Showing posts with label Motherhood. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Motherhood. Show all posts

20.2.13

Court Rules Human Rights Violation of Mother's whos babies taken away

·

BBC News - Mothers' rights 'breached' after babies taken into care

Mothers' rights 'breached' after babies taken into care

Two women whose new-born babies were taken into care have won a court ruling that their human rights were breached.

The mothers sought a judicial review after Renfrewshire Council and Glasgow City Council were granted protection orders by local sheriffs.

In both cases, the women were not given any notice or represented in court.

The Glasgow case involved a woman who had a history of prostitution and drug-taking. The other involved an 18-year-old who had parental care issues.

In the Renfrewshire case, it was noted that the teenage mother had a previous child in March 2009.

Supervision order

The child went home two days after the birth but was back in hospital a week later "due to lack of parental care".

The baby was given to foster carers and made the subject of a supervision order in August of the same year.

When the teenage mother became pregnant again, Renfrewshire Council warned her that they intended to take the child away at birth.

Her lawyer tried to lodge a caveat at the local sheriff court - a procedure which should guarantee a hearing before a decision is made.

The Court of Session in Edinburgh heard that the sheriff refused to allow such a move after her son was born in July 2010.

The Glasgow case involved a woman who had a history of drug-taking, prostitution and homelessness.

Lord Brailsford heard that she gave birth in 2004 and the baby was given to her mother to look after.

The judge noted that a report by social workers at the time concluded she did not have the capacity to care for the child.

"She showed no real bond with the child, had no idea of the child's needs and needed constant supervision over parental care issues," said Lord Brailsford.

The woman gave birth again in 2009 and midwives at the hospital expressed "serious concerns".

Mother attacked

Less than a week later the child was placed on the Child Protection Register.

The following April a Children's Hearing placed the child under supervision.

The Court of Session heard that the mother was attacked by the child's drug addict father while she was pregnant.

A case conference of social work child protection officers, police, a midwife and a psychologist decided to seek a Child Protection Order for the third baby as soon as possible.

The mother knew Glasgow City Council planned an application to a sheriff but she too was refused permission to lodge a caveat the day after her son was born, again in July 2010.

In both cases, sheriffs made orders to take the boys away without giving the mothers any notice and without them being represented.

Lord Brailsford noted that there were two issues involved in the cases.

The first was whether the mothers had a right to put their case to a sheriff.

The other question was whether, in all the circumstances, it was right to make the orders the local authorities wanted.

The women's case was based on provisions in the European Convention on Human Rights guaranteeing respect for family life and the right to a fair hearing.

Family life

Lord Brailsford was told that previous court challenges in Finland and Germany had led to rulings that it was a violation of the Convention Rights if it were possible to hear a parent's case without putting the child at risk.

The judge was also told that the women could have appealed against the orders at sheriff court level, without involving the Court of Session.

Lord Brailsford rejected the claim that the women should have been allowed to lodge caveats, saying their right to be heard did not come into play at that early stage.

He did conclude, however, that their right to enjoy family life had been affected.

"Both parties were prepared and ready for a hearing. There was no immediate risk or threat to the children," said the judge.

"A hearing could, in any event, have been dealt with and arranged expeditiously by the sheriff court if required."

Another hearing is expected, to decide what Lord Brailsford's decision could mean in practical terms for the women and the authorities.

The hearing will also address the issue of who will have to pay legal costs.

22.9.09

Living The Nightmare-Why are my children dead?

·

Living The Nightmare

SUSAN MURPHY MILANO'S JOURNAL

[blip.tv ?posts_id=2648076&dest=-1]

Amy Leichtenberg quietly approached the casino boat gamblers with fliers, hoping they may have seen her ex-husband, a known gambler. Three weeks earlier, he abducted the couple’s two young sons and by now all other leads had come up snake eyes. Then her phone rang.

An investigator on the case told her to drive to the McLean County Sheriff’s Department to discuss something new in the case.

Leichtenberg excitedly made the two-hour drive to the police station, allowing herself to daydream about her two boys—9-year-old Duncan and 7-year-old Jack—happily greeting her there.

Inside the station, she didn’t see her boys waiting for her. Instead, Beth Kimmerling, the county coroner, introduced herself.

"No!" Leichtenberg screamed, quickly realizing her hopeful daydream turned into her worst nightmare. "No! No! No!"

The coroner couldn’t even get the words out, telling Leichtenberg that Duncan and Jack—the joys of her life—were dead. And her ex-husband was dead, too, taking his own life after killing both his sons.

"Where are my babies?!" Leichtenberg remembers asking frantically through sobs. "Where are my babies?!" The coroner told her the boys’ bodies were with their father’s body in the back of the police station.

"I want my boys as far away from him as possible!" Leichtenberg remembers yelling, punching a desk and nearby concrete walls.

As the coroner left, Leichtenberg dissolved into a chair, crying, screaming and shaking. She felt numb. She felt empty. She felt like joining her sons in heaven. "I want to see my babies," she remembers telling authorities. No, they told her. Not yet. Not now. Not in their condition.
She begged them. They refused.

To read the entire story about Amy Leicchtenberg in the October issue of Chicago Parent click HERE.

Amy Leichtenberg was a guest on the Susan Murphy Milano show to listen to the interview it plays from this site automatically make sure the volume of your computer is turned on. Susan's show willresume again on Wednesday October 7, 2009 at 4:00 PM.

POSTED BY SUSAN MURPHY MILANO'S JOURNAL AT 02:13

LABELS: AMY LEICHTENBERG, BROKEN LEGAL SYSTEM, CHICAGO TRIBUNE,CHILD CUSTODY, CNN NEWS, JACK AND DUNCON CONNOLLY, MOTHERS IN COURT, WOMEN IN CRIME INK.

Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

1.9.09

Video Presenters at the Sixth Annual Battered Mothers Custody Conference: Albany NY 2009

·

Sixth Annual Battered Mothers Custody Conference:

http://bmcc6.blip.tv/

 

The Sixth Annual Battered Mother's Custody Conference: "Solutions"

Friday January 9th - Sunday 11th, 2009 Articles about the 2009 conference by professional journalists who were there:

Commentary womensforum.com By Garland WallerJanuary 13, 2009

The start of the New Year always fills me with hope, with plans for change, with determination. But for me, there is also an annual event that overshadows the hoopla and superficial goals. For me, the New Year heralds the Battered Mothers Custody Conference ... full article

This is Really Hard to Believe Opinion By Barry Nolan Thursday, 15 January 2009 09:14This is really hard to believe. I am sitting in a room filled with women who were beaten, and violated in terrible ways. The room is not in Bosnia, or some far flung third-world hell-hole. I am in a function room in a hotel in Albany at the Battered Mothers Custody Conference. ... full article

Presenters Schedule

BMCC VI Announcement and General InformationBrochure and Mail-In RegistrationOnline Registration 2009 Co-SponsorsSilent AuctionSupport the ConferenceAbout the Conference

Organizations and Support Resources

Legal Resources: Articles, Research,
Briefs, Case Law

Contribute a Panel to the "Children Taken By The Family Courts" Community Quilt

The Conference in PBS' 2005 Documentary

Film: Breaking the Silence, Children's StoriesFilm: Family Court Crisis

Testimonies filmed by Garland Waller at the 2008 conferen

Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Just to Hurt Mum...

·

Just to Hurt Mum...

A father who received shared parenting of the children:
1. Left a 14yo and 9yo alone in the home to see his girlfriend regularly.
2. Threatened to deprive them of their mother, if they told.
3. Took all of the furniture out of the house, leaving them with a few clothes and blankets.
4. Is relying on depression as an excuse of his negligence.
In the article, it states:
"Duty solicitor Mark Dollimore said the man was suffering depression, had not felt able to look after his children, and wanted to co-operate as much as he could."
Then why did he go to the Family Court and battle it out for Shared Parenting?
Just to hurt mum
Why would he leave them in such poor conditions?
Just to hurt mum
If he could not have cared for them, why didn't he just phone the mother?
Oh.. that's right, he is busy hurting the mother.
Fact is that the Family Court has been and is continually used as a weapon against mothers resulting in the harm of children. 
The people who made the shared parenting laws are bitter angry fathers who wanted the legal power to hurt not only their ex wives, but all mothers through the children.  They see them as nothing more than a commodity or a tool to use and spout their hatred for all women. 
Through the same charm and wit they used to lure these women into destructive environments, they used to promote this bill. 
Hence every mother who goes through this system, is forced to endure the suffering this shared parenting mob inflicted. 
The question is not how much suffering every mother can endure knowing that her children are at risk or are being abused and neglected.  The question is now, what is the government going to do about it?  How long do they have to endure this genocide?  How many idiots are they going to listen to before we are heard?
No matter how much you try to bury the truth rather than act, it will not only shine through but be sure there will be justice.

Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

23.8.09

Family Court Ordered Violence, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, CHILD CUSTODY, A GLOBAL ‘IN THE NEWS’ (ANONYMUMS NEWS)

·

ANONYMUMS NEWS

Subscribe to Zinmag TribuneSubscribe to Zinmag TribuneSubscribe to Zinmag Tribune by mail


Investigate Parent Alienation Cases

Why Are They Dead?
False Allegations Or Child Abuse?
Find out why most child abuse advocates are outraged by Family Court Decisions

Mothers: What's happening to them?

 

Martin Bryant: Would You Trust This Guy With Your Kids?

DV Victims: Her Course to Justice

Family Court Ordered Violence

Nothing more difficult for a survivor of Family Violence is the impact of judicial abuse. Many who have commendably broken free are ordered by the courts to return. The choices are limited often leading to further trauma and sometimes even punishment for a crime they never committed.

Read More

The Man Who Made PAS Said...

Fathers Rights: Rights or Violations?

In the beginning, they were labeled, "terrorists" with the bomb scares in the UK by Fathers for Justice to the militant Black shirts that stalked divorced women in Australia. A chief Justice of the Family Court, regarded them as, "dysfunctional" and a minister regarded them as, "Extremists". Despite all of these cautions, most of the demands they have made have come to pass. In US, Obama has announced billions of dollars in funding to the "Responsible Fatherhood Programs" and the howard Government in Australia, granted the shared parenting bill. Mudrer - Suicides have gone on the increase as both women and childrens rights have diminished. They call it, "Turning Back the Clock".

Read More

Systematic Abuse: Australia Follows The Others

Australia is following a worrying trend in the Family Courts where child custody is awarded to abusers. Recently, it was reported that custody was given to a convicted pedophile. Earlier this year, a five year old girl was thrown off the west gate bridge after the father was granted shared parenting. The family informed the media that they had notified various authorities over the past two years and nothing was done. This type of negligence is not unusual.

Read More

Herald-Sun Hijack: Fathers Rights Reporter Laurie Nowell?

0 Responses

Laurie Nowell, supposedly a Family Court Reporter of the Herald Sun has written once again in favor of the fathers rights groups.  Not only the agenda they promote, but includes stories from their perspectives denying that they were abusive or that they stalked their ex partners.  Considering how difficult it is to prove when a parent is unsafe towards the child with the current laws in place, it is of great concern as to why this perception of events is being promoted.  Despite the myths floating around the community that mothers make false allegations of child abuse and domestic violence to win child custody,  research over the years has proven that the majority of cases where child abuse and violence is raised are in fact true.  Furthermore, the majority that make false allegations are fathers.  It is no surprise to learn this after many fathers rights advocates have often said over the years that "lying in the family court is easy".  For them perhaps as the entire court revolves around their needs.   How so, if there are more single mothers?  The answer is in what the father wants being the first priority above all else.  Most families separate outside of court and dad chooses to be a weekend dad and in a lot of cases - he becomes a deadbeat.  During the shared parenting campaigns, mothers were mislead to believe that the courts were going to ensure that fathers had to participate in raising the children in an ideal child - focused setting.  No work in this area was done apart from adding further pressures and constraints on the mothers ability to parent her children.  With the current laws, the mother is entirely responsible for maintaining the relationship between the father and the child.

Very few cases allowed mothers to relocate(even to another suburb), protected her from physical abuse and in some cases restricted her from taking the child to a doctor.  Since the eighties, laws in the Family courts have diminished the status of mothers to the point that her rights reflect nothing but a glorified babysitter.  Even less of a role in the decision making process are the rights of children.  Most cases where the child has raised child abuse are perverted to portray that the child is brainwashed into making false allegations.  In countries where these laws have been established for a longer period, murder suicide rates are higher and children are the property of men often to puppeteer the mother into submitting into his demands.  There is even a motion in the states where the father can demand that the child reside with him or go to foster care.    Cases like these almost always begin with shared parenting, well known amongst fathers rights advocates as a gateway for full custody.

Anyone who tries to interact with them and raise concerns about child abuse or intimate partner terrorism is often abused or labeled. We have all heard and seen them vocalize their complaints about not receiving adequate rights, matched with their justifications.  What the general public have not really observed enough is the fact that even when they had been given what they wanted on a platter - it was not enough and have not ceased demanding for more.    A good example of this is what they said about the reporter Laurie Nowell after he wrote in their favor:

"F--k me sideways.  What a joke.
We'll have to start our own media." Nick Martin(Norsaint publishing)

The same rhetoric is in the media again regardless of the truths and virtues it violates.  The Christian lobby is urging Tasmanian Christians to write in and stop a bill that stops sperm donors of same sex couples from interfering and the fathers rights are busy making submissions against same sex marriages in the Marriage Act.  The cause appears at first glance "black and white" as if the evil government is denying children fathers, but on the campaign webpage it is pretty clear that they are yet again trying to make laws that reflect their values and incite hate towards same sex couples.    Again, its all about "keeping mothers on that leash" as if they were cattle.  By allowing religious laws, we open up the flood gates to an emergence of more extremists who may want to introduce similar laws to that of the Black Shirts or encourage perhaps the "religious freedom" to execute women for "honor".  What is a further disgrace is that the Christian lobby has been accepted as a balenced news source for google news engine along with Mens Daily News and other extremists.
Our news sources need to keep these agendas out and report without bias on the experiences that have barely been touched upon. 
The list of articles in fathers rights favour:

Banned dad's agonizing loss


Dad jailed over card

Family Court 'flawed' says Michael Lermontov-Midgley

Tough love needed for kids, says mother of violent

against women:

Victoria is Australia's abortion 'capital'

A thoroughly modern muslim

(click here to see why)
The public Link between Laurie and Fathers Rights Groups:
The announcement email sent out to him amongst other figures seen as "Fathers Rights Friendly"

Read more...

It is...

| |

Older Posts

Shirley Riggs When they took the children

  • IMAGE-TITLE-HERE

Share Tag Cloud Language

Parental Alienation Syndrome: How Gullible Are We?

·

 

Parental Alienation Syndrome: How Gullible Are We?

Filed under: Activism, Child Custody Battle, Child Custody Issues, Child custody for fathers,Corrupt bastards, Domestic Abuse, Domestic Relations, Domestic Violence, Dr. Richard Gardner, Family Court Reform, Family Courts, Family Rights, Legal abuse, Parental Alienation Syndrome, Whores of the court, parental alienation — justice4mothers @ 8:48 am

Up for inclusion in the new DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the most widely used psychiatric reference in the world) is the so-called “Parental Alienation Syndrome,” a syndrome invented by the pedophile-loving psychologist Dr. Richard Gardner, who committed suicide eventually.  Also up for inclusion again is making women’s menstrual cycles a psychiatric syndrome. Geezzzzz.

Money-grubbing nutcase lawyers and/or psychologists (in some cases they have both degrees!) work to get these so-called syndromes included so they can use them as a basis for taking children from protective parents (and make more money).  They use this twisted science as a basis for their claims…just how gullible do they think we all are?  Apparently many judges are, and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges are trying to correct this: see Family Courts are Warned They Should Not Accept So-called “Parental Alienation Syndrome”.

Here is a good example of how gullible people can be when you start throwing out so-called “scientific claims”:

Dihydrogen Monoxide

Dihydrogen Monoxide

A student at Eagle Rock Junior High won first prize at the Greater Idaho Falls Science Fair, April 26. He was attempting to show how conditioned we have become to alarmists practicing junk science and spreading fear of everything in our environment. In his project he urged people to sign a petition demanding strict control or total elimination of the chemical “dihydrogen monoxide.”

And for plenty of good reasons, since:

1. it can cause excessive sweating and vomiting 2. it is a major component in acid rain 3. it can cause severe burns in its gaseous state 4. accidental inhalation can kill you 5. it contributes to erosion 6. it decreases effectiveness of automobile brakes 7. it has been found in tumors of terminal cancer patients

He asked 50 people if they supported a ban of the chemical.

Forty-three (43) said yes, six (6) were undecided, and only one (1) knew that the chemical was actually just plain old water.

The title of his prize winning project was, “How Gullible Are We?”

He feels the conclusion is obvious.

http://www.snopes.com/science/dhmo.asp


Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

22.8.09

Domestic violence: Marin's most prevalent violent crime

·

 

Domestic violence: Marin's most prevalent violent crime

Jennifer Upshaw

Posted: 07/18/2009 10:33:46 PM PDT

http://www.marinij.com/marinnews/ci_12869767

This 49-year-old Mill Valley mother of two, a domestic violence victim, said she can relate to Danielle Keller, whose slaying hits close to home. (IJ photo/Jeff Vendsel)

The stigma of domestic violence is so great, the 49-year-old mother of two from Mill Valley didn't want her name used. But she said she can relate to what happened to Danielle Keller, the young mother who authorities said was killed last Sunday by her abuser."It's scary, of course it hits close to home," said the woman, who in May 2008 left an already troubled marriage after her drunken husband kicked down the door to their son's bedroom and then pushed her down on the bed and repeatedly struck her. Her teenage son, she believes, saved her from further harm by calling the police.

"I'm very sad for the family," she said of Keller's family. "I have to wonder about the child. What's going to happen to the child? As a mother that's your first instinct. For me, I was lucky and not everybody is that lucky."

The death of Danielle Keller has turned the spotlight once again on domestic violence, the most prevalent of violent crimes in Marin County, accounting for 50 percent to 55 percent of nonvehicular homicides in the past five years, according to the district attorney.

So far this year, two of Marin's three homicides have been domestic violence-related.

"Yes, obviously it disturbs me," said Marin District Attorney Ed Berberian. "We've got to address family violence and domestic violence."

James Raphael Mitchell, 27, of Pittsburg, son of the late San Francisco porn king Jim Mitchell, was charged with first-degree murder, domestic violence, kidnapping, child abduction and child endangerment in the July 12 baseball-bat beating death of his former girlfriend, 29-year-old Keller, and the kidnapping of their 1-year-old daughter.

The incident occurred despite a restraining order against Mitchell and a string of violent incidents, according to court records. Such incidents are not uncommon.

Addressing domestic violence

In the past five years, 88 percent of the 4,569 cases referred to the Marin district attorney's office by law enforcement agencies have

Facilitator Bill Eichhorn leads a discussion during a batters intervention educational class held at the The Mankind Program in San Rafael. (IJ photo/Jeff Vendsel)

involved domestic violence, according to statistics provided by the nonprofit advocacy group Marin Abused Women's Services.In addition to the Mitchell case, prosecutors are preparing for a preliminary hearing Aug. 31 in the matter of Chet Turner, a 48-year-old man accused in the April stabbing death of Avril Clary, 46, of Sausalito, with whom he shared a home on Bridgeway. The suspect told at least three acquaintances he killed her, authorities have said.

The death of 9-year-old Melody Osheroff is being prosecuted as a homicide but is not a domestic violence case. Edward John Schaefer, 43, is accused of riding intoxicated into a crosswalk on May 27, hitting Melody and her father, Aaron, who is recovering from his injuries.

Berberian said his office spends about $1.3 million of its $16 million budget on domestic violence cases. A specially created family violence court established about a year ago deals only with individuals who have pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges. A family violence prosecution team also has been established with specific attorneys assigned to cases. A more aggressive stance on misdemeanors has been developed, although such cases can be difficult to prosecute, Berberian said.

"When it gets in front of a jury it gets more difficult to impress upon a jury the danger of the situation because they don't see the injury results," he said. "In domestic violence, in particular, you many times have a victim that does not cooperate for all sorts of reasons.

"We have to try to," he added. "We're not going to just drop these cases because we have an uncooperative victim. We're going to try to press on if we can."

Provincial attitudes about the problem have improved somewhat but still exist, prosecutors said.

"Unfortunately there are still people that have that attitude, 'Well, this is just a domestic.' Well, these domestics turn into what we saw last week and you just can't ignore them.

"It's happening in Ross, it's happening in Novato, it's happening in Belvedere, it's happening everywhere," Berberian said.

"It's just very tragic - the cost to the family and to our community."

Help from MAWS

At Marin Abused Women's Services, a 30-year organization that assists about 3,000 victims of domestic violence annually, requests for emergency shelter have been increasing and there is a growing waiting list for transitional housing facilities, officials said.In 2008, the MAWS hotline received 1,918 calls. The group provided 5,548 nights of emergency shelter; 17,338 nights of transitional housing; advocacy and assistance to 568 women who needed restraining, protective and custody orders; and training for domestic violence prevention practitioners throughout California and the nation through 81 workshops reaching more than 1,332 participants.

Media coverage depicting the Mitchell family history as tragic and the incident as a "crime of passion" have been frustrating and distract from the societal problem - the "continuum of abusive behavior," said Donna Garske, MAWS founder and chief executive.

"Domestic violence is a deliberate action," she said. "It's a clear intention and a behavior of choice.

"There are a lot of people that have rough lives and don't commit acts of violence," Garske said.

Progress, particularly since the 1994 passage of the Violence Against Women Act, has been made, but "you can have the best darn coordinated system in the country and still have domestic violence," Garske said.

"Early intervention and prevention is really key to getting this problem to stop," she said.

Family law court

Some critics continue to point to the family law court at the Hall of Justice, where several judges and a former district attorney were targeted years ago in an unsuccessful recall campaign. The critics claimed Marin's family law court was a cesspool of cronyism and corruption that favored well-connected lawyers in child-custody disputes.Indeed, the system for years has been plagued by favoritism, and domestic violence cases can fall victim to it, said Barbara Kauffman, a San Rafael family law attorney and vocal critic of family law court in Marin.

"If the alleged abuser is: A, wealthy; B, white; and C, has representation by a favored attorney or a popular attorney, I don't see the restraining orders being issued," she said, adding that she has heard that more have been issued as of late as public scrutiny has intensified.

"I think because the heat is being turned up there may likely be and I hear people saying there are more restraining orders issued now," she said. "I do think they are making more of an effort. I think especially in cases where money and politics aren't involved they really are issuing a lot more.

"I think all cases should be decided fairly based on the facts and the law - not based on money or race or any of those outside factors," said Kauffman, who said she believes a changing of the guard on the bench could bring about positive change.

A new venue would help too, she added.

"What is a criminal issue is being decided in the family courts and it's inappropriate," Kauffman said.

Could be, said Charlotte Hideko Huggins, a family law attorney who represented Keller.

"Perhaps if these cases were not handled in family court, and they were handled in criminal court, maybe they would be taken more seriously," she said.

"For every 10 cases that are just maneuvering between couples and their relationship there is this one deadly person out there.

"I have to say in my experience domestic violence victims are very difficult clients to convince to stay away," she said. "The abuser first beats down your self-esteem so you think you are not worthy of anyone but him, (gets you in his) financial clutches, and then cuts you off from everybody.

"I think there has to be full enforcement of these orders," Huggins said of restraining orders and orders of protection. "This is where the counseling comes in.

"The victims need to understand that this is a serious issue," she said, adding that she had great difficulty convincing Keller to stay away.

"She was a sweet young woman. Even with all the abuse there was a level of naivet that I couldn't break through," Huggins said. "You have to be consistent and you have to say no."

GETTING HELP

For domestic violence help and information, call the women's 24-hour hotline at 924-6616. Spanish speakers can call 924-3456. The men's 24-hour hotline is 924-1070.

BY THE NUMBERS

50-55

Percent of nonvehicular homicides attributed to domestic violence in the past five years in Marin

88

Percent of cases referred to the district attorney's office in the past five years that involved domestic violence

2 of 3

Number of Marin homicides this year that have been attributed to domestic violence

Contact Jennifer Upshaw via e-mail at jupshaw@marinij.com

Windows Live™ Hotmail®: Search, add, and share the web’s latest sports videos. Check it out.

Technorati Tags: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

20.10.08

Jessica Gonzales- Inter-American Commission on Human Rights

·

 

This is the first case from the U.S. involving violence against women to ever be heard before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and people can actually watch it live over the Internet.


Jessica Gonzales (now Lenahan) sadly lost her case against the Castle Rock [Colorado] police in the U.S. Supreme Court.  They held the police had no duty to protect her children by enforcing her order of protection, despite clear law in Colorado mandating that police arrest  anyone in violation of an order of protection.  The failure resulted in her ex-husband killing all three of their children.  Her case, now reframed as a violation of her human rights by the U.S. government, will be presented before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights this coming Wednesday (Oct. 22nd).


It is officially scheduled from 3:15 to 4:15 pm (Eastern Time)in Washington, DC at 1889 F St., NW  at the corner of 19th St.  Her information will be posted on the ACLU’s web site.  For those who can’t attend in person (most readers, I suspect), but would like to hear the arguments, read the draft of what she plans to post on the ACLU web site, which ends with how to access the court’s hearing on-line.  (And one can listen in on about 5 languages, including English.) 

Note that she will testify herself, as well as be represented.  Please feel free to pass this on to others likely to be interested in seeing this case.  It is an amazing opportunity.  The IACHR court grants only a few hearings even when it takes cases.  Previously it heard issues around standing and exhaustion of remedies in this case. Feel free to pass this on to others who might want to watch this case.


All my best, Joan Zorza
Editor, Domestic Violence Report

 

*Jessica (Gonzales) Lenahan blog post *

image 
Jessica and her three murdered daughters


My name is Jessica Lenahan and I am a survivor of domestic violence.  On Wednesday I will make my second appearance before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Washington, DC.  The IACHR is responsible for promoting and protecting human rights throughout the Americas.  I turned to the IACHR three years ago because the justice system in the United States abandoned me.

In June 1999, my estranged husband, Simon Gonzales, abducted my three young daughters in violation of a domestic violence restraining order I had obtained against him three weeks before.  I repeatedly contacted and pleaded with the Castle Rock Police for assistance, but they refused to act.  Late that night, Simon arrived at the police station and opened fire.  He was killed and the bodies of my three girls were found murdered in the cab of his truck.

I sued the town of Castle Rock, Colorado for failing to enforce the restraining order I had against my husband at the time. The case went all the way up to the Supreme Court, but they ruled that the enforcement of a restraining order wasn’t mandatory under Colorado law.  I felt utterly abandoned: the police had failed in their duty to protect me and my girls, and the government told me there was nothing wrong with that.  I was sure that I would never have my day in court or a proper investigation of what happened.  I nearly gave up at that point – I had gone all the way to the Supreme Court, and I thought that was the end of the line.

But in December 2005, with the help of the ACLU and the Human Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School, I filed a petition with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.  In March 2007, I testified before the IACHR – the first time I was allowed to tell my story in a legal forum.  Before this case, I never knew this regional system existed and never thought of my private issues as human rights violations.  I am the first survivor of domestic violence to bring an individual complaint against the United States for international human rights violations.

I want other people like me out there to know that this system exists to protect all of us, and that our government cannot just turn its back on us and get away with it.  Although the U.S. is always pointing its finger at other countries for their human rights violations, there are plenty of violations occurring right here at home.  International human rights bodies like the IACHR give U.S. citizens the opportunity to have a voice, particularly those who have lost everything.

It is fitting that my hearing is being held in October, Domestic Violence Awareness Month, an important marker of what continues to be one of the most dangerous issues facing women today.


To watch a webcast of the hearing on Wednesday go to:
http://www.oas.org/oaspage/live/OASlive.asp.


For more information, contact:
*Selene Kaye, Advocacy Coordinator*
Women’s Rights Project | American Civil Liberties Union
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10004
T: 212.549.2645 | F: 212.549.2580 | skaye@aclu.org
www.aclu.org/womensrights


See previous post about Jessica’s case.
Article:
http://justice4mothers.wordpress.com/2008/10/19/opportunity-to-watch-jessica-gonzales-human-rights-case-online/

18.10.08

Opportunity To Watch Jessica Gonzales Human Rights Case Online On Wednesday, October 22nd « RightsForMothers.com

·

RightsForMothers.com

October 19, 2008

Opportunity To Watch Jessica Gonzales Human Rights Case Online On Wednesday, October 22nd

Filed under: Angry fathers, Child Abuse, Children's rights, Corrupt bastards, Domestic Law, Domestic Violence, Getting screwed by the Family Courts, Getting screwed by the politicians, Speak Out — justice4mothers @ 12:00 am

This is the first case from the U.S. involving violence against women to ever be heard before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and people can actually watch it live over the Internet.

Jessica Gonzales (now Lenahan) sadly lost her case against the Castle Rock [Colorado] police in the U.S. Supreme Court.  They held the police had no duty to protect her children by enforcing her order of protection, despite clear law in Colorado mandating that police arrest  anyone in violation of an order of protection.  The failure resulted in her ex-husband killing all three of their children.  Her case, now reframed as a violation of her human rights by the U.S. government, will be presented before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights this coming Wednesday (Oct. 22nd).

It is officially scheduled from 3:15 to 4:15 pm (Eastern Time)in Washington, DC at 1889 F St., NW  at the corner of 19th St.  Her information will be posted on the ACLU’s web site.  For those who can’t attend in person (most readers, I suspect), but would like to hear the arguments, read the draft of what she plans to post on the ACLU web site, which ends with how to access the court’s hearing on-line.  (And one can listen in on about 5 languages, including English.)  Note that she will testify herself, as well as be represented.  Please feel free to pass this on to others likely to be interested in seeing this case.  It is an amazing opportunity.  The IACHR court grants only a few hearings even when it takes cases.  Previously it heard issues around standing and exhaustion of remedies in this case. Feel free to pass this on to others who might want to watch this case.

All my best, Joan Zorza
Editor, Domestic Violence Report

*Jessica (Gonzales) Lenahan blog post *

My name is Jessica Lenahan and I am a survivor of domestic violence.  On Wednesday I will make my second appearance before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Washington, DC.  The IACHR is responsible for promoting and protecting human rights throughout the Americas.  I turned to the IACHR three years ago because the justice system in the United States abandoned me.

Jessica and her three murdered daughters

Jessica and her three murdered daughters

In June 1999, my estranged husband, Simon Gonzales, abducted my three young daughters in violation of a domestic violence restraining order I had obtained against him three weeks before.  I repeatedly contacted and pleaded with the Castle Rock Police for assistance, but they refused to act.  Late that night, Simon arrived at the police station and opened fire.  He was killed and the bodies of my three girls were found murdered in the cab of his truck.

I sued the town of Castle Rock, Colorado for failing to enforce the restraining order I had against my husband at the time. The case went all the way up to the Supreme Court, but they ruled that the enforcement of a restraining order wasn’t mandatory under Colorado law.  I felt utterly abandoned: the police had failed in their duty to protect me and my girls, and the government told me there was nothing wrong with that.  I was sure that I would never have my day in court or a proper investigation of what happened.  I nearly gave up at that point – I had gone all the way to the Supreme Court, and I thought that was the end of the line.

But in December 2005, with the help of the ACLU and the Human Rights Clinic at Columbia Law School, I filed a petition with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.  In March 2007, I testified before the IACHR – the first time I was allowed to tell my story in a legal forum.  Before this case, I never knew this regional system existed and never thought of my private issues as human rights violations.  I am the first survivor of domestic violence to bring an individual complaint against the United States for international human rights violations.  I want other people like me out there to know that this system exists to protect all of us, and that our government cannot just turn its back on us and get away with it.  Although the U.S. is always pointing its finger at other countries for their human rights violations, there are plenty of violations occurring right here at home.  International human rights bodies like the IACHR give U.S. citizens the opportunity to have a voice, particularly those who have lost everything.

It is fitting that my hearing is being held in October, Domestic Violence Awareness Month, an important marker of what continues to be one of the most dangerous issues facing women today.

To watch a webcast of the hearing on Wednesday go to:
http://www.oas.org/oaspage/live/OASlive.asp.

For more information, contact:

*Selene Kaye, Advocacy Coordinator*
Women’s Rights Project | American Civil Liberties Union
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10004
T: 212.549.2645 | F: 212.549.2580 | skaye@aclu.org
www.aclu.org/womensrights

See previous post about Jessica’s case.


Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

Opportunity To Watch Jessica Gonzales Human Rights Case Online On Wednesday, October 22nd « RightsForMothers.com