Please like and share. Also leave me a comment if you have had a similar experience with a judge. 

The burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi) is the obligation resting on a party in a trial to produce the evidence that will shift the conclusion away from the default position to one's own position.
The burden of proof is often associated with the Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit, the best translation of which seems to be: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."                                                                                                                         ~Wikipedia

Burden of Proof?

May 1, 2013 
San Bernardino Family Court
Commissioner Deborah Daniel, Courtroom S-11

Excerpt from Court Reporter's transcript...

"THE COURT: And if you want to cross-examine Dr. McGuire you have to subpoena her and you have to 

pay her fees.  

This is how I envision the matter going forward at  the time of trial, just so everybody is clear.  It would

be Mr. Barrow's burden to present evidence to establish that the Court should change the orders.  He will go

forward first in the presentations of the evidence.  If at the conclusion of his evidence I do not find that it 

would be sufficient for me to make any type of significant change in the orders, then I don't need to have a 

lot done from the Petitioner's side of the case, so it might be subject to a motion once the Respondent 

rests,  depending on the evidence presented.  

If his evidence does indicate that there should be  changes, I will certainly make that clear and allow, make 

sure there's a full opportunity for any rebuttal or  responsive evidence to be presented from the other side  of 

the cases.  Any questions, Counsel?"

This is an error on Commissioner Daniel's part. 
The burden of proof is on the accuser, the Petitioner, Christy Garrison, who filed her Ex Parte on August 7, 2012. She is the one trying to the rights away from father number 3 of child number 3. 

On July 11th, 2012, at the commencement of our trail, Commisioner Daniel asked that the Petitoner proceed with the presentation of their evidence (since they are the accusers/petitioning party)
I thought perhaps Commissioner Daniel had noticed her mistake and attempted to rectify the situation. Once again, and for the last time I gave Commissioner Daniel too much credit.
The opposing counsel, Diana Shropshire (Justice & Associates, Rancho Cucamonga) reminded Commissioner Daniel that she had ruled that I, the Respondent, would go first. 
Commissioner Daniel 

FYI: I am the respondent. Christy filed an ex parte on August 7, 2012 to have my parental rights removed...for 2 weeks.
Its been 1 year. 


<---- You have to pay her fees.