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.”

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home