--------- Forwarded message ----------

From: LIZGOAL@aol.com
To: DavidLevy1@juno.com
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 23:49:13 EDT
Subject: Tell me it isn't true
Message-ID: <92.1520e6ab.283ddeb9@aol.com>

I hear you are up to your old tricks again, David -- threatening to sue
people who tell the truth about you and your organization.

Please make my day -- I would like the opportunity to subpoena your
organization records, your e-mails, your billing records, your bank
accounts  and your federal program grant contracts and reimbursement, your
membership list etc etc.

In the meantime, please tell me that is isn't true:

You are not associated in anyway with Richard Gardner.

You or CRC never have promoted Gardner theories or works.

You or CRC never have received a grant to develop a custody program based
on Gardners works.

There has never been a CRC official or top activist who in any way has
endorsed, minimized or promoted pedophilia or incest.

You are not involved in any way with a program for paying fathers
attorneys fees to use Gardner /PAS methodology to gain custody for men accused of
child abuse or family violence.

Please make my day- - David. I want to get a reply back from you in
writing - that you will sue me for saying that none of the above is true; for
saying that David Levy and CRC is involved with pedophiles.

Liz Richards
National Alliance for Family Court Justice

******

[Webmaster's comments in purple, Levy in black]

<< In a message dated Fri, 25 May 2001 8:21:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time, "David L. Levy" <davidlevy1@juno.com> writes:

<< Liz Richards,

The reason I am responding to your email is that you have cc'ed other
individuals, [referring to the Hill News http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nfrc/message/3562]
and they need to know -- if they can't guess already --      
that everything you say is a lie or a distortion.
[that statement is contraindicated below]
Even your accusation that the Children's Rights Council is "associated"
with Richard Gardner is misleading. Gardner is one of hundreds of                
speakers at CRC conferences over the past 16 years.
[Gardner speaks every year and has been highlighted in past newsletters.
You join him at other conferences; remember, the
OnStep Institute?]

Other speakers have included members of the House and Senate,
Administration spokespersons,  
and major writers and researchers. Is CRC "associated" with these              
individuals because they have spoken at our conferences? What does the      
word "associated" with mean in your looney-toons dictionary? I can only        
imagine. And of course, as usual, you get the lawsuit information wrong, too.                
I did not threaten to sue you. The two people I talked to about this a              
few days ago know that. what I said was we DON'T sue you because lawsuits
are expensive, time-consuming and diverts our attention from helping              
children and families, and also, I suspect you are judgment proof (no
assets to speak of). What I said was that if any news organization with
assets is naive enough to repeat your libels, we would sue them!
[While sitting next to Gardner all day--he talking PAS and you talking
federal grants & deep pockets--no one addressed mothers losing custody.
OSi & CRC listened, but did non-custodial mothers ever get invited to
one of your seminars? NO. One would likely conclude that by saying
'children and families' you are referring to 'FATHERS and families.]

You have accused many government and non-government officials who          
disagree with you of pedophelia. One can only guess what in your                
background leads you to do this awful thing.. . .
[A few things leads one to that conclusion. For instance, the sexologists
on your advisory board. Remember Incest the Last Taboo? And how
about Richard Gardner & John Money? Why include Pamela Freyd?
Their philosophies protect pedophiles by diminishing and discounting
outcries of child sexual abuse.]   
                                     
I have tried to help you in the past, because I suspect you have lost          
contact with a child in a bitter custody dispute. But you have never              
responded about this.
Other people have suffered losses, but they don't respond by becoming        
sadistic individuals who spread poison about other people who have done      
them no harm.  [You heard my complaints regarding a Georgia case in
which a child Internet pornographer won custody largely due to Gardner's
theoretical pedophile excuses.  Both your and Gardner's lack of remorse
are unconscionable.  Your responsed at the next CRC conference by
memorializing yet another Georgia pervert, a dead beat batterer,
Sonny Burmeister, as your national child advocate.]

If you have guts enough to tell me to whom else you have spread venom         
such as in the email I received, I would respond to them.                                
Otherwise, do not email me again.
About our programs: When parents appear before a judge, sometimes in
the upset and anger over separation or divorce, one parent will say, "I
went to pick up my daughter last Friday, but she wasn't home," and the
other parent says, "You never showed up" Faced with this "He said, she
said" disagreement, the judge doesn't know who to believe. So the judge
will refer the parents to a Safe Haven Child Transfer Center if one            
exists in the community. These are generally in a church day care center    
with little toys and little chairs. There, a parent will bring a child,                 
say, at 6 p.m. on a Friday evening, and the other parent will pick up the      
child at 6:15. The reverse happens two days later on Sunday evening,
when the parent who had the child over the weekend returns the child at 5
p.m., and the other parent picks up the child at 5:15. [It may be cheaper to
find out who's telling the truth rather than gouge $$$ from both parents to
support the center.]
The transfers are monitored by CRC volunteers, and
we report to the court on how the transfer took place. .
[Another way you make money from unfortunate events, digging ever
deeper into the government's access-visitation pockets. We already
know about the grants, utilities, rent, and management are NOT "volunteer."]

This is "transitional parenting," in which parents learn to model their behavior
and can, we hope, after a few months, be able to transfer their children on
their own without using the transfersite. [We already know about "transitional
parenting" which equates to "deprogramming" protective parents, usually
mothers, who witnessed regressive behaviors of bed-wetting, night terrors,
chronic masterbation and acting out sexually on playgrounds then had the
audacity to believe their children's outcries of abuse.  You failed to mention
the "reunification programs" where the programers are taught to ignore the
children's cries of terror as they are returned to their rapists.]

We operate these Centers in Maryland, Washington, D.C., Virginia,
North Carolina, Illinois, Connecticut, Ohio and elsewhere.
We also operate a few "Supervised Access Centers" on Saturday mornings
where a parent may not leave the Center with the child.  [$$$] The parent and
child have two hours or more in which to be with each other under the
watchful eyes of a CRC monitor.  . [Ahem. Aren't CRC monitors trained in
Gardner's PAS theories? That's the problem we're having in the first place.] 

Parents are referred to these sites
because of substance abuse problems,
family violence, re-entry of a parent into a child's life after a long absence,
or severe communication problems. [Many mothers are restricted to a few
hours of supervised visits a month at supervised access centers after they
report suspected child abuse. Few can afford those fees; they can even
less afford going back into courts to increase access to their own children,
whom they never abused.  Yet few fathers are sent to programs, like Men
Stopping Violence, that have a proven track record in forcing abusers to
admit to control, anger, battering and rape issues.]  

These supervised access centers require security and liability
insurance. [As they should, since lawsuits against these organized
custody switching scams are on the rise and judgments striking down
immunity are beginning to surface.]

Some children are seeing their parents for the first time because of
these sites. Surprisingly, about 40 percent of parents at these sites
are never-married, and about 35 percent are mothers who do not have
primary care of their children. [We agree on that one, 35% is a high
number of non-possessory mothers compared to the national averages
of father-mother custody. But then, "supervised visitation" is the
recommended punishment, prescribed by Gardner via PAS, for mothers
who report suspected  child abuse.  You sat on the stage next to Gardner
and heard him say that mothers and children should be jailed if they continue
talking about sexual abuse and you don't have a problem with that?]

Some organizations charge parents who use these sites, but CRC does not.
We believe that a parent should not have to pay to see his or her child.
We began operating these sites without any funding.  [When was that?
According to your literature, you have received $10 million in fuding for
access visitation programs.  How was that money spent if not to open
a/v sites?  I don't know of any mothers who are not charged exorbitant
fees for supervised visitation.  We see it as extortion to keep mothers
whose children have disclosed abuse away and give the abuser continued
access to the child so they can get said child to recant.]
 Some sites now
have some funding from courts and child support offices, but others do
not. In addition to a website with information for parents,
www.info4parents.com, these are the only programs CRC runs.
Anyone is free to visit these sites at any time. I have offered you that
opportunity, Liz, but you have never accepted. Perhaps others will
accept and see for themselves.
Some people call CRC a fathers' group. But some fathers' groups accuse
us of being a women's group or a "wimp: group", [I understand that John Knight,
who wants to repeal women's right to vote, thinks you're too soft on women, but
that's relative. He also wants to take us back to Nazi Germany.  This is getting all
to familiar.  Once you quelch a minority group's right to due process and freedom
of speech, no telling where the fatherhood will lead us.]

because we

* have many women on our boards (including Dear Abby);  
   [Do they know about Gardner or Money? You've done a good snow job.]            

* help mothers as well as fathers;                                                                  
 
 [Yes, the second wives]

* don't favor sole father or sole mother custody, but instead promote    
   shared parenting (so a child can be with BOTH parents).   
   [Even when one is a child molester?]

As long as we get attacked by both sides, I know we are going up the
middle for children, where we want to be.
I have explained all of the above to you several times, Liz. This is
really for the people who have not heard it before. [People have
not heard MANY of these things before; I hope the rest of this page
will inform them. Thank you for introducing the topics I intend to expose.]

David L. Levy

EVIDENCE:   

On May 5, 1992, ABC's Peter Jennings hosted a “town meeting” titled Men, Sex and Rape. Author Warren Farrell, one of the panelists, concluded that it is time we begin teaching young girls how to take sexual initiative. So much for your comments, Warren, on the Ian Punnett Show, that you had not mentioned this subject since the Penthouse article in 1977.

Warren Farrell Lies about Penthouse and  "Incest the Last Taboo" Steven: What evidence did they have that supposedly you were promoting incest or rape? Was there any evidence of that?  Warren: None whatsoever except that I mentioned both words. The incest thing was very ridiculous because I just made an analogy about workplace sex being incestuous. I said that when colleagues in the same company have sex together, it was like people in the same family having sex together. And they took that and said I was recommending incest. It really shocked me that the producers didn't read for themselves what was being said. And with the rape, I was showing why the rape statistics are exaggerated, and saying that date rape was much more complex than the way feminists had portrayed it, as men oppressing women.

"Women Can't Hear What Men Don't Say: Destroying Myths, Creating Love" By Warren Farrell, Ph.D., A Review by Trish Wilson, "His conspiracy theory of a feminist cabal which silences the male point of view is not the issue here. Credible source material is...In the December, 1977 issue of "Penthouse," Farrell was quoted in Philip Nobile's article "Incest: The Last Taboo. Previously Suppressed Material from the Original Kinsey Interviews Tells Us That Incest is Prevalent and Often Positive." In this article, Farrell made many statements in obvious support of incest. The article included the statement, "[w]hen I get my most glowing positive cases, 6 out of 200," says Farrell, "the incest is part of the family's open, sensual style of life, wherein sex is an outgrowth of warmth and affection. It is more likely that the father has good sex with his wife, and his wife is likely to know and approve -- and in one or two cases to join in." In addition, Farrell was quoted in this manner: "... [M]illions of people who are now refraining from touching, holding, and genitally caressing their children, when that is really part of a caring, loving expression, are repressing the sexuality of a lot of children and themselves. ... [T]housands of people in therapy for incest are being told, in essence, that their lives have been ruined by incest. In fact, their lives have not generally been affected as much by the incest as by the overall atmosphere. ..."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

GENERALLY, GENTLY, GENITALLY CARRESSING CHILDREN-by Warren Farrell

1) INCEST: THE LAST TABOO by Philip Nobile (as originally published in
Penthouse, December 1977 issue):

"First, because millions of people who are now refraining from touching, holding, and genitally
caressing their children, when that is really part of a caring, loving expression, are repressing the
sexuality of a lot of children and themselves.

2) Subject: Re: A statement you allegedly made
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 13:10:22 -0700
From: Warren Farrell <wfarrell@home.com>
Organization: @Home Network

In the Penthouse article, the word "genitally" should be "generally".

3)Subj: Fw: Two More Experts Associated with the Children's Rights Council
Date: 10/19/00 7:49:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: davidlevy1@juno.com (David L. Levy)
To: FxCAR18@aol.com
CC: davidlevy1@juno.com

I asked Warren Farrell about this, and he said he was misquoted. The
quote should have been gently caressing, not genitally caressing.
An accusation that Richard Gardner is the center piece (sic) of CRC,
which I already replied to he is not. And a statement about
Underwager. Underwager is not connected with CRC.
You make charges against reputable organizations like CRC.
We do not support pedophelia, never have and never will.
We do not support abuse in any form.
I do not wish to receive any more emails from you.

[By the way, Penthouse never posted a retraction. They're under
the impression they got it right the first time. After all, the article was about
Farrell's research on INCEST. Why is is CRC associated with Warren Farrell?
And if you do not support pedophelia, then why to you profit  frinand support
those who do by inviting them and joining them on seminars?]

More Levy e-mail


EVIDENCE:

John Money, Brave new world.  "It was Money who in the 1991 Journal of Pedophilia called for legalizing all adult/child sex."  That same year he appeared in David Levy's CRC brochure and was an Advisory Board Member until he died in 1999.  Does CRC not have a research department?

John Money and Transgender Experments on Children

Pamela Freyd "How Could This Happen? Coping with a False Accusation of Incest and Rape," by "Jane Doe" which appeared in Ralph Underwager and his colleague and wife, Hollida Wakefield's publication, Issues in Child Abuse Accusations [3(3), 154-165]. In the Jane Doe article, (which Freyd later acknowledges authorship for in the February 29, 1992 FMS Newsletter) she chronicles "the effects of a false accusation of childhood abuse and rape by a grown daughter against her father" (P. 154).

Ralph C. Underwager resigned the FMSF, Inc. Scientific Advisory Board. His resignation came as pressure mounted following the discovery and wide dissemination of an inter view he and his wife and colleague, Hollida Wakefield, gave in the Netherlands publication, Paidika: The Journal of Paedophilia (Winter, 1993, Volume 3, Number 1). In this startling passage from that interview, Underwager clearly advocates for paedophilia.  He is listed as a member of the National Council for Children's Rights aka Children's Rights Council. Underwager, R., & Wakefield, H. (1990). How to avoid secondary victimization in child sexual abuse investigations. Presented at the Fifth Annual Conference of the National Council for Children's Rights, Arlington, Virginia, October 20, 1990. Also printed in Stepfamilies. 1991, Summer issue, pp. 6-7.http://www.acfc.org/lkallorg.htm

Underwager, Farrell & Freyd on "False Allegations" of Rape

American Psychological Association, Questioning Claims about the False Memory Epidemic

Family Research Council on the Effects of Pedophilia on Children


EVIDENCE:

Wade Horn, Don Eberly, David Blankenhorn, the National Fatherhood Initiative "NFI" and David Levy the Children's Rights Council "CRC" have influenced public policy for most of the past decade through an extensive federally funded marketing program disingenuously designed to engage fathers in children's lives with the end effect of separating mothers from children who disclose sexual abuse.

The Ever-Present Yet Nonexistent Poor [re Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector] by Seth Ackerman, Extra!, January/February 1999
http://www.igc.org/culturewatch/issue60.html,  A close look at Robert Rector, a poverty specialist for the Heritage Foundation, who is a ubiquitous voice for cutting spending on the poor. "In 1996, the year of the welfare reform debate, he was cited in media outlets an average of more than 15 times a month…[and he] feeds a vast network of right-wing talk show hosts and syndicated columnists who pick up and broadcast his findings. Yet for all his influence, Rector's work is a mess of misleading statistics and specious arguments."

The National Fatherhood Inititiative 12 steps to fatherhood program, (Please note that this program is ONLY for abusive men. Responsible and loving fathers will not only be turned away, they will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.)

Georgia Fatherhood Program and Wade Horn's National Fatherhood Initiative

http://www.state.ga.us/GAFatherhood/resources.html, National Fatherhood Initiative  & Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, etc...a resource for fathers, not mothers, mind you

Newt Gingrich, Wade Horn and Robert Rector

Besharov, Blankenhorn, Horn, Rector, Gallagher, Dan Quayle

Proceedings of the 14th General Assembly, of the Pontifical Council for the Family, Transforming the Culture of Fatherlessness by Rev. Robert A. Sirico, 2. David Blankenhoni, Fatherless America: Confronting Our Most Urgent Social Problem (New York: Basic Books, 1994). 3 Wade Horn and Andrew Bush, "Fathers, Marriage, and Welfare Reform" (Washington, DC: Hudson Institute, 1997)...7 Wade Horn and Andrew Bush, "Fathers, Marriage, and Welfare Reform" (Washington, DC: Hudson Institute, 1997), 3. 8 Ibid., 4. 9 Robert Rector and William F. Lauber, America's Failed $5.4 Trillion War on Poverty" (Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation, 1995).

Stepfathers Are Fathers,Too, Examine research related to stepfathering, and discover ways that stepfathers can overcome the unique challenges confronting them to most effectively fulfill the role of social father. Speaker: Dr. Wade Horn, Kids,The Courts and Custody,  Analyze court services, the issues and populations passing through, and other ways to resolve family disputes. Look at transfer sites for children that provide transitional parenting. Explore parenting plans, education, and mediation to “demilitarize” the divorce process. Speakers: Dr. Isolina Ricci and David Levy

David L. Levy, J.D., Child Access Mediation : Saving Time and Money, In fact, federally funded researcher $$$10M Sanford Braver $$$, of Arizona State University, has found that, where children have access to both parents, financial child-support payments are up to twice as high as where such access is lacking. According to Braver, who utilized 1989 Census Bureau materials.....(in Maricopa County, AZ)...When the Children’s Rights Council (CRC), an advocacy group of which I am president, led an effort to convince Congress in 1988 to fund demonstration projects for access - the first time Congress was to grant funds for access - it was the correlation between access and financial child support that was the most telling single argument in favor of access funding.

http://www.calvertinstitute.org/issue/9708/cib9708fn.htm, Robert Rector The Heritage Foundation, 91. Robert E. Rector and Patrick F. Fagan, "How Welfare Harms Kids," Heritage Foundation Backgrounder, No. 1084, June 5, 1996, Internet site(http://www.heritage.org). 92. Wade Horn, Director, National Fatherhood Initiative, prepared statement before the U.S. Senate, Labor and Human Resources Committee, Subcommittee on Children and Families, May 23, 1996.

Wade Horn & Robert Rector, http://www.fordschool.umich.edu/Conferences/Horn-Sawhill.pdf

More Wade Horn & Robert Rector http://www.policyexperts.org/insider/archives/juninsider.html

http://www.welfareinfo.org/childwelf.htm, David Levy Best States to Raise a Child , Children's Rights, Inc., Children's Rights Council, July 27, 1999 (8/4/99), (Posted 10/06/99) & How Congress Can Save Marriage: Reworking Tax Credits can Help Nurture Two-Parent Families in Poor Areas , Knight Ridder, April 5, 1999 by Wade F. Horn, National Fatherhood Initiative, and Isabel Sawhill, Senior Fellow, Economic Studies, (Posted 04/30/99) & Long-Term Trends in Child Welfare Dependence , Robert Rector and David Muhlhausen, The Heartland Inistitute, Intellectual Ammunition, Sept/Oct 1999, (Posted 10/19/99)

CHILD CARE SYMPOSIUM Committee on Labor and Human Resources: Subcommittee on Children and Families met to discuss certain child care and parenting issues, receiving testimony from Olivia A. Golden, Assistant Secretary for Children and Families, Department of Health and Human Services; Robert Rector, Heritage Foundation, all of Washington, D.C.; Maggie Gallagher, Institute for American Values, Westchester, New York; Wade Horn, National Fatherhood Initiative....

EVIDENCE:

Enter the realm of the phony research supporting biased evaluators funded by court appointments which discount disclosures made by children.

Wade Horn, National Fatherhood Initiative & David Levy Children's Rights Council & Judith Wallerstein

Wade Horn, & David Blankenhorn's Institute for American Values, http://www.now.org/nnt/winter-2000/fathers-act.html

http://www.americanvalues.org/, Judith Wallerstein, David Blankenhorn, Don Eberly, David Brenner, David Popenoe, Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, Ken Canfield, Maggie Gallagher

Wade Horn, National Fatherhood Initiative & CRC

Wade Horn, David Blankenhorn and the Womans Network

Federal Funded Custody Switch Hitting, A very nasty fathers rights guy made a mistake and talked too much. He says the Pittsburgh fatherhood initiative grants deadbeats $5,000 support forgiveness if the reestablish relations with their children (go for custody).
In a message dated 7/24/01 5:22:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, athompson3@cfl.rr.com writes:  << Studies in Pittsburgh and elsewhere have shown that a large percentage of these fathers simply go underground. They work odd jobs and try to keep one step ahead of the law. Is this the society we want? Fathers driven from their children by divorce and a bureaucracy that makes them a criminal simply for being a DAD? Fortunately in Pittsburgh there is a fatherhood initiative that grants $5,000 forgiveness on back child support if the fathers will reestablish a relationship with their children. >>

Meyer Elkin & Joan Kelly

Joan Kelly & Judith Wallerstein, Surviving the Breakup, by Wallerstein and Kelly, Center for the Family in Transition ("Center")--also in Corte Madera CA in lovely Marin County, where they mediate, mediate, mediate, can y'all say access visitation?  

http://www.ncmc-mediate.org/joan.html Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Wallerstein is on Wade Horn's National Fatherhood Initiative's National Advisory Board.

Judith Wallerstein's "research" & Center for the Family in Transition in Marin County

Wade Horn, Don Eberly, David Blankenhorn, David Popenoe & Judith Wallerstein, http://www.fatherhood.org/pdf/ft_spr01.pdf

Wade Horn's National Fatherhood Initiative & just to dispel future confusion this is not Liz Richards' site, nor is it Trish Wilson's.  And no, they aren't all on person, nor do they have anything to do with Liz Richards.  Warren Farrell and the Father's Manifesto keeps getting them mixed up.

National Center on Fathers and Families

http://fatherfamilylink.gse.upenn.edu/other/dadright.htm

http://fatherfamilylink.gse.upenn.edu/other/welfare.htm

http://fatherfamilylink.gse.upenn.edu/other/research.htm

http://www.abs-comptech.com/frn/menissue.html

Hip Pappa

Dead Bolted Dads

Father's Manifesto massive federal funding and their anti-Semitic tripe http://fathersmanifesto.org , signatories inlude CRC and ACFC's Stuart Miller

http://www.acfc.org/listserv/holyfld.htm I think it's a riot that they had Evander speak. What a great dad. After this address, he fathered an out-of-wedlock child, hired a father's rights attorney, Barry McGough, AAML leader tied to CRC, and kicked Janice out of his mansion. Here he is talking about the NFI and fatherlessness:

CRC's Sonney Burmeister Child Annual Advocacy Award, David Levy's national poster dad for the criminally dead beat dad.  Warren Farrell's kind of fall off the roof guy who died in the line of fire.

Sandford Braver, Janet R. Johnson, Arlene Rotman, Meyer Elkin, Isolina Ricci, Joan B. Kelly, "By 1986, AFCC's budget was approaching $$$ six figures $$$ and mediation was the boon. Divorce "adjustment programs" were increasing in popularity with mediators. The SAID Syndrome (Sexual Abuse Allegations in Divorce) was a topic of much discussion and abuse seemed to be everywhere-child abuse, drug abuse, alcohol abuse and sexual abuse. Conference workshops attempted to attend to the personal needs of court workers with presentations on managing job stress and burn out and maximizing mediation.  And so did Myer Elkin "cast a pebble in the pond"....appoint Hillary Clinton as your Honorary Chair...not a bad way to get more federal money $$$

[Sandford Braver, "The media further exploits research “findings”. In a study published in the book, “Divorced Dads”, Stanford Braver hand-picked 600 low-conflict divorced couples in Maricopa County, Arizona. His results were specific to that sample and could not be generalized to the population of divorced couples nationwide. So, the media generalized the results for him - making claims and drawing conclusions that were unfounded given the limitations of the research design. Special interest groups promote much of the media’s spin and interpretation of research." Trudell Van Burkleo, MA, Researcher, Flagstaff, Arizona]

http://www.afcc.demon.nl/, complaint brought against the AFCC, Association Family Conciliation Courts that exposes the national infrastructure for bribery of family and divorce court judges in the United States which aids judicial kidnapping of children under the color of the law

Parental Alienation Syndrome, the courts and how these seminars affect children on a personal level.

Georgia State Courts modeled after the Association of Family & Conciliation Courts mediation programAcademy of Matrimonial Lawyers

Georgia Supreme Court Justice Benham & the AFCC mediation program

AAML President who says there is no such thing as an uncontested divorce as long as either party has money, says divorce has become more contentinscious

AAML President on Parental Kidnapping, George Stern, represents father who gives chase to five squad cars and Children of the Underground

AAML President George Stern Lien and Mean, news on how to case manage with Stern on Talk Radio.

FAM-LAW-LIT, George S. Stern & Janis Y. Dickman, Stephen J. Harhai, Janet R. Johnston, Billie Lee Dunford-Jackson, J.D.

E-mail from AAML client

IAML GEORGE STERN......Treasurer [U.S.A.] 2001

Ralph Underwager, Presenter at the New York Chapter of the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers on the use of the anatomical dolls in the validation process of child sexual abuse, September, 1988. More AAML and Georgia Courts.

http://www.aaml.org/ Education of judges, attorneys and related professionals about family law issues through symposia and other means

Yet more AAML, Wallerstein & Georgia lawyers, http://www.split-up.com/db/infoGA.htm, Split-Up Law 12 Steps Mother Loses Custody

Meyer Elkin founder Conference of Conciliation Courts, aka Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, & David Levy with more Wallerstein, Ricci, Rotman, Northern California Task Force for the Alienated Child, Jonathan Gould, more alienation Doug Darnell, Meyer Mnookin giving his Meyer Elkin address, more Maricopa County and Sanford Braver, and The Collaberative Divorce Project  

EVIDENCE:

AFCC psychologist testifies for convicted murderer who hired a hit man and helped him shoot his pregnant girlfriend.

Jonathan Gould, "the only witness to testify for the defense during the sentencing hearing. Gould, a forensic and clinical psychiatrist who examined Carruth, testified that Carruth is 'a somewhat self-centered individual who might not be good at developing relationships over the long haul.' But Gould said that the jury's verdict was "highly inconsistent" with Carruth's personality. Gould instead described the former wide receiver as 'calm, optimistic and a problem solver.'"

Jonathan W. Gould and Philip M. Stahl, The Art and Science of Child Custody Evaluations: Integrating Clinical and Forensic Mental Health Models (pages 392-410) & Association of Family and Conciliation Courts Review, Joan B. Kelly and Hon. Arline S. Rotman

http://www.gendercenter.org/fatherhood.htm, Jonathan Gould, Jeffrey Leving, Ken R. Canfield, David Popenoe

AFCC & Shared Parenting Sanford Braver, Meyer Elkin, Hugh McIsaac, Richard Gardner, Joan B. Kelly, Judith Wallerstein, Janet R. Johnston, Arlilne Rotman, Ira Turkat, Richard Warshak

Divorcenet.com,  AFCC, Janet R. Johnston, Jonathan Gould, Stephen J. Harhai

Here's a "kids friendly" site, http://www.kidsturn.org/parents/links.htm with links to AFCC, CRC, AAML. SPLITUP.COM and the Northern California Mediation Center, none of of whom are friends to moms.  

FAMILY WARS, More Alienation links for Wallerstein, Kelly, Gardner,

American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers "AAML", CRC and David Levy

Terrance Campbell another CRC speaker & Ralph Underwager & Richard Gardner

Underwager, Gardner & Campbell , Underwager's Issues In Child Abuse Accusations Site, 1993.

Campbell & Gardner squabble, In his response to my original article, Gardner deserves credit for recognizing his own facility for pedantic excess as he debated obscure issues of grammatical protocol; and I have no desire to imitate him in that regard. I seriously doubt that such pettiness really interests readers.

The Family Court Reform Council of America, William Kirkendale claims that PAS has been included in a fantom DSM-IV-R.  [No it hasn't.]

http://www.deltabravo.net/custody/said-1.htm  "The falsely accused then find themselves involved in a networking phase with understanding and informative strangers: Bob Adams, Jimmy Boyd, Jim Cook, Peter Cyr, Nat Denman, Richard Doyle, Richard Esdale, Bob Hirschfeld, Randy Ingle, Robert Karls, George Kelly, Al Lebow, David Levy, Ken Lewis, Bob McGuigan, Michael Naylor, Ken Pangborn, John Rutherford, Peter Sokaris, Tony Steffes, Dick Woods, and many others....The falsely accused learn of professional associations, and private enterprises, they did not know existed: the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts...... The falsely accused learn of individuals from the medical, mental health, and other professions who express concerns on the many issues associated with sexual child abuse: Dr. Elissa P. Benedek, Douglas J. Besharov, Dr. Gordon Blush, Dr. Harold Boverman, Dr. Lee Coleman, Kathleen M. Dillon, Margretta Dwyer, Robert L. Emans, Dr. Richard A. Gardner, Corey L. Gordon, Dr. Arthur H. Green, Dr. Melvin Guyer, Dr. William F. McIver, Dr. David C. Raskin, Dr. Domeena C. Renshaw, Karol Ross, Dr. Diane H. Schetky, Professor LeRoy G. Schultz, Dr. Daniel C. Schuman, William D. Slicker, Dr. , Ralph C. Underwager, Dr. Alayne Yates, Dr. John C. Yuille, and numerous others.

More on Ralph Underwager on http://www.acfc.org/html/study.htm

Gardner's references himself  http://www.fact.on.ca/Info/pas/gard99m.htm

http://www.vix.com/crc/newsltr/sum97.pdf, False Memory Syndrome, more from Underwager and Pamela Freyd, $300,000 in access grants to Dick Woods and a 44-page evaluation by AFCC's Center for Policy Research, thanks to Congress appropriating $10 million in access grants to all 50 states.  Plus more Wallerstein, Braver and John Giudubaldi.

http://www.vix.com/crc/conf/  Training Sessions with Dick Woods and Dr. Richard Gardner on Access Visitation and Parental Alienation

http://www.info4parents.com/index.html David Levy denies ties with Gardner and NFI still on CRC's Spring 2001 Newsletter

National Congress for Fathers and Children, Several national non-custodial parent organizations lobbied Congress for the Access Grant Program. Some of the organizations include the American Coalition for Fathers and Children, American Father's Coalition, Children Right's Council and the National Congress for Fathers and Children. Access Grant funds are available, solely because of the lobbying efforts of these organizations. These groups form the nexus for the Access Grant Program. The public funds belong to these organizations - not to the State of Alabama to be misused and misappropriated for the personal edification of Alabama's judges. Isn't it amazing that "not one of these non-profit, non-custodial organization's members is on Alabama's Access Grant Committee?"

Keepers of the patriarchy? "We Couldn't Dominate Women If We Wanted To." Salon, October 8, 1997,  By Arthur Allen


SOME MAJOR CRC ACCOMPLISHMENTS

* 1979 Joint Custody Association http://www.jointcustody.org/about.html

* 1985. Under our original name, National Council for Children's Rights, formed a nationally prominent Advisory Panel, including "Dear Abby," U.S. Senators and Representatives, representatives of Mothers Without Custody, Stepfamily and Grandparents groups, researchers and writers on family issues.

* 1985. Sought Congressional authorization for the establishment of access (visitation) staff throughout the country to informally help children gain access to their non-custodial parents.

* 1986. First of 12 CRC national conferences, which bring together researchers and writers, CRC members, and policymakers from the U.S. and abroad.

* 1986. CRC testified orally for the first of 20 times before Congressional committees. Submitted the first of 40 written statements for the record in other Congressional hearings in favor of access (visitation) policies and programs, joint custody (shared parenting), welfare reform that would encourage 2-parent families, mediation, and implementation of the Hague Convention Against International Parental Kidnapping.

* 1987. CRC held a rally in front of the Capital, the first of various rallies, Candlelight Vigils, award breakfasts, and awards for "Best in Media," "Healer Awards" and "Parenting Awards" given over the years.

* 1988. Filed the first of 20 amicus curaie (friend of the court briefs) in support of a child's right to two parents. The first brief, filed before the U.S. Supreme Court, asked the court to uphold--which it did, by a narrow 5-4 majority, the right of an unwed biological father of a child to a hearing to determine if he should have visitation rights.

* 1989. After 3 years of advocacy by CRC on Capitol Hill, Congress provided in the Family Support Act of 1988 for access (visitation) demonstration grants in 6 states--Indiana, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Massachusetts, Arizona. Mediation, counseling, and telephone monitoring were

* 1989. Published the first of more than 75 evaluations of research reports over the years. The first report showed that fathers were paying up to 35% more in child support than federal figures had previously reported.

* 1990. Welcomed the first of 38 chapters in 32 states, Washington, D.C. and Japan.

* 1991 Published first annual edition of Parenting Directory, listing more than 1,000 groups across the country that can help parents. Speak Out For Children, Winter 1991-1992, Officers:  David L. Levy, Esq., President;  Honorary Chairman Mark Goodson, TV Producer, Beverly Hills and New York;  Advisory Panel, Meyer Elkin, Co-Found Association of Family & Conciliation Courts, Warren Farrel, Ph.D. Author, Ron Haskins, Ph.D., Associate Director, Bush Instutitute for Child and Family Policy. U.of NC; Joan Kelly, Northern Calilfornia Mediation Center, Vicki Lansky, James Levine, The Fatherhood Project, John Money, Debbie Stabenow, http://www.nambla.de/money1.htm

*  1992 Marc 18-20, Conference Program Flyer "NCCR"  Robert Rector, Policy Analyst, The Heritage Foundation;  Debbie Stabenow, state Senate, MI, author of Michigan's "Support and Visitation Law;"  Barbara Whitehead, Research Associate, Institute for Amirican Values [NFI's Blankenhorns org], Moderated by David L. Levy, Esquire, President, NCCR, Elizabeth McConagle, "Banana Splits"; Dick Woods, Fathers for Equal Rights [original a/v recipient], Ron Haskins, minority staff House Ways and Means Committee;

* 1993 Changed our name to "Children's Rights Council" to put children first. Published CRC book "The Best Parent is Both Parents" (Hampton Roads Publishing Co.)

* 1994 April 13-17,  Holiday Inn, Bethesda, MD, same as 1993 confernece, Sanford Braver [AFCC], Richard Gardner, M.D., Dick Woods, Iowa Access Demonstration Project

* 1995  March 29-April 2, Sonny Burmeister, CRC; Philip Stahl, Ph.d., AFCC, Michael Oddenino, Esq.CRC & AFCC, & Anne Mitchell, FREE

* 1996 April 24-28, Crowne Plaza, Atlanta, GA,  Parental Alienation Sydrome [PAS] and Richard A. Gardner, M.D., Dick Woods, administrator of the federal government access [visistation] grant in Iowa; Sonney Burmeister, CRC of GA moderator; David Arnaudo, supervisor of federal Access/Visitation demonstartion grants; David Gray Ross, former jduge, current director, Office of Child Support Enformcement, DHHS; Ron Haskins, staff director, Human Resources Subcommittee House Ways And Means Committe, Wade Horn, M.S.W., director American Fatherhoood Initiative, Lancaster, PA. 

* 1997 http://www.vix.com/crc/newsltr/sum97.pdf, False Memory Syndrome, more from Underwager and Pamela Freyd, $300,000 in access grants to Dick Woods and a 44-page evaluation by AFCC's Center for Policy Research, thanks to Congress appropriating $10 million in access grants to all 50 states.  Plus more Wallerstein, Braver and John Giudubaldi.

* 1999,  September 22-26, 12th National Conference "Keeping Children First in the 21st Century" Old Towne Alexandria Holiday Inn Hotel & Suites, Access Counseling Training with Dick Woods, Cost $60 plus conference registration fee. Includes accreditation as Access Counselor by CRC; Richard Gardner, M.D.Parental Alienation: Revisited and Revised;1st Sonny Burmeister Child Advocacy Award; Ron Haskins, Staff Director, Human Resources Subcommittee & his boss, Rep. Nancy Johnson (R-CT), chairman, Human Resources Subcommittee, House Ways and Means Committee (invited); How the Child Support Office is Becoming Family Friendly--Commissioner David Gray Ross, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS); Sanford Braver, Ph.D., author, educator, Arizona State University, Maricopa County & AFCC; Elizabeth Hickey, M.S., Vicki Lansky; Jeffrey Leving, J.D.; Michael L. Oddenino, J.D.; Kay Pasley, Ph.D.; Serge Prengel; Philip Stahl, Ph.D.; Douglas Darnall, Ph.D., ;Dean Tong Abuse-Excuse; International Parental Kidnapping-- Lady Catherine Meyer, wife of the British Ambassador to the United States;  How to Obtain Access/Visitation Grants--David Arnaudo, administrator of the $10 million in annual federal access grants to the states [Iowa and Maricopa County], U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CRC chapter heads administering grants in IL, NY, MD, NE and D.C., and state officials; Cease-Fire!--Stopping the Gender War!--Cathy Young, Nationally Syndicated Columnist, author, Cato Institute Fellow  http://www.talion.com/custody.html Cathy Young & David Levy; BY JOHN GUIDUBALDI, D.Ed., L.P., L.P.C.C. http://www.peak.org/~jedwards/minority.htm  

Cynthia Ewing, Senior Policy Analyst for the Children's Rights Council, a Washington, D.C. -based coalition of national affiliate organizations and 38 chapters in 29 states and Canada. Our organization represents more than 100,000 members. We have a prominent advisory panel consisting of leaders in government, academia, business, media, religion, medical and mental health professions, and the legal community

*2001 http://www.gocrc.com/NCCR_brochure.pdf

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ms-discussion/message/2892

Chritina Hoff Sommers http://www.fair.org/extra/9409/stolen-feminism-hoax.html


From: Wilbur Streett (WStreett@shell.monmouth.com)
Subject: Re: DO NOT VOTE FOR GORE/LIEBERMAN - See enclosed for why!
Newsgroups: soc.men, soc.women, alt.dads-rights.unmoderated, alt.support.divorce
View complete thread (60 articles)
Date: 2000/11/29

John C wrote:

>On Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:55:22 GMT, WStreett@shell.monmouth.com (Wilbur
>Streett) wrote:
>

>>>Well, Wilbur, just because you pointed out that Gore's statement about
>>>fathers was a lie, and your statement made the New York Times.....
>>>(good work, BTW.)

>>

>>Thanks.

>>

>>It also made the Washington Times. A recent letter to the Montgomery
>>Advertiser referenced it. I've finally figured out that lie and the
>>twisting of words that the Federal DHHS is engaging in. But I want to
>>write it up really smooth with the quotes from Voltaire about what we teach
>>our children all over the world.>

>Whoa!>

>Where was this? Could you post some cites please? Article or
>letters? Which day?
>Good On Ya, Wilbur!

Thanks..

While I don't have time to get the article right now, I got it in the email
that is referenced inside this message that I wrote.

Stuart Miller <afc@erols.com> should have the article, as he's the guy tha
sent it to me.

Subject: Re: Personal Matter VERY IMPORTANT
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 02:31:47 -0400
From: Wilbur Streett <WStreett@mail.Monmouth.com>
To: "David L. Levy" <davidlevy1@juno.com>
CC: jrogins@crosslink.net, JeffFACE@aol.com, vajail4judges@juno.com,
jail4judges@mindspring.com, farce@farce.org, GRomeo747@aol.com,
Baskers@email.msn.com, davidlevy1@juno.com, rweiss@mindspring.com,
cevm@erols.com, DeanTong@aol.com, Kutusov@email.msn.com,
Stuart Miller <afc@erols.com>

At 10:04 PM 7/21/00 -0400, David L. Levy wrote:

>I was at the NFI summit, and I want to let everyone know that Wilbur was
>not escorted out because of the yelling at Gore, but because the next
>day, Wilbur interrupted another speaker, and NFI was afraid he would keep
>doing it.

Yes, when Wade Blankenhorn was waving his fist in the air, ranting "there
must be some way to make those fathers more responsible" I replied with
"Yes, just let them look into their kid's eyes." Dead silence.

Don Eberly was quite clear that since I had corrected Gore, and had
specifically pointed out that reality to Blankenhorn, that they would not
allow me to be there when the Senator came in for lunch. But he didn't
bother to ask me to leave. Instead he came with a police officer and
attempted to force me to leave, complete with his own out of control
assault. That's why the Police Officer yelled at Eberly "Take your hands
off him!". Sadly ironic, but the Police Officer is divorced also, and
dealing with Family court and the child support and visitation stuff.

>IIt was not until near noon the day after Gore's talk that Wilbur was
>escorted out of the conference.
.. rather than simply being asked to leave. But Don and I had spoken for
about 15 minutes the day before, as he was angry about what I had pointed
out to Gore. As I left on Saturday, I loudly announced, "I'm being
escorted out of the building" for a reason.

>Wilbur, you made your point. Gore had to acknowledge you were accurate,
>when he said, if counting parents WITH child support orders, you were
>right---most of them pay..

Nope. As the AFC pointed out, the parents WITHOUT support orders DO NOT
OWE CHILD SUPPORT.

>> From: Stuart Miller <afc@erols.com>
>> To: American Fathers Coalition <afc@capaccess.org>
>> Date: Saturday, June 03, 2000 10:29 AM
>> Subject: Gore's vision of father involvement

<snip>Washington Times Article.</snip>

>> AFC NOTES:
>>
>> 1. If there is no order, there is no support owed. The fact that there is
no order does not mean that support is not being paid. Further, data reveal
that 50% of mothers do not want child support, typically because they do
not want the father involved in the child's life.
>>
>> 2. Child support is premised on the termination of a parent's right to
care for their own children and incorporates an order to pay someone else to
perform that duty. What crime has the terminated parent committed to lose
the inalienable right to the care, custody and nurture of their own
children?
>>
>> 3. The federal child support program is already the most expansive of any federal program and Gore is going to expand it more?
>>
>> 4. The federal government does not have any fatherhood programs, they
only have domestic violence and child support collection programs. Any
fatherhood programs Gore does initiate will be subordinate to feminist child
support and domestic violence programs.
>>|
>> 5. "Being a dad means respecting the mother of your children?" Even if
she is a drug addict, drug dealer, alcoholic, prostitute or whore? Sorry,
Mr. Vice-President, it does not mean that. Furthermore, personal respect is
earned, not assigned because of gender or elected office. (Respect for the
office is substantially different from personal respect, as is individual
respect... it is earned.) Wait'll Jerry Springer hears you think that being
a dad means respecting the mothers that appear on his show! It's the only
way to be a dad. Yeah, right!
>>
>> 5. This is what Gore said to people who support fathers. Imagine how he portrays his vision of fatherhood to the feminists!
>>
The statistics that I quoted have not changed at all since BEFORE the DHHS
has forced every divorce man into probation. The 70% figure is not the
result of a court order or the DHHS enforcement efforts, this was before
1992, from a study that also specifically did reference families with no
court ordered awards. Which was the point of what I said next. As I
mentioned in the other message, Gore had lied before that, with the same
lie that Clinton made to the entire country during the "State of the Union"
Address claiming that child support collections have doubled in the past
eight years. You can't double 70%. What they have done is pretend that
all of the money that I have been paying to care for my daughter, and all
fathers have been paying simply because we love our child with no coercion
at all, is "collected" when it is not.

Even worse, the percentage of WOMEN that do not pay is a lot worse than the
number of men that do not pay. But that was not mentioned at all. At the
National Fatherhood Initiative, Gore claimed that only one out of four
fathers
THAT OWE child support PAY. He provided no context to clarify this
statement. He made no public statement to the contrary. His context was
quite clear. "One out of four fathers that own child support pay child
support" is clearly an assault on fatherhood. His attempts to supply the
context to the Washington Times reporter ONLY do not change the public
statement that was made in front of about 6 TV cameras. The conference was
on C-SPAN2. Apparently it is also not the first time that sort of
statement has been made in public, as even the neighbors that I grew up
with thought that statement was accurate. That's not even getting into
Gore's statements about the $225 Million dollar propaganda campaign against
fathers, "It's your kid, be their dad." As I also said just after I heard
Gore make that statement, "It's my kid, I am her dad!"

Gore only covered up with his claims that the statistics were related to
fathers that do not have support orders. There is no study that supports
the one out of four figures at all. Even the worse study, from the Census
Bureau, which ONLY ASKED THE WOMEN, came up with 1 out of 2. The specific
questions way that the questions were asked, "How much does he owe a year"
and "How much has he paid so far" make it very clear that the statistics
are screwed up, as in July no one has paid the entire year's balance.

>You got quoted in two national newspapers, the Washington Times and the
>New York Times..

"That's a lie" is what was quoted. None of the rest of what I said was
quoted. There was no follow up. No verification. Nothing. I was quoting
a study from the DHHS web site. The bulk of the stories in the NY Times
and Washington Times was not about the gender biased statement that Gore
made, but the deadbeat dad myth that is being perpetrated. (Which would
certainly meet the definition of a Hate Crime.) At least that was the way
that I read them.

Gore specifically said that we would follow up on it later. He did not.
Instead I was confronted by the Secret Service asking if I had any personal
vendentta against Gore. I explained that I did not, that I had simply
spoken up that it was a lie because even the worst studies only claim one
out of two. I then handed the Secret Service Agents my card, and
specifically said that I was onto a significant number of criminal acts
that needed attention by law enforcement authorities. Pretty ironic that
some of the people that I loosely am associated with, in particular Dr.
Monty Weinstein, is actually helping Secret Service agents with their CS
and Family Court problems.

>You made your point, and you got publicity.
I got no publicity, and the lie was not recalled. The propaganda war on
fatherhood has not stopped. A couple days ago I saw that the DV ads are
now running on TV, complete with only showing the man responsible for DV,
when almost all of the studies specifically show that both women and men
initiate DV at about the same rate.

The NY Times article made no mention of Gore's claim that he was only
counting fathers outside the system. My take on the "spin" after reading
the entire article in the Washington Times is that Gore was claming that
only the Government can make a man a good father, all the rest are
deadbeats. I'm sickened by that sort of propaganda. My father taught me
about Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. He taught me about
individual responsibility. That's not defined by the government. My
father fought to protect it, not the government. My father also taught me
about the importance of truth. How all value in life comes from truth.

>How will your making a big issue of this help the movement?
I believe this to be a major part of the entire issue. Michel Foucault in
the mid-seventies wrote that the final intrusion into our lives and the
destruction of the family by the government would be initiated by the
Welfare Department for the good of the children. At exactly the same time
the Welfare Department in an attempt to quell the anger over Welfare
expenses created the Office of Child Support Enforcement, with the claim
that Welfare was totally caused by the "deadbeat dads" that didn't pay for
their children. I was quite aware and angry, even then, only being 15,
that the Welfare Department was engaging in a significant lie. Their their
statistics were based on the Welfare policy that they would only pay WHEN
THERE WAS NO MAN IN THE HOUSE. If there was a man in the house, they would
not pay welfare to a family. A guy at the NFI agreed with me and mentioned
"sundown dads" as the ways that families try to cope with these biased
actions. Without the propagation of these lies about fathers and
fatherhood, the government couldn't get away with the continued
intervention into our lives, the destruction of families, and the treatment
that men are suffering.

The number of men in jail on CS is not a part of the reported 2 million in
prison that we as a country passed in February of this year. It was a
major story in how we, the "land of the free" lead the world in prison
population. But in New Jersey while there were 3,465 reported in prison on
sentences this year, those numbers do not include men in jail on child
support. The Bergen Record reported 3,000 in jail on Child Support. But
neither of those statistics include all of the people rotated through the
prison, only those there at the moment of the report. Based only on the
numbers in New Jersey in relation to the reported national statistics,
there could be almost 2 million fathers in jail right now on Child Support.
But how many are going in and out, and how many go into jail every year?
The real statistics are not reported. What are they hiding? When you

start to calculate the amount of money spent keeping a man in jail, even on
the conservative federal reimbursement rate per day ($125/day) the numbers
stack up really fast. Then when you realize how much money a man is held
in jail for not paying, (I know of a guy that spent 45 days for $200), then
it's gets more than a little sickening. This country has recreated
"debtors prison". There's a reason that the Prison Industry is the number
2 industry in the country, and we lead the world in prison population. But
we lead without even counting the men in jail for child support.

But that's not even counting the number of men on Probation, at about 6.7
Million as the result of this child support racket. I put forth the
argument in alt.lawyers that I was on probation as a result of Child
Support Enforcement efforts, and the only argument that any lawyer could
come up with to refute my statement was that you could only be on probation
if you have commited a crime. But, as I pointed out, we are effectively
"on probation" as we are treated exactly as someone that is convicted of a
crime but out on probation. The only choice is that a man convicted of a
crime gets to chose if he wants to agree to be subject to the authority of
the probation department in exchange for being released from prison, and
they aren't managed by the Welfare department.

But then putting my own experiences into it. Having actually been in jail
WHEN I AM OWED CHILD SUPPORT. Having been arrested for "Failure to Appear"
in front of a Probation Officer. Being arrogant enough to ask all the way
through the process, "What law supports this?" and specifically have
numerous people in authority tell me "there isn't one". Having shared the
jail with, seen and spoken with the other fathers in jail (about 90 of us).
Hearing their stories, and seeing what is really happening. Getting to
ride in a chain gang over to the Court. Hearing how one guy had won
custody a few months back, was owed child support, but was arrested on
arrearages that he owned since he spent the money on the lawyer.. Or the
Black man that I had chained to my left arm in court and how he had told me
about how he was a union day worker, and would stand up for work every day,
and if he got hired, he'd be able to make the CS payment and have five
dollars left, but if he wasn't hired, then just couldn't make the payments,
and went in and out of jail every few weeks. He lamented about how the
best contract in the County was the jail expansion that they had made to
accomidate the overflow based on "child support" arrests. But since he had
been in the prison, he wasn't allowed to work on the project to say out of
prison. Or the man chained to my right arm, his second cousin, a crack
head, sitting next to me in the court room. Laughing about how he and his
buddies had tied up the "really tough" Crack dealers in Long Branch
suspected of a few murders and smoked the crack in their face. He laughed
about this in Court, under the microphones, loud enough for us all to hear.
He owed $70,000 in child support, and I'm quite sure that the two weeks
that he spent in jail on child support meant nothing more to him than
regular meals and a place to sleep, and certainly did nothing to coerce him
into paying.

Even though the prison had woken me up in the middle of the night at 2 AM
to have a health screening, left me by the outside door in prison fatigues
on a 20 degree night, I was still cognizant enough to ask the Judge "What
law supports my arrest" and explain how the Head of Monmouth County
Probation had specifically explained to me how he had has his staff
research this matter three times, and been unable to find a cite. The
Judge was unable to provide a law to support my arrest, but said that I
should contact a lawyer.. (I'll leave that story out.. this is long enough
already). Afterwards, the Sheriff that had lead us over in the chain gang
actually came up and apologized to me, saying that he had no idea that this
was going on.

After our appearence in court, after going back to the jail and being told
that I couldn't even secure my own release even though I had been arrested
with more than enough cash in my own pocket to secure my own release.. The
guy that had been chained to my left wrist came up to me and busted my
chops, "What, you think you get away with this because you'se a white
boy?". I was sickened. I grew up in base housing. I knew plenty of black
kids when I grew up. I knew about prejudice. I had seen it first hand.
My response was that I knew that the system was biased against Black men.
I knew that the Law were not fair against Black Men, and that one out of
three black men would spend a year in jail before he was 35. I explained
that I knew that I was one of the few white men there. I told him that I
knew that the drug of choice in black neighborhood, crack, meant
significant jail time, while the drug of choice in a white neighborhood,
marijuana, ("didn't inhale, did inhale") drug was a slap on the wrist. But
even though the rules were screwed up, I at least thought that they were
playing by the rules. That I couldn't believe that they had not cited even
one law to me supporting my arrest, even though the Bench Warrent didn't
even have my name on it. That I now knew that they were playing "outside
the rules".

But my story is nothing compared to some other ones that I have seen. I've
been trying to help Bob Cheney out. He tried to see his son for years, and
even went so far as to file kidnapping charges, but no one would bother to
help him. He who got run over by a truck and went to jail for not being
able to pay while he was crippled. He went on a hunger strike and was
released just before he died.. and they then took him back in again 55 days
later. He went back on the hunger strike, was abused by having them crank
up the air conditioner while giving him no blanket. At the verge of dying,
on the 72nd day of his hunger strike, the Sheriff came in and offered to
make it all go away if he just let his son be adopted. He thought about
it. Seriously, being on the verge of death, and realized that all that he
had left to give his son was to fight off this system and he refused,
preferring to die instead. As Dan Bailey pointed out, it's pretty sick
that all of his fathers rights have already been effectively terminated,
but if he gives up his name, then he's off the hook. But in the past week
we found out that that the warrent used to arrest him in New York had been
recalled the day it was issued since the court had declared "no probable
cause" a few days before it was issued. This makes me feel that the abuses
that I have suffered mean almost nothing... He's been in jail since
December 28 of 1999, and is still in jail, having been moved accross the
country without a Govenor's Extradition Warrent. Arrested with no Warrent
in the first place. But Bob Cheney isn't the first guy abused by Butte
County, as 60 Minutes documented the 15 Million Dollar persecution of Bill
Hill by Michael Ramsey, the DA out there.. Strangely enough, Bob is the
guy that got Bill Hill out by pointing out that he could do an Own
Recognizence (OR) request.

There is also the story of Barry Weinstein, who I've been trying to help
simply see his son. He was accused of Kidapping his own child when he had
a visitation order. This accusation came from the legendary "Bissel"
Prosecutors out of Somerset, the guy hunted down by the FBI, who supposedly
killed himself. Barry got to spend 19 months in jail, got out on appeal
since the Judge had directed the jury to "find him guilty" and fought off
the prosecutors for more than five years. Now he has had the charges
"dismissed with prejudice" but he still doesn't get to see his son. When
he applied to the court to see his son, despite that the law is very clear
that there is no basis to prevent him from seeing his son, as the charges
have been dismissed with prejudice, the courts ignored his arguments, even
admitting that he did great research and had good arguments. But in order
to shut him up, they attempted to crush him by using the $1,000 a week set
in a child support hearing that was done while was in jail, and he wasn't
even allowed to attend. Since they hadn't done an ability pay hearing, he
got out on appeal quickly the first time. David P. Davis brought up the
issue of lack of legal council, which is causing quite a bit of stir in the
legal community, as none of the lawyers want to be forced to represent
"deadbeat dads" in order to insure their right to due process. I helped
with both appeals, and the second time, we actually got a judge that
recognized what is going on. Appealate Court Judge Keefe and Collister
specifically defined that Barry was in "debtors prison". In the next few
weeks a large number of men were suddenly released in multiple counties in
New Jersey. No paper wants to do a story about that. No Court will
release the Judge's docket information that handles the chain gang so we
can verify it. But I know that when I was in the chain gang, the Judge
threw everyone back in, and we have had guys call and say that the Judge
let everyone go quoting "Weinstein v. Weinstein". But then there is John
Mutari, or David Neil, and just today I got a message from a guy in Kansas
who's going off to jail in much the same fashion I did.

But what is worse is that now I see that this is not a lawful system.
kept looking for an answer to the question of "What Law supports this?"
since my father had explained just how important the Law is, how it is the
set of rules that we have distilled from our combined life experiences over
the centuries and how they define our society. He had defined how the
public trust is dependent upon the law being upheld in good faith. I
researched the process that put out a warrant for "Richard Streett" and
resulted in my arrest, and kept asking "What law suports this action?" I
was specifically told there wasn't one by the acting supervisor of the
Child Support Hearing Officer Program, Robert LaBreck. I keep working my
way up the chain, asking for the law supporting it and the process that
initiated it. The Chief Child Support Enforcement Hearing Officer, Elle
Morales, replied, "Oh, I think it's the Federal Social Security IV-D" law.
(As if a Federal Law can be the basis for State arrests). My parents
taught me to read early in life. The net result is that I'm quite able to
read anything, including the Law, and comprehend what it says. In the SS
IV-D Law it says, "The states shall produce a report at the end of the year
to show that there is some sort of child support enforcement process in
place" (not verbatum) and actually included the phrase, "But nothing shall
be done to deprive a person of their due process rights" (not verbatum).
Being arrested for "failure to appear in front of a child support hearing
officer" with no subpeona, specifically against the Failure To Appear
Contempt statute, which defines ONLY A JUDGE, and the Enforcement Hearing
Officer statute, which defines that they have no authority unless a person
has been sentenced, doesn't sound like due process to me. So the SS IV-D
is not the source of the actions that I and millions of fathers have
suffered. So I kept looking. I then found on the DHHS web site, the press
release statement from David Gray Ross the Head of the OCSE at the Federal
DHHS that the States would have to meet the requirements of the Computer
System Specification, rather than the law. Why would he make a public
statement that the states had to meet the Computer Systems Specification
rather than the Law? The authority is in the Law, not the computer specifications.

My father was responsible for running the Data Center for the Armed Forces
in Europe in Weisbaden, Germany from '67 to '74. At one point there was a
large amount of media coverage about the build up of troops in East Germany
on the other side of "The Wall". I realized that if my father changed the
output of a single program, that he could move a lot of American troops to
this side of the wall. I actually approached him and asked him why he
didn't just do it? Why don't you just change a troop movement program and
move a bunch of troops to the wall, so that if the East German's attack,
there will be troops there to push them back. I thought that I had the
answer to all of the hysteria in the news. My father then explained to me
how that would be violating his oath of office, and the public trust. That
he wasn't in a position to make the law or the treaties between the
countries, but just to properly implement them. He explained how we had a
government that was specifically constructed and designed to prevent
private interests from taking over, and abusing our rights. He explained
how he would be violating the "Public Trust" and that if he did what I had
suggested, and how it might cause a war. How it might even bring about the
end of the world. He explained to me how system vendors sometimes
approached him and asked him to do things which violated his oath of
office, and how he reported them, and refused to be bought out by their
private interests. The military must have trusted my father, and respected
his integrity, because they had him implement data centers all over Europe,
and he was gone quite a lot doing it.

I ended up in the computer field myself, (like I had a choice!) and have
implemented systems to that same tough level of ethics that my father
taught me. I've turned down and reported bribe attempts. I've always been
sure to implement the systems according to the stated business
requirements, no matter how much pressure to the contrary. So I figured
that with David Gray Ross' statement, that I should look into the Computer
System Specification and be sure to identify if there was some place in the
CSS that the SS IV-D Law was not being faithfully implemented. I was
horrified at what I found. The Computer System Specification defines a
draconian process. It actually calls for the Welfare Department to
INITIATE the legal process. It calls for the computer to maintain and
manage the legal process, including full support for the entire process,
even including having all of the letter responses to all questions that
might be sent in. It calls for the federal DHHS to have full access to
every case at a complete level of detail at all times. All under the
control of the Welfare Department. Last I checked, the separation of
powers doctrine specifically defines that the Welfare Department does not
define how the Judiciary acts. They are a separate branch of government,
by definition. This entire process is implemented as the result of the
Computer System Specification, not any Law. But even worse, the
specification is written in such a way that it really represents a blank
check to the party that implements it, as the specification has vague
"goals" that define generic tasks that can never actually be satisfied.

I called up the General Council of the Federal DHHS and asked about the
liability of the DHHS if they ran a computer system which generated legal
process and caused an unlawful arrest. The man that I spoke to admitted
that it would be "almost unlimited liability" and asked me to document the
issue that I was talking about. I went back to the DHHS OCSE asking who
was responsible for the Computer Specification as I felt that it was a
breach of ethics and was something that I could explain to the person
responsible in the DHHS and perhaps get them to own up the responsibility
and make changes to the system specificaitons so that they were in
agreement with the SS IV-D Law and stop this criminal racket. After
getting hung up on several times, I found the ACESNet 800 number, and
contacted it, asking to speak to the person responsible for the Computer
System Specification. Instead of being referred to an employee of the
DHHS, I was referred to Ken Kather of Lockheed Martin. Several calls to
him went unanswered. Lockheed Martin is implementing this very complex,
expensive, and unlawful computer system specification all over the country.
In California it was a $109 Million dollar failure, and LM was only
responsible for $6 million. They are now implementing the new system in
California. In control at the Federal Level, and implementing it at the
State level all over the country. All with no basis in the Law.

After going through all of this, and figuring out the uncontrolled
involvement of a government contractor, and that there was no law
supporting my arrest, I decided to look into the law and determine how the
law defined these acts, as they certainly were not lawful. I found
"Unlawful detention for the purpose of profit or reward", which is
certainly what I have suffered. That is know by another more common word,
Kidnapping, a first degree felony. The very next law that I read, defines
that felonies that occur in an organized fashion are "Racketeering". Also
a first degree felony. Nothing like a computer system to make things
happen in an organized fashion. Then I found RICO, and Gender Bias, and
Bias Crimes, based on Marital Status.

After this bit of investigation, I wrote up the criminal nature of what Ihad
discovered. Steven Rosemilia contacted me and put me in touch with some of
the people that were also onto the criminal acts that I had discovered.
Bruce Eden actually had a copy of the contract in New Jersey between the
Welfare Department and the Judiary, complete with the same process
described in the Computer System Specification. We have since found the CS
Trust fund that the Judges Pension Fund is involved in. Calls to the local
prosecutor went nowhere. They could find no law supporting the action, but
refused to investigate. They didn't even follow up on the fact that the
Bench Warrent issued for my arrest had no law supporting it, actually was
specifically against the wording of the law that they claimed supported it,
and that it didn't even have my name on it. Discussion with the State
Attorney General's office actually had an assistant proclaim, "The welfare
department can't contract with the Judicary, they are separate bodies of
government" and I was overwhelmed. "Absolutely, I agree with you 100%!
But I have a copy of the contract in my hand." Nothing happened.

Contacting the DOJ about the Bias Crimes against men that I had identified
lead me to a statement from one of the Bias Crimes unit heads that there is
no Bias Crimes Unit to prosecute Bias Crimes that occur against men.
There's one for Women, there's one for Blacks, for Hispanics, but no
department to investigate and prosecute bias crimes the occur against men.
How can half the population not be subjected to a bias crime by some party
in some fashion? So I then knew that men had no rights, but I pretty much
knew that when I registered for Selective Service 22 years ago. But now I
knew that fathers had by definition have even less rights.

Then sometime later, my wife came and sat down and announced that she was
pregnant again. At the 4 1/2 month sonagram, you are given the opportunity
to know the sex of your child. With my first child I was hoping for a boy.
I was sad for about 3 minutes when I was told it was a girl. But I
realized that I'd play with her just a little differently than with a boy,
she'd be cute, lovable, smart, and it didn't matter. I was over it. The
second child that I had, with my current wife, I was hoping for a boy, but
it was a girl, and I was sad for about 15 seconds. They're both great.
But this last child, at 4 1/2 months into the pregnancy, during the
sonagram, the nurse asked me if I wanted to know what it sex the child was.
I had changed my mind. I was no longer hoping for a boy. I was hoping
for a girl. I was expecting a girl since the two prior ones were girls. I
didn't want a boy so that I wouldn't have to deal with him suffering what I
had

<<<BACK