Joseph Rossi , Campaigner for the protection of emotional abuse or death of children from violent parents.
Facts of Typical Domestic Violence and the neglect of duty of care by
Law enforcing officers.
Domestic Violence will not be curbed while
(a) Police are under staffed.
(b) While Court Judges only give fines (penalty) of just a cost of a box of beer.
(c) While there is no compulsory victim Impact statements.
(d)
While States and Federal Judges do not exchange information about the
perpetrators.
(e) While Judges give more penalty for verbal abuse than Physical abuse.
(f)
While Judges do not punish promptly and severely for the lies put forward
to
them by the perpetrators or their lawyers.
(g)
While the Judges use the court revolving doors for offenders instead of
the
jail revolving doors.
(h)
While Politicians under fund school social workers, Domestic Violence
shelters,
Children Access Centers.
Typical examples of the facts are. as at 16/02/2008. date
A woman is age 32 Born 1976.
Has 2 children boy aged 3 Born 2004 girl aged 2.Born 2005
She becomes pregnant with twins.. Age 6 months Born 2007.
Occupation House wife.
Husband is age 36. Born 1972.
Occupation Army.
|
Wife's Father age 60 Married once still together 3 adult children still at home. DOB May 1948 |
| Wife's Mother age 56 DOB October 1952 |
|
Father has an A Restraining Order, for Assault, molest, harass, threaten, interfere, engage in intimidation towards wife. |
|
Father says Father-in-law is , vindictive, accusatory, threatening, harassing, argumentative, demanding, |
|
Father continues to say Father-in-law is , controlling, patronizing, ballistic, bombastic, iron fisted, insulting, hostile, abusive, has toxic environment. |
|
Pat says of JPR , toxic environment |
Events:
Get married in Adelaide.
Both move with Defence force from Adelaide to Oaky, Townsville and Sydney.
Minimum distance from both parents some 1200 Kilometres apart.
Both return home Christmas or Easter to see relatives.
At start every thing good.
After First child Husband becomes possessive.
After second child. Husband picks on her mother (mother-in-law).
On knowledge of birth of twins (March 2007), husbands begins to nag wife daily.
Husband over spends on credit cards.
Wife’s parents invited by wife to come to Sydney.
Wife’s parents go to Sydney Mother’s day 2007 for first time ever in to daughter’s home.
Husband starts shoving wife against wall of home while still pregnant with twins.
Husband physically assaults wife throwing her against house wall and to the ground on to cement paths, bruising her stomach and back.
July 2007.
Twins girls were born September 2007 (13 weeks early).
Husband does not attend birth. Husband does not give assistance to wife at home after caesarean operation.
Husband refuses help from mother-in-law to look after wife.
Wife has Appendix operation Christmas day 2007.
Husband again physically assaults wife on 06/01/2008 (12 days after operation) Husband throws wife against house brick wall.
Wife tries to get away through garage door. .
Husband follows her to the garage.,. Husband punches wife in face, breaking her left hand cheek bone. .Husband goes inside
gives no assistance to injured wife.
Wife requires hospital treatment and calls the Ambulance.
Army, Police, Husband do not inform her parents of being in hospital.
Husband’s parents became aware of assault. They too did not inform wife’s parents.
Army Major's and establishment attempt to protect Army Husband with work reference to the NSW Magistrate Court
Army Majors do not attempt and do not get full version of events from wife. Army Officers lie in their work references to the NSW
Magistrate court..
NSW Police do not assist the wife with Victim impact statement. (Minister say "no need" (What a person must be dead before
an impact statement is warranted?)
==================== ====================
Is it common amongst Army Personnel? I am absolutely sure.
Should government policy with the Defence Force, the Military and State Police be changed as compulsory to inform parents of the Victim
when physical assaults are caused by the spouse.
I think yes. If the policy remains as is. It means that the Police go to next of KIN, (the perpetrator of violence) and say " did you know you
physically assaulted your partner."
Then What? The Violent partner waits for passive partner to return home and get another walloping.
