RICHARD A. GARDNER: IN HIS OWN WORDS – THE FATHER OF “PARENTAL ALIENATION SYNDROME’

RICHARD A. GARDNER:
IN HIS OWN WORDS

---

"At the present time, the sexually abused child is generally considered to be the victim," though the child may initiate sexual encounters by 'seducing' the adult."

Gardner, Richard A., Child Custody Litigation (1986), p.93

Sexualizing children can have procreative purposes, because a sexualized child is more likely to reproduce at an earlier age. "The younger the survival machine at the time sexual urges appear, the longer will be the span of procreative capacity, and the greater the likelihood the individual will create more survival machines in the next generation."

Gardner, Richard A., True and False Accusations of Child Sex Abuse (1992), pp.24-25

"It is of interest that of all the ancient peoples it may very well be that the Jews were the only ones who were punitive toward pedophiles."

Ibid. pp.46-47

Many child advocates are "charlatans, and/or psychopaths, and/or incompetents."

Ibid. p.526

"It is extremely important for therapists to appreciate that the child who has been genuinely abused may not need psychotherapeutic intervention."

Ibid. p.535

"There is a whole continuum that must be considered here, from those children who were coerced and who gained no pleasure (and might even be considered to have been raped) to those who enjoyed immensely (with orgastic responses) the sexual activities."

Ibid. p.548

"Older children may be helped to appreciate that sexual encounters between an adult and a child are not universally considered to be reprehensible act. The child might be told about other societies in which such behavior was and is considered normal. The child might be helped to appreciate the wisdom of Shakespeare's Hamlet, who said, 'Nothing's either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.' In such discussions the child has to be helped to appreciate that we have in our society an exaggeratedly punitive and moralistic attitude about adult-child sexual encounters."

Ibid. p.549

"If the mother has reacted to the abuse in a hysterical fashion, or used it as an excuse for a campaign of denigration of the father, then the therapist does well to try and 'sober her up'... Her hysterics... will contribute to the child's feeling that a heinous crime has been committed and will thereby lessen the likelihood of any kind of rapproachment with the father. One has to do everything possible to help her put the 'crime' in proper perspective. She has to be helped to appreciate that in most societies in the history of the world, such behavior was ubiquitous, and this is still the case."

Ibid. p.584-585

"Mothers who have been sexually abused as children may have residual anger toward her molesting father or other sexual molester, and this may be interfering with her relationship with her husband. This should be explored in depth, and she should be helped to reduce such residual anger... Perhaps she can be helped to appreciate that in the history of the world his behavior has probably been more common than the restrained behavior of those who do not sexually abuse their children."

Ibid. p.585

"It is likely that the mother has sexual problems... In many cases she herself was sexually molested as a child... She may never have achieved an orgasm -- in spite of the fact that she was sexually molested, in spite of the fact that she had many lovers, and in spite of the fact that she is now married. The therapist, then, does well to try to help her achieve such gratification. Verbal statements about the pleasures of orgastic response are not likely to prove very useful. One has to encourage experiences, under proper situations of relaxation, which will enable her to achieve the goal of orgastic response... Vibrators can be extremely useful in this regard, and one must try to overcome any inhibition she may have with regard to their use... her own diminished guilt over masturbation will make it easier for her to encourage the practice in her daughter, if this is warranted. And her increased sexuality may lessen the need for her husband to return to their daughter for sexual gratification."

Ibid. pp.584-585

"If he [the molesting father] doesn't know this already, he has to be helped to appreciate that pedophilia has been considered the norm by the vast majority of individuals in the history of the world. He has to be helped to appreciate that, even today, it is a widespread and accepted practice among literally billions of people. He has to appreciate that in our Western society especially, we take a very punitive and moralistic attitude toward such inclinations... He has had a certain amount of back [sic] luck with regard to the place and time he was born with regard to social attitudes toward pedophilia. However, these are not reasons to condemn himself."

Ibid. pp.593

"Of relevance here is the belief by many of these therapists that a sexual encounter between an adult and a child -- no matter how short, no matter how tender, loving, and non-painful -- automatically and predictably must be psychologically traumatic to the child... The determinant as to whether the experience will be traumatic is the social attitude toward these encounters."

Ibid. pp.670-71

"I believe it is reasonable to say that at this time there are millions of people in the United States who are either directly accusing or supporting false sex-abuse accusations and/or are reacting in an extremely exaggerated fashion to situations in which bona fide sex abuse has occurred."

Ibid. p.688

Mandated reporting of child abuse has resulted in the "reporting of the most frivolous and absurd accusations by two- and three-year-olds, vengeful former wives, hysterical mothers of nursery school children, and severely disturbed women against their elderly fathers."

Gardner, Richard A., Issues in Child Abuse Accusations, 5(1), p.26

"We need well-publicized civil lawsuits against incompetent and/or overzealous psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, child protection workers, 'child advocates,' police, and detectives whose ineptitude has promulgated a false accusation."

Ibid. p.26

---

OTHER ARTICLES ON THIS SUBJECT:

LIZ RESPONDS TO RICHARD GARDNER
responding to criticisms of PAS theory

PAS: WHY THERE IS NO SUCH THING
by liz

RICHARD GARDNER: A SELF-MADE MAN
by Judith M. Simon

WHAT IS PARENTAL ALIENATION SYNDROME?
by John E. B. Meyers, Esq.

PAS: HAS PSYCHIATRY GONE PSYCHO?
and LETTER BY KAREN ANDERSON
by Kelly Patricia O'Meara

LIZNOTES TABLE OF CONTENTS

Father Accused of Family Torture, Murder Appears in Court

35-year-old Ian Roderiquez allegedly killed his teenage son and tortured his wife and four other children.

VIDEO: Watch Elizabeth Espinosa's Report



Ian Roderiquez appears in court on murder and torture charges. (KTLA News / March 30, 2011)

• VIDEO: Father Charged with Murder, Torture Faces Judge - Elizabeth Espinosa reports

• Sujal Roderiquez and her son, Richard, who was killed in the attack

SAN BERNARDINO (KTLA) -- A 35-year-old father accused of killing his teenage son and torturing his wife and four other children appeared in San Bernardino Superior Court Wednesday morning.

35-year-old Ian Roderiquez was in court to confirm the appointment of his lawyer, Deputy Public Defender Celia Torres.

Prosecutors also got a protective order to keep Roderiquez from having any contact with his family. They say he faces up to six life sentences if convicted.

Roderiquez is currently behind bars and being held without bail.

Check out our crossword, Sudoko and Jumble puzzles >>

Meantime, gruesome new details have been released in the case.

According to a police report, Roderiquez beat his wife and children repeatedly with a monkey wrench, forced them to walk on broken glass and threatened to set them on fire during the 11-hour ordeal.

His eldest son, 16-year-old Richard was beaten so badly he died.

The incident began at about 10 p.m. on March 22 at Roderiquez' home in the 6700 block Merito Avenue in the Del Rosa neighborhood of San Bernardino.

According to police, Roderiquez accused his family of stealing his drugs and then proceeded to attack, beat and torture them for 11 hours.

"He was a bad man to me," neighbor Jo Ann Castillo told KTLA. "I didn't like the way he looked, the way he treated his children, the way he spoke with them. He cursed at them. He denied them of things that we know children should have."

Deputies responded to the home 9:15 a.m. Wednesday after receiving a 911 call from a neighbor reporting a man screaming for help inside the home.

When deputies arrived, they found Richard laying on the garage floor, underneath a car seat, covered with blood.

According to the report, Richard had numerous injuries including a possible broken lower leg, numerous cut and stab wounds all over his body and legs, blunt-force trauma to his left hand and multiple skull fractures.

Roderiquez' four other children -- 13-year-old Jacob, 12-year-old Gabriel, 10-year-old Daniella and 8-year-old Yasmine were found inside the home.

The children had all suffered blunt force trauma wounds and were taken to the hospital.

The surviving children told detectives that their father had forced them to walk barefoot on broken glass. Daniella told them she refused to lay down in the glass, prompting her father to pour bleach on her and threaten to set her on fire.

Roderiquez' wife, 35-year-old Sujal Roderiquez, suffered several stab wounds from a pair of scissors.

Roderiquez was arrested on suspicion of murder, attempted murder, torture and child abuse, said Cindy Bachman, spokeswoman for the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department.

According to neighbors, the father was yelling and cursing in the street earlier in the day.

One neighbor said that he yelled at the kids frequently.

"He was a drinker, so he would get in his moods... everybody knew him always yelling at the kids and stuff," Sofia Symeou told KTLA.

Symeou also said the kids showed signs of desperation.

"They would go around asking for food from the neighbors, or money, and whenever we gave them something it was like Christmas to them."

Two of the surviving children are now in protective custody.

Roderiquez pleaded not guilty to one count of murder, one count of attempted murder, four counts of torture, and four counts of child abuse.

Any one wishing to help the family can do so by sending a donation to the Memorial Funds for Richard and Family account at 1st Valley Credit Union, 402 2nd Street, San Bernardino, CA 92401.

It's not angst over custody: fathers kill their children to punish their ex-partners.

Men's murderous revenge

Illustration: Spooner

It's not angst over custody: fathers kill their children to punish their ex-partners.

Since Arthur Freeman was found guilty of murdering his four-year-old daughter, Darcey, much of the media focus has been on the distress of fathers going through separation and custody disputes. There has been a call for more support for fathers.

However, we must ask ourselves whether we are losing sight of the victims and, more importantly, whether this is the best approach to preventing these deaths from occurring in the future.

While the community understandably struggles to comprehend a parent killing a child, our research shows that these are not inexplicable tragedies. There is a particular type of filicide (the killing of children by parents) that occurs in the context of the separation of the parents.

In these ''spousal revenge'' cases - as recognised by the Freeman jury - fathers kill their children to punish their ex-partners. There is usually no prior violence against the children. In fact, they appear to love their children. The act of killing is directed towards harming the child's mother. The motive is revenge.

In the case of Freeman and Robert Farquharson (found guilty of three counts of murder of his sons Bailey, Tyler and Jai, aged two to 10, who drowned in a dam near Winchelsea), both fathers indicated that they wished to punish their ex-partner. Shortly before killing Darcey, Freeman told his ex-wife to say goodbye to her children and that she would never see them again - clearly to make her suffer. Farquharson told a friend that he would make his ex-wife suffer by taking what mattered to her most - her children.

Contrary to some claims, these cases are not about fathers losing access to their children. The reality is that in both cases, the fathers had access to their children and, in both cases, killed them during it.

There is no logic to the thinking that if a person is distressed about not spending enough time with their kids they would decide to kill them.

If, however, they are consumed with anger and hatred towards their ex-partner and wish to hurt them, then it is, tragically, a very effective means to do so.

The killing of the children in such cases should be recognised as a form of violence against the mother. We need to explore the relationship between the parents in order to understand the killing of children. In particular, the father's attitudes and behaviour towards the mother before, and after, separation must be examined. VicHealth has clearly identified the underlying causes of violence against women as including belief in rigid gender roles and a masculine sense of entitlement.

What we really need to challenge is the sense of entitlement that some men have over their families, an entitlement that leads them to believe that their partner has no right to leave them and no right to form a new relationship, and that punishing her is justified because of the suffering they themselves experience.

The current focus of commentary suggests that men are victims of the family law system. The mothers seem to be implicitly blamed for the distress their partners experienced when they left them.

Let's be clear: the first and foremost victims here are the children whose lives are taken. The mothers, whose children have died in perhaps the worst way imaginable, are also the victims, as are remaining siblings and other family members. Darcey Freeman's mother, Peta Barnes, had expressed concerns about the safety of her children before Darcey's death. She also expressed concerns about Arthur Freeman's ''anger management issues'' and mood swings. It is important that such concerns are heard and responded to appropriately by a broad range of professionals coming into contact with separating parents, as well as by family and friends.

The family law process must make children's safety its absolute priority. Importantly, the federal government has a family law bill before Parliament that prioritises the safety of children in family law matters.

The Domestic Violence Resource Centre Victoriaacknowledges that separation and family breakdown can be incredibly difficult for parents. Parents should be assisted to deal with separation and encouraged to take responsibility for their behaviour. As a community, we need to focus on building positive and respectful relationships.

We support the call for greater services and support. We ask that these services be equipped to identify and respond to risks to the safety and wellbeing of children and their parents. We need to ensure there is accurate and reliable screening and risk assessment for all forms of family violence. These cases demonstrate that the risk of harm to children is closely linked to risks of harm to the mother.

Cases such as Freeman's have a profound impact on the community and we are right to search for answers. Unfortunately, there has been very little research on parents who kill their children in the past decade in Australia. If we are to find ways to prevent these deaths, we need a far better understanding of why and how they occur.

Arthur Freeman: Father is a cold blooded murderer of his 4 year old daughter Darcy Freeman whom was thrown from the west gate bridge to her death. video of the murder scene.

Contains Video Footage of Arthur Freeman Murdering 4 year old Darcy throwing her off the bridge After being awarded shared parenting.

Herald Sun

Galleries: The death of Darcey Freeman http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/photo-gallery/gallery-e6frf94x-1111120724397?page=20

   

impropriety? Learn the language….

Hat tip to Sbry for this!

There is a collaboration of differences within the court system itself. If a judge orders you to a specific person, i.e. psychologist, GAL, etc... it is presumed that this person has been before the judge; for the judge to determine their merits. In that example, the question of the judges opinion of that person is called upon. Why would a judge specifically ask for this person, and although he/she has been before the judge, what were the reasons for the judge to specifically require a person to see this specific person?I believe that the first instant this happens, the litigant has the right to know why, the very reason a judge chooses another person to come into any case.

What exactly is it that the judge saw in this person? How long has this person been before this judge? Has there been any other functions that the judge and this person been to? Do they have the same circle of friends? How many cases has this judge ordered litigants to see this person? Does the judge have this persons direct number? Has the judge called this person? (In the last 3 months, 6 months, 9 months?) It is questionable when a judge orders anything out of the normal function and I figured when we have more to lose, that is when the judge gets nasty...that's when they require more, expect you to jump through hoops set on fire, when in all essence, they know you will not be able to.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/d/deliberate-indifference/

Deliberate indifference is the conscious or reckless disregard of the consequences of one's acts or omissions. It entails something more than negligence, but is satisfied by something less than acts or omissions for the very purpose of causing harm or with knowledge that harm will result.

In law, the courts apply the deliberate indifference standard to determine if a professional has violated an inmate’s civil rights. Deliberate indifference occurs when a professional knows of and disregards an excessive risk to an inmate’s health or safety. Even though it is difficult to identify what does and does not constitute deliberate indifference, courts have recognized several factual scenarios where deliberate indifference exists. For example, intentionally refusing to respond to an inmate’s complaints has been acknowledged as constituting deliberate indifference. [Gutierrez v. Peters, 111 F.3d 1364, 1366 (7th Cir. Ill. 1997)]; Intentionally delaying medical care for a known injury (i.e. a broken wrist) has been held to constitute deliberate indifference. [Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825 (U.S. 1994).]

The following are examples of case law discussing deliberate indifference

Prison employees who act with deliberate indifference to the inmates' safety violate the Eighth Amendment. But to be guilty of "deliberate indifference" they must know they are creating a substantial risk of bodily harm. If they place a prisoner in a cell that has a cobra, but they do not know that there is a cobra there (or even that there is a high probability that there is a cobra there), they are not guilty of deliberate indifference even if they should have known about the risk, that is, even if they were negligent--even grossly negligent or even reckless in the tort sense--in failing to know. But if they know that there is a cobra there or at least that there is a high probability of a cobra there, and do nothing, that is deliberate indifference.[Billman v. Indiana Dep't of Corrections, 56 F.3d 785, 788 (7th Cir. Ind. 1995)]

Deliberate indifference is defined as “a failure to act where prison officials have knowledge of a substantial risk of serious harm to inmate health or safety.” Crayton v. Quarterman, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103709 (N.D. Tex. Oct. 14, 2009)

Deliberate indifference is defined as requiring (1) an "awareness of facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm exists" and (2) the actual "drawing of the inference." Elliott v. Jones, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91125 (N.D. Fla. Sept. 1, 2009).

Learn the language........

Punish the Children if They Refuse to Go With the Abuser

BATTERED MOTHERS, CHILD CUSTODY, ABUSE AND MURDER

Societal accepted ‘norms’-Approve Abuse and Murder of Women and Children

Child abuse: when family courts get it wrong By Kathleen Russell »

 

Claudine Dombrowski after another beating by her daughter’s father, Hal Richardson

Well, this is very Gardneristic (the pedophile-loving psychologist that invented so-called “parental alienation syndrome”)…punish the children if they won’t go to the dad willingly.  Yes, this is happening.   Could you see Claudine Dombrowski (pictured to the left) telling her daughter it is her desire to that shesees and loves her father (the father that produced the injuries in the picture, who eventually caused her to be 100% disabled)?  (I don’t think anyone could lie that well.)  Instead, her daughter’s father keeps her from seeing her mother.

The American Psychological Association is living in La La Land, or doing some serious drugs, if they believe that children in joint custody have fewer behavior issues if one of those parents abuses the other parent.  But what is more common is for abusers to get custody, like in Claudine Dombrowski’s case…..yes, they may start off with joint custody, under the “friendly parent” sharade, but they quickly work towards securing sole custody away from their victims. This is “domestic violence by proxy.”

So send the children off to the abuser, even though they beg and cry not to go.  Even though they tell you they are getting “bad touches” or being violated in some way.  Even if your children are being raped.  Off they go or you will be punished.  No matter what the children will think of you for making them go.   When will these organizations that represent Whores of the Courtrealize that children are harmed far more by being forced to be with an abuser or rapist than forcing them to love mommy and daddy, no matter what?  Shouldn’t it make sense to these people that the relationship the parent had before the breakup (or didn’t have) should mean something, instead of forcing something down the children’s throats?

Judge Tells Mom: Punish Kids For Skipping Visits With Dad

by Melissa Kossler Dutton

Oct 1st 2009 4:08PM

Australian kids who want to skip visits with dad may find themselves without video games, television or other favorite pastimes.

A judge has ordered a mother to deny her children privileges until they comply with a court order requiring them to spend time with their father.The judge said noncustodial parents need to “positively encourage” visitation and start “removing privileges if the child was defiant,” according to an article in The Australian.

The father asked the court to intervene when his children chose to walk home to their mother’s house rather than meet him for a scheduled after-school visit. The 43-year-old dad later received a call from his ex who told him the boys, aged 11 and 12, “did not wish to go with them,” according to the article.

The problem is “very prevalent” among American fathers as well,Mitchell K. Karpf, chair of the American Bar Association’s Family Law section, told ParentDish.

Judges here have the power to enact similar rulings after a divorce, he said.

“Mom does have an obligation to say you’re going to see your dad and if you don’t you’re grounded,” said Karpf, who practices in Florida.

Judges also can take parents to task for badmouthing former spouses or preventing visitation.

A Florida court once ordered a mother to tell her children that it was “her desire” that they see and love their father, Karpf said. Encouraging children to maintain relationships with both parents makes sense, according to the American Psychological Association. Children in joint custody arrangements have fewer behavior issues, do better in school and have higher self esteem, according to a 2002 study published in the Journal of Family Psychology.

Equality with a Vengeance Men's Rights Groups, Battered Women, and Antifeminist Backlash

http://www.upne.com/1-55553-738-3.html

Click for larger image

Equality with a Vengeance
Men's Rights Groups, Battered Women, and Antifeminist Backlash
Molly Dragiewicz
Northeastern Series on Gender, Crime, and Law
Northeastern University Press
2011 • 168 pp. 2 illus. 5 1/2 x 8 1/2"
Women's Studies / Law

$26.00 Paper, 978-1-55553-739-5
$85.00 Cloth, 978-1-55553-738-8

(Cloth edition is un-jacketed.
Cover illustration is for paperback edition only)

---

A provocative investigation of how fathers’ rights groups are trying to erode the gains of the battered women’s movement

This book investigates efforts by fathers’ rights groups to undermine battered women’s shelters and services, in the context of the backlash against feminism. Dragiewicz examines the lawsuit Booth v. Hvass, in which fathers’ rights groups attempted to use an Equal Protection claim to argue that funding emergency services that target battered women is discriminatory against men. As Dragiewicz shows, this case (which was eventually dismissed) is relevant to widespread efforts to promote a degendered understanding of violence against women in order to eradicate policies and programs that were designed to ameliorate harm to battered women.

Endorsements:

“Equality with a Vengeance is a clear and convincing, finely contextualized account of violence against women and the multifaceted sources that help to understand its origin, pervasiveness and persistence. Dragewicz’s work stands to combat the resurgence of myths about interpersonal violence promulgated by anti-feminist fathers’ rights groups.”
—Susan Caringella, Professor, Department of Sociology, Criminal Justice Program, Western Michigan University

“This book is a major contribution to the field of domestic violence, as no one else is writing about the lawsuits being filed by men's rights groups around the U.S. whose purpose is to defund shelters for battered women. Dragiewicz analyzes the first of these suits in depth, explaining why the arguments made by the plaintiffs are wrong legally, and demonstrating the ways that these arguments mirror typical statements by batterers.”—Nancy K. D. Lemon, Lecturer, Berkeley School of Law, UC Berkeley

Click here for TABLE OF CONTENTS

MOLLY DRAGIEWICZ is Assistant Professor in the Faculty of Criminology, Justice and Policy Studies at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology.

Killer father gets life sentence

Chris Grady was given a life sentence with a minimum term of 15 years. (s)

Gary Smee

http://www.eveshamobserver.co.uk/story-Killer-father-gets-life-sentence-37522.html

A FATHER who killed his daughter and attempted to murder his son by driving them into the River Avon has been jailed for life with a minimum sentence of 15 years.
Chris Grady, of no fixed address, was convicted by a majority verdict at Birmingham Crown Court and sentenced on Tuesday (March 22) at the end of a three week trial.
The judge, Mr Justice Lindblom, told the 43-year-old he must serve at least 15 years for the murder of five-year-old Gabby Grady and ten years to run concurrently for the attempted murder of Ryan Grady who was six at the time of last February’s ordeal at Hampton Ferry in Evesham when he drove his car into the freezing river.
Grady has already spent 402 days in custody and this will be deducted from the sentence.
On passing sentence Mr Justice Lindblom said what Grady did would horrify any right-thinking person and had put his defenceless children, who were screaming and crying, in terror.
“Those crimes were born of anger and self-pity,” he said.
“In all of this, Ryan and Gabby were innocent. They were your children, they loved you. They looked to you for protection and support.”
During the trial, jurors heard that Grady had warned the children’s mother, Kim Smith, she had 10 seconds to say goodbye to them before he drove into the water at Hampton Ferry.
Miss Smith, 37, said he arrived at her house in Abbot’s Walk, Evesham, at around 9.15am, telling her to say goodbye, before driving away shouting the word river.
She said his face was contorted and vile with anger.
Grady had denied the charges saying it was an accident but the jury took five hours to find Grady guilty of both counts.
After Grady was led away from the court the judge offered his condolences to Miss Smith.
He said: “I turn to the family and in particular Miss Smith and Ryan (who was not in court).
“I offer them my own sympathy in their loss and I hope that the pain of that loss may now be easier to bear.
“You took from Miss Smith her daughter, and from Ryan his sister. You left your family to grieve.
“She says that what you did has shattered everyone in her family.
“She says that what they go through every day is like a recurring nightmare.’’

For more reaction to the Grady sentencing turn to page 3.

Incestuous German Father Convicted of 162 Counts of Abuse

http://www.aolnews.com/2011/03/22/incestuous-german-father-convicted-of-162-counts-of-abuse/

A German man whose stepdaughter bore eight of his children has been sentenced to 14 years in prison.

"This is about a pitiless egoist. He viewed his family as his property," Judge Winfried Hetger said.

According to ABC News, the defendant, a 48-year-old unemployed truck driver identified only as Detlef S., sat emotionless as he was convicted of 162 counts of sexual abuse.

Detlef, a former resident of Fluterschen, was accused of abusing his stepson and stepdaughter starting in 1987, when they were 4 and 6 years old, and continuing until 2010.

According to Hetger, Detlef also abused his biological daughter, who is now 18.

"When she was 12 years old he took her into a forest and raped her inside his Toyota Corolla," the judge said. "He explained to her that this was something really great."

Detlef forced both the biological daughter and the stepdaughter into prostitution, the judge said. In August, the biological daughter went to police with the molestation and rape allegations that resulted in her father's arrest.

During the trial it was revealed that Detlef had fathered eight children with his stepdaughter. Koblenz state court spokesman Alexander Walter told CNN that all but one of them is alive today. Koblenz was uncertain about the stepdaughter's age at the time of the various births.

Judge Hetger also ruled that Detlef should remain imprisoned indefinitely because there is a high risk that he could offend again if released.

Speaking with ABC News, Detlef's stepson and his sister, identified as Bjoern B. and Natascha S., said they were shaken by the verdict but happy that justice was served.

"Today is a day of truth, a day of justice," said Bjoern B., now 28. "Now we will see how we can continue our lives."

Law change liable to upset fathers –GO AUSTRALIA!!

http://www.theage.com.au/national/law-change-liable-to-upset-fathers-20110323-1c6qa.html

THE Gillard government will provoke the ire of fathers' groups today with landmark changes to family law designed to protect children in cases of domestic violence.

Attorney-General Robert McClelland will press ahead with legislation winding back some of the shared parenting changes ushered in by the Howard government.

The changes will make it easier for parents to produce evidence of violence in cases where parents are in dispute over contact arrangements. The legislation will include new legal definitions of abuse and family violence.

The government believes the Howard changes made it difficult for women to make allegations of domestic violence in custody disputes because they could end up with costs awarded against them, or be branded an unfriendly parent, increasing the chances of shared care being ordered.

Family law experts, and women's groups, have urged the government to make child safety a more compelling legal principle than the concept of equal parenting rights.

The bill went out for a consultation period and the government has changed the original proposal to ensure courts will still take note of the level of parental participation in a child's life and their preparedness to provide financial support.

The architect of the changes, former family court judge Richard Chisholm, said the government had chosen not to adopt all of his recommendations, but the amendments were positive. ''It is a sensible and moderate measure,'' Professor Chisholm said.

Mr McClelland, who has been lobbied extensively by shared-care proponents, said the government remained supportive of mothers and fathers sharing care of their children after marriages failed ''but only where this is safe for the child''.

The Coalition has signalled it will block the measure, forcing the government to court the crossbench for support.

Father tortured family before killing son, wounding wife, four kids, police say

VIDEO HERE: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/03/father-tortured-family-before-killing-son-wounding-wife-four-kids-police-say.html

San Bernardino police detectives on Thursday continued to investigate a bloody crime scene at a Del Rosa neighborhood home where police say a father tortured his family before his killing 16-year-old son and wounding his wife and four other children.

The Wednesday morning attack was so bloody and vicious that investigators still were trying to determine what weapon, or weapons, were used.

"It wasn't apparent from just looking at the victims if there was a weapon used, or more than one type of weapon used," said Cindy Bachman, spokeswoman for the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department.

Ian Roderiquez, 35, was arrested on suspicion of murder, attempted murder and torture, she said.

The suspect's wife, 35-year-old Sujal, suffered severe injuries and, along with the four children, remained hospitalized, Bachman said.

"A neighbor about 9:15 [a.m.] called 911, saying that a male subject at a nearby residence was screaming for help," Bachman said.

When police arrived at the house in the 6600 block of Merito Avenue, they detained Roderiquez as he was leaving. Deputies then entered the home and found the victims, Bachman said.

Earlier reports described the attack as a stabbing, but detectives are still trying to determine how the injuries were inflicted, she said.

The teen boy killed was identified as Richard Roderiquez. The injured children were Jacob, 13; Gabriel, 12; Daniella, 10; and Yasmine, 8, officials said.

All of the injured children were expected to survive and will be placed in the custody of the county's children and family services agency when released from the hospital, Bachman said.

Dr. Sharon K. Araji Talks about Domestic Violence in Contested Child Custody

This 28 minute Documentary explains how Abusers use the Court System to continue to abuse the mother for leaving, by taking her children.

Guardian ad Litems, Mental Health Professionals, Supervised Visits, Fathers Rights --

All make money by keeping the battered mother away from her children and by giving the children to the documented batterer.

These are crimes and in Family Court they are dismissed and turned into profit for the above so called ‘experts’.

Child trafficking is legal in Family Courts.

Run Mommy, Run, Their is no justice--- ‘JUST US’ perps-—batterers, GALs, MHPs, Custody Evaluators, High Conflict experts, Supervised Visitation, mediation… the list goes on and on.

Family Courts Need Reform, Say Judges, Legislators

Keep em coming Peter Jamison! Each and EVERY State in the Nation needs to take your lead!

http://www.sfweekly.com/2011-03-23/news/family-court-jerilyn-borack-mark-leno-peter-jamison/

Family Courts Need Reform, Say Judges, Legislators

By Peter Jamison Wednesday, Mar 23 2011

Our March 2 cover story, "Illegal Guardians," detailed problems in the state family courts' procedures for investigating allegations of child abuse and spousal battery in divorce proceedings — and four cases in which custody decisions led to children being placed with physically or sexually abusive parents. In one, a 9-month-old boy was murdered by his father after a judge refused the mother's request for a protective order.

Fred Noland

Since then, SF Weekly has spoken with two state officials who have been at the forefront of family court reform. They agreed that the problems need to be addressed, but had different ideas about where to start.

Sacramento Superior Court Judge Jerilyn Borack served on the state's Elkins Family Law Task Force, which issued a 2010 report on how to improve litigants' experience of the family courts. She says the key to improving court assessments of potential child abuse is devoting more resources in the form of money or personnel to the system. That could allow more time to look into abuse accusations when they arise, just as significant time is spent appraising the value of property divided in a divorce settlement. "I don't know why there is any more reticence to deal with an allegation of sexual abuse as to deal with, 'The house is worth $2 million; no, it's worth $200,000,'" she says.

State Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) thinks the courts need more than just additional resources. He says they need strict monitoring to ensure that officials properly review abuse accusations. "There needs to be some response if courts are not abiding by the law," he says.

Leno was the driving force behind a recently completed audit of the family courts in Marin and Sacramento counties, which found that mediators in both courts appeared to lack adequate qualifications to do their jobs. Following the completion of that audit, he says the courts have until January 2012 to "clean up their act."

At that point, he says, he will weigh whether additional legislation is necessary to push the judiciary toward reform. He says it can be politically sensitive to challenge the authority of state judges and their advisers, but that in light of the "horrific and frightening" cases described by SF Weekly, lawmakers might have no choice. "Part of the delicacy here is that we're talking about a separate but equal branch of government," he says. "But when you see the kind of abuses that you reported on, and that we uncovered through our audit, I think the legislative branch may need to step in."

Hawaii - SR84 & HR189 - Family Court Audit

Courtesy AngelGroup

SR84 & HR189 - Family Court Audit

Angels!  Here is little piece of heaven for you.  PLEASE support these Resolutions at every turn.  This is the fruit of your bravery and labor:)

Read SR84

Read HR189 (check out all the the signatures!!)

READ HCR218

REQUESTING AN AUDIT OF CHILD CUSTODY PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING THE COMMISSION OF FAMILY VIOLENCE BY A PARENT, TO ASSESS THE APPLICATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECTION 571-46, HAWAII REVISED STATUTES.

WHEREAS, domestic violence is recognized as a pattern of behaviors used by one person to coercively control another person in a relationship; and
WHEREAS, domestic violence may take the form of psychological, physical, or sexual abuse and may happen once or periodically to victims of any age, gender, race, culture, religion, education level, employment status, or marital status; and
WHEREAS, the primary, most damaging, and long-term form of domestic violence is psychological abuse, which rarely leaves any physical traces of its occurrence; and
WHEREAS, victims of abuse are encouraged to terminate relationships with abusive partners for their own safety and the safety of their children and to avert further and future harm; and
WHEREAS, the termination of an abusive relationship may increase a perpetrator's lethality because the perpetrator loses control over the victim and may increase abusive behavior in order to regain control; and
WHEREAS, child custody and visitation frequently become disputed issues after a victim successfully escapes an abusive relationship; and
WHEREAS, the litigation of child custody and visitation disputes often provides perpetrators of domestic abuse and family violence with an ongoing venue for the continued use of coercive control against their former partners under the guise of child custody and visitation concerns; and

WHEREAS, domestic violence is a serious crime in addition to being a serious personal or family problem; and

WHEREAS, section 571-46 (a) (9) - (14) , Hawaii Revised Statutes, establishes specific criteria for the Family Court to consider in custody or visitation disputes when family violence has occurred; and

WHEREAS, the Legislature is concerned that Family Court judges may not be correctly applying or enforcing section 571-46 (a) (9) - (14) , Hawaii Revised Statutes, to the detriment of domestic violence survivors and their children and ultimately punishing survivors and their children for successfully escaping abusive homes; now, therefore,

BE IT RESOLVED by the Senate of the Twenty-sixth Legislature of the State of Hawaii, Regular Session of 2011, that the Office of the Auditor is requested to conduct an audit of a sampling of contested child custody proceedings in which family violence has been alleged to have been committed by a parent and that were heard by the Family Courts during the period from January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2010, to assess the application and enforcement of section 571-46(a) ( 9 ) - (14), Hawaii Revised Statutes, by the Family Court; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Judiciary is requested to redact the names of all parties, witnesses, attorneys, judges, and other interested persons from all selected custody proceedings to maintain privacy and confidentiality; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Office of the Auditor is requested to submit a report of any findings and recommendations to the Legislature no later than twenty days prior to the convening of the Regular Session of 2012; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that certified copies of this be transmitted to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Senior Judge of the Family Court, the Administrative of the Courts, the Chief and the State Auditor.

Abusers Get Kids- Radio Show with Ron Winckler (HI)

Courtesy AngelGroup Abusers get Kids - Radio with Ron Winckler

 

Listen to the March 14, 2011 interview on:

Maui Mud Flats Radio Show

Three brave survivors of Domestic and Family Violence, have come forward to share their stories of how they were re-victimized through Hawaii's Family Courts. Hawaii - well known for honeymoons, weddings and "paradise" vacations -  is more aptly recognized as quite the opposite when trying to navigate the process of divorce and child custody, especially if one is fleeing an abusive relationship. 

In Hawaii, there are a few renegade judges who disregard statutory laws that FORBID children being given to perpetrators of abuse. 

The three whistleblower mothers featured on this radio show, have suffered at the hands of the very "officials" put in place to protect them.  Child Welfare Services and Dept. of Human Services have  - thus far - only contributed to the problems in these cases.  Please listen to the show.  If you are also a victim of Hawaii's Family Courts and would like to share your story,  Contact AngelGroup.

The Tactics and Ploys of Psychopath Aggressors in the Family Law System

by Charles Pragnell

 

n the twenty years I have been advising parents, children, and their legal advisers in several hundred cases in Family Law matters, I have often been asked, “Why is it that children are so often ordered to have contact with, and even into the custody of, parents who have abused them and have perpetrated violence against their partners.”

The answer to this question is not simple and involves an examination of the requirements of Family Laws which stress the importance of children having both parents in their lives after parental separation, the dynamics of legal processes, and the often very clear gender biases of the principals involved in judicial processes.

But one of the most outstanding and consistent features of proceedings involving the care of children post-separation are the conduct and behaviours which can be identified as clearly fitting the definitions of psychopathy/sociopathy.

The major personality traits of the psychopath are supremacy and narcissism. The afflicted individual must be in complete control of their environment and all persons who are a part of that environment or can serve the psychopath’s purposes in maintaining control.

The psychopath is capable of using both aggressive anger and passive anger with cunning and guile, to achieve their goals of exerting control. Examples of such contrary behaviours are the aggressive violence against intimate partners, with the frequent inherent abuse of children, designed to groom friends, relatives, and professionals into believing they are harmless and indeed very stable and friendly. If thwarted in attaining these goals, however, the passive can quickly turn into the aggressive.

In furtherance of these traits, the major tactics and ploys of the psychopath are:

1. denial of wrongdoings in the face of clear evidence;
2. refusal to take responsibility for behaviours and actions;
3. minimisation of the incident and consequences;
4. blame being placed on others;
5. misrepresentation, fabrication, embellishment and distortion of information and evidence;
6. minimisation of all information and evidence regarding wrongdoing;
7. claims of victim status, alleging the victim was the aggressor;
8. projection of their own actions and behaviour onto the victim; e.g. she abuses/neglects the children/ she is an alcoholic or drug abuser. This is based on the belief by the psychopath that attack is the best form of defence.

The grooming of friends, relatives, and professionals is very clear in many cases, and in particular some psychiatrists, psychologists and family evaluators/reporters have been hoodwinked by such tactics and ploys by the psychopathic individual. Their reports, of course favouring the psychopath, have very considerable influence on the Courts and their determinations. Very often clear evidence of intimate partner violence such as convictions, Domestic Violence Orders, Apprehended Violence Orders and Restraining Orders against the psychopathic aggressor and medical evidence of injuries suffered by the adult and child victims are ignored or dismissed as irrelevant by such professionals.

Such professionals now refer to such cases as `high conflict’ cases, when it is clear that they are situations of a violent aggressor/tormentor/persecutor and their victims. It is easy to see how the cases in Austria and America where young girls were imprisoned for many years by controlling individuals and regularly abused in several ways were undetected, when the aggressors/persecutors/tormentors were able to convince their family members, relatives and associates that they were reasonable, normal people. The same often occurs in other cases of violence and murder where neighbours report that the accused murderer is a nice and friendly neighbour. They do not recognise the Jekyll and Hyde aspects of the psychopath’s ploys and tactics and of those they have effectively groomed in their beliefs.

The high conflict which usually occurs in such cases is most commonly engendered by the respective lawyers, conditioned by operating in an adversarial process and arena, whose own major goal is to ‘win’, whatever may be the justness and fairness of the result.

It is not difficult to see, therefore, how the psychopath is able to readily gain the sympathy and support of some of the professionals engaged in the Family Law system and for them to abandon and forfeit their professional objectivity and impartiality in such circumstances. In blaming others the psychopath will allege the former partner is mentally ill and in some cases the former partner may be suffering a Complex Post Traumatic Disorder after suffering years of physical, mental, and sexual abuse and violence. This is often misinterpreted and misdiagnosed as a Borderline Personality Disorder or similar psychiatric term. In effect it is a classic ‘blame the victim’ scenario.

The groomed professionals then enable the psychopath to achieve their primary objective, which is to maintain power and control over their victims, their former partner and children. It is an act of vengeance and spite but mostly it is to maintain the power and control and feelings of supremacism and narcissism. “I am faultless and flawless and in control of my whole environment” are the unvoiced cravings of the psychopath, and “I can continue to inflict my tortures on my victims with impunity” are the psychopath’s continuing behaviours.

The Family Law and their shared parenting provisions and its administration by the Family Courts have become ready enablers for the psychopath.

Charles Pragnell is an Independent Advocate for Children and Families.

“Hearts Across America” -- Million Mom March Mother's Day 2011, at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Washington, D.C.

American Mothers Political Party Proudly Endorses

“Hearts Across America” -- Million Mom March Mother's Day 2011, at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Washington, D.C.

The Mothers Movement is a persistent, insistent civil and human rights campaign. We will never give up until this horrible nightmare for children and nurturing safe mothers ends.

This page will be updated as events and information are disseminated through Mothers Day 2011
If you have an event going on anywhere on Mother’s Day Please go to the contact and send to us.  We will promptly add to this page!

For up to minute information: Please Visit the Facebook page – Million Mom March

Travel and Lodging links: (if you Google search cheap air or cheap lodging and others you will be able to find more). We placed the following links below as a start and idea’s only. We do not endorse any of the following. * Special Offers - Southwest Airlines * Washington DC Hostel’s * Cheap Flights and Lodging *Amtrak *Greyhound * Expedia *Washington DC Hotels/Motels

Mr. President,

Mothers across the Nation are losing custody of their children to pedophiles and batterers through your Fatherhood Initiatives’ Program’s are speaking out. Fatherhood Funding receives in excess of $500.000.000.00 to fix bad dad, these funds are diverted and used to take mothers children and give them to the abusive father under the pretense of ‘involving fathers’ in their children’s lives.

Mothers across the Nation call for a Congressional investigation into the failure of family courts to protect children and potential fraud, waste and abuse of taxpayer dollars. Obama (and Congress) you are killing children with the tax payer’s money. STOP FATHERHOOD FUNDING NOW! Here is a sample letter that all can write to their congressman.

For mothers throughout the United States - corresponding events planned on Mother’s Day 2011.

EVENTS:

• California who would love to be there but can't please join us here in California! EVERYONE COME MARCH AGAINST JUDICIAL CORRUPTION WITH US

• MOTHERS DAY IN WASHINGTON DC AND CALIFORNIA
Mother's of Lost Children and other organizations are marching in Washington D.C on Mother's Day, Sunday May 8 and Monday May 9, 2011.
For those who cannot go to Washington, a march will be held at the CA State Capitol in Sacramento CA on Monday May 9th at 10:00 am to 7:00 pm.

• We will bring attention to the issue of how our broken family and juvenile court systems are harming children
• Speaker Pro Tempore Fiona Ma has graciously agreed to speak at our event.
• We are assembling a panel of experts: attorneys, investigators, child abuse experts, judges, domestic violence experts, psychologists, authors, etc.. to speak.
• We would also like to have a survivor's panel comprised of those who have survived or are currently surviving (somehow) abuse by a perpetrator of DV or child abuse AND abuse by the family or juvenile court system.
• If you have contacts who may be willing to participate in our panels, please send their contact info to Sue at 209-217-4948 skyleramelia@yahoo.com

During the past two decades, mothers have been losing custody of their children (even nursing infants) in increasing numbers to fathers who are convicted or identified batterers, child molesters, drug addicts, gang-bangers and felons. Family courts force children into the custody of abusive fathers at alarming rates, allowing these men to continue controlling and abusing their victims. Research shows that 70% of batterers who ask for custody get it. Safe mothers who left the abusers in order to protect their children are frequently labeled "unfriendly" and are inappropriately ordered to supervised visitation or denied all contact with their children.

The National Fatherhood Initiative website states in 15 years it has "ensured that two million more children are living with their fathers". The Leadership Council research indicates 58,000 children are placed with abusers every year. These statistics may be connected. Read more here:

Mother bringing abuse case to Supreme Court (Daytona Beach, Florida)

If your organization is able to supply an amicus brief in support of this mother, please do. Although I've read about many outrageous miscarriages of justice when it comes to custody/visitation issues, Linda Marie Sacks' case is clearly one of the more outrageous.

Mother bringing case to US Supreme Court/ Constitutional Violations/ Rights of Mothers/Linda Marie Sacks

Human Rights Violations Rampant in the Family Courts of America

Questions Presented are of National Importance to America’s Children

March 3, 2011

Amicus Brief Requests

On May 6, 2011 the Friday before Mother's Day, Linda Marie Sacks will file a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court. After years of legal hearings, this mother's only legal option is to ask our highest court to hear why she is concerned about her daughters' safety and should not be on court-ordered supervised visitation seeing her children for only two hours each month, for the last 4 years.

Family court judges should not end or severely restrict parent-child relationships because a parent fears their child is being abused. In Linda Marie's case, she was not the only adult concerned that her daughter was sexually acting out. The court had written documents from a Sunday School volunteer who overheard the then 8-year-old say she sucks her father's penis and reports of suspected child abuse from a therapist who watched as the girl drew the family picture below depicting her father as an erect penis with legs.

Justice for Children, a national organization that advocates for children when “official avenues” have failed to protect them, wrote a letter to the investigating agencies outlining concerns that the allegations of sexual child abuse were not properly investigated.

In the U.S. Supreme Court, few petitions are granted certiorari but the chances increase when multiple Amicus Briefs are filed with the petition. If your organization can help with gathering Amicus Briefs for this case that would be greatly appreciated. The questions to be presented are:

1. If a parent makes a good faith allegation of abuse, with documented evidence,

in an effort to protect her children, should that parent be deprived of physical

custody of her children, or have their contact supervised, indefinitely without a

case plan, or reunification plan provided by the trial court?

2. Does a state court violate the First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments when it

deprives a parent of physical custody, and limits that parents contact to Supervised

Visitation with her children, for taking the reasonable action based upon a belief,

supported by facts that her children need protection from abuse?

3. Does a state court’s custody decision that deprives a parent of access to her

children indefinitely, unless supervised, without a finding of unfitness by clear and convincing evidence, which effectively terminates a party’s parental rights,

violate the Fifth and Fourteen Amendments?

It is difficult to get a case to this point in our legal system. All other avenues must be exhausted which requires years of hearings and a substantial financial burden. This is a chance to tell our highest court that parents should not be punished for trying to protect their children.

Below is a legal summary of the case concerning the constitutional issues being appealed.

1) A finding that the mother's due process rights were violated and the custody was reversed

In May 2007, Mother, Linda Marie Sacks, appealed the decision of Judge Shawn L. Briese. The Fifth District Court of Appeals on 8/08 (Case 5D07-1682) in Daytona Beach, Florida issued a written opinion and REVERSED AND REMANDED the decision of custody of R.S. and S.S, back to the lower court. In the opinion it noted that Mothers due process rights were violated, and the hearing to determine custody should never have taken place, and when it did it violated Mothers constitutional rights. 2007 Sacks v. Sacks 991 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)

2) The Fifth District denied a request to prohibit Judge Briese from again being the presiding judge

Immediately after the 8/ 08 REVERSAL AND REMAND in 1st appeal, a Writ of Prohibition,(Case 5D08-3668) was filed in the Fifth District Court of Appeals. The writ requested that Judge Shawn L. Briese be prohibited from being allowed to be the presiding judge on this case any further. The writ showed documented evidence of judicial misconduct, violations of judicial canon #3, violations of Fl Ad Code 2.330 and ex parte communications by the judge and the 2 attorneys of record for the former Husband. On 11/13/08 it was denied, without a written opinion or citation……just DENIED and thus it sent this Mother right back to Judge Shawn L. Briese for the retrial., the same Judge who violated her due process rights, as he refused to be disqualified, and he demanded to have her case back on his docket.

3) Judge Briese again violated the mother's due process rights

In the Retrial of Custody in April 2009, Father's two attorney firms did not present a case but simply rested when their turn to present arrived. Judge Briese issued his oral ruling in June 2009 and gave Father, Sole physical custody and continued to place Mother on Supervised visitation because she did a TV interview with Chan 9 News in Albany New York, at the Battered Mothers Custody Conference, and didn’t buy greeting card for the father while on Supervised visitation...so refused to allow Mother any contact with her children UNLESS supervised at the local visitation center. Judge Briese, once again, ignored, suppressed and dismissed documented evidence of abuse to the minor children by the father…..and kept Mother on Supervised Visitation.

Mother filed a pro se appeal and in her Amended Brief of Appellant p.48 it says:

“Due process requires that the ruling from the trial court support its conclusions by clear and convincing evidence. Trial court “abuses its discretion” with respect to a child custody determination only when a reasonable person would take the view adopted by the trial court. Would any reasonable person agree with the trial court’s ruling that the primary custody of the minor children R.S. and S.S. should be with the father and the mother should only have supervised visitation? The court is bound to by law to apply the test that if no reasonable person could differ as to the appropriateness of the trial court’s ruling then the ruling must not stand. As a reminder, this court already found the mother’s due process rights were violated when her children were taken away in April of 2007 Sacks v. Sacks 991 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008). When the trial court gave the oral ruling on June 26, 2009 regarding the “Retrial of Custody of Children” it disregarded documented abuse. It is clear that this was a blatant disregard of abuse and evidence was suppressed, dismissed and ignored. This strongly suggests bias, discrimination in making the decision regarding the custody of R.S. and S.S.”

4) Constitutional Issues were also raised

Amended Brief of Appellant p. 4 states:

“The fundamental constitutional equal right of a loving, caring Mother is to be able to raise and nurture their children. The standard of review is abuse of discretion. In Bevil v. Carson 966 So. 2nd 1007, 1009 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007), in reviewing a custody determination the appellate court considers whether there is substantial competent evidence to support the factual finding by the trial court and whether its in the best interests of the children. Id.

If substantial evidence does not support the factual finds then the court abused its discretion, Fuller v. Fuller 13 So. 3d 1108 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009). A parent has a constitutionally protected inherent right to a meaningful relationship with his or her children, and must be treated equally under all of the 4th, 9th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America. (Exhibit B) There is no reason to excuse the judiciary participating in depriving the parents of the care and custody and time with their children, and sadly, in this case mother and R.S. and S.S have only had 68 hours of contact at the Supervised Visitation center.

The record is clear, Linda Sacks is a loving , caring, devoted Mother who was concerned for the safety and well being of her children and tried to protect them, and in doing so was placed on supervised visitation unjustly.”

Constitutional rights of a parent were also in other parts of the briefs as well. Abuse of Discretion issues were also raised, as well as the “best interest of children.”

Abuse of discretion was raised as it is the Standard of Review. The standard of review for the trial courts finding and determination regarding primary parental responsibility is abuse of discretion. The trial court finds regarding the best interests of the child must be supported by competent, substantial evidence. Knifley v. Knifley, 944 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006).

Also stated:

The trial court abused its discretion by not terminating the supervised visitation imposed on Linda Sacks and compounded that error by refusing to allow contact unless it was supervised, and knowing their was no detriment to the children, and no evidence to support the trial courts ruling on custody of Linda sacks, Appellant’s Minor children, R.S. and S.S

The trial court abused its discretion when substantial competent evidence does not support the erroneous findings of the trial court in the final judgment of the retrial of custody of children.

The trial on April 24 and 28, 2009 on the retrial of Custody of children and the evidence presented does not support the oral ruling or written final judgment showing clear bias and prejudice and abuse of trial discretion.

The Court compounded that error in granting primary residential responsibility and sole physical custody to the father and supervised visitation to mother once again.

In the briefs these arguments were supported by the record and case law to support the argument.

A transcript from the Retrial in April 2009, was submitted showing the father admitting on the stand to verbal abusing the mother in front of the children, to an altercation in the kitchen of the family home with R.S. at 8 years old that resulted in this child getting a split lip and blood, to wiping down the vaginas of R.S. and S.S. (school age children), to being in the bathroom again with S.S. as she was naked in the tub, with him having her stand on one leg, with her other leg in the air, after just being told by a licensed psychologist to STAY out of the bathroom, and on the way home from that very office, came in the house with S.S. and did it again…within minutes of arriving home.

All of these admissions collaborated the Dept and Children Child Abuse Hotline Calls the police reports and Mothers Domestic Violence Injunction of Protection. But Judge Briese dismissed all and said in his oral ruling on June 26, 2009, and this is included in the Appeal briefs (Reply Brief of Appellant p. 6 and 7) states:

Judge Briese states: “He testified that nothing, ever inappropriate happened, sexually or physically, and the court finds it to be the case, as it did the first time.(R. Vol. 2. T. p. 189, 1. 18-20)

This is an erroneous finding by the trial court, and in Donn v. Donn, 733 So. 2nd 581 (Fla 4th DCA, 1999) the appeals court noted that there were numerous inconsistencies between the Final Judgment and fact as presented in the Final hearing and this was reversed and remanded for a new hearing.

Thank you for taking the time to review this summary. Should you need copies of any documents, simply ask and they will be provided to you quickly. Linda Marie Sacks raised these issues in her court case and the appeal to preserve the issues on appeal to go to the US Supreme Court for the Cert Petition, and has preserved the trial record as she has $17,000 worth of trial transcripts.

For Information on Amicus Briefs

Please contact:

Linda Marie Sacks

386-453-3017

lindamariesacks@aol.com

For Press

Please contact:

Kathleen Russell

Executive Director

Center for Judicial Excellence

495 Miller Avenue, Suite 304

Mill Valley, CA 94941

Main 415.388.9600 Fax 415.388.4610

www.CenterforJudicialExcellence.org

Mothers Losing Custody to Abusers: Sexist Bias & Power in Family Court on WBAI Radio 99.5 FM-- Wednesday, March 16, 9-10 pm

PLEASE POST WIDELY

On Wednesday, March 16, 9-10 pm, Joy of Resistance will present Mothers Losing Custody to Abusers: Sexist Bias & Power in Family Court on WBAI Radio @ 99.5 FM and streaming live on the web @ www.wbai.org

Joy of Resistance: Multicultural Feminist Radio @ WBAI is proud to welcome a group of courageous activists, lawyers, psychologists and embattled mothers to its airwaves.

Guests on this important show will be: Nancy Erickson, 40-year Custody Lawyer; Barry Goldstein, member: National Organization for Men Against Sexism, co-author (along w/Mo Hannah) of Domestic Violence, Abuse, and Child Custody; Mo Therese Hannah, Psychologist, founder of the Battered Mother's Custody Conference--as well as some of the mothers who are fighting for custody.

The show will include Feminist News & listener call-ins at (212) 209-2900.

Contrary to myths promoted  by Fathers' Rights Groups, it is mothers who who face an uphill battle in custody fights with fathers.

Men who fight for custody will win it 75% of the time; they can afford better lawyers and they can play on a  host of sexist prejudices against women that are rife in Family Court (and all of society) and which include:

• women are widely assumed to make false allegations, women are assumed to be trying to alienate children from their fathers,
• women are assumed to be emotionally unstable and to suffer from a range of psychiatric conditions.
• While "Father's Rights" groups promote the line that mothers engaged in custody battles are vindictive liars, the truth is--as studies show--that only 1-2% of DV allegations are false--about the same as in any other crime situation.

It is estimated the in up to 90% of such custody battles there has been a situation of domestic violence. Yet--if a woman as much as mentions the abuse that she or her children have experienced at the hands of the father, she is very likely to lose her her custody rights because she will immediately be under suspicion of demonstrating "Parental Alienation", i.e., "attemtping to alienate the children from their father". She may also be called an "unfriendly parent".

One mother--who will testify on the program--had it held against her that, when giving birth to her child, she didn't want the father--who had hit her during her pregnancy--in the room. She lost custody.

Estimates are the 58,000 children a year wind up in the custody of abusers. And 100 children a year are murdered as a result of these Court decisions.

Court appointed Custody Evaluators have little or no training. They often unquestioningly follow the popular assumption that "children do best when they have two parents." But what should be the second clause of that sentence is left out: that "this is only the case when neither parent is an abuser."

Father's Rights Groups have gotten terrible legislation passed and alot of judges and lawyers are sympathetic to them or are members of these groups themselves. They know that it is the fathers who have the money, so they want to represent THEM. The women have a harder time paying for good lawyers.

These are just a few of the reasons why Family Court is a disaster for mothers. We are proud to be opening up this issue on Joy of Resistance and showing the situation from the mothers' point of view. The show will include a Feminist News Wrap-up & listener call-ins at (212) 209-2900 in the last part of the show.

So please tune in to 99.5 FM this Wednesday, March 16, between 9 and 10 PM--or stream us live on your computer at www.wbai.org. 

Joy of Resistance covers the ongoing worldwide struggle of women to for full equality and human rights. It broadcasts on the 1st and 3rd Wednesdays of the month, between 9 and 10 PM. You can contact Joy of Resistance at joyofresistance@wbai.org or leave a phone message at (212) 209-2987.

WBAI is listener supported, non commercial radio broadcasting to New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. It is part of the Pacifica Radio Network. WBAI is in a financial crisis and badly needs your financial support to continue broadcasting an alternative to the corporate media.

Please consider going to www.wbai.org and contributing whatever amount you can to help keep alternative radio alive. Thank you.

Fran Luck,

Executive Producer,

Joy of Resistance: Multicultural Feminist Radio @ WBAI,

99.5 FM, NYC, 1st and 3rd Wednesdays, 9-10 pm

(broadcasting to New York, New Jersey, Connecticut

& worldwide on the web)

Pedophile Pride Day aka Alice Day -Is the same day as Parental Alienation Syndrome Awareness Day, April 25, 2011 WATCH YOUR CHILDREN!

What a coincidence... or perhaps not—being that NAMBLA (batterers and Pedophiles) are the only supporters for Parental Alienation Syndrome-- (as this shuts up the victims) see: Family Courts Helping Pedophiles and Batterers Get Custody, by Peter Jamison http://www.sfweekly.com/2011-03-02/news/family-court-parental-alienation-syndrome-richard-gardner-pedophilia-domestic-violence-child-abuse-judges-divorce/

Pedophile Pride Day is the same day as Parental Alienation Syndrome Awareness Day, coming up on April 25, 2011

http://www.paawarenessday.com/

Alice Day is April 25th, WATCH YOUR CHILDREN

A.K.A Pedophile Pride Day

By Linda Crystal

It's called Alice Day, named after Alice Liddell and "Alice In Wonderland", originally Pedophile Pride Day. There is a whole story circulating the net that this holiday was named after the story that we all love so much.

Wow, show you what twisted minds will do. This holiday for pedophiles is this upcoming week. On this holiday the pedophiles celebrate, rape and molestation of little girls. It is okay to celebrate by "loving" a female child that day.

Ugh, how disgusting is this, that we live in a society that allows this sick animals to go around saying these things about our loved ones.

April is also Child Abuse Awareness Month according to this site as well. "April is Child Abuse Awareness month and coincidentally (or karmically), it is also the month in which child rapists/molesters/"lovers" reserve for their special "it's okay to sexually assault children" day - "Alice Day." Alice Day is to sexual predators of children what Christmas is to Christians.

April 25th is Sunday. Please watch your children. This is the best defense against any predator out there. They are looking for latch key kids, kids neglected, kids from chemically abused parents, single parents, kids without rules.

Pink is NOT the color you want to dress your girls in either. Pink is their attraction, so do not dress your little girls in pink. Predators love colors that are sexual like pink, reds, oranges.

This is good news regarding pornography:
MICHAEL GORMLEY, Associated Press Writer 
ALBANY, N.Y. - Internet providers Verizon, Sprint and Time Warner Cable have agreed to block access to child pornography and eliminate the material from their servers, New York's attorney general said Tuesday.

http://tuecaa.wordpress.com/2009/07/07/pedophile-symbols-and-codes-an-update/
Pedophile Symbols and Codes. You need to see this.

• A heart within a heart, or "GLogo" "GirlLover" is used by pedophiles attracted to girls. The heart in a heart, to them, represents a adult/ female child relationship.
• A blue spiral-shaped triangle symbol, or "BLogo" "BoyLover", symbolizes a boy (small triangle) surrounded by an older male (larger triangle)- and is meant to show adult/male child relationships.
• The butterfly CLogo a.k.a. "ChildLover" (commonly looks like four touching hearts) in pink/blue represents non-preferential gender pedophiles (girl or boy attracted, often both).
• The yin-yang looking circle is CGlogo, used in reference to the website, Common Ground, which was created as a place for both girl and boy attracted pedophiles to meet and sympathize with each other.
• The pink/blue triangles is "AmaroSymbol" is a variation of the CGLogo.

There are many ways pedophiles and sexual predators will celebrate today:

1. Find activities in their area involving children - such as parties, park outings, sporting events
- They will watch the children, photograph the children, and attempt to have a BM or GM, which stands for "Boy Moment" and "Girl Moment". This includes a conversation with the child, in which they could gain information to get to the child at a later date. However, this could also include just sitting back watching a particular child at play.

They appraise a child's form as if it were that of a stripper in a club, and they write the moment down later for their friends - online and in real life - with added feelings of desire they had while exploring the child's body with their eyes and filthy mind.

Please keep in mind that a child does not have to be nude or in a bathing suit to be visualized that way by these people. They are sick enough to imagine that for themselves.

2. Seek victims for themselves - either through the first option or by riding around looking for easy targets: children walking alone, children playing outside with no supervision, children wandering in a store with an inattentive parent... I don't have to tell you the rest as "victim" says it all.

3. Seek victims for others - through option 1 as well as option 2. The information they attain through their Boy or Girl moment is not always kept to themselves, especially on Alice Day. They get that information and share it to their pedophilia ring friends so that others will have a chance at acquiring a victim at a later date. The children they snare also often become shared sexual toys for themselves as well as others in their group.Al this information came from The Ultimate Evil Website. Everyone needs to read this website and know and understand what child abuse is all about. It is located at the link above, pedophile symbols and codes.

A lot of times, the person acquiring this information isn't even a pedophile, themselves. They are just in it for the money from the sales of the photos and information that a pedophile and child predator can use to get their target.

Also remember that men are not the only perpetrators. Women make up a small percentage of sexual predators and abusers, but they DO exist. Even so far as to pimp out their own children for drugs or other selfish reasons.

I'm sure you're wondering what can be done to spot or stop these people. You can't very well go accusing every person you see in a public venue of being a sexual predator, nor should you be paranoid. Just careful.

It's always better safe than sorry, but there is always common sense.

For instance: if you see a lone person with no children sitting nearby staring at the children at play, it's a pretty good chance he's there for less than honorable reasons. Particularly if he/she has a camera and no credentials to any claim of being a reporter - which should also be questioned and dealt with as any parent would by calling the editor of his paper to check his story should he say this.

If you are quite certain you've spotted someone with ulterior, twisted motives for watching your child or others at play, call the police immediately. Confrontation with a group of concerned parents also works. No violence is necessary as these people fear being caught at their private game and will quickly vacate the area. You also send a strong message that your children are protected and NOT easy targets!

ALWAYS teach children not to talk to strangers.
ALWAYS teach children to never give personal information to a stranger.
ALWAYS teach children to never give the information of another child to a stranger.
ALWAYS teach children to scream, "NO!" and "STRANGER!" very loudly if they encounter someone asking questions or trying to get them to come with them.
ALWAYS teach children to use a secret or safe word or password and to NEVER tell ANYONE, not even their friends, what this word is.People that want tto take photos of your children are especially suspicious. Teach your childen to watch for these types of people. They prey on the innocence of a child.

I know from experience and studying these creeps that they do in fact ride around looking for prey. They are predators. The child that is alone at the park is in trouble. Have your children use the buddy system. My previous article on "What Sexual Predators Don't Want You To Know"

Texting Codes Parents Should Know

Let's face it the kids are out texting us. We need to know what they are saying. Here is a list from The Ultimate Evil website against child abuse, just in case predators text our children. We need to know what these guys and our kids are saying. This is not for modest people. This is 2010, the language is rough. Then there is sexting. Yes sexting. Kids are having sex on the phone these days. Below is a list of codes for all of us parents to know what is being said to our children, especially if they are predators. Predators are always at a child's level and knows everything about children so they can communicate with them. There are many I have never seen before in my life. It reminds me of when we all learned pig latin. Now I am showing my age. However sexting is far more dangerous in the hands of kids. I know that I gave my grand children phones to be safe, but are they?

5 = High Five
121 = One to one 
143 = I love you
182 = I hate you
2moro = Tomorrow 
2nite = Tonight
411 = Information
420 = Marijuana
459 = I love you
4NR = Foreigner
4Q = Fuck you 
8 = oral sex
86 = Get rid of
9 = Parent is watching 
99 = Parent is no longer watching

A3 = Anyplace, anytime anywhere
AAF = As A Friend
ACORN = A Completely Obsessive Really Nutty Person
ADR = Address
AEAP = As Early As Possible 
AFAP = As Far As Possible
AIGHT = Allright
AITR = Adult In The Room 
AMAP = As Much As Possible 
AML = All My Love
AMRMTYFTS = All my roommates thank you for the show
A/S/L - age, sex, locationBJ = Blow job 
BOB = Battery Operated Boyfriend
BZ = Busy
BRB = Be right back
BTW = Back to work

CICYHW = Can I copy your homework
CM = Call me
C-P = Sleepy
C/S = Change subject
COS = Change of subject
CBJ = Covered blow job 
CD9 = Code 9, parents are around
CRB = Come right back
CRBT = Crying really big tears
CT = Can't talk
CTC = Care to chat?
CU = See you
CUL8R = See you later
CUNS = See you in school
CUOL = See you online
CYE = Check your e-mail
CYO = See you online
CYT = See you tomorrowDF = Dear friend
DGA = Don't go anywhere
DH = Dear husband 
DW = Dear wife 
DIKU = Do I know you? 
DL = Down Low (texts) Download (in context of attachments)
DLTM = Don't lie to me 
DNBL8 = Do not be late
DOC = Drug of choice 
DOE = Depends on experience 
DP = Domestic partner 
DUM = Do you masturbate? 
DURS = Damn you are sexy

DUSL = Do you scream loud? 
DWB = Don't write back 
DWPKOTL = Deep wet passionate kiss on the lips
DYHAB = Do you have a boyfriend 
DYHAG = Do you have a girlfriend

EMA = E-mail address
EML = E-mail me later
EMSG = E-mail message

F2F = Face to face 
FAB = Features Attributes Benefits
FB = Fuck buddy
FILF = Father I'd like to fuck
FMLTWIA = Fuck me like the whore I am
FMUTA = Fuck me up the ass
FOAF = Friend of a friend
FTF = Face to face 
FWB = Friends with benefits
FYF = From your friend

GTG = Got to go
G2G = Got to go
GAP = Got a pic? (pic = picture)
GBH = Great Big Hug
GF = Girlfriend 
GLBT = Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender 
GLG = Good looking girl 
GLB = Good looking boy 
GNOC = Get naked on cam 
GOS = Gay or straight 
GUD = Geographically undesirable 
GYPO - get your pants off

H&K = Hugs and kisses
H4Y = Hot for you
HBIB = Hot but inappropriate boy

I&I = Intercourse and Inebriation 
IBTC = Itty bitty titty committee
IDK = I don't know
IF/IB = In the front or in the back
IIT = Is it tight?
ILF/MD = I love female/male dominance
ILU = I love you
ILY = I love you
IRL = In real life 
IWSN - i want sex now 
ITS - intense text sex 
IWALU = I will always love you

J/O = Jacking off

KFU = kisses for you 
KFY = Kiss for you 
K4Y = Kiss for you
kitty = Vagina 
KK = Kiss kiss 
KOTC = Kiss on the cheek
KOTL = Kiss on the lips 
KPC - keep parents clueless 
KWSTA = Kiss with serious tongue action

L8R = Later
LB? = Like bondage?
LDR = Long distance relationship
LF = Let's fuck (pedophile lingo would be Little Friend)
LHOS - Let's have online sex 
LHSO = Let's have sex online 
LKITR = Little kid in the room
LOL = Laugh out loud/lots of laughs/lots of love
LMAO = Laugh my ass off
LMFAO = Laugh my f*cking ass off
LMIRL - Let's meet in real life 
LTTIC = Look the teacher is coming 
LUSM = Love you so much
LY = Love you
LY4E = Love you forever 
LYWAMH = Love you with all my heart

MA = Mature audience
MILF = Mother I'd like to fuck
MIRL = Meet in real life
MorF = Male or Female 
MOOS = Member of opposite sex 
MOSS = Member of same sex 
MOS = Mom over shoulder 
MPFB = My personal fuck buddy 
MSNUW = Mini-skirt no underwear 
MTLA = My true love always 
MUAH or MWAH = *it's the sound of a kiss*
MUSM = Miss you so much

NP = Nosy parents
N/T = No text 
NIFOC = Nude in front of computer 
NRN = No reply necessary

OLL = Online love
OMG = Oh my god
OMFG = Oh my fucking god

P = Partner
P&C = Private and confidential 
POS = Parents over shoulder 
PIR = Parents in room 
P911 = Parent alert 
PA = Parent alert 
PAW = Parents are watching 
PAL = Parents are listening 
PBB = Parent behind back
PHAT = Pretty hot and tempting 
PLOS = Parent looking over shoulder 
POM = Parent over my shoulder 
PRON = Porn 
pr0n = Porn (with a number 0 for O)
PRW = Parents are watching

QT = Cutie Q2C = Quick to cum

RL = Real life 
RLF = Real life friend
RNN = Reply not necessary
ROFL = Roll on floor laughing
ROTFL = Roll on the floor laughing
ROFLMAO = Roll on floor laughing my ass off
RPG = Roll playing games
RU? = Are you? 
RU/18 = Are you over 18?

STFU = Shut the fuck up

TTYL = Talk to you later
TTFN = Tata for now
TAW = Teachers are watching
TDTM = Talk dirty to me
TM = Trust Me
TMI = Too much information
TT = Big tease
TYVM = Thank you very much

U = You
U UP? = Are you up?
UR = You are or Your

WTF = What the fuck
WYFM = Will you fuck me? 
WYRN = What's your real name 
WYCM = Will you call me

XOX = Kiss Hug Kiss
XTC = Ecstacy

Y = Yes or Why?
YDKM = You don't know me 
YIWGP = Yes, I will go private
YW = You're welcome

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

"Age Sex Location" translates to: "I want to know if you fit my age of attraction, if you are the gender I want, and where you live so I can find you" when texted by a predator. It's okay to tell the age and if you're a female or male - this establishes evidence if a predator later claims not to know he/she was talking to a minor. But it is NO ONE'S business where you live. If you want to state the country, that's fine, but not even naming a state is okay.

"Change subject/No text/No reply necessary" can be used to signal the other person that they are being watched.

"Come right back" or terms like "What took you so long?" or anything that makes the child feel rushed or obligated to respond is a warning sign of control, either by a predator or a peer. They should know they are under NO obligation to text/IM/E-mail anyone at any time, unless it is their parents. Anyone who makes them feel they have to report in should be left alone and exposed to parents or teachers immediately. This is a very unhealthy, controlling relationship. Even if it's just a friend.

"Dear Friend" is not acceptable for an adult to tell a child. "Dear Wife/Husband" when said by a teen is a warning sign of a relationship that has gotten way out of hand, particularly if it is with an adult.

"DL" Down low means keep it secret/private. Downloading is a dangerous thing to do with people someone doesn't know or trust. Kids should always know the risks involved in downloading something from another person, particularly someone they only know online. These can contain viruses, Trojans, worms, or even unsolicited pornography. Any of this activity can be brought the attention of law enforcement, particularly if anyone sends your child or teen a nude photograph - wanted or not, which can be considered a felony (depending upon the circumstances and evidence, plea bargaining etc...) when it is from an adult to a minor. (See Sexting for more of my thoughts on teen - to - teen behavior.)

"Do you masturbate/scream loud?" and any other personal questions regarding sex are no one's business! Teens should understand that no one has the right to inquire such things, and if they do, they are to be ignored immediately and reported to a parent, teacher, and ultimately the police, whether the sender is known or not. Such questions are geared toward having a sexual relationship, and should be viewed as a serious threat.

"Do you have a boyfriend/girlfriend?" when asked by a stranger online is intrusive and should be ignored. "I'm sorry but that's really none of your business," would be the appropriate response. A teen may think it's innocent curiosity, but they do not know who is asking that question. It is highly inappropriate for an adult to inquire that of a minor who they do not know, and if this is an online personality, there is no way the teen knows if this is an adult or an adult pretending to be a teen. The reason for an adult to ask this of a minor is because that adult wants to be that minor's bf/gf. Even if the teen says yes, this will not dissuade the adult predator, only let him/her know the teen may be sexually active and they need only find a way to come between her/him and the real life bf/gf.

"Friend of a friend" translates to: I Am A Stranger!

"Friends with benefits," "Fuck buddy," and similar are exactly what they sound like.

"Face to face" means the person wants to meet offline.

"Got a pic" - kids/teens should NEVER share their photos with anyone they don't know. They can never get them back and they never know who is doing the asking or for what purpose.

"In front" or "In back" refer to sexual positions.

"Is it tight" refers to a girl's vagina/virginity.

"I love you" is never okay for a stranger to tell a teen/child, or vice versa.

"Parent/Mom/Teacher/Kid in room" is a sure sign there is something that NEEDS to be monitored. Adults have to remember THEY pay the bills and the child is THEIR responsibility. By "respecting a child's privacy," you are hanging a sign around your child's neck saying, "Do what you want - I will completely ignore your sexual advances and illegal behavior that will ruin my child's life forever."

"Private" means that no one else can see the conversation, like if they were in a chat room. If it's in an IM that is being monitored, this could also refer to private e-mails that no one else can read.

"Real life" refers to offline life, so if someone wants to meet IRL (in real life), they want to take their relationship from cyberspace into the real world for physical contact.

"Roll playing games" on the internet more often than not involve online sex, and are highly addictive and emotional since the characters get to act out their deepest fantasies. RPG's almost always result in offline meetings when kids or teens are involved. It's a grooming tactic, a way for predators to help their victim become comfortable with sex. Please don't confuse this with real games out there that involve taking over castles or defeating enemy armies. Use your judgment when you see you child engaged in a RPG, but remember that games which allow interaction with other gamers are just as dangerous if not more than chatting with strangers. Gamers become close friends online, and this is a way for a predator to form a tight bond with the target.

"What's your real name?" and other questions asking address, private contact information, phone number etc.. are red light questions that someone is trying to get personal information to use in a way neither you nor your child will want.

"XTC" is a drug.

"XOX" is as we all know the symbols for kisses (x) and hugs (o); however, this has no place in the conversation between an adult and a minor.

"Take off your clothes," and "Get naked on cam" etc... Sexually explicit dialogue is NEVER okay, not even teen-to-teen, and should be ignored immediately and reported to parents, teachers, and most importantly, police. What happens on text always has the potential of happening in real life, especially if the person is known to the teen. If the person is a predator, this could lead up to abduction and rape.

Code can be and is often used in sentences, as well: 
"W4nt 2 go 2 the m411 t0d4y?" translates to: "Want to go to the mall today?"

To some, this list and the translations may seem reaching or even as the old adage goes: Seek and ye shall find, meaning if you're looking for something bad, you'll see it even if it's not there. This, simply, is not the case here. These codes and their meanings are quite popular and no secret at all. I, myself, have used some of these codes in adult conversations. Those of us who use them know quite well what we mean when we say them, and we know minors have no business using them and no adult has any right using them with a minor.

Makes me want to rally watch what letters I am typing while I text for sure, lol. :)

I cannot take the credit for all this information. I wanted to bring it to your attention because of Alice Day April 25th coming up. The website is Ultimate Evil and it is a Child Abuse Awareness Site. I have listed the web address above.

The website also talks about correct Wiccan rituals that are being altered and other rituals being used to molest even more children. Yes it happens in all religions so no one is exempt.

WATCH YOUR CHILDREN

More resources

• What Predators Don't Want You To Know By Linda Crystal
• 4 Safety Tips For Parents From NY State Division Of Pollce By Linda Crystal
• Buffalo, NY Has 734 Sexual Offenders By Linda Crystal