Family Judge Daniel King, up for re-election, sent an unemployed father to jail for a noncriminal support violation leading to death at age 46

The child support practices in New York and many other states have become so draconian that they are increasingly causing early deaths among their target victims. Such practices are often mindless, revenue- driven and devoid of accountability. In too many cases, they produce jail terms and effectively kill debtor parents without commission of any crimes, thereby ending child support altogether.

Worse yet, debtor parents, desperate to avoid incarceration, surrender their parenting rights to appease underlying goals of their adversaries to secure a substitute particularly in married settings. Such was the case involving Michael Brancaccio, a father of four who was coerced into giving up his daughter in 2018 to avoid a recurring jail term imposed by Lewis County Family Judge Daniel King who is now up for re-election.

Mike had already served a six-month term for child support arrears in 2015, the maximum allowed by law, and he was now facing another identical term involving several thousand dollars. He had been through a number of jobs and could not keep up with the support orders being issued against him. During the first stint, he was committed to toughing it out by doing his time but that turned out to be a nightmare. He was also unaware that his monthly obligations continued to accrue while incarcerated in Lewis County jail.

Unable to reconcile the early release of fellow inmates on serious crimes, he was finally set free after serving a full “sentence.” He fell into a bad state of mind and was soon hospitalized for kidney failure and other complications. He survived that brush with death only to fall victim again to another support violation petition. This time he was coerced into waiving all parenting rights and access to his little girl, then aged nine, in order to have this debt erased and incarceration avoided.

The adversary mom quickly had his daughter’s last name changed to that of her new husband. This outcome devastated Mike who then returned to a depressed lifestyle while entertaining thoughts of serious revenge. On October 11, 2020, he was found dead at age 46 in his Utica, New York apartment. Those close to him who had witnessed his lively parenting periods and regular phone chats with his little girl knew that this debt-induced, permanent separation was the core reason for his downfall and early death.

That little girl cried at the funeral and asked those around her whether it was all “the court stuff” that caused her daddy’s death. She would now suffer his absence from her graduations, birthdays, weddings and other cherished events. In the end, no one in the family court system gave a rat’s ass about this barbaric outcome as they simply moved on to their next victims. Judge Daniel King who presided over it was likely unaware of the early death of the young dad he had sent to a debtor prison.

Instead, Judge King was too busy satisfying performance grants awarded to him (the state) by the federal government based on the number, size and collection of support obligations under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act. Mike was simply another statistic, a means for satisfying pay hikes under the state’s new compensation law. That law was influenced by a highly controversial lawsuit brought by the state’s chief judge and court system against the governor and state legislature, the ones constitutionally authorized to decide state salaries.

It was called the judicial pay raise trilogy, Maron v Silver, 14 NY3d 230 (2010). As a result of that lawsuit, judicial pay raises are now set by an appointed group and virtually automatic. The people would likely be shocked at the judge salaries we see today, and the money had to come from someplace. Federal funding incentives and legal fictions to maximize support orders were a big part of the answer. And it did not matter that impartiality and due process had to be sacrificed to make it happen.

While there is much more to understand about this pay-to-parent scandal, the bottom line here was that a mom got her substitute dad, a little girl lost her real dad for life, that dad got a funeral, and Judge King did his part to make it happen, all in the so-called “best interests of the child.” Greater detail exists in the newly published book, Whistleblower in Paris, available at Barnes and Noble, Amazon and major bookseller sites. Mike’s ordeal can be found in Chapter Five.

Shared Parenting: Why has it been so stifled despite decades of carnage caused by the antiquated custody system?

By Leon Koziol, J.D.

Director

Parenting Rights Institute

The above news article published by a mainstream newspaper in 2009 reflects the lack of progress in attaining fair treatment in our divorce and family courts. Despite surveys showing overwhelming support for shared parenting laws, relevant bills in Congress and our state legislatures have failed to achieve any meaningful progress. This dilemma exists despite vast increases in suicide, child murders and crime statistics traceable to the current antiquated child custody system. That system was constructed around a child rearing framework featuring stay-at-home moms and working dads.

I established the National League of Fathers, Inc. in 2008 to promote fair treatment consistent with my decades of practice as a civil rights attorney. However, that organization collapsed early due to misplaced priorities and a lack of financial support while the retributions suffered as a consequence violated all manner of human rights. Sadly, one of its board members hung himself from a tree in response to the horrific treatment he endured. Our goal was to reverse an alarming trend of fatherless families and the targeting of male parents to fund a court system which still discriminates on account of gender.

The Census Bureau steadfastly reports that over 80% of persons paying child support are men. Had that statistic reflected discriminatory employment against women in this day and age, riots would have erupted. To be sure, countless dads continue to be forced out of their children’s lives due to the hostage treatment exhibited in these courts and the draconian, one-sided manner of support enforcement.

I have explained all this in a recent post entitled, The Torturing of Child Support and its escalation of Parental Alienation. Specifically, our federal government, already reeling from a spending crisis, continues to supply these courts with incentive grants to the tune of billions of dollars annually under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act. This funding law is based on the number and size of support orders manufactured in the states. It therefore incentivizes lucrative conflict between parents forced needlessly to fight over their own offspring.

In my newly published book, Whistleblower in Paris, I have likened this parent alienation process to the Roman Coliseum. That book provides a valuable crash course for unsuspecting litigants and parents on the realities of our domestic relations courts and could prevent thousands in lawyer fees. It is important, therefore, that you do your part in exposing this silent epidemic virally and donating to our cause at http://www.citizencommissionagainstcorruption.org.

Shared Parenting: Has Anything Changed in Thirty Years of Discrimination?

The following Guest Column appeared in a mainstream newspaper of upstate New York 12 years ago. Read the highly informative content. Has anything changed today?

The Torturing of Child Support and its escalation of Parental Alienation during the holidays

By Dr. Leon Koziol, Director

Parenting Rights Institute

Author’s Note: The following column is based on two decades as a trial lawyer, twenty years as a parent and twelve years as a court reform advocate

When one thinks of child support, it’s generally a duty that parents have to pay a fair share of child rearing expenses. And despite tremendous strides in achieving equal rights over the years, child support continues to be predominantly a male obligation. Census Bureau reports still show that fathers are as much as 85% of all parents subject to a child support order.

Regardless of the gender disparities, the support of children should rank high among society’s priorities. But unfortunately, that priority has been abused well beyond its logical scope to line the pockets of lawyers, service providers and the support bureaucracy to result in bankruptcies, the raiding of college funds and a recent phenomenon known as parental alienation.

The realities demonstrate that our antiquated child custody framework is no longer committed to the so-called “best interests of the child” but a means for growing a trillion-dollar industry. And women are no longer immune from the consequences as we find countless moms today feeling the abuse which dads have long endured. Severe parental alienation has yielded a loss of contact with the children they are supporting over the holidays.

During the 1980s, Dr. Richard Gardner popularized that condition as a psychological disorder but his conclusions were rejected by his profession and never included among the 300 disorders recognized in the DSM-5 manual for insurance purposes. In my own reports since then, I have similarly rejected such a condition and preferred to treat it more accurately as a human rights violation.

A federal funding law is the “elephant in the courtroom” in that regard. As originally drafted, Title IV-D of the Social Security Act targeted absentee fathers through incentive funding to the states (and by extension their domestic relations judges). Such revenues were based on the number and size of support collections that could be documented. This, in turn, created a systemic bias among support judges.

But over time, a little-known adjustment to this funding law from absentee to “noncustodial parent” aggravated that bias through a revenue stream that grew many times over. The mere condition of career mom or gender status was now sufficient to place an adequate provider into a classification that destroyed the overriding assumption of parenthood and an existing willingness to support offspring without a state mandate.

From there, without any investigative reporting or public accountability, it was off to the races on the tactics employed to elevate obligations beyond a parent’s income and self-support capacities. It resulted in debtor prisons, child abandonment and unprecedented violence contrary to stated objectives. A new form of evil was born from the fires of hell.

The examples of carnage erupting from this corruption are countless: a mother who killed her two-year old daughter rather than give her up to a custody change (2018 Gabriella Boyd), a father who killed his girl only to burn himself along with her in his home (2016 Kyra Franchetti), a mother who obtained a gun overnight following a child support dispute to kill the father and children (2019 Damyrra Jones).

They include veterans and law enforcement: a father who left his eight-year old boy in a freezing garage resulting in homicide charges (ex-NYPD officer Michael Valva – 2020), a war veteran, Thomas Ball, who burned himself alive in front of a New Hampshire courthouse to protest child protection abuses, and a police investigator who killed his ex-spouse with a common kitchen knife after exiting support court to leave four children without parents, see Pearce v Longo, 766 F. Supp. 2d 367 (NDNY 2011).

This is only a sampling of real life horrors that attorneys, media and oversight entities are purposely ignoring due the immense influence of special interest groups. In our peaceful protests over the years, most recently the 2019 Parent March on Washington, we have demanded a federal investigation and congressional oversight hearings to address the human rights violations and rampant abuse of federal funds in this silent epidemic.

In Chapter 12 of my newly published book, Whistleblower in Paris, I outline some highly suppressed techniques concocted over the years in support proceedings to maximize profits and court revenues. You should obtain this valuable read at any Barnes and Noble store, Amazon, publisher Author House or major bookseller on-line. You can also join our live talk program, Leon’s Library, daily, Monday thru Friday at 7:30 pm EST on YouTube.

Here is my relevant book excerpt:

Chapter 12- No Place Like Home at pg. 193-195

To advance funding goals, state legislatures have enacted laws that require courts to name a “custodial parent” as a condition for a valid divorce or support agreement. Typically, an opt-out clause allows parents to by-pass the mandatory support formula, but to do so requires them to engage in a comparative analysis which often dilutes the reality of this option.

There is also collaborative law, but such processes are similarly diluted by additional attorneys who cannot be used later if agreement fails. More lawyers are added to a two-tiered process to support the adage that any community which cannot support one lawyer can always support two.

Here is a partial listing of fictions, in addition to those provided earlier, that were orchestrated over the years to maximize funding at the expense of judicial impartiality and due process:

  1. Service of a support violation petition can be achieved by simple mailing. These petitions typically contain boldface, capital letter warnings of arrest and incarceration. If this type of service is challenged on due process grounds, it can incur the cost of personal service unlike criminal counterparts which these proceedings resemble.
  • Expedited case management rules can provide a mere thirty days for defense preparation between a first appearance and trial. All too often, a jail term for contempt of a support order is the standard outcome conditioned on a purge or payment amount. Satisfaction is routinely coerced from relatives, employers or friends.
  • The case for a violation and jail term is easily made by a single non-party witness, typically a social services employee offering a delinquent support summary into the record. Intent is presumed from its mere production without any other proof.
  • The burden of proof is wrongfully shifted to the defending party to prove innocence. The standard for conviction is the lowest of all forms of litigation despite the stigma and incarceration which are at stake. There is no jury or indigent right to counsel.
  • Support judges have invented an evidentiary substitute known as imputed income which assures the highest support obligation possible, often well beyond the realistic income capacities of the targeted debtor. Defending parties are treated at higher levels of income based on past employment reports even when wrongfully terminated.
  • Support obligations continue to accrue at regular intervals during incarceration for violations or any other reason. They also accrue when a father is later found not to be a biological parent and despite frauds used to deny him child access. They also accrue until a petition for recourse is actually filed despite its futility in a biased process.
  • The state has expanded its tyrannical power beyond the original objective of recouping welfare costs for abandoned mothers on public assistance. It now acts as representative for self-sufficient support seekers to create a serious imbalance in the scales of justice. Attorney fees and other costs are made a part of the final judgment.

In my case, all but the actual incarceration was used against me. But the many processes employed were also fraught with serious error, gender prejudice and whistleblower retaliation. At what point, then, is a victim pushed to such an extreme that our Constitution confers upon him a legal right to fight back or take the so-called law into his own hands?

You be the jury.

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

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

President Trump: “I know parents who don’t love their children.” Reply: “I know parents who love their children but are alienated by federally funded judges.”

The above video, entitled “Parents Under Siege” is the first of a series used to promote our Parent March on Washington, subtitled: The Lawyer Epidemic.

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

At a campaign rally in North Carolina on Monday, President Trump twice told a crowd of supporters that he “knows many parents who don’t love their children very much,” see Haberman & Baker, At Rally, Trump Takes Aim at Democrats Amid Reshuffling of Primary Field, NY Times, March 3, 2020 edition, pg. A-17.

It was a statement I heard myself, and it remains unclear what was meant by it or why it was said. However, it should inspire parents victimized by our divorce and family courts to rally against a funding scheme that rewards these courts by the number of parents they can alienate from their children.

That shocking truth has been suppressed for decades due to the lucrative benefits that Title IV-D of the Social Security Act brings to lawyers, service providers and family judges. It is the truth behind a percentage of parents who seemingly “don’t love their children,” but are prevented from doing so by this funding scheme.

Lawyers “who don’t love ethics very much” may know little about how this funding scheme harms clients. But they do know from early financial statements in any divorce or support proceeding how much is available to pay for their fees. Once a parent is sucked into this court system, it’s a downward spiral. Lawyers incite needless conflict to keep the money flowing.

These are not genuine lawyers. They’re licensed con-artists preying on your emotions. They could care less about your children, mine or even their own given the precedent they set in these courts. Then, in an ultimate hypocrisy, they continue to maintain that they are bankrupting entire families and raiding college funds for “the best interests of our children.”

The judges (more accurately lawyers on the bench) are equally at fault in this custody gold mine. Financial incentives make them biased. They overlook and even promote the legalized robberies and kidnapping of parent-child relationships because they are rewarded by federal funds (Title IV-D performance grants) based on the number of “custodial parents” they can create.

Such funds are diminished whenever two parents can get along and need no “custody” titles. They need no government interference or supervision. This is why shared parenting laws are opposed by special interests and bar associations (so-called “professional” service providers who feed off the custody gold mine). That is also why mediation and settlement are also thwarted.

This category of moms and dads love their children beyond imagination. They will fight to the end to protect them, and that is exactly what these lawyers “love” to hear in consultations. They are there to test parents on how much money and assets they are willing to part with for the “best interests” of their children.

After 20 years as a proven attorney another 10 years as a victim, I have seen the carnage time and again. It’s all about the money. “Best interests” propaganda detracts from an epidemic no differently than tobacco, drug and food advertisements do. The child industry is now a humanitarian crisis with daily suicides, financial ruin and premature deaths. The difference here is that it’s being suppressed by the courts which profit from it.

Our federal courts may be more to blame. They were created for the very purpose of protecting our federal rights. But a look at the record shows the judges there abandoning their duties (despite life terms) to protect their state court colleagues instead. Any whistle blower lawyer or victimized parent who seeks reform and justice is targeted and destroyed no differently than the regimes our military is sent overseas to fight.

None of this will change until we parents make a profound public statement in Washington. A rare opportunity to do so now awaits you on May 27-29, 2020 when the Parenting Rights Institute will sponsor its Annual Parent March and Conference. We begin with an orientation session will occur at the Congressional Ballroom of the Holiday Inn Capitol at 7 pm on May 27.

At that session we will be preparing for our lobby day in Congress the next day. At 7 pm on May 28, 2020, we will sponsor expert speakers at the same location. This is a ticketed event. At Noon on Friday, May 29, 2020, we will assemble at Lafayette Square Park at the White House to begin our march under police escort down Pennsylvania Avenue to the Supreme Court.

Each Thursday at 7pm EST we are hosting nationwide conference calls to grow numbers for this event. These calls are not designed for war stories, therapy, legal advice or fringe ideas. We know what we are doing and will not tolerate moles and trolls who contaminate such efforts because they benefit from the system. This is a proven event for the sake of all victims.

If you would like to be a part of these calls or our 3-day event, call our office at (315) 380-3420 or e-mail me directly at leonkoziol@gmail.com.

President Trump has been kept in the dark on this “judicial swamp” and may be our only hope to clean up the corruption. But like former Judiciary Chairman, Senator Chuck Grassley stated at a recent Whistle blower Conference, “You can’t fix something if you don’t know its broken, that’s just common sense.” Let us now bring “common sense” to Washington.

 

 

 

 

 

While the Politicians were Impeaching…

Error
This video doesn’t exist

This 1-second video was taken north of Times Square, not far from Trump Tower on Wednesday, December 18, 2019. It was taken around 6 pm as politicians were wrapping up their day long testimony for a vote on the impeachment of President Donald Trump. 

Curious as to the unique culture surrounding homeless people, I monitored events to learn that the man in red was visiting fellow homeless victims to assure that they had sufficient protection for the night against the single digit snow squalls which I personally fought en route to my hotel. The forecast was a low of 15 overnight.

The guy in red had just delivered some additional cardboard bedding for the man buried under those blankets on the ground. I overheard that guy tell him that he would return to sleep on his other side as soon as he checked on others nearby.

IMG_1253

This photo shows a man buried under blankets beneath the marquis of a worship center in Hell’s Kitchen just west of Times Square. While he was fighting to stay alive on the sidewalks of Congressman Jerry Nadler’s district, Jerry was preoccupied with impeachment as Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

It was a cold, bright sunny day on Wednesday, December 18, 2019 as I drove down the New York Thruway on another assignment to uncover court corruption in Manhattan. A one hour traffic jam at the George Washington bridge made me late for my appointment. Six lanes at the New Jersey side toll booths narrowed to a single lane on the bridge due to vast stretches of ice being removed by construction crews on its south span.

I had already spent travel hours listening to testimony of congress members regarding the impeachment of Donald Trump which was approved later in the evening. Initially I was impressed with most of the statements including those with which I disagreed. However, even as a former office holder and trial attorney, I soon found myself anxious to switch my radio dial to something more interesting, like latino music which I do not get upstate.

That’s how predictable the testimony became, such that the traffic jams I so detest were becoming tolerable. The many reserved and yielded time for glory speeches could not be more boorish. If it was a Democrat, Trump was a treasonous villain compared to the likes of Benedict Arnold. And if it was a Republican, “colleagues across the aisle” were history’s most profound hypocrites, the likes of which would make Alexander Hamilton turn over in his grave.

In the end, the lofty presentations turned cold and grey as the weather was becoming as I finally reached midtown. They were entirely connected to party loyalty and not the gravity of events that would further divide our nation. So partisan were these representatives that the process lost its luster. There was no merit or genuine principle behind any of it. Whatever respect I had for this impeachment process, it was tortured by politicians focused on self-advancement.

Congressman Jerry Nadler represents the 10th District of New York. His district is the second smallest in the nation and one of the most gerrymandered ones on the planet. It stretches from Central Park down along a west side strip of Manhattan deep into the heart of Brooklyn. Obviously this district was carved out for Jerry’s re-election prospects and not for any constituent benefit in such diverse, chopped-up neighborhoods.

Jerry was the “gentleman from New York” who dominated the hearing as Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. I must have counted at least four times when he was recognized in a single hour, yielding time to select Democrat colleagues to impress the few outsiders who bothered to hear any of it. I was particularly offended because I visited Nadler’s office with his constituents during the lobby (middle) day of our Parent March on Washington (May 1-3, 2019).

I had been to Washington many times lobbying for court reforms and a federal investigation of Title IV-D funding abuses which are needlessly separating parents legally residing here from their children. Such abuses are causing veteran suicides and aggravated domestic violence, but because of the lucrative nature of this funding scheme in America’s family courts, you will not hear any lofty speeches from these same members of Congress supporting our requests.

Indeed, not a single member or staff in Congress responded to our reports and march down Pennsylvania Avenue under police escort. After a packed meeting in the conference room of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer in which we were promised a reply, none has materialized even after follow-up visits and calls. This is how obsessed he and other Democrat colleagues have become with the impeachment agenda which began shortly after the 2016 election of Donald Trump.

Meanwhile the people and constituents are literally left “out in the cold” based on the many homeless people in Nadler’s congressional district that were taking cover from deadly cold and snow squalls on the day of impeachment. They could also be found only blocks away from that district at Trump Tower on the other side of Central Park. To hear these epic hypocrites recite their “oaths of office” repeatedly during the same day hearings made me cringe given their violations of those oaths among the sidewalks of Manhattan and the family court victims of America.

Federal Court to Hear Precedent Case Regarding Parental Alienation, Support Abuses and Whistle Blower Retaliation

IMG_0924
Participants of our Parent March on Washington were rewarded with a police escort down Pennsylvania Avenue between the White House and Capitol Building on May 3, 2019. We spent the prior day in the halls of Congress lobbying for a federal investigation of human rights violations and federal funding abuses in our nation’s divorce and family courts.

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

On November 15, 2019, at 9 a.m., at the United States Courthouse in Albany, New York, a federal judge is scheduled to hear arguments regarding a precedent-seeking case entitled, Leon Koziol, Individually and as Natural Parent vs State of New York, Child Support Processing Center, Acting Family Judge Gerald Popeo, Support Magistrate Natalie Carraway, Chief Court Clerk Barbara Porta, Support Investigator Katie Lawrence, Custodial Parent Kelly Hawse-Koziol and Oneida County Sheriff Robert Maciol.

This case features inhumane retributions which I sustained as a model parent and attorney who blew the whistle on corruption in our divorce and family courts. That corruption is twofold: first the systemic bias among judges rewarded by the number and size of support orders they issue under a federal funding law known as Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, and second, a particular bias ranging from my pedophile custody judge removed from the bench (Bryan Hedges) to a racist, unethical and abusive judge censured by a judicial commission (Gerald Popeo, a defendant here).

It was filed on August 7, 2019 in New York Supreme Court after I was denied court transcripts and evidentiary subpoenas to show a major fraud during a support violation proceeding. My rights of due process, free speech and equal protection were violated incessantly after federal judges in upstate New York referred my complaints to state court over the years. In a shocking irony, the New York Attorney General (representing the state, judges and court clerk) then moved my case from state court back to federal court on August 29, 2019.

Nearly 40 trial level judges have been disqualified or removed from my originally uncontested divorce. Over a period of 12 years, my livelihood, reputation and parent-child relations were utterly destroyed through such concoctions as a “prohibited alcohol related gesture” (a wedding toast) and fabricated college degrees (PhD and Masters) to elevate my support obligations.

It has set new records for unmitigated corruption. For example, ethics lawyers engaged in the witch hunt against me have opposed my reinstatement to practice as long as I continue to blow the whistle. This has been ongoing for a record 10 years. The same lawyers were then allowed to resign without any criminal or ethics charges after being caught falsifying their time sheets.

As observers across the country have warned time and again, if they can do this to a model parent and unblemished attorney (for more than 23 years), imagine what they could do to the rest of us. A sort of Gestapo atmosphere is growing in our family courts to advance a trillion dollar industry. Anyone courageous or conscientious enough to stand in the way of this gold mine will be squashed, immediately or over time.

The greed and corruption are so rampant that I was subjected to a “shoot on site” threat arising from an unlawful support warrant one year ago. That warrant was issued by Defendant Judge Gerald Popeo who accepted an assignment to my support case six months after complaining of my supposed participation in a “witch hunt” that led to his  public censure by a judicial commission. Defendant Sheriff Robert Maciol admitted during a radio program that this high alert warrant was unlawfully leaked to the media. Read more details by clicking on to the link below:

(Koziol Complaint Dated August 7, 2019)

This is a watershed case seeking to declare excessive enforcement practices unconstitutional, to establish parental alienation as a constitutional violation, and to secure legal protection for judicial whistle blowers. Bradley Birkenfeld recovered $104 million in an IRS whistle blower case after serving a 30 month prison term in retaliation for his exposure of a Swiss Bank scandal involving billions of dollars in federal revenue losses. I am seeking to set precedent here for those parents sent to debtor prisons and punished for protecting their children. Over time, it could result in billions of dollars in federal tax savings.

Precedent cases in recent years have proven me correct in my long held positions while paving the way for justice to finally occur. These include unanimous Supreme Court decisions in Exxon Mobile v Saudi Industries, 544 US 280 (2005); Marshall v Marshall, 547 US 293 (2006), Sprint v Jacobs, 571 US 69 (2013) and Rippo v Baker, 580 US __ (2017)(per curiam). They are reversing a 50 year trend by lower federal judges of denying family court victims their rightful access to our federal courts whose paramount purpose is to preserve our most basic federal rights.

This year alone, in the case of Timbs v Indiana, 580 US ___ (2/20/19), the Supreme Court declared that excessive fines and asset confiscations violated the Eighth Amendment. Although applied in the criminal context, parallels can be made to the civil case abuses which lead to needless bankruptcies, parent-child separations and premature deaths. Throughout my highly isolated crusade, I have exposed excessive court orders which, like the seizures in Timbs, benefited the state and third parties more than they did the “best interests” of any parent, child or family.

Only weeks ago, a federal appeals court issued a “Precedential” decision in Surender Malhan v Secretary U.S. Department, et. al., 18-3373 (3rd Cir. September 18, 2019). Citing two of the cases listed above, the court reversed a lower federal ruling which had dismissed a father’s civil rights case seeking to curb excessive support enforcement practices. It rejected Rooker-Feldman and Younger Abstention practices which deferred federal claims to pending or completed proceedings in state court. The case was remanded back to the lower federal court. That means it is unlikely to reach the Supreme Court any time soon.

Court arguments will begin and conclude on my case in the morning of November 15, 2019 and are open to the public. It took a horrific sacrifice to make this happen for the benefit of court victims everywhere. Spread the word, attend the hearing, and donate to this site to cover our vast litigation costs. For more information, contact our PRI office at (315) 380-3420 or e-mail me personally at leonkoziol@parentingrightsinstitute.com.

 

More Good News: The Parent March on Washington will become a documentary

 

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Report to Congress for our Parent March Lobby Day is Now Available and a Subject of Tonight’s Conference Call

 

 

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.

Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

A 24-page report has been completed and will be the main component of our lobby packet to Congress and Justice Department on Lobby Day, May 2, 2019. That’s the middle day of our 3-day Parent March on Washington. Click here for itinerary and purpose.

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 leonkoziol@gmail.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:

A FEDERAL FUNDED EPIDEMIC

Vital Report Justifying a Federal Investigation of Human Rights Abuses in Divorce and Family Courts

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.

Click here to read: (Full Report)

Please help fund the Parent March on Washington