False Allegations ~ False Accusations ~ Recovered Memories
b

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW NEW  NEW

06/12/2012
EMERGENCY, EXPEDITED
PETITION FOR LEGAL OPINIONS ON
GUIDELINES FOR JUDICIAL PRACTICE: ABUSE PREVENTION PROCEEDINGS
PURSUANT TO M.G.L. c. 211, § 3
drano197-petition-guidelines-sjc-61212.htm
 

05/08/2012   RE#2: Petitioner's motion to recuse is allowed
and the single justice's 4/19/12 action on paper #1 is hereby vacated.
(Meade, J.) *Notice/Attest/Cornetta, J..
 

05/11/2012   RE#2 (Revised Action):
To the extent legitimate issues have been raised on appeal,
they are more appropriate for review by a panel of the court.
As to review of the trial judge's orders denying petitioner's motion for costs
the proper avenue of review is G. L. c. 261, §27D (which the trial judge specifically noted in his ruling).
Accordingly, all relief requested in the petition is denied (Trainor, J.). Notice/attest/Cornetta, J.

NOTE: Given that the petition IS about G. L. c. 261, §27D,
Judge Trainor's decision makes  no sense.
Now I have to figure out how to get the issue before a panel of the appeals court.
 

Petition For Rehearing,  Rule 27, A.C. No. 2012-J-0150
 drano195-petition-hearing-mrap-rule-27.htm

Petition for Further Appellant Review Pursuant to an exception to Mass.R.A.P. Rule 27.1 or
Petition to Invoke the Superintendency Powers of the Full Panel of the Supreme Judicial Court
 drano196-petition-far-or-superintendency-mrap-rule-27-1.htm

NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW NEW  NEW
Combined Motion
(1) to recuse Judge William Meade from the case on the grounds
of conflict of interest, personal prejudice, and failure to follow G.L. c. 261, §27D,
upon which he relied for closing the case, and
(2) to vacate closure of case and restore to the open list.
drano194-motion-to-recuse-meade-and-vacate-closure-42012.htm
NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW
Am interlocutory appeal on the grounds a judge so messed up
that his court is a "court NOT of record,"
meaning the court lacked jurisdiction and his judgment must be vacated.
SCROLL down to see the law across this nation.
drano193-interlocutory appeal-no-jurisdiction-void-ab-initio.htm
 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I was interviewed on James "Jake" Shannon's radio show (KTKK, Utah, am 630 K-Talk)
on Wednesday, 4/11 at 3:15 PM (EST) or 1:15 (MST) about my books.
Go to the audio tape of the interview.
jake-shannon-interview-41112-ktkk-utah-630-k-talk-61112.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My memoir is ONLINE: Why I Didn't Sleep with Mitt Romney & Other Tales

Go to the book page  http://www.amazon.com/dp/B006VZIMIK
Take a peek in the book http://www.amazon.com/dp/B006VZIMIK#reader_B006VZIMIK

Read a description at http://pronlinenews.com/?p=16265
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Behind the Black Robes: Failed Justice
is now on Amazon.com as both a paperback and a Kindle e-book.

Take it with you on vacation.  Buy it for a friend suffering in the courts.

You don't need to buy the Kindle machine.  Amazon will download it to your desktop or laptop computer.

Its also available in a TEXT-TO-SPEECH version.  The direct link to the book and Kindle is
http://www.amazon.com/Behind-Black-Robes-Failed-Justice/dp/1439241155\

See the TABLE OF CONTENTS of my book and learn how to search inside it before buying it:
Click behind-black-robes-table-contents.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Coming soon:  Cry Rape! Did Bill Abernathy rape his wife and his young daughter?
Find out in the true-life story of the investigation and his divorce and criminal trials.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Donate to the cause of court reform and the abolition or abolishment of judicial immunity, click
https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=SV6T3H4X7BHEG
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 
  
wr
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Read articles about four Native Americans, two brothers and two of their cousins,
who, I believe, were wrongfully convicted sixteen years ago of rape and sexual assault of a few nieces.
See my articles,
Writing a novel with an art-work selection at http://pronlinenews.com/?p=1214,
Wounded Knee Massacre Resurrected at http://pronlinenews.com/?p=1473,
Macro and Micro Structure of Novel, Chapter and Scene at http://pronlinenews.com/?p=1939,
Writing a novel; Narrator: he, she or me, past/present tense at http://pronlinenews.com/?p=2361,
Novel writing: faction versus fiction versus half-n-half at http://pronlinenews.com/?p=2581,
Write first and last lines of each chapter at http://pronlinenews.com/?p=3619.
I am also currently writing two more books: HOW TO books,
which I hope will help you who are representing yourselves in court.
To cover publishing and related costs, I am seeking donations via
PAYPAL from $1 to whatever amount you can afford.

Sign the petition for four innocent men.
In the same position, any of you would want publicity and help.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-feather-hubbeling-rouse/
Please post everywhere you can post.  Thanks.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"HOAX: The Continuing Distortions about Intimate Partner Abuse"
Christina Hoff Sommers on "Return of the Super Bowl Hoax"
(EXCELLENT 19-minute VIDEO: a fantastic speaker as well as fantastic author.
"Misinformation leads to bad policy, meanspiritedness to men. . . .
victims of domestic violence are best served by truth")
http://www.vimeo.com/23250019
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW  NEW



 
 
 

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT
FOR SUFFOLK COUNTY 
AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
 CIVIL ACTION:  ______________
In re GUIDELINES FOR JUDICIAL PRACTICE: 
ABUSE PREVENTION PROCEEDINGS
 


EMERGENCY, EXPEDITED
PETITION FOR LEGAL OPINIONS ON 
GUIDELINES FOR JUDICIAL PRACTICE: ABUSE PREVENTION PROCEEDINGS
PURSUANT TO M.G.L. c. 211, § 3 
(accompanied by Affidavit of Barbara C. Johnson 
and Affidavit of Indigency)

INTRODUCTION 

 This case arises out of the need to define the scope of the “Guidelines for Judicial Practice: Abuse Prevention Proceedings” (Rev. Sept. 2011, eff. Dec. 1, 2011), issued by the Administrative Office of the Trial Court.  It contains five counts for declaratory judgments (1) to determine whether a paid official advocate of a civil rights group may act as an advocate under Guideline 2:08, (2) to determine whether advocates standing with, assisting, and supporting a party throughout the proceedings, pursuant to Guidelines 5:02 and 3:09, may cross-examine the plaintiff and other adversarial witnesses, (3) to determine whether a disbarred attorney may act as an advocate as described in Guideline 2:08, (4) to determine whether a disbarred attorney may be paid for providing the services of an advocate as described in Guideline 2:08, (5) to determine whether a disbarred attorney may be deemed as not committing the unauthorized practice of law when acting as an advocate pursuant to Guidelines 2:08. 3:09, and 5:02.                             .

PARTIES

1. Your Petitioner, Barbara C. Johnson ["Johnson"], is a citizen of the United States and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts; was, prior to being wrongfully evicted at the age of 74 (three years ago), a resident at 6 Appletree Lane, Andover, Essex County, MA 01810-4102; is currently residing in Atenas, Costa Rica, 4013-20501; will be 78 years old in mid-October 2012; is a publisher and author of the domain www.falseallegations.com and the self-published books Behind the Black Robes: Failed Justice, and Why I Didn’t Sleep with Mitt Romney & Other Tales.  A third tome, Cry Rape!, a true-life legal drama, is nearing completion of the final revision and preparation for publication.

2. Johnson was sworn into the Massachusetts Bar in December 1987 and was disbarred in August 2006, primarily on the grounds of violating Rule 8.4(d) of the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct, SJC Rule 3:07: “(d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.”   The basis: Johnson had run for Governor in 2002 on a platform to abolish judicial immunity.  The moral: Lawyers do not have First Amendment rights.  Other charges were alleged but not proved. 

3. There was no trial of the disciplinary action, at least nothing that could be construed or be recognized as a trial.  There were no witnesses against Johnson, and all her trial witness subpoenas were quashed.  The public audience was ordered out of the hearing room—whereupon Johnson left with them.  Her reason for doing so was twofold: (1) The Special Hearing Officer told the stenographer to go off the record when Johnson spoke and back on the record when he spoke.  That egregious command appears in the certified copy of the hearing transcript supplied Johnson after the alleged “trial.”  (2) The majority of Johnson’s trial documents had been previously precluded from the “trial.”  There were other unlawful flaws in that “trial,” but they are collateral to, if not irrelevant for, this petition.

FACTS

 4. Since 1999, Johnson has been associated with The Fatherhood Coalition, an advocacy group seeking to protect their civil rights in Massachusetts.

5. Over the years, Johnson has contributed to the Fatherhood blog.

6. Around 2000, The Fatherhood Coalition gave Johnson an award and has posted that award on its website ever since.  Next to the name her domain, it reads “Falsely accused fathers’ best friend in the legal system.”

7. Until her disbarment in 2006, Johnson had clients from the coalition.  Some she represented pro bono or for a de minimus fee.  Johnson likens her fees to an informal sliding scale, according to the members’ ability to pay.  Generally, the members declared what they could afford to pay.  Some members performed plumbing, heating repair, painting, and installing roof shingles in exchange for services. 

8. In 2009, Johnson was evicted from her residence without a trial, contrary to  common and constitutional law.  See Kargman v. Dustin, 5 Mass.App.Ct. 101, 359 N.E.2d 971 (1977) and the Seventh Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. 

9. In 2011, the Massachusetts Appeals Court remanded her real-estate case for trial, but the judiciary in the Lawrence Division of Essex Superior Court has thwarted that order, resulting in a year-long fight in Lawrence and a second and third law suit.  See Johnson v. Johnson, et al, 2010-P-0471 (remanded for trial), Appeals Court Single Justice 2012-J-0150 (“issues . . . appropriate for review by a panel of the court,” Trainor, J.; Petition for Rehearing pending), and Supreme Judicial Court SJC-11089 (ready). 

10. Since taking political refuge in Costa Rica in July 2009, Johnson has continually received communications from members of The Fatherhood Coalition either by email or by phone.

11. In February 2012, the membership posted the document entitled “Guidelines for Judicial Practice: Abuse Prevention Proceedings” (Rev. Sept. 2011) on their blog.

12. Recently, members of The Fatherhood Coalition have discussed having Johnson return to the Commonwealth to be an official advocate, in accordance with that document, for the membership.

13. Impoverished and made homeless by the Massachusetts judiciary, Johnson has no money to live in the Commonwealth.

14. Members are contemplating paying for her return airfare and contributing to a used RV in which Johnson can both live and work as their official advocate.

15. Johnson presents this petition for emergency action before consenting to the members’ generous and gracious offers.

16. In the alternative, this Court may restore Johnson’s Bar license.
 


COUNT 1: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
(to determine whether a paid official advocate of a 
civil rights group may act as an advocate under Guideline 2:08)

17. Johnson repeats and realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 16 above with the same force and effect as if herein set forth.

18. There are actual controversies, which are set out below.

19. The first controversy is whether a paid official advocate of a civil rights group may act as an advocate under Guideline 2:08. See Exhibit A.

20. The second controversy is where “employees of the district attorney or of some other state, community or legal service agency” are paid by the DA’s office or are paid by an agency for the time serving as a 2:08 advocate, it would be discriminatory to not allow any other advocate to be paid for their services as a 2:08 advocate.

21. If these controversies are not resolved, there will be further litigation.


COUNT 2: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
(to determine whether advocates standing with, assisting, and supporting 
a party throughout the proceedings, pursuant to Guidelines 5:02 and 3:09, 
may cross-examine the plaintiff and other adversarial witnesses)

22. Johnson repeats and realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 21 above with the same force and effect as if herein set forth.

23. There are actual controversies, which are set out below.

24. The first controversy is whether advocates standing with, assisting, and supporting a party throughout the proceedings, pursuant to Guidelines 5:02 and 3:09, may cross-examine the plaintiff and other adversarial witnesses.  See Exhibit B.

25. The second controversy is whether the word “assist” means the advocate may only talk to the party being “assisted” or whether “assist” includes helping the party form proper examination questions or also includes “assisting” a party by performing the cross-examination on behalf of the party.  Having someone who knows how to form questions and how to cross-examine would be more efficient and expeditious and less time-consuming than such questioning by a party untrained in this skill.

26. A third controversy is whether a 2:08 advocate can object to questions asked of the party should he or she take the witness stand.

27. If these controversies are not resolved, there will be further litigation.
 


COUNT 3: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
to determine whether a disbarred attorney may act 
as an advocate as described in Guideline 2:08

28. Johnson repeats and realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 27 above with the same force and effect as if herein set forth.

29. There are actual controversies, which are set out below.

30. The first controversy is whether a disbarred attorney may act as an advocate as described in Guideline 2:08.

31.  A second controversy is whether the failure to allow Johnson to serve as a 2:08 advocate also would deprive the members of the coalition an attorney of their choice.

32. If these controversies are not resolved, there will be further litigation.


COUNT 4: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
(to determine whether a disbarred attorney may be paid for 
providing the services of an advocate as described in Guideline 2:08)

33. Johnson repeats and realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 32 above with the same force and effect as if herein set forth.

34. There are actual controversies, which are set out below.

35. The first controversy is whether a disbarred attorney may be paid for providing the services of an advocate as described in Guideline 2:08.

36. The second controversy is to determine whether the intent of disbarment is to deprive a person trained to practice law of any employment in which he or she can use his or her knowledge to earn a living or whether the intent of disbarment is to impoverish a formerly licensed lawyer.

37. A third controversy is whether not allowing a disbarred attorney to offer services on a sliding scale to pro se 209A defendants also deprives them of advocates trained to represent them in serious law cases, cases in which the parties can lose their families, livelihoods, property, as well as licenses and freedom of travel—all protected by the amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

38. A fourth controversy is whether not allowing a disbarred attorney to offer services on a sliding scale to pro se 209A defendants also deprives them of advocates of their choice.

39. If these controversies are not resolved, there will be further litigation.
 


COUNT 5: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
(to determine whether a disbarred attorney may be deemed as
not committing the unauthorized practice of law when acting as an
advocate pursuant to Guidelines 2:08. 3:09, and 5:02)

40. Johnson repeats and realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 39 above with the same force and effect as if herein set forth.

41. There are actual controversies, which are set out below.

42. The first controversy is whether a disbarred attorney may be deemed as not
committing the unauthorized practice of law when acting as an advocate pursuant to Guidelines 2:08. 3:09, and 5:02. See Comments.\1/

43. A second controversy is whether being a 2:08 advocate violates the statute defining the unauthorized practice of law. 

44. A third controversy is whether statute defining the unauthorized practice of law is void for vagueness.

45. If these controversies are not resolved, there will be further litigation.

 WHEREFORE, Petitioner Barbara Johnson prays that this Honorable court find:

(1)  that a paid official advocate of a civil rights group may act as an advocate under Guideline 2:08, 

(2)  that advocates standing with, assisting, and supporting a party throughout the proceedings, pursuant to Guidelines 5:02 and 3:09, may cross-examine the plaintiff and other adversarial witnesses, 

(3)  that a disbarred attorney may act as an advocate as described in Guideline 2:08, 

(4)  that a disbarred attorney may be paid for providing the services of an advocate as described in Guideline 2:08, and

(5)  that a disbarred attorney may be deemed as not committing the unauthorized practice of law when acting as an advocate pursuant to Guidelines 2:08. 3:09, and 5:02, or

(6) in the alternative, that Johnson’s Bar license be restored.

Respectfully submitted,
Barbara C. Johnson
 /s/ Barbara Johnson
12 June 2012  Barbara C. Johnson, Pro Se
Apdo #404-4013
Alajuela, Atenas, Atenas
20501-Costa Rica
barbjohnson74@gmail.com
SKYPE ID: barbjohnson74
SKYPEIN: 978-961-0079 (Newburyport, MA)
Costa Rican Landline: 506-2446-6724

 
 

EXHIBIT A

2:08 Role of Advocates in Assisting Parties. The court should support the participation of advocates at each stage of the c. 209A process, regardless of whether such persons are volunteers from a local advocacy group, law students, employees of the district attorney or of some other state, community or legal service agency, or friends or family members of either party. Where possible, such support should include providing an area of the courthouse where advocates can operate, allowing sufficient time in the complaint filing process for an advocate to speak to the party, individually or, if there are multiple parties, in a group setting, assisting the party in filing the complaint, and permitting the advocate to accompany the party, when so requested, to the courtroom. 

COMMENTARY

When parties in a c. 209A action come to court, the experience can be overwhelming. Advocates can be helpful in directing a person seeking relief under c. 209A through the myriad of court procedures. In so doing, advocates should consult with the personnel in each court identified by the Clerk or Chief Probation Officer to promote efficiency and effectiveness in the processing of these matters. A victim of abuse may experience feelings of shock, fear, depression, shame and helplessness. Trained advocates can remind the plaintiff to provide the court with all the information necessary for the judge to make an informed decision, explain to a plaintiff the various questions which the judge may ask, and encourage the plaintiff to consider and to decide upon what relief to request.

An advocate may also be aware of potential problems which can be solved before the hearing (e.g., identifying the address, or other identifying information, of a defendant who does not live with the plaintiff), or can identify other problems of which the judge should be aware (e.g., the presence of weapons in the home which have been used in an abuse incident). An advocate may facilitate the service of the orders by acting as a liaison with the police department.
Moreover, an advocate may be in a position to assist a plaintiff in developing a plan of action which will help to keep the plaintiff safe after the order is issued and in making referrals for other appropriate kinds of assistance, such as support groups, shelters, etc.

Other individuals, such as family members or friends, may also provide support for the parties, and such individuals should be encouraged to accompany parties at each stage of the proceedings. The assistance of any advocate in any particular situation should not be permitted to interfere with the party’s wishes or with the court’s ability to conduct an orderly proceeding
 
 

EXHIBIT B




3:09 Role of Advocates at Ex Parte Hearings. Judges should permit advocates to stand with the parties whom they are assisting throughout the proceedings and to aid and support a party during the hearing to the extent that the party wishes it and the court deems it helpful.

COMMENTARY

Trained advocates and friends or relatives of the party can play an important role in sup-porting the party through what may be a difficult process and in reminding the party to provide the court with all relevant information. See Guideline 1:04, Court’s Relationship With Local Advocacy Groups; Guideline 2:08, Role of Advocates in Assisting Parties; and Guideline 5:02, Role of Advocates at Hearings After Notice.

The role of the non-lawyer advocates in the courtroom should be limited to aiding the parties in their presentation to the court. Such aid may involve reminding the party of relevant factual infor-mation or pertinent circumstances that a party may have forgotten to state or, for whatever reason, did not bring to the court’s attention. An advocate with personal knowledge pertaining to the allegations raised by the party may testify to such facts upon being sworn as a witness.
 

5:02 Role of Advocates at a Hearing After Notice. At a hearing after notice, an advocate should be permitted to accompany a party in the courtroom, stand with the party throughout the proceedings, and assist and support the party to the extent that the party wishes it and the court deems it helpful. The court should allow an advocate to speak with the party in order to help the party to provide the court with relevant additional information.

COMMENTARY

The role of an advocate at a hearing after notice is essentially the same as at an ex parte hearing, whether or not the other party is represented by counsel. 
 


 

Petition for Further Appellant Review Pursuant to an exception to Mass.R.A.P. Rule 27.1 or
Petition to Invoke the Superintendency Powers of the Full Panel of the Supreme Judicial Court

Barbara C. Johnson
Apdo #404-4013
Alajuela, Atenas, Atenas
20501-Costa Rica
barbjohnson74@gmail.com
SKYPEIN No.: 1-978-961-0079 (Newburyport, MA)

29 April  2012

Office of the Clerk 
Supreme Judicial Court for the Commonwealth 
John Adams Court House 
Pemberton Square
Boston, MA 02108 

Re: Petition for Further Appellant Review Pursuant to an exception to Mass.R.A.P.
       Rule 27.1 or Petition to Invoke the Superintendency Powers of the Full Panel 
      of  the Supreme Judicial Court 
      Barbara C. Johnson, Plaintiff/Appellant v. Marc I. Johnson, individually and \     as Trustee, H. Yvonne van Bodengraven a/k/a Yvonne Johnson, 
      Dendants/Appellees
      Appeal Court No. 2012-J-0150; Superior Ct. at Lawrence, No. 2006-00332-C

To the Honorable Justices:

Barbara C. Johnson  [“Mother”] requests leave to obtain further appellate review because the issues presented will affect the public interest or the interest of justice if left unaddressed by the Court. 

The interest of justice which will be affected is the right of all present and future parties to rely on the cornerstone right of fundamental fairness and their rights to due process and equal protection under both the State and Federal constitutions and stare decisis.  This is a substantial reason bound to affect the public interest or the interests of justice.

Mother contends that many issues and facts were overlooked or misapprehended by a single justice of the Appeals Court.  Mother recognizes that an appeal from a decision of a single justice appears to be an exception to Rule 27.1. 

Unless an exception is made, there is no route to get to this High Court other than an appeal from the superior court case.  But that is IMPOSSIBLE because the lower-court judge claimed in writing that there is no record of a hearing referred to in his decision granting summary judgment, which Mother wants to appeal.  Without a record of one or both of the hearings of 12 August and 20 October 2011, the record canNOT be assembled completely and properly for the appeal for which Mother has filed notice. 

Motion (P#157) No action is taken on the request inasmuch as the telephonic hearing was not recorded but only witnessed by Clerl's [sic] office staff - all parties participated in the same with the Court. 3/7/2012 (Robert A. Cornetta, Justice). Notices mailed 3/7/2012
In accordance with Mass. R.A.P. 27, my Petition for Rehearing states with particularity the points of law or fact which the court might have overlooked or misapprehended. 

Judge William Meade should have recused himself from the case on the grounds of conflict of interest, personal prejudice, and failure to follow G.L. c. 261, §27D, upon which he relied for closing the case, and (2) to vacate closure of case and restore to the open list.

As grounds, Mother states that when she practiced law in Massachusetts, William Meade was opposing counsel representing the Commonwealth on at least one case. Mother recalls extensive communication with “Bill Meade.” 

Further, in 2002, Mother ran against Mitt Romney in the gubernatorial race.  In January of this year, Mother published a book entitled Why I Didn’t Sleep with Mitt Romney & Other Tales.  Meade’s connection to Romney is undisputed and published on the Appeals Court website at http://www.mass.gov/courts/-
appealscourt/justices/meade.html.  In it, his profile reads: 

From 2003 to 2005 he served as Deputy Chief Legal Counsel to Governor Mitt Romney, and from 2005 to 2006 he served as Legal Counsel to the Commonwealth's eleven District Attorneys. . . . He was appointed by Governor Romney as an Associate Justice of the Appeals Court on December 22, 2006.
Mother campaigned on a platform of court reform and the abolition of judicial immunity, inciting the ire of the judiciary. Two or three weeks following the election, Mother received a call from the Office of Bar Counsel informing Mother a petition for discipline against her would issue, and it did, ten days after New Years 2003.  On 8 or  9 August 2006, Mother was disbarred after a sham trial at which there were no prosecution witnesses and from which all Mother’s trial witnesses were precluded by quashing her trial subpoenas.  Meade was subsequently, within months, appointed to the Appeals Court.

Because this case arises out of political retaliation and discrimination, the appointment of Judge Meade who has always represented the Commonwealth demonstrates that his decision (1) is not fundamentally fair and (2) denies Mother of a neutral trier or fact and law.

On 19 April 2012, Meade wrote:

RE#1: Without deciding the question of the petitioner's indigency, after review, all relief requested is denied. To the extent petitioner seeks review of an order of the trial court denying her request for waiver of costs associated with the preparation of transcripts, she is directed to G. L. c. 261, s 27D. (Meade, J.) *Notice/Attest/Cornetta
General Law c. 261, §27D, does not apply to this case for several reasons.  Underlying each of the several reasons is the failure of both the superior court and the appeals court to apply the law as written.  It is well-settled that every word in a statute has meaning.  Neither court followed the law.

The relevant part of c. 261, §27D reads:
 Section 27D. In any case where the court denies a request for waiver, substitution or payment by the commonwealth of fees and costs, pursuant to section twenty-seven C or any other provision of law, the applicant may take an appeal as hereafter provided. . . . Upon being notified of the denial the applicant shall also be advised of his right of appeal, and he shall have seven days thereafter to file a notice of appeal with the clerk or register.
Section 27D explicitly states that it applies when “the court denies a request for waiver, substitution or payment by the commonwealth of fees and costs.”  In this case, the court did not deny Mother’s request.  Instead, Judge Cornetta wrote twice, on both 7 and 19 March 2012:
Motion (P#157) No action is taken on the request inasmuch as the telephonic hearing was not recorded but only witnessed by Clerl's [sic] office staff - all parties participated in the same with the Court. 3/7/2012 (Robert A. Cornetta, Justice). Notices mailed 3/7/2012
Judge Cornetta, instead,
(1) took no action on the request and 
(2) therefore did not notify Mother of a denial and
(3) did not advise Mother of her right to appeal
Those three actions prove that c. 261, §27D, absolutely does not apply.

Therefore Judge Meade, in his personal anxiousness and bias against Mother, in concert with the long-standing political discrimination and prejudice of the judiciary, made an impetuous decision to close unlawfully Mother’s legitimate and appropriate interlocutory appeal.

Years ago, Mother was warned about putting negative facts in a motion, because a judge would deny the motion so that it would not appear he or she was agreeing with all the facts in the motion.  Mother is taking a risk in this pleading, for she has no choice. The decade-old judicial anger and Meade’s motivation are inextricably intertwined.  As Judge McHugh would say, there is a “confluence of circumstances” that influenced Judge Meade to “play along to get along.”

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that this Court vacate the judgment of Judge Robert Cornetta, appoint a competent, neutral judge, and restore her case to the Superior Court list for trial.  If this court fail to take that action, then Mother’s interlocutory appeal in Appeals Court must be opened and restored to that list.

29 April  2012         Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Barbara C. Johnson
Barbara C. Johnson, Pro Se
Apdo #404-4013
Alajuela, Atenas, Atenas
20501-Costa Rica
barbjohnson74@gmail.com
SKYPE ID: barbjohnson74
SKYPEIN No.: 1-978-961-0079
Local Costa Rican phone: 506-2446-6724


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on 29 April 2012 I served by email a true and accurate copy of the above pleading on opposing counsel of record, Kenneth J. Rossetti, Esq., Barton & Rossetti, P.C. 2 Haven Street, Suite 204. Reading, MA 01867. 

29 April  2012         /s/ Barbara C. Johnson
                                Barbara C. Johnson
 

Petition for Rehearing,  Rule 27, A.C. No. 2012-J-0150

Barbara C. Johnson
Apdo #404-4013
Alajuela, Atenas, Atenas
20501-Costa Rica
barbjohnson74@gmail.com
SKYPEIN No.: 1-978-961-0079 (Newburyport, MA)

28 April 2012

Massachusetts Appeals Court
John Adams Courthouse, Suite 1200
One Pemberton Square
Boston, MA 02108

Re:  Petition For Rehearing,  Rule 27, A.C. No. 2012-J-0150, 
       Barbara C. Johnson, Plaintiff/Appellant v. Marc I. Johnson, individually and 
       as Trustee, H. Yvonne van Bodengraven a/k/a Yvonne Johnson, 
       Defendants/Appellees 

Dear Justices,

In accordance with Mass. R.A.P. 27, my Petition for Rehearing states with particularity the points of law or fact which the court might have overlooked or misapprehended. 

Judge William Meade should have recused himself from the case on the grounds of conflict of interest, personal prejudice, and failure to follow G.L. c. 261, §27D, upon which he relied for closing the case, and (2) to vacate closure of case and restore to the open list.

As grounds, Barbara C. Johnson [Mother] states that when she practiced law in Massachusetts, William Meade was opposing counsel representing the Commonwealth on at least one case. Mother recalls extensive communication with “Bill Meade.” 

