I have heard 5 customers of the familycaught complain about evidence ambush in familycaught, when fresh evidence was introduced verbally at a hearing, without being previously introduced in affidavits (that were served on all parties prior to the hearing).

I have given the name “evidence ambush”, as each of the people that complained used different descriptions for this legal strategy. Having a name, allows different people’s experiences to be linked together, for what is one legal strategy.

The most important issue should be – has this family and it’s relationships been protected?
It is only through protecting integrity and honesty – to foster a supportive, constructive relationship between the parents, that the children can be given the best life by their parents.

I will not discuss “Agenda Ambush” at this time, this is an entire topic in itself and it is covered by different familycaught rules.

Some people fumed silently in anger, some protested to the judge, one lawyer protested to the judge but his objection was simply ignored by the “judge”. One other customer admitted that s/he had accidentally successfully used evidence ambush against CYFs, without realising at the time what s/he was doing. The CYFs lawyer protested vehemently, but was overruled by the “judge”.

With respect to natural justice, it would generally be fair and reasonable to either adjourn the hearing for sufficient time to allow the other party to understand the issues and obtain any relevant evidence to rebut, or to order that the hearing continue, without the ambush evidence being admitted.

A similar situation is when one party forgets to attend a hearing. usually the hearing will be adjourned, so that all affected parties can be in attendance.

Why then did the “judge” take the different course of admitting the ambush evidence from one party, after the other party had laid their cards on the table in affidavits served prior to the hearing and requiring the hearing to continue without any time adjournment at all?
(more…)

An alert reader has noticed that we should be publicising this important piece of upcoming legislation. Thanks for the heads-up Mike.

Download the proposed Family Courts Matters Bill here. [1297 Kb pdf]

Submissions to the Social Services Select Committee on this bill are due on 29th October.

The Parliamentary debate at the introduction of this bill makes it clear that there is substantial cross-party support, indicating that it will certainly pass in some form or another.

Judith Collins (National), who has practiced in the Family Court, does a pretty good job of demonstrating how intervention by lawyers – expert at manipulation of the system – works against the best interests of children – which is to have parents who co-operate. (more…)

Scoop Release

The stark reality behind New Zealand’s family violence statistics has seen the emergence of a new profession – that of Child Victim Advocate practitioner. Child Advocates from around New Zealand will gather on 4 October 2007 for a Hui sponsored by the Family Safety Team (FST) initiative and supported by the Ministry of Social Development (MSD). The Hui aims to establish and maintain a national network of Child Advocates as well as to share information, debate advocacy issues and establish interest groups with particular advocacy focus.

The NSPNZ is on the march. Using the school as an entry point – now that hasn’t been done before, has it!

Let a women have her way regardless.

The flight was already 15 minutes late leaving, dogged by continual relocation of passengers to accommodate lone children. There was frustration in the tone of the flight officer’s voice as he announced a delay due to documentation. At this point one attendant was moving two passengers from one row, to seat three children together.
The bloke in the aisle seat obliged and moved to a different seat, but the women by the window — onboard emergency, warning, warning, tarmac domestic in progress, I will not be moved. At this point approaching 20 minutes late, there was distress showing on the faces of the flight crew. They gave up and put two children next to her and one next to “a man” shudder shudder. Then came that standard announcement, passengers are reminded that according to aviation law they must at all times comply the instructions of their flight crew. Perhaps it was that the plane was still on the ground, then again it could have been that a women with a window seat takes preference to airline policy and aviation law and what about customer satisfaction, very confusing.

The police shooting and killing of a man in Christchurch last night appears to be another tragic example of the DVA’s principles in action. The police were called to a domestic indicent and no doubt followed their current guidelines as demanded by feminist groups including Wimmin’s Refuge. They will have treated him immediately as a criminal rather than a distressed person and ganged up against him with the woman, ignoring any violence or provocation from her, encouraging her to use the DVA to shut him out of her life and the lives of any children, disregarding the issues and frustrations to which the man was reacting, forcing the man out of his home and generally depriving him of any sense of security, future or hope. Following this enlightened intervention by the police, the man left the house highly threatened, angry and feeling he had little left to lose. Never mind, Heather Henare will be happy to know the police then murdered him, better than most men deserve and sadly wasting four bullets in the process. They did have the decency though to apologize to the public for the inconvenience it caused to traffic flow.

An article on Campell Live on Tuesday night deserves comment. (Sorry, this video clip will only be available for a short time and I don’t currently have the skills to save the clip in a useable form).

The clip is about a 21-year-old mother in Australia who advertised for sperm and impregnated herself from a donor. She blatantly states that she wants no man in her life or father in the child’s life. She wants lots of children and has a target of 11 that she plans to produce in the same way. Of course, her choice is based on being entirely supported by the state.

In my opinion it’s a story of state-sponsored child abuse. It brought out some of the issues in a shallow way, but it’s a shame no representative of fathers’ groups was interviewed. I believe there should be a presumption of illegality for either a woman or a male donor deliberately to bring a child into the world without any intention of providing a family or any relationship with the biological father. Only in special circumstances should a Court be able to give people special dispensation to do so legally and to be entitled to state financial support for doing so.

The DPB, rather than providing basic welfare assistance to stave off starvation and exposure, has evolved to provide a viable, long-term lifestyle for women who choose to keep having babies. It has become so on the backs of men from whom the state steals in order to reimburse itself. This particular Australian woman promises not to ask for any contribution from the father, (yeah, right…) but it wasn’t made clear whether the state was extracting reimbursement from him. If not, then the woman must have been deceiving the welfare authorities in order to withhold the father’s identity, and this was ongoing because she said the father regularly contacted her to see how things were going. Regardless, someone has to pay for supporting this woman’s lifestyle, and such taxes are mainly taken from the blood, sweat and tears of men such as those who die in Australian mines.

This situation was a subset of the larger problem of state-funded child abuse. Every time the DPB encourages procreation into a situation with no father, and every time it facilitates the break up of a family unit, children are abused. In a very small proportion of such cases this may be outweighed by abuse that was occurring in the family unit, but mostly it’s just a matter of the adults seeking some elusive greater personal happiness at the expense of their children’s best interests.

The article showed how erroneous feminist ideology has so effectively become part of the average person’s belief system. Both the young woman and her mother expressed confident opinions that biological father involvement is irrelevant to children’s development. Who can blame them for believing this, given that most government policies and laws imply exactly the same? The DPB in its various forms across the developed world was introduced during an era when such beliefs seemed like common sense. Since then knowledge from research has built to show clearly that such father-marginalizing beliefs are unfounded, but DPB and child-related policies have not changed significantly. Feminism jealously guards the rights and privileges accorded to women at the expense of children’s best interests and society’s functioning.

Fathers might like to share something of their perspective on this poll being done by the Families Commission.

State funded National Radio (actually, I appreciate it immensely much of the time) broadcast an interview this morning on “research” into youth violence by Presbyterian Support researcher Sue Milligan. You can hear it for the next week on Radio NZ’s website. The research was based on 34 case studies and interviews with 40 people who worked with offending youth. This kind of qualitative research cannot properly be used to draw general conclusions about the population from which such small samples were taken. But such irritating patriarchal notions about science and knowledge did not stop Ms Milligan from blessing us with a full analysis of the relevant causes of the dramatic increase in violence and bad behaviour we are seeing in our youth (which at least she didn’t try to dismiss by quoting Aristotle). Apparently it’s all due to such factors as the stress our children endure, inadequate listening to them by teachers and parents, and the violence modelled by their families and society generally.

Of course, neither the researcher nor the interviewer thought it worth considering whether changes in discipline might have contributed to the problem. No mention was made of the banning of corporal punishment in schools and the steady deterioration in behaviour since then. The prediction that if we stop “modelling violence through physical punishment” then violence in society would disappear has been contradicted by events, but that didn’t stop the ideologues from illegalizing smacking and maintaining their over-reliance on simplistic modelling theory at the expense of other influences on behaviour such as punishment and reward.

So is this relevant to men’s issues? Very much so methinks. The idea that physical force equates to violence which is always bad is essentially a feminist ideological formulation. The role of men who can offer physical strength to intervene and to provide natural consequences for socially unacceptable behaviour has been resented and demonized, so now only uniformed agents of the state are allowed to use any such force. The demand by feminists that the state should usurp fathers’ roles (and make them pay for this privilege) required the promotion of beliefs that fathers are unnecessary and that their traditional roles in child rearing were not only useless but undesirable.

Sooner or later it will have to be acknowledged that policies based almost entirely on modelling theory are failing and that parents and teachers need the right to assert physical dominance over children at times in order to provide timely and effective behaviour-shaping consequences. We will need to recognize that pain receptors exist in part to assist in learning (hence we don’t keep touching hot objects or gorse bushes), and that a total, ideological restriction on taking advantage of pain receptors in socializing our children is foolish. We will need to realize that if people are not allowed to use physical force for responsible reasons, this will leave the violent criminals in our society much freeer to dominate the rest of us. No way will the police ever be able to replace that particular traditional male role unless every second person is recruited into the force.

Intersting to see Henare and Brian Garder ‘snickering’ when the suggestion that women sometimes make things up to get protection orders is raised.

This is ‘Eye to Eye’ from about three weeks ago

http://tvnzondemand.co.nz/content/eye_to_eye/ondemand_video_skin?tab=ONDEMAND%20NCA&sb=date-descending&e=eye_to_eye_2007_ep22#ep_eye_to_eye_2007_ep22

I draw readers’ attention to our laws on unlawful sexual connection. Note particularly the section on consent, which seems to allow almost any situation to be defined as unlawful. If you are considering having sex with someone (I will assume for this posting it is a woman), keep in mind the following information. (more…)

The following is an excerpt from the daily 3 news e-missive detailing lead stories to be seen on 6:00 pm news.

Woman jailed after drug-fuelled sex with 14-year-old

27-year-old Nelson woman Kursty Anne Hunter has been sentenced to 18 months in jail for supplying a 14-year-old boy drugs and having sex with him. The boy’s parents say they fear his childhood has been ruined forever.

I have just watched the item and was forced to utter a derisory laugh upon learning at the end of the item that the perpetrator had been granted leave to apply for home detention!

Applying artistic license here is the same scenario with a role reversal from a gender perspective:

“Man jailed after drug-fuelled sex with 14-year-old 27-year-old Nelson man K A Hunter has been sentenced to 12 years in jail for supplying a 14-year-old girl drugs and having sex with her. The girl’s parents (and lawyers and teachers and MP’s and psychiatrists and Police and doctors and anyone else who comes to mind) say they fear her childhood has been ruined forever.” Footnote: An application for home detention was declined with a stern admonishment from the judge for bringing the court into disrepute by making such submission. Instead a non-parole period of 10 years was ordered.

Commenting on boys education Republicans Education Spokesman Paul Haynes said

“The Ministerial Reference Group for Boys Education admits that even in traditionally male subjects boys are lagging behind girls, because the assessments are increasingly written and not practical.”

Full Release….

The Human Rights Commission has been taken to task today by the Republic of NZ Party, after a media release from EEO Commissioner Dr Judy McGregor, urged

“Women to vote in the up-coming local body elections and to consider voting for quality female candidates.”

More…..

We don’t yet know all the details about the case of “Pumpkin”, the little Chinese girl whose father abandoned her in Melbourne on his way to the US. However, the case stands already as another dramatic failure of the Domestic Violence Act (DVA) because a protection order was in place that failed to protect and perhaps increased the risk of violence. That won’t be noticed though by the media, even less by the domestic violence industry. All we will hear is unbalanced allegations against Mr Xue of domestic violence, omitting any consideration of the violence done to him by the DVA and Ms Xue. We will never hear Mr Xue’s side of the story nor get any insight into his experiences through his eyes. I am not condoning whatever Mr Xue may have done in reaction to his situation. He deserves normal justice for offences he has committed. But I would like to see some realistic analysis of the case and what it says about the DVA. (more…)

Southern Star Charitable Trust presents a “Kids In Show Seats” benefit in aid of The Burn Support Charitable Trust.

Auckland Single Parent’s Trust has received a number of free tickets for this event which we have heard are worth $30.00 each to the general public.

Date: 6th October 2007

Times: 10 am, 1 pm and 4pm.

We have tickets for all 3 shows so we need to know what time you would like to go and how many you need. Please be aware that each ticket is for 1 adult and 1 child under age 8. That means children 8 and over need their own ticket.

Venue: Logan Campbell Centre, ASB showgrounds, Greenlane Rd West, Auckland

[email protected]

Hi All, I had recently written a post for women to get us all together to fight as a team so that we can do our best to change situations regarding child support.

I took the post off because I felt that I had used harsh words and felt that maybe I might be taken the wrong way. But I meant it and I still do. This Child Support system is unfair. And I know, just as many of you do, that when women get nasty, they go all the way. Sorry for not reposting something sooner. I know situations aren’t getting any better.

There are other groups like the Salvation Army and many more that are feeling the overwhelming sense of being unable to help people. Everyone at least knows someone, if not a client then someone personally who is affected in a negative way. We need to start somewhere and we can’t do any worse. We have nothing to lose but much to gain. And we can rally other groups for support and target who ever it takes.

We don’t have to live this way. We can do something about it, that is we can try and at the same time help others like us in this situation.

I am not sure exactly where we can work together as I don’t think this site is the right place to have females taking over but I have a site and if that is not appropriate we can use a site that was activated just for child support if Scrap_the CSA is OK with it.

Hi Scrap, I guess I am asking for your guidance on this.

But even if need be, we can start a blogsite for free.

Anyhow contact me if interested:

[email protected]

or simply leave a comment.

Just in case anyone thought National? had not bought into the “only men commit violence’ argument…

An article in the Herald yesterday entitled “Teen, 16, in violent tiff with lover, 42” highlighted the gender double standards and female privilege applied by police, Courts and the media. Police treated the case as one of domestic violence by a male and charged him accordingly. If the young person had been female and the older person male we could expect a very different story. The police would have treated the situation as one of sexual abuse, avoided charging the girl and instead referred her to Women’s Refuge. The man would be facing at least domestic violence charges. The girl’s violent outburst would be understood as a reaction to being sexually exploited in a relationship under massive “power imbalance”. No way would the girl be bailed back to the man’s house! The media would never refer to the 42-year-old male as the girl’s “partner” with whom she had a “tiff”. Media would attempt to identify and expose the older male and his occupation. Louise Nicholas supporters might march to denounce him as a rapist protected by the system. Instead, this case reflected ingrained male-blaming double standards despite developmental differences causing boys generally to be less emotionally mature than girls of the same age.

Herald Link: Jim Hopkins – Big Mother is watching. – Highly Recommended

“Enough!!!” shouted Inspector One. “Citizen 3124583, I’m recommending you for immediate re-education as an unsuitable parental entity. Do not approach your child unless supervised and do not attempt to escape. We will be waiting outside until your re-educator arrives!” With that, the two grey figures clicked their heels and left.

It is a wonderful comical story featured by permission of incongenerous mockery. Is it a veiled warning to us, could this actually happen. If someone could think it, could it become reality?

Here is an extract from my family court case. (more…)

Professor Woodford is currently attracting plenty of media attention for his book that will expose the research and public management of research concerning A1 and A2 milk. A literature review was commissioned several years ago by the NZ Food Safety Authority who then discarded the lay summary the author had made for public release and also wrote news releases that did not accurately reflect the literature review. This may have put the issue on the back burner until Prof Woodford has now ensured the public are given an accurate picture.

Manipulation of the public through misrepresenting research is rife among feminist organizations and has been a major weapon in their war against maleness. Recent examples include the Children’s Commissioner’s commissioned review of the literature on smacking. The review was obviously undertaken by authors who had a pre-existing bias against smacking and who knew what the Commissioner wanted. The authors covered a biased selection of research, preferred studies with poor methodology and then drew conclusions that even ignored much of what those studies had actually shown, because in fact many of those studies had concluded that no harmful effects had been shown from mild and ordinary levels of physical discipline. Another example was the “research” conducted by Neville Robertson and associates into a few women’s gripes about their experiences when obtaining protection orders. This creative propaganda was commissioned by the Ministry of Women’s Affairs and clearly had been designed to manufacture exactly what fitted the authors’ and the Commission’s bias. Conclusions were drawn and recommendations made far beyond anything that the study could ever have justified.

Commissioned reports like these are seldom published in professional journals or subjected to peer review. In reporting these and other pieces of feminist propaganda, New Zealand news media generally avoid critical debate and searching questions, and fail to seek any comment from representatives of men’s and fathers’ groups.

Sadly, because our country does not have a Ministry of Men’s Affairs, men’s studies departments in universities or in fact much in the way of any publicly-funded agencies protecting the rights and welfare of men, there is nobody like Professor Woodford to expose such misuse of science towards political ends.

The radical changes to law and to fundamental principles of law plus other social engineering that this fraud is used to justify bring the most serious risks to social stability, child rearing and development, mental health and health problems such as those related to stress and suicide. Society also loses a great deal when science itself is brought (further) into disrepute through politicization.

Call for assistance – from Benjamin Easton:
The inappropriate (if not unlawful) discrimination against the child is direct. The indirect as unlawful discrimination is against fatherhood.

A child is protected under UNCROC to an association with dad. The process of assisted human reproductive technology as protected relative to the care of children under the COC has breached that protection. An ethicist on Sunday exposed this as unethical behaviour. That behaviour needs to be measured against the present policy in New Zealand.

Bevan Berg has a complaint in before the Commission which can be identified and proved to have been directly as unlawfully discriminated against when making his submission to the Commission and the neglect of that complaint.

If the mens’ movement is to be effective and show its strength then we need to work together and not in discord.

I am concerned that the MENZ website group may be suffering from Groupthink?

The following description is extracted from Wikipedia:

Groupthink is a type of thought exhibited by group members who try to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas. During Groupthink, members of the group avoid promoting viewpoints outside the comfort zone of consensus thinking. A variety of motives for this may exist such as a desire to avoid being seen as foolish, or a desire to avoid embarrassing or angering other members of the group. Groupthink may cause groups to make hasty, irrational decisions, where individual doubts are set aside, for fear of upsetting the group’s balance. The term is frequently used pejoratively, with hindsight. (more…)

Oh Colin James…..She still walks the furrowed fields of your mind…..oh yeah, come in Kenny Rogers. The senior moments are coming more frequently in the extending mid life crisis of Colin James. His continuing infatuation with a younger Helen Clark is reducing the objectivity of his writing, column by column. If his obsession is Helen, and his compulsion, to indulge subjectivity, one wonders if he is spending more time with the picture on the back of his toilet door, than his desk. This man’s pen idolises the laurels of Clark, his eyes are blind, his mind lost to an affair, with a vague temporal moment. Male menopause perhaps, or is his feminine side wrecking havoc with his emotions. Is his titanic sinking?
Hanging off her every word, digesting and regurgitating her, phrase by phrase. He is mystified by zero she has added to her turnover. She is now giving a 1000%. Having not grasped basic accounting, he is at a loss to accept that if the expenses are greater than the turnover, you are soon to be out of business. It is not surprising that John Key, who he describes as “spunky”, (now that has me worried too), is now preferred as Prime Minister. If you took away Clark’s breakfast show and her guest appearance of the 6 pm news each day, people would wonder where the Government had gone. If you’re ready to retire, then go quietly and bury your infatuated pen, while gardening. If you are only good for fiddling in your old age, go play Nero in a stage show. If not, wake up man; rejuvenate your mind with stage two economics. That only requires you to say ‘I used to be a parrot, but I am better now’; however it may raise the demand for your supply of opinion.

In response to a contribution 11 Sept 07, in that feminst rag, otherwise known as the NZ Herald

An interesting essay that draws a connection between our modern day obsession with sex, and declining birth-rates. (also hints at the reason feminism arose at exactly the same time as the TV in every house).

SEXUAL UTOPIA IN POWER

F.ROGER DEVLIN

(Excerpts):

It is well known to readers of this journal that white birthrates worldwide have suffered a catastrophic decline in recent decades. During this same period, ours has become assuredly the most sex-obsessed society in the history of the world. Two such massive, concurrent trends are hardly likely to be unrelated. Many well-meaning conservatives agree in deploring the present
situation, but do not agree in describing that situation or how it arose. Correct diagnosis is the first precondition for effective strategy.
(more…)

“I think that continuing as Minister of Corrections is the punishment, not the other way around,” she said at her post-cabinet press conference today when she was questioned about the future of her errant minister.

Helen “lock in up in cabinet” Clark

Mr O’Connor, will not receive any reprieve from his full term of imprisonment as Minister of corrections, according to the Prime Minister of corrections, Helen Clark.

Mr O’Connor is obviously not ready to be paroled outside of cabinet yet, noted the Republicans from their secure position outside of parliament.

Mr O’Connor joins a long list of cabinet ministers held captive for fear that their release could endanger the public safety.

While the notorious David ‘Tennis Ball’ Benson-Pope is under constant surveillance during his trial release, George “Huh” Hawkins is understood to be on bail and reporting daily. Others like Ruth “drunk driver” Dyson and Lianne “tell no liez” Dalziel” have had their releases terminated and have been returned to cabinet.

Reliable sources have indicated, that there is an ongoing internal cabinet investigation into the business activities of long term cabinet inmate Michael “I didn’t hold up the dollar” Cullen.

According to hard Labour sources the Prime Minister of corrections still regards life by cabinet manual as the most appropriate punishment for socialist misfits, but is considering reviewing all current sentences before the next election. She would not however, be drawn on whether she was continuing with the current electoral legislation to ensure her own preventative detention in cabinet.

I am developing the opinion that feminism is becoming pandemic with what appears to be a virulent airborne strain. We must be vigilant in our attempts to restrict the spread of this degenerative brain disease. Bevan Berg