- Home
- Note From An Alienated Dad
- Blog
- PA for DUMMIES
- Parental Alienation
- Main Alienators
- Alienated Children Speak out
- 3 VIDEOS explain PA
- Cross Country Parental Alienation Awareness Tour
- I CAN'T BE A FATHER
- Recent Articles
- An Alienated Child's View
- FACEBOOK posts
- Alienacion Parental (Spanish)
- The Rejected/ Targeted Parent
- Books on PAS
- Memories of a Monster
- Judge Gorcyca: PA most devastating Issue
- Infamous Alienators
- Kick Parental Alienation's @$$
- Epiloque
- Women vs PA
- The Step Parent
- REUNIONS
- Videos: Parents Speak out
- A New Hope
- I Am The Alienator
- It Happens To Moms Too
- Borrowed Content
- PA Movies to Watch
- Shared Parenting
- A Broken System
- San Bernardino Family Court
- Awareness in our Schools
- Law And Disorder
"...one thing often that many courts do is they quit reading after 5 pages. That's it. That's a maximum."
|
Commissioner Deborah Daniel
|
Commissioner Deborah Daniel points out one reason why our courts system fails so many families: Courts don't read the entire declarations before making life altering decisions
I hope she is wrong. I never thought I would say that about a family court commissioner or judge especially now after having experienced how a justice of the court can be just that. But I do hope she is wrong. I hope it's not true that many family law courts quit reading after 5 pages. If it is true it is disturbing. Its disturbing because children's lives are affected their futures placed at risk and families are potentially destroyed. So I hope what Commissioner Daniel was saying was just inaccurate, but perhaps she was telling the truth and many courts quit reading after a handful of pages; either way, its cause for concern.
I hope that she loses sleep as well. I don't mean that in a negative way, but more as a vote in her favor. If she loses sleep then one can say that she has empathy maybe even compassion. But then again, I saw the way she jaunted off her bench after her ruling with a self-satisfied strut into her chambers as if she had just done the world some good.
I hope that she loses sleep as well. I don't mean that in a negative way, but more as a vote in her favor. If she loses sleep then one can say that she has empathy maybe even compassion. But then again, I saw the way she jaunted off her bench after her ruling with a self-satisfied strut into her chambers as if she had just done the world some good.
Did Commissioner Daniel tell the truth?
What is concerning to me is that perhaps Commissioner Deborah Daniel was caught up in the moment with her guard down and had a brief episode of complete honesty. But if it is true and our courts do often only read the first 5 pages, I doubt that I am the only one to believe that, then there is something fundamentally wrong with that system? Only the first five pages? Is this practice encompass the entirety of our justice system or is this practice exclusively allowed in our family courts? THE FULL STORY: Its never about our child nor is it about getting to the truth. Instead Commissioner Daniel wants to berate me about one thing or another. This time because my declaration is two pages too long and how I am not following the rules. I'm sorry your honor I am fighting for our daughter, next time I will be brief. Bullet points sound good? My declaration was in fact 12 pages long. I admit that. I also admit that I don't see, in the great scheme of things and relatively speaking how much that really matters when their is a child's future at stake and I definitely don't see how my declaration being 2 pages too long--12 pages instead of 10-- and why that would justify you only reading the first 5 pages. Five pages your honor? I am curious if you stop at mid-sentence. Or do you finish the sentence even if you find yourself --gulp, loosens collar-- on page six. Or do you stop at the end of the last complete sentence on page five? Does this unwritten rule (because the only one I know of is the one written in California Rule of Court 5.1118) apply only to the respondent? or the petitioner as well? Or does it depend on if the respondent or the petitioner is male or female? or Hispanic or white? I ask because I have sat in your courtroom and not only on the days in which I had a hearing. But you know that. There seems to be a pattern. But the last thing that commissioner Daniel said was very revealing.
My wife had insisted that we include pictures of our bathroom locks and shower curtains. April and Christy had made some false allegations which included my "barging in" when April was changing, not having any locks on our bathroom doors, and that I "harassed" April in the shower. April described the shower curtain as being clear to Susan L. Bailes, the court mediator. She wrote this down in her mediation report. My wife wanted the pictures to further show that April was obviously lying about the shower curtains. In order to make her allegations that she was harassed more effective, she claimed that the shower curtains were clear with fish at the bottom. Commissioner Deborah Daniel responded with this: "And whether or not-- I mean i notice the picture of the shower curtain, that you cannot see the outline of a naked body {behind] the shower curtain. It is improper for a grown man to be in the same bathroom at the same time that a child is taking a shower, a 14 year old girl. It doesn't matter that you can't see anything. It is a clear privacy violation." She noticed the picture of the shower curtain. I responded, "It didn't happen is my point, Your Honor." And then went on to remind her of all the evidence that I had of her interference. She didn't want to hear it. I was glad that my wife, Tammy hadn't come. My thought at the time, besides the recurring theme of how ludicrous this all is, was that Commissioner Daniel may not read the entire declarations that loving parents submit in their defense, she and others judges apparently stop reading about halfway through, if that. But, I wondered if I should find any solace that at least she looks at the pictures. |