Archive for the ‘History of Family Court’ Category
Lethal Trinity of Hoodlums: Fatherhood, Motherhood, White-hooded White Men in the American MidWest
Custodial Dads & Stepmoms, Divorcing Dads, Foster Dads (married or single) and Absent Moms… Not good for kids. Sorry, folks, it ain’t.
I’ve been thinking about this one for a while. I’m going to pick on Indiana, as it has a prominent Fatherhood promoter in legislator Evan Bayh, and recent trouble with another Dad that won custody, 5 year old girl died, and he and STEPMOM tried to blame it (unsuccessfully) on the REAL (biological) mother, who is now down a child, just months after losing custody of (her).
In this one, the mandated reporters who had a chance to, DIDN’T, and the first who did report, just went along with blaming the real Mom.
New details emerge in death of 5-year-old girl at hands of custodial dad, step mom
(Muncie, Indiana)
The general public still thinks that mothers don’t lose custody unless they’re nuts or sluts. But this article tells you the truth: the protective mother lost custody because she COULD NOT AFFORD AN ATTORNEY. She was outgunned by a lawyered-up Daddy who could buy what he wanted. Which was basically a 5-year-old girl he could rape, torture, and systematically starve. Everybody happy now? In addition to CPS getting dragged through the wringer (again), are we going to see the names of the custody evaluators, judges, and other court officials who rubberstamped this custody arrangement? Don’t hold your breath. Even if a few CPS or medical workers get reprimanded or lose their jobs, the court people will stay golden. One of the few exceptions is Judge Robert Lemkau who got voted out of office after he gave a crazy violent father visitation of an infant, an infant who was murdered less than two weeks later. The public has got to start holding the courts responsible for these gross miscarriages of justice.
http://www.fox59.com/news/wxin-muncie-death-investigation-update-061610,0,871744.story
New details emerge in death of Muncie 5-year-old
During a six-month period last fall and winter, more than a half dozen health care workers treated or observed serious problems with five year-old Lauren McConniel. It wasn’t until about a week before she died on March 9th from severe malnutrition, that her injuries were reported to . . .
Indianapolis Stranger-rape, neighbors didn’t respond quickly to the commotion, child witness (NOT a father, but I guarantee you, a male….)
Child watches helplessly as man rapes mother Police said an Indianapolis woman was raped early Wednesday morning on the near north side, with her son in the same room.
Police are searching for a rapist who attacked a woman inside her home. They say the victim’s young child became a witness to the crime. It is a crime unsettling to even the most veteran of officers.”It is rather disturbing on a number of levels,” said IMPD Sgt. Linda Jackson.
Early Wednesday morning in the 1000 block of West 33rd, police say a young mother was raped in front of her own son.
“I heard him screaming,” said one neighbor.
Neighbors say they heard some type of commotion, but thought nothing of it, until now.
Well, maybe it’s time for neighbors to start figuring out FAST what’s happening when you hear a commotion next door, and some systems to respond if it does. This MIGHT help with domestic violence cases also … Maybe neighbors need to know our neighbors better than we thought we did. That is NOT going to happen without some radical restructuring of basic institutions. I’m not talking about the CONstitution, but practices.
Pretending that Dads as a group or Moms as a group are all nice is just stupid. We’s a gonna have to give up some of our precious myths and figure out a workable philosophy, better than , “the experts — that I’m paying with my taxes — have it under control.” NO suburb or city is an island, especially for females.
“It’s just sad ’cause she ain’t even been there a week. She ain’t even been there a good week,” said neighbor Lisa Coleman.
“To know that it’s right across the street – could’ve been us – ’cause we were sitting here watching TV. This window was open,” said neighbor Carmella Johnson.
In fact, the victim told police the suspect likely gained entrance through an open bedroom window. She was with her child on the couch in the living room when she says a masked man came in with a knife and threatened to cut her if she didn’t take her clothes off. As the rape occurred, police say, the suspect yelled at her son to shut up.
“During the course of the crime the suspect yelled at the child to be quiet to quit crying, when obviously the child was upset. There was something really bad going on in the house,” said Sgt. Jackson.
“I can’t imagine,” said Coleman.
On a street full of young children, it’s enough to startle already anxious neighbors who are currently reconsidering their decision to live here.
We all want “SAFE” places for us and our kids to live, and for the Police to all make it better and be fast enough, smart enough, honest enough, and in short able to protect us, along with other authorities we pay for this purpose.
The victim told police the suspect took her cell phone as he left. She waited 24 hours to report the crime to police. The suspect’s description is vague, as he was wearing a mask.
Go back, another century, and ….. it’s not Fatherhood, it’s MOTHERhood
Here’s MOTHERHOOD WORSHIP with the HOODED WHITE GUYS, same state (and supported by religious women, also….)
Lies Across America: What Our Historic Sites Get Wrong – Google Books Result
The Indiana Klan stressed law enforcement, motherhood, virtue, patriotism, … In that year’s Democratic National Convention, the Ku Klux
(This is accessible to view by Googlebooks and shows that a large resurgence of this clan, pre-civil rights of the 1960s, happened in INDIANA. It’s worth a read. They had got the press, the governor, and were aiming for U.S. President, as I recall, and they emphasized MOTHERHOOD. How ironic, the pendulum has swung the otherway; same state (and possibly same practices), now it’s “Fatherhood.” In Indiana and, thanks to the internet and increasing centralization in the U.S., and a less and less diverse U.S. Congress (it’s EXPENSIVE to get elected), nationwide.
I’m going to digress here, because the link to the “less and less diverse” article pictures Roland Burris, well-known in FATHERHOOD circles:
Senate likely to be less diverse after elections
By Deanna Bellandi, Associated Press Writer Fri Feb 5
CHICAGO – That historically all-white club known as the U.S. Senate is likely to lose what little diversity it has after November’s elections.
Two white men will be competing for President Barack Obama’s former seat in Illinois, now held by Roland Burris, the chamber’s lone African-American. Appointed by the scandal-tainted former governor, Burris won’t be seeking a full term.
In contests in Florida, Texas and North Carolina, black candidates face daunting challenges to joining the august body, from difficulty raising cash to lack of name recognition to formidable rivals.
Blacks comprise 12.2 percent of the nation’s population, but you wouldn’t know it in the 100-member Senate. Come next year, the total number could add up to zero.
“It certainly is not a desirable state of affairs,” said David Bositis, a senior political analyst with the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies.
Bositis noted that blacks don’t make up the majority population in any state and in states where there are large numbers of blacks, as in the South, there are racial divisions that make getting elected difficult.
Florida is more likely to produce the next Hispanic senator than it is the next black senator…
Notice that this article is only talking about the ‘diversity’ of skin color, not the ‘diversity’ of political thought.
In truth, if the Republicans take away more seats from the Democrat super-majority, the Congress will be certainly be more diverse.
But of course in the minds of the Associated Press, the color of one’s skin is far more important than the content of their character.
{{Guess that was not a pro-Burriss based on his politics site. However, he’s no less “fatherhood” than white guys….}}
Here’s to “Roland Burris fatherhood” google search:
U.S. Senator Roland Burris to Appear on a Special Father’s Day …
http://www.prnewswire.com/…/us-senator-roland–burris-to-appear-on-a-special-fathers-day-edition-of-chicago-attorney-jeffery-levings-fathers-right… – Cached
Attorney Jeffery Leving to Interview U.S. Senator Roland Burris on …
Fathers Rights: Jeffery M Leving-Leading Family Law & Divorce …
20thcentury
www.kkklan.com/various.htm
The following was taken from, “Hoods: The Story of the Ku Klux Klan”, by Robert Ingalls.
In Portland, Or., in the early 1920’s, the Ku Klux Klan pledged $50,000 to a children’s home and held a Christmas party featuring Kris Kringle. The Klan also organized a Klan Kommunity Kit to compete with the Community Chest, church visits became a kind of ritual. Typically, a small group of Klansmen would march down the aisle, hand the minister an offering of money, and silently depart. (page 39)
Protestant ministers quickly found that the Klan’s emphasis on religion helped swell church attendance. (page 41)
Similarly, the emphasis on DOMINATING women and keeping them in their “proper” roles is helping swell church tithes to this day, 2010….
Most Klansmen were law abiding, church going family men. Klansmen also hoped to eliminate vice and corruption through the ballot box. One Klansman declared, “Everybody knows that politicians nowadays cater to all kinds of elements, mostly selfish, some corrupt, and some definitely anti-American. They cater to the vice vote and even to the violently criminal vote. What the Klan intends to do is make them pay some attention to the decent God fearing, law abiding vote.” (pages 42-43)
Mr. Smith goes to Washington.
During the 1920’s, the Klan was subjected not only to verbal abuse but also to physical assault in some areas. Bootleggers, for example, did not take kindly to the Klan’s attempts to enforce prohibition. When New Jersey’s Klan declared war on local bootleggers, the rum runners formed a defense council and publicly threatened to “Shoot to kill” anyone other then a policeman who interfered with their illegal traffic in liquor. (page 68)
The following was taken from, “Hooded Americanism, the History of the Ku Klux Klan”, by David M. Chalmers.
In Minneapolis, the Klan presented bibles to Methodist Churches and stressed “positive Protestantism”. (page 151)
In Indiana the Klan gathered contributions to build a new hospital. (page 165
NOW FATHERHOOD:
=========
We (see blogroll to right) have blogged on this before. See Wikipedia for Son (Evan) and Father (Birch):
Evan Bayh – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Birch Bayh – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And see “MamaLiberty”‘s Sept. 2009 weblog for commentary on this:
This is from the Indiana Mothers For Custodial Justice, covering the recently introduced Fatherhood Initiative Bill:
Evan Bayh is Not His Father’s Son
I heard this comment in a meeting yesterday, and how true it is. ” Evan Bayh is not his father’s son.”
In Birch Bayh’s eyes, women should be given the same chances that men have. Women deserved equality and this was evident in his legislation.
By Richard VeilleuxFormer U.S. Sen. Birch Bayh of Indiana, considered the “father” of Title IX, the landmark federal legislation created more than 30 years ago that greatly expanded educational and athletics opportunities for girls and women, was honored during half-time of the women’s basketball game between UConn and Rutgers on Martin Luther King Day.
. . .
Sen. Bayh also played a leadership role in many other areas and in framing two Constitutional amendments: the 26th Amendment, which lowered the legal voting age to 18, and the Equal Rights Amendment, a proposed Constitutional amendment guaranteeing equal rights to women, which has been ratified by 35 states, including Connecticut.
AND, now, the son….
na in the U.S. Senate from 1963 to 1981.But for Evan Bayh, the apple has fallen far from the tree…he supports fatherhood (not parenthood)…this being sent out in preparation of the reintroduction of a Fatherhood Initiative Bill into the U.S. Senate:
Senator Bayh sent out this wonderful message for fathers on Father’s Day to the Hoosiers he represents. He missed sending out a message for mothers…tells you a lot, doesn’t it. He is up for re-election next year….Hoosiers mothers, are you paying attention?
Watch out for these bill just introduced: S. 1309, introduced by Sen. Evan Bayh, (D-IN) and two co-sponsors.H.R. 2979, introduced by Rep. Danny K. Davis (IL-7) and 27 co-sponsors.President Obama told Senator Bayh last year he would sign the bill when he gets it.
The 2006 attempt at this bill (with U.S. Senator Barack Obama as one of the two co-sponsors) died:
The list below shows legislation in this and previous sessions of Congress that had the same title as this bill. Often bills are incorporated into other omnibus bills, and you may be able to track the status of provisions of this bill by looking for an omnibus bill below. Note that bills may have multiple titles.
This one needs to die too.
Is it fair for our government tax dollars to go help take children from mothers, to help fund a custody battle in court (among other ‘fatherly’ support things), help that is only available to fathers? These funds pay for dads to do this. All dads are not good (see Dastardly Dads).
Abusive custodial fathers are constantly in the news, such as today [SEPT. 2009] : New Mexico Custodial Father Murdered Allegedly By 10 Year Old Son Who Couldn’t Take Anymore Abuse and Jon Pomeroy, Father of Seattle-area Girl, Pleads Guilty to Starving Her. Why should we help abusers take children from their moms? The American Judge’s Association knows this is a problem, why do you want to fund abusers to take custody of the children?
Yes, Evan, your dad took time to be with you. He didn’t seek to take your mother out of your life though, did he? Yes, this apple has fallen very far from the tree.
Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
- Entry Filed under: Child Custody Issues,Child Custody for fathers,Children’s Rights,Family Courts,activism,child abuse,domestic violence. Tags: abused children, abusive men, bad fathers, batterers, corruption, court whores, domestic violence, family court, family court corruption, government corruption, Indiana, Judges, killer fathers, maternal deprivation, misogynists, protective parent, responsible fatherhood intiatitives, restraining orders, Sen. Evan Bayh, stalkers, violence against women.
SHARE THIS POST on...
East Bay Roundup 6/12/2010 — Death by Dumbbell, Murder-Suicide, Married Father caught in sex sting, and Ex-Boyfriend imprisons his girl…
Yeah, I need to work on these titles…..
I was struck recently — especially in light of upcoming “Father’s Day” — of how the crime page of a Bay Area News Group paper reports crimes committed by men, and how the police handled them.
In reading order, they are, and with their given headlines:
- Pittsburg ~ Mechanic tied up, Robbed (3 men tied up a mechanic at a motorcycle shop and robbed him).
- Antioch ~ Couple Identified in Murder-Suicide (note — Antioch was where the Garrido couple, living in his mother’s home, falsely imprisoned, raped, impregnated, and used the services of a kidnapped 11 year old, Jaycee Dugard. It’s a major scandal that hasn’t finished playing out yet, I believe).
Victims in Antioch murder-suicide identified
Robert Salonga, Contra Costa Times, Posted: 06/11/2010 08:14:21 AM PDT.
— The Contra Costa Coroner’s Office has released the names of the husband and wife who died in an apparent murder-suicide early Thursday morning.Police believe that Robert Ellingson, 45, shot and killed his wife, 45-year-old Linda Ellingson, then shot himself. The couple was found in the master bedroom of their home in the 1700 block of Mt. Hamilton Drive.
Their two children, a 13-year-old son and 9-year-old daughter, were not at home at the time of the shootings. Linda Ellingson’s death marked the city’s sixth homicide of the year.
. . .
Police got a call about 4:20 a.m. Thursday from someone saying that Robert Ellingson had called him and said he had shot his wife and was going to kill himself. Shortly after, police got a call from Robert Ellingson himself saying the same thing.
Investigators now believe that Ellingson shot himself shortly after the phone call. But when they went to the home in response to a resident’s report of hearing gunfire, it was uncertain whether there was still a threat.
Over the next several hours, police cordoned off the neighborhood and a SWAT team was summoned. [[THEY WERE ALREADY DEAD]]. Two nearby elementary schools were briefly locked down. Friends and relatives of the Ellingsons gathered at the scene and were interviewed by police for information about them.
At 11 a.m., police entered the home and found the deceased couple. Investigators said that they had been experiencing marital and financial difficulties prior to their deaths.
[[CORRECTION: Before he shot her…This title is more accurate]]
Antioch man kills wife, self
June 12, 2010|By Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writer
[[another article reveals the woman was a freelance court reporter.]]
Here’s another one that came up, but this “Antioch” was apparently in Tennessee. This one sounded predictable and avoidable, and children witnessed it. TAKE A LOOK — because in MARCH, he’d already threatened to kill her (with gun to head) if she left the marriage, which apparently then resulted in a piece of paper saying, “sir, don’t!” and after violating THAT (a real danger sign, in the context….), he was arrested and then out on $31,000 bail. GUESS the Jail was full?
- Danville ~ Drug, Weapons Bust: (This involved one 22 yr old woman, but they were after a “Brandon Gunn” age 20 on probation, so the whole home got booked. Of note: They were accumulating both drugs,, firearms, AND 2 bulletproof vests. In other words, in accoutrements, they were challenging what police bring into a situation. The count was “being a felon in possession of a bulletproof vest”. There was a 32 yr old man, a 30 yr old man, a 20 yr old man and a 22 yr old woman involved. Note: Danville IS rich, basically white yuppie suburbia, good school system, although it’s had its problems around drug usage…)
- Walnut Creek ~ Arrest Accompanies Swat Response: (Here, an apparently single woman, and no kids mentioned, went to the police dept. at 11pm to report that she’d been sexually assaulted and held against her will by her ex-boyfriend, a 26 yr old resident. They interviewed her overnight, got a search warrant, and showed up 7am Friday with the SWAT time, and several personnel, closing off the area, because it was thought he might have a weapon. In this case, within 3 hours they contacted the man, and he surrendered peacefully within 20 minutes and was arrested & scheduled for booking into jail. Which goes to show you the young man knew better than to challenge that amount of paraphernalia — although he did feel entitled to sexual services against her will from a female. There were no kids at stake in this matter, and it didn’t, that I know of, make the TV news.
I also want to point out that the POLICE know not to take chances with such situations against violent young men. But they expect MOTHERS to handle ex-abusers repeatedly, without bulletproof vests, weaponry (and CERTAINLY without permission to use weapons for self defense) the fathers of their children who present much greater risk when challenged. We have to mediate with them, have exchanges of our children often without supervision or safety, and in general “work it out” ourselves. This woman was able to go on down to the police dept. and present her case. We can’t always do that, with kids, and without cars….
- PLEASANTON — mAN SENTENCED IN ONLINE Sex Sting (the only point I wish to make here is that this father’s children were NOT waking up in a “fatherless home” and presumably even though their father was seeking sex with a minor (and committing adultery, if he’d gotten it, as well as crimes) the real threat to our society is female-headed homes, as to our values and the values of our children…) Thankfully, this 44 yr old married man was caught and convicted.
And, the article that prompted this:
“Dumbell Death goes to jury”
Jury gets case against Hercules man charged with killing wife …
http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_15279159 – Cached
My friends, her mistake? She insulted his manhood. Is there any activity a woman CAN take which does NOT insult certain people’s manhood?
Dumbbell attack teacher Peter Harvey cleared of attempted murder …
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/…/Dumbbell-attack-teacher-Peter-Harvey-cleared-attempted-murder.html
Teacher who attacked pupil with dumbbell should never have been …
As usual, it pulls up another. I am out of time, hence commentary later.
She insulted his manhood, and was killed for it. She had sexual infidelity — less acceptable for women, apparently…
There’s a lot to learn in these two incidents (teacher & husband, dumbell attacks).
SHARE THIS POST on...
4 Minute (post) and 4 Recommended Books
1. The Bible. I still think Jesus was ahead of his time, when it comes to women. That doesn’t characterize the institutions that followed up …. for sure…
2. A recent find: “The Chalice & The Blade.” Riveting.
It talks about dominator vs. partnership and uses archeology, art, and a LOT more. Hmmmm…… Are you afraid to be female? Talks about the Minoan culture ….
Ever thought about the difference between “linking and ranking?” Or about this theme?
“Knowledge is bad, birth is dirty, death is holy.”
I thought not.
3. Let Justice Roll Down by John Perkins.
We need this one to integrate religion with justice, again.
4. Books by Irwin Schiff, to reclaim our time & $$.
All of these are OLD books.
That’s my 4!
SHARE THIS POST on...
He’s a violinist, she’s a violinist & mother & in jail, (update adds Ohio Judge deciding US-Saudi custody issues)
Get out your violin and play the sob story for this professional musician Dad, although it’s the professional violinist MOM who was jailed by a NJ (Bergen County) family law judge who QUICKLY bought his sob story.
OR. . . . get out some old-fashioned file cards and read the other side of this story, and take note of the biased language of reporting.
Remember those mothers whose own “sob stories” were NOT heard, and they are finding America a less and less safe place to live.
The United States of America sure knows how to make friends overseas, by telling other countries how to handle child abuse & divorce, or fork over the Moms.
I voted today. there were a FEW women on the ballot, and some of them got my vote.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/violinist_to_remain_in_jail_until_0dz5SWpINvLazKd7hJIdRJ
Violinist to remain in jail until kids returned: judge By KIRSTEN FLEMING Last Updated: 2:17 PM, May 28, 2010 Posted: 2:16 PM, May 28, 2010 Comments: 9 | More Print
A globetrotting violinist who was arrested in Guam months ago after she absconded with her two young children in South Korea will remain behind bars until the children are returned home, a Bergen County judge said today. “She remains arrested under my orders,” said Judge Alexander H Carver, of Si Nae-Shim, who did not appear in court.
{{well, “duhhh….” — she’s in jail. THAT’s real 4th Amendment conscious..}}
He reiterated that she would not be released until the children are brought home. Shim, 33, is being held on a warrant for interfering with a custody order, while her son Kristian, 6, and daughter Haerin, 3, remain with their maternal grandmother near Seoul.
{{Let’s talk about how that custody order was gotten, and what chance a woman has of getting a similar one should her husband (or ex-) pull the same stunt….}}}
Gee, kind of reminds me of our friend Lorraine in Wisconsin and HER daughter… Or Nathan Grieco in California….
=========
We of course know our government and courts are PARENT-friendly and GENDER-Neutral, right?
For example, this just out:
Current Government Projects
NFI has partnered with departments and offices of the U.S. Government to promote involved fatherhood. Learn more about these projects below.
NRFCBI
National Responsible Fatherhood Capacity Building Initiative
In partnership with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Family Assistance, National Fatherhood Initiative (NFI) has designed the National Responsible Fatherhood Capacity-Building Initiative (NRFCBI) to aid grassroots and community-based organizations through a series of capacity-building grants.
Awardees receive a one-time $25,000 award to strengthen fathers and families and are provided with National Fatherhood Initiative’s professional training and technical assistance at the annual Certification College.
“I pledge allegiance to flag of the United Healthy Marriage Demonstration Project Regions of America.. . . . . . One Nation (alized School, Health, Tax. Warmachine, and Family Design programs), under (our approved) God, with liberty, and justice, for all (those who fit our [male-dominated] definitions of fully human)
There’s a lot more to this story than hit the NY Post. .. Use your SEO and take a look. There’s an age gap between him and her. BOTH of them came from overseas to study at perhaps THE top music school in this country, Juilliard, and I believe the Manhattan School of Music (think Juilliard, high school level) also. SHE as well as HE had to audition and qualify, and both must have been exceptionally personally talented.
I have heard (from a graduate — not Robin Williams, obviously), that the latter school attracts teenaged talent internationally, sometimes without parental protection and support. She (yes she) related being sexually exploited (prostituted, as a matter of fact) through a psychology-based program in the school, and being raped overseas (during a tour) by a (also young, male) music colleague. It was devastating. In this anecdote, her birth mother was not available, and the stepmother was hostile.
BUT she had a Dad. SUrely more Dads in more homes will solve more problems, and if only we women would recognize that we are BREEDERS (whether musical and otherwise talented ones or not) and the fruit of our wombs, those human beings we gestated and many times nursed, or raised, and held, — are not REALLY ours, except by permission.
I also note a significant age difference in this couple (he was older). Perhaps he thought all Asian women were submissive?? ??? Maybe she broke that mold when her kids were involved.
If a North Jersey judge says, your word that they were in danger doesn’t count with me, well, your ass is grass (and jailed….). and his sob story will be heard.
There are a LOT of missing pieces in this story, and I regret that I cannot hunt them out, gather them together, and predigest them for the readers. But YOU can –if you wish to ….
Compare that with THIS:
Divorcing dad wants to take kids to Saudi Arabia
Culture clash at root of Cincinnati custody fight
By Dan Horn • dhorn@enquirer.com • June 5, 2010
File it under “FORWARD TO THE PAST”
Shaheen wants the kids to stay with her in Cincinnati, where they have lived for the past six years.
Bawazir wants to take them to Saudi Arabia, where he says he can get a good job.
Judge Elizabeth Mattingly will make the call, but she says she’s not happy about her choices.
HE JUST NAMED 3 CHARACTERS. HOW COME ONLY THE DAD MAKES THE HEADLINES? ??? AND WHAT ABOUT THE FOUR CHILDREN?
“You have got very few good options here,” she told Shaheen at a court hearing in March. “It’s not a perfect world.”
The big legal questions in the case – who should get custody and what are the rights of the other parent – come up in countless custody battles every day in Hamilton County’s domestic relations court.
But the case of Shaheen vs. Bawazir raises cultural, social and gender issues that few others do.
Shaheen and her lawyer are outraged the judge even is considering allowing her husband to take the four children, all of whom are U.S. citizens, to live in a country halfway around the world.
Yet in other cases, judges and sometimes legislators will reach overseas and try to get U.S. Citizen (children) BACK from a foreign country if a mother took them there, and arrest her for coming back when she did. For example, the Collins case…
They argue that a ruling in Bawazir’s favor would leave Shaheen, a homemaker, with the choice of either losing her kids, possibly forever, or following her ex-husband to a country where she believes he would control every aspect of her life, from where she worked to when she could see her children.
This is NOT just a “she believes” statement, it’s very likely true. Good grief, are our judges literate???
Her lawyer, Phyllis Bossin, said she also fears that any custody or parental visitation order Mattingly issues would mean nothing in Saudi Arabia because men in that country control decisions related to child custody and get preferential treatment in court.
Once there, Bossin said, Bawazir could make his own rules and American courts would be powerless to stop him.
Not Without My Daughter – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_Without_My_Daughter – 1 hour ago – Cached – Similar
“He wants to take these children to the other side of the world, practically into a country where she could never see them again,” Bossin said in court last month. “There are human rights issues here. She has a right to parent her children.”
Doesn’t her (female) lawyer yet know that the ubiquitous use of the word “parent” instead of “mother” is to delete the term “mother” from common usage (at least in a positive sense)? I mean, if our current Single-Mom raised African-American President can barely spit out the word — what more can we expect from the rest of us??
Bawazir and his lawyer, Reeta Brendamour, say Shaheen is maligning Saudi culture and that the children would not be harmed by moving there. Bawazir, who was born in the United States but has worked around the world, said he has job prospects in Saudi Arabia that would provide a good life for his kids.
Define “good.”
“We really think it’s the best for this entire family, for everybody, to move back there,” Brendamour said at the March hearing.
That’s right. I’m sure her Swiss born mother would approve of moving to Saudi Arabia, and say “obey your husband, er, ex-husband, honey — it’s all for the sake of the family…”
Brendamour does not recognize his wife as a separate entity here… And I’ll wager he has some understanding of the United States, the Bill of Rights, and some feminist movements here also. Perhaps we moms who have lost our kids WITHIN United STates should reassure this Dad, he need not be worried on that account (unless he has more horrific plans for his four kids)…..
“In the event mom does not want to go, that’s totally her decision. We would like to go and take the children with us.”
Mattingly has noted that the couple, whose children range in age from 6 to 14, lived in Saudi Arabia for eight years earlier in their marriage and are familiar with the culture. Shaheen’s father is Saudi and mother is Swiss, while Bawazir’s father is Saudi and mother is American.
So those Saudi fathers like European or American mothers …. Why??
Both have dual U.S. and Saudi citizenship, although they have lived most of their lives in the United States.
The judge told Shaheen in March that she should consider moving to Saudi Arabia or somewhere else overseas if her husband cannot find a job in the United States, suggesting it might be in her children’s best interests.
Yeah, this family law judge probably never heard of a child support order, or a SEEK-WORK order, or all the many fatherhood programs in place to help men meet (i.e., reduce) their child-support obligations. Or if she has, she ain’t mentioning them…. Or of creative single-Mom solutions available to this mother of four. She wouldn’t be the first single mother of four around.
“You are running out of money, and pretty soon your kids are going to be on the street unless you get a little more realistic about what your true options are,” Mattingly told Shaheen, reminding her that Bawazir had been unemployed since 2009.
WHY ISN’T SHE LECTURING BAWAZIR ON HIS RESPONSIBLE FATHERHOOD OBLIGATIONS?? BECAUSE WOMEN ARE EASIER TO LECTURE?
FACT IS, THAT’S WHAT THIS SYSTEM DOES — EXTENUATES AND EXACERBATES THE SITUATION TIL THE (TYPICALLY, FEMALE) PARENT HAS FEWER REAL OPTIONS LEFT. THAT’S SURELY IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILDREN….
“Maybe you don’t want to live in those places, but you got to start thinking about your kids at this point,” she said. “If the two of you remain broke, I don’t know how welfare looks to you, but they don’t pay much in this country.”
That’s funny. In MY state, when my ex was thousands$$ behind (without saying why, or expressing any remorse about it) I literally asked her to order a minimal percent (I was thinking 10% ) of his arrears to preserve my housing. Cool and calculated she suggested I apply for welfare.
The idea behind the OCSE Child support diversion acts was too many female-headed housese on welfare, let’s go get them dudes and make them pay up! Get them back in their families. (See above logo). That’s ostensibly the PRINCIPLE behind taking money out of TANF (and taxpayer millions into Responsible Marriage, etc.). Now it’s working beautifully in reverse, driving women BACK onto welfare, with or without access to their own offspring… Sometimes because their wages are garnished to pay a father who won in court.
