Contact Denial Grievance Founded with Recommendations ~ Kevin Avard – Google+

Committee Majority Findings:

After hearing the testimony of the Petitioner, reviewing the documentation and supplements, and having received no responsive testimony, substantive documentation, or other evidence from any of those cited officials, the Committee finds that the Petitioner was wrongly denied by the Family Division all visitation with his child contrary to N.H. law and his constitutional rights for approximately 13 months.

This wrongful situation was due to: Guardian ad Litem Tracy Bernson who:

1. Made unlawful recommendations to the Court in her 2/11/11 guardian ad litem report including suspension of all visitation with his son with no findings of fact that it would be detrimental to the child and with no findings of abuse or neglect contrary to RSA 461-A:2;

2. Posited as fact the psychological condition of the minor child without being an expert herself, and with no expert psychological findings or report, and apart from any testimony that is the product of reliable principles and methods contrary to RSA 516:29-a;

3. Recommended the imposition of extrajudicial conditions on reunification contrary to RSA 461-A:2, RSA 461-A:6 and contrary to the presumption that fit parents are presumed to act in the best interests of their children;

4. Recommended unlawful prior restraint of Petitioner’s free speech by restricting him from talking with his son about the subject of love (see RSA 461-A:6 I(a);

5. Recommended as a condition to see his son, that Petitioner enroll in a parenting class and separately in individual therapy which is contrary to the Troxel presumption that “fit parents are presumed to act in the best interests of their children,” (Troxel v. Granville, 530 US 57);

6. Did not complete the duties ordered by the Court in her stipulation;

7. Failed to comply with Family Division Administrative Order 2011-03 by not filing a final report with the Court and not submitting her final bill by the deadline;

8. Failed to comply with Supreme Court Administrative Order 17 by exceeding her court-ordered fee-maximum and not requesting a hearing to do so;

9. Fraudulently filed a stalking warning letter with the Dover/Laconia police departments in response to pro se Petitioner’s court-related correspondence for actions that do not qualify as stalking;

10. Failed to comply with GAL Ethics Rule 503.06(a)(1) by not recusing herself as requested after reporting that she was “fearful” of Petitioner; and,

11. Improperly recommended suspension of all of Petitioner’s visitation and parental rights with only allegations, but no findings of abuse or neglect per RSA 461:A-5 III.

The Committee finds that Marital Master Nancy Geiger also contributed to this when she:

1. Conducted a hearing that affected Petitioner’s parental rights without proper judicial notice per Duclos v. Duclos, 134 NH 42 – NH: Supreme Court 1991, quoting Morphy v. Morphy, 112 N.H. 507 – NH Supreme Court 1972[1];

2. Wrongfully recommended the suspension of Petitioner’s visitation and parental rights with no findings of abuse or neglect and no expert testimony;

3. Compelled Petitioner to finance the “therapeutic reunification” with his son in a forced contract contrary to Hale v. Henkel 201 U.S. 43;

4. Utilized what she knew to be false and/or incomplete GAL report testimony of GAL Tracy Bernson in arriving at her decision;

5. Refused to admit Petitioner’s properly authenticated telephone logs as exhibits at trial; and,

6. Issued a parenting plan that does not comport with N.H. RSA 490-D:9, requiring the signature of a judge accompanied by the judge’s sworn oath.

Further the Committee finds that Judges Ned Gordon and Brackett L. Scheffy also contributed by:

1. Approving a Marital Master’s wrongful orders, therefore failing to provide proper review or oversight; and,

2. Approved a parenting plan that does not comport with N.H. RSA 490-D:9.

The Committee finds that Marital Master Leonard Green also contributed when he denied Petitioner due process of law by declining to issue orders on Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration and; finally, that Administrative Judge Edwin Kelly failed to provide adequate oversight and supervision of marital masters and judges in the Hooksett Family Division by permitting ongoing malfeasance to occur after Petitioner notified him of it in a lengthy letter to which same judge, with the power to fire Marital Masters at will, responded that he had no authority to intervene.

The Committee therefore recommends that legislation be introduced to so amend our laws as to:

1. Eliminate coerced contracts and/or stipulations with guardians ad litem;

2. Make clear that there is a presumption that fit parents will act in the best interests of their children;

3. Provide greater supervision and accountability of guardians ad litem, marital masters, and judges in the circuit court family division;

4. Permit courts to deviate from equal parenting time distribution only in cases where there is clear and convincing evidence of abuse or neglect by one or both parents or it is requested by party receiving the lesser proportion of time;

5. Adopt strict rules of evidence for the family division;

6. Require advance notice for any and all hearings; and,

7. Investigate whether impeachment proceedings should be initiated to remove Judge Edwin Kelly, Judge Ned Gordon, and Judge Brackett Scheffy. Vote 8-2.

Rep. Alfred P. Baldasaro for the Majority of the Committee

Kevin Avard ~ Google+

Kevin’s YouTube channel.

Source:   https://www.facebook.com/kevinavard  Please share this. Petition #26…

Children’s Rights – Family Law Reform

http://iloveandneedmydaughter.blogspot.com/2011/10/who-is-she.html

http://iloveandneedmydaughter.blogspot.com/2011/10/who-is-she.html

Facebook.com/StandupforZoraya

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js

Related articles

• Pending Supreme Court Patent Cases 2016 (March 17 Update)
• Experts as Final Arbiters: State Law and Problematic Expert Testimony on Domestic Violence in Child Custody Cases
• Family Law Week: Who Guards the Guardians?
• Any Court, Any Judge, Any Attorney, Any Parent who rules or strives to keep a child out of the lives of both of their fit and willing parents should be considered a child abuser.
• End of PARENTAL RIGHTS?? Thanks Scalia
• Bad or Inadequate Judges are a Public Hazard.
• It’s a trillion dollar industry getting more barbaric by the day, and we have to join together nationwide to save lives. Here’s the proof:
• Brewington Writ of Certiorari for the United States Supreme Court
• Family Court Stress Disorder (PTSD)…
• Judicial Accountability for Court Ordered Parental Alienation