From a Father Jailed For Nonpayment of Impossible Child Support Order
Massachusetts Illegally Criminalized Dads for Many Reasons
The divorce courts have become a tyranny
(literally) where judges do what they want to enforce their
personal agenda and beliefs in spite of the facts and law. They violate
due process and the U.S. Constitution daily.
They pick random numbers for child support and throw people in jail who
can't pay it.
The throw people in jail for losing their job too.
Men have been made slaves to their ex-wives under threat of jail. This
is not equal rights this is slavery.
The excuse for this: "they have kidnapped your children" and you must
pay the kidnapper "support" even if you want to take care of your
children 50% of the time, which has been scientifically proven far
better for the children.
Here is one fathers story for his fight
to support his children directly.
My experience with the prison system
began as a result of a contempt charge from a custody determination by a
“Family” “Justice” “Court” (more about why I put these three terms in
All in all, except for some promises
about work release, a program which allows an inmate to work his regular
job during the day, with restrictions, and return each evening and
weekends, the prison was efficient as an institution. I even got to
borrow a book from the library.
But this letter is not about the
effectiveness of the prison. It is not about whining, or self-pity, or
self-importance. It is about the reasons why I and thousands like me,
face incarceration in the first place and what we, and family, friends
and children who are affected, can do to stop it.
You will find this letter is not about
the ‘he said, she said’ of divorce, but about legal and governmental
abuse under the color of law.
Let’s go back a few years. I mentioned
a book borrowed from the prison library. The book, “Middle-Class
Democracy and The Revolution in Massachusetts 1691-1780” by Robert Brown
(1955), provides many collalaries to today’s custody determinations and
associated government high crimes and misdemeanors. These are not
unique to Massachusetts, just as in colonial times the King and
Parliaments crimes against free Englishmen was not unique to the bay
colony. Vast quotations and credit go to Robert Brown’s work.
Vast credit belongs also to those who
are fighting the abuses of a government out of control with regard to
crossing the threshold of the legal maxim “every man’s house is his
Ever since the Mayflower Compact,
colonist “Americans” had been living in various forms of
self-government. Though Englishmen, they “had a charter that guaranteed
protection of persons and property by provision for due process of law,
trial by jury, and bail.”
In family court, there is no trial by
jury. This is a court which took my house, my present and future
income, and my children (by diminishing parenting to 17% access versus
true 50% access vis-à-vis the 14h Amendment). This same court, without
a jury, sentenced me to prison for ‘contempt’. I could not meet the
financial ‘order’ the judge, without a jury, required. I did assert my
fundamental liberty right to a trial by jury. I asserted my fundamental
rights to my property, children and present and future income. Thomas
Jefferson (Writings II) said that the people will not permit the
punishment of men “whose sole crime has been the developing and
asserting their rights”.
After all the freedom and
self-government which the colonists had established, the British found
economic advantage and indeed the threat to their empire as the free
colony expanded. “The Sugar Act and a whole host of restrictive
regulations were imposed by the British which were particularly
obnoxious to a democratic people:
Administrative courts without
British-appointed judges who
got a percentage of forfeitures
Colonial damage recovery
Prosecution of British offices
Proof of innocence rests with
In the family court, there is an
economic advantage for the court to create two different
“administrative” statuses for parents in a contested custody battle:
custodial and non-custodial. But it is so much more than
This custodial/non-custodial status is
important, the court claims for “the best interest of the children”;
more on this vague “standard” later. We will see how it is every bit
restrictive of liberty and allows the state to collect your tax dollars
through federal funds reimbursements in Title IV-D Social Security
programs. The qualifier is that one parent must be absent. By
creating, in many cases, the absent “non-custodial” father, the state
makes money by ordering child support wealth transfers. The state and
judiciary profit from this! I am being jailed without a jury trial, by
an unelected judge who has immunity. And, all the while, my ex did not
have to prove my guilt. In family court the non-custodial is “guilty
until proven innocent”. Ironically, Massachusetts is, as most states
are, a “no-fault divorce” state.
Remember the 1700’s! Cases concerning
colonial property were to be tried without a jury by one appointed judge
who got a percentage of forfeitures!
Initially federal reimbursements to
states for “child support” collections were designed to reduce welfare
payments. Now an unfunded mandate exists in that the middle class is
ordered into the state collection system. Therefore, there is no
incentive for a judge to order equal parenting time, which would, based
on current ‘statutes’, void a child support order. James Otis’s words
“if property can be taken without consent, so can liberty” ring so true.
This bias, along with the earlier due
process violations (no jury), make any order of these family “kangaroo”
courts void. Any divorce or custody judgment that diminishes even by 1%
the liberty or sacred rights protected by the state and US Constitutions
including the bogus “non-custodial” designation and its attending
infringements, is void.
“Towns of colonial times, with elected
representatives, declared unequivocally that as the people had always
expected to be the judges of their own rights and liberties, so they
rejected the pretended right of any Crown lawyer or any authority on
earth to determine, limit, or ascertain in any way their constitution,
charter, natural, civil, political, or sacred rights, liberties,
privilege, or immunities…At one time, the king’s prerogative had been
considered too delicate and sacred to be questioned. Statements by
James I that a good subject would be content with the king’s will as
revealed in his law was called by Boston Town ‘mystical jargon’, ‘absurd
and infamous rant’”.
We have lived so long under “best interest of the child” and “child
support” and “visitation” and “non-custodial” that we forget these are
made-up “mystical jargon”. These terms are made up by committees- often
committees of family lawyers who benefit from custody battles- not “We
the People” who live in the daily reality and repercussions of children
brought up by a “super-parent” while another equally fit parent is
“best interest” was well-intentioned but not at the expense of
fundamental and sacred rights of property, children, earning a living,
and, as I am testimony, even body attachment. The court said on
30May06, “if you can’t pay ½ the support [we] say you owe, you have to
do the jail sentence” (body attachment). What a racket! Debtor’s
prisons are illegal and unconstituitional and harken back to Dickens.
A pamphleteer of the time reminded the
colonists in 1749 “under British Dominion of New England, their fathers
had been stripped of their rights by Governor Andros and that when they
pleaded English privilege, they were told that those things didn’t
follow them to the ends of the earth”.
In other words, the maxim of “every man’s house is his castle” didn’t
hold in the colonies. This gave the king and his appointed Governor
much power. Thus Sam Adams and the Sons of Liberty were born. “Writs
and admiralty court cases [no jury] had increased popular opposition to
government. The people were taught that innovations, incompatible with
English liberties, were confirmed under pretense of law by judgments of
colonial courts and that the power of admiralty courts were always
deemed grievous because they were unconstitutional.” (Hutchinson,
Governor of Massachusetts, History III). Even revenue acts like the
Molasses Act of 1733 were unconstitutional according to James Otis.
“All security for life, liberty and property would vanish if the act was
enforced by writs of assistance in admiralty courts before dependent
judges without juries.”
Is anything really different in today’s family court with the assistance
of the Department of Revenue’s (DOR) reach, no jury, and a biased judge?
modern intolerable revenue acts in Massachusetts and perhaps your
state include the DOR notifying the Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) of
alleged “child support arrearages” which include penalties and interest
that penalize non-custodials and never benefit children but instead
become “pickings” the government profits from. Our fine Commonwealth,
like other states, suspended 24,000 driver’s licenses of mostly men this
spring. What does driving have to do with supporting your children
directly? Only to drive in order to work! The DOR also communicated
with other licensing boards and suspended nearly 1000 business
licenses. They tried to suspend my temporary help business license.
Earning a living is a fundamental right, not a privilege. Driving,
walking, biking the public way is a right. Custody of children is a
right. All of these rights cannot be removed or converted into a
privilege and made criminal by statute unless proven unfitness, neglect,
Throughout legal history custody and
support were reciprocal. If for example, an intact couple dies, the
person who receives custody of the children is liable to support them or
the children become wards of the state and in its custody. If the
custodial parent cannot support the children without a transfer of
wealth from the non-custodial, it makes perfect sense the
“non-custodial” should have the custody. Custody and support were
illegally and unconstitutionally split by state statutes. In court, I
put on the record that in fact the statutes the family court was using
to justify child support transfers and custody determinations were void
because of this fact.
In summary, the custody statutes are
vague and violate sacred rights that our state and US Constitutions are
supposed to protect (not grant, but protect). Judges are judge and jury
so due process is non-existent. Other governmental administrative laws
illegally appropriate income and assets, charge interest, and remove
other fundamental rights such as travel. Children are kidnapped from
fit parents [dads by and large], who become visiting uncles. Pretty
Orwellian. Coercive Acts just the same as the colonists experienced.
Adams: “I said ‘there was no more justice left in Britain than there is
in hell, that I wished for war’. Then he chided himself for such rash
boyish statements…Arthur Lee confided to Sam Adams that the enemies of
America considered any claim to constitutional rights as a ‘pretense
only on our part, for claiming absolute independence’. From charging
the colonists with this aim, he continued, these enemies had brought
them first to consider it, then to claim it, and he hoped, to confirm
I asked my judge if his court was
submitted to the state and US Constitutions. He wouldn’t answer
clearly. I consider this treasonous. I asked him if it was a court of
admiralty. Again, no answer. I had previously demanded a jury and a
removal to a different jurisdiction where I could get a fair trial
including a ½ day evidentiary hearing. I put on the record that the
court was biased due to invidious gender discrimination and that my
civil rights were being violated per US Code 42 § 1983. I shouldn’t be
treated any different than the “custodial” parent. All for naught as
the bailiff cuffed me presently.
The New Sons of Liberty are now inspired
to take action like our forefathers did. “Most of the towns
instructions [to representatives] discouraged the most intrepid Governor
but Worcester exceeded even this limit stating that the Charter of 1629
had been wrongfully wrested from the colony and the second charter had
been nullified by acts of Parliament, troops and a governor rendered
independent of the people. The representatives should open the port,
get the troops removed, impeach mandamus councilors as traitors and
secure them for trial, send a delegation to get aid from Canada, and
follow the advice of the Continental Congress to preserve unity. Then
declared Worcester, if all wrongs had not been redressed and all
charter rights restored by the day the Provincial Congress met, the
representatives were to consider the people of Massachusetts in a state
of nature, absolved from all charter obligations to Britain and were to
raise a new form of government in which all officials [judges too] would
be elected by the people.” (Worcester Town Records IV).”
No wonder the
British-appointed Governor cancelled the meeting of this General Court.
family courts have created the charges and the actions. This enemy of
the “non-custodial” (fathers) have caused “We the People” first to
consider total civil disobedience, then to claim our rights, and now, to
confirm the presumption of total equality in custody, and if the other
parent cannot support the children while the children are with them, to
claim full custody and support of our children AT LAW (not at equity).
Lest this beef sound outrageous,
consider the colonists’ with the British: Revenue Acts sought to support
the colonies when the colonies were already supporting themselves! And
the Sugar Act was a “means of laying a legal foundation for planned
changes in the empire and of providing ‘fat pickings’ for an army of
placement soon to be sent from England.” (Navigation Acts and the
American Revolution, Reverend Oliver M. Dickerson).
Today there is an “army of placement” of
Child Support Enforcement staff. There are ten times the amounts of
these enforcers than homeland security agents! There are many
“Intolerable and Coercive Acts” which have been passed by current
governments. Mentioned earlier, the DOR can and does garnish wages,
remove licenses by cooperating with other state agencies and attack
property, retirement, and insurance assets. The famous question “Who’s
your Daddy?” is loudly answered: “The Government is”. These “fat
pickings” are then reimbursed by the feds. All in all, a whole host of
hangers-on benefit from this picking of the American taxpayers pockets.
As our forefathers did , we “New Sons of
Liberty” must “introduce truth into the presence of a Governor [and
elect] bold friends of liberty, independence, and truth” (letter to
The men who did this defeated Governor Hutchinson who had lamented that
the colony was “governed not be weight but by numbers”. We in
Massachusetts, who in 2004 by a margin 84.5% to 15.5.% voted for Equal
Parenting instruction for the representatives of these same towns are
not being ruled by numbers but by the puffed up gravitas of judges and
the “infamous rant” “best interest of the child”.
“The House declared that the charter
granted them the rights of Englishmen and the powers of civil
government, that they would resist an invading enemy to the last breath
in defense of their rights, and that any threat to these rights from any
other source tended to reject and dispirit them” (Acts and Resolves IV).
Non-custodial fathers must be willing to
defy any DOR order not entered into voluntarily. They must represent
themselves or find attorneys that will fight for Equal Protection. They
must, in court, on the record, demand “the rights of Englishmen”,
including jury trial. They must refer to the case law and common law
which establishes that he who has the custody must support. All
citizens need to follow the money, including their hard-earned tax
payments, and make the law the presumption of Equal/Alternating Custody.
All representatives must be contacted
and lobbied. “Committees of Correspondence” where New Sons of Liberty
can organize must be raised in every town. People need to run for
office who put this issue as the cornerstone of all “family values”
planks. There are modern day British enemies to this cause. They
include Women’s Bar Associations and Domestic Violence funded
organizations along with Family Lawyers, GAL’s (Guardian Ad Litems),
court psychologists, and jails. Even the joint Judicial Committees of
the state, comprised of many probate and family lawyers, keeps things in
committee and squashes the bills designed to be sure children and
fathers get Equal Protection. In testifying before such committees,
I’ve asked “if the current judges don’t apply the 14th
Amendment, what difference will Shared Parenting legislation make”. In
other words, judicial discretion MUST be curbed.
As John Adams said, there must be no
compromise or we “might be deceived, wheedled, threatened or bribed of
…freedom” (Adams Letters I). John Adams would have willingly “given up
public life, public honor, and his own property for peace and liberty;
but these had to be sacrificed before he would surrender the right of
his country to a free constitution. (Adams Works I). Berkshire County
in Western Massachusetts stopped the courts because of a fear that
they were to be deprived of a constitution. They said it was better to
stop the courts that have justice dealt out piecemeal without any
foundation to support it. What they demanded was a bill of rights and a
constitution.” (Massachusetts Archives CLXXXIVCCXX)
And it’s not only in little old
Worcester Massachusetts where fundamental liberty rights are stomped
upon. Anywhere English law is the foundation- South Africa, Ireland,
Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand- children lose access to
their fathers and dads are denied due process. If you hear this
clarion call for action and do indeed act, your and my efforts will
touch the world in the same way the colonists’ action did: “There is so
much of a republican spirit among the people, which has been nourished
and cherished by their form of government that they would never submit
to tyrants or oppressive projects. The same spirit spreads like a
contagion into all the other colonies, into Ireland and into Great
Britain too, from this single Province of Massachusetts Bay, that no
pains are too great to be taken, no hazards too great to run, for the
destruction of our charter. (John Adams, Works II)
“The Revolution was affected before the war
commenced. The Revolution was in
the minds and hearts of the people, a change in their…sentiments of
their duties and obligations.
This radical change in principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections
of the people, was the real American Revolution”. –John Adams
“Edmund Burke maintained that Britain
should have won over the lawyers, presumable part of the upper classes,
who took the lead in opposition.” (Parliamentary History XVIII).
Currently the family court attorney and the appointed judges (most often
also family law attorneys) and the judiciary committee and the majority
of the legislature are lawyers who are “won over” by the status quo of
custodial/non-custodial designation, support transfers, and
“visitation”. Again, all at great taxpayer expense.
All politics is local, said Tip O’Neill.
Our New Sons of Liberty will fight to keep building coalitions and
resist all efforts at the curtailment of our protected liberties,
freedoms and rights. The Intolerable and Coercive Acts, the admiralty
courts without juries, the redistribution of revenue without
representation and debtor’s prisons are not something buried in history
books but occur every day in courtrooms across the land. They say the
courts are often “30 years behind the society”. We shall reform family
law. May God grant my son and daughter never are subjugated by his
What you can do:
Write back to me factually
disclaiming anything you feel is not true and honorable.
Copy this letter and mail to
friends and relatives. We’re all affected, including our children
and our children’s children.
Lobby your legislators for
Equal Parenting presumption and especially trial by jury wherever
fundamental rights are at stake. A man can be acquitted by a jury
in a Criminal Court and walk across the street and lose all Parental
Rights in a “Family” “Justice” “Court” which has no jury.
Run for office and/or elect
those who stand by sacred rights and the rights of families whether
they are intact or not.
Oppose any custody battle,
insisting on equal treatment under the law.
Oppose gold-digging attorneys,
unconstitutional admiralty courts, state acts and statutes that
steal rights and freedoms, and any orders which make dad absent
After I released my lawyer, I sign
everything Propria persona sui juris, reserving all rights, waiving none
ever, without prejudice UCC. According to our founding documents, each
person functions as their own Attorney General, keeping check on
Government. We the People are each Sovereigns. May our children learn
this because we lived it and made the sacrifices, as did our
forefathers, to preserve sacred rights. Never tire, never surrender,
and never cease to protect what is yours inalienably.
If you have any questions, write or call
me. For more resources, check out:
My best to you and your family.
George L. Mason IV, Propria persona sui
juris, reserving all rights, waiving none ever, without prejudice, UCC