“Do not do anything to damage the family’s name!” Those words echo in my mind from time to time. Well spoken words by my mother, I must admit. Being raised by both parents that enforced each other when it came to raising my two older sisters and I played a significant role. Furthermore, I was not an easy child to raise. My parents educated me to abide and to believe in the law. Justice would always be served in the end.
At the moment, I’m four years shy of being middle aged, a check away from being broke, educated, a parole agent, a private investigator, an advisor and with a broken family. “Was it all worth it?” I get asked that now and then. There was a time were I thought I was living the great “America Dream” with a family and no debt. That all changed when I tried to end a marriage to protect my children and I. The truth would be told and justice would serve in the end.
Justice will always be served in the end or will it? The victims were finally able to testify. Society has discovered that mothers and fathers are capable of committing unthinkable crimes. How can justice be properly served if a judge believes they cannot be wrong? After all, they are humans with at least six years of education on how to interpret the law and passed the bar. They have their own belief system, biases, egos, fears, history, network system and religion. Why should I have believed that justice would always be served in the end?
Our judicial system is intended to have a “Check and Balance System”. Nonetheless, it comes with a charge. If you are not content with a lower court’s assessment, you have a right to appeal the judge’s judgment to the Appellant Court. There you will find a panel of three attorneys, in which, they were elected or appointed as judges at a lower court before being seated at the higher chair. In recent years, the State of Michigan had to eliminate some positions due to budget cuts. Just think these judges require time to do a partial analysis of your case to ensure you obtain justice. In the meantime, your children’s future will be determined by only a partial analysis. Does it make common sense to have fewer judges to partially analyze the safety of your children to ensure the “Check and Balance System” works? After all, it is in the “Best Interest of the Child.”
For myself, I have been through the “Appellant Court Rodeo” twice now in quest of justice for my children and I. My parents educated me to abide and to trust in the law. I tried to end a marriage to protect my children and I. I held that justice would always be served in the end. Theoretically, the board of three reviewed my case. According to the record, they ordered the file from the lower court to analyze the file. If the panel of adjudicators had reviewed the file each time, then how did the three admirable board of judges miss one of the parties committing perjury countless times, contributing to the delinquency of a minor, child endangerment, the victim’s testimony and finally a judge ignoring some evidence while wiping out other evidence? The last time I inquired, it was against the law to destroy evidence. Gaslighting a party’s case to the panel of three seems to be a common practice. Did the victims of Jerry Sandusky have to go through this too when they sought justice? Why should I have thought that I was the only one who has gone through this type of injustice? I was told to get over it because it happens all of the time.