I have met and heard the tragic stories of many parents. PA is a function, by and large, of a custodial ex-partner, although some alienation can start while the couple is still together.

This blog is a story of experiences and observations of dysfunctional Family Law (FLAW), an arena pitting parent against parent, with children as the prize. Due to the gender bias in Family Law, that I have observed, this Blog has evolved from a focus solely on PA to one of the broader Family/Children's Rights area and the impact of Feminist mythology on Canadian Jurisprudence and the Divorce Industry.

Sunday, January 31, 2010

In OZ ~ 'No excuse' for family law shake-up

It appears common sense may prevail in Australia given the Australian Institute of Family Studies AIFS) have researched and found some non-partisan, non-ideological factors in favour of shared parenting. They have indicated they have found no correlation between violence and shared parenting, there has been a 22% reduction in court cases, and the practice of shared parenting is widely supported. 

The review, spread over two years involved 28,000 people, including 15,000 parents and  for most people it worked well.  It shows 80 per cent of parents are co-operating.

The AIFS is a world renowned organization whose role is to give non-partisan, non ideological advice on family matters.  We need an equivalent one in Canada to get us out of the Feminist dominated rhetoric of men being abusers and unsafe to share parenting. The trouble may arise in the legislature where Australia has a socialist bleeding heart government in power who typically bow to the feminist lobby within their ranks for fear of being cast as an abuser and of course whatever voting power they have.

Chisholm the ex judge appears to be a chivalrous drone and thinks violence or at least its propensity is worthy of spending more money.  The proportion of violence relative to the population of married couples and even those divorcing is minuscule but these useful idiots of the feminists give it much greater credence that it deserves. 

In Canada out of a million couples (2 million people) 999,997.7  females do not kill their male spouse and 999,992 males to not kill their female spouse. Do we make laws for the 999,990 plus people who are not a problem or the tiny fraction who present perplexities to the system, and in turn, penalize the majority.  If we make laws focusing on the tiny minority very few people could drive, get married, have children,  find a decent job, or live any kind of high quality life free of nanny state intervention.  It is one thing to take away points on a drivers license for using a cell phone or texting while operating the vehicle, quite another to deny a parent from legal involvement and maximum time with their genetic progeny. There can be nothing more personal or devastating to a rational human to be denied this right because of gender.


In any assessment, if violence is suspected or alleged, an investigation should occur. If the allegation is false the instigator should be charged criminally and primary custody of the children given to the parent who was falsely accused.  In Australia as in the USA the person most likely to kill or harm the child is the single mom, either alone or in concert with a boyfriend/new partner.MJM










By Sabra Lane for AM
Posted Sat Jan 30, 2010 11:25am AEDT
Updated Sat Jan 30, 2010 11:59am AEDT
A 
Family Studies Institute report found a drop in the number of cases 
going to court.
A Family Studies Institute report found a drop in the number of cases going to court. (stock.xchng: Asif Akbar)

The Federal Opposition has warned the Government against making changes to family law that alter the principle of giving children the right to a meaningful relationship with both parents in the case of divorce or separation.

In 2006, the Howard government introduced major changes to Australia's family law system, putting an emphasis on shared responsibility for separating parents.

This week, three reports were released on how the laws were working. The reviews were conducted by the Australian Institute of Family studies, the Family Law council and former judge, Professor Richard Chisholm.
The Family Studies Institute found a 22 per cent drop in the number of cases going to court.


But Professor Chisholm found many people wrongly believe the changes mean that separated fathers were automatically entitled to 50-50 custody of their kids.

The professor says the laws are confusing and troublesome, but Shadow Attorney-General George Brandis disagrees.

"The report by Professor Chisholm does take a fairly tendentious view of the operation of the 2006 reform," he said.


The Government says it is considering an information campaign to clear up misunderstanding, but Senator Brandis says he gives more weight to the report published by the Australian Institute of Family Studies.
"What the Australian Institute of Family Studies found was that the principle of shared parental responsibility is widely supported; that in general the 2006 reforms have worked well," he said.

"The Australian Institute of Family Studies found ... 'There is no evidence to suggest that family violence and highly conflictual inter-parental relationships are any greater in children with shared care time than for children with other care time arrangements'.

"So there seems to be something of a difference of emphasis, if not a conflict, between Professor Chisholm and Australian Institute of Family Studies."

Senator Brandis says the release of the reports does not justify a change in direction for family law.

"[They] should not be used by the Government as a pretext or an excuse to walk away from the principle that every child has a right to a meaningful relationship with both parents on the occasion of family breakdown, while always maintaining, as has never been in doubt, the paramount interests of the child as the first consideration."

The reviews were handed down nearly 12 months after four-year-old Darcey Freeman was allegedly thrown off Melbourne's West Gate Bridge by her father.

Professor Chisholm has recommended every case before the Family Court should automatically be assessed for violence risks and that the court be given adequate resources to do the job.

The chief justice of the family court, Justice Diana Bryant, issued a statement welcoming that finding.

The Attorney General's office was asked about the recommendation for resources. A spokesman for Robert McClelland says the court already receives $2 billion in Commonwealth funding, but that it will be considered.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/01/30/2805599.htm?section=australia

Marriage breakups, family feuds can leave older generation estranged from grandkids

This is a case of Parental Alienation but shows its impact on Grandparents. Many family members are affected including the target parent, his brothers and sisters and parents plus other extended family depending on the age of siblings. The first comment following the article sums the issue up succinctly and poignantly.MJM


 

 

 

By Jim Gibson, Canwest News Service






Grandparents will wait out the 
estrangement, hoping it will get better on its own, something Brooks has
 seen happen occasionally in her 23 years with the society.
 

Grandparents will wait out the estrangement, hoping it will get better on its own, something Brooks has seen happen occasionally in her 23 years with the society.

Photograph by: Photos.com, canada.com

Once again, Christmas came and went without Phyllis Coutts seeing two of her nine grandchildren.

It's a situation shared by unknown numbers of grandparents, often the collateral damage in marriage breakups and family feuds.


It's been over a decade since Coutts last saw the children from her son's broken marriage. Photos from their early grade-school years still line her home, along with updated ones of their cousins.


By now, her grandson would be well into his teens, and his sister, in her early 20s. They live only a neighbourhood or two away, according to Coutts, who lives in Victoria.


"I would love to see them," the 78-year-old says.


The question hangs in the air: Why hasn't she?


"I never go where I'm not wanted," Coutts says.


Her response is not uncommon, according to those who deal with estranged grandparents.


Weighted down by hurt and bitterness, these situations become entrenched, according to Barb Whittington, a University of Victoria social work professor whose research and counselling focuses on grandparents.


Grandparents worry that anything they might do to see the grandchildren could make a bad situation worse.

"They don't want to cause trouble," says Joan Brooks, the great-grandmother who heads the Ontario-based support group, Grandparents Requesting Access and Dignity (GRAND) Society.


Grandparents will wait out the estrangement, hoping it will get better on its own, something Brooks has seen happen occasionally in her 23 years with the society.


Many grandparents blame themselves for what happened.


People such as Whittington, Brooks, and family counsellor Jayne Weatherbe hear heartbreaking tales of estrangement.


"The cruellest thing is when the grandparent has lost a son or daughter, and access is denied them to the grandchild," Brooks says.


Some grandparents even drive to their grandchildren's schools, just to catch a glimpse, Whittington says.

And it's not always a former in-law; even a grandparent's own son or daughter could be denying access to the child, according to Weatherbe.


"It's a different world now," Weatherbe says, alluding to changes in parenting styles. Once-acceptable corporal punishment has given way to timeouts. Today's parents often hold firmer beliefs on such issues as diet, Weatherbe says.


"It's their life. It's their choice. You just suck it up and be supportive of (the parent)," Brooks says. Further, she advises, "Stay in the grandparent role; if they ask for advice, give it. Otherwise, stay quiet."

Both Brooks and Whittington agree that the grandparent seeking visitation might well have to take the first step.

Try a phone call, Whittington says, something along the lines of, "I'd like to talk to you, the children, or both."

Brooks recommends a letter to the child's parent, stressing a willingness to see the grandchild on the parent's terms and conditions. She also suggests writing, "If I said or did something, please give me a chance to correct it."


If sending a letter, always write two drafts, Whittington adds. Edit out any traces of bitterness.


One alternative is to find an intermediary in the community whom the estranged person might trust, "not someone who will just take your side," Whittington says.


Groups such as Brooks's are helpful, but not available in many communities.


There are non-profit organizations that counsel grandparents. Often, however, groups such as Parents Support Service and Families in Transition deal with situations far more complex than just grandparent visitations.


"People often do call us as a place to start," Parent Support Services Society of B.C. executive director Carol Ross says from Vancouver. After some conversation, callers are referred to such resources as social services or the soon-to-be discontinued LawLine.


Many of Brooks's generation prefer to talk their way to a settlement rather than use the courts.


Yet it's not uncommon for a separation agreement to allow a grandparent access, according to family lawyer


Trudi Brown. She cites, for example, a parent whose work keeps him away for long stretches. Under an agreement, grandparents could piggyback on the absent parent's access time.


Grandparents can apply for access under the provincial Family Relations Act, Brown adds, either doing it themselves or hiring a lawyer. However, today's court schedules can leave such a case lingering for months before being heard, she says.


Ultimately, the court decides on what is best for the child.


Some grandparents assume older children just don't want to see them, or they would do so on their own, according to Whittington.


What they often don't understand is that teens, in particular, are so absorbed in their own world, they don't readily think of others.


Conversely, the child might assume a grandparent isn't interested. Whittington cites one grandmother who sent the kids birthday and Christmas presents by taxi, only to have their mother return them the same way.

"The kids never knew the grandmother was trying," Whittington says.


One of Whittington's favourite reconciliation stories involves Canada's national game.


Just to see their grandson, the paternal grandparents would go to his hockey games, sitting on the opposite side of the arena from the estranged former daughter-in-law's family. The young player finally had enough, complaining he was getting whiplash from looking from side to side.


