Home Recommended Products Contact Us
Resources & Links
Fatherlessness Statistics
Child Support
Legal Resources
Search This Site
Bad Judges List
Free Templates
Restraining Orders
Judicial Abuse Stories
Father's Stories
Legal Help & Referrals
Constitutional Rights
Table of Contents
Terms & Conditions
Signup for Newsletter
Search Site
Recently, a woman named Bridget Marks had an affair with a married man, and she conceived and bore twin daughters as a result.
    The man in question is quite wealthy, and she in turn was a former Playboy model, so the case attracted a high level of publicity as a result.  The little girls in question are stunningly pretty.
    They were involved in a court case concerning the usual issues -- support and visitation.  During the course of the litigation, the little girls claimed that their dad sexually abused them.  They were 4 years old at the time.


    The court was enraged, and ordered mom to surrender the girls to their dad forthwith.  The court withdrew all custody and visitation rights from mom for her campaign of false accusation.
    At this point, the case became a media spectacle.  There were all kinds of reporters and photographers taking pictures of mom and the daughters, everyone weeping hysterically, as mom was complying with the court order to turn over the little girls to their dad.  Mom in fact set up the whole media blitz.  Anyway, the reporters took amazing photos of mom taking the hysterical girls from the lobby of their fashionable high-rise on Manhattan's Upper East Side to dad's waiting limousine.
    Mom appealed and won a couple of days ago.  Now, she and the daughters are all smiles.  She has custody.  She and dad are negotiating on a visitation agreement.  He asked for unrestricted visitation rights and she refused.
Letter to The Editors of New York Times
(Similar ones sent to NY Post and NY Daily News)

4-7-05  After the Bridgett Marks Ruling Where The Mother Denied the
Father Custody and being found guilty of perjury and Fraud


Dear Editor:

  The recent ruling for Bridgett Marks seems to exemplify the huge sexual bias against fathers in the probate and family courts nationally.  I guess if you are a good looking, sexy woman you can pretty much get whatever you want out of a man (before, during and after marriage). Even if he is a judge sworn not to be swayed by such sexual bias and stereotypes. Unfortunately you do not even have to know how to manipulate the press, as Bridgett did so well, to get this kind of treatment.  Here is a woman who has committed fraud and perjury, at the very least, probably also conspiracy by coaching her children to lie about their father.  It is so hard to see (and personally offensive) that women who actually get caught committing FRAUD and PERJURY get full physical custody of their children, when men might be sent to jail for such behavior.

What does this say about what we are willing to teach our children? What does this say about how deeply ingrained this sexual bias is in the courts today from 30 years of "tradition" and judges who must have had very bad fathers in the 1950s and 1960s and are taking it out on the fathers of this decade.

I continue to be totally disgusted by this rampant judicial bias, which is clearly against the equal rights amendment and other constitutional "guarantees" of fathers' fundamental constitutional "equal" rights to raise their children.  The supreme court has upheld and clarified these rights. The standard to take away a father's children is very high indeed. 

Legally, according to the supreme court, the state must show a "compelling interest" to the level of serious physical or emotional harm to the child to limit a father's rights to raise their children in any way.  Even when this is actually proven those fundamental rights must be limited to the minimum extent possible to alleviate this "state interest".  Yet states ignore this superior court ruling every day in the majority of their cases.  They hide behind vague state laws designed to give judges total discretion, called "the best interest of the children" which are not. These laws are probably completely unlawful, due to their vagueness under another very clear supreme court ruling.  The lawyers for men are actually afraid to confront judges of their abuses for fear of losing their right to charge their huge hourly rates.  The federal government just looks the other way. 

Where is our constitution going?  Attacks on the First Amendment get lots of coverage in the press, even though they are not that common. Here this is happening EVERY DAY, in virtually every state court and it is ignored completely.  There are class action suit in forty-six of fifty states on these issues and the national press has not even given this the slightest attention.  Our fundamental constitutional rights to raise our children, and enjoy their company are being squashed by sexual bias This is illegal, unfair, un-American and clearly unconstitutional too. The press needs to get involved in this problem, as it is one of the top problems in our country today. It is creating fatherlessness every day.

Shared parenting with 50-50 rights must become not only the law, but the actual practice forced on judges, unless the parents agree otherwise.  In a recent Massachusetts non-binding referendum eighty-five percent of voters agreed that equal rights should go to fathers and mothers after a divorce.  State legislatures have implemented laws to protect battered women that are actaully being used to abuse fathers every single day in most states todayIn interviews with lawyers I have been told that between 50% and 90% of restraining orders in Massachusetts issued are improperly used to throw the father out of the house and deny them access to their children, with absolutely no real basis in any kind of violence or threat of it.  It is the nuclear weapon of divorce, which instantly puts the father in a position of guilt when nothing has happened.  Often these are with false (and sometimes even no) accusations, but the standard of proof and evidence is ignored and a man's entire life, property, possessions and children are denied him instantly without due processThis can even be done without him present (ex-parte) and is happening tens of thousands of times each month in the U.S.  This is enormously destructive to families and children. However, again the "legal" system loves it because it generates huge legal fees. It sets up a great fight to maximize the earnings of lawyers who are hired to fight for the father, uphill all the way to get back to where the default should be anyway. What a racket!  The undebatable abuse of father's constitutional rights must stop and the press must begin to cover this issue until it is fully resolved.  No "due process", no presumption of innocence, no "equal rights" guaranteed under the ERA.   The research on what is best for the children is now in and it is very clear both parents must be involved as much as possible to balance the children's development. Yet the family courts are basing their decisions today on research that is decades old, and experts say was never scientifically valid in the first place. This practice should have gone away with the Equal Rights Amendment, at least for fathers that care about their children and want to participate in their upbringing  As is often the case the root of the problem is MONEY!  The $250 billion per year divorce and domestic violence industry is a monster. Hundreds of millions of dollars are being kicked back to states to increase "child support" payments.  Given the courts incentives to be biased.  Therefore the more child support, the bigger the industry and staff get to generate more child support and staff. It is a vicious circle that is fed by the powerful feminist lobby with no counterbalancing men's groups.  It is totally out of control, yet hidden from view to most people in the unaccountable halls of courts who are responsible to no one.   Do you know that Virginia, with a population similar to Massachusetts, has about 1,500 outstanding restraining orders at any one time and Massachusetts has over 50,000? Do you think men in Massachusetts are 33 times more violent? Of course not, lawyers in Massachusetts, Connecticut and may states are using this legislation for unfair advantage in divorce. They coach their clients to say the right words.  This abuse is immoral, rampant and despicable. Any woman that is willing to just say the word "fear" to a judge, true or not, immediately evicts her husband and controls the children and their home on day one. It is a horrible situation. Then this black cloud hangs over the man throughout the divorce proceeding as if he actually did something, when nothing ever happened. I found all this hard to believe but have now studied it for several months. I grew up thinking that the judicial system was fair and guaranteed us this, like I believe most people did. In fact this has all be subverted by "bench trials". Judges do what they want based on their personal agenda without fear of anything, even for fraud and bias.  Our forefathers, in their great wisdom, created juries to be the balance against the judicial system branch of our government getting out of control -- this has been squashed by overzealous judges and legislators more concerned about budgets and other things than justice for all.   There is no question that the family courts and judges are literally breaking the constitution every day (the 14th amendment as codified in Title 42, Sec. 1983, and 1985). The only question is when will they be called to task and held responsible for this abhorrent behavior that is damaging our children. I, for one, am committed to a multi-year battle to make this happen. Whatever that takes.   This Marks ruling shows what most others do with some visibility due to the pretty face that makes for good news and circulation - that fatherlessness is now encouraged by the state courts and current legal system. It is one of the largest problems in the U.S. today and will have decades of negative impact on the next generationThis is a silent travesty that is now coming to light.  Anyone who researches this well will easily see that only lawyers and judges benefit from the current system, not children and families. Of course, they want it maintained for their personal enrichment and say everything is fine.   The government is now effectively regulating against marriage, because it is so onerous to get divorced today, with as much as 40% of your after tax income going to your ex-wife just for "child support". On average this can represent more than six times the actual cost of raising a child (by independent statistics). Hence this is "child extortion" not child support - which would be 50% or so of the actual cost of raising a child - about 1/10th today's level in many cases.  Any man earning less than $70,000 per year can not even afford their own small apartment in Massachusetts after this standard divorce support award.  Many other states today also have guidelines that force men into bankruptcy and impoverishment, and then jail them for not keeping upRecently a soldier held hostage in Iraq was placed in jail on his return because he did not pay his child support while he was being held hostage.  What kind of court system does this? Only a broken one that needs complete reform by outsiders, without any vested interest in the huge sums of money changing hands.  The men (usually) also pay all the taxes on their ex-wife's income and far more, as the women gets the "head of household" tax benefits.  This is another story but it is what supports and propagates this entire travesty.   Divorced men are committing suicide at TEN TIMES the rate of divorced woman. Do you think this is an indication that things are fair?  A Harriet Tubman like underground railroad has formed to help men escape the country due to the tyranny. What does this indicate.  The real life Serpico was driven out of the country by the family courts. This is the man that broke the deep corruption of the NYC police.    I realize this may all sound complex and even unrelated, but believe me it is not. It has taken me months of study to understand this system and all these things are deeply interwoven and support each other.  As in all bureaucracies each layer adds another level of problems and miscommunication. These can multiple until a good intention from the top (some fair level child support when non-custodial parents do not want their children half time) can literally turn into an evil result (fatherlessness).   Father of two beautiful children kidnapped by the state of Massachusetts, with not even an accusation of any wrongdoing
I will not be a "visitor" to my children. I will be a father.


  1. Bridgett Marks was found to be an "unfit" mother by the court
  2. The father was found to be a "good and loving father"
  3. Bridgett Marks was found to have coached her twin girls to lie about their father sexually abusing them
  4. She took both her twin girls to the emergency room to be examined vaginally to try to convince people one girl was assaulted, when this was not the case
  5. The mother tried to induce asthma attacks when the father was coming to fake that the girls were upset and gave them drugs to do this to benefit from the press
  6. The mother spend little time with the children and have nanny's
  7. The father stop traveling on business to be with the children and claims to have never been away from them a single night while he initially had full custody
  8. The mother was awarded physical custody
What's wrong with this picture?
This woman should be fined and jailed for fraud,
defamation of character, perjury and conspiracy to commit fraud.
Any man who did what she did would probably end up with a jail sentence!