POLICY SOLUTIONS: FRAUD, CORRUPTION IN THE COURTS Anne Stevenson, Journalist and Policy Consultant see link POLICY SOLUTIONS: FRAUD, CORRUPTION IN THE COURTS Anne Stevenson, Journalist and Policy Consultant

Help us expose these dangerous outdated family court practices email this to your legislators, representatives, Governors, President Vice president any one entering the family court and help us eradicated these outdated family court practices see link thank you https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pL_PVtv2Li5pYp87UERUUVAwiIJHEf3bcsRqHLbgBa4/edit#heading=h.7huh6abmephs

Your Own Private RICO? A Guide for Family Court Litigants Considering Action

APRIL 3, 2015 BY CCFCEDITOR Excerpts "Search of AFCC Websites Revealed Behind-the-Scenes Admissions of Custody Evaluator Fraud and Extortion " across from section "Information Maintenance: As the gold nuggets start falling out it may be helpful to create personal dossiers on targets. Obtain contact information, job histories, professional and personal memberships, friends and family, etc. You can circulate targeted or general questionnaires collecting information such as “who was your custody evaluator/attorney/judge?” “how much did you pay to whom?” “What happened/what went wrong?” and other relevant data, then save the data in folders accessible by the group. Provided the data is collected and maintained confidentially within the group and in preparation for litigation, it may be protected by litigation privileges. You can use the data later as the foundation for an attorney’s further investigation and in litigation. Your Own Private RICO? A Guide for Family Court Litigants Considering Action APRIL 3, 2015 BY CCFCEDITOR

Opinion: Vargas and Gonzalez Say CT Family Court System Is Broken Opinion: Vargas and Gonzalez Say CT Family Court System Is Broken

Excerpts "The task force also heard testimony regarding an entity called the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) which allegedly functions like a

State Representative Minnie Gonzalez (D) Hartford has long been critical of the state’s Family Court System.

vendor and has had questionable practices, ties and relationships with judges, guardians and other court officials. Questions about AFCC have been raised in news reports by The Washington Times, which posted a 2013 opinion by the Connecticut Commission on Judicial Ethics stating: “An appearance of impropriety would arise if a Judicial Official serving on the board of directors of a nonprofit organization or member of the Judicial Office’s staff were to refer clients to the nonprofit organization.” At its worst, the AFCC operations have been likened to that of a racketeering enterprise. This could be fodder for the U.S. Justice Department, which disclosed to parents in January that it is conducting a review of the training that Connecticut judges and support staff receive regarding family court cases relative to the Americans with Disabilities Act.

As expected, lawyers, judges and guardians have circled the wagons to protect their turf. Lackeys in the Legislature can always be counted on to help. This is particularly true in the Judiciary Committee – traditionally a stepping stone to a judgeship – where 25 of the 44 current members are lawyers. All too often, these supposed representatives pull their punches or, worse – attack the complainants – when the subject is judicial misconduct.

How dare citizens demand to hold their public servants accountable, especially those who wear robes?

Still, something had to be done to contain the outcry. Why not form a task force to study the problems?

How about rigging the task force by putting those alleged to be at the heart of wrongdoing in charge?" Opinion: Vargas and Gonzalez Say CT Family Court System Is Broken

2014 Racketeering leads to child abuse in Texas By a PPC Member

Excerpts "This organized case-rigging is to ensure that the mothers that complain of abuse are discredited. These judges that are facilitated by secret judicial groups and are cross-affiliated to father’s rights groups are contributing to the corruption of our Family Court System. Knowledge of this pattern has come from sources such as father’s rights literature, HHS-ACF (Health and Human Services Department- Administration for Children and Families) Access and Visitation program funds and AFCC (Association of Family and Conciliation Courts) documentation. " Racketeering leads to child abuse in Texas By a PPC Member

Let's Get Honest! Blog: Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History Excerpts page 17 "

These behaviors and products are prime-time AFCC. and overall would be Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO), and perhaps may be with, however, the habit of actually legalizing this behavior may compromise it from being prosecuted under RICO. Also, if it were fully explored and prosecuted, as I may just about to show, it would possibly not clean up, but also completely empty out the family law system Justice = Therapy-dispensing monopoly of judges, mediators, certified family law specialist, and all kinds of psychologist, from J.D.-endowed Psy.D.s to the lowly man or woman who paid up the latest AFCC approved parenting coordinator, or mediator, or supervised visitation center training course.

Cleaning up the racketeering element of AFCC might end up shuing down the system, because it is probably (at this point) not possible to separate the private nonprofit association, “Association of Family & Conciliation Courts” from the concept (and practice) of family law, at all. this is such a fixture of our society that people forget it had an origin, and at one time, did not exist. This origin was NOT by public, grassroots demand, but it was (like most oppressive systems) from top-down; by highly placed legislators, judges, and/or others who got a law passed, started practicing, and then expanded.

On the other hand, passive inaction will just send the US economy downhill faster –a situation for which those who’ve been marketing these things will be in a beer position to handle than those they force to consume their products. At least they know how to operate businesses, reduce taxes, and even in some cases do it under the radar, avoiding taxes and dumping the real social needs of society (housing, food, water, the ability to defend ones-self and one’s property — or to own property or assets of any sort) on those already hardest hit.

The RICO link, above, explains how the law began in the 1970s to stop the Mafia, in 1980s was applied to more individual situations, and in the 1990s the federal government sought to restrict this use:

During the 1990’s, the federal courts, guided by the United States Supreme Court, engaged in a concerted effort to limit the scope of RICO in the civil context. As a result of this effort, civil litigants must jump many hurdles and avoid many pitfalls before they can expect the financial windfall available under RICO, and RICO has become one of the most complicated and unpredictable areas of the law.

Today, RICO is almost never applied to the Mafia. Instead, it is applied to individuals, businesses, political protest groups, and terrorist organizations.”

That said, let’s note that two judges in PA were convicted of this, recently — in Luzerne County; “Kids for Cash” scheme. And I cannot think of a better descriptive word, given the powerfully-connected (judges are members) and internet-connected, conference-churning, international, and training-oriented private “nonprofit” organization called “the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts” — particularly when the associated network of nonprofits working with it are considered. Talk about undue influence! People who are subjected to this treatment routinely call it “Mafia” or refer to extortion, which I believe overall, the practices are. Doesn’t that last one sound like extortion (though only for $40, do the math X how many divorces and custody modifications…..)? Why, for example, shouldn’t someone besides Libassi Mediation be able to run a simple Kids First class? And what happened to Dr. Chet? Has he got his own line of business with the county now? hard copy

Pedophilia in the Justice System

Keith Harmon Snow Conscious Being Alliance Tue, 01 May 2012 07:59 UTC

Excerpts "Former CT Judge Anne Dranginis has also been a member of the board of directors (1997) of the Association of Family Conciliation Councils (AFCC), and while AFCC officials were also Children's Rights Council officials, the AFCC and CRC are essentially interlocking organizations which collaborate closely together in passing laws, manipulating and exploiting court policies and procedures, and winning U.S. Department of Health and Human Services grants.

AFCC affiliated experts who have established federal 'model custody' programs using PAS methodology, include Joan Kelly, a founding official of CRC, and Judith Wallerstein of the Center for the Family in Transition. Richard Gardner originally based his PAS theory on Judith Wallerstein's and Joan Kelly's research.

"The AFCC started the industry in the early 1960's and the same founders started the Children's Rights Counsel about a year later," says Anne D'Angelo. "They clean out the litigants financially, but their main purpose is to rake in millions and millions in grant money." Hard copy

US Attorney Deirdre M. Daly: Investigation of corrupt CT courts

The DOJ announces formation of investigative task force following writers two-year coverage of corruption by Communities Digital News By Jim Picht Feb 5, 2015

Excerpts "Last year, Nowacki was one of nearly 100 parents with open family court cases who courageously testified before the legislature that they were victimized by predatory court professionals, many of whom were AFCC affiliates allegedly engaged in case rigging, healthcare scams, false billing scams, mortgage fraud, extortion, and other types of misconduct through the State’s publicly funded programs and services. " hard copy

1-9-2014 PROPOSAL to Legislature re- Court Funding ANNE STEVENSON Policy Consultant, Journalist Excerpts page 4 "In the hundreds of cases I have reviewed, I have never heard a single story about a single judge, GAL, attorney, or evaluator who has been professionally sanctioned for their outrageous conduct on a family court case.Parents file complaints all the time, but the oversight agencies dismiss them out of hand without investigating. For instance, in August 2013, the Committee on Judicial Ethics issued decisions saying that it would be a violation of Judicial Canon for a judge to be involved with the AFCC and AAML. Subsequently, a hand full of victimized parents submitted Complaints to the Judicial Review Commission that the same three judges who founded the AFCC’s CT Chapter did not disclose their conflict of interest or that they had a vested stake in the outcome of their cases because they were in business with the professionals assigned to their case. All complaints were dismissed without any meaningful investigation. " Hard copy

WOMEN'S CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION

Executive Director and Founder, Karin Wolf

karin@womensclu.org

Excerpts "Ms. Wolf spearheaded a major, political anti-corruption campaign using the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), which caused several judges to retire early and placed a federal lens on the corrupt practices of the NJ Judiciary, social workers, and other court vendors running a Kids-for-Cash trade organization, namely the AFCC, from inside the family and juvenile courts. More recently, she has opened a federal investigation into State manipulation of federal funding pursuant to the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. " Hard copy

CT Bar Association Fails Children and Families Again...

• Published on October 25, 2016 Peter Szymonik

Excerpts "> Ongoing support the family’s courts horrific “KIDS FOR CASH” and PAY PER VIEW PARENTING” programs – manufactured by the Divorce Industry and promoted by the AFCC in order to keep children from seeing both of parents, to unnecessarily prolong cases and to destroy children and families – forcing parents to pay for this abuse. " Hard copy

MACCAbuse FEDERAL FUNDING Excerpts "States are encouraged to hire consultants (such as AFCC trade association) to form Commissions to write and implement the plan (Pennsylvania’s Commission created “Changing the Culture of Custody in Pennsylvania”)."

Hard copy

hard copy of article that used to be on website have replaced links with working links except for one all hard copied

NEWSMAKINGNEWS.COM

FAMILY COURT CORRUPTION

by Cindy Ross © July 8, 2002

In June, CA NOW (National Organization for Women) released "Family Court Report 2002", the product of a three year investigation into complaints regarding CA family law courts. The CA NOW report identifies the California family court system as "crippled, incompetent and corrupt". It includes sections on the history of family law and the so-called "fathers' rights" (FR) movement. Problems identified include gender bias against women, loss of due process, fraud, corruption and the use of bogus "syndromes" to pathologize motherhood. The report can be found at the CA NOW www.canow.org website: Click. to read NOW report.

Family Court 2002 is the most recent of numerous reports, articles and documentaries which describe the systematic abuse of women and children, illegal activity and criminal misconduct occurring in family courts, not only in California, but across the country. Many cases have been identified involving male perpetrators of domestic violence and child molest getting custody, abusive and "deadbeat" fathers getting out of criminal prosecution and child support obligations and women and children being punished in jails and mental institutions. [1]

The Association of Family and Conciliation Courts is an organization comprised of the court "professionals" who fabricated the phony mental disorder "Parental Alienation Syndrome" (PAS, also called "alienation" or "alienated children"), as the means to turn abuse cases into "custody disputes". Click. AFCC - "Association of Family, Court and Community Professionals" website.

Through appointments of AFCC affiliates, mothers are forced into excessive and abusive court proceedings where they are drained financially and emotionally. They are bullied into submitting to ongoing evaluations, mediation and therapy, so that they will be deemed difficult and uncooperative and therefore unfit to parent their own children. [2]

Originally devised as the means to cover up evidence of child sexual abuse when the father is the perpetrator, the PAS legal strategy calls for the involvement of custody evaluators, attorneys for children, "special masters" (mediators with quasi-judicial authority), supervision monitors and other court-appointees operating in the guise of the family "conciliation court", who collaborate to shift blame to mothers trying to maintain custody and protect their children.

PAS calls for institutionalizing children to convince them that they were not really abused by their fathers, but that their mothers are crazy. [3] Use of PAS has been linked to the death of at least one child, who committed suicide rather than submit to court ordered PAS "threats". [4], [5]

Through illegally crafted orders, phony custody reports and improper "ex-parte" (emergency, unnoticed) proceedings, court appointees rig the outcomes of cases in favor of abusive men. By labeling mothers "alienators", blaming them for denying fathers "access" to the children and prosecuting mothers for "custodial interference" or similar "crimes", the family court works with the District Attorney to criminalize mothers' attempts to escape abuse and protect their children. [6] If the mother flees with the children, the FBI gets involved, treating the matter as "parental abduction" (a federal crime), which is used as further proof that she doesn't deserve to have custody.

The AFCC has been connected to judicial slush funds, such as the one identified in Los Angeles Superior Court, in several articles in the LA Daily News. [7] AFCC is cross affiliated with the Children's Rights Council (formerly called the "National Council for Children's Rights"), which is essentially the "umbrella" organization of the "fathers' rights" movement -- a perverse conglomerate of misogynists, anti-Semites and other hateful men -- who are calling for male ownership of women and children, "patriarchy under God" and repealing the 19th Amendment (women's right to vote). [8]

While CRC claims to advocate "shared parenting", in fact, its' agenda is to promote father custody specifically in cases where the father would be deemed an unfit or unsafe parent if legitimate court proceedings had been conducted in accordance with actual domestic violence and "children's best interest" laws. This is primarily to assist men with getting out of child support obligations, so that money intended for care of the children (including funds the court receives from federal Child Support Enforcement Program grants) is siphoned off by and through the AFCC affiliates who were appointed to coordinate the fund diversion scheme.

AFCC/CRC officials conceal the fact that many of their "experts" are pedophiles and others who promote incest and deviant sex. These people include Richard Gardner, who coined the term PAS, John Money, a sexologist affiliated with Johns Hopkins University, Ralph Underwager and Hollida Wakefield of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation and Warren Farrell, a political scientist who advocates "family sex" and "genitally caressing children" in the Penthouse article "Incest, the Last Taboo" (1977). [9]

The National Alliance for Family Court Justice -- founded and directed nationally by Elisabeth (Liz) Richards of Virginia -- is an international organization of grassroots activists addressing family court system failure, corruption and retaliation against women who report abuse. NAFCJ has identified and documented evidence that PAS not only is the means to conceal a pro-pedophile agenda disguised as "custody resolution", it is the basis of a court kickback scheme that calls for the misuse/diversion of federal grants, primarily Access to Visitation Enforcement, Child Support Enforcement, Responsible Fatherhood and Temporary Assistance to Needy Family (TANF) Welfare program funds.

CRC and AFCC, working directly with people like Richard Gardner, crafted PAS into the means of obtaining funding to turn the Access to Visitation Enforcement Program (AV) into a "fatherhood" program, whereby any father can get custody and any mother reporting abuse can be placed on supervision to silence her. Click. Children's Rights Council 12th National Conference, "How to obtain Access/Visitation Grants"

NAFCJ has obtained program documents from the Department of Health and Human Services that prove that federal "Responsible Fatherhood" programs use TANF/Welfare funds to recruit abusive men -- including incarcerated criminals -- into programs that assist them with getting custody by providing free legal services from contracted attorneys and mediators and rewarding them child support abatement and other benefits.

After they get custody, fathers continue to receive assistance from the family court and child support enforcement officials (usually either the state's Attorney General or the county's District Attorney Family Support Division), in preventing the mother's access to the children, placing her on supervised visitation for complaining and/or forcing her to pay child support to him.

When Family Court Report 2002 was released, David Levy, president of CRC, called it a "preposterous charge". [10] However, according to Liz Richards, Virginia Delegate Jim Dillard is asking for an investigation into CRC. It is my understanding that Del. Dillard was originally a supporter of CRC, until he reviewed evidence provided to him by NAFCJ, regarding CRC's role in federal program fraud and covering up for a pro-pedophile agenda. (Due to the 4th of July holiday, I was unable to contact Del. Dillard directly.)

The request for investigation into CRC is significant regarding the CA court system, especially Marin County Superior Court. While CRC is based in Maryland, one of its' founding officials is Joan Kelly. Kelly, former director of the Northern CA Mediation Center in Marin County, co-authored "Surviving the Breakup", with Judith Wallerstein, founder of the Center for the Family in Transition (also in Marin County). Kelly and Wallerstein are the "experts" upon whose "research" Richard Gardner based the PAS "theory". [11]

Largely due to Kelly's and Wallerstein's, influence, PAS methodology has become entrenched into federal programs, policy and funding, especially through CRC. According to the CA NOW report (p. 49), in 1986 Wallerstein provided testimony, along with David Levy, as to the "problems of single female parent families" in a hearing entitled "Divorce, the Impact on Children and Families", held in the House committee on Children, Youth and Families.

Wallerstein serves as an advisor to the National Fatherhood Initiative. NFI founding officials include Wade Horn, Assistant Secretary for Children and Families in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Don Eberly of the White House Office of Faith Based Initiatives.

Kelly sets up PAS programs in courts around the country, using federal AV Program funds. She gives seminars in PAS and trains special masters. The affiliates of Kelly's and Wallerstein's respective Marin County organizations, Northern CA Mediation Center and Center for the Family in Transition, have reformulated their group into the "Northern CA Task Force on the Alienated Child". "Task Force" members are identified as "getting it wrong" in UC Davis law professor Carol Bruch's article in the Family Law Quarterly (Sept. 2001), "Parental Alienation Syndrome and Parental Alienation": Getting it wrong in child custody cases." [12] The "Task Force" also includes the custody evaluators and special masters identified as engaging in misconduct in the February 2000 report by NY investigative reporter Karen Winner ("Findings on Judge Michael Dufficy, Commissioner Sylvia Shapiro and Court-Appointees in Marin County Superior Court in California.")\

Addressing court corruption specifically from the perspective of Marin County Superior Court would take up volumes and is outside the scope of this article. For more information about Marin County, Click. "Marin County Court Corruption Data Dump"

However, as I have documentation from my own case (included in the Winner Report) showing how Marin County "FLEA" (Family Law Elite Attorney) Mary Halbert diverted child support intended for my son, working with "Task Force" member Nancy Olesen, who wrote some kind of report that I was prevented from seeing; And since Mary was paid out of the "alternate public defender's" budget and Marin County Public Defender Joe Spaeth is one of the people on the Judicial Council committee that disperses AV and other grants to the courts, I may very well decide to do a follow-up piece on Marin County.

I would also like to direct a question to Marin court administrator John Montgomery regarding his comment to the Independent Journal that the CA NOW report "...is a shoddy piece of work that would not pass a college research class". Click. Marin IJ - Report: Family Court System Needs Repair. If the problems the CA NOW report and others have identified don't really exist, why is it that YOUR name and fingerprint appear instead of my own on the transfer deed to my home, that was taken from me illegally through an ex parte hearing which I did not even attend?

For further information about NAFCJ and our ongoing effort to expose and put an end to family court corruption, please visit the NAFCJ Click.

by Cindy Ross California © July 8, 2002

Director National Alliance for Family Court Justice Fairfax, CA

FxCAR18@aol.com

Pennsylvania Court Watch Public Advocacy for Judicial Accountability http://www.pacourtwatch.com America Wakes Up To Find Its Judicial Branch Infiltrated By Organized Crime Author : admin Date : September 25, 2015

My Story by Lola Telmos - TedGunderson.info

tedgunderson.info/index_htm_files/My%20Story%20by%20Lola%20Telmos.pdf

Romeo, Michigan Westfield, indiana 46074. 48065 (317) 896-5371. (586) 752-7972. Mid West Regional Director. National Alliance For Family Court Justice.

Hard copy

Full text of "FBI Whistleblower Ted Gunderson Exposes Mind Control ...

https://archive.org/stream/...14623/My%20Story%20by%20Lola%20Telmos_djvu.txt

My Story By : Lola Telmos teimosL@vahoo.com Old Address 11950 Springbrook Romeo , Michigan .....National Alliance For Family Court Justice http://NAFC.

Source Full text of "FBI Whistleblower Ted Gunderson Exposes Mind Control, Satanism, Pedophilia, CIA FINDERS and Drugs - COLLECTION"

see My Story By : Lola Telmos Mid West Regional Director National Alliance For Family Court Justice http://NAFCl.org https://archive.org/stream/CorruptionSatanicDrugCultNetworkAndMissingCHildrenVol.14623/My%20Story%20by%20Lola%20Telmos_djvu.txt

Second format for viewing https://archive.org/stream/CorruptionSatanicDrugCultNetworkAndMissingCHildrenVol.14623/My%20Story%20by%20Lola%20Telmos#page/n0/mode/2up

Excerpts page 10 last paragraph threw page 11 section"PRINCIPAL ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED IN THE FEDERAL PARENTING AND CUSTODY GRANT CORRUPTION

Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) methodology was devised by Dr. Richaid Gardner working 

with AFCC judges and father’s rights groups “FRs” principally Children Rights Council “CRC” 

11 ih ChildreT,,S Rights “ NC f RW ) 9X16 tf* National Congress 

custody litigation by producing false negatives to suppress paternal child abuse evidence. CRC’s 

IRS non-profit (S03(cX3) initial status determination (1985) and other documents name the 

following individuals as their officials: Meyer F.llda (also the Association of Family and 

Conciliation Courts - “AFCC” co-founder), Warren Farrell, Ronald Haskins (former 

Congressional Ways & Means, staff director, 1988-2000), Debbie Stabenow (then a Mich, state 

representative, now a U.S. Senator), Joan B. Kelly (Northern California Mediation Center ) 

James Levine (Director - Fatherhood Project), John Money (John Hopkins professor) and other 

important “players” in the AFCC-lead family advocacy and pedophilia movement. PAS was 

^ by ) ^ oduc . i,, 8* 61se negative and transferring 

forefather, blocking most or all contact with the mother and engaging in a campaign of official 

CRC literature proclaims close association with the AFCC. Many people who promote PAS are 

officials or activists with both AFCC and CRC, including Elizabeth Hickey of UT and Joan 

Kelly of CA - Northern California Mediation Center. AFCC judges associated with the CRC or 

the bad custody practices include: Judge Lawrence Kaplan of Pennsylvania, Dranginis - CT, 

Cawood - MD, Kass - NM, Rotman MA, Jones - North Carolina - and many others. 

Dr. Richard Gardner has been the centerpiece of the fathers rights movement and their public 

policy efforts- He was the featured speaker at their events until his recent death by “suicide” 

caused by 7” butcher knife stab in his heart. His publications have been sold through the CRC 

membership network, and has been instrumental in the implementation of CRC’s self-devised 

federal “custody” program - The Access/Visitation (A/V). Gardner’s writing are very pro- 

offender and pro-incest, including statements that a mother who is angry at the lather for 

incestuous relations with the daughter, should be sobered up and told to use a vibrator to make 

her more sexually responsive so that the father will not need to seek sex from his daughter. 

Despite being frequently discredited, judges adhere to his theories is custody cases. see page 12 of this copy of my story section "PRINCIPAL ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS INVOLVED IN THE FEDERAL PARENTING AND CUSTODY GRANT CORRUPTION

BEFORE YOU STEP ONE FOOT INTO FAMILY COURT – READ THIS!

By Wendy Murphy Jan. 17, 2014

A colleague of mine, Anne Stevenson, recently testified before the Connecticut legislature on behalf of good parents and ethical court employees who feared retribution if they spoke up themselves against the corruption, fraud and shady deals in Connecticut’s family court system.

The content of her testimony is critically important, and not widely understood, so I agreed to post it here to provide folks with a better understanding of how the “divorce industry” in Connecticut is ruining families financially, and subjecting children to dangerous custody arrangements.

Her proposed changes for reform, set forth below, were provided to the Connecticut legislature but are applicable to other states as well because the problems in Connecticut are systemic in American family courts.

Wendy

Excerpts recommendations 5 and 10 pertaining to afcc "http://www.wendymurphylaw.com/before-you-step-one-foot-into-family-court-read-this/

(5) The Judicial Branch should get out of the GAL training business. Many GALs are “certified” using the Judicial Branch’s FREE AFCC training program. States should not be spending tax dollars training private attorneys and psychologists to be “certified” as GALs who are then effectively “supervised” by the Judicial Branch. In Connecticut, such certification practices have led to harmful results in part because there is no “decertification” process to prevent substandard actions that hurt families. While judges have authority to sanction GALs, no GAL has ever been sanctioned for misconduct in Connecticut despite countless reports of misconduct and poor decision-making

Training and oversight of GALs (and supervised visitation professionals) should be removed from the authority of the Judicial Branch."

(10) Courts should not be contracting with the AFCC, and State workers who are running it should be fired. State Judicial Branch employees should not be using their offices and taxpayer money to run a private trade association that promotes the family court industry and the “collaborative efforts” of the AFCC professionals who do business in their courtrooms. Based on the number of complaints about GALs alone, the GAL trainings should not be allowed to use an AFCC curriculum, and the judicial branch should not be allowed to contract with AFCC to set up family court services.

Testimony included shocking stories about judges collaborating with certain attorneys and psychologists and effectively operating a private trade association for family court professionals from their state offices, and funding it with the money allocated by the government to family courts which are supposed to HELP families, not FUND an industry. The documents filed with the Sec. of State in Connecticut showed that Judicial Branch employees were listed as directors and officers of entities benefitting form the disbursement of these grant monies.

Brave parents in Connecticut testified about their concerns regarding the apparent “collusion” between AFCC leaders and family court professionals. Many testified that AFCC leaders and members do not disclose their conflict of interest to the families whose cases they influence, and because the AFCC leaders are State employees promoting the private industry complained of, this creates a disincentive to discipline any AFCC members or to even acknowledge there is a problem. They do not tell litigants, for example, that they are in business together. Who could possibly hope to have a judge hold AFCC accountable for a conflict of interest when the courts directly benefit from the conflict?

In addition to testimony about the AFCC’s involvement with GALs, many people testified that Family Services’ screening intake assessments were defective because they failed to accurately discern between fit loving parents and violent offenders who are not." see link for entire recommendations

http://www.wendymurphylaw.com/before-you-step-one-foot-into-family-court-read-this/

hard copy

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1annHPVEa3QOE7AlJy1dPi9im9INNA0CI87ED-nV0JH47_gPjOkH0EErD-bsv9EWRz6wDZYDgXAgf8FQH/view?usp=sharing

Submission of Peter T. Szymonik in FAVOR of SB 1049 April, 14, 2017

Excerpts " The AFCC was highly secretive organization in this state where a very small group of select divorce attorneys, therapists, mental health professionals, Guardian ad Litems (“GALs”), Attorneys for the Minor Child (“AMCs”) and other so called “court appointed experts” and “evaluators” met in closed door meetings with family court judges. They met with family court judges who then extorted and funneled millions of dollars from already struggling and suffering parents who came before them to these individuals, and mincing no words, in what amounts to court sanctioned organized crime. These family court judges often took children away from parents who dared to refuse these unconstitutional court ordered evaluations – as they represent unwarranted exploratory searches and forced medical treatments – which have been banned by the United States Supreme Court.

Family court judges in our state continue to routinely even jail parents who dare to refuse these forced “evaluations” or who dare to refuse to liquidate their retirement accounts, pension funds, and even their children’s college funds, to pay these individuals and mental health professionals. These forced payments to these AFCC vendors, most notably the mental health care professionals who have written in opposition to this bill and the oversight it would provide, are not recorded anywhere by the state or family court system. " see Hard copy for rest of testimony https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FXVRbmJFfEOtFbElcWF_pM6YxQlU2oacR7JUpw6M6vKivjJKO1Jq-LLI1ktdufvtQ4fIQqHumladzgE-/view?usp=sharing

Family Court Hides Kids from “Dangerous” Battered Woman - Connecticut Sep 4, 2015 - by Michael Volpe

Excerpts “No mental health professional organization recognizes parental alienation as a mental health issue, so calling it a specialty is antithetical,” Kelley says, noting that “the only mental health practitioners claiming to have the nonexistent specialty are AFCC members. AFCC-member legal professionals forcing a litigant to use only PAS specialists -- which is only AFCC - brings up some serious antitrust issues.”

Moreover, Kelley adds, “demanding that a mother only be allowed to see her children by patronizing business associates sounds like extortion.” Hard copy

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

JOURNALIST COREY DANIELS EXPOSES AFCC ABUSE IN THE CONNECTICUT JUDICIAL BRANCH!

Excerpts " Section " The public expects judges, court staff, and attorneys to not only abide by the law, but to uphold their duty to hold others accountable when they violate these laws. AFCC members, as public servants, have failed to even give the appearance of propriety either inside or outside the court:"

• 6) AFCC Programs deliberately misuse funding and place children in homes with violent offenders. Some of the Responsible Fatherhood, Access and Visitation and Department of Justice funded projects require judges to deliberately and arbitrarily reduce the amount of time fit parents spend with their kids, and instead place children in the custody of violent, unfit, and unwilling parents. Safe children do not need experts to assess and treat them for abuse they do not sustain, and they do not need a GAL or attorney to speak on their behalf, making safe children an undesirable demographic for the court industry professionals paid by these programs. For instance, some programs go directly into prisons to recruit fathers to sue for custody, or look for mothers who are poor drug addicts not willing or able to care for the kids they abandoned. For these reasons, it is possible that only corrupt court professionals benefit from AFCC programs.

(7) The AFCC is cross affiliated with MANY pedophile advocates and militant fathers rights groups which target victims through the courts. Examples include:

• The Children's Rights Council-Militant Fathers Rights group that has historically had many known pedophile advocates, even NAMBLA members on the board of directors.
• Incest Promotor Warren Farrell, who published his "research" in skin rag Penthouse glorifying family sex, men having sex with their young daughters.
• Pedophile advocate Dr. Richard Gardner, who manufactured the pedophile's legal defense of choice, Parental Alienation Syndrome. PAS is not a legitimate mental health condition, and it is not recognized by the APA or the AMA. PAS is a legal technique that allows pedophiles and violent offenders to shift the blame for their attacks onto victims and the advocates who try and rescue them. He committed suicide by stabbing himself in the heart.

(8) AFCC is a "Set Up To Fail" Business Provider. The following AFCC Directors, Presidents, Board Members, Presenters, and affiliates are also Judicial Branch employees/vendors who are responsible for overseeing the very problematic court programs and funding that the Family Court Task Force now seeks to "fix." Many of them also run the Court's GAL training program or sat on the 2002 Child Custody and Support Task Force which is responsible for much of the dysfunction we see today. *

Why is anyone willing to allow the "problem" to profit from manufacturing the "solution" to the problem they created for that purpose?

Hard copy

AFCC fee churning ring

Uploaded by Paul Charles D. on May 03, 2017

Key players in control of the HHS grant process who use this influence to gain favorable case results for CRC members and gov’t paid fees for AFCC professionals.

jeudi 6 novembre 2003 Program produces motherless kids

par Liz Richards

Excerpts "The men who are organized as fathers’ advocates are actually a branch of a secretive, California-based judicial organization, the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, which set them up for the purpose of instigating litigation. The Children’s Rights Council and the American Coalition for Fathers and Children are Virginia-based groups prominent in this movement.

The CRC is heavily cross-affiliated with, and get members’ cases steered to, AFCC judges and court professionals. This conflict of interest is never disclosed by the AFCC professionals.

CRC is also affiliated with pro-pedophilia psychologists Richard Gardner and Ralph Underwager, who devised highly discredited pro-abuser/pedophilia court methodologies for covering up abuse and awarding custody to fathers.

The AFCC and CRC set up a federal "model custody" program based on Gardner’s methodologies, even though he is condemned as a pedophile advocate by many legal professionals." http://sisyphe.org/spip.php?article754

The Web of Family Court: What You Should Know Before You’re Eaten Alive – By Karin Wolf

October 13, 2015 Karin Wolf

Excerpts "

Richard Gardner is the champion of the pedophile. He testified in over 400 custody cases. Gardner (1991, p. 118) suggests that Western society’s is “excessively moralistic and punitive” toward pedophiles. Gardner maintains that “the Draconian punishments meted out to pedophiles go far beyond what I consider to be the gravity of the crime.” The current prohibition of sex between adults and children is an “overreaction” which Gardner traces to the Jews.

Organizations such as the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) spread Gardner’s theory like wildfire, training judges, custody evaluators and social workers to disbelieve mothers and children when they report abuse, and worse – separate them as punishment. And what better way to enable pedophilia and other human rights violations than remove the mother as the child’s most natural and fervent protector? "

Texas "Tarrant County needs a Task Force to review child abuse cases and deaths "

BY PROTECTIVE PARENTS COALTION MARCH 29, 2016

See page 18-19

Excerpts "Judges, Child Support Enforcement, Family Court Services, Child Protective Services and court-appointed professionals are disregarding and proactively working against the protective parents (often the mother) who allege legitimate sexual and physical abuse. Instead of protecting the child from the perpetrator, the judges are giving the abuser more visitation and custody than before the allegations.

This organized case-rigging is to ensure parent’s abuse allegations are discredited. Select judges contribute to the corruption of our family courts by their associations with secret judicial groups and father’s rights groups. These patterns are revealed in documentation from father’s rights organizations, HHS-ACF (Health and Human Services Department- Administration for Children and Families), American Humane Association, Access and Visitation programs and AFCC (Association of Family and Conciliation Courts).

Judges and court-appointed licensed professionals are rigging these pro-father cases by terminating child support to mother and redirecting child support to pay the amicus attorney, ignoring statutes that protect children who have credible evidence of past sexual and physical abuse, court- appoint unethical and biased amicus attorneys who act on behalf of the court instead of the child, manipulate the case outcome by favoring the father and use licensed professionals to talk to children alone to either intimidate, discredit or teach child to recant their outcry to protect the perpetrator. "

AFCC Court Cancer Metastacizes: A Guide to Destroying Children

Uploaded by JournalistABC on May 08, 2013

http://familycourtcoalition.blogspot.com/p/medicaid-fraud-in-california-courts.html

Rehab Racket: the Sequel

California’s County-Level Judicial Branch Medicaid Oligarchy

A Family Court Accountability Coalition Special Investigative Report

By Ron Pierce

Excerpts "In a recent article by Capital Research Center, “Making Divorce Pay”, the author identifies an important control level over judicial branch “children’s services” by a veritable army of program facilitators, largely trained and licensed through the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts(AFCC); a collaborative network which took root in California in the spring of 1963, now a massive association of more than 5,000 members in dozens of disciplines throughout 25 countries.

Often styled the “divorce industry” by those acquainted with its reach, this network holds dominion over parent-child relationships in California and abroad, through an ever-increasing proliferation of individual county mental health agencies and their network of clinics. As the author, Michael Volpe notes,

AFCC didn’t create the term “high conflict” divorces, but the group has done a lot to turn it into a household word. “The challenges posed by high-conflict families were front-and-center issues for most courts, and AFCC members led the way in developing new processes and techniques for working with these challenging family members,” according to AFCC’s website.

“For the last 30 years, mediation and, to a lesser extent custody evaluations have dominated the family dispute resolution landscape,” an AFCC white paper from 2004 stated. “Only recently have a very few court service agencies begun to explore a triage process to select from a menu of services.”

Currently, the reality of just how insidiously complex this corruption has become is reflected in the public’s resignation and common holding that divorcing parents can expect their parent-child relationships to be assessed, classified, and restructured around court-ordered therapies, visitation and ongoing control by county clinics who, like those exposed in Rehab Racket, enjoy less than no legitimate oversight.

In reality, parents who resist the imposition of these services predictably incur disfavor with court facilitators, who then recommend reduction of custody and visitation until the balking parent and/or whistleblower relents out of grief and desperation for wont of an uncorrupted court. "

Let's Get Honest! Blog: Absolutely Uncommon Analysis of Family & Conciliation Courts' Operations, Practices, & History

OVW + BWJP-FVPF + PRAXIS + NCADV(s) + AFCC = same old, same old (with new names on the grant systems) Here’s why:

Excerpts see link https://familycourtmatters.org/2011/07/06/ovw-bwjp-fvpf-praxis-ncadvs-afcc-same-old-same-old-with-new-names-on-the-grant-systems-heres-why/

Understandably, this torrent of text with missing paragraph breaks can be very irritating to read. But for those who do read, or skim, I believe I have made the point that AFCC members flock together, consult together, and set policy together. Generally speaking any policy that comes out will somehow, somewhere, contain the words “Parental Alienation” “High-Conflict” and usually to go with it, “treatment” or “solutions” etc.

The solution is generally going to require counseling or the services of a psychologist, counselor, mediator, psychiatrist, therapist or other mental health expert.

• First, positioning member (this is long done, and ongoing) high in government, particularly in the court system.
• Programs are pretty much pushed from the Top Down while proclaiming they are actually grassroots demand . . . .
• Running conferences — all over the place, but noticeably in real nice places that most of the people they are talking about (in the conferences, i.e., parents) have little chance of reaching (or affording hotel & airfare for)– such as Honolulu, with an after-trip to Cuba, or other cool places. As well as the Contiguous US conference circuit, ongoing.
• Pushing the services of psychologists and psychiatrists, including Ph.D.s in the same to remedy the majority of life’s problems.
• This of course is easier to push when you also have judges in the mix willing to sign a few court orders forcing treatment.

PsyD Ph.D.+ JD = AFCC tactical lobbying unit.

• Taking advantage of Federal Grants and teaching membership how to do the same, whether from HHS or DOJ.
• Strategically forming nonprofit corporations to contract, or subcontract with whatever the grants are for.
• Skillful involvement of Child Support Service (OCSE) weaponry** to target participants in certain programs, like parental education, in particular.
• Co-opting the Battered Women’s Movement and diluting it through “collaboration.” (HHS grants system helps motivate this behavior). For example, when Battered Women’s Justice Project combines with Association of Family & Conciliation Courts to study the problems with Custody.

(I have to pause to post this one, just for the sheer joy of the language and the confidence it inspires in me, personally, to know that it’s a Canadian sociologist ethnographer who is going to be heavily involved in a projected funded by US Taxpayers about significant problems they have encountered with criminal behavior (battering) and the failure of the LEGAL system to address this. When in doubt, call in a sociologist, right?): See link for rest of well cited information https://familycourtmatters.org/2011/07/06/ovw-bwjp-fvpf-praxis-ncadvs-afcc-same-old-same-old-with-new-names-on-the-grant-systems-heres-why/