- 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.

Tue 21st March 2017

Judge slams Child, Youth and Family for misleading information

Filed under: Domestic Violence,Law & Courts — pcObelix @ 7:10 am

Just posted on stuff. Where are the politicos and concerned people that would be up in arms if this happened to a mother…..

Judge slams Child, Youth and Family

21 Responses to “Judge slams Child, Youth and Family for misleading information”

  1. BruceS says:

    Standard operating procedure for CYFS; father a violent bastard, mother a benevolent sweetheart. Separate father from child irrespective of the best interests of the child. Evidence suggesting mum is a nasty bitch shall be written off as a bad case of PMS.

    I’m amazed New Zealanders still tolerate the existence of CYFS. Their continued interventions using predetermined, subjective assessments of situations they are not qualified to deal with only compounds the view that they totally dysfunctional. It is indeed re-assuring to see that some judges are now beginning to question their veracity.

  2. DJ Ward says:

    It’s worse than just misleading information.
    They made threats agianst him.
    They lied to a minister of parliament.
    They acted to obstruct justice.
    They made false statements in court.
    IE perjury.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11822171

    “The man’s sister, whom the court praised for helping arbitrate between the father and the mother, said social workers told them if her brother made any more complaints they would put him on supervised access.”
    So he wasn’t violent towards the girl or he would have already been on supervised access.
    So making a compliant about risk of a child being abused meens the person making the compliant can be punished.

    “A psychologist reported to the court that the father had no history of aggressive behaviour or drug abuse, was a good carer for the girl”
    No history!
    How the hell did they claim he did have a history?

    This has the typical stench of man haters and bigotry.
    Don’t expect any changes.
    They will sweep this under the rug.
    The minister will turn a blind eye.

  3. hornet says:

    did this man have to take a private prosecution? Or was there a good lawyer out there who helped him with his fight?

    As I have stated here several times, I have evidence of Lawyer for child perverting the course of justice, Lying to the courts – perjury – and I have asked the police to prosecute, but they will not.

    Just as they will NOT arrest a mother who breaches a court sanctioned parenting order – multiple times and who has broken the law as it relates to the care of children act.

    Thanks

  4. Jerry says:

    History repeats

  5. brent says:

    Well Well nothing new here!

    However, A lot of kudos to the father for persistence and his sister who backed him! Now that is what I call news worthy and Anne Tolley is just a goat! And won’t do anything as those feminists have her squared away the old hag, should take the pension and go.

    Andrew little is just that “Little” and taken an opportunity to make a headline grab.

    The best thing that could happen now is for the father to go Public and name and shame all involved and in particular the mother. However, like Paedophiles their rights MUST be protected! Yeah Right.

    Bill English your full of Shit! More people are complaining because they no longer fear the repercussions because the internet provides the immediate proof and puts power back back where it belongs with the parent.

    My heartfelt congratulations to that father you SIR are a real CHAMPION and your daughter will love you
    4EVER.
    The most noticeable outcome shows, that you have what MANY lack and that is a SPINE!

  6. John says:

    I have wrote about this on another blog but I will repeat it here.

    In 2011 whilst I was settling custody issues with my ex-wife my oldest daughter called me to say that her mother had pushed her out of a door causing her to fall and sustain some slight injury.

    I contacted my lawyer who advised me to contact CYPS which I did. I was informed by the CYPS worker that she would thourghly investigate the allegation and report back to me with the outcome of that investigation.

    Two days later she rang back to say she had investigated the incident and had concluded it was my fault. Taken back by this I asked how she had come to this conclusion, she told me that I was failing to provide sufficient support to my ex-wife in the care of the children.

    I tried to tell her that I had the children every weekend and that my ex-wife would not allow me in her home or any where near her house but she was quite dismissive of what I had to say.

    I further asked her how she had investigated the incident and whether she had spoken to the children. She told me that she had talked to my ex-wife by phone and had not spoken to the children as she felt this would cause the children undue stress and emotional harm.

    I contacted my lawyer with the result of the investigation who advised me tread carefully as if my ex could manipulate the CYPS in this way then it would not be to difficult for her to lay sexual/physical abuse allegations against me which I would have little or no hope of defending and even if I did disprove the allegation it would make it incredibly difficult to persue a shared custody agreement.

  7. Pritchards says:

    This is truly shocking guys, you couldn’t make it up.
    #6 I take my hat off to you for standing up to this kind of behaviour without losing it

  8. 2c says:

    Im about to face my fourth if not fifth battle with cyfs. I have found them really difficult to work with. It is so time consuming and gravy money unbelievable. I have been accused many times of things I havnt done by not only cyfs but also third parties (who have even taken it upon themselves to take the law into there own hands (causing damage). I am at the end of the line.

    I have asked for support for my child many times and fallen on deaf ears. Mentioned some things have I have concerns about and yet not listened to. One time took cyfs 4 years to finally take one seriously and even then I was accused further by the then social worker.

  9. DJ Ward says:

    Let’s see how much they get slammed for this one.
    Sounds like a trend lately.

    Male = Offender.
    Even when nothing has happened.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/90703641/cyf-apologises-for-wrongly-telling-family-court-man-jailed-for-sex-offending

  10. Man X Norton says:

    We know these few cases of CYF discrimination against men and undue confidence in what women tell them are the tip of a huge iceberg. That media are even reporting these few cases is further evidence of the tidal change that is building regarding gender issues. A year or more ago media would have ignored such cases because they didn’t involve white-knighting about some female’s sense of injustice. However none of the media coverage I have seen made any mention of anti-male gender discrimination or the extent to which these cases resulted from it. That will come in time as we keep up our efforts to raise the issues.

  11. John says:

    We have to remember CYF are the professionals highly skilled in recognising the danger signs.
    If a father raises his voice or shows signs of frustration he has an anger management problem.
    If you use a profanity in frustration your verbally abusive.
    If you show signs of affection for your child your grooming them.
    If you temper your signs of affection your emotionaly berift and will be emotionaly harmful to the child.
    These highly skilled professinals know that when a father opens his mouth he’s trying to hide something or lying.
    As such these highly skilled professionals having university degrees and no agenda whatsoever are to better trusted by courts and police than a father who’s only agenda is to do the best for the child.

  12. Man X Norton says:

    John @11: Yeah right!

  13. hornet says:

    We are all currently FAILING as DADS = because we are letting a corrupted system HARM our KIDS.

    Dads are protectors of Children and Family, and yet we have allowed a corrupted system to portray us all as the Villains.

    Political correctness is a tool to Control your MIND and your THOUGHTS – removing common sense, reason and logic..

    Health and Safety laws – deliberately Limit, restrict and Control your PHYSICAL world – requiring you to seek approval and permission to do anything in public or at home.

    Spreading FEAR – Beware the Domestic Violence Offender – is no different than the Bogus “TERROR” threat – FEAR …….so we are forced to seek safety and security…….and give up our rights to parent.

  14. John says:

    Woe to thee who has a daughter who does ballet.
    To show an interest and attend your daughter’s class avert your eyes for surely the look of more than brief at any child but your own is surely that of the salivating despot scheming evil plots to despoil the innocent.
    You may faithfully bring your daughter to every class for 7 years, encourage her, complement her, learn to do her hair as good as any mother present, pay all the fees and provide for all the needs, whilst her mother can attend occasionaly, belittle her efforts and refer to teachers as anorexic tarts and watch as she is welcomed with open arms into the 2X clique and you sit quietly in the corner shunned and forgotten.

  15. BruceS says:

    @Hornet #13

    You nailed it; it’s called “scope creep”. The ever expanding micromanagement and control of our lives by the government and it’s frequently incompetent agencies. Take out the men first by pitting our women and our kids against us using our assets as bait. Women need to wake up; they’re next!

  16. Simon grant says:

    Great comments guys and fantastic insight.
    There is no more propaganda left. The comments here are well informed, grandmothers in their 70s are well informed too, they have missed their son’s children and watched their own sons go through the bad bad shit.

    Remove the protector and the children will be vunerable, they will be taken, institutionalised, places like Epuni, Koteri. They will be Abused, as they were in these institutions. The government will and do say, independent enquiery oh yes. The ministry of social development ran these institutions and it’s ok for the ministry of social welfare to run the investigation true, what shit. This went to court, the court said nothing to see here.

    They are taking our children!!!!

  17. Simon grant says:

    His honor tony Walsh usually sits in Porirua. No surprises there in terms of it being a man hitting fefdom. First job The Court Coordinator – get rid of Ann the bias Wilby who selects which self employed external c tractor will be picked for independent contractor such as the psycologist. Sure the judge directs but dear old Ann and her fellow court coordinators choose who gets to do the report – independent contractor. They will often do the kind of reports the person giving them the work likes to see. Right Ann? Sack the lot of them, tere was only one male in something like 53 courts around the country.

    This is no good for the little girl naturally, but for the father, he deserves compensation – as do I. C4c likely perverted the course of justice and a particular judge broke the law to. Assist in covering it up.

    Thumbs up for his H TW, let’s hope this is a serious attempt to flush out those who lie, pervert the course of justice in the FC, lawyer or mother or father.

  18. Doug says:

    I was in the interesting situation a couple of years ago when I was at a dinner with my work colleagues. The wife of one of them was a lawyer, and in talking to her I found that she worked for CYFS having previously worked for IRD. Of course I started trying to find out what she thought about her work and whether she was comfortable with the collateral damage, though obviously this isn’t something to debate too strongly in polite company. Her response was that she acted purely in the best interests of the child, my impression was that she believed she was on some sort of a holy crusade for justice and wasn’t particularly interested in alternative views of the subject. Have to say it made me glad I hadn’t come up against CYFS myself, it would be like arguing with a wall. Needless to say I swapped seats as quickly as I could.

  19. Simon grant says:

    Doug 17. Was her name Kathleen?

    These people are zealots. They have no life experience to speak of, they are full of their own importance and would not survive in mainstream business.

  20. andreas says:

    The trouble is that misleading information is given by CYF to the family court very frequently. These lies are only rarely picked up by the judge.

  21. Man X Norton says:

    andreas @20: Yes, and this often results from CYF personnel taking personal offence at people’s behaviour towards them, or simply taking a dislike to someone, rather than objectively considering the children’s welfare. They don’t use much in the way of objective assessment tools in reaching their opinions and decisions.

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