Archive

Posts Tagged ‘David Green’

Eileen Lasher and Dr. Emad Tadros Interviewed Regarding “Kids for Cash” San Diego Family Law Court Crimes

April 21st, 2012 5 comments

Eileen Lasher of the California Coalition for Families and Children was interviewed twice in 2011 by Walter Davis on his show Progress in San Diego. Dr. Emad Tadros, an outspoken critic of the San Diego family courts, joined them in the first interview. The second interview was shown in two segments.

In the interview segment below, Lasher discussed her experiences with the misconduct of minor’s counsel attorneys and how taxpayers and parents are paying for what is in her view an organized criminal enterprise. She says children and parents are being abused by the courts and points out the taxpayers and the abused parents are paying the financial costs for this misconduct.

San Diego Family Courts: Organized Crime Ring Targeting Middle and Upper Classes

Lasher contends the San Diego family law courts are operated as a criminal business that siphons the wealth from families and places it in the hands of the attorneys and experts such as custody evaluators. She views judges who appoint custody evaluators and minor’s counsel attorneys and many of those attorneys as particularly culpable. A minor’s counsel attorney is to participate in a custody case by representing the children. However, such attorneys often have conflicts of interest. They also typically run their own family law attorney business and are also in some cases are attorneys who are involved in probate cases and serve as “pro tem” judges in family law court.

Discussion focused on how low income families seldom have minor’s counsel attorneys and psychological evaluators ordered by the courts. These families have little money, so it is not lucrative to put them through the family court extortion process reserved for people who have some money. Middle income or higher income families often suffer from these expensive costs because they have significant assets and income that can be exploited by the divorce industry.

You have a house, so the attorneys and court want your house to be forced into sale so they can keep the proceeds and ensure their own wealth and job security at the expense of you and your children. You have retirement savings, the attorneys want those, too. There are college savings for the kids? Those can be raided, too.

How better to extort all or nearly all of a family’s wealth than to threaten their children? The attorneys and judges know how lucrative this extortion is and are eager to bring it into play when they see income and assets that can be pillaged.

If the parents don’t have substantial assets, the grandparents might. The court and its allies know that threatening their grandchildren is often an equally effective means to “financially gang rape” the family.

Generally speaking, San Diego family law courts operate by finanically raping the parents and deep-sixing their children’s futures. While there are probably some judges in the system who do not approve of the corruption and criminal conduct of other judges, it is evident that many do. It is in the judge’s own self-serving interests to increase the amount of litigation in the system. Busy inefficient courts mean more judges are “needed.” It is also in their interests to line the pockets of their attorney and custody evaluator friends, many of whom contribute to judicial re-election campaign funds or who may support them in future runs for political offices. And if they decide not to run for re-election, having funneled millions into the hands of their friends makes it easier for them to secure other employment in the same corrupt divorce industry.
Read more…

Flyer Protest in San Diego Family Law Courts

November 20th, 2009 16 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.
Read more…