A recent post from a blogger friend of mine focuses — as we are taught to do– on the PSYCHOPATH/SOCIOPATH characters of litigants.

As with “Whacko in Wisconsin” post (subtitle  “No, I’m NOT talking about the litigants…) I propose that it’s less

“The Tactics and Ploys of Psychopath Aggressors in the Family Law System“

as written by a reputable “Independent Advocate for Children and Families,” Dr. Charles Pragnell.

than.

The Tactics and Ploys of THE Psychopath Aggressors OF the Family Law System (including those who designed it!)

as proposed by me, an Independent “Devil’s Advocate” for my fellow-blogger, above, and practically anyone selling “solutions” for the crises (plural) in the courts which have any mental-health, jurisprudo-therapeutic-jargon-DSM-centric psycholinguistic talk

ANokYWHERE ON ANY PROPOSED ANALYSIS.

WHILE TRUE THAT THERE ARE PROBABLY PLENTY OF PSYCHOPATHS AND SOCIOPATHS WHO LOVE TO DOMINATE OTHERS WITH IMMUNITY — AND ARE SMART ENOUGH TO SET UP AND RUN SYSTEMS TO LEGALIZE THIS ACTIVITY — I HAVE A DIFFERENT ANALSYSIS.

This paradigm is closer to the rock-bottom truth (and will offend almost anyone I’ve been dealing with in these matters in past years), and is not a jest.

• The analogy of Family Law System as a Giant Squid, while it did ring true for me, and seem a valid paradigm, was obviously my joke, to relieve the pressure (by mocking the danged thing).
• The Alice in Wonderland analogy (shared — or was it co-opted?) by others is also truthful — normal English words (for example, “Child Support Enforcement!”) take on new and strange applications.  So yeah, for those who know Lewis Carroll’s book (or, an imitation — a recent movie about it) — that might ring true.
• RICO analogy is no joke.  It’s in earnest, and I think in its rock-bottom quality, that’s what the family law system IS.  One has to look at the interrelationship of parts — not just the ones at the front and public storefront segments of this system.

I do believe this one is closest to its heirarchical structure, extent, and purpose.

SO, today, below, I post link to an explanation of RICO by Mr. Grell — whose qualifications are stunning to explain this concept:  Georgetown University School of Law, magna cum laude, 1990, Assistant Attorney General ,Minnesota (2008-2010), plenty of court practices, he teaches or has taught it as at Univ. of MN, but most telling to me — he has been prosecuting and defending RICO cases quite a bit, and teaching on it as well.  Some say “those who can, do, but those who can’t -teach.”  It obviously doesn’t apply, here.   So check it out…

WHY STUDY RICO TERMINOLOGY?

— the terms are a primer of understanding the interrelationships between the court entitites, the involvement of the US Federal Government’s grants to states, and the BEHIND CLOSED DOORS DEALS made to dupe and extort parents (and taxpayers) in so many matters.

WHY AM I POSTING IT NOW?

Well, I have already begun reporting on these things, and once one begins to “squeal” the best thing is to probably keeping on reporting — and in public — for self-protection, if nothing else.  If people have questions about this “take” on the courts — I think the analysis holds, and without the emotion-based, cognitive-activity-curtailing rhetoric of PAS / anti-PAS (true or false, it’s the heartbeat of the courts, in the bottom line) or gender talk.

What gender, again, is money?

RICO — Check it out!

(if the shoe fits, wear it…)

COURT PRIMER 101:  RICO

“When it was passed in 1970, the RICO act was intended to eliminate the influence of the Mafia in the nation’s economy.”

RICOACT.com LLC JEff GRELL

In 1970, Congress passed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1961-1968. At the time, Congress’ goal was to eliminate the ill-affects of organized crime on the nation’s economy. To put it bluntly, RICO was intended to destroy the Mafia.

Throughout the 1970’s, RICO’s intended purpose and its actual use ran parallel to each other. Seldom was RICO used outside of the context of the Mafia, and it is not an overstatement to say that civil claims under RICO were simply not brought.

In the 1980’s, however, civil lawyers noticed section 1964(c) of the RICO Act, which allows civil claims to be brought by any person injured in their business or property by reason of a RICO violation. Any person who succeeded in establishing a civil RICO claim would automatically receive judgment in the amount of three times their actual damages and would be awarded their costs and attorneys’ fees. The financial windfall available under RICO inspired the creativity of lawyers across the nation, and by the late 1980’s, RICO was a (if not the most) commonly asserted claim in federal court. Everyone was trying to depict civil claims, such as common law fraud, product defect, and breach of contract as criminal wrongdoing, which would in turn enable the filing of a civil RICO action.

RICO’s broad application was the result of Congress’ inclusion of mail and wire fraud as two crimes upon which a RICO claim could be brought. Given the breadth of activities that had historically been criminally prosecuted under the mail and wire fraud statutes, it was not difficult for creative civil attorneys to depict practically any wrongdoing as mail or wire fraud.

During the 1990’s, the federal courts, guided by the United States Supreme Court, engaged in a concerted effort to limit the scope of RICO in the civil context. As a result of this effort, civil litigants must jump many hurdles and avoid many pitfalls before they can expect the financial windfall available under RICO, and RICO has become one of the most complicated and unpredictable areas of the law.

Today, RICO is almost never applied to the Mafia. Instead, it is applied to individuals, businesses, political protest groups, and terrorist organizations. In short, a RICO claim can arise in almost any context.

The purpose of this website is to simplify this very complicated area of the law and to articulate and make more predictable the legal standards that govern such claims.

My “Disclosure” — I have no business relationship or in fact, any relationship, with Mr. Grell and have never met or spoke with him.  I search the internet for things that make sense of the family law experience and which I believe will help others.  I just posted the intro text on this site’s home page and exhort — encourage –admonish — highly recommend– suggest — and (no, I do not beg) — that readres who are “baffled” by the courts issue, start to “get” that this is the best parallel of how it works around.

Mr. Grell appears to be an expert in this (check bio / CV) and teaches the concepts well, including glossary, and what the terms mean.

JUST FOR A LITTLE REMINDER:

In Pennsylvania’s Kids for Cash scheme, there were RICO elements, as I recall.

In a much older case from Chicago area, involving a woman (who was murdered, and her body driven into a canal, and the investigation covered up by multiple parties — who later got caught) — the Dianne Masters Case, at least three individuals were prosecuted under RICO.

I have blogged both these.

Attributes of such racketeering activity seem to include fraud, bribes, extortion, and money-laundering (front groups).  I am basically proposing that it seems this is the essence of some operations currently central to the court systems.  People talking about “reform the courts” and “train the judges” either are pretty gullible — or in on this, given the information that’s already out there.

THinking about it, if The Mafia was an extended family, who are the ‘FAMILY” members in FAMILY LAW and why are accusations of child-trafficking, sex abuse ignored, and why such a HUGE proliferation of profitable industries springing up around this system, when an existing set of laws says, anyone with a custody dispute comes under the court’s jurisdiction?

You need to know.  This was my first “hint” and more to come.

THINGS OF NATURE:  The closer you look, the more amazing power and beauty, and detail you see — it’s healing, awesome, and refreshing to look out, or be in.  Even when nature does a Earthquake/Tsunami an “Act of God” (so-called) destruction and population wipe-out.  People sit atop some powerful forces.  But inbetween earthquakes, it’s serene, exciting, sustaining, and in general, does something GOOD for the human psyche (as well as providing food).

THINGS of THIS NATURE:  The closer you look, the more disgusted, shocked, incredulous, and concerned (if not downright traumatized) one becomes, particularly if a close friend is involved, or in its grips.  It becomes hard to continue to find hope to persist — but a transfixed horror with the actual state of affairs.  It’s mesmerizing, soul-stopping, and then the after-response is often renewed righteous indignation and commitment to change it.

(That is, unless one is involved and sustained by the system, in which case the sentiment might be — what are those nutty parents complaining about ?  We are helping, rescuing, saving them from themselves!  We are child-rescuers…. Societal cleansers, “Therapeutic Jurists,” etc…)

[[yeah?  well the word Iatrogenic comes to mind also…  The cure is worse than the {alleged} sickness….]]

In short they are opposites.  The psyche’s response to the system, or examining it, is a huge clue as to what the source is.

So read up on RICO, and understand that the “psychology” is the rhetoric (and/or describing the EFFECTS) of the system.

NOTE:  One reason I post this now — after two weeks on and around the SFWEEKLY article (last post or so), I’m in a bit of shellshock (when not amused, or participating) at how tough a sell it is that the organization of the courts actually has an organization — beyond feuding viewpoints and people.  It’s as if most people simply cannot and will not move beyond their emotion (generally anger) and into reason/research other than research used to justify the anger, and then hurled into the “ranks” of the opposing gender.  It gets tiring.

The model is RICO — not “Psycho.”    READ THAT SITE!