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

Protecting yourself from Perjury

Filed under: Domestic Violence,Gender Politics,General,Law & Courts,Sex Abuse / CYF — MurrayBacon @ 8:07 am Wed 4th July 2012

With the familycaught$ heading into a period of extreme change, there may be an increase in manipulation and perjury.
Entitlement leads to immunity from other people’s rules. This is a dangerous disease, so try to be careful not to catch it yourself.

As Machiavelli said, time is the greatest innovator.

When the invisible rules of play are suddenly changing, deceptive people can easily have an increased advantage. In this treacherous environment, you must pro-actively protect yourself from other players, especially those using different rules to yourself.

I have heard of situations in NZ, where fathers and mothers had been able to defend against perjured allegations in familycaught$, using their voicerecorder, where they otherwise would have been succe$$fully framed. Up shit street without a paddle…..

If you want to walk into caught and trust to true justice winning every time, you may as well bury yourself!
Use common sense and protect yourself, in accordance with NZ laws. ******
After the event, you can only moan and groan, like an idiot without eyes and ears.
Insurance – it is better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

****** Just because there is a sign on a wall, doesn’t mean that it has any legal meaning!!!
Maybe the sign was put there by twisted thieves, to aid fraudsters and psychopaths?
Check these issues out for yourself, or ask several legal-workers and try to work out the reality from all of their answers….
It is a question that they find challenging.
Look closely at the sign. Was a new sign put up, just before your hearing?
Is there old dust on the sign?
If you are not satisfied, screw up a few of your own signs, to correct the situation!
Twisted screwing can be hazardous??

By way of example:
If a supervised access organisation ask you to agree to not use a voice recorder, I suggest that before agreeing you ask them how many of their supervisors have had to retract statements made in familycaught$ after having a recording of their words played back to them?

The truth will often come out, but it may need a lot of help. Better that the help be an honest voice recording, than a dishonest statement in the absence of an honest recording. Think through whether a voice recorder would help truth or help perjury?

From the small number of cases that I know about, I believe that the children were better protected by the truth becoming known, than by the perjurer obtaining what they thought (in their twisted deranged mind) they wanted. Honest parents are safer and more skilful, than liars!

US Courthouses Are Venues for Sociopathic Harassment Against Targets Without Audio and Video Recording Devices

Recently I was listening to an Internet talk show featuring Dr. Tara Palmatier of Shrink4Men and Paul Elam of A Voice for Men. A caller related a story about how his friend showed up for a court hearing to finalize his divorce and was physically assaulted in the court house by his ex and then falsely accused by her and arrested by the police. This story and several others I have heard and read provide ample cause for a revision in US laws to permit private video and audio recording in courthouses to be used for the protection of the people who are forced to appear in courthouses.

It occurred to me that some people may think being arrested for being a victim of assault in a courthouse sounds far out, but in fact it is not unusual conduct for abusers to go after their target in a court or public setting by staging attacks or simply making up false allegations. For details on this particular incident, listen to the radio program about 64 minutes into the show if you don’t have the time to listen to the whole program.

Another person who has been attacked by his ex in a courthouse is family law reform activist Ben Vonderheide of Pennsylvania. His ex and her new boyfriend conspired to attempt to frame him for assault in a courthouse and made false reports to police to attempt to get him arrested. But because he relentlessly employs audio and video recording devices, even when he is threatened over how they are not allowed and he thereby risks his own false arrest, he was able to prove they assaulted him. This resulted in what is claimed to be the one and only prosecution for perjury in a family law case in the United States.

Ben Vonderheide Exposes Pennsylvania’s Abusive Child Profiteering Racket

Vonderheide’s abusive ex and her latest boyfriend Theodore Yoder were convicted of repeatedly lying to police to try to get Vonderheide arrested on false allegations. The convictions occurred in part because Vonderheide had very convincing evidence. He video and audio records constantly because of his extended experience with pathological liar Flanders, especially if she might be in the area. If he didn’t have those recordings, he might have wound up in prison for a very long time. That’s because in the US, domestic violence and restraining order violation allegations are treated as guilty until proven innocent crimes in violation of the US Constitution. You have to prove your innocence, yet even when you do, you can still be hounded with persecution via a record of criminal accusations that will cost you jobs, income, and your reputation potentially for the rest of your life.