Further, in 2002, Mother ran against Mitt Romney in the gubernatorial race.  In January of this year, Mother published a book entitled Why I Didn’t Sleep with Mitt Romney & Other Tales.  Meade’s connection to Romney is undisputed and published on the Appeals Court website at http://www.mass.gov/courts/-
appealscourt/justices/meade.html.  In it, his profile reads: 

From 2003 to 2005 he served as Deputy Chief Legal Counsel to Governor Mitt Romney, and from 2005 to 2006 he served as Legal Counsel to the Commonwealth's eleven District Attorneys. . . . He was appointed by Governor Romney as an Associate Justice of the Appeals Court on December 22, 2006.

Because this case arises out of political retaliation and discrimination, the appointment of Judge Meade who has always represented the Commonwealth demonstrates that the decision by  the judge (1) is not fundamentally fair and (2) denies Mother of a neutral trier or fact and law. On 19 April 2012, Meade wrote:

RE#1: Without deciding the question of the petitioner's indigency, after review, all relief requested is denied. To the extent petitioner seeks review of an order of the trial court denying her request for waiver of costs associated with the preparation of transcripts, she is directed to G. L. c. 261, s 27D. (Meade, J.) *Notice/Attest/Cornetta
General Law c. 261, §27D, does not apply to this case for several reasons.  Underlying each of the several reasons is the failure of both the superior court and the appeals court to apply the law as written.  It is well-settled that every word in a statute has meaning.  Neither court followed the law.

The relevant part of c. 261, §27D reads:

Section 27D. In any case where the court denies a request for waiver, substitution or payment by the commonwealth of fees and costs, pursuant to section twenty-seven C or any other provision of law, the applicant may take an appeal as hereafter provided. . . . Upon being notified of the denial the applicant shall also be advised of his right of appeal, and he shall have seven days thereafter to file a notice of appeal with the clerk or register.
Section 27D explicitly states that it applies when “the court denies a request for waiver, substitution or payment by the commonwealth of fees and costs.”  In this case, the court did not deny Mother’s request.  Instead, Judge Cornetta wrote twice, on both 7 and 19 March 2012:
Motion (P#157) No action is taken on the request inasmuch as the telephonic hearing was not recorded but only witnessed by Clerl's [sic] office staff - all parties participated in the same with the Court. 3/7/2012 (Robert A. Cornetta, Justice). Notices mailed 3/7/2012
Judge Cornetta, instead,
(1) took no action on the request and 
(2) therefore did not notify Mother of a denial and 
(3) did not advise Mother of her right to appeal
Those three actions prove that c. 261, §27D, absolutely does not apply.

Therefore Judge Meade, in his personal anxiousness and long-standing prejudice against Mother, made an impetuous decision to close unlawfully Mother’s legitimate and appropriate interlocutory appeal.

WHEREFORE, Judge Meade’s decision must be vacated and the case be restored to the list of open cases.  There is no reason Mother’s case must not be heard on its merits.

28 April  2012         Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Barbara C. Johnson
Barbara C. Johnson, Pro Se
Apdo #404-4013
Alajuela, Atenas, Atenas
20501-Costa Rica
barbjohnson74@gmail.com
SKYPE ID: barbjohnson74
SKYPEIN No.: 1-978-961-0079
Local Costa Rican phone: 506-2446-6724
Affidavit of Barbara C. Johnson

I, Barbara C. Johnson, depose as follows:

1.  I am the appellant, movant, and affiant in the above-captioned case, 
     and the plaintiff in the case entered into the docket as No.
     2006-00332-C in the Essex County Superior Court at Lawrence.

2. All that I have written in the within pleading is true and accurate.

 Signed under the pains and penalties of perjury.

28 April  2012         Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Barbara C. Johnson
Barbara C. Johnson, Pro Se
Apdo #404-4013
Alajuela, Atenas, Atenas
20501-Costa Rica
barbjohnson74@gmail.com
SKYPE ID: barbjohnson74
SKYPEIN No.: 1-978-961-0079
Local Costa Rican phone: 506-2446-6724
      CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on 29 April 2012 I served by email a true and accurate copy of the above pleading on opposing counsel of record, Kenneth J. Rossetti, Esq., Barton & Rossetti, P.C. 2 Haven Street, Suite 204. Reading, MA 01867. 

28 April  2012         /s/ Barbara C. Johnson
                                Barbara C. Johnson


 
 
 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PETITION FOR INTERLOCUTORY REVIEW
With a Record Appendix and
a Memorandum
of Law in Support of the Petition
drano193-interlocutory appeal-no-jurisdiction-void-ab-initio.htm



 

1
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
APPEALS COURT

Essex, ss.                                                                                A.C. No. 20l2-J-

__________________________
Barbara C. Johnson,

Plaintiff/Petitioner
v.

Marc I. Johnson, individually
and as Trustee, H. Yvonne van
Bodengraven a/k/a Yvonne 
Johnson,

Defendants/Respondents
__________________________
 
Remanded by Appeals
Court: No. 2010-P-0471

Superior Ct. at Lawrence,
No. 06-332-C

Consolidated and formerly
Superior Ct. at Lawrence,
No. 2006-01263-C

Lawrence District Ct.,
No. 0618-SU-0067

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF
PETITION FOR INTERLOCUTORY REVIEW

Plaintiff/Petitioner Barbara C. Johnson [“Mother”] submits this memorandum in support of her Petition for Interlocutory Review of an order that makes assembly of the record impossible.  Mother filed a timely notice of appeal after receiving decision of summary judgment in favor of Defendants/Respondents.

Mother also filed (1) an affidavit of indigency (several times, several forms) and (2) two motions (original and one to reconsider) seeking the Commonwealth to pay for the tapes and transcripts of two hearings referenced in Judge Cornetta’s Findings, Rulings and Order for Entry of Judgment, dated 27 October 2011.

The two hearings were on 12 August 2011 and 20 October 2011. The August 12th hearing was a teleconference. The October 20th was not. Cornetta denied Mother leave to make a telephonic appearance on October 20th. In effect, the October 20th hearing was an ex
parte hearing. His decision after that hearing was memorialized on 27 October 2011. In it, he included so-called facts that were never in evidence, were solely from Cornetta’s own errorful and unsupported miscalculations, and in doing so, usurped a jury’s rights. Given that Cornetta’s unwillingness to produce a tape that might or might not exist, his bogus dollar figures and dates might have arisen from the defendants or their defense counsel during the ex
parte summary-judgment hearing. In toto, since August 12th, Cornetta’s conduct has been sufficient proof of the dangers of a judge being appointed to a case to achieve a predetermined result, usurping the job of a jury, and causing the court to become a court not of
record.

Cornetta denied Mother’s motion for tapes and transcripts of both hearings on the grounds that there was no record of the “telephonic hearing,” which was the August 12th hearing. If that was true, why did he not allow Mother’s motion and produce the tape of the ex parte summary judgment hearing?

On 19 March 2012, twelve days after the decision and order of 7 March 2012 issued on Mother’s motion, Judge Cornetta entered “Findings and Ruling,” allegedly in support the March 7th order. But his findings are fallacious––as described infra.

Despite Cornetta’s efforts in mid-March to disguise speciously his admission that his order denying Mother’s motion is meritless, it remains that there appears to be no record of either of those hearings. That deficiency caused his court to lose jurisdiction as of August 12th over Johnson v. Johnson et al. Given the lack of jurisdiction over that case, the summary-judgment decision and order of October 27th is void ab initio.

Further, Cornetta might not be appropriately called a “judge.” He evidently was appointed by CJAM Mulligan and thereby bypassed approval of the Governor’s Council (which is the public’s only opportunity to participate in a judicial appointment). Although a statute appears to give the CJAM the right to appoint a judge from one department into another, that statute is vague, and itself may be deemed unconstitutional. It is vague in that it neither provides for the transferred judge to be sworn in under oath nor be evaluated by the Council for suitability in experience, education, training, and knowledge to sit as a superior court judge. Mother’s petition pursuant to M.G.L. c. 249, § 4, details documentary facts proving that Cornetta is either not intellectually capable of serving in that capacity or, alternatively, a coconspirator with the unnamed co-conspirators identified in Mother’s petition docketed as SJ-2011-00412 (page 37) and her appellate brief, 2010-P-0471—the conspiracy being to retaliate and politically discriminate by wrongfully using judicial powers against Mother.

ARGUMENTS

1. Where there is no court record of the two hearings relied upon by Judge Cornetta in 
    his granting of Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, the court did not have 
    jurisdiction,  and thus made Cornetta’s order of October 2011 void ab initio.

A court of record is a court, or tribunal, which must meet the following criteria:

1. generally has a seal (in England and some states)
2. has the power to fine or imprison for contempt
3. keeps a record of the proceedings
4. holds a proceeding
5. is independent of the magistrate (judge)
COURTS OF RECORD are those whose acts and judicial
proceedings are enrolled, or recorded, for a perpetual
memory and testimony, and which have power
to fine or imprison for contempt. Error lies to
their judgments, and they generally possess a
seal. COURTS NOT OF RECORD are those of inferior
dignity, which have no power to fine or imprison,
and in which the proceedings are not enrolled or
recorded.
3 Blackst. Comm. 24; 3 Steph. Comm. 383; The Thomas Fletcher, C.C.Ga., 24 F. 481 (1884)(“The importance of the final record in our courts in all cases a few years old, where loose papers are constantly being misplaced, is too well known to be argued.”); Ex parte
Thistleton, 52 Cal. 220 (or 225), 1877 WL 1763 (1877); Erwin v. U.S., 37 F. 470 (or 488), 2 L.R.A. 229 (D.C.Ga., 1889) (“A court not of record is the court of a private man whom the law will not intrust with any discretionary power over the fortune or liberty of his fellow subjects.‘ 3 Bl.Comm. 24.”); Heininger v. Davis, 96 Ohio St. 205, 208-209, 117 N.E. 229, 231 (1917) (“‘A justice's court, in Pennsylvania, is not a court of record; a docket and short minutes of his proceedings are all that is kept by the justice, such as is kept by our justices of their proceedings.’”)

“A court of record is a judicial tribunal having attributes and exercising functions independent of the person of the magistrate designated generally to hold it.” Jones v. Jones, 188 Mo.App. 220, 175 S.W. 227, 229 (1915), citing Ex parte Thistleton, 52 Cal. 220, and Bucher v. Thompson, 7 N.M. 115, 32 Pac. 498 (1893). A court of record is also a proceeding according to the course of common law, its acts and proceedings being enrolled for a perpetual memorial. Ex parte Gladhill, 8 Metc. Mass. 171, per Shaw, C.J. See also Ledwith v. Rosalsky, 244 N.Y. 406, 155 N.E. 688, 689.

Logically, therefore, when Cornetta intentionally failed\1/ to comply with the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure and common law, he was but a private man without discretionary power over the parties in the underlying action. That is, Cornetta’s private court was a court not of record. 

\1/ Cornetta’s failure re Superior Court Rule 9A was called to his attention in Mother’s pleadings. His failure to allow Mother to appear telephonically at the summary judgment hearing was a violation of fundamental fairness and common law. See page 12, infra, for discussion of “the denial of fundamental fairness [is] shocking to the universal sense of justice.” Betts v. Brady, 1942, 316 U.S. 455, 462, 62 S.Ct. 1252, 1256, 86 L.Ed. 1595. His intentional scheduling of the first day of trial on the same day as the summary judgment hearing both precluded giving Mother an opportunity to prepare for trial if the summary judgment was denied, and was malicious if allowed, given that he knew Mother would have to fly a few thousand miles at considerable expense from Costa Rica for a short hearing in Lawrence, Mass. See Vaks v. Ryan, infra, where it defines Mass.R.Civ.P. Rule 6(c).
The “judicial power,” which article 3, §§ 1, 2, of the constitution confines to courts created by congress, extends only to “cases” in courts of record. Robertson v. Baldwin, 165 U.S. 275, 279, 17 S.Ct. 326, 329 (1897).

A party to a proceeding in a court not of record has in most cases a right to demand a new trial, to wit, a trial de novo, in a court of record. This is not an appeal, as such, but a new proceeding which completely supersedes the result of the prior trial.

“Where there is no jurisdiction over the subject matter, there is, as well, no discretion to ignore that lack of jurisdiction.” Joyce v. U.S., 474 F.2D 215, 219 (3rd Cir. 1973), citing F.R.Civ.P. 12(h)(3). Joyce was cited by Magistrate Judge Robert C. Collings in Lowry v. U.S., 958 F.Supp. 704, 714 (D.Mass. Feb. 12, 1997) (NO. CIV.A. 91-11233-MLW) for other reasons. “A departure [by a court] from those recognized and established requirements of law, however close apparent adherence to mere form in method of procedure, which has the effect [of] depriv[ing] one of a constitutional right, is an excess of jurisdiction.” Wuest
v. Wuest, 127 P.2d 934, 937, 53 Cal.App.2d 339, 346 (1942).

Even if a court has or appears to have subject matter jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction can be lost. A few of the many major reasons which apply to this case and why subject matter jurisdiction is lost follow:

• a judge does not follow statutory procedure, Armstrong v Obucino, 300 
   Ill. 140, 143, 133 N.E. 58 (1921),\2/
\2/ “Discovery and pretrial motions, including motions
pursuant to Mass. R. Civ. P. 12, 15, 19, 20 and 56, and such other motions as may be prescribed by the court, shall be filed, marked and caused to be heard by such date unless the court permits otherwise for good cause shown.”). See also Rule 9A(c)(3) of the Rules of the Superior Court (“Presumptive Right to a Hearing. Requests for hearings on the following motions will ordinarily be allowed: ... Summary Judgment (Rule 56)....”). Vaks v. Ryan, +supra and infra.
• unlawful activity of a judge or undisclosed conflict of interest. Code 
  of Judicial Conduct,

• violation of due process, Johnson v Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 58 S.Ct.
  1019 (1938)(denial of habeas corpus reversed and remanded; the court
  has power to inquire with regard to the jurisdiction of the inferior court,
  either with respect to the subject matter or to the person, even if such 
  inquiry involves an examination of facts outside of but not inconsistent
  with the record); Pure Oil Co. v City of Northlake, 10 Ill.2d 241, 245, 
  140 N.E.2d 289 (1956) (ordinance was invalid as a denial of due 
  process); In re Estate of Wells, 983 P.2d 279, (Kan. App. 1999) 310 
  N.W. 2d 502, (Minn. 1981); Lange v. Johnson, 204 N.W.2d 205 (Minn.
  1973)(where a court lacked personal or subject matter jurisdiction or
  acted in a manner inconsistent with due process,the judgment is void),

• where public policy is violated, Martin-Tregona v Roderick, 29 
  Ill.App.3d 553, 331 N.E.2d 100 (1st Dist. 1975); Vaks v. Ryan, 2012 
  Mass.App.Div. 17, 2012 WL 194398 (Jan. 18, 2012, NO. 
  11-ADMS-10007)  (party was entitled to opportunity to be heard 
  before new judge reconsidering earlier cross-motions for summary 
  judgment),

• fraud upon the court, In re Village of Willowbrook, 37 Ill.App.3d 393
  (1962).

Cornetta has arguably committed almost all of the above transgressions. For instance, at minimum, due process requires notice and an opportunity to be heard. Ouellet v. Cummins, infra. In this case, Mother was given notice but was intentionally precluded, given the circumstances, from having an opportunity to be heard. The right to be heard guaranteed by due process entails an opportunity to address the critical and determinative allegations which are at the core of a party's claim or defense and to present evidence on the contested facts. U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 14. Ouellet v. Cummins, 1998 Mass.App.Div. 256, 1998 WL
832618 *3 (1998), citing Highland Tap v. Commissioner of Consumer Affairs, 33 Mass.App.Ct. 559, 571, 602 N.E.2d 1095 (1992), and overturning Judge Cornetta’s
decision in Ouellet, No. 9713-RM-1477 (Lynn Div., Cornetta, J.), for denying a party due process and violating the Fourteenth Amendment.

Where the court lacked personal or subject matter jurisdiction or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process of law, and the entry of the summary judgment order violated due process, the judgment is void. U.S.C.A. Const. Amends. 5, 14. Triad Energy Corp. v. McNell, 110 F.R.D. 382 (S.D.N.Y. 1986). F.R.Civ.P. Rule 60(b)(4); Klugh v. U.S., 620 F.Supp. 892 (D.S.C. 1985); Eckel v. MacNeal, 628 N.E.2d 741 (Ill. App. Dist. 1993); Matter of Marriage of Hampshire, 869 P.2d 58 (Kan. 1997); Jaffe and Asher v. Van Brunt, S.D.N.Y.1994, 158 F.R.D. 278.

The void judgment has no legal force or effect whatever; it is an absolute nullity. Given that Mother’s rights were affected, she may attack its invalidity directly or collaterally whenever and wherever it is interposed. In re Estate of Steinfield, 630 N.E.2d 801, certiorari denied. See also Steinfeld v. Hoddick, 513 U.S. 809 (Ill. 1994). City of Lufkin v. McVicker, 510 S.W. 2d 141 (Tex.Civ.App., Beaumont, 1973). In re Marriage of Parks, 630 N.E.2d 509
(Ill.App. 5 Dist. 1994). 

Other courts offer a fuller definition of a void judgment:

A void judgment which includes a judgment entered by a court which lacks jurisdiction over the parties or the subject matter, or lacks inherent power to enter the particular judgment, or an order procured by fraud, may be attacked at any time, in any court, either directly or collaterally, provided that the party is properly before the court. 
Long v. Shorebank Development Corp., 182 F.3d 548 (C.A. 7 Ill. 1999). People v. Wade, 506 N.W.2d 954 (Ill. 1987). People v. Sales, 551 N.E.2d 1359 (Ill.App. 2 Dist. 1990). People v. Rolland, 581 N.E.2d 907, (Ill.App. 4 Dist. 1991).

The void judgment is devoid of any potency because of jurisdictional defects. Ward v. Terriere, 386 P.2d 352 (Colo. 1963).

A "final" but void order can have no preclusive effect. "‘A void judgment [or order] is, in legal effect, no judgment. By it no rights are divested. From it no rights can be obtained. Being worthless in itself, all proceedings founded upon it are equally worthless. It neither binds nor bars any one.' [Citation.]"  Bennett v. Wilson, 122 Cal. 509, 513-514, 55 P. 390
(1898).

A void judgment is one which, from its inception, was a complete nullity and without legal effect. Lubben v. Selective Service System Local Bd. No. 27, 453 F.2d 645, 14 A.L.R. Fed. 298 (1st Cir. (Mass.) 1972).

A void judgment may also be vacated at any time. Matter of Marriage of Welliver, 869 P.2d 653 (Kan. 1994). Hobbs v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 485 F.Supp. 456 (M.D. Fla. 1980). Holstein v. City of Chicago, 803 F.Supp. 205, reconsideration denied 149
F.R.D. 147, affirmed 29 F.3d 1145 (N.D. Ill 1992). Rubin v. Johns, 109 F.R.D. 174 (D. Virgin Islands 1985). Stidham V. Whelchel, 698 N.E.2d 1152 (Ind. 1998).
 

A void judgment is one which, from its inception, is and forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal efficacy, ineffectual to bind the parties or to support a right, of no legal force and effect whatever, and incapable of enforcement in any manner or to any degree.
Loyd v. Director, Dept. of Public Safety, 480 So.2d 577 (Ala. Civ. App. 1985).

A judgment shown by evidence\3/ to be invalid for want of jurisdiction is a void judgment or at all events has all attributes of a void judgment, City of Los Angeles v. Morgan, 234 P.2d 319 (Cal.App. 2 Dist. 1951).

 \3/ Evidence real or fabricated.
A void judgment has no effect whatsoever and is incapable of confirmation or ratification. Lucas v. Estate of Stavos, 609 N.E.2d 1114, rehearing denied, and transfer denied (Ind. App. 1 Dist. 1993). 

A void judgment is a judgment, decree, or order entered by a court which lacks jurisdiction of
the parties or of the subject matter, or which lacks the inherent power to make or enter the
particular order involved. State ex rel. Turner v. Briggs, 971 P.2d 581 (Wash.
App. Div. 1999). Cockerham v. Zikratch, 619 P.2d 739 (Ariz. 1980).

While voidable orders are readily appealable and must be attacked directly, a void order may be circumvented by collateral attack or remedied by mandamus. Sanchez v. Hester, 911 S.W.2d 173, (Tex.App., Corpus Christi, 1995).

When the sense of fairplay is shocking, due process is violated.Kinsella v. United States, 361 U.S. 234, 246, 80 S.Ct. 297, 303-304 (1960). 
 

[The] identification of the specific dictates of due process generally requires consideration of three distinct factors: First, the private interest
that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and
the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, the Government's interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail. See, e. g., Goldberg v.
Kelly, supra, 397 U.S., at 263-271, 90 S.Ct., at 1018-1022.
Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335, 96 S.Ct. 893, 903 (Va. 1976).

In the instant case, (1) Mother’s private interest has been affected by the lower court’s action, (2) Mother has been erroneously deprived of her financial interests, (3) the Commonwealth’s interest in retaliating and politically discriminating against Mother is against public policy. Because of the Ouellet case, in which Cornetta’s decision was overturned, he had to have learned the proper procedure. Therefore it can be circumstantially proven that Cornetta was acting with forethought of retaliation and discrimination, which were, in Mother’s opinion and as voiced in both her appeal, 2010-P-0471, and petition, SJ-2011-00412, the acts of Judges Lu and Billings, making Cornetta’s acts continuances of the judicial conspiracy “proved” – albeit not addressed – in the original appeal.

2.  Where the grant of summary judgment was void ab initio, the case must be 
     remanded for trial by jury.

Relief from void judgment is available when the trial court lacked either personal or subject matter jurisdiction. Dusenberry v. Dusenberry, 625 N.E. 2d 458 (Ind.App. 1 Dist. 1993).
When a rule providing for relief from void judgments is applicable, relief is not discretionary matter, but is mandatory. Orner v. Shalala, 30 F.3d 1307, (Colo. 1994).

A party to a proceeding in a court not of record has in most cases a right to demand a new trial, to wit, a "trial de novo," in a court of record. This is not an appeal, as such, but a new proceeding which completely supersedes the result of the prior trial.  See Box v. Talley, 1 Va.App. 289, 338 S.E.2d 349, Va.App., January 07, 1986 (NO. 0282-85) citing Walker
v. Department of Public Welfare, 223 Va. 557, 563, 290 S.E.2d 887, 890 (1982)(citations omitted) (“an appeal. . . from a court not of record . . . annuls the judgment of the inferior tribunal as completely as if there had been no previous trial ... and that such a trial de novo in the circuit court grants to a litigant every advantage which would have been his had the case been tried originally in such court”).
 

Respectfully submitted,
Barbara C. Johnson
Barbara C. Johnson
/s/ barbjohnson74@gmail.com
Barbara C. Johnson, Pro Se
Apdo #404-4013
Alajuela, Atenas, Atenas
20501-Costa Rica
barbjohnson74@gmail.com
4 April 2012 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this day I emailed a true and accurate copy of the above pleading and attachments and served by “first-class” mail on opposing  counsel of record, Kenneth J. Rossetti, Esq., Barton & Rossetti, P.C. 2 Haven Street, Suite 204. Reading, MA 01867.
 

Barbara C. Johnson
___________________________
4 April 2012           Barbara C. Johnson
**

Petition with 8 Counts for Declaratory Judgment
Trying to Get Rid of Judicial Immunity
Judge Cordy denied the petition for cert, but the appeal is now before the full panel of the SJC.
The assistant attorney-general's brief and my reply brief are on file.
Am awaiting court action.
STATUS: PENDING

The entire petition has been moved to
drano191-PETITION FOR CERT-PURSUANT TO M.G.L.c 249 § 4 .htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sign the petition for four innocent men.  In the same position,
any of you would want publicity and help.
Native Americans jailed 17 years for a crime they didn't commit:  http://pronlinenews.com/?p=6461
and
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/free-feather-hubbeling-rouse/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Governor's Council
Hear activists tell the Council HOW IT REALLY IS!!
 http://www.fatherhoodcoalition.org/video/cpf-video-gc.htm

Fathers' Corner
The most intelligent, handsome, wonderful activists explain
what is happening in the family courts
http://www.fatherhoodcoalition.org/video/cpfVideoFC.htm

RSS feed
http://www.fatherhoodcoalition.org/feeds/fatherhoodcoalition.xml

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

WEBINAR
I have outlined a course LAW FOR THE NONLAWYER. This course is planned to be a separate series of WEBINARS.   Each WEBINAR will be the length of time to answer everyone's questions. Will allow only 25 attendees at each WEBINAR.  Entrance fee" $25 payable in advance through PayPal.  Please email me -- barbjohnson74@gmail.com -- if interested in attending such WEBINARS.  Thank you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

TRAGEDY
Last statement from a self-immolation victim

On Thursday morning, June 16, 2011. the Sentinel received a "last statement" via mail from a man who insinuated that he planned to set himself on fire in front of the Cheshire County Court House, and an explanation of why he intended to do so. Through further reporting, The Sentinel is confident this is from the victim of Wednesday afternoon's fire, although police have not yet received confirmation of his identity. His statement is printed in full, except for two redacted items: The names of the man's mother and his three children.  Click http://falseallegations.com/tom-ball-last-statement-62511.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

UPDATE

I won the right to a jury trial.  My appellate brief on the case, mentioned below,  is at

http://www.falseallegations.com/drano191-appellate-brief-johnson-v-johnson.htm

The appellate brief is primarily about the bizarre conduct of
Associate Justices John T. Lu and Thomas P. Billings in Essex County Superior Court in MA.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

USING ADMISSIONS AT TRIAL

To use objected-to admissions at time of trial, a judge has had to determine the sufficiency of the party’s objections to the requested admissions.  In this case, the judge denied the sufficiency motions before they were even filed.  So . . . does Mother ignore, as the motion judge did, the stare decisis that demands that a sufficiency motion be determined prior to trial, and proceed at trial to characterize and offer the requested admissions as admissions of the opponents?

To resolve this issue now will allow expeditious and efficient use of the trial court’s resources when the case is in front of the trial court on remand.  The admissions go directly to Mother’s burden at trial, as stated on page 2 of this court’s Memorandum and Order, to wit, “Johnson must prove at trial that she in fact conferred a measurable benefit on her son, a person in his position would have reasonably expected to compensate her for such, and that she conferred that benefit with the reasonable expectation she would be repaid.”  Thus there was an abuse of discretion in the discovery-related orders, contrary to the conclusion in footnote 5 of this court’s Memorandum and Order of May 9, 2011.

In Caron v. General Motors Corp., infra, the court held that the facts set out in plaintiff's request for admissions should not have been deemed admitted, for the plaintiff failed to pursue a motion to determine the sufficiency of defendants' objections.   In Johnson v. Johnson, et al, Mother's motions to determine the sufficiency of the opponents’ objection should not have been denied before they were filed.  The motion judge predetermined—and put in his written decision —that he would deny them if Mother filed them.

That two-pronged ruling was unconstitutional.  37 Mass.App.Ct. 744, 746-747, 643 N.E.2d 471, 472 (1994).   Mother Johnson is entitled to the equal protection of all the statutes and rules, etc.

To require parties to rely on and adhere to the rules and then to deny Mother Johnson the opportunity to rely on the rules is unconstitutional selective discrimination (a class-of-one theory).  Given that this panel rejected Mother’s claim of political discrimination, what else could have been even a rational basis for Judge Billings’ predetermined denial of Mother’s motions?

Familiar with the Caron case, Mother noted that two later cases—albeit unpublished—also relied on Caron when determining whether objected-to admissions were admissible at trial:  Silverstein, infra, and Kourouvacilis, infra.   In a nutshell, a motion to determine the sufficiency of the objections is mandatory if one wants to use the objected-to admissions at trial.

. . . Alternatively, he argues that because “the defendants have never responded substantively” to either set of requests for admissions, all of the facts set out in these requests should be deemed admitted. (Pl. brief at 13). However, in answering the requests for admissions, the defendants had a right to object pursuant to Mass.R.Civ.P. 36(a), 365 Mass. 795 (1974). Had the plaintiff not been satisfied with the defendants' objections, he could have moved to determine their sufficiency. He did not. See Caron v. General Motors Corp., 37 Mass. 744, 748 (1994). Therefore, the requests could not be deemed admitted.

Silverstein v. Microsystems Software, Inc., 65 Mass.App.Ct. 1105, 837 N.E.2d 728, 2005 WL 3149555 *2 (2005) (unpublished).  In Silverstein, the defendants' motion to stay discovery was allowed pending appeal of the underlying case, so the plaintiff never moved to lift the stay or compel further answers.  The instant case and Silverstein contrast sharply.  In the instant case, a lower-court judge denied Mother Johnson’s motions to determine sufficiency before she had even filed them.

In Kourouvacilis v. Travelers Ins. Co., infra, Kourouvacilis challenged the exclusion of four of the insurance agency's responses to the requests for admissions, but the challenge failed because Kourouvacilis's trial attorney cited no case law, and was “deemed waived on that basis.”  57 Mass.App.Ct. 1105, 781 N.E.2d 881, 2003 WL 145511 *3 (2003) (“ten different sets of requests for admissions . . .  was a ‘clear abuse of the discovery process.’”) (unpublished).

In any event (internal cite omitted), if Kourouvacilis's attorney considered those responses improper, he could have timely moved to determine the sufficiency of the answers and objections.  See Mass.R.Civ.P. 36(a), 365 Mass. 795 (1974); Caron v. General Motors Corp., 37 Mass.App.Ct. 744, 748, 643 N.E.2d 471 (1994). He did not. There was no error.

Kourouvacilis, 2003 WL 145511 *3.  Again, in contrast to Kourouvacilis, Mother Johnson filed two motions to determine the sufficiency of the opponents’ objections, one set addressing her son’s objections and one set addressing his wife’s objections.  Each sufficiency motion was denied in writing by Judge Billings prior to it being filed [App. Brief: 6-7, 13, 21-23].  Mother did not fail to file her sufficiency motions, she was dared or threatened with denial were she to file them.   Lest there not be a record of her motions, she did file them.

As stated earlier, given that this panel rejected Mother’s claim of political discrimination, and there is neither a logical nor a rational basis for Judge Billings’ predetermined, written denial of Mother’s sufficiency motions, Judge Billings, at the very least, abused his alleged discretion—assuming arguendo that he even had discretion for his unusual action.

“One of the functions of an appellate court, of course, is to correct abuses of judicial discretion.”  Caron, 37 Mass.App.Ct. at 755, 643 N.E.2d at 477 (1994) (Brown, J., concurring).  So, (a) if Judge Billings’ action was discretionary, he abused his discretion and it should be corrected, and (b) if his consideration of a sufficiency motion is a mandatory action, then he violated Mother Johnson’s constitutional right to equal protection.  If the judicial action was mandatory, the mandatory action, too, should be corrected by this panel.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Oregon House passes bill outlawing purposely false child abuse claims

SALEM -- Over the opposition of some groups that deal with child abuse, the Oregon House on Tuesday voted 37-23 to make it illegal to accuse someone of child abuse who you know didn't do it.

Supporters of House Bill 2183 said they particularly wanted to discourage people embroiled in bitter divorce cases from accusing their estranged spouse of child abuse to keep them from gaining custody of the children.

House Judiciary Co-chairman Wayne Krieger, R-Gold Beach, said trumped up claims of child abuse leave a stain on someone's reputation that can be hard to erase.

The measure also had the backing of Sen. Jeff Kruse, R-Roseburg, who had earlier testified that he was once the victim of such a charge.

However, several groups dealing with child abuse testified against the measure, saying it could discourage people from reporting what they suspect might be abuse. The bill would create "even greater barriers for our citizens to protect kids," said Tonia Hunt, executive director of the Children's Center, which works with Clackamas County on abuse cases.

Hunt said that law enforcement officials already are often too quick to dismiss abuse charges that arise out of divorce cases and that this bill could further encourage that thinking.

On the House floor, Rep. Sara Gelser, D-Corvallis, called the bill "incredibly dangerous for children" and said that child abuse is already seriously under-reported.

Krieger said that no one should be discouraged from reporting suspected child abuse since the bill would only apply to anyone who knowingly files a false report.

Teachers, doctors, nurses, lawyers and people in several other occupations are required to report suspected cases of child abuse, and Krieger said so-called "mandatory reporters" aren't required to prove that child abuse is occurring -- only that something leads them to believe it might be occurring.

The bill would make it a violation -- punishable by a fine of up to $720 -- to knowingly and falsely accuse someone of child abuse. It's already illegal to purposely file a false report of a crime to a police or fire agency.

Krieger said he hoped making a separate crime for fake child abuse reports would help discourage anyone from trying it. And he said it might make district attorneys more willing to charge violators.

The bill, which was supported by all 30 House Republicans and seven Democrats, now moves to the Senate.

--Jeff Mapes

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sign "N.H. Families Request Audit of NH DHHS/DCYF" petition at
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/nh-families-request-audit-of-nh-dhhsdcyfnh-dcyf/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Revolutionary Series #10. Click.
 
 
There is a gag order on the woman on this case.  I heard of the story, only briefly summarized here, through an indirect source whom the woman does not even know.  I am therefore even unsure that the woman involved knows of significant detail I have been told by the third party.
There is a teenage boy in the custody and guardianship of his paternal grandfather.  The boy has for years been acting out and those acts have raised many red flags.

So I understand, the grandfather has admitted in court and to diverse therapists that he has been a sex abuser of young children, including his own.

The father of the child has been incarcerated ever since and he stabbed his father, to wit, the grandfather.  I do not know the details of the crime charged and do not know whether the cause of the multiple stabbings was the pedophilia of the grandfather.

The mother has attempted to remove the grandfather as guardian and custodian of her son.  The courts have denied the woman any help and have charged her several times with contempt of the gag orders placed on her.

Upon learning the fact pattern of the case, I asked, Why has not the courts considered the best interests of the youngster?  The failure of the respective courts to protect the child is more than just negligence or stupidity. 

Totally by inadvertence, I was told the other day that Mob was involved.   True or not, I do not know.  If, however, the Mob was involved, has there been a payoff?  If so, how much was the payoff?  And was it to one or more of the judges involved in the case? 

Clearly the long-standing gag order is inappropriate.  Only transparency can rectify this sad tale.   Names of the child and the grandfather and the father need not be mentioned, i.e., published, by the mother, nor by anyone else, but certainly, transparency must be mandatory and the case must be resolved according to the laws and rules of justice.   A fear of a professional involved in the case is that the boy might become a sociopath.  If this happens, the respective judges should be charged with aiding and abetting whatever future crime is charged . . . and certainly be drummed off the benches they are sitting behind.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

!!!!!      IMPORTANT   !!!!!

Support a proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution:
"Congress shall make NO law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply EQUALLY to the Senators and/or Representatives; and Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply EQUALLY to ALL of the citizens of the United States of America".
Click on http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=319215019302c  and join the fight for equality not only for all but by all.

Susan Komisar Hausman (http://www.KissesFromDolce.com): I've never understood why it should be different for Congress than for the rest of us.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

See the RADIO AND PRESS ROOM
Click radio-room-links.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

IMPORTANT: Will we get a crack in the door of immunity?

SCOTUS recently heard arguments on Pottawattamie County (Iowa) v. McGhee and Harrington, two teenagers in 1978, when they were convicted of murder with false testimony knowingly used by two prosecutors.  They were freed when their convictions were overturned.  Now suing the prosecutors for damages, the prosecutors are arguing they are protected by absolute immunity. It will be spectacularly important when SCOTUS issues a decision.

TWO TELL-ALL reports about Judges Christine Roach and Maureen Monks from MaryEllen Manning, a member of the Mass. Governor's Council.  Click here
Keep on scrolling down
The alphabetical list of files on this website is below.
See also the Drano Series table.

 
The inmate letters in the Innocence Insisted by . . . series are up to 41.  Please try to contact criminal defense counsel for those inmates.  You will be blessed for your humane efforts.  One phoned recently, a 3-way call with his wife.  Go to his website, put up by his devoted wife, Dusti, http://www.freedomprojects.bravehost.com/, which tells the whole story.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Archive of Barb's Thoughts of the Day . . . click
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
See historical files about Uniform Laws.  Links are in alphabetical ist below under "Uniform"

 
Added to the MMPI file: What's Wrong with This Picture?, Scientific American, May 2001.  Article debunks psychological tests: TAT and Rorshach. Click
 
COMING WHENEVER THERE IS TIME 
A list of the States in which the causes of action for "Alienation of Affection" and "Criminal Conversion" are still viable.   Follow up on the "Heart Balm" case in the alphabetical list below.  See the BIGAMY case uploaded!!!

 
 
WORDS TO REMEMBER
In my opinion, the formal commencement of a criminal proceeding is quintessentially this type of state action. The initiation of a criminal prosecution, regardless of whether it prompts an arrest, immediately produces “a wrenching disruption of everyday life.” Young v. United States ex rel. Vuitton et Fils, 481 U.S. 787, 814 (1987). Every prosecution, like every arrest, “is a public act that may seriously interfere with the defendant's liberty, whether he is free on bail or not, and that may disrupt his employment, drain his financial resources, curtail his associations, subject him to public obloquy, and create anxiety in him, his family and his friends.” United States v. Marion, 404 U.S.307, 320 (1971). In short, an official accusation of serious crime has a direct impact on a range of identified liberty interests. That impact, moreover, is of sufficient magnitude to qualify as a deprivation of liberty meriting constitutional protection.*fn9
Albright v. Oliver, 510 U.S. 266, 295-296, 114 S.Ct. 807, 824-825, 1994.SCT. 40853 at ¶80 <http://www.versuslaw.com> (1994) (Stevens, J., with whom Blackmun, J. joined, dissenting). The dissenting justices continued: 
I can think of few powers that the State possesses which, if arbitrarily imposed, can harm liberty as substantially as the filing of criminal charges. 
Albright, 510 U.S. at 312, 114 S.Ct. at 833,.1994.SCT.40853 at ¶119 (dissent)
. . . the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment constrains the power of state governments to accuse a citizen of an infamous crime.
Albright, 510 U.S. at 316, 114 S.Ct. at 835,1994.SCT.40853 at ¶127 (dissent).
What to do when you are fighting CONTEMPT
or How to Stay out of Jail
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Complaints for Contempt by
Pocahontas Against Smith
and
Smith Against Pocahontas,
Two Orders by Judge Smoot,
and 9 Motions to Amend by Smith
Click

 
Bulletin Board
Alphabetical list of over 240 files is below
the recent important pleadings.

Take a look also at the Drano Series Table.

 
Section 1983 and Malicious Prosecution
Scroll down to Drano Series Table for descriptions and links
##135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 
145, 146, and 147 now in both .html and .pdf files

 
Drano Series#129
Barb's Letter to the Editors, Lawyers Weekly, published on 8/16/04
Drano Series#128
See Judicial Immunity and the Supreme Court below
 
John Smith's Second Complaint
Civil Right Complaint
Section 1983 and Malicious Prosecution
Drano Series #111 Click

With special instructions how to write a Complaint


 
Daily Injustices
The Daily Injustices of Justices Catherine Sabaitis, Lisa A. Roberts, Edward Donnelly, and Dorothy Gibson. Revolutionary Series #9. Click.
Censorship by the BBO and Retaliation by the Appeals Court
Revolutionary Series #10. Click.
Where Did Justice Go??
Miscellaneous Cases
Drano Series #96 Click.
Judge Allen J. Jarasitis: Judas to Justice
A sitting justice is a traitor to justice in trying to help
the Bar Counsel and his Assistant Bar Counsel get Johnson

May they be hoisted on their own petard! 
May the judge be impeached and the Bar Counsel, Daniel Crane, 
and his assistant, Susan Strauss Weisberg,
be disbarred for unethical and perhaps criminal behavior.

We do not need such despicable people in our judicial system.

Drano Series #92
drano92-immunity-elderly-medical-assistance.htm#decision

DECISION IN ON JUDICIAL AND QUASIJUDICIAL IMMUNITY

An Elder Fights the Denial of Medicaid
by Division of Medical Assistance 
and
the Hearing Officer Needs the Immunity Defense 
Provided by the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act

 
Press Control-End to go to Google search tool
at bottom of page
You can search this website
or the entire web!

 
Drano Series #1 through #190 

SCROLL below
ALPHABETICAL LISTING OF SUBJECTS BELOW
SCROLL below 


 

Allegations: True or Not?

True or not, allegations of sexual abuse and/or rape of child ignite a chain reaction of events in administrative agencies, a police detective bureau, a district attorney's office, lawyers' offices, one or more criminal courts, possibly one or more civil courts, appeals courts, and, of course, likely a hospital, jail, and/or prison.

If you have had the misfortune to have been vacuumed into this maelstrom, what you need is a local lawyer pronto.  If, for whatever reason, you have not hired an attorney, what you need until you do is a guide through the system, lots of information, quickly, sample motions and supporting legal briefs, and some clues to strategy.  You don't need to read a story.  You're living it.

And you should read my goals.

My goal is to make this Website informative for all falsely accused of sexual abuse or assault or rape of a child. What I have uploaded is only the nucleus of what I hope to see here: a treasure trove of information related to false allegations.  If you don't see the answers to your questions here, watch for my upcoming Webimar, at which I shall teach and provide answers to your questions.   I shall soon also be offering consulting services.

Information such as practices and policies and successes and defeats of the authorities in each state would be welcome.  Names of so-called experts used by the state or defendants and the cases in which they testified would be welcome.  Names of community centers or other locations where supervised visitation may be held would also be welcome: knowing those resources could possibly make the ordeal a bit easier for those readers going through it at this time.  And suggestions for new Webpages are welcome!

In the meantime, the following is what this site can offer you now.  If you need further help in finding what you're looking for, you can use the search tool at the end of this page. It will help you search within this entire site, which contains multi megabytes of information!


 

ABA 10 Myths of Domestic Violence.  See the RADAR flyer about the falsity of the 10 myths: CLICK
Abel Screening
Abuse, Determining Whether Children and Adolescents Have Been Abused: Forensic Evaluation of Children and Adolescents Who May Have Been Physically or Sexually Abused
Abuse, Determining Whether Infants and Toddlers Have Been Abused: How to Conduct a Psychiatric Assessment of Infants andToddlers  (0-36 Months
Abuse, Problems in Determining Whether Abuse Occurred
Administrative Agency: form for written report by mandatory
      reporter; form for investigative report by agency
Alienation of Affection
A Man's Right to Choose:  Down with Paternity Fraud
A falsacc list member writes candidly about what must be done
          to prevent paternity fraud.
America's Secret Holocaust
Amicus Brief by Committee of Concerned Social Scientists, State 
of NewJersey v. Margaret Kelly Michaels
Anatomical Dolls
Another Reader's Story
Answers to Admissions
Answers to Interrogatories

Appeal  of  the contempt : 11 minutes 
http://www.suffolk.edu/sjc/archive/2007/SJC_09866.html
Appeal  of  the disbarment: 14 minutes: http://www.suffolk.edu/sjc/archive/2007/SJC_09820.html 

Appeal, Notice of
A Reader's Story
Articles from Eagle-Tribune about Barb!!!!!!!!!!!!
Attorney's Fees, Rule 1.5 of the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct
AttorneysFind out about your State's judiciary!!!!
Attorneys: ReferralsLooking for an attorney?  Looking for a "pro bono" attorney?
Uploaded the contact information for the 50 State bars.  Click
AVERSION THERAPY    On The planning Board 
Award: Barb's Woman of the Year AwardFathers Day, 16 June 2002
Banners:  Help Barb Advertise This Site by Putting One of Her Banners on Your Site

False Allegations at falseallegations.com


Barb: Articles from Eagle-Tribune about Barb
Barb's Letter to the Editor of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly
Barb's Thoughts of the Day . . . Archive click
Battered Men and Family Violence, authored by Tom Williamson, President of National 
        Coalition of Free Men. Click to Purchase
Battered Men:  http://www.noexcuse4abuse.org 
   877-643-1120 access code 0757
Bibliography for Amicus Brief by Committee of Concerned
Social Scientists, State of New Jersey v. Margaret Kelly Michaels
BigamyFall River jury awards $550,000 in emotionally charged bigamy case. From a legal perspective, it was a straightforward case of deceit and misrepresentation.       From all other perspectives, however, Weerasinghe Turner v. Viveiros was anything but straightforward.  Reprint from Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly for educational purposes.
Books: Bestsellers
Books for Defending Yourself
Books, Paperback/Hardcover Fiction/Nonfiction
Books to Relax with During Time of Stress
"Boys will be boys; women should let them," by Kathleen Parker
Cameo-o   Film scripts -- a little sex and sizzle used for education
Caretaking Plans
Certificate o
f Service(for convenience only)
Child: Consistent statements by child
Child: Do Children Lie?
Child: Establishing trustUpdated June 18th, 2008
Child: Repeated Interviews: Memory Distortion and Learned Behavior
Child-Batterer Profile (Eli Newberger's Testimony Inadmissible)
       Child Protection at the Crossroads: Child Abuse, Child Protection, 
      and Recommendations for Reform, by Susan Orr, Ph.D. (external link)
Child Custody: Due Process: Constitutional Rights and the Stigma of Sexual
  Abuse Allegations in Child Custody ProceedingsColleen McMahon, Catholic Lawyer,  Summer-Fall 1999 (NEWLY uploaded  older file)

Child Maltreatment Victims: Who Are They?National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information (NCCAN Clearinghouse) <http://www.calib.com/nccanch/>  (NEWLY uploaded  older file)
Child Protective ServicesIf you are having trouble with Child Protective Services or the Department of Social Services, you must read this case.   A Massachusetts case filled with lots of cases from lots of States!!!! 
Child Savers: A Dirge in Pictorial Poetry
Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome, CSAAS
Children's Suggestibility:The New Wave in Children's Suggestibility Research: A Critique (NEWLY uploaded  older file)
Child Support: Both parents have duty to support
Child Support Enforcement Program -- Dept. of Revenue, Auditor's Report - 1999
Child Support by Nonbiological Father
Child Support: Solution to Child Support Guidelines
Child Support Guidelines: Constitutional Aspects of the Guidelines 
and Their Enforcement as presented by Nathaniel "Nat" Denman, the granddaddy
of Fathers Rights, to ABA Family Law Section
Child Support Guidelines in Georgia Declared Unconstitutional
Child Support Modification for Reservists
Child Support Orders when two states are involved
  Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders, 28 U.S.C. 1738B
Child Support Guidelines for Massachusetts AND Worksheet for PRE-2/15/02
Child Support Guidelines for Massachusetts AND Worksheet for POST-2/15/02
Child-support guidelinesfor Massachusetts effective in January 2009.   Substantial changes. 
     Alternative links are direct to the Massachusetts government website:
http://www.mass.gov/courts/childsupport/guidelines.pdf
http://www.mass.gov/courts/childsupport/worksheet-child-support-guidelines.pdfhttp://www.mass.gov/courts/childsupport/child-support-guidelines-chart.pdf
Child-support worksheet for Massachusetts effective in January 2009.   Substantial changes.  http://www.mass.gov/courts/childsupport/worksheet-child-support-guidelines.pdf
Child-supportchart for Massachusetts effective in January 2009.   Substantial changes.
http://www.mass.gov/courts/childsupport/child-support-guidelines-chart.pdf

Child Support Guidelines -- Compare them from State to State:A very important study by David Weden, III,  financial analyst and expert on the guidelines.  See them  at the fact-filled site of a fathers' rights group in Massachusetts: Click Please note that the revised Child Support Guidelines were effective as of 2/15/02. Click  Note also that David Weden is available as an expert witness.

Circumcision: Pros & Consauthored by Tom Williamson, President of National Coalition of Free Men Click to Purchase
Citation for Motor Vehicle Offense: How statute is stretched to 
reach result desired by Commonwealth and likely the public, too
Civil liability for malicious prosecution: Immunity
Class Action by Divorced Dads for Illegal Child-Support Collection in
Michigan
Clergy abuse Sister Keri Burnor tells her story on her new web site, clergyvictim.com, of her abuse and the case that has reshaped her life involving St Joseph's Abbey in Spencer, Massachusetts. 
Client Fee Agreements: Hourly or Contingency  (Harassment in  Employment)
Blank Agreement Forms for Filling out and Signing: Hourly or
Contingency (Harassment in Employment), Contingency (Non-employment)
Clinical psychologists. See Psychologists
Cohabiting:  "She's cohabiting! Must I send so much support?"
Collection and the Department of Revenue
Colposcopy and the Unknown
Complaint for Modification(based on a deprivation of parental rights
        and a substantial change in circumstances)
Complaint:An Outline for a Complaint
Complaint in the Nature of a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari
and to Invoke the General Superintendence of the Court
Blank forms for filing judicial complaints at Commission on Judicial ConductClick
Confidentiality of Information, Rule 1.6 of the Mass. Rules of Prof. Conduct
Consulting Services: Multilevel Fee Structure   A Must Read
Contempt: Citations for the States of Washington and Texas by 
an Anonymous Friend
Contempt: Sample Appellate Brief
Controversy!  With Texas psychologist & University of Texas at Tyler
Crespo v. CrespoFourteenth Amendment Due Process, clear and convincing standard in domestic violence matters NEW
Criminal motions. See Motions, criminal
Custody
Custody and "Constant False Reporting of Abuse" -- A Story in Washington(NEWLY uploaded  older file) - 6/16/08
Dads on the Air, Sydney, Australia, 2glf, 89.3 fm, 
     www.dadsontheair.net, the world's longest running radio program on father's issues. Peter van de Voorde,  Producer and Presenter, dotafeedback@gmail.com.  Bill Kable, Interviewer.    John Stapleton.  More about the program at:   http://www.dadsontheair.net/About/Background/tabid/55/Default.aspx. 

Daubert Test and DNA
Dean Tong's Ashes to Ashes' Table of Contents
De Facto Parent Awarded Visitation
Defamation Complaint: A Live Case Provides a Sample Complaint .  See also Drano #153. 
Defending YourselfWhat to Do When You are Accused and Fighting for Your LibertyA falsacc list member writes candidly about how you must manage your defense team and what you must do to properly defend yourself. 
Denman's Cases for Custody/Visitation Fights
Dennis the Menace
Department of Social Services  If you are having trouble with Child Protective Services or the Department of Social Services, you must read this case.   A Massachusetts case filled with lots of cases from lots of States!!!!
Depositions
Depression according to DSM-IV
Deprivation of Parental Rights: A Federal Complaint
Development of memory
Diagnosing Sexual Offenders(NEWLY uploaded  older file)
Dictionary, See Law Dictionary at the bottom of every page
Disclaimer
Discovery Tools: SeeDepositions, Motions, Interrogatories, Answers to 
Interrogatories, Requests for Production of Documents
Divorce: Sexual abuse, prove by preponderance of the evidence
Dollar Incentives for States for Collection Efforts of Child Support  and Declarations of Paternity According to the National Women's Law Center Click    3/9/02  Why is there not a fathers' group gathering the statistics of how much the States receive, the methods used, and the errors made?
Domestic Violence Guidelines

See DRANO SERIES TABLE for rest of alphabetical list
Drano Viewpoint #1: Boys will be boys, by Kathleen Parker
Drano Viewpoint #4: Domestic violence law abuses rights of men by Phyllis Schaffly 
Drano Viewpoint articles
Dr. Peggie Ward.  See Family Wars: The Alienation of Children
DSM-IV Definition of Depression
DSM-IV Definition of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
Due Process: Constitutional Rights and the Stigma of Sexual Abuse Allegations in Child Custody Proceedings(updated older file)
Eli Newberger  Will the real Eli Newberger please stand up!
Emancipation
Equitable Bill of DiscoveryA bill of discovery is appropriate when a plaintiff (1) has "properly described an ongoing or contemplated cause of action for which information is needed" and (2) has "alleged sufficient facts to demonstrate the inadequacy of ... interrogatories" and (3) needs the bill of discovery as an aid to his or her position in a suit the plaintiff wants to bring. 
Establishing Trust
Updated June 18th, 2008
Evaluation of child: Problems in Evaluating Suspected Abuse
Evidence, Statutory Definition precludes Eli newberger's report
EXCULPATORY evidence    What you must know!

Expert Fees, Motion for
Experts
Experts: Five "Silver Bullet" Questions to Ask Opposing Experts
Expert: test .  .  .  See Kumho Tire below.
Family Wars: The Alienation of Children, by Peggie Ward, Ph.D., and
J. Campbell Harvey, Esq.
Fatherhood Coalition: Massachusetts proactivegroup (external link)
Fathers and Restraining Orders: "Do Restraining Orders Cause Domestic Violence?"
By Mark Charalambous"
Formerly Featured Home Page Stories
Lest they be forgotten!
Fedynich Children Are Still Missing
Fees
Fells Acre Day School(Massachusetts)

Film Scripts:  Cameo-o   -- a little sex and sizzle used for education
The First Steps in Your Defense  A Must See AND Do *****
Forensic Evaluation of Children and Adolescents Who May Have Been
        Physically or Sexually Abused (See Guidelines below)
Forensic psychologist. See Psychologists
Forever Fascinating Books to Relax with During Time of Stress
       in association with 
Forms etc etc etc for Massachusetts??
Forms from Franklin County's Register of Probate &Family Court!!!
Finally the ones you need!   Thank you Register John A. Barrett!
Forms for filing judicial complaints at Commission on Judicial Conduct
FORMS :Motions and Orders for Letters Rogatory and Commissions

When you want to take a deposition of someone in another state
Free Medical Expert for the Innocent(UPDATED; NEW CONTACT  INFO AND CURRICULUM VITAE)

Fresh complaint
Fresh complaint witness
Fresh complaint testimony
Grand Jury Attendance
Grandparents' Complaint for Visitation
Grandparents' Groups at egroups.com for Commiseration, Instruction 
& Action
Guardian ad litem guardian
Guardians ad Litem: ABA Standards and Standards in Florida, Missouri, New
Hampshire, Ohio, and Utah and Post-Audit Report
Guardians ad Litem: Massachusetts Senate Post-Audit Report Read the truth about the guardian ad litem system in the Commonwealth.
Guidelines byAmerican Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry for interviewing children for suspected abuse
GuidelinesForensic Evaluation of Children and Adolescents
        Who May Have Been Physically or Sexually Abused
GuidelinesHow to Conduct a Psychiatric Assessment of Infants and
       Toddlers  (0-36 Months)
Habeas Corpus: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
       and related motions, supporting affidavit, and proposed order
Click here for small (640 pixels) monitor
Hague Convention of Private International Law
When One Parent Is in One Country and the Other and the Child(ren)
         Are in Another: WHAT TO DO AND WHERE (47 member states)
Harm: Should it be an element of a sexual offense?
       Controversial paper by Rind, Bauserman, and Tromovitch

Have You Seen Paul Fedynich's Children? Last seen in Montreal.
Heacock v. Heacockexplaining res judicata, claim preclusion (merger and bar), issue preclusion (collateral estoppel)
heartros.jpgHeart Balm: Alienation of Affection
Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned  Excerpts from http://www.dvmen.org
including statistics from the Reverend Dennis Austin, who recently passed, to our sorrow.
Help Barb Advertise This Site
History of HELP-Texas by Harry Bowles: Real Patriots v. Mouth Warriors
How to Conduct a Psychiatric Assessment of Infants and Toddlers
       (0-36 Months) See  Practice Parameters below  or Guidelines
Immunity[updated, March 2008]
Infants, Standards for Evaluation of Abuse in
Injunction
In  Memoria
Innocence Project: Peter Lonergan 
NEW12/22/2007 In the next few months, I shall scan and upload to the website letters that I have received from men in prisons across the country. I do not know whether these men are innocent or guilty, but perhaps some lawyers will come forward to determine whether the allegations against were true or false.. A graduate student at University of West Virginia is looking into three of the cases in Pennsylvania.
Innocence Insisted by
1.  Allen Huerefeld (Cedar Rapids, IA) (July 3, 2007)  CLICK
2.  Edward J. Murray (Lovelady, TX)(June 4, 2000)CLICK
3.  Eugene C. Sellers (Somerset, PA) (March 3, 2006) CLICK 
4.  Frank Edward Johnson (Rush City, MN) (May 30-June 30, 2007) CLICK
5.  Glenn A. Holder, Sr. (Houtzdale, PA) (April 30, 2007)CLICK
6.  Jackie Ketter (Abilene TX) (July 9, 2007CLICK

7.  John J. Gephart, Sr. (Houtzdale,PA) (31 May 2003)CLICK
8.  John Robert Demos (Walla Walla, WA)(Deember 16, 2006) CLICK
9.  Mark Merech (Gowanda, NY)(August 27, 2007CLICK
10, Nedro G. Parker (Iowa Park, TX) (June 5, 2000)CLICK
11. P. Alvin Jones (Walla Walla, WA) (September 25, 2007) CLICK UPDATED*****
12. Pete Jenkins (somewhere)Letter #1 (Aug. 2000)CLICK
       and Letter #2 (July 28, 2008) CLICK
13. Peter G. Lonergan (Rush City, MN) (May 11, 2007)CLICK
14. Purvis Bush (Albion, PA) (May 3, 2007) CLICK
15. Rinaldo Duncan (Albion, PA) (July 30, 2007) CLICK
16. Tony Campbell (Rush City, MN) (June 23, 2008)CLICK
17. Joseph Mann (Cresson, PA) 
(July 11, 2008) CLICK
18. John Weister (Huntingdon, PA) 
(July 20, 2007)CLICK
19. Ohayola Ohadapo (Rush City, MN)(June 29,2007) CLICK
20. David Yeager (LaBelle, PA) (July 7, 2008) CLICK
21. Albert Medina (Indian Springs, NV) (May 21, 2008)CLICK
22. Rafael Vasquez (Tennessee Colony, TX) (April 4, 2005) CLICK
This is a lengthy story, mostly typewritten, by an articulate man who received a college degree, has attained paralegal status, and was pursuing a prelaw education at the time of this writing.  A writer and reporter, Carolyn D. Wall,  introduces him,.
23. Alfred Safka (Rush City, MN) (December 10, 2007) CLICK
24. Booker Leon Carter, Jr. (Huntingdon, PA)(Feb. 23, 2008) (a rape case)CLICK
25. Mark M. Robinson (LaBelle, PA) (June 11, 2008) ((mistaken identity?)CLICK
26. Jose Fields (Huntingdon, PA) (May 8, 2008) (DNA case) CLICK
27 Dean Williams (Bennettsville, SC)
(August 17, 2006)CLICK
28. Francis O'Neill (Huntingdon, PA) 
(March 18, 2008CLICK
29. James E. Nixon, Sr. (Bellefonte, PA)(May 20, 2007CLICK
30. Jonathan Crawford (Pound VA) (May 1, 2007)CLICK(alleged rape of ex-girlfriend)
31. Joseph Dickey (Pollock, LA)
(July 30, 2006)CLICK
32. Michael Carlton Lowe, Sr. (Rush City, MN) (June 12, 2008)CLICK
33. Robert F. Walker, Jr. (Waynesburg, PA) (February 12, 2008) (wants post-mortem info re time of death)CLICK
34. Rocco Mirra (Coal Township, PA)(January 3, 2008)(assorted sexual crimes)CLICK
35. Peter Jenkins (Tiptobville, TN) (July 28, 2008, Letter #2) CLICK
36. Andres Castillo (San Quentin, CA)****UPDATED****
Letter #1(June 1, 2008)and Letter #2(July  27, 2008)CLICK
37  Thomas Matthews (Cresson, PA) (Feb. 15,2008)CLICK
38. Tony C. Salkeld (Bellefonte, PA) 
(March 23,2007)CLICK
39. Leon A. Stone (Big Stone Gap, VA) 
(May 1, 2008)CLICK
40.  Steven Paul Scott (Cresson, PA) 
(August 3, 2008) (aggravated indecent assault,...,and Megan's Law)CLICK
41.  Clarence A. Yates (Waymart, PA)(May 19 and June 20, 2006) (rape of minor)CLICK
Yates' is a lengthy story, typewritten, by an articulate woman who befriended him      after he  was convicted, plus a page written by Yates himself..
Interviews for suspected sexual abuse. See Guidelines
Interstate Compact on Placement of Children and Illinois 45 ILCS 15 
(two versions)
Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA)
Investigations
Investigation by administrative agency
Investigation by "innocent" spouse
Investigation by accused spouse
Investigation of friendly witnesses
Investigation by police
Investigation by district attorney's office
Irrevocable Trust
Jeopardy in the Courtroom: A book about children's testimony
Jesse Friedman Story1/14/02
"Capturing the Friedmans," a documentary film at the Sundance Film Festival in Park City, Utah.  It "is a sobering re-examination of events that stunned Long Island in the 1980s, when they seemed to cast doubt on the very notions of normality, community and safety." Karin Lipson
Judges, Sizing up. See Sizing up Judges
Judicial complaints at Commission on Judicial Conduct (FORM)Click
Judiciary in YOUR STATE  Looking for an attorney?  Looking for a "pro bono" attorney? Click on the links to the judiciary home pages for your State!!!!NEW 4/23d

Jurisdiction: See When Dad is in one state . . .
Justice for Families: Bills written by Nevajac Moore submitted in January 2001 session in Mass.  (external link) 
Kidnapping a Child from the States to Elsewhere, 18 U.S.C. 1204
 International Parental Kidnapping Crime Act
  See Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act below.
Kudos to The Honorable Mary Anne Sahagian and Family Service Officer Mary Ann Curtin
Kumho tire Co,, Ltd. et al v. Carmichael et al: Answering questions left open  by Daubert
Laches: Sample Appellate BriefDid Mom wait too long to file contempt

           suit against Dad for nonpayment of child support?
Larz Anderson Auto Museum   Story of my donation of my fire engine and hearse to the
         museum in 2007.
Lie Detetector Tests. Please report to this site (a) whether lie detector tests are used by law enforcement in your state and (b) whether the results are admissible in your state and, if you know, the case(s) in which they were admitted. Email
Lest they be forgotten" Some Formerly Featured Home Page Stories
Links to Supporters, Resources, and Vendors
Lying.  See Child: Do children lie?    See State of New Jersey below.
Mandatory reporter
Margaret Kelly Michaels     See State of New Jersey v. Michaels below.
Martindale-Hubbell Caveat emptor
Massachusetts Court Rules:Where Did Justice Go? (Case #1)
Massachusetts courts allowed on an old lady's case a lien by an attorney whom she did not even know!!!  This is Drano Series #87.
Massachusetts Office of Victim Assistance
Mayo Clinic Study: Normative Sexual Behavior in Children
MCMI-II: Interpretative Guide to the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory
          (2d edition)
(uploaded  older file)
Mediation and Parental Alienation Syndrome:Considerations for an
Intervention Model,  Anita Vestal, Family and Conciliation Courts Review,
      October 1999 
(NEWLY uploaded  older file)
Memory
Michigan Department of Family Independence Agency
MindSpring: Web Host Provider ExtraOrdinaire Comes to the Rescue
A saga of interest probably only to those who want to set up e-commerce accounts
Miscreant Imprisoned: Lawyer Who Conspired with False Accuser Gets Prison,
     authored by 
Rob Mazzeo and published by National Coalition of
     Free Men (http://www.ncfm.org)
(uploaded  older file)
MisinformationRegardless of Age, Children Susceptible to False Reports of Experiences When Given Misinformation(NEWLY uploaded  older file)
Missing and Exploited Children
Missing and Exploited Children, National Center for(external link)
MMPI: All you wanted to know about it if you're putting or cross-examining an expert on the stand .  See also Psychological Tests, below. Read all about TAT and Rorschach in the MMPI file What's Wrong with This Picture?,
Scientific American May 2001.  Article debunks psychological tests 
Motions, Criminal Court: Samples
Motion for Bill of Particulars
Motion for Criminal Records
Motion for Curative Instruction When Fresh Complaint Witness Adds Improper Details
Motion for Directed Finding
Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Speedy Trial with Supporting 
Affidavit and Memorandum
Motion for Exculpatory Evidence
Motion for Funds for Experts
Motion to Inspect Statements of Witnesses
Motion to Inspect Tangible Evidence
Motion for Leave to File Additional Motions
Motion in Limine to Preclude "Fresh Complaint Evidence" Beyond 
the Scope of the Primary Evidence Given by the Alleged Victim
Motion for Names and Addresses of Interviewed and Percipient Witnesses
Motion to Preclude Any and All of the Commonwealth's Experts
Who Are Not Identified by April 6, 199x
Motion for Production of Police Reports
Motion to Quash
Motion to Sequester Witnesses
Motion for Statements of Defendant
Motion to Suppress Hearsay Testimony of Therapist with 
Supporting Memorandum and Supporting Affidavit by Counsel
Motion to Use Demonstrative Evidence
Motion: Request for Voir Dire Questions of Prospective Jurors
Motions, Divorce Court
Mysty's Tragic Family Story
National Association of Parental Alienation Syndrome

National Coalition of Free Men, Los Angeles, Referral List
Ne exeat
Newberger's report
Neuropsychologist: See Psychologists
Nightmare German Inflation
No-Fault Divorce (known as Separation) Agreements
Nonabusing Parent Loses Custody Pending Disposition of Criminal
Charges Against Stepdad
Nonbiological Voluntary Child Support Providers and the Law
North Dakota Custody case: Swanston v. Swanston, 1993
Notice of Appeal
Obama: 'A More Perfect Union'Obama's views on race.
His speech, delivered Tuesday March 18, 2008, at Constitution Center in Philadelphia.The transcript from the March 19, 2008 edition of the Christian Science Monitor.
OhioCan you help or know someone who can help Mysty and her family in Toledo? 
One Man's Story

Overturned cases: See Fells Acre; State of New Jersey v. Michaels
       (N.J.Appellate Division); State of New Jersey v. Michaels
        (N.J.Supreme Court)
Pattern or No Pattern of Behavior of Sexually Abused Children
Parental Alienation Is Open Heart Surgery: It Needs More Than a Band-Aid to Fix It by Kathleen Niggemyer, California Western Law Review, Spring 1998 
Parental Alienation Syndrome  Mediation and Parental Alienation Syndrome: Considerations for an Intervention Model,  Anita Vestal, Family and Conciliation Courts Review, October 1999   uploaded  older file)
Parental Alienation Syndrome:Virginia Court of Appeals Recognizes the "Parental Alienation Syndrome" --  Ange et al. v. Chesapeake Departmen of Human Services(February 3, 1998) (unpublished)  Parental Kidnapping Case: Com. v, Beals
Massachusetts High Court Interprets "without lawful authority" in Com. v. Beals
Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act   (PKPA), 28 U.S.C. 1738A
Parents Right to Counsel in Massachusetts in CHINS (Child in Need of Services) cases -- 
IN THE MATTER OF HILARYdecided February 2008
PAS: Interference with Parental Rights of Noncustodial Parent as
Grounds for Modification of Child Custody by Edward B. Borris
PAS: Parental Alienation: Not in the Best Interest of the Children
by Douglas Darnall, 1999 North Dakota Law Review
PAS: Parental Alienation Syndrome: How to Detect It and What to 
Do About It by J. Michael Bone, Michael R. Walsh, 1999 Florida 
Bar Journal
Paternity fraud: US-CAPF. Details onlinks page.
Peggie Ward, Ph.D., Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS)
Perjury
Penile Plethysmograph. Please report to this site (a) whether penile plethysmograph
tests are used by law enforcement or prison officials in your state and (b)
whether the results are admissible in your state and, if you know, the case(s) in 
which they were admitted. Email
Physical examination
Physicians.  See Experts
Pleas
Polygraph: Amicus Brief in Defense of the Polygraph and Its Reliability
Polygraphs.  Please report to this site (a) whether lie detector tests are used by law enforcement in your state and (b) whether the results are admissible in your state and, if you know, the case(s) in which they were admitted. Email
Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
Practice Parameters:Forensic Evaluation of Children and Adolescents
        Who May Have Been Physically or Sexually Abused
Practice Parameters:How to Conduct a Psychiatric Assessment of Infants and
      Toddlers  (0-36 Months)
Pricing Structure of Quick Questions, Consulting Services, and Legal
Representation  ****** A Must See ******
PROBATION DOMINO THEORY    On The planning Board
Profiles of sexual offenders
Pro Hac Vice Forms for U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas, and California, and Rules for Pro Hac Vice Admission in Connecticut(NEWLY UPDATED file)
Pro Se Group for Fathers
Prosecution team
Psychological testing of the accused : MMPI, TAT, Rorschach, penile
       plethysmograph.  See also MMPI - BW, above.
Psychologists, Clinical, Forensic, and Neuro-
PSYCHOLOGY, PUBLIC POLICY AND LAW reacts to Amicus Brief by
Committee of Concerned Social Scientists
RADARRespecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting, a network of concerned men and women around the country who are working to assure that the media present the hidden side of domestic violence. Twenty years ago, women who had been assaulted by their intimate partners often found that no one who would listen to their story. They felt ashamed and alone.  Now, another group in our society has a story that no one seems to want to hear: abused men.  Subscribe to RADAR E-lert!  RADAR, P.O. Box 1404, Rockville, MD 20849.   Trudy Schuett at media@mediaradar.org or 928-726-6200. http://mediaradar.orgSee VAWA Reform Coalition, Declaration, Drano 189
RADAR flyer.  CLICK
Rape, Commonwealth v. Morais(2000)
rape of a child and indecent assault and battery on a child under age of 14.

(NEWLY uploaded  older file)
Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD)
Real Estate Evaluation in North Billerica, Massachusetts: Very helpful realtor in Billerica.  Provided divorcing
client with reports of comparable homes.  Patience extraordinaire!!!  John R. Peterson,  Araskelian Real Estate, Inc., 295 Boston Road, North Billerica, MA 01862, 781-935-0185, 987-667-2301.  When you call, mention 
falseallegations.com
Recommendations by VOCAL for Those FalselyAccused of Child Abuse. VOCAL = VICTIMS OF CHILD ABUSE LAWS
Recusal of Anti-Children Judge, Plan for
REFERENCES EXAMINING ASSAULTS BY WOMEN ON THEIR SPOUSES OR MALE PARTNERS: AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY,compiled and examined by Martin S. Fiebert,  Department of Psychology, California State University, Long Beach.  Last updated: May 2008.  Used with the kind permission of  Martin S. FieberCLICKNEW August 15, 2008
Relationship Film Scripts  A Must Buy
Representation, Legal: Multilevel Fee Structure  A Must Read
Request for Voir Dire.  See Motions, Criminal Court: Samples
Requests for Production of Documents
Research Online: State Municipal, Superior and Appellate Courts
Restraining Orders:"Do Restraining Orders Cause Domestic Violence?" By Mark Charalambous, fatherhoodcoalition.org
 
The Revolutionary Series: (Activism: Issues for Concern)
Dr. Guillotine's new invention, approved as  an efficient and humane means of public execution by Louis XVI
The RevolutionarySeries (Activism: Issues for Concern) 
REFORMATTED FOR EASY READING AND LEGIBILITY (March 2008)
Revolution #1:
 
Revolution #2:
Revolution #3:
 

Revolution #4:


Draft of Speech to Judiciary Committee on Shared Parenting

What to Do When You Have or Are About to Get a Biased Guardian ad Litem
 

Revolution #5:
 
Revolution #6:
Revolution #7:

Revolution #8:


Are Family Courts Prejudiced Against Fathers?

The Ignominious Jailing of John Flaherty by Judge Beverly Boorstein
 

Revolution #9:
 
Revolution #10:
Revolution #11:


A Wish: A Suit Against Judges for Crimes Against Humanity A DRAFT OF A DRAFT OF A DRAFT

Rorschach Test.  Read all about it in the MMPI fileWhat's Wrong with This Picture?, 
Scientific American May 2001.  Article debunks psychological tests: TAT and Rorshach. Click
Rule 1.5 (Fees) of the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct
Rule 1.6 (Confidentiality of Information) of the Mass.R.Prof.C.
NEWSearch Tool, GoogleNEW
SexualAbuse Allegations in Child Custody Proceedings (Child Custody: Due Process: Constitutional Rights and the Stigma of Sexual Abuse Allegations, Colleen McMahon, Catholic Lawyer, Summer-Fall 1999 
(NEWLY uploaded  older file)
Sexual Abuse in Divorce (SAID)
SEXUAL DEVIANT THERAPY    On The planning Board Sexual offender profiles.  See Profiles of sexual offenders
Self-help Groups
Sexual Offenders, Diagnosing
Shared Parenting, A Bill New York Considered in 2001.  For Historical and Comparison Purposes Only!
SIDS
It's not SIDS, sudden infant death, its MCAD, medium-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency.   Published Sunday, February 3, 2002, at newsobserver.com. Use here is for educational purposes.
Simple Questions, if you have any
Sizing up Judges
Spanking: Whether Abuse: Cobble v. Commissioner of Dept. of Social Services (1999)(NEWLY uploaded  older file)
Speak Out: False False Allegations
SPECIFIC and GENERAL REQUESTS for EXCULPATORY Evidence
Stalking Laws: How to Determine the Elements a District Attorney Has to Prove
State of New Jersey v. Margaret Kelly Michaels:Factual background
State of New Jersey v. Margaret Kelly Michaels: Amicus brief  by Committee of Concerned Social Scientists
State of New Jersey v. Margaret Kelly Michaels (N.J.Appellate Division)
This decision is divided into eleven parts for quick loading.  You can hop from any part to any other part. A treasure trove of explanations

State of New Jersey v. Margaret Kelly Michaels  (N.J.Supreme Court

Submissions byAtlantis Internet Services
Suggestibility:The New Wave in Children's Suggestibility Research: A Critique(NEWLY uploaded  older file)
Supervised visitation locations
Susceptibility, see Misinformation.
Sylvia v. Sylvia (Mass. 1980).New wife's assets will be in jeopardy.    Be careful.Symptoms or not symptoms of sexual abuse
Taint Hearing: Nine Factors Justifying Taint Hearing for Determining Where to Suppress Child's Testimony
Taping: Go to "Can We Tape"?
TAT - Thematic Apperception Test.  Read all about it in the MMPI fileWhat's Wrong with This Picture?, Scientific American May 2001.  Article debunks psychological tests: TAT and Rorshach. Click
Temporary marriages allowed in IranNEW as of 9 April 2008
Tennessee, Shame, Shame -- A Tragedy: Mom and Dad's Story of Tribulations, and Terror.   A Tennessee Lawyer Needed to Help These Folks
Termination of Parental Rights in Utah by Attorney Michael L. Humiston -- Deleted.  Unknown results.  Not on Westlaw.
Testifying in Court: A book about expert testimony and vulnerability
Testimony by alleged child victim
Toddlers, Standards for Evaluation of Abuse in
Tom Finneran and the Felon's Forum.  A Talk Show Host and Felonious Lobbyist
Tragedy in Washington State: Chul-Mo Sohn, a single father, was raising his two daughters until the Department of Children and Family Services . . . Oct/2004Travesty of Justice Exalting Finality over InjusticeUpdated June 18th, 2008. Read about the courageous Judge Isaac Borenstein, voluntarily retiring from the bench
Trust.  See Irrevocable Trust
Tyco's Felonious Dennis "the Menace" KozlowskiNEW
Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction ActA DRAFT-- FOR HISTORICAL PURPOSES ONLYADDED June 19, 2008
Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act
Uniform Child Visitation Act (UCVA)A DRAFT-- FOR HISTORICAL PURPOSES ONLYADDED June 20, 2008
Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA)  ADDED June 20, 2008
Uniform Parental Rights Enforcement and Protection Act(PROPOSED UNIFORM STATE STATUTORY LANGUAGE) and Avion v.
Franklin County Prosecuting Attorney's Office (the only case across the States which mentions the UPREPA) and Federal Oversight and Implementation of UPREPA Among the Several StatesADDED June 20, 2008
Uniform State Laws: The National Conference of CommissionersADDED June 20, 2008
VAWA Reform Coalition, Declaration
VAWAFIX VAWA FLYERS and ANNOUNCEMENTS by RADAR. 
One of the most important issues in family law is the SCOURGE OF VAWA. R.A.D.A.R.––Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting––a non-profit, non-partisan organization of men and women, is working to improve the effectiveness of our nation's approach to solving domestic violence.
Videotaping of Interviews of Children
Visitation: supervised or unsupervisedSee also Supervised visitation locationsWhat is recovered memory?    On The planning Board
When Dad is in one state and Mom and the Child(ren) are in another:
How to Get Them Back
Where's My Daddy?   Shocking statistics spotlight extent of absentee fatherhood
Which States Are in Which Federal Circuits
Winning Poetry by Kids
West GroupIf you're a lawyer, write West!  And if you're not, still write!!
Wiretapping in Massachusetts      Massachusetts Wiretapping Law Strikes Again
Witnesses
Woman-of-the-year-award.htm  Woman of the Year Award to Barb from Fatherhood Coalition,Fathers Day, 16 June 2002
Worker's Compensation
Writ of Habeas CorpusClick here for small (640 pixels) monitor
Yesteryear (pictures of Barb)

Please report to this site (a) what you expected to fnd at this site when you came here, (b) what you wanted to find at this site, and/or (c) whether you found what you came for. Email.
 

Barb's Picksssss 
Your purchase helps support this site
Your purchase helps support this site

b

A recommended read: 

The Kingmakers: How the Media Threatens Our Security and Our Democracy 
by Mike Gravel and David Eisenbach;Citizen Power: A Mandate for Change by Mike Grave

b

Spring 2008
       A New Book Worth Reading 

by Ron Smith, Children Need Both Parents, Inc., 616-301-1515
CHEATED Parental Alienation is the teaching of children of divorce or separation to harbor negative feelings and emotions toward the parent who generally does not have custody and does not reside in the same domicile. This is usually done in an effort for one parent to gain the respect and love of the children, while destroying the image and relationship of the absent parent. This phenomenon will generate feelings of hatred, ambivalence, and distance between children and the non-custodial parent. Our family court system does little to eliminate these occurrences, and although the parent affected is cheated of a normal relationship with the children, the real damage will manifest itself within the children. 
Available \at Borderbook, other book stores, and amazon.com:. 
Your purchase helps support this site

Terms of Enforcement: Making Men Pay for What They've Done by Steven S. Richmond


Read a few excerpts from it at www.trafford.com/robots/01-0585.htmlSteven, the author, a psychotherapist and former senior level state social service administrator, tells to his paradox-therapist, Dr. Alicia Morgan, the story of his entanglement with the Massachusetts courts, prisons, and mental health system. He needs Dr. Morgan's help to understand how his wife of 30 years succeeded in obtaining a restraining order as leverage in their divorce settlement, and why the courts allowed his wife's petition. He had never harmed his wife.  (No referral fee on this one, just an interesting book you should buy.) READ THIS BOOK.  Fascinating.  A PAGE TURNER 


Handbook of Massachusetts Evidence by Paul Liacos (former Chief Justice, now deceased), Michael Avery and Mark S. Brodin This is the Bible of Mass. evidence. Whether you are in Massachusetts or elsewhere, you will learn how to look at what yu think is evidence.  It may or may not be.  Very expensive, but worth it. Click to purchase

The MMPI, MMPI-2, and MMPI-A In Court: A Practical Guide for Expert Witnesses and


Attorneys (2nd Edition) by Kenneth S. Pope, Ph.D., ABPP, James N. Butcher, Ph.D., and Joyce Seelen, Esq.. Publisher: American Psychological Association
Click to see chapter and appendix titlesClick to purchase


The Language of Confession, Interrogation, and Deception (Empirical Linguistics , Vol 2) By Roger W. Shuy, an eminent scholar and expertClick to purchase 
 

b

Language Crimes : The Use and Abuse of Language Evidence in the Courtroom

"Language Crimes tells the story of some of the remarkable cases in which linguist Roger Shuy has served as an expert witness. These cases covered criminal acts such as solicitation to murder, bribery, threatening extortion, and perjury, all of which use language as a medium. These intriguing stories show the power of the study of language to assist the courts to achieve justice. Click to purchase


A Few Months to Live : Different Paths to Life's End by Jana Staton, Roger W. Shuy, Ira Byock. Interviews of senior elders.  Write the first review of this book. Earn a chance to win a $50 gift certificate. Click to purchase

Divorced Dads : Shattering the Myths by Sanford L. Braver, Diane O'Connell (Contributor)funded study showing that some divorced fathers really do care about their children. In 1985, Braver (Psychology/Arizona State Univ.) began following more than 1,000 families in Maricopa County, Ariz. (which includes Phoenix), who had filed for divorce but whose marriages were not yet dissolved. His purpose was to put some meat on the bones of the numbers that pointed to divorced dads as abandoning their children financially and emotionally, and to find out why this was happening, if it was.He and his colleagues discovered the numbers were wrong.Click to purchase 
 

b

Who Stole Feminism? : How Women Have Betrayed  Women by Christina Hoff SommersClick to purchase
 

b

The War Against Boys : How Misguided Feminism Is Harming Our Young Men by Christina Hoff Sommers Click to purchase

The Decline of Males: The First Look at an UnexpectedNew World for Men and Womenby Lionel TigerBiological anthropologist Lionel Tiger, best known for developing the concept of male bonding in Men in Groups, offers what he calls "a chronicle of the decline of men and the ascendancy of women." If there were a male counterpart to feminism--masculinism?--this is where it would be found. Click to purchase 
b
Heterophobia: Sexual Harassment and the Future ofFeminism (American Intellectual Culture) by Daphne Patai. "A devastating expose of the way academic feminists are driving their wedge between men and women.   Professor Daphne Patai shows us the workings of the vast Sexual Harassment Industry (SHI) that nowflourishes on the college campus. With humor, style, and persuasive analytic power, she demolishes its male-bashing arguments. And she does it all from a classical feminist point of view." Click to purchase 
 

b

Ashes to Ashes, Families to Dust : False Accusations of Child Abuse: A Roadmap for SurvivorsOthers come and go, but Dean Tong's bookstays right up there!
 

b

Out of Control : Who's Watching Our Child Protection Agencies?
by Brenda Scotta Criminal Justice student, a NON-custodial parent, a grudgeless person, who based her book "upon actual state and federal reports that CPS does NOT want you to see."  Joe, Norwegian2@aol.com.

Expert Witnesses in Child Sexual Abuse Cases : What Can and Should Be Said in Courtby Stephen J. Ceci (Editor), Helene Hembrooke (Editor),another book with the imprimatur of the guru of the field of children's suggestibility.

Has A Child Been Molested? AttorneyPat Clancy's book currently unavailable

falseallegations.comBESTSELLERS
Clicking and purchasing a book helps support and make this site possible.
A must read::::: 
Judge Judy  Sheindlin 
speaks of this in her  recent book, 

Don't Pee on My Leg
and Tell Me It's Raining:

"American fathers are led down primrose path every dayin our family courts, often with disastrous legal results.
They wind up in the Land of Gender Bias, where they are systematically stripped of their rights, often without the slightest idea of why it is happening to them."

"If you think the mother-father disparity is outrageous, consider the sexual abuse syndrome, and how it affects visitation and custody disputes.
Here, the judicial impotence and  chronic blindness to men's rights  would appall you." 

"Courts are supposed to approach  cases of child custody, support  payments, and visitation rights in  what we call a gender-neutral  posture. It sounds fair, and it is fair.  But it is a myth. Judges are not enforcing these gender laws fairly,  and few seem to care."

"We will see more of these problems  until fathers organize to demand  fairer treatment. So get it together  dads: You have a legitimate legal  beef and you need to make this a  public issue. Right now the courts  don't hear you."