Posted Jul 9, 2010 12:18 PM CDT
By Martha Neil ABA Journal
Earlier this year, the future looked bright for Mary Ann Giebink. In addition to a Sioux Falls law practice, the South Dakota lawyer was a Democratic candidate for the state legislature. Then she fell off the wagon. On May 7, the recovering alcoholic had a relapse and led Minnehaha County sheriff's officers on a high-speed, booze-fueled chase, according to the Argus Leader and KELO. But that wasn't all. Within a month or so prior to her arrest, Giebink misappropriated $24,000 from the law firm's trust account, authorities say. She allegedly wrote checks two checks totaling $2,000 in April to two bars, once of which also operates a casino. Since then, Giebink has done her best to make things right. She quickly withdrew from the legislative race, closed her law practice and was voluntarily disbarred in South Dakota. Yesterday she pleaded guilty to drunken driving and eluding charges from the May incident, as as well offering an open guilty plea to a new charge of grand theft by embezzlement of property received in trust that was filed earlier the same day, the articles say. This permits the judge in her case potentially to impose the maximum 12-year penalty when she is later sentenced. Giebink, who is 50, told the judge yesterday that she had repaid some of the money taken from the trust account and promised to make full restitution. Minnehaha County State's Attorney Aaron McGowan described the situation as an ongoing cooperative effort. She also admitted to police when they interviewed her about the missing money that she had made a serious mistake, reports KELO. According to court documents, she stated: "I admit that I have committed a felony, grand theft. I knew I was creating my own disaster." As a result of her cooperation, charges of marijuana and drug paraphernalia possession were dropped.
I.F.F.O.C. President thinks there needs to be better oversight on attorneys and judges.
I.F.F.O.C. recommends a 12 panel of citizens who has the power to recommend suspension, or request a grand jury investigation. This would eliminate the good old boy system. These citizens would not be in the legal field, but have two legal advisors who would only give legal advise to the panel. This would give the citizens back our legal system, our forefathers had originally set in place for the people. Not the way our system is currently run by those who abuse our system of justice for profits, and ignore our constitutional rights guaranteed by law. This gives us as the people equality back in our system of justice, as well as, our State and Federal Courts.
Monday, September 6, 2010
Lawyer Accused of Smuggling Witness Hit List From Jailed Client
Posted Jul 9, 2010 2:56 PM CDT
By Martha Neil ABA Journal
A California lawyer has been accused of smuggling--perhaps unknowingly--a witness hit list from a jailed client. It allegedly contained highlighted names that would have understood by the recipient to be those of witnesses to be eliminated.While representing then-longtime client Yusef Bey IV in a case in which he is accused of ordering that journalist Chauncey Bailey and two other individuals be killed, attorney Lorna Patton Brown allegedly took unauthorized materials from him out of the Santa Rita jail and smuggled materials into the jail on multiple occasions, reports the Chauncey Bailey Project in an article published in the San Jose Mercury News. The article relies on an affidavit by Kathleen Boyovich, an inspector with theAlameda County district attorney's office. The affidavit was reportedly included in a court filing that seeks to prevent Bey from having unrecorded phone calls while representing himself in a separate real estate fraud case, due to concerns about witness safety. Brown stepped down from the criminal representation of Bey in April, citing a conflict of interest that was not detailed, reports KTVU. She has not herself been charged with any crime and it appears from the article that no action was ever taken by anyone to put the claimed witness hit list to use. She did not respond to a request for comment from the Chauncey Bailey Project and her lawyer declined to comment.
By Martha Neil ABA Journal
A California lawyer has been accused of smuggling--perhaps unknowingly--a witness hit list from a jailed client. It allegedly contained highlighted names that would have understood by the recipient to be those of witnesses to be eliminated.While representing then-longtime client Yusef Bey IV in a case in which he is accused of ordering that journalist Chauncey Bailey and two other individuals be killed, attorney Lorna Patton Brown allegedly took unauthorized materials from him out of the Santa Rita jail and smuggled materials into the jail on multiple occasions, reports the Chauncey Bailey Project in an article published in the San Jose Mercury News. The article relies on an affidavit by Kathleen Boyovich, an inspector with theAlameda County district attorney's office. The affidavit was reportedly included in a court filing that seeks to prevent Bey from having unrecorded phone calls while representing himself in a separate real estate fraud case, due to concerns about witness safety. Brown stepped down from the criminal representation of Bey in April, citing a conflict of interest that was not detailed, reports KTVU. She has not herself been charged with any crime and it appears from the article that no action was ever taken by anyone to put the claimed witness hit list to use. She did not respond to a request for comment from the Chauncey Bailey Project and her lawyer declined to comment.
Abuse Hotline Call Dismissed Months Before Baby's Death
The Harvey County Sheriff's Department says an abuse hotline call regarding 19-month-old Vincent Hill was dismissed two months prior to his death.
