Zithromax For Sale

This email is tailored after one from the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV) and the National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence. However, I re wrote it to support rather than oppose H.R. 4970. First there’s a brief explanation, then a list of legislative names and phone numbers, then a sample letter that you can modify and use to email, fax, or mail to your legislators. If we are unable to move forward H.R. 4970 it’s very likely that VAWA will be reauthorized for FIVE YEARS to include even more destructive provisions! We need to ACT NOW.  

PLEASE KEEP CALLING! 

May 15, 2012

Your help is MOST needed if you live in AL, CA, CO, FL, IL, KS, MD, MI, MO, MN, NV, NH, NJ, NY, NC, OH, PA, SD, TN, TX, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY!

 Act Now: Urge Your Representative to VOTE YES on H.R. 4970, the Adams VAWA Bill!

 

On Wednesday, May 16th, the House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on final passage of H.R. 4970, a bill to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), introduced by Rep. Sandy Adams (R-Fl, 24th).   H.R. 4970 is an pro common sense bill strongly opposed by the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV) and the National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence.   We must tell our legislators that we SUPPORT  H.R. 4970 and want to see a bipartisan bill that helps ALL victims.  Time is of the essence, we must take action BY May 16th!   ACTION: Call/Write/Tweet your Representative and tell them:"We strongly SUPPORT H.R. 4970 and urge you to VOTE YES.  

 House Target List  

 

 

 

  Sample Letter

[ORGANIZATIONAL LETTERHEAD]

  [May X, 2012]   Regarding: SUPPORT for H.R. 4970, Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA)   Dear Representative [Last Name]:   The [organization name] and associated organizations represent thousands of voters and advocates for fair, equitable, and cost effective treatment of domestic violence victims, joins the National Coalition For Men (or whomever you prefer) in expressing strong support for H.R. 4970, the Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), introduced by Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL).   In light of its favorable passage by the Judiciary Committee last week, H.R. 4970 continues to strengthen VAWA and provide vital improvements, including provisions designed to increase the safety of all the abused regardless of ethnicity, sex, and sexual preference. Native In addition, H.R. 4970 includes restorative provisions that correct years of inadequate provisions to protect the safety of alleged immigrant victims as well as alleged citizen abusers, many of whom have been falsely accused.   Consequently, H.R. 4970 offers protections for immigrant victims seeking to report crimes and those accused of those crimes. H.R. 4970 in no way increases the danger for alleged immigrant victims since they have left the alleged violent environment prior to filing for protection. H.R. 4970 not only supports existing anti-fraud provisions but calls for heightened enforcement.   The House has the opportunity to pass a victim-centered VAWA reauthorization bill endorsed by women and men advocacy groups that allocates resources to help hold perpetrators accountable and provide constitutional protections to the accused  and expands services and protections to all regardless of race, nationality, religion, immigrant status or sexual orientation. H.R. 4970 also provides provisions to better ensure VAWA funds are spent for their intended purposes thereby ensuring those in need of services are better served.   Those opposing H.R. 4970 have recently and loudly asserted that VAWA serves all people, which is absurd on its face, which is, the Violence Against Women Act. The speicious version offered by the opposition, H.R. 4971, by omission and lack of specificity, generally excludes men, particularly heterosexual men. This fact is bolstered by continuing baseless, insulting, and absurd cries that supporters of H.R. 4970 are fueling the nonexistent "war on women.   We strongly support H.R. 4970 and urge you to vote yes and urge all members of the House to support final passage when it's considered on Wednesday, May 16th. We cannot adequately address violence related issues by excluding half the population, allowing precious resources to be squandered for ideological purposes, empowering false accusers at the expense of true victims, and letting malfeasance and maladministration run unchecked without holding applicable program administrators accountable.   Thank you for your consideration and please do not hesitate to contact me  Sincerely,   [Name] [Title]   cc: National Coalition For Men       Harry Crouch National Coalition For Men California Men's Centers

Posted on May 15th, 2012 by Harry
Filed under: children, Family, Family Court, Legislation | No Comments »

This is a free book you can get for free off of Amazon.     Free Book from Dads Rights.org - No Catches, No Kidding! Dear Single Dads,       For one day, and one day only, "They're Your Kids Too:  The Single Father's Guide to Defending Your Fatherhood in a Broken Family Law System" will be free on Amazon, for anybody who has a Kindle or the Kindle app.  (If you have a computer or tablet or smartphone the Kindle app is free, so this is a great time to get the app and get the book for free!)       "They're Your Kids Too:  The Single Father's Guide to Defending Your Fatherhood in a Broken Family Law System" retails for $9.99 (Kindle version) and $15.95 (paper book version).   But on Wednesday the Kindle version is free! No catches, nothing to buy!      This offer is good for one day only: tomorrow (Wednesday, April 25th).       Just go to the Amazon page any time on Wednesday, and you can download the full version of the book for *free*!       Here's the link:       http://www.amazon.com/Theyre-Your-Kids-Too-ebook/dp/B006073BL2/       Remember, to get your copy free you *must* get it on Wednesday.     Your friends at DadsRights.org

Posted on April 25th, 2012 by Semper Fi
Filed under: Child Support, Family Court | No Comments »

Posted on April 18th, 2012 by Semper Fi
Filed under: Child Support, children, Family Court | 2 Comments »

VAWA just a costly, destined-to-fail ploy The letter below was published in The Washington Times on Tuesday March 20, 2012 and is followed by the article to which it responded. Gordon E. Finley, Ph.D. VAWA just a costly, destined-to-fail ploy http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/19/vawa-just-a-costly-destined-to-fail-ploy/ Ever since the Violence Against Women Act of 2012 (VAWA) squeaked out of the SenateJudiciary Committee on a party-line vote, everyone from actors in Hollywood to the New York Times has been bullying members of the Senate to co-sponsor and soon vote for VAWA (“Reese Witherspoon warns kids of domestic violence,” Web, Feb. 29). The bullying message is simple: If you don’t support VAWA, you are waging a war on women and every woman in America will vote against you in the coming election. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid appears to see VAWA as a political football to get Democrats over the goal line in November. The reality, however, is quite different from the contentions the bullies make. First, although their voices have been there before, this year more center to center-right women’s groups are voicing their opposition to VAWA. Thus, the battle over VAWA is not really a war on women, but rather a war on a certain group of women - those who are wrong on this legislation. Second, it must be asked, can debt-ridden America continue to afford to pour money down the rathole of failed gender-ideology programs? Not only has VAWA failed women, but it has placed women in harm’s way because it is based on a false ideological premise. Victims of domestic violence deserve better and are best served by family policies based on sound social science research. Finally, VAWA is the left’s most powerful weapon to destroy the traditional family and redefine the family as single mothers and their children. VAWA destroys families by removing fathers from the home, denying fathers due process, denying fathers their constitutional rights and severing father-child relationships through false accusations. Yes, there are matriarchal bullies. However, allowing bullies to waste scarce taxpayer dollars on failed programs is not going to reduce debt, help us turn the corner on the economy, serve victims or save father-child relationships. Just say no to VAWA. GORDON E. FINLEY Professor of psychology emeritus Florida International University Miami Reese Witherspoon warns kids of domestic violence http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/29/reese-witherspoon-warns-kids-of-domestic-violence/#.T2fQ9sNZHYY.email NATIONAL HARBOR, MD. (AP) - Actress Reese Witherspoon has had the talk with her two young children. Not the sex talk. The domestic violence talk. As a Global Ambassador for Avon’s efforts to help victims of domestic violence, Witherspoon traveled to the Washington area to speak to the 2nd World Conference of Women’s Shelters, prompting a talk with Ava, 12, and Deacon, 8. Though her kids were shocked to hear how one in three women is abused in this country, Witherspoon said it was important for them to be aware of the problem especially her daughter who’s almost old enough date. At a time when bullies are responding with violence, Witherspoon also says parents must educate themselves and their children about social media and “what constitutes harassment, what is acceptable and what is not.” Domestic violence is a topic in many songs, including Miranda Lambert’s “Gunpowder and Lead,” where she sings about shooting an abusive husband. Witherspoon says such songs “create retaliation fantasies,” which are “a very important part of our psychology,” but she doesn’t think they replace the effectiveness of going public about domestic violence. Witherspoon says talking publicly “creates empowerment” among women and helps them feel they’re not alone. She said it often gives them the courage to go to a shelter or take legal action that could save their lives.

Posted on March 20th, 2012 by Semper Fi
Filed under: children, Elections, Family Court, Legislation | 1 Comment »

Below link shows that Ben has done several requests to the Family Court to get info on the qualifications of Court Experts.  This is crazy that a simple request for information is ignored by the court staff when the public have a right to know.  So much for following the law.

The family court is a scam only designed to prey off of people that get stuck in it and suck away any assets you have until you are left with nothing to support yourself or your children.  Please contact this shyster and give him a piece of your mind.

Please read the below link and see for yourself:

http://www.earthage.org/familycourt/Michael_Roddy&Alksne.pdf

 

 

Michael Roddy

Executive Office – San Diego Superior Court

220 West Broadway

San Diego, CA 92101

Dear Mr. Roddy

I am writing to you over the California State Rules of the Court that are copied

and pasted into the end of this letter. They are from Title Five, Family and

Juvenile Rules (Rules 5.1 - 5.830). If you open the .pdf that can be downloaded

from

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/rules/…then go to > Chapter 5 > 5.225. > (j)

Responsibility of the Courts & (k) Child custody evaluator; see that said rules

match those from the CA State website.

It is my understanding that you are responsible for administration and

procedures having to do with the court. Please tell me where I can find

information that shows you are following these rules. I cannot find anywhere on

California’s or San Diego’s Court websites information related to these rules. I

cannot find a description or set of instructions over how to file complaint over

anything having to do with these rules.

I discovered you through a number of phone calls from office names and numbers

that were, at the very least, listed on San Diego’s Superior Court website. There

were no descriptions of what each office does. It just states Executive Office and

the phone number, and your name is not provided anywhere on the websites. So

it’s somewhat miraculous that I found you, and in the process I had to ask

numerous questions followed by evasive answers before I could get to your job

name, what you do, and who fills the role. You have no forms, no PDF downloads

from the website anywhere that reveals a process of complaint. Quite simply, it

appears there is no process for filing complaint against a 730 Code Custody

Evaluator, or is there?

Before I file complaint, I have some questions to ask you. Please answer each and

every following question.

CC: Honorable Judge Lorna Alksne

Where or what is your process for the Public to find qualified evaluators in your

jurisdiction? No process exists on your websites.

I would like copies of forms FL-325, FL-326, and FL-327 over my court case.

Stephen E. Doyne, PhD was my 730 Code Evaluator. Do you have those copies

that the court must make sure he fills out, and that he must be responsible for

filling out too? Please make them available to me by sending them to my address

above.

Have you provided the Judicial Council with copies as well? Please show proof

that you have.

Have you made sure that Stephen E. Doyne is qualified as afforded by FL-325

that he must fill out?

Do you have all applicable forms and documentation that Dr. Doyne must file

with you/the court?

Where do these forms reside?

If you don’t have them, where are they?

If they don’t exist, why?

I request that you provide all applicable documentation to me. Please respond

only in writing; do not call me. I request that you file this letter and any

applicable answers to my court case, No. . I request that your Honor

Judge Lorna Alksne do the same. Note that Judge Thomas C. Hendrix is no longer

my Judge therefore you are the next best option, plus I am also CC’ing you, the

Supervising Judge.

Sincerely,

Ben

CC: Honorable Judge Lorna Alksne

See the following CA State Rules of the Court:

(j) Responsibility of the courts

Each court:

(1) MUST develop local court rules that:  

FL-326 and San Diego's Family Courts A letter by Dr. Emad Tadros to the California Bar Association

  Emad Tadros MD - Diplomate American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology. 3914 Third Ave. San Diego CA 92103 TadrosMD@pol.net 619-291-4808 & Fax: 619-291-4426 August 27, 2011 The California State Bar Office of the Chief Trial Counsel -Intake Unit 1149 S. Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90015-2299 Atten: UPL Project  Re: Attorney Bob Lesh, a.k.a. Robert W. Lesh I am submitting a formal complaint asking for your immediate attention in regards to grave concerns about one of the Bar representatives, attorney Bob Lesh, Certified Family Law Specialist CA, President-Elect of the Executive Committee of the San Diego County Certified Family Law Specialists, and last but not least, the Chair of the Family Court Services Subcommittee for the San Diego County Certified Family Law Specialists. History of the FL 326: In the nineties, California Families and Family Courts  suffered countless complaints about incompetence, fraud, unprofessionalism and misrepresentation conducted by the Private Child Custody 730 Evaluators. The California Judicial Counsel/CJC decided to take the upper hand with firm measures by placing this serious matter under both judicial and parental control.   As a result, starting 2000, the CJC met on the average twice a year with every CA county court CEO along with the county’s presiding judges. It was considered pivotal that the public be present in those meetings to share their views and actually voted on how to serve the California Counties with a Statewide standard. CJC met in this public forum at least twice annually and since that time there have been other specific changes to the CJC forms FL326 and FL327. Purpose of FL326: In 2001 CJC established CRC 5.225 that relates to the Appointment, Qualifications and Credentials of 730 Private Custody Evaluators.  This was the birth of FL326 to be served on the parents where it would be filed by the Private Custody Evaluator at the Clerk’s Office and FL327 would be filed by the appointing judge, at the clerk’s office, as CJC strongly recommended. From its inception, FL326 was mandated to be signed under the penalty of perjury by the custody evaluator, for good reasons. Evolution of FL326: Over the following few years, the CJC evolved this pivotal FL326 with more specific details about qualifying 730 Evaluators, requiring their educational background, qualifications, credentials, expertise and continuing education hours that are specified according to CJC State Family law, to be properly submitted before appointing each and every private custody evaluator. Legality of FL 326: This FL 326 form continued to be signed “Under the Penalty of Perjury …regardless.” The CRC 5.225 (k)(1)(B) [re-lettered to now be (l)(1)(B)] is boxed and bolded on the Mandatory FL326 as follows:   FL 326 becomes Mandatory: Starting on January 1^st 2005, CJC MANDATED this specific rule 5.225 (k)(1)(B) &(l)(1)(B)  that only applies to FL326. CJC mandated that FL326 must be served on the parties involved in the custody action,  signed under the Penalty of perjury by the 730 Evaluator and be filed with the Clerk of the Court, “no later than 10 days after notification of each appointment and before any work on each child custody evaluation has begun.” CJC made sure to demand that such FL326 forms continue to be signed under the penalty of perjury, and mandated that new forms are filed individually for each and every new private custody evaluation case. CJC did not allow for any exemptions or alternatives.  The CJC pursued such mandatory steps for good reasons. Consequences of  Violating FL326: In June 2009, it was discovered by a frustrated parent that the San Diego Superior Court CEO, Michael M. Roddy had been aware of the new CRC [5.225 (k)(1)(B)  and (l)(1)(B)] mandatory rules, but chose not to implement them.  As a result not one single FL326 form was filled out, and/or turned in, for any Custody Evaluation case. This is to say that not one member of the San Diego Bar Association bothered to even Read the Court’s new Rule Book.   And if they did they either kept quiet or were told to do so: even after these rules became mandatory.  This violation story broke on ABC news and is currently posted under the www.thepubliccourt.com and http://www.thepubliccourt.com/archives/1. On 9-29-09, my attorney Mr. Mike Aguirre, past San Diego City Attorney, directed a formal communication (attached) to the Family Court Supervising Judge Hon. Lorna Alksne requesting the immediate compliance of such “mandatory but somehow missing” FL326 rules. Otherwise, some San Diego families were going to file a “Federal Relief Act.” Following this 9-29-09 letter by Mr. Aguirre, the Hon. Judge Lorna Alksne sent an immediate notice to all San Diego County attorneys asking them to make sure that the FL326 forms were filed by their appointed evaluators in a timely manner (10 days before any custody evaluation work starts) and to follow the mandatory CRC as the law mandates. Why Advance Notice about FL326 was Mandated to be given to parents: The main purpose for filing these missing FL326 forms is to give the parents a chance to check out, and make an educated decision to either hire or fire their appointed custody evaluator, before any work starts. However, in addition to robbing San Diego families of their new rights by lacking the filing of these mandatory forms with the Clerk’s office, this violation omitted who charged who and how many Thousands of Dollars the families were charged by the involved attorneys and custody evaluators. Consequences of lacking the proper filing of FL326: By not complying with these rules in a timely manner, the question of Felony Tax Evasion on both the State and Federal levels by San Diego Attorneys and Private Child Custody Evaluators is now on the table.  Otherwise, one wonders why these rules were not implemented when they became mandatory in January of 2005. Filing the FL 326 after the Fact: Asking San Diego attorneys and/or Private Child Custody Evaluators, directly or indirectly, to go back to old case files and sign the FL326 forms, under the penalty of perjury,  months / years after the work was started and/or completed is meaningless, unethical, and even criminal. If any, it behooves each and every San Diego Attorney to contact the violated families (who were never allowed to be knowledgeable, or were ever timely served these mandatory FL326 forms), advise them of the violation committed and offer them a fair and equitable remedy due to the violations of the Mandatory Rules of Court caused by the involved attorneys and evaluators. Mr. Lesh’s Professional Obligation: With Mr. Lesh being a Certified CA Family Law Specialist, the President-Elect of the Executive Committee of the San Diego County Certified Family Law Specialists, and last but not least, the Chair of the Family Court Services Subcommittee for the San Diego County Certified Family Law Specialists., he had a due diligence to notify the parents whose rights were violated; however, to date this has not been done. Mr. Lesh was also ethically and professionally obligated to advise San Diego County attorneys that filing these FL326 forms on any old cases is not only unethical, but illegal and criminal: especially if doing so would mean signing forms under the penalty of perjury after the fact, when the law mandated that they be signed “at least 10-days before any work started.”         Mr. Lesh Privately Prompts Family Attorneys to go to old cases: On October 1, 2009 Mr. Lesh sent a mass private email to all San Diego attorneys (attached) on the SDCBA list-serve. In that email Mr. Lesh stated:

“It seems [present tense]  apparent that there is going to be [future tense] a tremendous amount of scrutiny being placed [Present tense] upon these forms and if you have any old [Past tense] cases, where these forms have not been used [Mandatory Rule applies-10 days before any custody work starts] please make sure that they are [present tense] filed appropriately, as you risk claims from your client that the matter was not properly handled, if they later [future tense] disagree with the recommendations of the evaluators.” 

In above email, Mr. Lesh asks San Diego Family Law attorneys to file these past due forms “appropriately.”  Does this mean they are being filed only with the county clerk, or also with the parents whose rights were violated?  I have written to Mr. Lesh asking to meet with him in this regard, however I have not heard from him. I ask that the State Bar Association undertake whatever steps that it deems are necessary and appropriate, in keeping with the guidelines of how the Bar Association defines itself.  For example at the Free Online Law Dictionary website (at http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com ), the Bar Association defines itself as “An organization of lawyers established to promote professional competence, enforce standards of ethical conduct, and encourage a spirit of public service “pursued” in the spirit of a service of furthering the administration of justice according to law.”  The article goes on to describe members of the Bar association (or lawyers) as those who “encourage” and/or “offer Pro Bono … services.” When in-fact Mr. Lesh was prompting the attorneys to the untimely FL326 filing so they would NOT have to refund any money back to the violated families, instead of prompting them to call the families and acknowledge that their rights were clearly violated. On the behalf of countless San Diego families and on the behalf of California Coalition for Families and Children/CCFC, I appreciate your seriously needed attention to this matter. We ask the California State Bar Association to undertake the next step that would deem appropriate towards San Diego County Violated Families. Thank you for your prompt attention to this serious matter. Respectfully, Emad Tadros, M.D. CC: Various Members of the Public.  Enclosures: 1-     Mr. Lesh Private Email to the San Diego County Attorneys dated October 1-2009. 2-    Stephen Doyne Psychologist following Mr. Lesh’s commands to the T. 3-    Attorney Mike Aguirre’s letter to the San Diego Family Court Presiding Judge.

   Click Here for more details or  Scroll down to Post a comment

See also:  Appellate Court does not validate Stephen Doyne's Experience or Credentials

Here

Posted on March 15th, 2012 by Semper Fi
Filed under: Family Court, Legislation | 4 Comments »