Other Related Websites

 

Citizens Commission on Human Rights (CCHR)


Site recording the violence caused by the SSRI Class of Antidepressants which Cymbalta is of this Class of Drug


To See many cases of SSRI drugs (Cymbalta is of this class of drug) causing the destruction of Relationships


 Cymbalta (Duloxetine) Discontinuation Syndrome from the FDA server:


In my opinion (site with medical facts on these drugs)



North Richland Hills, Texas

Citizens Speak Out Against Judith Wells and Some Good Reasons Not to Reelect Her


In my opinion has gathered comments from across the web from Citizens about Judith Wells 325th court in Tarrant, County, Texas in Forth Worth from across the web and we are putting them here so the general public can be well informed about Judith Wells, and her actions that we feel are unwarranted from the bench especially her discrimination agent men, allowing false statements in her court with out asking for proof of same, and her questionable acceptance of campaign contributions from attorneys who have cases before her in court.

 

Congressional Testimony: Wendy Archer to Bill Windsor of Lawless America.


See who is Judith Wells Top Contributors and her Expenditures

Click here

 


All views are those of the authors:

Media comments about Judith Wells:

Judge Wells was written up in the Fort Worth Star Telegram newspaper on a front page article on Monday, July 11, 1994. The headline was titled, "Lawyers Give, Judges Take, Ethics Experts Worry". The article was about Judge Wells and the issue of her possibly taking bribes in the form of campaign contributions in exchange for favorable judgment in her court. Note: This was the front page lead story that day.

"Judge Judith Wells has awarded the custody of battered children to the mother who abused them, despite the objections of the father." (Reference: WFAA.com May 9, 2003)

"Judge Judith Wells has denied custody and visitation rights to loving fathers of children, despite the violence that the mother continues to inflict on the child." (Reference: The Texas Justice Press, March 17, 2003)


"Judge Judith Wells has, on more than one occasion, completely re-written 2 party agreements that were agreed to by both parties involved in the lawsuit. Imagine arriving at court with a mutually signed agreement by both parties, and your agreement is thrown out of court." (Reference: Tarrant County Family Law Bar Association)

Other web Comments:

The following is how Judith Wells treats men:

Source for the following articles: Courthouse Forum

Judith Wells needs to be removed, and her law license revoked she is against men and
she brings that to the court, she refuses to listen to evidence that would prove illness
due to a drug influencing the mental condition of a wife, all she wants to do is punish
men, when the man has done nothing wrong at all. She is one cruel person, and has no
interest for the truth or the law.
2011-07-25
Negative/Critical

If you want to win your case in Judge Well's court make sure you hire an attorney that
does "favors" for her.... She makes sure to return the "favors".
2011-04-15
Negative/Critical

This woman calls herself "Honorable." HARDLY. Not only did she completely go
against the CLEARLY written laws on Family Abuse, but she put my child in the direct
hands of a violent rapist! Witnesses were brought in as well as hard evidence to prove
his violent outrages, including HIS OWN Fire Chief and his most recent arrest records.
Not long after she granted this 'man' unsupervised visitation, he was once again arrested
for domestic violence IN FRONT OF MY SON! Then he kidnapped the baby for 32
days! He came home showing signs of sexual abuse & CPS was called in. NOT TO
MENTION his wife was arrested for DUI with her 2 year old in the vehicle!! Thank
GOD once again this nightmare of a person has not come around in 1 1/2 years now
which was the same time period he'd been gone when we went to court. Still no child
support, which she refused to address in court. The saddest part is the fact that she
denied my son the opportunity to live with the only father figure he's ever had, as well
as my baby boy a chance to bond with his father, my husband, a SGT in the US ARMY
stationed in Germany. It's been 3 years now and my children barely know him. I hope
you read this Ms. Wells, and learn a valuable lesson. These children rely on you to
protect them. As mothers the law will only allow us to do so much for them. You are
supposed to look out for them, not turn a blind eye and hope the parent will take anger
management classes before they victimize the babies. (Which of course he did not).
These children are our future, just think of what type of role models YOU are having
them grow up with. Do us all a favor & DON'T run again. DNA IS NOT THE MOST
IMPORTANT THING IN THESE CASES! NO ONE IS "ENTITLED" TO A CHILD
THESE KIDS ARE NO ONES PROPERTY!! Jesus you don't even have children how
could you EVER think you could make decisions for these kids lives without knowing
the fear and love a mother feels every day??!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2009-03-28
Negative/Critical

Judge Wells is the worst. She is crooked and makes no effort to hide it. She acts like she is
immune from any scrutiny and justice.
2008-03-24

I would not trust her with my dog. 2006-11-06

Source for this article:Yelp

If you are a father going through a divorce in Tarrant County and happen to have Judge Judith C.
Wells as your judge...you better get ready to take it up the ass!! She will award child support
above the normal amount and she will make you pay all of your ex's attorney bills. You are
seriously better off quitting your job and drawing unemployment or doing something that allows
you to hide your true income. The only chance you've got to avoid this situation is to make sure
your attorney is one of her political contributors and that he/she contributes financially to her
campaigns...because Judge Wells always rules in their favor. A conflict of interest??? You be
the judge!!

 

Source for below article

Texas SC rules judge should have listened to mom regarding visitation
7/9/2008 11:56 AM By Steve Korris
Judge Judith Wells
AUSTIN - Tarrant County District Judge Judith Wells improperly ignored a mother's objection when she awarded grandparents three days a month with the woman's 7-year-old child, the Texas Supreme Court decided June 27.

The justices unanimously directed Judge Wells to vacate a temporary visitation order she granted last year to Bobby Cook and Jamelia Cook.

The justices agreed that Judge Wells abused her discretion by reaching a decision without giving mother Stacy Chambless a meaningful opportunity to be heard.
Chambless formerly shared custody of the child with father Bobby Cook Jr., whose parents supervised his visitation. When a motorcycle accident killed Bobby Cook Jr., his parents petitioned for temporary visitation.

Judge Wells appointed social worker Rhonda Hopkins to the case. She reported that depriving the grandparents of access would be very detrimental to the child's emotion well being.

At a hearing, the Cooks introduced the report as evidence. Hopkins did not appear, so Chambless' attorney, Thomas Michel, could not cross examine her.

Michel argued that it would be in the child's best interest to deny visitation, but the judge did not allow him to present evidence.

Judge Wells signed an interim order granting the Cooks three days a month.

Chambless petitioned for a writ of mandamus at the Second District appeals court in Fort Worth, and the Second District denied relief.

Chambless appealed to the Texas Supreme Court, where she won mandamus relief.

According to the justices, the Texas family code presumes that a parent acts in the best interest of a child.

To overcome this presumption, they wrote, grandparents must prove that denial of access would significantly impair a child's physical health or emotional well being.

Dinah Stallings represented the grandparents.

Comment about how Judith Wells treats men:

The great father and dads rights activist can use your help
against one of the most corrupt, biased judges in the country..
Judge Judith Wells in the 325th court in Tarrant, (tyrant) Count
Texas in Forth Worth...He is the father that went on a hunger
strike....The judge has violated his constitutional rights on a number of occassions....He intends to punish him for
his speaking out about her feminist pro mommy Gener Apartheid
Court...

If you would like to fax the judge and say a word or two
on behalf of this father..

Fax the judge at

Judge Judith Wlls
c/o Tom Wilder Clerk of Circuit Court 325 District Court

at 817-884-3242

 

Judge Judith G. Wells, you are on your way quickly to a place where nobody rest, you are
the most disgraceful representative of law. You have no care for children, your concerns
are how high your power of attorney can go. You are hateful, you are prejudice, and you
show you don't care. I want you to think about what accountability truly mean. Because
one day , you are going to do what you enjoy doing, placing children in harms way, and
one child will die, are you ready for the outcome of the parent you removed that child
from, you made the decision for the child, so you are responsible for what happens
afterwards. You should not be re-elected. You are embarrassing to the definition of LAW;
(protect and serve).
Please resign!

Source for Below Article: The Center for Children's Justice - Pennsylvania Chapter

January 20, 2003

Judge Judith Wells
c/o Tom Wilder, Clerk of Circuit Court 325th District Court
via fax: (817) 884-3242

Judge Wells,

I am following very closely the case of James Loose, which you adjudicate, and have become all too familiar with "custody" cases that do not only exist in your courtroom, but all across America. In the vast majority of these "custody cases", children are ripped from one parent (which is usually the father) and awarded to the other like property for no legitimate reason. I equate this common judicial practice to nothing less than war crimes or crimes against humanity. There is a rapidly growing sector of society. This group is mostly made up of fathers who had their children and paychecks stolen by judges like yourself that inhabit courtrooms across America. The count is in the millions, and those same millions are starting to communicate and form a very strong bond. I am a five-year member of this rather large group. I am a victim of a family court system in Pennsylvania that is out of control just the same as it is in Texas but that is about to change. It's about time we victims take a stand in order to put an end to the violation of our rights guaranteed to us as American citizens and parents to our children. In case you didn't know, or have forgotten, you took an oath that just happened to mention something called the Constitution when you were sworn into office. This same Constitution protects victims like Mr. Loose and his daughter, and myself and my son, against the crimes that judges like you feel you have the jurisdiction to bestow upon us. The founding fathers created the Constitution so that citizens of this free country would be protected against any oppressive branch of government that just might happen to try and violate our rights guaranteed under the Constitution. It is written in black and white and is non-negotiable. The word is getting out that the only ones who benefit from "single parent households" are lawyers, who profit from the losing parent's many attempts to gain equal treatment and equal protection under the law along with the state in federal TANF grants. The sad part is that equal treatment or protection of the laws does not exist in family courtrooms just like yours all across America. It has been proven through legitimate research (as opposed to the research that was used to come up with the standard custody and visitation arrangement that you seem to favor) that the children who have one parent removed certainly do not benefit. The damage and harm that judges like you are causing children like my son and Mr. Loose's daughter is an outrage and must be dealt with. We all know the truth behind the practice of awarding children to one parent and removing the other. It is being done so that the state can collect its federal kickback with the help of judges like you. This practice is criminal and the perpetrators who hide behind some sort of false "best interests of the child" pretense should be prosecuted as such. The good news is that we, the victims, are going to get national media coverage in the case of James Loose and his daughter in order to put an end to this type of judicial tyranny. Hopefully this will get the message across that we are not going to stand for the blatant violation of our rights and the stealing of our children and our money any longer. I would venture to guess that I might be seeing a petition for your impeachment in the near future… an impeachment petition with national backing. Good parents like me who were arbitrarily reduced (by judges like you) to "visitor" and "paycheck"… you know, the ones who care about the future and the true "best interests" of our children, are going to make you famous.

Sincerely,

Dave Vincent

 

Judge William H. Bingham
C/o Tom Wilder 325th Judicial Court
Via fax 817-884-3242


January 16, 2003
>>
Judge Judith Wells
> c/o Tom Wilder
> Clerk of Circuit Court 325th District Court
>>>
Dear Judge Wells:
>>
The facts and infamous circumstances of the James Loose case---
which you> are presently adjudicating--- has spread rapidly across the
country.

I am a veterinarian in Alabama, a teacher, a husband with a
wonderful wife> and a 2-year-old son, and a noncustodial father of 2 teenage girls
from a previous marriage. I am also president of the Alabama Center for
Children’s Justice (CCJ) an organization dedicated to
protecting the> rights of children to grow up with two parents.

Constitutionally, ethically, developmentally, and psychologically,
children> need as much time, love, support, and nurturing as humanly
possible from> both parents. Considering both parents are fit (lacking criminal
convictions or severe physical infirmity) there is only one "best interest> of the child" consideration where parenting time and responsibility are> contemplated: Equal Parenting as a rebuttable presumption and
as a protected> equal right and fundamental liberty interest under the
Constitution. As a> graduate of an accredited Law School, you surely must understand
basic> constitutional law.

Adjudicating over cases like Jim's---or mine for that matter and scores of
thousands of other divorcing fathers where you as a judge believe
you must> decide the â€oebetter†parent and then relegate the other to
sharedparenting :

Message: Re: Letter to a judge?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sharedparenting/message/14280[3/10/2011 7:10:04 PM]
status of> absent parent or "visitor" (note the rare times the victimized
noncustodial> parent is "allowed" by you to contact his children is
termed "visitation" is morally reprehensible in addition to being blatantly
unconstitutional. Then> in the name of child support unfairly taxing the exiled parent by
extorting monies which are unaccountable as to how spent--- to "support"
children he> has without cause been banned from seeing, is egregious.
We all have heard about the punitive retaliatory efforts you are
using to silence Jim's constitutional activism---a fundamental right of all
American citizens to fight oppression and inequality. He has the right to
voice such rights in order to rightfully see his child. But you do NOT have
the right> or authority--- to deny him these fundamental rights, to
wrongfully deny him> the right to parent and be with his child.. We hear about your
authoritarian rejection of his First Amendment rights. To us, this smacks of
fascism and corruption. And, court-sanctioned child abuse because in your
ignorance,> arrogance, and self-righteousness----you attempt to destroy the
heart, mind,> and soul of yet another fragile child in your unenlightened rabid
pogrom of fathers.

Note this very seriously, Judge: Children of either gender---
clearly need> involved and caring fathers to be normal and healthy and happy in
life both as children and later as adults. A primary custodial mother and a
monthly check from an absent father---- business as usual in family court
rulings and certainly in your court---- is a recipe for disaster and the
root cause of numerous social pathologies in adolescents and adults.
Whenever you> deprive a child of either parent, without compelling cause, i.e..,
without> clear and convincing proof of unfitness in either, it is a tragedy
for the> entire family and most poignantly for the innocent child who, in a
real> sense, is completely at your mercy.

Yet you and most all your judicial cronies in family courts nationwide
unconscionably persist in butchering families and destroying sharedparenting : Message: Re: Letter to a judge?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sharedparenting/message/14280[3/10/2011 7:10:04 PM]
father presence> for young and vulnerable children. Why do you do this? Is this a
formula you> learn in Law Schoolâ€"unquestionably---that you apply
automatically while> believing you are "fair" or "Solomonic""competent"
or "appropriate"? I> offer that the Nazi high officers in Germany during World War II
like you> and the other the family court judges of today--- also believed
they were functioning appropriately and maintaining order the whole time
they effected> the Terminal Solution and created untold human misery and pain.

I will end by imploring you to do the right thing and restore constitutional
legitimacy to your family court proceedings and rulings. Start by providing
Equal Parenting to Jim Loose, followed by Equal Parenting orders in
all your divorce and custody cases where two fit (albeit different) parents--
-and> their beloved children--- are petitioning for your help in a time
of strife> and pain. Discard your previous conditionings and subconscious
or even conscious gender biased belief in maternal preference for physical
custody.
The evidence, if ever, that mothers intrinsically are "better"
parents died many decades ago and society has changed dramatically. The
constitutional evidence that parents have equal footing has been around at least
as long. I am writing the media in Alabama about the persecution of Jim
Loose by the 325th District Court. I see now that as more and more outraged
parents learn of your handiwork, your name likely will be a rallying cry for
oppressed fathers as well as the much fewer but equally devastated numbers
of noncustodial mothers. You will personally effectively serve as a
public symbol of gender hatred and bigotry as practiced in the nation's
family courts. People will far and wide learn what happens to the lives of
innocent children in your court and those of your comrades.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard c. Weiss
sharedparenting : Message: Re: Letter to a judge?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sharedparenting/message/14280[3/10/2011 7:10:04 PM]
>>
President, Alabama Chapter of the Center for Children’s
Justice

Source for article Below

A REPLY TO THE 325TH DISTRICT COURT
A recent phone call to the 325th District Court in Tarrant County, Texas, is the reason this article was written. In fact, it was the advice of a court clerk to do whatever I thought was necessary to get out the accurate information about a case that prompted the writing. The material contained in this article is a matter of public information; none of it falls within the realm of invasion of privacy or the release of priviledged information. All phone numbers are matters of public record, as are the proceedings in the court itself. The events described are accurate and verifiable. No names have been changed to protect the "innocent".

Because I am told I'm not an actual party to the case, legal action isn't one of my options. The court clerk also told me I cannot write to the judge and get a guarantee that my letter will be read. This is because it might prejudice the judge in the case. The judge, however, has already shown extreme prejudice. I suspect this may not be the first time. That has left me only one option....you.

I want to thank the court clerk who gave me the idea to post this on the internet. There's more than one court and sometimes I think the court of public opinion carries more actual weight than the one in the court building downtown. I realize the public opinion court is not a binding one while the court's opinion is binding. These issues, however, are more about what is right and what is wrong. At any rate, it sometimes seems the judicial system forgets that it has a public trust to administer justice. Perhaps this will refresh some memories.

There are vast numbers of people who feel our justice system is based on a "favor" policy. The good old boys get together, including the judges and the attorneys, and sort out who owes what favor/s to whom. When the sheets are balanced, the cases are heard and the decisions are rendered. A close look at this case seems to confirm such suspicions. When things don't add up and when event after event seems to defy logic, what other conclusion can a person reach?

There are several events that must be explained to properly tell this part of the story.

The first day in court in the divorce/child custody case involving Daniel Smith and J.C. was more than upsetting. Things were already tense, but the highlight was something Smith's attorney did. Attorney Gladstone did not present accurate information to the court. Let the reader decide if this was a legal maneuver, inaccurate information from a client, or an outright lie. Either way, J.C. instantly claimed that what the attorney told the judge was a lie. Judge Judith Wells showed no concern about whether or not the challenged statement was true. This was disturbing because I always thought justice was based on the truth. And I still think that if the first thing you say isn't correct, it makes it very difficult to believe anything else you say.

Both Daniel Smith and attorney Gladstone were confronted with this issue immediately after the court hearing that day. Each was asked in a face to face meeting why they lied. Daniel Smith laughed it off, making a mockery of the justice system. Since he made no effort to stop his attorney from saying what he did to Judge Wells, his own silence made him as guilty of misinforming the court as the attorney.

Gladstone had nothing to say as he looked away from the eyes of his accuser. The accusations seemed to make no differnce to him and no visible effort was made on his part to find out why anyone felt as they did.

How do I know his statement was not accurate? Am I caught up in the emotion of the moment or jumping to a false conclusion? Not only was I in the courtoom when it happened, I was also an eye witness to the fact that the claim Smith made through his attorney was not accurate as Attorney Gladstone quickly uttered it to the judge. Police reports also exist that verify this information. There were at least three other eye witnesses.

More upsetting than the misinformation given Judge Wells, though, was the apparent apathetic attitude of the judge herself. There were no questions about how accurate the attorney was. She merely shrugged off the accusation that it was a lie; like the accusation that it was a lie was a lie itself or nothing more than an emotional outburst. Judge Wells apparently ignored the facts by not even asking for verification simply because the statement came from an attorney. No attempt was made to learn the facts about either the claim or the accusation. The apparent lack of concern caused onlookers to wonder if Gladstone and Wells knew each other. Is that justice?

Even with the problems mentioned above, J.C. was still awarded primary custody of three year old Mollie. Daniel was given extremely liberal visitation rights. They were so liberal that they were almost laughable. Judge Wells claimed the law granted newly expanded standard visitation rights. Yet, the code was never cited. Nobody seems able to find any such law. Apparently it hasn't hit the internet postings of family law yet.

In the process of other hearings, Daniel Smith tried telling J.C. her presence was not needed at the hearings because they dealt with technical issues that did not require her presence. The hearings were still attended by J.C. because she wanted to know what was happening. As you can see, attempts were made by Daniel Smith to make J.C. think she didn't need to be in court for hearings but the attempts failed. Were these attempts made with the advice of Attorney Gladstone? Did his attorney know his client was doing this?

Unable to afford an attorney herself, every effort was expended by J.C. to secure one. However, the lack of funds made it impossible to hire an attorney. A pro bono attorney could not be located. Legal Aid would not help.

As time passed, J.C. adhered closely to the establed temporary court order regarding visits between her daughter Mollie and Daniel Smith. Not only that, but she even allowed Daniel Smith time to see Mollie that was NOT ordered by the court. She did this because it was in Mollie's best interest to let her see her dad.

