Wednesday, June 9, 2010

In New Hampshire ~ No bail for woman convicted of framing ex-husband by texting


Reader comments








By JAMES A. KIMBLE
Union Leader Correspondent



Kristin Ruggiero was ordered held without bail after a jury convicted her of trying to set up her ex-husband and have him jailed by falsely reporting to police that he sent her a dozen threatening text messages in May 2008.

Judge Kenneth McHugh said it was necessary to keep Ruggiero in jail after the jury found that the 34-year-old mother used the criminal justice system as a means to falsely imprison her ex-husband, Jeffrey, and ruin his career.
100507KristinRuggiero_60px
RUGGIERO
Judge Kenneth McHugh lectures Ruggiero - 1.3mb .mp3
Jury to begin deliberating in Ruggiero trial (14)
Prosecutors: Ex-wife falsified texts to have husband jailed (3)
Police chief says Ruggiero targeted him (5)

"The jury's verdict has confirmed my belief after hearing 8 days of this case that the defendant is a pathological liar," McHugh said. "She will do and say anything in order to distort facts so as to avoid responsibility for her actions."

McHugh remarked that Ruggiero's case was not a normal one for Rockingham County.
It came exactly two years after Kristin Ruggiero had played a key witness in the prosecution of her ex-husband, who was later exonerated by prosecutors when an East Kingston police investigation concluded that Jeffrey Ruggiero was convicted of crimes he did not commit.

Ruggiero, a U.S. Coast Guard chief petty officer, nearly lost his career and was jailed for three and a half weeks following an April 30, 2008, criminal threatening case based on Kristin Ruggiero's complaints.
As Jeffrey Ruggiero awaited sentencing in that case, his ex-wife complained to police about the text messages - sent on a disposable cell phone.

The investigation into that second case - undertook by East Kingston police Chief Richard Simpson - found the signals on the disposable phone coincided with Kristin Ruggiero's whereabouts in California and Tennessee.

Exeter District Court Judge Laurence Cullen, who convicted Jeffrey Ruggiero in the criminal threatening case two years ago, came to hear the verdict in the Ruggiero verdict, quietly taking a seat - out of his robe - in the rear of the courtroom.

Kristin Ruggiero used other technology such as computer viruses and anonymous text messaging to hack into her ex-husband's computer and e-mail as a way to continually stalk and harass her ex-husband, according to prosecutors.

McHugh said he believed her adept knowledge with computers and technology made her a flight risk.
"She has shown the ability to fly around the country. She is computer savvy and there's no doubt in my mind if she were allowed to leave this building today, she would find some way to avoid appearance on July 1," McHugh said.

Ruggiero showed no emotion as she was led out of the courtroom and taken into custody.
At her sentencing on July 1, Ruggiero faces a potential 3 1/2 to 7 year state prison sentence on each of the 12 counts of falsifying physical evidence. She was also found guilty of a misdemeanor charge of false report to law enforcement.

Following the verdict, Assistant County Attorney Jerome Blanchard said the conviction marked a victory for more than the criminal justice system.

"It's a good day for the men and women who are real victims of domestic violence," Blanchard said.
He prosecuted the 8-day trial with Assistant County Attorney Geoffrey Ward, a member of the domestic violence unit.

Simpson, the police chief whose investigation found Ruggiero was using the criminal justice system as a tool of revenge, said he will be happy to move on from the case, but hopes it serves as a warning.

"Maybe it will send a message to other people who would think of doing such a thing," he said.

Deputy County Attorney Tom Reid said despite the conviction, prosecutors will continue to investigate some of the evidence and documents submitted by Ruggiero as part of her defense.

Reid declined to say whether Ruggiero or others could face charges if evidence suggested other crimes were committed.

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=No+bail+for+woman+convicted+of+framing+ex-husband+by+texting&articleId=b0ca7b34-27a1-4771-a683-cb7ecdb65692

In Massachusetts an affirmative nod for Shared Parenting






Editorial Worcester, MA News Telegram

Thursday, May 13, 2010


Fairness for fathers
Bill makes sense for most divorces






Divorce is tough on all involved, especially the children. By smoothing the way toward sound custody agreements, House Bill 1400 offers help in the vast majority of cases: those involving two fit parents.

Advocates point out that the current practice in Massachusetts, in which the mother is the presumed custodial parent, encourages conflict. The Shared Parenting bill would require that courts handling separation and divorce agreements work from the presumption that both parents should share physical and legal custody.

That, says the advocacy group Fathers & Families, encourages cooperation and keeps the focus on what is best for children. Instead of a father having to fight for time with the children he loves, the legal system would assume that he merits equal time, and spend its time working out the details and practicalities of a given case. Shared parenting needn’t be a rigid 50-50 split; the mere assumption that both parents deserve ample time eases tensions, and the eventual agreement arrived at depends on a host of factors.

There was a time when it was generally reasonable for the mother to be awarded custody of the children almost automatically. That time is gone. Family dynamics and gender roles have changed. Just as women have proved themselves in the workplace, men have come into their own as nurturers at home, often very closely involved in their children’s upbringing.

The bill, it must be emphasized, is for families in which both parents are fit and no other problem gets in the way, such as parents living far apart. Judges would depart from the shared-parenting starting point whenever the best interests of the child so dictated, giving written reasons.

This simple bill, currently before the Joint Committee on the Judiciary, offers an enormous and welcome change in how families would navigate marriage dissolution. Once this sad, private decision had been made, the system would help the parents find the way forward that puts the children on the best possible footing. Afterward, other benefits would accrue: children doing better in school, paternal grandparents enjoying access, less fighting, better child support compliance.

In short, this bill offers respect and assistance to both partners who are parting ways, freeing up time and attention for the young ones affected — who want, and who need, both parents.

150 comments | Add a comment
http://www.telegram.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100513/NEWS/5130725/

Feminism has led to more female violence in their quest to be more like men

 

 

 

 

Feminism blamed for rising female violence

Social factors such as the rise of feminism
 could be behind the 
rise in violence amongst women, researcher says.By Louisa Rebgetz
Posted Tue Jun 1, 2010 6:24am AEST

Social factors such as the rise of feminism could be behind the rise in violence amongst women, researcher says. (www.sxc.hu: Dominik Gwarek)

A Northern Territory researcher says studies show women can be just as violent as men and social changes are behind a reported rise in violence among young women.

A senior lecturer in psychology at Charles Darwin University, Dr Peter Forster, says there is no truth to the argument that testosterone levels make men more aggressive.

He says social factors such as the rise of feminism in the last few decades could be behind the rise in violence amongst women.

"We've now taken away the expectation that women will behave differently to men," he said.

"It used to be that one of the biggest differences was that women were more peaceful, they were peacemakers.

"[But] that kind of inhibition to be violent has gradually diminished to the point where it no longer inhibits women at all."


F & F Helps Defeat Radical Bill from Opponents of Recognizing Parental Alienation

Fathers & Families have again been instrumental in defeating another anti Parental Alienation Bill in the California Legislature, brought by a malleable Democrat named Jim Beal. Beal, if nothing else, is willing to get thwarted again by his colleagues and one has to wonder what makes him tick. Given he has been "whacked" on the head twice for the same thing one can surmise he is just stupid or an ideologue.  He was defeated last year with Bil AB612 which had the identical intent.

It is very good news and if you click on the link below you can read the committee hearings discussing the pros and cons. I've included below the Title and the Support/Opposition portion of the assembly ruminations. The opposition to this version mirrors those of last years version.  The Centre for Judicial Excellence, an oxymoronic name, is a militant group consisting, in part, of a very angry, and potentially unstable, group of women who have lost custody of their children through abuse or neglect. In the USA 85% of physical custody of children (Canada 90%, UK 92%) goes to mom so those who lose custody suffer a great deal of cognitive dissonance. They are able to get radical feminist Lawyers who receive ample remuneration for their efforts and have no problem in going on shows like Dr. Phil to mythologize incidents that did not occur. False allegations, lying, cheating are all part of the repertoire of contrivances used to justify their end game.MJM

Date of Hearing: May 4, 2010

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Mike Feuer, Chair
AB 2475 (Beall) - As Amended: April 28, 2010

 REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support  
          Center for Judicial Excellence (sponsor)
          JusticeCalifornia



           Opposition 
          Association of Certified Family Law Specialists
          Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, California
          California Association of Marriage and Family Therapists
          California Dispute Resolution Council
          California Judges Association
          California Psychological Association
          Civil Justice Association of California
          Family Law Section of the Los Angeles County Bar Association
          Family Law Section of the State Bar
          Judicial Council
          Two individuals


           Analysis Prepared by  :  Leora Gershenzon / JUD. / (916) 319-2334  

Parental Alienator gets Jail Time and its about time

This is an egregious case of Parental Alienation but is instructive in terms of what the alienating parent will do to the target parent to get the children to hate, in this case, the dad. My ex tried many of the same tactics. What is new in this case is the parent, whose mental health is in question, as are most alienators, got jail time. A precedent has finally been set and hopefully more of this will occur. The children are emotionally impacted, often for life, by this kind of narcissistic behavior but more to the point the parent who would do this to the child is not firing on all cylinders. Serious counseling is in order for this woman. Notably the most vocal and obsessive opponents of Parental Alienation are parents who have lost custody for abusing their children in this manner. It is rather sad to see them use this child punishment as a further weapon to berate other alienated parents as abusers. I believe it more clearly shows the underlying afflictions they may suffer.MJM

 
Updated: Tue., Jun. 8, 2010, 10:59 AM home

An 'ex' to grind

Last Updated: 10:59 AM, June 8, 2010
Posted: 2:38 AM, June 8, 2010

She's the ex-wife from hell!


An outraged judge slapped a Long Island woman with a jail sentence for trying to drive a wedge between her ex-husband and their daughters, keeping them apart for weeks at a time and even claiming he groped one of them.

Lauren Lippe is a vengeful roadblock, the barbed wire standing in the way of her two daughters and their desperate dad, Judge Robert Ross said.


Lippe often went nuclear, launching foul-mouthed tirades at Ted Rubin in front of the girls -- calling him a "deadbeat," "loser," "scumbag" and "f - - - ing asshole."


Ross said Lippe, 47, was a scheming manipulator who deliberately planned last-minute trips and events when her ex was scheduled to visit the girls.

"He was compelled to consent or risk disappointing the girls," Ross wrote in his ruling, which found Lippe in contempt for violating the couple's joint custody agreement.

If Rubin protested, Lippe berated him mercilessly.

"We all hope you die from cancer," she once blared at him, the court papers said, with both daughters in her arms.

Lippe even had the nerve to smirk in court when an emotional Rubin described the agony of missing out on Hanukkah with his children. Ross said Rubin was relegated to visit at the end of his ex's driveway, where he lit a menorah with his daughters in his truck and watched them open presents from their grandparents.
But the worst, Ross wrote, was "the crescendo of the plaintiff's conduct" involving false accusations of sexual abuse.

Lippe charged in 2008 that Rubin had fondled the breasts of one of his daughters. Lippe later conceded that she knew nothing sexual had occurred.

"The evidence before me demonstrates a pattern of willful and calculated violations of the clear and express dictates of the parties' Stipulation of Settlement," Ross wrote in a decision handed down last week.
The judge was also annoyed that Lippe had punished the children for wanting to spend quality time with their dad.

On Thursday, Ross sentenced Lippe to six weekends in jail to be served on the first and third weekends of June, July and August. Lippe, who has since remarried, was scheduled to begin her jail time Friday, but her sentence was stayed pending an appeal. Rubin is expected to take care of the children while Lippe is on lockdown.

Ironically, it was Lippe who asked the court to modify the custody agreement.

Lippe declined to comment outside her Lloyd Harbor home, but her lawyer, Kieth Rieger criticized the decision.

"It's extremely unusual, and in this case, it's inappropriate," Rieger said. "He chose to believe the husband and not her. Of course, she's upset, but she's also worried about her children. She's worried that if she goes to jail how it will affect the children."

Rubin, 52, a marketing executive, declined to comment, but has sounded off about his dilemma on his Internet blog.

"Spending time with my girls is something I put before all else," Rubin wrote last year. "They are teenagers now and being a divorced dad, it can be challenging to continue to reach out, put them first, and maintain this in the face of their occasional lack of interest and the roadblocks so easily put in place by their mom."
Additional reporting by Jeane MacIntosh and Selim Algar
 
kieran.crowley@nypost.com
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/an_ex_to_grind_xg3281rUxt068tCFzX1skL#ixzz0qJmpiOoa 

Sucide by self immolation due to Australian Family Court Judge

The man has since died and he is yet another victim of gender apartheid sentenced to a life not worth living by another biased Family Court Judge. It's interesting Canada and Australia does not have the death sentence for the most heinous of crimes but innocent dads in Canada kill themselves 8 times a day, many for the same reason as this man. A man who loses his children through misandry suffers a devastating loss of self esteem, humiliation and frequently financial havoc.MJM

Man sets himself alight in Brisbane


law courts
POLICE investigate the scene outside the Brisbane law courts after a man set himself alight. Picture: Jodie Richter Source: The Courier-Mail
 
A MAN is believed to have set himself on fire outside of Brisbane's iconic Supreme Court complex after an unfavourable family court decision, according to witnesses at the scene.
The incident happened just after 2pm after the man, believed to be in his 40s, had been sitting in front of the iconic marble Law Courts sign for some time.

Witness reported hearing a bang and seeing flames as would-be rescuers ran to the man's aid.

Emergency workers at the scene say the man is in a critical condition - with burns to 90 per cent of his body.

Sources investigating the incident said the man had earlier been at the Federal Courts for family matter and may not have received the outcome he was after.

Two witnesses, Kylie Pannel and Kylie Beard, who were both close to tears, said they could not believe what happened just 3m from them.


"He said absolutely nothing,’’ Ms Pannel said. "He was so quiet it wasn’t funny."

The incident caused inner-city traffic chaos for more than 90 minutes as up to 15 emergency vehicles crowded into George St to get near the scene.

Police at the scene have declined to comment.