“Finding Ground Zero in Connecticut,” the Underground Economy in an AFCC Courthouse?
[THIS POST has been expanded and revised to about 6,000 words, much of it quotes, and has a feedback form. It links to two groundbreaking “Washington Times/Communities” articles on very disturbing custody cases; what’s groundbreaking is the angle of approach, and type of evidence posted. This post begins referencing TANF, because “TANF” funding is often operative in such cases. And it posts a comment on one of them I couldn’t get posted over at the WT.
My post explains “AFCC Courthouse” (my generic term) in some detail. In this Connecticut case, “AFCC Courthouse” refers to the “Regional Family Trial Docket” in Middletown Connecticut presided over by a certain judge. However the term in general refers to the nonprofit organization (AFCC) started in Los Angeles County [at least, they claim exactly, i.e., 1963] five decades ago, which has a tendency to set up specialized courts, once its judges (membership) are in charge of a family division, or in positions of influence to do so. I forgot to mention, that in its early years, it also incorporated in a variety of states, changed its corporate name (and EIN#) several times, and probably is not properly registered as a nonprofit to this day in all states and territories where it operates (most likely, all 50 + territories). See early newsletters at bottom of my blog. AFCC runs conferences, trains its membership and others, and lobbies for legislative and administrative changes in the way divorce, custody, and dependency law works. Hence calling a certain docket an “AFCC Courthouse” is often very accurate shorthand for that particular courthouse, or docket.
This post was, however, to also publish my comment which didn’t make it onto the Washington Times comments field, for unknown reasons, and for further reference to interested readers. Last I looked, only one of my very generic (nothing specific) comments was cleared. AFter technical difficulties and over three days, I decided to bring my response over here to the blog.
Although I believe the blog makes this plain, FYI I am a survivor of not this type of case (mine involved DV not identified or reported child molestation) and know how devastating it is. I also network with people who believe that the key to this is the money trail, not the harm done the children, which we believe is more likely just collateral involved in extracting the maximum $$ (public and private) through this abusive system of handling such matters. If this subject matter interests you, a contact and feedback form is on the post. (I would’ve added them earlier, had I noticed the widget available on wordpress!)]]
The Time is NOW to Speak Out regarding TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) Extension!
This frees up the federal $$ which draw down through a single-statewide agency (different for each state) to fund Access and Visitation Funds which seem central to many complaints about the court’s handling of abuse cases. Without this block of money diverted FROM needy families to “SERVICE” the same families (and no longer limited to low-income, as it was initially sold as helping) — probably many nonprofit contractors with family courthouses wouldn’t have bothered to incorporate. Involvement of the Federal Funding drawdown is the Golden Nugget, possibly the motherlode, in doing business with the courts.
It carries a big stick felt locally for anyone in a contested custody matter, or (in some jurisdictions with “conciliation” courts) even domestic violence cases without children! Apparently this group wants to set the standard on how to treat such cases. Given that a reason for many contested custody cases may (or can) involve sexual abuse of children (or, as AFCC tends to phrase it, “ALLEGATIONS” of sexual abuse of children // child molestation, etc.), that’s a big caseload. Then, as it goes, the large caseload of such types of cases (some of which might otherwise be handled, logically, through the criminal courts most properly) they complain about lack of resources, overcrowded courtrooms, and why they need to streamline the process by outsourcing services to professionals to inform the judge’s decision.
A lot of my blog, and blogging, deals with the issue of the federal funding, and the nature and related organizations comprising the “AFCC.” (Association of Family & Conciliation Courts) which should be understood as a nonprofit trade association blending the purposes of the ABA (Lawyers, which includes judges) with the APA (Psychologists and mental health component) to bill the public at large AND private parties for forced consumption of therapeutic jurisprudence. This is done through through lobbying (Task Forces, Commissions, Training Seminars, sometimes Administrative Orders from the State Supreme Court or Presiding Judge level)
and direct court order in individual cases, and through positions of influence within the judiciary, Administrative Offices of the Courts (in certain states) and sometimes at Law Schools as professors, or running certain “centers” (CFCCs) — to change the operations and purposes of the legislative and judiciary functions of the country towards a mutually-preferred model — therapeutic jurisprudence.
Key to the success of establishing a mental health archipelago (international and definitely nationwide in the US) is the ability to draw down federal funding or bill upwards for it without transparency and accountability for the funds. A large portion of this funding seems to come from either the Access/Visitation programming (initally $10 million/year) to set up ongoing programs, and the Marriage/Fatherhood promotion programming (far larger) which in turn both affect the culture and purposes of the OCSE (Office of Child Support Enforcement/National to local), which affects not just things like child support, foster care, etc. — but also the state/federal balance and budgets. In other words, at $4 billion a year, the OCSE is a major player.
It’s hard to know whether, collectively, the influence of a judge’s ability to order a parent out of their home overnight, or to sell real estate, turn the profits of business over to the courts (which has happened), and forget ever seeing their kids again (unless someone can pay up) — OR, the federal funding TO the States to enable programs like this, is doing more damage. However, I suspect that were it not for the federal involvement, many professionals contracting with the courts and highlighting their concerns for children, would be far less interested in setting up corporations, treatment plans, and curricula to “save” them, through reunification with a damaging parent, or through removal from a supportive and non-criminal parent.
HOWEVER
Parents and others traumatized or exploited by these abusive court programs can speak up NOW as the House Ways and Means Committee is getting ready to re-authorize TANF (extend it). It was supposed to expire last Sept., they keep extending it. Two Press Releases March 6th: At least let ’em know someone is watching! http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentquery.aspx?DocumentTypeID=1496
(last few press releases):
|
A CUSTODY CASE, A LITTLE BOY, HIS DISTRESSED MOTHER . . . AND, FINALLY, ACTUAL EVIDENCE OF THE FINANCIAL “TAKE”
In Connecticut, an investigative writer takes a different approach to the “same old” story of a molested child, a distressed and financially devasted mother, a VERY prosperous Superved Visitation setup, and the professionals involved. The writer posted the invoices and described how many professionals billed what, and whether or not it seems they actually listened to, or even met, the boy in question. Ever wonder how people get onto “TANF” (welfare) to start with, sometimes?
Finding Ground Zero in Connecticut! AND “Immunity for Guardian ad Litem Destroys Connecticut Family”
This is a “Burning Bush” situation. Been on the backside of a mountain wondering what to do about the chained to the courthouse masses? When you get signals like this, and feel called to actually deliver people (adult and young) from this type of long-term bondage (as opposed to just document it, complain about it, and wonder where justice went), wake up. Is this just a phenomena, or a regular occurrence in the courts?
Or, if we choose to go back to sleep, I’d say the “Handwriting [is already] on the Wall.” We need to get serious about exactly who has been shifting these paradigms artificially towards a certain model — someone else should be in control of the lever.
“Finding Ground Zero in Connecticut,” the Underground Economy in an AFCC Courthouse?
“AFCC courthouse?” Yep. AFCC judges and the organization are continually figuring out how to set up more specialized courts, which one of them will control, and can refer services to, ah, other people in the same businesses characterized by this group.
The next table explains why I basically call the courthouse in this case (another) “AFCC Courthouse.”
|
As it stands: Current website: State of Connecticut, Judicial Branch Website, “Special Sessions of the Superior Court” page lists the following specialized dockets: Child Protection Session
Significance: The existence (formation) of this judicial district (ca. 1994? on a small scale, then expanded?) makes it possible to “grab” cases (jurisdiction over cases) by subject matter. Hence, a case might start (as I understand it now) out of Middletown Judicial District, but get sent there. I.e., centralization of control of certain kinds of cases. Same general idea as the presence of “Unified Family Courts” (which I’ve written about elsewhere on the blog, including recently). How did it happen, generally speaking? 1997 Publish in a Family Law Journal a little history of how this court started with two judicial districts and expanded to statewide where it’s “hotly contested” custody (translation: high-conflict, an AFCC term) and the idea is to “avoid pain” for the children in being fought over. Is that working? 2004 Continue to Train the Bar Association: (run CLE classes, for fees & PR) 2008
Continue to Publicize in Legal Journals requiring special access and seek to establish it as a National Model: Back-to-school season looms as a harsh deadline for one of the most difficult types of family court cases – relocations. When a custodial parent is petitioning to leave the family’s hometown, to pursue job opportunities or life with a new partner in a distant city, it can rip aparty a family that’s already tattered. And by August, the kids need to know where they’re going to school. In this challenging type of case, Connecticut courts have tools that make it a national model. One is a specialized docket ? the Regional Family Trial Docket (RFTD) in Middletown ? for the hardest cases. The other is an innovative special masters program for mediating such cases before trial. June, 2012 article from CT lawyer. Attorney Maya Murphy warns parents not to take a chance, cites Judge Munro on the Regional Family Trial Docket among cases where parental alienation was considered in a custody decision: Typically these Dockets will be taking “parental alienation” very seriously, as opposed to, allegations of abuse of minors… Parental Alienation “Syndrome” – Real or Not, a Real Consideration During Custody”(also hover cursor)
[**]Interesting — because a lot of “protective parent” material seems to have focused on that this theory (PAS) was not valid. Possibly this plaintiff had run acorss the type of coaching which talks about PAS without mentioning who has been popularizing the language and how, i.e., the organizations running the courts!) Certain courts don’t care whether or not it’s valid. If you alienate, you lose. The article concludes recommending getting a good family lawyer (??).
I.e., the standard is, how well do you co-parent? Not, are you abusing a child….My point? This is an AFCC court. So, is Judge Munro an “AFCC” judge?
Well, she’s presenting at an AFCC conference in 2013….
Everyone is recommended to browse the brochure of AFCC planning the NEXT 50 years (til 2063) for our kids and family relationships when they have custody disputes. ANYHOW, in this AFCC 2013 Conference Brochure, p. 14 Bottom, Judge Munro presenting on the Mandatory Training for CT courts: WORKSHOP 53 “IMPROVING CONNECTICUT’S CHILD ADVOCATES an upcoming conference; her co-presenters (some of who figure in the “Ground Zero” case) include Sidney S. Horowitz [read blurb carefully], and Howard Krieger, both PhD’s [also read blurb carefully] from Waterbury Connecticut, and a J.D. Sharon Wicks Dornfield from Danbury. [in2011 Ms. Dornfield was “Vice-Chair of the Family Law Section of the Connecticut Bar Association.” (and an AFCC presenter). The topic includes showcasing the RECENT, MANDATORY TRAINING** for ‘NEW AND EXPERIENCED CHILD ADVOCATES” involving (this is typical AFCC policy and among its lifetime goals as an organization) partnership of “the bench, bar, mental health professionals, and a law school.” And, how they plan to get support to take it statewide. Another case (Toomey v. Toomey) were Dornfield came in later as minors counsel (not GAL) and recommended sole custody to the father after there’d been initially supervised visitation on the father, son alleged the father hurt him and locked him in the closet, etc. (I’ve not read it thoroughly, just skimmed. Simply looked for Ms. Dornfield through normal google search). Krieger and Horowitz both cite their contact on this AFCC brochure as “CT Resource Group” [[Note last three bullets of services offered]] and are presenting with this judge, yet in a separate case, apparently they are providing expert testimony of some sort before the same judge? Were they reimbursed for their workshop, and hence in business together at the conference, or upcoming conference, I should say? **{{translation, probably: “FEES-BASED INDOCTRINATION”}} Other workshops (upcoming, 2013) include: WORKSHOP #1: “WHEN A CHILD IS RESISTING CONTACT WITH A PARENT POST-SEPARATION.” (3-day intensive in-home intervention recommended; three presenters from Toronto. Mentions “alienation.” WORKSHOP #2: How to establish a Pro Bono Parenting Coordination Program (Parenting Coordination being a field invented by AFCC and a means to call out “alienation” in a family case; I have blogged this (herein) in a 4-part series and seen the handbooks, and how an association in one state will copy the standards from another state. Here, one of presenters (from San Diego) is program director @ Calif. School of Professional Psychology, Alliant International Univ. He also is Vice-chair of Board of CAPIC, a board which trains clinical psychology interns). AFCC membership is in, or seeks to get in, positions of influence and of training & mentoring developing professionals in their fields. Ergo, these interns are likely to be coached in parental alienation, etc.) He’s’ apparently well-qualified to present, I found he just (Dec. 2012) got a $60,000 grant to promote parent coordination in San Diego!(hover cursor) {{What a great way to end 2012 and kick off the new year! Dr. Neil Ribner, CSPP – San Diego, received a $60,000 grant in December from the Claire Rose Foundation to develop a Parenting Coordination program in San Diego and to begin to collect data on its effectiveness. … Alliant International University in San Diego has created a pro bono/low fee PC Program in San Diego under the direction of Dr. Ribner. Interns will be providing PC services. Initial funds will go toward hiring a supervisor, buying PC manuals, training interns, and administrative costs. (co)Incidentally? This Clare Rose Foundation is private, and while a “San Diego Grantmaker) is based in Fairfield, CONNECTICUT: “The Clare Rose Foundation donates to organizations which challenge the violent way of the running world. [[“running the world”?]] Because the Clare Rose Foundation is small [income ca. $2+mil] and our fund are limited, we focus on the causes of violence and the need to alleviate the effects of violence. A project which brings new strength to the victims of violence or attacks the root cause of violent behavior towards others comes within our guidelines and may be considered.}} WORKSHOP #14: USING A PSYCHOSEXUAL EVALUATOR (One of the presenters is Pres. of the Washington Chapter of ASTA, a 1984-formed society for the treatment of sexual offenders). Browse the brochure to get an idea of the scope and agenda of this organization. Then compare to where they were in 1983 newsletter (typewritten?) below, in my blogroll. Shows what positioning, leverage, planning, and of course early on obtaining the funding, can do. I have to admit it helps if your organization has plenty of judges and attorneys in it…. and psychologists. A recent study (last year or so) found that among the top ten highest paid professions (per hour) around were; Judges, and psychologists (at the doctoral level, Psy.D., Ph.D. etc.) Doctors and lawyers earn a lot too, but really put in the hours. |
THE ARTICLES
:
From the Washington Times Communities an investigative “guest author” reconstructs a case that involves a GAL who later became a judge, eliciting protests at the confirmation over the minor issue that a little boy under her care was getting literally (and his mother, financially) screwed. The medical testimony and urgent appeals from, for example, a prominent doctor, and others in the case, fell on deaf ears. Let’s see, now that the billings and contracts are starting to surface in a major publication, if this “on deaf ears” continues. It’s definitely one of those teaching moments for us all — and for the general public.
I don’t want this material lost or buried; if my comments are being bounced (again, it could be a simple technical issue), how many others are? Whether it’s a problem with my device, a problem with the formats of my comments, or a problem with the contents, of the same, I don’t know. However after a few frustrating days of losing comment after comment while submitting, or in draft, I have a sense I’m not welcome at the Washington Times Communities.
Here’s the article, and below it my informal (but informative) comment. I am actually working on different projects (in draft) here — but on seeing this excellent article, I stayed on it. Unfortunately, much time was wasted on dropped comments.
Anyone who has researched and paid attention to this field, over time, is a resource. The angle of “how the money flows” is such an under-reported issue (certainly all the “train the trainer” programs, whether fatherhood, domestic violence, or protective parents (Crisis in the Courts advocacy groups) don’t pay much attention to that aspect — which is, in my opinion, the primary aspect.
When articles like this are posted, with their supporting evidence, we don’t know how long it’s going to be on-line. I recommend people get it while they can, complying with copyrights of course, or the Washington Times is pretty clear, it may go after you!! And although the former owner has died (or is it passed on), it’s not the type of outfit whose resources I’d personally want coming after me!
The post would’ve displayed differently as an article comment. I’m leaving the informal style anyway. It’s here for reference and encouragement.
…This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW. |
Document trail available at Scribd
[LGH first instance of a feedback form. Hey, I’d wondered what that tiny icon was for in the formatting bar!]
What is your response to the article? Did you look at any of the supporting documents (footnoted)?
Do you have another website relevant to the issues it raises?
Well-written and well-documented article. If you’ve had enough of “Family Court in America<" (a.k.a. "Lawless America” these days?/anecdote after anecdote) or other types of blogs focusing on custody disasters (which are, at this point, innumerable) — anecdote + rhetoric MINUS the invoices, grants, contracts, and billings — this is a refreshing break. One look will also show you, a lot of effort went into gathering the evidence!
This particular case was also profiled and publicized when the GAL in question was nominated for judiciary while functioning as the GAL who refused to help this young boy. Over $1.5 million in fees spent on this — and the mother, having run out of money, can no longer see her son; a DIRECT consequence, it appears, of having expected someone in authority to respond to his trauma. Some of us do network around certain cases, and many were on this one. The GAL in question was nominated over objections, and is now a judge. I also blogged it at the time by adding a page and a post over at the Family Court Franchise System” (Connect-i-cut) however that blog is so slow to load, I took to blogging back here again, overall.
Here’s my response to a “Disgusted!” who said, who is going to redress their injuries?
[[beginning of comment that didn’t pass muster at the WT, or was lost on a technicality:]]
Who? You. People who are looking for someone else to do it, well….
(Long email. This gripping article has my attention! I’m writing as a mother who’s been through some of the gauntlet (west coast)).
What we can do: Talk about it, like Aine Nistiophain here, in terms of the economics. Any mother in this situation has her Ground Zero (I do.) Home goes from being a place of joy to a place which reminds you of the events. I can say, it doesn’t seem to end. We just get stronger. We develop resources inside didn’t know we had.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
One thing to do — read this article to get a grasp of how the federal funding is enabling Max’s trauma. And tweet, or point others to it (I often do, it gets the basics!)
Top 5 HHS Programs Endangering Women and Children (May, 2012, Huffington Post, Anne Stevenson)
Great summary showing that HHS grants (it’s about the largest federal agency) programs hurt women and children. They also hurt good Dads that don’t need bribes to want to see their kids, or threats of incarceration to help support them. It also robs men, women and children when millions of $$ from block grants to the states and “discretionary” social science projects gets “lost in the cracks.”
A lot of this is just using one word to mean something else; for example, “Children’s Rights” or “Family” means something more specific (like, fathers’ rights and its supportive industries).
Here’s highlights from the Children’s Rights Council “CRC” (link broken in above article) history page. See 1994, 1997, 2002. http://www.crckids.org/about-us/history-and-accomplishments/. You can see the lobbying. In Reverse order:
|
2002: “David L. Levy met with President Bush following his signing a bill providing for the ~~mentoring of children of prisoners, and to offer support for the Bush Administration’s Fatherhood Bill~~, which would provide $64 million for each of the next five years.”
1997: Sponsored by the National Parents Day Coalition,**[closely related to the Unification Church] CRC received the “Legislative Achievement” award from First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton at the White House in recognition of David Levy’s outstanding contributions toward child advocacy” and “CRC of California co-hosted a Fathers Symposium with guests including the Chief Judge of the Superior Court Family Law Section; ***Speaker of the California Senate; Director of Family Court Services;*** and President of the American Fathers Coalition. 1994: “The Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement published CRC Economist Don Bieniewicz’s “Child Support Guidelines: The Next Generation” as a model for child support guidelines. [[Access/Visitation funds: cf. Supervised Visitation, Parent Counseling, Parent Education, etc.]] |
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
After reading and following up on enough marriage/fatherhood (same diff at the grants level) grants (through taggs.hhs.gov the database, which is inaccurate but at least an indicator, through corporate fillings and 990 tax returns, etc.) I had to ask: OK, where did that missing money go? This is more than accidental!
Others that asked this include Richard Fine, John Silva (parent). Fine got disbarred and tossed in jail (Silva v. Garcetti, Los Angeles); I think overlapping this time (in the 1990s) another grandfather got some check copies (front and back), like this reporter did — and wrote about it, he also (elsewhere) wrote about the origins of AFCC and how the county courthouse was used as a cover for private corporations.
Exposing and Prosecuting Judicial Corruption through Common Law Discovery (ca. 1997?) (Bryer, short & clear, what’s going on).
He showed the role that the many training programs play..I keep coming back to his analyses, it makes more and more sense over time: He got 3 years of bank checks (had to subpoena the backs/impt!) under common law discovery (not FOIA) and found the fronts were made out to aliases (funds that didn’t exist) but the backs showed where it was going (i.e., fraud). Also points out that while gov’t actors on the bench (case in point) ARE immune, the nonprofit associations are not. Maybe there’s potential there….
What else can one person do?
TANF is up for extension or re-authorization by March 27, 2013. TANF was passed in 1996, and radically altered the concept of welfare, helped shift purpose I (help families with needy children) back and purpose IV forward (promote marriage and two-parent families). This was supposedly to reduce poverty. It did — for those in the marriage promotion business.
The revision of welfare from by the family to “block grants to the states” has attracted, I think, carpetbaggers to this industry.
“Out of the frying pan into the fire” is a real business plan, and it can’t be understood, I think, without understanding the economy. However, look in the mirror — because apparently, the judges, GALs, Psychologists, Psychiatrists, Supervised Visitation Monitor (how about the emergency room people), “all the king’s horses and all the king’s men” aren’t going to. Their suppers are from “the king.”
The public mentality, throughout society, is “the cult of the experts” — let the professionals handle it. Well, this is how the professionals are handling it: to maximize billing and minimize accountability. I’m speaking from experience and observation (networking). We have to be curious enough to say, “OK, Who did this, and why didn’t we know earlier?”
Letting our work efforts (wages/ income tax) go into a centralized pool of discretionary funding, and then simply not following how it’s used as if it was our own bank account, lets government increase profits by moving kids around, and grabbing more and more wealth. If someone goes to jails, jails are a business (private prisons do have investors). If they need therapy, therapy is a business. Business is business, and the purpose of business is profits.
