To change a final child custody determination, the law requires that the judge find some significant change of circumstances. However, it is not necessary to find any circumstance that has actually changed.I've been meaning to post some messages explaining what is wrong with this ruling, but I'm not sure where to start. It is outrageous from beginning to end.
To make a finding of abuse, the judge does not have to actually use the definitions of abuse that are in the law.
The judge must have substantial evidence for his conclusions, but that evidence can be unidentified morcels of hearsay that are not even on the record.
If a judge quotes extensively from a report in support of his final decision, it does not necessarily mean that he is relying on the report.
If a CPS witness testifies against a dad in open court, then the dad can be refused a rebuttal witness on the grounds that the rebuttal witness might not have had a right to access juvenile court case records. There was no related case in juvenile court.
If the mom remarries a man with a $3,600 per month mortgage, then then dad can be required to pay the mom an extra $1,000 per month over regular child support in order to compensate her for the possibility that some of her income might be used to help pay that mortgage.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
The ruling against me
The principal findings of the appellate court against me were: