When Family Courts Fail Fathers, Children Pay the Price

By any measure, I am a fit and loving parent. The courts themselves have acknowledged this. Yet for years, I have been denied the most basic right of fatherhood: time with my daughter. My story is not unique — it is emblematic of a broken system that too often allows parental alienation to masquerade as justice.

#StandupforZoraya

In 2008, after my daughter’s second birthday, her mother began denying me access to her. What followed was a relentless cycle of restraining orders, false allegations, and endless hearings. Judges dismissed claims of domestic violence as unfounded, yet still imposed restrictions that kept me from my child. Even when official reports documented the warmth of my relationship with my daughter — noting our conversations about school, science, and family, and her joy in our time together — the system continued to erect barriers.

The opposing party has criticized me for filing multiple petitions. Yes, I have filed three: the original paternity suit and two petitions for modification. And I will file as many as necessary. That is not harassment — it is persistence. It is the refusal of a father to abandon his child. The real question is not why I continue to fight, but why the courts tolerate reckless disregard for a child’s right to both parents.

This is not just about me. It is about the thousands of fathers and mothers across the country who face similar battles. Family courts too often enable one parent to erase the other, reducing children’s lives to half of what they should be. This is not protection — it is abuse, carried out under the color of law.

The consequences are devastating. Children deprived of meaningful relationships with both parents suffer emotionally, socially, and academically. Parents who care deeply are left broken, financially drained, and stigmatized by false accusations. Meanwhile, the system congratulates itself on “protecting” children while ignoring the harm it perpetuates.

It is time for reform. Family courts must stop enabling parental alienation and start enforcing shared parenting as the default. Judges must be held accountable for decisions that sever parent-child bonds without cause. And lawmakers must recognize that the reckless disregard of parental rights is not just a private tragedy — it is a public crisis.

I have complied with every order, attended every program, and paid every fee. The courts themselves have declared me a fit parent. Yet I have not seen or spoken with my daughter since January 2015. That is not justice. That is cruelty.

Children deserve both parents. Parents deserve fairness. And society deserves a family court system that protects relationships instead of destroying them. Until that day comes, I — and countless others — will continue to fight. Not out of anger, but out of love. Because no child should ever grow up believing that one parent simply disappeared.

An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society

Code of Conduct for United States Judges

The Code of Conduct for United States Judges includes the ethical canons that apply to federal judges and provides guidance on their performance of official duties and engagement in a variety of outside activities.

Introduction
Canon 1: A Judge Should Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary
Canon 2: A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All Activities
Canon 3: A Judge Should Perform the Duties of the Office Fairly, Impartially and Diligently
Canon 4: A Judge May Engage in Extrajudicial Activities That are Consistent With the Obligations of Judicial Office
Canon 5: A Judge Should Refrain From Political Activity
Compliance with the Code of Conduct
Applicable Date of Compliance

Just a Thought

It is vital to prepare yourself before you enter the Courtroom DoorsThere a legal "biases" in our courts. However, if you are aware of them you will have a better chance defending yourself."KNOWLEDGE is Power"

Judge Leonard Edwards wrote an article for the Judges Page on the National CASA website where he says that judges need to stop rubber stamping these cases and enforce the "Reasonable Efforts"  requirement, but they are afraid a "No Reasonable Efforts" ruling could cost their state millions of dollars.  There is also at least one Judges Bench Book (California) that is referred to as "The Smoking Gun" >>>  because it very clearly states that the courts MUST rule during the initial  hearing (after removal) that it is contrary to the best interest of the child to be returned home, otherwise the state is NEVER eligible for federal funding.   You can see it for yourself at:  on  pages 2, 3 and 13.

To Index

Introductory Reading

• Reasonable Efforts Judges View

• Blinking On The Bench is a law paper that questions whether Judges use intuition and/or deliberation to decide their cases. (Original Location:http://abajournal.com/files/Blinking_on_the_Bench.pdf )

• Navigating Custody & Visitation Evaluations in Cases with Domestic Violence: A Judge's Guide: This PDF document was developed under grant number SJI-03-N103 from the State Justice Institute. The points of view expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the State Justice Institute. (Comment on this Guide: A Mixed & Dangerous Tool(Source:http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/dangerous-tool.html  Document File))

• Related Reading: Standards of Practice for Attorneys Representing Parents in Abuse and Neglect Cases - ABA- 2006 (Download pdf) This document out lines the many responsibilities of what lawyers are supposed to do when working with their client. May want to download and review this to document what your lawyer actually does, in your particular experiences. Sections include: 1) Summary of the Standards; 2) Basic Obligations of Parents' Attorneys; 3) Obligations of Attorney Manager; and 4) Role of the Court.. (Check out other Lawyer Related Information)

What are Judges Bench Books??

Simply put,  the best way to say it would be that Judges Bench Books are the instruction manuals on how a Judge can or should rule and/or preside over a case.   The biggest benefit to providing access to the Bench Books is it gives people a chance to have "inside information" to help them better anticipate what they're facing, and possibly help them defend themselves better.  It also shows/proves any incentive that the Judges may have for ruling a certain way. 

Code of Conduct for United States Federal Judges

Family Court is a deadly business

Originally appeared at CatholicCourier.Com (Regional paper for Catholic Diocese of Roches Lyons man stands up for beliefs  (Publication Date:  09-03-2008)  By Jennifer Burke/Catholic Courier Lyons resident John Murtari has been standing up for what he believes in for years, but those actions recently made him a minor celebrity in his hometown. Murtari is featured in "Support? System Down," a documentary recently produced and directed by actor Angelo Lobo. The film explores what Lobo sees as the flaws in America's child-support system. "Support" premiered in California this past spring, and the recently restored Ohmann Theater in Lyons hosted a special screening of the film Aug. 13. In November 2006 Lobo visited Murtari in prison, where Murtari was serving a six-month sentence for failure to pay child support. Murtari claims he fell behind in his child-support payments because the payment amounts were calculated based on an income level he no longer had. What little extra money Murtari did have was usually spent traveling across the country to visit his son Domenic, he said. "What am I supposed to do? I want to see my son," Murtari, who belongs to St. Michael Parish in Lyons, told the Catholic Courier. "He wasn't (physically or financially) hurting for anything, but he wanted Daddy." Murtari refused food or water while imprisoned and instead received his nourishment through a feeding tube inserted through his nose. He did so not to harm himself, but to protest what he called an unjust family-court system that he felt had wrongly taken away his son and sent him to prison, all without a jury trial. Murtari also has been arrested several times for writing on the ground in chalk "I love you, Dom" and "Senator Clinton, help us" outside the Federal Building in Syracuse in an attempt to draw Sen. Hillary Clinton's attention to his proposed Family Rights Act. "The idea is to get Congress to pass a Family Rights Act. Each state has different family law, and it's almost amazing to think that your relationship with your children could be governed differently in Alabama than here in New York," Murtari said. Murtari, founder of the nonprofit organization A Kids Right, has a draft of the proposed act on the organization's Web site, www.AKidsRight.org. The organization's members believe all parents should be presumed fit and equal parents unless the government can prove through a jury trial that they are a demonstrated threat to their children, and have demonstrated that with harmful intent. Only then should the government interfere with a parent's right to raise his or her child, according to the organization and the proposed legislation. "John Murtari is a voice for the many non-custodial parents who wanted to share their children equally. People will see why he not only went on a hunger strike for change, but also continues to peacefully protest for the rights of children to have both parents," Lobo said in a statement. Murtari, who hadn't seen the movie before the Aug. 13 screening, said he was pleased with the way Lobo told his story and the way the film educated people unfamiliar with the child-support and family-court systems. "It's always weird seeing yourself (on film)," Murtari said. "What really got me was the people from town who were there and said, 'Wow, I never knew (about the system)." Murtari said he himself had never known much about the child-support and family-court systems before his divorce, even though he'd always considered himself a politically aware man. When his ex-wife decided to move across the country with their 5-year-old son, however, he said the "gut-wrenching" experience inspired him to learn more about the system and how he might change it. He drew inspiration from the Gospels and from reading about the lives of St. Francis of Assisi, Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi. Inspired by what these men were able to do through simple faith and nonviolent action, Murtari decided to follow their examples. "Nonviolent action doesn't mean writing letters. It's voluntary, loving self-sacrifice to show how deeply you believe in your cause," Murtari said. His nonviolent actions have landed him in jail more than once, but Murtari said he's seen some fruits from his labor. Once-hostile law-enforcement officers and court officials have begun treating him with respect, and he's full of hope that his actions can make a difference for families throughout the nation. "I could have easily descended into that bitterness and helplessness. Once I started taking these actions I felt better," Murtari said. "With faith you can lose that bitterness. When you're using that faith and sacrificing to make things better for others, you're going to feel better." EDITOR'S NOTE: To learn more about "Support? System Down," visit the film's Web site at www.SupportTheMovie.com.

