WikiLaw

Difference between revisions of "Faux Process And Rubber-Stamped Orders"

Faux Process And Rubber-Stamped Orders (view source)

Revision as of 07:22, 4 March 2024

991 bytes removed ,  4 March
no edit summary
(username removed)
(username removed)
Line 1: Line 1:
=McMasterForCobb.com=
<blockquote>
If you asked me a year ago what I would be doing in 2022, I would have said: "Who knows? But I want nothing to do with child custody cases. It tears at the heart strings, there is no winner and the children lose the most." However, an array of events that began in February 2021 and unraveled over a period of about eight (8) months caused a rewiring of my brain that, at this juncture, cannot be undone. Here is the TRUTH:
==The Cobb County Family Court System Is Prone To Failure, But It Doesn't Have to Be That Way==
Our broken judiciary is not the result of a bunch of evil judges sitting around a conference table plotting against the well-being of society and the Cobb County community. No, our maimed “justice” system is the result of flawed philosophies and the misalignment of incentives. In other words, our judicial officers have more to gain personally by not doing their job than by actually doing their job. And we The People suffer for it. So what are these personal incentives that detract judges from proper execution of their jobs? Simply put: Time and Money.
In 2020, I represented a mother in Muskogee County fighting for custody of her 5-year-old son. The mother had full custody at the time and an intermittent hearing was held to potentially appoint a Guardian Ad Litem to the case. The Muskogee County Superior Court did not change custody that day—and the judge asked the father’s attorney to draft an order appointing the Guardian Ad Litem to the case. The opposing counsel drafted the “proposed” order for the judge to review. In the proposed order, however, the opposing attorney inserted a clause that changed full custody from the mother to the father. Though no hearing on custody took place, the judge signed the order without scrutiny and, without notice or a hearing in the matter, the mother lost full custody of her son.
In 2020, I represented a mother in Muskogee County fighting for custody of her 5-year-old son. The mother had full custody at the time and an intermittent hearing was held to potentially appoint a Guardian Ad Litem to the case. The Muskogee County Superior Court did not change custody that day—and the judge asked the father’s attorney to draft an order appointing the Guardian Ad Litem to the case. The opposing counsel drafted the “proposed” order for the judge to review. In the proposed order, however, the opposing attorney inserted a clause that changed full custody from the mother to the father. Though no hearing on custody took place, the judge signed the order without scrutiny and, without notice or a hearing in the matter, the mother lost full custody of her son.


So what happened here? How could a judge simply sign parental rights away at the drop of a hat, without a hearing any evidence? This is what I call “faux process” (contra to “due process”) and what attorneys refer to as a “rubber-stamped” order. This was not the first time I had a client fall victim to a rubber-stamped order, nor was it the last. In fact, my first recollection of such injustice occurred at the hands of Judge Carl W. Bowers, and my most recent experience was at the hands of Judge G. Grant Brantley. While my heart sincerely wants to believe these were honest mistakes, rare flukes as a coincidental result of an alignment of the planets. However, mere cursory research into the personal backgrounds and experience of these two judges shows otherwise.
So what happened here? How could a judge simply sign parental rights away at the drop of a hat, without a hearing or evidence on the matter? This is what I call “faux process” (contra to “due process”) and what many attorneys refer to as a “rubber-stamped” order. The formula for this injustice is as follows: (1) First, a judge holds a hearing. (2) At the hearing, the judge makes an oral ruling and tells the attorney for the "winning party" to draft a proposed order for the judge to sign. (3) The drafting attorney then inserts remedies and wording that was not part of the judge's ruling nor within the scope of the hearing. (4) Lastly, the judge signs the order awarding the drafting party everything they wrote into the proposed order regardless of whether it was within the scope of the judge's oral ruling at the hearing.
 
In 2022, Judge Bowers praised Brantley stating
 
Imagine losing your house or, worse, your child simply because a judge was too lazy to read what they were signing. A judge disregarding true due process and lackadaisically
 
We The People are regularly robbed of rights by judges acting like cogs in a wheel, simple machines stamping signatures on pieces of paper without scrutinizing the contents. Apparently, they just don’t have time for that.
 
 
UPDATE:  On April 18, 2022, Judge Flournoy disclosed in a hearing that his wife recently hired the same Guardian Ad Litem as her probate attorney. Judge Flournoy finally recused himself from the above described cases on April 25, 2022 upon the Father's request in light of the latest conflict with the Guardian Ad Litem. However, in his recusal orders Judge Flournoy blamed this [https://mcmasterforcobb.com/why-matt mcmasterforcobb.com] website for his need to recuse himself without mentioning his conflict of interests with the opposing attorney and the Guardian Ad Litem. The Father still has not seen his only daughter in over a year as the case now hangs in limbo. This is all the tip of the iceberg. If you want to know more about Cobb County court corruption, visit [https://thewikilaw.org/wiki/index.php?title=Cobb_County_-_Judicial_Misconduct thewikilaw.org].
 


The young lady is still in the lion’s den because the Cobb County court system failed.
That was not the first time I had a client fall victim to a rubber-stamped order, nor was it the last. In fact, my first recollection of such injustice occurred at the hands of Judge Carl W. Bowers, and my most recent experience was at the hands of Judge G. Grant Brantley. While I sincerely want to believe that these were honest mistakes, rare flukes caused by an alignment of the planets, mere cursory research into the personal backgrounds and experience of these two judges shows otherwise.


Now ask yourself: What if this was your child?
Early in Judge Bowers' career, he served as Judge Brantley's staff attorney--a job likely handed to Bowers  In 2022, Judge Carl Bowers publicly praised Brantley stating: "He's given me great advice many, many times over the years when I worked with him," and "I learned so much from him that I use today in the courtroom in state court."


Our broken judiciary is not the result of a bunch of evil judges sitting around a conference table plotting against the well-being of society and the Cobb County community. No, our maimed “justice” system is the result of flawed philosophies and the misalignment of incentives. In other words, our judicial officers have more to gain personally by not doing their job than by actually doing their job. And We The People suffer for it. So what are these personal incentives that detract judges from proper execution of their jobs? Simply put: Time and Money.


The Powers That Be in Cobb County will not like what I have stated herein. But I would be lying if I worded it in any manner they approve. That is why I am running and why you should vote for me.
Imagine losing your house or, worse, your child simply because a judge was too lazy to read what he was signing. Judges are disregarding true due process, acting like cogs in a wheel, simple machines stamping their signature on a piece of paper without scrutinizing the contents. Apparently, they just don’t have time for that.  




[[Matthew D. McMaster, Esq.]]
[[Matthew D. McMaster, Esq.]]


Candidate for Cobb County Superior Court Judge
Candidate for Cobb County State Court Judge
(username removed)
Retrieved from "https://thewikilaw.org/wiki/index.php/Special:MobileDiff/1839"