PARENTING RIGHTS INSTITUTE

1518 Genesee Street Utica, NY 13502

(315) 796-4000 Honorable Members of the United States Congress The Capitol Washington D.C. Dear Senators and House Members: Today has been set aside by various parenting advocates to honor the founding fathers of America. However, we are dedicating the day not so much to our origins but to the need for preserving families and parent-child relationships. We are seeking parental recognition by our federal government as a matter of civil rights under the Constitution. On April 20, 2012, you will find concerned parents touring the capital and lobbying for the reform of oppressive and discriminatory laws which are harming children in all fifty states. Attached you will find summary material which we hope will convince you of the need for a congressional hearing and inquiry into the abuses caused by Title IV-d of the Social Security Act and federally sanctioned seizures of childrearing authority. At the top of the list is an ongoing alienation of fathers through unequal treatment under the law which in turn produces sexist slurs such as Dead Beat Dad (actually employed in a recent Justice Department release). The blatant discrimination has yet to be declared by our courts. However, after 23 years in the practice of civil rights law, I continue to file test cases in search of justice for parents similarly oppressed. Our productivity, health care and moral fiber as a nation are harmed in the meantime. Twenty years have passed since Mrs. Doubtfire provided America with a profound illustration of a nationwide crisis which has only gotten worse. Actress Sally Fields may have summed it up best when forced to admit that false custody accusations featured throughout that movie were perpetrated out of pure anger. A modern day picture of the pain endured by fathers through state corruption emerges with Liam Neeson in the film Taken. We parents simply ask that you keep these pictures in mind when considering sexist laws and funding requests which disparage Americas male parenting population. The consequences of this trend will be felt on an ominous scale as the economy worsens and our courts continue to deprive men of their rights under the Constitution. Without a fair forum to vent claims and April 20, 2012
leonkoziol@parenting rights institute.com

Congress Page 2 grievances, increasing numbers of good fathers will reluctantly take matters into their own hands. Particularly impacted will be returning military, law enforcement and racial minorities. In one community alone, a police investigator took his life and that of his ex spouse moments after exiting child support court, leaving three minor children without their mom and dad. A mother took a knife to the throat of her divorcing husband and was sent to prison for 13 years with no child contact. A father shot his boy in front of state police in a domestic standoff, and a decorated war veteran was killed on duty as a sheriff deputy only months ago in a similar domestic stand-off. A purple heart soldier attempted suicide after months of support and custody abuse, a mother drove her children into a river, and a father recently burned himself alive in protest of these same laws (Thomas Ball). Attached in the order provided, you will find 1) an April 10, 2011 editorial submitted to the New York Times which describes the crisis generally; 2) a local column from a first time father which demonstrates his unique role in a childs life; 3) an on-line circulation from a fathers rights activist which lays out the Title IV-d process and how it works to destroy parenting interests; 4) a flow chart from a victim of endless, recurring and costly court contests; 5) a typical short story from yet another victim offered for this lobby packet; 6) an opening remark from New Yorks Chief Justice on the subject of litigant equality, and 7) my April 5, 2012 reaction which shows how corrupt a top judge can become when too much power is conveyed to a single public servant. I want to thank you for your time and consideration with the hope that you will genuinely consider our request and proposed involvement.

Respectfully submitted,

Dr. Leon R. Koziol Parental Rights Advocate

Office of Leon R. Koziol

1518 Genesee Street Utica, NY 13502
Cell: (315) 796-4000 leonkozioljd@gmail.com April 10, 2011 Editor, Editorial Department New York Times New York, New York Dear Editor: Is this any way to raise our children? While our federal government asserts itself increasingly in foreign wars for the sake of human rights, a crisis on the domestic front is going unnoticed. Increasing numbers of families are being sacrificed to needless battles over custody, support and state control of our children. It is a trend having monumental impact upon our viability as a productive and free country. In 1925, the high court of New York adopted ancient practices of British monarchs to assert state control over all children impacted by divorcing parents. In its day, this seizure of power caught little attention because divorce was an anomaly and fewer numbers of lawyers were preoccupied with more legitimate matters of the profession. Today, separate parenting units are the mainstream and the state of California alone is impacted by nearly 300,000 lawyers. As a result, parental authority is becoming seriously undermined while children are exploited for money. By simply declaring any government act involving a child to be in his or her best interests, the state can remove one or both parents from their traditional and gender based functions. It is a gold mine for under employed attorneys which is perverting a natural order of childrearing. Adolph Hitler exploited similar propaganda to build a war machine. This perversion is cultivated by a separate but unequal doctrine of laws which forces parents to fight over their own offspring to secure custody and support awards. Competition for a childs favor then leads to immature parenting behavior and severe breakdowns in child development. Agreement, mediation and shared parenting are opposed as litigation substitutes because they would reduce conflict, thereby eroding a multi-billion dollar government industry. We are a nation which prides itself in equal rights and due process of law. Yet this unequal parenting doctrine emerges as the last bastion of discrimination remaining unchecked in America today. The custody process operates contrary to stated child objectives because it rewards the parent who can best destroy the other while creating and exploiting a lower class of person known as a non-custodial parent. Private family matters are used as weapons in public forums to entertain strangers in a manner reminiscent of the Roman Coliseum.

Data from the National Fatherhood Initiative shows that children fare better in life when both parents are involved in their upbringing. However, Census Bureau statistics continue to report that 85% of all child support obligors are men while custody decisions remain subject to care giver presumptions which substitute as evidence in favor of the mother. A father cannot overcome this unfair treatment due to additional burdens associated with his physical condition, male stereotypes and fraudulent report tactics. The current system operates under the further awful presumption that a dominant household is needed to raise children. More accurately it is a pretext for promoting endless court controversies. The states hypocrisy is evidenced by its bussing of the same children to institutional settings in the care of strangers without having to prove relative fitness of any kind. In this manner, a father is systematically demoted from his natural status and forced to pay for the process which took away his children through diverted support payments. True reform can get any lawyer or parent in trouble with the law because, when money transfers, all sorts of third parties benefit. Our state judiciary has been overhauled behind an unmanageable objective contrary to its neutral design under the Constitution. As a self declared super parent, it has become a bureaucratic albatross regularly employing legal specialists and forensic agents to tell us how to raise our own children. A mature decision to separate or remain apart for the sake of specific children does not translate into a general concession of power to the state. There is no utopian parenting philosophy. Our form of government encourages agreement and diversity for optimal results. A childs upbringing through decrees and court orders should not be the rule but the exception to state infringement upon private affairs. It remains a clash between government power and human rights. The Supreme Court has repeatedly found parenting to be the oldest liberty interest protected by our Constitution. At the same time, it has declared that the power to tax is the power to destroy. Here the state conveys such a power to one of two private litigants in a volatile environment which promotes mutual destruction. A state bank and collection agency have even been erected to collect money while no counterpart has been proposed to enforce child access. Whether you believe in God or Darwin, this truth remains: our very civilization was made possible by the free exercise of parenting rights by both fathers and mothers. Something much more profound is at stake than custody or visitation, terms commonly associated with prisons and funerals. When you separate moms and dads from their offspring on false pretenses, you invite dire consequences which no government can control. Until we make shared parenting the law, government will continue its costly preoccupation with the symptoms and not the cause of our social ills. Very truly yours, Leon R. Koziol, J.D. Co-Founder, Parenting Rights Institute Civil Rights Advocate

First-Time Daddy: One small grab for baby, daddy sees giant leap - Utica...

http://www.uticaod.com/news/x1830127711/First-Time-Daddy-One-smal...

Breaking News

Remington Arms lands $83.9M project, adding up to 50 jobs

First-Time Daddy: One small grab for baby, daddy sees giant leap
By DANIEL P. BADER Observer-Dispatch Posted Apr 12, 2012 @ 10:57 AM Last update Apr 12, 2012 @ 08:01 PM Hudson did an amazing thing last week. He took a rattle from my hand, and meant to do it.

Related Stories
First-Time Daddy: Dressing baby IS rocket science

Arent you in awe? Can you grasp how completely, immensely, explosively amazed I was at this small act? You cant. But for me, if Abraham Lincoln had walked in the door at that very moment, holding a pinwheel and wearing a party hat, I would have pointed to Hudson and have said: Abe, did you just see that? To you it was such a small thing, but its the biggest thing hes ever done, and Ill never forget it. Four months ago he was suspended in goo, upside down. Now, hes having conscious thoughts and grabbing rattles. Once or twice we thought he had grabbed his pacifier from just near his lips and pushed it back in, but dismissed those few times as a random acts. This time, to the soundtrack of 2001: A Space Odyssey, he zoned in on the rattle, slowly reached out his arm, and clumsily closed his fingers around the toy. For a triumphant minute, he held it there like King Arthur holding the sword-in-the-stone over his head. I really didnt expect the grab, which is maybe why I was so stunned. Before all of this, I was focused on waiting for him to laugh. According to a 2008 NPR RadioLab program on laughter, Aristotle believed the first laugh was when a human became a human being that laughter is what separates us from other animals. Babies laugh 40 days after they're born, Aristotle believed. Modern experts, the show said, put it more at 90 days. Ever since I heard the shows podcast, Ive quizzed every new mom about when their baby first laughed, and with one eye on the calendar have been waiting for Hudson to giggle. It was random when it happened. While sitting on my lap he gurgled something that sounded like the wazzzup joke from the Budweiser commercials. Mrs. Bader noticed, and just like the ads, said: Wazzzzzup dragging out the long jagged zzzzzup to Hudson. He smiled and laughed out loud and looked at her, his eyes smiling as if to say: Do it again. She did it again. He laughed again. She did it a third time. He laughed a third time. All three of us were sitting there in the living room laughing up a storm, guffawing at the same lame joke, but for different reasons. The fourth time, he didnt laugh. I don't blame him, even the original commerical wasn't really funny. But it was then that our sweet little family moment, my favorite, second only to the rattle, ended.

On the Web
First-Time Daddy: Guilt over hurt finger scars dad for life

Business News
5 Franchises You Want to Invest In 3 Things You Should Know About Small Business: April 18 Only 3 Cities Look Good for Home 'Flipping'

Suggested Stories
Utica man accused of repeatedly punching girlfriend in face Mohawk Valley Chamber 115th Annual Membership Meeting a hit Utica man accused of assault with ice scraper

From the Web

Parking Lot Murder-Suicide Claims Mom & Dad as Toddler Waits Just Feet Away

(The Stir By CafeMom)

Teen Gets 4 Years in Prison for Prank-Related Deaths

(itsybitsysteps)

Video - A Home in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., Sells for $5.1 But it was some moment. Million - WSJ.com (Wall

Street Journal)
Sponsored content

Daniel P. Bader is education reporter and first time daddy. If you see a man pushing a screaming kid in a stroller who looks totally in over his head, its probably him.

What's this?

Copyright 2012 The Observer-Dispatch, Utica, New York. Some rights reserved

Mortgage Rates Hit 2.50% 53-Year-Old Mom Looks 27 If you owe under $729k you may qualify Follow this 1 weird tip and remove 20 for 3.01% APR Govt years of wrinkles in
www.MortgageRatesExperts.com SmartConsumerMagazine.com

Mutual Funds Learn More About Mutual Funds. Open An Account Today.
www.integrityvikingfunds.com

Ads by Yahoo!

1 of 2

4/21/2012 8:03 PM

First-Time Daddy: One small grab for baby, daddy sees giant leap - Utica...

http://www.uticaod.com/news/x1830127711/First-Time-Daddy-One-smal...

Comments (0) Login or register to post a user comment.

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | About our Ads The Observer-Dispatch, Utica, New York | (315) 792-5000 | 221 Oriskany Plaza Utica, NY 13501 Copyright 2006-2012 GateHouse Media, Inc. Some Rights Reserved. Original content available for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons license, except where noted. SEO by eLocalListing | Advertiser profiles | RadarFrog Merchant Directory | Contest Rules | Internet Marketing by Propel Marketing | RadarFrog

2 of 2

4/21/2012 8:03 PM

by Jake Morphonios Wednesday, February 13, 2008 Congress would feign admit its own dubious contribution to the suffering of America's children. Rather, these politicians promulgate the myth that they are helping children through federal and state welfare entitlement programs. It is, in fact, these very programs which are responsible for the out of control rampage against children. Here is how the scam works. The federal government levies taxes against citizens to redistribute as welfare entitlements among needy applicants. Congress created the Social Security Act, a section of which is called Title IV. Title IV describes how tax dollars will be distributed among the States to subsidize their individual welfare programs. In order for States to tap into the federal treasure chest, containing billions of dollars, they must demonstrate that they are complying with Title IV mandates to collect child support revenues. In other words, to get money from the federal government, each State must become a child support collection and reporting agency. Every unwed or single mother seeking welfare assistance must disclose on her application the identities of the fathers of her children and how much child support the fathers have been ordered by a family court to pay. She must also commit to continuously reporting the father's payments so that the State can count the money as "collected" to the federal government's Office of Child Support Enforcement. As with all bureaucracies, this process has developed into a monstrosity that chews up and spits out the very people it was designed to help. States have huge financial incentives to increase the amount of child support it can report to the federal government as "collected". To increase collection efforts, States engage in the immoral practice of dividing children from their fathers in family courts. Have you ever wondered why family courts award custody to mothers in 80%-90% of all custody cases, even when the father is determined to be just as suitable a parent? It is because the amount of child support ordered by the State is largely determined by how much time the child spends with each parent. This means that the State "collects" less child support if parents share equal custody. By prohibiting fathers from having equal custody and time with their children, the State's child support coffers are increased and federal dollars are received. Opponents try to paint loving fathers as "deadbeat dads" for daring to challenge the mother-takeall system of family law. This is nothing more than diversionary propaganda. The concern of fathers is not that they are unwilling to support their children financially. This is not an argument against paying child support. Any father that cares about his child will do everything in his power to provide for the child. The concern is, rather, that children are being separated from their fathers by family courts because the State stands to reap huge financial rewards as a result of the father's loss of custody. The higher the order of child support, the more money the State can collect - even if the amount ordered by the court far exceeds the reasonable needs of the child or if the father is required to take second and third jobs to keep up with outrageous support orders and escape certain incarceration. The truth is that most fathers don't care about the financial aspects of these family court verdicts nearly as much as they care about having their time with their children eliminated for nefarious government purposes.

The root of this evil is a State-level addiction to federal tax dollars being doled out as entitlement monies by a monolithic federal government. In the wake of this horror are millions of children drowning for lack of the care, guidance, and companionship of their fathers. Statistics and empirical evidence universally confirm that children forcibly separated from their fathers by family courts are considerably more likely to suffer anxiety and depression, develop drug addiction, engage in risky sexual activity, break the law, and commit suicide. This travesty must end. Unconstitutional federal bureaucracy creates many of the societal ills it claims to be trying to solve. There are several steps incremental steps that could be taken to restore a child's right to the companionship of both parents. For example, citizens should insist that States abide by the 14 th Amendment to the Constitution. No father should be automatically deprived of his fundamental right to the custody of his children without due process of law. Being a male is not a crime. Absent a finding of true danger from a parent, family courts should order shared parenting rights and equal time sharing for divorcing parents. These rights are fundamental and should not be abridged. The automatic presumption of custody-to-the-mother is unconstitutional. The history of America is brim with examples of the federal government denying basic rights to its citizens. Women were denied the right to vote until the women's suffrage movement secured the 19th Amendment to the Constitution. Black Americans also were denied the right to vote and suffered myriad other cruel and humiliating indignities under the law until the civil rights movement brought about desegregation, put an end to Jim Crow legislation and compelled the enactment of the 15th and 24th Amendments to the Constitution. In each of these examples, society was slow to recognize that a problem even existed or that some of our laws were unjust. It took considerable time, concerted effort, self-sacrifice and perhaps even divine providence to realign concurrent societal paradigms with the principles of liberty and justice for all. Our generation is not exempt from similar assaults on liberty. While many just causes may stake claims for redress of grievances, one group, more than any other, pleads for immediate support. The need to defend the rights of this group of American citizens, reeling from the unjust consequences of state-sponsored oppression, is before us. It is time to stand up for the rights of children and demand their equal access to both parents. --Jake Morphonios is a civil rights advocate and North Carolina State Coordinator for Fathers 4 Justice - US.

THE DESTRUCTION OF A FATHER FAMILY COURT CHILD SUPPORT Case of Sean Delevan

A Disabled Father (Sean Delevan), attempts to modify his child support and what follows is a typical Family Court Experience

Start Here 3/9/09 Opposition is a No Show but Borofsky decides to award modication but only for 1 year simply because he feels this is right. 12/4/09 - Sean Delevan tries to stop child support from reverting back to full amount due to becoming fully disabled. (Borofsky coaches ex wife to seek adjournment). (Ex-wife falsely claims I am working AGAIN). ADJOURNED until 3/12/10

10/16/2008 Petition to Modify Support is Filed and assigned to Queens Family Court Magistrate Lewis Borofsky

Case Adjourned until 12/11/08

12/11/08 - Case adjourned until 3/9/09

3/12/10 - Borofsky OPENLY suggests for my ex to seek ANOTHER adjournment after she once again falsely accuses me of working. Borofsky is openly advising and acting as a lawyer for my ex wife but lowers the support to $25.00 TEMPORARILY, in order to allow my ex to prove I am working. BY THIS TIME, MY EX HAS ALREDY FILED TO COLLECT BENEFITS FOR MY CHILDREN AS A RESULT OF ME BEING DECLARED DISABLED BY SOCIAL SECURITY. Case Adjourned to 6/4/2010

6/4/2010 Magistrate Kevin Mahoney Replaces Lewis Borofsky

Continuation

6/4/2010 - Magistrate Mahoney takes over case and ex wife has no proof of me working and is currently collecting benets as a result of my disability.

6/4/2010Magistrate Mahoney CLEARLY explains that the only petition currently before the court is my motion to cap my arrears due to my disability. My Ex agrees and asks for an adjournment AGAIN until 7/29/2010

7/29/2010 Magistrate Gregory Gliedman replaces Mahoney

7/29/10 - Ex wife AGAIN asks for adjournment after having been granted 1 to obtain counsel. Magistrate Gliedman begins to state that I need to show proof of my Social Security payments due to the TECHNICAL Nature of my motion. Case is once AGAIN adjourned until 10/7/10.

10/7/2010 - Ade Fasanya is retained for my ex wife and immediately begins to argue that the original support order is what is to be heard because it was not marked nal. THIS WAS THE PARTING GIFT OF BOROFSKY TO MY EX WIFE, whom was supposed to prove I was working. GLIEDMAN has come into the hearing FULLY PREPPED, WILLING, and DETERMINED to redirect my petition to cap my arrears. CASE IS ADJOURNED TO 11/19/2010

Continuation

10/7/2010 - Gliedman knows EVERY aspect of my argument prior to the hearing taking place but yet refuses to simply ask if my ex wife is collecting Social Security entitlements as a result of my disability AFTER Ade Fasanya argues that the proof of benets is not CERTIFIED. This is while his client is currently receiving benets. (Adjourned to 11/19/2010
continuation

11/19/2010 Case Adjourned unti 1/27/11

1/27/11 - Snow Emergency - Case Adjourned to 3/24/11 (Magistrate Gliedman, having completed his mission to sidetrack case is replaced by Debra Stein). Case resumes 3/24/11.

5/31/11 - I demand explanation of what issues are being heard before the court and proof that there is anything OTHER than my petition to cap my arrears. Magistrate Stein Refuses and tells me to hire a lawyer. 5/31/11 - Magistrate and Ade Fasanya Fight my efforts to relieve my lawyer. Magistrate Debra Stein then DEMANDS I be immediately prepared to move forward. This is after 3.5 years of adjournments granted for Ex continution Wife. Magistrate Stein would grant multiple adjournments AGAIN for ex wife, after DEMANDING I be prepared to move forward.

New Node

3/24/11 - Magistrate Debra Stein Takes over Case and Immediately States: 1) She is going to make ruling on a case that is not even hers (Hot Potato Rule). 2) She is going to look for a petition that no one knows about or there is no record of (Willfulness Misconduct). 3) Stein states that a temporary order is temporary (meaning Borofsky's ruling in 2009. 4) Stein states that there is an H Supplement still before the court (This has been disproven repeatedly and she cannot produce petition, affidavit, or explanation of what that is. Case Adjourned Ruling to Be Made in 30 Days. Next Hearing 4/25/11

continuation

3/24/11 - Ade Fasanya states that there is Willfulness Misconduct petition, as well as an "H" Supplement before the Court. When I demand clarication of this because Ade Fasanya has a history of cross petitioning, improperly ling motions, and simply "creating" motions with no trace of paperwork, affidavit of service, or proof, the Magistrate states she cannot nd it but "will continue to look". I repeatedly question this and the Magistrate is openly hostile and refuses to answer during multiple hearings and simply states "It is there", "I have seen it", "Get a lawyer", and "Check the Record room". The record room has no le, no affidavit of service, or no mention of the "H" supplement or "Willfullness petition". Fraud once again.

4/25/11 - Magistrate Stein reads ruling stating that I must PROVE disability even though ex wife is collecting benets. case is adjourned to MAY 31, 2011

9/8/11 - I STEP BEFORE COURT AND STATE THAT I WILL AGREE TO THE ARREARS IN FULL AND ADE FASANYA SAYS HE WILL DRAW UP SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. OF COURSE THIS NEVER HAPPENS AND FASANYA EVENTAULLY DEMANDS continuation A TRIAL.

11/16/2011 - When I object to more adjournments being granted after I was ordered to move forward, Magistrate Stein says she will not allow a long adjournment and will recall the case in the afternoon. Ade Fasanya objects and asks for a SHORT postponement. Magistrate Stein insists the case will not be delayed more than 6 weeks. What appears to be a negation of a bribe transpires with Fasanya and Stein using future return dates as bargaining chips (This is of course simply my opinion from past experience). Adjournment granted for 12/16/2011. TRANSCRIPTS CLEARLY STATE THIS AND ALL PARTIES ACKNOWLEDGE THIS DATE ON THE RECORD.

continuation

12/16/2011 - COURT DATE HAS VANISHED FROM COURT RECORD and is now scheduled for FEB. 15, 2012. This is 3 MONTHS after Magistrate Stein states she will not delay case after I objected. I personally believe this was done EXACTLY as it was in my custody case with Ade Fasanya when I was INTENTIONALLY instructed to return to court on the wrong date, thereby ensuring the STEPFATHER would avoid having to testify. ALMSOT IDENTICAL NEGOTIATIONS took place during re-scheduling the next court date, as well as me being SHOUTED down by the Magistrate when I REPEATEDLY tried to being attention to the fact I was being instructed to return to court on the wrong date. This hearing was before Magistrate Mildred Negron in Queens Family Court and took place on ________________).

continuation

2/15/2012 - Ade Fasanya and Magistrate ght to have settlement offer REMOVED from the record that was accepted, stamped, and inserted into the record by the family court clerk. I refuse to accept the document I submitted and demand to know what ISSUES are now being slated for trial when this case was supposed to be settled. MAGISTRATE Stein refuses to clarify and sets the case for trial. I once again state that the only issue is capping my arrears and I want to know WHY the last court date was switched behind the scenes. Magistrate Stein refuses to answer and adjourns the car for trial on April 3, 2012.

continuation

Transcripts Vanish for 2/15/2012 hearing! - As I prepare for trial, I le a written request for ALL transcripts involving every Magistrate involved in this case. Having had transcripts and video testimony from my children disappear during custody cases involving Ade Fasanya, I expected this to occur again. All transcripts are sent EXCEPT the 2/15/2012 hearing. MULTIPLE requests are made for the transcripts by AAA Write it Right Transcription Services and they are IGNORED! As of 3-29-12, Family Court Clerks are still REFUSING release audio of the hearing.

ATTENTION LEGAL SCHOLARS: ACTUAL COURT TRANSCRIPTS ARE LOCATED HERE. MINUS THE 11/16/2011 ONE THAT IS NOT BEING RELEASED BY QUEENS FAMILY COURT

10/16/08: http://www.scribd.com/doc/86921739/ Delevan-v-Flood-10-16-08Created-3-13-12-Copy

12/11/08: http://www.scribd.com/doc/86921753/ Delevan-v-Flood-12-11-08Created-3-13-12-Copy

3/9/09: http://www.scribd.com/doc/ 86921752/Delevan-v-Flood-3-09-09Created-3-13-12-Copy

12/4/09:http://www.scribd.com/doc/ 86921744/Delevan-v-Flood-12-04-09Created-3-13-12

3/12/10: http://www.scribd.com/doc/ 86921734/Delevan-v-Flood-3-12-10Created-3-13-12

6/4/2010: http://www.scribd.com/doc/ 86921746/Delevan-v-Flood-6-4-10Created-3-13-12

7/29/10: http://www.scribd.com/doc/ 86921751/Delevan-v-Flood-7-29-10Created-3-13-12

10/7/2010: http://www.scribd.com/doc/ 86921743/Delevan-v-Flood-10-7-10Created-3-13-12

11/19/10: http://www.scribd.com/doc/ 86921736/Delevan-v-Flood-11-19-10Created-3-13-12

1/27/11: http://www.scribd.com/doc/ 86921749/Delevan-v-Flood-1-27-11Created-3-13-12

Magistrate Borofsoky OPENLY advising ex wife and COACHING her to seek adjournment AFTER repeated false accusations against me and multiple adjournments. Objection noted but adjournment granted. THIS COURT HEARING IS BEING USED TO JUSTIFY ARGUING MY SUPPORT ORDER NOW IN 2012

Magistrate Kevin Mahoney CLEARLY states the only petition before the court is my petition to cap arrears. Mother agrees and it is documented in transcripts.

New Magistrate Comes in and is fully prepared and prepped on case. Immediately redirects all arguments. Magistrate Gregory Gliedman

3/24/11: http://www.scribd.com/doc/ 86921750/Delevan-v-Flood-3-24-11Created-3-14-12

4/25/11: http://www.scribd.com/doc/ 86921732/Delevan-v-Flood-4-25-11Created-3-14-12

5/31/11: http://www.scribd.com/doc/ 86921747/Delevan-v-Flood-5-31-11Created-3-14-12

9/8/11: http://www.scribd.com/doc/ 87231999/Delevan-v-FloodSeptember-8-2011

11/16/11: SETTLEMENT OFFER IGNORED - MAGISTRATE ORDERS QUICK RETURN DATE AND THEN CHANGES DATE.

SEAN DELEVAN OFFERS TO SETTLE CASE FOR FULL AMOUNT OF ARREARS.. ADE FASANYA CLAIMS HE WILL DRAW UP AGREEMENT. ADE FASANYA COMES BACK TO COURT WITH NO AGREEMENT AND INSISTS ON TRIAL. FALSE NARRATIVE IS SHATTERED ABOUT FATHER BEING A DEAD BEAT

2/15/12 - COURT TRANSCRIPTS VANISH, Lawyer and Magistrate demand trial, refuse to answer what issues are before the court. Magistrate REFUSES to answer how we went from settlement with a 1 month return date, to trial and a 3 month delay.

During this hearing, I demand to know where is the settlement that was supposed to be drawn up by Ade Fasanya, and object to further delays. MAGISTRATE STEIN STATES SHE WILL NOT DELAY CASE AND THEN MAKES A SHORT RETURN DATE. RETURN DATE IS set for 1 month and then is secretly CHANGED OFF THE RECORD. (return date states Dec.15 and is secretly changed to 3-16-2012.

---------- Original Message ---------From: Chris G Mail <playoneontv@gmail.com> To: "leonkoziol@parentingrightsinstitute.com" <leonkoziol@parentingrightsinstitute.com> Date: April 15, 2012 at 3:16 PM Subject: I have a story to tell from CA... My son returned from Afghanistan November of last year after a full year in harm's way. As a member of the Hawaii Army National Guard. I am an "Air Force Brat". As his 24th Birthday passed to now, I owe $11,111, of which only $2,000 is "principal". Since my son's 9th birthday I was not allowed to see him or talk to him. The reason for my arrearage is well documented in the local media, (kept me out of prison). My former employer, a Limited Liability Company, took the child support out of my paychecks per the County of Sacramento's court order. (We were actually a contractor for the very same County) they did NOT however, forward these dollars to the County, for 2 1/2 years they performed the wage assignment and did not forward a dime to the County. They then filed for bankruptcy. As an LLC, the members were not held liable for these embezzled dollars. I was forced, after a legal battle fought in the local media spotlight, to go on "probation" and not only pay the child support I had already paid, but the interest on these monies that accrues like a reverse certificate of deposit from hell. Not only did I lose my child's life from about 6 - 18, I also had my credit destroyed due to the arrears showing in credit reports. This in turn took away the ability to gain credit, but a car or a home much less be able to find a good job. Again, as they run your credit, the potential employer sees this and labels you a "Deadbeat Dad" and sees you as a risk for theft or dishonesty. Regardless of the truth. I still have video VHS copies of the interviews with local KCRA channel 3 and Channel 10. Without these two stations showing these stories and following up with two more stories, I would have gone to jail as well. For being the VICTIM of a crime!!! Chris Harris (530) 632-0110

PARENTING RIGHTS INSTITUTE

1518 Genesee Street Utica, NY 13502
leonkoziol@parenting rights institute.com

(315) 796-4000 April 5, 2012 Honorable Jonathan Lippman Chief Justice New York Court of Appeals 20 Eagle Street Albany, New York 12207 Dear Judge Lippman: Until my public criticisms and formal challenges to bench and bar practices in New Yorks domestic relations courts, I enjoyed 23 successful and unblemished years as a civil rights attorney. Today I am filing an appeal to this court from an order of the Appellate Division, Third Department which features First Amendment retaliation and misconduct of named judges which I endured as a consequence of these criticisms and challenges. Over 20 judges have either been disqualified or replaced over the past six years of litigation on this case due to my condition as a father-litigant-lawyer abused by a discriminatory and proliferating court system. This letter is not intended to supply the details of an appeal which might ultimately be heard by this court, but to register my complaint to matters outside of the decision making process which I find to be an insult to the justice system as a whole. In your February 14, 2012 report on the state of our judiciary, you open with a prominent reference to Lady Justice depicted on courthouse walls everywhere, blindfolded and holding the scales of justice. However, on the same walls of this, our states highest court, a visitor or litigant will find a large poster of former Chief Justice Sol Wachtler at the public clerks office. He is proudly displayed along with two other former members of the bench campaigning on the Republican line for judgeship. This poster is offensive for two principal reasons. First, it advertises politics in an institution committed to impartiality and judicial independence. Second, and more disturbing, it lauds the election of a judge who was charged with extortion, racketeering and blackmail using the same high court offices as his facilitator of these crimes. To be sure, Sol Wachtler was accused of directing staff in his chambers to investigate the background of a lawyer for purposes of impairing his licensure. That lawyer, David Sampson, was being targeted as the close friend of Joy Silverman, the New York debutant who had been stalked and harassed by Judge Wachtler.

Re: Parenting Equality and Judicial Misconduct

Chief Justice Lippman April 5, 2012 Page 2 A comparable incident on a smaller scale is at issue in the Third Department record, and like the state system at the time of Wachtlers crimes, there has been no accountability obtained through the New York Commission on Judicial Conduct. Indeed fellow justices refused to seek Judge Wachtlers resignation even after his misconduct became public through an FBI sting operation. Today s poster advertises the purported integrity of Mr. Wachtler who was given back his law license in 2007. As you know, he pled guilty to harassment of the debutant and exlover which led to a federal prison term. It was influenced by Wachtlers threats of kidnapping and anonymous mailing of condoms to a 14 year old girl. So brazen was this jurist that he even submitted false claims in similar fashion to authorities which damaged other FBI investigations. While you may not be as personally affected by this daily reminder, I am the father of two young girls who finds Wachtler and his poster highly offensive. It is being prominently displayed for no logical reason during an appeal which features parents in this state routinely subjected to false tactical accusations in needless Family Court disputes. Such concoctions are encouraged and overlooked because they produce fees and revenues for the bench and bar. Innocent children are callously exploited in the process using antiquated and barbaric processes developed by their beneficiaries. These are issues which conflict with Sol Wachtler and his political feature at the courthouse entrance. Photocopies of the poster are enclosed. Its continuing display was confirmed today. Respectfully, I ask that it be ordered removed. On a related note, you emphatically declare in the same opening report that New York always has been and must remain at the forefront of efforts to ensure that Lady Justices scales, symbolizing equality and due process, are exquisitely balanced in our great state . However, nowhere in that same report will one find a candid recognition of the gender discrimination which occurs to the male half of the parenting population. Apart from Census Bureau statistics which confirm this inequality each year, our Institute has studied the issues and concluded, as so many other experts have, that fatherless childrearing is a principal cause behind the juvenile crime and overburdened dockets which you lament upon with funding requests in your report. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully submitted, Leon R. Koziol, J.D. cc: Hon. Thomas Mercure Associated Press New York Times Times Union USA Today