According to the Corrupt Judge William Adams, if a child makes an outcry of what a child psychologist called "horrific child abuse," the proper course of action is to ignore the child, because children are fantasizers. The child should simply be ignored because he is a child. It is his role as a judge to block all discovery and attack the child's parent who not only is concerned about the child but is targeted for false imprisonment. In other words, the truth is something to be concealed and obstructed. According to him, no child is worthy of belief. It could have been anything about this child because he never heard this child or anything inconsistent with what the child said (other than vague denials which is of course what child abusers do). Children should be ignored because children are fantasizers and it is ludicrous to believe an adult would abuse a child (particularly not him or his lawyer, and there is no reason he should have to disclose his conflict of interest either being that one of the child abusers was his lawyer).

Judge Ken Anderson was right. A child should be ignored. The child probably said his father didn't do it because his father may have been dressed up in a scuba outfit (actually what Ken Anderson said according to at least one witness). Besides, children are fantasizers. Judge Adams and Judge Ken Anderson two great minds thinking alike.

Then you have the corrupt James Ehler who think obstructing justice and concealing child abuse, solicitation of perjury, etc. is just fine. Lawyers should not believe their clients or their children (at certain lawyers no part of their circle of corruption). James Ehler has been corrupt for year supporting child abusers, fabricators of evidence.