Posted on 03/02/2005 7:02:31 AM PST by Fido969
However, the feminists who have taken over the family court have howled with objection every time this issue comes up. They truly beleive that alllowing a woman to accuse a man without any fear of consequence is "empowering" to women.
Feminsts could not do this without the complicency of family court judges, who are more interested in being politically correct than they are in enforcing the law.
Once court become political devices, rather than legal devices, they have lost their relevance. Unfortunately, that is exactly the case in the US courts.
Well, it is empowering. It gives them arbitrary power over their husbands, enforced by the courts. Sick.
Agreed. Anyone can make any false allegation without consequence. The law, truth and justice take a second seat to the witch hunt mentality that pervades the radical feminist propagandized politically correct 'system' that is run by immoral socialists...
I agree with you in most cases, but, I can't say Jacko has suffered much, although we all know he is in fact guilty, yet he lives on in the style of the HOllywood pervertati.
You are more than correct.
I have been the victim of such false allegations and been investigated by both police department detectives and DCS caseworkers. When the matter was before the court, I had both the detective and the caseworker present because they were willing to testify that the whole thing was a lie. It was a custody matter and they had also interviewed my daughter who was 7 at the time. The judge could not find me guilty because there was no evidence, but, because she knew that the state's own professional investigators were prepared to testify that a false report had been made, she would not even allow them to testify. And then she verbally abused me saying that I had just been "lucky" this time.
People actually wonder why so many men have no respect for female judges! Or why we discount all these reports of "domestic violence"? It's because women use this as a tactic to gain an advantage in divorce proceedings and the courts allow it every time.
I had a recent inquiry about donating some professional talents to the renovation of a "battered womens" shelter and, although I wasn't stupid enough to come right out and say it, I have no intention of contributing to this kind of thing when all too often it's simply used as a ploy in a court system that gives all the credence in the world to any allegation against a man, even when the proof of it being false is right in front of the judge's face.
Both my wife and I have a brother each that have been falsely accused of child sexual molestation, and after the truth was uncovered, no one was punished, and both our brothers were out many thousands of dollars, not to mention the jail time!
Someone needs a serious penalty when this happens, and then they should have to pay back all the expenses the falsely accused acquire from the case.
Well, I have worked with battered men for many years, and not only are the women's shelter being not helpful to those men, I have instance where people associated with those groups KNOWINGLY assisted with false accusations. So, when I am solicited for anything for those groups, I tell them exactly what my experience is and exactly why I will not support them. I mean, why keep this shameful thing a secret? That is what dysfunctional families do.
If I were speaking just for myself, I most likely would have come right out and told them why I wouldn't help, but this particular inquiry came to me by way of a much larger company which provides many necessary referrals. I didn't want it to reflect back on them if I had been too outspoken for one thing; and, for another, even the existence of a previous allegation, no matter how false, puts a man in a bad light. I'm not sure that if I'd told them why I was refusing, they wouldn't have gone to the larger company and claimed that they were doing business with an "abuser". I can't afford those kinds of bumps in my business.
I told the referring company that current cash flow simply didn't allow me to make any kind of contribution at this time.
bump!
Since I've finally learned that I can't learn if I'm unwilling to admit my ignorance, what does "bump!" mean?
It is a quick reply, that puts the post to the top of the "recent posts" list.
Judges need to restore some modicum of credibility to their courts by nailing people to the wall for this. They do if a person files a false police report, but if the victim is just some middle-aged white guy, he should just suck it up and get on with his life. Its horribly wrong, and the perpetrators of this character assassination need to be punished for it.
But they don't
Why? Because judges don't care about the court's credibility. They're like the 'rats who think the would is a pink cloud until election time, and they lose and say "what happened!?".
Judges tend to be isolated and have no clue what disgust the general population has with the court system.
Make sense now?
Of course, I know all that. But, even in a judge's own, self-absorbed world, you'd think they would want people in their court to at least respect them.
I know of one family court judge here in Wyoming who at least won't let unsubstantiated claims be thrown around in her court. She will just cut them off when they start to spew accusations and say, "I don't allow that kind of crap in my court. If you have evidence of abuse to present, then present it. Otherwise, don't go there."
They think people do - or at least they WANT to think that people respect them in their own court.
Fear them? Yes, and you should. But the public disgust with the legal system is a cliche. There is no respect there, only disguised contempt. And contempt that goes both ways.
In the Maine court a few years ago there was a judge like that. The fems HATED the guy because he would request evidence of abuse charges.
When he came up for renomination he was the only judge in recent memory who was not automatically renominated.
Judges in Maine know what happens if they try to enforce the laws against making false charges. They can expect to be fired.
Something happened when we weren't looking. Lunatics took over the courts, or something. We will need a concerted effort for a decade or two to get them back.
SSQ won't even stay in the house alone with our daughter and her friends, if an errand needs to be run. He'll do the errand and leave me with them. He doesn't even like for her friends to come up to her room on the second floor bedroom level if he happens to be at home. He is extremely cautious about this, because the whole sexual harassment thing has been drilled in at work, and he knows that once accused, there's no where to go to get your reputation back.
"It occurred to me what a shell game was being played here. Clearly both the judge and the DA's office are fully aware of he problem, and want to sweep it under the rug. They are clearly more afraid of the political ramifications of being seen as "women-unfriendly" than enforcing the law."
One of them many complex problems we now deal with because women can vote. We have congressmen and senators that want to keep the women's vote passing laws that "take care of everyone" and get rid of those dangerous guns. Along with trying to prevent the country from going to war because they don't want their precious babies killed in combat, never mind that the country is soft and defenseless like a woman.
Let the flaming begin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.