What must be done about the censoring of divorce and family court reform?

As families across America celebrate Father’s Day, this year they will be honoring a right that our Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized as the “oldest of fundamental liberty interests.”More than a freedom protected under the American Constitut…

Read more

Related articles

• Doctor, Lawyer, Dentist and Engineer Join in Writ for Father Equality at U.S. Supreme Court(leonkozioljd.wordpress.com)

  ---

• Must Read!!! Family Court and NSA Whistleblowers: What They Have in Common(leonkozioljd.wordpress.com)

  ---

• Will Parents Declare Independence on July 4th?(leonkozioljd.wordpress.com)

  ---

• The South or the Nation?(lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com)

  ---

• Today in Post-Racial America(lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com)

  ---

• War on Dads in our Nation’s Family Courts.(americanfathers.wordpress.com)

  ---

• Is the American public surrendering self-governance to rampant corruption ?(americanfathers.wordpress.com)

  ---

• 70 Million American Fathers Must Organize for Equal Rights(americanfathers.wordpress.com)

  ---

• U.S. Citizen Parent whose Son has been wrongfully retained abroad.(americanfathersliberationarmy.blogspot.com)

  ---

• Comparisons between Loving v. Virginia and the gay marriage cases aren’t apt(lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com)

Welcome to Leon Koziol.Com

Administrator’s Note:

Only months ago, we were getting messages and phone calls from Europe to Hawaii and everywhere in between. Some of our postings received over 2,000 views in 24 hours. Today we are averaging less than fifty. Could it be Facebook and on-line censoring? It has already been confirmed regarding the IRS and its targeting of conservative groups like ours (never prosecuted by the Obama administration).

During the week before Election Day, we posted a column about the Justice Department and Attorney General Loretta Lynch blocking reports (including our own) demanding an investigation of Title IV-D funding abuses in our nation’s family courts. We called it a “Pay to Parent” scandal involving a trillion dollar industry. Our viewership tanked dramatically after that, for example yesterday’s publication which is reprinted below .

In reaction to that publication, some of our followers are pressing for courthouse protests across the country…

View original post 1,113 more words

Advertisements

CHILD ABUSE FROM THE BENCH IN MIAMI-DADE COUNTY FLORIDA

All of us at one time or another find ourselves in front of the family court.

THE FAMILY COURT in Dade County is abusing children; either by ignoring their cries, as in this case, or by appointing Guardians that take money , are personal friends of the Judges and who just want a pay day.

WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN?

These people believe they are protected by the law, no one can stop them and they are G-d’s.

Well, we have given them this power…WE VOTED THEM INTO OFFICE.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

PLEASE HELP STOP CHILDREN ABUSE IN THE DADE COUNTY FAMILY COURT.

SIGN OUR PETITION AND ASK THE

Governor’s Office to Investigate Judge Scott Bernstein and Dr. Miguel Firpi.  

CHILD ABUSE FROM THE BENCH

• by: Geoffrey Cole
• target: The governor of the State of Florida, Miami, FL

Source: Petition: CHILD ABUSE FROM THE BENCH, Miami, FL

Facebook shared a post of mine about Opt IN USA from exactly one year ago today. In realizing that the campaign has been consistently described since then, I thought about complaints I’ve received that not everyone understands and can relate to Opt IN USA.
Of course I cannot imagine being unsure of whether I’ve been persecuted or psychologically tortured through misuse of administrative (as in quasi-judicial) or court (as in judicial) proceedings in America. It seems those of us unfortunate enough to have had such an experience would realize it happened or is happening. And Opt IN USA would speak to our embattled souls, even if aspects of the campaign left some of us confused.
While anything can be simplified, not everything is simple.
To thoroughly understand the problem of persistent U.S. legal system abuse is to perceive all of its complexities, which is helpful in devising solutions through which Opt IN USA constituents can be made whole.
Opt IN USA is about much more than being on the losing end of legal proceedings. Instead, the campaign identifies and addresses distinct patterns of judicial (including quasi-judicial) conduct and case outcomes that evidence deliberate violations of rights. Moreover, Opt IN USA links the failure of America’s current legal and political processes to redress this ominous problem to certain of their structural/logistical deficiencies. These deficiencies manifest as inadequate judicial oversight.
In other words, Opt IN USA goes beyond scandal advocacy, i.e., the process of “exposing” specific U.S. legal system bad guys in hopes of evoking enough outrage to get them ousted and reparations extended for their misdeeds. Instead, the campaign focuses on exposing how U.S. government unduly insulates this class of culprits from accountability and the devastation heaped on countless Americans, including children, as a result.
The goal of Opt IN USA and its sister organizations is to trigger genuine reform . . . not when the targeted bad guys are adequately proven to be bad or society is adequately protective of their victims, but when it is clear that everyone CONSCIOUSLY acquiescing to inadequate judicial oversight in America is complicit in the resulting harm.
True, Opt IN USA gets a bit “high brow” at times. But that is to reach Ivory Towers in which our complaints are dismissed as mere rantings of the confused, uninformed, misguided, and disgruntled. Our message must resonate there, arguably more than anywhere. As direct action is undertaken on Main Street, Opt IN USA and its sister organizations help ensure such efforts are not undermined by credible propaganda flowing from any Ivory Tower.
Surely not everyone discontent with America’s legal system has a well-founded complaint. But it is only through a fair and impartial administration of justice that our legitimate grievances can be properly sorted from those that are unfounded. America owes all of its citizens a fair and impartial administration of justice.
Learn more, join our efforts, and otherwise support Opt IN USA by visiting https://m.facebook.com/Opt.IN.USA/

C R Florida – 
Whatever the court setting, whether it is regarding divorce, child custody, parental support, probate matters, personal injury, property disputes, legal or medical malpractice, criminal charges, or other deeply personal issues, the frauds put forth in our courts add greatly to the trauma.

Related articles

• Do Nothing Judiciary
• The Pink Slip Project
• With One Judge Removed From Family Court, Koziol Seeks Removal of Another
• Please stop the unfair punishment of good fathers.
• The Due Process Clause guarantees more than fair process…
• Family Court Personal Injury – Class Action Court Filing
• Why…
• WHEN are WE as AMERICANS going to STAND UP
• Unwed biological fathers are often told they have no rights when it comes to their infant children
• Dwyane Wade Wins Huge Custody Battle Over Two Sons And His Ex-Wife Is Not Happy

Should a Father be allowed in the delivery room for the birth of his child?

…over the mother’s objections?

Judge Rules That a Mother’s Rights Trump the Father’s in the Delivery Room

A New Jersey Family Court Judge said NO in a ruling saying…

“Any interest a father has before the child’s birth is subordinate to the mother’s interest,” Judge Sohail Mohammed wrote.

I can understand why father’s rights groups see the ruling as discrimination: It privileges motherhood over fatherhood.

Rebecca DeLuccia and Steven Plotnick agree that they started a relationship in late 2012 and that DeLuccia learned she was pregnant in February 2013. Plotnick proposed and they got engaged. By September, they had broken up. Plotnick wanted to be involved with the pregnancy and with the child. Which is good, right? It’s what we want fathers to do. But in this case, for whatever reason, Plotnick lawyered up. In October, Plotnick’s lawyer wrote to DeLuccia, and then she got a lawyer too, and over the next month letters went back and forth about who would sign the birth certificate, who would be at the hospital for the birth, and—as Mohammed delicately puts it—whether there would be “litigation to resolve the matter if it could not be resolved amicably.”

In November, Plotnick sued, saying DeLuccia was refusing to let him sign the birth certificate, tell him when she went into labor, or allow him to be present for the delivery. DeLuccia responded by denying the first two accusations but saying that yes, she “will request her privacy in the delivery room,” as the judge writes. She said she would put Plotnick’s name on the list of visitors for after the delivery, though.

That sounds like a pretty good compromise to me. Once the baby is born, it’s about the baby. Before that, though, it’s about the mother, too—there is just no way to separate her from the fetus. That’s the basic reality of nature that should allow a mother to decide the circumstances of her labor and delivery.

“It is an inescapable biological fact that state regulation with respect to the child a woman is carrying will have a far greater impact on the mother’s liberty than on the father’s,”

…the Supreme Court said in 1992 in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the case that reaffirmed Roe v. Wade and also held that states can’t require women to inform their spouses that they’re having an abortion.

If a women doesn’t want her ex in the room while she gives birth—an ex who she’s not talking to and who after all is suing her—then he can wait in the hallway. He’ll still have plenty of opportunity to bond with his newborn.

The same logic of biology convinced me that a New York judge was wrong last year when she barred Sara McKenna, a former Marine and firefighter, from moving from California to New York, because she wanted to go to Columbia University, when she was seven months pregnant. The father of McKenna’s child was the Olympic skier Bode Miller, and he tried to block her from moving across the country by asserting his paternal rights before his child was born.

An appeals court quickly reversed that order. Again, fathers just cannot have rights over fetuses that interfere with a woman’s freedom of choice and movement in this way. Once the child is born, the law can accord equal rights to fathers and mothers. Before birth, it just cannot.

I recognize the pathos and irony here in turning fathers away. To resolve the dispute between Plotnick and DeLuccia, Mohammed turned to New Jersey’s parentage act, which he pointed out was designed “to help families deal with the problems posed by fathers who seek to avoid paying child support.”

In other words, deadbeat dads. Steven Plotnick has been anything but that, and with any luck his child’s life—and maybe DeLuccia’s, too—will be the better for it. But the impulse to want what’s best for his child could have led Plotnick to give DeLuccia her space rather than (figuratively) pounding on her delivery room door. As Mohammed pointed out, New Jersey and federal law also protect DeLuccia’s privacy rights as a patient. And he rightly notes that dealing with Plotnick’s uninvited presence could “add to an already stressful situation” in a way that “could endanger both the mother and the fetus.”

Surely Plotnick would agree that the baby’s health is paramount here.

Don’t Let Family Court Defraud You! ~ Families Civil Liberties Union

FCLU Has Opened A Formal Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Case. – FTC↓

Guaranteed Confidentiality For Court System Whistle Blowers & Informants – JIP™↓

Register Your Specific Family Court System Injustices For Action – VRP™↓

“Family court is the greatest fraud ever perpetrated on the American Public.”

Family Court / Family Law is a made-up business of consumer fraud, racketeering and collusion invented, marketed and protected by the monopolistic American Bar Association, ABA-member, predatory  lawyers, supportive and collusive ABA-members, Judges and their friends, and the “Experts.” 

Family law is a Brilliant Racket created to extort your family’s life savings through un-ending litigation prolonged deliberately by lawyer-instigated conflict, ambiguous laws and absurdly inefficient procedures at a time when you are most vulnerable and in need of help.  The system has no interest in actually divorcing you until you are picked clean of your life savings.  Once picked clean, the system drops you for the next victim.

There is no gender bias in family court. Those who suggest this are perpetuating the fraud.  Since Family Court has been transformed into one massive, fraudulent scheme, Judges punish both sides equally – Mother, Father, Man or Woman, it makes no difference.  These people will collectively take every last dime you have, or ever will have.

Buyer beware.

FCLU TV CHANNEL ~ powered by FAMILY COURT TV NETWORK

---

Upcoming Rally in New York on Sunday, Oct 9, 2016

Family Court – The Brilliant Racket™

It’s Time To End The ABA Lawyer/Judge Nepotism, Collusion, Racketeering & Fraud

Families Do NOT Belong in Court

– MUST SEE VIDEO –

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

For years, “Custody Evaluator/Therapist” Marsha Kleinman committed the most atrocious professional violations imaginable in family court by routinely coaching innocent children to say they had been sexually abused by their parents in order to gain a leg up in custody battles for her clients and revenue for her professional practice.  And, for years, New Jersey denied such criminal action could possibly occur.  By state law, children are subjected to vaginal rape exams for each and every false accusation perpetrated by unethical and fraudulent lawyers, judges and “experts” in their games for revenue.  Marsha Kleinman has put innocent men behind bars and destroyed the lives of countless children.  Professional behavior such as Ms. Kleinman’s is repeated daily in courthouses across America by similar “experts” and is fueled by family law attorneys and condoned by the family court system for revenue.  The false sexual abuse accusation is #4 in their sick Family Law Playbook.

American Family Courts and 1st Amendment violations of free speech

Part II — A Voice for Men

The tyrannical nature of Family Courts and their impact on fathers and children

Guy Mann recently penned his observations on the tyrannical nature of Family Courts and their impact on Fathers and Children.

Here we bring you the second and final part of his exposé.  ~ Via American family courts, the First Amendment, and violations of free speech: Part II — A Voice for Men

Non Payment of Child Support Indigent Defense | Turner v. Rogers

Turner v. Rogers and its Importance in Indigent Defense

| Criminal Law & Psychology Blog |

|Posted on November 2, 2010|

I wanted to take some time out of my schedule to discuss Turner v. Rogers while it’s still recent and I remember my thoughts on the matter.  First, I will provide some basic background on the case.  Then, I will discuss the basic legal and policy arguments of the case.  Finally, I will turn attention to my predictions and the importance of this case for indigent advocacy in general.

I. HISTORY OF THE CASE

What is this Turner v. Rogers case I’m talking about?  The answer, thankfully, is rather straightforward.  This case involves two indigent parents involved in a dispute over child support.  The mother, Ms. Rogers, brought a straightforward court claim against Mr. Turner for child support he owed to their daughter.  So far, nothing out of the ordinary.

The noteworthy aspect of the case is that Mr. Turner is indigent, a formal term for a person who is poor; presumably below the poverty line.  In terms of full disclosure, both Ms. Rogers and Mr. Turner were indigent parents.

The court in this case held Mr. Turner in contempt for failing to pay for his child support obligations.  A proper defense to this failure is an inability to pay based upon lack of necessary income.  If that’s the case, why did the judge hold Mr. Turner in contempt?  There is both a broad and specific answer.  The broad one is that the poverty defense is an affirmative one — one that a defendant must prove in order to avoid being held in contempt.  The specific answer is that Mr. Turner lacked an attorney, who would have certainly asserted this defense.

In these situations, a person can typically be held in either civil or criminal contempt, the specifics of which vary by jurisdiction.  This case occurred in South Carolina, where a person facing civil contempt may be incarcerated as a result.  That’s what occurred with Mr. Turner, who was sentenced to serve jail time for being what most us know in lay terms as being “a deadbeat dad.”

Mr. Turner appealed his case all the way up to the South Carolina Supreme Court on the grounds that he was entitled to have an attorney appointed for him since he could not pay for one on his own.  The South Carolina Supreme Court disagreed with his claim and, as a result, he petitioned the US Supreme Court to hear his case.

Lawyers would rather try heinous murder cases rather than one family law case.

Family law is not for the faint of heart, and institute teaches best principles and methods ~ Tulsa World

Family law is a tough practice.

Children’s futures are at stake. Homes and any monies involved are being divided. Cases turn ugly in a moment, and attorneys representing their clients must be prepared for these sometimes unexpected mood shifts.

Some Tulsa attorneys admit they would rather try a number of heinous murder cases rather than one family law case.

The researchers predicted that, after the children whose parents weren’t divorced, the children who lived with one parent would exhibit the fewest issues. However, these children were actually significantly more likely to experience various health problems

Judges have been heard to say they dread the controversial and contested family law cases because no one clearly is the winner and everyone loses when all cards have been played.

Even attorneys involved in a family law practice have difficult times because of the twists and turns a case might have. Shane Henry, who practices family law with the Fry and Elder Law Firm, said he consistently lost cases during his first three years in practice and knew he needed additional training.

The question was where to go.