ParentAdvocates.org

Judicial Corruption
 

Judicial Accountability in New Jersey: A Personal Story of Corruption by Jan Beddini

Since 1994 I have complained about a pattern of abuse and bias by NJ Superior Court Judge Thomas Dilts, the trial judge of Somerset County NJ , for refusing to recuse himself and for retaliating in his orders as a consequence of my pursuits. Thomas Dilts would manipulate his orders so that the opposing party would benefit while penalizing me for failing to follow orders when no such incidence occurred. The pattern was apparent and any and all pleadings for help through appropriate channels, non existent.

Members of Congress

Affidavit - this 9th day of May in the year of our Lord, two thousand and eight-
Case - FM 18 13975-92 – Somerset County, New Jersey – Janet Beddini

Respectfully, my story deals with an out of control family court judge, cronyism and pay to play in the State of NJ with no recourse. There is no accountability for family court judges who write their own laws. Complaints seed retaliation. Judicial immunity is ill applied and accountability is non existent. Family court judges have boundless discretion and latitude redering any complaint against a family court judge useless. Family court judges have operated devoid of scrutiny and their destruction to families are without reason. They have become senseless predators harming families devoid of any and all checks and balances. My certification addresses one family court judge not unlike most of them who are out of control. .

Judge THOMAS DILTS became a judge in 1992 and was handed our case in 1993 when we were divorced.

The parties agreed to work out a Contract of Divorce (Settlement Agreement) that did not involve THOMAS DILTS except for his verbiage of just how binding the contract would be and to render our divorce final. He also made certain he would force a transcript on both of us because it was “binding” and would not be altered in any way. Like his Orders that followed numbering in the hundreds in years to come, and contradicted each other, so too would he dismiss the terms of the Settlement of Divorce 10 years later, remove my children from my home, remove every dime from me to live, under the “guise of child support” because alimony was waived under the terms of the “Agreement,”, and order that I pay endless fictitious debt by manipulating order after order.

Since 1994 I have complained about a pattern of abuse and bias by the trial judge of Somerset County NJ for during the 14 years, refusing to recuse repeatedly and retaliating in his orders as a consequence of my pursuits.

Thomas Dilts would manipulate his orders so that the opposing party would benefit while penalizing me for failing to follow orders when no such incidence occurred The pattern was apparent and any and all pleadings for help through appropriate channels, non existent

The Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct or (ACJC) whose administrative function was and is to apply the rules defining misconduct by the US Supreme Court and the state of NJ, failed to apply the rules causing further retaliation by the same judge, No government official or agency would acknowledge the judges misconduct as defined by rules and codes

Since 1994, I have filed complaints of bias and misconduct against this trail judge now a presiding judge, to the NJ Conduct Committee, the AG office, the Supreme Court of NJ, the Legislature, the Administrative Office of the Courts, the FBI, the Department of Justice, the US attorney Chris Christie’s office but to no avail. In the case of the Judicial Conduct Committee where I have filed since 1994, 4 times, “you are just dissatisfied with Orders” was an unconscionable and moronic rationale for dispelling any help. In 2004 after submitting a letter to this committee by THOMAS H DILTS own hand where he refused to step down from my case even while a party in a Federal Lawsuit, they just elected not to respond. The Internet Press took charge of this dirty deed and still nothing was done by the State of NJ. The retaliation would be endless as a consequence of my revelations and would proceed to take my children, order me into endless debt, deprive me of all financial allocations agreed to in our contract between the parties, through manipulations of Orders and defiance of statutes and rules governing the state to which he pledged his oath and all under the pretentious “findings of fact and conclusions of law.”

Thomas DILTS would remove all the Contract Settlement financial terms of the Divorce and would have me paying trumped up fictitious debts to this day. He would play custody yo yo, ignoring confirmed neglect and abuse of the children while, ordering prolonged plenary hearings for psychologists, guardian ad litems, and having me pay for people I never met and allow children to remain in the home while proven acts of abuse were current being a party to even more criminal statutes. He would deny me any monetary allowance from a negotiated settlement of almost 2000 a month to now nothing since 2003.

When my one remaining minor son was returned to me two years too late in 2006, Thomas H Dilts retromodified an Order for child support arrears for 3 years, a clear violation of statute, to avoid me receiving any financial support and to do that he had a judge sign an order while out of the county where the case presided and where he did not review the case and where the signature was not the judge in question.. The fictitious child support arrears would disable my ability to care for my child and followed my request for another disqualification and change of venue.

When he learned of my disability following the loss of my children, he ordered yet more financial penalties. He had me pay child support from my disability check, fictitious retormodified arrears and debts while the opposing party earned 12-15x the disability amount. To this day his income remains in tact while I borrow to stay afloat in my home of 25 years fighting off a foreclosures, a home this judge has tried to take from me since 1994 when the pattern of denials and fictitious debt began.

Thomas H DILTS has refused to remove himself from my case despite the definitive case law regarding disqualification and despite his disqualification in 1996 and where in an unprecedented act by this same trial judge in defiance my special plea, his Code of Conduct and the US Constitution, would reassume the case in 1998 after being formally disqualified in 1996.

Repeated requests to have FBI and DOJ investigate “ Title 18” criminal violations led to responses that this is a civil or family matter. This judge, like so many other family court judges have manipulated the system and convinced the powers that be that they can perpetuate crimes under the auspices of boundless discretion and immunity when there is no such maxim. Officials have all twisted the definitions of corrupt criminal activity to equate to immunity and latitude of discretion because few if any are focusing on famiily state corruption and he like so many others, remain unscathed in office, when they should be disbarred and publicly humiliated.

Like the gay priest in his black robe, relentlessly pursuing its young prey and getting away with it time after time, this evil too shall be exposed..

There is no recourse for help because there is no enforcement for accountability;: only retaliation if you whistle blow. The pattern of money, conspiracy and pay offs exist in these courts and is kept under wraps.

THOMAS H DILTS was disqualified from my case in 1996 following a move to another county but still continued to influence rulings by interacting with the judge in that county. As early as 1996 both party and judge tried to manipulate a contract of divorce to remove the children from me for “complaining.” I was given that right to a new venue and loss of custody was temporarily halted.

In 1998 I had to return to my home but requested that they not transfer my case to Somerset County. and not to return my case to the same trial judges control of two prior years and 3 requests for recusal by that time. Following a letter from an Assignment judge stating that “there was no substantial basis shown” a letter from Thomas DILTS had been sent to both parties in 1998 in defiance of the law that “your case has been consolidated and I will have it in the future” There was more than a substantial basis shown after countless filings to remove a biased harmful judge who was already disqualified in 1996 and violating the due process clause of the US Constitution, and repeat violations of his oath of office in reassuming my case but corrupt judicial officials did not see it that way and resumption of harm to my children and me would continue until this day. Numerous complaints and cries for help from 1998 until the present would render my pursuits painful and useless. All Orders in my case that followed numbering in the 100’s by Thomas H Dilts are void as a matter of law and hopefully in the near future, he will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Following his forced resumption of my case in defiance of case law, Statutes and his oath, he then proceeded in a rash of continued misconduct by manipulating Orders, ignoring other judges rulings and suppressing their orders., altering other judges rulings, retromodifying Orders, defying and/or altering Statutes having an abusive partyr with a history of domestic violence assume custody and ignore the violence.

THOMAS DILTS would pursue his rash of violations of Title 18, his Oath of Office for the next 10 years refusing to disqualify himself despite Motion after Motion to do so. He would then retaliate financially until 2008 using my children as pawns for money profit and gain to the adverse party and his cominglings.

My children are the victims of his criminal conduct where he knowingly gave children to an abusive man with money and in defiance of a Contract Agreement that has been ignored by officials in the entire State of NJ.. My children have serious substance abuse issues, and depression having been exposed to violence since they were transferred at the ages of 13 and 17, and despite this judges knowledge through motion after motion, of said violence, kept them there committing blatant violations of Federal and State child endangerment laws but neither DYFS or the AOC or the police or the prosecutors office, or my right to change venue before the Assignment judge totally manipulated by THOMAS H DITS would do a thing to help my children..

The violations, manipulations of orders and court personnel, to control and manipulate an outcome against my family to cause harm to my children were endless, and severe. Thomas H Dilts issued a recent order in August 2007 following confirmed abuse, to enable more custody turmoil and playing roulette with a child’s fate, reinstating more child support distention and reaking havoc on a recently altered family dynamic . Dilts who is involved domestic violence and adolescent programs allowed violence to continue towards a juvenile just to retaliate and cause harm to plaintiff who sought his disqualification through a change of venue for the 9th time. He manipulated custody again less than one month following yet another altercation between father and child that was fully disclosed to trial judge, yet he continues to preside over family cases.

