Home » 2013 » October

Monthly Archives: October 2013

RSS News From Weightier Matter Family Court Litigant Resources

Family Court–Where Ignorance of the Law Is an Excuse? CCFC Responds to San Diego Family Court’s Lawyers Matthew L. Green and James B. Gilpin of Best, Best & Krieger

Family Court--Where Ignorance of the Law Is an Excuse?

CCFC Responds to Family Court Judges Who Proclaim Ignorance of the Law. Maybe that explains a lot…

Family Court—Where Ignorance of the Law is an Excuse?

Our experience with Family Court judges has been universally bizarre—irrational rulings, ignoring evidence, tolerating perjury, and a chaotic standard of practice by divorce lawyers known to be unethical.  It’s led many of us to believe Family Court judges are crooked, swayed by bribery, favoritism, or simple malice.

But in CCFC’s RICO lawsuit, we’ve encountered a new phenomenon that’s surprising given that the the people we’re suing are judges:

Ignorance of the law.

That’s right—Family Court Judges, ignorant of the laws that apply to them and their colleagues.

Surprised?  Maybe not, but we were, especially given that we’ve sued eleven of them.  You’d think they could together figure out even a complex civil rights/RICO lawsuit given that they deal with constitutional rights on a daily basis, and each of them come from criminal backgrounds where complicated criminal conspiracies are ordinary.  But in our recent lawsuit the judges have together filed a motion to dismiss, claiming CCFC’s Complaint is “unintelligible” and “exhausting.”  They’ve gone so far as to describe our Complaint as a “bucket of mud.”   Not only are they confused, they’re angry!

They’re so angry they’re also requesting sanctions, asserting that the Complaint was filed in bad faith, without any basis in fact or law.

We were puzzled.  Our Complaint is certainly complex—it sets out 34 Counts of criminal and civil allegations against eleven judges, family court evaluators, divorce attorneys, the San Diego County Bar Association, and the National Family Justice Center Alliance among others.  But as we looked closer, we discovered the problem—the judges simply don’t understand the law.  They’ve asked for the District Court to dismiss the action using the wrong rule of civil procedure.  They claim the Complaint doesn’t plead affirmative defenses—defenses that they, as defendants, must plead and prove.  They’ve claimed that the complaint doesn’t explain how their racketeering operation works, when their own books, articles, and even a former lawsuit against them explains their operations in (what must be for them) agonizing detail.

It took us time to grasp this fact, but it’s now quite clear:

The judges simply don’t understand that what they’re doing is illegal.

Our October 28, 2013 letter sets for the explanation in terms that are simple enough for even–well–Family Court judges to understand.  Two days later Family Court judges immediately declined our offer to resolve the matter informally–clearly without taking even a moment to digest our lengthy disclosure in the letter.  CCFC has been forced to file an emergency motion and exhibits to request that the Court permit expanded briefing on this critical issue.

CCFC’s letter sets out arguments that judicial immunity doesn’t apply in this case to the illegal acts of judges and the court in its interaction with family court forensic psychologists.  There is no immunity to criminal charges–even for judges.  You may be surprised if you’ve thought, or were told, that judges are always immune, or that regular civil procedure “doesn’t apply” in family court.  We show why that’s wrong.

CCFC has also served notice of its own intent to file it’s own motion for sanctions, seeking compensation for the time expended in responding to Defendants’ unnecessary, wasteful, motion.

Stay tuned–we’re headed for a showdown at hearing in U.S. District Court in San Diego on November 22, 2013.  Both Family Court Judges and CCFC are requesting to throw out the other’s pleadings, and sanctions for the efforts.  It’s high stakes for parents, children, and Family Court judges.  We’ll soon learn more about whether judges truly are as ignorant as they claim–and act–as our lawsuit moves forward.

Family Court Judges—Ignorant of the Law.  Is it an excuse for them?

 

**UPDATE: NOVEMBER 22, 2013 HEARING HAS BEEN CONTINUED BY THE COURT TO DECEMBER 19, 2013. SEE OUR EVENT CALENDAR FOR DETAILS. YOU’RE WELCOME AND ENCOURAGED TO ATTEND!

