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

USA cop acts to curb abuse of men by false complainants

Filed under: General — MurrayBacon @ 8:37 pm Tue 30th September 2008

While NZ judges and police refuse to prosecute perjurous complainants, then men (and a few women too) are open to deliberate abuse, through calculated abuse of caught process.

If the judges pay lip service to enforcing these laws, but steadfastly refuse to act, then it is left to men to protect themselves from this deliberate abuse, by driving through private prosecutions.

While men are divided, they are easily conquered.

All that is needed for the triumph of evil, is that good men do nothing. Edmund Birk 1760.

Eric suggested that we should work together, for mutual support, for legal lobbying. One example is driving through private prosecutions of perjurous false accusers. (As false accusers are worth many $tens of millions per year to legal workers, it will be a hard fought fight. Piracy versus private prosecutions?)

Say 15 private prosecutions would be far cheaper than 4,000 to 5,000 men a year abused, now for 13 years and with no end in sight. We can’t afford to NOT act.

This Atlanta policeman makes a stark contrast against our Henderson police!

Don’t forget that it is election year. While men are silent at the political meetings, then the abuse will probably roll on.

Anyone willing to fight?

Atlanta Cop: I’m tired of seeing restraining orders used as a weapon against good men

July 24th, 2008 by Glenn Sacks
“In my 14 years of policing, when proof is made to show the court that the T.P.O. is being sought for false reasons, no arrest is ever made…Judges just lecture the false accuser and sends her on her merry little way.”
On the subject of women employing fraudulently obtained domestic violence restraining orders as a strategic tool, I recently received this letter from Mark, an Atlanta police officer. Mark writes:
I have seen first hand the horrendous treatment that fathers get in Family Court. Just last week I had the privilege to prevent a woman from getting a Temporary Protective Order against her ex-boyfriend.
Her intent was to remove him from his house so she could move in and gain residency because she lost her home and had no other place to go. I felt an arrest was in order for false statements to the court in her application. She cited that he was abusive and she was scared of him. Failing to inform the court that she did not even live with him!
Fortunately for him, I, a police officer, was there to stand up on his behalf. Sadly, most men do not have an officer to prevent the issuance of T.P.O.s. Most counties do not even require a police investigation. The allegation is sufficient enough to warrant the T.P.O.
I believe we should all remember that a T.P.O. is a mere civil action until it is violated, which means there is no crime. The false statements and swearing, that is required, to obtain a T.P.O. is a felony right from the start.
In my 14 years of policing, when proof is made to show the court that the T.P.O. is being sought for false reasons, no arrest is ever made. Furthermore, this is done at a hearing in front of the judge. Judges just lecture the false accuser and sends her on her merry little way. I have witnessed many injustices against fathers.

I do feel that Protective Orders can be a good tool. I’m just tired of them being used as a weapon against good men.


  1. With New Zealand having a Minister of Police that parades about like a common street hooker when she is being interviewed on National T.V. – I have no other option than to give up – may we have a new government please and then someone may take our concerns seriously…

    This is not acceptable, “SAY NO TO ANNETE KING PROPAGANDA”, plain and simple.

    where is the transparency from Annette King ???
    where is the name of the family violence offender???
    and the purported injury received by the complainant???
    and documented by a medical professional ???
    and reported in the New Zealand Herald each week ???



    all other forms of violence are reported by the media in detail, right…

    Tell your neighbour, DON’T VOTE LABOUR !!!

    Police abuse of powers in New Zealand start by a false arrest via lack of credible evidence and a corrupt judge then convicts an innoccent person to save the pigs bacon and increase statistics to support the family violence myth.

