Somehow in the mountains of literature written about family court aberration and dysfunction, the voices that are missing are those of the executioners: the men and women in black robes. Those who speak out about the need for “reform” in family court seem to believe that these judges are not active entities, participants, even prime movers in the corruption.
Perhaps the reformers believe they cannot speak about the judges because judges have “absolute immunity.” That is, they are unaccountable. But their “absolute immunity” leads to a code of conduct that in no way, shape, or form is related to ethical work.
In the 2022 family court system, this “code of conduct” protects a pattern of racketeering. It involves coordinated cooperative communications between court actors, who conspire to transfer children into the isolation of abusers through custody transfer. Child support orders are then driven to support state programs and pay state operatives. They may in fact be looked upon as pork barrel projects that may advance the interests of the judge who enforce inconceivable, nonsensical directives.
In the past 40 years since the advent of the Gardner wizardry of all things perverted and the weaponized buzz words of “parental alienation” and “coaching,” the chute has been opened to jettison the abused child to the abuser.
The paramount goal is to obliterate guilt for crimes against children, along with maximizing legal fees and fees for extracurricular facilitators of custody transfer, resulting in the most lucrative possible payday, as analyzed by court actors even before the case began.
The gathering of personalities appointed, elected, managed by a “higher” intelligence has not been directed by an arc that tilts toward justice. Rather, this gathering has been formed with an eye toward maximizing profits.
Court actors across the country who act in cooperation and collusion with each other have an identifiable personality and character configuration that we assert conforms to a category of human beings whose intent is to inflict suffering, humiliation, and pain.
Exerting control and extracting submission does result in financial benefits. But these power plays also have the added “benefit” of gratifying the perverted psyche, and thus they become an end in themselves, with multiple forms of secondary gain that reward the individual actor.
When the power play involving the exercise of control with the infliction of pain, suffering, and humiliation becomes an end in itself, we are looking at tyrannical, autocratic, sadistic personality-disordered pathology. And we are looking at it in the form of the black-robed executioners, those who are equipped with power and control quite literally over life and death.
In the past, most people would have thought that women were not capable of being sadistic actors, only victims. Men were the only class of being associated with the diagnostic category known as sadistic personality disorder.
But times have changed. Now many women enjoy their positions of pontificating from the bully pulpit, airing their “scholarly” analytic/psychiatric, extra-legal commentary randomly and repetitively in court in order to exploit and humiliate the litigants they want to bury. They provide questionable grounds for the so-called testamentary evidence they enjoy believing they have produced.
Pain and humiliation are the point; exploitation of marital assets and the litigants’ personal income becomes the financial endpoint of sadistic psychopathic judges who consciously laud the “brilliance” of their pronouncements, supported by the genuflections of the court-appointed supplicants sharing in the spoils of a solipsistic system where judge, jury, and executioner are signed, sealed and delivered in one package.
We know that in today’s world many attorneys are employed by protective parents. However, instead of serving their clients, they are controlled by the judges and the comfortable call of collegiality, which provides shade deniability from complicity in taking responsibility for their larceny and lies or punishment for the harm they have visited upon their paying clients.
We know that attorneys, for example, ask their judges for permission to file certain motions. When the judge denies that permission, they make excuses to the client as to why suddenly they cannot, or why following the judge’s direction is a good idea, even when such direction is clearly wrong.
Attorneys must work for their own clients rather than genuflecting to judges whose personality disorders, characterological psychopathy, and insatiable greed compose the overweening power driving a case in which children’s lives and loving families are at risk.
Ignoring the issues of power and money, directed by dangerous unethical authorities in control, is to abandon hope and allow the lives of protective parents and their children to be destroyed.