Custody Battle ends in Tragedy

For many, becoming a parent is a milestone. A moment when a human being realizes he has the power to shape another life into a beautiful creation. However, this was not the case of Richard Anderson of Orange County, California.

It was a cold November morning when Richard Anderson heard a knock on his apartment door.  His girlfriend asks, “Go see who it is”.  Anderson answers the door as he wipes the crust from his sleepy eyes.  Upon opening the door, he sees a familiar woman. Vanessa Crawford, his former girlfriend that he broke up with 3 years prior. He has a small boy with her. Crawford exclaims, “This is your son, let’s be a family again…”

Anderson goes into a panic and slams the door. His girlfriend, Jasmine, shouts, “who is it honey?”  Anderson nervously yells back, “It was the paperboy…”

3 days later, Anderson receives an e-mail from his ex-lover from 3 years ago.

“Richard, I’m so sorry I didn’t tell you. We had a bad breakup, and I always wanted kids, you didn’t. I must have forgotten to take my birth control pills. I always wanted a child, so I was happy. My older brother has been supporting me, but, he recently kicked me out. I know I cheated on you before, but, that was a mistake. If you get back together with me, I promise not to take you to court. We can work this out!”

Anderson ignored the e-mail. He could feel his stomach beginning to cramp. What is he to do? Is this child even his?

1 month later, Mr.Anderson receives a letter in the mail from the Orange county Juvenile court house, stating that he was being subpoenaed to submit to a DNA test. Should he not comply, he would be arrested. Anderson arrives one month later to submit his DNA test. The result showed that he was indeed the father.  A subsequent child support/custody hearing would be set 30 days later.

Anderson decided it was time to come clean to his girlfriend about the child. Devastated at the news, she decides to break up with him. Now Anderson lives alone in his apartment, with all household bills laying upon his shoulders. Anderson became very depressed, but, he had a decent job, he could manage. He made 25K per year in salary. He worked as an office manager for a Construction company while moonlighting as a law student. His dream was to become a lawyer or a politician.

Soon, his court date arrived.  Anderson and his ex lover, Vannessa, approach the stand. Anderson is without a lawyer, since the courts do not provide them in civil cases. Vanessa is being represented, for free, by the state government. Vanessa explains all of her expenses towards the child. The judge’s assistance looks over both the mother and father’s income through their pay-stubs and tax returns.

The assistant plugs the numbers into an arbitrary computer program that calculates income and expenses such as daycare, after school programs, ect…

The assistant comes back with two pieces of paper. One for the mother and the father. The paper states that the father will be ordered to pay $645 per month in child support.

The mother then raises her hand, “what about all those months I raised him before we went to court?”

The assistant does more calculations. Five minutes later, she comes back with a new piece of paper stating that the father was being ordered to pay $8,459. in retroactive support, going back to the time of the child’s birth. an extra $5 per month would be paid towards those arrears with interest accruing at 12% per year.

The father lashes out, “I didn’t even know he existed? How could I have supported him?”   The mother’s attorney responds, “That’s neither here nor there now.”

The father then asks about whether he will be able to see his child. The mother says she will allow the father to see the child 4 days per month, supervised. The judge agreed that this was acceptable. The judge advises the father, “If you want joint or full custody, you need to hire an attorney and fight for it. You are also barred from leaving the state without court permission.  Case adjourned!”

Anderson is later fired from his job because the court date required him to miss work. He didn’t have any vacation time. Luckily, Anderson finds another job very quickly making about $10 per hour.

A few weeks later, Anderson noticed that his usual $400 per week check was now only $250. The Child Support Garnishment had now begun.  He then receives a text message from the mother who now has her own apartment. Apparently, her wealthier older brother was back in her good graces and was also funneling her money.

“It’s almost 7:30. If you don’t get over here at 7:30, you’re not seeing him. That’s the time we agreed on.” , the mother yells to Anderson.

Anderson rushes through his after work traffic to get to her apartment. He barely makes it. The mother opens the door, “You were almost late”.  Anderson attempts to play with his son and even snap a few selfies together while the mother uses the restroom. He whispers into the boy’s ear, “I’m sorry I put you in this crazy world son. I love you so much. I’m so sorry you got trapped in this situation.”

The mother exits the restroom. “What were you saying to him?” The father says, ‘Nothing”. The mother responds, “Don’t brainwash my son! If you aren’t going to move in and be a family with us, you can stay out of our lives. What is it going to be? Stay with us, or pay child support?”  Mr.Anderson, not being able to afford his apartment, decides to break the lease, and get back together with his ex as an attempt to salvage the situation.  Vanessa, his child’s mother, constantly makes demands over Mr.Anderson. Ridiculing him in front of the child, and making threats such as, “If you don’t do what I say, I’ll report you to the child support office.”  Mr.Anderson reaches out to his father, who is excited to be a grandad, but is worried about the situation. He tries to appease the mother by buying her a car so that he too can be a part of his grandson’s life.

For weeks, Mr.Anderson and his father do their best to be a good father/grandfather towards the boy. The mother makes constant demands towards them both. Asking for gifts, favors, and other errands be ran for her.  After about a month, Mr.Anderson can no longer take it. The constant fighting, arguing, jealously, he suddenly remembers why he left her 3 years ago.  Mr. Anderson contemplates moving in his father, however, he has a new fiance and she isn’t looking for any roommates.

Grudgingly, Anderson decides to move back home with his mother who had divorced his father 15 years prior.  Mr.Anderson’s mother herself exhibits similar qualities that his ex-lover has.  Many negative emotions and demanding attitudes. However, because of the child support payments, he cannot afford to go anywhere else. He agrees to pay his mother $100 per week rent to stay in his old childhood room.

In the meantime, Mr.Anderson takes law courses in his free-time and is looking for a higher paying job.  He still has a dream to one day become a lawyer or perhaps even just a highly respect clerk. Months go by, and Anderson has not seen his son or heard from the mother. She has blocked all communication and threatened to put restraining orders on any of Mr.Anderson’s family members who attempt to come near the small boy.

Essentially, the boy has been completely alienated from his father’s side of the family. Friends and family encourage Anderson to take her back to court, yet, none offer any help for legal fees.

Anderson struggles for the next year. Working, saving, studying, trying to better himself. He even manages to get a new girlfriend. Yet, it only lasts a few weeks once she discovers he is broke from his legal dilemma and is a 28 year old man still living at home.  Just days after this break up happens, he receives a letter in the mail.  A notice from the Child Support Enforcement Agency.

:Due to your arrears being over $7,000 dollars, according to federal law. Your passport is now revoked. We will also be intercepting your tax refunds and reporting this debt to the credit bureau which will negatively impact your credit score. 

Mr.Anderson tries to argue back in writing stating that the amount was from retroactive support, and he was making $5 payments towards it. The agency didn’t care….

Anderson finally finds a new job 1 year later making 32K per year. The monthly child support of $650 per month is still a challenge, but atleast he able to save a little more money now.  Anderson later discovers shortly after getting his new job that the courts automatically notify the mother of this change, thus giving her the chance to modify for an increase. The mother hasn’t been in contact with Anderson for over a year and has been getting her money, so Anderson isn’t too worried about it.

Weeks later, Anderson makes another discovery.  The mother’s brother, who she has living with her, is wanted by the FBI for molesting several underage women. Anderson becomes very distraught and notifies Child Protective Services. They respond by saying that, “Unless the child himself is being abused, with evidence, there is nothing we can do. He is abusing other people, not the child himself.”

After a quick google search, Anderson discovers that the mother is parading the boy around on Youtube making funny parody videos, profiting off the boy’s image, showing off expensive luxury items, most likely purchased with Child Support money.

Anderson becomes very agitated.  He reaches out to the mother by e-mail, letting her know that he is aware of these developments and seeks to sue her in court for custody. She responds by saying:

“If you try to fight for custody, I’ll raise your child support. I know you have a new job making more money now. My chances of winning modification of support are much higher than you taking a child away from his mother. I’ll gladly fight you in court as much as you like. Good luck paying child support and lawyer fees! haha 🙂 … ” 

Anderson knew she was correct. Even if he did manage to secure some type of visitation or custody, she would financially drain him even more and/or involve herself in his life even more, ruining relationships along the way and increasing his stress.

Ultimately, the hatred for this vile woman was more powerful than his love for a son that he only got to see on a handful of occasions.  Anderson was tired. He remembered what it felt like as a boy being estranged from his own father, and the brainwashing that his own mother attempted upon him.

Anderson decided to move on. He was going to strike out on his own and attempt to find his own apartment. Start over again. There was one problem. His credit was ruined due to the child support. No landlord would accept him, even though he had cash on hand to give. He had saved up $3,000 to get himself a place, but no one would lend or rent to him due to his credit score being so bad.

Anderson gets into his car to drive to the next apartment complex to inquire, but the engine doesn’t start. The crankshaft is broken. It will cost him $1,200 to repair. He returns home to his mother’s house, who now has a new alcoholic boyfriend. He witnesses the man slap his mother. Anderson attacks the man, finding himself in yet another court battle. The charges are dismissed.

Anderson vows to never live with his mother again, who he secretly resents for destroying his own father in a nasty divorce 15 years prior.  Anderson bounces around from friend to friend, family member to family member, looking for a place to call home. After a few weeks, every arrangement begins to become tense, forcing him to constantly move and seek survival while attempting to save every penny he can.

All the while, Anderson is seeking higher paying jobs. A few interviews here and there, but nothing so far. Eventually, a job out of state calls him, stating they are willing to pay him a salary of 50K per year.  Anderson jumps for joy, however, if he takes the job, he will have to get it court approved or he will be held in contempt, and his child support is likely to increase two fold. Negating the prospect all together. Anderson deliberates for weeks, until one day, the employer calls him to let him know the job was given to someone else.

