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.

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.

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."

(VW-MGBB)

- 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"

http://mommygobyebye-virginia.blogspot.com/

Bye Bye ferocious Judges -Disciplinary System Actions

BYE BYE FEROCIOUS JUDGES............




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.)
archives
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

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?

Daily Press

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.

Biased Judge Bruce D. White of Fairfax Circuit Court Must be Discharged immediately

Biased Judge Bruce D. White of Fairfax Circuit Court Must be Discharged immediately. Sign the Petition
_____________________________________
To: Virginia Congress
To: Virginia Governor Tim Kaine,
Delegate Members of the Courts of Justice
Chairman David Albo of the Courts of Justice Committee, Griffith, H. Morgan
Kilgore, Terry G. Athey, Clifford L., Jr. Janis, William R. Bell, Robert B. Cline, Benjamin L. Fralin, William H., Jr. Iaquinto, Salvatore R.
Gilbert, C. Todd, Peace, Christopher Kilian, Miller, Jackson H., Loupassi, G. Manoli, Johnson, Joseph P., Jr., Melvin, Kenneth R.,
Armstrong, Ward L., Barlow, William K., Watts, Vivian E.,Toscano, David J., Marsden, David W., Valentine, Shannon R.
Senate Members of the Courts of Justice
Sen. Henry Marsh Chair, Sen. Ken Cuccinelli (R-37), Sen. Creigh Deeds (D-25), Sen. John Edwards (D-21), Sen. Janet Howell (D-32), Sen. Robert Hurt (R-19), Sen. Louise Lucas (D-18), Sen. Ryan McDougle (R-4), Sen. Tommy Norment (R-3), Sen. Mark Obenshain (R-26), Sen. Toddy Puller (D-36), Sen. Fred Quayle (R-13), Sen. Roscoe Reynolds (D-20), Sen. Dick Saslaw (D-35), Sen. Ken Stolle (R-8)

Citizens Petition The General Assembly to Depose Judge Bruce D. White of Fairfax Circuit Court, and to appoint an independent Equitable Judge in his place:

Obstruction of Justice, Aiding and Abetting, Abuse of Power, Abuse of Discretion, Violation of his Oath to Uphold the Law and Serve the Public, Violation of Virginia Constitution, Violation of an American Citizen’s Constitutional Right.

Description of Violations:

1 - Judge Bruce D. White willfully violated the Judicial Canons that he has sworn to uphold.

2 - Judge Bruce D. White willfully violated Virginia Constitutional statutes in his judicial activism on the bench.

3 • Judge Bruce D. White condoned litigants in his courtroom lying at their depositions, without punishment.

4 • Judge Bruce D. White condoned the apparent commission of a fraud in his courtroom, even though the judge had substantial evidence to the contrary.

5 . Judge Bruce D. White deliberately designed decisions which aided and abetted the commission of an alleged fraud.


6 • Judge Bruce D. White denied many of the pro se litigants’ claims for damages, pre-trial, in an effort to protect his fellow friends.


7 • Judge Bruce D. White threatened a Pro se litigant with payback for resisting the judge’s attempt to coerce an unfavorable settlement,

We the Citizens of the Commonwealth of Virginia hereby put the Virginia General Assembly Senators and Delegates on notice regarding Judge Bruce D. White and for all of the above-mentioned reasons; Judge Bruce D. White should be immediately removed from Bench of the Fairfax Circuit Court.

Petition Signed by Citizens/Comments:
Should Judge Bruce D. White of Fairfax County, Virginia Circuit court be removed from the Bench?

Comment/ Pettition Signed No.: 1
09/20/09
YES: Yes. Immediately.

COMMENTS: My name is Lily Guan. I was just experienced another Immoral Judgment of Judge Bruce White on the Friday Motion Day 9/18/2009. I was insulted for no reason, discriminated for just being an Oriental American woman, and “judged before trial” by this horrible Judge. If any of you wish to obtain more detail on my case, please feel free to contact me at my email address ........@consultant.com…………………………………
Any day that Judge BRUCE WHITE has existed is that JUSTICE has not existed.

Comment/ Pettition Signed No.: 2
09/19/09
YES: Yes, immediately!

COMMENTS: My name is Anh Pham. I am a female student of Lord Fairfax Community College. My life is currently in danger because of this corrupted judge! I don’t know whether I’d still exist in the next minute or not, but I wish to send my vote to you for true Justice to be done. I’m available for further questions at .......@gmail.com.
Any day that this horrible man is still in his position spells out danger to all citizens!

"one isolated comment" does not make the mom's case and upholds custody for the dad.

Domestic Relations - School Lunch Traffic Picks Up During Custody Contests?

A mother challenges a trial judge's comment that parents "start visiting more" during school lunch times "when there's litigation going on," but the Court of Appeals says "one isolated comment" does not make the mom's case and upholds custody for the dad.

Mercurio v. Mercurio (Va.Ct.App.) (VLW 009-7-469) (11 pp.)

Va. lawmakers' state pay exempt from disclosure

The 2009 General Assembly was a fiscal nightmare.

By Bill SizemoreJulian WalkerThe Virginian-Pilot© October 26, 2009

But they are all case studies in how members of a citizen legislature navigate the murky shoals of potential conflicts of interest.

The bottom-line defense of lawmakers who go on the public payroll is that if voters find the relationship too cozy, they can vote them out.
To do that, however, voters need to know about it. In Virginia, there is no legal requirement that lawmakers disclose income from state or local government entities.
Lawmakers are required by state law to file an annual disclosure of their financial interests, including sources of income in excess of $10,000 a year. But they are specifically exempted from having to disclose income from state or local government entities. Some do, some don't.

FULL STORY HERE

Comments:

Submitted by grumpy on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 7:09 pm.
Just another version of K Street, good ol' boyz politics at its finest. No oversight entices corruption and greed. Politicians, what they do and how they do it should be an open book since they can't be trusted, Duh!

Submitted by Anold Wiseman on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 5:37 pm.
It seems that our legislature bodies on the national, state, and local levels have become good ol’ boy country clubs for those who have the right clout to get elected. That’s probably why so many lawyers want in to those positions. Can you imagine what our judicial court systems would be like if they were to run their business the same way that they perform their legislative duties. I can imagine that court business would be expensive, underhanded, and that money would have a big influence on the outcome of most cases. Let’s hope that it never comes down to this.

Submitted by theDigit on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 1:22 pm.
Just so we can see the list or our corrupt-, er.. "ethically challenged" public servants double-dipping at the public trough (your wallets)...
Del. Kenneth Plum, D-RestonDel. Bill Janis, R-Henrico CountyDel. Dan Bowling, D-RichlandsDel. David Nutter, R-ChristiansburgDel. Phil Hamilton, R-Newport NewsSen. John Miller, D-Newport NewsSen. Fred Quayle, R-SuffolkSen. William Wampler, R-BristolSen. Tommy Norment, R-James City
Thanks guys, you do us proud. Nice to know who's for sale.

Submitted by dmorgan23464 on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 6:13 pm.
The guys who make the disclosure rules decide to hide their own malfeasance with a loophole.
They know they are doing wrong, that's why they vote to hide what they are doing.
I say vote them all out! Bring new blood in and if/when they get greedy, throw them out as well!

Submitted by Armed on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 8:13 am.
As a state employee responsible for a program budget, I am required under the Code of Virginia, to disclose *all* sources of income, paid travel, honoraria, etc. ...And you mean to tell me that our legislatures are NOT required to disclose the same?! I find this difficult to believe, quite frankly. If true - it would be an outrage.

Submitted by dmorgan23464 on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 6:18 pm.
You are stunned that the guys who make the rules decide for themselves that they don't have to play by the same rules as us normal "peons"? It's an outrage to anyone BUT the good ole boys who are playing with our money.They make the rules requiring full disclosure from everyone - but themselves. That is nothing if not corruption.
Vote them all out!!!

Submitted by Chocolatelab1 on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 7:04 am.
Great article but you failed to use the word hypocrite. All these politicians, regardless of party affiliation are in it for themselves. They're all a bunch of hypocrites.

Submitted by babaloo on Mon, 10/26/2009 at 12:05 pm.
You're right they are all hypocrites, and most of them are crooks. I can no longer trust politicians, nor can I truly trust any major media outlet.
And to all the leftists out there that act like Fox News is the only biased media source... you're either morons or just lying to yourselves. All of big media is biased, Fox news is made to seem like its the only biased company because its the only one that is biased to the Right. CNN, NBC, etc. are LEFT-wing organizations so when contrasting one right-wing company against all the other companies that are left-wing it makes Fox look really biased.

Laws were never meant to be used as weapons against people.

http://mommygobyebye-virginia.blogspot.com/2008/12/polling-readers-which-parent-belongs-in.html

Judge Bruce D. White of Fairfax County, You should know that: Laws were never meant to be used as weapons against people.

Polling Readers:
Which Parents belongs in Jail???????? Ara? or Nowzari?

In your opinion, is John Bauserman, Esq., “completely intransigent” in his pursuit of the children’s passports (versus justifiably intransigent, for example.

PLEASE SEND YOUR COMMENTS TO:DLevy@CRCkids.org , DaveAlbo@aol.com

Original Message -----From: Veronique WYVELLTo: dlevy@crckids.org

Cc: DaveAlbo@aol.com ; Mitra_Ara@msn.com ; weijianwilson@gmail.com ; Mark.Rubin@governor.virginia.gov
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 11:35
Subject: Misters "Nowzari" and Bauserman in matter of children's passportsAttach: transcript 12.17.08 , arrest 2004 (a) , arrest 2004 (b) , criminal hx

ATTENTION: David LevyCo-Founder and CEOChildren's Rights Council8181 Professional Place, Suite 240Landover, Maryland 20785301.459.1220CRCkids.org

Dear Mr. Levy,I hear from many parents for the reasons explained below in that email for Delegate Dave Albo.*
Mitra Ara of Ashburn, Virginia, is one of them.
The turning of my back to people in difficult legal situations who write in with their stories is something I will never find possible to do. Two times now, however, you have hung up the phone on Ms. Ara. I wish I could do that. I wish that I could believe that Ms. Ara is "completely intransigent" as CRC president John Bauserman claimed in court last December (see attached transcript).If it is true Ms. Ara is displaying an attitude and a position, in this matter of delivering passports to the document-fraud-addicted father of her 7-year-old twin daughters, that are extreme, as "both parents best" co-leader Mr. Bauserman has stated, I think you would be "completely intransigent" too if you were in this mother's shoes.
Mr. Levy, please think about how you would react if those arrest records (again, please see the attachments) and that criminal history outline (also attached) described your ex-wife and the mother of your children.When your partner and CRC's president John Bauserman presses to have Ms. Ara jailed, in front of Judge White on February 13, 2009, in Fairfax Circuit Court, it is true that "both parents best" co-leader Bauserman will be seeking to enhance visitation but not by increasing the amount of time and number of hours the girls spend in the company of their father.On the other hand, "both parents best" co-leader Mr. Bauserman is taking the unreasonable risk that the girls will know decreased time and hours with their mother and see much less of their mother.Now, Mr. Levy, you have a website. And on this website, I see "Social Goals" for your organization:--Advocate increased opportunities for access to non-custodial parents; and--Decrease the nature, burden and expense of legal disputes and court interventions caused by persistent parental conflict. [SOURCE: http://crckids.org/about-crc.htm]

If "Bruce Nowzari" (or whatever his name is at the moment) wants his children to know their paternal grandparents in Canada, then the grandparents in Canada need to come to Virginia.
Let me tell you what the court told me many years ago. The court told me my French relatives living in France needed to come here to America if they wanted to see my daughter Brigitte. The judge took her passport away from me. My crime was that my own mother resides in France. I have not seen my child in nearly five years. Brigitte is 11.Brigitte's father is a pathological narcissist and dangerous sociopath just like "Mr. Nowzari" (or whatever his name is at the moment).
If you would like, I can introduce you to the mother of Grace. The judge took Grace's passport away from her mother too. Wei Wilson's crime was that her own mother resides in China. Ms. Wilson has not seen her child in nearly two years. Grace is 12.Grace's father is a pathological narcissist and dangerous sociopath just like "Mr. Nowzari" (or whatever his name is at the moment).
In keeping with the second of those two social goals mentioned and the overall mission of the Children's Rights Council as described by its slogan "The Best Parent Is Both Parents", I would like for John Bauserman, lawyer hired by document-fraud-addicted "Mr. Nowzari" (or whatever his name is at the moment), to curb his unreasonable urge to litigate and to STOP RIDING MS. ARA'S BACK.
Laws were never meant to be used as weapons against people.
Perhaps "Bruce Nowzari" (or whatever his name is at the moment) should look for better ways to manage his aggression than to obsess over putting the fit, loving, non-offending mother of his children in the brig.And perhaps Mr. Bauserman should think about how to better represent the mission of your organization than to obsess over putting one more fit, loving, non-offending mother behind bars.

I would like to see some “common sense” finally applied to Ms. Ara's situation.
Thank you.~
Veronique Wyvell, RN, McLean, Virginia
http://mommygobyebye-virginia.blogspot.com/

P.S. I hope you can get to know the new book by Philip Howard, Life Without Lawyers: Liberating Americans from Too Much Law (Norton, 2009).
*----- Original Message -----From: Veronique WYVELL
To: DaveAlbo@aol.com ; DelDMarsden@house.state.va.us
Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 08:46
Subject: 1 of 3} The Repeal of *BIOC* by 2010

Hello Mr. Albo,I am writing you because I have had no reply from Mr. Marsden. Legislators must get a lot of emails. Never easy to read and then answer every bit of it. I know because I get a lot of emails too. Most of the people who write me are parents, most are mothers, a few fathers. The message, however, is always the same. I hear over and over again that *BIOC* isn't working. But I think Virginia legislators know this. I think if Virginia legislators were more diligent about reading and responding to mail from their constituents who are innocent, and honest, parents in difficult legal situations because *BIOC* isn't working, my own mailbox would see less of it. People find me because I blog on the issue.I am hoping you might be open to considering, and pushing for, a new approach. This new approach is discussed below in my email for Delegate David Marsden. It's called THE APPROXIMATION RULE.~
Veronique Wyvell, RN, McLean, Virginia
… characterized by refusal to compromise or to abandon an extreme position or attitude … -definition intransigent

Parental Alienation: A Mental Diagnosis?

Parental Alienation: A Mental Diagnosis?
Some experts say the extreme hatred some kids feel toward a parent in a divorce is a mental illness
By Lindsay Lyon
Posted October 29, 2009

From an early age, Anne was taught by her mother to fear her father. Behind his back, her mom warned that he was an unpredictable and dangerous; any time he'd invite her to do anything—a walk in the woods, a trip to the art store—she would craft an excuse not to go. "I was under the impression that he was crazy, that at any moment he could just pop and do something violent to hurt me," says Anne, who prefers that only her middle name be used to guard her family's privacy. Typical of a phenomenon some mental-health experts now label "parental alienation," her view of him became so negative, she says, that her mother persuaded her to lie during a custody hearing when the couple divorced. Then 14, she told the judge that her dad was physically abusive. Was he? "No," she says. "But I was convinced that he would [be]." After her mother won custody, Anne all but severed contact with her father for years.

Full Story Here

Comments:

Children are torn apart by parents who suffer from pathological envy, narcissism, disavowal, perverse modes of thought, and a perverse attitude toward reality. The focus should remain on parental behavior. Why drag the kids into this? Not one comment in this growing column makes any sense to me. My little girl is not sick; her father is sick. I don’t care to see her slapped with some stupid UN-scientific diagnosis then sucked in to swallowing a bunch of poisonous psychotropic drugs to help her deal with it. And the last thing we need are more swindling shrinks in the courtroom mouthing off about some junk science called PAS, distracting the judge from his job of protecting children from hateful parents who simply can’t cope unless they’re smacking their ex with back-to-back barratrous legal action. The only person making any sense to me right now is Dr. Michael Donner; every family court judge in this country should read, and memorize, his article “Tearing the Child Apart…” Find an extract at http://mommygobyebye-virginia.blogspot.com/2009/08/michael-donner-phd-pathological-envy.html.

CCHR Comment... Parent Alienation - Another bogus mental disorder: Child is “mentally ill” if one parent has “alienated” him from the other
The phenomenon has been described for many decades, but it became a cause célèbre in 1985, when Richard Gardner, a clinical professor of psychiatry at Columbia University, coined the term “parental alienation syndrome.” The American Psychological Association has issued a statement that “there is no evidence within the psychological literature of a diagnosable parental alienation syndrome.” http://www.cchrint.org/ http://www.cchrint.org/2009/10/29/parent-alienation-bogus-disorder/

Access 2009 - Judicial Selection panel

Access 2009 - Judicial Selection panel
VCOG


Access 2009 panel examines judicial selection in Virginia

Richmond trial attorney Coleman Allen told a VCOG audience that he's practiced in both Virginia and West Virginia. He's seen good and bad judges in each state, and has concluded that both states' judicial selection processes (West Virginia elects; Virginia appoints) have merits and drawbacks.
The final panel of Access 2009 focused on judicial selection in Virginia. Moderated by George Mason University Counsel, and VCOG board member Tom Moncure, the panel looked at both the policy behind Virginia's current practice and the political reality of changing it.
Staunton delegate Chris Saxman said he liked the way Staunton area lawmakers are able to get a lot of citizen input about potential judge candidates at the trial level, though he admitted that at the appellate level, legislators are often asked to vote on people they have no personal knowledge of. He also noted that the likelihood of the General Assembly giving up its current power to interview and recommend candidates is next to nil.

Fairfax County Clerk of Court John Frey (Left) says he wishes there was more public input in the way candidates for judgeship are selected.

Larry Roberts, currently counselor to Tim Kaine as DNC chair and previously counselor to Tim Kaine as governor, said he appreciated the power the governor has to fill certain appointments without legislative approval, but also said it wasn't be the time to put all judicial appointments into the governor's hands.
Fairfax County Clerk of Court John Frey discussed how bad judges can sometimes stay on the bench too long. He noted that an adjusted pension-accrual process may be a way to lure older lawyers with more court (and life) experience to the bench. Frey also complimented Staunton for soliciting citizen input, saying he wished there were more public input in his area of the state.

Senate Amendment 2588 passed on a vote of 68-30 - Stop Family Violence

Great News!! Senate Amendment 2588 passed on a vote of 68-30

Together, we can www.stopfamilyviolence.org
Irene Weiser

To see how your legislators voted click here

" It seems like all Democrats Voted "YES" & all Republicans Voted "NO" !!!! Why am I not Surprised??????"

Thanks for your quick response!! Here's the press release from Senator Franken's office.

For Immediate Release:October 6th, 2009 Contact:Jess McIntoshJess_mcintosh@franken.senate.gov 202.725.6787

Franken's Proposal To Guarantee Sexual Assault Victims Their Day In Court Passes By 68 - 30, Amendment Offered in Honor of former KBR employee Jamie Leigh Jones Passes the Senate WASHINGTON, DC [10/6/09] - Today, the amendment offered by U.S. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) to stop funding defense contractors who deny assault victims their day in court passed the United States Senate by a vote of 68 - 30.

Last Thursday, Sen. Franken introduced an amendment (S.2588) to the FY2010 Defense Appropriations Bill that would restrict funding to defense contractors who commit employees to mandatory binding arbitration in the case of sexual assault. The legislation, endorsed by 61 women's, labor and public interest groups, was inspired by the story of Jamie Leigh Jones, who watched the vote from the Senate gallery today.

Jones was a 19-yr-old employee of defense contractor KBR (formerly a Halliburton subsidiary) stationed in Iraq who was gang raped by her co-workers and imprisoned in a shipping container when she tried to report the crime.

Her father and U.S. Rep. Ted Poe (R-Tex.), worked together to secure her safe return to the United States, but once she was home, she learned a fine-print clause in her KBR contract banned her from taking her case to court, instead forcing her into an "arbitration" process that would be run by KBR itself. Just today, Halliburton filed a petition for a rehearing en banc in the 5th Circuit Court, which means that Jamie's fight is far from over. "I'm proud of what we accomplished today," said Sen. Franken. "Victims of sexual assault deserve their day in court and no corporation should be able to deny them that right. Jamie's courage in telling her story will help women all over this country and I'm honored to have been a part of that.""I am highly honored that Senator Franken and his wife have created this amendment to ensure that others do not have to endure the suffering that I have," said Jones. "This amendment makes all the hard times that I have gone through, when going public with such a personal tragedy, worth every tear shed from telling and retelling my horrific experience. I know this amendment will save so many in the future."Specifically, Sen. Franken's amendment:
Does not require contractors to change or modify existing employment contracts. It only bars funds to contractors who continue to use these mandatory arbitration clauses in their employment contracts.
Narrowly targets the most egregious violations and applies to defense contracts, many of which are administered abroad, where women are the most vulnerable and least likely to have support resources. The amendment will apply to many contractors that have already demonstrated their incompetence in efficiently carrying out defense contracts, and have further demonstrated their unwillingness and their inability to protect women from sexual assault.
Applies to claims arising out of sexual assault, like assault & battery (including rape), intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent hiring, retention, and supervision, as well as Title VII civil rights claims, which were specifically designed to protect vulnerable groups in the workplace.
Leading Minnesota and national organizations who have endorsed Sen. Franken's amendment include the Minnesota Women Lawyers, the Minnesota Coalition Against Sexual Assault, the Sexual Violence Center, Minnesota NOW, Advocates for Human Rights, the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence, the National Women's Law Center, the National Partnership for Women and Families, the American Association of University Women, the National Council of La Raza, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, and the Consumer Federation of America. A full list of the 61 endorsing organizations is attached."Sexual violence is about a person trying to exercise power and control over another person through unwanted sexual contact and violence," said Pam Zeller, Executive Director of the Sexual Violence Center. "In arbitration the intent is to arrive at an agreement. This agreement does not have to be equitable in order to be resolved. It is also not intended to resolve a criminal matter.

Sexual harassment and sexual violence inherently have an imbalance of power. Submitting a victim of sexual harassment, or sexual assault, to a process of arbitration is a revictimization of the victim, and minimizes the seriousness of the crime of sexual assault. The proposed amendment by Senator Franken will protect victims of sexual harassment and sexual violence from being revictimized through the arbitration process." "This amendment reflects a critically important step in safeguarding the rights of those who have experienced discrimination in the form of sexual violence, harassment, and stalking," said Donna Dunn, Executive Director of the Minnesota Coalition Against Sexual Assault. "We know that justice for victims of violence often seems elusive. It is very important that each person have the right to assess and choose the options that they believe best fit their needs. This amendment is a giant step in that direction." "No survivor of sexual assault should be denied the ability to seek justice," said Terri Poore, Policy Chair of the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence. "Asking a victim to enter into arbitration with someone who raped her or a company that wouldn't protect her is outrageous and sends a clear message that such violence is simply not taken seriously." Minnesota Organizations Endorsing the Franken Amendment (SA 2588)Advocates for Human Rights.

List of Judges and their terms expiration dates - NINETEENTH CIRCUIT COUT - FAIRFAX

NINETEENTH CIRCUIT Courts - Fairfax County
Location: Fairfax Circuit Court
4110 Chain Bridge Road
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
Tel. (703) 246-4111

JUDGES MARKED IN RED SHOULD NOT BE REAPPOINTED & THOSE JUDGES WHO ARE NOT UP FOR THIS YEAR, BUT STILL IN RED INK, SHOULD BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY.

Judges: Jan Lois Brodie....term expires 2/13/09
David S. Schell .................term expires 2/13/09
Gaylord L. Finch, Jr..........term expires 6/30/09
Jane Marum Roush ..........term expires 6/30/09
Randy I. Bellows ...............term expires 1/31/11
*Dennis J. Smith................term expires 5/31/11
David T. Stitt .....................term expires 6/30/11
Michael P. McWeeny .........term expires 2/29/12
Leslie M. Alden ..................term expires 7/31/12
Jonathan C. Thacher .........term expires 4/30/14
Charles J. Maxfield.............term expires 1/31/15
R. Terrence Ney..................term expires 1/31/15
Marcus D. Williams............term expires 1/31/15
Robert J. Smith .................term expires 1/31/16
Bruce D. White ..................term expires 1/15/16

Virginia's Judicial Selection Process

by Doug Mataconis

Prompted apparently by a pair of articles in the Bristol Herald-Courier, here and here, several of my fellow Virginia bloggers have posts today about the pros and cons of the way that state-level, and especially trial court, judges are selected and appointed in Virginia.
Virginia is virtually unique in the United States in that is judicial selection and reappointment process is entirely controlled by the state legislature and goes back to the Reconstruction era, as the Herald notes:
No other state gives legislators more power in selecting judges than Virginia – one of just two states where legislature seats judges. In fact, judicial candidates must have the backing of at least one local legislator to be considered.
Though the process has evolved from the dominant party in the General Assembly ramming their preferred candidates through to the bench, there have been few broad reforms to the process, and it remains largely the same system as it was following the Reconstruction era.
A shifting political landscape in 1995 yielded the first administrative changes to the system, which sprung from a 20-20 split in the Senate between Democrats and Republicans. Instead of the majority party picking judges in closed-door caucuses, the divided assembly gave rise to a form of senatorial courtesy, which shifted the authority of nominating judicial candidates to local legislative delegations.
According to Senate rules, each lawmaker that represents part of a judicial circuit must sign a nominating form for a candidate, who would then automatically be placed on that chamber’s judicial appointment bill. If one senator withholds support, as one lawmaker did this session, the nomination is opened up to a floor vote – which would generally hew to the position of the senator whose party is dominant.
Scott White raises concerns about the propriety of the Assembly, which is made up of a lot of attorneys, choosing the judges that they and their fellow attorneys appear before:
One of my biggest concerns over the process we use to appoint and place our judges has in fact been that it is the General Assembly that does it.
A large part of our legislative body is made of of lawyers who have active practices in the districts they represent.
(…)
So what we have are legislators who are appointing judges and writing the laws that those judges are going to hold people’s actions against. And if that isn’t enough, those same lawyers are the ones who are going to be defending clients against the very laws they wrote and in front of the judges they appointed.

Smyth County Conservative, on the other hand, thinks that the current system works better than any of the alternatives:

I strongly favor Virginia’s current system of the General Assembly electing judges. I do not think it would be a good idea to allow judges to be popularly elected as it would inject judges into the public political process. I don’t think judges should be running public campaigns while in office. It wouldn’t be good for a judge to run a campaign by putting up signs with the likes of ”tough on crime” and other slogans as this could be a potential conflict with their duties.
And Kilo agrees:
While the process is not perfect, it is the best way to seat the bench. The process is not much different than the feds use. Many of us have seen first hand in Kentucky what happens when judges are elected by popular vote. That process makes you wonder what candidate is supported by drug dealers, pot growers, contractors, etc. Think about it.
If you want another example of what can go wrong when the judiciary succumbs to the electoral process, you don’t need to look much further than the Supreme Court of Alabama and Former Chief Judge Roy Moore, who (regardless of the merits of his views) acted more like a politician on the bench than a Judge.
There are ways to improve the current system but instituting the types of merit-based reviews that are currently performed for candidates for the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals as well as judicial appointments arising in certain jurisdictions such as Fairfax and Prince William Counties, but that’s as far as I think we should go.
If you think there’s a conflict of interest now, what do you think would happen if Judges were soliciting campaign contributions from the very lawyers who appear before them ?

MOTHERS WHOSE CASES HAVE STALLED, spiraled out of control and bumped up against the built-in corruption of our family justice system, CYJ is for you!

...
ALL MOTHERS with cases that have stalled, spiraled out of control and bumped up against the built-in corruption of our family justice system need to be in Richmond this fall for Confront Your Judge
--even if the judges hurting them are not up for reappointment in 2009...





...That's irrelevant.

The Court violated the Rights of Child

Child Abuse is ALSO committed by Government Social Workers who SNATCH a beautiful baby based on FALSE CHARGES

of "starving" the child, "failure to thrive" Child Abuse,

when the FACTS of Weights and Dates PROVE no Child Abuse.

The Foster Parents were Politically Connected to the County Chairman, and later Court Clerk.

The Court violated the Rights of Child, ...........Mother and Father.

I lost physical custody of my son to a man with mental illness and an arrest record.

MOTHERS REAL STORIES
Comment on our article:
The most dangerous Guardian Ad Litem in Fairfax Arlington County

Deborah S. Olin G.A.L
Dawn Davis (not verified)
at 15:45 on September 29th, 2009

He pulled a knife on me and locked himself in the bathroom. He kept yelling that he wished he was dead and wished he had a gun. When I tried to leave with our son in my arms, he swung open the door and tried to pull our son from my arms into the bathroom with the knife.

I am learning that my story is all too familiar. My divorce case was heard in Suffolk, Virginia (3 hours southwest of Fairfax).
I have lived in Northern VA for a little over two years now, since my ex-husband threw me and our 20 month old son at the time out of our home.

He pulled a knife on me and locked himself in the bathroom. He kept yelling that he wished he was dead and wished he had a gun. When I tried to leave with our son in my arms, he swung open the door and tried to pull our son from my arms into the bathroom with the knife.

During the first hearing two years ago, I was awarded full custody and he got supervised visitation. He was also ordered to go to a psychiatrist for an evaluation, which he turned out to be diagnosed with Major Depression and Adjustment Disorder.

A Guardian ad Litem, T. Kirk Pretlow was assigned to the case at the request of my husband's attorney. My attorney objected, requesting the judge appoint his own, but the judge turned the request down.
From that point on and for two years, the GAL was a nightmare for me. He never called me, interviewed me. or even called my son's daycare and doctor for interviews. He kept threatening me to "talk" to my husband or it would result in me losing custody.
I replied to him (through email) that I had no problems talking to my husband, but only about our son. My husband wanted to talk to me everyday, and cried to the GAL whenever I didn't citing that I was not communicating.
To make matters worse, my husband assaulted my mom during a visitation drop off and was convicted in August 2008.
The GAL told me that it was my fault for the assault, even though I wasn't even there. He always blamed me for my husband's outbursts. I reported the GAL to the Virginia Sate Board in November 2008 and wrote a letter to the judge. By rule, they notify the attorney when a complaint is filed.
I was hoping this would get him to remove himself from the case, make the judge remove him or at least make him do his job, but it did not. He said that my son should stay with me, but during the final trial on August 31, 2009, he stood up and said that he "changed his mind." He said that I needed to "mellow out" and I needed to have my son taken away from me to teach me a lesson and make me talk to my husband.
The judge had said earlier in the case that he would wait for the GAL's opinion before making a ruling on custody.
The parenting evaluator also changed his mind. His first report recommended that I keep physical custody, with my son not spending more than a week from me. Well, in February 2009, he was paid double by my husband to conduct a new evaluation and had already conducted a home visit before even calling me to tell me. His name is Dr. Brian K. Wald.
In court, he admitted to being paid $6000 by my husband and $1000 for his appearance. He even lied about when he spoke to me.
I lost physical custody of my son to a man with mental illness and an arrest record. I would ask myself how o why this happened, but I know how, and only the good Lord knows why.
I believe that this is a temporary situation to allow me to reach out to others and share my story. Shedding light on our judicial system is the only way there will truly be justice. There are so many corrupt attorneys and judges out there, that to try a remove them all on your own would take forever. But to bring the stories together and shed the light on the bigger issue;
Children being displaced and losing precious years for no reason. If you want to share your story, you have a pair of ears ready to listen. I plan to write an editorial to publish of the many stories out there that are all too familiar and devastating.

My life is currently in danger because of corrupted judge Bruce D. White

My life is currently in danger because of corrupted judge Bruce D. White! I don’t know whether I’d still exist in the next minute or not.............

We Asked............

Should Judge Bruce D. White of Fairfax County, Virginia Circuit court be removed from the Bench?

Anh Pham:

Comment/ Petition Signed No.: 209/19/09

Yes, immediately!

COMMENTS:

My name is Anh Pham. I am a female student of Lord Fairfax Community College. My life is currently in danger because of this corrupted judge! I don’t know whether I’d still exist in the next minute or not, but I wish to send my vote to you for true Justice to be done. I’m available for further questions at ..............@gmail.com.

Any day that this horrible man is still in his position spells out danger to all citizens!

I was insulted and discriminated by Judge Bruce D. White for no reason

I just experienced another Immoral Judgment of Judge Bruce D. White of Fairfax County, on the Friday Motion Day 9/18/2009.

We Asked...........................
Should Judge Bruce D. White of Fairfax County, Virginia Circuit court be removed from the Bench?

YES: Yes. Immediately.
09/20/09
COMMENTS:

My name is Lily Guan. I was just experienced another Immoral Judgment of Judge Bruce White on the Friday Motion Day 9/18/2009.

I was insulted for no reason, discriminated for just being an Oriental American woman, and “judged before trial” by this horrible Judge.

If any of you wish to obtain more detail on my case, please feel free to contact me at my email address ......@consultant.com

Any day that Judge BRUCE D. WHITE exists in the court room,...that means, JUSTICE does not ...........

Judge Ramona Taylor Censured by the Supreme Court

Ramos is escorted into the courtroom of Chief Judge Ramona D. Taylor in Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court in Virginia Beach.

Supreme Court censures Va. Beach judge
November 5th, 2009 ·

No Comments · Judicial Ethics, Supreme Court of Virginia

Virginia Beach Juvenile & Domestic Relations Judge Ramona Taylor is censured by the Supreme Court of Virginia today for thwarting a juvenile defendant’s right to appeal the judge’s bond ruling.

In 2007, Taylor denied bond for a 15-year-old repeat offender who admitted assaulting a younger boy. Taylor then wrote in her bond order that the order was “non-appealable” and emphasized that language when the clerk inquired about the issue of appeal.

Noting that, under Virginia law, every bond decision is appealable, a five-member majority of the Supreme Court holds that Taylor violated the judicial canons when she acted to prevent an appeal of her order. “A judge may not prevent the appeal of his or her own decisions,” Justice LeRoy Millette wrote for the majority.
The defendant was in detention for 9 days until a circuit court ordered the matter appealed.
By Peter Vieth

Lisa Deel accused of manipulation, obstruction, negligence, willful and repeated breach,

Lisa Ferry Deel Story in:

Mommy Go Bye Bye

Stockbroker and Financial Advisor Lisa Ferry Deel of Ashburn

and Belmont Country and Golf Club, in Virginia's Loudoun County, is accused of manipulation, obstruction, negligence, willful and repeated breach, and “a failure to execute” in a 2008 case before CBOE, or the Chicago Board Options Exchange. Deel is the same woman who 10 years ago began taking away, with intent to abduct, the daughter of the creator of the Mommy Go Bye Bye blog by force and by use of manipulation, obstruction, negligence, willful and repeated breach, and “a failure to execute.”
The French reserve for such people a special noun ...

Garce ...................

Attorney general nominees clash over ethics issue

By Olympia MeolaPublished: September 17, 2009


Democratic attorney general nominee Stephen C. Shannon, a delegate from Fairfax County, cited the employment controversy involving a state lawmaker yesterday while pitching his plan to strengthen government accountability.
He also dinged his opponent for not calling on the lawmaker to resign.
But Republican nominee Ken Cuccinelli, a state senator from Fairfax County, shot back, saying: "This is a pure political stunt on his part."
Del. Phillip A. Hamilton, R-Newport News, is under fire for pursuing a job at a new teaching center at Old Dominion University before he put in a $500,000 budget amendment for the center's creation. Speaker of the House William J. Howell, R-Stafford, has asked the House Ethics Advisory Panel to investigate whether Hamilton violated the state's Conflict of Interest Act.
Shannon reminded reporters yesterday in a conference call that he was the first statewide candidate to call on Hamilton to resign. Cuccinelli has said it should be left up to the voters of Hamilton's district.
"Our next attorney general cannot be ambivalent toward corruption in government. He must be a steadfast defender of the public trust," Shannon said.
But Cuccinelli said one possible outcome of the ethics panel is to refer the case to the attorney general.
"I'm not going to call for [a resignation] because that would suggest a conclusion in an ongoing case that I may end up having a role analogous to a judge in," he said. "[Shannon] doesn't care what the law is and that should bother Virginians a great deal."
Shannon's plan calls for a commission to review and make recommendations on an overhaul of conflict-of-interest laws and increasing the penalty for lawmakers and government employees who violate such laws, in some cases.
He also wants to increase transparency in government by compiling information for the public on the Internet, he said.
Cuccinelli said he has been fighting to make the state's budget more transparent -- including through legislation in 2008 to create a database so people could easily search for state budget items.
"I've been one of the biggest proponents of open government," he said.

Open-government conference to focus on Va. judiciary

Open-government conference to focus on Va. judiciary
Richmond Times Dispatch

By Michael MartzPublished: September 7, 2009

Virginia's judiciary will be the top topic of an annual conference this fall on opening the working of government to public view.
The judicial selection process, controlled by the General Assembly, and a hot-button proposal to make jurors anonymous in criminal cases will be debated by panelists at Access 2009, a conference convened by the Virginia Coalition for Open Government.
The judicial topics will occupy two of the four panels on the second day of the conference, scheduled for Oct. 15 and 16 at the Stonewall Jackson Hotel in Staunton. The other two panel discussions will examine whether President Barack Obama has lived up to his promises of more transparent government and the workings of Virginia's Freedom of Information Act.

"The focus is access," said Megan Rhyne, executive director of the organization, whose members include the news media, librarians and genealogists, as well as advocates for greater openness in government at all levels.

The executive and legislative branches of government are often the source of concerns about lack of public access to their government, but this year the judicial branch is drawing attention because of the way Virginia selects judges and the potential for juror names being kept anonymous in all criminal cases.
A group of citizens, known as the "Pitchfork Rebellion," have called this year for a public examination of judicial selection. Virginia is one of two states in which the legislature elects judges, but direct election isn't the primary issue under debate.
The group has expressed more concern about the lack of openness in the way judicial candidates are evaluated and chosen, and it wants a public forum on whether to change the selection process and how.

At the same time, the Virginia Supreme Court has raised concerns, especially in the news media, with a proposal to seal the names of jurors in all criminal cases. The proposal, made by the Advisory Committee on Rules of the Court, would go much further than a law adopted by the General Assembly last year to allow judges to limit disclosure of information about jurors in cases in which "good cause" has been established.

Another panel will discuss the Obama administration's record on transparency in matters ranging from spending under the stimulus bill to withholding of logs of visitors to the White House on major matters of public policy, such as health-care reform.
The final panel will discuss Virginia's Freedom of Information Act, which is a primary tool that the public uses to get information that government may not want them to have.
The FOIA also is the subject of a series of one-day seminars planned this fall by the Virginia Freedom of Information Advisory Council. Six one-day seminars are planned: next Monday in Richmond; Sept. 28 in Staunton; Sept. 29 in Abingdon; Oct. 6 in Suffolk; Oct. 27 in Manassas; and Nov. 2 in Richmond.