Fathers for Justice - 52 times to divorce court and 30 days in jail.

Your judges, your family. Will you be next to suffer injustice at the hands of today's unfair justice system?

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• custody
• fathers for justice
• fathers4justice

[matkakulfi]

First of all you are and idiot for getting married and now you want to have access to your kid.Well th court is doing the right thing by not allowing an idiot like you to have access to your son and teach him that marriage is a wonderful thing.

[petriz999]

Right on target!!! Now check out "Rocco's Story - The TRUTH about Family Court"!!!

[malarki5]

The plight of men such as Rand is truly heartbreaking!

[chris80088008]

Hi, Lawyer Jane Hoffman. Why are you responding to my Y Tube website? Are you looking for more work. You are bad. In answer to your Question. Ask Dr. Roshni Daya. You and Justice Colleen Kenny ordered a practice note 7. The 3 psychologists you asked for would not do it, due to a conflict of interest.. Dr. Daya did the practice note 7, and Justice Kenny said she could not here Dr. Daya's opinion because she ordered it. Makes no sense to me either.

[thestreetdogg]

My ex wife's attorney had no children, And she was not married. She was talking about what is Best for my daughter!? lol.

I replied once how would you know!?, than I was stopped by my attorney.

These judges, Attorneys don't work for what is the best INTREST OF THE CHILD.

They work for what is the best interest of their pocket.

[scarfdaddy]

On December 12, 2003, Mr. Marshall applied for full custody of Matthew alleging in an affidavit the child is being neglected and he wanted a psychological evaluation of Ms. Wallats ability to care for the child. In affidavits and at trial, there is no evidence whatsoever to substantiate the allegations. I conclude such motions were improper, vexatious and unnecessary. In fact, Mr. Marshall brought more than one application to have a psychological evaluation of Ms. Wallat done.

[scarfdaddy]

In February 2003 Mr. Marshall obviously realized his living in Vancouver was a disadvantage to his shared parenting request so it was at that time, up until trial and at trial, that Mr. Marshall started lying about being resident in Alberta.

[scarfdaddy]

I only refer to some examples: On October 21, 2002 Mr. Marshall applied for shared parenting and wanted Matthew with him in Vancouver. Justice Holmes granted one weekend per month in Alberta and stated that he was not going to allow a 14 month old child to go to Vancouver for one week. On December 9, 2002, some seven weeks later, Mr. Marshall filed a motion for shared parenting and asking to have Matthew for one week per month in Vancouver.

[scarfdaddy]

The trial was unnecessarily lengthened by Mr. Marshalls refusal to admit that he lives in Vancouver. There was extensive cross examination to demonstrate that he was in fact living in Vancouver, as I found at trial. The trial was further lengthened by Mr. Marshalls refusal to admit he did not pay for renovations to the house, forcing Ms. Wallats counsel to enter numerous exhibits to substantiate otherwise.

[scarfdaddy]

Mr. Marshalls refusal to even attempt to organize his financial documents, which he brought into the courtroom in two large suitcases, made the job for Ms. Wallats counsel more complex, as she had to familiarize herself with his documents so they could be presented to the Court. In fact, on several occasions she had to assist him in finding documents he wanted to present to the Court as she was more familiar with his documents than he was.