Mothers Of Lost Children – Indiana

Support for Noncustodial Indiana Moms

Archive for September 2009

Those Special “Relationships” Indianapolis Judges and Lawyers Have: Why Can’t the Indiana Supreme Court Get Rid of the Corrupt Bastards?

with 8 comments

Have you been a victim to an abuser represented by Andrew J. Thompson?  He  implies that he has “special relationships” with judges in Marion County.  No surprise that the judges here would have special relationships…others have been screwed over because their perp’s lawyers have these relationships with them.

From Andrew J. Thompson’s website, on fighting charges of  “Child Molestation, Domestic Violence and Battery“:

Very close in importance is the experience and relationship an attorney has with the judge and the courts where your case will be heard. It cannot guaranty a positive result, and if your case can go to a jury, the relationship with the judge is far less important, but it can make a difference in many ways.

Really?  In what ways, Andrew? You will see this text on his website in the screenshot below.

So if your abuser got off easy, or the charges were dismissed or totally blown off, investigate further.  This “relationship” with the judge may have just screwed you over, and nobody should be subjected to that.  We have to stop the business as usual here in Marion County Courts where domestic violence is blown off and abusers are getting custody of children from their victims.  Shame on crooked lawyers like this!  Indiana Supreme Court and Indiana Judical Commission, please get your blinders off to what these corrupt bastards are doing!


indylawyerA

How Do We Stop Domestic Violence In Indiana? Here is Our List!

with 3 comments

Do we expect anything to come of this…hardly.  The courts in Indiana refuse to take domestic violence seriously.  If there are allegations of domestic violence in a relationship, the perp’s lawyer will have it pulled out of domestic violence court (Court #21 in Marion County) and pull it into family court, even if they didn’t start there.  This is where the perp’s lawyer will turn it into a he said/she said battle, with allegations even more outrageous, in an effort to cloud the issue on who the abuser actually is.  Even with actual evidence, the crooked judges here often ignore it.   And there are plenty of father-leaning Whores of the Court here to feed it to them (see Local “Stepfamily” Counselor Celebrates Baby’s Death and Leading Lambs to the Slaughter…).

When the Indianapolis Star gives a local neonazi/skinhead father’s rights guy Stuart Showalter, of Boone County Fathers, the opportunity to pimp a shared parenting bill he is getting his lackey State Senator Dennis Kruse to submit to the legislature, and not print a letter from us warning of the dangers of these abusive parents using claims of “Parental Alienation Syndrome” as an excuse to get children from mothers when Governor Daniels signed a proclamation day for this, it is horrifying (see Our New Letter for the Press: The “Parental Alienation Awareness” Scam gets our Governor Mitch Daniels).   But that is the patriarchal cultural of Indiana.  You only have to look at the front pages of the Indianapolis Star on Mother’s Day and Father’s Day this year to see that.  And did you catch the Mother’s Day message from Senator Evan Bayh.  That’s right, he didn’t send one, but he did to father’s on Father’s Day in preparation of submitting his Fatherhood Initiative bill to congress.  Listen to the talk radio stations here in town.  An hour hardly goes by without father’s rights lawyers Cordell & Cordell advertising on how they will get the kids for guys (yes, they know who has to the money to fight the fight) and “protect their financial means to do so.”  Gag gag gag.  It is not about the kids for these guys. It is about the $$$.

Showalter blamed Angie Warnock for her own death by saying she shouldn’t had gotten a protective order against him, that it just caused the situation to get worse (see Joseph Warnock Takes Responsibility For Killing Angie, but Stuart Showalter Still Blames Her).  Really?  Stuart believes that every father, violent or not, deserves to share the child…50/50, even if the parent didn’t share in parenting before, even if the parent abused the other parent in front of the childen (he just needs family counseling Showalter claims).  I wonder how Angie’s two daughter feel about their father now, having witnessed him stabbing her in front of them.

Until the patriarchal, victim-blaming, mother-bashing culture comes to an end here, we will continue to see more victims at the hands of these violent men. 

1.  Stop the Mickey Mouse diversion programs…put the abuser in jail. 

2.  Stop pulling domestic violence charges out of the DV court.  It is not a civil matter, it is a CRIMINAL matter. 

3.  Stop taking children from mothers and giving them to the abusers, often with the mothers not allowed to see their children again.  Yes, that happens here.  It happens all the time.

4.  Start making the judges here follow the law.  Stop slapping their hands…fire them (see Miami County Judge Publically Admonished by Indiana for Awarding Child Custody to Father Without Telling Mother). 

It’s time to wake up people.

From today’s Indianapolis Star:

County forms task force to review deaths from domestic violence

Recent domestic violence deaths spurs county to form task force
Posted: September 24, 2009

The Hendricks County Commissioners have approved the formation of a task force to review local deaths from domestic violence.

The county has been stung with at least three such deaths in the past year, and that has triggered the formation of at least two organizations that will probe the causes and try to prevent more deaths.

One is a task force created with a new county ordinance to review previous deaths and report to state agencies that track statewide trends in domestic violence. The other organization is the revival of the long-dormant Hendricks County Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

October is National Domestic Violence Month.

The most recent of the three domestic violence deaths that have raised concerns in the county was the June killing of Angela Warnock, who was stabbed more than 50 times in front of her daughters. Her husband, Joseph Warnock, pleaded guilty to murder and faces sentencing Oct. 9.

The task force to review fatalities from domestic violence was created in response to a year-old state law.

Hendricks County Prosecutor Patricia Baldwin said the law requires each county to create a group to analyze causes and responses to domestic violence and report findings to the state.

“Domestic violence cuts across all economic and social levels in our communities, or at least that’s what we believe is the case, but it isn’t always easy to confirm,” Baldwin said. “This is part of a program to track the trends and our response.”

The ordinance requires the formation of a task force with about 15 members, including government officials, a judge, police, prosecutors, an emergency room physician, a defense attorney, a religious leader or pastor, a worker in a battered women’s shelter, and a pathologist or coroner. It also requires an educator, a probation officer, an animal control officer and representatives from the business community.

Baldwin said the task force would look at past deaths to see what could have been done to avoid or prevent such a tragedy.

“I think our responses have been pretty good. I don’t know that much would have changed” to affect the recent cases in the county, she said.

The Hendricks County Coalition has reformed after having lapsed for eight years.

Since August, about 15 people whose jobs touch domestic abuse and violence, have met twice to revive the coalition.

Julie Randall, a former director of Danville’s Sheltering Wings Center, said a preliminary online survey of professionals dealing with domestic violence found 72 percent believe violence is increasing.

Members of the coalition said they would step up efforts to educate the public about the causes of violence and the resources available to settle situations.

If necessary, they said they would look for reforms in state law, law enforcement and social services. They would train volunteers to expand on the county victims assistance program, with trained volunteers in the courthouse to direct victims of domestic violence to shelter and aid.

They look to the success of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, which educated the public about the dangers of driving while intoxicated.

“MADD stigmatized the crime of drunk driving so that it is not socially acceptable,” said Brian Johnson, a defense attorney from Brownsburg. “If you want to effect real change in domestic violence, than you have to create deterrence.”

In another Hendricks County death related to a domestic dispute, Michael R. Gelinas, 49, was killed in the driveway of his Avon home on May 27. John Gary Cooper, 58, Avon, faces one count of murder. Investigators said Cooper believed his wife was romantically involved with Gelinas.

In a third case that deeply affected Hendricks social and domestic violence workers, 44-year-old Yvonne Kretzer died of brain trauma in March in an Indianapolis hospital, after years of beatings. The Ohio woman had sought comfort in the Sheltering Wings Center in Danville, and then went back to her husband.

Child Support Help May Be Available Now to Noncustodial Parents in Indiana, Will the Courts Comply?

with one comment

I have heard mixed feelings on this.  On one point, an abusive custodial parent will probably still continue to deny access of the children to the noncustodial parent.  The courts here continue to enable abusers so further changes need to take place (like, ummmmmm, stop giving custody of children to abusers, and start taking domestic violence seriously).  But regardless of what new rules are in place, it is hard to get family court judges to follow them.  They will continue to support fathers in the courts here to the best of their ability.  This allows them to continue the financial abuse they dole out to noncustodial moms, even though they make far more than the moms do.  After all, it should be about children’s rights and human rights, not father’s rights, huh?  The courts just don’t get that here…

Published: September 21, 2009 3:00 a.m.

Court modifies support payments

Non-custodial parents could get aid for children

Angela Mapes Turner
The Journal Gazette

The Indiana Supreme Court last week issued sweeping changes to the state’s child-support guidelines that will take effect Jan. 1.

The changes could mean some parents who don’t have primary custody of their children will actually receive child-support payments from custodial parents.

“It’s a real reversal of what people think of generally when they think of child support,” said Ryan Cassman, a central Indiana attorney at Hollingsworth & Zivitz P.C. who wrote about the changes at www.indianadivorceblog.com.

Indiana’s child-support guidelines use a worksheet to calculate child-support payments and balance them with income and the amount of time parents spend with their children.

For example, a custodial parent might earn $200,000 a year and have custody of a child 52 percent of the time. The other, non-custodial parent, could have the child the remainder of the time but earn only $20,000 a year.

Although it seems counterintuitive, in a case like that, with disparate incomes and nearly equal parenting time, child support might be owed to the non-custodial parent, Cassman said.

“Those labels could be misleading,” he said.

Two judges dissented because they thought the decision should be left to the courts, not presumed.

The court also made changes that affect those at the highest and lowest ends of the income scale, reducing the lowest amount of child support that can be required and raising the highest amount.

The changes also give more recognition to situations where requiring unrealistic child-support payments from non-custodial parents who can’t pay could cause those parents to take a lesser role in their children’s lives.

“Ordering support for low-income parents at levels they can reasonably pay may improve non-custodial parent-child contact, and in turn, outcomes for their children,” the order said.

Besides changes affecting parents who receive Social Security payments, the guidelines more clearly define who must pay for a child’s “controlled expenses” – things such as school books and supplies, educational costs and clothing.

Many of those changes were already in case law, but Cassman said the new guidelines will help parents, attorneys and courts sort through costs.

“You kind of had to piece that together before,” he said.

To download the ruling by the Indiana Supreme Court Child Support Rules, please click here.

Fairness and Accuracy in Evaluations of Domestic Violence and Child Abuse in Custody Determinations

leave a comment »

Here is a great paper by Rita Smith and Pamela Coukos, meaning another scientific paper about mothers losing custody of their children to their abusers.  One day all the Whores of the Court, i.e. custody evaluators, Guardian ad Litems, psychologists, counselors, will understand that abusers are manipulative and have scammed them enough to get custody away from their victim.  They are successful 70% of the time.  Here is an excerpt:

Loss of Custody to Abusers

Reforms leading to more meaningful emergency protective measures and an improved criminal justice response do not address what frequently happens after a battered woman gets a restraining order or reaches a point where she feels able to leave an abusive partner, In many cases, she takes that step because witnessing domestic violence is affecting her children. She also may have discovered that her partner is actually physically and/or sexually abusing the children. To protect herself and the children, she files for divorce if the abuser is her husband, and initiates custody proceedings if they have children in common. If they have preexisting legal determinations respecting custody or visitation, she seeks to modify these arrangements. Shockingly, these common sense protective actions too often lead to the nonabusive, “protective” parent being put on trial. She then may face a loss of custody to the abusive parent, a loss of visitation, or in extreme cases, the termination of parental rights.

To download this paper, Fairness and Accuracy in Evaluations of Domestic Violence and Child Abuse in Custody Determinations” by Rita Smith and Pamela Coukos, please click here.

Some Indiana Counties Now Have Online Protective Orders Pilot Program

leave a comment »

From WTHR:

Victims can request protection orders online

INDIANAPOLIS – A pilot program in eight counties allows domestic violence victims to fill out forms to request protective orders online.

The new Indiana Supreme Court program debuted this month in Elkhart, St. Joseph, Marion, Grant, Madison, Wabash, Tippecanoe and Allen counties. It’s an expansion of the state’s electronic protective order registry that makes new orders available to police statewide within minutes.

The registry is used in all Indiana counties but Jefferson County, where the courthouse was recently heavily damaged by fire.

Once the online forms are completed with the help of a domestic violence advocate, they can be printed and taken to the county clerk for filing.

The improvements were financed by a $135,000 grant from the Indiana Criminal Justice Institute.

Submit a request

Remember, consider carefully options before requesting a protective order.   Mothers are generally punished by family courts here in Indiana for seeking protection from an abusive spouse. Of course,  protective orders meant nothing to the estranged husbands of Angie Warnock, Beth Stayer, and Amenda Yang, who were all murdered recently.

Kids Learn A Lot From Their Parents

leave a comment »

Doesn’t anybody care?

Don’t Be Fooled By The “Shared Parenting” Scam

leave a comment »

Seen on another site…it applies here.  Dr. Flood is in Australia, where they are already experiencing their own shared parenting disaster in courts.  His letter could very well apply here, because it is happening:

The misguided agendas of fathers’ rights groups

You are being bombarded at present with mass e-mails from fathers’ rights advocates urging you to adopt a ‘rebuttable presumption of equal parenting time’. Taking advantage of the same ‘e-mail megaphone’ system they have set up, I am writing to urge you to reject this proposal.

The proposed presumption of joint residence will, ostensibly, enhance shared parenting of children after divorce and separation, a goal with which few could argue. However, in practice it is likely that the changes will do little to encourage shared parenting. There are at least five problems with the presumption.

First, the proposed rebuttable presumption of joint custody is unnecessary: there are no formal legal obstacles to parents sharing the care of children after separation and divorce. Family law already endorses the principle of shared parenting, stressing that children have the right to know and be cared for by both their parents and that parents are jointly responsible for their children. Separating parents can make arrangements for shared residence, and small numbers do.

Second, the parents to whom this legal change would apply are those least able to set up shared parenting. The small minority of separating parents who reach the courtroom are often experiencing the most intractable and bitter conflicts, face issues of violence and abuse, and are the least likely to be in a position to share residence and parenting of their children.

Third, one size does not fit all. The best interests of the child, a key principle in family law, would be compromised by any presumption of a specific type of custody arrangement. The proposed law would undermine the ability and flexibility families need in order to develop parenting arrangements which best fit their children.

Fourth, the introduction of a presumption of joint custody is likely to increase the use of litigation to rebut the presumption, stretching the resources of the Courts and government.

Finally, a legal presumption of joint custody is likely to expose women, children and men to higher levels of violence. This prospect is particularly troubling given that there are already cases where the practice of family law privileges parental contact with children over children?s safety.

Promoting fathers? positive involvement with children is a laudable goal. But it will not be achieved by ill-considered changes in family law.

I have provided further detail on each of the above five points in the document contained here: http://www.xyonline.net/downloads/Joint_custody_DP59.pdf. And see the documents on the following website for my further discussion on how to promote fathers’ positive involvement in their children’s lives: http://www.xyonline.net/articles.shtml#father. Finally, see the following for critiques of the false claims made by fathers’ rights groups e.g. about women’s use of false allegations of domestic violence or child abuse.

Sincerely,

Dr Michael Flood
Postdoctoral Fellow
Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society (ARCSHS)
La Trobe University
E-mail: michael.flood@latrobe.edu.au
Ph. (02) 6125 9703 (BH)
PO Box 4026, Ainslie ACT, 2602 AUSTRALIA