The pace of this change accelerated with the internet, and if we don’t catch up in our understanding of who government (collectively speaking) is, then in general, there is going to be ever-increasing human sacrifice.
https://familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2012/11/20/government-same-turkey-outside-but-who-changed-the-stuffing/
(use the scrollbar, it’s not only specific to family courts…)
Lime-green inset table near the top (C.A. Fitts) and the very last quote at the bottom, summarize “what time of day it is.” IN between another person writes about how gov’t control is being transferred to private hands (by nonprofit associations). To understand government, understand those associations (AFCC, ABA, APA, etc.) and their private, philanthropic funders. These conference together setting policy for federal funds, and keeping the states dependent on the feds for their own economies…. For example, this last week in San Francisco (http://fathersandfamiliescoalition.org, see conf. page bottom right. Where HHS & OCSE meet fatherhood affiliates, trawling for grants, etc.) Jeffrey Leving supports, David L. Levy spoke at this one… 70pp brochure, faculty from all over the country (and some international).
The child abuse is intentional, and it’s for profit, and about profit
.
Nebraska senator John DeCamp who wrote up “The Franklin Coverup” (Nebraska, Franklin Credit Union, $40 million went missing, horrific child abuse (getting kids from foster care and/or Boys Town; 8 people died mysteriously during the investigation, finally the ringleader did time for tax evasion — but nothing for the abuse of Paul Bonacci -and – Sen. John DeCamp later commented, “We missed it. It wasn’t about the child abuse — it was about the money-laundering.” Children were being used for drug mules and blackmailing, among other things. The investigation was shut down (as I recall) when an announcement was made, they were going to follow the money.
http://economicbrain.wordpress.com/1980s-1990s-2000s-in-usa/
ALSO SEE:
>Photographer for White House child sex ring arrested after Thompson suicideTom Flocco, March 13, 2005
[WARNING: CONTENT is DISTURBING!]
The Justice Department, acting through the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Omaha, emerges from the record of the Franklin investigations not so much as a party to the cover-up, but as its coordinator. Rigging grand juries, harassment of witnesses, incitement to perjury and tampering with evidence -federal personnel were seen to apply all of those techniques in the Franklin case. (John W. DeCamp, Esq., The Franklin Cover-up, Second Edition, January 2005)WASHINGTON—March 13, 2005—TomFlocco.com—Photographer Russell E. “Rusty” Nelson was recently arrested two days after journalist Hunter Thompson reportedly committed suicide four weeks ago on February 10, according to two phone interviews with attorney John DeCamp last week.
Nelson was allegedly employed by a former Republican Party activist to take pictures of current or retired U.S. House-Senate members and other prominent government officials engaging in sexual criminality by receiving or committing sodomy and other sex acts on children during the Reagan-Bush 41 administrations.
Hunter Thompson’s death and the news blackout of Rusty Nelson’s simultaneous arrest raise questions that someone may be attempting to limit Nelson’s freedom or threaten him, since according to testimony, both men had allegedly witnessed homosexual prostitution and pedophile criminal acts in a suppressed but far-reaching child sex-ring probe closely linked to Senate and House members–but also former President George H. W. Bush. [In U.S. District Court testimony, Rusty Nelson told Judge Warren Urbom he took 20,000 to 30,000 pictures, 2-5-1999, p.52]
Pedophile victim Paul Bonacci–kidnapped and forced into sex slavery between the ages of 6 and 17–told U.S. District Court Judge Warren Urbom in sworn testimony [pp.105, 124-126] on February 5, 1999: “Where were the parties?…down in Washington, DC…and that was for sex…There was sex between adult men and other adult men but most of it had to do with young boys and young girls with the older folks…specifically for sex with minors
. . .John DeCamp told us last week that “Larry King was released from prison on April 11, 2001 after serving about five years,” adding “he’s back in Washington, DC and now involved in this story again.” [DeCamp’s book also said “King went to prison for embezzlement, conspiracy and making false financial record entries…there was no trial on any other charges, and the evidence of child prostitution and abuse perpetrated by King was never presented in any court.” Franklin Cover-up, p. 224]
. . .
DeCamp, a former Nebraska state senator and decorated Vietnam War vet, told TomFlocco.com “there are tons of pictures still left; law enforcement is currently looking for them,” adding, “you can also assume there are senators and congressmen implicated; otherwise this would not be such a big issue.” But no federal official has stepped forward to protect Rusty Nelson’s life, as Congress would be reluctant to hold hearings or force a federal prosecutor to probe its own members for sex acts with children–still punishable by law.
[(Paul Bonacci testimony)]:
“I threatened to go to the police in California, thought maybe they would listen whereas in Omaha they were in his pocketbook…he had me hung out of an airplane with a rope by my ankles…If they wanted to get something passed through the legislature, he would put some people that were against it in a compromising position. By using us boys and girls…Judge Urbom: Was this by your being the sexual partner of that person?…Yes…Judge Urbom: …Any estimates of how often you participated as the sexual partner of one of these persons that he wanted to get some kind of control over?…There were times when it would be four or five in a night…on probably a couple thousand times…sometimes dozens of times with the same person…” [U.S. District Court testimony, 2-5-1999, pp. 146-151]
IF TRUE, this indicates, besides that Congresspeople and other high-ranking officials, have certain addictions of the criminal sort, a.k.a. USING children for their own pleasure, or sense of power, which leave them vulnerable to being blackmailed, which is happening. Rather than get help for their addictions, this is enabling gov’t by blackmail using vulnerable children. It ALSO tells us that someone is more likely to prosecute for financial crimes than for unconscionable acts against children. It also tells us that Congress & the DOJ / FBI combined are not about to hold each other accountable, really, for what is done to children, not if it is too politically costly. They may need some of those addicted individuals to help pass another act of Congress….
~~~
https://familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/2012/11/03/domestic-violence-more-poverty-more-seeking-help-from-tanf-more-fatherhood-marriage-programming/ [very detailed, but shows which large grantees just can’t seem to stay registered as charities! This is actually typical, it seems. Why would HHS be so eager to dump millions into corporations which any fool can see, regularly break state corporate & charity registration laws? I found one the other week involving a prominent L.A. woman judge, pushing fatherhood; same theme, similar behavior — just wasn’t filing for YEARS!!!]
If we want to stop the child abuse, stop the systems that allow for money-laundering
.
To do that, we have to re-examine our own relationship to government, and quit participating in the parts that centralize wealth. No one said this was going to be easy. The systems have been accumulating momentum [and assets] for several decades..
Parents and others traumatized or exploited by these abusive court programs can speak up NOW as the House Ways and Means Committee is getting ready to re-authorize TANF (extend it). It was supposed to expire last Sept., they keep extending it. Two Press Releases March 6th: At least let ’em know someone is watching! http://waysandmeans.house.gov/news/documentquery.aspx?DocumentTypeID=1496
TANF frees up the diversion of money intended previously to help the children, into the same kinds of programs which are experiencing the overbillings, above (“Access/Visitation” style).
[[= the end of my comment that didn’t pass muster over at the Washington Times.]]
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 
Considering you rarely have comments and your outlandish views it seems no one really reads your posts. Maybe instead of blogging, get a job and stop relying on child support and other social programs. I agree family law needs reform but you are 180 degrees off base as to why. I would stop wasting valuable Internet space for midget porn or something else way more interesting than this ridiculousness
wewilliewilson
April 3, 2013 at 8:23 am
Thank you for your opinion and a window into your mindset, or at least persona.
Let's Get Honest
April 5, 2013 at 7:29 am
[…] the other hand, if you’re able to pull off reporting like the author of a recent “Finding Ground Zero in Connecticut” (that was actually my blog post on it) and talk about a custody case from the point of view […]
Join — or Start — a Conversation on the Family Court System. Jump in Somewhere! | Let's Get Honest! Blog
May 16, 2013 at 6:59 pm
Thank you for your brilliant compilations. A profound source of information. Thank you for preserving my sanity and for filling up my arsenal- Im in the field and fully committed to strategically throwing a legal wrench in the cog and even if in a small, perhaps a statical way, busting up- if not stopping this demoralizing terrifying machine.
Integrity
November 20, 2013 at 9:37 am
Responding to a FEEDBACK FORM received in the wee hours of mid-morning, the other day (Jan. 2014). Meanwhile, I have continued learning curve (see recent posts) and have not retreated from the position that the family courts need to be dismantled, as they create a place where criminal activity (under one law) can be reframed as psychological/relational problems (under family law), beyond which conciliation code in many states creates a further jurisdiction grab of “disputed” (high-conflict, conflicted, etc.) cases into these venues which otherwise would fall under criminal felony or misdemeanor situations. The conflict is guaranteed to be ongoing, which is where the profits come in, and the courts were structured (and laws changed to accommodate them) with a view towards ordering more services for parents — and involving federal funds (i.e., the public at large) to further help establish professions dedicated to pretending that violence, isn’t, and that everyone (almost) should be able to co-parent, UNLESS one parent refuses to, in which co-parenting becomes a thing of the past.
GALs play a strategic role in this, and help, when parents don’t cooperate and pay up enough, have the ability to help facilitate getting children instead into the foster care system, which is a very real threat to any decent parent. I encourage people to do their corporate lookups and get to understand the federal grants system affecting the courts and custody, which has been said often and plain enough on this blog.
I also believe the supervised visitation system should be shut down, not because some people might not need it, but because the structure itself facilitates fraud. Despite this long comment on an older post, I’ve simply taken the time to re-read the case I got feedback on, note that the GAL on the case not only was AFCC, but was behaving in a typical manner to such, and followed upon one of the services ordered, as below, which brings further profit to family lawyers who are already in the business as attorneys.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
To clarify (in case there’s any confusion) I’m not “Aini Nistiophain” or the person who has been publishing on Ground Zero. I supported this blogging primarily because so few writers are actually exposing not just the billings, but the organizations that also are associated with the billings in divorce courts.
I’m not a technical wiz, and it’s taken a while to realize that Feedback forms of this sort go to me, but how are they made public — and how to check for which people in their feedback forms want to have it made public. However, on Jan. 27, 2014 (about 2:40am PST), I got this feedback from the father who received full custody in the Toomey v. Toomey case, referenced above. Although this post is almost a year old now, and although there’s no indication (whatsoever) that the post was read at all, other than to notice his case referenced in it, I want to re-affirm the title of the post. That courthouse, and many other courthouses in various states, could be appropriately labeled “AFCC courthouses” which feed (off the parents’ incomes) an underground economy (barely underground — and really not hard to identify). Parents are ordered to consumer services from businesses owned or run by others in the network.
The feedback poll (Mr. Toomey, if you want your email published, reply with it here, otherwise I felt it was confidential). From the feedback form:
Response: See title of the post for what the post, and this blog is about. The connection of a certain trade association (AFCC in particular) with utilizing the family courthouses nationwide for private business promotion and referrals, at parental and public expense.
I again looked at the one link to your case posted above, and stand with my assertion that this seems typical: First, one parent (often the father) is given some sort of restraint, possibly for domestic violence — as Mr. Toomey initially was on supervised visitation. Thereafter the theme becomes access/visitation and child support modification, as enabled further by GALs (who are also often AFCC members and/or associated with another related organization, “NACC”). The first “Finding of Facts” consisted of discrediting the “bright articulate” boy’s feelings, and focused throughout on the strategy of the alienating mother, eventually leading to custody-switch to the formerly restrained parent.
Parents and child were all in therapy.
Parents were both ordered to access for and obtain an account at OurFamilyWizard.com. Let’s take a QUICK look at that. (See Look It Up website if this is still “complex” to anyone — it’s not. Just look!).
The website showed a Minnesota Address. “Our Family Wizard” is an expired (as of 7/12/2012) trade name registered to the street address of a family law firm (hint: look up street addresses of registered agents or business entities, as a rule). The trade name was registered in 2002. This is the lawfirm at that address, which shows clear signs of being “AFCC”:
http://www.ldbfamilylaw.com/attorney_profiles.html. This includes super lawyers who have made their fame in the family law arena:
~ Lindner: “Ms. Linder was also a member of the Advisory Task Force on the Guardian Ad Litem System for the Minnesota Supreme Court.” [[MN has its own civil rights violation issue — an attorney attempting to defend blatant violation of a mother’s rights (she was evicted from her own household under threat of arrest, being the mother of five children, with only 2 hours notice; the attorney attempted to file (did, actually) a civil rights violation, which changed jurisdiction and found HERSELF instead attacked by bailiffs or sheriffs during a break in the hearing stripped of belongings, glasses, jewelry (and of course boxes of evidence) and handcuffed to a wheelchair, after which she was rolled back into the courtroom to witness the rest of that sham hearing. In context, I’ve been telling people to watch the various task forces, particular GAL task forces, including the one in Minnesota. There is a hostility towards mothers…]
~Mr. Winter is a trained mediator and qualified neutral under Rule 114 of the Minnesota General Rules of Practice. In addition, he is a member of the International Academy of Collaborative Professionals.** Mr. Winter has been named a Minnesota Family Law Super Lawyer since 2004. He is a graduate of University of Colorado, Boulder and William Mitchell College of Law. ***
**this is a nonprofit (trade) association set up to push themes developed and strategized previously at AFCC.
***William Mitchell College of Law has an AFCC professor (or adjunct) on it, for a long time now, Nancy ver Steegh, and has helped support and spearhead a nonprofit “Center for Parental Responsibility” (run by Molly Olson) which is pushing a shared parenting law. Apparently Ms. Olson is married and without children, how appropriate.
The Our Family Wizard fictitious business name is now inactive (expired) although its website is still up and running. The business name is owned by Avirat, Inc., filed for incorporation in 2001 (also in MN and also street address and CEO is a family lawyer, Kathleen Kissoon.
In 2003, a press release announced that “Our Family Wizard” (a software enabled service) had cut a distribution deal with National Mediation Centers.
http://www.ourfamilywizard.com/ofw/index.cfm/about-us/press-releases/ourfamilywizardcom-signs-marketing-and-distribution-agreement-with-national-mediation-centers/. Notice the idea is described as the brainchild of an airline mechanic (man, presumably father) going through a difficult divorce.
(read link to see the plan to get courts to order this particular service, and using a pilot project in Minnesota to start to demonstrate it:)
“our people” page of this software business (tradename expired 2/12, but almost as immediately as it was formed, found a Minnesota Judge willing to sponsor it, oddly) include three “Kissoons” and apparently Mr. Volker has re-married, so it appears to be quite the family // family-law business.
http://www.ourfamilywizard.com/ofw/index.cfm/about-us/people/
For people with such technical software/engineering background, the actual website interfacing with the public looks low-cost, (cheap), and doesn’t tell the users much.
The website’s banner phrase contains at least two AFCC keywords: “conflict” and “children (out of) the middle.” ” Keeping the children out of the middle of divorce conflict.”
“About National Mediation Centers
National Mediation Centers (Sherman Oaks, Calif.), formerly Mosten Mediation and Mediator Network, is dedicated to helping parties resolve conflict and move forward in their lives by providing caring, accurate, thorough and creative mediation services. For more information, see http://www.nationalmediation.com”
(that domain name is now invalid (up for grabs). I”m going to look again at California Incorporation pages. Although certainly corporations change names with time (which is completely legal) certain groups do it far too often. Please note: One of the first major initiatives AFCC was pushing early on was mandatory mediation, which then got federal funding as of about 1988 under “Access visitation” and is now entrenched in the psyche and federal budget as “normal.” Even though it endangers people (such as myself) and their children (such as mine) who separated initially because of domestic violence, or in some other cases, child abuse. That’s the point — it’s an economic strategy using psychological rhetoric (in my opinion).
I will see what I can find about the feedback form and whether it’s intended to be a public platform or not, there has to be a better way than back and forth in comments fields. Happy New Year, etc.
Let's Get Honest
January 29, 2014 at 10:59 am
How can identical issues be in several cases in CT- attorney fees, GAL fraud, $$$$$$$$, abuse of mother, supervised visitation, repressing adept child communication, custody switch to restrained abuser father- identical misconduct, unlawful acts- check stamford case- Perrouna v Perrouna- how can this be? Governmental abuse of authority for financial gain- are we in America? We can’t do anything? Really?
Integrity
January 29, 2014 at 12:21 pm
There are some typos affecting dates in the above post. To verify about the MN businesses, look them up by name (you have to adjust between “Begins with” and “Contains” & Active and Inactive” choices, and get the combo right, it may take more than one “search”), at Minnesota Secretary of State Business & Lien System. Essentially, Avirat Inc. filed in 2001, a for-profit business with 1,000,000 shares (price not shown). I wonder who are the shareholders…check Judge Swenson, above (who chose to sponsor the pilot project).
