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

Sat 12th November 2016

Questions… of law and procedures-Family Courts

Filed under: General,Law & Courts — WrongGender @ 8:52 am

1- Should an ed-psych be writing s133 reports for the Family Courts

I was under the impression one had to be a clinical psychologist??? Any info welcome.

EDIT: Yes the courts can assign whomever they want even counselors to write clinical psychologist reports as in Nelson (30 years

2- Should an ed-psych with a history of International parental abduction be permitted to practice as a psychologist for the courts?

I ask this in light of the public interest, would this not put the courts at risks and or bring the courts into disrepute for having a potential witness with such huge possible credibility issues.

EDIT: Answer- if the psychologist is vetted by the board of psychologist then by all means – courts can do with them as they wish for as long that do not know – what if a complaint is made? The courts investigate.

3- Is it appropriate for a judge to assign her self a case when she is and resides at the opposite end of the country?

Specially a new judge whom had extensive working relationship with L4C in her previous role as lawyer.
And one whom has had an extensive working relationship with the local registry in her former role as lawyer.

4- And if this (3) is so – should it not be made clear to all parties that she is the out-of-town Judge assigned to a case – As part of the order stating an out of town judge is to deal with a particular case?

4- Is it true that that a family court judge has no power or jurisdiction to order a s133 report when there is an application to discharge or vary an existing parenting order and when claims of emotional and psychological abuse are made by the applicant? And specially in a complex case that has been live in the family Courts for over 8 years?

5- Can a judge refuse to order a psych report when concerns of ongoing parental alienation are made and still refuses to consider the evidence (3 previous psych reports) already on file raising concerns of such?

6- Can a judge make a decision that L4c is to act as guardian ad litem (dual roles) when an application is made for counsel for child due to L4C ongoing improprieties and constant breaches of L4c Code of practice and for acting outside his brief and for acting for a child when his appointment has expired due to child age?

7- Is it up to L4C to decide whether there is a conflict of interest between the child views (Which might be influenced) and the child’s best interest and welfare?

Any input welcome – thanks to all

72 Responses to “Questions… of law and procedures-Family Courts”

  1. MurrayBacon says:

    Dear VictimByGender, please don’t take the familycaught$ so seriously. If you fall into the trap of doing that, you might do yourself serious harm.

    If you harm yourself, you are less well placed to be able to care for yourself and for your children.

    It is important to always bear this in mind. Life is too short, to waste it by being in caught any longer than necessary. It is really important that caught customers judge the value that they are getting, for all of the costs. Without customers exercising caution, the caughts could easily be doing more harm, than they do good.

    Similarly, don’t take legislation or caught Rules seriously. There is some humour in some of them, so they have the value of a few laughs……but not much more. If they were ever applied successfully in caught$, then the Rules generally are common sense, constructive and aid efficiency and quality. But really, who wants that? Only customers!

    Legislation and Rules in secret caught$ are just dishonest marketing messages, outside the scope of advertising rules.

    Unqualified report writers isn’t a major problem in general. The major problem is unskilled report writers. Qualification and registration does weed out some of the unskilled report writers. Then, of course, it is a gamble whether or not you get a skilled report writer assigned for your case. Then you may have a particular problem with an unskilled report writer. The good ones are really good and……. Being practical, remember that the clowns get paid as much as the skilled workers. (Same for judges too..) So, make the most when they crack a funny joke.

    You can help the familycaught$ with the quality of psychological reports, by obtaining critiques and by aggressive attention to quality issues in cross examination. Without that, there are no working quality control systems in place. (Of course, this is like all other aspects of familycaught$ operation. Except their air conditioning is run under a working quality control system. Make sure that you enjoy their air conditioning.)

    judge$ do run a selection process, whereby unskilled report writers might be removed. This lottery is even less skillful than the registration process, so reduces the quality of report writers, rather than increases it, in general.

    Remember, when dealing with familycaught$, if you aren’t enjoying this process and being entertained, then you are approaching it wrongly or taking it a bit too seriously.


    Organisations only improve when they listen to their customers. The familycaughtS don’t do that. They are protected by politicians from all accountability and just don’t need to listen to any of their customers. Like dinosaurs, they rage on until one day it suddenly all comes to an end.

    Make it come to an end.

  2. golfa says:

    While sitting in Court one day representing myself, I asked L4c why the Judge was reading a new submission by my ex wife after the Judge had previously made a previous ruling that no further submissions would be accepted. L4c’s reply to me was, “It’s his Court, he can do what he likes.” And therein lies the problem. As much as former Principal FC Judge Boshier claimed that the Family Court is not a “secret Court”, it quite clearly IS ! Judges can pretty much do and behave how they want and because the public has no access AND that you’re not supposed to write about what goes on, Judges can do whatever the hell they like.

  3. MurrayBacon says:

    Rule 1. There are no rules.
    Followed by 98 pages of rubbish.

    UK Court Endorses Mom’s Abduction Of Children

    When we are asked to not report NZ examples, we can report outside NZ examples, that reflect NZ practices…..

    This site contains lots of material, that can be hard to find. At the top right hand corner, there is a Google search field. For example type “child abduction” into it and press enter. Lots of stuff comes up.

    It is not pleasant reading this material. These types of complaints have been going on for a long time. And, so far, nothing is being done to improve these situations for children and families.

    There have been quite a few changes in Government policies, that better feed legal workers and all who sail in familycaught$.

  4. Dear Murray and Golfa,

    Thanks both for your inputs.
    Murray, thanks for the links – Highly enlightening
    Golfa, that L4c is a certified idiot and has no idea.
    Or, he most likely wanted such a judge as it served him well.
    Best regards

  5. golfa says:

    #4. Strangely, L4C is now a Femily Court Judge.

  6. Golfa – Indeed.
    Tomorrow she will be in parliament and drafting the law.
    Notice how A bad egg floats to the top.

  7. voices back from the bush says:

    Sorry to drop this in on this page.

    This the submissions doc from moj.


    Those that contributed can check if your voice was heard down at page 67 where names are included.

    Could someone correct the link- please….

  8. Simon grant says:

    Lawyer for child
    Drafted letters on behalf of the children and mothers Doctor, had her copy them onto her letter head, sign them then send them to him so that he could attach them to a submission and then act surprised at how “they simply arrived on my desk your honor”.
    The first letter explained that the children were stressed due to over ight access with the father which was compromising their attachment to their primary care giver ( mummy and the fat GP’ s other patient

    The other letter drafted by l4c, sent to the Dr for her to copy onto her letter head, sign then send back to L4c said that the Dr would not care for her patients (the. Holden) whilst in the care of the father.

    You need to have the same GP for shared care.
    The purpose was to stop overnight access and to ensure shared care was not achievable. Right Peter?

    L4c recommended an independent change over venue run by a convicted fraud steer, drug dealer and tax evader. This place had ex psychiatric patients living there. Ignorant fuckwhit.
    This guy used a memorandum seeking clarification to get re appointed as l4c after the file had been closed, for the sole purpose of covering his low life underhanded arse.

    The psycologist first report August 2004, mummy hasn’t bonded with the children, dad has.
    Father applies for custody.
    12 weeks later but two weeks prior to the custodial hearing – good news mummy has now bonded with the children
    18 months later( a disgracefull time for my son) gee mummy hasn’t bonded with the boy.

    This psycologist is supposed to be highly regarded.
    This is about predetermined outcomes, the judge needs evidence to support the outcomes (findings) l4c gets the necessary supporting garbage, a psycologists report will do in the absence of a bent doctor.

    My suggestion is
    You are wanted to an extent, find out what that is?
    Beyond that you are wasting your time, rules will change, evidence may go before the court via l4c that you won’t even see.
    The worse L4c gets it wrong the more they may try to pervert justice, break their rules, circumvent process, use with out notice applications (it’s only their standards comitties who might be watching should you complain and the LCRO ain’t doing anything about it for 3 years) in conjunction with the mothers lawyer.
    It is possible to have directions with out you putting in any evidence.

    So don’t be deceived by this concept of rules which all parties will adhere to
    We all think that at the beginning, then we realize what goes on then fathers leave the process (generally)

  9. WrongGender says:

    Dear Simon,
    Sorry to hear about your children L4c.
    It appears everyone is of the same mind here regarding the FC.
    If you have balls you are the wrong gender.
    And if you are represented you get castrated.
    But what do you do when your kids are involved?
    How do you protect them when it is the litigation itself that causes them the most harm?
    Best regards?

  10. Simon grant says:

    Oh yes l4c, what a disgrace, even when the dead body was hanging in the mothers garage for my son to walk in on Peter (l4c) in porirua did nothing. It was the mothers garage though.
    It seems that every time he engineered an outcome which was demonstrated to be detrimental to the children. – his clients, he had to try to cover over his ineptitude and what may be perversion of the course of justice because I would tell the court in my affidavit “background” because I didn’t want the prick to carry on as he had.

    He did this by being underhanded and shifty, typically this produced more detrimental outcomes for the children so he couldn’t even suggest that what he did/didn’t do was in the best interests of his clients – the children.

    He briefed the psycologist
    He was duty lawyer prior to the psycologist giving evidence.
    He produced letters on the Drs behalf
    He used a memorandum seeking clarification to get re appointed as l4c with out me knowing for the sole purpose of covering his arse.
    He did nothing when the dead body was hanging there for my son to see.
    He recommended an independent change over venue run by a fraud steer, drug dealer and tax evader with psychiatric patients living there.
    He did nothing when my son was having serious difficulties based on an engineered directions crafted by him. All he had to do was make one phone call and my sons situation could have been improved.
    He placed evidence before the court that I was not privy to.

    What positive things did he do for my children?
    He then had the gall to make a submission to parliment re the importance of L4c and the haste the can be achieved in resolving issues when l4c is involved.
    I say his role was to engineer outcomes
    Crunch the father – for the most part.

    I have just read the MOJ submission available on the link on comment number 7.
    This changes the face of our system.
    This must be a deal breaker for fathers.
    Even if 50 percent of this was supported we have to honestly look at how much “anguish” a person can and should have to take because ther is a time to realize that our input as fathers is not valued or wanted. Actions do speak louder than words.

  11. WrongGender says:

    Hi Simon, I hear you but I do not understand what happened.
    Apologies for my ignorance.
    I have not followed your postings yet and do not know your background.
    Feel free to clarify.

  12. Simon grant says:

    I have described aspects of the process for me and the children and the involvement of l4c. What happened in the end, I didn’t decentd her third attempt at a protection order, defended the first two at a cost of about $6000 each.
    The children were removed from her protection order and the nonsense special conditions were watered down on the basis that we would seek a cost award if the hearing progressed.
    The mother became a P addled nut in league with the local bike gang, several of them were arrested for drug ofences and it would seem as though L4c was an ex cop. Perhaps the mother did a deal, get off the shit, dobb in these guys, we won’t take the children off you. We hear that these types of ultimatums are becoming more common.
    I have been arrested, threatened with arrest for breach of the protection order (charges dropped) and threatened with arrest three times for breach of the parenting order.
    So you battle through the family court 13 hearings to achieve shared care, you fend off CYPS complaints, you have several more court hearings, a judge appolgises for the process I have endured makes a variation to the parenting order as I had applied for only for another family court judge 13 months later to remove them, give the mother a temporary protection order, then remove the children from shared care with me with out notice after 6 years.
    With out notice after 6 years, that judge knew the outcome for the children would be a disaster.
    New L4c was appointed and sure enough he reported to the court that the children were sad and angry at not having seen their father for 8 weeks, care was reinstated.
    What a total circus, do not do it.

  13. WrongGender says:

    Dear Simon, are you saying “Don’t do it!” as in walk away~?

  14. Simongrant says:

    I am saying:
    The process has been described
    The behaviour of court appointed so called professionals has been described (l4c, psycologists)
    Some judges know this happens and how outcomes will be achieved.

    Fathers we must have our own “pain threshold limit”
    Look at these stories here, they are all the same, they have the same theme. Directions with out evidence , with out notice applications, protection orders dished out like confetti, cost, delay, process dujour but different tomorrow, The law society ensuring lawyers adhere to their rules (good one) juducial conduct Commissionar is overseeing judges behaviour ( have faith) detrimental outcomes for the children, this is all the same shit, for all of us and our children.

    By any of the people involved other than the children (actions speak louder than words)
    The process has always supported the mother and it always will.

    Understand your pain threshold, what is it?
    Three hearings, one arrest $20,000 or five hearings two arrests, three more allegations and a with out notice application? What is it?
    Perhaps it’s lawyer for child perverting the course of justice once or three times?

    Try for your children and for you but when your pain threshold is reached understand that mummy will be supported no problem by the FC process, police so I say get out when the pain threshold is reached just go.

  15. MurrayBacon says:

    Dear Simon, I acknowledge your experiences and the observed correlation of male gender and destructive treatment.

    I have been careful to listen to as many parents as I can access. Certainly more men are treated damagingly, than women.

    I have also seen couples treated in this same way. I have seen solo mothers and separated mothers treated in this same way.

    It is important to consider how many women are cash and income richer/poorer than men and custodial/noncustodial parents. (Of course the latter distinction was removed from legislation by the Care of Children Act 2004, but practically all judges are still running in Guardianship Act 1968 mode. This will continue long after the existing judges have retired, as it is cultural in their work experience, whereas there are no forces pressuring for the Care of Children Act to work in familycaught$. The Care of Children Act 2004 does look good in international comparisons and as dishonest marketing material to NZ citizens.)

    Fewer women are in noncustodial parent situations. Women more often have lower incomes than men.

    I would suggest that allowing for all of those factors, that the dominant prejudice is against the parent with more visible cash. Quiet assets don’t affect outcomes, just visible or talked about cash. I have seen men who were not well off, but were big talkers (known as wankers in technical talk) treated very harshly. I have seen men and women who were more discrete getting through the familycaught$ with minimal damage and their children were far less damaged by the familycaught$ relationship vandal mangle process.

    The next largest prejudice is that judges very rarely cross a custodial parent. Just look at Kay Skelton, to see how disastrous that prejudice may be. (Search for Kay Skelton in the search pane at top right of this page..). The phantom admonishment. Good medicine for noncustodial parents, but not for custodial parents?

    The paramount financial interest of the legal workers is always respected. Doesn’t really matter what happens to the children, as long as the mangle has squeezed out every visible coin, from the most vulnerable parent.

    Once one parent has put their fingers into the familycaught$ mangle, it is very hard to escape without going entirely through the asset and cash extraction process. It is not that they are ruthless in their self interests, it is that they don’t understand human relationships, they just don’t count. Money counts – it leaves you vulnerable to their unbridled avarice.

    The parents who have spent the most, most often have achieved the least for their children.

    Please don’t think that I am meaning to criticise women as taking advantage of evolutionary biology forces in the caughts. When fathers are given the opportunity to misbehave as custodial parents, their bad behaviour matches women’s. The causative factor does appear the lie in childhood attachment security. This is talked about in caughts, but isn’t actually taken into consideration……

    I have done my best to warn you….. It is your money that they are after.

  16. Simon grant says:

    Thank you Murray,

    I do get it, I didn’t at the start, I believed that being a caring child focused parent would be enough and that would always win through. I have come to the conclusion that:

    The process has not really changed
    Fathers are not valued by any one other than the children because actions speak louder than words.
    Decent fathers are a causality of the process.

    I say, consider your family court anguish threshold, when it’s reached, pack it in.
    Appreciate the time you had with your children until then, beyond that, you can’t influence so pack it in.

    If you are constantly under pleasure from all of the agencies on her side (police for example) all the more reason to pack it in. Some of us fathers are slow learners – now though, I get it.

  17. MurrayBacon says:

    Dear Simon Grant, you have jumped to one conclusion, that fathers should give up when their pain threshold is first reached.

    I certainly did not say that.

    Another possibility is to try to deal with the clowns in familycaught$, but to protect yourself financially and in terms of mental health.

    Pay them appropriately for what they do. When they demand payment up front, only pay to the extent that you can be sensibly confident that they will deliver value for money. You don’t have to be ripped off by these thieves. Make your own wise choices.

    I suggested that it is counterproductive to talk big and act rich. So, there are different ways of acting, that actually give you a better chance of getting what you want from familycaught$ and less chance of simply being robbed for no value at all.

    You might like to search on this site, for notes about self representation. With a bit of work, you have as good a chance of protecting your children and far lower risk of just being fleeced.

    So, rather than being beaten by your own hasty decision, use your imagination and street wisdom and play to get a tolerable deal, maybe even ok.

    Your children are worth all the care, development and protection that you can give them. Don’t give up in the face of mafioso, play to win as much as possible. Be streetwise. Look up Sun Tsu.

  18. Simon grant says:

    Thank you for the suggestions Murray.
    13 hearings to achieve shared care, some represented. Shared care has been achieved, that is not the issue here.
    This was achieved with all of the background I have described and I did not give up.
    Additional hearings took place.
    A variation so that our children could attend their extra curricular activities, this was achieved.

    One year later a different judge removed the variation put in place 13 months prior.
    Threats were made in open court via the mothers gang associations
    Clearly she had a drug problem, (Obvious – very obvious)the children were not removed from her care but I say clearly should have been.
    8 months later several of her gang associates were arrested for class a drug offences.
    It seems council for the children was an ex policeman.
    Was she put under survalince and when the time was right, a deal done with her – dobb in your mates or the children will be placed with the father full time.?
    I say this has not been ruled out as a possibility, therefore it remains a possability.
    This case/file is a shocker (in my view)

    With this level of “mummy can do no wrong” I suggest that we have irreparable systemic gender bias

  19. Simon grant says:

    I now get the message! No matter what you do, no matter what the mother does, fathers get crunched.
    After the FC has picked over your corpse, the police can have a go so I say again

    Establish your Pain Threashold, when that is reached, you have done your best.

  20. MurrayBacon says:

    Dear Simon Grant, I sort of agree with you.
    I hate thieves.
    I hate liars.
    I hate people who market dishonestly.
    I hate people who abuse power.
    I hate unmanaged incompetence.
    I see familycaught$ as offering all of these in one package.

    With this level of “mummy can do no wrong” I suggest that we have irreparable systemic gender bias

    I agree that it is a terrible challenge facing many fathers and some mothers.
    This is why it is so important that people entering “the mangle” can learn from those who have gone before and learned the hard way. Unfortunately, there are many reasons why this learning is not being effectively passed on. To many fathers, once they have had the opportunity to escape, do just that and live their lives as best they can. And, then the suffering is repeated and repeated….
    Anyway, on a more positive note, the Men’s Centre Suicide Bombers Squadrons are recruiting. We cannot promise 64 virgins and our fine print requires that they be returned still virgin……

  21. Simon grant says:

    Murray, I would like to talk over the phone or meet with you sometime.
    I think that the fathers who have experienced the underhanded disgrace of this process have, over time done well to inform others.

    Perhaps the interesting thing is the arrogance of some of these people l4c for example, the psychologist involved.

    Now grand parents shake their heads at the process they have watched their sons endure, they have missed their grand children.

    Principal Judge Ryan on radio live sees people leaving the process and not knowing where they go. It’s like this, they have gone mate, they realise what crap it is, what a sham, they have heard from others. ” court of injustice by Lauren Quaintaince (google) was published in North and South in 2001. Since then

    Directions with out evidence
    3 psychologists reports ( I say sham, scam evidence to ensure predetermined outcomes with detrimental outcomes for our children)
    Council for the children recommends a changeover run by a fraud steer, drug dealer, tax evader with psychiatric patients living there but he would not do any thing to change it.
    The mother became a meth head in league with the highway 61. Do they take the children off her, no. Perhaps surveille her and bust the bikers – more cop than c4c.
    A dead body hanging in the mothers garage for the Children to see. What to do ? Diss credit the father and call him a purpetrator of conflict for raising it but do nothing for the children.
    Perhaps pervert the course of justice, write letters for the children and mothers GP (Ruth Brown paraparumu) have her send them to him so that he could submit them to court, stop overnight access with dad, ensure no shared care.
    Use a memorandum seeking clarification to get reappointed as the C4c after the file was closed so that he could cover his arse
    Submit evidence to the court that you never see.
    Go into practice with the mothers lawyer (both from porirua) with the business having two names c4c (surname begins with H, mothers council, B.)
    These are some of the obvious things on the file.

    These are many things that we have all experienced, and the Process Credibility just keeps getting worse, it’s on Radio NZ, interviews with Adams, Ryan and fathers who are going through the same shit as in 2001 (court of injustice Lauren Quaintaince) do we think the public actually believe them, believe in them.

    I don’t, John Campbell interviews don’t appear to. The NZ Family court process has a disgraceful reputation across, children, grandparents, fathers.

    These people running this show appear out of touch, uncaring, inept, pious, and too lofty to actually change things. (I am not talking about bullshit reforms for the benefit of the press)

    I don’t have faith in the process, and the majority of fathers, grand parents who have experienced this process don’t either.

    The word is out there, people know and it is our job to inform these fathers new to the disgraceful process or the aforementioned underhanded low life behaviour.

    Your basic bank robber with a gun is bad.

    These people are worse, they are robbing fathers, children and are holding our children as the ransom for our participation in this money making process for them.

    Having never heard of a bank robber doing that, I have more respect for the bank robber.

  22. JohnPotter says:

    You can download the Family Court of Injustice June 2001 North & South article by Lauren Quaintance (61 KB PDF).

    Jim Bagnall and other Men’s Centre North Shore members helped promote this article outside Whitcoulls in Queen St.

  23. MurrayBacon says:

    Murray, I would like to talk over the phone or meet with you sometime.

    Easily done!
    My top secret phone number is hidden in the white pages.
    I am pretty old, so don’t get frightened off. I am not quite a skeleton, but maybe not much difference….
    Don’t muck around for too long, I may not live many more centuries…….

  24. Simon grant says:

    Thank you John Potter.

    Court of Injustice was bold of Lauren Quaintaince and North and South at the time. Ifirst read it in about 2007 and had already had 5 years of FC by then. I couldn’t believe how relevant the experiences quoted were to my own.

    Now 15 years, three reforms later we go to NZ Live Raido John Cambell where he has interviewed two fathers who have exactly the same experiences as the dads quoted in 2001 in the article Court of Injustice.

    Of reforms: Spin, Spin and bullshit, in many respects it’s worse now.

    Campbell interviews Proncipale Judge Ryan and Ms Adams.
    Adams is unaware of any problems

    His honor doesn’t know what has happened to those who ere to participate in the process after an application (fathers mostly) because they are not turning up for mediation or hearings. At least he knows they are not turning up which is an improvement but either can’t figure out why or doesn’t care why or doesn’t have any will to fix it – ( for about 30 years)

    So good dads go, mummy’ s new bloke abuses away, lawyers, courts and police continue to have work.

    Thank you Murrary, will call.


    They talk about the huge rise in With out notice Applications

  25. golfa says:

    #24 Simon grant, you may be unaware that North and South magazine were fined for publishing that article despite changing names and cities of residence of everyone mentioned in the article. The only thing that was real, was the people’s experiences in the Court. And for sharing those with journalists, the magazine was fined. I believe the sum was $40 000. Which explains why none of the TV stations, magazines or newspapers will show or print anything about the secret Family Court. I called an investigative journalist once and asked him if he would write a book about it and he said it was too big a gamble to take considering he could be fined.

  26. Simon grant says:

    I wasn’t aware of the fine but was aware that all press lived under a cloud or threat of such for reporting on the family court.

    Very bold of them, good on them a fantastic piece of investigative reporting so sadly missed in this day and age. John Cambell was perhaps the last of the TV reporters to report on government agencies and appeared to get the axe as a result. The good news is his raido show where he is prepared to ask the hard questions.

    “if you control the press, you control the people”

    (What has happened to our mainstream media, so many people don’t bother with the sanitised news paper or the feel good garbage on one and three news – some say to controlled)

    “The cat is well and truly out of the bag”
    So many for so long have had their lives ruined by the FC process, unfathomable, decisions. Read some of my posts and we realise that it is likely that we have been dealing with predetermined outcomes.

