To Men and Women who support this site
Men and Women who support this site and what it stands for, must step up to the mark and tell the FC, lawyers and report writers, that we are united and we are not taking this lying down for one minute longer.
It happened this morning while standing in Whangarei Warehouse. My 11 year old stepson rung his sister on her cell phone and said that there were two cars outside waiting to take him away.
His mother knew this was happening and allowed it to happen by giving the people taking him permission.
The child was in total despair crying that these people have come to take him away.
What the FC have done is illegal.
No forms have been signed by the father, The Care and Protection coordinator said he had to sign to allow this to happen, and the father has interim custody.
We don’t know where he is, who he is with, and what state he is in.
The Care and Protection coordinator doesn’t have any information.
The C4C is Christina Cook, she is the cause of this, and the one who has activated for this to happen and one to keep away from.
How the hell do they justify what they have just done to this boy.
How is he feeling.
He’s been abused emotionally and physically for 6 years and has now been taken to strangers.
The FC can go and get xxxxxxxx
If it is illegal then talk to the Police!! Why waste your breath here?
Comment by [email protected] — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 2:41 pm
Have and they say they can’t do anything because it’s not criminal.
Comment by sonnyking — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 2:54 pm
The police, L4C, and family court cannot activate this. It sounds verry murky. I suggest it is best not talked of on an “Open” site. For a child to be taken like this there has to be a Care & protection issue, which means CYF are involved. Get a lawyer quich smart. The nearest lawyer to you I can vouch for is Rebecca Holm of Takapuna.
If it is a CYF matter there is better advive at http://www.cyfstalk.org It’s worth joining!
Comment by Alastair — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 3:40 pm
Not criminal what bollocks, Read s210 Crimes Act
Abduction of young person under 16
(1) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who, with intent to deprive a parent or guardian or other person having the lawful care or charge of a young person of the possession of the young person, unlawfully takes or entices away or detains the young person.
(2) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 7 years who receives a young person, knowing that he or she has been unlawfully taken or enticed away or detained with intent to deprive a parent or guardian or other person having the lawful care or charge of him or her of the possession of him or her.
(3) For the purposes of subsections (1) and (2),–
(a) it is immaterial whether the young person consents, or is taken or goes or is received at his or her own suggestion; and
(b) it is immaterial whether the offender believes the young person to be of or over the age of 16.
(4) In this section young person means a person under the age of 16 years
Either the story you tell isn’t the full story or it is a crime. No other option.
Comment by [email protected] — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 4:17 pm
A fairly recent (2008) Court of Appeal judgment found when a child was uplifted the Court had a respoinsibility to provide legal advice in the form of Counsel to Assist at the time of the uplift.
The story you tell sonnyking just doesn’t ring true. If genuine then get off here and get some suport and assistance. If you are telling only partial truths why waste our time?
I very much doubt that the FC is acting illegally and if so then you have redress available to you and every post here just indicates that we are not being told the full story.
Comment by [email protected] — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 4:47 pm
There is not more to this story other than a dad struggling in court for his son’s right to be free from continual abuse.
I have said earlier that the C4C dropped a S19 into Judge Druce’s lap and there was a care and protection order for a meeting where by the father was given two options.
Agree to his son going to foster care or taken away completely.
No agreement was made and he has interim custody.
He has fought for years for day to day care for the sole reason of stopping the abuse the child receives from his mother.
The C4C believes the mother and that is that we have alienated him.
This is untrue we have stated this to the FC and even said that my partner would take a lie detection test.
Yes there are concerns for his welfare, from his mother.
The father has never had day to day care of his son ever.
Yet the father has of his daughter who was abused as well.
I don’t care about this being an open forum, and neither does my partner.
Let them do what ever they want.
A child’s welfare is the only concern and the FC certainly do not gop by the rules.
Everyone sits and moans here but doesn’t do anything.
Yes I will look at the Crimes Act.
I have gone through the Care of Children Act and the Child, Youth and Families Act and cannot find anything to justify what the C4C has ordered.
All my partner was told is that the C4C initiated it and he wasn’t allowed any details as to where the child is and how the child is.
There is a Judicial Conference pending this month ordered by Judge Druce.
I will look at the cyf talk site but CYF are not the ones that ordered it. They did what the C4C instructed.
