fbpx

Sydney Magistrate Terrence Murphy blames mother for child being sexually assaulted in care

Sydney Magistrate Terrence Murphy has recently handed down a decision in the Supreme Court of NSW, where he has dispicabbly blamed a mother for her daughter being sexually assaulted.  He has used this as an excuse to side with the Department of Community Services Campbelltown Office in stating that the newborn baby of this mother belongs in care - because the mother failed to protect her other child.

It is routinely common these days for DoCS caseworkers to blame mothers for being victims of domestic violence and use this as the reason for removing their children.  Little do they know that some of these children are turning suicidal because they have been taken away from the only family that they have ever known, and the mother who has loved and protected them their whole lives.

Magistrate Stella Struthridge violating Oath of Office

Former lawyer Stella Struthridge has been a magistrate in the Victorian Courts for some three years now.  Common sense tells us that no lawyer is trustworthy, hence they would make an even more dishonest judge, but common government continues to promote these people regardless.

Today in court, Struthridge reached an all new low, when for the second time, she dismissed an application for Personal Violence Intervention Order, after a DHS worker, Heather Podesta, of Albury / Wodonga DHS assaulted a client in front of multiple witnesses.

The second application by the victim has come with witnesses to the assault - yet Struthridge has refused to even hear the application before setting aside a verdict.

Magistrate refuses to use intellectual property to protect three year old boy from harm

Former Intellectual Property Lawyer, come Children's Court Lawyer, Darrin Craig Cain, has recently handed down a decision whereby he has sentenced a three year old boy to a further fifteen years confinement with his abusers.  The magistrate was presented with irrefutable evidence that he was and always had been safe in his mothers care, however turning a blind eye, even to photographic evidence and sided, yet again, with the Department of Human Services, whom he once represented in proceedings.

The magistrate could not substantiate any fact or allegation the department put forward, regarding concerns of the mothers ability to care for the child, but handed down an order giving the mother only quarterly access with her young son.

Magistrate Carney devastating Sydney families

Asshole Judge Carney --- Chewed too many pens - got ink poisoning maybe ?? Cant think straight??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.

Magistrate Carney seems only too happy to adjourn this newborns life another three months and into the new year to allow DoCS to entertain the court some more with their shenanigans.

Magistrate Carney may have transpired from the Roads and Traffic Committee, but one would think that before she be allowed to make decisions regarding the life of children, imparticular newborns, that she be knowledgeable on time limits imposed in matters relating to Children's Courts.

Whether she knows or just doesn't care is irrelevant, because the damage being done to newborn children, whom she happily boasts about "taking three babies per week", is not only unforgivable, it is unlawful.

Federal Magistrate Michael Jarret blocking victims right to appeal by refusing to produce original reasons for judgement

Magistrate Jarret from the Brisbane Federal Magistrate Courts, has hit our headlines again with yet another matter, where he is refusing to produce the Reasons for Judgement - in a case where he was severely biased toward a mother and young boy.  It appeared that the Magistrate worked with the father and the Independent Children's Lawyer to remove the child from his mother, after repeatedly refusing to hear the boys evidence on what his wishes were.  This is contrary to all legislation and the fundamental rights of the child.

By Magistrate Jarret refusing to produce the Reasons for Judgement, he is covering his own butt from being dragged across the coals for such an atrocious decision and placement on the boy, but he is also preventing the mother and boy from appealing his decision in a higher court.  To appeal the decision the appellants need the Reasons for Removal.

This is not only biased but a clear denial of the mother and child's fundamental human rights and this is the perfect example why Judicial Immunity should never be allowed in our court system.

High Court rejects ICAC's bid to investigate Crown prosecutor Margaret Cunneen

The NSW ICAC has lost its bid to investigate Crown prosecutor Margaret Cunneen which may have implications for past corruption inquiries like those involving Eddie Obeid, reports Michaela Whitbourn.

A landmark High Court ruling on the powers of the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption has "destroyed" a major part of the watchdog's jurisdiction and could lead to corruption findings against previous targets of inquiries being overturned, a former judge and ICAC commissioner has warned.

David Ipp, QC, who presided over historic corruption inquiries into Labor figures including Eddie Obeid and Ian Macdonald, said Parliament should intervene to give the commission back its powers "but whether it will is open to question".

The High Court ruled on Wednesday the ICAC had no power to investigate Crown prosecutor Margaret Cunneen, SC, over allegations she perverted the course of justice. The decision, which gave a narrow interpretation to one of the definitions of "corrupt conduct" in the ICAC Act, has far-reaching implications for past and future corruption inquiries.

Australian Senate Reform Act of 2016

No Tenure / No Pension. A senator collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

Senators (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.  All funds in the senator retirement funds move to the Social Security system immediately.  All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and senators participate with the Australian people.  It may not be used for any other purpose.

Senators can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Australian's do.

Senators will no longer vote themselves a pay raise.  Parliamentary pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

Judge Stephen McEwen terms child service officials "control freaks"

The protection of troubled children has been hijacked by obstructive control freaks who rely on psychological advice instead of obvious solutions, a judge says.

Senior Youth Court judge Stephen McEwen has levelled scathing criticism against the Department for Education and Child Development - formerly known as Families SA.

In a transcript obtained by the Sunday Mailhe said the department was paralysed by its reliance on a team of highly paid psychologists. He said dedicated, caring social workers had been handcuffed and vulnerable children left at risk of further harm.

"If this sounds a little bit like a dummy spit, that's because it is," he said. "I'm just sick and tired of that entire department being obstructive control freaks, constantly throwing up pseudo-reasons dressed up in social work speak for refusing to just have a look at the blindingly obvious.

"They hire people who are social workers who are trained and probably want to do social work, but they don't let them because no one will do anything without running it past a bunch of psychologists ... I think it is just utterly pathetic."

"When Judges Award Custody to Abusive Parents"

Courtesy of Joyce Murphy .  Joyce Murphy (right) fled California with her daughter because family-court officials wouldn’t listen to her accusations against her ex-husband. He was later sentenced to prison for sex crimes.

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)"

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"

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!"

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.

Subcategories

  • Case Law
    Article Count:
    1
  • Judicial Corruption
    Article Count:
    43
  • Lawyers and Solicitors
    Article Count:
    21
  • Law Reform
    Article Count:
    2
  • Legal Aid
    Article Count:
    1
  • Legislation and Acts

    We intend on using almost one dozen different legislation / acts. Below are a few that we feel would have the most impact for class action causes and or entry to Australian Crime Commission help.  What we need to be able to utilise the legislations is more than one person claiming the same type of offence, and by different departments and different areas.  This can show mass conspiracies so to speak which would then be covered by the National Crime Act.

    We also plan to use Crimes (Hostages) Act 1900 as this act allows for persons being held hostage (ie our children) until we agree to submit to persons to what they ask.  This is keeping a hostage, and by DOCs taking your children and not returning them until you have signed undertakings is not only hostage taking but blackmail. 

    There is no such thing as CONsent Orders.  You cannot possibly say anybody voluntarily signs these orders when the department has their children and will not return them until the orders are signed.  These are not Consent Orders.  This is Blackmail.

    When crimes total to over 3 years imprisonment which we can make an easy jump to, they are then also available to go to the National Crimes Act.

    We also plan on using the Director General as DOCs legislation and code of conduct and ethics documentation available also shows that any crime committed against these acts MUST be reported to the director general.  And as such the director general also has an obligation to report fraud and misconduct to the Attorney General and the Australian Crimes Commission.

    We will use the evidence we have to submit to lower level figures about their staff and they are then obligated to submit the complaint (by legislation) to the director general.  If they do not do this, they are then setting themselves up for charges also.  We will know if this is done because not only will we be submitting this information / complaints this way, but we will also be submitting directly to the director general also, who ALSO is under obligation to send to the Australian Crime Commsision and the Independant Commission Against Corruption.

    So, you say ... What do you need to do now ??

    You need to gather all your documents and evidence and start splitting hairs and complaints down to division / person and complaint type using the register we are currently creating.  You also need to contact me for other complaint types that we are not aware of so that we can include this also.

    This may take some time but time is all we have and the more the better.

    Article Count:
    69
  • SLAPP - Strategic lawsuit against public participation
    Article Count:
    2