Information to post on Unethical NH Attorneys, Guardian Ad Litems, Marital Masters, Judges or any other persons involved in "Judicial Child Abuse" or "Judicial Child Neglect." Please email details to nh.unethical.attorney@gmail.com. We will not post your identity or give out your personal information.

Message Board:

We need to keep the pressure on the NH Family Courts by educating the public about the numerous injustices occurring. Please feel free to send us your information for posting. I have not had any recent dealings with the court system so I do not have current information to post. The best way to deal with these unethical judges, guardian ad litems and lawyers is to post as much on them as you can so that people do not want to do business with them. I have personally known judges that have their own practices as most judges are attorneys first. Hit these people where it counts. Their wallets. Starve them out and cut off their funds. When people do not want to use their services, they will have to change their evil ways or be unemployed.

Thursday, October 13, 2011

Marital Master Philip Cross - Destroying Children - Destroying Families - Destroying Lives (From The Stop Judicial Child Abuse Website)

Marital Master Philip Cross - Destroying Children - Destroying Families - Destroying Lives

Dear Readers,

  This expose was received by the STOP Judicial Child Abuse Blog from a litigant who is suffering at the tyrannical hands of Marital Master Philip Cross, who is under investigatory impeachment by the NH Legislature.  It is reproduced in full, unedited form in black below.

  Please take a moment to read about this Judicial Child Abuser.  Formulate your own opinions and as always, we welcome your feedback!

Stop Judicial Child Abuse



·         [Art.] 73. [Tenure of Office To Be Expressed in Commissions; Judges to Hold Office During Good Behavior, etc.; Removal.] The tenure that all commissioned officers shall have by law in their offices shall be expressed in their respective commissions, and all judicial officers duly appointed, commissioned and sworn, shall hold their offices during good behavior except those for whom a different provision is made in this constitution. The governor with consent of the council may remove any commissioned officer for reasonable cause upon the address of both houses of the legislature, provided nevertheless that the cause for removal shall be stated fully and substantially in the address and shall not be a cause which is a sufficient ground for impeachment, and provided further that no officer shall be so removed unless he shall have had an opportunity to be heard in his defense by a joint committee of both houses of the legislature.

Just read the cases of Johnson v. Johnson, Puiia v Miner, Whelen v Emerson, Miller v. Todd, and now Kenick v Kenick:

1. He recommended an order holding a father in criminal contempt following a hearing that had been noticed as a civil contempt hearing, which order resulted in that father, who was representing himself and was the primary custodian of the parties' minor child, to be incarcerated for 10 weeks, in contravention of his right not to be deprived of liberty but by the judgment of his peers, as guaranteed by Part 1, Article 15 of the New Hampshire Constitution.

Thursday, October 6, 2011

Town Of Fitzwilliam, NH Recreation Department Coordinator Changes Her Position On Giving Legal And Biological Father A Schedule Of Soccer Games And Information On League Pictures After Dad Emails Towns Administrator Paula Thompson

This article is in regards to yesterdays posting regarding Julie Green the Town of Fitzwilliam, NH Recreation Department Coordinator emailing me and telling me that she could not provide me with a schedule of my son’s games or information on league pictures after I had explained that I am divorced and live out of state.

Green’s response was as follows:

“Unfortunately I am not able to furnish you with information. You will need to go through whatever channels you have set up with your family to acquire these details. It is beyond the scope of my position and authorization to be invoked in personal family matters.

I am sorry that I am not able to help you.”

Wednesday, October 5, 2011

Is Town Of Fitzwilliam, NH Recreation Department Coordinator Julie Green Responsible For Promoting Parental Alienation Involving An Innocent Eight Year Old Child? – Disturbing Correspondence From Green Telling A Father That He Can Not Have A Schedule Of His Son’s Soccer Games Or Notice Of When And Whom Is Taking League Pictures Of His Son So That He (The Legal And Biological Father) Can Obtain Copies Of His Son’s Yearly Soccer Picture.

I am outraged by an email that I received the other day from Julie Green, the Recreation Department Coordinator of the Town of Fitzwilliam, NH.  I decided to post this email so that others will understand just what alienated parents go through to keep involved in their children’s lives and the numerous hurdles that we have to jump. 

Many people have children who have been alienated by the other parent.  Legally we are their parents and by a divorce decree we have joint decision making but unless the other parent is willing to cooperate, we forfeit our joint decision making as the court seldom enforces this provision in divorce decrees when parents violate it. 

In my case when I went in front of Master David Forrest and raised the issues that my ex wouldn’t communicate anything with me about our children like when they had doctors visits, dentist visits, school activities, sports, summer camp, etc, Master decided to empower her and her attorney Jaye Rancourt and rule that she was doing everything reasonable to keep me informed.  I raised numerous issues with Master in regards to Parental Alienation but again the Master decided that my concerns were meaningless.

Monday, October 3, 2011

Fathers Deserve Equal Protections - A Letter Posted On The Keene Sentinel

Fathers deserve equal protections

Posted: Sunday, October 2, 2011 9:00 am

Fathers deserve equal protections

An American tragedy, rarely reported by the media, is how unfairly many divorced fathers are treated in the Family Court.

The court justifies this, claiming to act in the best interests of children. Is it in the best interest of children to put their fathers in jail when Daddy has lost his job, can’t find work, and falls behind in his support payments? Why aren’t the courts flexible, especially in today’s economy?

While it is a father’s responsibility to support his children, it is the court’s execution of this principle that is often so disturbing.

The court’s intransigence can extend to men who are not fathers, too. Recently, DNA proved a man was not the biological father. He was ordered to keep on paying. This is justice?