"I need you all on one side," he told them. They moved closer and closer until, eventually, they sat together, Whittington says.


Victoria Times Colonist
jgibson@tc.canwest.com



Comments:

M. Saunter
January 31, 2010 - 10:47 AM
 Marriage Breakup and generations, grandparents and grandchildren, and other cousins and aunts and uncles are left out of the life of the child.  I had to go to Court in Alberta for access and got it.  As a mother of five, I wanted access to my grandson as the daughter-in-law refused with always saying 'later'.  She was totally unreasonable and refused any of the dad's family to see the young boy.

The mom made many false accusations toward me in the Court Room and the judge told her she was a very angry woman and this child was of mixed heritage and should know both sides of the family; therefore, I got access.


The mother still tells the child the following:   he has no dad,  I am only his grandmother only when he is with me, but not other times, mom refuses to allow the child to take home presents or even a piece of paper or a candy, and  appears to be now saying at 11 the child is telling me all the bad things that went on in the divorce, and now that I'm controlling their life and the mom needs to get my approval on his life.  This is extremely confusing, upsetting and horrible for my grandson as he is now blaming me for controlling his mom!


All  are false allegations from the mom provoking alienation from grandson to dad's family.  He told his uncles he only needed to see them once or twice a year.  The mom has him lie as we wanted to watch him play soccer and it is only for his mom and him only.  We said we wanted to be his fans and cheer for him!


My grandson cries as the hatred she is creating in this beautiful child is causing emotional problems for my 11-old-precious grandson.  He said to me, how do I know you are not telling lies!  Do I show the Court Order where the rules are laid out that the mom is to drive him here for visits as the mom said I am controlling her life?


It takes about 60 minutes for my grnadson to settle in and he starts closing down about 60 before leaving.  He said he wants to keep coming; the mom told my daughter the child now makes his own decisions.  I asked him what decision he makes and he said his mom makes all his decisions as he was unaware of the mom's conversation prior.


Alienation stories usually about the paternal parent must stop in Canada!  False allegations against fathers and grandparents must stop in Canada!


Please Judges, listen and please start prosecuting the false allegations and lies against dads and grandparents in the Court Room.  If alienation continues after any Court Orders it should cost free to bring these issues back into the Courts for the benefit and best interests of the child as growing up with emotional hate imprinted into the minds and hearts of children used as prawns should be stopped in Canada.


My grandson should have access, visits to and from, phone calls to and from, his father's side of the family in the same manner that he has access and freedom from the mom's family and friends.  The paternal side has been treated with lies, hatred and alienation,  rather than a loving family with compassion and kindness and fellowship with the child within a family.


Thank you for allowing me to share our pain of not knowing any other info other than the few hours of visits in which the child is brow-beaten before and after the visit as to what we said and did and what he should not say!  Sad!


Margaret Saunter, Edmonton, Alberta,

PS Please keep reporting family alienation; it is child cruelty!


http://www.vancouversun.com/life/Marriage+breakups+family+feuds+leave+older+generation+estranged+from+grandkids/2499100/story.html

Saturday, January 30, 2010

Barbara Kay: London, Ontario Police statistics on domestic violence show classic signs of abuse









Barbara Kay, Posted: January 28, 2010, 5:08 PM by Jonathan Kay 

After six years of service, Chief Murray Faulkner, 57, of the London police force is expected to announce his retirement at noon today.

He leaves with a statistical stain on his record. For 2007 his department's statistics under the heading of domestic violence (DV) show that there was one DV homicide of a woman by a man, but zero homicides of a man by a woman. Not true.

On June 6, 2007, in a shocking case of love gone awry, police inspector Kelly Johnson, inflamed by her lover, retired police superintendent David Lucio's ending of their affair the day before, shot Lucio in the head with a .40-calibre Glock pistol (which she was not authorized to have in her possession) as he was driving his van through downtown London, and then killed herself with the same gun as the van careened into an apartment building.


If Johnson were a man, the case would have been labelled a cold-blooded DV murder, and exploited as yet another example of the pandemic of male violence against women. But the incident was spun as a kind of bilateral tragedy with no villain, just two victims.

Critics of Faulkner have long grumbled about his preoccupation with male violence against women and his tendency to downplay or ignore female violence against men. Normally it's tough to get the evidence to back up such a claim. But the  obviously purposeful refusal to classify the Lucio murder as a case of DV, when it so screamingly is a world-class example of DV at its worst, supports Chief Faulkner's detractors' claim of bias against male victims of DV.

Naturally this lapse calls all the other statistics in Faulkner's tenure into question. We all depend on statistics to help us make up our minds on issues, so it is extremely irresponsible to muck around with them in support of an ideological position. Presently the London police 2007 statistics tell us that DV-related homicide is 100% male on female and 0% female on male. In fact it is 50-50. It would be fitting if Chief Faulkner's last official act were to admit that the Johnson/Lucio homicide was indeed a case of DV, have the 2007 statistic formally changed, and give his successor the nod to review all the stats on DV posted during his tenure.






Jan 28 2010
5:33 PM
The admission will never happen, just like all marriage breakups are also the fault of the man.
by Rhino Party Whip
Jan 28 2010
5:47 PM
He made her do it.  The bastard.
by paulcerar
Jan 28 2010
6:04 PM
What are you talking about?  It is obvious that firearms are to blame for this!  If we ban all guns no domestic violence would take place.
by fixchildrensaid
Jan 28 2010
6:16 PM
Faulkner was exposed just a few days ago for fraudulently mis-classifying these statistics.  These false statistics have also been used to elicit money from taxpayers in order to specifically fund police activities that relate to the persecution of so-called inherently violent males.
The question should be asked at to whether Faulkner is retiring because he is running from potential fraud charges.
by Neilio74
Jan 28 2010
6:37 PM
Barbara Kay is a truly heroic writer!
by Tossed Salad
Jan 28 2010
7:11 PM
Thank God for Barbara Kay. The only writer who has the, ahem, balls to take on this issue. With empirical statistics proving that women are as likely to be the initiators and perpetrators of domestic violence it is a crime in itself that women are allowed to get away with it. Not to mention overwhelmingly been the murders of children.
by maths1
Jan 28 2010
7:20 PM
An exposure of either Chief Faulkner in statistical, department protecting deceit, or more generously Grade 8 failed on his c.v.
The mathematicians for whom I record  have  reported corruption * in public spending to police in Ottawa since Asst. Commissioner Poudrette, RCMP in 1963, and to all Ottawa police chiefs from Seguin through  to current Chief White , letters and 60-page reports, without acknowledgment.
Likewise, presentations to Ottawa Boards/Police Commissions are hidden by false minutes, further sheltered by removal of Chair/Councillor Herb Kreling  to sinecure.
This was  (then Ontario Attorney General) Michael Bryant's preference replacing the two days in open court for which we had petitioned.
We similarly petitioned Bryant's successor Chris Bentley for our two days * in Court: he too preferred that the rackets * continue, and McGuinty/Bentley accomplished the resignation of Bryant to sinecure.
(A petition has been filed for related character evidence to the court hearing of Crown versus Bryant fiollowing the violent death of a cyclist in Toronto).
This continues to endanger principled public servants  *, mathematicians * and police *
(see RCMP file GC-310-26-4-1, for wide ranks of police who endorse by letter our right of access to open Court).       *
ottawamaths.spaces.live.com
aguetta@rogers.com

Denis Pakkala
Jan 28 2010
7:23 PM
Thank you Barbara Kay for your honesty and integrity.  You are a hero!
An excellent article was written by Grant Brown in the Western Standard
Women are always victims, even when they're not
www.westernstandard.ca/.../article.php
"When women commit murder-suicides, there are extenuating reasons and circumstances that explain and make understandable why they did what they did. Not so with men."
by Denis Pakkala
Jan 28 2010
7:27 PM
I would postulate that Chief Murray Faulkner is retiring because the discriminatory bias of police training has been publicized through his own dumb statements … domestic violence is a “gender problem... Men, and what it is to be a man in our society, (are) the problem.”
I would also postulate that Chief Murray Faulkner’s bias has affected public confidence and created internal dissent in the London Police Force.  There are many hero-type police officers who are eager come to a woman’s rescue without proper investigation.  However, I firmly believe that there are a still a few experienced police officers with intelligence, objectivity and ideals of truth and justice.  There will be increased public dissent and internal dissent in Canadian Police Forces as long as they continue their discriminatory policies.
The London Police Services are no different than most Canadian Police Forces in their discriminatory training programs and policies that train officers to use gender profiling (dominant aggressor model) in domestic violence cases.  The only difference is that Chief Murray Faulkner has been very public about this gender profiling, whereas most police chiefs would publicly state that the laws are gender neutral and downplay any significance of gender profiling.  Their new police chief will likely be far more careful and political, but nothing will change!
For Canadian men, the police can not be trusted.  Record everything, they are accountable only to themselves!
There is a recent news story about a male victim of serious female violence.  I am extremely worried that these cases happen far too often, where a male victim of abuse is not provided any counseling or advocacy to deal with an abusive female or escape from an abusive relationship.  It is horrible to be in an abusive relationship; however it is particularly egregious when there is no help available, simply because you are a man!
Court: Rothesay woman avoids jail time and still lives with the victim
January 27th, 2010
telegraphjournal.canadaeast.com/.../933966
HAMPTON - After beating him with a frying pan and stabbing him with a kitchen knife, a Rothesay woman avoided jailtime and returned home with her victim/boyfriend.
Judge Henrik Tonning couldn't deny if the male/female roles were reversed, the penalty would likely be harsher.
Instead, he followed the joint recommendation of Crown prosecutor Kelly Winchester and defence lawyer Al Levine by sentencing Mary Lisa Joyce Carrier to a six-month conditional sentence, followed by one year's probation for assault causing bodily harm.

Tonning said domestic violence is a big problem that cannot be tolerated.
"Domestic violence is problematic," he said. "This is a situation that's fraught with danger. These situations can, in fact, turn into fatalities."
He said if the role was revered and it was a man who beat his girlfriend with a frying pan and then stabbed her repeatedly, he is "doubtful" the sentence would be as light.
"More likely he would be incarcerated for a significant period of time," Tonning said. "(But) I don't intend to rock the boat today."
by Denis Pakkala
Jan 28 2010
7:40 PM
Senator Ann Cools speaks to Toronto Police Services about the abuse of fathers as a result of domestic violence policies!
Senator Ann Cools speaks before members of Toronto Police Services on the subject of persecution and injustice committed against men as a result of zero tolerance domestic violence laws in Ontario.  Senator Cools describes how women's shelters are creating "bogus" statistics to mislead the public about the truth about domestic violence.
www.youtube.com/watch
Toronto criminal defense lawyer, Mr. Walter Fox speaks before Toronto Police Services on the topic of how government funded women shelter advocates in Ontario have effectively bypassed the democratic process using inquests to make their own hidden agenda the law in Ontario.
Ontario's zero tolerance policies and practices that have come about as a result of these inquests have effectively labeled men in Ontario as monsters not worthy of equal treatment under the law.
http://www.vimeo.com/1889117
by OracleMan
Jan 28 2010
7:42 PM
There is a conspiracy, organized jointly by media, social-services, lawyering, and law enforcement, to downplay female spousal abuse and to say that the "serious" kind is entirely male.
 Alberta CBC radio is running a week-long series that continues the conspiracy. Interestingly, the police personnel appearing on radio, and who are reinforcing it, are _all_ females themselves.
by MikeMurphy
Jan 28 2010
7:49 PM
Here is a post I made last week on the London Free Press site with respect to Faulkner's cherry picked stats and clearly anti-male corporate culture. www.lfpress.com/.../home.html
Police Service Culture:--- The recent beating of a man in Vancouver by the Police Service gives an insight into the culture of these organizations that comes from the top. An innocent man was hauled out of the house and beaten by police thugs based only on the dispatch message they were being called to a Domestic. Man guilty, judged, and sentenced before trial and in this case it was the wrong person. Faulkner has shown his biases through internal administrative activities which are fabricated, his support of the myth that women are not violent, and his speeches speaking untruths about the percentage of domestic homicides. In 2008 in Canada we had a total of 611 homicides, 465 men and 146 female. The rate of homicides with firearms has increased 24% since 2002 largely due to handgun use by gangs. Has Faulkner complained about the gun registry for long rifles being disbanded.
Handguns are still in the registry and more closely controlled than ever but yet usage increases. Gangs don't register their handguns and their members lack good male role models. Does Faulkner play a role in removal of good fathers from families through his biases?
Women victims 24% - lowest proportion ever. Male Victims 76% Both the rate of females killed (0.87 per 100,000 population), as well as the proportion (24%), were the lowest since 1961. 62 spousal homicides - no change from 2007. Lowest rate in 40 years. 45 women 17 men. The percentage of men killed is just over 27% but is actually greater because many deaths of men across Canada do not get classified as Domestic just as Brad (in this case Barbara) has pointed out.
There is a case in Peterborough before the courts where the wife hired a contractor. The question remains what is Faulkner doing about the 76% of men killed each year. Has he walked down the street wearing construction boots as opposed to his red stilettos .
There is a famous (infamous) picture of Faulkner wearing red high heels to parade his misandry that all men are violent and all women are benign.
by Sassylassie
Jan 28 2010
8:05 PM
You are going to make the feminist angry Mrs. Kay, and that's a good thing. We need to haul out the carcus called violence against men into the cold light of day, enough with the coverup.
by abgirl3
Jan 28 2010
8:09 PM
Alberta CBC radio? Who in their right mind listen's to that?
by strw
Jan 28 2010
8:48 PM
Good work, Barbara. You left out some data: Not only did Faulkner et al treat the case as if there were two victims -- he also announced at the time a memorial service to honour both officers. There was quite an uproar about the nerve of the Police Chief wanting to honour a murderer. I'm not sure if those plans went ahead; I was too disgusted by that point to even care. On another note, we (Londoners) are still waiting to hear the report on one of his officers -- "Barney Fife" -- who very willy-nilly shot up a neighbourhood one night. That report's probably been buried.
by OracleMan
Jan 28 2010
8:49 PM
"Alberta CBC radio? Who in their right mind listen's to that? "
Abgirl, when the Devil is living off your tax money, don't ignore what She's doing with it. That's what She wants you to do.
by MikeMurphy
Jan 28 2010
9:09 PM
@ by OracleMan Jan 28 2010 8:49 PM
_____________________________
I am agnostic and have doubts about the whole god/devil thing but I love your analogy to the CBC and this creature.
If there is a devil she is surely a feminist who rose to the top of the ranks in that nether world.
by alex36
Jan 28 2010
9:19 PM
it doesn't belong in DV stats because it's not domestic!
