Sunday, February 10, 2008

COMMENT Preface on how to use this blog.

This blog has been set up in attempt to not only tell a story but also allow you to witness the “legal process” that unfortunately fosters, enables and literally encourages crippling levels of parental alienation. Based on belief in the US Judicial System I sought for years to achieve fundamental justice, I was naïve of the how the system really works, that’s no longer true but what’s true is my daughters have already suffered the pain, damage and life-time harm to their lives.

So how will I give you some of the “legal process experience”? For 10 years every time I talked to an attorney they’d say “show me the court pleadings”. WHY? Because, what I’d tell them was so absurd or unbelievable in their mind, they never believed anything I said. Unfortunately the pleadings by opposing council are purposely authored specifically to mislead/misdirect, insight negative emotion, be confusing and are often contradictory and just plain false or lies. Unfortunately this is all done as specific legal strategy by those able to afford it. Intentionally overwhelm, perpetually stall, twist and contort fact, lie by commission and omission, discourage the judges and fundamentally thwart any progress toward justice or meaningful decisions.

This is how people with the most money totally destroy other people – actual truth plays little to no part. It allows money to control and win regardless of truth. Consider @ $200-250/hr to read documents, $1,000 buys you about 4.5 hrs. That’s barely enough to read half the documents from 1 simple pleadings process in mid-2006. In truth this case would require minimum one week (40 hrs = $10,000) in attorney fees, not including all associated fees to merely get familiar with the case, never mind actually file a motion or take an action.

Regardless, it’s valuable and often necessary to be able to read actual source documents. Plus things need time reference and to be placed into context of what else was going on to be correctly understood. So this is how the blog is laid out:

  • Blog Titles are prefaced with: PLEADING – refers to any document formally to/from the court. ORDER – refers to a specific court order issued by someone on the bench. DOC – refers to other specific documents in the case file but may of only gone between attorneys. COMMENT – refers to an entry that provides additional relative information (such as this entry you are reading now).
  • Underlined Blog Titles mean that if clicked on, the actual source document it references will be presented to you. Typically as a PDF file.
  • Blog Dates are chronological from newest to oldest time period. Dates shown correspond exactly to the applicable court/recording date of the document. This allows you to use the blog’s date index to go directly to any desired time period.

Monday, June 12, 2006

DOC+PLEADING – The origins of PA in this case

Parental Alienation (PA) as many destructive human behaviors, has been present for eons. Yet as a human behavior malady it did not manifest nor become widely apparent until certain conditions existed. Consider “alcoholism”, did that condition not exist prior to it being clinically recognized and identified as destructive behavior? I’m certain it did exist, and the damages it created prior to being “credentialed” were equal (possibly greater due to denial) as today, even when the condition is known.

Upon learning the magistrate’s near instant 6/2/06 DENIAL of our motion, I was not particularly surprised, but certainly still appalled. I’d lived through the life of this case so I’d actually predicted a month earlier to my attorney this could be the likely outcome. Given we’d spent a month reviewing, studying and redrafting the motion to make it as acceptable, unthreatening and legally compliant as possible he also was utterly amazed. His exact words in his email informing me of the DENIED motion (not sent till Mon 6/5/06) included:

  • “….He (magistrate) claims that… I (attorney) citied no legal authority pursuant to a Rule, he (magistrate) violates that very rule by failing to allow a response..."
  • “…Frankly, the whole thing is bizarre”.

So now - what to do next? I took a week to emotionally recover from the shock of such judicial incompetence (to be detailed in later post) and to ponder the issue, the following Mon 6/12/06 I sent the following email to my attorney:

From: Tom Smith (TechEn)
To: DJapha4064@......
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 10:54 AM
Subject: PAS goes back to very beginning, a possible strategy

David, having reviewed various options of strategy for response to my ex's 5/31 reply to our 4/31 pleading I'd like to present an option I'm sure is not on your list. I title it the "revelation of truth" approach. The court has clearly demonstrated its total ambivalence (at best! more likely acute directed bias) with respect to this case and my personal self. While one is told to view the court as utterly objective (no particular bias toward Tom Smith) and forming its decisions on facts - case history proves this is not be so. …

There is little to nothing one can do when the court perpetually selects to violate its own statutory procedure AND moral/ethical obligations - but judicial process does remain an avenue for formally archiving truths (per the record) regardless of whether it acts on them or not. With this in mind one option that remains is to provide in reply - a comprehensive documentation of truth and fact to the court, even under the awareness it most likely will do nothing at all with it.

This was the strategy I selected back in Dec 1999 when the condition described above was also in full swing --- namely ongoing denial of due process for myself and the condition of my children being denied any sense of "knowledgeable" human compassion. It is interesting for me to again review the attached 5 yr old pleading as it CLEARLY illustrates the conditions for creating PAS since inception of this matter. I just simply had no official "word" or syndrome to refer to it.

Labels: ,

Friday, June 2, 2006

ORDER (by Magistrate not even a Judge)

You figure it out – is any favoritism (or simple insanity) going on here?????

Over 30 days eariler in attempt to gain knowledge of the progress and health of my own child’s life I make simple request to get access to basic records (school report cards/attendance records, records or any medical professionals that have treated her etc). The request is basic and focused solely on serving the best interest of the child. It does ascertain the current state resulted from a grievous and hostile draconian ruling that came about via illegal acts and gross errors – however it makes no effort to blame nor seek revenge. It is directed solely to bringing to an end a serious 8-year wrong initiated by people that abused the system and the children, it seeks only to restore the basic human rights of the child.

15 days is the allowance for reply per civil rules of procedures. The ex-wife and her attorney violate that, but no issue, they just petition the magistrate and are immediately granted pardon -plus- get an additional 15 days (total of 30 days). They use that time to compile a unbelievable, overwhelming 90 page encyclopedia size reply.

Here is the calendar at this point

  • Wed 5/31 late day – ex-wife’s attorney, after double the normal allowed time, finally submits a 90 page encyclopedia size reply.
  • Thur 6/1 – is a single day in a shortened work week, due to observance of the Memorial day National Holiday
  • Barely 48 hours later on FRI 6/2 – Magistrate’s ruling in favor of wife is finished, been completely filed and processed, RESULT - father’s request is unilaterally dismissed.
  • Father never even knew all this happened until into the following week.

Consider

  • father is barred access to exercise his legal right to respond (10 days) per civil rules of procedure.
  • even under the pressure of heightened holiday week workloads, Magistrate has affectively considered all appropriate information related to an 8 year highly litigated case (with zero access to the prior judge as he has now been retired over 1 year) in basically 24 hours (the other 24 of the 48 hours used just in paper processing time).
  • and please pay very close attention to Para 9 in the Magistrate’s order (entire order can be viewed by clicking title of this blog) try to comprehend anyone making a similar conclusion as he did:

These are direct specific extracted quotes (believe me, I don't have sufficient imagination to make up this type of insanity). Para 9 of the Magistrates’ order is response to my attorney's statement about a prior judge's ruling:


Wording in original August 11, 1999 order “...there was no way “under present circumstances for the Court to allow the Respondent any role in these children’s [sic] lives…not to contact the children, their teachers, their schools, their mother, their camp, any other activities in which they are involved, their friends, their neighbors, or any people involved with any of those activities, at any time, in any manner, for any duration, or for any purpose, or for no purpose at all.”


---- putting aside the absolutely draconian element of that wording alone, consider the Magistrate's interpretation of those words is to basically equate it to "an adjustment in parenting time: ----


Para #9 - The Court finds that this characterization (sic “de-facto termination of parental rights”) of the proceedings and order of August 11, 1999 is incorrect. The Court did not terminate the parental rights of the Respondent. For instance, the children can still inherit from the Respondent and the Respondent still has a duty and obligation to support the children. However, the Court did issue an order affecting the Respondent’s right to exercise parenting time with the children.”

Wednesday, May 31, 2006

PLEADING - Response To Motion To Vacate and/or ...

Talk about abuse of the court - the ex-spouse and her attorney filed a 90 page reply. That's right a NINETY page reply. The vast bulk of it being very dense and complex information covering years of time. Further it all represented highly fabricated, sadistically twisted and often purely false information that had been provided repeatedly in prior years. But the strategy is simple - if you tell a lie over & over & over again - the audience (and even the person that KNOWS it's a lie) starts to see it as true.

So first you present something that is all fabrication, then pile it so high it's impossible to wade through or challenge in any way. Knowing no new judge would ever take time to actually read or begin to comprehend it. Plus if they browse it at all, they are indoctrinated and subject to being mentally injected with the hatred the author(s) have toward the other party.

So what happens? The new division judge doesn't even touch it, it's passed to the underling magistrate (a ruling that has life time impact on the well being of a minor child's life - doesn't even warrant a judge - never mind an actual hearing, credible evidence AND ABSOLUTELY no validation of presented evidence). The magistrate scared of his boss just rubber stamps the thing with whatever preceeding ruling existed - zero effort, zero justice, zero opportunity to correct a grave wrong. Just a casual browse, and an emotionally based personal opinion accelerated by desire to clear the docket is what determines "life time impacting decisions" for children in Jefferson County District Court. They are victims of their abusers and victims of those designed to protect them from the abusers.

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, April 27, 2006

PLEADING - Motion To Vacate and/or Modify Order of Aug 11, 1999

After many years of judicial abuse by a judge that was so mentally impaired (personality and senior age related emotional/cognitive impairments) that he was forced to go before judicial review, my attorney said it was time to file a pleading, since the judge was now retired. Little did I know - it was out of the pan into the fire. I learned not only was the judge incompetent, the entire Court Division was - the fact that it allowed a judge so lacking in competency to remain on the bench (nepotism and favoritism) regardless of the damage he wrought on the citizens, families and community should of been the warning I suppose.

This court pleading introduces the event that resulted in de-facto "termination of parental rights" of me and my 2 biological daughters back on Aug 11, 1999. For just short of 7 years during their most important formative teen years, two young girls had been 100% forcefully, unlawfully and unconstitutionally deprived of every possible sense of relationship with a father that deeply loved them, and forced to learn to hate a person they had always loved.

Labels: ,

Friday, March 23, 2001

PLEADING - Response to Mother's 2/20/01 motion for monetary judgment

Many divorce cases are subject to disputes about money, but once decided at the divorce hearing and made a court order via the final agreement the issue ends. Not with someone obsessed with intent to totally destroy the other party.

It is with review of historic documents that I truly realize it was my ex-spouse's full intent to destroy me in every manner: mentally, emotionally, financially and ultimately my physical health - just as she had vowed to me in private. It is amazing how manipulative and subtle the behavior of this type person can be. Viewed by outsiders without knowledge of the whole matter it can often look like any one thing is reasonable. Yet in total it reveals utterly aggressive, often irrational and frequently behavior inconsistent with the verbalized needs. Example: demand and actually aid me into returning to corporate employment (gave more predictable income & benefits) only to then, via meaningless abusive legal harassment of my new employer, get me terminated.

Most striking is the “unrelenting ruthlessness and persistence” of the harassment, going on year after year after year. Not random, but done methodically under a controlled disciplined plan of deliberate intent. Using money and financial issues as a weapon to beat me, the hated party – as the money itself was not really needed.

The attached pleading represents my effort to try and inform the court of just how out of control the issue was. Again as in virtually every ruling of this court, my motion was fundamentally ignored and the mother’s request was fully granted.

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, January 18, 2000

PLEADING - Father's Reply To Mother's "Time Extended" Response...

One would believe, that if he was at least granted "court ordered time" with his children for a Christmas Holiday he could expect that to happen. NOT when you have an utterly obsessed PA targeting parent willing to spend any amount of money. While happily anticipating having some Christmas celebration time with my children in 1999 - I learned that my ex-wife was not satisfied with just disobeying our court agreement, she was even going to LITIGATE to take "court ordered" father/daughter time away from me and the children.

So via very deliberate and hostile litigation in 1998 the mother actually overturned the court's own ruling. So at Christmas 1999 it was clear she was intending to do everything possible to repeat the process. The lies, personal character assassination and manipulation of the court were just totally over the top. In my own defense it was time to present information about who the mother really was. It had become apparent no sane or rational behavior regarding relationship with the children was ever going to come from her. That was the driving force behind creation of this pleading. Actual Outcome? The court completely ignored my response pleading, never even responded. It was if it had never been written and submitted.

Was this a gross violation of rules of civil procedure? Absolutely! But my judge did whatever he wanted, he simply ignored the law at will when he chose to - maybe unbelievable, but non the less totally true and very common.

Labels: ,