The short, complicated life of Jayden

This is a very tragic case of a mom killing her son in what appears to be some sort of revenge against the dad trying to get more access. It is more complex than the average custody battle but has elements of classical alienation behaviour. The most obvious one is withholding access.MJM

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Catherine McDonald, Global News; With files from Melissa Leong, National Post

A mother charged with killing her 18-month-old son was embroiled in a custody battle with the boy's father, a married co-worker with whom she had an affair.

The father, Richard Williams, and his wife of 19 years had reconciled and wanted to welcome the boy, Jayden, into their home.

On Friday, police found Jayden's body in Mississauga. He was in the passenger side of a vehicle parked under the office tower where his parents worked. Police allege Ms. Bernard killed him before trying to kill herself.

"This was an assault on my family," Richard Williams, 45, said in an exclusive interview with Global News from his Brampton home.

"I made an error in judgment, but my son should not have suffered. I am unable to sleep at night. Every time I close my eyes, I see my son."

His wife, Joy Williams, added: "I don't know how anyone could do this to him, because he was such a sweet baby. He was just so adorable."

Last July, Mrs. Williams, who works as a nurse in a maternity ward, found a card in her husband's belongings from the christening of a baby named Jayden Marc Anthony Bernard. Her husband's middle names are Mark Anthony.

She confronted her husband and only then learned of his affair with a woman in his office and that he had fathered a child with her.

After coming to terms with the news, she told him that she wanted to meet the nine-month-old boy.

"All my friends were saying, 'I don't know how you can do this' ... but I work with babies. There was no way I wasn't going to love that baby," she said, breaking down. "I needed to work it out because my family needs their dad. I still need my husband. Jayden needed his dad.

"It was hard trying to absorb Jayden, knowing how he came into the world, but Jayden was an innocent baby and the child can't be victimized."

In the months that followed, Ms. Bernard consented to Jayden visiting the Williamses, who have two children, an 11-year-old son and a 17-yearold daughter, four times a week. Their son took up piano to be able to teach his little brother.

"He looks so much like our daughter. Jayden is such a beautiful baby, and he was so sensitive and kind hearted," said Mrs. Williams.

Mr. Williams' last visit with Jayden was on Nov. 25. Following that, the Williamses say his mother began denying them access.

"She started letting him come visit regularly and when

she realized that I wasn't moving out and I was dealing this, and was loving Jayden, and the children were loving him and accepting him, I guess it was unsettling for her," Mrs. Williams said.

Ms. Bernard's lawyer, John Struthers, would say only that she was involved in a "tumultuous" custody dispute and it was close to being resolved.

According to court documents, in October Ms. Bernard, 34, reported to Bolton OPP that she received a harassing e-mail and a letter from Mrs. Williams. The Williamses denied the allegations and claim the letters were forged.

Less than three weeks ago, lawyers for the Williamses and Ms. Bernard met at the Brampton courthouse and arranged for Mr. Williams to visit Jayden twice a week. The visits never took place, the Williamses said.

Mr. Williams said Ms. Bernard was threatening to move to Florida with Jayden. His lawyer told her counsel that he would be advising the father to petition for full custody if the matter was not settled.

"The reason why I delayed it so much was because I did not want an adversarial situation. I said, 'This is not in his best interest,'" Mr. Williams said.

More than a dozen of Ms. Bernard's family and friends gathered in a Brampton court yesterday for her brief appearance on a first-degree murder charge. She was remanded into custody until April 23.

The accused's mother collapsed and paramedics were called to treat her.

"[She is a] wonderful mother, that's why it's so shocking," Ms. Bernard's cousin told reporters outside court.

Ms. Bernard's two other children were found safe, police said. They are reportedly staying with family.

Residents on Ms. Bernard's street in Bolton said she lived in the home with her parents and her two children from a previous relationship, ages 12 and 14.

Anita Taglione, a neighbour, remembered Jayden as a "cute little boy."

"This is inconceivable," Ms. Taglione said. "She was a good mother."

---------

FATHER' S STATEMENT

I need the court to send a strong message so that no other Dad has to experience the pain that I feel with the loss of my son. Children are not property. No one has the right to dispose of children, as if they are tangible assets when they feel they have no further use for them.

Nadine Bernard needs to serve a minimum of a life sentence for taking Jayden's innocent life. The law allows 25 years for taking a life and even that is 24 more years than Jayden got. The average life expectancy is at least 70 years, so this is the minimum sentence she should get for the crime she committed and she should not be allowed out on bail.

FATHER' S POEM

This poem was written by Richard Williams, the father of murdered toddler Jayden Bernard:

J - for the Joy you brought to everyone who knew you A-for the Aching hearts you have left behind

Y-for the Youthful days that were stolen from you

D-because we are Determined to bring your death to justice E-for the Everlasting love your dad has for you

N-for Near in our hearts we will keep you Jayden

We love you!

© 2009 The National Post Company. All rights reserved. Unauthorized distribution, transmission or republication strictly prohibited.

Canadian Judicial Council recommends that Justice Cosgrove be removed from office

Update April 3/09. Cosgrove has resigned. There is some justice after all but not much yet. Now let us see if Parliament's family jewels are still in place to finish the process or as was the only other case in Canadian history he will resign. (See Citizen article following) Given he is disgraced enough will he stay the course and wait to be the first Canadian Judge in history to be fired. It doesn't seem likely. Hopefully Cosgrove is the leading edge of greater removals for incompetence and corruption. Note in the 2nd following Ottawa Citizen article below the reference to "man" as in "Removal sought over botched murder trial of Kemptville man" The perp referred to as a man is actually a women. Whoops - who could possibly think of a women as a killer at the Citizen. Are your gender feminist leftist bias's showing I wonder out loud? Cosgrove and many other Superior Court Judges perform a form of gender apartheid on Fathers with social engineering like never before seen. This has been going on for almost 2 generations of children. Here is how it works. Under the no fault system a woman can lie, cheat, steal, commit criminal acts and blame the husband. Two thirds or more of divorces are initiated by the female. She will obtain, in almost guaranteed fashion, complete legal and physical custody of the children unless she is a drug addict with a needle in the arm riding on the back of a motorcycle at her court appearance. Did you read about the mom who fed her toddler cocaine for almost 2 years under the radar of family court judges. The child has permanent brain damage and is now in the custody of the dad. We see the results everyday in the newspaper. Here are some samples from Dr. Edward Kruk's research. "Some 85 per cent of youth in prison are fatherless; 71 per cent of high school dropouts grew up without fathers, as did 90 per cent of runaway children. Fatherless youth are also more prone to depression, suicide, delinquency, promiscuity, drug abuse, behavioural problems and teen pregnancy, warns the 84-page report, a compilation of dozens of studies around divorce and custody, including some of his own research over the past 20 years." The female will get child support at a rate that will cause great financial hardship to the dad. Even if he loses his job the divorce industry acolytes at the provincial child support collection agencies will persecute him. Did you know the worst deadbeats proportionately are those rare females who don't get custody. Interesting isn't it. The ratio of custody to females is 9-1 whether contested or not. In uncontested cases the dad's lawyer holds the metaphorical gun to his head and says, no judge will give you any form of physical custody, that's the status quo. Cut your losses and take this deal. You can save your pension by giving her the house. I understand Judge Harvey Brownstone may be breaking the mold. Not enough information is available to corroborate it but anecdotal information shows he even throws the mom in jail for violation of custody orders. Say What? Not only that she lost custody. Her remarks on his book publishers website were removed because of the "unmotherly" prose and expletives she used. The female will have at her disposal in Ontario $208,000.000.00 of specific earmarked women's benefits courtesy of Ontario tax payers, not including legal aid. This does not include federal dollars. She can try and hide her income and assets stored elsewhere and legal aid will be sympathetic. They will take a lien on the family home even if it is in dad's name solely because of your ex's criminal past. She will receive child benefits from both levels of government, she may get alimony and she may get ownership of the family home if the mans pension is on the line. All of this can happen even if the mom has been a net drain on the family income through her criminal activity. Just think of a family who has a business operated by the mom and the dad provides a steady stable income to subsidize it and pay off the mortgage of the family home. What if the female slips money from the business under the table to avoid taxes while it is losing money. She is playing the dad to subsidize her and get tax free income. Don't get me started on her taking a run to the local DV shelter to get a "leg up." These are just some of the permutations in our justice system - oh sorry - not justice at all. Lets call it what it is Family Law AKA FLAW. The legal system is in great disrepute. Its hard to say how much more men are willing to take. Over 3,000 men commit suicide each year across Canada. If only 400 of those, a conservative number, were directly related to FLAW it would be an epidemic greater than SARS but it flies under everyone's radar. How many victims of FLAW are those we read about having just killed family members? Did they pass the breaking point thanks to judges like Cosgrove who will now get a gold plated pension of $170,000.00 dollars a year for incompetence and corruption. Go figure. If a visible minority were treated the way men are in family court there would be outrage in our liberal media. Hmmm...just saying.MJM OTTAWA, March 31 /CNW Telbec/ - Following a public inquiry held at the request of the Attorney General of Ontario, the Canadian Judicial Council has completed its review of the conduct of the Honourable Paul Cosgrove of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. After finding that the judge engaged in serious misconduct, the Council is recommending his removal from office. An overview of the reasons contained in the report follows. The full report is available on the Council's website. Section 99 of the Constitution Act, 1867, provides that a judge may only be removed from office "on Address of the Senate and House of Commons." In accordance with the Judges Act, the Council has presented its report to the Minister of Justice, with the recommendation that Justice Cosgrove be removed from office. The matter now rests with the Minister and with Parliament. The Canadian Judicial Council is composed of the chief justices and associate chief justices of Canada's superior courts. Information about the Council can be found on its website at www.cjc.gc.ca. <<>> Complaints and Inquiries process: --------------------------------- When someone believes that a judge's personal conduct (on or off the bench) is in question, a complaint may be made to the Canadian Judicial Council. The Council examines only issues of conduct and does not review a judge's decision in law.The complaints process is simple: the complaint must be in writing, and it must concern the conduct of a federally appointed judge. No special forms are necessary. No legal counsel is required. No fees are charged. To the extent possible, the Council reviews anonymous complaints in the same way as complaints that are signed. When a complaint is made, the question before the Council is ultimately whether or not a judge's conduct prevents that judge from discharging his duties as a judge. In such a case, the Council must decide whether or not to recommend that a judge be removed from office. Complaints generated by the Minister of Justice or a provincial Attorney General When a complaint is made by the Minister of Justice or a provincial Attorney General, subsection 63(1) of the Judges Act allows for the process to immediately establish an inquiry committee. Complaint generated from the general public ------------------------------------------- A complaint is first reviewed by a member of the Judicial Conduct Committee. A complaint can be dismissed when it is clearly frivolous or does not fall within the mandate of the Council. In roughly half of cases, the complaint is studied in more detail and the judge in question, as well as judge's chief justice, are sent a copy of the complaint and asked for their comments. The complaint is often resolved at this stage, with an appropriate letter of explanation to the complainant.If the complaint cannot be resolved at that stage, the file can be referred to a Panel of up to five judges for further review. When a Panel concludes that the complaint has merit but is not serious enough to move to the next stage (a formal hearing by an Inquiry Committee) then the Panel may close the file with an expression of concern, or may recommend counselling or other remedial measures. When the complaint may be serious enough to warrant the judge's removal, the Panel can recommend that the Council establish an Inquiry Committee. After completing its investigation, an Inquiry Committee reports its findings to the Canadian Judicial Council. The Council then decides whether or not to recommend to the Minister of Justice of Canada that the judge be removed from office. In accordance with the provision of Canada's Constitution, a judge may be removed from office only after a joint resolution by Parliament.

For further information: Norman Sabourin, Executive Director and Senior
General Counsel, (613) 288-1566 ext. 301

Pull Cosgrove from the bench: judicial council

Removal sought over botched murder trial of Kemptville man

By Jordana Huber and Jennifer Green, Canwest News Service and The Ottawa Citizen April 1, 2009

Ottawa resident Steven Foster says it's no victory, but "we do feel vindicated" that the judge who set free his father's murderer may finally be pulled from the bench.

The Canadian Judicial Council said Tuesday that Justice Paul Cosgrove should be removed because he so thoroughly botched the 1998 trial of Julia Elliott, accused of killing and dismembering Lawrence Foster, a Kemptville mechanic.

"You can't turn back the hands of time, the trial can't be had again," said Foster. "I think the justice system has done what it had to do to patch up its own rooms."

The council said public confidence in Cosgrove's abilities has been "irrevocably lost" and no "alternative measure to removal" could restore public confidence in the judge, the judicial council said in its 16-page decision.

"The judge's misconduct was so serious and so destructive of public confidence that no apology, no matter its sincerity, can restore public confidence in the judge's ability to impartially carry out his duties in future," said the report by 22 chief justices and senior judges of the judicial council.

Removing a judge from the bench requires a joint resolution of Parliament, and Cosgrove is only the second judge recommended for dismissal by the judicial council.

A spokesman for Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said the report is being reviewed.

In early March, Cosgrove appeared before the judicial council in a last bid to save his job after an inquiry committee of the judicial body found there were grounds to justify recommending his removal from the bench for misconduct during the Elliott trial.

Cosgrove did not dispute the inquiry committee's findings of misconduct. But his lawyer, Chris Paliare, urged the panel to consider the 32 character letters written on behalf of Cosgrove, his complaint-free record following the Elliott case, and his "utmost" regret and acknowledgment of his actions.

He said removing Cosgrove from the bench would be akin to "capital punishment for a judge."

On Tuesday, Paliare said the decision was "obviously disappointing," but he had not had a chance to speak with Cosgrove about it.

In 1996, the judicial council recommended the removal of Quebec Superior Court Justice Jean Bienvenue, but he resigned before the minister of justice's address to Parliament.

It's likely Cosgrove will do the same, said Grant Huscroft, a constitutional law professor at the University of Western Ontario.

"I would expect the judge to resign at this stage," Huscroft said. "There hasn't been an instance of a matter like this getting to Parliament in the past, and I wouldn't expect this to get to Parliament."

Cosgrove, a former federal Liberal cabinet minister and mayor of Scarborough, Ont., was appointed to the bench in 1984.

In 1998, he sparked outrage with his decision to clear Elliott of first-degree murder

in the death of Foster, whose body parts were found in the Rideau River near his Kemptville, Ont., home in 1995.

Cosgrove ruled prosecutors and police committed more than 150 violations of Elliott's Charter rights, but the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned the stay in December 2003, saying, "there was no factual basis" for Cosgrove's findings, and he had "misused his power."

A few months later, former Ontario attorney general Michael Bryant made the rare move of asking the judicial council to investigate the judge's handling of the case.

Meanwhile, Elliott returned to her home in Barbados. She was later found in Costa Rica and extradited back to Canada, where she pleaded guilty to manslaughter and received a seven-year sentence.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

Barbara Kay: Turning children into tools of hate

My comments made on the National Post site with respect to Barbara's column follow. Those I have referenced appear after the article.MJM

