The San Bernardino Superior Court Presiding Judge Raymond L. Haight III refuses to file an exparte that was provided to the court on the 26th of April 2017. The Presiding Judge has refused to assign a judicial officer with a departmental assignment order according to CA rules of court 5.30 (a)(b) and CA rules of court 10.603 (b)(1)(B). The Presiding Judge assigns cases to the relevant departments.
On 4/25/2017 the court filed a domestic violence restraining order; without issuing a TRO according to CA family code § 240, 241, 242 and 246. The court refuses to address domestic violence and the impact of such domestic violence on children. The court refuses to address the immediate risk of physical harm and the immediate risk of children being removed from the State of CA, according to CA family code § 6323, which specifies that an exparte has to be considered according to CA family code § 3046. Both codes highlight the fact that the court has to consider an immediate risk factor for physical harm and a risk that children will be removed from this State. The court has to prevent a written finding why children shall remain in a domestic violence household (CA family code 3011 (e), which also cites CA family code § 6323.
“(e) (1) Where allegations about a parent pursuant to subdivision (b) or (d) have been brought to the attention of the court in the current proceeding, and the court makes an order for sole or joint custody to that parent, the court shall state its reasons in writing or on the record. In these circumstances, the court shall ensure that any order regarding custody or visitation is specific as to time, day, place, and manner of transfer of the child as set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 6323.”
In this instance the Riverside Superior court has transferred a domestic violence case without addressing the impact of domestic violence on children. The San Bernardino court refuses to address the correct orders that are listed in the Riverside Superior Court file, instead perpetuating and covering up the abuse, perpetuating further incidences of domestic violence that permeate the entire court file. The court fixates on the female parent as the harassing party when the mother files a request for domestic violence restraining order to protect the children from further escalation and further abusive incidents which have occurred in the past when the other parent has escalated out of control. The parent who has substantial experience with the psychopathic behavior and the resulting LONG term impact on children of course is not to be believed as the court prefers to adopt a wait and see approach until it is too late
The court does not have the capacity to deal with a psychopathic personality and in the court’s mind the fact that a mother has filed a request for domestic violence restraining order does not have any relevance as she was once married to the psychopathic personality.
The past and current abuse must be the preferred manner of living with this heinous scenario. This is even more heinous when a parent knows how innocent children really were and the impact of the past and current acts of abuse on said children.
As with the Riverside Superior Court the policy of the San Bernardino Superior court male judiciary is that if it does not affect their own children it does not have any relevance to a party or the children involved.
Women of course are not to be believed as in the mind of the San Bernardino Superior Court judiciary it is UNACCEPTABLE that women want to protect their children from abuse and refuse to have anything to do with the abusive ex-spouse.
Some parents are very familiar as to the impact of abuse and abusive interaction on a child’s formative years where children who are older than 10 already have the ingrained behavior of their abusive parent, especially when this abuse has occurred in front of these children for years and the court refuses to take action to protect these children.
It is unacceptable in the mind set of the male San Benrrardino Court judiciary that women are allowed to draw a line in any instance and say NO to the abuse of their children and themselves.
In the mind set of the San Bernardino Court judiciary a person just has to accept this abusive interaction at all cost including the violation of all court orders and the harassment , threats, and intimidation of governmental agencies, which occur in front of their children.
In the mind set of the San Bernardino court judiciary women and children are property of the abusive ex-husband and can be threatened, intimidated and harassed without any repercussions.
The court to date has refused to address all relevant documents that have been filed to address the fact that the court has refused to issue a TRO. The court refuses to adhere to CA rules of court and any relevant CA family code merely to perpetuate their vicious abuse of women and children in this court.