||RocklandFamilyCourt.ORG is a public service organization; it is not vested with judicial power; it is not a part of the judicial system of the state and is not a court of record.
This is not a rant by a "disgruntled litigant." Rather, this site is about recent real-life examples of fraud by family court judges, who defy the law with derision, openly and emphatically. The corruption takes on many forms, from making life-altering decisions for child custody at ex-parte meetings with one of the parties, to promoting personal vendetta against the litigant by the lawyer, who lost the previous "round" (in her own words) to entering on the state agencies' computers information which is false, so they could deliberately defraud litigants of hundreds of thousands of dollars, and in aggregate – many millions.
of fraudulent actions by magistrate Catherine Miklitsch of Rockland Family Court
The examples on this page are the easiest to grasp, simply because the fraud described herein is about money, which any adult knows how to count. Your knee-jerk reaction to an assertion that a judge routinely commits fraud is likely to be in denial. Judges are, after all, "fair and wise," or such is the medfia portrayal in the trashy TV shows about "crime and punishment," that clog America's TV channels. The real life is quite different, of which the Rockland county is a good example. With its highest density of population of hungry "family law" lawyers, judges here routinely abuse power in ways that would make your jaw drop. Plenty of facts here. But even a cursory look at the results of Ms. Mikltch's brand of justice reveals "something's rotten in Denmark:"(**)Out of father's social security retirement, his only source of income, she left the father $641/month to live on. She forked over $1931 to the mother, for their only child, who thank God, is healthy. That's 75% of father's social security-earned funds. Doesn't the N.Y. law say, 17%? for one child? The actual latest results are even more ridiculous: $1958 to mother, $624 to father, a punishment for catching the magistrate at fraudulently entering on the computer the amount 8 times (!!!) greater than her actual order.
(A NEW DEVELOPMENT: In an apparent retaliation for catching the magistrate at entering 8-times the amount on the CS Enforcement computer, CSE reduced father's check even further to $624/month. The family court refused to provide a copy of the modified order, so at this time we do not know who "they" are. But we will find out. Perhaps a complaint to the Chief Administrative Judge would make them cough up the information vital to the administration of justice.)
[LATEST: Magistrate Catherine Miklitsch admitted on the record that she had made this "ministerial error" — entering onto the Child Support Enforcement computer the amount, which exceeded the actual amount of her own order by a factor of 8 (!!!), then enforcing it through the Rockland CSE, then having a sham "Violation hearing," which may have resulted in the obligor's incarceration, had he not defended himself rigorously.]
The Rockland Family Court has made dozens of such "errors", the perpetrators of fraud (all the while on the tax-payers' payroll) getting out of their way to cover up for them, envoking institutional cover up, each time coyly assuming a posture of an "innocent" Bureaucrat committing purely "clerical" or "ministerial" errors. The huge volume of such mistakes, their one-sidedness and consistency with which they come one after another, and finally their high cost to the obligor (in many thousands of dollars) say otherwise: they are deliberate "tricks" under the color of law.
Now, how can they confiscate over 75% of Father's gross income? – Leaving him to exist on $500/month? Forking over to Mommy-dearest (a bankster on a very fat salary) over $2000/month extra for one child? How could that be?
– In this case the judge employed a long chain of "legal tricks" that she would call "mistakes" if and when caught, one elaborate "mistake" after another. "Inexplicably", all of these "mistakes" are one-sided, designed to defraud a respondent in a child support proceedings of thousands of dollars. If any of her trademark scams worked, she would have put the father in debt for hundreds of thousands, and most likely – landed him in jail. If you wish to conduct an investigation of your own or come to your own conclusions, you are welcome to our court files on this website: many of the documents are already available, and we shall make all of the documents fully available. Meanwhile, they are being scanned and "sanitized", and that's a lot of work. Unlike the employees of the family court routinelu committing fraud, the creator of this site, an Investigative Reporter with National Writers Syndicate, has an impeccible record.
For the sake of brevity and simplicity we won't go into details of such 'trifles' as “steering” a trial in a certain direction, denying exhibits into evidence, falsifying evidence, or concocting "evidence" of her own, where there is none, which magistrate Miklitsch does routinely. A detailed analysis of the "legal tricks" routinely depoloyed by Rockland Family Court is provided in the Objections, among other documents on this website. Again for brevity, we omit in this summary why and how her rejection of data provided for public use by the U.S. Federal government was illegal, not subject to her "discretion," which she abused in this case, as she routinely does. The data published by federal agencies, including the Social Security Administration and the U.S. Bureau of Labor statistics showing the worst unemployment in 70 years is too inconvenient vis-a-vis lofty amounts of non-existent income this judge imputes to the unemployed. In this case, Ms. Miklitsch's goal was to shake-down a 65-year-old retiree. Based on this writer's experience, there is nothing honorable about this woman's actions and demeanor, so whether it suits your political belif system or not, he's saying it here "as it is."
Magistrate Miklitsch rejected U.S. official data in favor of her own men-hating imputation to a 64-year-old retired former IT worker an ability to earn over $51,000 a year, despite the fact that he has been underemployed for the last 10 years, earning less than $9000 per year as an adjunct professor, having a yearly income below the federal poverty line. In her world of the feminazi Fourth Reich, the U.S. Government -provided information is the enemy propaganda, which she must ban.
As a judge, Ms. Miklitsch deliberately “blinded herself,” as another judge sublimely expressed:
“For a researcher not to employ information placed on a governmental web site, by a civil servant, for the benefit of the public would, indeed, be negligent and ridiculous. For a judge to ignore these new technological changes, made available by government and encouraged by court systems, would be to blind oneself.”[Emphasis added] (NYC Medical and Neurodiagnostic, P.C., v. Republic Western Ins. Co., 3 Misc3d 925; 774 NYS2d 916 (Civ. Ct. Queens Co. 2004)).
Let’s focus for a moment on her thinly veiled, yet highly effective “legal tricks,” designed to rip-off the non-custodial fathers of the last penny they, or their friends and family may still have. “Creative accounting,” and legal "dirty tricks" are the hallmark, the modus operandi of Catherine M. Miklitsch, the support magistrate of Rockland County family court. If caught red-handed (and it's a big "if") she'd just say, “oops, an ‘honest mistake!” and would go on, merrily, to use more tricks from her inexhaustible arsenal. So far she has been encouraged to continue the scams. This website is perhaps the first time her fraud is made public.
I have received dozens of letters from her victims. Here is a typical response:
<< Your website is spot on!
I have had the displeasure to have been involved with the Rockland County Family Court since 2000 trying to advocate for my children and what a lesson in civics it has been. The lies, disregard for law and absolute arrogance of the Judges has made me be ashamed to be a citizen of this country... >>
The end, which in her scam-artist's mind justifies the means, is to create massive arrears. She has been appointed into the position of a majistrate specifically for her scam-artist's "skills" of a consumate fraud. To achieve this goal, she issues orders based on nothing but crudely concocted lies. She ignores evidence solidly in the record. She knows how to unleash the full force of the Bradley amendment on her victims. Who cares, really, if to achieve her fraudulent ends, she declares in her order the parties who were divorced over 6 years ago, "still husband and wife?" Who cares if she charges a party with "arrears" on the order of support that never existed? Where are you going to complain, my friend? Many of her victims are immigrants, who wouldn't know where to turn, nor have any funds left, ripped off like nowhere else. Behold the family court mafia!
Oh, that must be just another "ministerial erroor", the reader would think. It was so declared by the Fraudster in Chief, Judge Linda Christopher,... except "ministerial error" it was not. It was quite a deliberate "error", introduced in order to bypass the order of divorce of 2004, which already addressed the issues of custody and support.
Once created, arrears cannot be undone and orders are difficult or impossible to overturn. For many victims of Ms. Miklitsch, the costs of appeal are prohibitive, out of reach. In 1986, the Bradley Amendment (authored by Democrat Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey) was signed into federal law. It mandates that state courts prohibit retroactive reduction of child support obligations. This iron-clad prohibition has caused tremendous hardship, including prosecution and imprisonment of thousands of indigent parents, overwhelmingly men, revocation and deprivation of driver’s licenses, revocations of passports, unrecoverable entry into financial slavery, poverty and jail. It deprived hundreds of thousands of indigent parents of their basic rights of citizens, making them into “outlaws,” jail birds and suicides.
Nationally-known attorney Jeffrey Leving said, “Child support orders cannot be retroactively modified, no matter how mistaken, misguided or ridiculous. Even men who fell behind on their child support because they had heart attacks, broken legs or cancer cannot have their arrearages eliminated.”
The Bradley Amendment was ostensibly adopted to help the government coerce unwilling parents into making payments of child support, regardless of the parents real financial condition and legitemacy of the support order. The presumption was that "the State is always right." But the law also created unbounded, unlimited opportunities for fraud: in the hands of feminazi [Fn1] parteigenossin [Fn2], such as Ms. Miklitsch, it's a blunt assault weapon for financial assassinations of men, and her assention into political power on their bones. Last I looked, tens of thousands of indigent fathers were in jail in Michigan alone, saddled with over $50,000 in child support, while their prior years' earning were below $10,000. "The land of the free," indeed! Income imputation has been a weapon of mass state-sanctioned murder, that claimed the lives of thousands of men. It is not a figure of speech. And so, the thrust of Ms. Mikltsch's scams is to create massive arrears in a "shock an awe" attack with one fraudulent trick after another.
For so doing she wins accolades and awards from her political allies and supporters in their "fight for social justice," where men are lynched as "oppressors," and "cut down to size" with the use of fraud upon the court. [Fn4] We the People, vested our power in the court, but it's the likes of Ms. Miklitch who usurped it, being put into the judge's seat by her shady political support-base.
Trying to defend oneself against legal thugs, such as Ms. Miklitsch, is extremely difficult: they do not abide by the law, they act as if they are the law, in secrecy: they are closely interconnected and conspire to coordinate their actions with other thugs and the thug-in-chief; they are vindictive and creative in punishing a litigant for daring to point out their shenanigans. At every turn they abuse discretion and enter fraudulent orders, denying litigants their constitutional right to a fair and open hearing, as there is no jury in family courts. The law gives them a lot of discretion, which they are willing and eager to abuse. And there is no legal recourse against them: judicial immunity means they act with absolute impunity.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. The Miklitsch's of this world are tyrants. No wonder the Rockland Family Court is built like a castle, complete with a moat and an army of policemen armed to their teeth; it has more security against the citizens of New York than Hitler had in his bunker; it uses a bigger metal-detector than major U.S. international airports, with the police guards confiscating chewing gum for fear of plastic explosives. Like in gestapo courts, litigants cannot make copies of documents on their files and are denied copies when ask for them under the freedom of information act. Short of a bloody revolution, the only effective remedy against these tyrants is making their chicanery public, shining the light of public scrutiny on their fraud, the same way Soviet dissidents took down "the evil empire" of the long defunct Soviet Union using glasnost [Fn3] as a power tool.
The author of these pages, a political dissident from the Soviet Union who immigrated to the U.S. in 1982, an engineer by profession, and a son of a prominent lawyer, fought the legal regime of the Soviet KGB on behalf of the Soviet dissidents, defending their rights in courts, and in his experience – the old Soviet courts were far more civilized, guided by and open to legal reasoning and consideration of evidence than the Kangaroo "family" court in New City, NY, under the "stewardship" of Linda "The Child Abuser" Christopher.
Judge Christopher routinely conducts ex-parte meetings with her political allies and supporters, at which she decides the faith of the litigants, destroys families, forever maims children and dispenses directives on how to silence the protests of her victims. But Linda Christopher, a relentless self-promoter, is a special case to which we shall devote a few pages of some really breath-taking factual material.
These "officers of the court" act so boldly to commit fraud that they leave plenty of evidence of their illegal activities behind them, no matter how much they try to hide it. As an anonymous "court employee" said in 2008, on a different website "expose corrupt courts dot com" (www.exposecorruptcourts.com)
March 2, 2008 1:01 PM
Court Employee said... Hon. Judge Linda Christopher:
This woman speaks with authority, but has hatred in her heart. She does not have a grasp on the matters before her. She was put in this position to appease the politically-correct crowd. She inflicts more pain and sorrow on CHILDREN than any street thug could ever accomplish. WE ask the Federal authorities to investigate this woman immediately.
There's plenty more there about this "judge," if you Google "Judge Linda Christopher."As it turns out, the Internet is teaming with rants about shenanigans of these fraudsters, who apparently make a career of it... until we The People make a consorted effort to meticulously document and disclose their fraud, and make it well-known to the apathetic public. They belong on the political graveyard, not in a court of law.
Lest anyone be tempted to hoist the above text on the author of these pages, it just ain't true: I knew little and cared less about Linda Christopher then, was way too busy trying to raise a child, single-handedly and to make a living, and did not come before Linda Christopher on my former wife's ludicrous false allegations until a year later, in March 2009. Besides, I am far less eloquent than the "court employee" above. I learned English at the ripe age of 36, and could not have said it better myself. One more comment: it is wrong to say "the court," meaning the judge. The judge is not the Court. The judge who routinely conducts ex-parte meetings, is abusing the power vested in her by The People and denies litigants' rights to a fair and open hearing.
In case of Linda Christopher, such abuses of power are especially despicable, as she's holding life-altering ex parte meeting with her former employee Jacqueline Sands. (Presumably, there is no conflict of interest. In reality, ex parte meetings between Linda Christopher and Jackie Sands for such "noble" purposes as revenge are well-documented, despite their effort to destroy documentary evidence of it.) Linda Christopher has made a career in cold-blooded child-trafficking to the highest bidder as an adoption lawyer, and is deliberately subjecting children to relentless parental alienation as a judge, which most courts and psychologists view as an especially insidious form of child abuse. She was hand-picked to be a judge by the special interest group precisely for being a low-life opportunist. So, the address "Honorable" shows the respect, which we the People, pay to the court presumed "just and fair." As for this woman, she dishonors the Court and defrauds the litigants. "Honorable" and Linda "The Child Abuser" Christopher is an oxymoron.
But back to the old Ms. Miklitsch who has committed so many inexplicably one-sided "mistakes," that her desire, ability and skill in committing fraud upon the court can hardly be denied with a straight face.
The outline of the issues now being out of the way, let's look at the technology of fraud employed by Catherine Miklitsch, the child support magistrate of the N.Y. Family Court, County of Rockland. She really worked it into a science:
- She issued a summons for a non-existent order of CS, allegedly entered 8 years ago. Why? Where does this come from? – Simple reason: Because the now 64-year-old father had a job in 2001 for the last time in his career and made decent money then. If the trick goes unnoticed, hidden in an elaborate farce of the proceeding (what's the difference, August-2009 order of support or Februry-2002, right?) she would put him in arrears for this non-existent order for... a drum roll please... 8 years! Most likely a pro se litigant won't even notice that he's been had, or would fail to object to it on the record.
- If she succeeds in such a scam, she would saddle the unsuspecting retiree with 8 years of debt, ripping him off hundreds of thousands of dollars, thus “owed” over the 8-year period. Who cares really that she is committing fraud upon the court? The Bradley Amendment does not care how the arrears come into being. If he does not object to it effectively, he’s in major legal trouble. The CS Enforcement will now enter on its computer the fictitious arrears, will expropriate any assets and any income he has, cancel his driver's and professional licence, revoke his passport... unless he pays up in full the amount fraudulently imputed to him. Forget about "mafia" in "Amerika" when we have judges running a far greater racket than any crime family could dream about. They do it with absolute impunity, more over -- the more flamboyant their fraud and inhumane, the more accolades they win along with political capital from special interests.
- In fact, behind this father's back, Ms. Miklitsch transmitted to the Child Support Collections an "order" which differed from the order officially entered in the family court... the drum roll please... making his obligation 8 times higher. Yes, that's 800% ! Meanwhile, the poor man has been harassed, ripped-off, threatened with jail, revocation of his driver's license and passport. Regardless of how outrageous Ms. Miklitsch's "mistakes" are, the burden of proof is on the accused: he will have to prove that the order did not exist. He will have to prove that CS collections has wrong information, find where the "mistake" is and prove it to the slow moving bureaucratic machine. The family court is still keeping the "amended" order a secret from the father, refusing to provide a copy. By this amended order, and at the hearing on 06/29/2010 Ms. Miklitsch admitted she had "made a mistake," that is — she committed fraud — which when discovered she turns into nothing but a little "mistake." If a store clerk charged your credit card $2000 instead of $250 (and did so month in and month out) would you call it "a small mistake?"
- Another father, an unemployed veteran, had been overcharged over $17,000, but Ms. Miklitsch threw him in jail for non-payment of CS, anyway, while the state CS collections owed him at least $17,000. Another "mistake"? — Hardly, as his saga continues.
- This old man is an immigrant, of whom Ms. Miklitsch has successfully fooled many, turning them into the modern age slaves, worked to the bone and drained-off down to the last penny. In most cases they have trouble understanding English, let alone the sham proceedings and customary "tricks" played on them in her courtroom. The courtroom interpreters are mostly a joke, playing for the "girls team" in their shamelessly dishonest translations. The victims of the likes of Ms. Miklitsch know there have been "mistakes" and they have been had. Naively, they expect the judge to correct the very mistakes she made on purpose. They don't know what to do about the "mistakes," or where to turn to. The Family Court run by the feminazi special-interest appointee Linda "the Child Abuser" Christopher is an extremely hostile environment: it refuses to consider their applications, it withholds vital information -- it does not serve its orders on the respondents when the time to object is of the essence, it refuses to provide copy of an order for fear that its fraud will be discovered and disclosed, it openly intimidates and takes adverse actions against male litigants every step of the way. Those unemployed in today's economy, which is the worst since the Great Depression, are turned away: their applications for downward modification are not even accepted, they are lectured, instead, to "get a job." They complain privately of acts of retaliation by the court when they do complain. Meanwhile, Ms. Miklitsch routinely pulls the wool over their eyes in the courtroom where she acts "a high priestess of law" in a farce over which she presides. (Read the details of this in Respondent’s OBJECTIONS submitted to the court.) This old man happened to be a Ph.D. and M.B.A. with a fair amount of forensic, and investigative journalism experience in the past, which is the only reason he managed to catch at least some major "mistakes" Ms. Miklitsch pulls like rabbits out of her hat. Other immigrant fathers end up in Rockland County jail, maitaining the lifestyles of the Rockland's rich – Miklitschs and Friends – as slave labor, sweeping the highways clean of leaves and debris, while watched over by the armed sheriffs. "Arbeit Macht Frei!" (Inscription on the gate to the Nazi Dachau concentration camp.) Defending yourself against the Family Court's thugs and fraudsters is a full-time, demanding job, requiring forensic, legal and accounting expertise, running a law office equipped with computers and copiers, any of which most people do not have, cannot do, and cannot afford. They end up being declared "crminals."
- Issue an order of Child Support, imputing unattainable income to the Respondent father – illegally in the first place and without any justification – then follow up with scores of other “mistakes,” the more the better (who can fight them all off?) Slap him with an off-the-wall imputed income, that he would never be able to earn, quadruple the so produced amount by fraudulently transmitting false information to the N.Y. child support enforcement, conceal from him your order and fraudulent "findings of fact" for the longest time possible. Who cares that he's 64, retired and unemployed. He's a man. – Impute. Impute. Impute to the hilt! Scam-scam-scam!
- Enter the monthly amount as … weekly… to quadruple the money expropriated by the CSC from him (she can always pretend it was "an honest mistake" if caught, conceal your fraudulent order from him for the longest time possible, while collections continue, lean back and take the accolades. The iron-fisted CS Enforcement will do the rest. (Read more on this in Respondent’s OBJECTIONS ). I dare you to read OBJECTIONS and count the number of such "mistakes" she made. And by the way, the saga continues. It's more of the same since the submission of OBJECTIONS.
Inexplicably, the CS Enforcement upped the bounty, while the family court witholds the new order.
- In an unlikely event she is caught, these tricks will be easily excused. But all this massive income imputation, quadrupling of so imputed obligation, inordinate delays, denial of access to essential information, and numerous other techniques in her arsenal, all serve one purpose: they tie up the litigant and pull him into the "legal vortex," they quickly impoverish and bankrupt him, they take an inordinate amount of time and effort to rectify. The Family Court strategy is to make fathers die "a death of a thousand paper cuts." They are treated rudely and denied any services. It makes a father a victim of further litigation, which he cannot afford. His petitions are ignored, demonstratively torn-up, unanswered or "denied" without as much as an explanation. If he appeals, the horse-trading begins all over again, but this time with the court acting from a position of strength, from the heights of the ridiculously high amount of CS already tossed against the wall in hopes it would stick. So, even if the father gets some concessions from the court, he often ends up paying another ridiculously high amount, just a bit smaller than the "totally ridiculous amount" imputed to him– without justification– in the first place.
- Here’s the family court’s very special trick that works like a charm every time: issue a ridiculous, off-the-wall order of child support, based on the magistrate’s pipe dream (or was it a cocaine-induced fantasy?) and keep it a secret from the respondent: simply conceal that the order exists, do not serve the order on the father – not by a process server, not by USPS mail, e-mail or fax. Deny his inquiries as to whether such order has been entered. More over, when he discovers it's been entered, deny – scoffing the Freedom of Information law – his request to provide a copy of the order. Why such secrecy? – The answer is simple: Father only has 30-35 days from the date of the order to object to it. Keep him unaware for longer than that – and he’s stuck with whatever off-the-wall ridiculous amount the magistrate imputed to him. Refuse to provide him with a copy of anything on the court file: he may use it to prove their fraud. Presumptively– whatever the judge does is "just and appropriate." Presumably, as trashy TV leads the public to believe, she's "just and fair." In reality, she's a crook taking advantage of the gullibility and indifference of the people. Never mind that such imputation, non-service, and denial of information are illegal. Too late, buddy. Who are you going to complain to? – To Parteigenosse Miklitsch or the crook-in-Chief, Linda "The Child Abuser" Christopher. Pay up or go to jail. (Read more on this … in OBJECTIONS and Notice of Motion to Vacate the ORDER OF SUPPORT.) (See a photo exposè of Ms. Miklitsch and Linda Christopher vying for support in the feminists' rank and file. )
- Respondent Father wins a lottery in the first week of 2008. So, impute to him that from now on, this is what he must be earning every week, year in, year out. This is the part and parcel of Catherine Miklitsch’s income imputation strategy: Respondent Father, age 64, former IT worker unemployed since 2001, was lucky to have a temporary contractual engagement in the first 17 weeks of 2008. Two years later, in 2010, Ms. Miklitcsh imputed to him, in an apparent abuse of discretion, the weekly income he earned, now in perpetuity. Who cares that temporary earnings may not be used as basis for income imputation, as is well-settled in law.
- She knows all of that. Who cares that the market crash of 2008 wiped out and forever derailed careers of the rookies, such as this father, in other fields of endeavor where he tried to make a living. She knows that. But by the time the unemployed, retired and destitute father goes through the slowly churning gears of the legal system, fighting illegal orders issued by Ms. Miklitsch, he will be thousands of dollars in debt (and if he could afford an attorney – he would be set back tens, if not hundreds of thousands in legal fees on mounting legal defense from an onslaught of "tricks" by legal thugs of the likes of Ms. Miklitsch.) Lawyers are in her support base, as her clever scams give them much business. (Read more on this … Respondent’s OBJECTIONS submitted to the court, the “findings of fact” and order, respondent’s Motion to Vacate.)
- In her order of support, Catherine Miklitsch went as far as putting in writing outright lies, ascribing to Father ownership of real estate (which she knew perfectly well from the detailed testimony at the hearing he did not have), “bank accounts,” and other “assets,” despite clear evidence before her to the contrary. The language, demeanor, the literal and implied message she conveys is:"I do not care about facts or your circumstances. I will impute whatever income I like." (Read Respondent’s OBJECTIONS ...) How a government official can commit such atrocious fraud with impunity is really beyond comprehension. Now the old man is in a sea of legal trouble, while the CSC is after him and the magistrate decides whether to imprison him on a violation of her fraudulent order.Who cares that a magistrate is a scam-artist? She wields virtually unlimited power unless we, the people, kick her off her sinecure government job.
- Beginning with a lie declaring the parties to be "still husband and wife," not a single fact in Catherine Miklitsch’s “finding of fact” has anything to do with facts, reality, evidence, or the actual testimony before her. She's creating odious legal realities of her own, taking her "facts" off-the-wall. We, the People gave this thief the clout of her position. Her con-artistry is supported by the special interest groups that launched her career in the first place. She is “the finder of fact,” who is able and willing to fabricate evidence, a “creative” finder of fact who's substituting fiction in place of facts and pulling tricks like a cards cheat. She "creates jobs" by imputing income. Trying to convince another judge to even look at the facts, after the official "trier of fact" has presumably done her job is not easy.That's why we, the people, cannot afford a crook in a black robe.
- Her "findings of fact " begin with declaring the two divorced litigants to be “still husband and wife.” – Is this a fact? What the hell has she been smoking?! They have been divorced in 2004, and she consulted their divorce order at least 3 times during the hearing. The only truth here is that the entreprising Petitioner momma married the Respondent bigamously, while still being married to her other husband, whom she left back in Russia and dumped her two children from the previous marriage on that man, whom she later called "a bitter drunkard asphyxiating on his own vomitus." She had a long list of eligible men in America, on which she hit methodically. But that issue was never before the magistrate. To create fiction, which her "finding of fact" is in its entirety, Ms. Miklitsch had to dance around the order of divorce. The order of divorce, stated, you see, in bold letters, "ORDERED AND ADJUDICATED that each party has waived maintenance and child support." This, and 50% custody was a condition on which Petitioner received 50% interest in respondent's real estate he possessed at the time. (Read more on Ms. Miklitsch creative imagination in Objections...)
- Ms. Miklitsch rejected U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, data by the NYS Department of Labor, and a study by the Social Security Administration because these presumably are “not certified” records. To put it bluntly, Ms. Miklitsch lied about what the law is: by law, the print-outs of U.S. government agency websites are self-authenticated records requiring no certification. Catherine Miklitsch's alligeance is not with the laws of the Uniited States or the State of new York. Her true alligeance is "feminist jurisprudence" -- man-hatred in the absolute, for which she wouldn't stop before making the law from the bench to fraudulently negate the federal and state law on the books. In her warped mind of a feminazi [Fn1] bureaucrat, it is right and righteous to misrepresent the law; there is no economic recession and the jobs are plentiful. When the U.S. agencies contradict her ideology, her allegiance is with the feminazi propaganda, not the law of the U.S. or the State of New York. An economic boom is, indeed, the reality in the divorce industry, which she stimulates and lubricates with cash flows: while corporate parking lots are empty due to unprecedented unemployment, the Rockland family court's parking lot is and has for years been jam-packed all day long, thanks to imaginative job creators, such as Ms. Miklitsch. The Family Court is towering over Rockland County as the bastion of economic activity, in which billions are made. Thanks to Ms. Miklitsch's of this world, the lawyers are busy writing letters and motions (at $350/hour) about her "little mistakes," everyone is happy except for the victims of this racket. The business of divorce, and the many industries around it are booming, thanks to the strife created by the likes of her. Comes the time of election, the legal crowd feeding off the victims of the family court will find a way to show their gratitude for the business tossed their way.
- Apparently, to impute to a 64-year-old Father an ability to earn over $51,000 a year, Ms. Miklitsch had to show that the facts of the unemployment rates in the N.Y. metropolitan area published by the U.S. Government mean nothing in her courtroom. These data and and statistics of the unemployment rates in his age group (seniors), and trade publications acknowledging massive job attrition are the facts contradicting Ms. Miklitsch's declaration that this 64-year-old father has "an ability to earn" over $51,000, when all he was able to earn for the last 10 years was an average of $9,000. So, she rejects the facts. An off-the-wall income imputation was her feminazi duty, no matter how much she had to twist the facts, reject information by the U.S. and N.Y. Sate Governments, to falsify evidence and deny common knowledge of unemployment rates worst in over 70 years (More on this in Objections...)
<<The seasonally-adjusted SGS Alternate Unemployment Rate reflects current unemployment reporting methodology adjusted for SGS-estimated long-term discouraged workers, who were defined out of official existence in 1994. That estimate is added to the BLS estimate of U-6 unemployment, which includes short-term discouraged workers. >> Source: ww.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts. So, the real unemployment rate (as it was measured before 1994) is about 23%, the same as during the Great Depression, when unemployment peaked at 23.6% in 1932 and at 24.9% in 1933, "dropping" to 17.2% in 1939 with the onset of WW-II.
- This “magistrate” makes a farce and mockery of a trial, bullying the father,“just testify to what I say you can testify to,”when he submits the official US Government unemployment report; she tells him to shut up and sit down, when he points out that the “order” of support going back to February 2008 is fictitious. She interrupts his testimony, obfuscates the facts he introduces, interrupts the flow of testimony to prevent facts contradicting her prejudged position. She is literally getting out of her way to conceal from the record the mere fact of her fraudulently issued summons. She acts as the petitioner’s counselor, advising her not to answer Respondent's questions on cross-examination. (Read Respondent’s OBJECTIONS, TRANSCRIPTS of the hearing, and TRANSCRIPT of a "violation" hearing of a non-existent order.)
- You should have seen the expression on Ms. Miklitsch's face when she proceeded to rip-up the Father's APPLICATION TO MODIFY THE ORDER OF SUPPORT. It was as if she was ripping apart a mortal, lethal enemy, a venomous snake that endangered her life. She hated that document with genuine passion! Being ripped apart is as much attention as father's application for downward modification got in her court. When this father asked Ms. Miklitsch at a conclusion of a hearing a rhetorical question, "Where do you suggest I get this money you are imputing to me?" – She barked, "I don't care. From your friends or family."
Let's look at the results of Catherine Miklitsch's shenanigans, at the proverbial "bottom line." You'd be the judge as to whether the results she obtained are "just and proper." As to how she arrived at such results – there's a venerable common law term, which describes it best – fraud upon the court.
The 64-year-old father, whose income in the last 10 years was below the federal poverty line (between $3000 and $9000/year to be more specific, as he testified and his tax returns show) is retired. He retired to maximize what his beloved son may receive, although it is nobody's secret, at least in this case, that his son's benefit from this hard-earned money is minimal, if any at all, as the money goes to mommy dearest who in the previous 11 years did not spend a penny on the child. The father's Social Security income would have been $1604 a month, hard to live on, but possible, if it weren't for Ms. Miklitsch's financial shenanigans.
It would have been $1604, but is reduced to virtually nothing by the partisan, hateful, and apparently fraudulent orders by magistrate Miklitsch. He earned for his son, and his son is receiving from the Social Security office $969 monthly, as a child of a retired worker. A decent amount, considering the needs of a minor who lives with a parent. Mommy dearest, meanwhile, who obtained the child custody from the father on another fraudulent order (another epic story to be documented here) is a Banker with J.P. Morgan Chase, making a nice salary of no less than $40,000 and receives the most generous benefits package in the banking industry. Based on the Ms. Miklitsch's fraudulent orders, the CSC demanded above $2000 monthly from the father. The Social Security Administration responded by sending another $962.40 monthly to the CSC (a maximum the federal law allows to garnish), leaving for the retiree father $641 monthly to live on, enough to buy some dog food for an occasional supper. Ms. Miklitsch has forked over to mommy dearest, magnanimously, $1931 monthly out of father's earned social security retirement. Let us repeat that: out of Father's SSA-earned funds, 25% goes to father, and 75% to mommy dearest, to supplement her fat check as a banker. This is a good illustration of how the Feminazi "fighters for social justice" operate, perceive and "achieve" social justice.
The rhetoric of the "best interest of the child" here would be quite misplaced. Based on the results of Ms. Miklitsch's "wise judgment," we must assume that the retiree's 11-year-old son's needs include purchasing a new Armani suit every month, his mommy's needs include a new automobile every year, while the child's 64-year-old father's civic duty now is to die in the ditch, from malnourishment and exposure, due to lack of shelter. But do not hold your breath as to who gets the loot. – Not the child. Mommy dearest in the previous 10 years, when the child lived mostly with his father, hardly spent a penny on the child, even when the child was seriously ill. Meanwhile, Ms. Miklitsch is generously rewarded by the taxpayer's money and federal grant moneys for causing the CSC to hunt down every penny of the father's SSA check.
But, that's not all. Ms. Miklitsch wasn't done, yet. In addition to $1958 monthly forked over to mommy dearest, Ms. Miklitsch ordered father – who cannot afford medical help for himself even in medical emergencies – to pay the lion's share of mother's medical deductible and employee insurance contribution, plus child care expenses, co-pay and other items.
Even that is not all. Ms. Miklitsch entered into the order – and admitted at the hearing 4 months later, to having made such a mistake – the amount of so calculated monthly child support obligation as if a weekly obligation, thus quadrupling father's "obligation," fraudulently, unleashing on the father the CSC apparatus of expropriation and oppression. Do you really think it was an honest mistake? In her creative accounting, Ms. Miklitsch imputed high income to a broke, 64-year-old father, more than 5 (five!) times higher than he earned in the last 10 years on average. Simultaneously, for the mother, she plugged into her calculation the number $2,000.00 smaller than Mother's guaranteed minimal income, despite mother's own testimony as to what it was. In view of all these "little mistakes," piled-up in a hasty progression, one after another, neither she nor her political supporters could any longer say with a straight face that she is "an unbiased" finder of fact. "Unbiased," indeed!
In the private industry, anyone who has made as many "mistakes" as Ms. Miklitsch, regardless of why, would be fired on the spot. In the private industry, the company's reputation is everything. One has to be either an absolute moron or a brazenly dishonest political activist, a foot soldier in the "gender war" for "social justice" feminazi style, to make as many "mistakes" as this magistrate did. Ms. Miklitsch is not a complete moron. These are not "mistakes." Her actions demonstrate a shrewd modus operandi, worked into a science of ripping-off fathers, unlawfully. She is a foot soldier in the war rabid feminazis wage on men. Ms. Miklitsch' Parteigenossin [FN2] and political patrons pat her on the back for the financial assassinations well done. Most of the men, especially so immigrants amongst them who are brought before this Magistrate do not even know what hit them. Most of them are intimidated into silence by open threats of more injustice, repression and retaliation. They complain privately of being retaliated against. Such is the corporate and political culture of the Rockland family court.
These are not isolated or innocent "mistakes." They are part of Ms. Miklitsch's modus operandi. Based on e-mails we receive, she has defrauded many litigants. Who do you appeal to regarding righting these wrongs? – Perteigenossin Mikltsch. If this is not Femi-Fascism in action, what is?
To better grasp the depths of scam-artistry this magistrate employs, the lies she pronounces from the judges seat, her brazen disregard for the law, while acting as if she IS the law, read the Respondent’s OBJECTIONS (cross-referenced to the transcripts), read the transcripts of the hearings, the "findings of facts" and "order" by Catherine Miklitsch and the NOTICE OF MOTION TO VACATE THE ORDER OF SUPPORT, which she, needless to say, just shrugged off, “I don’t really know what it’s about, and it doesn't follow CPLR. Motion denied.) It's about time, that we the people, deny this master-fraudster her fat salary and demand that she be fired and her job given to an honest lawyer.
This woman holds a NY state government job, paid by the taxpayers. The job gives her unlimited opportunities for abuse of power. She defrauds the citizens. She is a scam-artist. Her continued employment as a magistrate is an outrage and insult to the People. Catherine Miklitsch must go.
Fn1: Meriam-Webster Dictionary defines feminazi as: an extreme or militant feminist. Etymology: blend of feminist and Nazi. The term dates back to 1989, though the blue-print of its ideology goes back to 1960's.
Fn2: The official form of address between Nazi party members in fascist Germany (1933-1945) was Parteigenosse, an adaptation of the word Genosse, mate or comrade. By adopting Parteigenosse ("Party Comrade") the NSDAP, Nationale Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Partei (National Socialist German Workers Party) appealed to working-class German voters and instilled in its rank-and-file the close relationships, common political goals and fraudulent means of achieving them, typical of the parties of the extreme Left. Applied to the German people as a whole, Volksgenosse (racial comrade) indicated shared membership in the German "racial community," the "genetically superior race" (Volksgemeinschaf). The Third Reich (another Nation of Laws,) made mass-extermination of Jews, Gypsies and Poles a matter of law, while Slavs were to be converted into slaves, again by law.
Fn4: There are far-reaching parallels between the Nazi ideology and today's feminism, its ideology, political and legal practices, commonly referred to as Femi-nazism, quite appropriately. The brutality of German Gestapo (secret police and its courts) and brutality, fraud and derision of the basic human rights of men in today's family courts have much in common. These are hardly exaggerations, at least not for men who've been put through this "system." (More on ideology of feminazism and "feminist jurisprudence"...)
Ideologically, not unlike Nazi's propaganda of genetic superiority of Volksgemeinschaf (German folks,) there is voluminous contemporary feminist literature, pushing upon its readers the ideas of "scientifically proven" genetic inferiority of males and the infinite "goodness" of females.
Nazis set Reichstag on fire and used the fire to accuse the opposition. They used it as a pretext for suppressing the opposition, usurping all power and suspending all constitutional and civil rights. Feminazis use greatly exaggerated claims of domestic violence, which women readily commit themselves, sexual harassment, date rape and child abuse accusations to suspend and destroy the civil rights of men. In the political theater, the motherhood and apple pie is the easiest way to win support of the dummiest majority. The Nazis claimed and "proved scientifically" that "inferior races" are evil, subhuman and responsible for all evil in the world. Feminazis claim they have "proved statistically and scientifically" that all men are evil and sub-human, "rapists of women and their daughers." These deranged females throwing a slow-moe political tantrum are often propelled into positions of power and influence. (More on ideology of feminazism and "feminist jurisprudence"...)
The feminist "scholars" and "lecturers" seldom if ever venture beyond the reassuring confines of the "feminist studies," fraudulently derived "statistics," and the "awareness" seminars they mandate for indoctrination of family court judges, where humorless sentiment, political pressure and high-octane hateful opinion outweigh evidence and proof. They dread public scrutiny. Little wonder, then, that feminist "researchers" produced such wild claims as, 'a million girls die of anorexia in the U.S. every year' (the true figure is 100). The claims about "violence against women" are even wilder, appealing to men's natural chivalry and desire to protect the self-avowed underdog. The technololgy of how such fraudulent "scientific" claims are manufactured by the feminazis was well-described by the feminist researcher Christina Hoff Sommers in her seminal book " Who Stole Feminism?: How Women Have Betrayed Women."
Men-hating: Here's but a tiny sampler of brief quotations from this ideology being inculcated, hammered into the minds of the girls and women by the icons of women's studies in colleges and law schools across the land:
"I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in
his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig." (Andrea Dworkin)
"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honorable and viable political act, that
the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is
oppressing them." ( Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor.)
"The more famous and powerful I get the more power I have to hurt men." ( Sharon Stone, Actress )
"The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race." (Sally Miller Gearhart, in "The Future - If There
Is One - Is Female.")
"All men are rapists and that's all they are" ( Marilyn French,
Authoress; later, advisoress to Al Gore's Presidential Campaign.)
[FN3] Glasnost (Russian: Гла́сность), Openness. Glasnost was the governmental policy of maximal publicity, openness, and transparency in the activities of all government institutions in the Soviet Union, along with freedom of information, introduced by Mikhail Gorbachev in the second half of the 1980s in order to ensure true democratic changes. Although glasnost was not a new concept in the Russian intellectual tradition, Gorbachev, then the head of the Soviet governmental and political apparatus, emphasized Glasnost as embracing the policies designed to reduce the corruption at the top of the Communist Party and the government, and moderate the abuse of administrative powers. Glasnost was embraced by the general population almost instantly, with great gusto, despite the fearce resistance of the ruling elites.
Russian human rights activist and dissident Lyudmila Alexeyeva explained glasnost as a word that "had been in the Russian language for centuries. It was in the dictionaries and lawbooks for as long as there had been dictionaries and lawbooks. It was an ordinary, hardworking, nondescript word that was used to refer to a process, any process of justice of governance, being conducted in the open." (*)
What brought this word into the international prominence was a highly unusual move by the head of the Soviet government to actually implement policies of glasnost and openness. In comparison, the U.S. "Family" Courts utilize and encorage false allegations by women to attain instant material and legal advantage in a divorce. Based on trumped up charges of "fear," or on nothing but extreme prejudice of the judge, these courts send men to prison, strip them of their homes, parental rights, bank accounts, current and future earnings and all material possessions. All in absense of a jury, which would have thrown out such cases. Divorse lawyers and judges laugh at litigants' constitutional rights, made almost impossible to protect under the regimes of the Family Court Act and judicial immunity. Family Courts are the new Gestapo courts. Men in the United States today are treated by the Family Courts as Jews were treated in Fascist Germany until it collapsed in 1945. The only difference is that Jews were exterminated quickly, being shot or gassed, while men are exterminated first financially, then by losing their citizen's rights. Not even in the Soviet Union post WW-II were the basic human rights violated on such a massive scale, and the most sacred human ties broken between fathers and their children, as these courts do routinely in the U.S. Just as in Nazi Germany, Jews were exterminated by law, which Nazi judges "upheld." In the U.S., there is no lack of corrupt judges rearing to destroy families, children and men in search of good graces, monetary and political support from the multi-billion dollar divorce industry. In exchange, they get highly-well-paid jobs, unlimited power, absolute immunity, numerous perks and benefits up to ying-yang, for life.
To some judges, evidence is irrelevant. They distribute orders of protection like candy to women. Professor Stephen Baskerville, in his book Taken Into Custody, quotes advice by Judge Richard Russell of Ocean City, New Jersey, at a restraining-order training seminar: "Throw him out on the street, give him the clothes on his back and tell him, 'See ya around.'...The woman needs this protection because the statute granted her that protection...They have declared domestic violence to be an evil in our society. So we don't have to worry about the rights. Grant every order. That is the safest thing to do."
The US, with its absolute and per-capita numbers of incarcerated being orders of magnitude ahead of any other country in the worl has the gall, the audacity to lecture China or Russia, where these numbers are much lower than in the US, on "human rights." Many of these men in the US jails are thrown there on false allegations or to coerce them, their friends or relatives to pay up the fraudulently calculated child support.
A woman can get a domestic-abuse restraining order for just about any reason. She may assault and injure her husband with a weapon, be arrested and jailed by the criminal court for Assault in the 2nd Degree, then -- being unwisely bailed-out by her husband concerned with the Child having to visit mommy in jail -- come to the Family Court and obtain a restraining order against her husband and a custody of the child, as the mommy in this case did in 2001. She is actually telling her Family Shelter advocate (recorded on a surveillance videotape) that she assualted him because she wanted an order of protection. That's how assured she was by the Family Court that a woman can do no wrong. Prior to the assault, she explained to her husband that she did not need him any more, as her family was arriving from Russia and she wanted the house and his bank accounts all to herself.
A report from an organization called Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting (RADAR) suggests that it is as easy to obtain a restraining order as to tell the judge you are afraid, and you get an order automatically. In Rockland Family Court you hear a clerk calling out, anyone else for orders of protection? RADAR states: "The law defines almost any interpersonal maladjustment as 'domestic violence,' the courts then establish procedures to expedite the issuance of these orders."
Kangaroo Court (text adopted from West's Law Encyclopedia and other sources) - An unfair, biased, and hasty judicial proceeding that ends in a harsh punishment, often to the innocent; an unauthorized trial conducted by individuals who usurped the power, such as those put on by vigilantes or a political special interest group; a proceeding and its leaders who are considered sham, corrupt, and without regard for the law.
A kangaroo court may be a court that has had its integrity compromised; A KANGAROO COURT is a common everyday term for a sham legal proceeding, a term used a few times in court decisions. The outcome of a trial by kangaroo court is essentially determined in advance. For example, if the judge is not impartial and refuses to be recused. It may also be an elaborately scripted event intended to appear fair while having the outcome predetermined from the start. Terms meaning "show trial", like the Nazi German Schauprozess, indicate the result is fixed before (usually guilty): the "trial" is just for show. Notorious were Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin's kangaroo trials against his enemies, whom he labeled enemies of the people, notably in the context of the Great Purge.
But the most notorious and massive, perhaps, are the numerous family court proceedings in the U.S., where judges such as Linda "the Child Abuser" Christopher or Catherine Miklitsch, achieve their feminazi-defined brand of "social justice" by means of fraud upon the court, in utter disregard of the facts of any particular case. Their ascendance into power, the position of a Judge of the Rockland County Family Court, through political and money corruption, and their conduct of court proceedings are typical examples of the Kangaroo Court. Just like Gestapo and Stalin's judges would consider evidence against their case at secret, off-the-record conferences, so does Linda Christopher. When someone wth my experience, both in post-war Germany and the Soviet Union may wonder where the hell this Neandetrhal came from in the year 2010 – the answer is simple: she is the product of the feminazi movement, installed and supported by the heavy-duty money interests. Never mind the facts, their political patrons would try to assure the public that these are "fine jurors," just like the Nazi Gestapo judges were to the ruling elite of the Nazi Germany, seeking the apperances of legitimacy and civility.
The concept of kangaroo court dates to the early nineteenth century. Scholars trace its origin to the historical practice of itinerant judges on the U.S. frontier. These roving judges were paid on the basis of how many trials they conducted, and in some instances their salary depended on the fines from the defendants they convicted. The term kangaroo court comes from the image of these judges hopping from place to place, guided not so much by concern for justice than by their desire to wrap up as many trials as the day allowed. The term Kangaroo Court is still in common usage by defendants, writers, and scholars critical of a court or a trial.
The U.S. Supreme Court has also used it. In In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 87 S. Ct. 1428, 18 L. Ed. 2d 527 (1967), a case that established that children in juvenile court have the right to due process, the Court reasoned, "Under our Constitution, the condition of being a boy does not justify a kangaroo court."
Associate Justice William O. Douglas once wrote, "[W]here police take matters in their own hands, seize victims, beat and pound them until they confess, there cannot be the slightest doubt that the police have deprived the victim of a right under the Constitution. It is the right of the accused to be tried by a legally constituted court, not by a kangaroo court" (Williams v. United States, 341 U.S. 97, 71 S. Ct. 576, 95 L. Ed. 774 ).
(*) Alexeyeva, Lyudmila and Paul Goldberg "The Thaw Generation: Coming of Age in the Post-Stalin Era" Pennsylvania: University of Pittsburg Press, 1990.
(**) Shakespeare's "Hamlet." Act I, Scene 4: Marcellus (an officer) says, "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark," as he sees the ghost of Hamlet's father, the late king.