March 24, 2011

Come To My New Blog And Web Site!

I have a new blog and web site, and I'm inviting everyone to it. This blog/web site focuses on my erotic writing. I will continue to post sex toys reviews on this blog. So, if you want to keep up with me, visit me at my new digs.

Elizabeth Black - Blog and Web site

See you there!

Lizzie

Posted on March 24, 2011 at 12:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBack

December 02, 2010

Do As I Demand Or The Kids Die!

This post is a riff of two earlier posts I wrote, Do As We Demand Or The Bitch Dies - Part 1 and Do As We Demand Or The Bitch Dies - Part 2. Over the past couple of years there has been a rash of dads murdering their exes and children (as reported on Dastardly Dads).

The latest case making the news is giving feelings of doom for three missing children that I and other people I've talked to suspect with a sinking feeling are already dead. We now have the case of John Skelton a dad who supposedly sent his three young sons off with a woman (who likely doesn't exist) and then attempted suicide. Mom, Tanya Skelton, is obviously beside herself since her sons have been missing since Thanksgiving. Skelton had court-ordered visitation, something that shouldn't be allowed in cases with a history like this one. This isn't the first time John Skelton ran off with his boys. The day Tanya Skelton filed for divorce, John Skelton took two of the boys and spirited them to Florida. After this stunt, Tanya Skelton was awarded custody but later she and Skelton agreed to visitation with a judge's encouragement.

This story is bad enough, but the rats are coming out of the woodwork latching onto this case to promote their propaganda and to advertise their "services". More below the fold.

In 2009, we had fathers' rights advocate Jeffrey Leving pontificating about how families need supervised visitation centers to help both parents have continuing access to their children. The father's rights group The Children's Rights Council also got in on the gravy train. Lo and behold - CRC has visitation centers! Can you hear the money? The articles below are bald ploys to attract more attention - and more clients and money - for CRC's visitation centers and for Jeffery Leving. Oh, yeah, visitation centers work well. Pay the father's rights group fees for supervised visitation for fifteen years. Teenagers especially love to be in a room with toys for three hours.

Here's the piggyback-onto-a-tragedy article by an Ohio chapter of the father's rights group The Children's Rights Council. CRC is not a child welfare group. It is a male supremacy group that has made lots of money over the years from supervised visitation centers. No link. Not giving this garbage traffic.

So what's the implication here? To keep children "safe", or to give abusive dads their access regardless of how little that benefits the children? Child welfare is given lip service in this article. It's all about father supremacy and getting more clients and money for CRC visitation centers.

And national leader? Of a tiny chapter in Ohio? Oh, please...

Amid Morenci search, expert advises on custody disputes

Posted: Dec 01, 2010 4:06 AM EST
Updated: Dec 01, 2010 4:10 AM EST

By Jonathan Walsh
Posted by Lisa Strawbridge

TOLEDO, OH (WTOL) - The Children's Rights Council provides a safe place for
parental visitation when custody becomes an issue during or after divorce.

Margaret Wuwert is the national leader for the chapter in northwest Ohio. She
says she's very saddened about the case involving John Skelton and his three
sons.

"We want to make sure the kids are safe and that they do get to see both
parents," Wuwert said of her organization.

The purpose of the council is to provide divorced parents or single parents with
a safe way to have visits with children.

A room is provided for the custodial parent to drop off their children. Then 15
minutes later, the other parent comes in to spend time with the kids. She says
there are no confrontations among the parents, and the kids just play and enjoy
their time with mom or dad.

She says 90 or 95 percent of parents using the program think it's a good thing.

She adds there are so many emotions involved in a divorce. Then economic stress
and even the arrival of the holidays can add to those emotions. Wuwert suggests
parents always think of the kids first.

The Children's Rights Council of Northwest Ohio has 20 rooms available. It
serves 80 families a month with each session lasting three hours.

As sad and difficult as the Skelton story is to hear, Wuwert hopes it's at least
a wake-up call for adults who may be feeling some of the same emotions involved
with the Skelton case.

I won't give a link to this article below by Jeffery Leving because I don't want to give it traffic, but here it is in full. It's pretty heinous, piggybacking on a tragedy of children who have been murdered - at the hands of their father. He blames these deaths on alleged bias against fathers in divorce and custody cases, and does not hold these men responsible in any way for the murders they commit.

When Divorce Kills: How Gender Bias Pushes Some Men Over the Edge
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
By Jeffery M. Leving

Chicago, IL – (April 9, 2009) – In the past two weeks, the nation has been shocked by three cases of domestic violence ending in the deaths of innocent children. Two weeks ago, two Illinois boys and their father, Michael Connolly, were found dead in an apparent case of murder-suicide. Last week, James Harrison, a father in Washington, allegedly shot to death his five children before killing himself. On Monday, an Alabama man, Kevin Garner, allegedly killed his estranged wife, their daughter and two other relatives before committing suicide. A common factor in these three cases is divorce: a father in distress probably because he was losing all that he held dear.

I lament these terrible tragedies; as a parent myself, I can imagine the agony the death of a child must bring to a family. As a fathers’ rights attorney, I regret that these high-profile cases are reinforcing the malicious stereotype of the brutal father, a stereotype that sabotages the efforts of many good fathers who love their children.

