Publication of Proceedings
Dear John,
Keep it Legal
The content of any post is solely the responsibility of the poster. You may register using a psuedonym if you want your identity kept secret, however your email address (which is never displayed) must be valid. You are encouraged to discuss your experiences in the Family Court, but if you do you MUST NOT include any information which identifies you or your children. Be aware that MENZ will cooperate with authorities in supplying copies of posts and any information we have concerning the identity of a poster (ie: I’m not prepared to go to jail to protect your identity!).
My identity is far from being protected, I have been bandied around in the International Media as a wife and child batterer of 22 years SWEDEN KICKS OUT SHAUN
SHAUN IN THE MEDIA AGAIN
I have made application to the Family Court to publish all aspects of this case which makes “Kramer v Kramer” look like a veritable tea party as I am constantly being usurped, defamed, marginalised and generally shafted by unethical legal workers and Judiciary, which include Judith Surgenor who lied to Judge David Mather and continues in promoting hostility to further her sows purse, Judge David Mather whom I have publicly called incompetent,biased or corrupt. I reiterate my objections to this pioneer of the socialist experiment of the DVA1995.
Diane Ransfield who has been Counsel For Child in this ongoing saga shares legal premises with Counsel for Mother.
Same Telephone, Same fax, Same pillow talk, Any independance?????
The Perjurious Family that I am continually having to defend against are continually being shielded by the Court and my insistence for the Court to utilise it’s obligatory powers are dismissed offhand as they wont investigate or prosecute.
I will state for this record that I have been described as a person who disrespects Authority yet the opposite is evident, my Uncle, whom was revered as a Senior Superindent of Police, Awarded the DSM and a MBE for his services to “Her Majesty” in Policing.
He is completely aghast to what has transpired in this Country that we are fortunate or infortunate to call home.
To date I have not revealed any nitty gritty details of my sufferings for the past 22 years althouh Judge Ida Malosi thinks contrary, watch this space, subject to John P.
Posts RSS 2.0
Hi Paul,
Hmmm. I am not sure what is going on here and I hope my first impression is wrong.
I am very pleased with any progress you make for men who follow the same road and I am as sad for your past as I am for mine. Different circumstances, same pain.
However, I am finding that NZ people aren’t just intersted in men’s rights regarding the FC. As you know we have a new hoiday camp, I mean prison for women when we should be giving more resources to the majority which are men and we have youth problems which once again affect young males more than young females and then of course health issues where males seem to be less important than females.
My point is that a site such as this is valuable to all males whether fighting the FC or dealing with the rights of males in other areas.
I would hate to see this site closed down. It is already closely watched.
And yet I am in favour of free speech. So which is more important at this time?
Comment by julie — Thu 22nd June 2006 @ 10:53 pm
Hey Paul,
I admire your stand and your patience. I have listened to you and protested beside you, but I can only imagine your pain. As you may know, my pain was only brief, 64 days, as my child was returned to NZ.
As far as C4C and mother’s council being so geographically, proffessionally and socially close, one wonders where the line of “conflict of interest” can be drawn.
I have a similar issue with lawyers regarding the sale of my house.
I sold my house to pay for supervised access (A punative desicion for me going to the media), and 18 months later the deal on my house has turned to custard.
The lawyer who represented me can’t (or won’t) help me, stating that the other party’s lawyer is within the same law firm, and therefore there is a conflict of interest.
Well, to my knowledge, they were in the same law firm when we originally signed over the house, so wasn’t there a conflict of interest then?
There is very little I can do, since lawyers are only accountable to lawyers, judges are only accountable to judges and so on…
The law society fobs me off (perhaps becuase the first lawyer I complained about is now the president).
There is something seriously wrong with not just the Family Court, but the whole legal system.
I’m sure it wouldn’t stand up to the kind of auditing and scrutiny that any normal organisation, corporation or club would regularly undergo.
It’s time the gravy train was de-railed!
Comment by Wayne — Fri 23rd June 2006 @ 8:16 am
Hi Paul
How bizarre that a mother can have her side of the story splashed across a Scandinavian tabloid, (accompanied by posed and emotionally loaded photographs). but you must supposedly remain silent.
I can’t read the writing, but I assume it’s a one sided account. Is this allowed, in that Scandinavian country? Although bizarre, it’s sadly also not surprising, because it seems that when it comes to de-fathering children, anything goes no matter how low or unjust.
best wishes in your efforts towards re-unification.
Paul M
Comment by PaulM — Fri 23rd June 2006 @ 10:47 am
I do read Swedish and the article states that if the child were returned to New Zealand alone you wouldn’t be allowed custody due to an assault conviction? Is there any veracity in that?
