access to both parents, whenever possible.
In fact, South Dakota’s bill lost in a 21-13 Senate vote. That’s a swing of 5 senators. If merely 5 senators felt more pressure from South Dakotans than they did from special interests, South Dakota would have a shared parenting statute. We should commend the remaining politicians in South Dakota’s Senate for doing the right thing.
In Minnesota … well, Minnesota is a travesty. That bill passed, and on May 24, 2012 Governor Mark Dayton vetoed it. Governor Dayton claimed that both sides made “compelling arguments,” but because the “ramifications” of the legislation were “uncertain,” he decided to single-handedly overrule the will of his constituents and their representatives. Mr. Governor, unless you are ending slavery or beginning women’s suffrage, you will likely never have the benefit of “certainty” in your political career. Again, we should praise the Minnesotan politicians who voted for the bill.
Six people. Six people stopped two states from enacting shared parenting. Six people do not indicate shared parenting is a distant hope – they indicate profoundly that it is an imminent inevitability.
Mike Haskell is a divorced dad, shared parenting supporter and practicing family law attorney in Grand Rapids, Michigan. Posting of this article is not an endorsement for, or recommendation of, Haskell Law.
ACFC is America's Shared Parenting Organization
"CHILDREN NEED BOTH PARENTS"
The members of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children dedicate ourselves to the creation of a family law system and public awareness which promotes equal rights for ALL parties affected by issues of the modern family.
ACFC is challenging the current system of American family law and policy. Through a national system of local affiliates and in alliance with other pro-family and civil liberties groups, ACFC is shifting the public debate to the real causes of family dissolution.
PRO SE RIGHTS:
ReplyDeleteSims v. Aherns, 271 SW 720 (1925) ~ "The practice of law is an occupation of common right."
Brotherhood 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."