The 'Family Court in Focus' event is tomorrow night! - Note: You don't need to bring your tickets, just yourselves and support to bring these issues back on the public and political agenda. We look forward to seeing you there.

Dad Documentary ~~ Huffingtonpost.com ~ Family Court Is Bad…

\

The Family Court Is Badly Broken, And So Are The Parents  --  At a recent meeting in a converted warehouse in inner-Sydney 30 or so people -- both men and women -- told stories of devastation and heartbreaking loss. In…HUFFINGTONPOST.COM.AU

Using a child as a control mechanism is a domestic violence behavior

Ripped Apart

Divorced dads, domestic violence, and the systemic bias against men in King County family court.

By Nina Shapiro

Jim's first indication that his life was about to be turned upside down came the night he got home from work and was approached by an off-duty sheriff's deputy.

"Are you Jim?" the deputy asked.
"I am," he replied.
The deputy then informed him that not only was he no longer welcome inside his own house, he wasn't allowed even to collect his things. The officer handed him a suitcase his wife had packed and a $3,000 check—also from his wife, who earned far more than he did.
"What are the grounds?" Jim asked.
"It's all in there," the deputy said, thrusting a sheaf of papers into his hand.

The papers informed him his wife was filing for divorce. Worse, she had requested, and been granted, a temporary protection order based on allegations of domestic violence. The order—issued at a hearing that took place without Jim—took effect immediately. It required him to vacate his house and refrain from "any contact whatsoever" with either his wife or his 3-year-old son.

In it, his wife wrote that she felt like she had to "walk on eggshells" around Jim due to his unpredictable temper. He would scream to such an extent that "veins in his neck were bulging" and "spittle from his lips was hitting me in the face." She also described him yelling at their dogs, roughly handling their cat, and driving aggressively and recklessly.

But there's one thing she never claimed—that Jim had ever hit her or their son. Nor did she accuse Jim of threatening either of them.
Jim, an insurance agent periodically unemployed, had at times performed more child-care duties than his wife, according to a court-assigned social worker hired to assess each spouse's parenting skills. 

Observing interactions between Jim and his son, and talking to friends, relatives, and neighbors, she called the bond between them "relatively strong, happy, interactive, comfortable, playful, and full of physical play and affection." Yet it would still take 15 months for Jim to be allowed to have normal visits with his son.

Had he been charged with domestic violence in criminal court, where guilt must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt and the standards of due process are high, this might not have happened. But Jim's fate was decided in a very different venue: family court.

It's a court like no other—a hugely busy and rancorous place where the most personal aspects of people's lives are not only on display, but judged and reshaped in proceedings that often last no longer than 20 minutes. Appointed commissioners, rather than elected judges, make many of the most crucial decisions. And the standard of evidence (known as "preponderance of the evidence") is the lowest allowed by law.

Within a system which denies the existence of basic human rights, fear tends to be the order of the day

FLORIDA FAMILIES UNITED - CHILDREN'S RIGHTS FLORIDA - 2017 from Childrens Rights Florida

What Is The Role Of Lawyers?

Jeena Cho at Above the Law -  You get to define for yourself how you want to practice and what kind of lawyer you want to be.

Across the country women, children, AND MEN are becoming the victims of judges and the court system. It is time that we...
Posted by Children's Rights on Thursday, August 20, 2015

American Fathers Liberation -

Posted by Childrens Rights Florida  “Within a system which denies the existence of basic human rights, fear tends to be the order of the day. Fear of imprisonment, fear of torture, fear of death, fear of losing friends, family, property or means of livelihood, fear of poverty, fear of isolation, fear of failure. A most insidious form of fear is that which masquerades as common sense or even wisdom, condemning as foolish, reckless, insignificant or fut... more »

It's Time to Fundraise For Your Favorite Judge Again!

