Comments on: Proposition 115 would give governor more power in judicial selections http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/10/04/proposition-115-would-give-governor-more-power-in-judicial-selections/ Your Inside Track to Arizona Politics Mon, 17 Jun 2013 18:37:27 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Anthony http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/10/04/proposition-115-would-give-governor-more-power-in-judicial-selections/comment-page-1/#comment-78252 Anthony Fri, 19 Oct 2012 16:53:35 +0000 http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=51680#comment-78252 Yes. I agree. I wll vote "Yes" on Prop 115. My judge on my case who is Dean Christoffel stated that its CPS's fault for directing me(father) to motion the court for custody change after the mother was "substantiated" by CPS on neglect charges. Dean Christoffel stated "its not my fault that CPS did not do a dependancy". Dean Christoffel also stated that the evaluator recomended 50/50. But the evaluation clearly stated in his evaluation report that "father be the legal decision maker and mother have visitation everyother weekend." My daughter's childhood is being destrsyed by judical officers. Further more, Dean Christoffel ordered that Father pay mother $400 additional to what the state child support required. None of what dean Christoffel goes along with Arizona's "Best Interest of Minor Child Laws". Facts about the Mother: moved 6 times to diferent adresses, did not pay child support as required in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012. allowed access to a registered child sex offender for 8 months and was not notifed as required by law. fired from 4 jobs. one job was a foster care aganecy. Facts about the Father: One stabel address for the past 6 years which is less then 5 min from school. One consistent employment and still employed. Father pays for all cost for child. So you tell me is The Pima County Superior Court leadership following the ARS Laws? So which leaders is directing teh gender profiling aginst fathers? Leadership path is Jan Kearney, Sarah Simmons, Terry Chandler, Dean Christoffel and Margaret Maxwell. Yes. I agree. I wll vote “Yes” on Prop 115.
My judge on my case who is Dean Christoffel stated that its CPS’s fault for directing me(father) to motion the court for custody change after the mother was “substantiated” by CPS on neglect charges. Dean Christoffel stated “its not my fault that CPS did not do a dependancy”. Dean Christoffel also stated that the evaluator recomended 50/50. But the evaluation clearly stated in his evaluation report that “father be the legal decision maker and mother have visitation everyother weekend.” My daughter’s childhood is being destrsyed by judical officers. Further more, Dean Christoffel ordered that Father pay mother $400 additional to what the state child support required. None of what dean Christoffel goes along with Arizona’s “Best Interest of Minor Child Laws”.

Facts about the Mother:
moved 6 times to diferent adresses, did not pay child support as required in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012. allowed access to a registered child sex offender for 8 months and was not notifed as required by law. fired from 4 jobs. one job was a foster care aganecy.

Facts about the Father:
One stabel address for the past 6 years which is less then 5 min from school.
One consistent employment and still employed.
Father pays for all cost for child.

So you tell me is The Pima County Superior Court leadership following the ARS Laws? So which leaders is directing teh gender profiling aginst fathers? Leadership path is Jan Kearney, Sarah Simmons, Terry Chandler, Dean Christoffel and Margaret Maxwell.

]]> By: Jack Lee http://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2012/10/04/proposition-115-would-give-governor-more-power-in-judicial-selections/comment-page-1/#comment-78210 Jack Lee Tue, 16 Oct 2012 22:14:57 +0000 http://azcapitoltimes.com/?p=51680#comment-78210 Vote Yes on Proposition 115. The Proposition is not giving the Governor Sole authority but gives three authorities to review and hold accountable to the Arizona Laws. The Three are AZ Attorneys, AZ Legislature, and AZ Governors. This is as simple as requiring accountability of state judicial employees to our laws as it is a law based system not a privet club on tax payer dime. The Proposition notes that the current merit system does not work because the "rubber stamp" method rather then real review of performance. The merit system forces lower judges to go with the flow and not stand on their own when their higher judge directs them to carryout conduct associated to hate crimes, prejudice and discrimination. This Proposition will reestablish the true meaning of "honorable conduct". This Proposition will stop attacks on fathers by the legal community. This Proposition will stop extortion schemes between attorneys and judges. This Proposition will return the legal community back to following and using the Arizona Laws. Presently the legal community manipulates the laws in the gray area for the purpose of financial gain. This Proposition will require a Judge to explain to the legislature on why he/she felt that in his/her discretion that the "mother" needed to be rewarded with excessive child support and alimony when the evidence show that "father" should have been awarded custody. This Proposition will stop gender profiling by Judges. (Public is clearly aware that fathers are openly attacked unlawfully by superior court and notes extremes in Pima County in greater numbers) This Proposition will stop Judicial appointing by a committee that continues to use its authority to usurp specific judicial persons to carryout democratic political agendas. The Proposition will stop judicial officers from imposing personal values over Arizona Laws on the Public. The Proposition will stop Democrats from imposing socialism and superseding Arizona Laws on Best Interest of Minor Child. The Proposition will hold judicial officers accountable to the Arizona Laws and it has a greater than 10 year record of privatizing the legal process for personal agenda and personal gain in a state funded government position. So Citizens Vote "Yes" for Proposition 115! Vote Yes on Proposition 115.
The Proposition is not giving the Governor Sole authority but gives three authorities to review and hold accountable to the Arizona Laws. The Three are AZ Attorneys, AZ Legislature, and AZ Governors. This is as simple as requiring accountability of state judicial employees to our laws as it is a law based system not a privet club on tax payer dime.
The Proposition notes that the current merit system does not work because the “rubber stamp” method rather then real review of performance. The merit system forces lower judges to go with the flow and not stand on their own when their higher judge directs them to carryout conduct associated to hate crimes, prejudice and discrimination.
This Proposition will reestablish the true meaning of “honorable conduct”.
This Proposition will stop attacks on fathers by the legal community.
This Proposition will stop extortion schemes between attorneys and judges.
This Proposition will return the legal community back to following and using the Arizona Laws. Presently the legal community manipulates the laws in the gray area for the purpose of financial gain.
This Proposition will require a Judge to explain to the legislature on why he/she felt that in his/her discretion that the “mother” needed to be rewarded with excessive child support and alimony when the evidence show that “father” should have been awarded custody.
This Proposition will stop gender profiling by Judges. (Public is clearly aware that fathers are openly attacked unlawfully by superior court and notes extremes in Pima County in greater numbers)
This Proposition will stop Judicial appointing by a committee that continues to use its authority to usurp specific judicial persons to carryout democratic political agendas.
The Proposition will stop judicial officers from imposing personal values over Arizona Laws on the Public.
The Proposition will stop Democrats from imposing socialism and superseding Arizona Laws on Best Interest of Minor Child.
The Proposition will hold judicial officers accountable to the Arizona Laws and it has a greater than 10 year record of privatizing the legal process for personal agenda and personal gain in a state funded government position.
So Citizens Vote “Yes” for Proposition 115!

]]>