With no one to turn to. Anderson is confused and drained. Emotionally. Spiritually, Physically. And financially. He feels as if every choice he makes has some sort of pitfall at the end of it. He feels stuck ,trapped, and enslaved.  He begins drinking regularly to cope with the constant thoughts going through his mind. “One more medicated peaceful moment…” he whispers to himself as he drinks his 4th glass of red wine whereas he slowly falls into a drunken sleep.

The next morning, he gets a call from his mother. “You got mail at my house. They are suspending your driver’s license because of your arrears. I guess because of the retroactive support….”

Anderson calls the Child Support Office to once again explain that he is not in arrears. He pays on time every week. The amount is simply caused by retroactive support during months he was unaware of the child’s existence. The child support office agrees to reinstate his license, but warns him that every 6 months they will send him a letter reminding him to pay off the back support that is accruing with 12% interest each year.

Anderson replies, “Yes, I am well aware of the extortion process!” , and hangs up..

It took the offices 6 weeks to reinstate his license. In the meantime, he had to drive to and work in constant fear that he would be pulled over and arrested for having a suspended driver’s license.

Weeks later, Anderson goes into his office. Tired and stressed as usual. A co-worker walks in and places 12 files on his desk and says, “We need these processed by the end of the day and you’re on reception duty today also. Don’t let these phones ring more than twice before answering”.  Anderson nods.

Anderson walks to the bathroom and begins to feel a little lightheaded. He faints and hits his head. He wakes up in the hospital. The doctor states that he is suffering from bradycardia. A heart condition that is making his heart beat too slowly. They want to implant him with a pacemaker. Anderson refuses and walks out of the hospital, still in his gown. The nurse stops him and says, “State law says that because you lost consciousness, you are not allowed to drive for 6 months.” Anderson keeps walking and gets into his car and drives to an old church he frequented as a boy.

As he sit on its steps, praying, sobbing, crying out to god, he says, “Am I to be a slave for the rest of my life? Am I just a battery for everyone else?” He sees a playground across the street. He takes off his belt and attempts to hang himself from the swingset, crying uncontrollably, wishing for the pain to go away. He ties the belt tightly around his neck, and suspends himself from the playground swingset. The belt breaks after a few seconds.

Anderson lays on the ground, with a purple face, gasping for air.

It was at that moment that Anderson knew. He knew that he wanted to live. He wanted to be in love. To have a wife. To have another child with a woman he actually loved. To stay alive long enough to atleast tell his son the truth. To maybe even teach him to be the man he was supposed to be.  Anderson was no longer just at war with the mother of his child, the authorities, and the bill collectors…..Anderson was now at war with himself.

Anderson returns to work the next day to discover that he has been put on a warning list. If he misses one more day of work due to court or illness, he will be fired.

Anderson looks at his desk. Stacks of applicants looking to obtain credit with his employer, a credit company. Most of the applicants he noticed are in a similar situation as him. He hears the same stories everyday, and has to explain why these people are denied for credit applications.

Anderson takes a swig of the Brandy he hides in his desk at work. He loosens his tie, looks up at the ceiling and says….

“Everyone says men are pigs, but no body complains about bringing home the bacon.”

Anderson looks down at his phone.

It’s a notification from his Facebook account.

His ex-girlfriend who had left him almost two years ago, Jasmine, she is now having a baby of her own with her new husband.

Anderson begins to tear up, and says, “That should have been me.”

Anderson leaves his job without clocking out.

His co-workers ask him where he is going. He doesn’t answer.

He gets into his car and speeds down the interstate going the wrong way.

Anderson is determined to kill himself.

He crashes into a car going 120 MPH.

He dies upon impact. The other car has two named victims.

A woman and her son.

The same woman he had a child with, and the same son that he called his own.

He had unknowingly collided with his former lover and son. All three, now deceased.

Because of what?

When a mother and father fight…

When the sun and the moon argue,

there will be nothing but tidal waves and earthquakes.

And the children of the sun and the moon will bear the weight of this destruction.

CBS- ACTION NEWS

 

2017

Nalini-Global

Randell Stroud

*Fictional story written to illustrate a parable.

 

 

10 ways to Improve Family Law

 

The current model governing family law courts is extremely outdated and archaic. It is governed by a 1950’s chauvinistic view towards marriage and parentage. Men are expected to be emotionless, robotic-breadwinners whereas women are expected to be keepers of the home and children.  Women now work. The economy is in shambles whereas even those who are not burdened with child support or alimony are forced to work two jobs to stay afloat.  Below, I have proposed 10 ways to drastically improve fairness in the family law courts.

1. Remove presumptions:  When a man and woman enter into a courtroom, the presumption is that women are already the custodial parents who deserve child support. The courts should presume that both parents are equally shared in their rights. There should be a presumption of 50/50 shared custody with no mandate of child support payments.

