- promoting a clearer understanding of men's experience -


MENZ.org.nz Logo First visit to MENZ.org.nz? Here's our introduction page.
MENZ ISSUES

MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Sat 22nd December 2012

Family Court Proceedings Bill Submission Kitset – Dark Side

Filed under: General — MurrayBacon @ 3:54 pm

Our lawyers are asking the public to help protect their paramount financial interests:

Call to Action – Lawyers want public to protect their Important Gravy Train

http://childrenneedavoice.com/

Some of the links in the lawyer’s paramount interest website are wrongly put together, so to help them in their months of dire need, here is a link straight to the petition:

You can make comments on their blog:

Petition – Protect Lawyer’s Benefits from Government Cost Cutting

Are unmanaged conflicts of interest hazardous to our children and our wealth?
Vested Interests – Conflict of Interest?
Perspective on Conflict of Interests
Accountability that was never really intended to work !
Empty Pushchair Attacks Whitehall – again – in Honour of Wayne Pruden

NZ is a financially corrupted virtual image of a democracy. To protect this with all of it’s financial and legal corruptions, consider signing the petition to support corruption, at the cost of children: Corruption paramount over children! Petition

Make up your mind – do you want to supporrt the high integrity, well dressed bunch who aren’t yet in jail but should be, or the wife beaters who are dressed like they have been robbed and love their children……
Do you know how much it costs to support a mistress, or to keep a toyboy or toygirl off the streets? No – then you are on the wrong side!
Join the winners – profit from human trafficking and relationship vandalism.
Raise your blood pressure and heartbeat with unethical pleasures, live life according to the parable of the ten talents. Don’t waste your time on this earth worrying about your children, screw anybody that you can make money out of.
Get a law degree and surrender your humanity, to gain wealth and expensive clothing and more orgasms than you need to stay alive.
And you losers that pay child [and spousal] support, show some sympathy, support your lawyers now that their Government benefits are under threat. Do you want judges to be forced to do burglaries, just to stay afloat? –
support the establishment, not the great unwashed riff raff.
Protect your children from a corrupt familycaught$ and legal system.

3 Responses to “Family Court Proceedings Bill Submission Kitset – Dark Side”

  1. MurrayBacon says:

    The Lawyer’s Income Protection website links to 1 short video:

    YouTube video 1 4 views when I looked on 23/12/2012
    (YouTube seems to be mixing up several Noel Perrys.)

    The YouTube video has been assembled by Noel Perry, who appears to be one of the lawyers at Robyn Mathews Lawyer, Whangarei:
    Lawyer Details in Family Law Section
    http://www.familylaw.org.nz/public/find_a_lawyer/lawyer?mid=F006473
    Email: christopherofnz@yahoo.com

    The video is 39 seconds long. Listening to it, I had the feeling that I was sitting in court, listening to a lawyer talking barely truthful drivel.

    It is slightly sarcastic at Judith Collins. Then it goes on to emphasise the cost of counselling and making an application to Family Court.
    It seems to be aimed at people who don’t see themselves as taxpayers, who perceive themselves as eternal beneficiaries.

    Thus, although their campaign is headlined “Children Need A Voice”, the arguments seem to be focussed on lawyer’s benefits (the other side of parent’s costs), rather than protecting the interests of children. The biggest issue in children’s interests is protection of children’s relationships, not parent’s cash costs. Children’s paramount interests just don’t seem to be mentioned at all. Maybe these lawyers don’t want to hear anything about children’s real world paramount interests?

    If I am right, then the Lawyer’s Income Protection website is just naked, paramount self interest, dishonestly dressed up as concern for children’s interests. This echoes what goes on, day in, day out, in the familycaught$, at a wasteful cost to all taxpayers.

    Maybe there needs to be a Taxpayer Protection Website, where the lawyer’s self interest promotion is pointed out?

  2. MurrayBacon says:

    Dear Thane Haarhoff,

    your points and Maree’s points are valid. You ask ‘Why does it not happen?’.

    I seem to recall DeepThroat saying to the Washington Post reporters, ‘Follow the money’, as an answer to almost all of their questions about President Nixon and his henchmen..

    In our own situation, the checks and balances that you refer to are all present in the existing Family Court Act, Care of Children Act, CYFs Act, Crimes Act (perjury), Family Proceedings Act, the Family Court Rules and the regulations associated with these Acts. These were all passed by Parliament, with the overt intention, to protect children and their families.