For a year leading up to the Order of August 2007, he would dismiss all violations of interference in my parental rights and custody ignoring a clearly defined NJ Criminal Statute and despite numerous motions to return the child followed by an October 2007 Order ruling that there were no violations of past orders and therefore no contempt citations were to be issued while helping to retain another parent of another case in jail for a fictitious staged parental right interference.

We allow these criminals to alter the course of a family’s entire life where there is no accountability nor criminal prosecution for their wrongdoings.

When judges engage in misconduct, they violate the rights of individuals to whom the wrongdoing is directed. Such violation of an individuals rights under Color of Law, are felonies. Judges MUST be prosecuted for the crimes they commit against the public, against the person, and we must regain the RIGHT to redress our grievances. For Justice to prevail and accountability restored, judges must be prosecuted for their felonies and we are here today to make that happen. Accountability must be restored. It could be your family member that is pursued. They are not above the law

My case is similar to the countless horrors in family courts around the country but where it should not be any less significant nor disregarded. Judges are manipulating these cases at the expense of children and families for corporate profits and are getting away with it due to lack of accountability for their senseless acts..

We must halt state corruption and endless family court abuse. These judges are committing child abuse and endangering their welfare under the guise of judicial immunity. They are violating their OATH repeatedly, freely and openly because no one on the state or federal level is interested in stopping family court oppression and corruption.

We must have rotations and a more simplified removal of a judge from office in order to replenish public confidence and trust. We must have immediate disqualification upon the mere suggestion of bias shown only by a pattern and suspicion by that party being harmed and sanctions to those judges who refuse to recuse.. These laws are already in place but not enforced. Forums can be established in the community where one resides to avoid court bias and establish a more cooperative healing within the family infrastructure undergoing divorce and where the money trail does not channel through corrupt officials and representation. This will then put an end to the corporate corrupt court culture as we know it today.

I certify that the statements made by me are correct to the best of my knowledge and I am aware that if any of the factual contact of this document is intentionally false, I may be subject to punishment.

Jan Beddini
28 Monroe
Avenue Belle Mead,
NJ 08502
908 837 9819
908 625 9275 (c )

Robe Probe

Judicial and Legal Corruption

Jail4Judges

Courtwatch

Judges On Wrong Side Of The Law

MY STORY
LINK

In Feb. of 1994, after enduring another round of beatings at the hands of Mr.Inderbitzin, Ms.Allen took her then two year old daughter, and moved out. In March of 1994, Mr.Inderbitzin initiated a paternity action against Ms.Allen, asking to be named the father of Ms.Allen's daughter, and seeking unsupervised access to the child.

Ms.Allen was without legal representation, when she asked the court to grant Mr. Inderbitzin limited supervised visitation, due to his [documented] history of sexual abuse of children, and his [documented] history of acts of domestic violence, (which included threats to kill an elderly woman.)

A GAL {Steven Dwight Downing} was assigned to this case on 10 March 1994. This GAL demanded that Mr.Inderbitzin have unsupervised access to Ms. Allen's daughter, without investigating, nor even meeting Ms. Allen to hear her concerns. The court granted the GAL's recommendation.

Six months after unsupervised visits began, Ms.Allen's daughter returned to her, complaining that Mr. Inderbitzin had touched her inappropriately. She further had a signs of physical trauma to her personal area. Ms.Allen consulted the pediatrician, who advised that the child should be seen immediately.

Immediately following this incident, Mr.Inderbitzin, (not wanting to answer the charges of sexually abusing a child, sought to muddy the waters by now seeking sole custody of the child, and hence give himself the ability to downplay the severity of the charges as simply a dirty trick on the mother's part in a "custody battle".)

Judge VICKY LYNN HOGAN transferred custody of Ms.Allen's 3-year old daughter to Mr.Inderbitzin, and limited Ms.Allen's contact with her daughter.

This was also done, in light of the fact that Mr. Inderbitzin molested this child, AND another child in 1984. Judge HOGAN also restricted Ms.Allen's contact with her daughter; to now 3 hours a week of supervised contact, which was to take place in the GAL’s small office. ALL PURSUANT TO THE GAL's RECOMMENDATIONS, even though this GAL had not done one ounce of investigative work!

If this Judge had been following the LAW, this would never have happened. This judge violated two statues RCW 26.26.100, and RCW 26.09.187 (which set forth the guidelines restricting the assignment of children to people with history of domestic abuse and sexual misconduct).

However, in Pierce County, they make their own rules up as the go along, knowing full well that they face no repercussion.

From Vicki Hogan's 1 illegitimate, and illegal ruling on 22 June 1995, litigation has been NON-STOP. Numerous times Mr. Inderbitzin’s Attorney filed action after action, to the point that Ms. Allen lost her job, not once, but 3 times. When Ms. Allen gave into the idea that she could not entertain the idea of “employment”, for fear of loosing yet another job, and gaining a bad reputation with employers, she resolved herself to put her full attention on this court case. For that, she was penalized again…

Now Mr. Inderbitzin was after child support, and because Ms. Allen was no longer working, her income was imputed to a substantially higher rate then she ever made (rather then going off of previous employment earnings). Because of her inability to pay child support, she was constantly threatened with jail sentences…

Ms. Allen continued her fight, not only for her daughter’s safety, but also for her constitutional right to share a life with her only child. Mr.Inderbitzin fought only to protect himself from criminal convictions by keeping the child isolated, (in a catholic school and away from anyone who might lend an ear to the child) and away from Ms.Allen, and her family. Mr.Inderbitzin was successful in this case, only because the GAL has acted, and has continued to act as a defense attorney on Mr.Inderbitzin's behalf (in violation of the GAL rules.)

Side Note; This GAL is also a lawyer, and holds a conflict of interest, in that he represented two of Ms.Allen's relatives (cousins). What makes this significant is that Ms.Allen was engaged in a lawsuit against the same relatives parents, beginning in 1995, the jury trial ended in 1999. The GAL has made a small fortune off of this case, (Mr.Inderbitzin has paid him well), for his active involvement for over 8-years, and is still maintaining control over this case, even though he is no longer legally able to act as a GAL in the State of Washington (he has been removed from the GAL list, FOR MISCONDUCT) UPDATE = I SEE HIS NAME WAS BACK ON THE LIST. He continues to deny all of Ms. Allen's requests to share a life, a phone call, or even a moment with her daughter.

Ms. Allen’s parental rights have all been terminated, with the exception of paying child support.

Ms.Allen is now forced to live like a prisoner in her own home due to the fear of more illegitimate TERRORIST ATTACKS by this corrupt trio. Ms.Allen is no match for Mr.Inderbitzin's money, nor his Attorney John Fuhrman’s corrupt tactics, nor the GAL's malice.

Mr.Inderbitzin is a self-employed diesel mechanic, who owns a home on acreage, a speedboat, two street bikes, a vintage automobile collection (to include a 52 Chevy, a 62 Chevy truck and a Corvette), a roadster, a 1999 shop truck, and a 1991-pleasure truck, and an airplane. Mr.Inderbitzin has been fortunate enough to pay with cash for all of his belongings, and owns his home outright. He can afford to send the child he stole to a private school (not for the child's well being, but because it is easier to keep her isolated in this environment – private Catholic Schools do not offer counseling to children). His subpoenaed bank records for one month reflect deposits that total $43,000.00. Ms. Allen, on the other hand, owns one broken 1978-camaro and makes a modest income.

This child is "in need" nothing, but the love and affection of her mother. There is case law that states they are to compare the needs of one over the ability of the other to pay. Not only has THIS rule never been followed in this case, but NO COMMON PRACTICES, RULES, or LAWS have either.

Ms. Allen has not stopped her crusade to fight for her constitutionally protected right to hold a meaningful relationship with her daughter.

Ms. Allen was never accused of, nor found to be "unfit", their complaint? "I am over-protective"... For that, my young daughter was ripped out of my arms and I am not allowed to have contact or communication unless the GAL approves of it, in which he never has. My crime? I reported my daughter’s complaints of molestation and attempted rape to the proper authorities.

What did the abused victim learn? That her abuser is powerful, and protected.

The “final trial” came and went in October of 1996, as Judge Waldo Stone slept on the bench, only to order in the end PER THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE GAL that Vicki Hogan’s ruling shall be upheld, the child was to remain with Mr. Inderbitzin. Mr. Inderbitzin’s Attorney, John William Fuhrman, is famous for adding “rules” and further propaganda into the order, then what the trial court judge originally ruled upon. He then presents them with no notice to the opposing, for signature. In this “ruling”, among the several things he added, was a stipulation that the mother could not return to court for any reason on this case until the spring of 1997. Ms. Allen’s Attorney resigned from the case, haven given this his best shot.

