Documents Shed Light on Family Courts' Soft Stance Toward Abuse

6031493.28.jpg
Convicted child molesters Rex Anderson (left) and Henry Parson were awarded custody of their daughters in family court
In this week's cover story, SF Weekly takes a look at some of the tragic results of mistakes by California's family courts. These courts' insufficient provisions for investigating child abuse and spousal battery have led, in multiple instances, to children being placed with dangerous parents.

Because allegations of all kinds are often traded by feuding ex-spouses going through divorces, our story focused solely on cases where definitive evidence of child molestation or domestic violence existed in the form of a criminal conviction -- and, in one tragic case, through a clear murder-suicide.

Establishing this criminal conduct, as well as the family courts' inadequate procedures for addressing it, involved documents -- lots of them. Here are a few highlights from among the hundreds of pages of court records we reviewed:

Karen and Rex Anderson

A court-appointed psychological expert told a judge that San Jose resident Karen Anderson was engaged in "paranoid thinking" when she raised concerns about possible molestation of her daughter by her ex-husband Rex Anderson. The court awarded primary custody of the girl to Rex. Several years later, he was charged with multiple sex crimes, pleaded no contest, and was sentenced to 23 years in state prison.

Derrick Perryman and Shari Rivers

San Francisco resident Derrick Perryman pleaded guilty to misdemeanor domestic violence in Alameda County, where he had been charged in connection with an incident where he struck his baby's mother, Shari Rivers, leaving her face bruised. Nevertheless, San Francisco Family Court Judge Lillian Sing chose to award him joint custody of the child -- over Rivers' objections -- reasoning that it was better for the baby to have regular access to both parents. Here is a transcript of the courtroom proceeding that led to Sing's order.

Emily Gallup case

Emily Gallup was a family-court mediator in Nevada County, but was fired after her supervisors criticized her for researching parents' criminal backgrounds too extensively. After she filed a grievance against the county over her dismissal, an arbitrator ruled that concerns Gallup expressed about how business was done in the family court were reasonable -- and ordered an independent audit of the county's court system.

Katie Tagle and Stephen Garcia

Yucca Valley resident Katie Tagle asked for a protective order against Stephen Garcia, the father of her nine-month-old son, Wyatt, after he sent her emails threatening to kill the boy. San Bernardino County Family Court Judge Robert Lemkau told her in open court he believed she was lying, and allowed Garcia continued custody. Shortly thereafter, Garcia sent Tagle a suicide note while Wyatt was in his care and proceeded to kill his son, and then himself, with a handgun.

Follow us on Twitter at @SFWeekly and @TheSnitchSF

My Voice Nation Help
22 comments
equalist
equalist

Your conclusions are wrong because you have cherry-picked the "mistakes." What about the millions of children and fathers whose parental relationships have been harmed by "mistakenly" taking a lying woman's word for it and granting needless restraining orders and supervised visitation? This article is one-sided propaganda, masquerading as journalism.

Hotlava1966
Hotlava1966

The entire system needs abolishing until they devise a way to truly protect the child. Remember, psychology is based on pseudoscience and not proven theory. They cannot prove anything and try their darnest in their claims based on observation and evaluation. But that science is totally unreliable. You can always check to see if a child had been raped, but the states just don't want to go through the trouble, they can always ask the child, but then claim they are coached, they can always do a lot of things to make the case run through stumbling blocks, a apattern all too common nationwide. Their decisions are usually based on the maximum income generating for the agency itself in collusion with partnering agencies. This is worse than a well run mafia using the legal system to commit white collar and high crimes against the citizens of the United States of America. Criminal and inhumane crimes against the citizen's children by these so called quacks and so forth. There is no science that can support any form of drugging of any chlild as you will see. There are side effects listed with each drug. But those are not side affects, those are the devestating effects of the drug being induced upon America's children. Well families you can always look up Josie Perez if you want any additional philosophical views and i challenge some of these so called medical experts in their own field as well. I hope they passed their licensing before questioning me. I have seen and taken their exams and as i stated before, there is no scientific backing nor research to go along with that atypical you are shoving down your child's throat, it can very well be poisonous.

elizabethinsf
elizabethinsf

I really don't see how spending the amount of money required by the "advocates" would change the basic fact that we should start to license the breeders. After all, it's clear that these folks would have done the gene pool a favor by not breeding, and we're already broke paying for the schools that can't make all children above average, no matter what we spend. No, the problem is not "the system" it's the breeders themselves. It's time for women to stop buying into the nonsense that they should breed, when in fact, they can't even find a mate who won't harm them. Come on now, I've never heard of a single case where a man "went bad" all of a sudden, there are always plenty of warning signs some women are just too stupid to heed.

Julia Fletcher
Julia Fletcher

Thank you Mr. Jamison for reporting about the national family court crisis when many of your collegues will not touch this subject with a ten foot pole. I hope your reporting of the tip of this iceberg will be the spark that prompts others to do what they should have done years ago.

Count me out
Count me out

Wow -- all those catch-phrases indicating the family courts meant well, but made mistakes - they didn't have enough provisions (appoint more personnel, send more money, that will help, surely), and it was just feuding ex-spouses.

I have a question -- what's the Nevada mediator case doing in an article about California Family Courts? Where's the connection in that one? (I can hazard a guess).

I thought the SF Weekly specialized in real investigative reporting (and not just reading others' previous reports, framing them in the same language, and posting them) and ALTERNATE news. How much would it cost or who must one know to get some of the viewpoints in the (400+) comments in the main article into an actual post?

Where's the SF version of "Ron Kaye in LA" -- who actually did some fantastic reporting on the operations of the ripe-for-investigation governmental inbreeding in Southern CA? I heard these two weeklies were related. He even showed readers right on-line how to request vendor payments, technical how-to for monitoring one's own government.

I'm ashamed for my neck of the woods up here! Surely any region housing Berkeley could get to the bottom of such things.

Eashahin
Eashahin

Thank you for your work and revealing this truth so many mothers across America live with.Watching our children crushed not just by DV & sexual abuse...but then again by the system established to protect, failing and reabusing.

Liora Tziporah Farkovitz
Liora Tziporah Farkovitz

Equalist, I have suggested reading for your point of view. Lundy Bancroft wrote a book called, "What Does He DO That?", and he talks about abusers and their self perception as "abusers". Every single person has a threshold of violence or retaliation that they self define as 'acceptable'. So, they tend to see other abusers with higher thresholds of violence as the "real abusers", and that they have been misunderstood or falsely accused. What you have to ask is if the woman that is the recipient of your behavior finds your treatment acceptable. If she's saying "no", "stop it", "leave me alone" - guess what? You're violating her and "abusing" her when you refuse to stop. Some people may feel that yelling, name calling and emotional attacks are not "abuse". Others do. Some people feel that a slap is not out of bounds. Some feel that anything short of hospitalization is ok. Bancroft asked abusers questions to determine what they saw as acceptable. The man that pushed a pregnant woman on the ground claiming his "anger was out of control" was asked "Wow, once you had her down on the ground why didn't you just kick her in the stomach???" The man was horrified, and said "What kind of person do you think I am?" The point is this - he was not 'out of control' - he simply felt entitled to push her to the ground, and his threshold of violence simply did not include kicking a pregnant woman in the gut. But plenty of other abusers do. Society, and women, as a whole find neither acceptable. I think it's really important for men that are accused of being abusive to figure out what society's standards are - not their own - and adapt to those standards and quit making excuses for themselves.

Lea
Lea

I cannot believe that your post was written by a woman.  I have never heard anyone speak like that before.  Believe it or not, DV and abuse happens in wealthy and educated homes as well as uneducated people's homes.  The men are charming and loving, and, after the wedding, or baby, (when the partner is dependent), all of a sudden they start the abuse.  Can be small at first, jsut putting them down, or checking up on them, or losing it verbally, then they say sorry & make it up to them.  The woman (or child) think everything will be fine because the abuser has said that they were so sorry, then they are wary for a while.  When the victims start to feel like they can trust them again, and relax or start acting happy, then, wham, the abuse starts again.  The victims lose confidence in themselves, self esteem and have all sorts of physical and mental problems from being verbally, financially, emotiomaly and/or physically abused.  It makes it so much worse when children are involved as more often than not the woman is financially dependent or, as in one of the cases stated above, she had to work to support herself & the baby while the husband was on "disability" pension, so he got half custody.  I only hope Elizabeth that you or nobody you know suffers abuse at the hands of someone else, but, by the sounds of it, it is more likelly that you would be a bully yourself to speak like that about other human beings.  I hope you are not in some kind of service industry where you deal with people who are more worse off than yourself.

Count me out
Count me out

Please define "we." Licensing the "breeders" implies someone to give that license.

License people breeders, declaring that they (not you, of course) are "animals" or support the Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, and the Constitution which say the opposite.

Sooner or later when independence and protest and of course conflict has been "bred out" of the breeding stock, who knows whether the particular profile that matches YOU will become undesirable breeding stock. Then, who is going to take up the banner of freedom to save your ass?

Declaration of Independence (pls review) vs. breeder licensing; that's a slave -holder mentality.

Now, yes, I do realize that some who signed the Declaration of Independence (and none were women) held slaves. However, since then both slaves (male) and women (all breeds with citizenship) got the vote.

Obviously something has to give -- either the concept of innate superiority based on race, gender, or breeding -- (for how that spins out, see Holocaust, or Rwanda, or books such as 1984, Brave New World, Animal Farm, etc.) -- or the concept of principles of liberty, individual choice with responsibilities for those choices, and collectively submitting ourselves to written documents that embody those principles.

If you think in terms of People pedigree (superior/ inferior -- of course to call who's who would imply you are in the "superior" breeding stock, or a product of them) you should be also capable of understanding the pedigree of ideas and principles -- equally important, if not more important to the human spirit.

If you treat and think of people as dogs, there are possible responses. They may begin to act like dogs, or they may turn and protest, biting you. Again choose one.

That comment was seriously deranged in "pedigree," but very close to the truth of what's going on in the family courts, attempting to eradicate "conflict" (i.e., protest against wrongdoing) from the populace, and make sure that parents who protest such wronggoing are not able to transfer such dangerous concepts to their offspring.

Count me out
Count me out

Why is it the woman's responsibility to not be abused more than the man's responsibility to simply stop committing misdemeanor or felony domestic violence against her?

You think women LIKE being used for brood mares? What kind of perverted logic is that?

Who "bred" you? Are you thankful to be alive? Are you somehow superior to anyone else who has had marital problems? Wow....

The U.S. Penal code puts the responsibility on not committing crimes on individuals. That means an individual who commits a crime could be prosecuted by the State for committing it.

How is it you reverse that and say it's the woman's fault for having allowed a crime to be committed against her? Please explain who this philosophy would work in the case of drive-by shootings. Is it the victims' fault for having chosen to live in that neighborhood?

In Oakland, CA, at the Piedmont Avenue Piano Store a young boy was shot and paralyzed when someone across the street attempted to rob a gas station, and the stray bullet went through the walls. What's your lecture on that situation? ???

Change your attitude, and are you female? Good grief!

Cold North Wind
Cold North Wind

I imagine that you might blame a raped woman ,for having gone into her garden to gather some flowers. She should have recognized the signs that her neighbour was going to rape and beat her.Your comment indicates a tragic lack of knowledge about this sad topic.

pinky
pinky

I wonder if you have ever been in an abusive relationship and or had domestic violence in your family as a child? If you have not, you have no right to accuse anyone of the "warning signs!" These people that abuse, are very good at manipulation, sometimes it takes years before these signs of abuse come to a head. I have been through domestic violence in my family, and through a custody battle with my parents and years ago no one asked the questions on signs of abuse. Now finally we have advocates and associations that help get the voice out to victims and their families. I guess to you think I am stupid for marrying an abusive partner and went through that, also. If it was not for me getting away from my ex-husband one morning, I got a DWI leaving my abuser and placed in jail for the very first time in my life at 34 years old, speaking to my probation officer about my abuse, I would not be here today talking to you! Please feel free to comment on this. Maybe I could shed some light on what I experienced with you.

Count me out
Count me out

So, eliazbethinsf, I take it you are a "non-breeder"?

Suppose your mother had followed your advice, and not "bred" you?

Since "eugenics" is preferable, apparently, to looking at what's actually happening in the courts (Hotlava1966 above, is actually quite close to the mark in using the word "mafia"), I have another question (in case you forgot the last round of Holocaust, genocide, and forced sterilization of "inferior" breeders....

... Who is the next "we"? Who gets to decide who can, and who cannot breed?

Both school districts and courts have a problem with embezzlement, and some of it overlapping. I don't live in SF, but here's an article from 2002:http://www.sfbg.com/37/04/news...(SFBG-dot-com/37/04/news_dirty_money.html)Oct. 2002"Willie Brown's dirty moneyHow alleged – and convicted – thieves helped bankroll the mayor's reelection bid.By A.C. Thompson

DURING THE 1999 campaign cycle, Mayor Willie Brown and his close allies received $43,550 in contributions from corporations and individuals now charged with embezzling school district funds, a Bay Guardian review of public records indicates.

In one instance, prosecutors allege in court documents, $25,000 was stolen from the San Francisco Unified School District and given directly to the local Democratic Party for use in Brown's campaign. So far, none of the tainted money has been returned.

"If this money went to people running campaigns, I hope they do the right thing," school board president Jill Wynns told us. "People who received money that was stolen from the children of San Francisco should want to give it back."

In recent weeks state and federal prosecutors have brought three separate felony embezzlement cases against SFUSD staffers and companies that contract with the school system. The defendants – two corporations and seven individuals – are charged with collectively siphoning more than $1 million from school coffers."

8 years later, Nov. 2010 -- recently: Same practice still going on:http://www.baycitizen.org/educ...(BayCitizen-dot-org story)

"Payment Scandal Rocks SF UnifiedAdministrators funneled money into own accounts, documents showBy TREY BUNDY on November 12, 2010 - 6:53 p.m. PST

"A group of San Francisco Unified School District administrators, including an associate superintendent, engaged in a long-running scheme to funnel district money into their personal bank accounts via nonprofit community organizations, according to internal documents.

The administrators worked out of the Student Support Services Department, which partners with community organizations to provide thousands of San Francisco students with health education, substance abuse counseling, violence prevention, after-school activities and other services.

The scandal has stunned San Francisco educators and thrown Student Support Services into turmoil at a time when the district faces a $113 million deficit. Some vital student services have been threatened as investigators comb through millions of dollars of transactions dating back at least four years.

Documents obtained by The Bay Citizen under a California Public Records Act request show that administrators directed money from community organizations into their own pockets. Some also fabricated overtime reports and falsified signatures on district contracts. The records also include copies of checks and invoices, suspension and termination notices and contracts bearing signatures that the district says were falsified.

“It was a system developed by a small group of individuals operating outside of the budget and finance department,” said Deputy Superintendent Richard Carranza, who participated in the district’s investigation.."

Several Individuals and organizations reporting on and investigating the courts have already documented the same type of SYSTEM within the Family Courts. Reporting such as this, focusing on the individual personalities of judges, parents, and court-officials ignores the groundwork already done to expose a similar scheme of funneling federal (and private) money to nonprofits etc. operated and sometimes even started by judges and attorneys, as has been going on since, it appears in at least one case, 1988. "Needs" are manufactured in the minds of the originators, and sold to distressed parents, sometimes forced on them, during the separation process.

This undermines the basic integrity of government, and credibility of the courts.