Visit our Facebook Page at https://www.facebook.com/CCFCONLINE

The Soft Eugenics of Dark Hearts and Low Minds: Highly Educated, Wealthy Family Court Elites of the Domestic Distpute Industry Criminal Enterprise: Shaping a Future Safe-for Their Crime

10-17-2013 10-37-03 AM

Feminine Justice: Cease and Desist Letter to Former Family Division Head Lorna Alksne

CCFC’s recently filed federal RICO lawsuit

details allegations of a racketeering crime ring harming parents and children throughout California.  The perpetrators?  Not pin-stripped gangsters, ponzi backroom scams, or heady leathered street thugs, but a gang of thugs nonetheless.  Prominent members of our own communities;  Lawyers, psychologists, and even our own judiciary.  The letters below, based on the Alksne template, detail the bigotry, fraud, discrimination, and rampant lawlessness occurring under the noses of San Diego Superior Court judges.  CCFC has called the criminal behavior to their attention, to the attention of the District Attorney and the United States Attorney for this federal district. None have responded, leading CCFC to file a civil rights lawsuit in US District Court for the Southern District of California.  CCFC’s August 21, 2013 press release details further allegations  here.

CCFC Alksne (the model for all letters below)

CCFC Wertheimer

10-17-2013 10-58-13 AM

“Family Man”: San Diego Family Division Judge Michael Groch–a Gay Single Male Angering San Diego Families

CCFC Lewis

CCFC Walsh

CCFC Trentacosta

CCFC Hallahan

CCFC Danielson

CCFC Hallahan

CCFC Filner

CCFC Goldsmith

Its All About the Kids

Oddly, Family Court is set aside for the “sensitive issues” it handles; parent-child relationships, careers, often sanity, and sometimes even lives.  Those assigned to the court are expected to execute a special level of care, compassion, and concern.  For that reason women are disproportionately represented, under the impression that they are “kinder” and “gentler.”  The court has at least one gay male–perhaps for the same bizarre rationalization.

But their performance is anything but kind–parents are regularly subjected to a highly invasive judicial microscope of “soft eugenics”–Judges probing to reward or punish the existence or absence of arbitrary parental behaviors and personalities a given judge likes or dislikes–virtually all of which have nothing to do with even the lowest test of “legitimate state interests.”  A parent is wealthy?  Great! Cash machine.  Unusually neat?  Sounds: A: irrational obsessive-compulsive or B: responsible law abiding citizen.  (Check only one please).  Parent is just like me? Parent of the Year!  She gets everything.

We Know the Law About Families

And who’s making those studied, well-researched, virtually certain stare decisis judgments of the values and behaviors of others they’ve barely met? Former prosecutor-types who couldn’t make it throwing virtually defenseless California criminals in jail.  Banished to Family Court, they appear more successful.  Just don’t tell them that the prey in family court have even fewer defenses from arbitrary judgment, punishment, and “kinder” scorn.   Unleash the talents of a hangman to a waiting room of patients awaiting brain surgery–Why would we be surprised that we end up with a post-op piled with bloodied corpses?

Just…. Be More Like Us!

The rank and file judges–often not even parents themselves–are plagued with horrific personality defects of their own far more serious than any parent in their courtroom–personal and professional misconduct, multiple divorcees, serious domestic violence perpetrators, addicts, some near perversions, financial misdealing, abundant disregard for the rule of law–and disdain for anyone who disagrees.  Good old fashioned thuggery by a rogues gallery of unethical lawyers, judges, and psychologists in what has become a free-for-all crime ring.

As detailed in our lawsuit and soon to come to light, the “special forum” of family court has become “special”–for criminals intent on taking advantage of vulnerable, unsophisticated legal consumers in turmoil, strife, and now even more serious jeopardy.

And how do they regard parents in crisis?  “They’re all animals” says one notable family court psychologist, Stephen Doyne.

“As we express our gratitude, we must never forget that the highest appreciation is not to utter words, but to live by them.”

John F. Kennedy

CCFC Gore

CCFC Griffin-Tabor

10-17-2013 10-32-38 AM

San Diego Family Court “Parent Evaluator” Stephen Doyne Sued for  Federal Criminal Racketeering for Fraud and Abuse of Dozens of His San Diego Clients:  Yet still working for the Court. In his care clients have murdered their children, committed suicide, been thrown in jail, targeted by him for false child abuse allegations, disbarred, bankrupted, ruined careers, homeless, and rivers of pain. His response: “They’re all animals.”

CCFC Hugugenor

CCFC Jessop

CCFC Katz

CCFC C Goldsmith

CCFC Longstreth

We’re Only Trying To Help You

If you’re in family court, be aware that it’s anything but family friendly.  Parents had no input–no input whatsoever–in it’s creation, rules, and operation.  It was created and operated by divorce lawyers and Sacramento professional bureaucrats with a jobs agenda–theirs instead of yours or your children’s.  If you’re lucky enough to be the beneficiary on the political side of their agenda–yes, political agenda in a family court–that strongly favors women, feminists, gays–you may take some comfort that the killing machine is working for you.  That is, until it comes for you.  CCFC’s membership is replete with mothers, sisters, and daughters who’ve been duped into trusting, and then outright raped by those who claim to be acting in their interest.  Our Cease and Desist letter examines the history, writings, and workings of the court and its supporters such as the Family Justice Center, and the evidence is stunning.  Exhibit “B” to the Family Justice Center letter sets the evidence forth in graphic detail.

Family Justice Center Founder Casey Gwinn: "We're Feminism on Steroids"

Family Justice Center Founder Casey Gwin: “You’re Feminism on Steroids!” ~ Feminist Visionary Ellen Pence

CCFC Roddy

CCFC McAdam

We Can Assure Your Safety

The only safe move–we suggest avoiding it altogether if possible.  Free resources like UpToParents and TransParenting are far more effective, safe, and free.  If your attorney doesn’t offer it, or suggests you’ll “do better” fighting, get ready; you’re the next meal on their table.

Some doubt the safety of encouraging cooperative resolution of domestic disputes, arguing that its “risky” trying to bring a feuding couple together lest the man “returns to his abuse.”   For a very few men and women–perhaps.  But the question to ask is “riskier than what?”  The Alliance’s track record with heavy-handed family court judges in San Diego alone is storied with murdered spouses, children, suicides, exacerbated addictions, serious violence, death threats, false arrests, manipulation of police and child welfare agencies, physical attacks, theft, and character/career assassinations–the question is, Alliance: “If fostering domestic cooperation out of strife is risky, then how would you describe fostering its warfare?”

10-17-2013 10-34-38 AM


A Judge’s Judgment: Former Family Court Judge Lisa Schall Placed On Sensitive Family Court Matters After Three Serious Judicial Ethics Violations, Including Reckless Drunk Driving, and Dozens of Litigant Complaints.

What’s going wrong here? 

How have we reached a point at which entrusted officials, sworn to oaths to exercise their power only as it is delegated to them; to check themselves and others in its improper use; to enforce the law equally without regard to friend or foe; to obey the law themselves first and foremost, have been led so astray?  Knowledge of how to prohibit the inevitable abuse of power and the decay it inevitably results in, goes stale while the blood of victims overflows its cup?  Duties to abide by oaths to restrain the power of government are uttered in mocking tones once power is secured behind the hoods and robes of immunity from law?  How is it that those entrusted with enforcing laws on themselves and others in power so regularly cast themselves as the most notorious criminals in the courthouse?  How is it that intelligent people, taught the law, learned in the history of tyranny and oppression our nation was founded to temper and diffuse, schooled in ethics and moral philosophy, of innate human dignity, equal opportunity, and the terror to which power, politics, and greed can quickly devolve into, so blithely ignore what they’ve so well learned?

We’re Judges–We Know Better About
Your Kids Than You

Given the trust and power to protect those liberties, expand opportunities, develop tolerance, and grow the common wealth, how do such people so quickly convert those powers to condemn, restrict, and oppress the very communities they’re entrusted to support?  How have they become converted from a deep awareness of the values and wisdom of “equality” into proponents of rampant partisanship, nepotism, lawlessness, and short-sighted gain for a cherished constituency?

What forces intelligent, learned, experienced people like Lorna Alksne, Michael Groch, Lisa Schall, Stephen Doyne, Casey Gwinn, Jan Goldsmith, and so many others in our community to revert to pre-American rogue-like abuse of the “accidents of birth”; sycophancy and bluster begetting pedestal vanity, mantle entitlements, and their companion piqueish egos?

If We Can’t Do Something Right… What The Hell-Let’s See What Happens!

How have they forgotten the age-old Hippocratic Oath to “above all else, do no harm?”  We hire prosecutors for specific purposes–to punish criminals, but in civil and family court, how is that instinct relevant?  How is it anything other than a defect?  The result–the incompetent’s lack of necessary problem-solving mentality, negotiation skills, and real-client experience is converted into your crime.  “Do it our way or else.”  Now that’s legal talent!

They learned such skills in law school and have had opportunities to develop them, but they chose blunt force objects of handcuffs and an elaborate boudoir of King’s clothing.  Have the skills gone rusty from disuse?  No need to negotiate when you have all the guns.  Have they forgotten–perhaps the tax-subsidized educations they were bought have betrayed them.  Yet they’re educated at some of the world’s finest institutions.  Desperation to earn a living?  Not unless earning more than 95% of Americans makes you destitute.  How can so many so easily turn their back on what they know to be their duties, making choices that reflect so poorly on the opportunities to expand for others the blessings they’ve been so fortunate to enjoy?  Are they secretly on the take?  Psychopathology?  Just plain evil?

“Any man can withstand adversity.  If you really want to test a man’s character, give him power.”  ~Abraham Lincoln

What’s going wrong here?

