September 8, 2007
Bobby Brown Watch: Custody Battle Edition
Boston native Bobby Brown is known for many things. New Edition. A rather successful solo career. A tumultuous marriage with songbird Whitney Houston. A reality show in which Brown and Houston discussed highly inappropriate subjects on national television. Not paying child support.
These days, Brown is probably best known for the child support issue. Every time he sets foot in Massachusetts to see his children from a previous relationship, he winds up in the cooler because he hasn't paid child support.
Now, in a twist, Brown is campaigning to see his daughter with Houston, Bobbi Kristina, more often. He filed a lawsuit in California saying that he hasn't been able to see his daughter.
Houston testified in court that she didn't need child support from Brown and that she didn't want him around. Brown's exploits after his split with Houston - including jail for that little child support problem, spouting off about Osama bin Laden's affections for Houston, and a verbal attack on a UK television host - probably haven't helped his case.
A final custody decision will be made on October 22.
| 
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
[ report this ]
Bobby Brown going up against Stephen Kolodny seems a perverse sort of suicide.
But it seems to me the public is largely responsible for the mess of family court. If the public demanded coverage, media would follow.
Think about it. The one court most used most often, and for the longest period of time is Family Court. But media short changes its readers or viewers by not covering this court with any degree of regularity. Which explains in part, how the nicer sounding "Family Court" evolved into the divorce and custody industry.
Simply put, the business of government is Business. Nowhere is this more true than "Family Court." http://www.FamilyLawCourts.com.
As family court is such a target rich environment of bias and outright corruption, it beats the heck out of me why reporters aren't fighting for a family court beat. ;)
In that regard, my State Bar, the State Bar of California seems well, uh, bipolar. Below was recently sent to the Board of Governors for their upcoming seminar (I recently returned from speaking to the American College of Trial Lawyers on behalf of www.USAjudges.com regarding the Bar's duty to police itself and the bench.)
"...by way of example; when dealing with lawyers and their conduct, currently the State is spending an enormous amount of time to craft a Model of Conduct.
All while ignoring marketing tactics of attorneys which, includes their conduct.
Last weekend, www.FamilyLawCourts.com received a "brochure" from www.BrutalDivorceTactics.com
Brutal Divorce Tactics as a recommended marketing tool?!?
In checking some of the "dream team" members Brutal Divorce Tactics recommended, I was not surprised to learn they were more nightmare than dream - with extensive discipline records.
J Curtis Cox.
http://members.calbar.ca.gov/search/member_detail.aspx?x=147858
Krystal Clemens
http://members.calbar.ca.gov/search/member_detail.aspx?x=159525
However, because Family Court is the busiest court in the nation - the one court most often used, repeatedly, and for the longest period of time, one wonders why the State Bar ducks its responsibility to the public when it comes ignoring the behavior of attorneys when marketing future conduct.
I mean, seriously. Why bother with a code of conduct when the marketing tactics clearly outline the opposite?"
Another subject is the matter of State Bars circumventing the criminal justice system. Why don't beat reporters cover that?
Briefly, the State bar is aware of the individuals who practice law without a license as the Bar is the group that takes the license away. But they are so slow to act.
By way of background consider attorney Ron Lais http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2000/05/21/SC76910.DTL&hw=ronald+lais&sn=001&sc=1000
as after the State Bar finally made him resign - he simply put up a website and described himself as a custody "consultant." It took four years, but I finally got him prosecuted. Lais was so out there, the WSJ wrote about him, too.
An interested columnist wrote about sixteen column on the case and gave me my own rating. Am the last "R" entry.
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/columns/article_939203.php
The conclusion - but not the end.
http://www.ocregister.com/ocr/2005/08/01/sections/local/local_columns/article_618190.php
(no attorney would believe this part - so I was very happy it's documented)
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/columns/article_682538.php
The sentence, but not the end; and,
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/columns/article_690336.php
Lais trying to litigate - from prison (See Paragraph Seven)
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/columns/article_1244624.php
Lais has tried twice to sue me from prison...and threatened to "hunt you down." I recently learned he's also threatened to beat up his appellate attorney. When Lais is released from prison, I'm sure given the lack of mental health facilities, and his threat to me, (which the police ignored although he helpfully put in writing), it seems likely I'll see him again.
So while Bobby professes to want time with his child, time will translate into spousal support...which isn't written about.
So the public is grossly misinformed when judges state they're acting in "the best interests of the child." Children are useful as marketing tools, but their interests are seldom addressed appropriately.