Gun Collection + Malicious Mom + Government = Life in RuinsWritten by: Rodney Print This Article
Use of Our Content (Reposting and Quoting)
We’ve written many articles on our site about government abuse of children and families, particularly when the targets are fathers during child custody battles. You might think that government employees would be exempt from this kind of abuse. This is far from the case. In our article Father Imprisoned 20 Years on Fake Child Sex Abuse Charges, we talked about the case of falsely accused former police officer Clyde Ray Spencer who was set up by his ex-wife and her police sergeant lover to go to prison for child sex abuse crimes which apparently never occurred.
In this article, we discuss the case of Jeremy Swanson, a target of governmental abuse who was an employee of a Canadian war history museum. As an award-winning museum curator well known in community for his work for the Canadian Museum of Civilization War Museum in Ottawa, Jeremy Swanson unsurprisingly also had a personal interest in historic antique firearms. His small collection of antique firearms and non-functioning replicas was legal, licensed, and securely stored with trigger locks in a safe with ammunition stored separately. He took a trip back to his homeland of South Africa, during which time his ex-wife, Susan Swanson (formerly Susan Scott), initiated a divorce and made false allegations against Jeremy Swanson involving his mental health and gun collection.
Susan Swanson banned Jeremy from returning to his home, changing the locks and telling him of this via email two days before he was to return to Ottawa. She later made him appear unsafe by using the keys to the gun safe in their home which she had (and he did not) to scatter his gun collection about the home and then report it to the police. The police seized what they misleading called a “mini-arsenal” without his knowledge until months later and continued to hold it for years, using it as an excuse to badger and threaten him with court proceedings at their whim and to introduce “new evidence” as reason to not return his gun collection to him:
November 2003: My lawyer attended a JPT re: the confiscation of the firearms. There were no charges against me and the judge expressed her disbelief as to why firearms were being discussed at all. They were to be held for safekeeping for 12 months. The firearms are still in police custody as new evidence without disclosure is being presented every time the firearms are supposed to be returned. I have not been able to register these while they are being held and I am unable to store them securely at any address since the separation. The police could destroy them although there was no need for them to be removed from the marital home in the first place. I am fighting this as it impacts negatively on my CPIC record, and me.
Susan succeeded at falsely making Jeremy appear to be mentally unstable and a danger to their children, despite no actual evidence of either and psychological testing of Jeremy showing it to be untrue. Jeremy Swanson not only lost his children over this, he lost his career with the Canadian War Museum, all of his assets, and all quality of life. In a confidential settlement with the Canadian War Museum, Swanson was paid some monetary settlement. He didn’t get to keep it as the courts gave it to his ex-wife, the person who appears to have been largely responsible for destroying his career through her false allegations and defamation.
Swanson hasn’t been charged with a single crime, largely because he never committed any crime. But lack of criminal behavior doesn’t keep the government from unethically and illegally persecuting those it targets, even when they are government employees like Swanson. His life has been ruined. As of 2007, he lived on government assistance unable to get a job because of the destruction of his reputation. As of September 2009, he hasn’t seen his children in over six years.
Gun Collectors: Targets for Deprivation of Civil Rights
Canadian National Post columnist Barbara Kay writes about how Canada’s Firearms Act of 1995 has demonized men who own guns who have never misused them in any way and made them easy targets for parental alienating mothers:
Ironically, in spousal or partner killings of Canadian women by men, guns are the culprit in only about 25 cases per year — this in a country of over 30 million people. Spurned men are far more likely to kill themselves than their partners. Women are six times as likely to be assaulted with other weapons as with guns. Nevertheless, since the Lepine massacre, guns have become synonymous with violence against women, and gun control with protection for women.
Enter the Firearms Act, which had nothing to do with general gun crime (at a low ebb when the Act was introduced), or actual prevention of homicidal intent, and everything to do with appeasing feminists’ irrational fear of a frightening — but statistically tiny –menace.
The good guys who suffer the most are gun collectors — invariably men — in the process of a marital breakdown. For in its obsession with protecting women, the Firearms Act now accords spouses control over their husbands’ right to renew their licences (in principle, the control operates bilaterally; but in reality, it almost invariably comes down to women controlling men’s renewals) and, in many cases, the right to continued ownership of their property.
Canadian law enforcement has been turned into a persecution agency which seizes property without warrant or notice, persecutes its targets without regard to the facts, and can assist in parental alienation child abuse on behalf of a malicious spouse:
(from Turning Legal Gun Owners Into SOCIAL LEPERS)
Six months after their separation, in October, 2001, Swanson’s wife, who was legally authorized to store the collection elsewhere if she didn’t want guns in the house, instead asked the Ottawa police to take the collection — principally four antique rifles, two non-firing BB guns (falsely recorded as rifles), a toy Luger replica (falsely recorded as real) and some jokey paperweight dummy grenades (all together ominously labelled by the police as a “mini-arsenal”)– into “safekeeping.”
Then his real troubles began. Swanson was never informed by the police of the seizure (he found out six months later by chance). From that day to this, he has never been interviewed by the police, let alone arrested or charged with any crime, nor has either a past or present chief of police ever responded to his pleas for a meeting. Although police attempts to declare him a “danger to himself and others” have come to naught, they have entailed several humiliating summons to criminal court.
Swanson remains in the Kafkaesque limbo of a man with no criminal record who for six years has been treated like a criminal, not to mention a social leper, on the basis of nothing. Sadly, I am told by insiders versed in firearms-related law, the injustices Swanson has suffered are in no way unique.
Government Conspires to Assist in Persecution Without Prosecution
The Canadian police, courts, and unethical mental health care professionals committed abuses against Jeremy Swanson and his children to deprive them of their father and destroy his life at the behest of Susan Swanson. It is a common story, and in this case shows that anybody whose job or personal hobbies include any use or interest in firearms and weapons is at great risk of being attacked by the government. That Swanson never used a gun in any violent manner, his guns were licensed and safely stored, and that they are antique firearms vastly different from modern semi-automatic and military-style weapons popular with gun aficionados makes no difference.
This abuse excuse of firearm ownership perverted by a malicious mom isn’t limited to Canada, either. We’ve previously written about Texas doctor Tim Emerson who was similarly persecuted and ended up in prison and lost contact with his daughter. See the article Texas Doctor’s Life Destroyed by Government Abuse for more on Emerson’s nightmare.
Psychologists Assist Mother’s Commission of Child Abuse
A key feature of the Swanson case is the involvement of uninformed and biased mental health care professionals in pushing an abusive mother’s parental alienation agenda. Parental alienation is a form of emotional child abuse which occurs in many conflicted child custody cases as well as some other situations. Access blocking and defamation against a parent are key features of parental alienation child abuse. Susan Swanson has used the mental health care professionals she contacted to help her execute her parental alienation campaign. They were biased in the first place as they were Susan’s personal friends who had little knowledge of Jeremy. She duped them into filing reports claiming threats of violence and “murder / suicide” scenarios to help her get sole control of their children, kick their father out of their lives, and corner him into a defensive position in which he’s been deprived of his children, home, most of his assets, and his job while being forced to defend himself against false and misleading accusations.
In this case and many others, unethical and/or incompetent mental health care professionals are used to bolster the case of a malicious mother intent on destroying her ex-husband to “own” the children and keep them from ever seeing him again. It is common for the alienating mother to line up therapy for herself and to get the therapist to believe her husband is a violent psychotic individual and that she is a victim. Often she will select female therapists because she knows they are more likely to buy into her “I’m a poor victimized woman” fictions. Susan selected therapists she already knew as friends to make statements against Jeremy, actions which he points to as a violation of professional ethics codes in Canada.
It doesn’t take long to dupe many, perhaps even most, therapists as they are poorly trained in providing psychotherapy in divorce and child custody conflict situations. They are taught to believe and listen to their clients with little skepticism. They are also often under the mistaken belief that as a rule women are victims and men are abusers. This is likely because they have failed to keep their education current with regards to more than 20 years of research that shows the “women are victims” stereotype is false. Objective studies by top-notch researchers from organizations such as Harvard University, University of New Hampshire, and the US Centers for Disease Control show that in reality abusive homes typically feature abuse patterns in which women commit abuse. About half of families experiencing domestic violence feature the women committing DV abuse similar to the men. Of the remaining featuring sole abusers, the women are the sole abusers in about two-thirds of the families. Mothers also commit just under two thirds of physical child abuse, contrary to the popular misconception that child abuse is largely perpetrated by men.
Such idiot mental health “professionals”, completely lacking in any personal knowledge of the target and being uneducated in the realities of domestic violence, start filing child abuse and domestic violence reports at the whim of the client. They are often required to do so by government laws that insist any mention of violence or abuse means a report to the government is required. Failure to file a “mandatory abuse report” means the mandatory reporter can be charged with violating the law and be fined or imprisoned. Even if no criminal charges result, mandatory reporters may lose professional licenses and thereby be banned from their professions. So there is a substantial incentive for any professional who hears claims of abuse to report it even if they believe the claims are unfounded. They would rather protect themselves and wrongly harm and even destroy children and a falsely accused parent than to run the risk of being sanctioned for failure to report.
This tendency for mandatory reporters to protect themselves is the same type of mentality which lead to the wrongful prosecution of Dale Akiki, a disabled man helping in a church child care center, in the 1990s despite the mandatory reporting party (a church pastor) not believing Akiki committed any child sex offenses for which he was accused and tried. The witch-hunt resulted in prosecution of Akiki with incredible claims that he slaughtered elephants and giraffes in a church child care center as the children were claiming he did, despite nobody knowing where he could have gotten such large animals or how he could have disposed of their carcasses. The jury was shocked and disgusted at the actions of the government and found Akiki not guilty on all charges. As far as anybody can tell, no child was ever harmed by Akiki, but many were harmed by the government and the destructive therapists in its employ.
Destructive therapists may also write reports to CPS (Child Protective Service) agencies and courts pumping up the mother and trashing the father. Often, as in the Swanson case, the alienating parent gets therapy for her children, too, and controls it all. She keeps the father from even learning about it until later he is accused of child abuse and domestic violence by this so-called “professional” acting “on behalf of the children” whose statements are given great weight by the government, especially when they back the feminist gender politics of holding men responsible for all problems and treating women as powerless victims. Women in fact are not powerless victims given how many programs there are to assist them at no cost. Moreover, they are in fact the aggressors in cases in which they level false and malicious accusations against men in order to recruit dozens of allies to attack their targets on their behalf.
The Swanson case also features harassment by a police force that is unwilling to comply with the law as well as abuse using laws which appear to be unconstitutional against Canada’s Constitution and at odds with hundreds of years of legal precedent. The Firearms Act of 1995 has been used by Canadian government to attack law-abiding citizens, turning them into criminals subjected to ridiculous charges for victimless crimes. Canadian law enforcement should start considering what would happen if each and every one of them were to be treated in the manner they treat Canadian citizens. They would lose their jobs, homes, financial assets, gun collections, and even children over nothing but being targeted with abuse of power by the government. Those law enforcement agents who participate in these abuses deserve all of that, the innocent citizens they wrongly target do not.
Family Law Kangaroo Courts
As with many contested child custody cases, the family law courts operate in a reality entirely disconnected from the law, ethics, and the truth. In the Swanson case, a prenuptial agreement calling for an equal split of assets and child custody was tossed out as invalid based upon questionable legal reasoning based upon disputable facts regarding questions about a loan or gift. Whatever the conclusion, it does not appear that setting aside the entire agreement was ever warranted. But doing so enabled the court to wrongly strip Jeremy Swanson of his custody and all assets and transfer them to his ex-wife.
POINT to consider: Susan and I signed a pre-nuptial agreement in South Africa in 1985. Under the terms of the agreement there was to be an equal split of all property, custody, money, etc. in the event of a divorce. Mrs. Swanson’s Counsel stated that there was an outstanding “loan” of $14,000 (should have been R14,000 SA rand-which is NOT $14,000), to my father. Susan knew that this was not a loan but a gift, and an advance on the will to enable us to buy our first home. It was never a loan. The Judge never gave reasons why this was an impediment to the pre-nuptial being realized. He blindly believed Susan’s version, without a request for proof of “loan”, and the pre-nuptial was therefore casually made “void”, despite the fact that it would have provided for an equitable split of assets and made the custody situation tolerable.
Father = Government Abuse Target
The Swanson case has just about every aspect of governmental abuse against a parent in a custody case except for any actual allegations of child abuse or domestic violence and involvement of CPS. Every other piece, from harassment by police, use of unconstitutional laws to persecute a target, harmful and unreasonable actions by unethical and incompetent mental health care providers, and unjust decisions by family law courts manipulated by perjury are all present. Cases like this should never happen. There have been so many opportunities for government employees to step in and correct the obvious wrong-doings by their agencies and other government entities. But it never happens. Once a target, always a target seems to be their motto.
Realistically, there are very few ways that fathers such as Jeremy Swanson have any real hope for getting any justice given the current political hell created by oppressive Western governments. About the best they can hope for is that when their children turn 18 years old, they will seek out the truth and find out how their mother and the government wrongfully destroyed their father and deprived them of all contact for most of their lives.
Holocaust Against Families
What is happening in Western nations today with unconstitutional laws, violations of civil and human rights, and corruption of the judicial systems and government agencies with incompetent and biased officials threatens the safety and security of all citizens. That it is being done with the duplicitous claim of “protecting women and children” doesn’t make it any more ethical or just. While fathers seem to bear the brunt of the outrages and this apparently satiates gender feminists bent on ruining men, in the long term it seems unlikely that the government will be satisfied with destroying and dominating only fathers.
When viewed as part of a pattern of eroding civil rights, revisionist readings of Constitutions allow governments to “protect” their citizens via the creation of a Nazi nanny state to eliminate any real chance of opposing out of control governments. The unspoken intent of the state seems to be to make all citizens dependent upon it, fearful of it, or at least under its strict control to maintain power at all costs. Even the male-hating minority of feminists should be alarmed by this. Totalitarian governments often start targeting the easy targets before they move on everyone to control society in their vise-like grip. For Nazi Germany, it was first the gypsies, then the communists, then the Jews — millions of them — until the Gestapo and SS moved along to being able to wrongfully accuse, attack, imprison, and even kill anybody deemed an enemy of society.
Common people cannot be safe in their homes from government attack in Western nations today. Westerners have reached the level of being even more oppressed than politically uninvolved citizens in the early days of totalitarian regimes such as Stalin’s Soviet Union, Hitler’s Germany, Mao’s China, and Kim’s North Korea. With the possible exception of North Korea, the average politically uninvolved citizen in those nations today probably has less chance of being wrongly destroyed and having their family, livelihood, and assets stripped from them by abusive government action than the citizens of supposedly free democracies such as the United States, Canada, Australia, and United Kingdom.
Citizens of Obama’s America today can expect to become unemployed due to reckless government economic mismanagement or dependent upon government “assistance” for basic living. They can expect to be barred from effective medical treatments available in many other nations due to the government’s insistence upon helping big political donors making money at the expense of public health and public finances. And worst of all, they can expect their families to be attacked by a vicious government with no reasonable provocation. But this erosion of rights and due process didn’t start with Obama. It started decades earlier and continues to worsen in virtually every “established democracy” allied with the United States.
In these nations, any time somebody repeatedly makes accusatory statements involving children, parents and children are at extreme risk even if those statements have no basis in fact or are extreme distortions. While high conflict divorces are a common source for such accusations, they are hardly the only one. Many can expect to be falsely accused of child abuse, domestic violence, or other crimes that never occurred and then be persecuted without a trial for years or decades. The children are often exposed to abuse via parental alienation, intrusive medical exams, psycho-terror by therapists bent on proving abuse when none occurred, and government that encourages the madness to continue until such destruction has been created that the targets no longer have the means to fight back.
Fathers Easy Targets, Mothers Future Targets
In today’s so-called established democracies, the easy targets for the state to abuse are men, specifically fathers going through nasty divorces. The government gets a willing accuser in the malicious mother and can then invoke claims of “protecting children” along with spreading misleading propaganda to make their abuses sound justifiable.
But already we see the same abusive illegal tactics used against men are sometimes being used against women, too. Some destructive dads have figured out they can use the same tactics as malicious moms to gain government assistance to ruin their ex-wives and get sole control of the children. If you’re a mother targeted with government abuse because of false allegations and lose access to your children as a result, you may be in an even worse situation than many men because this type of abuse is even less known than that against fathers. Moms should be helping to raise awareness to stop this government abuse.
Failure of Western Democracies Calls for Citizen Response
The trend is extremely disturbing. But few citizens do anything about it until they learn the truth after they are targeted for ruination by a malicious spouse and out of control government. At that point, most have few resources left to fight because they are emotionally and financially devastated from the persecution.
”In Germany, they first came for the gypsies, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a gypsy. Then they came for the Bolsheviks, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Bolshevik. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics. I didn’t speak up then because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak up.” – Martin Niemoller, a Lutheran pastor arrested by the Gestapo in 1937.
It’s been oft-stated by people educated decades ago that a failure to learn history dooms one to repeat it. Others have observed that even those who learn history manage to repeat similar disasters in new ways. What is happening today is essentially a Holocaust against families and civil and human rights across the Western world. The citizens must speak out and act against the governments which are conducting these campaigns of terror before it is too late for them to do anything because they have become nothing but government slaves owned and controlled entirely by the state.
|Child Abuse, Child Custody, Children, Civil Rights, Courts, CPS, Divorce, Domestic Violence, Family, Federal Government, Government Abuse, Legal, Parental Alienation, Police, Politics, Psychology|