New Trend in Law Enforcement - DV Fraud
October 30th, 2009 by Robert Franklin, Esq.“For everybody who calls, everyone who walks through the door, their claims are taken at face value.”
That's Yolanda Jimenez talking. She's the commissioner of the New York City Mayor's Office to Combat Domestic Violence. It seems six women have just been popped for posing as DV victims in order to receive subsidized public housing. This article that tells us about the case seems to be battling multiple personality disorder (New York Times, 10/22/09). On one hand it informs us that scams of the sort alleged,
are so rare, and the issue so sensitive, that city officials and advocates for domestic violence victims said that they are not usually on the lookout for fraud when people come forward with claims of abuse.
Which leads a normally inquiring mind to wonder if they're not "on the lookout" for them and if all "claims are taken at face value," how city officials know false claims are rare. The simple fact seems to be that those who provide the benefits believe any and all women who claim to have been abused.
Jimenez's belief that there has been no fraud in any of the 36,000 cases of DV claims over the past four years sounds a lot like the governor of Texas claiming that the state has never executed an innocent man. You can only hold those beliefs if you make no effort to ascertain the truth. And from the article, it's crystal clear that little or nothing is done to find out if a claimant is on the level or not.
Indeed, the article goes on to list a variety of benefits to being a seen as a victim of domestic violence, from subsidized housing to green cards for immigrants to free legal advice and in some cases job training. Those benefits, together with laughably lax standards for proving DV victim status make scams like the one charged closer to inevitable than to rare.
To "document" one's status as a DV victim, one need only produce a police report and a restraining order or a family court petition. The women charged had forged those documents, or at least that's what prosecutors say, but in many cases, even that documentation isn't necessary.
In that regard, the attitude of Maureen Curtis of Safe Horizon seems typical. She's quoted as saying,
“Some of them can’t or don’t have the documents they need... Does it mean that the person is not a victim of domestic violence? No.”
Very true, but can you imagine any other governmental agency taking that attitude? For example, come next April 15th, I think I'll just claim some massive deduction on my income tax filing and when the IRS asks me for documentation, I'll just tell them "No, I don't have it, but does that mean I didn't incur the expense? No."
Think that'll work? I hope they let me keep blogging from prison.
But seriously, Curtis' statement seems to typify the attitude of people on whom the taxpayers are relying to root out DV scams. After all, tax money spent for benefits for DV victims should go to, you know, actual victims, not someone who wants to abuse the system. So, if governments are going to provide these benefits, they need to realize that, wherever there's something to be gained, there will be corruption. In short, they need to institute safeguards to make sure the people receiving the benefits are the ones they're meant for.
It is beyond amazing that apparently no one has yet thought of this in the context of DV. In every other context, yes, but not DV. It's high time we left "Believe the Woman" out of public policy.
"));
19 queries. 0.366 seconds.
October 30th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
are so rare, and the issue so sensitive, that city officials and advocates for domestic violence victims said that they are not usually on the lookout for fraud when people come forward with claims of abuse.
There is no need to be on the lookout for fraud claims. This is just a redirect meant to silence people who don't instantly believe people who claim to be victims of DV. The problem at hand is not that no one is actively looking for false claims the problem is that people are actively ignoring false claims.
With the way DV is now most people who would get involved (from police, to shelter personnel, to politicians, to judges) in claims start off with assuming the claim is real or that the claim is false. Either "This person was abused and I have to prove it." or "This person was not abused and I have to prove it." Both approaches are wrong. The only way to ensure that DV claims are checked out and dealt with properly is for people to come in with an open mind. More like, "This person says they were abused. We need to find out what happened."
October 30th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
The first handful of women who perpetrated false DV probably thought they were really clever. The next group probably thought they were also. The problem of course, is that this tactic will get used more and more by a wider group of people until it is as common as water. Combine this with the fact that slowly but surely awareness of false DV is growing and the number of men, women, and children who are collateral dammage are starting to organize and what we are going to end up with is a public relations disaster for feminists.
October 30th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Robert, please consider this as a serious suggestion: you and Glenn ought to do a mainstream news piece on this subject. This is the kind of thing that will get middle America's blood boiling -- we have the women cheating the government out of money, and on top of that, they are destroying innocent men's lives in the process. I can't think of any issue in this area that would resonate better than this one.
October 30th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Here in the town i live in, the domestic violence shelters are full of women who are crack heads, and pain killer addicts. It's almost like the state is enabling, and subsidizing these sick / violent womens addictions, which in turn feed the American cultural drug problem.
October 30th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
Just was sitting with a woman last night who sought out shelter services. She told me about the professional liars who were getting services. It's like welfare. There is an underground information network that informs those who want to abuse the system. The domestic abuse system in the ideal target for their efforts. If there is fraud, they can hide behind the victim card. The industry wants to grow to provide more jobs for more feminists. There really are no limiting factors. Politicians who might criticize will be taken to task and will be in a "no win" position.
October 30th, 2009 at 7:30 pm
.
the false dv court tyranny must get exposed
My wife of 25 years of marriage turned bad because of these "power mongers”. True she must have had a deep dark secret side to steal. These laws now give females unlimited power to destroy the family unit within seconds, if she is not happy.
2. I never dreamed this could happen to me this way. My first wife back in 1984 had limited abuse of power which she used often but never could the police arrest me now they can. The unreal fact is the female can now perjure herself and the courts will "ALLOW this behavior and condone even promote perjury or face getting arrested if she does not to do everything in the governments power to destroy the family unit. To think these new laws have just started.
3. America is just @ the beginning stage of these new laws the ”power mongers" have put into place to steal,beat,suppress, the male even the child in my opinion to commit suicide plus any man the female chooses to be jailed.
http://www.massoutrage.com/ma/restraining-order-resources/fighting-false-restraining-orders/
http://www.dvmen.org/dv-13.htm#pgfId-998197
--------------------How it felt the day of my arrest---------------by this unreal abuse of the "power mongers"
Scott and average man who was married for 24 years proud of his wife and children and happy with my life then, on July 6th 2009, Scott woke up July 6th 2009 at 5:00am took Vincent Cole my oldest son to work at Lowes, when I got back Joanna & I had coffee then she mentioned to me she could not stand it that me being blind and she could not imagine taking care of me when I get old if I was blind in my other eye. Joanna knew I had a grandmother who was blind in the same good eye that I have left to see out of.
Unknown to Scott, Joanna @ around 11:30am decided to end the marriage and sought help from the local women's center the (typically feminist and funded by the government with taxpayer’s money). She received free advice about how to end her marriage, in particular about financial matters, emotional counseling, court support, legal advice, the availability of emergency housing for women, and what Social Security and if benefits were available.
After advice, Joanna went to the Troopers then the local Court house in Kenai and got an on-the-spot (ex parte) interim Intervention (Domestic Violence) Order. She had alleged that Scott had threatened, beat, even raped her and the order was issued automatically. This Order prevented Scott from entering his own home, collecting his own personal property, and from talking to or being anywhere near Joanna or Raymond. Joanna then went online locked up the bank accounts. Then she claimed I had stolen money from her.
3 State Trooper went to Scott's home and arrested him. Scott thought the Troopers must have made a mistake. How could he have been found guilty of being violent when he had never been violent? He hadn't been arrested, hadn't been to court, and didn't know anything about it. But the Trooper explained that Scott couldn't go home and couldn't see or speak to his child or his wife, or he would go to jail again once you’re released again. He had to go to court in a few days.
After being released from prison Scott hurried to get online to see if his unemployment was in jeopardy it was because if you’re incarcerated more than 2 days you lose your UI benefits for that week. I then checked to see if there was money in the bank account. What was going on? Had the world turned upside down? Scott needed help but where could he go? There is no Men's resource Center. No free legal advice. No counseling. No emotional support. No emergency housing. Scott couldn't even get fresh clothes because he couldn't go home.
A few days later Scott went to court thinking he could sort all this out. After all, he had never been violent, toward Joanna other than occasional raised voice she and I both did the night before about her affair she was having with a 64 year old BJ Dempsey (which I have 3 witnesses) that arguing only took place, it just wasn't in me to do as Joanna has claimed. The magistrate I thought would fix up the mistake. But when I arrived, I found I was facing the police, prosecutor, not Joanna.
Scott, unaware of court protocols and judicial bias, was told by the magistrate to sit down and be quiet, the magistrate satisfied herself that Scott was guilty based solely on Joanna's allegations and on what the police said, and granted the Intervention Order for a one year period. No evidence other than what Joanna presented nor proved that Scott was violent and that Joanna needed the order. When Scott left the court he was shocked and stunned, wondering what the hell just happened to justice. (It is a fraud)
Weeks later, unable to afford a Civil Attorney, Scott, still unaware of judicial bias, appeared alone before the Family Court Judge. Figuring he had always been a good husband and father, always supported his family, and he and his children loved each other, Scott looked forward to being granted full custody and the property he owned because Joanna he knew had fabricated the story.
Scott was not eligible for legal aid and felt intimidated, vulnerable and alone. He now realized one purpose of the Domestic Violence Order was to prevent him from having any hope of shared custody or substantial contact with his children.
The next 3 months had passes what Scott got was monitored phone calls every night to speak with 14 year old son Raymond.
Scott now would never ever re-marry. (THE MARRIAGE LICENSE IS NOW A LICENSE TO STEAL)
Joanna now receives money from her Job, BJ Dempsey, Child Support, all without a husband she now receives more than she ever did with one.
------ -below has not happened yet but will in March 2010----------------
Eventually, not having been able to see his son for nearly a year, Scott attends the Family Court alone. Still unaware of judicial bias, he believes the court will enforce justice and the access order to see his kids. The Court doesn't, because the Chief Justice of the Family Court has instructed Family Court not to jail or fine mothers even when they ignore Court orders. There is nothing that can be done. If Joanna won't allow it, Scott cannot see his children again, and if he tries to, he will be jailed and have a criminal record.
In later dealings with the Family Court, Joanna was given their house and most of what other assets remained.
As a result, Scott is absolutely devastated and shattered and in such a state of depression that he loses his job. He finds he has no children, no assets, a reduced motivation and capacity to earn and no income, and he sees no future. Scott also sees the grief in his children's grandparents, uncles, aunts and cousins, who have been cut off from the children they've grown to love.
This story sounds unbelievable, but it is not it is true. This and worse things happen every day to fathers all across America.
October 30th, 2009 at 8:15 pm
I don't know if your organization(s) utilize billboards or if you have funding for such, but while thinking the other day , I came up with a billboard idea.....
A family silhouette background with the caption: "Courts that allow perjury hurt us all"...
I think this would make a nice pamphlet too, if the billboard is too expensive.
I'm really not a fan of this site, per se, but the injustices I read on here are unbelievably appalling.
October 30th, 2009 at 10:53 pm
Scott,
Wayne wants to know where Scott lives, Wayne wants to know what Scott is going to do to help change the situation.
My question is Scott the person who wrote the comment the same Scott that Scott is talking about??
Which ever Scott wants to listen, if you are in Mass call 617-Sad-Dads
October 31st, 2009 at 2:00 am
Alaska,
I'm representing myself. I have written Fox News, Anchorage KTUU, local paper and allot of blogs, and Bill Oreilly.
I have filed 3 lawsuits. I'm pleading not guilty. The DA now after 3 months said she has no case and I said throw it out dismiss the case "NO" she said she needs more time so the Magistrate said they have until 11/5/2009 to get their evidence. I said trial by Jury and a "JUDGE"
Never use a Magistrate the DA can have your case over turned later so always use a "JUDGE.
The court system will always find the man guilty and I have done the research for the last 3 months on the Internet it is "UNREAL" what I found out. When my wife wrote her original Affidavide I was "BLOWN" away by the "LIES" I said to myself she lied how did she pull it off.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Perjury and subornation of perjury are standard practice.)
"UNREAL" everything is confiscated now but I hope I can contact the right people that may secretly sit in on my trial or do the Marxist feminists control them too?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.dvmen.org/dv-13.htm#pgfId-998197
In 2003 the Colorado legislature was swept by a wave of political correctness that exceeded even their usual corrupt standards and renamed "restraining orders" to "protection orders" despite the fact there is no evidence to suggest such orders, by any name, have ever protected anyone.
What happens, what you must, and must not do under a civil protection order
Top
The following tabulation is aimed at Colorado residents. Attorney Gregory Hession has an excellent section on How to fight false protection orders for Massachusetts residents. Either of these guides should provide basic information for residents of other states as well.
1. If your female partner, her relatives, doctor, social worker, etc., accuse you of domestic or emotional abuse, or even the potential for such abuse, you will be served with a standard temporary protection order under C.R.S. § 13-14-102 to stay away from her and her domicile (what you thought was your house and home). No proof or evidence is required to obtain such an order. Hearsay is admissible. Perjury and subornation of perjury are standard practice.
2. Typically you will also be barred from any direct or indirect contact with her friends, relatives, employer(s), or other associates or third-parties. They may have been "your" friends or associates before but after the protection order is issued any female friends are hers.
That will be more than an inconvenience should you work at or near the same location, and you can expect to lose your job in such circumstances, or go to jail for violating the order. In many cases you can expect her to attempt to arrange for you to violate the order so she can have you jailed.
And if an acquaintance does mention to her that "Joe said..." that is indirect contact and could get you arrested as well.
3. No contact means "no contact" by you C.R.S. § 18-6-803.5(1) . Even accidental contact in a grocery store can get you arrested.
If your kids call you that is a criminal violation of the protection order.
If you accidentally hit the autodialer on your cell phone and it dials your home number, that is a criminal violation and you can go to jail. Men have had their cell phones in their pocket and it has dialed home. Jail him!
Your computer may get infected with a virus or a worm and send her (and everyone else you've ever sent electronic mail to) an email. That has been construed as a criminal violation of the protection order.
4. Protection orders only work one way. You are restrained. She can, and will do anything she wants.
If she calls you, and you talk to her, that is a criminal violation of the protection order.
If she comes over and tries to crawl in bed with you (this actually happens), whether you cooperate or not, you have criminally violated the protection order.
If she sends you an email or fax you are in violation of the protection order if you make any response at all. Such communications from her might make good evidence against her if the matter comes to trial or for a hearing, however, so save them with a date/time of receipt stamp.
5. The most common version of stalking reported to the Equal Justice Foundation is a woman who takes out a protection order against a man and then stalks him with cell phone in hand. When she finds him, she calls the police, who then must (law reads "shall") arrest the man for criminal violation of the protection order under C.R.S. § 18-6-803.5(3)(b) .
6. In many cases where an abusive female has been arrested for domestic violence she then goes to a shelter or victim's advocate and obtains a civil restraining order against him that forces him out of his own home.
7. Violation of domestic violence or abuse protection order costs the great majority of men we hear from their jobs. Even having a permanent protection order against you may cause the loss of your job and will certainly get you discharged from the military or fired from the police force or similar occupations where having a weapon or handling hazardous materials is a condition of employment.
8. The order will be served ex parte (without the other party present), preferably, from her standpoint, with no prior warning whatsoever.
9. Generally you will be escorted from your home, often in the middle of the night, with little more than the clothes you are wearing, or what you can pack on five minutes notice.
10. You may visit your home once after the order is served in the company of a police officer to collect any "undisputed" items you might claim. Usually such accompanied visits are limited to one hour and the police are there to protect her, not you.
11. The order usually spells out the terms of any visitation or contact rights you have with any children in the relationship (usually none initially even if the children are yours and not hers). You must scrupulously obey the terms of the order, i.e., no telephone calls or birthday cards to the kids.
12. Get a good criminal defense attorney! In life, and in America, you get what you pay for.
13. Read the laws yourself! Do not assume your attorney is going to do everything for you. Do your homework. Look for loop holes or advantages in the wording of the law. Read the statute(s) you are charged under 20+ times if you have to. Men often get lazy, or are in shock, during the time before they have to go to court but the sentence you face is for life without possibility of parole.
14. A hearing must be held within fourteen days as to whether the temporary order should be made permanent. However, such hearings are commonly continued for month after month unless you object. Have your attorney file a motion for dismissal if the hearing date is more than fourteen days after issuance of the protection order.
It likely will be made permanent (as in the rest of your life) unless you have competent counsel. Even then you have a good chance of losing as the hearing will be perfunctory, and your side of the story won't be heard unless you have a good attorney, so don't treat this casually.
15. If the protection order against you is made permanent, either through default or at a hearing, under C.R.S. § 13-14-102(17.5) you cannot request any modifications to the order for a minimum of four (4) years.
16. Objective evidence wins court cases. Phone records, answering machine tapes, e-mails, pictures, etc., are all basic to winning your freedom. Collect them if you can without violating the protection order or have your attorney subpoena them, identify date and time, and go over your evidence with your attorney. Make sure any evidence you have is admissible and has been discovered to opposing counsel prior to your hearing.
17. If the protection (restraining) order is made permanent (as in the rest of your life) under DoD Directive 5220.6 (PDF) you may be denied a security clearance and any current clearance may be revoked.
18. You will almost certainly be left confused with few answers to your questions. A good attorney will take care of the legal issues in court. But you will probably never get the answers as to why she did the things she did. Accept it!
19. From the time the protection order is imposed until it is cleared from all databases it is a violation of Federal law 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8 and 9) to purchase, acquire, or be in possession of firearms or other dangerous weapons, e.g., swords, grenades, explosives, ammunition, etc. This is a felony with a mandatory minimum of 5 years in federal prison if convicted.
Collectors items are held to be in this category as well. "In possession" generally means in the same room as, or in close proximity to. If you are visiting a friend and they have a gun collection, you are in violation and could be sentenced to five years (minimum) in prison.
If you have a gun collection, swords, etc., the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) approved method of storage after issuance of a protection order or being charged with domestic violence is with an attorney, with the police or sheriff, or with an approved firearms dealer. Have a friend or relative collect them for you and remove them to an approved storage location until after you are sure the protection order has been lifted and your name removed from the state and federal databases. That will usually require a separate motion to the court or personally carrying a certified copy of the court order of dismissal to a Colorado Bureau of Investigation office.
20. If you win, be sure the protection order has been removed from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI) database as well. That requires a separate court order. You can, and will be arrested if the protection order remains in the CBI database even though the court has lifted the order. Remember, you are guilty until you prove your innocence, and even after until you clear out the CBI records.
As a safety measure you should have a gun dealer run a check on you after the order is dismissed to be absolutely sure your name has been removed from all databases.
21. Stay away! If you violate, or she contrives to have you violate the terms of the protection order you will likely find yourself in jail (C.R.S. § 18-6-803.5). There is a not so funny joke that cell phones were invented to allow women to report protection order violations. Believe it!
22. Always carry a copy of the protection order with you to show police when you are stopped. The order will have specific terms you must meet and sometimes you can avoid arrest by presenting the officers the specific terms of the order and showing them you have not violated any of the restrictions.
http://www.dvmen.org/dv-56.htm#courts
Tyranny in the courts
We pride ourselves that we are a nation that lives by the rule of law. But glaring problems now exist in our legal system.
There is an old saying that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. However, noted editor and author John W. Campbell observed that it wasn't power that corrupts, but immunity. Under that standard, the corruption in our courts results not from the judges wielding power, but the fact that they do so without being held accountable.
The rule of law is not the rule of judges and lawyers and such judicial imperialism threatens the very foundations of our society. The rule of law has been largely replaced by emotion, not to say hysteria. Reason has been corrupted to feelings. Jurists seem to have no concept of logic, and ad hominem is now interpreted to mean "attack all men," but it is still the same fallacy.
October 31st, 2009 at 7:31 pm
"This is the kind of thing that will get middle America's blood boiling -- we have the women cheating the government out of money, and on top of that, they are destroying innocent men's lives in the process."
-- not to mention profiting on the backs of the women and men who really HAVE BEEN abused, not unlike someone panhandling around New Orleans, falsely claiming to have lost a home in Hurricane Katrina.
November 1st, 2009 at 8:49 am
One of the best things we can do is punish lawyers who facilitate false DV claims. Less lawyers will coerce or convince their female clients to use false DV claims if they stand a chance to be punished for doing so.
November 2nd, 2009 at 7:53 pm
When it comes to DV it is pretty widespread that the women will be believed based on only her verbal declaration. It is true with most Government Agencies and DV shelters in Canada. i recall a statement on the Ontario Government website "You will be believed".
Indeed they are whether its true or false.
November 3rd, 2009 at 3:05 am
Sounds like some ACORN hidden camera exposure is in order...
November 3rd, 2009 at 10:29 am
I am tired of women getting away with all this bullcrap, while the men have to pay the price for their actions. What a damn joke, and we keep getting told to just shut up about stuff. Oh, I think not.
November 10th, 2009 at 7:01 pm
Alaska,
1. False DV claim update, it has now been 4 months the DA still has nothing and wants more time.
2. Nov 5th 2009 2:45pm I said dismiss the case. Judge said to DA come back Monday 11-09-2009 they had until 3:30pm to get their facts together.
3. 11/09/2009 I showed for my Jury trial 8:30am same old bag of tricks by the DA. The Judge said he did not have time for my case but stay in contact.
4. The corrupt Judicial system is allowing the DA to trap me more than likely into a accident or a situation in which I may not know falls under the bogus DV laws to see if I accidently cross it by mistake while giving the bogus DA time to find some way to change the false DV claim into a real one. “UNREAL” pathetic crooks.