January 26, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

Hi All,

This past Friday morning, a server rolled into my driveway and presented me with evidence that I was to be in Court on February 2, 2009.

I am being charged with remedial contempt of court by my wife and her attorney.  The opposition is charging that my web site, and the commercials advertising it, are an attempt to communicate with our children.  The web site in question: http://www.ourkidsmisstheirdad.com

This Hearing will be in front of Judge Ramona A. Gonzalez. Welcome back to our nightmare Judge Gonzalez!

The penalties Kathy and her attorney seek are severe.  Payment of a sum of money sufficient to compensate a party for loss or injury suffered the party as the result of the contempt of court, a forfeiture not to exceed $2,000.00 for each day the contempt continues, that I pay my wife’s attorney’s fees for bringing this charge into Court, that I pay $500.00 for every time the commercial ran, and a couple of other requests for Orders which will financially harm me - and Kathy as well.

It appears the website is something the opposition desperately wants to go away.  Judge Rosborough would hear none of it so now they’re going to try to get Judge Gonzalez to make it go away.  As one father reported to me (paraphrasing), “The people who work in the Family Courts are like vampires, they fear the light.”

I believe, at best, Kathy and Mr. Horvath’s chances for successfully finding me in remedial contempt of court resembles the success of people spitting into the wind.  I will not report my defenses at this moment, however, they are extremely sound and should carry overwhelming weight.

I am resolutely convinced Kathy and her attorney will be defeated on this charge.  It has been a long time since Mr. Horvath has won an Order that he and Kathy  sought and I look for his and her losing streak to continue (October 24th when AFCC Fleishman admitted impropriety and removed herself from our case).  That is, if justice actually works in the Family Courts.  Most report that it doesn’t.

I’m currently reading a new book by Stephen Baskerville, “Taken Into Custody - The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family”. It is not fun reading this book as it details with voluminous reputable statistics the consistent horrific and horrendous treatment of fathers in Family Courts.

However, I like the book.  It starts with a quote from my all-time favorite book, “Atlas Shrugged” by Ayn Rand (many thanks to Aaron Bolstad for recommending this book):

“There’s no way to rule innocent men.  The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals.  Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them.  One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”

The Family Court has made me a criminal for telling our children the truth, for parenting the way I see fit and not the way the government sees fit, and thus the government now has the power to judge and rule over nearly every aspect of my life.  On February 2, 2009, the Family Court is getting the opportunity to label me a criminal again for having the audacity to exercise my freedom of speech.  This is the worst thing about Family Court, it can summarily turn you into a criminal while affording you none of the rights an accused criminal has in Criminal Court.  In Family Court, many men are routinely sent immediately to jail for violation of Court Orders for which they have no means to comply.  Should the Court Order me in contempt of court, and I’m unable to pay the money requested - which I’m not, jail is likely my next address - an address I’ve been prophetically predicting for some time now.

This is how the system deals with folks like me; they lock you up, you go away, and they move on. As this is the most effective way for Kathy to realize her goal of never having to deal with me again, bank on Kathy hoping for jail as my future.  In fact, as detailed on the web site, she has numerous times informed me and others that she hopes I end up in jail - one time sending her stepsister down to law enforcement to effectuate an immediate arrest of me while I was legally at our property. Yet she constantly informs our children she wants them to see their dad - that her and other’s are working very hard to make this happen.  I’m sure she hasn’t informed Sammy and Walker that it is her goal for this “seeing your father” to happen through a phone with me, in an orange jumpsuit, on the other side of Lexan glass window. Of course, she’ll offer Sammy and Walker her patented response, “This isn’t what I wanted, this is what the Court has decided.”
Samuel M. Polhamus
5734 Cambridge Road
Sparta, WI 54656
Phone: 608.488.4880
Cell: 608.792.8417

Posted in Paternal Rights, Propaganda Exposed | Print | 3 Comments »

January 26, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

Actions and consequences for a duped and defrauded father.

The following is a response to a complaint about real case of paternity fraud in the US. The names and locations have been altered to protect the victims of the fraud.

The man who wrote the original complaint is experiencing the whole gamut of the weapons of the divorce industry:

• Paternity fraud;
• Child abduction and move-away by the mother (involving an eight-hour trip - one way - by the father if he wishes to see the child whom he has come to see as his own);
• False allegations of domestic violence, to keep they alleged fathers at bay and away;
• The defrauded man duped into paternity;
• The mother of the child refuses any child access to the alleged father;
• The defrauded father has become very strongly bonded to a child who is not his, for whom he pays child support, but a child whom he no longer gets to see, and more.

If anyone reading about that case here has any good advice or pointers, please post a comment to this blog entry.

Here is my response to the man’s complaint:

Hello Bill,

Sorry for your troubles, but thanks for writing.

Don’t blame your misfortune so much on a miscarriage of justice due to your lawyer’s ineptitude as on a justice system in which the cards are stacked against you.  That is because you are a man.  The family-law system hates men.

That is nothing personal, but the more difficulties men encounter due to the justice system, the more money the players who inhabit the system and make it thrive can extract from men.  Family law grew into a social cancer.

The most important thing you can do is to get in touch with a fathers-rights organization in Flatbush, Tennessee.

It is highly likely, almost certain, that you must file your case in a Tennessee court, as Flatbush is the place of residence of the biological parents of your child.

However, do everything you can to keep the case out of family court. Family courts were a response by the legal system to the large back-log of divorce applications that occurred in the 1960’s as a consequence of the implementation of the concept of “no-fault” divorce (in whom the fault for the divorce is always placed squarely on the shoulders of the man). Family courts are not in existence to help families and to dispense justice for families.  They exist to pursue their original reason for existence: to help speed up the destruction of families.  In family courts the precepts of normal courts — to follow the rules of the courts and the rules of evidence, your right to be judged a jury of your peers, your right to face your accuser, your right to own property, your right the enjoy the earnings of your labour and your right not to be forced into indentured labour and not to have you forced into forking over your earnings to third parties — have all been abrogated and no longer apply.

You need to get in touch with that fathers-rights organization in Flatbush to learn from them what you can do to help your case.  You will most likely learn more from them than you can learn from a lawyer.  More importantly, you can ask them and learn from them how to go about finding a lawyer that can help you the best to win your case.  However, your chances of winning are slim.  That is because you are a man.  The system hates men.

That was in relation to your wish to obtain custody of your daughter.

As to what you must do to get compensation from your lawyer and to get him punished or fined for lack of action, for botching your case, and for being a bad lawyer all around, you will have to file that case in New York.  That case will have to be brought to court in New York, perhaps in New York State.

I do not know who in New York will be able to help you.  I am not aware of a fathers rights activist who may be able to point you into the right direction on that.  It will not hurt you to ask more fathers rights activist about it.

A word on your choice of lawyer in the very specialized field of family law:  Family law is not specialized because lawyers receive much training in family law (at some universities, family law is covered in no more than a day), but because it has become a sector of the justice system that, along with many other government bureaucracies nurtured by and living off it, grew into an enormously large and profitable industry that mainly extracts money from men and pretends that is justice, all under the excuse that it all is “in the best interest of the child.”

The relationship between you and any lawyer working for you is like that with any other contractor you hire. You are the boss and pay the bills and his wages.

A lawyer works for you according to your plan, your schedule, your objectives, your instructions and your supervision.  For you to miss out in any of those aspects is an invitation to disaster and much like giving the lawyer a signed, blank cheque.

Moreover, you must select and choose a lawyer like you would any other contractor.  With a construction or building-renovation project you may engage in a formal and tender and bidding process.  You would receive bids for a given job from more than one contractor.  You would evaluate the bids and pick the most promising contractor.  If you were not to do that, you would have no assurance that the contractor you hired would be the best for the job you want him to do.  If you don’t follow a similar process when hiring a lawyer, then there is no possible way that you can be sure to have hired the best lawyer possible.

As to going by the recommendation of someone who said you should pick that lawyer, “good advice” like that is cheap, and it is worth to you what you pay for it, but it may be worth more to the party offering the “good advice.”  Medical doctors pay a referral fee to other doctors who bring clients their way.  I don’t know whether lawyers operate that way, but I would be surprised if they did not.

As to how to find a fathers-rights organization, go to http://www.dvmen.org/dv-190.htm#help

Some general observations:

Given that your daughter is not your biological child, although you were duped into believing that she was, that will cause some special problems for you.  It appears obvious that you were duped in order to make you become involved in a strong emotional bond with your daughter.

The fact that the bond now exists lays you open to blackmail and extortion by the biological parents of the child.  Moreover, because you openly accepted the child as your own and are now even fighting for her custody and that of her sister, you are legally the father of that child and of her sister.

In all likelihood you will be paying child support until the girl comes of age or until she finishes her education, whichever comes later.  Yet, you may not ever see her again.  The “legal” system will insist that that is in the best interest of the child — not only that, but that your daughter is entitled to the level of comfort she became accustomed to while still in your care.  That means also that the child support amount will be increased over the years as your income increases.  It will be said that that is necessary because she would have the increase in the level of comfort if she were still with you, and that those increases in child support payments, too, are in the best interest of the child.

Moreover, it is relatively easy now to make you the father of not only the girl whom you believed was your daughter, but also of the one that clearly and quite openly was not your child.  That doubles the stakes in the game that you became involved in.

If the biological parents are in the state of existence you described, they will have a very strong interest in having you make those ever-increasing child support payments for as long as possible.  In fact, as far as they are concerned, the best thing that could happen would be for them to have your daughter(s) go to university for as long as possible.  They could well afford that, because you will be paying for it.

Your child support payments will be their major source of income.  It will be far better than receiving a government disability pension, and it is possible for them to use the power of the State to make sure the money you are able to pay will keep coming their way.

That will motivate the parents to refuse to hand the child(ren) over to you.  Against their resistance it will most likely be impossible for you to gain custody of your daughter(s).  The parents will have lawyers beating a path to their door to help them fight your application to gain custody.  You will be paying your lawyer out of your own resources.  Their lawyers will be paid out of the bottomless public purse.  You will therefore fight against an opponent with unlimited financial resources.

Under those circumstances it will be difficult for you to maintain the pretense that the girl is your daughter.  You will have little or no feedback from her to re-enforce your bond with her.  The question now is for how long you can keep up the pretense that the child is your daughter.  When that pretense ends, the child support you are paying will be seen by you for what it is, extortion money that you must pay because you were duped and defrauded.

If you were to consider all of that, you should then not fight for custody but for recognition of what happened.  You were duped and defrauded.  That is a crime.

You are not the father of that child, and you should fight to have your status cancelled of having been made the father through fraud.  Your legal paternity is a fraud.

If you were to base your future actions on the fact of that fraud and if you were to attempt to put an end to it, you would have a very small but slightly better chance to have your paternity declared null and void than you have to gain custody of one or both of the girls.

All the best,

Walter Schneider
http://fathersforlife.org

Posted in Paternal Rights, Paternity Fraud | Print | 2 Comments »

January 26, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

Please sign my petition and pass it on.

Freeman Jackson

http://www.petitiononline.com/ivfrape/petition.html

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++`

Petition to US Congress, NY Dept. of Health, DHHS, & DOJ

Artificial Insemination used for Immigration & Paternity Fraud and the complete removal of this child’s rights to a father.

Baby X has been stripped of his rights to have a father, by the State of New Jersey and Bergen County Courts, by a malicious plot involving NJ Bergen County Family Court and the corrupt Judge Edward Torack, Dr. Tanmoy Mukherjee, of the Mount Sinai Hospital/Reproductive Medical Center of New York.

Baby X is a victim of a sinister plot by the ruling class to destroy Black Families and Men using the false flag of Child Support system and Women’s Rights. Baby X was created during unauthorized artificial insemination by Dr. Mukherjee and a Black Woman facing deportation for defrauding a university in New York City. In order to avoid deportation, Dr. Mukherjee and The Mother of Baby X conspired together to take and illegally use the semen of a Black Male US Citizen in order to perform an artificial insemination, and create an anchor baby. They also conspired to victimize the said Black Male with the responsibility of Child Support without his consent to an IVF.

During hearings at NJ Bergen County Family Court, Baby X’s Father was able to present a copy of Baby X’s Mother’s immigration records (which constitutes a history of immigration fraud conducted by Baby X’s Mother) and get Baby X’s Mother to admit, under questioning, that she had the child via Unauthorized Medical Experiment/IVF.

Immediately after clear evidence was presented in the court, that Baby X was created by an Unauthorized Medical Experiment/IVF for the purposes Immigration Fraud, the Father was completely banned from all courts and all judges - by the corrupt Judge Edward Torack of NJ Bergen County Family Court.

The court ban against the Father to Baby X includes the denial of the following rights:

1. A “Request for a DNA test of all parties”
2. Access to appeal, any other judges/courts
3. Visitation between Baby X and Father X.
4. Any modifications to Child Support, including a decrease in income of Father X
5. Any ruling on evidence pertaining to immigration and paternity fraud in the case.

The end result is to totally strip Father X of any rights to the child except to shut up and pay. He did not have a right to say when, where and how to have a baby, and he did not have a right to have any representation in court. And therefore the State of New Jersey has stripped Baby X’s f of the right to have a Father!

Posted in Paternal Rights | Print | No Comments »

January 26, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

Foxnews.com

2009 01 24

Branch Davidian leader David Koresh’s mother was found dead Friday of stab wounds. Her sister has been charged.

HOUSTON —  The mother of infamous Branch Davidian sect leader David Koresh has been stabbed to death, and Koresh’s aunt was in custody on a murder charge Saturday.

Bonnie Clark Halderman, 60, was found Friday afternoon at the home of her sister, Beverly Clark, in a rural area near Chandler, Henderson County Sheriff Ray Nutt said. Chandler is about 175 miles north of Houston….(Full Story)

Posted in Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

January 26, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

KRDO - Colorado Springs, CO, USA

Woman Charged With Murder

“She walked into that mud room and put the gun close to his chest and (told
him); ‘I have one last thing to say to you and she shot him,’” says
Holley….(Full Story)

Posted in Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

January 26, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

Mail Online; U.K.

2009 01 25

BBC personality made 40 false rape allegations against her ex-boyfriend whose life remains blighted by her lies

By Antonia Hoyle

A BBC personality has shattered her ex-boyfriend’s life by falsely accusing him of rape.

The woman, who has broadcast to television audiences of millions, accused him of raping her 40 times throughout their two-and-a-half-year relationship.

He was arrested, held in a police cell and handcuffed as police searched his flat for evidence of his crime. But she retracted her allegation weeks later, and the officer investigating the claims described them as ‘inconsistent’ and ‘not credible’.

Despite the lack of evidence, the incident remains on the Police National Computer thanks to a legal loophole, which campaigners say is blighting the lives of falsely accused men.

Even if the ‘victim’ withdraws their allegation, it will show up under enhanced Criminal Records Bureau checks that are undertaken regularly on people who apply for jobs with employers such as the NHS or schools. It will also prevent them from travelling to the United States….(Full Story)

Posted in Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

January 26, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

The Star; U.K.

2009 01 23

Tears as teen is cleared of rape

CHEERS erupted from the public gallery at Doncaster Crown Court after a teenager was cleared of rape charges.

Dean Bunn, aged 19, broke down in tears and had to be helped from the dock when he was overcome by emotion at the end of his six-month ordeal….(Full Story)

_____________
F4L: The boy had been incarcerated for six months while witing for that decision, and all for nothing more than that an older woman invited him to have sex with her, after which she accused him of having raped her, which he did not.

Posted in Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

January 26, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

The Sidney Morning Herald, Australia
January 25, 2009

Surrogates told to pay support

Deidre Mussen

THE Australian Government is demanding a New Zealand surrogate mother pay child support for the baby she had for two gay Queensland men, amid accusations she abandoned it.

Her case has raised fears of financial clawbacks for other New Zealand surrogates, including an Auckland woman who is eight-months pregnant with a son to another gay Australian couple.

“She’s told the couple they have to sort it out as there’s no way she’s paying,” said the second surrogate, who declined to be named….(Full Story)

Posted in Paternal Rights, Gay issues, Family, The New World Order | Print | No Comments »

January 26, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

The newsstar.com; Monroe, Louisiana, USA

January 24, 2009

Wouldn’t let her sleep, suspect told deputies, so she shot him

Staff report

A Monroe woman, who said she was angry because her boyfriend wouldn’t let her sleep, shot him with a small-caliber handgun, according to an arrest affidavit.

Charged with aggravated battery was Roshonda Anding, 21, of 3002 Burg Jones Lane. She remained in Ouachita Correctional Center on Saturday afternoon with no bond set….(Full Story)

Posted in Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »

January 26, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

Middletown Journal, Ohio, USA

BUTLER COUNTY COMMON PLEAS COURT

39-year-old mother accused of having sex with teen boys
Trenton police suspect woman of having sexual conduct with two males she allegedly met through her own children.

By Lauren Pack

Staff Writer

Saturday, January 24, 2009

HAMILTON — A 39-year-old woman is facing two charges for allegedly having sex with two teenage boys over the past two years.

Tracy Conley, who lists addresses on Trenton-Franklin Road in Madison Twp. and Weeping Willow Drive in St. Clair Twp. in court documents, was indicted last month on two counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, a third-degree felony….(Full Story)

_______________
F4L: The article does not mention it, but for a 39-year-old mother to have sex with under-age boys is constitutional rape.

Posted in Women's Violence | Print | No Comments »