• ·  Online Court Document Management Tool
• ·  Save yourself thousands of dollars by simply being organized!
• ·  Make sure the actions and/or inactions of the professionals involved in your case stand up to public scruitiny!

Organize Your Documents

Most family court litigants have minimal experience dealing with bureaucracies and thus many individuals tend to end up with stacks of paper lacking any organization.

We have found that having your documents in a logical and organized fashion eases the process that professionals must go thru when attepting to understand your case.

This can result in saving you thousands of dollars.

Let There Be Light

The appellate court is designed to act as a check and balance for our family court systems.

This is like letting the Fox guard the Hen House.

The real test for most professionals including the family court is how their perfomance stands up to public scruitiny.

Court Story Maker is a cost effective method to get the truth out regarding the failures of the family court system to the public via the internet!

YouTube Even Toddlers Need Fathers

Dot Com Even Toddlers Need Fathers

Blog A Critique of the Principle of ‘maternal Deprivation’ Used by Courts in the United Kingdom to Justify Contact Orders Between Children and Their Parents 

R E V I E W S

“I am very grateful to all those, like yourself who have written and particularly where you have been able to demonstrate your own thinking from the experiences you have had. Congratulations on your battle” The former Home Secretary, and dad, David Blunkett, 22 March 2005.

“It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book ‘even Toddlers Need Fathers’ and Her Majesty has noted your concerns” Buckingham Palace, 26 July 2006

B I O G R A P H Y

Kingsley Miller is the author of ‘even Toddlers Need Fathers’a critique of Dr John Bowlby’s theory of ‘maternal deprivation’ as applied to family proceedings in the UK. Professor Sir Michael Rutter, called the book an ‘interesting and informative guide’ and the author has received a letter from Buckingham Palace which said, “It was thoughtful of you to enclose a copy of your book ‘even Toddlers Need Fathers’ and Her Majesty has noted your concerns”. The former Home Secretary, and dad, David Blunkett also wrote to say, “I am very grateful to all those, like yourself who have written and particularly where you have been able to demonstrate your own thinking from the experiences you have had. Congratulations on your battle”.

Linda J Gottlieb

STATISTICS ON FATHERLESS HOMES

• 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (US Dept. Of Health/Census) – 5 times the average.
• 90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes – 32 times the average.
• 85% of all children who show behavior disorders come from fatherless homes – 20 times the average. (Center for Disease Control)
• 80% of rapists with anger problems come from fatherless homes –14 times the average. (Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, p. 403-26)
• 71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes – 9 times the average. (National Principals Association Report)
Father Factor in Education – Fatherless children are twice as likely to drop out of school.
• Children with Fathers who are involved are 40% less likely to repeat a grade in school.
• Children with Fathers who are involved are 70% less likely to drop out of school.
• Children with Fathers who are involved are more likely to get A’s in school.
• Children with Fathers who are involved are more likely to enjoy school and engage in extracurricular activities.
• 75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes – 10 times the average.
Father Factor in Drug and Alcohol Abuse – Researchers at Columbia University found that children living in two-parent household with a poor relationship with their father are 68% more likely to smoke, drink, or use drugs compared to all teens in two-parent households. Teens in single mother households are at a 30% higher risk than those in two-parent households.
• 70% of youths in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes – 9 times the average. (U.S. Dept. of Justice, Sept. 1988)
• 85% of all youths in prison come from fatherless homes – 20 times the average. (Fulton Co. Georgia, Texas Dept. of Correction)
Father Factor in Incarceration – Even after controlling for income, youths in father-absent households still had significantly higher odds of incarceration than those in mother-father families. Youths who never had a father in the household experienced the highest odds. A 2002 Department of Justice survey of 7,000 inmates revealed that 39% of jail inmates lived in mother-only households. Approximately forty-six percent of jail inmates in 2002 had a previously incarcerated family member. One-fifth experienced a father in prison or jail.
Father Factor in Crime – A study of 109 juvenile offenders indicated that family structure significantly predicts delinquency. Adolescents, particularly boys, in single-parent families were at higher risk of status, property and person delinquencies. Moreover, students attending schools with a high proportion of children of single parents are also at risk. A study of 13,986 women in prison showed that more than half grew up without their father. Forty-two percent grew up in a single-mother household and sixteen percent lived with neither parent
Father Factor in Child Abuse – Compared to living with both parents, living in a single-parent home doubles the risk that a child will suffer physical, emotional, or educational neglect. The overall rate of child abuse and neglect in single-parent households is 27.3 children per 1,000, whereas the rate of overall maltreatment in two-parent households is 15.5 per 1,000.
Daughters of single parents without a Father involved are 53% more likely to marry as teenagers, 711% more likely to have children as teenagers, 164% more likely to have a pre-marital birth and 92% more likely to get divorced themselves.
Adolescent girls raised in a 2 parent home with involved Fathers are significantly less likely to be sexually active than girls raised without involved Fathers.
• 43% of US children live without their father [US Department of Census]
• 90% of homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
• 80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes. [Criminal Justice & Behaviour, Vol 14, pp. 403-26, 1978]
• 71% of pregnant teenagers lack a father. [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services press release, Friday, March 26, 1999]
• 63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes. [US D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census]
• 85% of children who exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes. [Center for Disease Control]
• 90% of adolescent repeat arsonists live with only their mother. [Wray Herbert, “Dousing the Kindlers,” Psychology Today, January, 1985, p. 28]
• 71% of high school dropouts come from fatherless homes. [National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools]
• 75% of adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes. [Rainbows f for all God’s Children]
• 70% of juveniles in state operated institutions have no father. [US Department of Justice, Special Report, Sept. 1988]
• 85% of youths in prisons grew up in a fatherless home. [Fulton County Georgia jail populations, Texas Department of Corrections, 1992]
• Fatherless boys and girls are: twice as likely to drop out of high school; twice as likely to end up in jail; four times more likely to need help for emotional or behavioral problems. [US D.H.H.S. news release, March 26, 1999]
Census Fatherhood Statistics
• 64.3 million: Estimated number of fathers across the nation
• 26.5 million: Number of fathers who are part of married-couple families with their own children under the age of 18.Among these fathers –
◦ 22 percent are raising three or more of their own children under 18 years old (among married-couple family households only).
◦ 2 percent live in the home of a relative or a non-relative.
• 2.5 million: Number of single fathers, up from 400,000 in 1970. Currently, among single parents living with their children, 18 percent are men.Among these fathers –
◦ 8 percent are raising three or more of their own children under 18 years old.
◦ 42 percent are divorced, 38 percent have never married, 16 percent are separated and 4 percent are widowed. (The percentages of those divorced and never married are not significantly different from one another.)
◦ 16 percent live in the home of a relative or a non-relative.
◦ 27 percent have an annual family income of $50,000 or more.
• 85 percent: Among the 30.2 million fathers living with children younger than 18, the percentage who lived with their biological children only.
◦ 11 percent lived with step-children
◦ 4 percent with adopted children
◦ < 1 percent with foster children
• Recent policies encourage the development of programs designed to improve the economic status of low-income nonresident fathers and the financial and emotional support provided to their children. This brief provides ten key lessons from several important early responsible fatherhood initiatives that were developed and implemented during the 1990s and early 2000s. Formal evaluations of these earlier fatherhood efforts have been completed making this an opportune time to step back and assess what has been learned and how to build on the early programs’ successes and challenges.While the following statistics are formidable, the Responsible Fatherhood research literature generally supports the claim that a loving and nurturing father improves outcomes for children, families and communities.
• Children with involved, loving fathers are significantly more likely to do well in school, have healthy self-esteem, exhibit empathy and pro-social behavior, and avoid high-risk behaviors such as drug use, truancy, and criminal activity compared to children who have uninvolved fathers.
• Studies on parent-child relationships and child wellbeing show that father love is an important factor in predicting the social, emotional, and cognitive development and functioning of children and young adults.
• 24 million children (34 percent) live absent their biological father.
• Nearly 20 million children (27 percent) live in single-parent homes.
• 43 percent of first marriages dissolve within fifteen years; about 60 percent of divorcing couples have children; and approximately one million children each year experience the divorce of their parents.
• Fathers who live with their children are more likely to have a close, enduring relationship with their children than those who do not.
• Compared to children born within marriage, children born to cohabiting parents are three times as likely to experience father absence, and children born to unmarried, non-cohabiting parents are four times as likely to live in a father-absent home.
• About 40 percent of children in father-absent homes have not seen their father at all during the past year; 26 percent of absent fathers live in a different state than their children; and 50 percent of children living absent their father have never set foot in their father’s home.
• Children who live absent their biological fathers are, on average, at least two to three times more likely to be poor, to use drugs, to experience educational, health, emotional and behavioral problems, to be victims of child abuse, and to engage in criminal behavior than their peers who live with their married, biological (or adoptive) parents.
• From 1995 to 2000, the proportion of children living in single-parent homes slightly declined, while the proportion of children living with two married parents remained stable.

Fathers4Equality Blog

“Men and their children fare badly within the family law system . Fathers are removed from their children against their will and through no fault of their own. The majority are not granted reasonable access after contested legal proceedings costing thousands of dollars. False accusations of domestic violence or child abuse are  not infrequent  in attempts to ensure custody of the children. Fathers are then forced to pay “child support” without any guarantee the money is used for the benefit of the children. The system refuses to enforce access to their children and does not support shared care.”

“We do little to support fatherhood . Until the 1970s dads weren’t allowed to be present at the birth of their children. Since then the role of the Australian father has changed from sole breadwinner to sharing the hands-on parenting and earning roles with his partner. Fathers are more likely than ever to require time off work to look after their children’s needs but government legislation and workplace cultures haven’t followed suit. Men are still expected to put in long hours and not take time off for family responsibilities. Discrimination complaints by men because of their parental status have  more than doubled  in the past decade. Many fathers feel excluded by staff and services in the early childhood health and education sectors that appear to be focused solely upon the needs of mothers. Ante-natal courses for new fathers are rare despite post-natal depression rates in first-time dads of  up to 10 percent .”

“There is an epidemic of fatherlessness . Of the five million Australian children in 2009-10, 864,000 (17 percent)  lived away from their father . Of these children, 48 percent saw their father at least once per fortnight, while 24 percent rarely saw their father. Almost half never stayed overnight with their father. In 2009-10, there were 366,030 non-resident fathers. Research from the USA shows that violent crime, drug and alcohol abuse, truancy, teen pregnancy and suicide all correlate more strongly to fatherlessness  than to any other factor.”

READ MORE

JOIN AND BECOME ACTIVE

By James Chapman

PUBLISHED:00:18 GMT, 13 June  2012| UPDATED:00:18 GMT,  13 June 2012

Separated parents who fail to allow their  partners to maintain a proper relationship with their children could be stripped  of driving licences or passports, hit with curfews, ordered to do a period of  unpaid work or even jailed.

Ministers will today propose a dramatic  extension of punishments for breaches of court orders regarding care  arrangements amid concern that millions of youngsters are losing contact with  absent fathers.

The move is part of the most radical shake-up  of the family courts for decades, with a new right to ‘shared parenting’ following family breakdown to be enshrined in law.

Ministers have decided reform is necessary in  the light of heartbreaking evidence that one in five children from a broken home  loses touch with the parent that leaves the family home within just three years  and never sees them again.

Many more lose contact with a parent, most  often with fathers when mothers are awarded custody, as they grow  older.

Children’s minister Tim Loughton will  announce that the Government is to rewrite the 1989 Children Act, which states  that the child comes first in law courts in the UK.

More…

• Where  are my parents? The question from little Nancy when she found the Camerons had  left the pub without her

Campaigners for fathers’ rights complain that  the courts repeatedly pander to the notion that mothers are ‘more important’ than fathers.

The Government will consult on how the law  should be changed, but its preferred option is for courts to be required to ‘work on the presumption that a child’s welfare is likely to be furthered  through safe involvement with both parents’.

Unless their welfare is threatened by staying  in touch with either their mother or father, children must have an equal right  to a proper relationship with both, ministers say.

The move is designed to ensure that the  parent who moves out of the family home – normally the father – cannot be cut  out of their children’s lives following an acrimonious separation.

Ministers say they also want to ‘put a rocket  under the courts’ to ensure that parents who flout court orders about access or  care arrangements are punished.

Courts are to be told to deploy existing but  rarely-used sanctions more often, including fines, unpaid work or imprisonment.

The Government is also considering giving  them new powers to withhold passports or driving licences and order curfews  requiring an offending parent to remain at a specified address between certain  hours.

‘Parents must understand that enforcement  action is available and will be used where necessary to ensure… contact  decided for the benefit of the child,’ the Education Department’s consultation  paper says.

Mr Loughton said: ‘Our starting point is that  we want most parents to resolve disputes out of court, wherever possible – that’s why we are investing in and promoting family mediation services and other  support to help parents reach agreements in their child’s best  interests.

‘But we must improve the system where court  cannot be avoided – where disputes are intractable or complex or children’s  welfare is at risk.

‘We need to clarify and restore public  confidence that the courts fully recognise the joint nature of parenting.

‘We want the law to be far more explicit  about the importance of children having an ongoing relationship with both their  parents after separation, where that is safe and in the child’s best  interests.

‘Where parents are able and willing to play a  positive role in their child’s care, they should have the chance to do so. This  is categorically not about giving parents equal right to time with their  children – it is about reinforcing society’s expectation that mothers and  fathers should be jointly responsible for their children’s upbringing.’

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said: ‘Both  parents have a responsibility and a role to play in their children’s upbringing  and we want to make sure that, when parents separate, the law recognises  that.’

The Government’s announcement overturns the  main finding of a family justice review, conducted for the Government by  businessman David Norgrove, which was published last November.

It concluded that giving fathers shared or  equal time, or even the right to maintain a meaningful relationship with their  children ‘would do more harm than good’.

The review for the Ministry of Justice was  branded a ‘sham’ that dramatically undermined David Cameron’s pledge to be the  most family friendly government in history.

The proposals sparked a Cabinet revolt, led  by Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith and Mr Clegg, who insisted the  law must be amended to strengthen fathers’ rights.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2158490/Mothers-deny-fathers-access-couple-s-children-break-jailed.html#ixzz29GonK5pd Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Free Republic Femnazi Jennifer McIntosh

Free-Press-Release Blog ^| 8 January 2012 | Eli Daniel

Posted on Monday, 9 January 2012 1:55:53 AM by Love for Israel

January 8, 2012 — As the Israel government is now recognizing that divorced fathers and their children deserve equal rights as divorced women, a militant feminist conference at the Rackman Center in Bar Ilan University has caused a fury in Israel. The anti-male conference was designed to sabotage parental equality and indoctrinate social workers to treat all men and fathers in divorce or separation as unfit or dangerous parents. Men’s and children’s rights organizations vehemently protested it, members of Knesset tried to stop it, litigation in Texas has been launched and pleas to the United Nations (UN) CEDAW rapporteur Rashida Manjoo were sent, seeking the termination of the organizer, Ruth Halperin Kaddari’s membership in CEDAW.

The Rackman Center at Bar Ilan University is headed by militant feminist Dr. Ruth Halperin-Kadari, in close association with another leading speaker, Dr. Dafna Hacker of Tel Aviv University’s Gender Studies program, another militant feminist with strong ties to the New Israel Fund. Hacker is a founder of Itach-Maaki, an organization that recently volunteered to assist in the legal defense of sadistic man-killer Erika Orbush Frishkin. Father’s rights groups in Israel state that Halperin-Kaddari and Hacker publicly encourage women to use children to extort financial benefits from former spouses.

The morning session at Bar-Ilan was an indoctrination session to train social workers in justifying parental alienation – PAS, and the use of sophisticated language to deny fathers parental rights and access to their children. Australian male bashing guru Jennifer McIntosh participated by video conference and tried to persuade Israel social workers that only mothers connect to children because of “neuron emissions from the right side of their brains”. There was no discussion of the documented importance of a father’s role in the well being of their children. The second session is the unveiling of two committee reports, one on custody and visitations, and the other on child support. Both committees announced reforms which the ultra feminist organizations are desperately trying to sabotage. The second session was attended by the Minister of Justice, Yaakov Neeman, and the committee chairmen, Dan Schnit and Pinchas Schiffman.

Israel pro-family and men’s rights organizations are outraged that such important conferences are held on the militant feminists’ home turf, and will be moderated by the same women who try to prevent any reform in family law from taking place. Moderator Ruth Halperin Kaddari has already expressed her position that the tender years presumption (automatic custody to women) should not be eliminated and instead stretched out to apply to children and youths until the age of 18.

In the past, Ruth Halperin Kaddari has been caught falsifying statistical data and disseminating false results of public opinion polls and surveys. Another speaker at the first session, Saviona Rotlevi, was herself in charge of a sub-Commission on parental equality between 1997-2003. After six years of deliberations, she refused to issue a final recommendation, on the ground that she personally thinks that men are not mature enough to handle tasks of caring for children.

This appears to have been the 9th annual conference held in this format. All eight previous conferences were secret and the public was not made aware of them. Members of the pro-family and men’s rights organizations stated: “Now we understand why we are being treated with such immense hostility. Apparently, the Israel Ministry of Welfare has been training its social workers at the institution where hatred of men is a form of art.”

MK Yulia Shamalov-Berkovich (Kadima) has published letters she sent earlier this week to Welfare Minister Moshe Kachlon and Bar Ilan President Moshe Kaveh, asking them to rethink the conference, and cancel it. She states that it is academic hypocrisy to allow only radical male hating feminist speakers at such important conferences with national impact, and close the events to speakers supporting parental equality. The conference is timed to coincide with the release of the conclusions of government committees that are expected to recommend canceling the Tender Years Clause that gives mothers automatic custody over young children in divorce. Israel is said to be the last country in the world where this presumption is still in effect, and causes a generation of fatherless children.

Member of Knesset Shamalov-Berkovich notes that the conference is biased and that the social workers should also be exposed to the views of experts who support the cancellation of the Tender Years presumption, and the benefits of joint custody. In divorce cases that involve disagreement over parenting arrangements, social worker’s reports and recommendations are crucial to shaping the court’s decision, because family courts simply “so order” them without trial.

Bar Ilan U’s militant feminist leadership suffered some setbacks in the past year, in the wake of growing criticism of its ultra-leftist leanings. Jennifer McIntosh, the Australian key speaker who advocates use of “mental primary caretaker” research in Australia, received warnings from Israeli men’s rights activists. “It is a shame that anything bad in Israeli family law in blamed on the Australians feminists, who are persistently meddling with Israeli families”, said Amir Shipperman.

“The fathers’ rights organizations in Israel protested both inside and outside against Australian meddling with the internal affairs of Israel and the rights of parents in Israel for a happy, peaceful, loving and caring relationship with their children post-divorce on an equal basis”. The fathers complain that McIntosh has “no idea about the ruthless oppression of men in Israel Courts and by social workers, police, psychiatrists and even the rabbinical courts”, and “no idea how prevalent the “contact centers” are in Israel. It is enough that a woman creates a “lack of trust” situation for the SW and judges to send normative men to contact centers”. In an op-ed letter sent to the Sydney Morning addressed to McIntosh, the fathers wrote to McIntosh “You have no idea how many men commit suicide here because of the incitement of hatred by organizations such as the Rackman Center. You also have no idea how hate mongering propaganda emanating from the Rackman Center is being used to suppress the lives of men, and you appear to willingly join the war against men in Israel”.

According to the divorced fathers, the conferences were videotaped and will be used as evidence in a litigation which is already filed in Texas based on Alien Tort Claim Act (“ATCA”) on the allegation that that the McIntosh and “the ferocious feminist organizations incite hatred and perpetrate crimes against humanity by separating men from their children”. In conclusion, the Israeli fathers told McIntosh: “we find that what you have spoken of, at said conference, is nothing but junk science and a despicable one as well, dressed up as ‘academic research’, when in fact, it is purely hate speech and incitement to commit crimes against humanity, incitements to perpetuate conflicts between women and men, incitement for woman to file false domestic violence complaints to create ‘high conflict’, and the encouragement of parental alienation on a grand scale. You and your cohorts have already given Australia a negative reputation in the international community and especially here in Israel, since your unfounded, undocumented and gender bias ideas have no academic substance whatsoever.” An Israel Justice Ministry panel called to revoke an archaic 40-year-old law that automatically grants custody of all children under age six to the mother. The proposal suggested the law be replaced with a gender-equal alternative.

A complaint submitted last year to the United Nation’s Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Coalition for Children and Family (CCF), an Israel non-profit organization vying for father’s rights, blasted the legislation as “blatantly discriminatory against men.” “If it was not for crazy feminist hate-inciting monsters we could have achieved changes in legislation in 2003,” said Daniel Zer, a father who has not seen his son for more than two years and who is active in the CCF. “This would already have brought us a whole slew of changes, including in the area of divorces and the rabbinical courts, which is also a problem for many men.”

Zer stated that Schnitt’s recommendations were not relevant because it was the state’s obligation to remove this specific law because “Israel’s basic laws require equality.” He said that it was time for Israel to adopt similar measures followed in most Western countries regarding custody placement. “There either needs to be gender mutuality, where the law is simply silent about the gender of the parent and bases the decision on the best interest of the children,” said Zer. “Or there needs to be joint custody with a two-home presumption.”

I am a guy raised by my Mum and my sister. It is obvious Julia Gillard bias is a problem with men, why does Julia Gillard hate families’, children, boys, and men? I like normal people don’t have a problem with empowered women or people, what I do have a great problem with liars, cheats and feminist bigots. Julia Gillard is giving all women a very vicious reputation as liars and cheats.

The flow on affect of Julia Gillard’s lying cheating misandry and bigotry being emulated by the feminists foot soldiers dominating Australia’s bureaucracies and judiciaries is laying devastation to Australian children, families and their fathers.

Posted by JamesJohnsonCHR ⋅ October 3, 2012⋅ Leave a Comment

Justice for None. Whistleblocked! Whistleblowing lawyer faces lifetime ban

for exposing legal, judicial and government corruption

Amazing human rights battle, political trial, in Melbourne (Friday 5 October)

Victorian Civil Administrative Tribunal at the “William Cooper Justice Centre”, 223 William Street (cnr Lonsdale Street), Melbourne

10:.00 am on Friday 5 October 2012 (nb: check the time and room number the evening prior via online on VCAT’s “Daily List” website page)

Must see http://lawyerocracyontrial.wordpress.com/?s=corruption

http://jamesjohnsonchr.wordpress.com//?s=lawyerocracy

And Follow @JamesJohnsonCHR and The @21May12 Project on Twitter

AT 10 AM THIS FRIDAY MORNING IN MELBOURNE, prominent Australian journalist, lawyer and political activist Mr James Johnson will be sentenced on two charges of “professional misconduct” and faces being banned from practising law for at least 5 years (possibly for life) as payback for blowing the whistle on widespread corruption and misconduct in Australia’s legal system.

Earlier this month, the Victorian government (in its Victorian Civil Administrative Tribunal) ruled that despite a distinguished two decade career amongst the elite of the legal profession, Mr Johnson’s crime? Making comprehensive whistleblower complaints about corruption and misconduct by a number of Australian barristers, solicitors and judges – complaints that, despite their seriousness and the weight of evidence behind them, the relevant government authorities have not and will not investigate to determine whether they are true or not.

The Victorian Legal Services Commissioner, Mr Michael McGarvie, who is prosecuting Mr Johnson has asked Victoria’s VCAT Tribunal Senior Member Mr Jonathan Smithers impose a lifetime ban on Mr Johnson.

Mr Johnson has responded by filing a 500 page submission proving the truth of his allegations, including draft orders for the VCAT Member to sign, and by demanding the resignations the Legal Services Commissioner, along with Mr Jonathan Smithers of VCAT and Mr John Bowman of VCAT. In May of this year VCAT Deputy President Bowman ruled at a secret all-Government hearing “a day [and a half” before the “trial” against Mr Johnson began on 21 May, that Mr Johnson would not be allowed to produce any government evidence to defend himself to against the charges and to prove his status and rights to legal protections as a “whistleblower”. VCAT struck out 57 summonses calling for the production of substantial government records and testimony from 57 hostile witnesses, most of them prominent public servants.

“Australia is the only country in the world where, and only since 2005, it is against the law to sue lawyers who are negligent in the court room.” Mr Johnson said, “On top of this, we have a lame legal regulator who refuses to investigate more than 90% of the 2,000 complaints about lawyers that the Legal Services Commissioner receives every year. The complaints he refuses to hear include complaints about family lawyers (over 40% of complaints), lawyers executing wills and estates (nearly 30% of complaints) and litigation lawyers generally (another 20% of complaints). The stories, and the statistics, are chilling.”

Mr Johnson has not said anything more about the state of corruption in the legal system than has been said by dozens of other prominent legal figures including parliamentarians, cabinet ministers and judges).

“The bureaucrats have a hard time ahead, explaining why they have repeatedly gone after me for whistleblowing, while not going after any of those dozens of high profile legal and political figures who have said the same things as me over the years, including recently.” Mr Johnson said.

Mr Johnson has campaigned for years to the Victorian Premier and Attorney-General on the need to heed the calls of a damning 2009 Annual Report to Parliament by Victorian State government on widespread corruption and failure in the office of the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner.

“The Baillieu Clark government needs to turn the clock back on the legal profession, only as far back as 2004, when lawyers were regulated by an independent non-lawyer regulator, Ms Kate Hamond the former Victorian Legal Ombudsman. The Baillieu Clark government needs to launch an in-depth investigation into widespread abuse of the courts system by the solicitors, barristers, judges and bureaucrats that run them. We can’t wait for an ‘Independent Broad Based Commission Against Corruption’ – especially one that looks like it will not be independent of the legal profession, and will not be broad based either. The government has to act now.”

Mr Johnson is philosophical and continues to work to change the system. “What the Victorian bureaucrats have done is to declare that notwithstanding glorious Acts of Parliament like Victoria’s Whistleblowers Protection Act of 2001 and Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act of 2004, the day to day reality is that it is illegal to be a whistleblower and to speak out against government corruption in Australia.”

“As Christine Assange said, ‘we live in an age where whistleblowers are criminals, and journalists are enemy combatants. And I am a whistleblower and a journalist, as well as being a lawyer and a political activist,” he said.

“Our elected members of parliament, whom we elect to govern and protect us from excessive misuse of powers by bureaucrats and judges, should all hang their heads in shame. They are failing us too.”

This is not just James Johnson’s personal battle for justice, freedom of speech and the right to speak out against corruption in government – a “lawyerocracy” as Mr Johnson famously calls it, “This is a personal and political battle for the 99.99% of us Australians.”

The stage is set for an epic battle between the forces of good versus evil, on Friday morning in VCAT (“William Cooper Justice Centre”, 223 William Street at 10:00 am).

– o0o –

CLICK AND SIGN HERE

CLICK AND SIGN HERE

CLICK AND SIGN HERE

• Target: PRIME MINISTER, MINISTER OF JUSTICE, HOUSES      OF PARLIAMENT
• Sponsored by: Stephanie      Freeman

Please sign this petition to Help save my two sons Lewis and Ryan from Forced Adoption, and to save them from a life in the uk care system that is clearly failing them. Lewis is 8yrs and Ryan is 3yrs, they have both stated that they want to come home, but their wishes and feelings are being ignored. They have both suffered injuries and neglect whilst in state care, along with emotional abuse. We have had our contact cancelled time after time and never reinstated. We are currently supposed to see each other for 1hr and 30 minutes per fortnight, this will then turn to once a month. Lewis and Ryan were always loved by me their mother. I never did and never would ever intentionally harm them. Our lives have been turned upside down, and inside out. All, they both want is to be back home with Mummy again where they were loved and cared for and above all where they were protected from harm. Please sign this petition to HELP SAVE LEWIS & RYAN. Thank You. X X X X X

CLICK AND SIGN HERE

CLICK AND SIGN HERE

CLICK AND SIGN HERE

 THE central Queensland childcare centre where a worker is accused of torturing a child has been temporarily closed.

The Isaac Regional Council announced on Friday it has suspended services at the Moranbah Early Learning Centre.

The move comes after police on Thursday charged a 21-year-old female employee with torture, deprivation of liberty and assault.

The woman, who allegedly taped a child’s legs together, is to face court next month.

In a statement on Friday, the council said it owns the childcare centre but a company called Total Childcare Solutions manages it.

The staff member, who has been charged, has been sacked and two others who are being investigated have been suspended, the statement said.

Isaac Regional Council Mayor Anne Baker said a solicitor has been hired to conduct an independent investigation.

“As a parent and grandparent, hearing these sorts of allegations makes me sick in the stomach,” she said in a statement.

“I will not allow one child to step foot into that centre until I’m confident … the appropriate standards are being met by everyone.”

She said parents should make alternative arrangements for at least the next week.

The centre is also offering counselling to parents and children.

Meanwhile, the Queensland Commissioner for Children says there are no plans to review the state’s blue card system.

Elizabeth Fraser says the scheme for screening people who work with children has been regularly refined over its 11-year history.

“Queensland’s system is regarded as one of the most comprehensive and robust of its type in Australia,” she told AAP in a statement.

Under the scheme, the commission is alerted when a blue-card holder’s police file is amended.

Obtaining a blue card to work with children involves a national criminal check.

Read more:

There is nothing feminine about lying.

There is nothing feminine about cheating

There is nothing feminie about misandry.

There is nothing feminine about bigotry.

There is nothing feminine about narcissism.

There is nothing feminine about child abuse.

There is nothing feminine about abortion.

There is nothing feminine about infanticide.

There nothing feminine about feminism.

Most violence neglect and abuse against children are by women, the most violent is abortion and infanticide by women.

Feminist, are particularly vile and narcisstic.

Women have an historical overwhelming reputation they can’t be trusted, just out for a free ride and free passes.

Their real agenda seems to be male submission their rule control and servitude, not ever equality.

“Sexist feminists, in the familiar phrase, “want to have it all”, the children and the money. It follows that they want fathers to have nothing, other than what individual mothers deign to allow them.” [AVfM]

There so few stand-up women, until women make an undertaking committed effort and pledge to be upstanding and act with honesty and integrity they will carry their well earned distrust and contempt.

I wonder if any will commit to such an undertaking or simply duplicitic feminist drones and trolls.

Dear Member of Parliament

We would like to express our concern over the lack of respect being shown for the role of fathers of Australia, and the vilification of all fathers personally in that role. The nature of political discourse in this country has sunk to a very low point. Although we may not all support the Government and all of its policies, the unacceptability of current abusive and violent attacks on our fathers is something that we can all agree on. As professionals, we find this kind of abuse and gender based insults totally unacceptable and demeaning to all men.

many fathers and their children calling for Human Rights and Social Justice highlighted the extent and intensity of the “attacks, vilification and demeaning portrayal” of fathers . We note that large numbers of ordinary Australians are contributing to this vilification with comments on Facebook and by forwarding chain emails that contain derogatory material. We believe, like fathers in ‘Dads in Distress’ that this behavior is being encouraged by the example set by some members of Parliament, . This behavior undermines the civility necessary for democracy to operate effectively, and risks creating an environment that denies men equal opportunity to contribute to Australia’s democratic government. and parenting

We call on all members of Parliament to provide leadership and publicly acknowledge that the kind of misandric behavior being demonstrated in Parliament, and in the broader community is not a legitimate part of political debate and needs to stop. We call on the mothers, fathers, spouses, partners, sons and daughters of members of Parliament to support our call and insist that these attacks will not be tolerated.

Yours sincerely

Professors of fathers suffering