    Please think through the terms of trade, under which judges work in the employment of Her Majesty. Flat hourly payment rate, with no checks and balances at all. Even the Principal Judges, are unable to discipline their employees, for anything that the police could not bring them to account.

    Very, very, very few private employers employ their staff, from such a weak position. If they did, they would be out of business within a few years at the most. The Government chooses to not have effective systems of discipline. Most MPs are lawyers, so I wonder why?

    How then could we hope for the NZ Courts to function efficiently and competently, if we, the employer fail to discipline the staff competently? This oversight failure is not just Family Court, but any of the Courts in NZ. Secrecy removes the discipline by informed public debate. The failure to manage is complete.

    We cannot complain if we pay the staff to treat us in this way, we deserve everything we get from our judges. We must take responsibility for our own failure to manage the courts. Lets manage the Courts for positive results. We cannot afford not to. Just look at the cost of prisons.

    It is democratically important that people act, to support initiatives like this, for a more cost effective Family Court.
    ————————————————————————–
    I wonder if this comment will survive on the Lawyer’s Benefits Protection Website?
    Only time will tell?
    Children could be ‘silenced’ in Family Court shake-up
    I wonder if dear old Professor Henaghen is being quoted out of context? He is an old gentleman, I suspect he doesn’t know the half of what really goes on in the familycaught$. I know he is sensible enough, not to want to be fully informed. This is why he is safely an academic. Safer than our children, alas.
    The link above shows a TVNZ news item which was taken straight from the material provided by lawyers. In my opinion, this short segment lacks professional journalistic balance, but I dare not criticise the profit media, as TVNZ is a bit better than newspaper print media.
    I am giving up on alcohil, it just doesn’t hit the spot any more. I am having to drink too much, I need more effective chemicals, multiple personality escapes and drug distractions.
    Cheers, Murray Bacon – furious, frustrated(sexually, drug-wise and democratically) fragmented axe murderer..

  3. MurrayBacon says:

    I attach an anonymous complaint about Australian Family Court, written supposedly by a mother. I am always very suspicious of anonymous complaints, but in any case, it seems to illustrate that women have a large number of complaints about Family Court too.

    Men might like to make their own complaints, in the form of a submission and then append this “mother’s” complaint, to show that these problems and malpractices do need to be addressed, to protect our society from legal workers.
    There are many examples of feminist scholarship in this article….
    ___________________________________________________________________________________
    Presented at the Child Sexual Abuse: Justice Response or Alternative Resolution Conference
    convened by the Australian Institute of Criminology
    and held in Adelaide, 1-2 May 2003
    2

    Chief Justice Alistair Nicholson is on record as saying that child abuse cases should
    not be heard in the Family Court.
    I have to agree.
    The Court is ill equipped to make decisions about children’s safety. Judges are experts
    in law: not in child abuse or child psychology. Lawyers likewise.
    It is laid down that the primary concern of the Family Court Judge has to be the best
    interests of the child. From the dozens of cases I have seen while waiting in the
    Family Court, I can tell you that they’ve lost the plot. Child protection isn’t happening.
    Unfortunately, I can’t identify myself or my child because of the secrecy surrounding
    Family Court cases “¦ secrecy that can hide bizarre decisions from the public. Secrecy
    that enables Judges to hand children to their abusers knowing that they can’t be sued
    for their mistakes or the damage they might cause. If they had to be accountable, how
    different things might be!
    I was a very vulnerable divorcee with two children … when I met the father of my
    youngest child. We lived together for only six months because of domestic violence.
    My partner was sick but he refused to follow doctor’s advice to have blood tests.
    Later, I discovered that his refusal related to the fact that he was concealing
    HIV/AIDS.
    My partner was irresponsible with his disease, proof of which lies in the fact that I
    became pregnant and gave birth to our daughter in 1995. I subsequently learned that
    my partner had 26 criminal convictions, 2 of which were for sexual assault –
    commuted from rape.
    He also admitted to his doctor that he was bi-sexual and in 1997, when he seroconverted
    to AIDS, it was estimated that he had been positive for up to 10 years and
    had a life expectancy of only 7 years.
    Although my partner had not lived with us and had little contact with our baby
    daughter, he applied to the Family Court for supervised access. He gained sympathy
    and I was perceived as the bad person who was discriminating against an AIDS
    victim.
    Concerned about the safety of my child, I moved away, taking her with me.
    Three months later, I was tracked down by Federal Police who literally snatched my
    young daughter from me and took her into foster care. I had no idea where she was.
    Police notified her father of her whereabouts. He collected her and took her to his
    home where she’s been ever since.
    The father was granted continuous access and, subsequently custody of the child.
    Given his medical and criminal history, one can only assume that I was being
    punished for trying to protect my daughter by removing her without the permission of
    the Court. Interestingly, the Trial Judge described his sex offending as “trivial” and
    irrelevant.
    The abduction of my daughter was the most horrendous experience of my life. She
    was only three years old, had neve r lived with her dad or anyone else but me.
    3

    It’s widely known that trauma of this kind can cause brain damage to children of this
    age. What could be more traumatic than being physically torn from your mother,
    delivered into the hands of strangers, put into a strange bed in a strange house then
    handed to a very sick man you scarcely know. She never knew whether she would see
    me again and feared I was gone forever. In other words, my child was psychologically
    abused by the very system designed to protect her.
    Police told me that I would get my daughter back within a month if I returned to the
    Adelaide Family Court. Four years later, at the age of seven, she is the primary
    caregiver to a man dying of AIDS.
    This is with the full knowledge and approval of Family Court Judges and Family and
    Youth Services.
    Her education is disrupted. She exhibits severe behaviour problems at school. She
    can’t socialise as other children socialise.
    In the interim period, there have been numerous reports to the Child Abuse Helpline
    that my daughter has been physically, sexually and emotionally abused and neglected
    by her father and sexually abused by her half-brother.
    FAYS will not act to protect my child because the case is in the Family Court. My
    child is one of the many who have fallen into the gap between Federal and State
    Govermments.
    My contact with my daughter is restricted to three six-hour sessions a month or 9 days
    a year.
    International research shows that children lose their relationship with their parent if
    they don’t see them for 50% of the year.
    Because I took my child away four years ago, I am considered to be the dangerous
    parent and our meetings have to be supervised.
    Each Christmas, I have to apply to the Family Court for her to spend time with her
    maternal relatives and siblings. In 2001 I was granted from 9am-12 noon. I have to
    travel 75 kilometres to my ex partner’s home, have no car and, of course, on Christmas
    Day there is no rural public transport.
    Last year, I again applied for Christmas access and was told that my application would
    be heard on January 6th “¦ ensuring that no Christmas contact took place.
    People ask, “Why is your child living with her father? You must have done something
    wrong”
    My crime was to try to protect my child from a man whose criminal history would
    preclude him from working in any service with children.
    My crime was to return to the Family Court again and again without legal aid while
    my partner was almost always represented.
    On one occasion recently, the Judge said I needed to get professional help to deal with
    my inability to accept that the Family Court is fulfilling its duty to act in my child’s
    best interests.

    4
    Time after time, when I go to Court, the discussion revolves around the system:
    completing appropriate forms, having permission to make an application. “¦ lots of
    legal jargon which has nothing to do with the dangers to, or the needs of the child.
    Often, she isn’t even mentioned.
    The focus is on the rights of adults, not the safety of children.
    One Family Court Judge banned me from making applications without her permission
    “¦ and she refused permission.
    Recently, the Judge told the father to put it in his will that I do not get my child back
    when he dies of AIDS!
    Why didn’t I appeal against the Court’s final decision?
    The child’s father was legally represented; I was not.
    Had I lost the case, I would have had to pay his costs … about 20 thousand dollars. I
    would have had to pay for copies of the court transcript … costing over $7000.
    My concern right now is that my child lives with a dying man and nobody gives a
    damn. There are no plans for her protection when he is too sick to care for her. And I
    am assured by FAYS that when he dies, there is no guarantee that the Family Court
    will return her to me “¦ her mother.
    She could go into foster care causing further psychological damage.
    It seems that, for having the effrontery to challenge the system, the Family Court can
    and may punish me for the duration of my daughter’s childhood and adolescence.
    And by that time it may be too late.
    If this is the best that Australia can do to protect our children … may God help them …
    because no one else will.
    ___________________________________________________________________

Leave a Reply

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

Since May 2019 this site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

« »

Powered by WordPress

Skip to toolbar