Well, damn, I’d come to that county and gotten myself OFF welfare, and now a family court judge ruling on a child support arrears, unexplained, after child-stealing, tells me go back on it? How sweet ….
A difficult job search
Shaheen and Bawazir married in 1991 and lived overseas for years as he moved from place to place for his job with Modern Products Co., which is based in Saudi Arabia. They moved to Loveland in 2004 and his family stayed there when Bawazir was assigned two years ago to a job in Venezuela.
He said he lost that job because of the stress of his deteriorating marriage and the separation from his children.
“I want to be with my kids,” Bawazir said at the March hearing. “She refused to come down to Latin America. So it’s like, how do I bridge that?” He said he has been unable to find a job in the United States because his experience in international business means his best job opportunities are overseas, particularly in Saudi Arabia.
“I don’t think I can personally get a job in the U.S.,” he said.
But Shaheen doubts he has been trying hard to find a job here. She and her lawyer say a man with more than 20 years experience in the business world should be able to find a job in Cincinnati at least as easily as in Saudi Arabia.
Shaheen also questioned the fairness of her and the children starting over in a new country every time her ex-husband gets a new job.
“Being divorced, are we supposed to just keep moving and following each other from country to country?” she said in March. “I also fear that going to Saudi, I will not have any rights over there.”
Bossin said Saudi Arabia should not even be an option. She said divorcing parents make concessions about their jobs all the time to be near their children, and that Bawazir is more than capable of finding a job closer to Cincinnati.
“When people get divorced, people don’t follow their spouses,” Bossin said. “They are not married any more.”
Both sides are lining up experts for the trial, which starts June 15, to talk about life in Saudi Arabia. Bossin made clear at a hearing last week that the impact of Saudi culture and society on the children is closely tied to the question of whether Bawazir should be the custodial parent.
When Brendamour said Bawazir would agree to shared custody in Saudi Arabia, Bossin said no.
“If he has the children in Saudi Arabia, he can just simply say, ‘You’re never going to see the children again,'” she said. “The right of women to have custody of their children in Saudi Arabia – or even to see their children – is an issue.”
Discrimination a problem
The U.S. State Department’s 2009 country report on Saudi Arabia, which adheres to a strict form of Islamic law, lists several concerns about the status of women in that country: They are not permitted to drive. They need the permission of a male guardian, such as a husband or father, to get a job, open a business or to move freely around the country.
And the family court system tilts heavily toward men, who get full custody of boys at age seven and girls at nine.
“Women have few political or social rights and society does not treat them as equal members,” the State Department report says. “Discrimination against women was a significant problem.”
The rules for women have loosened a bit in recent years but they remain stringent, said Karen Dabdoub, director of the Cincinnati chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
“Just living in Saudi Arabia is not necessarily the most horrible thing,” Dabdoub said. “I know people who lived there and liked it. I know people who lived there and hated it. The kinds of jobs that women can do are limited and where they can go is limited.
“If she’s saying that her movement and rights would be restricted, yeah, absolutely.”
The judge will have to take those factors into consideration when she makes her decision about the couple’s two boys and two girls, said Katherine Federle, director of Ohio State University’s Justice for Children Project.
She said the case is, technically, no different than any other relocation case involving divorced parents, although this one is “writ large” because it involves a potential move to Saudi Arabia.
“This sounds like a relatively typical custody battle that involves relocation,” she said. “It’s just a long way away.”
Mattingly will hear at the trial from experts about Saudi society and what a move there would mean for the children. She also will hear from a court-appointed guardian and lawyer responsible for protecting the children’s interests.
Shaheen, Bawazir, the judge and the lawyers would not comment before the trial, but court proceedings so far have been contentious. Mattingly has said she wants to get the case resolved as soon as possible for the sake of the kids.
She said their grades in school and their well-being have been damaged by the long court fight.
“Your children are suffering with this battle,” Mattingly said in March. “You are getting to the line where decisions have to be made.”
Yeah, well — — there’s the Korean/Chile/NJ case, then there’s the dual-citizenship Saudi-Swiss-American Hamilton County Ohio case. Either way, women are getting lectured and jailed and separated (or threatened with it) from their own children. Sounds like third world stuff to me…
Go read Phyllis Chesler’s account of getting HERSELF out of such a marriage. It’s on her site….
SHARE THIS POST on...
What Family Justice Center Executive Directors do in their spare time…
THIS POST IS INTENDED TO PRESENT LINKS OTHERS MAY READ BEFORE JUNE 8TH. I AM VERY DISTRESSED TO LEARN ABOUT THE RECENT DISTRICT ATTORNEY SELECTION PROCESS (CIRCUMVENTING VOTER PARTICIPATION) (ORLOFF/o’mALLEY) AND I CAN PERSONALLY TESTIFY THAT THIS JUSTICE CENTER (BELOW) ISN’T DISPENSING AS MUCH JUSTICE AS ITS FUNDING WOULD IMPLY. LOOK AT LOCKYERS, DRAW SOME CONCLUSIONS… THINK BEFORE YOU VOTE!
Where were YOU on this date? Where I was (see below photo)…
In the news
06/30/2006
http://www.acfjc.org/who_we_are/in_the_news
Contra Costa Times
Governor names new victim advocate
Schwarzenegger vows support for victims’ rights, monitoring of offenders
By Chris Metinko
STAFF WRITERGov. Arnold Schwarzenegger continued his tough-on-crime talk in Oakland this week with a promise to support new rights for crime victims and more determined monitoring of the state’s worst sex offenders.
Speaking before crime victim advocates and local law enforcers Tuesday at the Alameda County Family Justice Center, Schwarzenegger also announced the appointment of Susan Fisher to the newly created position of crime victim advocate. She most recently was chairwoman of the state’s Board of Parole Hearings.
“Being victimized is a life-altering experience,” ** Schwarzenegger said. “Too often, we focus on locking up the criminal and putting more cops on the street. But there’s one very important part of the equation that is too often neglected … and those are the crime victims and their families.”
{{**which he knows from conversing with the bad guys acting in his movies??? }}
And here are the top dogs, getting it together for a press conference. At this SAME TIME I was struggling to prevent a kidnapping, and being shouted down by a law enforcement officer, same county, and threatened with loss of custody if I falsely reported that this was taking place. But, being only a mother, what did I know? . . . .
Two months later, it did. Still, who was I to try to stop the slow wheels of justice from grinding out their own ruts in a different direction, self-congratulation and centralization. …
06/27/2006
Gov. Schwarzenegger Visits the Family Justice Center
to announce his Sponsorship of a Crime Victims
Bill of Rights andto Announces New Crime Victim Advocate
Governor Schwarzenegger and Chief Assistant District Attorney
Nancy O’Malley speaking at the Alameda County Family Justice Center press conference
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/05/07/MNCK1D906A.DTL&type=printable
Oakland police seek to cut response time
Matthai Kuruvila, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Oakland police have been taking an average of 15 minutes to get to the scene of some of the city’s most violent 911 emergencies, including fights in progress and domestic violence.
{{This caught my attention at once, because typically, after, say, a murder-suicide, the words “estranged” and “domestic dispute” or “disturbance” are key. Abuse, maybe. But not flat-out “domestic violence.” So I knew something was up in this report…}}
The change, which took effect March 21, elevates such calls as a person screaming, domestic violence and fights to the top of the list along with shootings, homicides and robberies in progress.
{{WOW — there is that phrase again. Unbelievable. Why is the press loosening up and actually calling it this again?}}
That’s because for years, the decision on how fast to respond to a 911 call was left up to the officer on the street or a supervising sergeant. Dispatchers had little say in how urgent the police response should be.
Police Chief Anthony Batts is changing that by expanding the list of crimes that dispatchers and police must treat with the highest urgency – a Code 3, which directs officers to exceed the speed limit by up to 20 mph and drive through red lights after stopping to check for traffic.
. . . .
When someone has a problem that needs an immediate response, there can’t be any delays,” said Link, 65, who has lived in the city for 29 years. “That’s a moment of crisis.”
Faster response times to domestic violence can mean the difference between life or death, said Nadia Lockyer, executive director of the Alameda County Family Justice Center, which provides services for domestic violence victims and their families. Lockyer, an attorney in the Alameda County district attorney’s office who is running for county supervisor, said a faster response is vital for catching suspects and collecting evidence necessary for a good prosecution.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/05/08/MNCK1D906A.DTL#ixzz0pq9wSpnm
(note also the label: An attorney in the A.C. D.A’s office….)
So now you know why. This was posted in May, 2010. An election is upcoming, and good press is just good press. Get that name out there:
“Alameda County Family Justice Center.” Sounds great…. and of course its spokeswoman…
And of course, the city is broke. I’m not disputing that:
But, Batts said, that won’t happen until the city can increase police staffing to 878 officers – roughly 100 more than what it has now. But with the city facing a $42 million deficit in the next fiscal year and the prospect of having to lay off police officers, that appears unlikely anytime soon.
E-mail Matthai Kuruvila at mkuruvila@sfchronicle.com.
This article appeared on page A – 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle
=======
And more on Mrs. Lockyer:
I found this in the SF Chronicle from May 28, 2010…
Setting record straight on candidate Lockyer
(that’s the author. Not nearly so photogenic as the Executive Director of the ACFCJ…. who looks great in this photo…
http://www.eastbaycitizen.com/2010/04/q-lockyer-on-lockyer.html
ANYHOW, as Mr. Chip Johnson says…. which my last post was mentioning…
Nadia Lockyer, the wife of state Treasurer Bill Lockyer, describes herself on her campaign Web site as an “attorney in the Alameda County District Attorneys (sic) Office.”
And while she is technically correct in describing herself as an attorney who is employed by the district attorney’s office, it’s disingenuous. It implies she’s involved in the prosecution of criminals – and that’s far from reality.
Even more stunning is that Lockyer described herself as a deputy district attorney on her campaign Web site, which she corrected this week after admitting it was a mistake.
Lockyer is a licensed attorney who since 2007 has worked as the executive director of the Alameda County Family Justice Center, a one-stop center for victims of domestic violence. Her position is paid for by the Alameda County district attorney’s office.
When a prospective client walks into the office of a patent attorney, it’s reasonable to assume that he’s not there to consult with an office administrator who also happens to be an attorney. More than likely, he’s looking for a practicing patent attorney with proven trial experience in that specialized area of the law.
AND…
It’s safe, also, to assume that when victims or witnesses come to a county prosecutor’s office they would expect to discuss the details of a case with a prosecutor rather than a department administrator.
Fact is, Lockyer’s biggest legal victory was on the defense side of the aisle in Southern California where she led a pro bono effort to overturn the wrongful conviction of a 16-year-old boy for armed robbery in 1998.
Her supervisor, Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, said she believed that all references to Lockyer’s work as an attorney in the office had been removed from her campaign Web site months ago.
But on her campaign Web site Thursday, Lockyer still described herself as an attorney in the D.A.’s office and an executive director for the Alameda County Family Justice Center – as if they were two separate jobs.
“She is not part of the prosecution team and the position she holds is not a classified attorney’s position, but she does use those skills in her daily duties,” said O’Malley.
“I don’t want to be in the middle of her (election) campaign,” she added.
Monday, April 12, 2010
You’ve Got Mail From Nadia Lockyer
By NICHOLAS TERRYAfter a long days work, I came home to the usual boring junk in the mail; bills, advertisements, bills, greeting card, Proposition 16 literature and a GIANT envelope from the Nadia Lockyer campaign.Wowza! Someone’s got some cash to spend. Move over Mary Hayashi, Nadia Lockyer is on her way!
To date, I am not sure the exact amount of money Mrs. Lockyer has raised; it’s not that I’m too lazy to look it up, I think sharing the number doesn’t matter. Why? Because if I said the number it would only turn into an argument that she can raise how much she wants; neglecting the other candidates. Someone will then argue, she’s the popular one and I’ll end it there with, “Why the hell is this a popularity contest, because your candidate has a famous last name?”
This envelope contained a letter opening with “Dear Neighbor” and went on to talk about her announcement for county supervisor and that she’s going to tell me more about who she is. First off, Mrs. Lockyer, you’re not my neighbor. As your material points out, you live on Oakes Drive in Hayward…the nice part of Hayward, the part that’s hidden from the problems you think you’ll fix. Perhaps you were referring to your campaign headquarters on A Street. Question: Why does a candidate for county supervisor have a campaign headquarters, let alone, need one?
Nadia goes on to talk about the three other candidates who are looking for a job because of term limits; I think I need to do research.
Hayward City Councilman Kevin Dowling has served on the council since 1998. In fact, Hayward City Councilman Olden Henson has been serving since 1994. Mr. Dowling has served the City of Hayward for 12 years and thinks he’s ready to serve at the county level; that’s admirable, not because of “term limits.” According to an email response from the Hayward city clerk, there are no term limits on councilmember’s; so, Mrs. Lockyer’s literature is not completely true about Mr. Dowling, one of three other choices.
. . . Next, Nadia talks about how people ask her if she’s married to Bill Lockyer. She tells them yes, her husband is the “California State Treasurer.” They were married in 2003, had a kid in 2003 and are both committed to serving and improving their community. Oh, and she’s running with her own ideas in mind, not Bill’s, not Art’s, not Mary’s. A former Santa Ana (Orange County) School Board member that studied law in Los Angeles is somehow more qualified to serve this county then a veteran (and passionate) councilman, or a former State Senator/Assembly Member or Mayor. Yet, so many will think she’s ready, and that her name doesn’t hurt her, nor do her friends that stand in-front and on the side of her.
Then there is a one-page glossy print of three photographs; one of Nadia and her husband, California State Treasurer Bill Lockyer, one of their son and one of her with her son. Now, I will not go on about her family, however, I will point out that good money must have been spent for us to know that she has a picture-perfect family. We’re also left to believe that she believes “county government can do more for children and families,” more than, I guess city, state or federal government, “especially in these tough economic times.” One could probably argue if she knows how hard times are for families, living up on Oakes Drive.And just in case you want to show you support for Mrs. Lockyer and believe in her “track record of delivering government services efficiently while saving taxpayers money” (still waiting on more details of that statement), she’s graciously included a big red and black campaign sign for you to stick in your window. The sign is to “help remind others to vote.” If that’s the case, I’ll just remind them of the election in June, and let them pick the candidate they think is best for the district and county.
All that said…Nadia sure has a lot to live up to.
Nicholas Terry is a resident of Hayward and a former Alameda County Consumer Affairs Commissioner and Hayward Citizens Advisory Commissioner.
HERE”s ANOTHER one talking about the discrepancy in campaign funds available for this campaign: Ms. Lockyer’s (sorry, MRS. Lockyer’s?) had less than 1% from within the district she seeks to represent:
(Large font below — unintentional…. where are my “Technical Assistance Grants” anyhow?)
Friday, May 28, 2010
Bill Lockyer Contributes Hefty Sum to Spouse’s Campaign
Bill Lockyer campaign donates over $300,000 in last two months; Less than 1% of Nadia’s fundraising comes from within District By Steven Tavares
In the past two months, Alameda County supervisor candidate Nadia Lockyer has raised over $410,000 with most of it coming from the campaign largess of her husband Bill Lockyer’s re-election for state treasurer, according to reports filed with the California Fair Political Practices Commission.The Bill Lockyer for Treasurer 2010 campaign made two donations totalling $300,000 in April and May to his wife’s campaign. To date, Biil Lockyer has been, by far, the largest contributor to Nadia Lockyer’s bid to replace retiring supervisor Gail Steele on the Board of Supervisors.
Of the $647,000, Nadia Lockyer has raised in this campaign, Bill has contributed over $469,000.
Lockyer’s opponent, Hayward Councilman Kevin Dowling, called the sum “breathtaking” and says reform is needed to manage fund-raising at the county level. “This shows the county needs campaign finance reform,” said Dowling. “If this election was in Hayward, Bill could not be able to give this kind of money because of fund-raising limits we have.”
According to the report filed with the FPPC, Bill Lockyer’s campaign also contributed $2,262.24 in child care services to Nadia Lockyer’s campaign. Dowling told The Citizen Friday afternoon that he questions whether listing the services of a nanny for their young child is a legitimate campaign expenditure.
Dowling’s campaign fund-raising report was not available Friday, but he says he has raised between $15,000-20,000 over the past two months with $10,000 cash-in-hand. Former state Sen. Liz Figueroa, meanwhile, reported raising just $5,000 with $17,000 cash-in-hand. In contrast, Nadia Lockyer brought in over $341,000 over the past two months and over $50,000 in cash-on-hand with the help of her husband’s campaign, but with very little local financial support, something her opponents have long criticized.Less than one percent of Lockyer’s two-month fund-raising total comes from contributions within the district she hopes to represent. A total of $3,025 was raised mostly from supporters in Hayward, according to the FPPC. The campaign has faced lingering criticism from its opponents over the appearance Lockyer’s support only emanates from outside the area
Nadia Lockyer, the wife of state Treasurer Bill Lockyer, describes herself on her campaign Web site as an “attorney in the Alameda County District Attorneys (sic) Office.”
And while she is technically correct in describing herself as an attorney who is employed by the district attorney’s office, it’s disingenuous. It implies she’s involved in the prosecution of criminals – and that’s far from reality.
Even more stunning is that Lockyer described herself as a deputy district attorney on her campaign Web site, which she corrected this week after admitting it was a mistake.
Lockyer is a licensed attorney who since 2007 has worked as the executive director of the Alameda County Family Justice Center, a one-stop center for victims of domestic violence. Her position is paid for by the Alameda County district attorney’s office.
When a prospective client walks into the office of a patent attorney, it’s reasonable to assume that he’s not there to consult with an office administrator who also happens to be an attorney. More than likely, he’s looking for a practicing patent attorney with proven trial experience in that specialized area of the law.
It’s safe, also, to assume that when victims or witnesses come to a county prosecutor’s office they would expect to discuss the details of a case with a prosecutor rather than a department administrator.
Fact is, Lockyer’s biggest legal victory was on the defense side of the aisle in Southern California where she led a pro bono effort to overturn the wrongful conviction of a 16-year-old boy for armed robbery in 1998.
Her supervisor, Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, said she believed that all references to Lockyer’s work as an attorney in the office had been removed from her campaign Web site months ago.
But on her campaign Web site Thursday, Lockyer still described herself as an attorney in the D.A.’s office and an executive director for the Alameda County Family Justice Center – as if they were two separate jobs.
(see my last post, D”.A. Dubious Doings – SF Bay Area”)– where one researcher ferreted this out a while back… and therefore the two stacked selection committees were basically more likely to provide a facade of accountability for the federal grants supporting this organization, and of course her $90,000 ED salary…)
(I learned more actually by reading about which 3 county supervisors went along with the appointment process of O’Malley, who helped start this justice center… Now this same person wants to be County Supervisor, too.).
HERE is “GUIDESTAR.org.” Please sign up (for free) and look at some of this mission statements and IRS 990s. Get to know your groups.
I googled this justice center and found “family Violence Law Center” (Oakland) which says that is’ working with this group:
FVLC has set the following goals for the current year (FY 08-09):
- Continue to strengthen collaborative relationships with other agencies co-located at the Alameda County Family Justice Center with FVLC. This includes the Oakland Police Department, Alameda County District Attorney’s Office, and numerous other community-based agencies.
- Engage in policy work around domestic violence by playing a leadership role on several state and countywide task forces, including the American Bar Association’s Commission on Domestic Violence, California Partnership to End Domestic Violence, Alameda County Family Violence Council, Domestic Violence Advisory Council for the Social Services Administration of Alameda County, and Alameda County Teen Dating Violence Task Force (formed and led by FVLC).
- With our collaborative partners Youth ALIVE! and Youth Radio, expand leadership training and policy work around teen dating violence at Oakland middle schools through various classroom, after-school, and summer activities, effectively reaching approximately 1,600 adolescents. This is made possible through a generous four-year, $1 million grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
SHARE THIS POST on...
50 Ways to Steal a Child — Legally or Not
(I thought title that might get your attention. No, I am NOT in favor of the above activity, just reporting on the reporting of it. EVERY story, especially the ones hitting the headlines, is likely to have another side.)
I dedicate this post to whistleblowers who gave their lives to report, such as I believe the late Nancy Schaefer and her husband are, after reporting on such rampant and widespread corruption in CPS that she doubted it could be reformed. Some of us believe that it is in essence engaged in child-trafficking, not preventing it.
I’m posting just enough to I hope inspire someone to finish reading the blog, and keep this in mind the next time someone, especially someone MALE, comes up moaning and groaning about no access to his kids.
I’m FEMALE, and as horrible as my marriage was, I never stooped so low as to cut off contact with him. Given an inch by the family law court, he took the rest of the rope and hung us out to dry . . . . No comment, locally.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/article1096407.ece
Child abduction law’s backer has checkered background
By Susan Taylor Martin, Times Senior Correspondent
In Print: Friday, May 21, 2010
When a Florida Senate committee considered a bill this spring to prevent parental child abductions, one of the witnesses in support of the measure was Peter Thomas Senese. “I flew in this morning from Los Angeles,” Senese began, identifying himself as the head of an L.A. entertainment company. He told lawmakers that his own son had “traveled a very dangerous road” after being “internationally kidnapped” by his ex-wife in collusion with lawyers. Senese’s March 26 appearance was noted on a Tallahassee blog, Capitolsoup.com, that also identified him as author of a “critically acclaimed book” on child abduction. The testimony of Senese and others proved persuasive enough that the bill, introduced by Rep. Darryl Rouson, a St. Petersburg Democrat, sailed through both houses and was signed into law May 12 by Gov. Charlie Crist. But while Florida’s new Child Abduction Prevention Act addresses a very real problem, Senese’s own story is far different from what state lawmakers were led to believe. The “very dangerous road” began in 1998 when his ex-wife, pregnant with their son, returned to her native Canada after Senese landed in a California jail for bouncing $6,800 in checks used to finance a hot-air balloon wedding. The “critically acclaimed book” is self-published and has yet to go on sale. And many people say they have been scammed by Senese, including a California father who says he was “profoundly devastated” when Senese reneged on a promise to help pay $30,000 toward the return of the man’s abducted children from the Philippines. “He’s a master con,” says John Lee Smith, a carpenter. “I will not sit by any longer and let this guy continue to do to other people what he has already done to me and my sons.” Smith and others say they suspect that Senese’s “impassioned” support of the Florida bill — as Senese called it in a press release — was largely motivated by a desire to get publicity for his book, Chasing the Cyclone: a Father’s Unending Love for His Son, and obtain funding for a movie based on the book. “If you look at his website everything is promoting Chasing the Cyclone,” says Karl Hindle, a Briton who briefly worked with Senese. “The idea was he had funding in place for this movie and all these parents were going to be part of it. He was just playing to the dreams of people in a very desperate situation.” Senese, 44, accuses Hindle and others of “untruthful and malicious” statements and says he only wants to help other victims of parental child abductions. “I have attempted . . . to the best of my ability to help educate society about the gravity of this issue,” he said in an e-mail to the St. Petersburg Times. “I have used a substantial amount of my own resources to do this and have never earned a penny from my efforts.” The bill Senese supported was written by Carolyn Ann Vlk, a St. Petersburg resident briefly married to a man who was not a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident. Vlk, afraid that her Czech husband would flee the United States with their son, was surprised to find that Florida had not adopted a 2006 federal law that lets judges impose restrictions on parents deemed likely to abduct their kids. “At the very least our state law needed to indicate risk factors and other preventative measures for judges to use as a guide,” Vlk says. She sent a report with recommendations to dozens of agencies and politicians, including Rouson. “I said, ‘Carolyn, if you write it (the bill), I will file it,’ ” Rouson recalls. Vlk says she knew nothing about Senese until he called her and offered to help “get the word out” about the legislation. “For me, he’s been a perfectly lovely, sincere gentleman, and he wrote some great articles,” she says. “I would like to believe he’s motivated truly out of concern for other parents. The past is the past.” But, critics say, Senese’s past is a troubling one. In 1997, he pleaded guilty to grand larceny in his native New York in a scheme targeting doctors and insurance executives. Senese even set up temporary offices at prestigious Manhattan addresses to buff his image as a rich venture capitalist with homes in Italy and Boca Raton, Newsday reported. A year later, Senese was still on probation when he got married in California and spent months in jail after bouncing checks on a lengthy honeymoon. He pleaded no contest to one count of burglary with intent to commit grand larceny. “My drug of choice was not a narcotic nor alcohol, but the most severe addiction of all: the addiction of money,” Senese wrote to the judge, according to a story in the law enforcement magazine APB. Over the next several years, Senese self-published three books and in 2006 promoted his idea for a TV show called Book Beat, which would feature major authors like J.D. Salinger and “make rock stars out of writers.” That brought Senese to the attention of author Victoria Strauss, who has a blog that tracks schemes that allegedly prey on writers.\
(Note – I have only skimmed the article).
More later — I have another half-baked post to publish today.
SHARE THIS POST on...
District Attorney Dubious Doings — SF Bay Area
OK, I have done it again folks. I think sometimes all day about what I am going to post, or for some days. Then I toss it onto a post in the form of links I have previously read, or a close approximation.
We have a race for District Attorney in my area, and the Mighty Dan O’Malley’s posters are visible from the commuter bus lanes and even the highways. Dan O’Malley running for D.A. in Contra Costa County, and through the Tunnel to Oakland’s East Bay (Alameda County) Nancy O’Malley it seems was a key figure in obtaining a major grant to start something called the Alameda County Family Justice Center. (ACFCJ).
Now you begin to see the relevance of the topic. Justice Centers are supposedly where one goes to get help getting some justice, or at least information on how to. HAH! Maybe out the door to start with …. D.A.’s of course help prosecute crime, that’s what they do, and we hope that ALL of this is done with due process.
It gets a little upsetting then, to realize that not only is what’s being marketed not making it down to “street level,” when it comes to certain volatile / violent / and criminal / issues that land in family court, but that the head of this major center (a JUSTICE center) might even have been appointed without due process to start with.
This is a $90,000/year post (it says) presiding over and receiving, presumably, federal grants to help us poor men & wimmen who just can’t get along with each other or figure out how to navigate the justice system on our own. Or get attorneys who can stick with us through several years of the process, rather than start, then dump when funds run out, which they will….
And, depending on whether the posts I’m going to paste are accurate, it seems Nancy O’Malley also figured in getting a certain wife of a certain Attorney General appointed to be the Executive Director of this.
THIS POST IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE HARSH, EVEN THOUGH THE RESEARCH IS NOT MY OWN. UNDERSTAND, THESE MAY BE REAL “NICE” PEOPLE, AND MAY GET A LOT DONE. BUT I’M THINKING IN TERMS OF MY YEARS IN THE AREA (MANY) OF PEOPLE I KNOW GOING THROUGH THIS SYSTEMS, AND STANDING IN FRONT OF, OR HAVING APPEALED FOR (ENFORCEMENT) HELP FROM SOME OF THE SAME D.A.’s, judges, prosecutors, and justice centers. Most of the individuals I haven’t actually met. HOWEVER, my point is, when people go and ask some branch of the system to fix itself (pay your taxes, leave it to the experts, and appeal to one of the experts if another area is “off.”) – that’s not simply how things work.
So, unrealistic promises and procedures should NOT be marketed to women, or men, attempting to leave seriously dangerous situations, or with lives, livelihoods, or children at stake. Or friends and relatives.
OK, here goes:
Politics in this famous SF Bay Area, at least Alameda County are, in one blog I read — while probably not equal to Chicago’s or New York’s, known for:
Nepotism, Cronyism, Racism and Corruption
The Alameda County District Attorney’s office is also famous for nepotism, cronyism, racism and corruption. D.A. Orloff, did not start this tradition, but he certainly has continued it.
{{Quote is from a blog post dated July 2009,
The Alameda County District Attorney’s office is also famous for nepotism, cronyism, racism and corruption. D.A. Orloff, did not start this tradition, but he certainly has continued it.
It’s the first two that concern me today, although the outside ones aren’t much better. I note this blog author didn’t say “sexism.” Hmm…
Here’s a trivia sampler of Keeping it “All in the Family” in these interlocked systems — generally speaking:
Some people related to VIPs/Judges hired or promoted by Orloff:
1. Nadia Lockyer, wife of Bill Lockyer [former Calif. Atty. Gen] (hired);
{{She runs the “Family Justice Center” in Alameda County. Questionable appointment process}}2. Lisa Lockyer, daughter of Bill Lockyer [Current Calif. State Treasurer] (hired);
3. Chistopher Bates, son of Tom Bates (hired);
4. Jeff Stark, son of Pete Stark (promoted);
5. Erin Kingsbury daughter of Alameda County Judge Kenneth Kingsbury (Ret.);
6. Paul Hora son of Alameda County Judge Peggy Hora;
7. Paul Delucchi son of Alameda County Judge Alfred Deluchhi (Dec.);
8. Maya Ynostroza, daughter of Alameda County Judge Yolanda Ynostroza;
9. Catherine Horner Dobal, Mother of Alameda County Judge Jeffrey Horner;
10. Jason Chin, son California Supreme Court Justice Ming Chin; and
11. Judge Stuart Hing, Son of Alameda County Administrator Mel Hing (Stuart Hing and Kenneth Kingsbury were employed together as D.A.’s by Orloff.There are other judge’s relatives who are working of did work in the DA’s office, but we are not sure if Orloff hired or promoted them, as we say, nepotism, cronyism, racism and corruption is a tradition Orloff has followed:
12. Mattew Golde, Appointed head of D.A. Juvenile Division in 2007, son of Judge Stanley Golde (Dec.);
13. Ivan Golde, son of Judge Stanley Golde (Dec.); and
14. Amilcar Ford, grandson of Judge Judith Ford.There are many more judge’s kids who got hired, but I believe they pre-date Orloff.
Note: It seems, the relationships are already prepared, groomed, in place.
By hiring Chris Bates and Lisa Lockyer, Orloff had the kids of both the local assemblyman, Tom Bates, and the local Senator, Bill Lockyer (later became the Attorney General of the State of California), working for him. He already had the local Congressman’s kid, Jeff Stark, working for him, and he prmoted Stark.
Names to keep straight here:
- ORLOFF (D.A.) (and Nancy O’Malley, coming up, Assistant’ D.A.)
- LOCKYER
- BATES
- STARK
An Orloff is going to help a Nancy O’Malley stay in place for his position. In turn (or, also), this same O’Malley is going to help Lockyer’s wife get a prime position that attracts a lot of federal grants (Article 1, below). A Deborah Stark commenting on Mrs. Lockyer going for Supervisor (January 2010):
http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2010/01/27/deborah-stark-endorses-nadia-lockyer/
Deborah Stark endorses Nadia Lockyer
By Josh Richman
Wednesday, January 27th, 2010 at 12:27 pm in Alameda County Board of Supervisors
Alameda County Board of Supervisors District 2 candidate Nadia Lockyer today announced she has the endorsement of Deborah Roderick Stark, whom she described as “a nationally recognized expert in child and family policy” and a First Five Alameda County Commission member.
The news release delves deeper into both women’s professional bona fides, but doesn’t mention that Lockyer, 38, is the wife of state Treasurer Bill Lockyer, 68, or that Stark, 43, is the wife of Rep. Pete Stark, 78.
The question is: should it?
On one hand, Lockyer might be trying to campaign only on her own qualifications, which seems admirable; on the other hand, her husband’s long political career indisputably enhances her name recognition and political connections. Ditto Stark, to some extent; though she’s certainly a respected child and family policy expert, I find it hard to believe she’s not better known around here as Pete Stark’s wife.
Or is that just because hacks like me keep pointing it out? Does a candidate omit the information with the knowledge (and/or tacit consent) that journalists most likely will report it anyway? And, should we?
…
OK, back to quoting the first blog above, which charged nepotism, cronyism, etc.
None of this would matter, except that the same kind of favoritism is shown by the fact that Orloff never prosecutes a politician or connected person for corruption unless that person has already been caught by the media, and sometimes not even then.
LET’s GET HONEST’s 2 cents worth:
I’ve lived in these two counties for some time, and I wouldn’t give 25 cents for half of what these people say, especially the D.A.’s. Why? I miss my daughters. ONE sheriff saying no ONCE to either domestic violence (in my home while there) or no, do NOT take those girls because the court order says you can’t — oh my, what a difference this would have made.
Especially on inflated numbers of DV victims “served.” I’m still looking for a woman — any woman — who after custody switch on hearsay, or overnight, or by any action involving a felony or violation of due process, actually got them back. Or who, after a restraining order was obtained, then countered by sending the thing to divorce court, actually kept it on and kept custody of and access to minor children in her home.
For more, continue to google these names & “Steve White”. He reports a lot of “stuff” I happen to think smells right, and his manner of reporting includes some research on topics not usually mentioned. I’ve not met him, but now that elections are up, and several officials proclaiming they are against violence towards women and of course adamantly against child abuse, then we should ask, have the figures dropped recently in these areas? And what’s up with the funding.
An on-line look only, then cannot tell the whole story. Another source to be considered is actually walking into the courtrooms, the child support offices, and getting the temperature of an area by living in it, and seeing how incidents are reported in the news, AND by talking with people. Don’t forget to also talk with poor & homeless people (male & female) who are NOT pressing for justice at this point in time; they might just have given it up as a waste of their time.
Because this will make for a VERY long post, I’m going to start with one article dating back to 2006, and then a separate post, perhaps the google references and another article or so. I do not pretend to have researched this thoroughly, just wish to call attention to what’s between the lines and the relationships between KEY PLAYERS in the justice system.
ARTICLE 1: Dec., 2006
(this is a little laborious, but shows how the author thought & acted to get his questions answered).
http://www.indymedia.org/en/2006/12/876740.shtml
Attorney General’s Wife. with no previous experience, Gets Top Job in Alameda County Domestic Violence Center
Steve White 14 Dec 2006 15:36 GMT
This is a very short article and commentary on Nadia Lockyer, wife of Attorney General Bill Lockyer, being given a $90,000 per year job as Executive Director of the Alameda County Family Justice Center, a job for which she seems to have no special qualifications. The article also questions the propriety of her employment, considering her husband’s position.
Here is a link to the brochure she put out on her past work and life experience:http://www.alamedacountyda.com/nadialockyer.pdf
if that does not work, please type in:
http://www.alamedacountyda.com/nadialockyer.pdf
This brochure actually gave me a very good laugh. Ms. Lockyer spends three pages telling us about herself, (which all boils down to she had a lawyer father who was involved in Hispanic politics, and she is following his path) and talks about little volunteer work things she’s done, but does not tell us her most important qualification for the job, that she’s married to the Attorney General. All she says at the end is, “Ms. Lockyer is married and lives in Oakland”.
The name Lockyer is relatively rare. Ms. Lockyer uses it, rather than her maiden name, it would seem she wants to have it both ways. She wants political people to know who her husband is, but she doesn’t want the public to realize how she got her job. (a job which is a great political platform, this issue of domestic violence is now thoroughly mainstream)
There is not much question that many long time activists in this field wanted the top job. The Center is only ten minutes drive from the Rockridge area which has been a locus for this movement.
I will attempt to find out what intrigues occurred before she got the job, where her salary is coming from and if any ethical rules have been violated, as far as nepotism and special influence by the Attorney General are concerned.
e-mail:: boatbrain@aol.com
Variations of Ms. Lockyer’s name, in case anyone wants to Google her
Steve White 17.Dec.2006 04:27
Nadia Davis-Lockyer
Nadia Maria Davis-Lockyer
Nadia Davis Lockyer
Nadia Maria Davis Lockyer
Wife of California Attorney General Bill Lockyer
Wife of Bill Lockyer
Wife of Attorney General Bill Lockyer
Wife of State Treasurer Bill Lockyer
Arranged by the District Attorney’s Office
Steve White 28.Dec.2006 18:37
After speaking to several people involved in the selection process, I’ve been told the main player was the Alameda County Chief Assistant DA, Nancy O’Malley.
This was not a big surprise. Alameda DA Tom Orloff is an old ally of Bill Lockyer. In fact, Orloff hired Lisa Lockyer, his daughter, in her first job out of law school. After many years as a DDA, Lisa Lockyer got a job with NASA.To understand how it worked, it’s important to look at who was involved in the process. According to the brochure, there were two selection committees. One for initial screening, the other for final interview.
The first committee was made up of the person who wrote the brochure, (unnamed) and three other people. One of the others was Harold Boscovich, he is a DA staffer.
The second stage was a committee made up again of four people. Of those four, two were local DA staff, prosecutors Karen Meredith and Lisa Foster.
With half the votes in the process, the DA could block any applicant in a tie for the ultimate selection. If the writer of the brochure was Nancy O’Malley, as I suspect, that stage was controlled by DA staff as well.
If Lockyer did commit a crime, under Calfornia Govt. Code Section 81700, he seems to have been helped by three or four people in law enforcement.
Selection process was all for show, Nadia Lockyer is DA staff
Steve White 01.Jan.2007 15:47
I have just received a letter from the Alameda County District Attorney’s office which indicates Nadia Lockyer is an employee of that office.
The letter goes on to respond to my Public Records Act request for all info relaated to her hiring. The DA’s office claims all the info is exempt from disclosure, except for a brochure announcing the job. So they sent me a copy of that announcement.
The denial of information was expected. What was surprising to me is that Lockyer is an employee of the DA’s office. I thought the Family Justice Center was an independent entity which worked with the DA, not a subordinate office.
Under the Alameda County Charter, the District Attorney can hire, fire, and promote anyone he wishes, without any need for approval from other branches of county government. (Alameda County Charter Section 35)
The entire selection process seems to have been unnecessary as far as Alameda County law is concerned. There was no need for two selection committees, or even one selection committe.Therefore, one has to suspect that process, which was pretty much a farce anyway, was either for show, or was intended to create the appearance of complying with Federal rules on spending the Federal grant money given to the project.
The plot thickens. I wrote to Bill Lockyer and told him if there is any basis for it in California law, (and now maybe Federal law) I will be suing him for violating California Govt. Code Section 87100.
Violations of Federal Laws
Steve White 11.Jan.2007 17:10
It seems there was a violation of Federal Laws in the actions taken to get Nadia Lockyer the top job.
The OVW, Office on Violence Against Women, sent me the following letter:
————————————————————————-
Dear Mr. White:Thank you for expressing your concerns regarding the Alameda County Family Justice Center. All OVW grantees, including Family Justice Centers, are required to follow the Office of Justice Programs Financial Guide, which is available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/finguide06/index.htm. In addition, grantees must follow certain circulars from the Office of Management and Budget, available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/grants/grants_circulars.html.
Thanks again,
Marnie Shiels
Office on Violence Against Women————————————————————————–
I clicked the first link, which as the first page of a book on guidelines and rules for Federal graants, then went to the chapter entitled “Conflicts of Interest”
Reading that, it seems pretty clear Lockyer violated the Federal law, and presumably this is why they went through the big show of pretending to use an objective process to pick his wife for the job.
These folks knew they were doing something shady from the start.
Further evidence is that everyone involved is trying to duck my Public Records Act requests for more information. More on that in my next post
Phony Statistics put out by ACFJC
Steve White 25.Sep.2007 13:37
The first week of September, 2007, the ACFJC announced a large grant from the US Department of Justice, and in the grant announcement, which naturally everyone was very happy about, they added some statistics on how much good the ACFJC had done so far.
The stats were impressive. They claimed “Since it’s launch” the ACFJC had reduced Domestic Violence (DV) deaths from 26 to 6 in 2005, and, they had provided services to “20,000 victims and their families”.
Both claims were untrue. I checked with the Alameda County Public Health Department, and it turned out there has been a very long term decline in DV deaths, from 26 in 1996, eleven years back, to 6 in 2005. The Center opened in the last half of 2005, in August.
So, that first claim gave the Center credit for something that happened long before it existed. And, by the way the DV death decline is a nationwide phenomena, with the national numbers approaching the same as the county.
As for the “20,000” victims claim, I pointed out to the aide to Supervisor Lai Bitker that I doubted that number was true as well. I had no way to check on it, there was no other agency with hard numbers such as Public Health has for death rates, (actually, the death rates may not be solid numbers either) but I doubted there were that many victims helped. The reason is simple. If you go to ACFJC and just stand outside, watching the people come in, not many do. Not nearly enough for them to have helped 20,000 victims in just two years.
Since the web page has been changed to say, “provided 20,000 services” I think my guess was right there. I think it’s very likely, to get that “20,000 services” number, ACFJC included every time they answered the phone or gave out a brochure. Seriously, stake the place out, you may wait a couple hours before anyone who is not staff comes in.
I don’t doubt they are helping some people, but the claims made should bear some resemblance to reality. There was a big push for the need to centralize DV services in the County, but to me it looks like it could not have made much difference in how many people they actually reach. What is lacking is any kind of cost/benefit analysis. By inflating the numbers, the ACFJC was trying to deceive the public into thinking the benefit was much greater than claimed.
The Alameda County Family Justice Center is one of many local agencies funded by the Federal Department of Justice’s Office on Violence Against Women, (OVW).
The center is relatively new, and there was a recent search for the Executive Director. Eventually, Nadia Davis Lockyer was given the top job, which pays about $90,000 per year. (initial pay was $65,000 but extra money was found to make it $90,000. I am researching where the extra money came from)
{{Endquote}}
ARTICLE 2: Sept. 2009
Op-ed: Orloff and Other Oakland Stories
Clinton Killian
Last Updated on September, 22 2009 at 02:19 PM
(original link has a nice photo)(style changes — bold, color, etc. –are mine)
Earlier this month, Alameda County District Attorney Tom Orloff announced his resignation after 15 years in office. He was slated to run for re-election June 2010. In his resignation letter to the Board of Supervisors, he requested that his second-in-command Nancy O’Malley be appointed to succeed him.
This caused quite a stir since the District Attorney is an elected office. When the vacancy occurs before an election, the law gives the Board of Supervisors the power to appoint a successor to fill out the unexpired term. This means that there would be no open election and the appointee would not have to face policy questions.
{{Naturally, the domestic violence community women, the family law courts, flourishing as ever, weren’t really notified that we might want OUR issues — like unenforceable court orders, for one — like violation of due process through the entire system, for another — like unfair practices within the child support system, and the grants behind those practices, or like why programs that claim they are to help both “parents” only help one gender of parents, generally speaking (Access/Visitation, etc.). And much more… }}
This early retirement and appointing your successor is an old political ploy. It gives the successor a leg up to run for election as an “incumbent” against all challengers. It is one of the ways that the Oakland City Council remained Republican dominated until the late ‘70s. Not to be out done, the Alameda County DA’s office has not had an open election without an incumbent in nearly 100 years, the last one being before 1920. This appears to be the same thing that Mr. Orloff and Ms. O’Malley have practiced.
The Board of Supervisors rushed forward with the appointment by holding a perfunctory public hearing and then took a vote. They did not have any type of public selection process whatsoever. That’s right: no public notice inquiring if there was anyone interested in being appointed, no public interviews, no public hearings, no vetting of candidates — nothing. Three of the five supervisors determined what normally all Alameda County voters should get a chance to decide.After all, no public scrutiny is an Alameda County DA tradition.
Notice there was not not one peep out of the three who voted for this instant appointment. There was no justification of their exclusionary “hurry-up” process. It has to make you wonder why it was so imperative to appoint a successor immediately. The number two person could easily run the office in an interim basis while the Board of Supervisors took 10-20 days to hold public hearings, gather comments, vet applicants and make a public decision.
It would have been nice to hear from the potential District Attorneys about their views regarding prosecution of criminals in Oakland and Alameda County, the use of preventive measures for minor crimes to keep people out of the criminal justice system, targeting violent criminals throughout to remove them from our streets, targeting drug dealers to reduce crime – It would have been great to see democracy in action.
Instead, we had a gang of three make the decision for you, the voter, now and in 2010. Yes, lets’ hope someone shows the gumption to run. Applause should be given to Supervisors Keith Carson and Nate Miley who refused to go along with this charade. Maybe the Board of Supervisors should write better ground rules for the appointment of elected officials so that there is an open public process.
(Carson is African-American, O’Malley is, whattaya think?)
((Of note to me — LetsGetHonest blog author — two of the county supervisors who DID vote for this, apparently (Alice Lai-Bitker & Gail Steele) are outspokenly proclaiming themselves against violence against women, and child abuse. They have a reputation for this…. )))
The drama and pain and trauma and economic devastation — NEEDLESS, I believe — my particular family (3 generations of at least our kids’ two family lines are now involved, plus some elderly relations to another ex- ex-girlfriend, if you can keep that straight…) been going through has gone under these reigns, and these individuals’ jurisdictions. ))
And the guy Steve White commenting on it again:
Nancy O’Malley’s political scheming
The objections about the appointment process did not seem to include any objections to Nancy O’Malley personally. That’s a shame, because her true character should be made known. One example – when the former head of the Alameda County Family Justice Center quit a few years back, O’Malley rigged the selection for the new one so that Nadia Lockyer, wife of then Attorney General Bill Lockyer, would be sure to get the job. This was not really legal, both state law and federal law were against it, so O’Malley used a ruse to create the appearance of an impartial system. She used two “selection committees” of four person each to chose who got the job, but then stacked the committees with two DA staffers each, in other words, her own subordinates. With a tie vote on each committee, she could block any other candidate from being chosen while she blocked Lockyer from being rejected. This is the way she operates. Worse than Orloff.
By :Steve White On : September, 30 2009 at 01:43 PM
When I think about the salaries of some of these officials, the grants-funded organizations and the salaries of some of those heading them up (some of which I from time to time research) and the simple truths of this system that are NOT told to women separating from abuse, or how the few guided steps they take now may have put entire lives off course for a decade or more — – – – well, I have an issue with nepotism, cronyism, inflation of “people served” and violation of simple appointment rules for people with this amount of influence in our community.
When I remember how hard I worked to penetrate this bureaucracy, and to find even a phone or a internet access after years in the courts, or how to obtain unemployment after the last job was lost, and how humiliating it is to be in this position for simply seeking JUSTICE and OUT — it’s a little much.
Nothing personal, Orloff, O’Malley, Lockyer (although your agency did “squat” (nothing) for me this decade, and yes, I DID call, more than once over time), Stark, Steele, Lai-Bitker, and so on.
My personal experience with the D.A.’s departments (sheriffs, police, etc.) was it was almost as horrifying as dealing with my ex, to realize armed men were angry with me for expecting a court order to be respected. I no longer believe that family, civil, and criminal are any more separate than Legislative, Judicial or Executive Branches of the U.S.
I have been shouted at for seeking help to protect my own children from being abducted, as if I was the problem, and not seeking to solve one, and I called supervisors, and got little to no response. Go ask someone else…
It would’ve been better to have the “forget you” emblazoned on posters, and move on with life understanding how lawless a land we live in, and plan accordingly.
Next post, I hope to simply put up some more search results on these topics and these people.
SHARE THIS POST on...
Can you say “Mama”? Apparently our President Can’t…
OK, folks — pls. review the post about “copyediting” (why I don’t). Fact is, I process information, read on topics (or, case in point, react to them) while out and about. I have less than 2 hours a day to compress something into this spot — not my own PC — and then print out what I read. Or sometimes even published.
Last post, for example, had the usual word errors (some related to the topic, others to brain full of processing, not editing). For example, a man was “reserved” a restraining order.
I referred to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and perhaps the woman not wanting to challenge them directly because “they’re armed…” THAT statement refers to my own reticence about challenging armed law enforcement who refused to enforce the law (or court order) in a number of situations in my own case. My mistake.
The point I thought of, afterwards, was: While Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, and Sotomayor protest a citizen in an “organized” state (say WHAT??) taking the criminal justice system into (her) own hands — and protest breaking that principle — How’s Come they didn’t “GET” that the crime of assault and battery IS a citizen (a male one) taking the law into his own hands, or rather, breaking it.
And overall, I’d say that the concept of protecting women from getting KO’d by an ex hasn’t exactly worked yet, in this country.
In Bulgaria, per NYT, women can be an asset. Glad to hear it…..
Bulgaria News – Breaking World Bulgaria News – The New York Times
topics.nytimes.com › World › Countries and Territories – Cached – Similar
Feb. 4, 2010 – Washington, D.C.
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/obama-speeches/speech/176/
SPEAKER: PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA
[*] OBAMA: Thank you so much. Heads of state, cabinet members, my outstanding vice president, members of Congress, religious leaders, distinguished guests, Admiral Mullen, it’s good to see all of you. Now, let me begin by acknowledging the co-chairs of this breakfast, Senators Isakson and Klobuchar, who embody the sense of fellowship at the heart of this gathering, two of my favorite senators.
Let me also acknowledge the director of my faith-based office, Joshua DuBois, who is here. Where’s Joshua? He’s out there somewhere. He’s doing great work.
(APPLAUSE)
I want to commend Secretary Hillary Clinton on her outstanding remarks and her outstanding leadership at the State Department. She’s doing good every day.
(APPLAUSE)
I’m especially pleased to see my dear friend, Prime Minister Zapatero, and I want him to relay America’s greetings to the people of Spain.
OBAMA: And, Johnny, you are right: I am deeply blessed and I thank God every day for being married to Michelle Obama.
(APPLAUSE)
I’m privileged to join you once again, as my predecessors have for over half a century. And like them, I come here to speak about the ways my faith informs who I am as a president and as a person.
But I’m also here for the same reason that all of you are, for we all share a recognition, one as old as time, that a willingness to believe, an openness to grace, a commitment to prayer can bring sustenance to our lives.
There is, of course, a need for prayer even in times of joy and peace and prosperity, perhaps especially in such times prayer is needed to guard against pride and to guard against complacency.
But rightly or wrongly, most of us are inclined to seek out the divine, not in the moment when the Lord makes his face shine upon us, but in moments when God’s grace can seem farthest away.
Last month, God’s grace and God’s mercy seemed far away from our neighbors in Haiti, and yet I believe that grace was not absent in the midst of tragedy. It was heard in prayers and hymns that broke the silence of an earthquake’s wake. It was witnessed among parishioners of churches that stood no more, a roadside congregation holding Bibles in their laps. It was felt in the presence of relief workers and medics, translators, servicemen and women bringing food and water and aid to the injured.
One such translator was an American of Haitian descent, representative of the extraordinary work that our men and women in uniform do all around the world, Navy Corpsman Christian Bouchard (ph). And lying on a gurney aboard the USNS Comfort, a woman asked Christopher, “Where do you come from? What country? After my operation,” she said, “I will pray for that country.” And in Creole, Corpsman Bouchard (ph) responded, “Intanzini (ph),” the United States of America.
God’s grace and the compassion and decency of the American people is expressed through the men and women like Corpsman Bouchard (ph). It’s expressed through the efforts of our armed forces, through the efforts of our entire government, through similar efforts from Spain and other countries around the world. It’s also, as Secretary Clinton said, expressed through multiple faith-based efforts, by evangelicals at World Relief, by the American Jewish World Service, by Hindu temples and Mainline Protestants, Catholic Relief Services, African-American churches, the United Sikhs, by Americans of every faith and no faith, uniting around a common purpose, a higher purpose. It’s inspiring.
This is what we do as Americans in times of trouble. We unite, recognizing that such crises call on all of us to act, recognizing that there but for the grace of God go I, recognizing that life’s most sacred responsibility, one affirmed, as Hillary said, by all of the world’s great religions is to sacrifice something of ourselves for a person in need.
OBAMA: Sadly, though, that spirit is too often absent when tackling the long term, but no less profound issues facing our country and the world. Too often, that spirit is missing without the spectacular tragedy, the 9/11 or the Katrina, the earthquake or the tsunami, that can shake us out of complacency.
We become numb to the day-to-day crises, the slow-moving tragedies of children without food and men without shelter and families without health care.
{{AND APPARENTLY, MAY I ADD, CHILDREN & FAMILIES WITHOUT WOMEN. CAN YOU FIND A REFERENCE TO CHIDLREN OR FAMILIES IN THIS SPEECH WITH THE WORD WOMAN OR MOTHER?}}
We become absorbed with our abstract arguments, our ideological disputes, our contests for power. And in this Tower of Babel, we lose the sound of God’s voice.
Now, for those of us here in Washington, let’s acknowledge that democracy has always been messy. Let’s not be overly nostalgic. Divisions are hardly new in this country. Arguments about the proper role of government, the relationship between liberty and equality, our obligations to our fellow citizens, these things have been with us since our founding.
And I am profoundly mindful that a loyal opposition, a vigorous back-and-forth, a skepticism of power, all of that is what makes our democracy work. And we’ve seen actually some improvement in some circumstances. We haven’t seen any canings on the floor of the Senate anytime recently.
(LAUGHTER)
So we shouldn’t over-romanticize the past, but there is a sense that something is different now, that something’s broken, that those of us in Washington are not serving the people as well as we should. At times it seems like we’re unable to listen to one another, to have at once a serious and civil debate.
And this erosion of civility in the public square sows division and distrust among our citizens. It poisons the well of public opinion. It leaves each side little room to negotiate with the other. It makes politics an all-or-nothing sport where one side is either always right or always wrong, when, in reality, neither side has a monopoly on truth.
And then we lose sight of the children without food and the men without shelter and the families without health care.
{{Did he read this, or had he practiced the phrase enough.}}
{{I know some homeless women. Apparently President Obama, at least here, doesn’t. There are also some families who became fatherless and motherless when a father, re-inspired perhaps by the fatherhood programs, asserted his rights to not be left by killing her. Then himself… THAT’ll show them who’s in charge…}}
Empowered by faith, consistently, prayerfully, we need to find our way back to civility, and that begins with stepping out of our comfort zones in an effort to bridge divisions. We see that in many conservative pastors who are helping lead the way to fix our broken immigration system. It’s not what would be expected from them, and yet they recognize in those immigrant families the face of God.
We see that in the evangelical leaders who are rallying their congregations to protect our planet.
We see it in the increasing recognition among progressives that government can’t solve all of our problems (inaudible) talking about values like responsible fatherhood and healthy marriage are integral to any anti-poverty agenda.
Stretching out of our dogmas, our prescribed roles along the political spectrum, that can help us regain a sense of civility.
Civility also requires relearning how to disagree without being disagreeable, understanding, as presidents said, that civility is not a sign of weakness.
Now, I am the first to confess I’m not always right — and Michelle will testify to that…
(LAUGHTER)
… but surely you can question my policies without questioning my faith or, for that matter, my citizenship.
(LAUGHTER)
Challenging each other’s ideas can renew our democracy, but when we challenge each other’s motives, it becomes harder to see what we hold in common. We forget that we share at some deep level the same dreams, even when we don’t share the same plans on how to fulfill them.
OBAMA: We may disagree about the best way to reform our health care system, but surely we can agree that no one ought to go broke when they get sick in the richest nation on Earth.
We can take different approaches to ending inequality, but surely we can agree on the need to lift our children out of ignorance, to — to lift our neighbors from poverty.
We may disagree about gay marriage, but surely we can agree that it is unconscionable to target gays and lesbians for who they are, whether it’s here in the United States or, as Hillary mentioned, more extremely in odious laws that are being proposed most recently in Uganda.
Surely we can agree to find common ground when possible, parting ways when necessary, but in doing so, let us be guided by our faith and by prayer, for while prayer can buck us up when we are down, keep us calm in a storm, while prayer can stiffen our spines to surmount an obstacle — and I assure you, I’m praying a lot these days — prayer can also do something else.
It can touch our hearts with humility. It can fill us with a spirit of brotherhood. It can remind us that each of us are children of an awesome and loving God.
Through faith, but not through faith alone, we can unite people to serve the common good. And that’s why my Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships have been working so hard since I announced it here last year. We’ve slashed red tape and built effective partnerships on a range of uses, from promoting fatherhood here at home to spearheading interfaith cooperation abroad.
And through that office, we’ve turned the faith-based initiative around to find common ground among people of all beliefs, allowing them to make an impact in a way that’s civil and respectful of difference and focused on what matters most.
It is this spirit of civility that we are called to take up when we leave here today. That’s what I’m praying for.
I know, in difficult times like these, when people are frustrated, when pundits start shouting and politicians start calling each other names, it can seem like a return to civility is not possible, like the very idea is a relic of some bygone era. The word itself seems quaint, “civility.” But let us remember those who came before, those who believed in the brotherhood of man even when such a faith was tested. Remember Dr. Martin Luther King, not — not long after an explosion ripped through his front porch, his wife and infant daughter inside, he rose to that pulpit in Montgomery and said, “Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into a friend.” In the eyes of those who denied his humanity, he saw the face of God.
Remember Abraham Lincoln, on the eve of the Civil War, with states seceding and forces gathering, with a nation divided half-slave and half-free, he rose to deliver his First Inaugural and said, “We are not enemies, but friends. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection.” Even in the eyes of Confederate soldiers, he saw the face of God.
Remember William Wilberforce, whose Christian faith led him to seek slavery’s abolition in Britain. He was vilified, derided, attacked, but he called for lessening prejudices and conciliating goodwill, and thereby making way for the less obstructed progress of truth. In the eyes of those who sought to silence a nation’s conscience, he saw the face of God.
Yes, there are crimes of conscience that call us to action. Yes, there are causes that move our hearts and offenses that steer our souls, but progress doesn’t come when we demonize opponents. It’s not born in righteous spite.
Progress comes when we open our hearts, when we extend our hands, when we recognize our common humanity. Progress comes when we look into the eyes of another and see the face of God. That we might do so, that we will do so — all the time, not just some of the time — is my fervent prayer for our nation and the world.
Thank you. God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.
(APPLAUSE)
END
PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE OBAMA on FATHER’S DAY 2008:
Did Peter Orszag hear Obama’s speech on fatherhood?
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/01/does_peter_orszag_know_about_o.html
The affairs of Peter Orszag appear to be quite a source of amusement for Washington’s political and intellectual elite. The town is abuzz with talk of Obama’s nerdy budget director, a divorced father of two, who, it turns out, is the father of another baby born to ex-girlfriend Claire Milonas in November and who recently announced his engagement to ABC correspondent Bianna Golodryga.
As for the child born out of wedlock? “What’s the big deal?” seems to be the thinking. Orszag and Milonas released a statement this week saying, “we are both thrilled she is happy and healthy.”
Maybe I should leave this alone. Unfortunately, I have trouble squaring Orszag’s behavior with his boss’s views on family and fatherhood.
In a Father’s Day 2008 speech http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2008/06/15/obama_delivers_fathers_day_ser.html to the Apostolic Church of God in Chicago, then-presidential candidate Barack Obama told the congregation: “Of all the rocks upon which we build our lives, we are reminded today that family is the most important. And we… recognize and honor how critical every father is to that foundation.”
Obama didn’t mince words. “If we are honest with ourselves, we’ll admit that what too many fathers also are is missing – missing from too many lives and too many homes. They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.”
He continued: “We need fathers to realize that responsibility does not end at conception. We need them to realize that what makes a man is not the ability to have a child — it’s the courage to raise one.”
On that Father’s Day, president Obama was talking to and about men in the African American community.
Do those presidential views also apply to Peter Orszag?
AND, here we have a February 2008 commentary on Our Chief Executive/Big Brother as the nation’s Father-promoter.
Obama on Responsible Fatherhood and Healthy Families Act of 2006
http://opine-editorials.blogspot.com/2008/02/obama-on-responsible-fatherhood-and.html
From his issues page on poverty, he mentioned the Responsible Fatherhood and Healthy Families Act that was introduced in 2006 he co-sponsored, but nothing ever happen to it. Here are just a few of the findings by Congress
(1) The most important factor in a child’s upbringing is whether the child is brought up in a loving, healthy, supportive environment.(2) Children who grow up with both parents are more likely to finish high school, be economically self-sufficient, and to have a healthier lifestyle than their peers who grow up in single-parent homes.(3) Father-child interaction has been shown to promote the positive physical, social, emotional, and mental development of children.
WANT TO KNOW HOW MUCH THE RESEARCH THAT CAME TO THIS CONCLUSION COST THE TAXPAYERS???
As of MARCH 2010, I hear, the “pretense” that healthy marriage/responsible fatherhood actually includes a resident mother (as opposed to putting single Dads back into kids’ lives, at whatever cost, and by whatever means, including sometimes unceremoniously tossing out the resident Mom – or forcing her back into poverty through repeated court hearings hoping to regain contact with her children, or protect them, or in short, function like a decent mother. Like, say, President Obama’s … I think she did all right, eh?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/12/the-family-funds-breakup/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/12/the-family-funds-breakup/print/
Contrast with the Picture on the ABA Family Law page in California:
http://www.acbanet.org/layouts/55/graphics/FamilyWinter2009News.pdf
Is the Obama administration trying to divorce the federal government from the marriage business? Yes, the White House is ditching the only real federal effort to strengthen the institution of marriage, say some marriage-movement activists, who are already lamenting the loss of the Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood grant program.
But others, including those involved in federal and local fatherhood programs, say not really – its replacement program is an important adjustment in family policy.
Still others say the marriage money may be gone, but people should save their tears – government funds have already done what they can to till the soil and it’s now time for private enterprise and religious groups to step up and revive America’s marriage culture.
The center of this debate is located in two lines of the Obama administration’s 2011 budget.
One zeroes out the $150 million Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood grants, and the other creates a $500 million Fatherhood, Marriage and Families Innovation Fund, aimed at issuing three-year competitive grants to states. The new fund absorbs the funding of the George W. Bush-era marriage and fatherhood grants.
{{TO make this more interesting, the average MOTHER “in a family [law] way” doesn’t even know these millions of grants exist – to help her lose custodial time with her kids. Courtesy (in Calif. At least) a lot of tweaking by the county child support agency}}
The change perplexes Nisa Muhammad, founder of Wedded Bliss Foundation, which has celebrated the weddings of more than 100 low-income couples in recent months.
“Marriage” is in the title of the new innovation fund, she said, but “when you read deeper … where’d it go?”
The description of new fund’s purpose is even more discouraging for marriage watchers. Half the money is slated for state-initiated responsible fatherhood and employment programs, “including those with a marriage component,” budget language explains.
The other half will go to programs for “custodial parents,” i.e., single mothers.
{{“Lord almighty, we’re helping single mothers again. There goes the neighborhood…”}}
Fundable activities include job training, substance-abuse treatment, child-support enforcement and other anti-poverty activities that already receive funding from dozens – if not hundreds – of federal programs.
“Job-training programs have been going on for years and years, and now we want to revert back to that? We are in a different state and time,” Mrs. Muhammad said. “There’s really a disconnect” in Washington, she added. “They really don’t understand what the breakdown of the two-parent family means for children.”
PS. A woman got killed by her ex (who then killed himself) in San Jose last week. What else is new. Shon Box and Miriam Olivo….
SHARE THIS POST on...
Wykenna Watson challenges a plea-bargain on restraining order violation. Her criminal contempt IS upheld. But Supreme Court Justices: C.J. Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy & Sotomayor “Strongly Dissent..”
This just in. . . . .
These notable Honoraries, from the Highest Court in our nation, which court’s Chief Justice gets to swear in the President of the United States in an oath to protect & defend the Constitution, . . . . . are objecting to her actually expecting the violation of a RECENT restraining order to be taken seriously, for once, and not plea-bargained. This may go a ways towards making such restraining orders less “certifiably insane.”
This Washington Post article tells how a woman challenged a DISMISSAL of charges on a 2nd assault by her boyfriend, which assault was also a violation of a restraining order (probably of the criminal one…)
She is saying “NO!” to those who plea-bargained him OUT of an assault AFTER a civil restraining order was in place. The U.S. Attorney’s Office let him off easier, and she said NO by filing for criminal contempt.
She can’t exactly go after those who plea-bargained him quite so easily. For one, they are armed…..So she went to uphold the concept of “ORDER” meaning “ORDER” and violating it intentionally as SERIOUS.
By Josh White | May 24, 2010; 2:30 PM ET
The U.S. Supreme Court today dismissed a case originating out of the District that challenged the ability of a private citizen to bring criminal contempt charges against someone else in a domestic violence case.
Split 5-4, with a strongly worded dissent by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court declined to interfere with a lower court decision that upheld guilty findings on criminal contempt charges against John Robertson, who was convicted in the District of violating a restraining order against him.
But as part of a plea agreement with the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Robertson agreed to plead guilty to the first attack if prosecutors were willing to dimiss charges for the second attack, which they did.
Watson, dissatisfied with the outcome, later that year herself filed criminal contempt charges against Robertson. After a two-day trial, Robertson was convicted, sentenced to an additional year in jail and ordered to pay Watson $10,000 in restitution.
Ms. Watson showed some real courage & savvy in doing this, as the 2nd assault itself represented (in context) a form of retaliation for saying no the first time.
Speaking for myself, and many other women, we have been discouraged by repeated failures of the CRIMINAL section of government (D.A. on down)’s failures to arrest, prosecute, and keep in jail, batterers who escalate their actions after being confronted.
This article doesn’t say (upfront) whether mutual children were involved, which adds another layer of possible intimidation and threat to the woman confronting abuse.
I have found it very frustrating to experience all the results of crime, including trauma, job loss, and curtailed social connections, and repeatedly return to “family court” and have our case funneled through mediation as if it was still a personal squabble. SPeaking for myself only, I have been treated with disdain and disrespect (repeatedly) in seeking this.
Failing to prosecute or show consequences for assault & battery, whether misdemeanor (THIS time) or felony-level, sends a clear message to the perpetrator: “no holds barred, go ahead, we won’t really punish you….” and it also sends a message to people who support the woman in noncriminal ways. It taxes their resources also. I believe this is WHY California law had this clause, even though it’s largely ignored in practice:
Google search of “clear and present danger” only pulled up references to spousal abuse on the 2nd page of searches. That the first one was from my blog! tells me it’s not a common topic of conversation these days….
Search Results
“Clear and Present Danger”…fuzzy usage by AFCC « Let’sGetHonestBlog
Dec 1, 2009 … The Legislature hereby finds that spousal abusers present a clear and present danger to the mental and physical well-being of the citizens …
familycourtmatters.wordpress.com/…/clear-and-present–danger-fuzzy-usage-by-afcc/ – Cached- [DOC]
Domestic Violence, by its Nature, Frequently Results in Forfeiture …
– 3 visits – 10/15/09
File Format: Microsoft Word – View as HTML
Domestic violence victims frequently fail to assist in their batterer’s prosecutions. ….. “[Since] spousal abusers present a clear and present danger to the mental … Code § 273.81 (West 2005) (establishing Spousal Abuser Prosecution …
http://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/GilesAmicusBrief.doc – SimilarCHAPTER 2.5. SPOUSAL ABUSERS – Sections 273.8-273.88 – California …
The Legislature hereby finds that spousal abusers present a clear and present danger to the mental and physical well-being of the citizens of the State of …
law.justia.com › … › California Code › California Penal Code – CachedA Critical Look at Janet Johnston’s Typology of Batterers by Lundy …
Janet Johnston’s work attempts to make this sort of clear demarcation, ….. A new, negative image of the other spouse is crystallized out of this desperate … how batterers present in public, including some of the most dangerous. … Johnston’s work may, in the aggregate, be contributing to the danger of the …
www.lundybancroft.com/art_johnston.html
The fact that sometimes people die, or suffer serious injuries, or kids are kidnapped and cut off with contact from the other parent, bypassers sometimes are hurt, and property (houses, businesses) may get trashed in the process — is, I’d say, an “indicator” of “clear and present danger” to more than just those “intimate partners.”
But in Family Law and Civil Law La-La-Land, you couldn’t tell, in practice.
I keep general tabs on the local courtrooms or “family court services” areas in at least two counties in California. Well, I’ve been in the system for years, also. And I have noticed that the material even “Saying” the words “Domestic Violence” are becoming rarer and rarer. They are replaced — even when distributed right next to a window whose title is “restraining orders,” with brochures published, for the most part (in one county) by the ubiquitous “AFCC” (see my blog, search term, or search the web) and/or Child Support Brochures, all aspects of parenting. I.e., a marketing plug for the professionals in memberships of AFCC.
In the other county, there were multiple brochures put out by the local State Bar. The ONLY one (of same format) put out which said “Domestic Violence” on it was put out by a family-law section of this state bar. By now, most of us should know that to become a certified (even) family law specialist doesn’t require much training at all in domestic violence, and less in child abuse issues, which overlap. ….
In the social services office, at another address, again, a large (and well-populated!) room, as I usually do, I looked for materials on domestic violence. There was ONE brochure, and the word is (FYI no longer “violence” but “Abuse.” However the same group that put this very small brochure about “abuse” out (even though the nonprofit’s name contained the word “violence”) had a duplicate one more about parenting issues.
We have become a nation of family counselors and psychologists, judging by the courtrooms, and where the public funding is going. Forget crminal prosecution for criminal acts — the line has blurred.
Into this, walks a woman whose case hit the Supreme Court, AND I notice that there was “STRONG DISSENT” that private citizens should actually take action to treat contempt of a court order as serious, in addition to an assault on a woman by a man after he’d already been reserved a restraining order.
Well, she’s right, and I think we just see where the Supreme Court considers the government/private citizen divide.
We might well wonder who switched the priorities from government — for whom citizens pay — serving the citizens, to the citizens serving the government. Anyhow, continuing with this article……
Robertson appealed, arguing that any such charges against him were in violation of his plea agreement with the government, and could not be initiated by a private citizen. The Court of Appeals rejected that arguments, finding that the criminal contempt prosecution was brought as a private action and not in the “name and interest of the United States or any other governmental entity.”
In a case that garnered great interest from defense attorneys and those who work to fight domestic violence alike, the Supreme Court ultimately opted not to get involved, with a one-sentence opinion letting Watson’s victory stand and appearing to validate D.C. laws that allow victims to initiate such prosecutions regardless of plea agreements with the government.
In other words, there’s hope for actual consequences for violating court orders saying “Don’t Tread On Me!” Good.
(please read rest of article, link above).
NOW, let’s take a look at that dissent, and WHY the Supreme Court doesn’t want to let go some of the power of the criminal sector to actually go towards its designated end, stopping crime, if a lowly WOMAN, and a Private Citizen, takes action to defend her rights to expect the courts and police and prisons (etc.) to defend her physical person…
Remember, “life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.” Which one of those comes first, and which one of those should we really leave up to a distant politician, legislator, or US Attorney’s Office to plea-bargain out?
I read on-line often enough of criminal sector complaints that women sometimes drop charges. A lot of conferences and discussions takes place on those bad women for not participating in the prosecution. There have been discussions on whether it’s appropriate to hold a WOMAN in contempt for NOT participating in being a witness, or in the prosecution of criminal level domestic violence. In some of these cases, she is weighing what the system will (or in too many cases, WON’T) do against the safety of herself, and/or, her family members (kids or parents). To fail to weigh this is to be flippant with human sacrifice — it bears weighing, this “life” thing….
Now a woman IS participating in the prosecution, and here’s the “STRONG DISSENT” from the highest court in the land:
Roberts’ 12-page dissent, joined by Justices Scalia, Kennedy and Sotomayor, strongly argues for the issue to be revisited.
“The terrifying force of the criminal justice system may only be brought to bear against an individual by society as a whole, through a prosecution brought on behalf of the government,” Roberts wrote, arguing that changing that concept gives rise to “unsettling questions” about defendant rights. “Our entire criminal justice system is premised on the notion that a criminal prosecution pits the government against the governed, not one private citizen against another. The ruling below is a startling repudiation of that basic understanding.”
Here is the dissent:
Per Curiam
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested tonotify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 08–6261
v. UNITED STATES EX REL. WYKENNA WATSON ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS
[May 24, 2010]
P
ER CURIAM. The writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted.
It is so ordered.
I
In March 1999, Wykenna Watson was assaulted by her then-boyfriend, John Robertson. App. 40. Watson soughtand secured a civil protective order against Robertson, prohibiting him from approaching within 100 feet of her and from assaulting, threatening, harassing, physically abusing, or contacting her.
Id., at 20. At the same time, the United States Attorney’s Office (USAO) was independently pursuing criminal charges against Robertson arising from the assault.
