You are on page 1of 24

A Federal Funded Epidemic

Vital Report Justifying a Federal Investigation of

Human Rights Abuses in Divorce and Family Courts

Submitted to President Donald Trump, United States Congress

Justice Department and Constituencies Across America

Dr. Leon R. Koziol

Parenting Rights Institute
(315) 380-3420

Table of Contents

About the Author..………………………………………………………………………………. 3

Introduction…………………..………………………………………………………………….. 4

Vital request for a federal investigation

and oversight hearings to address funding
abuses that separate loving parents from their
children in America’s divorce and family courts………………………………………………... 6

Request for Justice Department investigation and

prosecution of criminal violations involving parental
rights protected under the United States Constitution ………………………………………….. 8

Request for a National Shared Parenting Act which

gives incentives to the States to overhaul their courts
from a revenue enterprise to a parent-promoting environment ……………………………….. 11

A Judicial Whistleblower Protection Law by the

Federal Government is critical for assuring accountability,
public respect and the delivery of justice in our Third Branch ………………………………... 13

Parallels to the Mueller Report: If our family courts can

interfere with federal elections and a Judicial Whistleblower
Attorney, they could undermine any member of Congress …………………………………… 15

Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………….. 24

Appendix ………………………………………………………………………………………. 25

About the Author

Leon R. Koziol, J.D. is a lawyer placement consultant for intellectual property firms. He is also a
civil rights advocate who practiced law at all levels of courts until 2010 after more than 23
unblemished years. Self-trained, he generated a perfect record of acquittals in criminal cases. His
clients included a city mayor, public safety commissioner, police chief, veterans, local agencies,
malpractice victims, first responders, elected officials, citizen groups, insurance companies,
small corporations, businesses and a former president of the National Organization for Women.

Dr. Koziol remains an advocate for government abuse victims. He appeared on the CBS program
60 Minutes, front page of the New York Times, and other media. A published book was discussed
on CNN and his candidacy for Congress was a headline story in 2006. After years of complex
litigation, he secured judgment in New York Supreme Court invalidating the largest (billion dollar)
casino compact in the state on constitutional grounds. He succeeded alone against high profile law
firms such as Cravath, Swaine & Moore, LLP, one of the most prominent in the nation.

A Juris Doctor degree was conferred by Northern Illinois University, College of Law with an award
from the American Bar Association in State and Local Government. Leon earned a Bachelor of
Professional Studies degree from the State University of New York (currently SUNY Polytechnic).
He immediately joined the management team of a Fortune 500 manufacturer, later serving as a city
corporation counsel, school district attorney and city councilman with a focus on risk management.
His novel, Voyage to Armageddon, exposes a nuclear terrorist threat using domestic waterways.

Precedent cases include Patterson v City of Utica, 370 F.3d 322 (2nd Cir. 2004)($333,820.32 civil
rights verdict argued before Justice Sonia Sotomayor); Oneida Nation v Oneida County, 132 F.
Supp. 2d 71 (NDNY 2000); Peterman v Pataki, 2004 NY Slip Op 51092(U)(successful casino
challenge for citizen group in both federal and state courts); Koziol v Hanna, 107 F. Supp. 2d
170 (NDNY 2000)(free speech challenge invalidating city gag order); Currie v Kowalewski, 842
F. Supp. 57 (NDNY 1994)(successful sexual harassment case), Palaimo v Lutz, 837 F. Supp. 55
(NDNY 1993)(brutality and confinement claims against state police for a 72 year old woman).

Dr. Koziol exposed misconduct at all levels of government, making him a predictable target of
retribution. It compelled him to testify before the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption in
2013 at Pace University. There he exposed family judges for widespread misconduct and within
weeks incurred severe retaliation from those same judges. Since then, he has traveled to Paris,
Hawaii, Washington D.C., United Nations, New York, California and elsewhere advocating for
human rights. His judicial watch group, Parenting Rights Institute, was established in 2010.

Leon has submitted reports to oversight committees, international organizations and the Justice
Department while monitoring court proceedings such as those of a Manhattan doctor, university
professor and resort owner who together spent over $10 million in divorce lawyer fees. He was
featured in a documentary produced by Dr. Joseph Sorge and Divorce Corp based on his whistle
blowing and court reform activity. In 2017, he published a two-part book, educational and
memoir, entitled, Satan’s Docket: Corruption and Carnage in America’s Divorce Industry.

The epidemic documented by this report is underscored by two horrific murders occurring only
days apart during its production. On March 28, 2019, Brian Kennedy walked into a local Wawa
Store in Delaware and gunned down his ex-wife with a semi-automatic rifle. This venue was
selected for child exchanges due to its many security cameras. Eclipsing that event, one week
later, the mother of a 17 month old child was shot dead in front of the Hawthorne, California
police station during a similar child exchange. Neither venue proved to have any deterrent effect.

Discriminated, persecuted, and separated from his children under threat of incarceration, yet
another aggrieved parent committed suicide because of a family court system corrupted by
federal dollars: Christopher Mackney, 45, took his life in our nation’s capital. Countless others
are suppressed from public knowledge to protect a trillion dollar industry. His suicide note:

The love that my daughter and I shared was truly special. She is a such a sweet, kind and gentle
spirit. I am so sorry that I will not be there to see her grow into a beautiful woman. It absolutely
crushed me to not be in her life over the last three years. I worked very hard as a father to build
her confidence and self-esteem. She is smart, funny and considerate, but she didn’t know it yet. I
pray that she realizes her strengths and her confidence in herself will continue to grow. I love
you dearly, Lily.

My son Jack was just entering Kindergarten, when I lost access to him. He is gregarious,
outgoing and a great athlete. He is smart and fearless. He could have just as much fun by himself
as he could with other kids. Even the older boys in our neighbourhood wanted to play with Jack.
It absolutely breaks my heart that I will not be able to help him grow into a man. I love you to,
Jack. I miss you both so much.

My identity was taken from me, as result of this process. When it began, I was a commercial real
estate broker with CB Richard Ellis. I lived by the Golden rule and made a living by bringing
parties together and finding the common ground. My reputation as a broker was built on my
honesty and integrity. When it ended, I was broke, homeless, unemployed and had no visitation
with my own children.

I had no confidence and was paralyzed with fear that I would be going to jail whenever my ex-
wife wanted. Nothing I could say or do would stop it. This is what being to death or ‘targeted’ by
a psychopath looks like. This is the outcome. I didn’t somehow change into a ‘high-conflict’
person or lose my ability to steer clear of the law. I’ve had never been arrested, depressed,
homeless or suicidal before this process. The stress and pressure applied to me was deliberate
and nothing I could do or say would get me any relief. Nothing I or my attorneys said to my ex-
wife’s attorney or to the Court made any difference. Truth, facts, evidence or even the best
interest of my children had no affect on the outcome.

The family court system is broken, but from my experience, it is not the laws, its the lawyers.
They feed off of the conflict. They are not hired to reduce conflict or protect the best interest of
children, which is why third parties need to be involved. It should be mandatory for children to
have a guardian ad litem, with extensive training in abuse and aggression. It is absolutely

shameful that the Fairfax County Court did nothing to intervene or understand the ongoing
conflict. Judge Randy Bellows also used the Children as punishment, by withholding access for
failing to fax a receipt. The entire conflict centered around the denial of access to the children, it
was inconceivable to me that he would use children like this. This is exactly what my ex-wife was
doing and now Judge Bellows was doing it for her.

To all my family, friends and the people that supported me through this process, I am so sorry. I
know my reactions and behavior throughout this process did not always make sense. None of this
made sense to me either. I had no help and the only suggestion I got from my attorneys was to
remain silent. At first, I did what I was told, remained silent and listened to my attorneys. Then
after I had given my ex-wife full custody to try and appease her, I learned about Psychopathy
and emailed Dr. Samenow about my concerns and asked him for help. Of course, I was ignored.

As the conflict continued, I was forced to defend myself. When that didn’t work, I thought I could
get the help I needed by speaking out. There is no right or wrong way to defend yourself from
abuse. Naively, I thought that abuse was abuse and it would be recognized and something would
be done. I thought speaking out would end the abuse or at least get them to back off. It didn’t.
When no one did anything they were emboldened.

I took my own life because I had come to the conclusion that there was nothing I could do or say
to end the abuse. Every time I got up off my knees, I would get knocked back down. They were
not going to let me be the father I wanted to be to my children. People may think I am a coward
for giving up on my children, but I didn’t see how I was going to heal from this. I have no money
for an attorney, therapy or medication. I have lost four jobs because of this process. I was going
to be at their mercy for the rest of my life and they had shown me none.

Being alienated, legally abused, emotionally abused, isolated and financially ruined are all a
recipe for suicide. I wish I were stronger to keep going, but the emotional pain and fear of going
to court and jail [because of exorbitant child support] became overwhelming. I became
paralyzed with fear. I couldn’t flee and I could not fight. I was never going to be allowed to heal
or recover. I wish I were better at articulating the psychological and emotional trauma I

I could fill a book with all the lies and mysterious rulings of the Court. Never have I experienced
this kind of pain. I asked for help, but good men did nothing and evil prevailed. All I wanted was
a Guardian Ad Litem for my children. Any third party would have been easily been able to
confirm or refute all of my allegations, which is why none was ever appointed to protect the
children or reduce the conflict.

Abuse is about power and control. Stand up for the abused and speak out. If someone speaks out
about abuse, believe them. Please teach my children empathy and about emotional invalidation
and ‘gas-lighting’ or they may end up like me.

God have mercy on my soul.

Chris Mackney

A Federally Funded Epidemic
Vital request for a federal investigation and oversight hearings to address funding abuses
that separate loving parents from their children in America’s divorce and family courts

While our federal government struggles with illegal parents separated from their children at our
borders, American parents are being separated daily and without accountability in family courts
across our country. Under federal law, a “custodial parent” is mandated for states to qualify for
billions of dollars in performance grants, Dept of Family v DHHS, 588 F.3d 740 (1st Cir. 2009).
This, in turn, undermines shared parenting laws and cooperation, i.e. Bast v Rossoff, 91 NY2d
723 (1998)(attorney parents’ agreement struck down for failure to name a “custodial parent”).

Under Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, 42 USC Section 658(a), state courts earn vast
amounts of revenues from our federal government through performance grants based on the
number and size of child support orders issued and satisfied. Not only does this create an
inherent and systemic bias among ostensibly impartial jurists, it incites needless conflict between
parents forced into an oppositional framework for deciding custody, support and other disputes.

Originally intended to recoup aid to needy families from absentee fathers, Title IV-D was later
expanded to encompass all “non-custodial parents,” good and bad. By lumping them together,
federal funding was thereby increased exponentially. Such a performance-based program proved
highly ineffective on common sense grounds alone. Parents who love their children will use their
God-given liberties to advance the interests of their offspring. Instead, natural human incentives
are countermanded and replaced by a rigid control structure for money generating purposes.

Federal money thrown at divorce and family courts in this way has become the proverbial gas
thrown on a fire. As veteran family judges have observed, this oppositional framework leads to a
winner-take-all contest that draws the worst from parents at a time when children need their best.
One example is the case of Webster v Ryan, 729 NYS2d 315 (Fam. Ct. 2001) at fn 1, where
“parenting time” was preferred over “custody” and “visitation” due to a system which has
“outlived its usefulness.” Such terms are more appropriate for prisons and funerals, but their use
here causes judges to treat parents as criminals and objects of exploitation for federal funds.

Title IV-D protects this antiquated “custody” framework derived from a day when moms were
caretakers and dads were the breadwinners. From that outdated framework, an epidemic has
emerged which is producing escalating harm to government, families and society as a whole. It is
a silent epidemic suppressed by special interests and bar associations which benefit from custody
and support battles. Federal funds have induced states to seize parental authority beyond the
rational limits of the judges and lawyers they license to regulate family relationships.

The separation here is not the simple product of divorcing or separated parents. It is an insidious
form of separation, far worse than the kind experienced by immigrants, because children are
being programmed to ignore, even hate their parents, for the principal purpose of generating
lawyer profits and court revenues. Worse yet, it is done every day without so much as a pause
from federal lawmakers who, knowingly or not, funded the parent-child separations. The end
result is a panoply of societal ills that have elevated government programs and taxpayer burdens.

This insidious form of separation has become understood as “Parental Alienation.” That term
derives from the work of Dr. Richard Gardner, an American child psychologist who produced
books and studies to show a condition known as Parent Alienation Syndrome or PAS. This
condition emerged from custody and support wars featuring one or both parents abusing our
courts for reasons other than the “best interests of children.” By removing the “non-custodial
parent” from children’s lives, the alienator and courts guarantee a support and revenue stream.

It has become a pay-to-parent scandal, a tax on children, where parent alienation is not so much a
condition as it is a symptom. It can be compared to tobacco companies which denied the harmful
effects of smoking for decades to resist protective laws. Here, one entity to target is the highly
automated Child Support Collection Center in Albany, New York. It has a single confidential
office which rakes in billions of dollars in aid and support interest with little accountability.

Ominously, the antiquated custody system has had the effect of reversing a natural order of child
rearing successfully observed since “time immemorial.” This is because parents, forced to
compete over their offspring, endeavor to curry favor from those too underdeveloped to realize
that they are in a custody “game” as one judge put it. It has become the proverbial “tail wagging
the dog” with parents acting like the children they are charged to raise. Child protection agencies
then fuel this absurd condition with false charges or petty reactions to justify their existence.

State oversight authorities, created and occupied by the beneficiaries of Title IV-D, are failing
the people they serve in preventing this outcome. They are the foxes watching the chicken coop.
Indeed, family judges exercise authority that may be the envy of the CIA, FBI and IRS. Every
aspect of a parent’s private life can be invaded without any wrongdoing or criminal charge. This
has aggravated the fear that government is treading upon all rights protected by our Constitution.

Aggrieved parents across America are now calling upon the federal government to intervene,
investigate this funding program, and modify or repeal its harmful provisions. The human rights
violations here have reached epic proportions. Suicides, homicides, domestic violence, worker
productivity, and the psychological, financial and physical harm to parents, families and children
everywhere add to the mound of evidence establishing this as a national concern.

The combined damage may eclipse that caused by drug and chemical companies. There has
never been an open congressional inquiry on this subject despite countless victim reports
including CDC statistics showing a record high level of suicides and drug addictions. It is an
epidemic suppressed by a media policy of avoiding family issues and federal court abstention
practices which defer to state courts. As will be seen, such deference has led to “constitution-free
tribunals” that act as judge, jury and supreme court with our children as their rationalization.

This deference is not anything new to government regimes which have exploited children for
illicit reasons. Here is what Adolph Hitler declared in his book, Mein Kampf, to execute the most
horrific war in human history:

The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as
the government is perceived as working for the benefit of children, the people will happily
endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.

Request for Justice Department investigation and prosecution of criminal violations
involving parental rights protected under the United States Constitution and federal law.

Our Supreme Court has long declared the right to raise children as the “oldest liberty interest
protected by the Constitution,” Troxel v Granville, 530 US 57 (2000). Yet family courts trample
all over this right every day by exploiting a “best interest of the child” doctrine derived from
feudal England, Finlay v Finlay, 148 NE 624 (NY 1925). They reason that a co-equal right
necessarily diminishes one parent’s access in separated environments. However, this reasoning
has been abused for illicit, even criminal, purposes as case files obtained by this Institute assert.

Title 18 section 241 of the United States Code provides as follows:

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in
any State … in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by
the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the
same … they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both
Title 18 section 242 of the same Code defines another crime with similar language but it is
confined to individual impairments of rights protected under federal law. Such code provisions
have little substance if the FBI and Justice Department overlook them with a preference for more
salacious, self-advancing or high-profile investigations. Under such an unofficial policy, it might
behoove the Bureau and Department to submit a report to Congress that these provisions should
be repealed by reason of a lack of interest. They are cherry-picking which laws to enforce.
In the meantime, low priority citizens continue to rely on good faith consideration of our
criminal complaints by federal agencies. As this report will demonstrate, family judges are using
children to retaliate against parents who properly challenge their authority. They are purposefully
inflating support orders to satisfy funding quotas knowing that the money will come from family
to keep loved ones out of debtor prison. It is a tactic that would be the envy of organized crime.
An inquiry here could show large-scale drug abuse which overbilling practices feed. The same is
true of service providers needlessly ordered to evaluate parents rightfully outraged by all this.
Insurance firms and Medicaid are also over-billed with the costs passed on to other victims.
The myth that widespread corruption in our courts is nonexistent may easily be debunked by
citing major joint investigations such as Operation Greylord in Chicago during the 1980s. 17
judges, 48 lawyers, 10 deputy sheriffs, 8 policemen, 8 court officials and one elected official
were indicted. Nearly all were convicted. The young lawyer secured by the FBI to gather
evidence in Operation Greylord was advised that he might never practice law as a result. The
author of this report has endured a comparable outcome but with no government protection.

Federal intervention is further justified by recent reports such as those in New York and
California showing that as little as 10 % of all complaints are even investigated by judicial
commissions. Our third branch of government cannot immunize itself from accountability in this
manner. The number of judges convicted in federal court of bribes, extortion, racketeering and
fixing custody cases is unprecedented. That fact alone justifies checks and balancing of their
self-regulated operation. To that end, a sampling of documented cases is now in order.

New York Chief Judge Sol Wachtler was sent to federal prison for secretly harassing his mistress
and her daughter for a bribe. He directed paid court staff to harm the lawyer who was helping her
expose him. In his book, After the Madness, Wachtler rationalized that judges are taught to think
as gods. Contrary to that status, one custody judge was banned from the bench after admitting to
sexual abuse of his handicapped, five-year old niece, In re Bryan Hedges, 20 NY3d 677 (2013).
Brooklyn divorce judge, Gerald Garson, was also sent to federal prison after FBI agents proved
that he had accepted a bribe to fix a custody case in favor of a father. In upstate, New York, yet
another judge tried the same thing in favor of a mother. New York Supreme Court Judge Thomas
Spargo was convicted by federal authorities for seeking a $10,000 bribe.
In the “Kids for Cash” scandal, two Pennsylvania judges were sent to federal prison for
accepting bribes from detention center contractors. 4,000 juvenile convictions had to be
overturned by the state’s Supreme Court which had its own justices mired in scandals. One
juvenile victim committed suicide, and his mom chastised these judges at their sentencing.
A married Michigan judge, Wade McCree, presided over a child support case while getting the
mom pregnant and putting an unknowing dad on a support monitor. He was removed from the
bench, but the dad’s lawsuit was turned down by the U.S. Supreme Court due to judge immunity.
Can it be that judge adultery in chambers with an active litigant is now a protected judicial act?
Finally, we bring you a shocker from Utica, New York. City Judge Gerald Popeo was merely
censured in 2015 by a Judicial Commission despite a hearing judge who found that he had made
racist jokes to an African-American attorney. Asked whether the attorney knew what downstate
blacks called upstate blacks, Judge Popeo got no answer. He then stated, “country niggers.” He
targeted a former African-American commissioner causing a suicide attempt in the city lock-up.
Gerald Popeo was found guilty of numerous ethics violations. He threatened to come off the
bench to wipe a smirk off a litigant’s face. He jailed men for contempt in violation of their rights.
And because he was never removed, Popeo was assigned to this author’s family court matters in
2018 (as a city judge), resulting in a near fatal outcome. Popeo was brought up on complaints of
racism and bias against this civil rights attorney but, to date, nothing has come of it.
Such egregious misconduct is not limited to state judges. In United States v Cossey, 632 F.3d 82
(2nd Cir. 2011), a federal judge issued a six-year sentence for a non-violent offense with the kind
of omnipotence that would make anyone cringe. Judge Gary Sharpe announced a gene to explain
criminal behavior, one that would be not be discovered for another fifty years: “It is a gene you
were born with. And it’s not a gene you can get rid of,” he emphasized to the defendant while
condemning the psychiatric profession for its own opinions that were “all over the board.”

Reversing this decision, a federal appeals court unanimously found that Sharpe’s brand of justice
“seriously affected the fairness, integrity and public reputation of judicial proceedings.” In a rare
move, it referred the case to another judge on remand. Such gross misconduct conflicted with the
rationale for granting life tenure to federal jurists. Recourse is limited to the illusory process of
impeachment where only one judge in our history was removed for non-criminal behavior. This
sort of “Hitleresque” mindset must be rooted out for the evil that it is with congressional hearings.

In countless family court cases, records are falsified and misconduct is concealed or disregarded
to protect judicial reputation. Judges are widely deemed to be beyond reproach. Tragedies have
therefore resulted from oversight failures and a lack of criminal prosecutions involving human
rights violations under federal law such as the one cited above. Four cases highlight the horrific
consequences to parents, veterans, families and law enforcement over the past decade:
On September 28, 2009, police Investigator Joseph Longo was ordered to pay $1,800 in monthly
child support. He answered the same day with a murder- suicide leaving four children without
parents. Even the district attorney could not predict this. A $2 million recovery was based on a
zone of danger created by city officials as opposed to family court, Pearce v Longo, 766 F.
Supp. 2d 367 (2011) LaDuca, Rage built Longo to murder-suicide, Observer Dispatch, 12/30/09.
On June 15, 2011, a father and war veteran, Thomas Ball, burned himself alive on the steps of a
family court to protest years of abuse and separation from his children. It stemmed from a single
incident of slapping his daughter, and he left behind a manifesto on how to firebomb courts.
Even after such a horrific death, the ex-wife stubbornly defended herself by complaining that her
children’s dad failed to comply with court counselling. This is how demented the process has
become, see Mark Arsenault, Dad leaves clues to his desperation, Boston Globe, July 10, 2011.
On April 4, 2015, Walter Scott, an unarmed father was shot dead five times in the back by a
traffic cop while fleeing a support warrant. The shocking murder was videoed by a concealed
bystander. Contrary to national hype focused on racism, the victim’s funeral pastor blamed it on
draconian child support confinements. Many concluded that the state was now killing for money
given the revolving door outcomes. In vain, two reporters warned of this trend, see Robles and
Dewan, Skip child support. Go to jail. Lose job. Repeat. New York Times, 4/15/15 at pg. 1.
On July 30, 2018, a physical therapist with a practice in Manhattan fatally shot his ex-wife, their
6-year old son and current wife in his Astoria (Queens) home. It became the final edict in a
protracted custody battle fueled by judicial war games. After a failed Go-Fund-Me effort to pay
his lawyer fees, in a page titled “Child Kidnapping,” the abused dad, James Shield, explained, “I
had the perfect life a few years ago but it has spiraled out of control,” Moore, Musemeci and
Sheehy, Custody battle led dad to family murder suicide, New York Post, July 31, 2018.
Less transparent are the countless cases swarming beneath these four which can easily explode.
Their cause is wrongfully blamed on the parents. The public is duped into believing that an
adversarial process yields truth and justice in our courts. That may be true in other forms of
litigation, but when children are taken hostage by untethered lawyers, the opposite is true here.
Parents commit perjury on an artificial premise that they are protecting their offspring. Sparks
convert to forest fires, children emulate the dysfunction, and the perpetrators profit.
The proof can no longer be ignored. Our Census Bureau continues to report that nearly 85% of
parents paying child support are men, roughly 20% of all persons listed on county warrant lists
are support debtors, and nearly 100% of those sent to prison for up to seven years are also men.
Other reliable reports cite 22 veterans committing suicide daily, i.e. Purple Heart’s Final Beat,
Second Class The White House has recognized a need to reverse this trend, but its
focus is on the symptoms. Congress must take swift action to literally save American lives.

Request for a National Shared Parenting Act which gives incentives to the States to
overhaul their courts from a revenue enterprise to a parent-promoting environment

In simpler terms, the federal funding scheme operates much like the “Kids for Cash” scandal in
Pennsylvania where family judges were rewarded with kickbacks from detention center
contractors based on the number of juveniles they sent to such facilities. Here family judges are
rewarded by the number of parents they incarcerate on a wide range of contempt issues. The
only real difference is that the latter rewards are legal and insulated from public knowledge.