Birds of a Feather (the slush fund feathers) often flock together. Howsabout you encourage people to look into this (i have) and call a ceasefire on broad-swath profiling of people by whether or not they are "fit' to have children, in your eyes.

It's every citizens' duty to help keep government honest overall. So what are you going to do with this information?

For more info, see the comments field on the main article, wade through it (we had to) and look for data by individuals such as "NAFCJ" or myself -- we are naming specific names, providing links, and not talking about "feuding parents" which is not the main issue, as press would like us to believe. Nor is the issue insufficient resources.

The issue is system design and, and corruption in how the finances of it are handled, including identified cases of fraud. The Bay Citizen (above) found things out by filing a "Public Records Request Act" which is key, and a start.

The problem IS "the system" and not "the breeders." And stop blaming women for being unable to find a mate "who won't harm them." We are not all mind-readers, and judging by what happened at the SFUSD, some people are indeed slick.

What about men not buying into the nonsense that THEY should breed? And plenty of tax dollars, as we speak, are also being spent (by the US Govt. mostly HHS dept) to then supposedly coerce, cajole, and persuade the "men who bred" (fathers) to become responsible -- while this is concealed from mothers in the courts, that such programs even exist. It works through the child support system, principally, but not only.

FYI, I "bred" after two college degrees and a solid work career. I am glad I did -- despite all this, there are two tremendous human beings in this world now who wouldn't have been otherwise, and had I not gone through some of this court _ _ it I might never have known about it (as it appears many readers still don't) and thus been motivated to change it.

Count me out
Count me out

We are not hope-mongers around here, but anyhow, Julia, thank you for your Blog.

(though i really don't know what you see in the PMA, whose logo is all over it).

Thank you for your wordpress site posting articles like this that point out conflict of interest as on Feb. 24 of this year,

"brooklyn-family-court-asher-white-henna-white-ohel-family-services" (part of post name):

CONFLICT OF INTEREST? ASHER WHITE REPRESENTING OFFENDERS OF HENNA’S DV CLIENTSPosted by calany on February 24, 2011 · Leave a Comment

After learning of a several cases in Brooklyn, The Awareness Center and the Coalition Against Legal Abuse have joined forces to insure that the Brooklyn Family Court system is safe for survivors of domestic violence, sex crimes and other types of abuses.Yesterday, attorney Asher B. White, attempted to represent a man who’s wife and children are alleged victims of domestic violence.

Only problem Asher White's wife was working for a different agency, ultra-orthodox Jewish, and possibly compromising confidentiality. CALNY out'ed them, I gather:

"Throughout the evening both parents and teens were encourage to bring allegations of both sex crimes and domestic violence directly to Henna White’s office at the District Attorney’s office of Kings County – instead of going to a legitimate rape crisis center, domestic violence center, or directly to the Brooklyn Police Dept.

Ms. White acts as the liaison and victim advocate for the Jewish ultra orthodox community. According to recent investigations, Ms. White has been providing confidential information to her defense attorney husband Asher White, who then uses the information to protect the alleged offenders, leaving those who have been victimized out in the cold.

{{Victims, you are forewarned! This happens throughout the system!}}

David Mandel promoted himself as an expert in sex crimes. Mr. Mandel is the CEO and spokesperson of Ohel Children’s Home and Family Services. Mandel does not have a clinical degree, yet promotes himself as an expert in cases of abuse and assault. His education is in business."

(Site -is wordpress, domain "CALNY")Conservative religious groups, whether Muslim, Jewish, or Christian, tend to have abominable records on prosecuting criminal actions against women and/or children.

Also, thank you for posting the Youtube on Stephen Doyne and Zoe D Katze (a feline custody evaluator) ... (your March 2, 2011 post on the blog)

The article says Doyne has done about 3,000-4,000 custody evaluations. One resume I saw of another Psy.D." boasted a lot of seminars in which Doyne was one of the faculty. Unbelievable.

Anyhow, Ms. Julia, please start to include a few posts about the role of the AFCC and CRC in setting up the court systems. Please go from posting and "hoping" to understanding and acting. Thanks.

PACKERVICTIM
PACKERVICTIM

Beautifully said - many of us have had to suffer in silence since speaking out could invoke judicial retaliation and upsetting the applecart for all the court appointees.....

FixBrokenCourts
FixBrokenCourts

Ahem, to answer your question above- if you bother to read the article carefully, you will see that the mediator in Nevada is in fact a Californian, working in Nevada County, California. You clearly haven't been "up in this neck of the woods" very long if you don't know that Nevada County is a California county.

It's always best to read the article carefully before trying to trash the author! You've clearly stuck your foot in your mouth in a big way here. Who's ashamed for our neck of the woods now... we have higher standards for comments than this one you've posted in haste here.

elayneg827
elayneg827

@Eashahin The problem with Juvenile system is inost states. I am in Va. Court reporters should be mandatory as no lawyer, judge or court officials can prevent records be blocked and deny any errors or misconduct. Without PROOF the court protects themselves and too bad if the children they are supposed to protect suffer. I have learned this the hard way. States need to communicate and agree on laws and enforcement...we are supposed to be a Nation and states need to get it together. My grandchilds mother, is with a Registered Sex Offender, she stayed with me for years but then instead of investigating and my son moved they let her take her back and ignore or refuse to give access to prove they made mistakes and refuse to release discovery so kids suffer.  grace

equalist
equalist

Liora, I’m not clear on your point. I agree that different people have different concepts of what constitutes abuse. But, you also seem to be implying (1) that I am defending my own abusive acts, and (2) that women have stricter standards than men of what constitutes abuse. I totally disagree.

For example, you say pointedly to me: “What you have to ask is if the woman that is the recipient of your behavior finds your treatment acceptable. If she's saying "no", "stop it", "leave me alone" - guess what? You're violating her and "abusing" her....” I find your assumption to be very sexist. It is true that I have been accused of abuse (and, as is automatic, a restraining order was issued and was used as amunition to keep my son from me), but there was no truth and no evidence of truth. Indeed, the most serious accusation (that I came to her home and threatened her with a gun) was disproved by half a dozen affidavits establishing that I was at a business meeting several miles away. In contrast, I went to the police on two separate occasions while still bleeding from this same “victims” assaults. She did not deny inflicting the injuries and the police literally laughed at her everchanging excuses for what happened. But, no legal action was ever taken against her.

As to your claim that men and women have different standards, it seems more dependent on the target than on the perpetrator. In other words, the double standard which researchers find is that the same behavior which is considered abusive when done to a woman is considered benign (or even humorous) when done to a man.

Count me out
Count me out

I replied (apologizing for the Nevada County Oversight) probably a week ago to this comment. I notice my reply was not posted, and another reply to a comment above went immediately to "moderation." FixBrokenCourts assumed I "trashed" the author (who I don't know personally) rather than the reporting. There are serious omissions in this, disturbing to someone who has been stuck in the court system for years, a situation that makes retaining employment and other professional relationships almost impossible. This type of questioning and critical thinking (not just complaining) has led to some very solid leads in WHY the courts operate as they do, as has been demonstrated in the counterpart, LAWeekly -- from the same state. Court practices and government practices do not differ that much from Southern to NOrthern CA, and we could learn from that example

Count me out
Count me out

I beg your pardon on the oversight.

I am very familiar with CJE's work -- I have friends who blog it constantly, and they are so enamoured, they will repost my blogs, but have lost all curiosity for actually investigating the money trail in the courts, figuring someone else will do it for them.

The topic of mediation is a sore point with me, because I know that CJE knows a lot more than they are acting on. And the purpose of emphasizing mediation is, by federal grant to the California Judicial Council mandate -- to increase noncustodial parenting time. On the TAGGS.HHS.gov judicial base -- where I learned to go from Liz Richards of NAFCJ.net, and where I spent a LOT of time tracking funding -- the category 93.597 (I believe) is Grants to states for Access/Visitation. In California, it was stipulated to accomplish ("facilitate") more noncustodial parenting time -- and the literature on this is just about overtly fatherhood, and the practice most assuredly (with few exceptions) is -- by three method:

(Order may be off);1. Mediation2. Supervised vistation3. Parenting Education and Counseling.(check exact details).

These fields exactly are where the major problems with custody going to batterers lies, and right there - on the court site, on government sites, on literature on this, and if people actually read father's rights groups talking about this among themselves, they talk about this! it's been in place since 1996. ALong with this some of these groups then branch out and try to drum up more business, reaching out to fathers.

Logically speaking, then, task forces on how mediation is done are not the answer unless it ALSO incorporates, the court system has a financial incentive to do so, and specifically where that's at. Moreover, the trainings have already been identified (LAST decade) as a source of sometimes kickback or slush fund activity -- and there is simply not oversight.

People who have worked with CJE have explained that too, including one mother that did NOT lose her child because she utilized calling that situation out -- someone in her case was receiving payments through these funds. We KNOW that's the issue.

If you come at my comments thinking my main point is personal -- well, yeah, at this point I AM getting a little personal about this. After all, I haven't seen my children for years, and the thing ruined me financially, and deprived my kids of their own child support by waiting til an arrears had accrued, doing nothing when he broke a custody order, (and committed a felony-level event, at least legally speaking), and then the mediator white-washed it. I didn't find out til all was gone WHY...judges won't listen.

I have also sat through mediation approximately four times so far, and each time lost something valuable -- the next to last time, both my children. There is no one that could convince me that training mediators would improve them -- they are in on the take somewhere, and what they are doing is NOT mediation. Even my kids saw through them, before they each hit puberty: Just wanted to know which parent to blame.

The reference to "our neck of the woods" was regarding the SF Weekly as opposed to the LAWeekly for investigative reporting, including sometimes of the courts. Here's an example:

City Hall Money Games: How Personal Slush Funds Work, OfficeHolder Accountshttp://ronkayela.com/2010/05/-...

This article, and many others, from Ron Kaye in LA (formerly of the LA WEEKLY) dates to Mary 2010, it is good investigative reporting, and as SF and LA courts are in the same state and a lot of the origins of the family law system itself came from L.A., I think it would behoves some of our advocates to take a look at this, inbetween psychological evaluations and requesting task forces to audit, with much clamor and publicity.

Pointing to things like this would help moms acquire some skillsets, rather than just how to do free PR and encourage people to attend rallies they can't quite afford anyhow...

Also, FYI, I wasn't trashing the author (I don't even know the guy) but complaining about the article's contents. Keep it straight and remember the First Amendment, OK?

Your name "FixBrokenCourts" indicates that you (like most people) haven't looked into their setup thoroughly. That's a choice and there is a lot more information under this name on the main related article, with the 500+ comments from all quarters.

If you're a noncustodial mother or one whose custody is being challenged, I strongly suggest you print and read the commentary from various quarters, including Glenn Sacks attempting to trash Jennifer Collins.

I think in the larger context, I could be excused a minor error born out of frustration. I have done good work, for free and i haven't exploited anyone in the process, or engaged in any coverup or attempting to derail the conversation activities for profit. CJE has. I'm tired of it, and also it's late here. Good night.

PS. If you are offended EASILY around personalities, you won't go far in reform. Also if you are more loyal to a person than to a cause, although loyalty counts if things are going to happen.

I'm not EASILY offended - the BMCC conference for me was a turning point. Mothers are being used, and also no mention was made of all the fatherhood nonprofits that are helping sabotage the cases. It's time to start thinking strategically, and not just strategically for single-action solutions, but for understanding the entire setup. Omitting the slush fund angle entirely is simply irresponsible at this point. Some of them appear to be running right out of SF Courts.

Wouldn't waste time (beyond the apology) to respond here, except it's a public view with a general readership in SF.

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

©2014 SF Weekly, LP, All rights reserved.
Loading...