Another domestic violence shelter acknowledges that DV occurs to both genders. If you are in the Lansing, Michigan area, there is help available in the 517 area code. If you need non-residential services, End Violent Encounters (EVE) provides various services. Below is their letter to the editor that was published in the Lansing Journal.

Help's available

The Michigan Uniform Crime Report indicates 14,936 males were victims of domestic violence in 2005. EVE, Inc. (End Violent Encounters) provides crisis line support (372-5572), counseling, advocacy, and personal protection order assistance to male victims of domestic violence.

Due to the physical space of our shelter, we cannot offer shelter services to men.

However, male victims of domestic violence can receive support through EVE, Inc.'s non-residential program and we will work with male victims to find a safe place to stay.

Males accounted for 4 percent of individuals seeking EVE's non-residential services and crisis hot line support during 2006-07. For more information about EVE, Inc.'s services for victims, please call 372-5572.

Jillian Pastoor
Lansing

We are kicking off our event today titled FIRE JUDGE DWYER! I left voicemails for all of the clerks, letting them know first that I have a $1000.00 reward for whistleblowers and secondly that we are kicking off our FIRE JUDGE DWYER event beginning today. I am sure that it was pleasant for them to know because I do not think they all like their boss too much. Click the images below to print and help. We are passing them out everywhere and have thousands to finish off today! Help US Help YOU stop FAMILY COURT FROM KILLING YOUR FAMILIES!

For those of you unfamiliar with the issues, the Family Court in Frederick Maryland has been causing a noticeable amount of death in the past 6 months. Suicides, Homicides, Thanksgiving Massacres, and Arson with the common factor of the Frederick County Family Court System. Couple that with unethical judges that use their positions for political gain and favors and we have a recipe for corruption, uneven application of the law, and a sledgehammer tool they used under CRIMINAL CONTEMPT OF COURT. (common law remedies) Since the Legislature has not restricted the circuit court system in this community, we have a situation that if you happen to be charged with criminal contempt of court, even if you have not been prior charged with civil contempt of court successfully, you could find yourself with an upward sentence of TWENTY (20) or more years. Make no mistake that these courts have done very ridiculous things to people that have led to increase suicides, increased homicides, and increased arson. Don't let family court kill your family too!

A friend of mine and fellow advocate for equal parenting that has been denied competent counsel, pretrial access to witnesses, and pretrial evidence for his defense is currently being held in Frederick Maryland. He was a former volunteer of the Minute Men Project that has taken tough stances against Illegal Immigrants and has been instrumental in raising awareness of equal rights issues regarding the family and children. He has not seen his child, Paul Jr., in a significant amount of time. More details about this man and his personal case will follow, pending an upcoming trial that has been rescheduled for December 3, 2007 (Monday) at 9:00am. I hope to see you all there, because I will have many people there with me in support of Deborah Courtney, Paul, and to keep an eye on a heavy-handed long-arm and bullish court system that just doesn't care about children, families, or parents.

At the center of all of this is Judge Dwyer, who needs to be removed from the Bench.

Download a copy of these two flyers and send a copy to him at CIRCUIT
COURT FOR FREDERICK COUNTY, ATTENTION JUDGE G. Edward Dwyer, Jr. His address at work is 100 West Patrick Street, Frederick Maryland 21701.

Be sure to listen to last night's GET OFF THE BENCH radio show at http://www.getyourjusticelive.com as well as some of the hearings as they have become available. Some people have been successful at getting me recordings of the events which will be posted accordingly.

There is no question in my mind that 9 out of 10 fathers would have changed their minds with the choices that they made
if they would have known ahead of time what the outcome would have been with procreating.

Which one would you choose if you knew in advance?

THIS ONE? The Gold Digger.


OR

THIS ONE? The Equal Parent.

YOU BE THE JUDGE!

I think the world already knows your answer and so do the people that should be wearing these things. Because the people know the difference between right and wrong they try to hide who they really are until they can secure a child support order against an unwitting parent. Those that use their children as a source of income instead of raising their child with a balanced diet of a mother and a father should beashamed and required to be marked with the newest line in apparel like that above.

Let me know if you are interested in helping to make a skit like Saturday Night Live to promote equal parenting. Yes Yes, I know, to some this may be offensive but we have to change our marketing methods if we want to gain mainstream attention. If you would like to send a couple of pairs of these to your local child support enforcement office send me the location and who you would like me to send them attentioned to. This will be completely anonymous on your behalf.

State worker accused of taking child support money

The SeattlePI.Com website on November 16, 2007 reported yet another state worker taking child support money from children and families.

OLYMPIA, Wash. -- A state employee in Olympia who handled child support payments has been accused of taking $24,000 and spending the money at casinos.

As more audits begin to be conducted on the many unaccountable child support agencies across the nation, there is a high probability that more and more fraud will likely be exposed just like the above story. The child support programs across the nation are currently charged with handling billions of dollars on behalf of parents and families with very little accountable oversight. 

KTAR.COM (November 14th, 2007) recently ran an interesting report entitled Audit: Child Support Enforcement Needs Improvement but so does the reporting provided by KTAR.COM. Let's start with basic investigative reporting before just releasing a five paragraph report that is fairly vague with little to no follow-up. I posted follow-up comments regarding two key areas the article didn't touch on, with the first being undistributed collections and the second being who are actually benefiting from the program. The KTAR.COM after several days didn't approve the comments of anyone that was posting to their website.

Not only is there "room for improvements" in the Arizona child support program, but there is definitely room in KTAR.COM's reporting style so they just don't fall prey to serving a well-oiled government propaganda machine.

"The Auditor General's Office conducted a special review of the state Department of Economic Security's program to collect child support payments." Essentially the auditor general, according to the above article, states that there are room for improvements, suggested that the state track how long it takes to process court orders, there is no efficient way to determine how many payments are being misdirected.

My major problem with the lack of reporting is that the auditor general, according to this article, doesn't account for the $17,945,269.00 in 2005, leading to about $11,388,064 dollars being absorbed into the general fund as a result of their failure to distribute. This is actually a reward for poor performance. In 2006, $11,112,336 was the net undistributed collections with at least $5,318,124.00 qualifying so far for absorption into their budget. The State of Arizona doesn't explain why the children have not received these millions of dollars and why the State of Arizona is allowed to transfer undistributed collections to their own budget instead of back to the paying parents.

Furthermore, the report does not talk about the massive number of NEVER ASSISTANCE or FORMER ASSISTANCE members that are receiving child support services opposed to the very small number of actual needy families that receive the child support collection benefit on taxpayer dime. The number of participants that should not be receiving services are also climbing at a higher rate than those of people that are actually receiving the benefits as a result of being engaged in other forms of government assistance.

In 2006, only $11,834,544 was collected for actual needy families which almost equals the amount that was actually undistributed by the State of Arizona!!! This is a very telling story showing how ineffective the child support program actually is. Interestingly, about 7 times the amount of support collected for needy families number was collected by the government, $97,456,711, which is an 8.1% gain over 2005, for families that receive no government assistance at all. Another $173,422,153.00, a 7.1% gain over 2005, was collected for families that are not on current assistance programs, but may have been in the past. As you can tell the program does not serve needy families at all when you demonstate the money being retained by the state.

There is definitely a need for further audits by the Auditor General in Arizona to explain why the program was not fully investigated and certainly questions directed to the staff at KTAR.COM on why they are assisting in suppressing the truth about the ineffective program. Rest assured your comments will not be suppressed at this website.

An accurate representation of someone's pockets when they enter the anti-family court system. Be sure to log on to http://www.getyourjusticelive.com.

If our fine state is willing to send a parent that is behind but is currently paying to jail, who benefits?

What about the custodial parents who become
accustomed to receiving weekly payments that now stop while we -- the
public -- become responsible through public assistance?

Does
the public that is now paying to house the "deadbeat parent" in jail
benefit? At a minimum of $30 a day, which I'm sure is conservative, it
will cost us $10,800 to house one person a year. If a person is two
years at $20,000 and given a two-year sentence, they are now $40,000
behind and the public has paid almost $22,000 to house them in jail.

Do
the children that have lost a parent for that two years and get to say,
"My dad can't take me to Cub Scouts because he's in jail," benefit?

Do employers who lose employees because they are now in jail benefit?