Vonderheide finds himself a frequent target for physical violence and false allegations because he asks questions of backers of the abusive family courts and gender-biased domestic violence laws. These people seek to intimidate and harass him any way they can. When he showed up at the US Senate to ask questions of those backing renewal of the sexist VAWA law, National Organization of Women attorney Lisalyn R. Jacobs physically assaulted him. This abusive physically violent woman is a domestic violence expert for CNN and the New York Times. She espouses the ‘men are violent, women are victims’ drivel that is one the primary reasons behind the total failure of the DV industry to put a stop to violence in families, yet she herself is violent and her actions prove she is a liar when it comes to the DV claims pursued by her gender-biased organization.

Jacobs’ assault on Vonderheide was captured on his video recording, and this enabled her prosecution for a crime that would probably have otherwise gone completely unpunished.

Jacobs later plea bargained to get 32 hours of community service and agreed to ‘refrain from all harassing, assaultive, threatening, or stalking behavior against John Bennett Vonderheide.’ Reports are that she later lost her law license over her crime.

Vonderheide’s experience shows that the laws against recording devices in courthouses are dysfunctional as they aid abusers in their harassment campaigns. The problem is much bigger than the small number of publicized physical assaults in courthouses and similar government buildings would suggest. Courthouses are often venues for creating false allegations of harassment by the actual abuser precisely because the courts prohibit the use of cameras and recording devices and the victim is often forced to appear in a location known and readily accessible at a set time by the abuser.

A typical example of how this victimization works involves a self-proclaimed ‘abused woman’ who is actually an abuser herself. She stalked her ex around the courthouse, trying to make contact with him via nasty looks, smirks, intimidating hand signs, and pretending to have to go to the court business office or the bathroom at the same time as him. This man is in danger every time he sets foot in a courthouse for a court hearing or mediation with his abuser. The woman is a predator stalking her prey. The laws against recording devices in courthouses prohibit him from being able to defend himself with solid evidence, all while the unjust courts often require him to be in the presence of his abuser with no real protection whatsoever from harassment and false allegations.

Despite his efforts to stay away from her, one time the woman got into proximity of him and relatives with her attorney beside her and proceeded with her usual depraved behaviors. Weeks later, she and the attorney then filed a declaration in court falsely claiming that the man and his relatives were shouting and screaming insults at her in the courthouse. This was a total fabrication. If it had happened, given that it was tens of yards from a security scanner and guard station with half a dozen armed police officers and was in the middle of a court business office with dozens of people walking about or in lines, there would have been witnesses. She produced no witnesses besides her lying attorney and herself because she was lying.

How is a falsely accused person supposed to defend against such a lie? There was no shouting, no screaming, no violence, and nothing to attract attention of the dozens of people all around. As a result, the target of the lie cannot get any witnesses because nobody else remembers a thing. Literally nobody is going to come forward weeks later as a ‘witness to nothing happening.’ But if the abused man or his family had been able to carry around video recorders all throughout the courthouse to protect themselves, it would have been very easy to prove the woman was perjuring herself yet again. Fortunately, this man and his relatives were lucky that the judge didn’t give any credibility to the woman’s perjury. Unfortunately, the judge did not take any action to punish her perjury. So she has continued to perjure herself, file false police reports, and engage in widespread harassment against her many targets for years.

Ben Vonderheide has worked long and hard to fight the good fight for justice for children and families (mothers included). His tactics include carrying recording devices with him at every opportunity. This is a must for a person working in this depraved system where a false accusation with no evidence is assumed to be the truth. You can learn more about him and his tactics via an Internet radio program featuring him talking with Dr. Tara Palmatier or by visiting his website Daddy Justice.

In the Internet radio program, Vonderheide talks extensively about how video and audio recording is so important to protecting victims of sociopaths who will attack them in courthouses, at child custody exchanges, and over the phone. He points out that without evidence, you will be attacked and you will be assumed to be guilty.

The program also features a caller who is a mother whose family was helped tremendously by Ben Vonderheide as the Lancaster County government abused her family. The woman calls him her ‘hero’ and in my view she’s so right on this.

Citizens cannot be safe from abuse by sociopaths and abusive government employees without the right to freely use audio and video recording devices in public settings or in their own homes and businesses. Any law that constrains the use of such devices without providing alternate mechanisms to ensure the safety and security of people from false allegations is a law that aids and abets criminal behavior.

America needs many more heroes like Ben Vonderheide, Carlos Miller of Photography Is Not A Crime, and the many contributors at sites like CopBlock who expose the brutality and crimes of police officers and other government employees by using audio and video recording devices.

If you’ve got a story about how you were abused in a court house, a government building, or other public setting via false allegations, assault, intimidation, or other abusive aggression, please share it with us by leaving a comment. The public has a right to know how widespread these crimes are. The lawmakers must be pushed into updating the legal codes to allow targets of abuse and everyday law-abiding citizens to collect evidence to defend themselves against the liars and criminals around them.

Further Reading

Ben Vonderheide Exposes Pennsylvania’s Abusive Child Profiteering Racket

Cole Stuart’s Review of Baskerville’s ‘Taken Into Custody’

NOW and VAWA attorney Lisalyn R. Jacobs Cops a Plea for Assaulting Daddy Justice, Ben Vonderheide

Happy Ballentine’s Day from Daddy Justice: Ben Vonderheide Exposes Corruption of District Justice Kelly S. Ballentine that Results in 9 Felony Counts

Carlos Miller on Keene Courthouse Corruption

Videos Of My Speech At NH Liberty Forum And Near-Arrest At NH Courthouse

Photography Is Not A Crime

All Dressed Up And Nothing to do Except Arrest Photographers.

Civil Rights, Courts, Crime, Divorce, Domestic Violence, Government Abuse, Legal, Partner Violence, Police, Prosecutor
Ben Vonderheide, Carlos Miller, CopBlock, Daddy Justice, family law court, Lisalyn R. Jacobs, National Organization of Women, Photography Is Not A Crime, VAWA


  1. After my first experience with a Family Court appointed report writer I recorded all subsequent interviews. Including interviews with C4C. The recordings were not covert. All the subsequent people were not entirely thrilled but they did not object. I was prepared to politely terminate the interview if they refused to allow recording but no one did.

    Comment by Vman — Wed 4th July 2012 @ 9:30 am

  2. Thank you for your useful example Vman.

    Four-star tirade costs firm $94,000
    By Matthew Theunissen
    5:30 AM Wednesday May 23, 2012

    An engineer labelled a “f****** sniveller” during a foul-mouthed tirade by his boss has been awarded $94,000 by the Employment Relations Authority.

    James Irvine had worked for Timaru-based company Andar Holdings for several years before it was sold to engineering firm Wallace & Cooper.
    Mr Cross denied he had said this, claiming he had told Mr Irvine: “If you’re told to sit in the corner, then you sit in the corner.”
    However, Mr Irvine’s version was backed up by another employee who heard the exchange.

    The ERA was also played an excerpt from an audio recording secretly made by Mr Irvine during a meeting with Mr Cross.

    In it, Mr Cross could be heard using the F-word or its derivatives many times, accompanied by the sound of him banging a table for emphasis.
    If you have a voice recorder in your pocket, then this possible accountability should help you to consider your words carefully, before you give them breath. This should help you and the other party too. MurrayBacon.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Wed 4th July 2012 @ 9:57 am

  3. Judge: police clearly wrong
    Last updated 11:54 06/07/2012
    Two Timaru policemen have been told by a judge their evidence was unreliable about why they Tasered and pepper-sprayed a man.

    Timaru freezing worker Troy Duanne Hamuera Reuben, 36, was found not guilty of assaulting an officer in the execution of his duty by Judge Joanna Maze in Timaru District Court yesterday.

    On December 29 last year police were called to Reuben’s address after 11pm after a neighbour reported yelling and property being broken. When the first officer arrived a second man, said to be responsible for the disorder, was spoken to.

    Then Constables Christopher Pritchard and Rory Chapman arrived and they went straight to the front door and entered, despite a boarder at the property telling them not to.

    Chapman searched the house and did not find anyone, while Pritchard went into the bathroom where Reuben and a woman and child were showering in their togs, having just come back from the beach.

    Both officers were then in the bathroom and claimed Reuben tried to throw the shower door at them. Pritchard then focused the Taser on Reuben, who along with the woman was yelling at the police to leave.

    The officers alleged Reuben used the child as a shield as he went into the lounge and then lunged at Chapman, who then pepper-sprayed him, which also got in the eyes of a child in the room. Pritchard then fired the Taser at Reuben’s back.

    Judge Maze did not accept the lunge was an assault based on evidence from the Taser camera.

    “The pushing or shoving of the shower door did not occur, the Taser camera shows it was still intact. Both officers are clearly wrong.

    “Using the daughter as a shield is frankly nonsense. I do not accept the officers can be relied upon, given what they have said about both incidents,” Judge Maze said.

    “The footage shows the woman and man repeatedly asking them to leave, yet they remained while the child was screaming.”

    She believed Reuben had touched the constable’s arm as he was gesturing for them to leave and that they did not have a license to remain as no-one was in danger. “The officers remained at their peril.”
    – © Fairfax NZ News
    Notice that Reuben was saved by obtaining access to the video camera footage from the police taser. The police do not always honour discovery (in time for the hearing!), so he was very fortunate to be able to use the police footage, against the police. If you rely on correct practice, then you are gambling. If you have your own camera and can use it at short notice, then you are taking a much smaller gamble.

    Also notice:
    There seemed to be no question of the policemen being prosecuted for perjury?
    Maybe perjury is quite commonplace, for prosecution of perjury to not even be considered?
    Expecting the police to prosecute themselves for perjury, is just another unmanaged conflict of interest..

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Fri 6th July 2012 @ 4:18 pm

  4. police can make up any shit they like

    Comment by Ford — Fri 6th July 2012 @ 4:45 pm

  5. Perjury is just one form of perverting the course of justice.

    How seriously a caught takes perverting the course of justice, shows the public how seriously the caught takes justice.

    If a judge turns a blind eye to perjury and other methods of manipulating caughts, then the caught is a waste of money, time, respect. We need to act to destroy such incompetent and socially dangerous judges.

    UK: Judges Outraged at Breach of Family Court Secrecy
    August 25th, 2011 by Robert Franklin, Esq.

    To gain an advantage in a custody case, Vicky Haigh coached her daughter to call her father a pedophile. But that’s just the beginning of Haigh’s wrongdoing and its far-reaching consequences. Read about it here (Daily Mail, 8/23/11).

    What’s perhaps most remarkable about the case is that the English judges who’ve heard it have gotten highly incensed about Haigh’s behavior. After all, mothers lying about fathers in the course of custody matters is hardly new. Mothers falsely claiming domestic violence or child sexual abuse by the fathers isn’t either. Those are so common and any form of punishment for them so rare that the case can’t help but draw attention.

    So the salient feature of the case must be the reason for the judges’ pique.

    Vicky Haigh and David Tune were locked in a custody battle and Haigh, fearing success by Tune, played the abuse card. She said he’d sexually abused their daughter and coached the girl to back up her claims.

    But Haigh went a dangerous step further. She hired one Elizabeth Watson as an “investigator.” Watson’s “investigation” consisted in toto of slander and libel. She fired off multiple emails re-alleging Haigh’s claims, all of which might again have gone unnoticed by the judges, but she too went a step further.

    Watson not only libelled, but named the social workers hired by the Doncaster council to investigate Haigh’s allegations against Tune. Those unfortunates had looked into the claims and found them to be false, so Watson took to the ether to libel them by name as well as the Doncaster Council.

    And I’d put good money on the proposition that it’s that – the naming of the individuals – that got the judges’ dander up. Not only the trial judge, but the highest judge in the British family court system Sir Nicholas Wall, took time out to excoriate Haigh and Watson.
    Sir Nicholas said: ‘Allegations of sexual abuse were first made by the mother and not by X. These were false and the mother knew them to be false. X was coached by the mother to make allegations of sexual abuse against the father.’

    He added that two judges examined the case at previous High Court hearings and both found that Mr. Tune was not a paedophile and had not sexually abused his daughter.

    Sir Nicholas said: ‘The child’s mother is wholly unable to accept the court’s verdict and, with the misguided assistance of Elizabeth Watson has unlawfully and in breach of court orders, put into the public domain via email and the internet a series of unwarranted and scandalous allegations about the father and others.

    ‘She has repeated the untruth that the father is a paedophile and – without a scintilla of evidence – has attacked the good faith of all the professionals who had had any contact with the case.

    ‘These proceedings have had a serious effect on the life of the father and have threatened the stability of the child. Her mother’s actions are wholly contrary to her interests.’

    Watson has been sentenced to nine months in prison. So far there’s no word if Haigh will receive any punishment at all.

    As I said, this type of thing goes on all the time in family court and it’s one of the scandals of the family court system that it routinely allows perjury and false allegations to go unpunished. The unsurprising result is that the practice of false swearing continues. Why wouldn’t it?

    But the real issue to the judges was that Haigh and Watson aired the whole thing publicly, and that, as Judge Wall made clear “will not be tolerated.”

    You see, in the United Kingdom, family court proceedings occur in secret. Usually, no one is allowed to name names or reveal much of anything about who said or did what. The press is generally barred from reporting anything of substance about family court.

    And it is that secrecy that is surely to blame for much of the anti-father decision-making of British family courts. The theory behind the secrecy is that the publicity would be too traumatic for children (another “best interests of the child” argument, don’t you know.) Of course with the number of divorces involving children, 99% of them would never make the papers anyway, and of those that did, most would do so completely outside the child’s awareness.

    So it’s always seemed to me that the secrecy imposed by British family courts has a lot more to do with protecting judges than with protecting children. And I’d say this case bears that out.

    Enter John Hemming. He’s a Liberal Democrat MP who made the mistake of taking up Haigh’s cause in the House of Commons. He did the same in a previous case.

    The MP said Haigh had been unfairly put under threat of imprisonment by Doncaster Council for speaking to a Westminster meeting about family law issues.

    Again, Haigh had named names and among them were the Council and the social workers in her case. More to the point, he was sticking up for Haigh’s right to speak publicly about the doings of family courts. He picked a uniquely bad case in which to do so, but that’s what he was doing. Now he too is in hot water, with at least one MP calling for his resignation from the office his constituents elected him to.

    Well, I can’t go to bat for two women who slander, libel and defame a father in order to deny him custody, an attempt that failed by the way. I’m glad Watson is going to prison and I think Haigh should too. What she did was illegal and should be punished.

    But what’s also true is that courts routinely tolerate exactly that type of behavior with nary a blink. The reason they didn’t in this case is that the pair, plus MP Hemming, made the matter public. They divested the family court of its cloak of secrecy, and that, and that alone brought the wrath of the court down on them.

    But the High Court should direct its attention elsewhere. First, it should punish perjury, false allegations and false swearing in custody cases. It should do so not in isolated cases that are forced into the public eye, but in all cases. Only then will the practice cease.

    Second, it should do away with the secrecy of family courts that serves to shield from public scrutiny the often outrageously anti-father decisions of those courts. As long as the press can only guess at what happens behind the closed and locked doors of family courts, there can be no effective public clamor for reform.

    So this case should be seen for what it is. The judges feign outrage at the lies of two women. What they’re really upset about is the women’s breaching the secrecy of family court proceedings.

    Both must change.
    MurrayBacon It looks to me that the “judges” were angry at their tolerance of perverting the course of justice, being publicly exposed!!!!!!!
    Methinks the lesson is that much more exposure of what goes on in secret caughts is required.
    The idea that for justice to be done, it must be seen to be done is many hundreds of years old.
    Why do some thieves keep trying to reinvent this destructive wheel?
    We should be jailing “judges” who foster and encourage perjury.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Sun 8th July 2012 @ 6:09 pm

  6. Elliot Turner pleads guilty to perverting the course of justice

    Watch the video to see the story by Europe correspondent Melissa Davies
    Elliot Turner, who is charged with murdering his New Zealand girlfriend Emily Longley, has how pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice.
    Turner, 20, denies murdering the 17-year-old aspiring model in his bedroom at the family home in Bournemouth, Dorset.
    But in Winchester Crown Court on Monday he changed his plea on the other charge after it was amended to take away reference to Turner failing to call an ambulance following Emily’s death.
    His father Leigh Turner, 54, who along with his mother Anita have denied charges of perverting the course of justice, told the jury that paranoia led him to believe a letter he found could have been a confession that his son murdered Emily.
    Leigh Turner said he did not read the letter from Elliot to his mother and he had ripped it up.
    He later had learnt a little of what was in the note when he overheard his wife and son talking about a mallet, an argument and being hit.

    He said there was no excuse for destroying the letter, but he denied he realised he was perverting the course of justice when he did it.
    He also denied taking a jacket from the house when it was a crime scene.
    The prosecution alleges Elliot Turner strangled Emily in a jealous rage on May 7 last year after he feared she was seeing other men.
    Leigh Turner told the jury he had returned home after a call from his wife that Emily “might be dead”.
    “She looked like she was asleep for that split second,” he said. “I knelt down beside, her touched her cheek, touched her head and touched the side of her neck. She was cold – ice cold, like a crystal cold. The girl had passed away.
    “I said ‘sorry butterfly’ or something like that, I’m crying.”
    He said his son had packed a suitcase and he had said to him: “What are you going for? There is nothing to run from.”
    Leigh Turner said what he was heard saying, on tapes covertly recorded by police, about Elliot strangling Emily was the “worst-case scenario of what might have happened”.
    If the non-secret caughts can jail for perverting the course of justice, why is it that secret caughts are so reluctant and unwilling?
    In my opinion, it is because they are thieves, who have lost all sight of the social reasons that Government funds courts. Just beneficiary thinking on the part of the “judges”.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Sun 8th July 2012 @ 6:16 pm

  7. I was watching a Dr. Phil Show, with a mother and father who had been litigating over the custody of their children.

    After letting both speak, Dr. Phil started honing in on the mother and challenging some of her behaviours. At times there were gasps of revulsion from the audience. Women’s faces in the audience were shown, so I guess they showed more revulsion than the men?

    It turned out that after several false allegations about her ex-husband, and further acts of Parental Alienation, custody of the children had been transferred from mother to father.

    If USA courts can assess the credibility of a mother’s allegations, then why are NZ familycaught$ “judges” so unwilling to assess credibility of mothers in NZ?

    Where men are unable to protect their children from hazardous mothers, then in my opinion the obligation to protect your own children is greater than the obligation to work in trust through an incompetent, thieverous and corrupt familycaught$.

    Twenty years ago I was in that situation. I suspended my disbelief about the familycaught$ and tried to work with them in trust.

    I now regret greatly that I trusted these clowns, thieves and arrogant fools. I am still working through the resulting problems for my children.

    It is well past time we held the familycaught$ “judges” to accountability for the quality and cost of their actions.

    Comment by MurrayBacon — Sun 8th July 2012 @ 6:28 pm

  8. i watched a louis theroux doco about herion addicts in the doco went on to a hospice unit helping women overcome of the female directors of the hospice was saying all the women there are and their problems all stem from the men they have had in their lives and thats what they taught them..what a crock of shit..teaching women to blame men is what they do

    Comment by Ford — Sun 8th July 2012 @ 8:16 pm

  9. i watched another american woman unloaded 2 fully loaded handguns into her hubby and squealed battered woman syndrome..i think she got 5 yrs probation

    Comment by Ford — Sun 8th July 2012 @ 8:41 pm

  10. mucking around on google i found an article that stated brian banks,,an american student was convicted of rape…his accuser admitted to lying yet kept her 1.5 million dollar rape compensation payment..he spent 5 years in jail

    Comment by Ford — Sat 10th November 2012 @ 6:19 pm

  11. Reply to Ford #10

    Ford if you wouldn’t mind,can you give me a link …many thanks….

    Comment by johndutchie — Sat 10th November 2012 @ 6:45 pm

  12. Johndutchie (#11) – you can see a synopsis from L.A. Now here:

    …just more proof that the US and NZ justice systems are riddled with holes; guilty until proven innocent is a good place to start!

    Comment by Bruce S — Sat 10th November 2012 @ 7:17 pm

  13. thanx the name brian banks and youll get results also

    Comment by Ford — Sat 10th November 2012 @ 7:43 pm


    hope this works

    Comment by Ford — Sat 10th November 2012 @ 7:48 pm

  15. If perjury can be 100% proven what can be done as it would seem no one actually cares..

    Comment by Carl philpott — Thu 19th January 2017 @ 2:39 pm

  16. Yes they care but only when a man does it.

    “But this was the first time he had lied to a judge.”
    Take note.
    Perjury has no history of behaviour.
    It’s just perjury and has no warnings.

    ”I can’t find any authority where someone has bareface lied to a judge,” he said.
    WTF visited the family court lately.
    Women are exposed as lying all the time.
    When they say he is the dad no need for paternity test.
    And the test fails that’s perjury.
    Oops they have an exemption for that.
    Apparently 50% of FC child abuse allegations are complete bullshit.
    Commonly called perjury.
    Etc etc.

    “Birch was jailed for one year 11 months with the prospect of home detention swiftly quashed by Judge Phillips at the hearing’s outset.”

    There is a standard for FC judges to follow.

    ”You hold the judicial system and the court up to ridicule,” he said.
    The family court is a complete joke.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Thu 19th January 2017 @ 3:09 pm

  17. I know I am a women but there is a lot on here that is helping me.

    I would love to talk to some fathers about what is happening to me and what has happened to them.


    Comment by Mel Stewart — Sat 5th March 2022 @ 4:08 pm

  18. #17 Mel welcome.

    There has been at times, regular female writers.
    For the most part, people respond to what is said.
    I have found in life a simple truth, why your experience is important.
    If it has happened to you, it’s likely happening to many others.
    It’s extremely unlikely, your the only one.

    If it’s a problem that hurts women, then men should help to fix it.
    If it’s a problem that hurts men, then women should help to fix it.
    Shouldn’t anything that hurts anyone, be a common enemy.

    Discussing things, is better than just taking the side of our gender.

    Comment by DJ Ward — Sat 5th March 2022 @ 8:33 pm

  19. I agree, we need to get back to the race we are, the Human Race, they are discussing education in schools around how to behave toward the other sex, but so far what has been discussed out loud on radio I have heard only that it is boys who need this training.
    Perjury is one scurge that will always create ugly problems for those it is casted upon. In an over communicated world we have lost the ability to communicate… and a cold world it is when we no longer need, or worse, want to communicate…shiver…shiver

    Comment by Hydes — Tue 8th March 2022 @ 3:50 pm

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