Before going farther, a little background information on Daniel Smith will help you see more of the untold story. Smith is one who MUST be in control of all things unless it relates to his parents. It is a compulsive behavior on his part. Those who disagaree with him are always wrong without question. J.C. already had a child resulting from sexual assault several years ago. This contributed to her having to drop out of high school. As an alternative, she considered getting a GED. But according to Daniel a GED meant nothing, even though this author personally knows of some who have taken the GED and gone on to become college graduates.

This and other abuse on his part was aimed at destroying J.C. She couldn't return to high school and he belittled gettting a GED. What could she do? To a certain extent, his mission of destruction succeeded. The lack of food to eat and unpaid bills created more than a few problems. Financial stress caused J.C. to seek employment outside the home, not an easy task for someone not having either a GED or a high school diploma. Still, J.C. found employment as a food server. Smith's need for control led him to follow J.C. while she was at work and he did everything in his power to make sure she didn't work. Countless other things happened along the way, too numerous to mention here. Some of them were so twisted that the need for serious professional help was displayed. Unfortunately, none was sought. One of the results of these countless events was that Daniel Smith's behavior drove J.C. into making a big mistake.

An associate Judge threw some evidence out of court and claimed a business involved with the evidence was a joke. End of story? The judge had trouble understanding J.C.'s plight because the associate judge had never done anything wrong in her life, except for saying she had never done anything wrong in her life. This was an accomplishment and the judge, being a perfect person, was more than qualified to render a decision in court that day.

At that point, the associate judge ordered more evidence. Then the Judge said that a hearing would take place when evidence from another company came in. She thought it might take about a week, but there was no way to be sure. Both parties were verbally told to be ready just in case the evidence came in within a week. No firm court date, however, was set and nothing was submitted in writing.

One week later, Judge Judith Wells seemed to demonstrate what some people call frauding the court. This is the process that involves a judge impeding the justice process so that justice cannot be done. Now we see the implementation of "fall apart" justice. A court hearing was held without the presence of J.C. and the judge reversed her ruling about the primary custody of Mollie. She was given to Daniel Smith because the court ruled it was in the best interests of Mollie to do so. Would you like to read the rest of the story?

Though the court papers claim J.C. was given due notification about the hearing, none was given. Research into the matter showed that due notification must be in some written form. No letters were received, no certified mail was rejected, nothing came from the court or from Richard Gladstone. Thus, due notification was NOT given. There are questions about whose responsibility it was to notify J.C. about a hearing. Previous attempts to make J.C. look bad for not showing up at a court hearing had all failed, one after claiming she wasn't there as she stood in the court room. But Daniel Smith and his attorney finally succeeded. A secret hearing was held. Nobody called to check on the whereabouts of J.C. or to ask her where she was for this secret court hearing. Isn't that a violation of the law? Is that justice?

The evidence the Associate Judge ordered had not arrived yet. So what did Judge Judith Wells do? She used the evidence the Associate Judge threw out of court and rendered a decision based on the original evidence. Do the judges talk to each other or read notes written to one other? Evidence that was thrown out of court was used to render a decision against J.C. The hearing that was supposed to take place when the evidence arrived took place BEFORE the evidence came in. This is a confirmed fact. BUT NOBODY CAN TELL THE JUDGE THIS BECAUSE WE NO LONGER HAVE A VOICE AS INDIVIDUALS. WE MUST HAVE AN ATTORNEY TO SPEAK TO A JUDGE! Is this justice?

This still is not the end of the story.

I wrote earlier that Daniel Smith must be in control. Those he cannot control anger him and he has demonstrated this anger. Now he feels he can manipulate the justice system to serve his own interests and to a certain extent he has done just that. He is the primary custodian of Mollie and J.C. has whatever visitation right he grants her, unlike the original court order. Judge Wells amended the order in the secret hearing.

People visiting a relative in prison have more rights than J.C. has to see her own daughter.

The court granted supervised visitation rights to J.C. What does that really mean? No matter what anyone tells you, nobody really knows. No definitions were given in the court order. If Daniel Smith doesn't feel like he wants J.C. to see Mollie in a given week, he simply doesn't allow it. The action apparently finds itself fueled by the emotional whims of the invisible supervisor. There have been countless demonstrations of what is in Daniel Smith's best interest but not in Mollie's best interest. Part of this is because the way the court order is worded. I wish someone could tell me how this is in Mollie's best interest. The failure of the court to explain itself has affected many people.

While supervised is "defined" in the law, the perimeters of supervised visitation are nowhere to be found. The legal system now says to ask for a motion to clarify the court order. Why can't the court explain what it means without having to be paid to explain what it said? As it stands now, the perimeters of supervised visitation mean something different to every person on earth! Who is right and who is wrong? If you don't pay me, I won't tell you! Is that justice?

Judge Judith Wells has nurtured a demon with her decision. For example, when Mollie's mother takes her to the bathroom, Donna Smith goes with them to listen in on any conversation. Nobody sees anything wrong with this, not the local police or CPS! Donna admitted to a minor in a nearby restroom stall that she enjoyed listening to this teen relieve herself. If going into a restroom with a closed door, Donna stands with her ear to the door, listening. If Mollie was taken out to see her grandfather in the car, Donna and other relatives stood behind the car as it was parked so that the grandfather would not "drive away with her in the car". Such actions were not only illegal, but most people would consider them perverted. The exception to this is the local police and CPS. How is this in Mollie's best interest? Is this justice?

Is it in Mollie's best interst to remove her from the home that raised her and fed her and put her to bed at night and got her out of bed in the morning, to remove her from her sister, to remove her from her church family, to take away her clothes and toys and replace them with garage sale leftovers, to only allow her to see her grandparents under "guard", to place her into the hands of a control driven man who has never himself proven that he's a fit parent? Much much more could be written about this!

On Mollie's birthday, her mother was barely allowed to see her. Thanksgiving came and went and her mother was not allowed to see her at all due to car problems while accusations that she didn't care were hurled at her. Had she gone alone to the house of her estranged husband to see Mollie that day, she would have been "trapped" in a home with no way out. Will J.C. or any of her other relatives get to see Mollie on Christmas?

Thanks to Judge Judith Wells, Daniel Smith, Attorney Gladstone and the 325th District Court for creating the need to ask such questions!

J.C. learned that evidence confirmed every claim she made from the beginning. The court, however, does not know that.

The one in control of the supervised visits (Daniel Smith) does not let Mollie out of his sight. J.C. can't take Mollie to the restroom alone during visitation at a restaurant or other public place, nor is Mollie allowed to go to J.C.'s house or see her other grandparents at their home by herself. Such is the case even if she knows the loved ones she wants to see better than she knows her own dad. Is that in Mollie's best interest, dear reader? No, this is not justice, no matter how you define it.

This is still a developing story and there is much more that could be said, true things that would disturb your sleep at night. Space does not allow all the story, only a part of it. Judge Judith Wells must now take responsibility for her own decisions about this case, right or wrong. The failure of CPS to take action when presented with pertinent information (that's another story) is something it will give account for someday. If anything were to happen to Mollie in the care of Daniel Smith, the untold story of this case would go to the networks and beyond, the whole story that is so grisly it sounds like something out of The Twilight Zone.

Thanks to the court clerk of the 325th District Court, part of this has been written out. Can you help with this mess? My own blindness to the justice system has been cured. If only the ignorance (willingly and knowingly ignoring the facts) of the justice system could also be cured. It seems our justice system is broken. I'm not sure it can be repaired. If you find yourself in this kind of situation, don't allow yourself to believe everything even the judge tells you. Keep an eye out for the good old boys. Prepare yourself to view firsthand the "favor" system. And hope the balance sheet is in your favor!

A person learns to expect deceit and underhanded dealings from the world in a general sense. When it appears in the justice system, something is wrong somewhere. How can you trust a system that betrays that trust by its own actions?

Regardless of what the attorneys think or what the judge rules, they will both answer to another judge who will administer true justice and will not accept any appeals.

The person who contacted me with all of this information has verified its accuracy.

What do you think? Want to call the court? The phone number is 817-884-2572. An advocate is needed and maybe you can help. It is a sad world we live in when every person must be paid to do something. Contact me if you can be a good Samaritan.

I am a concerned citizen who was raised to believe in the justice system but have learned by experience not to trust it. Sometimes it works, but nobody knows in advance when that sometime will come. If you have dealt with a similar situation and had success, I am interested in hearing what you have to say.

Seems ASSOCIATE JUDGE TERRI WHITE of the 325th also has the same issues as Judith Wells

Source

Thursday, August 4, 2011

JUSTICE FOR JORDAN

IS THERE JUSTICE FOR JORDAN?
ASSOCIATE JUDGE TERRI WHITE MAKES SOME VERY QUESTIONABLE AND LIFE CHANGING CALLS
TARRANT COUNTY FAMILY COURTS
IN THE 325th JUDICIAL DISTRICT
CASE NUMBER: 325-483499-10

I have been reviewing several cases with the Tarrant County Family Courts for over seven years now and I would like it to be noted that I am a father of three children. I have never been more amazed by the injustice with one like I have in following a case that was brought to my attention September 2010.

An 11 year old boy was ripped away from his mother (and two, half siblings) who had raised him his entire life since he was born by Judge Terri White giving full custody to his biological father (who has been represented by a well spoken attorney who has seemed to have had more than just a case conference relationship with Judge White) who had not only been absent in the childs entire life making him a complete stranger to the child but failed to provide any type of financial support. Judge White had stated that the mother had ran off and denied the father the right to establish a relationship with his child. As referenced to me by a witness at the childs previous school while in his mothers care, when the father and grandmother came to the school to detain the child with Judge Whites court order, neither the father nor grandmother could identify the child! The school as well as the police department refused to give custody of the child to the father. The child was two later to be removed by writ of attachment. As the case progressed on, the facts appeared to start surfacing (police reports and medical records dated as far back as July 1997 referencing domestic violence against the father ) on the mothers behalf but Judge White would not allow them to be admitted into evidence. Mother stated in an Affidavit provided to the courts September 2010 that she did not deny the father a relationship with the child, that the fact was that the father was severely abusing not only her but there child also documented again. In a CPS report that was falsely filed against the mother by the childs father on 12/23/2005 (two days before Christmas) which was ultimately closed as unfounded due to the father not being cooperative and refusal to submit to an drug test mother had disclosed abuse with a case worker Sharon English stating the child had suffered burns under the fathers care but that no medical treatment was sought by the childs father or grandmother) The mother had stated that she in fact did try to locate the father, taking the child to even visit the grandmother (fathers mother) on several occasions but had not been given any information to locate him. Father had admitted under oath that he in fact had moved 4 or 5 times throughout the 11 years but per the DMV records his address was never updated until October 2010. The father who also testified under the oath of Judge Terri White that in fact the mother was not a terrible mother, that she was clean, had a nice home that she had raised there son to be respectful, well mannered and that in fact he personally had checked with the childs school and had determined that the child had in fact been a A, B honor roll student with perfect attendance while in mothers care. Mother was still placed on supervised visits with the child Judge White had stated that she did not like the mothers past lifestyle ( Fraudulent use of ID over 10 years ago, 3 bad check cases most recent being 2007) and that the mother could flee, despite the fact the mother had only moved 3 times in the last 11 years and did update her address with the DMV each time she was considered a risk by Judge Terri White. It would later be noted by the Tarrant County Family Courts (who began to monitor the case) that the child appeared to be unhappy with the father and at times seemed to be in fear of the father, on one occasion it was disclosed by the child to the mother and caseworker that the father was telling him what to say and how to respond in the event he was asked questions by the courts, documented missed visits by the dad ultimately denying the mother access to see the child. A supervisor with the Tarrant County Family Courts went on to note a conversation of a call placed by the father in regards to the mothers supervised visits stating that he was not happy with them that the mother (who had raised the child his entire life) was getting to much time with the child and it was a conflict with his work schedule. While noting mothers behavior was more than positive and nurturing with the child, no missed or late visits child seemed very happy with mom, it was noted that mother seemed to even provide the child with necessities and financially. This information was also submitted to Judge Terri White but as well this issue was never addressed. On an interview provided by someone who would like to remain anonymous with the Tarrant County Family Courts they advised, that they have never in there over 15 years with the department seen a case like this. That they personally believed that something was going on behind closed doors, what they have seen from mom, dad and child does not add up to the rulings that have been made on this case.
The mother would receive vulgar and demeaning emails from the father and on one occasion even threatening her life, Judge Terri White stated in court that she in fact believed that the emails were “made up”, the mother determined to prove wrong subpoenaed Yahoo, the father who had filed a motion which originally was signed by the Judge preventing the mother from obtaining these records,(his motion would later be overturned). The mother would later on prove that in fact the emails were not made up, evidence was not seen or heard in the District Court (Judge Judith Wells) stating that Judge White had previously addressed this issue!
CPS was contacted in May 2011, Candice Stephens out of Fort Worth was the investigator on the case, the child was interviewed by Ms. Stephens without the mother being present. The child had disclosed to her (which was documented in the report) that the father would always call him names, that the father had smoked drugs in front of him, that the father had even thrown bleach on him out of rage, that the father had punched him, that the father had choked him and thrown him up against the wall, that the father had pulled a gun on him and threatened to kill him and his mother, the child had disclosed with the caseworker not to send him back that he was in fear of what his father might do to him, (the caseworker would note that she did not observe any markings, the child who is darker skinned, wearing a collard shirt and pants was never physically examined by the worker and no pictures were taken of the child due to a “camera malfunction” (as noted by the worker). None of the references on the mothers behalf were never verified, the childs lifetime pediatrician was never contacted as well. The worker met with the father who gave his statement and was able to provide pictures and videos of apparently of “happier times”, the worker verified his references, a pediatrician who had only seen the child twice, a counselor who had seen the child 5 times with the presence of the father and a neighbor, case was closed due to “unable to determine”. The father would later appear for a hearing in Judge Terri White court where he would be arrested for Assault Causing Bodily Injury towards the mother and be tested for drugs. (The Assault charge is currently an open case with the Tarrant County Criminal Courts as of August 2011, with possible additional charges being filed against the father as well as an active EPO in place against the father with the child listed as well as two of his two half siblings) Ironically the Defense Attorney that represents the father in his criminal cases is actually the spouse of the fathers Family Attorney. The father would ultimately test positive for marijuana with results that would indicate to be chronic user, would seemingly make at least some of the accusations made by the child to be true! The child was interviewed by Judge Terri White where had disclosed to her that his father would call him names, that no he did not in fact whoop him that he down right would put his hands on him and everyone else in the home! That he in fact did not want to go and live with the father because of the drugs and mistreatment. The child was advised by Judge Terri White that the reason that he was placed with his father was because she didn’t like what his mother had done in her past and because his step father who the mother had been separated from and not been residing in the home together for years prior to the case being filed (who had been in the childs life physically, emotionally and financially) was convicted of selling drugs and that she believed that the biological father had looked for him.
After further review and investigating and several witnesses input, the father and his current wife (who has never appeared once in court with the father) who actually resides in the fathers home and also has been accused by the child to be a drug user have anything but a squeaky clean past. The father was actually accused of rape in 1997 while attending school in Fort Worth Texas. The father was arrested for theft in 1999, and currently has current open criminal cases. The wife who has never had to appear in front of Judge Terri White has been in trouble for hot checks (the same thing that the childs mother was slandered by Judge White for) and been accused to be a drug user by the child. In June 2011 the father had filed a motion to place the mother on supervised visitation stating that she was not complying with the orders and that she should be ordered to pay him child support. This issue was never addressed by Judge Terri White causing the father to be irritated once again. A decision was handed down by the District Judge on 7/29/2011 ordering the child to go back and reside with the father as shared custody but that no child support would be paid (It was also discovered that the order had been amended by the childs fathers attorney and without the presence of the mothers attorney to state “No Family Violence Had Occurred”) yet it was still signed by the Judge with pending criminal charges. Father who demonstrated his unhappiness with this order would later on appear at the mothers home intoxicated and what appeared to be under the influence of something to discuss his concerns actually wanting the mother to help him with his criminal case, when mother didn’t agree he became more irritated and began yelling, because it was so late mother told him to leave that she didn’t want to disturb her children. After refusal their child had went downstairs to help get the father to leave, father punched the child on the side of the face telling the mother “go ahead and call the police I am here but he will be sent back in a trash bag” afterwards leaving. The mother would then immediately excess the damage of a childs face ear and would take the child to the local emergency room where the child would be noted by an on call physician to have suffered blunt force trauma and would need to be followed up with in 1-2 days, child was listed in good condition upon discharge. Police were called to the scene by the on call hospital officer, where a statement was made and the child was spoken with (while his two halve siblings were in the room) by the officers upon arrival, mother was not present. CPS was also contacted again by the hospital nurse. Despite the current incident the fathers attorney filed yet again for a writ of attachment which would be signed on 8/1/2011 by another presiding Judge. On 8/2/2011 the childs mother would file a motion to set aside the Writ stating that the child had suffered injuries at the hands of his father (yet again). The motion would be seen by Judge Haddock who ultimately contacted Judge Terri White. Who ultimately would do what most are stating to be the unthinkable.
The mother who would seemingly be doing the right thing as instructed by local law enforcement was forced to release her child to CPS placing him in Foster Care but not before Judge Haddock (who had never seen the case, never heard the case, and never met either parent) would have a few choice words for the mother in front of the child who was being placed in Foster Care on the behalf of Judge White recommendation. The mother and child would be told the unthinkable. That “Judge White has determined your mother unfit and unable to care for you”. That “Because your mother and father fight, you are being placed in Foster Care”
That “Mom I don’t know what you have done but Judge White is not happy with you , I have never her seen her like this towards anyone in my entire career” When the child begs and pleas with Judge Haddock her response to him “Oh stop it you get that behavior from your mother” The child begins crying very emotionally the Judge offers no comfort to him stating “Don’t blame me I am not the bad guy you need to talk to Judge White” when the child ask her “will I be adopted the judge jokes “no of course not but, if you want I can try to find you two new parents” the child crying tells the judge “my mom is perfect she hasn’t done anything to me” the Judge replies “Judge White doesn’t think so”, The 12 year old child would then begin to cry and try to explain to the Judge his reasoning of why he didn’t want to go to dads the Judge tells him “If you over talk me again you will go to Juvenile instead of Foster Care!” (Is any choice better than the other?). Ironically a question of what was going on was directed to the fathers attorney about the case. The attorney would then respond to the Judge indicating that the mother and child were not being honest and that she had already discussed this with Judge White, that the mother had made two CPS reports against dad, and moved three times recently. The Judge went on to tell the mother of the child that “Judge White and I have known (fathers attorney) since she was a baby and she would never disclose any information to her client or lie”! (It has now been proven that the mother had recently moved once, and that the CPS reports actually were made by the local law enforcement and the local hospital which would be indication of a lie on the fathers attorneys part).

Did anyone not realize that there was a 12 year old child named Jordan that only eight months prior had been taken from the only family and life that he had known but ultimately placed with family who were all strangers to the child by Judge Terri White? And now placed with complete strangers in Foster Care by Judge Terri White? So while this child sits in Foster Care because of Judge Terri White ultimate dissatisfaction with mom as stated by Judge Haddock. Because, after review and several conversations with different people there is a lot of dissatisfaction with the father especially as a parent.

Is Jordan not to be heard? Does he not have a right? Does he deserve to be mistreated or displaced based on personal opinion or for what seems to be bios towards one parent which would happen to be the parent that he adores. Can he ultimately have a “normal” life after this? Or is he being considered just another case on a docket? And I will extend a question, what does this message send to other domestic violence victims? Do they not have a right to protect their children? This child is currently sitting in Foster Care two days after receiving an injury to the head suffered by the hands of the father. Judge Terri White is hearing this case again on 8/8/2011 at 9:00. Please pay attention to this child and ask IS THERE JUSTICE FOR JORDAN?

 

Article used with permission of the website owner or link to site provided

  Back to top

 

Twitter