Wednesday, October 17, 2012

Shut Up is A Good Word and Other Parenting Lessons From a Sociopath



Recently, I had the unfortunate opportunity to be present while the sociopath attempted to indoctrinate our son on his sick and twisted belief system. Of course, these lessons are always given in a place where he doesn't think he will be overheard. Except for me. He knows the only sure fire way to get under my skin is to threaten the well-being of my child.

In general, people suffering with Antisocial Personality disorder are maladaptive. It is like their mental development comes to a screeching halt somewhere between four and seven years old. They are never able to process the world through the lens of an adult mind. Scientists attribute this phenomena to a genetic fault in frontal lobe brain development. It is also passed down through the environment that a child lives in.

It is interesting to note that the sociopath has recently learned that his beliefs are not tolerated by mainstream society. So while he remains maladaptive, he is not completely unable to adapt if he has to. Like most sociopaths, he has learned to fake it. Sometimes he carries it off extremely well, and other times an astute person will catch him. It is really pathetic when our five year old son catches him.

Here are a few choice quotes from the sociopath on how to parent a child:

 
  1. “Shut up is a good word. It is okay to tell people to shut up. Pissed Off is not a bad word. Its okay for you to say pissed off.”
  2. “Your mother is a bitch. There is nothing wrong with saying that- it means female dog.”
  3. “If anyone tries to hurt you- you kill them. I will show you one day. You take a pocketknife, cut their fat tummy open and spill their intestines right here on the kitchen floor. I'll tell you what- no one will ever try to hurt you again once they know what will happen to them.”
  4. “Church people are all weak. They are nice to you because they want you to be weak too. That is why they try to teach you fairy tales, son. There is no God.”
  5. “When you get older you are going to bang a lot of chicks. Remember, that is what girls are really for. Don't let one trick you into thinking otherwise.”
  6. “Always wear a condom, son. I will show you how to use it. When you are finished with it, I will teach you to put hot sauce in it so some girl doesn’t try to steal your stuff and get herself pregnant.”
  7. “Fat people are disgusting. Remember that. They are lazy and stupid and weird and gross. That is why you can't eat much. You can never let yourself get fat. Fat is for losers.”
  8. “People from Tennessee are stupid, fat, uneducated, ugly hillbillies with no teeth. We are not going to live in Tennessee forever. I am going to get you out of here one day. “
  9. “You stay away from Santa Claus. He is a fat pervert who hurts little boys. He is scary.”
  10. “I am going to teach you how to be a man, son- strong. Your mother and her friends want you to be a girl- weak. Don't let them make you into a girl.”

There is little I can do to stop the indoctrination of hate messages. What I CAN do however, is aggressively teach my son that this type of behavior is wrong. I NEVER say, "your father is bad for telling you things." I say that the behavior itself is wrong. Hurting people is WRONG. Lying is WRONG.

And guess what? My five year old may be terribly confused about “the rules” right now, but he is getting some of it. In fact, his insight blows me away. His father took him to the pediatrician a couple of months ago and the doctor discussed child safety with the sociopath. The topic? Riding on motorcycles. Now, I realize that there are a lot of people who don't think that it is wrong for a five year old to be on the back of a motorcycle. That argument is completely irrelevant.


What does matter though is that the American Academy of Pediatrics strongly states that a five year old does not posses the necessary skills developmentally to be a motorcycle passenger. Of course, the sociopath does put him on his bike (and without a helmet) simply because he knows I can't stand it.

What is funny though is that when the pediatrician confronted the sociopath about doing this, he lied (of course he did, right). My son was there. He came home to tell me, “mommy, did you know that my daddy is a liar?”

Ugh, well yeah- but I can't tell my five year old that.

So the parenting lesson today is:

If you are fat, a mother, a church member, believe in God or Santa Claus, a woman, live in Tennessee, or believe it is wrong to teach children to swear then you are a loser in the eyes of a sociopath. I don't know about you, but in this case THANK GOD I AM A LOSER!








Monday, October 15, 2012

How a Sociopath Defines 'Roughly' in Child Support Court


Today I spent a little over four hours sitting in child support court. Why, you may be wondering, am I in child support court? Well, the sociopath' s first step in revenge was to take custody of our son. He came close, getting a 50% time share. Next, he wanted to eliminate his child support obligation. So, what does he do? Well, he lies, of course. After all, that is what sociopaths do best.


Define: Roughly

At the trial in December, the judge made finding of fact regarding both parties earning capacity. What follows is an excerpt from the actual court transcript:
 
Nimrod (sociopath's lawyer for those who missed the previous post): How much do you think you are going to report this year for income? I don't mean gross income, I mean net income.
Sociopath: Roughly- this year was slower than last- about $50,000
Nimrod: So you are going to net out $50,000?
Sociopath: Yes, roughly.
The Judge: Now you do know the difference between net and gross, right?
Sociopath: Yes
Nimrod: We had a merchant here and I asked him what kind of Christmas he was having and he said, “it would be a good one if not for expenses” So you do understand that...
Sociopath: Yes
Nimrod: So you would put in your pocket and pay taxes on $50,000?
Sociopath: Yes

'Roughly' six weeks later the sociopath files for a child support modification. He now claims his gross is only $36,000 and his net is $13,000. My attorney argues that the modification should be postponed because the Appellate Court has jurisdiction over the case. In the appeal, he is arguing his gross is $50,000 annually. You can't argue a competing set of facts in two ongoing cases.

Anyway, the child support hearing was postponed until today. When confronted about his lies, the sociopath claims he was mistaken about what he thought he earned. Apparently, the sociopath thinks 'roughly' means a guess between $13,000 and $50,000. Gee, wish I had known that secret formula when my income was imputed.

Here is the deal- he hired a new lawyer to represent him at the hearing. He is currently paying $100.15 per week in child support. He believes he should pay nothing. When his new lawyer finds out about the existence of the above testimony, he tells him that it would be more reasonable to offer to pay me something... so he offers $30 a week. Yeah, right. I know how to calculate income shares too.

I offered to agree to $70 a week (which is within $3 of being the correct amount), plus he has to reimburse me for half of the medical and extra-curricular activities expenses (which he hasn't paid).
He declined my offer. So, back to court we go for a hearing in front of the custody judge to determine what amount of child support he has to pay. The case has been reset for November 5th- 'roughly'.  I imagine that the state's attorney has to be shaking her head in disbelief.

Friday, October 12, 2012

Corruption in Family Court Exposed: Verdict in whistleblower’s historic case exposes the flaws of an unregulated legal system



For Immediate Release: For info, contact:

October 12, 2012 Emily Gallup 530-559-0101



Jury Finds Nevada County Superior Court Guilty of Retaliation

Verdict in whistleblower’s historic case exposes the flaws of an unregulated legal system



SACRAMENTO, CA – Former family court mediator Emily Gallup prevailed today in an

historic wrongful termination lawsuit against the Nevada County Superior Court (NCSC). After

three days of deliberation, a Sacramento jury found NCSC guilty of retaliating against Ms.

Gallup, awarding her $313,000 for the financial and emotional damages she incurred. Gallup was

represented by M.Catherine Jones and George Allen in the four week trial.

“This verdict should serve as a wakeup call to family courts across America,” said Gallup.

“Children cannot be treated like widgets and shoved through the family court machine. Laws

protecting the best interests of children must be followed.”

Gallup alleged during the trial that her department failed to comply with the California Rules of

Court. She reported that family court mediators were making recommendations about child

custody without reviewing court files, gathering collateral information, or checking parents’

criminal backgrounds. She explained to jurors that domestic violence (DV) victims were

routinely not offered separate mediation sessions as required by law. Trial witnesses testified that

parents were subjected to a variety of coercive tactics by Judge Julie McManus and court

mediators, including threats that their children might commit suicide if they failed to reach a

mediated agreement.

“Children’s health and safety were being compromised,” Gallup states. “I was being told to do

what I was told, and I just couldn’t do that in good conscience. I wasn’t willing to blindly follow

misguided orders,” Gallup explains, “even if they came from a judge.”

It has been a long road for Gallup toward today’s decision. She originally discussed her

compliance concerns with her supervisor, the family court judge, the human resources director,

and the Court Executive Officer. She called the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) for

help in April of 2010 but learned that the AOC was not authorized to enforce individual court’s

compliance with the law. Gallup filed a grievance against her department at that time, and an

arbitration hearing occurred in September of 2010. NCSC terminated Gallup in December 2010,



]



495 Miller Avenue, Suite 304 ~ Mill Valley, CA ~ 94941 ~ 415-388-9600

info@centerforjudicialexcellence.org



prior to the issuance of the arbitrator’s award. The arbitrator found in Gallup’s favor, ruling that

she had raised concerns in good faith, and that her efforts had been met with retaliation. In

addition to awarding Gallup back pay and attorney’s fees, the arbitrator ordered an audit of the

Nevada County Family Court Services Department. NCSC subsequently had the arbitration

award vacated on the grounds that the arbitrator overstepped his authority by ordering an audit.

“There is a shocking lack of oversight over the judicial system,” Gallup said.

She has joined forces with the Center for Judicial Excellence and the California Protective

Parents Association to lobby for reforms that will bring accountability to the family court

system. Gallup expects that problems in the family court system will persist until judges and

other court officials are held accountable for following the law.

###

My Sociopath Lives in Dimension X and The Truth is Subject to Reality Quakes


Everybody lies from time to time. Sometimes it is to spare the feelings of a loved one, sometimes to protect ourselves and sometimes because it is just easier than explaining the truth. While everyone may occasionally lie, most people have remorse for it. It is the instant guilty pang we experience when we know we are not being true to ourselves.

When the sociopath or narcissist lies, they don't feel guilty. It is such a normal part of the routine that it rolls off of their tongue with ease. If you catch them with proof of their lie, they don't blink an eye. Another fabricated story is waiting in the wings- and it is usually one that makes you feel crazy. How do they do this?

The best way that I can explain it is to use an analogy. My son has a favorite book called “I Left My Sneakers in Dimension X.” It is about a young boy who is trapped in an alternate reality with monster aliens. Things in dimension x are strange and reality is subject to change at any given moment . They call this a “Reality Quake.” It is similar to an earthquake on Earth. Monsters and humans may shrink, grow, turn into plants, or other weird objects. The walls become the floor and the floor becomes the ceiling.

Once the Reality Quake is over, things go back to normal- most of the time. Occasionally, if the quake is a bad one, you can get stuck as whatever you turned into. This is the modus operandi for a sociopath. In the first stages of what psychologists call “gas lighting,” you notice that things seem a bit off. The sociopath does something weird but offers an explanation for his behavior.

If we really stretch our imagination, we can see how his explanation may be plausible. Then we write it off as being an odd quirk and we forget about it. In reality, this is a huge red flag. Whatever odd thing the sociopath did was not a normal or acceptable response. Yet we give him the benefit of the doubt.

The second phase involves self defense. We recognize that the sociopath's version of reality is not true, so we confront him about it. He once again offers an explanation, but it is usually one that makes it our fault. “I am sorry that you took what I said the wrong way. You are so sensitive and defensive. I think you may have low self esteem- you should work on that.” Of course, the conversation is circular: it never actually addresses your question and keeps going to back to how it is your own fault.

Our response is to start defending our feelings as being rational and justified. We can't stand that our partner see us in the light he has portrayed us in- and we can't convince him he is wrong- so we work even harder at fixing our perceived flaws. Over time, we lose the ability to see anything that is wrong in our relationship unless it relates to something that the sociopath says we are doing wrong.

Here are 5 signs that you have been “gas lighted”:

  1. You are constantly questioning reality. The sociopath offers plausible explanations that insinuate the real problem is with how you see a situation- not the situation itself.
  2. You question yourself- Am I too sensitive? Is he right about what he says?
  3. Your gut tells you something is wrong, but you can't pinpoint exactly what it is.
  4. You withhold details and information from your close friends and family so that you don't have to explain weird things.
  5. You start lying to yourself or others in order to explain the Reality Quakes in a normal way.

    Here is reality: You are in a relationship with an emotional abuser. Gas lighting is his way of maintaining power and control. It is a tool of manipulation designed to prevent the sociopath from being accountable for his behavior. It places all blame squarely on the shoulder of his victims.




Wednesday, October 3, 2012

The Dirty Tricks That Dirty Lawyers Use To Award A Sociopath Child Custody


Okay, so it is no big secret that one particular attorney I know has suffered a major fall from Grace in my eyes. I am referring to the the sociopath's lawyer, not any of mine. Ironically, this man purports himself to be a righteous christian among our small community. He has a solid reputation for being very good at his job, and that much is true.

What is also true is that he frequently represents abusers. With his background being in criminal justice, he is a formidable adversary. I am quite convinced he could persuade a judge of almost any fallacy that a mind could conceive. "My client couldn't have flashed that woman, your honor! His penis is too small to be seen from twenty feet away!"
 
The courtroom theatrics and expert debating tactics would be entertaining if it were not but for the fact that a child's life is at stake.

How does an dirty attorney win when his client is a nut case, he has no evidence, and no valid legal argument?

The technique I watched him use in my case is known as the “Straw Man Argument.” Basically, it is a bogus strategy built around a lie. This lawyer, who I will call Nimrod, set out to win an impossible case with no evidence and a star witness who couldn't tell the truth if his life depended on it.

The Straw Man Argument


"A straw man argument is a logical fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.” - Wikipedia

Nimrod doesn't have a valid argument strong enough to win the case. So, he invents an argument for the opponent's side (which is a lie) that he can defeat. It doesn't matter what the argument is, it just needs to be something he can sell to the judge. Nimrod's argument is a fake, a dummy he creates, hence the name “Straw Man.”


Here is how he sells it in court:

1. Present a misrepresentation of the adversaries position to the court. Refute it and then pretend that the opposing parties actual position has been refuted.
 
2.Misstate the facts of the case. Misquote the other party so that actual words are construed as something else.
 
3. Over simplify the adversary's position into one simple theory that can be refuted.


There are other ways that this argument can be used, but these are the three main points. The important thing to point out here is that it is all based on dishonesty. So much for truth and justice for all. Nimrod is good at pretending righteousness, but the truth is that he is as dirty as those he defends.

What truly amazes me is that the judge didn't see it. When the facts of a case don't add up, do you know what you get? Conspiracy and pay off theories that make what may be an honest judge look dirty too. Probably the saddest aspect is that this particular lawyer has been suffering with some serious health issues. If I were in his shoes, I would hate to know that I could be facing my maker with the burden of having to answer for the countless children he has helped hurt. How many millstones will Nimrod carry? Probably a lot.

Matthew 18:6
And everyone who commits an offense against one of these little ones who believe in me, it were profitable for him that a donkey's millstone would be hung around his neck and he be sunk in the depths of the sea.”- Armaic Bible Plain English

Tuesday, October 2, 2012

What Joint Equal Child Custody Looks Like to A Sociopath


Hey, have you ever wondered what a shared parenting arrangement looks like to a sociopath?



It's MINE, all MINE!

When the Judge says, “I am going to order equal, 50/50 custody”-the sociopath hears, “ha I won! I have sole custody! Now I can get on with my plans to crush you and never pay child support. While I am at it, I am going to make the child suffer just so I can torture you in the process! The Judge said it was okay!”

That is what my current shared parenting plan looks like. The sociopathic father will disregard my parental rights as often and as thoroughly as he can. He will try to needle me by ignoring our son's healthcare needs, refusing telephone contact, neglecting our child, and endangering his safety. He will tell everyone that he has sole custody and decision making authority. And... he believes he has the Judge's permission to do so.

Recently, I had our son at his pediatrician due to an ongoing ear problem. He referred him to a specialist to find out what was going on. The sociopath managed to change the appointment to HIS week at the last minute, leaving me waiting seven (Yes I said, “SEVEN”) hours for him to show up with our son. Once he did, he refused to allow the health questionnaire I filled out to be included in the record and told ALL of them that he had to insist that he made all the decisions becuase he has custody.

As embarrassing as this was, I actually felt sorry for the medical personnel. They don't care about the custody situation- they want to provide care for the child. The nurse was clearly aggravated with the father's lack of cooperation. Gee, welcome to my world. Try having bags of medication thrown at you during a custody exchange!

However, it made me think about a sociopath's flagrant disregard for the rights of others and their inability to conform to rules. We all know that this is the nature of the beast. The sociopath can't help himself and he is certainly not going to change. Regardless of what your court order says, the sociopath is never going to follow it. The judge is bound to get tired of the sociopath's antics eventually!This is the very reason why they will not win in the end.

Can anybody say Contempt?