Karin Wolf’s ADA complaint against the State of New Jersey for PAS fallacy and sex-based discrimination has passed judicial review and the court has issued the summons to be served by U.S. Marshal upon the defendants.
Karin Wolf’s ADA complaint against the State of New Jersey for PAS fallacy and sex-based discrimination has passed judicial review and the court has issued the summons to be served by U.S. Marshal upon the defendants.
She’s crazy. That bitch is whacked. She’s just being hysterical. She’s too emotional. She’s not emotional enough; she must be lying. She’s a malicious c–t. She’s a maneating succubus. She’s alienating me from the kids. I’m gonna screw that bitch in court.
Karin Wolf, Executive Director of the MCLU, recently filed a new federal ADA lawsuit against the State of New Jersey for using the misogynistic and discredited theory of “PAS” to discriminate against her and her two children, and all women and children similarly situated, in order for the State to extract federal funding via the controversial Responsible Fatherhood initiative.
When women are accused of “PAS” or otherwise being treated as if they have some phantom mental illness in family court, they are being discriminated against under the regarded as prong of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA/ADAAA) and sex-based stereotypical assumptions of “PAS.” This puts them on unequal footing – they do not have a meaningful opportunity to be heard; they do not have full and equal access to the courts. This is a violation of the ADA. States and state agencies such as DCF, CPS, family courts and their judges – are all public entities within the meaning of Title II of the ADA. When they violate the ADA and are receiving federal funding, they can be stripped of that funding under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and made to pay compensatory damages. Under Title II and Title III of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, states, judges, attorneys, and custody evaluators do not have immunity; they’ve waived it as a condition of receiving federal financial assistance.
This is not saying any woman in family court has a mental illness. It’s saying that if the family court is going to treat a woman like she’s got one, they’ve likely opened up a Pandora’s box of broken federal regulations for which they are now liable.
“PAS” is junk science, and using it in family court proceedings as if it were a real mental impairment, violates the ADA. A court can’t take away someone’s kid(s) based on perceived notions of a mental illness, and assumptions and stereotypes of that perceived disability (i.e. Richard Gardner’s misogynistic stereotype that women are the foremost culprits – a convenient excuse for men raping their kids and vehicle for Jedi mindf–king women and children).
“Crazy is the new ‘c’ word.” – interview with Karin Huffer, Therapists: When your traumatized client must face an abuser in court, the federal ADA law can help.
Women being accused of parental alienation (“PAS” and “PAD”), Bipolar Disorder, Malicious Mother Syndrome, being “emotional” (code for Hysteria), or, wait for it, an “unknown mental illness” (code for “PAS” and “PAD”) – all are ADA violations.
Yet, Gardner’s disciples, many of whom are occult, I meant cult, members of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC), keep zealously pushing “PAS” and pitting the Responsible Fatherhood initiative against the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) to generate a cyclical “need” for federal funding and profit.
Because Richard Gardner’s “PAS” theory originated in Bergen County, NJ, all women in all 50 states and U.S. territories might have a claim against the State of New Jersey for allowing him to keep his license and spread discrimination by testifying in over 400 child custody cases. Those claims may even extend to adjudication in the International Court as we see women in countries such as Australia and Canada facing the same discrimination. Incidentally, the AFCC has international chapters in those two countries.
Gardner zealots, such as a one Dr. Judith Brown Greif, has dispensed misogynistic training all over the U.S. Licensed in NJ and NY, and also doing business in PA, MA, DE, CT, VA, and MN, chances are Dr. Greif has come to your area at some point, training your local family court judges, CPS social workers, GAL’s, etc. to discriminate against women. Those who know, would tell you she’s New Jersey’s dirty little secret.
So, here are some insights and Karin Wolf’s recent federal filing further below. And by the way, if a flurry of ADA complaints by women started flooding the USDOJ and federal courts, hmmm….did I mention that the U.S. Attorney General has a duty to investigate pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 12133 and 12188 ???
“Persons with disabilities may not be treated on the basis of generalizations or stereotypes. For example, prohibited treatment would include the removal of a child from a parent with a disability based on…stereotypical belief.” See 28 C.F.R. § 35.130 (b)(3) and (h)
See ADA Technical Assistance Manual published by the U.S. Dept. of Justice (DOJ) and U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS):
Protecting the Rights of Parents and Prospective Parents with Disabilities: Technical Assistance for State and Local Child Welfare Agencies and Courts under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
In addition to filing a federal lawsuit, complaints can be filed with both the USDOJ and HHS:
Karin P. Huffer, M.S., M.F.T., PhD, is an American marriage and family therapist, who is known for identifying a potential consequence of legal abuse, the condition known as Legal Abuse Syndrome (LAS), a form of post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) which can be caused by ethical violation, betrayal, abuse of power, lack of accountability, or fraud within the legal system. – Wikipedia
Susan Skipp is a Director at MCLU, has a Masters in Education (MEd), and is a certified Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) Advocate and Forensic Disability Specialist.
Federal Court issues summons in Wolf v. New Jersey
Concrete evidence of procedural fraud by Peter Van Aulen and Edward Crane. This alone is enough to overturn the entire case and void all orders from Feb 1, 2011 to present. This is what fraud upon the court looks like:
Property Settlement Agreement, Removal Clause – Article II, #6, incorporated into the Final Judgment of Divorce, dated May 22, 2007
Peter Van Aulen’s Certification of Attorney’s Fees, dated February 1, 2011
BERGEN COUNTY | HUDSON COUNTY | NEW JERSEY
1. Foreclosed or nearing Foreclosure on your home?
2. Is your loan at Select Portfolio Servicing (SPS) or held by Bank of New York Mellon?
If you answered “yes” to either of these questions, I want to hear from you (I am not an attorney or represent any legal or court entity)
Has your home been or is in the process of being foreclosed? Did you hire an attorney to take your case to court, a loan that was sold to you anywhere between 2002-2007 as a Mortgage Pass-Through Certificate, but was your case dismissed before you attorney could argue a case of fraud in court?
“NOTICE OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO STRIKE CONTESTING ANSWER, ENTER DEFAULT AND TRANSFER CASE TO THE OFFICE OF FORECLOSURE”
Did you apply a re-modification home loan through Making Home Affordable (HAMP) but were DENIED by the bank?
Have you been unsuccessful in pursuing legal or loan options to keep your home?
Please contact me, Gi at UncontestedForeclosures@gmail.com with the following information:
Subject line: YOUR NAME, NAME OF BANK holding your loan, and STATE where property is located
Body of text:
Overall summary of your experience
If you retained an attorney, please provide name of firm and if you are still retaining them and the name of the Judge who dismissed your case
Name of bank
If you have applied for HAMP, but been denied
Contact information and best times to reach you
A custody battle is a form of domestic violence. It’s harassment….period.
In many states, a rapist can sue the victim for custody or parenting time and win, forcing the victim and child to a lifetime of trauma.
Perpetrators of domestic violence often take revenge on their former partners for leaving the relationship and use custody battles to seek revenge and maintain control over their victims. (Stark, Coercive Control; Bancroft, Why Does He Do That? and The Batterer As Parent)
After leaving, a domestic violence victim is most at risk for the two years immediately following the end of the relationship, however a campaign of harassment can last for years, culminating in an abusive custody battle.
Even though there may be a property settlement agreement or consent order defining child custody, courts can and do eradicate the bargained-for terms of these agreements, which abrogates contract law. A family court judge will think nothing of violating a mother’s due process rights – disallowing evidence and witnesses, dismissing attorneys directly before trial, and completely ignoring the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) and the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), inter alia. Motives are often political, involving bribery, racketeering, human trafficking, child prostitution, and child pornography, the latter of which 60% comes from the United States. Child Protective Services (CPS) is part of this racket, as Nancy Schaefer would have been able to tell you, were she not murdered for exposing them.
Bribery is not just the classic slipping of money under the table – it can be anything from business deals, to offering a retiring judge a post-retirement job, to paying off a judge’s real estate properties.
Contrary to de jure law and public policy, there is a de facto policy of discrimination against women and children, especially domestic violence and child abuse/neglect victims, in the family courts. Family courts often engage in domestic violence by proxy, flying in the face of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and the Model Code on Domestic and Family Violence (National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, 1994) .
The segregation of mothers and their children has been achieved via Richard Gardner’s highly-controversial, pseudoscientific theory Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), which has been rejected repeatedly by the American Psychological Association (APA); and fails Daubert and Frye standards.
Gardner was a misogynist who claimed that when the child(ren) do not want to spend time with the father, it is because the mother is alienating him from the child(ren). This is bogus, a bill of attainder against women. It is natural for a child to prefer the mother, it is simply nature. Look at everything from puppies and kittens to cubs and ducklings.
Moreover, if a child is being abused, that child would naturally not want to be around their abuser. This is simple human nature and a basic human right. It is common sense.
Legitimate scientific studies such as the ACE Study by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the Saunders Report commissioned by the United States Department of Justice (USDOJ) have proved that removing a child from the mother and primary attachment figure is a health risk and that the problem is most often a male perpetrator of domestic violence.
The term “high conflict’ is a misnomer and redirect for what is really domestic violence (Stark). The first thing a court will do is gaslight a domestic violence victim by claiming no domestic violence exists. Father’s rights groups, a.k.a. men’s rights groups, love this concept, as it is a nexus sprung from Parental Alienation Syndrome, because it is way to blame the victim and seek custody to maintain control and dodge paying child support, as well as subjugate women in the larger scope of things.
What is happening in actuality is not Parental Alienation Syndrome targeted at the father, but Tangential Spouse Abuse (Stark and Lischick) and Legal Abuse Syndrome (Huffer) targeted at the mother. The objective is clear.
Father’s rights groups will often pose as families rights groups, but this is simply a ruse. Rest assured, these groups are more intent upon idolizing football players and rap artists for “keeping her in line” and employing Screw the Bitch tactics than anything else.
The two most common accusations a mother will face in a custody battle are 1) Parental Alienation or PAS claims in order to subvert domestic violence, child abuse and neglect, and 2) False accusations that the woman is mentally ill, in order to destroy her credibility.
Both fall under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), not because the mother is actually mentally ill, but rather because giving the impression that someone is mentally ill garners protection for that person under the ADA. Under Title II of the ADA, judges are not immune from suit. This is important because family court racketeers often hide behind the cloak of judicial immunity.
Richard Gardner is the champion of the pedophile. He testified in over 400 custody cases. Gardner (1991, p. 118) suggests that Western society’s is “excessively moralistic and punitive” toward pedophiles. Gardner maintains that “the Draconian punishments meted out to pedophiles go far beyond what I consider to be the gravity of the crime.” The current prohibition of sex between adults and children is an “overreaction” which Gardner traces to the Jews.
Organizations such as the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) spread Gardner’s theory like wildfire, training judges, custody evaluators and social workers to disbelieve mothers and children when they report abuse, and worse – separate them as punishment. And what better way to enable pedophilia and other human rights violations than remove the mother as the child’s most natural and fervent protector?
One need only look at a mama bear with her cubs as a prime example of the nature of mothers (and what happens when you mess with them).
PAS opened up a Pandora’s box of corruption – What better way to torture a mother than take away her child? To run a Kids for Cash racket? To distract and control women?
Men’s rights groups are intent upon resurrecting Lord Hale’s Law and the Rule of Thumb, which resonates with the antiquated notion of women and children as chattel.
Mothers are persecuted and marginalized without a legitimate basis, trying to protect their children. Victims may flee to another state with their child(ren) for protection, then face kidnapping charges of whom she bore and nurtured. In actuality, what the mother is doing is self-defense, as self defense includes the defense of others. Public policy on domestic violence states that the mother should not face repercussion, however despite this being the 21st century, mothers are vilified by the court for running off with “his property.” Family court proceedings, though considered civil, are in actuality, quasi-criminal where the mother is selectively prosecuted. This also speaks to Miranda rights.
Child Support and Financial Gaslighting
It is a truth universal, that men do not want to pay child support. It is not uncommon for mother and child(ren) to be denied proper child support in order to bring about bankruptcy of the mother, thus placing them in an untenable financial predicament, then claim she is financially unstable, and give custody to the monied spouse or partner.
It is not uncommon for the judge and father’s attorney to collude in hiding financial information or tweak a financial picture to benefit the male, even when tax returns clearly show otherwise. This is financial gaslighting and is absolutely illegal. In some cases, judges go so far as to order the mother or wife to unwittingly commit insurance fraud by ordering her to amend tax returns and lie to health and car insurance companies, placing her in an untenable predicament.
There are father’s rights organizations, backed by Fatherhood.gov, where men can “donate” items such as cars and boats bought with marital funds, which sets up the bribe. These financial manipulation networks help men evade taxes, circumvent paying money to a soon-to-be ex, and predetermine the outcome of the case.
Wall Streeters are most apt to engage in this racket, employing methodologies concurrent with the 1991 book Screw the Bitch: Divorce Tactics for Men by Dick Hart and Sun Tzu’s The Art of War as popularized by Gordon Gecko’s “Greed is good” phraseology in the 1987 film Wall Street.
This idolization mixed with the greed of the family court system, has resulted in the degradation of human decency and phenomenal financial losses of those affected by Ponzi schemes, foreclosure fraud, and family court fraud and racketeering in violation of the RICO Act of 1972.
Corruption and Social Engineering are nothing new
Don’t assume everyone knows the truth or rather, wants to know it. One of the most common misconceptions is that courts don’t take children away from the mother unless she’s unfit. This is an absolute myth. The reason for this is that the family court crisis is largely absent from the media. Why? Because every media outlet has a legal department acting on behalf of the legal community, not the public interest, advising reporters not to cover family court corruption, and instilling the fear of being sued, despite First Amendment protection of the freedom of the press.
Hitler wrote, “The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.” – Mein Kampf
Juvenal wrote, “Who will guard the guards themselves?” – Satires (Satire VI, lines 347–8)
Corruption and moral turpitude are running rampant in the family courts. The interests of children should be of paramount importance, but have given way to an abomination of a cottage industry exploiting children for profit and bankrupting the American public. You may wonder how this affects you if you don’t have children, however as you will see, it affects all of us because our civil and constitutional rights as a whole are being destroyed. It is happening in family courts across America, the implications of which are pivotal to the future of this country.
Karin Wolf files Affidavit of Prejudice in U.S. District of New Jersey, and cites U.S. Attorney Paul Fishman and the Monmouth, Bergen, and Hunterdon County Prosecutors for selective prosecution, in ignoring the criminal charges and Grand Jury demands of some 30 parents via Letters of Presentment, and for the failure to prosecute the many crimes of Gov. Chris Christie, NJ Attorney Generals (past and present), Kim Guadagno, and New Jersey judges exposed in the Ashley Madison scandal.
Children kidnapped by the State of New Jersey and given to an abuser. Think it can’t happen to you?
Mother had originally obtained a fault-based divorce for domestic violence under N.J.S.A. 2A:34-2(c) – Extreme Cruelty (see below), against Edward Crane, which rendered the case res judicata, yet he sought revenge for her leaving him and waged a campaign of harassment against her for years, culminating in an abusive, post-divorce custody battle that eradicated bargained-for terms of the Property Settlement Agreement and Mom’s Custody Order.
A matter held against the U.S. Constitution:
The Constitution declared “suspended” in the Bergen County Court by Judge Donald R. Venezia.
Egregious due process and civil rights violations.
Contempt of court by Judge Gerald S. Escala and Judge Victor Ashrafi.
Procedural fraud by Peter Van Aulen, Esq., who admitted to the U.S. Court for the Third Circuit, that he falsified evidence in another case (Carrascosa) and that he had a brain hemorrhage in yet another (Rieger).
Corrupt custody evaluator and quid pro quo kick back queen Dr. Judith Brown Greif.
Bribery of Judge Gerald C. Escala, notorious for foreclosure fraud and taking a bribe in the Denike v. Cupo case.
Mother denied thousands (est. over 100K) in child support. Mother bankrupted. UCCJEA violations. Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) violations.
False ‘parental alienation’ claims used to cover up domestic violence, child abuse and neglect (via pro-pedophile Richard Gardner’s highly-controversial, pseudoscientific theory PAS, which has been rejected repeatedly by American Psychological Association; and fails Daubert and Frye standards).
Mother marginalized without a legitimate basis, trying to protect her kids. Kids denied in camera interview with judge.
Mother’s attorney dismissed by court, literally 15 minutes before trial (no kidding).
Fault-based divorce for domestic violence under N.J.S.A. 2A:34-2(c) – Extreme Cruelty:
Karin Wolf’s children must be returned to her immediately. She is the only one with legitimate parentage and lawful custody her children. Every day they are not returned to their mother is criminal. Mother and children have not seen each other in over a year. Two kids illegally taken from their primary caregiver and protective mother Karin Wolf, by the Bergen County Family Court, State of New Jersey.
Kids are now being brainwashed. Unfortunately, this is a common formula of the misogyny present in the family courts.
Warning to all New Jersey mothers – Leave New Jersey with your kids and don’t give the State of New Jersey any jurisdiction in your family court case. There’s a war on the sanctity of the mother-child bond.
Know the facts – visit the Facebook page for New Jersey Coalition for Family Court Reform and www.goldenlassoblog.com for details, including the class-action RICO lawsuit filed with the Federal Court, naming all women and children similarly situated, and citing hundreds of civil rights violations and sex-based discrimination against women by the State of New Jersey, Gov. Chris Christie, DCP&P, and the NJ Judiciary, all of whom are using taxpayer dollars to defend their criminal actions and making false claims to the federal government under Title IV.