and Commercial Stations program Managers to air her grievances. Fortunately, there are reputable accredited managers and supporting staff who take a very dim view of ' overbearing ' individuals who ingratiate themselves in public. We have numerous recognised institutions and Org's e.g Bravehearts, Lifeline, Social services Hotlines etc for people in crisis and dire straits.

It seems TV stations are inundated with characters with an axe to grind, pushing their peculiar agenda on emotive wheel barrows, possibly to gain attention and notoriety, and a quick buck. The media has sunk to unfathomable depths of craven commercialism paying for ' scoops '. Another imported phenomena.

Hetty Johnson. President of Bravehearts. A true advocate for children everywhere. A tireless campaigner for oppressed women's rights, deprived and exploited children; pursurer of paedophiles, deviants and other odd-ball jetsam and flotsam. The Feds only recently subsidised her organisation which hitherto depended on charitable donations. She was instrumental in unmasking, bringing to justice several high profile Politicians, school principles, clergy, perverts and paedophiles.She has no illusions about gender perpetrators, acknowleding many women are as much to blame for violence, mayhem on defenceless children.

Everyday,mothers leave their children in parked cars, in the heat of the day, while shopping. Without moralising some of these kids have succumbed from the heat and dehydration ? Murder !

The plight of those wretched Indigenous children taken into Christian homes, seperated from families, never to see their love ones again. The thousands of British children brought here to escape the Blitz, mercilessly raped, tortured and deprived by Christian clergy and Brotherhood. The shocking treatment of thousands of aussie kids suffering at Christian Colleges like St Bernados, Boy's Town, Boy's Grammar etc. None of the clergy who committed gross indecencies on young alter boys and girls in Churches around the Nation are ever prosecuted. Some are shifted, other retired on gratuitous pensions, some continue to practice their immoral lifestyle with impunity.

Without arriving at the crux of the Freeman case, we do a diservice to families everywhere by hasty knee-jerk, emotive reactions which are neither helpful or spiritually enriching.

C'est la vive.

Darcy's mother had expressed concern over the father's capacity to care for his children for the past 2 years accordingly to the family's statement released by Victoria Police http://www.theage.com.au/national/statement-from-darcey-freemans-family-20090205-7y3y.html?page=1

Yes, Darcy's family claim to have been harassing him via allegations of violence for some two years apparently. According to the report, the authorities were not convinced.

I wonder how much responsibilty that harassment may bear for the terrible final outcome?

If the Family Court was not filled with dishonest lawyers, it would not have separated a child or children of such tender years, from their mother. This is law as Principle 6 of the Declaration of the Rights of the Child, which these dishonest murderous bastards, could find if they looked, as schedule 3 to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 . Children are subject to the prohibited action of traffic, being regarded as mere chattels by the Family Court. ( Principle 9)

Further to that intrinsic dishonesty in the point two five of one percent of the privileged class, is the denial by them, in all their Courts, of the principles in Schedule 2. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. As slavemasters, the Family Court Judges, believe children should be seen but never heard. They are after all their bread and butter. Without children to allocate hither and yon, they would have no leverage over the parents and would probably be told where to get off.

This case demonstrates the complete failure of the Family Court to heed and apply Article 23 of the Covenant-Provision shall be made for the necessary protection of any children. Lawyers have not admitted basic Statutory interpretation skills for forty years.
(1) The Constitution is paramount.
(2) Federal Laws overrule State laws.
(3) A Schedule is part of an Act. ( s 13 Acts Interpretation Act 1901)
(4) The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is Law.

So they cannot be successfully sued for failure to apply Statute Law, lawyers had the Parliament in New South Wales repeal the right to do so in 1970. They then started to make themselves very wealthy. There is no direct federal right to sue for breach of Statute. It is indirect, declared in 1914, as Section 43 Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth) attempting to pervert the course of justice in respect of the Judicial Power of the Commonwealth, and is indictable. It is time the KR government enacted a direct right to sue for breach of Statute, with a jury

Unless and until it is acknowledged that our adversarial court system is not the venue, under any circumstances, to determine custody cases-where children are to live and which parent is to be the main care-giver, children, and also their parents, will continue to suffer.

Children are not chattel. Children are very young human beings and as such cannot be 'owned' by anybody, not by either of their parents.

Whether Darcy would have survived her father's anger and despair even if there was a different system in place is debatable, so her death may be a catalyst for discussion, but to prevent only deaths as the reason for change is limiting the discussion only to extreme expression of dysfunctional behaviour.

It should simply always be taken as a given that if parents cannot seperate the well-being of their children from personal anger towards the other parent and need to resort to court there is some serious dysfunctional behaviour taking place.

The courts are not the place to resolve this. One parent 'wins', the other 'loses' and really, in spite of the rethoric, the children are the biggest losers-pretty much always. They get no meaningful say in the proceedings.

Go to court to divide up chattel-the furniture and other assets-if you are stupid enough to throw away good money.

Go to the police to report criminal activity.

There remains this bizarre dichotomy, to this surely more enlightened day, that criminal behaviour within the family somehow needs special treatment, to criminal behaviour outside the family. A person needs a blue card to engage in any activity with other children, but somehow is exempt in relation to their own.

The family court is being used by many people with a personal aggrievement and vendetta against another to maintain, sometimes years, of financial and emotional bullying. To the detriment of all, but especially children who have no choice in participating in their parents poor choice of partner and poor life skills.

Today the little girls uncle speaks on behalf of the family at www.ninemsn.com.au

He says"..the judical system has failed our family and will continue to fail other families..." until someone in authority does something.

Antiseptic that you seek to blame this obviously loving and honourable family...