Divorce Matters

Mark and Sherry Lund discussed the creation of a podcast focused on court reform and family issues, with Sherry sharing her personal experiences and advocating for better safeguards and accountability in the legal system.

They also criticized the criminal activities of the legal mafia, the lack of due process, and the impunity of judges and lawyers, emphasizing the need for significant changes in the system. The discussion also touched on the injustices caused by the legal system, the importance of legislative action to remove judicial immunity, and the challenges they faced in trying to expose and address these issues.

A KidsMatter.charity Production

Sherry's Personal Experience With Court Reform

Mark and Sherry discussed their plans to create a podcast focused on court reform and family issues. Sherry shared her personal experiences as an advocate for family court victims, including her own legal battles with probate courts.

She described an emotionally charged situation where her stepdaughter fell ill, leading to a lengthy and contentious legal battle over her inheritance and accusations of misconduct against her family.

Sherry recounted how her family, with her husband's involvement, fought against a well-connected legal team and the accusations made against them. The legal team repeatedly served legal papers on her family, even on holidays, as part of their tactics to keep the case going.

Improving Estate Management and Conservatorships

Sherry shared her family's experience with the mismanagement of a loved one's estate and their subsequent legal struggles. She highlighted the need for better safeguards and advocated for a new bill that guarantees the right to an accounting of the estate and access for interested parties.

She also discussed her involvement with the Free Britney movement in California, highlighting the violations committed against Britney and the need for conservators to appoint their own attorneys. Sherry emphasized the importance of due process and the rights of the person of interest, even in probate cases involving minors' trusts. Mark agreed with Sherry's perspective, pointing out the potential for abuse when attorneys are appointed to take over trusts for minors.

Legal Mafia and Systemic Issues

Sherry and Mark discussed the criminal activities of the legal mafia, a highly organized crime syndicate operating under the color of law. They identified a significant issue within the legal system, where state court judges and actors do not always acknowledge federal law, leading to a lack of accountability.

Sherry also shared her family's experiences with the legal system, where her relative, Michelle, has been wrongfully accused and denied visitation, causing emotional distress. Sherry urged individuals not to use the court system to settle personal scores, as the innocent party is often the one who suffers most.

Judicial System Accountability and Impunity

Sherry and Mark discussed the issue of judges and lawyers acting with impunity and violating the rights of others. Sherry expressed her concern about the judicial system's inability to hold judges accountable for their actions, even when they break the law. They both criticized the system for its lack of due process and the complicity of certain individuals in maintaining a problematic situation.

They highlighted the double standard in the legal system where attorneys could lie in court but others had to prove the truth of their statements. They both agreed on the need for significant changes in the system and noted that any false statements made in court were protected activity.

Addressing Judges' Law Violations and Accountability

Sherry and Mark discussed the issue of judges violating the law and the lack of accountability for their actions. Sherry shared her efforts to address this issue, including reaching out to Senator Cavanaugh and working on a petition to choose the attorney for a trial by jury before a guardian or conservator is appointed.

Sherry also highlighted her work on a bill related to disability rights, which faced unexpected opposition from Judge Polks. The discussion also touched on the need for accountability in stakeholder meetings and Sherry proposed a thought experiment to emphasize the importance of accountability and address the growing frustration with judges.

Injustices in the Legal System Discussed

Sherry and Mark discussed the injustices and abuse caused by the legal system, specifically targeting families and children. Sherry shared her personal experiences and highlighted the devastating impact on families, including the loss of loved ones and the destruction of relationships.

Mark expressed his outrage and blamed the press for not exposing these issues more widely. Both were critical of the actions of lawyers and judges who they believed exploit vulnerable individuals for personal gain, and they expressed frustration at the lack of accountability in the system.

Critiquing the Court System and Judges

Sherry and Mark discussed the issues with the current state of the court system, particularly highlighting problems with judges and their decision-making processes. Sherry voiced her frustration about the lack of accountability and the need for impeachment, suggesting that outside investigations should be conducted by those with no connection to the court.

They also discussed the negative impact of court procedures on families and the importance of trying to resolve issues through communication and negotiation before involving the court. Mark agreed that the system is flawed and that judges often make decisions based on gut feelings rather than following the law.

Addressing Judicial Immunity and Accountability

Sherry and Mark discussed the issue of judicial immunity and lack of accountability in the legal system. Mark proposed organizing a charity fundraiser event on September 21, 2024 in Arizona to address this problem. Sherry expressed concern over criminal activities by some lawyers and judges. Both agreed on the need to abolish judicial immunity for greater accountability. Sherry shared her experience with her daughter's former attorney being investigated.

Addressing Unlicensed Psychiatrist Cases

Sherry and Mark discussed a case involving a judge who appointed an unlicensed psychiatrist to evaluate a child, disregarding the child's best interests. They expressed their frustration with the legal system's complicity in such cases and the challenges they faced in trying to expose and address these issues.

They also discussed the need for legislative action to remove judicial immunity and allow victims to seek justice. Mark emphasized that the legal establishment's resistance to change could only be overcome through direct pressure and public exposure.

Welcome to Divorce Matters, a podcast where we delve into the intricate and often misunderstood world of divorce, custody battles, and the legal system that navigates these turbulent waters. Today, we're unpacking a case that has captured national attention and sparked a significant conversation about the integrity of the family court system, the impact of false allegations in custody disputes, and the profound emotional toll these battles take on families. Our focus is on a landmark $21.3 million jury verdict awarded in a disputed Colorado custody case, a verdict that calls into question the actions of an ex-husband, the decisions of family court evaluators, and the rulings of a judge that led to a mother being barred from any contact with her children based on allegations now deemed to be falsely manipulated.

--------------------------------------------

SPONSORED BYwww.kidsmatter.charity WE'D LOVE YOUR DONATION

------------------------------------------

This case, stemming from Routt County, Colorado, involves Cynthia Hayek, a mother who lost all contact with her children due to her ex-husband Steven Herron's allegations that her new fiancé sexually abused one of their children. These allegations, which were later found to be part of a "false narrative" cultivated by Herron, led to a series of legal and child protective actions that isolated Hayek from her children and ultimately resulted in a jury finding Herron liable for defamation, conspiracy, outrageous conduct, abuse of process, and malicious prosecution. As we dive into the details of this case, we'll explore the implications of the jury's verdict, the systemic issues it highlights within the family court system, and the path forward for those seeking justice and reform in similar disputes. Join us as we navigate the complex, heart-wrenching, and ultimately hopeful journey of Cynthia Hayek and the broader lessons this case teaches us about the power of perseverance, the importance of truth, and the need for systemic change in our family courts.

Details

Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant:

Cynthia Hayek, an individual

V.

Defendants/Counterclaimant/Third Party

Plaintiff:

Steven Herron, an individual; and Christine

Herron, an individual,

V.

Third Party Defendant:

Kenneth Wayne Hamp, an individual.

This case revolves around a deeply contentious and complex legal battle stemming from the divorce and subsequent disputes between Cynthia Hayek and Steven Herron, involving allegations of child abuse, manipulation, and emotional distress. After their divorce, Herron and Hayek became embroiled in a series of legal confrontations, with Herron accusing Hayek and her boyfriend, Kenneth Wayne Hamp, of various forms of abuse towards their children, leading to a series of investigations and legal claims. These allegations, which Hayek contends are entirely fabricated and part of a "False Narrative" created by Herron to gain an advantage in custody and parenting disputes, have led to a multifaceted legal battle involving claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress, abuse of process, conspiracy, malicious prosecution, and negligent infliction of emotional distress. The case highlights the severe personal and legal ramifications of such disputes, touching on the emotional toll on all parties involved, the impact on the children at the center of the allegations, and the broader implications for the legal and community systems navigating such deeply personal and contentious issues.

In light of the resolution of this contentious custody case, where a jury awarded $21.3 million in damages after finding that the ex-husband corruptly manipulated proceedings to gain full custody by falsely alleging abuse, here are revised questions reflecting the allegations and the jury award:

1. Legal and Ethical Implications:
   • "With a $21.3 million verdict against Steven Herron for defamation, conspiracy, outrageous conduct, abuse of process, and malicious prosecution, what message does this send about the use of false allegations in custody disputes?"

Join us as we delve into the harrowing story of a 61-year-old woman who fell victim to the corrupt family courts in San Diego, California. With two judges admitting to the falsification of a court judgment by her ex-husband, a CPA and forensic accountant who specializes in fraud, the courts have yet to take action and fix their error. Our podcast seeks to uncover the truth behind the injustice faced by countless families in the San Diego family court system and shed light on the need for change. 

About Karie Mcewen
I am a 61-year-old woman who is the victim of the family courts in   San Diego CA. Two judges, one being the Presiding Judge Michal T. Smyth have admitted that the court took a fake judgment that my  ex-husband who is a CPA, a Forensic accountant specializing in fraud had submitted to the court and got a clerk to stamp it to make it appear real with the court's stamp on it.  This Judgment did not show in the register of action.  The Judge whose name is on the fake Judgment and the two attorneys whose names are on the fake Judgement have all said
  it never happened . 

My ex-husband has walked away with all my retirement and has left me and my autistic son penniless. My question to the court is when the courts make a mistake who fixes it?

The court media person Emily Cox said Judge Michael T. Smyth sent this to the D.A.’s Office to be investigated in August 10, 2022 three days later the D.A.’s office said they did not have enough to prove my ex-husband who has worked with the DA's office on many cases and has been exonerated.
The DA's office also ignored Judge Ratekin in 2019 who also sent this fake document and a fake wage assignment to have the D.A. to only be ignored.
   The courts have enough evidence to prove it did not happen. Two judges now have been sent the judgment and fake wage assignment to the D.A. 's office.  To date 5 years have passed and the court still has not fixed the error. 

There is no dispute of the validity that the Judgment was a fake and was never heard in front of a Judge and was never a court ruling. The courts have admitted in open court that the Judgment was fake, and the court clerk should not have stamped it.

I have the tape recording of the Judge saying it in court in 2019. I have spent thousands of dollars to have the court fix their error.
 

Who fixes a court error in Family court in San Diego? I still have not had one judge fix the court error and to date still am being held to this fake Judgment. The courts have delayed this case until October of 2024.

Due process is not a real thing in family court in San Diego.

In this podcast episode of "Divorce Matters," host Mark welcomes guest Ira Paskowitz, a law enforcement officer in South Florida, to discuss parental alienation and parental interference. Ira shares his personal experience dealing with family court and custody issues with his ex-girlfriend, who engaged in relentless parental alienation towards him and his family. Despite paying $1,100 a month in child support, he was denied visitation with his daughter. The conversation highlights the financial and emotional toll of these legal battles and the impact on children caught in the middle.

Guest Rhonda Noordyk 

The "Divorce Matters" podcast episode features guest Rhonda Noordyk , founder and CEO of the Women's Financial Wellness Center, discussing seven ways to prepare for divorce. The host, Mark,, asks Noordyk's about common issues that lead to divorce, and Noordyk notes that infidelity, mental illness and abuse, and addiction are common factors. Noordyk  also emphasizes the importance of one's partner making a sincere effort to change in order to avoid divorce.

Noordyk goes on to discuss the importance of financial preparedness in divorce, as well as seeking out emotional support and being realistic about what to expect in the legal process. She also stresses the need to have a clear understanding of one's own values and priorities, in order to make informed decisions throughout the divorce process.

The host and guest also touch on the emotional toll of divorce and the importance of self-care during this difficult time. Noordyk emphasizes the need to prioritize self-care in order to stay emotionally healthy and to make clear-headed decisions.

Overall, the episode offers practical advice for anyone going through a divorce, with an emphasis on financial and emotional preparedness. Noordyk's insights and advice can help listeners make informed decisions throughout the divorce process, and help them emerge from the experience with their financial and emotional well-being intact.

