Judge William Adams / Lanette Joubert Dishonesty Corruption
Posted in the Rockport Forum
#1 Nov 6, 2013
Judge William Adams corruptly and dishonestly held that it was frivolous to believe a child's outcry of horrific child abuse. This was blatant dishonesty because the law does not ignore outcries of abuse by children. Actually, it gives special attention to such outcries including duties of reporting.
This was corrupt for a number of reasons. First, it was flat out dishonest with no basis in the law whatsoever. There was no evidence whatsoever presented this child was somehow unbelievable. Both parents testified that the child was honest. There was no basis for the corrupt, dishonest order other than the child's age (nearly 6). Child much younger are regularly believed to the extent of imprisoning people for life. The judge admitted he signs arrest warrants based on what children say but this particularly child could not be believed? Why the only explanation is that one of the child abusers was his personal lawyer (William Dudley). It was corruption. The conflict of interest of was never disclosed. It was corruption.
It is now known that the lawyer who drafted the corrupt order and advocated this corrupt position (Lanette Joubert) at the same time as she was arguing that it was frivolous to believe the child who reported child abuse committed by her was believing a much younger child to the extent of denying a man access to his child and obtaining a criminal indictment against him. The allegations against the man were later determined meritless. The man spent $236,000 just on attorneys' fees defending against the meritless claims and of course was traumatized by the wrongful indictment. He didn't see his children for a long time. His children were physically molested by multiple sane exams based on the meritless allegations. Lanette Joubert has a long history of accusing parents of sexual misconduct with their children usually in conjunction with denial of visitation. Many ultimately prove unfounded or never proven founded.
It is immensely dishonest for Lanette Joubert to claim that it is frivolous to believe a 6 year old child who reports child abuse committed her while attacking other people based on statements of children much younger sometimes in diapers.
Judge William Adams is immensely dishonest and corrupt for ratifying her dishonest, corrupt positions, and the same is true Marie Haspil and James Ehler who are corrupt lawyers at the bar.
ames Ehler has supported false sex abuse allegations, groundless denial of visitation, lying for over a decade. Marie Haspil is newer. James Ehler thinks lying to corrupt court proceeding is funny, and he isn't ethical.
#2 Nov 7, 2013
The child abuse concealed by Judge William Adams was a request by the lawyers and other authority figures that the child lie (solicitation of perjury). A child psychologist talked to the child and said this amounted to "horrific child abuse."
This is corrupt game works. The child is involved a lie. The parent loses visitation based on the lie and sometimes is prosecuted criminally. Normally, the parent is helpless because he or she does not have the money to defend. Defense is very, very difficult for a number of reasons. The parent referenced above spent $236,000 defending himself. The parent is destroyed finally, emotionally, and possibly imprisoned for decades. Meanwhile, the child is severely damaged also.
James Ehler participated in coverup of this type of behavior more than once. He always takes the side of corruption and dishonesty.
Now, if a lawyer actually attempts to do the right thing, the lawyer is attacked. A corrupt judge like Judge William Adams says it is frivolous for the lawyer to defend his client. Of course, it would be absolutely disloyal to a client to ignore the fact that the client was being set up for fraudulent loss of her child and imprisonment. In the Judge William Adams case the lawyer was being set up also. Lanette Joubert and William Dudley had been lying for months as the bar clearly authorizes them to do (James Ehler is a supporter of lying to Courts) that the lawyer and client were sexually involved (based on no evidence at all -- just lying -- the dishonest Judge William Adams joined in their lying at one point again based on no evidence whatsoever -- a text message he sent his ex wife).
A lawyer has a duty to zealously represent his client especially when his client is being set up in this way. This was based on the statements of a perfectly credible child. The child's statements were supported by a child psychologist, independent third party witnesses, but most importantly by the fact that his statements corresponded to lies by Lanette Joubert and William Dudley already in progress (the lies about a sexual relationship between lawyer and client).
Lanette Joubert and William Dudley lie about sex. This is one of their main strategies.
The judge corruptly sanctions the lawyer in coordination with the corrupt bar in a dollar amount the lawyer cannot afford. The bar then complains that the lawyer did not pay (e.g. did not follow a court order). The bar has corruptly eliminated the lawyer who dared try to represent his client in the face of systemic corruption.
Add your comments below
|Audrey Vasquez||7 hr||Xpiece||2|
|Kiewit women (Apr '14)||16 hr||John||7|
|Who Knows her? (Mar '13)||Tue||DFW||24|
|chris bradford (Mar '11)||Mon||Ruby G||24|
|Kris Cady (Mar '11)||Jul 23||Ned||4|
|Zombie Cop Unit Patrols Dogpatch||Jul 17||Ghanaboy Blackblue||1|
|Jennifer Aguirre (Sep '13)||Jul 16||Colonel Sanders||6|
Find what you want!
Search Rockport Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC