This guy claims there is some type of collusion between governmental entities shortchanging traditional fathers. We have California fam here, you know what this fella is talking about, or is he smoking some of that legal weed they have over there now?
11 comments:
Very broad accusations so hard to know what the underlying beef is. I suspect his shady girlfriend accused him of something awful and the court awarded her custody and forbade him visitation. That's what is sounds like.
The Judicial Council in California is a rule-making body, not the judicial branch. Most Cali lawyers know them because they make the standard forms that are used in our courts, like the form to dismiss a case, notify the court of a settlement, apprise the court of developments in the case. It allows for uniformity across the various counties in California, all of which have their own little in-house set of rules so this brings uniformity. I think the Judicial Council also is somehow in charge of judicial discipline. It's where naughty judges go to get their hands slapped. The Judicial council is comprised of the Chief Justice of our Supreme Court, some judges from around the state, some attorneys, and some legislators.
You mean like JournoList, where everybody conspires to lie their faces off to advance the agenda?
Say it ain't so.
I read an article about this situation a long time ago, so I don't remember the details. Just that Californian men are bankrupted by family court and have very little, if any visitation rights. Maybe it saves on food stamp costs if the fathers are held accountable for provision of food. Also shields children from the oh so toxic influence of evil males and their inherent violence. By which I mean the attempt at the pussification of generations of boys.
As the dark wave of leftwing fascism sweeps over us, expect more.
A small part of a story from a small part of my world.
The names will change to protect the innocent. no names.
My frined's 20 year old son had a horrible girlfriend. Anytime her son and his GF would fight, she would beat him down emotionally by mocking his relationship with his mom. The 20 year old young man did have a strained but close relationship with his mother. Mom was a helicopter parent, to the hilt. (good or bad? ... both) anyway, the girlfriend would also threaten to go to the police and claim he raped her.
He would never do such a thing. It's unfathomable. I watched this shy kid grow up and just no way.
Young girls know how to manipulate and use sex as a weapon, even when no sex is involved.
The 20 old died about 2 years ago after he went missing for over a year.
my computer speakers are dead.
Speaking of California, anyone heard from DBQ? I hope she's ok.
It wasn't so long ago we had extended families and communities to straighten out domestic problems. Government bureaucracy is a poor substitute but complaining about the system in generic terms without offing concrete solutions for reform isn't going to accomplish much, IMHO.
Well, maybe it feels good to get it off your chest and maybe that's something.
And some people like to cheer it on as if were validation.
Maybe it is.
What the hell do I know?
A little follow up: The Judicial Council has nothing to do with Judicial Performance. My bad. That's the Commission on Judicial Performance.
This is one of the main problems with Big Government; it's so opaque no one knows who is in charge of what and who is accountable for what so there's very little accountability. Anyway: editorial comment on the guy. He's in the wrong place. He doesn't know where to go. He's pissed off about his stupid and greedy girlfriend/wife and although I'm not a family law/divorce lawyer, he's probably right to be. She's misbehaving. It's likely he misbehaved as well (I'm just saying it's a statistical likelihood; I don't know anything about this case and I don't believe either men or women are on the side of the angels) but he's the one being punished by being deprived of his kids and the kids (as he rightly points out) are being deprived and punished as well by being separated from him. He's being hosed down financially by a whore (Life Lesson for all persons, male and female: STEER CLEAR of greedy whores) and the judge has a presumption in favor of the female. Abandoning this presumption would require that judges and lawyers actually THINK and argue and make decision based on the merits rather than procrastinate and hope that the abused party just gives up, runs out of money, walks away from the controversy.
This presumption in favor of women in child custody cases is (1) sexist, (2) a procedural short cut that advantages the court and the women, and (3) an additional avenue for extortion and exploitation that does not favor the children. Retire it.
Also, good point about DBQ though I always assumed she and the Plumber were on the east side of I-5/Shasta but that may just be me making an unwarranted assumption.
The big fire near Redding (the Carr fire) is mainly on the west side of I-5.
Post a Comment