South Florida Lawyers at South Florida Lawyers -

Can you believe it? Where did the summer go? It feels like we just started our summer break and here we are again, with the kids back in school* the endless judicial fundraising pitches, emails, and faux events!* Didn't we just do this? When is the election even? Next tisha b'av? Don't worry -- just give, give and give again. I'm pretty sure it's a necessary evil -- *hey, wait a minute, why is it necessary again? * And remember -- that judge you save could be your own (I kid, they won't even remember you)! Seriously, you might as well be part of the solution -- support the sm... more »

The Record: Parental due process

LK at Legally Kidnapped -

The Record: Parental due process LEAVING CHILDREN unattended in vehicles remains a serious problem, notwithstanding many publicized warnings against it. Some 45 children have died from heatstroke while locked in cars in hot weather since the beginning of 2014, according to researchers at San Jose State University in California. Children left alone in cars are also susceptible to being kidnapped.

Southern District of Florida Blog: S.D. Fla. celebrates LGBT achievement

John Oliver Explains Why It Is Too Soon To Celebrate LGBT Equality

Kathryn Rubino at Above the Law - 1 day ago

Even if you don't agree with Oliver's views his fast pace, clever graphics and sly demeanor keep you entertained.

The politics of sociological consciousness

Paul Campos at Lawyers, Guns & Money -

This weekend, the NYT ran an interesting article by a former waiter at one of New York’s Michelin three-star restaurants, who is now a graduate student: In a playground for the superrich, I was an overpaid chaperone wearing a bespoke suit. Gluttony was common. So was sex; more than once we had to interrupt coitus […]

Is This Racist? State Bar Can’t Tell If This Is Racist.

Joe Patrice at Above the Law -

After honoring a story written by a man associated with a hate group, a state bar flies into embarrassing damage control.  

They named a drink: The Foster Child

LK at Legally Kidnapped -

Drink of the Week: The Foster Child, a Banana Foster margarita at Salty's Gulfport Looking for a margarita unlike any other? Try a bananas fosterita, dubbed the Foster Child ($8), at Salty's Gulfport. Bartender Kat McKenna created the cocktail based on the flavors of the dessert bananas Foster.

Law Grad Drowning In Debt Tries To Sell Law Degree On Craigslist

Staci Zaretsky at Above the Law -

Go on, make this lawyer an offer he can't refuse.  

Judge Judy Destroys Child Support

Judge Judy, known for her sharp and no-nonsense demeanor, might have taken a strong stance on child support issues. Judge Judy has often been outspoken about the challenges and complexities of family law, and her courtroom style has garnered both praise and criticism for its directness and sometimes harsh judgments.

In cases involving child support, Judge Judy has frequently emphasized the importance of both parents being financially responsible for their children. She’s been particularly critical of individuals who attempt to avoid paying child support, especially when there is a clear obligation to do so. She’s also been known to dismiss cases where she believes one parent is simply trying to "get back" at the other through the child support system, as well as cases where the amount being requested seems disproportionate.

The following is my argument to the Court in the Parental Alienation case, Nov 2014. Identities are protected by substituting information contained inside the parentheses.

CLOSING ARGUMENT BY MR. HUGUENOR:
YOUR HONOR, DR. (ABC).  FAMILY COURT SERVICES FOUND GREAT CONFLICT, (THE CHILD VICTIM OF PA) WAS BEING PLACED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CONFLICT AND PHYSICAL HARM TO (THE CHILD VICTIM OF PA).
DR. (ABC) STARTED THE CONJOINT COUNSELING.  HE (THE DOCTOR) TESTIFIED THAT HE WAS AWARE OF THOSE FINDINGS.  HE TESTIFIED THAT IT WAS PART OF HIS PURPOSE TO EVALUATE WHAT WAS CAUSING THE CONFLICT AND HARM AND THE PLACING (THE CHILD VICTIM OF PA) IN THE MIDDLE.
DR. (ABC) TESTIFIED THAT HE FOUND NO INCIDENT OF (THE TARGETED PARENT) CREATING CONFLICT.  THE CONFLICT WAS CAUSED BY (THE PARENTAL ALIENATION PERPETRATING PARENT).
(THE PERPETRATING PARENT) DID NUMEROUS THINGS THAT PLACED THE CHILD INTO THE MIDDLE OF THE CONFLICT.  (THE PERPETRATING PARENT) HAD EXPRESSED TO THE (CHILD—VICTIM OF PA) THAT THE (TARGETED PARENT) WAS ESSENTIALLY OF NO VALUE.  (THE PERPETRATING PARENT) DID THAT DIRECTLY TO DR. (ABC) IN HIS OFFICE.  HE FOUND THAT THE CONFLICT WAS SIGNIFICANTLY HARMFUL TO THE CHILD (VICTIM OF PA).  HE FOUND THAT IT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD, DETRIMENTAL TO THE CHILD'S WELFARE FOR JOINT CUSTODY, JOINT PHYSICAL CUSTODY TO CONTINUE.
(THE DOCTOR) DESCRIBED THE SITUATION AS STAGE THREE OF PARENTAL ALIENATION.  HE DESCRIBED THAT (THE CHILD VICTIM OF PA) WAS NOT ALLOWED TO LOVE (THE TARGETED PARENT) IN THE (PERPETRATING PARENT’S) HOME.  (THE CHILD) WAS NOT ALLOWED TO RESPECT THE (TARGETED PARENT).  HE SAW (THE CHILD VICTIM OF PA) AT TIMES WHEN (THE CHILD) HAD COME FROM (THE PERPETRATING PARENT)'S CUSTODY AND TIMES WHEN (THE CHILD) CAME FROM (THE TARGETED PARENT)'S CUSTODY, AND HE FOUND A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CHILD, A CHILD WHO WAS HEALTHY IN (THE TARGETED PARENT)'S CUSTODY.
HE FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE, ALTHOUGH (THE PERPETRATING PARENT) REPEATED SUBSTANCE ABUSE OVER AND OVER AND OVER.
AND THERE WERE TWO STATEMENTS FROM (THE CHILD VICTIM OF PA).  ONE, EXHIBIT (X), IN WHICH (THE CHILD VICTIM OF PA) IS DESCRIBING SUBSTANCE ABUSE (OF THE TARGET PARENT) TAKING UP THE STATEMENTS OF THE (PERPETRATING PARENT).  DR. (ABC) TESTIFIED THAT THIS IS COMMON IN THIS TYPE OF A SITUATION BECAUSE (THE PERPETRATING PARENT)'S LOVE IS CONDITIONAL LOVE, AND THE CHILD QUICKLY LEARNS THAT (THE CHILD) MUST ADOPT THE ATTITUDES OF THE (PERPETRATING PARENT) IN ORDER TO BE IN A POSITION OF LOVE WITH THE (PERPETRATING PARENT).
(THE CHILD VICTIM) WANTS TO LOVE THE (PERPETRATING PARENT).  (THE CHILD) WANTS TO LOVE THE (TARGETED PARENT).  (THE CHILD) DOES LOVE BOTH PARENTS, AND THIS (PARENTAL ALIENATION) IS CHILD ABUSE, AS DR. (ABC) TESTIFIED, FOR (THE PERPETRATING PARENT) TO ORCHESTRATE A SITUATION WITH (THE CHILD VICTIM) WHERE (PERPETRATING PARENT) IS TRYING TO CAUSE (THE CHILD VICTIM) TO REJECT AND WITHDRAW FROM (THE CHILD’S) (TARGETED PARENT) 100 PERCENT.
BASED ON THIS TESTIMONY, WE REQUEST SOLE PHYSICAL AND SOLE LEGAL CUSTODY OF (THE CHILD VICTIM) TO THE (TARGETED PARENT), AND TO TAKE (THE PA PERPETRATING PARENT)'S VISITATION DOWN TO MINIMAL, AND HAVE (THE PERPETRATING PARENT) WORK WITH A THERAPIST, WHOEVER, OF (PERPETRATING PARENT’S) CHOICE, WHO WILL THEN WORK WITH DR. (ABC) AND WILL TRY TO TRACK, OR THEY WILL TRY TO TRACK PROGRESS THAT (THE PERPETRATING PARENT) IS MAKING THROUGH ACTIONS, NOT JUST WORDS, WHERE (THE PERPETRATING PARENT) WILL NO LONGER PUT (THE CHILD VICTIM) AT RISK.
THANK YOU.
Thomas M. Huguenor originally shared to Guys With Kids - Important

When I was successful in prosecuting a child custody parental alienation (PA) case, a couple of weeks ago, I was thankful because PA is child abuse that is rarely proven.  When I say "proven" I mean to the extent that the Court significantly reduces the parenting time for the PP (parenting who is perpetrating PA). In a PA case, which I handled, a year ago, the Court's expert witness found that the PP had committed only acts of "bad parenting" although it was established, through another independent psychologist, that this parent had committed 20 acts of PA; and that the victim child had completely withdrawn from the Targeted Parent. Many experts are reluctant to acknowledge that, or they simply cannot recognize when, significant acts of PA have been committed. Also, many Family Court judges have had little or no training, or work experience with PA.  So, frequently, even when the Court finds wrongful actions have been taken by a parent; there is no finding of PA and nothing other than a warning to the PP to stop this behavior. PA is not visible in the way that a physical beating would be.  It can't be diagnosed by a police officer coming to a home after a 911 call. Please see the referenced article by Dr. Major which explains why PA is so hard to prove and, when it is, the finding rarely results in change of custody. However, allow me to conclude which the following: PA can be established in court. PA can be stopped and even reversed through appropriate court orders. In the next post I will include my closing argument to the Court so that you may see what factors I stressed as significant and my requested child custody modification orders.

Thomas M. Huguenor originally shared to Guys With Kids - Important

http://www.breakthroughparenting.com/PAS.htm #childcustodyparentalalienation

Standing in the Hall of Fame.

We only support organizations who show an understanding that children need both parents, and that either parent is equally capable of the choice to perpetrate hate or declare peace.

Little to no oversight is brought to bear for Americans...

U.S. Atty. Loretta Lynch should say to U.S. Dist. Atty. David Capp: INDIANA HERE I COME!

Opt IN USA

• On February 16, 2016, the first annual report was released on Opt IN USA, a grassroots U.S. foreign policy reform, judicial accountability, and international human rights campaign. The report title is “AMERICANS IN JEOPARDY: When Human Rights Protection Becomes America’s Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Branch Shell Game”.
• Corporate sponsor of the report is National Judicial Conduct and Disability Law Project, Inc. (NJCDLP), a nonprofit U.S. public policy think tank and legal reform advocate headquartered just outside Chicago in Crown Point, Indiana.
• While all NJCDLP board members are cutting-edge pioneers in detecting and addressing patterns of U.S. legal system abuse, the organization's Executive Board member Mr. Rodney A. Logal, his wife, attorney Zena Crenshaw-Logal*, and their fellow NJCDLP co-founder, Dr. Andrew D. Jackson, are the organization's driving force.  They are NJCDLP’s full-time volunteers as well as the non-profit’s primary financial benefactors. 
• In that context it is particularly significant that two Indiana judges have taken to repeatedly placing the Logals and Dr. Jackson at respective risk of arrest:  a death threat for Mr. Logal given how jail would affect his medical care and health.  Moreover, substantial debt has been imposed by default upon the Logals and Dr. Jackson, and is in the process of being collected although the underlying judgments are void as a matter of law!
• In late September 2015, the Logals and Dr. Jackson asked the Indiana House Judiciary Committee and the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Indiana to investigate several area judges whose activities may be part of what has been dubbed “The Third Degree” (TTD).  
• As the 2016 Opt IN USA report makes clear, TTD is a persistent pattern of persecution and psychological torture imposed through U.S. legal system abuse.  
• U.S. District Attorney Capp has shown no interest in the phenomenon despite its obvious peril for Mr. and Mrs. Logal as well as Dr. Jackson, not to mention the prospect of multiple related murders, including the suspicious death of a lawyer who attested to the bribery of a now retired Indiana state court judge.
• Uncanny it is that little to no oversight is brought to bear for Americans claiming to endure TTD.
• Ironically their allegations -- specifically the notion that they are targets of TTD -- rarely if ever garner more than cursory major media and U.S. government attention. Yet for each of them, powerful private sector and/or U.S. public sector actors expend tremendous time, effort, and resources muting their government critiques through quasi-judicial and/or judicial processes.
• Whether as a result they opt to suffer in silence, become widely ignored or disregarded, cease communicating while incarcerated, and/or die . . . these supposedly too-insignificant-to-take-seriously people get silenced.
• Please do not allow the Logals and Dr. Jackson to "get silenced".  Your representatives in Northwest Indiana are in the process of letting that happen.
• The time has come for protection of the Logals and Dr. Jackson to come out of Washington, D.C.  And time is of essence as the Opt IN USA debut report makes clear, particularly its section on "Ground Zero: INDIANA, the Hoosier State" and Appendix.  
• Learn more @ www.thethirddegree.net