    Comment by Colin of Nazareth — Thu 2nd October 2008 @ 10:05 am

  2. Further more to what i have also stated before, there are no women abusers in the “SAY NO TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE” campaign, we need pest control / exterminator to rid parliament of it’s rat problem. T.V. 3 last night could have at least put the question to the king rat, as to why there were no female abusers represented in this such wonderful campaign she is so happy to glorify… (which coincidentally just happened to be the same night that mens prostate cancer funding issues were being addressed)

    Comment by Colin of Nazareth — Thu 2nd October 2008 @ 10:45 am

  3. Dear Colin,

    before criticising Labour, please remember that the Domestic Violence Act was passed by National. Sir Doug Graham said in Parliament that he knew that the act would be a challenge for judges, but he was confident that they could deal successfully with these issues.

    The act does not create breaches of natural justice, but it does make it easy.

    Each such breach occurs because of the decisions made by the individual judge. There is nothing in the Domestic Violence Act that requires a judge to breach the rules of natural justice.

    Thus it is individual personal responsibility of the judge in every case.

    National introduced the act and Labour have continued it.

    I cannot see any significant difference in their policies, on this issue. This is why scrap disparagingly refers to them as Lational and Nabour. So do I.

    These judges are presently under public pressure to reduce domestic violence deaths. Even if you put every man in NZ in prison, a few women would still die from domestic violence! If there is little useful that a judge can do, then their only remaining options are useless actions, to try to assuage the public pressure. Most men seem to be just lying back and enjoying this, rather than taking positive action to protect their children’s relationships.

    While men don’t complain, in a way that their family and friends can hear, then nothing will change.

    If you are concerned about these issues, then surely it is worth discussing them in the widest forums that you have access to. Ask voters to consider domestic violence policies, when they make their decision. Candidates need to know what voters are considering, when they frame their policies. At present, the majority of voters don’t seem to see any problem and this is why the dangerous policies are going ahead.

    It all reflects lacks of listening and too much trust in people that we would be scared to have not trustworthy! Real head in the sand stuff! Positive change will only occur when we are willing to face these issues, rather than parroting on with entrenched positions.

    Some of these entrenched positions are very profitable, thus creating socially dangerous conflict-of-interest situations.

    Best regards, MurrayBacon the random axe murderer.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Thu 2nd October 2008 @ 10:52 am

  4. i did not approve of the king rat speech last night, i am aware of the specifics you have highlighted today as you have said this before, the friendly reminder is okay by me.

    Comment by Colin of Nazareth — Thu 2nd October 2008 @ 12:15 pm

  5. Both my partner and I were on the receiving end of appalling false accusations from his ex wife – one molestation one against me! It is the most debilitating, humiliating, horrible feeling I’ve ever had. You feel completely powerless. Luckily for us her unforgivable behaviour backfired and we have 50/50 parenting now but the way the law is in our country defies logic. It cost us thousands while she got legal aid and there was no course that we knew of to retaliate – if you wanted to. The cost of her very bad behaviour is substantial and there is no accountabiity for her lies. We need to change. Our system has produced an easy tool for low-life’s to abuse with zilch liability – just a psychological and physical cost to their victims.

    Comment by AnnieB — Thu 2nd October 2008 @ 5:09 pm

  6. Dear Annie,
    you clearly state a good example of the damage done, when accountability isn’t enforced.

    Just as good parenting is finding ways to bring consequences back onto the perpetrator (disciplining or accountability). When parents doing damage are not brought to account, then they can feel free to go on and do more and worse damage.

    In exactly the same way, when “judges” refuse to bring the consequences onto the person who made the decisions that created the costs, then they are failing to perform the duty that they are paid too well to perform. They are failing to protect the victims of the misbehaviour.

    When we look closer, we can see that they are investing in their own future, at the cost of those that they are required by law to protect! When they don’t nip such vandalism in the bud, it goes on and grows worse, creating more work for the legal workers – at huge cost to our society.

    This is a classical conflict-of-interest situation.

    I suggest that instead of being allocated a “judge”, that people who want to be judges advertise and the customer can select the judge that they wish, by their reputation for timely service and quality service and also by their charge rate.

    If the people are not satisfied, they have the option of refusing to pay, subject to the risk of being sued for payment. It all feeds back into the judge’s public reputation.

    If you are paying for the judge, then you want everything to move smoothly and quickly, as you bear the cost, subject to costs allocation, if it proceeds to a full hearing.

    When judges know which side their bread is buttered on, most of them will miraculously become efficient and successful. The rest can be left to starve slowly away to nothing.

    Suddenly, the previous conflict-of-interest is able to be managed by the litigants and will cease to be a problem. Most cases would be sorted, without going to a full hearing, thus reducing the number of people required to work as judges. This is how the legal system is meant to operate, when the legislation is clear and workable.

    If the judges ruling is successfully appealed, then you would recover your costs from the judge, just the same as buying a faulty TV, replacement or full refund of purchase price.

    It is all a question of can any legal workers deliver a service that is fit for the purpose and value for money? Let them compete on this basis.

    Lets see which political parties are willing to back user pays for judges, in this election?

    Best regards, MurrayBacon.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Thu 2nd October 2008 @ 9:27 pm

  7. I will say for the record i know of only one good Judge in New Zealand and his name is Jeremy Doogue, there may be others, but i must admit i was impressed by this fellow in every manner of speaking, when i appeared before him (criminal court) in 1998. He has a reputation of not being intimidated by powerful (and undue) influences.
    Judge Marie Sharpe was okay too i guess for a woman.

    Comment by Colin of Nazareth — Thu 2nd October 2008 @ 10:05 pm

  8. Dear Murray
    I’ll vote for you!

    Comment by AnnieB — Fri 3rd October 2008 @ 9:26 am

  9. Mr Bacon,
    # 1. pigs bacon is by no means, reference to your good name.
    I received your e-mail, but i have my own views.

    You will not acheive anything with your protests against legal workers. I am not interested in this style of rebellion. Thank you.

    It is about time transparency and accountability entered the arena.

    1. Nature of offence, injury sustained (medical professional verification)
    2. Name of offendant
    3. Name of complainant.

    A national (internet) data base or NZ Herald (monthly) documentation of the specifics, to supposed Domestic Violence.

    I believe Domestic Violence is a myth until i see the evidence.
    Department of Statistics (Ministry of Justice) is not good enough because half the Judges are convicting people without credible evidence, to fudge the numbers.

    Domestic Violence must be the biggest organised scam in this country.

    Shame on Justice of the Peace and all you corrupt New Zealand Judiciary. (Judge Jeremy Doogue excluded)

    Comment by Colin of Nazareth — Fri 3rd October 2008 @ 11:26 am

    The childs mother defended what was in her affidavit even when challenged by lawyer John Dines, which now i think of it only greater emphasises a stronger case of perjury against her, because not only were her false statements in police summary of facts, she also defended these statements when challenged by a lawyer under oath.

    The charge was 3 x Male Assaults Female. The NZ Police are a confident bunch when it comes to going the distance. I started out with 3 x charges and they wanted to reduce it to 1 x charge if i pleaded guilty, all within seconds before the trial was to start, i was furious, i said no way, there were no assaults and we went back in the court room.

    The idiot Judge said, because there were many allegations, i.e. 3, that you must be guilty. So he said, i can not see any evidence but we will convict you of 3 x common assault coz we are not sure.

    The Judge was Judge Moore, he was always falling asleep on the bench too.

    Comment by Colin of Nazareth — Mon 6th October 2008 @ 11:16 am

  11. Would a bomb at his front door wake him up ?

    Comment by Perseus — Tue 7th October 2008 @ 12:35 am

  12. “Best regards, MurrayBacon the random axe murderer.”
    Murray, I must be the only one that knows why you sign off this way. Everyone else must think you’re nuts!!!
    Me – I know your nuts!!! LOL.
    P.S. – great post at #6

    Comment by Dave — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 5:20 pm

  13. Does any one know if in NZ you can bring a civil action against someone who lied and got a protection order? I guess it would be impossible to prove. I know there was a case of civil action for perjury in the Family Court but I don’t know how that turned out.

    Comment by Dave — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 5:23 pm

  14. The cops have a cast iron perjury case against Kaye Skelton. Do they prosecute?
    Not yet anyway and I think we can all predict they won’t ever. Dad has spent nearly $200,000 in that case but there is no redress for that either.

    Comment by allan Harvey — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 5:39 pm

  15. Dear Dave, if you can “prove” the lie, “prove” the damage that resulted and “prove” the cause and effect link between the lie and the damages (without previously being thrown out of caught part way through), then it should be quite straightforward.

    While you are at it, don’t forget about Sympathy, that great slayer of real evidence when out of sight of public gaze!

    Remember that perjury is charged in the District Court, whereas the information to prove it – in the protection order example – comes from the familycaught. In this unfortunate instance, you will be required to obtain the permission of a familycaught “judge” for “publication” of the evidence in the District Court.

    Normally, this would be a mere formality, but our NZ familycaught “judges” don’t see it as permission that should not be unreasonably with-held. On the contrary, Judge Sharp dismissed Jeff Page’s private perjury prosecution out of hand and refused to allow even a 15 minute adjournment, so that such permission could be sought. I was not there, but I was told she made some comment along the lines that “these women should not be being prosecuted for perjury”.

    Perjury left unprosecuted by St. Patrick see #37

    Alternative Path of Complaint
    When a Protection Order application is made without notice, the solicitor must supply a certificate saying that they have made reasonable enquiries and the material facts supplied are truthful, and complete and not misleading.

    There are “meant” to be severe penalties applying, when this certificate is supplied, without the enquiries being competently completed. One example that I know of, is a man working from his home. This detail was left out of affidavits, presumably deliberately by the woman’s solicitor. The net result was the man being denied access to his tools of work and workplace. The solicitor covered this, by not putting his work address on the application, so it wasn’t obvious that this detail was being hidden from the familycaught “judge”.

    The woman’s ruse worked. The man just gave up his business and allowed it to be largely destroyed, what had taken a number of years to build up.

    To my dismay, the man refused to make a formal complaint, as he considered that the Law Soiety would fail to act on the complaint. I knew he was right, however, as a first step it is necessary to go through the motions. Then later – in theory – it is possible to blow this issue up in front of the Law Society and demand that the Legislature remove this legislation, as the legal workers lack the integrity and skills to process it ethically and competently.

    Thus, the responsibility for this defective legislation remaining on the books, lies with us men – when we don’t follow through with formal complaints.

    I know that prosecuting perjury is the “responsibility” of the police and that they are well paid to do it. However, I suppose that it has got to be boring, so they do other things.

    It seems that all? perjury prosecutions in the last 10 years have been private. On acassion, the police will refund the costs of the private prosecution, but the risks were carried by the indivividual that initiated the private prosecution (policeman prosecuted for perjury at Whakatane a few years back).

    It seems that the police are leaving international child abduction largely to private prosecution. Our children will only be protected when we stop waiting for the police and get in and do the prosecutions ourselves.

    I hope that this makes clear, why there is such a dire need for successful teamwork. We cannot protect our children, through private prosecutions at an individual level. We only have a chance of success, if we work successfully together.

    All of these things frustrate me intensely, leading to my well known problems with impulse control. I just don’t want anyone to find out why there are so many axes in my house, when they are alone with me. Anyway, there are “voices” calling me to other work now. Only the paranoids really know what is going on….

    Best regards, MurrayBacon.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 6:25 pm

  16. There is too much attacking of individuals, perhaps where we should be trying to offer support. We all have our problems, some bathed in more or less blood than each other. Please may we focus more onto how best to protect our children and all of their relationships?

    Cheers, MurrayBacon erratic and unpredictable I swerve and hit people…

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Mon 17th November 2008 @ 10:52 pm

  17. spot on, Colin of Nazareth, the whole system is corrupt.

    we need to set up common law courts and our own government accountable to the people on a monthly basis.

    Comment by phil watts — Thu 12th February 2015 @ 10:09 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

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.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar