While Dr. Koziol continues to work on a number of important projects, today we will feature a video on court corruption that was produced by Larry DeMarco, the producer of the parent march on Washington docushort. The video is described below:
“In this video, we will discuss Phil Zombardo’s Ted Talk, “The Psychology of Evil,” and the direct application of his research to America’s judiciary (particularly family Court). Zombardo also proposes a new definition of a hero – ordinary people fighting for positive social change, and we will also suggest solutions for court reform and the need to for all citizens to raise awareness and support these reform measures.”
Victim of court corruption? Contact Dr. Koziol @ 315-796-4000
In only a matter of weeks, the vision of a powerful reform statement in our nation’s capital is becoming reality. Promoted as the Parent March on Washington, now there is more incentive for victimized parents to join us. All the divorce and family court ordeals presented at the speakers events will be consolidated into a video documentary. When completed at a later date, it will be published everywhere and submitted to all members of Congress.
This is a crucial development because your stories will now be “eternalized” as the producer described it. Collectively they will become a powerful statement lasting well beyond our three-day event. This documentary is being financed by a Philadelphia lawyer (and former judge candidate) based on his reading of our recent report “Federal Funded Epidemic” and the videos published on this site, http://www.leonkoziol.com.
Only the ordeals of those who come to this March will be included. There are two speaking events for this purpose. On May 2, 2019 at 7 pm, in the Congressional Ballroom of the Holiday Inn Capitol, 550 C Street, SW, we are featuring expert speakers in law, politics, education and psychology. By coming here, you will obtain valuable information to apply to your cases. Extraordinary ordeals will also be featured where time allows. There is no charge for this event.
The second speaking event is the one on May 3, 2019 at the end of our March across from the Supreme Court (Area 10). This is where anyone can offer their stories of corruption, parent alienation and other human rights violations occurring in these courts. A microphone and sound system will facilitate this at approximately 3 pm (depending on the time of the March which begins at the White House at 1 pm). We are inviting mainstream and social media to both events.
To maximize our success on behalf of victimized parents everywhere, we need you to share, promote and support this event. We also need you to make and solicit donations on this site. This event is costly and we rely on your financial assistance. It’s time to shift the focus from illegal immigrants at our borders to American parents separated from their children here at home. Join our nationwide conference calls beginning dasily on Monday, April 20, 2019 at 7 pm EST. Call (605) 313-4165, enter access code 763491 when prompted.
Featured below are excerpts from speakers near the same location at a news conference in 2016. It begins with Dr. Mario Jimenez of Miami, Florida. The purpose was to draw attention to a case which I had docketed the same day at the United States Supreme Court (in the background). Now, an economics professor from a prominent university has a case which will be reviewed by the Justices here only days after our March ends. He will be speaking at both events.
REMINDER: Our next nationwide conference call regarding the Parent March on Washington is tonight, and every Thursday (and Monday nights) at 7 pm EST. Call the same number and code being used all along: Call (605) 313-4165, then enter access code 763491.
This report details how federal funds are being abused by divorce and family courts to cause parental alienation and human rights violations. It contains highly valuable information based on my 23 years as a practicing attorney in these courts, 12 years as an abused parent, and 10 years as a whistleblower victim.
A federal investigation, congressional oversight hearing, Shared Parenting Law and Judicial Whistleblower Protection Act are among the recommendations being made. It is now available at no cost by e-mailing me at email@example.com or viewing it here. That link will soon be provided.
This report should be used to request meetings on Lobby Day with your representatives and contacts in Washington. Here is an opening excerpt:
While our federal government struggles with illegal parents separated from their children at our borders, American parents are being separated daily and without accountability in family courts across our country. Under federal law, a “custodial parent” is mandated for states to qualify for billions of dollars in performance grants, Dept of Family v DHHS, 588 F.3d 740 (1st Cir. 2009). This, in turn, undermines shared parenting laws and cooperation, i.e. Bast v Rossoff, 91 NY2d 723 (1998)(attorney parents’ agreement struck down for failure to name a “custodial parent”).
Under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, 42 USC Section 658(a), state courts earn vast amounts of revenues from our federal government through performance grants based on the number and size of child support orders issued and satisfied. Not only does this create an inherent and systemic bias among ostensibly impartial jurists, it incites needless conflict between parents forced into an oppositional framework for deciding custody, support and other disputes.
Originally intended to recoup aid to needy families from absentee fathers, Title IV-D was later expanded to encompass all “non-custodial parents,” good and bad. By lumping them together, federal funding was thereby increased exponentially. Such a performance-based program proved highly ineffective on common sense grounds alone. Parents who love their children will use their God-given liberties to advance the interests of their offspring. Instead, natural human incentives are countermanded and replaced by a rigid control structure for money generating purposes.
Federal money thrown at divorce and family courts in this way has become the proverbial gas thrown on a fire. As veteran family judges have observed, this oppositional framework leads to a winner-take-all contest that draws the worst from parents at a time when children need their best. One example is the case of Webster v Ryan, 729 NYS2d 315 (Fam. Ct. 2001) at fn 1, where “parenting time” was preferred over “custody” and “visitation” due to a system which has “outlived its usefulness.” Such terms are more appropriate for prisons and funerals, but their use here causes judges to treat parents as criminals and objects of exploitation for federal funds.
Title IV-D protects this antiquated “custody” framework derived from a day when moms were caretakers and dads were the breadwinners. From that outdated framework, an epidemic has emerged which is producing escalating harm to government, families and society as a whole. It is a silent epidemic suppressed by special interests and bar associations which benefit from custody and support battles. Federal funds have induced states to seize parental authority beyond the rational limits of the judges and lawyers they license to regulate family relationships.
The separation here is not the simple product of divorcing or separated parents. It is an insidious form of separation, far worse than the kind experienced by immigrants, because children are being programmed to ignore, even hate their parents, for the principal purpose of generating lawyer profits and court revenues. Worse yet, it is done every day without so much as a pause from federal lawmakers who, knowingly or not, funded the parent-child separations. The end result is a panoply of societal ills that have elevated government programs and taxpayer burdens.
This insidious form of separation has become understood as “Parental Alienation.” That term derives from the work of Dr. Richard Gardner, an American child psychologist who produced books and studies to show a condition known as Parent Alienation Syndrome or PAS. This condition emerged from custody and support wars featuring one or both parents abusing our courts for reasons other than the “best interests of children.” By removing the “non-custodial parent” from children’s lives, the alienator and courts guarantee a support and revenue stream.
It has become a pay-to-parent scandal, a tax on children, where parent alienation is not so much a condition as it is a symptom. It can be compared to tobacco companies which denied the harmful effects of smoking for decades to resist protective laws. Here, one entity to target is the highly automated Child Support Collection Center in Albany, New York. It has a single confidential office which rakes in billions of dollars in aid and support interest with little accountability.
This month I completed an expensive business plan for the Parenting Rights Institute to secure major funding for an initiative to reverse the escalating process of criminalizing fathers in our nation’s family courts. It is based on my thirty years of litigation experience, countless case studies across America and ten years of courageous reform efforts in a conscientious stand taken against my profession. Below is the powerful opening statement behind this latest initiative. Please do your part by promoting it, sharing it and supporting us financially.
Over the past half century, western society has seen an alarming transformation in fatherhood, from its traditional respected status to an incompetent, violent, absentee reputation. We have seen this trend in politics, entertainment, school districts, child rearing and social institutions. The act of denigrating a male parent or blaming him for a myriad of problems has become fashionable, even encouraged without so much as a critical footnote from mainstream media.
The infection of social thought with dad stigmatization might not be rectified any time soon, but when reverse sexism obtains legal protection, it is the duty of a self-governing people to respond. That duty begins in our family courts because this is where protected discrimination is most blatant and harmful to all society. A Supreme Court Justice once described these tribunals as “kangaroo” courts, but conditions since the time of that opinion have only seriously worsened.
This prospectus will show how that occurred, why corrective action is urgent, and it comes from a parental advocate who successfully litigated complex cases in federal and state courts for over thirty years. The goal is to raise sufficient funds behind a research, watchdog and lobbying entity to properly police and reform a self-regulated judicial bureaucracy where support enforcement and domestic violence by fathers obtain state prosecution but false accusations, clear perjury by spiteful moms, custody abuses and extortion through incarceration are ignored or covered up.
For background, during the 1970s, Congress began legislating laws to track down absentee fathers to ease a growing welfare burden. Well intentioned, these laws were never divested of male parent targeting. Exemplary is a January, 2016 “Dead Beat Dad” crusade by Arizona Governor Doug Ducey. Over time, the scope of enforcement practices was enlarged to include all “noncustodial parents.” Its effect was to merge good, bad and absentee dads so that federal funding could be vastly increased while jeopardizing the long term viability of social security.
In a quest to maximize state revenues under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, performance quotas were devised based on the number and magnitude of child support orders manufactured in family courts. The new rule of law became a profit motive for lawyers and lawyers on the bench. Through these “incentive grants,” judicial impartiality was sacrificed to the almighty buck with much less value placed on father-child relationships. In callous manner, family judges were incarcerating dads to alarming levels for a debt euphemistically termed “child support.”
In other debt instances, such imprisonment would be unlawful. But with children as its pretext and contempt of court as a weapon, the unconstitutional debtor prison was functionally resurrected with no public outcry. Gradually, these tribunals were rendered inherently prejudiced against fathers who may have simply been the victim of a bad economy. Lawyers were retained often with borrowed funds on a good faith belief that basic rights would avert the horror of being caged like an animal. No one came to the rescue because foxes were guarding the hen house.
In one of the most ironic twists, girls, women and moms were slaughtered along the way. Their own fathers, brothers, sons and partners became victims while countless dads recognizing the futility of fighting for their parental rights simply walked out of their children’s lives. This only added to the epidemic, undermining the original goals behind these laws. As the carnage grew, so did the number and variety of beneficiaries in the way of evaluators, “experts,” psychiatrists, pharmaceutical companies, mediators and more. They turned sparks of conflict into forest fires.
At first blush, the notion that courts are criminalizing fathers for profit is a hard pill to swallow. However, stripped of all the legal jargon and propaganda, draconian enforcement practices have been making criminals of non-criminal parents for many years while inciting crimes of horrific proportion including those committed by fatherless children in our schools, communities and workplaces. If those debtor practices were limited to the standard income and asset executions, we would not have the dubious distinction as the most imprisoned nation in the “free” world.
Despite profound advancements in equal rights for women, minorities and newly recognized classes of people, the Census Bureau continues to report that nearly 85% of parents paying child support are fathers. If those statistics were recorded for male employment, women would be rioting well beyond Trump’s White House. A review of public warrant lists shows that as much as 20% of arrestees are connected to support. Inmate lists follow the same pattern. Nearly all are fathers with veterans and minorities most vulnerable to suicides, violence and drug addiction.
Fatherless children are often a factor in mass shootings. Even where dads remain active in separate parenting environments, their authority is countermanded by judges purporting to act in the “best interests” of children they can never truly know. The emasculation of men, a futility in asserting a father’s basic rights and the sexist stigma of “dead beat dads” promote abandonment of vital parenting roles which have stood the test of time. This is a system which presumes that a dad has no desire to support his offspring while torturing the very incentive for doing so.
There is no refund or accountability when recipients of these welfare styled benefits spend their tax-free “awards” on drug abuse, gambling or vanity excesses. Meanwhile, judges charged with the highest duty of safeguarding our rights are eroding them instead. An antiquated “child custody” system remains “the law” in most states in lieu of progressive shared parenting because custody and support “wars” are lucrative whereas co-parenting is not. For the same reason, the damage caused by this revenue generating scheme is highly suppressed from public knowledge.
Money has become the priority in place of our children’s true best interests turning family courts into a socialist industry while making a mockery of our constitutions. Criminals, even violent felons, often receive lower sentences, less stigma and far greater rights than dads do here. They have freedom from self-incrimination, indigent free counsel, stricter due process protections, mandated disclosure, highest standard of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, jury rights and more.
In shocking contrast, a father can be incarcerated for extended periods without so much as an accusation of a crime and none of the rights just cited. And it can be wrapped up in a matter of months, even weeks. So reckless has it become that a contempt prosecution can be commenced by mail service of a summons with boldface capital letter warnings of arrest and imprisonment for up to seven years. Any non-appearance is ruthlessly answered by an arrest warrant instead of the standard default for other civil cases with an undertaking (bail) as a condition for release.
Should an errant debtor be fortunate to avoid immediate incarceration on a warrant, he will be “released on his own recognizance” no differently than an accused rapist. The entire process has been turned upside down with only the prosecuting parent given the benefit of free counsel. Indeed, when viewing the substance and not the formalities of these “family” court cases, they bear all the trappings of a criminal prosecution without the necessary constitutional safeguards.
In short, these “constitution-free zones” facilitate the easy imprisonment of fathers for profit. Worse yet, unlike any other targeted member of society, a debtor can become a revolving door inmate for an indefinite term of confinement, theoretically to the extreme of life imprisonment as a repeat offender. This is achieved through other draconian practices such as “imputed income” (judge speculated earnings), accruing monthly support obligations during incarceration, and a federal felony conviction should a father cross state lines under circumstances of flight.
Collection practices mirror those of loan sharks and underworld figures. Family judges know that payment will be made by high risk loans, employers or loved ones. The fleecing process is backed by the power of confinement. It was this sort of civil contempt, depicted as “keys to the jailhouse,” which landed California attorney and judicial whistle blower Richard Fine in solitary at age 70 for 18 months. As the Los Angeles County Sheriff aptly decried on CNN, such cells would have been better occupied by criminals given early releases due to prison overcrowding.
The most ominous aspect of this court process is that the parent who has been advised to war against the other has little knowledge of the potential magnitude of destruction until it is too late. The children may suffer most in the end while the lawyers and beneficiaries simply walk away from the damage they cause when the money has all been tapped. Then they blame the outcomes on their clients. There is no honor, remorse or concern for any of the carnage because this is “the law” without any mention made of the bar associations and special interests which produced it.
In consequence, meaningful reform efforts have failed across the board. Protests have likewise been suppressed through abuses of a parens patriae power that would be the envy of the FBI, CIA and IRS. Viet Nam veteran Thomas Ball protested by burning himself alive in front of a New Hampshire family court. Unlike the self-immolation he tried to copy in Morocco resulting in global media coverage, this one got little notice. They merely swept his ashes into a sewer. Still, he left a manifesto showing how to construct Molotov cocktails for attacking courthouses.
What little reform may be evident is focused on symptoms such as domestic violence prevention. Its futility is borne out by such cases as an upstate New York police investigator who committed a murder-suicide leaving four children without either parent. A high conflict divorce led to the easily obtained protection order against the dad followed by career damage and the confiscation of weapons. When support court left investigator Joseph Longo subsisting on marginal income, it was the last straw. He resorted to a common kitchen knife to register his form of protest.
The tactic of child exploitation to serve an illicit purpose is not new. It has been routinely employed by tyrannical regimes throughout history. For example, Adolph Hitler advised in his book, Mein Kampf, that if the state simply declares it is acting for the benefit of children, the people will “happily” give up their rights. Here, the tyrant is not so much a person as it is a giant bureaucracy and the illicit nature is not a war machine but an insatiable taxing monster. It has been unleashed on sensitive family relationships with little regard for the higher laws of nature.
While all this background was not known by Walter Scott on April 4, 2015, the gist of it was when he fled a child support warrant at a traffic stop in South Carolina. A “repeat offender” of child support orders, he had done enough prison time without commission of a crime and was shot dead in the back five times unarmed by a white officer. It would have been publicized otherwise but the horrific act was captured on cell phone by a concealed pedestrian. That event was blamed on racism, but as we shall see, our family courts were now killing for money.
PLEASE SHARE THIS POST AND HELP US FUND THIS VITAL INITIATIVE !
Call our office at (315) 380-3420 or Dr. Koziol direct at (315) 796-4000
It’s entitled Leon R. Koziol v Attorney Grievance Committee of the Third Judicial Department,and it was docketed by the Supreme Court today under Case No. 17-993. Unlike prior filings, this one recognizes my appeal from the high court of New York as a challenge to a “discretionary” decision. It could mean nothing, it could be everything because I am asking our nation’s highest court to review a non-final process of law license reinstatement which does not satisfy the finality requirement for Supreme Court jurisdiction. Hence such petitions are routinely rejected.
However that rule is set aside in cases where a continuation in the lower courts would be a gesture in futility, for example a recurring process due to the bad faith of decision makers or harassment for the exercise of constitutional rights. Mine is precisely such a case, and the high court may have docketed it for the reason that I have been harassed with endless, non-final reinstatement processes for too many years as punishment for my public exposure of court corruption and promotion of shared parenting laws.
In my petition for writ filed for consideration last week (January 9, 2018), I cited the case of In re Snyder, 472 US 634 (1985) where the Supreme Court granted writ to invalidate a six month law license suspension of an attorney who refused to apologize for his criticisms of a fee accountability process. My case carries far greater public import. Indeed if my third of three requests is granted, lawyers across the country would be impacted by open public disciplinary proceedings which would then benefit all clients in terms of genuine accountability.
In 2015, the Supreme Court did exactly that for all attorneys licensed to practice in its own court, and it may now be poised to do this for all courts nationwide. What a benefit this could bring to media, justice and reasonable attorney fees. From a personal perspective, what a sweet pay-back it would be for all those lawyers (and lawyers on the bench) who persecuted me for over ten years due to my conscientious stand against my profession. What a sense of justice it could bring for all the moms, dads and innocent children abused in our nation’s divorce and family courts.
Once again I am asking my followers to share this post with media, bloggers and parents everywhere. Organizations and interested parties have an opportunity now to offer amicus briefs in support of my case. But the window period for that is only about two months and I will not donate any more of my valuable time and limited resources. I have sacrificed enough. Here is an opening excerpt from my writ petition docketed today:
Lawyers all across our nation are regularly called upon by the People to challenge abuses of government power. Fearless advocacy is not only a hallmark of the legal profession, it is critical to the maintenance of a free society. But what happens if an unrestrained body of government is able to invidiously suppress such advocacy when the critical argument is directed against it? Do our rights continue to have substance in communities large and small? Do all people benefit the same from safeguards that our military and civilian personnel strive each day to preserve? Is not the whole of a profession called to task?
This case seeks to answer such questions. Throughout our history as leaders of the free world, American lawyers have risked their livelihoods in the quest to assure that our most precious rights are not systematically eroded. Without the unique liberties exercised by our “architects of justice”, it is likely that “separate but equal” doctrine would still be alive and well in our public schools and transportation systems. Countless innocent people might be imprisoned each day out of a lawyer’s fear of state disciplinary retributions.
A civil rights attorney in upstate New York is now asking this Court to review a disciplinary process which harmed his livelihood and parent-child relations simply because he represented minority groups and boldly championed unpopular causes. His ordeal has been compared to that of Nobel Prize candidate Gao Zhisheng, the Chinese lawyer stripped of his law license and denied contact with his children due to his representation of minority groups and criticisms of a communist government. The cause in this case is not garden variety, parental equality remains the final frontier of civil rights reform in America.
Literally, an innocent man was convicted of fabricated misconduct for endeavoring to bring equal rights to a courtroom where children are exploited for money and fathers are being extinguished from the family equation. This conclusion is easily demonstrated below by the proximate exercise of rights and adverse state action. Without the necessary protection for our protectors, any lawyer can fall victim simply by excelling in his or her work at the wrong place and the wrong time.
If you have something genuine to contribute (not war stories, keyboard pontifications or requests for free advice), call me at my office at (315) 380-3420 or personally at (315) 796-4000. You can also make a donation here, purchase my newly released book entitled Satan’s Docket, or obtain other professional services which I offer at http://www.parentingrightsinstitute.com.
The Parenting Rights Institute has made a formal request to Congress for a comprehensive investigation of our nation’s family courts. The text of this request is also contained in a full page newspaper advertisement for my new book, Satan’s Docket: Corruption and Carnage in America’s Divorce Industry.
I continue to seek major donors and investors for the Parenting Rights Institute due to the vital work we do, the accountability and oversight which are grossly lacking in these courts. We are a fledgling “Judicial Watch” for the divorce industry. But we can do nothing for countless victims without the resources to investigate and report on their individual cases.
Free keyboarding from the comfort of your homes to no one who cares is getting us nowhere. I am hoping to have sponsors of similar advertisements in communities across the country to move our representatives to action. Kindly share this mission statement and support it with your contributions, book purchases or our offerings at www.parentingrightsinstitute.com.
I can be contacted at our office at (315) 380-3420 or personally at (315) 796-4000.
This is the text and photos (above and below) appearing in the full page advertisement, page B8, of Sunday October 29, 2017 edition of the Utica (New York) Observer Dispatch. The on-line version will remain available to all of my followers and interested persons for another two weeks. You are welcome to duplicate this text in your own advertisements or in letters of support to the same congressional leaders
Request to Congress for Investigation of Family Courts
To: Hon. Chuck Grassley, Chair, Senate Judiciary Committee
Hon. Robert Goodlatt, Chair, House Judiciary Committee
Hon. Trey Gowdy, Chair, Oversight Committee on Government Reform
From: Leon Koziol, J.D., Director, Parenting Rights Institute
Amid recent probes by your committees into the conduct of former Attorney General Loretta Lynch regarding last year’s election, I am asking you to consider a review of Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, more particularly the vast abuse of federal funds in our family courts.
While your oversight objectives are commendable, I believe the American people are highly frustrated by the constant focus on Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. The election ended long ago, and it is time to move on, to focus on the issues that truly impact the rest of us.
There is a growing epidemic in this country which has been ignored and even protected by the Justice Department and bar associations generally. Our federal government is rewarding states with billions of dollars based on the number and magnitude of “child support” orders they issue.
On its surface, “child support” appears laudable, but in practice, judicial impartiality has been sacrificed to the almighty buck. State courts are inciting needless controversy, alienating moms and dads from their offspring, fueling domestic violence and veteran suicides, and wasting tax dollars to enrich other beneficiaries of a dysfunctional “custody” system.
Lawyers and lawyers on the bench should not be allowed anywhere near sensitive parental disputes because they are programmed to litigate. They bring gas to the sparks while family assets, business interests and college funds are plundered in the “best interests” of our children. Shared parenting and mediation alternatives have been thwarted because they are not lucrative.
In March, 2015, Obama’s Justice Department issued a report condemning criminal courts in Ferguson, Missouri due to excessive fines raised through false arrests and other civil rights violations. I made the same parallels to excessive fees and family court “awards” in reports to your oversight committee and Loretta Lynch one year later.
Our Supreme Court has declared parenting to be the “oldest liberty interest” protected by our Constitution. I emphasized that to national media and your Democrat colleague, James Clyburn, at the funeral of Walter Scott, an unarmed father shot dead in the back five times for fleeing a child support warrant. Government is now killing for money.
Despite all this, the harm to our health, education, productivity and law enforcement continues. We remain the most litigious and imprisoned society in the free world, and if reform is ever to occur, it must begin here because children and future generations are at risk.
Oversight in family court is best described as the foxes guarding our chicken coup with whistleblowers like me persecuted to the point of losing my children, livelihood and liberties. After 23 unblemished years as a civil rights attorney, another ten as a model parent, it became a scene right out of the former Soviet Union.
In July of this year, I was interviewed by sponsors of the Whistleblower Summit in Washington due to the horrific nature of my ordeal. It has now been captured in a book entitled, Satan’s Docket. I have also documented the ordeals of parents across the country. I am enclosing a copy so you can gain a real world perspective on this epidemic.,
Your committees have helped enact whistleblower protections for those who have uncovered waste in diverse areas of federal spending. They may have saved taxpayers billions of dollars in recent decades. However there remains no protection for judicial whistleblowers.
Indeed when I sought relief in our federal courts, I was subjected to serial rulings designed to kill the messenger of reform. In my book, I compared it to a Rodney King beating with the fists and batons replaced by orders and edicts. Either punishment can achieve the same fatal end.
Donald Trump is attacked any time he criticizes a federal judge despite a Supreme Court member (Ginsburg) who attacked him from chambers as a private citizen. A federal judge in my case was removed from an earlier one by an appeals court due to a human gene he used to make decisions, one that would not be discovered by scientists “for another 50 years.”
I am not making this up any more than Hitler did in the day. You can “discover” Gary Sharpe’s gene in United States v Cossey, 632 F.3d 82. New York Republican Leader Joe Bruno condemned the same Judge Sharpe in his book, Keep Swinging, after a failed political prosecution which cost taxpayers over $15 million.
Bruno’s senate secretary was given immunity to testify against him despite some $100,000 she stole from government. My ex-secretary did the same after being influenced to orchestrate ethics issues against me. In a 2012 report, bolstered by her own immunity, I detailed how she was operating her own divorce practice. She was not finally arrested and jailed until 2016.
To hold the “foxes” accountable, I have opened a fledgling “Judicial Watch” known as Parenting Rights Institute. But I lack the resources to save victims such as Tom Ball who burned himself alive at a New Hampshire family court, or a police investigator who chose a different form of protest through murder-suicide and a $2 million wrongful death recovery against my city.
If this is not a silent and suppressed epidemic, what is? In his opening address at the 2015 Whistleblower Summit, Senator Chuck Grassley declared plainly, “You can’t fix something if you don’t know it’s broken.” Well now you know.
Show Your Support With A Write-In For Family Judge on Nov. 7th