The fact is that most fathers do not harm their children. Domestic violence is not gender specific, as some mothers have also committed similar unnatural acts. For example, I am currently representing a soldier, formerly deployed in Iraq, who is now struggling to rescue his daughter from the alleged abuse of her mother in Chicago.

Divorce is often regarded as one of the most stressful events in an adult’s life. However, it is especially painful for men in our society due to blatant gender bias in our system. Most divorced men lose custody of their children, and have to pay substantial and sometimes onerous child support. This bias is evident when examining the raw numbers of custody rulings from jurisdictions across the United States. Mothers win 85 percent of all such disputes. According to the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, divorced and separated men are two and a half times more likely to commit suicide than married men. By contrast, the incidence of suicide among divorced women is no greater than that for married women.

The notion that divorced or otherwise estranged fathers don’t want or need continuing involvement with their children is insensitive and false. Fathers suffer very real pain and an overpowering sense of loss when excluded from their children’s lives. In my book “Fathers’ Rights,” I warned of the agony suffered by fathers affected by the gender bias, pointing out that “fathers from all walks of life find separation from their children to be a torturous, devastating experience.”

While most divorced men are able to cope with the unfair treatment by our system, some individuals collapse under the pressure of their emotions, destroying their family and themselves. Sometimes all these fathers need is someone who understands; someone to share their problems with. This and more can be provided by the not-for-profit organization which I founded in Illinois, the Fatherhood Educational Institute (URL deleted - I won't give traffic to these guys), as well as the government agency that I chair, The Illinois Council for Responsible Fatherhood (URL deleted). Similar organizations are needed everywhere. Both organizations offer resources to educate fathers to deal with their emotions, and to assist them in times of crisis.

The stress of divorce is well-known. However, it is manageable and should not lead to killings. Instead of focusing on those three men who allegedly committed unforgivable crimes, we should look at our society and our attitudes towards the role of fathers after separation and divorce and correct these unhealthy stereotypes.

Leving's brand of giving access to even violent fathers because it's society and its horrid attitudes about fathers that causes these tragedies is nothing new. Want to see some comments from father's rights activists about dads murdering their children and exes? These are some pretty noxious comments that give you an idea of the real nature of the father's rights movement, and it's not concern with children's welfare. It's all about male supremacy. Well, here you go:

From my article, Do As We Demand Or The Bitch Dies - Part 1:

Some of you may have heard the story about a fathers' rights advocate Darren Mack, who had stabbed his wife to death and shot the judge who heard his case. The judge lived. This guy is now at large. Well, fathers' rights groups got wind of the story, and they are excusing this guy's behavior. They blame "the system" for what this guy has done.

This is nothing new for these guys. They already blame "the system", feminists, and ex-wives when dads commit suicide. What they usually keep quiet is that they also blame "the system" et al when dads murder their wives and children. Lowell Jaks of The Alliance for Non-Custodial Parent's Rights had gone as far as to blame "the system" for the D. C. sniper shootings. In the article Divorced Dads Snap Under Pressure, which is available at ANCPR's web site, Jaks said that "[s]ome guys kill themselves, some snap and go out and kill others. You can dismiss them as crackpots, you can say we need more protection for women, but it's not going to take away the problem." In another article, available at the web site for the fathers' rights group "A Kid's Right", Jaks said ""None of these guys are poster children. But when you cause this much pain to so many men, there are going to be repercussions. A certain percentage are going to crack."

Quotes from father's rights activists from the same article, referencing Darren Mack murdering his ex-wife and shooting the judge who heard his case. Mack got lots of sympathy from father's rights activists. No surprise there. Would you as a mom (or dad) want to give these guys access to your children? Hell, no!

Jim Deeny said,
on June 13th, 2006 at 1:49 pm

There’s only one wat to stop this nonsense! Stop paying!

mikevac said,
on June 13th, 2006 at 4:56 pm

The harder the courts pushes people the harder they will push back. This bastard judge lived - this time. Next time he will not be that lucky. And there will be a next time because he is a bigot. Eventually, he’ll push another person to the brink and they will kill him. Unfortunately, this is the only way a victim of this the family court can get justice - by killing the judge.

anothervoice said,
on June 13th, 2006 at 5:31 pm

This judge all like him get absolutely no sympathy from me. Here’s a solution: Have judges in family court (now there’s a contradiction in terms) only limited to five year terms and and for every complaint against them such as violating someone’s due process because it helps the custodial parent then they aren’t allowed to work for a year; hey, better yet, sned the jackass/bitch to jail for three months for each and every violation accrued to be run consequetively. Then maybe they won’t be so eagar to assholes.

buddyhyatt said,
on June 13th, 2006 at 7:00 pm

I do not condone this type of retaliation. However “you reap what you sow” and evidently this judge had it coming. I am in this very situation in Tennessee. I am paying $1005 per month to the child’s mother whom I was not married to, while she does not work but fishes and hunts 10 to 18 days per month. (Yes she’s a lesbian now.) All the while I have the child more than half the time??? I am being rail roaded as we speak. I will fight it tooth and nail until it is settled fairly. I will not however shoot the judge. God’s vengeance will be much worse than anything I could do.

