Pro-Trump Civil Rights Advocate Censored by Facebook, Courts and Media

IMG_0743
Sean Hannity, Dr. Leon Koziol and Dr. Ari Braverman in Manhattan

Parenting Rights Institute

First it was a judge, then the courts, followed by mainstream media, and now Facebook is joining the gang of liberals persecuting a once prominent civil rights attorney in New York.

It all began in 2008 when Dr. Leon Koziol set out to expose corruption in divorce and family courts in an effort to replace antiquated custody and support laws with progressive shared parenting. The retributions achieved epic proportion after he supported Donald Trump BEFORE election day, going so far as to file a 2016 motion for disqualification of Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsburg due to her anti-Trump political interviews from Supreme Court chambers.

Dr. Leon Koziol employs the alternative “Juris Doctor” for his professional name because an Albany, New York appeals court prohibited him from using the term “attorney” in a six month suspension order. Such a prohibition conveniently removes the credibility of his corruption reports and reform message. The license suspension was long completed in 2013, and it was caused by a secretary influenced to create ethics issues in Dr. Koziol’s law office. That secretary was eventually convicted of felonies committed on later victims.

2013 was also the year that Dr. Koziol testified regarding widespread judge and lawyer misconduct before the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption at Pace University. It was the same year that ethics lawyers appointed by the same court announced to a panel of justices in closed proceedings that they would oppose returning Koziol to his civil rights practice so long as his public criticisms continued. It was a year when custody judge, Bryan Hedges, disqualified by Koziol motion in 2011, was permanently removed from the family court bench for admitting to sexual abuse of his handicapped five year old niece.

That same year, the same ethics lawyers were allowed by their judge superiors to resign quietly after a state inspector general uncovered their falsified time sheets. They were never prosecuted, criminally or ethically, and still allowed to practice law in New York’s capital district. This is in contrast to one Koziol client who was immediately prosecuted as a felon for obtaining a $16 city gas card reimbursement two hours after wrongful discharge. He was cleared by a jury before obtaining a consequentially large civil rights recovery.

These were only some of the shocking revelations brought before the Moreland Commission. Within weeks of that testimony, Dr. Koziol lost all contact with his daughters due to a family judge, Daniel King, who was reported for fabricating college degrees in child support decisions. Judge King could find no evidence of unfit parenting, indeed there was never any child protection agency report, so he based his decision on a “prohibited alcohol related gesture” (a wedding toast) among other demented concoctions. He even imposed a gag order on this site which was removed only after Dr. Koziol sued him in New York Supreme Court on First Amendment violations

And so it’s been, a suspension of a law license exceeding eight years, one year longer than a felony disbarment period, without so much as an accusation of any criminal wrongdoing. And no child contact for over four years! It is an unprecedented ordeal and a judicial record by most accounts. But that’s not the only record en route to shattering the glass ceiling of judicial immunity. Over 40 trial jurists have been assigned so far to Dr. Koziol’s originally uncontested divorce since it was filed in 2006.

With each assignment, grounds for disqualification arose immediately, causing one judge after another to recuse himself or herself at the outset. For others who pressed on in violation of judicial ethics, misconduct inevitably reared itself, and removal was secured through motion filings. Rather than accepting the systemic retaliation and the state’s role in all this, judges are now faulting the victim of their corruption.

The latest one is Gerald “Rocky” Popeo (Judge #41) who was publicly censored in 2015 by the New York Commission on Judicial Conduct after a hearing judge found that he had joked about downstate blacks and upstate “country niggers.” Popeo was also found guilty of making a violent threat to a litigant from the bench. The public censure encompassed serial contempt and jail sentences in violation of due process. However, much more was never reported or excused by that Commission, and this sadistic, self-loving and mentally challenged judge was never even removed.

For example, a former African-American city official and Koziol client attempted suicide in a jail cell after Judge Popeo presided over a racist targeting of his night club. All nuisance and liquor violations were dismissed by a jury after Judge Popeo re-committed the suicide prospect to jail from the hospital where he was in recovery. Prior to the targeting, this same African-American activist obtained a jury verdict of $333,000.00 in a race discrimination case against some of the same people now behind the Koziol witch hunt. It was argued by Dr. Koziol before a current Supreme Court Justice, Patterson v City of Utica, 370 F.3d 322 (2nd Cir. 2004).

In the summer of 2017, Popeo initiated a heated exchange with Koziol at a local bar, witnessed by a U.S. Marine veteran. It was based on Gerry’s belief that Leon had something to do with the 2015 misconduct prosecution against him. Despite all that, like his denials of racism reported by an African-American attorney, Judge Popeo denied that the bar conversation even occurred. He did so as an “Acting Family Court Judge” assigned to Dr. Koziol’s custody and support cases. His peculiar assignment came at a time when a series of editorials and full page advertisements by Dr. Koziol critical of the judiciary were featured in the Syracuse, Utica and Watertown, New York newspapers.

And despite even that, the same Gerald Popeo denied Dr. Koziol’s motion for disqualification this past week, ruling that he can be impartial. Since his assignment in February, 2018, Popeo has continued to deny Koziol all contact with his daughters. He now stands ready to jail him on orchestrated (unlawful) child support debts. The Leon Koziol story was recently documented in a shocking new book, Satan’s Docket: Corruption and Carnage in America’s Divorce Industry.  It is a must-read for all court participants and good government advocates, available on-line at http://www.parentingrightsinstitute.com.

With this backdrop, can anyone continue to be shocked by Donald Trump’s condemnation of federal judges who interfere with national security decisions of our elected president? The Leon Koziol story shows how the elected goal of “draining the swamp” cannot be limited to the executive or legislative branches. A federal judge who dismissed Dr. Koziol’s civil rights case against his persecutors is all the proof we Americans need to support President Trump.

That federal judge, Gary Sharpe, was removed from a case by a federal appeals court in Manhattan for announcing a human gene for decision making that would not be discovered by scientists for “another fifty years.” United States v Cossey, 632 F.3d   82 (2nd Cir. 2011). Never mind the swamp, that sort of lunacy on the bench rivals Hitler’s Nazi Germany. It also presents an important message for all whistle blowers like Edward Snowden: Stay in some free country where it’s safe!

Please don’t simply read this post and move on. The important information just received came to you at a high price. Share it with those who can help us fight this growing corruption in America. The censorship of our values and Trump supporters is very real as proven again today by Fox News headlines. They featured a black woman duo known as “Diamond and Silk” who were censored by Facebook due to the pro-Trump content of their popular site. You can also donate to our cause at Leon Koziol.com or call Leon personally at (315) 796-4000 for more information.

God Bless America !

Happy Easter Walter Scott

EP-150409468.jpg&MaxW=520&q=85
Why is the horrific murder of a loving dad for child support being ignored by the media and government?

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

I was born on Easter Sunday, just before dawn, and although I never bothered to  verify it until decades later, the date and time proved correct on my certificate. I was also born to be a dad, and that made my daughters possible. Although I wished them a Happy Easter today, as usual, I got no reply.

It’s been like that for years. Never found to be unfit as a parent, subject of any agency report or charged with any crime, the years spent with my girls as a “noncustodial parent” (due to my male birth status) were filled with events to make any child envious. Trips to Manhattan, the ocean, our nation’s capital, lakes, skiing, climbing and school events comprised only some of our experiences without incident. I built them a playground on my two acre property that rivaled our finest local parks.

Then their “custodial parent” decided that they should have a new father, someone she admitted to be pursuing strictly for his wealth. And the many custody judges assigned to my case, including removed pedophile family judge, Bryan Hedges, made no mention of this illicit agenda for over ten years. Instead, one who frequented a bar with his children, Daniel King of Lewis County Family Court, placed bizarre conditions upon me such as “prohibited alcohol related gestures” (a wedding toast) to make continued father-daughter relationships impossible.

They could find no reliable proof of unfit parenting so they simply made things up and any attack on my reputation to discredit the reform message and court corruption I was publicizing across the country. So intense was the legalized kidnapping that the wealthy substitute dad actually tried to run me over with his Cadillac last summer. It was witnessed by a bar manager who happened to be near the sidewalk I was crossing the street toward.

We live in a world today dominated by money. It can buy judges, lawyers and politicians. Anyone so naïve to believe otherwise should look up the many bribery and extortion cases coming out of divorce and family courts, judges like ex-New York Chief Judge Sol Wachtler, Gerald Garson and Thomas Spargo sent to federal prisons. And they are only a few of the ones who actually got caught.

But you can learn all about that in my recent book, Satan’s Docket: Corruption and Carnage in America’s Divorce Industry. Today’s holiday post is focused on a far greater crime, this epidemic sweeping across America as part of a New World Order to take control of our children. It is being accomplished through an antiquated “custody” system mandated by federal Title IV-D funding laws.

Like the drug industry, this epidemic has turned our courts into a trillion dollar industry while transforming cooperative parenting into lucrative war zones. It has also produced fatherless children like the one in Parkland, Florida, who decided one day to murder fellow classmates just for kicks. My own ex-wife lacks all moral compass when lying repeatedly under oath to the glee of corrupt judges anxious to exploit her stupidity to avenge my public criticisms.

And that brings us to Walter Scott. You may remember him as the unarmed father shot dead five times in the back by a psycho cop near Charleston, South Carolina while fleeing a child support warrant at a traffic stop. Our government is now killing for money and resurrecting debtor prisons using our children as justification. Adolph Hitler explained this agenda in his famous book, Mein Kampf, i.e. if you can get the people believing that you’re acting in their children’s “best interests,” they will “happily” give up their rights.

Walter Scott is solid proof of this agenda for all the unbelievers. I spoke out at his 2015 funeral before national media to emphasize that this was not so much a race crime as it was a gender crime, one targeting dads and the destruction of fatherhood in America. After discussing it with a New York Times reporter and appearing on the Charleston evening news, I got some mainstream media traction, especially when the funeral pastor preached the same conclusion I did.

Walter Scott’s murder, captured on an i-phone by an unseen by-stander, was, by far, the most horrific one in the Black Lives Matter crusade. Unlike the others, Scott was unarmed, he raised nothing resembling a weapon, and he was running from a money debt not any criminal act. Worse yet, Title IV-D state court revenue was among the objectives of the arrest warrant resulting in his murder.

Despite all this, time and again, when the national media recites these murders, Walter Scott is notoriously absent. No doubted calculated to protect the money trail, this practice resembles incidents like the Selma, Alabama anniversary march with George Bush cropped out of a New York Times photo or the television reporter, who never was, claiming to be flying in a helicopter over Iraq during a news feature. Walter Scott is purposely omitted because it raises the taboo subject of father discrimination and draconian law enforcement practices that threaten the New World Order.

In a March 31, 2018 front page story in the New York Daily News, a series of black victims are named in civil rights history ending with Trayvon Martin. Walter Scott is not among them. Again, today, in an Associated Press story by Corey Williams carried nationally, a summary of recent black murders is given. Still no mention of Walter Scott. Lawyer Benjamin Crump is featured in that story because he has been assisting victim families to get monetary compensation. The largest of these to date is the family of Walter Scott which recovered $6 million. So why was it “cropped out?”

The war on dads is very real. I may be among the most profound examples of this given the inhumane retributions I sustained as a result of my parent equality crusade across the country. As a prominent civil rights attorney who obtained jury verdicts and six figure recoveries for civil rights victims, including white landowners and sexually harassed women, these witch hunters can discredit my public message using the mother of my children as their stooge, but they can never take away my accomplishments.

As I look back on these past ten years of persecution, I often come to the conclusion that my sacrifices have been in vain. No one donates, few show up at our rallies, and keyboard warriors prefer the comfort of their private homes. Accordingly the epidemic grows, and the day is destined to arrive when some victim will explode to take horrific action at some courthouse or law office. Thomas Ball nearly did exactly that before burning himself alive in front of a family court and leaving behind a cryptic manifesto.

While I have done all I could to prevent such a holocaust, I have moved no mountains. After a record 40 trial judges were disqualified from my originally uncontested divorce, a racist judge who makes violent threats from the bench has now been assigned to finish me off as an “Acting Family Judge.” My website has been highly censored and I can recite little progress. If any, it has occurred among individual cases only. Occasionally I get inspiration from a friend, family member, stranger, caller or even a cleric, one such as Reverend James Forbes, the “Martin Luther King” of Manhattan.

However, on this Easter Sunday, a Christian celebration of resurrected life, I got some unexpected inspiration from a pastor at St. Paul’s Church in Whitesboro, New York. I cannot deliver it as eloquently as he did, but I would like to share it with you, especially all those who have stayed in the fight against the odds for so many years. You know who you are. The sermon goes something like this:

One day God directed a man to move a large stone by pressing against it each day with all his might. After months of doing so, the man grew weary. He had not moved that giant rock a single inch and began to accept the reality that he never could. Satan therefore intervened and suggested that he give it a day’s rest especially as it happened to be a Sunday. Surely a good God would accept such rest on his day and recognize all the daily commitment. But the man turned Satan down and kept on pushing against that rock however foolish he may have looked. Finally, the man asked God why he had committed him to such an impossible task. It was then that God replied that this was a test of his faith, and because he had honored the directive, God would now move that rock for him.  

 

Are you a victim of court corruption? Learn why from an expert!

IMG_0921
Dr. Leon Koziol, former civil rights attorney, has been exposing court corruption throughout the country, pictured here at the exclusive National Press Club in Washington during the 2017 National Whistleblower Summit featuring Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley

By Dr. Leon R. Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

Administrator’s Note:  Because we received so much support for our last post entitled, Why are there so few judicial whistleblowers, we have decided to upgrade it here. This is now a highly valuable publication with solid proof behind the credibility of our professional work on behalf of countless victims of court corruption. It should be shared with fellow victims, media and potential investors. It is a crucial publication to benefit parents, families and future generations.

Why are there so few whistleblowers in the Judicial Branch of Government?

It’s a good question if you’ve ever stopped to think about it. Yet it is directed to a full one third of our government, the elusive judicial branch. A single judge can derail an entire act of Congress or a major agenda of the president. In the states, children can be permanently alienated from good parents without so much as an amber alert. Protracted litigation can cost its victims millions in lawyer fees and court costs. Yet no one seems to know who the abusers are and why they get away with this. Media rarely reports on them perhaps out of fear. Hence, corruption flourishes in our courts with little or no accountability.

That is because it is a self-regulated profession (lawyers) which controls the judicial branch and pretty much everything else that goes on in America in one way or another. Shouldn’t that then translate into a need for greater accountability? According to lawyer Stephen Kohn who wrote the manual on whistleblowers, those who expose corruption on the inside of government or corporations produce the greatest savings and benefits for the people.

In the judiciary, the most effective whistleblowers are lawyers, and among those, civil rights attorneys are most reliable when it comes to exposing corruption. Yet to date, there remains no protection for such individuals. A lawyer who exposes corruption can incur orchestrated ethics charges, in my case by exploiting an ex-secretary (finally convicted of felonies in 2016) to suspend my law licenses and harm capacities to support my children.

The public relies on judicial whistleblowers to apprehend judges such as Gerald Garson of Brooklyn or Thomas Spargo of Albany for soliciting bribes in custody and divorce cases. In Morin v Tormey, 626 F.3d 40 (a 2010 decision of a federal appeals court in Manhattan), a chief family court clerk ultimately recovered $600,000 in a judicial retaliation case due to her refusal to engage in “political espionage” directed by a chief judge and family judge. The first one, James Tormey of Syracuse, is still on the bench and the family judge, Bryan Hedges, was permanently removed three years later only because he was forced to admit to sexual abuse of his own handicapped, five year old niece.

How much of this corruption is never exposed? The answer is likely astounding for unsuspecting litigants who foolishly pay exorbitant fees for lawyers in cases which are already a “done deal.” And the reason there are so few judicial whistleblowers to expose this is the severe retaliation which can be expected. In my case, it was the loss of my children, law firm and basic liberties within months of my whistleblower testimony before the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption at Pace University in 2013.

The agenda for suppressing whistleblowers or any reform message that harms lawyer profits is to destroy their credibility, make them appear “crazy,” take away their means of sustenance and even incarcerate them, if necessary, on some made-up or minor allegation. Against me, that agenda took a long time, twelve years and counting, but I’m still standing. A look at my true accomplishments will show why my website, Leon Koziol.com is so highly monitored by ethics lawyers, judges, law enforcement and politicians.

They can take away pretty much anything but not my long term accomplishments. For victims of corruption, such a proven background should verify the credibility of my reform work. For example, I secured judgments in both federal and state courts to invalidate a billion dollar casino compact, the largest in the state, on constitutional grounds. I defeated giant law firms as a sole practitioner including one of the most prominent in the nation, Cravath, Swaine & Moore of Manhattan. Look it up at Oneida Indian Nation v Oneida County, 132 F.Supp. 2d 71 (NDNY 2000) and Peterman v Pataki, 2004 NY Slip Op 51092(U).

In the Oneida federal case, so concerned were they regarding a little guy from a small city that the opinion had me as co-counsel for a much larger Syracuse law firm, Bond, Schoeneck & King, even though that firm had nothing to do with the victorious client. Its president had no idea who John Dee was or why his firm was listed because it had never represented the citizen group or had any contact with it. But there it was, black and white, and you cannot retroactively amend all those case books worldwide to correct it.

I won my first appeal out of law school DeNigro v DeNigro, 543 NYS2d 777 (4th Dept 1989), an interstate divorce case, and secured a restraining order within months of passing the New York bar exam on a $30 million high school project. It caused the new Rome Free Academy upstate to be built at a better location in the Griffiss Technology Park. I won that opening decision alone against the highly influential law firm Hancock & Estabrook.

I won my first federal court trial, a sexual harassment case, in Currie v Kowalewski, 842 F. Supp. 57 (NDNY 1994). That case was front page news because the first decision was lost in Currie I (810 F. Supp. 31 (1993), but I had it reversed by unanimous decision of a federal appeals court in Manhattan to secure the final victory. The lower judge there was forced to reverse himself on the same trial record, a highly unusual feat which angered him, the same federal judge who dismissed my civil rights case in Parent v New York, 786 F. Supp. 2d 516 (NDNY 2011) after the targeting of my public criticisms of the judiciary began.

Although I could get a million dollar project restrained and billion dollar casino invalidated in federal and state courts, I could not get a family judge to order phone contact with my daughters after that. Prior to the targeting in cases involving many of the same judges, I secured a $333,000 jury verdict which was argued before a Supreme Court Justice (Sonia Sotomayor) when she was a member of the same federal appeals court in Manhattan, Patterson v City of Utica, 370 F. 3d 322 (2nd Cir. 2004)(settled at $220,000).

As former corporation counsel for that city, I sued its mayor to remove gag orders on city employees yielding another favorable jury verdict in Koziol v Hanna, 107 F. Supp. 2d 170 (NDNY 2000). I earned a perfect record of acquittals primarily for those falsely accused by employers. While I could go on, I served the people, my profession and my family without blemish and with distinction for nearly a quarter century. Suddenly when I began exposing corruption and promoting parental equality, nothing I could do was right. I have now been suspended from practice for eight years, one longer than the period for felony disbarments.

In stark contrast, lawyers in my judicial district were allowed to continue practicing law despite criminal convictions or serious ethical misconduct. Attorney Robert Sossen was convicted of tax evasion on some $2 million in unreported client income. A law partnership, Petrone and Petrone, mismanaged hundreds of thousands of dollars in client money. And if you can believe this, the lawyers engaged in the witch hunt against me were allowed to resign quietly after an inspector general discovered their falsified time sheets (Torncello, Zayas and Devane). These are the standard-bearers of lawyer ethics I previously reported as an “unethical ethics committee” charged with a duty of preventing overbilling practices.

It’s the foxes watching the chicken coup. That is what I concluded before the Moreland Commission after disclosing that my family judge upstate (Daniel King of Lewis County), used fabricated college degrees to elevate child support for punitive incarceration purposes. The New York Commission on Judicial Conduct failed to act on my complaints as it did to some 90% statewide. This prompted me to recommend closure of the judicial commission due to its window-dressing nature which only encouraged more corruption. Instead it was the Moreland Commission that was shut down after its work implicated top state leaders.

If you still do not believe that judicial whistleblowers are sadistically targeted by those with the highest duty of assuring justice, consider this: The first speakers before the Moreland Commission were lawyers who took aim at corruption in the first two branches of state government. I was one of the few focused on the third branch. Preet Bharara went on to fame as a top federal prosecutor and Loretta Lynch was elevated to United States Attorney General. I went the opposite direction, hounded to a degree of seeking human rights safety in Paris. It reads like a John Grisham novel and featured in my new book, Satan’s Docket: Corruption and Carnage in America’s Divorce Industry

So when you view our court corruption site and public positions wondering how the before and after pictures can make sense, just read the cited cases here. Then you will know why there are so few judicial whistleblowers, why you have become so victimized. You will also recognize the value in the services we offer at www.parentingrightsinstitute.com.

Please share this crucial public message and support our cause financially. I am looking for major investors in my judicial watch organization, Parenting Rights Institute, focused on divorce and family courts. With proper funding, we can come to your courts and expose the corruption which is being ignored by our  judicial conduct commissions. You can even call me personally at (315) 796-4000.

 

Catch me if you can: A Shocking Story of Court Corruption for the Ages!

place-your-corrupt-judge-or-lawyer-photo-along

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

Now this is a story of for the ages, court corruption on steroids. For those of you who have followed my ordeal as a judicial whistleblower, you know how my daughters, livelihood and law licenses were taken from me due to my conscientious stand against my profession after 23 years of unblemished practice of law. I have never even been charged with a crime or unfit behavior as a parent.  

You also know how the ethics lawyers in the witch hunt against me were allowed to resign quietly by their appeals court employers for falsifying time sheets without any criminal or ethics charges. And you know about the unprecedented 30 plus trial level judges assigned to my originally uncontested divorce of 2006 who were disqualified for various reasons.

They included my custody judge, Bryan Hedges, removed from my case just prior to his admission of sexual abuse on his handicapped, five year old niece. And just when you thought it was safe to come out, along comes today’s feature on Leon Koziol. com, a parental blog site dedicated to exposing corruption in America’s divorce industry.

My recently released book, Satan’s Docket, continues to entertain readers while educating them to the realities of divorce and family courts from a model father and highly successful civil rights attorney. What a great Christmas present as so many have discovered through recent orders at www.parentingrightsinstitute.com.

Today’s shocking story could never have occurred unless I so angered certain judges with my public disclosures that they went ballistic with their retributions and abuses of judicial office. You need to share this with media, organizations and fellow victims not so much for my sake, no one is seriously supporting me anyway, that’s why the corruption continues to your own detriment  as parents and taxpayers. Do it for the sake of innocent children and future generations of Americans.

As yesterday’s post reported, I filed a parental equality case in New York Supreme Court. One day after its filing, on December 15, 2017, I was summoned to appear before the 40th trial level jurist assigned to my originally uncontested divorce.

That’s right, forty (40). I’m not making this up any more than my pedophile custody judge who was sued along with administrative judge, James Tormey, for directing “political espionage” of his family court clerk (Morin v Tormey).

I’m also not making this up any more than Judge Hedges’ replacement, Daniel “Kangaroo” King, who allowed a fabricated PhD and Master degree into the record for purposes of imputing false income. He did so for retaliatory support incarceration in 2013 after I reported his misconduct at public hearings before the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption.

Now the name of our latest villain is Natalie Carraway, and I have no idea where this support magistrate came from any more than the security deputy did who said she had come to our local family court just for me. How truly “honored” was I.

Anyway, four days earlier on December 11th, I had appeared before Kangaroo King’s replacement judge, James “dweeby” Eby of Oswego, New York Family Court. It was a first appearance on my show cause petition for holiday parenting time filed at least one week before Thanksgiving.

Of course, the dweeb had no intention of “granting” me father access to my daughters after nearly 1,500 days removed from their lives. He was likely assigned by Syracuse Judge James “Bond” Tormey to harass me with every possible abuse of judicial office. The Jimbo twins may have become determined to discredit my professional reputation and public message of reform at any cost.

After telling me to pound salt, the dweeb was interrupted during proceedings by that security deputy. He came in uninvited and asked this Oswego judge if he could serve me with a support violation petition then set for a first appearance four days later before Natalie “clueless” Carraway. The dweeb replied that it was not Oswego “policy” to allow service of papers in a case not assigned to the presiding judge, but because it “may be” policy in Oneida County, he ruled that I was “served.”

We were then excused from his deliberations, but I refused to accept service on grounds that I was intending to challenge “service by mail” in the separate support case, a mode of service requested by the “custodial sociopath” Kelly Hawse-Koziol on the face of her sworn petition. Because such petitions feature warnings of arrest and incarceration of up to seven years, that’s right seven years, on their face, I was not expecting “corrective” service by a court deputy assigned to security.

More importantly, I wanted to obtain a ruling to invalidate this unchecked practice of mail service given its clear violation of due process and devastation to victims such as Walter Scott. You might recall him as the unarmed dad in South Carolina shot dead in the back five times while fleeing a child support warrant. His family recovered $6 million for civil rights violations (the latest form of “child support”).

But how could Judge “dweeby” Eby know any of this? He was not assigned to the support case. And now he unwittingly became a witness to the service issue and therefore subject to (yet another) disqualification (always blamed on me, the innocent victim). Of course my adversaries, known and unknown, will endeavor to “sweep this all under the carpet” using every lame excuse possible.

But they would have to get around the fact that I was successful in a “Traverse” hearing as it is called one year ago where a support case by the same custodial parent was dismissed for improper service. I actually got the city marshal process server hired by her to admit on cross examination that he lied under oath before the last support magistrate. Or maybe they just don’t care about “law and order” anymore. We got to get this guy, Leon Koziol, out of the way at all costs, legal or illegal.

To my surprise, the security deputy was still pursuing me outside the courthouse to serve me again with the same papers even after Eby’s ruling that I had already been served. Now how close did this pursuit come to the one which resulted in the murder of Walter Scott? The only thing which separated our fates was the mood and mentality of this sheriff deputy who managed to barge into an unrelated (custody) proceeding and take control of it. Stay tuned! It gets better!

Between the dweeby proceeding and clueless one of December 15, 2017, I had the parties named in my state Supreme Court case served properly with my complaint. I did this with a privately retained process server. We had to travel hundreds of miles over a two day period to serve New York’s top judge in Albany, and judges Eby and Tormey in Oswego (Lake Ontario) and Syracuse. It cost me hundreds of dollars to comply with “the law.”

All that was left to serve in my newly filed lawsuit at our December 15th support hearing was the “custodial sociopath” and Clueless Carraway. We got the sociopath, Kelly Hawse-Koziol, in the court lobby and then my server joined me in the back of the courtroom  before Magistrate Natalie Carraway. She progressed through the usual formalities.

That’s when I learned that my custodial adversary was now represented by her sixth attorney employed by Social Services (while she was earning nearly $100,000 annually as a tenured Frankfort-Schuyler school teacher receiving $45,500 in tax free child support only two years earlier, again under threat of incarceration to a debtor prison).

When the subject of our next appearance came up, I logically raised the mail service challenge and in-court service by a sheriff deputy assigned to court security. But my ordeal never ends when it comes to shocking events. Clueless Carraway informed me from the bench that she had taken it upon herself to investigate the service issue already (before I even raised it at our first appearance now underway).

Magistrate Carraway had secured the transcript of Judge Eby’s custody proceedings at public expense when it was my adversary’s legal obligation to do that at her expense for purposes of proving proper service. More bizarre, Judge Eby would eventually become the appeals judge in her support case and therefore tainted as a biased witness to proper service.

Hey this is New York, don’t try to figure it out. In my lawsuit, I explained why judges and experts could not understand my ten year ordeal, but stick with me anyway. It’s for your own good. You’ll just have to trust me on that. Judge Clueless announced that she was accepting her colleague Eby’s ruling on service while selectively excluding the county policy question which preceded it.

That’s when I responded with the chaos that would follow from her precedent which I was certain that no judge in my (Oneida) county would adopt. I asked Clueless to imagine what our system of justice would be like if any court security deputy could simply interrupt any court proceeding to serve papers for a private party in a separate case. An angry Carraway was unmoved as presiding judge here. And that’s when her world was rocked.

If that was her firm precedent, I asked her to accept service of my state Supreme Court summons and complaint which named her as a defending party by my process server seated in the back of her courtroom. She made me repeat that question as it was evidently beyond her comprehension that a judge could be served by a litigant while deliberating on his case.

But come on man! This is exactly what had occurred to me in Judge Eby’s courtroom four days earlier and she had just ruled that this was an acceptable mode of service. Utterly discombobulated, Clueless Carraway finally replied that she was going to conclude this first appearance and attend to matters in chambers (this was her only case and she was probably intending to consult her assigning judge, James “Bond” Tormey about it all).

But our needless wait in the court lobby for Carraway’s exit had its fateful benefits because the deputy was enticed in the meantime to respond to our casual inquiries about what had just happened. He gradually disclosed that he had been contacted by an Oneida County family court clerk (only minutes after my arrival for Eby’s hearing and Hawse-Koziol’s observed entry into that clerk’s office) to serve papers for someone. Deputy Dummy replied, “sure, why not” while abandoning his security post for this purpose.

Deputy Dummy then confirmed that he had no idea who this service was for and that he was not being paid for it. After all, that would be double dipping and likely the crime of official misconduct inasmuch as he was already being paid a wage for public safety purposes. Making matters worse for him, he also conceded that he was not a part of the Sheriff Department civil division which by law must charge a fee for such private purposes.

I could go on and on, but you probably know where I’m going with all this now. That’s right, the same state Inspector General who caught my ethics lawyers falsifying time sheets. After all, imagine the liability consequences if a violent event erupted in the court lobby while Deputy Dummy was preoccupied, uninvited, in closed proceedings where no one was in danger. Judge Tormey’s chief family court clerk recovered $600,000 just for being directed improperly to conduct “political espionage.”

This was also a nail in the coffin for my state Supreme Court case against Dweeby Eby, Clueless Carraway and James Bond Tormey. Can a better case be made for gender discrimination practiced by those who apply public dollars and special court privileges to give free process serving to a custodial mother while dad is required to pay for his? Shouldn’t we “lock her up” along with all the others who do this?”

There’s much more to come. Stay tuned!  

   

 

        

Beware of Fee Predators like William “F. Lee Billy” Koslosky

 

IMG_1194
Seriously, would you let your children meet privately with this guy and a pedophile custody judge? FORTUNATELY, I stopped it from occurring with an emergency motion only months before that same judge was removed from the bench. UNFORTUNATELY, child lawyer “F. Lee Billy” Koslosky (pictured here) is still lurking and looking for dollars in the same family court.

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

You’ve got to admit, he’s pretty scary looking. But what he does to children and fathers in family court is far more scary. You can find him regularly in Oneida County (New York) family court where he makes a living making mountains out of molehills in his judge assignments representing unsuspecting children at taxpayer expense.

In my original uncontested divorce case filed in 2006, there was no need for family court predators like William “F.Lee Billy” Koslosky, lawyers who cannot make much of a living elsewhere. But as soon as a “custodial sociopath” named Kelly Hawse-Koziol decided to give gold diggers a bad name, she got him involved. Her life has been a nightmare since.

Hawse-Koziol will never admit the nightmare she caused despite how pathetically obvious it remains. Like a wind-up doll, an energizer bunny banging around in circles, she keeps on kicking, the proverbial “Bull in a China Closet” destroying everything that others have worked so hard to provide for her children’s futures. She hired a series of lawyers, wasted a vast amount of money without any of the child support increases she sought, and all her extortionist offense petitions were thrown out.

Now she’s at it again, repeating the cycle yet one more time. Never mind the cliff which is awaiting her. It’s the lies, her perjuries, a scorned woman that would make Satan proud. Our courts and legitimate laws are being abused for illicit purposes. And public servants like my ex-pedophile custody judge, Brian Hedges, are facilitating it.

William Koslosky is a Utica, New York attorney who has been filing false affidavits in retaliation for my whistleblowing activity (provable on the face of  court documents). To date, he has not been charged with anything ethically or criminally.  He was appointed by Judge Hedges to “represent” my daughters in a custody proceeding, chastising me for seeking removal of Judge Hedges prior to a private meeting with my little girls in his Syracuse court chambers (known as a Lincoln hearing).

Fortunately my removal request was granted only months before the same judge admitted to sexual abuse of his handicapped five year old niece. I shudder at the kind of looks and questions which he would have posed to my then six and eight year old girls at the time. Little did they know, while mom approved of Judge Hedges during her agenda to have me replaced by millionaire Flihan, their real dad was truly looking out for them.

The entire story is now a big seller locally, my early release book entitled Satan’s Docket. Rather than explaining segments here, I will provide the ones relevant to court predator Koslosky below so that you can learn about his kind and act like I did to protect our little ones in these sick, lawyer-infested tribunals. Please share this post with fellow parents, taxpayers and concerned citizens for the sake of everyone’s children.

 

Satan’s Docket: Corruption and Carnage in America’s Divorce Industry (available at http://www.parentingrightsinstitute.com)

Chapter 16:  Killing the Dream (pp 172-174)

Like sheep to slaughter, though, moms and dads continued to throw their money at lawyers instead of reform, as many as ten in one of my expert cases by the time it was all over. Years of cooperative childrearing can be forever torched within the span of a one hour consultation with an unscrupulous lawyer and a custody handbook.

Even the notion of kidnapping was exploited through this handbook. Due to my publications chronicling extreme cases of child abductions by desperate moms and dads, I became an instant suspect. Such an incendiary notion replete with amber alerts and other hysteria could be the trump card for custody while deflecting from the father alienation which was truly occurring.

On one occasion, I had become so frustrated by Kelly’s anal monitoring that I texted her back that we were on our way to Rio to make up for years of lost parenting time. She could see me in her driveway at that moment a half hour late from a weekend excursion. Her foolishness had to end, the courts were only fueling it, and I thought this facetious text would finally work.

I had come to believe that she was actually believing her own delusional concoctions. Yes, I was late, but there were moms all over the country by my own research and contacts who would happily give up a full hour or even a few months just to have a loving dad in their children’s lives. For them, such anal foolishness would be profoundly condemned or ridiculed.

It needs no mention that circumstances often cannot be controlled such as a storm, traffic jam or simple human failure to keep track of time. It did not matter that the girls had a wonderful time with a father sacrificing so much to better their quality of life. A prominent attorney or elected statesman was something to selflessly promote, not selfishly destroy. But this was family court where absurdities were reaching new lows by the day.

Kelly would not yield anything beyond my 0-15% of total parenting periods. As she all but conceded at our custody trial, this was necessary to keep the child support flowing to her. It left me maximizing as much time as I could when I could. If a rare accommodation could be elicited, I was required to exchange an equal amount of time from another “non-custodial” period.

That necessarily led to office babysitting and significant time lost during weekend obligations which the “custodial parent” would then twist into a neglect issue. Her strict adherence to the custody playbook incited a treasure trove of custody issues for her to exploit, a lose-lose scenario no matter what I did. And her mommy and daddy in robes patted her on the head every time.

On this Rio text occasion, Kelly could hear our daughters exiting my vehicle because she confirmed it from her living room window while looking down at her phone. She also took note of the girls’ laughter and excitement over a great weekend escape with daddy and his girlfriend. Such scenes were common, and they moved Kelly to achieve those new lows of absurdity.

After all, the courts were the places where her parent adversary earned a living. Taking a giant dump there was of no concern to her in the classroom of a rural school district. I dare say most moms would discard such a text in a milli-second. But not this one. She saw it as an opportunity to strike at my weekends, filing again for suspended or supervised “visitation” because of it. I was then forced to defend that text at a costly full blown court hearing on May 19, 2011.

It’s true, I’m not making this up. One question during cross-examination comes to mind because it is destined for the Lunacy Hall of Fame. The judge-appointed child attorney was regularly cited in my court filings to decry the fee-generating abuses of this dysfunctional system of child control. He proved it again after the conceded facts (facetious text and driveway location) had been admitted into evidence. That’s when the big time court drama began.

William Koslosky was a Fifth Judicial District lawyer in upstate New York with an arm defect who made a living in these courts. At age sixty, he was childless, never married and living with his lawyer brother (a decent man) in a log home up the road from my residence. This strange bird thrived on boorish court room theatrics.

In all those years of judge appointments to our case, he never once advanced a compromise solution. Ever the attack dog upon the judicial whistleblower, he was appointed to represent my daughters without their consent but effectively represented the judges and members of the local family bar instead, or the subjects of my public criticisms.

In a rare moment of conscience, one judge, James Gorman, removed William Koslosky from a later child support proceeding in a November 19, 2012 decision. His reasoning was that Billy would be counter-productive to a comprehensive resolution I had been proposing as part of a new career. But he was reappointed by the next assigned judge, Daniel King, despite that decision. Together with his siblings, Billy operated a small law office in Utica, New York.

Indications were that Billy had no life apart from his lawyer work and some involvement with boy scouts. In me he saw an additional opportunity to woo the platonic affection of my ex-wife. He was the Billy in shining white armor rescuing this (lying) damsel in distress from the big bad dad. In his submissions, he commended judges in glowing terms who “stood up” to me even after disclosing a childhood contempt of his own dad on our custody record, more on that later.

There had to be visions of the O.J. Simpson trial as he rose from his trial table, a fictional hoard of observers in the empty pews behind him, imaginary camera crews in suspense, and media from around the world hanging on Billy’s every word as he began his cross examination. There may even have been a Rocky theme song playing in his mind as he opened his mouth.

Now brace yourselves because, as federal taxpayers, you paid the bill for what came out of that mouth. And here it is, drum roll please! Without anything of evidentiary value for his nonexistent jury, the facetious text and location already admitted, Billy asked me to confirm on the stand that I was not, in fact, in Rio when I sent that text from the mom’s driveway.

Utterly dumbfounded, I looked up at the judge next to me and back at “F. Lee Billy,” as I came to depict him. To my dismay, they were silent with continued expectation of an answer. I ended that silence with a general objection (i.e. the text was a joke, why are we here?) I also objected on grounds of a fact not in dispute, a question already answered, and a new one I called stupidity.

Syracuse Family Judge Michele Pirro-Bailey overruled whatever grounds were on my mind. Simply unable to contain my level of disbelief, I asked her if she truly wanted me to answer such a ridiculous question. At some point, judicial insanity has to be put on the record, and that was my every intention here. Her ruling stands, she replied, and I must answer it. In protest, I refused.

Judge Pirro-Bailey could have held me in contempt. A lawyer, Richard Fine, was imprisoned for some eighteen months in California in a contempt situation not unlike mine. But privately, my judge must have agreed with me because she announced instead that my refusal would be used against me in her decision. And boy was it. She imposed the first defamatory forensic order only days before her disqualification the next month. It was quickly removed by a replacement judge.

Pirro-Bailey then directed “F. Lee Billy” to move on to his next question and the Rio caper was over, leaving Ito and O.J. terribly disappointed. This was only one example of the bombastic pleasure that Koslosky took in blowing up family non-issues into sensational murder trials. He did this to justify himself and the fees paid to him by taxpayers. The fees he amassed included needless trips to far-away hearings while one or both parents participated by teleconference.

The girls were clearly impacted by all that was occurring to me, made to believe I was somehow defective as a dad especially when the witch hunt on my law license went public. Kelly could not have succeeded with any of this absent the support of those who were abusing judicial office in retaliation for my public criticisms. Few moms would be as stupid as stupid did here

Chapter  20:  Shopping with Martha (pg. 229)

After my departure from “her” (Martha Walsh-Hood’s) court on July 24, 2009, child attorney, William Koslosky, disclosed a domestic violence incident at his home fifty years earlier during closing statements. What any of this had to do with my case I’ll never know, but I found it buried in costly trial transcripts, a treasure trove of billable hours on behalf of grade school clients who could never hold him accountable. I also found fables, serious provocations and tales of horror which might be described as a love affair with a fictional girlfriend.

In this particular court case, her name was Kelly Hawse, a victim supposedly locked in her marital home (while I lived our last year of marriage at a Lake George apartment), subjected to meritless lawsuits to keep her subservient (when she filed the first one over child support which was never increased and continued with a series of fear lawsuits that were all thrown out), evinced fine skills as a teacher (petitions replete with grammar errors) and distinguished herself as a mother who loved all things (like the millionaire dad who could buy her all those things).

It was abundantly clear that Billy Koslosky was on a mission of revenge, abusing his entrusted role and tax dollars to murder exemplary father-daughter bonds. He actually had the audacity under protection of court security to accuse me of “terrorizing” my children, an accusation which if made in my presence could have sent him out the court window. Once again, fate had spared us all a disaster due to my pre-closing departure which Billy pathetically exploited.

This terrorist thing is being exploited these days by thoughtless provocateurs to advance their wallets and purses without regard for the potential consequences. Terrorists fly planes into buildings. They don’t pursue proper channels for the resolution of disputes. I visited the Trade Center ruins on the day after 9-11 to volunteer what I could to aid the victims. Comparing me to a terrorist as Judge Gartenstein had done to Professor Pappas (Chapter 3) is an assault upon my patriotism in addition to my fatherhood.

Apparently Billy had been using the terrorist depiction in a lot of cases because he also used it to describe his relationship with his own dad. As he explained it, little Billy was “terrorized” by his police man dad during a dinner argument a half century ago. Somehow dad’s uniform and gun made him dangerous. Somehow F. Lee Billy had beamed himself up to la-la land as he raked in the easy dollars. It was as if that fictional hoard of media had returned, O.J. Simpson nodding with glee, and Judge Ito ready to give Billy eight more months, if needed, to play to the fanfare.

Billy’s closing statement reflected a childhood contempt for his dad which he simply transferred to his latest target in a now infamous tragedy we call the Potato-Police Rescue. [1] How can such a strange bird be allowed to represent children against their fathers? I asked that question before many courts to no avail. They simply looked the other way, and that only elevated the abuse in later proceedings. At nearly sixty years of age at the time, this was no way for Billy to compensate for personal defects or a lack of marital and childrearing experience. You be the judge:

One thing that I remember is disagreement between my mom and my dad. My dad was a policeman and one day he came home and he was mad because we didn’t have red-skinned potatoes and all that she could say is we have Yukon Gold, and I was terrorized. I’d never seen dad arguing like this and, my God, he’s in the police uniform with a gun. What is he going to do? So I went to the store to get red-skinned potatoes and I don’t like Yukon Gold.

If there is any purpose to a judge in any proceeding, it is to control it so that sanity, justice and civility may prevail. Wide latitude is generally given to lawyers in closing statements, but in this case, it was a custody proceeding, not a high-profile murder trial. There is no way my daughters, aged five and seven at the time, would have approved of their involuntarily appointed lawyer referring to their daddy this way. It was the appointing judge’s duty to prevent it. But Walsh-Hood was evidently enjoying this all with sadistic satisfaction. Another judge might have cut Billy off:

Mr. Koslosky, this is family court, not criminal court. What’s with all the terrorism in your characterizations of an American father seeking proper relief here? There’s no jury, and such colorful depictions will not influence me. I’ve heard and seen all the evidence as you have. There’s nothing to support any of this. No child protection agency has even been contacted, let alone involved. And I could care less about your own dad and whatever went on with these potatoes. Confine yourself to the record, and let’s move on, alright?

As stated, the adversarial custody system is archaic and utterly counter-productive to cooperative child rearing arrangements. Here we have sick proof of this, a fee-loving lawyer appointed for unsuspecting children who is throwing gas on a fire ignited by the court process itself.

One month after this closing statement, an off-duty policeman without gun or uniform in our region committed a murder-suicide leaving four children without parents. He did so with a common kitchen knife despite protection orders after being abused in the same Family Court. [2] So if you ever hear about some divorce victim shooting up a courthouse, understand how easily it can occur. There is no accountability for the arrogant judge or reckless lawyer who incites needless violence.  

[1]   Koziol v Hawse-Koziol, New York Supreme Court, Oneida County Case No. D2004-422102; Custody transcript, Vol. V at pg. 857-858 (July 24, 2009)

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

 

What else do they sell at Joseph Flihan Restaurant Supply?

untitled

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

Thanks to all who have purchased my book, Satan’s Docket, and responded to my request for information to explain the real reason why Kelly Hawse-Koziol was allowed by “family court” to end all contact between me and my daughters for a period of four years. Since 2006, she has lied, perjured herself and had all her offense petitions thrown out in a scheme to have me replaced by a childless millionaire named Joseph Flihan Jr.

After exposing her misconduct and that of this “boyfriend,” I was nearly run over by a black Cadillac recently. Fortunately a witness caught the whole thing, and I am adding the incident to my reports. You may recall how former Georgia Senator Nancy Schaefer was mysteriously killed after publishing her own book and exposing family court corruption. Rest assured in my case, should this happen, it will be no accident or self-inflicted wound. We’re talking big money here that is being threatened by judicial whistleblowers like me.

In 2014, Kelly Hawse-Koziol relocated my daughters without my knowledge to Flihan’s home on Ironwood Road, New Hartford, New York. For eight months this “custodial sociopath” was able to hide it on the family court record while retaining her old address and a tenant paying rent to her. She violated a custody order in the process but Judge Daniel King of Lowville, New York excused her fraud despite an e-mail address she claimed to have used to give me that required notice of relocation (gmai.com without the “l” character in her computer confirmation notice).

Now I have no idea what my daughters are doing, and Hawse-Koziol has brainwashed them to make no contact with me for years now. Even life term prisoners get better treatment while I have never even been accused of a crime, abuse, neglect or alcohol related incident. King was disqualified as our judge last year after I exposed his alcohol habits at a local tavern with his children present. In my case he condemned me for a “prohibited alcohol related gesture” (a wedding toast).

But the loss of my daughters has never been corrected so I must treat it like a missing person case. Obviously something other than a “child’s best interests” must explain why so many lawyers and judges are quietly backing this father replacement agenda. My recent book, Satan’s Docket, lays out much of it in Part Two. But now with my full page ad series in our regional newspaper and radio programs, I have received extensive information which is being followed up on together with a request for a federal inquiry.

For example, only yesterday, a group of Frankfort-Schuyler high school graduates informed me of some additional antics of Kelly Hawse-Koziol as their former teacher. When the subject of my ads came up at a spontaneous gathering with a former client, these girls (ranging from 21 to 25 years of age) asked me who my ex-spouse was. When I responded, they broke out with uncontrolled laughter citing how they learned nothing from her.

Stories abounded regarding a poodle and e-bay preoccupations, the Nile River flowing south and a resume with numerous grammar errors. But my greater concern was the activity during field trips at the back of the school buses. If you have more information, kindly share it with me. I have maintained confidentiality with informants on request.

Other information recently obtained include activity inside a bar known as the Great Laker Inn, Oswego, New York, apparently a hang-out of King’s replacement judge, James Eby. I was chastised by family court lawyers for seeking removal of another custody judge, Brian Hedges, but everyone went silent when he admitted to sexual abuse of his five year old, handicapped niece. This pedophile judge was then removed altogether from the bench.

These are disclosures which can protect not only my daughters but other children as well. Unfortunately one of my information sources passed away recently from a drug overdose. Other informants will not sign affidavits which I must have to make a solid case. So if you or someone you know can share information about Kelly Hawse-Koziol, Judge James Eby, Judge Daniel King, and Joseph Flihan Jr., his restaurant supply business or his parties at a camp near Old Forge, it will be crucial for you to share it with me at (315) 796-4000.

Shopping with Martha (Judge Martha Walsh-Hood) on Black Friday

 

Martha Walsh Hood With Glasses
This post is dedicated to Syracuse family judge, Martha Walsh-Hood

By Dr. Leon R. Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

Today we take you into the courtroom, my first custody trial conducted in the Syracuse coliseum known as Family Court. This is the same forum which featured a pedophile child custody judge, Bryan Hedges, 20 NY3d 677 and judicial espionage agent, Chief Judge James (Bond) Tormey, Morin v Tormey, 626 F.3d 40.

Yesterday was Thanksgiving Day across America, when countless parents were denied time with their children because of an antiquated custody system designed to enrich lawyers .Today is “Black Friday” when the same persecuted parents will find it hard to satisfy their loved ones at the malls because those same lawyers have taken their money to create needless court issues for profit, leaving less or nothing for Christmas presents.

You are now connected to one of the most informative and active parenting rights sites in America. Judges, lawyers, ethics agents, law enforcement and politicians regularly check in along with our supporters. So you’re in good company, and that has to tell you something. We have proven ourselves as experts in the corruption field. Nevertheless we remain grossly under-financed and devoid of staff necessary to become a formidable “Judicial Watch” over our divorce and family courts.

The reason for this is that the victims continue to engage in keyboard attacks to no one who cares while sending donations to their enemy lawyers instead of us. One former ally made this highly misguided move despite his professed knowledge of the epidemic. He paid thousands of dollars to a loser lawyer and ended up losing everything as a predictable consequence. Not one dime was spent here to put his “money where his mouth was.”

And so the abuses escalate. You may think that the abusers are principally men, those public figures accused of “groping” women 20 and 30 years ago by scary looking victims collecting unemployment or welfare behefits, the attention seekers paid to make the accusations without prior report or resistance. Yes the insanity of today continues to reach new heights.

Well there are countless women in those same positions engaged in the same form of sexist behavior. Today we bring you Syracuse Family Judge Martha Walsh-Hood, a closet man-hater who presided over the “show trial,” Koziol v Hawse-Koziol. Shortly into proceedings, a court agent disclosed confidentially in the outer “Halls of Justice” that Martha was an anti-father judge. Evidently, under her “rule of law,” only women can make for fit parents, even the drug addicts that are suddenly “rehabilitated” to earn their “custody” rights back.

On Black Friday, 2011, Martha was featured on highway banners and advertisements as a promoter of the Fifth Judicial District adoption campaign. Put simply she was facilitating the destruction of parenthood through this barbaric, lawyer-enriching custody system and placing the victimized children (collateral damage) onto the shopping market of strangers that include closet pedophiles and coke-heads. We therefore featured a highly popular post, Shopping with Martha.

Today we bring you an entire chapter of the newly released book, Satan’s Docket: Corruption and Carnage in America’s Divorce Industry. I authored and published it based on two decades as a trial lawyer and ten years as a parent in these courts. Not surprisingly the chapter is titled, Shopping with Martha. And what a chapter it is! This is our holiday gift to you, the parents we strive to serve and protect across the country. Here you are not alone. In this chapter you will be taken inside the courtroom, a treat which one of our book review experts found very rewarding. You may too.

Judge Martha Walsh Hood

Chapter  20

Shopping  with  Martha

To this day, there has been no finding of parental unfitness on my part; no arrest, criminal record, drunk driving charge, marital violence report or involvement of any child protection agency. Indeed, I did not know we had an abusive marriage until I read it for the first time many years later in custody papers. In short, there was nothing to explain how a gang of judicial thugs seized my babies. But they did, and in a manner which would make any dictator or petty tyrant proud.

They did it over time, steadily pecking away like mangy buzzards over an injured animal. And the lucrative structure of proceedings was most helpful in making this happen. We left off in the last chapter with a foreboding to parents hauled into a seemingly innocuous room for a support hearing. But when adding the custody component, the process becomes even more alarming.

There have been many litigation “components” added to the originally consolidated divorce or custody process in our nation’s domestic relations courts. A recent one, for example, is Domestic Violence Court. When we think of litigation, it is commonly understood as a single case with one or many issues ultimately decided by a single trial judge or jury.

The logic behind this is that we can’t have separate proceedings in different courts between the same parties all conflicting with one another. As the upcoming court excerpts will verify, a disjointed structure tortures due process whereas a consolidated judge is more familiar with all petitions, motions and interrelated proceedings. Under the current system, frustrated judges become hostile to other judges at the same trial level competing for jurisdiction. Litigants with diverse perspectives then complicate matters further to become the ultimate, innocent victims.

There are judge-made laws such as res judicata and collateral estoppel which support joint proceedings under a traditional framework. It’s not only good for a sane justice system but also our taxpayers who foot the bills for judges and court personnel. In divorce and family court, the structure defies this logic like outer space defies gravity. And this means higher taxes.

The reason for that, once again, is lawyer greed and predator enrichment. Once marital dissolution and property distribution are completed by a general jurisdiction divorce judge, related issues of child support and custody are routinely sent down to family courts of limited jurisdiction. The support component is then sent down further to the basement of these courts, a hearing officer, referee or magistrate who could even be a practicing part-time attorney.

The sending court has the complete authority to decide all such issues or litigation components which the receiving court does not. In a sort of elitist “slight-of-hand,” a separation has occurred where the lowly “kangaroo” court is accorded a “specialized” role. These family courts are still trial courts like the greater jurisdiction divorce courts, but they have no ability to call juries or foreclose on a home, for example. Confusing, maybe, but stick with me. It’s important.

This peculiar separation is indicative of the low esteem placed in our family court system, one which creates all sorts of profiteering, public confusion and nightmares for the litigants. And just when you thought it was safe to come out, the original trial court splits again like an amoeba or cellular mitosis into a lot of other courts while adding an extra costly tier to the appeals process.

Unlike other states and our federal government, New York’s Supreme Court is the trial court of general jurisdiction which simply means that its tentacles can reach to just about anyone and anything. The rationale here is that even the middle level Appellate Division of that Court and the state’s high Court of Appeals have limited jurisdiction (appeals and extraordinary actions). Indeed the trial level Supreme Court has been abused to exceed even its constitutional authority.

A precedent example is the case of Maron v Silver, [1] the judicial “pay raise trilogy,” where New York’s chief judge on its high court and various lower level judges sued the Governor and Legislature for pay raises in its own trial court (Supreme Court). Clearly a violation of the constitutional separation of powers, the lawsuit was filed and accepted anyway as a declaratory judgment action to gain publicity and influence, purposes that are routinely deemed frivolous and subject to sanctions if brought by commoners or our taxpayers.

The case got to the state’s high court despite nightmarish conflicts of interest. Not surprisingly, the court ruled that all state judges deserved substantial raises. The other branches defied that ruling but eventually granted the raises through the proper political process. I used that precedent to challenge the lucrative structure of divorce and family courts, but it has not been mentioned in any federal or state decision to date. I guess if it’s never mentioned, it never happened.

My public stands for equal justice did not get me invites to bench and bar banquets, but getting back to what’s truly important, in support court, the hearing officer or magistrate is appointed and not elected as family judges typically are. This was justified by making family judges the first step of a support appeal process, a sort of appeals court within a trial court concoction. Then you get to the middle level appeals court (not so middle any more), the state’s high court and finally, the United States Supreme Court which accepts about a hundred cases globally each year.

The standard (less costly) three stage appeal process is now four (or five if a federal law issue takes you to the very top). It gets worse, and this is where the deceptive snake strikes again. The support officer renders findings which are typically rubber stamped in a “confirmation” hearing by the elected family judge. The original (sending) judge is long gone, and the middle level appeals court rarely interferes with the non-final decisional process of our family courts. That makes your politically appointed hearing officer the Supreme Court for all intents and purposes.

And this judge wants a pound of your flesh through the Title IV-D funding program. In this manner, judicial impartiality has been surrendered to the almighty buck. Support court was separated from the custody and divorce process not because there is no correlation, you learn the truth when the custody judge emphasizes that child support is a key factor there. It is separated because the decision process can be expedited to get more federal dollars sooner along with interest revenues at support collection centers, effectively a giant state bank.

Because most states comply with the federal program, this structure reaches insanity with the naming and assigning of trial level judges to these various “courts.” Some are elected, others are appointed, still others are transferred, and then there’s some you have no idea how they got there. Like a smorgasbord or jack-in-the-box, you never know what you’re going to get, or when, in a process which decides the fate of your parent-child relationships to impact future generations.

To bring this all home, after denial of my first consolidated appeal of divorce and family court orders in March, 2009, my split support and custody cases were assigned to judges elected in far-away places and not the county where my case was filed. It forced us to make entire day trips even for half hour appearances. I know this is sounding crazier than ever if you have a rational mind but it did happen, and the resulting orders cost me my children and my law license.

Politician James “Bond” Tormey is the administrative judge who made these assignments. Remember he’s the guy sued by his chief family court clerk due to unlawful retaliation for her refusal to conduct “political espionage” beyond her job description. She recovered $600,000 after being reassigned to the same far-away places. I was denied such recovery in the same federal court because judges are still immune from litigant recovery but not employee lawsuits.

My child support case was assigned to Supreme Court Judge Michael Daley as an “Acting Family Court Judge” and my custody case was assigned to a Family Court Judge Martha Walsh-Hood as an “Acting Supreme Court Judge.” This really did happen. To this day, I still cannot figure out how that came about especially after Tormey removed Daley previously from my custody case and returned it to the original divorce judge, John Grow. Stay tuned, it gets better.

Judge Daley was set to confirm a willful support violation on May 26, 2009. It was found against me by a non-elected hearing magistrate, George Getman, a/k/a, G. Stephen Getman, who had been suspended as an attorney for a mere six months after admitting to misappropriation of more than $7,000 in client money. [2] He denied my pre-decision motion for his removal from my case.

I was not physically present at the Daley confirmation hearing due to the set-up I was logically perceiving, a jail term ambush. Instead I called in by phone from a remote location. On the hearing transcript that day, prior to my call, Judge Daley opened the hearing with a bombastic pitch that he was somehow assigned to this support case and he “did not know how it got here.”

Seriously Mike? Or was that simply a deflection to make this appear to be an impartial hearing for record purposes? Moments later, I called in and immediately challenged his authority while reminding him of a motion which had been filed for his disqualification. That motion was based on his removal earlier from a highly politicized client case which made Daley look bad publicly.

Daley’s removal there resulted in a dismissal of a six count felony indictment contrary to a guilty plea he had been seeking. A jury and replacement judge saved my client’s career. In parting remarks on the removal record, Judge Daley assured me that he would share my “histrionics” with a replacement judge in his home county where fortunately the case was not reassigned.

So if you still don’t believe that judges talk behind the scenes to target critics, here you have a public declaration showing that they do. Daley never did set up a hearing for his disqualification as he promised on the record in 2009, but he did violate me months later in a decision with no mention of the foregoing. It led to my first license suspension on February 5, 2010. The media learned of it before I did, and the news was front page for two successive days.

At the end of the telephonic transcript of May 26, 2009, Judge Daley concludes that he had always found me to be respectful and courteous to the court. So here we have a compliment regarding my professionalism from a hostile judge who had known me for over twenty years. With that backdrop, we turn to the custody component of my ordeal which was assigned virtually overnight to Syracuse Family Judge Martha Walsh-Hood. She was meeting me for the first time.

On July 20, 2009, the parties appeared for our first custody trial. A reading of the case record would confound any legal expert and make a truly impartial judge want to adjourn proceedings just to get a better handle on things. How we went from Supreme Court to Family Court and back to Supreme Court with a family judge presiding as the eighteenth trial jurist is perplexing enough but familiarity with the subject matter is crucial to decisional competency on any case.

And that is what led to the unraveling of Martha’s fake neutrality, her underlying bias against fathers generally and this one in particular. As this week-long custody trial progressed, it became increasingly evident that her mind had been made up. The outcome was a done deal on multiple counts no matter how much faith I supplied to our justice system, no matter how many witnesses I brought, no matter what it cost the people affected by it. By the time it was over, I would storm out of the court room after condemning the entire process as one giant fraud on the people.

The opening segment of trial transcript will verify the flawed structure and chaotic process which federal judge, Gary Sharpe, blamed on me in a May, 2014 dismissal of my consequential civil rights case. Among other things, Gary never even mentioned my procedural (judge bias) and substantive (conscience shocking) due process challenges to this bizarre, multi-faceted state proceeding. As for the state judge presiding over my custody trial, it can be seen how unfamiliar Martha Walsh-Hood was with it, yet she pressed forward anyway with assorted excuses: [3]

Walsh-Hood: Okay, good morning. Well, I’ve spent some time trying to become acquainted with this rather voluminous file, and my intent in scheduling the earliest possible court date was to try and address the… some of the issues which both parties have raised in a number of different courts… Given the fact that Judge Greenwood had scheduled the matter prior to his recusal for July 20th, I readjusted my court calendar…

 (After dismissing three petitions on consent, the judge proceeded with others): With regard to the support issue, it’s my understanding that (it) was originally heard, I believe, by Judge Caldwell (who never heard any issue after stepping down at the outset).

 Mr. Koziol:  There were some eighteen judges on this case (2006 thru 2009)…

 Walsh-HoodI understand.

Mr. KoziolAs far as the support issues go, and the intertwined, interwoven (proceedings), having been here from the beginning, perhaps I can best speak to that history (neither the child lawyer, William Koslosky nor mother’s latest attorney, Rebecca Crance, had been present for the entire history).

Walsh-HoodWell, I’m not so much concerned about the history, although I did go through it. My understanding is that the support issue was in fact heard, that there is a willful component to that hearing, that is, in fact, before Judge Daley.

Mr. KoziolThat’s correct, who was previously removed from the case, and he’s back for some reason that he didn’t seem to understand… I don’t know how that’s going to resolve itself.

Walsh-HoodBut from my selfish perspective… all matters relating to support are before another judge, although I do understand that under Eschbach and Friederwitzer (case precedent) in custody (decisions), support can be a factor considered…  Further it’s my understanding that the Judgment of Divorce (Judge Grow decision) is now on appeal as well as issues relative to, Mr. Koziol, your original request for a change of venue (change of location to a remote judicial district)… I think the venue change has actually been accomplished through a number of recusals…to be heard by the Appellate Division. In fact there’s a federal action pending for some of the same relief that’s before this court…”

Mr. KoziolThat’s right.

Walsh-HoodEven given that situation… there are applications by both parties in Supreme Court and Family Court (both trial courts in New York)… both parties are seeking custody and allegations of contempt, or at least Mr. Koziol has of Mrs. Hawse-Koziol. Is that everybody’s understanding?

Mr. KoziolI don’t know if you’re characterizing it as I see it, but Ms. Hawse has been allowed to go through support court, she’s gone through all that process, while my petition against her for violating parenting orders, and I want to get to this past weekend, once again I was deprived of an entire weekend with my children… For now, in terms of the narrow framework of pending petitions is concerned, it’s my contempt against her that has been held in abeyance for a couple years.

Walsh-Hood(after denying my motions for removal of William Koslosky as Judge-Appointed Child Attorney and Walsh-Hood as presiding judge)… I don’t feel there is any reason for me to step down as other judges have done. You stated yourself, very eloquently I may add, that matters have been pending in the court which have not been heard since 2007. The day has come, sir, for those matters to be litigated… if you feel uncomfortable in proceeding today, though I’m sure you are capable of doing so, then Ms. Crance (mother’s lawyer) can proceed first, and that would give you a little additional time… Ms. Crance, are you willing to do that?”

Ms. CranceYes.

Mr. KoziolNo, Judge, I’d like to be heard.

Walsh-HoodSure.

Mr. KoziolObviously you haven’t read the petition and you’re making a determination before reading the content of it, which is not your fault because you were just served today.

Walsh-HoodI was just served.

Mr. KoziolThere’s a good reason for that, if you’re ready.

Walsh-HoodGo ahead.

(I explained that the past weekend was unilaterally denied with my children for tactical reasons. I needed that time to recall events necessary for my proofs. The judge quickly interrupted to attack me only, citing improper child preparation which was not my issue. That weekend was denied to rehabilitate bonds with the mother’s parents from another state, her only witnesses. Citing her 90% dominant period since child birth, I challenged the inherent prejudice in my petition served that following Monday morning, the custody parent’s violation of my weekend parenting rights to impair my ability to present any kind of case for custody, petitions unfairly delayed for so long. The judge responded:)

Walsh-HoodYou know what I’m going to do, Mr. Koziol, before hearing your argument, I’m going to take a ten minute recess. I’m going to review your papers, and I’ll allow you to be heard and then I’m going to rule on the motion.

As expected, the motion was denied, but it can be seen how Judge Walsh-Hood was ready to start this trial without having concededly read my violation petition. Moreover, she claimed readiness to proceed without the standard first appearance or pretrial conference which sets the scope of trial ahead of time. Here in this opening interplay, Walsh-Hood is setting her scope on support, custody, contempt and other petitions after dismissing three on consent of the parties.

Setting aside the unprepared judge for the moment, how is a lawyer or litigant to know what proofs and witnesses to subpoena or present before a court more than fifty miles from our homes with this sudden and dramatic change of scope? She tried to justify herself by citing years of delay but these were caused by a denied venue change and as many as eighteen prior biased judges. Rushing proceedings now proved to be a grave error because it only forced me to correct this unprepared judge as evidenced in her claim that Judge Caldwell had been highly involved.

This expedited trial was nothing more than a “show trial” with a predetermined outcome. It is all that was necessary to validate my challenges to a structurally flawed process under the federal child support funding statute. This judge knew exactly what I was asserting but did everything she could to protect the system. The appellate and federal judges reviewing this did the same.

Because a formula under that law requires parents to name a custodial parent at the outset of any legal separation or divorce, a father is typically prejudiced due to his gender in a later custody proceeding especially if it is delayed for years as it was here. There was no need for this “show” trial. Structurally, the decision was already made and only the legal representatives benefitted.

As a full time teacher, Kelly’s stubborn adherence to tax free support and a replacement dad forced me to make this challenge which resulted in the seizure of my joint custody rights by the time this trial was over. My custody (parenting) petitions were delayed while support was expedited due to state court funding priorities over the paramount interests of the litigants. A fairly treated parent is a happy one who will work overtime to support children out of love alone. But discrimination and forced labor, like slavery, will promote conflict and costly resistance.

It can also be seen how courts and processes are needlessly segregated for profit. With so many places to go and duplicative arguments to make, lawyer profits are magnified many times over. Even this judge was forced to admit that child support is a factor in custody proceedings. So why separate the two with the kind of prejudice and confusing outcomes demonstrated here?

All of these issues could have been resolved in one divorce court having full jurisdiction over them. Instead, the federally induced framework produced at least three trial courts handling divorce, support and custody, each struggling to figure out the scope of proceedings. As the costs and job impairments mounted, so did the anger between parents. This yields even greater profits for the court predators in cases all across the country.

Another due process anomaly is seen in the reversal of the order of presentment. As the custody petitioner, I had the benefit of starting with my case-in-chief. Instead, to make this system work, the responding party was allowed to go first. It was fatal to my case because surprise testimony such as “striking my child on one occasion,” caused me to stand up and call the mother-in-law a bald-faced liar. I simply could not control my outrage over a non-existent strike of either child.

There was no such accusation ever made by anyone in the prior record, the petitions, the public or in any incident report. Even the scheming and spiteful mom, by my recollection, never made such a claim. And although the decision did not accept that claim, it was clear that my reputation on all fronts was under attack in this one-sided hearing. Still, with each reaction, Walsh-Hood was taking notes to support her intended outcome.

It got to a point, like the gmai.com concoction in later proceedings, where custodial lies were coming out left and right. I even excused myself on one occasion as my emotions could not be contained in the onslaught. This was not an American court proceeding. It had been transformed into a star chamber, a show trial like the ones in Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, a gang assault.

Here there was no true judge. A self-styled procedure emerged as a form of punishment for a litigant who rightfully exposed a lack of preparedness on the part of the hastily assigned decision maker. I should not have had to correct a judge facing needlessly overcrowded dockets anxious to wrap up a case with a mind already made up. With each correction, there arose resentment which, as we will see, grew as this trial progressed.

The reversal in presentment also allowed my custody adversary to derail my accurate position, unwavering for years to this point, that I wanted shared parenting or near equal time with my daughters. I was not seeking to selfishly dominate my children through a full custody demand as the mother was. It is well known that early impressions are hard to overcome, and Kelly Hawse managed unabashedly to assert that I wanted such a shared arrangement to avoid paying child support. It was during her direct opening testimony with nothing but her mouth to prove it.

This was not only a gross anal concoction obtained from a custody playbook but it was countered by everything realistic, from a voluntary forty-five percent support increase offered in 2006 to a successful career in which money was never an issue, at least not until the speech retributions were inflicted. Even if we were to accept this concoction as true, why should money matter at all to a model father who simply wants to spend more time with his daughters? This is where a pay-to-parent scandal is proven under this antiquated custody system.

Anxious to feed into the stereotypes, Judge Walsh-Hood took this support avoidance concoction to an absurd level by requesting that I stop pointing my pen in my adversary’s direction when making an objection. Somehow this was intimidating her, even though the alleged victim made no such claim. This was not only a clear showing of gender bias and the direction this case was headed, but it incited Kelly to make idiotic fear claims in later proceedings.

For example, after Walsh-Hood disqualified herself the next year, during continuing proceedings before Judge Pirro-Bailey in 2011, a desperate Kelly Hawse-Koziol interrupted court arguments between lawyers to announce a fear of my body language. It caused that judge to direct her to face the wall if she truly felt that way. This is how pathetic the gender card has become despite having all of her offense (fear) petitions thrown out over a ten year period.

This is no small matter for the general public. During the same year in the same Syracuse courthouse, I watched curiously as a security officer was escorting Kelly to her vehicle beyond view of the courthouse. It prompted me to investigate. While doing so, violence erupted in the hallway involving a chained inmate. Additional security was called in while one of them was placating a mom’s custody playbook. I reported the safety issue to the court’s chief officer, Judge James “Bond” Tormey. Nothing came of it other than the potential for more lawsuits. [4]

At the same time, Kelly showed no fear during child exchanges or outside events, even asking me during a chance encounter at Lake George to watch our girls while she went off to get towels. Despite such testimony, none of it mattered. I struggled with a novice lawyer who repeatedly failed to lay proper foundation for her questions, i.e. dates, locations, etc. while the judge became more fixated on a writing implement than proper evidence for decision. Here is the relevant interplay which poisoned later proceedings and public safety in our courts: [5]

CranceHas Mr. Koziol relayed to you his desire to have shared or half parenting time?

Hawse-KoziolYes.

Q: Has he… what is your understanding as to why he wants shared parenting time?

A:  So he doesn’t have to pay child support.

Mr. Koziol:  Have I told you that? Objection, please, can I go back? When did I say this

Walsh-HoodOkay, you’re objecting for foundation?

Mr. KoziolRight.

Walsh-HoodI’m going to ask you not to point, counsel. I’m just asking you not to point.

Mr. KoziolYour honor, I have a pen in my hand, if the record can please reflect this. I flipped the pen in her direction, I meant her, so we can find out from her. I don’t understand that to be a negative or somehow an influential statement based on what we’ve been through.

Walsh-HoodCounsel, we just had testimony about a number of alleged domestic violence incidents. [6] You were objecting as to foundation, which is fine. You are somewhat animated at this time and you have the pen pointed. She was indicating some incidents, and I don’t want her to feel intimidated. I’m not suggesting that you’re trying to do that. I’m simply requesting that you not point the pen… That you were holding and taking notes, and I…

Mr. KoziolIn response, Judge, to make it clear so I don’t get accused of that, I’m going to put my pen down, I will no longer write. That is habit. 

Walsh-HoodNo, no I’m not suggesting that you’re intentionally pointing at her, I’m asking you not point the pen, that’s all, in her direction. If you want to point it in my direction, go ahead… (but not the witness)

Mr. KoziolJudge, I would just like the record to reflect my understanding, I did point it in the direction of the bench and her, but I don’t know how I’m animated at this point. I don’t see it, but if you do, I’m going to have to leave it at that. I’ve been very respectful, very calm (to this witness), it’s emotional… I’m non-responsive to most things here. I want that for the record because there is no video camera here.

Walsh-Hood:  I don’t believe so, though there are cameras in the hall and other places.

I had been litigating trials unblemished in both federal and state courts for more than twenty-three years at the time of this pen-pointing admonition. Never had I been restrained in this manner, indeed, not even in the many support, custody and violation proceedings as a pro se litigant before and after this directive. A look at the courtroom would show how the bench and witness stand were in close proximity to one another. It would therefore be nearly impossible for me to point at one and avoid the other, yet one more example of contempt by ambush.

Despite Martha’s back-peddling, this was a clear anti-man edict corroborated by a court officer thereafter who advised me that Walsh-Hood had an anti-father record in Syracuse. How does one control a pen while objecting as a habit over so many years? Incidents like this were many, but exemplified here to show the uphill battle good fathers face every day in these courts and why so many of them are forced out of their children’s lives. There was no finding of physical abuse in the ultimate decision, but when I stormed out at the conclusion, I will admit I was very animated.

After so many witnesses (only the parents on her end) and proof, time, sacrifices, cost and good faith, this feminist in a robe was not going to get away with her sexist brand of deliberations. I promptly reported her to the state Judicial Conduct Commission and sued her in federal court. Unfortunately male litigants are also discriminated there. Imagine if a woman lawyer had been flipping her pen during an objection at a male witness. It goes on all the time. Would Martha dole out the same admonition to derail her concentration, confidence and flow?

During this trial, Koslosky and Walsh-Hood took issue with nearly every witness and positive aspect of my “non-custodial” parenting time while accepting virtually everything the “custodial parent” had to offer. Even my campaign parades were attacked as an exploitation of my children who enjoyed them so much while throwing candy to others along the parade route. The shocking aspect here is that one would expect such auspicious events to be lauded in a genuine child-oriented court. Instead, in “Family Court,” heroin addicts are being reunited with their children.

One of Martha’s colleagues, Family Judge Randy Caldwell (mentioned in her trial opening), paraded with children and relatives during this same campaign year as did every other candidate I knew. Indeed, I dare say, Martha herself was parading at one time alongside her dad when he campaigned for Congress. But Walsh-Hood, “Agent 007” Tormey and politically correct judges of an opposite party evidently render such “exploitation” a-okay in those identical situations.

On the last day of trial, a steady flow of provocation culminated in a seizure of my notes on the witness stand when I finally testified. Walsh-Hood had entered an order I had never experienced in any self-represented context. She wanted me to present testimony in question-answer format which I could not do under such short notice and, as stated, the lack of any pretrial conference. We compromised with a note version and exhibits necessarily taken with me to the stand.

At one point during convincing testimony, “F. Lee Billy” Koslosky objected on yet another anal ground of reading testimony from my notes. That was not the case, of course, as proven by the lack of ethics charge threatened by Judge Hood before “the Fourth Department” licensing court. Now, even the lawyers were being favored as their notes were never scrutinized. I had no lawyer, but the judge began referring to me as “counsel” presumably as a predicate for such an ethics charge despite the obvious fact that I was not acting in that capacity. I also had no client.

By the time the trial was concluding, I had no notes to convey ten years of events I could never independently recollect, my pen was now a weapon of intimidation, every anal detail about a model parent was being twisted and debated to absurdity, and my daughters had been exploited to advance a prominent career which would have benefitted them immensely. Finally, I had had enough and asked to be excused from the witness stand. I did not come here to be abused by a gang of misfits. A judge deserves only so much respect as she reciprocates as a public servant.

Judge Walsh-Hood must have recognized her dilemma because she tried to discourage my exit. But now the hostility was brazen. I was not about to legitimize this bizarre proceeding with any more of my valuable time while elevating the probability of a serious outburst. I was not about to do time for contempt of a kangaroo court. I persisted with my request, and she finally excused me. As I exited with my girlfriend, I made an impromptu closing statement condemning the lunacy of this sexist tribunal. My parenting time was immediately suspended.

That suspension was removed on the judge’s own initiative three months later but re-imposed in November, 2009 after my newly fired secretary teamed up with Kelly to allege threat antics. Although I got my girls back after a May 3, 2010 hearing, ten months of contact and precious bonding time were lost which I will never recover. Such seizures in lucrative custody contests lead to children without parents, and with severe un-remedied alienation, it is often permanent.

Two years after this trial, Judge Martha Walsh-Hood was featured on roadway banners promoting National Adoption Day. In response, I featured a website post entitled Shopping with Martha on Black Friday. It was a satirical piece decrying the manner in which Martha was exploiting her judgeship to promote a sale of children functionally orphaned in family courts.

After my departure from “her” court on July 24, 2009, child attorney, William Koslosky, disclosed a domestic violence incident at his home fifty years earlier during closing statements.

What any of this had to do with my case I’ll never know, but I found it buried in costly trial transcripts, a treasure trove of billable hours on behalf of grade school clients who could never hold him accountable. I also found fables, serious provocations and tales of horror which might be described as a love affair with a fictional girlfriend.

In this particular court case, her name was Kelly Hawse, a victim supposedly locked in her marital home (while I lived our last year of marriage at a Lake George apartment), subjected to meritless lawsuits to keep her subservient (when she filed the first one over child support which was never increased and continued with a series of fear lawsuits that were all thrown out), evinced fine skills as a teacher (petitions replete with grammar errors) and distinguished herself as a mother who loved all things (like the millionaire dad who could buy her all those things).

It was abundantly clear that Billy Koslosky was on a mission of revenge, abusing his entrusted role and tax dollars to murder exemplary father-daughter bonds. He actually had the audacity under protection of court security to accuse me of “terrorizing” my children, an accusation which if made in my presence could have sent him out the court window. Once again, fate had spared us all a disaster due to my pre-closing departure which Billy pathetically exploited.

This terrorist thing is being exploited these days by thoughtless provocateurs to advance their wallets and purses without regard for the potential consequences. Terrorists fly planes into buildings. They don’t pursue proper channels for the resolution of disputes. I visited the Trade Center ruins on the day after 9-11 to volunteer what I could to aid the victims. Comparing me to a terrorist as Judge Gartenstein had done to Professor Pappas (Chapter 3) is an assault upon my patriotism in addition to my fatherhood.

Apparently Billy had been using the terrorist depiction in a lot of cases because he also used it to describe his relationship with his own dad. As he explained it, little Billy was “terrorized” by his police man dad during a dinner argument a half century ago. Somehow dad’s uniform and gun made him dangerous. Somehow F. Lee Billy had beamed himself up to la-la land as he raked in the easy dollars. It was as if that fictional hoard of media had returned, O.J. Simpson nodding with glee, and Judge Ito ready to give Billy eight more months, if needed, to play to the fanfare.

Billy’s closing statement reflected a childhood contempt for his dad which he simply transferred to his latest target in a now infamous tragedy we call the Potato-Police Rescue. How can such a strange bird be allowed to represent children against their fathers? I asked that question before many courts to no avail. They simply looked the other way, and that only elevated the abuse in later proceedings. At nearly sixty years of age at the time, this was no way for Billy to compensate for personal defects or a lack of marital and childrearing experience. You be the judge:

One thing that I remember is disagreement between my mom and my dad. My dad was a policeman and one day he came home and he was mad because we didn’t have red-skinned potatoes and all that she could say is we have Yukon Gold, and I was terrorized. I’d never seen dad arguing like this and, my God, he’s in the police uniform with a gun. What is he going to do? So I went to the store to get red-skinned potatoes and I don’t like Yukon Gold.

If there is any purpose to a judge in any proceeding, it is to control it so that sanity, justice and civility may prevail. Wide latitude is generally given to lawyers in closing statements, but in this case, it was a custody proceeding, not a high-profile murder trial. There is no way my daughters, aged five and seven at the time, would have approved of their involuntarily appointed lawyer referring to their daddy this way. It was the appointing judge’s duty to prevent it. But Walsh-Hood was evidently enjoying this all with sadistic satisfaction. Another judge might have cut Billy off:

Mr. Koslosky, this is family court, not criminal court. What’s with all the terrorism in your characterizations of an American father seeking proper relief here? There’s no jury, and such colorful depictions will not influence me. I’ve heard and seen all the evidence as you have. There’s nothing to support any of this. No child protection agency has even been contacted, let alone involved. And I could care less about your own dad and whatever went on with these potatoes. Confine yourself to the record, and let’s move on, alright?

As stated, the adversarial custody system is archaic and utterly counter-productive to cooperative child rearing arrangements. Here we have sick proof of this, a fee-loving lawyer appointed for unsuspecting children who is throwing gas on a fire ignited by the court process itself.

One month after this closing statement, an off-duty policeman without gun or uniform in our region committed a murder-suicide leaving four children without parents. He did so with a common kitchen knife despite protection orders after being abused in the same Family Court. [8] So if you ever hear about some divorce victim shooting up a courthouse, understand how easily it can occur. There is no accountability for the arrogant judge or reckless lawyer who incites needless violence.  

 

[1]   Maron v Silver, 14 NY3d 230 (2010); Chief Judge v Governor, 884 NYS2d 863 (3rd Dept 2009)

[2]   Matter of G. Stephen Getman, 147 Ad 2d 163, 542 NYS 2d 896 (4th Dept 1989)

[3]   Koziol v Hawse-Koziol, New York Supreme Court, Oneida County Case No. D2004-422102; Custody transcript, Vol. I at pg. 2-30 (July 20, 2009)

[4]   Morin v Tormey, 626 F.3d 40 (2nd Cir. 2010)(Chief family court clerk recovers $600,000 in 2012 against court administrator, Judge James Tormey, for directing “political espionage” at Syracuse courthouse)

[5]   Koziol v Hawse-Koziol, New York Supreme Court, Oneida County Case No. D2004-422102; Custody transcript, Vol. II at pg. 230-233 (July 20, 2009)

[6]   While stressing these alleged domestic incidents corroborated by no witness or independent proof, Judge Walsh-Hood was likely manufacturing her own proof here for later decision. That decision made no mention of an off-duty sheriff deputy, posted inside my home, who witnessed an assault by the mother during a child exchange. By opening the custody record to pre-divorce periods, Walsh-Hood was also able to facilitate false claims at the marital home where no witnesses were present. There was never an incident report during that remote period, and although physical abuse was never found, there was no accountability for the fabrications.

[7]   Koziol v Hawse-Koziol, New York Supreme Court, Oneida County Case No. D2004-422102; Custody transcript, Vol. V at pg. 857-858 (July 24, 2009)

[8]   Pearce v Longo, 766 F. Supp. 367 (NDNY 2011)