The Child Support Crisis: What you need to know about draconian enforcements

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

Just shut up and pay YOUR child support! It’s a familiar insult which presumes that only one parent has any such obligation and that both parents cannot be trusted to set up their own arrangements free of state supervision. Given the complex society of today, the better assumption is that the state is ill equipped to raise our children and that a nation founded upon a limited government will no longer tolerate its abuses of power.

The euphemistic term “child support” has been conveniently exploited to build a giant bureaucracy focused more on revenue generation and service fees than the “best interests” of our children. Just place the child on top of the state tank and you can crush the rights of the people, even convincing parents to “happily” surrender the ones applicable to their offspring. It’s a tactic used by Adolph Hitler to build one of the greatest war machines in history.

Widespread declines in moral, family and religious values can largely be traced to this surrender. The word combination “child support” has been effective in drowning out the truth about a corrupted process that invites self-serving jurists to tread increasingly upon our most basic rights. These include our fundamental liberty interest in childrearing, Troxel v Granville, 530 US 57 (2000) and guarantee of procedural due process, Turner v Rogers, 564 US 431 (2011).

An ominous dissent in the latter case by Justice Clarence Thomas should have all of us alarmed. He bucked the court’s majority by declaring that the due process safeguards required of a support contempt proceeding undermine the state’s interest in a more vigorous enforcement process. This represented a grave departure from reality when taking a deeper look at the draconian enforcement practices that have caused joblessness, homelessness and premature deaths among support debtors.

Such practices have not only “undermined” support capacities, but they have forever ended “child support” in countless cases. Three exemplary deaths over the past decade, Joe Longo, Thomas Ball and Walter Scott, are all that is needed to show the absurdities of the Thomas opinion. Taken together with other victims, it is clear that we have an epidemic underway, one that “shocks the conscience of a civilized society” in violation of substantive due process as well, Rochin v California, 342 US 165 (1953).

Government today is actually manufacturing bad parents through its “custody” and “support” mandates under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act. This is the federal funding law that rewards courts by the number and size of support orders they issue and satisfy. Apart from the inherent bias that this has created, the imbalance has yielded a crowd of silent or walking dead, victims of murder, suicides, false charges and domestic violence, others that await justice that never comes.

Police Investigator Joseph Longo was so traumatized after exiting support court that he used a common kitchen knife to commit a murder-suicide at the former marital home. It left four children without both parents and taxpayers with a $2 million lawsuit debt, Pearce v Longo, 766 F. Supp. 2d 367 (NDNY 2011). The court predators kept pounding him with protection orders, support intercepts and career damage without considering the breaking points of their targets.

You should’ve just shut up, Joe, and paid YOUR child support.

Then there’s Thomas Ball, victim of an overzealous child protection agency who sat down one day on the steps of a New Hampshire courthouse to protest family court abuse. But this was no sit-in, no “occupy court” mission. He poured gas over his head and burned himself alive. We cringe at the extreme pain he must have suffered before and during this holocaust. In the end, there was no national coverage, no court reforms, they merely washed his ashes into the sewer.

You should’ve just shut up, Tom, and paid YOUR child support.

Finally we bring you Walter Scott, a black father shot dead five times in the back. He was killed, unarmed, by a white cop while fleeing a child support warrant at a traffic stop. Unlike other BLM victims, this one was not involved in any criminal activity. It was a civil debt, and our government was now killing for money. This obvious fact is never mentioned in the ongoing George Floyd protests because “child support” is the holy grail for feminists and man-haters.

You should’ve just shut up, Walt, and paid YOUR child support.

Even in necessary cases involving absentee parents or public charges, there is little or no accountability for tax-free, support checks used for drugs, partners or vanity excesses. Most contemptuous are the cases where child support is exploited as a tactical weapon for a custody award that inevitably leads to severe parental alienation. Here the one dutifully paying “child support” is, in reality, paying the state to take his children away. Even then, sadistic alienators are not satisfied until their children are brainwashed to hate the other parent.

This author’s ordeal is one such case that features a high school teacher, Kelly Hawse-Koziol.

The easy way to avoid this “inconvenient truth” is by detracting from it, i.e. “Just shut up and pay YOUR child support.” Support judges say this without mouthing the words by trashing procedural protections and crafting evidentiary substitutes to expedite a desired outcome. Examples are too numerous but include such fictions as “imputed income” and a substandard level of proof. This star chamber process ignores the right of a “noncustodial” parent to finance a separate home for the same children. It also ignores the horrific collateral harm.

Nowhere is an accounting made of the working parental arrangements upended by this custody and support mandate found in the funding laws.

Such collateral harm does not discriminate. It includes a white mom who drove her children into the Hudson River rather than surrender to a custody and support order. A similar derangement caused another to heinously murder her two-year old girl resulting in a conviction and jail term that will never bring back the child (see Gabriella Boyd Foundation). A black mom in Philadelphia went further. In an overnight rage, she purchased a gun and killed both her children and their dad.

The child victims are particularly heart-wrenching. There’s Kyra Franchetti and Thomas Valva whose young lives were lost to mentally disturbed fathers. An Albany (NY) Times Union story on October 13, 2020 revealed that a child protection agency suppressed 725 child death reports over a decade. This is shocking but not really when considering Governor Andrew Cuomo’s suppression of nursing home deaths currently under investigation. Such tragedies omit the live victims torn apart by court proceedings needlessly protracted by greedy lawyers.

This author was subjected to a sixteen year battle over “child support” which induced the “custodial” mom to brainwash his precious daughters in relentless fashion. This went unheeded by the courts despite the lack of any abuse report or unfit finding and despite father-daughter experiences that would be the envy of most children. Over 40 trial level jurists were assigned to his family proceedings with many removed for misconduct, a national record by most accounts and the price to be paid by a judicial whistleblower.

This is not just a public policy issue or a lack of judicial accountability. It is a growing crisis that has caused more deaths than the coronavirus pandemic. It was the theme of our 3-day Parent March on Washington in 2019, a peaceful protest featuring a lobby initiative, expert speakers, a march down Pennsylvania Avenue under police escort and a concluding vigil for those lives lost to this unjust system. Its goal was to obtain congressional hearings and a Justice Department investigation. But it achieved nothing, only more evidence for BLM to justify violence. Peaceful reform is no match for the gold mine which this system has viciously protected.

If you wish to learn more about this author’s unprecedented ordeal as a judicial whistleblower, consult the many posts at http://www.leonkoziol.com or his 2017 book, Satan’s Docket, soon to be updated with more graphic retributions. You might also be interested in a DVD film entitled “Crisis” based on a true story. It features a triple storm of whistleblowers who take on the DEA, academia and the drug industry as common victims. They illuminate the kind of retaliation exposed here.

Due to the censorship of this vital message, it is critical for readers to make it viral for the benefit of parents, children and families everywhere. The author may be reached at (315) 796-4000 or leonkoziol@gmail.com.

Just Shut Up and Pay YOUR Child Support !

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

Just shut up and pay YOUR child support! It’s a familiar dictate used by the ignoramuses of the world to drown out all truth regarding the family court obligation known as “child support.” This two word label has been abused on an escalating scale to result in countless parental alienations, lucrative court conflict and premature deaths among litigants and their children.

It is an overbroad and even fraudulent label which generates federal funds for court operations and fees for “court predators” as I call them. When “child support” is mentioned, the public simply assumes that the debtor does not want to support his (or her) children. Few bother to look beyond that term to learn how it has been abused for anything but a “child’s best interests.”

There is little or no accountability for tax-free, support checks used for drugs, vanity excesses, residential partners and as tactical weapons for a custody award that inevitably leads to severe parental alienation. In so many cases, the one paying the so-called “child support” is, in reality, paying the state to take his children away.

The easy way for judges and politicians to avoid this “inconvenient truth” is by detracting from it, i.e. “Just shut up pay YOUR child support,” as if the recipient has no co-equal obligation. It is an unjust system harvested over the years which automatically assumes that all moms and dads do not want to provide for their own children. And it largely ignores the monies necessarily invested by a “noncustodial” parent to provide a home for the same children.

Nowhere is an accounting made of the working parental arrangements upended by this custody and support mandate found in the funding laws.

Government is actually manufacturing bad parents. They become the silent or walking dead, victims of murder, suicides, and child abuse, others that await justice that never comes. Take, for example, Investigator Joseph Longo, a father of four, so traumatized after exiting support court that he used a common kitchen knife to leave those children without parents for life. [1] The court predators just kept pounding him with protection orders, support deductions and career damage without considering the breaking points of their targets.

Then there’s Thomas Ball, victim of an overzealous child protection agency who sat down one day on the steps of a New Hampshire courthouse to protest family court abuse. [2] But this was no sit-in, no “occupy court” mission. He poured gas over his head and burned himself alive. I cringe at the extreme pain he must have suffered before and during this holocaust. In the end, there was no national coverage, no court reforms, they merely washed his ashes into the sewer. You should’ve just shut up Tom and paid YOUR child support.

How about Walter Scott, an African-American father shot dead five times in the back in 2015? He was killed, unarmed, by a white cop while fleeing a child support warrant at a traffic stop. Unlike other BLM victims, this one was not involved in any criminal activity. It was a civil debt, and our government was now killing for money. This crucial fact is never mentioned in the ongoing George Floyd protests because “child support” is the holy grail for feminists and man-haters. You should’ve just paid YOUR child support Walt and you might still be alive today.

Of course the victims are not just dads. They include a mom who drove her children into the Hudson River rather than surrender to a custody and support order. A similar derangement caused another mom to heinously murder her two-year old girl resulting in a conviction and jail term that will never bring back the child (Gabriella Boyd).

There’s Kyra Franchetti and Thomas Valva whose young lives were lost to mentally disturbed fathers. An Albany (NY) Times Union story on October 13, 2020 revealed that a state child protection agency suppressed 725 child death reports over a decade. This is shocking but not really when considering Governor Andrew Cuomo’s suppression of nursing home deaths currently under investigation.

There’s the Iraq war veteran who attempted suicide only to be saved through my intervention, a member of our parenting rights organization who hung himself from a tree in his back yard, the mom who called me daily for help until vanishing altogether, and the dad I dissuaded from a kidnapping of his own children now hiding in Israel. A Florida talk show host who interviewed me early in my crusade was a victimized dad who took his life a few years later. Not included are the the immeasurable victims who suffered psychological and physical harm.

And the list goes on.

This is not just a public policy issue or a lack of judicial accountability. It is a highly suppressed epidemic that has caused more deaths than the coronavirus and other illnesses combined. It was the central theme of our 3-day Parent March on Washington in 2019, a peaceful protest demanding congressional hearings and a Justice Department review. It achieved nothing, only more evidence to support BLM justifications for violence. Peaceful reform is no match for the billions of dollars sent to the states to keep this corrupt “child support” system afloat.

It is the main reason why conscientious reformists are being depicted as delusional wack-jobs.

Which one are you?


[1]  Pearce v Longo, 766 F. Supp.2d 367 (NDNY 2011)

 

[2]  Mark Arsenault, Dad leaves clues to his desperation, boston.com, July 10, 2011

Justice Achieved for George Floyd but not Walter Scott, shot dead unarmed in South Carolina fleeing a child support warrant

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

Only hours ago from the time of this publication, a jury in the Derek Chauvin murder trial found the defendant police officer guilty on all counts for the death of George Floyd on May 25, 2020. A 9-minute video of this murder left no doubt that justice had to be done for a horrific, racially charged incident witnessed the world over.

However, while protesters and family victims applaud the outcome in Minneapolis today, a highly contrasting one must be recalled in the murder trial of Michael Slager in 2016. He was a white police officer who shot another black man, Walter Scott, dead five times in the back while fleeing, unarmed from a child support warrant discovered at a traffic stop. It occurred on April 4, 2015 in North Charleston and was caught on camera by a concealed by-stander.

That horrific video, like the George Floyd one, also went viral worldwide and touched off a wave of protests across the country. Despite all that, the murder trial resulted in a hung jury after a single white juror claimed he could not “in good conscience” join the other jurors in a unanimous guilty verdict. It was a sad outcome no doubt influencing the much wider protests and anxiety surrounding the Derek Chauvin trial five years later.

Fortunately with justice denied in a South Carolina state court, justice was ultimately achieved one year later in federal court when Michael Slager pled guilty to multiple counts resulting in a 20-year sentence. The family had previously recovered a $6.5 million civil settlement in connection with the same incident, yet these events did little to avert the carnage which followed in multiple locations.

When these racially charged murders are chronicled in various reports, Walter Scott is often omitted. Child support injustice is never addressed. Yet this victim was not chased down and killed for the commission of any crime. He was gunned down because he was unable to satisfy a money debt. But because child support is the holy grail for feminists, that crucial element is downplayed. Is our government now killing for money? It is a further sad commentary on the draconian enforcement practices that have also killed countless parent-child relationships.

Indeed, in my home town of Utica, New York, a police investigator exited child support court in September, 2009 after his guns were confiscated, protection orders were issued and his career permanently tarnished by a divorce needlessly inflamed by such practices. He promptly entered the former marital home to commit a murder-suicide through the use of a simple kitchen knife, leaving four children without a mom and dad. The family obtained a $2 million settlement against the taxpayers in the case of Pearce v Longo, 766 F. Supp.2d 367 (NDNY 2011). Yet no one blamed the family court system and, to date, no reforms have occurred.

Diverse victims and the public generally rely on qualified civil rights attorneys to expose judicial corruption. They comprise a tiny group yet to be acknowledged as judicial whistleblowers. This is because retaliation is severe and common. As one such victim, I issued reports, exposed clear misconduct, filed precedent-seeking cases, and sponsored reform efforts across the country. At the Walter Scott funeral I addressed national media, Al Sharpton and Congressman James Clyburn regarding the needless conflicts caused by federal Title IV-D funding. My efforts were rewarded by severe harm to my health, law practice, and father-daughter relationships.

You can learn of my horrific ordeal throughout this site, http://www.leonkoziol.com and in my 2017 book, Satan’s Docket. In short, like the white lawyers who were brutalized down south during the sixties for their courageous stands against racial injustice, I was subjected to similar brutality. It is long past the time when such sacrifices are given similar recourse against the perpetrators of hate crimes upon people everywhere.

The Legacy of Susan B. Anthony merits consideration in a Supreme Court overhaul

Dr. Leon Koziol

Director, Parenting Rights Institute

Former New York trial and appellate attorney

President Joe Biden’s new commission to study an overhaul of our Supreme Court met for the first time today, April 16, 2021. According to a New York Times story by Charlie Savage, that commission will now explore changes well beyond an increase in the number of justices proposed by a group of lawmakers yesterday. This is a positive development given the political motivations behind the expansion plan which has already crashed and burned.

That does not mean the idea of an expanded high court should be dismissed altogether. As I urged in yesterday’s post, it simply means that any such proposal should be based on merit, one that places the interests of aggrieved citizens over the categorical ideologies of the current nine-member bench. Leaders on both sides of the aisle wisely recognize that the Supreme Court must not be transformed into a political institution, however implausible that may be.

To that end, the legacy of Susan B. Anthony may be instructive. This famous leader of the women’s rights movement was arrested in Rochester, New York for the crime of voting in the 1872 elections. She asserted the newly adopted Fourteenth Amendment as her justification. Her criminal case went to trial the following year before a presiding justice of the Supreme Court named Ward Hunt. He was born in Utica, New York, my home town, during its heyday as a thriving industrial hub. After serving as its mayor, he was appointed chief judge of New York’s high court before being nominated to the Supreme Court by President Ulysses S. Grant.

At the time, justices of the Supreme Court presided in both trial and appellate capacities among various federal circuits. So bizarre was this practice that when I first learned of it in the Anthony case, I immediately believed that she was tried before a justice of the state supreme court which, unlike all other states, is the trial level court in New York. Ward Hunt deliberated in a way that might shock today’s conscience, but then again, startling parallels can be made to modern day courts when I revisit my ordeal shortly as a persecuted civil rights attorney, aggrieved parent and judicial whistleblower.

Judge Hunt essentially conducted a star chamber trial. He used Anthony’s unsworn statements at the arrest scene as testimony against her while refusing to let her take the stand, directed the jury to find against her, and even issued a guilty opinion prepared prior to opening statements. He ordered her to pay a fine of $100 which she refused and then failed to incarcerate her as a consequence so that no appeal could be taken to the full Supreme Court. Such egregious deprivations of due process were not rectified until 1895 in the case of Sparf v United States which prohibited judge verdicts in place of the jury in criminal cases.

The effective merger of trial and appellate courts did not end until the circuit courts of appeals were created by act of Congress in 1891. There are currently 13 circuits with justices ranging in number from the First Circuit in Boston with six to the Ninth Circuit in California with twenty-nine. They all operate with 3-judge panels that decide most appeals and full court, or en banc review, for high profile matters. A loser in a panel appeal can petition for full court review, but it is rarely granted (much like the petitions denied by the Supreme Court). This two-tier process of appellate review assures that all properly filed appeals will be heard.

The current proposal to expand the Supreme Court from nine to thirteen is merely an increase in number, a bureaucratic exercise bent on avenging President Donald Trump’s conservative appointments. It does not assure that more cases will be heard and may even reduce the high court’s capacity when more justices delay outcomes through complex opinions, i.e. unanimous, majority, plurality, concurrent and dissenting. To be truly beneficial for the people served, that proposal should incorporate the two-tiered circuit court structure which has proven effective for many decades. A thirteen member Supreme Court, for example, could feature four three-judge panels with a chief justice focused on administrative duties.

The Susan B. Anthony trial was known for its positive impact on women’s suffrage, but it also helped shape a better court structure for the delivery of justice. So outraged was this defendant by the miscarriage delivered to her that she openly defied the orders of a Supreme Court justice, including a fine that was never paid. We look back today with great admiration for her courageous stand. However when a similar one is taken by reformists and whistleblowers of modern times, retaliation is common with the typical reputation damage that comes with it. By killing the messenger, corruption thrives in all branches of government.

Therefore the Biden Commission must take a hard look at judicial immunity doctrines and compensation of whistleblowers for the wrongs committed against them. My ordeal is exemplary. Like the Susan B. Anthony criminal case, my family court process featured judge verdicts on child custody and support with no jury at all. I was directed to cease making objections by one judge, Daniel King, which compelled me to exit and waive my rights to testify. After his disqualification, replacement Judge James Eby, forced the litigants and their paid attorneys to make a 160 mile round trip from Utica to his Oswego courthouse to receive a decision that had already been completed.

Ironically the appellate courtroom in Rochester named after Susan B. Anthony is the same one where my law license was first suspended for the stand I took against the Ward Hunts of today. Don’t let my sacrifices be in vain. Help us in our cause to reform our nation’s broken justice system. Share this post with media, public officials and aggrieved litigants. Make a donation here at Leon Koziol.com or call our office at (315) 380-3420. I can also be contacted directly at (315) 796-4000. E-mail option is leonkoziol@gmail.com.

Supreme Court expansion raised as a judicial access issue in the case of Koziol v King, Docket No. 16-512

Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

In 2016, a Florida doctor, New York lawyer, California dentist and Virginia engineer joined efforts at a news conference on the Supreme Court steps to announce a case docketed there by civil rights advocate Leon Koziol. It challenged the high court’s repeat denials of petitions filed by aggrieved parents who were wrongfully separated from their children in our nation’s divorce and family courts. It can be found on the Supreme Court website under docket no. 16-512.

The historical refusal to hear such cases led to an opening point seeking a declaratory ruling in support of the court’s expansion. It was based on Article III of the Constitution together with First and Fourteenth Amendment guarantees of judicial access and due process. The case was turned down on January 9, 2017. The greater history of this case features a horrific ordeal of a judicial whistleblower and civil rights attorney which reads like a John Grisham true story.

Like so many other publications here at Leon Koziol.com, our positions are repeatedly vindicated. It happened again today, five years after the Koziol v King case, when members of Congress announced a plan to expand the Supreme Court. Such expansion has also been advocated by Dr. Anthony Pappas, retired professor of St. John’s University, who has written reports on the subject. He was the Republican-endorsed candidate against Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) in her first race for Congress. In a 6-1 Democrat voting district, Dr. Pappas was barely able to make the radar. However, he used his public platform to boldly challenge judicial immunity and widespread injustices in our nation’s domestic relations courts.

Site Administrator’s Note: The opening argument in Koziol v King is presented below. Note its startling relevance to current events. Also note, at the time of filing, a vacancy had the Supreme Court functioning with only eight members. For more information, contact Dr. Koziol, Director of the Parenting Rights Institute, at (315) 380-3420. You can also contact him directly at (315) 796-4000 or his e-mail at leonkoziol@gmail.com. Given the censorship we have endured over the years, we ask our many followers to share this post with media and interested parties.

Point One

In its present form, the Supreme Court has rendered itself inaccessible to petitioner and the vast majority of Americans through artificial barriers to federal court jurisdiction in violation of due process, its duties under Article III of the United States Constitution and genuine principles of federalism.

During the period when Marbury v Madison,  5 US 137 (1803), was issued, the Supreme Court had six members. The population of the United States was little more than 5 million, and global complexities were utterly unimaginable. Today with the politics being played over the Court and presidential campaigns, there are only two additional members despite a population of over 300 million.

There are some 10,000 petitions filed annually with this Court and about 100 that are granted, less than one percent of the total petitioners seeking proper relief under Article III of the Constitution.  Against this backdrop alone it can plainly be seen that our Supreme Court has been transformed from a constitutionally prescribed role to an elite tribunal inaccessible to all but the most fortunate of litigants. When petitioner’s last filing was considered, there were over 800 petitions reviewed by this Court’s eight members on the same conference day of September 26, 2016.

Three fathers’ rights cases were among them, all denied on the same day. It is ludicrous to expect the American people to believe that every judge read all 800 petitions with any meaningful comprehension. It is more plausible to conclude that the vast majority of these petitions were never even examined directly. The insult to the people served lies in the futility of their hard work, expense and good faith in the current petition process particularly with the rigid rules for production, filing and standards for consideration.

In order to limit the unmanageable influx of meritorious petitions, this Court has had to erect artificial barriers to exclude a statistical 99% or more of petitioners and potential filers who neglect to seek recourse on futility grounds. They include such well known and formidable obstacles as Younger abstention, Rooker-Feldman doctrine, subject matter jurisdiction, judicial immunity, res judicata, collateral estoppel, waiver, pleading requisites, deference policies, factual insufficiency or excess, statutes of limitations and domestic relations exception.

If a pro se litigant lacks sufficient means to continue his or her pursuit of justice after relinquishing them to lawyers, they have a virtual zero probability of access to their nation’s high court…. (This case) is now ripe for a declaration of candid limitation … so that reform might be influenced. This was the approach taken by former chief justices of New York’s high court when they brought a hybrid mandamus-declaratory judgment action in their own lower courts for pay raises naming executive and legislative leaders as defendants, see Maron v Silver, 14 NY3d 230 (2010).

The relevant “Issues Presented” found on the third page of this filing reads as follows:

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

1) Has the Supreme Court rendered itself inaccessible to petitioner and the vast majority of our citizens in violation of due process and Article III of the Constitution?

2) Has the Supreme Court erected and ratified onerous obstacles to federal court jurisdiction for parents victimized in divorce and family courts contrary to due process, a fundamental liberty interest and genuine principles of federalism?

3) Has the Supreme Court encouraged or justified private remedies for law abiding citizens to vindicate their constitutional rights when its duties were abandoned here?

Hypocrisy, Corruption and Arrogance on Steroids: Will Andrew Cuomo change Empire State label to Cuomo Country?

Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting rights advocate and former trial attorney

Media and political observers have been baffled by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo who continues to resist mounting calls for his resignation. The state he has governed for more than a decade is now facing unprecedented tax hikes, overregulation and mass exodus of industry, business and residents. Long known as the Empire State, New York once boasted the largest population in America. But in recent decades it has shrunk to number four beneath California, Texas and Florida with no end in sight.

So why is this governor who presided over so much of this decline hell bent on fighting everyone to stay in the Governor’s Mansion? If Andrew Cuomo truly believed in “I Love New York,” he would simply step down for the good of the state. To be sure, his sex scandals are sufficiently nauseating to induce vomit among mainstream families. This is not what Andrew’s dad meant by the “Family of New York” when he governed the state during the eighties.

Andrew loves to benefit posthumously from that dad, former Governor Mario Cuomo. He even renamed the new $4 billion Tappan Zee Bridge after his father in 2017. The costly highway signs for miles around could not come up fast enough. More recently, he sought ostensibly to give essential workers recognition under a measure he called “Matilda’s Law” after his mother. Now wouldn’t it have been more genuine to have it named after the Manhattan doctor who took her life under pressure during the height of the pandemic?

After all, tradition backs up those who see through the current governor’s hypocrisy, corruption and arrogance on steroids. For example, the former Griffiss Air Force Base upstate was named after the first pilot who lost his life in World War II. And what was wrong with the Tappan Zee bridge named after a Native-American tribe which once lived along its shores? Is Andrew Cuomo’s renowned fury directed at Donald Trump better explained by a preference to have a Cuomo face on Mount Rushmore?

The framers of our Constitution envisioned a nation where leaders were elected for limited terms in humble service to the people. Here in one of our original colonies, it’s anything but that. The state’s top leader loves to play the role of a tough guy from Queens, even comparing himself and Dr. Anthony Fauci to Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino at a December, 2020 public appearance. But when anyone else makes comparisons to the Godfather characters that made these movie stars famous, this so-called governor fumes ethnic discrimination.

Brother Chris also loves to play tough guy, but when his juvenile threat of throwing a heckler down the stairs is compared to Fredo Corleone, he fumes too. Andrew even went so far as to threaten to deck the president of the United States when Donald Trump made an identical comparison. And who gives a hoot that Andrew is now single? By announcing it as governor, and groping state employees at the mansion, he appears to be offering sex interviews on company time. What is going on in New York government today?

Should all of us now follow the lead by taking the law into our own hands? Will the Empire State label soon change to “Cuomo Country?” Such a country will include the lawless, the “expendable elderly” in nursing homes, falsified death reports to promote a book, a state worker required to sing Danny Boy for personal entertainment, and a state plane abused to play strip poker. Yes, Andrew has basked in all this absurdity, the kind once cited to remove President Trump from office, but how Karma comes around with the bizarre “Cuomo Conduct” we see today.

On Constitution Day, 2013, I was invited to testify before Andrew Cuomo’s Moreland Commission on Public Corruption. It was called a “dream team” of experts, lawyers and law enforcement recruited with great fanfare at taxpayer expense to reverse a “culture of corruption in Albany.” As a long time whistleblower and civil rights attorney, I was duly impressed with all this. Accordingly, I traveled to Manhattan to expose major corruption in our third branch of government. But like so many other “window dressing” commissions, this one was prematurely dissolved when presenters began implicating persons close to the governor.

Fortunately one of those presenters, federal prosecutor Preet Bharara, could see through the pathetic cover-up. He seized Commission files resulting in the conviction of the state’s top legislative leaders including a Cuomo aide depicted as an adopted Cuomo family member. Like “Teflon Don” of Godfather fame, the top dog Cuomo knew nothing of the corruption, did nothing wrong, and managed to escape similar liability. Did his Democrat friend in the White House have something to do with this? FYI: another Moreland presenter, federal prosecutor Loretta Lynch, was later promoted to U.S, Attorney General by President Barack Obama.

A self-loving politician as brazen as Andrew Cuomo has proven time again that he could care less about New York’s expendables, his sexual harassment victims, and those who sacrificed so much by testifying in good faith at his self-promoting commissions. If there is anything to be learned from the Cuomo legacy, it is that such victims expose misconduct at their peril. Retaliation will be severe and immediate. In my case, within months of my public testimony, I was punished with a loss of licensing privileges, child contact and hard-earned professional reputation. To date, all recourse has been viciously denied.

Welcome to Cuomo’s New York!

Putting a face on the parent alienator: meet Kelly Hawse-Koziol (Usherwood)

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Director, Parenting Rights Institute

Former Civil Rights Trial Attorney

Among my popular publications are those that shed light on this human rights tragedy known as parental alienation. It is the centerpiece of a nationwide epidemic promoted by greed, lawyer profits and billions of dollars in federal funds under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act. It is a gold mine for service providers, prescription drug companies and conflict predators of astounding variety, an underworld of corruption made possible by a rarely tested declaration that our domestic relations courts are acting in the so-called “best interests” of our children.

This epidemic is escalating by the day because government is failing us in its duty to safeguard our most cherished right of parenting, one that the Supreme Court has repeatedly declared to be the “oldest liberty interest protected by the Constitution,” Troxel v Granville, 530 US 57 (2000). It is failing us most horrifically by refusing to correct parental alienation which has become so silently widespread across America. Instead, more regard is given to illegals, criminals and child traffickers at our borders.

Consequently we must take a closer look at these domestic tribunals. They all seem legitimate with the decorum, perfunctory overtures, and lawyers cloaked in black robes pressing us to believe that our precious offspring are in good hands. As an alienation victim, I tested that blind trust resulting in one of my custody judges being permanently banned from the bench for sexual abuse of his handicapped, five year old niece, In re Bryan Hedges, 20 NY3d 677 (2013). Only last year another of my custody judges resigned for sexual harassment of his female clerks (Michael Hanuszczak).

Indeed, over a twelve year period of retaliation for the conscientious stand I took against my profession, more than 40 trial level jurists were removed or disqualified from my family litigation, a national record by most accounts. I did not ask for this record or so many parenting substitutes since an uncontested divorce was upended by court predators. Since 2004, they orchestrated a blood bath reminiscent of the Roman Coliseum.

After all, have you ever wondered why loving parents are forced to joust over a “custody” award or “visitation” schedule? Are not these terms more appropriate for prisons and funerals? And haven’t such archaic terms “outlived their usefulness” as a veteran judge long ago declared in the case of Webster v Ryan, 729 NYS2d 315 (Fam. Ct. Albany 2001) at fn. 1?

I did not ask for the years of daily persecution that ultimately led to my hospitalization four months ago. I did not ask for this simply to spend more time with my daughters. I did not ask for the alarming information disclosed to me anonymously and otherwise concerning my ex-wife bent on replacing me time and again with her preferred dads.

This hideous alienator, Kelly Hawse-Koziol, brings a face to this epidemic. Indeed she could become its poster parent, exemplifying the absurdity of taking a support and custody battle to an illogical extreme. After all, what did she gain by destroying the career of her children’s dad? She got the attention she craved, pleased the ones anxious to even the score for a lost case, but how did any of it benefit the girls who could have been so much better off today.

In my case, I was never given an out, constantly forced on the defensive to prove myself as the fit parent I always was. For example, through a series of family offense petitions, all thrown out for lack of evidence, and a malicious campaign for failing to give up my parenting rights, Hawse-Koziol (soon to be Hawse-Usherwood) brainwashed my girls into hating their biological father who made their existence possible.

I raised them without incident for the first ten years of their lives, sacrificed immensely to stay with them, provided over a quarter million dollars for their support, and showed them a wonderful time which would be the envy of most children. Yet today they seem content to reward me with silence, avoiding contact even while I was hospitalized during the Christmas holidays. I cannot imagine doing this to my own parents or to my ex if the shoe was on the other foot. It is a modern day evil which our courts are manufacturing daily.

Such is the face of severe parent alienation, and it warrants a federal investigation of human rights violations in addition to the rampant abuses of federal funds. It also warrants criminal prosecutions and jail time for contempt to balance the consequences that have long been applied to child support debtors. I mean, isn’t a parent-child relationship far more deserving of legal protection than money transfers that are so often abused for non-child related activity? Parental alienation also warrants a new form of lawsuit that compensates victims.

Those who join with the alienator should also be held accountable. Again, I did not ask for the reports from concerned observers that my ex-wife was at it again by soliciting a guy named Lou Usherwood to act as the father of my children. Indeed during a high school football game in 2019, her illicit agenda was confirmed when, accompanied by this latest substitute, she threatened me by text for talking to my cheerleader daughter without a proper court order.

This is “insanity on steroids” and it is becoming commonplace. But in my case it is laced with retaliation for the exercise of speech outside the courtroom and constitutional right of parenting free from excessive interference. I have never even been charged with child abuse or found guilty of unfit parenting. Yet convicted felons in prison get better “visitation” orders.

After exchanges with the ex designed to move on from this disaster last year, I took down all negative posts involving her. However, the alienator showed true colors again by continuing with her sick agenda. She is doing this despite all the precious time and advice lost between “daddy and his little girls” that can never be restored. It is an evil I have never seen before, even among some of the worst criminal defendants I have come across. Yet I continue to have no legal recourse against those who made her agenda possible due to judicial immunity.

In my 2017 book, Satan’s Docket, I document how a corrupt family court made all this possible. It is not only uniquely educational but it reveals an epic ordeal deserving of a long overdue documentary. To order a copy or respond personally to this post, feel free to contact me at our office at (315) 380-3420 or electronically at leonkoziol@gmail.com. Kindly help us overcome the censorship of this epidemic by making our vital message and this blog site viral.

Should our courts honor lawsuits to compensate victims of parental alienation?

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Director, Parenting Rights Institute

Former civil rights trial attorney

You can’t just run into court and expect a recovery simply because you were wronged by someone. It has to be a legal wrong to avoid dismissal. Legal wrongs accepted by the courts are generally known as a cause of action. Your facts or grievance must satisfy the elements of a cause of action to be actionable for an award of damages.

So, for example, there are causes of action for civil assault, fraud, conversion (civil theft) and breach of contract. Then there are what’s known as developing causes of action, gradually accepted by judicial rulings, which eventually become commonplace. One example is the tort of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress. The elements which typically must be satisfied are 1) an intentional act by the defendant 2) which is extreme or outrageous 3) and the direct cause of 4) severe emotional distress.

Over the years there have been variations of such torts in family courts such as custodial interference, but when it comes to the destruction of a non-custodial parent’s relationships with his or her children, the courts have yet to convert such a wrong into a legally recognized one. To give you an idea of how long this latter developing tort has been around, it was my 1983 assignment in the Illinois State Moot Court Competition while in law school.

There has been no progress in the four decades since because the remedies for such wrongs have remained limited to custody modifications. These limitations fail to compensate victims for the severe emotional harm caused by the outrageous conduct of the alienating parent. In addition there is no optional recovery against judges who fail to correct the injustices due to a judge-made doctrine known as judicial immunity. And because a lawyer accomplice (i.e. child attorney) has no legal relationship with the same victim, malpractice is also unavailable.

Parental alienation was offered as a psychological disorder by Dr. Richard Gardner in 1985. However, to this day, the psychiatric profession has failed to recognize it among the 300 or so disorders found in the DSM-5 manual (even though many of the established disorders combine to cause alienation). In my research and precedent-seeking litigation over the past twelve years I have argued that parental alienation is not so much a psychiatric disorder as it is a cause of action for damages against the alienating defendant regardless of his or her status.

Our courts have not adopted this logic because it would undermine the lucrative nature of custody and support battles in family court. Face it, a custody modification is only a partial remedy. Properly completed with a damage award, a new cause of action for parental alienation would further deter future misconduct by any would-be alienator. The elements of this new form of lawsuit can be an extension of those already established in the intentional tort context.

Given the history of parental alienation, elements such as outrageous conduct and severe distress cannot be disputed. These are common characteristics which a civilized society would want to have rectified with children as additional victims. And strictly from a legal standpoint, our Supreme Court has declared parenting rights to be the “oldest liberty interest” protected by the Constitution. This is why I attempted to obtain recovery under an optional cause of action established under our civil rights acts, most notably 42 USC section 1983.

Many victims have sought similar refuge by filing pro se actions under this section in federal court. Such actions are routinely dismissed in deference to state courts. In my case, retaliation set in early, resulting in an unprecedented number of persons and entities infringing on my “oldest liberty interest.” My actions against them fell victim to various immunities, abstention doctrines and jurisdictional technicalities as as result, see i.e. Parent v New York, 786 F. Supp. 2d 516 (NDNY 2011). This 45-page decision is all that one needs to confirm that federal courts have closed the doors to wrongs committed in any divorce or family court case.

A parental alienation cause of action was not recognized in the Parent case either as a tort or civil rights violation. As a result, instead of deterring misconduct, this decision only added fuel to the fire, emboldening my ex-wife (custodial parent) to escalate her outrageous conduct. With the support of biased judges, 40 of whom were removed or disqualified over a twelve year period, she created an impossible environment for me. Her hatred was so severe that I received no visit from them in more than six years. Shockingly I also received no phone contact during the holidays four months ago while hospitalized for a life-threatening condition.

That life-threatening condition was caused by the incessant persecution I sustained as a reformist and whistleblower, adding further justification for a parent alienation cause of action. Few could withstand the daily stress I endured for so many years simply to spend more time with my children. There was never even a report of child abuse and no finding of unfit parenting while all offense petitions of the alienating parent, Kelly Hawse-Koziol, were thrown out. Where was the accountability or justice for the true victim here? And should not the courts also allow a monetary recovery against a third party acting wrongly as a substitute parent? To be sure, convicted felons received more contact in prison than I did.

During my 23 years as an unblemished practicing attorney, I was able to get a restraining order on a $30 million high school project right out of law school, substantial recoveries and jury verdicts for victims of government abuse, a perfect record of acquittals for the wrongly accused, and a state supreme court order invalidating a billion dollar casino compact. see i.e. Patterson v City of Utica, 370 F.3d 322 (2nd Cir. 2004); Oneida Nation v Oneida County, 132 F. Supp. 2d 71 (NDNY 2000); Peterman v Pataki, 2004 NY Slip Op 51092(U); Koziol v Hanna, 107 F. Supp. 2d 170 (NDNY 2000); Currie v Kowalewski, 842 F. Supp. 57 (NDNY 1994).

Today I am unable to get a family court order for a phone call with my teen daughters. This demonstrates the extreme to which the system will go to preserve the family court goldmine. My case is much more than judicial retaliation but a series of human rights violations warranting a federal investigation. These violations are chronicled in my 2017 book, Satan’s Docket, with much more to come hopefully in the way of a documentary. Help me help you by donating to our cause and making this post viral.

Contact me, Parenting Rights Institute, at (315) 380-3420 or leonkoziol@gmail.com.

Government Accountability is a Fraud: Why should the people honor laws that lawmakers flaunt?

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

Is there any shame these days to the widespread misconduct of public officials? Is there any accountability for those who flaunt the law with impunity? We’re not talking about isolated indiscretions, but serious misconduct undetected for years, even decades. Former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, Congressman Anthony Weiner, Wall Street regulator Bernie Madoff, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and ex-California Congressman Duncan Hunter constitute a small list of disgraced officials who brazenly advanced themselves at public expense, a joint hypocrisy of epic proportion.

And now, topping this list, we find Andrew Cuomo engaged in a flurry of news releases to deflect from his growing scandals. From a sudden legalization of recreational marijuana to the relaxation of coronavirus restrictions, the current governor of New York is relying on an electorate that quickly forgets. This long abused practice flies in the face of government misconduct that should be held accountable to avert the lawlessness it incites elsewhere. The public message here is that if you bend the rules, by the time anyone catches up with it, a lavish life has already been fulfilled.

Yes, crime pays, and the message continues to be that the people served are idiots for honoring laws that apply differently to separated classes. Those in power abuse their authority to achieve a higher standard while those who make it all possible are remanded to a life of poverty, incarceration, suicide and meager employment. To maintain the upper class, various programs are announced to make it appear that these lawless politicians truly care about the rest of us struggling to make sense of our reality as a two class society. Any middle existence is an illusion of escalating proportion particularly with the impacts of the current pandemic.

On Constitution Day, 2013, I testified at Governor Andrew Cuomo’s Moreland Commission on Public Corruption, to warn of our current realities. This was yet another window dressing entity designed to fool the public into believing that there will be accountability for a “culture of corruption in Albany.” But the same governor who created this commission with great fanfare acted just as quickly to dissolve it when growing testimony implicated officials close to Cuomo himself. Not to be duped, one of those testimonials came from a federal prosecutor who seized commission files resulting in the convictions of both leaders of the state legislature and a top Cuomo aid.

For my part, as a qualified whistleblower in our third branch of government, I exposed a family court epidemic that was causing vast separations between parents and their children. How ironic and hypocritical it is today that much more attention is being given to criminals and illegals at our southern border. Is this equal justice for our tax paying citizenry or the promotion of corporate profits dependent on cheap labor, drug addictions and false advertising?

In my reports to Congress and Justice Department I explained how Title IV-D funding was creating a biased judiciary rewarded by the size and number of child support orders doled out in our nation’s domestic relations courts. Put another way, federal funding was being incentivized by the number of “custodial parents” needlessly manufactured to incite lucrative conflict in the so-called “best interests” of our children.

In support of a federal investigation, I even cited proof in my own case featuring over 40 trial level jurists removed over a twelve year period in a maliciously protracted divorce that caused irreversible parental alienation. This was anything but a process for advancing the best interests of my two precious daughters. And in the end, like most whistleblowers, I suffered severe retaliation to suppress judicial accountability. Attacked as the messenger of overdue reforms, I was targeted by these same jurists and their ethics agents. By destroying my credibility, the gold mine of service fees and federal money was further preserved.

That targeting was successful largely because the public is further duped to believe that judges are “beyond reproach” as members of that arbitrarily created elite class. Such argument was used by lawyers to attack my motions for removal of biased judges from my support and custody cases in Syracuse, New York. That was before some of them were removed from the family court bench for misconduct that was made public. They include Judge Bryan Hedges permanently banned from judicial office by New York’s high court for sexual misconduct on his handicapped, five year old niece and more recently, Judge Michael Hanuszczak, exposed for sexual harassment of female court clerks.

The growing number of judicial scandals should have all of us very concerned because this is where we expect justice to be dispensed. Examples cited in my reports include Brooklyn Judge Gerald Garson sent to federal prison after being convicted of seeking a bribe in favor of a father in a custody case, and Albany Judge Thomas Spargo for seeking a bribe in favor of a mother in a divorce case against a father-attorney.

Such judicial misconduct is nationwide in scope as demonstrated by the “Kids for Cash” scandal which landed two Pennsylvania judges in prison, and Michigan Judge Wade McCree who impregnated a mother while presiding over her child support case. The victimized father was unable to secure justice or compensation in federal court due to judicial immunity, sending the message that adultery in chambers is a protected judicial act.

Unfortunately my expert reports, lobbying excursions, and peacefully led marches in Washington yielded no reforms. Instead I was rewarded with human rights violations, indefinite suspension of licensing “privileges,” and near death experiences. Such are the consequences for whistleblowers in countries led by ruthless dictators, not one that professes democracy and social Justice. Yet those remain the consequences here in America for a civil rights attorney whose greatest crime was to seek more parenting time with his children and to expose corruption by self-jurists and politicians. My ordeal is now a looming documentary published in a recent book, Satan’s Docket.

This is not a “lone wolf” project but a representative undertaking for a disjointed mass of aggrieved parents from across the country hoping to achieve resurrection from their suffering at the hands of evil beings. It is not the message I was hoping to present on Easter Sunday 2021, but we can either join to achieve a better society or we can continue to surrender to one that is becoming more godless by the day.

Please help spread this vital message to overcome censorship of this public service blog site, Leon Koziol.com. You can reach us for comment and support by calling our office at Parenting Rights Institute at (315) 380-3420 or me directly at (315) 796-4000, e-mail at leonkoziol@gmail.com. Stay tuned for an eye-opening post coming soon on the subject of parental alienation which caused two girls to avoid all contact with their hospitalized dad this past Christmas holiday.

HAPPY EASTER TO ALL !

Andrew Cuomo’s Tale of Two Cities

After creating the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption in 2013 to address a “culture of corruption in Albany,” New York Governor Andrew Cuomo dissolved it prematurely to suppress a growing level of testimony implicating top level officials close to him in criminal activity. It led to the convictions of leaders from both houses of the Legislature and a high level Cuomo aid when federal prosecutors seized Commission files in response. History now repeats itself with mounting scandals because the same governor was never held accountable then.

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Former government attorney, corruption whistleblower and current civil rights advocate

Andrew Cuomo is obviously a legacy of his father, the former New York Governor Mario Cuomo. He boasts often of his dad’s accomplishments and took great credit for the elder’s success as his campaign manager during the 1980s. Andrew even re-named the new Tappan Zee Bridge, a $3.9 billion project, after his dad in 2017. But of all the audacity that Andrew may have acquired, he never grasped the true meaning of his dad’s most famous speech delivered at the 1984 Democrat National Convention.

Dubbed the “Tale of Two Cities,” Mario Cuomo made an allusion to Charles Dicken’s epic novel of the same title which decried the cavernous gap between the elite and proletariat around the time of the French Revolution. He used this allusion to attack then president Ronald Reagan and his depiction of the United States a “Shining City on the Hill.” This speech elevated Mario Cuomo to national prominence much like Andrew Cuomo’s news conferences did for him at the height of the coronavirus pandemic.

But while Andrew was depicting New York as a model of success, the reality was that various scandals yet to be made public were telling a whole different story. This one might warrant another allusion to Charles Dickens about the other city left behind in the valleys of the empire state. Andrew Cuomo exploited his leadership role over two entirely distinct regions, upstate and downstate, to play politics at the expense of struggling businesses, working class and those victimized in nursing homes.

Much like Michael Avenatti, Andrew Cuomo flew too close to the sun as he bamboozled media in a game of politics with Donald Trump. When the Javits Center and hospital ship were made available for emergency relief to New Yorkers at great expense to federal taxpayers, Andrew Cuomo was out to prove that he needed no assistance from President Trump. Instead he sent coronavirus patients from downstate venues to hospitals in upstate New York. Such transfers of a hundred miles or more violated the most basic scientific protocols about isolating such patients in their places.

This scandal, like so many others, was suppressed to protect a media darling from public accountability. During the same period, I published a series of blog site postings which described this political exploitation of two regions to serve the ends of party politics. It was titled “Corona Chronicles” and can still be found on this site at http://www.leonkoziol.com. That series was likely made subject to internet censorship because the viral benefits once enjoyed by this site trickled down to nothing by the year 2020. It occurred after I was forced to bring an action in New York Supreme Court resulting in the removal of a family judge gag order imposed upon this same site in 2016.

Among the many exposures and predictions made here, the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption is very fateful today. In 2013, Andrew Cuomo assembled a dream team of lawyers, experts and law enforcement to crack down on a “culture of corruption in Albany.” As one of the small number selected to speak, I traveled to Pace University to expose corruption in our state’s domestic relations courts. Instead of overdue reforms, this commission was prematurely dissolved when testimony began implicating officials close to the governor. For my good faith efforts, I was rewarded with human rights violations, a loss of livelihood, and an end to father-daughter relations.

Such retaliation for the exercise of constitutional rights forces victims to go underground, to lose faith in their government, and ultimately to exhibit violent protest. It is a slippery slope that has become all too common this past year. In short, the King Cuomo scandals do not warrant individual prosecutions deserving of due process so much as they do a humble response to a serious loss of public faith in governance. For the good of the people, therefore, this governor should heed the calls for his resignation.

For related outside commentary on the Moreland Commission visit https://www.counterpunch.org/2013/10/18/new-york-is-drowning-in-bribes-and-corruption/

ADMINISTRATOR’S NOTE: FOR THE SAKE OF GOOD GOVERNANCE, PLEASE HELP US MAKE THIS POST VIRAL. YOUR INPUT IS WELCOME ALONG WITH FINANCIAL SUPPORT ON THIS SITE, LEON KOZIOL.COM. WE ARE A NONFUNDED PUBLIC INTEREST GROUP AND YOUR DONATIONS MAKE CRUCIAL REPORTS SUCH AS THIS ONE POSSIBLE. CONTACT US AT leonkoziol@gmail.com OR OUR OFFICE PHONE AT (315) 380-3420 (PARENTING RIGHTS (INSTITUTE).