Protective Mothers' Alliance International

family court abuse/corruption

Archive for the ‘corruption’ Category

Domestic Abuse by Proxy – Family Court Abuse Video

with 2 comments

“The mother has to comply with a court order and send her child to be alone with an abusive, violent man.

This is torture for her, and for the child, when they find themselves in a frightening situation, taken from their protector and forced into contact with a man, whom they may have witnessed seeing him beat their mother or who has been abusive to them.

This is abuse by Family Court.”

Domestic Abuse by Proxy, Family Court Abuse: Failing to Protect Children and Mothers” is a powerful and informative video released on Youtube by Family Court Abuse (UK). 

This video describes how abusive ex partners will use the family court system, and manipulate the legal process, to gain control, and inflict further harm of their victims. Abusers also seek custody to cause the most damage to a former partner; by attacking her love, and maternal bond, with her child. An abuser attacks by taking a child away from their mother, and destroying their relationship. Children are also used as pawns by an abuser in other ways designed to terrorize, hurt and harass their victim.

The legal system is a minefield for an abused woman.The process of how the family court system can perpetrate and enable domestic violence to continue is also described in this video.  Family court judges and professionals often lack training in domestic violence, and do not recognize the abuse. Or, the judge and professionals have been so indoctrinated in parental alienation theories, and other prejudices, that they mistake signs of abuse for parental alienation syndrome and discredit legitimate concerns. Or see the mother’s attempts to get help as a sign that something is “wrong” with her. Domestic abuse advocates and experts are rarely consulted by the court system, and a judge has the discretion to disallow or ignore evidence presented by a mother (evidence of abuse, and expert testimony is commonly discredited by judges after a mother has been falsely labelled). Obtaining legal representation is also difficult, most women go to court without an attorney because they can not afford one. An abuser with an attorney has a powerful advantage over her, and gains an ally in the legal system.

Unresolved Trauma

The lives of children are also endangered when Courts work to give an identified abuse custody and/or unsupervised visits. The video mentions that the Courts order “more contact than would be usual, to enable the child and father to ‘quickly establish a relationship’“. This means there is less scrutiny, and less care given to how these decisions are being made, and the effect on the child involved. 

Featured Image -- 3784

This video will be familiar to those who have experienced family court, and offers validation to what you have endured. It is also a powerful teaching tool to educate, and raise awareness, of how the family court process fails to protect victims of domestic violence and their children.

 

Note: The end of the video offers suggestions on how to raise awareness of family court injustices by using social media as a platform. PMA International does not offer legal advice or professional services. Reposting this video does not constitute advice or suggestion of any kind. Please use discretion, and take reasonable care, when making decisions. If you need help or legal assistance, please contact a qualified professional and/or organization.

 

 

California Appellate Court Judge Vance Raye Implicated in Alleged Federal Racketeering Scheme

leave a comment »

This article was originally posted by Legal News on CNN i report ( link below)
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1202054

A Sacramento Superior Court watchdog group has posted online court records and other documents which they allege detail a racketeering enterprise operating in the local court system. Using court filings, court reporter transcripts, public records and other documentary evidence, members of the group say they have reverse engineered the structure and players of the scheme.

“This package of evidence was compiled over four years, and includes records dating back ten years,” said Ulf Carlsson, the spokesperson for the group. “Judges, court employees and lawyers involved in this criminal enterprise have been able to conceal it for a long time.”

The group asserts that the documents show the scheme began in 1991 when two judges, Peter McBrien and Vance Raye, restructured the family court system with attorneys from the Sacramento Bar Association Family Law Section. The conspiracy has expanded and been ongoing since that time, according to the whistleblowers. Judge Vance Raye has since been elevated to the 3rd District Court of Appeal in Sacramento, and continues to assist the organization when cases involving the enterprise reach the appellate court level.

The goal of the judge-attorney partnership is to significantly reduce the caseload and administrative duties of full-time judges by effectively privatizing the Sacramento Family Court settlement conference program, according to the whistleblowers. The attorneys agreed to take over and run the program in exchange for kickbacks in the form of preferential treatment from judges when they appear in court representing clients.

“The attorneys ostensibly act as volunteers,” said Carlsson. “But we have documented that the lawyers are in fact compensated with illegal kickbacks in the form of ‘rubber-stamped’ rulings and court orders for their clients, in addition to other perks.”

In order to run the settlement conference program, the attorneys are designated as “judge pro tems,” or temporary judges. In operating the settlement program, the lawyers reportedly use heavy-handed, unethical tactics to coerce couples going through a divorce to reach a settlement. When they do, the case is terminated and no further court hearings are required, significantly reducing the workload of full-time, state employed judges.

“The coerced settlements often result in an unequal division of community property, one-sided child custody arrangements, and unfair child and spousal support payment terms that don’t comply with state law,” Carlsson explained.

