A rare expose of the Family Court bias. The court appointed a lawyer for my two daughters. The first lawyer was Chris Robertson from Ashburton who was a cousin of the maternal family seeking court protection and custody,. I challenged and he stood down and was replaced by Adrienne Edwards a Christchurch battle axe bitch who never bothered to witness the loving interaction between myself and my daughters. Not once in seven years. Is that not bias? I hope both court appointed lawyers rot in hell you sinister sick scum of the earth.The Family Court has destroyed my family. What can I do !!!!
Quote: The judge had advised the social worker "to expect to be challenged
about the father's family issues" during cross-examination, Ms Brasch told
the court. She said the judge also had remarked to the social worker,
regarding the child's paternal grandparents: "I've got a picture of this
family. They are Presbyterian. The mother can't stand up to the father."
<http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/brisbane-family-court-trial-halted-over-claims-of-secret-talks-with-social-worker/story-e6freon6-1225890430027>
The Courier-Mail
11 July 2010
Brisbane Family Court trial halted over claims of secret talks with social worker
By Matthew Fynes-Clinton
Photo: Gross photo of Diana Bryant standing in front of a picture of the
father-hating moron Alastair Nicholson.
A child custody trial was aborted when a Brisbane Family Court judge
disqualified himself after being accused of holding secret talks with a
case social worker.
The week-long trial which involved an allegation of sexual abuse against
a young girl ended abruptly on April 28 following an application to
Justice James Barry from the child's representatives for him to stand aside
on the grounds of "apprehended bias".
Family Court Chief Justice Diana Bryant has summoned Justice Barry to a
formal interview in Melbourne this week and alerted Federal
Attorney-General Robert McClelland to the issues.
Justice Bryant told The Courier-Mail that while she had no specific
disciplinary powers, she would be spelling out to Justice Barry the
"gravity of the situation for the Court and the serious inappropriateness
of the conduct".
"Whilst not entirely agreeing with all that was asserted ... to have been
said between him and the (social worker), (Justice Barry) accepted that he
had inappropriately discussed the contents of the family report with the
(social worker)," Justice Bryant said. "The report was evidence in the
proceedings."
Applying for the disqualification, barrister Jacoba Brasch counsel in the
trial for the court-appointed Independent Children's Lawyer told Justice
Barry that the social worker had informed her of the private talks which
took place in the judge's chambers.
"It is ... reported that Your Honour has said in this discussion, 'These
men' a reference to (the relative accused of sexual abuse in the case)
'they go off half-cocked, you don't know if they are innocent or ...'." Ms
Brasch told the court.
Ms Brasch submitted that she had been told the judge had, in the
conversation, said he liked the social worker's independent family report
as well as commented on the mother in the dispute and her "overvaluing".
"(The social worker) ... says Your Honour indicated you liked the report
and it appears that there were various aspects of the report ... discussed,
including what was called the mother's overvaluing," Ms Brasch told the court.
"(The social worker) indicated that Your Honour had said, 'What is it with
some mothers and their overvalued ...' and I didn't catch ... the next word."
The judge had advised the social worker "to expect to be challenged about
the father's family issues" during cross-examination, Ms Brasch told the court.
She said the judge also had remarked to the social worker, regarding the
child's paternal grandparents: "I've got a picture of this family. They are
Presbyterian. The mother can't stand up to the father."
The trial, part-heard last October, had resumed on April 22.
Ms Brasch outlined to the court that she "ran into" the social worker near
a court elevator on April 23.
"(The social worker) said to me, "The judge had spoken to me," Ms Brasch
said. "His Honour (had) asked, 'You can tell by someone's reaction whether
they're innocent . . .'. (The social worker) said he said, 'I'm not judge'."
On April 27, Ms Brasch told the court, she took advice from Bar Association
of Queensland ethics' counsellors and then further clarified with the
social worker the nature of his discussion in Justice Barry's chambers.
"(The social worker) indicated ... he thought this discussion was in
March," Ms Brasch told the court. "But it may be there was (another)
discussion prior to the trial in October." Ms Brasch told the court that
the social worker said he had initially "gone to Your Honour's chambers to
discuss another matter".
The social worker was an in-house "family consultant" assigned by the court
to impartially help resolve high-conflict custody cases. Family
consultants, who may also be psychologists, are effectively witnesses.
Their written reports which make recommendations about parenting
arrangements often play a pivotal role in evidence.
The Family Law Act grants no authority to family consultants to interact
with a judge beyond providing the reports and giving oral evidence in an
open court.
Ms Brasch's application was supported by the mother's barrister Jenny Hogan.
In court, Ms Hogan asked Justice Barry to disqualify himself due to a
reasonable apprehension that he would not decide the case in an "impartial
and unprejudiced" way.
In responding to the application and aborting the trial, Justice Barry told
the court: "I am tempted to make a number of observations but have
concluded so far as the discussions with (the social worker) are concerned,
discretion is the better part of valour.
"I will be acceding to the application for me to step aside."
One Brisbane barrister told The Courier-Mail that any closed conference
between a judge and a family consultant raised the possibility of one party
influencing the other unbeknown to the litigants and their counsel.
"How a trial should be conducted is not a matter of private briefings and
discussions," the barrister said.
"It's got to be clear (to the court) what the judge is making his mind up
on. The process of evidence has got to be transparent."
