These people act with impunity, and their behaviour doesn’t improve as complaints are never acted upon. When the state is concerned with its own interests rather than that of its citizens, then there is little option other than to get personal. Looking back at history, one can only say, it was an effective protest, and the North Shore Family Court got a whole more friendly when the Silly Bitch left, shortly after.

I fully agree with Jim’s comments in the NZ Herald article:

Union of Fathers president Jim Bagnall said he did not know what the protests outside lawyer’s homes would achieve.

“But we have seen what pressure has achieved from our Family Court protests for six years. We got a change in the law. ”

He said the Union of Fathers would evaluate the effectiveness of the demonstrations before deciding whether to continue.

“I personally don’t like it very much because it gets down to a form of tribalism. But on the other hand … children’s human rights in this [Family] court are being violated in a gross way.”

I also think we need to be very aware of the danger of an ‘agent provocateur’ or two initiating some illegal act designed to destroy the credibility of Union of Fathers. This tactic seems to have stopped the very successful UK Fathers4Justice group in its tracks.

I have discussed this issue previously, in the editorial for the October 2000 MENZ Issues.

The targeted lawyers are not drawn at random from the Yellow Pages.
They have subjected themselves to this form of protest because of family devastation they have willingly abetted.
The judge & jury does consist of a panel of peers, who are dedicated in trying to establish the concept of equal parenting despite the obstructional practices of all that are fed from the belly of the System.
Our panel is formed from a coalition of fathers/parent interest groups, and have well over 60 years collective experience with our own and our further involvement in the assisting of others who fall as prey in this devastating and profitable Industry.
We are fully aware which apples in the barrel are free from taint.

Regards
Paul Catton

Had they exercised sound judgement in the first place, your second incident would not have occurred nor would there have been the need to waste court time, money and strong emotions

I’m just making the point that we cannot expect perfection from individuals that operate in one of the most emotionally driven courts in the system. Consistent patterns of bias I will protest against.

Quoting : “…whose task and responsibility it is to represent father, mother and child without fear or favour”

I didn’t think it possible, but it appears they [the judges] believe that they are actually being fair with thier rulings.

Although I guess they are just exercising the law laid down, but somehow it doesn’t seem right : To be a Judge, do you have to have no concept of morality ?