by MikeMurphy Apr 01 2009 4:48 PM

@by Stew88, Rect Barbara's example of Pamela's nightmare is well documented. Anyone the least familiar with Barbara Kay knows full well she does not pander to females. She, in fact, is a brave and courageous journalist fighting in an arena that most male journalists cannot. Their editors won't have it and the men will surely be pilloried by hateful gender feminists. I know as it happens to me all to frequently through the internet. Google my name and parental alienation and it will take you to sites you thought section 13 of the CHRA should be invoked if I were one to whine and complain. Many sites are offshore outside the jurisdiction of Canada in any event. I am hated and reviled by the deniers that PAS exists. It, for me, is a badge of honour to have been selected as an enemy because these deniers are Luddites and through their denial are enablers of child and spousal abuse. I was fortunate to attend this historic symposium and I am a male veteran in the war against this cruel punishment of children and the target parent. It was, in the beginning, according to Dr. Gardner, a female only instrument of child abuse against a dad primarily in custody wars to get the advantage in court. Today it is still a predominately female weapon but many dads also use it. The Turnbull decision in 2008 was made against a dad. Gene Colman's original research presented at the conference show a significant number of female abusers and a significant bias in favour of females in court decisions. I believe most of us knew the latter through our own observations. That females end up with custody in a 9-1 ratio whether it be contested or signed off by a judge is telling. As a veteran of these battles against a biased justice system and a mentally ill parent who uses children as allies I can tell you to be assertive. Do not be passive when it comes to dealing with PA. The more time the alienator has the more the child will be in her/his camp. I developed a strategic plan to deal with it, one component of which is a media plan. Covering up abuse by remaining silent, even if the court admonishes you, is not an option. My ex took me to court 3 times to have my blogs removed and my ability to speak openly. Courts, lawyers, CAS, mental health workers, and welfare workers are all complicit in enabling this abuse. You will need to be strong and resilient because you will be vilified by the gender feminists and their sycophantic allies. The one thing that will keep things on course for you will be to see your children realize you do care about them, you do try to see them, and you are fighting for the return of the love you had with them. I can attest a strategic approach does work but your movement will be in millimeters not meters but it can work. Be patient. The most important job you will have ever been given is that of a parent. Stay the course as best you can. I am still in the middle of my battle against all the forces that work against a dad in the Family Law (FLAW) system but I shall never give up on my children until I take my last breath. Nothing else has more importance nor significance. Nothing else matters. I am nearly bankrupt but I made the decision in my planning that money isn't as important as my children. I will continue to learn how to represent myself and if I pass from this earth my writings will be testament to the effort I made to be a parent to my daughters not a visitor. It will attest I made every effort possible to stay in their lives despite my ex repeatedly telling them "I did not care about them."

Barbara Kay: Turning children into tools of hate

Posted: April 01, 2009, 12:26 PM by NP Editor

Last weekend, I attended the Canadian Symposium for Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS), Canada’s first international conference on a form of child abuse that can be as bad as, or even worse than, sexual and physical abuse.

For the “show, don’t tell” version of what the presentations added up to, read A Kidnapped Mind (Dundurn Press, 2006), by former model and journalist Pamela Richardson, who spoke at the symposium.

Richardson wrote the book after her 16-year-old son, Dash Hart, neither drunk nor drugged, threw himself off Vancouver’s Granville Street Bridge on New Year’s Day, 2001.

IN OZ ~ Fathers praise access law

This is a followup article. The previous one is here.MJM

Caroline Overington | April 01, 2009

Article from: The Australian

THE Family Court has undergone a radical change in direction since the Howard government's changes to the Family Law Act came into effect, and the emphasis is now firmly on the rights of fathers to have relationships with their children after separation and divorce.

Wayne Butler of the Shared Parenting Council, which was established in 2002 to push for legislative change that would largely benefit fathers, said the law was quite clear: "that children are entitled to a relationship with their dad, and it's good to see the Family Court coming around to that".

Mr Butler was responding to a report in The Australian yesterday in which Family Court judge Robert Benjamin removed two children, aged nine and seven, from their mother in Tasmania, with whom they had lived since the couple separated in 2005, and sent them to live with their father in Melbourne.

The mother had been the primary carer of the children since birth. The father left Tasmania for Melbourne in 2006. He had access to the children on holidays, but the "changeovers" had become fractious and his daughter was becoming estranged from him.

The judge said the mother had not encouraged her children to have a good relationship with their father.

Under changes to the Family Law Act (1975) introduced by the Howard government, the Family Court is required to apply the presumption that it is in the best interest of the child for the child's parents to have shared and equal parenting responsibility, unless there is violence.

Solo Mums Australian convenor Elspeth McInnes said Justice Benjamin had not taken into account psychological damage to the children, who had lived solely with their mother since 2005.

"From the child development perspective, it seems extraordinary," Dr McInnes said.

"It seems the judge is saying that mothers must make their children happy to see their fathers, or else they will be punished. I don't think such punishment has any regard to the children's wellbeing."

Mr Butler said the changes to the act meant fathers were getting better outcomes than they had previously.

"You're better off now with a judge than you were before, and you're better off than you would be, if you just accept what your former partner gives you," he said.

Patricia Merkin, who advocates on behalf of women in Family Court disputes, said the changes were "nothing less than a social engineering experiment to respond to the so-called bias against fathers".

Barry Williams of the Lone Fathers Association said he dealt every week with fathers "attempting suicide ... because they can't see their children".