Who's judging New Hampshire's judges? Only the Legislators ...

The excerpts I included in this article came from a Concrod Mointor article, written by a Dr. Robert O. Wilson, chairman of the New Hampshire Judicial Conduct Committee (NHJCC), he said “it does not surprise me that there is public confusion over the role of the House Committee for Redress of Grievances as it may relate to judicial matters.”  I have included his direct quotes here but rewritten what in fact, is the reality of the situation.

I think the confusion starts with the fact that the people before the redress of grievance committee have already been before the Judicial Conduct Committee, complaints including conflicts of interest, a judge sitting on a criminal case and then behind closed doors a parallel case with DCYF, Judges demeaning women in their court, refusing evidence by males and females, bias against either sex, refusing to answer motions, simply keeping them in the file and pushed aside and the marital masters not following Rules 12-14 all ignored by the Judicial Conduct Committee and it is in large part why the legislators finally ended the marital master program. 

Judges have codes of conduct to be followed and the NHJCC has repeatedly and consistently failed to hold them accountable to the public they serve and those codes of ethics.  Which is why, “The New Hampshire Constitution, while establishing the three branches of government - executive, legislative, and judicial “ may have “heavily weighted the scope of governance to the side of the Legislature.” However it is more likely they saw mans greed, and wanted to “established the Redress Article “for the purpose of accountability for "the wrongs that the people suffer" at the hands of government.”

“Dormant for many years, the Committee for Redress of Grievances was re-established in 2011;” to a large number of complaints by citizens of this state. “Many of its hearings have dealt with citizens unhappy with judicial decisions and the judiciary in general. Sometimes, with the encouragement of legislators, aggrieved former litigants tell their story to the committee, but the committee goes no further to investigate a claim of judicial malfeasance. I have to disagree, this committee requires real evidence of these individuals to present their grievance, many whom I helped direct where to get the evidence to prove their point and highlight the concerns that exist within the Judicial System“In some instances, the committee votes overwhelmingly in favor of the grievant and threatens to bring a bill to the House to impeach the judge.”  Yes, this has happened based on real evidence that the committee took hours and days to pour over, unlike the Judicial conduct committee who meets once a month for a couple of hours to pour over many complaints.

Dr. Wilson, a retired oral surgeon with no legal background, finds “this disturbing, because the public hears only one side of what is often a complex and emotionally charged story.” The committee has repeatedly asked the judicial branch for their side and they refuse. What is disturbing is that this Doctor is chairman of the New Hampshire Judicial Conduct Committee.

"A long history"

"The Judicial Conduct Committee was established more than 35 years ago as an independent, lay-dominated body charged with investigating complaints against judicial officers and, where appropriate, imposing or recommending discipline for misconduct as defined by the Code of Judicial Conduct.

In 2006, the appointing bodies were changed so that the speaker of the House and the Senate president each appoint one lay member; the governor appoints two lay members; the New Hampshire Bar Association appoints two members, one of whom must be a lay person; and the Supreme Court appoints five members: one representing each of the three lower courts, a clerk of court and one lay member. There is also an alternate panel, which hears cases involving a member of the standing committee." hmm I wonder if that happen when complaints were lodged against a Lyn Aaby whose husband sits on the board? A GAL & NH Attorney who in the beginning stages of  a divorce case, gave pick up and drop offs to a girlfriend of the father in the matter, oh who was also her client in her own case, and did not disclose the conflict of interest and intentionally misrepresentative herself to the mother and Judge in the case, the result of the JCC was that there was no conflict, this was also held by the NH GAL Board, who charged a $100.00 to file the complaint. However, we can sincerely thank the executive council who received the exact same information and made sure that Governor Lynch's recommendation that Lyn Aaby become a Judge was DENIED.

"Every state has a similar committee to handle complaints of judicial misconduct using a code of judicial conduct. The New Hampshire code was developed over many years to define how judges, masters, clerks and court reporters will conduct themselves to assure the public that it can feel confident cases will be judged fairly."  If it was done fairly it wouldn't be confidential and hidden.

“The JCC meets at least monthly and, after a thorough investigation of a report of misconduct, will either dismiss the report or carry the matter forward.” Right here it shows that they take less time with the complaints than the legislators who actually heard, reviewed, and analyzed what was brought to them over weeks and long hearings.

"Should the committee find that a judge, master, clerk, etc., violated the code, it will determine an appropriate sanction, even so far as recommending suspension to the Supreme Court. But the JCC cannot overturn a judicial decision. That remedy is accorded only to an appellate court, which in New Hampshire is the state Supreme Court."  The key here is the word "Should" meaning "ought to" but they have not. 

"It is not uncommon for someone reporting what he or she believes to be judicial misconduct - often submitting 20 to 100 pages or more, photographs, and recordings to document their report - only to learn that the committee did not agree and cannot change the ruling or substitute another judge to hear their case."  It is only too common that the JCC never agrees. The one Judge recently removed was due to public fraud not a complaint in her court.

"If litigants report to the JCC that a judge yelled at them, or was biased in some way, was rude or demeaned their testimony or didn't follow the law, the JCC may ask its executive secretary to obtain the sound recording of the trial and/or the transcript for the members to hear and read for themselves."   Again, litigants have been providing audio and transcripts of Judges threatening, berating and/ or being bias. But we'll see what they say shortly ... about a Judge who tells a litigant that if they appeal his order for a GAL, that the party clearly cannot afford that he will recuse himself. Furthermore, Judges that simply push motions to the side and refuse to rule on them and cause more chaos in the courts, they haven't found fault with this to date, lets see if they are put on notice if they will.

"If the committee votes to move to the next stage of inquiry - a complaint - it will ask for a response from the judge, master, clerk, etc. Should the committee be dissatisfied with the response, it can conduct an additional investigation, leading to the filing of a statement of formal charges and a public hearing, should there be clear and convincing evidence of judicial misconduct. Reaching that level is rare - perhaps once or twice a year out of 80 or 90 reports of judicial misconduct."   You have to look at this "clear and convincing evidence" line because it is the lowest standard used in Child Protection Cases to take parents rights away to collect federal money and it goes through all the time. Try to hold a Judge accountable and well as you can see from the JCC findings compared to the same evidence being given to legislators that took more time to listen and review real evidence it's not happening, they are not Judging NH Judges they are covering up for them. 

Don't even get me started on the NH Bar Association... vote yes on Question 2 we need a constitutional amendment. 

Another Reason to Vote yes for NH Constitutional Amendment

Marital Masters on their Way Out but....are the scales between corruption/money and real justice balanced?

picture by cynical patriot 

Apparently not, here is another example of the Old boys network in NH.  Supreme-Court-AO-2012-08 describes how these marital masters who were appointed with 3 year terms will get a great benefit package at the cost of indigent families being denied an attorney in NH RSA 169-C cases and no supplemental payments for Guardian Ad litems in NH RSA 461-A cases.

Keep an eye and ear open for recommended appointments of Marital Masters to Judges positions with the approval of the Executive Council  not all of them but many do not deserve it.  If you have had an adverse experience with a marital master that is being considered for a Judicial appointment  go to the meeting and simply sign in, to have an opportunity to be heard - bring any documentation with you; please, please go you will save so many more families heartache, by ensuring they are not appointed, check nominations here.

When you read through the order above, please note that it takes awhile for legislators to get a bill through the house; they started this one in 2011 to get rid of the reappointments of marital masters and the Judicial Branch in a blatant effort to cover their comrades, over the people they are suppose to serve as stated in the first paragraph issued this order NH Supreme Court Administrative order 2011-05 which starts right off with "The anticipated legislative appropriation" instead of looking for ways to protect the community they are suppose to serve, they are as always only looking to protect each other.

Anyone who has ever tried to submit a judicial conduct complaint knows that it will yield no results; the reason why? Is because they are governed by the rules made by the Supreme Court,  which is why we need to vote yes for the constitutional amendment enabling the legislative branch to take back rule-making authority from the courts of NH.

The Judicial branch is suppose to enforce laws not make rules to get around them.

Do we or do we not, want laws passed by our Legislature to be enforced?

This article in the Nashua Telegraph today talks about the balance of government by a new yet old amendment.

I think the best part of the article above, highlights what these two branches have been arguing over in the quotes below:

 "The amendment would change Article 73 of the state constitution, giving the legislative branch explicit authority to overrule the Supreme Court’s rule-making authority for the judicial branch. 

 Specifically, laws passed by the Legislature would have precedence if they conflict with rules adopted by the chief justice and the rest of the Supreme Court. 

 The chief and the court would still govern the judicial branch and the state’s court system as usual unless a conflict arose." 

 As a legal and community researcher, lets look at those two paragraphs, because I have to simply point out that the people not backing this, do not know the law or how our government has been formed and/or lack the ability to be accountable.

I mean is it really that hard to figure out? Do we or do we not, want laws passed by the Legislature to be there to protect us?

 The Supreme Court and many Judges would prefer that you have access to justice only based on "precedence" in reality meaning the preference of any particular Judge at any given time, our Judge's by all accounts appear to be human beings. As such, human beings are flawed and come with varying shades of gray and yes, each has their own unique flawed prejudice's. As such, our founding fathers had the foresight to see man's (and women's) greed and created a separation of powers.

The legislative branch is entrusted with making laws, the Judicial branch is entrusted with upholding those laws; not overriding them with their own set of rules. They also are entrusted with letting us know if those laws made by the legislative branch are unconstitutional. Information on all branches can be better articulated in this article. I hope this starts to paint a better picture and hopefully a well known concept about our government's checks and balance system for a historical look back check the the Federalist Papers and the framers original attempts of the authors to explain the constitution being adopted. 

If we accept that the NH Legislative branches role is to create laws, and then allow them to be merely overridden by a conflict with "rules" adopted by the chief justice and the rest of the Supreme Court, we will have no one to blame but ourselves for giving them so much power, that they continue to miss use it and hurt the public they are suppose to serve and treat equally, because they will continue to be accountable to no-one.

Checks & Balances make it simple stupid

When a piece such as, this is unsigned;it should simply be ignored. 

(above link to telegraph article communicating mis-information about what they think the separation of powers is.) 


The Legislative branch is creating a check and balance system against the Judicial Branch, 

because they are out of control and do not follow their own rules and their answer to when 

this happens surrounds "each Judge has the discretion to move away from the rules" which 

is simply causing havoc. 


CACR 26 is a check and balance against the Judicial Branch, one which should have never 

been given away in the first place. The same way the Courts rule that some laws passed by 

the legislative branch are unconstitutional. CACR 26 checks and balances the Judicial branch 

creating accountability. Ignore the rhetoric and look at the basics. 


Because the next time someone is complaining about the Judicial system, it might 

be someone you don't know, or it may be you.

Legislators & One County Attorney Validate Complaints by Citizens in NH

Redress of Grievance Committee: Most complaints valid

The above article try's to convey that the Redress Committee is a waste of tax-payers dollars; really? Consider that these Representative make  a $100-$200 a year and put in time like this: "The Panel held hours-long hearings during the legislative session on the complaints - most involving the family court system. Committee members determined that 20 of the 27 complaints  were legitimate and pronounced seven unfounded."  

The Family & Court System in general and DCYF are out of control and out of touch.  Starting with the NH Family Court; parents are getting stuck with outrageous bills for Guadian Ad litem (GAL), even when the law states:

A GAL/Attorney in good standing with the NH Bar/GAL boards should be aware of the rules, laws and Admin. order of Judge Edwin Kelley (2005-03) clearly defining “the maximum fee (including costs) as not exceeding $1,000.00 for any case.  This is further ordered by the Courts with their standard appointment of said GAL, approximately 85% of litigants are pro se and finding the corresponding Administrative Orders to protect their rights is almost impossible since they do not link up with any of the laws. Moreover, this administrative order shows the fee for a GAL is suppose to be $60.00 per hour, yet many family's have been paying more. 

This order further states: “No GAL may be appointed  in any new or reopened marital matter in which one parent is indigent and the other is able to pay for the services of the GAL due to legislation that eliminated funding for GALs,” yet this happens all the time and indigent parents face bankruptcy because of it and/or lose their children, because of unwarranted harsh criticism by GAL's that can be paid up front and not because they are a bad parent.

Consequently, the Office of Cost Containment in NH RSA 461-A: 18, is no longer providing funds for GAL cases; confirmed by phone at 603-271-1416 on 7/5/12; contradicting NH RSA 461-A:17 Guardians Ad Litem and Mediators; Liability for Expenses. "The judicial council shall have no responsibility for the payment of the costs of a mediator or guardian ad litem for any party under this chapter." Thus, creating confusion and hardship for an indigent pro se litigant;

Florida recognized that  “It is difficult to grasp how it is in the best interest of the child to deplete the resources of the family” Higgenbotham v. Higgenbotham 857 So. 2^nd 341,342 (Fla. App.2003); New Hampshire claims to have realized it, yet only on paper by legislators not in practice by the Judicial Branch. 

With DCYF the Department of Children Youth and Families - Social Workers are routinely conducting improper investigations, failing to obtain even doctors reports to support their disclosures and acting on hearsay because NH RSA 169:C states thats ok.   Judge Bamberger and Judge Leary sit on the mental health, criminal, and DCYF cases all which often present a conflict of interest when the defendants are in one court or another and the DCYF hearing is behind closed doors. Furthermore, they threaten people not to talk about their cases to legislators or anyone else, in fact denying them of their 1st amendment right to free speech whether or not it's in court records.  FYI, not one person that came before the Redress was arrested. 

Parents are not being informed of their rights at first contact by DCYF, initially because it was just a protocol, now apparently, because it is actually part of the law. They consistently refuse to give parents paperwork contact logs, 3rd party information etc in their case, it's a simple thing when requested by a parent, it's called due process and now they they DENY them a Lawyer, the only State to do so, and the Family is at risk of losing custody of their child.  A fate most would consider worst than death, and it's all done on hearsay evidence NH RSA 169-C:12 .  Furthermore this department failed both Federal And State Audits consistently for the last 2 rounds over 20 years. And Family's in NH experience the torture depicted in this video:

Family's in NH and across the United States are facing challenges that no one in America should face and at least these legislators, getting paid a mere $100 -$200 a year, are attempting to correct it, they do not get paid extra to sit on committees. The Judicial System, NH Bar Association and Attorney General's Office do not hold these Attorney's and/or Judges accountable; look at what Robert Walsh former county attorney got away with letting the attacker of 2 EMT's badly injured go. with no accountability for not involving the EMT victims in his plea bargain, even when their injuries amounted to a few Felony's. Yet Robert Walsh, simply let this attacker go to a mental health court, and her father who was at the scene merely stood back and let his daughter attack these EMT's, he also appears to have called in a false 911 call because he was afraid to drive her to the hospital, why should this concern us? Because the Father is a well known doctor/ psychologist  who you should click on to find out who it is and stay away from, he also one who the courts call on to access the mental capacity of individuals before the court; why should we or the Courts believe him when he lies about his own daughter, in fact telling the EMT's she wasn't on meds and/or the real reason for his 911 call. Ann Rice at the Attorney Generals office supposedly conducted an investigation and simply scolded Attorney Walsh;  a strongly worded letter at the conclusion of her investigation way to go Rice, it you click on that last piece it's because he apologized in the paper, but never to the victims, nor did he or anyone else help from the State help with their mounting medical bills or 40% reduction in pay because they are still out of work, and no one from the town of Amherst, NH so much as sent them a card.  Furthermore,  the EMT's were rebuffed by Judge Cocker and then denied a restraining order see The two EMT's in this video   who were  denied their rights and their attacker was allowed to walk free until County Attorney Hogan stepped in and had his office reopen the case. 

Fairy Tale Access airing 10/5/12 for the full story, and then Speak Up the week after for the very gruesome details.  These are women in our community who provide a service for their community when YOU need them.  Yet they are still now out of work receiving 60% of their pay, for an incident that happened in May of 2010 and dealing with a corrupt Workman's comp policy that is not covering all of their injuries and who are not receiving victims assistance to get them back to where they were.  Really, that's justice? 

If Lafrance was willing to put her neck out as describe in a recent article in the Nashua Patch, for anything including protecting victims of crimes, ethically as assistant county attorney to Robert Walsh, she failed. 

The Federal Government and states like Wisconsin are actually allowing and/or using funding to help reunite families. Yet, NH goes out of its way to destroy them, with Judges who divorce and marry each others wives  2-3 times and/or have children with other women and fail to tell their current families, and then wonder why their children are upset with them when they do find out. These are the people deciding whats right in other family's matters... and who are also denying victims of crimes their rights and it goes right up to the Supreme Ct.. The Criminal in NH has more rights than you, if your not a criminal. Kentucky is investigating DCYF as seen in this video   adoption for $$$


Vote for the people trying to protect your rights, people like Dennis Hogan the new County prosecutor whom we voted for over Walsh.  Also consider that LaFrance, worked under Walsh as his assistant and did nothing for these victims and several others. Vote for O'Brien and others like Kevin Avard on the redress of grievance panel who went out of their way to listen to complaints and who are trying to enforce accountability. The next time a family or someone else is injured in anyway due to the Judicial System and/or NH Bar Association's failure to hold Attorney's and Judges accountable to the public they are suppose to serve, it could be just someone else you don't know or it could be YOU. 

Pro Se Organization - Family Law - It Matters

"The law should be a shield for the weak and powerless, not a club for the powerful."  

                                                             -Gov. Roy Barnes, 2004 Equal Justice Conference

STANDARD CASE CONSTRUCTION

Whether you are coordinating a pro se case for an upcoming hearing or for issues to bring to the NH Redress of Grievance Committee/Legislators and/or a new Attorney you need to coordinate your paperwork. The following is an example of a frequent complaint in the NH system and a suggestion for coordination of paperwork to bring issues with supporting documentation to a fact finders attention the initial layout which is standard for most coordinating most cases; this is not intended as or to be construed as legal advice but may add in organizational and research technique's.

Start by making the following piles with the most recent date on top:

1. All Motions starting with the initiating motion
    and then the Response

2. ALL Orders

3. Correspondence/Assessments to a court by a GAL Guardian Ad 
    Litem NH RSA 461 -A

4. Correspondence between DCYF NH RSA 169-C for division 
    protocols whether for abuse and neglect and/or domestic 
    violence see the Attorney Generals website
    http://www.doj.nh.gov/criminal/victim-assistance/protocols.htm
    Obtain all contact logs and 3rd party documentation

5. Evidence what was accepted and what was not accepted

6. Correspondence between you and your attorney

7. Outline the facts, orders and how it effected and/or affected your 
    case

THE CHILD PROTECTION ACT
These piles especially the first 5 allow a fact finder to easily cross reference the information in your file.  And for you to pull and copy information to explain where in your case you feel your rights were abridged; with supporting rules, and/or protocol's which are part of the law under NH RSA 169-C:34 &/or 169-C:38- a. which can only  be changed before a legislative committee and/or laws that were not applied.

Review your information and determine how you think your rights may have been abridged.  Now set out to prove the how, when, why, where or what caused the injury, how your rights have been abridged by DCYF or someone else and/or what is a fair conclusion to an abnormal situation.

THE GAL
For example a noted complaint to legislators is about GAL's (Guardian Ad Litem's) -the GAL in NH exceeded the $1000.00 standing order without a motion prior to exceeding to exceed.  Where would a standing order be: http://www.courts.state.nh.us/fdpp/adminorders/index.htm
then click on the GAL http://www.courts.state.nh.us/fdpp/adminorders/2011-03-AdministrativeOrder.pdf this shows that the cap is $1000.00 based on the Parties ability to pay and court order split of payments.

For any other administrative court orders that may pertain to your case it would be http://www.courts.state.nh.us/fdpp/adminorders/2011-03-AdministrativeOrder.pdf which clearly states if one party is indigent a court can not appoint an GAL due to some of the following: 

1st. what does the law say? Check the statute on the GAL in your state in NH it is http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XLIII/461-A/461-A-16.htm cross reference with the OCC "office of cost containment" see http://admin.state.nh.us/occ/gal.asp

If you are unable to pay the court ordered amount you could have contacted the OCC at http://admin.state.nh.us/contactus2.asp?division=Office of Cost Containment; in the past or call them at 603-271-1416 as of 7/5/12 a Chris at that office has confirmed that are no funds available due to the changes in the law.  Unconfirmed; however, it appears that because the Judicial Branch received a cut in their funding they decided to retaliate by cutting funding to the publics most vulnerable - those who are indigent.

After receiving an order to pay for a GAL because one has been arbitrarily appointed; you may also need to file a motion indicating that you have an inability to pay and/or reiterating it as describe in the NH RSA 461-A:18 at this link http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XLIII/461-A/461-A-18.htm check  461-A:17 Guardians Ad Litem and Mediators; Liability for Expenses. "The judicial council shall have no responsibility for the payment of the costs of a mediator or guardian ad litem for any party under this chapter."

RESEARCHING THE LAW IN NEW HAMPSHIRE

For full text of the Law your researching go to http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/indexes/search.html
1. type in the RSA main number like 461-A
2. a series of RSA's will appear
3. click on your title and read the law as it pertains to your case

OUTLINING THE CASE
Document the complaint for an attorney or yourself (Pro Se) where the law was not applied or considered not relevant in your case show where in the motions and/or orders it was brought up. The order against and the Law and Rules that are suppose to apply.  As you will find here, the Law controls, Rules and orders are second (case law), your federal constitutional rights are the controlling factor found here http://www.house.gov/house/Constitution/Constitution.html amendments are in the upper right hand corner a click away see notes at the bottom of the page to see if a later amendment may have affected your rights, in the amendment that most closely resembles your case. States can only enhance your federal rights they can not take away from them so then you need to check your state constitution in NH it can be found at: http://www.nh.gov/constitution/constitution.html

However, under 461-A:18 Repayment. – it connects to the OCC office ... the fees and expenses paid on the party's behalf as the court may order consistent with the party's ability to pay, such ability to be determined by the unit of cost containment.

The above areas that cover the payment and assignment of GAL's appear to contradict themselves and it is best to get the advice of an attorney.  If you can not afford one you should attempt by "Motion for Clarification" to a Court to the full picture.  Ask and/or bring to its attention that you have an inability to pay, do not understand your rights because of conflicting and overlapping laws and administrate court orders and/or bring to the attention of the legislators with all of the documentation to support your claim in as brief and direct a matter as possible.

For instance the past redress of grievance/legislators have reported receiving numerous complaints that mimic the following:

I was assigned a GAL with out the court determining the parties ability to pay based on submitted financial affidavits;
I was assigned a GAL that exceeded the $1000 cap per case;
The GAL prior to submitting a Motion to Exceed - Exceeded and when I objected the Court ordered it anyway and/or did not assess my ability to pay.  DCYF did not advise me of my rights. DCYF went out of their jurisdictional area to get a Judge to sign an order to grant them emergency custody of my child.  DCYF fabricated evidence and/or did not look at all evidence. Players to be aware of.

These complaints/Motions can be answered by what should have happened based on the law, court rules and or standing court administrative orders.  Administrative orders in the Family Division are put out by the Administrative Judge of each court; in Family Matters in New Hampshire that is Judge Kelley and these orders are directed at the Judges who work under him to protect your rights because of changes in funding, administration and/or changes in the law.

461-A:6 Determination of Parental Rights and Responsibilities; Best Interest. –
III. In determining parental rights and responsibilities under this section, including residential responsibility, the court shall not apply a preference for one parent over the other because of the sex of the child, the sex of a parent, or the financial resources of a parent.

If you feel your rights were abridged due to any of the above bring it to the attention of the court your in and read your Motion to the Judge and answer clarifying questions and then bring it to your legislators to get the laws strengthen, the Court's can only interpret the law as well as the law is written. It is a bit of work but you can't correct a problem unless you make people aware there is one.

The inconsistency's between the courts and how they operate in New Hampshire is the main complaint.  Coordinating evidence, protocols and your rights is necessary to protecting and asserting your rights. 

If there is any way I can make this article better and/or easier to follow please do not hesitate to leave a comment or email me at dmvc@live.com.  I often seek to update, modify and or simplify my work so that others may benefit from my experiences in the legal field.

"It is one of the most beautiful compensations of this life that no man can sincerely try to help another without helping himself."     

Ralph Waldo Emerson

Legal Knowledge is Empowering

Legal Knowledge is Power... recent interview on "Speak Up"
http://youtu.be/h-s2fhC322w





Indicative of a quote by Henry Miller "Chaos is the score upon which reality is written"

Anyone, involved in the legal system understands that it can be daunting and complex; learning & knowing your legal rights will help you gain the confidence to make order out of the chaos.

Courts - Ethics - Transparent - Oppression - Results

The American Court system and U.S. Government has serious flaws as seen in reports not being covered, by the main stream media; although, a few are starting to pick up on the fact that Child Protection Services and corrupt Judicial System's, are on the rise in America. This is in part aided by life time appointments for Judges who disregard the law, ignore pro se litigants and even Attorney's but, this latter group is losing creditability daily as well, for its failure to take accountability for the roles the Court dictates it takes. 

Lawless America is covering these abuses and naming names http://lawlessamerica.com/index.php?option=com_mtree&Itemid=100  http://www.lawlessamerica.com/ in a movie taking place across the United States.

The problems are similar to countries like China where transparency is really a veiled threat behind closed doors and confidentiality clauses that only protect the government and the judicial branch.

I support http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/i-support-honesty-in-government-and-the-rights-we-were/sign.html Honesty in Government the rights we were allegedly given in the Bill of Rights and our Constitution. I am signer 892 whats your number ... the world is a smaller and smaller place all the time if America is to remain a leading nation it is going to have to start taking accountability and providing transparency while fixing its interior problems, before it can help anyone else.  Results can only be attained when you stand together against oppressive conditions imposed upon you, by your government.

OPEN COURT'S ARE A SUCCESS - EXPOSING CPS CORRUPTION

http://articles.boston.com/2012-05-28/news/31878518_1_child-welfare-open-hearings-dependency-hearings

Are foster kids helped, harmed by open hearings May 28, 2012|Kelli Kennedy, Associated Press

Excerpts from the original article my quotes are italicized in response to what was not specified.

"A California judge’s decision to open a county’s child welfare hearings earlier this year has energized a debate among advocates in other states about whether greater transparency helps or harms the young victims appearing in family court." ... nearly 20 states, including Texas, New York, Florida and Illinois, those hearings are usually open to the public"

Usually, and open are two different things; if you want accountability usually needs to be ALWAYS because:

"Proponents say transparency leads to better decisions by putting a spotlight on judges, exposes the blunders of child welfare workers and gives the public a better understanding of how the system works. ... “Confidentiality has done more to protect the system than to protect the children in the system,’’ said Michael Nash, chief presiding judge of Los Angeles County’s children’s court. He ruled in January that dependency hearings in his county will be open to the public unless there is proof the child will be harmed."

Children rarely testify in these hearings and if they were allowed to the court room could be sequestered. Its a thing we do with wittiness's in every other court; so they do not feed off of each others testimony.

"But critics say children will be further traumatized by testifying about abuse in a courtroom full of strangers. The Children’s Law Center of California, which represents most children in the Los Angeles County system, asked the state appeals court to overturn Nash’s decision, but that move was rejected."

Good because again sequestered means isolated from whats going on in court and it even flys for rape trials. But there is no reason for the entire proceeding to be behind closed doors.

"Executive Director Leslie Starr Heimov says it’s unfair to compare states that have open hearings with California because children don’t have a legal right to attend hearings in many states. More than 200 children attend hearings every day at the Los Angeles courthouse."

In New Hampshire under NH RSA 169 “‘[P]arty having an interest’ means the child” (RSA 169-C:3 (XXI-a)); yet these children who ARE recognized as having rights; are not appointed an attorney to represent those rights; and in the entire system statewide in NH there are only "two Judges" and only one who consistently takes the time to talk with children privately without it recorded about what is going on in their case; my guess is he better understands what the two sides are trying to bring to his attention and better act in the Child's best interests.

“It’s difficult and it’s painful and they’re in the system through no fault of their own and to create a system where there’s forced to endure more pain, that’s harmful,’’ Heimov said."

This women works for the Children's law center in California; http://www.clcla.org/about_message.htm  you really have to wonder from reviewing the site whose side she is really on; open courts provide oversite and accountability for her team as well; possibly the problem they fear most - when like NH with Guardian's Ad Liteum's who meet the child once and write reports based on fiction; parents beware look at their reports and for those alleged statements of fact; ask them did you witness this? No? where did you get your information? and then slam them with the real facts and bring in rebuttal wittiness's.

"Family courts have opened gradually since the early 1980s, beginning with Oregon. An advocate for child welfare reform says that among the states that have followed suit, New York and Missouri’s moves in the late 1990s were particularly significant. The change is usually spurred by a horrific child abuse case or a push from local media to gain access. The beating death of 6-year-old Elisa Izquierdo by her mother prompted the opening of New York family courts in 1997 and the passage of a state open-records law referred to as “Elisa’s Law.’’

Do we really need another child to die; to realize that the courts need to be open to be accountable?

“Social workers were identified as falsifying records and lying in court, and I heard horror stories from family court judges. The lack of transparency has harmed far too many families and children in Kentucky,’’ Westrom said.

Across the country and in New Hampshire we have been fighting for open courts; law makers are suppose to enact laws that their voters want.

"Activist Gail Helms has fought for open courts in California since her 2-year-old grandson Lance was beaten to death by his father in 1995, shortly after the man was awarded custody despite a history of drug use. The boy’s father was sentenced to 25 years in prison for second-degree murder."

Again, how many Children have to die before legislators understand the realities of closed court rooms in America!

“They need to have someone in there to monitor and see what goes on in those courtrooms,’’ said Helms, whose efforts have included protests and remarks at public forums.

"Wexler said that despite some initial protest when hearings are opened, no state has reclosed them." “In every state there are lots of people worried and upset that courts are going to be opened and then a few years later everybody forgets the courts were ever closed. The disasters that everybody worried about never happened and there is a modest uptick in attention. It’s constructive,’’ said Matt Fraidin, a law professor at the University of the District of Columbia. Lawyers in Michigan, Missouri, Kansas, Oregon, and Utah told Fraidin no problems have been reported since opening courtrooms there."

In every state the only people worried about open courts are the ones abusing the system. Children lives taken to soon should not be martyrs. John B.S. Haldane once said: "While I do not suggest that humanity will ever be able to dispense with its martyrs, I cannot avoid the suspicion that with a little more thought and a little less belief their number may be substantially reduced."

Let's add a little more thought to the discussion of Open court rooms in the foster care system and a little less belief that Child Protection Service's is there for the greater good; my guess is with open courts we will prevent more deaths, it will prevent children who become wards of the State from being abused in foster care and needlessly drugged because it will require accountability.