Take a seat. Your about to read one of the most horrifying parental alienation cases currently going through the family court. Seriously, no person can make this stuff up!
Meet David Polson. He is a currently ‘lawyer for child’ on a case being heard in the Dunedin Family Court. He lives that 1 Maheno Street Maori Hill Dunedin
Meet his Wife Lauris Valerie Polson, a social worker at this place http://www.anglicanfamilycare.co.nz/
His son, Mathew David currently in Sweden.
Daughter, Helen Denise Currently in New York (at the university).
Another daughter Dagmar Alexandra (a name taken after David's mother) currently in the UK.
This case, that David is involved in, has been raging since November last year. David Polson is the second lawyer for child to be brought in, after the first one left due to a ‘conflict of interest’.
This case is known to the media. And after the hearing, the case is going to be aired. So this is a heads up for the public on what they will see soon.
While, Judge Emma Smith, wants to put children with ‘child abusers’, this case is a complete opposite. The Family Court, along with the mother, are moving ‘hell and high water’ to stop a father from seeing his son. The clinch is, there have been NO abuse allegations.
Father and son have been seeing each other for the last nine years (since the parents parted). They have an established relationship.
So, what the (beep) is going on?
Malicious Mother Syndrome.
The mother is on a (one of her many typical), vengeful nasty trip. Again. I don’t like to talk in this manner about people (unless you’re a Judge, who is way out of line) but this ‘mother’ is a very vicious and nasty person. She has not got a nice bone in her body. The father has had to go to the police because of her threatening and abusive behaviour.
She lies, manipulates people, alienates children from parents, and psychologically abuses people with some of the nastiest things you could ever image! All communication with her has been recorded. There are abusive messages left of the fathers phone telling him ‘you’re not a parent to (beep)’ which is just horrible. She refuses to facilitate contact, tell the father or discuss with the father important guardianship issues. She makes defamatory and derogatory comments to the child about the father. God, this could go on! Kay Skelton has got nothing over what this one does.
Now, what the mother did was file an example of the ‘best imagination’ a person could have. It’s one of those case where the custodial parent is making up a whole heap of 'stuff'.
The Father has this mother blocked from his ‘facebook’ so she went and made up a ‘fake’ profile and then ‘stalked’ the father on facebook. This is called having ‘to much time on your hands’.
The father had a ex-Police officer with 25 years’ experience look at the court documents and he laughed. The mother has not filed ANY evidence of this child being ‘abused’. The ex-police officer could not believe the Family Court had even accepted it and in his opinion it should be thrown out.
Ok, so back to David Polson (Your going to see a lot about this mother’s behaviour when the story is aired).
Other reason this case is interesting is:
So far, Judge Emma Smith, Judge Coyle, Judge Flatley, Judge Strettell and Judge Ryan have been on this case.
Chester Burrows has been called in twice to the case also.
The Family Court have not followed any procedure. There has not been a mediation. One was set down. The father lives almost four hours away and said ‘he will be at the mediation by telephone’. Judge Flaltey had this big ‘psychotic melt down’ about it, claiming no mediation has been done by one participant on the phone. Really? Not according to a number of Dunedin lawyers, which were phoned (and recorded) have said.
Because this case makes the Family Court look, really really bad and anti-fathers, Judge Laurence Ryan was called in (yes, Principal Family Court Judge Laurence Ryan).
If New Zealand ever needed an excuse to have Judge Ryan ‘removed’ from his position. This might help. Judge Ryan issued a ‘minute’ and threatened the father.
‘If this direction is not complied with, rule 176 of the Family Court Rules may be applied and the defaulting party’s ongoing participation will be determined’.
Woo there cowboy, your like a women on steroids! No one likes threatening behaviour.
Because the mother is just a plain horrible, unprofessional and a nasty person. She has not been (obstructing) allowing the child to see his father (there is a parenting order and it has not changed). So for the last eight months the child and father have not seen each other. This is the longest they have ever gone without any contact. So the father tried to get at least one last chance to see his son before the Family Court forcibly rips them apart. He applied to have the current order enforced.
Judge Strettell ordered an up dated report from David Polson and instructed David Polson to liaison to get some contact. In my opinion, David Polson could not liaison his way out of a paper bag.
It is this ‘updated’ report of David Polson that has been responsible for the generating of this post.
There have been two ‘child’ reports. One from the first lawyer for child and one from David Polson.
Get this- the first lawyer for child do not talk with the father. David rung the father once and spoke for five minutes. David has now ‘shut down’ and refuses to talk with the father. David is scared he will be recorded. Which he will. What have you got to hide? But David has twice talked with the mother. Bias? I think so. Anti-fathers? I think so.
So, David emailed the father. ‘The courts do not fund me to come and see you’. Dear Family Court, Your not paying David Polson enough ‘funds’.
The first report by David Polson was all ‘anti-fathers’…blah blah blah. It was written like a ‘letter’ which is not a normal presentation of ‘lawyer for child’ reports. The father has this report.
The father has been refused a copy of the second report.
Judge Laurence Ryan again…………………..
‘The parties are to file undertakings to the court that; “That they will not, and they will not authorise any other person to, release copy or publish the report in any manner whatsoever”. Once this has been done the Lawyer for Child report dated 23 July 2013 will be released to them.
Yeah right, how unlawful is that!
The father already has two other ‘reports’ (that have not been published). David Polson’s report above contains nothing more than what has already been said in the two other reports! There will be no surprises within this next report. David Polson and the courts are all anti-fathers.
After I recovered from my ‘fit of laughter’ and the father sat there saying ‘I don’t really even want it’. The father rung a lawyer who represents in the High Court. After HE recovered from his ‘roar of laughter’. An appeal (Actually a Judicial review is being filed as this is an ‘administration’ error on part of the Family Court), is to be filed.
If you’re wondering why the father is going to take this to the High Court, when he doesn’t even want the ‘report’. Because, this case has NEVER been about the ‘best interest of the child’ and it is not about the child. This case is now a ‘procedural war’ with the Family Court who act ‘unlawful’ and repeatedly get it wrong. The father is even going to throw in the ‘mediation war’ of Judge Flatley, just to clear that up for him.
This case is about a mother using a child as a weapon and the Family Court holding a child to ransom.
If the Family Court and Judge Ryan are wishing to further shine criticisms on themselves, then this is a sure fine way of doing it.
To help make these proceedings even more ‘family orientated’ they bring in Simon Jefferson (Has now asked to have his role reconsidered). He is ‘counsel to assist’. In other words he is to ‘sit there’ and ‘look pretty’. No wonder Judith Collins is annoyed at the ballooning costs of the Family Court. I would be too.
When you file an appeal against the Family Court. The Family Court then troll through to find a Family Lawyer to represent them. Simon Jefferson is an ‘ongoing’ choice for this.
I have a number of his papers he has written over the years. He has complied a lot on the role of Lawyer for Child.
So I suspect the High Court case, will have him as the ‘opposing counsel’. The Family Court have a poor performance in Judicial reviews. They lose them all the time!
So to all New Zealanders.