Flyer Protest in San Diego Family Law Courts

Written by: Print This Article Print This Article   
Use of Our Content (Reposting and Quoting)
November 20th, 2009 Leave a comment Go to comments

In late October 2009, one or more people distributed a large quantity of flyers inside the San Diego family law courts. Reportedly they were stuffed in books, free magazines, and other literature in the courthouses. The flyers protest the use of expensive professionals in child custody cases, in particular section 730 psychological evaluators. Criticisms are also directed at minor’s counsel attorneys, exchange and visitation monitors, and consulting psychologists.

You can see a scanned PDF of the flyer.

The text of the protest flyer has also been posted on Courthouse Forum, one of the sites hosting discussions about the scandal. Some other web sites with related public discussions are:

Some of the discussions mention the courts sealing the Tadros v. Doyne case after it started to be discussed publicly. Perhaps the courts want to “protect privacy” or maybe simply cover up allegations of their misconduct. Whatever the case may be, you can read the text from this quote in case the link or discussion thread becomes unavailable:





Judges regularly order parents into Private Child Custody Evaluations and appoint a specific evaluator. Yet no one in the Court, including the Judge, verifies the education, credentials, training, or competence of the appointees. The Court deems itself “not responsible” for private sector practitioners, yet they make orders that force you to sign a contract and pay for what could only be called a “disservice” to your children.

The evaluator then coerces you to sign a service agreement, medical releases, and other documents, when no legally binding contract existed prior to your signature being received. If the Court is allowed to make this kind of order, why is your signature required?

But you will do this. You will do this because your lawyer (who probably told you it was a good idea and suggested an evaluator), the Judge, and the evaluator themselves will deem you “uncooperative” and imply that you will lose all custody of your children if you don’t.

Parents, WE, AS CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY, have no right under the U.S. or California Constitutions to raise or even have contact with our own children. Those in the business of the “Justice Factory” know this and will exploit your fear of losing your child to serve themselves and feed the mill.

Regardless of these facts, the Judge will enter any report an appointee generates into your Court file under California Evidence Code §730, without verifying that the evaluator followed the legal procedures and/or complied with the orders they issued in your case. Once released to the court, you have no independent access the report you paid for.

If you are ordered into a 730 Evaluation, your only chance at 50/50 custody is if:

a) You are paying the “right” Family Law Attorney ($250+/hr.), and;

b) You agree to pay for ½ the evaluation, in advance of the report….

….which has no set limit as to how long it can take or how much the evaluator charges hourly. Evaluations can cost as much as $30,000 and you may be required to participate in more than one!!! As well, you may be “farmed out” to their partner marketed colleagues for “therapy”, “mediation”, “parenting coordination”, “supervised visitation”, “coaching” and a few other “services” these same people provide.


* Please download PKT-036 at the link provided below


In 1992, the Federal Government enacted The Child Support Recovery Act. The States were at risk of having welfare funding cut. In response, California dismissed “Argos Minimum Child Support Standards Act of 1984”, in favor of “The California Child Support Guideline” (Family Code §§4050-4076). Child support was thereafter based on “time-share” rather than meeting the minimum needs of the child.

Non-custodial parents, previously disinterested in custody but ordered to pay child support or face criminal charges, flooded the Court seeking custody. Resources exhausted, the Court, in its infinite business sense, created measures allowing the “out-sourcing” of services at the parents’ expense. The Court enticed private practitioners by calling them “expert witnesses”, such that their “work product” was immune to lawsuit, under Evidence Code §730.

With HMO’s and PPO’s limiting payments to doctors for mental heath services that were not “medically necessary”, psychologists who formerly refused to be involved in the Court system, suddenly saw a “cash cow”. The public was now required to pay their full hourly rates for an indeterminate length of time, in hopes of continued, meaningful contact with their children.

To this day the Court takes no responsibility to ensure that the credentials, training and education of the 730 Evaluators they appoint meet the legal standards. Lorna Alksne, Supervising Judge of the Family Court, recently told Channel 10 News that it is the responsibility of the parents to verify credentials of an appointed evaluator.** In other words, they “scapegoat” their incompetence, corruption, and deliberate ignorance on you, at the cost of your home, your retirement, your children’s savings and college funds and most important, your child’s psychological, emotional, physical and spiritual wellbeing…


“730’s”: Stephen Doyne, John C. Parker IV, William Dess, David Green, Lori Love, Russell Gold, Steven Sparta, Robert Simon, Yanon Volcani, Breffni Barrett, Neil Ribner, Linda Altes;

Marketed Partners: Hannah’s House, Family Connections, Monika Konia, Penny Angel-Levy, William Eddy, Terrence Chucas, Dave Schulman, Margot Lewis….and more too numerous to list here.


* (search “PKT-036” – created 7/09)

** (check Amazon for deals) (note email link) (what???)

– created and/or dispersed 9/09 by citizens exercising their 1st Amendment Rights

Special Offers on Life Extension supplements:
Super Sale Extended! Get $15 off $150 | $60 off $425 + free shipping on all Life Extension supplements (until February 5, 2024)

Save 20% on Life Extension’s Top Rated Two- Per- Day Multivitamins with AutoShip & Save! (until February 5, 2024)

Authorship Unclear, Possibly Related to Tadros v. Doyne Case

Although it’s not clear who the authors of this protest flyer are, my best guess is that they’re motivated by the San Diego family law court scandal involving Stephen Doyne, a section 730 child custody / psychology evaluator, and the pervasive violations of court rules in San Diego County regarding psychological evaluators. Check my recent articles, including Stephen Doyne and San Diego Family Law Courts Under Fire, for more information on that dispute.

Widespread Criticisms Typical of Child Custody Disputes

Because of way California courts treat divorces and child custody disputes as adversarial matters, the government encourages conflict that hurts children and families. The judges are clearly incapable of understanding the complex matters that go on in these fighting families in the limited amount of time they have to spend, especially because there is seldom any clear-cut evidence and there is extensive perjury in many cases. Even when there is “evidence” it is sometimes not clear what is real and what is not. Fabricated documents, spinning the meanings of e-mails, phone messages, and photographs, and outright lying about events that never even occurred are common.

Sometimes the dispute simply comes down to one or both parties having such animosity towards each other that they will do anything to hurt the other. Such parents often view children as pawns in their war. So there is a very high chance that the lying party will “pull one over” on the judge and if that party is awarded anything approaching 100% custody, the results will be dire for the children. Severing the connections between a parent and his or her children, especially by hostile means such as parental alienation, tends to cause a lifetime of psychological problems for both the children and the parent.

The result of the adversarial process imposed by the courts is that one or both parents are generally very upset at many of the divorce professionals, often rightly so. It’s my perception that these professionals should have understood the damage this adversarial system causes and how it often fails to reach accurate conclusions while financially devastating the parents and emotional damaging everybody involved. While there are some cases in which parental alienation campaigns or severe substance abuse problems almost demand a psychological evaluation, even those cases may not be truly clear-cut even with dozens of hours of interviews and testing.

There are some psychological evaluators who do “get it”, but even they are often put into a position that they cannot truly help much. Even after they have issued their reports, often one party wants to continue to fight and argue and refuse to accept that the children need and should spend time with both of their parents. The psychological evaluation often simply serves to waste a huge amount of money while perpetuating a damaging conflict. Everybody suffers except for the people making their living on applying the destructively nutty psychological evaluation process in cases where it really isn’t appropriate.

Whores of the Court: The Fraud of Psychiatric Testimony and the Rape of American Justice

Booklist Mini-review

A take-no-prisoners condemnation of psychiatric experts being waved into the witness box, this account trashes psychiatry in general as a quack profession. Hagen (a psychology professor) assails most of the diagnostic tools of the field in her text, which roams among court cases whose outcome hinged on the testimony of mental-health experts. Her fundamental contention is that psychiatry is a junk science whose theories when extended to matters of legal culpability go against common sense. Indeed, Hagen assumes the posture of that legendary legalism, the “reasonable person,” and her prose is peppered with exclamations and rhetorical questions like “Who could believe that?” which might annoy as many readers as it might convince about whatever points are in question. Among them are such topically current items as battered-wife syndrome, recovered memory claims, post-traumatic stress syndrome, and urban psychosis claims. The average person could easily encounter in divorce and child custody litigation the situations Hagen vigorously complains of, so her energetic attack could gain considerable attention. Gilbert Taylor

Further Reading

Unjust Delays in San Diego Family Law Courts

Eileen Lasher on San Diego CPS/Family Law Court Misconduct

Amicus Curiae brief filed for Emad Tadros v. Stephen Doyne

California “Access to Justice in Family Court” Law Panel

Stephen Doyne and San Diego Family Law Courts Under Fire

California Legislature Orders Investigation of Family Law Courts

Unconstitutional Child Custody Decisions

Holding Family Law Judges Accountable

  1. Monika’s Not So Bad
    December 13th, 2009 at 20:03 | #1

    There are a lot of people listed on that flyer. I don’t know most of them. But I’d like to speak up for one I do know, Monika Konia. She’s been up-front and focused on enabling kids to see their parents. She makes her living doing that.

    I am unhappy that I have to use services of her and people like her. But it’s not because she does a bad job. On the contrary, she has been very professional. If I hadn’t hired her, I might be spending many times the amount I spent on supervised exchanges fighting more false accusations from my vicious ex.

    It sounds to me like whoever is behind this flyer is lumping together some really bad people (Doyne) with some OK people (Konia) simply because they are providing services to comply with court orders and making their living doing so.

    Maybe they should be attacking the judges and courts for doing such a bad job of resolving family conflicts rather than shotgunning everybody involved in providing the services. The courts encourage conflict to intensify and never get resolved. That’s why there are so many people making their livings from the misery of divorces.

  2. missing the point monikas not so bad
    March 26th, 2010 at 16:30 | #2

    You are missing the point altogether Monika’s not so bad, the very fact that you have been ordered to a Stalinist supervised visitation monitor business is absolutely and completely wrong for most parents. The court routinely abuses situations like yours. Your Constitutional rights and civil rights are being violated by the very fact that you have to see your child in supervised visitation.

  3. mike marvin
    July 14th, 2011 at 14:23 | #3

    monika has false reported, lied,everything she can possibily do to make money and prolong the abuse of children. Any positive reports of her come from her or someone she knows. Absoluetly the worst of the bunch. She needs to be jailed!

  4. mike marvin
    July 14th, 2011 at 14:29 | #4

    monika is a lieing ,false reporting criminal that needs to be jailed, she will abuse your kids to profit . dont use her!

  5. Allison
    July 16th, 2011 at 01:45 | #5



  6. Carol
    September 29th, 2011 at 00:40 | #6

    Monica Konia is unreliable and unprofessional. On the phone most of the time while “supervising.
    She is obviously only involved for the money. She gossips about attorneys , judges and the other parent. Her reports could be written by a third grader. Will follow the directions given to her by David Schulman or Stephen Doyne. Very low rapport with children. Uses poor language.

    • October 4th, 2011 at 07:15 | #7


      Many of the complaints I have heard about custody exchangers have come from the abusive parent who does not like that their maliciousness is being reported.

      Other times the abused parent is complaining because they feel unfairly treated which in fact they are. Frequently abused parents are made to pay for supervised visitations going on for years and have to choose between being nearly destitute or not seeing their kids. Men are frequently the targets as the family courts are undeniably sexist, but it happens to women, too.

      The San Diego family law courts are among the worst in the nation in terms of corruption, bias, violations of laws, and willingness to reward perjury and harm children.
      From the top on down, the message is that hurting families is profitable so that should be the business of the courts. Few in the courts are willing to oppose these corrupt marching orders. Those who do may see themselves reassigned or mistreated by the judicial criminals who run the San Diego courts.

      No politician can honestly claim to stand for “family values” unless he or she is demanding drastic reform of the family law system in this nation.


  7. One of thousands
    October 5th, 2011 at 15:57 | #8

    I politely suggest the comments here are missing an important point.

    Divorce is a profit industry. They make money by placing hurdles between you and your kids. Why? Probably because your spouse wants to shake you down too.

    I’m a lawyer and am >ashamed< that so many of my professional colleagues accept-no-encourage this behavior. It is a disgrace.

    Solution? Kill them? Illegal, though it sounds reasonable. Reform them? Hard to defeat blind greed. Report them to the CJP? Or just vote them out for those who promise to promote independence? Hmm. There is an election coming up in April 2012…

  8. One of thousands
    October 5th, 2011 at 16:14 | #9

    The last thing these maniacs want to see is justice.

    Our founders gave people the power to speak, and decide whether they wanted to be controlled. Personally I’d throw out family court and require immediate mediation, but too many of my lawyer douchebag colleagues make so much money off of hysterical, greedy scumbag clients. An
    But the real disgrace to our society is that our courts are their partners in crime.

    The solution is pretty simple-throw their sorry asses out immediately. Make them suffer the abuse they have created. Put in honest, diligent, fair citizens who don’t get a hard-on dealing out pain.

    Please Vote in April, 2012.

    My best to all.

  9. Filth-Buster
    October 16th, 2011 at 04:57 | #10

    konia is a sidekick to doyne. Two of the worst COURT WHORES in San Diego county.
    It was by the grace of God that I didn’t beat the living shit out of her or her pansy-ass ass-licking sidekick spouse. In fact, I bet his twat was bigger than hers.

    A truly Filthy sub-human duo. And doyne is their daddy-in-crime.

    Make that a Filthy sub-human trio.

    No worries though- it all washes out in the end

  10. Konia the two headed monster
    August 22nd, 2012 at 21:30 | #11

    Konia forwarded every email I wrote to her to my ex which was used in court against me. Konia volunteered to write a declaration to the court, when she left off an incident I reminded her to include it. She then falsely accused me of “telling” her what to write and stated I had done something illegal. She finally figured out her error but not before writing my ex-spouse that I had asked to do be involved in illegal activities. My advice is to avoid her at ALL costs. I will never ask her anything again and my answers will never be longer than two words.

  11. WhoreExposer
    August 25th, 2012 at 22:34 | #12

    If you are using the konia duo pussies, then you deserve what you get.
    Those two are kunts

  12. rob donaldson
    August 27th, 2012 at 19:44 | #13

    Monika is late 80% of the time. Rarely returns phone calls and is SO unprofessional that she brings her own kids.

  13. rob donladson
    October 10th, 2012 at 20:13 | #14

    Konia is another reason why I believe all women are bitches. Mr. Glitch, her husband goes around with a stop watch! Wonder how that works since she is habitually late. The new Kid does look promising though. I would like to gargle his balls

  14. Admin
    November 4th, 2012 at 22:31 | #15

    @ Konia the two headed monster

    There is a reported dispute about the comment made regarding Monika Konia on August 22, 2012. We have received an email that seems to be claiming the comment was written to impersonate another party.

    The party sending the email requested that the comment be removed. We do not have enough information to determine the accurate identity of the party leaving the comment, and it appears other recent similar comments may be related. Therefore pending further information we are posting this notice that the August 22 comment is disputed and also note that the comments on August 25, August 27, and October 10 may be involved in the same dispute.

  15. Paul Bas
    August 7th, 2013 at 16:31 | #16

    Monica was referred to me by my attorney William Benjamin and yes she was late most of the time and played on her phone. She seems nice but I did not trust her, best to have another adult in the house just in case. Had all day trial and judge said there was nothing he heard that would require me to have supervised visits.

  1. January 4th, 2010 at 02:47 | #1
  2. January 12th, 2010 at 18:55 | #2
  3. January 25th, 2010 at 17:46 | #3
  4. April 1st, 2010 at 14:46 | #4
  5. July 29th, 2010 at 17:28 | #5
  6. October 10th, 2010 at 03:12 | #6
  7. November 11th, 2010 at 23:30 | #7

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *