Family Court Judge T. Arthur Ritchie, Clark County, Nevada
Judge T. Arthur Ritchie Family Court Ritchie, Clark County, Nevada Obstruction of justice, violation of civil rights and constitutional rights, child endangerment, nonfeasance, slavery, kidnapping and extortion

Judicial improprieties

That the Plaintiff believes and alleges that the court has ignored relevant evidence to this case and has made rulings that are detrimental and prejudicial against the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff now requests that the order be amended or that this case be moved to another department in front of a judge who is willing to look at all the facts and evidence.

John Wayne Gacy masqueraded as a clown that loved children. He loved at least 33 them to death. Judge Ritchie is masquerading as a judge who cares about children and families.

1. That the minor child #1 has been on five illegal drugs while in the custody of the Defendant and the exhibited drug test results provided to this court have been ignored by this court.

2. That the minor child #2 has been expelled from school for drugs and behavior problems and this fact is being ignored by this court.

3. That the minor child #3 has been suspended twice in the last two months for behavioral problems and this fact is being ignored by this court.

4. That four of the children's close friends have been killed in the past five months as a result of their behavior, which is identical behavior of that of the children's and this fact is being ignored by this court.

5. That the Defendant has a superior income ($60,000 per year), three times that of the Plaintiff this fact is being ignored by this court.

6. That the Defendant has repeatedly violated court orders discussing court issues with the children constituting emotional abuse and this fact is being ignored by this court.

7. That the Defendant's apparent interest is in money, rather than caring for and supervising the children properly and this fact is being ignored by this court.

8. That the Plaintiff was the parent that suspected and exposed the drug use of the three minor children four years ago and again recently as documented in this case and this fact is being ignored by this court.

9. That the court has allowed false allegations by the Defendant that child #1 and the Plaintiff were arrested, without rebuttal and this fact is being ignored by this court.

10. That the children's counselor's of eight months have not been permitted to contribute their findings and this fact is being ignored by this court.

11. That the Plaintiff's equal protection and equal access rights to the children and to due process have been unjustly denied and this fact is being ignored by this court.

12. That the statistics filed and exhibited by the Plaintiff on how poorly children do without certain parents are being ignored by this court and the consequences are detrimental to the minor children.

13. That the recent decisions of this court will place the Plaintiff in a situation of poverty and expected to live on $1000 per month with no possible way to obtain any assistance.

14. That the these three minor children clearly need close supervision as recommended by the family therapists, which cannot be, and will not be provided by the Defendant, and this fact is being ignored by this court.

15. That the court has made no recommendation or ruling whatsoever to help rehabilitate these children.

16. That the history of how these children have been raised by the Defendant for ten years, and how they are currently being raised and improperly supervised, which has brought the children into their current dilemma is being ignored by this court.

17. That the court has dismissed the importance of and has made no recommendations or rulings to attempt to rebuild a relationship with the Plaintiff and the minor child #1 or to be sure that the minor child is drug free.

18. That in spite of the Plaintiff having joint legal custody, the court has permitted the Defendant to place all three children on amphetamines and antidepressants without prior discussion or consent of the Plaintiff and this fact is being ignored by this court.

19. That the court has not mandated the Defendant to answer interrogatories submitted by the Plaintiff and this fact is being ignored by this court.

20. That the court is willingly and knowingly leaving these three minor children in an environment in which they will not be properly supervised or rehabilitated.

21. That the Defendant has historically used all child support money paid by the Plaintiff to fund a legal defense and said payments have never been used for the welfare of the minor children, but instead to keep them in a dysfunctional home and this fact is being ignored by this court.

22. That the court has refused to take all exhibits relevant to this case and has unjustly reprimanded the Plaintiff for attempting to pursue his due process rights and is in fact obstructing justice.

23. That although the Plaintiff has submitted to and survived an extensive Psychological Evaluation, the Defendant has not been ordered the same, thereby creating bias and the mental health of the Defendant is a mystery to this court and this fact is being ignored by this court.

24. That the court has used the bailiff to try and intimidate the Plaintiff when attempting to defend oneself and argue the case, causing undue stress and bias against the Plaintiff, while at the same time permitting the Defendant's attorney, verbose diatribes with lies and attacks against the Plaintiff.

25. That the Defendant's has violated numerous court rules, including but not limited to failing to abide by the ethics of the American Academy of Matrimonial Attorneys, which is required under Nevada law and this fact is being ignored by this court.

26. That the court has ordered the Plaintiff to pay $250 of the Defendant's attorney's fees and the Plaintiff did not hire said attorney.

27. That the minor children are at risk and are being harmed and are in danger residing in the Defendant's home and this fact is being ignored by this court.

28. That Las Vegas is a dangerous place for teenagers to be unsupervised and this fact is being ignored by this court.

29. That to force a parent into poverty and to pay another parent to improperly supervise children and keep in a dangerous situation is a form of kidnapping, extortion, and slavery.

Company: Family Court Judge T. Arthur Ritchie, Clark County, Nevada
Country: USA
State: Nevada
City: Las Vegas
Address: 601 N. Pecos Road
Phone: 7024553156

  <     >