cotter:"judges rarely read affidavits"

Hahaha. I suppose they're usually too busy taking bribes from well-heeled self-employed fathers. You're really very funny.

cotter:"dismiss evidence often defying logic, and the transcripts of cases on Austlii are often 'cleansed'."

I do believe you're straying perilously close to contempt of the Court. Please do go on... oh hang on, you have.

cotter:"reading judgements that are different from what went on"

If you have evidence that the Court Reporting Service is systematically falsifying Court records, have you brought this evidence to the authorities? Having thought another couple of nanoseconds I reckon you're still full of it.

I know, you can tell us again about some fictitious child that features in your most lurid anti-male fantasies. I bet there isn't a transcript...

"Cotter, proudly making things up since 2005".

You must be proud.

cotter:" the jury - if there is one is already being told via the media that he might have been a paedophile, that will no doubt be repeated at trial. "

This is what is known as "evidence as to motive". It is intended to establish that a "mens rea" existed at the time of the killing. Mens rea means a "real intent" to commit the crime, rather than it being an accident or an unforeseen outcome of a lesser attack.

Think of it this way - because you habitually live in a state of neurotic fear of every man you encounter, there is no rson to believe that all or any of these men wish you to feel afraid or have done anything to make you feel afraid. The "mens rea" to make you afraid is absent - you're a victim of your own neurosis.

Really then septic, by your own behaviour and admission you are a bit of a loser in business too, as well as in relationships, ignorant of what really goes on in courts, as opposed to what you assume ought to go on. Go you mysogenistic, ignorant (because you just dont know and assume you are right) narrow minded, unprincipled, abusive narcissist! (identifying your traits yourself allows this armchair analysis from those exposed to your putrid vitriol).

You think judges read all those lying affidavits? Lala land buddy.

A complaint about transcripts being changed goes to both the judicial commission (because the judges are the ones who authorise and sign off on them)and the Attorney General at the state level (because they have authority over courts administration.

You should listen to some tapes of court hearings and compare them to the written transcripts and then apologise. (just after Hell freezes over hey!)

Jacksun:"you are a bit of a loser in business "

LOL. how many businesses have you started with no capital, dear?

As it happens, though, I'd much rather have stayed in my career, but the CSA made it impossible, so you're partially right. Never mind, I'm sure that'll never happen again.

Jacksun:"ignorant of what really goes on in courts"

Oh, of course, I was only a spectator in those 6 court matters brought by the ex. I must be dreaming that I self-represented successfully. And I most certainly didn't learn anything at all about the Law...

As I said to cotter, if you have evidence that fraud is taking place, put it before the authorities. I'm sure they'll give your claims all the attention they deserve.

Now, off you toddle and ask Mum what to say next. I'm sure you don't want to make her angry...

'septic - Are you perhaps confusing mens rea with motive? A maxim rich in tradition and well known to law students is actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea or "a person cannot be convicted and punished in a proceeding of a criminal nature unless it can be shown that he had a guilty mind".

You apparently base your comprehensive up-to-date practical legal knowledge on your own case in Family Law, from some time ago. I have no doubt you learned heaps. It's a shame humans don't know it all going into relationships instead of too late. The judge/magistrate may indeed have read more of your affidavits as you were self-representing, and hopefully you were extended the courtesy of the court. Sometimes a judicial officer will go out of their way to assist a SRL, sometimes they make it as hard as they can.

in one case mum was the SRL, and the judge warned her before her cross of the father 'Be very careful lest i decide you are an unfriendly parent'.

I didn't mean judges dont read any affidavits, but they do not read anywhere near them all according two judge's associate colleagues of mine. (Or I could be lying about having colleagues according to you)

I also have to disagree that lodging a legitimate complaint against any part of the legal system's practices is going to get corrective action. Fraud & perjury are criminal offences, police do not investigate what goes on in courts generally. Look at outcomes from complaints to the Judicial Commisssion and the legal services commissioner in their annual reports. The abiity of the law to protect itself is profound - it is the main thing I am forced to admire about the adversarial system.

If one tries to get political assistance to remedy a wrong, you soon find the separation of powers excludes politicians - be it premier, prime minister or other from 'interventing in a court process - or fixing it in hindsight, and of course victims have no right of legal counsel or appeal.

Man who loses war

Continues battle with women

His children suffer

person with little to say
strives to find
new ways to say it