Friday, July 24, 2009

More from OZ ~ Divorced dads fear rollback of parent laws

Gosh its been a whole 3 years since some brave Ozzy legislators passed laws to try and level the playing field in the war against dads and men. It hasn't gotten even close to level as only about 15% of dads have 50-50 custody but the vocal minority of socialist victim feminists, some of whom are listed in Overington's most recent diatribe against dads below, are getting most of the press. Note Overington's selectivity when interviewing ensuring most of those who are for a reversal to the good old days of absolute matriarchal supremacy when it comes to parenting get to promote the review covering up the real agenda of a WalMart style roll back. If it is reversed there will be a great backlash. Men have fought and died in wars to protect everyone including the victim feminists but especially their own children. As a dad I can attest nothing else matters to me than my children. Nothing!

DV in most western democracies is pretty much equal between genders. In some cases of IPV the female has been shown to be the initiator in 71% of cases. It has also been shown females will not get injured nearly as much if they don't initiate the violence. Single family mothers in the USA and parts, if not all of OZ, are clearly the biggest abusers and killers of their children far and away. The hysteria over dads wanting equality has got to stop and politically correct and gutless politicians need to evaluate it carefully.MJM

Caroline Overington | July 25, 2009

Article from: The Australian

THE shared parenting laws that have given divorced fathers more time with their children will be rolled back because of the power of left-wing feminist women in Kevin Rudd's cabinet.

That is the view of men's groups that lobbied for the laws when the Howard government was in power, and who now fear "that 15 years of progress in getting fathers and children to spend time together is about to be undone".

"I met with (Attorney-General) Robert McClelland a few weeks ago, and it was clear to me that these laws are being rolled back," said Sue Price, of the Men's Rights Agency.

"They (the Rudd government) say they are reviewing the law, but basically the law will change because in the Labor government there are a number of women who are well and truly indoctrinated in a 1970s feminist movement background, and they do not value the role of men in society.

"(Tanya) Plibersek pushes domestic violence based on incorrect data. (Nicola) Roxon dances a merry dance around men. The fact is that children are at far greater risk from their mothers. Mothers kill more children than fathers, and that's a fact."

Mr McClelland yesterday appointed former Family Court judge Richard Chisholm to review family law processes, using the case of Darcey Freeman, the girl thrown from Melbourne's West Gate Bridge, allegedly by her father, as a reason to consider change.

In a statement, Family Court Chief Justice Diana Bryant said she supported the review of "how the courts manage the important issues of violence in family law matters. I welcome any suggestions as to how we can improve with system."

Edward Dabrowski, of the Shared Parenting Council, was dismayed, saying: "Vocal minority groups, mostly women, have latched on to a few cases and are now saying the shared parenting laws are leading to situations

that are loaded with domestic violence.

"That is not the case, and if there is to be a review, it ought to be a public review. They should have a full inquiry and let's see what the public, including fathers, think about going back to the old days."

Ms Plibersek's spokesman said she was on leave but would perhaps comment when she returned to work on Monday.

However, NSW Acting Attorney-General Verity Firth entered the fray, saying there "seems to have been considerable problems" with the new shared parenting law in reconciling a child's right to a "meaningful relationship" with both parents "and the protection of the child from exposure to violence".

Ms Firth said there was some evidence that a "very strong pro-contact culture had arisen even where the safety of children couldn't be guaranteed".

Jen Jewel Brown, of the National Council for Children Post-Separation, welcomed the review, saying the new Family Law Act was working as a "wrecking ball for many damaged children and their parents, in particular, as they try to re-establish themselves after the breakdown of abusive relationships".

She said mothers had grown reluctant to raise allegations of violence in the Family Court because they feared being "accused of raising false allegations or not promoting a meaningful relationship with the other parent", which can mean they lose custody or face the entire bill for court costs.

The chairman of the Family Law Council, John Wade, said there was an "appetite for change" and "a feeling that we need to look at it again, and see whether it's working", but he said any changes were "bound to be controversial because it's the area of law that most Australians have contact with, either themselves or through their relatives.",25197,25832215-5013871,00.html

In the UK ~ Amy gives the judge a twirl to 'prove' she didn't punch dancer

Yes Amy you are so innocent - a superlative victim who has already shown your 5' 2" impaired height is no barrier to beating up your male mate who is even bigger and stronger than this female. It looks like you got a break this time but as a paraphrase to the lyrics to a song by the 3 degrees go "when will we see you again."MJM

Amy Winehouse leaves Westminster Magistrates' Court in London yesterday in her ballet shoes. Photo: REUTERS/TOBY MELVILLE

Amy Winehouse leaves Westminster Magistrates' Court in London yesterday in her ballet shoes. Photo: REUTERS/TOBY MELVILLE

By Steve Bird

Friday July 24 2009

AMY WINEHOUSE twirled in front of a judge and showed him her pink ballet shoes in an attempt to prove that she was a mere 5ft 2in tall and could not have punched a fan.

In one of her most bizarre public performances yet, the Grammy Award-winning singer insisted that she had not attacked Sherene Flash moments after being asked to pose for a photograph at a charity ball.

Instead, Ms Winehouse (25) claimed that Ms Flash, who is 5ft 7in tall and was wearing high-heeled boots, was drunk and being rude as she towered above her.

"Ms Flash came over and put her arm around me. She lent down. She's taller than me. I had flat shoes on," she said.

Asked what shoes she was wearing, Ms Winehouse jumped up from the witness box at Westminster Magistrates' Court and twirled in front of District Judge Timothy Workman to show her footwear.

"I'm probably 5ft 2in to 3in tall," she said before rearranging her 8in-high black beehive and adding: "But my hair does make a difference."


She continued: "I had shoes on like this. In fact, these are the very shoes I had on that night. Look, they don't even have a sole. They don't have a heel."

After the judge reassured her that he was fully aware of what flat shoes were, she returned to the witness box, straightened her grey pinstripe mini-skirt suit, sat down and smiled.

The prosecution claims that she acted with "deliberate and unjustifiable violence" towards Ms Flash, a dancer who, like Ms Winehouse, had performed at the Prince's Trust charity ball in Mayfair, Central London, last September.

Other dancers have told the court Ms Winehouse appeared to be either drunk or high on drugs during the altercation.

Ms Flash said that after her performance she had been "tipsy" on champagne and had gone to Ms Winehouse's dressing room and politely asked her to pose for a photograph with her friend, Kiaran Connolly, who, by his own admission, was "hammered" on drink.

Ms Flash said: "She punched me forcefully in my right eye. She used a fist, her right one. I started crying with shock. I couldn't open my eye for a while."

A recording of Ms Flash's 999 call was played to the court. Asked by the operator who had assaulted her, she replied: "Amy Winehouse, of all f***ing people." She said that she was left with a headache and a scratch to her eye.

Ms Winehouse said that she felt scared of Ms Flash, who had ignored her offer to pose for a picture once she had seen a friend out of the venue.

"She kneeled down to try to pose next to me. Her friend came round in front. I said, 'Do I get a choice? Hello?' I wanted her away from me. It was like, 'Leave me. I'm scared of you.'

"I said I would be back in two minutes. It's just then she lent down all over me and put her face next to mine. It's just rude. My bodyguard was keeping an eye on what was going on. He stepped in. It was like, 'Let that girl be, she's drunk'."

Ms Winehouse denied hitting the dancer with a clenched fist, insisting that any injury was accidental. She added that she was worried that the woman was trying to sell her story to a tabloid newspaper. She added: "People are just rude or just mad these days. Or people can't handle drink."

Ms Winehouse denies common assault. The trial continues.

- Steve Bird

Winehouse found not guilty of assaulting dancer

Amy Winehouse has been found not guilty of assault. Photo: Getty Images

Friday July 24 2009

British singer Amy Winehouse has been found not guilty of assaulting a dancer at a charity ball in London.

The 25-year-old was accused of hitting burlesque dancer Sherene Flash in the face while backstage at the Prince's Trust Ball last September.

Winehouse denied assaulting the dancer and had insisted she was intimidated and scared by the drunken Miss Flash, who was demanding a photograph with the star.

The court heard the dancer had refused to wait for a few minutes after Winehouse agreed to the request and the singer had pushed her away.