The Mecca Murders

Judge Jane Gallina-Mecca is one of the judges written about as a family annihilator.

Family court judges across the country are removing critical protective orders filed on behalf of women who were threatened with mortal physical abuse by their tormentors.

Those accused tormentors then found a path to alternate family court judges in their mutual jurisdiction, and the alternate judge removed protective orders that then cleared the path for that tormentor to follow through on acts of mortal abuse.

Judge Jane Gallina-Mecca has been written about extensively on this website as a family annihilator, as per her judicial acts transferring children from the hands of known protective parents into the isolated custody of the children’s physical, sexual, and emotional abusers. The chronicles of those abusers included mandating visitation over a protective order, so that the children developed panic attacks, vomiting, dissociation, and immobilization and were police-escorted if they resisted–for visits with an abuser they called “that maniac!” and time with him “torture” and “worse than death”–eventually, he violently kidnapped them, so that they would never see their caregivers again.

In another case, an abusive parent needed only to cross state lines from New York to New Jersey to have permanent protective orders entirely erased, which Judge Gallina-Mecca dismissed with the simple statement, “New Jersey is not New York”; now, the mother has not seen her three children in three years.

Even more shockingly, Judge Gallina-Mecca also placed children with fathers who were documented as being involved with members of a trafficking ring known as “the barber shops,” a group that populates the corridor of I-95 across the country and is known to engage in child sex trafficking.

Judge Gallina-Mecca is known by the Foundation to have transferred children to the custody of a parent who has themselves been documented by psychiatric professionals as having been engaged with their children in acts of intimate sexual activity. Judge Gallina-Mecca knowingly protected the accused parent, alleging that the accuser was insinuating that the accused parent was hurting the feelings of the other parent and that the acts of insult and argument between adult parents did not rise to a level of actionable abuse against the alleged abuser. No amount of carefully documented acts, behaviors, and patterns of behavior that clearly indicated child sexual abuse as well as emotional abuse of children and domestic violence against the co-parent mattered.

In cases of partners who were abused, their abuse was minimized, dismissed, and they were humiliated and berated by Judge Gallina-Mecca. In one case, she so threatened a mother during courtroom sessions, she developed post-traumatic stress disorder from those sessions, when even living with her murderous partner for over a decade had not caused the disorder.

In other cases, Judge Gallina-Mecca dismissed the protective order that provided some barrier of access to the victim, who ultimately was murdered following Judge Gallina-Mecca’s removal of a protective order that then immediately led to the murder of the protective parent who had been subject to a history of acute domestic violence.

The case of Alicia Arnone is one such case that the Foundation is investigating and evaluating for possible civil rights litigation.

A number of other cases of death have been linked to this judge. Other cases have been brought to the attention of the Foundation, through articles written about judges known to be family annihilators, such as Jane Grossman of Connecticut.

Judges with a history of having removed protective orders that have led to the murders of protective parents, men and women, have not been brought to the attention of the judicial review board or the FBI.

It is the intention of the Foundation to seek out judges who are directly responsible for having removed protective orders that then were clearly a nexus leading to the murder of a parent.

It must be noted that many of these murders of protective parents are committed in the presence of the children who were subject to the protection of the protective parent.

While most of these murderers have been incarcerated following the murder of the protective parent, the murderers have maintained authority over the parenting rights of the children, thus often precluding the protective parent’s family from taking charge of the child who was the subject of the protection that led to the murder of that parent.

Such was the case of 28-year-old Devyne Briggs, whose murder can be linked to his development of proof that his wife was exploiting their young son for her own emotional needs for personal acknowledgement and attention, both from physicians and from what has been alleged to be a highly combustible and conflicted relationship with her own mother. The child became a conduit for exploitation of money, control, power, and attention  that was threatened by her husband, the father of the child, exposing the seriously pathological environment that the child was being exposed to and the deviant manner in which the child was being raised. As it became clear in the course of time that the evidence that was being presented to the court would most likely lead to a change of custody, 28-year-old Devyne Briggs was murdered in a most brutal fashion. As his wife was arrested and placed in jail, because DHS never referred charges of child neglect and abuse against the mother and refused to remove custody from the mother, the mother retained all authority over the placement of this child and chose to support the custody placement of this child with the mother of the woman who brutally murdered her husband. The court-appointed attorneys were then able to access grants through the court not only to defend the person who murdered her husband but also to appoint custody evaluators who were not only biased and incompetent but who committed fraud and engaged in major HIPAA violations in the conduct of the writing of a severely incompetent and biased custody evaluation that supported the court in appointing the maternal grandparents as custodians of the child and completely isolated the child from any contact whatsoever with the family of the child’s father and his family. The child and his maternal family were able to move to a new state with the prospect of establishing custodial jurisdiction in a new environment that would place further boundaries and restrictions and complications for the paternal family in seeking access and protections of the child from continued severe abuse and neglect within the family, who can be indicated as being responsible for the pathological development of the person who then murdered her husband and took control of the child she thought to exploit by proxy through her mother, whom she had accused of abuse of her as a child and claimed as the person responsible for her own early childhood suffering.

The Foundation cannot express more strongly the fact that we are seeing a harvest of children transferred from exemplary protective parents who have gone to the nth degree in legally, psychiatrically, medically seeking to protect their children from the incursions of a deranged court that practices parental alienation theory as advocated by the perverted concepts disseminated by Richard Gardner MD, forensic psychiatrist, whose position on the denial of child sexual abuse has allowed for attorneys to reap massive financial gain by representing child predators. We are referring to child predators who are evidentially well documented, medically and legally, as having engaged in child sexual abuse and exploitation.

The arguments that state that children lie or are not able to accurately state the identity of the person who abused them and the nature of their acts is factually, scientifically, and medically untrue. Children are able to communicate, behaviorally, emotionally, and reactively, in patterns that are clearly documentably expressive of exactly who, what, when, and where events have occurred.

The inadequacy of poorly trained or biased professionals who find their advantage in exploiting the finances of those who have the most to lose by being reasonably, accurately accused of sexual abuse is a crime that must be laid at the feet of the court and not used to exploit generations of helpless vulnerable children.

The false claims of bias or lack of scientific documentation is used as an excuse to transfer children from protective parents into the custody of abusers because of the ability of courts to exploit transfer of federal funds into state coffers on false allegations of reunification of parents who have been wrongfully separated from their children because of false allegations of sexual abuse.

We are asserting that the great majority of charges of abuse are accurate and that those claims are not being processed because of threats and intimidation by a phalanx of court actors that are court appointed officers of the court, hiding wolves in sheep’s clothing, hiding malicious acts of abuse for financial advantage.

Protective parents are being driven into bankruptcy by lawyers who provide misleading and false information to litigants allowing protective orders to be removed, suggesting that case settlement will protect children, when in fact the protections that are required are stripped from protective parents and children, leaving children at the mercy of a court that is transferring vulnerable children into the custody and isolation of abuser who are torturing and tormenting children, not only through the court transfers but now through an additional layer of false reporting, through so called reunification services. The courts are stating that, even in the case of parents who have been accurately accused of sexual abuse on children, the children are placed in a position of having to adapt to the abuses of the parent, because for some inconceivable notion that parent is part of the child and the child must accommodate and make peace with that dissonant relative for purposes that are incalculably irrational.

Excuses for abuse are stated to be just a normal part of parental interactions, and court orders and threat of contempt hearings transfer protective parents into prison for extended period of time and further encumber them with additional fees for legal work, reunification services, and other forms of damages and property loss. The encumbrances that protective parents have become subject to are constitutional violations that the attorney population is either unwilling to engage as interventions, or the fees for those interventions make access to those forms of protection beyond the reach of the normal reasonable population of middle class or financially challenged families.

Harvesting children for the purposes of financial plundering has become the rule of family courts across the country without exception and not the exception. The lambs to slaughter parable parallel image is accurate and profoundly real.

The Foundation is advocating and litigating and seeking prosecution of these senseless abuse cases committed by judicial authorities across the country and seeking to locate subjects of judicial abuse whose parental members have lost their lives as a result of judicial conscious exploitation of parental vulnerability that has directly led to the murder of multiple protective parents and the murder of children.

Share This: