0 rtesTo summarize to this point, we have seen how Judge William Adams lied about the law to coverup a crime committed by his personal lawyer. Specifically, he lied stating that it is frivolous to believe a child. There is no such law and in fact the law regularly believes children. There was nothing about his child even arguably rendering him unbelievable. It was fraud, corruption, and dishonesty. This was done to cover up the crime of his personal lawyer William Dudley (asking the child to lie).
Lanette Joubert drafted the corrupt, dishonest, fraudulent order, and Judge William Adams signed. The Order attacked the mother's lawyer for believing the mother's child. There was substantial reason to believe the child including independent third party cooboration and circumstances and the child's behavior. Most importantly, the child is a highly credible child and deserves to be heard. Attacking the people most particularly the child's mother and her lawyer for believing the child was unconscionable.
The child did not report a little wrong. The child reported a wrong that was extremely serious. The child was told to lie that his mother had "touched" him. This was a lie that could place the mother in prison, and certainly the child would have been believed if the child had lied as requested. The child was also asked to lie that he saw his mother and her lawyer in bed together. The father's lawyer had been lying about a sexual or romantic relationship between mother and lawyer for months.
Marie Haspil and James Ehler are two unethical corrupt lawyers who work for the Texas State Bar. They certainly joined the lie after the fact, and there is substantial reason to believe they conspired in the lie before the fact. According to text messages written by the Corrupt Judge William Adams, he was in communication with the bar even before he signed the corrupt orders at issue.
James Ehler has a history of corruption with respect to these same lawyers. He supports their crimes and frauds.in one instance, it came out that these same lawyers had fabricated evidence insinuating child sexual misconduct. They acting through their ad litem (related to one of them through marriage) attributed words to a witness the witness never said.
According to the corrupt James Ehler who is a representative of the Corrupt Texas State Bar, that was perfectly OK. It didn't even state a complaint. The victim of that perjury was unable to see his child reliably for over a decade based on a series of frauds and corruptions. The corrupt James Ehler was always on the side of corruption, dishonesty, and fraud. He creates an atmosphere of corruption in the South Texas Legal system particularly with respect to family law that allows false sexual allegations with impunity. If any one complains, they are attacked. This has led to at least half a dozen known cases of false sexual allegations all disrupting parent child relationships and one resulting in suicide of a man (he killed himself as a result of a false accusation).
James Ehler thinks lying is funny. He has literally laughed when one of these lawyers was caught telling a black and white lie to a tribunal. He represents and promotes corruption.
Now, for the next commentary. The mother requests the mental health records for the woman used by the father for child care. She did this because the woman had a "breakdown" of some sort. Lanette Joubert presented false evidence that the woman was perfectly Ok. Further, according to the corrupt Lanette Joubert as supported by the corrupt James Ehler and Marie Haspil, any lawyer who actually represents his client is "harassing" or "frivolous." Thus, according to the dishonest Lanette Joubert, the mother's lawyer should not even have asked for the information.
The mother presented evidence of the breakdown both her testimony and a receipt for child care services necessary during the child care provider's breakdown. The corrupt Judge William Adams ignored the evidence presented by the mother (she apparently is not entitled to belief just like her child isn't). He denied the discovery based solely on Joubert's falsehood (her client lied also). Specifically, Joubert and her clients said the woman was perfectly OK.
However, MHMR was also subpeoned. MHMR produced substantial documentation. The care provider is actually homicidal, suicidal, pyschotic, hullinatory, etc. She is heavily medicated. She attempted suicide at least once and she was in the mental hospital several times. She was sexually molested as a child by her father (Lanette Joubert and William Dudley have a fondness for placing children in environments invovling child molestation). She doesn't believe in education.
You would think there might be a problem with Lanette Joubert presenting false evidence? No, you see, she has a right to present false evidence. Judge William Adams and the bar particularly the corrupt dishonest James Ehler love false evidence. They protect it. This is a long pattern.
You see Judge William Adams instead of being concerned about concealment of evidence obviously pertinent to the well being of the child was mad about revelation of the truth. He could not see the relevance of the child care provider being homicidal and said the evidence was irrelevant. He also said the condition of the child care provider was not pertinent because she is not a party. Let's see, a parent can subject the child to individuals with dangerous characteristics because those individuals are not parties? That of course is insanthee. It is also dishonest and corrupt.
The bar loves corruption particularly the morally depraved James Ehler and his subordinate Marie Haspil. They saw no problem with Lanette Joubert presenting false evidence either. Remember, James Ehler is a protector of lies, corruption, and fraud. It entertains him. He has a long history of lack of ethics and integrity going back at least a decade.
Marie Haspil demands to know why an order was violated. There was no order violated. The subpeona against the child care provider said nothing about MHMR records. She then demand to know why the records were not privileged. First, no privilege objection was ever made whether by MHMR or Lanette Joubert who was effectively representing the psychotic child care provider. Second, applicable exceptions exist to all pertinent privileges when the welfare of a child is at issue. Any issue with HIPPA could have been cured, and it was not the responsibility of the mother or the mother's lawyer to comply with HIPPA. It was their responsibility to protect the child. Any technicalities with HIPPA could have been easily cured.
Most offensively, Marie Haspil demands to know why the mother's lawyer believed her. Well, the mother's lawyer is supposed to believe her (he is supposed to be loyal to her). Further, there was no reason to not believe her. Further, the mother's position that the child care provider would be caring for the child was not even disputed throughout the litigation (until the MHMR documents). The father consistently said he would use her as the child care provider while he worked. Orders existed requiring exchange of the child at her house. The father never changed his position. The lying Lanette Joubert flip flopped just temporarily that the psychotic would not be watching the child together with the dishonest corrupt Judge William Adams. Later, Lanette Joubert went back to saying the psychotic would be watching the child (after the MHMR records were held irrelevant).
Marie Haspil made her demand just 2 business days before trial. The clear message was that that the mother should not be believed just like her child should not be believed. There was absolutely no reason to disbelieve this woman just as there was no reason to disbelieve her child. This was just corruption consistent with a pattern of corruption lasting over ten years that Lanette Joubert, William Dudley, and William Kelly have a right to lie and anyone who presents the truth is attacked. Marie Haspil was of course corrupting the legal system. People have a right to lawyers, and this means lawyers who are not terrorized into not believing them. A lawyer who is terrorized and threatened into not believing his client is no lawyer at all. Total complete corruption.
In summary, it is wrong to believe this woman and her child even though neither has been discredited in any way. The woman's lawyer must believe Lanette Joubert when she says the child care provider is completely OK (it was wrong to subpeona the MHMR records). It was wrong to believe the mother that the psychotic would be caring for the child even though this had been the consistent position of everybody throughout the litigation until the MHMR records.
Of course, this is all nonsense. It cannot be reconciled in any way other than corruption and dishonesty. The proceeding was totally corrupt, and the corruption involved the lawyers for the father (Lanette Joubert and William Dudley), Judge William Adams, and the bar represented by Marie Haspil and the corruption loving James Ehler (a pattern of over 10 years).
In the legal system, yes, people particularly judges should be given the benefit of the doubt. Otherwise the system cannot function. However, at some point, there is no conclusion that can be drawn other than that corruption exists and any honorable person must oppose it. A lot of innocent people including children have been harmed by the type of corruption represented by Judge William Adams, Lanette Joubert, William Dudley, Marie Haspil, and James Ehler.
0 comments