Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Monday, March 30, 2009
read more | digg story
One wonders why a "psychotherapist" would need any annual divorce payments at all? Twisted gender hateful Judge Dread again .We must not forget the divorce industry and the Family Court are the Holy Grail for all women. It is a sordid place where lies are welcome and can go totally unchallenged without consequences.
Surely she is trained and capable of making her own way in the world?
If not the USA education system is failing to prepare its girls and women.
<http://www.theage. com.au/news/ lifeandstyle/ lifematters/ cleese-gets- divorce-discount /2009/03/ 26/1237657121730 .html>
The Age (Melbourne)
27 March 2009
Cleese's recession divorce discount
By Sean Nicholls and Emily Dunn
Comedian John Cleese is breathing a sigh of relief after halving his £1.3 million ($2.7 million) annual divorce payment to his third wife, Alyce Faye Eichelberger, 64, an American psychotherapist to whom he was married for 15 years.
Cleese now has to pay £650,000 a year, after a US judge ruled that the original amount was excessive in the face of the recession, which had slashed the value of the actor's property portfolio.
Cleese is not alone. A host of former high earners in Britain are now seeking cut-price divorces, with former husbands returning to the courts to battle for reduced settlements and payments in line with their shrinking earning power.
Recent prominent cases include that of Brian Myerson, a fund manager who claimed his post-divorce fortune had been wiped out, meaning he could no longer afford the £9.5 million he owed to Ingrid, his former wife.
In the original settlement Mrs Myerson received 43 per cent of her husband's assets. Myerson's 57 per cent share, however, was tied up in the shares of his investment company, which have plunged in value, and would
leave him £500,000 in the red if he complied with the divorce order.
And the advice from Mr Myerson's lawyer, Raymond Tooth, to men considering divorce? "Move on now while your star is low in the sky. You can escape with less."
Saturday, March 28, 2009
"Groups like Fathers4Justice and protesters like Jolly Stanesby are vilified for calling attention to the confiscation and abuse of their children, when they are merely responding as any parent can be expected to do when someone interferes with his child."
Associate Professor of Government
Patrick Henry College
1 Patrick Henry Circle
Purcellville, Virginia 20132
Friday, March 27, 2009
Twenty men, devoted fathers are killing themselves every week as a result of being denied their children, often as a result of the use and abuse of a restraining order. And what are Australian politicians doing about this ? Absolutely nothing .
Recently, an associate of mine, Nick, another father’s activist and devoted father, gave his daughter a present on her birthday . For this act of fatherly love he was arrested and held in jail without trial for 9 days. .
He is currently being held in jail again without trial, after being arrested.
His crimes? ‘Allegations‘ of breaches of a restraining order
I was arrested and denied bail for 2 months until my case was heard for breaching a restraining order-postal breaches of a restraining order
The ‘specially selected’ known corrupt magistrate, Phil Rodda, gave me 8 months jail for my heinous crime. (4 months suspended.)
When fathers denied their children ,driven beyond human endurance , instead of shooting themselves , start shooting politicians , then and only then will there be a massive change in attitude re the absurdity and injustice of Australian family law, in particular the use and abuse of restraining orders, which currently are used to evict a father out of his home and his children’s lives.
This letter has been sent to Victorian and Federal politicians , the media and others, and is being circulated world wide on the internet.
Ian Kay Activist for children not to be denied their father’s love and protection . 26-3-09
dad4justice spent many months in prison for sending things like Christmas Cards and birthday presents to his abducted and alienated daughters. New Zealand politicians are part of Hitler's arsehole!
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
ATTORNEY: What was the first thing your husband said to you that morning?
WITNESS: He said, "Where am I, Cathy?"
ATTORNEY: And why did that upset you?
WITNESS: My name is Susan!
ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact?
WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks.
ATTORNEY: Are you sexually active?
WITNESS: No, I just lie there.
ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?
ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory?
WITNESS: I forget.
ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot?
ATTORNEY: Do you know if your daughter has ever been involved in voodoo?
WITNESS: We both do.
WITNESS: We do.
ATTORNEY: You do?
WITNESS: Yes, voodoo.
ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his
sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?
WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam?
ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the twenty-year-old, how old is he?
WITNESS: He's twenty, much like your IQ.
ATTORNEY: Were you present when your picture was taken?
WITNESS: Are you sh*tting me?
ATTORNEY: So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th?
ATTORNEY: And what were you doing at that time?
WITNESS: Getting laid
ATTORNEY: She had three children, right?
ATTORNEY: How many were boys?
ATTORNEY: Were there any girls?
WITNESS: Your Honor, I think I need a different attorney. Can I get a new attorney?
WITNESS: By death.
ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated?
WITNESS: Take a guess.
ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual?
WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beard.
ATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female?
WITNESS: Unless the Circus was in town I'm going with male.
ATTORNEY: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney?
WITNESS: No, this is how I dress when I go to work.
ATTORNEY: Doctor, how many of your autopsies have you performed on
WITNESS: All of them. The live ones put up too much of a fight.
ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you go to?
ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?
WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 p.m.
ATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time?
WITNESS: If not, he was by the time I finished.
ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample?
WITNESS: Are you qualified to ask that question?
And the best for last:
ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for
ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure?
ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing?
ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
WITNESS: No .
ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor?
WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
ATTORNEY: I see, but could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless?
WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
I must thank Christchurch Family Court psychologists Michael Davidson and John Watson along with sinister Court appointed child counsel Adrienne Edwards for poisoning my daughters against me. These sick creeps brainwashed my children with the assistance of scum Ashburton lawyers Paul Finnigan, Geoff Kean and Chris Robertson. All these people have lied about the truthful interactions between a dad and his daughters ,meanwhile court appointed Christchurch lawyers Siobhan McNulty and two faced Tony Greig actively worked against dad. Do not trust these filthy low down types. These so called family court professionals are guilty of destroying two young girls and the death of my mother. I wonder how many families and children these creeps destroy in a lifetime? Can I sue these scum of the earth for the horrific damage they have caused? No wonder I had no show of obtaining equal custody when so many criminals from the family court were working against my daughters best interests.
The Age (Melbourne)24 March 2009
Feuding parents unlikely to get equal custody
By Carol Nader
Family Court judges seem reluctant to order that children spend equal time with parents in the most bitter and complex disputes, with only 15 per cent of such cases resulting in a 50-50 parenting split.
Mothers are more likely to be granted the most time with their children in the most acrimonious cases contested in court, according to Family Court figures.Of mothers involved in contested cases, 60 per cent were granted main residence, or the majority of time.Of fathers in such cases, 17 per cent were granted the majority of time. The analysis is based on almost 1,450 cases contested in court that were finalised in 2007-08.
Changes to family law that came into effect in July 2006 moved towards a presumption of equal shared parental responsibility and an obligation for the Family Court to consider shared time between parents when it was thought to be in the best interests of children.
The figures suggest that in most of the more acrimonious cases, judges do not consider it in the best interests of children to evenly divide their time between parents, or even to have a more lopsided shared-care arrangement.
Of fathers involved in contested cases, 14 per cent were granted between 30 per cent and 45 per cent of time with their children.
Most separated couples come to their own agreements without going through the court. Matters that end up before the court are the most difficult and contentious. But it is unknown whether that has altered since the Howard government changes, as the figures for before 2006 were not released.
The Family Court granted 50-50 parenting in just 15 per cent of contested cases, but the picture is similar for parents who come to their own agreement and have it finalised by the court. A separate analysis of 2,700 of those cases shows that 19 per cent ended up in a 50-50 arrangement.
Family law specialist Caroline Counsel, vice-president of the Law Institute of Victoria, said judges and parents always had to make decisions about what was best for children.
"It is not in the children's best interests to be put in highly conflictual households where there are two households at war with each other," she said. "And all you're doing is accelerating the conflict if you are
dividing a child's time in half. You are not giving that child a place where they can grow away from the conflict."
Australian National University associate professor in sociology Bruce Smyth said having parents share the care of their children was a growing trend, but there was a need to assess how children fared in these arrangements.
"Social change more broadly all around the world is moving towards increases in time sharing," he said. He said it was difficult enough to make shared care work when the parents got along, let alone when there was conflict.
"Kids often get used as spies, messengers and go-betweens ... when kids are stuck in a tug-of-war, it can take its toll," he said.
"The arrangements might be lasting if they're 50-50, but it might not mean that they're working well for kids."
Sunday, March 22, 2009
| PARENTAL ALIENATION |
| Pulled from both sides |
| Chethan Kumar |
Studies show that kids who suffer through their parents' divorce have more conduct problems, lower academic achievement and social difficulties than their peers
| || |
To be hit hard by an adult orgy of emotions — ranging anywhere between love and care to anger and ego or blame games is a trauma unrivalled. It is, thus, probably normal if a kid goes harum-scarum trying to balance relationships with separated parents, and worse when he or she is experiencing parental alienation.
Of course, there is no common ground for such parents, but, is ‘parental alienation’ the only solution for the children? Is it right to impose one’s choice on the child? Questions are aplenty, answers, biased and few...
Parents are surprisingly naive when it comes to such situations. In an attempt to win over each other, they compromise on their children and create environments that are not suitable for their upbringing.
While parents assume their jolly-rides on ego-trips, children feel shallow and hapless, searching for those ‘magical hands’. Ironically, seldom is there a fairy tale — and often they are left to fend for themselves. In fact, studies show that children who go through their parents’ divorce have more conduct problems, symptoms of psychological maladjustment, lower academic achievement, social difficulties and problematic relationships with both parents. Therefore the onus must always be on childcare and other things must come after that. Though this may not apply to all children, it is definitely a reason big enough for parents to recognise and act against it.
The argument here, is not at all about whether parents have the right to get a divorce or not. It is just about how a child must be treated during such situations.
On the one hand, parental arguments, separation and discomfort caused by these incidents taunt children. And on the other hand, ‘excessive individualism’ and competitiveness among separated parents leading to parental alienation are also causes of disquiet.
Parental alienation, in most cases, occurs, when one parent disallows the other parent from communicating with their children for personal vendetta. Pursuit of personal goals by adults (parents) in the family, thus, causes damage to the children. To make matters worse, many parents often influence their children to choose one parent over the other and this is often traumatic for the child and has to be stemmed. So, what are the solutions to these problems that the children face? One, of course, is that no parents are ever separated – but, for lack of utopian land that would probably be run by flawless creatures, we will forego it. And for other light-minded ideas, we could have a ‘civil birth ceremony where parents are publicly given rights and responsibilities over the child’, or ‘a game of poker to settle divorce issues’.
However, there are not too many serious answers but the question itself. The solution, therefore, is in shared parenting, where parents understand the problem, and address it.
“There must be mutual co-operation among parents to understand what the child is going through and they must do everything they can to ensure that the welfare of the child is not compromised,” Children’s Rights Initiative For Shared Parenting (CRISP), President Kumar V Jahgirdar told Deccan Herald.
Being one of its kind, CRISP provides counselling for parents contemplating divorce or separation and tries finding solutions for the children. It also focuses on furthering the rights of a child to remain connected with both parents as it deals with issues related to unquestionable right of children to be cared for by both biological parents.
Among other solutions, parents wanting divorce should be given mandatory counselling on “shared parenting” and the benefits there of, by a panel of experts supervised by the family court.
As ensuring meaningful and balanced participation of both parents in the lives of children in case of separation is essential for the welfare of the child. And this will also eliminate child-custody battles and stress on both the parents and the child.
(With statistical inputs from CRISP)
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Courts failing domestic violence victimsLast updated 13:03 21/08/2008
Relevant offersFamily Courts need better security, better information from criminal courts and legal aid for applicants if they are to work effectively, says the court's top judge.
Principal Family Court judge Peter Boshier addressed the Continuum of Family Violence Conference in Napier today on how the justice system treated victims of domestic violence.
Judge Boshier said the ramifications of family violence permeated through New Zealand society and the "horrifying" statistics were only just scraping the surface.
In 2006 police recorded 71,000 family violence related incidents. One in four women and just under one in five men would be the victim of domestic violence at some stage in their lifetime.
Judge Boshier said courts had an important role in responding to violence incidents. "But there is much that must be done both in and beyond the judicial system," he said.
"The security in our courts seems woefully inadequate," he said, when compared with overseas courts, and even airports and Parliament.
The threat of intimidation in courts was high and in one year 4231 items were taken off people entering New Zealand courts.
Judge Boshier cited items collected from the Manukau court house, which included pistols, knives, razors and scissors.
"A real worry is the knowledge that some victims will not come to the Criminal Courts to give evidence because of fear and equally they look askance at the Family Court because of the uneven standard of security. We can and must do better."
He said victims must have access to justice that recognised their state of trauma and disempowerment, and they must have access to better information and safety than just the mere granting of a protection order.
Judge Boshier said he would like to see all applicants properly legally represented and seen by trained Family Court staff to explain to them what they were entitled to.
The state had a responsibility to provide free legal representation if the applicant could not afford it. Duty solicitors were available for offenders in criminal courts.
Victims might not feel empowered and may unwittingly be put at risk without the "wraparound support services" being available, he said.
Family Violence Courts in some centres were a bold step in reforming the criminal justice system, but because of cumbersome nature of the criminal system, struggled to provide effective access to justice.
Judge Boshier said he wanted to see greater use of electronic confirmation of court orders.
There would be better safety for victims if the Family Court was diligent in reporting perpetrators who did not attend prescribed programmes, and if police actioned every referral and prosecuted where needed.
The "clunky" paper-based exchange of information between the Family Court and District Criminal courts could be done better with computers to reduce the errors, he said
Judge Boshier also said the Family Court would be better served if it had access to a defendant's complete criminal history, especially when deciding whether to continue a protection order or not.
Friday, March 20, 2009
President Obama created a White House Council for Women and Girls. Is it sexist to create a parallel one for men and boys, or sexist to not create one?
Dr. Warren Farrell [ http://warrenfarrel l.com/ ], a former Board member of the National Organization for Women in New York City, the author of seven books on men and women, and currently at work on The Boy Crisis, predicts "the boy crisis will be to the end of the next decade what the financial crisis is to the end of this decade." Here are a few hints as to why:
* 82% of the people losing their jobs since the recession are men.
* Of jobs ranked by the Jobs Rated Almanac as the "Worst" jobs (roofer,welder, etc.), 24 of 25 are comprised of 85-100% men.
* Boys do worse than girls on the crucial predictors of mental health and happiness: from reading and writing, to verbal and social skills; from ADHD and dropping out of high school, to drinking and drugs. When girls have problems, we blame the schools; when boys have problems, we blame the boys.
* Boys are a minority group in college, yet virtually all the single-gender academic scholarships are earmarked for girls, a remnant of the days when girls were the minority group.
* Boys are helped most by dad involvement. Yet divorced dads who don't have at least $100,000 to spend on a custody battle are highly unlikely to be able to prevent the mom from taking the children and moving away.
* In 1920, American men died only one year soon than women; today they die five years sooner.
* Men die sooner than women of 14 out of the top 15 leading causes of death, yet there are many federal offices of women's health and none of men's health.
* Boys' suicide rate increases as the male role takes hold: from equal-to-girls prior to puberty, to six times' girls by the age of 24.
For more examples and documentation, contact Dr. Warren Farrell at
warren@warrenfarrel l.com [ mailto:warren@warrenfarrel l.com ], or
click on www.warrenfarrell. com [ http://warrenfarrel l.com/ ].
Thursday, March 19, 2009
1:00 am Eastern
Unless there's been a monstrous misunderstanding, the man is muddled, malevolent, or both.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Justice secretary Jack Straw announced today that judges who are sacked for misconduct are in future likely to be named.
But he said each case would be considered on a "case by case basis".
Details of disciplinary action taken against members of the judiciary have in the past been kept secret.
Ministers are facing a legal challenge by The Guardian newspaper over their refusal to release details of historic cases.
From today, the Ministry of Justice will usually reveal the names of the coroners, magistrates and judges removed from their posts and the reasons for their dismissal.
Straw said: "We will continue to give consideration to the disclosure of relevant information in cases that have attracted a high degree of interest from the public and media."
The announcement coincided with the end of the first day of an Information Tribunal hearing in London.
The Guardian is appealing a decision by the Ministry of Justice and the Information Commissioner to reject its FoI request for the names of judges sacked for misconduct.
Representing The Guardian, Geoffrey Robertson QC said: "It is our contention in a nutshell that there is overriding public interest in every act by the executive to discipline or dismiss a judicial officer.
"The principle of judicial independence is one of the proudest principles this country has developed and given to the world.
"It can only be safeguarded if such actions and the reason for them are made publicly available."
He added: "The press have a vital watchdog function of communicating facts of great public importance to the public.
"Imagine the headline: 'Cabinet minister sacks judges'. That's news and that's exactly what we are talking about.”
The hearing was adjourned until tomorrow.
In the financial year 2007/08, 21 members of the judiciary were removed from office after facing disciplinary action - up from 16 in 2006/07.
The Office for Judicial Complaints (OJC), which handles misconduct cases involving judges, said the cases involved two tribunal heads and 19 magistrates.
One was removed for "inappropriate behaviour or comments", 15 for not fulfilling their judicial duty, one for misusing judicial status, one for motoring offences and three for criminal convictions.
A magistrate was removed from office for countersigning a passport application which involved stolen documents and a fake identity, the report revealed.
Another magistrate was dismissed because of "association with a sex offender", the report said. The magistrate had "failed to inform the local bench of the situation even after being interviewed by the police".
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Please take a moment to read about this important issue, and join me in signing the petition. It takes just 30 seconds, but can truly make a difference. We are trying to reach 10000 signatures - please sign here: http://www.thepetitionsite.
Once you have signed, you can help even more by asking your friends and family to sign as well.
Thank you! Peter
Monday, March 16, 2009
Divorce kids sack mumhttp://www.news. com.au/dailytele graph/story/ 0,,25189957- 5001021,00. html
Justice Peter Murphy spoke after the teenagers took their case to the Family Court, in a bid to leave their mother to live with their wealthy father on the Gold Coast. The girls, aged 14 and 15, have been brought up almost solely by their mum since their parents split up 10 years ago.
But their dad, a successful businessman, has recently remarried, settled with his new wife on a Gold Coast property and the sisters want to join him, the court has been told.
It is an unusual case that is being closely watched by family law experts as the court has to weigh up the wishes of the children with what is in their best interests.
The sisters said it's hard living with their mum who swears, is depressed, yells, treats them like children and doesn't allow them the independence they would get with their dad. They even said they feel easier talking about personal issues including their periods with their father's new wife than with their mother.
But Justice Murphy accused them of "holding a gun" to the head of the court and the heads of their parents after he heard that they had refused to go home - and proceeded to give them a good dose of common sense.
"It is very different, it seems to me, parenting children during holiday or weekend time than it is parenting children during week-to-week time when they are involved in their week-to-week activities including school," he said.
"It seems clear that the father has spent very little, if any, day-to-day, week-to-week time with his young children and later adolescent children, attending to the sorts of duties and responsibilities that are highly likely to cause stress within any family household."
However he acknowledged that the girls loved their dad whose business activities had been "clearly extensive and time consuming" for the past 10 years.