A top divorce lawyer said the events had rocked Queensland's family law
fraternity and reflected a "mickey mouse" court.
"It's a disgrace," said the lawyer.
The abandoned trial, which entailed substantial court and legal costs, will
be re-heard before another judge.
Quote: The judge had advised the social worker "to expect to be challenged
about the father's family issues" during cross-examination, Ms Brasch told
the court. She said the judge also had remarked to the social worker,
regarding the child's paternal grandparents: "I've got a picture of this
family. They are Presbyterian. The mother can't stand up to the father."
<http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/brisbane-family-court-trial-halted-over-claims-of-secret-talks-with-social-worker/story-e6freon6-1225890430027>
The Courier-Mail
11 July 2010
Brisbane Family Court trial halted over claims of secret talks with social worker
By Matthew Fynes-Clinton
Photo: Gross photo of Diana Bryant standing in front of a picture of the
father-hating moron Alastair Nicholson.
A child custody trial was aborted when a Brisbane Family Court judge
disqualified himself after being accused of holding secret talks with a
case social worker.
The week-long trial which involved an allegation of sexual abuse against
a young girl ended abruptly on April 28 following an application to
Justice James Barry from the child's representatives for him to stand aside
on the grounds of "apprehended bias".
Family Court Chief Justice Diana Bryant has summoned Justice Barry to a
formal interview in Melbourne this week and alerted Federal
Attorney-General Robert McClelland to the issues.
Justice Bryant told The Courier-Mail that while she had no specific
disciplinary powers, she would be spelling out to Justice Barry the
"gravity of the situation for the Court and the serious inappropriateness
of the conduct".
"Whilst not entirely agreeing with all that was asserted ... to have been
said between him and the (social worker), (Justice Barry) accepted that he
had inappropriately discussed the contents of the family report with the
(social worker)," Justice Bryant said. "The report was evidence in the
proceedings."
Applying for the disqualification, barrister Jacoba Brasch counsel in the
trial for the court-appointed Independent Children's Lawyer told Justice
Barry that the social worker had informed her of the private talks which
took place in the judge's chambers.
"It is ... reported that Your Honour has said in this discussion, 'These
men' a reference to (the relative accused of sexual abuse in the case)
'they go off half-cocked, you don't know if they are innocent or ...'." Ms
Brasch told the court.
Ms Brasch submitted that she had been told the judge had, in the
conversation, said he liked the social worker's independent family report
as well as commented on the mother in the dispute and her "overvaluing".
"(The social worker) ... says Your Honour indicated you liked the report
and it appears that there were various aspects of the report ... discussed,
including what was called the mother's overvaluing," Ms Brasch told the court.
"(The social worker) indicated that Your Honour had said, 'What is it with
some mothers and their overvalued ...' and I didn't catch ... the next word."
The judge had advised the social worker "to expect to be challenged about
the father's family issues" during cross-examination, Ms Brasch told the court.
She said the judge also had remarked to the social worker, regarding the
child's paternal grandparents: "I've got a picture of this family. They are
Presbyterian. The mother can't stand up to the father."
The trial, part-heard last October, had resumed on April 22.
Ms Brasch outlined to the court that she "ran into" the social worker near
a court elevator on April 23.
"(The social worker) said to me, "The judge had spoken to me," Ms Brasch
said. "His Honour (had) asked, 'You can tell by someone's reaction whether
they're innocent . . .'. (The social worker) said he said, 'I'm not judge'."
On April 27, Ms Brasch told the court, she took advice from Bar Association
of Queensland ethics' counsellors and then further clarified with the
social worker the nature of his discussion in Justice Barry's chambers.
"(The social worker) indicated ... he thought this discussion was in
March," Ms Brasch told the court. "But it may be there was (another)
discussion prior to the trial in October." Ms Brasch told the court that
the social worker said he had initially "gone to Your Honour's chambers to
discuss another matter".
The social worker was an in-house "family consultant" assigned by the court
to impartially help resolve high-conflict custody cases. Family
consultants, who may also be psychologists, are effectively witnesses.
Their written reports which make recommendations about parenting
arrangements often play a pivotal role in evidence.
The Family Law Act grants no authority to family consultants to interact
with a judge beyond providing the reports and giving oral evidence in an
open court.
Ms Brasch's application was supported by the mother's barrister Jenny Hogan.
In court, Ms Hogan asked Justice Barry to disqualify himself due to a
reasonable apprehension that he would not decide the case in an "impartial
and unprejudiced" way.
In responding to the application and aborting the trial, Justice Barry told
the court: "I am tempted to make a number of observations but have
concluded so far as the discussions with (the social worker) are concerned,
discretion is the better part of valour.
"I will be acceding to the application for me to step aside."
One Brisbane barrister told The Courier-Mail that any closed conference
between a judge and a family consultant raised the possibility of one party
influencing the other unbeknown to the litigants and their counsel.
"How a trial should be conducted is not a matter of private briefings and
discussions," the barrister said.
"It's got to be clear (to the court) what the judge is making his mind up
on. The process of evidence has got to be transparent."
A top divorce lawyer said the events had rocked Queensland's family law
fraternity and reflected a "mickey mouse" court.
"It's a disgrace," said the lawyer.
The abandoned trial, which entailed substantial court and legal costs, will
be re-heard before another judge.
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment