PLEASE NOTE: This blog is a bigotry free zone open to all persons, regardless of age, race, religion, color, national origin, sex, political affiliations, marital status, physical or mental disability, age, or sexual orientation. Further, this blog is open to the broad variety of opinions out there and will not delete any comments based upon point of view. However, comments will be deleted if they are worded in an abusive manner and show disrespect for the intellectual process.

Thursday, April 16, 2015

WOMEN WHO DIVORCE AT CONSIDERABLY INCREASED RISK OF HEART ATTACK!

Reporter Amy Norton of HealthDay News reports as follows:

"Duke University researchers found that among nearly 16,000 U.S. adults followed over two decades, those who were divorced at some point had a higher heart attack risk than those who stayed married.

The connection seemed stronger among women, but there was no evidence that a second marriage improved their situation. Women who remarried were still 35 percent more likely to suffer a heart attack than those who stayed with their first husband..."

For more on this topic, please click on the link below:

http://www.everydayhealth.com/news/divorce-tied-higher-chance-heart-attack-study/?xid=aol_eh-cardio_6_20150413_&aolcat=ESR

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL REPORTS STATES ARE SHIFTING CUSTODY LAWS TO FAVOR MEN!

Reporter Ashby Jones of The Wall Street Journal reports as follows:
"Some of the biggest battles over child custody are playing out not in courtrooms, but in statehouses.
Prompted partly by fathers concerned that men for too long have gotten short shrift in custody decisions, about 20 states are considering measures that would change the laws governing which parent gets legal and physical control of a child after a divorce or separation.
The laws generally encourage judges to adopt custody schedules that maximize time for each parent. Some of the measures, such as those proposed in New York and Washington state, take an additional step by requiring judges to award equal time to each parent unless there is proof that such an arrangement wouldn’t be in a child’s best interests. 
Critics of these bills contend that they threaten to take discretion away from judges and risk giving leverage to abusive men. They also say the laws are poorly targeted because typically the only custody cases that end up in court are ones in which former spouses are too hostile toward each other to effectively practice shared parenting anyway."
For the rest of the article, please click on the link below:

THE CT LAW TRIBUNE SPEAKS OUT IN REGARD TO EXCESSIVE FORCE BY POLICE!

In a recent editorial, The Connecticut Law Tribune stated as follows:

"We have a national excessive use of force problem in our law enforcement community. The onslaught of examples in the last nine months has moved this issue to the forefront. This is not a new issue, but our awareness is particularly heightened in light of the rapid dissemination of written and visual information. Our use of force problem isn't isolated to racially charged communities, although we are more likely to find excessive use of force in urban and large metropolitan areas where, not by coincidence, we are also likely to find minority communities. Use of force is endemic throughout our nation, including a small community in northern Connecticut, as evidenced by allegations reported in this paper as recently as Oct. 22, 2014."


NOTE:  I would say this issue affects persons of color and also very tragically individuals with disabilities, particularly those with development disabilities and mental health disabilities.

Read more at the link below: 


http://www.ctlawtribune.com/id=1202723729015/Editorial-Police-Excessive-Force-Complaints-a-National-Crisis#ixzz3XVFi3hMw

Tuesday, April 14, 2015

THE HARTFORD COURANT DISGRACES ITSELF BY ATTACKING REP. MINNIE GONZALEZ!

In surprisingly harsh terms, an anonymous editorial posted today on The Hartford Courant website attacks Representative Minnie Gonzalez for a strongly worded email she sent to a constituent criticizing Rep. Rosa Rebimbas.  The Hartford Courant editorial further speaks of the Gonzalez email as "insulting" and "disgraceful" and proposes that Rep. Gonzalez should be sanctioned publicly by the House.  

I still have not had the opportunity to watch the CT-N video of the Friday, April 10, 2015 hearing and so I personally cannot comment upon Rep. Rosa Rebimbas' behavior on that day which resulted in this email.  However, I will say that granted how frustrated victims of family court feel about the sufferings that they have endured and the need for reform, I would hardly call the email itself anything but a fairly minor blip on the screen.  

Further, I think we have all experienced enough of life at this point to know when particularly rotten individuals, such as the Republicans in this particular matter, attempt to derail the focus which should be on a serious and important matter of family court injustice by hooting and hollering about a relatively minor matter, i.e. this email, and making out that it is second in terms of atrocities to the holocaust itself.  

The disgrace here is not in regard to a relatively minor and uninteresting piece of hyperbole on the part of Rep. Minnie Gonzalez, the disgrace is that the Republicans did not have sufficient good judgment and character to overlook this minor disruption in the scheme of things in order to proceed with business and do the jobs that they were hired to do, particularly when we had such significantly important bills on the docket such as the one in regard to videotaping the police and in connection to protecting the victims of domestic violence.  

It is laughable that The Hartford Courant would describe Rep. Minnie Gonzalez use of the Central American equivalent of "every dog has its day" or "every pig has his Saturday" as some kind of vicious "threat" against Rep. Rebimbas.  

I mean, please--get real.  You want to know what a real threat is?  A real threat is when you get a summons from a marshall asking you to respond to a debt collection complaint from your former family court attorney including a lien on your house which will result in a foreclosure, a direct consequence of judicial abuse in your recent divorce.  

That is a threat--not some silly remark about pigs.  

You know, every day I get up and act as parent to my children.  Every once in a while during the course of my role as a parent in these past few years, my ex husband has made threats to take me back to court and sue me for custody of my children, implying what a bad mother I am.  This does not excuse me from being a parent.  

Likewise, just because a few people have a hot under the collar interchange during the course of their work on the Judiciary Committee, this does not justify shutting the entire Committee down.  

What is this--Kindergarten?  

I was particularly disappointed to see The Hartford Courant's name on this piece of nonsense editorial, but I was not in the least surprised.  Contrary to their journalistic ethics, The Hartford Courant has been maintaining a cozy relationship with the CT Judicial Branch by participating in the CT Judicial Branch's Judicial-Media Committee.  This has meant that several top CEOs and journalists from The Hartford Courant, other print media around CT, and also television in the State of Connecticut have been conducting regular meetings with Judges, attorneys and other CT Judicial Branch employees ostensibly to improve the relationship between the CT Judicial Branch and the media and to increase media access to legal proceedings.  

In reality, what these meetings have done is make the media a captive audience while the CT Judicial Branch has force fed it with their official lines regarding their policies, actions, and excuses for the Branch's widespread corruption.  Imagine if any political party or special interest group in the State of Connecticut had anything like this kind of immediate access to members of the media--how remarkable would that be?  

What The Hartford Courant is not telling you here is that such a special relationship between itself and the CT Judicial Branch is a complete violation of its journalistic ethics and represents a deeper and more widespread well of corruption than anything Rep. Minnie Gonzalez could concoct.  

Many family court litigants during recent years have been talking about how important it is to get their stories out to the media and yet they have not been taken seriously when they've approached journalists with their stories.  

In essence, for the last decade or more, there has been a complete media blackout on the struggles of individual litigants in the CT Family Courts although their stories of injustice and exploitation are compelling.  

Why do we hear of the injustices in so many other arenas but not in the area of the corrupt CT Family Court System?  I'll tell you why--because media outlets such as The Hartford Courant long ago sold out to the CT Judicial Branch for the ego enhancing privilege of rubbing shoulders with the CT Judicial leadership whom they appear to worship blindly.  

They should be ashamed.  

The Hartford Courant should look to itself and its own glaring flaws before daring to criticize a leader such as Rep Minnie Gonzalez who is, though clearly very human, doing  the best she can to assist the most vulnerable.

Monday, April 13, 2015

CTNOW REPORTS H.B. 5505 AND 44 OTHER BILLS ARE IN LIMBO AS REP. GONZALEZ EMAIL ALLEGED TO BE SOURCE OF FILIBUSTER!

Christopher Keating of CTNOW reports as follows:



A clash over a legislator's email caused the failure of 45 bills Monday at the judiciary committee as Republicans and Democrats squared off as the committee faced an important deadline at 5 p.m.
The clash led to the failure of all bills on the agenda as Republicans staged a filibuster that lasted until the deadline.
The two sides disagreed on some substantive issues, but the dispute was a spillover from Friday between state Rep. Minnie Gonzalez, a Hartford Democrat, and Rep. Rosa Rebimbas, a Naugatuck Republican who serves as the ranking House member, officials said. Gonzalez and Rebimbas clashed publicly during a long hearing Friday regarding the confirmation of Connecticut State Supreme Court Chief Justice Chase Rogers.
But both Republicans and Democrats said the dispute continued following an email that Gonzalez sent Saturday that was copied to numerous legislators, including Rebimbas herself. At least 25 people - both Republicans and Democrats - had seen the email by Monday, based on the email trail.
The original email was written to a non-legislator who has concerns about the longrunning controversy over guardians ad litem, which are mentioned by Gonzalez as GAL. The guardians are often appointed in contentious divorce cases involving the care and custody of minor children.
The email by Gonzalez, obtained by Capitol Watch, is as follows:
"Do not waist your valuable time with people like Rep Ribimbas.She is an atty and also a GAL,she is fighting for her pocket not for the people like you and others the are suffering .She is cold with no heart.All she did on Friday was kissing the judges back and attacking another Rep and calling you a liar.not professional .people that were watching knows what a brown nose she is.she didn't look good but she think  she was awesome,Dianne always remember that every pig has 
his Saturday .ps Ribimbas I hope y enjoy 
VIDEO TESTIMONY ABOUT  5505 king another Rep and insulting you. She think that she did good

Sent from my iPhone Minnie González''
The mention of 5505 by Gonzalez refers to House Bill 5505, which advocates are pushing in an attempt to make changes to the family court system on issues such as supervised visitation in contentious child custody cases.
House Republican leader Themis Klarides, who was clearly frustrated by the developments, declined to comment on the email.
"I don't want to talk about it,'' Klarides told Capitol Watch outside the meeting room.
Gonzalez sent a second email on Monday that said, "Dear Representative Rebimbas,
"On Saturday, my emotions got the better of me on an issue that I, and my constituents, care deeply about. It was inappropriate for me to include other people in an email that should have remained between us, and for that I apologize.''
But Sen. John Kissel, the longtime ranking senator on the committee, said the second email "really wasn't an apology.''
Kissel said that Republicans had sought "a simple apology'' that never materialized over the course of the day and led to the filibuster. 

COLLEEN BUDEN SPEAKS ELOQUENTLY ABOUT WHY WE NEED TO PASS H.B. 5505--PERHAPS A LITTLE LATE, BUT I HAD NOT SEEN IT BEFORE!

My name is Colleen Buden (Formerly Colleen Bushey).

This is difficult to write without emotion. My children were taken from me by the following perpetrators: CT Children’s Law Center (CLC) Atty. Justine Rakich-Kelly, Atty. Parul Patel, Atty. Monique Ryan; Along with Dr. Stephanie Stein Leite (psych), Maureen Gould (Family Services), Dr. Janet Schrager (Psych), and Andy Hechtman (unlicensed College student who charged $150/hr for unspecified counseling), and Judge Holly Wetstone. As these names are very well known to the Judiciary Committee you can imagine where this is going.


Note: All these names are AFCC member, all assigned to my case by the Judge (who was the AFCC Director Judge Wetstone)


I am only a mother, with absolutely no history. The above people worked in collusion to remove my children from my care on 8/15/13. The GAL’s Monique Ryan and Parul Patel came up with outrageous lies or were very incompetent. Despite the CLC’s cattiness and attacks, they could never prove that I was an unfit mother. The CLC and Maureen Gould worked with my x-husband to not resolve issues but to promote conflict. The CLC is in place to elongate litigation, act on paid for decisions, and funnel parents to Federal Funded programs such as supervised visitation centers.

Barbara Aaron President of the CLC stated children will not have a voice if Bill #5505 is passed. I disagree as the children at this point already have no voice. The CLC has made a business off of their lawyers providing inaccurate information based off what they and claiming children say. There is no proof to substantiate these claims. A simple cost-effective solution to this problem is to either video tape or audio record the sessions. I have been doing it for years and it hasn’t cost me a dime. The reason the CLC won’t do it is because there is no money to be made if cases are resolved in a timely fashion. Conflict is the CLC’s business. The CLC stayed on my case for almost 5 years. My x-husband and I made over a 150k combined income. I repeatedly asked for a financial review but Justine refused even though we were not indigent. Why was Justine adamant on staying on this case? Because the CLC was paid for a service and that service was child trafficking. It wasn’t until the CLC successfully pulled the kids away on 8/15/13 that Justine announced the CLC can now remove themselves from our case.
On 3/11/15 in front of the Judiciary Committee I watched Justine and her staff mocked the members of the Judiciary Committee, acting like a bunch of junior high school girls rolling their eyes and scoffing. This was the same unprofessional behavior I encountered with the CLC Staff.
page1image23416


My x-husband admitted he paid for the decision on audio recording, twice. My x husband walked into the CLC office a week before the 8/2013 trial and handed a paper bag over to Parul Patel.



In my case the CLC removed my children from a parent with no history of abuse or neglect. Parul Patel, Monique Ryan, Dr. Stephanie Stein Leite, Justine Rakich Kelly, and Judge Wetstone should all be in Federal Jail. Anyone dictating what children are saying should be recorded. There is no reason for a lawyer to tell a judge what the children are saying when we live in an age of technology, tape record it! Prove it. My children will tell the Legislative Body what they told for years to the CLC staff.

I actually feel sorry for my x-husband. He was put on a pedestal then when the game was exposed and he was knocked to the ground the court appointed venders scattered like roaches. He was destroyed, losing his job, having his car repossessed, and having to file for bankruptcy. Even his lawyer Atty David Golas dropped him (who got stuck with over 100k in lawyer fees when my x recently filed for bankruptcy).

My x-husband felt defeated and walked away from the kids, he dropped them off with garbage bags filled with their personal belongings in 7/2014, and he hasn’t seen the children since. The CLC destroyed this family.


With the return of my children and the removal of the CLC from our lives we are once again happy. The CT Children’s Law Center was a complete nightmare, they controlled every aspect of being a parent they spoke on behalf of the kid’s counselors, the kid’s school, the kid’s pediatrician, et al. Imagine a GAL that doesn’t have a child of her own telling you that “your children are my ward” (I have this in an email).


Since 7/2014 with the kids being returned:
  •   The kids have called and texted their father hundreds of times. The father has not returned any calls.
  •   The Father just changed his phone number, now the kids can’t call or text him
  •   The Father blocked his children from emailing him
  •   The Father recently filed to terminate his Parental Rights. 

  • No “normal” father walks away from their children’s lives willingly and the above critique explains why. This is the same father who the CLC stated for almost 5 years was the better parent. 

    The children were recommended to live with the father, in an industrial park (Representative Gonzalez visited the area and asked for an investigation by the States Attorney’s office which has yet to be finalized), to be raised by a girlfriend who three months before the CLC was assigned to our case was arrested for assault and child neglect. For 5 years the CLC GALs desperately recommended to the Judge that the children need to live with the Father. The CLC worked in kahoots with Dr. Stein-Leite to write a report, which we have emails to prove, which painted the mother black and the father white. This report was easily discredited by Dr. Hiebel.page2image25192 page2image25352
Dr. Hiebel critiqued Dr. Stephanie Stein Leite’s evaluation and came to this conclusion about the father
  •   His scores showed significant thought dysfunction (p.52).
  •   His “very high score” may indicate paranoid delusions.
  •   His scores on Aberrant Experiences showed unusual thought processes.
  •   His “Psychoticism” score indicates unusual thought process and thought disorder
  •   Based on his score on Behavior/Externalizing Dysfunction he Is likely to have a history of acting 
    out an externalizing behavior that has gotten him into trouble. 
  •   Also got a high score on Juvenile Conduct problems 

    Please pass the Bill #5505
  •   GAL’s need to be held accountable for their actions, as the rest of society must be held accountable for their actions, the GAL’s should not be held to any other standard. They do not deserve superior authority, as we have all proven GAL’s are purposely destroying families.
  •   Supervised visits should only be for parents who have proven neglect or history (this is just common sense). This is a money-makings scheme for the Kids for Cash going on in this state, another reason to drain parents. 

    The CT Children’s Law Center destroying families one child at a time. 

THE CONNECTICUT LAW TRIBUNE REPORTS ON THE REAPPOINTMENT OF CHIEF JUSTICE CHASE T. ROGERS!

John Marinelli of The Connecticut Law Tribune reports as follows:

"It was eight years ago that Chase Rogers was nominated to be Connecticut's chief justice. Since then, she has worked to increase the transparency of Judicial Branch operations, coped with the skyrocketing number of self-represented litigants and dealt with an increasingly unhappy group of critics of the state's family court system.

All those topics were discussed April 10, when Rogers appeared before the legislature's Judiciary Committee and discussed past events, current initiatives and future goals. She was nominated for a second eight-year term by Gov. Dannel Malloy, and was confirmed unanimously by the committee early Saturday morning. Her nomination now moves to the full General Assembly.

During a lengthy confirmation hearing, Republican Sen. John Kissel said it's a "blessing" to have Rogers oversee the Judicial Branch.

But Democratic Rep. Minnie Gonzalez questioned Rogers for about two hours, saying she wants everyone who uses the court system to be treated respectfully. Rogers agreed, pointing out how she's taken steps to improve "access to justice" and make the courts more transparent..."


Read more: 


http://www.ctlawtribune.com/id=1202723344045/Chief-Justice-Reappointment-Clears-Committee#ixzz3XFBbu4Qp