"I find it hardly surprising that they would want to spend time at his home with him and his new wife," Justice Murphy said. "It offers a number of enticing and exciting possibilities for them and if there is tension in the mother's household, it is hardly surprising that they would express the view that they have."
While the case has yet to be heard in full, the judge said that in the interim the sisters had to go home to their mother while still being able to see their father.
Family law expert Michael Taussig QC said it was an unusual case and the judge had handled a complex decision very fairly.
"If a 14-year-old and a 15-year-old have strong and mature views then they are usually listened to by the court but as this is an interim hearing pending a full trial then the status quo has been maintained," he said.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
From: peter burns
Sent: Friday, 13 March 2009 9:29 a.m.
To: Justice and Electoral Select Committee
Subject: Has my submission been accepted by the committee?
Can you please tell me if my submission regarding the changes to the Domestic Violence Act has been accepted. Other people involved with fathers rights are boastful online about their date to present oral
submissions. Is my submission just another fob off just like the Judicial Matters and Care of Children submissions to this meaningless select committee?
Have the decency, if capable, to advise me on matters asap!
Good morning Mr Burns,
I can tell you that the committee decided to return your submission on the Domestic Violence (Enhancing Safety) Bill, requesting that you consider resubmitting you submission without material it was concerned would breech natural justice provisions.
If the correspondence from the committee has taken some time to reach you, I apologise. Every effort is made to communicate with submitters as soon as possible. I have attached a scanned copy of the letter sent to you.
Clerk of Committee - Justice and Electoral Committee
Select Committee Office
Office of the Clerk of the House of Representatives
Phone: 04 817 9508
Fax: 04 499 0486
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Lies built the foundation that created the court protection orders that have ruined my life. I have no money to try and clear my name and just like the bloke in the video I have all the evidence that can prove a women can destroy a man's life on false allegations without any consequences. The truth does not matter to a gender bias judiciary. How can these women get away with such false testimony?
read more | digg story
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
------------ --------- --------- --------- ---
Mr. Torm L. Howse
Co-Founder, National Board Director, Instructor,
United Civil Rights Councils of America
Co-Founder, National Board Director, Trustee,
Parental Alienation Awareness Organization - US
Founder, Owner, President,
The FIDO Network
P.O. Box 68665
Indianapolis, Indiana 46268
(317) 286-2538 office (888) 738-4643 fax
DC FESTIVAL 09 + PARENTS DAY 09:
http://unitedcivilr ights.org/ conquest09. html
Monday, March 9, 2009
Public submissions welcomed on New Zealand's draft human rights report.
Public comment and feedback is being invited on a draft report that examines New Zealand's human rights record.
The final report will be submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Council for review as part of its Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process on 7 May 2009. This is the first time New Zealand has
undergone this process.
A draft report on New Zealand's human rights situation has been developed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade in consultation with other government agencies, the New Zealand Human
Rights Commission and civil society groups working in the area of human rights.
The closing date for public submissions on the draft report is 5pm Tuesday 17 March 2009.
For further details, including a copy of the draft report and information about how to make a submission visit the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade website at:
Go to the 'Gender' section
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Saturday, March 7, 2009
read more | digg story
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
My children were abducted from my life, so after 6 months I sent birthday and Christmas cards to my estranged daughters.I sent the package to the maternal grand parents via mail post, because I did not have a clue as to the whereabouts of my daughters and ex partner . I was shell shocked when police arrested me for sending cards that contained presents and cards for my daughters. I got locked up for two weeks in Paparoa (C Block remand) prison for two breaches of the temporary Family Court protection orders. Prisoners did not believe me when they asked what I had done wrong. The Family Court is evil and devoid of natural justice. My family could not understand the unlawful gender discrimination. The same prisoners said the same thing year after year, as police used me a whipping dog, because I would not stop fighting to clear my name as a credible father. I bump into the same cops with my court work all the time. They have said, sorry mate no hard feelings. I say, tell that to my deceased mother and my four children who had to witness the lengthy persecution.