Reporter: Stephanie Diffin / KAKE News March 31, 2010
The Harvey County Sheriff's Department confirms someone called an SRS abuse hotline more than two months before 19-month-old Vincent Hill was allegedly beaten to death. But Newton SRS and Harvey County law enforcement say they were never informed of the call. The call came in from a couple who lived in the same duplex as Hill, his mother, Katheryn Nycole Dale, and her boyfriend, Chadd Carr. Dale and Carr are both charged in the case. "Nothing ever gets done until it's too late, and unfortunately, it's too late," said Jason Monarez, the victim's neighbor. Vincent Hill's father describes the little boy as happy and always smiling. "He's never going to be able to play catch with me, I'm never going to teach him how to learn how to fish," said Ricky Hill, Vincent's father. "I''m not going to get to see him do anything." Now, Ricky Hill wonders if he would have gotten the chance to see those things if social services had further investigated a call it received on January 20th, two months before Vincent's death. "We tried to stop it, we tried... me and my girlfriend both," said Monarez. "You could just hear through the wall, the child screaming." So Monarez' girlfriend called an SRS abuse hotline. But the center dismissed the call saying it didn't indicate there was any harm taking place to the child. The last sentence of the report reads, "This completes the initial assessment with no further action needed." "It just makes me angry, really, to know that i tried and it wasn't taken seriously," said Jessica Link, who placed the call. Since the call stopped at the call center, Newton SRS says it never got word of the suspected abuse. "If they would have had the report, they probably would have notified us, and something would have gotten done," said Harvey County Sheriff T. Walton. SRS will not comment about specific cases, but did release this statement on the process of investigating calls to its hotline; "SRS receives reports of alleged abuse and neglect through our Kansas Protection Report Center, 1-800-922-5330. In State fiscal year 2009 SRS received 56,207 reports of alleged abuse or neglect. Of those, 49% or 27,340, cases were assigned for further investigation." "Intake workers receive protective services training to elicit specific information about the situation. Information requested is focused on the extent of the situation, circumstances of the situation, child’s functioning, parenting practices and caregiver function, in addition to information regarding the child’s age, person alleged to have caused harm to the child, where the child is located, other individuals or agencies who may have information regarding the incident and the availability of a non-abusing adult to protect the child from further harm."The information gathered through the intake process is then provided to a licensed social worker to review and determine whether the incident requires further investigation. This decision is based on specific safety and risk factors, including but not limited to: seriousness of the incident, prior agency involvement with the family, and seriousness of injury to child." "All reports assigned for further investigation involving allegations of maltreatment of child must be investigated within either a 24 hour or 72 hour timeframe, depending on the nature of the allegation. Situations requiring a 24 hour response include, but are not limited to: life threatening situation, sexual abuse with the alleged perpetrator in the home, child in protective custody, or a child with current visible injuries." "Certain reports, not alleging maltreatment, may be investigated within 20 working days. An example of this type of case would be truancy."
Reporter: Stephanie Diffin / KAKE News March 31, 2010
The Harvey County Sheriff's Department confirms someone called an SRS abuse hotline more than two months before 19-month-old Vincent Hill was allegedly beaten to death. But Newton SRS and Harvey County law enforcement say they were never informed of the call. The call came in from a couple who lived in the same duplex as Hill, his mother, Katheryn Nycole Dale, and her boyfriend, Chadd Carr. Dale and Carr are both charged in the case. "Nothing ever gets done until it's too late, and unfortunately, it's too late," said Jason Monarez, the victim's neighbor. Vincent Hill's father describes the little boy as happy and always smiling. "He's never going to be able to play catch with me, I'm never going to teach him how to learn how to fish," said Ricky Hill, Vincent's father. "I''m not going to get to see him do anything." Now, Ricky Hill wonders if he would have gotten the chance to see those things if social services had further investigated a call it received on January 20th, two months before Vincent's death. "We tried to stop it, we tried... me and my girlfriend both," said Monarez. "You could just hear through the wall, the child screaming." So Monarez' girlfriend called an SRS abuse hotline. But the center dismissed the call saying it didn't indicate there was any harm taking place to the child. The last sentence of the report reads, "This completes the initial assessment with no further action needed." "It just makes me angry, really, to know that i tried and it wasn't taken seriously," said Jessica Link, who placed the call. Since the call stopped at the call center, Newton SRS says it never got word of the suspected abuse. "If they would have had the report, they probably would have notified us, and something would have gotten done," said Harvey County Sheriff T. Walton. SRS will not comment about specific cases, but did release this statement on the process of investigating calls to its hotline; "SRS receives reports of alleged abuse and neglect through our Kansas Protection Report Center, 1-800-922-5330. In State fiscal year 2009 SRS received 56,207 reports of alleged abuse or neglect. Of those, 49% or 27,340, cases were assigned for further investigation." "Intake workers receive protective services training to elicit specific information about the situation. Information requested is focused on the extent of the situation, circumstances of the situation, child’s functioning, parenting practices and caregiver function, in addition to information regarding the child’s age, person alleged to have caused harm to the child, where the child is located, other individuals or agencies who may have information regarding the incident and the availability of a non-abusing adult to protect the child from further harm."The information gathered through the intake process is then provided to a licensed social worker to review and determine whether the incident requires further investigation. This decision is based on specific safety and risk factors, including but not limited to: seriousness of the incident, prior agency involvement with the family, and seriousness of injury to child." "All reports assigned for further investigation involving allegations of maltreatment of child must be investigated within either a 24 hour or 72 hour timeframe, depending on the nature of the allegation. Situations requiring a 24 hour response include, but are not limited to: life threatening situation, sexual abuse with the alleged perpetrator in the home, child in protective custody, or a child with current visible injuries." "Certain reports, not alleging maltreatment, may be investigated within 20 working days. An example of this type of case would be truancy."
I.F.F.O.C. Discovers New Technique Federal Prosecutors Use
I.F.F.O.C. has discovered in cases that Federal Prosecutors use a new technique
in which, they hand pick the doctors to get the results they want in order to control
the case. I.F.F.O.C. has discovered that one doctor in particular doctor that I.F.F.O.C.
had done research was named Dr. Robert G. Lucking out of North Carolina. His
specialty for the government was to discredit the individuals if they needed, as well
as, prescribe heavy medication such is what is known as a haladrol. Thanks to modern technology (the internet) I.F.F.O.C. has discovered the following information:
1). A pattern of practice of Dr. Robert G. Lucking to mislead or perjure himself, as well as, inappropriately secure a Sell Order, without an Harper Hearing, before initiating a Sell Litigation, in which Dr. Robert G. Lucking has now violated C.F.R. § 549.43 See ref USDC of Arizona case no: CR-05-0099-02-PHX-MHM order dated 09/28/09 by the Honorable Mary H. Murguia.
2). “This is also a pattern of practice of inconsistencies in Dr. Lucking’s testimony that remains unexplained.” As stated in CR-05-0099-02-PHX-MHM order dated 09/28/09 by the Honorable Mary H. Murguia.
3). Now the Defendant has recently discovered that “this is not the first time that a court within the District of Arizona has been addressed the Federal Medical Center’s attempts to inappropriately secure a Sell Order. See United States v. Gonzalez-Aguilar, 446 F. Supp. 2d 1099 (D. Ariz. 2006).”
4). Dr. Robert Lucking testified that he had opened mail after it was sealed and stamped without a warrant, in which is a federal crime, whereby now it discredits the doctors testimony , as well as, creditibility in any future pending case.
I.F.F.O.C. then begins to questions the motivations of the U.S. prosecutors, in which are supposed to protect the rights of the accused and prevent this type of injustice from occurring, or are the U.S. prosecutors building up their résumés to build up their careers at the cost of defendants lives and injustice.
It is amazing to I.F.F.O.C. that these individuals had taken an oath to uphold all laws, statutes, and the constitution of our government, as well as, to protect all liberties and rights of all citizens of the United States, and have all the access to the information we as I.F.F.O.C. has provided, but they cannot even do a background check on this doctor to make sure he is reliable in a court of law.
I.F.F.O.C. is only publishing this as a dedecation to those who suffered under false pretenses, (better known as constructive or extrinsic fraud) and to show that the average citizens or individuals can find the truth under the smoke screen that these corrupt individuals use or put in place to better their careers, at the price of those who fall into their trap of deceit. But what you do in the dark will eventually come into the light, as we now have shown. I.F.F.O.C. wants the average public to know their dirty little secrets to protect all from their harm these corrupt individuals may cause, because they don’t have a conscious when they use deceitful tactics like this, and to expose it would be I.F.F.O.C.’s gift to all it may help.
This is exactly why I.F.F.O.C. refers the ideology that attorneys are true to their character, better known as doctors of deception.
in which, they hand pick the doctors to get the results they want in order to control
the case. I.F.F.O.C. has discovered that one doctor in particular doctor that I.F.F.O.C.
had done research was named Dr. Robert G. Lucking out of North Carolina. His
specialty for the government was to discredit the individuals if they needed, as well
as, prescribe heavy medication such is what is known as a haladrol. Thanks to modern technology (the internet) I.F.F.O.C. has discovered the following information:
1). A pattern of practice of Dr. Robert G. Lucking to mislead or perjure himself, as well as, inappropriately secure a Sell Order, without an Harper Hearing, before initiating a Sell Litigation, in which Dr. Robert G. Lucking has now violated C.F.R. § 549.43 See ref USDC of Arizona case no: CR-05-0099-02-PHX-MHM order dated 09/28/09 by the Honorable Mary H. Murguia.
2). “This is also a pattern of practice of inconsistencies in Dr. Lucking’s testimony that remains unexplained.” As stated in CR-05-0099-02-PHX-MHM order dated 09/28/09 by the Honorable Mary H. Murguia.
3). Now the Defendant has recently discovered that “this is not the first time that a court within the District of Arizona has been addressed the Federal Medical Center’s attempts to inappropriately secure a Sell Order. See United States v. Gonzalez-Aguilar, 446 F. Supp. 2d 1099 (D. Ariz. 2006).”
4). Dr. Robert Lucking testified that he had opened mail after it was sealed and stamped without a warrant, in which is a federal crime, whereby now it discredits the doctors testimony , as well as, creditibility in any future pending case.
I.F.F.O.C. then begins to questions the motivations of the U.S. prosecutors, in which are supposed to protect the rights of the accused and prevent this type of injustice from occurring, or are the U.S. prosecutors building up their résumés to build up their careers at the cost of defendants lives and injustice.
It is amazing to I.F.F.O.C. that these individuals had taken an oath to uphold all laws, statutes, and the constitution of our government, as well as, to protect all liberties and rights of all citizens of the United States, and have all the access to the information we as I.F.F.O.C. has provided, but they cannot even do a background check on this doctor to make sure he is reliable in a court of law.
I.F.F.O.C. is only publishing this as a dedecation to those who suffered under false pretenses, (better known as constructive or extrinsic fraud) and to show that the average citizens or individuals can find the truth under the smoke screen that these corrupt individuals use or put in place to better their careers, at the price of those who fall into their trap of deceit. But what you do in the dark will eventually come into the light, as we now have shown. I.F.F.O.C. wants the average public to know their dirty little secrets to protect all from their harm these corrupt individuals may cause, because they don’t have a conscious when they use deceitful tactics like this, and to expose it would be I.F.F.O.C.’s gift to all it may help.
This is exactly why I.F.F.O.C. refers the ideology that attorneys are true to their character, better known as doctors of deception.
Divorce Lawyer Changes Approach After Her Own Marriage Crumbles
Posted Jun 23, 2010 6:00 AM CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss ABA Journal
Maryland divorce lawyer Regina DeMeo changed the way she practices law after her own marriage ended. Before her divorce, DeMeo took a businesslike approach when counseling divorce clients, the Washington Post reports. “OK, come on," she would think. "Get yourself together and let's move on." Then DeMeo herself divorced after seven years of marriage, and she realized how divorce can be so shattering. Now DeMeo practices collaborative divorce and is president of the Collaborative Divorce Association, the Post story says. DeMeo asks her clients to tell her the story of their marriage, and if she thinks there is any ambivalence about divorce, she’ll recommend counseling, the story says. If that isn’t an option, she recommends collaborative divorce, a negotiating process that takes place outside of court. About a fourth of her clients opt for collaborative divorce. The divorcing couples are still represented by lawyers, and they aren’t forced into an agreement. But if they can’t agree, they have to hire new lawyers for the court case. DeMeo says the collaborative process opens up the lines of communication and gives the divorcing couples decision-making power. “They feel like they own it because they're the final decision -makers,” she told the Post.
I.F.F.O.C. President understands attorney tunnel vision, when it doesn't involve them, reality is hell when you are paying the price. Education is at it’s best, the home school way of understanding.
By Debra Cassens Weiss ABA Journal
Maryland divorce lawyer Regina DeMeo changed the way she practices law after her own marriage ended. Before her divorce, DeMeo took a businesslike approach when counseling divorce clients, the Washington Post reports. “OK, come on," she would think. "Get yourself together and let's move on." Then DeMeo herself divorced after seven years of marriage, and she realized how divorce can be so shattering. Now DeMeo practices collaborative divorce and is president of the Collaborative Divorce Association, the Post story says. DeMeo asks her clients to tell her the story of their marriage, and if she thinks there is any ambivalence about divorce, she’ll recommend counseling, the story says. If that isn’t an option, she recommends collaborative divorce, a negotiating process that takes place outside of court. About a fourth of her clients opt for collaborative divorce. The divorcing couples are still represented by lawyers, and they aren’t forced into an agreement. But if they can’t agree, they have to hire new lawyers for the court case. DeMeo says the collaborative process opens up the lines of communication and gives the divorcing couples decision-making power. “They feel like they own it because they're the final decision -makers,” she told the Post.
I.F.F.O.C. President understands attorney tunnel vision, when it doesn't involve them, reality is hell when you are paying the price. Education is at it’s best, the home school way of understanding.
Family Court Corruption
In June, CA NOW (National Organization for Women) released "Family Court Report 2002", the product of a three year investigation into complaints regarding CA family law courts. The CA NOW report identifies the California family court system as "crippled, incompetent and corrupt". It includes sections on the history of family law and the so-called "fathers' rights" (FR) movement. Problems identified include gender bias against women, loss of due process, fraud, corruption and the use of bogus "syndromes" to anthologize motherhood. Family Court 2002 is the most recent of numerous reports, articles and documentaries which describe the systematic abuse of women and children, illegal activity and criminal misconduct occurring in family courts, not only in California, but across the country.
Many cases have been identified involving male perpetrators of domestic violence and child molest getting custody, abusive and "deadbeat" fathers getting out of criminal prosecution and child support obligations and women and children being punished in jails and mental institutions. [1] The Association of Family and Conciliation Courts is an organization comprised of the court "professionals" who fabricated the phony mental disorder "Parental Alienation Syndrome" (PAS, also called "alienation" or "alienated children"), as the means to turn abuse cases into "custody disputes".
Through appointments of AFCC affiliates, mothers are forced into excessive and abusive court proceedings where they are drained financially and emotionally. They are bullied into submitting to ongoing evaluations, mediation and therapy, so that they will be deemed difficult and uncooperative and therefore unfit to parent their own children. [2] Originally devised as the means to cover up evidence of child sexual abuse when the father is the perpetrator, the PAS legal strategy calls for the involvement of custody evaluators, attorneys for children, "special masters" (mediators with quasi-judicial authority), supervision monitors and other court-appointees operating in the guise of the family "conciliation court", who collaborate to shift blame to mothers trying to maintain custody and protect their children. PAS calls for institutionalizing children to convince them that they were not really abused by their fathers, but that their mothers are crazy. [3] Use of PAS has been linked to the death of at least one child, who committed suicide rather than submit to court ordered PAS "threats". [4], [5] Through illegally crafted orders, phony custody reports and improper "ex-parte" (emergency, unnoticed) proceedings, court appointees rig the outcomes of cases in favor of abusive men. By labeling mothers "alienators", blaming them for denying fathers "access" to the children and prosecuting mothers for "custodial interference" or similar "crimes", the family court works with the District Attorney to criminalize mothers' attempts to escape abuse and protect their children. [6] If the mother flees with the children, the FBI gets involved, treating the matter as "parental abduction" (a federal crime), which is used as further proof that she doesn't deserve to have custody. The AFCC has been connected to judicial slush funds, such as the one identified in Los Angeles Superior Court, in several articles in the LA Daily News. [7] AFCC is cross affiliated with the Children's Rights Council(formerly called the "National Council for Children's Rights"), which is essentially the "umbrella" organization of the "fathers' rights" movement -- a perverse conglomerate of misogynists, anti-Semites and other hateful men -- who are calling for male ownership of women and children, "patriarchy under God" and repealing the 19th Amendment (women's right to vote). [8] While CRC claims to advocate "shared parenting", in fact, its' agenda is to promote father custody specifically in cases where the father would be deemed an unfit or unsafe parent if legitimate court proceedings had been conducted in accordance with actual domestic violence and "children's best interest" laws. This is primarily to assist men with getting out of child support obligations, so that money intended for care of the children (including funds the court receives from federal Child Support Enforcement Program grants) is siphoned off by and through the AFCC affiliates who were appointed to coordinate the fund diversion scheme. AFCC/CRC officials conceal the fact that many of their "experts" are pedophiles and others who promote incest and deviant sex. These people include Richard Gardner, who coined the term PAS, John Money, a sexologist affiliated with Johns Hopkins University, Ralph Underwager and Hollida Wakefield of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation and Warren Farrell, a political scientist who advocates "family sex" and "genitally caressing children" in the Penthouse article "Incest, the Last Taboo" (1977). [9]
The National Alliance for Family Court Justice -- founded and directed nationally by Elisabeth (Liz) Richards of Virginia -- is an international organization of grassroots activists addressing family court system failure, corruption and retaliation against women who report abuse. NAFCJ has identified and documented evidence that PAS not only is the means to conceal a pro-pedophile agenda disguised as "custody resolution", it is the basis of a court kickback scheme that calls for the misuse/diversion of federal grants, primarily Access to Visitation Enforcement, Child Support Enforcement, Responsible Fatherhood and Temporary Assistance to Needy Family (TANF) Welfare program funds. CRC and AFCC, working directly with people like Richard Gardner, crafted PAS into the means of obtaining funding to turn the Access to Visitation Enforcement Program (AV) into a "fatherhood" program, whereby any father can get custody and any mother reporting abuse can be placed on supervision to silence her. NAFCJ has obtained program documents from the Department of Health and Human Services that prove that federal "Responsible Fatherhood" programs use TANF/Welfare funds to recruit abusive men -- including incarcerated criminals -- into programs that assist them with getting custody by providing free legal services from contracted attorneys and mediators and rewarding them child support abatement and other benefits. After they get custody, fathers continue to receive assistance from the family court and child support enforcement officials (usually either the state's Attorney General or the county's District Attorney Family Support Division), in preventing the mother's access to the children, placing her on supervised visitation for complaining and/or forcing her to pay child support to him.