In today’s world, custody and support orders are increasingly difficult to manage because the
state has entangled itself far too invasively in the private lives of our families. In family courts,
petty differences are converted into violent confrontations through a revenue-driven process
dominated by those who are programmed to litigate. They profit from an “attack dog” mentality
with little or no regard for the consequences of their actions. The poison is in their medicine.

Family judges have been called “petty tyrants” because of the vast abuses of power they wield
on a local, often political, level. They are systematically transforming a civil process into one
with all the trappings of a criminal proceeding. Given the financial rewards offered them by
Congress, the combined effect has been to seriously compromise judicial impartiality. Unjust
practices have arisen strictly to maximize revenues and fees. Here are some examples:

1) Family judges have created evidentiary presumptions in contempt cases which

wrongfully shift the burden of proof for child support debtors seeking to avoid prison terms. A
willful violation can be established by a payment summary offered by a single agency witness
before a hearing officer. The petitioner has the burden of proving her case but is under no
obligation to testify. Instead it is shifted to the accused to prove that the violation was not
intentional. This is only one of many gimmicks employed to expedite federal rewards.

2) Family courts are presumed to be civil courts, but in practice they act as criminal
tribunals without the constitutional protections that are otherwise mandated. Fathers are
routinely put on the defensive due to their gender and traits with substandard levels of proof.
Theoretically, they can be committed to recurring prison terms for the balance of their children’s
lives. While treated as criminals, aggrieved parents are not afforded due process protections such
as a jury right, indigent right to counsel, full disclosure and proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

3) Judges have invented evidentiary fictions to enhance their performance measure under
Title IV-D. For example, “imputed income” is a concoction which artificially raises support
obligations. It is based on a parent’s past employment levels as opposed to current realities.
When adding arrears, interest, lawyer fees and mandated expenses, such obligations can exceed
total disposable income of the debtor parent, leaving him bankrupt, hopeless and suicidal.

4) Child support is not taxed to the recipient but to the debtor, further reducing the
income needed for sustenance. There is no accountability for expenditures made on drug abuse,
vanity excesses or the support of a substitute parent residing with the support recipient. In
practical terms, the “non-custodial parent” is being required to pay for the legalized kidnapping
of his children or parent substitution under penalty of arrest and confinement in a human cage.

5) While a debtor parent is imprisoned, support obligations continue without means of

payment. Upon release, he is subjected to an ever-growing debt with no bankruptcy protection.
Seizures of licenses, tax refunds and bank accounts needed for self-employment add to the
chaos. It is a revolving door cycle with no means of escape. Victims are forced to surrender
parental rights to avoid jail including solitary confinement, a mode of punishment that some
Supreme Court members are deeming “cruel and unusual.” Such manner of parental termination
circumvents proof standards set by the Supreme Court, Santosky v Kramer, 455 US 745 (1982).

6) So draconian have these collection practices become that the Parent Punishment Act
(originally tauted as the sexist “Dead Beat Dad Act”) now makes it a federal offense or felony
for a parent with $5,000 in support arrears to move to another state. Our federal government has
effectively criminalized parenthood to a point of escalating a “fatherlessness” crisis in America.
The number of parents seeking refuge in other countries is staggering but never publicized.

7) A four-tier appellate structure has been established for support violations to replace
the traditional three step process (five tiers if the Supreme Court is sought). In reality, however,
the Supreme Court here has become a single family judge who is accorded undue deference by
appellate and federal courts. A willful violation with jail sentence is recommended by an
appointed hearing officer (often a part-time lawyer) and quickly confirmed in nearly all cases.

8) Appeals can also be foreclosed by immediate incarceration while settlements are

increasingly conditioned on a waiver of appeals, a practice carried over from criminal courts. A
victim can be imprisoned within weeks without a jury or ethics monitor under the guise of
supporting children with bail disguised as an “undertaking” for release. Meanwhile custody
violations are routinely excused, leaving victims to take “the law” into their own hands.

9) After subjecting parents to a horrifically dysfunctional court system, family judges

are accorded wide discretion to order forensic evaluations. There are no real standards for
issuing such orders, but they are highly lucrative for the providers including those that contribute
to judge campaigns. These orders range from “comprehensive psychological evaluations” to
various drug and alcohol programs, even a “Parent Education Program.” Parents can be required
to attend many sessions as a condition for child access. The bills can reach $50,000 or more with
added lawyer fees that can easily bankrupt a desperate and unsuspecting parent or family.

10) The DSM-5 Psychiatrist Manual contains over 300 conditions or disorders accepted
by insurance companies for billing purposes. The only condition not defined is normalcy. An
untold number of service-providers act as if a failure to find a parent defect would be tantamount
to contempt. They are programmed to find as many disorders as possible to justify both the
referral and their livelihood. Even if the highly stigmatizing disorders were valid, despite
widespread criticism as voo-doo science, they are caused by a system which manufactures
involuntary patients through needless wars over their offspring. Legalized drug dealing follows
with medicated parents prone to suicide and violence. The carnage benefits our drug companies.
A Judicial Whistleblower Protection Law by the Federal Government is critical for
assuring accountability, public respect and the delivery of justice in our Third Branch.

It can easily be concluded from the foregoing that our nation’s divorce and family courts have
been turned into a trillion dollar industry. It can also be concluded that any person who exposes
the corruption in this industry will be subjected to widespread retaliation. This is exactly what
occurred to this author after 23 unblemished years as a successful civil rights attorney. In 2008,
he began a reform initiative which was targeted in every imaginable way, resulting in the loss of
parent contact with his daughters, a record nine-year suspension of his law licenses, and a “shoot
on sight” threat by a traffic cop purporting to enforce a child support warrant.

When a self-regulated branch of government fails to properly investigate serious misconduct, the
last bastion of accountability falls to whistleblowers. Indeed, as former Judiciary Committee
Chairman Chuck Grassley stated at a 2015 National Whistleblower Summit, “You can’t fix
something if you don’t know it’s broken. That’s just common sense.” According to nationally
acclaimed whistleblower attorney, Stephen Kohn, “(w)histleblowers now uncover 70 percent of
the civil frauds recovered by the United States. Whistleblowers were able to detect and report
more fraud in government contracting than every government contract officer, inspector general,
Justice Department attorney, and other paid government bureaucrat combined.”

According to the same attorney, the IRS forever changed whistleblower law when it issued a
“dramatic ruling” by awarding Bradley Birkenfeld $104 million under the IRS Whistleblower
Protection Act. He had exposed a $20 billion federal tax avoidance scandal by the world’s
largest bank in Switzerland. Prior to that award, Mr. Birkenfeld incurred severe retaliation which
sent the message that whistleblowers should remain silent. He lost his employment, was
prosecuted by the federal government for tax violations and sent to prison for nearly three years.

Unfortunately, there is no legal protection for judicial whistleblowers. In the case of the author
here, a model citizen, the retributions were horrific. After twelve years exposing corruption, on
August 30, 2018, he was subjected to a “shoot on sight” threat by a traffic cop as part of a child
support warrant issued by Judge Gerald Popeo (described at page 9). Only by happenstance was
he not in his vehicle at the time of this stop. It was detailed in a 2018 report to federal authorities
and all but predicted in a June 12, 2015 report to U.S. Attorney Loretta Lynch following the
police murder of Walter Scott, an unarmed father shot five times in the back fleeing a child
support warrant at a traffic stop. This author addressed national media at Walter Scott’s funeral.

Yet reform remains elusive. Consequently, the Parenting Rights Institute has collected case
summaries from victims across the country. Most could be considered judicial whistleblowers.
They routinely express fear of retaliation especially after learning of the ordeal of this author
who is ideally qualified and positioned to expose judicial corruption. The standard reaction is,
“if they can do this to a prominent attorney, they can do it to any of us.” This whistleblower has
never been charged with a crime, never reported for child abuse and never able to have his
complaints prosecuted for crimes by a law office secretary. During a five-year absence from his
daughters, a mother in the same region, 21-year old Sarah Travis, was sent to prison for years
due to a criminal enterprise. On her release in 2018, she was quickly reunited with her child.