    Perhaps it works like this:
    C4c go and get the evidence to support the predetermined outcome which has not been directed as yet but may have been made prior to any hearing – is that what goes on? Many think so.
    This can be, psychologists report, letter from the mothers GP (perhaps Recomended by C4c even)
    Many suggest that this is how it is done and why many directions areI unfathomable, all the judge has to do is give a weighting to particular evidence and not other evidence.
    C4c gets the evidence, the judge weighs that as high importance, the directions are made and supported by the evidence and the predetermined outcome is arrived at all nice and neat. Or the process is used to delay and frustrate until Dad is dumbfounded, calls it a crock of shit (eventually) gives up. Stupidly this leaves the way for mummies new intimate partner abuses the kid.

    Kid becomes a head case, in and out of court.
    Perpetual work for lawyers etc, simple, underhanded, has the appearance of a court, eg evidence, then directions pointing to supporting evidence.

    It may be that this appearance is necessary, the FC is supposed to behave like a court, like they can’t have directions with out the ability for a party to put in evidence unless no one is looking and you are a self litigant. Oh yes they can I am forgetting the now misused with out notice application.

    ” there is no greater power to use on the people than rhetoric”

    Adolf Hittler quotes which appear relevant.

  27. MurrayBacon says:

    Dear Simon, I am presently doing a telecoms changeover and my phone isn’t working. Try later today, or tomorrow.

  28. MurrayBacon says:

    The money is always flowing in the same direction. The rhetoric changes, the clothing is meddled with a little, the games change around, but the underlying ethos of the familycaught$ has never changed……..

  29. Simon grant says:

    Murray, what city, suburb please? White pages wngt don’t have you listed as I have called the Bacon surnames there.

    The underlying ethos has not changed in what 30 years?
    I have been involved for 13 years over 23 hearings, 13 hearings to achieve shared care. Hearing number one (a protection order application) no care and protection issues “the applicants evidence was unbelivable, her demour when giving evidence was unimpressive and was prone to exhaggeration” (the mother was the applicant and did not get her protection order)
    12 more hearings to achieve shared care
    The mother applied two more times for her protection order.
    The next was defended successfully again.
    The third – I couldn’t be fucked again, got it watered down and the children removed.
    I recall reforms in about 2005 after John Howard announced “shared care as of right” we got a half page article announcing reforms then.
    Then another batch of reforms.
    Now the latest in 2014
    “Same old pig, new set of lipstick” many would say.

    Others in the Fc industry would say “there’s another father suffering conflict”, nothing wrong here, nothing to see, NZFC process is the best in the business, why change it, how do you improve perfection?

    This is a played for position. The powers that be want fathers to piss off it is the ethos no doubt.


  30. MurrayBacon says:

    It is your money they are after. (Maybe have a go at some of the women, if they are good looking..)
    There isn’t much more to it than that. They screw women financially, if that looks like it will give the better return.
    ph 638 7275

  31. Simon grant says:

    What prefix please Murray, tried 04,07,09

  32. WrongGender says:

    HI Simon, you mentioned something about a cost application/threat/order which did have some positive effect.
    What was it and how did you achieve that?
    You also mention being self-represented?
    What was that like as an experience and what did you learn from it as opposed to being represented?

  33. Simongrant says:

    Wrong gender, you ask about: cost application/threat/order , I don’t know what you mean, please point me to the post ?

    Self Representation
    At first I was represented (for about 9 hearings)
    Then a self litigant for about 12 hearings
    Then represented for a couple of judges conferences

    It depends on the judges
    The stakes are high for protection order applications, if she gets it and you cop supervised access, I would say see you later. If you can afford a decent counsel for this I suggest that you do it. $ 6,000 to defend one.

    A high court judge (socially) who used to do family law shook his head when I told him who two of the female judges I had were. He said imagine being “tag teamed by them”
    As a self litigant directions were made with no evidence ( no problem he’s just a lay litigant)
    These two judges made directions which had severe detrimental outcomes for my children as far as I am concerned their directions were disgraceful.
    As a self litigant her honor judge Mary ODwyer gave me a really fair go, even got to cross examine Lawyer for children (underhanded prick) perverting the course of justice was where he looked to be heading.

    Then next hearing back to one of the tag teamers who removed the directions put in place by her honor Judge ODwyer only 12 months prior.
    The tag teamer was described by a senior barrister as “conspicuous by her directions”

    In short I found that representation helped to keep the judge honest in terms of things like directions with no evidence, being told the file has been mislaid three times (imagine that, a records management system with a full audit trail on every document, oh yea we lost the file – 3 times)
    C4c applying to be reappointed using a memorandum seeking clarification – with out me getting a copy and knowing. So that is the sort of shifty shit they will do to a self litigant.

    You don’t know the tricks or the levels pricks like c4c will stoop to, you don’t know the process or the rules. The law well, you don’t know that either.

    A decent Judge is a decent judge.
    A gender biased ideologist is just that and I got the feeling that certain judges rely too heavily on folk like c4c and if he is a bent prick with predetermined outcomes in mind – that’s the ball game.

    Her honor judge ODwyer,
    His homer judge Mill
    His honor Judge Grace

    Seem to be really good, represented or not.

    I have been told by a senior barrister that:
    Her honor Jill Moss is a good judge on the basis that she will not break the law.
    His honor Judge Walsh, same thing, but if you don’t know the law and your position in relation to the law you might find yourself at a disadvantage, in such an instance you might need representation.

    In short, decent counsel with a reputation for filing their own memoranda should the judge be an ideologist tag teamer is a good thing.

    Do what you can, beyond that go fishing.

  34. WrongGender says:

    Thanks Simon.
    Makes perfect sense now.
    Ignore previous request about cost order.
    I can relate to you as I have had good judges try their best to apply the law and focus on the children’s best interest as I sat quietly and witnessed two senior counsels bind his hands with the law.
    It appears almost every hearing has been about what a judge can and cannot do rather than how to best protect these children from harm.
    I have also seen young judges defer to these counsels “wisdom” or gospel and make really bad decisions as currently.
    Technically, it’s procedures over investigation or even inquisition and the outcome is predetermined by the nature of claims being made to initiate proceedings.
    I believe there are a lot of judges out there whom hate the system as much as we do.
    I have discovered that the judiciary in NZ is directly under parliament but It has no right to decide whether the laws are fair and just, it is only here to apply what parliament has decided.
    IN America apparently, the supreme court when faced with rampant dishonesty by congress made its own law within a judgement to grant itself the right to decide if the laws passed by congress are against the constitution.
    And this has ensured no wrong law can be made and even if made, it can be put to the side. Not saying it is perfect
    In NZ – there is no such thing. And without such checks and balances, there is really nothing protecting human rights from being cancelled as per the FC motto -if in doubt shoot the other parent!.

  35. WrongGender says:

    SO I ask again by what right?
    If a law is unjust, it cannot be a law.
    It may be legal but unlawful.
    What remedies do people have against unjust laws?
    Is it possible that this is all a dream we are contributing into by standing besides our rights and allowing others to trespass?

  36. Simon grant says:

    It seems that the juducial Conduct Commissionar is there to consider the procedure a Judge has adhered to.

    None of us has faith in this office as it appears like the Law Society considering their buddies behaviour but this is a two way street.
    If the Judges behaviour and procedure followed does not favor you it seems that in reality you are pissing in the wind to do anything about it.

    If the behaviour favours you, then the other side is pissing in the wind to do anything about it.

    Something in court which I was unhappy about was suggested by the snide prick (c4c) in court. The under handed perverter of justice (c4c) new that my only recourse would be The Juducial Conduct Commissionar. The judge new this too and the would be hopelessness of any complaint I might make.

    The Judge was not up for it, basically the underhanded prick was asking the judge to make directions that his behaviour (c4c) was all good.

    Later in the hearing her honor was to make directions to favour me that were perhaps beyond the application before the court (exactly what the underhanded snide prick asked her honor to do earlier). The double standard wanker suggested to the judge that this was outside the scope of the application.

    Her honor politely invited the shifty prick to take the matter up with the juducial Conduct Commissionar, knowing the difficulty the shifty prick would have, he shut up and continued to stare at his Biro Pen.

    Her Honor is experienced, been around, knew the process had a really good handle on the underhanded perverter of justice and was prepared to push the boundary. The shifty prick slithered away to fuck up some of his other clients lives.

    The directions her honor put in place were focused on outcomes for the children, they were better off, she knew it and was not about to let process and protests from the shifty prick impede that.

    A decent judge is a decent judge, a gender biased ideologist is just that and they tend to rely heavily on the shifty prick (c4c) to get the evidence to support the predetermined gender biased outcome – in my view.

  37. MurrayBacon says:

    Dear Simon, my phone is still out of action. Try in a day or two.
    Communications at the speed of light. Repairs at a tenth the speed of a snail…

  38. MurrayBacon says:

    Put the plug into Tel1, not Tel2 then it all springs into action….. Sorry about the delay, it was my own mistake.

  39. WrongGender says:

    Der Simon,
    Thanks for that. Makes sense again.
    It does sound like self representation as Murray says is the way to go.
    In your case though it seems you tried both and ended back with a lawyer. Why?

    Dear Murray,
    Thanks for your advice. Every word is worth its weight in gold.
    But also rather confusing. After much mulling over your words it appears you say three things in one breath (You are SCREWED -BUT Plan and Prepare -THEN Self Represent),
    Feels like you are not asking a victim of domestic violence to go back to their abuser but rather that they go back and stay in it until the desired outcome is achieved. And yet, with a 2-5% chance of escaping death by castration.

    TO MENZ in general or funeral
    My questions in the original post have no answer yet.
    I have received good answers to the psych queries but anything else seems to have fallen by the way side. I was hoping for legal and technical answers as to “yes it is wrong and this is why!!!” with precedents or law attached.

    So if you guys can offer a tad more, would greatly appreciate it. Thanks
    I have heard what the FC do and plenty –

  40. MurrayBacon says:

    Simon – sorry my phone works outgoing, but the number seems to have changed. I don’t know the number myself! So I am trying to get that sorted……

  41. Simon grant says:

    It appears that the court is ignoring the evidence of the three psych reports
    (there you go putting a weighting on some evidence but not other evidence)

    If the c4c is making guardianship decisions, and care decisions what is their role?
    What is the brief?
    Complain to the law society if they are acting beyond their brief (don’t expect a result though)
    Write to the principal family court judge, be factual and unemotional.
    If the judge has made directions you are not privy to, complain to the JCC (don’t expect a result)
    If you are a self litigant you have a right to all evidence that means the 3 psych reports – they will not want you to have them but you are entitled to them.
    Request a judges conference and ask for them in writing.
    If you are represented by someone with grunt, backbone and integrity you will notice much bullshit stops.

    Who is the judge/s
    Who is c4c
    Can you point to detrimental outcomes for the children as a result of court directions?
    Make an application, file a memoranda seeking the judges recusal if necessary.
    I have found that when C4c engineered detrimental outcomes for the children he became more entrenched in protecting his arse than his clients well being. It may be his ego was bigger than positive outcomes for his client.
    So who is C4c?
    Is the mother a decent mother doing a good job for the children because that is key?
    If not stick to it.

  42. Simon grant says:

    Why did I seek representation again.
    Directions of 2012 were what I applied for
    I was told by the judge at the time, if this matter comes back befor the court with in 12 months I will do something about it (place the children with the fathe)
    In this hearing I questioned C4c, the judge gave me the opportunity to.
    C4c did not want this, he said “I don’t have to take this from you”
    Her honor seemed to have a different view c4c was told, oh yes you do if you don’t want to face a disciplinary hearing, I carried on.
    Her honer seemed horrified at what this so called senior counsel had done, it was obvious.

    The matter did come back to court in 13 months, counsel manipulated the dates and the judge availability so that the presiding judge was one of the original tag teamers (again)
    That judge removed the directions put in place in 2012 in a two day hearing in 2013 where it became obvious that the mother had drug problems, threatens me with her gang associations.
    The tag teamers directions ignored all that – nothing to see here, it’s mummy after all.
    Another hearing a year later
    The tag teamer was asked to recuse and did.
    A basic hearing regarding the children’s school turned into a 5 hour cross examination of me (the judge, and counsel go a long way back)
    Then a with out notice application from the mothers counsel to stop shared care after 6 years, granted by the E judge, guess who? The tag teamer.
    Why did the tag teamer do that, to get me back into court. Why? Not for the children’s benefit, something else.
    I say the tag teamer removed shared care to get me into court.
    I appointed counsel then and got shared care reinstated by agreement after new c4c reported that the children were sad and angry at not having seen their father for 8 weeks.
    More detrimental outcomes for our children based on The tag teamers directions.

  43. WrongGender says:

    Thank you Simon,
    You make perfect sense now and I am indebted to you.

    I have heard the rest of your advice and I seriously appreciate it.
    Will mull over it.
    Many thanks

  44. Simon grant says:

    Do not defame the judge or L4c, praise them in your next post, but name them.

    So we know who you are dealing with .

    Psycologists usually study psychology so as to learn about themselves.

    Where are these matters being heard?

    Does Allan Harvey know about this case?

  45. WrongGender says:

    Hello SImon,
    I am not sure about Allan Harvey.
    And some psychologist just as some lawyers become so to justify their own egotistical needs.
    Best regards

  46. Simon grant says:

    Wrong gender, remember this;
    It remains possable that the family court process is about Predetermined Outcomes with psychologists and low life c4c just gathering the evidence necessary to support the predetermined direction.

    Court coordinator appoints the psychologist

    The psychologist is an independent contractor with most likely over 90 percent of their income coming from that court coordinator. (do you know a contractor who bites the hand that feeds them?)

    The complaints process for the psychologist is now to the Family Court – the organisation the court coordinator works for and the organisation who pays the psychologist.

    Some people have no faith in this process at all, I am one of them.

    Who is the court coordinator?

    You ever talked to them?

    I have, I asked ” How come there is only one male court coordinator in all of the Family Court jurisdictions in NZ” (about 50 nationwide at that time)

    Answer from the court coordinator
    “this is a job that requires multi tasking, and let’s face it some jobs are better suited to women than men”
    Ask to meet them, go see the general manager of courts (staffing and clerical administrative role, nothing to do with court or judges) tell the general manager of courts you are concerned at the systemic gender bias of the FC process and you do not want a court coordinator who is a gender biased old trout any where near the file.

    This is the process which may well be simply a scam.

  47. MurrayBacon says:

    Justice Dept employ lots of women clerical staff, at wage rates that a man generally couldn’t feed a family. So obviously wage rates is more important than having a staff that includes both genders. What they save, they spend 20 times over on wage increases for familycaught judges?????
    Predetermined Outcomes is a big issue. In my opinion, familycaught tends to pick a winner and back them the whole way, no matter what happens. Read the whole Kay Skelton files to see that dumb dynamic in action. It took Judge Boshier to alter direction in that case, after years of significant child abuse going without comment, let alone positive action. They milked it for what is was worth.
    There are some examples of judges approaching hearings afresh.

  48. Simon grant says:

    And still they carry on, and on and on.
    Pick a winner you say ! Who?


    Na, mummy of course, unless she is burning them with cigarettes.

    Has not bonded
    A dead body in the garage
    Mum a meth head
    Hangs out with bikees
    Nothing to see here, it’s mummy remember.
    Oh shit we have cocked up, quick discredit the father.
    Go Pete.

  49. WrongGender says:

    Dear Simon, I really like your input. But I also fear for you. I had to undertake therapy to rebuild my relationship with my son. Of course it was a load of crock having to see a therapist to rebuild a relationship that was already good. But it was either that or await a report writer which would have taken a few more months.
    I am very glad I did. I knew I was hurting inside but I had no idea how severely wounded I had been. I was so hurt and so traumatized by the sudden shift in the dynamics between my children and I and the sudden disappearance of my children from my immediate life and the home I have built for them and with them that I was an empty shell simply echoing my pain and concerns for them.
    A father need is to protect, nurture and care for his children.
    A situation such as yours or mine takes you away from your own needs and rights and locks you out of your children’s lives.
    Between the incapacity to act to protect and defend your children and being prevented from even assuaging whatever fear or need they may have, a good parent, and specially one that has had hands on care of his children suddenly realizes all the parameters of his existence have been removed. And there is no saying when they are coming back or even if they are coming back.
    Suddenly, one must re-identify himself emotionally-psychologically and spiritually. And if there are any other levels to reach into, one must do so
    And believe it or not, had I not seen that therapist, I still would be stuck where I was, grieving, and dying without ever realizing it. And more likely than not, damaging my own case through it. And anger, if any, no matter what or whom caused it, is of no benefit to our children.
    In fact, we can only benefit them if we can transmute this anger -if any- into positive energy.
    Often when I get my kids back, that is when I get very saddened and piss-off. While I am in the court’s system anger is of no use. But when the children are returned and I realize that the whole time there were not with me and they were abandoned by their mother; that hurts even more than anything the courts could have done.
    In the process they loose both parents and of course are left in the care of a stranger or strangers that abused them while they were neglected by the mother whose only purpose seems to be to show the entire community the courts have sided with her…albeit…only temporarily…
    I guess that is the intrinsic beauty -if any- of parental alienation. The parent whom does it cannot emotionally connect with the children. And so the children have to side with her psychologically in order to derive/extract any love from her as she is bereft of it. A big mind but no heart. Plenty of hate but no love.
    I am not sure if you have your kids back but if you do, I pray you simply love and protect them. Not by hating and keeping your anger but by accessing it, challenging it and transmuting it into positiveness.
    Thank you again for your input and if you have not talked to a therapist yet, I strongly urge you to.
    Remember they will always love both mom and dad no matter what. They cannot be blamed for what happened even if their own input may have been used to hurt you.

  50. WrongGender says:

    To Golfa – what is the name of that judge?

  51. golfa says:

    #50 In post #2 ? Ryan. He’s now the big cheese among Family Court Judges.

  52. Simon grant says:

    Wrong gener,
    A couple of questions:
    Who are you?
    What would you seek suggestions from a forum?
    You wrte like someone I have met.

    The children
    Self preservation becomes foremost at a given time. I say 23 hearings is that time.
    I can do no more.
    I want to do no more.
    It is futile.
    A therapist might suggest “go around the block again” ( albeit with a different approach)
    To this suggestion – thanks but no thanks.
    In 2001 a submission from Dr Newman suggested 20,000 fatherless children are created via the Family Court every year which is thre times more than was created annually by WW2.
    The gloss has worn off for me.

  53. Simon grant says:

    Wrong gender please realize I had been in the family court process 13 years.
    I am not in the court process.
    There is no psycologist
    There are no additional directions or things I am required to achieve due to directions.
    After 13 hearings shared care was achieved,
    Been there, endured that.
    Parenting has been a pleasure
    The mothers mission has been to destroy and frustrate
    The support for her is and has been a disgrace.
    I am thankful for the opportunity to parent the children.
    Her distraction and support continues.
    I say, good luck, well done, done my best and I am proud of what I have endured and delivered for the children.
    Preservation is foremost now.

  54. WrongGender says:

    Dear Simon,
    I am glad to hear that you are over the hill and a distance away from the fc.
    I am sorry to hear she still persists.

    Poor kids but lucky kids to have you.
    Good job and many thanks for your input.

  55. WrongGender says:

    Dear Simon,
    Sorry I missed your previous post about who I am.
    You have familiarity with my words because they echo yours as a parent.
    I would be surprised if I had met you but who knows?
    I am seeking answers from the forum because I am not satisfied with the answers I am getting by my representation and need to see the other side from parents like you that have gone through the wringer and are back to testify.
    So thank you. I believe we will meet soon.

    Golfa, thanks for that.

  56. SimongrantSimon says:

    I believe that if you persist you can get there, as I say 13 hearings to achieve shared care with the first hearing a defended protection order application from the mother. She did not get this but it made NO difference to her blocking, frustrating everything I applied for or did for the children.

    The biggest surprise for me:
    That the mother continually received funding
    That even after a cost award to me in her first protection order application, she was funded to apply another two times (three in total, didn’t get the first, didn’t get the second so for me to defend those $ 12,000. For the third application why I bother defending that ? So that I could spend another $6,000 I don’t have?

    The bottom line for me – have a go, try your hardest for your children but realize that Mummy wil be funded, mummy can apply again and again for her cherished protection order with total impunity. Mummy can oppose any application you make and will be funded to do that too.

    You are not on a level playing field, she has had 8 legalialky aided lawyers, 9 if you count the appallingly bent C4c and that is what you are up against.

  57. WrongGender says:

    It is hard to quantify love for one’s child with income or financial assistance as overriding determinant factors. And yet it appears that

    When the money runs out and when there is no hope of any change, one wishes to cut their losses and move on.

    I have met many men that did that and the regret they carry on with and the guilt for failing to protect their loved ones gnaws at them daily-and forever.

    Forever because the children always come back but maimed for life and too late to rekindle the relationship.

    The kids – now adult – will finally see what the other parent has done and awoken but it is already too late because they have become her/him.

    That is essentially what we are trying to prevent by providing them with both sides of their identity and personality. Sharing is caring.

    I admire your stance (walk away) but it appears to me it is not a solution. You walk wounded to the core.

    The question is not whether you have done your best. I am certain you have.

    I think the question I want to ask you is ” is there anything you could have done better or smarter looking back at it now? in a legal-lawful sort of way I mean.

  58. Simon grant says:

    Could have done better?
    Yes in 2012 her honor judge ODwyer gave me an opportunity for custody.
    Our children were nine
    The application before the court high lighted the mothers bikee association and the aforementioned background regarding c4c with the initials PH from Porirua.
    This application was for a variation to the parenting order so that our children could attend extra curricular activities irrespective of which parent was caring for the children at the time. This was because the mother simply wouldn’t take the children to any activities (sports etc) Iin her time, clearly the mother who had opposed every second of time I had applied for wouldn’t let me take them either (which I would have done)
    I said that I could mitigate aspects of the mothers environment if the children were able to attent the activities (swimming lesson etc) which I could have.
    My son had not bonded with his mother and she had not bonded with him (identified by the bullshit psychologist in her third report who had no choice but to contradict her second report which contradicted her first report – Jo Leach) this manufacturer of outcomes knew that I would call three teachers to give evidence. (These ladies we’re pissed off at what they saw my son go through every time the mother came to collect him compared to when I came so we shouldn’t believe Ms Leach was “coming clean of her own accord”)

    I felt it was important for him, I knew I could mitigate the environmental issues for my children with the variation approved)
    Her honor was bloody good
    She also gave me an opportunity to cross examine the low life c4c as her honor wanted to know if he had done the things I had high lighted in the background of my affidavit.
    He refused to answer (PH regarded as a senior C4c) too arrogant for that and he had done some appalling stuff which had clearly had detrimental outcomes for the children.
    My recollection is that
    He was told:
    Go on answer him
    I don’t have to answer him
    Oh yes you do, if you don’t want to find yourself before a disciplinary hearing, and I will make sure I am there.
    You might like to carry on, ask him again.
    PH was fucked, stared at his biro pen, to answer honestly would have been an admission that he had perverted the course of justice.
    I rubbed it in, seems to have taken an unnatural interest in his biro pen your honor, he did it.
    Yes he did didn’t he.
    Her honor: I was asked,
    What do you want to do with him (PH – low life)
    I explained, this is not about him, this application is for the children, I just want to ensure he never does it again.
    I let him off, I don’t believe I am naturally vindictive.
    The directions I asked for we’re put in place, her honor explained that if the matter came before the court with in 12 months she would do something about it. (place the children with me)
    A good judge, no fucking around, focused on outcomes for the children first and foremost (in my view)
    The mother did her usual shit, didn’t make the children available etc. (I had hoped this would stop, but no)
    I applied to the court with in 12 months for more time with the children
    The low life manouvoured the hearing to a Judge who has been described by a senior barrister as “a Margaret Wilson Appointment conspicquous by her directions”. – retired perhaps early in 2015 (MWA) this FC judge had no children of her own, you would think it a prerequisite as a FC judge.
    It appears that some judges are over influenced by C4c

    My recollection of the next hearing is
    In the next hearing this judge (MWA)simply removed the directions put in place by her honor judge ODwyer less than a year earlier even though the mothers evidence was clear.
    She went to the highway 61 bar
    It’s a nice place
    It has an open fire
    Gang members come to my house.
    She did suffer anxiety
    Most likely because of the Meth they fed her
    C4c submitted (carefully, a nod and a wink to the judge – perhaps to ensure any recording would be transcribed as court discussion should there be an appeal.
    She has been seen arriving and leaving on several occasions in a condition you don’t want to know about your honor (the mothe, the gang bar)
    I asked C4C how he knew that ?
    Perhaps more cop or ex cop than anything else?
    I asked him methamphimine?
    He looked surprised
    Why would you say that ?
    I said look at her, how do you think you get like that?

    What happens next?
    The judge (MWA) removed the directions put in place 12 months earlier by her honor judge ODwyer.
    7 months later 7 of her gang member mates were arrested and charged with class A drug offences.
    A hearing about the children’s schooling is coming up.
    The Margaret Wilson appointment has tagged the file for herself (after her last directions she would have to)
    New rules re funding
    Mother applies for her third protection order
    Tempory is granted (MWA)- special condition – children removed so access with dad in the normal way
    4 months later a hearing about the children’s schooling, the last judge (MWA) was recused.
    C4c manoeuvred the hearing to his old buddy.
    I was asked questions like are you aware you have been under survalince by the low life c4c
    The mothers lawyer had gone into business with C4c (nothing to see here – no problems)
    Why put me under survalince?
    How did I know the mother was a meth Ho? (a dip shit could work that out)
    Was I involved?
    No not at all.
    Can we get some leverage over the father, we must find something on him, can’t have him writing stuf on a blog site for example (remember reputation is everything for c4c, what would his neighbours in Plimerton say if they knew what he had done/ not done, think of his reputation – he is)
    Hearing re schooling goes mummies way (she had taken no interest in schooling, homework, had to drive past the orthodontist to get the the gang pad but had never gone to the orthodontist to take our daughter there, her contribution was “he has taken her from shcool in my time”. I had been taking our daughter there for almost three years.)

    Had to defend the protection order application number three the hearing dates arrived in the mail boxing day 2015.
    Decided to get representation.
    Her honor judge ODwyer may have suggested a decent council should I have more problems with the low life C4c ( her honor knew what this guy was capable of) I located him (decent council) a good guy with a passion for the law, children, justice who jas faith in the system – perhaps as the only alternative and a family court lawyer to respect. (in my view)
    Managed to get the hearing adjourned.

    The with out notice application from the mothers lawyer legal aid jockey number 8 (LAJ8) now in business with C4c (nothing to see here because the last hearing was heard by C4c’s old buddy)
    This is the third such application by LAJ8 to have me removed from the children’s lives
    This went to the E Judge – guess who popped up?
    The recused judge MWA, the result from this judge ?
    Shared care removed with out me knowing, after 6 years.
    New C4c appointed, reports the children are sad and angry at not having seen their father for 8 weeks.
    Shared care reinstated by agreement (no choice for the mother and LAJ8)
    Didn’t defend the third temporary protection order put in place by MWA
    Got it watered down, children removed LAJ8 knew her client would be out the back door should there be another $6,000 hearing.
    Been threatened with arrest three times For protection order breach. (cop haven’t even read the order – special conditions, bully moron)

    Arrested and locked up for the weekend.
    Allen Harvey was actually with me at the time.
    Elected defended hearing jury trial
    Police removed charges, no case, more obscene policing ( childrens mothers father is a retired cop)

    Threatened with arrest three times for breach of the parenting order, involved barrister cops slithered away.

    What would I do differently
    Nail c4c, have no compassion
    Have accepted custody
    Never ever believe in the Family Court process as anything but a sham and a scam.
    Realise there are good judges.
    Know how corrupt C4c can be.
    Realise their money and reputation trumps everything.
    Not have gone to the birth
    Not have accepted any responsibility for the children at all.
    I never lived with the mother.
    Realise that we are dealing with state intentions because nothing could be designed to be this bad if we weren’t.


  59. WrongGender says:

    Much to digest.
    And many thanks for sharing.
    You assessment is very fair and balanced.
    May your children never read your regrets for it might hurt them more than the mother ever done. I however know what you mean. A heart can only bleed.
    I can hear you about C4C influence on judges and judges ability to tag a file for themselves.
    I think I know exactly what you mean.
    Did Judge recuse himself or did you make him?

  60. Simon says:

    Wrong Gender
    No the MWA judge was her honor (sir name begins with U, last letter H)
    Unlikely to be able to tie her own shoes with out PH (c4c) suggesting the knot.
    C4c ex cop most likely
    I went to his house, knocked on the door, seemed a little “put out” by my visit, perhaps the impromptu nature I guess, next time I will leave a note prior.

    Be aware.
    The web sites fathers go to will be put before the judge (this is evidence but we don’t see it and we are not told)
    He had the mother and children’s Dr write to him re the negative impact of over night access on the children.
    He had the same Dr write to say that she (the dr) would not see the children (her own patients ) when in the care of the father.
    He then attached these letters to a submission with his usual crap: your honor look what has simply arrived in the mail, I feel duty bound to put this before the court.
    I was copied
    The mother was copied, she attached the the letters to an affidavit and applied to stop over night access (after only two visits)
    His honor judge Walsh made the directions – over night access was stopped.
    When the dead body was hanging in mummies garage – no submission from the low life
    When the mother was clearly a bikee Ho meth head – no such submission from the low life
    When he Recomended an independent change over venue, run by a convicted frudster, drug dealer which had ex psychiatric patients living there – no submission from the low life.
    When my son had serious issues for all to see including his teacher – no submission fro the low life.
    How to fix this ?
    Put the father under servaliance to :
    Find something to gain leverage to shut him up so as to cover his arse.

    The question is ” what do we do about him?
    He made a submission to parliament (it’s on google) re the importance of C4c when the government was considering abolishing c4c. It’s a real cracker I didn’t know who I was reading about. Talks about reducing the number of hearings when C4c is involved.
    His role is, or he thinks his role is:
    Ensure predetermined outcomes have the evidence to support them.
    Gather dirt (private eye stuff) put it before the court (you don’t see it) so there are two layers of evidence.
    Porirua FC appears to have their own processes.
    Once C4c started his usual “sink dad” stuff he began a process which became worse.
    He recomend the change over venue, it was run by a fraudster and drug dealer – cumt didn’t do his job properly – he had the resources and police connections.
    He then needed to cover it up.
    He wrote the letter to the children’s Dr had her put them on her letter head, sign them, send them to him so tha the could submit them to court to ensure his desired outcomes were arrived at. The Dr is Dr Ruth Brown of Raumat Beach. – a sad sack gender biased frump and known to be so.
    I find out how these letters “just arrived in the mail your honor”

  61. Simon says:

    Sorry part of last post.
    I put some pressure on the Dr, who then cried to C4c, so to cover his arse he produced a memoranda to the court seeking clarification (it was actually an application to the court for him to be reappointed so that he could become the gatekeeper of the medical record. He did this using a memorandum which I did not receive a copy of.
    I knew he would do this or something along those lines, I went to court to check the file and sure enough the file had been closed for two or three years but “hello” a memorandum had just arrived but I was not allowed to see it until the judge had dealt with it (his old buddy his honor judge E)
    Again, the purpose, to cover his arse for the aforementioned potential perversion of justice.
    So :
    Do not trust.these people or this process.
    There are hardened criminals out there with way more integrity than that.
    It. Remains likely that this guys perversion of the course of justice was way more detrimental for the children and a far greater crime than a basic bank robbery.
    Your basic bank robber is unlikely to hurt a child in the way that this guys doctored outcomes have.
    He made many wrong calls, supported the mother blindly.
    We need to consider the type of person who is appointed into these roles.
    Any real assessment ever done on c4c or the judges, court staff?
    I say he is a physiopath with other issues but he won’t be assessed, he should be, all of them should be because there is no law there. These outcomes for children are decided based on a discussion between c4c and the judge, perhaps the odd purple sock wearing psycologist

  62. WrongGender says:

    Simon, your story is fascinating and reveals a lot I heard of and kinda have seen (rather close to me and if not very much within my own case). The dynamics are the same. so similar the resemblance is uncanny. I am glad of your posts and truly appreciate them. Many thanks again. May be you are right after all. “Run to the hills – protect your sanity…”

  63. Simon grant says:

    I think the things that have been done via the so called process have demonstrated that the process/system does not calve fathers at all. The stories in “court of injustice” in 2001 are the same as now.

    Same shit different decade. For all of the spin and reworks and go faster stripes, there is nothing Hapening today to give me more confidence in the process than it deserved in 2001.

    15 years, with “big brains” working on “reforms” and more reforms. What has changed for children and their relationships with their fathers?
    Has it got easier?
    Has it got more encouraging?
    Has it become more supportive of fathers?
    Is it prepared to say “mummy yu are taking the piss out of the father, the children, the court, the tax payer” and one more intentional attempt to frustrate access and you are down the dunny, got it.

  64. hornet says:

    Psychological reports. My child was and is a victim of Parental Alienation that the family courts were aware of and refused to protect her from, and below is a quote from a letter I recently detected where LAWYER for CHILD and LAWYER For MOTHER were actively colluding to have the MENTAL HEALTH concerns of the MOTHER removed from the PSYH report. In the face of known and serious harm that PA was causing the CHILD at that time..

    “ We refer to recent correspondence in this matter and specifically YOUR ( the Lawyer for Child’s ) PROPOSAL that the Psychologist XXXXXXX, should be asked to REDUCE her concerns about (MOTHERS) MENTAL HEALTH in writing to be put before the court.”

    So here is a direct example of the lawyers having direct evidence of a child being harmed by Parental Alienation which was reported to the court as causing severe psychological harm to the child and when additional reports exposed mental health concerns with the MOTHER – we have two lawyers here colluding to cover this up…….


  65. Simon grant says:

    You say Lawyer for Child and Lawyer for Children actively colluding.

    You ask why?
    First Point
    Lawyer for the mother was a sole practionar in Porirua – Ms Bryne for the mother
    Lawyer for the children was a sole practionar in Porirua – Harrison Law (Peter Harrison) for the children.
    There was a hearing in 2013, this was the representation for that hearing (the directions did not resemble the evidence in relation to the application before the court )

    Another hearing, a reasonably basic application regarding the children’s secondary school.
    By now the representation is:
    Harrison Byrne for the mother – Ms Byrne.
    Harrison Byrne for the children – Peter Harrison

    This turned into a hearing with me having to give evidence from about 10.30am until around 3pm. This was unbelievable.
    This was supposed to be ok Harrison Byrne for the mother and Harrison Byrne for the children, same firm, same reception, same printer, same common foyer, no privacy for my children to see their lawyer with out the ever present Byrne there to advise her client as “Kathleen rings most nights” according to the children’s mother.

    So how about that?
    Some say “Nothing to see here” is how the law society standards committee views this type of relationship between lawyers.
    Advance to the LCRO (check out the backlog of complaints escalated to that office – the staff will perhaps apologise for the delay then tell you we are still dealing with complaints from 2013)

    Then what do people who see this time and time again say? Do we;

    Say golly gee, “what a pro father process this Family Court process is” ? Or perhaps
    “You can have faith in a process like this to be impartial at the outset, there are no preconceived outcomes, all evidence, memoranda, applications, ability to place evidence before the court prior to directions will be available to all parties” Or mabe
    “Gee Wizz, those with out notice applications are so carefully critiqued by the court and complaints for their misuse upheld by the standards comittie that we can have faith in the integrity of the process and the misuse of the with out notice application – even if ony for legal aid” Or “Wow the complaints process should a person feel a court appointed psychologist has not done their job, been selective in their observations on which to report or gives evidence like “I don’t recall observing that” or some other slippery shit to support a predetermined outcome with clear adverse outcomes for the child has become really transparent and fair”

    No of course not, the bigger question is: whoever says those things about this Process? I have never heard of it, has any one here?

  66. WrongGender says:

    Dear Simon,

    I think you have nailed it on the head. You are describing people that abuse their position without moral conscience and ethical concerns since they know no one can prove nothing and if someone can, well it takes forever to action.

    In Hornet’s case though, Lawyer has acted criminally and endangered your child welfare and safety and Seems you have proof of criminal malfeasance. A smart man would sue lawyer personally for his bond; if he has any, and protect others from suffering the same fate. I would call it a public duty rather.

    Remember every man is accountable before the law. Any action one commits; if against that one’s appointment or against another man’s right; becomes their one’s own. Half the problem is to prove it.

    Btw I am no lawyer and nor even sure I know what the above means.:-) just an opinion

    something worth reading though and may answer some of your questions Simon re bonding

  67. Simon says:

    It seems the lawyer Peter Harrison of Porirua has a close association withtoe judges in particular one was her honor judge Ulrich who seemed perplexed unless Harrison told her what to do.

    Directions from Ulrich on two occasions have had detrimental outcomes for the children.
    Things that Harrison did had detrimental outcomes for the children many times over.
    Harrison even attempted to be reappointed using a memorandum that I was not allowed to see until the judge had made directions relating to it.
    Cover his own arse number one
    Support the mother number two (no matter what)
    Go into business with the mothers lawyer Ms Byrne – Harrison Byrne.

    Here is the problem.
    They have always been able to do what they like on the basis of “it’s in the best interests of the children” but what about when their actions have detrimental outcomes – then they are not acting in the best interests of the children. So in Harrison’s case,
    To dictate letters o. Behalf of the children’s GP so she could send it to him and he submit it to tue court for example may just be good old fashioned perversion of the course of justice.
    There is a list of underhanded behaviour form him and ineptitude resulting in detrimental outcomes for children.
    Principal family court Judge Ryan wonders way people (applicants – men right) aren’t turning up .

  68. WrongGender says:

    I do not believe it is enough to expose them here. THIS IS JUST A HOPEFUL OPINION – AS stated above, once you get your kids out of court, I think you should find the evidence and make them accountable. It is not that hard at all if you care to look. I believe it is everyone duty to keep them straight and I think we need to find volunteers that have self represented previously and whom can actually move the court specifically on issues such as the ones you describe. Even if all you can achieve is a fine or penalty then these volunteers can still self fund and keep the rest straight.I do not believe the courts will care either way as it will be business as usual (war is money – litigation is money). Only difference now is lawyers such as yours have to watch out or else the courts will dip into their own cheque books or they may not become bondable – cannot practice. Either way if the punishment is not worth the crime, even rat bags start to think and act straight.

  69. Simon says:

    As I have said I am not, nor are my children in the family court system now. Have been but not now. I am happy to expose, prosecute, persecute, sue, apply for bond or what ever. This needs to be planned and executed, I am ready willing and have the data, evidence necessary, who can help.

    This will demonstrate;
    Directions with no evidence
    A different Judge breaking the law
    Outcomes from directions of another Judge clearly detrimental to the children.
    Court appointed psychologist, three reports contradicting each other (same psychologist)
    C4c perhaps perverterted the course of justice
    C4c did everal things of note and many thing he should have done but did not.

    So come on who can help?

  70. WrongGender says:

    Simon, I wish I could. That knowledge would be precious.Feel free to share in your discoveries.

  71. mopardad says:

    Simon, just reading your posts to get an idea of what has happened, you say you were threatened 3 times for breach of a Parenting order, who made the threats?

  72. DJ Ward says:

    The video is worth a watch.
    Actually a good look at the subject although there’s an obvious pro female bias.
    The case with the little girl is interesting.
    1) It takes something significant for a father to get full custody.
    2) We can’t say if the mother was winding up or manipulating the child.
    3) She takes the child to the doctor to be examined.
    4) Gets CYPS workers to come and look at the child.
    5) Stinks of a false abuse allegation and intentional keeping of the child.
    6) Judge and L4C didn’t put up with her bullshit. Why?
    7) Reporter says I’ve seen the files. Who’s files.
    8) The mother filmed it. Had she been through this before?

    Oh don’t forget the Backbone Collective.
    Pretty good at putting on the tears.
    The uplift is brutal.
    The uplift is a barbaric practice.
    It’s clearly not nice but what a drama queen. Those emotive terms are a total exaggeration. Young girls taken by ISIS have a better understanding of those terms.
    If she had it her way if the courts said a father can see a child but the mother says no then the father can go and jump off a bridge for all she cares.
    The child may not be at risk with the parent. This is not a reason to exclude the other parents from the child’s life.
    It’s called being selfish and manipulative.

    There is a vast difference in the older child’s case which gets a smaller part in the story. It doesn’t pull on the heartstrings as much seeing a 14 year old boy cry.
    As pointed out by the professor the child has the right to have his opinion listened too. The courts actually got things wrong based on the info provided.

    whats the end game for all this?


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 2016 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