False Arrest in Family Law

return to menu

I am flabergasted - yes flabergasted by the softly softly approach by The Rodent in saying if parliament did not change "the" to "a" in the "Terror War Law" then suspected towelheads could blow up Lucas Heights because there was no head of power to arrest them. Every bloke [dead or alive] who has been terrorised by blood sucking lawyers in family law knows that arrest or threats thereof [without any head of power] are par for the course in the rich tapestry of his family law experience.

In case you are blissfully unaware of these devices I will detail just two cases, including my own case 10 years ago, but starting with a recent case in the FMS

2005 case

The case of Mr W was a standard track lawyer trust fund embezzlement as described in BEWARE The device is to capitalise child support as far into the future as possible, get the spoils into a lawyer trust fund and charge the lot as fees for doing so and finally make liberal use of plain brown paper envelopes. This device has become flavour of the month in the FMS to the extent that Professor Parkinson has been convinced by his lawyer buddies to "codify" it in his new dream for the future Report on CSA. By codify I am referring to s 128 as per Dwyer & McGuire which says

In such a case, the liable parent would effectively be paying twice (or, more accurately, one and three-quarter times) and the custodian entitled to child support would be effectively both "having his or her cake and eating it, too", which could hardly be regarded just and equitable as between them.

But in Mr W case Judge & Co was not going to let some stupid statute get in the way of the brown paper spoils. The orders had been easy as Mr W had used blood sucking lawyers to defend [not] him. I entered the picture with a learned winning submission to the full court of the FCA [sitting as a single judge, Kay J] but the damage had been done at the trial and the appeal only reduced the spoils by $10,000, meaning still some $80,000 up for grabs.

Our story starts with the same Judge [Walters FM, herein Walter] & Co [Ms Tulloch of counsel, herein the Horse] at the Enforcement stage, but they were so keen to execute their dash for the cash before Xmas they forgot to ORDER a SOURCE for the funds, and as such Mr W had totally legally invested his money in real estate in NZ. So Walter & Horse decided to use the arrest trick [as if they were Saddam Hussein] to soften up Mr W. Then for reasons that even baffled Kay J they sought help from the FCA. So we are back in the FCA but with Kay J as a trial judge this time and apparently he has read the transcript of the arrest and is totally aghast. But first I will explain the Act/Rules [to explain WHY he was aghast].

S 123 of the FLAct allows the judges to Make Rules [which are not inconsistent with the Act] and the Rules for financial enforcement say the ONLY arrest situation would be to bring a recalcitrant person TO court. Mr W had certainly kept to all the court dates but Kay J decides to try to save the collective arses of Judge & Co [especially Walter's] by offering a floating branch to the Horse:

HIS HONOUR: Contravention application because 67,500 not paid. Then on 22 December - - -

MS TULLOCH: The contravention is issued as a consequence of the failure - - -

HIS HONOUR: He's arrested.

MS TULLOCH: He's arrested.

HIS HONOUR: He didn't show up on the contravention application; that was foolish.

MS TULLOCH: Questions are asked of him as to his - - -

HIS HONOUR: He's released from custody that night 5.30 pm.

MS TULLOCH: No, your Honour.

HIS HONOUR: I've got an order here: The husband be released from custody with effect from 5.30 pm today.

MS TULLOCH: Sorry, yes, he was arrested and he was sent to the cells and after spending a few hours in the cells after lunch he decided he would answer questions as to his financial situation. It was then that he revealed that he'd sent the money to - the 400 or so thousand dollars to New Zealand and that he'd purchased properties in Invercagill, because he declined to answer the question as to where the moneys had gone prior to lunch. After having spent some time in the cells he did answer those questions and he was asked questions about his financial position.

So the Horse has such a smell of brown paper in her nostrils that she not only brushes aside the branch offered by Kay J but she spills the beans on the totally illegal acts performed by Walter. I won't burden this article with the actual transcript of Walter but clearly that is what he did, ie use all sorts of illegal softening up tactics as if he were in Abu Ghraib to try to obtain information that was otherwise protected by the Privacy Act. There were more illegal atrocities like taking Mr W's passport [so we had to file an injunction/contempt applic to get it back] but I move on to my own case, which can be distinguished from Mr W case as the arrest being used for purposes of power mongering rather than monetary inducement.

1995 case

In July 1995 my ex wife [herein Buttercup] relocated from Sydney to Darwin with our 3 kids, and in September I was working my butt off to afford to have a good holiday with the kids at Xmas [as ordered by consent], but a knock on the door had a large Mr Plod handing me a piece of paper threatening

"you will be arrested by all the police of the NSW Police Force, all the Police of the Federal Police and the Marshal of the Family Court"

This really floored me as I had not murdered anyone, so next time I wrote to my kids I mentioned they would have to visit me in Long Bay. Well my kids have amazing sense of humour of the Python type so they would have enjoyed the situation but of course the letter was intercepted and Dr Meredith of Court Counselling was given the job of cementing the severance of me and my kids. Of course the kids never came for contact and of course the lousy Family Court allowed Buttercup off Scott free [we all know how the system works].

Dr Meredith refused to come to court for my cross examination of his Family Report diatribe and Johnson JR had a bit of a giggle of my deposed description of this yellow coward as "on Sabbatical disguised as a Bedouin sheep hearder in Upper Mongolia". Now if you are on broadband up there buddy and you tune in to this learned article, please be advised that a strange quirk of fate has provided me with other people you know to testify and therefore be assured that if you thought it was safe after 10 years to return to Oz then think again Motherfucker as your arse is on the line, legally that is.

So what was behind this arrest tactic? - not Buttercup per se as she was too busy spending money she got from me in her DIP [Divorce Investment Portfolio]. It was in fact the lawyers she used for that DIP, Sydney boutique feminist lawyers "Cock & Hole". That was the term Margaret Hole used but she was in the shadow of the more charismatic Daphne Kok up to that point and it was Daphne [whose calling card said "eats husbands and their lawyers for breakfast"] who did our DIP. But Daphne had decided to become a magistrate so Hole took over our account.

As a Greer feminist [and just as ugly] Hole was looking for a power play to get herself recognised as a President of the NSW Law Society, but she was competing with the nastiest lawyer of all John "ANZAC" Marsden ANZAC who not only mocked our brave ANZACs by calling himself [as a raging faggot] "ANZAC" but later on accepting a commission to defend Saddam Hussein as the ultimate blood sucking lawyer [but condoned by our Rodent??!!??]. History says Marsden got the spot in 1997 but Hole made it in 1998. So the job she did on my kids and I was on the super nasty side [as judged by her colleagues] and while I won't go into her other atrocities I'll just say that the arrest attempt was the catalyst for the rest.

The illegal nature was this time spotted and avoided by the new judge Stephen O'Ryan QC [SO'R at Butterworths] and he recognised there was no such order as the Summons said I had contravened so he simply asked, with an Eric Cartman grin below very pink cheeks, Ms Hole at the bar table "is that what you intended Ms Hole". Well she was not under oath so could lie her arse off anyway but she did the requisite Lawrence of Amnesia and said "I don't think so".

It seems my friend the CJ [at the time] was a bit perplexed that the Order 33 Enforcement Summons template in the FLRules was termed like the Charge of the Light Brigade with this whole possie of forces on horseback descending upon a single alleged dead beat dad and castrating him on the spot, and that feminazis like Hole were able to use it as a weapon of domestic [once removed] violence. Soon after he therefore changed the words to:

2. Further, subrule 3 (7) of Order 33 of the Family Law Rules provides that, where a person fails to attend before a court as required by a summons, the court may issue a warrant directing that the person be taken into custody and brought before the court.

So all in all, with some minor modifications to purpose and tactics, arbitrary arrest is and has always been alive and well in the "Family Courts", and you don't even have to be an electrician!

return to menu