2. Repeal Title IV-D of The Social Security Act:  This law states that the Federal Government will give $2 to the State government, for every $1 they collect in Child Support payments. This creates an automatic incentive for courts to set high child-support measurements. The extra money awarded to the states also does not benefit the children, it goes into “slush” funds.  There is no basis for the state to receive profits in these cases. It creates a conflict of interest.

3. Limit the Child Support Enforcement Agency’s Power:  CSEA administrators should NOT be acting as judges. They should NOT be issuing and calculating child support orders. They have no authority to hear special circumstances, to forgive debt, or to deviate from normal guidelines. It is costing tax payers over 3 billion dollars a year to staff and maintain these agencies which probably shouldn’t exist to begin with or should atleast be severely downsized.

4. Give equal representation:  Under the constitution, in criminal law, defendants are entitled to representation even if they cannot afford an attorney themselves. In child support cases, the state is a profiting party that has vested interests. The petitioning party is backed by the Child Support Enforcement Agency with incentives being paid to the state via Title IV sec D award payments.  While child support cases are technically considered “civil cases”, the repercussions and complexity of family law are very severe; not to mention a child being involved. If the courts truly believe in the best interest of the child, they will seek to properly represent and protect both parents. Fathers who feel protected and considered are much more likely to accept their duties if they don’t feel so scared and alienated from the process. This is why I believe both parents should have court appointed advocates to give everyone the best deal. Happy parents= Happy children.

5. Build up Non-custodial Parents:  According to my research, parents who make under then national medium income ($42K) per year, are considered at “high risk” for going into arrears.  Fathers or (NCP’s) who make under $42K per year should be given the option to complete job programs in lieu of sanctions. If the courts can offer programs that will help the paying parent reach that benchmark of $42K per year, they will become “low risk” at falling into default.

6. Remove Crippling Sanctions:   The courts can garnish their wages, seize their bank accounts, liquidate their properties, do whatever you want to recover owed child support payments. However, do not suspend a person’s driver’s license and do not incarcerate them. By doing either, you severely limit that person’s ability to earn an income. They get caught into a cycle of jail, accumulation of debt, and a destroyed resume. No one wants to hire someone who has a record. And if you live in a city that has poor public transportation, getting back and forth to jobs can become extremely burdensome, thus limiting job opportunities.  Debtors prisons were outlawed for a reason. To transform someone’s child into a source of someone’s imprisonment is a crime unto itself.  A married man who doesn’t provide for his child is left alone by government, however an unmarried man is subject to discrimination.  Find out why the parent is unable to keep up with the order and in the “best interest of the child” make it easier for the parent to be able to keep up with the order!

7. Let both parents opt-out:  Women can legally murder their children via abortion and thanks to “Safe Haven Laws”, they can also drop off their children at Fire-stations or Police Departments with no questions asked. A woman who makes the decision that she is not emotionally or financially ready to be a mother is given the option to choose parentage. Men are told to suck it up or face prison. The parameters found in states that allow abortion, should also apply to men. Up until a certain point, determined by law, a man should be able to dissolve his desire to be a parent just as a woman can. Many will argue that it will create more welfare dependent mothers, however, we must consider many things. The federal government can spend 1 trillion dollars on unconstitutional wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, yet they complain about a welfare spending that takes up less than 5% of the Federal Budget? Also, who says the government has to distribute foodstamps in the first place? If the federal government can afford to give states $2 for every $1 they collect in child support, then they can afford to feed and house poor people.  The Federal Reserve printed up billions to bail out corporations, why not bail out the people?

8. Cap amounts and Spending:   It is outrageous that a custodial parent can claim $10,000 a month just by getting pregnant BY a wealthy person, perhaps even get HIS house too! With the magic of “no-fault divorces”,  someone can literally get pregnant by a wealthy man, divorce him for no reason, and take half of his assets for the next 18 years.  Caps need to be developed based on cost of living in the state, so that divorces are not incentivized for those looking for a quick lottery ticket!  Additionally, the paying parent needs to have tools available to hold the custodial parent accountable for how his money is being spent. Custodial parents should be given prepaid cards that are trackable.  Housing, Food, day care, school-supplies, medical expenses, clothes,…..these things would be acceptable charges. However, if the custodial parent used the card to buy alcohol, vacations, TV’s, and other non-essential items, those charges would be disputed. This card system could create an argument that the custodial parent needs more money and/or less. Another option could be to use the left over money at the end of every month and have it automatically go into a trust fund for the child and/or to be applied to arrears.

9. Create a Child Visitation Enforcement Agency:  Parental Alienation is a HUGE epidemic. Fathers have to spend thousands of dollars in legal fees to get basic access to their children with no help from the state. If there is to be a child support enforcement agency, there needs to be an agency or hotline for non-custodial parents to call if they are actively being denied access. In many cases, fathers go years without being able to see their kids because of expensive legal fees, phony restraining orders, and cooperative mothers.

10. Mediation first- Court Second:  Before a mother and father ever see a judge, both parties should be required to attend mediation first. Have a worker use the child support model as a starting point, then allow each parent to discuss and negotiate with one another and come to agreeable plan. If the parents cannot communicate properly or the order is later deemed insufficient, then the judge can step in and give his own calculated orders. My point is, give the parents one last chance to solve things without government intrusion!