Jeffrey Leving and his ilk don't care about child welfare, "equality", or giving dads a fair shake. They care only about making sure men, especially the mad dads of the father's rights movement, have the ability to lord it over the women who try to leave them. They use the children to get back at the women who have the audacity to leave them. Remember that a Florida Bar Journal article noted that abusive fathers are much more likely than nonabusive parents contest custody, not pay child support, and kidnap children. You can add killing exes and children to that list. Comments such as the above prove those facts.

Posted on December 2, 2010 at 12:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack

April 04, 2005

Lowell Jaks Is Gearing Up For A Fight

My regular readers know that Lowell Jaks, the founder of the fathers' rights group Alliance for Noncustodial Parents Rights (ANCPR), was imprisoned for kidnapping his son and spiriting him away to the Dominican Republic. You may read my Lowell Jaks/ANCPR archive, which tells the whole story, at this link.

He is now out of jail, and he has no contact with his son. I just received word from his ex-wife Elaine Rudis-Jackson that he has shown no remorse for what he had done. He said "I'm glad we did what we did. I'm proud of what I did. I went ahead with this action." [...] "I let my principles get the better of my judgement," said Jaks. But added that he didn't agree with the court system having jurisdiction over families "and not the parents as it should be. This results in severe dislocation. The situation is just untenable, equivalent to a modern day holocaust."

I hereby invoke Godwin's Law.

Jaks recently had a hearing about his case, and he's not happy that he didn't get what he wanted. Rudis-Jackson heard him say "this is great, this is just what I wanted to have happen. The media is going to hear about this" referring to "not even being able to send a birthday card to his son".

He hasn't learned a thing, which doesn't surprise me. He has no regrets about what he had done. I think there is a danger that he could kidnap his son again, and it looks like the courts see the same possibility.

It also looks like he is still living off of ANCPR membership fees. His views haven't changed. He believes that "as of the institution of so-called 'no fault divorce' in the late 70's - has one motivation and only one. That is, to legitimate adultery by women."

This man is not fringe. ANCPR is one of the most popular (and nastiest) fathers' rights groups out there. It's driving force is helping men get out of paying child support. Jaks himself owed $100,000 in child support and penalties to his two ex-wives. I hope he continues to be denied contact with his son. It's for the best.

Posted on April 4, 2005 at 09:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (11)

September 30, 2004

Lowell Jaks Due To Be Released November 9

Update January 25, 2005: Welcome, everyone who is coming here from Wampum's Koufax Awards "Best Series" nomination. This series of posts is about Lowell Jaks, the founder of the Alliance for Noncustodial Parents Rights (ANCPR), an especially nasty fathers' rights group. Jaks had kidnapped his son and spirited him away to the Dominican Republic. His son is now back in the states with his mother. Jaks just finished serving a prison sentence. I have followed this story from the very beginning. This is the newest post. To catch the entire story, start from the bottom of this category and read forward. Jaks and ANCPR are examples of how horrible fathers' rights groups and activists really are. They are not concerned with the best interests of women and children, nor do they represent decent fathers.

-----

My long-time readers know that I have been following the Lowell Jaks case from the very beginning. Lowell Jaks, the founder of the fathers' rights group Alliance For Non-Custodial Parents Rights, is due to be released from prison on November 9. He is in jail for kidnapping his son Alec and spiriting him away to the Dominican Republic. For the full story on this case, please visit my entire Lowell Jaks/ANCPR category on my blog.

I heard from his ex-wife, Elaine, who sent me a recent article about Jaks's time in jail. I don't care much for the article because it portrays Jaks in a rather positive light, as if he is merely a beleagered father who wanted only to spend more time with his son, and that he was willing to go to jail because he wanted to be with his son. Read my entire Jaks/ANCPR category to get the real story. You'll see how inaccurate the positive depiction really is.

The reporter found my Jaks/ANCPR category on my blog because a comment Nicole Jaks, Jaks' daughter from his first marriage, left on my blog is quoted in the article:

"In a letter on an Internet site about the Jaks situation, she wrote: "Mr. Jaks has stated that children need the love of their father not his money, but I know we didn't feel that way when my mother had to work extra hours and be gone longer, leaving us with no parent, or depending on the welfare system."

The good news is that Alec is doing very well since being returned to his mother. I'm happy to hear that. Jaks is unrepentant, and I fear that once released he may attempt to kidnap Alec again. From the article:

Jaks said he feels he was unfairly prosecuted. He said Alec asked to be with him and he feels, "If a young boy wants to live with his dad, that's the end of the matter. Mothers should not have a say in that." He acknowledged it "made me sick to take him (Alec) away from his mother." But, he added, "Some things are just right to do even if you know that most people feel it's wrong."

