Corrupt Judges of America

#StandupforZoraya #SayHerName, Blogs Followed, Family Court Insanity, Fathers' Rights, PAS is Child Abuse, Petitions

enough-2017Our family courts are not constitutional courts, they run under the “Domestic Relations Exception” by each state’s individual laws. However, The Law Of Supremacy says no state make make laws that take away U.S. Constitutional rights and all judges are required to swear and oath to the constitution. Unfortunately, due to financial incentives created by the federal government all 50 states are violating Fundamental Constitutional Rights constantly for their own convenience and profit. This video and series explains all the illegal activities of the U.S. family courts, which are much closer to racketeering organizations, or mafias, then they are to real courts of law. Protect yourself and view this entire series. Save your children, your assets and yourself from being raped by this unlawful scheme run by judges and lawyers.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Welcome to Leon Koziol.Com

Judge James K. Eby, Oswego County Family Court, Oswego, NY

Administrator’s Note: This is the third of a three-part series we call the “Turkey Trology.” With all our uncompensated work exposing court corruption over the years, we have neither the resources nor the time to make this publication viral. We leave that to you, our fellow victims, tortured as you must be during the holidays. So kindly make good therapy of your time by sending this out to the world.

Send it to fellow victims so they don’t feel “crazy” for lodging legitimate complaints to these useless state judicial commissions. E-mail a copy to your representative in Congress or state legislature, an oversight committee, good government group, your lawyer, media, even your parent “adversary” on this “thankless” holiday season. Maybe you’ll be very happy you did.

By Dr. Leon Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute

What you are about to read is…

View original post 1,964 more words

Advertisements

Trust Women? Hahahahahaha

#StandupforZoraya #SayHerName, Blogs Followed, Family Court Insanity, Fathers' Rights, PAS is Child Abuse, Petitions, Presidential Election

real-women-support-fathers-rights-2017#TrustWome?  Hahahahahaha – moms4dads

There’s a new campaign in town… First, we had to Listen and Believe. Now, we are told we have to #TrustWomen  Why? Because they’re women. And… because it’s 2016. Trust me, it’s still 2016, it’s true, I said it and I’m a woman, therefore it’s true.

Wait, I thought being sexist was wrong and I thought feminism is about equality, then why trust only women, why not everybody? I guess the next campaign will be #TrustMigrants, why not, right? What could possibly go wrong?

“It’s now or never for reproductive rights”

(Women’s reproductive rights, obviously, because feminism is about equality…)

Source: #TrustWomen? Hahahahahaha – moms4dads

Time To Put Kids First

#StandupforZoraya #SayHerName, Blogs Followed, Family Court Insanity, Fathers' Rights, PAS is Child Abuse, Petitions, Presidential Election

21372-stop2bfamily2bcourt2bcorruption2b-2b20162

Abusive Judges
Bad Judges - Stop Abuse Campaign 2015

The essence of nomocracy, the rule of law, is limitation of the discretion of officials, and providing a process by which errors or abuse of discretion can be corrected. Some discretion is unavoidable, because law cannot anticipate every eventuality or how to decide which law may apply to a given situation. What guidance the law cannot provide is supposed to be provided by standard principles of justice and due process, reason, and the facts of each case. Ideally, officials should be mutually consistent and interchangeable, making similar decisions in similar cases, so that no one can gain an undue advantage by choosing the official or exercising undue influence on the official or on the process he operates. We trust officials to exercise such discretion as they have with wisdom, justice, and competence, to avoid government that is arbitrary, insolent, discriminatory, prejudiced, intrusive and corrupt.

Within the public sector, discretion can be exercised by legislative, executive, or judicial officials. Within the private sector, discretion may be exercised by private officials, such as agents, trustees or corporate officers, who are in principle subject to the supervision of the courts. The focus here is on judicial discretion, and the abuse of it. It will not discuss every area of judicial discretion.

The first major check on the discretion of judges was the jury. A judge, holding office over the course of multiple cases, and selected by appointment or election, is susceptible to undue influence. A jury, chosen by sortation, or lot, for a single case, just before the case, is less likely to be corrupted, and having multiple jurors render verdicts collectively provides a check by each on the others. What they might lack in knowledge of the law is offset by their connection to the non-legal environment in which most people subject to the law must operate.

In courts that try to save time and money by not using juries, such as family courts in some states, complaints about abuse of judicial discretion have led to calls for juries to decide questions of custody, visitation, child support, and the distribution of marital property.

Judges who impose lenient sentences, to avoid prison overcrowding and the early release of violent offenders, often provoke demands for mandatory minimum sentences or sentencing guidelines that reduce their discretion to do things like impose reduced sentences on defendants thought to be remorseful or unlikely to commit another offense.

Most complaints of abuse of judicial discretion, and calls to limit it with more laws, concern questions of policy or equity. But there is another broad category, which concerns constitutional questions of due process and civil rights. This is too large a field to discuss adequately in a short article, so only a few of the more important kinds of judicial discretion that are often being abused will be presented.