Experience with contempt?
The Great One
her for PAS or denying visitation.
If you can prove otherwise, do so. I would like to know where I can move if
this is true.
Sailawayhome wrote in message
<19991205203653...@ng-cj1.aol.com>...
>Anyone every experience a bio-parent getting away with contempt (not
adhereing
>to a court order) because they say the child will not abide by it and they
>can't make them?
>
>In this case SS is 12 and mother has manipulated her for over a year now,
and
>has refused to allow contact and bad-mouthed DH and now DH is pusuing
>enforcement and BM claims SS is refusing to go for the visitation and that
she
>is "trying".
>
>We know from experience that this is not true -- but will a court let her
off?
>I would think not being able to control your child would be grounds for a
>custody change. Anyone know anything about that either?
>
>Any help or experience would be appreciated.
>
>
Sailawayhome
Sailawayhome
compliance at all -- she's just trying to skirt contempt penaties by saying she
can't do anything because the SS sayes he won't go.
SS knows BM doesn't want him to see DH and he's been coached as how to best
support BM's wishes.
But my question is -- is there any chance the court will let BM off the hook
with this excuse?
Wilbur Streett
You need to make it very clear that you are aware of that, and that the
court needs to take other measures to insure that this womans lies and
attempts to cause PAS doesn't destroy the child's relationship with the
father.
Get it on the record, and get ready for an appeal. This is a lawyer game
to get you to piss away your money, and has nothing to do with truth,
ethics, integrity, or what is good for your kid.
Wilbur
sailaw...@aol.com (Sailawayhome) wrote:
--------------------------------------------
Putting A Human Face On Technology ;-)
--------------------------------------------
Literally! http://www.monmouth.com/~wstreett/FaceIT/
Wilbur Streett
>Forget about it! No court has ever found an ex-wife in contempt and jailed
>her for PAS or denying visitation.
Depending on the state, you may be able to file criminal charges for denial
of visitation.
The probably won't prosecute, but the ex may not know and understand that
and cave in.
Wilbur
Paul Fritz
Sailawayhome wrote:
It all depends on if the judge has a spine or not. I've know one that threatened
to jail the kid (14 at the time) for refusing to go others just throw up their
hands and say it's the kids choice.
tweak-it
Perjury is not prosecuted in Family Court!
Perjury is not prosecuted in Family Court!
Perjury is not prosecuted in Family Court!
Perjury is not prosecuted in Family Court!
I think saying it like this gives a better feel for what
they will encounter . Wilbur Streett said it like it is!
Tweak-It,
Wilbur Streett wrote:
> Perjury is not prosecuted in Family Court.
>
> You need to make it very clear that you are aware of that, and that the
> court needs to take other measures to insure that this womans lies and
> attempts to cause PAS doesn't destroy the child's relationship with the
> father.
>
> Get it on the record, and get ready for an appeal. This is a lawyer game
> to get you to piss away your money, and has nothing to do with truth,
> ethics, integrity, or what is good for your kid.
>
> Wilbur
>
> sailaw...@aol.com (Sailawayhome) wrote:
>
> >Anyone every experience a bio-parent getting away with contempt (not adhereing
> >to a court order) because they say the child will not abide by it and they
> >can't make them?
> >
> >In this case SS is 12 and mother has manipulated her for over a year now, and
> >has refused to allow contact and bad-mouthed DH and now DH is pusuing
> >enforcement and BM claims SS is refusing to go for the visitation and that she
> >is "trying".
> >
> >We know from experience that this is not true -- but will a court let her off?
> >I would think not being able to control your child would be grounds for a
> >custody change. Anyone know anything about that either?
> >
> >Any help or experience would be appreciated.
> >
> >
>
Wilbur Streett
>
>Maybe y'all should stop, just for a moment, and realize that perjury is a
>criminal offense - and would need to be prosecuted in criminal court, not
>family court.
Maybe you should stop and realize that we KNOW WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.
The Judge is responsible for bringing the charges, and the CRIMINAL ACT is
defined as lying under oath, there is no definition of Criminal or Family
court that defines whether it is a crime. IT IS NOT PROSECUTED if it
occurs in family court.
Tell you what, twit, find ONE CASE where PERJURY in Family Court has been
prosecuted.
Wilbur
Chris Priga
Wilbur Streett wrote:
> "Anastazia" <Anast...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >Maybe y'all should stop, just for a moment, and realize that perjury is a
> >criminal offense - and would need to be prosecuted in criminal court, not
> >family court.
>
> Maybe you should stop and realize that we KNOW WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.
>
> The Judge is responsible for bringing the charges, and the CRIMINAL ACT is
> defined as lying under oath, there is no definition of Criminal or Family
> court that defines whether it is a crime. IT IS NOT PROSECUTED if it
> occurs in family court.
>
> Tell you what, twit, find ONE CASE where PERJURY in Family Court has been
> prosecuted.
I asked the DA's office in Ventura County, CA if they prosecuted perjury and
they told me that had not prosecuted one case (from all the courts in Ventura
County) in the last year. By the way I was looking into the perjury (written)
of my ex-wifes attorney in one of the court papers. She was basing her
request for payment of fees on a perjured statement in the pleadings that
legally dragged my parents into the case. The legal fees, by the way, wiped
out the last of their retirement monies.
Chris Priga
Sailawayhome wrote:
> Unfortunately the BM is only playing a game. She is not encouraging the
> compliance at all -- she's just trying to skirt contempt penaties by saying she
> can't do anything because the SS sayes he won't go.
>
> SS knows BM doesn't want him to see DH and he's been coached as how to best
> support BM's wishes.
>
> But my question is -- is there any chance the court will let BM off the hook
> with this excuse?
Depends on the judge and other factors in the case, but I have heard of quite a
number of court battles recently, where the judge has lost his patience with the CP
ex-wife on visitation issues and threatened contempt and jail time. Generally only
after repeated violations of the visitation order.
jac...@melbpc.org.au
Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) and Richard Gardener.
PAS is where the custodial parent seeks to alienate you from the
child. Saying the child doesn't want to see you is indicative IMO
that she is also engaging in PAS and trying to poison the child's
mind. PAS is predominantly a female phenomenon - at least at present
with the biased court system that favours women and views children as
women's property.
Try the following search engines (and others you know)
Northern Lights is also meant be good.
On 06 Dec 1999 01:36:53 GMT, sailaw...@aol.com (Sailawayhome)
Wilbur Streett
>Depends on the judge and other factors in the case, but I have heard of quite a
>number of court battles recently, where the judge has lost his patience with the CP
>ex-wife on visitation issues and threatened contempt and jail time. Generally only
>after repeated violations of the visitation order.
"Threatened"..
There is a computer system being built where men are JAILED without even a
Judge's involvement. (Oh, forgot, they get paid for it from the welfare
department).
Wilbur Streett
>> Tell you what, twit, find ONE CASE where PERJURY in Family Court has been
>> prosecuted.
>
>I asked the DA's office in Ventura County, CA if they prosecuted perjury and
>they told me that had not prosecuted one case (from all the courts in Ventura
>County) in the last year. By the way I was looking into the perjury (written)
>of my ex-wifes attorney in one of the court papers. She was basing her
>request for payment of fees on a perjured statement in the pleadings that
>legally dragged my parents into the case. The legal fees, by the way, wiped
>out the last of their retirement monies.
That's a false certification, (at least in NJ laws), not perjury. If you
have proof, you don't have to wait for the Judge to do anything about it,
but go down and file the charges with the local (read TOWN) court.
Probably wont' go anyway, since the prosecutor is in this game, but you can
still stir up some trouble.
Wilbur Streett
>Chris Priga <cpr...@gte.net> wrote:
>
>>Depends on the judge and other factors in the case, but I have heard of quite a
>>number of court battles recently, where the judge has lost his patience with the CP
>>ex-wife on visitation issues and threatened contempt and jail time. Generally only
>>after repeated violations of the visitation order.
>
>"Threatened"..
>
>There is a computer system being built where men are JAILED without even a
>Judge's involvement. (Oh, forgot, they get paid for it from the welfare
>department).
Oh yeah, and it's UNLAWFUL since there is no law to support it, it was
created by administrative process in the WELFARE Department.
Let's see.. there is this law:
2C:13-1 Kidnapping.
2C:13-1. Kidnapping. a. Holding for ransom, reward or as a hostage. A
person is guilty of kidnapping if he unlawfully removes another from the
place where he is found or if he
unlawfully confines another with the purpose of holding that person for
ransom or reward or as a shield or hostage.
b.Holding for other purposes. A person is guilty of kidnapping if he
unlawfully removes another from his place of residence or business, or a
substantial distance from the vicinity
where he is found, or if he unlawfully confines another for a substantial
period, with any of the following purposes:
(1)To facilitate commission of any crime or flight thereafter;
(2)To inflict bodily injury on or to terrorize the victim or another;
(3)To interfere with the performance of any governmental or political
function; or
(4)To permanently deprive a parent, guardian or other lawful custodian
of custody of the victim.
c.Grading of kidnapping. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of
this subsection, kidnapping is a crime of the first degree and upon
conviction thereof, a person may,
notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1) of subsection a. of
N.J.S.2C:43-6, be sentenced to an ordinary term of imprisonment between 15
and 30 years. If the actor releases the
victim unharmed and in a safe place prior to apprehension, it is a crime of
the second degree.
(2)Kidnapping is a crime of the first degree and upon conviction
thereof, an actor shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment by the
court, if the victim of the kidnapping is less
than 16 years of age and if during the kidnapping:
(a)A crime under N.J.S.2C:14-2 or subsection a. of N.J.S.2C:14-3 is
committed against the victim;
(b)A crime under subsection b. of N.J.S.2C:24-4 is committed against
the victim; or
(c)The actor sells or delivers the victim to another person for
pecuniary gain other than in circumstances which lead to the return of the
victim to a parent, guardian or other
person responsible for the general supervision of the victim.
Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1) of subsection a. of
N.J.S.2C:43-6, the term of imprisonment imposed under this paragraph shall
be either a term of 25 years during
which the actor shall not be eligible for parole, or a specific term
between 25 years and life imprisonment, of which the actor shall serve 25
years before being eligible for parole; provided,
however, that the crime of kidnapping under this paragraph and underlying
aggravating crimes listed in subparagraph (a), (b) or (c) of this paragraph
shall merge for purposes of
sentencing. If the actor is convicted of the criminal homicide of a victim
of a kidnapping under the provisions of chapter 11, any sentence imposed
under provisions of this paragraph shall
be served consecutively to any sentence imposed pursuant to the provisions
of chapter 11.
d."Unlawful" removal or confinement. A removal or confinement is
unlawful within the meaning of this section and of sections 2C:13-2 and
2C:13-3, if it is accomplished by
force, threat or deception, or, in the case of a person who is under the
age of 14 or is incompetent, if it is accomplished without the consent of a
parent, guardian or other person
responsible for general supervision of his welfare.
e.It is an affirmative defense to a prosecution under paragraph (4) of
subsection b. of this section, which must be proved by clear and convincing
evidence, that:
(1)The actor reasonably believed that the action was necessary to
preserve the victim from imminent danger to his welfare. However, no
defense shall be available pursuant to
this subsection if the actor does not, as soon as reasonably practicable
but in no event more than 24 hours after taking a victim under his
protection, give notice of the victim's location to
the police department of the municipality where the victim resided, the
office of the county prosecutor in the county where the victim resided, or
the Division of Youth and Family Services
in the Department of Human Services;
(2)The actor reasonably believed that the taking or detaining of the
victim was consented to by a parent, or by an authorized State agency; or
(3)The victim, being at the time of the taking or concealment not less
than 14 years old, was taken away at his own volition by his parent and
without purpose to commit a
criminal offense with or against the victim.
f.It is an affirmative defense to a prosecution under paragraph (4) of
subsection b. of this section that a parent having the right of custody
reasonably believed he was fleeing from
imminent physical danger from the other parent, provided that the parent
having custody, as soon as reasonably practicable:
(1)Gives notice of the victim's location to the police department of
the municipality where the victim resided, the office of the county
prosecutor in the county where the victim
resided, or the Division of Youth and Family Services in the Department of
Human Services; or
(2)Commences an action affecting custody in an appropriate court.
g.As used in subsections e. and f. of this section, "parent" means a
parent, guardian or other lawful custodian of a victim.
Amended 1979, c.178, s.23; 1986, c.172, s.2; 1999, c.190, s.1.
..
and this other law
..
2C:5-2. Conspiracy
Conspiracy. a. Definition of conspiracy. A person is guilty of
conspiracy with another person or persons to commit a crime if with the
purpose of promoting or facilitating its
commission he:
(1) Agrees with such other person or persons that they or one or more
of them will engage in conduct which constitutes such crime or an attempt
or solicitation to commit such crime; or
(2) Agrees to aid such other person or persons in the planning or
commission of such crime or of an attempt or solicitation to commit such
crime.
b. Scope of conspiratorial relationship. If a person guilty of
conspiracy, as defined by subsection a. of this section, knows that a
person with whom he conspires to commit a crime has
conspired with another person or persons to commit the same crime, he is
guilty of conspiring with such other person or persons, whether or not he
knows their identity, to commit such
crime.
c. Conspiracy with multiple objectives. If a person conspires to
commit a number of crimes, he is guilty of only one conspiracy so long as
such multiple crimes are the object of the
same agreement or continuous conspiratorial relationship. It shall not be
a defense to a charge under this section that one or more of the objectives
of the conspiracy was not criminal;
provided that one or more of its objectives or the means of promoting or
facilitating an objective of the conspiracy is criminal.
d. Overt act. No person may be convicted of conspiracy to commit a
crime other than a crime of the first or second degree or distribution or
possession with intent to distribute a
controlled dangerous substance or controlled substance analog as defined in
chapter 35 of this title, unless an overt act in pursuance of such
conspiracy is proved to have been done by
him or by a person with whom he conspired.
e. Renunciation of purpose. It is an affirmative defense which the
actor must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he, after
conspiring to commit a crime, informed the
authority of the existence of the conspiracy and his participation therein,
and thwarted or caused to be thwarted the commission of any offense in
furtherance of the conspiracy, under
circumstances manifesting a complete and voluntary renunciation of criminal
purpose as defined in 2C:5-1d.; provided, however, that an attempt as
defined in 2C:5-1 shall not be
considered an offense for purposes of renunciation under this subsection.
f. Duration of conspiracy. For the purpose of section 2C:1-6d.:
(1) Conspiracy is a continuing course of conduct which terminates when
the crime or crimes which are its object are committed or the agreement
that they be committed is abandoned
by the defendant and by those with whom he conspired; and
(2) Such abandonment is presumed with respect to a crime other than one
of the first or second degree if neither the defendant nor anyone with whom
he conspired does any overt act
in pursuance of the conspiracy during the applicable period of limitation;
and
(3) If an individual abandons the agreement, the conspiracy is
terminated as to him only if and when he advises those with whom he
conspired of his abandonment or he informs the law
enforcement authorities of the existence of the conspiracy and of his
participation therein.
g. Leader of organized crime. A person is a leader of organized crime
if he purposefully conspires with others as an organizer, supervisor or
manager, to commit a continuing series of
crimes which constitute a pattern of racketeering activity under the
provisions of N.J.S. 2C:41-1, provided, however, that notwithstanding
2C:1-8a. (2), a conviction of leader of
organized crime shall not merge with the conviction of any other crime
which constitutes racketeering activity under 2C:41-1.
L. 1978, c. 95; amended by L. 1979, c. 178, s. 17; 1981, c. 167, s. 3;
1981, c. 290, s. 10; 1981, c. 511, s. 1; 1987, c. 106, s. 4.
2C:5-3. Incapacity, irresponsibility or immunity of party to conspiracy
a. In general. Except as provided in subsection b. of this
section, it is immaterial to the liability of a person who conspires with
another to commit a crime that:
(1) He or the person with whom he conspires does not occupy a
particular position or have a particular characteristic which is an element
of such crime, if he believes that one of them
does; or
(2) The person with whom he conspires is irresponsible or has an
immunity to prosecution or conviction for the commission of the crime.
b. Exceptions to subsection a.: Victims, behavior inevitably
incident to the commission of the crime. It is a defense to a charge of
conspiracy to commit a crime that if the object of
the conspiracy were achieved, the person charged would not be guilty of a
crime under the law defining the crime or as an accomplice under section
2C:2-6e. (1) or (2).
L.1978, c. 95, s. 2C:5-3, eff. Sept. 1, 1979.
tweak-it
That Is interesting but not factual,
My Ex-wife's Live-In-Boyfriend
Molesting my Daughter was a criminal act, but the
court system in Los Angeles tried the case in
the sham of a Division called "Children's Court"
This division deals with both Family Law & criminal cases
against children.
Yes, the State of California is allowing criminal cases
to be tried by inexperienced and untrained Judges
to save money and shift cases from the Superior Court.
Needless to say allot of cases like my Daughters are blown!
and some sick and evil people get off scott free!
My daughters testimony was flawless,
and my Ex-wife was proven to have covered up the crime,
my Ex-wife committed perjury may times on the stand
and was caught every time.
The Judge did not even raise eye brow.
So as I said the Court System does not prosecuted Perjury
but Ill say:
"No Court's are Prosecuting perjury"
if you feel I needed to be more actuate!
Tweak-It,
Anastazia wrote:
> tweak-it <twe...@micron.net> wrote in message
> news:384C8282...@micron.net...
> > Perjury is not prosecuted in Family Court!
> > Perjury is not prosecuted in Family Court!
> > Perjury is not prosecuted in Family Court!
> > Perjury is not prosecuted in Family Court!
> > Perjury is not prosecuted in Family Court!
> >
> > I think saying it like this gives a better feel for what
> > they will encounter . Wilbur Streett said it like it is!
>
Customer Service
himself sick for weeks before the trip. He said he just would not get on the
airplane.
We spoke to our attorney and the judge told him, if the child did not get on the
plane, his dad would go to jail.
Adelle
Pale Horse Publishing
http://custodywar.com
Marie
heard the case he had some clue as to what was really going on because he wrote
into the order that BM had to drop the child off for visitation (putting
responsibility on her getting the now unwilling child to comply) and he also
added that neigher parent was to allow the child in their home during the
other's period of visitation or otherwise provide a means the child to not
comply....I'm just wondering if when push comes to shove -- will he make her
pay for the non-compliance irreguardless of child saying he won't go. Will he
hold her responsibile for not being able to control a 13 year old who has been
in her sole control and influence for 2 years? {We all know she does control
every move he makes}.