Posted on September 30, 2004 at 12:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (10)

June 17, 2004

A Letter From Lowell Jaks, In Jail

Update, July 2, 2004: Here it is two weeks later, and Lowell Jaks still must not be getting any fan mail. What's the point of kidnapping your son and taking him to a third world country, away from his family and friends, his school, and medical assistance if he needs it, if no one knows what great sacrifices you've made in the name of fathers' rights? Why bother to go to jail for "the cause" if no one knows or cares that you're there? This post from the same fathers' rights mailing list as the other one practically begs people to write to Jaks while he rots away, unpraised, in jail. It's the third item down on the mailing list post. It's makes a BIG point twisting around what Jaks had done in writing "We don't endorse what he did. [Sure they don't. Heh.] It is a crime. He should be punished. But all of us know the anguish of being separated from our children, and perhaps similar thoughts we've had to "make things better." Fathers have no rights! Write to him while he sits in jail, wasting away! While I had not named the mailing list in my original post, I will name it in the update - A Kid's Right. The owner, John Murtari, has a penchant for stalking Senator Hillary Clinton. He's spent more than his share of time in jail. What is it with fathers' rights activists and jail time?

-----

Poor Lowell Jaks. Here he is, sitting in jail, trying to pass himself off as the Martyr For Fathers' Rights, and he has had no visitors. Hardly anyone has written to him, even after fathers' rights activists posted his mailing address at jail on their mailing lists. His Alliance For Non-Custodial Parents Rights (ANCPR) buddies have given him a wide birth. This letter he penned from behind bars has appeared on a fathers' rights mailing list that will go unnamed. I have the original in my back-up files. As expected, he shows no remorse for kidnapping his son and spiriting him away to the Dominican Republic, all in the name of fathers' rights. He wrote that "self centered, self absorbed, hedonism, consumerism" blocks one off from what is real. It's ironic that all of that is what got him in trouble in the first place.

Get a load of this claim of his - that the "no fault" divorce "industry" exists for one purpose: "to legitimate adultery by women."

You've gotta be kidding me.

Regarding all the New Age blather and the talk of becoming a monk, remember that he has also operated as a psychic.

"Thank you so much for your letter. And also, thank you for the $10 you
included. A precious few have written to me, each appreciated greatly.
I am not surprised that news and discussion of me has receded - you
of all people, I'm sure, are aware of how lonely is the effort to
raise awareness of the issues we face.

I have already accepted a 'deal'. I'll get a year in county jail,
followed by two years probation. I have avoided doing much explaining
of my actions. That is because my motivations were extremely
personal, and I doubt that the particulars of my situation are really
applicable or pertinent for others. With the way things work here, a
year may mean that I'll be out of jail before Thanksgiving, perhaps
even sometime in October. Of course, there is always the possibility
that Federal authorities could arrest me and try me for federal
charges as well. If that were to happen, and I were convicted, there
could be a lot more time in a federal penitentiary. Only time will
tell.

I am actually doing quite well here in jail. As I'm sure you know,
jail is actually quite liberating. I even have people who wash and
fold my underwear for me, at the county's expense! It's really
amazing how many people are faced with family law issues here in jail.
I would say most are. One observation, which is apropo -- most of the
guys are fine with flaunting the laws with respect to drugs and
alcohol, yet to risk incarceration because of a protest action on
child support, or some other family law issue would, I'm sure, be out
of the question. Isn't that really the problem though? Self
centered, self absorbed, hedonism, consumerism, etc. -- It blocks one
off from what is real -- from what really matters.

I don't have any family near to where I am incarcerated -- no
visitors. I have received mail from my father, one of my brothers, and
my oldest daughter.

Most people in our society. I believe, are frightened by anyone who
steps outside the law. Most people would rather forget such an
"outlaw" and therefore relegate such a one to the status of a
'non-existant' or 'non-person'. Its a little like most people's
attitude toward death- best kept at a distance.

I treat this time - I conceptualize this time - as if I had taken vows
in a monastery. It really isn't much different. In truth, I have
often thought of living as a monk. The stories of those who have had
themselves sealed off in a cave for years had held appeal for me since
I was very young. In my meditations, shortly before embarking on this
most recent path. I was able to achieve a degree of attunement that
felt as if I could really maintain equipoise, even in a jail -- even
if all the trappings of ego had been stripped away. Subsequent events
have confirmed that this is indeed so. Spiritually, then, these
events have constituted a kind of initiation. You may think of this
time as one of a lesson in detachment. Can one look upon all as one
-- without differentiating as to status, etc.? Can one do the same as
to any vicissitude? Jail in the Dominican Republic is a particularly
apt place to find out the truth! Miami Dade county jail is another.

I am not allowed any contact whatsoever with my son. I expect that in
a month or so that may change. Before we left on this adventure,
while we were discussing the possibility of leaving -- I had let him
know that if we were caught, we would be separated for a long
time. He's very resilient -- a real 'go with the flow' kind of a kid.
I'm glad we did what we did. I'm proud of what I did. I went a head
with this action, not out of vengeance, but out of the conviction that
it was the right thing to do, under the circumstances.

When I look at the current state of affairs with respect to Family
Law. I am forced to conclude that there is no hope of any significant
reform. Look at the size and ubiquity of the Child Support Industry.
Look at the size of the additional industry surrounding custody
issues. Look at the size and proliferation of the entire legal and
social edifice surrounding Domestic Violence issues. We got there
because few people any more are even capable of critical thought. We
are a culture driven by emotionalism and utilitarianism. This leads
to a system in which the ends justify the means, with zero tolerance
becoming the norm.

