Issues Area Home

Issues Summaries
Abortion Veto for Dads
ACTA = Anti-Counterfeiting Surveilance
Adoption Veto for Dads
Adopted Children Disallowed NPs
Affirmative Action
Age Of Consent
BC Vital Statistics Act Misandry
BC Legislature MUST
Big Brother, Micro-Management
Bill C-22
Best interests of the Child
Birth Registration - Paternity Fraud
Birth Registration - Paternity Denied
Breach of Trust
"Case Law" is NOT Law
CCA Wood and Playgrounds
Child Support Tables / SOW Fraud
Child Trafficking by Public Officers
Corren Agreement
Court Ordered Sexism
Custody Orders not Enforced
Debtor's Prison Reinstituted
Day Care Universal
Deadbeat Dads
Disabled parents
Domestic Violence Propaganda
Division of Assets
Drugging of Children, State
Enticement Seduction
Ex Parte Orders
Fabian Socialism
False Accusations
Father Hatred Propaganda
Fatherlessness, State Imposed
Federal Reserve / Fiat Currency
Feminism = Socialism = Nazism
Fitness Test for Natural Parents in Divorce
Fitness Test for Students: "Transitions"
FMEP = Family Maintenance Enforcement
Forgiveness is NOT Compulsory
Freedom of Speech
Friendly Parent Rule, Max. Contact
Fundamental Justice
Globalism is Treason
Grandparents Raising Children
Habeus Corpus Abandoned
Homofacism
Homosexual Activism
Homosexual Marriage
Human Trafficking
Imputed Income
Inheritance Theft: Grey & Black Widow
Judicial Activism is Breach of Trust
Judicial Falsification of Court Transcripts
Judicial Freemasonry is Racketeering
Judicial Globalization is Treason
Judicial Interpretation
Law Societies' Self Regulation, Corruption
Lawyers Lying in Court
Letters to MP
Legislative Changes
Letters to MLA
Letters to Editor
Malicious Mother Syndrome
Malicious Prosecution
MCF = Ministry Children & Families
Misandry, Hatred of Males
Money as Debt / Money Masters
Move Aways
Narcissism
Natiional Sovreignity
Natural Parents Rights Eliminated, SSM
NAU - North American Union
Parliament MUST
Parental Alienation
Parental Kidnapping
Parenting Time Presumption
Passport & DL Removal
Pedophiles Fear Dads!!
Pedophiles Fear Dads New
Petitions
Poofy Judges
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
Protestant Revolution, BBC
Sexual Abuse by a Public Officer
Shadow Government
Sole Custody is Child Abuse
Special Prosecutors for Homosexuals, Judges
Status of Women's Father Hatred
Star Chamber's Secret Overlords
Stockholm Syndrome Paradigm Shift
Supremacy of Parliament
Target Legislation
Teachers displacing Parents
Teachers Seducing Students
Tracts and Flyers
"Women's Shelters" Lesbian Gulags

Will Parliament Remedy the "No Fault" premise of Divorce Law?

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.

More... Issues

Canada Court Watch Home

Canada Court Watch Audio

What happens to kids, when their Dads are taken away from them?

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%

source: http://njlaw924.com/id39.html

What happens to Canadians when Judges Drive Dads and Boys into servitude and compliance

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 Raised in Sole Custody in profoundly greater risk

2005-xx-xx Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect

"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."

Judicial Accountability Act Proposals

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

Kinship Families, Grandparents raising Grandchildren

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

Do we have any such provision? Who executes the required actions in the event a Judge has to be removed? Submit new info on Removal of Judges

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"

Phyllis Schlafly and Stephen Baskerville

On February 14, 2006 Both Phyllis Schlafly and Stephen Baskerville join together in a landmark interview
"War Against The Family".mp3

Phyllis
Schlafly

"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"

Stephen
Baskerville

"Why isn't "Focus on the Family" working for Equal Parenting?

Stephen Baskerville's Home; American Coal. for Fathers and Children

Terminology

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."      .....

More, Glossary of terms

2006-03-10 The right to abandon your child by Mona Charen;
"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

CHRISTIE BLATCHFORD

Latest Columns

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."

Imputed Income:

More... Imputed Income
Jeffery Hal's Testimonial;
Hall Jeffery's Danica Petition

Imputed Income

The Child Support Tables depend upon an Income of the Payor only to determine from the Tables the Child Support Payment to be paid.

The extortionate sums used in the Tables were were first passed as part of a package of FTSOTC Legislation. (Once the Child Support Tables were passed, the rest of the FTSOTC Package was cast off.) The Tables as passed incorporated the incomes of BOTH parents (the only sensible way to do it) but the Liberals pressed by Hedy Fry and SOW with a Majority Government dropped the Income of the Payee (ie, Mom) from the Calculations, relieving the Payee (Mom) the obligation to use her income to support the Children. Initiatives to make Child Support contingent upon on the Custodial Parents fulfilling her obligation to fulfill the terms of the Custody Agreement failed. Instead more jobs for Public Servants were created to enforce the payment of Child Support ONLY.

Compounding the problems already presented to Dads by these methods only, Judges started 'Imputing" income to artificially boost the Child Support Payments put upon Dads who are not earning enough to support payment the Judge has predetermined. For example, Hal was a Widower and had a daughter, Danica, from a previous marriage. Hal then had two children with a new wife while living on an island near Courtenay where the cost of living was very low. Hal was a Potter. Mom left Hal when the two new children were toddlers. (She is reported to have taken up with her Courtenay lawyer - not an uncommon scenario - while their greatly appreciated Island Property was liquidated under very peculiar circumstances.)   When our BC Family Courts put Hal through it's torments of Imputed Income, Gleaned Wages, State Imposed Homelessness, and Debtor's Prison, they imposed these same torments on his daughter Danica, then a Tween. You can see where that left BOTH Hal & Danica: homeless and dependent on the kindnesses of neighbors for survival. When Courtenay's Judge Higenbotham Ordered Hal to Jail (that is Debtor's Prison) for non-payment of Imputed Income, Higenbotham was ordering his daughter Danica to be not only homeless and penniless, but also Fatherless. In spite of all the other things being done to him, Hal's emphasis was that the Child Support Tables assume the only children to support are the Payee's children. Hal tried unsuccessfully by his Danica Petition to have recognized what BC Judges do mindlessly to a Father in Family Court they also do to his children from a previous marriage.

Danica Bill and Petition, by Hal Jeffery, Courtenay

Hal & Danica Jeffery's: Danica Bill and Petition

PROPOSED LEGISLATION
The Danica Bill
That no government or government agency shall intercept, garnishee, or otherwise attach an amount of income below which an individual or their dependents can reasonably be expected to survive on.

That mediation be made mandatory. That litigation be allowed to proceed only after every attempt at mediation has been exhausted.

That all children comprising a family unit be entitled to equal consideration under Federal Guidelines, irrespective of bloodlines, save where previous provision has been made for their care.

That the practice of imputing income be abolished. That only actual income be assessed when child support is being set, save where tax evasion or fraud has been proven.

That a ‘shared base of information’ be built into the system to establish assets and income.

That the business of mediation be held at arms length from the business of litigation to ensure checks and balances.

That judges specializing in family law be appointed throughout all hearings.

That hearings be reframed, using neutral terms (wife, husband, mother, father, given names) rather than petitioner/respondent or plaintiff/defendant.

That any charges of wrong doing be handled by criminal courts and not brought on during divorce proceedings where there is incentive to fabricate charges for financial gain. That no party be made to suffer loss from any charge they have been served no notice of beforehand. That the burden of proof rest with those bringing such litigation.

That court officials draft court orders when legal counsel is available to one party only.

That Court transcripts be reported verbatim - to preserve the integrity of public hearings - and not be subject to review or editing by court officials .

That no individual's income be garnisheed below federal income assistance levels.

Upon completing the above I received word that many of the above recommendations have been implemented in Australia. I will close by appending this article to the end of this letter. I challenge this government to lead our families and this province back to the basics of equality and respect for all its citizens.

Sincerely,

Hal Jeffery

Family Law in Crisis :

Imputed Income

This site has been assembled to support a petition located at   http://www. petitiononline.com/b4kidsok /petition.html

BACKGROUND

It is common practice in our courts to use confrontation and adversarial strategies to resolve family matters. However, this approach only further distresses families already in crisis at a time of divorce. With parents committing suicide, or left destitute on the street, it is high time to implement drastic changes to present legislation. If you believe the following recommendations to be reasonable and fair minded please support this process and sign the petition.

PROPOSED LEGISLATION

That mediation be made mandatory. That litigation be allowed only after every effort at mediation has been exhausted.

That all children comprising a family unit be entitled to equal consideration under Federal Guidelines irrespective of bloodline (save where previous provision has been made).

That the practice of imputing income be abolished. That only actual income be assessed when setting child support (save where tax evasion has been proved).

That no individual's income be garnisheed below federal 'income assistance' levels.

        THE DANICA BILL   http://www3.telus.net/halswebsite/p2

Submitted May 2003 to Premier Campbell and the Honorable Geoff Plant.       Attorney General, British Columbia, Canada

I am a child of this family and of this country and I believe it is my right to be included in equations ... and the duty of my government to ensure it is done.

in the name of family and in the name of law

If a BC Judge thinks the Child Support you pay based on your real Income isn't enough, they might impute Income to you to artificially boost the Support Cheque. These "judgements' can be free-wheeling, arbitrary and punitive for all members of the Victim's family.

Hal's Web:

Index

2004-08-11 BC Judge Higgenbotham's Order sending Hal Jeffery to jail for non-payment of Child Support on Imputed Income.pdf

Danica's letter to Gordon Campbell

The Danica Bill

Sign the Petition.

F4L: McLachlin Inquisition

Determining “EARNING CAPACITY” in imputed income cases

Paul Sielski in <MD> Debtor’s Prison over Child Support on "Imputed Income"

2007-12-03 FORMER MINUTEMAN PROJECT VOLUNTEER FACES POSSIBLE 20 YEAR SENTENCE DUE TO CHILD SUPPORT - Family Court Reports ; "A former Minuteman Project volunteer faces a possible 20-year criminal sentence for charges alleging outstanding child support, ... Paul Sielski, a 41-year old Honorably Discharged Marine and Anti-Illegal Alien activist is scheduled to appear in Frederick County, Maryland Circuit Court ... Sielski could be sentenced to over 20 years in jail for the common law charge. Defendant Sielski has already been confined for over 100 days in the Frederick County Adult Detention Center. ... Paul Sielski has been unable to gain access to his child since August 2004, who is now three and a half years old. .. 'No person should ever be ordered to pay $3500.00 monthly for child and spousal support, especially when visitation has been consistently withheld by the Defendant’s Ex-Wife,” further states Courtney. ..."

Deborah Courtney (714.381.2446) requests your assistance in what appears to be another case of Judicial PAS, Imputed Income, and Debtor's Prison against her Husband, father's rights advocate Paul Edmund Sielski, Sr.,. Paul's Trial is in Maryland but the "Mixed Warfare" strategy of these Globalizing Judges is very familiar. See for example, Jeffery, Hal & Danica. We don't want to see Paul going the way of Wilbur Streett, RIP as a result of the Fabian Socialist Party's "Brownshirts"

Deborah continues, "... Paul’s ex wife, Kimberly Whitmore Sielski gets the female discount when she shoots to kill her first husband and gets it reduced from Attempted Murder to Reckless Discharge of a Firearm within City Limits. I just re-read the police report and she stated to three separate officers, “I just wanted to kill myself because nobody loves me”, and they won’t give Paul his son? They ignored Paul when she kidnapped Paul Junior for 100 days, and denied him his visitation rights. They did not allow Paul an annulment after 8 months of marriage, or the ability to place the police reports of Kimberly’s attempted murder of her first husband and intent to commit suicide into the court records. <How familiar!!> ..

Kimberly’s Step Father is Co Chair of the “Retain Sitting Judges” for Frederick County, and just lost his four year post from former Republican Governor Ehrlich to the Judicial Review Committee, and hails from an ultra wealthy Original Land Owner family here in Maryland. Undue Family Influence. .. These are all the reasons I need your help. Please send me ideas, please help me implement the ideas, and please call people to be here for Paul .. Feel free to pass this around, or feel free to call me, Deborah Courtney, at 714.381.2446…. ... The Nation needs to know the dirty little secret about Frederick County, Maryland."

2004-09-10 Update from Hal

On Liberty and Law

An appeal for a different approach

I have just received a court order which will send me to jail October 1st, and each month thereafter, so long as I remain unable to pay child support based on imputed not actual income Though the amounts seem trifling at $ 329 per month, given where we have been left at the end of 24 hearings, it is again a sum that remains out of reach. This is the common thread that runs through 4 years of litigation and the shield that this petition was initially erected to raise around us.

Today I am branded an irresponsible father unwilling to support his children. However, I can honestly say that I have never had to work so hard my entire life as I have the last four years ... or exist on less. We would have had no problem sharing what we have at any stage had we been left enough to provide ourselves with the basics. Throughout this has been denied, setting up a cycle of non stop litigation compelling us to again and again defend ourselves with no access to counsel. The end of this process has predictably resulted in both sides of this family being sapped. On August 11, 2004, my ex spouse testified under oath that she owes legal bills out to the year 2007 and received less than $ 5,000 from the forced sale of our house. This property is now back on the market for $ 120,000 more than it was liquidated at. Stepping back from this one must ask - who are the beneficiaries of all of this litigation?

It is a sad day though for all families when people like me end up going to jail - kids like Danica get treated as non existent entities.

It is shameful - and I would suggest that something has happened in Courtenay other than another parent deciding to starve themselves and one of their children - in order to avoid feeding the other two.

Seeds have now been planted to raise 30,000 signatures from mothers and fathers across the country. Please be a part of this process. The issue is not about divorce - but the rules by which we allow ourselves to be governed. Though we sometimes forget, we are a democracy nonetheless. Please know our spirits are good and that we will come through this. In the meantime we now embrace jail as an inescapable part of our lives.

With heartfelt gratitude.

Hal and Danica