What do Custody Evaluators Steven Adam and Stephen Doyne have in common? “A Los Angeles Times news item from 1992 states that court justices reverse a decision which dropped Adam from a lawsuit brought by a woman who sued him for approving unmonitored visits to her daughter by her ex-husband.. The appeal justices’ ruling stated court-appointed evaluators such as Adam do not get “blanket immunity for all negligenct conduct.” Mark I. Pinsky, “Court of Appeal Reverses Verdict in Murder Case, Los Angeles Times, June 2, 1992.” This case answers the question for so many families caught in the family court trap, “Can I sue my custody evaluator?” The answer in California is, “Yes, you can, in particularly, for negligence.” AND “Adam is also the poster child for stepping out of the scope in the court orders for a custody evaluator. In the Seagondollar case, the appeal justices spanked Adam for not following the court orders that defined a custody evaluation. Adam, took it upon himself to follow his own rules. The court of appeal justices caught Adam stepping out of the scope in the well known California Family Law Appeal case known as The Seagondollar Case. This lead to mandated classes for all custody evaluators across the U.S. regarding how they must follow court orders in how a custody evaluation is to be conducted. In the courts terms and not dictated by the custody evaluator.” Seagondollar Appellate case opinion What is of significant importance in regard to Adam and the Segondollar case is that in the entire San Diego County, prior to July 24, 2009, CA Rules of Court were never followed, never administered, when they are very clear that ‘each court must’ follow them. Well in the case of Tadros vs. Doyne this is highlighted by Emad Tadros and Chris Morris (Associate of Mike Aguirre) in that they had 20″ x 30″ inch poster boards showing the very forms having to do with the Rules that were violated in front of Judge Jay Bloom and he completely ignored the violations Stephen Doyne and Court itself had violated for years. Judge Bloom granted Doyne the Anti-Slapp and ordered Tadros MD to pay Doyne 80k for blowing the whistle on him and the Court.
Dr. Stephen Doyne Phd and all of the rest of the Custody Evaluators in San Diego County as well as all of the Judges in San Diego County, NEVER used these forms (FL-327 and FL-326) as mandated by the Court.
Michael M. Roddy, Court Executive Officer of San Diego Superior Court participated in Judicial Counsel meetings where the Rules (CRC 5.225-5.230) pertaining to these forms were first introduced, and then he attended another Judicial Counsel meeting and voted on amending to them, continuing to make them more detailed and important in protecting the Public from fraudulent and unqualified Custody Evaluators.
However, Mr. Roddy NEVER administered the Rules of Court he voted on to protect the Public!
These Rules also protect Evaluators as well in substantiating their background training and qualifications in order to perform evaluations or serve as expert witness of the court, and they are to be signed under the penalty of perjury.
Precisely, because these forms were never filled out and filed in the time-sensitive, mandatory 10-day period they were to be completed by, NOT a single Evaluator in San Diego County over several years were NEVER qualified to serve as expert witness — They were UNQUALIFIED!
Stephen Doyne should never have been granted the Anti-Slapp ruling precisely because he never legally attached to Tadros MD’s evaluation in the first place. The Rules are very clear, if you don’t complete the form FL-326 then you cannot serve as expert witness, but they all have been doing it anyway, committing to HIPAA violations in the act, denying litigants their due process, and well, essentially being illegal interlopers in the act of conducting 730 Custody Evaluations. These are just the broad sweeps of what is at issue, there are many more details to these Rules of Court known as CRC 5.225 – 5.230 and how San Diego’s Custody Evaluators are conducting themselves.
It is very clear that the precedents that the Segaondollar case went ignored by San Diego County and it’s corrupt team of so-called court professionals. Why did San Diego ignore these Rules of Court when every other county in the State of CA complied with them??? If you really want to know, follow the money…and good luck!
What is important as well is that every time those FL 327 forms were changed it was for a reason. A change in policy and procedure had occurred and those changes were documented in State wide court administration meetings. The changes demonstrated that custody evaluators were not following rules or were not up to date on continuing education requirements, for example. Dr. Tadros was able to factually demonstrate the evolution of the FL 327 starting from the first single page form that was generated in the 1990’s to the current multiple page form used today. Besides those visual forms, Dr. Tadros had the minutes from the meetings with the signed/documented attendance sheets. Across the State of California, Custody Evaluators have perjured themselves or not acted under the Family Law Codes for performing a custody evaluation. All the while, court administrators signed attendance pages for meetings that clearly explained the needed changes and Custody Evaluators attended mandated classes explaining the changes as well. The result; nothing was done.
Parents, please look through your family court files and look for these documents. Do you have them in your file or not? This is the document that could change the whole course of your family law case.
@parents4justice: When you say FL-327, I presume you are speaking about both FL-327 and FL-326, right?
FL-327 is the order or notice of appointment from the court that so-and-so will conduct an evaluation on X and Y litigants.
FL-326 is the ‘response’ form that the Custody Evaluators are required to fill out and sign under the penalty of perjury, showing that they meet the mandatory, required background, training, and education requirements of the CA State Rules of Court CRC 5.225 – 5.230 in order for them to legally and authentically perform a 730 Code Evaluation. As mandated, they are to complete 326 within 10-days of appointment or else they can’t serve as expert witness, it is that cut and dry. No completion of form = no serve as 730 Evaluator per appointment.
FL-325 is another one but that is for Court-connected Evaluators, such as those working in Riverside County for example. San Diego County does not use court-connected Evaluators, they use Private Child Custody Evaluators, which means that they remain a SEPARATE business person until they complete FL-326 properly and timely, and then and ONLY then do they legally become a part of the litigation process serving as expert witnesses for the Court.
In other words, the entire County of San Diego NEVER had legally binding professionals performing Custody Evaluations over their lives and relationships with their children from 2001 to July 24th, 2009. On July 24th, 2009 Mr. Michael Roddy put out a change or amendment to to the local rules to adopt the CA State Rules of Court they were in violation of. It IS the Public and the Media that brought this to the Court’s attention — again, Mr. Michael Roddy voted on these rules and under Title 10 of CA State Rules of Court it is his duty to administer them. He more negligent than anyone! The facts are in the Judicial Counsel minutes and reports that are in the hands of many now, the facts stand very strong.
When Mr. Roddy and the Court were shown how they were not doing their job, that they were seriously remiss in their duties, Stephen Doyne and I think a couple of other Bogus Evaluators ran and filed FL-326s months or more beyond the mandatory 10-day window. The evidence is there, the facts stand very strong.
Yes, I agree .. Expose The Real Painful Truth. The Truth is the most Powerful Weapon that CCFC owns and this ONLY will keep the Frauds Like Doyne & “Assoicates” on the Run.
CCFC proudly uncovered that the Fraudulent professionals who clearly decided to take a path and pirate college funds in our county for the last many years, are a boat load and IT IS A MATTER OF TIME for this boat to sink.
Doyne is a very clever deceiving and a flat out untrusted professional. Since when a deceiving porfessional will tell you upfront that they are deceiving? The decieving is clearly a con who only comes across as real!
My message to our state officials and the CA Administrative Offices of Court/AOC is as long as Fraud is let loose on long leach, CCFC will stop at nothing.
Emad Tadros MD
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: jvandoorn at cox.net
To: tadrosmd at pol.net
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 12:34:31 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Email from Robert Lesh to Family Law Community
Emad,
Below is a forwarded email I received from an anonymous source who is a member of the San Diego Family Law community. I was told that this email was sent as a mass emailing to all members of the San Diego County Bar Association who practice in family law. I had originally received this email in early October of 2009 and as you recall, had forwarded it to you and various other members of the ‘Doyned’ community at that time.
If required, I can and will testify under oath as to the conditions that I received this communication under and the integrity of the individual who forwarded this document to me and his/her professional affiliation (a practicing member of the family law section of the San Diego Bar Association) in order that you can legally establish the veracity of this document with the courts.
Regards!
John van Doorn
———————————————————————–
Robert Lesh [mailto:wrl@leshlaw.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 5:19 PM
To: SDCBA Family Law Section
Subject: [sdcbafamilylaw] Important Custody Evaluation Forms/Orders
SDCBA Community Message Sent by: W. Lesh. To reply privately to W. Lesh,
Click Here
Note: By replying to this message, your response will be e-mailed
directly to the individual sender. Click “Reply to All” in your e-mail
client to send your response to all SDCBA Family Law Section members
instantly. This is a PRIVATE list for members of the SDCBA’s Family Law
Section. Do not forward messages or post confidential case or client
data on this list server. For a list of SDCBA list serve guidelines,
click here.
To permanently unsubscribe from this listserve, Click Here
I have been advised that a press conference occurred today (October 1)
which involved the issue of custody evaluations and the submission to
the Court of the attached Family Law Forms 326 and 327. As you may be
aware from a prior e-mail I sent to all of you, these forms are
mandatory and have been now for some time. Whenever you are involved in
a custody evaluation matter, you need to make sure that your custody
evaluators sign form FL-326 and that that gets filed with the Court, as
there is a strong possibility that the custody evaluator will not be
paid for work that they perform prior to the form being signed and
submitted to the Court.
As to Family Law 327, that also needs to be signed and contained in the
case file.
It seems apparent that there is going to be a tremendous amount of
scrutiny being placed upon these forms and if you have any old cases
still pending where these forms have not been used, please make sure
that they are filed appropriately as you risk claims from your client
that the matter was not properly handled, if they later disagree with
the recommendations from the evaluator.
If you have any particular questions regarding this, feel free to
contact me.
Bob Lesh
CFLS Chair
__.___._
ABOUT THIS MESSAGE FROM THE FAMILY LAW SECTION
You are a receiving this email as a member of the San Diego County Bar
Association’s Family Law Section. This email was generated through a
listserve, and does not represent the views of the San Diego County Bar
Association, or the San Diego County Bar Association’s Family Law
Section. To adjust your list delivery settings and subscription options
for all SDCBA list servers and communities, Click Here.
NOTE: By replying to this message, you will be replying to the
individual sender. Click “Reply to All” to send your message to all
members of the Family Law Section
To send your own message, send email to
sdcbafamilylaw@lists.membercentral.com
To permanently unsubscribe from the Family Law Section listserve, Click
Here.
_.___.__
I just checked out Mr. Bob Lesh’s website, http://www.leshlaw.com, and it says he is a Certified Specialist in Family Law. Down the page is reads:
“Bob is currently President-Elect of the Executive Committee of the San Diego County Certified Family Law Specialists, and is in his second three-year term as a Board Member of the Executive Committee. Bob has lectured on different aspects of Family Law at seminars presented by the Certified Family Law Specialists and the San Diego County Bar Association. Bob is currently a member of the San Diego County Bar Association and its Family Law Section, as well as a member of the State Bar of California and its Family Law Section, and is currently the Chair of the Family Court Services Subcommittee for the San Diego County Certified Family Law Specialists, and is also serving on the Minor’s Counsel Subcommittee.”
So basically this Certified Specialist in Family Law who knows the CA State Rules of Court told all of the Family Law lawyers on the SDCBA list-serve to go ahead and break the law by making sure these forms get filled out and filed post-haste even though the law mandates that they are to be filled out within 10-days of appointment or else the Evaluator’s opportunity to serve as expert witness is invalid; he/she cannot serve as expert witness. Since when are the Attorneys advocates for the Evaluators? Afraid of losing your corruptly earned money Bob? Way to go Bob, way to break the law you swore to follow! What a model lawyer you are Bob!
Isn’t one of the lectures you attended Bob titled “Litigants Behaving Badly” and hosted by non-other than Stephen Doyne, your ‘golden boy’ Evaluator who also breaks the law with CRC 5.225?
How about “Lawyers Behaving Badly” Bob? Or, “Evaluators Behaving Badly?”
My family law case has been held hostage for 16 years without resolving any housekeeping issues. On June 15, 2010 my ex husband’s attorney Dave Schulman, Esq and my former attorney Anthony Dunne, Esq went before Judge Allard indicating they had no idea why they were in Court. I had given my attorney Anthony Dunne $5,000 and he indicated he had no idea why he was there. According to the rules of the Court attorneys are required to work things out prior to going into the Court room otherwise they are subject to sanctions. My ex husband’s attorney Dave Schulman, Esq said very nonchalantly that the file went missing for quite a long time and things are missing. End of proceedings. Gone was my $5,000. San Diego Family Law Court is being run by a group of attorneys who churn “high conflict” cases for fees and delay resolution. It is a financial institution that should not be in business.
It appears Mr. Lesh and the entire Executive Family Law Committee are making criminal decisions. They are violating the very mandated laws that they should be following.
My daughter and I made an appointment with Michael Rody after I attended a meeting spearheaded by Mike Aguirre. During the meeting approximately 50 litigants told their horror stories about their San Diego Family Law Cases. It was clear my situation was not unique. Approximately 50 litigants who had the same attorneys I had experienced the same racketeering. I called Michael Rody’s office and made an appointment. I thought I was bringing this organized crime ring to his attention for the first time. My daughter explained that her Court Appointed Minor’s Counsel Marcia Orenstein who had billed the San Diego tax payers for her “services” never checked on her. Michael Rody explained to me and Natalie that his job was to keep the lights on and he has no role in the court cases. Upon closure of the meeting my daughter and I were immediately placed under arrenst by 5 deputies and taken to Judge Hoffman’s Courtroom where he wanted to conduct a debtor’s exam. No service was provided. Thankfully I contacted the Commission on Judicial Performance and they thanked me for bringing this to their attention. Judge Hoffman was discplined but based on the current rules they could not reveal any other details. In other words the personnel within the San Diego Family Court Service are working together to scam “high conflict” litigants out of their money without accounting, rules being followed or any process.
Micheal G. Roddy said it is his job to keep the lights on? His job is outlined in Title 10 of the CA State Rules of Court and it in no way, shape, manner or form says that is his job.
If fact, under Title 10 Rules of Court it is Micheal G. Roddy’s job to administer Rules of Court, this would include new rules and amendments to them.
Yes, and by Bob Lesh telling all of the Family Law Attorneys what he has told them is supporting the denial of “due process” that litigants are entitled to.
What Bob Lesh is telling the Family Law Attorneys is the Evaluators’ responsibility to have those forms filled out and filed appropriately. It should have been the Attorneys to have appropriately counseled their clients over these forms and to vet the Evaluator. Now Bob Lesh apparently trying to cover-up a mass violation of law due to the unprofessionalism, incompetence, and corrupt San Diego Superior Court and San Diego Family Law Community. Can you spell Federal RICO?
I want to thank the hard work of the members of CCFC. Digging through files, searching for documentation in its various paper and electronic forms, driving to court houses to personally interview court administrators, and gathering countless examples of litigant experiences to put the pieces together demonstrates muckraking at its finest.
CCFC should be added to this list of well known muckrakers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muckraker
On 4-15-10 I stated in public, to Judge Bloom that FL326 is mandated to be filed “Under The Penalty of Perjury.” On this form, a verified signature by the evaluator is mandated according to Rule 5.225 k-1-b, which states in BOLD that this form must be filled out and signed “Under The Penalty of Perjury” 10 days “BEFORE-BEFORE” ANY custody work starts, by any evaluator.
The ethical, legal and professional instructions from the SDCBA to all San Diego attorneys, who are supposed to care about the child Best Interest, is to never touch any old cases as it is illegal on its face and according to the clear cut mandate outlined by 5.225 k-1-b.
As a matter of fact filing these forms after the fact is only committing perjury in day-light.
Any layman would wonder: was this prompting to flagrantly violate CRC, serve the public or serve thy Attorneys?
Was this about Child’s Best Interest or was it about taking the candy out of the kids mouth and keep the attorneys sucking on it, instead?
PLEASE READ AND EXAMINE WHAT WAS ALREADY FILED PUBLIC AND NOW OUTLINED IN THE PENDING TO BE FILED AMIUCS…….
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: jvandoorn at cox.net
To: tadrosmd at pol.net
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 12:34:31 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Email from Robert Lesh to Family Law Community
Emad,
Below is a forwarded email I received from an anonymous source who is a member of the San Diego Family Law community. I was told that this email was sent as a mass emailing to all members of the San Diego County Bar Association who practice in family law. I had originally received this email in early October of 2009 and as you recall, had forwarded it to you and various other members of the ‘Doyned’ community at that time.
If required, I can and will testify under oath as to the conditions that I received this communication under and the integrity of the individual who forwarded this document to me and his/her professional affiliation (a practicing member of the family law section of the San Diego Bar Association) in order that you can legally establish the veracity of this document with the courts.
Regards!
John van Doorn
—————————————————————————–
Robert Lesh [mailto:wrl@leshlaw.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 5:19 PM
To: SDCBA Family Law Section
Subject: [sdcbafamilylaw] Important Custody Evaluation Forms/Orders
SDCBA Community Message Sent by: W. Lesh. To reply privately to W. Lesh,
Click Here
Note: By replying to this message, your response will be e-mailed
directly to the individual sender. Click “Reply to All” in your e-mail
client to send your response to all SDCBA Family Law Section members
instantly. This is a PRIVATE list for members of the SDCBA’s Family Law
Section. Do not forward messages or post confidential case or client
data on this list server. For a list of SDCBA list serve guidelines,
click here.
To permanently unsubscribe from this listserve, Click Here
I have been advised that a press conference occurred today (October 1)
which involved the issue of custody evaluations and the submission to
the Court of the attached Family Law Forms 326 and 327. As you may be
aware from a prior e-mail I sent to all of you, these forms are
mandatory and have been now for some time. Whenever you are involved in
a custody evaluation matter, you need to make sure that your custody
evaluators sign form FL-326 and that that gets filed with the Court, as
there is a strong possibility that the custody evaluator will not be
paid for work that they perform prior to the form being signed and
submitted to the Court.
As to Family Law 327, that also needs to be signed and contained in the
case file.
It seems apparent that there is going to be a tremendous amount of
scrutiny being placed upon these forms and if you have any old cases
still pending where these forms have not been used, please make sure
that they are filed appropriately as you risk claims from your client
that the matter was not properly handled, if they later disagree with
the recommendations from the evaluator.
If you have any particular questions regarding this, feel free to
contact me.
Bob Lesh
CFLS Chair
__.___._
ABOUT THIS MESSAGE FROM THE FAMILY LAW SECTION
You are a receiving this email as a member of the San Diego County Bar
Association’s Family Law Section. This email was generated through a
listserve, and does not represent the views of the San Diego County Bar
Association, or the San Diego County Bar Association’s Family Law
Section. To adjust your list delivery settings and subscription options
for all SDCBA list servers and communities, Click Here.
NOTE: By replying to this message, you will be replying to the
individual sender. Click “Reply to All” to send your message to all
members of the Family Law Section
To send your own message, send email to
sdcbafamilylaw@lists.membercentral.com
To permanently unsubscribe from the Family Law Section listserve, Click
Here.
_.___.__
September 15,2010
San Diego
Dear Senator Boxer:
The pleadings that are screamed aloud by the violated San Diego Families are real, and are of extreme concern. Our San Diego County Judiciary now fits the criteria of a Fascist establishment that operates in conjunction with a specific group of the private industry, who constantly and illegally fund judges’ election campaigns, all to collude and rip off the families and grandparents of their assets while using the suffering children as PAWNS. “Pay for play,” otherwise the financially capable parent cannot be able to see his/her children. The San Diego Court professionals have been unprofessional thugs violating California Rules/CRC of Court for the last 9 years. The CRC were made Mandatory for a reason! As a result parents and their children have been constantly broken down financially, professionally and as a human being stripped off their basic rights.
The California Administrative Office of the Courts/AOC (which employs the California Judicial Council that establishes California Rules of the Court/CRC), has been cleverly represented by Mr. Eric Pulido. He is, in my opinion, specifically “hand-picked” to be as diplomatic as he can, absorb, waste time and frustrate the complainants from the “clear as day” violated families! By doing so, families feel hopeless, go no further and throw in the towel. All in my opinion, at the hands of the top of our state, the AOC that is located in San Francisco. The Public is not allowed any formal communication with these public officials. Their email is held “confidential.” The one thing allowed is 866-865-6400 with only a recording and very limited time to leave a message for a maximum of 30-45 seconds or so.
Repeated Phone calls and pleadings to the AOC have not been returned to many of our citizens for a reason! And when AOC does (with much prompting) The documentation is left up to the interpretation and bias of the AOC listener or complaint taker, Erik Pulido. Nobody knows how and what AOC exactly writes when they take such a phone complaint. They have taken some of our email addresses or contact information and said that they would send us a confirmation of our complaints. So far, AOC has done nothing.
This is exactly what happened in my case, total silence from the AOC. I met with the Senate Judiciary Committee at the State Capital in Sacramento, they expressed that the AOC is the “Fox in the Hen-House.” Is it true?
AOC very cleverly established a masked “Performa” Complaint Process. They refuse to give their email out and they tell you to locate their physical address off the internet, but they will not give it to you over the phone and God only knows why the AOC behaves this way?
The AOC only allow a general fax (never a personal one) and this never confirms whether or not they received anything and how many pages they received to start with? Therefore, the AOC has created a complaint process whereby there is no formal way of documenting anything. The AOC makes sure not to have it formal for a very good reason!
The thievery, lies and deception all in the name of Justice is atop our nose. We are a group of committed high-functioning San Diego parents numbering in the 100s, and on their behalf, CCFC is NOT going to keep quiet with those local and state corrupt officials who are all conspiring “wide eyed,” ripping off family assets, all in the name of justice.
We are ready to fly to the White House. Whom should we ask to arrange a meeting with our President? Can you help us out?
Referenced Google sites are:
Angeimedia Stephen Doyne and San Diego Family COurt Under Fire
https://angiemedia.com/2009/11/18/stephen-doyne-and-san-diego-family-law-courts-under-fire/
Channel 10 blog Custody Evaluator’ credentials questioned in a lawsuit
http://10newsblogs.com/iteam/?p=657
Stephen Doyne City Search Reviews
http://sandiego.citysearch.com/profile/424587/la_jolla_ca/doyne_stephen_e_phd.html#profileTab-reviews
Emad Tadros, M.D.
Diplomate American Board of Psychiatry and Neurrology
Cofounder California Coalition for Families and Children
858-775-2122
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: “Emad Tadros”
To: “benjamin palmer”
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 7:29:12 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Fwd: Saskia.Kim@Sen.ca.gov
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: “Emad Tadros”
To: “Saskia Kim”
Cc: “Equalparenting” , “cole” , “Eileen Lasher” , “Maureen Miller” , “Harold Rose” , “John Van Doorn”
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 7:22:19 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Fwd: Saskia.Kim@Sen.ca.gov
9-15-10
Dear Senator Saskia:
On the behalf of San Diego Parents, we are obligated to respect your office and your person as long as your office serves and does not mislead the public! Any silence on what appears to be Organized-Crime, will be carried forwards and WE will go to the White House and IT IS A MATTER OF TIME.
Please allow me to express to you that I do not appreciate your silence which clearly conveys unprofessional approach, corresponding with my serious concerns, in regards to our County Parents who have constantly been ripped off all her assets by our court Personnel, for many years, conducting illegal activities and flat out violating California Rules of the Court. I do not believe that there should be an iota of any government official who should dream that he/she will ever be “Above the Law.”
Please take a note that we are documenting any and all email communications with your office. And that we so far, have received nothing from your office.
Emad Tadros, M.D.
.—– Forwarded Message —–
From: “Emad Tadros”
To: “Saskia Kim”
Cc: “cole staurt” , psychlaw@hotmail.com , equalparenting@mac.com
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 3:45:07 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Fwd: Saskia.Kim@Sen.ca.gov
8-26-10
Dear Senator Saskia:
Did you receive my May 21 2010 earlier email and its same attachments? If you did, we at California Coaliton for Families and Children/CCFC would appreciate your office’s professional reply.. We have a lot of the ripped off families who lost their shirts because of our San Diego county’s court derelict and unprofessional behavior! You reply is pivotal. Our San Diego County Courts, BAR and judges continue to use Doyne who is the solid CA Rules of the Court CRC/Violator and total fraud as their number one referral source and lecturer to our judges and lawyers. I find this to be quite frustrating and is clearly building more anger in our county and our families…. Are you going to do anything here?
Thank You..
Emad Tadros MD
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: “Emad Tadros”
To: “Saskia Kim”
Cc: “cole”
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 3:13:29 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Fwd: Saskia.Kim@Sen.ca.gov
Dear Senator Kim Saskia:
My name is Emad Tadros, MD, Diplomate American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology. Your email was sent to me from my previous attorney, Mr. Michael Aguirre who used to be the San Diego City Attorney for many years. I accidentally found your email and discovered that I totally forgot to send my requests to you.
Mr. Aguirre was handling my case as a plaintiff before the San Diego Superior Court accusing Court officials of Fraud. Mr. Aguirre and I both mutually gave up on his further involvement as long as my case stays in San Diego county Courts. Mr gruirre concluded that a BROAD San Diego formal investigation of our county courts would reveal fraudulent and illegal utilization of state funding by our County Courts.
We have discovered that San Diego county Superior Court had undertaken unusual and unprofessional steps for the last nine years would mount to serious State and Federal Felony Tax Evasion. Please investigate and I attached My Internal Revenue Service Letters for your convenience.
Emad Tadros, MD
San Diego
TadrosMD@pol.net
office 619-291-4808
cell: 858-775-2122
Attorney Cole Stuart
858-335-2653
“cole” ;
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: “michael aguirre”
To: tadrosmd@pol.net
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 4:13:21 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Saskia.Kim@Sen.ca.gov
Michael J. Aguirre
Aguirre, Morris & Severson
444 West C Street, Suite 210
San Diego, CA 92129
(619) 876-5364
maguirre@amslawyers.com
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: “Emad Tadros”
To: “eric”
Cc: ……………………………………………….
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 4:18:41 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Formal email communication to request a Formal Investigation against San Diego Judiciary filed CCFC
9-22-10
Dear Mr. Pulido:
We sincerely appreciate your professional approach handling our San Diego matter. While we will try our best to put restraints on our frustrations to your office, we ask your administration to realize the fact that the parties are at immediate harm, and who have been and continue to be at a total loss are the helpless and “silenced” Children.
For clarification purposes, the court professionals who for decades put legal “duct tape” on the children mouths to make sure never to allow them to vent their frustration and the truth about who those court professional are, have been those same court professionals mostly Minor’s Council and the Illegal 730 Evaluators, sheltered by our judges fostering such behavior! Some of our honorable county judges are also Family Law Lawyers part-time! This is a gross conflict of interest. One of whom has been a total fraud ripping off parents and putting liens on their homes. Yes, this is done by some of the Family law Honorable, whom 33 (out of total 36) are in the habit of not reporting Election Campaign Funds, when in-fact it is the law to report to the public by filing Form 700 and report it in all relevant court hearings.
Our San Diego CEO Mr. Michael Roddy is well respected and honored to the point he received medals of some judicial and special recognitions. Mr. Roddy was advanced to be one of the most respected executive members of the California Judicial Committee/CJC and this has been the case already for many years. This CJC is the one that is supposed to sincerely listen to the public, act on behalf of the public, and execute CRC as requested, voted and mandated by the Public.
These CJC Executive members owe us back Honesty, Integrity and Professionalism. As a result Mr. Michael Roddy being one of the CJC Executive members, was the guard on the Hen House, the state of California in general and San Diego specific.
Mr. Roddy is getting annual salary ~ $185,000.00 and to my understanding with “incentives”, he gets paid around half a million more or less annually. As for donation to him or his office and who donates to him, this remains to be a secret?
Mr. Roddy has been travelling to San Francisco on a regular basis (average twice a year or so since ~~ 2000). Mr. Roddy noticed, approved and seconded the CRC 5.225 to:
1- Establish FL 325, 326 (both are serious forms and they both are signed under the penalty of perjury from day one for a reason to protect the Public) and 327 as strongly recommended in each CA county. To our Knowledge every CA county has been compliant in using those forms as strongly recommended by our CJC Executive members except San Diego County Superior Court where Mr. Roddy is actually the Court CEO! Why?
2- Every year thereafter these forms are more and more appreciated and detailed for a reason. Yet Mr. Roddy would travel regularly, but somehow as soon as Roddy lands in San Diego, he suffers from “Selective Amnesia” as to what was being strongly recommended under the penalty of perjury in his own San Diego County where he sits as Court Executive Officer.
3- Starting January 2005 these forms, besides being under the penalty of perjury and being more detailed annually, had become MANDATORY and again in every CA County. Yet, Mr. Roddy somehow continues to suffer from this “Selective Amnesia” Process especially when they become Mandatory.
Was there a reason or financial incentive for the churning caused by the illegal 730 evaluations who were constantly ripping off and committing frauds on the naive trusting parents and their helpless children? These Evaluators in San Diego County alone have been charging upwards of $350 per 45-minutes, or an average of $15,000 per Evaluation. This is grossly excessive.
Each and every Evaluator is a multimillionaire, drives a $100,000 Mercedes funded by the stolen and illegally seized college funds, at the court order. To our knowledge many of them take months vacations “around the world” and are cleverly fraudulent that you do not really know where they invest their illegally stolen property at?
Those mostly led by the fraudulent Evaluator (who also illegally take on other roles by chameleon the same parents case, with different professional colors, at the court order, such as Mediator, Supervisor, Therapist, Reunification Therapist, Case Manager, Special Master) are not held accountable for any of their fraudulent billings that continue on a day to day basis. This is a custom to keep ripping off families with fraudulent work hours, fraudulent phone calls and fraudulent contacts. Judges would not move an inch or ever allow the public any chance to formally expose such a fraud! It is a custom not to make any court orders of any inquiry or allow any details ordering such frauds who “IN REFUND” constantly and illegally fund the Judges’ Election Campaign. Why is that?
Most of our county judges have been sitting there for years and they un-contested with, in the first place? I learned that it is unspoken language to never dare to challenge a judge on his/her re-elction. The statistics are very low to challenge any judge and strongly speak against any judge losing re-election! Therefore , why do our San Diego County judges (FL 327 repeated Violators and passive violators of both FL325 and FL326) still allow parties at different attorney/evaluators’ homes held for their re-election Campaign Funds? Is this called Money Laundry or Bribery, committed by our San Diego County Judiciary?
In late 2009 I advised Jaqueline Hernandez MFT who was one the captives in the Riverside Family Court(70 miles away from San Diego). She gave due diligence over Roy Bradbury, Phd credentials claimed expertise, being taught by Doyne’s own CLE courses and his verified status as a 730 Custody Evaluator. Ever since, Dr. Bradbury has been under the Credentials Microscope. When he was due to formally file his credentials and expose them to the court as mandated by the CJC, he shot himself committing suicide in a parking lot in Riverside County on 5-21-10. It was discovered that Bradbury never filled out the mandated CJC forms, same as Doyne, since 2003. Also records confirm that Bradbury actually never fulfilled the legally required CLE hours, to start with. Clearly such unchecked Bogus Credentials taught by Doyne were ripping off and controlling thousands of families. This is totally expected when CRC were violated. This is FRAUD! Fraud by Mr. Michael Roddy, fraud by the Evaluators!
THIS ALSO SPEAKS VOLUMES AS TO THE SERIOUS IMPORTANCE OF CRC AND AS TO WHY CRC WERE ESTABLISHED IN THE FIRST PLACE?
We are not just parents who have been violated. We are speaking on the behalf of many intentionally kept silent suffering children. For that, we have been spending much time and finances uncovering every deceptive and fraudulent Court-Professional who dares to mess up with the Children. Seeking immunity and shelter behind the judges’ robes and granting it to those violators, have been the bread and butter practice, fostering Fraud in the name of Justice in our San Diego County.
As long as I refused to keep quiet and or settle earlier with the Fraud Doyne, I am now ordered to pay the Fraudulent Doyne $80,000 in Attorney fees by the Honorable Bloom who makes sure to hold on to the case personally and never let it take a breath out of our corrupt San Diego county, FOR A REASON. The order to pay the “clear as the sun” Fraudulent Doyne $80,000 is nothing more than “Spread the Fear and Terror” in the hearts and minds of San Diego County parents who dare to speak up and uncover the San Diego Superior and Family Court Chronic Judicial Fraud.
So far, we have been stopping at nothing. We sincerely thank you and your office for taking us seriously. We are sincerely hoping that you would help us to stop at your office and go no further.
Respectfully,
Emad Tadros, MD
Diplomate American Board of Psyhciatry and Neurology
California Coalition for Families and Children/CCFC
858-775-2122
Attached Hereto is my Petition for Writ of Mandate, to Recuse Judge Bloom in Tadros V. Doyne.
Due to email limitations, Petition by the 92 members of the public to Recuse judge Bloom off Tadros V. Doyne filed by the public and filing with the State Supreme Court to recuse judge bloom will be follow on another email.
Thank you again for your patience and professionalism with us.
—– Original Message —–
From: “Eric Pulido”
To: “Emad Tadros”
Cc: “Equalparenting” , “cole” , “Eileen Lasher” , “Maureen Miller”
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 4:46:54 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: RE: Emad Tadros Reply Brief from CCFC
Dr. Tadros,
At this time, today, I am in receipt of four messages with attachments from you with timestamps of 3:27p, 3:31p, 3:39p, and 3:40p.
I am still reviewing all the documentation that both you and Mr. Siegfried provided on Friday. As you know the volume of those submissions is also very high. I am reviewing the information on a first-in-first out basis.
At the suggestion of Mr. Siegfried, I am carefully reviewing the documents. In addition to a full workload before your group’s complaints and the high volume of documents submitted so far by members of your group, it will take me some time to get through the information submitted so far. This office is not staffed to handle this volume so I respectfully request your patience and consideration.
You and your colleagues will receive acknowledgement letters soon. You and others in your group have stated your individual and collective frustration. Considering this, I implore you and others not to misinterpret the language in the letter as my office ignoring your complaints. Due to the sensitive nature of any complaint process not much information is provided.
The information submitted thus far will be reviewed and if needed further contact will be made. You are still welcome to submit more information; I do want you and your colleagues to be aware it is taking time to get through the information.
Eric Pulido
Supervising Internal Auditor
Internal Audit Services
Judicial Council of California – Administrative Office of the Courts
455 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102-3688
415-865-8030, Fax 415-865-4331, eric.pulido@jud.ca.gov
http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov
“Serving the courts for the benefit of all Californians”
—–Original Message—–.
From: Emad Tadros [mailto:tadrosmd@pol.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 3:40 PM
To: Pulido, Eric
Cc: Equalparenting; cole; Eileen Lasher; Maureen Miller
Subject: Fwd: Emad Tadros Reply Brief from CCFC
9-21-10
Dear Mr. Pulido:
I appreciate you looking into this serious Public matter. Please take a note of this PUBLIC document (Reply Brief to change Venu filed for 6-11 hearing that never took place) as a part of my formal complaint against what appears to clearly corrupt and unprofessional San Diego Superior Court. This document among many serious concerns outlines the flat outright violation of CRC since 2001 and that only 3 out of 26 judges reported election campaign funds in San Diego County.
Please let me know that if you do not consider this as a formal document without my signature. I will be glad to sign the last page and send it to you.
We at California Coalition for Families and Children/CCFC appreciate your candor and professionalism approaching this serious matter. Please maintain this email for your records.
Signed
Emad Tadros, MD
Cofounder California Coalition for Families and Children
CC: Some Members of CCFC.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The information transmitted in t
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The information transmitted in this e-mail message is intended to be confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you are in possession of privileged information, also, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution or copy of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, immediately notify us via return e-mail at the address above, & discard, remove, delete, & destroy any trace of it.
his e-mail message is intended to be confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you are in possession of privileged information, also, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution or copy of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, immediately notify us via return e-mail at the address above, & discard, remove, delete, & destroy any trace of it.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The information transmitted in t
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The information transmitted in this e-mail message is intended to be confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you are in possession of privileged information, also, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution or copy of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, immediately notify us via return e-mail at the address above, & discard, remove, delete, & destroy any trace of it.
his e-mail message is intended to be confidential and for the use of only the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you are in possession of privileged information, also, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution or copy of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, immediately notify us via return e-mail at the address above, & discard, remove, delete, & destroy any trace of it.
Hey Bob Lesh, Michael Roddy, Lorna Alksne, Stephen Doyne, and all the other cast of unprofessionals with no heart and soul, I got a special message for you that you should pay attention to. Listen carefully, especially at about minute 18:30:
http://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_on_vulnerability.html
Below is the ongoing reasearch findings being conducted while collecting stories from hundreds of many of San Diego Parents who are victimized by the so-called “Family Court Dismantlers”:
As long as:
A. 50/50 custody “BY DEFAULT” does NOT exist along with child support,
B. child support is being based upon parents’ income and not necessarily the child’s actual needs, the money churning machine ripping off families, run by the Court Family Dismantlers, will only have an incentive to keep pushing parents into the ring, fiercely fighting each other longer and harder.
HOW?
What happens when it is NOT 50/50 physical Custody:
1- One scenario, where a lower percentage parent (usually the one who is the cash cow) let us say 30% or so, will ALWAYS be anxiously prompted by his/her attorney to only keep paying the Family Dismantlers for “Hire” to their COURT ORDERED SERVICES to see his/her kids, hoping for higher percentage over time.
Once 5% higher Physical custody, i.e. as little as 35% is achieved, the bribing parent (to the dismantlers), obviously will start paying less child support to the other parent! Any such increase (from 5-50%) is highly dependent upon money paid (bribed by that parent) and money still visible to the Family Court Dismantlers to grab. The Dismantlers’ report will be fabricated and filed with the court, accordingly.
Imagine such a rich parent paying $50,000. Would that parent get a 50% increase in Physical Custody?
Does anyone know if there is a $$$ Service Menu (fees/bribes) to adjust the physical custody?
Would that take us to square one as to why there is never 50/50 custody by default, except for poor parents, where this becomes an almost automatic procedure?
2- The parent who has a higher custody of 70% is warned by his/her attorney (who have been keeping quiet since 2001, aiding and abetting CA Court Rule Violations and allowing the dismantlers to commit perjury in day-light). They subtly keep that parent in fear that he/she will have to pay them more fees to keep the support coming at 70% and not any less$$$. That parent also senses the subtle threat coming from the dismantlers for likely less custody, so they only keep paying both the attorney and the dismantlers to keep custody at 70% (because there is no such 50/50 by default). This way, the kids’ college funds only continue to churn to the Dismantlers and Attorneys on both sides.
3- As a result of such a firm “hollywood-stance” orchestrated by the Dismnatlers and attorneys in action on both sides, and successfully tearing apart both parents, the next move is to start accusations, further breaking down both parents!
Surely and gradually, both parents while losing their shirts to the Dismantlers and Attorneys, will only find themselves fighting each other for years, to be able to see their kids!
What a Racket?
Who else gets indirect financial support for this behavior?
Why do the judges not legally report election campaign funds?
The end result is Mom and Dad are both fighting real good utilizing both attorneys, with the Attorneys giving you the intelligent impression that they are on your side and you are a winner — pay this to get this much percentage higher, pay that to get that, etc. When in fact the Dismantlers including Attorneys, Evaluators, Therapists, and Mediators are ONLY cashing out the kids’ college funds with nothing left for the kids.
Wake up parents………
Do you now understand why on 4-15-10, San Diego’s outspoken parents were called “Litigants Behaving Badly” at an arrogant seminar hosted by the SDCBA where they falsely propped up and gave standing ovation to the “cat credentialed” Stephen Doyne, et al.?
Parents, please listen to other parents in the know, and do not believe one iota of what you are being told by your attorneys who keep promoting and supporting the Dismantlers.
One of the Thousands of Litigants Behaving Badly.
District Attorney County of San Diego has a section called Family Protection Division – one would think that this Division would have an interest in San Diego Family Law Court being victimized by a group of attorneys running a racketeering business. This racketeering crime ring was funded by tax dollars and continues to be funded by tax dollars. The tax payers are providing the initial down payment for their illegal activities. In today’s current financial climate more than ever a criminal investigation should be conducted immediately and the perpetrators of this scam with tax payer money should be arrested and with their profits should be made to pay not only the litigants back but the tax payers. It is also clear these crimes are being committed under the color of authority – making these crimes much more serious as well as placing these crimes under the jurisdiction of the US Attorney’s Office.
The one Million Dollar lawsuit threat is alive if we do not shut down this thepubliccourt.com site. Please USmail the Amicus signature page only or attach it to my email. This Amicus has no conection or liablities to the lawsuit that we filed agiasnt the ACFE or ACFEI on 1-10-11.
Let the the Frauds and their Racket read your professional opinion with no swearing please. We are to be respectful at all times and regardless. Even though no one desires to respect such a racket, however we are only to “Lead By Example.” It is who we are being real professionals and we do not want to be a fake symbol of who they are.
Every single public support is needed. Thank you.
TadrosMD@pol.net
I love thepubliccourt.com! Here I always find a lot of helpful information for myself. Thanks you for your work.
Best regards
This is my Clarification to the Nationwide phone inquiries in regards to the “Authentic-Psychology-Specialty Board.” Please note that we only mention the facts and not opinions.
The Facts Are:
The American Academy of Forensic Psychology/AAFP is the one and only legitimate, well respected Forensic Psychology Board. It is the Forensic sub-specialty branch of the APA, the American Board of Professional Psychology or ABPP. There are a total of 11 sub-specialty ABPP Boards. Each one of them is a well respected psychology sub-specialty board recognized by the APA/American Psychological Association as opposed to the counterfeit APA/American Psychotherapy Association that is owned by Robert O’Block.
Why did O’Block recreate the same “APA-sounding” name?
Mr. O’Block created a counterfeit APA, (using the same APA acronym) as the real APA as if to convey his entire sham organization as the real APA, and justifying it by calling it the American Psychotherapy Association?
It is layman’s language to state the APA or AMA or FDA etc. and one rarely states the full three words.
Would that fit the definition of Fraud according to the FTC? Watch out for sound-alikes!
The naïve public is victimized and deceived by such counterfeit APA wall plaques that appear from a distance to be the real thing (read with the APA in big letters), but the actual words underneath and their meaning need a magnifying lens to tell the difference.
It is obviously clever that Mr. O’Block created a name that sounds exactly the same as the real APA. O’Block’s “sleight-of-hand” is cleverly crafted counterfeiting of the APA’s name. If you happen to inquire from his phony certificate purchasers as to whether or not their certificate was authorized by the APA, the answer would be “Yes,” thus confusing and defrauding the naïve public.
Please review the Real Diplomate Directory dated 9-26-06 above, where it says “0 Dilpomate” under the American Academy of Forensic Psychology/AAFP for Stephen Doyne.
DIPLOMATE DIRECTORY SAYS:
“0 DIPLOMATE” WHEN SEARCHING FOR STEPHEN DOYNE.”
TadrosMD@pol.net
The Voir Dire of Forensic Experts: Issues of qualification and training
[Subtitle: “Sheepskins for sale: Shortcut to Slaughter?]
Presented at
American Psychological Association
Boston, MA. 8/22/99
Stephen L. Golding, Ph.D.
Professor
Department of Psychology
Adjunct Professor
College of Law and Department of Psychiatry
judicialcouncilwatcher says:
January 30, 2011 at 7:18 pm (UTC 0)
Here is our bio’s on your two Internal Audits people at the AOC:
John “The Cleaner” Judnick, the senior manager of the AOC internal audits division serves as the ironically named ”confidential fraud waste and abuse coordinator” for California’s judicial branch of government. His title as the ironically named “confidential fraud, waste and abuse coordinator” accurately represents what his role is in coordinating fraud, waste and abuse. He operates an 800 number where dumb-ass judicial branch employees who genuinely believe they are doing the right thing reporting fraud, waste and abuse can call and file a report. Mr. Judnick’s role is not to do anything about any fraud, waste, abuse or public corruption. His role is to ferret out the whistleblower, ferret out the facts, ferret out the evidence and then make it all disappear. Mr. John Judnick is a central figure in the taxpayer funded racketeering enterprise that is the AOC.
Eric “The Cleaner’s Boy” Pulido is the supervising analyst in the internal audits divison and the number two person in charge. His job is to work with John “The Cleaner” Judnick supervising lower level auditors but also to work together to ensure the judicial branch or trial courts remain faultless.
By the way, judicialcouncilwatcher is placing the finishing touches on marincourtwatcher and sandiegocourtwatcher. For the proper definiton of what a cleaner is, use urbandictionary.com
3. Cleaner
Usually called upon to clean up a mess another mobster has made. For instance: a gangster robs a store one night and comes back to base with a bullet in his stomach. A cleaner is quickly called-up and will be sent in to clear any sight of evidence, even if this means killing the store-keeper.
Elite cleaners are rarely found in the mobs/mafias/gangs etc., but instead are part of a government agency. Considering the drastic consequenced often involved with these agencies actions, elite cleaners are required. You never hear of them, and you rarely hear of what they have cleaned up. All that’s left is the event: something happened, but the cleaner will make sure there are no trails left behind. Such cleaning jobs can be on a global scale, such as clearing a trail of money used to get the job done.
The Riverside Superior Court has the same problems, and they are not using the FL 327form. I’ve pasted my letter to the judicial council. The court attorney is refusing to release the fl 325 forms to a the party who has a right to know what the education, training and licensing of an evaluator was, and the court is refusing to issue subpoenas requesting that information.
Judicial Council of California
Administrative Office of the Courts
455 Golden Gate Avenue
San Francisco CA 94102
2/5/2011
Re: Evaluation Appointment forms utilized by the Riverside Superior Court.
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am lodging a complaint and requesting an investigation into the forms utilized by the Riverside Superior Court, (Indio Division), to appoint evaluators that substantially violate litigants rights to procedural and substantive due process and demonstrate the oppressive forum of the court against prose
litigants.
The Court uses its own forms to appoint evaluators under FC 3111 (exhibit 1). The form does not specify court evaluation services or family court services, it specifies one particular evaluator. The form has an attachment listed (page 2, item 6), which outlines to litigants that the report will be adopted without foundation and over hearsay objection.
I am requesting the date and request by the Riverside Superior Court to the Judicial Council to supplement the mandatory FL 327 form (enclosed) which must be used by a Court. The term supplement suggest that a local form is used in addition to the mandatory FL 327 form not as a replacement to a form that MUST be used.
CA rules of Court 5.225 (k) specifies the responsibility of each court.
k) Responsibility of the courts
Each court:
(1) Must develop local court rules that:
(A) Provide for acceptance of and response to complaints about an evaluator’s performance; and
(B) Establish a process for informing the public about how to find qualified evaluators in that jurisdiction;
(2) Must use an Order Appointing Child Custody Evaluator (form FL-327) to appoint a private child custody evaluator or a court-connected evaluation service. Form FL-327 may be supplemented with local court forms;
(3) Must provide the Judicial Council with a copy of any local court forms used to implement this rule;
(4) As feasible and appropriate, may confer with education and training providers to develop and deliver curricula of comparable quality and relevance to child custody evaluations for both court connected and private child custody evaluators; and
(5) Must use form Declaration of Court-Connected Child Custody Evaluator Regarding Qualifications (form FL-325) to certify that court-connected evaluators have met all the qualifications for court-connected evaluators under this rule for a given year. Form FL-325 may be supplemented with local court rules or forms.
CA evidence code section 1200 a and b, stipulates that hearsay is not admissible over objection. The statement by the Court that “written evidence shall be received into evidence without foundation and over hearsay objection”, directly violates the fundamental due process rights under the 14th Amendment
guaranteed to any litigant in the United States justice system and is severely discriminatory to pro-se litigants who may not be aware of their rights under the CA evidence code and that evidence can lack foundation and be incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial.
Sincerely,
Elena Gross
I recently underwent an appeal to an original 730 eval which I won in Fresno Co. I am a professional parent and have had primary custody of our six kids for the last 18 months. Opposing counsel chose a Dr. to conduct the appeal. I have yet to read the report as my attorney has deemed to not release it to me, but the recommendation was to split up our kids. The youngest were to be place with their mother despite a trail of paperwork and documentation that you could land a plane on that suggested strongly the mother was unfit. He told me I would have to continue to fight for my kids and that my expectations for maternal cooperation was not reasonable. I can’t believe this guy is allowed to operate with the amount of action and controversy he has been in.