Too often, a growing epidemic is ignored until a horrific event captures national attention. A
prime example is the scathing Justice Department Report of March 4, 2015 triggered by the
police shooting of 18-year old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. It identified routine
violations of federal rights by judges and patrol officers engaged in false prosecutions to raise
revenues through court fines. Similar practices have been underway in family courts for decades.
In its Ferguson report, the Justice Department devoted extensive text to First Amendment
violations having stark applications here. The parents marching on Washington, demanding
reforms and filing complaints against their persecutors are not simply exercising free speech,
they are exercising their rights of self-governance. That point was made abundantly clear by our
nation’s top jurist in the precedent case, Snyder v Phelps, 562 US 443 (2011):

The First Amendment reflects “a profound national commitment to the principle that
debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open,” citing New York
Times v Sullivan, 376 US 254, 270 (1964). That is because “speech concerning public
affairs is more than self-expression; it is the essence of self-government,” citing Garrison
v Louisiana, 379 US 64, 74-75 (1964). Accordingly, “speech on public issues occupies
the highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values, and is entitled to special
protection,” citing Connick v Myers, 461 US 138, 145 (1983).

Less than ten years later, a public defender in New York City was excused of attorney ethics
violations on First Amendment grounds despite his magazine depictions of New York’s
Appellate Division justices as “madams and whores,” see Erdmann v Stevens, 458 F.2d 1205
(2nd Cir. 1972); Justices of Appellate Division v Erdmann, 33 NY2d 559 (1973). In the Phelps
case, members of the Westboro Baptist Church were cleared of tort liability on First Amendment
grounds for their protests at the funeral of a gay veteran. Even flag burning has been found to
constitute protected speech under the Constitution, Texas v Johnson, 491 US 397 (1989).

In sharp contrast, the speech here is not nearly so offensive. It concerns our nation’s parents,
families and children torn apart for money, clearly matters of great public importance.
Government leaders cannot know how such abuse is occurring unless qualified lawyers are
allowed to speak without fear of retribution. In his 2013 testimony before the prematurely closed
Moreland Commission on Public Corruption, this attorney exposed serial misconduct of judges
and compared it to the docket sheet of any criminal court. At the same hearing, New York
Family Judge Daniel King was exposed for fictional college degrees used to inflate this lawyer’s
support obligations. Within weeks of that testimony, King ended free access to his daughters.

Similarly, reinstatement to the practice of law was denied five times over a five-year period
while New York attorney, Stanley Cohen, who represented terrorists and cop killers, was
reinstated in 2017, only two years after his release from federal prison on felony convictions. At
a closed hearing in 2013, ethics lawyers opposed this author’s reinstatement citing his public
criticisms of the judges deciding his case. Due to their witch hunt, they were described as an
“unethical ethics committee.” This author was proven correct only weeks later when the
committee’s chief counsel and deputy lawyers resigned for falsifying their time sheets. No
criminal or ethics charges were ever lodged and they returned to private practice. These are the
standard-bearers of lawyer ethics charged with a duty of preventing over-billing practices.
Parallels to the Mueller Report: If our family courts can interfere with federal elections
and a Judicial Whistleblower Attorney, they could undermine any member of Congress

The foregoing text provides a good segue into the next lengthy part of this report. To understand
the epidemic, it is essential that applications be made to real life ordeals. To that end, case
summaries obtained from victims across America are available. They are too numerous to
comprise an appendix but included with many of these reports being disseminated by our viral
followers in Washington and elsewhere. The ordeal of this whistleblower can serve as a
representative one because it encompasses most of the complaints made in those summaries.

The notion that Congress or the Justice Department can investigate every case is obviated by
limited resources. This ordeal, however, can provide an efficient vehicle for reaching the kind of
corruption common to most cases nationally. To that end, this report must shift grammatical
usage to first person, thereby reducing the confusion which might arise if the prior format was
continued. My ordeal is not a John Grisham novel, it is a real-life experience, any part of which
could occur to family members and loved ones in Congress. My very life was put in jeopardy.

Ironically, it all started with my campaign for Congress in 2006. As a frontrunning Democrat in
a field of candidates, this campaign was undermined during my early divorce process (filed the
same year). Despite two cooperative years of separation, the ex-spouse retained a divorce lawyer
to increase support payments. That lawyer, Keith Eisenhut, made a living convincing clients that
fathers were “hiding income” without proof. He has never been held accountable. Three years
later, after the damage was irreversible, a judge found that the agreed upon amounts were proper.

In our case alone, this lawyer inflamed conflict by filing papers in the wrong court causing a
dismissal of his client’s first family court petition, he used boiler plate language in a proposed
decree which had his own client guilty of “cruel and inhumane treatment” contrary to agreement,
and he leaked information to third parties resulting in a protection order against him, his partner
and law office. Such reckless conduct and correction diverted time from my law practice and
therefore my ability to support my children. Like a bull in a china closet, he did all this to raise
fees paid out of child support to effectively make free campaign contributions to my opponent.

Although he was eventually fired and replaced by a series of lawyers and firms over the years,
his unchecked abuses caused a downward spiral which the ex-spouse exploited to substitute my
rightful status as the natural father of my daughters with an unfit, childless millionaire who also
contributed to congressional campaigns. Nowhere among the first 40 trial jurists assigned to my
15-year divorce was this replacement agenda referenced despite repeated petitions for a remedy.
In short, the divorce and family court process were abused to interfere with a federal election.

A more direct interference occurred twelve years later during the campaign for Congress in New
York’s 14th District. Dr. Anthony Pappas was the Republican candidate when Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez defeated incumbent Joseph Crowley in their June 26, 2018 Primary. A campaign
account was established with a distinct identification number at a bank in compliance with
Federal Election Law. Donations steadily grew from outside the district with each national
appearance made by the opponent due to her socialist views. But the campaign was upended
early on when that account was seized by an opposing lawyer in Pappas’ 15-year divorce case.

The donations were then applied to satisfy a divorce judgment regarding marital debts and assets
accumulated prior to the filing of the divorce in 2004. Put another way, money intended for
campaign purposes was being diverted by a divorce court to personal uses, something prohibited
by Federal Election Law. Indeed, if the candidate applied such monies in this manner, he could
be subject to criminal prosecution much like Michael Cohen faced in the Stormy Daniels affair.
Although Dr. Pappas immediately challenged the seizure of this campaign account in federal and
state courts, no emergency relief was granted. The matter is now before the U.S. Supreme Court.

When Robert Mueller was assigned to investigate reports of Russian interference in the federal
election for president, the concern focused on the integrity of our American electoral process.
Collusion with a foreign government to influence outcomes was a serious matter. However, after
a costly two-year investigation, a final report was issued clearing the president and his campaign
of any such collusion. Meanwhile, divorce court interferences with federal elections on the home
front were ignored despite clear ethical and criminal implications involving the perpetrators.

Now I will focus on the personal whistleblower aspect of this report. When a mayor or legislator
issues a gag order against free speech at a public venue, it is easily seen as a First Amendment
problem. Retaliation is also seen as a standard practice for suppressing disclosure and criticism.
However, such observations tend to incur a disappearing act whenever a judge is abusing public
office to exact the same form of retaliation. Apart from judicial immunities expanded beyond
reason, the violators command the forum where the grievances are filed to remedy such abuses.

A judge who dutifully addresses free speech violations consistent with his oath faces retributions
from colleagues for doing so, even exposures of concealed misconduct. In such an environment,
our First Amendment is effectively repealed. Faced with un-American government misconduct,
victims naturally turn to public exposure with the hope that other officials take corrective action.
This presents the abuser with a more challenging task of suppression since the whistleblower is
outside his control. The typical means then employed is to discredit the critic and his message.

This was the means applied to me by divorce, family, ethics, and appellate judges. To put this in
perspective, right out of law school, in 1987, I was able to get a restraining order on a $30
million high school construction project. I won my first appeal two years later regarding an
interstate divorce, I obtained substantial verdicts before juries in both federal and state courts,
and I obtained final judgment in New York Supreme Court invalidating a billion dollar casino
compact on constitutional grounds. Today I cannot get a family judge to order phone contact
with my teen daughters, and I raised them without incident since birth. I have been denied nine
years of client representation due to the crimes of a secretary emboldened by a witch hunt.

Clearly, Houston, we have a problem. This is not what my own father expected after spending
five years in a Nazi camp and fighting for the allied cause. The regime I faced is headquartered
in Syracuse, New York, beginning with Fifth District Administrative Judge James Tormey and
Fourth Department Appellate Judge John Centra. The first was sued along with my disgraced
custody judge, Bryan Hedges, by his chief family court clerk for retaliation after she refused to
obey their directives to engage in “political espionage.” She recovered $600,000 in Morin v
Tormey, 626 F.3d 40 (2nd Cir. 2010). Tormey’s co-defendant, as stated, resigned after admitting
to sexual abuse of his handicapped, five-year old niece, In re Hedges, 20 NY3d 677 (2013).

But the chief judge held on and ended up assigning a record 40 trial level jurists to my originally
uncontested divorce. Half of these judges properly disqualified themselves due to personal or
political interactions over the years. It could have all been avoided had my original divorce judge
granted my logical motion for a change of venue to another judicial district. As a result, systemic
bias set in. This occurs when a replacement judge examines the case file and views the notes or
discusses the case “off record.” The misconduct became so brazen that it led to escalating court
corruption, including one judge, no longer on the bench, who stepped off a client case resulting
in the dismissal of a five-count indictment against a falsely accused woman city commissioner.

After my bid for public office was derailed in the manner stated, I set out to reform the system
starting with a show cause motion which detailed the serial misconduct of the divorce lawyer. It
came before Syracuse appeals judge, John Centra, on January 9, 2008. This judge also decided
attorney disciplinary cases. I did not know that the same divorce lawyer had been appointed by
him to the Fifth District ethics committee a few blocks away. On the same day, a first-time ethics
prosecution was started against me after two decades of unblemished practice. It featured ten
grievances going back many years. Half were eventually dismissed on their face but not before
five were exploited in retaliation for hotel forums I was sponsoring to hear corruption reports.

Ten years later, I was approached by a former client who advised that an attorney attempted to
get a false statement from him at the outset of this witch hunt. But even the five grievances could
have been defeated had my law office secretary not been similarly influenced to cause ethics
violations. She tampered with mail, court calendars, and removed file material needed to defend
myself at a hearing before a retired judge appointed by Judge Centra’s court. She also pilfered
well over $100,000. When discovered, she was fired in November, 2009. I was then informed
from reliable inside sources that a witch hunt was underway, that I should investigate options.

After two years of that, I submitted an internal report to the district attorney and city police
department, the same entities that were the subjects of civil rights and criminal cases which I had
successfully concluded over the years. That report contained extensive bank records, client
affidavits and forged documents convincingly showing a criminal enterprise involving my fired
secretary that extended beyond my office. Over a six-month period of follow-up in 2012, I was
informed such things as lost complaints, misplaced files and ultimately a referral to civil court.

That changed the same year when I helped expose my ex-secretary’s crimes in a nearby county.
She had been operating her own divorce and family law practice for years, demonstrating
emphatically how easy it could be for a lay person to play divorce lawyer. My case against her
was reopened but never prosecuted prior to expiration of a five-year limitations period. It was
apparent that she was acting under some form of immunity to set me up. That only caused her to
victimize other law office employers as predicted in my report. She was finally indicted, arrested
in Illinois and sent to jail in 2016 in my home county for felonies committed upon later victims.

On the domestic side, my custody and support matters were regularly shifted to judges of all
variety and discipline. In New York, there are 11 different trial courts in comparison with
California, our most populated state, which has only one. Despite its lucrative nature, the
structure is so byzantine that even the state’s bar association issued a report condemning it in
favor of a constitutional reform convention in 2017. My originally uncontested divorce was

splintered into unmanageable components before supreme court judges, family judges, support
magistrates, hearing officers, court of claims, retired judges and even a city criminal judge.

To illustrate the chaos which occurs when impartiality is compromised in an antiquated court
system, Syracuse family judge, Martha Walsh-Hood, was assigned as an “Acting Supreme Court
Judge” to decide my custody case while Supreme Court Judge Michael Daley was assigned as
“Acting Family Judge” to decide my child support case in courtrooms 60 miles apart in 2009.
With each new arrival came an orientation process. It was easy to recognize all the venom, but
when forced to correct their unfamiliarity with the record (because they had prejudged my case),
I caused judge humiliation in the courtroom. This only aggravated the vendettas against me.

Judge Hood betrayed an additional defect when targeting my male traits. I was informed by a
court reporter that she typically ruled against fathers and that might have explained, in part, her
assignment by Judge Tormey. During our trial, she berated or limited testimony of my many
witnesses whereas my ex-spouse produced only her mother and father. Judge Hood was so sexist
that she blocked my use of notes as a pro se litigant on the witness stand and even my pen which
she alone deemed to be a weapon of intimidation. There was no such fear expressed by the ex-
spouse, but Hood was looking for anything to use against me as she purposefully inflamed my
emotions. The habitual flipping of a pen in my hand during objections was one of them.

If a judge is allowed to succeed with such abuse, he or she will carry it over to the next mom or
dad who comes into court. The standard means for accountability is an appeal. But the appeals
court here, occupied by Judge Centra, was already engaged in a disciplinary prosecution, hence
its impartiality was clearly suspect. Accordingly, I filed for disqualification of that appeals court.
My motion was denied “without prejudice” and without explanation in November, 2009. At the
same time, my reform efforts necessarily heightened as did the retributions on all fronts to
protect this gold mine. I was exposing the abuses in editorials and conducting news conferences.

In 2010, I took a conscientious stand against my profession for its long-time failure to correct
gender inequality in these courts. I compared this to the actions of Susan B. Anthony and Dr.
Martin Luther King. I refused to pay so-called “child support” orders that were also the product
of unjust practices catalogued on pages 11-12. Despite the witch hunt, the same court suspended
my law license for the first time on February 5, 2010 due to non-payment. Only two months
later, it revisited my motion and disqualified the entire Fourth Department court from both my
disciplinary and domestic cases. This is a highly unusual event. All such matters were then
transferred to Albany, but the license suspension order was not set aside for reconsideration.

The suspension was caused by Judge Michael Daley who promised me a hearing on his own
disqualification. This judge was assigned out of order by Judge Tormey, and such transfers are
not subject to transparency. Litigants are left to guess what occurred behind closed doors. Both
Tormey and Daley were highly political, and it made no sense that the latter would re-appear
after being removed from client cases (i.e. woman commissioner). The ex-secretary was highly
involved as no hearing was set by the judge or placed on my calendar. Instead I was violated on
October 1, 2009. At the same time, a client case involving the same two was compromised
leading to a six-month suspension order (still extant) on June 6, 2013. This came only days after
ethics lawyers complained of my public activity at a closed reinstatement hearing, see pg. 14.

Although the foregoing is documented in transcripts and records, appellate recourse was
effectively closed due to systemic bias. Accordingly, I turned to federal court which is charged
with a paramount duty of protecting federal rights under our Constitution. U.S. District Judge
David Hurd denied a temporary restraint on March 16, 2009 which could have averted the
license, custody and support fiasco that followed. In an October, 2009 decision, he granted my
motion to amend my February 26, 2009 complaint and consolidated a later action taken in
November, 2010. Both events could not have occurred unless there was some merit here. The
latter case was filed after a swat-like invasion of my home executed by town cops, support
agents and flatbed operators to seize vehicles in violation of an agreement and court order.

The federal litigation resulted in a 45-page decision dismissing all claims, Parent v New York,
786 F. Supp. 2d 516 (NDNY 2011). Not only did the decision analyze the many abstention,
deference and technical obstacles routinely employed to keep aggrieved parents locked in family
court, it featured the many judges, agents and lawyers named as defendants who had been acting
as my substitutes in parental decision making. Due to state sovereign immunity under the
Eleventh Amendment, state agents who violate our rights can only be sued in federal court by
naming them personally. Even then, judicial immunity forecloses monetary recovery unlike
court employees, i.e. Morin, supra. That personal naming rule only aggravated the systemic bias.

Emboldened by these events, replacement judges for Hood and Daley aggressively sought to
discredit my reputation and reform message beginning in 2011. They did so by granting tactical
motions of the ex-spouse’s latest attorney and “Attorney for the Child,” William Koslosky. Most
effective were the forensic orders detailed earlier. Like child support, I was forced to resist such
orders as they were plainly directed to suppressing my First Amendment rights through an abuse
of judicial office. When Syracuse Family Judge Michelle Pirro-Bailey refused to read my
opposition papers or even hear my position at oral argument, I exited on grounds that my due
process rights were additionally violated. In my absence, she issued the first such forensic order.

Among the grounds asserted to support that order was a false factual statement by William
Koslosky that I had sought to have my law license reinstated before this family judge. If true and
unopposed, this would clearly show law license incompetency since such matters come under
the exclusive jurisdiction of appeals courts. That statement was sworn under oath and filed with
two appeals courts. I provided copies of the motion and record which Koslosky cited to support
his facts. Nowhere was such a reinstatement sought. My appeals of the Pirro-Bailey orders were
rendered moot when that judge disqualified herself and her replacement judge vacated them on
the same record. This event proves how flippant, needless and lucrative these orders can be.

William Koslosky has never been married and remains childless in his sixties. Like Eisenhut, he
has made a living in these courts making mountains out of molehills. So obsessed was he at
killing my reform efforts that he falsified statements which harmed his own unsuspecting clients
by removing both their only father and his support capacities. His agenda clearly conflicted with
theirs, but none of the many judges took note of this except a support judge who removed him in
November, 2012 due to conduct that was harming settlement (and my new career position).
Nowhere in any decision to date has the falsified attorney affidavit been mentioned despite
repeated motions and reports which attached the requisite proofs. Instead, he was rewarded with
a re-appointment in 2013 by the next, newly-seated judge, Daniel King, of Lowville, New York.

Judge King was, perhaps, the most childish and incompetent of all 41 trial jurists assigned during
my 15-year divorce. Time and again, I was forced to correct his understanding of both the law
and record. When a Syracuse support magistrate raised my support obligations, he cited a PhD
degree among his justifications. That PhD did not exist and it was nowhere mentioned in the
record of his hearing. But it can be found in a May 3, 2013 decision issued only eight days after I
published a 25-page judicial conduct complaint against him on my website. On review of that
decision, Judge King called it “harmless error” and gave me a Master’s degree instead which I
also never had. In their spite, these judges were conferring degrees without university authority.

As stated, such injustices were brought before the Moreland Commission later the same year. At
the same time, the forensic abuse tactic was resumed to the delight of King who quickly ordered
a battery of evaluations without any competent support only weeks after my testimony. His
orders were conflicting and hypocritical. For example, I obtained proof of his alcohol habits near
his children at a Lowville bar which I also published on my website. It created what I later raised
in federal and appellate courts as a “contempt by ambush” since I would be in violation of his
conflicting orders no matter how I spent time with my daughters.

Faced with this dilemma at my niece’s wedding in November, 2013, I “indulged” in the
traditional champagne toast. This was quickly reported by an ex-spouse livid about the
wonderful affair of which she had no control. Judge King then conducted what he called a
“mini-hearing” on the same day as our first appearance without any notice to facilitate witnesses.
He forced me to take the stand, and although there was no proof of consumption, he decried the
toast as a “prohibited alcohol related gesture” which was never prohibited whatever that meant.

This bizarre prohibition is found on page 5 of a December 2, 2013 decision, and it caused a five-
year separation from my precious daughters. Judge Centra, perhaps overwhelmed by all the
unexpected chaos he helped cause, issued a stop-order against King ten days later which allowed
me to spend my last holidays with them. The Fourth Department appeals court then re-appeared
despite its 2010 disqualification to remove that order, thereby permitting Judge King to continue
with his antics, and there are too many to recite here. A voluminous record speaks for itself.

One would think the vast harm inflicted upon me at that point was enough. But this sadistic gang
was intent on eliminating me completely. In my litigation and reports, I have compared it to “a
Rodney King beating with the fists and batons replaced by orders and edicts.” This is because
either can result in death. Consistent with their joint agenda, an ex-spouse or “custodial parent,”
hell-bent on replacing me with an unfit, childless millionaire, resorted yet again to willful child
support violations. Incarceration or death was the most efficient way of achieving the combined
objectives after all her protection orders over the years were thrown out for lack of evidence.

I could not satisfy support obligations with interest that was still based on pre-2010 law practice
income. Together with foreclosed career options, a jail term was assured. Contrary to all logic of
a mother promoting her children, the ex-spouse, Kelly Hawse-Koziol, was abusing our courts to
inherit a lavish lifestyle for herself. She had destroyed all the child benefits I had built up over a
30-year career. A last resort federal action in 2014 was dismissed by Judge Gary Sharpe, the
“gene theorist,” effectively closing all courthouse doors and leaving me to my own remedies. It
is a condition undoubtedly faced by support victims everywhere who then resort to violence.

In my case, a last resort would be Paris, France where I would seek international protection. This
is exactly what I did in November, 2014 with Judge King positioned to confirm a six-month jail
term recommended by yet another biased support magistrate. Ironically this was the opposite of
what is occurring on our borders today and the last thing my father expected when he escaped
this country at the end of World War II. It was also ironic that one of the few judges who refused
to join this witch hunt managed to reach me directly in Paris and his name was Judge Paris.
However, no support warrant was issued, and that is likely the only reason I am preparing this
report today, because I returned home and was forced to agree to a payment plan to avoid jail.

Not surprisingly, that plan collapsed when I discovered by happenstance that Hawse-Koziol had
relocated my daughters to the millionaire’s home immediately after the jail recommendation.
She did so in willful violation of our custody order, and this much was proven beyond doubt
with a purported notice in late 2014 conveyed with an e-mail confirmation that lacked an “l” in
“” Even my daughters would know that such transmission was impossible. However,
Judge King, ever committed to denying me any “breaks,” excused the violation. He also denied
my motion to set aside the agreement based on this clear fraud upon the father and the court.

When the next deadline for payment expired, King, Koslosky and Hawse-Koziol came cruising.
A support warrant was issued by King on September 1, 2015. Fourth Department appeals judge,
Nancy Smith, the only judge above trial level ever to be disciplined by the state’s Commission
on Judicial Conduct, denied me a stay order. Three loans were then applied to pay the required
balance and remove the warrant. Such payments were ordered to be made at the local support
collection unit, but they had stopped taking them, referring us instead to a central processing
center which had a confidential location. King refused to accept certified bank checks held by
my attorney, thereby forcing me into fugitive status for weeks until the process was complete.

Despite all this, the war waged on. One month after the warrant was lifted, I posted the entire
fraud on my website, That site had thousands of followers globally since
it went up in 2010, and it had been monitored regularly by media, ethics lawyers, judges and law
enforcement for good and bad reasons. The posting enraged a deranged “custodial parent,” and
she set out on yet another mission of destruction. She obtained the last of her protection orders
from Judge King in November, 2015. In reality, it was “gag order” in disguise because it
directed a removal of offensive postings without specificity, and there was no physical threat or
presence near the home alleged. I motioned for its removal, or at the very least clarification, but
both were denied, leaving me again in “contempt by ambush” due to its purposely vague terms.
The only safe approach would be to shut down the site altogether which I refused to do.

The latest scheme backfired when the order included the childless boyfriend in its scope. This
gave me standing to sue him along with King and Hawse-Koziol in New York Supreme Court
on First Amendment grounds. An order against King was granted by a judge far removed from
the region. A protest was also set to occur on the hearing date of June 22, 2016. However,
between those dates, Judge King cancelled his own hearing on the protection order, removed it
without litigant motion on the face of the petition, and removed himself from the case altogether,
thereby rendering moot the one set by state Supreme Court. That case was then dismissed on the
higher judge’s own motion to strongly suggest that the whole thing was arranged behind closed
doors. Hawse-Koziol and my daughters moved out of the millionaire’s home one month later.

Judge Tormey then passed the case onto Judge James Eby in remote Oswego County. Like his
predecessors, Eby never familiarized himself with the full record as my fate was already sealed.
On our first appearance, he forced all parties to make a 160-mile round trip in lieu of a phone
conference to receive a decision that had already been completed. He then used this opportunity
to humiliate me with a courtroom lecture about the basics of an appeal. Meanwhile, William
Koslosky was billing taxpayers for his time. Such abuse mirrored the retaliation against the court
clerk who recovered $600,000 against Tormey. She was similarly reassigned to remote courts.

During the next year, I tried time and again to remove the serial conditions that had been placed
upon my parenting time by prior disqualified judges. Many years had gone by, and my daughters
were reaching driving age. Still Judge Eby refused to budge, ultimately conditioning my access
with supervision by the ex-mother-in-law who burned her home down due to neglected candles.
He kept that order intact even after that woman accosted me publicly at a summer recital where I
endeavored to bring flowers to my girls at the end of their performances. In the end, no matter
what I did, it was never right despite being kept in the dark on everything in my girls’ lives.

After that volatile exchange, I filed for holiday parenting time in November, 2017. The
“custodial parent” answered days later with another willful support violation petition. On the
return date of December 11, 2017, a security deputy employed at the courthouse by the Oneida
County Sheriff Department was solicited by a female court clerk and Hawse-Koziol to serve me
during the custody hearing now being conducted locally by Judge Eby. Abusing his position, he
entered the courtroom and announced his intentions which Eby declared was contrary to policy
in his home court. I then exited without the papers which had already been mailed to me.

Four days later, I appeared on that violation petition in the same courthouse before Judge #40,
Natalie Carraway. She opened with standard exchanges but quickly moved on to ask whether I
knew what was occurring here. I sarcastically replied that I had no idea after spending 30 years
in these courts. I quickly avoided a referral for contempt by raising the manner of service which
was unlawful on various grounds including a deputy sheriff abusing his security position and
denying his civil division and taxpayers the service fee prescribed by law. I also stressed that it
was bad precedent given its non-emergency interruption of active proceedings (i.e. he could
have served me at the only exit point when released by Eby). Carraway saw no issue. Therefore,
I acted on her precedent by having my agent in the back of her courtroom serve her with a
lawsuit I had filed to restrain proceedings. Her reaction was palpable, and she refused service.

One month prior to these proceedings, I had published a book entitled, Satan’s Docket:
Corruption and Carnage in America’s Divorce Industry. It was purchased and circulated by
judges, lawyers, politicians and many others in the region. Corruption was detailed as related
throughout this report. On February 8, 2018, I followed with a full-page advertisement and
editorials published in Syracuse and regional newspapers. I debunked Judge Tormey and New
York Chief Judge Janet DiFiore in their glowing renditions of an “Excellence Initiative.” In
response, judge #41 was assigned after Judge Eby stepped down, presumably due to his witness
of the service event. Judge Gerald Popeo was a local city judge assigned as “Acting Family
Judge” with a vendetta. His assignment was contrary to the remote ones occurring since 2009.

Gerald Popeo was assigned not for legitimate deliberation but to complete an agenda for
incarcerating a public critic. He denied a disqualification motion supported by a sworn witness
statement disclosing that only months earlier, citizen Popeo had approached me at a local bar
irate over the false belief that I was part of the witch hunt resulting in the censure described on
pg. 9. As judge, Popeo denied the bar incident as he did the racist remarks in the censure case.
There was also a civil rights history between us that included an African-American city official
who attempted suicide after Popeo jailed him. All charges were later dismissed by a jury.

The serial misconduct of Judge Popeo mandated not only a self-disqualification from the family
court case but a removal from the bench altogether by the state Judicial Conduct Commission.
However, a former state supreme court judge was his defense counsel, and Popeo was let loose
as a repeat offender might to harm more litigants. A discriminatory procedure was then crafted
by the county sheriff and family court to unlawfully obtain jurisdiction over me as a support
debtor deprived of his income. My six-month law license suspension, long ago completed, has
been extended for more than nine years, longer than the seven-year disbarment period for felons.

An arrest warrant was immediately issued against me only one week after my advertisement and
editorials without notice. I discovered it by chance, and it was lifted when compliance was made
under protest. The agenda continued with a support magistrate who refused to properly rectify a
$35,500 support payment in 2015 that was not credited in the account statement offered by a
social service agent at our May 17, 2018 violation hearing. It was accepted, then rejected when I
exposed the fraud. It was the only exhibit and may have been shredded as I was denied a copy.
That attempted fraud would have doubled the actual debt to guarantee a violation and jail term.

The social services attorney offering that exhibit provided free services to a “custodial parent”
earning nearly $100,000 annually with benefits. Despite all this, a violation was found, opening
the door for confirmation of a $46,803 support judgment without any calculation and six-month
jail term. Two successive stenographers mysteriously reversed their retainer commitments to
produce the hearing transcript showing the judicial misconduct, lawyer malpractice and support
collection fraud. An appeal or stay application could not be completed without this transcript.

However, Judge Popeo, unlike his predecessors, refused to grant a necessary adjournment to hire
a third stenographer. Instead, he issued his incarceration order and second arrest warrant on the
rationalization that he alone had reviewed the hearing CD to conclude that there were no issues
with that judgment. For his part, the same sheriff deputy who served the petition placed a call to
me to turn myself in. Like the abuse of his security duties, such a call was contrary to procedure.
Based on my extensive experience, his abuses of public office would rise to a criminal act.

At about this time, I received information from a former county jail inmate that if I turned
myself in, a plan was in place to have another inmate admit himself to a “protective custody”
location for the purpose of inflicting a serious physical assault. As a trial attorney, I had secured
such civil rights recoveries as $300,000 against the Oneida County Sheriff and jail facility. Prior
to license suspension, my last jury trial in Syracuse federal court featured a Russian national
subjected to cruel treatment and injury during his term of incarceration there.

By the time of this deputy call, the illicit activity was escalating without even the courtesy of a
reply to my complaints to the county sheriff, state agents and Chief Judge Janet DiFiore as the
chief administrative officer of the New York Unified Court System. My written complaints were
made in January, 2018 and remain unanswered. After 12 years of persecution, a family court
system laced with crime and corruption, and faced with the choice of a jail beating or outside
self-defense, I advised this deputy that I would resist any unlawful arrest which was my right.

In response, this deputy put out a secret bulletin attached to the arrest warrant which unlike
others had my name in capital letters on the public warrants list. As I later learned, businesses I
frequented were contacted by city police to notify if I was spotted. The bulletin gave my phone
statements out of context, omitting the deputy’s lawlessness and Popeo’s dishonesty. It also
featured shirtless photos from a Facebook site to portray me as a dangerous suspect. That
bulletin was unlawfully leaked to the media as the Sheriff himself conceded in news reports.

On August 30, 2018, a former client was driving my winter vehicle to deliver legal documents
needed for an extended stay in fugitive condition so I could prepare an appeal. That appeal was
again denied by the same Judge Nancy Smith who denied my last one despite the concealment
of a needed hearing transcript. The vehicle was detained on Interstate 87 after exiting toll booths
in Albany. Seven patrol cars arrived on the scene. The driver was then chained to a guard rail.

The vehicle was searched in vain and the driver interrogated. Officers threatened him with jail
and felonies if he failed to bring them to me. A town cop yelling at him, threatened to shoot on
site after disparaging me in shocking manner. As it turns out, the sadistic operatives back in
Utica, New York had placed law enforcement here in harm’s way, if any, due to the man they
were harassing based on his criminal history. Despite an outstanding warrant of his own, he was
released. While all this was occurring, terrorists, murderers, pedophiles and violent felons were
frequenting the same Interstate. Payment of the fraudulent support debt was ultimately coerced
through a loan and fundraising campaign. The warrant was then removed. Vendetta completed!

On each morning for over five years, this whistleblower victim awoke with the severe pain of
knowing nothing about his precious daughters. The reader should imagine being in that horrific
condition simply because the feelings of a gang of judges were hurt. Like Operation Greylord,
this gang must now be investigated and held accountable for the federal crimes clearly shown
here. As stated, our Supreme Court has declared the parenting right to be the “oldest liberty
interest protected by the Constitution.” Free speech, due process and equal protection add to the
rights ruthlessly violated. Action is now required because no one is above the law in America.

April 12, 2019 Respectfully submitted

Leon R. Koziol, J.D.


You might also like