Michael's YouTube Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/MrPropriaPersona1

Contact Michael at www.judicialrevolution.us 

Want to help us fight judicial injustice? Donate to www.KidsMatter.charity 

Guest Rhonda Noordyk 

The "Divorce Matters" podcast episode features guest Rhonda Noordyk , founder and CEO of the Women's Financial Wellness Center, discussing seven ways to prepare for divorce. The host, Mark,, asks Noordyk's about common issues that lead to divorce, and Noordyk notes that infidelity, mental illness and abuse, and addiction are common factors. Noordyk  also emphasizes the importance of one's partner making a sincere effort to change in order to avoid divorce.

Noordyk goes on to discuss the importance of financial preparedness in divorce, as well as seeking out emotional support and being realistic about what to expect in the legal process. She also stresses the need to have a clear understanding of one's own values and priorities, in order to make informed decisions throughout the divorce process.

The host and guest also touch on the emotional toll of divorce and the importance of self-care during this difficult time. Noordyk emphasizes the need to prioritize self-care in order to stay emotionally healthy and to make clear-headed decisions.

Overall, the episode offers practical advice for anyone going through a divorce, with an emphasis on financial and emotional preparedness. Noordyk's insights and advice can help listeners make informed decisions throughout the divorce process, and help them emerge from the experience with their financial and emotional well-being intact.

Michael's YouTube Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/MrPropriaPersona1

Contact Michael at www.judicialrevolution.us 

Want to help us fight judicial injustice? Donate to www.KidsMatter.charity 

In this heart-wrenching episode of our podcast, we speak with a father whose children were taken away by CPS under suspicious circumstances. He shares his story of how their happy family life was suddenly shattered, and how he's fighting tirelessly to get his children back. With firsthand accounts from the father and a look at the evidence that led to the removal of their kids, we delve into the complex world of child protection services and the impact it can have on innocent families. This is a story of resilience, hope, and the power of a father's love.

And we also discuss how to avoid the same situation if you ever get into one. 

Michael's YouTube Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/MrPropriaPersona1

Contact Michael at www.judicialrevolution.us 

Want to help us fight judicial injustice? Donate to www.KidsMatter.charity 

Join legal experts Lisa Johnson and Chris Barry in this episode as they discuss the abusive nature of family court systems. With firsthand experience dealing with clients across the world, they share their perspectives on the corruption and cronyism within the industry that leads to extreme cases of high-conflict divorce. Tune in to learn about the challenges faced by good parents and the problems with the current court system that prioritizes money over the well-being of children.

So let's jump right in now, though. Lisa, you were in Connecticut. Is that correct? Is that the court system that you're in? And then Chris, where were you? New York only? Okay, so you guys have got a northeast perspective, which isn't too far off from California. 