This puts her case in a situation that not all women get to — some of them (us, in my case) don’t even get the police, or DA’s office to start the criminal charges. I wonder if this had been a family law case if it wouldn’t have been shunted to the local Family Law Facilitator’s Office before she knew what happened to her. Did it involve a kickout, or was it closer to what society actually recognizes as wrong — assaulting a woman in public or about her business, rather than “behind closed doors.”??? In which case it’s easier to discredit.
On June 26, Robertson violated the protective order by again violently assaulting Watson. On July 8, he was indicted for the previous March incident; shortly thereafter, the USAO offered, and Robertson accepted, a plea agreement resolving those charges. Id., at 26–30. At the top of the boilerplate plea form, the Assistant U. S. Attorney added in longhand: “In exchange for Mr. Robertson’s plea of guilty to attempt[ed] aggravated assault, the gov’t agrees to: DISMISS the [remaining] charges[,] [and] [n]ot pursue any charges concerning an incident on 6-26-99.” Id., at 28.
i.e., Are such plea forms so common, there is a “boiler plate” for them. But this Assistant U.S. Attorney went one farther and said, he’s not really a bad guy, he just was disturbed by the breakup of the relationship, and if he’ll make OUR job (if not her life) easier, we’ll let him off without the full punishment.
The Superior Court accepted Robertson’s plea and sentenced him to 1 to 3 years’ imprisonment.
That there’s a lot. Wonder what the quality of the first assault was.
Id., at 30, 46, 53. A few months later, Watson filed a motion to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against Robertson forviolating the civil protective order, based on the June 26 assault. See D. C. Code §16–1005(f) (2009 Supp.); D. C.Super. Ct. Domestic Violence Rule 12(d) (Lexis 2010); In re Robertson, 940 A. 2d 1050, 1053 (D. C. 2008). After a 2day bench trial, the court found Robertson guilty on three counts of criminal contempt and sentenced him to three consecutive 180-day terms of imprisonment, suspending execution of the last in favor of five years’ probation. The court also ordered Robertson to pay Watson roughly $10,000 in restitution. App. 2, 63–64. Robertson filed a motion to vacate the judgment, which the court denied. Id., at 1059–1060.
He said, “I don’t want to take responsibility for the assault.”
Robertson appealed. Criminal contempt prosecutions,he argued, “are between the public and the defendant,” and thus could “only be brought in the name of the relevant sovereign, . . . the United States.” Brief for Petitioner 8, 10 (quoting Brief for Appellant in No. 00–FM–1269 etc.
(D. C.), pp. 20–21, and 940 A. 2d, at 1057; internal quotation marks omitted). So viewed, the prosecution based on the June 26 incident could not be brought, because the plea agreement barred the “gov[ernment” from pursuingany charges arising from that incident.
The Court of Appeals rejected Robertson’s arguments, in a two-step holding. Step one: “the criminal contempt prosecution in this case was conducted as a private action brought in the name and interest of Ms. Watson, not as a public action brought in the name and interest of theUnited States or any other governmental entity.” 940
A. 2d, at 1057–1058 (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted). Step two: because the criminal contempt prosecution was brought as an exercise of private power,that prosecution did not implicate a plea agreement that bound only the government.
And so forth. This next paste is from the end of the dissent:
Allegorical depictions of the law frequently show a figure wielding a sword—the sword of justice, to be used to smite those who violate the criminal laws. Indeed, outside our own courthouse you will find a statue of more than 30 tons, Authority of Law, which portrays a male figure with such a sword.
{{para. added by blogger}} According to the sculptor, James Earle Fraser (who also designed the buffalo nickel), the figure sits “wait[ing] with concentrated attention, holding in his left hand the tablet of laws, backed by the sheathed sword, symbolic of enforcement through law.” Supreme Court of the United States, Office of the Curator, Contemplation of Justice and Authority of Law Information Sheet 2 (2009) (available in Clerk of Court’s case file).
A basic step in organizing a civilized society is to take that sword out of private hands and turn it over to an organized government, acting on behalf of all the people.
Indeed, “[t]he . . . power a man has in the state of nature is the power topunish the crimes committed against that law. [But this]he gives up when he joins [a] . . . political society, and incorporates into [a] commonwealth.” Locke, Second Treatise, §128, at 64.The ruling below contravenes that fundamental proposition, and should not be allowed to stand. At the very least,we should do what we decided to do when we granted certiorari, and took the unusual step of rephrasing thequestion presented: answer it.
I respectfully dissent from the Court’s belated determination not to answer that question
As to that, I refer to the Declaration of Independence…. when highest officials in a state, or country, violate its own laws (with impunity) and retaliate against those who protest, we in a different context than the actual separation of either CHURCH & STATE, or — and I have done some homework on this — “PRIVATE MONEY” and the state.
I’d have given a lot for any male figure with a weapon in his hand and the laws in the other hand. But in the past 20 years, I’ve yet to find one willing to intervene between me and the male figure I married, who at times had weapons in his hands, and I assure you, there was no consideration of the laws, or upholding them, in context. To this day, I wonder how life might’ve been different had I been “woman enough” to “man up” and fight back. But as I was pregnant and a mother at the time, I had other considerations. . .
So, I have not examined this in detail, but am posting it as recent, and relevant. I hope readership will consider it the article & the dissent, and those issues in more detail.
When it’s “blown off” as a misdemeanor, or not take seriously, the overall standard of what’s acceptable — in our country (or locality) goes downhill. It sends a message that this WILL be tolerated. It’s OK to assault your girlfriend.
I’m a woman, and I’m a mom. I had daughters, not sons. I do NOT think it’s OK to assault one’s girlfriend, or boyfriend, and I know how hard it is to breakup from a “committed” relationship, although I must say, from the start, my own was a nightmare.
I also know where support is, and isn’t (mostly isn’t) in these matters. DOn’t ask your pastor to stick up for you, or priest, in most cases. Maybe on a short-term, but when it gets stuck in the courts? Who’s going to help then?
(dates to 1987, but old doctrines — especially Calvinist — die hard….)
///
Sexual and Family Violence: A Growing Issue for the Churches
by Lois Gehr Livezey
Dr. Livezey is assistant professor of Christian social ethics at Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton, New Jersey. This article appeared in the Christian Century, October 28, 1987, p. 938. Copyright by the Christian Century Foundation and used by permission. Current articles and subscription information can be found at
www.christiancentury.org. This material was prepared for Religion Online by Ted & Winnie Brock
. . .
John Calvin wrote the following words to a battered woman seeking his counsel:
We have a special sympathy for poor women who are evilly and roughly treated by their husbands, because of the roughness and cruelty of the tyranny and captivity which is their lot. We do not find ourselves permitted by the Word of God, however, to advise a woman to leave her husband, except by force of necessity; and we do not understand this force to be operative when a husband behaves roughly and uses threats to his wife, nor even when he beats her, but when there is imminent peril to her life . . . [W]e . . . exhort her to bear with patience the cross which God has seen fit to place upon her; and meanwhile not to deviate from the duty which she has before God to please her husband, but to be faithful whatever happens [“Letter From Calvin to an Unknown Woman,” June 4, 1559, Calvini Opera, XVII, col. 539, in P. E. Hughes, editor, The Register of the Company of Pastors of Geneva in the Time of Calvin (Eerdmans, 1966) , pp. 344-345].
{{Let’s Get Honest comments: That’s all of this post for today, I provided the links, you do the legwork!}}
Let's Get Honest! Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History 
Social Services or Simply Serving Up Socialism?
leave a comment »
{{post began in late May…}}
I’m almost off the deep end after having made the rounds of all the potential “services” available to help with — well, what exactly WERE they supposed to help with?
I looked at yet another set of conferences (and the backgrounds of the speakers).
Consider:
FAMILY COURT SERVICES (serving up WHAT to WHOM?)….
HUMAN SERVICES
and for that matter,
SUNDAY, or SATURDAY, MORNING SERVICES.
Adding to the dissociation, neither the word “Sunday” nor “Saturday” (above) derive from the Judaeo-Christian writings, which forbade worship of the heavens (or creation) and simply numbered the days, rather than naming them, except for specified feast days. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, SABBATH.
Changing that 7th day to “Sunday” was a power play not even shrouded in history, but clearly documented — and part of our ADHD landscape today. The days of the week are named after what this tradition called “Pagan” gods, and not even consistently so. Some are named after planets, some are gods (Norse, if I have it right).
Then we name the months also — some of them after divinities (January, March) some after emperors (August) and some after numbers (like September — which means Seven — but in OUR mixed up calendar, it’s actually the 9th month). No wonder the year starts with the god with two faces, Janus.
======
BUT — back to the idea of “SERVICE”
Just who is being served? And what?
What’s on the plate, and who’s paying the piper?
The more I actually THINK about this, examine, and reflect (things low-income single mothers, let alone litigants are NOT supposed to do; they are supposed to leave the evaluation up to those hired to do so, i.e., the “evaluators” and other “experts,” few of who — as I keep saying — have experienced what we are going through (including at the hands of the courts), and not enough of them having actually even experienced giving birth and functionin as a MOTHER, and then suddenly having motherhood ripped out from underneath them…. That is not typically the job route to becoming a judge…. But, if you are a 2nd (or in the case of Ms. Nadia Lockyer, I heard, THIRD) wife, then it’s probably a different scenario. She moved up real quickly through the ranks, having a child the same year she married, and within 4 years (who’s raising HER child?) becoming head of the Alameda County Family Justice Center — something she surely knows a lot about, having actually raised a family (??? ??? ????)
There is a slippery road of Slipshod language sliding downhill FAST to what I basically call SLAVERY.
14 steps to slavery listed
in the back of the NDCC book. “NDCC” stands for “None Dare Call It Conspiracy.”
One dare not call a conspiracy a conspiracy because of the namecalling, slander, shunning campaign likely to follow.
Why can’t one use the word “conspiracy” if one exists, or is thought to exist? We have a Department of Homeland Security whose very job is to STOP “conspiracies” to overthrow it.
Suppose people notice a conspiracy to overthrow civil rights, or a particular group of people, which shows indicators of heading towards a partial genocide by (name your profile) — we are NOT supposed to talk about it? Will that DHS come after us if we do?
I’m going to talk about it, because I know what I have personally experienced, I know my experience is NOT unique, and I’ve been around enough to know which topics are censored (never brought up) by which types of conferences, even when the conference APPEARS to have (on the face of it) diversity of viewpoints represented.
The diversity is superficial, as in the case of the VAWA groups collaborating with the Fatherhood Groups (1994 VAWA and 1994 NFI are clear enough indicators) and NONE Of them are really talking about the Fatherhood movement actually being a religion [these adherents are so upset with feminists because feminism challenges the male-dominated Judaeo-Christian religion], about misappropriations of federal grants, nor are they talking about government sanctioned child-trafficking, which is just about what’s taking place these days.
[[I’ll paste top of that link at the bottom of this post…]]
Here are 14 indicators, per Gary Allen, (link below) and he wrote this in 1970. He claimed that several were already in effect at the time:
I SHUDDER as I realize how many of the above are taking place through the family law system, and have become accepted, and commonplace, by society {A few bracketed above in italics are mine, not Mr. Allen’s}. I was deeply affected by the one regarding education when private education is possible. It’s easier to make orders like this to divorcing or separated parents (given the threat of removing custody to the other parent if compliance is not quick) than a united pair. I most definitely had fewer rights separated than married, and remember, my marriage standard was the religious version of domestic violence.
Here’s where it goes when the Religious Police hold sway, or could go. THis time, a man was caught, but typically it leans hard on women:
http://www.google.com/search?q=90+lashes+kissing+in+public+&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1
Is this where we want to head?
We DO realize, right? that psychology & psychiatry is basically a religion substitute, and shares many of the same qualities, stating norms and deviance from them as mental illness sometimes requiring medication …..
And Wade Horn and other religious folk are fundamental architects of many HHS programs.
We’d better face these issues nationally!
We’re on it, and far down this road. I can’t take on the nonprofits and the foundations behind them without reliable housing, food, and transportation, let alone identifiable FUTURE. At this point, I can’t even write a well-reviewed post.
But one thing I CAN do is walk into a room, or a venue, and pick up on the linguistic ambience. This comes perhaps from my former profession (teaching, musicianship) in combination with the years of living with a spouse who was overt about controlling everything.
You want to “explicate” domestic violence? I have it in a simple motto, and no conferences need be run on the finer points of it: It’s slavery.
It’s this attitude:
Read the “14 steps to slavery” in the back of this book. We’re in it. And while reading, ignore any onlookers who start the namecalling — you’re a Tea Party member, you’re a fundie, you’re paranoid.
NO, I’m awake. Grrrrowllll
[PDF]
NONE DARE CALL IT CONSPIRACY
at their disposal to fire the barrages at None Dare Call It Conspiracy. …… This book: None Dare Call It Conspiracy. In writing this book we have tried …
The Great Income Tax Hoax
Welcome to the Net-based copy of 16 chapters of Irwin Schiff’s masterpiece on the US “Income Tax”! Laws are the whitewash that governments use to disguise the ugly fact that they steal money from productive people, then use it to control how they live their lives.
Being merely one-sided contracts, [tax, presumably] laws have no moral validity whatsoever; but eight generations of government schooling have conned Americans into supposing that they are magic, to be held in respect and awe.
Accordingly, if there is a tax law, most people tend to obey it. In this masterpiece, perhaps the most important book he ever wrote, Irwin Schiff shows that there is no such thing; how even that veneer of respectability falls off the “income tax” when its origins are systematically probed
==============
SANDIEGOCHILDTRAFFICKING:
(The sites spelling and formatting is a LITTLE better than mine…)
Here are some of the links at the top of the page. The average person does not have the time or stomach to process all of this:
Child Trafficking
Son says Hennepin County ignored his claims of hidden camera in home
He says he reported it in 2007; father indicted in May on child-porn charges
dhanners@pioneerpress.com
Updated: 06/12/2010 09:40:16 PM CDT
SHARE THIS POST on...
Written by Let's Get Honest|She Looks It Up
June 11, 2010 at 4:56 PM
Posted in After HE Speaks Up - Reporting Child Sexual Abuse, Cast, Script, Characters, Scenery, Stage Directions, Designer Families, Split Personality Court Orders, Where's Mom?
Tagged with 14 Steps to Slavery, CPS, custody, Declaration of Independence/Bill of Rights, Due process, family law, fatherhood, foster father child porn arrest, Hennepin County MN, hidden camera in foster care family bathroom, None Dare Call It Conspiracy, obfuscation, Our ADHD calendar, Pierre Larsen case, runaways, San Diego Child Trafficking, social commentary, Who's serving Whom WHAT?, women's rights