When Family Court Report 2002 was released, David Levy, president of CRC, called it a "preposterous charge". [10] However, according to Liz Richards, Virginia Delegate Jim Dillard is asking for an investigation into CRC. It is my understanding that Del. Dillard was originally a supporter of CRC, until he reviewed evidence provided to him by NAFCJ, regarding CRC's role in federal program fraud and covering up for a pro-pedophile agenda. (Due to the 4th of July holiday, I was unable to contact Del. Dillard directly.) The request for investigation into CRC is significant regarding the CA court system, especially Marin County Superior Court. While CRC is based in Maryland, one of its' founding officials is Joan Kelly. Kelly, former director of the Northern CA Mediation Center in Marin County, co-authored "Surviving the Breakup", with Judith Wallerstein, founder of the Center for the Family in Transition (also in Marin County). Kelly and Wallerstein are the "experts" upon whose "research" Richard Gardner based the PAS "theory". [11] Largely due to Kelly's and Wallerstein's, influence, PAS methodology has become entrenched into federal programs, policy and funding, especially through CRC. According to the CA NOW report (p. 49), in 1986 Wallerstein provided testimony, along with David Levy, as to the "problems of single female parent families" in a hearing entitled "Divorce, the Impact on Children and Families", held in the House committee on Children, Youth and Families. Wallerstein serves as an advisor to the National Fatherhood Initiative. NFI founding officials include Wade Horn, Assistant Secretary for Children and Families in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Don Eberly of the White House Office of Faith Based Initiatives. Kelly sets up PAS programs in courts around the country, using federal AV Program funds. She gives seminars in PAS and trains special masters. The affiliates of Kelly's and Wallerstein's respective Marin County organizations, Northern CA Mediation Center and Center for the Family in Transition, have reformulated their group into the "Northern CA Task Force on the Alienated Child". "Task Force" members are identified as "getting it wrong" in UC Davis law professor Carol Bruch's article in the Family Law Quarterly (Sept. 2001), "Parental Alienation Syndrome and Parental Alienation": Getting it wrong in child custody cases." [12] The "Task Force" also includes the custody evaluators and special masters identified as engaging in misconduct in the February 2000 report by NY investigative reporter Karen Winner ("Findings on Judge Michael Dufficy, Commissioner Sylvia Shapiro and Court-Appointees in Marin County Superior Court in California.")\ Addressing court corruption specifically from the perspective of Marin County Superior Court would take up volumes and is outside the scope of this article. For more information about Marin County, However, as I have documentation from my own case (included in the Winner Report) showing how Marin County "FLEA" (Family Law Elite Attorney) Mary Halbert diverted child support intended for my son, working with "Task Force" member Nancy Olesen, who wrote some kind of report that I was prevented from seeing ; And since Mary was paid out of the "alternate public defender's" budget and Marin County Public Defender Joe Spaeth is one of the people on the Judicial Council committee that disperses AV and other grants to the courts, I may very well decide to do a follow-up piece on Marin County. I would also like to direct a question to Marin court administrator John Montgomery regarding his comment to the Independent Journal that the CA NOW report "...is a shoddy piece of work that would not pass a college research class". If the problems the CA NOW report and others have identified don't really exist, why is it that YOUR name and fingerprint appear instead of my own on the transfer deed to my home, that was taken from me illegally through an ex parte hearing which I did not even attend?
Many cases have been identified involving male perpetrators of domestic violence and child molest getting custody, abusive and "deadbeat" fathers getting out of criminal prosecution and child support obligations and women and children being punished in jails and mental institutions. [1] The Association of Family and Conciliation Courts is an organization comprised of the court "professionals" who fabricated the phony mental disorder "Parental Alienation Syndrome" (PAS, also called "alienation" or "alienated children"), as the means to turn abuse cases into "custody disputes".
Through appointments of AFCC affiliates, mothers are forced into excessive and abusive court proceedings where they are drained financially and emotionally. They are bullied into submitting to ongoing evaluations, mediation and therapy, so that they will be deemed difficult and uncooperative and therefore unfit to parent their own children. [2] Originally devised as the means to cover up evidence of child sexual abuse when the father is the perpetrator, the PAS legal strategy calls for the involvement of custody evaluators, attorneys for children, "special masters" (mediators with quasi-judicial authority), supervision monitors and other court-appointees operating in the guise of the family "conciliation court", who collaborate to shift blame to mothers trying to maintain custody and protect their children. PAS calls for institutionalizing children to convince them that they were not really abused by their fathers, but that their mothers are crazy. [3] Use of PAS has been linked to the death of at least one child, who committed suicide rather than submit to court ordered PAS "threats". [4], [5] Through illegally crafted orders, phony custody reports and improper "ex-parte" (emergency, unnoticed) proceedings, court appointees rig the outcomes of cases in favor of abusive men. By labeling mothers "alienators", blaming them for denying fathers "access" to the children and prosecuting mothers for "custodial interference" or similar "crimes", the family court works with the District Attorney to criminalize mothers' attempts to escape abuse and protect their children. [6] If the mother flees with the children, the FBI gets involved, treating the matter as "parental abduction" (a federal crime), which is used as further proof that she doesn't deserve to have custody. The AFCC has been connected to judicial slush funds, such as the one identified in Los Angeles Superior Court, in several articles in the LA Daily News. [7] AFCC is cross affiliated with the Children's Rights Council(formerly called the "National Council for Children's Rights"), which is essentially the "umbrella" organization of the "fathers' rights" movement -- a perverse conglomerate of misogynists, anti-Semites and other hateful men -- who are calling for male ownership of women and children, "patriarchy under God" and repealing the 19th Amendment (women's right to vote). [8] While