No Judge who is corrupt, who condones corruption in others, can possibly remains on the Bench.

Monday, November 16, 2009

Judicial Interviews of 2009 - Richmond, Virginia

To all Mothers who are wounded by corrupted Virginia Judicial System
Join us at Judicial Interviews of 2009 Richmond, Virginia
When: Thursday December 17th 2009
Time: 8:30 am

Where: In the House room C of the General Assembly Building in Richmond, Virginia


CONFRONT YOUR JUDGE who unjustly & unlawfully seized your children from their loving Mothers. We Must congregate & collaborate regardless of the Judge who hurt our Child & our Family is up for reelection this year or not………………
Our Mission is:




Sunday, November 15, 2009

Another Story of Judge Bruce D. White and his non-just treatment

I'm an ex-husband that has expereinced the same rediculous and non-just treatment of this idiot, White, along with the entire "justice system" in Fairfax.

Fri 11/13/09 11:31 AM
ExternalClass DIV

Hi Artim,

I'm not a mom, I'm an ex-husband that has expereinced the same rediculous and non-just treatment of this idiot, White, along with the entire "justice system" in Fairfax.
To recap briefly, my ex wife, Elizabeth D. Seale, was an appointee in the Bush administration involved at the highest level of faith, family and children departments and organizations.
The divorce case was sealed by Judge Wooldridge and my malpracticeing attorney, Raymond Benzinger, purposely refused to inform me of a deadline to appeal the sealing of the case. He actually shined me on by saying he would get to it. He also refused to obtain my ex's phone records but handed mine over to opposing counsel without delay. My ex-wife had several affiars while she was married priviously to our short marriage, and was having an affair during our short marriage while employed at the federal level for faith, children and family departments which she admitted to in depostions. The case was sealed, by their defense: to protect her political empolyment. No kids, no financial records, just her politicial employment. Recently, someone posted some of the sealed court documents on the internet which exposed the malpractice of Benzinger, and others involved in covering up my ex's facts.
Without ANY proof, I was found guilty of contempt of court and given only 4 days notice of the hearing, (I live in Key West, Florida), and the hearing was in Fairfax, VA.
It appears that White is the latest to fall into lockstep with the cover-up of my ex's facts.


Dr Ariel King and Ariana-Leilani's United States Supreme Court Petition accepted

Dr. Ariel King and Ariana-Leilani's United States Supreme Court Petition accepted

The United States Supreme Court case for KING, is a case for ALL children who have been deprived their human rights under the 14th Amendment that requires equal protection and "due process" like all people under the US Constitution.
We are asking that you send this brief to as many people as you know who could also pass it on and sign the petition to the Supreme Courtas an organization. Our goal is to get at least 100 organizations to sign the petition... family courts for too long have been their own little island of non-law abiding activities and profits at the expense of OUR children.
This human exploitation needs to stop and we WILL get justice for OUR children and for ourselves.
We will resend all of these illegal orders and our children will be returned and will be provided the physical, psychological and mental support
they will need to heal from this "ILL-LEGAL HUMAN CHILD TRAFFICKING."

On June of 2008, Ariana-Leilani – now 6 years old, Daughter of well respected Dr. Ariel King founder of The Ariel Foundation International was legally kidnapped from her loving Mother by the Juvenile & Domestic Relations (JDR) court in Arlington, Virginia - A court ”NOT OF RECORD”.

Since then Dr. King's parental rights including her rights of contact with her then 5 year old daughter were effectively and unjustly terminated.
Dr. King who was the child's primary caregiver up until that point was Forced to be vanished from the life of 5 year old daughter Ariana.
The JDR court entered a series of orders making an appellate
review …………….
The “NOT OF RECORD” JDR court effectively terminated the loving Mother’s parental rights and criminalized her for caring for her daughter.
The denial of constitutional & internationally recognized human rights of the child without substantive review is a denial of Due process & equal protection.

Last week we filed a Petition for Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court. This Petition asks that the problems with the lack of due process in Virginia be addressed, and the child’s rights recognized. This could lead to a landmark decision. Please take a few moments out to read the Petition, we think you will find it informative. Of particular note is the background section of the brief, that clearly lays out the history of the case, and how Dr. King and Ariana-Leilani were denied their rights without due process and equal protection. Existing Supreme Court case law finds a parent-child relationship a fundamental right that is entitled to the same protections as other fundamental rights in the US Constitution. We also believe that the “right to life” interests would find this case of interest because it addresses the rights of the child.
Petition for writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Virginia

The key player on these decadent & depraved actions is the famous deceitful G.A.L. “Deborah S. Olin”

Please read the petition carefuly in order to discover the similarity of the cases which Deborah S. Olin was appointed as the Guardian ad-Litem.
Olin’s standardized tactics are dreadful & outrages.

Saturday, November 14, 2009

Are you a victim of Corrupted Judicial System in Virginia????

Are you a victim of Corrupted Judicial System in State of Virginia???

Report your Bias Judge

To report Judge's Misconduct & their Delinquency actions - contact us & share your Story:

Friday, November 13, 2009

Chief Judge Teena Grodner

the Honorable Chief Judge Teena Grodner
Posted by: sydney's friend ()
Date: October 26, 2009 01:39PM
Judge Teena Grodner is up for reelection in December 17th, 2009.

The Honorable Chief Judge Teena Grodner refused residential Drug treatment for Sydney Hardy (DOB 3/16/91) going against at the request of her court appointed probation officer and parents. This past week, at a follow-up hearing to see how Sydney was progressing, the Honorable Judge was presented with a death certificate. Sydney had a heroin over-dose in Las Vegas. Obviously this Honorable Judge knew better than to help a child that was having substance abuse issues. Now she has blood on her hands. Fairfax County Judicial System = FAIL.

Thursday, November 12, 2009

a judge's signature is little more than a rubber stamp of an out-of-court compromise or one party's position.

To save money, reform the courts

Karen Ann DeLuca,
DeLuca, of Alexandria, is a Virginia lawyer.

Bob McDonnell's one new idea to solve Virginia's transportation budget woes is divestiture of the ABC stores. I have a more innovative suggestion out of my everyday life. In the money hunt, I would start with the courts.
While often treated as sacrosanct, the judiciary is part of government. And while constitutionally provided for, it is not as the exclusive vehicle of justice. So, why the bypass? Because here's the clunker we have now:
There's the avoidance canon, where judges either don't decide or rule on a ground that really doesn't resolve anything, disposing of matters to get them off their desks, abrogating the reason parties, their customers, come to the tribunal in the first place.

This is especially prevalent in the lower courts around holidays and in the appellate ones at the end or beginning of a session, when there is personnel changeover. It keeps their workload way down, but is expensive and inconclusive for litigants who expect and deserve more than a drive on the road to nowhere.
Another major problem, at all levels, is law-clerk justice. Just out of school, a bunch of mostly 25-year-olds in training, green as granny apples, making impactful decisions that their bosses blindly sign off on. As these rulings travel up the system, they are routinely rubber-stamped by more apprentices, who cover their peers' tracks in this self-interest network where everyone's paving the way for their next career move.

A stop sign should be put to this extraconstitutional exercise of judicial power and payment of redundant salaries.
There's also judicial black ice, shortcut justice that borrows from the marking system in the world of figure skating, the winning pecking order dependent on incestuous familiarity and number of appearances rather than the merits of a case.
So what's Virginia to do? Why not privatize the courts?
Portions of their functions already are -- for example, through the increased use of mediation. In many instances, a judge's signature is little more than a rubber stamp of an out-of-court compromise or one party's position. With more and more legal issues being resolved the DIY way, there is less need for the traditional role of the judiciary or for the pricey courthouses that garage them.
Or courts could become self- funded and/or the public option in a hybrid system, forced to up the quality of their product to maintain traffic, on the theory no one will pay for a lousy, accelerated job. This would mean parking the best, most experienced personnel in the lower courts, where statistics show decision-making below is determinative. A system should be instituted tantamount to student evaluation of professors at the end of a semester, letting those directly impacted exercise a public option and have input into who makes the grade.
Better yet, the entire taxpaying public should get to vote. Such positioning would also eliminate the need for some of the vast appellate bureaucracy if litigants were satisfied below, more potential budget savings. In addition, these justices should be routinely rotated like tires to avoid becoming too cozy in their communities and professional backslapping cliques.
To pave the way for new roads and rail in a Virginia that is running on fumes, everything needs to be on the next governor's GPS. That includes Virginia's side street and back alley courts.

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

Confront Your Judge - Vote - Team Up - Go Public

Virginia, Team up for the Rational Justice
To all Mothers abused by Virginia Unjust Judicial System
Lets Team up – Go Public & Bond Close to put an end to this Corrupted Family Court System in Virginia
"For the leverage you need to force the respect you don't get and the fair rulings you are due."
- Confront Your Judge at Judicial Interview Of 2009 – Richmond, VA

- Support in getting on November 2009 ballot, the question of: “The Constitution of Virginia should be amended to change the method of re-appointing state judges from confirmation by the legislature to retention election by the voters.”
- Go Public by sending your Story to be published
For more information please visit "Mommy go bye bye"

Saturday, November 7, 2009

Bye Bye ferocious Judges -Disciplinary System Actions


Lets hope The Vicious Judge Bruce D. White of Fairfax County, VA will be next..........He should..............

Disciplinary System Actions
July 2009 – Present
(Except for agreed dispositions, disciplinary actions imposed by a District Committee remain subject to appeal for 10 days after notice of the determination is mailed to the Respondent.)
(Except for agreed dispositions, disciplinary actions imposed by the Disciplinary Board remain subject to appeal for 30 days after the Memorandum Order is served on the Respondent.)
Updated November 9, 2009

November 9, 2009
Crystal Anita Gist Fisher, Esquire 10462 Kelso Court, Waldorf, MD 20603
VSB Docket Nos. 08-042-073471 and 09-042-075770
On October 22, 2009, a Virginia State Bar Fourth District-Section II Subcommittee issued a public reprimand with terms to Crystal Anita Gist Fisher for violating disciplinary rules that govern diligence and communication. The misconduct occurred in two employment discrimination matters. This was an agreed disposition of misconduct charges.

November 6, 2009
Alfred M. Tripp, P. O. Box 9672, Norfolk, Virginia 23505-0672
VSB Docket No. 08-021-073929
On October 20, 2009, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board revoked Alfred M. Tripp's license to practice law. In consenting to the revocation, Mr. Tripp acknowledged that he provided false information on judicial selection questionnaires provided to the General Assembly to support his application for a judgeship.
view Tripp order (pdf posted 11/06/09)*

November 3, 2009
John Wesley Bonney, 5416 Tidewater Drive, Norfolk, Virginia
VSB Docket Nos. 08-021-074831, 09-021-075690, and 09-021-079170
On October 26, 2009, a Virginia State Bar Second District Subcommittee issued a public reprimand with terms to John Wesley Bonney for violating disciplinary rules that govern diligence, fees, declining or terminating representation, firm names and letterheads, and misconduct that reflects adversely on a lawyer's fitness to practice law. The subcommittee ordered Mr. Bonney to refund money to two clients and to vacate a judgment against one of the clients. This was an agreed disposition of misconduct charges.
Ex-judge’s law license revoked - Complete list

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Secrecy in Virginia's conflict of interest law protects lawmakers. It should be remade to protect citizens instead.

Why should the public trust lawmakers who design and operate such a self-protecting system?

Another astounding aspect of Virginia's conflict of interest law gives lawmakers a legal break nobody else gets.

In other words, lawmakers have made ignorance of the law a sufficient defense if they break the law. Those who write the law are the last people who should be able to claim ignorance of it. Citizens are shortchanged by all this secrecy. And they don't like it.
That's because Virginia shuts citizens out of the process. Instead, it shields legislators.

The conflict of interest case involving Del. Phil Hamilton
and Old Dominion University has had one very public result — Hamilton's defeat at the polls last week. But almost everything else about it remains secret. Unfortunately, that's just the way the Virginia General Assembly likes it when it comes to ethical questions about legislators.Having drawn statewide attention because it helped unseat a powerful lawmaker, the Hamilton case presents an opportunity to fix that.When voters in the 93rd District decided that Hamilton wouldn't represent them in Richmond any more, they acted on incomplete information. That's because Virginia shuts citizens out of the process. Instead, it shields legislators. Voters knew from news disclosures that an e-mail trail shows Hamilton asking for a $40,000 job at a new teacher training center at ODU before and at the same time as he was seeking General Assembly funding to create it. And they knew from news reports that the House was investigating, as was a federal grand jury. But they didn't have clear information about what ODU was expecting and the terms of its understanding with Hamilton. They weren't allowed to listen as ODU officials and legislators involved in the budget process talked with the House Ethics Advisory Panel. Its meetings are so secret, it won't even admit when it's meeting.Unless and until the investigating panel decides that a violation took place, its proceedings remain secret — unless the scrutinized lawmaker requests that the hearings be open (and even that doesn't force the entire investigation into the open). The whole process — hearings, records, reports — should be public. If there has been no violation, a legislator should have nothing to fear. If there has been, the public has a right to know. Who's guarding the henhouse is also a problem. Ethics panels are appointed by the leaders of the foxes — a committee in the Senate, the speaker in the House. The deck is further stacked by the law's requirement that some members be former legislators/foxes. The choosers can pick whom they want, and the current speaker tapped several people widely recognized for their partisan activities.

A better approach would create nonpartisan panels made up of citizens, since the point of the law, and its application, should be to protect citizens. Another astounding aspect of Virginia's conflict of interest law gives lawmakers a legal break nobody else gets.

The ethics panel may recommend legal action if and only if it finds that the violation was knowing. An unknowing violation goes to another committee, which has the option of recommending that the member be disciplined in-house, not charged with a crime. In other words, lawmakers have made ignorance of the law a sufficient defense if they break the law. Those who write the law are the last people who should be able to claim ignorance of it. Citizens are shortchanged by all this secrecy. And they don't like it. In a recent poll conducted by the Judy Ford Wason Public Policy Center at Christopher Newport University, 83 percent said the House investigative panel's work should be open.They're right. Because what's at stake is public trust. Why should the public trust lawmakers who design and operate such a self-protecting system? The best outcome of the Hamilton affair would be a rework of the General Assembly's approach to conflicts of interest. It should aim for a fair, open process, one that inspires trust in the people citizens rely on to write — and respect — the laws.