Sorry if it sounds muddled, I’m so frustrated and all I can think of is the child and what he will be feeling at the moment, which will be total terror, being with complete strangers in place he doesn’t know.
Comment by sonnyking — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 6:42 pm
Alan go xxx you.
Don’t you dare tell me I’m here for the fun of it and not telling the truth.
Jam it mate, your words are disgusting and appalling and I arrrgh can’t say what you make me feel when I read your rubbish.
Comment by sonnyking — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 6:46 pm
So much for support and assistance.
You make people lower their standards by saying terrible things about them
Comment by sonnyking — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 6:47 pm
Will look at CYF talk but they didn’t initiate this?
Will contact Rebecca tomorrow.
Anyone you trust in Whangarei?
Comment by sonnyking — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 6:50 pm
Although I’m curious as to why the father was given the two options, lose your son or lose your son, it’s probably best that you don’t answer me here. I’m just nosy.
I’d be inclined to take Alistair’s advice and join cyfstalk where there is a private members forum where you’ll receive support, advice and help from others who have experience that you might benefit from. I don’t go there anymore because life’s too short to take any sh!t from bad-tempered arse-holes however 99.99% of the members there will offer genuine help to you in a respectful manner.
I do wish you the best of luck.
Comment by SicKofNZ — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 8:46 pm
Doesn’t anybody get it.
I am not and will never be afraid to speak out.
What the child has been subjected to is far worse than the FC could possible ever do to me.
Plus it is not the CYF that did it.
The C4C did something.
We think it may be a S140, we don’t know.
We tried to contact the Whangarei Court today to find if the Judicial Conference still stands but there was Industrial Action and you couldn’t get through by phone, we don’t live in Whangarei but nearly an hour away.
The choices the father was given, we can only guess, is that it is because they don’t believe the children and the father.
Comment by sonnyking — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 9:02 pm
Yes, I do get it. I’m hoping you might have a happy ending and also trying to guide you so that you have no regrets later by saying too much in an open forum. It could be used against the father/child relationship. I do get it, honestly. I’m just trying to help.
Comment by SicKofNZ — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 9:14 pm
Dear Sonnyking and family.
You may seem alone, yet not alone.
Infighting within MENZ without complete redress towards your predicament has entailed.
You were given my contact details to address the situation, which
I would like to see Dargvalle properly represented.
Jude Hay/Clough?
Unlike many doubting Thomases and their Boy Wonders, I back you and give the support required.
I remain as ever,
In Kindest Reards
Paul Catton
East Auckland Refuge for Men and Families
(09) 271 3020
Comment by Paul Catton — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 9:41 pm
I have edited so that you don’t feel as though I am creating a problem.
In my opinion, the following.
Don’t go there with Jude she ruined so much and did 4 reports.
The first said that the children would be better off with the father.
The last said that she didn’t know the father’s sister on a personal level. Which she did and the father’s sister had been to her home where she use to live, ‘Lilac Villa’, which is 800 metres from our home and she watched us like a hawk.
She lied in Court for no reason and prevented the father having day to day care back in 2005.
You guys don’t no what has gone on.
There is no way I could say even a quarter of what has happened on here as there wouldn’t be the room.
We have boxes upon boxes of paper trail and that was before we were self represented.
Comment by sonnyking — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 10:11 pm
Problem is: We all know very well what goes on and your story is not going to be any different than the injustices the men on this site see and hear all the time and have done for years.
You can try and work with them which you have attempted and look where you are? Nowhere! You’ll be no better off in 2 years time and will have spent a whole lot more money.
Why don’t you give Paul an e-mail and see what he can suggest you do? It won’t hurt and it is one of the best offers you’ll get. IMHO, you’ve met up with men that are experts in this.
Allan is also suggesting you to take this to the next level.
Comment by julie — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 10:56 pm
Yes Julie I will give him a call and I said that.
What is meant by the next level?
And yes the men on here have gone through the ringer.
You didn’t understand my comment and mistook it.
What my comment says is know one here knows what has happened fully, who we have had as expert report writers, lawyers, C4C’s Judges etc and the reasons of why and the events that have happened.
Just like I don’t know what has gone on in your situation.
Comment by sonnyking — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 11:12 pm
Could be.
Actually, I didn’t take your comment any differently that what you write above. I get what you are saying.
To allow these guys to look into your case closely off this site and in the background. In a way you are dealing with this yourself and then giving us feedback. We can’t really know (as you say) the details. But hearing all the he said, she said, they said, doesn’t bring us any closer to helping you.
At the moment all we can do as commenter is say, “Be strong”. Except for the likes of Paul and Allan and Alistair and Dad4justice. They deal with this kind of thing as advocates so chances are they are going to say what they are saying.
Comment by julie — Mon 16th November 2009 @ 11:51 pm
Bevan Berg is up that way.
I still want the files – in fact I cannot help immediately without them other than to say I can commit to help. We have one more battler up that way but I would have to contact him separately. In truth we have an army up there buts is wounded – needing some encouragement and active revenue finding them to bring them out of their emotional graves.
Kind regards,
Benjamin (I need the files)
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Tue 17th November 2009 @ 12:05 am
Dear Sonnyking,
I know Jude Hay/Clough, she shafted me.
I understand how this system works.
I was eventually able to work outside of this system and now command the high ground.
The Courts will not allow any publication of Catton v Catton / Larsson as the Solicitor General has threatened.
Bar of soap deary.
You are in Dargaville, you have been shafted in the Whangarei District Court and now after shafting you wonder why?
Alan Candy and the North Shore Mens Centre could also wonder why?
Had you bothered to contact the Refuge as earlier suggested tactics would have been different,
I remain in kindest regards
Paul Catton
East Auckland Refuge for Men and Families
(09) 271 3020
Comment by Paul Catton — Tue 17th November 2009 @ 12:05 am
Julie – this is time for intervention if justified – justification is found in fact and not in emotive response – the supporters of an individual need to commit to assist ratehr than discussing the issue and then commit to help otherwise it is all simply pretty words in round about places. We live in our own heads until in some way we get out of them and then we can see what others are facing.
Benjamin… (in go slow reply)
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Tue 17th November 2009 @ 12:08 am
Oh, I forgot to say you also work in this area. Sorry about that.
Absolutely.
Comment by julie — Tue 17th November 2009 @ 12:18 am
Maybe Julie – but there has been a cross over as you say – like I say I have a bit of a slower reply than others – if I get the facts I can pass them to you and you can interpret them and contact your own contacts – or contact those who are responsible and relate your contact of those to your contacts – which in many ways is more effective. I can get to the news easy enough – whether or not they report it would be dependent on how physically capable a group is to give practical support and then the camera would be immediate – it just needs to be done. I just need the files.
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Tue 17th November 2009 @ 12:27 am
Paul will phone you soon, this morning, after I have contacted the FC to see whether or not the Judicial Conference this month still stands after my partner was told the C4C may have actioned this under S140.
Strangely enough the mother didn’t seem at all perplexed at what was happening and later the CYF worker who told my partner the C4C had actioned this, rung our home looking for the mother’s partner.
We think the mother knows where the child is, even possibly went with him, and this whole situation has a very bad smell to it.
Contacting you earlier would have not prevented this as we had already filed twice and the Judge’s response was the Judicial Conference, then this happened out of the blue without the father’s knowledge, but with the mother’s complete knowledge.
Yes no doubt Alan Candy is wondering what the hell has happened
since the last time.
You can tell him this is far worse than keeping the daughter safe.
We feel that the C4C in now running the show.
Benjamin I will contact you via E-Mail, but I can’t give you the files as they are not duplicated and we have everything right from 2001 and from the previous lawyers that have worked this case.
Is Bevan Berg a lawyer or advocate for Menz groups.
Comment by sonnyking — Tue 17th November 2009 @ 7:09 am
The next level is to let someone with experience look at the case and provide you with an opinion and options. To date you have made lots of posts and asked for advice when no-one is familiar enough about the case to comment helpfully.
What you described yesterday was a case of a s210 crimes act offence yet you let the Police sideline your complaint.
Get some support, confide in that support, develop some options and a strategy. That is the advice from Paul, Julie, Alastair, myself and Sickofnz. Maybe some of us know more than you do? Maybe some of us have been through this several times.
There are diverse approches here, pick one and share with that person. Off site is much better at this stage. What you have shared so far is likely to be used against you in FC so again I say get off here and get some support that can help and can spend time to understand the whole situation.
Comment by [email protected] — Tue 17th November 2009 @ 9:29 am
If we start to view protection orders and sending of fathers from their homes as state assisted kidnappings (SAK) then we will not have someone here doubt sonnyking.
How could a lay person in the street who is un-aware of the evilness of the family court will sympathies with sonnyking if someone with at least a minimum knowledge about the violence and abuse of the Family Court thinks so of sonnyking?
There is absolutely no justification what-so-ever in removing a child from a parent unless dangerous conditions are proven.
This is simply state terror.
There is no point in being scared from the sate. A repressive state feeds on the week. They only back up when their violence is matched with resolute firmness.
The damage the state services inflict on children is of cosmic scales.
Protection Orders are not there to protect the children and women but to protect judges from ‘just in case…’. Their option is simple just serve a temporary protection order. Involve police, women’s refuge and the woman’s parents.
Comment by tren Christchurch — Tue 17th November 2009 @ 10:03 am
sonnyking,
I am sorry I could not come up with any tangible advice or proposition.
I am angry that all these state public servants will go tonight to their homes, have a beer, sip a pinot… while a powerless child, unable to defend itself is put i care of strangers. Many scores of children loose their lives or abused while in state care each year.
In 50 years the government of the day will apologize. Just like in Australia today for the stolen innocent children of England. And few crocodiles tears shed.
In these two nations there are two sports. Rguby and apologies.
Comment by tren Christchurch — Tue 17th November 2009 @ 10:17 am
Sonnyking –
Do you know how to copy files into pdf? or attach them as a document if written on a computer? There is an internet cafe in Dargaville – very expensive as I remember when I was up there cost me a meal and a bus to use it – but they can show you how and do it for you to replicate the documents.
I advise that I am familiar and more so now with Richard Lay’s case with filtering through the ‘guff’ to find teh controversies and if they read as you suggest to me to date it won’t take me long to pin point the critical sentences.
If Bevan is not an ex-police informant then he is the best you will get to help you – but only if he has the back up to let him take control.
Kind regards,
Benjamin.
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Tue 17th November 2009 @ 11:50 am
It is a sad state of affairs and it gets worse each day.
Our only hope is that the strangers he is with are okay and the knowledge that he is out of his mother’s abusive environment is in itself a blessing.
To update the Judicial Conference is still allocated for this month.
The father stills knows nothing of where his son is but he has suspicions that the mother does.
Comment by sonnyking — Tue 17th November 2009 @ 1:04 pm
A Judical conference is largely a procedural event. Don’t have many expectations that much will happen and then we have the Christmas silly season upon us. I do think the whereabouts of the child needs to be disclosed at such a fixture, if you demand the information, but anything else needs to be resolved by consent or is fairly limited to procedural matters such as timetabling etc.
If it is getting worse by the day then I suggest you act earlier, if C4C knows where the child is then that is where to start.
Comment by [email protected] — Tue 17th November 2009 @ 2:49 pm
Benjamin I have emailed you this afternoon.
I work and study on a computer as well as build them, yes to your question.
Please read your E-Mail and I’ll make contact with.
Allan I will E-Mail you back.
Comment by sonnyking — Tue 17th November 2009 @ 7:49 pm
Best thing to do would have been to quit NZ and go to a country not member of Hague Convention, most Pacific islands fall into this category
Comment by ThaiBoy — Tue 17th November 2009 @ 11:24 pm
Sorry ThaiBoy, but that is not realistic.
Comment by sonnyking — Wed 18th November 2009 @ 7:08 am
@sonnyking
I [and Paul] have looked through the files you have sent. In brief and obviously, there are more we need to consider in order to build proper traction to your circumstances.
However, I have enough information to prosecute my early concerns. I will construct a letter to John Carter MP for Northland (and Paula Bennett, Minister of Social Development) and copy Shane Jones (and Annette King, opposition spokesperson for SD), by Tuesday. I will not use your names unless you contact me giving me that entitlement and will [publicly] initialise the document in its call for help. I will head the document as URGENT, and I will state [my] intention to place a CYFS call on Friday 27 November.
Obviously, it will be better for me to have more information to work with, and ask you to send through what other files you feel comfortable sending: remembering that the case will close according to facts integrated with previous judgment and decisions — and not necessarily to the conditions of one or either (excluding CYFS at this stage as a party) of the parties although I concede the point that it is most important that you put your concerns first, as they are the way that you naturally assess the circumstances.
I have sent you this email off menz.org.nz as well as publishing it to your article, although I am comfortable with reply in either forum/jurisdiction. Personally it is better that the progress is documented on line as transparently as possible.
Kind regards,
Benjamin Easton
LAOS New Zealand
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Sun 22nd November 2009 @ 11:19 am
I have emailed my opening letter to sonnyking and wait for a reply before posting globally, including the Member of Northland – and Social Development representatives..
Benjamin
LAOS New Zealand
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Tue 24th November 2009 @ 8:23 pm
Dargaville, as a sample of NZ Family Law
Benjamin Easton
PO Box 24415 Manners St
Wellington
[email protected]
027 390 2169
EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE
25 November 2009
To: The elected Member for Northland, National Party,
The Honourable John Carter,
Tena koe Honourable John Carter,
Copies to: Hon Paula Bennett, (Minister of Social Development)
Hon Shane Jones, (Labour, MP for Northland)
Hon Annette King (Labour and opposition spokesperson for Social Development)
Publication menz.org.nz
Tena tatou katoa,
I have requested to view files from a Dargaville Family Court matter involving Child Youth and Family, detailing the position of a Counsel for Child and several psychologist reports. I have read in part the personal submissions and relevant affidavits from the party aggrieved and respond immediately on reading them — not willing at present (and until the circumstances are secure for the author) to read them all. The live and ancient allegations posed by this party against the institution of New Zealand family law are shocking.
I am very familiar with family law. I am presently assisting and prosecuting cases before the Courts, in judicial review as well as through the traditional means. Most cases are in their infancy by comparison to these circumstances in Dargaville, however, I have not considered a live case like this and stress upon you, in an environment where the Family Court has recently been declared with a stunning mortality rate on men and fathers (exposed to family law) the ramifications of my observations should be taken seriously and considered significant.
This letter acts in public statement to advice government, without detailing any private information relative to the circumstances, that there is a growing will among the public damaged by failed Court practices to expose and publish the damning circumstances. In a following letter I will send to you and other interested parties and before the pending Court proceedings, I will identify the matter and will describe the controversies as I see them as best I am presently able to interpret.
I will request your URGENT attention to the matters I will raise and encourage here that my inquiries will be met in a manner that protects the families/parties. I will also request that government responsibly considers the depth of these extraordinary problems prior to protecting any practice or function of gender discriminatory fact as neither real nor living controversy.
Respectfully,
Benjamin Easton
LAOS New Zealand
(of a) father’s coalition
Comment by Benjamin Easton — Wed 25th November 2009 @ 9:24 am
You have got to be crazy recommending Rebecca Holm as a Barrister to anyone but your worst enemy
Comment by Anthony Dunne — Mon 25th February 2013 @ 8:10 pm
Any female lawyer is dangerous. I am not sure if they don’t understand client confidentiality or whether they cannot overcome the hardwired need to ‘share’.
Comment by Down Under — Tue 26th February 2013 @ 6:50 am
Your post and recommendation of Rebecca Holm (barrister)goes against men and menz issues. Rebecca Holm another incompetent and corrupt barrister.
Comment by anthony — Wed 27th March 2013 @ 4:26 pm
Can anyone suggest a lawyer that has the ability to take on the hyena that is Christina Cook? Am happy to go out of Northland if need be.
Comment by Merv — Tue 14th May 2013 @ 1:59 pm
Hi Merv,
I’m in Wellington and it has been several years since I worked with a Northland case. Don’t let any lawyer psych you out. Whatever the FC matter it is about common sense and not rocket science.
If you have a clear strategy, know what you want and how you plan to get to this position then you are more than halfway there. The other information you need to consider is are the short, medium and long term steps in achieving what you wish and what is good for your children. If these are aligned then you will be able to direct either your own self-representation or the lawyer of your choosing.
I, and others, are available if it helps to talk through strategy matters. That is probably a better starting place than seeking a new lawyer to be your conquering knight or hyena gladiator.
Comment by allan harvey — Tue 14th May 2013 @ 3:11 pm
Having trouble with Jude Clough myself. Anyone able to successfully get a critique report done? She has put in her report all the allegations that the other party has made which clearly go against supporting evidence. Her final recommendation is that an urgent OT notification be made, and that my son return to his mother. My useless lawyer didnt file my response to the S133 in time and now I cant. Any ideas where to go from here?
Comment by Joe — Wed 2nd June 2021 @ 12:09 am