I think they share a lot of things. Whereas other parts of the country can be quite different actually. Yeah, but I would. I would agree that the family court system is quite abusive, I actually think they encourage it. And I'm not talking everybody everyone knows I have an asterisk next to most things I say, because I've met some good judges. But they're the exception, not the rule. But I feel like most courts are have been developed. A family courts have been developed to encourage this type of behavior because their friends get richer off of it. And again, not every judge but I feel like most of the stuff could be shut down very quickly. And most of these things can be resolved in a room or in two or three days. But they're not
but because of all the money involved. So either one of you chime in where am i right? Or am I wrong? Okay, well, we have this weekly legal abuse support group, we meet on Sundays for about an hour and a half over zoom with clients from all over the world, different laws, same issues, everywhere that we know of that speaks English, where we have clients. And we say that divorce is a tremendous money making industry. And that it's not just you and your difficult ex, but they're actively participating in keeping these things going these high conflict cases and everybody benefits, except you and your children. And so, Chris, why do you think that is? Do you think these people are truly evil? Do you think like, they're just trying to attract money? Or the pirates? What are they? So I think, I think maybe calling them evil is a little bit of a stretch, maybe? Certainly, there are some evil ones out there. But I think so there's a couple of different contributing factors. One is, there's ignorance, right, because most people enter the court system in a divorce, they're angry, there's a reason they never got married, thinking we're when we get divorced, this is how it will be they don't intend to get divorced. So something happened and it got bad enough that they ended the relationship. And sometimes, you know, if their kids involved, they really really didn't want to end it. But it got so bad that they had to so people start off angry. But usually, you know, after a year or nine months, year, year and a half,
most rational people calm down. So when what the case is, at least I deal with, there's something going on with our clients, former former partner, where you know, it's a like a mental health issue, whether it's narcissism or borderline, you know, we're not psychologists, we're not qualified to, to diagnose anyone, we look at the behaviors. And it's amazing how consistent the behaviors are, you know, we don't need a label, we look at the behaviors. So that's, that's the biggest factor in the ones that we deal with, we deal with the 5% were that people never the other spouse never comes down. Their anger never subsides, they act irrationally, they spend way more, you know, at least we'll talk about her case, but they spend way more on attorneys fees than if they just reached a reasonable settlement to begin with. So that's that's one. That's the biggest one for us. That the courts don't understand that stuff. It doesn't always take two to tango. Let me challenge you on something. What do you mean, the courts don't understand that you don't think they understand what's going on? They don't they look at these high conflict, generally speaking, okay. You know, not in every case. But generally speaking, they look at when two people are fighting, they can't settle. That it's both their fault. They're both
the you know, the term is mutual combat. Yeah. You know, or takes two to tango is another thing that people say all the time. They're not sophistic judges, you're so overloaded with it with cases, they just want you out of their your business transaction to them. Right, so why won't you settle and they get angry at both parties, without having the time or the expertise to like dig deep into what's going on. Also, you know, the toxic personalities, which I know this isn't about toxic personalities. But those people there, they're really, really persuasive. They're manipulative, they've been practicing it for really their entire adult lives. So they go in there and they spin these fantastic lies, and distractions, all kinds of stuff. The other issue though, is because I know I'm going on with this response. A big part of it also, is this sort of this cronyism system that's grown up around divorce. So whether it be parenting, you know, custody evaluators, parenting coordinators, guardian ad litem, or as we call them in, in New York attorneys for the children.

Michael's YouTube Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/MrPropriaPersona1

Contact Michael at www.judicialrevolution.us 

Want to help us fight judicial injustice? Donate to HTTP://www.KidsMatter.charity 

Join legal experts Lisa Johnson and Chris Barry in this episode as they discuss the abusive nature of family court systems. With firsthand experience dealing with clients across the world, they share their perspectives on the corruption and cronyism within the industry that leads to extreme cases of high-conflict divorce. Tune in to learn about the challenges faced by good parents and the problems with the current court system that prioritizes money over the well-being of children.

So let's jump right in now, though. Lisa, you were in Connecticut. Is that correct? Is that the court system that you're in? And then Chris, where were you? New York only? Okay, so you guys have got a northeast perspective, which isn't too far off from California. 

I think they share a lot of things. Whereas other parts of the country can be quite different actually. Yeah, but I would. I would agree that the family court system is quite abusive, I actually think they encourage it. And I'm not talking everybody everyone knows I have an asterisk next to most things I say, because I've met some good judges. But they're the exception, not the rule. But I feel like most courts are have been developed. A family courts have been developed to encourage this type of behavior because their friends get richer off of it. And again, not every judge but I feel like most of the stuff could be shut down very quickly. And most of these things can be resolved in a room or in two or three days. But they're not
but because of all the money involved. So either one of you chime in where am i right? Or am I wrong? Okay, well, we have this weekly legal abuse support group, we meet on Sundays for about an hour and a half over zoom with clients from all over the world, different laws, same issues, everywhere that we know of that speaks English, where we have clients. And we say that divorce is a tremendous money making industry. And that it's not just you and your difficult ex, but they're actively participating in keeping these things going these high conflict cases and everybody benefits, except you and your children. And so, Chris, why do you think that is? Do you think these people are truly evil? Do you think like, they're just trying to attract money? Or the pirates? What are they? So I think, I think maybe calling them evil is a little bit of a stretch, maybe? Certainly, there are some evil ones out there. But I think so there's a couple of different contributing factors. One is, there's ignorance, right, because most people enter the court system in a divorce, they're angry, there's a reason they never got married, thinking we're when we get divorced, this is how it will be they don't intend to get divorced. So something happened and it got bad enough that they ended the relationship. And sometimes, you know, if their kids involved, they really really didn't want to end it. But it got so bad that they had to so people start off angry. But usually, you know, after a year or nine months, year, year and a half,
most rational people calm down. So when what the case is, at least I deal with, there's something going on with our clients, former former partner, where you know, it's a like a mental health issue, whether it's narcissism or borderline, you know, we're not psychologists, we're not qualified to, to diagnose anyone, we look at the behaviors. And it's amazing how consistent the behaviors are, you know, we don't need a label, we look at the behaviors. So that's, that's the biggest factor in the ones that we deal with, we deal with the 5% were that people never the other spouse never comes down. Their anger never subsides, they act irrationally, they spend way more, you know, at least we'll talk about her case, but they spend way more on attorneys fees than if they just reached a reasonable settlement to begin with. So that's that's one. That's the biggest one for us. That the courts don't understand that stuff. It doesn't always take two to tango. Let me challenge you on something. What do you mean, the courts don't understand that you don't think they understand what's going on? They don't they look at these high conflict, generally speaking, okay. You know, not in every case. But generally speaking, they look at when two people are fighting, they can't settle. That it's both their fault. They're both
the you know, the term is mutual combat. Yeah. You know, or takes two to tango is another thing that people say all the time. They're not sophistic judges, you're so overloaded with it with cases, they just want you out of their your business transaction to them. Right, so why won't you settle and they get angry at both parties, without having the time or the expertise to like dig deep into what's going on. Also, you know, the toxic personalities, which I know this isn't about toxic personalities. But those people there, they're really, really persuasive. They're manipulative, they've been practicing it for really their entire adult lives. So they go in there and they spin these fantastic lies, and distractions, all kinds of stuff. The other issue though, is because I know I'm going on with this response. A big part of it also, is this sort of this cronyism system that's grown up around divorce. So whether it be parenting, you know, custody evaluators, parenting coordinators, guardian ad litem, or as we call them in, in New York attorneys for the children.

Michael's YouTube Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/MrPropriaPersona1

Contact Michael at www.judicialrevolution.us 

Want to help us fight judicial injustice? Donate to HTTP://www.KidsMatter.charity 

Where are we with the Robert Emert case?

A lot of you have been emailing and calling and all that. So he's still in jail. Unfortunately, if you don't recall, we had a, a podcast about this thing a few episodes ago. And because he's still in jail, literally for ridiculous reasons. Things that I believe were either made up by the DEA or exaggerated. In order to teach Ron the lesson, he filed a federal lawsuit. This is a title 42 USC 9083, which is essentially a federal lawsuit used against people that are violating his civil rights under color of law. And he named nine defendants because you can't sue the state, typically, unless they violate your ADEA, which are Americans with disabilities. And they did. So in part, he sued a state actor, I don't believe he sued a state. But he didn't sue nine people in total that were violating his civil rights, including the DEA investigator, Luis Pena, here in San Diego, who I believe was the one that was behind this with another woman that's in the DHS office, just basically a travesty. And these are the things that the people have to rise up and demand change. Because if you can throw a dad in jail, who was for all intents and purposes, one of the best dads of the year, he just got angry with the courts who were trying to take his son away from them and put them put him in the home. So now, we're in a situation where he's got a federal lawsuit, which they've got 21 days to respond. I think that was from February 7. So we'll get back on at the end of the month and talk to you about what happened there. We just witnessed a preliminary hearing, I believe it was yesterday where they presented their evidence. And I can tell you, I was looking at the DA was looking at Louis Pena, these people are nervous. Her hand was shaking, and she was reading from it because they know this is a fraud. It's BS, what they're trying to do. And if they win, and they set precedents here, then if you miss, or if you have an infraction of any sort, and they deem you, as someone that they don't like, then hey, you could be arrested without bail. It's insane. And they know it.

Michael's YouTube Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/MrPropriaPersona1

Contact Michael at www.judicialrevolution.us 

Want to help us fight judicial injustice? Donate to www.KidsMatter.charity 

Michael's YouTube Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/MrPropriaPersona1

Want to help us fight judicial injustice? Donate to KidsMatter.charity 

https://kidsmatter.charity/campaigns/kids-matter-donate/donate/