domestic violence is defined as violence between people of the same family or who live together. they didn't. here's the quote that explains everything, from the day it happened...
"We can confirm that there was a relationship between these two people, but the exact nature of this relationship is the subject of our investigation," said London Police Chief Murray Faulkner.
if you need an investigation to verify that they had a relationship, it's clearly not ``domestic.''
by OracleMan
Jan 28 2010
10:10 PM
Well that's a convenient excuse, Alex. Especially when there are hubbies supporting a separated wife & kids -- who live in a different apartment. Still married, not co-habiting, she shoots him, no DV. Great stuff for the spin doctors.
by Denis Pakkala
Jan 28 2010
10:11 PM
Alex, living arrangements are not the deciding factor in the definition of domestic violence, hence the newer term "Intimate Partner Violence".
It is violent or abusive behavior within an intimate relationship, regardless of biological relationship or living arrangments.
In the case of Johnson and Lucio, they had a 3 year intimate relationship which was ended by Lucio.  The investigation was ordered by Chief Murray Faulkner to provide a cover-up for a murderous female.
Chief Murray Faulkner has commited fraud and negligence in his duties to the public!
by MikeMurphy
Jan 28 2010
10:59 PM
@ Alex:  The whole point of the column is you cannot believe anything Faulkner does or says with respect to DV or IPV.
You have fallen for his gibberish but then so have many others over the years, including the London Free Press management.
The rules for what constitutes IPV are largely made by feminists and adopted by useful idiots like Faulkner and can be as small as shouting at your spouse or ex spouse or ex partner no matter where they reside all the way to death.
Be careful what you say. Jail is only a shout away if you are a man!
by Smokey4531
Jan 28 2010
11:31 PM
These institutions get millions of taxpayers’ dollars every year promoting these lies, anything which is in contravention to their ideology is covered up and buried.
They ignore the taxpayers who have built their institutions and pander to a small minority of feminists, who are professional spin doctors.
With no transparency and a real show of contempt for the truth, is there a difference between Stalinist Ideology and their own? Sounds like a Marxist nightmare to me.
How many people believe this is just another cover up raise your hands, let see; one, two, etc. etc. the cover up conspiracy wins the vote by a landslide.
B.K I’d buy you a bullet proof vest but the government is trying to make them against the law too. Have you no fear?
by fixchildrensaid
Jan 29 2010
12:12 AM
Alex... Not an incident of Domestic Violence, huh?
This is taken from the London Police Service's 2007 In-House Domestic Violence Statistics, from which Barbara Kay obtained her facts:
"What is Domestic Violence:
Domestic Violence is any use of physical or sexual force, actual or threatened, in an intimate relationship, including emotional/psychological abuse or harassing behaviour.  Intimate relationships include those between the opposite-sex and same-sex partners.  These relationships vary in duration and legal formality, and include current and former dating, common-law and married couples."
By the London Police's own definition, therefore, it was indeed a Domestic Violence murder.
Furthermore, Faulkner's statement that you quoted sounds like it came from the TV statement that he made the day of the murder-suicide, correct?
Perhaps you can speak to some of the London Police Officer that I have spoken to, who were infuriated that Faulkner made those statements, leaving it up-in-the-air as to who was responsible despite the fact a determination of guilt was made within minutes of the officers' arriving on scene.
Faulkner did this - yet again - to avoid laying appropriate blame on yet another female perpetrator of Domestic Violence.
by Ambrose99
Jan 29 2010
12:19 AM
Here we go again, Barbara Kay trying to undermine her own sex. Violence against women is an epidemic world-wide and Ms Kay trots out a couple of examples of violence by women against men.
  Perhaps it hasn't occurred to her that such violence is so unusual, it tends to get downplayed.
  As for the turkeys who admire Ms Kay's writing, what you are admiring is a one-dimensional thinker with a startling lack of originality or insight.
by fixchildrensaid
Jan 29 2010
12:43 AM
@ Ambrose...
If female-perpetrated Domestic Violence is so rare, then why would Murray Faulkner feel the need to LIE about this murder being what it was: a DV incident?
Simple.  Female-perpetrated DV is not nearly as rare as you believe it to be.  But then again.... your views are based on those very statistics that Murray Faulkner and others have the power to create - which are fraudulent statistics.
by Sassylassie
Jan 29 2010
12:56 AM
As usual Ambrose you partake of personal attacks to the op eder and retreat like a coward. As for your assertion that women aren't violent wanna hang with me me when I have PMS?
by rkozga1
Jan 29 2010
12:58 AM
Certain societies throughout history, dominated by certain regimes and/or calculating-manipulative classes of people, have had to endure imposed (conditioned) mindsets (i.e.: prejudices, stereotypes etc...), where facts, reality and truths were ignored, camouflaged, even denied.
To limit (or restrict) “what must never be uttered” about (some) Canadian women (i.e.: their bad behaviours, faults, shortcomings, mistakes, crimes and evil ways), while perpetuating at every opportunity the ridicule, abasement, denigration, even demonisation of men, has been the recurring all-too-Canadian way, since the early 1970s. It is refreshing to read Barbara Kay, who pierces through the layers of denial, hypocrisy and gender double-standards.  Please keep up the good work, and many thanks to The National Post.
by MikeMurphy
Jan 29 2010
1:25 AM
by Ambrose99 Jan 29 2010 2:19 AM
Here we go again, Barbara Kay trying to undermine her own sex. Violence against women is an epidemic world-wide and Ms Kay trots out a couple of examples of violence by women against men.
__________________________
Ambrose is a eunuch and a chivalrous drone. ignore it - maybe it will go away.
It also wants to see 90% of males wiped off the planet. It may well be some kind of sicko as well.
Oh and just so you know dweeb London Ontario is in Canada which is the topic. You know - our country. Has that managed to sink into your otherwise usefully idiotic brain! :)
by Ambrose99
Jan 29 2010
1:30 AM
It's not a personal attack, Sassy, it's an attack on her writing, which is fair game. When she writes about gender issues, Ms Kay always seems to take the male side. Hence the one-dimensional comment.
  Her shallowness on this issue is revealed by the fact that violence against women is the single-most specific form of violence we have. No other type of violence comes close in quantity.
  Violence against women is systemic. Violence by women amounts to the odd occasion. To make an issue of these few cases is to grossly distort the true picture.
  Barbara Kay presumably knows all this, but she insists on highlighting the rare instance of violence by women. She's a sham.
by Rectificatif
Jan 29 2010
1:49 AM
Ambrose, fess up and tell us about the gal you're shacking up with. Is she human or an inflatable? Does she dictate your trolls?
  Turning to much better things, I loved Sassie's invitation, to hang with her when she has PMS. First dibs go to me. We could arrange to meet at the firing range. I'd stand behind her, not beside.
by Rectificatif
Jan 29 2010
1:57 AM
Ambrose (don't take my dig above personally) Ms Kay does not simply "debate." She researches her topics and writes about it.
 If she endorses "the man's side" in this article, it's for 2 reasons that I can see: 1) because she's discovered in her research a tissue of lies against men; and 2) because few other mainstream writers  report this controversy honestly.
  Hence the need and interest in her writing. Look up 'disingenuous' and get your head around that accusation against your postings.
by Ambrose99
Jan 29 2010
2:22 AM
Rectificatif--a couple of examples does not a tissue make. Barbara Kay finds an odd example through research. So what? She is indirectly trying to minimize systemic violence against women. She is a charlatan.
by Rhino Party Whip
Jan 29 2010
3:06 AM
Ambrose provides pretty much the best endorsement for a Barbara Kay book I can imagine.
by Ambrose99
Jan 29 2010
3:34 AM
Barbara Kay is a pathetic, sexually frustrated old hag who desperately tries to suck up to men. What other explanation is there?
by Rectificatif
Jan 29 2010
3:46 AM
Ambrose, the one case BK has cited is not "a case of dv," but THE case of a _politicised police official_; the case she reports on is about an official who has misled the puboic, about intimate-partner violence. Period.
  Beyond that, she places that case within the context of an ongoing URBAN MYTH about domestic violence, a myth that has been constructed as the propaganda pillar of N. Americal feminism.
  Now, why does BK come back to this regularly? I suppose it's because she knows how it illustrates a permanent issue in today's world: how feminism uses lies to degrade men's natural and civic rights.
  In Ms Kay's case, she actually cares about it. Wow, what a concept.
  I have to ask: can you read? You're myopic on this one, and it would seem deliberate.
by JEST
Jan 29 2010
3:47 AM
Recent studys have shown that conservatives have sex more often and enjoy it more than liberals.Perhaps thats because conservative women actually like men.Thanks Barbara.
by Rectificatif
Jan 29 2010
3:52 AM
As you can all see from my typos, I'm learning Chinese. :>)
by Smokey4531
Jan 29 2010
3:54 AM
Charlatan; the only charlatan is you Ambrose99, if you are a male at all it is very unlikely, unless your wife or you are part of a family counselling DV clinic industry. In which case neither of you are human beings so it really doesn’t matter.
London has the highest number of millionaires by percentage than any other Canadian City. They are influenced by these radical feminist who have been educated in the same biased schools that these feminists were educated in. The same Alma Mater so to speak, with the same distorted perspective on male and female violence, from the same nourishing mother.
Did you know; that police officers have a higher incidence of killing themselves with their own guns than killing a criminal or anyone else. Yes they have a really high suicide rate compared to the rest of us law abiding citizens. So before the next police officer takes a gun and puts it in his hand to end his or her life, reflect on what is said here today, in that the majority of Canadians just wanted you to do the right thing. Not fall victim to an ideology that will cost you your moral conscience and possibly your life.
Isn’t that what we ask for all Canadians, is to just follow their own moral conscience, nothing more and nothing less.
We have fallen victim to moral revisionism perpetrated by these feminist spin doctors, who have their own self interests at heart. Lies only work for a while then they don’t work any longer, no matter what spin you put on them.
May god bless, and keep everyone safe.
by Rectificatif
Jan 29 2010
4:07 AM
[only we elderly will get this one]:
 Rect: Say goodnight, Ambrose.
 Ambrose: Goodnight, Ambrose.
by fixchildrensaid
Jan 29 2010
4:28 AM
Perhaps Ambrose-type people will understand that something is seriously wrong with London, Ontario (and the rest of Canada) when criminal fraud charges are laid against Faulkner because he intentionally falsified provincially-mandated (MCSCS) statistics?
Funding that was obtained by Faulkner based on those false statistics brings the fraud to a whole new level.
Lastly, Ambrose, have you ever considered how Dave Lucio's parents felt about Murray Faulkner's complete disrespect for their son due to his actions?
by Tossed Salad
Jan 29 2010
12:31 PM
Ambrose99
Jan 29 2010
3:34 AM
Barbara Kay is a pathetic, sexually frustrated old hag who desperately tries to suck up to men. What other explanation is there?
******************************
Wow your true sexist colours emerge Amby. You are not only misandric you are also misogynistic.  A bit of a temper as well.  Revenge is going to be a biatch for you types.
by Denis Pakkala
Jan 29 2010
1:19 PM
Barbara Kay is well aware of the mountains of research that shows that domestic violence against men is NOT just a matter of a few isolated cases.  It is as serious and pervasive as domestic violence against women, yet it is virtually ignored  (cover-up) by our government institutions and academia.  This is a widescale fraud by public officials and academic scholars!
Gender Symmetry in Partner Violence:  The Evidence, The Denial, and the Implications for Primary Prevention and Treatment., April 2007
Murray A. Strauss
Symmetry in Perpetration Rates
"By 1980 there were already at least ten high quality studies which found that women physically assault their partners at about the same rate as men attack female partners.  By 1995, there were about a hundred such studies.  As of this writing, the evidence is even more overwhelming.  There are about 200 studies documenting equal rates of PV perpetration (Fiebert, 2004).  The meta-analysis by Archer (Archer, 2000) found a pattern of equal or higher rates by women in studies conducted in several national and cultural settings.
Gender symmetry in rates of physical violence may not extend to other forms of abuse or aggression against a partner.  Although there are numerous studies showing substantial rates of sexual coercion by women, men are much more likely to use physical force to coerce a partner into sex, and stranger rapes are almost exclusively a male crime.  Criminal data also suggest that women are more likely to be stalked by their partners and that men are much more likely than women to be perpetrators of parent-child homicide-suicide.  However, these behaviors occur very infrequently relative to non-lethal physical violence in relationships. "
by MikeMurphy
Jan 29 2010
3:30 PM
by Ambrose99 Jan 29 2010 3:34 AM
Barbara Kay is a pathetic, sexually frustrated old hag who desperately tries to suck up to men. What other explanation is there?
_____________________________
Those of us who have met Barbara and not only read her columns but can also comprehend them would suggest that you are indeed a very pathetic example of human kind.  You are, however, typical of the victim feminist who truly believes they are oppressed by this mythical patriarchy and all the lies that float along in its swift and meandering path.
Its like a lot of things out there that take on a religious facade and true believers get whip lash from jerking there heads back and forth trying to fend of criticism.
I say we get useful idiots like this (male, female, it) to head up a search party led by Faulkner to hunt it down and bring it to justice so we can all see it.
Barbara knows both sides of the story and she also knows one side is disingenuous and gets promoted frequently the other does not. She chooses to write the truth and then tools like ambrose (it means would you believe "A sweet-scented herb"LOL)  take umbrage cause it hurts there long established mythic sensibilities.
Methinks this sweet smelling herb is a "Girly Man" or just a fake but has certain psychopathologic traits not in keeping with good breeding when it wants to see 90% of males eliminated consistent with Mary Daly, Marilyn French, et al.  Thank goodness the latter two are dead.
What kind of man would take a moniker of a sweet smelling herb I wonder?
by Sassylassie
Jan 29 2010
4:00 PM
Barbara Kay is a pathetic, sexually frustrated old hag who desperately tries to suck up to men. What other explanation is there?
End quote:-----------
I hope your account get's suspended for your unprovoked personal attack. It's not often I wish I could reach through the computer and make you insult us gals to our face. Cowardly personal attacks is typical of women like you who spend your time sniveling victim victim. Yes Ambrose you are a female of that most of us are certain.
Jest, LOL thanks for the laugh.
by Denis Pakkala
Jan 29 2010
4:28 PM
Barbara Kay is also aware of the many slanderous attacks against other brave truth-tellers on this subject.
The age of political correctness is ending, the slanderous attacks are like water off a ducks back.
The slanderous attacks now have the reverse effect of exposing the lack of intelligent debate for defenders of the discriminatory status quo.
by Rectificatif
Jan 29 2010
4:35 PM
Postscript: The Lesbo-feminist Mission to Alberta (aka CBC Radio) concluded its series this morning on "partner violence" with interviews of highschool-age children, 15 years of age. The kids answered the CBC's questions as if reciting a catechism. It was all about boys threatening and hurting girls. I heard no mention of the coercive and abusive behavior we see in girls far earlier than in boys.
  It was obvious the kids  had learned the answers by rote, in a one-dimensional classroom, possibly to earn marks. They barely understood what they were talking about. ABgirl, this is the way your son/daughter is being taught, and the way your tax money (CBC) is being spent.