"Honorable
senators know that I have studied a terrible and pernicious
heart of darkness
that has developed in our court system, being the use of
FALSE ACCUSATIONS in civil justice.
"This
is the mischief of litigating parties, usually mothers,
suddenly within the context of divorce and within child
custody proceedings falsely accusing the other party,
usually fathers, of the sexual abuse of their own children.
,,,
"These
FALSE ACCUSATIONS are often made with the overt
or covert complicity of their
lawyers. They are a
lethal weapon in the business of parental alienation. They
are a tool for achieving sole custody of children and
creating fatherlessness."
"Natural
Parents have NO RIGHTS.... ONLY RESPONSIBILITIES....
"Natural
Parents' Rights now gone with my Homosexual Marriage
bill"
16.10 Maximum Contact & Friendly Parent Rule has to go to
conform
to Judicial Practice, or Judges may be held in criminal
BREACH OF TRUST"
FYI,
the ideas that the State assigns
Rights &
Responsibilities to it's Citizen is straight from
pre-war Nazi Germany. Under the British system
rights are not State-given, but God Given.
Buying into the Court's position that what
rights remain are Children's Rights, is buying into the same
position that "<Natural> Parents have no rights", and
Canadian Children are at birth the property of the Courts.
In
"Women and the Process of Constitutional Reform"
McLellan warns that <Horrors!>
"Provincial
Legislatures may impose a presumption of Joint Custody...
and perpetuate the domination of men over women"
Ask a lawyer what "Common Law" is and
they will likely tell you it is
"Judge Made Law", and expand up this to say
"Common Law is whatever the Judges are commonly saying these
days".
This is completely FALSE. The Judges
are Agents of the Crown and they BY DEFINITION Judges are WITHOUT
CAPACITY to make any law whatsoever. Since
1649, only
PARLIAMENT has the Capacity to make Law.
British Common law was NOT created by Judges, it was
only observed and documented by individuals sent out by the
newly Norman Crown after the
Norman Conquest of 1066 to observe and codify the
laws and customs of the various peoples of Britain..
This was done with a view to aggregate existing customs
which may vary across the land, into a unified body of
Laws. The Authority quoted by the Commoners in their
administration of
Common Law were frequently direct quotations from the
Bible and
principles of
Danelaw
The process of documentation took only a
couple of hundred years, and
the product was a STATIC body of Law which was historical,
popular, and has served in the intervening centuries as a
Benchmark against which
Statutory Law may be measured for "Fairness".
It does NOT change.
Instead their position to promote the
"rights" of a "Parent" in the widest sense of the
word, making NO distinction between
NATURAL PARENTS and
wannaabe
Legal Parents. They have bowed to
University of
Victoria's assertion that the SCC's
Trociuk
Decision
"endorses a Heterosexual View of the Family and must be
ignored", legitimizing the ongoing
Child
Trafficking by the State which views
Canadian
children as State Property and merchandise for sale in
the lucrative Child
Adoption Market They refuse to be hampered by prior
obligations to that pesky Natural Parent who thinks they can
Veto an Adoption.
It appears that many
"Fathers Rights" groups commonly fall in with the United
Nations and Liberal
Irwin Cotler's assertion that the
Child's Right is to be protected, but the Natural Parent
has "NO RIGHTS",
making the State, not the Natural
Parents the Protector of the Child..
Without Cause or
Consent, no Child shall be removed from a Natural Parent!!!
"In spite of credible revelations dating back to April 2002
about Bill Graham, a sex addicted bi-sexual sodomizing a 15
year old male prostitute named
Lawrence Metherel,
Paul Martin allowed Graham to remain
Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister - and eventually named
him to the portfolio of Minister of Defense.
"On Sept. 28/2005 a vote was held in Parliament to raise the
age of consent from 14 (one of the lowest age of consents in
the world) to 16 (an age which many still consider too low).
"Bill Graham, Paul Martin, and Anne McLellan, on Sept. 28th,
voted against raising the age of consent to 16
"The Family Courts
are <generally> a bunch of second rate hangers-on
... build each other's businesses through
referrals...Family Law is a <parasitic> self-sustaining
Industry"
Habeas
Corpus : "literally, "you
may have the body". A Habeas
Corpus is a legal writ that protects an individual against arbitrary
imprisonment by requiring that any person arrested be brought before
a court for formal charge. If the charge is considered to be valid,
the person must submit to trial; if not, the person goes free. When
the law is suspended, then individuals can be imprisoned
indefinitely and without charge."
.....
Skeletons in the Closet, a film drawn from the dramatized lives
of families living with a protected
Pedophile and the mental
illness it may create when a loving, faithful, Victim keeps the
Secret. This is shockingly
common. The Secret is their Power -
BREAK IT!
(You would be well advised to stay away from the Public Servant.)
FYI, most of what you hear
about Family Violence is a huge fraud because
World Health Organization
obligates members to:
a) NOT report results of studies which do
not show "expected results", and
b) if "unexpected results do eventually get
reported, they may only be reported with "expert" commentary to
explain away the deviation from the expected result that "Men are
violent" and "Women are their Victims".
The World Health has as a primary Sponsor, the
Rockefeller Foundations, a
Fabian Socialist group
which has as it's aim the conversion of the West to a Soviet style
block which can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.
See Norman Dodd.
It seems any time the Crimes of a
"Friend of the Court" gets forced into the Public Eye, BC Courts
provide their buddy with a
Special Prosecutor to minimize their
sentences and hopefully get them back in business as fast as
possible. Aren't these crooks supposed to receive
Trial By Jury?
Opponents of Equal Parenting like to tell you
that seventy something percent of Custody Cases don't go to Trial,
and are awarded as Sole Custody to Mom BY CONSENT.
What they don't tell you is that in ninety
something percent of Custody Cases that do go to Trial Mom gets Sole
Custody anyway, and Dad has to pay on top of his Lawyer fees, the
Court Costs for having lost his Application. Faced with these
abysmal odds, Dads are commonly told to "Just give her what she
wants so you can have a good relationship with her". Under
such
Duress many Dads foolishly acquiesce .... for
a time at least......
We prefer that Natural Parents NOT sign a Consent
Order that is not completely Equal with respect to Gender, as the
relationship of the divorced couple is greatly destabilized with
each injury to the equality of parental powers .
Pedophile Activists obviously don't go around
telling you what they're up to. Instead they call
themselves "Mentors", "Social
Workers", "Feminists" or "Homosexual Rights Activists". In
Canada, Pedophile Activists have been successful in getting
greater access to children by reducing the
Age
of Consent to ,
and in eliminating a parents "right to know" when the child reaches
the age of
,
replacing them with school counselors and
Social Workers, and by, of course, eradicating fathers from
their children's lives entirely from birth on request by the mother.
With
the recent changes to accommodate homosexual marriage, the right of
natural parents to "parent" their natural children will soon be
removed entirely. Through these statutory changes, the term
"LEGAL PARENT" is replacing the
historic term "NATURAL PARENT"
in Canadian statutes. As a result Natural
Parents can no longer automatically claim to be the Legal Parents of
their own natural children at birth. Instead, to accommodate
the Homosexual Activists' plan to push Natural Parents aside when it
comes to parenting children, the Courts alone now decide who will be
the "parents' of all children born in Canada.
Pedophile
Activists are often lawyers, school counselors, teachers,
Social Workers, Sex Ed teachers,
YWCA leaders,
pastors, Judges, etc. etc. They seek positions with access and
power over Children & Families, and positions to create social and
political change. The publicly undisclosed prevalence of
Pedophile & Homosexual Activists in our civil service has been
attributed to their determined politicism in the many groups like
ACT UP! , the secrecy of the
alliances made in various "secret societies" and sex clubs, and to
Sexual Nepotism in the workplace.
"Carol
Rhodes, former Friend of the Court Investigator ... recently did
an interview with host Richard Farr on the
KRights.com Internet Radio station. Michigan Shared parenting
activist
Robert Pedersen of
A Child’s Right was also interviewed. To listen, click
here.
BC Liberals to provide
BC Judges and Lawyers with statutory changes to legalize many of the Courts' entrenched but presently
ILLEGAL Child
Trafficking and Extortion
rackets, while creating
more jobs for Social Workers..
Judicial Racketeering
will remain a Criminal Act, but crooked Judges will likely
continue to be protected by the crooked Law Societies.
They
say it is their
"Policy" to NEVER return OVERPAYMENTS on Child Support.
They say it is their "Policy" or to NOT
acknowledge Payments to the Payee directly without going through
their Office, saying such payments are "Gifts" only,
and will NOT be considered by them to be payments of Child
Support. They say their "Policy" of removing
Passports and Drivers' Licenses, and spreading around your SINs
to strangers NOT involved in taxation is justified by the
"Greater Good"of defending a
Child's Right to receive
Support Payments. They claim Themis is a "Creation of Statute",
exercising only the powers given it by Parliament. See
Issues: Breach of
Trust of a Public Officer, Criminal
Themis operates as
Chris Beresford's
mercenary
Bounty Hunter.
We have known of Moms who, having seen what Themis has done to
Dad, have waived payment of Child Support to stop
Themis' attacks, but Themis has refused to stop.
For decades, they have been pictured as living the high life
-- driving their Porsches, vacationing in exotic places -- while
their former wives and their children haunt food banks and live
off welfare. Branded as "deadbeat dads," they are viewed as
heartless men who have simply walked away from their family
responsibilities. The fact is, sure, there are some dads who
fall into this category -- men who have fathered children but
don't want to honour their obligations to them -- but a closer
examination reveals another story.
In general, statistics indicate that between 85 to 91 percent of
Canadian children covered either by private or court-ordered
child-support agreements actually receive payments, the vast
majority receiving regular support payments. And statistics also
reveal the close association between the regularity of payment
and the frequency of contact between fathers and their children.
Studies also show that many noncustodial fathers who do not pay
child support simply can't afford to. Some are
unemployed or on sick leave. In fact, one of the best predictors
of nonpayment is the unemployment rate. Higher incomes are
associated with higher compliance rates, and lower incomes with
lower rates. One study suggests that a father's ability to pay,
in addition to his willingness to pay, determines the extent to
which he fulfills his child-support obligations.
Burdened by unrealistic court- imposed support payments,
continuing legal fees, increased taxes due to changes imposed by
Bill C-41 and estrangement from their children, some men
find themselves caught in a downward spiral of depression and
have resorted to the ultimate escape: suicide. With a divorce,
funds that were unable to support one household are now expected
to support two. Add to this the cost of expensive litigation,
the fact that one party may be trying to use money as a means of
obtaining concessions such as access or custody, and we have a
recipe for disaster -- with children often caught in the
maelstrom
What happens after the break-up of the family? Eighty-seven
percent of children end up living solely with their mothers
after a parental separation (only 7 percent live with their
fathers). Only 30 percent of children report visiting their
fathers every week. One quarter of children visit their fathers
irregularly -- once a month or on holidays. A whopping 15
percent never see their fathers.
And what has Bill C-41 done for fathers? Under the changes to
the tax treatment of child support, which came into effect on
May 1, 1997, it is no longer taxable in the hands of the
receiving parent and no longer deductible in the hands of the
paying parent. It is worthy of note that when the Parliamentary
Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of
Canada rose in Parliament to speak in favour of Bill C-41, he
stated that the revenue derived from ending the deduction of
child-support payments would yield the federal government more
than an additional $1 billion dollars over a five-year period.
Finding solutions that are in the best interests of the children
was the aim of the 1998 Senate-Commons Joint Committee on Child
Custody and Access. Understanding that children of divorce are
entitled to a close and continuing relationship with both
parents, the committee recommended that the terms "custody" and
"access" be stricken from the Divorce Act and a new term,
"shared parenting," be incorporated. Both parents would have
access to information and records regarding the child's
development and social activities, such as school and medical
records and other relevant information. The federal government
has apparently shelved the committee's recommendations, however,
in the interests of further study.
Yes, there are some deadbeats who don't care about their kids.
But it's unfair and unproductive to label every father who falls
behind in his support payments a "deadbeat."
Deadbeat Dad Propaganda:
"Deadbeat Dads" are usually "Beat Dead" Dads
"Studies also show that many noncustodial fathers who do not pay
child support simply can't afford to"
"I am writing on behalf of
Darrin Bruce White. I am the oldest of his four
children. My name is
Ashlee A D Barnett-White. ...
No one would listen to my father , no one
would give him a chance to speak. ... My dad was an abused
husband, he was abused by his wife, and the justice system.
... He was a kind man who fought a good fight but no matter
what he did or said, he could never win with this system.
Things need to change for all fathers going through this
same thing. We need to help, too many kids go without a
father because of this , too many kids are hurt."
Ashlee A D Barnett-White, Eldest Daughter
He was also paying $439 a month to support an
older
child from a previous marriage.
He had to take stress leave from his job as a train engineer
for BC Rail. Master Baker ordered Darren out of his home on
two days notice.
The common practice in BC Courts when Fathers
do not pay Child
Support - which most of the time is merely
Imputed - is to send non-paying Father to Prison until he or
his family members pay the fees imposed by the Judge.
Even when mothers agree that Child Support should no
longer be paid, we find that the
Family Enforcement
agencies, which are private contractors
functioning as
Bounty Hunters, typically refuse to end their
claim on the father's income,.
Affirmative Action has made White Heterosexual Anglophone Males (WHAMs) a Class
of employment ineligibility & PC Hatred since 1980
"I get government cheques..... you stupid Canadians.. I get
government cheques.", Korean Realtor
Canadian Affirmative Action programs coupled with massive
immigration from "non-traditional" sources to accommodate UN commitments
precluded white males and many white females from employment and progressive
employment in government offices.
These same White Males are now routinely subjected to
Imputed Income by Family court Judges
- the majority of whom are beneficiaries of Affirmative Action programs - when
Dad's incomes aren't as high as the Judge expects them to be.
Disclaimer: EqualParenting-BC.Ca encourages exercising democratic
rights such as the freedom of expression, but does not by association or
reference to other materials condone or sanction violence or hatred.