These are just a few ideas I have. This idea that we must punish and throw people in jail only works on those rare individuals who CAN afford child support yet choose to hide their assets or use trickery. However, most of these laws, albeit well intended, end up turning the middle-class and poor into criminalized debt-slaves.

Earlier this year, I submitted a 54 complaint to the Human Rights Council in Geneva,Switzerland addressing the global epidemic of unfairness in the family law courts around the world. A portion of that report can be found at https://naliniglobal.wordpress.com/human-rights-reporting/

“Global Human Trafficking In the Family Law Courts” 

 

-Nalini-Global

2017

How to settle Legal Matters- A basic guide for Newbies

 

“Money makes the world spin”.  It’s a phrase that we all know very well. Credit cards, alimony, child-support, mortgages, student loans, business loans, ….with a current 19 Trillion debt, the United States and its citizens are buried in financial problems.  But, there is one thing that most of these aforementioned debts have in common, they can usually be mitigated with “settlements” and/or negotiations. However, in this article I will focus on basic lawsuits and criminal cases.

When we hear the word, “Settlement”, images of money are immediately conjured into our minds.  Most of the settlements we hear about in the media are for large sums, anywhere from $50K to millions of dollars, often involving celebrities or powerful business moguls.  Many people might ask, “If a party knows they are innocent, then why would they agree to settle the case?”

People settle cases for all kinds of reasons.

  1. Save on lawyer expenses
  2.  Avoid public attention
  3.  Reduce stress/Time in court
  4.  Reduce risks of harsher sanctions from potentially losing in a trial.

Defendants often settle criminal cases for “plea” bargains. (An admittance of guilt in exchange for a lighter punishment) for similar reasons that defendants agree to settle in civil cases.

Nobody likes being in court! It is costly, time consuming, stressful and can be somewhat intimidating. Whether you are being sued for a credit card debt or facing criminal charges, the potential of being garnished, put in jail, missing time away from work and family, the presence of armed guards, black robed judges, ect…. the entire process can be a bit frightening, especially for those who do not spend much time in the courts. (Which is usually most people unless you are a legal professional, police officer, or a habitual criminal.)

When we decide to settle a case, we have to weigh our options. Defendants and Plaintiffs settle for the same reasons believe it or not. If a defendant believes he has a weak defense or is simply fed up with the court process, he is likely to settle, if a plaintiff believes he has a weak argument or he is fed up with the court process, he is likely to settle. Time is money, and people do not like to have their’s wasted!

In essence, settlements happen when people come to a conclusion after assessing in their minds a “cost-benefit-analysis”.  Let us take a look at the perspective from a defendant and plaintiff’s point of view in a hypothetical discrimination case.

John sues Corporation-Z for racial discrimination.  John has several witnesses who have agreed to testify. Corporation-Z learns that these witnesses with be participating. Corporation-Z believes that John has a good chance at defeating them in court. Corp-Z offers John $10,000 to settle the case out of court. If John were to win the case in court, he would probably sue for much more in damages, however, if John takes the offer, he can save himself attorney fees and months (possibly years) going to court cases.

Although Corp-Z is in a disadvantageous position, they are well-funded and will be able to drag the case on for a long time. John is a simple 9 to 5 employee with very little resources. However, John feels that he has strong evidence and is unwilling to settle for $10,000, he refuses the offer and decides to see it through to the end. Corp-Z offers another amount for $15,000, John still refuses.

Corp-Z files several continuances to drag out the case. John is getting tired.

John later finds out that several of his key witnesses have decided not to testify. John is now getting worried. Corp-Z has not yet learned that the witnesses have backed out. The next court date is in 6 weeks. John must act fast! Due to these new circumstances, his chances to win the case have gotten much lower.

At this point, John has several options:

  1. Contact the defendant and accept their $15,000 settlement offer
  2.  Send the defendant one last counter offer for a higher amount before agreeing to settle.
  3.  Rebuild his case, look for new evidence, take the case to trial and potentially win big or end up with nothing if he loses.

Option 1 is the safest–  Defendants and Plaintiffs have the option to offer and/or withdraw settlement offers at ANY TIME. In this scenario, the defendant, Corp-Z is likely to accept to settle unless new evidence has been obtained.

Option 2 is a little risky–  In this situation, John has learned that his witnesses are refusing to testify. Corp-Z has not yet found out, however, if they do find out, they are very likely to withdraw any offers to settle, as they will be likely to defeat the suit. John can attempt to negotiate one last time to get a higher amount from the defendant, but it will take some time to sort out the particulars, and time is something John doesn’t have with a looming court date. The closer the trial date gets, the more likely the defendant is to find out about the witnesses backing out.

Option 3 is highly risky– If the case goes to a trial by jury and John has other evidence besides witness testimony, the jury could still see it his way. If his witnesses are his key pieces of evidence, then he is at high risk for losing. This option would require very careful consideration. If John wins the case through jury, he will likely receive a huge pay-out, if he loses the case, he could end up losing everything or even end up being counter-sued by Corporation-Z.

Factors to consider:

Is John poor? How bad does he need money? If he loses the case, will he still be financially sound? Is he looking for justice or a pay-out? What are his goals in this lawsuit? Is he mentally and emotionally prepared to stay in court for several more months?  These are questions John has to ask himself before making a decision on how to proceed.

 

From the Defendant’s perspective:

Corporation-Z is a business and they have a business to run. Handling these legal matters are a huge cost and burden on the operation. Negative publicity can also hurt the business extensively.  Even if Corporation-Z discovers that the plaintiff, John, has lost his key witnesses, it still may be beneficial for Corporation-Z to settle. Typically, when settlements occur, non-disclosure agreements must be signed stating that the allegations against the company cannot be publicly discussed.  If Corp-Z refuses to settle and defeats John, John may still end up retaining his right to discuss the trial and his allegations to public organizations causing bad press not to mention the extra legal fees it may take to try and sue John later for defamation.

In this situation, if Corp-Z discovers that John has lost his witnesses, Corp-Z can agree to settle, for the same amount previously offered or for a lower amount, (since Z now has bargaining power!) or Corp-Z can withdraw all offers and attempt to win in trial.

Corporate attorneys are famous for their slogan to , “Always settle, settle, settle”.

While Corporation-Z has a good chance at defeating John, they may end up spending triple the amount of their settlement offer attempting to defeat the suit, also, Corporation-Z isn’t fully aware if John has any other additional evidence that is not yet known.  Victory is not always guaranteed. In court, just as in a boxing match, the ability to appear weak when one is strong, and the ability to appear strong when one is weak, is very crucial in the negotiation process of settling a case.

Timing:

Losing a lawsuit that goes to trial can result in dire consequences.

  1. Income garnishments
  2.  Loss of employment as a result of being garnished by multiple entities
  3. Loss of public reputation
  4. property being seized
  5. injunctions being placed against yourself or your business
  6. liens being places on your assets
  7. Tax refunds being withheld
  8.  Negative credit score

(These are just a few examples)

Some may be tempted to file for Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 bankruptcy in light of being sued for a debt, however, I wouldn’t recommend doing so unless your debts exceed $10,000. I’ll save that discussion for another article.

Timing is very critical when it comes to successfully mitigating a civil or criminal case. Let’s say you owe a credit card company $10,000.  Typically, after you default on your loan for more than 90 days, the credit card company will likely sell your debt to a third party collector. A few months to a year later, you are likely to be served with a warrant stating that you are being sued for the amount by the third party debt collector who purchased the debt for pennies on the dollar.

Once the lawsuit is filed, the creditor now has the upper-hand. Since you have essentially ignored all attempts to collect, it is assumed that you are avoiding the debt and do not have the means to pay it back. A smarter decision would have been to inquire about hardship programs or attempt to settle the debt with a partial amount before you were sued. (Always get everything in writing).  However, since things have escalated to a court hearing, the creditor now probably believes that they have a great chance to win the case.

When most people owe a debt, they stick their heads in the sand and do nothing. If you are sued for a credit card debt, your goal now is to re-establish your bargaining power! Even if you owe the debt, make them prove it! File an answer to the lawsuit, file a discovery request, ask for continuances! ( I can help you do these things by offering a template to follow.) Once the creditor sees that you aren’t going to be like the other 99% of people who don’t show up to court and allow for a default judgement, the creditor will be likely willing to settle the debt for a fraction of what they are suing you for.

While you are fighting the lawsuit, whether your intention is to get it dismissed through lack of evidence,lack of itemization or your goal is to settle the debt for a lesser amount, you must act swiftly! If you do intend to settle the debt, be sure to make the number attractive but not too high. If you owe $10,000, offer them 30%, because they are likely to counter back asking for 50%.

If the creditor is not willing to settle and/or you lose the case, enroll in a “slow-pay” program. That’s right! If you lose a lawsuit, you can enroll in a “slow-pay” program whereas you may only be paying $20 a month or so to the creditor. (Albeit for a very long time!).  Through the slow-pay process, you can pay with a check or money order. In order for the plaintiff (or creditor) to garnish your wages, they have to get an approved garnishment order from a court. If you miss a single-payment through the slow-pay program, some jurisdictions automatically issue a garnishment order because of your lack of ability to keep your promise to pay.

Federal law protects workers from being fired if they are being garnished by a single entity. However, if two or more entities are garnishing you, federal law allows employers to fire you because of the administrative burden your garnishment orders are costing to the company you work for.

Any legal case must be taken seriously whether it be criminal or civil. Even traffic court can cost us! If you ignore a traffic ticket, don’t be surprised if you later find out that your drivers license has been revoked! Reinstating a revoked license is time consuming and can cost hundreds, even thousands, depending on the liens placed upon the license.

In many criminal cases, district attorneys will offer “plea deals”. This “deal” is basically where you agree to admit guilt in exchange for a lighter punishment. Plea deals can benefit both parties. The district attorney meets his conviction quota, you receive a lighter sentence than you would if you lost your trial, and the process of court is sped up.

Going back to the lessons we learned earlier about, “Appearing strong when you are weak, and to be weak when you are strong”, accepting plea deals is an art within itself just as accepting settlements are.

Example:

John is accused of stealing a car. John maintains that he is innocent.

John’s witnesses didn’t show up to court.

The state offers him a plea deal.  Admit guilt and you will only face 6 months in jail.

John refuses! The trial continues

The state is having a hard time presenting evidence against John.

The state offers a new plea deal.

“1 month in jail with 6 months probation.”

John again refuses and demands a jury.

The jury hears John’s defense and the state’s allegations against him.

The jury decides that John is guilty! John will be sentenced to 3 years in prison.

John should have taken the plea deal!

Now, this is a worse case scenario! Just as in our lawsuit example earlier with, “Corporation-Z”, many factors come into play.

Let us replay the scenario. This time, John has several alibis and video surveillance of the vehicle being stolen that he managed to find on the internet. The video is low-quality but the suspect appears to have red-hair, John has brown hair!

John challenges the state’s claim. The state claims that John merely dyed his hair brown and his alibis are lying about where he was during the alleged carjacking!

John is confident in his defense and refuses all plea deals.

The jury finds John innocent!

Had John taken a plea deal, he would have ruined his record and served time for a crime he never committed! However, the jury could have still convicted him. No matter how confident you feel in your case, always prepare for the unexpected and don’t be afraid to appeal if necessary to buy yourself more time.

When to refuse a plea deal or when to take one, is no different than debating on whether or not to take a settlement. Many innocent men and women have taken plea deals for crimes they didn’t commit on the advice of their attorney who advised their client that the evidence is just too strong against them; even though they maintain their innocence.

Some defendants value their honor so much, that they resolve to never take a plea deal regardless of the consequences, whereas others make informed decisions in an effort to preserve themselves. In law, there is no “black or white”, “right or wrong” choice. Everything is about weighing risks vs rewards.  Every situation is completely different.

Who is the judge presiding over this case? Who are the jurors? What state is this case being held in? What do the state laws say? Are you in a liberal state or a conservative state? Does your lawyer have a good reputation or a bad reputation? Are you handling this case pro-se? Do you have any experience with legal matters?

These are all questions that can drastically effect the outcome of a case, or as I call them , “The intangible factors”.  In your heart, you may know that you are innocent, or feel that your case is valid, however, it isn’t always about what you “feel”, it’s about what you can convincingly present to the courts in conjunction with applicability of the law.

If you are involved in a lawsuit or criminal case as either a plaintiff or defendant, be sure to check out our “Legal Services” page.  Our programs there offer legal defense funds for people starting as low as $20 per month with unlimited consultations with licensed attorneys.  If you want to consult with me personally, follow instructions on my Consulting Page .  I can offer you one-time friendly advice, educational lessons, templates, and other resources to you, however I cannot offer you legal advice as I am not a licensed attorney, thus, anything I advise you on will have to be taken as “friendly” advice, not legal advice.  I have been working in the legal-field as paralegal/researcher for about 7 years and have experience in various jurisdictions and areas of law.

feel free to contact me Naliniglobal@yahoo.com 

 

Copywrite 2017- NaliniGlobal

Randell Stroud

 

Family Law Courts attacked by Nalini-Global

On 3/8/2017, the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva,Switzerland , will receive a 30 page shadow report and an additional 31 pages of semi-classified US federal court documentation (to later be published after rulings are made) displaying the gross abuse of power within the family law courts; not only in the USA but in every country around the globe.

The family law courts around the world have been responsible for mass incarceration of fathers, widespread Parental Alienation Syndrome   epidemics,  abuse of children, racism towards Indigenous native populations, increased suicide risks, and so much. Worst of all, the system that thrives off their famous slogan, “For the best interest of the children”, is profiting from such abuses.

Gender discrimination against men, and mothers who wish to transfer custody to fathers without stigma, are under-documented problems we face in our ill social structure.  Racism, rights of immigrants, women being sexually harassed in the work-place, failing economies…..all very important topics that deserve continued monitoring, yet the plight of children and parents, namely fathers, who get caught in the destructive nature of the modern domestic family law courts is deserving of equal consideration.

Please visit our “shadow report” page here  to read the full 30 page report attached to the complaint filed by myself and other effected persons of the family law courts.   This report sheds light on the thousands of fathers,mothers, and children who have been negatively effected by the family law courts, with a specific focus on fathers. Since the popular phrase “Deadbeat Dad”, became mainstream in the 1990’s, society falsely believes that fathers who are not in their children’s lives, always do so at their own discretion. Yes, some fathers do raise their children for a short time then abandon their children despite cooperation from mothers; which is dissapointing; just as some mothers have also done. But, there are many other factors to consider when trying to understand why some men are deterred and what can be done to encourage their participation in the parenting process.

This report highlights the unique social challenges that men, children, and Indigenous populations face in the family law courts, as well as society as a whole. Genital mutilation, forced military service, majority of homeless populations, majority of suicide cases, majority of bankruptcy filings, all attributed to men! In fact, there is a 2:1 odds in suicide cases showing that most men who commit suicide have either recently gone through a divorce/custody battle, or are in the process of doing so.

Since President Bill Clinton passed various federal mandates throughout his presidency increasing sanctions on unwed fathers and “accused” male spousal abusers, the incarceration rate of men has skyrocketed! Since 1994 to present, more than 70% of black children now grow up in single parent homes because their fathers are incarcerated or face economic hardship. The stats aren’t much better for white fathers. In fact, studies show that children are more likely to grow up with a family pet than they are with their father. After divorces take place, men are likely to end up in poverty or in jail.  In Massachusetts alone, fathers being arrested for getting behind on child support payments make up the bulk of the jail population. Before the 1990’s, the rate of single parent homes in the black and white communities were significantly lower, especially in the lower income areas which often hit the black communities even harder, thus resulting in more incarcerations for the Prison Industrial Complex.

Ironically, Mr.Clinton himself has been dodging paternity test requests from his illegitimate son,  Danney Williams, since the 1990’s. Perhaps the scorned Hillary decided to unleash her fury upon the entire male population through the executive powers of her husband.  Alas, the issue isn’t just with the USA. It is a global epidemic. In fact, recently, A fathers rights union filed suit against the government of Israel through the United Nations, whereas the International courts did condemn the “Tender years law” in Israel that disallows fathers to file for custody of their children until they reach the age of 7 with the arbitrary belief that, “Only mothers can care for children under the age of 7”.

Another group  that loses in family law courts are the Indigenous populations of the United States, who have very little sovereignty in cases of removal of indigenous children by DCS. (Department of Child Services.)

Please read my 30 page report with an open mind and come away with a new understanding of these issues. Nalini-Global is NOT a Women’s rights organization, a Men’s right organization, or a children’s rights organization, but rather a HUMAN rights organization.  Unbiased and clear, we discuss topics that the public may not be aware of. After reading this report, you will learn about the Prison Industrial complex, the Military Industrial complex, how the State is profiting from Mothers and Fathers, and most importantly, how the system is dividing the very essence of what it means to be a human being who is entitled to equal protection under the law.

I truly believe that this report will effectively blow the lid off of the family law court conspiracy. I believe that our current situation is caused by the “blowback” effect (A popular CIA term  used to describe the consequences of militaristic foreign policies) .  Marginalized groups of people are discriminated against or harmed, thus, those groups seek more power, then that group becomes the discriminator, and the cycle of hate and war continues. Victims become bullies.

My report exposes the false presumption of “welfare spending is bankrupting countries”, “Illegal immigrants have babies and don’t pay taxes”, “Men who cannot pay child support are deadbeat dads”, “women who lose custody of their children are drugs addicts”, …… all of these are stereotypes that are based on very loose understandings of a major social problem that is linked with bad economics and bad governance.

My report is broad and generalized and covers many topics, it even dissects parts of the Federal Reserve system, yet, when you realize that the family unit is the starting point for any culture or nation of people, all of its other problems can be traced to it. The economy, war, military spending, crime, ….it is all linked to the family law courts in some way.

We live in a time where we are supposed to pledge allegiance to flags and invisible borders, yet we must stay silent in our prayers to our chosen Gods, and we must ask for permission for nearly everything we do. Have you noticed that, in order to maintain your freedom, we are being exposed to an increasing number of laws and mandates in order to remain unincarcerated?  1 in 4 Americans will experience jail time in their lives.  The United States of America has the largest prison population on Earth, with 75% of its inmates being incarcerated for NON-VIOLENT crimes (i.e. legal technicalities) it is a huge money making racket for the elites.

However, I am optimistic. With the publication of my report, among many other efforts and advocacy done on my part and by others, we can work together through the proper channels and get a conversation going! Creating more laws isn’t the answer to creating a moral society. The more laws you  create, the more criminals are created. If wearing black socks became illegal, I would become a criminal in this very moment! It is truly that arbitrary. Simple words on paper, which can transform ordinary men and women into criminals who aren’t allowed to drive a car, leave the country, or obtain employment.  It is a cycle of destruction.

If you or someone who know has been effected by these issues, please read my report, print off as many copies as you can and send them to you legislators, governors, Prime Ministers, NGOS, Governmental bodies, or as a reference to your own research or case-work.

Many are chanting, “Let’s make America great again”…..  I say, “Lets make humanity a family again.”  What effects men effects women, what effects women effects men. We are interlinked in our struggles. It high time we realize such truths.

Nalini-Global

2017 TM

Naliniglobal@yahoo.com