Shortly following this case, Waldo Stone retired from the bench.

The Honorable Judge RUDY TOLLEFSON took his place.

In the spring of 1997, Ms. Allen acting as pro se (without Attorney) brought forth a motion seeking visitations with her daughter. The GAL showed up, and true to form, continued to misconstrue the facts, and as is normal procedure, Judge Tollefson rubber stamped the GAL's recommendations, and denied Ms. Allen's motion.

It then became readily apparent to Ms.Allen that the only way she would ever attempt to have any contact or communication with her daughter, was to move the court to terminate the GAL from this case. (This move had been made once before by Ms.Allen's former Attorney in 1995, who not only asked to have the GAL removed, but further if he was to remain on this case, then he should be subjected to a CR-35 (psych-eval). Judge Vicki Hogan denied the motion entirely, refusing even to listen to what our "probable cause" was.)

With that, Ms. Allen compiled her evidence of over 23-examples of misconduct (to name a few) on the part of the GAL and his inept investigation, and typed out a motion to bring before Judge Tollefson. She filed her motion, and the waiting period began (opponents have a time line to respond in).

Shortly following this, she received a notice in the mail that she was being charged with criminal charges for violating a restraining order (that did not exist). Upon further investigation, she found that the GAL had manufactured evidence against Ms. Allen, alleging that she had been seen at her daughter’s school on a date that she was not even in the state (traveling interstate to assist her father). Coincidence or not, but the date of the this arraignment, was the same date and time that she had scheduled to appear before Judge Tollefson on her motion to terminate the GAL.

Ms. Allen arrived to court early, to attend both hearings. She dropped off a written “plea” notice to answer the charges, and then ran into Judge Tollefson’s courtroom. Ms. Allen began to pour out her complaint for over 45+ minutes, to the only Judge in the history of her case, that did not violate her constitutional right to due process, and who not only listened, but also asked questions as he followed along with Ms.Allen as she read her evidence out loud. Judge Tollefson then took the case under advisement for 30-days, but not before asking the three stooges (Inderbitzin, Fuhrman & Downing) if they would allow Ms.Allen to see her daughter for Christmas. Of course they adamantly refused.

At the end of the 30-day period, on 23 January 1998, Judge Tollefson permanently terminated GAL Downing with prejudice, and replaced him with a GAL that has a reputation as that of a bulldog for seeking the truth (Mr. Doug Schafer). Judge Tollefson granted Ms. Allen liberal visitation with her daughter to begin immediately, and ordered Mr. Inderbitzin to finally undergo a complete psychosexual evaluation.

Ms. Allen took her sister Cindy to pick up her daughter for the weekend visit. Mr. Inderbitzin was over an hour late, and her daughter was crying, and indicated that she was afraid. The transitional period was tough on her, but the visit in and of itself was wonderful.

Mr. Fuhrman immediately appealed the ruling, and moved to have the visits stopped on an emergency basis (which was denied) and Judge Tollefson removed from the case.

It was later discovered that Judge Tollefson read the entire file (at this time 6-7 volumes). To date, no other Judge on this case has ever read the file. Judge Tollefson found that portions of the record were missing, he picked up the phone and attempted to call one of the psychiatrists on the case, seeking a copy of Ms. Allen's evaluation, but, the psychiatrist could not be reached, and he later found a copy of the report. He phoned another psychiatrist {Julia F. Tybor-Moore} to ask if she had knowledge of Mr.Inderbitzin's prior history when she made her report, to which her reply was no, she had not. He phoned another psychiatrist, seeking a copy of Mr.Inderbitzin's 1984 psycho-sexual evaluation, as it was also missing from the 1994 file. As it turned out, his 1984 psychosexual evaluation was incomplete. Inderbitzin refused to submit to any further testing in 1984 and therefore he was never granted unsupervised access to his older daughter.

Two months after Judge Tollefson signed his order terminating the GAL, he issued a 12-page order of his findings in this case, detailing corruption, and the statutory rape Mr. Inderbitzin committed on a 11 year old girl, (which Mr.Inderbitzin never denied),

After he issued this report, the GAL and opposing Attorney filed a complaint with the Commission of Judicial Conduct, alleging that Judge Tollefson made personal attacks against themselves in his 12-page order. A portion of Judge Tollefson’s report was based not only on his own investigation that was prompted out of concern for my daughter, but also based on the new GAL’s investigation.

*Interestingly* Vicki Hogan then began a inside campaign seeking fellow comrades willing to make a complaint against Judge Tollefson, this would include her court reporter, Ms.R.Segamo.

Judge Tollefson was accused by both of them for being verbally abusive. Judge Tollefson admitted to a provoked outburst towards Ms.Segamo, but Judge Tollefson denies any such incident happening with Vicki Hogan.

This whole thing was orchestrated to cast a shadow on an honorable man, with pure intentions. At this juncture, it is imperative to again mention that Vicki Hogan was the original trial court Judge assigned (or hand selected) to this case. She is at risk of exposure to her illegal rulings, which placed my daughter in harms way.

Why did Vicki Hogan work so hard to discredit The Honorable R.J.Tollefson?

Was she "a friendly judge" to Inderbitzin??? Did she recieve compensation for her ruling??? I ponder, how much my child was worth...

I firmly believe, given the nature of the way this case played out;

1. Attorney John Fuhrman GUARENTEED Inderbitzin would win custody of my daughter in the very beginning of this case

2. GAL Downing showed extreme favoritism towards Inderbitzin BEFORE even meeting me.

3. All the PhD’s (post hole diggers) were in favor of Inderbitzin before meeting me.

4. Every Court Commissioner and Judge on this case RECUSSED THEMSELVES AFTER JUDGE TOLLEFSON ISSUED HIS 12-PAGE RULING, SOME STATING “PERSONAL AQUOINTENCE” – this includes Vicki Hogan.

5. Inderbitzin’s bank loans were excessive http://www.piercecountywa.org/pc/abtus/ourorg/aud/record.htm (search yourself for mark richard inderbitzin)

6. GAL Downing’s IRS lien (CONSIDERATION AMOUNT 31762.43) was lifted just before my final trial. Search using same link as above.

That this was one of those “friendly” cases, in where one is given a sum or several “financial gifts” influence friendly rulings. (see “comments on the system – BROKEN TRUST).

When the misconduct of a GAL is brought to a Judges attention, it only makes sense for the Judge to look into these allegations himself, to verify the validity of his “eyes and ears.”

In this case, Ms.Allen's motion to terminate the GAL set off red flags in Judge Tollefson's mind, which resulted in his own investigation. His investigation uncovered serious substantial misdeeds, lies, and corruption. Upon further {limited} investigation by GAL Doug Schafer, it was discovered that the corruption didn’t stop with GAL Downing.

When the misconduct of a officer of the court (GAL) is brought to a Judge's attention, specifically, that a GAL lied, withheld pertinent parts of the record, and interfered with a criminal investigation, should a Judge take a closer look into the case, and the evidence therein? That… is the million dollar question.

Or do you believe a Judge should blindly look the other way and allow the abuse to continue, to the detriment of not only the participants in a case, but also to Justice itself?

What is the purpose or intent of a court of law? Is it used to abuse its constituents, or to protect the vulnerable and elderly?

Ms. Allen's only desire was to have the TRUTH known, and therefore she had no problem with the Judge checking the validity of the GAL investigation.

Mr.Inderbitzin's only fear WAS to have the TRUTH known.

The GAL program is turning out to be nothing more than a scam. Some corrupt Judges are receiving a kickback from this scam, while they assist GAL's in ripping off estates from the elderly, completely depleting their assets & bank accounts, leaving heirs with nothing. In cases involving minors, they lean heavily in the favor of "the litigant with all the money". It is purely criminal for a Judge to continue to blindly rubber stamp any recommendation made by a GAL, without first reviewing all of the evidence placed before them.

Mike Reagan was correct in his reply to hearing about legal abuse, he said "follow the dollar". This must be stopped.

Once Judge Tollefson stepped down off of the case, it went back up to the drawing board. Because of the front-page article in the Tacoma News Tribune {5/13/1998}, and Judge Tollefson’s 12-page order, several Judges rushed their “request for reassignment” notices into the presiding Judge. Some had already given prior rulings in this case. Judges Larkin and Felnagle stated “personal acquaintance” (not of mine). Hogan did not give a reason. Judge Van Deren stated “familiarity with case due to GAL committee”. Bruckner and Strombom stated “other”. The only Judge willing to take my case, was Bryan Chushcoff.

The next move was to terminate every ruling since the appointment of the GAL (3/10/94 – 2/1998) based o