There is also a very sordid side to all of this. I would make
argument that the entire edifice of modern family law -- which, by the
way, is wholly and entirely new, as of the institution of so-called
"no fault divorce" in the late 70's -- has one motivation and only
one. That is, to legitimate adultery by women. Every single law
giver in the history of mankind has warned of this - from Moses to
Manu. This has led to a wholesale denigration of fatherhood on a
scale never before seen. It's no ones fault. It's merely a
reflection of the times in which we are living. We are in a time of
decline, and there is nothing you can do about it. In times like this
the only sensible advice is that proffered by Buddha - his last words
- "Seek your own salvation, diligently."

Again, thank you so much for writing me, John! "

Lowell Jaks

Posted on June 17, 2004 at 07:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (8)

May 01, 2004

Fathers' Rights Activists Found My Jaks Posts

Here is more proof that fathers' rights activists are not concerned with "the best interests of the child," despite their loud protestations to the contrary. I've mentioned Robert Cheney, a. k. a. "Aaron Burr," in previous posts. Trust me, he's speaking from experience. He even admitted it in the post below. He's made a career out of landing in jail for willful refusal to pay child support he has been ordered to pay. This guy is a real piece of work.

Being jailed for refusal to pay child support as ordered by the court is not as common as conspiracy moonbats like Cheney want dads to think. There is no "debtor's prison" alive and well in the U. S. There is a difference between being unable to pay for good reason and being unwilling to pay. Guys don't land in jail for not paying child support. They land in jail for willfully refusing to follow a court order. They also have to work very hard to land in jail. All other methods of obtaining payment such as liens, garnishment, seizure of assets, payment plans, and the like are exhausted before jail time even becomes a possibility. Even poor dads in the fatherhood initiatives so dear to the Dept. of Health and Human Services aren't tossed in jail so readily. Some of them have seen their past arrearages forgiven in exchange for enrolling in a "male involvement" program. If a man is truly having a rough time that is not temporary in nature, and is not feigning in order to avoid paying, he is not tossed in jail.

For men like Cheney, "bend-over-and-pick-up-your-bar-of-soap" becomes a way of life.

Please note that the person to whom Cheney is responding has found his information from reading my blog. This post originated on a fathers' rights mailing list that will go unnamed. Oh, one more point. Someone should remind Cheney that Jaks had kidnapped his son because he refuses to pay child support he owed not only to his son's mother but also to his other ex-wife. Jaks has only himself to blame for the predicament he is in now. I think Cheney's self-centered blathering is an example of "I feel the pain you're gonna feel, Dude." Maybe it's time to re-read that post I wrote about narcissists, divorce, and contentious custody cases...



    From:  Aaron Burr [email deleted]
    Date:  Thu Apr 29, 2004  7:30 pm
    Subject:  Re: Jaks sentence - a/k/a if you want something done.......

    Dear David,

    No. This is NOT a good sentence.

    First, he should not be in jail at all....

    Secondly, the sentence is a scam, and I predict, will end in disaster for
    him. The DA and county are acting in bad faith. They are not just going
    to let him out and then let him serve out the rest of his Parole in
    peace. No! They are going to screw around with him. They are going to
    harass him. THEY ARE GOING TO GET HIM BACK IN JAIL FOR 'PAROLE VIOLATION'
    ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR MAYBE FIVE MORE TIMES!!!

    If he cannot pay his extortion amounts (which are EVEN ACCRUING WHILE HE IS
    IN PRISON!) If he owed $10,000 in back child support, when he gets out he
    will owe almost double that.

    The nanosecond he gets a job, they will vacuum virtually the whole amount
    to let him live in poverty. He will pay for CS and not see his son any
    more (great system).

    They will electronically deduct and garnish his wages--yet soon (within the
    first year) even if everything goes perfect he will be about $500 BEHIND in
    his child support payments. (How can you get behind on electronic
    deduction from your wages??) They do this all the time.

    What they are doing, is they NEED men to fall behind so the county can
    check a box called PARTIAL PAYMENTS. This box will show the Feds that
    there are THOUSANDS of 'bad 'ol dads' who are pathologically, "behind" in
    payments. (Poof! The county has just given themselves more money coming
    in from the Feds to combat this "terrible problem' (which they invent
    against many unsuspecting fathers.) It's all about "checking boxes" and the
    county 'may' put Lowell back in prison just on this fraud alone (if he
    can't then cough up the one or two payments the 'computer' will
    mysteriously keep him behind. Even if he pays, then poof! Again, a few
    months later, lo! He's behind again.

    This is not a guess...it happened to me, and it is happening to INNUMERABLE
    fathers across the country. This is 'not' just a "California" problem.

    Then there is the continued harrasment. "IF" he does not comply, he will
    lose his license. Once he loses that, anf "IF" he gets pulled over without
    it (or merely doesn't produce "valid ID" upon any officers request--then he
    goes back to jail.

    Again, this whole thing is complete slavery. The majority of men never get
    through it. Many commit suicide because of the hopelessness...yet, the
    courts, the DA and the whole system exactly knows what they are
    doing. They will sadistically torture him until some disaster strikes.

    This is how this whole situation got started in the first place! Lowell
    begged the courts not to PAS him from his son, and they just scoffed at
    him. Poof! Lowell (correctly) leaves with his son to another
    (non-extradtion country). We should fight this case just to see how much
    they spent on Lowell, and how they got a non-extradition country to
    extradite him.

    Methinks 'bribe' is the operative word here--and this begs the
    question--how much money will they spend to hunt men back into slavery?

    What has happened to Lowell should be protested by every human in
    America. Fathers' should be visibly outraged at what occurred to Lowell,
    and one thing is sure--we got to stop this madness.

    These people who are doing this to this poor man, are our enemies.

    This finally brings up the point, of how all men just simply accepting this
    slavery--is giving them untold amounts of money and power. Men across
    this nation MUST start refusing to pay child support. It is only a system
    which invests in our destruction. All men in this nation are paying child
    support so it can destroy both them, and their children.

    We must recognize this fact, and refuse to pay child support.

    Start destroying this evil system, stop paying child support.

    Hope this helps.

    Aaron

    At 10:38 AM 4/29/04, you wrote:

    >
    >Google search on Jaks sentence shows he got 365 days. In NJ, a similar
    >case just resulted in 5 years - he's lucky. With good time, he should be
    >out by August.
    >
    >April 18, 2004
    >
    >ANCPR's Lowell Jaks Pleads Guilty To Felony Child Stealing
    >
    >I heard from Elaine Jackson, Lowell Jaks's ex-wife. For those who haven't
    >caught this story, Lowell Jaks is the head of the very popular and very
    >nasty fathers' rights group, the Alliance for Non-Custodial Parents Rights
    >(ANCPR). Jaks had kidnapped his son and spirited him away to the Dominican
    >Republic. He has since been found by authorities and extradited to
    >California. Mr. Jaks and his organization present themselves as being
    >concerned only with helping fathers remain in their children's lives after
    >divorce, but both are primarily concerned with finding ways to avoid child
    >support obligations and lording it over their ex's, using the children as
    >weapons. Kidnapping as an abusive act of retaliation isn't something good
    >fathers do.
    >
    >According to Ms. Jackson, "Lowell Jaks has pleaded guilty to felony child
    >stealing on March 29 and will be sentenced on April 27. I have been
    >informed that he will be sentenced to a fixed-term of 365 days in jail of
    >which he will serve about 180 days, then he will be on 3 years
    >probation. The upshot is that he will get to spend his time in county
    >jail rather that going to state prison, which I assume had bearing on his
    >guilty plea. I was hoping to work in a psych eval but apparently he's
    >been too well behaved for them to think it warranted."
    >
    >Alec Jaks (the son) is doing much better now. He's getting caught up on
    >missed schoolwork and adjusting to the entire situation. I'm very happy to
    >hear that.
    >
    >Here are all of the links to my blog posts about Lowell Jaks, ANCPR, and
    >the kidnapping:

    [Trish's note - links deleted. I'm going to create a new category for all of the Lowell Jaks posts in a few minutes.]

Posted on May 1, 2004 at 03:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

April 28, 2004

More Portrayal of Lowell Jaks As A "Victim"

William Wagener is the host of a cable public access show, an active member of the Libertarian Party of California, and a fathers' rights advocate. If Mr. Wagener is angry that California taxpayers will have to pony up $35,000 to provide Lowell Jaks with three hots and a cot, he should blame Jaks, not Jaks' ex-wife and "the system." Lowell Jaks and the supporters of his popular organization ANCPR have never been concerned with the proper parenting of children. Jaks brought on all of his problems himself. The whining displayed by Mr. Wagener is exactly what you will see when you refuse to coddle a fathers' rights advocates' overblown sense of entitlement. First, they sulk when they don't get their way. Then, they get ugly when they cannot bully others into giving them what they demand.

Oh, did I forget to mention that Mr. Wagener had a couple of additional wives that his legal wife was probably not very happy about? The web site for the 2002 Santa Barbara County Elections pointed out that "[h]is run for the Santa Maria City Council recently was thwarted, he said, by revelations of a nasty lawsuit in the early '90s. Court testimony indicated that Mr. Wagener had a legal wife at the time, and three others who signed "marriage contracts" drawn up by Mr. Wagener. He was sued by his second "wife" over the custody of their two sons." He blew it off, saying that he had "engaged in plural marriage years ago."

Kangaroo bones, wingnuts who dress up like Spider-Man and scale tall buildings, bigamy... I swear you can't make this stuff up.

This post originally appeared on a fathers' rights mailing list that will go unnamed.


TUESDAY, Bakersfield,CA.

By William Wagener

Defendant Lowell Jaks, was sentenced today after accepting a felony charge
without trial.

Judge Collette Humphrey, as the urging of the female prosecutor ordered
this dedicated father to fill up space in a State Prison, for taking his 12
year old son out of the State, without Court permission. Jaks was ordered
to pay for the cost of flight back, etc. Mr. Jaks, looking somewhat
content, said not a word. It was all over in 5 minutes. Now it will cost
the taxpayers of State of California in excess of $35,000 to keep this
father of his son, from his estranged and bitter mother of that son, locked
up.

It started by being a routine custody case, where the mother claims she is
most fit, and "he" is unfit to be custodial parent. From there it was all
down hill, until finally, it is claimed the 12 year old son, begged his
Father, Lowell Jaks to "get me outta here".

Mr. Jaks, did just that and was caught in the Carribean and arrested and
returned to face the obvious null factoid, that a Father had stolen his own
son. How is that possible. How does one steal his own son. It starts by
being labeled in Court a NON-Custodial parent[NCP], then vilified over and
over, while watching your son suffer daily.

This might seem a strange take on the day of sentencing, when the
"defendant-Father" did not ask for jury, did not say a word. His act
alone to help his son "escape." The deed said it all.

But in Bakersfield, CA. where not too long ago, a retired police officer
had a rebellious son, who took up living the HIGH LIFE with a former [not
dead] Kern County assistant District Attorney. The allegation that the
Asst. D.A. of Kern county was "using" the retired police officers under-age
son as his personal "boy toy" in a homosexual and highly illegal
relationship, puts a different hue on the Jaks story. The retired police
officer was convicted of killing the active duty Asst. D.A., and he did it
to protect his wayward, rebellious teenage son, who died in a car crash,
facilitated by the Asst. D.A., who after all is suppose to UPHOLD the law,
now pervert it to his own personal perversions with minor boys. Most folks
I spoke to believed absolutely, that the Asst. D.A. had committed some form
of sexual fornication with the minor. Many felt no remorse that the
retired police officer, also swarn to uphold the law, took a life.

The entire sentencing was captured on digital video tape, by court
permission. This case was of course only about Mr. Jaks, or was it. Was
the system of Justice really on trial? Has it become a crime to be a
hetersexual father who cares about your sons concerns to go to the length
Mr. Jaks did? And in a city now reknown for the alleged homosexual Asst.
D.A. murder by an angry father, and a policeman at that.

The basic fact is, once you are labeled NCP, you are already set up to
become a criminal, so the perverters of justice, can drain you of every
dime in a system that claims the "best Interests of the child", but makes
sure the divorce industry profits a lot, and perhaps, even to let
homosexuals in the District Attorney's office abuse their power, and the
constitution that they allegedly took an oath to uphold.

Watch Judge Collette Humphreys, hand down the sentence, she was mandated to
give, one becomes painfully aware that the "system" has failed. No one who
has not been convicted of prior felonies should be forced to be a NCP.
Mr. Jaks, silently turned and went with jailors to start his ordeal as a
"father felon", who cared too much. What a crime. There were no protests
outside the Kern County Courthouse, no one, not even the Public defender
said a single word in Mr. Jaks defense. One had the sense of what it was
like to FEEL jews being tried in a Nazi Court. All caught on tape, with
permission of the court, by Wm Wagener, Tv Host and Producer of On Second
Thought.

May Peace and Capitalism Prevail.


Posted on April 28, 2004 at 11:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 19, 2004

Lowell Jaks's Original Plea - Innocent

This article at The Mercury News is available only by registration, which is why I'm including the portion about Lowell Jaks here in full. Jaks has since pleaded guilty.

A "parents' rights advocate"? Who do they think they're kidding?


Posted on Wed, Mar. 17, 2004
News from the San Joaquin Valley
Associated Press

---

BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (AP) - A parents' rights advocate from Ridgecrest has pleaded innocent to charges of child stealing.

Lowell Anton Jaks, 52, was arrested Feb. 27 in the Dominican Republic on a $100,000 warrant. He entered his plea Tuesday and is due back in Kern County Superior Court on March 29.

Authorities alleges Jaks took his 10-year-old son, Alec Jaks, as the boy was riding his bicycle to school.

The mother of the boy and the defendant's ex-wife, Elaine Jackson, had a protective order that prohibited Jaks from being around his son, authorities said.

Jaks founded the nonprofit Alliance for Non-Custodial Parents Rights in 1994.

No, he didn't. He founded it in 1997, mainly with hope of avoiding his child support obligation.

Posted on April 19, 2004 at 12:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

Fathers' Rights Party Line: What Lowell Jaks Did Was Wrong, But.. But... But...

Let the chest-thumping, backpedaling, side-stepping, and melodramatic torch-bearing begin. Fathers rights activists will do whatever they can to turn a criminal who had kidnapped his son into a Poster Boy and martyr for their movement.

Fathers rights activist John Murtari, who founded "A Kid's Right," was released from jail after his latest episode of stalking Senator Hillary Clinton long enough to release another mailing list action alert that included information for fathers' rightsters who want to write to Lowell Jaks in jail.

Get a load of this tripe. These people refuse to see that Jaks is not a "victim" of the system, or of his ex-wife, or of anyone else. He kidnapped his son as a power ploy against his ex-wife. This was not the act of a father who cares about his child's welfare. It was an abusive act of control and retaliation. It was also a retaliatory act to avoid paying child support. Fathers' rights activists who endorse the recommendations in the mailing list post below not only support what Jaks had done, they are willing to help him get away with it.

Here is the portion of the "A Kid's Right" mailing pertaining to Jaks:


6. Write to Lowell Jaks - in jail.
---------------------------------
For more background on Lowell, please see earlier list messages at: [deletia] -- Lowell had been made an NCP by the Court. He decided to take his child and leave the country; the other parent out of the child's life. He was arrested.

We don't endorse what he did. It is a crime. He should be punished.
But all of us know the anguish of being separated from our children, and
perhaps similar thoughts we've had to "make things better." We don't
need to agree with what he did, but certainly let's show him our
compassion. Jail can be a lonely place. One of the greatest things to
get is a letter!

If you wish to be inspired by this tragedy -- then SACRIFICE to change
the system that drives good people to perform such hopeless acts.

Following Submitted by: "Aaron Burr" [email deleted]

> Legends Legal Aid Society is attempting to assist Mr. Lowell Jaks, who now
> sits in a jail in Kern County California.
>
> We need "someone" in the area to act as a legal runner for Lowell. We,
> unfortunately, are 500 miles away--so we will develop the legal paperwork
> for him, but we need 'some volunteer' to do things like serve the Kern
> County California DA, the Court, etc.

> Specifically, we need someone to go to the court clerk and get the:
> 1.) Complaint.
> 2.) The Police or DA report
> 3.) Look over his documentation and court minutes and get them to us.
>
> I called the Kern County Courts and Jail. Currently, Lowell is at:
>
> LOWELL JAKS

[prison information deleted]

> I am certain that any letters from "you" would be of great
> encouragement to Lowell, as he has no family. Also, you may send him
> books, which also would be of assistance (order them through the
> bookstore, as the 'publisher' has to mail them to him).

"Aaron Burr" is Robert Cheney, an original signatory and founding member of Fathers' Manifesto. He is also a founding member and signatory of Fathers' Manifesto's DEMAND, which included these statements as its platform:


The first amendment right to free exercise of religion has not been repealed.
2. My religion is Christianity.
3. It is a fundamental principle of Christianity that children belong to fathers--not the state nor any other body nor individual.
4. I DEMAND that my children be returned to my care immediately.
5. PERIOD.

Fathers' Manifesto is also responsible for the anti-Semitic "Talmud Survey" hate site.

He was a member (the only one?) of The Sovereign Patriot Group, in California. That explains his internet alias. He sees himself as some sort of patriot. A hero. He is neither. He spent time in jail himself for willful refusal to pay child support. Father's rights activists had also organized letter-writing campaigns and protests when he was behind bars. He has also made some rather insidious, abusive, and manipulative suggestions regarding how men may get back at their ex-wives.

Please note that Murtari is back to stalking Senator Clinton. I'm sure he'll be back in jail again soon. Maybe he and Jaks can write to each other from behind bars.


7. NonViolent Action continues - Syracuse.
-----------------------------------------
John Murtari returned to the Syracuse Federal Building in our continuing
attempt to petition Senator Hillary R. Clinton for a meeting with parents. He
was arrested, arraigned and release by Federal Magistrate DiBianco. John
plans on returning to the building on Monday, April 5th. Your support
and participation is welcome and needed!

Details at: [deletia]

For dads who supposedly want only to do right by their children, these guys sure spend a lot of time earning three hots and a cot. They also engage in hate speech and they incite aggressive behavior on their mailing lists. Neither Lowell Jaks nor his Internet fathers' rights group, The Alliance for Non-Custodial Parents Rights (ANCPR) is concerned with the welfare of children or with helping fathers become better parents. None of these activities is in the best interests of anyone, let alone children.

Posted on April 19, 2004 at 11:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 18, 2004

ANCPR's Lowell Jaks Pleads Guilty To Felony Child Stealing

I heard from Elaine Jackson, Lowell Jaks's ex-wife. For those who haven't caught this story, Lowell Jaks is the head of the very popular and very nasty fathers' rights group, the Alliance for Non-Custodial Parents Rights (ANCPR). Jaks had kidnapped his son and spirited him away to the Dominican Republic. He has since been found by authorities and extradicted to California. Mr. Jaks and his organization present themselves as being concerned only with helping fathers remain in their children's lives after divorce, but both are primarily concerned with finding ways to avoid child support obligations and lording it over their ex's, using the children as weapons. Kidnapping as an abusive act of retaliation isn't something good fathers do.

According to Ms. Jackson, "Lowell Jaks has pleaded guilty to felony child stealing on March 29 and will be sentenced on April 27.  I have been informed that he will be sentenced to a fixed-term of 365 days in jail of which he will serve about 180 days, then he will be on 3 years probation.  The upshot is that he will get to spend his time in county jail rather that going to state prison, which I assume had bearing on his guilty plea.  I was hoping to work in a psych eval but apparently he’s been too well behaved for them to think it warranted."

Alec Jaks (the son) is doing much better now. He's getting caught up on missed schoolwork and adjusting to the entire situation. I'm very happy to hear that.

Here are all of the links to my blog posts about Lowell Jaks, ANCPR, and the kidnapping:

Fathers' Rights Activist Kidnapped His Son

NCMEC - Lowell and Alec Jaks

MensNewsDaily Turns Jaks Into A "Victim"

Fathers' Rights Advocates Support Jaks Kidnapping Son

The Aftermath of ANCPR's Lowell Jaks Kidnapping His Son

Trish Wilson's Blog: Lowell Jaks Update - includes Polly Klaas Foundation link and a link to Lowell Jaks's psychic web page. (Yes, you read that right.)

ANCPR/Lowell Jaks Update - Alec Jaks Has Been Found And Returned To His Mother

Lowell and Alec Jaks Update - Dominican Republic

Alec Jaks' Return - More Details


Posted on April 18, 2004 at 01:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)