Family Court -- Unconstitutional Judicial Gag Orders - justice's posterous

Over the past decade, family court judges routinely have uttered broader and broader gag orders, forbidding parents in custody battles from talking or writing about their cases. The pretext for these orders is that they are needed for the protection of the child.  Nevertheless, it's suspected that more often they are prompted by embarrassed officials who dislike scrutiny and criticism by internet bloggers in the wake of burgeoning out-of-control shoot-from-the-hip "therapeutic jurisprudence" in the family courts. The stated child protection rationale is specious because defamation, obscenity, violations of privacy, harassment, and other unprotected speech appropriately are addressed by the law after the fact when actual or potentially harmful speech can be specifically identified.

These orders are illegal under the First Amendment as violations of the constitutional prohibition against prior restraint. Now one mother, Faith Torres, has contacted the American Civil Liberties Union because of a gag order entered in her case by Judge Debra DeSegna in Providence, Rhode Island, July 29, at the request of the Rhode Island Department of Children, Youth and Families. Steven Brown, executive director of the ACLU's Rhode Island affiliate, called the order a "blatant violation of the First Amendment." Let's see some federal lawsuits. http://newsblog.projo.com/2010/08/judge-bars-ri-mother-from-talk.html

NewYork Daily News:Domestic abuse cases ignored in Topeka as city & county fight over who should handle prosecution

Getty
Topeka, Kanas might decriminalize domestic violence to save cash and avoid trying cases.
RELATED NEWS
Half-baked plan to stash pot in cookie shipment
Topeka, Kansas is going soft on wife beaters.

A 10 percent budget cut has forced local prosecutors to pull back on prosecuting misdemeanor cases - including domestic violence charges, Fox affiliate WDAF-TV reported.

In response, the cash-strapped city is considering repealing its anti-domestic violence law, the station reported, hoping it will persuade the Shawnee County District Attorney's office to reverse their decision.

As the city and DA's office try to hash out who's responsible for prosecuting such cases, at least three accused domestic violence offenders have slipped between the cracks, according to the Topeka Capital-Journal.

While that doesn't mean the men won't face charges down the line, interim city manager Dan Stanley told the publication, it does send potentially dangerous criminals home for the time being.

"The loser in that kind of scenario are the victims and the families," Stanley said at a news conference Wednesday.

More than 30 other misdemeanor cases have already been dropped by the DA's office since the September 8 announcement.

Claudine Dombrowski, whose partner once beat her in the head with a crowbar and sent her to the hospital with two broken wrists and 24 stitches in what was labeled a "misdemeanor" domestic abuse case, is among residents fighting the city's decision.

"They need to invest in headstones, because these women are going to end up in cemeteries," she said in an interview with Fox News. "The city of Topeka just said domestic violence is legal and you can beat your wife."

"I'm terrified for these women."

The city council will vote next Tuesday on the repeal of its domestic violence ordinance.

rmurray@nydailynews.com

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2011/10/07/2011-10-07_topeka_puts_do...

Claudine Dombrowski: Topeka KS - Two Domestic Violence Survivors Speak Out Failure to Prosecute and City's plan to 'Decriminalize' Domestic Violence

October 4th, 2011
City Hall, Public Hearing
Re: Repealing Ban on Domestic Battery
Submitted by Claudine Dombrowski

Council members,

I stand before you to speak about the issue known as REPEALING THE BAN on DOMESTIC BATTERY within the City Limits that the vast majority of Topekans, and now AMERICANS, recognize as a measure to ‘DECRIMINALIZE DOMESTIC BATTERY’ within the city limits of TOPEKA.

Topeka domestic abuse survivor trembling over DA's decision to pass down misdemeanors - Kansas First News.com - News, Weather, Sports - Northeast Kansas

16 years after enduring constant physical abuse, the memories still shake Claudine Dombrowski to the core. She says, "I was beaten with a crowbar, it was a misdemeanor. I've had both my wrist broken and it was a misdemeanor."
When Shawnee County District Attorney Chad Taylor decided to hand over misdemeanor cases, like Dombrowski's, to the city, she knew it would weigh heaviest on victims of domestic violence. Knowing the consequences a victim could face when the abuser is arrested, then released, she advises victims not to call the police. She says, "You, as a survivor, know how to survive. You just keep surviving. If you call the police right now, and God forbid you end up with the city, you might die."
Dombrowski says she's disgusted at how poorly survivors are treated after making the terrifying decision to call authorities. She says community leaders see it as, "Let's put these victims in with weed control and dog at large and parking tickets. That's how important you are to our community."
Dombrowski says the word "misdemeanor" has such a harmless connotation and wishes people knew the horrible actions hiding behind it. She says, "I was pushed through plate glass windows and if I had not been in a relationship with this man, he would be in prison."
If the city does decide to take on the domestic abuse cases, Dombrowski hopes it's only until funding can be restored at the District Attorney's office. She says, "We've just jumped back 30 years into the dark ages, and it's very dark. The lights just went out in Topeka."
She says many times the misdemeanor charges get reduced to disorderly conduct and destruction of personal property, and she can't imagine how easy the abusers will have it in city courts. Dowbrowski says you can help domestic violence victims of Topeka by demanding more money for the District Attorney's office, so they can continue to protect the public.

UPDATE:
Wednesday morning, Topeka Interim City Manager Dan Stanley said there is some thought being given to repealing the city ordinances to force the prosecution back on the county. He says it will then be up to the D.A. to prioritize what cases should be prosecuted.
Stanley says he's concerned about what will happen to the individuals whose cases are not being prosecuted. He says, "We know of three cases where judges have released the people accused of domestic violence back out because it their understanding that the district attorney will not prosecute and so there may be more of these."
Topeka Police Officers are forwarding misdemeanor cases involving domestic violence to the District Attorney's Office. Stanley says the D.A.'s office has already turned away 30 cases. He believes the victims and their families are most affected.

Peter Jamison exposes horrors of family court « Media Misses

Peter Jamison writes an outstanding article detailing the horrors of the family court system:

California Family Courts Helping Pedophiles, Batterers Get Child Custody

Interviews with dozens of parents, activists, lawyers, judges, children, and former family court employees, as well as a review of hundreds of pages of family and criminal court documents, indicate that the system’s methods for assessing whether child sexual abuse or spousal battery has taken place — findings that are critical to deciding whether a parent should retain custody of or visitation rights with a child — fall short of the standards accepted by domestic-violence experts and the criminal-justice community.

And here lies the problem:

Still, advocates of reform say a few widespread problems lead to poor court decisions, such as inadequate procedures for investigating abuse; the use of controversial and potentially dangerous psychological theories about child welfare; and a prejudice toward joint parental custody, even when one parent is clearly violent. Compounding these issues, critics say, is a lack of accountability for judges, attorneys, custody evaluators, and other court personnel, who enjoy immunity from lawsuits even in cases where they make decisions that do obvious harm to children and parents.

And this:

Family courts have no juries, and litigants who lack the money for a private attorney have no right to counsel. (As a result, many parents without financial means must represent themselves.) In the place of the traditional fact-finding apparatus that operates daily in criminal and civil courtrooms — dueling lawyers, and jurors charged with determining the facts of a case from available evidence — family court substitutes a cadre of individuals who make decisions in concert. Foremost is the judge. And it is with the judges, in some ways, that the problem starts.

Few aspirants to the bench relish the idea of refereeing the roughly 20 percent of divorces that are hostile enough to end up in family court. As a result, many assigned to this branch of the judiciary are rookies — paying their dues for a year or two before moving on to the more genteel arenas of civil or criminal law — or lifers without the aptitude to move on. “Family courts are the ugly stepchild of the law,” Oakland family law attorney Kim Robinson says. “It’s considered the bottom of the barrel. Almost no one wants to be there as a judge. The judges come in with a major attitude about it from the get-go.”

Family law judges are aided by a range of subjudicial officials, including psychological evaluators and minors’ counsels, attorneys appointed to represent the children in disputed custody cases. The courts also rely on mediators, who attempt to arbitrate custody agreements between parents. Failing such an agreement, they have the authority in many California jurisdictions to make a recommendation about custody rights.

Complaints about how all these people do their jobs aren’t new, and in light of their high-stakes, high-conflict work environment, some amount of dissatisfaction among litigants is to be expected. But officials in state government have begun to take the sheer volume of those complaints seriously.

Another problem:

While the system’s mistakes affect both mothers and fathers, men are statistically more likely to be the perpetrators of the types of serious crimes that highlight the family courts’ shortcomings — as they are in all the cases, substantiated by criminal convictions, examined in this article. The topic of gender’s correlation with violent crime is hotly debated, but studies have found that only 6 percent of sex offenses and 5 percent of serious incidents of domestic violence are committed by women.

Sound advice:

“The way that the courts have to work is evidence-based, not theory-based.”

And more good advice:

Geraldine Stahly, a psychology professor at California State University at San Bernardino, likewise says that the family courts need to be revamped so as to devote more attention to evidence — as do other courts of law — rather than the opinions of individuals such as psychologists, mediators, or even judges. “I would like to see judges relying a lot less on psychological evaluations and a lot more on the facts of a case,” she says.

NY Judges Jailing Moms & Pedo's Custody

Manhatten, New York -- Did Judge Gloria Sosa-Lintner give custody of a little girl to her pedophile father, and destroy an innocent women's life? Did Manhattan Family Court Judge Helen Sturm throw a protective mother in jail and make it worse? Redux.

Amplify’d from justice.posterous.com

"In 1997, the New York City Administration for Children's Services alleged that Dyandria Darel's ex-husband, a retired New York City police detective, had molested their daughter. But a series of complicated twists in Manhattan Family Court would cause judges to drop the accusation as "unproven," find Darel guilty of neglect, and place her daughter in foster care. Eventually, she lost custody for good to the man whom ACS had once accused of abuse. The outcome has fueled an eight-year war... her attorney, Robin Yeamans, a California family- and constitutional-law specialist, filed a petition for a writ of certiorari asking the nation's top court to hear Darel's appeal... on the question of a jury trial, asserting that the U.S. Constitution ensures such due-process protections in Family Court..." http://www.villagevoice.com/content/printVersion/201979/ (2006)

Read more at justice.posterous.com

Why The U.S. Should NOT Sign the “Convention on the Rights of the Child” (CRC).

Amplify’d from parentingnewsnetwork.com

The United States stands alone among industrialized countries in the western world as well as many others in the third world, in having not signed onto the United Nations’s “Convention on the Rights of the Child” (CRC). This is as it should be. While on an unconsidered read, the idea of proclaiming the human rights of the child would seem to be unassailable, and the CRC’s language may read to the non-legally-trained eye as laudable, the United States should NOT sign on to this document.

Here are just some of the reasons:

Read more at parentingnewsnetwork.com

California Family Courts Helping Pedophiles, Batterers Get Child Custody

Allegations of domestic violence or child molestation were backed up by criminal convictions — and, in one case, a murder-suicide. In all of them, the courts seem to have failed to follow basic procedures, including some dictated by state law, for weighing evidence of a parent's abusiveness before making crucial custody decisions.

Amplify’d from www.sfweekly.com
image

Looking out for the children who find themselves in the middle of bitter divorces is the most important function of the state's family courts, and arguably one of the most significant duties of the judiciary as a whole. Yet evidence has mounted in recent years that it is a responsibility in which family court officials are sometimes failing dramatically.

Interviews with dozens of parents, activists, lawyers, judges, children, and former family court employees, as well as a review of hundreds of pages of family and criminal court documents, indicate that the system's methods for assessing whether child sexual abuse or spousal battery has taken place — findings that are critical to deciding whether a parent should retain custody of or visitation rights with a child — fall short of the standards accepted by domestic-violence experts and the criminal-justice community.

Read more at www.sfweekly.com