Business Type
Business Corporation (Domestic)
MN Statute
302A
File Number
11M-466
Home Jurisdiction
Minnesota
Filing Date
01/18/2001
Status
Active / In Good Standing
Renewal Due Date:
12/31/2014
Registered Office Address
1302 2nd Str NE #200
Mpls MN 55413
USA
Number of Shares
1,000,000
Registered Agent(s)
(Optional) None provided
Principal Executive Office Address
1302 2nd Street NE, Suite 200
Saint Louis Park MN 55413
United States
Chief Executive Officer
Kathleen Kissoon
1302 2nd Street NE, Suite 200
Saint Louis Park MN 55413
United States
Our Family Wizard (fictitious business name, aka I call it trade name) filed in 2002, same year the Judge announced pilot project:
Business Type
Assumed Name
MN Statute
333
File Number
270664
Home Jurisdiction
Minnesota
Filing Date
07/08/2002
Status
Inactive
Renewal Due Date:
07/08/2012
Registered Agent(s)
(Optional) None provided
Principal Place of Business Address
3205 W 76th Str
Edina MN 55435
USA
Nameholder Nameholder Address
Avirat Inc 3205 W 76th Str, Edina, MN 55435
Street address matches law firm “Linder, Dittberner & Bryant, Ltd. (for better formatting, do the searches yourself):
Business Type
Business Corporation (Domestic)
MN Statute
302A
File Number
8Y-802
Home Jurisdiction
Minnesota
Filing Date
12/20/1995
Status
Active / In Good Standing
Renewal Due Date:
12/31/2014
Registered Office Address
3205 W 76th Str
Edina MN 55435
USA
Number of Shares
100,000
Registered Agent(s)
(Optional) None provided
Principal Executive Office Address
3205 W 76th Str
Edina MN 55435
United States
Chief Executive Officer
Karen Linder
3205 W 76th Str
Edina MN 55435
United States
Comments
Law
(Karen Linder at a minimum appears to be AFCC, attendee at 2008, 45th Annual Conference) (not, I’d save this scribd document to disk, it’s 25 pages alpha by last names only, and may clarify a lot of interrelationships among court connected professionals in more than one country, i.e., specifically many also from Canada).
Searching Judge James T. Swenson — he’s passionate about family court. Another judge refused to serve in an insecure courtroom and so was transferred to family court, which they are smart enough to equip with weapons screening procedures! (BUT, it’s just a family dispute, really…..). The judge who was transferred considered this punishment….http://www.startribune.com/local/136980213.html (dated January 2012)..
http://www.mncourts.gov/?ID=30237&page=31
Swenson presenting at AFCC conference in Chicago, 2012. Note his government website makes no mention of AFCC: Here’s the presentation:
Let's Get Honest
January 29, 2014 at 12:37 pm
Mosten Mediation Centers is not showing as a California nonprofit (shouldn’t be, either given what business it’s in) — However Mosten is next presenting for AFCC at the California chapter in 2014 February, per his site:
http://www.mostenmediation.com/training/upcoming.html
There’s an international competition with his name on it, per that list: Pls. explore this website:
http://www.brownmosten.com/pages/brown_mosten_background.htm
and this EIN# 95-4291235, which is about undergo another name change (removing Mosten’s name):
Frequent namechanges is a Hallmark of AFCC nonprofit corporations. This one is now:”International Client Consultation Competition” and is worth another post… Good grief…
Let's Get Honest
January 29, 2014 at 1:07 pm
The FTC should investigate these unfair trade practices that are financially destabalizing and bankrupting parents with this for profit “family justice system” designed to allow the flow of cash to a cottage industry filled with corruption. This seems to be exactly the type of situation they take complaints about. Why hasn’t anyone pursued this course of action? Why haven’t the people demanded that the legislature investigate pursuant to it power to do so provided for by statute?
Anonymous
October 10, 2014 at 7:19 pm
[…] was then the involved GAL. I’d posted (a number of times, but also) June 6, 2013 on “Finding Ground Zero in Connecticut — the Underground Economy in an AFCC Courthouse.” A link to the related story and financial drill-down at the bottom of that post (it was in […]
“Chasing Down Corporate and Charitable Registrations for Court-Connected Nonprofits” (Such as Kids’ Turn SD, SVN, and others) and Their Donors). Part 1. [Revisiting-viewing-formatting my Aug. 31, 2011 post @ Jan. 2018]. | Let's Get
January 4, 2018 at 1:41 pm
[…] was then the involved GAL. I’d posted (a number of times, but also) June 6, 2013 on “Finding Ground Zero in Connecticut — the Underground Economy in an AFCC Courthouse.” A link to the related story and financial drill-down at the bottom of that post (it was in […]
“Chasing Down Corporate and Charitable Registrations for Court-Connected Nonprofits” (Such as Kids’ Turn SD, SVN, and others) and Their Donors). Part 1. [Revisiting-viewing-formatting my Aug. 31, 2011 post @ Jan. 2018]. | Let's Get
January 4, 2018 at 1:53 pm
[…] was then the involved GAL. I’d posted (a number of times, but also) June 6, 2013 on “Finding Ground Zero in Connecticut — the Underground Economy in an AFCC Courthouse.” A link to the related story and financial drill-down at the bottom of that post (it was in […]
“Chasing Down Corporate and Charitable Registrations for Court-Connected Nonprofits” (Such as Kids’ Turn SD, SVN, and others) and Their Donors). Part 1. [Revisiting-viewing-formatting my Aug. 31, 2011 post @ Jan. 2018]. | Let's Get
January 4, 2018 at 2:31 pm
[…] was then the involved GAL. I’d posted (a number of times, but also) June 6, 2013 on “Finding Ground Zero in Connecticut — the Underground Economy in an AFCC Courthouse.” A link to the related story and financial drill-down at the bottom of that post (it was in […]
“Chasing Down Corporate and Charitable Registrations for Court-Connected Nonprofits” (Such as Kids’ Turn SD, SVN, and others) and Their Donors). Part 1. [Revisiting-viewing-formatting my Aug. 31, 2011 post @ Jan. 2018]. | Let's Get
February 21, 2018 at 2:17 pm