Comments on: Hawkes Bay Family Court Watch

By: Jim Bailey

Jim Bailey — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 09:38:07 +0000

War-4-Kids WAGON leaves Birkenhead

Tuesday 24July 10am

Overnight in Taupo

Dinner and billets in Hastings Wed – Thurs – Fri – Sat

Return to Taupo for dinner and billets Sunday

Home by 2pm Monday 30July

Passengers Share petrol to get there I pay the overhead – HB will fund trip home – Onward – Jim 027-429-0055 -/- 09-480-4373

By: JimBWarrior - HandsOnEqualParent

JimBWarrior - HandsOnEqualParent — Thu, 17 May 2007 09:40:49 +0000

John-M,

Several from Palmy/Levin are joining the efforts Napier/Hasting at the end of July

Consider coming over with them and meeting the growing army that seek real change in the Matrix of Family Law and Social Policy

If you are interested get in touch with Viv re a billet and we can arrange for you to meet those coming from your area

Onward in Coalition with others to Re-Build the **Whole-NATURAL-Biological-FAMILY** – Jim

By: John Maxwell

John Maxwell — Thu, 17 May 2007 09:28:33 +0000

Just received my judgement – another negative over in Levin. I found this website and am starting to wonder what it will take to get justice; will it have to wait for some father to totally lose it and shoot someone. Something I would never condone but the overall Justice system is going down the gurgler. Do we need to form a Political Party – “The Justice Party”?

By: Hans Laven

Hans Laven — Fri, 11 May 2007 07:09:43 +0000

I am willing to view any psychologists’ reports that might happen to be put before me, and to comment on any shortcomings or possible breaches of the Psychologists Code of Ethics. Many of the reports I have seen prepared for the FC involved such problems. I used to do reports for the FC but all referrals stopped after I came out in support of the fathers’ movement. My e-mail is hans@xnet.co.nz

By: Benjamin Easton

Benjamin Easton — Fri, 11 May 2007 01:08:53 +0000

I’ll be there.

By: Karl Brett

Karl Brett — Thu, 10 May 2007 22:59:00 +0000

This is the father who has experienced the events in 9. at the hands of Judge von Dadelszen…to continue with the story the final order of 5 hrs restricted contact was granted in February 2007. A vehicle was required to allow this contact to occur. Six weeks later the vehicle was seized to cover court costs….and effectively shutting down contact yet again.

I would very much appreciate shadowdad contacting me, as I too wish to look at the options of sueing the State for breach of human rights of both father and children as well as child abuse

By: Gary Brown

Gary Brown — Thu, 10 May 2007 22:32:38 +0000

Hi Guys,

I did not believe that this stuff actually went on, but after personally witnessing the corruption in the judiciary in this country I am appalled. If you look at the web site http://www.kiwisfirst.co.nz you will see first hand a lot of corruption occuring in the high court and court of appeal. I initially thought that it was only in the family court that this bias and corruption was evident. The truth will prevail, and scum like boshier will be taken to task with his smokescreen tacticts. Ever wondered why there have been 273 complaints received by the Judicial Conduct Commissioner and not one of them have been investigated. One was my complaint against Judge Anne Mc aloon for lying in her judgement, and making up evidence which was not there (By the way I have her on record as saying that it is not helpful to the court to submit affidavits – They are merely opinions of your friends – This she said to affidavits of people who were well qualified professionals in child development!).

The Truth will prevail. i support you fully
Good Luck and keep fighting for the sake of our children

Gary Brown
A warrior in this campaign for childrens rights.

By: shadowdad

shadowdad — Thu, 10 May 2007 21:55:05 +0000

Different judge, same treatment;
1. Father is denied contact for 2 months despite shared parenting order.
2. Father applies X-parte for “enforcement of contact”
3. Judge T awards “order to enforce contact”. (a caring judge)
3. Next day mother’s lawyer applies to have order rescinded on the basis that father didn’t tell the courts about a letter he never received. (she sent it to the lawyer who was representing him prior to becoming self-represented, and neither lawyer forwarded it to the father. Was this a set up?)
4. Judge B immediately rescinds Judge T’s “order to enforce contact”, changes fathers X-parte application to On-notice and sets a hearing date.
5. At hearing Judge B establishes that there was no protection orders, no history, hint or possibilty of harm to the child (except in mother’s care, but that didn’t count), and mother admits that father is very good with son and would never harm him.
6. Judge B delivers oral decision days later, ordering “supervised contact” and giving mother “Interim custody”. (Family Court rules state supervised contact only where there is potential harm to child)
7. Despite the Contact Supervisor saying that the interaction between father and child was the closest he had ever witnessed in his years of observation (obvious…father was formerly primary caregiver), Supervised contact of 2 hours per week continued for 5 months, followed by 1 month of 4 hours per week.
8. Father sues NZ government for breaches of human rights, financial losses, stress, loss of enjoyment, and child abuse, and retires with son in a father/child friendly country as far from NZ as possible.

By: Dr Dad

Dr Dad — Thu, 10 May 2007 21:34:42 +0000

The story on comment 9 is not my story but one of the guys in Hawkes Bay.

By: Pete

Pete — Thu, 10 May 2007 21:00:52 +0000

1. VD grants supervised contact
2. The X repeatedly impedes this draconian type of contact
3. VD admonishes the X
4. The X disregards the admonishment and continues to impede supervised contact
5. Father applies for “Order to enforce contact” and “Bond”
6. VD *scolds* the father in court for applying for an “order to enforce contact”. He tells the father that it would be disaterous for the children if Police came and picked them up from the mothers house. VD was APPALED that the father even applied for such an order!