New Zealand news on Stuff.co.nz: Fathers group target more lawyers
Family Court lawyers living on the North Shore will be the next target of a fathers’ rights group, a move the Law Society describes as inappropriate and worrying.
Fathers Coalition spokesman and Browns Bay resident Andrew Wotton says group members plan to demonstrate outside the homes of 50 of what his organisation considers the worst Family Court lawyers. Several people must raise objections for a lawyer to make the list.
Mr Wotton says the coalition has already been to about 16 lawyers’ houses in Auckland city. Protests take place about every three weeks.
He says “quite a number of lawyers on the North Shore” are on the list. The group will begin protesting on the Shore in about six weeks.
Law Society family law section chairman Simon Maude says the group’s behaviour is worrying because family lawyers are only following the law.
“It seems inappropriate and highly unusual that a group that has a gripe about the law itself would picket lawyers who don’t make the rules and must work within those rules,” he says.
Mr Maude says picketing with loudhailers in residential areas can frighten children.
“It’s our view that submissions and demonstrations should be directed at the lawmakers and not lawyers and their families.”
But Mr Wotton says it is the behaviour of the lawyers that is the main reason for the demonstration.
“The problem with lawyers is they’re trained to represent their clients and that’s okay in criminal or commercial cases,” he says.
“But in Family Court there’s a third party: The children. So representing clients the best you can may adversely affect the child.”
Mr Wotton says some of the ploys include delaying tactics and overcharging to discourage fathers from fighting cases.
“One father spent $17,000 on a lawyer and didn’t see his daughter for eight months. Then he represented himself and got 50 percent shared parenting.”
He says lawyers have been known to encourage false allegations and be anti-men.
“A woman might come to a lawyer and say: `He shoved me’, and a lawyer will almost habitually say: `That’s a violent assault’.”
Mr Wotton, a builder and engineer, gained 50 percent parenting of his own daughter after representing himself in court five years ago and now helps other men.
He says the protests are giving fathers “quite a lot of empowerment and enthusiasm because at last they see some way of expressing their concerns”.
Mr Wotton says he hopes eventually the law society and judges will get involved and recognise the issues.
The protests will include demonstrations outside the homes of judges and in the future might include politicians.
“The judges in Family Court are extremely scared of being attacked and won’t want their addresses to be known. So if we protest outside their houses, sensibly they’ll come and talk to us,” Mr Wotton says.
He says North Shore demonstration sites may include the offices of East Coast Bays MP Murray McCully and North Shore MP Wayne Mapp.
6 responses so far ↓
1 Kevin Merck // May 15, 2006 at 3:41 pm
[“One father spent $17,000 on a lawyer and didn’t see his daughter for eight months. Then he represented himself and got 50 percent shared parenting.â€]
Not only should everyone denied “shared parenting†or “equal protection†refuse to pay any mandated “child supportâ€, we should also refuse to hire any “lackey lawyers†to represent us. These parasites are little more than a stooge of the court. They will put on a “dog and pony showâ€, but the outcome is predetermined.
I learned this mistake the hard way and it cost me dearly. Ann M. Laverty of Cedar Rapids Iowa refused a “deal†from the extortionist mother that would have ended my case in 2002. She did so without consulting me. She caused me over $200,000 dollars in damages and “untold†pain and suffering. A “private admonishment†was her punishment. Not one lawyer in the state of Iowa would represent me in suing her for malpractice because I was over $55,000 in arrears at the time. No lawyer wants to represent someone accused of being that far behind in “child supportâ€.
It’s all good though. This is the reason for my existence now. There is nothing in this world more important to me than being as instrumental in the destruction of this corrupt court system as possible.
Do the right thing; refuse to pay this “blood moneyâ€, and don’t hire lawyers. Millions of future “would be victims†will be very glad you didn’t.
Kevin Merck
2 Wyatt // May 15, 2006 at 5:50 pm
Hey Kev,
I hear ya man. My divorce atty was a bad joke. She took my money and convinced me to do what ever my ex wanted. I have been Pro Se ever since. I REFUSE TO PAY ANOTHER PENNY TO GET BACK WHAT WAS ILLEGALLY TAKEN FROM ME TO BEGIN WITH! And if that means never seeing my kids again, so be it. I know I have done everything in my power to be a part of their lives. I refuse to make myself destitute while I line the pockets of the criminals. I really do hope they all hang for their treason. The lawyers are a part of the extortion racket and I refuse to contribute to my own demise.
Later Bro.
3 seanheeger.com // May 15, 2006 at 7:34 pm
Most lawyers bank on family law with the exception of a few that actually have values (yeah, an attorney with values. That’s a good one) If they have a problem with the collateral damage that their actions produce while practicing this flavor of lawn then I suggest that they option not to participate in it. “We’re just doing or job” is no excuse. It’s not even a reason.
4 Jim Deeny // May 16, 2006 at 4:09 am
Nothing like a 250.00 an hour walking filing cabinet!
5 Kevin Merck // May 18, 2006 at 7:46 am
“At the establishment of our constitutions, the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by precedent, sapping, by little and little, the foundations of the constitution, and working its change by construction, before any one has perceived that that invisible and helpless worm has been busily employed in consuming its substance. In truth, man is not made to be trusted for life, if secured against all liability to account.”
Thomas Jefferson
6 Jim Deeny // May 19, 2006 at 6:12 am
To sit back hoping that someday, someway, someone will make things right is to go on feeding the crocodile, hoping he will eat you last–but eat you he will.
You must log in to post a comment.