Feminist Justice System Extends Well Beyond The Family Court
This was a rare case in which Family Court Judge Peter Callinicos challenged and brought about consequences against a woman for providing dishonest, conflicting claims and evidence in that arena of deceit. There seemed no doubt that the woman said things in Court that contradicted her sworn affidavits and that she lied at various times. The Family Court decided in favour of the ex-husband whom she had accused of all manner of depravity and violence. She was then prosecuted for perjury (something that needs to be done much more often in that den of fabrication), found guilty and sentenced for perjury although that conviction was overturned on appeal (we wonder what gender the Appeal Court judge was in that case…). Now High Court judge Rebecca Ellis has reversed the Family Court judgment on the basis that J Callinicos was wrong to conclude the woman had committed perjury and claimed that J Callinicos teamed up with the ex-husband’s lawyers in order to treat the woman unfairly. OMG, Family Court judges plus ‘lawyer for child’ team up with the woman’s lawyer in a majority of cases! Oh, and the ex-husband’s lawyers shouldn’t have asked probing or pejorative questions of the woman; of course, that’s only ok when done to men, huh?
J Callinicos was not in fact constrained by a robust standard of proof in reaching his determinations, only the ‘balance of probabilities’ standard. When that standard is conveniently (routinely and daily) used in the Family Court to determine that unsupported allegations by women against men are factual, that’s all good and the relevant judge is quite within his/her rights to do that. But when the same standard is a applied in a way that finds against a female litigant’s preference, a female High Court judge decides to condemn it after applying to the matter quite a different standard of proof.
While we would like to see the standard of proof improved for Family Court, the current rules still pertain at present and we don’t like to see this hypocrisy. We hope J Rebecca Ellis’ handiwork is challenged in another higher Court. For example, there would need to be robust evidence that J Callinicos ‘teamed up’ with the ex-husband’s lawyers. Is this a case of the women in our system teaming up when Family Court decisions don’t suit their sisterhood?
@1 The answer to that question is yes. Women in our system are allowed to team up when Family Court decisions don’t suit their sisterhood.
Have a listen to the 2 audio files and link to Karl du Fresne blog in this link.
https://menz.org.nz/2022/alleged-corrupt-heads-of-bench-judges-exposed-by-lawyer-tony-ellis-journalist-karl-du-fresne-was-watching/
Comment by Lukenz — Thu 7th December 2023 @ 6:26 pm
What counts is the original decision, it was about dishonesty.
As I understand it, she had done something wrong.
At that moment in time, what was the judge to do.
The case getting to perjury, that’s a prosecutor.
That’s supposed to be the balance, there is two people.
A judge can’t be a prosecutor, or a prosecutor a judge.
So why is the judge being attacked, we have separate powers.
Did the judge overstep that rule, being the prosecutor as well.
If the judge was wrong, so was the prosecutor wrong.
Judges make mistakes, and maybe he made one.
Imagine setting a new legal standard, judges should be worried.
Comment by DJ Ward — Thu 7th December 2023 @ 10:07 pm
I read an article today, supporting the woman in the case.
It seems the allegations were serious, rape for example.
The article was very feminist, demanding she should be believed.
That it’s a serious problem, the family court is bad for women.
You could say that’s correct, many women are not believed.
Genuine male abusers, are not held to account.
But that’s true for men as well, male complaints are ignored.
The article doesn’t mention men, as having a right to be believed.
Should her right to be believed, be greater than his.
If a male says something, it’s automatically a lie.
But if a woman says something, it’s automatically the truth.
Imagine being a judge who do you believe, your wrong 1/2 the time.
What hope do we have, media attacks the judiciary only for women.
Comment by DJ Ward — Wed 13th December 2023 @ 9:43 pm
What is the justice system, beyond the family court.
The criminal justice system, is not the only type of court.
Even the power to give a speeding ticket, is the justice system.
The laws themselves or even services, is also the justice system.
So each of those things, can be examined for feminism.
Are the good things, more than 50% in favour of females.
Are the bad things, less than 50% in favour of females.
The criminal justice system, clearly prosecutes more men.
The police give high speeding tickets, more often to men.
Sexual harassment cases, are more often against men.
It can be explained for those things, why we have a biased result.
But if you look closer, there is feminism.
If all DV was prosecuted, men and women are about equal.
Female sex crimes, are virtually completely ignored.
In fact if only a woman can do it, it’s completely legal.
If only women drove fast, would the justice system care.
If you lie about being on the pill, there is no justice system.
If you remove the condom during sex, there is no justice system.
If you commit paternity fraud, there is no justice system.
See feminism is not about equality, it does not want equal justice.
Comment by DJ Ward — Sun 14th January 2024 @ 8:46 pm