10-17-2013 10-39-36 AM

Hon. Joel Wohlfeil; One of the Few Family Court Judges Without A Hangman’s Background; As a civil lawyer his background was money. Good thing too. The experience has come in handy in establishing and operating Family Court’s private for-profit forensic psychology enterprise of custody evaluators. Is it “Hon.” or “Herr.” C.O.O.?

Good questions, and as our lawsuit progresses, we’re likely to have some very specific answers to share with you right here, so stay tuned.  The hangman wears a hood of anonymity–the judge wears a robe of immunity.  Unhooded, uncloaked, and no longer protected by the manufactured fiction of inability to sin, the real person stands before God and woman to answer for her crime.  The verdict on sin will await a higher court.

“Man is the only animal that blushes.  Or needs to.”

~- Mark Twain  Following the Equator

In the meantime we encourage your feedback and attention to these critical issues affecting parents and children throughout California and our nation. Please feel free to join us in demanding more–much, much more–from your elected judiciary, paid legal representatives, non-profit public welfare agencies, and those entrusted with the care and well-being of our entire community–not just those they want to win.  Your liberties, the liberties of those you know and love, and perhaps even one day the liberties of your own children and grandchildren hang in the balance.  Don’t allow them to slip.

Good luck parents.

Visit our Facebook Page at https://www.facebook.com/CCFCONLINE

CCFC v. SDCBA LAWSUIT PLEADINGS: California Coalition for Families and Children v. San Diego County Bar Association, United States District Court, Southern District California, Case No. 13cv1944-CAB-BLM

sdcba protest cover photo

CCFC Members at April 15, 2010 SDCBA Family Law Subsection Meeting

CCFC v. SDCBA FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (Jan. 9, 2014)

APPENDIX TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT (Caution 124 MB)

CCFC v. SDCBA VERIFIED COMPLAINT (Aug. 20, 2013)

MASTER EXHIBIT SET 1-49 (CAUTION 204 MB)

MASTER EXHIBITS IN PARTS (1-23, 10 MB EACH)

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part1

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part2

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part3

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part4

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part5

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part6

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part7

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part8

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part9

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part10

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part11

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part12

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part13

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part14

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part15

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part16

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part17

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part18

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part19

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part20

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part21

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part22

Master Final Exhibits 1-49_Part23

PARTIAL EXHIBIT SET (KEY EXHIBITS FILED WITH INITIAL COMPLAINT 62MB)

CCFC’S APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER RE: HARASSMENT (18 U.S.C. 1514, F.R.C.P. 65)

SAN DIEGO SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES’ MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT

CCFC’s MEET AND CONFER LETTER RE: MOTION TO DISMISS TO MATTHEW L. GREEN AND JAMES B. GILPIN

STUART DECLARATION AND EXHIBITS ISO APPL TO FILE OVERLENGTH BRIEF

CCFC’S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO FILE OVERLENGTH BRIEF

CCFC’S DECLARATION ISO MOTION TO STRIKE/OPPO TO MOTION TO DISMISS

CCFC’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT

CCFC’S MOTION TO STRIKE

Visit our Facebook Page at https://www.facebook.com/CCFCONLINE

Judicial Malpractice? Why Judges Are Afraid–Very Afraid–You’ll Figure It Out–They Need Malpractice Insurance

Judicial Malpractice? Why Judges Are Afraid--Very Afraid--You'll Figure It Out--They Need Malpractice Insurance

Judicial Malpractice Insurance is Common. Why They’re Afraid You’ll Find Out–and Sue

We’ve said it before–“Judges break the law on the bench and off all the time.  They’ve replied–“Yeah, but then your only remedy is an appeal. We can’t be sued.”

Who’s right? Ask a lawyer and they may side with the judges. Tough road to sue your master.  But if you can’t believe what you hear, believe what you see.  Judges recognize they can be sued–for a lot of things they do as lawyers. They’re so tuned in to it that they’ve asked insurance companies to write special policies for them.  This article by David Cohen of Case Western Reserve examines the issue closely, exposing how many judges purchase insurance, what they pay, what they’re afraid of being sued for, and why.  Cohen explains;

“For several centuries judges enjoyed absolute judicial immunity. Recent years have seen a decrease in the scope of judicial immunity. The increasing success of suits against judges has caused many members of the judiciary to purchase judicial malpractice insurance. The Author questions the current cost of such insurance by examining the amount and necessity of protection it affords and the risk of civil liability not already covered by the state.”

Despite the fact that they’re insured, and the premiums are paid for by tax dollars, they still peddle the “I’m just a poor government employee” tune to litigants and attorneys who don’t know better. Which is why Cohen met resistance from judges when he researched the issue.

 

 

Visit our Facebook Page at https://www.facebook.com/CCFCONLINE