Comment by Ed — Fri 23rd June 2006 @ 1:18 pm
two years ago in the femily caught I asked the judge a question and i quote
“Is it in the best interest of my children and the femily caught that I never see my children again.
Everytime I have made an attempt to see my children the FC has seen fit to punish me for doing so.
The FC at that time had blocked me seeing my children for 18 months, the FC had seen fit to punish me with PD in the form of anger management classes, the FC had ordered that I be responsible for all costs of court, C4C, counsellors, and for my ex wife’s lawyer too.
I proceeded to tell the Judge that the only crime I was guilty of was loving my children at a time when their mother had abandoned them.
So is it in the best interest of my children that I never see them again.”
His response was that I obviously have a lot of contempt for the FC and ajourned the proceedings that day.
I was then called back to court on a day that I was due in the district court at the same time for his decision. I couldn’t be in 2 places at the same time and informed FC that i was already in court at that time. The FC went ahead and ruled against me again and I still don’t see my boys. It’s been 4 years now and the Judge was right, I DO have contempt for the Femily Caught.
Comment by Mike Paterson — Fri 23rd June 2006 @ 2:35 pm
I celebrate five heartbroken years trapped inside the femily court cess pit.July 12 -2001 =6 x sets of protection orders & the rest is sad history of PAS, prejudice & corruption.The system has never once wanted to acknowledge the existance of the strong emotional bonds of LOVE that I enjoyed with my daughters in their early childhood years. If I told you what I would like to do with the femily court then this web site would be shut down by sunset !!!! careful d4j - only joking -lol - for the enemy spies . In solidarity -kids need dads too - dad4justice
Comment by Peter Burns — Fri 23rd June 2006 @ 3:03 pm
I have protection orders against me as well,funny thing is my ex has a new man in her life whom is more of a threat to me than me to him but he is covered in the protection order.
however why don’t they have an expiry date!!
Comment by Mike Paterson — Fri 23rd June 2006 @ 4:19 pm
From my observation here and brief experience of being a victim of the FC (there) it appears that the FC has taken on the roll of delivering a sick vendetta or punishment regimen. It was kind of said between the lines by that retiring Judge when he said.
“What often seems to get overlooked in criticisms of the Family Court is that the originating problems brought to it are not of the court’s making.”
That statement in another regard is disputable in itself particularly after the first hearing in a FC.
What I read and again from my experience “someone must be punished”.
And that goes for Child Support as well especially and Admin reviews.
In my ignorance when I took a matter to the FC I expected a healthy family type out come but so sadly I was treated like a very low form of life. Then I decided that from what I saw and experienced that I would not stand a chance of a fair hearing or out come (on any matter) that would be based on integrity.
I think WHAT A WASTE OF A RESOURCE.
And a waste of so much family money. The waste is, that the money, it goes to a lobby of people who can make more money by kicking the snot out people who are down in a personal, emotional and probably spiritual way.
My heart goes out to the Men and children (or who ever) that are literally Caught in a system of punishment.
Lets keep working on ripping the establishment of such ill repute down and out.
I’m yet to hear a story that puts the FC where it should be in high esteem.
Who would complain about publication if the out come of FC cases were to the satisfaction of parties concerned?
Comment by Phoenix — Fri 23rd June 2006 @ 8:15 pm
The reason I put that warning there is that I don’t want anyone writing here to be under the illusion that I would willingly march off to jail shouting defiently: “I’ll never reveal my sources.”
My most important role in life at the moment is as the primary caregiver in our family, while Felicity pursues her accademic career. You can’t be much of a dad locked in a cell!
I also don’t encourage people to break the law - I think it is possible to reveal a significant amount without identifying participants, and without overstepping the boundries of legal protest
I admit my attitude might be quite different if I had a supervised access nazi in my face every weekend, but I thankfully don’t.
Of course in your case Paul, and other high-profile cases such as Stephen Jelecich, keeping names hidden would be pointless.
I hope MENZ doesn’t get closed down - I think it offers the authorities a unique and valuable insight into the impact their decisions have on actual people.
Comment by JohnP — Fri 23rd June 2006 @ 9:32 pm
Right on John P.
nz is such a village you don’t need to go online to tell folks what’s going on. Word soon gets round the beer, wine and latte circles.
I told lots of friends back there all the crooked goings on I came accross in Abu femcaught.
No one subsequently came knocking at my door with a warrant.
True democracy means having free speech.
It’s what our menfolk at Gallipolli died for - To be spared the yoke of Faccism.
Now it seems we of today’s generation have our own faccists to fight, but this time they’re gender faccists who use gas, bombs and bullets, but instead use cultural warfare propoganda to disparage and demonise fathers at every twist and turn. Thier warcrimes are painted as vituous actions by dupes and mercenaries alike.
There exists too much ‘we mustn’t break family court confidences because it will damage the kids’ rhetoric which is actually abuse wrapped up in tinsel and sugar coated.
All this sickeningly often to keep wraps on many terribly biased decisions made against dads and the poor sodding kids who are rendered fatherless.
All of this so soon too - So soon after good Kiwi men died in the putrid mud and blood of European battlegrounds, smitten and splattered to preserve democracy in thier homelands.
Oh, woe is me. How soon we forgot!
Oh, how I ache for my son and our sons and daughters to be loved firm in the bonds of thier fathers.
This is a lamentable shame for all honorable Kiwis to carry.
I’d vouch simply too lamentable and heavy for many to bear just yet, and so they, like I once did, suck up the great saccarine coated feminist lies and choose denial of this great and ugly nz truth.
I know this because it’s my lived experience and I’ve subsequently held enough men to know it’s all too commonplace.
I’ll never be swayed to surrender this truth unless I allow myself to once again become deluded and self loathing as our misguided feminist tormentors would want. However, that’s not going to happen as I continue to excercise my birthright to free speech.
So here below is my own judgement as a free man -
Crime scene - Hamilton Family ‘court’.
Crimes - Child abduction, extortion, perjury, fraud.
Principal defathering agent - Judge Twaddle in Hamilton.
Accomplice - Counsel for Child Richard Gerram.
Defathering interrogation Officer and chief brainwasher - Psychologist Ruth Arcus.
Accomplice - Melanie Harland ‘legal’ representative.
I hereby sentence you all to Kharmic detention.
Comment by Stephen — Sat 24th June 2006 @ 1:00 am
I would like to thank JohnP for openly softening his attitude towards publication, and also for a simple acknowledgment that so many people can’t comprehend - as you say John (I admit my attitude might be quite different if ). If you want to publish, publish the injustice, the lies, and the incompetence. Look at all the family court staff that have had a good public floor mopping so far. The reality of what is happening is getting through to the media, and the public. If authority cannot do what is right, then society must. We don’t have to suffer for the sake of the legal few. Perhaps that should be the illegal few.
Comment by Bevan Berg — Sat 24th June 2006 @ 9:45 am
Yes to your last posting Bevan. I echo your thanks to JP for taking an ethical stand and exemplifying -Satyagraha.
Satyagraha is the philosophy of nonviolent resistance most famously employed by Mohandas Gandhi in forcing an end to the British Raj and also against apartheid in South Africa.
Satya is Sanskrit for Truth, and Agraha is used to describe an effort, endeavor. The term itself may be construed to mean any effort to discover, discern, obtain or apply Truth. The word is rooted in Sanskrit, Hindi and Gujarati.
Comment by Stephen — Sat 24th June 2006 @ 11:05 am
I obsolutely agree with everything said above, I am a victim of state funded child abuse, pergury, and wastage of public and state money.
I will fight to the end to change this dysfunctional system to protect the society of New Zealand from this dysgraceful family Court system.
Both Paul and Wayne ( who I have met ) are loving caring fathers, who deserve a medal for sheer determination.
julian
Comment by Julian — Sat 24th June 2006 @ 7:59 pm
Story of luck I think - off the topic but couldn’t find elsewhere to post.
I’ve read comments on this site for years now and yes, I know the pain, been there….
I took perhaps an unusual approach to the legal system. Maybe by luck, as I was very alone but I kept the solicitors out apart from drafting separation documents exactly as I directed and using a solicitor as the sole conduit for communications with the ex. forever after.
I don’t really need to go into the details, you all have similar tales but in summary:
The ex decided the milkman was a better prospect and booted me out.
I took the separation and divorce on the chin. Decided I’d get nowhere fighting and so gave up 80% assets and moved away (to avoid community scorn and find work).
I didn’t fight for custody (knew I’d lose) but maintained contact directly with the kids (9 & 11) via internet and a common relative. As your members know well, it was an extreme hurt. I couldn’t bring myself to visit them for 3 years and I died the lesser death so horribly common.
What did I do right?
I went with the legal flow and didn’t fight it.
I clung to that tenuous contact of monthly emails, whether theu answered or not and let them know, without getting in the way, that I was always here for them. My life hung on that contact, but they will never know that.
I never, ever discussed the ex.
The outcome was unexpected.
After 3 years the boys (then 12 & 14) fell out with the live-in milkman No.2 or 3, boarded a plane and knocked on my door. When the dust settled (where are they, did I abduct them), the lawyers agreed that the FC was unlikely to order the kids back to the step-father arrangement against their wishes. I didn’t get involved in that fight but stayed neutral.
So I became full time father again.
That’s 5 years ago now.
They visited and still do visit their mother every other year, at her expense.
There were winners and losers in this. I stayed neutral and luck turned for me eventually, but against her.
However, I do understand the pain of many of your contributers.
regards
epres (formerly NZ now in Oz)
Comment by epres — Sun 25th June 2006 @ 4:09 pm
Paul, JohnP, Stephan, Bevan, Julian and Epres,
You have added so much to our hope and our strength, and I thank you all for that.
Epres, you should be commended for your stand; but my son is simply too young (3), and without my fight, he would never know how much I love him and how important we are to each other.
As many of you know, I am soon to walk to Wellington to deliver a petition to Parliament. My petition is simple; I request a full enquiry into the Family Court system. I will be pushing a pram on the 600km journey; a symbol of the hurt I felt when my partner left me when she met the \”milkman\”. Our 8 month old son had undergone open heart surgery only 4 weeks earlier.
The main problem as I see it will not be the 600km walk in the middle of winter, but rather, the case information I intend to release during my walk. As you all know, there is fine line between appealing to the emotions of the public to gain their support and breaching Family Court rules.
It’s simple; if the public knew what was going on, they would be happy to see the judge’s head paraded around town on the end of a stick. But the judge and her ilk have ensured there are laws to ensure their protection, no matter what they do!
Solutions would come from carefully managed government intervention, ensuring that the judicial system delivers fast, efficient services that put the child’s best interests first, and wherever possible, act to preserve the family as \”two halves living separately\”, rather than enemies fighting over a child.
I am a decent honest dad, who simply made an application to the FC for custody of my only child after the mother told she had met another man. Yet I have been treated more severely than a person convicted of murder, and 2 ½ years later I am still waiting for my day in court. It is not my intention to break any law, yet Family Court rules conveniently ensure that publicly discussing my case is a breach of the law. I will attempt to stay within the law, while courting the public for their support, and while preserving the \”tentative\” relationship I have with my x partner. I have never considered myself a circus act, but that’s about what it will take; the skills of a master juggler.
Comment by Wayne — Sun 25th June 2006 @ 8:05 pm
Dear Wayne,
As a radical I wish you luck, even though we see things differently. I hope you succeed for NZ men, and all men worldwide, and in so doing avoid the problems that are to come if you are given your 5 minutes of fame and generally ignored. If you succeed in getting any real moves by the establishment you will prove me wrong and I’ll have to eat crow, but if they do nothing, or next to nothing (5 minutes on the tube distorted again), it might be time to admit some of us radicals might have something to add to the moderates’ PC, non-generalizing, wrapping yourself in the children approach. This isn’t from a person who has sat on the sidelines and second guesssed, for over 10 years ago I went to a parliamentary committee touring the country and was the lone male (in the afternoon session) representing fathers. I too learned a lot that day, and hope that you learn something or prove me wrong. I will use my resources around the world to draw attention to you moves, for you are acting directly and deserve our support before you succeed, than simply jumping on the bandwagon after you have succceeded.
Again good luck and we will be crossing our fingers,
Intrepid
Comment by Intrepid — Tue 27th June 2006 @ 12:26 pm
Epres
you were lucky in that your kids were of an age to understand what was going on around them.
the situation of explaining to a kid who has been brainwashed from the age of 2 is a lot difficult to get around or near impossible. Nothing less than a severe shock event would cause them to question what they have been brainwashed with ….
hence yes you are extremely llucky.
Comment by star — Tue 27th June 2006 @ 5:07 pm
Dear Intrepid,
Wayne is not a lone man. He has an army behind him. I tell you that these NZ men are not one’s to be reckoned with.
When the tough gets going, the tough stand and fight.
Comment by julie — Tue 27th June 2006 @ 6:03 pm
Dear Intrepid,
The type of mission I am about to embark on has been attempted before; That I am painfully aware of. However, those before me, including yourself and Ben, I see as heroes, because you acted at time when our grievances where virtually unknown to the public.
Now the environment is different, and public awareness is at an all-time high, thanks to the work of the NZ Father’s Coalition, Fathers 4 Justice, Stephen Jellicich, and many individuals who have devoted much of their time to bringing about awareness and improving the lot of children and families, separated or otherwise.
I thank you for your support, and fingers crossed, we can one get together and discuss the battle in past tense, as victors standing side by side. If I don’t succeed in initiating an enquiry by the House of Representatives, then at least I have removed another block from the wall. I guess I’ll owe you one eh.
I respect what you say, and I thank you and anyone else who throws a bucket of cold reality over me. Recent times have caused my skin to thicken and very little surprises me anymore.
And, Julie, wonderful Julie, you keep it up girl. Without you and Intrepid, our minds might become hollow cobwebbed voids. I am going to miss your posts dearly during my walk to Wellington. Hmmmm…have I generalised here?
Comment by Wayne — Wed 28th June 2006 @ 6:57 pm