Tuesday, 28 January 2014

AND she is back..................for more.............

Yip the good 'old' (and she certainly looks it here) Siobhan McNulty.

Is it just me or does she have the face of a weasel?

She's been involved with the most shocking Family Court case ever seen in New Zealand where Siobhan wants to place a child with a sex offender.

Siobhan does NOT CARE ABOUT ANY CHILD. She is a truly vicious person. I think she might be menopausal too!

She has had to respond to misconduct complaint.



Well I know a bit more about this wee lawyer, who wants to use and abuse children. All for profit too of course.

I even have some really interesting tape recordings. And she has to be about the most stupidest person in Christchurch (or at least in the running for the title).

Funny enough, I had a conversation with a person last night and we reckon Siobhan McNulty would be the PERFECT family court lawyer to take a 'negligence case' against. Moneys not a problem, and neither is finding a QC to take the case- that's been sorted.

I already know of two previous 'child' clients of Siobhan McNulty who have a LOT to say about what she did to them in 2001 (in short terms she stopped them from seeing their father through lies and false documents, but it didn't work because they ran away from their mother to be with their father). They hate her with a passion and very much enjoy telling people what she and the Christchurch family court did.

Plus I know off TWO mothers who also would be keen to see Siobhan McNulty brought to justice.

So stay tuned, I am going to put up some court documents and tape recordings of Siobhan. But in mean time that's get her family on board and aware of what this little wee weasel has been doing.


Sunday, 26 January 2014

A day in the life of the Author of 'Who's Judging the Judges'...

So I daily received emails from people who want to know..
'who are you'?
'Tells us about who your are?'
'I love reading your blog and want to know more who you are?'
'Keep up the good work, I have struggled for years with the family court and reading your blog gives me hope that one day they might listen'.
'I want to read your books, where can I buy them?'
'Go get them Wendy, give them shit'!.

They go on...........................

Some know who I am, my story and what I do. But.........................

So far I have told my readers I have been a family court advocate for 12 years. This is true. I want to expand on this a little......

How did I become so involved in the Family Court?

My husbands own battle with this ex-partner. Yes the 'Dunedin Case' posted about here is my husbands case with his ex-partner. There is a face book group and she is named in so there is no secret as too who she is. We also have a book coming about his battle to see his son.

This case will blow your mind over how ignorant the Family Court is. And a mental note. She is a TEACHER, yes New Zealand you let people who abuse their own children teach others. Congratulations. All interactions with her have been tape recorded, including texts and threatening phone calls. New Zealand is the only country in the world who allows people with this type of history to teach children. Once again, congratulations NZ, your outstanding, you truly are.

Yes I maybe bias, but my husband is the most perfect man in the world. I come home at night and I have roses waiting for me, a cooked dinner and everything done (note I work 12 hours a day). My husband is my soul mate, he is awesome beyond compare! I would personally die for my husband. He IS perfect in every way.

Every one of my friends comments on how awesome my husband is.

We are also very 'in tuned' with each other. I came home yesterday to find a four poster bed in my room. Why? Because for the last four years my dream has been to have a four poster bed. Well my husband found a 'library four poster bed' at Harvey Norman and went out and brought it for me, to surprise me! (the library bit is for the fact I love books and write books). How perfect is that?

This is it..

I have a picture of it in my room, but I can't upload it until I get to work as my mobile broadband wont let me. But I will upload it when I get to the office.

I had tears when I saw it.

Sorry ladies, he's all mine and you can't have him! He is tooo perfect!

Two months ago I lost my wedding ring and engagement ring. I had hired a car in Melbourne. But due to the 'heat' my fingers swelled up and I took my rings off and put them in the ash tray of the car. When I returned the car I forgot about my rings. They were never found :(

I was too scared to tell hubby. When I finally did he said 'That's ok sweetie we can buy you new ones and I can get you that eternity ring I have been wanting to get you'. Oh my god! was my thinking!
I thought he was going to be upset! I cried!

He's perfect! in every way. And that's how all husbands and wives should think about each other regardless. The 'divorcing generation' should hang their heads in shame'.

It makes me laugh at those who's marriages end after three years. My husband and I plan on being that old couple still holding hands walking together down the road (or around the mall). And sitting on our front porch rocking our arm chairs. This is how marriage is MEANT to be people!
Our friends tell us, if we can survive what my husbands ex puts us throughs, we can survive anything- and it is true. (yes, she is that evil and jealous!). Stay tuned you will get to read it all very soon.

Then there is my ex-husband. Oh yes it comes in two's people!

My ex-husband IS a domestic violent predator. ALL comfortably tape recorded AND now on youtube for your viewing pleasure or dis-pleasure.

To be continued...my laptop needs charging..............


Ok, so my husband has a 'nutcase' ex, she admits in court to 'obstructing access'  and I have a 'mentally unwell' ex. Yes, do feel sorry for us. we have it all! This is why I symphonise with both fathers and mothers! we are the only people in new Zealand who have the perfect situation from BOTH sides. We have a mother who obstructs access for no reason and a father from the other side, who is a nut case.

You will not get a New Zealander who knows BOTH sides. Which is why I support both MOTHERS AND FATHERS fighting ignorance of the family court. Plus I am the most experienced at both.

Lets continue.

My ex-husband has mental health issues. He suffers anxiety, depression and manic depression episode. His GP doctor has him ladled as a 'hypochondriac'. He has a 'high users card' because of this. He suffers from what he describes, as 'dizziness in the head'. (or, if your a doctor, frontal lobe issues').

In layman terms, he's an idiot who has a brain tumour and mental health issues.

He is a ticking time bomb.

The police thought it was a fantastic idea to give him a gun license and access to guns.

A perfect 'suicide, murder' mix.

The family court thought it was a perfect mix to give him children.

Hands up who see's a disaster coming?

Yip, another family court massacre coming your way. Stay tuned to 'stuff' all the reporters know this case.

I left my husband in 2002 (that's a ruff guess because I don't dwell on the past like others) he had a 'manic depression' episode and attacked my son. (All recorded and coming to youtube this week).

Long story shot (long version on an international website and made visible to New Zealand in three weeks). For 13 years both my eldest children have been in my care because my ex- is a 'nut case'.

Get this...............

Note my first post on this site?

Well, Judge Laurence Ryan took offence to my first book about District Court Judges and instructed my ex- to take my children. As a 'ransom' and 'punishment' to me and my book.

Hands up who thinks that is a 'civilised' form of behaviour? 

Funny thing is my eldest went ' no way am I living with my father', and what does that tell you?
His father has continually abused our eldest child throughout the years, calling him 'stupid' among other name calling situations. My eldest felt undermined and his self-esteem went down due to this. So when it came to 'crunch time' my eldest said 'no way' to the family court'. (all tape recorded)

My daughter,  was lied too and manipulated by my ex-husband. But that has proven not to work because recently she cried to her lawyer that she 'misses her mum and bother and sister and can't understand why she can't see then'. She has been refused by my ex to see us because he is jealous and annoyed I put up his domestic violence tape recordings. Specks volumes for his character doesn't it!

Through the whole 13 years, I have NEVER obstructed access between him and the children. Yet I have been stopped from seeing my daughter who has said "I miss my mum". Wow, specks volumes for the New Zealand Family Court too, doesn't it.

I want to clarify to all my readers. I have never hurt my children in any way, shape or form. I have child psychology qualifications and  I AM ONE OF THE FEW IN THE WORLD TO HAVE CHILD CLEARNCES TO WORK WITH CHILDREN IN MY FIELD. I worked under the worlds BEST Child Psychologists for 12 months to get my clearance. I HAVE FBI clearance.

Guess who my daughters lawyer is..............and guess who my ex-husband's lawyer is.....

Guess what the Family Court don't want you to know about this case............

I'm going to tell you...............and I am going to tell you who my ex is, including his address and phone number.


Australian Family Court OVER RULES new zealand family court


Christchurch Family Court didn't have much fun with the quakes. There were major issues with (and it was mainly mothers but also a few fathers did this too) parents picking up kids and taking off. Either to other parts of NZ or off over seas. The claim was 'the kids were to traumatised from the quakes'.

Two groups to this occured. The parent who had been trying for a long time to relocate them and their children out of Christchurch and basically used the quakes as an excuse to leave (this didn't work and the where told to promptly return or the kids would be removed from them).

And the group that were 'genuine' about being traumatized by the quakes and had not been trying to escape with the kids from Christchurch before the quake. They were also told to promptly return.

This also all happened in the first round of Wellington quakes.

This mother is one of the 'genuine group'. And thankfully Australian Family Court Judges ARE BETTER TRAINED than new Zealand family court judges. Especially in the concepts of human behaviour.

But what I like about this article is that shows how a Family Court from another country can stand OVER and RULE OVER the new zealand family court.

So when the principal family court judge of new zealand tries to claim new zealand has a 'world class family law', just laugh at them- because they don't.

Note; The lower cases are purposely used in reference to new zealand and their judges because they are subrogates to other International Family Courts and don't deserve a capital letter. I should also note that new zealand lawyers and judges are known as 'piss heads' to international lawyers and judges. This was a comment made to me by a Australian Judge at a conference recently. Going by the fact Judge Ryan goes through a bottle of whiskey a week, it looks like I don't have to do much to ruin his reputation, as he is doing a fine job himself.

Stephanie Marsden also spends more on wine than she does on her power bill (the comparison is her power bill is huge as she has a pool. I know the cost of having a pool as I have one myself and my power bill is huge for it. So yes her wine consumption is massive when it's costing her more than her power bill!).


Saturday, 25 January 2014

Family Court Judge's continue to violate Human Rights.

CLM v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development HC Auckland CIV 2009-404-7117 [2010] NZHC 1299; [2011] NZFLR 11 (28 June 2010)

Last Updated: 13 August 2010
UNDER the Judicature Amendment Act 1972 and/or Part 30 High Court Rules, the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 and the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990
IN THE MATTER OF an interim custody order granted without notice by the Family Court at Waitakere on 14
October 2009 in respect of the plaintiff's
unborn child
Hearing: 19 May 2010
Appearances: Rodney Harrison QC and Dianne Martin for Plaintiff
Una Jagose and Rachel Roff for Defendants
Dagny Baltakmens for Third Defendant (to abide) Judgment: 28 June 2010

[62] I declare that the decision of the Family Court at Waitakere on 14 October
2009 to make an order without notice to CLM placing her then unborn child in the interim custody of the Ministry breached CLM's right to natural justice under s 27(1) NZBORA 1990.

[63] Costs normally follow the event. CLM is not legally aided. The Ministry is ordered to pay costs and disbursements.

[64] Mr Harrison sought an award for increased or indemnity costs based on what he describes as high-handed behaviour by the Ministry's representatives, both in applying without notice and in refusing to co-operate in suspending enforcement of the first order once CLM was served and made known her intention to apply to set it aside. He submits that an application for judicial review would not have been necessary but for the Ministry's intransigence and irrationality. In the result, CLM was forced to obtain an interim order in this Court on 30 October, largely on the same conditions as those imposed on the second order in the Family Court, when her complaint could have been dealt with promptly and efficiently, with the Ministry's co-operation, in the Family Court.

[65] I have some sympathy for Mr Harrison's argument. The conduct of the Ministry's solicitor in failing to respond constructively to proposals made by Ms Martin for interim resolution was unsatisfactory, arguably arbitrary. And Ms Jagose has properly drawn my attention to authority which might be invoked in support of an application for indemnity costs.

The THREE Family Court Judges involved in violating the Bill of Rights in this case are;

Judge Tony Fitzgerald
Judge Simon John Maude
Judge David Mather

I think these three can go on the Judges Directory blog.


Wednesday, 22 January 2014

Named and Shamed


Named and Shamed

If CYFS, Police and the Family Court just admitted their mistake, then there wouldn't be such a backlash. But they can't seem to learn the basics of life!
There are a few more cases just like the first link on this to come out over the next few months. Including are now famous Stephanie Marsden, David Polson and many others.

Sunday, 19 January 2014

Emails...they come in thick when I wake up!

Dear Mellissa Evans,

Why is it, that every time I post a topic. My phone buzzes with an email from you. You seem to think every post on this (news media) blog is about you. In fact, you recently stated in court that this whole blog was about you.

Please lady, don’t flatter yourself. The truth is………………

Yes, you are a malicious mother. I assisted your ex-husband in the Napier court because of your behavioural issues ie: you’re a liar (sorry there is no pill you can take for that).

The Napier Judges have respect for me, as I do for them. That is because I tell them ‘as it is’ (the truth because I have no alliance with either you or your husband) and they know I see things they do not. That is the relationship we have- trust. Other Judges sitting in courts around New Zealand will slowly learn this too (perhaps at the expense of their reputations).

Mellissa, don’t worry your feeble little mind. It is not you who is being sued. That’s not to say you should be.  You’re a ‘benefit bludger’ with no skills. How could my lawyer get enough money from you to buy my husband a Ferrari? You couldn’t buy us air freshener.

However, let me give you a little bit of advice (god knows I am good at that). Don’t ever annoy someone with more money or networking power than you. If you take a look at DOTCOM it is not panning out too well for the New Zealand Government.

You lost custody because of what YOU did, not what I did. Step back, take a look at yourself in the mirror. You have potential, but it is you who holds yourself back. Not me. I publicly scrutinise Judges, I take responsibility for that. This is what my life is, not yours. They are big boys and girls, they can defend themselves if they chose to do so. I am very successful in my career. I left home at 16 years old and lived on the streets of Australia and New Zealand (I have this thing called ‘life experience’, which is more than any Judge out there). I am a survivor of domestic violence. I have studied at Universality level, I am about to graduate with a second degree and I have the best children and husband the world could possibly offer. I speck three languages. I have friends whose yachts, I cruise on in the Sydney Harbour. I have two companies (in different countries) and friends earning millions. I am very ‘complete’ (as you like to put it) with myself. I am proud of what I do. Equally I am proud of the people I support. THAT INCLUDES FATHER RIGHTS GROUP and anti-Domestic Violence groups. My company works against child sex trafficking at an international level.

Guess what! you could be as successfully too, if you weren’t so bent on revenge against people. It’s called ‘empowerment’ and ‘confidence’. God help us all!

Note; To my readers, Mellissa Evans is a mother who would repeatedly obstructed contact and lied in order to use her children as ‘revenge’ against her husband. The father tape recorded all interactions with her and was successful in court. He now has custody of the three children and she only has access. She blames me for this (hands up who’s surprised?).

I do not live in New Zealand (in fact, according to my lawyer I am country-less due to the amount of country hopping I do- I never knew that!), therefore I can name the parents. After all, no person in one country could possible comply with the laws of a country they do not live in! New Zealand laws are not universal.  

If Mellissa contacts me again I will tell you where she lives and her phone number.

 With that said, the real fun now begins. Guess what….the Family Court has a secret (oh my gosh who knew)! And I am going to tell you what it is.

Kindest Regards

A win for american bloggers


It's good to see that the courts are starting to realise what bloggers truly are. They provide news that is of public concern. As my followers know, I have a publishing company and therefore we have to have insurance (like most media outlets) for Defamation (in fact I have it twice via two companies).

I have just recently had approval from my insurance company to sue three particular people for defamation (it is not normal for this to be done, normally they only provide if someone sues you so this is a first). The comments these three people have made about me has been described by my lawyer the worst he has seen.

It really, truly amazes me how people don't realise these laws apply to them.

I am seeking quarter off a million dollars from each person and I intend to upload these court proceedings once my lawyer gives permission. You will also get to see who they are and what they did.

The great thing, is it will not cost me a cent and as everyone knows, insurance company's have unlimited funds and push very hard in court cases to win at all costs (as anyone who has been up against an insurance company knows). Plus we are filing in the High Court, so no idiot District Court Judges (who do not know the law) to deal with.

Personally, my family and I are relieved we can seek justice from these people for their very derogator comments and malicious behaviour. I hope they learn a very valuable life lesson.


Saturday, 18 January 2014

" Domestic Violence is a Knee Jerk' States Judge Lex De Jong

Dear Lex,

In light of the father and two children dying at the hands of your court. Perhaps you and Christina would like to take the opportunity to tell New Zealand how you fully support male violence against women and children. After all you are on record making the admission in court that Domestic Violence is nothing more than a 'knee jerk'.

Perhaps you would also like to enlighten New Zealand to the fact that you refuse to protect a women and two children from a male (father) who has mental health issues (depression and anxiety, a perfect massacre mix), has threaten to kill them, has abused them, is using a child for revenge and even has guns.

I am sure New Zealand would like to hear from you how you 'held the domestic violent male in your bosom and told him there... there I will protect you'.  After all you profit from domestic violence, children/mothers being beaten or killed.

OR, perhaps you would like to leave it to the media to tell everyone since they have the tape recordings of the domestic violence that you so lovingly indorse. And for New Zealand to hear it themselves, there is even a delightful picture that the father took posing a gun with a child and then used it to threaten the mother.

You can even tell New Zealand how you have been told that the father is a 'high risk' to harm himself and others as he has also been under Psychological care.

No wait! you and Christina want this father to harm so you can go to Phuket for a holiday.

The reality is Lex, your a coward and you have children's blood on your hands.

Research from the Domestic Violence Resource Centre Victoria in Australia shows there may be specific warning signs for the risks of retaliatory filicide, such as a history of intimate partner violence, controlling behaviour towards family members, extreme anger towards the other parent in relation to the separation, and any threats or indication of an intention to harm the children in order to punish an ex-partner.

"While perpetrators are responsible for their actions, our governmental system also needs to be held to account," he says. "There is growing evidence of inappropriate or inadequate responses from the likes of CYF, the Family Court and the police. I think one of our major problems in New Zealand is lack of responsiveness.
"As a priority, women's and children's safety would be strengthened if statutory bodies were better at taking women's reports of threat to their safety seriously."
DVRCV found 62 per cent of all children killed between 1997 and 2008 in Australia were victims of filicide. Filicide research is limited in NZ, but the Social Development Ministry reported an average of three cases of a year between 2002 and 2006.

New Zealand has a history of children suffocated, strangled, stabbed, bludgeoned, thrown from heights, and now shot, by fathers acting with the notion that killing a mother's child is a greater punishment than her own death.

A research paper analysing murder-suicides in Norway states psychic imbalance is "essential in the complex picture that leads to a person to commit murder-suicide".
Although rare, these cases are fairly consistent in their frequency, context, and warning signs.
Family violence advocates argue that such atrocities generally are preventable


Unfortunately Judith, Judge Lex De Jong has stated Domestic violence is a 'knee jerk' and it is this mentality that got your cousin killed. The fact is Judges ears are painted on. It's through poor training and the ignorance of Judges and Lawyers.


Friday, 17 January 2014

A personal message to my two prolific fan's

To: smcnulty@atticuschambers.com
Cc: SHM@smarsden.co.nz
Subject: judge the judges post
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2014 19:27:59 +1300

just want to make sure you two see my post coming up about
the Dunedin murders as it will have a LOT about you two.
Given Steve's mental health issues, his guns, the tape
recordings of his abuse towards his ex wife and the children, his
alienation of Grace. How he lies and makes up stories. And I
think it is time everyone saw the pictures he took of
putting Daniel with a gun and then using it to threaten his ex wife.

Stephanie I am very much enjoying the fact your prepared to
ruin you and your children's reputations for Steve. You have
my personal admiration for that! Many just would not do it.

Also Stephanie, can you get Steve to reply to Daniels last
email (I find it interesting he is still allowed to contact
Daniel but his ex wife is obstructed from contacting Grace, that's not
good parenting, oh no wait, there's no profit in that for
you) as I want to use them as an example of how he uses the
children as a weapon for revenge and a protection order
was nothing more than a revenge tool for him.

The QC filing the High Court action is NOT representing on
the family court stuff just yet. His notice of
representation will be with the documents served.

If I do not see your IP address up as viewing the post I
will copy it and address it to each of your partners. And
hold tight- I have a big year planned for both of you and
your families, many pamphlet drops many posts and even a

Your both the present that just keeps giving.

Thursday, 16 January 2014

NZ Family Court are Child killers

Remember, Judge De Jong has gone on record confirming that domestic violence is a 'knee jerk' and then two children die. More too come over the next few days........................

Palmerston North, New Zealand; Tel 06 357 1901
Mobile 027 437 9050, E-mail: bruce.tichbon@gmail.com
17 January 2014: For immediate release.
Family Court Has Blood On Its Hands – Yet Again!
“The Family Court has been a major contributor to a succession of child murders in New Zealand over recent years”, Bruce Tichbon, spokesperson for Families Apart Require Equality (FARE), stated today.
“As a nation we are deeply saddened by the tragic deaths in Dunedin this week of Bradley and Ellen Livingstone, and their father Edward Livingstone. The Dunedin children were just nine and six years old respectively.
Yet there has been a sickening succession of such incidents in New Zealand in recent years. In 2000 in Nelson, Alice, Maria and Cherie Perkin, were murdered by their mother, Rosemary Perkin, who also killed herself. The Nelson girls were just eight, six and 23 months old respectively. In 1995 Tiffany, Holly and Claudia Bristol were murdered by their father, who also killed himself at the same time during acrimonious litigation. The Bristol children were just nine, five and two when they died.
The Livingstone, Perkin and Bristol children were young, healthy, and in the prime of life, till they died at the hands of one of their parents who was locked in a destructive Court battle.
In these cases the problem is the Family Court system, which almost invariably encourages separating parents to compete with each other in a winner-takes-all battle to have control of the children. It is the custodial parent who will get effective ownership and control of the children, and all the benefits that come with them. The Family Court imposes a win-lose outcome. In this environment parents are driven to fight over the most precious thing in their lives, their children.
Parents become so desperate they become irrational, and faced with potentially losing their children (or control of their children), the parents can and are driven to the extreme of murdering themselves, and their children.
The Family Court urgently needs to change its procedures to prevent more children dying in this way. In the USA, and many other countries, a far better system known as ’shared parenting’ has been adopted.
Instead of the parents being forced to compete with each other to be the ‘winner’ or sole physical custodian of the children, they are both made physical custodians. The parents are encouraged to work together instead of competing with each other. If one parent is uncooperative, they stand to have the Court remove their joint custodial status. Thus, instead of parents being forced to fight, they are encouraged to cooperate.
The benefits of shared parenting are dramatic. The number of ongoing court cases is halved, as arguing between parents is greatly reduced.
The divorce rate is dramatically reduced, as is the uptake of social welfare benefits. The only negative outcome is reduced earnings for lawyers, psychologists and others who profit from the suffering endured by children caused by the current regime.
Under current New Zealand family law the Family Court could more often exercise effective shared parenting, but the Judges for some inexplicable reason will not consider shared parenting as the preferred outcome to protect the welfare of children. In 2000, MP Muriel Newman introduced a Private Member’s Bill that aimed to reduce the tensions between parents by favoring the shared parenting model that has been so successful overseas. The Government rejected Newman’s Bill outright, and would not even allow it to go to a select committee.
In Dunedin this week children died once again because the Family Court, and the Government, are not fulfilling their responsibilities to the community, and refuse to use up-to-date and non-adversarial techniques to resolve child custody and access disputes. The Family Court is breaking the fundamental principles of the laws it is supposed to administer by consistently not acting in the best interests of children.
FARE calls on the Principal Family Court Judge, and the Government, to publicly state what they are doing to eliminate the tensions between divorcing parents and reduce the risk of this latest tragedy in Dunedin being repeated yet again, and again, which will most certainly happen again if nothing is done”, concluded Tichbon.
Enquiries to Bruce Tichbon Mob 027 437 9050

Congratulations to the Dunedin Family Court

Only 16 days into 2014 and you have successfully killed of one father and two children. That must be a record. I wonder if Laurence Ryan still gets his 'warm fuzzy feeling'.


First, the father was NOT a violent person. He was subjected to the normal course of the Family Court's object of causing as much misery to children as possible.

People need to realise that Family court Judges and lawyers PROFIT from abusing child and parents alienating children from another parent. These children died so JUDGE FLATLEY could buy a new car for his daughter.

I am not exaggerating by any means. I will post more on this later.

I have three days left of my holiday. I have a number of interesting bits planned for the Family court in 2014. This will not be a good year for any Judge or lawyer who I have my sights on.

For those looking for the Emma Smith recordings they have been up since December 16. Some can see it and some can't. That's due to myself and Justice Ministry technical and Judicial security are having a tiff with each other. Its a fun tiff though as I get to point out that they are like 'ants' considering my business partner is FBI and we get to read all their emails and are one step ahead of them.


Wednesday, 1 January 2014

Judge Clarkson/Green....the suicide Judge

I think this deserves a reprint given a wee whisper in my ear that cancer and karma have descended upon her.

Good morning judge green, now known as judge clarkson.
I met you at a familycaught hearing at 10 am on 6th October 1992. I had applied for this hearing 10 months earlier, after my children were abducted from my settled care and then re-enrolled into schools in the mother’s area. Although I applied to the familycaught in good faith, you used every available delaying tactic, so that it could be said that the children were now in the mother’s settled care. Essentially, you manufactured evidence, to support the child abducting mother.
As I walked into the hearing, I had known for 9 months that the hearing would be a charade, could only be a charade, just a dishonest window dressing amateur theatre. The fact that you had left the children in her care and delayed access to a hearing for 11 months, made it clear that your decision about whether to return the children after abduction, had actually been taken when the familycaught received the papers, that is before the evidence had been heard.
The only information that your decision was based on – was that the abductor was the mother.

When I asked you, for my children’s relationship with me to be protected from child abduction, you said “I am not here for men, I am here to protect women and children”. Her decision approved the abduction and set it’s consequences into concrete. Further, it encouraged the children’s mother to do the same again, two and a half years later. Her approach did not seem to me to be an act of integrity.
Your statement “I am not here for men, I am here to protect women and children”, told me that you didn’t see any value in honesty between parents, or in protecting children from mother-abductors.
I couldn’t understand how a judge couldn’t place any value on honesty between parents. To bring up a child competently and with discipline, honesty is necessary to stop the children playing off the parents against each other. This is just as necessary between separated parents, as still married parents. Honesty between parents allows them to negotiate to make the best life for their children, by efficiently utilizing their resources. Dishonesty wastes resources, thus impoverishing what the parents can offer their children. Dishonesty between parents doesn’t develop children who can be emotionally competent as an adult, sustaining an intimate relationship.
How could a judge not value honesty?
How could a judge reward dishonesty?
It is only through honesty between parents, that parents can work together to provide consistent, effective and appropriate discipline for their children.
It is only through honesty between parents, that parents can work together constructively and productively, to bring up their children and give them the best.
Through your knowledge of “family law”, you appear to know nothing about real world parenting, discipline of children or family budgeting. “Family law” may exist as a legal academic subject, but it has less than no value in contributing to the parenting of children in the real world. “Family law” is simply irrelevant and destructive, in it’s impacts onto real world parenting.
“Family law” only has value to legal workers, for extending disputes and increasing legal workers extortionate charges to the families of children.
Your statement, “I am not here for men, I am here to protect women and children”, also told me that you have repudiated your judicial oath.
The judicial oath is given in the Oaths and Declarations Act, available on www.legislation.co.nz and it says:
I, dale green, swear that I will well and truly serve Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, Her heirs and successors, according to law, in the office of District Caught Judge; and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of New Zealand, without fear or favour, affection or ill will. So help me God.
Your statement, “I am not here for men, I am here to protect women and children”, also told me that you have repudiated your judicial oath.
I do appreciate your honesty, by saying this to my face, in your secret caught.
By repudiating your judicial oath, you have chosen to revert from judge green, to plain dale green. In the same way that you placed my children and I outside of the protection of statute law, you have acted outside the law and placed yourself outside the statutory immunity protection for judges, while acting judicially.
You have taken the responsibility for your actions onto your own shoulders. You tried to make me out as an outlaw, a person outside the protection of Parliament’s laws. You stand outside the legislation and you have also made yourself into an outlaw.
When questions of responsibility for the consequences of judgements arise, judges have found no personal responsibility on the part of the judge, when acting judicially, that is – within the law. However, dale green, when acting outside of your judicial oath, outside of Parliament’s legislation, then you must carry the responsibility PERSONALLY.
After 2 hours of hearing, with only 10 minutes devoted to parenting skills and resources, you then scoffed at your own conclusions about parenting skills and awarded ongoing custody to the mother-abductor.
You followed “judge made law”, not the legislation set down by Parliament, for all citizens and judges to follow. These previous judgements that you followed, are not available to citizens, as they are unpublished judgements. They are seen only by legal workers practicing in familycaught and judges. The judgements published by the legal publishers show only the judgements which comply with legislation. How is it, that there are two sets of laws, one available to citizens and one available only to judges and legal workers in familycaught for use in secret trials?
In a genuine common-law country, all judgements are sent to the legal publishers and they are free to decide which of these set new precedents and will be published. judge mahony discussed this when he met with Parliament’s Social Services Subcommittee, on 16th May 2001. Principal Family Court Judge Patrick Mahony appeared before the Social Services Select Committee. He was heavily criticised in the media for insisting the press be excluded.
The full Mahony document is available at:
Here is an extract from the transcript of his memorandum:
“I have accepted your invitation to meet with you to provide information and answer questions as far as I am able against an acceptance that the Courts and the Judiciary are independent of Parliament and its processes. So I have not come in any sense as being answerable to Parliament or the Committee, but in the hope that through sharing information I can be helpful.
Public confidence in the Courts is just as important as it is for the law making process through
Parliament. It is in that context that I have been concerned at recent criticism of the Family Court aired in the media insofar as it has been ill informed, exaggerated and couched in terms calculated to destroy the Court’s credibility, particularly when it has been directed at the personal and professional integrity of the Judges.
The Family Proceedings Act placed an obligation on legal advisers to ensure that clients were aware of the counselling services available and an obligation on the Family Court to promote conciliation.
(b) It should have specialist Judges who are legally trained and qualified by personality, experience, and interest to decide matters and direct overall activities of a Family Court.
(e) Strict adversary rules should be relaxed, as assured the more traditional forms of dress and address so that, when cases have to be resolved in Court, the hearing can be conducted in an atmosphere of relative informality. The aim of the Court should be to help resolve problems with the co-operation of the parties, wherever that is possible, and with a minimum of disruption in all cases.
All Judgments are sent to the legal publishers through my office. They have the editorial freedom to choose cases for reporting in the two series of Family Law Reports published in New Zealand.
Unreported Judgments are also available through the legal publishers and are frequently referred to in the Family Court manuals published by both Butterworths and Brookers. They are unavailable to legal academics and the Universities who teach family law and are free to scrutinise and comment on Judgments of the Court.”
“unavailable” presumably was a transcription error and should read available.
Although judge mahony claimed that all judgements are supplied to legal publishers and are available to legal academics, this simply is quite untrue. After I had received a reference to a case, in a published appeal K v C appeal against removal of child without notice Priestly 21FRNZ686, I searched for the original judgement, that had been appealed against. I asked a Professor of Law if he had the original judgement and he replied that he frequently has difficulty in obtaining familycaught judgements.
It is interesting to read judge mahony’s submission, as I believe that there is not a single page which is completely truthful and not misleading.
So judge green, where does your judgement fit into the issue of whether NZ is a genuine common law or bound by precedent country. I asked both Butterworths and Brookers, the two legal publishers operating in NZ, whether they held copies of the judgement that you issued in the hearing of 6th October 1992. I asked under the Privacy Act, so that they are required to answer truthfully. Both said that they did not hold this judgement.
So, when you know that you are acting outside of Parliament’s legislation, then you don’t supply the judgement to the legal publishers, as this would enable the public to see whether you were acting outside of the law.
The Interpretation Act defines how courts should analyse the meanings of a statute, if this is not already completely obvious and unambiguous. It is required that words shall have their common english useage, unless the term has a well known legal definition.
How to Understand an Act of Parliament 7TH EDITION by D. J. GIFFORD
Words used in an Act of Parliament (if they are not defined in the Act) are to be read as having the meaning which they had in ordinary speech (or, if they are technical words, then as having their technical meaning) at the time when the Act was passed:
When we look at the “legal definition” of “best interests of the child”, should this have the meaning taken by familycaught legal workers, or the meaning accepted by competent and successful parents?
The “legal definition” is based on a legal analysis of the family, an analysis no more sophisticated than who was born with male genitals and who was born with female genitals. This should easily result in treating like cases in a like way!, but is this sufficient to meet the term “best interests of the child”, as it is understood by successful and competent parents?
Clearly this “legal definition” of “best interests of the child” fails to include issues such as each of the parent’s skills, resources for parenting, support from family and friends and all of the cultural issues as well.
Although the “legal definition” is accepted by legal workers and familycaught judges, it is not seen as sufficient to do justice to “the best interests of the child”, by any competent and successful parent.
So, what are the consequences for the children when a familycaught judge goes off the rails, outside of the legislation set down by Parliament? The mother of my two children felt free to break familycaught Orders for access, hundreds of times through the following 12 years. I never applied to the familycaught for assistance at enforcing these Orders, as it was clear from dale green’s behaviour, that the orders and the familycaught could not be taken seriously.
I lost all remaining trust of familycaught judges and for all aspects of this Mickey Mouse caught. You saw me as an outlaw dale green, living outside the protection of the laws passed by Parliament. I see you dale green, as an outlaw, you choose to work outside the law.
The Guardianship Act gives both parents the right to take part in decisions affecting their children. You turned your back on this legislation. Following on from you, judge M D robinson also approved the next abduction from my care. By removing from me the ability to take part in decisions protecting my children, you acted to prevent me from being able to protect my children from their abductor mother.
The stresses of this lawless lifestyle and lack of parental discipline, led to my older son leaving school, without even passing 3rd form exams. So what, a lifetime loss of almost a hundred thousand dollars doesn’t even register to a familycaught judge, you just couldn’t care less!
I was slapped across the face by your statement, “I am not here for men, I am here to protect women and children”. I realised that the “Alice in Wonderland” stories I had heard about the familycaught were true and that in practice I was going to be prevented from taking any part in the decisions relating to my children’s upbringing. This being to the point that you, dale green, saw fit to prefer the parenting of a child-abductor mother, over that of an honest father.
I had a suicidal streak throughout my childhood. Your expression of me as an outlaw, pressed these buttons again. I pulled myself away from these suicidal thoughts as quickly as I could, through the following 18 months. I tried to not look back. I dismissed it as my own troubled reaction.
I have an interest in suicide, as I know how many separating men (and probably women too) harbour suicidal thoughts, for some time during the separating process. Some of the triggers are “insensitive” comments made by family court legal workers, both judges and lawyers. I know that most people don’t act on these thoughts, as they have later discussed them with me.
I know that a large proportion of male suicides, are in the year or two after separation, so that the connection between men discussing suicide triggers pressed by familycaught workers and the significant number of suicides in the short period after separation is not just a coincidence.
I looked up NZ’s suicide statistics. It is terrible, when any person takes a long term solution, for a short term problem. Since the introduction of the familycaught, men in the age range 20 to 45 have been committing suicide at about x4 the rate in the previous 25 year period. Most of this increase occurred in the first 5 years after the familycaught opened for trade, since judges gained the freedom to operate under protection of secrecy. This is an increase in suicide deaths from about 2000 in 25 years from 1955 to 1980 to nearly 9000 from 1980 to 2005.
Keeping suicide in perspective, the average GP is involved with a suicide every 18 months, they are not particularly common. They have a similar incidence to road fatalities, actually a little lower. Road deaths are probably over-reported, as suicides are probably under-reported. Fortunately therefore, most of us do not have immediate family personal experience of completed suicide. This low incidence leads many in the public to not take this subject seriously, until it strikes very close to home. Then it is too late.
Much of this increase might be due to increased work stress and financial pressure to support families. This period has had it’s ups and downs, but generally there has been steadily increasing wealth. Through this 50 year period, there has been peacetime and substantial development in psychiatric treatments and medicines. These should have led to a significant reduction in suicides triggered by psychiatric conditions.
Careful analysis of road deaths, has led to safer roads and safer cars. Better emergency access to hospital treatment has also reduced deaths and the impacts of injuries. Improved driver testing, has also led to a reduction in road deaths. Between these two 25 year periods, there has been a reduction in road deaths of about 5000 people.
Why then, has suicide in 20 to 45 year old men increased by x4, through this period, especially through a period without major war? Most of the increase in the suicide rate occurred through the first five years that the secret familycaught first traded.
Was my personal experience of dale green and familycaught usual or unusual?
If it was typical, then dale green’s repudiation of her judicial oath and favouring of mother-abductors and similar activities by some other judges, may be resulting in many men and some women too, deciding to escape from NZ through suicide.
If she has behaved similarly with other men and perhaps one of them did decide to follow through on his suicidal impulses, then it is probable that Judge Green is a manslaughterer, quite possibly many times over. Gallons and gallons and gallons of blood may have been callously spilt, by her trying to prove her feminist credentials.
If my treatment was “normal”, then we could expect that similar treatment would be foreseeably likely to tip a significant number of the 5,000 men who are dragged through the familycaught each year, to consider and complete suicide. Even if only say 0.5% of separating men did complete suicide, then we would be seeing 25 additional suicides per year, which is in line with recorded suicides.
At 25 additional suicides per year, then since the familycaught started trading, at 500 suicides total, there would be an average of 4 suicides for each judge. Some judges may not have triggered any suicides. More dismal judges may be responsible for far higher than 4 suicides.
Now that I have looked back on my own experience in the familycaught, I see that even if I avoided the final solution, about 15 men each year may be falling into the man-traps set by these judges, acting outside of legislation passed by Parliament.
I am not saying that all familycaught judges behave in these ways. Probably, some judges deliver suicidal triggers much more than others. I am not accusing them of doing it consciously, deliberately and murderously. I believe that killing people in a foreseeable way is still culpable manslaughter, even when hiding behind the british tradition of judges not taking responsibility for their decisions. To the extent that these judicial behaviours foreseeably deliver suicide triggers, then there is personal responsibility.
This raises the issue of the appointment of people with legal, but not judicial training, as judges. In choosing to accept the risk of appointing lay judges, we wear the additional suicides, triggered by these under-skilled judges.
I know that judges are taught to NOT personally take responsibility for their decisions. In the days of hanging, a mistake could amount to “legal” cold blooded murder. Who would want to face the responsibility for their own error or mistake, extinguishing an innocent human life?
If I assault my friend, who unknown to me has a weak blood vessel in his brain and he dies, then I will be required to wear the responsibility. There is a rule in common law, that “you take your victim as you find him”. In a similar way, in my opinion, when a judge says to a man (Judge Green to me on 6th October 1992), after this hearing and as its consequences for my children and I unfolded, I gave serious consideration to killing myself. I did not want to be associated with bringing up my children, through the type of relationships being imposed by the Family Court. I had decided to have children, to offer them the best parenting I could.
I cannot stand silently by, while this careless carnage goes on. Parliament never envisaged that these judges would act so far outside of the legislation, at such an unnecessary bloody cost to our community.
Judges acting judicially, are not held accountable for the consequences of their judgements. However, this protection does not apply when they act illegally, outside of statute law, as in your case dale green. Your responsibility is personal. As the consequences are not reversible, you wear this blood all over your hands, blood that can never be washed off. Over 20 litres of blood.
Listeners, if you have a family member, friend or work colleague who has killed them-self, please find out whether the familycaught judges may have played an active role in their decision to destroy their life. If so, was their decision affected by any illegal aspects of how they were treated by these acting judges? If so, who is the culpable judge?
It is necessary to look very closely at the file and all papers in it. Just looking at the judgements does not give a complete or honest understanding of what has really happened through the familycaught process. Usually blackmail and threats are verbal or implied. These legal workers are really cowards, of the lowest order. They never stand up to carry responsibility for their actions.
Please do not shrink away from this cold dark task. I am not asking you to face these bloody demons, for the pleasure of facing off with death, but to protect our still alive sons, daughters, family and friends. Lets find out who are the worst death-dealing judges, so that we can replace them by judges who are willing to carry out their job, legally and with family competence.
I invite people to communicate their good and less good experiences with dale green, the acting judge. What conclusion can be drawn from a wider sample of her practice as a judge?
Someone could suggest that only weak men, with severe psychiatric problems, would complete suicide. I suggest that these people are already showing in the suicide rate prior to 1980, the trading start of the familycaught. Many of our most creative artists, writers, scientists and teachers have fought some of their life with mental illness issues. Notwithstanding this, they have contributed greatly to the cultural life of our nation – probably more so than any legal worker in NZ.
Here I am only discussing the additional suicides. If I punch and knock to the ground my opponent and he dies, due to weak blood vessels in the brain, then I am required to carry full responsibility. I take my victim as I find him.
If a doctor takes a life through careless application of his craft, the courts are very willing to place the responsibility onto his shoulders.
I am only asking that our society place the same burden, the same duty of care onto our responsibility ducking judges.
Lets stop the unnecessary bloodletting. Lets respect all members of our community.