The Canadian Parliament might also
consider eliminating the threat to the matrimonial bond
inherent in "No Fault" Divorce. Permitting one
marriage partner to unilaterally end a joint relationship
with impunity is very destabilizing to Canadian families,
and creates too much business in Family Law . We think
Canadians still get married for more reasons than just
establishing a temporary monogamy within which to
share spousal benefits and to establish paternity claims.
We think Canadians still think of marriage as a
relationship of Trust and security, in the tradition of the
oft spoken vow of "For Better or Worse".
With "No Fault
Divorce", there is no remedy when the Trust
placed in a "Spouse" is breached. There is
therefore no deterrent for matrimonial predators who by
becoming a "spouse" have free license 24/7 to take children,
inheritance and family assets, and hold these hostage from
the distraught father. There is no fund
established with the "saved" litigation costs to insure the
victim of Divorce as there is in other "no-fault"
schemes. Since ~1972 Canadian legislation
has been gutted of such dearly held values by "No Fault
Divorce" and has been devolved into a division of assets
and other financial obligations. Only the
lawyers gain by putting so much more within their grasp.
We think there is substantial merit in:
Reestablishing the "Fault" in
Divorce legislation. If couples prefer to live
under a cohabitation agreement there is nothing to
prevent them. But if a couple wishes to live as a
"married" couple, why should legislation preclude them
from living as "married" in the historic sense?
Reestablishing the Enticement laws,
providing the injured spouse with claims against third
parties who entice their spouse to end their marriage.
This one change will make the ubiquitous father-hatred
groups unprofitable to run, and leave families to
succeed or fail of their own accord. It also gives
children a chance at recouping their inheritance from
these professional Misandrists
Reestablishing the Seduction laws,
providing the injured spouse with claims against third
parties who seduce their spouse into adulterous
relationships.
We apologize that the
following figures have not been developed for the Province of BC
specifically. We hope to do this over time. We do know,
however that women often move to BC from Alberta and the rest of Canada
to have their divorces done here in BC where the
misandry of the Family Courts will
maximize their powers to destroy their husbands.
Children from fatherless homes account
for:
63% of youth suicides. (Source: US Dept.
of Health & Human Services, Bureau of the Census).
71% of pregnant teenagers. (Source: US
Dept. of Health & Human Services)
90% of all homeless and runaway
children.
70% of juveniles in state-operated
institutions come from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. Dept. of
Justice, Special Report, Sept 1988)
85% of all children that exhibit
behavioral disorders. (Source: Center for Disease Control).
80% of rapists motivated with displaced
anger. (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol. 14, p. 403-26,
1978).
71% of all high school dropouts.
(Source: National Principals Association Report on the State of High
Schools).
75% of all adolescent patients in
chemical abuse centers. (Source: Rainbows for all God's Children).
85% of all youths sitting in prisons.
(Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of
Corrections 1992).
Children from fatherless
homes are:
11 times more likely to exhibit violent
behavior than children from intact "married" homes.
5 times more likely to commit suicide.
32 times more likely to runaway.
20 times more likely to have behavioral
disorders.
14 times more likely to commit rape.
9 times more likely to drop out of high
school.
10 times more likely to abuse chemical
substances.
9 times more likely to end up in
state-operated institutions.
20 times more likely to end up in
prison.
"37.9% of
fathers have no access/visitation rights."
(Source: p.6, col.II, para. 6, lines 4 & 5, Census Bureau
P-60, #173, Sept 1991.)
"40% of mothers reported that they had interfered with the
non-custodial father's visitation on at least one occasion, to punish
the ex-spouse." (Source: p. 449, col. II, lines 3-6, (citing
Fulton) Frequency of visitation by Divorced Fathers; Differences in
Reports by Fathers and Mothers. Sanford Braver et al, Am. J. of
Orthopsychiatry, 1991.)
"Overall,
approximately 50% of mothers "see no value in the father's continued
contact with his children...."
(Source: Surviving the Breakup, Joan Kelly & Judith
Wallerstein, p. 125) Only 11% of mothers value their husband's input
when it comes to handling problems with their kids. Teachers & doctors
rated 45%, and close friends & relatives rated %16.(Source: EDK
Associates survey of 500 women for Redbook Magazine. Redbook, November
1994, p. 36)
"The former
spouse (mother) was the greatest obstacle to having more frequent
contact with the children." (Source:
Increasing our understanding of fathers who have infrequent contact with
their children, James Dudley, Family Relations, Vol. 4, p. 281, July
1991.)
"A clear
majority (70%) of fathers felt that they had too little time with their
children." (Source: Visitation and the
Noncustodial Father, Mary Ann Kock & Carol Lowery, Journal of Divorce,
Vol. 8, No. 2, p. 54, Winter 1984.)
"Very few of
the children were satisfied with the amount of contact with their
fathers, after divorce." (Source:
Visitation and the Noncustodial Father, Koch & Lowery, Journal of
Divorce and Remarriage, Vol. 8, No. 2, p. 50, Winter 1984.)
"Feelings of anger towards their former spouses hindered effective
involvement on the part of fathers; angry mothers would sometimes
sabotage father's efforts to visit their children." (Source:
Ahrons and Miller, Am. Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Vol. 63. p. 442, July
1993.)
"Mothers may
prevent visits to retaliate against fathers for problems in their
marital or post-marital relationship."
(Source: Seltzer, Shaeffer & Charing, Journal of Marriage & the Family,
Vol. 51, p. 1015, November 1989.)
In a study: "Visitational
Interference - A National Study" by Ms. J Annette Vanini, M.S.W. and
Edward Nichols, M.S.W., it was found that 77% of non-custodial fathers
are NOT able to "visit" their children, as ordered by the court, as a
result of "visitation interference" perpetuated by the custodial parent.
In other words, non-compliance with court ordered visitation is three
times the problem of non-compliance with court ordered child support and
impacts the children of divorce even more. Originally published Sept.
1992
Child Support
Information from multiple
sources show that only 10% of all non-custodial fathers fit the
"deadbeat dad" category: 90% of the fathers with joint custody paid the
support due. Fathers with visitation rights pay 79.1%; and 44.5% of
those with NO visitation rights still financially support their
children. (Source: Census Bureau report. Series P-23, No. 173).
Additionally, of those not paying support, 66% are not doing so because
they lack the financial resources to pay (Source: GAO report:
GAO/HRD-92-39 FS).
The following is sourced from: Technical Analysis Paper No. 42, U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Income Security
Policy, Authors: Meyer and Garansky.
Custodial mothers who receive a support
award: 79.6%
Custodial fathers who receive a support
award: 29.9%
Non-custodial mothers who totally
default on support: 46.9%
Non-custodial fathers who totally
default on support: 26.9%
Judges and their elite
Star
Chamber entrench their power and status to rule over Canadians with
impunity and unbridled
narcissism.
Feminist and Homosexual Activists as Judges effect
their political agenda without the consent of the Canadian demographic.
They with full knowledge and intent (scripted in the sixties & seventies
by their Activist writers) circumvent due democratic process and
knowingly contravene the founding legal constructs of Canada in the BNA
& in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Activist Judges happily
and routinely breach the Trust placed in them by their employer, the
Canadian Taxpayer.
Lawyers routinely Entice into self-destruction and
financial rape vast numbers of families entering their doors.
Because of the Statutory self-regulation of the BC Law Society, we know
of no limiting factor to cap the Activism of the Judiciary other than
prosecuting Judges and Lawyers who exceed the powers granted them by
Statute.
The BC Law Society pimps BC women, and use them as
their hookers. With others (also conspicuously funded by the
Taxpayer), Law Society members instruct women to hook fathers and
families into the Courts and the financial ruin a "Legal Marriage"
entails. Children NEED this threat to their security to be
EXTERMINATED.
Faced with the entrenched Father Hatred and
Affirmative Action of the burgeoning civil service, boys and young men
despair. Having no vision for a Future or a university education,
they become prone to fulfill the Father Hatred prophecies of BC
university's Women's Studies faculties and Feminist Activists.
"Children of single parents were at
higher risk of physical abuse and of all types of neglect and were
overrepresented among seriously injured, moderately injured, and
endangered children. Compared with their counterparts living with both
parents, children in single parent families had:
a 77% greater risk of being
harmed by physical abuse (using the stringent Harm Standard) and a
63% greater risk of experiencing any countable physical abuse (using
the Endangerment Standard);
an 87% greater risk of being
harmed by physical neglect and a 165% greater risk of experiencing
any countable physical neglect;
a 74% greater risk of being
harmed by emotional neglect and a 64% greater risk of experiencing
any countable emotional neglect;
a 220% (or more than three
times) greater risk of being educationally neglected;
an approximately 80% greater
risk of suffering serious injury or harm from abuse or neglect;
an approximately 90% greater
risk of receiving moderate injury or harm as a result of child
maltreatment; and
a 120% (or more than two times)
greater risk of being endangered by some type of child abuse or
neglect."
2006-11-10
Top judges rebuke Tories Federal plan would allow police to help
appoint judiciary - workopolis.com; "Beverley
McLachlin, Canada's Chief Justice, along with a powerful council of
the country's top judges issued an unprecedented rebuke yesterday to
Justice Minister Vic Toews for hatching a plan to arbitrarily change
the way judges are chosen. The Canadian Judicial Council
expressed dismay that Mr. Toews is planning to introduce "significant
changes to the composition and functioning of the Judicial Advisory
Committees," secret groups which are set up in each region to vet
candidates for the 1,100 federal judgeships across the country.
Chief Justice McLachlin, who chairs the council, urged Mr. Toews to
include the judiciary and key legal bodies in any discussion of
changes to the committee vetting process."
We
need in the very least some kind of JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
which will look something like::
Divide the Law Society into two groups of
Judges and Practicing Lawyers to protect the Lawyers who would
make Cases against Judges. There would be some Law Society
Members who may practice as Barristers, and some as Solicitors,
but a Judge must RETIRE from the Practice of Law and
become unable to affect the Law Society while they act as a
Judge. On removal of a Judge for
Judicial Activism,
the Law Society may deny their return to Practice from
Retirement for specified cause, such as the case made during
an unsuccessful Criminal Charge of
Breach of Trust or Treason.
The Judges naturally divide into two bodies,
the Provincial and Federal Judicial Societies to parallel the
Provincial and Federal Courts. Membership in both Judicial
Societies must be precluded. Federal Judges would be tried
by Provincial Judges according to the
JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT, and the Provincial Judges would
be tried by the Federal Judges. They could be tried both
in Tort and in Criminal Court for
Breach of Trust and for
Treason.
Make Judicial Appointments for a FIXED TERM
of no more than five years (Jimmy Pattison where are you when we
need you?)
Judicial Re-Appointment must meet a Test for
Judicial Re-Appointment which demonstrates the prescribed
Impartiality (that is an Activism Free record.) and Non-Infamy
with the Electorate.
Automatic Temporary Suspension Without Pay
for a Judge who is going to Trial in Tort or in Criminal
Court, pending its outcome.
Eradication
of
Freemasonry from the Judiciary and Law Societies. Both
are granted special privileges by Parliamentary Statute which
they receive In Trust.. Judicial Candidates and sitting
Judges must be vetted for Occult
practices resulting in Public Safety concerns such as
Pedophilia.
Pedophilia is an established part of Occult worship
(See
Malachi Martin among others) and is reported to be a
tolerated practice of some high ranking Judges.
Trial by Jury of Judges before non-allied and
non-associated Judges, e.g.. Federal
Judges
tried before Provincial Judges, visa versa..
NO SPECIAL
PROSECUTORS for Judges or other Public Servants being
tried.
Under the "federal" division of powers in the BNA
(Constitution Act, 1867)) Education falls into the Provincial
domain. A parallel Provincial Statute to amend the licensing
and Suspension of Teachers
would be necessary to stop the present use of our Schools for
Political Indoctrination by Activists. See also
Four Missions
Natural
Grandparents Rights Proposals; Social Works
& Foster Parents get funding for raising other people's
children, Grandparents don't because they're a "Kinship Family".
See Saskatoon G I F T (Grandparents Involved Full Time)
Dorothy Bird: (306) 382-3650
We
say that's WRONG, and Grans should not be jeopardizing their
financial stability to raise an unexpected New Arrival.
2008-01-09_Documentary to focus on kinship families
"Tammy Brockhaus, with her grandson, Alex, is one of thousands
raising a grandchild in Canada. W-5 is airing a documentary on the
issue of grandparents raising grandchildren on Feb. 9 .. Brockhaus
is a 58-year-old widow who has been raising her six-year-old
grandson, Alex, since he was 30 days old. While the last six years
have proved to be a challenge for her, Brockhaus,
who also has three grown children, has found fulfillment raising a
child the second time around."
Removal of judges from office, Oklahoma
Constitution
(a) In addition to other
methods and causes prescribed by the Constitution and laws,
the judges of any court, exercising judicial power under the
provisions of Article VII, or under any other provision, of
the Constitution of Oklahoma, shall be subject to removal
from office, or to compulsory retirement from office, for
causes herein specified, by proceedings in the Court on the
Judiciary.
(b) Cause for removal from
office shall be: Gross neglect of duty; corruption in
office; habitual drunkenness; commission while in office of
any offense involving moral turpitude;
gross partiality in office;
oppression in office; or other grounds as may be
specified hereafter by the legislature.
(c) Cause for compulsory
retirement from office, with or without compensation, shall
be mental or physical disability preventing the proper
performance of official duty, or incompetence to perform the
duties of the office"
"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."
.....
"This
is one of those moments when you want to grab liberals by the lapels
and demand, "Well, what did you expect?" ... A group called the
National Center for Men has filed a lawsuit they are calling "Roe v.
Wade for Men." ... More than three decades
ago Roe vs. Wade gave women control of their reproductive lives but
nothing in the law changed for men. Women can now have sexual
intimacy without sacrificing reproductive choice. Women now have the
freedom and security to enjoy lovemaking without the fear of forced
procreation. Women now have control of their lives after an
unplanned conception. But men are routinely forced to give up
control, forced to be financially responsible for choices only women
are permitted to make, forced to relinquish reproductive choice as
the price of intimacy."
COMMENT: Roe
V. Wade was a "Femi-Narcissistic" decision, looking after the
interests of the Mother only. The principal established there
established was extrapolated into a Mother's "murder rights"
expressed in minimal sentences when murdering their children.
Equal Parenting eliminates much of this.
Father dealt difficult hand by the system
"Even last week, when the family court file of
Elaine and Leo Campione was released to the press -- in
significant measure because Mr. Campione didn't oppose the
media's bid to see it .. There is, to be frank, an
underlying perspective of feminist oppression from which all
else springs. .. Women are seen first as victims --
generally of male power and particularly of husband power -- and
presumed to be truth-tellers and good mothers until proven
otherwise. The starting point for men is that they are abusers
and deadbeat dads in the making unless they can prove the
contrary, and if it takes years for them to demonstrate that, oh
well."
In
a just world, Englishwoman
Erin Pizzey, who founded the
world's first shelter for battered wives in 1971,
would be a sought-after speaker on the subject of
domestic violence. In the real world, however, Pizzey's
name is a byword for politically incorrect apostasy.
Pizzey's
crime? A humanist, she challenged the belief system
dictated by radical feminists, who colonized her shelter
and made her presence untenable. Their ideological
mantra, still alive and kicking, insists that men are
the default perpetrators in domestic violence (also
known as "intimate partner violence," or IPV, in the
jargon) while women are invariably innocent victims who
inflict violence only in self-defence. But Pizzey knew
from her own experience (her wealthy, socially elite
parents were mutually abusive, and her mother violent to
Erin), and from what the women in her shelter told her,
that most partner violence is reciprocal.
Holding
women responsible for their violence was so at odds with
the received wisdom of the movement's activists that,
for her whistle-blowing pains, Pizzey's dog was killed
and her entire family received death threats. Undaunted,
she pursued her equal-responsibility crusade in the
United States for many years in a fusillade of articles
and books.
While dramatically extreme, Pizzey's story is
nevertheless emblematic of the hostility truth-tellers
confront in the domestic violence industry.
Another
outlier, University of British Columbia psychology
professor Don Dutton, is acknowledged by his peers
as a world expert on IPV. He has proven, over and over
again -- most recently in his definitive 2006 book,
Rethinking Domestic Violence -- that the tendency to
violence in intimate relationships is bilateral and
rooted in individual dysfunction: Men and women with
personality disorders and/or family histories of
violence are equally likely to be violent themselves, or
seek violent partners.
But Dutton's scientific credentials and extensive
25-year archive of peer-reviewed research cut no ice
with Canadian policymakers, none of whom has ever
solicited his advice.
Instead, pseudo-science absolving women of violent
impulses, delivered on demand to interest groups by the
same tiny, incestuous coterie of ideologically
sympathetic professionals, is routinely applied in
training police, family law judges, social workers and
women's shelter personnel.
A lazy, politically correct media dutifully spreads the
party line by reporting uncritically on bogus
selection-biased "studies" by non-accredited
stakeholders, who extrapolate to
the general population
data that are based on testimonials from men in
court-mandated therapy programs or women in shelters.
Ah,
women's shelters! Southern Ontario resident
Mariel Davison offers up a rather damning story of
what happens when naively impartial volunteerism
collides with women's shelter groupthink.
"When it comes to nonreciprocal violence between
intimate partners, women are more often the
perpetrators"
Note also that women in Lesbian relationships are twice
as likely to be violent as those in heterosexual
relationships.
Davison has an honours degree in psychology. A few years
ago, considering herself an "equal opportunity
feminist," she volunteered to serve at a local women's
shelter. During eight weeks' "training," Davison was
subjected to relentless male-bashing and junk science.
That, and the puzzling incongruity of the
female-as-victim message with the battered lesbians who
also sought refuge -- lesbian violence was a taboo
subject amongst trainees -- led to further intellectual
inquiry.
Davison thought her trove of
cutting-edge findings would prove welcome, but instead
they got her turfed by her peers: "I was told I had too
much education to volunteer at the shelter."
Incredulous, Davison dogged the shelter's supervising
and financing government ministries with demands that
they review objective literature, but was stonewalled at
every turn. Nothing came of her campaign.
And nothing will for the foreseeable future, because the
domestic-violence industry is a closed shop, from
Women's Studies courses (don't look for Pizzey's or
Dutton's research there, or in Men's Studies, since
there are none), to women-only shelters, to Status of
Women, to the National Judicial Council, to the Supreme
Court of Canada. They're all reading from the same
myth-riddled hymnbook.
Erin Pizzey and Don Dutton were both keynote speakers at
a recent Sacramento, Calif. conference sponsored by an
independent body, the National Family Violence
Legislative Resource Center (Motto: "Advocating for
nondiscriminatory and evidence-based policies"). Pizzey
accepted a lifetime achievement award to a prolonged
ovation.
Pizzey
told her standing-room-only audience that for gender
politics "Canada is the scariest country on the planet."
Scary to men who suffer because of it, certainly, but
apparently not to most other Canadians, who remain
curiously indifferent to the demonstrable misandry
permeating the institutions that define and shape our
culture.
What's Women's Lib about? Nick
Rockefeller says it was to get women into
the work force so they can be taxed.
Secondly it was to get Parents away for
children so the kids would see the State as
their Father. See also
Dodd, Norman,
Congressional Investigator, former Banker
"In situations where very low levels of
violence are documented or there are results that are otherwise not expected,
the findings should be discussed with key informants and different community
groups before being widely disseminated. Where these groups question the
validity of the findings, their concerns should also be presented during
dissemination activities."
".... The
Steering Committee of the WHO Study agreed that interviews with men
should not be included, largely because of the logistic and safety
implications of interviewing men and women in the same study. The
Committee recognized the importance of getting accurate data on violence
from men but considered that such an endeavour was worthy of its own
study. ..."
2006-04-01 Violent Woman's call to Police and
attack on her husband caught on HeadCam. Video- wmv;
Classic Woman's con caught on HeadCAM: Attack
husband, and call Police for "protection" from the
husband's "Violence". In Canada, the RCMP Policy
Manual instructs Officers to arrest the "heaviest"
individual at a Domestic Dispute, but in practice it is
the man who is arrested regardless of which spouse is
the Attacker.
Note
also that in Domestic Disputes, Police policy is to arrest the
"heaviest" spouse (ie. Dad) without regard to the facts before them.
This and the
False Accusation Impunity doctrine readily puts
innocent Dads in jail and fighting criminal charges which are entirely
manufactured. When Domestic Violence statistics are compiled, the
writers usually prefer to report ARREST statistics rather than
CONVICTION statistics. Watch out for this trick!
Subject: Crime is about people, not stats (Aug. 1, 2004)
There is one thing about Stats Can. non-stats that
few seem to have paid any attention to. Stats Can. does not report data
on crime, only on reports made to police which they then disseminate as
if these reports were found facts.
True, they do give that caveat in the each of their releases, but
then go on to call a complainer a “victim” and an accused an “offender”
or a “perpetrator”.
According to a subset of 94 police departments representing 56% of
the national volume of crime, in 2002, approximately one-quarter (27%)
of all victims of violent crimes were victims of family violence. Among
all family violence victims, 6-in-10 (62%) were victims of violence at
the hands of their spouse.
• In 2002, females accounted for 8-in-10 (85%) of all victims of
spousal violence reported to the subset of police departments. Young
females aged 25-to-34 experienced the highest rates of spousal violence.
• The most commonly reported spousal violence offence for both female
and male victims was common assault (64% and 60%).
• About eighty percent of spousal violence incidents resulted in a
charge being laid by police. Incidents involving female victims (82%)
were more likely to result in a charge being laid than those involving
male victims (70%).
• According to a subset of 78 police departments who have
consistently reported to the Incident-based Uniform Crime Reporting
(UCR2) Survey since 1998, rates of police-reported spousal assault have
steadily increased for both females and males between 1998 and 2000, but
have shown slight decreases in 2001 and 2002. Annual rates were on
average, over five times lower for males than for females, however,
trend patterns for spousal assault against males were similar to those
of females.
• In 2002, according to a subset of 94 police departments, about
8-in-10 victims of criminal harassment had some form of relationship
with their stalkers, either as partners, friends/acquaintances or other
family members. Females were most likely to be criminally harassed by a
partner, while males were more likely to be harassed by an acquaintance.
Note how Stats Can. is silent about the rate of convictions.
Furthermore, the phrase “females accounted …. of all victims of spousal
violence reported to the police” is misleading as it presupposes that an
act of violence had actually occurred. A report does not make a finding
of fact, therefore the correct phrase simply is “females made … of calls
received by the police”. That is especially true as the police dismiss
most of the calls outright.
Note: “wife assault” is a subgroup of “other” assaults. The police no
longer give separate data for males and females. In spite of several
requests, the police refuse to tell how many of the reports were made by
men or women and how many were about intimate partner violence.
Yet, Stats Can. will disseminate the above as: there were 2,226 assault
victims …. That, of course is not true, especially considering that they
do not tell us how many of the calls were repeat calls by the same
person, how many of the calls were dismissed without charges being laid,
etc.
Ottawa Police Services:
The City of Ottawa Chief of Police, Vince Bevan, in his paper called
“The Partner Assault
Program: a risk management approach by the Ottawa Police Service to
reduce domestic violence” (presented at the Canadian Police College
Symposium on investigative excellence and innovation, October 2002. The
Canadian Police College is described as being “a centre for professional
education for members of the Canadian and international policing
community”) claimed that the “partner assault unit” handled 4,152 calls
to alleged incidents and laid 2,407 charges (each incident may have more
than one charge and calls can either be repeat reports by the same
complainer or a first complaint, thus it is highly doubtful that even
one half of the original complaints were credible, nor can we equate the
number of complaints to be indicative of the number of potential
perpetrators and victims) of intimate partner violence in 2001. Thus, in
spite of the stringent “zero tolerance” directives, the majority of the
reports were so unbelievable that the police, who have to justify in
writing why they failed to lay a charge and make an arrest, were not
able to justify even one charge. Yet, Stats Can. counts the number of
reports as findings of fact.
Now, let’s look at the Ottawa Police Service “Annual
Statistics, Violent Offences” for that year. These data, which one
assumes to be reliable, indicate that there were a total of 4,485 calls
to all alleged assault related incidents (again, let’s stress not
individuals who were the alleged perpetrators or victims) in Ottawa and
three homicides. If we go by the chief’s statistics, practically all
assault related calls in the city of Ottawa were by females who claimed
that they had been victimized by their intimate male partners. Yet, data
from across the world, including Canada, show that most true assault
victims are male.
It is of further interest that charges and convictions no longer need
not be based on “reasonable and probable grounds”, “reasonable” is
enough. See the Ontario Ministry of the Solicitor General and
Correctional Services. “Policing Standards Manual” Section 0217.01,
0217.04 (1994): “Mandatory Arrest/Charging policy refers to guidelines
that require police officers to lay criminal charges against the abusive
partner in all cases of wife assault where there are "reasonable
grounds"”
Judge Lyn Ratushny, in the “Self-Defence Review” that she was
commissioned to conduct by the Department of Justice Canada, claims that
a woman’s allegation is to be accepted as long as it “has an air of
reality" and/or “is supported by evidence reasonably capable of belief”.
She herself admitted that these standards are questionable. Her
definition of “reasonable” is anything but reasonable. [source:
Department of Justice. The Backgrounder, September 1997. The
Self-Defence Review: Overview and Next Steps]
The Hon. Dianne Cunnigham, Ontario Women’s Directorate said in her
speech during the opening of the North York Domestic Violence Court
Pilot Project: “...The offender must plead guilty and is required to
participate in a ‘male batterer’s program’. [Note that Ms. Cunningham
assumes that “accused” and “offender” are synonyms and that the accused,
whom she refers to as “offender”, is always a male. Furthermore,
if a guilty verdict is obtained by coercion, it is hardly an indication
of guilt]
Below is some sage advice from the law firm Birenbaum, Steinberg,
Landau, Savin & Colraine, LLP. Family Law Toronto. Information Resource.
http://www.familylawtoronto.ca/ This further proves that men who
are caught off guard when they find themselves arrested and hauled to
places like the Don Jail, are easily tricked into pleading guilty to
something that they did not do:
“Findings of abuse can have a number of consequences in a family law
case.
• A court will make a non-harassment order directing the abusive
spouse not to contact the victim, and may provide particular
restrictions regarding the type of activity that is forbidden. If the
abuser breaches that order, he or she may be found guilty of contempt.
Also, the Ontario Provincial Police can arrest without warrant, anyone
whom they reasonably believe is breaching such an order.
• A finding of abuse will almost certainly entitle the victim to
exclusive possession of the matrimonial home.
• A finding of abuse will also certainly result in the victim being
awarded custody.
• A finding of abuse may result in the other parent having his or her
access suspended, reduced or supervised.
• A finding of abuse may result in a divorce being granted on the
grounds of cruelty.
• A finding of abuse may result in additional damages for personal
injury or intentional infliction of mental suffering, and may be a
factor in the calculation of the amount of spousal support ordered to be
paid
· Just the allegation
of abuse opens the door to the possibility of such consequences at least
on a temporary basis. Judges will often err on the side of caution and
even though abuse has not been proven, will not want to run any risks.
Consequently, people accused of abuse may be ordered out of the house on
the basis of allegations or a temporary restraining order may be made on
the basis of allegations alone.
· The potential impact
of abuse or allegations of abuse can, therefore, be quite significant to
the party who is accused. The consequences to a spouse who has falsely
alleged abuse are not so dramatically or frequently applied.
· The police will often
attempt to trick a suspect into speaking to them. Common tricks are for
a police officer to say something like, "Look, if nothing happened, just
tell us and you’ll be okay," or, "It’s your right not to say anything,
but I know if I was accused of beating my child and I hadn’t done it,
I’d sure want my version on the record," or, "Let’s go outside for a
walk in the hall, just the two of us, no notebooks," or, "If you talk to
us now, things will be a lot easier on you later."
· Do not agree to any
plea without asking to speak to duty counsel. The police or even Crown
Attorneys may tell you that all you have to do to get out of this
situation is agree to a several month long anger management course and
it will be over. What they do not tell you is that you have to plead
guilty before you can take the course [end quotes]
If men who have been falsely accused refuse to plead guilty they will
face prolonged litigations and often will end up waiting for a long time
to have their cases heard. By that we can deduce that there are an awful
number of men sitting in jails while waiting to be found innocent. At an
awful cost to the accused, their families and the society. Not to
mention the numbers to be added to the false data that are churned out
from Stats Can. In spite of the evidence, Stats Can. refuses to do a
survey on false allegations.
The following suggested directive may be of interest as it now is a
standard practice by many police forces:
· Test not met:
Where there are no reasonable grounds to believe that an offence has
been committed, but police nonetheless believe that the victim’s safety
may be at risk, police should consider the availability of other
responses, including civil protection orders under provincial and
territorial legislation on domestic violence, where applicable (see
below), and recognizance orders under section 810 of the Criminal Code.
However, these alternative responses should not be used in place of
charges where the test has been met. [Source:
Spousal Abuse Policies and Legislation. Final Report of the Ad Hoc
Federal-Provincial-Territorial Working Group Reviewing Spousal Abuse
Policies and Legislation. Prepared for Federal-Provincial-Territorial
Ministers Responsible for Justice ]
In short, if there are no grounds to believe the complainer, police
will issue a restraining order if the accused is a male and thus save
themselves the trouble of having to justify in writing why they did not
lay a charge and make an arrest. These orders then are disseminated by
Stats. Can. as if they were based on valid grounds.
The same report tells us that though the other favourite Stats Can.
“finding” is that “Violence against Women” costs the Canadian
taxpayers more than $4 billion a year it is actually the creation of
the myth that costs us that much:
· In 1995, a study
of selected economic costs of three forms of violence—sexual
assault, woman abuse in intimate partnerships and incest or child
sexual abuse—estimated the partial annual costs of violence against
women in four policy areas as follows:
· the economic
burden of unintentional and intentional injuries combined is
estimated to be greater than $12.7 billion per year or 8% of the
total direct and indirect costs of illness, ranking 4th after
cardiovascular disease, musculo-skeletal conditions and cancer. (The
economic burden of illness in Canada, 1998. Health Canada, 2002)
· Another economic
study estimated that unintentional injuries alone cost Canada more
than $8.7 billion annually. (Angus D et al. The economic burden of
unintentional injury in Canada, SMARTRISK, 1998)
An example of the myth making is a program that is delivered to
school children, beginning in kindergarten, called the “Black Eyed
Susan”
http://www.bconnex.net/~dsneyd/index.htm The program directs
teachers to ask primary grade students to “draw pictures of their
impressions of the film and then describe them to the rest of the
class and to make construction paper flowers and paper bag puppets
of each of the main characters, collect the flowers and arrange them
in a vase. Encourage students to playact their puppets through
different roles from various parts of the film.”
The brainwashing becomes more intensive when children reach the
junior grades. Teachers are instructed to divide classes “into 2 or
3 drama clubs and help them produce all or part of The Disclosure, a
three-act play taken from the Black-eyed Susan script.” Let us not
forget that these same children have already been subjected to the
same propaganda in their primary level. The instructions to the
teachers are to proceed with the following methodology:
Considering the time and effort that is used for this, it is
small wonder that our children finish their education without the
essential academic skills but fully cognisant of the false data that
are presented by Stats Can. [see
http://www.bconnex.net/~dsneyd/stats.htm ]
National Judicial Institute (Canada):
“2-3 women are killed by their partner/ex-partner every week in
Canada”
According to Juristat, the yearly average number of women killed
by their current or former intimate male partners during the ten
year period between 1992 and 2001 was 65. Based on that number, the
weekly average is 1.25 women. It is noteworthy that many of these
cases were murder-suicides. It still more noteworthy that even these
numbers are inflated as many men, who were initially found guilt,
have been exonerated later though the statistics have not been
corrected. The National Judicial Institute is responsible for
judicial education in Canada.
The preferred method by Stats Can. and other propagandists is to
disseminate statistics in percentages only. Thus one Department of
Justice Canada document admits that their 100% recidivism rate was
based on two case, another report indicates that the final estimate
was arrived at by using an original sample of “10 or less” reports.
Tammy Landau in her “Synthesis of Department of Justice Canada
Research Findings on Spousal Assault” tells that the “Manitoba
Tracking Study” by Jane Ursel indicated that only 21% of all cases
dispatched resulted in charges, and only 12% resulted in
convictions.
Crown counsel withdrew or stayed 58 percent of the 474 criminal
harassment charges in our sample. Twenty-five percent of the accused
pleaded guilty, 10 percent were found guilty, and seven percent were
found not guilty. Looking at the outcomes of cases including all
charges (more meaningful, since this is the way that the Crown,
defence and the courts generally plan strategies and make
decisions), we see that in 29 percent of cases all charges were
dropped in exchange for a peace bond, and in an additional 20
percent of cases all charges were dropped or stayed unconditionally
(Table 9). A conviction on at least one charge was obtained in 46
percent of the cases. Fifteen percent of accused pleaded guilty to
all charges, and eight percent were found guilty of all charges. In
nine percent of cases the accused was convicted of criminal
harassment, and all other charges were withdrawn or stayed.
Looking at criminal harassment charges only, Vancouver, Toronto
and Montreal withdrew or stayed charges with considerable
frequency (68 percent, 61 percent and 56 percent respectively).
Winnipeg withdrew or stayed 49 percent, Edmonton 47 percent and
Halifax 20 percent (2 cases). Peace bond resolutions where
criminal harassment was the only charge were most frequent in
Montreal (35 percent), less frequent in Vancouver and Toronto
(26 percent and 20 percent), and least frequent in Edmonton (13
percent), Winnipeg (10 percent) and Halifax (no cases). The
criminal harassment conviction rate in Halifax was 80 percent (8
cases). In Winnipeg it was 45 percent, in Edmonton 42 percent,
in Toronto 36 percent, in Montreal 31 percent and in Vancouver
22 percent.
· [I]n about 20
percent of the cases in which charges were dropped or stayed,
the file indicated that the victim wanted the charges to be
dropped, or that the victim did not cooperate with the
prosecution of the case in some way. The files in no cases
indicated that these were determining factors in the Crown's
decision, but it is clear from our interviews that most Crown
see no point in taking a case to trial without the victim being
willing to testify in keeping with the original statements taken
by the police.
Police Services Division, British Columbia Ministry of Attorney
General, called "Survey of Spousal Assaults Reported to Police
[year] in British Columbia" has made an attempt to document the
number of initial reports that are eventually validated.
According to this report, in 1996, 70% of level 1 reports of
[alleged] spousal assault cases were cleared by charges, whereas
28% of reports of level 1 of [alleged] non-spousal assaults were
similarly cleared. Ten per cent of all charges were for
allegations of uttering threats [p. 22]. As Statistics Canada
bases the numbers that it
The survey indicates that 48% of the reported “incidents” ended
in convictions. Only 36% of all charges laid by the Crown ended
in conviction, 56% ended in non-conviction, and ‘other’ findings
accounted for 8% of the outcome. It is curious that there is no
reference to the possibility that the charges in the 56%
non-convictions were due to false allegations. Or that at least
some of the 48% who were convicted were innocent.
The report continues: “It is interesting to note that although
60% of the charges [not incidents which each may have several
separate charges] were for the least serious form of assault
(level 1 assault) and 71% of victims did not seek medical
attention, in most cases the police proceeded with charges and
the crown approved these charges.”
The semantics become somewhat confusing, once more, as p. vii
of the report tells that about 13% sought medical attention. The
breakdown on p. 20 indicates that in 16% of the cases it was not
known if medical attention was sought. The 13% includes both
male and female victims.
When looking at injury related statistics it is prudent to keep
in mind that a British Home Office Research Study (HORS
191)shows that rather than seeking medical attention for
injuries "half of the women who saw a doctor or went to hospital
said that it was wholly or partly for emotional or other
reasons" [p. 38]
According to the latest Statistics Canada annual "Family
Violence in Canada" there were 1.2 million Adult Criminal Court
Convictions from
1997/98 to 2001/02; out of these 257,000 were "crimes against
the person" convictions. There were 727,000 [reports of] violent
crimes which were cleared by charge from 1997 to 2001 and a
total of 3.5 million of reported incidents. Thus, about one
third of the incidents (or charges) cleared ended in
convictions. As many convictions are achieved by somewhat shady
plea bargains even this number seems inflated. Furthermore, each
report may result in several charges being laid, or may be a
repeat call by the same complainer. [note how Stats Can., in
order to create more confusion, compares different time spans
against each other]
The document in hand does not specify how many of the reports
were dismissed outright by the police in spite of the zero
tolerance directives.
Health Canada:
In 2001, Health Canada began to issue statistics from hospital
ERs and immediately encountered a problem. Women’s visits to
emergency departments due to all assault related injuries are
minimal. Only 2.27 percent of all injury related visits to
hospital ER by all females (3.27% males) were due to all
“quarrels/aggression” (Health Canada’s term), irrespective of
the victim-perpetrator relationship. Another set of tables
indicates that only 1.19 percent of all ER visits by females
were by women in the 20-24 age group (2.87% in the 25-44 age
group), the maximum number of visits were made by girls between
the ages of 1-4 (9.90), closely followed by those between the
ages of 10-14 (9.54%) and 5-9 (8.54%). The corresponding numbers
for males are: 20-24 years: 1.90% (25-44 years: 5.00%); 1-4
years: 12.95%; 5-9 years: 11.72% and 10-14 years: 15.90%. It is
hard to fathom where Statistics Canada finds the scores of
battered women who, allegedly, need medical help.
What is urgently needed if we want to have some semblance of
reality is that the press becomes aware of the facts behind the
figures.
".... The
Steering Committee of the WHO
Study agreed that interviews
with men should not be included,
largely because of the logistic
and safety implications of
interviewing men and women
in the same study. The Committee
recognized the importance of
getting accurate data on
violence from men but considered
that such an endeavour was
worthy of its own study. ..."
If women only Domestic Violence
Studies do not show men to be
sufficiently violent, the
results shall not be published.
If results must be published,
they shall be published only
after circulation among other
researchers whose concerns
regarding the unexpected results
must be published along with the
unexpected data .
"In situations where very low
levels of violence are
documented or there are results
that are otherwise not expected,
the findings should be discussed
with key informants and
different community groups
before being widely
disseminated. Where these groups
question the validity of the
findings, their concerns should
also be presented during
dissemination activities."
Source: "Putting
Women First: Ethical and
Safety Recommendations for Research
on Domestic Violence Against Women",
World Health Organization - Gender
and Women's Health Department,
August 2001
2006-02-13 Real Domestic Violence Tactics - Tutorial
for Women on Effective Use of <FALSE> DV Allegations;
Documents what we've known since the early nineties:
Lawyers routinely encourage women to make false accusations
in Family Courts because there is no down-side for them in
perjuring themselves there. This is of course great
for the legal business, and extortionate of fathers and
their children. Reject these parasitic Highjackers,
and opt for our alternative of Equal Parenting before you
get married, or if getting divorced, before you put your
family's welfare into the hands of a Lawyer. We are
currently seeking Legal Contractors who will construct for
you by Consent, Equal Parenting Legal Documents at minimal
cost on dissolution of a Marriage.
"politically correct"
information you read on Domestic Violence is a Scam.
Like taking away the guns, the State is taking out the Men as
part of their Disarmament program in preparation for the New
World Order.
Note that a common trick used by the "Femi-Nazi" type "scholars"
in
our "Women's Studies"
faculties to support their Misandric
Propaganda is to report Statistics drawn women's REPORTS of
domestic violence to Police rather than actual VERIFIED
INCIDENTS of Domestic Violence. What these Statistics
actually tell you is that women are far more likely to LIE about
Domestic Violence than men in reporting violence.
In Canada it's not very likely that a man will even report
Domestic Violence if he knew that RCMP policy is to always make
an arrest in cases of Domestic Violence, and the one they will
arrest is the "heaviest" Spouse. You will not be surprised
that like Law, Police work is a career Lesbians have pursued
vigorously, and that a man calling the RCMP for help is most
likely going to get ridiculed or beaten even more by a SWARM of
these these female RCMP.
Recall that
Aaron Russo tells us that the
Rockefellers claimed that "Feminism" was their idea, and
funded by them not to emancipate women, but to get women out of
the Child Rearing business so children would have to be raised
entirely by the State. See also
Griffin, G. Edward
BTW, now that women are about as likely to be
in the workplace as men, it is now found that women are now far
MORE likely to be Violent, commit Adultery, and be Promiscuous
than men.
The
new Director-General of the
World Health Organization (WHO), Dr Gro Harlem
Brundtland, and the President of the
Rockefeller Foundation, Professor Gordon Conway,
signed a memorandum of understanding this morning in
Geneva.
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.
Teachers
would be necessary to stop the present use of our Schools for
Political Indoctrination by Activists. See also
2008-02-14
Erin Pizzey on KFBK talk radio (Sacramento,
California) 