Come on your regulators (POLITICIANS) get real.
Should the hospital policy be changed as compulsory to inform parents of the Victim when physical assaults are caused by the spouse. I think yes.
The results of these encounters were wife got a broken left check bone and left home with 4 children under 5.
Army Officers Contact Wife in South Australia from Sydney.
Army Officers patronizes wife and report back to Husband .
Army Officers gave good reference about solder husband to NSW Criminal Court hearing. ( Not accurate in details)
Husband only got $30 fine and good behavior. By such a low fine (less than the cost of a carton of beer) The NSW Magistrate did not give a clear indication to others that Violence was not acceptable in the Australian Communities.
Wife's Father
Husband left life threatening phone call to father-in-law.
Husband got $500 fine and good behavior for threatening. .(Port Adelaide Magistrates Court)
Again Husband with the help and advice of Norman Waterhouse Group of Lawyers. Namely Georgina Parker
puts in other Affidavits that are Court time consuming, inaccurate, contaminating the facts where by putting more heat into an already
volatile hostile situation.
The conduct of the Magistrate in Adelaide Family Court.
Responds:
Noticing that Wife's father is not afraid to defend daughter and makes forceful statements of facts.
The Magistrate becomes uncomfortable. Starts to Stutter in his speech and makes some
prejudice biased errors of authority.
Magistrate refuses to listen to Court Applicant without her having a qualified lawyer to represent her.
Magistrate goes 100 percent in favor of Army Solder.
Federal Magistrate gave unsupervised access to husband to all the children.
Federal Magistrate refused medical treatment of the boy from emotional psychological trauma.
The Army commanders tells wife’s father go away. Nothing to change regarding Army policy interfering in Civilian matters Accurate
information or not)
The Family Court Judge considered the victim (passive Partner -mother) as the villain and not the perpetrator (Violent Husband )
==================== ====================
Let us share a few Scenarios.
Scenario (1)
The wife's father is what the son-in-law accuses him of:
is , vindictive, accusatory, threatening, harassing, argumentative, demanding, controlling, patronizing,
ballistic, bombastic, iron fisted, insulting, hostile, abusive.
Would the daughter travel 1000 KM to got home to such an environment.? Answer No.
Would the daughter travel 1000 KM to got home to such an environment.? Answer Yes if the husband is worse than the father..
Would the daughter travel 1000 KM to got home and applies for Court help in Marriage Separation ? Answer Yes.
Do you the reader believe that a victim of violence needs to have a
vindictive, threatening, controlling,
bombastic, iron fisted, hostile,
parent
environment
and
also a vindictive,
threatening, controlling, bombastic,
iron fisted, hostile, Husband environment
to be again confronted by a vindictive, threatening,
controlling, bombastic, iron fisted, hostile,
Family Court Magistrate
environment.
I think Not.
What did the Magistrate expect from a concerned father. To say thank you for hitting my Daughter Dear son-in-law of Mine.
What did the Magistrate expect from a concerned father. To say thank you to the Army Officers for giving false evidence to the NSW Magistrate Court..
What did the Magistrate expect from a concerned father. To say thank you. Continue to submit false fabricated Affidavits by Norman Water House Group of Lawyers.
What does the Magistrate expect from a concerned father. To say thank you "your honour for ignoring your oath of office.
I would expect from a violent father-in-law to have by surprise bashed the son-in-law immediately he received the facts the daughter got bashed up.
==================== ====================
29th. October 2008.
Scenario (2)
The father is a religious person who does not believe in Blood transfusion.
The mother does believe in blood transfusion.
A child need blood transfusion to survive.
Which parent has the choice in recommending the treatment?
Scenario (3)
The father is a person who has no medical background. Only his opinion.
The father is a person who does not believe in chiropractors.
The mother’s parents have had over 30 years had mobility enhancing chiropractic treatment.
The mother’s parents have had over 30 years had mobility enhancing chiropractic treatment.
The mother has had before marriages had mobility enhancing chiropractic treatment.
Does believe in chiropractors.
The mother there for does believe in chiropractors.
A child need back manipulation.
Which parent has the choice in recommending the treatment?
Scenario (4)
The father is a person who has no medical background, may have a psychological problem.
The father has been convicted of Domestic violence.
The father admits the son has psychological problems. (Social behaviour problems)
It is assumed as fact that the father has emotionally abused the child.
The father is a person who does not want the child to be psychological assessed and treated. Because he does not want to be proven of the emotional abuse.
The mother does want the child to be psychological assessed and treated.
Which parent has the choice in recommending the treatment?
My belief is that the proven least violent parent out ranks the most violent partner.
That all medical treatment authority remains with the least violent partner.
That all serious life-threatening problems of the children must be made available to both parents.
That the Family Law Courts Judges and Magistrates identify the most violent parent and not grant veto rights court orders to that most violent partner.
It seems that the present government has not learnt from the "Forgotten Generation" court judgments and government interference.
Scenario (5)
( I stress here that there may be as many females as males that fall in the same categories.
Sex Discrimination should not be assumed..
(A) The Grand father on wife's side is a person who is
(a) vindictive, accusatory, threatening, harassing, argumentative, demanding,
(b) controlling, patronizing, bombastic, insulting, hostile, abusive, iron fisted, went ballistic,
.(c) Assaulted, molested, harass, threatened, interfered, and engage in intimidation.
The Husband is a Abusive Narcissists worse than the Father-in-law.
The Husband gets his way so there is no need to get outside assistance like the police, the Lawyers, or the Family Law courts.
Why should he
(B) The wife gets emotionally and physically assaulted by the husband.
The Ambulance is called and the police takes statements.
The Army Officers are called in. They take the view of protecting their own In this Scenario the Husband.
Army records and Hospital records show next of kin is the Husband (perpetrator)
Police, Hospital and the Army do not contact an alternative next of kin.
The wife organises separation papers and lodges them with the family Law Court.
(C) Husband makes allegations that the father-in-law is
vindictive, accusatory, threatening, harassing, argumentative, demanding, controlling, patronizing, bombastic,
insulting, hostile, abusive, iron fisted, went ballistic,
.Assaulted, molested, harass, threatened, interfered, and engage in intimidation that was the cause of conflict
between husband and wife.
Justifying his own actions like to his father-in-law. Why should the father-in-law complain.
(D) The Father-in-law writes letters to the police, and the Army, demanding why there was not better protection for his daughter.
The Father believes he is the father and the son-in-law is equal to the daughter and not senior.
(E) The Lawyers, the Court Officials get the impression the Father is the worst in the group. They become hostile towards the father and use the grand children against him.
Giving the violent parent (son-in-law) unsupervised access to them.
What treatment does the mother feel about Justice? (Answer: Nil)
What protection and care has there been for the protect of defenceless children by all law enforcing officer concerned. Answer: Nil)
Scenario (6)
(A) Assuming there are as many violent male parents as there are violent female parents.
I come to this conclusion because the violence is in 99 percent of cases taught from their own parents.
We shall compare the violence towards children before the Family Law Act 1975 was introduced and the comparison of violence towards children after the amendment s to the Act in about 2006.
Prior 1975 Little divorces occurred.
The passive parent was forced to stay with violent partner.
The passive parent in most cases tries to protect the children 24 x 7.
The passive parent relatives if violence was too excessive would take the law into there own hands and bash the violent partner to behave.
I say some 5 percent of families would be violent 24 x 7 towards their children.
From 1975 to 2006..
The female had all the power in law. Accuse a male partner was violent proof or not and the husband would
automatically get a restraining order .
.
The female would move some where in Australia and the husband would not be given details of her and the children where about.
The children would become adults and parents themselves and they would not know their own father.
Assuming that each violent family has a minimum of 4 children each.
This was totally wrong for 2 reasons.
Father accused of violence when not guilty.
The children never been told who their father was..
From 2006.
The lazy politicians who wanted the 1975 law to go away> Then changed it to all children must know both parents.
In my opinion most males want to work, have sex and one good meal a day and they are happy.. Little attention if any interest is given to the children unless asked for by the mother ( Wife).
Who cares what school, what figure cut, what small cold the children have during the day or week. The mother is there to look after those trivial things.
So I still consider only 5 percent of children were brought up in a violent environment.
Now we have 5 percent of violent fathers come into the picture. Making automatically 10 percent of the children being brought up into a violent environment.
Add to this the opportunist fringe violent or revengeful partner and this figure could go up by another 5 to 10 percent.
All children must know both parents. under any circumstances and at any age.
(1) The mentally in sain, (2) The Drug growers (3) Drug Addicts. (4) Alcoholics. (5) Road raggers. (6) Violent tempered.. (7) The Narcissists. (8) The Paedophiliac
all of who the politicians try to avoid and definitely the community want to avoid.. Yet the children are not allowed to escape from these villains..
Not only are the children pulled in one direction by a parent but both parents are pulling on the children's mind and body every alternate week as shared parenting is forced upon the parents by the stupid unconceived law of unthinkable politicians.
ABS 1996 there were 6300 Reports to safety Houses by women.
12% live in fear.
Jane Mulroney
Senior Research Officer
Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse.
Mathematically 12% of 6300 =756 women each with 4 children=3024 children. then 1996.
About the time I was alleged to have supported the policy " all mothers with 3 or more children from 3 or more father's should be sterilised"
At the time that I had 3 single mother each with 5 children who I had complains from neighbours about the children asking for food, milk and
pinching mail cheques from letter boxes.
At a time that, when I interviewed the mothers they were meek, quite, well mannered.
Making me feel a heel, yet very upset to see beautiful young children under 5 being more intelligent than I. one week.
Then the next week f finding out that one child was burnt to death when the mother fell asleep with a cigarette and the home burnt down.
Another child had his leg crushed by the wheels of a train when he was playing chasse on the railway tracks.
Where were the fathers I asked. Answer In Prison. No wounder the women were meek and quite. One word out of place and a few teeth would have gone flying.
What did Mr. Michael Atkinson do at the time. Put the Port Adelaide media dogs on to me.
What did Mr. Mike Rann do at the time. Put Mr. Michael Atkinson and Kevin Foley on to me in Parliament to ridicule.
So Much for their propaganda for Anti Domestic violence and children protection.
The Liberals also distanced themselves. I ask Where were the Liberal lawyers who had come across domestic Violence and children cases
within the Family Law Courts?
Without having a full personal experience with a relation in 2007 to 2009 from start to finish and following it through the Family Law Courts,
I would still have been blaming the women in getting involved with violent partners.
Again I am witnessed children under 5 having their little minds twisted by violent parent with no help is sight from any Government Authority of any kind.
3024 children. then 1996. I consider it doubles every 10 years . So in 2009 it is assumed there are some 6000 children living in fear with no government support.
That is if all children are identified.
But like nature with the ice burgs. one third above water and 2 thirds hidden. So too the facts of child abuse and reported violent parents.
Initially I blamed fully the Magistrate for the ambiguity of the decisions made. As the procedure through the Family Court progressed I became aware that the Law was mostly at fault. Add to that, that the magistrates too, have no time to ram anis, assess, evaluate evidence.
IT ALL comes back to the government. All lip service and no humans on the coal face of the problem.
PRESENT CHILDREN PROBLEMS ARE CAUSED BY Either
(1) Not enough Magistrates to have the ability to sieve through cases properly.(2) Government legislation being in appropriately drafted.
(3) Not enough police dedicated to family Violence. (4) Not enough child social workers in schools.
(5) Not enough social workers for Children access Centres.(6) Not enough social council ling agencies.
Rann, with the children. Like Nero watched while Rome burnt.
I will at this point also introduce the other feel good confusing tug of wars with the state government propaganda of Grand parents having rights to the grand children.
You now have not two but 6 adults fighting over children. No wounder there are more bullies in schools as those children must rely on self survival.
The Police do not protect them.
The father can not protect them.
The mother can not protect them.
The Children Lawyers are only interested in money and do not protect or recommend appropriate laws to protect the children.
All the result of lazy thinking politicians trying to please every body and ending up pleasing no one.
( Talk about air pollution, water pollution, what about legal garbage pollution.)
The problem with this legal garbage pollution. is caused by politicians elected too young (before the age of 50 that are trying to reinvent the wheel with out knowing the mechanics of life.
I refer to my back ground history comparing my 9 years of education to my parents 2 years and now I am 60 years old I still can not disprove their theorem of life compared with my theory of what it should be. Get ride of children in Parliament. No room for reinventions., BY UNDER 50 YEAR OLDS.
Amendments to the Family Law Act 1975.
(1). Get rid of lawyers in Domestic Violence cases where custardy of small children under the age of eight is concerned.
(2). Let the parent’s debate issues with the judge directly.
(3). Let the Judge assess who is the best parent to look after the child’s interests.
(a) First thing get all individuals of the family assessed psychologically.
Judge has to have a starting point.
Judge
makes a decision as to who is the best Parent to have
full custardy.
(b)
In further
disputes regarding violence. The Judge gets
children again assessed
psychologically.
Again
Judge has a comparison between start of the alleged
violence and a most recent
assessment.
(c)
Judge
again makes an informed decision based on facts
not personal unquantifiable
criteria.
Litigants can still get legal advice. But the individual litigants should be the persons the Judge cross examine.
A few pages of Court witnessed hand written documents should also be submitted to the Judge.
Reason: Hand writing tells a bit about the individual’s character and emotions.
Affidavits can still be type written.
Quick responses to question also give an indication as to
honesty about
evidence.
(4).
Comparing which
parent may make the best choice to have full
custardy of the children.
Comparing each Mother and father with the following:
( All relevant to
what age the offences were committed.
I would include even the dates if the age were the same)
Possible ways to Evaluate Best parent by the use of Prior Criminal History back to parents own childhood, records of Drug, Alcohol, Driving Record ( Road rag), work record, Residential record. (Making sure the comparisons are apples with apples).
The Parent with the least serious convictions should be the parent to have full custardy of the children under the age of 10. If no differences than there is no reason why each can not have shared parenting. Providing the children would be safe.
If there is doubt to the safety of the children, then similar evaluation of the Grand parents should be made. Again the Grand parent with the least Police offences should have direct say as to custardy and safety of the children.
Valuation : (1) A Parent that does not come across well before the judge with all recorded conviction has a criteria to base an assessment.
No voice tone conviction,= no physical dedication, = no commitment, = no responsibility., = not suitable to have full custardy of children.
Valuation : (2) No Criminal convictions ? Extremely good chance of being a good parent. then grading the police recorded information of the mother to those of the father. Comparing oranges with oranges)
Criminal Conviction Child hood ? May be a good parent.
Criminal convictions Teenage years ?
Criminal convictions Adult years 5 or years before
approaching the family
Courts?
Criminal convictions Immediately Current? Forget
about Custardy, and rights, these should be all lost
as to access to the children.
Valuation : (3) If evaluation of the immediate parents are identical
(Criminal, and financial)
Then the maternal and the Paternal Grand parents
should be evaluated under
similar criteria's.
I am absolutely sure this assessment would be better than the present ad hoc, etcetera --- etcetera ---Family Law Act.
Where the Lawyers have more say than the blood relatives.
The Full custardy applies to children under 10 years.
It does not apply to restraining of telephone calls, letters, or 2 weeks a year supervised children access as was the
case before the 2006 amendments of the Act.
2. Received a letter written on behalf of the Australian Federal Attorney General by Adele Byrne of 16/10/2008 stating
"As you are not a party to these proceedings and an outcome is
pending it is not appropriate to comment on the specific issues
which you have raised in your letter"
If I am not allowed to comment on specific issues regarding the pending case, so be it. I however still believe that I have a right to express my freedom
of speech on the way court matters are handled and due to my own observations put forward general terms that I consider inappropriate within the system.
This is so that people in upper areas of decision making can take on board my comments and reassess and improve the appalling system that prevails.
One would have to say not enough feedback is obtained to improve the system and when there are comments given it is usually during court proceedings
and cannot be addressed at that time. There should be a collection centre for this information so that the information can be filed and revisited.
When the court case ends a person should be allotted to collect data and provide a report to a recognized project officer to make improvement
suggestions to someone who has the power to change the things that need fixing. Surveys should be done regularly to get feedback from those who
have previously participated in the court system.
3. I note 2006 changed to the Family Law Act 1975.
These changes are so minor that it is difficult to note any adversarial changes.
This is also not noticeable by the judgments that I have seen given out first hand by visiting the Court rooms and listening to some of
the proceedings under different judges.
Your comment that the process is less adversarial and easier to navigate is a farce.
I did an observation visit to the court hearings in Adelaide taking in 3 different Magistrate’s court room to observe procedure
and on one occasion was horrified that the father having been on drugs, growing drugs and being violent still has the right to access the children.
This I consider absurd) The father must undergo treatment, and be rehabilitated. What better incentive than real love for the children.
If not rehabilitated then the rights to see the children should be when the children have an understanding right from wrong and at
least 8 years of age. The children then can choose how often and what duration they want to spend with the father who has drug or
violence issues. (Not when the children are at their most vulnerable, under the age of 8, in which they have no understanding
of what is right or wrong.
==================== ====================
(Very Important Reading)
The Internet reports of Dr. Sam Vaknin, Books Malignant Self Love and Relationships with Abusive Narcissists. Web site http://samvak.tripod.com/abuseefamily6.htmlhttp://samvak.tripod.com/abuseefamily6.html
(a) Coping with your abuser.
(b) The Guilt of the abused.
(c) Reforming the abuser.
Doctor Phil (Human Behavior)
Doctor Harry (Animal Behavior)
2. The Family Law Act 1975 continue to uphold with no changes is a farce.
It seems that humans know more about training successfully animals and not fellow humans.
To me the rules are the same. (Theorem not theory) Every one has a place in society. Every one should know their place in that society.
3. Narcissist person.
==================== ====================
( I ) Adelaide Advertiser Newspaper reports.
(a) Kym Mostyn, 47, indecent assault with autistic boy ,
No case to answer Judge Harriman Advertiser 20/03/2009.
(b) Atkinson, mental health, Mondays deadly family stabbing Deveron Park Advertiser 20/03/2009.
(c) Atkinson , schizophrenic man 2 years ago Joshua john Scalzi,
Advertiser 20/03/2009.
(d) David James, Wyatt, murdered son age 2 injured fiancé age 21, stabbed newly born daughter Advertiser 20/03/2009.
(e) Melbourne West Gate Bridge Murder of child Darcey Freeman by father. Advertiser 31/01/2009.
(f) Murder Aliya Zillic 3 year old son 11/05/2008 Cooper Pedy SA Advertiser 11/05/2008.
(g) Man 24, Murder 2 year old son, Partner age 21 Years.
Advertiser 14/03/2009.
Just to mention a few resent court mistakes.
(a) Agreed. Our client seeks that your client also be so restrained and an injunction granted in corresponding terms
(b) .Every demand made by Narcissist person. should be at the very minimum countermanded by the victim. Equal terms and conditions.
Domestic Violence
The present Censorship of family Court matters does not protect the children but the Court officials.
Am I mad and frustrated? Sure am ! especially when needless deaths of children are involved, caused by arrogant court officials.
The only group in society that do not pay for their crimes. Work independent of Government and independent of civil action. What a joke.
The number of homeless youths, children deaths (about 20 per year) youths on drugs. Are all persons affected
by an unbalance home life?
A life where the schools have neglected to recognize. A life where the social workers have neglected to recognize.
A life where politicians doing the so called door knocking have conveniently ignored. (Act, and talk show pony, gas bag,
and then do nothing.) I consider Attorney General, Michael Atkinson a classic contender.
(10.) Shared custardy of children.
a) Optimum is equal shared parenting/ Which would have been the case in a marriage held together.
b) The protection and safety of the children would be better while the parents remain together. If there is a separation
due to domestic violence then the violent parent can not be trusted to not be similarly violent to the children when alone.
c) If a violent parent has demonstrated no self control against the equal status adult partner. How can that same person
have self control with defenseless children?
d) If shared parenting did not function under the one roof (together in the one home. How can the courts and politicians
believe that it will work under demand, instructions, bullying of court orders?
e) Violence, Alcoholism,
Drug addiction abuse towards a partner
and or children daily or weekly should be
an automatic
restriction on no unsupervised
access to children till the children are at an age where the
children can and do
speck to court authorities in relation
to the conduct and behaviour of the
violent parent.
f) No shared parenting right should be given to violent persons.
==================== ====================
We may learn something by USA experience and making Judges and Magistrates accountable.
No more recycling of offenders through rotating court doors.
No more sugar money for hungry lawyers.
In Adelaide jails prisoners used to in the 1960’s and 70’s, grow their own vegetables. They used to do Water Supply road signs and tools.
Then Don Dunstan and Mike Rann (advisor) came to government and prisoners began to laugh. The punished people remained outside (Paying council rates, high rents, land tax, school fees. The protected criminals got rewarded on the inside with free shelter, free food, and free gymnasium and in jail education.
Labor Party. does not have DNA (Democratic plate form) It has policies of Dictatorship. (refer to Labor Constitution.
My name is Joseph Peter Rossi.
I was a taxi driver in 1973 for Yellow cabs when the depot was in Gawker Place Adelaide.
(1) Lawyers are not like taxi drivers.
(a) Taxi drivers do have a starting point and a finishing destination.
(b) Taxi drivers get paid for the completed trip.
I disagree with “we have a choice about having witnessed lawyers representing clients in court. Particularly failure of Children lawyers failing to investigate the child's interest diligently.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment made on 25th June 2009 based on actual Court Hearing.
My comments before were based on events leading up to a final Court settlement hearing due this week.
I have found out that the Magistrates and the Judges have to some extent have their hands tied by the legislation before them.
We must get the politicians to change the law immediately.
It seems that the villains in the family court have the upper hand.
Parties are forced to negotiate. If the Party without a lawyer refuses to negotiate then it is a act of attrition, which party runs out of money for lawyer fees or which party is the weakest. In most cases the strongest is the villain and forces the passive in to submission.
(1) The mentally in sain, (2) The Drug growers (3) Drug Addicts. (4) Alcoholics. (5) Road raggers. (6) Violent tempered.. (7) The Narcissists. (8) The Paedophiliac
all of who the politicians try to avoid and definitely the community build jails for to avoid.. Yet the children are not allowed to escape from these villains by government legislation.
They at present are not forced to under go treatment before being allowed to have access to their children.
No incentive for past villains to seek help.
No incentive for present villains to seek help.
It reminds me of coke fighting. Two adult parents fighting each other threw the courts to protect their own children. .(Fighting ring is the court room)
Or Gray Hound racing dog training, Putting a rat in the bag and the end of the bag tied around the dog's head . The Rat scratches and bits the dog making the dog wild threw pain. So much pain that the dog has to ware a muzzle when near humans to protect humans from being bitten.. . Putting two adult people with their heads in a bag (bag is court room negotiations.)
The Court system as it stands at present makes the placid, quite law abiding parent so angry, hurt, resentful for having to be forced to put up with the violent, vindictive, and a narcissist ex partner that all members of the family, Children, grand parents become resentful and thinking of taking the law in to their own hands.
Wake up Rann, Rudd, and other Labor politicians. Change the law quickly.
Do not make the same mistake as lack of burning the undergrowth in Victoria and then the bushfire kills so many innocent people. (Victorian Bush fire of 2009.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A typical letter from a grand parent to the placid lawyer representative.
(NOT TO HAVE PERSONS IDENTIFIED I HAVE PLACE (xx) AND REPEATED INITIALS (BB), ETCETERA.
Reference: File number: ADC 10xx of 2008, BB.
Dear BB. Lawyer,
BB. has corresponding with your office for some 5 months now.
My understanding is that BB. has put in writing what she wishes to achieve in the Family Law Court.
I have been staying out of her business all this while.
As an observer I am extremely disappointed with the legal system as has operated with BB..
May I stress the following ABOUT PP.
May I stress the following ABOUT BB..
(1) BB. has been beaten by PP. while she was pregnant.
(2) She has been daily emotionally abused during her last pregnancy.
(3) PP. gave no moral or physical support while BB. recovering from caesarean operation.
(4) PP. lawyer asked that court costs be disbursed while BB. represented her self in the second appearance. May 2008.
(5) Magistrate Brown directed BB. to get a qualified lawyer if he Brown was to listen.
(6) Note that BB. has had no previous criminal record or activity. Yet Magistrate Brown felt fit to suppress PP.’s home address while exposing BB.’s address.
May I stress the following ABOUT an Adelaide Family Court Magistrate..
If Item 5 and 6 was legal for Brown to impose. Why is it not appropriate to impose the same restriction on PP.?
Finally:
Your office said that the hearing could not be adjourned without both parties agreeing.
Last evening your office did not indicate a delay in the hearing.
Today at 9.30 AM. the court hearing should have been under way.
Today at 1.45 PM. I find out negotiations are still continuing without PP. (the violent parent) having a lawyer present.
How many times does BB. have to say something for legal persons to understand her?
The requests from an assaulting husband PP. is listened to with out questioning his motives.
I.e. why does he have to know the address of BB.? My experience is, so that he can intimidate and hurt her without any witnesses. This is a fact not fiction.
The Grand parent's address and phone number is just as quick and easy to get information about the children not about BB..
Child access change over’s. Why a police station instead of a Child Access Centre? Because PP. can again get at BB. with out witnesses a short distance from the station.
How come no condition is placed on a mentally sick person before the person gets unsupervised access to the defenceless children?
I feel strongly that BB. has been victimised by the lawyers and the Magistrate.
I shall not stand by and let this happen if to BB. definitely not some one else in similar situation.
Reasons for this letter.
I stress it is not because I am interfering but because the system is not treating the victim better than the criminal.
I stress it is not because you have to listen to my wishes but you (legal fraternity are not listening to the client.)
With PP. one has to ask the question why he wants this or that. Especially on person issues (means) and not affecting the end result. (Children Access hours and days)
I.e.; Why BB. has to take the children to an access centre. .Why not any other member of the family?
Is it not just important that the children get there?
Double standard I can not tolerate.
All day yesterday should have been enough negotiation.
I do not know the workings of the Courts. Just that the victim has been under stress since separation (18 Months) and further stress, in my
opinion is unnecessary.
An inexperienced person can not debate issues with experienced lawyer. I find it unfair that BB. had no opportunity to request second opinion
from another family member in addition to your recommendations.
Your recommendation may be the best. A second opinion better. But it would be too late to know differently after the event.
Especially when PP. had both parents and 2 siblings present and BB. NONE.
The law must be changed. No tortured placid person should under go this type of stress.
Yours sincerely, Concerned Grandfather.
Copyright © 2000 - 2009 Printed and authorized by Joe Rossi,
Woodville
South 5011
Joe Rossi former Liberal member of SA. Parliament 1993 to 1997 for the seat of Lee.
South Australia,
Home Ph 08-82430151, Mobile Ph 041-989-5550
E-mail joerossi48@optusnet.com.au
Face Book
Joe Rossi.
Webb
www.army-rann-children-courts.com.au
Webb
www.jp-rossi-political-sa.info
Telephone 08 82430151
===================================
Written
and given by Joe Rossi
without any University $120 thousand a year spin doctors.
What you read is what
you get.
No hidden meanings.