CRC claims to advocate "shared parenting", in fact, its' agenda is to promote father custody specifically in cases where the father would be deemed an unfit or unsafe parent if legitimate court proceedings had been conducted in accordance with actual domestic violence and "children's best interest" laws. This is primarily to assist men with getting out of child support obligations, so that money intended for care of the children (including funds the court receives from federal Child Support Enforcement Program grants) is siphoned off by and through the AFCC affiliates who were appointed to coordinate the fund diversion scheme. AFCC/CRC officials conceal the fact that many of their "experts" are pedophiles and others who promote incest and deviant sex. These people include Richard Gardner, who coined the term PAS, John Money, a sexologist affiliated with Johns Hopkins University, Ralph Underwager and Hollida Wakefield of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation and Warren Farrell, a political scientist who advocates "family sex" and "genitally caressing children" in the Penthouse article "Incest, the Last Taboo" (1977). [9]
The National Alliance for Family Court Justice -- founded and directed nationally by Elisabeth (Liz) Richards of Virginia -- is an international organization of grassroots activists addressing family court system failure, corruption and retaliation against women who report abuse. NAFCJ has identified and documented evidence that PAS not only is the means to conceal a pro-pedophile agenda disguised as "custody resolution", it is the basis of a court kickback scheme that calls for the misuse/diversion of federal grants, primarily Access to Visitation Enforcement, Child Support Enforcement, Responsible Fatherhood and Temporary Assistance to Needy Family (TANF) Welfare program funds. CRC and AFCC, working directly with people like Richard Gardner, crafted PAS into the means of obtaining funding to turn the Access to Visitation Enforcement Program (AV) into a "fatherhood" program, whereby any father can get custody and any mother reporting abuse can be placed on supervision to silence her. NAFCJ has obtained program documents from the Department of Health and Human Services that prove that federal "Responsible Fatherhood" programs use TANF/Welfare funds to recruit abusive men -- including incarcerated criminals -- into programs that assist them with getting custody by providing free legal services from contracted attorneys and mediators and rewarding them child support abatement and other benefits. After they get custody, fathers continue to receive assistance from the family court and child support enforcement officials (usually either the state's Attorney General or the county's District Attorney Family Support Division), in preventing the mother's access to the children, placing her on supervised visitation for complaining and/or forcing her to pay child support to him.
When Family Court Report 2002 was released, David Levy, president of CRC, called it a "preposterous charge". [10] However, according to Liz Richards, Virginia Delegate Jim Dillard is asking for an investigation into CRC. It is my understanding that Del. Dillard was originally a supporter of CRC, until he reviewed evidence provided to him by NAFCJ, regarding CRC's role in federal program fraud and covering up for a pro-pedophile agenda. (Due to the 4th of July holiday, I was unable to contact Del. Dillard directly.) The request for investigation into CRC is significant regarding the CA court system, especially Marin County Superior Court. While CRC is based in Maryland, one of its' founding officials is Joan Kelly. Kelly, former director of the Northern CA Mediation Center in Marin County, co-authored "Surviving the Breakup", with Judith Wallerstein, founder of the Center for the Family in Transition (also in Marin County). Kelly and Wallerstein are the "experts" upon whose "research" Richard Gardner based the PAS "theory". [11] Largely due to Kelly's and Wallerstein's, influence, PAS methodology has become entrenched into federal programs, policy and funding, especially through CRC. According to the CA NOW report (p. 49), in 1986 Wallerstein provided testimony, along with David Levy, as to the "problems of single female parent families" in a hearing entitled "Divorce, the Impact on Children and Families", held in the House committee on Children, Youth and Families. Wallerstein serves as an advisor to the National Fatherhood Initiative. NFI founding officials include Wade Horn, Assistant Secretary for Children and Families in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Don Eberly of the White House Office of Faith Based Initiatives. Kelly sets up PAS programs in courts around the country, using federal AV Program funds. She gives seminars in PAS and trains special masters. The affiliates of Kelly's and Wallerstein's respective Marin County organizations, Northern CA Mediation Center and Center for the Family in Transition, have reformulated their group into the "Northern CA Task Force on the Alienated Child". "Task Force" members are identified as "getting it wrong" in UC Davis law professor Carol Bruch's article in the Family Law Quarterly (Sept. 2001), "Parental Alienation Syndrome and Parental Alienation": Getting it wrong in child custody cases." [12] The "Task Force" also includes the custody evaluators and special masters identified as engaging in misconduct in the February 2000 report by NY investigative reporter Karen Winner ("Findings on Judge Michael Dufficy, Commissioner Sylvia Shapiro and Court-Appointees in Marin County Superior Court in California.")\ Addressing court corruption specifically from the perspective of Marin County Superior Court would take up volumes and is outside the scope of this article. For more information about Marin County, However, as I have documentation from my own case (included in the Winner Report) showing how Marin County "FLEA" (Family Law Elite Attorney) Mary Halbert diverted child support intended for my son, working with "Task Force" member Nancy Olesen, who wrote some kind of report that I was prevented from seeing ; And since Mary was paid out of the "alternate public defender's" budget and Marin County Public Defender Joe Spaeth is one of the people on the Judicial Council committee that disperses AV and other grants to the courts, I may very well decide to do a follow-up piece on Marin County. I would also like to direct a question to Marin court administrator John Montgomery regarding his comment to the Independent Journal that the CA NOW report "...is a shoddy piece of work that would not pass a college research class". If the problems the CA NOW report and others have identified don't really exist, why is it that YOUR name and fingerprint appear instead of my own on the transfer deed to my home, that was taken from me illegally through an ex parte hearing which I did not even attend?
Louisiana coast's battle against drifting oil expected to last months, if not years
By Bob Marshall, The Times-Picayune
May 23, 2010, 9:00AM
Patrick Semansky/The Associated Press This oil-stained island near the South Pass of the Mississippi River was photographed Friday. For those saddened by the scenes of thick oil washing into Louisiana's coastal wetlands a month after the BP oil disaster began, experts on oil spills and the coastal ecosystem have some advice: Get used to it. The crews mopping up oil on beaches and marsh shorelines this week are fighting just the first of what will probably be a series of rolling skirmishes that will last for months, if not years -- even after the runaway well is finally capped. In fact, the untold millions of gallons of oil already fouling the Gulf off the Louisiana coast could stay in the area for at least a decade and on the sea floor for more than 100 years. "I'm afraid we're just seeing the beginning of what is going to be a long, ugly summer," said Ed Overton, an LSU professor who has consulted on oil spills for three decades. Michael DeMocker/The Times-Picayune Oil on the beach in Grand Isle was photographed Friday. "I hope and pray I'm wrong, but I think what we're in for is seeing a little bit come in each day at different places for a long, long time -- months and months. "That's not what I said in the beginning of this. But events have made me amend my thoughts." When it began April 20, Louisiana and the world feared a quick and dramatic result, a black tsunami washing over one of the world's most productive and valuable coastal ecosystems. Expecting a disaster with iconic images to rival the environmental mugging of Prince William Sound by the Exxon Valdez, the planet's media rushed to the scene. Within days fishing towns like Venice and Hopedale became datelines in newspapers from Paris to Hong Kong, which painted pictures of a culture bracing for ecosystem Armageddon. But for weeks, little happened on shore. Even as the amount of crude spewing from the 19-inch hole in the Gulf climbed, the wetlands and its critters remained healthy. That began to change this week. Thick oil invaded the wetlands of the Mississippi River delta, then began spreading westward, rolling up on coastal beaches and barrier islands from Grand Isle to Marsh Island in Vermillion Bay. But even this hasn't been an inundation. The oil has been in long, narrow lines. And there seems to be no discernible weather pattern associated with the arrivals. They have cropped up on calm days and rough, and days with little tide range. That random pattern, experts now say, is probably the best guess of what the state should expect for many months ahead. And they stress the "guess" part, because the location of the runaway well and the environment into which it is flowing make it unprecedented in the history of oil disasters. "We learn from experience, and the last experience we had witha big spill was the Exxon Valdez, so naturally people expected similar results," said LSU oceanography professor Robert Carney, who has done extensive research on the Gulf of Mexico. "But everything about this is so radically different."The Exxon Valdez accident released 11 million gallons of crude from a tanker onto the surface of an enclosed body of water close to a rocky, static shoreline, Carney said. The BP disaster is pouring tens of millions of gallons from the floor of the Gulf 5,000 feet below in an open sea, and 50 miles from the nearest land, which is a composed of broken marshes, river deltas, open bays and barrier islands. "Because no one has experience with a situation like this, all we can really do is take educated guesses," Carney said. "There are so many things to consider when trying to track the oil plume." The biggest unknown is the oil's journey to the surface -- and that is what has made predicting where and how it will come ashore such a challenge, scientists said. That difficulty was clear in initial estimates of how long the oil would take to get to the surface. "Originally it was three hours to 30 days," Overton said. "That shows you just how many variables are involved." In a static and shallow environment, oil, which is much lighter than sea water, would zip to the surface like an ice cube from the bottom of a glass of water. But nothing is static in this environment. Researchers say there are numerous currents in that part of the Gulf between 5,000 feet and the surface, each of which can grab some of the plume and shuttle it in different directions. There also are different temperatures layers that also can redirect portions of the plume. At a depth of about 1,500 feet, a cold layer meets a much warmer layer of water, and the change in density creates a virtual wall that can trap particles. "Anything that stays below 1,500 feet can stay in deep circulation in the Gulf for an extended period of time," Carney said. "I would say deep oil might be detectable in that environment for 10 years." Misconceptions about the nature of the flow also abound, Overton said. The oil spewing from that open pipe is not the pure viscous liquid that pours from an oil can. Instead, it's natural gas mixed with oil droplets that probably vary in size from an egg to ink dots, blasting out of the Gulf floor with the force of a powerful fire hose at full throttle, he said. Video from the scene shows billowing clouds of the mixture spilling from the break. What it doesn't show, Overton said, is what type of plume that mixture is forming. "We really need to know that, but we can only guess," he said. "And my guess is that it's been spreading out across a large area, sort of like the way smoke from a forest fire spreads across the landscape on a calm day. ." It's obviously not all rushing to the surface like that ice cube in the glass of water, Overton said. That complicates the job of collecting it and predicting when, where and in which quantities it will come ashore. A further complication has been the undersea use of dispersants, Overton said. Breaking the oil into small "micro" droplets at that depth may be reducing its buoyancy, causing it either to sink to the bottom or stay suspended somewhere under the surface. "They will float below the surface, where they can't be reached by the weathering agents like sun and wind and air," Overton said. "Eventually they will stick together and form larger droplets and begin moving toward the surface. "But that could take month or years. We could be seeing these things rise and wash up on the coast for years to come." Overton said this week's oiled beaches strengthened that hunch. "The pictures I saw included a lot of black oil," he said, "and that tells me it could be oil that just came to the surface. If that's the case, then a lot of this oil is still suspended, moving to the coast without being weathered on the surface, probably because of the subsea dispersants. "So the reason we haven't seen big coatings, may be because much of it is still below the surface." In fact, the consensus building among scientists and oil spill experts this week was that BP's mistake likely will never result in a black wave soaking miles of coast in thick layers of black oil. Instead, Louisiana is probably in for a years-long war of mostly small skirmishes against random, low-volume oiling of coastal marshes and beaches. "I think we're looking at many months of intense activity, but then years of follow-up work," said Robert Barham, secretary of the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries. "I've been told by the ocean experts this stuff could hang out there on the bottom of the Gulf for more than 100 years. And as long as it's out there, it can come ashore. "We might not see big black waves, but we may be seeing a smaller, but serious problem, for years and years to come."
I.F.F.O.C. wants to know why these individuals or corporations are not being prosecuted for lying to the American people and government, as well as, tampering and ruining our environment, and destroying our ecosystem.
May 23, 2010, 9:00AM
Patrick Semansky/The Associated Press This oil-stained island near the South Pass of the Mississippi River was photographed Friday. For those saddened by the scenes of thick oil washing into Louisiana's coastal wetlands a month after the BP oil disaster began, experts on oil spills and the coastal ecosystem have some advice: Get used to it. The crews mopping up oil on beaches and marsh shorelines this week are fighting just the first of what will probably be a series of rolling skirmishes that will last for months, if not years -- even after the runaway well is finally capped. In fact, the untold millions of gallons of oil already fouling the Gulf off the Louisiana coast could stay in the area for at least a decade and on the sea floor for more than 100 years. "I'm afraid we're just seeing the beginning of what is going to be a long, ugly summer," said Ed Overton, an LSU professor who has consulted on oil spills for three decades. Michael DeMocker/The Times-Picayune Oil on the beach in Grand Isle was photographed Friday. "I hope and pray I'm wrong, but I think what we're in for is seeing a little bit come in each day at different places for a long, long time -- months and months. "That's not what I said in the beginning of this. But events have made me amend my thoughts." When it began April 20, Louisiana and the world feared a quick and dramatic result, a black tsunami washing over one of the world's most productive and valuable coastal ecosystems. Expecting a disaster with iconic images to rival the environmental mugging of Prince William Sound by the Exxon Valdez, the planet's media rushed to the scene. Within days fishing towns like Venice and Hopedale became datelines in newspapers from Paris to Hong Kong, which painted pictures of a culture bracing for ecosystem Armageddon. But for weeks, little happened on shore. Even as the amount of crude spewing from the 19-inch hole in the Gulf climbed, the wetlands and its critters remained healthy. That began to change this week. Thick oil invaded the wetlands of the Mississippi River delta, then began spreading westward, rolling up on coastal beaches and barrier islands from Grand Isle to Marsh Island in Vermillion Bay. But even this hasn't been an inundation. The oil has been in long, narrow lines. And there seems to be no discernible weather pattern associated with the arrivals. They have cropped up on calm days and rough, and days with little tide range. That random pattern, experts now say, is probably the best guess of what the state should expect for many months ahead. And they stress the "guess" part, because the location of the runaway well and the environment into which it is flowing make it unprecedented in the history of oil disasters. "We learn from experience, and the last experience we had witha big spill was the Exxon Valdez, so naturally people expected similar results," said LSU oceanography professor Robert Carney, who has done extensive research on the Gulf of Mexico. "But everything about this is so radically different."The Exxon Valdez accident released 11 million gallons of crude from a tanker onto the surface of an enclosed body of water close to a rocky, static shoreline, Carney said. The BP disaster is pouring tens of millions of gallons from the floor of the Gulf 5,000 feet below in an open sea, and 50 miles from the nearest land, which is a composed of broken marshes, river deltas, open bays and barrier islands. "Because no one has experience with a situation like this, all we can really do is take educated guesses," Carney said. "There are so many things to consider when trying to track the oil plume." The biggest unknown is the oil's journey to the surface -- and that is what has made predicting where and how it will come ashore such a challenge, scientists said. That difficulty was clear in initial estimates of how long the oil would take to get to the surface. "Originally it was three hours to 30 days," Overton said. "That shows you just how many variables are involved." In a static and shallow environment, oil, which is much lighter than sea water, would zip to the surface like an ice cube from the bottom of a glass of water. But nothing is static in this environment. Researchers say there are numerous currents in that part of the Gulf between 5,000 feet and the surface, each of which can grab some of the plume and shuttle it in different directions. There also are different temperatures layers that also can redirect portions of the plume. At a depth of about 1,500 feet, a cold layer meets a much warmer layer of water, and the change in density creates a virtual wall that can trap particles. "Anything that stays below 1,500 feet can stay in deep circulation in the Gulf for an extended period of time," Carney said. "I would say deep oil might be detectable in that environment for 10 years." Misconceptions about the nature of the flow also abound, Overton said. The oil spewing from that open pipe is not the pure viscous liquid that pours from an oil can. Instead, it's natural gas mixed with oil droplets that probably vary in size from an egg to ink dots, blasting out of the Gulf floor with the force of a powerful fire hose at full throttle, he said. Video from the scene shows billowing clouds of the mixture spilling from the break. What it doesn't show, Overton said, is what type of plume that mixture is forming. "We really need to know that, but we can only guess," he said. "And my guess is that it's been spreading out across a large area, sort of like the way smoke from a forest fire spreads across the landscape on a calm day. ." It's obviously not all rushing to the surface like that ice cube in the glass of water, Overton said. That complicates the job of collecting it and predicting when, where and in which quantities it will come ashore. A further complication has been the undersea use of dispersants, Overton said. Breaking the oil into small "micro" droplets at that depth may be reducing its buoyancy, causing it either to sink to the bottom or stay suspended somewhere under the surface. "They will float below the surface, where they can't be reached by the weathering agents like sun and wind and air," Overton said. "Eventually they will stick together and form larger droplets and begin moving toward the surface. "But that could take month or years. We could be seeing these things rise and wash up on the coast for years to come." Overton said this week's oiled beaches strengthened that hunch. "The pictures I saw included a lot of black oil," he said, "and that tells me it could be oil that just came to the surface. If that's the case, then a lot of this oil is still suspended, moving to the coast without being weathered on the surface, probably because of the subsea dispersants. "So the reason we haven't seen big coatings, may be because much of it is still below the surface." In fact, the consensus building among scientists and oil spill experts this week was that BP's mistake likely will never result in a black wave soaking miles of coast in thick layers of black oil. Instead, Louisiana is probably in for a years-long war of mostly small skirmishes against random, low-volume oiling of coastal marshes and beaches. "I think we're looking at many months of intense activity, but then years of follow-up work," said Robert Barham, secretary of the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries. "I've been told by the ocean experts this stuff could hang out there on the bottom of the Gulf for more than 100 years. And as long as it's out there, it can come ashore. "We might not see big black waves, but we may be seeing a smaller, but serious problem, for years and years to come."
I.F.F.O.C. wants to know why these individuals or corporations are not being prosecuted for lying to the American people and government, as well as, tampering and ruining our environment, and destroying our ecosystem.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)