Karen Anderson suspected that something strange was going on between her ex-husband, Rex Anderson, and their 15-year-old daughter. Prior to the couple's separation in 1998, the girl would sometimes put on high heels and makeup, "visiting" her dad while he worked late at night in the family's basement. It was the same retreat in which he stored the dildos and artificial vaginas he used to stimulate himself sexually.
After the divorce, Rex was given primary custody of his daughter, as well as the couple's 8-year-old son. Karen says this was because he had a full-time job as a facilities engineer at Santa ClaraValley Medical Center, while she was unemployed. While staying with her on weekends, her daughter would sometimes say she hated herself and wanted to die.
In 1999, Anderson, a resident of San Jose, decided to take her concerns to Santa Clara County Family Court. Like similar courts across the state, it is charged with adjudicating high-conflict divorces — managing the division of property, child support payments, and the often bitter process of establishing a plan for shared child-rearing. She urged the court to investigate whether her daughter was at risk of sexual molestation, and whether Rex's custody rights should be restricted as a result.
Family Court Judge James Stewart temporarily barred the children from seeing their father while the court looked into the abuse claims. But instead of seeking evidence as to whether molestation was taking place, he hired a Menlo Park–based psychologist, Leslie Packer, to evaluate both parents. Among Packer's tasks was to assess, in light of their psychological profiles, whether the accusations were likely to be true. After a series of interviews and personality tests, such as the Rorschach inkblot test, she delivered her opinion: Karen's fears for her daughter were unfounded.
"Judges critical of mum jailing (by corrupt Judge Michael Jarrett)"
- Details
-
Category: Judicial Corruption
-
Created: Tuesday, 30 October 2007 18:03
-
Written by Janet Fife-Yeomans - Daily Telegraph
A MOTHER who could not afford the petrol to drive her children to a court-ordered contact visit with their father should never have been jailed, the Full Bench of the Family Court has ruled.
In an extraordinary judgment, the court said not only did Federal Court magistrate Michael Jarrett get it wrong, his considerations fell "far short" of what was required by the Family Law Act.
With no money to put petrol in her car and without a lawyer, she had represented herself before Mr Jarrett, who earns $239,430.
She was jailed for four months in March but released on appeal on the order of the Full Bench after eight weeks and reunited with her daughter, 6, and son, 8.
The Full Bench of the Family Court reserved its reasons which were published yesterday.
Justice Mary Finn, Justice Bernard Warnick and Justice Jennifer Boland said prison should only be invoked as a last resort.
"For this mother, with primary care of two young children, the more so," the judges said.
They said they expected Mr Jarrett would have "cogent and thorough" reasons for such a serious decision however his reasons were "deficient in detail and lacked clarity".
The parents split up when their son was 14 months and the mother was pregnant with their daughter. The children have always lived with their mother, who has since remarried.
The three judges said Mr Jarrett was also wrong in sending the children to live with their father indefinitely when he jailed their mother.
Just three months earlier, a Family Court judge had granted the mother custody, saying she was an outstanding parent doing an outstanding job and living with their father would expose them to "too much prospect of harm". (Source : http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/no-petrol-so-mum-jailed/story-e6freuzi-1111114751899)
"Appeal Court Judgement - Kafkaesque Trial - Help Beth and Her Boys"
- Details
-
Category: Judicial Corruption
-
Created: Friday, 15 November 2013 10:24
-
Written by HelpBeth.blogspot.com
The Appeal Court Decision is outrageously unjust, totally biased and massively scandalous. If anybody is in any doubt that this process is a sham and a mockery of the EU Human Rights Charter, please keep reading.
One of the top divorce lawyers in Austria submitted my appeal: 60 pages of concrete evidence of gross misconduct by the judge Susanne Gottlicher and Social Services in the father’s district.
All applications;
- for custody,
- for better visitation rights,
- to fine the father for cancelling so many of my visits
- and the chance to hold more hearings and reconsider the case,
were ALL DENIED
"Judge Munby - Yes another plea from a parent who is abused by the UK families court who try to hide the crimes of their actions!"
- Details
-
Category: Judicial Corruption
-
Created: Saturday, 21 December 2013 04:54
-
Written by mrnigelcooper
Dear XXX
So in the end I do have capacity - but Elliott Maher - stolen brutally by the British criminal systém, the sitting judge Sir James Munby decides to hide attrocities and most serious violations against humanity covering up the crimes of the previous judge and all criminals involved - the parties in this case at the expense of my sons life, at the expense of life of innocent Eliott Maher. Sir judge munby knows he must hide and decides to hide the brutality and criminality of his colleague royal judge sir peter singer- the judge who gave death sentence order to my son and who fled the court room when his crimes were found out by a prominent UK London Chelsea private international lawyer, who also proved the criminality of this case, proved criminality of the SS and their psychiatrists and criminality of Caffcass nora Bukley. The current judge Munby also received the copies of these important documents re the brutal criminality of this case but hides them to protect all criminals ie parties in this case.
Elliott´? best lifetime interest ie his mother therefore play no role whatsoever and flie out of the window. This despite being the paramount requisite legal condition for his decision, to také into consideration when making his judgement- Elliott whole lifetime since birthe brought up and cared for solely by his mother as a single parent securing only best interest for her son, Elliott being a professional athlete, always a healthy happy boy also excelling academically, brought up in extremely close, loving, caring home with his always responsible and loving mother leading together a meaningful and fulfilling life in honesty. Elliott begging for his mother since brutaly removed is in his best interest, deprived of everything he ever had and loved-this is the UK child protection systém- the whole world knows now what the UK has been up to in secret courts, and the consequences are being publiced around the world, I fail to see their last effort to gag and silence the mother through RRO and the rest of the Slovak Republic and International, Global community.
Conflict of Interest - Judges on NGO Panels
- Details
-
Category: Judicial Corruption
-
Created: Sunday, 21 February 2010 15:12
-
Written by Alecomm
A Judge being on bench in Children's Courts and being Council Member for NGO's such as Centacare / Catholicare, does this constitute a conflict of interest?
Centacare 2008-2009 Annual Review p23 - Council Members shows the below mentioned judges on the board of Centacare.
Source : http://www.centacarebrisbane.net.au/resources/
Federal Magistrate Paul Howard - Brisbane (appointed 9 July 2007)
Source : http://www.fmc.gov.au/html/magistrates.html and
His Honour Judge Kerry J O'Brien -Judge Administrator, District Court of Queensland
- Judge Administrator, District Court of Queensland (2008–)
- President, Children's Court of Queensland (2002–2007)
- Judge, District Court of Queensland (1989–)
Source : http://www.sclqld.org.au/qjudiciary/profiles/kjobrien/ and http://www.fmc.gov.au/html/magistrates.html
"Judge Carnage delivering Devastating Verdicts to Innocent Babies in Sydney"
- Details
-
Category: Judicial Corruption
-
Created: Friday, 12 October 2012 22:44
-
Written by Alecomm2
Judge Carnage - better known as Federal Magistrate Carney is working full on to enhance this New Stolen Generation with continual judgements being made to the Department of Community Services where there has been NO intervention prior to removal and no hard evidence of any abuse of children. For anybody to take a child without lawful means is Kidnap, and it comes with a 10 - 14 year imprisonment time.
If a child is removed - whether by the government or anybody - without lawful means - it constutes kidnap, and what is currently happening is exactly that. Children are being removed (kidnapped) from their families on nothing more than a signed piece of paper on behalf of the Director-General of Human Services. There is no evidence of abuse. Nothing. There is "at risk of emotional abuse", here is "has had a prior history of ...", and identifying reasons as low as "Failed to protect the child" when the department has forced the mother to send a child unsupervised to their father / step-father AFTER the mother has left the father / stepfather for domestic violence. How is that abuse? It is not. And in any other court of law, the matter would be laughed out of the court.
This is NOT a laughing matter. This is what is happening each and every day beneath the noses of the ignorant and disbelievers. Judge Carnage is delivering verdicts, at least three times per week, of "Legalised Kidnap" by the Australian Government, again, on presumption of guilt before evidence. Some children are fortunate enough to go home, maybe one in one hundred, after months, sometimes years, of litigation between the parents and the department - however by then, the damage is done. The child / baby is already scarred forever and so is the rest of the family.
Six weeks after DoCS took baby "Doc" into "care", they're still breaking every law possible and getting away with it. Isn't it wonderful to have a judge in your pocket.
Mark Ciavarella Jnr ordered to pay $1.2m in restitution after he was found to be a 'figurehead' in the conspiracy