“In many cases, only one side has an attorney – who is a member of what we refer to as the ‘cartel’ – while the other side can’t afford a lawyer and is self-represented. These cases are where the one-sided outcomes are the most severe,” Carlsson said. “You have someone going through a traumatic divorce without a lawyer facing off against a spouse represented by a veteran family law attorney. On top of that, the party without a lawyer is forced into a settlement conference run by a judge pro tem lawyer who often is a personal friend of the other attorney. As we’ve now documented, the outcome of these rigged settlement conferences is not fair, ethical, or legal. The conflicts of interest are required by state law to be disclosed, but never are.”

The alleged criminal enterprise deprives the public of the federally protected right to honest government services, a crime under 18 USC 1346, includes predicate acts of mail and wire fraud, and thereby constitutes a RICO racketeering enterprise under federal criminal law (18 USC 1962), according to the watchdog group.

Carlsson said the judge-attorney collusion also violates a number of state laws as well. “The scheme results in unjust enrichment for the judge pro tem attorneys, constitutes unfair business practices, and implicates antitrust laws,” Carlsson asserted. “Due to their consistent, virtually perfect success rate in obtaining favorable outcomes in court proceedings, the temporary judge lawyers have achieved a significant monopoly on the family law and divorce business in the greater-Sacramento area.”

The 43-page set of documents compiled by the group is posted online at Scribd, and can be viewed at this URL: http://www.scribd.com/doc/251282897/Justice-Vance-W-Raye-Charged-in-Color-of-Law-Conspiracy-RICO-Racketeering-Scheme-in-3rd-District-Court-of-Appeal-Sacramento-Superior-Court-Sacramen

Written by protectivemothersallianceinternational

January 7, 2015 at 7:51 am

PMA International Blog Talk Radio Show- Hot Re-Runs/ PMA Intl’s first expert attorney Q and A

leave a comment »

Using The Internet Safely, While Advocating For Your Personal Custody Case

with 13 comments

unnamedPMA International always has safety as our leading priority. In light of this, PMA international will not release personal information and/or personal custody information about protective mothers and their children who are in active litigation. PMA International will not sponsor, endorse or support any event or activity that is engaging in the above due to the risk involved.( The only excepts to the above is at the discretion of PMA International’s Co-Founders and/or Executive Director Janice Levinson and Lundy Bancroft). PMA International advises protective mothers to be extremely cautious in revealing any personal custody details along with personal information about themselves and their children on the internet. Doing so, might prove to be very risky to you and your children’s personal safety and the outcome of your case.

Some safety tips for protective mothers to consider before deciding whether or not to reveal case details and personal information on the internet especially if you are in active litigation;

1. Posts on the internet create a historical footprint of you name and your child’s name which is very different if not impossible to remove.

2. Once your post is made public you have no control over who reads and shares your information.

3. Once your children become older they will most likely come across this information and this may affect your relationship.

4. Once older, your children’s peers will most likely come across this information and this may impact their friendships. In addition, this action may create your children being targets for bullies.

5. If you post personal details about your court case your judge and other court officials involved may read it and this might be used against you. Even if you post your information with the best of intentions, this does not mean court officials will see it the way you do.

6. You must be certain not to post your location or any information that could allow your abuser to find you or your children.

7. Do not use locator and map applications on face book and phones.

8. Be aware of pictures posted online that could reveal your location.

9. Caution your friends not to tag you in anything online that might reveal your location.

10. We all know when abusers are exposed the abuse escalates. Be careful about posting online custody information and personal details that could escalate abuse and endanger you and your children.

11. Be cautious and do your research on anyone asking for your personal and custody information. Also be very cautious with whom you decide to entrust your personal and custody information.

PMA International is an advocacy organization and we are not trying to discourage you from advocating for your personal custody case. We support protective mothers advocating for themselves in creative and cautious ways as to not endanger, themselves, their children and risk the outcome of their case.

The PMA International Team

Fighter

with 3 comments

Screen Shot 2014-05-30 at 12.57.07 AM

What Does The Quote That “58,000 Children Are Sent to Live With Abusers Every Year” Mean? / E.J Perth U.S.A Regional Director , Healing and Prayer Administrator- PMA International

with 2 comments

41779_128454180537124_3727_n

By E.J Perth

What does the quote that “58,000 children are sent to live with abusers every year” mean?

Actual Quote: “According to a conservative estimate by experts at the Leadership Council on Child Abuse and Interpersonal Violence (LC), more than 58,000 children a year are ordered into unsupervised contact with physically or sexually abusive parents following divorce in the United States. This is over twice the yearly rate of new cases of childhood cancer.”

This number is an estimate, the link below explains how the LC came to that number in 2008. I have not seen current numbers.

CONTACT is explained as ,”This number includes BOTH those who are left in the sole care of an abuser and those who are required to have unsupervised visits.

“The LC admits they used estimates because there was a lack of information in certain areas.

The LCl says courts often fail to detect family violence so children’s lives are put into danger, “Once placed with an abusive parent or forced to visit, children will continue to be exposed to parental violence and abuse until they reach 18. Thus, we estimate that half a million children will be affected in the US at any point of time. Many of these children will suffer physical and psychological damage which may take a lifetime to heal.”
Link: http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/med/PR3.html

WE NEED UPDATED studies and evaluations to get current information, and be able to analyze trends in family courts, and what its failures are today. Updated info will also help determine how interventions in family court are working.

Common Responses After Losing a Child (for Protective Moms)/ E. J Perth PMA INTL. USA Regional Director, Healing & Prayer Network Administrator

with 4 comments

Screen Shot 2014-03-18 at 11.00.45 PM
A list of common responses/reactions after losing a child in a family court proceeding

I feel it is important to distinguish the loss and being related to family court proceedings because often times the process involves factors that re-traumatize the family and prolong any possibility of stabilizing the family. In essence, there is a distinct type of grief that follows losing a child due to unjust proceedings that villify a parent trying to protect their children.

Mothers who loose their children in family court proceedings often experience (and report):

* Character assassination and/or emotional abuse of the mother (who may be labelled as having “Parental Alienation Syndrome” or “Malicious Mom Syndrome”)

* Minimizing past abuse and its affects/Minimizing the current danger

* Legal proceedings that deny a mother of her legal rights

* Feeling threatened or coerced by court personnel

*Expensive legal or court costs, often resulting in severe financial hardship (I have heard of mothers losing their home and being forced to work several jobs, in which their contact with their children becomes even more limited)

* Re-traumatization

* Inability to protect children combined with valid concerns the children may still be in danger

* Children forcibly removed from the home (a majority of these mothers were primary caregivers)

* Mothers denied contact with children–these children are oftn abruptly, and without warning removed from their homes, their community, their friends and any connection to the mother

* Mothers being compelled into supervised visitation to see children, and may be exposed to other abusers (I have actually heard of a woman who took the bus to supervised visitation, and was stalked by an alleged abuser when leaving the premisis)

* Inability to get help or support for herself. Mothers may have their medical and psychological records subpoened by the court and/or their abuser, in which she degraded or labelled based on the findings and then forced to “prove” she is a fit mother. Mothers may also become isolated because they feel others do not understand their situation. It is common for people to feel overwhelmed hearing these stories and then to be unable to provide support. The financial depletion caused by family court may also limit a woman’s ability to seek help. Not to mention the woman may be so overwhelmed that she does not have the energy to get the help she may need.

* DV by Proxy ; the abuser manipulating the children, or using them in ways to hurt, intimidate or harass the mother (Ie using children to send messages to the mother, telling the children false information about the mother, threatening to harm the children, threatening to take the children, etc..)

Mothers who loose their children in this way often experience:

* Physical Illness (including but not limited to headaches, ulcers, vomiting, fatigue and exhaustion)

* Anxiety/Panic Attacks

* Depression

* Guilt/Shame/ Self-Blame, particularly around issues that they failed or could not protect their children

* Flashbacks (The court proceedings may trigger memories of abuse, or legitimate fears)

* Binge Eating and/or Lack of Appetite, Nausea

* Insomnia

* Shock (A combination of all these factors, feeling numb, unable to perform daily tasks, feeling as if she is living in a fog, lack of memory/concentration, tremors/trembling, hot flashes etc)

* A surge of emotion/adrenaline

* Hyperventilating

* Post Traumatic Stress

* Avoidance (Especially around areas that remind them of their children. It would be common to even avoid social places and friends)

* Withdrawl

* Anger

* Fear

* Fits of Crying — There are often triggers. (When I lost my child, I remember avoiding the grocery store because I would pass my child’s favorite treats, think of my child, and start to cry. It got to the point where I could not even remember what I wanted in the grocery store because I was so upset.)

* Memory Loss/Concentration Difficulties

THIS DOES NOT MEAN THE MOTHER IS MENTALLY ILL OR UNSTABLE, these are typical responses to the loss of a child in combination with the extreme stress of being involved in family court proceedings that are perceived as unjust, and which a mother has no control over. It takes time to work through the grief and emotions of losing your child, and being involved in family court proceedings–these response may emerge and change as the mother processes what has happened.

I found it helpful to be part of a domestic violence group, hosted by a battered women’s shelter. The group is confidential and does not keep records. I was able to talk with other women and learn tools on how to cope, and rebuild my life. There is hope–Stay strong.

Blessings ~ EJ Perth, PMA Intl.USA Regional Director, Healing & Prayer Network Administrator

If you have anything to add to this list, please add a comment. Please keep remain respectful. Any derogatory language will be deleted. Remember PMA is a NO ABUSE ZONE! Thank you for keep it friendly 🙂

%d bloggers like this: