What’s wrong with Family Court in CT?
1.
CT family court is a “brawl for hire.” A racketeering operation. A system of legalized plunder. Craft, not conscience, is the golden rule.
Falsehood, not truth, is a golden means to get money.
2.
State statute §46b-56(b) requires the ‘active & consistent’ involvement of both parents in the lives of children incidental to no-fault divorce.
Judges ignore the law.
Judges sever parent-child bonds. This increases billings and prolongs fighting, since the deprived parent often continues to fight to be with their children until they spent their last dollar and are homeless.
3.
CT grants blanket immunity to court-appointed, private-pay court actors. This frees sinister actors from the standard of care and duty otherwise required in their profession.
4.
Family court judges rely on the opinions of privately paid psychologists.
Their private pay opinions include character assassination, lack of professional protocol, and no standard of care.
This increases billings and prolongs the fight.
Custody Evaluator Jessica Biren-Caverly can find out if there is parental alienation. She only needs to know who’s paying.
5.
The court actors promote conflict, prolong litigation, and maximize billable hours.
Often the most successful ways is to generate recommendations for mother-child separation and dissolve parent-child bonds.
GAL Jocelyn Hurwitz smiles at every recommendation of parental alienation she makes. Why? Because she has fine teeth.
6.
There is no database by which people can scrutinize decisions in family court. No index is available. No master list of family court files is available on the E-file system.
Court personnel direct citizens to visit each courthouse to manually review case listings.
If you want to prove or disprove this, it is easy. Just go to each courthouse in CT and manually look at every case. Once you determine which ones are family court cases, just study the dockets for each one.
7.
Family court judges order family court litigants to use a private company, Our Family Wizard, to communicate.
This allows court actors to monitor their speech. This profits the court actors.
8.
The Regional Family Trial Docket is “a special docket, which handles contested custody and visitation matters, referred to it from any Judicial District in the state.”
CT created it in 1990 to relieve the caseload on regional districts. One judge manages the docket.
The goal is to handle contested cases involving children quickly and without interruption. The presiding family judge is supposed to refer cases to the Regional Docket when they meet the criteria:
Child-focused issue
Ready for trial
Family relations case study completed
Not more than nine months old
The court appointed a GAL for the children.
In reality:
There is no rule for referrals other than judicial discretion.
Cases are not resolved ‘quickly and without interruption’
Litigation is prolonged
It has become a form of judge shopping
Usually, judges refer only families with money
9.
Opposing attorneys appear to collaborate to prolong litigation and seek a particular decision. The collaboration seems to focus on what brings the most billings, not children’s welfare.
10.
It is a racketeering operation. It is not based on race, creed, gender or age.
Greed and a lack of checks and balances is the common denominator.
CT operates without understanding Acton’s “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Judges have absolute power.
They delegate that power to the Guardian Ad Litem.
The GAL is usually an attorney who also practices family law and is part of the racketeering enterprise.
The GAL has absolute power in a given case, but is dependent on referrals from other family lawyers in her enterprise.
Family lawyers have absolute power, since they will not recommend GALS to their clients who don’t support maximizing billings.
The GAL assigns her absolute power to Custody Evaluators, who then decide who gets custody of the children in the case.
The Custody Evaluator depends on the GAL and other family attorneys for referrals.
She must take her cues from the GAL. None of this conspiracy is discussed aloud.
The checks and balances favor the family attorneys and therapists working to ensure high billings.
Parents have no checks and balances.
Wise parents with more money than their spouse can game the system by paying the top dollar to the court actors, and taking it out of the other spouse’s share of the marital support.
Some excellent actors:
Judge Donna Heller
Joette Katz
Jocelyn Hurwitz
Sue Cousineau
Nancy Aldrich
Judge Jane Grossman
Jessic Biren-Caverly
Candace Fay
Mary Piscitelli Brigham.
Janis Laliberte
Maria McKeon
Judge Elizabeth Stewart
Lisa Knopf
Jill Plancher
