A MELBOURNE father of three has been jailed for sending a birthday card to his daughter.
The man "Mick" — who cannot be identified for legal reasons — was locked up in a suburban police station for seven nights and spent another in the tough Melbourne Custody Centre.
He says he was surrounded by drug addicts and people charged with violent offences during his ordeal last month.
Mick claims he is a victim of a family law system that is biased against fathers.
"I was jailed for nine days and eight nights for sending my 11-year-old daughter a birthday card," he said.
"Apparently I broke an intervention order.
"It's ludicrous and it breaks your heart."
The 51-year-old is estranged from his wife and claims she has brought a series of intervention orders against him, banning him from contact with his children, without any evidence.
"Until my wife divorced me I was a legally unimpeachable citizen — now
Unjust: "Mick" was jailed for eight nights.
I'm being treated like a criminal just because I want some contact with my kids," Mick said yesterday.
"And that contact was
ended arbitrarily without even a hearing or the presentation of evidence.
"jn a court of law, if you are accused of something you are supposed to have the ability to cross examine your accusers and call witnesses.
"In the secret chambers of the Family Court you are not guaranteed that at all."
Mick says the experience has cost him $20,000 and his career as a writer.
"It's a plundering and looting exercise on the part of lawyers involved in this and there are no juries or scrutiny by media to keep them accountable," he said.
The Sunday Herald Sun was denied access to documents relating to Mick's case and lawyers for his estranged wife declined to be interviewed.
Historian and academic Prof John Hirst this week called for an overhaul of family law.
"The court is not enforcing its decisions, the costs of going to court are onerous and there is little public accountability," he said.
Are fathers being treated unfairly? Have your say at heraldsun.com. au
It's a pity he didn't consider the truth when writing a "good story". The person he is writing about is Nick Martin who has made threats against his ex wife's lawyer, the family reporter, the judge and anyone else involved in his case. There was never a birthday card even, and Nick Martin knowingly and deliberately breached an intervention order. He's been on the run from the police for a long time and is facing 12 charges. . Laurie Powell didn't even get that part right. Stories like this, don't help the mens rights and they certainly don't help Laurie Powell who doesn't mind telling a few lies to get published.
This email to Fathers4equality forum from Martin himself:
From Norsaint/Nick Martin
the library is within 500 yards of the ex wife's house (my old place) and that is the distance now stipulated by an intervention order.
I've been charged with going there, sending texts to my older daughter (although funnily enough, no complaint was ever made about this; the walloper grabbed my phone and after snooping through it, found - sorry, allegedly found - texts to daughter wishing her happy birthday etc).
Facing 12 charges in all. They include writing to children, to the ex, urging her to come to her senses, her sister urging her to use her influence for good, birthday wishes to children etc, talking to her in court one day etc. .
Laughable stuff of course but alas, we don't get to appear in front of juries in these "special courts" for "special" people, and I've got a suspended sentence hanging over my head. (had to plead guilty 18 months ago to get out after three days, having been jugged for watching my son play football)
There is no due process of law, which means they're corrupt courts and shouldn't exist.
With regard the birthday card, the chief walloper confidently informed the woman (what else?) Magistrate that it had been "intercepted by the victim"!
This sort of bastardization of the language puts a whole new perspective on going to the post office to collect one's mail.
Perhaps we could bring a class action against Australia Post, for victimization.
With regard the satire about letters below, this sort of thing has already been seriously proposed in the US by their crooked industry shonks. The idea to build big compounds whereby fathers could fleetingly visit their off-spring has been mooted, according to Baskerville. In fact I think he pointed out a situation whereby a lunatic judge was proposing castration for men who fell behind with their divorce subsidy payments.
Then there was this garbage which contained lies yet again by Laurie Nowell. The truth was Simon Hunt (who identified himself on various forums) breached an Intervention Order and went to his ex wife's house. The order was made int he County Court and Simo Hunt chose to ignore that order and has no respect for the courts at all. He has actually already breached the new order by publishing it, complete with his ex wife and daughters address in Brighton on 3 different Mens Rights Groups public forums.
Banned dad agonizes at loss Herald Sun
January 3rd, 2009 · 2 Comments
December 07, 2008 12:00am
“STEVE” has been barred from seeing his daughter for seven years.
He has never harmed his only child or her mother. He has never threatened them and a court has accepted he is of good character.
But last week, after a tortuous 10-year journey through four courts, more than 20 hearings, 12 psychologists and six lawyers, he was told he could not see his daughter until she came of age.
Steve, whose real name cannot be revealed for legal reasons, has gone through more than 20 intrusive psychological examinations, while daughter “Molly” has endured seven.
He says he has spent more than $100,000 in 10 years.
His wife twice raised sexual-abuse allegations, proven false after months of investigation.
But the court accepted she would “shut down” emotionally if Steve was allowed to see his daughter and that her distress would affect her parenting skills.
It was deemed in Molly’s best interests that she not see her father until she turned 18.
Now Steve, a successful small businessman from Melbourne’s southern suburbs, faces being alienated from his daughter forever.
“It just rips your heart out. If you can’t forge a relationship with your child in their formative years, there’s a real risk that you never have a good relationship,” he said yesterday.
“There was no violence, threats, abuse, harassment or intimidation.
“I was shocked when (the judge) announced that the order would apply to both my ex-wife and our daughter and would last for 10 years.
“I was able to persuade her that this would criminalise me if my daughter tried to contact me when she grew up.
“But I bucked the system and paid the price. If you argue with the court’s finding, they label you as unco-operative.”
Steve said while everyone wanted women and children protected from violence, intervention orders should not be used as weapons in custody battles.
“These orders are being used to persecute men and children by litigants who know courts will always err on the side of caution and remove fathers without there being any violence at all,” he said.
Steve said he feared his daughter had been scarred by the court’s insistence on psychological examinations.
This year he approached his ex-wife’s new partner to see if there was any chance of mediation that would allow him to see Molly.
His wife instantly launched legal action alleging he breached an intervention order that prevented him approaching her or Molly.
“The court decided that my - very polite - conversation with my ex’s partner represented harassment. It’s just unbelievable,” Steve said.
Thanks to Laurie Nowell's repeated searches on his name, the ranking for this page has increased to Number 1 for Google searches on Laurie Nowell.