The Press Needs to Ask the Question

The general public remains unaware media is as out-of-touch with the reality of "Family" Court as Family Court is out-of-control. But the public would benefit from coverage reminding them the business of government is Business.

Conversely, it may be media is just a reflection of a society that doesn't value children. I'm not really sure how else to explain why media doesn't cover the one court most used by the public for the longest period of time.

The bad news is the abject failure of media to cover Divorce Court (only government would think to term the court that shreds families of their members and financial resources as "Family Court" is the topic of my speech at an upcoming conference of the American College of Trial Lawyers this summer.

We've become brainwashed as to word usage. It's not "domestic violence." It's assault, attempted murder, or murder.
www.FamilyLawCourts.com/domestic.html - dead spouses
(Also not reported? Domestic violence is profitable. See below.)

Again, please consider word usage. It's not child "abuse." It's assault, battery, attempted murder, and murder.
www.FamilyLawCourts.com/kids.html - dead kids listed alphabetically by state.

However, Family Court judges don't like children to testify. (It interrupts the money flow to advocates - and might negatively impact future budgets).

So judges ignore the U.S. Supreme Court case of Crawford vs. Washington altogether.

(The short version being, since government subsidizes, not solves problems, whenever you hear "domestic violence" look around. There's a non-profit somewhere looking for a gig.)

More Media Misses? Please consider these four, big ones.

1. The public isn't aware in California, the Association of Marriage and Family Therapists hired lobbyists to introduce legislation Mandating six hours of "educational" counseling in any divorce involving children; or the divorce Cannot proceed. That's right. Therapists could stop the divorce process until paid. Folks, it's a national organization and is coming to a state near you.

2. Most State Bar organizations are circumventing the criminal justice system. These organizations are fully aware of individuals practicing law without a license, having suspended or disbarred them from the practice of law. However, no State Bar routes these former attorneys turned criminals to local DA's. Lais was but a blip on the radar.
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/columns/article_939203.php
and one hilarious column on the guy's behavior, attorneys wouldn't believe had not the reporter documented it.
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/columns/article_682538.php

3. Supervised Visitation.
No oversight, no education, fined by the state for practicing therapy without a license. Paying restitution to the County for misusing funds...but no matter; judges like you so continue ordering people to your facility, Hannah's House. (Monitors need only a "domestic violence" class and clean driver's license. Then it's come on down!)

Consider how media covered another tragic, but spectacular case of the father murdering his daughter and killing himself. Dad takes daughter in his airplane, calls ex-wife and tells her she'll never see their daughter again. (Child heard screaming in the background, "Mommy come get me!")

Father flys plane into his ex mother-in-law's house. Kills both.

I detailed the problems with coverage on the story as nicely as possible. The reporter's response outlined the problem. The good news was my response was a breakthrough for him, and why I'm sharing it with you, below.

Reporter:

"Thanks for the input. Certainly you realize this was a reported story, not an opinion column.
I interviewed a therapist, a judge and two attorneys.
What you read are their thoughts, not mine.
Thanks
XXXXX"

****
Dear XXXXX,

Yes, you interviewed attorneys, therapists and judges. That's exactly the problem with the coverage.
Reporters are interviewing the very people who are largely responsible for the problems, not the solution.

For an example, if your story was about employers harassing employees, you would have interviewed the head of the union, attorneys on both sides of the case, and of course, witnesses.

But Family court litigants have no union. Many have no attorney. Witnesses? Litigants witness the destruction of family life as they know it as judges make orders emptying their lives of their children, and financial resources. Often these parents have no union or attorney to protect them.

In other words, they can't sue the company.

4. No coverage means the public is completely Unaware "Family" Court is the One court where a parent can legally lose all parental contact with their children, and by that I mean, no calls, no writing no visits, Nothing; based on a "hunch" by a judge.

That's right, no evidence required. So who should be surprised when parents flip out?

A parent doesn't even need to be charged with a crime. All it takes is a judge having a "feeling" and Presto. No constitutional rights for that parent.

It's about parental alienation, it's rampant and rarely talked about. Well, at least until Andrew Giuliani spoke up.

The problem being Reporters conducting the rare interview concerning family court; interview those perpetuating the problem. And the public remains uninformed that the business of government is Business. Judges function like sales reps for all comers, in a no-bid Halliburton kind of way.

It gets worse. Consider this case which could be titled, "Law? What law?"

"Mitchell vs. McBride 944F.2D 229 "A judge will not be deprived of immunity
because the action he took was in error, was done maliciously, or was in
excess of his authority; rather he will be subject to liability only when he
has acted in the clear absence of all jurisdiction.' The rule of judicial
immunity applies even where the judge is accused of acting maliciously or
corruptly.Sariello vs. Campbell 860 F. Supp. 54""

When California, Marin County Grand Jury voted to investigate Family Court Judges - the DA rushed in saying the Grand Jury over stepped their role. That sparked a recall election which the Marin IJ, the biggest local paper completely torpedoed. (The Coastal Post did not) http://www.coastalpost.com/01/5/07.htm.

However, the FBI decided to investigate. People they talked with reported they were asked to keep quiet. The result? Nothing.

In the Pellicano case; Dennis Wasser, the original lawyer who suggested Pellicano go after Steve Kolodny (the most ethical and brilliant divorce attorney in the nation, Period) probably because he couldn't win legitimately against Kolodny, who was representing Lisa Bonner against her ex, billionaire Kirk Kerkorian. The FBI asked Kolodny not to talk to the press and he agreed. The result? Nothing. Wasser skips along.

But as mentioned earlier with the upcoming presidential elections, the chickens Are coming home to roost.

When the FBI rolled out their goofy "CALL 877-NO BRIBE" public relations program, I called and identified it as that, mentioning local judicial corruption has been allowed to thrive since I first reported it in 2003. An agent called and invited me to their office. Again. I declined. So they're coming to my office and I'll again provide more evidence of public corruption.

(And yes, I do consider it a stroke of good luck the report on the FBI misusing the Patriot Act came out when it did.)

Our government is broken. It's up to the people to fix it. Not legislators. Not Congress. Us. Good news. At least in the area of judges, we can.

Attorneys and the public created reports on judges (bypassing State Commissions which seem to protect bad judges) at www.USAjudges.com

One attorney sent a video of a judge so shocking, that we helped them un-elect a judge who had been on the bench for eight years. He is now free to return to practicing law in the private sector. Kinda gives the meaning of "benched" a whole 'nother perspective. :)

Just as Rudy Guiliani will be wasting a lot of money before his fatal campaign flaw is realized, not to be snarky, but I wasn't surprised media missed it, since media doesn't cover the one court most used by the public and for the longest period of time. . .how could they?

So when Andrew Guiliani spoke out against his father, only the program director at WOR who interviewed me last Friday on parental alienation, grasped that Rudy's alienated Two sets of voters. Ex-wives and now grown young men and women: aka: new voters....themselves a product of parental alienation.

(He later told me the phones rang off the hook. Receptionists answering the phones for magazines say the same thing.)

WOR was also the first to open the reality door on parental alienation, and in a fairly spectacular miss - that police benefited budgetwise, from domestic violence...while the non-profits have made it a profitable career choice. Yes. Profitable.

Not widely reported? That these court sanctioned non-profit Anger management programs don't work. Except of course for the people collecting grants and program fees.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/10/13/MNGPF8VQE160.DTL

Neither does Media report the police benefit from "domestic violence" equipment wise, via the money chute known as "Family Justice Centers."

The President's Family Justice Center- and the Office On Violence Against Women, funnels grants applications from the police for bullet-proof vests, rather than for programs benefiting women.) Some of these centers are at the bottom of this page.
http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/pfjci.htm

To see the grants for bullet-proof vests, click here: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/fy2004grants/

Notice the victims, usually women, receive almost nothing.

However, thanks to our Supreme Court, and the DOJ's Office on Violence Against Women - police officers are now safer and better equipped to answer the calls of their choosing wearing bullet-proof vests.

Women calling for help? They remain largely unaware per U.S. Supreme Court decision in Castle Rock vs. Gonzales, the police aren't legally Required to respond to restraining or protection order enforcement. (Gonzales is now suing the U.S.).

The first Family Justice Center was created in Eron-by-the-Sea, San Diego, by former city attorney, Casey Gwinn. He operates it as a private non-profit. Except that these centers are due process violating, quasi governmental agencies. Gwinn says he expects to make 250k a year. Hasn't filed taxes in a couple of years.

Ergo, Family Justice Centers function to collect grants; but are not a howling success in reducing the number of family crimes.
http://www.10news.com/news/3771446/detail.html

On another subject also not widely reported, rethinking calling the police seems like a good idea in the first place. Don't do it, unless there is a witness present. Below example demonstrates why.
http://www.purpleberets.org/macias_instead.html

Also see, www.FamilyLawCourts.com/badcop.html or and the most scary site of all, www.badcopnews.com