Boshier speaks of "considerable delay in resolving the issues". That is the understatement of the century. If only an early intervention service had listened and read factual evidence that proved the Family Court protection orders placed on me were maliciously obtained by a sinister family then it might have saved the New Zealand taxpayer a couple of million dollars .The false allegations were promoted by the gender bias Family Court who seemed to thrive on the seven year case,which painfully become a meandering gravy train of meaningless and heartbreaking litigation.My four children were destroyed by a callous and cold Family court of deceit and lies.My mother died a heartbroken paternal grand mother because she was denied access to her alienated two grand daughters. What about the widespread destruction caused by the so called lying professionals in my case Judge Boshier?
Justice is coming Boshier!
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/3566134/Family-Court-changes-announced
A shake-up of Family Court processes will speed up child care cases, with those involving abuse or violence to receive urgent attention.
Principal Family Court Judge Peter Boshier, who announced the changes today, said cases involving family break-ups often saw bitter disputes between parents.
"This can cause considerable delay in resolving the issues, which can be harmful to the welfare of the children caught in the middle of these conflicts."
From Monday the more than 27,000 cases filed each year which relate to children will enter the court's new Early Intervention Process.
Where there are issues of safety for children they will be treated urgently with judges taking responsibility to ensure issues are dealt with swiftly.
Parties in non-urgent cases will be sent to counselling. If this fails they will move on to a lawyer-assisted mediation, then a conference before a judge.
Where the parents are still unable to reach an agreement the case will go before a full hearing under a judge, with wait times no longer than a month.
Judge Boshier said the new system would be quicker, cheaper and more effective than the old ways once Ministry of Justice staff and lawyers adjusted to the changes.
"The Early Intervention Process is a landmark for the court and will be one of its most significant reforms since the Family Court was created in 1981.
"Children need stability restored to their lives after the trauma of family break up, and it is vital to their welfare that the conflict surrounding them is reduced as much and as soon as possible."
Family Court changes announced
God Hates Judges by Ann Coulter
This story reflects sadly on how low society has plummeted into the depths of despair..Can't we show respect for our fallen soldiers? Anyway the world is mad and Ann hits the nail on the head when describing idiotic lawyers ;
"Thanks to idiot lawyers, who think it makes them sound smart to say "Black is white" and "Up is down," one of the biggest problems in society today is the refusal to draw lines."
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=36408
God Hates Judges
by Ann Coulter
In an opinion that may have been written by Heidi Montag, a federal court of appeals recently threw out a jury verdict in favor of a father, Albert Snyder, who had sued protesters at his son Matthew's funeral for intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Solely because Matthew was a Marine, a Kansas-based cult, consisting mostly of members of a single family, traveled to Maryland in order to stand outside Matthew's funeral with placards saying things like, "God Loves Dead Soldiers," "God Hates You," "You're Going to Hell," "Semper Fi Fags," "Thank God for Dead Soldiers," "Thank God for IEDs" and "God Hates Fags."
But wait, it gets funnier.
The cult's leader/father is Fred Phelps, who calls America a "sodomite nation of flag-worshipping idolaters." Since you won't read it anyplace else, Phelps has run for public office five times -- as a Democrat.
The Fred Phelps cult members travel around the country and hold vile signs outside military funerals because they believe that the reason American soldiers die in wars is that God hates the U.S.A. because it tolerates homosexuals.
I'll leave it to others to speculate as to why the very thought of male homosexuality gets Fred Phelps into such a lather.
Snyder has appealed his case to the Supreme Court, and now the court will have to decide whether the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) can ever exist in a country with a First Amendment.
Unlike many legal concepts, the tort of IIED is not an obscure legal doctrine written in pig Latin. It means what it says: speech or conduct specifically intended to inflict emotional distress. The usual description of the tort of IIED is that a reasonable man viewing the conduct would react by saying, "That's outrageous!"
The Second Restatement of Torts (196 5) defines IIED as conduct "so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community."
As a respected New York judge, Judith Kaye, described it, "The tort is as limitless as the human capacity for cruelty." Inasmuch as IIED claims are made based on all manner of insults, rudeness, name-calling and petty affronts, the claim is often alleged, but rarely satisfied.
But if a group of lunatics standing outside the funeral of a fallen American serviceman with hateful signs about the deceased does not constitute intentional infliction of emotional distress, then there is no such tort recognizable in America anymore.
The protesters weren't publishing their views in a magazine, announcing them on a "Morning Zoo" radio program, proclaiming them on some fringe outlet like "Countdown With Keit h Olbermann" -– or even standing on a random street corner. Their protest was held outside a funeral for the specific purpose of causing pain to the deceased's loved ones.
But the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals noticed that the cult's malicious signs contained words, and that words are "speech" ... which is protected by the First Amendment! (Or was it the Seventh?) Anyway, that was basically the end of the court's analysis.
True, speech will often be involved in inflicting emotional distress on someone, say, for example, standing outside a funeral with signs that say "God Hates You!"
Similarly, words are used in committing treason ("The Americans are over here!"), robbery ("Your money or your life!") and sexual harassment ("Have sex with me or you're fired."). Copyright law prohibits speech that uses someone else's words, and insider trading and trade-secrets laws prohibit the use of words revealing insider information or trade secrets.
The fact that "speech" was involved in the Fred Phelps cult's assault on Matthew Snyder's funeral is a mundane and irrelevant fact. The question is: Did that speech constitute intentional infliction of emotional distress? Hey, look! That reasonable man over there is nodding his head "yes." If so, the First Amendment is as irrelevant as it is to a copyright law violation.
The Supreme Court has upheld shockingly restrictive bans on speech outside of abortion clinics: content-based restrictions on the speech of pro-lifers singing, "Jesus loves the little children, all the children of the world, red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in His sight, Jesus loves the little children of the world."
Is abortion more sacrosanct than a son's funeral? Is singing "Jesus loves the little children" deserving of less First Amendment protection than p lacards saying, "God Loves Dead Soldiers"? Hey, reasonable man over there -- got a minute?
Even the Fred Phelps cult's "epic" posted online and accusing the Snyders of raising their son badly, which would seem to have the strongest claim to First Amendment protection, would not be protected in other contexts. Last week in Massachusetts, nine teenagers were criminally charged with cyberbullying, based in part on malicious postings about the victim on their Facebook pages.
Thanks to idiot lawyers, who think it makes them sound smart to say "Black is white" and "Up is down," one of the biggest problems in society today is the refusal to draw lines. Here's a nice bright line: Holding malevolent signs outside the funeral of an American serviceman who died defending his country constitutes intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Crooked lawyers' force review of legal aid
Yes I agree, my forced nightmare started in July 2001 and many corrupt bottom feeder lawyers made heaps from the falsely obtained protection orders. They helped police stack lie upon lie which unfortunately saw the heartbreaking litigation meander on until 2008.
Many thanks to the dirty corrupt legal aid scum lawyer that were court directed to participate in my miscarriage of justice.
Thanks for nothing you
Thanks for destroying my family you low life Ashburton filth lawyers Paul Finnigan and Geoff Kean.
Thanks for acting against my best interests and helping to kill my mother Adrienne Edwards, Siobhan McNulty and the sly two faced pomy bastard Tony Grieg.
Justice is coming you dogs.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3105051/Crooked-lawyers-force-review-of-legal-aid
'Crooked lawyers' force review of legal aid
By COLIN ESPINER - The Press
He has vowed "urgent structural change" to shore up public confidence in the system.
Power has asked justice officials to compile an urgent report on how quickly the Legal Services Agency can be disestablished and folded into the Ministry of Justice. Cabinet will consider the report on Monday.
The agency, set up in 1991, doled out $124 million to legal-aid lawyers last year for 95,000 applications.
In a damning report on its performance, Dame Margaret Bazley says that potentially tens of millions of dollars have been pocketed fraudulently by lawyers "gaming the system". At least 200 lawyers – possibly more – were involved in the practice, which Bazley described yesterday as "unscrupulous and corrupt".
In one of the hardest-hitting reports in Bazley's long career, the public service troubleshooter slated both the agency and the Law Society, saying they had a "dysfunctional" relationship and appeared either unable or unwilling to stop abuses in the system.
"Car-boot lawyers" were deliberately dragging out court cases, seeking unnecessary adjournments or changing pleas halfway through trials to maximise their fees. Some had no offices and operated out of interview rooms at court, she said.
"I have very serious concerns about what I found and I was appalled by the behaviour of some lawyers and their clients," Bazley said.
"Some lawyers appear to be acting corruptly and should be disbarred."
Every major and provincial court in the country was affected, although it was "much worse" in Manukau, where as much as 80 per cent of legal-aid lawyers were "gaming" the system, she said. "
She has advised against attempting prosecutions, however, saying it would be easier and more effective to change the system.
Accused people, 63 per cent of whom were repeat clients of the agency, were also gaming the system, including the practice of "musical lawyers", which involved dismissing counsel near the end of lengthy or complicated trials to delay going to jail.
Bazley is recommending a mix of public and privately-provided legal aid, with a public defender model using a pool of experienced lawyers set up in Auckland, Wellington, and Christchurch.
In other centres, legal aid lawyers should be grouped under a senior lawyer responsible for quality. She recommended that legal aid work should be bulk-funded.
Repeat clients or those who dismissed their counsel should lose the right to appoint their own lawyer, Bazley said, while high-cost cases such as murder trials should be overseen by a senior public servant
Power said he was "shocked" by Bazley's report.
"I'm deeply concerned about what Dame Margaret has found. What she has identified goes to the very centre of the integrity of our legal system. Things must change, and fast," Power said. "The Government will consider the report and move very quickly on it. I intend to raise initial issues at Cabinet on Monday as a matter of urgency."
Power said while the Government could make structural changes, it was up to the Law Society to weed dodgy lawyers out of the system.
Law Society president John Marshall QC said he welcomed Bazley's report, which reflected much of the society's own position.
Judge criticises slackness
dad4justice thought you would be interested in the following item from nzherald.co.nz:
Who will protect innocent from bad protection orders?
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20100404/OPINION10/100402057
No one could argue that women do need protection from dangerous men who would do them harm. But who is going to protect those men who are unjustly accused?Too many times we hear stories of women claiming to be afraid, and if they’re convincing enough they will be identified as victims and “protected.” In cases where there is no real evidence of abuse, more scrutiny should be given to these claims. Professional counselors can get to the bottom of these things quickly, and much more accurately, than the court system.
They can easily identify parental alienation syndrome, where one parent manipulates the children against the other one.
Everyone seems to agree that there are evil people in every aspect of society. Well, guess what? They know how to use the family court system, too. And those protection orders are used by judges to help decide on custody issues, so this is not without consequence for the accused.
Let’s just make sure we’re doing the right thing on both sides of this issue, so that kids are not denied access to good dads because their moms have decided to move on with their lives.
Bill Robeson, Newark
Parental Alienation Awareness Day
Sadly the nasty Family Court of New Zealand will not accept the existence of parental alienation.They actually help promote alienation by meandering litigation working on the theory that the longer the painful case drags on the more blood money they can extort from all the misery. The Family Court of New Zealand is a cesspit of lies and disgusting so called professionals who are nothing more than pious villains.Take my daughters lawyer Adrienne Edwards who told despicable lies to various judges for seven years or the vile two faced psychologist John Watson, who disobeyed a direct order from a police owned judge John to keep my mother out of proceedings. Parental alienation is a valuable tool for these creeps who fester the Family Court. The damage to my family is beyond repair but the " civil court "does not care. I cannot clear my name.I cannot get justice for my mum.. If only the general public knew the heartbreak the Family Court can cause when they listen to false allegations. Parental alienation is hurtful stuff.
What shall I do to extract Natural Justice, an eye for a eye eh Judge.
RIP Mum.
Parental Alienation Awareness Day - www.record-bee.com