The Evidence Standard To Fight Corrupted Family Courts

Evidence - 2016Preponderance of Evidence Standard

Under some circumstances use of the low preponderance of evidence standard may be a violation of constitutional rights. For example, if a state seeks to deprive natural parents of custody of their children, requiring only proof by a preponderance of evidence is a violation of the parents’ DUE PROCESS rights (Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 102 S. Ct. 1388, 71 L. Ed. 2d 599 [1982]).Due Process Right TFRM - 2016

Freedom in matters of family life is a fundamental liberty interest, and the government cannot take it away with only a modest evidentiary standard.

However, a court may use a preponderance of evidence standard when a mother seeks to establish that a certain man is the father of her child (Rivera v. Minnich, 483 U.S. 574, 107 S. Ct. 3001, 97 L. Ed. 2d 473 [1987]).

Most states use the preponderance of evidence standard in these cases because they have an interest in ensuring that fathers support their children.Child on the stand - 2016

Fight Corrupted Family Courts and CPSStop Gender bias and discrimination in Family Courts - AFLA Blog 2016

via Preponderance of Evidence Standard | Fight Corrupted Family Courts and CPSParental-rights (1)

Amendment 14 US Constitution - 2015Under the United States Constitution 14th Amendment Children Rights

One is free from Government involvement: Also, California law confers discretion on the court to grant “reasonable visitation” rights “to any other person [a non-parent] having an interest in the welfare of the child.” [Ca Fam § 3100(a) –“reasonable visitation may be ordered to any other person . . .” (emphasis added); Barkaloff v. Woodward (1996) 47 Cal.App.4th 393, 398, 55 Cal.Rptr.2d 167, 170], get familiar with this: “However, this right is limited.45618-anti-family

Parents have a 14th Amendment substantive due process “fundamental right” (a “liberty interest”) to make decisions concerning the care, custody and control of their children. A state law that, as applied, allows trial courts to grant nonparent visitation rights over a parent’s objection whenever the court determines such visitation may serve the child’s best interest, unconstitutionally infringes on that right. [Troxel v. Granville (2000) 530 U.S. 57, 65-70, 120 S.Ct. 2054, 2060-2062 (invalidating application of Wash. statute authorizing grandparent visitation solely on “best interest” showing] ”custody players 2015

Read more at www.leginfo.ca.gov

Vindicate The Violated - 2015

Advertisements

16 thoughts on “The Evidence Standard To Fight Corrupted Family Courts

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s